John Rogers AU Class of 1985 The Nail Gun of Quiet Reflection The Al Del Greco of Atlanta
"Subordination is the natural order: there is subordination in Heaven - Thrones and Dominions take precendence over Powers and Principalities, Archangels and ordinary foremast angels; and so it is in the Navy. You have come to the wrong shop for anarchy, brother."
A very well-written article. I wonder how many of us "former" liberals whose values were also shaped during the Civil Rights days and the McGovern campaign also feel betrayed by the current left?
Lumped in with the "liberal" movement was also a bunch of just plain anti- American radicals who were against whatever the US was for; it seems those are the ones running the movement today, while the rest of us have been left behind.
I thought his point about "Leading voices in America's 'peace' movement are actually cheering against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom," hit the nail directly on the head.
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Well, look. I mean, is he gonna be able to chase us? Cause if I woke up lookin' like that, I would just run towards the nearest living thing and kill it. -- Master Shake
I tend to agree with liberals on most issues(not all, by any stretch of the imagination), however I am *not* a democrat, nor do I refer to myself as a liberal. Not because I am ashamed of my opinions, but because this country is locked in an idealogical struggle where both sides are equally disgusting.
I am a conscientious objector in politics.
My dream presidential ticket is John McCain and Joe Biden.
Damon Scott Hynes 23 May 2005 07:35:26 [ permanent link ]
If this is what you wingnuts want to trot out - well, in the immortal > words of one of my buddies, I only have one thing to say:>
"I have nothing more to say."
And you did that quite well. Keep it up.
-- Damon Scott Hynes
After the 2006 midterms, when the Dems have 25 Senate seats, 75 in the house, and Hillary is in Plumpers And Big Women magazine, wonder how many of the Jackass Party will still think Dean-o is The Answer? __ http://www.opensecrets.us/
"J. Hugh Sullivan" <sull1927@adelphia.net> wrote in message news:42913c7f.46492112@news1.news.adelphia.net...> On Sun, 22 May 2005 22:02:28 -0400, John Rogers <tiger7_88@yahoo.com>> wrote:>
Yeah, Alan Mundy <idontwan2knowspamsucks@hotmail.com>, well... that's just like... your opinion man.
I am a conscientious objector in politics.
This...
My dream presidential ticket is John McCain and Joe Biden.
...does not compute with this.
John Rogers AU Class of 1985 The Nail Gun of Quiet Reflection The Al Del Greco of Atlanta
"Subordination is the natural order: there is subordination in Heaven - Thrones and Dominions take precendence over Powers and Principalities, Archangels and ordinary foremast angels; and so it is in the Navy. You have come to the wrong shop for anarchy, brother."
I suppose he could be the exception to the rule that the only good>> liberal is a dead liberal.>>
Hugh>
Give me a fucking break! This guy is a "liberal?">
Since I'm guessing that most people wouldn't have actually read through >all of his tripe, permit me to quote selectively from his "I am now >enlightened" revelation, and judge for yourself:
I read about 1/2 or 2/3 of it. I thought he expressed the liberal view very well but I think the "conversion" article was written to meet a deadline, sell papers and create controversy. Sticking to the facts doesn't seem to attract much attention anymore.
Of course my statement was posted to see how many hecklers I could rouse. I don't really think all liberals should be dead - just defeated. We right wingers need a few liberals around to keep us from going to extremes.
I suppose he could be the exception to the rule that the only good>>>liberal is a dead liberal.>>>
Hugh>>
Give me a fucking break! This guy is a "liberal?">>
Since I'm guessing that most people wouldn't have actually read through>>all of his tripe, permit me to quote selectively from his "I am now>>enlightened" revelation, and judge for yourself:>>
1)>>"Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering>>against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country>>because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.>
There's a truckload of truth to this one. Blinders must be removed tho.>
What?
I most definitely consider myself a part of the "peace movement" that he mentions. So I'm cheering "against Iraqi self-determination?" And I hate George Bush more than I "love freedom?"
That's a truckload of crap!
<snip>
4)>>"Susan Sontag cleared her throat for the "courage" of the al Qaeda>>pilots. Norman Mailer pronounced the dead of Sept. 11 comparable to>>"automobile statistics." The events of that day were likely premeditated>>by the White House, Gore Vidal insinuated. Noam Chomsky insisted that al>>Qaeda at its most atrocious generated no terror greater than American>>foreign policy on a mediocre day.">>
Fuckin' awesome!>
Are you celebrating what your cohorts on the left are saying here?
