FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Left-wing Nut Shoots up Discovery Channel Offices





jmi256
Another example of a violent Left-wing nut, this time worked into a frenzy by Al Gore and other ‘Global Warming’ alarmists. I don’t fault people who hold views I don’t agree with, even if I think they’re wrong (and/or insane). But it’s one thing when they simply make crazy death threats, and this guy came ready to kill as many people as he could.


Quote:
Police kill Discovery building gunman
Three hostages safe, police say; man told NBC he had several bombs


SILVER SPRING, Md. — Police shot to death a man armed with several bombs who held three hostages Wednesday at the Discovery Communications building. Authorities said the hostages were safe.

At least one device on the man’s body went off when he was shot inside the building in suburban Washington, D.C., Montgomery County police Chief Thomas Manger said. Police were trying to determine whether two boxes and two backpacks the gunman had also contained explosives.

Manger said SWAT officers shot the gunman about 4:50 p.m. ET because officials “believed the hostages were in danger.” The hostages — two Discovery Communications employees and a security guard — were unhurt after the four-hour standoff.

An NBC News producer who called the building to find out what was going on had a brief telephone conversation with the man when he came on the line unexpectedly. He identified himself as James J. Lee and said, “I have a gun and I have a bomb. ... I have several bombs strapped to my body ready to go off.”

NBC News informed Montgomery County authorities of the conversation as the producer spoke to the man for about 10 minutes. NBC News did not report the conversation until the hostage situation had been resolved.

Speaking to reporters, Manger would not release the man’s identity, but numerous law enforcement authorities gave NBC News the same name — James J. Lee. Lee, 43, was a longtime protester at the building who was sentenced to six months of supervised probation for disorderly conduct in March 2008.

Manger said the suspect held the hostages in the lobby area of the first floor. He said police spent several hours negotiating with the armed man after he entered the suburban Washington building about 1 p.m.

The building in the close-in suburb of Washington was safely evacuated, including the Discovery Kids Place day care center, and none of the 1,900 people who work in the building were hurt.

‘The planet does not need humans’
Lee appears to have posted environmental and population-control demands online, saying humans are ruining the planet and that Discovery should develop programs to sound the alarm.

“I want Discovery Communications to broadcast on their channels to the world their new program lineup and I want proof they are doing so. I want the new shows started by asking the public for inventive solution ideas to save the planet and the remaining wildlife on it,” the alleged manifesto reads, adding:

“Nothing is more important than saving ... the Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels. The humans? The planet does not need humans.”

Court records show that Lee was arrested Feb. 21, 2008, on the sixth day of a protest at the Discovery building. At the time of his conviction in March 2008, he was identified as being from San Diego.


Police were called to the scene when a crowd that had gathered began growing “unruly” as Lee threw thousands of dollars of cash into the air, some of it still in shrink-wrapped packages, police said at the time. (Lee was found not guilty of littering.)

Lee said at the time that he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”

Nathaniel Harrington, a former Discovery employee, told msnbc TV’s Peter Alexander that he saw Lee outside the building during the 2008 protest.

“He was seen as something of a joke,” Harrington said. “I hate to say it, but at the time we kind of half-joked about it because he could come back shooting. Nobody took it very seriously.”

“As soon as I heard” the news Wednesday, “I knew it’s got to be Lee,” he said.

Lee had been active in other online arenas, too, in pursuing his causes:

While his main domain, savetheplanetprotest.com, is now a single page presenting his complaints, archives show that in the past he has used it to promote a contest to give away money and property in Hawaii “for the best TV show idea to save the planet.”

In early 2008, a message board called Save the Planet Protest was set up by a man calling himself Lee who uses a profile picture very similar to other photos of James Lee.

In a January 2008 post, the man, using the screen name misterfifteen, explains that he specifically targeted Discovery because he believes its identification with environmentalism is a sham:

“Discovery is hugely responsible for what is happening and their ineffective programming must be protested and dealt with. The time for pussy-footing around the subject is done. It's time to protest them until they start changing their stupid message. They ARE glorifying the damned fishermen who are overfishing the planet and I would think that you would see that for yourself instead of defending them.”

Pitch for ‘Save the Planet’ reality TV show
The man goes on to say that he approached Discovery with programming ideas at one point “even though I had a feeling that they were working for their own greedy ends.” Discovery officials “didn’t do anything,” he writes.

