The story I’d like to share with you goes to the core of our belief that the quality of democracy and the quality of journalism are deeply entwined. Public media is now under attack, as am I, by the right-wing media and their allies at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). CPB was established almost 40 years ago to set broad… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (227)Steve,
I am glad you can see what a political embicile Jack Barnes is. He can quote from his “vast” readings, but he is unable to assimilate any of that information into wisdom. He and his type are the bane of America. You are absolutely right, Bitch Brown will start tearing down all the worker’s protections post haste. It’s all a game to JB. He couldn’t care less about anyone but himself.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 9, 2005 at 1:10 AM Could the news be any more bizarre?
Katherine Harris Running for U.S. Senate:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-06-07-harris-senate_x.htm
Posted by Tim Christopher on Jun 9, 2005 at 3:54 AM Margaret, you reduced to spouting the vilest
sexist terms ! Wow !
One thing I have noticed about liberals and the
left is that it is impossible to have an honest
disagreement with them. If you oppose their views,
it’s only because you are in the pay of Big Oil,
not because anyone could honestly oppose the
welfare state or socialism ! Heaven forfend !
Many of us workers are tired of paying for all
the bums who can’t. We would like to be able
to make the real money to provide for ourselves
rather than depend on a state stipend.
How fascist of us ! Except fascism is the opposite
of laissez-faire capitalism.
So, Margaret, why don’t you give your workers a
60% raise today, morally you should with all that
government moolah your getting from us and not
voluntarily on our part.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 9, 2005 at 3:00 PM Tim,
Fortunately, Katherine is not wildly popular. Also, Bill Nelson garnered a lot of support recently when he and Rep. Boxer brought national attention to the program sanctioned by the Feds to test pesticides on small children. After their presentation, the program was shut down in 3 days.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 9, 2005 at 4:38 PM Kathrine Harris is awful. No respect for democracy! Look up US national election in 2000. What fraud!
Posted by steve on Jun 9, 2005 at 4:51 PM What about the stolen 1960 election ?
What about the rather biased all Democratic
Florida Supreme Court ?
Too bad about the Sore-Loserman ticket !
Oh, cry me a river !
About as genuine as the Democrats’ concern for
the rights of minorities under the filibuster !
Then why did they change the rule from 67 to 60
if they were so damned concerned ?
Go, Janice, go ! She’s not only a libertarian-Objectivist, smart as all get out but beautiful
too ! Unlike the Boxer, Pelosi and Feinstein
bowwows.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 9, 2005 at 5:04 PM Bill Nelson usually votes with the GOP.
Was he the one Demo Senator who voted for
Brown yesterday ?
Zell Miller has written a new book (again)
detailing the decline of the Dummyrats in
a perversion of special interest anti-American
identity groups.
What a pathetic ragtag mob ! The GOP LOVES
Dean, so my Repub friends tell me.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 9, 2005 at 5:08 PM Margaret,
What you refer to is true, but I wouldn’t bet the farm on the outcome of this particular race.
Harris is way out of her league but state GOP operatives are obviously confident they can pull off another dirty campaign like they did for Mel Martinez—another mindless yes man for Carl Rove. And of course, the Harris campaign can also count on considerable influence from Washington GOP goon squads—and perhaps unlimited funding if numbers maintain a favorable show of support as the campaign proceeds.The Democrats should win this one, but then where have we heard THAT before? It will all hinge, I think, on their campaign effort and how well they take advantage of the current unfavorable polls that show Americans now feel that Bush is leading the country in the wrong direction - particularly among the elderly and there are elderly aplenty here, concerned about cuts in Medicare and Social Security, the high cost of prescription medicines and funky HMO health care.
Nelson is vulnerable in overall consistency and the GOP will no doubt focus on that as they did in the National election with Kerry. Nelson has caved to Florida developers and Agri-business on occasion and relevant to this column, he voted along with Martinez to fund the entirely idiotic and wasteful TV Marti. One can only speculate what THAT was about: either to strategically compete for the South Florida Cuban vote or perhaps as a tradeoff for a piece of the campaign contribution pie of South Florida corporate barons, but either way, the people of Florida that work for a living lose and they will lose a lot more if Harris is allowed to represent them in Washington as… my God, a Senator.
Grand Theft America: http://bushflash.com/gta.html
Posted by Tim Christopher on Jun 9, 2005 at 6:28 PM Has anyone noticed how the wingnuts and trolls only talk about the past? There is total avoidance of what is going on right now…today. They drag “red herrings” across any attempt to address the present. They simply dismiss “as absurd” any thought that might expose the reality of today’s situation.
Luminous Beauty, in another thread, said it well:“What we’re trying to do here is discern what is genuine from what is BS, not compete in a popularity contest.”
This forum is not for determining whether “I am better ‘n you,” because I can quote all manner of sources about the past to prove some arcane point that justifies my personal agenda. It is not, IMO, to wage a “college type” debate where the prize is the “championship” of the debating team. A “See! My team is better than yours!”
I tire of reading the diatribes and red herring arguments from wingnuts and trolls like Jack Barnes (J Craig or what ever name he chooses today.)
I recall another poster stating about J Craig, I believe, “Too much talkie, talkie.” That astute observation holds for the latest incarnation of Craig. Those that have the least to say speak prolifically and do so in a loud voice, as is evident with our “I’m better ‘n you” Barnes.Barnes said it himself recently to “Maggie” in the last few days, as did his alter ego, J Craig, weeks ago in another thread. I paraphrase, “If you don’t like it, don’t respond!” To “discuss” anything with enablers is nothing short of emotional ignorance, and to do so in the face of their own warning is just plain foolish.