No. I'm just overwhelmed by his prose and his hyperbole - that's all.
<snip>
-- I'm so hip I have trouble seeing over my pelvis. I'm so cool you can keep a side of meat in me for months.
"Zaphod Beeblebrox" <victor.kingNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message news:wr-dnYibRo73VgzfRVn-jg@comcast.com...> Jim Brown wrote:> > "Zaphod Beeblebrox" <victor.kingNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message> > newsZydneVKHde72gzfRVn-og@comcast.com...> >
J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:> >>
On Sun, 22 May 2005 22:02:28 -0400, John Rogers <tiger7_88@yahoo.com>> >>>wrote:> >>>
I suppose he could be the exception to the rule that the only good> >>>liberal is a dead liberal.> >>>
Hugh> >>
Give me a fucking break! This guy is a "liberal?"> >>
Since I'm guessing that most people wouldn't have actually read through> >>all of his tripe, permit me to quote selectively from his "I am now> >>enlightened" revelation, and judge for yourself:> >>
1)> >>"Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering> >>against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country> >>because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.> >
There's a truckload of truth to this one. Blinders must be removed tho.> >
What?>
I most definitely consider myself a part of the "peace movement" that he> mentions. So I'm cheering "against Iraqi self-determination?" And I> hate George Bush more than I "love freedom?">
That's a truckload of crap!
Well to be fair, I havent noticed you doing that here, but if you were, you wouldnt be alone.
<snip>>
4)> >>"Susan Sontag cleared her throat for the "courage" of the al Qaeda> >>pilots. Norman Mailer pronounced the dead of Sept. 11 comparable to> >>"automobile statistics." The events of that day were likely premeditated> >>by the White House, Gore Vidal insinuated. Noam Chomsky insisted that al> >>Qaeda at its most atrocious generated no terror greater than American> >>foreign policy on a mediocre day."> >>
Fuckin' awesome!> >
Are you celebrating what your cohorts on the left are saying here?>
No. I'm just overwhelmed by his prose and his hyperbole - that's all.>
<snip>>
-- > I'm so hip I have trouble seeing over my pelvis.> I'm so cool you can keep a side of meat in me for months.
Zaphod Beeblebrox was cut from the Baylor football team for saying...
1)>"Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering >against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country >because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.
I think this has a lot of truth to it.
Trent Chairborne "Nine of Diamonds" Ranger
...To be a great NCO, you need three bones: a backbone, a wishbone and a funny bone.
In article <42920ed4.1529589@news.cableone.net>, woodruffs@cableone.net (Trent Woodruff) wrote:
Zaphod Beeblebrox was cut from the Baylor football team for saying...>
1)> >"Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering > >against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country > >because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.>
I think this has a lot of truth to it.
You're a lunatic, then.
Nobody's cheering against real self-determination. They're just skeptical that American military power and occupation followed by American corporate dominance brings any kind of self-determination worth talking about.
Freedom and democracy are sideshows in this circus.
-- Jon Somalia
"Every Democratic Senator is to the right of Kerry..including Kucinich." - C. Beauchamp
In article <1116871071.442014.94410@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Tom Enright" <freddy_hayek@yahoo.com> wrote:
1)> > > >"Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually> cheering> > > >against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World> country> > > >because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.> > >
I think this has a lot of truth to it.>
You're a lunatic, then.> >
Nobody's cheering against real self-determination. They're> > just skeptical that American military power and occupation> > followed by American corporate dominance brings any kind of> > self-determination worth talking about.>
"followed by American corporate dominance"...>
Could you prove his point any more obviously?
Freedom is more than brand choice.
-- Jon Somalia
"Every Democratic Senator is to the right of Kerry..including Kucinich." - C. Beauchamp
Jon Somalia was cut from the Baylor football team for saying...>> woodruffs@cableone.net (Trent Woodruff) wrote:>>>Zaphod Beeblebrox was cut from the Baylor football team for saying...
1)>>>"Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering >>>against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country >>>because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.
I think this has a lot of truth to it.
You're a lunatic, then.
Since you're one of the people my remark was aimed at, I'm really not surprised you'd disagree.
