The telltale sign of desperation in politics is when people start making wild threats and accusations. From Joe McCarthy to Richard Nixon, the Republican Party has a long record in this realm, regularly trying to deflect attention from its troubles by lashing out with menacing rhetoric and intimidation tactics. Today’s Republican Party is no different. Case in point is scandal-plagued House… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (137)Page 1 of 1 pagesIs anyone really surprised by Tom Delay?He’s what happens when you sell your soul to the Devil.
As well,he should be a poster child against prolonged exposure to insecticides.Tom,please,get out of politics and go back to crushing helpless things with SIX legs.Kill a few cockroaches and you won’t feel like tampering with Social Security anymore.
Posted by wwoods on Apr 18, 2005 at 1:34 PM Mr. Sorito
I strongly believe in your statement
I feel that government involvent should have been excluded from the decision made by the husband of Terri Schiavo. I call here by her by her full name becouse I refuse to talk about her like I know her. I am not going to lie, i believe in pro-life. I want to live and do as many things as possible while I am alive, but we realy have to put ourselves in the same situation as Terri Schiavo. Imagine looking at a wall in a the same room for 15 plus years. Although she might not be suffering on the outside she could be suffering from the inside. That to say if she even has emotional feeling. Laying in a bed fro a week is painful enough, I would have not been able to lay down for 15 plus years. I feel realy sorry for the entire family of Terri Schiavo, but sometimes people have a very hard time letting things go. Hopefuly they will relize that when they come to time when “passing away” is around their corner.
It was her time and the courts had made a decision. Maybe this will open some doors when it comes to the death penalty.
Travis Teeboom (D) of denver
P.S. I oppologize if i offend anyone. I am just practicing my right.
Posted by Travis Teeboom on Apr 18, 2005 at 3:58 PM I can hardly wait for the wingnuts on the far right (read this neokook administration and its enablers) to rush in and defend poor Tom from the the traitorous enemy (read Liberals) spewing lies and distortions about him. I can hear it now… Why Tom is an upstanding conservative God fearing and worshiping Republican. Didn’t he just leap off his white horse in an attempt to save Terri Schiavo from the murderers on the life hating left? And didn’t he, almost singlehandedly straighten out the Congressional districts down in Texas that the left had “fixed?” Its just such a shame that poor Tom is being hounded like this. You Liberals should be ashamed!
Posted by Merlin on Apr 18, 2005 at 6:51 PM I think we need to remember that, to the folks DeLay is trying to reach, this does this does not appear “out of line”. Remember that DeLay first responded that he was “being persecuted”, and there was “a conspiracy” to bring him down. The next logical step would be to fight back, when what you are fighting against is “EVIL!”
This is being framed right in line with people that have panderd to the religious right for all of recorded history. Remember the tactics of Jimmy Swaggert. He was taken down in the end but only after overwhelming evidence of “evil doings”.
To them, Tom DeLay is doing Gods work. To bad the
faithful cannot see that they are being used as pawns in all this.
Posted by Gary on Apr 18, 2005 at 8:33 PM About your last statement: “When it will end, no one knows. But you can rest assured it will. History proves no amount of intimidation can turn democratic America into the quasi-fascist state that conservatives desire.”
I sincerely hope you’re right about this—I wonder if it’s true? Perhaps, since America is the only major power that can’t possibly adapt to the looming era of “peak oil” it’s poised to become a quasi-fascist state and remain that way until it falls apart completely.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 18, 2005 at 9:10 PM Don’t you believe it. If there’s one thing “history proves”, it’s that a country can sicken and fall within a decade. This kind of stupid optimism is part of the problem. “Oh, it’ll all work out in the end” - don’t you believe it.
Posted by Niki Lambros on Apr 18, 2005 at 9:38 PM I agree with those who are less sure than David Sorito about the polical potential of DeLay and all he stands for. The big mistake every-one (including myself) has made in the past, is thinking that fascisim speaks with a funny foreign accent. It doesn’t. The beast lies waiting in every society, waiting to be stroked into life and released against its enemies. The US is not immune from the forces that have wracked every society under strain from social crisis and economic stagnation. The whole world needs the US progressive movement to spring into life and restore liberalism to your society. It is your task to rescue your society from the reckless idiots that now have both the US and the world in thrall. Our lives depend upon it.
Posted by Jane Doe on Apr 18, 2005 at 10:22 PM Jane,
I understand your point—I wrestle with this all the time—I accept that there exists a responsibility for me to help fix my broken society. If I leave with my family, it’s one less voice here; if I stay, our lives are diminished and marginalized by hordes of people rushing to consume the last available resources and pursuing mindless agendas of conformity.
Also, as a California bay area resident my vote only counts for so much since we’re already saturated deep in the eighty percent range voting against the republicans.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 18, 2005 at 11:34 PM Gordon,
One trusts you vote on more than just local issues. Just a handful of miles away, across the causeway, there are more than enough voters willing offset that eighty percent. How do you suppose Der Govenator got there? The notion that your vote doesn’t matter much is a load of Bravo Sierra. The extremist conservatives gain so much because they turn out to vote in large numbers while most everyone else decides they have something better to do than go to poles. In the recent local elections here, in the heartland—not far away from John Ashcroft’s hometown, the turn out was 10%. TEN PER CENT! Lot’s of people complain about the course of government, but who shows up when it counts? Look at the results. Almost half of those registered to vote in the Presidential election didn’t. Most folks don’t care and don’t find the process important. How many of those disenfranchised participating would it take to break the elections open into convincing landslides? If nothing else, how many would it take to more accurately reflect the desires and interests of the average working soul? Progressives, Leftists, Democrats, Centrists, Old Rockefeller Republicans, you name it, all need to get off of their asses, stop complaining, and get ACTIVELY INVOLVED again. As my sainted Irish aunt once told me; “If you leave, they win. Don’t let the Bastards get you down!”
Posted by troulble in the Heartland on Apr 19, 2005 at 11:48 AM trouble in the Heartland,
Agreed, voting is step one and I’m doing that and that’s not enough—the country is not even taking the most basic protective measures to ensure that our voting system is working. Don’t be afraid to question that basic assumption—take a look at this article for example:
http://onlinejournal.com/evoting/041505Partridge/041505partridge.htmlI know there are still a lot of wonderful people living and working in America—people who care about the world’s future—people too fair themselves to believe that even the corrupt republican elite would fix the election but that’s why you’ll fail.
Finally, the party that most closely matches my views is the green party. Will they ever be elected? Probably not in time to save this country—I want to live and work in a society that I can support and that I believe mostly shares my values. This just ain’t it.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 19, 2005 at 2:55 PM For those who wish to enable change in our corrupted voting system, please go to either/or all the below:
blackboxvoting.org
fairvote.org
commoncause.orgI’m sure there are plenty more groups, but those are the ones I’ve dealt with. I just attended a conference in my area put on by our city’s grass roots group in conjunction with blackbox. They had several speakers, one of whom, Robert Cohen, is putting out a film on the boondoggle that was Election 2004. After the film was shown, after several speakers finished, a gentleman raised his hand, and asked if he could come forward to the mike. It turned out that he is the City Clerk for our city (2 million people). He almost had tears in his eyes. He said, “You people have opened up my eyes. I never understood the resistance to the electronic voting machines (GRE), but I do now. I pledge to make our city first in our area to find and implement a safe and secure voting system by 2008”. Wish they could do it before ‘06, but at least he seemed very sincere. Will watch for his actions now.
Point being, people don’t know what happened and is happening. We have already slid into the infancy of theocratic fascism, and my brothers and sisters in Christ don’t know they are being used. It’s up to us, a mountain of hard work, and a lot of prayers, people.
READ ROBERT KENNEDY, JR’S. ARTICLE IN VANITY FAIR THIS MONTH (DESPARATE HOUSEWIVES ON THE COVER). ELOQUENT, FACTUAL AND A MINDBLOWING ARTICLE TO SHARE WITH THE STILL-NAIVE.
Posted by Margaret on Apr 19, 2005 at 3:11 PM Margaret,
Will look for it—thanks very much. One issue I’ve noticed—and has been noticed in other articles—is the look that enters peoples faces when I so much as mention this issue. I’m a statistician and I read some of the early work on the election—please believe me, they left room for error and made conservative assumptions when they quoted million to one odds of the data looking as it does. That should scare folks who still think the system is working.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 19, 2005 at 4:58 PM Gordon,
I believe your addressing the article by Christopher Hitchens regarding the stolen election. That was a couple months ago. The article I’m referencing is about the role of the conservative media and the lack of liberal media and the resultant disconnect between reality and conservative fantasy that made a huge portion of voters turn against their own economic interests in pursuit of “moral” values.
Posted by Margaret on Apr 19, 2005 at 5:29 PM We posted a link to this insightful article at
www.gnostics.com/newsletter.htmlRegards,
GNOSTICS & THE SOCIAL REVOLUTION
www.gnostics.com
Posted by Gnostic Communications on Apr 19, 2005 at 11:41 PM Margaret,
The marketing machinery employed by the republicans for this election was truly awe inspiring—I believe “shock and awe” is the term they like—but I think there’s more going on. In some sense, there’s kind of two scenarios: one, our people can be convinced to vote against progress in the world by “likeable guys” with a boatload of money; or two, the elections were undermined with dirty trick technology. I’m fully prepared to believe that Americans were convinced to swarm to the polls at the last minute to prevent John Kerry from being elected (I read one story where some incensed hubby was threatening violence for his wife if she voted for John Kerry, etc.) However, I believe the “voting hack” scenario is plausible as well. Either way, it’s not good news and hard to change—I’ve found that most people don’t really change until they either have no other choice or hit absolute rock bottom.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 20, 2005 at 2:58 AM “Wild threats and accusations…” Yeah, like this ongoing crackpot lie about the election being stolen? Actually, my most recent favorite is that Gannon/Guckert is actually Johnny Gosch, that poor kid who was abducted 20 years ago. Then theory sinks even lower; the Jeff Rense wannabees claim that Guckert was part of a male escort service that winds its way clear to the White House. It really is disgusting that these people have incorporated the Gosch family tragedy into this conspiracy. They should be ashamed.
Posted by Scott on Apr 20, 2005 at 3:35 AM I don’t think your last paragraph holds up. History shows that we aren’t quite complete fascist yet, we are certainly well on our way to being quasi fascist.
Posted by Chuck on Apr 20, 2005 at 3:50 AM I also have to disagree with the optimistic sentiments of that last paragraph, the patriot act effectively nullifies the US constitution and the bill of rights, without which our country, with it’s corporate controlled media, paperless electronic voting, and near one party rule in all branches of government, is in serious danger of losing it’s democracy. As for voting, I do it, but sympathize with people who tell me that they don’t bother to because they see little difference between the two parties and believe that power is in the hands of an oligarchy no matter who is in the white house. Gore and Kerry both ran awful campaigns, failed to insist that every vote be counted, almost as if they were throwing a fight. I thought I’d never vote for another democrat again, better to lose after supporting a candidate I believe in than to hold my nose voting for a guy who would have done the same things Bush did, only better.
DeLay may go the way of Gingrich, or Lott, but what does that change? Bush may compromise on social security reform, but the damage being done to the country on so many other fronts will continue. How much media coverage did the bankruptcy bill get? Mercury in the water? The packing of the courts? The right has been executing their game plan steadily for over 20 years, while the democrats aid and abett them, vote with them, work with them, drink with them, and accept campaign cash from the same coffers as them. Gloating over DeLay’s troubles, as satisfying as it is, distracts from the relentless rightward drift of the entire system and the continuing implementation of their agenda.
Posted by Kenneth D. Brown on Apr 20, 2005 at 6:22 AM “Democratic” America has already become a quasi-fascist state.
Posted by Brian on Apr 20, 2005 at 11:09 AM Gordon,
I didn’t just say go out and vote. The words were “...get ACTIVELY INVOLVED again.”
It doesn’t matter how disparaging the odds seem against your cause, positive change can happen. I was alive during the civil rights struggles. You don’t think the system wasn’t rigged then? Do you have any idea what the Viet Nam protesters were up against? I grew up when large stretches of your California coast line were blighted by the sight of countless oil platforms & derricks and beaches constantly smeared with ‘tar’. After the Santa Barbara spill people had had enough, at least for a while. Only then did California become a champion of environmental protection. The list goes on and on. The point is, actively engaged people, working in solidarity of a cause, were able to bring about positive change. And now, to the same extent that involvement was responsible for improving our condition, complacency is allowing all of those achievements to be reversed.
I am not endorsing a particular party. I truly believe that all political parties ultimately trend towards the prevailing consensus median. Too many of the left have cowered to the sidelines. I have every confidence that at such time they choose to once again become involved that consensus median will shift dramatically. Absolutely, go out and complain about computer ballets. Do not accept it. Speak up, stand up for your Constitution. Make these people we elect accountable to their legal employers, us. The system can and does work.
Should the Greens gain any kind of viable support, the other parties will have no choice but to adjust and make accommodations. The only reason Gore retreated partially from parroting the DLC/business line was the heat he was feeling from Nader. Only then, during the last few days of the campaign, did Gore gain enough to be even in contention. Had he not been prodded by Nader and the successful response to his ideas the election would have been a landslide for Shrub. Just think how it could have gone the other way for Gore if had only stood up for those more progressive values from the start—-values, it should be pointed out, that were once the bread and butter of the Democratic party.
Above all, do not yield to despair.
Posted by trouble in the Heartland on Apr 20, 2005 at 1:32 PM Who said the NAZIs are dead! The current, so-called Republican Party is so far from the ideals
of Abe Lincoln, I personally think ‘ole Abe would
split a rail and use it for a ballbat on people
like Delay, Ging(r)inch, Bush, and the most evil
of all, Karl Rove. This is 1933 Germany all over
again. Let’s call them for what they really are:NAZIS
If it quacks like a duck, goose-steps like a
duck, it’s a NAZI! (I personally think calling
them fascist is an insult to even those low-lifes.)
