Entrophy, I watched Casa Blanca, and didn't like it all that much: typical Bogart movie of him posturing in a number of ways, and nothing really goes anywhere. But I can't agree with you that people were encouraged to go to war with that movie.

Green Berets was different. Here John Wayne presents a very false view of how they operate (I was in Vietnam and visited with Green Beret camps). And further made our visit there honorable, which it absolutely was not. So I see that movie as major false propaganda, and not so with Casa Blanca.

Mike, when Obama first came on the scene I bought both of his books. And it became very clear to me that moved to each new endeavor (community organizer, to lawyer, to state representative, to US senator, to president), because he realized he wasn't accomplishing what he wanted to in the first place. The further he got, the more frustrated he got; never realizing that what he initially wanted was never going to work. By the time he got to run for president, I"m sure he switched to wanting fame and a lot of money.

All such people are divorced from reality in all areas of their lives, including their relationships with their spouse and children. So he may claim he loves his wife and daughters, and may believe that he does, but it is guaranteed to be an abstract concept of love that is not real. Hence another scam. You may not believe this, but I am clear it is true. And since from my view it is his view of the world, I accept him for who he is, and have no negative feelings toward him. Further, I realize he is only doing what most Americans want done, so he isn't taking anyone to where they don't want to go.

Right, I thought I was clear the government credit card approach to daily expenses was insane. It is obvious that for a couple of years the "borrowing" to finance the annual deficit was actually the Fed putting a couple more trillion in the Treasury's checking account at the Fed, and was not borrowing at all. At some point in the future, this will result in major inflation. It is truly irresponsible behavior.

I just wanted to challenge your view Republicans were doing it to decease dependency. You should only object to something based on it just doesn't work, or it is really irresponsible. Otherwise your objection will go over the heads of the intended party.

Cog, we need to agree to disagree on this. People experience being dependent, and experience being independent. No one experiences being interdependent, because it is an imagined concept. And the word dependent and independent was part of the human experience long before psychology was first dreamed up.

Yes, Walter, now. But I predict that won't last long, once insurance companies realize current mental treatment is never ending and very expensive.

Excellent link Mc, excellent link. I just changed my view of John Wayne a lot. But his Green Beret movie was pure propaganda.

MIke, I have observed Obama doing dozens or actions, and every single one didn't work. The idea that I can't say everything Obama touches is a scam without hating is absurd. It that were true, one could never make an unbiased and accurate conclusion that a person is very incompetent. And that is absolutely possible.

Thanks Mike. You finally perceive our differences.

No Walter, not medical science, but conventional (disease-oriented) medical approaches. Back in the late 1800's, the vast majority of physicians and medical scientists, decided (arbitrary and capriciously: without any evidence) that every human was a machine made up of parts, and illness didn't exist except as a process begun as pathology (one or more physical tissues malfunctioning). And medical "science" began to be exclusively about discovering pathology and then eliminating it or controlling it. And no more did any conventional physician or medical scientist investigate whether or not any other phenomena might be the cause of each illness.

If it was true, which I can prove is true, that no illness starts with pathology, and when pathology when present is always the end product of an illness process, and that the initial start of every illness is an imbalance in the ill person's spirit, then attempting to eliminate or control pathology, only results in the illness process moving to a more limited manifestation, then this pathology treatment approach only results in ill people becoming more and more limited over time; "no matter what treatments a physician can apply either before, during, or after an injury or illness, all are ineffective?".

And any unbiased look at all ill people reveals that is true. If you believe that removing suspicious polyps from the colon prohibits future colon cancer, and you ignore that that person becomes more emotional, more cloudy in their thinking, and having more and more limited attitudes, you can claim suspicious polyp removal is effective. But if you look at the ill person's overall experience of daily living, it is not effective and actually counterproductive.

When you look solely at whether a person smokes or not, or eats raw bacon instead of lots of fruit, the conventional approach appears to have promise. But if you discover that any person who smokes three packs per day, or eats a lot of raw bacon has major attitudinal limitations, and just ceasing the smoking or bacon eating, doesn't for a second change those attitudinal restrictions, and that person becomes more and more limited over time, that preventive medical approach begins to be seen as very unproductive; which is what always occurs; in essence a scam.

Bomber, I have no idea what you are claiming. Nothing about what I wrote stated that people who get a job are automatically lazy.