In reply to this comment by radx:
The Institute for Public Accuracy published a comment, co-signed by Daniel Ellsberg, on the current WikiLeaks situation and quoted this Pravda article, a quote I'd like to copy:

What WikiLeaks has done is make people understand why so many Americans are politically apathetic … After all, the evils committed by those in power can be suffocating, and the sense of powerlessness that erupts can be paralyzing, especially when … government evildoers almost always get away with their crimes. …

So shame on Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and all those who spew platitudes about integrity, justice and accountability while allowing war criminals and torturers to walk freely upon the earth. … the American people should be outraged that their government has transformed a nation with a reputation for freedom, justice, tolerance and respect for human rights into a backwater that revels in its criminality, cover-ups, injustices and hypocrisies.

The Institute for Public Accuracy published a comment, co-signed by Daniel Ellsberg, on the current WikiLeaks situation and quoted this Pravda article, a quote I'd like to copy:

What WikiLeaks has done is make people understand why so many Americans are politically apathetic … After all, the evils committed by those in power can be suffocating, and the sense of powerlessness that erupts can be paralyzing, especially when … government evildoers almost always get away with their crimes. …

So shame on Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and all those who spew platitudes about integrity, justice and accountability while allowing war criminals and torturers to walk freely upon the earth. … the American people should be outraged that their government has transformed a nation with a reputation for freedom, justice, tolerance and respect for human rights into a backwater that revels in its criminality, cover-ups, injustices and hypocrisies.

right, so rape charges are bullshit. however, refusing to talk these women after he slept with him about the possiblity that he gave one of them an STD - if thats the actual story - makes him an asshole.

also, so far he's leaked that things don't shock americans. we expect that our military is gunning down civilians, and are rather apathetic to it. we expect to get dicked over financially, and are rather apathetic to it. the embassy cables, while hilarious and ironic, were also not shocking. americans either don't know who robert mugabe is, and if they do, they already knew he was the devil. we suspected that merkel was unimaginative and of course we think the iranian government is pure evil

I've lost faith in Assange. i suspect there is some explosive truth to be told in the files he's using as leverage. Maybe I'm just imagining it and maybe I'm too optimistic about the power of information, but I'm sure theres some pretty explosive stuff about BP and the banks that americans actually do care about right now and truths we deserve to know. But he's holding on to anything consequential to american politics (i'm sure the other stuff effects global politics, but americans dont actually care about that) to save himself. If you want to expose what self-serving, bought pricks america's political and corporate leaders are, and share truths that need to be told, why waste time and clout on embassy cables? Why not expose exactly how oil and banks are fucking us in the ass while giving reach-a-rounds to our politicians?

So, basically, I like leaking information and all that. But I'm pretty sure Assange is an egomaniac.
>> ^notarobot:

"The two Swedish women who accuse WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of sexual misconduct were at first not seeking to bring charges against him. They just wanted to track him down and persuade him to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases, according to several people in contact with his entourage at the time."
(via The Guardian.)

One of my co-workers, Danielle was taking the N back to Brooklyn one night. As she was pulling out of the station, she heard a soft "thump" on the window right next to her head. She turned to find a guy "banging the biggest cack I ever seen" against the window. But she didn't feel threatened because the guy was outside of the train.

I swear to god, you've never heard funny until you hear a yenta from Brooklyn tell that story.

This stuff is part and parcel to riding the train though. I've had to shield women from guys who were trying to grope them before. It's pretty amazing how apathetic people can be but once you've ridden the NYC subway system long enough, things just stop surprising you. It's great to hear about this stuff though. I was on a train one time when a guy started asking the girl next to me if she would come home and suck his dick. I heard him say it but when she called him out, he started saying she was crazy and full of shit, etc. He even said she was desperate. So we(me and my wife and another male passenger) took her to the other end of the car. When the guy followed, we physically forced him out onto the platform. We must've gone twenty stops but sure enough, when the girl got out, the guy was peaking his head out from the end car and started following her again. So we called the cops and followed him until they picked him up. I can't believe the balls of that guy. I really wonder what would've happened had no one gotten involved.