Posted by Mike Hacke on Apr 20, 2005 at 2:47 PM Let’s call these thugs whatthey truly are:
NAZIs
I wouldn’t even insult those low-lifes fascists!
Posted by Mike Hacke on Apr 20, 2005 at 2:51 PM I really do hope that the final sentence in the last paragraph is true, but events of the last 4 years don’t make me too assured of the future of our country. I won’t ever leave and let the takeover come about without a fight, but the way the American people aren’t responding to the numerous outrages Team Shrub have visited upon the citizenry disheartens me. Sometimes I really think that there will be a catastrophe of such proportions that a majority of our fellow countrymen ask that the amendment to the Constitution putting a limit to presidential terms be abolished and Shrub be made our leader indefinitely. I am all for doing my part to make this country a ray of hope again, but despair and tragedy are lurking ever closer.
Posted by Sherman Brennan on Apr 20, 2005 at 5:33 PM Good range of viewpoints on these messages. Today I called the high school where my son was registered last year and asked about the opt-out form for mailing his information to military recruiters. I felt a moment of terror when they said the information on juniors had already gone out and since he’s no longer registered that I wasn’t sent the opt-out letter. To my relief, when they double checked they found that because he wasn’t registered his information didn’t go out. Bottom line? I’m afraid of this country and the people who run it.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 20, 2005 at 6:41 PM I look forward to the day that Tommy has to face the same judiciary that he’s been bad-mouthing for the last few weeks. Oh, the sweet irony of it all! what I wouldn’t give to be the judge handing down the sentence!
Posted by Mr Woolly on Apr 20, 2005 at 11:09 PM I wonder if it might be shooting oneself in the foot to call Bush and the Republicans Nazis…
Not to imply a brush-off of the frustration and disgust that fuels such comments! On the contrary, I can ABSOLUTELY identify with those sentiments. As anyone who grants the smallest attention to my rants will know, when the Patriot Act passed so rapidly following 9/11 I had a chill of horror that hasn’t gone away yet, a sort of hunted feeling as though any minute I might find that the whole idea of rights has been discarded in America. Pre-emptive war, based upon “crap intelligence” (or whatever the real impetus for Iraq was… I have my own suspicions…), the Machiavellian use of rhetoric to fictionally but convincingly link 9/11 with Saddam Hussein in the minds of the public, the seemingly serious discussions to actually codify cultural/religious uniformity in the Constitution via a Marriage Amendment… no, I can’t fault anyone who feels so embittered and so under threat that they react so strongly.
My concern, though, is that by pushing the Nazi comparison, the opponents of Bush and the neocons make it less likely that they’ll be taken seriously on a mass basis. I think too many Americans will have a visceral rejection of the concept, even if historical parallels are drawn that seek to justify the comparison (like the Big Lie trick, for one; sad that it’s so ongoingly effective).
God knows, with concrete issues like computerized voting (there’s no such thing as a hack-proof computer), the Patriot Act (why has the virtual nullification of several constitutional amendments not been challenged?), the entire doctrine of pre-emptive military action, etc etc etc, there are plenty of ways to lambast the administration and the party that commands it.
Rove et al are very adept at identifying hot-button issues to which millions have a powerful emotional reaction, it seems to be the heart of their political strategy (and a winning one, sorry to say). Thinking ahead to the midterm elections of 2006, perhaps it would be wise if the neocons’ opponents emphasize our own hot-button issues and motivate, as much as can be done, feelings that translate into votes. Anyone who has been undercut by current economic conditions, or had their rights abridged or denied, or who feels tricked by the administration with regards to the wars, they’ll all have a hell of a lot of feelings that might be tapped rhetorically.
Actually, my biggest fear is of a flaccid Democratic response to these affronts (and after all, when it comes at the very least to the f’n Patriot Act, the Dem Senators did line right up and vote yes, didn’t they, with one single exception… those timorous and/or conspiratorial bastards!).
I don’t think the effort of trying to paint a tootbrush mustache on Bush will work, even though, as I said, I can certainly relate to the anger that inspires such comments. Holy crap, I haven’t felt this cynical since I was in my 20s, it takes a positive effort sometimes not to give in to it!
Just a point of tactics, y’all, just hoping to contribute to the weakening and eventual dismissal of the neocons and their agenda; Think 2006 (and 2008)!
Posted by Kuya on Apr 20, 2005 at 11:19 PM “History proves no amount of intimidation can turn democratic America into the quasi-fascist state that conservatives desire.”
I agree. However, it’s pretty scary how successful the conservative leaders have been in their misinformation campaigns of recent years. Too many Americans believe in information that is totally false, such as Saddam’s involvement in the 9/11 attacks. The bi-partisan 9/11 Commission found no connection, yet polls have shown a high percentage of Republicans believe there was. This is one of the reasons they feel the war in Iraq is justified and that the now nearly 1,600 soldiers deaths is acceptable. And this is just one example.
Posted by Ken Ingus on Apr 23, 2005 at 1:37 PM Kuya,your absolutely right,name calling only serves to anger people,and they stop listening,even if what your telling them is factual and verifiable.But the truth is,that most people don’t want to know the truth,because the implications are too frightening.So we just stick our heads in the sand and pretend that everythings rosy.How do you fight against that?
Posted by whats the truth? on Apr 24, 2005 at 6:01 PM Hello what’s the truth?
It truly is hard to continue putting out effort when there seems to be so few people willing to listen, question preconceptions, examine data, admit they’ve been mistaken. You could say that about “liberals” as well as “neocons”, actually. But as for the Bush admin and opposing their supporters in the 2006 midterms, maybe I’d borrow a page from Reagan’s campaign to replace Jimmy Carter as Prez; his rhetorical question “Are you better off now than you were when the Republicans took power?”
Some will say yes, obviously; rich folk or those who believe they’ll be more prosperous soon, others whose cultural agenda aligns with the crusader faction and their sympathizers. My bet is, though, that most will say “No!”
Opposing them means making a nuisance of oneself, in the end. Postcards, phone calls, emails sent to elected reps, complaining about policy or pressuring their votes, etc, is a tactic other posters have described on these boards. There’s also self-made political video spots featuring those who have suffered or been let down by the Bush admin’s programs, that can be uploaded onto the web, sent to influential media organs overseas and in the US (if Murdoch won’t acknowledge them, send to his competitors). Full-page ads taking issue with particular policies or actions could also be of use.
Be relentless, in a nutshell. Rove’s tactics of relentlessness have borne fruit, they should be learned from.
Maybe the neocons’ opponents can decrease the overall bullshit quotient in public discourse, though. There are enough concrete examples of bungling, misrepresentation (hell, call it what it is, LYING), neglect and negation of constitutional limits on power, unkept promises, etc, to shoot pointed barbs at them, without an untrue word being spoken. If we get caught up in the BS-dissemination business, you can bet your last dollar the neocons will flood the airwaves with it (they’ll likely try to anyway, via Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, et al).
As I complained of above, I think the obvious group to have led this charge is the Democratic Party. It’s terribly frustrating that anyone outside the two-backed beast that is the two-party system gets automatically tagged as “fringe”, but there you are.
One might ask them, are y’all part of the solution or part of the problem??
I tend to think of the fight for rights, progressive social structures, etc as automatically an uphill battle. It seems to have been so for a long time as well as now; we seem to be in a real back-slid condition at this moment in history. It’s happened before, and the advances that have crawled forward in America have often been the result of minority “fringe” movements keeping up their efforts in the face of popular disdain and energetic opposition. It was true for the abolition movement, the efforts to put women on an equal legal footing with men, guaranteeing religious liberties, and so many more. I guess we’ll have to keep on working and not allow ourselves to go limp, even when discouraged, like the forbears.
Not a very inspiring set of suggestions, I know. Just doggedly chipping away, really. Sort of like melting a glacier with a magnifying glass… or maybe with a lot of magnifying glasses, if enough people got to work on it.
Posted by Kuya on Apr 24, 2005 at 11:36 PM Kuya,
Let’s say there’s two scenarios: One, it’s fixable within the system; or, two, the system’s been coopted in a truly unprecedented way (i.e. we’re no longer a democracy but we think we are, etc.)
Your advice is really helpful for the first scenario. But how about for the second? Or, do you feel that the second scenario is so unlikely that we should discount it completely? I’m not sure what to think because if we are in the second scenario it would look a lot like what we have now, right?
Of course, if the right wing had the means and willingness to subvert the system they wouldn’t announce it while they were doing so. And, it is somewhat subtle(?):
1. Keep up our way of life (e.g. minimal energy conservation and maximum consumption) until constant middle east war and nuclear fission power are the only solutions.
2. Erode domestic economic structures until gated communities and super-max prisons are the only way to handle the unemployed, uninsured, and uneducated, masses.
3. Fully develop a foreign policy of “preventative war” until we are universally reviled/feared—with the threat of nuclear war our only means of national security (e.g. as in the case of north korea, etc.) we become a de facto empire.I think this is the path we’re on—either our people have chosen it or the system is subverted. Again, am I missing something here? Can someone offer up evidence that the second hypothesis is wrong?
Gordon
Posted by Gordon on Apr 25, 2005 at 12:46 AM My grandfather had his head bashed in and was killed on the streets of Los Angeles in the 1920’s while doing his part to get stuff like a 40 hour week and abolition of child labor. You don’t the system was skewed sideways then, Gordon. What did he and others like him put their lives on the line for? It is a constant struggle. How many do you know who would being willing to sacrifice as much in defence of belief and the betterment of others? If you have trouble thinking of very many, then yes, we are on the path of your second scenario. If that’s the case, we don’t deserve the privilege of democracy anyway. As Ben Franklin once warned; “It’s a Republic—-if you can keep it.”
So, what are you going to do? Get involved or quit?
Posted by trouble in the Heartland on Apr 25, 2005 at 10:48 PM Okay, but what if I’m not willing to get my head “bashed in”—what are my options? Are there other countries where I can live and work in relative peace? Somehere my values and society’s are more similar? Someplace where my neighbors have reasonable access to housing, health care, and education? Look, in this day and age, I shouldn’t have to die in the streets to support commonsense notions of fairness and justice. If we’re back to that then what progress have we made?
What if there are three basic levels of society: totalitarian orwellian, modern industrial, and progressive.
Eventually the totalitarians give up or have to be destroyed by the entire world. The modern industrial slowly move to progressive or degrade back to the first level. I suggest that we’re degrading back to the first level with one of two explanations: the system has been undermined or the majority support that move. If it’s the former reason then we need to talk about it and not be afraid to find out. If it’s the second then what?
Gordon
Posted by Gordon on Apr 25, 2005 at 11:37 PM And, by the way, the two camps are *very* polarized—if it’s a majority of the kind of thick headed folks that surfaced during the last election, then it’s not going to change anytime soon.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 25, 2005 at 11:39 PM Hello Gordon,
In response to the two scenarios you mentioned above, I’ve thought long and long about whether any efforts to influence the political and social culture of the country was worthwhile or not. In my most cynical moments, I’ve also contemplated emigration, just to say “hell with it” and move away permanently. However, the greater share of my mind wants to continue pushing.If I became convinced that the US really had evolved into a place I could never identify with again, a place where lowest-common-denominator culture and ethics had drowned out anything higher for which America might once have stood, then bailing out would be the right choice. I’m accustomed to living overseas, and in fact, at this specific moment in history I probably would feel more at home in Canada or the Netherlands (to an extent, that is).
But at the moment I feel the fight isn’t decided. If my belief is shown to be naive, if after GWB the country continues to restrict rights and freedoms, dream up pre-emptive excuses for war, obsess about security and cultural uniformity, and violate its own highest principles in favor of the expedient-du-jour (today’s is “war on terror”), then once I’ve been bludgeoned enough perhaps I’ll sever my ties.
However, I feel that much of what we’re seeing today is a form of PTSD following 9/11. Symptoms include overindulgence in junk food (“comfort” food), mass use and abuse of psych meds, continued seeking of insularity against the incomprehensible outside world, and selective acknowledgement of information that disturbs any sense of secure mentality (e.g. Bill of Rights-violating behavior by US personnel domestically and abroad). There are other symptoms, but hopefully you get my point about the syndrome.
To me, Americans are displaying fear-reactions and the mean-spirited, denial-related behaviors that result from them. Hey, I might be entirely wrong, maybe the country really has gone quasi-fascist and all my hopes are pie-in-the-sky.
Right now, though, I’ll continue as if we’re just in a fight. So that means being able to take a hard punch (like I had to take last November when it became apparent how many people really do think that differential rights based on sexual preference is necessary) without caving in. And, the readiness to deliver a few good shots of my own.
Yup, it’s hopefulness, stubbornness, and idealism at work. I’ll see in time if those are all delusional, but right now, I feel more like fighting some more.
Besides, to surrender to the likes of GWB, Jerry Falwell, Karl Rove, all them characters, would be just too galling. Too soon to accept defeat.
When is a fight just a quixotic waste of time? I don’t know for sure, but not yet.
Posted by Kuya on Apr 26, 2005 at 2:38 AM Hi Kuya,
“To me, Americans are displaying fear-reactions and the mean-spirited,
denial-related behaviors that result from them. Hey, I might be entirely
wrong, maybe the country really has gone quasi-fascist…”In my view, not the people. They are, as you suggest, easily manipulated by fear and are being treated that way. Only the leaders are quasi fascist. Is it mere coincidence that the polls keep going down for the Bushies in all areas except “terrorism?” I think not. We have had no orange alerts etc. and the public is beginning to relax about the threat from abroad. And guess what? Suddenly the bread and butter Dem issues are starting to be important to them. Stop the fear mongering and people begin to see with clear eyes.
I continue to hope that there is no Iranian surprise. That would reverse the polls overnight just as 911 did.
