The largest right-wing bloggers, such as Michelle Malkin and Charles Johnson, devote themselves on a virtually daily basis to condemning Muslims and mocking Islam. During the “Mohammed cartoon” controversy, they repeatedly published the blasphemous cartoons. Malkin has a blogger on her Hot Air blog who derisively blogs under the name “Allah”. Were fatwas issued against them? Are they living in seclusion, under 24-hour guard from the Grave Islamic Menace that lives in Kirchick’s head?
Of course, given the constitutional erosion that’s forced you to move to Brazil to escape government censorship, you might as well go live under some version of sharia somewhere. Maybe under the mad mullahs in Iran.
Oh, wait. You wouldn’t exist there.
(h/t LGF)
“Are you not amused?”
UPDATE: Gleen begins an update to a post with the formula, “I honestly just read . . . .” No, really. Were fatwas issued against them?  No, but good old religieuse Gleen is deeply concerned about the blasphemy and wound to the sensibilities of Allahpundit’s handle. O tempora, o mores!
UPDATE2: More fun spun off from Gleen’s fantastical inferences regarding our fantasy lives: They are terrified but they can’t look away. “Tormented, they invent their own counter-fantasies where they are the ones holding the long, hard, dark penis and telling the source of their agony, ‘Suck. On. This.'” Because the only explanation for why one might differ from their point of view has to do with psychosexual deficiency. That’s the Progg Fantasy in a nutshell.
 UPDATE3: Another numbskull weighs in:
None of this should surprise anyone. America is filled with people like Dan Collins, some of whom may be in your own families. I recall a relative of mine arguing in favor of extensive war in the Middle East, saying that if we didn’t bomb the Arabs into submission, they would come over here and “fuck us in the ass.” That’s a direct quote, by the way. I remember that line well because I had no real come back to it. I mean, what do you say to that: “To the contrary, they won’t fuck us in the ass”? Not exactly Oxford debate material. Still, the rightwing fascination with homosexual rape and queer-tinged scenarios in general says more about their confused psyches than the actual politics of the real world. I’ve run into this time and time again. Hell, twenty years ago I heard similar violent and gay-oriented rhetoric from the ex-Dartmouth Review editors and writers I had gotten to know. Back then, it was the Sandinistas who wanted to fuck us in the ass. You’d think that the U.S. has the most tantalizing rear the planet has ever seen, given how many countries desire cramming their dark, uncircumcised pricks deep inside our cheeks. This is why we must kill them before they drop their pants and pull out the bad news. Call it the Tucker Carlson school of international diplomacy.
I’m not worried about getting rammed up the ass by a Muslim, you jackass. I’m flummoxed by Gleen’s running interference for homosexual-murdering regimes and then turning around and lecturing us on our insensitivity to a particular brand of cultural difference that seems to inculcate that practice.
Of course, none of this should surprise anyone, because whatever that cultural difference may consist in, it cannot possibly be as dangerous as Neo-cons.
In fact, Gleen pretty much embodies Lacanian disembodiment:
Because of this lack of signifieds, Lacan says, the chain of signifiers–x=y=z=b=q=0=%=|=s (etc.)–is constantly sliding and shifting and circulating. There is no anchor, nothing that ultimately gives meaning or stability to the whole system. The chain of signifiers is constantly in play (in Derrida’s sense); there’s no way to stop sliding down the chain–no way to say “oh, x means this,” and have it be definitive. Rather, one signifier only leads to another signifier, and never to a signified. It’s kind of like a dictionary–one word only leads you to more words, but never to the things the words supposedly represent.
But people being stoned to death because of their sexuality by a regime that represents no threat to anybody, that’s rather real, I would imagine, in the moment the rock breaks the skull. On the other other other hand, you have one sockpuppet that refers to another sockpuppet that refers to another sockpuppet, ad infinitum.
Oh, look. TBogg, another stellar arbiter of civil speech and well-reasoned debate weighs in. If TBogg come, can Sadly, No! be far behind?
“Blasphemous cartoon? You, sir, are a blasphemous cartoon. Sir!”
Dan … it’s happy hour in the pub.
Only by the KozKidz and the Usual Suspects.
Yup.
Those Islamo-Nazis are just trying to make a better life for all of us.
From what I’ve seen, journalists fare especially well under Sharia…
Wow,Did he just type “they repeatedly published the blasphemous cartoons.”
Im living in a Scrappleface
world.
I don’t know…I think it’s why Allahpundit doesn’t go to parties.
So, your point is the fact that these fatuous blowhards haven’t been firebombed yet is proof that evil arabs have been thwarted? No fatwas; I made it under the wicked jihad wire, where’s my prize? I think the point is that there are not as many spooks as you want to find hiding under your camisole.
…Or is your point that that the libzz live in a hall of mirrors and are therefore perceptually disabled?
Put the bottle down and step away from the bar.
There is a different standard for kufr like Johnson and Malkin. They have never been part of the Ummah, so they can’t be apostates, for whom the worst punishments are reserved.
Just look at how wackademics treat Jeff for an example of raw hatred at apostates.
Allahpundit, on the other hand, by taking upon himself that nom de blog, probably is wise not to let his true identity be known. I don’t think anyone even needs to issue a fatwa for there to be a legitimate threat to him.
I bet Charles Manson is slapping himself on the “X” right now…”But judge, I can’t be a murderer…look at the billions of people I haven’t killed!!”
Then again, Theo Van Gogh (not Muslim to my knowledge) was found dead with a note to Ayaan Hirsi Ali saying “You’re next!” affixed to his body with a knife.
So we’ve got that going for us.
American Muslims live in isolated enclaves?
I think he’s getting them mixed up with the Amish.
[comment removed, because I’ve asked this psycho Sparkle stalker not to post here. But she just doesn’t seem to get it. Probably thinks by virtue of being able to use cyberspace, this blog belongs to her and “the people.” Poor dumb pinch-faced troll -ed]
You too.
Well, looks like they left the ward unlocked again.
It’s almost like Glenn wants to shut down conservative speech. Again.
Forget the almost part.
“Hey, Faggot Stupid”
Is this some sort of inside joke?
Monster: you make some good points; well worth consideration.
So, what’s cynn’s point?
I feel slighted.
Then again, if I were included, I’m pretty sure all those others would feel slighted.
Fortunately, I’m antisocial so the choice is easy. HOW DARE YOU LEAVE ME OFF YOUR DEMENTED LIST, MICHELLE!!??
Is this some sort of inside joke?
Yes.
Well, they don’t live in Europe, so it’s not as much of an issue. Yet. I, for one, would like to keep it that way.
“Yes.”
What is it? I love being able to laugh at “faggot.”
JHoward: Bottom line, I thnk the extreme righties crank up their spine-stiffening fear of all things arab because they want to subjugate first, and amalgamate second.
<points at Cynn and laughs>
You just don’t get it, cynn.
We want subjugation, period.
Amalgamation?
Eeeeeew…
You need to be laughing at “stupid”. I am.
Yeah, like that Iraqi Army. Booga booga.
“You need to be laughing at “stupidâ€Â. I am.”
That part I got. What I didn’t get was the crossed out “faggot”
Somebody call Suicide Prevention for Jeff, stat.
I just can’t quit you, man.
andy, you are proving Dan’s point, and you don’t realize it cause you are slow. Read the piece, and get yourself one of those General Foods International Coffees. Maybe hazelnut. Careful, it’s hot. Now have a special andy moment. It’ll come to you. You’re mommy’s special little guy.
Or, not. But someone should get him off the ceiling. Tied back up at 8 in the bottom of the 13th, Rox with no outs.
Quite the barnburner going on here.
A very un-Trevor Hoffmanlike performance. That guy is usually lights out.
Rox win!
Holy crap, they just won. Get Jeff in off the ledge!
And while the team takes the field for their celebration, Holliday is on his knees bleeding…after scoring the winning run…that he really didn’t score. Never touched the plate.
Madness, I tell you!
13 innings of all or nothing decided on a bad call. They’ll be talking about that in the morning.
This means more shrine-tending in future I guess. If I were Peggy Noonan I would probably sigh. I’m sure I would, really.
“Oh, wait. You wouldn’t exist there.”
Arabs aren’t big fans of socks, either, so the whole family is right out.
I find that everytime I read Gleeeeeen that I channel Steve Martin.
You know everything is not an anecdote. You have to discriminate. You choose things that are funny or mildly amusing or interesting. You’re a miracle! Your stories have NONE of that. They’re not even amusing ACCIDENTALLY! “Honey, I’d like you to meet Gleeen , he’s got some amusing anecodotes for you. Oh and here’s a gun so you can blow your brains out. You’ll thank me for it.” I could tolerate any insurance seminar. For days I could sit there and listen to them go on and on with a big smile on my face. They’d say, “How can you stand it?” I’d say, “‘Cause I’ve been with Gleeen. I can take ANYTHING.” You know what they’d say? They’d say, “I know what you mean. The shower curtain ring guy. Woah.” It’s like going on a date with a Chatty Cathy doll. I expect you have a little string on your chest, you know, that I pull out and have to snap back. Except I wouldn’t pull it out and snap it back – you would. Agh! Agh! Agh! Agh! And by the way, you know, when you’re telling these little stories? Here’s a good idea – have a POINT. It makes it SO much more interesting for the reader!
— The Glenns are illiterate. Michelle Malkin is not large. Judging by pictures of his bikes, neither is Charles. And Allah is not a blogger who blogs derisively. He’s a blogger who blogs dispiritedly. Blog-a-blog bloggitty, cartoon-cartoon! Jesus.
— That game was fucked up. It’s appropriate that this season should end with a long series of mistakes.
— A list should have at least three things in it.
I am Spartacus. And if you come near me I’ll kick your ass and fuck it raw.
Just saying.
Oh faggot, all you need is a big hug! Come on, hug me!
Andy. If we have to explain the jokes, you won’t come back.
– andy comes here so he can feel his inner homophobe.
– He was out at the plate, but the ump wanted to go home. The Pads didn’t really play well enough to deserve it, so its ok.
Wait a minute… wouldn’t most conservatives prefer that gay people not exist HERE, either? I’m not getting the sudden focus on how Glenn’s sexuality and how it would play in Iran.
And why use the word “faggot”? It reeks of playground bullying.
Candice, it’s under erasure, you see. The issue isn’t Gleen’s homosexuality, it’s his manifest stupidity. The arguments that he uses are so clearly more devastating when turned against that which he claims is innocuous than that which he claims is dangerous, that it’s simply silly.
I can’t speak for most conservatives, but I will say that the ones that I know have no problem with gays or gay rights, until they attempt to refashion institutions to their liking by circumventing legislative solutions. Schoolyard bullying? More like poking fun at a witless demagogue.
Now the foreign policy genius has got his thong in a twist over Dan’s post, once again demonstrating why he’s not a serious commentator.
But, but, he’s been read on the Senate Floor! The Floor! Space hallowed by the statesmanship of giants such as Harry Reid and Tom Harkin.
GOOD DAY, SIR!
– In the world of the Progressive ideolog, they would decidedly fail the assinine logic test.
– They will use outright lies to try to normalize, Legalize, Federalize, and institutionalize thier sexual preferences by demigogery, smear campaigns, and media propeganda using posers like Beauchamp. All against people whos only “crime” consists of disagreeing with their agenda and attempts to legiislate from the bench. But for the Islamofacists who hang them, stone them, cut off their heads, and in the most extreme of homophobic bigotry, deny that Gays even exist, for those Secular fanatics they would give a pass, and their open support.
– And then the Progressives howl when they are considered illogical nutbags, anti-American, and siditionistic traitors.
– The Left simply hates the Conservative viewpoint, and will lie, cheat, misrepresent, anything they can, because its really all they have. The “Big Lie”.
– someone should get up in the Senate and tell Reid to his face that he’s a lying sack of shit pandering to his far Left base, and a coward for doing so.
“Hey, Faggot”
Classy!
See, that’s exactly my commentary, Point After Try. It’s not that Glenn’s gay, it’s that he’s stupid. Stupid to be gay, and not understand who really constitutes a threat. Stupid, not because he’s gay, but because he’s a moron. But, yeah, go ahead and dismiss me as a homophobe. It’s all you’ve got.
BB,
Attacking Reid in that manner would be undecorous and unbecoming of a Senator, who must not engage in the politics of personal destruction. Attacking Limbaugh, however, is acceptable because he’s not a person, he’s a conservative.
Of course, given the constitutional erosion that’s forced you to move to Brazil to escape government censorship, you might as well go live under some version of sharia somewhere.
People who think like you are are small, weak and afraid. It’s hard to believe that your ancestors actually conquered this country, let alone had the balls to sail across the ocean in the first place. You are all sniveling little weaklings, and it astonishes me that you think we should continue fighting in Iraq in some effort to cure you of your psychologically debilitating fear of swarthy terrorists. Honestly, you guys need to grow up.
If we learn to not fear terrorists but embrace them and accept them, everything will be perfect.
