Paul, Thanks for the support but you, too, have stated quite succinctly (Jeez, my spelling is bad!) where we are. I also think most of these responses are based on an emotional state caused by a thought package into which one is heavily invested.
I want to do everything possible to avoid being incinerated in a fireball (or beheaded or shot between the eyes) so I am willing to give the current administration some wiggle room when dealing with suspected Muslim terrorists in this country who are contacting other thugs who are in the Mideast. Remember what Osama said:
"We will not rest until we kill 4 million Americans on American soil, and half of those must be children." Only way to do that is with nuclear weapons. Anyone else thinking something immediately has be done about Iran?
And, Jeez Louise, is anyone still upset that some Army soldiers made terror suspect prisoners wear panties on their heads? You can watch any Madonna video and see worse than that! Or, pick any one of a dozen MTV shows like Jackass, Bad Boys, and that one where the adults kids assault their parents while we are supposed to be laughing. Raise a generation on this crap and how do you expect them to act in a degraded situation like an Iraqi prison? I remember in the days after 09-11-01 that people such as Thomas Friedman, Jeff Greenfield, and even Al Franken all advocated some form of torture of terror suspects. Even some Democrat congressmen (whose names I can't remember now) preached the same thing. We wisely realized in those brightly lit days that things had changed. We were now fighting for our very existance.
Thank you for expressing, so clearly, the facts of history to our more "emotional" members. Have you ever considered running for the Senate? How about - TOMRYAN for President! :-) As you so clearly understand, rational, clear thinking debate, is a good thing. But, when the survival of our countrymen and culture is at stake, cloudy, emotional, ranting has no place in the debate. Congratulations on being such an eloquent spokesman - I only wish I had your gift.
Dreadhead, Contextual thinking is not your forte, eh? We were the solution to Nazism, Japanese Imperialism, and Communisim (90 million dead! Get on board!!). Germmany and Japan were both victims of American "imperialism" and thank God, at least from their own points of view. This was Franklin Roosevelt's philosophy - change the damn regimes once and for all.
It's not working real well in Iraq for two reasons: 1) They've never had anything like a constitutionally limited Republic based on Jeffersonian principles and cannot yet comprehend the logic and benefits. 2) We did not inflict enough military punishment to convince the enemy of the futility of resistance. Remember that the Nazis mounted an insurgance after their formal surrender. We smashed it with such certitude that they gave up.
How long are we going to have a military presence in Iraq? Just remember that we've had troops on the ground in Germany and Japan for more than 60 years. By the way, things are going pretty well in both those countries, thanks to our imperialism. Even though our government and Germany's have many differences, there is absolutely no consideration of war or any military action considered btw the two. Germans are not coming to the USA to mass murder our citizens and no Americans are doing that to them. Why?
Imagine Iraq, Afganistan, and finally Iran becoming like Germany and Japan. "What a wonderful world" indeed!
Walter, I also respect your point of view. By the way, I'm not a conservative. I believe people have the right to live for their own sakes and should not be coerced into servitude. However, this applies only to citizens of the USA because of the natural structure of reality. We simply cannot apply the same principles to others in the world, and this is why we have police work against our own citizens and war against other countries.
No question, Clinton had little more regard for the Constitution than Bush. Although I too may be jaded, I am not quite prepared to sacrifice the Fourth Amendment based on your anecdote, or Bush's judgment of who should be detained, who should be spied on. There are legal means to spy, if that is needed. As for the Master Plan to set countries in the Middle East on the right path, please explain to me exactly how that would work, how it conforms to conservative values, how it is not imperialist? We may not see eye to eye, but I respect your point of view.
Robm321,
"Cry Me a River"? Nah, it seems that under the circumstances, the Police song "Every Breath You Take" ("I'll be watching you") is more appropriate. But your suggestion is very, very clever, make no mistake about it.
I read about two guys who were locked up partially based on warrantless evesdropping (which as yet we don't know whether legal or not but then these are times the likes of which we've not seen before). Both are Muslims from the Mideast, one who is cooling his heels in prison because of confessing to a plot to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge during rush hour. The other also in an 8x8 having been convicted of supporting, working with, and financing terrorists groups in the Mideast. I hate to sound jaded but I'm glad someone was following these dopes.
By the way, Bill Clinton's administration (who never addressed the worldwide Islamic terrorist threat, but then neither did the Republican congress. I'm pretty sure Bush never mentioned it during any speeches in 2000.) also "illegally" wiretapped and broke into an American's house. This guy is in prison now convicted of spying for Israel.
I think the Bush admin. had this plan (not very well executed): Take Afganistan and turn it into a civilized state. Next take Iraq and do the same thing. Now we've got the big prize, Iran, in a squeeze hold and hopefully the people of Iran would rebel and throw out the savagely dangerous terrorist regime. Then decency and goodness would spread throughout the rest of the Muslim world!! Yay!!!
