1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

White house collecting data

Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by Mikeintx, Aug 11, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mikeintx

    Mikeintx Well-Known Member

  2. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    Very interesting. On the one hand I may see the Fed's point if it's intention were to stifle scam artists or legal trolls...but at the same time it has no buisness involving itself with such concerns in the first place. Even if the intentions were well-meaning it was a pretty poor move, to say the least (especially when you consider all the debate flying around concerning federal power and such).
  3. Mikeintx

    Mikeintx Well-Known Member

    It shows how easily people are mislead by the love of the media for obama... if Bush did this there would be calls for impeachment and public stonings... people need to start getting pissed off.
  4. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    Perhaps, but then again Bush got away with measures such as the PATRIOT Act without attracting much ire. Granted it came after the fear and insecurity of 9/11 but still. I think as long as we're in crisis almost any president can get away with something like that.
  5. Entoloma43

    Entoloma43 Well-Known Member

    People still take Faux news seriously?
  6. Mikeintx

    Mikeintx Well-Known Member

    And Obama strengthened it.
  7. Mikeintx

    Mikeintx Well-Known Member

    Well I guess you already made up your mind before reading the article.
  8. JohnADreams

    JohnADreams Well-Known Member

    Yeah, because the left are all evil Muslims who hate freedom. Come on, stonings? You can't be serious.
    Much like the reporter made his mind up before writing that article.

    The comments on the article are pretty good though.

  9. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    That is what bothered me about this article and what ultimately diluted the accusation: the author was way to pedantic, hot-headed, and all-around unproffessional in his delivery. Much of it seems like a cheap appeal to fear and bitterness; I mean Black Panther Part members standing outside polling stations? Liberals being slaughtered and "rightfully so"? Sounds more like an angry rant than reporitng, even if the subject itself was worthy of covering.
  10. Mikeintx

    Mikeintx Well-Known Member

    I agree I could have picked a more rational article to post, but either way the topic is the same. On a side note I just came across these quotes online, what is your take on these Zurk? Usually any conspiracy theory crap throws up red flags for me but these quotes are downright creepy:

    "Quotes from Obama's advisers:

    Statements from Ezekiel Emanuel, Cass Sunstein, and Peter Singer all part of the Obama administration in charge of developing national health care. These are people with whom Obama has currently surrounded himself.

    Ezekiel Emanuel

    "When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the...youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated...The complete lives system justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst off rather than instrumental value."

    Cass Sunstein

    "I urge that the government should indeed focus on life years rather than lives. A program that saves young people produces more welfare than one that saves old people."

    Peter Singer, author of "Why We Must Ration Health Care"

    "I do think that it is sometimes appropriate to kill a human infant. For me, the relevant question is, what makes it so seriously wrong to take a life? Those of you who are not vegetarians are responsible for taking a life every time you eat. Species is no more relevant than race in making these judgments."

    "A human being doesn't have value simply in virtue of being a human..."

    "I don't believe in the existence of God, so it makes no sense to me to say that a human being is a creature of God. It's as simple as that."

    "Characteristics like rationality, autonomy and self-consciousness...make a difference. Infants lack these characteristics. Killing them, therefore, cannot be equated with killing normal human beings...In the animal kingdom, after all, parents sometimes kill and even devour their offspring."

    Singer argues that the West can learn from the other cultures like the Kalahari where children are routinely killed when they are unwanted, even when they are several years old.

    "When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of the happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the hemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him." (Peter Singer, Practical Ethics, p. 142)

    "When we kill a newborn, there is no person whose life has begun. When I think of myself as the person I am now, I realize I did not come into existence until sometime after my birth." (H. Kuhse and Peter Singer, Should he Baby Live?, p. 133)

    Since animals are able to "[see] themselves as distinct entities, existing over time," it has led to Singer's impassioned crusade for animal rights, even going so far as to suggest that non-harmful sexual relationships between humans and animals need not be viewed as immoral."
  11. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    Thanks for sharing all that! Good discussion. Well for one thing most of these quotes, save one, are uncited, so there is no telling whether they came from credible sources themselves or, most importantly, if they were taken out of context (ironically Singer accuses his critics of that).

    I know Emanuel support euthanasia and right-to-die legislation, so one could infer that he leans to a utilitarian view of elderly and sickly folk. However what if that quote was said in his younger years as a student for example? The rest of them could have easily fallen prey to misquoting as well.

    Sunstein and Singer, to my knowledge, aren't even officially involved in the healtcare project (Emanuel is). Granted they may have an advisory role but they're hardly as influential as those formally involved, or as much as some of those sources may seem to think.

    Besides, those are just three out of dozens (if not hundreds) of people involved in this reform. You can pull out a large sample of people from all administrations and find at least a few with unsavory opinions or personal beliefs. Granted they should sitll fall under some sort of scrutiny but it should otherwise be taken with a grain of salt.
  12. Entoloma43

    Entoloma43 Well-Known Member

    I didn't even click the link - I just saw "foxnews" - that's all anyone needs to know :p
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.