Happy Birthday, Kenneth.
Great offering joedirt-If those here who fancy themselves informed or knowledgeable of the entire process of those who wield the real power of government and who control the contrived and fundamentally fucked economic system in the US and the world which, in effect, keeps everyone butt-fucking apathetic and enslaved would demand answers to some simple questions, well, the emperor wears no clothes doesn't quite begin to cover it.

Elections are shit, because the people who vote for the most part in the US, are fucking ill-informed idiots who watch too much fucking television, eat shit disguised as food, and raise their children to be optimistic, dutiful putties.

Here's to Gaetano Bresci, Leon Czolgosz, and anyone else who decided that something radical must be done to affect radical change.

[redacted]

Step away from there citizen! it has always been illegal to dig in the sand...

and we have always been at war with east-asia...

we don't live in a police state, not yet. give it a few more decades as more and more apathetic people grow from children to adult. then make no mistake, we will be cattle.

Me scared? Did you miss the part where I said I don't really care? Mostly, I feel completely apathetic about the whole situation. I was merely saying that, in this particular case, I can understand why people are upset. And while I understand your sentiments on using racism and war to garner political strength to accomplish alternate goals, it still doesn't assuage my understanding.

It is all just symbolic anyway, that is why I don't think the government should be involved at all. But I do understand why it upsets people. It would be like putting a Irish pub next to a school that was bombed by the IRA, or some other such thing. It doesn't "do" anything but sit there, but to those that had a close relation to the disaster, it is a symbolic slap in the face. I don't know the motivations of those building it, and most likely it isn't trying to spite people in the local area. But when your are even minority associated with one of the most brutal acts in US history, you have to expect some resistance even if it isn't right.

I, of course, believe in liberty, so let them build it. That doesn't mean, conversely, that people can't be outside the building everyday protesting it and demanding it be moved. I don't give a rats but, symbolism never did anything for me. Just recently, someone told me a story where butterflies landed on the husband of the wife who's funeral he was attending...and I guess it was supposed to be moving, but the only thing that moved on me was my intestines.

Put away your dagger man, it doesn't become you.

You can win elections by promising to balance budgets, but as soon as you start cutting programs you get replaced by the next guy promising big buzz words with as few specifics as possible.

No argument. The problem is the GOP doesn't want to do that because they are just like Democrats in the sense that they want to keep eating and promising free lunches. America for 20+ years has been living in a government sponsored 'benefits bubble'. Everyone thinks they can get free this & cheap that and politicians have spent the farm for their votes. This is not a GOP/Democrat issue. This is a "political class" issue. There are a few glittering jewels in the mine like Christie in NJ and Chaffitz from Utah - but they are far too rare.

This is a problme that is not going to be solved unless (A) the government completely collapses or (B) voters collectively wise up and vote in a couple generations of true fiscal conservatives. This election cycle gives some very distant gleams of hope that (B) might happen - but I'm pessimistic. I think America has already reached the Alexander Tytler point of no return...

"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is followed by a dictatorship."

We see this happening right before our eyes. More wisdom - same guy...

“From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”

In my cold assessment of the American condition, the U.S. POLITICAL CLASS is firmly decided on "dependance" and is starting to push into "bondage". The American PEOPLE however, are factionalized into about 30% "liberty", 20% "complacency", 20% "apathy", and 30% "dependance". By and large most of the public falls towards the "Liberty" side but you flash enough baubles to get 21% of the complacency/apathy vote and BOOM the U.S. is running over a cliff to tyranny.

That's what happened with Obama. Only what can be described as the collective insanity of emotion based stupidity elected that doofus. If he was in ANY other country, he would already be swaggering around in a uniform with epaulettes and making everyone call him "Commandant". He's a disaster, and polls are showing that even the apathetic and complacent realize they made a horrible mistake electing that specimen.

But too little - too late I fear. I think the government is too addicted to spending, and the public too addicted to the lie of 'free/cheap' government stuff. Loose fiscal policy will collapse this great nation, and there will be a period of subseqent balkanization. At this point, I fear it is inevitable.

I mostly agree Doc. Allow me to explain;

Libertarianism is not the antonym of socialism, but of authoritarianism. Yes, I know - so why paint socialism as 'nanny state' government-runs-everything-and-makes-all-decisions-for-you authoritarianism? I know you didn't, but blankfist and many others do.

