PDA

View Full Version : Looks like it might be an interesting book...



Mtnjim
01-24-2006, 05:07 PM
(Emphasis mine!) :type:


GOSPEL OF WORK VS. GOSPEL OF WEALTH
By Russell Mokhiber and Robert

Weissman

It was a company town.

A company region, actually.

The Mohawk Valley in upstate New York.

The

Remington boys had started a gun company.

And they had come to dominate the region.

There was even company

scrip.

Scrip you could use like money to buy food, and clothes.

Get a haircut.

Even donate to the local

church.

And when you went to church, Mr. Remington was there.

So, if you had a complaint, you could tap him on

the shoulder.

And talk about it.

People were generally happy.

Then the gun trust came to town.

And

sabotaged the whole deal.

And down it went.

That's the story line of Worked Over: The Corporate Sabotage

of An
American Community by Dimitra Doukas (Cornell University Press).

Doukas, who is now a professor at

Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova
Scotia, says that in the late 1800s, corporations, once they took
control of

production, tried to change the culture of the United States.

From the gospel of work to what Andrew Carnegie

called the gospel of
wealth.

"If we look at the United States in the 19th century, we see a popular
culture

that was, in a word, anti-capitalist," Doukas said. "And this
was reflected very much in the political scene of the

time. You had to
be in favor of the working man. You had to support and praise the common
man. The basic idea is

that work is what dignifies a person. It is an
anti-aristocratic ideology. It goes way back, really. Aristocrats

were
characterized as parasites, as people who lived off the work of others.
Whereas good, virtuous American

people worked hard and were expected to
enjoy the fruits of their labor."

So, for example, Abraham Lincoln, in

his first annual message to
Congress in 1861, makes his statement about capital and labor: "Capital
is only the

fruit of labor. Labor is the superior of capital and
deserves much the higher consideration."

But when the

corporations came in and took over, the major message was
-- no, it's capital, not labor, that produces the wealth

of society --
it's capital that deserves the greater consideration."

And this is what Doukas means by "the

sabotage of an American community."

"Sabotage in the sense of undermining or continually poking at it,

first
with very little sophistication, poking at the basic value set of the
society," she says. "And the reason

they poked at it is because the
corporate value system could not co-exist with the American value system."

On

the whole, working for the Remingtons was a positive thing. There
were no strikes. The Knights of Labor were

influential at the time. And
people look back with fond memories of the time.

"To work for the Remingtons was

not to have a job in our sense," Doukas
told us. "The people worked as contractors. They sold what they made

to
the company. They were organized into departments under a senior highly
skilled craftsperson or artisan. Each

of these persons could conceive
themselves as working independently."

Working people took offense at being wage

slaves -- what most of us are
now. They had a sense of independence from the man. And the man was
right there in

the community. You ran into the man -- on the street. You
could talk with the man.

Now, the man sits atop a

giant corporation, unreachable, unknowable.

"A whole way of life was organized around working for the

Remingtons,"
Doukas says. "People looked at it as being wholesome -- American,
virtuous, dignified -- and still

today they look back at that period.
Even today, there is a tremendous sense of history among local

working
people. They are tremendously critical of the present day situation."

So, there was economic democracy

under the Remington family?

"In this very particular sense -- back then, you had local ownership,"
Doukas said."

The biggest boss sits in a pew next to you in church and
was there to be buttonholed after church. There was direct

access. You
can think of it as economic democracy, maybe, in the broadest sense. But
locally, it is more like a

ranked system where skilled workers saw
themselves in some sense as ranking lower than the Remingtons. And yet
the

high ranking person was accessible to them. At the same time, there
was a sense of the tremendous dignity of being

a working person and
creating the wealth of the country. And this is how people spoke of it
for better than a

century. So, it is democratic in the basic sense that
if you had a grievance, you could get some sort of action on

it, and
fairly directly. You had a voice -- ground to stand on."

