[greenamp]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Mass rallies have also been a sign of change.

Civil Rights
Woman's Suffrage
Lots of AIDS researchers attribute the AIDS Quilt to the start of large funding to AIDS research by individuals.

March of Dimes
Million Man March
were both pivotial the first time they took place.

Mass movements have worked.

Look at Spain post-attacks just a few months ago.

lol, oh please.

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally posted by greenamp:

How Kerry thinks that volunteering, getting a couple scratches on his ass and quickly leaving is supposed to be impressive to men like my father, and their children, is beyond me.

You have no idea what the war in Vietnam was like (worse than Hell could ever be) so to criticize veterans is as low as one can get. There were many volunteers because they thought it was right but became disillusioned. That's what happens when people can no longer justify what is happening.

Some put it somewhere in there brain and try to live as normal as they can and others try to speak out against it for the sake of their children and their children's children. And because of them you harp on and belittle them.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by Atomic Rooster:
You have no idea what the war in Vietnam was like (worse than Hell could ever be) so to criticize veterans is as low as one can get. There were many volunteers because they thought it was right but became disillusioned. That's what happens when people can no longer justify what is happening.

Some put it somewhere in there brain and try to live as normal as they can and others try to speak out against it for the sake of their children and their children's children. And because of them you harp on and belittle them.

If you read my post a second time and still think I was criticising vietnam vets, then you my friend are in idiot in the most respectful of ways.


Whatis with you liberals and your STRAWMEN?

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by greenamp:
If you read my post a second time and still think I was criticising vietnam vets, then you my friend are in idiot in the most respectful of ways.


Whatis with you liberals and your STRAWMEN?

What is it with you calling those who disagree with you "liberals" and "strawmen"?

[greenamp]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
What is it with you calling those who disagree with you "liberals" and "strawmen"?

Because distoring someones statement and then attacking that distortion happens to be called a "strawman fallacy," and seems to be quite popular with liberals.

Classic example of a strawman fallacy:

I said I have no respect for politicians who use war of any kind for political gain. I went on to explain that I feel this way mainly b/c of my fathers experience in vietnam, and the experience of thousands of others soldiers who faught and/or gave their lives fighting there.

Atomic Rooster distorted my statement by making it into an attack on vietnam vets, and then he proceeded to attack his own distortion of my words.


Am I going to have to keep explaining things to you here?

[Nicko]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Because distoring someones statement and then attacking that distortion happens to be called a "strawman fallacy," and seems to be quite popular with liberals.

Classic example of a strawman fallacy:

I said I have no respect for politicians who use war of any kind for political gain. I went on to explain that I feel this way mainly b/c of my fathers experience in vietnam, and the experience of thousands of others soldiers who faught and/or gave their lives fighting there.

Atomic Rooster distorted my statement by making it into an attack on vietnam vets, and then he proceeded to attack his own distortion of my words.


Am I going to have to keep explaining things to you here?

What about politicians who start wars for political gain?

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Because distoring someones statement and then attacking that distortion happens to be called a "strawman fallacy," and seems to be quite popular with liberals.

Classic example of a strawman fallacy:

I said I have no respect for politicians who use war of any kind for political gain. I went on to explain that I feel this way mainly b/c of my fathers experience in vietnam, and the experience of thousands of others soldiers who faught and/or gave their lives fighting there.

Atomic Rooster distorted my statement by making it into an attack on vietnam vets, and then he proceeded to attack his own distortion of my words.


Am I going to have to keep explaining things to you here?

So you basically agree, you protecting your dad's memory as a viet-nam veteran, and Atomic Rooster protecting Kerry as a viet-nam veteran.

In the end, the problem is that you don't like Kerry because you think he is a fraud, while Atomic Rooster believes he is the real thing. But you have both the same respect for the veterans.

Do you have to call people names when you could have expressed your opinion differently?

Misunderstandings are just that.

[Mr. Bob]

To me, this is just like painting signs on cattle, and having them walk down the street.

Although, indeed, it is a large protest. 250,000 people in NYC have shown that they can be controlled by propaganda. Showed, that they can be told what to do, and do so mindlessly. Showed, that they can be told to hate a person, not to ask why, and then walk down a street proclaiming their disgust. What is sad, I bet if you held out a map of the Middle East, without names, most people in this protest would not be able to even find Iraq.

Indeed, Bush has done some things that has made some people unhappy, that is the nature of government. It is imposable to make people everyone happy. In this day and age, however, not being happy is a reason to hate someone else I guess.

What I do when I want to get my point across, is say my opinion, and then defend it. I debate with people often. People should be trying to get their point across, through debate, that is how adults do things. The number of people do not define the validity of an opinion. Validity is defined by how well your argument holds up under fire. Many of these people are protesting arguments that have, time and time again, been shown invalid.

Now, I do not particularly like Bush. But, I have logical reasons to what I believe he has done wrong. Most of these people hate Bush just because they are immature. It is very easy for propagandists, (which defines most of these anti-Bush groups), to be controlled.

Do not like Bush, hey, that's okay. But to shut down an entire city to say something bad about someone, is like using a shotgun to kill a roach. I mean, there are ways to get a point across very easily today.

