| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Therion Ware" |
| Date: |
06 Sep 2005 12:13:30 PM |
| Object: |
OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 12:38:43 PM |
|
|
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
You mean, how can a pampered momma's boy steal the 2000 election
and even our veterans -- the people who placed their life on the line
for democracy -- couldn't be bothered to register a complaint?
How Bush was rewarded for allowing 9/11 to happen, instead of
punished for the single worst security failure in America's history?
How even today, with a national treasure destroyed, a city older
than America itself gone, it's about as easy to find maggots excusing
Bush's lack of response as it is finding Americans disgusted by it?
I'm at a total loss myself. I wish I had an answer, knew a reason. I
honestly do.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 12:26:38 PM |
|
|
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com...
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Too much fried food and beer, I'm guessing :/
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 12:46:17 PM |
|
|
Robibnikoff wrote:
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com...
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Too much fried food and beer, I'm guessing :/
And cable! Don't forget cable!
;-)
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 12:53:28 PM |
|
|
"Olrik" <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in message
news:MBkTe.54066$Wa6.604473@weber.videotron.net...
Robibnikoff wrote:
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com...
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Too much fried food and beer, I'm guessing :/
And cable! Don't forget cable!
Ah, yes! Silly me ;)
Those damn Playstations and Nintendo Game Cubes probably don't help either.
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 03:11:19 PM |
|
|
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com...
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Well, we'd like to, but...first we need to send out a request for bids (from
the usual suspects: China, India, and Mexico) to outsource all that messy
gunplay.
LC~ Revolution? Seems like a lot of work...<sarcasm alert>
"Civilisation is a race between education and catastrophe"~ H.G. Wells
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
12 Sep 2005 11:36:19 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 20:11:19 GMT, "LC" <LCain't@this.com> wrote:
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com...
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Well, we'd like to, but...first we need to send out a request for bids (from
the usual suspects: China, India, and Mexico) to outsource all that messy
gunplay.
LC~ Revolution? Seems like a lot of work...<sarcasm alert>
"Civilisation is a race between education and catastrophe"~ H.G. Wells
/me whips out the Wil-E-CoyoteŽ Revolution Calculator {Return on
Investment} made by AcmeŽ. Fingers dance-stare at screen. Fingers
dance-stare at screen. Fingers dance-stare at screen. The results
are massively negative.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David H." |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 12:25:14 PM |
|
|
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com...
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
I think it is because you hare hearing mostly from a vocal minority.
Most folks are basically happy with how their life is going and
therefore unwilling to revolt - they have no reason to.
The number of people who are truly willing to revolt and overthrow
the government are a very small percentage of the whole, but may seem
like a larger number than they really are due to how loud it is that
they scream.
My opinion, anyway. If most people were as upset as it looks like
from just reading this NG, then we would have had a revolt a long time
ago.
David H.
aa #2217
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 12:41:37 PM |
|
|
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
Most folks are basically happy with how their life is going and
therefore unwilling to revolt - they have no reason to.
Um, impeachment?
And if even THAT seems too radical for you (though it wasn't
radical when we had a Democratic President, and everything
was going GREAT), there's always just not returning the failed
leaders to power.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David H." |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 02:25:08 PM |
|
|
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jvGdnU7t_fHxT4DeRVn-gQ@comcast.com...
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
Most folks are basically happy with how their life is going and
therefore unwilling to revolt - they have no reason to.
Um, impeachment?
And if even THAT seems too radical for you (though it wasn't
radical when we had a Democratic President, and everything
was going GREAT), there's always just not returning the failed
leaders to power.
I am not defending Bush. A lot of the people I talk to are willing
to support not electing any more boobs, but boobs are all we get, (
Non-breast definition of boob ). As far as pulling off an all-out
revolt/revolution to overthrow the US Government, well, there just isn't
enough people dissatisfied enough to go that far. Right now, most are
happy just complaining.
Impeachment? Sure, as long as there are enough elected officials who
go for it.
Revolution? Naw, I don't think so. There would have to be one
obvious, glaring screw-up to get a real revolution going. Something like
the supreme court making someone president who only got 10% of the vote,
or something like that. ( I use 10% as just a number to throw out there,
I am not trying to set a standard here.)
From the outside looking in, one might well ask 'Why no revolution?'.
From my point of view, the answer would be that there just aren't that
many people dissatisfied enough to start one. You can hear someone say
"That fuckin' Bush!" as they shake their heads and take another sip of
beer from the glass in their air conditioned bar with cable TV playing
the locally favorite NFL pre-season game. You are not going to find many
people other than the white supremacists running around in the woods in
camouflage to help you with a revolution.
David H.
aa #2217
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 03:41:37 PM |
|
|
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
As far as pulling off an all-out revolt/revolution to overthrow
the US Government, well, there just isn't enough people
dissatisfied enough to go that far.