Root causes! Me, I don’t mind a nice warm foot bath every now and then. How much embracing exactly do we have to do, ’cause some of those guys don’t seem the “embaceable you” type, if you know what I mean.
How small of you to fear people who will actually kill you. Much more sophisticated to live in fear of those who *gasp* criticize you.
When you embrace, just be careful of the detonator.
Xanthippas beats the living shit out of a whole lot of straw. But it’s bring your own, so no harm done.
Hey Dan,
If Muslims pose such an immediate threat, why are you wasting time blogging when you could enlist and waste Muslims? When are you going to enlist and do some real fighting instead of the arm chair type? Just wondering.
Bob is “just wondering”.
But Bob, why bother enlisting when you can just put on a ski mask and throw rocks at people coming out of mosques?
After all, soldiering is a profession, so those not in the profession have to do their parts some way, eh?
I mean, who DOESN’T love a good “faggot” joke?
I look forward to a struck-through of the n-word in a post about Obama.
Good question, Bob, since I’m beyond enlistment age. But how about you . . . spending all your time working in food pantries, are you? Out there making a difference in the War on Poverty or the War on Global Warming, are we?
He’s mighty clean, you know. Unlike Clarence Thomas. Why don’t you go over to Hamsher’s and look?
And how does this formula differ, exactly, from a strike-through of the n-word, f-face?
“Stupid to be gay…”
NICE. I’m still not getting how using the word “faggot” (even if it’s stricken through, as if that negates it) strengthens your argument.
And I don’t really detect an argument at all in your post  it just boils down to the usual “Don’t like it here? Move to Iran, freak.” How is this supposed to foster constructive dialogue?
Now, when you call me “f-face”, does the “f” stand for “faggot” or “fuck”?
I’m excited about your Obama post, I’m sure your explanation in the comments will look something like this:
“The issue isn’t Obama’s race, it’s his manifest stupidity. The arguments that he uses are so clearly more devastating when turned against that which he claims is innocuous than that which he claims is dangerous, that it’s simply silly. I can’t speak for most conservatives, but I will say that the ones that I know have no problem with blacks or black rights, until they attempt to refashion institutions to their liking by circumventing legislative solutions. Schoolyard bullying? More like poking fun at a witless demagogue…. It’s not that Obama’s black, it’s that he’s stupid. Stupid to be black, and not understand who really constitutes a threat. Stupid, not because he’s black, but because he’s a moron. But, yeah, go ahead and dismiss me as a racist. It’s all you’ve got.”
Hilarity.
Nice. How does it feel, you disingenous twat?
“If Muslims pose such an immediate threat”! People like Bob are too fucking dumb to ever get it. Muslims don’t necessarily pose an immediate threat, but jihadists very much do. Bob, your ignorance on things Islam isn’t our problem. Please do read up…
Islam, imo, is a silly religion (BTW, I know that a lot of people think my religion is silly, too. No problem.), but I know that not all muslims are terrorists, or even want me to submit to allah. BUT, I do know that the guys that follow the original prescription of islam, you know Mo’s islam, are very much a threat. With or without the Iraq war, they are a threat.
For those who are playing the home game, and for whom the score is not clear:
1) Glaring pronouncement of inverted perception of reality by the Greenwalds, check.
2) Utterly clueless response by Andy, check.
3) Blandly hostile response by cynn, who knows better but has got a couple drinks in her, check.
4) Random clueless trolls who ignore the point even after it is explained slowly, in words of one syllable, and twice, check.
Keep on using the “Republicans are more dangerous than jihadis” mem, guys. Every time you do it, you lose more reasonable people from your “side.”
It is amusing to think how many of the trolls are from either the same IP address (student lounge at Caric’s school? Assigned work?) or from one of our classics (how many name has timmah had now?).
Oh, and we’re all feeling so nostalgic after the “chickenhawk” cameo. Good days, good days. They are over now, you realize?
Hahahaha, Slim! Hilarious.
Only, I didn’t say that Obama was stupid. I said that Gleen was. Do you see the difference? No. Because to you, there is none. That’s because you’re an ass.
BTW, does Barack believe we ought to pull out of Iraq as quickly as possible?
Andy didn’t get it. Candice doesn’t get it.
Exactly how many super-dense fools does it take to form a singularity? Are we in danger?
immediate – where did that word come from. Oh yeah, same place as the people who keep claiming Bush said Saddam was an imminent threat. Manufactured.
“Only, I didn’t say that Obama was stupid. I said that Gleen was. Do you see the difference? No. Because to you, there is none. That’s because you’re an ass.”. Dan, Don’t you understand by now. Gays, blacks, hispanics? They’re all the same to these “enlightened” minds. That is, they’re all just special interest groups to slim. They’re voting blocks. They’re not people. To swap out one for the other is standard operating procedure for these folk.
Personally, I wouldn’t have used the faggot thing myself. But that aside, tell me how labeling Malkin, LGF, and other large rightwing blogs as Muslim haters — or using their concern over the aims of worldwide jihadism as an occasion to question their “manliness” — fosters constructive dialogue?
I mean, it is reductive, cartoonish (and not just the BLASPHEMOUS kind), and intended to demonize and marginalize right wing thought. And it is rich coming from a sniveling nasally clump of pallid verbosity whose ostensible idea of manliness just coincidentally mirrors himself!
Greenwald has admitted, incidentally, that his intent is to marginalize the “dangerous” “right wing” voices that are threatening this country with their differing ideas on policy and strategy. HE IS SAVING ALL OF YOU FROM BAD IDEAS — EVEN IF HE HAS TO CARTOON THOSE IDEAS OUT OF RECOGNIZABILITY TO DO SO!
FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!
If you want of foster dialogue, you can begin by acknowledging what your opponents’ positions actually are, instead of reducing them to easy straw men, then standing over them wagging your finger of outrage.
Greenwald uses a lot of words to convince people (or rather, to reinforce the belief of the audience he appeals to) that “wingnuts” are dangerous and should not be listened to.
“Dialoging” with them is like holding a conversation with cancer. Can’t be done. They must be excised from the body politic. Post haste.
Greenwald has made a living as the worst kind of hack: he takes easy generalizations, dresses them up in 5000 word posts, and then stands back and lets those already predisposed to believe his horse shit do the dirty work of trying to stifle dissent for him.
I mean, he calls himself a civil libertarian, then complains about the publication of “blasphemous cartoons”? He calls himself a civil libertarian, but argues that half the population must be silenced, so as not to sully society with their vulgar hateful ideas?
Civil libertarians scoff at such a complete inversion of tolerance and free speech.
Which is why his audience is leftists and other faux civil libertarians who are nothing more than progressives trying to use the “civil libertarian” label to pretend toward non-partisanship.
See also, Bill Maher. Mona the Greenwald sycophant. Jim “Jeff Goldstein is a despicable human being” Henley. And about a fifth of the Reason staff.
Even though I’ve been banned from Little Green Footballs by the feminazis who run the Lizard Lounge, I stand up for LGF.
Malkin and Johnson grasp an essential fact that is lost on liberals: Islam is a totalitarian ideology, not an authoritarian one. Islam is a political ideology as much or more than a religious one.
In an ironic turnabout, post-modernists incorrectly apply Western ideological categories, such as the separation of church and state, to a non-Western culture.
Duh.
The post of the most dishonest blogger on the internet have become truly formulaic. Rage. Stale unrelated quote. Rage. For some reason the left loves it, considers it to be wisdom. Me, his blatant hypocrisy makes me want to hurl. He has no original thought. He steals ideas from people he considers luminaries of conservative thought such as John Dean (insert big laugh here) and perseverates on them.
Please excuse this sniveling weakling while he wets his bed.
“Hey Dan,
If Muslims pose such an immediate threat, why are you wasting time blogging when you could enlist and waste Muslims? When are you going to enlist and do some real fighting instead of the arm chair type? Just wondering.”
Because somebody has to stay here and deal with the appeasers like you, Bob.
“Nice. How does it feel, you disingenous twat?”
LOL! The Internet: SERIOUS BUSINESS!
I haven’t called anyone a “Muslim hater.” And I don’t think Malkin and others would deny that they hate Islam  of course, they would say that they don’t hate ALL aspects of Islam or Muslims, but certainly, the content on her site and Hot Air indicates that they have a major problem with most of Islam, and don’t tend to differentiate between radical Islam and mainstream Islam. They are as different as Robert Schuller and Eric Rudolph. Glenn (or, if you prefer, “Gleen”) has been very good about documenting this, and I would definitely refer you to his site if you’re unsure about that. Still, I don’t see what any of this has to do with Greenwald’s sexuality.
Anyway, have fun with your name-calling. SO PRODUCTIVE! SO MATURE! :)
PS: I love my twat! Thanks for noticing!
Notice, how it eventually becomes all about them?
“People who think like you are are small, weak and afraid. It’s hard to believe that your ancestors actually conquered this country, let alone had the balls to sail across the ocean in the first place.”
When the war is over, are we going to have to go back to being ruthless butchers who stole this country from the native Americans? Because we kind of like this conquering heroes meme better.
Just something to add to the conversation, from the WSJ (courtesy Terry Hastings):
No, you idiot. How does it feel to have your words clipped of context, to says something that wasn’t intended? I didn’t say you’d called anyone a Muslim-hater, but you seem to find it congenial to your ends to engage in exactly the kind of indiscrimination regarding those who feel Wahhabism constitutes a significant danger that you impute to them.
Gleen’s sexuality doesn’t exist in Iran, so there’s really no cause for him to worry. I’m sure that you don’t feel that you distorted what I said. After all, Gleen’s spotlessly honest with his representations of others, and you’ve learned at the feet of the master.
“I haven’t called anyone a “Muslim hater.—
Followed by,
“And I don’t think Malkin and others would deny that they hate Islam […] [C]ertainly, the content on her site and Hot Air indicates that they have a major problem with most of Islam, and don’t tend to differentiate between radical Islam and mainstream Islam.”
Better off without her. Blind child who believes feigning disinterest is a salve for all the contradictions she must swallow to maintain her world view.
“…they would say that they don’t hate ALL aspects of Islam or Muslims, but certainly, the content on her site and Hot Air indicates that they have a major problem with most of Islam, and don’t tend to differentiate between radical Islam and mainstream Islam…”
That is bullshit. I got recruited by Allah to comment on Hot Air specifically to combat a wave of “all Islam is evil” commenters. What you are saying is patently untrue.
“And it is rich coming from a sniveling nasally clump of pallid verbosity whose idea of ostensible idea of manliness coincidentally mirrors himself.”
And another thing, Jeff and Dan: can you answer an interesting implied question from Glenn’s response to this post? Just why do you wingers get off when the military (of which, btw, you are not a part) is deployed? Super curious about that one.
Just why do you believe anything Gleen says? Super curious about that.
Oh, so I see we have one who accepts a favored rhetorical trick of Greenwald’s — the demand that on each and every occasion that Islam is criticized, it be accompanied by the qualification that the author(s) aren’t speaking about every single Muslim, and that there are some peaceful Muslims, etc.
In other words, lawyerly demands for plausible deniability,
Which would have the effect of making every post as verbose and boring as one of Greenwald’s — even though he doesn’t have that excuse, being the King of Generalizations.
Reasonable people understand who and what we are talking about. Opportunistic people pretend not to — and then express outrage over the GENERALIZED HATE.
It’s a silly game — one that Greenwald plays whenever he can.
None of which matters to me, because I don’t give Greenwald much of a thought anymore, aside from the phenomenon of his influence, which speaks less about him (other than his being a carefully crafted cutout intended to fill a niche) and more about his audience.
But intellectually speaking? He ceased going that route when he found how easy it was to pen long bits of misleading propaganda, and have thousands of people rise up in unison to pretend he was saying something original or illuminating.
Of course not Jeff. You don’t have to. It’s sort of inferred with the whole “cock slapping” meme wouldn’t you say?
So, I pointed and laughed at Cynn, and all these others crowded in here to get a piece of that action?
Happy to oblige.
<points at Candice and laughs>
<points at Notorious P.A.T. and laughs>
<points at Xanthippas and laughs>
<points at Slim Tyranny and laughs>
Please pay the cashier on your way out. Thank you.
Oops, ‘nother one slipped in while I was busy with the others.
<points at Davebo and laughs>
Can’t speak for Dan, Helen, but for me, it’s the bright lights and the explosions that I totally dig!
Plus, brown people blown to bits? What more can a “winger” hope for? — other than, if all goes well, we can colonize and steal oil, to boot.
Greenwald can trot out the chickenhawk meme all he wants. If he wants to take civilian control of the military away, cool. Not very “civil libertarian” of him — nor consistent — but hey, what do you expect from a guy living in Brazil presuming to preach to us about US law?
Is it? I wouldn’t know, really.
I’ll have to cue up Cruising and see.
Oh. And it would be “implied,” not “inferred with”, Davebo.
Similarly, the frequency with which you bring up “cock slapping” suggests you just can’t get the image out of your conflicted little head.