Also, this protest is not going to change any minds. I don't think lower of Bush, or higher of Kerry after this protest. If your opinion changes from a protest, it just shows you are one of those people that jump on the bandwagon.

Wow, 250,000 people hate Bush, I guess, I must hate Bush too!

What is sad, is people are voting for Kerry, solely because they dislike Bush. Which is not a good reason. if you are voting for Kerry because you believe he will do a better job, then that is good. But, most of these protesters probably do not even know any of Kerry's plans, what so ever. They just think.

BUSH BAD!

NOT BUSH GOOD!

What does this show about people in America, our 1st amendment runs off of ignorance.

Now, some of you are going to disagree with my, little synopsis, that is fine too. I just hope you have a good reason, besides.

BUSH BAD!

Or.

YOU HATE CONSTITUTION!

Because, : sigh : that just is not it at all.

Note: Just so you know, I am not a liberal, or a conservative. Some actually believe that being in the center is good too, and that civility actually has a purpose in a civilized group (which obviously at least 250,000 people do not belong).

[Spliffdaddy]

Mr Bob, that is probably the best post ever made in this forum.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
So you basically agree, you protecting your dad's memory as a viet-nam veteran, and Atomic Rooster protecting Kerry as a viet-nam veteran.

In the end, the problem is that you don't like Kerry because you think he is a fraud, while Atomic Rooster believes he is the real thing. But you have both the same respect for the veterans.

Do you have to call people names when you could have expressed your opinion differently?

Misunderstandings are just that.

Yet another tactic from the liberal grab bag. Provoke your oponent to anger then deal the victim card.

Regardless, I don't want to be pulled into an immature name calling session with you so Ill state my ideas once more in the hopes we can just move on.

1)I am against kerry using his vietnam record for political gain.
2)I am against anyone using war for political gain.
3)With these two points now established, I am against the idea of using symbols of slain war soldiers in protest aimed at achieving political gain.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Mr. Bob:
To me, this is just like painting signs on cattle, and having them walk down the street.

Although, indeed, it is a large protest. 250,000 people in NYC have shown that they can be controlled by propaganda. Showed, that they can be told what to do, and do so mindlessly. Showed, that they can be told to hate a person, not to ask why, and then walk down a street proclaiming their disgust. What is sad, I bet if you held out a map of the Middle East, without names, most people in this protest would not be able to even find Iraq.

Actually, several dozen million Fox viewers have proven this a lot better than this protest.

More the docile sheep than the cattle, but why not stretch the analogy?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by KarlG:
Really boosts that self-esteem, right Zimph? I mean, how can it get any worse, when people actually think they have a right to speak their mind?

This isn't about speaking their mind. They aren't going to change anything doing what they are doing. More than not, they are probably turning people AWAY.

They are doing it to make themselves feel self important.

[greenamp]

Mr. Bob great post. I wish I could get my points accross as well as you.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Yet another tactic from the liberal grab bag. Provoke your oponent to anger then deal the victim card.

I am not a victim. I am not a liberal. You feel provoke in anger while I am trying to discuss with you. Discussing is a way to build a common understanding. Won't always work on first attempt, even if you are a Pulitzer recipient.

Regardless, I don't want to be pulled into an immature name calling session with you so Ill state my ideas once more in the hopes we can just move on.

Read your posts in this thread. I did not use any name calling. You did.

1)I am against kerry using his vietnam record for political gain.
2)I am against anyone using war for political gain.
3)With these two points now established, I am against the idea of using symbols of slain war soldiers in protest aimed at achieving political gain.

That is clear. Can we disagree with you?

[greenamp]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
I am not a victim. I am not a liberal. You feel provoke in anger while I am trying to discuss with you. Discussing is a way to build a common understanding. Won't always work on first attempt, even if you are a Pulitzer recipient.



Read your posts in this thread. I did not use any name calling. You did.



That is clear. Can we disagree with you?

You're getting off topic, can we plz move on?


Topic: TENS of THOUSANDS protest GOP convention

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Mr. Bob:
To me, this is just like painting signs on cattle, and having them walk down the street.

Although, indeed, it is a large protest. 250,000 people in NYC have shown that they can be controlled by propaganda. Showed, that they can be told what to do, and do so mindlessly. Showed, that they can be told to hate a person, not to ask why, and then walk down a street proclaiming their disgust. What is sad, I bet if you held out a map of the Middle East, without names, most people in this protest would not be able to even find Iraq.

Indeed, Bush has done some things that has made some people unhappy, that is the nature of government. It is imposable to make people everyone happy. In this day and age, however, not being happy is a reason to hate someone else I guess.

What I do when I want to get my point across, is say my opinion, and then defend it. I debate with people often. People should be trying to get their point across, through debate, that is how adults do things. The number of people do not define the validity of an opinion. Validity is defined by how well your argument holds up under fire. Many of these people are protesting arguments that have, time and time again, been shown invalid.