The nature of that proposed programming can be gleaned from an undated pitch letter Lee sent to Discovery.

Calling himself “Mister Lee” and giving a Silver Spring address, Lee proposes “an idea for a reality-game show called ‘Race to Save the Planet.’”

According to the letter, which msnbc.com retrieved from archives of unlinked material on his website, Lee says contestants “would come from all over to compete with each other and come up with ideas to save the planet. The idea here is to use human inventiveness to save the planet from the environmental destruction it’s facing. People competing can either have completely new ideas on how to save the planet, or they can build on another person’s idea and make that original idea better.”

He concludes: “‘Race to Save the Planet.’ This show could very well save the planet.”

Also pulled down sometime in the past two years was a page set up to protest Discovery. On it, he writes:

“If their ‘environmental’ shows are actually working, then why is the news about the environment getting worse? It should be getting better if they were doing their job and we should be seeing that reflected on the nightly news. But NO! The Discovery Channel is actually not about saving the planet, they are just another ‘green’ corporation whose real interests lies in MONEY! Products! Junk! Trash!”

‘Chaotic’ scene described
Wednesday’s drama likewise played itself out online as scores of Discovery employees sought and gave information on Twitter and other social media services.

At the scene itself, helicopters and dozens of police cars patrolled the area, and most of the streets were blocked off.

“Someone over the P.A. said there’s a situation in the lobby, go back to your desks,” Melissa Shepard, a Discovery employee, told msnbc TV. “So we all went to offices and crammed into offices and shut the lights off and listened to the news. Then someone knocked on the door and said we need to evacuate.”

Shepard described initial confusion over the evacuation plan.

“The scariest was when they were telling us to go upstairs, then downstairs, then upstairs. I don’t know if it was safe,” she said.

“The thing is we were hearing there were two people, then explosives, then hostages, then that people were shot. We kept hearing different stories. It was one thing after another.”

“It’s pretty chaotic,” Tariq Warner, a photographer for NBC station WRC-TV, said on msnbc. He said a woman ran past him screaming.

Discovery Communications reaches about 1.5 billion subscribers in more than 180 countries with the Discovery Channel, TLC, Animal Planet, Science Channel and Planet Green networks.

Source = http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/


And you can see a video of this Left-wing nutjob at a “Shoe Bush” event before the inauguration.

deanhills
I dunno jmi. I thought Al Gore was pretty harmless along Casper lines. Would be difficult for me to understand how he could motivate people to the point of extremism. Any way, left or right, what difference does it make when a person who is obviously not mentally balanced, loses it completely. I don't think it is the politics that did it, there is obviously a screw loose with the guy.
ocalhoun
Another left-wing lunatic story?
Do I need to post some right-wing lunatic stories to even it out some? There's plenty to choose from...

Really, you can find nut-jobs in any large group if you look hard enough.
Anecdotal accounts of individual crazies doesn't serve any (honest) purpose in describing the groups they're from.
coolclay
Talk about a polarizing post!
Quote:
Another example of a violent Left-wing nut, this time worked into a frenzy by Al Gore and other ‘Global Warming’ alarmists

There are unbalanced individuals all over the world and on every side of every issue. Trying to blame his "problems" on anyone is absolutely ridiculous, and makes you look just as crazy!
Voodoocat
Quote:
There are unbalanced individuals all over the world and on every side of every issue. Trying to blame his "problems" on anyone is absolutely ridiculous, and makes you look just as crazy!


Remember that for Handfleisch's next rabid anti-Republican post Laughing
Voodoocat
I think that jmi's post was to point out that there are violent nut jobs associated with all political parties. However, the news media seems to be focussed on labelling right-wing groups as violent and extremist. A point in case: the media's portrayal of the tea party. The tea party has been labelled as being composed of violent racist right wing extremists. Andrew Brietbart has offered a large reward to anyone that can produce video proof of these claims. The reward remains unclaimed.

Unfortunately it appears that the tree-hugging, whale-loving, gun-banning, tax-anyone-that-makes-more-money-than-me-and-give-it-to-me, make-love-not-war crowd is just as capable of violence as anyone else.

Only they are more hypocritical about it.....
jmi256
Voodoocat wrote:
I think that jmi's post was to point out that there are violent nut jobs associated with all political parties. However, the news media seems to be focussed on labelling right-wing groups as violent and extremist. A point in case: the media's portrayal of the tea party. The tea party has been labelled as being composed of violent racist right wing extremists. Andrew Brietbart has offered a large reward to anyone that can produce video proof of these claims. The reward remains unclaimed.

