Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Open Discussions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-23-2005, 04:35 PM   #101
Adam Alexander
Dojo: none currently
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 499
United_States
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Nathan Gusdorf wrote:
Or your job will get outsourced and you won't make the money because someone in India has your job. Or perhaps you never had the opportunity and support to become successful. But I guess im just being silly because everything must be black and white with no exceptions..
You're not owed the job or the money...You negotiated the wage for the work you performed when hired...in it, unless you've got a contractual stipulation citing the length of the relationship it really doesn't matter who gets the job after you lose it to a better competitor...Better because of price or whatever.

It is black and white.

Quote:
Nathan Gusdorf wrote:
First you say that everyone who wants to be successful can be. But now when people take advantage of an opportunity in the way you suggest you say that because they made that choice they can die and its alright because they chose to be there. .
The government or anyone else is not here to tell you how or to give you the supplies to become succesful--it and them are only to stay out of your way while you figure it out...Same as those people you refer to...and yes, they can die.


Quote:
Nathan Gusdorf wrote:
And clearly your own personal needs are the only considerations. You're not a woman so why do women's reproductive rights matter? Perhaps you could look at his whole resume and how he will affect the whole country as opposed to the simple effects on your own life..
A woman's right to abort a child because she was irresponsible is not my concern.

Roberts is going to crush the liberals by leading the charge to reinstitute The Constitution Soon, we'll be a little more free again...See, I'm concerned about more than reproductive "rights."

Quote:
Nathan Gusdorf wrote:
but the idea the the government could violate that privacy scares the crap out of me.
Then you might want to steer clear of liberals...they want to tell you how to live--how you spend your money, how you treat your kids, how you run your community, etc. If that's not the ultimate invasion of privacy, I don't know what is.

Last edited by Adam Alexander : 09-23-2005 at 04:38 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2005, 12:12 AM   #102
MitchMZ
Dojo: Prairie-Aikikai
Location: Clive, IA
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 75
United_States
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

*I think government in general violates a lot of our privacy. That goes for conservatives and liberals in our system. I was under the impression disappearing freedoms were a bipartisan issue.

I would rather not have the government take huge gobs of tax money from the middle class to spend on pork and the lower class, while many of those highest in society find ways around paying much at all to the goverment. That just screws the middle class/majority of America.

I'm all about free trade and finding more efficient ways to run our nation.

I also find it ridiculous that the government gets invloved in moral issues such as censorship; I really think the only place true censorship takes place is in the home.

A good example of goverment BS is a law that was just passed in my city here in Iowa. Pop and candy are now not allowed in Des Moines public schools, and they are shrinking food portions. I find that a ridiculous waste a taxpayer's money. If kids want to eat a lot or drink pop they will. And don't get me started on the conservatives and liberals that have been picking on video game developers; frankly, I think they should be slapped.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2005, 01:23 PM   #103
Erik
Location: Bay Area
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,200
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Mitch Kuntz wrote:
I would rather not have the government take huge gobs of tax money from the middle class to spend on pork and the lower class, while many of those highest in society find ways around paying much at all to the goverment. That just screws the middle class/majority of America.
It also screws the middle class to spend extravagantly and not tax. Well, it screws them eventually, that is, but we seem to be a country that figures eventually will never arrive.

Also, the rich, by far, pay the most taxes. The discrepancy is huge, in fact. That being said, I would agree that the Bush tax cuts have favored the wealthy to an extreme. We need to roll the tax cuts back.

Our leadership, on both sides, stinks in this country. It's probably the only thing I agree with the troll from Santa Cruz on.

And you know who, you are still on ignore.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2005, 02:59 PM   #104
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Jean de Rochefort wrote:
You're a "decentralist" who's a fan of corporations? A decentralist who's a fan of centralization?

See, when you encourage corporations, you discourage individual action through business...since your idea is based on corporations, you're discouraging individual action...that's a liberal for you, I suppose.
This (*holding hands out a spans-width*) is the pier...and THIS (*holding hands out a span-and-a-half*) is your stroll of logic, along said pier.

I do not, nor never have, encouraged corporations. Try not to read meanings into things I've never propounded.

Quote:
Also, everyone does have the means to support themselves...except the stupid, uncreative, and/or lazy.
Absolute, unequivocal nonsense. The sick, the aged, the ppl stuck in the Superdome?? All unable to help themselves.

Quote:
Those people should starve because they don't give what the community needs...
With respect: SOMEONE needs a severe and thorough re-examination of their morals. NO ONE, I mean NO ONE: "deserves to starve."

Quote:
Money is the measure of someone's communal value.
Ah, now we're into nice, pat fairy-tales. This might be a nice theory, but in reality: money has an altogether different value--tied to ppl's conception of its value (i.e., the market), the value of goods produced and sold, and a myriad of other factors.