Now, I do not particularly like Bush. But, I have logical reasons to what I believe he has done wrong. Most of these people hate Bush just because they are immature. It is very easy for propagandists, (which defines most of these anti-Bush groups), to be controlled.

Do not like Bush, hey, that's okay. But to shut down an entire city to say something bad about someone, is like using a shotgun to kill a roach. I mean, there are ways to get a point across very easily today.

Also, this protest is not going to change any minds. I don't think lower of Bush, or higher of Kerry after this protest. If your opinion changes from a protest, it just shows you are one of those people that jump on the bandwagon.

Wow, 250,000 people hate Bush, I guess, I must hate Bush too!

What is sad, is people are voting for Kerry, solely because they dislike Bush. Which is not a good reason. if you are voting for Kerry because you believe he will do a better job, then that is good. But, most of these protesters probably do not even know any of Kerry's plans, what so ever. They just think.

BUSH BAD!

NOT BUSH GOOD!

What does this show about people in America, our 1st amendment runs off of ignorance.

Now, some of you are going to disagree with my, little synopsis, that is fine too. I just hope you have a good reason, besides.

BUSH BAD!

Or.

YOU HATE CONSTITUTION!

Because, : sigh : that just is not it at all.

Note: Just so you know, I am not a liberal, or a conservative. Some actually believe that being in the center is good too, and that civility actually has a purpose in a civilized group (which obviously at least 250,000 people do not belong).

[greenamp]

Those claps are pegging my 1gz ibook cpu to almost 100%


LOL

[deedar]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
It's great to see clearly how many Americans disagree with Bush's incredibly stupid policies.

There are a LOT of us lbk, lots of us. Keep the faith.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by Mr. Bob:
To me, this is just like painting signs on cattle, and having them walk down the street.

So people who express their views differently than you will deserve that kind of respect?

Although, indeed, it is a large protest. 250,000 people in NYC have shown that they can be controlled by propaganda. Showed, that they can be told what to do, and do so mindlessly. Showed, that they can be told to hate a person, not to ask why, and then walk down a street proclaiming their disgust. What is sad, I bet if you held out a map of the Middle East, without names, most people in this protest would not be able to even find Iraq.

Prove it. All of it.

Indeed, Bush has done some things that has made some people unhappy, that is the nature of government. It is imposable to make people everyone happy. In this day and age, however, not being happy is a reason to hate someone else I guess.

Generalization and oversimplification 101. Try again with further analysis for marketability.

What I do when I want to get my point across, is say my opinion, and then defend it. I debate with people often. People should be trying to get their point across, through debate, that is how adults do things. The number of people do not define the validity of an opinion. Validity is defined by how well your argument holds up under fire.

That sounds like a popularity contest. I thought the best argumentations are those proceedings from facts. As a scientist, I know for a fact that people are impressionable, but reality is based on facts, not on fame. The fire of the debate may require stamina, but reality will nail you to the ground if the fire makes you fly too high.

Many of these people are protesting arguments that have, time and time again, been shown invalid.

Which people? You say many; you heard them all? What did they say exactly that has been shown "invalid", "time and time again"?

Now, I do not particularly like Bush. But, I have logical reasons to what I believe he has done wrong. Most of these people hate Bush just because they are immature.

When did you meet them to judge them like so? Aren't you the one who posted on candidates being judged before there had been a debate? I thought thought you were going to be "milking both guys to the bitter end". How about giving the same chance to 250 000 manifestants?

It is very easy for propagandists, (which defines most of these anti-Bush groups), to be controlled.

Do not like Bush, hey, that's okay. But to shut down an entire city to say something bad about someone, is like using a shotgun to kill a roach. I mean, there are ways to get a point across very easily today.

How? What have you tried yourself ini this matter? Or do you have a good account to report?

Also, this protest is not going to change any minds. I don't think lower of Bush, or higher of Kerry after this protest. If your opinion changes from a protest, it just shows you are one of those people that jump on the bandwagon.

Wow, 250,000 people hate Bush, I guess, I must hate Bush too!

Again, generalizing and oversimplifying...

What is sad, is people are voting for Kerry, solely because they dislike Bush. Which is not a good reason. if you are voting for Kerry because you believe he will do a better job, then that is good. But, most of these protesters probably do not even know any of Kerry's plans, what so ever. They just think.

Did you ask them? Didn't people vote for Bush for some other sets of reasons of their own? How can you tell a candidate was "justly" elected for the "good reasons"? And what if the majority voted for reasons that are totally opposite to yours? I guess that would make you an exception... right?

(...)

Some actually believe that being in the center is good too, and that civility actually has a purpose in a civilized group (which obviously at least 250,000 people do not belong).

Oh. I see. They are uncivilized. Public manifestations are a lack of civility... And that judgement is based on what?

[villalobos]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Mr Bob, that is probably the best post ever made in this forum.

LOL

[-00-00-]

That civilied beings sit down and debate instead of running around in mobs screaming?

[-00-00-]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Mr Bob, that is probably the best post ever made in this forum.

Definately the best post I've seen here in 3-4 years.

[MindFad]

Yep, a regular Fox News bit. A+++++++++++

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by Mr. Bob:
To me, this is just like painting signs on cattle, and having them walk down the street...

