David, ENOUGH ALREADY!

[valiens]

This thread has traveled way off course from its original subject, sort of indicative of the UFO subject in general.
Also funny is that someone wanted it locked about 8 pages ago.

I agree. Let's get back to kicking Dave's ass for having educated opinions!

 

[devan]

...this thread is already over. I won, ya'll lost.

I agree. You won. You brought sanity to this thread. But I hope Gene & David realize that they have a window of opportunity to gain more listeners in the wake of Art Bell's departure. However, many listeners with a serious interest in UFO studies and potential guests will be put off by biased, partisan attacks. (Never mind the thrashing the latter might be subject to the following week.) As a student of history, I can tell you that the truth doesn't lie in conservatives/republicans bad... liberals/democrats good. Each group has its warts, but also are deserving of praise for some really great things. But I don't want to get off track myself. I'm just saying that this is how the show often comes across.

When I first came across this show a few months ago, I had hoped it would be a place for serious, honest and unbiased discussion without a bunch of political B.S. The market is already swamped with shows like that. The Paracast has so much potential, it doesn't need to carry the torch for Air America. When David is on topic, he can display extremely provocative insights and express them like few people can. But then there are times when I think I'm listening to Keith Olberman or Chris Matthews spouting predictable Democratic party talking-points. And no flames, please. I'm just saying this is the "impression" that some listeners are being given. I can also tell you that many people view the UFO crowd as a bunch of left-wing nuts who see a conspiracy behind every door. This is a big reason why the topic isn't taken as seriously as it should. That's unfortunate and will have to change before much progress can be made. Either that or we will have to have the proverbial flying saucer land in D.C. before the subject is taken seriously.

 

[valiens]

I thought the "ufologist as left wing nut" was a commonly held view until I went on a paranormal/conspiracy radio show hosted by a liberal and a conservative. The conservative host told me it was the opposite--people assumed it was the gullible right winger who believed in anything.

So maybe that depends on where you're from.

Here's my problem with taking a middle-of-the-road political stance on a show like The Paracast:

Ostensibly, it's a show trying to get to the truth behind the facades. If one of those truths is that Bush Co. is a criminal organization, should that not be expressed for fear of "taking a democratic stance"? What are we supposed to do, let a criminal organization eat away at the country without saying peep because that might offend some people who don't think that's happening?

Guess what! Saying "The government is lying about ufos/aliens" is offensive to some people.

I think saying "This sounds like Keith Olberman, therefore it's just more liberal talking points" is a bogus argument here because they aren't talking points based on toeing a party-affiliated line. They are based on actual, factual observation and documentation. Not everything is a matter of uneducated opinion. Facts do exist. And if some of those facts line up to the right or left of the political spectrum, that doesn't mean anyone is spouting talking points, it means that sometimes peoples' talking points line up with reality.

I also think it's kinda nonsensical in another way, which is that it seems silly to do a show where implicit in some of the topics, if not all, is the notion that the government/military complex is outright lying to us about UFOs, and it's okay to bitch about that every week, but we have to keep quiet about other areas in which they are lying because somehow that's offensive to certain listeners.

Meh.

 

[BrandonD]

I thought the "ufologist as left wing nut" was a commonly held view until I went on a paranormal/conspiracy radio show hosted by a liberal and a conservative. The conservative host told me it was the opposite--people assumed it was the gullible right winger who believed in anything.

So maybe that depends on where you're from.

Here's my problem with taking a middle-of-the-road political stance on a show like The Paracast:

Ostensibly, it's a show trying to get to the truth behind the facades. If one of those truths is that Bush Co. is a criminal organization, should that not be expressed for fear of "taking a democratic stance"? What are we supposed to do, let a criminal organization eat away at the country without saying peep because that might offend some people who don't think that's happening?

Guess what! Saying "The government is lying about ufos/aliens" is offensive to some people.

I think saying "This sounds like Keith Olberman, therefore it's just more liberal talking points" is a bogus argument here because they aren't talking points based on toeing a party-affiliated line. They are based on actual, factual observation and documentation. Not everything is a matter of uneducated opinion. Facts do exist. And if some of those facts line up to the right or left of the political spectrum, that doesn't mean anyone is spouting talking points, it means that sometimes peoples' talking points line up with reality.

I also think it's kinda nonsensical in another way, which is that it seems silly to do a show where implicit in some of the topics, if not all, is the notion that the government/military complex is outright lying to us about UFOs, and it's okay to bitch about that every week, but we have to keep quiet about other areas in which they are lying because somehow that's offensive to certain listeners.

Meh.