Posted by Merlin on Apr 26, 2005 at 3:48 AM Kuya,
I like this idea—it also explains the current support for the seemingly unsupportable—perhaps you’re right. I guess I feel that four more years of GWB will push us too far into the red. He’ll walk away, leaving the country still hooked on oil after the realization that Peak Oil has come and gone, and Americans will be left in a very sorry condition: permanently weakened economy, skyrocketing interest rates as our debt is allowed to float, half a generation of poorly educated young people, an entrenched underground economy, a reactionary supreme court, a fractured (and fractious) nation, ruined global credibility, and perhaps a permanent gap in our mastery of the important alternative energy technologies (and markets that want them.)
After world war II we had an opportunity to lead the world in many areas—instead we squandered it on brutally repressive foreign policy against democratic countries, expansion into the suburbs fueled by cheap oil, voracious consumerism and corporate greed, massive (and often unilateral) investment in WMD, and a complete disregard for developing sustainable technologies for a progressive future to hold onto our prestige as a superpower in the dawning of a global age. It’s sad but just examine our policies over the past fifty years and you’ll see that we’re dead and just don’t know it yet. We either join the world community or become a rogue nation—hell bent on preserving our “leadership” in the world—that is the most likely candidate to precipitate world war III.
Gordon
Posted by Gordon on Apr 26, 2005 at 5:21 AM Hello Merlin,
Hell, the way things are going, they’ll have to draft people my age to do anything in Iran. Oh wait, I forgot, the high schools are still there, aren’t they…You can see I put few things past this administration, even if only in quasi-jest.
Dude, what a debacle that would be! That would pretty much set the stage for a generations-long clash of civilizations, with my beloved, sometimes benighted country as the aggressor. Too many more thoughts like that and I may have to just go out and get drunk!
Seriously though, it is mildly heartening to read polls that imply a more critical view of Bush & Co. being adopted by the public, but only mildly; I’d love to believe that enough people will be galvanized by the time of 2006 to cut a leg or two off the Repub table. I don’t actually disbelieve it, it’s just an anxious hope. If I had my way, there would be a much higher skepticism quotient in general with regards to politicians, whether rightish or leftish (I often think that their very appetite for power disqualifies them from ever having it). Americans, God love ‘em, are a credulous lot, and that can possibly have a good effect in the form of a more optimistic and forward-looking approach to life, as though “believing in oneself”, IF they’re not distracted by threats (whether imaginary, real, or of their own causing).
Maybe some of those bread-and-butter issues can come to the fore. “Are you better off since the
Republicans took power?”Like I said above, it’s an uphill fight, I sure wish a party with a national scope was more a part of it. I’m sure you know the one I mean.
Posted by Kuya on Apr 26, 2005 at 7:09 AM Hello Gordon,
For all my attachment to the United States, I also have feared that we may go down in history as an example of wasted potential for the benefit of the world, to the point where we might actually precipitate a disaster.Actually, in regards to atmospheric pollution and future climate instability, I think we’re already in the midst of precipitating one, but that’s another story.
I wonder if it’s truly justified to think of this coming 20 to 50 years as a pivotal time in human history. I can’t help but believe that it is. How many civilizations have claimed that they were at the center of a worldwide, historic nexus of events that would propel the human race into one destiny or another, only for it to be overblown national-mythical sentiments? But considering the simple potency of US policies and examples to the rest of the world, maybe it really is true here and now for America, especially now that mass media, military technologies and trafficking, global popular movements, and economic manipulations all have threads that trace to the US, either favorably or seeking to attack or undermine it.
That’s some daunting shit. As if, we better get it right, or it’s gonna go terribly wrong.
It’s as you said, Gordon, America is either a beneficial participant in the world community or, unless I’m attributing too much significance to the power of US decisions and actions for the next half-century, we’ll be one hell of a fucked up rogue nation, able to wrack things up for ourselves and the world in a way that will truly go down in history as disastrous.
But some folks are stubborn and hopeful. Now if only we can include ethical and effective (and numerous), we might get somewhere. Don’t lose your energy, no surrendering.
Posted by Kuya on Apr 26, 2005 at 7:43 AM David Sirota’s op-ed is pure garbage.
We can ignore the mindless Left Party Line
on Schiavo. Even those of us who are pro-abortion
choice and atheists had doubts about the wisdom
of her court-ordered slow death.
See Nat Hentoff’s columns on this on the Village
Voice and Jewish World Review websites.
But on the earlier history on McCarthy and Nixon
Sirota simply regurgitates the old left cliches.
See Arthur Herman’s Joseph McCarthy for a welcome
revisionist look at the subject. The facts are
that there was considerable Soviet penetration
of the US Govt under FRD-Truman and it continued
into Eisenhower. The public was entirely fed up
of Korea, Communism and Corruption under that
slimey ass Truman, which is why like the other
yellow liberal, LBJ, he chickened out from running for reelection in 1952. The GOP was
entirely right to press on these issues and the
main criticism should be how little they acted
to change things once in office in 1953.
There was nothing UnAmerican about what Nixon or
McCarthy did to root out Communist penetration
of the US Government or Hollywood or the Academe.
McCarthy was never forced from office, he died
in May, 1957 before he was up for reelection the
next year. Nixon was ousted in what in retrospect
is the alltime chickenshit scandal and may have
been the last intelligent US President, look at
the stumblebums who came after him.
DeLay may well be a crook but that doesn’t invalidate his proper concern over the Schiavo
case nor does it imply public acceptance of the
stale old liberal agenda.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Apr 26, 2005 at 4:05 PM Kuya,
Both posts interesting. You’ve hit on an important element about American credulity—it gives us that optimism but also makes it possible for us to believe in a fear based campaign or even martian invasions, etc.
However, I would prefer skepticism—especially towards any institution or point of power. It’s essential if we’re to be able to live in relative safety and prosperity. It would also render us immune to statements like: “We’re invading to help the people,” etc. As Noam Chomsky points out: if the statement is exactly the same whether you’re invading for oil or liberty then the statement carries zero information.
In your second post you’re being too kind:
“Actually, in regards to atmospheric pollution and future climate instability, I think we’re already in the midst of precipitating one, but that’s another story.”Actually, I think this is the important story. There’s no future in fighting over the last big reserves of oil—we need to think about global climate issues and American refusal of Kyoto was a mistake. That was the first firm attempt to get America to join in the common effort to literally “save the world.” Yes, we would have the biggest overhang of all the countries but what people have to understand is that it’s a fair calculation. It’s like going to a restaurant, having one person order more food than all the other guests *combined* and then refusing to pay his fair share. And, imagine that this shared meal in the restaurant takes place every day.
The point is that we would not have been able to pay but we could have started the process of becoming more aware of the true cost of energy and channging our society in more graceful way. Instead, if we wait until the last minute the changes required will be draconian or we will continue to externalize the costs (war, pollution in the third world, etc.) until disaster strikes.
Optimism and hope are luxuries that most of the world can’t afford—only we can because we’re not bearing any costs. It’s comfortable to be in America—meanwhile, the rest of the world is suffering and struggling to find ways to cope with global problems. Funny that we’re only willing to “help the world” when it comes to firebombing, dropping atomic bombs, or “decapitation strikes.”
Gordon
PS Sorry if I sound anti-American—but I think that powerful states, much like powerful corporations, are inherently dangerous to humankind. No country is “great” or even “good”—to the extent that a country is seen as “great” it’s always due to individual people making global contributions citizens to humanitarian projects, science, art, music, literature, etc.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 26, 2005 at 4:08 PM Michael,
I was just about to ask the forum if they thought that the right wing folks had conversations like this?
Well, it’s too bad that you don’t have the opportunity to enjoy the type of leadership provided by Nixon and McCarthy. Also, what’s a “stale liberal agenda”—if you mean it’s time to go further left then I agree wholeheartedly. OTH, if you think American liberals are too left (i.e. too “egalitarian”, progressive, etc.) then please remember this exchange when you see what happens to the country after three and half more years of Bush/DeLay.
There are problems facing us that are much bigger than whether or not you agree with Joseph McCarthy (though that’s certainly scary). This country’s had many chances to change it’s ways but we keep passing them by in favor an insensitive, unsympathetic, almost gleeful, acceptance of any ridiculous or outrageous statements uttered by any forceful/aggressive “leader” in charge—Bush and DeLay are thugs, with an army of skillful PR handlers in Bush’s case, and you’re following them with gusto. Good luck.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 26, 2005 at 4:25 PM McCarthy and Nixon ehh? Fine role models there. Ya know, cheating to win an election, lying to the stupid electorate and taking away basic constitutional rights based on fear and false accusations sounds like a winner. You must be very happy with the current administration, seemingly cut out of that exact same batch of cloth.
Posted by Matt Harris on Apr 26, 2005 at 4:50 PM Matt, Matt,
Button your lip, man! How dare you! We are in the presence of preachers and folks who have “seen the light.” The high and the mighty. To speak such sacrilege! I’m shocked…simply shocked. Have you no shame? Listen to those here; the wise theologians and those who have lived through the McCarthy era themselves. Listen in rapture and awe. Believe, repent your dirty liberal ways and be saved, heathen…
Posted by Merlin on Apr 26, 2005 at 6:20 PM Merlin,
Just scheduled the frontal lobotomy that will allow for the recommended repentation. I am on my way to Neocon Nirvana-where up is down, dirty is clean and smart is stupid! Yeeee hah!
Posted by Matt Harris on Apr 26, 2005 at 10:53 PM I’m 60 so I lived through both McCarthy and Nixon,
Gordon. Remember the Army-McCarthy hearings well
though I was only 9 going on 10 at the time.
Arthur Herman’s book is a good antidote to the
standard nonsense on McCarthy. I’ve had to revise
much of my own thinking here.
Matt, the 1960 election was stolen by JFK according to Roger Morris, a very Left biographer
of Nixon, so spare us your selective indignation
on the subject. JFK lied all over the place about
a missile gap that was a BIG LIE and even tried
to paint Nixon as soft on Castro. Talk about lying
to win an election !
I voted for Kerry, previously Nader twice, Clinton
once, Jesse Jackson in primary, Dukakis in general
election, last time I voted GOP was in 1980, not
since.
Sorry to queer up your stereotypes, guys.
Yes, Nixon was a crook but much smarter and more
informed than the Demo-Repub trailer trash we
have suffered through since.
As far going further left, Gordon, no, that’s not
a good idea. Government run economies whether via
nationalization or regulation do not work.
No, we don’t need to give up our guns to the state. No, we don’t need to outlaw hate speech.
No, we don’t need more affirmative action discrimination, no we don’t need to reward Mumia
for killing that cop and we don’t need state-run
medicine. Nor do we need to look up to Noam Chomsky as any sort of moral exemplar, he’s a
stinking apologist for every leftist tyranny that
ever existed, ergo for “historian” Howard Zinn.
DeLay and Bush are bad, I agree, you lefties
want to know WHY they are in power, TAKE A HARD
LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Apr 27, 2005 at 6:28 PM “Matt, the 1960 election was stolen by JFK according to Roger Morris, a very Left biographer
of Nixon, so spare us your selective indignation
on the subject.”Gee, I don’t remember the subject of the article or your first post being about JFK. So, Michael, I guess your contention is that if I want to comment on a certain president’s moral shortcomings, I have to comment on each of the other 42 president’s shortcomings also, to avoid “selective indignation”. Sorry Michael, but I’m gonna hafta call stupid contention on that one.
Well, I’m off to go look in the mirror now. Something I’m able to do, since I don’t have my head up my ass, unlike some 62 million other Americans. The fact that they do is WHY Bush is in power. But you go ahead and blame us lefties for that too there Michael, and don’t let logic get in your way.
Posted by Matt Harris on Apr 28, 2005 at 1:59 AM Michael,
Let me respond to your post step by step:
“I’m 60 so I lived through both McCarthy and Nixon, Gordon. Remember the Army-McCarthy hearings well though I was only 9 going on 10 at the time.
Arthur Herman’s book is a good antidote to the
standard nonsense on McCarthy. I’ve had to revise
much of my own thinking here.”A reasonable thorough (and brief) account of Joseph McCarthy’s life and career can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_mccarthy—my take? If you accuse everyone of being a communist you’ll be right some of the time but our system is *supposed* to rest on due process of law.
“Matt, the 1960 election was stolen by JFK according to Roger Morris, a very Left biographer
of Nixon, so spare us your selective indignation
on the subject. JFK lied all over the place about
a missile gap that was a BIG LIE and even tried
to paint Nixon as soft on Castro. Talk about lying
to win an election !”Nixon lied about a lot of stuff—all politicians lie: it’s a question of degree and topic. Nixon was intelligent—too bad he didn’t respect America enough to obey our laws.
“I voted for Kerry, previously Nader twice, Clinton once, Jesse Jackson in primary, Dukakis in general election, last time I voted GOP was in 1980, not since. Sorry to queer up your stereotypes, guys.”
Good for you—no it doesn’t queer up my stereotype—you seem very certain of lots of things and you’re willing to fight for them. Unfortunately, these issues call for a lot more careful *feeling* for the condition of your fellow citizens, both national and global.
“Yes, Nixon was a crook but much smarter and more
informed than the Demo-Repub trailer trash we
have suffered through since.”Carter and Clinton were both better than Nixon—I’d agree wrt Reagan and Bush II—Bush I was about the same but didn’t get caught.
“As far going further left, Gordon, no, that’s not
a good idea. Government run economies whether via
nationalization or regulation do not work.”Why are you so convinced that what we have is working? You’re so certain—talk to people without jobs, healthcare, or prospects, and they might disagree with you.
“No, we don’t need to give up our guns to the state. No, we don’t need to outlaw hate speech.”
I think we could do without hate speech and assault rifles or handguns. Let’s “agree to disagree” here :)
“No, we don’t need more affirmative action discrimination, no we don’t need to reward Mumia
for killing that cop and we don’t need state-run
medicine.”Who’s we? By “we” do you mean the tens of millions of adults who suffer discrimination every day in every walk of mainstream life? Or by “we” do you mean the 45 million people who don’t have health care? (census 2003) I think by “we” you mean yourself and other folks like “you”
“Nor do we need to look up to Noam Chomsky as any sort of moral exemplar, he’s a stinking apologist for every leftist tyranny that ever existed, ergo for “historian” Howard Zinn.”