I attribute that to strong writing.
Hell, I own you people, don’t I?
Ah, but that’s the whole crux, isn’t it, Jeff? They make no distinction between what’s implied and inferred.
At least the “Helen Troll” observed the directive;
“Please state you accusation in the form of a question.”
Why are the left so obsessed with false accusations? It’s an entire lifestyle for some.
I’m starting to worry about that singularity thing. I think the edges of the thread are starting to shrink. Soon they’ll swirl inward, faster and faster, to a tiny point of light, which will then give off a momentary burst of gamma radiation before it begins consuming all the other tabs I have open.
Dan – we’re talking about people who can’t tell the difference between different things as a general rule – implied vs. inferred is asking quite a lot of someone for whom Bush = Ahmadinejad.
I think the point of confusion here is between what these people
a. WANT to do
and
b. CAN do.
The extremists DO hate us. they want to cut off our heads, kill gays, stone women, and generally stop liberal democracy on this planet. And they do hate the liberal lifestyle most of all – I completely agree with all of that.
But here’s the rub: they are incapable of achieving their goals. They are simply not an existential threat to us. They live in caves, and their 1 trick pony is done (large constantly launched missles called “commercial airliners”). Of course, we should be vigilant – protect ports, safeguard nuclear material, perform surveilance, etc. But the notion that we are under an existential threat (or that invading Iraq would somehow ameliorate that threat even if it did exist) is a pure fiction foisted by those wanting to further a particular political ideology.
And for shame for using the word ‘faggot’. I just disagree with you on the political stuff, but slurs like that really show a lack of character, even if it impresses all of your friends.
Davebo loves him some cock slapping!
And Candice. Candice, Candice, Candice…Again, like Bob, you just aren’t very bright it seems. It’s not that they “hate” Islam (I’m guessing they don’t). It’s that they hate a VERY BIG part of original Islam known as jihad. I bet that they do hate Jihad and the jihadi jihadists that practice Jihad. This they wish to stop. They may even hate some of the doctrinal stuff (sharia) that goes along with Islam. But, I am betting again, that they don’t hate the actual MUSLIMS who practice that stuff. They just disagree with Sharia and those who would wish to implement it. Maybe you don’t. Maybe you hate gays too. IF you can’t see the difference between hating jihad and not hating Islam (even if you think it’s a silly religion) then you’re too daft to understand much harder concepts.
Because we like victory?
Nahhhhhh… keep on implying other stuff, please.
Really? No danger? Is that why Ayaan Hirsi Ali has to go back to the Netherlands? And you really illustrate well my point: to employ the stricken word “faggot” is a much greater offense than . . . you know, to stone or hang homosexuals.
You ninny.
“They live in caves, and their 1 trick pony is done (large constantly launched missles called “commercial airlinersâ€Â)”? Wow, you have no clue, do you? There are whole movements of these people. They lead countries. You, too, need to read more. My God. Is this ignorance this wide spread amongst the left/lew rockwell libertarians/paleo-right? I wasn’t for going into Iraq, but it’s done and you have got to learn to let go. But to say that the ONLY people that are sharia loving jihadists are the ones living in caves highlights a world class ignorance of the jihadist. If I didn’t know any better, I’d say you’re a useful idiot, whether you’re a willing one or not is for you to answer.
“missiles”, I’m begging you.
To clarify: you are calling you support of Guantanamo, the Military Commissions Act, the (former) violation of FISA, the arresting and holding without trials of American citizens part of your civil libertarian cred?
Or, are you explicitly claiming you are not libertarian…which is cool and would make much more sense. And, it make the last sentence make so much more sense.
Don’t worry about whether or not we categorize him as a libertarian or not; what we’re saying is, he’s a moron.
You found Cruising somewhere? I looked for it on Netflix ages ago and was told it wasn’t available on DVD anywhere.
I am not a libertarian. But I’d quibble with several of your characterizations: first, the FISA question comes down to a difference in legal interpretation. I still think FISA has no jurisdiction, but things have been shored up now, with the Dems’ help. Seems even they were uncomfortable saying the NSA couldn’t monitor phone calls going into and out of the country to known terror hotspots. And of course, by “monitor,” we’re not talking about Harry Caul listening in with a headset.
Second, I have no problem with Guantanamo. You have (again) Dems saying we can’t have Guantanamo, but that they wouldn’t want enemy combatants housed in the US, either. So I guess we could just shoot them all, but that’s not much of a civil libertarian option, either.
And yes, I trust military courts just as much as I trust criminal courts. But then, I don’t hold a view of the military built on repeated viewings of Kubrick films.
I am a classical liberal. There are definite overlaps with my positions and libertarian positions, though I tend to grant the CiC more authority during war time, and I’m more of a stickler for the separation of powers and federalism than people like Greenwald.
Greenwald, as I noted, is trying to silence half of the population. His pretend concern for civil liberties — while it appears to extend to nodal information gathering from spy agencies that hold no evidentiary value in court anyway — does not, conversely, extend to those who disagree with his policy prescriptions. It doesn’t acknowledge that his arguments are just that — arguments — meaning that they are subject to debate, and that differing viewpoints based on different interpretations of Constitutional law are not inherently evil, or based on some sick desire to install a totalitarian theocracy in the US.
In short, Greenwald doesn’t argue in good faith, because he doesn’t believe his opponents deserve that kind of consideration. They are subhumans, after all.
I can’t control that. But what I can control is the ability to be shouted down by pretend civil liberties enthusiasts who are nothing of the sort.
After all, civil liberties enthusiasts don’t join the Kos Townhouse talking points listserv as a way to “unify the narrative.”
Hope that helps.
To clarify: you are calling you support of Guantanamo, the Military Commissions Act, the (former) violation of FISA, the arresting and holding without trials of American citizens part of your civil libertarian cred?
Apart from the notion that support for any of these things removes one self from the support of civil liberties crowd, When did we begin asserting that you must be in perfect harmony with an ideal before you can speak to any aspect of it? If this truly is the case, then why is it that many on the left would so gladly excuse only themselves and their fellow travelers from this new “rule”.
My guess is those asserting it have very elevated opinions of themselves, despite being, in actual fact, small minded bigots who probably don’t really understand the issues which they are so ready to make judgment on.
Rdub —
It just came out on DVD a week or so ago. Special edition with Friedkin commentary.
– “Most of their solutions rely upon force.”
– Ok peaceniks. Name a single instance in all of history where a totalitarian state, (of any religious/political system/social structure, doesn’t matter), has xoluntarily changed away from its human rights infractions/oppression/killing fields without the use of force.
– Hasn’t happened, and as long as you support such fanciful naive’ ideas, “Teh Cartah mentality”, you just help insure the deaths of even more people. That is the real danger of your daydreaming.
Noooo Dan… I think you really are afraid of getting rammed up the ass. Its ok to admit it.
oooh, Bud, can you tell me what next week’s Powerball numbers will be? what with your extrasensory powers and all.
Noooo, Bud. I think you really are afraid of having to argue Gleen’s position in good faith. I’ll still respect you in the morning if you spill.
We need to come up with a name for all of these Greenwald synchophants who show up to warble in defense the great Ellers whenever Dan or Jeff deign to offer an opposing view.
I was thinking “Gleenmunchers” but I didn’t want to appear ungracious.
Oops! Too late!
I’ll admit it: I’m afraid of getting rammed up the ass. Because it would be involuntary, and so would probably hurt quite a lot, and as a consequence, would probably damage something or other that I’d just as soon remain undamaged.
There. Any other silly-ass projections?
I can tell you I’m afraid of amoebas eating my brain.
Me, too, Dan, yet I’m still willing to risk it and go water skiing. Whereas butt-ramming? Still not of much interest to me.
How about “Walddorkians?” “Synchowalds?” “Cabana-annas?” “Ellersphants?”
No?
Candice – you can take your misguided stereotypes and jam them right where the Gleen’s prefer it.
Xanthippas – has trotted his battallion of straw men out here before. New day, same tired old drivel.
Bob, slim … Damn Collins. You really have them coming out of the woodwork today. You should denounce yourself. Or bang a scimtar against your forehead. LOL
And I see Mithras is still doing that mass-mind-reading thing that he’s always really sucked at. If you’ve seen American Idol during the early part of the season, you’ll know a Mithras when you see one: high self-opinion accompanied by complete and total lack of talent where it comes to delivery.
We have to come up with a good name for all of Gleen’s Cabana Boyz, and galz. They are so damn fun to have around.
The Glabana Kidz are about as much fun as brain-eating Ameobas.
How many of them are the Greenwalds themselves, one wonders.
They do follow the Wonkette model, if that helps. You know, fragile attack, break, strawman, break, anal sex.
Notice how it eventually comes down to them accusing us of being afraid of taking it up the poop chute? Does that mean that they are scared of the va-jay-jay?
Wilson’s Army? Dryer rejects?
I think by calling the folks over here either homophobes or closet homosexuals they have covered a fair amount of the waterfront. By design of course. I still get amused at the closet homosexual slur.
The Other Sock
Or…The Other Sock(puppet)
I vote for the Glabana Kidz.
Dan – I clicked through to all of those links, and now find myself looking forward to the next brain poundingly stupid post from Caric, just to raise the level of discourse a bit.
Sure, there are none of teh ghey in Iran. They have killed them all already.
Surrender to Win
Grandeur through Appeasement
Achievement by Rolling Over
Liberty through Idiocy
Democrats in 2008
Hillary Clinton gathers no moss?
Dan Collins @ 102:
“Really? No danger? Is that why Ayaan Hirsi Ali has to go back to the Netherlands?”
I said existential threat. Obviously these people are dangerous. Actually reading the posts can enhance your understanding of them greatly.
“And you really illustrate well my point: to employ the stricken word “faggot†is a much greater offense than . . . you know, to stone or hang homosexuals.”
So you can be a biggot becasue the Islamofacsists are bigger biggots? OK, thanks for clearing that up. The bottom line is it’s wrong. I question your character and you point out that the yardstick for your behavior are terrorists Nice work.
Please define existential threat, Sartre.
B Moe @ #86,
I wasn’t recruited because I was standing in line when I realize Allah was picking the keyboard back up, but I have had some similar offline conversations with him (or is it Him?) and I’ve seen him ban enough people for that line of rhetoric to confirm what B Moe says here as absolutely true.
Not only is what you said untrue, Candice, it’s a slur. How in the fuck did you come up with that impression?
I don’t think Dan is trying to make a case for his continuing to ass-pound that hobo in Jeff’s cellar, steve.
Or did you have some other kind of bigotry in mind?
Ah, TBogg. Another intellectual equivalent of the American Idol early-season reject.
I’ll tell you what’s wrong, numbnuts: deflecting criticism from or mitigating the threatening and murderous behavior of gay-killing savages to try to score internal political points is wrong. Bite me.
This one, maybe.
Sorry, steve, but you are feigning outrage, and everyone here knows it.
Ironically, it is educated people like Dan most willing to use the “slur” faggot in a pointed way (in this medium of public discourse) who are less likely to think of the condition of homosexuality as either evil or aberrant. In fact, so comfortable are they with their own NON-homophobia, that they are able to adopt and use the language to their own rhetorical purposes without fearing the fake righteous indignation coming from people like you who, I’m guessing, suspect that Dan is not at all homophobic — but who see in his use of the word an opportunity to suggest he is, and so force him to defend himself.
This way, you get to elevate your own moral stature by affecting indignation, while at the same time neglecting the point of the rhetorical exercise in the first place. The subject gets changed from Greenwald’s awe-inspiring cognitive dissonance to Dan’s purported HATRED OF TEH GAYS!
As I said upthread, I wouldn’t have used “faggot” myself. But switch it out with homosexual or gay or queer, and the point doesn’t much change, does it?
Or is it now a hate crime to identify homosexuals who are outwardly homosexuals as homosexuals? — while simultaneously, it is a laudable political crusade to out non-outed homosexuals who happen to be conservatives?
The pretzel logic, it just begs for more mustard!
The stoning or the word faggot? And if it’s the word, is it another one of those deals where it’s OK for homosexuals to say it, just not anyone else? Because those rules are stupid.
steve, Candice, slim, et al. –
Since you presume to be the holder of the keys to the language, please tell us what the rest of the unwritten rules are after
1. Tapping your foot in an airport restroom stall is a signal that you want to have a penis jammed in your rectum.
While you are at it, please tell us what other words are banned from our vocabulary. Faggot is apparently verboten, as are homosexual, gay, and any other signifying word. This apparently also immunes them from criticism. Please expound on that concept.
Jeff,
Well, yes, as long as you’re not conforming to Teh Narrative™. I recall being called a homophobe by one of these losers for calling Gleen(s) “GiGi.”.
But all you have to do is peruse these search results to find that it’s perfectly acceptable to call a guy a “faggot” if he happens to be a Republican. Mark Foley, Jeff Gannon, Matt Sanchez and others, I’m sure, return similar results.
