Maybe it's the perspective that's askew; the thoughts, the language, the projections... Maybe people need courage rather than frustration, brotherhood rather than self righteousness, humility rather than victimization...Think?
Noble, but maybe not the most implementable sollution in this case. I would start with different strategies for both teams. Less dirt throwing and more respect for each other. I think then the people would see the candidates less as dirty enemies and more as valid choices for presidenty.
Ah, ok. I understand your point now. I just wanted to understand a bit better where you were coming from. In popular culture it seems to be acceptable to use the personage or life teachings of Jesus as a reference point for everything from blatant hypocrisy to the debate over the health benefits of pea soup. He exists both within and outside the dark pools of human frailty and presupposition. A true man of sorrows...
Jesus is in my cheeseburger... no wait, that's Elvis. Carry on.
I just liked the mental image of people that had to choose between 2 enemies and choose the one they hated the least.
Maybe it's the perspective that's askew; the thoughts, the language, the projections... Maybe people need courage rather than frustration, brotherhood rather than self righteousness, humility rather than victimization...Think?
It was meant as a joke, made by an orthodox christian that knows about the apples and the oranges in the comparison. Jesus was innocent. I wouldn't call Trump innocent. Barabbas was conficted for (at least) manslaughter. Hillary most probably not manslaughtered or killed anyone.
I just liked the mental image of people that had to choose between 2 enemies and choose the one they hated the least.
Ah, ok. I understand your point now. I just wanted to understand a bit better where you were coming from. In popular culture it seems to be acceptable to use the personage or life teachings of Jesus as a reference point for everything from blatant hypocrisy to the debate over the health benefits of pea soup. He exists both within and outside the dark pools of human frailty and presupposition. A true man of sorrows...
More of a reader and member of the peanut gallery in all of this, but I digress...I'm not sure whether this is satire or just old fashioned irony or that I'm not too sure of what you mean; but Barabbas was a murderer, pardoned so that an innocent man could be more conveniently murdered. Barabbas wasn't crucified with Jesus. He was allowed to wear his insurrection like a crown for the benefit of the deceived throngs. Literally bread and circuses, and I haven't even mentioned Trump and Hillary...or have I?
It was meant as a joke, made by an orthodox christian that knows about the apples and the oranges in the comparison. Jesus was innocent. I wouldn't call Trump innocent. Barabbas was conficted for (at least) manslaughter. Hillary most probably not manslaughtered or killed anyone.
I just liked the mental image of people that had to choose between 2 enemies and choose the one they hated the least.
Well, Jesus and Donald have something in common. Jesus had Barabbas. Trump has Hillary. They both get crucified anyway.
More of a reader and member of the peanut gallery in all of this, but I digress...I'm not sure whether this is satire or just old fashioned irony or that I'm not too sure of what you mean; but Barabbas was a murderer, pardoned so that an innocent man could be more conveniently murdered. Barabbas wasn't crucified with Jesus. He was allowed to wear his insurrection like a crown for the benefit of the deceived throngs. Literally bread and circuses, and I haven't even mentioned Trump and Hillary...or have I?
I decided to go get some wrong, just to see... "You got 20% correct. You can’t tell Donald Trump and Jesus apart. That's a little terrifying. Please don't vote."
Well, Jesus and Donald have something in common. Jesus had Barabbas. Trump has Hillary. They both get crucified anyway.
You got 100% correct. You can tell Donald Trump and Jesus apart. That's reassuring, because they are nothing alike.
Pfew...
I decided to go get some wrong, just to see... "You got 20% correct. You can’t tell Donald Trump and Jesus apart. That's a little terrifying. Please don't vote."
Predicted very dispassionately a few decades ago by one of my favorite movies. Like "1984" and "Idiocracy" many of its insights are coming to pass.
"Nations are bankrupt. Corporate society was an inevitable destiny..."
Still, there will always be governing bodies and some version of a Bill of Rights and its controlling counterpart of laws or rules.
Rollerball (this, the original) is one of my favorite movies as well. I have used it for decades as an example of where we are headed. We are almost there now. It seems we are on the same page when it is all said and done.
Yep, that about sums it up. And I completely disagree. And not just because the critics and witch-hunters have misrepresented and completely overstated Clinton corruption.
Saying the status quo is not worth saving is basically saying that the founding fathers got it wrong. In particular, I believe that the US started strong and got stronger and the country is in much better shape and less corrupt than any time in its history.
I cannot see any good from trying to fight corruption by putting an even more corrupt individual in power. Obviously you do not think he is more corrupt and we won't get anywhere discussing that.
My philosophic position is that government should be a stabilizing influence - geopolitically, socially and economically. Changes should be considered and incremental. The government influences the country but cannot and should not completely control the social and economic direction. It can, however, help mitigate the economic cycle and, in particular resist the crashes caused by abuses of the free market. If you got rid of everyone in politics you would just create a power vacuum to be filled by the most brutal and self serving power-seekers. Revolutionary ideas have their place, but the implementation should be as orderly as possible. Trump doesn't have any revolutionary ideas and has no concept of how to implement the ideas he does have.
It is that simple.
Please remember my response was a redirect from the thought that supporting Trump was all about a return to the Good Old Daze (GOD). I don't know anyone who thinks that we can or should return to the GOD. They are long gone and we cannot return. The fox in the hen house was used by someone here months ago in reference to putting Trump in charge. I meant it here as a metaphor for hitting the reset button, to return to the rules we are supposed to be using.
The Clinton corruption cannot be overstated. The continuing revelations by wikileaks just cannot be ignored because they confirm too many things long assumed by many to be true. Yeah, I know we are supposed to ignore the revelations because they are from the result of a hack by the Russians (yet to be proven) and are not admissible in a court of law. Yet there they are. Ignore them at your's and mine own peril. 'Redneck Bill' got a $1 million birthday present from the government of Qatar ? Those that defend against that by saying that Bill is not on the ballot are truly naive, to be kind.
Long ago, I stated my thoughts on Trump's insights on governmental corruption. Yes, as a builder, he has had to be a player, just to get things done. Its how that biz works, everywhere. But that does not mean he likes it as so many state. It does gives him real working knowledge as one on the other side of the equation on how to fight it.
While Trump doesn't have any revolutionary ideas, and who among his supporters has said he does, where is the proof he doesn't know how to implement the ideas he does have ? What is offered as 'proof' is just hearsay from unreliable sources and nothing else. The proof I need is in the existing physical results of the buildings and projects he has accomplished, in spite of all the opposition and obstructions placed in front of developers by government, be it international, national, state or local.
I have said from the beginning of this current cycle that Hillary will win. And she will. She has (and been) bought and paid for this presidency. Wikileaks are the receipts that prove that.
Enjoy her presidency. I won't. I know what's coming and what the costs will be. Wikileaks is your friend. All the answers are there to see. The future of our borders and the Bill of Rights will be destroyed.
Location: Half inch above the K/T boundary Gender:
Posted:
Oct 17, 2016 - 6:40pm
haresfur wrote:
Yep, that about sums it up. And I completely disagree. And not just because the critics and witch-hunters have misrepresented and completely overstated Clinton corruption.
Saying the status quo is not worth saving is basically saying that the founding fathers got it wrong. In particular, I believe that the US started strong and got stronger and the country is in much better shape and less corrupt than any time in its history.
I cannot see any good from trying to fight corruption by putting an even more corrupt individual in power. Obviously you do not think he is more corrupt and we won't get anywhere discussing that.
My philosophic position is that government should be a stabilizing influence - geopolitically, socially and economically. Changes should be considered and incremental. The government influences the country but cannot and should not completely control the social and economic direction. It can, however, help mitigate the economic cycle and, in particular resist the crashes caused by abuses of the free market. If you got rid of everyone in politics you would just create a power vacuum to be filled by the most brutal and self serving power-seekers. Revolutionary ideas have their place, but the implementation should be as orderly as possible. Trump doesn't have any revolutionary ideas and has no concept of how to implement the ideas he does have.
It is that simple.
Well said.
It is sad that Trump is so profoundly failing in his opportunity to bring forward a positive, thoughtful, provocative message of possibility for the country. To be deprived of a respectful, though partisan, dialogue and then a real choice this election cycle, is a loss for us all. Lose, and then go away, please.
Edit: I am sad too, for all the people who do support him, but have a horrible messenger. They do need to be heard and to expect a positive response to grievances.
Nicely said until ... it ain't about bringing back the Good Old Days™. Its about stopping corruption more than anything else. The corruption is so bad that it requires turning the fox loose in the hen house and culling the herd. There is nothing the status quo is not worth saving. It is that simple.
Yep, that about sums it up. And I completely disagree. And not just because the critics and witch-hunters have misrepresented and completely overstated Clinton corruption.
Saying the status quo is not worth saving is basically saying that the founding fathers got it wrong. In particular, I believe that the US started strong and got stronger and the country is in much better shape and less corrupt than any time in its history.
I cannot see any good from trying to fight corruption by putting an even more corrupt individual in power. Obviously you do not think he is more corrupt and we won't get anywhere discussing that.
My philosophic position is that government should be a stabilizing influence - geopolitically, socially and economically. Changes should be considered and incremental. The government influences the country but cannot and should not completely control the social and economic direction. It can, however, help mitigate the economic cycle and, in particular resist the crashes caused by abuses of the free market. If you got rid of everyone in politics you would just create a power vacuum to be filled by the most brutal and self serving power-seekers. Revolutionary ideas have their place, but the implementation should be as orderly as possible. Trump doesn't have any revolutionary ideas and has no concept of how to implement the ideas he does have.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Oct 17, 2016 - 9:57am
kurtster wrote:
Nicely said until ... it ain't about bringing back the Good Old Days™. Its about stopping corruption more than anything else. The corruption is so bad that it requires turning the fox loose in the hen house and culling the herd. There is nothing the status quo is not worth saving. It is that simple.
If the overriding and sole desire was to put into office a person who is not (at least does not appear) to be) part of the corruption and is espousing ideas and policies that, if implemented, would knock down and rebuild the governmental foundations, then votes for Bernie Sanders would have been in order.