Excellent post. Well thought-out and explained.

[deedar]

Originally posted by ambush:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ain/index.html

YEAHHHHHHHHHHHH

Truly a thing of beauty. DAMN, I wish I were there!

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by deedar:
Truly a thing of beauty. DAMN, I wish I were there!

Yeah and you could bring your ibook along and sit outside Starbucks mooching off their WiFi signal, IM'ing Lerkfish "wish you were here!"

[MindFad]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
Yeah and you could bring your ibook along and sit outside Starbucks mooching off their WiFi signal, IM'ing Lerkfish "wish you were here!"

AWEXOME! LO!L!!1

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Mr. Bob:
Now, some of you are going to disagree with my, little synopsis, that is fine too. I just hope you have a good reason, besides.

How's this: "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Apparently, the framers thought there might be something useful about public demonstrations, even when you disagree with the demonstrators, or think they've failed to make a sufficiently detached analysis of the issues. Imagine that.

I'm like you - never been to a protest, and have no plans to go. I don't care much for sloganeering and the like. But the purpose of demonstrations is symbolic/political, not analytical. People who aren't so anal retentive as us like to have them and, well, demonstrate stuff, such as the fact that they're angry about something. Sometimes it has an effect, sometimes it doesn't.

What I don't understand is why so many people are so worked up about people having a demonstration in New York City, of all places. You'd think the sun had failed to rise in the east.

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by MindFad:
AWEXOME! LO!L!!1

It's fun reducing your posts to quivering Jell-O.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by Mr. Bob:
To me, this is just like painting signs on cattle, and having them walk down the street.

Although, indeed, it is a large protest. 250,000 people in NYC have shown that they can be controlled by propaganda. Showed, that they can be told what to do, and do so mindlessly. Showed, that they can be told to hate a person, not to ask why, and then walk down a street proclaiming their disgust. What is sad, I bet if you held out a map of the Middle East, without names, most people in this protest would not be able to even find Iraq.

Indeed, Bush has done some things that has made some people unhappy, that is the nature of government. It is imposable to make people everyone happy. In this day and age, however, not being happy is a reason to hate someone else I guess.

What I do when I want to get my point across, is say my opinion, and then defend it. I debate with people often. People should be trying to get their point across, through debate, that is how adults do things. The number of people do not define the validity of an opinion. Validity is defined by how well your argument holds up under fire. Many of these people are protesting arguments that have, time and time again, been shown invalid.

Now, I do not particularly like Bush. But, I have logical reasons to what I believe he has done wrong. Most of these people hate Bush just because they are immature. It is very easy for propagandists, (which defines most of these anti-Bush groups), to be controlled.

Do not like Bush, hey, that's okay. But to shut down an entire city to say something bad about someone, is like using a shotgun to kill a roach. I mean, there are ways to get a point across very easily today.

Also, this protest is not going to change any minds. I don't think lower of Bush, or higher of Kerry after this protest. If your opinion changes from a protest, it just shows you are one of those people that jump on the bandwagon.

Wow, 250,000 people hate Bush, I guess, I must hate Bush too!

What is sad, is people are voting for Kerry, solely because they dislike Bush. Which is not a good reason. if you are voting for Kerry because you believe he will do a better job, then that is good. But, most of these protesters probably do not even know any of Kerry's plans, what so ever. They just think.

BUSH BAD!

NOT BUSH GOOD!

What does this show about people in America, our 1st amendment runs off of ignorance.

Now, some of you are going to disagree with my, little synopsis, that is fine too. I just hope you have a good reason, besides.

BUSH BAD!

Or.

YOU HATE CONSTITUTION!

Because, : sigh : that just is not it at all.

Note: Just so you know, I am not a liberal, or a conservative. Some actually believe that being in the center is good too, and that civility actually has a purpose in a civilized group (which obviously at least 250,000 people do not belong).

Interesting how you've generalized 250,000 people, who you've never met, as "cattle", and automatons "controlled by propaganda".

I haven't read many of your posts but I do remember you arguing passionately a few days ago (in the stem cell thread) for the civil liberties of a few dozen cells. Not a person, or a fetus, but a couple of dozen undifferentiated cells.

Yet here you are are badmouthing an entire group of people for doing exactly what you were pleading for - exercising their civil liberties. In your eyes are they to be honored for that? Absolutely not. Because now they are all "cattle" being led around "mindlessly".

Here we have an adult, independent, and educated group of people exercising the very right we've fought wars over and you categorize and dismiss them in a single sentence.

Are their concerns valid? Do you know? Have you talked to any of them? No, you saw a picture on a website. I guess that tells you everything you need to know.

I always find it curious how some can express such devotion and respect for life... until they disagree with you. Then they should be turned on and pushed down. Not because they threaten your life or harm you in any way but because they simply disagree with your political position. Then they are to be hated and grouped together as less then human.

I guess it's easier to vilify them. That way you don't have to listen to what they say. I mean, who cares what "cattle" think, right?

(edit-punctuation)

[OldManMac]

vmpaul, that is probably one of the best posts ever made in this forum.