Anyone who is from upstate New York knows that

it's one of the most
beautiful regions of this country.

And for years it has been battered by big corporations

that don't give a
damn about the region.

Doukas says there was a time when the man cared.

Hard to

believe.

But it's worth taking a peek at her book and making your own judgment

tim929
01-25-2006, 05:02 AM
Ya know something? You would be

shocked if you knew how much time my friends and I have spent imersed in the very discussion about the undermining

of the american way of life.The hard work that our grandparents did that paid off in the end has given way to a

culture where slavery to wages has become the norm.I could write volumes on the subject as it has been bantered back

an forth over coffee in my circle of people.The sad part is...thats how the masters have set things up and short of

an all out bloody revolution...thats what we are stuck with to the end.

Mtnjim
01-25-2006, 12:44 PM
I'm convinced that we are

regressing back to feudal times and the "middle class" are becoming "serfs" to the wealthy.

belgareth
01-25-2006, 04:06 PM
I'm convinced

that we are regressing back to feudal times and the "middle class" are becoming "serfs" to the wealthy.
It

sure looks that way, doesn't it? You ever wonder how people can be such sheep and allow that crap to happen?

Mtnjim
01-25-2006, 05:09 PM
It sure looks that

way, doesn't it? You ever wonder how people can be such sheep and allow that crap to happen?

I believe

they are refered to as "sheeple"!

belgareth
01-25-2006, 08:29 PM
I believe they

are refered to as "sheeple"!
//RANT=On// Yup! Never question authority. Never buck the system. Believe

whatever the government and corporations tell you. Be a nice little guy and do as your told. We'll tell you what to

do and believe. Remember that daddy knows what is best for you. //RANT=OFF//

tim929
01-26-2006, 12:35 PM
Okay...unless I miss my guess...I

have been on and on about this for years:type: There has been a consistant effort over the last half century to turn

the people into a productive and docile herd of money producing cattle for harvest.The shrinking minimum

wage,dramatic increase in media induced apathy,general increase in drug use and apathy in the younger

generations...etc etc.

I cant count the number of times I have said it,but the masters have gone to great

lengths to make sure that the herd doesnt buck in thier pens too much.Its sort of like milking cows.Bribe the herd

into the milk pens with alittle bit of grain,milk them for all they are worth and then drive them out the other side

with a cattle prod for the next wave to take thier place to be milked.As long as they are happy when they enter the

milk pen,you have it made.Who gives a crap how they feel when they go out the other side? As long as they have given

all they are worth.And if they stop giving milk...what then? Nursing home baby! Sort of like sending the cows out to

slaughter when they stop giving.The average family is working far to hard and has far too little time to spend any

of it taking care of thier elderly parents.So they are processed into nursing homes and left to rot.

I saw a

great example of this the other day when I dropped a package of pharmacuticals off at the local nursing home.A half

a dozen old people sitting around a radio listening to soft,soothing music and wasting away.No conversation,no loved

ones surrounding them and making them feel loved,no grand children or great grand children to ask them things about

what it was like when they were young...NOTHING!! The look that these people gave me when I bounced in all fresh

faced and energentic said "please just shoot me,this realy sucks!" WHERE THE FU#@ ARE THESE PEOPLES FAMILIES!!?



Thanks to a system that keeps the rest of us running around spending the little bit of money we do make on

consumer goods and bull shit.A system that makes sure that nobody can afford to stretch forth thier arm,extend thier

middle finger to thier boss and simply go get another job! In europe they laugh at us and our

forty,fifty,sixty,seventy hour work weeks,barely livable pay checks, meeger two weeks vacation,unpaid holidays,no

health coverage,etc etc...Everyone in this country is afraid to thell thier boss to "take this job and shove it!" As

a result,employers have been able to herd us into the milk pens with very little fuss and milk us till we bleed and

then cast us asside like yesterdays news paper at the slightest hint that we might actualy want to take a few days

extra off or have some extra time with our families.

