Americans - who are you voting for?

Current events and political views (It's not liberal vs conservative , it's better versus worse!)

Choose your candidate

I'm not voting
19
28%
Mccain
21
30%
Obama
29
42%
Clinton
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 69

Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by OneArrow on Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:08 pm
([msg=5871]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

romulous wrote: He was a cut rate president anyway, and only won the civil war due to the actions of Gen. 'Butcher' Grant. Grant won the war despite loosing men at a rate of 3 to 1! Sounds impressive don't it? Not really, he just had the south out numbered 5-1, and thus could afford to fight a war of attrition.


I've heard it more often as Gen. "Useless" S. Grant. The Union didn't know how to fight a war, but damn if they didn't know how to throw so many resources at a problem that it was mathematically impossible to lose (in the most general sense). It is depressing to think that this is the only reason our country is whole today. Hell, we still use this strategy, and adhere to it as though it were gospel. Most military minds would agree that it is worst to besiege walled cities. Those days are over, though we still haven't learned the underlying lesson: a war of attrition leaves both sides with nothing. It is inelegant and fruitless, apart from being distasteful.

As for the response I promised...

All one needs to remember is that the world revolves on respect. Give it. Get it. If it is with held, take it by force. But always have it. If your enemy respects you they will end up your friend, or at least no longer your enemy.


I would agree, up to the point about taking respect by force. This is similar to conquering through brute force and attrition. Beat me all you want, metaphorically or literally, but I am in no way forced to respect you. It is as much something earned as it is given. This is why the human mind is so dangerous - it can be manipulated by those who allow it, but ultimately it cannot be controlled.

I think dark master kaiser's political opinions are complete bullshit. I have told him so. He has said prety much the same. We do it tactfully, and in a respectful manner. I would not mind having a beer with him some time. He is my political enemy, but I still respect him. He has shown me the same respect. We do not make personal attacks against each other, only each other's opinions. This is respect. If everyone had it, we would be a stronger nation. We do not. This is sad.


It is. Debate is dead, it seems. Just as swordplay and individual skill has given way to nuclear arsenals and veiled threats, debate has given way to finger pointing and accusation.

In this Nation, we have two political classes. Those that matter, and the rest are peasants. In this Capitolist system, we are being defeated by our own greed.


Perhaps. But I would elaborate further - the peasant is not necessarily one who is financially bankrupt, but intellectually. A strong mind and a strong will is enough to create one's own reality, as opposed to settling for the reality that is being created for them.

The greatest political mind I have ever known was a Martial Artist that told me you have all the rights you are capable of physically enforcing at that moment in time. All other rights are forefit unless someone gives them to you. That is why I have spent the last 15 years learning and mastering Martial Art. Martial Art being the art of killing or disabling your opponent in as rapid a time as possible, and moving on to the next man. This has nothing to do with fighting, it is totally different. Each free man is responsible for staying that way. Learn some martial arts, get a gun, be free, and stay that way.


It seems we are of the same mind here, in our belief that we only truly have what we can personally defend. I study the martial arts for this reason, but also for another. It is more to me than simply protecting what I have, but bettering myself in the process. As I've suggested earlier in the thread, I believe the highest form of victory to be that in which no blood is drawn. No strife. No struggle. Wherein the opponent submits because they are out of options, rather than out of resources. I would be more apt to respect someone who parried my blows with an olive branch, than someone who hacked wildly at my limbs with a blade. Respect, I believe, is derived from personal power and skill, tempered by compassion and righteousness in the eye of the beholder.
OneArrow
Poster
Poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by Lord DarkMasterKyzer on Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:17 pm
([msg=5889]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

Lincoln - For the First Republican, Didnt do a bad job, 4 more republicans controlled the nation afterwards...
Lord DarkMasterKyzer
Experienced User
Experienced User
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:14 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by romulous on Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:58 am
([msg=5918]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

Oh, much fun, intelligent replies!

I would agree, up to the point about taking respect by force. This is similar to conquering through brute force and attrition. Beat me all you want, metaphorically or literally, but I am in no way forced to respect you. It is as much something earned as it is given. This is why the human mind is so dangerous - it can be manipulated by those who allow it, but ultimately it cannot be controlled.