[MindFad]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
It's fun reducing your posts to quivering Jell-O.

You're big. On the Internet. It's fun watching you get a kick out of that. Except I'm seriously enjoying it, whereas you're just being an Internet Tough Guy�. It really is funny.

Sup?

[zigzag]

Originally posted by KarlG:
vmpaul, that is probably one of the best posts ever made in this forum.

Yes, definitely the best I've seen in 3-4 years.

[MindFad]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Yes, definitely the best I've seen in 3-4 years.

I DEFINATELY AGREE!

[Spliffdaddy]

*smacks some folks upside the head*

[daimoni]

.

[Timo]

Originally posted by KarlG:
vmpaul, that is probably one of the best posts ever made in this forum.

Awesome.

[Mr. Bob]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
So people who express their views differently than you will deserve that kind of respect?

Expressing different views is great, I already said such was a good thing to do. However, have some civility while doing it. I agree with the war, and being in the military, I put my money where my mouth is. However, if you disagree with it, that's fine too. What people should do is get together, talk about it, and find ways to debate with people.

What I would love to see, is a pro-war and anti-war group file for the ability to get a section of central park, and debate the war in front of the masses. But, this would not be propaganda. Its easier to just stand alone, and express one side.

Moderated interviews, and debates are the only way to see a clear answer. This protest is not moderated, and is not a debate. Lenin used the same technique.

Prove it. All of it.

"As a scientist, I know for a fact that people are impressionable," (angaq0k) You already did for me pal. Thanks.

Generalization and oversimplification 101. Try again with further analysis for marketability.

You are saying my statement is invalid because it lacks substantiation, but at the same time, fail to substantiate your own inverse claim.

That sounds like a popularity contest. I thought the best argumentations are those proceedings from facts. As a scientist, I know for a fact that people are impressionable, but reality is based on facts, not on fame. The fire of the debate may require stamina, but reality will nail you to the ground if the fire makes you fly too high.

Hmm, not sure where logical, and substantiated debates are classified as "popularity contests". Protests are about getting allot of people, to say one thing. If anything they are the "popularity contests" you speak of.

Which people? You say many; you heard them all? What did they say exactly that has been shown "invalid", "time and time again"?

The whole BUSH LIED thingy, which the 911 commission proved was not true. Lots of BUSH LIED signs in that protest.

Anyway, it is imposable to meet everyone, generalizations are necessary. And, again, you do not have to agree with them. This is America, indeed, my generalizations are not scientific, but I got a good feeling, that they paint a semi-accurate pictures of this event. My feelings are opinions, and I would hope that I am entitled to them, because for you, these 250,000 people are.

However, of course, feel free to disagree. If you meet everyone and prove me wrong, I would be happy to know the truth. However, I think when people hold large signs displaying an idea, they would, umm, agree to the idea they are displaying, with the large sign.

When did you meet them to judge them like so? Aren't you the one who posted on candidates being judged before there had been a debate? I thought thought you were going to be "milking both guys to the bitter end". How about giving the same chance to 250 000 manifestants?

Indeed, I am still waiting for my answer, as I may find Bush may try to turn pro-abortion (although unlikely). Bush, may say he wants to firebomb the protest, Bush may change his mind, and I still keep the radar on him. I do the same for Kerry. Kerry may want to stop killing children, or may actually have a position that makes sense. One of the reasons I know Kerry flips around is because I keep the radar on him. Bush changes his mind too, and I know when, because I still watch him. If anything, it is more of a check-and-balance, then anything else.

I am leaning a certain way, but am not convinced, as things may change. Hell, Bush may get killed at the RNC. Who knows. But, I watch and read what each candidate does. You should too. However, these people are not. They knew exactly who to vote for after being told who to vote for.

These people do not have a vote, they just give propagandists like Moore, and moveon.org thousands of votes. That is the problem.

How? What have you tried yourself ini this matter? Or do you have a good account to report?

History has shown propaganda to be an extremely effective tool for controlling large masses of people. Most people usually do not ask why something sounds good, if it sounds good. It is just the nature of most people. A group of people have said Bush is to blame for your woes. Why does not matter for these people, they are just happy with who.

Again, generalizing and oversimplifying...

If you change your opinion by hearing a one sided argument, then you have done just that. There are multiple sides to each argument, and the political world is not left and right. Some people hear the left side, like it, and do not ask why. This is the same for people on the right as well, but being conservative, most of your Repubs do not turn to protest. It is the nature of the ideology. I can make fun of Repubs too, but the purpose of this thread is to make fun of the Libs. Because, at the moment, they are the one tear-assing throughout NYC.

Did you ask them? Didn't people vote for Bush for some other sets of reasons of their own? How can you tell a candidate was "justly" elected for the "good reasons"? And what if the majority voted for reasons that are totally opposite to yours? I guess that would make you an exception... right?

If the majority of people voted differently then me, then they should be represented, that is how a voting democracy works. I am, somewhat unsure on what point you are really trying to make with this segment. Also, you do not need to ask the protesters, these people do a very good job of telling you themselves. I did not ask to hear what these people feel about Bush, these people did a very good job of filling a city with their ideas.

