There's already too much emphasis on military in the US political paradigm. A Prez with a military background doesn't add anything new or unique to the WH.
It would be amazing if future Presidents came with a track record of success in philanthropy, education, or medical fields instead of law or military.
Interesting social comment in that second article:
I go even further in my views than Mises. I maintain, and have tried to provide evidence of this in many different ways in my writings, that it is democracy which is causally responsible for the fatal conditions afflicting us now. The number of productive people is constantly decreasing, and the number of people parasitically consuming the income and wealth of this dwindling number of productive people is increasing steadily. This can’t work in the long run."
Hence the cause of illegal immigrants "taking" the jobs of citizens in say, the USA... def a global phenomenon
The question I always ponder about the NSA/CIA/DARPA spy programs ... so what exactly can they do to a person with information they gathered? Presuming that person is a law abiding citizen whose interests lead them to looking for information via google or to join in discussion groups in forums, or pass information legally found via twitter? So they Bbuild a profile? Then what? Big brother has most everybody's shopping preferences already via those little plastic cards for grocery stores and other outlets that track your purchases. And the surveys you fill out. Some of us have all family members in the big DB due to one family member's activities. My feeling, oh well. I'm not doing anything illegal.
It's one big shopper's mall of mostly useless data, unless you're in the business of selling goods. Living simply avoids that pitfall.
(snip)What the great teachers of the past would say today…
Isn’t for them to say
It has been handed to us now: here and now, To stand up and make our way into truth.
Because we don’t have wings, yet we can help each other fly.
A Personal Tao can be a gift to make a difference. The gift to simply say: “Hey, just be yourself :) ”. It’s enough to make one fly. It’s enough to change the world.(snip)
students and newcomers to the way are often known to pose questions and if in the posing of a question one "violates" some sense of how the water flows, how the emptiness washes over an initiate, how the bowl's rim sings, there is an irony that a violation of one's sense of the way one might follow the path of learning - how does one judge the learning path of another?
(snip)Unlike any other system taught in human history: Taoism accepts no final definition other than the Tao. The Tao by definition is indefinable.
Yet being human, we do define it. Human nature seeks answers and embraces truth towards our place in a seemingly larger universe. We are colorful beings and that means we live to the heart. The human heart leads this journey towards completeness, as each person uniquely finds meaning for their life. (snip) source:
The rule I found in your comment was that there are certain things one does not do in discussing the Tao. I find your imposition rather humorous for it was a rule imposed. If I read it as a rule it is not because I make a rule in the reading, but because of the way in which the comment was made and I found it to be very similar to the teachings outside of Taoism of other orders.
(snip)Truth and Taoism
Truth is an interesting topic, one which needs to be talked about from several angles.
Lets start here:
Humans love definition. Definition implies we can find an answer for everything. The problem is making the assumption that an absolute truth exists to every definition. This is not the case. Taoism teaches that from human perspective no absolute truth, no absolute falsehood can be defined or embraced by a person. By human nature we are a smaller part of the larger whole. When examining something, looking for answers, finding a statement: every such examination will contain both truth and falsehoods.
Even more confusing, the mixture of truth and falsehood is relative to each observer. Even more confusing, the mixture of truth and falsehood will shift for each person over time as they change.
So when you look at anything, as a Taoist you accept a view of the world being a mixture of perception. Within that perception there will be elements of truth and falsehood. (snip)
this made me laugh. I'm thinking, what a great thread, a wonderful opportunity for people to explore the ideas of Lao Tzu, a safe place to question, to ponder, to awaken... and then...
What if it, this thing people call God, isn't at all what you've been told to think it is?
I mean, why are so many scholarly and historic texts hidden or destroyed? What is there to hide in the vault of the Vatican or elsewhere?
Me, I think "it" is a formless energy that exists between and within each of us. It is not some external being or myth, "it" exists here, now, everywhere. That would explain why psychics/mediums/occultists/readers/and others are able to "see" and relate "events" to the rest who don't have that "gift" developed. And this would explain why the Church is so afraid of telling everyone the real story. They don't want you to know you have the power to do great things (it's a control issue).
okay, so, in one of these recent threads on the return of Jesus one stated that there's science proving Jesus existed... they haven't been back to answer my request for that scientific source. An all too common issue with the debate on J - when it comes to real proof there is none. So.... I'm no longer waiting on the science, that'd be like waiting for the return of Jesus. Silly of me ...
As long as corporations wield more influence over gov than consumers do, there will be no justice for the people. Toluene and Benzene combined are certainly not safe and I certainly won't be holding my breath in waiting on any agencies to be fully transparent about any chems approved for sale without sufficient labeling. As long as the economic factor is involved, US agencies will not be helping citizens, unless that citizen is say czar Jeff Immelt or czar John P. Holdren or czar Michael Taylor or, haha, Twitter's top attorney just appointed privacy czar, Nicole Wong....
The only way I can explain why I disagree with this assessment or concept of the EPA is by relating my experience with Monsanto's RoundUp and the subsequent run around I got from authorities and the medical system.
In '86 my landscape supervisor showed me how to use RoundUp in the 5 gal backpack sparyer which has a hole int he cap to manage the pump/spray pressure. As I put the sparyer om my back after putting inthe water and the RoundUp, the mix splashed on my back. I said, it just splashed on my back, he said, don't worry about it you'll get used to it. I was young and dumb so I didn't think anything much about it, but it kept splashing on my back as I walked around spraying and I began telling my bosses I didn't like that much, they said, design a system to divert it away from your back.
As a crew leader I didn't really have time for that and all of my other responsibilities. So, about three weeks or so into the stuff splashing on my back I had a wild electrical shock syndrome in my arms form my hands up, painfully strong zaps and loss of strength in my hands. I went to my super, told him how I almost ran down a young tree in the landscape because I couldn't use my hands to shut the machine off and he sent me to the doctor. The Doc said, it looks like carpal tunnel, sent me home, told me to rest for a week. That was a Friday. That weekend I had the most exhausting bout of a crazy full-body bronchial attack that lasted more than week. I wasn't able to go back to work for several months and when I did go back, my hands began acting up again.
Long story short - the EPA found that Monsanto had allowed a rep from Monsanto in the IBT test labs during tests of RoundUp and they found that many of the tests conducted were fraudulent. The EPA tossed out the test results, did not cause Monsanto to have the tests redone and allowed RoundUp to be put on the shelves of US stores with no special announcements about its insufficient testing. Because there was no evidence of RoundUp's seriously foul ingredient on the "inert ingredients" (as noted in a letter to me by the WA state epidemiologist in 1993 or 94) the medical profession's responses were, oh, RoundUp can't do that to you.
It's all documented in an article published in The Progressive June or July 1987. So, I don't have any faith that the EPA has done right by consumers and am not at all confident that they will with Monsanto fully represented in the big house.
Thank You, Daytona... we can agree to disagree, but it does concern me that you've used several time snow that lake of fire concept. It's really a waste of your typing time since it has no bearing on my reality and only causes me to think you are too caught up in the myth. So, have a great evening or whatever it is for you.
Well, maybe that Pres ought to have ordered the EPA to wear steel teeth and not be pushed around by corporations who now own them .. cough cough... I was thinking about the vile, mean spirited bumper stickers at the Repug tables at fairs when I wrote that. Just plain mean.
amazing, there you go again - shame now. whatever happened to respecting a person's right to believe other than what you believe? fitting right into that intolerance mode.
You aren't going to cause me to tremble or feel shame because you aren't able to accept that we disagree.
A poem I wrote some years ago:
Lead me not Lead me not into your stain glassed room perfectly littered with circumscribed pews, ascribed with dead and bloodied images of one whose Father left Him to those who kill for power and fame, putting in motion the endless notion that might begets righteous claim.
Lead me not into your desolate, and gilded bloom for hate suffocates those who subjugate truth for their own - schilling contaminated words to masses who believe they know what is right, for they’ve donned cocked crown of man’s God in His majestic light.
Lead me not into your Holy House while blind minions blame and grouse beseeching thee to come to Thy Glory of God whose hands lay idle, broken and loath for you have burned His words in cruelty.
Lead me not.
I'm not a believer of religious cult rhetoric/propaganda and you will never convince me I ought to be. I don't threaten you because you believe in something I don't believe in. You have not once asked me exactly what I do believe. You seem to think I'm an atheist. Maybe I am, but Maybe I'm Not. So please stop with your silly and empty threats.
RE: Should the commander and chief of the military "President" have served in the military
partly correct, Bush Jr primarily bailed out on his Natl Guard Service, but Bush Sr is a Vet of WWII.List of Presidents of the United States by military service