Unfortunately it appears that the tree-hugging, whale-loving, gun-banning, tax-anyone-that-makes-more-money-than-me-and-give-it-to-me, make-love-not-war crowd is just as capable of violence as anyone else.

Only they are more hypocritical about it.....


Bingo. Give that man a prize!
handfleisch
jmi256 wrote:
Voodoocat wrote:
I think that jmi's post was to point out that there are violent nut jobs associated with all political parties. However, the news media seems to be focussed on labelling right-wing groups as violent and extremist. A point in case: the media's portrayal of the tea party. The tea party has been labelled as being composed of violent racist right wing extremists. Andrew Brietbart has offered a large reward to anyone that can produce video proof of these claims. The reward remains unclaimed.

Unfortunately it appears that the tree-hugging, whale-loving, gun-banning, tax-anyone-that-makes-more-money-than-me-and-give-it-to-me, make-love-not-war crowd is just as capable of violence as anyone else.

Only they are more hypocritical about it.....


Bingo. Give that man a prize!

They play bingo on your planet?
jmi256
handfleisch wrote:
jmi256 wrote:
Voodoocat wrote:
I think that jmi's post was to point out that there are violent nut jobs associated with all political parties. However, the news media seems to be focussed on labelling right-wing groups as violent and extremist. A point in case: the media's portrayal of the tea party. The tea party has been labelled as being composed of violent racist right wing extremists. Andrew Brietbart has offered a large reward to anyone that can produce video proof of these claims. The reward remains unclaimed.

Unfortunately it appears that the tree-hugging, whale-loving, gun-banning, tax-anyone-that-makes-more-money-than-me-and-give-it-to-me, make-love-not-war crowd is just as capable of violence as anyone else.

Only they are more hypocritical about it.....


Bingo. Give that man a prize!

They play bingo on your planet?

Yes, we play bingo on planet Earth. Feel free to visit some time.
IceCreamTruck
coolclay wrote:
There are unbalanced individuals all over the world and on every side of every issue.


Agreed. This is just someone who has an idea and a poor grasp of right and wrong. He may very well have been successful with one of his TV show ideas if he had kept pitching them. I wonder why everything pivoted on Disney for him... sure, they are big and powerful, and their seemingly "green" stance might enrage some people who are investing their lives in making the planet green with their actions, but why stop there. Only after you've approached several networks can you really say an idea won't fly. Different networks run different programming.

Honestly, this guy is a true whack-job! I wonder what he ever did to help the planet!! I want a list of things he consistently recycled, a list of products he bought that were strictly renewable, recycle backed, good for the planet products. I want to know where he sweat and bled for the planet... sounds, to me, like he didn't do anything except protest, and probably overlooked the horrible carbon footprint that many of the products he bought produced. It's a safe bet that his idea of saving the planet is just that "an idea" not a reality of him actually cleaning up the carbon footprint of his life. I wonder what the carbon footprint of his bombs are... were they "green" bombs? Smile It's a joke, yes, but seriously... how committed to this premise is he? Pointing a gun in someone's face is not brave... it's the easy way out of working with them toward your goal. Was he that superficial with all his attempts at saving the planet? Honestly, he didn't even take anyone out with him. I'm happy for the families that got their loved ones back, but it just proves he's impotent on a lot of different levels and obviously acting out at his own inadequacies -- poorly.

Seriously, change yourself first people or your just a babbling nut case too. Reform your own life, and live by example; then start discussing how the world can change. I'm so tired of people blaming everyone else when the little choices we all make are the reason we create so much unrecycleable trash, and use up non-renewable resources incredibly fast. Allowing corporations to make choices for us, and continuing to reward them in buying their products IS what's wrong with this country. We need to unify against -- boycott -- companies that make bad choices, and we need to follow up on their green statements to make sure this is their stance across the board and not just in one area, or a lame marketing attempt to please or appease us.

There is an argument that capitalism has failed us in that it relies too heavily on the individual citizen being ultimately responsible. Ben Franklin said "the most important public office is that of the [voting] public citizen" but this assumes the individual citizen will remain wise, and informed enough to choose leadership and vote on reform. I put forward that we need a system that does not rely on the least of us being "wise" either politically or in civil matters. We need a system that assumes the bottom rung of the latter is as stupid as many of them have chosen to be. I'm just saying it would work better for us politically... I'm not saying it's right or wrong -- it's just logical at this juncture.

Unfortunately guys like this will always justify their lunatic fanaticism and if it's not being fake about being "green" that makes them angry, then it's something else. Some people are just dying to go mad, and we should be careful to NOT lay blame on any group for the actions of a single individual!
handfleisch
Too bad Vood and JMI rarely even attempt to back up their arguments (AKA insane rants), and Vood just about never actually responds when people try to correct him on his hilariously wrong posts. They just keep posting the same kind of thing no matter how many times they are proven wrong or shown to be wacky. I think there's a term for that....
coolclay
Quote:
Remember that for Handfleisch's next rabid anti-Republican post Laughing

Don't worry I won't and never have!

Quote:
(AKA insane rants)
Says the king of Insane one sided polarizing rants!
IceCreamTruck
I think it needs to be said that this article is old. September 1st, 2010... makes this a little outdated especially in light of some things that have happened since then.

How'd you come across this article now? It hasn't been a headline for months and months.
IceCreamTruck
handfleisch wrote:
They just keep posting the same kind of thing no matter how many times they are proven wrong or shown to be wacky. I think there's a term for that....


Junior Frihoster? lol... we all used to be one except, of course, bondings!
ocalhoun
coolclay wrote:

Quote:
(AKA insane rants)
Says the king of Insane one sided polarizing rants!

I don't know, there's a lot of competition these days for the title of 'king of insane one sided polarizing rants'...

(I think everybody here knows who the two front-runners are.)

Really, both of you, get some perspective!
Utterly defeating the 'other party' would not significantly improve anything. Being ultra-partisan is the absolute worst thing you can do for the state of politics in the US.
Don't you two realize that all that is wrong with Washington feeds off of what you're doing right now? Demonizing the 'other guys' is how horrible politicians keep getting elected on BOTH sides. As long as you're distracted with hating the other party, you don't notice the problems of your own... or if you do notice them, you still vote for them, thinking it to be the lesser evil.

If a party agrees with your political ideals, that's great... But when so many people take it to this level, it cripples the democratic process -- and we are worse off because of it.

*edit*
Okay, so that was also a rant... And I suppose you could argue that it is insane...
But, it is not one-sided or polarizing, I hope.
handfleisch
ocalhoun wrote:
coolclay wrote:

Quote:
(AKA insane rants)
Says the king of Insane one sided polarizing rants!

I don't know, there's a lot of competition these days for the title of 'king of insane one sided polarizing rants'...

(I think everybody here knows who the two front-runners are.)

Really, both of you, get some perspective!
Utterly defeating the 'other party' would not significantly improve anything. Being ultra-partisan is the absolute worst thing you can do for the state of politics in the US.
Don't you two realize that all that is wrong with Washington feeds off of what you're doing right now? Demonizing the 'other guys' is how horrible politicians keep getting elected on BOTH sides. As long as you're distracted with hating the other party, you don't notice the problems of your own... or if you do notice them, you still vote for them, thinking it to be the lesser evil.

If a party agrees with your political ideals, that's great... But when so many people take it to this level, it cripples the democratic process -- and we are worse off because of it.

*edit*
Okay, so that was also a rant... And I suppose you could argue that it is insane...
But, it is not one-sided or polarizing, I hope.

1. Your stated life dream is to evolve into a horse. And you accuse others of insane musings?
2. If you are referring to me, please name one rant that you would characterize as insane and why. I admit I might rant, but usually it is about how insane and know-nothing the Republican party has become. This can be easily backed up by seeing the percentage of registered Republicans who believe obvious, proven falsehoods and right wing/corporate lies, for example, that Obama might be Muslim and is hiding his true place of birth, that climate change is not happening, that Obama is a socialist, etc etc. Also by looking at the words and actions of major Republican leaders like Palin, Bachman, Kyl and even Boehner, and conservative leaders like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, FOX etc. If you can in any way put my posts into the same category as JMI's other-planetary nonsense, his list of provably false wild assertions straight out of the right wing talking points, or Jwellsy's for that matter, then again your own grip on reality is in question (which leads us back to point 1.)
IceCreamTruck
Ocalhoun would be the lead stallion in a nation of very diplomatic horses who's leader is elected by a mandate of the masses for all I care! He honestly is making a lot more sense than you are right now handfleisch just to back up what I am reading in front of my face.