Oh. I see. They are uncivilized. Public manifestations are a lack of civility... And that judgement is based on what?

Well, when they hijack an entire city, it is. My judgment is quite simple, people use that city. Millions of people left the city to make room for 250,000. The people are already breaking laws by stripping naked and such. There will be trash everywhere, and things will get broken. Business will be lost, money will be spent. Security for the event cost millions, and these people complain about high taxes, and low economy at it is. Holding a large protest costs money, and prevents some business from making money.

The popular "Shut Down NYC" wanted people throughout NYC to take the day off, which would cost any business the RNC will bring. The people who left the city because of the protest, will cost the city even more money.

Getting a group of people in a theater, or multiple theaters, or even in a large, organized outside setting, and hearing their views is good. But, ransacking through a city, and heavily disrupting the lives of others to get the same point across, is like I said before, shooting a roach with a shotgun.

But hey, enjoyed hearing your side. As you can see, this is the debate thing I am talking about. Because of this, people get two sides, and can make a good judgment.

Psst, you will also notice, we did not have to capture an entire city to display our views. Pass it on.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by KarlG:
vmpaul, that is probably one of the best posts ever made in this forum.

aw, shucks. thanks.

(he slowly backs away from the keyboard thinking he should retire from the forum now that he's finally pulled together a decent post)

[Mr. Bob]

Originally posted by vmpaul:
Interesting how you've generalized 250,000 people, who you've never met, as "cattle", and automatons "controlled by propaganda".

I haven't read many of your posts but I do remember you arguing passionately a few days ago (in the stem cell thread) for the civil liberties of a few dozen cells. Not a a person, or a fetus, but a couple of dozen undifferentiated cells.

Yet here you are are badmouthing an entire group of people for doing exactly what you were pleading for - exercising their civil liberties. In your eyes are they to be honored for that? Absolutely not. Because now all they are are "cattle" being led around "mindlessly".

Here we have an adult, independent, and educated group of people exercising the very right we've fought wars over and you categorize and dismiss them in a single sentence.

Are their concerns valid? Do you know? Have you talked to any of them? No, you saw a picture on a website. I guess that tells you everything you need to know.

I always find it curious how some can express such devotion and respect for life... until they disagree with you. Then they should be turned on and pushed down. Not because they threaten your life or harm you in any way but because they simply disagree with your political position. Then they are to be hated and grouped together as less then human.

I guess it's easier to vilify them. That way you don't have to listen to what they say. I mean, who cares what "cattle" think, right?

Hmm, not exactly. Stem cells in a petre dish are not currently protesting throughout a city. As I have said, many times, people deserve the right to protest, but should be civil.

However, they are not being civil as they have captured an entire city, and could have gotten their ideas across in other ways.

I am unsure where you got the idea that I dislike protests, as I have said time and time before, that people sharing their opinion with others is a good thing, as long as it is done in a civilized manner.

People deserve the right of life at conception. If they choose to do something that goes against a set of laws, then it is acceptable to remove them from society. Example, embryo, should live. A fetus would live. A grown adult should live. A grown adult that has raped and killed 17 women should be killed. Everyone is born with rights, only they can do the action that takes them away.

People protesting is dandy, but get a permit and do it in a way that does not inconvenience millions of people.

Finally, the stem cell argument (which you use) is not relative to this current argument. Everyone would rather be alive and gagged then dead, the reason why is simple.

If your gagged and are alive, you can try to remove the gag. You can fight to retrieve your rights, if they were ever removed.

If you are dead, you are not able to speak. Your right to free speech (and all of your other rights) are directly depended on you being alive. The right to be alive, is the supreme right on which others derive. Without it, you have no voice, and cannot retrieve anything.

So I am wondering why you think my beliefs that people who are innocent should not be killed, is conflicting with my beliefs that people who have something to say, should be allowed to say it, but in a civilized manner?

Free speech is good, and should be protected. But, do it in a civilized manner. Hell, in the information age, our lifestyles should revolve around efficient communication. But, I guess that would require people to read more, and yell less.

[daimoni]

.

[Spliffdaddy]

LOL, LMAO

In 2008, perhaps.

Kerry is dropping like rock in the polls.

[Timo]

Originally posted by Mr. Bob:
Expressing different views is great, I already said such was a good thing to do. However, have some civility while doing it. I agree with the war, and being in the military, I put my money where my mouth is. However, if you disagree with it, that's fine too. What people should do is get together, talk about it, and find ways to debate with people.

What I would love to see, is a pro-war and anti-war group file for the ability to get a section of central park, and debate the war in front of the masses. But, this would not be propaganda. Its easier to just stand alone, and express one side.

Moderated interviews, and debates are the only way to see a clear answer. This protest is not moderated, and is not a debate. Lenin used the same technique.

Ah, irony. You see it, right? These protests have started debates. Between you and me, for example.