I’ve heard this “apologist” charge before (verbatim)—why not read his great new book: “Hegemony or Survival” or watch “manufacturing consent” and “the corporation”—you’ll see that he is not an apologist for *any* source of power—least of all murderous thugs like the totalitarian states. Your statements are completely uninformed.
“DeLay and Bush are bad, I agree, you lefties
want to know WHY they are in power, TAKE A HARD
LOOK IN THE MIRROR.”At least I can look in the mirror—I wonder how DeLay and Bush feel if they ever do it. It’s very comfortable siding with power—there are plenty of inducements to do it. However, the antidote is simple: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Or, if you could trade places with a homeless welfare cheat, would you do it?
Thanks for this opportunity to rant a bit,
Gordon
Posted by Gordon on Apr 29, 2005 at 2:02 AM One more point that I neglected:
“we don’t need to reward Mumia for killing that cop”
Well, I’d say that 25 years on Death Row isn’t exactly a “reward”—a lot of thoughtful and intelligent people have spent decades of their lives fighting for this man and the cause of fairness in our justice system. But go ahead and ridicule their efforts—their work helps all of us whether you realize you need the help or not.
Gordon
Posted by Gordon on Apr 29, 2005 at 2:08 AM Gordon,
A point by point rebuttal follows:
1) The Wikipedia entry is a joke and the standard
smear. Again, see the Arthur Herman book for a
rather thorough rebuttal of the traditional anti-
McCarthy view.
2) Your part about “feelings” is exactly wrong.
Our people need to do a lot more thinking.
3) Carter was a joke ! The absolutely worst bottom
of the barrel President we’ve had excepting Truman.
4) Clinton was much inferior to Nixon, EVEN FROM
A LIBERAL AGENDA. Check out what Nixon accomplished in domestic affairs ALONE, well
to the left of Willie Whitetrash, not to mention
China & Soviet detente. Nothing remotely comparable under Clinton’s Presidency.
5) I didn’t state that our current fascist form
of socialism mixed economy was wonderful, only
that the Left proposals are WORSE.
HMO is a hybrid capitalist-socialist-fascist system that was put through by Nixon and Ted
Kennedy.
6) CHOMSKY IS AN APOLOGIST FOR LEFTIST TYRANNIES
GOING BACK TO HIS CONTEMPTIBLE, ASSKISSING VISIT
TO NORTH VIETNAM IN 1970, HIS ATTEMPTED HOLOCAUST
DENIAL ON POL POT WHEREIN HE HAS BEEN PROVEN WRONG
IN EVERY PARTICULAR, HIS PAST ADMIRATION YEARS
AGO FOR MAO THE GREATEST MASS MURDERER IN HISTORY,
HIS LIE THAT THE US WAS CONDUCTING A SILENT GENOCIDE IN AFGHANISTAN AFTER 9-11, HIS LIE THAT
CLINTON’S KILLING OF ONE PERSON IN THE SUDAN WAS
MORALLY COMPARABLE TO 9-11, HIS CONSTANT DOWNPLAYING OF SOVIET TYRANNY IN EASTERN EUROPE
AND THE LIST GOES ON. IF ONLY 40% OF THE DOCUMENTATION IN THE ANTI-CHOMSKY READER IS CORRECT AND I BELIEVE IT IS MORE 60% CORRECT, HE
WILL GO DOWN AS THE SLIMIEST APOLOGIST FOR COMMUNIST & LEFTIST TYRANNIES IN WORLD HISTORY.
I CORRESPONDED WITH THAT ASSHOLE FOR 20 YEARS,
1985-2004 AND EVEN REVIEWED HIS BOOKS FOR Z
AND THE NATIONAL GUARDIAN. DO NOT NEED TO READ
ANOTHER PIECE OF UNREADABLE BILGE BY HIM.
HIS SOURCES DO NOT CHECK OUT AND HE IS A LIAR
WITHOUT PAR. YOUR COMMENTS HERE ARE TYPICAL
OF LAZY, MISEDUCATED PEOPLE WHO NEVER CHECK OUT
CHOMSKY’S SOURCES BUT SWALLOW IT WHOLE SOLELY
BECAUSE IT COINCIDES WITH YOUR PREJUDICES.
7) No, I wouldn’t trade places with a homeless
welfare bum nor do I have any sympathy with same.
8) It must take a lot of gall for you to look into the mirror.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Apr 29, 2005 at 9:34 PM Well, Matt, since you brought up Nixon, I thought
it was appropriate to bring up JFK since he stole
the 1960 election from Nixon.
I didn’t think a person with a normal brain would
confuse that point with the other 41 Presidents.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Apr 29, 2005 at 9:37 PM Just read your idiot piece on the convicted cop
killer Mumia, Gordon.
Maybe these “intelligent” people never read the
transcript of his trial because he never contested
anything at the trial and did nothing to rebut the
DA’s case. Marc Cooper has in fact demonstrated
that he is guilty. When Dan Flynn tried to give a
lecture at UC Berkeley in 2000 on his book proving
Mumia’s guilt, the local leftists rioted and burned the book AND told Flynn that they didn’t CARE if he killed that “pig.”
So much for those “thoughtful” people and no,
delaying justice for a killer for 25 years is
NOT something we all should be thankful for.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Apr 29, 2005 at 9:43 PM FYI—-sometimes I do not get near the computer
for days, so if there is some response to my
postings that I need to rebut, the rebuttal
will take place.
Gordon, Matt——brace yourselves for some serious
assbeatings if you are foolish to respond with the
kind of pathetic arguments you gents have employed
to date.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Apr 29, 2005 at 11:03 PM Whooo boy…this is rich!
Gordon, Matt——brace yourselves for some serious
assbeatings…“Ya hoo, more “assbeatings” from the right….” Wait I have to get my popcorn and get a front row seat.
“Your part about “feelings” is exactly wrong.”
Seems like the only feelings you are in touch with are those at the end of whatever you choose to beat them up with. Your anger simply screams at the world with all those CAPITAL letters that you used on purpose. I’m not sure which is more tiresome; an angry snarling dog with barking threats or a much more gentle theologian who can’t see the forest for the trees.
Posted by Merlin on Apr 29, 2005 at 11:33 PM Michael,
I’m going to let your “comments” stand by themselves (for the most part) and even give readers a few links to some of your other postings (and criticisms thereof):
http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2004/11/chomskys_outlet.html
http://wetheliving.com/pipermail/atlantis/Week-of-Mon-20020311/012173.html
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/911/P120/Also, notice how in my comment I referred to DeLay and Bush looking in the mirror while you directly attacked me “gall to look in the mirror, etc.”—this comment, combined with your aggressive style (“assbeatings,” etc.) is very unpleasant to deal with; however, your casual dismissal of my offered references renders any type of real discussion impossible (i.e. read my sources, but yours are beneath contempt…)
I suggest that you’ve mastered the art of the “shoutdown” attack perhaps you should work for the neocons—they love “attack dogs” of your type. Also, point of net etiquette, WRITING IN ALL CAPS IS THE EQUIVALENT OF YELLING AND MAKES YOU LOOK INSANE!
Posted by Gordon on Apr 29, 2005 at 11:57 PM Narrow-mindedness, intolerance, and bigotry are just as unseemly coming from the left as they are coming from right-wing presumptive christian fanatics. To dwell in a system of absolutes and to assume definitive knowledge is the height of hubris. Why not leave the simple-minded polemics to the bloated gas bags Limbaugh and Hannity. There is already enough hatred and contempt flowing amongst us. Let us strive for solidarity and positive change.
Peace Brothers—
Hempshackle
Posted by B Q Hempshackle on Apr 30, 2005 at 5:42 AM Gordon,
Just as I thought you have no arguments, no reason, no facts, no history….....only pathetic
ad hominems. One part of my response to you was
in caps, and that’s OK ! In reference to Chomsky,
so that maybe it would penetrate the thick skull
of yours, I notice you use the language of the
totally discredited psychiatric racket, see many
works of Thomas S. Szasz, MD, in this regard.
Exactly as the Soviet spy, Alger Hiss, attempted
to discredit Whittaker Chambers. A total failure.
Ergo for Merlin, try to separate substance from
style. The content is what counts, not necessarily
the manner of expression, unless unduly profane
and mine wasn’t. Because of the large Chomsky
Cult I decided to emphasize my critique of him.
Now Oliver Kamm is a lowlife neocon smear artist
who is incapable of any reasoned argument. After
reading him, Dershowitz, Lipstadt, Elie Wiesel,
Wiesenthal, ad nauseum, I long since know the
holocaust revisionists are right, which is why
they have to outlaw them wherever they can.
As far as racism goes, blacks excel at same as
noted by John McWhorter and other conservative
blacks. They hold themselves back far more than
any white racism.
On the uninsured let’s have a free, nonlicensed,
nonstate controlled competition in medicine
and those 45 million will be able to afford medical care.
Gordon, the left is finished, good riddance, I’ve
voted for my last Dummyrat.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Apr 30, 2005 at 6:47 PM Gordon,
You offered one source, and coincidentally I read
it a few weeks ago and found it the standard anti-
McCarthy, I didn’t CASUALLY dismiss it, I stated it was totally wrong and recommended a scholarly
work by Arthur Herman for a 90% rebuttal and
I myself could do the remaining 10%.
The assbeating comment was tongue-in-cheek but I
didn’t realize that I was dealing with humorless
oafs.
Or is that typical liberals (and forgot about
trying to tag me with those Israel First Neocons).
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Apr 30, 2005 at 6:54 PM Michael,
If you spent as much time trying to understand the plight of millions of people in the world struggling for basic freedoms as you do trying to understand “smear jobs” on poor Joseph McCarthy then we wouldn’t need to waste time in a value argument. Start from a realistic assessment of your own basic principles, Michael—that will bring you closer to making real progress than reading even one thousand books on Joseph McCarthy.
My principles are quite simple—here are a few which I’ll share for you: all sources of power and coerciion should be challenged and justfiied; any policy or action should be examined from the standpoint of treating others as I would like to be treated; I will be conservative with respect to other people’s problems (e.g. if I have heath care I’m not going to take a strong stand against health care for people without, etc.)
Gordon
PS If you don’t share these principles then let’s just “agree to disagree” and disengage since there’s no way you’re going to change my fundamental values and vice versa.
Posted by Gordon on Apr 30, 2005 at 7:45 PM Gordon,
I’m very familiar with the Chomskysite milieu on
which your premises are based but who appointed
you as the spokesman for the suffering millions ?
When Pope Noam went to Hanoi in 1970 he did not
challenge THEIR power base but merely went along
with all their state propaganda. Apologize for
capping the word but I don’t have an italicizing
feature on my computer otherwise I’d have used it
instead of the caps,including the last time.
The big difference is that governmental power is
coercivist in nature while private or economic power is not unless it is mixed in with the state
inwhich case it is fascist or national socialist,
not capitalist.
It’s ok to agree to disagree but sometimes one can
hope that exchange of ideas can change minds.
That may be too radical a proposition.
Best to you,
Michael
Posted by Michael Hardesty on May 1, 2005 at 12:17 AM “Well, Matt, since you brought up Nixon, I thought
it was appropriate to bring up JFK since he stole
the 1960 election from Nixon.
I didn’t think a person with a normal brain would
confuse that point with the other 41 Presidents.”Actually it was the author of the article and then you who brought up Nixon. Then I commented as to what I thought about Nixon. This brought from you the charge of “selective indignation”. Which, no matter how much you try to obfuscate my rebuttal, is still an unfounded, and yes stupid charge.
“The assbeating comment was tongue-in-cheek”
Pun intended!? Now that’s funny Michael!
Posted by Matt Harris on May 2, 2005 at 2:36 AM Here’s the amusing bit, when one objectively evaluates the achievements and legislation passed, Nixon IS far more left than Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush. Mr. Newt’s Contract On America took aim at, and intended to undo, most of what was signed into law during Nixon! This is in no way a defence of Nixon. Rather, it is to point out just how far right our nation has drifted. The notion now popularly held that either Clinton is remotely liberal or left is beyond absurd, yet, many insist that it is so. These are dark and confused times. For anyone with the slightest recollection, this is an era of embarrassment and shame. It is all so skewed and distorted. Even Hunter Thompson reluctantly admitted longing for the days of Tricky Dick. Who can blame him for exercising the extreme option? The Salazar brothers may have the last straw.
It seems we have arrived at a time when few comprehend the difference between right and wrong, and even fewer are willing to stand up to defend what’s right when they do.
I strive to maintain Hope, but, the nature of response and postings here make that a greater challenge.
Posted by left alone on May 2, 2005 at 4:43 AM Matt,
Any way you cut you are guilty of selective indignation. None of you clowns who moans and
groans about 2000 or even more absurdly, 2004,
ever refers to the stolen 1960 election in
which Nixon was cheated out of the Presidency.
Left alone, your comments are good, I was trying
to make the point that even from a left perspective Nixon was a better President than
Carter or Clinton. Too hard for the Matts of the
world to grasp.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on May 2, 2005 at 2:54 PM Mike,
When I moan and groan about the war on Iraq, I never mention the Mexican-American war either. Does this make it selective indignation? Your charge is garbage. No matter how you try to dress it up, it still smells like garbage.
Posted by Matt Harris on May 2, 2005 at 4:58 PM You’re right, Matt. Just another attempt to dress a pig up in fancy clothes and call it a fashion model. Notice he doesn’t compare Nixon and Bush Sr., who was a one-term mediocre president if one ever was. But ultimately, I’d take him over his “spawn” any day of the week.
