30-10-2003 02:44									#31
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Quote of the Day, from Wesley Clark

"I guess the next thing we’re going to hear is that the sailors told him to wear the flight suit and prance around on the aircraft carrier."



"prance"!!!!

The Navy is now saying that the banner came from the White House. When you treat people like ****, don't be surprised if their sense of loyalty to you isn't exactly their #1 priority.

	30-10-2003 02:44									#32
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Doh! Better get your money back on that Poli-Sci degree there Imran Why should I, I'm correct. quote: Liberals see private property as fundamental to liberalism - tis the very definition of liberalism. Progressives tend to be ambivalent to socialist on property questions. Depends on if you are talking about European Liberalism or American Liberalism. American Liberals, since FDRs time (the first 'American' Liberal), do not see private property as fundamental.

FDR's system always assumed the existence of private property. taxed and regulated to be sure, but still owned privately (with the exeption of TVA) It was not based on govt ownership of the means of production, or the "commanding heights" of the economy, much less of agricultural property, etc.

	30-10-2003 02:47									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: FDR's system always assumed the existence of private property. taxed and regulated to be sure, but still owned privately (with the exeption of TVA) It was not based on govt ownership of the means of production, or the "commanding heights" of the economy, much less of agricultural property, etc.

His view of private property was much less 'fundamental' to his politics than the so-called Progressives (TR, Bryan, LaFollete, Wilson).

	30-10-2003 02:47									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by The Templar It's not a 'radical liberal rag' Not 'radical' because it is fairly conventional in its editorials and its reporting is objective. Not 'liberal' - just compare it to the nation, which is liberal or to the American Prospect. Not a 'rag' because it is exlusively a webzine Dammit Sloww, if I have to school you again, I'm going to charge you tuition!

Oh common now, youre not calling "The Nation" liberal? Radical, progressive, not-quite-Stalinist, whatever, but not liberal.

	30-10-2003 02:48									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Chemical Ollie The political spectrum is a broken circle, not a line. Nazis and ultracommies/anarchists meet at the very ends.

No we don't. We're fundimental opposites on issues of private property and social rights and poltical participation. The fact that the communists that came to power ended up being seized by a reactionary element doesn't change that.

	30-10-2003 02:53									#36
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: FDR's system always assumed the existence of private property. taxed and regulated to be sure, but still owned privately (with the exeption of TVA) It was not based on govt ownership of the means of production, or the "commanding heights" of the economy, much less of agricultural property, etc. His view of private property was much less 'fundamental' to his politics than the so-called Progressives (TR, Bryan, LaFollete, Wilson).

He was less ideological and more pragmatic, and he had elements in his administration who were either more "radical/progressive" than liberal IE eleanor, Henry Wallace, or Social Democrat ie Hillman. But he was also facing a different economic situation, and was in a society that had evolved over the previous 20 years.

I dont think that FDR ever really articulated his view of the ideal society - he wasnt that kind of leader. If he had, I think private property would still have been fundamental. And I would suggest that FDR was as far as American liberalism ever went in a progressive/socialist direction - certainly i dont think any dem Presidnt after would contemplate the degree of govt intervention in purely market functions (as opposed to social and environmental regs) as occured with the NRA, WPA, financial regulation, transportation reg, etc.

	30-10-2003 02:56									#37
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara No we don't. We're fundimental opposites on issues of private property and social rights and poltical participation. The fact that the communists that came to power ended up being seized by a reactionary element doesn't change that.

On private property agreed. political participation? Every leninist state used mass mobilization, but kept control in a centrally run party. Not far different than fascism. Or are defining communism more broadly, so that Lenin is just a reactionary element?

Those who use the term totalitarianism this way tend not to see the property question as central - one understands that communists, and most socialists disagree.

	30-10-2003 02:57									#38
	Get a bigger avatar today!

That's what you commies keep saying, Che, but I can find more similarities between a Nazi and an ultracommie than between a Nazi and a conservative. It's a tread topic on it's own, however, and I'm too tired to jump into that discussion tonight. And you are wrong on the private property issue. Nazis are basically against private property, especially if the property is a large corporation or a natural resource of national interest.

	30-10-2003 02:57									#39
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Liberals see private property as fundamental to liberalism - tis the very definition of liberalism. Progressives tend to be ambivalent to socialist on property questions. Depends on if you are talking about European Liberalism or American Liberalism. American Liberals, since FDRs time (the first 'American' Liberal), do not see private property as fundamental.

You didn't say 'American Liberal' did you? But seriously, when Rawls, Nozick, etc. are talking about 'Liberal Democracy' they are not excluding Republicans and they are certainly not thinking of socialism or communism. They are talking about democracy with property rights. These guys are Americans and are the paragon of contemporary US political thought. I know 'liberal' means 'left' on cable talk shows, but I thought we were above that here ...

quote: quote: And libertarians are not that socially radical ... A group that believes in full rights based on sexual orientation and the legalization of all drugs does not sound like a moderate group to me.

Neither of those is radical. Let's see - full rights to people, even gay people? Yeah, that's radical. Isn't it always conservatives crying about big government and exhaulting individual rights and liberty? Drugs? Again, big government and individual liberty.

If you had talked about libertarianism and polygamy you might have had something radical. But you didn't.

	30-10-2003 03:02									#40
	Put an end to popups!

quote: You didn't say 'American Liberal' did you?

We are talking about the US in this thread.

quote: when Rawls, Nozick, etc. are talking about 'Liberal Democracy' they are not excluding Republicans and they are certainly not thinking of socialism or communism. They are talking about democracy with property rights. These guys are Americans and are the paragon of contemporary US political thought. I know 'liberal' means 'left' on cable talk shows, but I thought we were above that here ...

Why should we listen to Rawls or Nozick over the 'cable talk shows' when the cable talk shows are the ones describing how the terms are generally used in the US? In the US, Progressives are merely parts of both Liberal and Radical dicotomies.

quote: Let's see - full rights to people, even gay people? Yeah, that's radical. Isn't it always conservatives crying about big government and exhaulting individual rights and liberty? Drugs? Again, big government and individual liberty.

Full rights to gay people is, at the very least, on the liberal side, and drug legalization... yeah, that's left.

	30-10-2003 03:03									#41
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by lord of the mark On private property agreed. political participation? Every leninist state used mass mobilization, but kept control in a centrally run party. Not far different than fascism. Or are defining communism more broadly, so that Lenin is just a reactionary element?

Lenin, actually, frequently argued for broader and more inclusive politics, with specific concrete exceptions: such as not allowing the enemy to share the government with you during wartime. When he tried to tighten things up inside the Communist Party it was because of the danger that reactionary element, of which Stalin was the chief representitive. The ban on factions in 1921 was to both supress the bureaucracy and prevent the appearance of division in the government just as the Civil War ended (and Wrangel's army was sitting in Romania waiting to move).

quote: Those who use the term totalitarianism this way tend not to see the property question as central - one understands that communists, and most socialists disagree.

Hannah Arrendt thought there was a fundimental difference between the two, even if there were superficial similiarities. Interesting how nuanced arguments always get banalized.

	30-10-2003 03:04									#42
	Remove this text

quote: "I know [the banner] was attributed somehow to some ingenious advance man from my staff," said Bush. "They weren't that ingenious, by the way."

uhhh.... all he said was they weren't ingenious. he didn't blame it on the sailors.

	30-10-2003 03:04									#43
	Remove this text

Bush didn't blame the soldiers. In fact the "mission accomplished" sign was suitable. The sailors did their job successfully.

Liberals are trying to paint a different picture.

Templar: Salon.com is a center-left newspaper with an obvious agenda. The only thing I liked about their reporting was when they did a report on Hugo Chavez, whom they criticized heavily. But other than that they are as leftist as it comes. And ARE NOT objective.

	30-10-2003 03:05									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Yeah, but a President/Seamen contriversy is always good

	30-10-2003 03:07									#45
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: From left to right: radical - progressive - liberal - moderate - conservative - reactionary

From left to right:
Che - extremist nutcase - radical - progressive - liberal - moderate - conservative - reactionary - authoritarian - extremist nutcase - Fez.

Just having some fun

	30-10-2003 03:09									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

well, if the navy says it's from the white house, and the white house says it's from the navy, and the white house has proven itself to be remarkably adept at manipulating backdrops for photo ops and the telly, while the navy seems to issue most of its comments from a rather drab room with only their seal, who would you believe put the "mission accomplished" sign up?

	30-10-2003 03:09									#47
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Hey I am no extremist nutcase... wanna know some places where I am not so conservative in? Gay rights... for one... umm... that's all I can think of...

	30-10-2003 03:23									#48
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Q Cubed well, if the navy says it's from the white house, and the white house says it's from the navy, and the white house has proven itself to be remarkably adept at manipulating backdrops for photo ops and the telly, while the navy seems to issue most of its comments from a rather drab room with only their seal, who would you believe put the "mission accomplished" sign up?

Evil department of Defense civilians of course. Its all the neo-cons fault!

	30-10-2003 03:33									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

rumsfeld is a civilian. is it his?

	30-10-2003 04:43									#50
	Increase Your PM Length

The "Mission Accomplished" sign may indeed have been for the soldiers, but the White House doesn't make those signs for all the ships and other units return home. The difference is that the President and, therefore, lots of cameras were there. The entire thing -- from the landing to the flight suit to the sign -- was a publicity stunt meant to show President Bush as an accomplished war president. The ship was even turned around as to look (on camera) as if it were at sea and not merely a short distance from San Diego.

	30-10-2003 04:47									#51
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by uh Clem Quote of the Day, from Wesley Clark "I guess the next thing we’re going to hear is that the sailors told him to wear the flight suit and prance around on the aircraft carrier."

That is the funniest ****ing thing I've heard all day.

I wish Wes would show that much spunk and wit in the debates.

	30-10-2003 04:51									#52
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Guynemer That is the funniest ****ing thing I've heard all day. I wish Wes would show that much spunk and wit in the debates.

Debates require thinking on your feet, not having a clever writer tell you what you think.

	30-10-2003 04:53									#53
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by SlowwHand http://www.salon.com/ Tell me it isn't a Radical Liberal rag.

I think the question in point is not whether it was reported by a lefty mag, but whether it was true or not...

If this report is not true, then by all means you are entitled to your disparaging remark - if it is true, well then you're just being a ****...

	30-10-2003 07:19									#54
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Fez Hey I am no extremist nutcase...

	30-10-2003 07:31									#55
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Much tado about nothing. Bush announced the major combat mission was over and it was. "Mission Accomplished"? Who cares? Quick attributions of mistakes to deceit should be avoided...

	30-10-2003 07:37									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Full rights to gay people is, at the very least, on the liberal side, and drug legalization... yeah, that's left.

Yeah, those left wing Founding Fathers.

	30-10-2003 08:21									#57
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Bush has displayed a complete lack of leadership. A true leader takes responsibility for the actions of those he/she commands.

Truman said "The buck stops here", and it is still a legendary sign that will go through American history as a great philosophy of a leader.

Bush.... "Uh its the CIA's fault, they gave me poor intelligence..."

"Uh... the sailors wanted that banner..."

He had no right to wear what a military officer would, since he has no clue. Every military scandal has ended with the highest in command of their field taking responsibility.

Fact is, Bush actually thought it was all over. Just another one of his many, many "miscalculations" regarding Iraq.

	30-10-2003 09:12									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Bush has displayed a complete lack of leadership. A true leader takes responsibility for the actions of those he/she commands.

I'd agree it was silly for him to say someone else - sailors - wanted the banner and they put it up if it was the White House, but he may have been uninformed on whom put it up.

quote: Fact is, Bush actually thought it was all over. Just another one of his many, many "miscalculations" regarding Iraq.

When did he say it was all over? He said the major combat mission was over and it was. Obviously he meant a cessation to the actual war, not the occupation, and he added in that speech that Iraq was still a dangerous place obviously referring to the fact the occupation would not be without violence and attempts by Saddam's loyalists to resist regime change.

	30-10-2003 09:27									#59
	Increase the size of your Attachments

That was the miscalculation. To think that the war would be tank vs. tank. The war is just gettting started.

	30-10-2003 09:56									#60
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Why should we listen to Rawls or Nozick over the 'cable talk shows' when the cable talk shows are the ones describing how the terms are generally used in the US?

I don't know. Maybe because Rawls has something more to say than a soundbite? Since when is prefering Hannity and Colmes to substantive argument a preference one admits to without embarrasment?

quote: Full rights to gay people is, at the very least, on the liberal side, and drug legalization... yeah, that's left.

Other than right wing religious fanatics who has even a half-articulate* opposition to gays having equal rights?

*Yes, I know many people have a prejudice against gays but inarticulate, unreasoned prejudices are hardly a virtue are they?