Why doesn't this natural born peacemaker do something about the war of 
terrorism killing innocent people?

peace & Love

> Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 18:15:37 -0700
> Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: What does it mean to "own" something?
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> 
> 
> There have been many men in the course of history who have let this
> world to better places who also put his pants on just like you and
> me.   I don't attribute any magic to Obama.  Just that he's a natural
> born peacemaker, diplomat and is ethnically, racially, politically,
> morally and physically right to lead us to the next level of
> civilization.   It is as much a matter of human society being ready
> for peace as it is someone to lead them to it.  It's mainly a
> confluence of serendipity, timing and desire.
> 
> On Aug 7, 5:17 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >  I am
> >
> > > of the mind and heart that Barack Hussein Obama is the man who will
> > > lead this world to a higher level of existence -- a global peace such
> > > as our species has never seen -- throughout his life's work.
> >
> > Oh man.  Are you serious or are you just yanking my chain?  He does it
> > one leg at a time just like the rest of us, gruff.  I agree with you
> > on free-markets though.
> >
> > dj
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:15 AM, gruff<[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > "... On Aug 3, 1:20 pm, frantheman <[email protected]>
> > > wrote: ..."
> >
> > >> Ok, gruff, I'll jump in - a bit!
> >
> > > Glad you did, Francis, a very nice restatement.  You proved out an
> > > item or two I wasn't aware was in my exposition.  For instance, I
> > > hadn't noticed the "sanctity of private ownership" aspect of my brief
> > > which can be expected, I suppose given my personal experience with
> > > possessions, but that sanctity is certainly strongly implied.
> >
> > > Of course free-market capitalism is far from perfect in its pratice,
> > > but given the vicissitudes of the human condition, I'd say we're not
> > > doing too badly with it.  I'm not sure I totally agree with the
> > > essence of capitalism being personal possession.  I think perhaps that
> > > is a byproduct of it.  I see the essence of capitalism as profits.
> > > Capital used to grow wealth.  Of course, these profits or capital are
> > > held by individuals which could, I suppose, be reduced to the concept
> > > of personal possession.  I agree completely with your concept of
> > > surplus value (profits) tied with the concept of minimizing the all to
> > > human larceny which seems to lie in most all hearts.  This almost
> > > gives credence to the concept of original sin, doesn't it.  Almost.
> >
> > > How would you define this 'social market economy'  you name?  I think
> > > I can make a pretty good guess based on the term itself but I'd like
> > > to hear how you think it's constructed and how it works.
> >
> > > I also agree with your assessment of the eighties where we took a
> > > major turn to the right and began to be suspicious of any government
> > > intervention in the social processes and I have to admit to my own
> > > complicity in proselytizing the ability of the market to be self-
> > > regulating.  I still believe that to be true, but the boundaries where
> > > that self correction comes into play are clearly way beyond the limits
> > > our current economic system can bear.   But I beg innocence.  We are
> > > relatively newcomers to this complex and fascinating world of
> > > economics, especially on a fiat and global basis so if there is any
> > > forgiveness capital left, I think we deserve a small dollop of it.
> >
> > > However, I don't see Vam's preferences, at least the way you restate
> > > them to be that much different than my own.  I have long supported the
> > > concept of a free-market capitalist economic structure because it
> > > generates a tremendous amount of wealth which can in turn support and
> > > generously fund all manner of social benefits for the good of society
> > > as a whole and each individual within that society.  A wealthy society
> > > can and should be not only willing but eager to raise even the least
> > > of its members to a higher level of existence which in turn can do no
> > > less than raise everyone.
> >
> > > Such efforts easily encompass such humanitarian concepts of fairness,
> > > compassion, solidarity within the fundamental character of the human
> > > species and I think it is quite natural to do so.  This current state
> > > of dog eat dog and to hell with they neighbor is antithetical to our
> > > basic nature, which I truly believe is compassionate, fair and bound
> > > to each other in the deepest of senses.  To this end, I continually
> > > battle fear, which I believe to be the root cause of all the bad
> > > humans do.
> >
> > > In that sense, I do think one of the major results of the '08 crash
> > > will be more compassion and concern for each other (i.e., a healthy
> > > self interest) and a general raising up of all of us.
> >
> > > I do not, however, think the window of opportunity is closing.  I am
> > > of the mind and heart that Barack Hussein Obama is the man who will
> > > lead this world to a higher level of existence -- a global peace such
> > > as our species has never seen -- throughout his life's work.  For the
> > > basis of this belief I refer you to his Keynote Speech at the 2004
> > > Convention.
> >
> > > /e
> > 

_________________________________________________________________
Show them the way! Add maps and directions to your party invites. 
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/products/events.aspx
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to