Nobody's cheering against real self-determination.
I believe that you are, if it aids Bush.
Trent Chairborne "Nine of Diamonds" Ranger
...To be a great NCO, you need three bones: a backbone, a wishbone and a funny bone.
Maybe you should check out his other writings before you make him a poster child for the conservative movement. Seem's he's quite the fan of UFO's, angels, and other mystical things. Here's an inteview with him: http://www.excludedmiddle.com/thompson.html
"E.M.: One of the themes we found most intriguing in Angels and Aliens was the idea of ufology viewed as an evolving mythology. What inspired you to take this approach?
K.T.: There were a couple of departure points. First, as I began to immerse myself in the literature and attend various UFO conferences, I was struck that many of the personalities in the field of ufology spent much of their time doing to each other what the personalities of Greek mythology are famous for: quarreling, settling scores, jockeying for position, seeking revenge, and so forth. I wanted to find out which of the gods and goddesses, which actors from the timeless annals of mythology might have slipped into the UFO cosmos, like thieves in the night.
Hermes, Greek mythology's swift-footed messenger between heaven and earth, is all over the place. Communication under the sign of Hermes borrows from twisted pathways, shortcuts and parallel routes. Hermes loves to straddle the fence between the explicit and implicit and never tires of inventing nuances to place his message in the "right" context, which involves deliberate ambivalence and strategically partial disclosure. This is a good description of the UFO's style of display. Another Greek divinity who shows up is Dionysus, with his characteristic ways of upsetting our notions about secrecy and true identity -- two key themes in the debate about UFOs. The thing to remember about Dionysus is that he wears masks not to disguise himself but rather to reveal himself. Maybe the UFO's behavior, which fits our fantasy of secrecy, constitutes its own style of self-disclosure. That's a Dionysian way of thinking.
But the idea that ufology involves "mythology" doesn't mean I dismiss the reality of UFOs, although some readers thought that was what I was saying. All of life has a mythological dimension, and the UFO phenomenon is no exception. Myth offers a background of images that allow life to show up with greater richness and depth. The assumption that UFO events must be either real or symbolic -- but not both -- is fundamentalist thinking at its worst. Try as we might, life refuses to be reduced to any flat singular interpretation. Interesting, that the word "symbolism" is derived from the Greek symballein, which means "to throw together." The word denotes the drawing together of two worlds. Hermes is a spanner of boundaries, a mediator between realms, an ambassador between domains which seem separate but are connected by subtle thresholds.
In Angels and Aliens I was trying to show that UFO reality is complex, multidimensional, remarkably nuanced and textured -- and above all, not cooperative with the mental categories to which the Western mind has become so attached."
So, like Don King, Dennis Miller, and Ron Silver, he's all yours.
How do you prefer your martini, Mr. "Tom Enright" <freddy_hayek@yahoo.com>? Shaken, or stirred?
Ralph Kennedy, look upon my briefs, ye Mighty, and despair:>
"Tom Enright" <freddy_hayek@yahoo.com> writes:>
Jon Somalia, who dragged William Holden from the pool:>
You're a lunatic, then.>> > >
Nobody's cheering against real self-determination. They're>> > > just skeptical that American military power and occupation>> > > followed by American corporate dominance brings any kind of>> > > self-determination worth talking about.>
"followed by American corporate dominance"...>> >
Could you prove his point any more obviously?>
How does that "prove" that people are rooting>> against Iraq becoming self-determinant?>
Living under "American corporate dominance" would be considered> a bad thing, therefore, efforts that result in such an ending> also must be bad.>
-Tom Enright>
Is it even worth having a discussion with someone who can't even see the pejorative statments in their own arguments?
I suppose to those people, "American corporate dominance" is equivalent to say, "Chinese military dominance". -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Well, look. I mean, is he gonna be able to chase us? Cause if I woke up lookin' like that, I would just run towards the nearest living thing and kill it. -- Master Shake
Ralph Kennedy, look upon my briefs, ye Mighty, and despair:>
"Tom Enright" <freddy_hayek@yahoo.com> writes:>
Jon Somalia, who dragged William Holden from the pool:>
You're a lunatic, then.>>>>
Nobody's cheering against real self-determination. They're>>>>just skeptical that American military power and occupation>>>>followed by American corporate dominance brings any kind of>>>>self-determination worth talking about.>
"followed by American corporate dominance"...>>>
Could you prove his point any more obviously?>
How does that "prove" that people are rooting>>against Iraq becoming self-determinant?>
Living under "American corporate dominance" would be considered> a bad thing, therefore, efforts that result in such an ending> also must be bad.