When real conservatives appear, and it is obvious when they do, a real discussion can begin. Wingnuts and trolls should be relegated to the trash heap as they are not worth recycling, and destroy that which they claim to fertilize.I believe we should take him at his word and simply have nothing to do with him and those neocon enablers like him. Let us concentrate on not losing sight of the goal Luminous Beauty states above. Let us discover, and broadcast the BS when we find it and not get misled by the rotten smell of dead herrings and those that handle them.
Posted by Merlin on Jun 9, 2005 at 7:05 PM Merlin,
Well said! I truly enjoy discussions that bring out the best of ideas and can solve problems. I’m pumped!
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 9, 2005 at 7:12 PM I think there’s a guy around here beating his GOP spin drum and calling someone else a Democratic Racist, HAHAHA! Read this posted by CNN on 6/9/05:
Former Republican Sen. Jesse Helms extended comments on national affairs since he retired from the Senate in 2003 after five terms. Helms, 83, was one of the nations leading voices of segregation as a TV commentator in Raleigh, NC in the 1960s and opposed nearly every civil rights bill while in the Senate. He has never retracted his views on race or said segregation was wrong.
Helms also was an outspoken opponent of laws to protect homosexuals from discrimination and of funding for AIDS research, but he writes in the book that his views evolved during his final years in the Senate.
Helms writes, “it had been my feeling that AIDS was a disease largely spread by reckless and voluntary sexual and drug-abusing behavior, and that it would probably be confined to those in high risk populations. I was wrong.” (yes you were, don’t you read?)
When you stop to consider how many times this guy was re-elected, time and again, after showing so much incompetence, inhumanity, and ignorance towards others, it is sickening. This guy was 81 when he retired, Urghhhh! 81!
We all know about Strom Therman too and his love of African Americans but his political insecurities stopped him from coming out publicly. Thats because a good old GOP party member would be ostracized for such behavior.
We all know that the GOP is primarily white party but it has its token blacks too! The GOP does not resemble the face of America. Stop hiding in you suits GOP boys and admit that all you care about is your money and the power to control others!
Signed: An American Without a Country
Posted by V.O.A. on Jun 9, 2005 at 7:32 PM You left out the reasons Helms gave for his
opposition to the civil rights laws, an intellectually dishonest maneuver on your part.
You’re agism is disgusting and you are NOT the
voice of america.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 9, 2005 at 8:00 PM Merlin, a magician you’re not. It is obvious that
you can’t deal with an opposing viewpoint, it is
a mental illness that most liberals have, so you resort to ad hominem attacks accusing others of
doing what YOU do, posting under multiple names.
I do not. You do. I’ve never even seen anything by
J. Craig on any ITT Board.
Get to the arguments, can the wordsalads or get off the board. It’s not as if you’re going to
be missed.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 9, 2005 at 8:07 PM Colby said to Jack Barnes,
“instead, i issue a challenge. come to guatemala, come to nebaj where the united states military aided and abetted a slaughtering of an indigenous people by a a man (rios montt) president reagan called a great man…
and i want you to stay there for 3 months, and everytime you walk down the street and a woman grabs her child and runs into the corn i want you to think about why. why is she so afraid of you and your white face. i want you to sleep on the ground, i want you to try and live one day in this reality…but mostly i want you to stop talking about how much you know, and begin to be able to tell me how much you have experienced…then you can call me incoherent.”Thanks, Colby. Powerful stuff! And worth repeating on this new page. It should give all us armchair pundits food for thought before placing our feet firmly in our mouths, and our heads up a soft warm and smelly place.
Posted by Merlin on Jun 9, 2005 at 8:19 PM Ooooh, my,
Seems as though the little man with feet in his mouth and head in soft warm place is exercised. Tremble, tremble tremble. Maybe I should run and hide from the big bad J Craig (nee Barnes) and never post again. Yeehaaa! Love it, (this bullshit of his,) or leave it, he trumpets as he gallooops off to any other blogs he can find, creating havoc and depositing large piles of manure for others to deal with….Maybe our humble and sweet Jack Barnes should address Colby’s challenge, above, find something he has neither recognized nor felt, called compassion and understanding, and discover what it feels like to be a real human being for the first time in his life.
Posted by Merlin on Jun 9, 2005 at 8:48 PM barnes would have to be crazy to even respond to
you two swishes. never read such incoherent verbiage. colby is obviously in an institution
for the criminally insane and merlin is into
smelling his butt. notice you talk a lot about
men’s hineys, merl. you trying to tell us something ?
who cares what some stinky little beaners in some
latin pigsty think ? as long as they don’t get
my tax money I could care less what happens to
them.
Posted by Eddie Willers on Jun 9, 2005 at 10:23 PM I can see the immaturity here and I see the name calling, and its part of the nature of politics. But when I see things like what Mr. Willers wrote, thats disgusting. This is my last writing here.
Thanks Ya’ll
Posted by V.O.A. on Jun 10, 2005 at 12:15 PM V.O.A.,
Don’t go away! I see signs of fruitful discussions beginning to take place. Even Jack Barnes, when he chooses to, engages is real argument that has all the components.
It’s tempting to respond to people like Willers; I see such types in a number of forums but, fortunately, they are few no matter what ideology is represented at the website. However, the only reason for responding to these types is to make sure they don’t get away with their crap. But these particular types won’t change and are interested only in talking “at” others who believe as they do. The Willers-types serve no purpose in society other than to provide comic relief if you are able to calm your nerves. It takes practice, I’ll admit.
Even though the subject comical-while-disgusting posting mentions Jack Barnes, hopefully, Jack will not buy into it. We may not agree on much, but Jack shows signs of willingness to discuss matters, and that’s a beginning.
Take deep breaths and mentally envision the disgusting posters in a TV sitcom that’s so infantile that you change the channel.
Stay with us V.O.A.; we need voices of reason.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 10, 2005 at 3:18 PM VOA,
That’s right. Jerkwads like Jack Barnes (J. Craig, Lin Biao, and many others) are frustrated, racist, hated and lonely Libertarians. I’ve never met a non-Libertarian that didn’t think that Libertarians were basically insane.
So, just ignore his trash. I do, and I get the benefit of talking with a lot of a great people on this site. I’ve tried to talking with trolls like him, and it never works out. They have such wretched, miserable, inconsequential and bitter lives that they only can feel good when they think they’ve trumped someone online. They mostly just spew diarrhea from their mouths.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 10, 2005 at 3:37 PM Eddie’s style is not mine but in all candor I
have to agree it is a total waste to respond to
objects like Merlin and Colby.
So moving on, I see Margaret is still mired in
the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem
and argument from authority. Since nonlibertarians
convert to libertarianism all the time, her latest
droppings stand revealed as even more egregiously
asinine than usual and that is saying something !
Oh, are your nonignoring ignorings like Nixon’s
nondenial denials in Watergate, Maggie ?
Nonservile, I’m always open to a reasonable debate
and when people disagree reasonably I respond.
Some folks like Margaret rarely do and I’m not
any sort of Christ-Culter who turns the other
cheek. Though I’m aware of the old adage that
when you get into an argument with an idiot,
people might not be able to tell the difference.
Merlin and Colby are probably Margaret’s sons.
Miss Bunny Hop flunked out.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 10, 2005 at 4:03 PM Well, it’s bad news in the Washington Post today about funding for public broadcasting. I’ve stated my opinion that the best way to prevent politics from determining programming is to eschew tax funding, but I certainly believe it should be a phased process so that valuable programming isn’t eliminated before alternate funding is secured.
The House subcommittee’s excuses all boil down to not enough money being available and tough choices having to be made, public broadcasting not achieving high enough priority and thereby suffering from it.
Of course, fighting illegal wars as part of empire-building around the globe is quite expensive and the neocons need to steal money from any and all available sources.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 10, 2005 at 6:26 PM Just read the Post story. That’s good news,
even lefties hate NPR/PBS for their bland pro-government centrism. They were among the most
pro-war outlets leading up to Bush’s invasion of Iraq.
William Boofuckley was on there for years with
his terminably boring show. They had several
business shows and no labor show.
Then they canned Moyers.
They get enough money from their corporate sponsors like ADM to get off the dole.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 10, 2005 at 8:10 PM Jack,
Of course your opinions are valuable to you as mine are to me, but there are people who did enjoy Buckley and Moyers, so what about them?
Anyway, I’d like to discuss this issue of PBS funding with you, but first I’d like to ask: Do you support the idea of a broadcasting system that is educational; that provides subject matter for study from a variety of ideologies for the politically-minded; that provides subject matter that is not politically oriented; and that also provides educational opportunities for children?
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 10, 2005 at 8:49 PM “...and that also provides educational opportunities for children?”
1nonservilepeasant,
That is exactly why the GOP is striving to rid themselves of public broadcasting.
If you dumb down the ciriculum at school so that your kids really aren’t learning anything they can use to get by in life, so they don’t learn critical thinking skills or thoughtful analysis, then they will be more compliant with your political will.
You bring Mom and Dad down to near poverty so they can’t make enough to have college money by removing the labor, wage and hours laws (like our new judges to the Appeals Court wish to do), they can’t send the kids to college. The kids don’t have the grades or the money now. And, they are stupid because our educational service made sure they were.
You throw things like bankruptcy laws out there that screw the individual but reward the corporation, increase taxes on the poor and allow corporations to shed their employee’s pension plans, you now have the “have-not’s” just where you want them in your corporate oligarchy. They will do anything to get by. They are more truly indentured slaves than employees.
So, you now offer the military with sign-on incentives that can offer them a “way out”, and you have your cannon fodder. Yes, the GOP really is a “fine” example of the “culture of Life” and “family values”, NOT.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 10, 2005 at 10:16 PM The curriculum was dumbed down 75 years by
John Dewey and the social adjustment Left.
The NEA, staunch Democrats all, are the biggest
enemies of real learning in the country as
Margaret has learned to her great sorrow from how
her own rugrats turned out.
Once these crappy welfare programs are finally
repealed, this economy will boom as never before.
By the way it was a Democrat named Nelson who
voted for Janice Rogers Brown but it was Nelson
of Nebraska, not Nelson of Florida.
I can see Rogers as a great Supreme Court Justice
or even President and a real looker too !
Not a bowwow like Boxer or Feinstein or Pelosi.
Dean’s great at the DNC, go Howard !
