Rick wrote: Well I have to admit I often just assume PS right on this stuff because he usually is.
You may be right, but that doesn't mean I can't question him, either. All he had to do to "end" the citizenship discussion was actually show me a link to an article like you did. Instead, he chose to drag it out expecting me to "accept" his version of things all the while not backing anything he said up.
Sometimes all I have is the knowledge that I have gained over years of reading Z. Asking me to prove what I was saying regarding citizenship is, to me, a lot like asking for a link to prove that 2+2=4. I know that 2+2=4, and I can logically demonstrate that 2+2=4, but I'm not really sure where to find a link for you to follow that backs up that knowledge if you were to question the validity of my stating that 2+2=4. Does that make sense to you? Sometimes all I can tell you is that I know what I know and logically try to explain to you why what I know is so.
Search engines generally serve only to frustrate me unless I know with a high degree of exactness precisely what it is I am looking for; and since I don't get along with them, I rarely play with them, which makes it even less likely that I will experience anything but frustration the next time I try to use one. I understand that, but I get frustrated enough as it is without purposefully seeking out more of it. For crying out loud, I don't even know how to post a picture to this site, or link to a video, "share" items, or even how to give myself an icon under my name. I'm sure I could learn, or figure it out, or ask someone to explain it to me, but I really don't care if there is a picture under my name, or whether or not a video is embedded in my post.
Anyway, long story at least semi-short, computers and I really don't get along very well, they aren't "my thing". My 10 year old nephew knows more about my tablet and my phone than I do and I kinda like it that way. You don't have to accept what I say, ever, but sometimes that's all you're ever going to get along with the logic that supports it and your unwillingness to accept that at face value does nothing to diminish its correctness or its validity. I know what I know, believe what I believe, and believe it or not, I know the difference between the them. Many of my beliefs are the result of my knowledge, but none of my knowledge is the result of my beliefs.
PrintSmith wrote: As the main "offender" in that regard, let me say that I see nothing at all positive about the "progressive" movement. Their objectives, their beliefs, are almost universally in diametric opposition to individual liberty, self determination and limited government. From its very beginnings straight into today "progressives" seek an activist government, subjugation of the individual to the collective, approve of a growing welfare state and believe that the Constitution is outmoded and should be interpreted according to contemporary society, that its meaning "evolves" and is dynamic with the times.
And while that may indeed be a "narrow description of beliefs and/or values", it is also a description of the core values inherent in the "progressive" movement from its beginnings in Theodore Roosevelt's time straight through to today. And I see not a single positive thing in those core values, not a single thing.
P, I mean what I'm about to say/ask with all due respect. I grew up in a very conservative community. The church I belonged to while growing up embodied that conservatism to the nth degree. I questioned my elders. I questioned my Pastor. I questioned my parents. I questioned my aunts and uncles. My older brother did the same. All of those listed told us to just have faith. We were both chastised and pretty much told we were going to Hell for even daring to question faith at its most basic level. No definitive answers to the questions we asked - just "have faith" and, if you don't, you're going to Hell.
As time went on, I came to my own realization that Jesus Christ, to me at least, is the embodiment of virtually everything you appear to find so offensive about progressives with the exception of your posit that progressives seek an activist government (I think it's safe to say Jesus was not even close to being anything remotely resembling a supporter of activist government).
So, my question to you (again, with all due respect) is how do you reconcile the tenets of Jesus Christ vs your conservative views of some of the things those of a more "progressive" bent try to do?
We can get into that Z, but you are now delving into beliefs with that request. As long as you realize that, I'm good with it. Do you still want to go there? Before you answer, know that I had two great-uncles who were Monsignors. One of them started the Register newspapers, as in "The Denver Catholic Register". The misrepresentations of Christ and His teachings are something I'm well versed in.
I'll start with this one. Christ never once advocated subjugating the individual to the collective. He certainly preached that one should subjugate themselves in service to others, but He never, even once, advocated subjugating others for the good of the collective.
PrintSmith wrote: Sometimes all I have is the knowledge that I have gained over years of reading Z. Asking me to prove what I was saying regarding citizenship is, to me, a lot like asking for a link to prove that 2+2=4. I know that 2+2=4, and I can logically demonstrate that 2+2=4, but I'm not really sure where to find a link for you to follow that backs up that knowledge if you were to question the validity of my stating that 2+2=4. Does that make sense to you? Sometimes all I can tell you is that I know what I know and logically try to explain to you why what I know is so.