Irony: Crazy people say they are not crazy, and sane people think they must be crazy!

I'm not crazy! Twisted Evil Brick wall
handfleisch
IceCreamTruck wrote:
He honestly is making a lot more sense than you are right now handfleisch just to back up what I am reading in front of my face.

Care to make your comment more than just a dull, glancing blow? That is, what are you talking about?
IceCreamTruck
handfleisch wrote:

1. Your stated life dream is to evolve into a horse. And you accuse others of insane musings?
2. If you are referring to me, please name one rant that you would characterize as insane and why.


suggesting others do leg work they never will do is a tedious cop out!

handfleisch wrote:

I admit I might rant, but usually it is about how insane and know-nothing the Republican party has become. This can be easily backed up by seeing the percentage of registered Republicans who believe obvious, proven falsehoods and right wing/corporate lies, for example, that Obama might be Muslim and is hiding his true place of birth, that climate change is not happening, that Obama is a socialist, etc etc.


etc etc... the kitchen sink... a chicken named steve ... yeah I follow you now

handfleisch wrote:

Also by looking at the words and actions of major Republican leaders like Palin, Bachman, Kyl and even Boehner, and conservative leaders like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, FOX etc.


etc. Steve.

handfleisch wrote:

If you can in any way put my posts into the same category as JMI's other-planetary nonsense, his list of provably false wild assertions straight out of the right wing talking points,


LOOK OUT! STRAY BULLETS!! Don't diss the dreamers! Dude... not cool!

handfleisch wrote:

or Jwellsy's for that matter,


More stray bullets!

handfleisch wrote:

then again your own grip on reality is in question


Do you read Freud much? Tell me about your mother.

handfleisch wrote:

(which leads us back to point 1.)


ocalhoun is crazy about horses, and genuinely wants to be one... I've been back for like two seconds and I figured this out, but it's ok you aren't showing symtoms of the disease... you're probably just a carrier! Twisted Evil

Your post came across kind of like warm vomit on a paper plate. Suggest rewording.

Now repeat after me: "I'm not crazy!" Brick wall

Have you tried the orbital cannon on him yet, ocalhoun?
handfleisch
IceCreamTruck wrote:
Don't diss the dreamers! Dude... not cool!

time to wake up
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:

1. Your stated life dream is to evolve into a horse. And you accuse others of insane musings?

Yes and yes.
Being somewhat insane myself, I know what I'm talking about. ^.^
Quote:

2. If you are referring to me, please name one rant that you would characterize as insane and why.

If you've never posted insane rants, why would you assume I'm talking about you? I was only talking about people who post insane, one-sided, polarizing, partisan rants.
Ever hear the phrase "thou doth protest too much?"
It refers to how a guilty person will often defend himself too quickly and too vehemently, thus actually implicating his guilt.
Quote:
[...] Republican party [...] registered Republicans [...] right wing/corporate lies, [...] major Republican leaders like [...] conservative leaders [...] right wing talking points

I guess you didn't get the point of my rant...
Being partisan like this is harmful to the well-being of the nation.
Even if you're right, and the left-wing is sooo much better than the right-wing, it is still harmful to be partisan and one-sided like this.
IceCreamTruck
handfleisch wrote:
IceCreamTruck wrote:
Don't diss the dreamers! Dude... not cool!

time to wake up


To what? Your depression over people not being as genuine or as factually boring as you'd like? No thanks, I already deal with my own issues but I've learned that free speech is awesome and precious and if I'm going to say that then it means I'll probably have to read a lot of leisure time musings of people on frihost. I won't diss them for imagination though. You apparently don't have any imagination... very sad. BTW, just so you know ocalhoun entertaining ideas like transforming into a horse is literally keeping his imagination alive, as it fades in adults do to specific calcification of the brain. Using imagination is the only way any of us will keep it. It's good advice to try and imagine SIX impossible things before breakfast... not just one.

I will just continue do what I always do on frihost and that's explain to them where I think they are wrong, and listen to them explain to me how they think I'm wrong. Which is a beautiful arrangement because we all get to hear other people perspectives without always having to ask.

I agree with ocalhoun that if everyone had your political perspective or partisanship then all balance would be gone and the world would be a horrible place! Especially for the democratic process.

