NEWS: Why Can't I Know What Bush and Gore Talked About? Not Fair!

Alright guys, I'll level with you all:

That picture was taken in my living room and I desperately need to sell the couch.

What do I have to do to move this couch?

(guy not included cause it's me)

I want that couch! It's ugly as shit but it's the first thing I've ever seen ACU's actually camouflage with!

editing posts is like rocket surgery for drnk people... ertybu7rtyu7i8 <-- that's just me rolling my face across the keybord. (maybe I should just go play in the sillines thread!

I'd recommend it.

The bold portion is what disturbs me the most. You think it's shitty for people to actually care about what's happening in the world around them ("sitting around...worrying about the ills of the world." Though I do doubt that many people just "sit around"), but that it's a good thing to just let things happen? I doubt you'd apply that philosophy if you saw someone being stabbed in an alleyway.

The bold text disturbs me. If I'm reading this right, you're a happier person because you don't give a crap what happens, because you "let things happen"? But, it's bad for people to actually care about the world around them (or, as you put it, "sitting around...worrying about the ills of the world." But, that's just a silly generalization, based on squat.)? This is a questionable philosophy, which makes me wonder how far you're willing to take it.

Somehow, I want to think you wouldn't take it so far as to ignore a person laying in the middle of the street with an open knife wound, but this comment of yours is so incredibly cynical that I'm questioning that assumption.

I'm a firefighter, I affect lives every day. I have too much to be concerned about in the here and now than to worry about what some big wig thousands of miles away is doing. I can't affect political change, I can just do my civic duty and vote for who I think will do the best job.

But stewing over Bush vs. Gore 7 years after the fact it an exercise in mental masturbation.

why the fuck should I give half a rats ass about if Bush signed a bill doing whatever if I could be worrying about whether or not me and my brothers are gonna make it out of the next fire?

Politics is a game for rich old people. One day when I'm a rich old man I'll take a more active part. But for now, voting will suffice.

Why can't you do both? Voting is affecting political change, it's the entire point of the process. You're posting here, so you aren't solely a 100% in-the-present experientialist. It's kind of hard to do that, actually. You will end up caring about something at some point that is more abstract than people inside a burning structure. But again, in the times when you aren't fighting fires, why don't you have the time to even reflect on what it all means?

Again, you are obviously fully capable of doing both. You don't have to do it while you're fighting fires. My job is far less important than yours. I tend bar. But unless a customer brings it up while I'm on the clock, I'm not really thinking about "if Bush signed a bill doing whatever" (pretty disingenuous phrasing, if you ask me) while I work. I would hope you work longer hours than me, but still. You aren't working constantly, and you apparently have enough time to type out poorly-conceived attempts at logical argumentation with people in an on-line forum, so how on earth isn't that time enough to actually think about what the people in charge of this country are doing to you?

You're old enough to serve, you're old enough to be responsible both for your own opinion and the backing of same. Proudly stating that you just ignore it all and let the chips fall where they may is more of a self-indictment than any kind of justification of your attitude.

Finally: Being a "rich old man" in some hypothetical future is vitally linked to there being a country and an economy to be a rich old man in.

I could think about policy all I want, but what's it gonna do other than give me an ulcer? When it comes time to vote I'll compare the candidates and vote for whoever is gonna benefit my life the most if they're elected.

What what good can it do for me to worry about whether or not it was right to go into Iraq? I'm going there whether I agree with it or not. If I worry myself over the causes I'll just be miserable while I'm there. So I go by what my experiences have taught me, and what my gut tells me is right.

But actually putting up a well thought out and heartfelt argument over some political matter that you have absolutely 0% chance of changing, on a porn site no less, just makes people look like whiners.

If you wanna take to the streets, protest, riot, whatever, do it. But arguing here is like throwing air at the Sears Tower to knock it over.

Do you blatantly flout your own integrity as some kind of weird object lesson for the rest of us?

It's obviously very hard to ever think because, y'know, there are fires and stuff.

@SpectreInTheUK:

How do you end up knowing which candidates (and, I would hope, local policies) benefit your life the most if you don't ever talk about them? Do you honestly think your tired defense of "you guys take it too seriously, lol, porn site" holds up at all?

"Worrying" (and there's no need to do any actual worrying; just use your brain) about the righteousness of action in Iraq calls into question the decisions of the people who led us there. These, in turn, are the very same people that you are going to vote for or against.

So explain to me again how keeping your head in the sand leads to educated voting and a better life over all?

I don't keep my head in the sand. I read the news, I read the little pundit pieces that fly across my newsreader. But arguing with people who aren't going to be swayed one way or another is pointless. I don't care what your opinion is, and I really don't expect you to care what mine is. And given the climate of this site my opinion is more than likely just going to get you to shut down and resort to bashing and name calling almost instantly. So I ask again, what's the point?

You can sit up there on your pillar and throw stones down at the rest of us who'd rather lead our lives and worry about ourselves first all you want. What I'm doing is what's best for me.

Hey, at least he's honest about his cowardice.

So I am supposed to keep myself from the level of name-calling, but you get to say the above? Please stop with the routine of the victimized enlightened hedonist.

And again, typing away (and over and over) at people who you yourself say will not sway in their opinion is not at all congruous with leading your life and not worrying.

As to "worry," you are the person who introduced that to the narrative, so I guess I can only challenge you to think (not worry!) about your actions and views and on how they impact the people around you. You may think you're alone, but that will only be true when you least expect it, and I don't think you'll like it very much.

Really? A game? For rich, old people?

No wonder everything's so fucked up.

"Hey Jerry, did ya see what I did there? I managed to cut half the education budget, and then misused the other half to get myself a nice office."

"Bonus! 50 points!"

I know, I'm interpreting too literally, but that was a funny notion.

Again, I question this notion: if you just let the rich old men play their little games, then you are saying they have no accountability. This is the very notion that the Constitution was set up to prevent.

Discussion and discourse are what this country is founded upon. It doesn't matter if you change someone's opinion, or what your chances of changing national policy are. If you can get out a point of view to others, you're allowing them to consider that point of view, correct? Giving, or getting, some consideration for a view point can, and often does, improve the chances that that view point becomes more popular. It often takes one person to ask the question, and a whole movement can begin around it (such as "Why can't a black man sit where he wants to on the bus?" or "How is it fair that I get taxed by a government, but have no say in it?"). And that's true, regardless of the forum of discussion.

P.S.: I apologize for the double post, I thought it didn't post the first time.

Insightful of you. I now know all I need to know about both Al Gore and George Bush. And you did it all in just a few sentences.

I read your blog too, the one where you tell anyone who loves Bush or whatever to never contact you or speak to you in anyway other than to forward you their suicide note. Equally succinct and offered a lot of insight into who you are as a human being; tolerant, accepting, open to intelligent discussion. Just so I get this straight, you're allowed to put your opinion out here for everyone to consume, but no one is allowed to retort, am I correct? Okay, thanks!