For those of you who missed it earlier today, the Democrats succeeded in turning Crawford, TX, into some sort of sad, surreal, televised minstrel show. Really—I’m surprised the DNC didn’t dress Jim Rassmann in blackface, or strap a tap shoe to each of Max Cleland’s stumps. That’s how embarrassingly crass the whole pathetic spectacle was.
I hope somebody passed around a hat. ‘Cause if you’re going to trade your dignity for a lump of faux-outrage, you should at least get bus fare out of it.
***
update: Allah has more
“Cleland lost his own 2002 bid in Georgia for re-election to the U.S. Senate after a bitter campaign in which Republicans questioned his patriotism. Cleland lost both his legs and one arm while serving in Vietnam. (Additional reporting by Adam Entous.)”
I think I’ve figured it out. “Republicans questioned his patriotism” is how the Democrats describe self-inflicted wounds.
Old media is good for 15 percentage points in Kerry’s favor. Hopefully he’ll lose anyway.
How anybody paying attention can vote for this guy is beyond me. In fact, the entire DNC machine has devolved into one giant ends-justify-the-means circlejerk, with lies and rationalizations for those lies all that’s keeping it going.
Agreed, Jeff. The DNC spectacle truly breathtaking. My jaw hits the floor every day over shit like this.
However, I no longer think this election will even be close. Kerry’s killing himself here.
W takes 40 states.
Hey…where’s Esteban?
What I found amazing was the way Reuters matter-of-factly repeats the bald faced lie-“Republicans questioned his patriotism”. Normally the not-biased-at-all news agencies simply feature the accusation prominantly without any context or rebuttal. Reuters goes them one better and takes a completely unsubstantiated accusation and treats it as fact. Oh well, it is the “news” agency, I guess.
”Alleged” news agency, Bill.
Reuters tagline – “Cleland lost both his legs and one arm while serving in Vietnam”
Because, like a dumbass, he picked up a live grenade lying on the ground, when about to enjoy some recreation with friends.
Purple hearts are strictly Forbidden for that kind of injury, and yet they let on like Cleland gave up his limbs for his country.
Which puts me in mind of a little verse.
John F. Kerry went to town
riding on boloney
Got some magic in his pants
and called it
macaroniRice-a-Roni, the san-francisco treatThough I once laughed at the sense of humor of this blog, it has now become obvious to me that it is the site for GED wannabes. I highly recommend that every one reading this reenroll in 5th grade and make every effort to fill in the blanks. Your higher order thinking skills may never recover from the brain damage already incurred, but at the very least, you may be required to read something more than nursery rhymes, nefarious insults and sleazy, no, make that despicable, innuendos, about the service of a veteran who showed up, fought and came home minus three limbs.
I’ll check back one last time to see the replies, that is, after I go outside and watch the cow jump over the moon.
SarahW
Maybe I am too much a gentleman, but much as I detest the actions of Cleland over the last 2 years I don’t think that he deserves the tone of that post.
Yes, he has been a jerk, yes he has exploited the fact that he lost limbs while not mentioning how the injury happened, but any man who gets an arm and two legs blown off while serving in the military (even if it was due to foolishness, although I would say ‘bad luck’
deserves to be refuted on his speaking points and then politely ignored. I think your post drifts off towards the ‘feverishness’ from Dems that makes my skin crawl.
We have to set an example, not descend to their level.
What “nefarious insults” are you speaking of, 2muddy? Cleland was sent to Crawford to preen and chest thump at a staged, media-friendly photo-op. In short, he was used (albeit willingly) by his DNC handlers. And he was used precisely because of his service and the injuries he suffered during that service.
Sorry if you think my analysis of the Crawford letter stunt smacks of kickball and spelling bees, but that’s the way I saw it.
Nothing I wrote speaks at all to Cleland’s actual service. I’m just offended by the way he’s using it as a political cudgel—just as I’m offended by way John Kerry wields his service record, as if it were a magic wand capable of shielding him from scrutiny.