Why do you suppose maternity and family leave bills had to

be passed?

EMPLOYEE:Can I have a couple days off to be with my wife and new baby please?

EMPLOYER: You're

fired! You worthless sack of putrifying shit!!

That story was played and replayed for a long time befor the herd

finaly got wise and said enough is enough.How much more of this crap is going to have to happen befor the herd

finaly wakes up and says "NO MORE!" The next time you see a transit bus taking folks to work,or listen to a traffic

report on the radio about a rush hour traffic jam,think of the cowboys...men on horses with whips...herding the

cattle into the corral for processing and disposition and eventual harvest.

We have a "rush hour." What the fu@#

is everybody "rushing" too? A cubicle farm? And for what? Your corperate employer is going to make many many times

more money on you today than you get paid in a week!And if he doesnt...your job goes to some hadji in India where

they can make them work ninety five hours a week and pay less than you make in a hour!Saddly,with tax structures and

regulation the way it has been set up...small employers are shoved into a position where they cant pay employees

enough to keep them and have a hard time just keeping the doors open.As a result,the small business either gets

pushed out or bought up because they just cant match the productivity of a corperate farm.

The next time you

drive on a major interstate highway and see a state trooper with his ticket book...think of a cow hand whos job is

to make sure the herd stays on the trail and gets to the stock yard on time for auction.Because thats his job and

the state...thats us...pays him to keep us on the trail to the stock yard where we will be sold off and

harvested.Its beautiful in its simplicity,make the herd pay all the expenses of keeping the cattle barons in

business.

I could draw paralelles with Nazi Germany in the structuring of this system of business...but I wont

because it would be an insult to the people who suffered and died for that hidiouse philosophy.But if you want to do

alittle history reading about groups like Einsatzgruppen...you can see how many of the practices are very,very

simmilar.Herd them in,work them to death and then...well...we havent gone that far yet but it wont be too much

longer.

And until the rest of the herd wakes up and kicks and bucks in the pens and starts kicking down a few

fences,the rest of us are stuck with the inevitable.

Okay...the nurse is here with my meds...I'll stop

now....:blink:

belgareth
01-27-2006, 11:31 AM
Study Finds Rich-Poor Income Gap Growing By MARK JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer



Fri Jan 27, 2006





ALBANY, N.Y. - The disparity between rich and poor is growing in

America as the federal minimum wage has remained flat for years, union membership has declined and industries have

faced global competition, according to a study released Thursday.

The report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Economic Policy Institute, both

liberal-leaning think tanks, found the incomes of the poorest 20 percent of families nationally grew by an average

of $2,660, or 19 percent, over the past 20 years. Meanwhile, the incomes of the richest fifth of families grew by

$45,100, or nearly 59 percent, the study by the Washington-based groups said.

Families in the middle fifth saw their incomes rise 28 percent, or

$10,218.

The figures, based on U.S. Census data, compare the average

growth from 1980-82 to 2001-03, after adjusting for inflation.

The

poorest one-fifth of families, the report said, had an average income of $16,780 from 2000-03, while the top fifth

of families had an average income of $122,150 — more than seven times as much. Middle-income families' average

income was $46,875.

Trudi Renwick, an economist with the union-backed

Fiscal Policy Institute in New York, said globalization, the decline of manufacturing jobs, the expansion of

low-wage service jobs, immigration and the weakening of unions have hurt those on the lower end of the economic

scale.

In 38 states, the incomes of high-income families grew by a

higher percentage than those of the lowest-income families; Alaska was the only state in which the reverse was true.

The 11 states where the high and low incomes increased at about the same rate were mostly in the West and

Midwest.

The greatest disparity between rich and poor was in New

York, where the top 20 percent of wage earners had average incomes 8.1 times larger than the poorest 20 percent in

the early 2000s. Texas had only a slightly smaller gap; Wyoming had the smallest disparity at a 5.2 to 1

ratio.