Quote:
If you have no money, that's because no one's willing to give it. If no one's willing to give it, that's because they don't think the service you provide is valuable. If the value of your product (petting cats or whatever) has a social value and you're not being compensated, the community will suffer when you stop providing that product and will create a demand...resulting in you getting some money
If you have no money: there are many reasons for not having it--your corporation in which you poured your heart and soul left town; you invested unwisely; you were cheated out of it; etc.

Quote:
Further, you've convinced me to give to the GOP again this coming election season.
Well, if it were THAT easy: then I fear for your cognitive ability to discern right from wrong.

Quote:
The ideology that you're encouraging and the illness within the community that was exposed to Katrina reminds me of why I voted for Bush for his first term.
And still: you'd rather vote for the Party that foisted up the single most danger to the US gov't, due process, and checks and balances, than thinking outside your concrete box.

I feel much sorrow, for your self-imposed mental conscriptions.

Quote:
Sure, Iraq's a bunch of BS. However, you've got to keep the war machine primed...and let's face it, those soldiers dying over their aren't there because someone drafted them.
No, the vast majority of them are over there because they need the money.


Quote:
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. It's a shame. What do you pick, the corporate prostitute or the apologist of the lazy?
What do YOU pick... corporate greed, or guilt-tripping the poor (based upon a few backsliders)?

Nah, don't bother answering...you already have.

Quote:
Well, I like guns and will never need an abortion...and darn it...I really like Roberts.
How nice for you.

Quote:
Who knows, maybe a Perot-esque candidate will emerge. Until then, I'm going to concern myself with local politics.
You'll get no protest from me, on THAT score.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2005, 03:03 PM   #105
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Pot. Kettle. Black.

Quote:
Erik Haselhofer wrote:
It's probably the only thing I agree with the troll from Santa Cruz on.

And you know who, you are still on ignore.
Oh, I am so aggrieved.

A man who comes on (here, and on other threads) only to proclaim that I'm a troll, from the comfy safety of ignore.

Newsflash, bubulah: SOMEONE needs a definition check:

TROLL

Quote:
In the context of the Internet, a troll is a person who posts inflammatory messages intended to cause a disruption in discourse. The word is also often used to describe such messages.
And so, I bid thee well, with these three simple words...(see title)
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2005, 03:11 PM   #106
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Jean de Rochefort wrote:
Then you might want to steer clear of liberals...they want to tell you how to live--how you spend your money, how you treat your kids, how you run your community, etc. If that's not the ultimate invasion of privacy, I don't know what is.
How long have you labored under this misapplied definition of "Liberal?"

Quote:
Liberalism is an ideology, or current of political thought, that attempts to maximise individual liberty through a system of rights under law, in a system allowing economic competition and competition of ideas within a defined framework.

Principle tenets of liberalism include:

That all people have equal rights under the law.
That no person shall be deprived of life or property without due process of law.
That the freedom of individuals shall not be arbitrarily abridged.
That governments rule with the consent of the governed.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2005, 09:02 PM   #107
Nathan Gusdorf
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 14
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
I wrote:
but the idea the the government could violate that privacy scares the crap out of me.

Quote:
Jean de Rochefort wrote:
Then you might want to steer clear of liberals...they want to tell you how to live--how you spend your money, how you treat your kids, how you run your community, etc. If that's not the ultimate invasion of privacy, I don't know what is.
Really? Thats interesting. I'm not sure what you are referring to though. Because its the Republican party that supports the Patriot Act. Whether or not you think that giving the government incredible power to infringe on our rights to catch terrorists or embezzlers is a good thing its an infringment on privacy. It was conservative judges who dissented in Roe v. Wade which is largely a privacy concern. The conservative judges dissented in Lawrence v. Texas, another privacy issue. Our republican president is the one who wants to be able to lable citizens as enemy combatants to hold them indefinitely without attorney. He also wants to tell you who you can marry. These all seem like fairly significant violations of privacy to me. Where is it that liberals are the ones who are infringing on privacy?
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 08:01 AM   #108
Hogan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 106
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Nathan Gusdorf wrote:
Really? Thats interesting. I'm not sure what you are referring to though. Because its the Republican party that supports the Patriot Act. Whether or not you think that giving the government incredible power to infringe on our rights to catch terrorists or embezzlers is a good thing its an infringment on privacy. It was conservative judges who dissented in Roe v. Wade which is largely a privacy concern. The conservative judges dissented in Lawrence v. Texas, another privacy issue. Our republican president is the one who wants to be able to lable citizens as enemy combatants to hold them indefinitely without attorney. He also wants to tell you who you can marry. These all seem like fairly significant violations of privacy to me. Where is it that liberals are the ones who are infringing on privacy?
Correct me if I am wrong, but the Patriot Act was passed unanamously. That means it was supprted by both democrats and republicans - liberals and conservatives.

