The republican plan to use reaganomics to destroy governments and the middle class is hard at work here and in Europe.
Reaganomic, spend and borrow and tell us to give tax cuts more time because eventually tax cuts will mean more taxes bullshit, deregulate so millionaires get rich while regular people get the shaft, to make Grover Norquist's dream of drowning government in bathtub is close to being a reality. But strangely enough, it's Europe that's going down first. And that is by republican design. Evil geniuses these republicans are. And they'd have gotten away with it to if it hadn't been for that darn Truth 101!
Republicans don't care about the poor and middle class. Any small business man that thinks the republican party cares in the least about his welfare and success is a deluded fool. Anyone who votes republican on moral grounds cause they spout their family values bullshit is a deluded fool.
In the Eurozone, several countries are on the brink of disaster or past it. Greece is in default. The EU's answer is brutal austerity. No rich Greeks will suffer. Just the ones who rely on a pension or paycheck or government service. Virtually all but one percent of Greeks. Italy is in the same boat. Spain isn't far behind. And the answer will be to screw the poor and middle class. Deregulate banks so they can bury poor people in bad loans and sell these loans as AAA securities so millionaires can become billionaires.
On an even grander scale, but nothing is too big for Cheney and the republicans. This outfit manipulated America into two invasions and occupations that made Halliburton and other defense contractors billions, the ultimate goal is the destruction of China's middle class before it's gets out of hand. The destruction of the Eurozone is a major step in this since Europe is a huge trading partner for the Chinese. The Chinese middle class has been demanding better pay and working conditions. Destroying Europe's buying power would force Chinese workers to accept less since demand for their products would be lower. But the few Chinese elite will still get theirs. The rich take care of their own. Ken Lay was always welcome at the country club even after Enron collapsed.
Republicans will pull out all the stops to destroy the middle class. They make despicable charges against Occupy Wall Street protesters and infiltrate their gatherings to stir up trouble and shine a bad light on the movement which is simply people fed up with government working for millionaires.
We can fight back. We can be better organized and more focused on a simpler message. We can get all the factions of the Democratic Party under one banner. Like that will happen. Everybody wants to rule the world. Or do something like send a contribution to Elizabeth Warren who's running for US Senate in Massachusetts like I did. That will piss of a republican. And that's always a good thing.
80 comments:
Truth 101,
I truly admire you!
As you know I have been fighting the Republicans, whether they hide their true identities behind terms such as "independent conservative" and or "moderates" and I recognize you as a sincere brother in arms!
Without a middle class and economic opportunity we are not a capitalist society nor are we a democracy.
Keep up the good fight, you are truly an honorable man of high principles!
Joe - I don't know about that but I do know I'm one pissed off Liberal.
"Republicans don't care about the poor and middle class.'
By this statement I am sure you mean the Party structure, etc., etc.
What about the middle class working Joe and Jane republican. There are I'm sure many of them.
There is nothing in the post that can be refuted Sue.
I shall endeavor to keep up the good fight despite the offers made to me by the republicans to join them.
They fear Truth 101! As they should...
I addressed that in the post RN. These people are deluded fools.
The EU's answer is brutal austerity. No rich Greeks will suffer. Just the ones who rely on a pension or paycheck or government service. Virtually all but one percent of Greeks. Italy is in the same boat. Spain isn't far behind. And the answer will be to screw the poor and middle class.
In a way, it's even worse than here. The EU is the functional equivalent of the US economic conservatives, forcing austerity upon economies that desperately need job-creating stimulus. But at least here we can vote the Republicans out. The EU is a supra-national entity and its real decision-makers are beyond the power of the voters. Vote in a different party in Spain or Portugal or Greece, and you're just voting in a new bunch of people to obey the same orders from the EU.
It's no wonder that of the ten biggest Occupier rallies so far, four were in Spain, and that the protests in Greece have been getting violent. Those peoples' backs are against the wall.
But the only way the European countries will ever escape their economic death spiral is when the EU and the euro are done away with. Fortunately that shouldn't be much longer.
That's good information Infidel. Appreciate that.
On a side note, that Rick Perry is one of the shitheadedest people I've ever seen. When asked what he would do to cut the busget he said he would eliminate three departments. Then he could only name two. At least sarah Palin had the sense to write herself cliff notes.
or the idiot could have said he was going to pray for budget cuts. That would have resonated well with the religious dupes who vote for idiots like Rick Perry cause he says he Jesus would be his vice president should He return during his term.
Joe - Deluded fools? Gotcha.
Stoking the old class envy, class warfare embers.
Ah, what the hell. Both sides are doing a fine job of it.
The EU's answer is brutal austerity. No rich Greeks will suffer.
What's the 21st century equivalent of letting the fuckers eat cake?
Of course I'm all for the old fashion, 18th century response of cutting some rich peoples heads off. Class warfare be damned!
he laughs at joe's assertion. sorry, my good friend, i refute it all.