The "minimum" clearly includes infrastructure, security, and justice. Yup, right on. What is 'infrastructure'? Some would say roads and airports. Others (like me) would expand it to include hospitals, schools, etc. Security would include protection from exterior forces, but also from the elements, from starvation, from criminals, etc. Security has to mean security for people, not just property. Justice is the fun one. Justice is not just prisons, justice is not just laws - justice includes a human element, an element of dignity.

Many 'socialist' states are generous and compassionate - many are very generous. Socialism does not preclude generosity or compassion, just like libertarianism does not guarantee it. In fact, many socialist countries are far more charitable than the U.S. Would you suggest people in Sweden or Norway (which both give the most to charity by % of GNI) are apathetic zombies?

This is the problem I have with rhetoric - it often ignores easily verifiable facts. I would gladly support a libertarian society with minimal government if all people were in good health with access to good educations and a level-playing field, but that doesn't exist anywhere I know of. Oddly enough, the closest thing to just, equal societies I can think of are the socialist countries at the top of that ^ wikipedia list.

I went ahead and answered Blankfist's loaded questions, I hope he can answer mine.>> ^Doc_M:

Libertarianism is not the antonym of socialism, but of authoritarianism.
It is as broad as any other political ideology. Libertarianism is not anarchism, just as socialism is not communism.
Minimizing government is not eliminating government. The "minimum" clearly includes infrastructure, security, and justice, amongst other things.
In a small society, charity is the libertarian welfare, a personal decision to care for those who need care. In a large society such as ours, some level of gov't involvement and social organization is useful (quite possibly even required) for support of those who would otherwise slip through the cracks. Given good enough organization, charity could manage care, but some amount of socialism seems to be required for the simple fact that not all people are generous or compassionate. However, to generate a society in which these two virtues are completely irrelevant is socially self-destructive, perpetuating a child-like state of apathetic obedience. When government enforces compassion, the word becomes meaningless.

Libertarianism is not the antonym of socialism, but of authoritarianism.
It is as broad as any other political ideology. Libertarianism is not anarchism, just as socialism is not communism.
Minimizing government is not eliminating government. The "minimum" clearly includes infrastructure, security, and justice, amongst other things.

In a small society, charity is the libertarian welfare, a personal decision to care for those who need care. In a large society such as ours, some level of gov't involvement and social organization is useful (quite possibly even required) for support of those who would otherwise slip through the cracks. Given good enough organization, charity could manage care, but some amount of socialism seems to be required for the simple fact that not all people are generous or compassionate. However, to generate a society in which these two virtues are completely irrelevant is socially self-destructive, perpetuating a child-like state of apathetic obedience. When government enforces compassion, the word becomes meaningless.

>> ^bleedmegood:

i am entirely too jaded and apathetic to take this much joy in anything....ever......


you need to eat more shrooms

i am entirely too jaded and apathetic to take this much joy in anything....ever......

when will the masses in the US realize who their government really works for
i mean, they aren't even really trying to hide it anymore
and still people are more concerned about celebrity gossip

the rest of the world hates the US because of their apathy/lack of knowledge about their countries foreign policy, and the suffering it causes around the world

they also pity you because you seem to be too apathetic/stupid to see that foreign policy being turned towards 98% of your population

and yet you still believe you are the shining example for the rest of the world

France exercises more democracy than the US, should chose French Fries over the Freedom Fries I guess

The only problem with the "have at it, we'll see how that works out for you" approach is that we are constantly bombarded with proof that a whole hell of a lot of people out there are stupid. And not just "tragic twist of fate" stupid but full-on, willful, contradiction-embracing, double-standard promoting stupid.

Anyone that would have voted for a ban on gay marriage in Texas would be extremely likely to either:
A) Fail to realize that literal enforcement of anti-sodomy laws would criminalize straight oral sex also, and/or
B) Correctly understand that enforcement of such a law would be very selectively applied, and only to gay couples. Unless law enforcement needs some equivalent of a "tax evasion" charge to incarcerate the next Al Capone.

So I guess we'll find out what happens when an unstoppable stupid force meets an immovable apathetic electorate.