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 10, 2005 at 10:38 PM Left out “ago” after 75 years in first line of above.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 10, 2005 at 10:40 PM Janice Rogers Brown is an Uncle Tom fascist whore. So glad you approve.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 10, 2005 at 10:41 PM Remember Rose Bird? JRB will go down, just the same way, but by the opposite party. But enjoy yourself for now, since you have almost no one else crazy enough to belive in Libertarianism in Congress who will stand up for her when the other justices kick her and Pryor and Myers’ asses out.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 10, 2005 at 10:44 PM Congrats, Jack Barnes! You’re the best troll I’ve ever seen. Truly, trolling is an art form. You have to effectively use your party’s rhetoric, toss ridiculously childish insults at those you’re talking to, keep one or more repeated themes (for you, it’s panties and drugs, amonmg other things), and remind everybody of how much you read and how things should be documented because that saves the work for you. You’ve excelled on all points. Trolling isn’t my thing, personally…I prefer honest, polite, intelligent, and respectful discussion. But you have made me chuckle a few times. Thanks.
Posted by A libertarian on Jun 10, 2005 at 11:41 PM <Margaret wrote: Yes, the GOP really is a “fine” example of the “culture of Life” and “family values”, NOT.>
I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of the Bushista regime. At the present time in America, we can only elect Democrats or Republicans and the neocons have nabbed the Republican Party for the most part. So, the best thing for America is to elect as many Democrats as possible to stop the neocon steamroller and, at the same time, we continue to participate in making changes at every opportunity we get at every level. The Bushistas have already joined forces with enough corporations and ultra-rich humans to form the corporate oligarchy that rules America at the present time. The best way for an oligarchy to rule over the masses is for the masses to be poor; world history has many examples to prove this method to be effective. We should be ashamed that through complacency and trust, both destructive to a republic, we let this oligarchy seize power.However, even after we get the neocons out of power, there will be many problems to solve, as you mentioned in your post, including the problems of political and corporate influence in public broadcasting. How should this problem of influence be solved?
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 11, 2005 at 2:24 AM Hi 1nonservilepeasant
You said:
“However, even after we get the neocons out of power, there will be many problems to solve, as you mentioned in your post, including the problems of political and corporate influence in public broadcasting. How should this problem of influence be solved?”A very important and complex problem indeed and in need of discussion by all people of good intentions. Unfortunately, at this time, IMO, I believe it to be too early to consider the best path. We have not even reached the immediate goal of changing the balance of power in the legislature coming in 2006! To talk about solutions at this point in time would be like standing in a burning building and discussing the best way to fireproof it after it after the fire is out. To paraphrase an old saying:
When you are up to your ass in neocons (alligators,) first get rid of the neocons (alligators,) and then fix the damage done to this country, (drain the swamp.)
Being the pragmatic optimist that I am, I believe that we can make huge strides in the right direction once this cancer has been excised. With the balance of power so dramatically out of whack in every area, very little can be acomplished now in any case.
Posted by Merlin on Jun 11, 2005 at 7:02 AM Merlin,
You’re right, of course. It’s just that I feel duty-bound to engage reasonable people whenever I get the chance. The PBS problems are symptomatic of many of our country’s problems so it seems fruitful to discuss them if for no other reason than to learn from the experience.Even with all its faults, our democratically operated republic is still the best form of government the world has ever seen. And, even though its reputation is slipping, America is still the greatest country, overall, in the world today. But we’ve seen how the political power of a republic can be seized by a small group of plutocrats. Now, is it possible that rule by majority can become oppressive? I mean, it’s one thing to analyze a situation and say to oneself, “Well, I don’t like it but it ain’t so bad I can’t live with it,” but it’s an entirely different scenario if the opposition is just that—opposite. If the majority presents such policies that the minority considers them abhorrent, then peace will not be achieved. And then if said majority finds a way to eliminate plurality in expression and actions, virtually shuts out any opposition, then abhorrent policies can become more frequently instituted and daily existence for the minority becomes oppressive. We’ve all read about and possibly witnessed what oppression leads to. Of course, the majority doesn’t see what all the fuss is about. And we’ve all now seen that a 51% majority can be considered as a mandate and be forcefully used to further the interests of a plutocratic oligarchy.
I’ve been studying other ideologies as fast as I can, though I can’t spend the time I want to because I also have to earn a living. One very interesting concept I’ve read about is the idea that, unless people can find policies upon which 9 out of 10 agree, don’t promote them. Now, with the population of America, maybe that is not practicable, but surely we can honor our country enough to spend the energy to find solutions with which 7 out of 10 agree. Doesn’t it seem to anyone else in this group that there is a significant lack of creativity being used in government, at all levels really, but especially the federal level?
To simply get a simple majority and then go about instituting policies and making drastic changes irrespective of their short and long term negative effects on the minority seems lazy as well as tyrannical. Isn’t America worth expending the amount of energy it takes to give liberty and the pursuit of happiness to as many Americans as possible, far more than simply 51% of them?