I apologise for offending. I am not “refuting Cleland”, however. It’s Reuters I had the beef with.
I should probably refrain from using Fark tags with regard to Cleland’s grenade incident.
That he went on to make a decent life for himself despite devastating injury says something good about him.
He did not, however, lose those limbs as a result of his service in defence of the country, and he did not receive, nor could he have qualified for a purple heart.
It is dishonest for Reuters to leave the impression he was wounded in combat.
Wish I could edit – wounded in combat or wounded as a direct result of actions defending the country.
Max Cleland is an honorable man who’s allowed himself to be ridden like a show pony here. Brett mentions that he’s lost limbs without being specific about how it happened, and that’s not quite true.
Mr. Cleland has never claimed it was anything other than an accident. Sadly, his name has been used by other Democrats (Grandma Barb Mikulski, among many others) specifically as a Purple Heart awardee, and he has never been seen to correct them. If he did, they wouldn’t have any further use for him.
And for such an honorable guy, however unfortunate, who returned from his misfortune and made a real name and life for himself, that’s the shame of it all. I’d expect he’ll never live this silly-ass stunt down, because they’ve used him like a $0.50 whore, and he knows it.
SarahW
Yes, well, al-Reuters can lead one to irrational hatred of just about anything. Thanks for being a true lady about the clarification. And I agree. They and the Democratic party have been less than honest and upfront about potentially damaging or diminishing facts.
What is most sad is that Cleland will be tossed aside in November without so much as a cup of coffee for jumping into bed with McAuliffe et al.
I must admit to having argued with Dems about the draft before showing up here. (they were ‘too subtle for [me]’ A direct quote aimed at one of my posts.) and you, Sarah, have proven yet again why I prefer being a part of the VRWC rather than drink the Kool-Aid.
I will go ahead and call a spade a spade. Cleland was appointed by Bush to a gravy train post making $136k and he has the audacity to pull this stunt? That makes him a classless, low-down bag of piggy shit.
Jeff,
I took the time to reflect on the kickball, dodgeball games and the mandatory anti-bullying sessions that were part of my early school days.
I remembered who it was that used to fire the ball at the kid with the pocket protector, wire rim glasses and payless gym shoes. I most especially remember the kid who laughed and taunted the girl on the crutches who had CP and had to sit on the sidelines while the rest of the class ran up and booted the ball about the field. I then remember that kid who sat silently, smirking in the positive social behavior sessions, and when called out by a brave few in the class to explain his actions, he flatly denied that a) he did it; b) the kids grievously harmed were actually harmed at all. Later, he marched around on the playground denouncing those who had called him to recognize his own disabilities. Finally, I remember what the girl with the braces and bad acne shouted at him as they lined up to go in from recess. She yelled, “Loser!”
Staking out some high ground in the blog war against the Dems, by picking on a man such as Max Cleland, who has been sent out, whether pawn like or not, to the forefront of a debate over service, valor, credibility seems to me to be quite a bit like the kid who blasted and bulleyed his way around the elementary school.
Oh ya, and regarding… my previous comment about nefarious insults and despicable innuendos, nursery rhymes and higher order thinking skills… it was really directed towards the commentors of this blog and not necessarily just at you. I guess that i should recognize that protein wisdom is a version of the old def comedy jam where insults and baseless humor is the point rather than some engaging discourse on the merits of our candidates and the direction of our troubled nation. I’ll tune in occassionally to see how your talents mature. It is what we as teachers do when we see talent misdirected at an early age. We look to see how time and experience weaves into the fabric of strong intellect.
You know, there’s wild places all over the world decorated with the skeletons of intellectuals. Africa, the Amazon basin, Newark…
The quality of intelligence it takes to analyze Cleland’s contribution to this debate, and the motives that drove yesterday’s little production, rises no higher than what is needed to pour water out of a boot.