Re Roe - the conservative argument is that it should be left to the states & their legislatures, i.e., the will of the people, and not the courts, i.e., unaccountable government. Which way would be more invasive ? An unaccountable branch of government or the branch that has elected folks ?

Re marriage - both sides are telling us who we can marry. If it's the conservatves who say we can marry only the opposite sex, or if its the liberals who say we can mary both sexes. But another argument is why should the government be in that argument at all ?? However, if it is 'the publics' opinion that 'family' should be encouraged, then whatever government is in power has the right, through the electoral system, to enact tax laws, etc. to encourage 'the publics' definition of a happy marriage. Should their be marriage between adult and child ? Between brother and sister ? Between cousins ?

However,
-who is more likely to pass laws that define what free speech is ? A liberal who wants to 'protect' the little guy, or a conservative who says, free speech for all, hate speech, bigoted speech, whatever ?
-who is more likely to pass gun control laws, a liberal or conservative ? And what kind of laws will be passed by the liberal ? Restrictive laws ?
-who is more likely to want a supreme court that is involved in personal issues, like abortion, etc., a conservative or a liberal ? Would a conservative say, "The Supreme Court is the word of God", or "The Supreme Court makes laws" ? No, these quotes were given by liberals, and both of these quotes are quite invasive and activist.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 11:36 AM   #109
Adam Alexander
Dojo: none currently
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 499
United_States
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Absolute, unequivocal nonsense. The sick, the aged, the ppl stuck in the Superdome?? All unable to help themselves.
It's all about your perspective on helplessness. To me, their helplessness is the result of many decisions that led up to that moment.

I feel bad for those ppl, but the reality is that they've had an entire life to prepare for such catastrophes and chose not to. Therefore, they were not helpless.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
With respect: SOMEONE needs a severe and thorough re-examination of their morals. NO ONE, I mean NO ONE: "deserves to starve."
Depends. I mean "deserve" as simply the expected consequence of an action, group of actions or course of life chosen.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Ah, now we're into nice, pat fairy-tales. This might be a nice theory, but in reality: money has an altogether different value--tied to ppl's conception of its value (i.e., the market), the value of goods produced and sold, and a myriad of other factors.
We're saying the same thing.



Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
If you have no money: there are many reasons for not having it--your corporation in which you poured your heart and soul left town; you invested unwisely; you were cheated out of it; etc.
Yes, all things that the individual should have gaurded against...again, a situation where the result is deserved...or, if you prefer, to be expected...All of which I would categorize as manifestations of stupidity, laziness, lack of creativity, etc.



Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
No, the vast majority of them are over there because they need the money.
No, Neil, because they want the money. Maybe they prefer hurting innocent people over homelessness. That's still a choice.

But, for the most part, it's far less severe consequences they're trying to escape.

Hmph--the effimination of America. Let's all make excuses for why everyone does anything.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 04:28 PM   #110
James Davis
 
James Davis's Avatar
Dojo: Ft. Myers School of Aikido
Location: Ft. Myers, FL.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 716
United_States
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Jean de Rochefort wrote:
It's all about your perspective on helplessness. To me, their helplessness is the result of many decisions that led up to that moment.

I feel bad for those ppl, but the reality is that they've had an entire life to prepare for such catastrophes and chose not to. Therefore, they were not helpless.




Depends. I mean "deserve" as simply the expected consequence of an action, group of actions or course of life chosen.




We're saying the same thing.





Yes, all things that the individual should have gaurded against...again, a situation where the result is deserved...or, if you prefer, to be expected...All of which I would categorize as manifestations of stupidity, laziness, lack of creativity, etc.





No, Neil, because they want the money. Maybe they prefer hurting innocent people over homelessness. That's still a choice.

But, for the most part, it's far less severe consequences they're trying to escape.

Hmph--the effimination of America. Let's all make excuses for why everyone does anything.

Need the money/want the money...
Just how rich are these soldiers getting anyway? I know a few guys that went into the armed forces and not one of them joined the military with the intention of "hurting innocent people". Sure, some of them wanted help with college tuition, but there are other ways to get that. Maybe they felt that they would be defending our right to do what we're doing right now?
All I seem to be reading or hearing from the media lately is that our servicemen are either dumb hucklebucks that were duped into joining the military, or sadistic bastards that want to torture and kill innocent people. This might sound like a crazy idea to some, but maybe these guys joined the military with good intentions and an idea to "give back to their communities"?
I know someone will probably be posting here in no time at all to badmouth some of my friends, family, sempai and kohai. That's okay. They couldn't look through an electron microscope and see the rat's behind that I give about their opinion.

"The only difference between Congress and drunken sailors is that drunken sailors spend their own money." -Tom Feeney, representative from Florida
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 04:51 PM   #111
Nathan Gusdorf
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 14
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but the Patriot Act was passed unanamously. That means it was supprted by both democrats and republicans - liberals and conservatives.
Well I don't have time to respond to all your comments because that would mean not doing homework. Then I can't go to Aikido or watch Boston Legal. So I'll make it quick. The Patriot Act was not technically passed unanimously, but it was for all intents and purposes. After people read it however you must admit that in general conservatives supported it and liberals did not.