There's a few Democrat's involved in this as well unfortunately, in this country, two that I have been writing about myself (and been accurate on) are Reid and Baucus for sure, I also believe that this faction in the Democrat Party has been influencing the President to go against some of his initial proposal's and/ or promises.
Thanx for the post Truth/ Joe
Republican economics,run up huge debts and then stick Democrats and Liberals with the bills.
Additionally, slash government jobs, underfund agencies and deregulate or blithely ignore laws then when decimated government can't stop BP, Halliburton, Transocean from causing rampant pollution or killing it's workers blame Government.
Conservatism is Terrorism...
There isn't enough money among the rich. You can tax everything over $250,000 a year at 100% and you would still have a deficit. It always comes down to, as William Graham Sumner used to call him, the Forgotten Man; people like me and you and RN, Truth.
Joe - Don't you ever check my blog?
As adept as you are at the Socratic method of asking questions that lead to more questions, your deludedness both bemuses and disappoints me Griper.
The whole premise of the right is to drive down wages and destroy anything such as unions or OSHA or the Dept. of Labor which looks out for the working American.
There is absolutely no way you can honestly refute this Griper.
The super committee if doing it's best to lie like hell about Social Security so the deficit will be paid off by those who can least afford it Will. You, me, RN, Grunge Gene, Sue and the other 99%.
I knew that they should have hired the super-dooper committee.
joe,
i already have refuted it. and i stated it very clearly. the only way you can say that your statements are inrefutable is on the presumption that everyone thinks the way you do.
there are quite a few of us that are not determinists like you and Tao. so your foundational premise is a false premise.
and it is the falsehood of this foundational premise that makes your statements very refutable.
You offfered nothing other than a lame refutation. That's no more impressive than a teenage boy saying he has a big wiener then walking away thinking he showed "them."
Any more questions?
joe,
you said that your words were inrefutable. i refuted them. and gave the basis for it. but apparently that isn't what you expected. so i'll refute it by saying this,
as a man of free will i know i have no right to speak for others, only for myself. you, on the other hand and is consistent with determinism can speak for you fellow man.
"The whole premise of the right is to drive down wages..."
as a man on the right and speaking only for myself, i refute this.
employment is a legal contractual contract between employer and employee. since wages are part of the terms of that contract which both parties agreed to willingly and consensually i have no problem with the amount of pay that employee agreed to whether they be low in your eyes or high in your eyes.
i don't make judgements based on the "ends" as you have shown many times that you and Tao do. i make judgements based on the "means".
my refutation of the rest of your accusations follow along the same line of thought.
so, your words have been validly refuted.
The right's goal is to destroy unions. Eliminate minimum wage. Ship jobs overseas to the cheapest place with the most desperate workers they can find. China is discovering this now as they're losing jobs to Viet Nam Griper.
Your refutation is refuted with fact and not some made up thinking point named determinism. Or objectivism or whatever your thinking point of the week is.
joe,
i made myself very clear, i speak for myself and no one else. what someone else says or does is up to them to defend, not me so you refuted nothing i said.
it was you that made the challenge that no one can refute "your words" and that is exactly what i did, refute your words not someone else's words or behavior.
i have never asked that you defend what someone else says or does so don't demand that i defend what someone else does or says and call it a refutation of my words.
and if you consider how you answered my comment refuting it. i'd suggest you look the word up.
Joe said... "The right's goal is to destroy unions. Eliminate minimum wage. Ship jobs overseas to the cheapest place with the most desperate workers they can find."
Perhaps this describes some, it does not describe all.
It is in NO ONES rational self interest to destroy our manufacturing infrastructure by sending jobs overseas. That destroys the middle class and in the end puts businesses, as well as the nation in a position none of us should want to be in.
Businesses in the US must remain competitive against businesses competing in the global marketplace. While the US has the highest productivity in output per man hours it does not have the same luxury in output per labor dollar. So business react by doing what is necessary to cut costs.
You can Thank Bill Clinton for NAFTA... which only made maters worse in this respect. However had Republican been in office thy no doubt would have signed the damn law as well.
Anyhow, broad brush strokes are sometimes appropriate. Sometimes not. Often they polarize occasionally they help.
My guess is, given the tone out there it's going to get a bunch worse before it gets better. Or Collapses entirely.
Like I think I said somewhere, the vast middle that is made up of moderates and independents are getting screwed no matter which way they turn.
Now doubt there are those hard at work tying to figure out how to screw things up worse than they already are.
Damn, my 3 year old grandson and 6 month old granddaughter will pay the price. So yeah, I'm pissed too...
In a roundabout way RN is agreeing with me Griper. And you never actually say anything so who know's what you agree with.
joe,
"And you never actually say anything so who know's what you agree with."
so, you are admitting i put forth an argument you weren't prepared for or taught how to handle. but then again this isn't the first time this has happened is it?
but to be nice, i'll bring my arguement down to your level of understanding.
both, RN and I, are members of the right and we are refuting your description of us.
that is the problem with making generalized accusations, joe. it must fit all or its a false accusation.
both, the left and the right, have the same generalized goals. what differentiate the two sides is the method of addressing the problems with achieving those goals.
the left believes that those goals can be achieved only through a collective effort with a central government being the catalyst of that effort by the enactment of laws. and you blame those on the right for hindering this achievement.
the right believes it can only be achieved on a collective level by the efforts of individualism. and since individualism requires individual liberty then they blame government for hindering this achievement.
one side relies on the laws of man to bring about this achievement. the other side relies on the natural laws of this existence to bring about this achievement.
the left sees government as an entity of force for good. the right sees government as Geo. Washington described it, a entity of force which is a poor servant and a lousy Master or more politely as Thomas Payne described government, a necessary evil.
the left believes that the only check on the powers of the federal government should be the will of the people which is why they describe the Constitution as a living document.
the right believes that the checks of power on the federal government is explicitly stated in the Constitution in such a way so that there is balance of powers between the State governments and the federal government which is why it is described as a contract.
the right believes in the strength of the individual. the left believes in the power of the collective.
and i qualify these generalized statements by saying that there are some on each side that would not fit this generalized description of their position. in other words they would be the exception to the rule.
now, if my description of the left is false then present me with a description that can be declared as a more fitting description.
You crack me up Griper. You complain that I paint all the righties with one broad brush stroke, then you paint all lefties.
If you want a literal interpretation of The Constitution then go someplace with no technology newer than the 1776 brands. Your way is to let the most powerful do as they please because nowhere in The Constitution does it say Exxon can't ruin Prudoe Bay or BP can't ruin the Gulf of Mexico.
next time you're on the interstate give a nod of thanks to President Eisenhower. Oh yeah. He was a republican.
When your cell phone company wants to sell your number thank the ACLU for fighting that on Constitutional grounds.
I believe government should work for the common good of all. Why you have a problem with that is a mystery to me seeing as how your reading this is a testament to government involvement in the creation of the microchip and internet Griper.
Careful including RN in your conservative clique Griper. He's a classical liberal.
joe,
"You crack me up Griper. You complain that I paint all the righties with one broad brush stroke, then you paint all lefties."
that is not the truth. if you really believe what you just said, i'd suggest you go back to school and learn reading comprehension. for you show very little comprehension skills with that last comment.
and i noticed you didn't refute my description of the left so i will assume that you agree with it. and with that agreement you know that i have a very good understanding of your ideology.
and your complaint about the literal interpretation of the Constitution just exemplifies your ignorance of the concept.
if you understood it as intended you'd realize that the federal government has the authority and power to deal with each of those issues.
so, that leaves only one conclusion. your understanding of the Constitution is an understanding of one who was trained in his ideas by someone who didn't approve of the philosophy and how the founding fathers set up the government of this nation. and i'll have to admit that he did a real good job of that training. he can be real proud of himself.
I was unaware the Founding Fathers agreed on everything Griper. You mean Adams and Jefferson agreed on government's role and all those arguments they had were about who was picking up the dinner check?
If the Founding Fathers hated government so much why did they bother forming one? We'd be the Anarchist States of America.
Remember to thank government in your prayers for the internet and ability to converse with me across cyberspace Griper.
Truth - I hope you don't expect me to thank Al Gore for creating the internet... ;)
In all seriousness the founding fathers, those classical liberal minds born of the Age of Reason and who were Renaissance thinkers had as many differences (perhaps more given some accounts) as politicians do today.
The big difference is they figured out how to create a nation that has survived for 233 years and today's leaders can't even figure out how to shit effectively let alone move on to resolving problems facing the nation.
Please forgive my rather uncustomary and graphic description.
Thomas Paine said in Chapter 1 of his Rights of Man, "Of Society and Civilization"... "Great part of that order which reigns among mankind is not the effect of Government. It has its origins in the principles of society and the natural constitution of man. It existed prior to Government, and would exist if the formality of Government was abolished. The mutual dependence and reciprocal interest which man has upon man, and all of a civilized community upon each other, create that great chain of connection which holds it together. The landholder, the farmer, the manufacturer, the merchant, the tradesman, and every occupation, prospers by the naid which each receives from the other, and from the whole. Common interest regulates their concerns, and forms their law; and the laws which common usage ordains, have a greater influence than the laws of Government. In fine, society performs for itself almost everything which is ascribed to Government."...
A classical liberal view? You guys be the judge.
Who is going to enforce these laws paine talks of RN? If the right has it's way the only law will be whatever the most powerful corporations decide.
And you admitted in a previous comment on this thread that you grandson and granddaughter "will pay the price."
