Who is that anti-amrican bastard?...

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by mosgood
Soooo..... your views on government are more valid than his because........?

Have you ever hear Jane Fonda (or some other uneducated idiot) speak in public about the dangers of some technology (of which she is totally ignorant?)  

Yeah, I know more about nuclear physics than Jane Fonda and I sure as hell know more about government than Kurt Vonnegut.

Man, he's an entertainer!  He writes very entertaining books, but they are fiction.  Read some of James Hogan's books (another science fiction author.)  They are superb reads and about as realistic as Dagwood finding a closed form solution to the 3-body problem.

curly

[Saurdaukar]

SH5 was a good book.

[mosgood]

Originally posted by AKcurly
Have you ever hear Jane Fonda (or some other uneducated idiot) speak in public about the dangers of some technology (of which she is totally ignorant?)  

Yeah, I know more about nuclear physics than Jane Fonda and I sure as hell know more about government than Kurt Vonnegut.

Man, he's an entertainer!  He writes very entertaining books, but they are fiction.  Read some of James Hogan's books (another science fiction author.)  They are superb reads and about as realistic as Dagwood finding a closed form solution to the 3-body problem.

curly

Ok, so you've just said that you know more about government than him... the question was why? Why do you think your views are more valid.  Because they are different than his?  Because your views make more sense to you?

And just because he's an entertainer doesn't mean that that is ALL he knows.  Jane Fonda is a nice example to prove your point.... what about President Ronald Reagan or the present governor of california.  Or are they OK because they share your views?

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by AKcurly
Citing Kurt Vonnegut's views on government is rather like citing Goldie Hawn's views on nuclear physics.
He is a freaking science fiction author.  He makes money by writing crap like this.
curly

  you have the logic of a Vulcan...oh wait, thats Sci-Fi, too....

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by mosgood
Ok, so you've just said that you know more about government than him... the question was why? Why do you think your views are more valid.  Because they are different than his?  Because your views make more sense to you?

And just because he's an entertainer doesn't mean that that is ALL he knows.  Jane Fonda is a nice example to prove your point.... what about President Ronald Reagan or the present governor of california.  Or are they OK because they share your views?

Ronald Reagan and Herr Groppenfuhrer certainly don't share political views with me.

Concerning the entertainer stuff, sure, I'll admit it, I'm prejudiced.  Uneducated people with strong political views are usually poorly educated or at best naive.

If I want an informed opinion about medicine, I ask a physician; if I want an opinion about government, I would check with sociologists/economists/government hacks.  And I repeat, reading Kurt Vonnegut for meaningful theories about government is ludicrous.

curly

[Otto]

Don't forget 'Ice Nine'....  The guy new what he was talking about...

[Nash]

Gotta say curly... that's a pretty narrow-minded POV and thus confusing to me.

Literature cannot touch on government.... or Hey!... anything but writing, because the authors are not experts in any other field. Do you know how many great works that'd wipe out? One Russian writer comes immediately to mind. Among many others. And that's just politics.

It's a forest for the trees thing. Of course you'd go to the experts for such things as how exactly how a law is drafted (for eg.)... But I sure as hell wouldn't look to any of those same people for meaning or perspective on how it winds up affecting us.

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by Nash
Gotta say curly... that's a pretty narrow-minded POV and thus confusing to me.

Literature cannot touch on government.... or Hey!... anything but writing, because the authors are not experts in any other field. Do you know how many great works that'd wipe out? One Russian writer comes immediately to mind. Among many others. And that's just politics.

It's a forest for the trees thing. Of course you'd go to the experts for such things as how exactly how a law is drafted (for eg.)... But I sure as hell wouldn't look to any of those same people for meaning or perspective on how it winds up affecting us.

Sure, you expect (and need) commentary from the press.  But one should not confuse statements by authors or reporters with facts.  

A good function of the press (and authors like Vonegut) is they cause us to re-examine our beliefs.  Hell, they're free to say anything because they are the press ... free society.

I took exception to Boroda posting Voneguts meanderings like they were some great findings, that's all.  Vonegut is a great author of fiction.  While his work is certainly grounded in reality, it may not even represent his opinion.  He exists to sell books.

curly

[Nash]

"He exists to sell books."

omg. Vonnegut?

That's the depressing and sheep-like (read all-too-common) height of cynisism that sadly pervades too much of our discourse.

Like an accomplished 81 year-old writer would say these things to sell even more millions of books he'd written 40 years ago.

The asians don't look at their elders as "gone through war thus damaged". I appreciate that model. If someone who's actually been through the depression, WWII, Korea and etc., wants to offer me his perspective, trust me, I am going to listen.

The thought of him trying to hawk yet even more of his books won't even cross my mind.

I will NOT read Kennedy/Lott/Clinton/Bush... your so-called experts.... to give me perspective on how great the law they just crafted really is.

In my mind, I thanked Boroda for posting this.

It's was an authentic change of pace from all the cnn/fox rip 'n paste garbage posts. If you have something to paste from anyone who happens to be smarter than the folks I named above (can't be that hard), feel free to post them here. No matter what viewpoint it advocates, it would be a welcome change believe me.

You might disagree with Vonnegut... hell knows many do. But ditch the cynisism, listen and then decide where to store it. He sure as hell knows a bit more about things than pampered generations like mine.

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by Nash
"He exists to sell books."

omg. Vonnegut?

That's the depressing and sheep-like (read all-too-common) height of cynisism that sadly pervades too much of our discourse.

Like an accomplished 81 year-old writer would say these things to sell even more millions of books he'd written 40 years ago.

The asians don't look at their elders as "gone through war thus damaged". I appreciate that model. If someone who's actually been through the depression, WWII, Korea and etc., wants to offer me his perspective, trust me, I am going to listen.

The thought of him trying to hawk yet even more of his books won't even cross my mind.

I will NOT read Kennedy/Lott/Clinton/Bush... your so-called experts.... to give me perspective on how great the law they just crafted really is.

In my mind, I thanked Boroda for posting this.

It's was an authentic change of pace from all the cnn/fox rip 'n paste garbage posts. If you have something to paste from anyone who happens to be smarter than the folks I named above (can't be that hard), feel free to post them here. No matter what viewpoint it advocates, it would be a welcome change believe me.

You might disagree with Vonnegut... hell knows many do. But ditch the cynisism, listen and then decide where to store it. He sure as hell knows a bit more about things than pampered generations like mine.

Ah yes, but you see, I don't belong to your pampered generation.

Whether I agree or disagree with Vonnegut isn't the issue.  The issue is citing *entertainers* as serious contributors to our society and Vonnegut is an entertainer.

Tell you what Nash, next time you need a few facts on nuclear energy, write Susan Sarandon.  She'll give you all manner of *facts.*  Or hey, since Boroda started this, if you need a few *facts* about biology, ask him to send you a copy of a text by Lysenko.

One depressing issue with your sheep-like, pampered and drug-besotted generation is that you have trouble with facts.  You want to the truth to sound like you *think* it should.  You want your facts to come to you via brisk media sound bites.  

Cyncism my left foot!

curly

[Nash]

So what generation DO you belong to? Baby boomers is my guess. You aint that different than me. In fact you taught us everything we know.

K.....

Let me see if I understand you right.

Literature is merely "entertainment", with nothing more than entertainment to offer. Is that what you're saying?

Anyone who has a certain view can be equated with the dumbest of viewpoints of same:

"Nookular is bad. Sarandon said so. She's a ditz. Therefore nookular is good."

Obvious bs tactic. Aren't/weren't you a Prof? Would you accept the same reasoning from any of your students?

You say our generation has trouble with the facts. Your generation is feeding us the so-called facts. Do you honestly fault us for not buying them?

[Nash]

And I find it funny that you say our generation has trouble with the facts.

... after casually brushing off Vonnegut by saying "he exists to sell books".

I'm going over your head for "facts".... and you're spitting out the sound bites here.

[Nash]

Fuggit and Gawdamn!

"The issue is citing *entertainers* as serious contributors to our society..."

That just gets under my skin. I cannot help myself in being a post-potato onnacount of it. Forgive me for I have ranted.

I have seen alotta dumb things said here... but MAN....

.... Cuz I think yer smarter than this... And so I immediately have to think of your motive in posting something like that. Cuz dude you can't possibly mean that.

All the literary works are based on the sale of books.

And those authors are some how not "serious contibutors to our socitey..."

Hello!

Damn...

And those books are "entertainment"....

What shrecking caca! Just retarded.

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by Nash
Fuggit and Gawdamn!

"The issue is citing *entertainers* as serious contributors to our society..."

That just gets under my skin. I cannot help myself in being a post-potato onnacount of it. Forgive me for I have ranted.

I have seen alotta dumb things said here... but MAN....

.... Cuz I think yer smarter than this... And so I immediately have to think of your motive in posting something like that. Cuz dude you can't possibly mean that.

All the literary works are based on the sale of books.

And those authors are some how not "serious contibutors to our socitey..."

Hello!

Damn...

And those books are "entertainment"....

What shrecking caca! Just retarded.

Lol Nash.  Sorry dude, slip of the finger.  Instead of *serious contributor*, I meant *serious commenator.*

Entertainers have to be serious contributors, or they go down the tubes.  But their comments?  Well, they have to fill a niche of some sort.  They need to resonate with current problems or they need to be entertaining, but they sure don't have to be accurate.

curly

[Nash]

whatever....

The Coming of Wisdom with Time

Though leaves are many, the root is one;
Through all the lying days of my youth
I swayed my leaves and flowers in the sun;
Now I may wither into the truth.

-Yeats


Here's an "entertainer" for you. With nothing to offer you that Madonna can't.

You talk of accuracy? Well then this dude is missing the mark because there's no way he could grow leaves.

But maybe there's something more here....

Maybe it aint just entertainment (Pahtoohey! spit)

And maybe you, curly, need to revisit this. Just my observation cuz you seem to be getting farther from it.