And speak of “selective indignation”, the Republicans were indignant over Clinton’s proposal to use some of the budgetary surplus to create private accounts, and both the Dems and Reps squashed it flatly in ‘96. Now, however, it’s just the best idea since buttered bread—since the Republicans brought it up this time. Difference being, we now have a, what, 500B deficit. But I guess that seems like a much better time to put millions who worked hard their whole lives at risk than we you had about that much in surplus. Selective, indeed.
Posted by Margaret on May 2, 2005 at 6:56 PM Matt,
The lady doth protest too much. I nailed you.
Nixon and Kennedy are much more related than Iraq
and the Mexican War.
Margaret,
I didn’t think Bush Sr. was worth mentioning.
I stated that Nixon, bad as he is, was the best
Prez in the last half century.
Don’t recall defending W’s deficit spending,
he obviously needed to cut spending to balance
the necessary tax cuts, of course, the rich get
more back, they pay more.
Frankly, hearing Demos talk about balanced budgets
is as selective a piece of indignation as I’ve
seen.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on May 2, 2005 at 7:07 PM As your party has completely given up the concept of a balanced budget, I guess someone has to.
Posted by Margaret on May 2, 2005 at 7:22 PM p.s.
Enjoy your trolling now, Michael, as the webmaster has informed me that a new policy goes into effect within 2 weeks and we will blip you out just like the conservative sites do to us now.
And “obviously” is a very subjective word in this case, as he didn’t need to give the upper 1% of earners in our country the tax breaks he did. While we earn 6 figures, I never complain about my taxes because God has lectured us long and hard in the Bible about caring “for the least of us”, for “the widows and orphans”, etc. How selective of you to decide that to punish the poor and reward the rich is the best way to make money available for an illegal war. Thou protesteth too loudly as well.
Posted by Margaret on May 2, 2005 at 7:26 PM How nice ! You can simply talk to yourselves.
That’s a good way to enlarge the ranks.
You might be surprised to know that some of us
oppose the Pentagon welfare programs too including
wars brought on by the Israeli Lobby that controls
both parties.
People at the top pay the most even with loopholes,no reason they shouldn’t get back more.
So God is a welfare-stater…...........
oh well, learn something new every day.
I never visit conservative forum sites so I’ll
take your word for it, and two wrongs make a
right…...................
Tell the webmeister that he can ban me now.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on May 2, 2005 at 8:10 PM “I nailed you.”
That sounds so 4th grade. Ok, 3rd grade. Congratulations.
Here’s an interesting graph breaking down federal budget deficits by year and party controlling the White House:
http://www.littlepiggy.net/deficit/index.php
Posted by Matt Harris on May 2, 2005 at 8:28 PM Matt,
I think we are in presence of a Libertarian. That’s one of the really great things I’ve learned over the last year blogging, Libertarian philosophy. Talk about a screwed up set of principles. I had no idea how anti-Semitic they are until I started talking with them here.
By the way, Michael, read the “Numbers Before Politics” article on this site. I’m afraid your notion of “welfare state” has been a product of right-wing scare propaganda. And, yes, God is a welfare-stater.
Matt, I look forward to hearing interesting facts and new data to use in the war against the Philistines (Republicans) and the Anti-Christ (Libertarians) from you and the other rational individuals on ITT in the future. What a relief to leave vapid political obfuscation to our neocon and Libertarian encounters offline.
Blog on!
Posted by Margaret on May 2, 2005 at 8:36 PM So you talk to God, Margaret ? Does he/she/ it
tell you how to use ad hominem attacks in place
of reason ? And people who oppose AIPAC control
over your bought & paid for Congress are anti-semitic ?
And money you people pay to support welfare bums
at both gutter street level and corporate insider
level is simply scare tactic ?
You seem very insecure and only can read whatever
reinforces your prejudices, that is a defining
characteristic of mental illness.
Does your chart go back to the beginning of the
deficit spending in the 1930s ?
Why should people read your stuff when you are
scared to read or exchange views with differing
viewpoints ?
I’m sorry your personal life is vapid and so very
boring.
Matt, you a wit with a capital SH.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 2, 2005 at 9:32 PM Looks like the rest of the 3rd grade class showed up to blog. You funny Lin, with a capital NOT.
Posted by Matt Harris on May 2, 2005 at 9:40 PM It’s so funny how THEY always use the term “ad hominem” attacks when they don’t like the fact about their nature that you’ve just pointed out.
Yes, God talks to me and millions of other people around the world daily. You just have to have the “connection” hooked up before you can hear THE voice. But the spiritually bankrupt are not able not hear, so they are afraid of knowing what God says.
Unlike many, I am not afraid of other viewpoints, so long as they aren’t just nastiness vaunting themselves as “superior intellect” with no real message. For an example of what I am speaking of, look up two spots to Lin Biao’s blog. Nothing said, really, just nastiness because nothing relevant could counter the statements from Matt and I outside of their nasty diatribe. Better luck coming up with an actual argument next time, Lin.
Posted by Margaret on May 2, 2005 at 9:49 PM Lin,
I received your message…sorry. God says if you want to hear him, you have to drop the cynicism. Best of luck!
Posted by Margaret on May 2, 2005 at 10:06 PM You not afraid of others’ views as long as said
views accord with your own.
Matt, Gordon and you have not presented any reasoned arguments here on board but merely
assertions and the assertions have been rebutted.
So is god black, Chinese, white, male, female ?
His son a product of virgin birth and Hebrew too ?
He resurrect himself from grave ?
In Shanghai people with views like you in institutional settings.
Matt, how long it take you to think up such a
clever riposte ?
I can see why you people are anxious to talk only
to yourselves. I bet you mostly do now…..
Posted by Lin Biao on May 2, 2005 at 10:06 PM God has no gender, no nationality. It is a spirit in a spiritual domain. People on earth assign the attributes you mentioned to make God something to be more easily grasped.
In fact, I talk quite frequently with people of opposing views. I read conservative and liberal press, just to get the facts. They usually lie somewhere between the two.
Well, good luck over there in China. I’m sure you enjoy all your freedoms and can have as many children as you want, live where you want, study where you want, move where you want, right?
How sad that you are unable to debate with nastiness. A real sign of immaturity and low intellect. You should really work on that.
Posted by Margaret on May 2, 2005 at 10:16 PM We now have it very good here. As long as you
don’t criticize the CCP you can start a business,
have kids (just no welfare for them after first),
pretty much move where we want, study all manner
of views, Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged now over here,
the CCP has revealed that possibly hundreds of millions were killed under Mao by Gang of Four
(he unaware).
Sarcasm and pointed humor not nastiness but sign
of superior intelligence.
If you so sensitive why are you engaging in public
political debate ? As one of your moron Presidents, Harry The Failed Haberdasher Truman
put it, not like heat, get out of kitchen.
God concept makes no sense. All things are
ultimately material including consciousness
but you live in a country that devalues science
and believes in creation. Very sad.
We are the future. Will try to deal kindly
with you people but lots of memories….......
USA seem heading towards third world jungle status. Very sad…....
Posted by Lin Biao on May 2, 2005 at 10:39 PM “Matt, Gordon and you have not presented any reasoned arguments here on board but merely
assertions and the assertions have been rebutted.”Oh really. Where? Show me, oh wise one. Or are you just going to assert it?
Posted by Matt Harris on May 2, 2005 at 11:05 PM Lin,
There is much to be learned from the Middle Kingdom:“When the world is in possession of the Tao,
The galloping horses are led to fertilize the fields with their droppings.
When the world has become Taoless,
War horses breed themselves on the suburbs.There is no calamity like not knowing what is enough.
There is no evil like covetousness.
Only he who knows what is enough will always have enough.”
—-Lao Tzu TAO TEH CHING #46“If only I had the tiniest grain of wisdom,
I should walk in the Great Way,
And my only fear would be to stray from it.The Great Way is very smooth and straight;
And yet the people prefer devious paths.The court is very clean and well garnished,
But the fields are very weedy and wild,
And the granaries are very empty!
They wear gorgeous clothes,
They carry sharp swords,
They surfeit themselves with food and drink,
They possess more riches than they can use!
They are the heralds of brigandage!
As for Tao, what do they know about it?”
—-Lao Tzu TAO TEH CHING #53Hempshackle
Posted by B Q Hempshackle on May 2, 2005 at 11:25 PM Lin,
How sad you were brought up in a world of aetheism. If you knew God, you would never make the statements you make. I guess Harry Truman was so much of an idiot that he ended the Japanese aggression with two quick strikes. Not that I want nuclear aggression, I surely don’t. But it did put an end to that one rather quickly, didn’t it?
Also, only a person with an undeveloped soul would think that the world is only materialism. That is absolutely untrue. But you have never experienced anything else, so it’s unfair of me to expect you to understand.
Finally, the one thing I will agree with you on is that China is the future. The United States is currently run by a bunch of warmongering morons and a populace that doesn’t want to put any effort into researching if the propaganda we are fed is truth or not. I suppose that, ultimately, as predicted in the Bible, the world will come down to three superpowers—China (who will likely eventually control ALL of Asia), the Middle East (which will likely control all of Africa as well), and Europe, which will bond with the former Soviet Union. The Book of Revelation shows the ultimate outcome, and the U.S. is nowhere to be seen. I think we’ll either have corrupted ourselves to the point we are a feudal corporate society, we’ll have possibly joined in with one of the above-mentioned groups, or we’ll be brought to our knees by foreign terrorists and be unable to join. So, in that respect, I forsee our doom because of the rampant willing ignorance of our people, or because the outside world will crush us.
Nonetheless, all three groups will be crushed when Armeggedon occurs. In the meanwhile, I will do good and refute communist aetheist propaganda of the type you espouse because, ultimately, you will lose. Whether you like it or not, good (God) will win.
So, save your Communist crap for someone who cares. Nobody in America thinks you are superior, or you would have overthrown your “masters” decades ago.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 1:45 AM Harry Truman committed a massive war crime through
the unnecessary use of the atomic bombs on Japan.
The Japanese had been attempting to surrender for
nine months and instead Truman served Soviet purposes by dropping that bomb, getting the Soviets to come in against Japan at the last moment and thus they got Manchuria, which gave
them a huge base to turn over to Mao for the
Communist conquest of my country. Not to mention
the illustrious traitor General George Catlet Marshall, who upon stumbling across Zhou Enlai’s
little book of Communist agents in the Chiang
government, returned it to Zhou without looking
at it ! See Arthur Herman’s Joseph McCarthy,
page 191. Not to mention Marshall and FDR setting
up Pearl Harbor to get reluctant US public into
WW2. See John Toland’s Infamy and George Morgenstern’s Pearl Harbor. Not to mention the
disastrous Marshall Mission which attempted to
pressure KMT into coalition government with Mao.
Gar Alperowitz, a leftist, wrote The Decision
To Use The Atomic Bomb, which shreds every rationale Truman & Co. had for the use of the
bomb. It did not save US lives as the US was never
going to invade the Japanese mainland as MacArthur and Eisenhower said at the time.
Truman was surrounded by Communists such as
Harry Dexter White, Laughlin Currie, Owen Lattimore and others. The charitable thing is
to consider him a moron, the alternative was
that he was a traitor.
Interesting that a religious person like you apologizes for Truman who brought the Chinese
Communists into power. Maybe McCarthy right when
he claimed the clergy heavily Communist infiltrated.
You can quote all the silly socialist-communist
quotes in the bible that you please but here in
China we are moving towards capitalism.
We are not inspired by some barebutted primitive
Hebrew tribes of 2,000 years ago as the last
word in ethics, Bible a very genocidal and bloody
document, as bad as the Communists in USSR and
here.
You share that Armageddon nonsense with religious
Radical Right, you sure you not a Bush supporter ?
You stepped into on Truman, big time.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 3:42 PM Matt,
You’re request seems very simpleminded. Can’t
look you look up your postings yourself and
cognitively comprehend them along with honorable
others mentioned ? If you can you will see they are baseless assertions with no intelligent argumentation.
BQ, thank you for much food for thought.
You study our history ?
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 3:52 PM “You’re request seems very simpleminded.”
Then hopefully you understood it.
“If you can you will see they are baseless assertions with no intelligent argumentation.”
Basically I’ve made 3 assertions:
1) Nixon cheated during an election.
2) Nixon lied to the American people.
3) McCarthy used fear and false accusations to take away people’s constitutional rights.I don’t see anything in any posts on this thread that have debunked these assertions (backed up by a Presidential impeachment (#s 1,2) and a Senatorial Censure (#3)).
Again, I invite you to either show me the post that debunked these assertions or go crazy and debunk them yourself. Good luck.
Posted by Matt Harris on May 3, 2005 at 4:35 PM Lin,
I find the majority of your evidence completely anticdotal. There is no firm evidence of FDR “setting up” Pearl Harbor. Yes, it has been rumored, but after 60 years, still no actual evidence.
Congratulations, by the way, that China has finally realized that the Americans had it right! Capitalism and free enterprise, though not a flawless endeavor, is the one that has worked best in the 20th century. Good for you that you realize Communism is basically a failure.
Also, I’m a lifelong Democrat. Really, Lin, you should be blogging on a Republican site. That is where you’ll find the majority of the idiots responsible for the mess our country’s in, not on this site.
Lastly, your comments on the Bible, though it was bloody in the Old Testament, show a real lack of understanding and knowledge of its contents. At least when our government indulges itself in human rights violations, we are free to protest and bring it to the attention of the world. Too bad the same can’t be said for China. We have at least some sense of what a human rights violation is. Like Mao didn’t know what the Gang of Four were doing -ha, ha, ha, you send me into great fits of laughter!
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 6:13 PM 3) Easily disproved. See Arthur Herman’s
Joseph McCarthy. He took away no one’s
constitutional rights at any time, name one
if you can, and he was right about the extent
of Communist infiltration in the US Govt.
Previous posts by Michael Hardesty gave the
reference to debunk this assertion.
Censure said nothing about any violation of
rights, it was a political motive that concerned
McCarthy’s comments about two Senators.
