This is incredibly infuriating.

Sage_Override
atheistBlogger
Sage_Override's picture
Posts: 582
Joined: 2008-10-14
User is offlineOffline
This is incredibly infuriating.

Just got back from the gym, feeling really energized and got online.  Then, all that energy just went bye-bye after seeing THIS...

 

http://news.yahoo.com/senate-approves-662-billion-defense-bill-012555722.html

 

Quote:
Democratic-controlled Senate on Thursday overwhelmingly approved a massive, $662 billion defense bill that would require the military to hold suspected terrorists linked to al-Qaida or its affiliates, even those captured on U.S. soil, and detain some indefinitely.  The vote was 93-7 for the bill authorizing money for military personnel, weapons systems, national security programs in the Energy Department, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1. Reflecting a period of austerity and a winding down of decade-old conflicts, the bill is $27 billion less than what President Barack Obama requested and $43 billion less than what Congress gave the Pentagon this year.

 

*sigh*....Even beginning to wrap my head around this might cause part of my brain to pop.  I mean, I know WHY the senate can pass this, even after facing a temporary government shutdown earlier this year and being TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS in debt; there's money in war and we still fear for our collective lives even when the economy's inevitable collapse is staring us right in the face.  Lobbyists are like the overbearing mothers to these officials when there doesn't seem to be any hope in sight; they coddle their children by saying "shhh, shhh, it's ok; everything will be alright as long as we have guns, bombs and a properly funded military."  We don't know what else to do but throw money at weaponry in order to protect us from threats that don't exist to not only sooth the delusional masses, but ease the minds of these pathetic, backwoods, redneck Republican supporters that get butt-fucked every year by the very government that they support.  It's even worse now because the Democrats are seemingly more and more on the same page as Republicans by backing this bill; not that that's a shock because they were always in sync with one another with the main goal of global control in mind among other aspects of social manipulation.  

 

It's just...FUCK!...I'm done...any thoughts, guys? 

"When the majority believes in what is false, the truth becomes a quest." - Me


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
It could've been worse.. I

It could've been worse.. I guess.

Maybe if enough of you move here the US will lose enough income and information resources that even the politicians will wake up?

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Sage_Override
atheistBlogger
Sage_Override's picture
Posts: 582
Joined: 2008-10-14
User is offlineOffline
I doubt it. If anything,

I doubt it.

 

If anything, we'll erupt into another civil war and the rich will get out leaving us holding the ball.  If the government were asleep, they're all Snow White and it would take a charming prince named "revolution" to get them out of bed.

"When the majority believes in what is false, the truth becomes a quest." - Me


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3436
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Sage_Override wrote:I doubt

Sage_Override wrote:

I doubt it.

 

If anything, we'll erupt into another civil war and the rich will get out leaving us holding the ball.  If the government were asleep, they're all Snow White and it would take a charming prince named "revolution" to get them out of bed.

out of bed and against the wall, if i'd have anything to say about it.

if a socialist revolution occurred in the US, revolutions across the developed world would likely be immanent, and those rich runaways would run out of places to go.  it wouldn't be like 1917, when revolution happened in a feudal backwater and was strangled in its crib by the stalinist thermidor and the ridiculous idea of "socialism in one country."  revolution must be worldwide or not at all.  if it begins in the US, it will very likely succeed.

the problem is, when the vacuum comes, will there be a revolutionary party capable and willing to seize power?  right now, that looks unlikely.  if civil war were to erupt tomorrow, we could all expect a fascist, populist reaction that would plunge us all back into the dark ages.  then, if humanity were to have any hope of not losing 300 years of progress, it would mean taking to the hills, the forests, the mountains, and the caves, and beginning the long war of resistance.  in a country like the US, such a war might take generations.  it would be the only cause worth anything anymore.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
On a lighter note, bunnies

On a lighter note, bunnies are soft and cuddly.

 


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Sage_Override

iwbiek wrote:

Sage_Override wrote:

I doubt it.

If anything, we'll erupt into another civil war and the rich will get out leaving us holding the ball.  If the government were asleep, they're all Snow White and it would take a charming prince named "revolution" to get them out of bed.

out of bed and against the wall, if i'd have anything to say about it.

if a socialist revolution occurred in the US, revolutions across the developed world would likely be immanent, and those rich runaways would run out of places to go.  it wouldn't be like 1917, when revolution happened in a feudal backwater and was strangled in its crib by the stalinist thermidor and the ridiculous idea of "socialism in one country."  revolution must be worldwide or not at all.  if it begins in the US, it will very likely succeed.

the problem is, when the vacuum comes, will there be a revolutionary party capable and willing to seize power?  right now, that looks unlikely.  if civil war were to erupt tomorrow, we could all expect a fascist, populist reaction that would plunge us all back into the dark ages.  then, if humanity were to have any hope of not losing 300 years of progress, it would mean taking to the hills, the forests, the mountains, and the caves, and beginning the long war of resistance.  in a country like the US, such a war might take generations.  it would be the only cause worth anything anymore.

There about a zero percent chance of anything resembling a true Socialist revolution on American soil.  Besides Socialism being an utter and complete failure, there's too much of a tradition of Capitalism and Private Property ownership.

The current problems aren't caused =by= Capitalism, per se, but by the complete corruption of our existing =politicians=, and by the growing number of Sheeple who get their news and education from paid entertainers -- Rush Limbaugh, et alia.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3436
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:There

FurryCatHerder wrote:

There about a zero percent chance of anything resembling a true Socialist revolution on American soil.  Besides Socialism being an utter and complete failure, there's too much of a tradition of Capitalism and Private Property ownership.

The current problems aren't caused =by= Capitalism, per se, but by the complete corruption of our existing =politicians=, and by the growing number of Sheeple who get their news and education from paid entertainers -- Rush Limbaugh, et alia.

i have absolutely zero interest in bringing anyone on this board around to my way of thinking on this issue.

revolution has never been made via debate.  revolution has always been a fait accompli, one way or another.  the next one will be too.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:FurryCatHerder

iwbiek wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

There about a zero percent chance of anything resembling a true Socialist revolution on American soil.  Besides Socialism being an utter and complete failure, there's too much of a tradition of Capitalism and Private Property ownership.

The current problems aren't caused =by= Capitalism, per se, but by the complete corruption of our existing =politicians=, and by the growing number of Sheeple who get their news and education from paid entertainers -- Rush Limbaugh, et alia.

i have absolutely zero interest in bringing anyone on this board around to my way of thinking on this issue.

revolution has never been made via debate.  revolution has always been a fait accompli, one way or another.  the next one will be too.

There are other kinds of Revolutions.  The first American Revolution was about getting rid of British Aristocrats.  The second American revolution will be about getting rid of American Aristocrats.  Neither was or will be Socialist or Communist.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3436
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:There

FurryCatHerder wrote:

There are other kinds of Revolutions.  The first American Revolution was about getting rid of British Aristocrats.  The second American revolution will be about getting rid of American Aristocrats.  Neither was or will be Socialist or Communist.

the american revolution was a bourgeois-democratic revolution, and, judging by the evidence, not terribly popular with the average colonial.  it didn't get rid of any aristocrats.  those "british aristocrats" became the "american aristocrats" because they didn't want to pay their taxes.  it was a fait accompli handed to both the british military establishment (most of whom were imported from the isles) and the majority population of poor yeoman farmers who fared no better under the new system than the old.

"communist revolution" is a misnomer.  it's by definition impossible.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen