Ok, ok, but it's nice to dream isn't it? Anyhoo . . .
Think we are not headed for a fascist state? If you dare show up near glorious leader's speeches with anything other than fawning support, you get the treatment.
A high school student in Clive, IA was told he would be taken out by a sniper for wearing an anti-bush button. CLICK HERE
And, did you know that OUR paper in Amarillo will not take any more LTE's about the election until after 5pm tonight? Let 'em know how you feel about it CLICK HERE.
Meanwhile the AGN is printing nonsensical wingnut ramblings like JAMES ROBINSON'S boolsheet about a perceived entitlement mentality. DARN THOSE DISABLED VETS NOT PULLING THEIR WEIGHT! Grrrrrrrr . . . really . . . I can't stand that talentless hack.
Speaking of hackery, that brings me to today's wingnut blather-o-rama from none other than serial liberal hater and (self-described) Christian Virgil Van Camp. Virgil goes from images of kids singing in church to examples of terrorist killings, to what Van Camp falsly claims is Kerry plan to keep us safe, then to glorious leader's plans.
Get it? If you elect Kerry our kids will get killed. In church. While they are singing.
Van Camp also says that Bush will be successful because he treats terrorism as a new phenomenon. What about the IRA bombings in England for decades? Basque sepratist terrorism in Spain for decades? Algerian independence fighters in France?
My fav Virgil bit? " Presidential candidate John Kerry has a plan to deal with terrorism. A plan with nuance. A plan that will reduce the problem to one of law enforcement. Terror will become a low-key, but manageable, constant problem much like drugs and prostitution. "
Can any of you ditto-monkey lurkers out there explain something to me?
What do you rethugs have against peace and prosperity?
Why are you only happy when you feel like martyrs (you think) against (real or perceived) enemies?
I PRAY for the day when the threat of terrorism is a nuisance. I don't like it when 3000 of my brother and sisters die because the administration WAS ASLEEP AT THE SWITCH!
We have got two priorities here. Get the Bushistas OUT, then work on making the republican party extinct like the whig party, then force the media to ensure that Van Camp's and Robinson's extremist hate goes back to being the unacceptable exception to discourse.
-Panhandle Truth Squad
2004
"What do you rethugs have against peace and prosperity? Why are you only happy when you feel like martyrs (you think) against (real or perceived) enemies?" - Neville Chamberlain to Winston Churchill after signing the Munich Pact, September 29, 1938.
ReplyDeleteAhhhhhh, anonymous....the old hawks are Churchill, doves are Chamberlain comparison. Still beating that dead horse are you? Perhaps you should review the history of the lead up to WWII and see who Bush and his neocon puppet-masters really have similarities to....
ReplyDeleteSo, you'd like a more recent example of the hawk-dove debate? How about the Pershing II-Cruise missile buildup of the 80's by Reagan in response to the USSR's SS-20's, as opposed to the nuclear freeze movement, championed by Ted Kennedy and yes, John F. Kerry. I was stationed in Germany when the Bundestag made the courageous decision to deploy. If you think the Europeans hate our guts now, you should have been there back then!
ReplyDeleteBut as a result of hanging tough, half a continent was liberated, the Soviet Union was dismantled, and the number of nuclear weapons was actually reduced. If Kennedy, Kerry et al. had gotten their way, we'd still be at Cold War status quo with no "peace dividend" to fund the Clinton budget surplus.
I visited Berlin twice during the Cold War (on both sides of the wall). The contrast between the two parts of the city was stunning, and this at a time when East Berlin was considered the showcase of communism. In 1993, I visited the reunited city numerous times when I was a lecturer at the Teachers' College of English, University of Szczecin, Poland, a three-hour train ride from Berlin. With the exception of one German cabdriver who took me to the airport to fly back to the States, I didn't meet anyone in either country who didn't prefer the latter situation to the former (I speak fluent German and Polish, by the way).
So what does all this have to do with the present-day situation? John Kerry has been consistently on the wrong side of every major conflict. He even voted against the Gulf War: that quintessential mulitlateral, United Nations blessed, "global test" passing conflict. The truth of the matter is that despite his four months in Vietnam, three Purple Hearts, and even his borrowed camouflage hunting jacket, Senator Kerry cannot point to a single cause he would consider worth fighting for. He longs for the good old days when terrorism was merely a "nuisance." This man that would be leader of the free world is still living in a September 10th paradigm.
By the way, the only reason I post my comments as "Anonymous" is because I was too lazy the first time to choose a pseudonym and password. Being the feeble-minded "right wing-nut" that I am, I'd probably just forget them anyway! So for anyone who's interested I am,
Your most humble servant,
Carl Mueller (Master Sergeant, United States Army, Retired).
P.S. Now that I've vented my spleen, I'd be interested in blogarillo's arguments about how President George W. Bush more closely resembles Hitler than Churchill (that is the World War II leader you were alluding to in your last post, isn't it?). And please, no cutting and pasting from moveon.org!
P.P.S. Is there anyone else on this blog (beside Barry Cochran) who would dare to drop their nom de plume and take full responsibility for their comments?
P.P.P.S. Lest you think I'm a hate filled fascist who would start stalking you if you identified yourself, nothing is further from the truth. The reason I even began posting on this blog is because I feel there's much too much "preaching to the choir" on both sides of the political spectrum. I've been stimulated and challenged by some of the other posts I've read, and I hope what I've written has shed more light than heat (despite my rather heavy-handed saracsm at times).
Regardless of who wins on November 2, chances are good that about half the country is going to be bitter, angry, and accusatory towards the other half. George W. Bush is not Hitler, John F. Kerry is not Ho Chi Minh, and the republic will survive no matter who our next president is. In the words of that great philosopher, Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"
Carl-Anon,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughtful comments. I agree that there is far too much preaching to the choir, but, sadly, this year the choirs on each side of the aisle are all that's left to preach to. We are very, very divided no matter how much anyone tries to pretend, or wishes that it weren't so.
No, Geo. Bush is not Hitler, but he has been responsible for more unnecessary deaths than any American President since Johnson/Nixon. And his administration has been responsible for the greatest threats to democracy yet witnessed by my generation. We cannot sit idly by and let this pass.
As for noms de keyboard, I think most bloggers view themselves as heirs to the pamphleteer tradition, and like the original pamphleteers, choose pseudonyms. (It also goes back to the early days of computer BBSs, pre-internet, when BBS users were more akin to CB radio or shortwave hobbyists and chose "handles") I actually grappled with this when we started this blog and, for myself, decided that I wanted the fun and quasi-mystery of a pseudonym, but did want to stand behind what I wrote. So I put my name where it was easily visible if anyone cared. Thanks for caring.
Everyone else makes his or her own decision.
SPACEDARK
One other thing, Carl-Anon, I don't even know the flesh-and-blood names of everyone who posts on this blog, but those I do know have published political op-eds elsewhere under their own names. So it's not like they're afraid to stand behind their opinions.
ReplyDeleteAlso, blogs (like the liberal DailyKos or the conservative FreeRupublic) tend to become more and more closed to dissenting opinions partly because most trolls are not as thoughtful as yourself. Most are simply abusive. We're glad to have you here as a dissenting voice as long as you keep things as thoughtful as you have. You don't have to be nice. We don't intend to be nice to you. But the mindless abuse of some trolls is just . . . well, mindless. We hate that.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete1. No, Bush is not Hitler, but our invasion of Iraq has much in common with Germany's expansion prior to WWII, invasions for resources that were driven by fear. I wholly reject the notion that people who were opposed to our invasion of Iraq are a bunch of "Chamberlains" who were somehow too trusting of Hussein and Bush is certainly no Churchill.
ReplyDelete2. Frankly, I didn't care what your real name was. I referred to you as anonymous because that is what you were at the time. For the record, I don't know any of the others here personally. I only know them through their writing. Spacedark answers your question quite nicely. As he said, some people here have been published in the paper under their real names and I am no exception.