David Brooks: ‘I’m so confused’ about what to do in Iraq.
By on Jul 21st, 2007 at 8:00 am
David Brooks: ‘I’m so confused’ about what to do in Iraq.
Fresh off his hero worship of President Bush, New York Times columnist David Brooks said last night on the PBS Newshour that he’s more confused than ever about Iraq. “Let me say, I’m more uncertain about what to do than I’ve ever been in this war,” he said. “I really have no clue. So I almost have no judgment on what we should do, stay or go. I really am so confused.” Watch it:
UPDATE: Atrios notes a time when Brooks was less confused.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
199 Responses to “David Brooks: ‘I’m so confused’ about what to do in Iraq.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
DADT
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Graham
Guantanamo
Hannity
Health Care
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Limbaugh
Liz Cheney
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Rove
Sanford
Sotomayor
Steele
Supreme Court
Terrorism
ThinkProgress
Tiller
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
How could he possibly know what to do? He is a journalist!
July 21st, 2007 at 8:03 amJust wait a day or day, Brooks, and Rove will tell you what to do and say.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:04 am"confused"? Brooks is now entering the world of George W. Bush - perpetually confused and befuddled.
In reviewing the threads from yesterday, other than a few real TP posters scattered throughout the threads, it's becoming clear that the trolls (the same troll or two, as the case actually is) appears to be either engaging one or two people (new to the threads?) in dialogue or actually writing his post in one name and answering his own posts in another.
I'm sorry to say that this blogsite has definitely deteriorated and if they continue to drag their feet in doing what the other blog sites have done with the trolls who do nothing more than contribute to this degeneration, then TP will get what it's creating - more psychotic trolls talking to themselves or to each other and no intelligent discourse on any of their topics.
Is this what you desire, TP? If so, I'm outta here in a flash. There are simply too many other good liberal blogs out there to waste time on one who has so little concern for the integrity of their site.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:10 amDo what you always do, David: repeat what the Bushies tell you to.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:12 amFor the record: IP addresses checking solves the name jacking problem.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:12 am"I really have no clue." Let that be your epitaph.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:22 amSecret Report: No Iraq Oil Deal by September
A confidential intelligence report prepared for U.S. officials this week concludes a key U.S. benchmark of progress in Iraq, a law to divide oil revenues equitably among the provinces, "will not be agreed by September, even if cosmetic legislation is put in place."
An agreement on how to divide oil profits among Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish areas is one of 18 key benchmarks of progress to be reviewed by the U.S. in September.
More than 90 percent of Iraq's revenue comes from the export of oil.
But the report, obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com, says the issues the three sides are too far apart to agree on are the "role of foreign companies in the oil sector" and the division of the oil profits.
The report also includes a grim assessment of the possibility of an increase of oil output in Iraq despite its huge reserves.
It concludes that security in Iraq is so unstable "it is unlikely that any major foreign oil company will be able to invest in Iraq during 2008 (unless they are heavily underwritten by the U.S. government)."
The report says the Kurds favor foreign oil companies playing a larger role, but that is opposed by many Shi'a in the south "because of a fear they will lose control of their assets to outsiders."
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/07/secret-report-n.html
July 21st, 2007 at 8:23 amFor the record: IP addresses checking solves the name jacking problem.
Not when the Mossad-built Megaphone Software is being used.
The operatives who are here using this software can literally change IP addresses and names with every post, view everyone elses IP address, and run the entire site if they choose to.
The trolls actually know your IP address.
That's how bad it is.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:25 amMossad-built Megaphone Software
What the hell is your major malfunction? Megaphone Software? Mossad? Ah yes, it's the joooos. They're after us all. Right, ace?
Please take your pills.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:29 amThe fact that Mr. Brooks is confused is confirmed by his high praise of a low president.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:30 amAll the trolls on Earth can spin the fact that they have spent 6 years propping up a failed President who has proven to be neither "conservative" nor "Republican." Even David Brooks can't change that fact.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:31 amwhat to do, hmmmm. stay forever? nope. leave next year? nope. leave next spring? nope. in the fall? nope.
leave next month? nope. i know, it's a trend.
The time to end this madness is now. Today, not tomorrow. now.
Some reading:
"Top-Ten Reasons to Get out of Iraq Now"
July 21st, 2007 at 8:34 amhttp://www.populistamerica.com/top_ten_reasons_to_get_out_of_iraq_now
Bush, Mideast Wars and End-Time Prophecy
By JP Briggs II, Ph.D., and Thomas D. Williams
t r u t h o u t | Special Report
Friday 29 June 2007
"Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the 'wall of separation between church and state,' therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society."
- Former US President Thomas Jefferson
President George W. Bush has become dangerously steeped in ideas of Armageddon, the Apocalypse, an imminent war with Satanic forces in the Middle East, and an urgency to construct an American theocracy to fulfill God's end-of-days plan, according to close observers.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062907J.shtml
Read the whole thing
July 21st, 2007 at 8:40 amit is tedious to hear how the clinton presidency is inevitable and it is tedious to watch the elected democrats fail to end the war
July 21st, 2007 at 8:41 amGet a back bone david. Write about bringing the troops home, now. And stop the pouting.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:42 amWhatever happened to that blatant confidence you wrote about the other day. Only lies are forgotten so quickly.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:47 amMr. Brooks, it so good of you to admit that after carrying water for this lawless administration for almost seven years, you are "lost" as to what to do in Iraq. Reading tea leaves, or are you just the last man standing to finally "get" that most Americans are smarter than you are?
July 21st, 2007 at 8:48 amveritas,
I used to post here often and when the trolls started to hijack every thread they decided that they'd clamp down and ban people using multiple names and vulgarity. I still lurk here and post on occasion and they've clearly not cleaned it up. The comment/feedback in the threads here is an embarrassment on the whole because you have to wade through the name-calling and various other BS to get to the good, cogent ideas (and there are plenty here).
This site has everything you'd want in a blog, good research, topical, smart contributors, slick design, etc. but the trolly nonsense flushes it down the toilet.
I spend most of my time and Firedoglake, Crooks & Liars, Common Dreams, etc. where, as you point out, no nonsense.
C'est la vie.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:49 amWell, he's just been unplugged from the Matrix. Of course he's confused. He never knew what to do, only what the Matrix told him needed to be done. And he accepted it and repeated it as if it were his own opinion.
I wonder what he'll do next. Staying a pundit means repeating some party's or politician's stated beliefs as if they're the right thing to do. Becoming a journalist means repeating opposing parties' or politicians' stated beliefs and let the audience choose. Getting an entertainment show like Olberman means repeating what blogs say is the right thing to do. Or become ostracized and unemployed by stating his own reasoned opinions and/or a progressive point of view. Hmmm...
July 21st, 2007 at 8:54 amChris,
You've watched Olbermann and come to the conclusion that he's getting his ideas from progressive blogs? I have never seen more impassioned, thoughtful commentary on TV than Olbermann's "special comments", I suggest you watch more closely and take notes. He writes them himself and he is not, unlike Brooks and the rest of the rightwing shills, parroting talking points. Everything I've heard Olbermann say is shrouded in truth and reality.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:58 amOccupation? There may be different dimensions to the violence but occupation is in itself a sufficient cause for 'resistance'. In 1958 Iraqis celebrated the overthrow of the pro-British regime after decades of colonialism and informal control. Consider this in the light of subsequent events in Iraq and the Middle East and they were never likely to welcome the British and Americans as liberators. It remains a mystery to me that Americans (and Britons to some extent), who display patriotism in abundance, fail to appreciate the force of nationalism elsewhere.
July 21st, 2007 at 9:03 amNo Iraq Oil Deal by September
Hence all the spin to stay from the republican wishful thinking Oil Thiefs
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/07/secret-report-n.html
July 21st, 2007 at 9:06 amTobey,
Especially considering the fact that the Iraqi's knew why the Americans and the British were invading, and it had nothing to do with "liberation".
July 21st, 2007 at 9:06 amAh yes, it’s the joooos.
Comment by Boudin Bob
Well, there's a give-away. What other troll(s) do we know who use that term all the time?
For the record, I find you disgusting. Well, this particular character that you're portraying, anyway.
July 21st, 2007 at 9:06 amComment by Boudin Bob
BTW, what's a "Boudin"?
