So we're seeking some common ground yes? Two wings
make the eagle fly, what what?
First, I'd ask you to site some specific refrences of
the "untrue things" you've heard or seen me write or
say about Bush. It is certainly not my intention to
spread more falsehoods. It is my intent to spread some
light to some of the dark corners that the
establishment wishes us not to see.
Here we will likely come to the first obstacle between
us: bias in the media. Those of the right-wing would
have us believe that the media as an interest is
liberal, or left-leaning. Those on the left see
corporate interests that could not help but be biasd
towards their owners, namely, the people on the right
who believe that the media is liberal...ad naseum, ad
infinitum.
I may be wrong, but i believe in logic this is termed
a solipism. A circular argument...
Still, we have to discern and refine our thoughts and
opinions based on the information that comes to us via
the media. As a media consumer I try to draw from as
wide a range of material and mediums so as to have a
reasonable handle on what everyone is saying.
As a media producer, first through the Free Press,
then through the show and my latest career venture, I
admit a bias. I like underdogs, I like the meek, the
poor, the weak of heart. I like to champion their
causes because no one else, or few else, will.
Here we reach the second obstacle: interpretation.
What's it all mean? Wars and elections and taxes and
the whole big world...what does it all mean? I would
assume, I think reasonably, that you are a Christian.
You have sent me religious material, and I have the
sense that you are, moreover, an apocalyptic
Christian, waiting for the rebuilding of the temple
and the gathering of the armies at Megiddio.
I must admit that I don't fully grasp the brand of
Christianity that seems all the craze these days.
There is a hateful attitude that drives a group of
people to pickett someone's funeral. Do we have common
ground here, Chris?
I too look to the skies and await the return of the
son of man. I look to the day of judgement when we
will all have to account and atone for our actions. I
look to the day when blessed will be the peacemakers,
and the meek inherit the earth. What a grand thing...
We all have our filters. From my good book and all
those sunday school lessons I learned tolerance,
humility, and forgiveness. Do we have common ground
here?
You speak of national identity, and I will tell you
first off that I am leery of nationalism as a means of
motivating a people. I am not threated by a
pluralistic society that can speak with many voices.
My concept of personal liberty is the freedom from
nationalistic or other "group think" philosophies.
Still, there is something to being a nation. We are
unique species among all the races of man, because we
are all races of man. And woman. Queer and straight
and black and white and indian and african and polish
and the whole sordid lot. We are all america, so in my
vision there is no national identity without near
absolute personal liberty.
I also believe, futhermore, that the basis of our
government and the spirit of our constitution should
always stem from a deep and profound respect for the
liberty and soverignty of the individual. Is there
common ground here?
Here we reach the next road block: the culture wars.
I am to assume that if not you, then most right-wing
Christians, republicans, neo-cons and the whole lot,
would be really threatened if my sister and her wife
could have a legally sanctioned union? I am further to
assume that the idea of a worker owning their own
labor is also to be ranked among the many liberal "bad
ideas." I am also to assume that the very idea that,
given the vast resources and talents at the disposal
of mankind, that the idea that everyone should be fed
and clothed, provided shelter and safe drinking water,
that everyone should be afforded the basic necesities
of life...this too would be another bugaboo sent to
threaten the hallowed halls of western civilization?
I too see a great nation crumbling. I see broken
infrastructure, corruption, and the consoldation of
power in the hands of fewer and fewer people. I see
the people's fears used as a means to keep them
divided and servile. I see the slow, steady
degredation of our enviroment as the insatiable
american appetite continues to devour more and more
resources.
We may argue about forms of economic exchange,
supply-side trickle down or estate taxes or why it is
a threat to the economy to suggest that people on
minimum wage should get a dollar raise, but how it
never seems a threat to the economy when a ceo tacks
on another milion dollar bonus.
We could argue these finer points all we want, but in
the end the system we have in place now and that looms
large over the world, global corporate commodification
of every aspect of life, well, that system is simply
not sustainable.
Maybe the money or the oil or the potable water runs
out in 2040, or 2090, or maybe we even make it another
century as a nation...what then? What does the future
hold Chris? Were all the wars and votes and lives cast
before history so we could end up handing over to our
great grandchildren one world under Halliburton? Is
there no limiting the market? Ever? What do they call
this...worshipping mannon?
As to leadership. Striking new ground may be bold, and
bold action may be what the situation warrants.
Sometimes though, especially if you have no recon of
the wilderness, if you have no idea where to cross the
streams, or no concept of where the ice is
weak...well, sometimes caution and wisdom should weigh
out over bold action, lest the whole enterprise be
lost...my idea is that a real leader knows the
difference between the two. Do we have common ground
here?
Lincoln made the point: a house divided can not stand.
I respect you, and everyone that aligns themselves
with the right wing of this great eagle. I hope that
in the end we can accept one another and face the
challenges as one nation, indivisble...but I will not
willingly see this nation congealed under a banner of
demographic marketing, christian fundamentalism and
the morals of the Spartan war state.
See any common ground?
dennis-the red menace
4 comments:
Well Big Dog wrong again.
When I was speaking of domestic I was speaking of something else not necessarily Amanpour. I am sure she would have foreign ties but. Remember Bush said that the 500 subjects were known to have direct alqaida ties remember that? Now either its direct or its not.Then later when asked to explain Scotty claimed later that Bush really meant improper communications.
Either way no warrants. You claim I use fancy lawyer tricks. But I can claim that you cut and pasted your book.
I simply said that maybe Andrea Mitchell knows something.I also said NBC ommitted that part about Amapour.
Did you forget that already Star Child
lmao
I do not need to say whether Dean is lying or not. I am not a Democrat. I do not trust any politician. crooked is as crooked does both republicans and democrats.My opinion on this subject is apparent.
Post a Comment