They are coming...

They are coming...

...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson                                 |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations                               |     et      | 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson
Loading thread data ...

I'm normally very suspicious of writers who use the word "existential" because they're usually Cultural Marxists like Bill Sloman. However, this guy does make a lot of sense. Well worth the read; thanks, Jim. :-)

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Cursitor Doom

He is dead wrong about Venezuela. Other than that not bad.

Reply to
jurb6006

"I don?t trust the government and this country was established on that bedrock principle."

Yeah, George Washington was so anti-Federal government that the first thing he did upon America's founding was roam around smashing armed insurrections against the Federal government.

"Many of the resisters were war veterans who believed that they were fighting for the principles of the American Revolution, in particular against taxation without local representation"

Looks like they thought wrong eh

Reply to
bitrex

Everyone knows the reason the right wing gun nuts want to own a bunch of guns, it's cuz they hope someday when there's some crisis and the Federal government isn't looking they'll get to run around and gun down unarmed people they don't like, as JT has grossly fantasized about on this NG on numerous occasions.

Reply to
bitrex

Y'know, if just about everything the NRA said didn't come off as the words of a murderous stone cold psychopath maybe people would be a little more accommodating.

Reply to
bitrex

Cursitor Doom is actually uncomfortable with people who use word "existenti al" because is contains eleven letters, which is more than his brain can gr asp in one fixation. "Cultural Marxist" involves two eight-letter fixations , which he can manage.

He hasn't got a clue what either "existential" or "cultural Marxist" actual ly means, but he's happy with anything he reads on a right wing web-site, n o matter how absurd it gets.

"As a Jew, I have a problem with any government having all the guns. The la st time we allowed that to happen, it ended with millions of dead Jews. I believe any Jew who denies that reality puts their own political naivet? ? above the survival of the Jewish people."

The proposition that an armed Jewish minority would have done any better in Nazi Germany is entirely fatuous.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

Jim, did you miss the rallies where all those school kids came out and said they were sick of being targets?

John

Reply to
John Robertson

tial" because is contains eleven letters, which is more than his brain can grasp in one fixation."

See there CD ? Slow Man again proves that one can have a degree and still b e dumb as a box of rocks.

He actually considers that worth typing out in an argument, I am really lau ghing at him. And to think I used to treat him as though he has a working b rain. Well, I guess you have to give the mentally challenged a chance. Been there done that. It is over now.

Reply to
jurb6006

Jurb hasn't noticed that it's actually an insult ...

You can't make your insults so obvious that every half-wit can get them without prompting.

As if Jurb could recognise a working brain ...

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

Existentialism was one of those poncy buzz-words beloved of pseudo- intellectuals back in the 1960s. They'd toss it around in conversation in an (unsuccessful) attempt to make themselves appear more intelligent. Its usage today only serves two functions: to confirm its utterer as living in the past, and to remove all doubt as to his Cultural Marxist proclivities.

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Cursitor Doom

They don't care. Pissed off that kids still have a shot at their ship coming in, but theirs sailed a loooooooooooong time ago.

Old men like addled washed-up rocker Ted Nugent calling kids names is pretty gross; how any "man" like him looks at himself in the mirror and still uses that term for himself seriously at the end of the day is definitely beyond me.

Reply to
bitrex

The kids did learn a hard lesson which I'm sure they'll remember on what the old timers in the American Right has to offer them in exchange for their support: nothing.

Reply to
bitrex

s

"Cultural Marxism" is just as meaningless, and confirms it's utterer as liv ing in a right-wing echo-chamber, and removes all doubt about his gullible susceptibility to alt-right jargon.

"Existentialism" did mean something once, as did "cultural Marxism" but all the meaning got washed away by their use by people - like Cursitor Doom - who were charmed by the sound of the polysyllables and didn't really care w hat they were saying, so long as it sounded poncy.

formatting link

formatting link

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

Because we need energy to survive. Before we used it people worried about freezing to death every winter. That's not a bad reason.

Why do Democrats undermine our effort to produce our own with great determination?

They have a backward culture, but most Westerners can't seem to distinguish between their culture and their policy. Flogging rape victims could not possibly be imposed as a policy unless it was popular. Their government has made reforms since then, trying to change the culture. A new battery of reforms came a few months ago. They were reforming slowly in the 70's before the Iranian revolution put a stop to that, due to the grassroots political pressure they got with an even more pious neighbor. So why do Democrats appease Iran, which is directly responsible for many terrorist attacks as a matter of policy?

Reply to
Tom Del Rosso

Drive a smaller car, problem solved. Or fight endless foreign wars overseas over decades and decades to the tune of trillions of dollars and millions of lives if you count both sides (I wouldn't expect most Americans to care about lives in shithole countries but sometimes even the average American can surprise with an ability to occasionally snap out of the usual pattern of self-absorption and petty vindictiveness.)

No Democratic president has ever "appeased" Iran as far as I'm aware, but if one considers doing anything but threatening strikes and sanctions and blustering and laying ultimatums on Middle Eastern countries to be "appeasement" then I don't think we have a lot of common ground to debate on. I do not personally believe anyone has treated them like we're good pals.

What American presidents do seem to do with near uniformity is kiss Saudi butt as if we're pals, when when looking act actions rather than words we are objectively speaking most certainly not.

Iran has an ugly past but has potential for peaceful reform, and is far better behaved on average than it was 30 years ago. Its youth certainly want something different than a "culture" of routinely flogging rape victims. Saudi Arabia regularly funds Islamic terrorism around the world with far more leverage than Iran ever had and is a habitual troublemaker and warmonger in its own neighborhood. They're incorrigible and recidivist, why do we want these people and their "culture" on our team at any price?

Reply to
bitrex

[snip]

I didn't watch it at all 20 years ago. But there was so much hoopla in the leftist media I looked it up. Turned out, the local ABC affiliate was re-running it, so I DVR'd it.

Hope you can find it! ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson                                 |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations                               |     et      | 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

etter behaved on average than it was 30 years ago."

Well when you depose their lawfully elected President and install a Shah wh o butchers them and allows western oil companies to steal their country's n atural resources they might not be too happy about it.

The US is responsible for the Shah and therefore the uprising including the seizing of the US embassy which resulted in the beginning of a theocratic government. President Mossadeq was actually quite progressive and would not take the bribes from the west to join the little "club" involved in the ex ploitation of natural resources across the world. The Shah was part of the old boy's club even though not politically aligned, he was financially "ali gned", which means bought.

Reply to
jurb6006

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.