Here's one of the things on the first page of the "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT)"

Quote:
To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes.
That 'for other purposes' part seems kinda invasive to me.


Quote:
However,
-who is more likely to pass laws that define what free speech is ? A liberal who wants to 'protect' the little guy, or a conservative who says, free speech for all, hate speech, bigoted speech, whatever ?
Im going to assume that "whatever" includes 'cursing speech' on the radio. Flag burning is also a form of speech. Typically liberals seek to allow these more than conservatives.

Quote:
-who is more likely to pass gun control laws, a liberal or conservative ? And what kind of laws will be passed by the liberal ? Restrictive laws ?
Concerning ourselvse with privacy, to me carrying a gun in public is more than privacy issue. If you are referring to other issues cite them.

Quote:
-who is more likely to want a supreme court that is involved in personal issues, like abortion, etc., a conservative or a liberal ? Would a conservative say, "The Supreme Court is the word of God", or "The Supreme Court makes laws" ? No, these quotes were given by liberals, and both of these quotes are quite invasive and activist.
As long as we are following our constitution the Supreme Court must have some say in personal issues as the constitution gives us rights (like privacy) and the only way to keep states from violating those rights is to have a check, i.e. the Supreme Court. And I don't know any liberals who share those sentiments.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 05:09 PM   #112
Adam Alexander
Dojo: none currently
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 499
United_States
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
James Davis, Jr. wrote:
I know a few guys that went into the armed forces and not one of them joined the military with the intention of "hurting innocent people".
Yup. And mentally ill arsonists set fire to help people; Some pedophiles think what they do makes their victims feel good; etc.

It doesn't matter what their intention was/is. What matters is what is the result of their actions...in this case, helping create a whole new welfare state...in the mid-east. And a colony.

Wake up!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 05:59 PM   #113
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Jean de Rochefort wrote:
It's all about your perspective on helplessness. To me, their helplessness is the result of many decisions that led up to that moment.

I feel bad for those ppl, but the reality is that they've had an entire life to prepare for such catastrophes and chose not to. Therefore, they were not helpless.
Again, nonsense. What about the ppl locked in the prison (note: a short-term facility, not long-term. They had one guy in there who was arrested for reading tarot without a license) who drowned because the guards didn't bother to get them out? Did THEY deserve what they got?

What about the infirm who were left in the Superdome with promises of food and water and were forgotten?

What about the mom of 2+ kids who did not receive a proper education from ANYONE, much less public education, about family planning? Does SHE deserve our scorn?

Please: let's not go around pointing fingers and casting blame at the lot of the poor, merely because they weren't ready for whatever disaster sent them to their present fate. The old Indian adage applies here: "Grant that I may not judge my neighbor until I have walked a mile in his mocassins."

You cannot judge a poor, single mother on welfare, because you'll never, ever be in that situation; so don't even try.

Quote:
Depends. I mean "deserve" as simply the expected consequence of an action, group of actions or course of life chosen.
I care not in the least HOW you define "deserve." NO ONE "deserves" to starve. Everyone has a basic right to live.

Quote:
Yes, all things that the individual should have gaurded against...again, a situation where the result is deserved...or, if you prefer, to be expected...All of which I would categorize as manifestations of stupidity, laziness, lack of creativity, etc.
You see? You get into this judgemental attitude towards the lot of ppl, and you cast broad-net assumptions about them (i.e., they are "stupid, lazy," etc).

I'll give you a personal example. I once applied for a job (independent contractor status) where the boss/interviewer told me that he expected a year's commitment from me.

Now, from this: one might well assume that the employer was planning to keep the job active for a year as well, right?

Wrong. After about 6 weeks, he "sold" that part of the business to another contractor, who promptly turned to me and fired me, with 2 weeks' notice. Now, was I "stupid," "lazy," or "naive" for making the assumption of the job's security? Perhaps, but I tend to think that the employer was being less than honest, in asking for a years' commitment when he was clearly planning to sell that part of the business, even as he was interviewing me. At the least, he could have told me of his plans.

So, it is presumptive and arrogant to make assumptions about ppl's life choices, when you know so little about their lot.





Quote:
No, Neil, because they want the money. Maybe they prefer hurting innocent people over homelessness. That's still a choice.
Again, your presuming.