The only possible benefit I see in that case would be the political arguing that is so hard to listen to would stop, and maybe we'd be able to get something done. I also agree with ocalhoun that this political stale mate we keep entering because of all the arguing is ridiculous, and we are forgetting the real problems over partisan issues.

I see you are going to continue to react emotionally, however, and that you're never really going to present any solid argument because you never limit your arguments to just one topic or area. You always flood in a bunch of random topics, and ETC ETC ETC ends all of your statements. There's no hope of settling anything with you no matter how diplomatic we are.

Calm the voices in your head... they are interfering with your ability to make friends, and argue your perspective.

Repeat after me: "I'm not crazy" haha, you're too easy to inflame emotionally. I couldn't stand being that emotional, so I just don't.

Let's return to ocalhouns good point: Non of this was directed at you, handfleisch!

My point: You are NOT important.
deanhills
IceCreamTruck wrote:
My point: You are NOT important.
I disagree. Handfleisch's point of view is important. I always look forward to what he has to say, as there is always an opportunity to learn from contrarian views such as jmi and Handfleisch's. Handfleisch sometimes also makes interesting points and his write-up about Ocalhoun had me rolling with laughter. I'm sure Ocalhoun must have laughed as well. The banter between Handfleisch and Ocalhoun can be great stress relievers.

I'm positive even jmi would miss Handfleisch if Handfleisch should decide to say cheerio. Although I can imagine Handfleisch would probably just dust off any criticism coming his way. This forum would not be the same without Handfleisch in it, that's for sure.
IceCreamTruck
deanhills wrote:
IceCreamTruck wrote:
My point: You are NOT important.
I disagree. Handfleisch's point of view is important. I always look forward to what he has to say, as there is always an opportunity to learn from contrarian views such as jmi and Handfleisch's. Handfleisch sometimes also makes interesting points and his write-up about Ocalhoun had me rolling with laughter. I'm sure Ocalhoun must have laughed as well. The banter between Handfleisch and Ocalhoun can be great stress relievers.

I'm positive even jmi would miss Handfleisch if Handfleisch should decide to say cheerio. Although I can imagine Handfleisch would probably just dust off any criticism coming his way. This forum would not be the same without Handfleisch in it, that's for sure.


You can't understand my statement unless you also understand that I am not important. Until such time as I distinguish myself, no one has to pay me any attention. I feel I've been heard on frihost when I have something important to say, however.

Handfleisch's comments were slanderous, no one else is dealing out low blows to other frihost members, and this argument is not important.

Dean, what you say is important to me, however, if you keep taking your time to voice your opinion I will listen. You don't fire darts of hate!
deanhills
IceCreamTruck wrote:
Dean, what you say is important to me, however, if you keep taking your time to voice your opinion I will listen. You don't fire darts of hate!
Thanks! That is appreciated. And I now have an understanding what you mean.
ocalhoun
IceCreamTruck wrote:

Handfleisch's comments were slanderous, no one else is dealing out low blows to other frihost members,

Well, to be fair, I was kinda doing that too...
handfleisch
IceCreamTruck wrote:
handfleisch wrote:
IceCreamTruck wrote:
Don't diss the dreamers! Dude... not cool!

time to wake up


To what? Your depression over people not being as genuine or as factually boring as you'd like? No thanks, I already deal with my own issues but I've learned that free speech is awesome and precious and if I'm going to say that then it means I'll probably have to read a lot of leisure time musings of people on frihost. I won't diss them for imagination though. You apparently don't have any imagination... very sad. BTW, just so you know ocalhoun entertaining ideas like transforming into a horse is literally keeping his imagination alive, as it fades in adults do to specific calcification of the brain. Using imagination is the only way any of us will keep it. It's good advice to try and imagine SIX impossible things before breakfast... not just one.

I will just continue do what I always do on frihost and that's explain to them where I think they are wrong, and listen to them explain to me how they think I'm wrong. Which is a beautiful arrangement because we all get to hear other people perspectives without always having to ask.

I agree with ocalhoun that if everyone had your political perspective or partisanship then all balance would be gone and the world would be a horrible place! Especially for the democratic process.

The only possible benefit I see in that case would be the political arguing that is so hard to listen to would stop, and maybe we'd be able to get something done. I also agree with ocalhoun that this political stale mate we keep entering because of all the arguing is ridiculous, and we are forgetting the real problems over partisan issues.

