[Peachie]

Originally Posted by oshunluva

The sky is falling, the sky is falling!

I agree, Historybuff.

And I have to admit after rereading my post, the intent came off wrong... I wasn't telling OSL to bury his/her head in the sand. I should have typed , "bury one's head in the sand" in an attempt to do a different take on OSL's philosophy that the fact the US is now arming against itself is not discussable and we're crazy to be unsettled regarding the current situation. I think we should be able to be able to vent information and our personal take on the post from Sam.

Therefore, OSL, if you thought I was telling you to bury YOUR head in the sand, I apologize. I was addressing your response to the thread only. And there is a lesson to be learned here, don't type a response when you are in a hurry to leave for a Dr. appt. I do attempt to maintain civility :-)

[chelsea24]

Wow that is really scary! It doesn't surprise me though. From what I read, in different articles, there can be some terrible scenarios where we are attacked by terrorists and entire cities or towns are cut off from the rest of America. Either because of a nuclear attack or some kind of poison. It's just terrifying.

Also, it's funny I should come home to this post because we were on a cruise and saw just bits of the news and I commented to my husband, that if this were another age, the people would have stormed the castle (White House or Lenders) by now.

And CNN also had a documentary called "Out of Gas" where people ended up becoming violent, fighting for food and other supplies. It's horrifying to think of such things, but I agree, we absolutely can't hide our heads in the sand.

Yes, this article, did indeed, give me the willies.

[samhass]

Tomorrow is October 1st. Do we know where our army is???

[Sidney Lanier]

I have said at times--a little facetiously, I guess--that if people have not 'taken to the streets' by this point, then the only way that it would happen is if somehow television could be turned off nationwide for 72 hours.... Does anyone else wonder at the complacency with which we accept whatever is put in front of us?

Regarding how this relates to the economy but as a general observation as well, we have a good friend who maintains that everything happens in cycles, saying that if things look really bleak, and we think that they couldn't possibly become more bleak, then all they can do is get better. I tend not to be negative in outlook, but when I hear things like this, I wonder, to use one example, how our predecessors would have felt at the very beginning of the Great Depression if they had known how long it was going to last--and that it would be followed by World War II?

Many things seem not to look good, and the link that Sam posted seems just another piece that validates this....

[billethkid]

but there was none to be found, so far on this thread.

So I'll just add to the negative thinking...it is a quick response force to deal with runs on banks that get out of control.

I am glad to see concern for what could happen if there were no gasoline. We all know it is a matter of time until it becomes a reality. One terrorist intervention that results in the serious damage to the mid east oil supply system and y'all better be ready. I bring this up, as I did yesterday in the political forum. The disruption of our energy supply is a much, much bigger problem than the Wall Street/banking crisis. Oil supply intervention at our consumption level has NO SHORT TERM SOLUTIONS. With such a time bomb ticking why no uprising from the masses?
(Sorry I did not intend to hijack the thread....maybe the troops are quick response for gas rationing control).

One brigade in this huge country we call the USA is statistically insignificant.
Just look at Iraq with 150,000 troops and what they can or can't control, in a country with only 18 million people.

I can't wait for the sun to come up in the morning to help look at the brighter side of life. We are blessed and should realize how fragile it COULD be.

BTK

[bestmickey]

Kind of reminds me of an old movie .... I think it was titled Soylent Green.

It also reminds me of a great TV series that was cancelled after two seasons, "Jericho".

I would like to think it was just government efficiency (an oxymoron, I know), just having a "drill" in the event the troops are ever needed. I know that when I worked for the State of NY, we had many homeland security drills with the Feds. Unfortunately, I know better than to think it's due to "government efficiency". There is no such thing.

[Sidney Lanier]

Originally Posted by oshunluva

Maybe he is contemplating ahead of time the ramifications of a McCain/Palin win in November. Everyone knows how insane and dangerous the left and/or Obama supporters can become when things do not turn out the way they [planned].

IMHO, what an utterly strange and incomprehensible comment. In the history of our nation, starting with the election of our second president, John Adams, amidst what was the beginning of opposing political parties, the citizenry--and those parts of the world with which our fledgling democracy had international relations (mostly in Europe)--waited with bated breath to see if the first presidential transition could actually be a peaceful event, and indeed it was. And it always has been; consider that the riots during the Civil War (1860s) and those during the times preceding the civil rights movement (1960s), to use just two examples, had nothing to do with presidential transition. This is not to say, of course, that supporters of losing candidates over the centuries have been pleased with the results, but there's never been a need for, say, a cessation of our U.S. Constitution-granted civil liberties stemming from the results of a presidential election.

I have a theory which admittedly may have no basis in reality, but I wonder if, generally speaking, persons who are inclined to put politics before principles tend to politicize in an effort to smokescreen and cloud other very real issues affecting us as citizens. I believe--and there are certainly those whose right is to disagree with me--that such things as:

1. the condition of the economy (and I know that there are those who feel that everything in our so-called 'free market' is just dandy...) with its uncertainties (some expressed in earlier posts in this thread) that I'd have to say I don't ever remember during my entire adult life and which includes growing class disparities which go way, way beyond the glib response of 'I worked hard and you were lazy...';

2. the worsening condition of health care (e.g., see another TOTV post from a retired military person; health care is one of my overwhelming concerns based on the horrors I've seen as a Hospice volunteer; the increasing power given to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries in recent years to the point that it's harder and harder for medical decisions to be made between oneself and one's physician; and a real pet peeve of mine about which I've posted before, the manner of structuring of the Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Plan debacle);

3. although crime and scandals are nothing new, what appears to be a growing lack of--not sure how to put it--morality, decency, honesty, respect in public life--as evidenced by such disparate individuals as Ken Lay, Scooter Libby, and Jack Abramoff, to use just three examples; and the recent bailout of the banking industry which had difficulty passing as so many citizens were adamantly opposed to it (and let their elected representatives know it!) as it seems to reward the 'ills' that led to the need for the bailout.

These are just three; for sure there are others. I've seen the word 'scary' used more than any other in relation to this post, not only on the post but also from others that I've shared the link with. And this is not to say that the world is about to fall off its axis. There are lots of wonderful things out there as well that we need to stay conscious of, live, and enjoy; and to use that overused expression, in many ways the glass is half full, not half empty.

But even so, 'scary'....

[samhass]

Nice post, Sid. I am confounded as well by Osh's statement. If I support Obama in this election, I can be insane and dangerous? I would never be supporting Obama if Romney or Ron Paul was on the Repub ticket. My own party drove me away. There's that glass navel again.

[Sidney Lanier]

Originally Posted by samhass

Nice post, Sid. I am confounded as well by Osh's statement. If I support Obama in this election, I can be insane and dangerous? I would never be supporting Obama if Romney or Ron Paul was on the Repub ticket. My own party drove me away. There's that glass navel again.

Thanks for the compliment! My post was not political but more, well, I'm not sure, maybe some social, some economic, some psychological, so I didn't feel as though 'insane and dangerous' was directed at me personally, but I guess you're right in your interpretation. That just adds to 'scary,' IMHO.

One's own party (whichever party) driving one away seems to be a recurring theme this year, not only on TOTV but throughout....

What the heck is a 'glass navel'? Geez, I have enough problems! '-)

(HB and I are looking forward to seeing you guys when we're back next moth for the winter!)