Thursday, January 31, 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
The Vanity of the Selfless
"There is no doubt that in exchanging a self-centered for a selfless life we gain enormously in self-esteem. The vanity of the selfless, even those who practice utmost humility, is boundless."
Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements (1951)
Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements (1951)
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Bush Squanders Nazi Good Will
H.D.S. Greenaway takes away the idiotic sentence crown from James Carroll this week, ending his column with a dramatic question:
Apparently Greenaway feels he doesn't need to answer this question; after all, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Halliburton, Bush Lied, etc.
I had to stop to untangle the logic here. First of all, there are no “prisoners of war” in Iraq because we’re not fighting an army in uniform. But overlooking that detail: Greenaway makes a comparison between American prisoners in World War II and Iraq. The former were Nazis, the latter are terrorists. Some Nazis were pro-American after the war, but the terrorists we catch trying to blow up our soldiers with roadside bombs don’t renounce Osama and become “pro-American.” Isn’t it obvious that AQI terrorists already hate America and will continue to hate us in captivity? Maybe if gave them seminars on George Washington and the invisible hand of capitalism instead of providing them with Korans?
Is the fact that terrorists captured by our military don't like us really a reason to feel bad about our country?
A young German [at Davos] said his grandfather had been a prisoner of war of the Americans, but remained staunchly pro-American all through his life. The young man asked: Would that be true of an Iraqi prisoner of war today?
Apparently Greenaway feels he doesn't need to answer this question; after all, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Halliburton, Bush Lied, etc.
I had to stop to untangle the logic here. First of all, there are no “prisoners of war” in Iraq because we’re not fighting an army in uniform. But overlooking that detail: Greenaway makes a comparison between American prisoners in World War II and Iraq. The former were Nazis, the latter are terrorists. Some Nazis were pro-American after the war, but the terrorists we catch trying to blow up our soldiers with roadside bombs don’t renounce Osama and become “pro-American.” Isn’t it obvious that AQI terrorists already hate America and will continue to hate us in captivity? Maybe if gave them seminars on George Washington and the invisible hand of capitalism instead of providing them with Korans?
Is the fact that terrorists captured by our military don't like us really a reason to feel bad about our country?
Obama:Politics as Usual
A friend sent me a video link to Obama's prebuttal of the State of the Union speech. My friend thinks Obama is a new JFK--with some MLK Jr. mixed in.
It wasn't a bad speech, but contrary to the charge that Obama only talks in vague generalities, he presented specific idea after specific idea--all of which I disagree with.
--He wants to withdraw troops from Iraq immediately; I could not disagree more.
--He claims that "we know it's just not true" that the surge is working (i.e., Bush and Gen. Patreus are lying) because the Iraqi government has failed some arbitrary standard of compromise that he and the news media have invented; I could not disagree more--the surge has been wildly successful in reducing violence in Iraq and turning the population against al Qaeda and to dismiss this is insulting to Gen. Patreus and our troops.
--He says George Bush's Washington let the banks run amok--haven't democrats been whining for years about banks' discriminatory lending practices?
--He wants nationalized health care; I think it would be a dismal failure.
--He thinks lobbyists are part of the problem; I think they are a necessary part of our system of government.
--He claims that Republicans demonize their enemies; I think that intolerance is far more prevalent on the left than the right.
--He thinks the Bush tax cuts took money from the poor and gave it to the rich; I think the Bush tax cuts are responsible for the economic gains of the last 6 years and we need more tax cuts not some Robin Hood program to soak the rich and big business and add to middle class entitlements.
How then is Obama going to be a President who leads all the people, not just half of the Congress? The only way this will happen is if everyone who disagrees with his liberal ideas gives up the debate and goes along with him. He's not about compromise at all--and presenting himself as above partisan politics is just more politics as usual.
It wasn't a bad speech, but contrary to the charge that Obama only talks in vague generalities, he presented specific idea after specific idea--all of which I disagree with.
--He wants to withdraw troops from Iraq immediately; I could not disagree more.
--He claims that "we know it's just not true" that the surge is working (i.e., Bush and Gen. Patreus are lying) because the Iraqi government has failed some arbitrary standard of compromise that he and the news media have invented; I could not disagree more--the surge has been wildly successful in reducing violence in Iraq and turning the population against al Qaeda and to dismiss this is insulting to Gen. Patreus and our troops.
--He says George Bush's Washington let the banks run amok--haven't democrats been whining for years about banks' discriminatory lending practices?
--He wants nationalized health care; I think it would be a dismal failure.
--He thinks lobbyists are part of the problem; I think they are a necessary part of our system of government.
--He claims that Republicans demonize their enemies; I think that intolerance is far more prevalent on the left than the right.
--He thinks the Bush tax cuts took money from the poor and gave it to the rich; I think the Bush tax cuts are responsible for the economic gains of the last 6 years and we need more tax cuts not some Robin Hood program to soak the rich and big business and add to middle class entitlements.
How then is Obama going to be a President who leads all the people, not just half of the Congress? The only way this will happen is if everyone who disagrees with his liberal ideas gives up the debate and goes along with him. He's not about compromise at all--and presenting himself as above partisan politics is just more politics as usual.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
What Liberal Bias?
The cover of Newsweek this week announces: "The Party's Over: A dispirited GOP struggles to find its post-Bush path."
Dispirited? The [Republican] Party's Over?
What are they talking about? It's a Presidential election, and a Republican candidate has not been anointed after a handful of primaries. This is proof of the end of the GOP?
Only self-deluded liars can continue to pretend that (in Rushspeak) the MSM (mainstream media) is unbiased and anything but DNC (Democratic National Committee) media. Bought, owned and fully in the pocket of the Democrat party.
Dispirited? The [Republican] Party's Over?
What are they talking about? It's a Presidential election, and a Republican candidate has not been anointed after a handful of primaries. This is proof of the end of the GOP?
Only self-deluded liars can continue to pretend that (in Rushspeak) the MSM (mainstream media) is unbiased and anything but DNC (Democratic National Committee) media. Bought, owned and fully in the pocket of the Democrat party.
James Hansen silenced on national TV
After one of the coldest games in NFL history, CBS broadcast "The Age of Warming"--a transparent effort to make a few bucks by repeating the usual litany of Al Gore alarmism. The best was James Hansen in what must be his four-thousandth interview being given twenty minutes to make his case--in prime time Sunday night national television--whining about how he has been "silenced." I admit he has talent to be able to make this claim over and over without cracking up into uncontrollable laughter.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Christian Zionism?
James Carroll writes about the U.S. government’s “Christian Zionist dream of a God-sponsored Jewish state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean,” using the same language of the Hamas charter that denies Israel’s right to exist by claiming these same lands. In reality, the Bush administration’s roadmap has encouraged Israel to give up yet more land in a futile attempt to appease Hamas.
James Carroll writes about “the traditional American commitment...[to] the Christian Zionist vision of ultimate Jewish conversion to Jesus”; in reality, it is Islamofascists who are committed to conversion of infidels to their religion.
An American government full of Christian Zionists? It seems Mr Carroll is prey to psychological projection: “a defense mechanism in which one attributes to others one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts.” (Wikipedia)
James Carroll writes about “the traditional American commitment...[to] the Christian Zionist vision of ultimate Jewish conversion to Jesus”; in reality, it is Islamofascists who are committed to conversion of infidels to their religion.
An American government full of Christian Zionists? It seems Mr Carroll is prey to psychological projection: “a defense mechanism in which one attributes to others one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts.” (Wikipedia)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)