I agree, Merlin, that this problem can’t be solved for awhile, but it certainly shows us, right here in this discussion thread, that creative and critical thinking are going to have to be used to a high degree to solve this PBS thing to the satisfaction of more than just the barest majority.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 11, 2005 at 5:31 PM its so great, it really is, this whole thing is about bill moyers, and the fact that he has been attacked by the right in a hatchet job, because his ideas are dangerous to those in power, and so the way the right does it is to attack him personally cause if you cant beat him, destroy him…if you cannot engage intellectually call him names…that always works
i have been told i am on drugs and insane and in a mental institution…actually i am in mexico city about to head south to guatemala where i run an education project and work with gang members…in my off time i lead tours around the world…and what you need to know is…not all of us are afraid…come for a visit…
Posted by colby on Jun 11, 2005 at 6:16 PM Hi 1nonservilepeasant,
You noted:
“It’s just that I feel duty-bound to engage reasonable people whenever I get the chance.”Yes, I feel exactly the same way. The trick is to see who the “reasonable people” are, and recognize the rest as not worth talking to. Having done that, the real trick is to not get suckered in by Trolls like Barnes, nee J Craig, lin Bio etc. The pull to respond, defend oneself, explain your point or further or strike back is strong indeed. And this troll knows that very well. Oh yes, he is good, as all the arguing with “it” on this forum can attest to.
And observed:
“Doesn’t it seem to anyone else in this group that there is a significant lack of creativity being used in government, at all levels really, but especially the federal level?”Hopefully we all see this! This point would be important IF we had an Administration that was that harmless! Lack of creativity is not the problem here. I dearly wish creativity was the most important issue! The real problem is that this neocon group with a megalomanic, “W” at its head is willfully, and with full intent, attempting to destroy this country. Today we have many things in common with Fascist regimes of the past and present. It is downright scary to see how close we are, and so many people utterly blind to the peril. Fortunately the polls keep moving in the right direction. Think 2006!
I recommend you check out:
George W Bush and the 14 points of fascism at:http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
If this doesn’t scare the hell out of you, you better check your pulse.
Posted by Merlin on Jun 12, 2005 at 12:10 AM “libertarian”, yeah, right !
You’re comments are accurate when aimed
at the leftists on this forum.
Outside of my posts, there is very little
honest, polite, respectful and intelligent
conversation on this board.
Margaret, I lived in California during the
Rose Bird recall. Brown can’t be recalled,
she’s on the bench for life. Funny when lowlife
white racists resort to impugning a black woman
who wandered off the white liberal plantation.
Bunni is a whore but not Brown.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 13, 2005 at 3:55 PM She can be brought down through executive order. Black has nothing to do with it. Bunni is a virgin and at least she doesn’t sit around and suck on herself like you suck your dick.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 15, 2005 at 10:24 PM by the way, I just reread all posts for the last month, and no one who isn’t you in disguise thinks you are even sane, let alone intelligent. You are the most pathetic person I’ve ever encountered. I truly feel sorry for such a bitter, lonely person as yourself. Jesus loves you.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 15, 2005 at 10:27 PM When was a Supreme Court Justice brought down
by Executive Order ? Name one example.
Where in the Constitution is this procedure
authorized ?
Answer: it never has happened because it is not
allowed as a method of removing a Justice.
I have have many admirers on this board and
many more who have read my postings and agree.
Are you really as stupid as you look ?
You actually most people agree with you ?
You say Bunni wants to suck my dick ?
I’m sorry but I’m choosey and I bet she’s no
more a virgin than you.
Jesus never existed.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 16, 2005 at 1:47 PM Left out “think” between actually
and most in sentence seven.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 16, 2005 at 3:15 PM <Jack Barnes wrote: Answer: it never has happened because it is not allowed as a method of removing a Justice.>
I don’t think this is a valid argument. It is not a DISallowed method. We could go on for weeks about the various codes the Federal government has written itself for accomplishing its myriad goals, many of them shown to be nefarious, both the goals and the methods. One thing maybe we can all agree on is that the Federal government, through its various machinations, has far too much power over individuals. I hope all Americans will demand that many of the methods by which the Federal government has seized such power be subjected to Constitutional review.
The goals of those on this board who write with bitterness and abusiveness escape me. Nobody mentally stable would change ideological positions based on any posting containing some of the junk I’ve read in this thread, yours included, Jack. I think the reverse is true; people are more likely to become more solidly entrenched in their positions after being lambasted by useless vitriol.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 16, 2005 at 3:47 PM Brown is not on the Supreme Court, that is your fantasy. Once Bush is impeached, she will never move any higher than she is right now. In the meanwhile, her views are highly unpopular and she can take her place always writing the dissenting view on the losing side as her judicial peers ostracize her back to dogcatcher status.
Bunni is WAY too good looking for a troll like you anyway, Jack. But even ugly trolls can dream.
Also, ever read the history chronicles of Josephus? He mentions Jesus of Nazareth several times. There are also Roman records validating his existence. Not to mention the Aramaic records documenting thousands of people seeing him in person. Bunni read your statement and bust a gut that anyone could be that be that much in denial.
Posted by Margaret on Jun 16, 2005 at 4:13 PM Neither a Federal Justice nor Judge
can be removed by Executive fiat,
please study the Constitution,
ignoramuses.
Brown’s current title is Justice,
she is a Justice of the California
Supreme Court,the most important Supreme
Court outside the US Supreme Court.
The egg showing or what ?
Bunni did what in her pants ????
I think you should spare us the
more intimate details of your family
pathology. Nonservile, to answer the
relevant part of your disoriented ramblings,
we have a certain constitutional procedure
for removing Judges and what Margaret/Liz/lefty/Richard suggested
would not be legal under our system.
Under one of the fascist socialist systems
that you favor, sure, but not under ours.
One doesn’t post here to convert the
blithering leftist imbeciles but to
counteract their nonsense and to persuade
more rational people who might happen
to be reading this board. That has been the rewarding part for me.