Quote:
Hmph--the effimination of America. Let's all make excuses for why everyone does anything.
It beats blaming the poor and the downtrodden on their lot based upon your limited understanding of them, by a mile, IMO.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 06:08 PM   #114
aikido funky monkey
Dojo: aikido northwest
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 13
United_States
Offline
Ai symbol Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
John Hogan wrote:
I thought the majority of the poor are white ?? Didn't you say that in another recent thread ??
ya. I beleive that only 25percent or so of the poor people are african american(never refer to someone as black or whit in front of me),(if i new how to start a thread Id start one about it).
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 06:25 PM   #115
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
John Hogan wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but the Patriot Act was passed unanamously. That means it was supprted by both democrats and republicans - liberals and conservatives.
And another thing: you like to present facts and ignore the tiny, yet highly significant details: such as the fact that there was war hysteria going on at the time, and the people were pressuring Congress to get something done. The Patriot Act was presented without time for debate--a tactic that BushCo likes to do a lot, these days.

Quote:
Re Roe - the conservative argument is that it should be left to the states & their legislatures, i.e., the will of the people, and not the courts, i.e., unaccountable government.
Wrong. The Conservatives want Roe dead. They cannot attack it directly (as it's the law of the land), and so they make little end-runs around it, limiting its effectiveness (i.e., the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, etc).

This narrow interpretation of the Constitution of "only applying it to limited circumstances, and let the states decide" is another end-run. Many Con's want nothing more than the good old days of the 19th C, where Social Security and gov't assistance are nonexistant.

Just watch: we'll get an ideologue in the Supreme Court who will use this idea of "narrowly interpreting the Constitution" to effectively neutralize Roe.

And THEN, just watch the social misery rise.

Quote:
Re marriage - both sides are telling us who we can marry. If it's the conservatves who say we can marry only the opposite sex, or if its the liberals who say we can mary both sexes. But another argument is why should the government be in that argument at all ?? However, if it is 'the publics' opinion that 'family' should be encouraged, then whatever government is in power has the right, through the electoral system, to enact tax laws, etc. to encourage 'the publics' definition of a happy marriage. Should their be marriage between adult and child ? Between brother and sister ? Between cousins ?
An interesting point, but you are slightly off in the Liberal perspective. Personally, it should be about consent. Cousins should be allowed to marry, if they are in mutual consent and aware of their familial ties, IMO.

A child cannot properly consent to marriage, because a child cannot be fully informed of the consequences of his/her actions.

Quote:
However,
-who is more likely to pass laws that define what free speech is ? A liberal who wants to 'protect' the little guy, or a conservative who says, free speech for all, hate speech, bigoted speech, whatever?
huh??? Conservatives, as I understand it, do not promote bigoted or hate speech. And, any issue can become partisan, but the issue would be to define "free speech" to protect people from unjust prosecution.

I just read about half of "Perilous Times," in which the author pointed out that this issue was at the core of free speech: defining it so that the Supreme Court could
determine who could be jailed for citing insurrection, and who could not.

Quote:
-who is more likely to pass gun control laws, a liberal or conservative ? And what kind of laws will be passed by the liberal ? Restrictive laws ?
Depends upon the Liberal. If it were me, I would not bother with gun control.

Quote:
-who is more likely to want a supreme court that is involved in personal issues, like abortion, etc., a conservative or a liberal ?
Both.

Quote:
Would a conservative say, "The Supreme Court is the word of God", or "The Supreme Court makes laws" ? No, these quotes were given by liberals, and both of these quotes are quite invasive and activist.
Really, John: it's time for those history lessons (maybe take them along with the civics classes you so desperately need). You seem to lack understanding of the role of the Supreme Court. Liberals certainly do not claim that the Supreme Court is "the word of God," any more than they would claim that it is responsible for making laws.

The Supreme Court acts as a legal interpretor of the Constitution, in reference to laws passed by Congress, as well as maintaining a check upon Presidential power. If anything, "activist judges" tend to come more from the "Conservative" side, rather than the "Liberal."

Remember the Scopes Monkey trial? Or, the Dred Scott decision? Or even more recently, the case of Bush v. Gore, which selected our current walking disaster to be the Pres?

And remember? The decision, for the first (and hopefully, only) time in history, abandoned the notion of precedent? The decision was meant to be a "once-only" affair: because if it were widely applied, all states would have had to revamp their electoral process.

If this isn't a Conservative Judicial activist decision: I dont know what is (and, let's not forget Jon's fave S.C. nominee--John Roberts--who decides in favor of allowing the Gitmo detainee's no habeas corpus, even as he is being interviewed for the Supreme Ct. decision, by the very man named as defendant in this trial...George Bush the Lesser.

"Activist?" Hell, yeah!)
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2005, 06:28 PM   #116
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Kyle Lindsey wrote:
ya. I beleive that only 25percent or so of the poor people are african american,(if i new how to start a thread Id start one about it).
To clarify:

1. The majority of blacks, are poor.
2. The majority of poor, are white.

Quote:
never refer to someone as black or whit in front of me
No, I wouldn't. I just use it as shorthand instead of typing out "African American's," or "Caucasian."