July 21st, 2007 at 9:21 amHasbara's strategy revealed:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mnFX8PZAPOs
Orchestrated disreaity.
July 21st, 2007 at 9:25 amIn I raq the situation cannot be solved without inflicting pain, undeserved pain, on at least one of the groups involved.
a) leaving immediately - the civil war will most certainly deteriorate, the government (however independent or not it may be) will collapse. The Iraqi people will be subject to even more suffering and will eventually be reigned by a strongman or by Taliban-style clergy. The country will most probably fall apart.
a) leaving later - see above point a) plus there will be a considerable number of US soldiers dead, too.
c) the 50yrs. solution - status quo for a considerable period of time with the US soldiers as main targets for certain militia groups and the Iraqi people suffering from the daily violence for at least two generations. The US Army would have to change radically to avoid dysfunctionality, e.g. reinstaing the draft.
Meanwhile the US interests are without proper protection from other crises that will most certainly occur.
I can understand Mr Brooks is confused. Leaving now would be paid for dearly by the Iraqi civilians, who didn't choose this invasion in the first place. Not leaving would add American deaths to the equation. And the bottomline is: The Administration who started this war cannot get out of it, without doing further severe damage. The Administration that has been enabled by men like Mr Brooks and a war that has been instigated and supported by men like Mr Brooks has brought your country in a lose-lose situation that will have to be solved by the next and the following and even a third administration. And that you as a people and your children, and your grandchildren too, will have to pay for.
I'd say Mr Brooks is not confused. He's perfectly trapped in his own web of words, that he used to further his own career as a journalist.
July 21st, 2007 at 9:35 amBrooks needs to make sure he doesn't show Bush up by being smarter than him. So he plays dumb, hoping to get another date with the president.
July 21st, 2007 at 9:37 amThis incident apparently never happened...right?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Up0Bvwwx9hA
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_QD_aJaFvGw&mode=related&search=
July 21st, 2007 at 9:39 am"It concludes that security in Iraq is so unstable “it is unlikely that any major foreign oil company will be able to invest in Iraq during 2008 (unless they are heavily underwritten by the U.S. government).â€"
Comment by Tobey Tall — July 21, 2007 @ 8:23 am
Well, then, that pretty much tells us what BushCo will choose to do.
Bastards!
And David Brooks should take some time off from spouting his idiocies to actually do some research and start forming real, informed, well-thought-out opinions. Yeah, right, that'll happen.
July 21st, 2007 at 9:39 amSome retired Major General up here in NH just sent a letter to the editor of the local paper smacking down some asshat who wrote a lette and said the US should just "take off the gloves" and throw the rules out the window in order to deal with the Iraq war.
The General said the US is in such shit-shape BECAUSE we have ignored the rule of law since Chimpy and his Master Gimp have abandoned all principles.
Hoorah!
-GSD
July 21st, 2007 at 9:57 amMr. Brooks:
You are being played for a fool.
All of this handwringing is a joke.
The plan from the outset was to CREATE A QUAGMIRE.
EVERYTHING that has happened has been by design.
They CREATED the insurgency.
They CREATED the civil war.
They CREATED the NO WIN / NO WAY OUT situation
O N
P U R P O S E
Stop assuming Bush wants to WIN and LEAVE.
NOTHING could be further from the TRUTH.
Watch his lips.
If they're moving, he's LYING.
LISTEN to every word, then flip it on its head to ascertain where the TRUTH LIES.
I'm not making this shit up - I know it for a FACT.
"Incompetence" does not begin to describe the thousand coincidences that have led us to this point.
McCain and Lieberman are in charge of all war strategy - and have been Selected By Israel to be our next Dictatorship.
"The Way Forward" refers to this:
Meyrav Wurmser is an opponent of the Oslo peace accords and a central neoconservative figure. In 1996 she helped write “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm†and advised then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Meyrav Wurmser said: "Our fight against Iraq was only a battle in a long war. It would be ill-conceived to think we can deal with Iraq alone. We must move on, and faster."
Hudson Institute's Meyrav Wurmser is the Israeli-born wife of David Wurmser, who serves as Cheney's leading expert on Iran and Syria
This war is fought for ISRAEL - at your expense.