If you can’t distinguish between the valid arguments and copious references that I’ve submitted here from the lunatic ravings of a “Margaret” there’s little hope for you.
Frankly, getting Miss Manners lectures
from you is like getting sobriety lectures
from the town drunk.
Posted by Jack Brown on Jun 16, 2005 at 4:53 PM The Roman records do no such thing.
Read Gibbons and learn something.
That some lunatic calls himself the
son of god does not validate anything.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 16, 2005 at 4:56 PM Jack, your biggest problem is that you don’t read and contemplate; you read and rant. For this reason alone, it is no wonder that you lack comprehension of the writings of others.
Your purpose, whatever it is, won’t be served here or anywhere that reasonable people intend to find solutions. Your interest is only in your point of view and never in finding optimal results among your fellow Americans. My opinion from your writings is that you think all Amercicans should believe and act as you do and that even force would be acceptable as a tool to achieve that end. You are, therefore, a neocon, through and through. You may claim Objectivist status, not a badge of honor for certain, but you are without a doubt a neocon.
Incidentally, you won a bet for me with your “disoriented ramblings” comment. Those who took my bet gave me the win because they admit that your comment has the same meaning as “incoherent” which is the term I bet you’d use when responding to my post. It was only $80, but I can use it. Thanks.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 16, 2005 at 5:48 PM You are engaging in what psychologists call
projection. Your description of yourself in
the above posting is accurate, for a change.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 16, 2005 at 6:05 PM Geez, Jack, when my kids were very young they used to do the “I’m not, but you are” thing.
Your analysis of psychological projection in this particular case is incorrect.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 16, 2005 at 6:15 PM Peggy Noonan: “We need PBS, but we could do without the politics.” - The Wall Street Journal
If everybody knows PBS has such a liberal slant, then why do polls (including the one at taxpayer expense commissioned by Kenneth Tomlinson) all reveal that the public at large feel that PBS is the most trust worthy news source on television and that the majority polled also don’t agree with the rancor of right-wing pundits that believe PBS is inexorably tainted?
Ms. Noonan also suspiciously fails to identify in her article any valid example of liberal bias, relying merely on innuendo to support her personal point of view. She also stealthily uses the same innuendo technique for the vilification of Bill Moyers, forever a target of right-wing zealots because he dares to provide viewers with honest reporting and does not pander to authority as all conservatives would like.
By prescribing a restricted programming for PBS as a compromise to the straw dog she creates here, it becomes clear that Ms. Noonan is only serving the interests of the right-wing conservative (majority of readers of the Wall Street Journal) in calling for the suppression of opposing views. Such restrictions of programming would also serve to pave the way, as it were, for further restrictions down the road, as a conservative (religious) minority would see fit and certainly not my idea, or that of the majority of Americans, as a free society reflected in it’s electronic environment.
Posted by Tim Christopher on Jun 16, 2005 at 8:31 PM Last night as I was casually viewing (as defined by prioritizing a TV program selection and then completing other tasks, mostly on the computer, during the course of that program) - a program on digital cable about the hanging coffins of China, a news brief caught my attention: it mentioned that two key figures had been outed as the primary driving force to end public funding for PBS/NPR and the NEA and that those figures were supposedly super wealthy right-wing supporters of president Bush and directly involved in the turmoil led by Tomlinson - that it was primarily their rancor against public broadcasting that has caused the current situation. Imagine that.
Today however, I can’t find anything relating to that news brief. Maybe it will take a few days to trickle down the news wires. And neither have I heard anything else on what verdict the U.S. Senate will hand PBS although word on the street is that it’s expected the Senate will restore most of the funding that the biased subcommittee, comprised mostly of right-wing barbarians, had cut from it’s budget. And meanwhile, the playing field is expanding.
For better or for worse, we are experiencing great debate over the future America is to have and distinctly symbolic of this choosing will be the continued battle for PBS. And so, too, it’ll be interesting to see how <u>government for the people</u> will distribute the wealth <U>of the people</u> when converting from analog broadcasting to the new digital technology. But as for today, I’ll be up all night listening to Mohammed’s Radio.
Posted by Tim Christopher on Jun 16, 2005 at 10:21 PM <Jack Barnes wrote: Nonservile, you ARE projecting.>
Jack, by making this statement, you confirm that you do not understand the concept of projection. You cannot use it to produce humorous irony in this particular case.
This is all silliness; talk about off-topic posts! My apologies to the group.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 17, 2005 at 3:48 PM Have a Ph.D in psych.
What you are doing with your insults
is a textbook case of projection.
the lady doth protest too much !
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 17, 2005 at 4:08 PM Battle for PBS UPDATE:
PBS, which rejects accusations of liberal bias, said it has been reviewing its procedures since before Republicans in Congress moved to cut its financing. The Republican chairman of the corporation, Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, specifically accused the show “Now with Bill Moyers” - which Moyers no longer hosts - of featuring guests hostile to conservative views.
Meanwhile, the corporation’s inspector general is investigating $15,000 in payments that were made to two Republican lobbyists last year, according to a report on The New York Times Web site Wednesday night. People who are involved in the inquiry but wished to remain anonymous told the Times that one of the lobbyists was retained at the direction of Tomlinson.
The inspector general’s office is also examining $14,170 in payments to a man who provided Tomlinson with reports about the political leanings of guests on “Now.” None of the payments were disclosed to the corporation’s board, the Times reported.