Fuck you hypocrites.
– ” And if it’s the word, is it another one of those deals where it’s OK for homosexuals to say it, just not anyone else?”
– HOMOHAWKS!!!11!one!!1!uno!!1
Collins:
“Please define existential threat, Sartre.”
Putting an end to liberal democracy, global caliphate, what have you. If this is not your argument, my bad. That said, It IS the standard defense hurled about by neocon hawks – call it WWIII, the clash of civilization or whatever. If you do not believe that we are fighting an existential war, then I’d love to know why we need to occupy 2 Muslim countries and are slouching towards a 3rd. (actually, Afganistan I agree with)
“I’ll tell you what’s wrong, numbnuts: deflecting criticism from or mitigating the threatening and murderous behavior of gay-killing savages to try to score internal political points is wrong. Bite me.”
Who the hell’s deflecting anything? I think those people are fucking nuts – what do you want me to say? That it’s OK for you to call gay guys faggots becasue terrorists are murderers, and there’s some sort of moral mutual exclusitvity going on between your biggotry and their murderousness?
Their murderoousness is muchh. much worse. Feel better now? It’s all so thought disordered….
And what’s with all fo the fucking BS? Why don’t you put half the effort into the discussion that you put into the 5th grade “bite me”s and maybe we could have a friggin discussion. Christ….
Jeff G.
I’m not “outraged”. That’s a bit if an exaggeration. I just think that calling a gay dude a ‘faggot’ is wrong. You can wrap it up in all of the nuance you want. And what’s your Steely Dan logic behind the notion that being secure in your hetero status somehow makes it OK to call a gay person a faggot? How’s that work?
It’s ismple: I know alot of gay people, and they don’t like being called names constantly, or turning their computer on to see just how marginalized they are. I just don’t see the justification, and I do belive that there’s a cumulitive effect of having to go through that BS day after day after day. OK? I guess you call that outrage? What can I do. I think it’s wrong in the same way racist epithets are wrong.
Then there’s the straw man:
“Or is it now a hate crime to identify homosexuals who are outwardly homosexuals as homosexuals?  while simultaneously, it is a laudable political crusade to out non-outed homosexuals who happen to be conservatives?
The pretzel logic, it just begs for more mustard!”
Who said anything about this?
Nice. I can speak from some experience that the mere use of “faggot” or “nigger”, utterly regardless of context and speaker, automatically constitutes bigotry or racism among leftists…except when it doesn’t, and for that you need credentials.
I’m having a lengthy running conversation with a liberal who does just that. Fact? Context? Intent? Meaningless.
But appearances? Party of record? Skin color? Of utmost importance…because even abused to point 180 degrees the other way — especially abused to point 180 degrees the other way — asserted intent is the most convenient tool.
That bigotry is convenient for the purposes of exposing bigotry.
And this from the enlightened and the educated.
That mustard, spicy, brown stuff, is it? RACIST!
my intent for me, I’ll define it first: That’s not a criticism, it’s an observation. When a word on a page has universal meaning the purpose of which is to use an asserted intent as a weapon, the wielder is an idiot.
**broken comment. Add this part:**
“Precisely.
Here, I’ll help you out, steve: You’re not bright enough.
Since you’ll probably now define my intent for me, I’ll define it first:” Etc.
Wow. I’ve never seen such bending over backward to justify calling a gay guy a ‘faggot’.
First, it’s OK becasue there are worse crimes. Then, it’s OK becasue libs do it, and they’re hypocrites. If someone’s secure in their hetero, well, then it’s OK because we’re supposed to know (somehow) that they really don’t see being gay as “either evil or aberrant”. It’s also OK if you use it in a “pointed way” (in this medium of public discourse)”, whatever that justifies.
Anyone else think this sounds an awful lot like a load of horse shit? That’s what I smell anyway.
Whatever happened to ‘yeah, I shouldn’t have said that”. When did that get deleted from the public venacular? You would htink blogs would increase this instead of all the heal diggin in I see.
J HOward”
Not what you’re saying – and yes, I know your comment was broken. I’ll give it a shot
If I mischaracterized someone’s intent, then they can clarify that intent. Calling me “numb nuts” and such hasn’t really acheived that end as much as you might think.
Words represent intents. If the user of those words decides to use them in a way that’s so different from their established meanings, I think the burden of clarification is on them. Calling a gay dude a faggot has a pretty clear meaning to me.
SHold say “not sure what you’re saying” J HOward
I think calling someone a faggot is derogatory.
Maybe not in Brazil though.
Right, steve, and not calling a dude a faggot has meaning as well.
And getting really upset about the word faggot has a clear meaning as well.
It’s backlash, really. Why should anyone worry about the words that they use if they are, by definition according to their race or political leanings, a racist homophobe *no matter what?* If Dan doesn’t use the word faggot, if he, in fact, uses no proscribed language whatsoever, he’s going to be accused of using secret CODE. Because, no matter the truth and even if there is nothing he’s done, he’s still a Crypto-homophobe-racist.
That’s how the rules work. It’s not the rules set up by “right wing haters” it’s the rules set up by those thoughtful and intellectual sorts who believe in dialog.
“It’s backlash, really. Why should anyone worry about the words that they use if they are, by definition according to their race or political leanings, a racist homophobe *no matter what?* If Dan doesn’t use the word faggot, if he, in fact, uses no proscribed language whatsoever, he’s going to be accused of using secret CODE. Because, no matter the truth and even if there is nothing he’s done, he’s still a Crypto-homophobe-racist.
That’s how the rules work. It’s not the rules set up by “right wing haters†it’s the rules set up by those thoughtful and intellectual sorts who believe in dialog.”
1. This is a lame excuse for bad behavior. Behaving consistently with a negative stereotype becasue – “hey, they’re going to say that about me anyway!”. Poor.
2. By this logic you should also be able to call Afican Americans the N word. WOuld trhat be OK?
“we do not wish to provide the right wing hawks with more justification for creating war. This reluctance is reasonable. However, the reluctance degenerates to silence, which then allows our right wing peers to appropriate (and hijack) the entire human rights project. Once appropriated, the right wing then determines which “solutions†to apply. Most of their solutions rely upon force.”
This was quoted further up… did Glenn say this? Other than identifying both the cause and effect he’s actually right.
The only thing is that what has happened isn’t that the “right wing” hijacked the cause of human rights, it’s that the right wing found human rights abandoned and starving at the side of the road.
Just like the “right wing” is finding freedom of speech abandoned and starving at the side of the road.
Whining about the right taking over classical liberal values is simply pathetic.
Free speech is a real bitch, ain’t it, steve?
steve is right that calling people names is bad.
Comment by Dan Collins: “…since I’m beyond enlistment age…”
Your posts are on a much younger level, however.
Steve, you can have the true answer or not. Your choice.
You don’t have to even admit responsibility for your part in it.
Push-back isn’t a lame excuse for bad behavior, it’s an illustration of a pathological system that *needs* a push-back in order to become healthy.
Aggressively ignorant, or willfully obtuse? You be the judge.
Oh, and now we can add Rick to the chorus. Or is that Tomas’ McEllersburg?
In other words… “I won’t play your game” can be considered… adult.
– “2. By this logic you should also be able to call Afican Americans the N word. WOuld trhat be OK?”
– If I were really pissed at you I might call you a twatwaffle, or some such expletive, but I like to think I’d have to be on the verge of murderous intent to bash you with sex references, or ethnicity, or race. Of course if you’re a dumb Pollack I might make an exception.
– Ah the quiet subtle humor of the Left, a thing to behold. Take EVERYTHING to its funereal dead, burned bodies littering the freeway end, because we’ll all be dead by weeks end anyway. Marx should really have gotten out more often.
steve has a lot of work to do today cause I was poking around and I saw people calling people bad words on lots of other blogs. Go get em, Tiger!
Steve – Do you get all up in arms when we are accused of being racist, sexist, homophobes, Nazis, fascists, authoritarian, war mongers, evil, etc … ? Until then, the feigned outrage is laughable.
steve needs to go spend some quality time at AoS, where sometimes people aren’t nice.
:)
– The Left simply hates the Conservative viewpoint, and will lie, cheat, misrepresent, anything they can, because its really all they have. The “Big Lieâ€Â.
You forgot to add the troops to this hate too.
– Sorry Tops – Its an age thing, like the screwed up tags……
– What I am enjoying is watching the braindead Dembulb Senators trying to deflect the Patraeous fuckup by the crazy aunts in the attic wing of their party with this unbelievable feckless attack on Rush, trying to parse his words to what the WISH he would say.
– They just keep bringing attention to the fanatic, troop hating nutbags at moveon, because everyone is laughing at their efforts to “yank” the narrative. Deeper and deeper they go. If Iraq continues to improve, by the time we get to the election cycle, they’ll have dug clear through, and have to learn Chinese to talk to their supporters.
Steve – Do you get all up in arms when we are accused of being racist, sexist, homophobes, Nazis, fascists, authoritarian, war mongers, evil, etc … ? Until then, the feigned outrage is laughable.
What’s more telling is that steve (along Ellensburg and the rest of his amen corner) are more outraged by use of the word “faggot” then they are about regimes that kill gays.
But I’m sure Salon’s largest producer of greenhouse (or is that gleenhouse?) gases has a 3000 word essay set to fog that one up, too.
Bad behavior, steve? What if I think it’s bad behavior of high order to discriminate, race-bait, control speech, spend my tax money, and assume higher moral ground on the basis of incorrectly asserted meaning?
A few comments back I “called” our host a racist. Clearly he’s anything but. Did you complain that my assertion was unjust?
Or did you get the damn context that time?
I propose that not only do you selectively impose meaning, but that you do so with ends and means and causes and effects quite out of whack.
– Hey common guys. Whether Conservative or Classic Liberal, we’re simply not allowed to use certain pejoritave words, no matter the context, and in particular if we’re busy showing some additional example of the fucked up “moral equivalence” meme. Thats just, well, BLASPHEMY!
You’re damn right it would be okay, but not for reasons you’re likely to admit.
I don’t speak for all here, but I feel that if I use the Word That May Not Be Used as liberally as possible, it should be completely, utterly legal. Because I happen to believe in free speech. Kinda like when, to hear the Left tell it, Islamic nutjobs get Ivy league invites. Because we’re all constitutional then.
See, I’m willing to take my lumps elsewhere — in the market, in the church, from the wife, or out back — as the result of my legal choices to speak even Bad Words.
What cracks me up is the preemptive sanctimony in which it seems you ask the question. As if this’ll out them pw bastards! If they refuse to kneel at the N-word altar, then I’ll have ’em!
What a hoot. And what a travesty against reason, civility, decency and justice PC is.
You offend easy, steve. Me, I offend when folks try and run my affairs by their morals. You know, that church and state thing.
#
Comment by steve on 10/2 @ 1:58 pm #
J HOwardâ€Â
Not what you’re saying – and yes, I know your comment was broken. I’ll give it a shot
If I mischaracterized someone’s intent, then they can clarify that intent. Calling me “numb nuts†and such hasn’t really acheived that end as much as you might think.
Words represent intents. If the user of those words decides to use them in a way that’s so different from their established meanings, I think the burden of clarification is on them. Calling a gay dude a faggot has a pretty clear meaning to me.
Me too. I wouldn’t like being called a bundle of sticks myself. White assed honky motherfucker is OK though.
I find the use of the word steve highly perjorative.
Sometimes.
Especially when it’s not about steve.
But when it is then it just plain fits.
Okay, then. I take back the numbnuts thing.
So, steve, where does the State derive the right to modify society according to the majority’s morality? And from there, to isolate certain sectors for special treatment (and others for oppression)?
Speaking of words, if the Southern Baptists did that under Falwell, wouldn’t they be Fascists? You know, a variant on BushCo’s Christian Mystical Tour.
Knowing Dan, I don’t think this title betrays any actual homophobia. The problem with saying “faggot” in a mean-spirited post is that it’s going to be taken, well, mean-spiritedly. “Hey, (Non-Existent) Faggot” might’ve worked better, because then the swipe at Iran would’ve been more obvious. But I can’t go around titling other people’s posts … and I’m not going to go around explaining “context” to my fellow liberals again. (I remember what happened the last time I tried.)
Actually, Dan, if you wouldn’t mind answering, why did you use “faggot”? (And, unrelatedly, why’d you mention Lacan? No one should ever, under any circumstances, mention Lacan.)
Of course human rights protection involves the use of force. There is no other language that opressors will bow to, no matter how diplomatic you are. Little Rock’s Central High School was ordered to integrate by a federal court, and that order was enforced by the application of the 101st Airborne Division.
Please, someone, argue that wasn’t an application of force. As implications go that implication was hidden by gossamer.
As for Glenn’s fans, you can call them ‘Gluppets’.
I’ll argue that it was a questionable use of force. And restate my question this way: In a world where one majority’s behavioral justice is a later’s injustice, where’s the initial right to place government in the business of managing private behavior?
For example, the Fed just botched the economy. The Fed, it could be argued (at the risk of appearing Ron Paulian) had no principled right to dick around with fiat currency for the last number of decades. Now Congress, naturally, has the self-appointed task of subjectively bailing folks out.
On the one hand this has an ironic rightness to it, but on the other, what essential right does government have managing the domestic well-being, as it sees it, of the population?
In parallel, what right does it have managing speech?
If that’s not steve’s point, then his point must be that personal morality allows/prevents one using the N word. And if that’s the case, why are we having this conversation if the steve’s among us manage intent?
I’m flummoxed by Gleen’s running interference for homosexual-murdering regimes…
Mmmm-mmmm! That’s some mighty good strawman you serve up there! “Running interference”…err, how exactly? By asserting the wingnut bed-wetting over The Next Hitler’s speech at a college was overblown? By holding the opinion of the majority of Americans — that invading Iraq was a stupid mistake?
Pathetic.
That’s a lot of m’s.
instaputz has taken his nose out of the Gleen’s sphincter long enough to grace us with his presence. We should be honored.
No you don’t. You just try to pretend you do, because it allows you to pretend you are more “civilized” and “tolerant” than those here who are, frankly, far more linguistically sophisticated than you are.
If you can’t fathom how the use of a derogatory word can be used pointed in a public forum against the prevailing social standards to speak to something OTHER than the specifics of the word in question, I suggest you take it up with, say, George Carlin or Richard Pryor.
Though, wait — that last nigger dead, ain’t he?
My bad. Stick to Carlin.
Maybe Mona and John Cole will drop by too, to explain to us how they are true conservatives, or all the other drivel that flies from their fingertips.
… and I’m not going to go around explaining “context†to my fellow liberals again.
Context is like in that Janet Jackson song when she says that “the memories came back to me in my mind.”*
In this case, Janet’s head is the context for the memories she found in there. That is what Janet calls a good day.
Well, Glenn would call himself a faggot, and he doesn’t own the word. Just like blacks don’t own nigger, or Jews kike, etc. But you miss the point.
The pointed way it was used here — under erasure, and as a way to show the cognitive dissonance of a guy who finds his enemy to be the “neocons” rather than those who operate a country, say, that HAS NO HOMOSEXUALS (and as I wrote at the time of Ahmanwhateverajahd’s claim, I suspect stones to be the cause of this rather than some homo-resistant Persian DNA) — is indicative of a self-consciousness of word choice, one that, from an interpretive perspective, should make any honest interpreter think, “now, why did he chose that word?”
One possible interpretation is that Dan is too stupid to know that the choice wouldn’t offend some people, or that the word itself is in some quarters considered taboo. Another is that he was drunk, and — his inhibitions dropped — he let his true inner homophobe out for all to see!
— both of which interpretations strike me as silly, but then, I’m big into this kind of hermeneutic stuff.
You, on the other hand, have seen the word “faggot,” larded it with your own meaning (per steve, faggot, whenever it is used by a conservative, must be a homophobic slur — and could not feasibly be used for ironic purposes), and have taken to passing moral judgment on the basis of your own preconceived notions of Dan, conservatives in general, and an adherence to a PC worldview that seeks to rob our language of much of its force.
You can argue that Dan’s rhetorical attempt was clumsy, or it failed. But to argue that simply employing the word faggot necessitates homophobia is ludicrous.
Sorry, steve. But I won’t have people like you policing my expression, because frankly, you don’t have the chops.
sometimes the truth is harder than the pain inside
Is bed-wetting fear? Or is it an all-purpose adjective to describe wingnuts qua wingnuts? The usage, it is confusing.
Because no one feared “Wipe Israel Off the Face of the Map’s” speech. They just didn’t want to see a prestigious university dignify a man whose country traffics in eliminationist rhetoric, human rights abuses, and the denial that Persia produces gays to the delight of a bunch of indoctrinated leftist sycophants with a hardon for powerful charismatic dictators (even if, in this case, he is but a puppet).
Greenwald thinks the right’s reaction to giving Ahmanofconstantsorrowajad a forum to spew propaganda was “overblown”? That’s absolutely stunning coming from a guy who wrote a book outraged about how the NSA was gathering intel on potential terror threats.
You people defy parody.
Jeff, Isn’t it ‘nigga’? I’m always so confused by that. I always stick to ‘nigga’ just for reasons of personal safety.
Hey not niggers, great thread. But whats with the “gleen”? and why the crossed out “faggot”?
Some of these guys have left without paying. How am I supposed to make a living pointing and laughing if the people I point and laugh at steal the service?
I’m calling the RIAA for advice.
Actually, it is pretty easy to parody them. Just start calling wingnuts a bunch of names, use the TPM and Kos talking points no matter what the topic, and throw in generous doses of racist, sexist, and stolen elections in ’00 and ’04.
As if on cue, andy drops by.
I think ‘gleen’ is the amalgamation of his first and last names, and also a way to prevent use of his real name as to not, um, make him a bigger news item on google? Not too sure. I just use it in a mocking way.
It also helps to use marxist redirection.
I.e: “Your room is dirty. Clean it up!” “Oh yeah? Well… uh, your room is dirty!”
Yeah, it’s really that lame.
Keith Olbermann’s tie picks up the highlights in his hair. If I were Peggy Noonan I’d sigh like twice.
The preffered usage is Gleens; in the plural.
I thought the origin of “Gleen” was a joke about how Glen would sound when pronounced by his Brazilian cabana boys. “The Gleens” refers to his multiple online personalities, that incredibly share the exact same rhetoric.
RiverC – That is about the extent of it, no? That reminds me of my favorite bumper sticker, saw it in NY. “Vote Dem – Why bother thinking?”
Also, up in the title bar of my browser, it says “Hey, Faggot Stupid.” No cross out. Thats whats in between the [title] tags of the HTML. Looks like your metadata isn’t communicating the fact that you want to cross out “faggot” (whatever the reason for that might be) very well. Should think about fixing that, or your title.
“I just use it in a mocking way.”
Like ‘dubya’? But that at least tracks his prunciations.
happyfeet – Are your eyes alright? My eyes bleed every time I accidentally click through MSNBC when Olberdouche is on. I heard he is doing/ruining an NFL show, which I have managed to avoid up to this point.
It was just my takeaway from the picture Dan put up there. I never actually watch him except sometimes on YouTube. I heard he had some half-hour where he rants before football. But I also heard he was doing something directly with football coverage. I should look that up really.
andy – Look at the title of the column, asshat.
Imagine a Brazilian cabana boy running errands for Mister Glenn.
GiGi – Garson, go fetch me a fresh umbrella drink.
Cabana Boy – Si, Meester Gleen. Do you want the peach orchard petals floating in the hollowed out coconut like last time?
GiGi – Only if the coconut is carved out by non-sweatshop labor, and done at a wage that ensures a standard of living far above that of the national average.
Cabana Boy – Si, Meester Gleen. Though it will take me a while to find something not produced at a sweatshop around here. In the meantime, here are some umbrellas and flowers to play with while I am gone. When I return, I shall service you, and praise you to all that will listen.
GiGi – Good DAY, sir.
gay biped – If you find out, please let us know, so we can avoid it at all costs.
“andy – Look at the title of the column, asshat. ”
I did. I’ve been asking about it. I don’t suppose you know why its there? Doesn’t he know how to use the delete key? It also doesn’t match the metadata. So thats one to fix.
“Cabana Boy – Si,”
They don’t say “si” in Brazil, not ignorant.
Lots of things don’t match the meta-data, days are, andy. If you listen closely you can hear Peggy Noonan sigh.
Well, JD, it was the majority enforcing their morality, using force. But that has always happened and always will happen. The question is what morality is calling on force to sustain it and advance it? In the case of Little Rock it was a morality that said all citizens could attend a school. In the case of the nineteenth century Royal Navy, it was a morality that said trafficking in slavery had to stop. In the case of Iran it is a morality that says all homosexuals must die. Along with Jews. And everyone else who offends against the mullahs.
It isn’t use of force, it is what is force being used for. All moralities and all governments will use force – we have to choose what kind of force and for what.
Excuse me – that was to JHoward.
My very, very bad.
Sorry.
andy – Oui? Nam? Sim? Who gives a fuck? You knew what I meant.
Are you just playing dumb, or is that a whole ham setting on your shoulders.
Hmm, As I recall we call G.W. ‘dubya’ as well. Was there some point to that gesture? Or are you the mincing fencer that always thrusts and jabs at the air just to look pretty?
Oops, I guess that homophobia is showing again. Oh, dear.
Mikey NTH – I will let it go, this time. LOL
I was about to let loose with a profanity laden tirade at you, but figured some wire must be crossed somewhere. ;-)
Andy – Since you are dummer than a box of Carics, maybe we will have to spell it out for you? Something about we don’t have any of those in our country.
Wow, all you people need a hug. Not from me though, my ass hurts.
notstupid“andy – Oui? Nam? Sim? Who gives a fuck? You knew what I meant. ”
Actually, I don’t really know why you are imagining the cabana boy, or asking me to.
“Andy – Since you are dummer than a box of Carics, maybe we will have to spell it out for you? Something about we don’t have any of those in our country.”
I understand the oppression homosexuals face in Iran. I also understand that Glenn lives in Brazil with his male life partner. I just don’t know why I am being asked by you to imagine your cabana boy scenarios, or what that has to do with Faggot being crossed out.
The fact that there is an argument between ‘calling bad names’ and ‘putting to death’ says all that needs to be said on the issue. There is no equivalence between the two (‘bad name’ and ‘put to death’ for the clue impaired).
So, is there a difference between these two republics? Which republic as they are currently constituted and currently actually are would you rather live in, and the doctrine of which would you wish to see propagated? (They are the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran, if you did not know yet.) And if so, which of these two republics are more supportive of human rights, and you can take into account all of your sins – venal, secular, and cardinal – when you make that choice.
Well, what’s it going to be now, Gluppets?
Mikey, my question to steve related to his assertion that the use of certain words themselves was flatly not “OK”. I assume this means either morally offensive or legally prohibited (although I suppose it could also mean politically incorrect, which to me also usually implies 100% morally vapid.)
Since steve apparently cannot accord meanings to words that violate his ends, thereby eliminating the moral component, I implied the question that perhaps his alternative use of “OK” was meant to assert some sort of legal control of speech. (Sheer political correctness also exerts a universe of such control — or universities, if you prefer — it by tremendous social pressure, including in this thread.)
So. Does steve wish to imply a moral code preventing some words being used, regardless of intent and context, or does steve wish to impose some sort of prohibition against those words, a prohibition, I’d argue, that’s within reach of government right now.
Then my example about government-managed behavior, etc.
I am as offended that many idiots give no apparent thought to the difference between pragmatism and right as I am in their blind assumptions that the mere existence of a policy or law or action proves its right. I’m offended by their foolish assumptions about an entire hierarchy of morality when they’ve apparently never weighed the component parts against their individual fruits. For example, not questioning welfare when it dooms seemingly endless generations to poverty. Cart, horse.
It’s one thing to isolate a problem and expect a federal solution. It’s entirely another to never question if such is principled and allowed.
JHoward, I was merely replying to steve also, in that human rights had to be enforced by, well, force. I used Little Rock as an example as it had come up recently. Force had to be used to enforce a right, as it always has to be used. Might doesn’t make right, but right better damn well have some might or it is as dead as a Burmese monk.
Just that. The only light a bully is sure to see are the stars when you hit him square in the snot-locker – that has been my experience.
THE MUSLIMS ARE COMING! THE MUSLIMS ARE COMING! OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOES!
Yes, but are they coming alone, in pairs, or mixed groups, and are multiple genders involved?
You can be assured, ThomasD, that there will be no homos amongst them.
It’s one of those mini-anvils people buy to display in their backyards.
I thought he should have gone for a toilet, but I was pointing and laughing when I suggested it, and for some reason he took exception.
That’s a relief, because if they were then the lil’ smokies, potato salad, and domestic bottles just wouldn’t cut it.
“You can be assured, ThomasD, that there will be no homos amongst them.”
Those are the ones that come for asylum. And white gringo ass.
“Are you just playing dumb, or is that a whole ham setting on your shoulders.”
Now just imagine where the speaker would have gone and the sights he would have seen…
If he had said that to Richard III?
Now, in light of the above, imagine saying to Ahmadinejad “Is that a pickle in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?”
Imagine saying that to George Bush.
Now (since we’re imagining) imagine that you are a male (1) addressing Ahmadinejad in Iran or (2) addressing Bush in the USA.
What will your life expectancy be under (1) or (2)?
Or Mel Brooks. I submit that “Blazing Saddles” is one of — if not the — least racist movie in cinema history. The “n-word” is slung around with great abandon, but primarily in order to make fun of the people who consider it an insult.
I told you you should have gone with polesmoker, Dan.
BUSH IS SHREDDING THE CONSTITUTION AND RAPING CIVIL LIBERTIES AND TURNING AMERICA INTO A THEOCRACY WHERE X-RATED MOVIES WILL BE BANNED! BANNED! RUN FOR THE HILLS! OH NOOOOOOOO!
Andy —
If you’re too lazy to read upthread where Dan talks about the strikethrough, what makes you think we should have to explain it to you? Or is what you are asking for kinda like reading welfare, or on-demand cliff’s notes?
As for the cabana boy scenario, we were told that any number of guests at casa del Greenwalds had access to his computer, and could have been living cut and paste defenses under various names in his stead.
Of course, not one of them ever admitted to such a thing — nor did his life partner — but the way Greenwald presented his sockpuppeting defense left one with visions of house parties and hairless manboys oiled up, sipping coconut rum drinks, and taking turns on Glenn’s computer.
Least, to those of us with vivid — and HOMOPHOBIC! — imaginations.
from gg’s comments…
They really don’t leave much to the imagination, really.
Hey, I like “Gluppets” as a nickname.
Oh, and I see that, later the same day, Andy claims to still not get the joke. At this point it’s either pathology or disingenuity. Almost certainly. Somethingelseendingin-ly.
“If you’re too lazy to read upthread where Dan talks about the strikethrough, what makes you think we should have to explain it to you?”
I did read it. Up at #48. I still don’t see whats up. If its because the issue isn’t Glenn’s homosexuality, then why have “faggot” at all? Does it really all boil down to the usual crap “try that at the enemy’s house” or “homosexuals should be more concerned with Iran than with issues here”? What makes it hard to understand is those are such middling points, so I don’t imagine that is what he intends.
“Of course, not one of them ever admitted to such a thing  nor did his life partner  but the way Greenwald presented his sockpuppeting defense left one with visions of house parties and hairless manboys oiled up, sipping coconut rum drinks, and taking turns on Glenn’s computer.”
Really? Wow. I just imagined he was being deflective, rather than living out Larry Craig fantasies.
Have you been following Thomas’ book and interviews? You a fan of his?
andy leans back and enjoys a satisfying sip of his Creme Caramel from General Foods International Coffee. This, he sighs with a muted Peggy Noonan zest, is what it is to be provocative.
Greenwald thinks the right’s reaction to giving Ahmanofconstantsorrowajad was “overblown�
Greenwald and anyone with an emotional age over 12.
And by the way — not the whole right. Just the kooky subset of the right that still thinks the Great Leader Bush is beloved, that We’re Winning The War Against Islamofascism By Fighting Them In Iraq, that the President of Iran is Hitler, that Saddam was the Hitler before him, and that Greenwald — through his blog — is “running interference” for the Terrorists.
Just that right.
“Greenwald and anyone with an emotional age over 12.
And by the way  not the whole right. Just the kooky subset of the right that still thinks the Great Leader Bush is beloved, that We’re Winning The War Against Islamofascism By Fighting Them In Iraq, that the President of Iran is Hitler, that Saddam was the Hitler before him, and that Greenwald  through his blog  is “running interference†for the Terrorists.
Just that right.”
Debating is a lot easier when you define your pronouncements so far into the cartoonish as to be meaningless.
wannabe, sniffs andy.
You’re hoping nobody really notices that, right ange?
“You’re hoping nobody really notices that, right ange?”
I’m hoping someone comes along and clears this up, yeah.
andy drains the mug, a faint smile crosses a face illuminated by monitor-light. So there.
240 posts in…let them explain that.
Debating is a lot easier when you define your pronouncements so far into the cartoonish as to be meaningless.
It is cartoonish, true, but one can find examples of every single one of those wingnut memes on Google quicker than it takes Michelle Malkin to call VoteVets traitors.
You are cartoons.
Whereas protesting Rumsfeld at Stanford, or protesting a Larry Summers or Ward Connerly speech — that’s just standing up to the hate.
Like I said, you defy parody.
Tell me, is the only thing that prevents you from thinking Ahmajokerahmasmokerahmamidnightokerajad is a wannabe Hitler the fact that he hasn’t yet been able to wipe Israel off the map? Or do you just not take the President of a country trying to obtain nuclear weapons seriously because, well, lord knows, he’s just a silly little Persian nobody? Bluster. Talk. Cultural differences. We wouldn’t understand.
But you do. He needs but pity and understanding from his betters. Of which number you count yourself. By virtue of how much you care.
What he doesn’t need is HATE from “that right.” Or Bollinger, either. But he’ll be dealt with internally. Kos will perhaps issue a Townhouse memo.
Funny thing is, I bet you don’t even recognize the arrogance of your position.
Which makes it all the more predictable — and interesting — that you show no hesitation in going after those who should know better, people who’ve benefited from your progressive largess, like Mr Summers, who as a liberal should have known better than to move away social constructionism to argue that men and women may be wired differently (BLASPHEMY!); or Ward Churchill / Clarence Thomas, who by virtue of being black owe people like you for their successes (AFTER ALL, YOU ARE FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION!)
You are their champion. And they turn their backs on you?
How ungrateful. How uppity.
tsk tsk.
Oh. Well, if you don’t imagine it…
So you DID know what we were talking about. Your denials — your desperate need of some sort of explanation to make it all make sense — this was disingenuous?
Why, I’m stunned!
But hey, Larry Craig reference! “See,” says “andy”. “I can do the ‘they do it to thing’ and supply a layer of meta meta grooviness! AND I REMAIN UNCONDEMNED, GIVEN THAT I AM ONLY BEING REACTIVE!”
Which Thomas?
I am a fan of Justice Thomas’ legal thinking, though I’ve disagreed with him on occasion. But I don’t see what that has to do with anything.
You know, you start to wonder if this is a new troll or one of the old trolls… and then, you wonder, does it matter?
Oh, and don’t forget TEH HYPOCRISY!!1!!elevenpointfive!
Oh, and andy, if you don’t get it now, you never will. I seem to recall a story I read once about someone who “couldn’t” see through glass because they didn’t understand the concept of a solid you could see through. This reminds me of that.
instaputz is certainly living up to its nomme de blog. One might think that at least it could trot out some original material. Sadly, no.
Tell me, is the only thing that prevents you from thinking Ahmajokerahmasmokerahmamidnightokerajad is a wannabe Hitler the fact that he hasn’t yet been able to wipe Israel off the map?
Actually, Jeff, the only thing that prevents me from comparing the current president of Iran to Adolf Hitler is my brain. The fact that you actually defend that absurd comparison proves my point nicely.
Cartoonish, as your own reader wrote.
“Oh. Well, if you don’t imagine it…”
Yeah, i thought it would be better. Seems like a smart guy. But this is it? And how again does “faggot” get us there?
“So you DID know what we were talking about”
Once you told me it was about his sock puppet stuff. Yes. But not once it was just about cabana boys. That connection was more obvious to you folks than me.
“I am a fan of Justice Thomas’ legal thinking, though I’ve disagreed with him on occasion. But I don’t see what that has to do with anything.”
I’m curious if you have any ideas as to whether some of the stuff in his recent book and interviews have anything to do with your “making of a racism charge” work. You been following him? I really like that work, and would like to see it developed further. I recommend you take it in this direction.
One could even tie it in right? Like imagine Joe Biden writing “hey, [strikeout]Nigger[/strikeout] wingnut.” And see how Thomas rolls. That would explain a lot.
What, pray tell, is absurd about that comparison?
Apparently, comparing President Bush to Hitler is a sign of intellectual rigor, but making a comparison between the Iranaian theocrat that has publicly expressed his desire to rid the world of the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooos and kills teh gheys, all while trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and Hitler, who tried to do all of the above, is absurd?
Strunk and White are rolling over in their graves.
andy – Biden is too busy plagarizing papers and mocking Indians to make fun of African Americans.
“andy – Biden is too busy plagarizing papers and mocking Indians to make fun of African Americans.”
Nowadays, maybe. But didn’t he had time for the “high tech lynching”?
“Actually, Jeff, the only thing that prevents me from comparing the current president of Iran to Adolf Hitler is my brain. The fact that you actually defend that absurd comparison proves my point nicely.
Cartoonish, as your own reader wrote.”
Intellectually unserious. Completely unworthy of our time. Interested only in playing gotcha games and pretending that the most condescending individual wins the debate.
You’re talking in riddles, Andy. But instead of feeling like in the presence of the Sphinx, I’m just annoyed at how you can never just come out and say what it is you are trying to say.
And wouldn’t it be best if you directed your questions about Collins’ intent to him? I’ve already explained what I think he was doing, but you don’t accept any of the explanations on offer, so instead of saying so, you just continue to pretend you’re baffled.
It grows old fast.
As for Thomas, no, I haven’t read his book or heard his recent interviews. Been sick. So maybe you can develop that line of thought for us and post it on your site.
Or in Patterico’s comments, or some such.
“And wouldn’t it be best if you directed your questions about Collins’ intent to him? ”
I have. You stepped up, and then I asked you.
“As for Thomas, no, I haven’t read his book or heard his recent interviews. ”
No Riddles. I think you’d like it. The 60 minutes interview. They covered it briefly in the Daily Show today. I think it would help your “Making of a Racism Charge” type work to work through the racism charges in there.
I think Blue Texan is like one of those people who were all about drawing a distinction between the TRUE greatness of Hank Aaron and the pseudo-accomplishments of Barry Bonds.
That entertainement vehicle being a paragon of intellectual rigor.
Beyond parody, seconded.
JD had it right at 249 I think.
“Whereas protesting Rumsfeld at Stanford, or protesting a Larry Summers or Ward Connerly speech  that’s just standing up to the hate.”
No, it’s silly. Very, very silly. There’s a difference between the two examples, however — the evil liberals protesting Summers and Connerly are college students with nothing better to do during the ultimate off-season. The people screaming that the end of the world was imminent because Ahmadinejad came to Columbia included multiple members of Congress. A subtle difference, I know, but still.
“Tell me, is the only thing that prevents you from thinking Ahmajokerahmasmokerahmamidnightokerajad is a wannabe Hitler the fact that he hasn’t yet been able to wipe Israel off the map? Or do you just not take the President of a country trying to obtain nuclear weapons seriously because, well, lord knows, he’s just a silly little Persian nobody? Bluster. Talk. Cultural differences. We wouldn’t understand.”
I can’t speak for Blue Texan, but if I had to name just one thing that made him different from Hitler, it would probably be that Hitler controlled his country’s armed forces, whereas Ahmadinejad does not. (http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/24/africa/iran.php)
There are a couple other reasons, but that one about sums it up for me.
Just to be clear, the desire to wipe out the Jews and the stoning of gays — that doesn’t track?
Or is it just a pronounced lack of ovens that makes you so sure?
To put things in perspective, I never would have compared Hitler to Hitler until he became, you know, Hitler, but then, having the luxury of history to draw on this time around, I’m a bit less sanguine about Iran’s aims than you seem to be — particularly when they are courteous enough to state their intentions up front.
I don’t think Ahmawhatever is Hitler now. I think he wishes he were.
If it’s your “brain” that keeps you from seeing that, try turning it on. Or changing the batteries.
“That entertainement vehicle being a paragon of intellectual rigor.”
Highly entertaining. Not as rigorous as your average foxnews alert. But definitely entertaining.
Convenient to omit Rumsfeld from your formulation. Maybe because a large amount of his opposition isn’t just college students.
But hey, even if it was it seem decidely illiberal to dismiss them as mere students. After all it’s not like they are educated adults, the cream of the crop at some of our contries most prestigious institutions of higher learning, people who will likely advance to positions of significant power and responsibility.
No where near as trusted or respected as your average NASCAR fan.
I’d ask you to stick around actus, I mean andy. but it’s not my blog, and we both know you are not welcome here.
But I’m gonna save that quote for use over at Patterico’s.
My mom said I wasn’t put on this earth to be entertained. It took me a long time to understand that really.
happyfeet, stop looking at Peggy Noonan porn. That sighing is fake you know…
She’s in my brain, mishu.
“Just why do you believe anything Gleen says?”
Actually, I’m believing my own lying eyes, into which you practically spooge every time a raghead gets obliterated.
That wouldn’t be very practical at all, really.
Helen – wait, wait, wait … there I go. Spooged all over my monitor. Some raghead must have got obliterated somewhere. Give me a minute to clean things up.
There. Now where were we? Oh yeah, Helen was joining blue balls in Laredo aka instaputz and andy in the “I can say the dummerest thing. No, I can. No, I can!” contest. Looks like a horserace. Where is Kerry?
Wait – Helen said raghead! She’s not allowed to say that. That’s like Islamophobic or something. Somebody should alert steve or Gleen or the Gluppet thought police. Jeff runs a nice blog. You can’t say stuff like that around here, twatwaffle.
“Convenient to omit Rumsfeld from your formulation. Maybe because a large amount of his opposition isn’t just college students.”
An honest oversight, I assure you. Though I would also argue that the protests over Rumsfeld are different in another way, because he’s been appointed to a post that’s (seemingly, at least) at the university, whereas Ahmadinejad was only there for a single speaking engagement. The rest of your response was a non sequitur.
This wonderful thread has many examples of porgressives using words like “faggot”, “gringo”, “nigger”, and now “raghead” thus perfectly illuminating the inherent hypocrisy of political correctness. Good work lads and lasses.
Geez Dan – what a spiteful little creep you are.
Your focus on Glenn’s sexuality rather than his substantive point, i.e. that islam is regularly mocked in the West without consequence despite your hysterical shrieking to the contrary, is telling indeed.
Glenn may be gay, but at least he’s not a snivelling coward running scared from the big bad Muslim menace.
Logically, since Gleen is such a manly man, whatever threat that made him run away to Brazil should already have caused us cowardly Republicans to expire in fear* thus depopulating large swathes of red state America. Then why am I still here?
*The physiological mechanism would involve dehydration from wetting ourselves so often. Probably uncontrollable sweating would contribute, as well.
“focus on Gleen’s sexuality”
Is that code for “
faggot“?Apparently, Theo Van Gogh didn’t get that memo. Neither did ABC, CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPo, etc…
Poor Goldstein, so tortured about his frail masculinity, lashing out again and again. Freud would have a field day with you, little man. The only thing more pathetic are the little anonymous sycophantic commenters.
[Uh, Charles? Not my post, buddy. – ed]
Already, this “bed-wetter” meme is tired. Since when did masochism equal masculinity?
Better stick to lawyering, Charles, because you absolutely suck as at psychiatry.
I’d guess you probably suck at law, too, but there’s camouflage in numbers, there.
Wow. Faggot. Gleen. I am amazed at the high tone and intelligenc4e in this post and thread.
It’s little wonder that the last place I stop for adult conversation is the right wing blogosphere.
Freud, the Big Nobodaddy of the Left, beloved and reviled by them.
“The only thing more pathetic are the little anonymous sycophantic commenters.”
That means sooooo much coming from a Gluppet.
“It’s little wonder that the last place I stop for adult conversation is the right wing blogosphere.”
Of course its the last place you stop. You don’t continue looking for something once you found it, do you? Just wait a little bit, the Gluppets and trolls will soon leave and the conversation will get up to adult levels again when everyone doesn’t have to explain everything three times – and slowly – for all of the left-wing lackwits.
[…] really love what you all are doing with the […]
John Cole !!!!!!!!!!!!!! A true conservative. You care. How sweet.
I don’t think Ahmawhatever is Hitler now.
You don’t think?
You don’t think, for sure.
To compare an anti-Semitic, delusional figurehead of a fourth rate power to a man who built the world’s most powerful war machine in the world’s most technologically and arguably culturally advanced nation, conquered a good chunk of the Western world — and launched a war that killed 60,000,000 people in the process — is the stuff of sheer assclownery.
Again, that this has to be pointed out — again and again — is mind boggling.
Andy: If its because the issue isn’t Glenn’s homosexuality, then why have “faggot†at all?
just imagined he was being deflective, rather than living out Larry Craig fantasies.
Uh-huh. You use “Larry Craig fantasies” as an insult, but Dan is the one who’s “homophobic”.
You’re actually a right-winger in disguise posing as a lefty for parodic reasons, aren’t you? I mean, no one could actually be this stupid in real life, right?
Charles: Freud would have a field day with you, little man.
That would be cutting, if anyone in the psychological community had been paying any serious attention whatsoever to Freud’s theories at some point in, oh, say, the past 70 years or so.
Hint: They haven’t. Freudian theory joined phlogiston, the doctrine of signatures, and the geocentric model of the universe quite some time ago. Really.
blue texan – We cower in fear of your witty rejoinders. Again, in lala land, comparing Bush to Hitler is the pinnacle of intellectual thought, but comparing two people that actually wanted to exterminate the Joooooooooooooooooooooooooos, just silly.
blue texan: fourth rate power
Pay no attention to those centrifuges behind the curtain!
Idiot.
4th rate powers tend to not have one of the largest standing armies in the Middle East. Just sayin’
Chucklehead Giacometti sure does have some anger issues.
Freud, the terror of frenetic Catholic partisans, reviled by Vermonters with a chip on their shoulder
Dan does not have a chip on his shoulders. He has fresh maple syrup on one, and a parrot on the other, but no chips.
Iran has “one of the largest armies” in one of the world’s least literate, most impoverished regions. Therefore, Iran is a Great Power.
You people crack me up.
JC: Is the parrot a Norwegian Blue? Beautiful plummage…
Yeah, centrifuges are a real laughing matter. You are trying to beat out the Box of Carics for dumberest comments, huh?
Mondo rock has the prize for dumbest comment. And in a thread full of Greenwald’s minions, that is saying something. Who is running you dumb little man? You and your kind are the cowards. Afraid of stirring up an already stirred up hornets nest? You don’t run from a probalem. You confront it. This has nothing to do with Iraq, too. And again it is NOT Muslims. It is jihadists that need to be eradicated. You fucking morons are too much. Keep your own hatred of Islam to yourselves. Is it a silly religion, imo? Yes. But, nobody wants to kill all Muslims and nobody is running from confrontation.
It is like one of those pirate parrots, without the eye patch.
Myself I’m kind of agnostic about Freud. Democrats have a highly developed id is mostly what you need to know. Mean word make Dems mad and cry. They giggle for freedom. Bless their hearts really.
Yep, we should never be concerned about the Hitlerian or Stalinistic ambitions of people in fourth rate powers, because they don’t have the technology to actually really hurt the west or carry out any of their genocidal desires.
I think history would brand your scorn and nonchalance as foolish, Blue Texan.
Blue Texan is a tautology anyway.
Who is this mysterious “JC?” (heh)
bluetexan: First, stop holding your breath.
Second, stop intentionally framing the argument with an ironclad connection to Germany’s industrial and military capabilities in the late 1930’s. Modern Iran and 1930’s Germany do not have to have the same capabilities to make the comparison reasonable.
Iran not only possessess one of the largest standing armies the ME but it has, over 25 years, demonstrated a consistant commitment to exporting it’s peculiar brand of mayhem to other parts of the world. Beyond that, Ahmandinnerjacket’s public pronouncements as the face of the Iranian government (if not the actual power) have several Hitler like overtones, like holocaust denial (perfectly in line with Hitler’s programs to hide the deed) and his expressed opinion that Israel should be “wiped from the maps of the world.” The draconian and dark ages way that Iran dispenses justice certainly reflects Nazi Germany in style if not in exact statute.
So no, genius, it’s not an exact match but there is enough of a real comparison to devalue your snide, sniveling remarks.
Now, if you are an obsessive idiot, you’ll be back with some inane, utterly irrelevant spew about Irans GNP or some racially charged rant about the brown peopleses lack of education.
Or you’ll just quietly walk away and go read a history book. Exhale!
BTW: blue texan.
If I’m not mistaken, Germany was a fourth rate power in the 20’s and early 30’s. Neh? Ignorance is not bliss!
BJ – Don’t go getting all factual on these assmonkeys. They are impervious to not only irony, but apparently facts as well. They are the rhetorical version of the cockroach.
Ass monkeys? This is the kind of thing that sort of proves Greenwald’s point, no?
As for Lacanian disembodiment, WTF? Bush is Hitler. His apologists are Geobbels. Pretty easy to understand, I don’t need a degree in postmodern analysis to understand that.
Obstreperous Indifel: Does your theory of “confronting” the problem involve, you know, enlisting in the military? Because if it doesn’t I kinda think you maybe ought to consider shutting thy piehole.
Can’t reply to all the comments, folks. That said, since they are almost entirely straw men, I will speak in generalities and y’all can apply them as you like:
1. I never said the state should get involved in any of this (not that you guys should let that deter you from saying that I did). It should be completely legal to use any word that you want.
2. I never said that these words are completely verbotten regardless of context (not that you guys should let that deter you from saying that I did). I can find many situations where there’s clearly a joke or commentary involved. Jeff used the N-word in a way abovre that clearly demonstrated that point (and it was kind of funny). And I agree. I listen to Howard Stern every morning, and my fav comedian is Carlin, just to give ya a hint. It’s just that I do not beleive that Collins was using it that way. Doesn’t mean I’m saying he’s a homophobe – I have no idea. He used it as a slur to call a gay dude a faggot, and he had 1000 different reasons for it. I call BS. MAybe he wanted to impress other wingers? How should I know. But if context and all that matter, shouldn’t there be a time where it’s INAPPROPRIATE to use that word et al.? I say this is one of those times.
3. I’m not outraged or ‘offended’, I just think it’s wrong (not that you guys should let that deter you from saying that I’m outraged and offended. I mean, hey – who the Hell am I to tell you what I think?)
4. Maybe – and I get this from people on the left, too – if you guys stopped with the running bifurication error of thought that characterizes political ‘discussion’ in our Republic, a real discussion could happen. This is nothing but Red Sox /Yankees (Go Sox!) with politics. An inane excersise where all of the comments and replies can be 99% predicted. If nothing else, it’s just so fucking boring.
Are you silly wingnuts saying Iran has V2’s or something?
http://english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveId=22328
Or is it the 1,000,000-strong military that resembles WWII Germany’s?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#Military
Ah…the chickenhawk arguemnt. I’ll consider that your surrender. What does that even mean?
Iran not only possessess one of the largest standing armies the ME but it has, over 25 years, demonstrated a consistant commitment to exporting it’s peculiar brand of mayhem to other parts of the world.
“Other parts of the world” being other parts of the Middle East and not, say Mexico or Canada. In other words, Iran only has the ability affect our interests in the Middle East except for oil, in which case they have as a little incentive to screw with that as we do. In other words, Iran does not equal the Soviet Union, my apologies to those of you who get sentimental about the thought of a legitimate world power to contest with.
“Gleen”? That’s the best you can do? That’s the full extent of the wit around this place? A spoonerism? Anyone with half a brain would be embarrassed.
Obstreperous Infidel asks what the chickenhawk argument means. That’s an easy one. It means you and Goldstein are fucking pussies who beat the drums for war but would never in a million years fight in one.
Clear enough?
[Sorry, been away and hadn’t seen this until now. It’s true. I’m a pussy. But then, you are what you eat. Which would Charles Greenwald’s cock, I guess. – ed]
Okay, Jocko, riddle me this: what does Glenn mean by “blasphemy” in his post?
Last person with a life to leave this thread, please turn out the lights.
Oh, Charles is the tough guy? That could be your side’s whole problem. What war am I am beating a drum for, you fucking moron?
ChOnto the whole chickenhawk thing. So, I take it you guys police your own neighborhoods? Correct? You guys are policemen/women? If you are, well then that’s fantastic and I applaud you. However, I’m doubting that’s the case. So you can’t advocate anything without ever having performed that “thing” yourself? Listen, we have a military. They do their job, which is unbelievably taxing and courageous. I am eternally grateful. You’re probably not. This is all so extraordinary. The true pussies that are afraid of rocking the boat, or committing to any action other than appeasement, are the ones calling us afraid? Is it the multi-culti shit, charles? You know moral relativism and all that shit. Or is that you’re just projecting your own fears onto us?
Or is it the 1,000,000-strong military that resembles WWII Germany’s?
Please, keep it up. It just gets better and better.
Xan – not Mexico,not Canada, not South America?
ignorance of current events is not an excuse
speaking of SA how about that Chavez, he’s a pip ain’t he?
Oh, fer gawds sake, Obstreperous Infidel. You’re using reason on Charles! Silly winger, that never works!
These Blue Texasy people that get all defensive and minimizey about Ahmadinejad making existential threats towards our ally Israel are the same people who think Bush has alienated our allies. They’ll get people killed if they get into power, which sucks for all the dead people but it will totally prove a point about how stupid they are.
Wow, Obstrep, I hit a nerve, eh?
Listen, when you grow a pair, I have an army recruiter you can talk to. In the meantime, go back to slapping your cock in Goldstein’s face or jacking off to pictures of Bush in a flight suit, or doing whatever it is you fucking pussies do when you aren’t eating Cheetohs.
Pathetic little men.
To recap:
The DroneWalds: “Stop almost calling Our Hero a faggot, you bed-wetting, momma’s boy, closet case, girlymen homos! Calling someone a faggot is offensive and childish, you cock-munchers! We love the gays, except for you faggots!”
Man, if I were gay, I’d sure be glad you tolerant and sensitive hippies were on my side!
Listen, when you grow a pair, I have an army recruiter you can talk to.
Are you with Glenn(s) in Afghanistan right now? Great job over there — keep those Talibananas on the run! Semper Fi!
[…] It’s almost as much a drag to have to explain a gnomic conceit as it is a joke, but Jeff and S…. I placed it under ineffective erasure because the simple fact that referencing it as verboten highlights it, as is evident from the comments. As I mentioned, my issue isn’t with Gleen’s homosexuality, but his integrity and intelligence. Once he acknowledged the hailing, “he,” as a constructed identity, became entrapped in the problematic of distancing his own insulting and mean-spirited characterization of others and their “fauxtrage” at certain representations that he promotes. I don’t care that he’s a faggot red herring. You can bet that Ahmadinejad does, though. So, Glenn makes strange and contorted choices over what to become exercised about, in my view. […]
Sorry, Bender, but “our side” doesn’t care whether someone is gay or not. We care whether someone is a coward or not. When I say Goldstein and his sycophants are pussies, I mean the obvious–that they are fucking cowards.
It’s a pretty simple equation. If you want war and you are able, be ready to fight in it. That Goldstein and the others fail to see the obviousness of this point speaks volumes about the depths of their cowardice.
If you are referring to the cock-slapping reference, I was merely referring to how Goldstein himself tries, again and again and again, to prove his masculinity to a world that knows all too well that, well, there’s no there there.
you’re a silly monkey
Was it you who sent the email to me, Charles? You seem pretty much into the hypermasculinist rhetoric, I must say. I mean, sure, I’ve given you cover by threatening to cock slap a guy who accused me of breast feeding, but still. You really RUN with it, man!
Their side doesn’t care if someone is gay. Like Jeff Gannon. Or Matt Sanchez. Or that dude in the stalls. Or that preacher.
Nope. Why, they hardly even notice!
Sorry, but I’m done with this guy, who I think came over from Cole’s site.
I’m embarrased for all of us who have names that end in a vowel.
Oh, bullshit. Try selling that crap to Matt Sanchez.
Which fits nicely into a pretty simple mind, despite it’s being logically deficient.
Charles, you should talk to Dick Cheney’s daughter, who is a lesbian.
What! Dick Cheney’s daughter is a lesbian?
Geez, what a faggot.
Chuckles is just full of the love today. Hell, over at instaputz, he tried to tell me that JD is not my name. Technically, he is right. It is J.D. Chucklehead is one of the more aggressively arrogant trolls to drop by in a while. I have not seen the chickenfucker slur tossed around so freely in quite some time. Major John, wishbone, RTO – What say you?
Charley – Don’t leave. You are comedy GOLD. Between you, insta-moron, and steve, it is a cornicopia of stupidity, providing material so easy to mock that it is almost unfair.
“a man who built the world’s most powerful war machine…”
No. They got their ass handed to them on their home field. By the world’s most powerful war machine.
… in the world’s most technologically and arguably culturally advanced nation…
I would be interested to hear that argument, Blue Texan. How is it you would consider Nazi Germany the epitome of cultural advancement?
The Nazis didn’t even have Cheddar Jalapeno Cheetos. (made with REAL CHEESE!)
No. They got their ass handed to them on their home field. By the world’s most powerful war machine.
You really are an idiot. We weren’t the most powerful war machine in 1939. Or 1940. Or 1941. Or 1942. When Hitler invaded Poland, our army was smaller than Romania’s.
Asshat.
“Apparently, comparing President Bush to Hitler is a sign of intellectual rigor, but making a comparison between the Iranaian theocrat that has publicly expressed his desire to rid the world of the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooos and kills teh gheys, all while trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and Hitler, who tried to do all of the above, is absurd?”
Yes absurd coz every one of those allegations has been complete debunked.
1. No Iranian leader has said a word about wanting to rid the world of Jews. Don’t believe me, ask the 25,000 Jews in Iran that refuse to leave even after Israel offered them wads of cash to relocate to Israel.
2. Not only is there no evidence that Iran is trying to acquire nukes, but even bubble boy Bush has said that their might one day be a threat if Iran acquires the capability to enrich uranium to the point where it might decide to develop nukes.
It does help to have some grip of reality.
“When Hitler invaded Poland, our army was smaller than Romania’s.”
Three years later we had destroyed Hitler and the Japanese. I doubt the Romanians could have pulled that one off.
Whatever, I am really more interested in hearing your argument about the cultural superiority of Nazi Germany. This should be good.
Man, this thread has really deteriorated since I got my ass kicked and fucked raw.
Yet we managed to kick their ass, something that France has yet to thank us for, properly.
You have the temerity to call us stupid? Apparently, in blue ballz world, a little ethnic cleansing is the sign of cultural enlightenment.
Shingo – I stand corrected. Ahmadicrazyeyes only wants to wipe Israel off of the map. He just forgot to tell us about his plans to evacuate all of the Joooooooooooooooooooos prior to wiping Israel off of the map. That Ahmadkillmesomejoooooooooos really has a man crush on the uncircumsized zionists.
If you can just ignore those centrifuges, that’s absolutely right! ‘Course, you’d have to be about a moron to do that, but I think Shingo has that covered.
B Moe,
Prolly something to do with great big ovens and Zyklon B showers.
Whatever, I am really more interested in hearing your argument about the cultural superiority of Nazi Germany.
That’s wise. Get your ass handed to you with one argument, and with a “whatever” move on to the other.
It should be obvious to anyone who breathes through their nose that Hitler took over Germany. Not Nazi Germany. The Germany that produced Freud, Wagner, Einstein, Hegel, Schiller, Heidegger, Expressionism, Kant. That Germany. That culture.
When Iran produces 1/10000th of what Germany produced in the 100 years before Hitler took over, let me know. Otherwise go back to your comics, GI Joes, and “300” war porn and STFU.
Yeah, that Heidegger thing worked out well for ’em. And do they get De Man by proxy? Cause that would be cool, too.
Blue Texan – How is it that you feel you proved that the Germans sported the strongest and most advanced fighting forces ? How then would you explain the fact that they got their ass kicked ?
Those Germans were great cooks, created the largest gas ovens known to man. And, schnitzel.
How is it that you feel you proved that the Germans sported the strongest and most advanced fighting forces?
Are you seriously arguing that wasn’t the case when they started the war, and even up to, say, 3 years after they started the war? Really?
They weren’t quite so bad, were they? Considering they got their ass kicked. No?
“Oh Danny boy, the pipes, the pipes are calling”
Here’s to that Collins named Dan
Of ass-fucking who was a big fan.
He shrieks like a banshee,
“Jeff Gannon, come ram me!”
A closet case none’s sicker than.
Good one, Lulu. It’s got a good beat, and Gleen can jerk off to it.
I get it, Blue Ballz. You were desperate for a little traffic, just like Prof. Dick, so you figured you would stop by, moon everyone, and then right a post for your 6 buddies, telling them how great you are. Well done. Now, head on back to your place. actor and Chuckles are lonely.
I was ready to vote Blue Texan, but then shingo showed up.
I was leaning towards shingo, but Blue Texan has the trifecta of stupidity – aggressive, persistent, and brain-poundingly stupid. shingo was just a hit-and-run.
“Oh Danny boy, the pipes, the pipes are calling”
From glen to glennnnnnnnnnn and down the brokebackmountainsiiiiiiide…
BRAVO, guisPen, BRAVO !
“It should be obvious to anyone who breathes through their nose that Hitler took over Germany. Not Nazi Germany.
Uh. Yeah.
Boy, Dan sure has a talent for attracting real “energizer bunny” trolls.
I’m not sure I want to read the middle part where trolls (a troll?) begin exalting the inherent superiority of the German
RaceCulture.Ooops! I used the strike, andy will be confused now.
Blue Texan banned me. It must have been for something I said here, as I was fairly civil over at his site.
Merovign – Something about Freud, Kant, and a group of engineers that designed the world’s largest convection ovens.
Comment by JD on 10/3 @ 7:15 pm #
They weren’t quite so bad, were they? Considering they got their ass kicked. No?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!
Poor little man…delusion runs deep on your side, don’t it?
Hee! bluetexas instaputz has his/her own little greek chorus!
(what does he mean with the italics?)
How cute! Except for you, Charles you
faggotpussyhuman bullhorn!Wait a minute? Did the Germans beat us? Hitler was successful? Fuck. Yet another thing the history books have gotten wrong. Thank Allah we have an actor around to correct things for us.
You are just trying to be this fucking stupid, aren’t you? I refuse to believe that blueballz and actor come across this naturally. But, then again, those Hollywood types have not shown much intellectual heft in recent memory, so actor could be being himself/herself/itself.
The more I think about it, Occam’s Razor and all, aggressive stupidity is the most likely probability.
Oh, come on, trolls! Don’t quit now! We can break 400!
Go trolls go, go trolls go!
I prefer “fanny bandit” myself. Speaking of which it looks like our favorite has thrown his whole sock drawer at y’all this time. So brave, so earnest, and the most macho among ’em would squeal like a little girl if you stamped your foot, but they talk BIG, man!
The cultural superiority of Nazi Germany? Well, isn’t it obvious? It was those little pink triangles. Made it oh so easy to hook up.
http://www.kansascity.com/news/world/story/304219.html
After 4 years of war and american presence, shit like this still happens.
Maybe you’ll say this is because there’s not ENOUGH of war/american presence. But in the end, the point is to let people have self-determination. In the end, we would have seen such shit again.
So my question is this : if all the US has done in Iraq doesn’t stop gays from being bashed, and women from being persecuted, why will an attack on Iran do that ?
littlehorn:
Please explain the Iran thing, because you’ve managed to cause me to scratch my head.
thanks!
“How is it that you feel you proved that the Germans sported the strongest and most advanced fighting forces?
Are you seriously arguing that wasn’t the case when they started the war, and even up to, say, 3 years after they started the war? Really?”
Actually Blue Texan, i happen to have an interest for the 2nd World War, and i’ve read that plans for re-militarization in Germany were to end in 1944.
That means, Hitler went to war with far less troops than necessary. This is why he made a deal with Stalin, cause he knew there was no way in hell he could fight on both fronts at the same time.
In other words, the french army was stronger than the german, but its defensive strategy was so old and so out-of-touch with reality that they lost big time.
Of course, after the capitulation, french officials wouldn’t say that, they would lie on how the germans had much more troops than they had, and thus that war was lost from the start. A very convenient position to take. But the truth was the General Staff was a bunch of old geezers who couldn’t think out of WW1’s strategy lines.
Long story short, germans were outnumbered, but they outsmarted everyone with fresh strategies (blitzkrieg).
littlehorn:
Hmmm…Then it is possible to achieve strategic goals due to superior strategies and technological advantages? Maybe even without a draft? Radical, dude.
Donkey Kong, what say you? Sorry, littlehorn, but be prepared to be called stupider than a retarded monkey.
“Please explain the Iran thing, because you’ve managed to cause me to scratch my head.
thanks!”
Well thanks to you, i thought i’d get much more radical replies :-p.
What is there to explain ? I think bashing gays/women is cultural in Iran (and in the Middle-East) and there ain’t no bomb/war/occupation/regime change that can stop that.
If we’re going to try and change attitudes towards gays, we should look at our first experiences elsewhere, for instance in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I don’t know everything there is to know, so i’m not giving lectures. But i’ve heard things don’t look so bright for women in Afghanistan. There are still machos who will tell them how to dress…
“Hmmm…Then it is possible to achieve strategic goals due to superior strategies and technological advantages? Maybe even without a draft? Radical, dude.
Donkey Kong, what say you? Sorry, littlehorn, but be prepared to be called stupider than a retarded monkey.”
I see where you’re going with this. No i’m not saying it’s still possible for the occupation to succeed.
The US has the most powerful army in the world. There’s nothing it cannot destroy. Troops are used to destroy, and they destroy alright. They destroy every few months. And then the resistance gets up again, and some other major destruction occurs. And so on.
Basically, what the officials like Condi Rice are betting on, is that suddenly the population will feel sympathy towards the troops. I don’t see why that would happen. Now you’re the one who will say i’m stupid :-p.
Well it’s true that i’m slow and i guess i don’t know everything there is to know.
I agree with you, but it’s not what Dan was trying to say with his provocative post nor does it reflect the commentary of the regulars here.
Seperate from “war” the piont related to Gleen’s constant drum beating about conservatives frothing to carpet bomb Tehran or cowering in abject terror before the mussleman. Nowhere to be found in any of the Glens’ writings is any similar outrage about the treatment of gays in Iran or any other Middle East Country. His use of the word “blasphemous” (this coming from an avowed atheist) when referencing the printing of the Mo cartoons brought all of this to a focus on, if not on his stupidity, then on his obsessive blinkeredness when it comes to conservatives and his moral inconsistancy with regards to muslims.
The only long term solution to womens’ and gay rights in the Middle East are secular, democratically elected governments. Any significant participation of Islam in governmental affairs will inevitably lead to the persecution of gays, women, animists, Christians, Jews and apostates. Such is life in the Islamic theocracy.
Well, that and the kite flying…
[…] just now got to looking at Greenwald’s response to Dan’s faggot post, which I note mentions me (and my Pajamas Media affiliation) by name. Dan, on the other hand, is […]
Yhanks you146af657cfb9c074a6a1bd71a86c12fc
Just proves the old adage. It’s an ill wind that blows no good. – Madam, there’s no such thing as a tough child – if you parboil them first for seven hours, they always come out tender. – W.C.Filelds 1880-1959