WAKE UP & SMELL THE FASCISM!
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Central_Asia_watch/Is_Iran_Next.html
July 21st, 2007 at 10:07 amTHIS IS THE A-HOLE WHO RECENTLY CLAIMED IN ONE OF HIS TOO CIRCULATED OP-ED PIECES THAT POOR PEOPLE WERE POOR BECAUSE OF SOMETHING WRONG WITHEIR AMYGDALAS, In other words, poor people were poor because of brain damage.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:08 amIsn't this a notable cry for help? He doesn't know anything except what he is sure of, and isn't sure of anything.
this would indicate sir, you are in the wrong line of work and are doing something that is contrary to your personality. It is tearing you apart.
just quit. you will serve yourself and others. write about your mistakes, be cathartic and let the world know what you think you know. it will sort you out and help prevent your confused and disingenuous reporting. reporting isn't really the right word, guessing seems more apt. prognosticating may be fair, spewing tripe may also be applicable considering your last public statement.
don't let mental illness let you down, you can fix it
July 21st, 2007 at 10:09 am"Meyrav Wurmser said: “Our fight against Iraq was only a battle in a long war."
Comment by ace — July 21, 2007 @ 10:07 am
Hmmm..."AGAINST Iraq"? That pretty much puts paid to the idea that the U.S. was liberating the Iraqi people from a cruel dictator. (Not that most of us believed that line anyway!)
July 21st, 2007 at 10:12 amMr. Brooks appears unable to separate the real person from the office of the President. Noble in gesture but suicidal in practice.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:14 am"Should I stay or should I go now?
July 21st, 2007 at 10:14 amShould I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble
An if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know"
using the Clash methodology, we should go as staying will lead to double
For those who may have missed it, the official Bush White House & RNC approved list of Republican talking points on Iraq has gotten a bit of a make-over in the past few days.
President Bush's staggeringly incoherent surge interim progress report last week returned "We're Making Progress" to GOP mouthpieces everywhere. Then, the Senate Republicans' successful filibuster of the Levin-Reed after all night debate brought the Rove stamp of approval for "Political Stunt." (This turn of events signaled the death of a previous GOP favorite, "Up or Down Vote.") And now, Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman has updated John Boehner's "Embolden the Enemy" with a twist of his own, "Reinforces Enemy Propaganda."
For the full list of the latest GOP approved Iraq falsehoods, smears and hallucinations, see:
July 21st, 2007 at 10:14 am"The Official Republican Iraq Talking Points."
Veritas, I think if you hang out until school starts again you might see a drop in the number of troublesome trolls drop dramatically. The stooges are probably off for the summer.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:17 amSubject: glasgow v america
If this had happened in a US airport, compared to Glasgow Eyewitness
accounts.
America:"Oh my God! There was a man on fire, he was running about, i
just ran for my life. I thought i was gonna die, he got so close to
me"
Glasgow "Bawbag wis running aboot on fire, so a ran up n gave him a
good boot, then decked him"
America:" I just wanna get home, away from here. I just wanna get
home, I thought i was gonna die"
Glasgow:" here shug, am no leaving here till am oan a f*ckin' plane!"
America:" there was pandemonium, people were running in all
directions, we didn't know what was happening thought i was gonna die"
Glasgow:"F*ck this fir a kerry oan, moan we ll get a pint in"
America:" We thought he was gonna blow us all up he had a gas
canister, and was trying to get into his trunk, I thought we were
gonna die, I just ran for my life"
Glasgow:"a swaggered by the motor that wis on fire, and the dafty
couldnae even open his boot, he wis in fire annaw so a ran up n gave
him a good boot to the baws"
America: there was this huge explosion, it sounded like war, I thought
i was gonna die"
Glasgow:" There wis a bang, yi know when yi throw BO basher intae a
fire it wis like that"
America:" I'm too traumatized even to speak, I thought i was gonna die"
Glasgow "here mate, gies 2 minutes till a phone ma auld dear, if am
gonna be oan the telly a want her tae tape it"
& finally, two quotes from an eye-witness......... John Smeaton (these are
real)
John just surpassed himself on the National ITV news. The interviewer
asked "What message do you have for the bombers" - he replied "This is
Glasgow we'll just set aboot you"
John done an interview on cnn and they asked how he restrained the guy
July 21st, 2007 at 10:18 amand he said "me and other folk were just tryin to get the boot in and
some other guy banjoed him" !
