Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
freshwest
freshwest's Journal
freshwest's Journal
July 15, 2015
n. the traditional greeting when saying the word namaste with folded hands and a slight bow:
http://www.carolhansengrey.com/Quotes/Native_Quotes.html
The 'Founding Fathers' tried to codifiy this:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness...
~ The American Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776.
Repeated until the end of time, around the globe. No matter the fallout that ensues, the ideal remains the same.
I found a video narrated by Morgan Freeman, in which he informs us that the part of the Declaration which decried the institution as a moral crime, which was edited out by southerners. It was a powerful spiritual statement by Jefferson, a slave master, knowing he was a 'sinner.' But it didn't make it into the final document. Yet the framework was, tantalizing all future generations to change the world to something better.
But technology has nothing to do with equality if it is the substitute for self-awareness. It concentrates power into the hands of those who possess it, from the gun to the atomic bomb to the latest system of communications. Or let us say, more correctly, the owners of the technology, who can turn it on or off, make it available and socially liberating or use it as a tool of division, exclusion and demagoguery.
As far as 'humans do not seem to possss the ability to advance at the same rate', I cannot see this in the way that some have. There is an infinite potential in each individual, even those who surround them may not find it useful to their own purposes. As Morpheus' sig line says, 'I am human, nothing is alien to me.' IIRC. I pondered on it several times. It is a profound statement on the diversity of human ability and creativity and acceptance. One may think what another is into is a waste of time or stupid, but it illuminates others. We can't judge the ability of another in terms that advantage us, that is not their purpose on Earth.
If you are speaking of people's failure to 'advance' in their perception of Equality, from their spiritual core, to treat with reverence others, I do understand that. I've found practicing walking through a day in the spirit of Namaste is a great surprise at first, if one is determined to stay within their own place of comfort. But if one 'lets go' it is as profound as walking through the world considering the atomic bonds that compose matter. There are lot of empty spaces in an atom and a molecule that is held in place by attraction, and we can't figure that out without allowing the unknown to spark.
Going through the world that way is mind blowing. I think a few minds need that.
Just a few thoughts.
It's a spiritual lacking, denying 'Namaste':
namaste interj. literally, "I humbly bow to you"; also used as a greeting or acknowledgement of the equality of all, and pays honor to the sacredness of all.n. the traditional greeting when saying the word namaste with folded hands and a slight bow:
http://www.carolhansengrey.com/Quotes/Native_Quotes.html
The 'Founding Fathers' tried to codifiy this:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness...
~ The American Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776.
Repeated until the end of time, around the globe. No matter the fallout that ensues, the ideal remains the same.
I found a video narrated by Morgan Freeman, in which he informs us that the part of the Declaration which decried the institution as a moral crime, which was edited out by southerners. It was a powerful spiritual statement by Jefferson, a slave master, knowing he was a 'sinner.' But it didn't make it into the final document. Yet the framework was, tantalizing all future generations to change the world to something better.
But technology has nothing to do with equality if it is the substitute for self-awareness. It concentrates power into the hands of those who possess it, from the gun to the atomic bomb to the latest system of communications. Or let us say, more correctly, the owners of the technology, who can turn it on or off, make it available and socially liberating or use it as a tool of division, exclusion and demagoguery.
As far as 'humans do not seem to possss the ability to advance at the same rate', I cannot see this in the way that some have. There is an infinite potential in each individual, even those who surround them may not find it useful to their own purposes. As Morpheus' sig line says, 'I am human, nothing is alien to me.' IIRC. I pondered on it several times. It is a profound statement on the diversity of human ability and creativity and acceptance. One may think what another is into is a waste of time or stupid, but it illuminates others. We can't judge the ability of another in terms that advantage us, that is not their purpose on Earth.
If you are speaking of people's failure to 'advance' in their perception of Equality, from their spiritual core, to treat with reverence others, I do understand that. I've found practicing walking through a day in the spirit of Namaste is a great surprise at first, if one is determined to stay within their own place of comfort. But if one 'lets go' it is as profound as walking through the world considering the atomic bonds that compose matter. There are lot of empty spaces in an atom and a molecule that is held in place by attraction, and we can't figure that out without allowing the unknown to spark.
Going through the world that way is mind blowing. I think a few minds need that.
Just a few thoughts.
July 15, 2015
We love it because it feels so good!
Well, the reptilian brain is essential but has be buffered by the forebrain. If one has one. But
these are not your normal earthly reptiles, but reptiliian humanoid aliens. Behold:We love it because it feels so good!
July 15, 2015
'This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.' ~ President Barack Obama...
The GOP was warned. They still refused to go with the side of peace and justice.
July 15, 2015
Look at this one here:
That's a reptilian thing.
Just think, he could be POTUS!
It IS in their DNA:
Look at this one here:
That's a reptilian thing.
Just think, he could be POTUS!
July 15, 2015
It's not like media wants to inform us of issues. They just go for the outrage.
An old media theme used to inflame.
It's not like media wants to inform us of issues. They just go for the outrage.
July 14, 2015
Posted: 07/05/2015 10:50 am EDT Updated: 5 hours ago
Democratic presidential candidate and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) offered a first glimpse on Sunday of some of the people he might consider for his cabinet in a potential Sanders administration, and a few that he certainly won't.
"My cabinet would not be dominated by representatives of Wall Street," Sanders said on CNN's "State of the Union." "I think Wall Street's played a horrendous role in recent years, in negatively impacting our economy and in making the rich richer. There are a lot of great public servants out there, great economists who for years have been standing up for the middle class and the working families of this country."
Prompted by host Jake Tapper, Sanders went on to praise Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist. Krugman is a vocal opponent of tax cuts for the rich, and he has warned readers for years about the dangers of income inequality. "Krugman does a great job," Sanders said.
Also doing a great job, Sanders said, is Columbia University economics professor and Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, whose recent work has focused on the perils of radical free markets, such as those espoused by some in the libertarian wing of the GOP.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/05/bernie-sanders-cabinet_n_7730208.html
to Jefferson23:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251426778
I've said for a while, since HRC helped fund Bernie's Senate run, they don't have core differences. They merely have a difference in how to get to the same goals. They both support Israel, with Bernie being the one who elucidated his best, saying they protected us from ISIS, who he says must be wiped out.
He's not against sending tax dollars to defense corporations or funding wars he may not have approved of; he's even for using drones to prevent employing ground troops, but not ready to leave the theater of war in the Middle East. He voted for the bombing of Kosovo, too.
They're both for public schools, unions, free college and pre-school; increasing taxes on the rich and expanding the social safety net; and rebuilding infrastructure, both physical and social; they both see working on climate change and more positive foreign policy as goals.
There are other similiarities. I'm comfortable whatever either of them do. Clinton has been closer to seeing the responsibilities of POTUS. Let's not delude ourselves that voting for POTUS is voting for the Prince of Peace. That eagle holds olive leaves in one claw and arrows in the other.
I see him as just as 'hawkish' as she is but he seems less open about his foreign policy than she has been. After all, she was SoS and followed Obama's orders to keep us out of warfare not bound by treaties. Both support NATO.
Add to that, the GOP has long framed Clinton because of her community organizing, push for the rights of women and children; and other things that Democrats want, as a wild eyed socialist. A democratic socialist, with universal coverage of social services.
She has had to deal with the Gingrich majority and the Bush years. And then the Tea Party but less directly. The Koch front groups have been working on the American mind to get them to distrust and loathe her as much as Rush and RW fundies do. As Mike Malloy said:
"Clinton haters are the scum of the Earth."
Most of us who were of age when Bill was elected, saw the Starr Chamber, its intimidation and persecution of those who didn't say what they wanted them to say, terrorizing people and destroying lives, in order to derail his agenda, then shut down the government causing people to die, literally, and all they did to degrade the office of the POTUS, know just what has been said and done.
And virtually all the cable and radio pundits that made their start in media going after Bill daily, along with RW fundies, are still influencing the mind. This is the machine going after her, and it's just as effective as it has been since the Nixon era. I'm sure the RW cabal has not forgotten that HRC was right up there in D.C. trying to get Nixon impeached, but he resigned and was immediately pardoned by Ford.
And so they got away with it. I'm not content to let them get away with it again.
Well, his days of fame seem numbered now:
Bernie Sanders Hints At What A Sanders Administration Cabinet Could Look LikePosted: 07/05/2015 10:50 am EDT Updated: 5 hours ago
Democratic presidential candidate and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) offered a first glimpse on Sunday of some of the people he might consider for his cabinet in a potential Sanders administration, and a few that he certainly won't.
"My cabinet would not be dominated by representatives of Wall Street," Sanders said on CNN's "State of the Union." "I think Wall Street's played a horrendous role in recent years, in negatively impacting our economy and in making the rich richer. There are a lot of great public servants out there, great economists who for years have been standing up for the middle class and the working families of this country."
Prompted by host Jake Tapper, Sanders went on to praise Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist. Krugman is a vocal opponent of tax cuts for the rich, and he has warned readers for years about the dangers of income inequality. "Krugman does a great job," Sanders said.
Also doing a great job, Sanders said, is Columbia University economics professor and Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, whose recent work has focused on the perils of radical free markets, such as those espoused by some in the libertarian wing of the GOP.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/05/bernie-sanders-cabinet_n_7730208.html
to Jefferson23:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251426778
I've said for a while, since HRC helped fund Bernie's Senate run, they don't have core differences. They merely have a difference in how to get to the same goals. They both support Israel, with Bernie being the one who elucidated his best, saying they protected us from ISIS, who he says must be wiped out.
He's not against sending tax dollars to defense corporations or funding wars he may not have approved of; he's even for using drones to prevent employing ground troops, but not ready to leave the theater of war in the Middle East. He voted for the bombing of Kosovo, too.
They're both for public schools, unions, free college and pre-school; increasing taxes on the rich and expanding the social safety net; and rebuilding infrastructure, both physical and social; they both see working on climate change and more positive foreign policy as goals.
There are other similiarities. I'm comfortable whatever either of them do. Clinton has been closer to seeing the responsibilities of POTUS. Let's not delude ourselves that voting for POTUS is voting for the Prince of Peace. That eagle holds olive leaves in one claw and arrows in the other.
I see him as just as 'hawkish' as she is but he seems less open about his foreign policy than she has been. After all, she was SoS and followed Obama's orders to keep us out of warfare not bound by treaties. Both support NATO.
Add to that, the GOP has long framed Clinton because of her community organizing, push for the rights of women and children; and other things that Democrats want, as a wild eyed socialist. A democratic socialist, with universal coverage of social services.
She has had to deal with the Gingrich majority and the Bush years. And then the Tea Party but less directly. The Koch front groups have been working on the American mind to get them to distrust and loathe her as much as Rush and RW fundies do. As Mike Malloy said:
"Clinton haters are the scum of the Earth."
Most of us who were of age when Bill was elected, saw the Starr Chamber, its intimidation and persecution of those who didn't say what they wanted them to say, terrorizing people and destroying lives, in order to derail his agenda, then shut down the government causing people to die, literally, and all they did to degrade the office of the POTUS, know just what has been said and done.
And virtually all the cable and radio pundits that made their start in media going after Bill daily, along with RW fundies, are still influencing the mind. This is the machine going after her, and it's just as effective as it has been since the Nixon era. I'm sure the RW cabal has not forgotten that HRC was right up there in D.C. trying to get Nixon impeached, but he resigned and was immediately pardoned by Ford.
And so they got away with it. I'm not content to let them get away with it again.
July 13, 2015
Because it's the new American Exceptionalism. We're the most evil thing on the planet. USA USA USA!
Strange how that belief system comes up in all situations. No other country ever did anything bad, they're not capable of such stunning evil.
No, we're the experts, the rest of the world knows nothing. We're responsible for all that happened, even before this nation was a glint in the Founding Fathers' eyes.
Look at it that way, creatively and it all works out that we can still be superior! 'All things are possible for those who believe.'
in case it's needed...
July 13, 2015
Don't have the time for it, but it is in there... Will post more if you want it, Sancho.
What a great find you posted. Thanks...
Links I posted to his plan. It was the equivalent in terms of as a war. Sorry, no time to edit:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024005190#post5Don't have the time for it, but it is in there... Will post more if you want it, Sancho.
What a great find you posted. Thanks...
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Dec 10, 2010, 11:36 PMNumber of posts: 53,661