The price is deficits and a weakened government that is impotent to act and infested with corporate whores. A Social Security system under attack.
You're pissed because of the right wing "conservative" governing since Reagan.
joe,
"I was unaware the Founding Fathers agreed on everything Griper."
just shows that you are more aware of your own personal political ideology than you are of history.
and where did i say that the founding fathers hated government?
trying to put words into my mouth is a very poor attempt to control this debate and you're not a good enough debater to do that.
You and our man RN invoke the Founding Fathers whenever you're in trouble Griper.
I'm self taught Griper.
Truth - I did not invoke the founding fathers. I invoked Thomas Paine using a very brief except from the opening chapter Rights of Man.
I suggest you pick up a copy and read the full text.
You might be pleasantly surprised.
Or perhaps your ideology gets in the way? Just sayin...
a self-taught man huh?
to paraphrase an old legal proverb;
a man who is his own teacher has a fool for a student.
for a man who holds to an political ideology founded in twentieth century doesn't say much about what you have taught yourself.
as for me, i proudly claim the founding fathers as my teachers of the government they established for this nation.
How hard are you fighting if you don't vote?
Bitch all you want, but you can't be very serious if you won't even practice the only way to make political change in America, voting.
You berate me for learning from Kennedy, Truman, FDR and others Griper?
I suggest you read up on Adams and Hamilton my friend. You pick and choose whatever fits your preconceived ideas. And still, you say nothing but "Founding Fathers."
Lets see, Truth believes that government should work for the good of all...
Yet, he also acknowledges that large organizations have self interests. We have the fine example of PSU, child sex abuse, and the efforts of everyone in the PSU hierachy to protect PSU not children.
How exactly is government different from PSU? How exactly is a union different than PSU? Or corporations?
If an organization grows so large does it not force the individuals within the organization to sacrifice to protect the organization?
Look at PSU and the number of fine people who were willing to keep quiet on child rape to protect the institution?
So, all organizations corrupt individuals and thus we should destroy all organizations....
What about the middle class working Joe and Jane republican. There are I'm sure many of them.
I know lots of the, some quite intelligent in most things. They vote based on sound bites and they can rarely articulate what their candidate of choice stands for.
joe,
"You berate me for learning from Kennedy, Truman, FDR and others Griper?"
oh, so you now claim to have had teachers instead of being a self-taught man. at least we got one retraction from you.
as for berating you, i have no need to do that. you have done a very good job of berating yourself already by the assumptions you have made. all i did was cite an appropriate proverb for it.
and from the names of your teachers i'd say that you were admitting that you were given a very biased and prejudicial education too.
bias and prejudice doesn't lead to very logical conclusions the last time i was taught logical thought.
------------
"You pick and choose whatever fits your preconceived ideas."
alright, i acknowledge the possibility of this accusation, now, prove to me that it is my ideas that are preconceived and not yours given the admission you made already.
this is really going to be interesting.
You're against me using my time to learn from Kennedy, Truman and FDR among others rather than formal schooling or visiting a website and parroting whatever they think these people were doing and thinking Griper?
I thought you and RN were the independent guys.
As an example of what I'm getting to, look at Socrates. His biographers, Plato and Xenophon, described Socrates very differently. Plato said he was serious and preferred homosexuality because Plato was serious and homosexual.
Xenophon described Socrates as playful and straight because Xenophon was playful and straight.
I figure I'd just read what Socrates himself had to say and did and figure it out myself.
I'm sorry if this is too deep for you Griper. Perhaps you can google something a Founding Father wrote to try and trip me up again.
Good luck...
Government works for the benefit of all TAO. Organizations work for the benefit of members. it's up to a sensible government to provide the balance so one bloc does not have an unfair advantage over another.
Unfortunately the republicans have figured out how to legislate and obstruct so government works for it's wealthy benefactors while the democrats argue amongst themselves overwho's in charge.
As towhether or not we should destroy organizations? WTF are you talking about TAO? I support gun owners rights but that still means I think guns should be regulated to keep them out of the hands of crooks and kooks. Organizations are regulated also. And criminal behavior is regulated. The ones at Penn State who hushed Sandusky's despicable acts up to save the "good name" of the institution belong in jail for failing to protect children. Madoff belonged in jail. So did Ken lay.
By your logic TAO, all football coaches and university presidents are now evil but anyone who says so is a hypocrite because we like football.
Nice test though.
Nope, Truth you missed one key factor....
Organizations take on a life of their own and they have "agendas."
If you actually look into this Sandusky guy at PSU...he had weaved quite a network. There is no way that anyone in PSU land could have stood up to the network that he had weaved. It included the superindent of schools, the DA, the mayor, everyone....
I believe the guy could have argued his way out of being arrested for child rape even if you had had 8x10 glossies.....
Oh, and everyone is SO fucking sure that if they had seen something they would have stood up and said something! Oh, everyone is so sure that they would have done all the right things!
If everyone was so sure THEY would do the right thing then why is there so much evil in the world?
If everyone is so fucking sure that good always trumps evil then why do we all admire heroes when they stand up? When they risk their lives to save others?
I have been a "whistleblower" three times in my life and trust me, its not pretty.....and even after you are found to be right everyone still avoids you...
Everyone wants to believe that PSU and its football program made everyone kowtow down and avoid rocking the boat.
The reality is all organizations have that effect on people; its not just successful sports programs, or the catholic church.
Its not just the republicans that don't give a damn about the working stiff....the democrats and Obama are taking money from Wall Street too!
You want me to believe that that Obama and the Democrats do not let that money influence their policies?
Hey, everyone knew that Madoff was a crook, but they kept doing business with him. Madoff never had a negative year and no one thought that was odd?
Sure!
Oh, but we sure feel so good when we got a scapegoat don't we? It sure makes us feel better about ourselves when we watch Joe Paterno get sacrificed.....
Sacrificed for doing nothing more than what most of us do on a daily basis. I went to the bank last friday and cashed a check for $275 and the teller gave me $280. I did not notice until I went to a store at which point I drove back to the bank and told the teller of her error and gave her her $5 back.
The young girl cried!!! She cried....the branch manager came out and informed me that I was the first person they ever had that had done something like this!
Now, come on. That is a pretty sad world when people over react over the act of return $5 that was not theirs.....a simple thank you would have been sufficient.
I was embarrassed to say the least.
No wonder Walmart has security cameras covering every inch of their store....
Tell me Truth, who do you trust? Do you trust your lawyer? Your minister? Your kids little league coach? Your kids teachers? Your elected officials? Who?
We don't trust anyone any more. We can't because everyone is suspect.
Think about that....
I return $5 from a mistake in a cashed check and you would have thought I was some super hero....
I returned $20 last year and the teller looked at me like I was a criminal.
I'm never want to see an icon, or anyone fall TAO. Forgive me if when one does and deserves to that I feel no sadness for him. or when i got a bunch of stitches in my head from an old valve that fell on my head that should have been replaced 20 years ago. far better to take an aspirin and keep the fat cats from using it as an excuse to sell my job to a company that donated a political campaign $500.
We all have to weigh the consequences. I'll take my chances with my job if it means a ten year old boy doesn't get butt fucked by a scumbag.
There's a big difference between a schmuck like me looking the other way when I see another schmuck ripping off a candy machine or something like that. I know what ostrasization feels like too.
Out of understanding of your position and shared view of humanity, I hope I never am faced with a situation like the guy who witnessed Sandusky doing his dirty deed. But I'm still calling 911 and somebody is going to get shit beat out of him before the cops arrive. I'll take a whoopin to save a ten year old boy from a scumbag also.
joe,
don't have to go to the founding fathers to trip you up. you tripped yourself up again.
you cite in your example of Socrates of going to the source for your information instead of his biographers who could only interpret his words to come to a conclusion on your own. i applaud this.
but then you go to Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy to learn about our government who are not the source but only interpreters instead of the founding fathers who were the source.
so, you have just proven that your ideas are the ones that are preconceived not mine.
checkmate
Joe,
If I saw a man raping a child, the only call that would have to be made is to get the police to come with a body bag to pick up the pieces of the scumbag after I got done with him.
But, Joe we are a minority, a very small minority.
You criticize Obama and you are made an outcast of the little liberal blogosphere. So, if you want to be part of the group, you have to get along.....you cannot speak what you really feel or your comments are deleted.
Of course everyone claims that "this is different" because it involves child rape. Or the idea of returning money that one gets wrongly....
The reality is if you cannot do the right thing over $5 or $20 or over a valve...then you can be sure you won't do the right thing over child rape when it involves a very powerful person.
Its easy to talk the talk...but its rare to find someone who walks the walk....
I just wish more people would spend more time honestly evaluating themselves rather than being so damn sure of their own morality.
When did I say I learned about "government" from them Griper.
You, in your zeal to try and one up me, fail as usual because you are entirely one dimensional.
The key to learning and benefitting is to know yourself Griper. learn from the superstars. Take what you can use and strive to become a better person. I'm not FDR or JFK or TAO or Octopus. Four people I've learned much from. I've learned from Les and Jack Jodell and MadMike. I have learned from you.
Everyone is my superior that I may learn from them Griper. Your ego is your downfall. You've won no argument here. Others can decide for themselves who won or lost or who really cares. But I got to invoke Socrates and FDR and Harry Truman and TAO and Jack and MadMike and JFK and Octo and Les. Never done that before and I thank you for the discussion that I was able to reference them and pay them all a well deserved compliment by including them in with people I respect and admire.
I respect you also Griper. When you trip me up I'll let you know.
You will never find anyone more honest with himself than me TAO. Mine is a life of unfulfilled potential.
Joe - Why do you keep hitting on yourself.
To tell you truth, Truth - you sound a lot like me.
I'm always griping about my unfulfilled potential - but now I'm seeing that maybe what I'm doing now is all the potential I am destined to have and the unfulfilled part is just my unrealistic view of myself.
Know what I mean?
I blame golf for my downfall Sue. I thought I was pretty hot when I was way youngerthen I got a chance to play 9 holes with Fred Couples. I bombed one 270 on number 10. Couples hit from the tee ten yards behind me and outdrove me by 60 yards. I quit golf for a week then reapplied myself. Made myself a scratch player. Won my club championshiop 3 times. Contended in the city tournament a few times. Won a few events on the small golf course circuit.
I have a shelf full of trophies that have made me no money and I'm remembered in local golf circles as the guy who hit two in the lake on 5 to lose the city tournament. I can barely break 80 now. I did get a new driver Friday and found a lot of lost distance. Went 42 on the front but came back with a 35 on the back. Pissed away three strokes with my crappy putting. My eyes suck. I can't see grain or subtle breaks anymore. So instead of doing the responsible thing and concentrating on my job and continuing education so I can be the boss one day, I'm playing golf next weekend. I love golf. I hate golf. I must play golf.
joe,
nice try to wiggle out of that corner you painted yourself into. it actually brought a smile to me.
what you said was implicit not explicit.
your every comment and post declares it implicitly. the post and every comment between us was about politics not about the idea of the betterment of the self.
to declare that what you learned from these men was about something else other then government or politics would be admitting that you are trying to change the issue of discussion and that in itself is an admission of defeat.
Ah Griper my deluded friend. Harry Truman said it takes politicians to run government. To discuss politics is to discuss government.
And pissing off republicans is honest politics seeing as how they cling to lies.
joe,
and the biggest lie of all is to hold to a poltical ideology filled with fallacies and believing that if a person ignores those fallacies of thought they will magically disappear when confronted with them as you have shown a knack for.
this is a person who dares not question his own beliefs out of fear of the truth rather than questioning them out of faith in the truth.
You must be referring to the lie of trickle down economics and how it will benefit the poor and middle class Griper.
Yes my friend. Republicans need to stop living the lie and question themselves and who they get their isms from.
joe,
since my comment was specifically addressed with you in mind only one of two conclusions can result from your response to my previous comment.
1.you were a republican and an advocate of trickle down economics and then saw a fallacy in it. and if this is true then i must apologize for my accusation that you just ignore the fallacies of your personal ideology with this proof as you presented.
or
2. if the above conclusion is false then this is yet another example of ignoring the fallacies in your ideolgy thus validating my accusation.
i'll leave it up to you and the rest of your followers to make that determination.
There are no fallacies in my philosophy Griper. I am Truth 101. Democrat. If the Democratic Party elders choose a platform that doesn't sgree with me that's their fault.
They should read Truth 101.
you know something, joe, i think you really believe that. thank you for making your ideology
so clearly put.
can't think of a better reason than that for not adhering to the liberal theology.
case closed. i need say no more in this thread.
The thing is Joe - you work with what you have now.
You stop calling it your 'downfall' and instead look at what you have.
You love golf.
You play golf.
But you hate golf because you want more than what you are.
~~~
I've always wanted to publish my writing.
I've always wanted to play the Rach 3 in front of an audience.
I've always wanted to sell my paintings for an exhorbitant price.
~~~
That's what I want.
But the reality is:
~I blog and put my writing on that.
and i get a lot of satisfaction out of blogging because i can write and form relationships with people i'll never know.
~When I play the piano I'm NEVER good. Only when I play alone.
yet once more i am going to attempt to learn the rach 3(see tonight's post )
~My paintings are good - yet I've never sold one and I know I never will becuase I would set a price on them no one would pay.
~~~
Now here's the f*ing reality of it all.
Tonight I will go to bed and cry myself to sleep.
Why? Because like you I'm a failure.
But when I get up tomorrow I will have the same hopes and dreams that I will never achieve - it's called clinical insanity - google it.
~~~
I've seen this happen to other people.
It is called HOPE. I hate that word - because in my heart HOPE is for losers.
Only people who can do something do not have to have hope.
but a force keeps me going
and i can't stop it
it is a vicious cirle - the circle of life
by the way Joe - I didn't cry myself to sleep last night.
but i did cry first thing - when i woke up this morning
~~~
can anyone tell me when bill is coming
because i'm not sure how much longer i can wait...
Don't know if any republicans got pissed off or not. But the thread ran the gammut.
I knew that Griper would bow down eventually to my superior wit and wisdom RN. They all do.
Truth - As much as I consider you a worthy adversary, one of character and integrity, this "classical liberal" shall never "bow down."
I will acknowledge valid and cogent points that expand my base of knowledge. I will however never bow down to anyone. Not even Truth 101.
The Griper: "...a man who is his own teacher has a fool for a student."
Well apparently you'd think the following people are fools because they were self-taught:
George Washington
Abraham Lincoln
Albert Einstein
Walter Cronkite
Walter Pitts
Benjamin Franklin
George Bernard Shaw
Charles Dickens
You're in very good company, TRUTH101, as a self-taught man.
I, myself, am a great believer in autodidactism.
Shaw - We are in good company there.
Although I am not self-taught in my education - in my latter years I am - and a lot of it is the most valuable lessons I have learned.
Rational - I am with you on this one.
I have a no backdown policy but only after I have made a decision for good that I am committed to something - a person or a cause.
and one example is Joe.
Abraham Lincoln was self taught. I'll take that as good company.
RN read Ayn Rand. She disn't actually go to his house and school him personally.
Poor Griper. He tried. God bless him.
Shaw,
the only man that can declare himself as being self-taught is that man who uses the trial and error method of learning. and any learning comes from learning from the errors discovered from the trials. and there are only two persons on that list that would qualify, Einstein and Franklin. they were scientists who delved into areas of learning not yet discovered.
every other one had teachers. the author of a book is as much of a teacher as a person in a classroom. the only difference being the method of communication. the teacher in the classroom uses verbal communication while the author uses written communication.
what makes the so-called self taught student a foolish person is that he is unwilling to learn from the errors of others and believes he is wise enough to try to do the same thing as tried many times before without making the same mistakes.
that is the primary gist behind the phrase "the foolishness of youth" and of the proverb of "the mistakes of the past are doomed to be repeated in the future"
and anyone who believes that they hold to the perfect ideology is a man who feels he has nothing more to learn about life and has failed to learn from the past.
but even if there were such a thing as a perfect ideology it would require that perfect men apply and maintain it and i don't know of any man that can call himself a perfect man, Joe included, without revealing his arrogance and self-righteousness. and that in itself would be enough for me to reject his ideology.
So you reject William Buckley also Griper?
Whoever taught Michele Bachmann that the Founding Fathers "worked tirelessly" to eliminate slavery, President Obama that the Austrian people speak Austrian/that there exist in the military Navy Corpsemen, and Sarah Palin that Paul Revere was actually trying to warn the British that the British were coming should ALL be fired.......Of course, if ALL of those details were self-taught....
"Shaw,
the only man that can declare himself as being self-taught is that man who uses the trial and error method of learning."
I disagree. Those who learn from books have to use the power of their intellect to understand and interpret the texts and what they contain and apply that information to their experiences.
Even Einstein stood on the shoulders of Newton--a teacher.
Mr. Lincoln was self-educated through his reading. William Lee Miller wrote in his biography of Lincoln, "Lincoln's Virtues:"
"Having received almost no formal education, Lincoln embarked on a quest for learning and self-improvement. He read incessantly, beginning as a youth with the Bible and Shakespeare. During his single term in the House of Representatives, his colleagues considered it humorous that Lincoln spent his spare time poring over books in the Library of Congress. The result of this ''stunning work of self-education'' was the ''intellectual power'' revealed in Lincoln's writings and speeches. He relied, Miller notes, on in-depth research and logical argument to persuade his listeners rather than oratorical flights."
Reading a book as a "teacher" does one no good unless one has the intelligence to understand and apply what it is one reads.
the only man that can declare himself as being self-taught is that man who uses the trial and error method of learning
Griper is trying to redefine what "self taught" is used to mean as a means of winning the point.
This logic is a known fallacy. No need to respond beyond that. If he needs to do this, he obviously concedes by default that the common definition applies. No one his claiming that they are Griper's personal definition of "self-taught" since before today none of spoke the language of Griper.
Shaw,
"I disagree. Those who learn from books have to use the power of their intellect to understand and interpret the texts and what they contain and apply that information to their experiences."
that is true regardless of how you learn. those who learn from the verbal words of others need to do the same thing. words as written is no different than the vocal words.
a teacher passes along knowledge he possesses. that is his role in a teacher/student relationship. a student absorbs new knowledge from those who possess it. that is his role in that relationship.
to say a man is self taught is to declare that the student is learning what he already knows.
it is the author of that book that is passing on knowledge to the reader of that book. if this wasn't true then there'd be no need to identify the author as the owner of that intellectual property.
--------
""Having received almost no formal education, Lincoln embarked on a quest for learning and self-improvement. He read incessantly, beginning as a youth with the Bible and Shakespeare."
i don't disagree with this but who was he learning from, Shaw? he surely wasn't learning from himself.
learning something and teaching something are two separate concepts. and they are just as different as between the concepts of teaching and being brain-washed. you can possess the same knowledge from learning as you can possess by brain washing. but we'd never approve of the use of brain washing as the method of choice to instill that knowledge.
------
the idea behind the common understanding of the phrase, self taught, is the recognition that person has decided of his own free will to go learn something as apposed to being forced to learn something as is the case now where schooling is mandated in some manner or another. and he has chosen the person to learn from as opposed to learning from someone that someone else chose for him as is the case of a formal education.
but if you want to continue to accept the common understanding of its meaning that is fine with me.
i prefer my understanding because it clearly defines who i honor for the knowledge i possess.
Humans are cognitive beings. In theory all have the ability to learn.
Reading, listening, everlasting, using ones physical senses are all part of the learning experience.
How one goes about that experience is really immaterial if learning has occurred.
It is easy to accumulate data and categorize it. That would make one an encyclopedia of information if that is all one did.
It is when one applies logic and reason to data that real learning has occurred. No mater the path one takes to arrive at the data.
Some of the smartest, and wisest people I personally have ever known were individual with sharp minds and a thirst for answers to the problems and opportunities they confronted.
Some were high school graduates. One barely made it out of high school. My grandfather who had only a ninth grade education was truly a talented and wise man.
Leaning is always a choice griper. Not learning is also a choice. Both are a matter of free will for the individual possessing cognitive ability.
For those who suffer mental illness or mental retardation the above obviously does not apply.
So, on this one griper I align myself with Shaw. I cannot see how you can refute simple logic.
RN,
now, you guys have got me confused. how does anything you said refute what i said?
from what i read of your comment you are addressing the concept of "learning" and i'll agree with you on that concept.
my argument was about who did the teaching, a whole different concept. teaching is the cause of learning.
their stand on this issue is just another take on the proverb of the end justifies the means.
a person can only teach himself by the trial and error method. that is the only way to learn when that person has no previous knowledge of the issue. that is the most basic concept behind the discipline of science.
Self teaching is the process of observing through sensory perception.
From these observation the cognitive mind, using some level of reason and logic draws conclusions from the observations.
Trial and error is the process of proving or disproving the conclusions one drew from their observations.
Thus learning has occurred.
Any thinking man or women is to some degree self taught. That is unless they accept anything and everything they hear or read as being the rational truth, never questioning anything.
So griper I understand both what you and Shaw are saying. Sometimes semantics or the pride of authorship gets in the way of understanding. I know cause it happens to me from time to time.
Not often ;)
"..to say a man is self taught is to declare that the student is learning what he already knows."
No.
Griper, you get into these word games with me quite often, and I don't know why. I think John Myste is correct. You just want to redefine the word. But every dictionary says your definition is not correct:
Merriam-Webster:
self-taught:
: having knowledge or skills acquired by one's own efforts without formal instruction (a self–taught musician)
2
: learned by oneself [self–taught knowledge]
self-taught:
(sĕlf'tôt')
adj.
Having taught oneself without formal instruction or the help of others.
self-taught:
people who are self-taught have learnt particular skills by themselves, instead of being taught by someone
Nowhere in any dictionary does it say a self-taught person learns what he already knows.
You can make up your own definitions as you wish, and even publish your own dictionary to prove your point, but that won't make what you insist on correct.
Sorry. I'm done with this.
Shaw,
He literally made up a personal definition of a term that is known and communicates and then debated you for not adopting the definition he invented.
If he does not see the flaw in this reasoning, no evidence or reasoning will correct his thinking.
RN,
you have just described the scientific process in your comment.
"elf teaching is the process of observing through sensory perception.
From these observation the cognitive mind, using some level of reason and logic draws conclusions from the observations."
this is called an hypothesis
"Trial and error is the process of proving or disproving the conclusions one drew from their observations."
this is the experiment used
"Thus learning has occurred"
this results in the theory.
in other words, RN, you have just affirmed all i said about the matter. thank you.
------------
Shaw,
don't isolate the words of another to create a argument. as you just did.
you took its usage out of context of my whole comment. my argument was a rebuttal argument not a position argument.
and yes, i understand Shaw's position also, RN.
their primary point is the fact that in their eyes in order to have a teacher that person has to be physically present. and any learning without this physically present person is called self-taught
i was just pointing out that in order to have a teacher it doesn't require the physical presence of another person and that the person could be of the past as well as of the present. and that we learn from them through their writings or some other media device.
Just as there is no shame in begging for a piece of bacon, there is no shame in joining the hordes that have conceded to Truth 101 Mr. Griper.
There will always be another opportunity for you to test your mettle against the master. Here. RN's place. Shaw's. Mystes. Or yours when he figures out how to get his comments to post. damn Wordpress! If it were a hydrant I would pee on it.
I concede only that this comment thread and the thoughtful individuals who commented on it kept me coming back.
That and 80 total comments is an awesome thing.
Post a Comment