Selecting our leaders

Interbane · Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:55 am

I created this thread to deal with the tangent in another thread. It's an excellent topic.

Thanks johnson and pres c., I'm following along.

geo · Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:14 pm

It's relatively easy. We just have to find people like Thomas Jefferson.

President Camacho · Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:14 pm

Why Thomas Jefferson?

geo · Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:11 pm


	President Camacho wrote: Why Thomas Jefferson?

He was eminently qualified to be president. He was a scientist, philosopher, statesman, principal author of the Declaration of Independence, one of the most influential of our founding fathers. Perhaps his best quality was that he was so knowledgeable in so many different areas.

from Wikipedia:
"When President John F. Kennedy welcomed 49 Nobel Prize winners to the White House in 1962 he said, "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent and of human knowledge that has ever been gathered together at the White House – with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

President Camacho · Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:14 pm

Have you ever read the federalist papers? Hamilton was pretty amazing.

If you haven't read them, I'd be willing to read them with you. I've read half way through and it's a tough journey. I bought one of those electronic dictionary/bookmark gadgets. I had to look up like every other word. That was about 4 or 5 years ago. Lemme know. It really is worth the read to find out what our Founding Fathers' truly intended for our nation.

These are the vocal ones - not the introverts like Washington and Jefferson.

geo · Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:20 pm

I haven't read the federalist papers, but I'd be willing to tackle that. Right now I'm reading Chaucer and The Evolution of God, so maybe soon.

Many of our founding fathers were amazing individuals. I'm guessing most of these guys were educated in Europe? I don't know much about Hamilton per se. Franklin was pretty amazing too, but he had some personality quirks that might make him less than an optimal candidate.

President Camacho · Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:27 pm

god... why people like reading and discussing that worthless topic is beyond me. The only reason anyone should discuss it is to find the reason 'why' so that it never happens again - much like finding a cure for a disease. What a waste of time.

geo · Tue Aug 24, 2010 6:28 am

Pardon?

DWill · Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:45 am


	geo wrote: I haven't read the federalist papers, but I'd be willing to tackle that. Right now I'm reading Chaucer and The Evolution of God, so maybe soon. Many of our founding fathers were amazing individuals. I'm guessing most of these guys were educated in Europe? I don't know much about Hamilton per se. Franklin was pretty amazing too, but he had some personality quirks that might make him less than an optimal candidate.

geo, are you reading Chaucer in Middle English? That's the way to go! I've always meant to read Chaucer again. I'm not sure that in Chaucer class we were required to read the complete Tales.

DWill · Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:50 am


	President Camacho wrote: god... why people like reading and discussing that worthless topic is beyond me. The only reason anyone should discuss it is to find the reason 'why' so that it never happens again - much like finding a cure for a disease. What a waste of time.

Hey Comacho, sorry to interrupt, but I'm curious to know how you deal with the matter of god or God when you come across it in your extensive reading of classics. Don't you find that, like it or not, the god-thing is actually a big part of the humanities? Do you just ignore all of that? A friendly question.

geo · Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:23 am

Oh I get it. I didn't know that Camacho was referring to the Evolution of God. I thought he was saying, god, why does anyone want to talk about that. And I didn't know what "that" was.

Anyway, Camacho, I'm fascinated with the concept of belief, mostly the psychological and evolutionary components of it. People believe in god for all kinds of reasons and over the centuries our concept of "god" has evolved. It's pretty interesting stuff. The author doesn't talk about "God" per se but how our concept of god has changed from hunter-gatherer times until now. It's a look at what makes people tick.

geo · Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:30 am

DWill wrote:


	geo wrote: I haven't read the federalist papers, but I'd be willing to tackle that. Right now I'm reading Chaucer and The Evolution of God, so maybe soon. Many of our founding fathers were amazing individuals. I'm guessing most of these guys were educated in Europe? I don't know much about Hamilton per se. Franklin was pretty amazing too, but he had some personality quirks that might make him less than an optimal candidate.

geo, are you reading Chaucer in Middle English? That's the way to go! I've always meant to read Chaucer again. I'm not sure that in Chaucer class we were required to read the complete Tales.

Hey DWill, I'm reading The Penguin Classics version which has both Middle English and translated pages side by side. Honestly, I look at the Middle English and can't make much of it. I might get a better handle on it as I go on.

Most of the Canterbury Tales volumes out there are selections from the overall work. This one's quite good. I'm enjoying the hell out of it. Why don't you and Camacho read along?

http://www.amazon.com/Canterbury-Tales- ... 804&sr=1-6

johnson1010 · Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:27 pm

i don't think that our electoral process really does ferret out the best and brigtest of our leaders.

There are far more profitable jobs, which are given to less scrutiny, and actually allow for the exercise of greater personal power, such as the CEO of a corporation. The term CEO instantly conjures the image of some villain to my mind, but i don't think that has to always be the case, or that most of these people started off that way.

There is often just too much bull in the way for a person to submit themselves to it. I suspect that a lot of the real idea wranglers work out of the spotlight as advisors.

The electoral system is pretty busted right now, but i don't have a good way to fix it.

President Camacho · Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:51 pm


	DWill wrote: Hey Comacho, sorry to interrupt, but I'm curious to know how you deal with the matter of god or God when you come across it in your extensive reading of classics. Don't you find that, like it or not, the god-thing is actually a big part of the humanities? Do you just ignore all of that? A friendly question.

How I deal with the matter of god or God when I come across it in my extensive reading of classics...

I'm really a hypocrite. I'm reading Hesiod's Theogony and Works and Days right now. Theogony deals only with the Gods. You see, this book explains exactly how certain gods came to be. It's all about the Greek Gods... or as we like to think of it now - Mythology. MYTHOLOGY!!!!!! Can you believe that??!?!?!?!?! hahahaha!!!! We tell our children with a smile that these were just fanciful stories of conjured up super-beings meant to explain why things are the way the are - you know, before science and CHRIST!!!! HAHAHAHAAAA!!!! Can you believe it!?!?!?!?!? LMAO! There are some that are reading this shrugging their shoulders and wondering what I'm getting on about. I guarantee it!!!!

God is inseparable from history because man has made it so. But that's where the idea belongs!!! HISTORY. We need to, as adults, put these toys away. Then I can tell my children with a smile all about American Mythology.

Creating Gods is something humans have done forever. I can't escape some form of man's idea of a god or gods when I read my "classics". Christians managed to get a good monopoly on religion by explaining that other forms of idolatry are different and wrong from what they do. It's crazy.

But! - Throughout history man has also been trying to reveal religion for the sham it really is. So there has always been a war between good and evil - with evil winning at almost every turn (stupidity).

President Camacho · Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:02 pm

I agree with finding out why people choose to create gods - but I think I know.

It's a form of groupthink where one main azzhole gets a group of people to believe what he's saying and then, by gaining a foothold in society, increases power by making life difficult for those who don't accept the true faith. Various methods are employed such as ostracism, withholding items of want or need, making breathing difficult, certain death, getting others to shun them... man, you name it! They can get really creative when it comes to these forms of punishment for not accepting the 'true faith'. They create this fervor and madness. It's madness!!! Once you can create that madness and your followers are lapping up the kool-aid, you're f*cking done my friend! Congrats, you have yourself a legitimate religion. Good luck keeping it from branching out into individual little mad groups of their own based on your original idea.

Forum rules

Selecting our leaders Tweet This Topic

Who is online

Chat Room Always Open!