I see you are going to continue to react emotionally, however, and that you're never really going to present any solid argument because you never limit your arguments to just one topic or area. You always flood in a bunch of random topics, and ETC ETC ETC ends all of your statements. There's no hope of settling anything with you no matter how diplomatic we are.

Calm the voices in your head... they are interfering with your ability to make friends, and argue your perspective.

Repeat after me: "I'm not crazy" haha, you're too easy to inflame emotionally. I couldn't stand being that emotional, so I just don't.

Let's return to ocalhouns good point: Non of this was directed at you, handfleisch!

My point: You are NOT important.

This rant of yours is mostly incoherent and otherwise coherently wrong.

The hippies also believed that flights of fancy and tripping out, man, would lead to freedom and a better political discourse, that facts weren't as important as fantasy. It led to disillusionment, alienation and a lot of ugliness that harmed the responsible progressive movement and helped create the conditions for the disastrous election of Reagan.
Quote:

I see you are going to continue to react emotionally, however, and that you're never really going to present any solid argument because you never limit your arguments to just one topic or area.

Here you are just reversing reality, maybe another example of your daydreaming hobby. I present solid arguments and discuss them rationally anytime someone is up to it; usually no one here can or wants to do that. For example, you just mocked it when I asked someone for concrete examples of what they were talking about. I think your celebration of goofiness is a way to cover up your ignorance and your inability to think critically.
pampoon
@Handfleisch
The same can be said about the other side as well:



The true answer? Both parties suck. Right and left. Conservative and liberal. Insane and crazy. American politics has taken a total turn for the worse. Whichever side you take, someone will be able to find holes to poke in your beliefs/values. The fact of the matter is that we need to focus more on solving the problems, rather than observing them.

Have you ever read Jonathan Swift's work, A Modest Proposal? It is a delightful tale that I believe is greatly parallel to the current issue in America. If you haven't, Swift lived in Ireland during a time when there were more people than food to feed them. The people were in extreme debt, and children were dying from disease and famine because there were so many of them. And women just kept having more! No one knew what to do, and no one was trying to find a solution, but you can be sure that everyone has two cents to throw in about the issue. So Swift wrote A Modest Proposal, as a joke, to scare the people into doing something about the problem. Too many people simply worry about the fact that bad things are happening in today's government and not enough people are actually providing suggestions. If political leaders would just stop worrying about party standings and focus on fixing things, we might actually be able to get somewhere.
handfleisch
pampoon wrote:
@Handfleisch
The same can be said about the other side as well:


Anything "can be said", but not factually. The sky is green polka dots and the earth is flat "can be said".


pampoon wrote:
The true answer? Both parties suck. Right and left. Conservative and liberal. Insane and crazy. American politics has taken a total turn for the worse. Whichever side you take, someone will be able to find holes to poke in your beliefs/values. The fact of the matter is that we need to focus more on solving the problems, rather than observing them.

Have you ever read Jonathan Swift's work, A Modest Proposal? It is a delightful tale that I believe is greatly parallel to the current issue in America. If you haven't, Swift lived in Ireland during a time when there were more people than food to feed them. The people were in extreme debt, and children were dying from disease and famine because there were so many of them. And women just kept having more! No one knew what to do, and no one was trying to find a solution, but you can be sure that everyone has two cents to throw in about the issue. So Swift wrote A Modest Proposal, as a joke, to scare the people into doing something about the problem. Too many people simply worry about the fact that bad things are happening in today's government and not enough people are actually providing suggestions. If political leaders would just stop worrying about party standings and focus on fixing things, we might actually be able to get somewhere.


Thanks for mentioning Swift's essay, which was a satire aimed at the extreme conservatives of the time, the British occupiers of Ireland and their Irish apologists. Notice how the subtitle sounds like something Rush Limbaugh would say: "Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public". Republican Gov. Walker of Wisconsin might say "Preventing the Teachers in Ireland From Being a Burden to Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public." Gov. Brewer might say "Preventing the Children of Mexicans in Arizona From Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public."

While I know what you mean about the parties, I believe focusing on them as both being part of the problem is inaccurate and ignores the real problem, which is that our elected representatives don't have as much power as the wealthy, the giant corporations who control both the election process and the mainstream media.
deanhills
handfleisch wrote:
While I know what you mean about the parties, I believe focusing on them as both being part of the problem is inaccurate and ignores the real problem, which is that our elected representatives don't have as much power as the wealthy, the giant corporations who control both the election process and the mainstream media.
Now this is completely on the mark for me too. I've always thought that the US is a plutocracy:
Quote:
The second usage of plutocracy is a reference to a disproportionate influence the wealthy have on political process in contemporary society: for example, according to Kevin Phillips, author and political strategist to U.S. President Richard Nixon, the United States is a plutocracy in which there is a "fusion of money and government."