Search engines generally serve only to frustrate me unless I know with a high degree of exactness precisely what it is I am looking for; and since I don't get along with them, I rarely play with them, which makes it even less likely that I will experience anything but frustration the next time I try to use one. I understand that, but I get frustrated enough as it is without purposefully seeking out more of it. For crying out loud, I don't even know how to post a picture to this site, or link to a video, "share" items, or even how to give myself an icon under my name. I'm sure I could learn, or figure it out, or ask someone to explain it to me, but I really don't care if there is a picture under my name, or whether or not a video is embedded in my post.
Anyway, long story at least semi-short, computers and I really don't get along very well, they aren't "my thing". My 10 year old nephew knows more about my tablet and my phone than I do and I kinda like it that way. You don't have to accept what I say, ever, but sometimes that's all you're ever going to get along with the logic that supports it and your unwillingness to accept that at face value does nothing to diminish its correctness or its validity. I know what I know, believe what I believe, and believe it or not, I know the difference between the them. Many of my beliefs are the result of my knowledge, but none of my knowledge is the result of my beliefs.
At least that's a start. I only hope you can understand my own frustration with some of your posits when it appears you are refusing to give verification, just stringing me along, and are asking me to accept your posts as factual. I honestly had not seen citizenship presented before in the way the article that Rick provided the link to does. I'm also not so thick headed and stubborn as to keep a closed mind on anything that's presented to me as long as I can somehow either verify it for myself, or have someone else provide verification (as Rick did).
PrintSmith wrote: We can get into that Z, but you are now delving into beliefs with that request. As long as you realize that, I'm good with it. Do you still want to go there? Before you answer, know that I had two great-uncles who were Monsignors. One of them started the Register newspapers, as in "The Denver Catholic Register". The misrepresentations of Christ and His teachings are something I'm well versed in.
I'll start with this one. Christ never once advocated subjugating the individual to the collective. He certainly preached that one should subjugate themselves in service to others, but He never, even once, advocated subjugating others for the good of the collective.
Perhaps we should start a new thread that addresses this?
BlazerBob wrote:
First to SC. WOW, just WOW. If you want to expand my attention span buy me some.
You know I meant it jokingly, right. I get a lot of sh** sometimes for how long my posts are, and I don't think there's anything wrong with long posts, even though it goes against all conventional wisdom and "recommended" marketing practices (I don't do things I'm supposed to just because others say to do it that way - being unique and doing things differently is an asset too). This is just who I am, and I'm not going to hold it against you if you don't want to wade through it, but I will give you crap for not just cuz I get crap for putting it out there that way.
I agree on not needing to respond to every post as well. Good advice. Nor do we need to hold each others' feet to the fire should someone decide not to answer a question, or provide sources to back up their claims. If they don't, they just don't. It's their choice, we can't force each other to respond. It's telling when they do, I recommend leaving it at that.
One other point to ponder while I am being ornery. A post along the lines of "what about this" with just a link does not make me interested in clicking on it. I might but am more likely too if there is a snippet
or at least a clue of what it is.
Not to say I have never done it my self or never followed a mystery link or that anyone cares if I do or don't but there might be others who feel the same. Maybe it depends on the speed of your internet connection. I started the internet with dial up toll calls. Know what a toll call is.
I once was connected to a toll access # when I thought it was local. Never knew it until the 3 thousand dollar phone bill came and that was when 3 thousand dollars was real $.
BlazerBob wrote: One other point to ponder while I am being ornery. A post along the lines of "what about this" with just a link does not make me interested in clicking on it. I might but am more likely too if there is a snippet
or at least a clue of what it is.
Not to say I have never done it my self or never followed a mystery link or that anyone cares if I do or don't but there might be others who feel the same. Maybe it depends on the speed of your internet connection. I started the internet with dial up toll calls. Know what a toll call is.
I once was connected to a toll access # when I thought it was local. Never knew it until the 3 thousand dollar phone bill came and that was when 3 thousand dollars was real $.
Boy, there are some folks over on that other local site that could heed your advice on just posting links. I'll admit I do it sometimes. I'll try to be better. I promise. Don't beat me up.
pineinthegrass wrote: The Eric Garner grand jury decision from today surprises me much more than the Michael Brown decision did. The Garner case had video and looked like an overreaction by multiple police (for illegally selling cigarettes I think).
I get a lot of sh** sometimes for how long my posts are, and I don't think there's anything wrong with long posts, even though it goes against all conventional wisdom and "recommended" marketing practices (I don't do things I'm supposed to just because others say to do it that way - being unique and doing things differently is an asset too). This is just who I am, and I'm not going to hold it against you if you don't want to wade through it, but I will give you crap for not just cuz I get crap for putting it out there that way.