I think the real insult to the intelligence of observers is the Kerry campaign’s attempt to sell the junior senator from Massachussets as a war leader based on a handful of carefully parsed experiences thirty years in the past. It’s immaterial whether the account is even honest; where’s the microscopic evaluation of the public activism and public service since then? It seems to me that professional journalists would be more interested in exploring the voting record of Ted Kennedy’s page than holding a spear in his chorus…if they were serious about contributing to the public debate toward selecting a viable president. The act of attempting to dictate what is or is not suitable for the electorate to consider when examining a candidate showed that the political culture behind Kerry, with the willing collusion of the media shill corps, was arrogance on a level normally seen only in badly-produced movies about the last days of the french aristocracy. We’ll pass on the cake, thanks. Now, senator, just why did you vote against every major weapons system we now take for granted? And just how would pulling six billion dollars from our intelligence budget after 9/11 improve our ability to counter threats? And for our readers, are you FOR or AGAINST the current war in Iraq today?
The reaction of the campaign to the Swifts’ testimony and the few-and-far-between mentions of Kerry’s senate record has had all the weighty impact of a socialite diva throwing her purse on the floor and stamping her feet after being told her favorite table was not available. Americans do like a winner, yes, and we have a tendency to make folk heroes out of rogues, but whiners seldom even place in races where the stakes are so high.
As the letter said, you can’t have it both ways.
If this post is marked up for grade, please remember to use purple ink. Remember, self esteem trumps all in this progressive age…
Except that it doesn’t, and that’s why Kerry and the mob he is attempting to herd must not be allowed access to power. It’s not the end of history.
2muddy seems to have an inside perspective on the school yard bully who ultimately was called “loser”. I assume it was him…
As far as “GED wannabees” that comment on this blog, blow it out your ass, nyah nyah nyah… I’m guessing any one of us who regularly comments on this blog would be happy to shred your argument in half the word count of your pompous diatribe.
Not that I know what “diatribe” means.
2muddy, I’m glad you’re so in touch with your inner child, and have so many schoolyard memories to reinforce your moral compass. It truly speaks to how your talents have matured. Your gentle and non-judgemental guidance is truly inspiring, a splendid example for we pitiful, maturing teachers to follow.
I would point out to you, however, that the only appropriate response to the nonsense coming from the Kerry campaign these days are the “insults and baseless humor” you so snidely denigrate. Or do you really think Cleland’s photo-op should be taken as serious political discourse ? Do you really think injuries sustained in service to his country insulates this man forever from any criticism ?
One commentor in this post made some slightly out of line comments, for which she has apologized. You somehow see this as confirmation of your moral authority over the rest of us lowly commentors, based on your grade school experiences. Please, spare us any further inept schoolyard analogies.
But please do check in from time to time. I am looking forward to what you will teach us next, since we can always use another pompous ass to raise our awareness levels.
Wow! 2muddy’s got a stereotype for everyone in grade school. Funny how it’s only adults who see stereotypes. Kids pick on each other for reasons that are obvious, not so obvious, or no reason at all. How do you think we climbed out of the cave? How do people learn to excel? How do people mature? By doing and learning and competing, and making mistakes along the way. It is a strange utopian concept to think we are making our society better by preventing children from acting on their instincts, both good and bad, and then assume they’ve learned a lesson.
Mandatory anti-bullying sessions? No wonder you’re hyper-sensitive as to adults questioning another adult’s motivation, by questioning the judgment, or the lack thereof, of Cleland’s. If you’re concerned that Cleland’s being “called” (or bullied, in your usage) on his unfortunate disability, it’s because he’s being used as a sympathetic prop by Kerry in order to deflect scrutiny of Kerry’s record.
As a former Senator, Cleland is expected to present logical arguments. If he doesn’t respect the rest of us enough to understand that we’ll see through his proposition, then his argument will be ridiculed–because his argument consisted of his disability.
