Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Identify this US Leftist

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Nathaniel
    Champion of the Balance
    • Nov 2006
    • 1989

    #16
    Originally posted by opaloka View Post
    ... transporting terrorist suspects to American soil (and where else should they be tried?)...
    The Haig?

    Not attempting to be facetious, but it seems to me that if we try war crimes in international courts that terrorist (at least, non domestic) crimes should be tried in the same manner.

    Comment

    • opaloka
      digital serf 41221z/74
      • Jun 2006
      • 3746

      #17
      Personally I'd prefer it if we all started moving in that direction but US voters might not go for it... also I'm not sure if the ICC is equiped to handle it? So far it seems like they only do a very few really high profile war crimes cases, heads of state... it'd be intersting to find out what the rationale is there, for not using the ICC.

      Comment

      • Kevin McCabe
        Citizen of Tanelorn
        • Jun 2007
        • 6112

        #18
        I like Ike! But he wasn't even close to the first important American. By my lights it was all those guys on the jury in that libel case well before the revolution. Oops! I forgot...The reactionaries in the Tea Party thought the idea of an American Revolution was a tad pink and deleted reference to that event in the school texts.
        Kevin McCabe
        The future is there, looking back at us. Trying to make sense of the fiction we will have become. William Gibson

        Comment

        • Wolfshead
          Itinerent player of pasteboards
          • Sep 2008
          • 883

          #19
          I agree with opa on the troop commitment. Obama did do what he said he would, drew down in Iraq, added in Afghanistan. Would I like to see the US out of both, certainly. Is it going to happen right away, not hardly. Again it is a situation that existed when the man took over and no matter how much we wish it could be done one cannot just say, "come home" and have it happen. Again it's a situation that took 8 years to develop and while caused more problems then it was worth to pull out and create a power vacuum will be even worse. The man has a strategy,he has the good sense to rely on his military advisors on how to implement the strategy, unlike a certain other president who thought it was going to be a Harry Potter swish and flick operation, and he's getting things done though maybe not as fast as his supporters think or like.

          As for his fiscal policies what can the man do that he hasn't done? Employment went from 5% to 9 or even higher because of the financial meltdown. That was in progress even before he took office, no way it was going to be stopped just because he went to the White House. People bitch about his spending in bailing out the banks and companies like GM but just think what the unemployment rate would have been without those policies to shore up those companies. Hell, I'm one of the dispossed, I lost my job in the meltdown. It's the second time a financial collapse caused by allowing companies to do what they wanted has cost me a job. There was no safety net for the job market because the prior administration cut it and I don't mean federal programs. I keep hearing those bitching about Obama's tax policies say they hurt small businesses and that small business is the greatest employer in the country. Could be but if so why do these same folks support a system that allows small businesses to be gobbled up in to gigantic mega corps? Look at the financial field alone. At one time there were thousands of small regionals but they all got gobbled up as everyone wanted to be Bank of America or Wells Fargo or whatever. When a couple of big banks got hit there were no midsize or smaller ones left to take up the slack, the whole system went down. Same as businesses, they consolidated, grew, shed jobs in the name of efficieny and when money got tight they contracted and laid off and the small businesses they had gobbled up earlier were no longer around to cushion the blow. All in the name of unfettered capitalism. If unfettered capitalism is what people want then they better be prepared to return to the days before 1929, when people lived in company towns and bought at company stores or worked in sweatshops for pennies a day with no bennies while those at the top of the food chain took their untold millions and started philanthropic institutions with them, pretending to care about the masses while using the crap out of them to get those millions. I don't have the numbers but I will bet the unemployment rate wasn't all that great then either and we will head in that direction as long as deregulation is seen as the be all and end all. Oh wait, we already are except that today's captains of industry and finance don't have the balls to pretend that the give a damn, to them it's the old mantras greed is good and if you got it, flaunt it.

          As for his policies not working I don't know about you but my investments, mainly my retirement fund have come back some from their lows, too bad I had to spend too much of it after I lost my job. Something must be working. Also there was a report out not too long ago stating that businesses have recoved quite a bit more than thought they just aren't spending the cash to reinvest and rehire, they are hanging on to it. Now considering that higher unemployment makes for cheaper labor and that with no sign of a recovery the people are willing to forsake Obama's policies and vote back in the party of deregulation you don't think there might be some ulterior motives as to why the economic situation hasn't improved more than it has? The sheeple have already shown what they are willing to do and have made it harder for anything to get done since they have returned the G NO P to some power. I didn't like the monilith we had last decade and I surely don't want one on the other side either but unless someone is willing to compromise nothing is getting done and Obama has shown a willingness to compromise. Too bad noone else has.

          All things considered is Obama perfect? Hell no. At least he has some intelligence and is willing to work towards helping the people. Do I agree with everything he has done or plans on trying to do? Again hell no but as far as I'm concerned he's the best of a bad lot right now. I shudder to think what we could be looking at with a Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman in charge. Does he get a pass? Not really though i'm not going to condemn him for things beyond his control either. Personally I'm pissed off at his cave in on health care and his inability to reform a tax code that give the mega corps tax breaks and credits for keeping profits out of the country but then again not only has the GOP but up barriers here but so have members of his own party. On issues like these I wish he wasn't such a compromiser and would take to the bully pulpit and try and get the point across to the people. Just think, if GE was paying taxes on that $14B profit rather than getting a credit on it maybe the deficit and debt wouldn't be so in the red. And do you think Exxon really needs subsidies on oil these days? But instead of people thinking of this they prefer to believe that Obama's "treehugging" enviormental policies and the fact that gays want to get married are at the root of our problems.

          Ok, off my soapbox for a time. Just hope noone takes these comments personal, just my POV. Hell I got relatives and a couple of really good friends who take me for a raving loon because I support the man but I haven't excommunicated them yet. As was said probably can't change POVs but I'm at least going to get mine out there and am reading others even tho I may not agree.
          herb

          Man spends his time on devising a more idiot proof computer. The universe spends its time devising bigger idiots. So far the universe is winning.

          http://www.wolfshead.net/wolfshowl


          http://www.wolfshead.net/books

          Comment

          • Vazkar Asquinol
            Champion of the Balance
            • Oct 2007
            • 1603

            #20
            Originally posted by Kevin McCabe View Post
            I like Ike! But he wasn't even close to the first important American. By my lights it was all those guys on the jury in that libel case well before the revolution. Oops! I forgot...The reactionaries in the Tea Party thought the idea of an American Revolution was a tad pink and deleted reference to that event in the school texts.
            Bolded confuses me. Are you referring to the text book thing down in Texas? That wasn't the Tea Party folks. As a matter of fact the Tea Party folks are the ones that were upset at the "revision" of history in text books there and brought the revisionist agenda to light.

            Or are we talking apples and oranges here? Please clarify.
            "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." -Robert A. Heinlein

            "If I accept you as you are, I will make you worse; however, if I treat you as though you are what you are capable of becoming, I will help you become that." -Johann Wolfgang Goethe

            "Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind." -Thomas Jefferson

            Comment

            • Lucid Sirius
              Jester, ret.
              • Mar 2009
              • 465

              #21
              I miss Ike. Seems to have been a general exception to Mark Twain's quip:

              "History has tried hard to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians. Now, to go and stick one at the very head of the government couldn't be wise."

              What I find most interesting about the current president is that there hasn't been a high-profile scandal in his administration. Yet? Could be, or could be he's something different from what we've had since Ike.

              "When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained."
              - Mark Twain, notebook entry, 1898.

              Comment

              • Pebble
                Eternal Champion
                • Dec 2006
                • 2550

                #22
                http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/t...-messages.html

                Oscar the Grounch?

                One! Two!Three!
                Papa was a Rolling Stone......

                Comment

                • opaloka
                  digital serf 41221z/74
                  • Jun 2006
                  • 3746

                  #23
                  If shows are trying to brainwash kids to be leftists they are doing a really crap job. Anyway, there's always been plenty of shows with an unabashed right wing bias (agenda?) as well. Ever watch 24?

                  It doesn't really matter one way or another IMO. Most of the youngsters that voted for Obama were formed in the 80's, when most of the brainwashing that was going on in cartoons was right-wing. Similairly the hippies had to endure constant indroctination into the right wing agenda in the 50's. I grew up in the 70's and for the most part we had liberal indoctrination on TV but it didn't stick, the predominate view of folks my age is a kind of corporate libertarianism, albeit a vaguely green one.

                  Comment

                  • Wolfshead
                    Itinerent player of pasteboards
                    • Sep 2008
                    • 883

                    #24
                    Originally posted by opaloka View Post
                    If shows are trying to brainwash kids to be leftists they are doing a really crap job. Anyway, there's always been plenty of shows with an unabashed right wing bias (agenda?) as well. Ever watch 24?

                    It doesn't really matter one way or another IMO. Most of the youngsters that voted for Obama were formed in the 80's, when most of the brainwashing that was going on in cartoons was right-wing. Similairly the hippies had to endure constant indroctination into the right wing agenda in the 50's. I grew up in the 70's and for the most part we had liberal indoctrination on TV but it didn't stick, the predominate view of folks my age is a kind of corporate libertarianism, albeit a vaguely green one.
                    For every "leftist" show out there there has been a similar one with a "rightwing" viewpoint. Funny how those never seem to get mentioned. Kind of like the major news outlets or MSM. Over the last decade or two most, outside of FOX and MSNBC have been pretty centrist and newspapers basically reflected their publisher's bias, left or right, yet somehow the MSM has been labeled leftist even when none of them challenged the policies of the right dominated government the last decade while FOX, which was a virtually cheering section for that government was called fair and balanced. That's been the problem with the left and even more so the center, as they have let the right define the terms over the last 20 years without fighting back and now people are so used to hearing those definitions that they accept them as the truth.

                    Just witness the 2008 elections where rightests like Coulter and Limbaugh tried to label the undecided vote as too dumb or wishy washy to pick a side. Although I could say it probably never occurs to some people that maybe people are undecided because they like some liberal and some conservative policies (myself I have no problems with balanced budgets and term limits but also believe in gay marriage and a woman's right to choose) and therefore are trying to figure out which candidates represent the greater potentiality for them as they probably aren't getting everything they want in one package. I think they know exactly what the undecided vote is but are intentionally trying to marginlize them. Me, I think they are probably the smartist people out there but listen to the right they are stupid because they don't follow the dogma on only side of the spectrum.

                    I think it's about time to stop letting the right define the terms and the battlegrounds but trying to find charismatic enough spokesmen that might be paid attention to seems to be kind of hard. The best spokesmen for the center to left are guys like Colbert, Franken and Maher, who, because they use humour are viewed more as comedians where as Beck, Limbaugh and Coulter, instead being viewed as the commentators they are are considered "news" people because of the outlet FOX has given them.
                    Last edited by Wolfshead; 05-30-2011, 09:38 PM.
                    herb

                    Man spends his time on devising a more idiot proof computer. The universe spends its time devising bigger idiots. So far the universe is winning.

                    http://www.wolfshead.net/wolfshowl


                    http://www.wolfshead.net/books

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X