Posted by Tim Christopher on Jun 17, 2005 at 4:24 PM <Jack Barnes wrote: Have a Ph.D in psych. What you are doing with your insults is a textbook case of projection. the lady doth protest too much!>
Congratulations on your degree; you do “project” a sense of intellectual ability when you choose to.
I don’t insult people.
Your intent in using the term “projection” in the post as applied to the subject was an attempt at sarcasm, but it won’t work if the term “projection” is applied. You insist on denying this, but I know you know it, and you know that I know that you know it, you know?
Now, let’s stop the foolishness and discuss important subjects like adults, shall we.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 17, 2005 at 4:40 PM Multiple assertions do not make an argument make.
I was not being ironic, I was being literal.
When you insulted and characterized me, you
were projecting. You were describing yourself
to the proverbial “T.”
Obviously, I have touched a rather exposed nerve
here.
Stop projecting.
Posted by Jack Barnes on Jun 17, 2005 at 4:47 PM I am dismayed at the grip the religious right has on our country, and ultimately, our foreign and domestic policies. What is truly amazing is that the religious right claim moral superiority, yet support war at every turn—which is diametrically opposed to morality. The U.S. is a war machine, and it’s not because we are on a mission to spread “freedom.” Our shameful administration chooses war for economic purposes and power. What’s especially hilarious is that if these fanatics were truly religious, they would follow the teachings of peace. At Christian stores, jewelry and other goods sport the message WWJD? (What Would Jesus Do?). This simple phrase should be substituted with the blow-‘em-up attitude of the U.S. Maybe the Christian right should be true to their cause and embrace this phrase. In the end, the big cosmic joke may be that the freakishly religious folks will be the ones who are denied entrance into the kingdom of heaven, because they chose not to use their God-given gift of a brain.
Posted by Stephanie on Jun 18, 2005 at 4:01 PM Stephanie,
I really must agree! I don’t know why Jesus is suddenly recast as a right-wing Repulbican of all things unless it is to give legitimacy to the current agenda of militarization and foreign conquest. I haven’t gone into a Christian bookstore and wouldn’t know where to find one! If you want to stay informed and develope an alternative paradigm from that of Bush & Co. just look for alternative bookstores in your area or read the alternative press stuff from publishers like Monthly Review, Verso, Zed, South End Press, Pluto Press, Common Courage, the Nation, Seven Sories Press, the New Press, Thunders’ Mouth Press, Pathfinder (Trotskyist) and, of course, International Publishers (if you want the CPUSA line). This should get ya started!
Posted by steve on Jun 18, 2005 at 4:11 PM Jack,
Do you have a life?I’ve noticed your blithering on multiple posts at various times throughout the day all this month,as though all you do is harangue people on this site.Either you’re paid to spew your drivel,or you have a serious problem.I post regularly,but,then again,I’m off for the summer.Seriously,change out of your underwear,go outside and do something.Who knows?You might even meet a girl.
I’m beginning to believe that Jack is one of those schizoid street ranters gone digital.
Posted by wwoods on Jun 20, 2005 at 2:15 PM Woods, or whomever you are,
could you translate that latest rant
into english ?
You’re OFF more than just the summer.
Posted by Jack Banres on Jun 20, 2005 at 4:04 PM Check Out: “It’s Money That Matters”
Music and Lyrics by Randy Newman
Posted by Tim Christopher on Jun 20, 2005 at 8:37 PM Jack,
Let me get this straight:1.You are in your sixties.
2.You have a Ph.D.(i’ll assume that doesn’t stand for PHony Dork)in psychology.
3.You were an acquaintance of Ayn Rand.
4.You’ve been published multiply in several papers and magazines.
5.You have a distinctly right-wing point-of-view.
6.You have a well-defined style of writing,and I don’t mean your printing margins.
Consider this,why would you go to such lengths to win arguments by saying anything.When the info you disseminate could be compiled and used to expose you as a freeper? Obviously you’re not much of a chess player,are you?You use all these bogus names to cover your tracks,so you think,yet leave a trail of bread crumbs.
Oh,since you think it’s cute to use my posting name,I won’t be using it anymore.I’ll think up another one.
Posted by wwoods on Jun 24, 2005 at 5:36 PM jack
every damn time someone says something to you that you cannot answer, you accuse them of being crazy and not making sense. you have a degree in physcology do you, well tell me this, what do you call a person that says,
i know you are but what am i?
i cant here you, are you talking, i cant hear you..
OK I WILL TELL YOU
5 YEARS OLD
Posted by colby on Jun 24, 2005 at 8:51 PM Hi Steve,
You mused:
Can’t we all just get along??!! Rodney King.As far as “Jack” is concerned, the answer is NO! In my view his purpose IS to stir up trouble, not to discuss anything, which he has been very successfully doing for a long time here. This article appeared on May 31! Everyone is still arguing with him! He will not change as Rodney King wishes above. He is doing exactly what he wants, the way he wants to do it, with good results in his distorted view. That is the main point that should be very clear by now!
I suspect Jack gets the same thrill out of upsetting people that a pyromaniac gets when he secretly lights a forest fire and watches it burn down peoples homes.
Posted by Merlin on Jun 24, 2005 at 9:03 PM The Battle for PBS:
Yesterday, the House voted overwhelmingly—by a margin of 284 to 140—to restore $100 million to the budget for public broadcasting, thanks to overwhelming public support and the combined organizational efforts of progressive groups; such as, FreePress, MoveOn, and others.