I have on many ocasions taken respect by force. No, not always physical. I have in the past allowed an enemy to live when I should have killed them deader than dirt, beating them, and then walking away just short of the killing blow. In martial art, I have had opponents that had no respedt for me, and when we fought could not lay a finger on me. Instead of demolishing them, I showed I could do so if I wished, and then did not. Taking respect by force shows an opponent that you could defeat them if you chise to do so, but are above such actions. In Japan there is a term, as there is among the Native Americans, "Honored Enemy". Just because I don't loke you does'nt mean we can't get along.

Perhaps. But I would elaborate further - the peasant is not necessarily one who is financially bankrupt, but intellectually. A strong mind and a strong will is enough to create one's own reality, as opposed to settling for the reality that is being created for them.


You can be a complete moron with lots of money, and still matter socially. Case in point, Bill Clinton. Thanks to slick willy, blow jobs are no longer concidered "Sexual Intercourse". As a result, girls all over the country give head freely as it is not really having sex. Was he the best president ever, or what? Madonna made being a slut socially acceptable, thus opening the way for more sexually open females in society. She also opened the way for bisexual, and lesbial females, as did Alecia Silverstone. Popularity can make otherwise taboo acts socially acceptable.

There is a thunderstorm, I have to go. I will be back to finish later.
romulous
New User
New User
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 9:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by romulous on Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:03 pm
([msg=5933]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

It seems we are of the same mind here, in our belief that we only truly have what we can personally defend. I study the martial arts for this reason, but also for another. It is more to me than simply protecting what I have, but bettering myself in the process. As I've suggested earlier in the thread, I believe the highest form of victory to be that in which no blood is drawn. No strife. No struggle. Wherein the opponent submits because they are out of options, rather than out of resources. I would be more apt to respect someone who parried my blows with an olive branch, than someone who hacked wildly at my limbs with a blade. Respect, I believe, is derived from personal power and skill, tempered by compassion and righteousness in the eye of the beholder.


What Martial Arts do you study? I am master of some, student of others, and have found some to be worthy of study, while I concider others to be complete bull shit. Myself, I practice a hybrid of Muay Thai, CQC, Iron Fist, Isshin Ryu, Shorin ryu, Judo, Jujut su, and a few others. I can beat most opponents in a single strike, but I can grapple and throw efficiently as well. Oh all of it though, I prefer the ridge hand. That fucker is just flat lethal, it can come from nowhere, at any angle, at any time, and hit with enough force to shatter bone. It has weaknesses, but they are mostly due to predictablity of the long single strike. In close it has none at all.
romulous
New User
New User
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 9:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by OneArrow on Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:38 pm
([msg=5944]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

romulous wrote:What Martial Arts do you study? I am master of some, student of others, and have found some to be worthy of study, while I concider others to be complete bull shit. Myself, I practice a hybrid of Muay Thai, CQC, Iron Fist, Isshin Ryu, Shorin ryu, Judo, Jujut su, and a few others. I can beat most opponents in a single strike, but I can grapple and throw efficiently as well. Oh all of it though, I prefer the ridge hand. That fucker is just flat lethal, it can come from nowhere, at any angle, at any time, and hit with enough force to shatter bone. It has weaknesses, but they are mostly due to predictablity of the long single strike. In close it has none at all.


Matsukazi Shito Ryu, with smatterings of Muay Thai, Judo, Pai Lum, and others that I picked up from friends, family, and independent research. Student of many, and always a student. I'm not bad at modern archery and marksmanship, either, and tend apply the same martial philosophies as I train with modern weaponry (I don't believe in using a release, for example, as I see it as a crutch that inhibits learning). I've had to take an extended hiatus to pay my way through college, but I look forward to continuing my formal training as soon as I'm able, and maybe take on a few more styles and forms in the process (swordplay has always fascinated me, but I haven't yet settled on a style). I'm also very interested in weaving advanced visualization and meditation into my form - as I suggested before, I believe the mind to be the ultimate weapon, in that it gives rise to the physical martial forms and cannot itself be sundered without your own permission.

But I digress, back to your post.

A well-placed ridgehand is devastating, true enough - I myself tend to favor the backfist in most situations when up-close, but regardless of preference, it isn't a strike to be overlooked. The trouble with any one technique is that an equally matched opponent will know the technique as well as you, and the situations in which it can be optimally executed and correctly applied. An otherwise equally matched opponent with a keen mind, on the other hand, will have a defense prepared already.