There’s a reason FDR did not want to be photographed in his wheelchair, and why he stood when giving public speeches. He wanted to be respected for the strength of his leadership, and not pitied for his disability.
Also, I think you gave away your politics with the “troubled nation” comment. Maybe it’s just a half empty/half full dichotomy, but I’d say, pick any year from any prior decade, and tell us why it was less “troubled” then.
2muddy—
Do whatever you’d like. Long lectures told in extended metaphor bore me. I’m beyond rehashing the same old talking points. And I’m beyond trying dry, reasonable discourse to convince people that John Kerry is a dandified fraud, or that Robert Byrd is a racist, or that Ted Kennedy is a pampered hypocrite, or that Michael Moore is vile propagandist. You can find all that stuff in my archives. These days, I use humor and satire. If it’s not to your taste, fine. Go read Stephen Den Beste.
The fact is, Cleland participated in the event my post described. I didn’t “pick on him” any more than I picked on Jim Rassmann. Both are grown man responsible for their actions. And I called them each out for their actions.
A better question to ask, while we’re educating each other and wondering how time and experience will weave into the fabric of our separate strong intellects, is this: why do you presume Cleland needs your protection in defense of his actions?
He’s an adult and a politically active public figure, isn’t he? Is there some reason I shouldn’t treat him as such, and hold him responsible for being used like a trained monkey?
C’mon, admit it. You love that I took Cleland to task. Because that gives you the opportunity to play save the cripple—y’know, assert your moral superiority, then follow it up with a Oprah-like parable about schoolyard bullies.
Well, I’ll let readers decide who is showing Cleland more respect—me, by treating him like any other boneheaded politico; or you, by suggesting that Cleland’s lost limbs mean I should treat him like he rides the special bus to school.
“Diatribe” A bitter, abusive denunciation.
or [Latin diatriba, learned discourse, from Greek diatrib, pastime, lecture, from diatrbein, to consume, wear away  : dia-, intensive pref.; see dia- + trbein, to rub; see ter-1 in Indo-European Roots.]
“Pompous” “Pompous in high presumption.’’ –Chaucer.
or “pseudo-scientific gobbledygook and pontifical hooey”- Newsweek
As for “Ass”, I go back to my inner child and reply
sticks and stones….
Finally, I did read the apology and commend it. And must offer my own…
Sorry for the “GED wannabe” comment. This blog is obviously read and responded to by serious and thoughtful, moreover, highly educated people. I will therefore reduce my word count, refrain from analogy, and keep my dictionary handy.
Kudos, to the blogosphere, protein wisdom and all who entertain the possibility that we are able to be swayed by the written word and humored by it as well.
Excuse me for a while. Barney is coming on the tely.
Max Cleland made his wheel chair and now he has to sit in it.
Just being in the military doesn’t make you a hero (especially in the draft era). There was absolutely nothing dishonorable about being horribly wounded in the way Max Cleland was, but they don’t make him a hero.
The fact that he has allowed himself to be used as a tool by a “Real Bad Guy ™” is dishonorable. It’s just like when Sarah Brady rolls out poor Jim. How low is it to “use” these people for evil ends.
Being a wounded GI doesn’t automatically give you a “Get Out of Being Called a Jackass” card.
I didn’t know Timmy had served in Congress.
I think the GOP should demand that Kerry demands that moveon.org stops the obvious coordinated smear campagin against GW. Furthermore, I think a jewish orphan who lost their parents to the holocost should be helecoptered to Kerry’s Idaho mansion and deliver a letter asking Kerry to put a stop to the hate driven Nazi propoganda perpetuated by moveon.org.
Or we could let the 427 stand on its own merit and trust voters to come to their own conclusions.
We agree that “dry, reasoned discourse” doesn’t sway people or convince them anymore, if in fact it ever did. Must it follow then that quick hitters filled with satire and venom are much more likely to get to the masses. And that is why the story of Max Cleland is so gravitational. We have an electoral system that weighs the opinion of the “GED wannabes”, the college educated, and the Nascar set equally. If the pendulum of polled opinions is as important as we are told it is, then it must be that the “ends justify the means.”