As for civility, well, I agree with you. Civil is important. And it's my sense, from being on the ground, that these protests were civil. The number of arrests was low for such a huge crowd. Check the Times analysis:

A roaring two-mile river of demonstrators surged through the canyons of Manhattan yesterday in the city's largest political protest in decades, a raucous but peaceful spectacle that pilloried George W. Bush and demanded regime change in Washington.

emphasis added
But you also have to understand that a lot of people have a message to get across, and whether or not they offend your sensibilities is perhaps not the prime directive.

The whole Lenin bit, BTW, is a cheap shot. The differences between this march and whatever you're thinking Lenin organized far outweigh the similarities. But I can see why you might just throw that name around -- I mean, there's a 50+ year tradition of opposing change in this country by calling it Communist. You'd think someone'd eventually retire that rusty, crude tool, but no, too tempting, too familiar, eh?

But hey: perhaps that's what debate means for you. Fatuous comparisons with history, and a love of the status quo masquerading as common sense and civility.

The whole BUSH LIED thingy, which the 911 commission proved was not true. Lots of BUSH LIED signs in that protest.

Your language gives you away. The 9/11 Commission "proved" something? Even better, the 9/11 Commission "proved something untrue"? C'mon. The 9/11 Commission, at best, demonstrated things. Proofs are for math and the courts.

You can't really believe the 9/11 Commission exonerated Bush -- how can you explain his adamant opposition to forming the same said Commission? I think the explanation is several degrees simpler. Mr Bush did not want the 9/11 Commission to reveal, among other things, no direct connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq. He did not want the 9/11 Commission to investigate the intelligence failures and policy lapses on his watch. Now I think generally Americans are quite forgiving of the latter, but Mr Bush hasn't helped himself any by suggesting Americans can't handle the truth -- which is the suggestion implicit in stonewalling the Commission.

And that's where the Bush Lied thing comes into play. The argument has been made that we're not in Iraq because of WMDs or Al Quada or the Iraqi people, or any of the given reasons. Instead, we're in Iraq because there's an idea in Washington to reshape the Middle East in our image, with a newly-minted democratic Iraq as the centerpiece. Such a reshaping would do many good things, such as secure for this country a constant supply of oil, reduce our depandancy on the Saudi government as our primary allies in the region, pressure Iran and possibly provide an angle to break the Israeli-Palestinean stalemate.

All nice ideas, but so far they seem to be disconnected with realities on the ground.

So that's the lie: our President isn't on the level with us. He thinks we can't handle the truth. He wants to manage us just the way you claim "propagandists" are managing "the masses" (really, you should update this vocabulary...it sounds so, I don't know, "red menace" or something). He doesn't want the debate where some of us, like myself, say, these goals are as naive and out of step as Wilson's were in 1919. Because that would be unpatriotic.

What I'm getting at is that there is, right now, a contest of interpretation about what happened, and a great debate about where we are going. The 9/11 Commission report is a part of the inquiry about what happened (sadly, too inconclusive at times). And this President sure isn't brooking any debate about where we're going: it's his way or the highway, with dissent like treason. No thanks: like 500 000 other people on the street, I reject the framing of the debate in that light. Like 500 000 other people I'd like a debate about our future, not a secretive Administration that condescends to the very people who he purports to represent.

Which gets back to civility: you've got to realize it's not yours to decide, but rather, yours to practice. You cannot demand it of others, you can only give it of yourself.

I am leaning a certain way, but am not convinced, as things may change. Hell, Bush may get killed at the RNC. Who knows. But, I watch and read what each candidate does. You should too. However, these people are not. They knew exactly who to vote for after being told who to vote for.

These people do not have a vote, they just give propagandists like Moore, and moveon.org thousands of votes. That is the problem.

You've got it backward. You way overestimate the "power" of Moore and moveon.org. Just take a look at the Times analysis yesterday, with its article about how fractured and unorganized the 900 groups marching in the parade were. Indeed, this is one of the bugbears of the Left: disorganization and disunity. It's usually just the Republicans who recognize the wisdom of a big tent, but today, the usual liberal factional fighting (and nobody does holier-than-thou better than Lefties) was subordinated to getting a larger message across: the direction that this President is taking this country is wrong.

Heck, even the Times recognized, as most anxious Leftists do, that while these protesters are surely anti-Bush, they are not automatic Democrats. Alot of these people are disgusted with EVERYTHING. You see, they're not robots giving their votes to moveon.org. Rather, moveon.org fervently hopes it can convince such folk that a vote for Kerry isn't just a vote for a Bush-lite -- but I think they have their work cut out for them.

History has shown propaganda to be an extremely effective tool for controlling large masses of people. Most people usually do not ask why something sounds good, if it sounds good. It is just the nature of most people. A group of people have said Bush is to blame for your woes. Why does not matter for these people, they are just happy with who.

I'm not for these kind of generalizations, and it doesn't look like your history book made it to my school, or anyone else's school that I know.

If you change your opinion by hearing a one sided argument, then you have done just that. There are multiple sides to each argument, and the political world is not left and right. Some people hear the left side, like it, and do not ask why. This is the same for people on the right as well, but being conservative, most of your Repubs do not turn to protest. It is the nature of the ideology. I can make fun of Repubs too, but the purpose of this thread is to make fun of the Libs. Because, at the moment, they are the one tear-assing throughout NYC.

Um...OK. But if you're going to make fun of folk do us the favor of being witty?

IPsst, you will also notice, we did not have to capture an entire city to display our views. Pass it on.

I'm not sure you could find 500 000 people of your stripe in one place, unless they're now making the aloha deck much bigger than in the old days.

[Atomic Rooster]

Best post I've seen in here in at least 3 years Timo!

[BlackGriffen]

Heh, nice to see you come out of retirement, Timo. I still remember tangling with you a couple of times. What I remember is that it was tough as Hell, and I don't recall if I came out on top (probably not ).

Excellent post!

BG

[Timo]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
Heh, nice to see you come out of retirement, Timo. I still remember tangling with you a couple of times. What I remember is that it was tough as Hell, and I don't recall if I came out on top (probably not ).

Yeah, I can't wait for this election to be over so that we can go back to our usual factional infighting and dumb debates. It all seems so...quaint.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by Mr. Bob:
However, they are not being civil as they have captured an entire city, and could have gotten their ideas across in other ways.

I am unsure where you got the idea that I dislike protests, as I have said time and time before, that people sharing their opinion with others is a good thing, as long as it is done in a civilized manner.

I certainly got the idea that you dislike this protest. Perhaps it's when you described the whole group as "cattle" or wrote them off as "mindless". If you don't see a problem with that, then there's not much to say.

As for "capturing the city", while 250k is huge for a political cause it's fairly standard for a typical St. Patrick Day's parade. Most of whom only show up for the promise of green beer. That'll give you a sense of proportion (and New Yorkers priorities).

[vmpaul]

Great post Timo.

Excellent summation.

[Mr. Bob]

Originally posted by Timo:

Ah, irony. You see it, right? These protests have started debates. Between you and me, for example.

Indeed, and this debate we are having, is actually very good. This is not irony, this is involvement. Instead of ranting about something, people in this forum (well, most) are exchanging ideas, and having to back them up. This is the opposite of propaganda, this is how democracy should work. This is why the internet is a good thing. It represents efficient and public asynchronous communication.

It is effective, and gets your ideas heard, and validated.

Also, allot of what you said, I have to look into further, and in all honesty think about, so thanks for a new and slightly different view point. I am sorry to do this, but will have to get back to you on a portion of what you said.

But, my position on this protest still stands. There are better ways to get your point across in this day and age. Look at the internet, look at the media. A protest like this is something that should be used as a last resort. If Bush closed off internet sites, quelled the newspaper, silenced people. Rights are milti-tierd.

Walking down the streets and having someone talk to me is good, and often insightful. But having a mob of people yelling about the same thing is not, especially if I have heard it all before. The city belongs to everyone, not just that 250,000. I believe they were not oppressed enough to justify taking the city from everyone else. If they are forcing people to hear them, there should be a good damn reason, and in this case, there was not.

The reason for the 2nd amendment is to fulfill your duty to revolt against your government if it were to become tyrannical. However, that is the last resort.

The reason for the 1st amendment is to speak against the government to prevent it from becoming tyrannical. This has been allowed, constantly. The media, internet, and people who constantly talk in the streets people have showed that they have not been quelled, but encouraged for their opinion.

Unity can be showed in many ways, however this protest is showing that many people dislike our current administration, something that is already known. It is, however, not allowing any of their ideas to be validated. A protest allows people of the same beliefs to unite, but it does not mean that their beliefs are right.

But, this forum thingy is. Although this current thread is being used to discuss this particular protest, Bush, Kerry, the GOP, Dems, the war, etc... have been a constant topic. Many people have good views on both sides because of this whole debating principal. Such communication makes educated decisions.

Protests like this happened at the start of our nation, because that was the only way to disseminate information to the masses due to a tyrannical government. We have evolved to allow this to be done in other ways, and if a box office movie can be made which sole purpose is to discredit the president, you will really have a hard time telling me our current government is preventing its people to speak free. I have heard their words over and over again. They are shouting when I have heard them very clearly before while talking.

But, the fact that we are debating is a good thing. Groups with different political views should spend more time debating with other and not blocking city roads. These people are not looking at this with an open mind, they have an idea, and they just want to say it over and over again.

But, I just wanted to chime in real quick about how it seemed to me that by that one quote that you thought us debating was a bad thing. People thinking differently then me is just great. But, you do not have to close off city streets to show that you think differently.

[Mr. Bob]

Originally posted by vmpaul:
I certainly got the idea that you dislike this protest. Perhaps it's when you described the whole group as "cattle" or wrote them off as "mindless". If you don't see a problem with that, then there's not much to say.

As for "capturing the city", while 250k is huge for a political cause it's fairly standard for a typical St. Patrick Day's parade. Most of whom only show up for the promise of green beer. That'll give you a sense of proportion (and New Yorkers priorities).

Celebration is different then protest. You cannot drink beer and be social in person with thousands of people over the internet. Such a thing is for good will. Stating in mass unison that you hate a person of group of people, however, does not require the same physical involvement.