That, and an unconscious or dead opponent is not one who can properly learn from your example. By applying force only where and when necessary, it is possible (and better form) to attack the will to fight, rather than the means that can be used to fight for you later. It is equally a matter of nobility and practicality - just as you wouldn't nuke a country (and its myriad resources) into oblivion for rising against you, it is foolish to end a life if it has more to offer yourself and others - and it almost always does.

romulous wrote:I have on many ocasions taken respect by force. No, not always physical. I have in the past allowed an enemy to live when I should have killed them deader than dirt, beating them, and then walking away just short of the killing blow. In martial art, I have had opponents that had no respedt for me, and when we fought could not lay a finger on me. Instead of demolishing them, I showed I could do so if I wished, and then did not. Taking respect by force shows an opponent that you could defeat them if you chise to do so, but are above such actions. In Japan there is a term, as there is among the Native Americans, "Honored Enemy". Just because I don't loke you does'nt mean we can't get along.


Though I do agree about having respect for one's enemies, I would not say you have taken anything by force, because ultimately, your enemy still has a choice in how they respond - you may control the body, but not the mind. Rather, I would say that you have used force as a means to that end: the respect comes in part from the fact that you have given them that choice. The great strategist Zhuge Liang captured and released the Nanman king Meng Huo seven times, because he knew the way to victory was not through his death or the destruction of his civilization, but through earning his respect through equal measures of skill, strength, and mercy.

You can be a complete moron with lots of money, and still matter socially. Case in point, Bill Clinton. Thanks to slick willy, blow jobs are no longer concidered "Sexual Intercourse". As a result, girls all over the country give head freely as it is not really having sex. Was he the best president ever, or what? Madonna made being a slut socially acceptable, thus opening the way for more sexually open females in society. She also opened the way for bisexual, and lesbial females, as did Alecia Silverstone. Popularity can make otherwise taboo acts socially acceptable.


But whether you (or a group of people) allow someone to matter socially is ultimately a matter of perspective. We can act, or we can forfeit that right and allow ourselves to be acted upon. There's no question that lying about being unfaithful is unbecoming of a world leader, though I would say that those you claim whose actions were directly influenced by his actions were only influenced because they allowed themselves to be acted upon, just as he excused his own actions to begin with. Saying "It's ok because so and so did it" does not excuse anyone from being responsible for their own actions. This is part of what I mean about being intellectually bankrupt, using outside circumstances to excuse one's own actions. The weak still act upon the weak, and the cycle continues.

Personally, I don't give a shit what other people, especially the high-profile figures we love to hate, say and do... unless their actions directly impact me or my ability to act, it is irrelevant. From my perspective, these figures are socially unimportant, the byproducts of empty sensationalism, broken politics, and the perceived need for mind-numbing escapism - little more than peasants who happen to hold positions of power. The people who are in the thick of things, grounded in reality, these are the people who socially matter, because they truly embody society. Sadly, much of society is still made up of peasants... those who matter still allow themselves to be acted upon.

And yes, popularity can make the taboo acceptable... and that which should be acceptable taboo. And it's all because of the peasants who allow themselves to be ruled by things like popularity.
OneArrow
Poster
Poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by romulous on Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:16 pm
([msg=5981]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

Well, I typed up an extensive reply, and had it get fucked off by the stupid fucking tendancy of this site to log people off. This really pisses me off. I will post a new reply later. maybe if it fucking allows me to.
romulous
New User
New User
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 9:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by romulous on Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:27 am
([msg=6053]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

Matsukazi Shito Ryu, with smatterings of Muay Thai, Judo, Pai Lum, and others that I picked up from friends, family, and independent research. Student of many, and always a student. I'm not bad at modern archery and marksmanship, either, and tend apply the same martial philosophies as I train with modern weaponry (I don't believe in using a release, for example, as I see it as a crutch that inhibits learning). I've had to take an extended hiatus to pay my way through college, but I look forward to continuing my formal training as soon as I'm able, and maybe take on a few more styles and forms in the process (swordplay has always fascinated me, but I haven't yet settled on a style). I'm also very interested in weaving advanced visualization and meditation into my form - as I suggested before, I believe the mind to be the ultimate weapon, in that it gives rise to the physical martial forms and cannot itself be sundered without your own permission.