Since you support the most Jesuitical regime in American history, I'm surprised that you buck at at an "if the end is just, the means are just" argument.
How do you prefer your martini, Mr. kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy)? Shaken, or stirred?
James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> writes:>> How do you prefer your martini, Mr. "Tom Enright">> > Ralph Kennedy, look upon my briefs, ye Mighty, and despair:>> >> "Tom Enright" <freddy_hayek@yahoo.com> writes:>> >> > Jon Somalia, who dragged William Holden from the pool:>> >
You're a lunatic, then.>> >> > >
Nobody's cheering against real self-determination. They're>> >> > > just skeptical that American military power and occupation>> >> > > followed by American corporate dominance brings any kind of>> >> > > self-determination worth talking about.>> >
"followed by American corporate dominance"...>> >> >
Could you prove his point any more obviously?>> >
How does that "prove" that people are rooting>> >> against Iraq becoming self-determinant?>> >
Living under "American corporate dominance" would be considered>> > a bad thing, therefore, efforts that result in such an ending>> > also must be bad.>>
Is it even worth having a discussion with someone who can't even see>> the pejorative statments in their own arguments?>>
I suppose to those people, "American corporate dominance" is>> equivalent to say, "Chinese military dominance".>
It's not like you to say something so patently> stupid, Mr. Schrumpf. Did someone suck out half> your brains overnight?>
Perhaps. With which point did you disagree? The worth of having a discussion, etc., or "American corporate" vice "Chinese military"? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Well, look. I mean, is he gonna be able to chase us? Cause if I woke up lookin' like that, I would just run towards the nearest living thing and kill it. -- Master Shake
How do you prefer your martini, Mr. kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy)? Shaken, or stirred?
James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> writes:>> kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy)? Shaken, or stirred? >> > James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> writes:>> >> How do you prefer your martini, Mr. "Tom Enright">> >> > Ralph Kennedy, look upon my briefs, ye Mighty, and despair:>> >> >> "Tom Enright" <freddy_hayek@yahoo.com> writes:>> >> >> > Jon Somalia, who dragged William Holden from the pool:>> >> >
You're a lunatic, then.>> >> >> > >
Nobody's cheering against real self-determination. They're>> >> >> > > just skeptical that American military power and occupation>> >> >> > > followed by American corporate dominance brings any kind>> >> >> > > of self-determination worth talking about.>> >> >
"followed by American corporate dominance"...>> >> >> >
Could you prove his point any more obviously?>> >> >
How does that "prove" that people are rooting>> >> >> against Iraq becoming self-determinant?>> >> >
Living under "American corporate dominance" would be considered>> >> > a bad thing, therefore, efforts that result in such an ending>> >> > also must be bad.>> >>
Is it even worth having a discussion with someone who can't even>> >> see the pejorative statments in their own arguments?>> >>
I suppose to those people, "American corporate dominance" is>> >> equivalent to say, "Chinese military dominance".>> >
It's not like you to say something so patently>> > stupid, Mr. Schrumpf. Did someone suck out half>> > your brains overnight?>>
Perhaps. With which point did you disagree? The worth of having a >> discussion, etc., or "American corporate" vice "Chinese military"?>
The latter. The former is typical rsfc snark> and of little consequence. The latter is just plain> dumn. Just because people might not like American> corporate dominance doesn't mean that they equate> it to every other evil in the world.>
Reasonable people wouldn't; I thought were talking about the people who were rooting against democracy in Iraq because it was W's pet project.
You're not saying that there _aren't_ people who consider them morally equal? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Well, look. I mean, is he gonna be able to chase us? Cause if I woke up lookin' like that, I would just run towards the nearest living thing and kill it. -- Master Shake
James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> wrote:> How do you prefer your martini, Mr. kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph> Kennedy)? Shaken, or stirred?
The latter. The former is typical rsfc snark>> and of little consequence. The latter is just plain>> dumn. Just because people might not like American>> corporate dominance doesn't mean that they equate>> it to every other evil in the world.>
Reasonable people wouldn't; I thought were talking about the people who > were rooting against democracy in Iraq because it was W's pet project.
Nobody's "rooting against democracy in Iraq." Some of us, however, are pretty sure that "democracy in Iraq" consists of more than symbolic voting followed by American military occupation in support of American corporate interests.
Your suggestion that anyone is rooting against democracy in Iraq pretty much sums up what you have to contribute here. You're not even living in the real world if you actually believe that tripe.
-- Jon
"Every Democratic Senator is to the right of Kerry..including Kucinich." - C. Beauchamp
How do you prefer your martini, Mr. somaliaj@earthlink.net (Jon Somalia)? Shaken, or stirred?
James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> wrote:>> How do you prefer your martini, Mr. kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph>> Kennedy)? Shaken, or stirred? >
The latter. The former is typical rsfc snark>>> and of little consequence. The latter is just plain>>> dumn. Just because people might not like American>>> corporate dominance doesn't mean that they equate>>> it to every other evil in the world.>>
Reasonable people wouldn't; I thought were talking about the people who >> were rooting against democracy in Iraq because it was W's pet project.>
Nobody's "rooting against democracy in Iraq." Some of us, however,> are pretty sure that "democracy in Iraq" consists of more than> symbolic voting followed by American military occupation in support of> American corporate interests.>
Your suggestion that anyone is rooting against democracy in Iraq> pretty much sums up what you have to contribute here. You're not even> living in the real world if you actually believe that tripe.>
I never suggested it; it was from the article that started this thread. I just figure that somewhere there are people who would rather see Iraq fall into complete chaos and internecine warfare than have GW's goals reached.
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Well, look. I mean, is he gonna be able to chase us? Cause if I woke up lookin' like that, I would just run towards the nearest living thing and kill it. -- Master Shake
How do you prefer your martini, Mr. kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy)? Shaken, or stirred?
James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> writes:>> How do you prefer your martini, Mr. kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph>> Kennedy)? Shaken, or stirred? >> > James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> writes:>> >> kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy)? Shaken, or stirred? >> >> > James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> writes:>> >> >> How do you prefer your martini, Mr. "Tom Enright">> >> >> > Ralph Kennedy, look upon my briefs, ye Mighty, and despair:>> >> >> >> "Tom Enright" <freddy_hayek@yahoo.com> writes:>> >> >> >> > Jon Somalia, who dragged William Holden from the pool:>> >> >> >
You're a lunatic, then.>> >> >> >> > >
Nobody's cheering against real self-determination. >> >> >> >> > > They're just skeptical that American military power and>> >> >> >> > > occupation followed by American corporate dominance>> >> >> >> > > brings any kind of self-determination worth talking>> >> >> >> > > about. >> >> >> >
"followed by American corporate dominance"...>> >> >> >> >
Could you prove his point any more obviously?>> >> >> >
How does that "prove" that people are rooting>> >> >> >> against Iraq becoming self-determinant?>> >> >> >
Living under "American corporate dominance" would be>> >> >> > considered a bad thing, therefore, efforts that result in>> >> >> > such an ending also must be bad.>> >> >>
Is it even worth having a discussion with someone who can't>> >> >> even see the pejorative statments in their own arguments?>> >> >>
I suppose to those people, "American corporate dominance" is>> >> >> equivalent to say, "Chinese military dominance".>> >> >
It's not like you to say something so patently>> >> > stupid, Mr. Schrumpf. Did someone suck out half>> >> > your brains overnight?>> >>
Perhaps. With which point did you disagree? The worth of having>> >> a discussion, etc., or "American corporate" vice "Chinese>> >> military"? >> >
The latter. The former is typical rsfc snark>> > and of little consequence. The latter is just plain>> > dumn. Just because people might not like American>> > corporate dominance doesn't mean that they equate>> > it to every other evil in the world.>>
Reasonable people wouldn't; I thought were talking about the people>> who were rooting against democracy in Iraq because it was W's pet>> project. >
And just who are all these mystery Americans?> Where are you hiding them?
I'm not hiding them anywhere.
You're not saying that there _aren't_ people who consider them>> morally equal?>
Christ, has anyone in this forum taken an elementary> logic class?>
Quit dodging the question.
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Well, look. I mean, is he gonna be able to chase us? Cause if I woke up lookin' like that, I would just run towards the nearest living thing and kill it. -- Master Shake