However, I opine that it is precisely the debate over the “ends” and “means” that matter most. Senator Kerry has no higher ground to stand on than President Bush in this regard. How can we blow away the fog of politics?
With your permission, I will continue to read protein wisdom because I really do enjoy satire. And admittedly, I am captive to your “you need me on that wall” rationale. Besides, and c’mon, you love that I have come to read your blog and comment. I may be one of the few that you have a chance to sway.
Stay, go, bring a picnic basket and some knitting and just enjoy the smells…your call.
To answer your question, though—no, it doesn’t follow that “quick hitters filled with satire and venom are much more likely to get to the masses.” But then, I don’t pretend to be proselytizing.
The way I see it, folks have had 4 years to grade Bush’s performance, and they’ve had plenty of time by now to scrutinize Kerry’s character and record.
Personally, I’m astounded that so many people continue to take the new old Democrats seriously. In fact, not only am I astonished, I’m horrified.
That’s the point I try to get across here.
On less necessarily partisan issues than elections, however, I’m certainly willing and able to discourse on a level more appropriate to serious debate. But as I’ve already mentioned, my days of trying to reason with people who spew the kind of hatred I’ve seen leveled at George Bush these past several years are way behind me.
In 2muddy’s defense, the little poem stunk up the joint; Rice-a-roni has always struck me as inherently funny, but my multi-degreed husband assures me it is not. Also, “boloney” is spelled with an “a”.
Brett, appreciate your graciousness.
FWIW, I would always take out super-hot, super athlete Lisa H. and fire-ball thrower Jamie W. with skid-balls to the ankles. ‘Cause they threw the stingers, and once they were out, victory was assured. It’s called “stragery.”
“strategery.” ::sigh::
Jesus, Cleland’s stunt is TOO Gothic…
Re: Dodgeball…
I’d take out the weakest, slowest, most frighteningly uncoordinated participants first. It’s called “thinning the herd.”
Which had the added bonus of frightening some of the better players to death, and clearing a lane to catch the ball.
Also strategery.
Re Re Dodgeball:
Teaching that winning means working. Teaching that losing once has no effect on winning tomorrow (at least in the game arena). A delivery system for the thrill of success/agony of defeat that imparts an urge to scucceed rather than to fail.
I LOVE being politically incorrect. And yes, I did leave my shattered glasses on the gym floor TWICE. Win some, lose some. What morons we let mold our children; those who teach that any risk is unacceptable teach failure.
Yup. I got an archives full of that very same sentiment, tmjutah.
And a stack of Christina Hoff Sommers books, to boot.
Dodgeball and tag aren’t allowed at recess
In your face Goldstein! Everybody wins! No emotional trauma!
At the parochial school I attended as a child, we played football on an asphalt playground – totally against the rules. When we were caught (a frequent occurrence), we would get a ruler across the knuckles (in addition to our skinned knees) to teach us not to do it again. “Getting away with it” became part of the fun.
These bureaucrats are creating a generation of pussies, with plenty of self-esteem but no reason for it.
crap, dario. I knew folks here had let the real boogyman of too muddy’s story get away: the thought police and their “positive social behavior sessions.” scramble the kids to the fallout shelter of charter, private and home schools everywhere!
Ah, I have wonderful seared memories of playing this… “dodging ball”, you called it? Yes, we played dodging ball quite a bit at my Swiss boarding school; it was there that I discovered that kids in wheelchairs made good shields.
I do believe that if the real John Kerry (is that an oxymoron?) made that statement, I would vote for him.
Holy Christ that was funny. Thank god I wasn’t drinking anything at the time.
ZZZZZ….sorry, I dozed off on 2muddy’s holier than thee schtick. Did I miss anything cool?
Nothing like smug, long-winded, ever-so-righteous condescention to OD me fast. Not suprised to learn 2muddy’s profession: teacher.