Again, it's not that a revolution is too much, it's that ANY
response is too much.
Impeachment wasn't going too far back in the 1990s, when
everything was going great and the worst crime the President
managed was being a bad husband.
Why aren't the people demanding impeachment now?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David H." |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 04:02:43 PM |
|
|
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:WuKdnZ2dnZ1UQDPOnZ2dnQBhgN6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
As far as pulling off an all-out revolt/revolution to overthrow
the US Government, well, there just isn't enough people
dissatisfied enough to go that far.
Again, it's not that a revolution is too much, it's that ANY
response is too much.
Impeachment wasn't going too far back in the 1990s, when
everything was going great and the worst crime the President
managed was being a bad husband.
Why aren't the people demanding impeachment now?
The fine folks in the Senate/House have obviously not been given
anything that they feel would give them a successful impeachment.
I know for a fact that there are those in DC who would be pushing
for one if they had anything that the constitutional attorneys said they
had a chance with.
I don't know why they do not impeach *if they have evidence of an
impeachable offence. The only answer I can come up with is that they do
not have what it would take to pull it off.
You can have 100,000 protestors carrying "Impeach Bush!" posters, but
you can't actually impeach the guy if you don't have the evidence.
In Clinton's case, they caught him in a lie while testifying under
oath. That's all they needed for the impeachment. I disagree with that
as all of us know that there aren't many married men who would admit on
national TV that they got a BJ from an intern. Somehow, that shouldn't
count, but it did. It was a provable impeachable offense.
David H.
aa #2217
David H.
aa #2217
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 04:21:27 PM |
|
|
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
The fine folks in the Senate/House have obviously not been
given anything that they feel would give them a successful
impeachment. I know for a fact that there are those in DC
who would be pushing for one if they had anything that the
constitutional attorneys said they had a chance with.
That's *****, and you know it.
The administration has already admitted to violating the
constitution. Only the house can appropriate funds, and
the administration admitted to taking funding appropriated
for Afghanistan and misappropriated it to the invasion of
Iraq.
Bush swore an oath to preserve & protect the constitution,
but he violated that oath on first opportunity.
Clinton, on the other hand, was simply a bad husband.
There's no excuse for NOT impeaching the incompetent
*****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David H." |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 05:01:44 PM |
|
|
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:XoydnSCYXcxumIPeRVn-1A@comcast.com...
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
The fine folks in the Senate/House have obviously not been
given anything that they feel would give them a successful
impeachment. I know for a fact that there are those in DC
who would be pushing for one if they had anything that the
constitutional attorneys said they had a chance with.
That's *****, and you know it.
The administration has already admitted to violating the
constitution. Only the house can appropriate funds, and
the administration admitted to taking funding appropriated
for Afghanistan and misappropriated it to the invasion of
Iraq.
Bush swore an oath to preserve & protect the constitution,
but he violated that oath on first opportunity.
Clinton, on the other hand, was simply a bad husband.
There's no excuse for NOT impeaching the incompetent
*****.
OK, then. To whom do I write?
I don't think what I was saying is *****, either.
You're telling me that Ted Kennedy wouldn't push for an impeachment if
he had anything impeachable?
Now, *that's *****!
David H.
aa #2217
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 08:07:21 PM |
|
|
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
There's no excuse for NOT impeaching the incompetent
*****.
OK, then. To whom do I write?
The house of representatives.
I don't think what I was saying is *****, either.
Think again.
You're telling me that Ted Kennedy wouldn't push for an
impeachment if he had anything impeachable?
Ted Kennedy is the senior Senator from Massachusetts. That's
all. He holds no position of authority other than "Senator."
Impeachment begins in the house. The house is controled by
the Republicans. The people to place pressure on -- the
people you want to write -- are the members of the house,
and the Republican members specifically.
Unless Bush takes to raping & murdering orphans live
on TV, the only way you're going to get Republican
members of the house to vote for impeachment is if you
convince them that their job depends on it.
No impeachment == no re-election.
Unless they absolutely believe this, they will back Bush
185% on everything he says & does, before he ever says
and does it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 06:34:02 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 22:01:44 GMT, "David H."
<davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:XoydnSCYXcxumIPeRVn-1A@comcast.com...
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
The fine folks in the Senate/House have obviously not been
given anything that they feel would give them a successful
impeachment. I know for a fact that there are those in DC
who would be pushing for one if they had anything that the
constitutional attorneys said they had a chance with.
That's *****, and you know it.
The administration has already admitted to violating the
constitution. Only the house can appropriate funds, and
the administration admitted to taking funding appropriated
for Afghanistan and misappropriated it to the invasion of
Iraq.
Bush swore an oath to preserve & protect the constitution,
but he violated that oath on first opportunity.
Clinton, on the other hand, was simply a bad husband.
There's no excuse for NOT impeaching the incompetent
*****.
OK, then. To whom do I write?
I don't think what I was saying is *****, either.
You're telling me that Ted Kennedy wouldn't push for an impeachment if
he had anything impeachable?
Now, *that's *****!
Why would he bother. It won't get voted in. All it would do is cost
Kennedy's state in some form of retailiation.
This is a one party system now. Bush's party has control of both
houses. There is no way any impeachment process has any chance of
success.
It doesn't matter if every citizen in this country demands
impeachment, if the congress and the senate don't support it, it will
never happen.
The only way to get this problem out is to vote it out and it may be
too late for that now. There are too many populous states currently
controlled by that party that have computer voting with no paper
trail.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
12 Sep 2005 11:16:26 AM |
|
|
On 6 Sep 2005 18:34:02 -0500, (Kate ) wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 22:01:44 GMT, "David H."
<davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:XoydnSCYXcxumIPeRVn-1A@comcast.com...
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
The fine folks in the Senate/House have obviously not been
given anything that they feel would give them a successful
impeachment. I know for a fact that there are those in DC
who would be pushing for one if they had anything that the
constitutional attorneys said they had a chance with.
That's *****, and you know it.
The administration has already admitted to violating the
constitution. Only the house can appropriate funds, and
the administration admitted to taking funding appropriated
for Afghanistan and misappropriated it to the invasion of
Iraq.
Bush swore an oath to preserve & protect the constitution,
but he violated that oath on first opportunity.
Clinton, on the other hand, was simply a bad husband.
There's no excuse for NOT impeaching the incompetent
*****.
OK, then. To whom do I write?
I don't think what I was saying is *****, either.
You're telling me that Ted Kennedy wouldn't push for an impeachment if
he had anything impeachable?
Now, *that's *****!
Why would he bother. It won't get voted in. All it would do is cost
Kennedy's state in some form of retailiation.
This is a one party system now. Bush's party has control of both
houses. There is no way any impeachment process has any chance of
success.
It doesn't matter if every citizen in this country demands
impeachment, if the congress and the senate don't support it, it will
never happen.
The only way to get this problem out is to vote it out and it may be
too late for that now. There are too many populous states currently
controlled by that party that have computer voting with no paper
trail.
Diebold has spoken.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
12 Sep 2005 11:15:55 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 17:21:27 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"David H." <davidhaapala@sbcglobal.fart.not.net> wrote
The fine folks in the Senate/House have obviously not been
given anything that they feel would give them a successful
impeachment. I know for a fact that there are those in DC
who would be pushing for one if they had anything that the
constitutional attorneys said they had a chance with.
That's *****, and you know it.
The administration has already admitted to violating the
constitution. Only the house can appropriate funds, and
the administration admitted to taking funding appropriated
for Afghanistan and misappropriated it to the invasion of
Iraq.
Bush swore an oath to preserve & protect the constitution,
but he violated that oath on first opportunity.
Clinton, on the other hand, was simply a bad husband.
There's no excuse for NOT impeaching the incompetent
*****.
When Congress is under the control of the Shrubbian party there aren't
the votes to carry a movement for impeachment. Further, much of the
Congress would personally also be liable for impeachment, too.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ike" |
|
| Title: Re: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 08:16:32 PM |
|
|
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com...
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Television. Also enough to eat and not too much harrassment.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 01:02:04 PM |
|
|
In episode <kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com>, Therion Ware
burst into the room and exclaimed:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there isn't
more social unrest than there is.
Damned if I know.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
.
|
|
|
| User: "Clockmeister" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 02:47:06 PM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:B6-dnWKNd6MGRIDeRVn-tg@megapath.net...
In episode <kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com>, Therion Ware
burst into the room and exclaimed:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't
more social unrest than there is.
Damned if I know.
Apathy probably. Same story in Australia, we may as well change our national
anthem to the star spangled banner and adapt the American flag (with an
extra star for us). The way our society and national identity is eroding to
American standards right under everyones noses without so much as a peep
from the majority is astounding.
Hardly surprising that our prime minister is a lying mutant midget Bush
butt-crawling useless redneck god-grovelling lapdog quite happy to screw
over his own country as long as he gets to stand next to the president of
the USA, just so he can feel important.
That he gets away with it is astounding.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
12 Sep 2005 11:28:42 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 03:47:06 +0800, "Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com>
wrote:
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:B6-dnWKNd6MGRIDeRVn-tg@megapath.net...
In episode <kvhrh1lsfssc06ngnn7s3dqm63f96dr8qv@4ax.com>, Therion Ware
burst into the room and exclaimed:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't
more social unrest than there is.
Damned if I know.
Apathy probably. Same story in Australia, we may as well change our national
anthem to the star spangled banner and adapt the American flag (with an
extra star for us). The way our society and national identity is eroding to
American standards right under everyones noses without so much as a peep
from the majority is astounding.
Hardly surprising that our prime minister is a lying mutant midget Bush
butt-crawling useless redneck god-grovelling lapdog quite happy to screw
over his own country as long as he gets to stand next to the president of
the USA, just so he can feel important.
That he gets away with it is astounding.
Could it be a case of; "The garbage remains the same only the name
changes?"
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Meteorite Debris" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 06:58:55 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 17:13:30 GMT the ET form known as Therion
Ware<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> sent a radio signal across the vast
expanse of deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
An example of the frog in a jar of warming water.
--
Remove YOUR_SHOES before replying
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2009
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
Apatriotism Yahoo Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apatriotism
Sunday: A day given over by Americans to wishing that they themselves
were dead and in Heaven, and that their neighbors were dead and in
Hell.
-Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Knight" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 08:05:23 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 17:13:30 GMT, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Lemmings don't have leaders. You follow the guy in front.
I think any American knows if he made trouble for the ruling class
he'd have an 'accident'.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
www.sonic.net/~wooly
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Buck" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 10:14:39 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 17:13:30 GMT, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Some will cry "Godwin" on me for this, but I really couldn't give a
***** at this point, it's my honest perception on the matter and simply
parroting "Godwin's Law! Godwin's Law!" does _not_ invalidate the
comparison: For much the same reason there was no revolution by the
German people in regards to Hitler's attempted extermination of the
Jews and other minority groups. "Denial" tops the list, "laziness" is
another factor (Americans have been trained to be the laziest bastards
on the planet for the past hundred years).
--
L8r,
Uncle Buck
_o-O=~_o-O=~_o-O=~_o-O=~_o-O=~_o-O=~_o-O=
Those who say, "Now is not the time for placing blame"
...
....are quite often to blame....
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
12 Sep 2005 11:39:30 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 20:14:39 -0700, Uncle Buck
<UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 17:13:30 GMT, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
Some will cry "Godwin" on me for this, but I really couldn't give a
***** at this point, it's my honest perception on the matter and simply
parroting "Godwin's Law! Godwin's Law!" does _not_ invalidate the
comparison: For much the same reason there was no revolution by the
German people in regards to Hitler's attempted extermination of the
Jews and other minority groups. "Denial" tops the list, "laziness" is
another factor (Americans have been trained to be the laziest bastards
on the planet for the past hundred years).
Induced reaction to 'authority' since birth. Freedom is
available-provided you have the proper permits.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 06:41:03 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 17:13:30 GMT, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
The country is being taken over by a facist section. Our electorial
college system gives greater power to the lower population states, add
to that some hinky stuff with computer voting and you've got one party
control - the corrupt party.
Add to that a media take over by the same kind of people. It was a
huge mistake for Clinton to open the markets on the media - now the
vast majority of the television and radio markets have been taken over
by a small group of corporations. This controls the news and whether
people are told what is going.
Sitting outside of the country, you probably have a much clearer idea
of what is going on, than someone in the midwest does. They don't
hear about any questions about Bush, they think everyone agrees he's
doing a dandy job and don't even know what he did to the levies, FEMA
and that all the problems in NO were caused by the bad democrat
governor who didn't ask for help.
Control the media and you control the people.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "J Forbes" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 02:39:50 PM |
|
|
Therion Ware wrote:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
we finally have the moron in office that is just like (most of)
us...we've reached a state of democratic perfection.
Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
08 Sep 2005 03:54:18 AM |
|
|
On 6 Sep 2005 12:39:50 -0700 in alt.atheism, J Forbes ("J Forbes"
<jforbspam@fastmail.fm>) said, directing the reply to alt.atheism
Therion Ware wrote:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
we finally have the moron in office that is just like (most of)
us...we've reached a state of democratic perfection.
I can relate to that.
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
#442. Want food NOW? Then try http://www.rtios.co.uk/
- Yep, currently under test... Your opinion welcome.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
12 Sep 2005 11:29:36 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 09:54:18 +0100, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
On 6 Sep 2005 12:39:50 -0700 in alt.atheism, J Forbes ("J Forbes"
<jforbspam@fastmail.fm>) said, directing the reply to alt.atheism
Therion Ware wrote:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
we finally have the moron in office that is just like (most of)
us...we've reached a state of democratic perfection.
I can relate to that.
It's Blairingly obvious. :\
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Why no revolution in the USA? |
06 Sep 2005 12:22:11 PM |
|
|
Therion Ware wrote:
Well, not exactly revolution.
But the thing that continues to amaze me about the USA is why there
isn't more social unrest than there is.
"Panem et circenses".
I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, (yet...) but this
genuinely puzzles me.
Your thoughts welcome.
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
