Stephen Colbert

[Andail]

You're over-sensitive, my friend
First you get all wound up about something I never said, namely that fencing is unsophisticated or whatnot (which is a complete fabrication on your part), and when I try to make you feel better by mentioning that I myself go to a gym, which is far less sophisticated, you make a big deal out of that:
"the mighty gym-attending, self-actualized Andail ".
It seems there is little I can say to console your wounded ego.

As far as an insult goes, I was hitting more at your English learning method than your actual spelling.

This is a part I still don't get at all. What, pray, are those methods that you make fun of? I just got back my literature thesis, and I got a far better grade than any of my Sussex (native English speakers) classmates.

And even if I would have acquired all my English knowledge from Mortal Kombat (a game whose connection to me I still fail to grasp...or wait, is it the usage of "K"? Please tell me it isn't!), wouldn't that be quite cool?

EDIT:
A little article about what I spoke of earlier
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060508/8homeland.htm

extract:

U.S. News has identified nearly a dozen cases in which city and county police, in the name of homeland security, have surveilled or harassed animal-rights and antiwar protesters, union activists, and even library patrons surfing the Web. Unlike with Washington's warrantless domestic surveillance program, little attention has been focused on the role of state and local authorities in the war on terrorism

[SSH]

Woah, hadn't read this thread for ages and i see it has turned into a discussion of welfare, libertarianism and a flame war!

BB: income tax isn't the only tax. Best to look at the total tax burden in a country. Also, fencing does have the image (in the UK at least) of being elite and establishment, which I think was all that Andail was saying.

Tuomas: you have the freedom to move to another country and pay the taxes there for a different set of priorities. In the EU you won't even need a Visa to live there permanently.  That is much more freedom than many countries.

Andail: that would is confusing and superfluous in your last paragraph. Better to be "And even if I had..."  : Also, libertarians would equate lack of taxes with freedom... but then they are confusing "gratis" and "libre" somewhat.

[DGMacphee]

Nixon had 15% approval in 1973 [after getting 60% of the vote in '72]. I don't think Bush has dived that low yet.

Bumpin' the thread because they announced today that Bush's approval rating has dropped below Nixon's when Watergate was in full swing in the Summer of 1973 (39%). I reckon there's a good chance it could drop lower than Nixon's worst (As Naranjas said, 15%).

Even Republicans are pissed at him and surveys indicate 1 in 3 want the GOP out of Congress. I was watching Joe Scarborough recently and even he reckons a few of the leading administration officials will be swept away. So, unless Bush pulls a rabbit out of a hat (or Osama), he's going to go from being up Shit Creek to crashing down Shit Rapids.

Also, there's talk that Karl Rove's going to get indicted.

[Barbarian]

And the "sweeping under the rug" continues... 
Interesting news follow up... The YouTube and IFILM websites have been forced to have the Colbert video clips removed from their sites:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/colbert_video

[lo_res_man]

As well the Bush vs. Bush debate (can you spot the real deal ) is offline for "copyright issues"
While financial freedom in America may be greater then in many countries( less taxes) political freedom is dropping to an all time low. Though, give America credit, in quite a few countries he would be shot for the things he said. But somehow this is more insidious.

[Kweepa]

The YouTube and IFILM websites have been forced to have the Colbert video clips removed from their sites:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/colbert_video

Hardly "sweeping under the rug" since the speech is prominently featured at the top of the page, and in good quality, at video.google.com. When it mysteriously disappears in a week or two I'll be back on the conspiracy train, but for now I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.

[Barbarian]

It's a "sweeping under the rug" I tell you, a major sweeping!    Com' on, jump on-board the conspiracy wagon, you know you wanna:
http://denisdekat.com/?p=1217
http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000437.htm
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/1/1299/16704
  etc.. etc... See see! It's all a massive cover up to "censor" the "truth" I tell ya. 

[Helm]

can I still comment on the 'america is freer or is she?' thing?

Political freedom is not hard to define. The ability to congregate on social or political issues, to speak one's mind about such aspects without fear of censorship of even worse, persecution from govermental or semi-govermental elements, the freedom of vote, etc. Textbook stuff, no?

Therefore, any democratic country which doesnt enforce the Patriot Act or a variation of the form offers more political freedom to it's people than the US does.

Agree?

[lo_res_man]

Yes, Helm, for once (that is nothing against you), I agree with you. I think we can't simply define Freedom, it has different aspects, and often certain freedoms are mutually exclusive.   For example Financial freedom and freedom from poverty are (correct me if I am wrong) are impossible to have in large amounts, co-existing.

[DGMacphee]

Yeah, I agree too. I think Helm pretty much nailed it on the head.

[Nacho]

I am sorry... But aren't we making some way of patriotic act when spreading the idea that Europe/Japan/Australia, etc... has more freedom than the USA?

I mean... the idea that "we are more democratic, cult, peacefull..." than the USA is THERE, at least in Europe. Man, we are seeing that in this certain thread!

Where has came that idea? Has it magically sprouted from the people? Or has it been put there by someone? I have the documental channel in my TV, and, man... you just can say when a program is french just by the topics, and how anti-americans they are. I mean, the "official" version in France is that they are the paladdins of freedom, the lighthouse of culture of the new Europe against the decadent America.

That is patriotism...

It's different than the patriotism of that fat men who have a skull of bull in his Jeep, and a confederate flag in his Harley Davidson, but patriotism. Just that our is more subtile. It is that subtile that you are being patriot without knowing it.

We are as patriots as the Americans. You just gotta name "AMERICA" in a certain place, and you'll soon start 3 or 4 voices telling how they suck, and how better than them we are! We are patriots, just that we are patriots showing how sick we are of the Yankees and they are patriots saying that their country is the best in the world... I don't really see the difference.

At least from the European point of view, I can't talk of other places, never been in Australia.

[Helm]

Farlander, I am reffering to The Patriot Act, not acting like a patriot in general.

[Nacho]

Reading it... seems that it is a severe cut of freedom by the idiot George... And he had the guts to call it "the patriot act"  What an arse.

So, I just can't do more than agreeing with Helm. 

[Kweepa]

Exactly. Call it the Patriot Act, and then if you oppose it, you are obviously unpatriotic. It's typical for this administration.
The Clear Skies Act, the Healthy Forests Initiative, etc.

[Babar]

Wouldn't freedom be better categorised according to people than to countries? I really can't think that any country could be equally free for all types of people.

[Helm]

political freedoms aren't very difficult to agree on for most of the western world. Depends on the point of view, but between andail, big brother, farlander and most other that post in this thread, I'm pretty sure they all agree on basic human rights and liberties, freedom of speech, press, voting and so on

[Nacho]

I agree. We all know (In Europe, Japan, USA, Australia...) what freedom is. And my opinion is that in Western contries "which is more free" is something that can't know, because the amount of freedom is simillar.

What is out of discussion is that meassures like the "patriotic act" tie your freedom, so the USA is loosing points in the score.

I can't say how many points, and if that is making them have less advantage in the "freedometer", or making higher the distance between the US and the virtual "leader", but I agree with Helm...

But this looks for me (I hope to be right, for the benefit of my American friends, mainly...) more than a temporal issue than an unsolvable problem.

*Edit* I see that I don't mention Turkey (Gord10) or Pakistan (Babar) in the list of "free countries". That doesn't mean that I think they are not free, but the cultures are so different that maybe the concept might change a bit. But I love both of them... Specially Babar, when he has a beard.

[Babar]

Heh, thanks, Farlander. I'd like you too, if you grew a beard

I'm sorry for being so stupid, Helm, but what do you mean by "Political Freedom"? Perhaps I'm taking the wrong meaning. Would democracy be more "free" than communism (not that I think that democracy is the opposite of communism. It just seems taken to be so)? What about the minorities, then? What about when your "liberties" infringe on mine? Where should the line be drawn? How "free" would we be with these "lines" in place?

What I meant about freedom categorised by people: Since you brought up Pakistan, I'd say I'm reasonably free over here. Of course, I'd have to admit that being male, muslim, (perhaps even bearded?) might be helping in that- but that's probably not political, just perceptive freedom. But then, I see non-muslims, females, even non-pakistanis are reasonably free over here. I see about 4 to 5 churches on my daily travels. I see truck drivers who have painted huge murals of Christ on the cross at the back of their trucks, I see many taxis with little crosses hanging on the rear view mirror, about half of the students in my classes were shias, I see women walking around in sleeveless tops, and tight fitting jeans, I see posters all around of women even more provocatively dressed, The news has some scathing article about what bad things the president has done lately, what close-mindedness the mullah's have displayed lately, etc. Of course, I'd be the first to admit that there are many things that can in no way be considered "free". The "Freedom" is geared towards one specific set of people.

The thing is, I don't see it much different in other countries (ok, perhaps a little).

In the name of religious freedom, in some countries (2?) they banned the hijab in schools. What about those people who actually wanted to wear the hijab? Isn't their freedom being restricted? Even in countries where there is no such ban, if someone wears a hijab, they are automatically thought of as "poor, isolated, mistreated, woman", while the woman who is wearing it could be trying to represent the exact opposite traits with her dress. This might not be "political" in any way, but it's a restriction of freedom. People can be stopped and strip-searched at airports just because they happen to have a terroristy sounding name, or nationality.

In the name of capitalism (freedom to make money), peoples freedoms are also being restricted. Poor people cannot really compete against the richer ones in making money, even if they have an incredible idea. In fact, the whole concept of having money-making as such an important part of a culture seems weirdly unfree to me.

[Barbarian]

Sorry to bump da thread.
As some peoples here were talking about "freedoms" in the US and such, though it's interesting to mention about recent news developments about that Bush and his Gvnmt "...has been collecting data on the phone calls of tens of millions of Americans...", "Ã, The country's three biggest phone companies have been handing over call records to the National Security Agency (NSA) since 2001". Ã, So, basically, you're free to make a phone call, but the Bush and his Government is free to spy on you if you doÃ, 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4762623.stm