I have picked up a lot of strategy, and quite a few moves from independant research. It is too frequently overlooked in martial arts, but as my Isshin Ryu teacher says, "A technique stolen is far more valuable than a technique given." Yup, I take what knowledge I find, and sort it out in my own time. As far as sword play goes, I practice IAI. It is the only art that starts with killing the opponent, and moves on from there. While guns and knives can be used to subdue an opponent, only the sword was designed just to kill. No matter the intent of the user, the damage caused by even a light slash can disembowel, or dismember an opponent. It also has the advantage of being completely silent, reasonably concealable, and never running out of ammo. ;)

A well-placed ridgehand is devastating, true enough - I myself tend to favor the backfist in most situations when up-close, but regardless of preference, it isn't a strike to be overlooked. The trouble with any one technique is that an equally matched opponent will know the technique as well as you, and the situations in which it can be optimally executed and correctly applied. An otherwise equally matched opponent with a keen mind, on the other hand, will have a defense prepared already.


The back fist has a few signifigant disadvantages to concider. First, if used on a person skilled in jujut su, they will rip your arm off. Ouch don't quite describe that. Second, it can leave your ribs on that side open to attack. Third, a back fist is not as powerfull as several other moves.

On the plus side though, it can devestate an opponent who thinks your back is open, you are facing the wrong opponent, or who is foolish enough to try infighting with no skill. (I have had this happen many times, and CQC dominated them easily). Some people think that a little size difference makes them better at infighting, I invite said people to piss off a thai kickboxer. They may be only 5' tall, but they pack a lot of high grade whupass into that little frame.

That, and an unconscious or dead opponent is not one who can properly learn from your example. By applying force only where and when necessary, it is possible (and better form) to attack the will to fight, rather than the means that can be used to fight for you later. It is equally a matter of nobility and practicality - just as you wouldn't nuke a country (and its myriad resources) into oblivion for rising against you, it is foolish to end a life if it has more to offer yourself and others - and it almost always does.


If I am actually upset enough to put hands on you, I do not give a shit if you learn a lesson, or not. By that point, all I give a shit about is disassembling your anatomy in as painfull a manner as possible. If I am upset enough to kill you, I recomend you skip the country before I get there, as I will do everything in my power to put you in the ground. That said, I am extremely hard to piss off. I am one of the most even tempered people I know. It really does take a huge ammount of shit to get me really riled up. I have a few buttons that you could press to set me off, but that would be your bad. I do not look for trouble, it finds me well enough on it's own. If on the other hand, you are just young and stupid, I will hold back conciderably, and just leave you laying on the ground, counting stars, and wishing you had not said/done that. Wisdom comes with experience, experience comes with fucking up repeatedly, and getting your ass handed to you for it.

But whether you (or a group of people) allow someone to matter socially is ultimately a matter of perspective. We can act, or we can forfeit that right and allow ourselves to be acted upon. There's no question that lying about being unfaithful is unbecoming of a world leader, though I would say that those you claim whose actions were directly influenced by his actions were only influenced because they allowed themselves to be acted upon, just as he excused his own actions to begin with. Saying "It's ok because so and so did it" does not excuse anyone from being responsible for their own actions. This is part of what I mean about being intellectually bankrupt, using outside circumstances to excuse one's own actions. The weak still act upon the weak, and the cycle continues.


Bullshit. While I respect your opinion, if you exist in modern ad filled society, you are bombarded with millions of images, scenes, sounds, etc... all geared to getting you to do something. You cannot help but be influenced by society to some degree, just by living in it. Hell you are in an open social debate right now, just by reading this. If I sway so much as one neuron, then you are wrong. If you are wearing a pair of Nike shoes, you are wrong. If you are wearing a style you thought was cool on TV, you are wrong. If you see a baseball game on TV, and decide to go outside and enjoy the day, you are wrong.

If on the other hand, you are wearing whatever was cheapest in the store, but fit. If you don't watch TV, listen to music, go to politically active hacker sites on the internet (Uh,hum), or have eyes to see all the ads plastered on everything, then yeah, you are so totally not affected by society. Yeah, you pretty much lost that argument. No pop in another tune by Ramstein, and post a decent reply! And add me to your damned friends list!
romulous
New User
New User
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 9:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by OneArrow on Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:36 pm
([msg=6093]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

romulous wrote:I have picked up a lot of strategy, and quite a few moves from independant research. It is too frequently overlooked in martial arts, but as my Isshin Ryu teacher says, "A technique stolen is far more valuable than a technique given."