Matthew Maguire, a spokesman for the Business Council of New

York state, said the money earned by the state's wealthiest residents is "something that everybody who cares about

New York should be pleased about."

"New York's wealthy pay huge sums

in taxes and those wealthy people and their taxes make it possible for New York to provide the nation's most

generous social service programs to less fortunate New Yorkers," he said. "It also reflects the fact the state is a

magnet for immigrants who come from the four corners of the globe to a state they see as symbol of economic

activity."

Renwick said the government "needs to continue its

commitment to correcting the natural outcomes of the marketplace" by raising the minimum wage with inflation and by

tax policies like the earned income tax credit.

Renwick also

suggested that governments, when giving tax breaks to companies, insist those companies provide jobs that pay higher

wages.

tim929
01-27-2006, 05:59 PM
belgareth...how dare you post

something that shines such an unfavorable light on the masters of our scociety!? Report back to your milking stall

at once!That goes double for the rest of you over paid,under worked layabouts!

koolking1
03-04-2006, 03:29 PM
nursing

homes in your future. I'm thinking the next step is to raise the retirement age to 85 so that you can just work

till you keel over. 401Ks were introduced years ago with the supposed idea that people would save money that way,

in reality, it's meant to let corporations off the hook with pension plans. And now, the new health care savings

plan, a way for people without health insurance to save up in case of an emergency health problem, fooled again -

this is meant to let corporations of the hook for health insurance which is projected to take 1 of every 5 dollars a

person makes.

I remember back in the early 70s when I was stationed in Italy. I was making 6K a year by

then (thanks to Nixon who finally raised our pay). I was a somewhat highly trained technician who had pledged to

fight, kill, lose my own life if need be, for the defense of the USA. An Italian acquaintance, who worked for us

(the US Govt.)driving a school bus, made 18K a year, he was always loaded with cash for partying etc..



During the mid 80s we military folks at headquarters everywhere were quite excited about the downfall of the

Soviet Union and what we expected to be a "very generous" peace dividend (believe me, we have a much lower standard

of living as the "world's protector" than we should have due to the enormous defense costs we routinely approve

of). Did things get better? Hardly. We have to face facts, we have a fairly good standard of living compared to

the 3rd world, not so when compared to much of Western Europe. But, I guess that's ok cause we are "free".

belgareth
03-04-2006, 04:03 PM
We're free? Where'd you ever

get that idea? We're in bonded servitude to our government. You haven't even paid off your debt for this year yet,

you have about three more months to go. And look at all you get for those huge taxes. People telling you how to

live, people telling you you can't worship as you willl, people using your tax money to fight the voter's

decisions in court, wars in foriegn lands, billions spent to pay off dictators who would as soon bomb us out of

existance. You get to subsidize major coporations as they move jobs overseas and you get to pay for elected

representatives to go on 'fact finding' vacations to exotic places.

You get a lot for your servitude. What

does it matter that senoir citizens can't afford to eat or buy the medicines they need? Or that our children

aren't being educated? Or that money iis poured into a sysetm that encourages staying on the public dole? Or that

you can be sent to jail for disciplining or failing to discipline your child while an elected representative can

help rob half a million people if their savings and walk away from it rich. Or that The State can force people out

of their homes so the land can be given to businesses to raise taxe revenues.

When are people going to get the

idea that OUR GOVERNMENT IS A FAILURE! Get a clue people. Taxes are never going to go down under the current system.

They keep thinking up new ways to increase revenues, that's a nice way of saying RAISE TAXES. And services are

never going to improve. They keep talking about new ways to reduce costs, that translates to CUT SERVICES. It ain't

about party or any single elected representative. The system, the entire system, is broken! So long as the powers

that be can keep us divided and bickering over stupid party ideologies they can be sure we'll never get together

and start demanding something better than what we are getting from OUR government.

DrSmellThis
03-04-2006, 05:09 PM
I like most of the points just

made, and agree that the system is broken. We do not currently live in a democracy, and our leaders are not

accountable to the people, including in how they spend our tax dollars. But to me the idea that it's more about

government (e.g., taxes, the size of government; please correct me if I'm wrong) and not who is running it is

itself an ideology, and a fairly common one, especially among disenfranchized conservatives/anti-liberals (not to

pigeon-hole anyone). To me there are positives and negatives to that ideology, like others. My point isn't about

whether this ideology is the best one, but just that it is an ideology. I have an ideology too (Though I try as hard

as I can to make it holistic, evidence-based, and flexible, my ideology has negatives too, which I try to

elimenate when possible). So ultimately we still all have the problem of disagreement about why government is

failing.

That doesn't mean that people can't find areas of agreement. I don't think many citizens, with the

exception of the wealthy and powerful, are satisfied that their interests are being represented.

But when you

have a democratic process that is so broken that the party in power can rig elections to stay in power, increase

power, and squash dissent; you have a serious problem.

Though the preponderance of evidence suggests loudly that

we have a historically unprecedented neo-fascist crime family in charge of the U.S., there is a system that allowed

that crime family to gain power. Neocon Republicans (I have little quarrel with old school Republicans and believe

their insights necessary in the balance of things) achieved power due to their own efforts within that system, due

to a multi-decade effort. They have exposed the system in a florid way. My sincere hope is that this results in

increased public consciousness.

The question is what to do about it. To me the first step is to get rid of the

neocons, because they are currently blocking every attempt by some decent people in Congress to restore a bit of

democracy. Our country is being run into the ground at a rapidly accelerated pace, and we have a horrible standing

in the world all of a sudden, not that is was great before.

On the other hand, all but 10 or 13 Senate

democrats just voted for the Patriot Act.

So we really do have to get rid of a lot of Democrats too. There are

too many hypocrites and cowards. But people like Joe Lieberman and Hilary are the last thing we need. Middle of the

road status quo won't cut it. But where are the candidates that are committed to deep reform? I'm not sure

it's in our culture at the moment. We have to pull ouselves up by the bootstraps.

belgareth
03-04-2006, 08:32 PM
I do hope you are not trying to

imply I am either a conservative or specifically anti liberal. I tried several times before to dispel that rather

silly generalization made about me. I sincerely believe the democratic party is as dirty, as greedy and as worthless

as the republican party. I have no use for either group. Like I said, and I quote "stupid party ideologies". It was

directed at all parties as a whole. I do believe the liberal ideology has more inherent flaws but that doesn't in

any way mean I support the republicans. That would be black and white thinking to assume that. I try very hard to

look at each and every issue on a case by case basis and determine my stand on the merits of the issue itself.



Another misconception I see is the notion that the wealthy don't feel as disenfranchised as the less so. Mostly

they do, from what I've seen and heard. I regard statements like that as primarily intended to deepen the rift

between people of various walks of life. Implying they are somehow different or see the world differently is the

same approach as party politics. We are all in this together and the only way we can make it work, that we can fix

the terrible sickness that is eating at our country is by recognizing that we are all part of the whole and all part

of the problem and part of the solution. Divisive statements and stands can only make matters worse.

Like you, I

am for reform. But I don't believe the democrats have any better idea or would be any better at managing our

country than the republicans. They've both failed miserably time and again as is demonstrated by the last fifty or

so years of recent history. So, my first suggestion is for people to start looking at the individual issues, not the

party and to vote their concience rather than their wallet. My second is to enact strict term limits and find a way

to get big money out of the election process. Possibly revise it completely to finance the entire thing with tax

money. It would be a drop in the bucket of the national budget and might very well have far greater returns. It

would certainly give every real candidate a fighting chance and help break the strangle hold two very bad groups

have on this country's politics now.

