- Feb 5, 2002
- 21,117
- 5,608
- 63
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Poll: The President Most Americans Would Bring Back? Ronald Reagan
- Thread starter Wolseley
- Start date
thaumaturgy
Well-Known Member
And indeed this is the work equally of both political sides of our system.
I agree. We are following much the same path as the USSR. Even down to the "getting into an intractable war in Afghanistan, the graveyard of empire". The Chinese will be the following power. They are sitting quietly by while we exhaust ourselves.
Only thing that will halt China's imminent rise is the collapse of globalization which will be the result of the end of cheap oil energy. At that point we all scale back and become individual countries again.
But on the way there we'll get into some nasty resource battles with China over the remaining oil. We'll lose of course because China has more capital than we do.
But the irony of that scenario is that we will be largely responsible for the reason why the battles even exist. We make up 5% of the world's population but use about 25% of the world's petroleum.
And we don't even have much of a manufacturing base anymore. So we are using it mostly to fuel our personal hungers to drive big suv's and enjoy a lavish lifestyle which while fun in the short term (most of our generation) will end up costing us sooner rather than later.
We are likely heading for some tough times and like most great powers it will be largely due to our own voluntary actions. That's what happens when you are the biggest power. You have the power to design your own demise.
We're standing on the brink of the next dark age, folks. People will someday look back on the coming period with horror and amazement, and will thank God fervently that they didn't live through that time.[/quote]
Upvote
0
thaumaturgy
Well-Known Member
Apparently optimism is not in your vocabulary
It is obvious that you have not paid much attention to the trials and tribulations that each generation endures and comes through. You are fixated on doom and gloom without realizing that this is life.
Actually I agree with the "doom and gloom" potential. I'm a raging librul so I'm coming at it from a possibly different viewpoint, but I really think we are facing, largely through our own intransigence, a rather gloomy near term future.
Oil will run out before we are prepared for it.
Burning of fossil fuels (sure we have plenty of coal) will prove to be damaging to our climate and environment and will force us to stop using that.
We are balkanizing ourselves in the U.S. right now along ideological lines with parties digging their heels in. We've already got a political movement who feels that "compromise" is the worst sin. We've seen these ideologues drive out country to the edge of economic cliffs because they don't want to cause any discomfort to the richest people the planet has ever seen .
We will liekly have to, as they say about addicts, hit bottom before we can convince ourselves to act like the adults we apparently used to be.
We are addicted to the "easy life" without want and we've forgotten what we had to do to get to this point.
We learned nothing lasting from the Great Depression because we systematically deconstructed the failsafes put in place after the G.D. and wound up teetering on the same brink about 70 years afterwards.
We learned nothing from even basic economic geology that a limited resource will cause us to act exactly as we are acting with regards to oil.
We have within our grasp a way to extend our comfort, albeit moderated, but we won't take that in our hands until we have no choice and then we'll have to work twice as hard to make it back to even a minimal level of comfort.
Upvote
0
thaumaturgy
Well-Known Member
At times I envy that in some folks. But at times I fear it keeps us facing our failings realistically.
We need people like you to see the bright side, but we need the doom and gloomers to remind us that the shiny side of the coin might have a side that needs shining up.
Upvote
0
- Feb 5, 2002
- 21,117
- 5,608
- 63
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Then I must admit a very strong wonderment as to why you continue to frequent these news forums. Must be awfully depressing for you.
I quite agree. The two major parties are nothing more than two sides of the same equally corrupt coin. Both are self-serving, both are parasitic, both are worthless. Neither represents the will of the people.
Again, I agree. And when that happens, the entire Westen Hemisphere will likely become nothing more than a vast storehouse of resources to be gutted out and sent to China to fuel their industries.
Enjoy your national parks while you have them, Americans, because pretty soon they'll be fueling the inside of a blast furnace in Kweiyang.
Or a demographic apocalypse in China once their "one child policy" catches up with them in the next decade or two and they no longer have enough population to feed their continuous growth.
Or we'll see a resurgance of the feudal system that will make today's predatory Wall Street capitalists look like a bunch of kids playing sand castles on the beach.
Or we may come to such a desperate strait that it will result in an exchange of nuclear weaponry in which nobody will win.
It's going to be very uncomfortable, but it'll be interesting, that's for sure. I wonder how many of us will live through it to see what happens?
Upvote
0
Au contraire, it does not depress me in the least. You on the other hand had recently stated that you were curtailing your posting here. I wonder when that will happen?
For perspective:
I cried because I had no shoes until I met a man who had no feet.
Upvote
0
Ronald Reagan Sounds like Ron Paul - YouTube
At 5:05: "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
.
At 5:05: "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
.
Upvote
0
- Feb 5, 2002
- 21,117
- 5,608
- 63
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
I said I was thinking about it, but hadn't decided for sure.
I have, however, cut back on the time and number of threads I participate on; so cheer up, that should make you happy, at least.
Sympathy is when you're looking at a man buried in a pile of manure and feel pity for him.
Empathy is the pity you feel when you're buried in the manure pile with him.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
thaumaturgy
Well-Known Member
Wow. So you find such gross levels of hyperbole don't tend to eliminate any value to your argument points?
If Obama is "almost Satan himself" what do you say when you see real evil in the world?
And why should he be tried for "high treason"?
Sounds like you are fighting against a largely imaginary Barack Obama.
(Not to be overly pedantic but I think in your post you meant to use the word "intelligence". You would be the only one in the room who had any intelligence. And you'd be the one without the horns and pitchfork obviously).
Upvote
0
Accuracy is always good ... what if we just call it "spawn of Satan", how about? Does that work for everyone?
Oops ...
Upvote
0
It is neither sad nor pathetic. Reagan was the not the one that brought down the USSR. They did it to themselves.
We live in the real world not the mythological world of the US.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
thaumaturgy
Well-Known Member
Firstly, why is Obama so horrific in the eyes of some folks that invariably the comparison to ultimate evil springs to mind for them?
AND
I tend to prefer "personal pronouns" like "him" when referring to Obama as opposed to "it".
Upvote
0
Meritocracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Like "utilitarian" and "pragmatic", the word "meritocratic" has also developed a broader definition, used to refer to any government run by "a ruling or influential class of educated or able people." This is in contrast to the term originally coined by Michael Young in 1958, who critically defined it as a system where "merit is equated with intelligence-plus-effort, its possessors are identified at an early age and selected for appropriate intensive education, and there is an obsession with quantification, test-scoring, and qualifications." Meritocracy in its wider sense can be any general act of judgment upon the basis of people's various demonstrated merits; such acts are frequently described in sociology and psychology. Thus, the merits may extend beyond intelligence and education to any mental or physical talent or to work ethic. In rhetoric, the demonstration of one's merit regarding mastery of a particular subject is an essential task most directly related to the Aristotelian term Ethos. The equivalent Aristotelian conception of meritocracy is based upon aristocratic or oligarchical structures rather than in the context of the modern state.
The most common form of meritocratic screening found today is the college degree.
So ... you would be profoundly anti-communist and a devotee of Ayn Rand, for example?The most common form of meritocratic screening found today is the college degree.
And ... how does the country get to being a meritocratic republic?
.
Upvote
0
You clearly don't have a clue about what Reagan was really like. He was intelligent, very personable , and very caring. Not to mention, he was a great President. He did make mistakes...as have all great Presidents... but overall his Presidency was one of huge success.
Upvote
0
Allow me to start the list ...
- Obamacare
- wanton disregard of anti-Obamacare sentiment
- closure of Chrysler dealerships not contributing to Democrat coffers
- $2.4 trillion TARP, QE1, QE2, jobs, etc.
- refusal to consider balancing budget
- refusal to submit budget
- support for "Arab spring"
- Van Jones
- British Petroleum
- Hillary Clinton
- Goldman Sachs
- Cass Sunnstein
- General Electric
- Jeremiah Wright
- Mahmoud Abbas
That's just a few things right off the top of my head ...
What good has "it" wrought?
.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
thaumaturgy
Well-Known Member
Let me stop you right there! That's a "bad" thing? OK. So the fact that every president since Teddy Roosevelt has been talking about overhauling healthcare in the U.S., the fact that 40+million americans are without healthcare and have access to ipso facto lower quality healthcare because of this, and the fact that we as a nation pay far more for healthcare per capita than any other developed nation yet don't have the longest lifespan, lowest infant mortality and the highest ranked healthcare system is a bad thing?
I'm anti-Obamacare because it doesn't go far enough.
Few politicians in the executive position will ever be in favor of a balanced budget amendment for the entire US. That's why it is never going to be. It's a rhetorical device. And look at how effectively it is working here in California! After a while the legislature and the executive simply punt and refuse to even present a budget!
The U.S. has been in constant debt since the Jackson administration. Try telling President Sarah Palin suddenly she'll have to oversee the elimination of almost 200 years of constant debt!
So supporting the overthrow of regimes considered by their people to be corrupt and abusive is bad. Is it worse than what W. did in Iraq by making us pay with money and the lives of our soldiers to do that?
Not that I think the Arab Spring will result in many real new "democracies", but I don't see how support of people's self determination is a "bad thing".
Certainly didn't realize it was satanic!
You mean OBAMA was responsible for BP's failure to put a blowout preventer on the Deep Horizon well?? Was Obama equally responsible for BP's poor safety record?
Wow. He is one bad and one powerful guy!
Yeah, I forgot that Obama "made" Hillary in his evil lair. Robot monster Hillary.
Wait, Hillary has more track time than Obama has. How is Obama responsible for Hillary? Was Obama responsible for Hillary back when the Conservatives were having a "go" at her during the Clinton administration too?
You mean that Goldman Sachs got bailout money from the TARP PROGRAM ANNOUNCED UNDER THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION?
Wow, Obama is really powerful if he's responsible for things the Bush Administration started! Was W a puppet of the mighty and evil Obamanation?
Wow, I'm scared of Obama now! I didn't realize he was pulling all the strings for the past 20 years or so! Yikes!
What a MONSTER.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