1) Baloney. McGovern could have not won the 1972
Election if Nixon had been caught humping a mule
as LBJ said. Nixon was cheated out of an election
in 1960. 1968 was closer but there is no way that
that clown, HHH, as LBJ called him, could have won.
Previous post also gave source, Roger Morris bio
on Nixon, to debunk your assertion here.
Nixon was not impeached by the way, Billyballs
was.
2) True but so what ? So did Clinton, JFK, Ford,
Carter, Truman, Ike, FDR, et cetera.
Final point: person making positive assertion have burden of proof, namely you, not doubters.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 6:22 PM Margaret,
You are dead wrong, read the Toland and Morgenstern books, the evidence is overwhelmning
on FDR’s setting up PH with Marshall. It’s not
a signed confession but the kind of circumstantial
evidence that convicts, not acquits.
Democrats have been consistently hostile to free
enterprise, that is more Republican cause.
Democrats run US for over 50 years, WW1, WW2, Korea, Indochina, Balkans Big Lie War, et cetera.
Not peace party and just as much for US fascist
welfare-warfare state as GOP.
Old Testament is the heart of the Hebrew Bible
and very pornographic & bloody.
New Testament of dubious origin. Made up by liberals to deflect from basic harshness of
the Old one.
You may be right about Mao but he was pretty much
out of it after 60s.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 6:31 PM Since when is blacklisting a writer and, thereby, disabling him in his ability to earn a living because of an alleged political belief not a violation of that person’s rights? What was that phrase, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”? I don’t know too many people with no job or money who are very happy.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 6:34 PM Also, you’d better tell Bill Gate, Sumner Redstone, George Soros, etc. that they are anti-free enterprise. That will shock them, I’m sure. Lin, you have a very distorted picture of America. Perhaps you should come here and see what it’s really like.
Also, the Apostles were NOT LIBERALS. If anything, they sought to bring a sinful nation to repentance and a closer relationship with God. Your statement is simply incorrect.
Also, most anti-war and green groups are populated by Democratic and Green Party constituents. You’re right that many wars have been fought during Dem presidents, but the Democrats themselves have fought much harder to turn back that tide than the Republicans traditionally. LBJ was a real corporate jerk just like Bush, so it’s not the party affiliation that determines the push for war. It’s the greed factor, who can make the most money for their “friends” who bankroll their campaign.
America isn’t perfect, that’s for sure, but neither is China. Get over yourself.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 6:43 PM McCarthy never blacklisted anyone, HUAC investigated the Hollywood Reds and all ten
of them were indeed Communist Party members
and hardcore Stalinist agents, Trumbo, all
of them.McCarthy strictly investigated government
employees that the Truman people originally listed
as Communist or security risks. They had no right
to government employment and most of them should
have been removed long before they did.
The Hollywood Ten should have been blacklisted
by the studios, it would not be a violation of
their rights but in fact it was the anti-Reds
that were blacklisted like Rand, Reagan, Menjou,
etc. The US Constitution does not guarantee anyone
either money nor a job, so again, there is no violation of their rights.
There’s an old saying that in America the poor are
Democrats, the middle class are Republicans and
the rich are Communists, so your listing in no
way disproves my previous comments.
There is no evidence that the Apostles wrote the
New Testament. The Old one was simply a rehash
of old Arabian legends as Lenin noted.
I meant the New one is the liberal face compared
to the obscenely reactionary old one.
But neither had anything to do with “god” or proves the existence of any such entity.
Your earlier anti-scientific remarks on materialism are pure rubbish and a holdover
from the reactionary Idealist philosophers who
have been discredited since Darwin and Marx.
Antiwar.com and Lewrockwell.com are rightist
libertarians and they are much more anti-war
and pro-peace than anything on the US or European
Left.
I did not mean to imply China was perfect, only
that it is becoming more perfect each day and
we will soon be your masters. If we pulled out
of your Treasury bonds and stock market your
whole economy would collapse.
Pretty soon, we tell Bush get butt out of Taiwan
and he follow orders.
We may be able to employ some of you in the future
after you are properly reeducated.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 7:04 PM Excuse me, Reagan blacklisted? I don’t think so. He was the president of SAG at the time and very involved in outing “commies”. There were many people who were wrongly blacklisted. Your data is incorrect there.
Oddly, I don’t know of any rich Communists in the US. Those mentioned in my prior post are all Democrats. And since Bill Gates is the richest of all, your argument falls flatly on the grounds of incorrect data.
Communism will implode in China, just like it did in the former Soviet Union. Once your people have tasted wealth and freedom brought on by the free market, they will chafe at their communist tethers. You really do delude yourself. No one in America admires Chinese communism, except the communists (which a VERY few).
I don’t think you’ll have to tell Bush to leave Taiwan. I think the Taiwanese will do that themselves once China and Taiwan have made ammends, which seems to be happening now. Frankly, I wouldn’t lift a finger to defend Taiwan and think our government should mind its own business.
You’re not telling me or the Democrats anything new our about our deficit. We know that George “the idiot” Bush sold us out to you and Japan. But you will never be our master. We would nuke you off the face off the earth before we let that happen. Sure, you’d strike back, but I don’t think Europe is so hot on you’re vision, even less so than they are about ours. But that’s what Armeggedon is. You, Europe and Middle East/Africa coming together to put an end to Israel. Then all of you get vaporized. Too bad I won’t be around to see it.
You are a real misguided dreamer. Just like Sadaam saying “the mother of all wars”, ha! What a joke!
Oh, by the way, the last two wars were begun by Republicans.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 7:28 PM You bring up Darwin. Without the “missing link”, which is still missing, the “ascendancy of man “theory is a bust. Actually, there is a great deal of archeological data that supports Biblical perspectives. But I do believe many Christians are wrong about the earth being 6,000 years old. The truth lies somewhere between the two factions.
I, for one, don’t think Darwin was entirely wrong. Look at animal husbandry. Breeders use certain stock to crossbreed and achieve a certain animal. I disagree with other Christians on this count. Niches do create features for adaptation. But transgenetic cross-mutation is currently an unsubstantiated theory. No missing link, no proof.
And since Lenin’s experiment failed miserably, I wouldn’t put a great deal of stock in his teachings. Same with Marx. You and Cuba are about the only two communist countries still trying to claim success. I think China will survive and prosper, but not as a communist state.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 7:51 PM 1) Name the people WRONGLY blacklisted, name one.
2) There was a blacklist privately done of the
ten friendly HUAC witnesses including Reagan,
he was largely forced to work in TV from then on.
3) Frederick Vanderbilt Field, Corliss Lamont
and a host of wealthy Reds financed Communist
and leftist causes from the 30s on. Just because
you have chosen to remain unaware of it does not
mean anything as to the existence of rich Reds
or parlor Pinks or limousine Liberals.
4) Taiwanese are not about to tell Bush to leave,
whether they are KMT or pro-independence.
5) Kosovo War based on lie of Serbian genocide
in Albania was done by Clinton and Blair.
Ended up with Stalinist narco-gang KLA in power
and Serbs cleansed. Never was a holocaust against
Muslims as lied about by Clinton and Blair.
6) Democrats strongly supported Bush’s illegal war
as you can check from Congressional votes.
So one war, Iraq, begun by Bush and one war,
Ygoslavia, begun by Clinton.
7) You are racist hypocrite who would defend Israel, resting on land totally stolen from
Palestinian Arabs but would not defend Taiwan,
even though most native Taiwanese have not lived
under mainland rule for almost a century.
8) You love to nuke people ! Pace your previous
Truman War Criminal defense. Well, as Mao told
Soviets in 1957, kill half a billion of us and
half a billion remain.
8) China is not Iraq, China is now becoming the
second super power in the universe.
Saddam quote another invention of Zionist run US
media. Pathetic.
9) Communism to collapse any day now, eh ? Been
singing that US imperialist song for 60 years !
Cuba has not even collapsed, you Paper Tigers.
10) “Very few” Communists in China are 61 MILLION
MEMBERS, many more than Democrats in USA.
11) You don’t have to show your scared, we already know it.
12) Armeggedon another Hebrew “holy” book fraud.
Christianity is the Jews revenge upon the gentiles
as Nietzsche wrote.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 7:54 PM Lin,
So cheating is ok as long as the end result is not close? The Watergate break-in is a well documented occurrence and if that ain’t cheatin’, I sure as hell don’t know what is.
And lying is ok as long as everyone else is doin’ it too!? I’m beginning to see why you have no problem with Nixon and McCarthy as upstanding examples of moralistic leaders.
Over 300 artists and writers were blacklisted including Dalton Trumbo, Ruth Gordon, Dashiell Hammett, Jose Ferrer and Orson Welles, in large part due to McCarthy’s baseless, sweeping allegations.
But hey, nice try.
Wasn’t aware of the Positive Assertion Burden of Proof. Thanks for that. What official rulebook of blogging did that come from? Does that also detail that assertions can be debunked by simply posting the title of a single information source? Or is that detailed in that hot new bestseller, “Debunking for Dummies”?
Posted by Matt Harris on May 3, 2005 at 8:01 PM 1) You doubt the truth of evolution ? You might
read Stephen Jay Gould’s massive work on evolutionary theory, his last work about 1400 pages. Whatever defects it sure beats Adam and Eve
story ! The earth is billions of years old, not
started in 4004 BC as Christians claim. That doesn’t look “halfway” to me.
2) For about 50 years Lenin’s ideas largely worked, then collapsed because of internal
contradictions and revisionist policies of
Soviet leadership. This hardly discredits
everything he wrote. We notice Americans
are very blackist or whitist, simpletons
with an all or nothing approach to the
world. Read Mao “On Contradiction.”
3) South America is going Communist, Chavez in
Venezuela, de Silva in Brazil, leftist victories
in Argentina, Ecuador, Chile, Uruguay, etc.
All anti-capitalist and anti-American.
Your encirclement is beginning, better get
surrender proposals on table now.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 8:03 PM Matt,
You’re as sloppy a reader as you are a thinker.
McCarthy NEVER investigated Hollywood or any of
the private sector. He only investigated the US
GOVERNMENT.
HUAC invetigated Hollywood and Dalton Trumbo
was a Communist Party member and hardcore Stalinist. As was Dashiell Hammett, Lillian Hellman and many more. They should have been
blacklisted for their membership in a party that
upheld the murder of many millions but they were
not, unfortunately. Welles and Ferrer were never
blacklisted even though they were fellow travellers rather than outright Reds. All of the
original Hollywood Ten were outright Reds and their Communist Party membership cards were
produced at the HUAC hearings. Spare me the
crocodile tears over these Stalinist scum.
The proposition that the person makes the assertion or positive claim is part of the laws
of logic. Going back to Aristotle.
Ever read a book, Matthew ? Not everything is on
the internet though we understand that your generation of American retards seems to think so.
The Watergate break-in did NOT cost McGovern the
election, no US political analyst believes that,
which is one of the reasons it was so ludicrous
and unnecessary. No one was defending this but
this in no way effected the election chances of
the total loser McGovern. That is why Mao preferred to deal with Nixon because he said the
rightists were much more reliable, the leftists
are all losers.
Velly nice try but no cigar, Mister Matthew.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 8:18 PM There is no “Palestinian” people before 1948. They were nomads given contiguous land while Israel (who had the land from about 3,000 BC till 69 AD) was given broken fractions of dirt and rock. Sorry that you are a racist anti-Semite. Thought communists were supposed to “equal”?
Ron Reagan testified willingly, but was never blacklisted. Dalton Trumbo claimed that the only thought he’d ever given “the working class” was “how to get out of it”. Perhaps many were communists, but I really don’t get your point here. So what, some people believed that communism might be a good plan. They backed off under pressure, and the communist party has never taken hold here. Also, I said there aren’t many communists in America, not China. You misunderstood me.
Hugo Chavez is entertaining socialism, not communism. He is looking more toward the Sweden model, not China. And once Bush and the Republicans are out of power, things will settle down. Venezuela had no problem with us when Clinton was president. People all over the world still cheer for him, and they will cheer again when we don’t have a warmongering idiot for a president. But that’s democracy, you have to ride out the bad, try to minimize the damage and get back into office next election. Too bad you have no control over any of that in China.
You really are funny, Lin. Americans really aren’t afraid of China at all. And even if you pull your treasury notes out from under us, we will survive. We have been through the Great Depression and two world wars, neither of which we started. You can puff yourself up and feel good that your country is trying to imitate our success, but you still haven’t learned better than the teacher. Wages will catch up with you and your current advantage will end.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 8:19 PM Matt,
See you on another site. This GOP-loving Commie is a real bore. I have a business to run, so enough of this nonsense. Too bad he can’t have an original thought. But that has always been corporate America’s complaint about them anyway, hasn’t it? Great at imitating, piss poor in inventing.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 8:29 PM Margaret,
1) You are an anti-semitic racist as Arabs
of Palestine are not nomads but farmers and
townspeople and have lived in Palestine for
thousands of years going back to the Philistines,
Phoenicians, Assyrians, Canaanites. 99.99% of
the world’s semites are Arabs. Many Israeli
Jews are not original Semites or even Hebrews.
2) Israel didn’t exist before 1948 AD and did not
control Palestine for three thousand years.
There were only two small ancient Hebrew Kingdoms
in ancient Palestine and they were shortlived.
This was debunked here in ITT in September 1984
in a scathing review of Joan Peters’ worthless
work by Norman Finkelstein.
3) Bedouins are a very small proportion of the
Palestinian population. Christian racists like
you like to focus on Israel as a way of avoiding
your own persecution of the Jews over the years.
Christianity is a Jewish Cult and has been a
total disaster for the world.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 8:44 PM 1) Dalton Trumbo and the rest of the Hollywood Ten
were cardcarrying Stalinist Communists and their
membership cards were so produced at the 1948
HUAC hearings. They were never blacklisted by
the govt or even the movie industry but Reagan
and the Friendly Hollywood Ten were. There are
books on the subject, they were not blacklisted
by the govt either but by the influence of the
Stalinists and liberals in Hollywood.
2) Clinton was anti-Chavez and so was Kerry even
more so than Bush. Chavez’s model is CUBA, not
Sweden and he has stated so many times, ergo
with Lula in Brazil and others. Socialism and
Communism are the same except that communism
is the stage of socialism wherein the state withers away. The USSR was socialist as well
as China. Sweden is welfare state capitalism
and Chavez has specifically condemned capitalism.
So much for your knowledge of Latin America.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 8:52 PM Margaret,
USA did start the Great Depression and Wilson’s
intervention transformed European conflict into
a world war exactly as FDR’s did WW2.
So it is accurate to say that you people did
start both WORLD wars.
China is not afraid of you which is the more important proposition.
You people are no teacher to a 5,000 year old
civilization. You can’t even teach yourselves.
Your racist comments about Chinese being imitators
is on par with your previous anti-Japanese and
anti-Korean racism.
You have no morals or gold left, you are much
weaker morally and spiritually than in the 30s.
You are finished. I can see why you wish to flee
this debate, I would too if in your crumbling
shoes.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 8:59 PM Reagan was never blacklisted. And again, you never explained what is so important about the Hollywood 10. So what? 50 years ago the American people realized it was just a Republican ploy to eliminate liberals, not socialist/communists. That was a “red” herring (that is a pun). Then McCarthy was censured by the Senate, one of only 3 in history. He left office disgraced and died at 48.
If you think Latin America will rally to your cause, you are sadly mistaken. I deal with latinos daily in the hispanic-saturated area that I live in. They ALL say that their families aspire to moving to America and becoming an American. Despite our foibles, we are still far more beloved than China. Get over it.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 9:07 PM Reagan was one of many anti-communists blacklisted
by the Stalinists and their liberal stooges in
Hollywood. Check out the Ayn Rand Institute
and Ayn Rand Bookstore websites, since Rand was among the blacklisted, they sell a book on the
subject.
The Hollywood 10 were among the top writers spinning out Red propaganda in the movies and
culture, it would be like having top Nazis in
Hollywood key positions during WW 2 and you were
in just as much of a war.
The American people strongly supported McCarthy’s
war on the Reds, they got tired of the Army hearings. But today liberal is as dirty a word
as communism/socialism then so what did your
side win ???? Not much.
McCarthy never left office, he died IN office
while still a Senator at age 49 (you can’t
seem to get one fact right).
The censure was a total joke as Edward Bennett
Williams, a top DEMOCRAT and McCarthy’s atty
wrote in a book in 1962.
He was accused of ignoring a handpicked partisan
lynch mob committee from the PREVIOUS Congress
and disrespect towards ONE Senator in the current
Congress though his remarks were mild compared
to what other Senators said about him.
Truman stupidly called the Soviet spy Alger Hiss
case a Red Herring and as a member of the Jackass
Party you follow in his steps.
You know more about what Latin American want
than the Latin Americans who ae voting for
pro-Communists like Chavez and Lula ???
The USA is the most hated nation on the globe today.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 9:32 PM Left out the letter “r” in next to last sentence
above between the words “who” and “voting.”
Margaret, who told you there was going to be no
more dissent allowed on this website forum ?
So far you have not said anything that factually
checked out.
You are another emotionalistic liberal who’s
a religious nut and Zionist racist anti-Communist
extremist to boot.
No wonder the Jackass Party is going under….....
I get a headache just reading your intellectually
schizoid views.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 10:11 PM The webmaster told me it would start in about 2 weeks. None too soon, jackass. Don’t even get me started on how many of your facts were incorrect. Once again, Reagan was never blacklisted. He testified and was aquitted. He named names. Get your facts straight, you racist god hating commie loser.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 10:47 PM p.s. Israel occupied the land around 3000BC and the reign of King David was before the birth of Christ, so you’re wrong on that one.
Also, Lucille Ball was called before the committee and was not found guilty, for one.
According to a poll I recently read, China is despised in the Asian continent. Didn’t Ho send troops to deflect you all the minute we were out of Vietnam. Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Japan, Burma all listed China as the most despised nation. I will take the word of your neighbors.
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 10:54 PM I thought I smelled a Libertarian nutcase! Thanks, Gordon!
Posted by Margaret on May 3, 2005 at 10:56 PM 1) Wrong again, there were only two brief Hebrew
Kingdoms, Kingdom of David and Kingdom of Judah,
they lasted not even two hundred years total.
Israel or Palestine had not been Jewish for over
2,000 years prior to Israeli seizure in 1948.
2) Lucille Ball was NOT found not guilty, HUAC
never made a determination on guilt or innocence
since it was not a court. She would not have been
found guilty either even if she had been a Red
because that was not the function of a legislative
committee.
3) I’m glad Reagan named names, there were a lot
to name, but he and all the other anti-Reds were
blacklisted afterwards.
4) I read a poll that stated 80% of Europeans
feel the Holocaust is greatly exaggerated.
So what ? The USA would come out on top of any
negative polls in Asia or anyplace else.
5) Gordon is wrong. Not surprising considering
his weak previous postings.
6) We sent troops to stop Vietnam’s anti-Chinese
pogroms, Ho had been dead ten years by then.
7) Reagan was never acquited because he was never on trial. You are obviously ignorant of your own
constitution.
8) If webmaster only want stupid uninformed viewpoint like yours, that’s his choice.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 11:08 PM I’ve shown these exchanges to people here in Shanghai and they agree that USA may be falling
faster than even we thought, you people do not
know your own history and are unable to make,
much less sustain an argument.
You can’t argue with the message but can only try
to shoot the messenger and you are bad shots to
boot.
No wonder you showed such cowardice in Korea
and bailed out in Vietnam.
Talking to yourselves is only exercise in self-sterilization.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 3, 2005 at 11:13 PM “Ever read a book, Matthew ?”
Nah, made it through college without doing so. Pretty good accomplishment, if I say so myself. Oh, I get it, this is your way of calling me stupid. Wonder what Aristotle and other logical thinkers would think of your arguments so littered with ad hominem attacks. You’d think, having read all them big books, you’d be able to make your arguments without them. Give it a shot. You just might like it.
Posted by Matt Harris on May 4, 2005 at 12:26 AM Lin Biao = Michael Hardesty = J Craig
What a blur of trolling
Posted by Merlin on May 4, 2005 at 12:45 AM Yeah, John Craig Roberts. I saw an idiotic diatribe of his on a site just yesterday. The guy has his head you know where. Oldconservative or something like that was the name of the site.
Have you noticed the plague of Libertarians on this site? The webmaster, Seamus, agreed that they are out of control and he is, therefore, implementing the new program. Funny how guys like these, no matter where you provide facts, never can agree with them. Actually the kingdoms of Judah and Israel were simultaneous, and then David’s kingdom came afterwards. But once again he twists things to suit his own purpose. Like asking who was not found guilty, “name just one”, he said. So I do, and then twists it to say that they weren’t a court. Well, then why did he ask the above question? Because he’s a major loser assbite.Looking very forward to Seamus shutting these jerkwads down. That will leave us time to plan the elimination of the Libertarian/Republican fascists.
I think J. Craig, JM, Lin Bao or whatever must be a very bitter, lonely and hated person.
Posted by Margaret Billard on May 4, 2005 at 1:06 AM Matt,
Can you not think of anything more original than
to recycle my original complaint about you and
the other intellectually bankrupt liberals here ?
You people have done nothing but make ad hominem
arguments, which is why I brought the idea of
having your ilk read Aristotle in the first place.
I made arguments in the brief space here but gave
references so people could see the full context
of the issue.
Considering the lengths to which I went with Margaret on the Middle East, China, the difference
between McCarthy and HUAC and the fact that an
investigating committee is not a court, I fail to
see what more needs to be said. It’s not as if
she came back with any counterarguments.
Merlin, so sad you are reduced to inaccurate ad
hominems.
Margaret, as usual you are sadly wanting in the
cognitive area, reduced to a pathetic plea that
some man will protect you from opposing ideas
and censor out reality for you. I feel very sorry
for you. You are reduced to psychobabble and semi-
profanities.
On Ancient Hebrew Kingdoms they still didn’t last
more 200 years total, the both of them combined
timewise. So how the Zionists have right to toss
Arabs who have been there thousands of years,
very name Palestine came from Philistine.
ITT in 1984 exposed lying Joan Peters book on
Palestine, believe it was September.
Norman Finkelstein finished off her shoddy book.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 4, 2005 at 2:45 PM More lessons from the Middle Kingdom…
“One on tip-toe cannot stand.
One astride cannot walk.
One who displays himself does not shine.
One who justifies himself has no glory.
One who boasts of his own ability has no merit.
One who parades his own success will not endure.
In Tao these things are called ‘unwanted food and extraneous growths,’
Which are loathed by all things.
Hence, a man of Tao does not set his heart upon them.”
Lao Tzu TAO TEH CHING #24T’ai, the meeting of Heaven and Earth, the receptive and the creative. It means peace and is correlated with contentment, complete union, and a time of flowering and greatness.
—-Hempshackle
Posted by B Q HEmpshackle on May 4, 2005 at 3:29 PM BQ, thanks again for sharing ancient Chinese
philosophy with us.
May I respectfully suggest a caveat here ?
Much of this ancient wisdom is of a very reactionary, passive, anti-struggle nature.
One reason for the terrible Communist violence
since 1949 here is the accumulated baggage of
5,000 years of very questionable philosophy.
Much in Chinese history not wonderful and the
Confucian mentality not very progressive in
the western enlightenment sense, not using
progressive in the liberal-socialist-communist
misnamed terminology.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 4, 2005 at 3:43 PM The present is a recapitulation of the post Manchu period embracing a reawakening of the doctrine of Sun Yat-sen. Are not his three principles becoming manifest?
May humbly assert there is still much of relevance to gleaned?
“A good soldier is never aggressive;
A good fighter is never angry.
The best way of conquering an enemy
Is to win him over by not antagonizing him.
The best way of employing a man
Is to serve under him.
This is called the virtue of non-striving!
This is called using the abilities of men!
This is called being wedded to Heaven of as of old!”
Lao Tzu— TAO TE CHING #68“The strategists have a saying:
I dare not be a host, but rather a guest;
I dare not advance an inch, but rather retreat a foot.
This is called marching without moving,
Rolling up one’s sleeves without baring one’s arms,
Capturing the enemy without confronting him,
Holding a weapon that is invisible.There is no greater calamity than to under-estimate the strength of your enemy.
For to under-estimate the strength of your enemy is to lose your treasure.Therefore, when opposing troops meet in battle, victory belongs to the grieving side.”
Lao Tzu—TAO TE CHING #69A principle of martial arts is to turn an opponent’s strength back upon them—-
We worship and extol the majesty of the dollar as we enjoin the rest of the world to follow our newly revealed religion.
Stepping back, diminishing the thrust, returning the force to bring the opponent down—-
So it is that our greed has enabled China.B Q Hempshackle
Posted by Hempshackle on May 4, 2005 at 4:52 PM BQ, many thanks again for thoughtful comments
and thought-provoking quotations.
Sun Yat-sen, as you know, founder of modern China
republic in 1911. Democracy and socialism are two
of the three principles he forcefully advocated.
Both KMT and CCP claim to be his intellectual
heirs and following very bloody KMT purge of
CCP members in 1927 the Sun Yat-sen movement
split into vociferous factions, his widow live
in Mainland China till her death and Mao was
friendly with her.
Will have to read carefully the quotes you have
submitted and try to get back to you before the
Great Purge on this forum.
Do appreciate finally “meeting” intellectual,
thoughtful poster.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 4, 2005 at 5:42 PM Wow,Hempshackle, I’m very impressed. Fake China dude didn’t know where to go with that one! But for anyone following, he’s really a Libertarian anyway. Just for your information:
Libertarianism is built around a single, faulty premise; that people in general can be trusted to handle themselves responsibly around other people. Well, one morning commute in the city ought to show you that’s full of baloney. If people can’t be trusted with turn signals, how can they be trusted to conduct themselves socially without some form of policing or restraint? I don’t trust these people with their SUV’s, I sure as heck don’t trust them with automatic weapons. If you think people in general are intelligent and responsible, take a look at what movies and music are popular. People are trusted to watch whatever kind of television they want and what do they choose? Survivor and American Idol. Most people are stupid and selfish and they need government to keep them in line. Period. I don’t mind submitting to a few laws if those same laws are going to keep the psychos hiding in the woods where they belong.
Seems to me that is why communism failed in USSR. You can’t expect people to be altruistic, generous and fair on a level playing field, because the nature of man is to strive to be the one on top. Corruption ensues, classes begin to differentiate, deals are cut in private and, eventually, communism collapses. Just like it will eventually in China. They already are on the path to riches and capitalism is now the dream of the Chinese youth and business community.
Posted by Margaret on May 4, 2005 at 9:11 PM Agree with last paragraph of your thoughtful post.
Lao Tzu has some good tactical advice but the
implementation depends on the concrete material
circumstances, sometimes you do want to strike
hard. Knowing when to advance as well as when to
retreat is necessary. Also read “On Contradiction”
by Mao Zedong.
Things are not always either/or.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 4, 2005 at 9:16 PM Just responded to BQ thoughtful post when I see
another wordsalad by Margaret, which bears no relation to anything we have discussed.
Sorry about her Nazi-Social Darwinist-Hobbesian
view of man as dummy to be controlled by the wise
men of the state. A proven 5,000 year failed ideology. She is speaking introspectively when
she passes judgment on all of mankind’s alleged
inability to act responsibly. Most people do.
People like Margaret want the fascist police to
have all the guns so they can maintain their form
of dictatorship. Margaret like all would be Hitlers assumes that the authorities will rule
the way she thinks they should rule.
She a typical liberal who despises the masses
and for no reason at all thinks she superior.
She think masses endorse TV trash but if shown
something better they will watch it. TV and Hollywood controlled 99% by one very small clique
of people who are frankly liberal degenerates,
not representative of total population in any
country. Margaret may well need institutional
care but that hardly means the rest of us in
any country need to be kept in line, very
revealing language for so-called liberal Democrat,
no wonder they not win elections.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 4, 2005 at 9:28 PM Hieaah Marget,
I fool you good. I not Libertrian. I Lin Craig. HA ha ha ha ha.
Posted by Merlin on May 4, 2005 at 10:39 PM Ah, Lin Biao, no Michael Hardesty but a pathetic fraud…
Merlin’s satire of your fake Chinese personna is about as racist as you are Chinese. Leaving a word out of every other sentence and dropping an occassional s off the backs of words, while cute, is lame. Playing the race card here is slimy, and well, fucked up. Go get a fuckin’ life.
Posted by Matt Harris on May 5, 2005 at 1:27 AM I agree that you’re playing the race card is slimey and that is what we have come to expect
from US liberals, no logic, no history, no facts,
no philosophy, no argumentation of any sustained
nature, only racist mouthings like Margaret
wanting to nuke all Chinese and spouting vicious
anti-Arab racism. Then to top it off she goes
one further than the Nazis and denies my existence
!!!! Based on nothing at all.
My knowledge of english is quite good but not perfect. I doubt you know any mandarin or cantonese.
I notice empty headed liberals like yourselves
are reduced to profanities because you don’t
know enough real words in your own language
to carry on a constructive debate or really
any kind of debate at all !
No wonder Mao told Nixon that he preferred to
deal with rightists, they are at least honest.
The word liberal has the component parts of the
word liar, not a coincidence, perhaps ?
Posted by Lin Biao on May 5, 2005 at 2:52 PM Isn’t it funny how letters FU found in both words: Fucking Fraud.
Ho, ho, ho. Me so FUnny.
Posted by Phuk Yu on May 6, 2005 at 7:29 PM Velly witty. Always nice when liberals show their
erudition.
Posted by Lin Biao on May 6, 2005 at 8:34 PM This is so funny! Reading this page has made me realize that Lin Biao really is very clever, because he has created a wonderful illustration for us of the pettiness, cluelessness, childishness and total ineptitude of the Republican party to do anything but steal elections! Good joke!
Posted by Margaret on May 7, 2005 at 1:12 AM How person in China illustrate GOP unclear.
Perhaps Non-Aristotelian logic.
Democratic Party can neither win elections or govern if they do.
Legacy:WW1, 2, Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, FDR concentration camps for Japanese-Americans,
race riots throughout the 60s, Carter ineptitude
foreign and domestic, Wilson’s Palmer raids after
WW1, Truman’s police action in Korea, LBJ’s
invasion of the Dominican Republic, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan under Carter, the House
Impeachment of Clinton, Hillary’d failed health
welfare plan for large insurers, Gore’s fundraising scandals, JFK’s stolen 1960 election,
Truman’s sellout of China to the Reds, FDR’s
sellout of half of Europe to Stalin at Yalta,
Carter’s failed energy bill, Carter’s failed dept
of consumer affairs, Truman’s many corruption
scandals, LBJ’s appointment of Communist sympathizer Ramsey Clark as Attorney General,
Medicare which greatly inflated ALL medical costs
and which will bankrupt your social security
system, affirmative action which puts incompetent
women and minorities first, soaring 60s crime
rate due to liberal soft on crime policies, etc.
Indeed proud record…...........
Posted by Lin Biao on May 9, 2005 at 2:58 PM “In response to the two scenarios you mentioned above, I’ve thought long and long about whether any efforts to influence the political and social culture of the country was worthwhile or not. In my most cynical moments, I’ve also contemplated emigration, just to say “hell with it” and move away permanently. However, the greater share of my mind wants to continue pushing.
If I became convinced that the US really had evolved into a place I could never identify with again, a place where lowest-common-denominator culture and ethics had drowned out anything higher for which America might once have stood, then bailing out would be the right choice. I’m accustomed to living overseas, and in fact, at this specific moment in history I probably would feel more at home in Canada or the Netherlands (to an extent, that is).”
Kuya, I’d like to say something in response to your post to Gordon!I DO KNOW what you mean - but would you permit me to say I think “running away” is FUTILE? In the long-term, if not mid-term future.
(Unless you need to do so to protect your actual physical safety, from arrest, or whatever, on political charges by the GOP louts and their fellow-travelers. THEN I’d say - GET OUT FAST and God(or Gaia!) speed you!!)
But, you see, while Canada and the Netherlands may STILL be fine places (I come from neither, nor the US)... if you READ any international/ist newspaper/website, eg. The World Socialist Web, www.wsws.org, you will see that the right-wing neocon neo-liberal US disease, with all its economic ills, of which militarism is just the biggest symptom, is increasing WORLDWIDE - that social provisions are being REMOVED from the masses, in Canada, Australia, France, Germany, Britain and… practically everywhere else you can think of! Even Sweden!! (And what about all those right-wing/racist/anti-Muslim groups that are growing apace in Holland - what are THEY symptomatic of?)
It might be BETTER in all those places NOW - but it ain’t going to stay that way. Certainly not in terms of social provision, workers’ rights and so on.
So - your ONLY bet as a member of the working class (or lower or middle-middle class for that matter!) is to “stay put”, and fight it as best you can in your local area - OR in the nearest likely metropolis!!
Posted by Liz on Jun 19, 2005 at 9:25 PM The US - in so many ways - is STILL where it’s at! It’s what I’ve called a “powerhouse culture”. There are so MANY of you - and your middle class is STILL so large, I have realized - and so many of you STILL get a pretty good education - well the very NUMBERS of all these enlightened people make not only a good coffee-house culture (and you have one!), but revolution, TRULY possible, in my mind!
There’s just ENOUGH of you, all over, to be able to FORM all these groups and websites and boards and blogs… As for socialists/Marxists… You’d think there were hardly ANY in the US, the way their mainstream media studiously avoids the issue! There are PILES of them!! (Us!) The US. Marxist or international (but most of them ARE based in the US) websites are the best by MILES. There’s none to compare with them in Britain or anywhere else English-speaking.
As for the Dems - the Marxists might sigh and say: “They’re so wrong, to rely on the likes of the GOP which is now incapable, if it ever was, of serving the working class…”
But - Dems - there are so MANY of you!!! And so many CAPABLE INTELLECTUALS, famous and non, working for your side, under your aegis!! (Again, the British Labour Party, Australian Labour Party and all that lot - don’t hold a candle!!)
Who have the Repugs got to boast?!! A bunch of slimy neocons, some absolutely RETARDED Christian Right guys like Robertson, Falwell and Dobson - and some laissez-faire economists (the likes of Murray Rothbard and Milton Friedman and the whole pack of ‘em.)
The DIFFERENCES between the whole pack of ‘em are in fact BIGGER - and could and DO - lead to bigger splits than those between liberals and Marxists, and different varieties of Marxists/socialists!!!
YES THEY ARE… Because the Neocons HATE the Christian Right from who the GOP draw so much of their power!! Of course they do; Xtian Righters are intractable religious chauvinists, who believe that everybody not “saved”, ie members of a few Protestant sects, will go to hell: Neocons are mainly Jews, as I am gradually finding out, more and more!! So are many of these laissez-faire economists: you only have to look at their surnames… Yeah, I know there are left-wingers and right-wingers of all religions, really… but I’m just pointing out where the FAULT LINES occur!
Another fault-line is probably that many of these laissez-faire types would rather be Libertarians, it would seem - ie, small state, including small military, with FEW imperial pretensions - which goes against what BOTH the Christian Right and the Neocons want!! (Anyway, what these Libertarians want is straight from 18th/19th century isolationism, where they gain all their ideas, the Wild Wild West, I reckon, and is totally incompatible with modern capitalism, which HAS to use imperialism to protect its profits!)
So you see, there are splits between all these “three factions”!
FEAR NOT, ALL PROGRESSIVES!! Go sock it to ‘em and sic’ ‘em!!!
Posted by Liz on Jun 19, 2005 at 9:25 PM Hey, Hardesty, Hempshackle, Jack, whoever-you-are!!
Ayn Rand was a WACKJOB. I haven’t read any of her books yet, but the more I read about her on the net, the more I realize that.
Anyway, there are TONS of authors who wrote more than one novel who have OUTSOLD her, in numbers terms!! Charles Dickens has probably outsold her. Joanne Rowling certainly has. That Christian wackjob Tim LaHey has, BY MILES… His “Left Behind” series, of what, 7-8 cheap thrillers, has sold 80 MILLION COPIES… (Jesus! Is all I can say to that! Wept.)
Rand has only sold a bit above 20 million.
Fascist wackjobs… It just proves to me, that a psyche once threatened, can marshall ALL its defences, ALL sorts of strange weapons, constructed in the depths of the id (a Freudian term and I’m a Jungian but let’s run with it!) to defend itself… ALL kinds of dark sorcery and Error….
(I shall make a note to tell the Fourth Internationalists, the Trotskyists I am in contact with, the ones with an INTERNATIONAL presence… If they’re going to do any expropriating this time when the revolution comes, as it surely shall within the next 20-50 years if modern capitalism continues the way it’s doing, can they please just limit it to conglomerates - who don’t belong to anybody, just a vague collection of shareholders, as if the directors REALLY cared about those (!), and the OBVIOUS big crime families, like the Bushes etc.
Not people who own drugstores and chemists shops and various medium-sized businesses. Otherwise they’re going to breed another generation of dreadful “thinkers” like Ayn (Pain) Rand.)
That’s going to be high on my requests list!!
(Actually it probably will be possible to take over whatever we want, economically speak, after regime change, by stringently prosecuting big fish for economic crimes which are ILLEGAL UNDER THIS SYSTEM, NOW!!)
Anyway, “Jack”, read this following site for a refutation of Rand’s self-contradictory ideas.
http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/rand5.htmThe more I research Rand, the more weird things I keep hearing about her… See, when I was in institutes of learning in whichever country I come from, nobody ever talked about her… Nor in school. She was NEVER a geeky teen interest in my neck of the woods. I therefore find her to be a US obsession. Unsurprisingly. Funnily enough, though I think I was always peripherally aware of her, because of watching a documentary when I was a minor, sth. about Hollywood. I seem to have somehow got the idea that her novels were sort of like a futuristic Wild West, though - whereas it seems she’s much worse!!
Well, apparently one of her novels “Atlas Shrugged”, glorifies rape, within a hero/heroine relationship. She’s obsessed with “macho”, phallic metaphors - never with the female side of life. (A sort of Jazz Age Camille Paglia, then!)
Only she wasn’t homosexual, or if she was, she hid it well. She was against homosexuals, apparently - usual macho reason, thought they were effete and a “disease”.
And then there’s all this junk about which Michael informs us, that Rand was against the civil rights movement… Hmm. Yes, we’re in VERY good company!!
(HOW else did she expect blacks to emancipate themselves, other than outright bloody war - by BUYING the votes from the whites in the South?)
Oh yeah, and apparently she got her start by the good graces of Cecil B. DeMille… another GREAT friend to humanity! I am sure.
Hm. Wonder if it would work for me. Maybe if I go to Hollywood, stand outside studios and wiggle my hips and pout my lips when Steven Spielberg (after all, he’s not so bad politically) drives by…
Assuming he’s not gay, of course.
Anyway, like Ann Coulter - another media whore. Albeit operating in an environment where it was new; ie Rand was a pioneer in this respect.
Posted by Liz on Jun 20, 2005 at 1:00 AM To Lin Biao, alias Charlie Chan
You think you very funny, me think you not very funny.
Drop lame Asian act or me come and get you with me tommyhawk.
How! (Peace, man.)
Posted by Big Chief Crazy Horse on Jun 20, 2005 at 1:10 AM Lin Biao is the only making sense here.
Rand has sold in the hundreds of millions,
if not billions soon.
No wonder Liz got banned after reading
her wacko posts.
If she never even read Rand how could she make
such judgments ??????????
The Dems are growing fewer every election
and as for capable intellectuals therein,
WHOM ? No names come to mind.
Posted by Martin on Jul 6, 2005 at 2:59 PM Oh, *I* never got banned, “Martin”, aka Michael, aka Jack….
I just left the blog for a while. I have PLENTY of Internet fora to go to and sites to attend!
But as for *you*... I would await an e-mail from the webmaster.
anyway, they’ve just changed the system. To stop dorks posting on it with multiple aliases.
FYI, *I* am now the only Liz enabled to use that username on the board; the webmaster arranged it for me.
Posted by Liz on Aug 10, 2005 at 2:51 PM It’s not difficult to make judgements on Rand’s work, “Lin” and “Martin”, when they are so well known - as you make out - and there are so many websites concerning these works and indeed “abstracts” of them on the web. I’ve seen “The Fountainhead”, or was it “Atlas Shrugged” acted out with little robot dolls!! On the web.
Go figure!!
She obviously has some very odd fans - and counter-fans.
I’ve discovered that some of the people who profess to LIKE her are rather strange and ambivalent about her… even YOU, Michael, aren’t consistenly in favour of her on the other websites on which your comments appear.
As for “auteur” Frank Miller, whose views have appeared on the web version of NBC and several other websites… well he professes to adore her works.
So WHY, I wonder, does he use the name “Roark” for an evil paedophile-sheltering cardinal in the movie “Sin City”, when in fact that name is the very one Rand gives to her iconic architect hero?
Hmm. Well, if it gives you any pleasure, Michael, I must say I’d rather read “Atlas Shrugged” than watch Sin City again. Or read “The Big Fat Kill” on which it is based.
But I think she attracts weirdoes.
Posted by Liz on Aug 10, 2005 at 3:03 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by David Sirota
- We Are What We Trade and How We Trade It
- TARP on Steroids
- A Party With No Punch
Three parables for progressives and the Grand Old (Democratic) Party. - A Tale of Two Supermen
- Say It Ain’t Snowe
- The Zombie Zeitgeist
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2005 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