By the way, Saddam paid for dozens of terrorists attacks against Israel and allowed terrorists safe haven and training in his country. I also think Iraq was the weakest of the countries that needed "adjustment". And if Iraq was not part of the worldwide terrorist network, why do the terrorists think it's so important to keep it that way?
Tomryan, you said, and I quote "we are the solution" What kind of nonsense is that?? Sounds a lot like the Nazis during World War II. Maybe you should change your moniker from Tomryan to Aryan.
While I agree that the opposition (i.e. the Democrats) to the current regime is sadly devoid both of ideas/solutions and courage, I must strongly disagree that protest songs--from last year or any other--"do not make a valid point about anything." Of course, I do not generally look to pop songs for actual solutions to complex political problems, but when the President of the United States has basically made a mockery of the Constitution he has sworn to defend (using the NSA to spy on American citizens is merely the latest outrage, but far from the only one), I believe anger is the appropriate and "valid" response and does, in fact, make a point. As for Churchill's old bromide, what could be more "conservative" than preserving and honoring the Constitution?
As for the "intractable enemy," do you mean the terrorists or Iraq? Do you know of a link between the 9-11 attack and Iraq that no one else has found? If so, please contact the White House at once. They've been searching frantically for quite some time now, so far to no avail.
Colitas, Martin Luther King Jr. was a very good man who moved civil right farther than along than imagined, and Vietnam was a war we lost because we didn't want to overstep our bounds and engage with the Soviet Union. What either of those statements has to do with anything today is lost on me. The world has changed in the last 35 years.
Howard, I think I'm trying to say that we are up against an intractible enemy and also remind what Churchill said decades ago. Anyone who is not a liberal when young doesn't have a heart. But anyone who has not become conservative once fully grown up doesn't have a brain. It's taken me a long time to realize that we are not the problem - we are the solution. The world needs more Thomas Jeffersons, not Michael Moores or Noam Chomskys.
All the silly songs from this past year (Green Day, Steve Earle, etc.) don't make a valid point about anything and offer no solutions or insight whatsoever. Just the same old stale thought package that they think makes themselves sound cool. And that's the real shame - we've devolved to a point where being "cool" is the main desire and drive of our culture.
"First we kill all the Jews, then we come and kill you!" - Omar, student at Western Mich. Univ. when asked why he was going back to the Mideast during mid-session - 1972
"He has gone back home to kill Jews." - Answer from Nabil when asked where his brother was who hadn't been to our kickboxing club for a couple of weeks - 1983
"Saddam is on the march! Mike has gone back home to help drive Israel into the sea!" - Abdu at the video store when asked where his brother was who usually works the counter - 1990
"Mr. Hitler, you are doing some very good things here. But you must become more efficient and forceful in your dealings with the Jews." - High ranking Palestinian imam while visiting Germany during WWII.
Anyone see a pattern here? And you think us Americans have bad attitudes!!
Charlie101 If freedom of speech is so offensive to you... rather than attacking someone for having a different opinion, move to North Korea where no one is allowed to have an opinion that opposes the government. That will be much more to your liking.
Charlie 101- Just because someone "did'nt serve" it doesn't mean they don't love their country or that they are cowards. People are entitled to their opinions- even those different than yours.
By the way- I didn't serve either. Never wanted to sign up. By your criteria for patriotism and bravery, I'm a coward as well. Never mind the fact that my Dad was killed in the line of duty in the US Navy in '64, and I'm a political conservative.
Come on, let's calm down a bit buddy. Insulting longtime members on this forum isn't going to gain you any new friends :)
I thought so. Another arm chair political expert. You never had or have the guts to serve. Squawk squawk squawk huh? I can hear the chicken clucking from here.
When you sum up a whole year with a negative statement, that would be miserable to me. But I guess others thrive on negative, so maybe they are negative and happy. Good for them. Or maybe they are unhappy that Bush won 2 out of 2 elections.
Well this is my THIRD attempt to join this thread: My vote for song summing up the year for the country is B.Y.O.B(Bring Your Own Bombs) by System of a Down. With a rippeng roar of "Why do they always send the poor". "why doesn't the President fight the war, why do they always send the poor" pretty much sums up the WAR. Well Nrchy wether it's Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Wolfy, it seems that the Neo Cons have taken over the Gov, especially sence Bush says his not beholden to laws enacted by Congress, for things like torture. When will this country stop invading others under false pretenses for Wall Street. Whatever happen to Kennedy's idea of no Pax American inflicted by weapons of war, now we see this as the only solution. SAD
Personally though for me it was a good year, with attending a SUN Dance at the sacred pipestone quarries. I caught the last three days of dancing, and for me those Sun Dance songs were the best of my year! I can still feel that drum beat when I think back to dancing in +100 degree heat. To me this is where it's at. Dennis Banks(AIM) said that the soldiers should just replace their American Flags with Bechtel Logos, kind of sums it up for me. True it's to the point and Black and White but the Internet is not really the medium for true communication. Nrchy I too have wondered if I belong here too, but feel it's just as good as being a catalyst as anything else.
"Don't Let me be misunderstood" is the most memorable song I had. I remembered the first time I heard it from a DEMO CASSETTE TAPE when I bought my Nakamichi 680ZX cassette deck during the early 80s. That song was sung by a black singer(I imagine so! ) wish someone out there can really help me who that singer is.
Wow, a lot of negative miserable people out there.
Who's miserable? Vocal, perhaps. Dissatisfied with certain aspects of our nation's governance, sure. But certainly not miserable. In fact, none of the respondents spoke of being miserable. Glad to see you're so happy and appreciative. A true blessing.
I consider everything O'Reilly says satire, ESPECIALLY when he's trying to be serious. He should stick to sexual harassment of female staffers. Can you say out of court hush money settlement Bill? I think ya can! The only thing more laughable is Rush Limbaugh's hard line on drug offenders!
Wow, a lot of negative miserable people out there. I had a rough year personally, but I will elaborate on "It's the end of the world as we know it" and say "but I feel fine" -It was another year that I was alive and have the freedom and funds to enjoy such a hobby. I appreciate what I have.
I hope the miserable people with all the negative views will have a better year in 2006, but somehow I think it is like this every year for them. And of course it's all Bush's fault that they are miserable not their own ;)
In case anyone is interested, this is the story on Mr. O'Reilly's comments. He suggested (among other things) that the terrorists should blow up Coit Tower, which is in fact a monument to firefighters.
Appreciate the attempt to balance this point, Paul (Oldpet), but in all of the time I have watched Mr. O'Reilly, the word 'balanced' has never come to mind as representative of his delivery, or content. He (like others, yes) has a specific agenda. He is not a reporter. He is a well-compensated pawn for the Rupert Murdoch conservative agenda, a mono-chromatic politicizer of issues, and completely out of line to suggest to this dangerous enemy to which you refer should blow up an American city. This is not balance, and it is without question NOT satirical. It also would not be tolerated had Al Franken or Michael Moore said it, nor should it be. This is a heinous invitation to bring the violence here to the US. Sorry, not funny.
As I've always said, if you believe in the war, put your money where your mouth is and suit up. Go and fight, or your words are meaningless. I can tell you one thing, however. I wouldn't want them recruiting in my kid's high school. Nor do I want Procter & Gamble paying for their audio/video equipment either, for obvious reasons.
Mr. O'Reilly understands sales. He understands politics. We might even say he understands the Clinton-esque side of backroom sexcapades. But he does not understand the first thing about the current geo-political scenario in which we are ensconced. He's not a newsman. He is not a sage. He is a barking firestarter, and paid extremely well for being exactly that.
"At the same time, Bill O'Reilly suggests that it would be a good idea for Al Qaeda to annhiliate San Francisco. Forget damaging the morale of the troops, he's encouraging terrorists to blow up an American city!"
I'm sure Mr. O'Reilly would find this to be an ammusing post, as do I. However, People reading this thread who do not watch or listen to O'Reilly, as often as I do, and perhaps, you should, might take what you have said as being factual. The fact is: O'Reilly, often times uses SATIRE to make his point. He was using the Al Qaeda vs. San Fran. secario, to point out the ridiculous ideology that has caused San Fran. to prohibit military recruitment in their (S.F.)shcools during a time of war.
Mr. O'Reilly clearly understands the dangers this enemy presents to EVERY American. It is so sad that every American doesn't clearly understand the nature of this enemy.
The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naïve and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who likes his country more than the rest of us, and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair. H.L. Mencken
JD, I found the video to be quite entertaining and dead on politically. I have since forwarded it to everyone in my my address book. Why do you feel the need to apologize? These threads are a public forum, open to different views. The key word being "public". It never ceases to amaze me when your opinion might not be the same as someone else's somebody always resorts to name calling and worse. Right or left, what makes this the BEST country in the world is forums like this that give us all a chance to express our thoughts and ideas.
While I'll admit that I am definitely not a fan of George Bush, my link to the video was meant as a humorous response to the question, and I'm sorry if it truly angered anyone.
