duckfoot Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Interesing comments. I curious, how you all feel about the IRS being used to target certian groups and individuals that don't agree with the politics of power? You know what I mean.That was not Nixonian at all. The IRS was going after both sides, not just one. Like KDD said, there is nothing wrong with IRS using it's powers. Abusing is another matter, which was not the case here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Interesing comments. I curious, how you all feel about the IRS being used to target certian groups and individuals that don't agree with the politics of power? You know what I mean.It is interesting to conclude that there were two-sides here. If they were totally impartial the issue would never have come up. They knew there were two-sides and acted in a questionable manner. Stosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagledad Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Interesing comments. I curious, how you all feel about the IRS being used to target certian groups and individuals that don't agree with the politics of power? You know what I mean.You guys are so funny. Google "resignation of acting IRS commissioner". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagledad Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Uh oh! This is timely. http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-lo...rticle/2538263 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Uh oh! This is timely. http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-lo...rticle/2538263 Awww, com' on, you can't really believe the media would actually get anything correct? Seriously, there's just too much evidence to sweep it under the rug, but that doesn't mean they are still trying. It worked for Fast 'n' Furious, Benghazi, ObamaCare, and a bazillion other shell games they've been playing. This administration is going to go down in history as the most corrupt of all time! Stosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Ding Dong Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Uh oh! This is timely. http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-lo...rticle/2538263 Scooter Libby anyone ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Uh oh! This is timely. http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-lo...rticle/2538263 I'm thinking that what we see today would make Nixon blush. A robbery break-in hardly affected anyone except the Democratic party. Fast/Furious not only got people killed, but the tally hasn't been taken on what loss Obama"Care" will be able to accomplish in the next few months. Millions with insurance no longer have it. Hardly a apples to apples comparison to Scooter and the gang. Stosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walk in the woods Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Uh oh! This is timely. http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-lo...rticle/2538263 Libby deserved to be punished for outing Plame, probably Chaney too. That's exactly the kind of outrage people should have over the IRS crap and Ms. Lerner as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Uh oh! This is timely. http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-lo...rticle/2538263 Yep, there's always someone else out there to point your finger at hoping to take the spotlight off your favorite. Like my pappy used to say, "You had to be crooked in order to be a politician." What he didn't say was that some are better at it than others. Stosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeBob Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Uh oh! This is timely. http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-lo...rticle/2538263 dcssimmons: Libby did NOT out Plame. "No evidence has ever come to light that Mr. Libby disclosed Plame's CIA status to Mr. Novak, or anyone else." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame Go after Richard Armitage (never punished) "Mr. Armitage have has confirmed that he was the initial and primary source for the columnist, Robert D. Novak, whose column of July 14, 2003, identified Valerie Wilson as a Central Intelligence Agency officer. " http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00614F93A5A0C738FDDA10894DE404482 Try to keep it factual. please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berliner Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 IMHO after 9/11 and the Patriot Act it was just taken too far. Interesting is how americans and europeans view data & privacy issues differently. NSA = Nanny State America (I just thought of that ROFL) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 Everything our Founding Fathers created was good for freedom for all people, they put in the US Constitution. It made America different than any other country in the world. Small federal government, states and local governments of the people, doing the heavy lifting. The US became a leading world leader. Now that that document has been discarded, we're pretty much just like everyone else and the freedoms we once felt necessary are rather quickly eroding. The New World Order Government dream has now replaced the American dream. How much clout has the UN been gaining in recent years? They are on the verge of being able to tell everyone in the world what they can and can't do. Recourse for dissent rests in the World Court. It doesn't take a political scientist to see what's happening. Survival of the Fittest (Social-Darwinism) is the catch phrase of every tyrant. Every tyrant looking for world dominance has done so with Militarism, Imperialism, and enslavement or extermination of the "unfit". Individual freedoms have no place in the New World Order, only the "Fittest". If individual freedoms are to be preserved, I'm hoping we don't have to repeat the process that got them originally. Those that don't learn from history are destined to relive it. Stosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 Everything our Founding Fathers created was good for freedom for all people, they put in the US Constitution. It made America different than any other country in the world. Small federal government, states and local governments of the people, doing the heavy lifting. The US became a leading world leader. Now that that document has been discarded, we're pretty much just like everyone else and the freedoms we once felt necessary are rather quickly eroding. The New World Order Government dream has now replaced the American dream. How much clout has the UN been gaining in recent years? They are on the verge of being able to tell everyone in the world what they can and can't do. Recourse for dissent rests in the World Court. It doesn't take a political scientist to see what's happening. Survival of the Fittest (Social-Darwinism) is the catch phrase of every tyrant. Every tyrant looking for world dominance has done so with Militarism, Imperialism, and enslavement or extermination of the "unfit". Individual freedoms have no place in the New World Order, only the "Fittest". If individual freedoms are to be preserved, I'm hoping we don't have to repeat the process that got them originally. Those that don't learn from history are destined to relive it. Stosh "Everything our Founding Fathers created was good for freedom for all people, they put in the US Constitution." I'd like to see you make that claim at a meeting of the NAACP sometime. "....the catch phrase of every tyrant." I just love these absolute statements. Prior to Darwin, there were no tyrants I guess. Heh, heh, and then there's George Bush's "New World Order" speech: : "Out of these troubled times, our fifth objectiveâ€â€a new world orderâ€â€can emerge" http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/public_papers.php?id=2217&year=1990&month=9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 The Founding Fathers knew full well the hypocrisy of the document at the time, but sold out to the southern states insisting on slavery or they wouldn't have backed the revolution. I believe it was Jefferson who said something about having a wolf by the ears in reference to the problem. Prior to Darwin? Heck, he stole every one eles's ideas for his book. Wallace came up with the idea and coined it survival of the fittest to explain why the superior species were able to progress and not be "set back" by the inferiors. The concepts of evolution go way back to the Greek and Roman times in some form or another. Most of the ideas that philosophically formulated about evolution appeared in the time period between 500 BC and BC. Darwin took/stole credit for a lot of other people's philosophies. Aristotle, Plato and Socrates all philosophized on the subject. `We are united in the belief that Iraq's aggression must not be tolerated. No peaceful international order is possible if larger states can devour their smaller neighbors.'' - One can't express anti-Darwinism any better than that. Quote taken from the Bush speech you are referring to. "Saddam Hussein is literally trying to wipe a country off the face of the Earth." Tyrannical Darwinism once more cited. "We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective -- a new world order -- can emerge: a new era -- freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor. Today that new world is struggling to be born, a world quite different from the one we've known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak. This is the vision that I shared with President Gorbachev in Helsinki. He and other leaders from Europe, the Gulf, and around the world understand that how we manage this crisis today could shape the future for generations to come." One one puts the comment back into the context it was taken out of, one can see it is very anti-Darwinian. Karl Marx was the one who wrote in Das Kapital about how to "speed up" evolution through revolution and anarchy. (Class-Darwinism) Hitler, simply put it into practice with his whole premise of how superior the Aryan Nation was above all others. (Racial-Darwinism) The new world order Bush is referring to is not the one you are suggesting. Instead it's based on the Judeao/Christian dynamics of world peace through cooperation and welfare for all, not the imperialism and conquest of one's weaker neighbors. The principles promoted by Darwin are also the same ones promoted by Rome as it, too, tried to rule the world by militaristic imperialism. Greeks with Aristotle, Plato and Socrates also had the same ideals. Just doesn't work, "The meek shall inherit the world", and it's interesting, the meek are still around in spite of the destructive philosophy of survival of the fittest. Stosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moggie Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 The Founding Fathers knew full well the hypocrisy of the document at the time, but sold out to the southern states insisting on slavery or they wouldn't have backed the revolution. I believe it was Jefferson who said something about having a wolf by the ears in reference to the problem. Prior to Darwin? Heck, he stole every one eles's ideas for his book. Wallace came up with the idea and coined it survival of the fittest to explain why the superior species were able to progress and not be "set back" by the inferiors. The concepts of evolution go way back to the Greek and Roman times in some form or another. Most of the ideas that philosophically formulated about evolution appeared in the time period between 500 BC and BC. Darwin took/stole credit for a lot of other people's philosophies. Aristotle, Plato and Socrates all philosophized on the subject. `We are united in the belief that Iraq's aggression must not be tolerated. No peaceful international order is possible if larger states can devour their smaller neighbors.'' - One can't express anti-Darwinism any better than that. Quote taken from the Bush speech you are referring to. "Saddam Hussein is literally trying to wipe a country off the face of the Earth." Tyrannical Darwinism once more cited. "We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective -- a new world order -- can emerge: a new era -- freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor. Today that new world is struggling to be born, a world quite different from the one we've known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak. This is the vision that I shared with President Gorbachev in Helsinki. He and other leaders from Europe, the Gulf, and around the world understand that how we manage this crisis today could shape the future for generations to come." One one puts the comment back into the context it was taken out of, one can see it is very anti-Darwinian. Karl Marx was the one who wrote in Das Kapital about how to "speed up" evolution through revolution and anarchy. (Class-Darwinism) Hitler, simply put it into practice with his whole premise of how superior the Aryan Nation was above all others. (Racial-Darwinism) The new world order Bush is referring to is not the one you are suggesting. Instead it's based on the Judeao/Christian dynamics of world peace through cooperation and welfare for all, not the imperialism and conquest of one's weaker neighbors. The principles promoted by Darwin are also the same ones promoted by Rome as it, too, tried to rule the world by militaristic imperialism. Greeks with Aristotle, Plato and Socrates also had the same ideals. Just doesn't work, "The meek shall inherit the world", and it's interesting, the meek are still around in spite of the destructive philosophy of survival of the fittest. Stosh It is my understanding that the phrase "survival of the fittest" was coined by Herbert Spencer after reading Origin of Species. What Darwin was working towards was natural selection, he did use the phrase but for symbolism rather than in its literal sense; rather than the "nature, red in tooth and claw" as you seem to be suggesting and I don't think that was Darwins intention. As always happy to be corrected Gareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now