Apologies to anyone offended by this shorthand.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 09-27-2005 at 06:33 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2005, 07:20 AM   #117
Hogan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 106
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Nathan Gusdorf wrote:
Well I don't have time to respond to all your comments because that would mean not doing homework. Then I can't go to Aikido or watch Boston Legal. So I'll make it quick. The Patriot Act was not technically passed unanimously, but it was for all intents and purposes. After people read it however you must admit that in general conservatives supported it and liberals did not.
So, the liberals don't read legislation as important as this before they vote ? And we pay them how much ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2005, 07:31 AM   #118
Hogan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 106
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
And another thing: you like to present facts and ignore the tiny, yet highly significant details: such as the fact that there was war hysteria going on at the time, and the people were pressuring Congress to get something done. The Patriot Act was presented without time for debate--a tactic that BushCo likes to do a lot, these days.
Then the liberals shoulda' read the act and had some backbone.

Quote:
Wrong. The Conservatives want Roe dead. They cannot attack it directly (as it's the law of the land), and so they make little end-runs around it, limiting its effectiveness (i.e., the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, etc).
You're right, they do want it dead; they want it left to the states.

Quote:
huh??? Conservatives, as I understand it, do not promote bigoted or hate speech.
No, they just don't want to restrict it - free speech and all.

Quote:
... I would not bother with gun control.
I love you.



Quote:
Really, John: it's time for those history lessons (maybe take them along with the civics classes you so desperately need). You seem to lack understanding of the role of the Supreme Court. Liberals certainly do not claim that the Supreme Court is "the word of God," any more than they would claim that it is responsible for making laws.
Sorry - Nancy Pelosi said just that. She said the US Supreme Court is the word of GOD. During the hearings, there were several democrats that remarked that the supreme court MAKES LAWS. It is not me that needs the history lesson, it is those that made these remarks. Read my post carefully; I was quoting - these are not my views.

Quote:
If anything, "activist judges" tend to come more from the "Conservative" side, rather than the "Liberal."
Quote:
Remember the Scopes Monkey trial? Or, the Dred Scott decision? Or even more recently, the case of Bush v. Gore, which selected our current walking disaster to be the Pres?
And Kelo v CT ? By the way, the relevant court decision re Bush v Gore was decided 7 to 2; the 5 to 4 decision was whether FL had enough time to finish recount, which time frame is governed by the US constitution.

Quote:
And remember? The decision, for the first (and hopefully, only) time in history, abandoned the notion of precedent? The decision was meant to be a "once-only" affair: because if it were widely applied, all states would have had to revamp their electoral process.
You know, there has to be a first time for precedent. It has to start somewhere. By they way, precedent had been over-turned on numerous occasions by the court.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2005, 07:37 AM   #119
Hogan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 106
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
...No, I wouldn't. I just use it as shorthand instead of typing out "African American's," or "Caucasian."

Apologies to anyone offended by this shorthand.
C'mon, Neil, don't cave into this politically correct blackmail !! Free speech ! Why, it's as simple as black & white (free speech, that is) !
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2005, 10:18 AM   #120
James Davis
 
James Davis's Avatar
Dojo: Ft. Myers School of Aikido
Location: Ft. Myers, FL.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 716
United_States
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

[quote=Jean de Rochefort]It doesn't matter what their intention was/is. What matters is what is the result of their actions.../QUOTE]
Jean,
I hope we never heve to injure or kill someone to protect ourselves or those we love. I hope a kid never chases a ball in front of our cars. I hope our duties, responsibilities, choices, or destinies never lead us to do something unpleasant, because it won't matter if we're good people or not. ??

"The only difference between Congress and drunken sailors is that drunken sailors spend their own money." -Tom Feeney, representative from Florida
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2005, 12:00 PM   #121
Adam Alexander
Dojo: none currently
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 499
United_States
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
James Davis, Jr. wrote:
I hope we never heve to injure or kill someone to protect ourselves or those we love. I hope a kid never chases a ball in front of our cars. I hope our duties, responsibilities, choices, or destinies never lead us to do something unpleasant, because it won't matter if we're good people or not. ??
I'm with you--I hope it doesn't happen...you know, someone not wathcing their children in order to keep them out of the street and all...


"never refer to someone as black or whit in front of me"

What kind of BS is that? Never refer to someone as short or tall, fat or skinny, funny or boring in front of me!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2005, 04:04 PM   #122
Adam Alexander
Dojo: none currently
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 499
United_States
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Please: let's not go around pointing fingers and casting blame at the lot of the poor, merely because they weren't ready for whatever disaster sent them to their present fate. The old Indian adage applies here: "Grant that I may not judge my neighbor until I have walked a mile in his mocassins."
LOL. Yeah, they couldn't help not having a few bottles of water stored away...they're so poor they needed the bottle deposits for cigarrettes. LOL.

You reep what you sow.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
You cannot judge a poor, single mother on welfare, because you'll never, ever be in that situation; so don't even try.
LOL. Not only can I, but I'm obligated as an American and a victim of tax-theft to judge.

Here's my verdict: No one owed her the "education" you refer to. She chose to spread them. She chose to have children. She chose not to be prepared for the emergency. And I find her defense guilty of victim-mentality.



Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
I care not in the least HOW you define "deserve." NO ONE "deserves" to starve. Everyone has a basic right to live.
LOL. Where'd you get this? So proper use of words isn't contingent on definitions. LOL.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
You see? You get into this judgemental attitude towards the lot of ppl, and you cast broad-net assumptions about them (i.e., they are "stupid, lazy," etc).
That's right. However, the beauty of my judgement is that I want a government that gives those people the opportunity to break free from the misery that ideologies such as yours impose on people...victim-mentality and dependance.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
I'll give you a personal example. I once applied for a job (independent contractor status) where the boss/interviewer told me that he expected a year's commitment from me.
So? You were foolish. I've been there too. That's life. Live and learn...and I recommend never working for a lawyer either...I've done work for a handful and they've been consistently snakes who ripped me off.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Now, from this: one might well assume that the employer was planning to keep the job active for a year as well, right?
Years ago, I would of assumed that. However, I recognize that talk is talk now and don't maintain the foolish belief the employer OWED me that...that's called learning from mistakes.

If you wanted to do something good, start telling the story at schools or something.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
So, it is presumptive and arrogant to make assumptions about ppl's life choices, when you know so little about their lot.
No more presumptive and arrogant than believing the person you witness murder someone was a killer. The evidence is in the paycheck.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
It beats blaming the poor and the downtrodden on their lot based upon your limited understanding of them, by a mile, IMO.
Come on Neil, I WAS POOR!!! I grew up on welfare!!! I lived just outside of Detroit where the social cancer had spread.

I know all about the poor. I'm here to tell you, they reep what they sow.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2005, 09:30 PM   #123
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
John Hogan wrote:
Then the liberals shoulda' read the act and had some backbone.
Yes, and no. On one level I agree with you.

The Liberal Senators SHOULD have had some backbone. They SHOULD have stood up to a power-grabbing cabal that took over the White House.

But on the other: this is taking things out of context. Consider the pressure the Senators were under, to do something. Along comes the "Patriot" Act...now, in the wake of 9-11: how many Senators are going to say: now, wait a minute. Let's discuss this bill for a few weeks, sit down and talk about it. No: They're going to do the thing that covers their a**.

Is it high-minded? No. Is it human nature? Surely.

Quote:
You're right, they do want it dead; they want it left to the states.
Where it will be whittled down; or banned. Sorry, but this is the law of the land. The anti-abortion nutcases want to see the return to the days of back-alley operations and teen suicides. No thanks.

Quote:
No, they just don't want to restrict it - free speech and all.
Where they can legislate and lock up ppl for "treason" for speaking out, as they tried to do with the St. Patrick's Four. If the gov't managed to ram that one through: then ANY person expressing his free speech rights against Bush would be locked up.

You see: when you fail to legally define and protect free speech, you leave a BIIG loophole for the gov't to call dissenters treasonous. All this "free speech should not be legally defined" nonsense is a big legal smokescreen.

Quote:
I love you.
Scary.

Quote:
Sorry - Nancy Pelosi said just that. She said the US Supreme Court is the word of GOD. During the hearings, there were several democrats that remarked that the supreme court MAKES LAWS. It is not me that needs the history lesson, it is those that made these remarks. Read my post carefully; I was quoting - these are not my views.
Great, but one Congressman grandstanding to the cameras, doth not the general view of Liberals make. In her attempt to grandstand, she misrepresented the role of the Supreme Court.

Besides: since when is one Democratic Senator the "Voice of The Liberal?"

You'll need a few more examples, to prove your point.

Quote:
And Kelo v CT ?
Don't know that one. My point is that "activist judging" (whatever THAT means) is not the sole province of "Liberal" judges.

Quote:
By the way, the relevant court decision re Bush v Gore was decided 7 to 2; the 5 to 4 decision was whether FL had enough time to finish recount, which time frame is governed by the US constitution.
Sorry, but to me the relevant court decusion WAS the 5-4 decision to allow Florida to recount, as was their reasoning behind not allowing it.

Quote:
You know, there has to be a first time for precedent. It has to start somewhere. By they way, precedent had been over-turned on numerous occasions by the court.
The point is: this was the first time the Supreme Court said that precedent would NOT be used, in their decision.

And whether or not, precedent is overturned isn't the point: never has the S.C. stated that their decision CANNOT be used, as precedent.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2005, 10:08 PM   #124
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Jean de Rochefort wrote:
LOL. Yeah, they couldn't help not having a few bottles of water stored away...they're so poor they needed the bottle deposits for cigarrettes. LOL.