Right behind you on that one. We also have to keep in mind that not everyone has the same definition of "liberal" and "conservative". To some people (that I've personally known), a liberal is simply someone who questions authority... according to that definition, everyone on this list is a liberal! We are questioning the authorities of science and government on pararnormal issues.

It's my opinion that if anyone wants to get into a discussion and involve obsolete terms like liberal and conservative, they should at least establish a common agreement on exactly what those terms mean. Otherwise, everyone's just bandying them around like verbal clubs, whacking each other on the head when the other person says something they don't like.

 

[auntiegrav]

Right behind you on that one. We also have to keep in mind that not everyone has the same definition of "liberal" and "conservative". To some people (that I've personally known), a liberal is simply someone who questions authority... according to that definition, everyone on this list is a liberal! We are questioning the authorities of science and government on pararnormal issues.
It's my opinion that if anyone wants to get into a discussion and involve obsolete terms like liberal and conservative, they should at least establish a common agreement on exactly what those terms mean. Otherwise, everyone's just bandying them around like verbal clubs, whacking each other on the head when the other person says something they don't like.

Where'd I leave that "corporatist" club? I've got some serious whackin' to do !!
Did one of you goddamn tax and spend liberals use it for making tofu again? What about you, Mr. Cheney? Are you smackin' GW around some more? Chasin' those drug-pumped cattle around again?

 

[DBTrek]

Here's my problem with taking a middle-of-the-road political stance on a show like The Paracast:

Have you ever stopped to consider that spreading the 'truth' about politics as you see them is not the purpose of the Paracast?

Ostensibly, it's a show trying to get to the truth behind the facades. If one of those truths is that Bush Co. is a criminal organization, should that not be expressed for fear of "taking a democratic stance"?

What does any of that have to do with the paranormal? Sounds like another pinhead attempt to beat everyone in the head with your view of politics. What you're not understanding here is no one cares that you (or David) hate Bush. Look at the polls, most people hate Bush. Duh. People don't come to these forums or listen to the show to catch up on the political opinions of random nobodies.

What are we supposed to do, let a criminal organization eat away at the country without saying peep because that might offend some people who don't think that's happening?

Yeah, that's what happens. If we don't drag our personal politics in to every nook and cranny of the internet and shove them in people's faces, then our country gets eaten away. There's the Jihadist mentality; everyone must hear my religious/political views all the time, everywhere, or society is destroyed. We're going to be enlightened by bug-eyed, uninformed, frothing wisdom whether we like it or not, for the good of the country!

I also think it's kinda nonsensical in another way, which is that it seems silly to do a show where implicit in some of the topics, if not all, is the notion that the government/military complex is outright lying to us about UFOs, and it's okay to bitch about that every week, but we have to keep quiet about other areas in which they are lying because somehow that's offensive to certain listeners.

It probably seems nonsensical to you, because you can't envision a place where people who don't hold your views are left in peace, to enjoy a show about the paranormal.

-DBTrek

 

[cottonzway]

I really think the whole left/right paradigm is way off to how politics work at the higher levels of government anyways. Truth is, regardless of political side, that our “elected” leaders work for corporate interests and private interests. People lose sight of that. They work for Raytheon, Bechtel, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, DynCorp, the World Bank, ect. The overwhelming majority work for THESE people so the whole “I’m a liberal” or “I’m a conservative” talking points are kind of pointless. It’s true that everyone should have their own personal views and that tends to lean to one-side or another then that is fine. Just understand that the banter between the two parties doesn’t matter because the “leaders” of both sides are robbing us blind.

I openly support Ron Paul, who is going for Republican presidential candidacy, but not because I am some lifetime right-winger. I have always stayed an Independent previously and I made the switch so I can vote for Dr. Paul because of his policy and not the party he resides in. If someone on the left had a better policy then I would have went there. Policy/person over party 10/10 for me.

In terms as talking about politics with the “UFO” field I tend to agree with David. It’s not like the current boob, I mean president, knows about this info. It’s not like the next one will either whomever that will be. While I do not think this kind of info is known by the executive branch, legislative branch, or the four branch of our military I do think there are groups to look at that if such advanced technology exists (be extra-terrestrial or multi-dimensional). That would be private companies within the military industrial complex. Companies like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Booz Allen Hamilton, Parsons, ect. If it is not all “black or shadow” government there are groups that could have this technology. Like NORTHCOM, STRATCOM, the NRO, the NGA, and DARPA. There are a lot of interesting places to look IMO.