Oh, absolutely. The period where I learned the most about technique was when a group of my friends and I would meet up at a local religious retreat center, and hold a series of semi-contact sparring bouts to exhaustion. Ironically, it sort of became our religion, and was one of the most beautiful things I've ever experienced.

The back fist has a few signifigant disadvantages to concider... On the plus side though...


All things have their place. :] Just as you wouldn't use a ridgehand from considerable range, you wouldn't use a backfist in the wrong circumstances, either.

If I am actually upset enough to put hands on you, I do not give a shit if you learn a lesson, or not. By that point, all I give a shit about is disassembling your anatomy in as painfull a manner as possible. If I am upset enough to kill you, I recomend you skip the country before I get there, as I will do everything in my power to put you in the ground. That said, I am extremely hard to piss off. I am one of the most even tempered people I know. It really does take a huge ammount of shit to get me really riled up. I have a few buttons that you could press to set me off, but that would be your bad. I do not look for trouble, it finds me well enough on it's own. If on the other hand, you are just young and stupid, I will hold back conciderably, and just leave you laying on the ground, counting stars, and wishing you had not said/done that. Wisdom comes with experience, experience comes with fucking up repeatedly, and getting your ass handed to you for it.


We have a tendency to inflict pain when we ourselves our in pain. One of the greatest strengths of all is being able to end that self-perpetuating cycle, by allowing the enemy to defeat himself. By allowing oneself to be governed by anger, one loses perspective and focus, and sinks to their level of self-control. The foundation on which all training is built comes crashing down, setting the stage for a monumental defeat.

Bullshit. While I respect your opinion, if you exist in modern ad filled society, you are bombarded with millions of images, scenes, sounds, etc... all geared to getting you to do something. You cannot help but be influenced by society to some degree, just by living in it. Hell you are in an open social debate right now, just by reading this. If I sway so much as one neuron, then you are wrong. If you are wearing a pair of Nike shoes, you are wrong. If you are wearing a style you thought was cool on TV, you are wrong. If you see a baseball game on TV, and decide to go outside and enjoy the day, you are wrong.

If on the other hand, you are wearing whatever was cheapest in the store, but fit. If you don't watch TV, listen to music, go to politically active hacker sites on the internet (Uh,hum), or have eyes to see all the ads plastered on everything, then yeah, you are so totally not affected by society. Yeah, you pretty much lost that argument. No pop in another tune by Ramstein, and post a decent reply! And add me to your damned friends list!


My friend, though I respect your opinion and ferocity, you fight first and seek victory after. :] I work in advertising and promotion, and could make a living by manipulating the attentions of others if I so chose. Modern advertising is founded on flashy, impulse-generating gimmicks, and as you say, the public is bombarded day in and day out. But just as we become desensitized to violence, many are starting to see these gimmicks for what they are, and they are losing their effectiveness. I see the ad, and I see through the ad, because I have trained myself to disassemble the message (just as you say about "stealing" martial techniques). And by doing so, the impulse-generating effect is lost on me because I am conscious of it - I choose not to be affected, because I am aware.

I am not saying that we live in a vacuum, as you seem to suggest that I'm saying. But I am saying that ultimately, we do not need to be ruled by our environment, or society by that matter. I am saying that there is a gap between stimulus and response that separates us from mindless sheep, and that the (in)ability to harness that gap is what separates "nobles" and "peasants."

Your declaration of victory only reinforces my point - you may claim that I'm beaten, but I'm just getting started. :]
OneArrow
Poster
Poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by pudgylumpkins on Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:32 am
([msg=7392]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

i'm too young to vote, but if i could i would vote, for mccain. Mainly because he's a veteran and has proven that he'll do anything for our country. I believe he would be a great leader.
pudgylumpkins
New User
New User
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:53 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Americans - who are you voting for?

Post by OneArrow on Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:13 am
([msg=7610]see Re: Americans - who are you voting for?[/msg])

pudgylumpkins wrote:i'm too young to vote, but if i could i would vote, for mccain. Mainly because he's a veteran and has proven that he'll do anything for our country. I believe he would be a great leader.


To be frank, I just don't understand where people get off saying that being a veteran, or even being tortured, makes one a great candidate for the presidency.
OneArrow
Poster
Poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


PreviousNext

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests