Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Freedom of Accredited Speech [Dan Collins]

A follow up to my follow up to a reaction against TSI’s eulogy for Solzhenitsyn, only written by Ralph Peters:

The show preceding mine featured a young woman, Mahvish Rukhsana Khan, who’s published a book about the poor, innocent, kitten-loving prisoners at Guantanamo. Her interview climaxed with the claim that Guantanamo is the equivalent of the Holocaust.

I guarantee you that no one from MoveOn or DailyKos questioned that outrageous comparison. (Nor did the patsy interviewer challenge it.)

The Holocaust’s victims were 6 million innocents. The handful of prisoners at Guantanamo are accused terrorists. Guantanamo has no gas chambers; prisoners aren’t forced into slave labor. They aren’t tortured or starved or shot. And their trials are open to members of the press.

The truly outrageous aspect of such comparisons is that the American left, with its Stalin-redux willingness to rearrange history, neglects to mention that, outside of Japan, all of the 20th century’s great totalitarian regimes had roots on the political left.

Read the whole thing, please.

Here’s Roger Simon on Weak E-Pedia.

204 Replies to “Freedom of Accredited Speech [Dan Collins]”

  1. thor says:

    What a bizarre disconnect that lady lives in.

    While the Right does a we’re-the-greatest dosey-doe, the left is lost in a all-things-relative fantasy.

    What Solzhenitsyn went through was horrible enough, but there was much worse. Doe-eyed uber-liberals don’t want to know the truth.

  2. Dan Collins says:

    The US stopped Saddam. He needed to be stopped.

    I am sorry about the losses, and happy for the gains.

  3. Education Guy says:

    While the Right does a we’re-the-greatest dosey-doe

    At least this is an arguable position to take. It isn’t completely fantasy land to assert something like this and use historical examples to back it up. This lady is just making shit up and there is no way to back it up with facts.

  4. JHoward says:

    Maybe what you should do, thor, is send Dan a five hundred thousand word screed on all that’s wrong with the US and all that’s wrong with the PW phantoms commentariat. You can, of course, simultaneously ignore my request that you merely produce a paragraph exploring a single valid leftist philosophy. But shoot Dan all that pain and discontent and he may just guest post it for you. Could be cathartic.

    Because it’d sure as hell be more efficient.

  5. Dan Collins says:

    Sigh. And just when thor was saying that doe-eyed lefties are clueless.

  6. JD says:

    timb is an idiot. Fuck off, timmah.

  7. BJTexs says:

    JD: Neh?

  8. sashal says:

    stopped Saddam from what, Dan?
    How much do you think the support to your Utopian good will interventionist fantasies (which resulted in unnecessary death of 4000 brave Americans) would have been in USA if people knew right away about no WMD and no 9/11 connection?.
    Close to 0 I bet…
    At least something the commies were good for- they taught neocons how to lie and use propaganda very effectively…

  9. Dan Collins says:

    I don’t give a rat’s ass why other people may or may not have supported it, sashal.

  10. JD says:

    BJ – I clicked thru to the link at commentsfromleftfield, and timmah was there pontificating.

  11. Rob Crawford says:

    stopped Saddam from what, Dan?

    Genocide. Torture. Rape as government policy.

    If you don’t think stopping that was a good thing, FOAD. God, I’m sick of you.

  12. Sdferr says:

    Sashal, do you think Pres. Bush would have insisted on taking the nation to war with Saddam had Saddam complied in good faith with any of the many escape routes on offer, i.e. full and fair disclosure of WMD and associated programs, or failing that, leaving the country with his sons just prior to the invasion? I don’t.

    On the other hand, had Saddam been left in place, the sanctions removed and the costs of keeping him hemmed in militarily mounting to the point of discontinuation, what would he be doing today, looking across his border to the Persians proceeding to develop nuclear weapons? Hmmm. His oil wealth skyrocketing with the increase in per barrel price? Hmmm. His affiliations with al Qaeda beginning to bear fruit? Hmmm. That’s a puzzle right there.

  13. BJTexs says:

    He just can’t quit us.

  14. JD says:

    Homophobe.

  15. thor says:

    Comment by JHoward on 8/5 @ 1:00 pm #

    “merely produce a paragraph exploring a single valid leftist philosophy”

    Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    Done.

    Anything, genius? Any other my-team versus their-team dumbness you need me for? Should I order you a Gloria Steinem blow-up doll so you’ll always have a philosophical enemy instead of constantly trying to invent one?

  16. JHoward says:

    And away we go again. sashal, can’t this time we at least hang BoooshCoMcChimpyHaliburtoon by whatever administration installed the thug? You know, another kind of intentionalism. Adds spice.

    HEGEMONIC CAPITALISTIC IMPERIALIST MOTIVES FROM WAY BACK!

  17. TheGeezer says:

    Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    You mean the act that was blocked in the Senate filibuster until a Republican minority was able to cobble together enough votes to get it out to the floor for passage?

    Idiot.

  18. BJTexs says:

    Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    Passed largely by the support of which political party? Opposed largely by which political party?

    Be alert for the dumass stones heading for your glass house, thor.

  19. JHoward says:

    my team vs

    How ironic, thor. Fortunately you’re immune.

    Just not from ranting.

  20. Minister Jack X Klompus Africa-Muhammad Ali Shabazz says:

    18. The name….is Doo-Mahs.

  21. JHoward says:

    Oh, and what was that, thor, three entire threads encompassing some four hundred comments and entire days of denial effort just to come up with a stupifyingly wrong answer? As has been put to you, at best you’re unresponsive.

    WTF is the underlying tenent of fucking leftism that redeems all its many physical, historical, democidal failures gives it resonance in the human soul that perpetually longs to be free?

    I understand aborigines die in overnight lockup because they have no sense of future. Apparently the word hope exists for a reason. Ask a Russian.

    Oh, and OBAMA!

  22. BJTexs says:

    sashal: While you are content to whitewash the evil neocon imperialistic warmongers with the brush of Bolshevik cowboy diplomacy one wonders if you could step back a minute and look at the intention of the Iraq affair.

    Was it to dominate and oppress the Iraqi people and turn them into good commissars, worthy vassals of a Soviet like hegemony as a client state? Nope! Instead we have three elections and a slowly blooming democracy in a portion of the world that supports logistically and financially asymmetrical warfare/terrorism against western targets of convenience. A potential functioning democracy where no tradition of it lives outside of Turkey, arguably., and a potential “shining light” to the citizens of Iran and Syria, among others.

    Was it worth the cost? Time will tell.

    As long as you cling to the fevered client state delusions about this administration’s intentions, then this discussion goes nowhere and your ongoing comparison contains a demonstrable falsehood.

  23. BJTexs says:

    thor will be back to scream that all of the right wing nuthouses were in the Democratic party and make insulting comments about political manhood in 3 … 2 … 1 …

  24. BJTexs says:

    …were in the Democratic Party in 1964

    context: The other white meat! (racist code)

  25. Minister Jack X Klompus Africa-Muhammad Ali Shabazz says:

    and of course yell at everyone for not knowing anything because after all HE’S BEEN TO FUCKING RUSSIA, DUDE!!!!!!!!!! RAWWWRRRRRRRRRRR SO GO DIE WINGERS!! BLAAAAHH!!!!! I am thordouche smartest douche I’ve ever known!!!!!!!

  26. JHoward says:

    look at the intention of the Iraq affair.

    Exactly. For an ideology built on the sheer hopeiness of this-time-we’ll-finally-get-it-right, you’d think intentions are all that’d matter, BJT…

  27. sashal says:

    BJ, do you think the Bosheviks would ever say our intentions is to harm people?
    They had that wide eyed dream of the Utopia on Earth and everybody is so happy, rivers are flowing with milk, fields are full with grain, food aplenty, etc….What did happen on the way to this dream, we all know.
    I am tired of repeating this. This is typical nanniism and socialism what you are advocating. Let them all to come to the appropriate stage of their development on their own. We, as an older and richer neighbor, can give advice or even supply some tools for the improvement in their house, but we do not storm into their house and tell them what to do, accidentally stamping over their dog and cat.
    You admit yourself, you do not know for sure the future, nobody does, but is that lofty goal , which may or may be not come to fruition( most likely we have an Iran’s satellite state) was worth all those dead by not Saddam’s hand?
    BTW, somebody up thread said something about genocide, I think Rob. First he is clueless what genocide is, Saddam did not have genocide against his own people, he was brutal dictator, he already exterminated his enemies-opposition, he was not in the business of exterminating the population of his country….

    Sdferr, yes I think Bush would have go to war no matter what, like Dan, he would not give a shit what most people think, which is understandable, I am the same, but I am not the president of the most powerful country and I do not use lies and propaganda to convince people in my cause….

  28. JHoward says:

    Been around that block a hundred times already, sashal. How do you feel about a decade of UN sanctions?

    Or this: http://coldfury.com/?p=5970

  29. BJTexs says:

    JHoward: thor’s drunk the kool aide of the Military/Industrial complexs’ imperialistic designs on TEH PLANET!

    I’m not arguing that America has always operated on the world stage with all of the best intentions. The sober fact is that our ambitions have never, ever, been associated with world domination for the sake of developing a world wide, tighly controlled “workers paradise.” That’s why we are more than content to look at results rather than proposed ideals and continue to be comfortable with the transcendence of American democracy if for no other reason than the fact that thor, sashal, dataless and cleo are not begging for a second helping of cold fish eye soup while clutching the tattered remains of their burlap smocks around their chests.

  30. cynn says:

    “WTF is the underlying tenent of fucking leftism”

    I want to say a fundamental belief in the benevolence of people, but that hasn’t always worked out so well.

  31. Aldo says:

    I want to say a fundamental belief in the benevolence of people, but that hasn’t always worked out so well.

    It might be more accurate to say that it is fundamental belief in the benevolence of the state.

  32. sashal says:

    I do not feel anything about those sanctions…JH.
    Sanctions in general do not harm dictators, but the population.
    As far as your link, as soon as I opened it, I remembered the story about Japanese soldier found in the Philippines mountains like 20-30 years after the war ended still fighting it….

  33. Rob Crawford says:

    BTW, somebody up thread said something about genocide, I think Rob. First he is clueless what genocide is, Saddam did not have genocide against his own people, he was brutal dictator, he already exterminated his enemies-opposition, he was not in the business of exterminating the population of his country….

    Human Rights Watch disagrees with you. Repeatedly.

    Go fuck yourself you little twat. God, I’m so fucking sick of you.

  34. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by thor on 8/5 @ 1:51 pm #

    Comment by JHoward on 8/5 @ 1:00 pm #

    “merely produce a paragraph exploring a single valid leftist philosophy”

    Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    Done.”

    Which was actually supported, on a percentage basis, by more Republicans than Democrats.

    Jim Crow, baby, Democrat all the way.

  35. Rob Crawford says:

    I do not feel anything about those sanctions…JH.
    Sanctions in general do not harm dictators, but the population.

    In other words, “it’s no skin off my nose if we punish innocent people with sanctions, but the minute we take out the dictator, I’m agin’ it.”

    You should be thankful you were allowed into the US, sashal. Generations sacrificed and died to build the land you enjoy, whose essential qualities you’ll never understand.

  36. BJTexs says:

    Oh, sashal, I barely know where to begin.

    BJ, do you think the Bolsheviks would ever say our intentions is to harm people?

    Saying and doing are two entirely different things. We already had Germany and Japan as models and, more importantly, as a moral foundation for steering conquered countries into liberty and prosperity. the Bolsheviks can say all that they want. They have no, none, zippo factual record of success and, indeed, a wide swath of evidence as to dark, imperilistioc intent. Deeds over words, my friend.

    Let them all to come to the appropriate stage of their development on their own. We, as an older and richer neighbor, can give advice or even supply some tools for the improvement in their house, but we do not storm into their house and tell them what to do, accidentally stamping over their dog and cat.

    You do if your neighbor has shot up the neighborhood multiple times and proclaims his intention to continue, paid others to shoot up your friends, invests in grenade launchers and explosives, invades neighboring homes and brutalizes the residents and, after finally being contained at great cost, tries to sneak around the curfew put on him by the neighborhood to get more heavy weapons while starving his own family while he eats fillet and, by the way, continues to pay thugs in the neighborhood to shoot up neighborhood houses.

    ( most likely we have an Iran’s satellite state)

    Not as long as us and our friends in the neighborhood have anything to say about that. Plus you don’t strike me as Nostradamus.

    BTW, somebody up thread said something about genocide, I think Rob. First he is clueless what genocide is, Saddam did not have genocide against his own people, he was brutal dictator, he already exterminated his enemies-opposition, he was not in the business of exterminating the population of his country….

    Tell that to the Marsh Arabs, the Kurds gassed with mustard, the Shiites picked up, tortured and killed that collectively numbered into the hundreds of thousands over the life of his regime. We know what genocide is and there are still thousands of Iranians living with the after effects of the chemical cocktails that Saddam used in that nasty little war. Genocide? Maybe not up to his hero Stalin’s standards but pretty substantial for the Caliph wanna be.

    and I do not use lies and propaganda to convince people in my cause….

    Which would make Bush no better than the Bolsheviks if that were true, Which it’s not. There is no real evidence, after countless hearings by both partisan and non-partisan committees and investigative boards that Bush or anybody in power deliberately lied in order to provoke a war for either convenience or profit. Not. One.

    Opinion is a beautiful thing and I celebrate your freedom to express it but facts rule, my friend.

  37. Rob Crawford says:

    And let’s not forget that the Civil Rights Act is hardly a leftist idea. Liberal? Sure, in the classical sense. Leftist? Hell no — the modern corruption of quotas and separatism under the code word “diversity” is the fruit of leftist thought.

  38. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by sashal on 8/5 @ 2:24 pm #

    BJ, do you think the Bosheviks would ever say our intentions is to harm people?”

    Of course not. They lie. That’s what genocidal power-hungry maniacs do.

  39. Rob Crawford says:

    Opinion is a beautiful thing and I celebrate your freedom to express it but facts rule, my friend.

    As if sashal gives a rip about facts.

  40. dicentra says:

    For the hardcore left, the party line always trumps conscience. MoveOn isn’t new – it’s just Pravda with poor punctuation.

    Great line.

  41. N. O'Brain says:

    “I hate Communism most for its cold-blooded murder of the truth! Pravda doesn’t mean truth. Pravda means whatever serves the world Communist
    revolution.”

    -Robert A. Heinlein

  42. Dan Collins says:

    E pluribus carnem.

  43. Pablo says:

    “merely produce a paragraph exploring a single valid leftist philosophy”

    Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    Done.”

    OK.

    The bill was sent to the House of Representatives, and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Emmanuel Celler. After a series of hearings on the bill, Celler’s committee greatly strengthened the act, adding provisions to ban racial discrimination in employment. The bill was reported out of the Judiciary Committee in November 1963, but was then referred to the Rules Committee, whose chairman, Howard W. Smith, a Democrat from Virginia, indicated his intention to keep the bill bottled up indefinitely.

    Normally, the bill would have been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator James O. Eastland, from Mississippi. Under Eastland’s care, it seemed impossible that the bill would reach the Senate floor.

    The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964 and the “Southern Bloc” of southern Senators led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. Said Russell “We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states.”

    What was that you were saying, thor? How was the Civil Rights Act leftist? Hint: it wasn’t.

  44. Dan Collins says:

    It was liberal, though.

  45. royf says:

    Well sashal as you know Iraq has a election coming up and politicians are campaigning and doing interviews on Iraqi TV. Here are a couple of excerpts from Iraqi MP Mithal Al-Alousi aired on Al-Salam TV.  The entire interview is very good and this man is very popular, evidently quite a few Iraqi’s share his outlook.

     […]

    “If we do not have international commitments and agreements, with which we can force the international community and that strong country, America, to defend the Iraqi borders and sovereignty – who will defend Iraq’s borders in the east, the west, or even Basra?

    […]

    “I want a strategic agreement [with the U.S.], which would guarantee the building of an army, as well as Iraqi universities, which would guarantee that American universities be open to Iraqis, and which would guarantee financial ties between Iraqi and American banks. With all due respect to the employees of Al-Rafidein Bank – this is not a bank. It is a meeting place for the unemployed. It is banking hocus-pocus.

    […]

    “By Allah, we will build a strong Iraq, which will be an ally of the West. Let Iran and all those foolish Arab countries listen carefully. Iraq will be the ally of the West, and will progress more than the Emirates and Singapore, and all the rest will come looking for work in Iraq.”

    […]

    Complete interview located here. Now I’m sure Saddam allowed people to talk like that right? And from what the military blogs and other journalists which have spent most of the war in Iraq such as Bill Roggio, Michael Yon say this is what most Iraqi’s think.

    BTW sashal I doubt you really are interested in what is actually going on in Iraq but if by chance you are those are two very good sites to read. There are many others as well but what is clear to anyone who digs past the crap talking points of the MSM is that something which could have very big implications on the entire Middle East is going on right now in Iraq. Non of which would have ever happened with Saddam still in power.
     

  46. thor says:

    The Obama-haters union is now taking credit for the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    It is the silliest of silly seasons. Silly String anyone? Where’s my cape? Once my cape catches a mighty gust I’ll drop my undies and fill your hair with fluorescent orange stingies.

  47. JHoward says:

    Let’s give thor the lunatic his pound of flesh, kids. So thor, what underlying philosophy did the Act illuminate, and why are both important?

    I figure with a gilt-edged invitation like that, thor will be taking skin off, yesiree.

  48. Hadlowe says:

    WTF is the underlying tenent of fucking leftism

    Wow, I’m in agreement with Cynn on something.

    It absolutely is the belief that humans are basically good, or, in more precise terms, that man in a natural state, and under no duress will choose to do good by their neighbors when it provides themselves with no discernible benefit or hardship.

    Such a philosophy is a much more personally pleasant belief system than to believe that humans are capable of choosing, and equally likely to choose, to do great evil in the same condition. Often it is an exposure to human indecency on a grand scale that “converts” the former belief into the latter. See David Zucker of Airplane’s transformation from limousine liberal to conservative in the aftermath of 9-11 for an example.

    Tangentially related, I have a theory that the reason leftism dominates urban centers and conservatism dominates ruralities is that folks in rural locales are much more likely to be exposed to the utter indifference and casual cruelty of nature firsthand in a frontiersy setting. Call it the “Shooting Old Yeller” effect. A conservative looks at his faithful dog foaming at the mouth and pulls the trigger, mourning during the burial. The lefty looks at the faithful and brave dog and puts the gun aside, damning the dog to a painful, drawn-out death, and endangering the countryside.

  49. BJTexs says:

    Hadlow: Your lefty has a gun? The cognitive dissonance just knocked me from my chair. I’m thinking the “dog psychiatrist.” :-)

    thor: Once again, no substantive argument to the clear fact that it was Republicans who were largely responsible for passi9ng the Civil Rights Act of 1964. surprise, surprise.

    You screwed up, thor. If you had said the Civil Rights movement was largely a leftist concern, you would have been right. However, that movement had no governmental authority so JHoward’s question would have gone begging, as it continues to go begging.

    Drop your cape and splay the stringies into the headwind and be draped.

  50. thor says:

    The act illuminated the philosophy of jumping ship. The Southern Democrats who voted against it would eventually jump ship to the Republican party.

    Come on pom-pom Johnnie, tell me how Martin Luther King was a Republican, yes, and how you marched with him.

  51. Mikey NTH says:

    The Bolsheviks have Katyn Forest on the list of their crimes. The United States did not do that or anything remotely like it.

    From their deeds you will know them, and any objective comparison of deeds between Bolsheviks and Neocons, between a totalitarian/authoritarian state* and a western liberal democracy like the United States makes it very clear that these are two vastly different things. You may as well compare hemoglobin and hematite.**

    *fascisim/naziism/communisim and all the rest of the isms that sprang off of Marx’s tree
    **both contain iron, after that not much in common

  52. thor says:

    Yes, the Republicans were responsible for passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Later they would support Democrat Barack Obama in 2008.

    I can hear it now.

  53. sashal says:

    45, royf.
    Yon is a good journalist, I read him often (though i do not share his view on the nessesity of this war)
    Hee is an interesting tidbit:
    “A Counterinsurgency Guide for Politicos.” From the forthcoming manual on counterinsurgency strategy written by David Kilcullen, a “former Australian Army officer who is now an adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.”

    The handbook seeks to provide a framework for considering whether Washington should intervene in foreign countries’ counterinsurgency operations, raising difficult questions about whether such nations deserve U.S. support; under what conditions that support should occur, and whether success is possible at acceptable cost. No systematic approach to strategic-level questions in counterinsurgency currently exists for senior U.S. government officials.

    And how difficult are the questions being raised? Well, in what’s sure to be the pull-quote of the piece for those media outlets who still consider anything other than Surge Logic (TM) important, Kilcullen provides a little color:

    More bluntly, Kilcullen, who helped Petraeus design his 2007 counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, called the decision to invade Iraq “stupid” — in fact, he said “fucking stupid” — and suggested that if policy-makers apply the manual’s lessons, similar wars can be avoided in the future.

    “The biggest stupid idea,” Kilcullen said, “was to invade Iraq in the first place.”

  54. Mikey NTH says:

    And as others have noted – leftist does not mean liberal. Leftists are notoriously illiberal in supporting human liberty, leftists support authoritarian/totalitarian methods to implement their policies. As an example, see any campus speech code.

  55. bigbooner says:

    The lefty will loan his neighbor his gun and ask him to take care of the problem. After the neighbor shoots the dog the lefty will then criticize the neighbor for being a heartless bastard because he didn’t need to handle it that way. The moral to the story? The neighbor should have shot the lefty instead. Then fed him to the dog.

  56. dicentra says:

    “The biggest stupid idea,” Kilcullen said, “was to invade Iraq in the first place.”

    Ah, yes, the wayback machine policy! Shouldnta, wouldnta couldnta. Let’s set the dial on March 2003 and make things right!

  57. thor says:

    It wasn’t liberal. It wasn’t leftist. It was Martin Luther Kingish-Rightish sort’a, if you consider the underlying conservative political theory, which states all liberals suck.

    Let’s just make it up as we go.

    And landing on the moon, John Glenn? Republican! John F. Kennedy? Republican. Jesus Christ? Card-carrying lifetime Republican!

  58. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by thor on 8/5 @ 3:36 pm #

    Yes, the Republicans were responsible for passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

    thor doesn’t even recognize when he’s been cock-slapped.

  59. sashal says:

    here is an interesting tidbit for you, dicentra.
    Just waht I was saying for all this time, Rand corporation finally agrees:
    Rand Corporation – in a report paid for by the government states this:

    The United States can defeat al-Qaida if it relies less on force and more on policing and intelligence to root out the terror group’s leaders, a new study contends…Its report said that the use of military force by the United States or other countries should be reserved for quelling large, well-armed and well-organized insurgencies, and that American officials should stop using the term “war on terror” and replace it with “counterterrorism.”

    “Terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors, and our analysis suggests there is no battlefield solution to terrorism,” said Seth Jones, the lead author of the study and a Rand political scientist.

    “The United States has the necessary instruments to defeat al-Qaida, it just needs to shift its strategy,”

  60. N. O'Brain says:

    Comment by sashal on 8/5 @ 3:44 pm #

    Ah, the Rand Corporation wrote it.

    Just like people are run over by SUVs and shot by guns.

  61. Mikey NTH says:

    #48 – one of the tenets is that man is perfectible, and will be perfected to support the ideals of the left whether he wants to or not. He will be forced to be perfected that way.

    Giving all power in society to the state and then expecting that utopia will appear and that the state will wither away is one of the greatest examples of magical thinking this side of the underwear gnomes’ business plan.

  62. Rob Crawford says:

    The [Civil Rights] act illuminated the philosophy of jumping ship.

    Unresponsive, again. It’s like he doesn’t want to actually answer questions, just deal out abuse.

    WTF is up with people who think thor’s intelligent? Are you delusional? Is it because he drops the names of authors that are big with the intelligentsia?

  63. Rob Crawford says:

    It wasn’t liberal. It wasn’t leftist. It was Martin Luther Kingish-Rightish sort’a, if you consider the underlying conservative political theory, which states all liberals suck.

    Let’s just make it up as we go.

    And landing on the moon, John Glenn? Republican! John F. Kennedy? Republican. Jesus Christ? Card-carrying lifetime Republican!

    Unresponsive — written only to abuse.

    Again, I have to ask — what leads people to think thor has an ounce of brains?

  64. Salt Lick says:

    Interesting fellow, David Kilcullen, and also interesting that sashal didn’t reveal the man does not support withdrawal from Iraq. Oh well, there’s pravda and then there’s pravda.

    “Spencer Ackerman, in yesterday’s Washington Independent, claims I told him the Iraq war was “f*cking stupid”. He did not seek to clear that quote with me, and I would not have approved it if he had. If he HAD sought a formal comment, I would have told him what I have said publicly before: in my view, the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was an extremely serious strategic error. But the task of the moment is not to cry over spilt milk, rather to help clean it up: a task in which the surge, the comprehensive counterinsurgency approach, and our troops on the ground are admirably succeeding. Anyone who knows me has been well aware of my position on Iraq for years. When I went to Iraq in 2007 (and on both previous occasions) it was to end the war, by suppressing the violence and defeating the insurgency. (Note: I said END the war, not abandon it half-way through, leaving the Iraqis to be slaughtered. When we invaded Iraq, we took on a moral and legal responsibility for its people’s wellbeing. Regardless of anyone’s position on the decision to invade, those obligations still stand and cannot be wished away merely because they have proven inconvenient)…The question of whether we were right to invade Iraq is a fascinating debate for historians and politicians, and a valid issue for the American people to consider in an election year. As it happens, I think it was a mistake. But that is not my key concern. The issue for practitioners in the field is not to second-guess a decision from six years ago, but to get on with the job at hand which, I believe, is what both Americans and Iraqis expect of us. In that respect, the new strategy and tactics implemented in 2007, and which relied for their effectiveness on the extra troop numbers of the Surge, ARE succeeding and need to be supported.”

  65. Pablo says:

    The Southern Democrats who voted against it would eventually jump ship to the Republican party.

    Really, thor? Name some of them who did.

  66. Mikey NTH says:

    In RE: The Rand Corporation Report.

    The United States has used military force and will use it against Al-Qaeda. It will also use intelligence, police forces, diplomacy, economics – all the tools in its toolbox. The question is actually this – in any given scenario, what is the best tool to use? KSM wasn’t captured by an army battalion, was he? That was intelligence work and police work. The guys who were plotting to bomb US bases in the US weren’t stopped by a navy task group.

    The response depends on the nature of the opposition, and I would be surprised if a USA that could manage a global war in the 1940’s using every tool I described couldn’t – and isn’t – doing the same now.

  67. sashal says:

    Salt Lick, what does he say about withdrawal?

  68. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “It was liberal, though.”

    – Some of the most Liberal ideas have been enacted by Conservatives.

    – thor, you picked one of the worst examples you could have managed, unless you just like getting your brains kicked in. Even a 1st year poli-sci frat knows the Dems were the party of slavery, the history of the Whigs/Republicans, Lincoln, etc.

    – The Southern (and some Northern) Dems ran home, MIA, refusing to vote, afraid they would get thrown out by an angry electorate back home.

    – Once it was legislated out of existence, the Dems built their entire party platform on the backs of the Black community, nurturing the “victimhood” plantation mentality. They’re trying every way they can to keep it going to this day, clinging bitterly to the race card.

    – When you blow it, you really jump the whole fucking row of sharks.

  69. thor says:

    The Republicans are responsible for the Civil Rights Act, they didn’t all vote against it. I have to give credit where credit is due.

    Minorities that benefited most from the Act repaid the Republicans by voting for them overwhelmingly ever since. It’s fact.

  70. B Moe says:

    Do you need someone to read it out loud to you, sashal?

  71. Mikey NTH says:

    #64 Saltlick:

    I think Megan McArdle said it a few years ago that what was frustrating was asking the question “Where should we go from here?” and only hearing the response “We shouldn’t be here in the first place!”.

  72. royf says:

    Well sashal if Iraq turns out to be a representative republic of a functioning democracy such a Japan, Who is a ally with the US against international terrorism. Who was right President Bush or David Kilcullen?

  73. royf says:

    of or a functioning democracy

  74. sashal says:

    royf, that will never happen, things like that require nation to be historically and culturally ready for that type of conversion.
    And “what if” guessing is not enough reasons to play dangerous games with other human lives

  75. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “And “what if” guessing is not enough reasons to play dangerous games with other human lives”

    – Exactly sashal. Which is why we didn’t leave the future of the entire ME in the hands of a murdering meglomaniac family, along with the lives of 25 million Iraqui’s.

  76. poppa india says:

    Police and intelligence forces will need the support of nearby standard military forces. Otherwise the area where they are working could come under the control of terrorist forces to such an extent that counter-terrorism will be impossible. The two groups need to be working together. Pulling our regular units home and leaving small forces there alone to carry out police and intelligence activities and what used to be called Civic Action Patrols will doom the whole effort.

  77. Sdferr says:

    Notice that D. Killcullen says he disagreed with the decision on strategic grounds. “…In my view, the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was an extremely serious strategic error. …” He does not elaborate as to his reasons why he views the decision as error. He may not agree with sashal’s position about the matter at all. He may be basing his judgment on the relative merits of the case for invading Iraq as opposed to focusing our power elsewhere (Afghanistan, s.e. Asia, Syria, who knows?). He may have been looking to the size of the American Armed forces and judged them to be too small for the task required, seeing ahead of time the stress that has in the event been placed on the forces. He may have any number of other reasons, none of which sashal has alluded to on Killcullen’s behalf.

  78. urthshu says:

    Part of the mythology of the modern Left is that they’ve cleansed themselves of the Southern racists in their midst. Its a way of comforting themselves after they lost the South circa Jimmuh.

    And, of course, they claim the racist Southerners came to the Republicans – how could it be otherwise?

    What they ignore is the “new South” does not tolerate racism and that very many working class Northern whites – their base – are often outspokenly racist themselves.

  79. Dread Cthulhu says:

    Thor: “The Republicans are responsible for the Civil Rights Act, they didn’t all vote against it. I have to give credit where credit is due.”

    Nor did they, in the tradition of Barak Obama, abstain.

    They voted for the act in a greater percentage than the Democrats, thor. Like it or not, the Party that brought forth the Klan and Jim Crow law was the Democratic party. Now, to be fair, some of those Dixiecrats, such as Strom Thurman, did eventually find homes in the Republican party, whilst others, such a Senator Byrd, former Kleagle and one of the filibusterers against the Civil Rights act, stayed in the Democratic party.

  80. royf says:

    And “what if” guessing is not enough reasons to play dangerous games with other human lives.

    But saying “that will never happen” is enough reason to play dangerous games with other human live, is that what you are saying. There is plenty of evidence which point to the Iraqi’s being ready to step up and grasp the opportunity which has been presented to them, certainly they couldn’t defend themselves against Iran or Turkey invading them, Which is why they need a agreement with the US. But to say that Iraqi’s aren’t  stepping up and joining the police and military and dying in defense of their government just isn’t a accurate statement.

  81. urthshu says:

    Northern working class whites, BTW, are prob’ly the last racist holdovers from the CW period. They resented being drafted along with/to free negroes, so they supported the Dems, who were the enemy.

    Thats the Dem tradition, after all is said and done.

  82. Ric Locke says:

    What thor, and in a different way sashal, are illustrating for us is the reason Russia will never amount to much, despite having a resource base that makes North America look like a howling desert of pure quartzite sand: the casual, selfish, self-defeating nihilism that says nothing is worth doing because nothing can be done, it’s all beyond anything anyone can do, so let’s just get drunk and forget about it.

    Thor, you said on another thread that you’re an American. Sorry, you aren’t. Oh, I’m sure you’ve got a passport that says UNITED STATES OF AMERICA on it, and you may have ancestors back to Plymouth Rock, but whether from predisposition or your in-laws your attitude is thoroughly Russian.

    The MIG-29 uses alcohol injection to achieve maximum power, because despite having almost the world’s entire supply of molybdenum, titanium, and tungsten the Russians were never able to come up with alloys that would stand the full heat. The regiments that employed the airplane never had operational readiness worth a damn, because the troops who were supposed to maintain them would drain the alcohol tanks and drink it. A better existential definition of Russian ways of thinking probably doesn’t exist.

    Regards,
    Ric

  83. dicentra says:

    The United States can defeat al-Qaida if it relies less on force and more on policing and intelligence to root out the terror group’s leaders, a new study contends…

    Honey, that’s what Petreus’s COIN manual outlined. That change in strategy was part of the surge, and that’s why it worked. Had we simply shipped in 30,000 troops and kept playing by the old rules, the surge wouldn’t have worked.

    BTW, can you articulate the differences between the pre-surge strategy and the post-surge strategy. Off the top of your head, that is. Because if you can’t, you’re talking through your hat and can be safely ignored.

  84. Ric Locke says:

    Sorry, left out a clause:

    …despite having a population that may be the most intelligent non-Orientals on the planet in pure processing power, and a resource base…

    Regards,
    Ric

  85. urthshu says:

    Also, I think one of the things sashal misses completely is that the USA has different strands of foriegn policy philosophies, and that one of them is about bringing the Revolution to the world.

    In that sense, there is a vague simillarity to the USSR’s international communism. Propaganda is often a part of that, b ut no one is expected to swallow whatever is said/published whole-hog [unlike the USSR]

  86. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – You and thor must get awfully tired of stepping on your own cranks sashal.

  87. sashal says:

    77, sdferr.
    Let me guess, may be he thought that it was a bad decision because it would have screwed up the operation in Afghanistan?

    Yes we can, Rick, yes we can
    We can play with other human’s life and fate and present them all with the gift of democracy and elections by INVADING THEM.
    Who will be next with purple fingers, Rick,- Sudanese, Burmese?
    One thing you forgot to mention about -the great naivete and unfamiliarity with the world history and realities of different cultures, this features are very common with Americans…..

  88. B Moe says:

    A better existential definition of Russian ways of thinking probably doesn’t exist.

    I have one that is close. I know a couple of Ukrainian carpenters, who happen to be outstanding craftsmen, and I was joking with one about what I assumed had been American exagerations about the horrible quality of Russian buildings. They assured me it was all true, that they intentionally left shit out, or undone, or ill-fitting, because while their straight pay sucked, they could make good money making things right after hours for under the table pay.

  89. B Moe says:

    I am interested in what manner of police action and intelligence gathering sashal would recommend for the mountainous border area of Afghanistan and Pakistan that seems to be AQs primary residence at the moment?

  90. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by sashal on 8/5 @ 4:07 pm #

    royf, that will never happen, things like that require nation to be historically and culturally ready for that type of conversion.”

    Yeah just look at Imperial Japan, dammit!

  91. Sdferr says:

    Please sashal, D. Killcullen is a serious thinker in these matters and I do not doubt has an extremely well reasoned position on the “strategic error” he finds. I do not know what his position is. I don’t believe you know either. Perhaps you can find his position with a little work. Just don’t come here and peddle his opposition to the Iraq front in the WoT as consonant with your position. It may be, it may not be. Show where it is he agrees with you and I’ll be happy to accept the fact. Until then, you’re just blowing so much hot air.

  92. SEK says:

    You can’t win this shell game without setting ground rules, like “all definitions must be of their time,” or you’re going to get people talking about how the Dixiecrats blocked the passage of Civil Rights Act.

    You also can’t let people slip between Democrat/liberal/leftist as if they were one and the same. The question’s about leftism, not party affiliation, so the fact that socially conservative, pro-segregation Democrats who voted for Thurmond in ’48 were Democrats is irrelevant.

    You can argue that self-identified, pro-New Deal liberals who voted for the man who proposed the legislation, John F. Kennedy, championed a legislation they believe better accorded with their own ideas, as well as those they imputed — rightly or wrongly — to Jefferson et al. You can say that the Congressmen who opposed the legislation were racists of the socially conservative variety, in that they also opposed the teaching of evolution, the separation of Church and State, &c.

    You can point out that the Civil Rights Movement was led by a coalition of liberal religious organizations which included a large number of socialists, communists, and Old Leftists, like the largely Jewish New York Intellectuals. You can note that MLK’s personal politics were decidedly leftist — not “liberal,” but leftist — and that the anti-imperalism he openly embraced vis-a-vis is also evident in his admiration of Gandhi and his adoption of the tactics of non-violent protest.

    But you can’t, in fact, win this shell game.

  93. SEK says:

    Consider that tag closed.

  94. urthshu says:

    We can play with other human’s life and fate and present them all with the gift of democracy and elections by INVADING THEM.

    Oh, invading isn’t the only method.

    And, anyway, ‘invading’ is kind of a misnaming for the Iraq situ. We were never at peace with them, firstly, and Clinton established official policy for Saddam’s removal, for two.

    It was gonna happen, IOW. Just a matter of time.

    I disagree with Kilcullen saying it was a stupid mistake and I’ll say why:
    -When you have no intelligence assets, the quickest way to get them is to start a war in the area you want them.
    -Having a democracy is the midst of the ME is the best way to model what behaviors WE want. Yes, WE.
    -Turning out the biggest asshole in the region had the same effect as punching out the biggest bully on the block. That we did it so quickly had a salutary effect for US in that the other bullies quickly sat down and shut up.

  95. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by SEK on 8/5 @ 4:47 pm #

    You can’t win this shell game without setting ground rules, like “all definitions must be of their time,” or you’re going to get people talking about how the Dixiecrats blocked the passage of Civil Rights Act.”

    Bullshit. Conservatives are smeared 24/7/365 by reactionary leftists with what are historically untrue charges.

    Conservatives have examined our past, and know where there were errors. REactionary leftists are a bunch of ahistoric assholes, recreating the universe overy 20 seconds, never acknowloging te past, let alone apologizing for it.

  96. Techie says:

    Because, SEK, when I think of conservative legislation, I immediately think of the New Deal.

  97. Ric Locke says:

    …the great naivete and unfamiliarity with the world history and realities of different cultures, this features are very common with Americans…

    Sashal, I am from a little town (Population 3796, the sign said from 1960-1970) in a backwoods corner of Texas, an area that is Southern in culture.

    The first foreigner I ever met… was a Pakistani, here in the United States on the nickel of one of the eeeeeeevul oil companies to learn about American methods of sheep-raising from Dad’s friend the Trotskyite veterinarian. He, the vet, was the son of a Macedonian Greek who came to the US right after WWII and opened a sandwich shop near a Texas cow college. One of my neighbors spent ten years, off and on, in Saudi Arabia advising on methods of oil drilling; another took his whole family to Nigeria and lived there for a decade as a missionary. One of my mother’s cousins was stationed with the Air Force in Japan, where they lived “on the economy” while he advised the JSDF on how to make their computers play nice with SAGE; another was OSS, and spent the War (WWII) in Venezuela playing cat-and-mouse with Nazi agents looking for oil; yet another spent some time in Iran in the early Fifties. Another cousin (actually the relationship is obscure, but he’s family) has a German wife, not a souvenir of military service but from living there implementing the Marshall plan. One of my ex-clients spent half a year in the USSR (actually Ukraine) trying to get aerial photographs despite the weather and bureaucracy, ending up leaving the film behind on grounds of national security.

    I could go on, but the point is that while I know that attitude is common among the self-designated elite, it is absolutely false. Oh, the Jet Set knows Paris and London, and nowadays maybe Berlin and Basel, but I would give long odds that you would find more people who are familiar with the daily life and living conditions of any randomly-selected country by visiting a white-painted Baptist or Evangelical church in the Piney Woods of Texas or the eastern mountains of Oklahoma than you would out of an equal-sized population of New Yorkers — especially if the New Yorkers were Long Island suburbanites.

    As for “play[ing] with other human’s life and fate”, you’re damned right when they start playing with ours. Saddam was a flag, a rallying-point for Arab chauvinists who bragged that he’d won Gulf War I because he was still in power and GHW Bush was not. Americans are famous for an indirect approach. When we went to war against the Germans, we began by attacking — North Africa? When we got serious about the Japanese, we went after… minor Pacific Islands. Sometimes the short cut is the long way around. Iraq is a crapshoot, no doubt about it, and remains so, even though one die’s come up a four. But the objective, despite all the leftoid crying about “imperialism” that you’ve swallowed whole, was attitude change in the Middle East, and Iraq was and remains the best place to do that.

    Regards,
    Ric

  98. Techie says:

    God knows our side has its sins, but I’ll be damned if I hear one more Leftist go on about how “their side” is as pure as the driven snow.

    There was widespread support for the Soviets/communism during the CW on the Left, and they’d prefer that I’d just forget all about it.

  99. Mikey NTH says:

    Ric: I read Viktor Belenko’s book. He was the MiG-25 pilot who defected with his aircraft back in 1975 (IIRC). He said the MiG-25 was known as the flying distillery because of the alcohol it used, and the alcohol was very much desired. Party officials liked to visit MiG-25 bases for that reason. So he said.

    BTW – as an aside – the British Pacific Fleet in late 1944-early 1945 needed P-40 droptanks for the Seafires because they would fit and didn’t leak. A destroyer was detatched to a large Australian base which used P-40s. The destroyer had its ‘coin of the realm’ – a case of scotch – onboard.

    The Australian commender was said to have responded “For that you can have the entire base!”

    So I remember reading from Sir Bruce fraser’s biography about 25 years ago.

  100. Mikey NTH says:

    And “what if” guessing is not enough reasons to play dangerous games with other human lives.

    Yet still deciscions have to be made with less than perfect information. That is the fate of every human, from the guy deciding whether to buy a used car to General Eisenhower deciding to launch Overlord on the best guess of the weather forecasters.

    My dad bought a used Buick on advice from an autoshop teacher friend that turned out to be a money sink; I bought a used escort from a friend that gave years of reliable use.

  101. SEK says:

    Because, SEK, when I think of conservative legislation, I immediately think of the New Deal.

    Wait, what?

    Conservatives are smeared 24/7/365 by reactionary leftists with what are historically untrue charges.

    Untrue claim: Republicans opposed the Civil Rights Act.

    True claim: Social conservatives from Southern states opposed the Civil Rights Act.

    If you want to assess praise blame based on party affiliation, I’d recommend looking at the breakdown by party and region. In the House:

    Socially conservative Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
    Socially conservative Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)
    Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
    Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

    As the link shows, the same pattern holds in the Senate. Turn this into a Republican vs. Democrat piss or praise competition and you miss the fact that the social conservatives both parties elected to the House and Senate almost unanimously opposed the Civil Rights Act.

    Conservatives have examined our past, and know where there were errors. Reactionary leftists are a bunch of ahistoric assholes, recreating the universe every 20 seconds, never acknowledging the past, let alone apologizing for it.

    And yet if you check the citations in Jonah Goldberg’s reinvention of the wheel, you’ll see that he’s quoting the very same evil liberal academics he (and you) otherwise claim have never come to terms with their past. It’s a nifty parlor trick, so long as you can find someone blinkered enough to fall for it.

  102. Rob Crawford says:

    royf, that will never happen, things like that require nation to be historically and culturally ready for that type of conversion.

    Sounds remarkably like Marx’s dialectic.

    And, hey, we all know the Japanese weren’t ready for democracy. Or the Filipinos. Or…

  103. happyfeet says:

    oh. Hi SEK I am glad to see you back here! I can’t read all these words though cause I had too much sugar I think. But hi.

  104. happyfeet says:

    Frees speech I love that stuff.

  105. Rob Crawford says:

    One thing you forgot to mention about -the great naivete and unfamiliarity with the world history and realities of different cultures, this features are very common with Americans…..

    It’s no more common in the US than in any other country.

  106. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “Sounds remarkably like Marx’s dialectic.”

    – Yes, well, the Bolsheviks got a raw deal….they had a Utopia going there for a few weeks, and they would have gotten away with it to, if it wasn’t for those pesky Marxists.

    – And yes SEK….those damn Conservative Democrats. But just the same, the spoiled rich white kids in the Left movement had no real effect on the CR legislation, it was the Black CR pioneers that pushed the legislation down the Obstructionist Dems in Congress’s throats. All the Dems, and the Left, managed to do was prolong the process.

    – Just like Viet Nam, the Lefts real influence in both cases is a legend in their own minds.

  107. Rob Crawford says:

    And yet if you check the citations in Jonah Goldberg’s reinvention of the wheel, you’ll see that he’s quoting the very same evil liberal academics he (and you) otherwise claim have never come to terms with their past.

    And if you read his book for understanding, you’d realize that he acknowledges that. It’s just that when the Progressive/Fascist connection is pointed out, it’s either denied or poo-pooed as “old news”. Sometimes both, by the same person.

    In any case, the left truly hasn’t come to grips with its own past. The usual response is to rewrite it — see, for example, Bill Clinton’s statement to the effect that we were all in agreement during the Cold War.

  108. Techie says:

    105: In the Left’s minds eye, “Europe” is a magical place where the citizens/subjects sit around discussing Proust and Mann into the wee hours of the morning. The problem, of course, is that the Germen, French and English bestseller lists belie this image.

    What does the average Pole know of the French or the Swiss? What about the Spanish, do they a deep understanding of The Ukraine? A survey (I always distrust these studies to begin with, but hey) found that 1/5 Britons believed that Winston Churchill was a fictional character.

    (Source: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jkhaMzfJ3JEjQsM7DaUlY1PFEU_g)

  109. N. O'Brain says:

    “One thing you forgot to mention about -the great naivete and unfamiliarity with the world history and realities of different cultures, this features are very common with Americans…..”

    My son didn’t have his passport with him, just that little green active duty military ID they carry.

    6 months onboard the USS Kearsarge, 12 different countries.

    100s of thousands of young Americans just like him, traveling all over the world.

    So take your “American naivete” argument, fold it until it’s all corners, and shove it up your ass.

  110. N. O'Brain says:

    “True claim: Democrats from Southern states opposed the Civil Rights Act.”

    There, fixed it for ya.

  111. Mikey NTH says:

    If you want to effect a great change, you need great power. That change can be done for good or for ill.

    Choose wisely.

  112. urthshu says:

    One thing you forgot to mention about -the great naivete and unfamiliarity with the world history and realities of different cultures, this features are very common with Americans…

    If you’re saying that our intelligence/military services do not tend to include person like TE Lawrence, you have a point. We don’t tend to ‘go native’ easily.

    If you’re saying that Americans by and large do not learn languages and spend a lot of time in other countries- you’re right, but I can point towards many insular europeans who haven’t clue about us and our lives as we live them. In fact, I’d pretty much say your descriptor applies to them in spades, which I say b/c I’ve spent a great deal of time amongst them, in many countries of the EU. But they’d never believe it.

    If you’re saying that present company is blinkered, naive, ignorant of others’ history, etc., then you’re entirely wrong.

  113. SDN says:

    Somebody remind me again why we traded Karl for thor????

    Talk about lack of judgment….

  114. B Moe says:

    …the great naivete and unfamiliarity with the world history and realities of different cultures, this features are very common with Americans…

    Bullshit, the realities of a myriad different cultures is America.

  115. SEK says:

    “True claim: Democrats from Southern states opposed the Civil Rights Act.”

    N. O’Brain in 101, you want me to repeat myself? Sigh.

    Socially conservative Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
    Socially conservative Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

    You know what’s a true but meaningless statement? “One-hundred percent of Southern Republicans in the House — as in all of them, every last one — voted against the Civil Rights Act.”

    You know what isn’t a true statement?

    Yours.

    Seven Southern Democrats in House voted for the Civil Rights Act, whereas none of their Republican counterparts did.

    [T]hose damn Conservative Democrats.

    JHoward specified leftist, so party affiliation doesn’t matter. It is, however, a fine way to confuse the issue. As is this:

    But just the same, the spoiled rich white kids in the Left movement had no real effect on the CR legislation, it was the Black CR pioneers that pushed the legislation down the Obstructionist Dems in Congress’s throats. All the Dems, and the Left, managed to do was prolong the process.

    You know those arguments when people say “class is the real issue here, not race”? To repeat myself, this is an argument in which party affiliation matters less than geography:

    The original House bill was widely supported by the Northern contingent of both parties to the tune of 284-33.

    The original House bill was widely opposed by the Southern contingent of both parties to the tune of 7-97.

    Yes, Democrats ruled the South, but they were social conservatives of a sort who don’t identify with the Democratic Party anymore, which means under the terms JHoward presented, their presence in the party is less relevant than the ideology they espoused.

  116. thor says:

    Comment by Ric Locke on 8/5 @ 4:20 pm #

    What thor, and in a different way sashal, are illustrating for us is the reason Russia will never amount to much, despite having a resource base that makes North America look like a howling desert of pure quartzite sand: the casual, selfish, self-defeating nihilism that says nothing is worth doing because nothing can be done, it’s all beyond anything anyone can do, so let’s just get drunk and forget about it.

    Thor, you said on another thread that you’re an American. Sorry, you aren’t. Oh, I’m sure you’ve got a passport that says UNITED STATES OF AMERICA on it, and you may have ancestors back to Plymouth Rock, but whether from predisposition or your in-laws your attitude is thoroughly Russian.

    I’ll be sure to tell ’em at customs my citizenship was revoked by a r-wing message board sheriff.

    I once had to revoke Karl’s membership to the Republican party (a scar that’ll never heal). I’m sorry Ric, but now I must remove any Tolstoy from your personal library. You have insulted the Land of Poets and now you must pay the price.

  117. N. O'Brain says:

    #Comment by SEK on 8/5 @ 6:39 pm #

    Explain to me again how the Republicans invented segragation, Jim Crow, poll taxes and the KKK?

  118. Mikey NTH says:

    Not your legal citizenship, thor.

    Just your mental citizenship. There were many people who came here from other lands who were American, not matter the circumstances of their birth or its location.

    General Walter Krueger, USA.

    http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/wkrueger.htm

  119. Mikey NTH says:

    thor, only in your mind do have authority over any citizen of the USA.
    You little wanna-be commissar.

  120. N. O'Brain says:

    “There were many people who came here from other lands who were American, not matter the circumstances of their birth or its location.”

    There are many people STILL living in other lands who are Americans.

  121. SEK says:

    Explain to me again how the Republicans invented segragation, Jim Crow, poll taxes and the KKK?

    You’re deliberately muddying the waters. I didn’t claim the Republicans did any such thing. But I’ll turn it around on you: show me how marxists, socialists and leftists invented segregation, Jim Crow, poll taxes and the KKK.

    You can’t, because they didn’t. As I expect you’ll greet my sticking to JHoward’s term with more irrelevance, I’m going to go watch a movie.

  122. cynn says:

    ric: you say the Russians can never proximate the U.S. We both have oligarchs. What’s the diff?

  123. Mikey NTH says:

    They didn’t invent those categories, SEK. They created other enemies, and desired to use all of the power of the state to eradicate them. Marx, as applied, brought all of the power in a society into the direct control of the state, and used that power against all of the party’s enemies: no matter how young, or how old; no matter gender, or circumstance, or ideology, or religious belief. All were enemies of the state and deserved to die because of that,nad the killing was don, with state sanction.

    Katyn Forest wasn’t an accident; it and all other mass graves were the result of all power (totalitarianism) given to the state. And the world has been retching on that for a hundred years.

    Keeping power broken up is the only cure to totalitarianism, and you so do not get that.

  124. Rob Crawford says:

    ric: you say the Russians can never proximate the U.S. We both have oligarchs. What’s the diff?

    Who are the American oligarchs?

  125. Mikey NTH says:

    cynn:

    You so do not understand the USA versus the former USSR.
    Explain Andrew Jackson; explain Abraham Lincoln; explain Henry Ford; explain Bill Gates.

    Explain Dwight Eisenhower and Chester Nimitz.

  126. Mikey NTH says:

    Explain all of the above, and explain General Walter Krueger.

    Scions of Oligarchy?

  127. McGehee says:

    @ #113: It was Jeff’s decision, and one of a very few with which I strongly disagree — but this is his blog.

  128. thor says:

    #

    Comment by SDN on 8/5 @ 6:25 pm #

    Somebody remind me again why we traded Karl for thor????

    Talk about lack of judgment….

    Blame the salary cap.

  129. thor says:

    Comment by cynn on 8/5 @ 7:11 pm #

    ric: you say the Russians can never proximate the U.S. We both have oligarchs. What’s the diff?

    Our oligarchs don’t have as much money. Have you seen the dollar lately?

  130. cynn says:

    I won’t get much into this because you’ll brand it as some kind of trembling leftist conspiracy theory. Basically, an oligarchy is a small group of interests who have somehow controlled the market on a necessary commodity. Be as stupid as you want, but the Russians and others are getting the hang of it. They actually have money.

  131. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Mikey NTH on 8/5 @ 7:20 pm #

    cynn:

    You so do not understand the USA versus the former USSR.
    Explain Andrew Jackson; explain Abraham Lincoln; explain Henry Ford; explain Bill Gates.

    Explain Dwight Eisenhower and Chester Nimitz.

    Explain Sergei Bubka.

  132. cynn says:

    Whatever, thor. I’ll admit I’m not up on the ancient history of economics. And even if I were, I’m not inclined to debate with you. I only know what I see in the current markets. People who blow off Russia are morons. They’re watching Iran like a hawk.

  133. thor says:

    Comment by Mikey NTH on 8/5 @ 7:20 pm #

    cynn:

    You so do not understand the USA versus the former USSR.

    No, Mikey, you do not understand. We people here and they people there, it’s fingers and toes, you got 20 of those, they do too, that’s what counts. The only differences in them and us is what your little hate-filled heart will allow.

    We’re One, and we get to carry each other, brothers, sisters, Love is a temple, Love is the higher law.~Bono!

  134. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “show me how marxists, socialists and leftists invented segregation, Jim Crow, poll taxes and the KKK.”

    – No one said the “Left” did those things, they were done by Southern Democrats. The Left, goaded on by the SDS, Weather underground, Black Panthers, Winter soldiers, and other Marxist groups, just utilized the opportunities from ginned up race and class warfare, playing on emotions and fears. And they still do.

  135. thor says:

    Cynn, they’re reliving the “Fuck Yeahs!” of cold war glory. If Russians and Russia didn’t exist they’d invent a Potemkin Obama Nation where lots of destitute, downtrodden white people were born evil and made evil’r by evil books.

  136. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Tell you what SEK. Lets cut to the fucking chase. You really want to defend the Marxist Left and their dreams of totalitarian rule in America, then lets do it.

    – Tell me what you think SDS and the WU was doing for two weeks in Kent before the “event”. Enlighten us.

  137. Cynn, they’re reliving the “Fuck Yeahs!” of cold war glory.

    Do you even believe that the correct side won the Cold War? There’s plenty in the land that don’t. For safety’s sake, we keep them penned up in university humanities and poli sci departments.

  138. N. O'Brain says:

    “But I’ll turn it around on you: show me how marxists, socialists and leftists invented segregation, Jim Crow, poll taxes and the KKK.”

    The Democrats did it.

    Marxist, socialists and leftists.

    Damn, you’re easy.

  139. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – thor, I’m ignoring your ignorant comments. Your colossall lack of education and experience drips from every comment you make. You wouldn’t know a true Marxist if one bit your fucking nose off. You’ll be perfect material for the party droggs.

  140. Mikey NTH says:

    #133 was full of nonsense, as usual.

    Walter Krueger went from immigrant, to private, and eventually to General in an institution that was not shook up by those in it being executed in a revolution. Omar N. Bradley got five stars, and he came out of where, and when? What back ground was Dwight Eisenhower from? Or Chester Nimitz? Or Harry Truman?

    Thanks for playing.

  141. Mikey NTH says:

    Indulging your rage isn’t really getting you anywhere here, thor.

    Is it?

  142. N. O'Brain says:

    “We people here and they people there, it’s fingers and toes, you got 20 of those, they do too, that’s what counts.”

    Except of course, if those 20 Russian fingers and toes were lost to frostbite in the Gulag.

    So fuck your moral equivelance.

  143. cynn says:

    Thor, slow down; you’re on hyperdrive. Although I like it, because I don’t get the ticket.

  144. Mikey NTH says:

    #139 BBH: All thor knows about Marxists is that his fiancee’s father was real tight with them, and since he is tight with her they can’t all be bad, can they?

  145. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – I’m waiting for SEK to spill the real beans on just exactly how the “oh so caring and beneficent” Left operates with a specific example I was involved in. I want to see how much he really knows.

    – SEK, you’ve got the floor.

  146. The Lost Dog says:

    thor –

    You are apparently quite young and have absolutely no idea where this country is coming from. It must be tough to have been educated by left wing idiots who have no idea what the word “freedom” means. To your left wing profesors, freedom means that they take all of your incentive and money, and give it to crack heads.

    Fuckin’ perfect, baby! I think when you take away all of my money, I am going to be so excited about getting out of bed and busting my ass for lazy MoFo’s who wouldn’t be able to cash their welfare checks if we put them under their workboots!

    I just can’t wait!

  147. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    “Sdferr, yes I think Bush would have go to war no matter what”

    And you’d be wrong. Damn, you’re a fucking idiot, sashal. No better than a far left idiot who “feels” they are right, too. You’re just plain dumb.

  148. cynn says:

    Lost Dog: Yes, my education and experience is muddy as I see my daughter off into high school. It never occurred to me when I was young that I should retain everything I was exposed to for eventual vetting. I was just a distracted kid, and I assume my daughter will be the same. We can only hope for the best in this best of all possible worlds.

  149. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – You slipped up on just one thing TLD. The typical hard core Lefty slacker wouldn’t be caught dead with work boots.

  150. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “We can only hope for the best in this best of all possible worlds.”

    – No cynn. As parents we can do a whole hell of a lot more than just “hope”. Thats the bullshit meme of the typical griefer. You can impart a world of guidance to your children in so many ways they simply could not be listed.

    – But among those things we can teach is a balance of mind and spirit, and instill some basic principles of morality and reasonable caution. Most important, a sense of individuality, but a willingness to be sociable and a team player. as long as their rights are respected, and they respect the rights of others. A strong rejection of “nice people finish last” lie, coupled with a pragmatic understanding that the world doesn’t owe them a living, and theres no such thing as a free lunch.

    – No. You can do much much more than just sit and hope.

  151. thor says:

    I come for the snark. But I stay for the lectures.

    Peace.

  152. cynn says:

    Wow. How much do I owe you?

  153. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – You’re welcome.

  154. thor says:

    More each day, actually. Let me add more paper to my adding machine and tally it.

  155. cynn says:

    Not you, thor. You know, the collective — she who must be obeyed.

  156. cynn says:

    Somebody totally screwed up the rhythm.

  157. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – See cynn. thats how you get to be a thor. But running your mouth when you should be listening. His future will be its own reward, and he’ll have the last laugh he seeks so desperately – on himself.

  158. cynn says:

    … And whom should I be listening to, oh wizened one? You? Just send me your newsletter.

  159. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – If that sort of response to the freely offered words of a man who raised 4 children to be successful parents in their own right will make you feel more assured concerning your daughters welfare and future, then so be it.

  160. cynn says:

    Are you chastising me? Scolding me? So, I challenge you, how should I raise my daughter, apart from fitting her for a chastity belt and binding her feet?

  161. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Chastising you? Scolding you?….I’m at a loss.

    – Is this your customary response to any kindness?

  162. cynn says:

    You all are super-kind, like the no-kill animal shelter. Ugh.

  163. Dread Cthulhu says:

    BBH: “You slipped up on just one thing TLD. The typical hard core Lefty slacker wouldn’t be caught dead with work boots.”

    Surely you jest, BBH — can’t have the whole “working class hero” thing going on without work-boots… now, those boots will never have actually been *worked* in, but you can’t have everything.

  164. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – But to answer your question, any parent that even considered such a horrid idea as a chastity belt should have foregone parenting altogether.

    – Binding feet is a sexual kink of the Japanese. They adore small feet in their women, and they went with the idea that hobbling females would limit their mobility. A cultural act we would find unacceptable, unthinkable. Not sure how that applies to our discussion, unless you’re implying I’m some sort of religious fanatic, which would be ridiculous.

  165. Sdferr says:

    Chinese.

  166. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Oh I know. I used the word “morality”. That must have conjured up any number of nightmarish images. You, of course have no idea what my reasoning is in using the word, but your visceral response is understandable, so we’ll just let it be, but I doubt its what you think.

  167. cynn says:

    Well, I suspect you’re a religious fanatic, but it’s good to know I can go shopping this weekend instead of sexualizing my daughter!

  168. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Both

  169. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – cynn, you have some issues. You know absolutely nothing about me personally, yet you comment as if you’re a long personal friend concerning “what I am”.

    – And then you wonder why the Left is characterized as “list of enemies” keepers. Read you last few posts and it will answer your question.

  170. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – I won’t even respond to #167. That comment is so off the wall you sound unhinged, and I’d rather not think of you that way.

  171. lee says:

    Umm, Hi guys.

    I just got back from a marvelous vacation in a foreign country, so I’m way behind.

    WTF is this about Karl?

  172. Dread Cthulhu says:

    BBH: “- I’m waiting for SEK to spill the real beans on just exactly how the “oh so caring and beneficent” Left operates with a specific example I was involved in. I want to see how much he really knows”

    The problem there, BBH, is that conservatives judge a program or action based upon the results. Liberals judge programs and action based upon their intention. This is why, despite the corrosive impact of welfare on society, particularly upon the African American family, they still see ever increasing social programs as a “good” thing.

    Social Security is a rip-off on multiple levels — it is, as currently organized, a Ponzi scheme — income from current investors is used to pay off prior investors. Congress “borrows” the Social Security surplus in exchange for below-market rate paper. To the actual investor, there is a miniscule return that doesn’t even cover the rate of inflation. And, yet, to the liberal dems, this program is sacrosanct, despite its failures on all fronts, because their intentions were good — the very best. In their stewardship, they have been disengenuous — trying to misrepresent a supplemental savings program — something never meant to be an individuals sole resource for retirement, as being intended as such, hence the “grandparents eating dog-food” trope as the need for making the program more generous. The program has expanded over the decades — rather than address the structural flaws in the program, they simply dragooned new segments of the population into this failed program until there were no more sheep to shear.

    And yet, this Ponzi scheme is one of the crown jewels of the liberal agenda — not because it works particularly well, but because their intentions were good and that it gives them control over another slice of the American pocketbook.

  173. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Karl has chosen to move on. Hes a damn good writer and political analysis guy. Everyone wishes him well.

  174. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Anyone who trusts the Left with an economic program deserves to eat dog food. Its a financial suicide pact, and not even out where you can see it like Fannie and Freddie.

  175. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – And then the perps want to give all of our health care over to the same sort of government run Ponzi scheme. Simply amazing.

  176. lee says:

    Are you kidding BBH, Karl is the bomb!

    But comments #113& 127 have my head spinning…

  177. Slartibartfast says:

    what leads people to think thor has an ounce of brains?

    Objection: strawman.

    Unrelated: I think we ought to grant truths when possible. SEK’s points are truth. You can’t shy away from the truth just because it tends to diminish your point of view just a bit. The fact is, Republicans weren’t blanket enthusiasts of the Civil Rights Act. Neither were Democrats. The discriminating factor appears to be Southern. Oh, and numbers: there just weren’t all that many Soutthern Republicans.

    There were a great number of people who failed to cover themselves with glory in the Civil Rights era. I don’t think it’s a mistake to recognize that.

  178. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “There were a great number of people who failed to cover themselves with glory in the Civil Rights era. I don’t think it’s a mistake to recognize that.”

    – Which, of course, fully explains the Lefts temperate use of the word “racist”, and use of the race card only on very rare and properly applied occasions.

  179. B Moe says:

    what leads people to think thor has an ounce of brains?

    He knows the names of some really important authors.

  180. Dread Cthulhu says:

    Slartibarfast: “I think we ought to grant truths when possible. SEK’s points are truth. You can’t shy away from the truth just because it tends to diminish your point of view just a bit. The fact is, Republicans weren’t blanket enthusiasts of the Civil Rights Act.”

    Objection: Strawman — no one has claimed the Republicans were balck enthusiasts for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, only that Republicans voted for Act at a higher rate than the Democrats.

  181. Slartibartfast says:

    It’s equally true that Northern Democrats were more enthusiastic about the Civil Rights Act than were Northen Republicans.

    That’s a fact. I don’t know what’s next in that line of reasoning; no truue scotsman? It’s not my argument, so I have no idea.

  182. Dread Cthulhu says:

    Slartibartfast: “It’s equally true that Northern Democrats were more enthusiastic about the Civil Rights Act than were Northen Republicans.”

    Comme ci, comme ca — the break-out of North vs. South is inaccurate / awkward — they ignore the border states, such as West Virginia and Maryland as a seperate category. We have the farce of Senator Byrd being listed as a “Northern” Senator, for instance. Typically, the “Southern states” include only those states of the Confederacy, which distorts the issue somewhat.

    Likewise, there were reasons other than race to oppose the bill. For example, the was some Republican opposition to the original version as it contained language allowing the Federal government greater power to regualte private businesses. The devil, as it often is, in the details. Goldwater, for example, saw Title II as an intrusion into personal liberty and an attempt to legislate morality.

    However, the Southern Bloc of the Democratic party made clear that they would “resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states.”

    Now, oddly, the party that casually tosses the word “racist” about is the one that has a Klansman in their midst and fought tooth and claw against integration.

  183. Slartibartfast says:

    Honestly, I don’t think argument of this nature serves much. First, it’s finger-pointing. Secondly, it almost always devolves into discussions of whether Lee Atwater was racist (which is a fucking joke, as far as I’m concerned. I mean, look at who he hung out with) and the like. There’s never anything new in this kind of finger-pointing, and if thor had the perception to see that, he wouldn’t start it in the first place.

    Predictably, though, he doesn’t have that perception. Or chooses not to exercise it. Or, worst of all, does have that perception, and pretends not to.

  184. Pablo says:

    Honestly, I don’t think argument of this nature serves much.

    Agreed. It also doesn’t satisfy the challenge laid out way back in comment #4. “You can, of course, simultaneously ignore my request that you merely produce a paragraph exploring a single valid leftist philosophy.”

    What else ‘ya got, thor?

  185. Slartibartfast says:

    Pa le, I think the supposition that thor’s got a point, ever is completely unsupported.

  186. Pablo says:

    Yeah, I was just hoping he’d tell us again about all the Russian girls he’s fucked with his big thick cock. That story never gets old.

    0!

  187. alppuccino says:

    We killed Karl.

    A very wise man, I can’t remember his name off-hand, but he is very wise and smart, like a genius – said at the outset, that thor is a master parody. And if you look at thor’s body of work, he masterfully illustrates the crazy emotional’s method of destroying everything. He’s given hints in the past. But he must be given credit for being the Robert DeNiro of method parodies. He is totally in character, and when you stop saying “It’s just a movie” It gets to you. When I see thor, I see Borat.

    Of course Karl is not a racist. That’s ridiculous. But Borat’s free-form jazz-odyssey of parody went down that road and he had to keep going.

    Best wishes to Karl.

  188. Rob Crawford says:

    I won’t get much into this because you’ll brand it as some kind of trembling leftist conspiracy theory. Basically, an oligarchy is a small group of interests who have somehow controlled the market on a necessary commodity.

    Well, that’s not an accurate definition of oligarchy, but let that slide… Again, who are the oligarchs, cynn?

    If you’re not willing to defend your assertion, then it must be because you realize it’s crap.

  189. Rusty the blog nazi says:

    #163
    That would be Timberlands or Danners without the steel toes. Steel toe hurt your feet, especially in winter. Real working class have CAT or Walmart specials.Worn until the steel toe shows through.If your in the upper eschelon of fabricators you maybe got Wolverines. I got me a pair of those, but I don’t use em. Nice compfy worn Rockports for me.

  190. JHoward says:

    Hi kids. Since I was under the car all day yesterday — it not being a Lada and yes, I paid for lunch — I missed all this stuff. Hi ‘feets, SEK. Piss off, thor.

    But a couple observations:

    (Love Ric’s story about alcohol injection, BTW. We may try what they call wet compression because apparently a fine mist of mere water, injected pre-turbo, reduces intake charge temps enough to make intercooling far simpler and more compact and softens the combustion such that you can add fuel and air beyond what you normally could. They’re making 1400hp from 2L production motors in the aftermarket these days, although I’d be quite pleased with, and nervous about, 400. Fun stuff.)

    So, SEK lost my respect during the great moral equivalency experiment, the one that dealt with bad stuff somehow equaling talking about bad stuff. thor…well, thor and respect don’t appear in the same sentence — it’s like trying to ask for and purchase nine ounces of bitter aftertaste. In both cases intellectual dishonesty factor, although SEK does better here in this thread, at least in terms of maybe trying to follow what’s actually going on.

    Except neither have bothered to itemize that pesky baseline leftist philosophy, and a bunch of you horrid rightists have made quite passable pulls at that same handle.

    My view of things suggests that the great majority of statist meddling these days is left-leaning regardless of regime (and I’d include, say, the Pelosi Congress as something that could be loosely defined as a “regime-by-effect”. A regime because since SEK is such a stickler about precise meaning, regime is by definition quite neutral but has great overtones of manipulation, oppression, and the loss of personal freedom. That’s a digression and yes, history describes rightist regimes and nasty consequences. But malignant rightism should respond favorably to the pressure of noble leftist theory. To leftist philosophy.)

    In practice, however, if something lies fundamentally in the private sector and was then absorbed into government it’s generally not considered classically liberal. Then it’s considered a leftist program. It’s not classically liberal to absorb, subvert, dominate, warp, or ruin a formerly functional status (especially including just by claiming it wasn’t and then to enlist hordes of stupid dependents, called voters) and with that status, its former successes. Controlling the shit out of it and watching it become another in an enormous list of things sent down the path to becoming a Kafkaesque unintended consequence isn’t good. It violates the philosophy.

    For this reason one could fence-sit about the world’s MLK’s. Tons of street cred bordering, by now, on a mystical, a projected, politically-correct holiness, but way too much call on government to institute whatever legitimate, personal morality that may yet lie there. A great idea and one that underscores a fundamental tenent of fundamental leftism should empower either of our resident leftists to expound upon it as a philosophy. But sadly, crickets — the insecurity, it nearly hangs in the air. Perhaps they, like me and like you, see the short circuit immediately created by “statifying” all great ideas.

    When collective and central power absorbs something else, whether conventional wisdom or action, maybe we’re all asking by what authority shall it do so? I think that question should be the first thing that comes to mind.

    Name any major social program and you find an entire industry sprung up, an industry straddling the private/public sector and thus behaving not at all like a private industry, instead converting profit, user-satisfaction, and freedom of choice into a sordid mess of their polar opposites. Perhaps as with civil rights, even the most ardent supporters at least subconsciously realize the taint of collective power brought to bear on the former freedom of what had been a noble ideal.

    Pursuant al that, if leftism has a philosophy, apparently neither SEK nor that sorry thor can so much as utter its name. And more importantly, neither can find the apparent headspace to make a run at defending that which cannot be spoken either, such as it may forever be hidden from view because it’s elite and needs lots of preparatory parsing among the unwashed. This, goes the unspoken assumption, makes great sense: It’s some really cool stuff because nobody can get a handle on it. But if you snag a few titles off Amazon… You get the picture.

    Maybe somebody needs to lead by example. For example: The philosophy of classical liberalism leans heavily on personal freedom, such freedom being likely the underlying condition most capable of delivering self-satisfaction, self-reliance, free social order, progress, a high standard of living, and happiness the world has ever seen. In fact, one could reasonably think that freedom enables the very finest pursuits of man, God’s creation.

    And like that. Whether or not you agree — I added some personal stuff — is irrelevant. That I could make the statement, claim the underlying philosophy — the simple philosophy of freedom that finds traction in literally every space, place, mind, and action you could care to list — gives classical liberalism, at least, a tangible character and a functional grasp. It’s a philosophy. It even appears to support and be supported by what action follows understanding and using it.

    Leftism? Perhaps not so much so. Because if a seriously pissed off, bent, and incoherent America-hater and a word-parsing scholar with a lousy take on bigger pictures can’t be bothered to do anything but squawk and mince words about it, I’m afraid the side, such as it may effing be, has not yet produced a single syllable with which to fundamentally and principally recommend itself.

    If you need me, which you will not, for the next half dozen hours I’ll be buttoning up and installing the new motor. One enjoys the feeling of accomplishment of simple tasks. I’m much to old for it, but being able to yet do it makes me feel young again. Thanks for the space, Dan.

  191. thor says:

    I’m not a Leftist, Liberal, Secular Progressive, social Deconstructivist etc.., so why should I answer for them, you right-wingerist, conservatist, 1000-points of jackassedness, and all around dumb name-calling fool?

  192. Dan Collins says:

    That’s more like it.

  193. JHoward says:

    Well, I did write that on 3 hours sleep, Dan. I’ll reread thor again.

    But I really object to that 1000-points thingie.

  194. Sdferr says:

    No. You’re not. On your say so. We got it. So what? BFD. And for the rest? Name calling. Oh, that’s so useful. Thanks. Another mindless round of reciprocation. Jolly.

  195. Dan Collins says:

    Naw, you did great, JH. It’s just that I want the insults, when they come, at least to be inventive.

  196. […] PROTEIN WISDOM on “Freedom of Accredited Speech” …. […]

  197. SEK says:

    They didn’t invent those categories, SEK. They created other enemies

    In other words, you’re not going to address what I said, you’re going to be irrelevant. Tell you what: How about we talk about the Apollo missions? Why not? Or birthday cakes? Penguins? Toothpaste? Intel? Cups? What are the rules for irrelevance?

    No one said the “Left” did those things, they were done by Southern Democrats.

    BBH, you’re missing the point: JHoward spoke of “leftists,” thor replied “the Civil Rights Movement,” people rebutted by claiming the Democrats opposed it. I was correcting a category error, not perpetuating one.

    The Left, goaded on by the SDS, Weather underground, Black Panthers, Winter soldiers, and other Marxist groups, just utilized the opportunities from ginned up race and class warfare, playing on emotions and fears.

    You’re being sloppy: liberals, i.e. left-leaning centrists, were influenced by the New Left, the banner under which the groups you list (with the exception of the Black Panthers) fall. The New Left isn’t coterminous with the Left, leftism, or (surprise!) the Old Left.

    Tell me what you think SDS and the WU was doing for two weeks in Kent before the “event”.

    The SDS? Protesting ties between the university, corporate America, and the military industrial complex? (As per their pamphlet.) Splintering along the same lines as the national
    organization?

    Wait, I forgot, this is completely beside the point. You’re talking about actions, JHoward asked about a philosophy. If you’d like to argue that certain philosophies necessarily give rise to certain actions, the burden of proof’s on you, and I’m going to demand you be specific. None of this “Stalin killed millions because he was a communist, a socialist, and a marxist!” Those are three distinct philosophies with distinct histories, so I’ll need you to be specific.

    I’m waiting for SEK to spill the real beans on just exactly how the “oh so caring and beneficent” Left operates with a specific example I was involved in.

    Let me guess, because you’re going to universalize your experience and use it to denounce all leftists and leftist ideologies in the history of ever? You’re welcome to do that, but I’ll counter with my experience in Baton Rouge when David Duke was running for governor, and conclude that all conservatives and conservative ideologies are necessary mendacious and racist. And then where will we be?

    The Democrats did it.

    Marxist, socialists and leftists.

    N. O’Brain, you really need a history lesson. I’d recommend a reading list, but I’m not the optimist I once was.

    Big ups to happy and Slartibartfast for being their usual, reasonable selves.

    JHoward:

    SEK lost my respect during the great moral equivalency experiment, the one that dealt with bad stuff somehow equaling talking about bad stuff.

    Yes, that’s exactly what I argued. Five years down the line, I’m going to have said that it’s worse to attack racists than to be a racist, and boy howdy, will I have been an idiot then.

    Except neither have bothered to itemize that pesky baseline leftist philosophy[.]

    For one, I’m on vacation, about to board a plane, and can’t quite summarize the history of the left for you. For another, if you want to be accurate, you’ll have to dispense with mythical origins — the baseline of the leftist philosophy — because there’s no such thing. (People here have a problem differentiating Marxism, communism, and socialism. I tremble to think what’d happen if I tried to discuss 19th Century populism, Christian socialism, or any of the non-bogeyman varieties of leftist thought.) There are influences and beliefs, but those change over time, so if you want to discuss them honestly, you’ll have to limit them to a particular period. (But then no one can yell “STALIN!” if I discuss socialized medicine.) In other words, when you talk about the core principles of your liberalism, you’re being very specific about what tenets you’ve adopted. And have probably blurred the line between liberalism, a political philosophy, and capitalism, an economic mode. So maybe when I’m home and settled, we can talk about how empty a statement this is:

    The philosophy of classical liberalism leans heavily on personal freedom, such freedom being likely the underlying condition most capable of delivering self-satisfaction, self-reliance, free social order, progress, a high standard of living, and happiness the world has ever seen.

    Because, you know, “personal freedom” has some inherent meaning, i.e. you aren’t free to murder someone who pisses you off, but you can take them to small claims court, but a small claims court is a municipal institution which could abridge “personal freedom,” however defined, &c.

  198. David Harr says:

    I know I should really weigh in about how all Republicans are Fascists and all Democrats are Communists, we are all racist except Baracky and he wants to steal all our oil. However, being basically a geek, my concern is with a statement in the original article (or a quote, anyway).

    ]The truly outrageous aspect of such comparisons is that the American left, with its Stalin-redux willingness to rearrange history, neglects to mention that, outside of Japan, all of the 20th century’s great totalitarian regimes had roots on the political left.

    The only problem with this statement is that Japan was never a totalitarian regime. Even in the midst of World War II, they had a functioning constitutional democracy. True, there was only party and true, it was heavily influenced by the military, but within that party there were sharp political differences at least as great as those between the Republicans and the Democrats today. The actual reach of the government was pretty sharply circumscribed by the power of the Emperor’s representatives, but it was not a totalitarian state, it was a democracy. Not a great democracy, but a democracy. So, I guess that statement should be revised to say

    The truly outrageous aspect of such comparisons is that the American left, with its Stalin-redux willingness to rearrange history, neglects to mention that, all of the 20th century’s great totalitarian regimes had roots on the political left.

    David

  199. David Harr says:

    Nice. I love it when an italics close tag gets lost in the noise of the post.

    David

  200. Rusty the blog nazi says:

    Howard. If you’re not busy this weekend I have a caliper and two lower ball joints to replace.

    Water injection into the supercharger was routine in WW2 fighter aircraft.

  201. JHoward says:

    Thor couldn’t be bothered either, Scotty. Point taken.

  202. JHoward says:

    Where you at, Rusty?

  203. Slartibartfast says:

    Ball joints? Piece of cake. All you need’s a pickle fork and a BIG fucking hammer. Calipers…well, you either have to replace the whole thing, which is easy except you need someone to bleed the freaking brake lines for you, and my wife never seems to have the time.

    So, wsome of that is work better suited for two. Even when not, you’ve got to have someone sober enough to run out for more beer.

    Beer iis the answer, if anyone’s asking.

  204. Rusty says:

    In the Fox Valley about 45 miles from Chicago. The caliper will get done this weekend. The ball joints the next. I can sometimes persuade my teenage daughter to help me.

Comments are closed.