DrSmellThis
03-05-2006, 04:54 AM
You are whatever you choose to

be at this moment, and I'd never want to presume anything else. Multiple times in the past you've come across as

anti "liberal", to use your term; not in the sense of against liberals as people, but against their philosophy as

you see it (I'm against "tax and spend" as a guiding philosophy myself, for that matter, but don't personally know

anyone who adheres to that these days.). That's all fine, of course, and I appreciate that we need a variety of

perspectives. The stand you're articulating here seems slightly softer regarding "liberalism", whatever that is (a

perjorative label, usually); but in no way do I want to belabor that point or waste energy trying to stick a label

on anyone. Clearly, even if you were to take my statements personally, in no way did I suggest you support the

Republican party, so I guess I'm not at risk for black and white thinking.

Though I could have been interpreted

as such, I didn't mean to say that all rich people are fine with the government; only to make the obvious point

that only the very few are benefitting by today's policies, on the face of it. If a rich person has depth and

smarts he or she will indeed realize we are all in this together; that justice for any requires it for all. But

please don't suggest I "intend" to be divisive or "deepen the rift between walks of life". It doesn't come across

in a positive manner to be unnecessarily aggressive and presumptuous.

I agree with most all your ideas in the

last paragraph, but strongly disagree that both parties are the same. My jaw drops at even considering that to be

the case; though I certainly recognize many problems with party politics in general, and agree both parties are

screwed. Currently the Republicans in power are far worse than the Democrats, though there are some Republicans

taking a stand for some good things too. All this stuff is on their watch, and it's far worse than it ever was.

Having said that, I am quite angry with Democrats in Congress right now, and would like to throw most of them on

their asses. Like virtually everything else, it's not black and white.

Campaign finance reform and term limits

are a minimal but important start to what we need to do. There are lots of changes we need to make along those

lines.

One idea is to make anything said in public while functioning as a politician on duty be under oath. That

would enable people to hold politicians accountable for lying. Lying to the people while on duty as a politician,

with the flag flying behind you, should be against the law, IMO. But it's not.

People do need to consider issues

individually, but of course not at the expense of having a holistic and deep philosophy; a basis of fundamental

wisdom that reaches across issues. Ideally, a successful political movement would be based in that wisdom, and help

people see the interrelations among issues.

belgareth
03-05-2006, 06:05 AM
Doc,

To be blunt, I

responded to Koolking in the hopes of having a discussion with him regarding his viewpoints. In no way was I

addressing anything I said to you. I'm not interested in playing what I percieve as word games, for example the

comment about ideology. Of course its an ideology! How could it not be?

The American Heritage®

Stedman's Medical Dictionary
Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton

Mifflin Company.

Main Entry: ide·ol·o·gy
1 : a systematic body of concepts

especially about human life or culture
2 : a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an

individual, group, or culture

Ennuendo such as a statement in reply to some thing I said followed by

"Not to pigeon hole anybody" is no more than a means of doing exactly that. I'm not interested in word games and am

not going to play them.


We do seem to agree fairly well about the fact that things need to change and seem

to agree on some or all the changes. Where to take the changes is another area that I don't believe we can agree

because I think your core values and mine are very far apart. That's fine, so long as one does not force their core

values or beliefs on another I have no problem with it. My beliefs do not require anybody ever agree with them as

personal beliefs are for the individual alone to determine.

DrSmellThis
03-05-2006, 06:04 PM
Misunderstandings sometimes

arise. Your perception of "word games" is your perception. When I said "not to pigeon hole anyone," it meant exactly

that -- this was my impression of the politics of a lot of people who have this view who I have met. I was leaving

room for myself to be wrong and be corrected in your case, because I can't speak for anyone else's viewpoint. I

thought you were anti-liberal, because you said that under no circumstances would you vote for a liberal, and that

liberal policies fail time and again. Now I hear you, that you're not "anti-liberal"; that you just believe liberal

policies have more flaws than conservative policies.