Organizers are saying it was one of the largest public petition drives in history with somewhere around a million signatures collected and presented to representatives in Washington along with strong phone and letter campaigns.
Now on to the senate to restore funding for children’s educational programming and technology upgrade support.
But now, just as the public campaign to remove Kenneth Tomlinson begins to gather momentum, the agency that distributes funds to PBS and NPR has appointed a new CEO : former RNC co-chairman, Stacy Harrison.
Ms. Harrison has absolutely no former experience with public broadcasting and her main area of expertise, under the hat of “public relations,” seems to be having raised money to elect Republican party candidates between 1997 and 2001.
Stay tuned….
Posted by Tim Christopher on Jun 24, 2005 at 10:17 PM The victory for the progressive forces was clear as was the message that Bush’s Mandate is not as clear as many Republicans think! There is still a progressive voice in the US but even more importantly the attempt to squelch the last bastion free thought and SERIOUS consideration of issues was foiled. We need a diverse array of ideas and perspectives in a news station whereby views aren’t stigmatized and pigeon-holed in stupid, dumbed-down categories like “liberal” and “conservative” so language can do people’s thinking for them instead of actual reasoning. Orwell feared this and wrote a profound essay on it called “Politics and the English Language”. It is still very relevant today! The Republicans feed off public ignorance like a drug dealer feeds off despair in the ghetto! Its really true! The “wets” like McCain and Hagel and others better get off their duff and really start challenging Bush for the leadership of the party if they are to have a future! Looks like they’ve already done this with the downing street memo on Iraqi intellegance failures and the war!
Posted by steve on Jun 25, 2005 at 3:45 PM i am very glad i found this site. as an american living in canada, i am so happy to see there are many there defending the america i know and love. i read once somewhere that
“everyone has the right to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.” far too many as i see it confuse the two far too often. thanks for the space to speak.
Posted by g ferrell on Jun 27, 2005 at 3:41 PM I totally retract my childish attack
on Mr. Barnes. Have been in the left
for so long that I can’t tell up from
down, right from left, black from white.
Barnes has fully rebutted all the largely
nonarguments put forward by the psychobabblers
on this board.
Again, my total apologies, Jack.
Posted by Colby on Jun 30, 2005 at 6:21 PM I second Colby’s manful mea culpa.
Can someone put in a good word for
me with the parole board ?
Posted by wwoods on Jun 30, 2005 at 6:23 PM Hi Jack. How’s it going? Still nothing of value to add, I see. That’s okay; we’ll take care of everything and get back to you when it’s all over.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 30, 2005 at 6:32 PM I repudiate the imposter who posted
under my name above as I have long
since retracted all the stupid things
I said about Jack Barnes.
Jack was right and that’s why
Woods, lefty, Margaret have all
retracted on this board.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jun 30, 2005 at 8:28 PM Yes, I admit it now.
I am really the BTK killer.
As I’m going up for the rest
of my life, I just want you
all to know that I did jerk
off incessantly while reading
your responses and am also
listed on the national sex
offender list.
Posted by JACK BARNES on Jul 8, 2005 at 4:09 PM I posted the above phony post under the
name of Jack Barnes.
Please understand it was my only chance
for revenge since he demolished me in all of
our arguments.
I totally retract all postings that I have done
under phony names including Dr X, wwoods, Matthew
K, lefty, steve, Liz, Margaret and Douchbager.
Posted by wwoods on Jul 8, 2005 at 4:59 PM Jack Barnes or anyone else participating in this foolishness,
I don’t know who’s writing all this silly stuff, it could one person or several, I don’t really care. Let’s just call you “Flake/s ‘R’ Us” for lack of a better title but continue reference as YOU.
You are inhaling atmosphere and then exhaling poison in the form of carbon dioxide. If you are living under an umbrella of trees so as to permit their absorption of the poison you exhale, and you are caring for said trees, I will consider you as having some redeeming quality that mitigates the damage you do to our planet. However, if you are not living in such conditions and performing such service, then it appears from what you’ve contributed to this forum that you serve no useful purpose.
Additionally, I can find no connection to The Battle for PBS in your commentary. Please dribble your drivel at other blogs that will welcome such uselessness.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jul 8, 2005 at 6:00 PM I apologize for above posting. Oversnorted a huge
amount of pure Colombian again.
I have been posting as Lefty, Liz, Margaret,
Douchebagger, Steve, Matthew KKK, Gordon, Merlin
and none of it has made any sense.
Posted by 1nonservilepeasant on Jul 8, 2005 at 6:11 PM I’M the only real, authorized Liz on this board - and you lot of imposters can now “put a sock in it for me” as a fairport convention song says.
Specially since the webmaster has just changed the system! That should stymie you, you blaggers.
Posted by Liz on Aug 14, 2005 at 8:34 AM Thanks for the Randy Newman lyrics site recommendation, Tim!
He’s right you know!
Posted by Liz on Aug 14, 2005 at 8:44 AM -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Bill Moyers
- Is the Fourth Estate a Fifth Column?
Corporate media colludes with democracy's demise - Bill Moyers Interviews Rev. Jeremiah Wright
- In Praise of Reporting Reality—And The Truth
- Reckoning with the God Squad
Fundamentalist bullies cannot be appeased. They must be confronted. - The Battle for PBS
- Blind Faith
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