The wealthy minority exerts influence over the political arena via many methods. Most western democracies permit partisan organizations to raise funds for politicians, and political parties frequently accept significant donations from various individuals (either directly or through corporations or advocacy groups). These donations may be part of a cronyist or patronage system, in which major contributors and fund-raisers are rewarded with high-ranking government appointments.

While campaign donations need not directly affect the legislative decisions of elected representatives, politicians have a personal interest in serving the needs of their campaign contributors: if they fail to do so, those contributors will likely give their money to candidates who do support their interests in the future. Unless a quid pro quo agreement exists, it is generally legal for politicians to advocate policies favorable to their contributors, or grant appointed government positions to them. In some instances, extremely wealthy individuals have financed their own political campaigns.

Many corporations and business interest groups pay lobbyists to maintain constant contact with elected officials, and press them for favorable legislation. Owners of mass media outlets, and the advertisement buyers which financially support them can shape public perception of political issues by controlling the information available to the population and the manner in which it is presented (see also: fourth estate).

Within government bureaucracy, there is often the problem of a revolving door: the employees of government regulatory bodies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States, often transition to and from employment with the same companies they are supposed to regulate. This can result in regulations being changed or ignored to suit the needs of business, since the regulators are more likely to later find employment in the private sector if their government work was beneficial to their new potential employer.

Source: Wikpedia
IceCreamTruck
Economically Regan was great. He produced a huge profit for the government by lowering taxes. That's brilliant economics. If only more presidents could figure out a better balance to lowering taxes producing a better economy that would be awesome.

What's your choice Handfleisch? More powering the economics in this country with more war like the Bushes seem to think works for this country? Personally I think they were just bettering their financial situation and they didn't give a crap about any of the rest of us.

You can't really argue with Regan's numbers, because he produced an economically viable government with a move that seems backwards to every american business man... taking less money upfront produced more transactions and greater revenue for the government. No one since has gone as good a job as this. I really didn't like Regan as a person, probably never will, but we need more presidents to think like that, and have genuine concern for this country and economy.

You're still up to your old tricks Handfleisch. Let's stick to a topic.
handfleisch
IceCreamTruck wrote:
Economically Regan was great. He produced a huge profit for the government by lowering taxes. That's brilliant economics. If only more presidents could figure out a better balance to lowering taxes producing a better economy that would be awesome.

What's your choice Handfleisch? More powering the economics in this country with more war like the Bushes seem to think works for this country? Personally I think they were just bettering their financial situation and they didn't give a crap about any of the rest of us.

You can't really argue with Regan's numbers, because he produced an economically viable government with a move that seems backwards to every american business man... taking less money upfront produced more transactions and greater revenue for the government. No one since has gone as good a job as this. I really didn't like Regan as a person, probably never will, but we need more presidents to think like that, and have genuine concern for this country and economy.

I take it you can't focus on the general argument and instead need to go off on a subtopic, in this case Reagan.

Well, I hate to break the news to you but you are completely wrong in your facts about Reagan, and you've swallowed a whole lot of bull. Reagan's trickle-down theory did not result in greater revenues, it resulted in greater deficits. In fact Reagan began the modern era of massive deficits when his "trickle down" theory did not work at all. It didn't work with Reagan and it doesn't work today.

Another part of Reagan's disastrous economic legacy is that in short eight years he turned the US from the world's #1 creditor nation into the world's #1 debtor nation.






Quote:
The green line shows what would have happened if Reagan and the Bushes had just kept the debt growing at the same rate as the economy.

http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html
Related topics
NY Times: A perfect example of lieberals spreading...
Justification for War in Iraq
CNN even knows Fox Rox!
Brain Or MIND?
The Left Wing Blues
CON-serve-va-tives and LIE-ber-alls are essentially the same
Which is the most intelligent animal?
Hi, my name is....
Global Warming
Discovery Channel/What to Study
Left-Wing Extremist Media
Glenn Beck getting fired from FOX. Boycott works
Left-wing “Occupiers” Unleash Their Bigotry
Left-wing Occupiers Attack SoCal Street Vendors
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.