 

[BrandonD]

Yeah, that's what happens. If we don't drag our personal politics in to every nook and cranny of the internet and shove them in people's faces, then our country gets eaten away. There's the Jihadist mentality; everyone must hear my religious/political views all the time, everywhere, or society is destroyed. We're going to be enlightened by your bug-eyed, uninformed, frothing wisdom whether we like it or not, for the good of the country!

Sorry man, this is a wacky point of view. HOW exactly is this "bug-eyed, uniformed, frothing wisdom" being shoved into your face? Please tell us. Is David at your house forcing you to listen to his podcast, and then forcing you to participate on the boards?

What you're describing above is not even remotely the jihadist mentality. The "jihadist mentality", if that's what you want to call it, is the position that every man must *possess* the same religious/political views or he will be punished. There's quite a difference between the two. The example you gave is simply freedom of expression. The freedom that a person can state what he believes in public, and not feel that he will be persecuted for it.

NO ONE is forcing a single thing down your throat.

In addition to all the above, your position is also hypocritical because you don't even follow your own advice. You frequently poke your political opinions into areas where politics was not the focus of discussion.

In case your memory is faulty, I'll provide an example. In "David...enough already!", I was describing a scenario in which an unseen evil force was influencing powerful people in the world. I specifically stated that my opposition was to power and domination, and not to any particular country or rulers. Even though politics was loosely involved, I intentionally remained politically neutral because the important point was the *paranormal* aspect of the unseen force and its unfluence upon people of power. I didn't even cite Bush or any particular world leaders.

Nevertheless, you could not resist chiming in with: "So . . . present day Iraq must be looking pretty good to you, since no one has a firm grip on the power, or is in control.

Man . . . if only the whole globe looked more like Iraq!"

Even if you disagree with my position that this is an absurd response, you can't deny that it's CLEARLY political. You're guilty of doing exactly what you accuse others of, forcing your bug-eyed, uninformed, frothing wisdom upon them whether they like it or not.

 

[David Biedny]

I love the fact that folks feel passionate enough about this show, and these forums, to participate and express their opinions.

But let's all realize that The Paracast is whatever Gene & I want it to be, and the definition is sometimes a moving target. While we generally try to keep the political angle out of the show, I'm someone who is somewhat obsessed with the political situation in this country, and it bleeds into my time on the show. There is no producer telling us to lay off, no advertisers threatening to pull their advertising, so we express ourselves as we like. Strong opinions often create strong reactions in people, and if pressed, any of my closest and oldest friends will tell you that I have no qualms making my thoughts known, expressing myself in as passionate a manner as I wish, which is often extreme. Well, these are extreme times we live in, and intense dynamics bring out my most intense side. One of my closest friends has told me that she's noticed that people either really like me, or despise me, with not a whole lot of middle grounders. That's fine by me, and apparently extends to the audience of the show. And that's not a bad thing - middle of the road, wishy-washy is not what I am, and never will be. I'm extreme, take it or leave it. That's the deal with moi.

DBTrek, while I truly appreciate your participation in these forums, I often find myself disagreeing with you rather strongly. When you make statements about what this show is supposed to be about, and what kind of content we should cover, you're showing your rather high opinion of yourself. You've made more contradictions than I care to point out, and I often ignore your words. Feel free to ignore mine in return. Seriously. But I hope you'll continue to be an active voice on these forums. As much as we can all disagree about so much stuff, it would seem that ALL of us are interested in the paranormal side of life. And that's alright by me.

Oh, one other thing, DBTrek: don't listen to our next show, I promise you that you'll just fucking hate it and wish that we were dead and gone. Really. Don't turn it on, don't listen to the archive of it, just make believe it didn't happen. If you listen to it, your brain will implode and you will die a painful death from the blood spurting out of your eye sockets. Don't say I didn't warn you. I worry about your little anarchist fantasy, man, and don't want to see you get hurt.

 

[DBTrek]

Sorry man, this is a wacky point of view. HOW exactly is this "bug-eyed, uniformed, frothing wisdom" being shoved into your face? Please tell us. Is David at your house forcing you to listen to his podcast, and then forcing you to participate on the boards?

The point was allegorical, not literal. You're smart enough to know that, so I'm going to ignore your rather lame bait.

As for hypocrisy, I'm afraid your example is lacking. Maybe you're lashing out at me from the embarassment of making a new-age diatribe about the evil of power structures, and having it pointed out that there are places that resemble your anti-power utopia, and they suck. What political agenda was furthered by my statement? What political party was empowered? Whose talking points was I espousing?

Nobodies. I simply pointed out that the land with weak and non-existant power structures isn't the solution to the worlds ills. That may have been a splash of cold water in your face, but it wasn't particularly political.