We definitely have some value differences, but I'm glad we

agree on the changes to the political system that need to be made.

tim929
03-06-2006, 04:59 AM
The unfortunate problem that we

run into when we define "liberal" and "conservative" is that the nice folks who run for office are niether.The

policies that are stated in press conferences and campagne speeches and meetings with various "concerned citizens"

groups have absolutly nothing to do with what elected officials plan on doing.They make the noises that thier

constituents want to hear and then go on about thier mary way.

I will give you a wonderful example,and please

forgive me for the religious nature of what I am about to say...I try not to foist religious viewpoints off on

anyone but this realy says alot.

In the book of Revelations(The last book of the Bible) we are warned of a time

when durring the reign of the anti-christ, men and women will be required to take a mark on the hand or

forehead.This is reffered to as "the mark of the beast." That no one will be allowed to buy or sell without this

mark.It will...in effect determine if you are authorised to be a citizen.Christians have been on and on about this

for years,wringing thier hands and worrying that the end is near and that the democrats are trying to usher in the

anti-christ and the end of days.

Funny thing...this mark has always been dependant on the technology and the

infrastructure to make it a feasable method of controlling the general population and insuring obediance to the

anti-christ.

George W. Bush,as a foundational element to the war on terror and the patriot act,signed into law a

provision that would require RFID chips in ALL drivers licenses nation wide by 2008.In addition,since a drivers

licence can be lost or stolen,wouldnt it be easier to do what they do with pets and alzhimers patients and simply

implant it?Thats on the board for implemntation by 2012 under the bill that George W. Bush signed.Considering the

sensativity of christians to the concept...you would think that the various right wing christian groups would be

outraged.But because George says he believes in Jesus as his lord and savior,they remain silent.He is,after all a

good christian man.

When this happened I almost died with shock.I was stunned that so many people would simply

turn a blind eye to the very thing they have most dreaded and reviled.But because George said the right thing in

front of the cameras to a christian group,nobody even seemed to notice.If you believe that what the bible says is

true,it would stand to reason that the very man that christians support just sold them out to satan.But this stands

as a classic example of the american voting public.As long as the politician says the right things,what he does is

completely irrelevent.

So liberals support certain people based on thier so called stand on abortion or gay

rights...the words they have used however mean nothing when they are confronted by a lobbyist or special interest

group with a big check in hand...Sad...but thats the way it works.

Mtnjim
03-06-2006, 01:33 PM
In addition,since a

drivers licence can be lost or stolen,wouldnt it be easier to do what they do with pets and alzhimers patients and

simply implant it?Thats on the board for implemntation by 2012 under the bill that George W. Bush signed.Considering

the sensativity of christians to the concept...you would think that the various right wing christian groups would be

outraged.But because George says he believes in Jesus as his lord and savior,they remain silent.He is,after all a

good christian man.

There have been suggestions that the right wing radical "Christians" have been

pushing the agenda to speed the "end times" along so Jesus would return sooner. This "Mark of the beast" would fit

right in.

DrSmellThis
03-06-2006, 01:50 PM
The unfortunate

problem that we run into when we define "liberal" and "conservative" is that the nice folks who run for office are

niether.The policies that are stated in press conferences and campagne speeches and meetings with various "concerned

citizens" groups have absolutly nothing to do with what elected officials plan on doing.They make the noises that

thier constituents want to hear and then go on about thier mary way.It's strange because I really think

this is a good point, and I'm thankful you made it; and yet I still believe there are some fairly genuine

people in government. If we think strictly in the cynical way, we also paint ourselves into a corner. Though it's

not hip to say this, I still believe there is a meaningful relation between the words, or articulated platforms, and

how leaders act, even though concrete acts ultimately determine service. This is based on personal experience.

Philosophies and platforms still are important in choosing a candidate. Ideas still preceed actions on this

planet.

But it's possible for us as citizens to do a much better job of screaming and making their life

difficult when they sell out. I sort of see that happening now in the Democratic party, where people are getting

called out, though this citizen process failed when it came to the Patriot Act. Old school conservatives who believe

in Federalism, effective national defense, personal responsibility, government off your back, ethics, and fiscal

responsibility have been totally screwed over by their supposed party; and are also increasingly angry. I have

enough hope to keep working within the system we have for now.

We definitely need to support candidates who are

aware of the systemic issues (e.g., need for campaign finance reform, term limits, laws against politicians lying)

as well as demonstrating philosophical wisdom in their words. To me a big part of the problem has been in going

backwards on the idea level (e.g., fundamentalism, the idea that we can impose our will on the Middle East

militarily, a lack of understanding of democracy).

DrSmellThis
03-06-2006, 02:09 PM
There have been

suggestions that the right wing radical "Christians" have been pushing the agenda to speed the "end times" along so

Jesus would return sooner. This "Mark of the beast" would fit right in.This is a scary prospect, of course.

I think what we're seeing now is a combination of actual extreme ideology; and cynical, phony manipulation of

people vulnerable to extreme ideology, by people who want only power and money (e.g., Bush pandering to

fundamentalists and overly fearful people, while actually not caring about many of their concerns).

tim929
03-07-2006, 04:41 AM
There have been

suggestions that the right wing radical "Christians" have been pushing the agenda to speed the "end times" along so

Jesus would return sooner. This "Mark of the beast" would fit right in.

While this is a possibility in

terms of radicals behind closed doors,the christians I reffer to are the average pew warmers who attend church on

sundays.These folks,weather you agree or disagree with them and thier religion(Im such a crappy christian that I

seperate myself from them so as not to embarras them or God) are for the most part very sincere in thier beliefs and

very likely to voice concernes over any form of attack on those beliefs.


It's strange because I really

think this is a good point, and I'm thankful you made it; and yet I still believe there are some fairly

genuine people in government. If we think strictly in the cynical way, we also paint ourselves into a corner. Though

it's not hip to say this, I still believe there is a meaningful relation between the words, or articulated

platforms, and how leaders act, even though concrete acts ultimately determine service. This is based on personal

experience. Philosophies and platforms still are important in choosing a candidate. Ideas still preceed actions on

this planet.


The genuine people in government are NOT elected.I have a friend who has be active in

politics and has run for office twice.Durring those runs for state office we found out that the game that has to be

played in order to be elected means being a sell out from day one.If you dont sell out you will get nowhere at the

speed of light.The only folks in government that have any sincerety are hired by the various agencies.Saddly,they

rather quickly find out that the only way to keep thier job is to shut up and play along.There are an aweful lot of

very disenfranchised folks working in government right now who feel that there is nothing they can do about it but

keep thier heads down and not make eye contact.They dont dare risk saying anything because to loose a state or

federal job and be forced to work in the private sector would mean giving up a standard of living and bennefits that

private sector employees could only dream of having at this point.

belgareth
03-07-2006, 05:34 AM
Tim,

I've warned you

about heresy before. They're going to burn you at the stake in the town square one day if you aren't careful.



You can't ever convince anybody of anything or even hope they'll listen because they have already determined the

outcome and only seek thoughts or ideas that reinforce them. As my dad used to tell me, "Never try to teach a pig to

sing. It's a waste of time and annoys the pig."

Mtnjim
03-07-2006, 10:46 AM
While this is a

possibility in terms of radicals behind closed doors,the christians I reffer to are the average pew warmers who

attend church on sundays.These folks,weather you agree or disagree with them and thier religion(Im such a crappy

christian that I seperate myself from them so as not to embarras them or God) are for the most part very sincere in

thier beliefs and very likely to voice concernes over any form of attack on those beliefs.

You are right,

it's not the nice normal Christians. I was refering to the whack job radicals who have the ear of "W", like Pat

Robertson and his ilk.