I agree entirely, Dan. We are experiencing what I see as a retardation of meaningful discussion in this country, and I happen to believe that governmental heirarchies impact the country in exactly the same way that parents and CEO's do in their respective environments, setting the tone of discussion/tolerance/money management/sense of entitlement/greed/etc. right from the top on down. While I can't readily think of a song to represent that particular dynamic, the one title I skewed (in half jest, albeit) is for me representative of the past year, and applicable to politicians, corporate executives, moralistic leaders, and others who "Like Iraq" throw up a smoke-and-mirrors image of themselves while operating in a world of deceit. This phenomenon extends beyond party lines, religious affiliations, and bullshit commitments to customer service. We've become experts at lying about who we are, and most effectively so to ourselves, to the point that we believe the charade and thus are mostly impervious to a truthful dissection of our actions. In other words, we are being taught that personal responsibility and honesty are nothing more than fodder for building a fictitious self-image. People complain about kids not being responsible for themselves? It starts at the top, with this endless array of scandals and lies. Again, I'm not simply pointing the finger at Bush. Rather, it is the tone that has been set by his government, one that actually honors deceit, and one in which all discussion shall not venture beyond the surface.
I'm not sure any of the responses given here would be representative of a radical left, as Nate mentioned. I don't think any of us is out tossing molotov coctails at WTO meetings. Nor were any of the responses overt expressions of hatred toward Bush. Indeed, 9/11 was a wake-up call, and I happen to believe that "you're either with us or against us" fired the starter's pistol on this volatile state of affairs. Because from that point on, unrestrained and unsubstantiated became the name of the game. As the economic future of our esteemed country is being whittled away, we fling names and moralistic epithets at each other, having now been charged with the supreme duty of separating the patriots from the enemies within. At the same time, Bill O'Reilly suggests that it would be a good idea for Al Qaeda to annhiliate San Francisco. Forget damaging the morale of the troops, he's encouraging terrorists to blow up an American city!
Nate, whether or not you feel you belong on this site is up to you. There is no question that you have offered an immense amount of valuable discussion and useful audio recommendations within these threads. Personally, I hope you choose to continue. The Internet is tough sometimes, especially because many of the tools we use to communicate (vocal fluctuations, facial expressions, gesticulations, etc.) cannot be infused into this simple exchange of words. It's also difficult because most of us have never actually met in person, which if we did it would help to deepen subsequent conversations.
We live in a volatile time, one that might take us aback while looking at it 20-30 years from now. Dan, you said something last week about the selfish nature of man, something that really got me thinking. You said:
to describe human nature as "selfish" is not unlike calling an elephant large. What we call "selfishness" is simply a basic human trait.
This is a quality with which I've never been comfortable, and always wished it was different. But as you say, it just is. It certainly explains the corporate scandals, the mass genocides, the falsifying of pharmaceutical data, cheating on taxes, and so on. Ultimately, it might also explain another human trait: the desire to live beyond it. While I'm not convinced this is possible, we do have our moments. And many times, they occur right here in this community. Thank you, Dan.
Barb is here, so we're off for a drive in the foothills. Enjoy your weekend, you guys.
You both have valid points in my opinion. Howard and I have different politics in many ways, yet it goes without saying that he's a very intelligent guy- and his opinion is something I respect.
Here's what's REALLY sad to me: Our national politics have devolved to a vehement, rhetorical, bareknuckled brawl on both sides of the aisle.
What happened to guys like Truman? Fervent believer in so many traditional liberal causes yet respectful of his opponents- many of whom were close friends? Or Lincoln- smart enough to surround himself with people who DISAGREED with him on a daily basis?
I thought 9/11 was a wake up call. But with guys like Dick Durbin,Pat Robertson and others spouting endless hot headed rhetoric, it's obvious that we can't respect one another's opinions at the National level.
It's okay to dislike Bush or Kennedy politically. But to openly spout HATE toward these people shows a lack of restraint and political maturity.
There. I think Nate, Howard and Lugnut would all agree on that one.
My biggest issue with the responses is that as soon as anyone asks a question about anything other than what kind of amp should I buy to go with my new Joseph Abboud shirt, it turns into some anti-Bush thoughtless tirade.
Are stereo gear and radical left-wing politics the only thing going on in peoples lives???
Sorry for not narrowing the question enough, but I didn't know I would have to be that narrow to get a meaningful answer!
Maybe I don't belong on AudiogoN anymore, if I ever did???
All I can say from having spent quite a lot of time with Pat is that he would be ashamed that you so speak so callously to a community of which you are a member. Compassion and understanding is not conditional, and yet you make it so. Next time you want specific responses, fill them in yourself.
I'm sorry for your loss, Nate, truly. And I'm sorry for your insensivity as well. Re-read your post again. It leaves all options available as far as responses go. If you don't realize that you live in a highly polarized nation, you are either not paying attention, not asking questions, or simply too busy labeling the idiots. Well, you can consider me one of them, and I'm grateful that Pat found it so easy to love me for it.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