You shouldn't take it personal. Many users here like to put on their hippie pants and reel off their enlightened solutions to the worlds ills between bong hits. The vast conspiracies and hidden spiritual truths are so much clearer in a thick haze of THC. The problem is, we're not all high at the same time so some of us can clearly see the gaping holes in certain statements.

I'll await your literal dissection of my last paragraph in your next post, where no doubt you'll inform me that pants can't be hippies, therefore I'm an idiot. Peace out, groovy brother man.

-DBTrek

 

[David Biedny]

[attachment=70]

Hippie Pants. Just say [size=x-large]NO[/size]

 

[DBTrek]

DBTrek, while I truly appreciate your participation in these forums, I often find myself disagreeing with you rather strongly. When you make statements about what this show is supposed to be about, and what kind of content we should cover, you're showing your rather high opinion of yourself. You've made more contradictions than I care to point out, and I often ignore your words. Feel free to ignore mine in return. Seriously. But I hope you'll continue to be an active voice on these forums. As much as we can all disagree about so much stuff, it would seem that ALL of us are interested in the paranormal side of life. And that's alright by me.

I stand by my statement that the show needs to have more beer and bikini babes. You may disagree strongly with that if you wish, but I would point out that you have a girlfriend, while most of your listening audience is married to a six-pack of Mountain Dew, their Star Wars action figures, and a poster of Kitty Pride from the cover of X-Men #147. It's all well and good for those that have to look down on those who have-not, and ignore their needs. It's that "I got mine" mentality that's fueling the disparity that threatens to erode the very fabric of the country.

Think of the little people while you're living that carefree Burguoise lifestyle. That's all I'm saying.



-DBTrek

 

[auntiegrav]

Hippie Pants. Just say [size=x-large]NO[/size]

GHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

FLASHBACK!!! (bangs head on toilet seat) OWWW!!!

Man, Dave. Don't do that again. Brain hurt.

Dear Libertarians:
"You can't govern if you don't believe in government."
Dear Iraqis:
"You can't be governed if you don't believe in government."
Dear America:
"Your government lies to you. Stop believing it."
Dear Corporate American CEO's and Board Members:
"Think about your customers (government and civilian); It's time to lead them, not bleed them."

 

[valiens]

DBDREK:

Let me make this really simple so you can understand it....

1.) David Biedney is passionate about most any subject he speaks on. When it's a subject you like to hear about, you're like, "Yeah! Go get 'em, Dave!" When it's something you disagree with, you're all, "Boooo! There's no place for that here! -- Jihadist!"

And by you I mean we. And by we I mean you and maybe one other. And by Jihadist, I think you unconsciously mean you're mentally retarded, which is why I'm keeping it simple.

So David spouts off at the mouth about whatever and he attacks that whatever with the same gusto. You're saying he should censor the whatever, limit it to just paranormal subjects. I'd rather not stifle the man. Do you really want him tripping over his own thought process trying not to do what he does best simply because it conflicts with your political views sometimes (or your view on what this show should be)?

2.) It's a paranormal show at heart. Sometimes it crosses over into political/military conspiracy. So it IS political as well, which means it IS appropriate to talk politics every now and then.

The End.

 

[Goody]

Anyone for a beer? My shout?

 

[BrandonD]

Anyone for a beer? My shout?

I think George Bush is a ghost from Atlantis. Discuss. Without getting political, please.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Anyone for a beer? My shout?

I think George Bush is a ghost from Atlantis. Discuss. Without getting political, please.

I think we would regard him as one of the servants that failed to pass the Atlantis test for mental acuity. This is, of course, a complicated affair that is not appropriate for this forum, I suppose. :

 

[BrandonD]

I think we would regard him as one of the servants that failed to pass the Atlantis test for mental acuity. This is, of course, a complicated affair that is not appropriate for this forum, I suppose. :

That was my guess also. He's one of the dropouts from Atlantis University. And he fled the continent when they were drafting soldiers for the battle against Lemuria.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I think we would regard him as one of the servants that failed to pass the Atlantis test for mental acuity. This is, of course, a complicated affair that is not appropriate for this forum, I suppose. :

That was my guess also. He's one of the dropouts from Atlantis University. And he fled the continent when they were drafting soldiers for the battle against Lemuria.

Well, you see he flunked the physical, which is really a serious matter for Atlanteans.

 

[sk4p]

Well, you see he flunked the physical, which is really a serious matter for Atlanteans.

Aleister Crowley wrote an "essay" about Atlantis in which he "reveals" that the Atlanteans were traveling from one planet in our solar system to the next. Perhaps GWB was one of the defective ones they left behind when they bade farewell to Earth ... it might explain certain simian characteristics.

--Shawn