utabintarbo Posted November 15, 2008 Report Share Posted November 15, 2008 (I have been given the explanation in private.) This piques my interest. Is there some reason the explanation cannot be aired for the benefit of the rest of us? Why the secrecy? </offtopic> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted November 15, 2008 Report Share Posted November 15, 2008 Why the secrecy?If we told you we'd have to... ... ... no, I assume CF simply didn't want to go off topic. The "organizers" group was created for people who want to volunteer with stuff on the forum, but who are not admins nor moderators. If anyone wishes to follow-up on this...maybe volunteer etc. ... that would be great; but, let's use the "Website Leadership" sub-forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utabintarbo Posted November 15, 2008 Report Share Posted November 15, 2008 If we told you we'd have to... ... ... no, I assume CF simply didn't want to go off topic. The "organizers" group was created for people who want to volunteer with stuff on the forum, but who are not admins nor moderators. If anyone wishes to follow-up on this...maybe volunteer etc. ... that would be great; but, let's use the "Website Leadership" sub-forum. Excellent. I will file this away in the brain stem for future reference. We now return you to your regularly scheduled topic. Move along, nothing to see here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mammon Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 (edited) 1. So he was a burglar, who was punished, and there is no way you could reasonably expect that he will do it again. How does that make him a domestic terrorist? Which large american population did he terrorize? Was he involved or did he support the only act of domestic terrorism of the past decades, the Oklahoma City bombing? He planned on doing bad things to people because of their political views. Hence the terrorism, which may be a bit of an exageration. But still, he never repented it! 3. As far as calling for the death of a police officer, that isn't worse than calling for the death of anyone. Police officers are not special, they have the same exact rights we have. If someone, anyone is an immediate threat to your life, you are within your rights to kill them in self defense. The fact that they are police officers is irrelevant: if you have a problem with him calling for someone's murder, the issue should be that, not the victim's profession. And please, prove that he's calling for murder, and explain why he hasn't been prosecuted in a country in which that is quite illegal. So... his calls for the death of a police officer who threatening your life is right and morally just. Is breaking into someone elses property to spy on a political opponent morally just and right as well? He doesn't seem to understand rights. Also, I heard Sean Hannity call William Ayers a terrorist for wanting the deaths of police officers. But Liddy isn't? Oh yeah, Liddy has right wing views and his friends with Republicans so he gets off the hook! By Mammon's standards, he's probably a dangerous ultra-right-wing extremist! And so is, IMO, another person I mentioned in that post. BTW, what does "Organizer" in red letters mean? Is that something like what Obama was? How you get away with the amount of dirth you dish out boggles my mind. I can't say anything back to you without seeing the post end up in the trash can. Edited November 16, 2008 by Mammon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aleph_0 Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 But that's just me thinking Thom Hartmann is a liberal. By Mammon's standards, he's probably a dangerous ultra-right-wing extremist! And yet by your standards, Ann Coulter is a model Objectivist! We all have our little eccentricities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grames Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 So... his calls for the death of a police officer who threatening your life is right and morally just. Is breaking into someone elses property to spy on a political opponent morally just and right as well? When the opponent is George McGovern, yes. Nixon's election and reelction was a popular rebellion and refutation of the entire '60s counter-culture. A little spying never hurt anyone. Don't you for one second think that the Democrats haven't gotten away with much worse. The entire 1960 presidential election was stolen, Nixon should have been president then. Nixon learned then to fight fire with fire. All over the world politics is blood sport. Be grateful the American version is as genteel as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalism Forever Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 How you get away with the amount of dirth you dish out boggles my mind. I can't say anything back to you without seeing the post end up in the trash can. [Writes retort, hits backspace] I guess I've already written enough about you, and the above post is WAAAY too easy a target anyway! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalism Forever Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 And yet by your standards, Ann Coulter is a model Objectivist! We all have our little eccentricities. To paraphrase the title of her latest book: If Republicans had brains, they'd be more like Ann Coulter! Not all of Ann's ideas are correct, but the intransigence with which she presents them is a model for anyone who wishes to practice the virtue of independence. You see, you can't write a caricature of my ideas without me agreeing with at least part of it. When Thom Hartmann's guests point out--correctly--that his ideas are very similar to those the Soviet Union was built on, he is always in a rush to deny that there is any trace of plausibility in the comparison, to state that he is "all for free trade" (yeah, right...), and to dig out some quote from Jefferson. And when Mammon's posts ... but I have written enough about him. But try to satirize me, and I'll break the satire down into actual parallels that I am proud of--and non-parallels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake_Ellison Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 (edited) 1. He planned on doing bad things to people because of their political views. Hence the terrorism, which may be a bit of an exageration. But still, he never repented it! So... his calls for the death of a police officer who threatening your life is right and morally just. Is breaking into someone elses property to spy on a political opponent morally just and right as well? He doesn't seem to understand rights. 2. Also, I heard Sean Hannity call William Ayers a terrorist for wanting the deaths of police officers. But Liddy isn't? Oh yeah, Liddy has right wing views and his friends with Republicans so he gets off the hook! 1. Terroroism has nothing to do with doing bad things to people because of their political views, nor does the break in have to do with political ideas: it had to do with one political opponent of his bosses. Terrorism is large scale violence used to intimidate masses. 2. Was Ayers talking about a situation where a specific police officer is threatening a specific innocent man's life, and thus this innocent man has the right to defend himself? Or was he talking about using mass murder to back up his political views? In conclusion: I find your arguments so ridiculous and so thoughtless, that from this point on I do not wish to argue with you, nor shall I ever waste my time reading your posts. To everyone else: if in the future you find yourselves in a conversation with me, and you think Mammon made a good point I need to consider, please repeat that for me in your posts, because I won't be reading his. P.S. What does the title Organizer in red letters mean? Am I in danger of beings screwed with by this guy for not voting Obama? Edited November 16, 2008 by Jake_Ellison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve D'Ippolito Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 Quite possibly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 Is this going to be recorded anywhere? I'll be in class for these 3 hours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mammon Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 When the opponent is George McGovern, yes. Nixon's election and reelction was a popular rebellion and refutation of the entire '60s counter-culture. A little spying never hurt anyone. Don't you for one second think that the Democrats haven't gotten away with much worse. The entire 1960 presidential election was stolen, Nixon should have been president then. Nixon learned then to fight fire with fire. All over the world politics is blood sport. Be grateful the American version is as genteel as it is. So, it's okay to violate people's rights if they have different political views then you do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 When the opponent is George McGovern, yes. Nixon's election and reelction was a popular rebellion and refutation of the entire '60s counter-culture. A little spying never hurt anyone. Don't you for one second think that the Democrats haven't gotten away with much worse. The entire 1960 presidential election was stolen, Nixon should have been president then. Nixon learned then to fight fire with fire. All over the world politics is blood sport. Be grateful the American version is as genteel as it is. That is ridiculous. Number one, Nixon was an AWFUL president. He may rank in the top five or six worst of the 20th century! Quite a feat, really. Number two, democracy means you have to deal with the consequences. If McGovern got elected, oh well. What if the Dems were to do this now? Many of the Republican rabble-rousers on here would be all up in arms about how much of a fascist Obama is, but since a good ol Republican did it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalism Forever Posted November 16, 2008 Report Share Posted November 16, 2008 P.S. What does the title Organizer in red letters mean? Am I in danger of beings screwed with by this guy for not voting Obama? Reading the thread is your friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grames Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 What if the Dems were to do this now? What do mean, IF? Every election is not just a contest of who can get out the vote, it is also a contest of who can commit the most election fraud and get away with it. There are 3 voting precincts in Minnesota trying their damnest to get Al Franken elected senator by mysteriously producing hundreds of Franken votes many days after the voting stopped, and the recount hasn't even started yet. Most big cities have voter fraud organized by ACORN. Politics is civil war by other means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 Politics is civil war by other means.Hyperbole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 What do mean, IF? Every election is not just a contest of who can get out the vote, it is also a contest of who can commit the most election fraud and get away with it. There are 3 voting precincts in Minnesota trying their damnest to get Al Franken elected senator by mysteriously producing hundreds of Franken votes many days after the voting stopped, and the recount hasn't even started yet. Most big cities have voter fraud organized by ACORN. Politics is civil war by other means. That doesn't make any of it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalism Forever Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 Hyperbole. Politics doesn't have to be a civil war, but that is what democracy turns politics into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 Politics doesn't have to be a civil war, but that is what democracy turns politics into. Rather than thinking of it as "Civil war", I prefer to think of it as gang war. When Liddy sends his henchmen to raid the other gang's offices, I see it similar to Don Corleone sending his men to do something to Don Luciano's guys. Liddy gets no credit from me for being a good planner, for going after his particular goal with contextually appropriate rationality and action-orientation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 Back to the topic at hand, Liddy will give Rand's views a fair hearing on a nationally syndicated show. That can only be benificial. For general information: Liddy did not go to prison for burglery, he was sent up for refusing to talk. He remained loyal to the President and refused to rat out his associates. Regardless if you agree with his political views, the man has the courage of his convictions. Calling him a domestic terrorist is ridiculous. I doubt that a lot here were even born yet when the Watergate incident occured. I was a teenager and remember it well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted November 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 Either Liddy has a cold, or something has happened to his voice, but so far the show has been pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IchorFigure Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 ayn rOnd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 Liddy does sound like he has a cold. ayn rOnd He also pronounces Greenspan as "Greenschpon." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0918 Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 "Alan Greenspawn"... I think I like that more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake_Ellison Posted November 17, 2008 Report Share Posted November 17, 2008 (edited) It's so amazing that someone would call in and say Rand was a "secular humanist"-she sounded coherent too. Is that what coservative radio tells people about her in the midwest? Edited November 17, 2008 by Jake_Ellison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.