Hey, you’re not really Al Gore are you?
Sorry to bore you kelly. The dodgeball game was good. You missed it when Jeff and friends knocked the kid with the glasses and payless gym shoes off of his feet. I just heard them on the playground though. There over there laughing about how the boogers and blood came out of the kid’s nose.
Oh ya, because you can read this, you should probably be a little less judgemental on the teacher profession.
Back to Sesame Street. Big Bird is helping a little Chinese American girl off of the ground. ::Sigh::
Kelly, nope you still haven’t missed anything.
2muddy —
You can’t win the game otherwise.
If you’re listening, kid with the glasses and Payless shoes, here’s some friendly advice: learn to catch the ball, or learn to get out of the way. Or, y’know—sit the next game out.
Oh. And wipe your nose. You’ll find the other kids won’t laugh at you quite so much if you mix in a Kleenex from time to time.
…Now, what any of this has to do with somebody who made it all the way to the US Senate is anybody’s guess. Who knows, maybe 2muddy is the champion of the non-oppressed, too.
Come on, now. What do you judge a human being by, their physical aspects or their words and deeds? Is this really a dodgeball game, where physicality matters, or is it a debate of issues, where the mind counts most? It’s clearly the latter; Cleland’s missing limbs don’t affect his capacity to reason, to form opinions, and to defend those opinions should he make a jackass out of himself and be taken to task. To “let the poor crippled guy say whatever he wants to… after all, it’s his only joy in life” is disgustingly condescending, isn’t it? If Jeff decked Cleland and kicked him while he tried to get up with only one limb to help, that would be bullying, and comparable with the CF sufferer on the dodgeball court analogy. Pointing out that the behavior he and others displayed was pretty crass is hardly the same thing.
Sorry about that last post. Sorry Kelly. Sorry Jeff and friends. I just wanted to try out an ad hominem argument with a tongue in cheek twist. It didn’t work, and it didn’t make me feel any better. And now I probably won’t be able to convince you of anything, especially like the merits of the teaching profession or affordable health care, or sound national security policy.
The moral of the story…. It is probably almost a sure thing that whoever wins the election, the same will be true. This is a troubled nation.
To complete my day of analogies…. I think I’ll take my dodgeball and go home. I don’t like this game anymore.
No need to convince me of the merits of the teaching profession, 2muddy. I’ve been teaching at a private university for 8 years.
Thanks Jeff. I would take your class for sure. This was a great learning experience for me. It made me think about whether or not I should spend any time reading, discerning, at all, the merits of the service, valor, credibility issue. It is a very derisive one, at that.
This was my first time actually getting involved in a posting commentary on any blog site. The socratic dialogue format has great potential. Again thanks for the responses. And for pointing me to Christina Hoff Sommers to gain another perspective on the nature of this ad hominem debate. I have taught inner city middle school for 16 years, kids with issues of life and death presenting themselves on the way home. I am truly shaped by that experience and believe there is a critical need to teach some manner of conflict resolution. The “we” / “they”, “dog eat dog”, “fittest survive” reasoning is pretty hard to accept under such circumstances.
I guess that let’s the cat out of the bag. I am not Al Gore, but that did make me laugh.
Good luck to all of us come November 3rd.
“<i>The “we†/ “theyâ€Â, “dog eat dogâ€Â, “fittest survive†reasoning is pretty hard to accept under such circumstances.” <i>
Too bad that’s exactly how the world is wired, isn’t it?
Back when Americans started to govern themselves they worked very hard to establish a set of ground rules logical and robust enough to establish a functional society yet protect the people from the rise of tyranny that had been the result of all previous experiments in democracy.
They recognised that freedom without limits was an oxymoron. So they defined the simplest set of inviolable rules they could (careful to make the individual citizen the direct beneficiary) and then bet on the prinicipled participation of citizens, aided by statute checks and balances, to regulate the functions of society.
Some of the founders walked away from the constituitonal convention convinced they had participated in a fool’s errand. Who was it…Jefforson?…who thought that a revolution every twenty years might be necessary to knock back the tyranny of the state?
We are still here. We lead the world. Even in a dog-eat-dog-the winner-gets-the-spoils world, we still have people from every continent, culture, race, and religion literally dying to get here.
I don’t pretend to know if we are merely lucky, somehow better, or possibly God’s annointed. What custom and rules underlies our mundane daily lives works, and works very, very well. The key has been, and ALWAYS been, that men free to pursue their happiness while allowing their peers the same grace always improve the situation of the community they live in.
There is no penalty in succeeding on one’s own hook, if done honestly. The model we need to encourage is competition. We need to celebrate it. Not insist the concept of rising to a challenge as being par with some sort of predatory act.
Please. Thank you. Ma’am. Sir. I can. We can. I was wrong. I forgive. This is good. That is bad. These are the line commands for freedom without tyranny. Use them. Go ahead, try it. You might be amazed.
The secret of community is that it depends on wilfull participation. It doesn’t mean dehumanizing conformity, it means reaching out to the maximum number of people to accomplish goals not attainable by any one individual…no matter how gifted or able. It’s much, much easier to teach the ground rules to toddlers than it is to franchised adults. I believe that that is the challenge we have created for ourselves over the last thirty years – reinstalling the groundrules for civility that were abandoned wholesale by the Best and Brightest who determined that “It ought to be” somehow outweighed “It is” in the big brass scales of life.
*sigh* PIMF.
“The “we†/ “theyâ€Â, “dog eat dogâ€Â, “fittest survive†reasoning is pretty hard to accept under such circumstances.”
I am sorry tmjutah. I tried to work through your response to the “we” / “they”, etc… argument by reading it twice. Then, I tried a semantic map to figure out what you meant. Then, I tried to dissect your version of the history and intent of the Founding Fathers as well as the “Best and the Brightest” whoever you meant by that. I didn’t do so well. That is, I didn’t understand the gist of it.
So let me just offer this. I remember reading that in the time of the constitutional convention and for a few years after, personal attacks were settled with pistols at 15 paces. Service, valor and credibility were only questioned if one was willing to put his life on the line, literally. Not willing to do that, the debate remained one of reason. And yes, some left out of disgust, but they didn’t go back to England.
It is also noteworthy that we have a body of criminal law to make sure that in a dog eat dog world, the dog with the illegal gun doesn’t get to prey on the dog that follows the law. Or the dog corporation with the most creative accountant doesn’t get to hose the dog investors. Or the dog registering voters doesn’t get strung up in the tree by the dog group that has it in for him.
So, I agree with you that the Please, Thank You, Forgive me, etc… manners are part of a civilized community, and competition when applied fairly and with willing participants is great. And it is right for a nation that holds in highest regard the credo of “justice for all” to ensure that fair rules are applied. and unwilling participants are not crucified.
And now I probably won’t be able to convince you of anything, especially like the merits of the teaching profession….
I already have my suspicions.
I’m sorry Paul. I can’t read into your message. What is the suspicion?
2muddy –
It’s a pleasure to disagree with you, even if my statement didn’t make that (among ALL the other things) crystal clear.
I displaced my left shoulder about an hour before I cut loose with the fingerpaint up there.
Right here on the bottle it says “Don’t drive. Do not operate heavy machinery. You may experience drowsiness.” Nowhere, NOWHERE, is there a little sticker with the helpful advice “You may ramble and embarass yourself in other folk’s living rooms”….but now I know.
The short point I would like to make is that people have to work at being anything other than cutthroat. We are what we are. It’s hard work, and we’ve hothoused a society that disdains hard work in general and financial success without celebrity in particular. Nothing is ever perfect where people are involved but golly I think we could do a LITTLE better than what we’ve arrived at now…
Thanks for the convo. Off to icepack land.