You reep what you sow.
Ah, and here we exhibit the usual and always amazing Conservative
ability to read minds, and discern the fate of people.

Yes, yes: you were poor. Me too: welcome to the club.

But, I don't judge ppl as lazy and worthy of "reaping what they sow;" when I hear about the lot of maquiladora's in Mexico, for instance: in towns where the Company owns everything: your house, your job, your groceries, your doctor's: and there is no chance to change or improve your lot....and then people such as yourself come along and smugly state that they "reap what they sew."

Such arrogance and presumption is saddening, to witness.

Quote:
LOL. Not only can I, but I'm obligated as an American and a victim of tax-theft to judge.

Here's my verdict: No one owed her the "education" you refer to. She chose to spread them. She chose to have children. She chose not to be prepared for the emergency. And I find her defense guilty of victim-mentality.
And so you act as judge, jury and prosecutor: without allowing her a proper defence.

Tsk. Your judgementalism narrows your perspective. To you: it seems to be all about "making mistakes," or not: and if she does, well...she has to live with them, and that's that.

Sorry: but this "rugged individualism" nonsense is unhealthy, within a society. The kids she raises without dads will not likely be well-adjusted contributors to society, so your constant, somewhat brutal attempts to judge them as "reaping what they sew" when they already started out several notches back is a narrow and parochial view, IMO.

Certainly, it doesn't advance anyone's interest to not offer incentives for these disadvantaged a leg up. Plenty of statistics and empirical evidence to prove my point.

Quote:
LOL. Where'd you get this? So proper use of words isn't contingent on definitions. LOL.
As John likes to say: "get thee to a dictionary"


Quote:
That's right. However, the beauty of my judgement is that I want a government that gives those people the opportunity to break free from the misery that ideologies such as yours impose on people...victim-mentality and dependance.
Ahh, more garbage...here comes an avalanche...

So, I guess Colin Powell and Condi Rice (both recipients of A.A.) are dependents, with a victim-mentality (hmm...that WOULD explain a lot....)

Quote:
So? You were foolish. I've been there too.
And here we see the Leaning Tower of Jon's Logical Pisa, fall earthward.

CRash!!!

Newsflash, Jon: You don't know Jack about me. Nor, can you especially talk Jack the lot of a woman, no matter what her economic level.

Go ahead, just ask any woman within the sound of your typing....CAN JON SPEAK, FOR ANY OF YOU???

(um, be prepared to duck, Jon.... )

Quote:
and I recommend never working for a lawyer either...I've done work for a handful and they've been consistently snakes who ripped me off.
Another thing we agree on...altho I HAVE met one or two good lawyers....but not too many...


Quote:
The evidence is in the paycheck.
I bet Michael Brown got a nice, fat paycheck: guess he deserves it all, by your logic.

Quote:
Come on Neil, I WAS POOR!!! I grew up on welfare!!! I lived just outside of Detroit where the social cancer had spread.

I know all about the poor.
I worry about post'er's with Messiah complexes...I mean, ya gotta worry about a guy who thinks he can speak for approx 25% of America...
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2005, 07:27 AM   #125
Hogan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 106
Offline
Re: Kayne West Outburst Live On NBC

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
...Great, but one Congressman grandstanding to the cameras, doth not the general view of Liberals make. In her attempt to grandstand, she misrepresented the role of the Supreme Court.

Besides: since when is one Democratic Senator the "Voice of The Liberal?"
She is the democratice leader of the Senate. The Big Tomale. The One. And since she said the court spoke as if it was the word of god, then she must not have any problem with their Bush v Gore decision....

Quote:
Don't know that one. My point is that "activist judging" (whatever THAT means) is not the sole province of "Liberal" judges.
Kelo was the recent eminant domain case, where all the liberal judges threw precedent out the window, and voted for business and against the little guy, by defining public use as including private use as well.

Quote:
..Sorry, but to me the relevant court decusion WAS the 5-4 decision to allow Florida to recount, as was their reasoning behind not allowing it.
One man one vote wasn/t enough of a reason for you ? Just time to finish recount without standards ? Anyway, recounts were conducted and Bush won them all.

Quote:
.. never has the S.C. stated that their decision CANNOT be used, as precedent.
Huh ? What about Kelo ? It said that their decision doesn't prohibit states from overriding their decision - in other words, states can go beyond supreme court decision and do the opposite. Doesn't that mean that states don't have to follow their precedent ?

Last edited by Hogan : 09-29-2005 at 07:30 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Live Streaming Aikido on the Net LiveMartialArts Marketplace 4 11-01-2006 05:47 PM
live blade/bokken Paula Lydon Weapons 35 02-09-2006 03:23 AM
Jimmy Sorrentino in West Reading, PA AikiWeb System AikiWeb System 0 06-09-2004 02:37 PM
Live blades gi_grrl General 25 12-26-2001 09:00 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:53 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2018 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2018 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate