On Aug 24, 1:18Â am, Hardpan
yahoo.com> wrote:> On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 12:10:45 -0700 (PDT), Shrikeb...@
gmail.com wrote:
>>On Aug 21, 10:49Â pm, Hardpan
yahoo.com> wrote:>>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 10:52:35 -0700 (PDT), Shrikeb...@
gmail.com wrote:
>>>>On Aug 20, 12:49Â am, Hardpan
yahoo.com> wrote:>
>>>>When a wealthy famous celebrity pretends he's not a part
>>>>of "the club," (i.e. the owners of America), all you can do
>>>>is laugh. Â It's an ironic version of the liar's paradox. Â Those
>>>>rich wealthy bastards don't care about you, says the rich
>>>>wealth bastard. Â Yeah, and he does.
>
>>> Did he inherit his wealth like most of the rich have done or did he
>>> make it on his own?
>
>>What difference would it make? Â Many of the wealthy
>>bastards who are selected to be the choices for the
>>electorate, about whom he was talking when he
>>claimed "they don't care about you," made their own
>>money as well.
>
> Following politics is a hobby of mine, not a passion, for I know that
> in America at least its all about profit and greed.
In all places, as in America, politics is about power and
force. As Max Weber defined it, a political organization
is one which enforces its decisions by the threat of force.
It is necessarily the case, then, that politics is about
force and power. Profit is an inevitable consequence of
power and force
> For many its almost like professional sports with two teams playing
> against each other in a game of war, when in fact the two teams are in
> bed with each other.
For references, see KKKahill's post, who does treat the
Democrats as his team, and who actually doesn't care
about any principles whatsoever. Also, it seems that in
Carlin's video he is pushing a partisan Democratic agenda.
> Most people just don't understand that and many other truths and
> George Carlin shoved it down their throats in a way that was
> palatable, not offensive, to them.
Carlin is be demagogic. Pandering. Tickling the ears. Etc.
It is inevitably the case that someone who does that is trying
to sell something unpalatable.
>>> I don't see Carlin as being part of any club. He wasn't the type.
>
>>I don't see it as a literal club, anyway. Â I see it as a
>>projection.
>
>>Anyway, he was talking about the "owners." Â As a rich
>>wealthy player in the Entertainment Industry, which has
>>the greatest interest in dumbing down the public, since
>>a more critical public might require entertainment that
>>requires more thought to produce, he is one of the owners.
>
> Not if he wasn't a big-time player in the stock market or become a
> political activist or "leader" , since these "things"
> that look human, but act like our masters that we elect every few
> years, are not real leaders any longer. They are power-mad control
> freaks with a mind to do whatever they wish, now that 9/11 occured.
Actually, a real leader would be a power-mad control freak.
Nietzsche points out the hypocrisy of modernity, wherein
leaders try to pass themselves off as "servants of the people."
Slave morality means being a leader is automatically evil.
> No, they are nothing but cowardly sheepherders, watching their stock
> grow fat and dumb and getting ready for the slaughter, in a large part
> by passing unconstitutional laws and having the paid-for-whores in the
> supreme court rule them as such.
Have you been following the recent rulings of the Supreme
Court against the W administration?
> If we had any sense we would revolt and start from scratch, but that
> entails a certain danger to liberty as well, considering the education
> level of the average American stooge, who think they are "free".
One thing that Americans are more free than they ever
have been is in the arena of speech. They may have
been whittling away at our 4th Amendment protections
over the last few decades, but the 1st reigns supreme.
That's the way of evolution. You win some, you lose
some.