Comment by dim-wit — July 21, 2007 @ 10:14 am
I like your 'Clash" logic. Simple, straightforward and totally apropos!
July 21st, 2007 at 10:20 amA little self-knowledge is a dangerous thing. There is nothing noble about David Brooks'; he simply purveys Rove's version of reality.
Bush has never known what to do with Iraq. Pretending to admit it now, via Mr. Brooks, is another ploy to buy time. Not knowing what to do is generally motivation to find out. Especially when you're spending a billion and a half a day on the problem you don't know how to fix. Especially when not fixing that problem - and having your opponents document your lies about fomenting and perpetuating it - is likely to send your political party into a semi-permanent wilderness.
But Mr. Bush doesn't want to fix this problem, any more than he wants to fix global warming or Social security, any more than he wants a functioning Justice Department or an apolitical federal government. He just wants to do as he's told and get out of Dodge before all hell breaks loose. Just as he's done in every other job he's ever had.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:28 amI believe that Keith Olberman a few nights ago summed up Bush's War as "George W. Bush's Self-Fulfilling Prophesy". Certainly, it's a legacy which will stick to him like glue for eternity and not one which he prefers; however, attempting to foist it on someone else as his scapegoat not only makes him look imbecilic but helps to feather Hillary's campaign nest.
I believe that our Commander in Chief is crumbling before our very eyes. His persona changes like the wind - laughing inappropriately one day with the Press Corp and then aping Cruella DeVille the next day - the obvious effects of pharmacological intervention.
And, in his defense, who wouldn't be absolutely nutso by now with all the lying, covering up those lies with more lies, and so on...until the mountain of lies becomes so weighty that no human being can recall what they've said to whom and on what occasion. Bush's avalanche of lies is coming crashing down on him and it's beginning to not look pretty at all. In fact, it may soon be time for his GOP handlers to keep him less visible because they can attest to a direct correlation to the number of Republicans changing parties and his descending poll numbers. A third grader could figure that one out.
In any case, I believe as the author of the great piece on impeachment on http://www.smirkingchimp.com has written - that the only way to not have a full-blown constitutional crisis is to use the inherent contempt charge on Harriet Miers. Bush cannot stop that. It's the only card they hold in their hand at this point.
Miers will either perjure herself or tell the whole lurid truth - in either case, either she or her buddy will go down in flames. If she refuses she will be marched off to jail. The People need to organize and press congress for impeachment so it becomes, like the mid term election, a "mandate of the people" thereby, eliminating any sense that this congress is considering it for partisan reasons.
Get involved, people. It's OUR country still - they haven't totally taken it out of our hands. Our destiny and the destiny of our children lie in our taking action or our lethargy and inaction! The time to act and become involved is NOW. Let's get the impeachment ball rolling - wherever you reside - NOW.
Go to the article on smirkingchimp.com re: Impeachment and get involved. I have.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:31 am"...asked “What message do you have for the bombers†- he replied “This is Glasgow we’ll just set aboot youâ€
Comment by Tobey Tall — July 21, 2007 @ 10:18 am
Love it! Sounds almost like a New Yorker!
Great illustration of the completely differing mindset of a Bush-terrorized American and a hard-headed Glaswegian.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:33 amOutsourced and veritas, excellent posts.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:36 amThe Religious Right may have supported Bush in his pseudo Presidency, but it is fairly obvious, at this point, that they have been politically mugged and raped in the process (their own lack of intellectual and political honesty has contributed to their situation - they are getting what they deserve). The conservative body-politic, in general, has been used in the same way, a la David Brooks.
Your focus on Bush's religiousity is misplaced. This is about money, pure and simple. Bush continues to use his religious base to prop up his seriously flagging support. The reason he does this is not messianic or apocalyptic, it is to continue funneling money to his buddies (and altering the laws so that the money will never be returned nor the beneficiaries be punished).
The more time he has, the more he can divert and the harder he can make it for the system to respond as it would if not compromised by his assertions of devine privilege/executive authority.
As we learned from Watergate: If you want to know what's really going on, follow the money.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:37 amHow often have each of us said to ourselves: "What were they thinking???" when we view on the History Channel the march of Adolph Hitler and the amoral incineration of a segment of the human race? To imagine that this mentality occurred during our lifetime is more incredible, isn't it?
And we always come away shaking the chills from our bodies after viewing it with the feeling that "this would not have occurred on our watch"....well, guess what??? It is occurring under our watch as we sit back and do nothing about it.....not unlike those citizens who both watcheh and permitted Hitler to accomplish his murderous spree. These were people like you and me. They felt voiceless perhaps or impotent to do much because their voices clearly were not being heard. How is that any different at all from what we have occurring right now in this country??
We have a congress who not only is blind but now is deaf as well. Clearly, they have not acknowledged the wishes of the people who in the mid-terms placed their faith and trust in them to take action in accordance with the will of the people. Yes, the Rethugs are totally obstructionist and, yes, the Dems squandered their first opportunity to do something credible when they caved to the funding of the iraq war. Both are now complicit; both are now enablers.
But simply because Congress has made one mistake in not clipping W's purse strings does not mean that they cannot reverse things now. And reverse they must. Right now!
If one more individual's blood is shed in this war, it's one death too many. We KNOW this is an amoral war (always was) and if we fail to stop this demonic war profiteering machine right now, more blood will be shed and more of our children will be lost forever.
Like those who watched as Adolph Hitler accomplished mass genocide right under their noses while they sat back and did nothing, we cannot allow history to repeat itself now. Some of us have learned those lessons in morality; some of us recognize that this regime must be stopped; some of us are definitely calibrating at a higher level of spirituality and....there are more of us then there are of them, thank goodness!
July 21st, 2007 at 10:41 amMarcus:
Thanks for that thoughtful response.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:41 amit's about time for the thought police to begin their deletions.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:43 amBlessings and peace to all. Later/Gators!
July 21st, 2007 at 10:43 amMarcus & Ace: Yes, follow the money is right! And let's see who has those offshore accounts and make bets on it.....no doubt our illustrious leaders have well-feathered nests and mega acres in Paraguay where they will go in exile when they leave office.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:45 amAce: I sincerely hope not and I do plan to follow up and check later against what I've saved. Have a fab day and thanks so much for your continued enlightenment.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:45 amBlack Budgets = Fascist Dictatorship.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:49 amHAHAHA Bush may have cancer.....I hope you die sir. How fitting that something in your rectum may kill you.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:50 amFrom the article that ace linked to, http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062907J.shtml
"One piece of evidence is Bush's funneling billions of dollars to "faith-based" organizations. Faith offices making grants are now so widespread inside government agencies that federal watchdog officials have serious difficulties accounting for how much money has actually been spent."
I remember hearing a report a few years ago that these "faith-based charities" didn't keep records of whom the funds were going to. Apparently that's still the norm. This is bullshite, not to mention unconstitutional. We taxpayers need to know where our hard-earned money is going. It's bad enough that we're funding a war that most of us disagreed with in the first place, but this "faith-based" crap is just puke icing on a turd. Americans should not be funding the second coming!
July 21st, 2007 at 10:56 amA slogan gaining momentum in the streets of Iraq reflects this popular mood:"La lil ihtilal; la lil ta'iffia; la lil irhab": "No to the occupation; no to sectarianism; no to terrorism."
July 21st, 2007 at 10:57 amAbout the trolls at TP.
Trolls engaging themselves in mock-debate/agreement and namejacking should not be tolerated.
However, foul language and traded insults have their place in the debate. For too long, Dems and Liberal/progressives have been bringing their intellects to a fist fight. You know why the right is steamrolling the left? Because they don't respect integrity - they respect power. That's why there is such a call for the Congress to stand and fight.
Personally, I believe foul language is the vernacular of the Right wing base, as well as being very useful as a tool to provide emphasis and color. It also tells the thugs on the right that they don't want push to come to shove.
Here's what trolls don't want to hear: If you fu(k with us, at all - no, strike that - if you even think about fu(king with us, we'll bust your ass.
Mean it when you say it (never forget - they're cowards that depend on your meekness - they wilt when challenged).
We'd better start standing up to these asshats.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:58 amThanks back to you for the dialog.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:59 amSo the fat old white man needs to be reminded that occupying a foreign country can get a little troubling. Aw.....doesn't he just need a hug. What a sad sack of shite.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:01 amHAHAHA Bush may have cancer…..I hope you die sir. How fitting that something in your rectum may kill you.
Comment by sarah_nav
Could this be considered brain cancer for the Chimp?
July 21st, 2007 at 11:03 amWhat would help immensely to allay Brooks' confusion is for him to take a trip to Walter Reed or any VA hospital across the country and to see the veterans who have returned broken and maimed, physically and psychologically, from what they have experienced, not only in Iraq, but also in Korea and Vietnam. The hope is that Brooks will finally realize that what these veterans had to endure was all for naught since those wars were fought for absolutely no justifiable reason whatsoever. If Brooks does not want more veterans to end up in Va hospitals, then he should start changing his tune and using his position to speak out against this idiotic occupation. All this is contingent upon Brooks actually being aware of the definition of the word empathy, a word that few Americans seem to be familar with.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:06 amI have a suggestion as to what he can do. Take a long walk off a 20 story building.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:07 amThis confession by Brooks is amazing. The mark of the NeoCons has always been what Brooks calls "self-confidence." I called it arrogance and self-righteousness. The trolls on TP threads reflect the attitude Brooks has always expressed previously.
This is something new. I'll be interested in seeing where this leads.
The fact of the matter is that while Brooks is "confused," Iraqis are being killed, maimed, and turned into refugees. And, our troops face day-in-day out danger in harm's way, also being killed and maimed and being forced to kill others. While all the death and destruction is taking place, life for the average Iraqi is getting worse and worse.
I have found that re-stating these facts at every oppotunity turns some of the NeoCons into rationale human beings. (It seems rationale to be "confused" with so much death and destruction going on.)
So, I've re-stated the facts here one more time. It is my small contribution to sanity.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:09 amComment by Jane E. Schneider — July 21, 2007 @ 11:10 am
Sorry for the double posting. My name/email etc. fields had gone 'null', so I didn't think the first one went through.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:11 amImagine if the US Constitution could be edited by anyone just like Wikipedia? Bush and the neo-cons do.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:12 am"HAHAHA Bush may have cancer…..I hope you die sir. How fitting that something in your rectum may kill you.
Comment by sarah_nav — July 21, 2007 @ 10:50 am"
You people worry and whine about the "trolls" who wish to support our President and engage in honest debate, and label us as such merely because we disagree with liberal, weak-kneed, defeatist ideology.
Yet you have no problem with horrendous, evil, mean-spirited hate mongers such as this? Actually wishing someone dies of cancer?
I see a lot of name calling and childish attitude towards folks who disagree with you ideologically, but don't see much rebuke of people who call for sickness and death on our duly elected leaders and fellow Americans.
I challenge you to repudiate people like this who add nothing to the debate, and merely weaken the credibility of websites such as this, and cheapen the debate for all.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:13 amYeah, since Bush already has his head all the way up there, a colonoscopy does sound redundant...can't he just have a look around?
July 21st, 2007 at 11:14 amO. Bigmouth, you have NEVER actually honestly debated ANYTHING on any of the threads you have been on, that I have seen.
When you claim you have come in here for an honest debate, you are lying through your teeth! Get honest, for a change!
July 21st, 2007 at 11:18 amBrooks. A relacitrant cult member? No judgement, no clarity, no clue.
Here's a clue, toady: We're f*cked if we stay, we're f*ucked if we go.
All thanks to the Gorious Decider, YOU, and freaks with names like Mayrev Wurmser.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:18 amThe fact of the matter is that Iraqis are being killed, maimed, and turned into refugees. And, our troops face day-in-day out danger in harm’s way, also being killed and maimed and being forced to kill others. While all the death and destruction is taking place, life for the average Iraqi is getting worse and worse.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:20 amSpeaking of the Wurmsers/Warmongers for Israel:
"The CDI's Ledeen, Amitay and Sobhani were featured speakers at a May 2003 forum on "the future of Iran' sponsored by AEI, the Hudson Institute and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. The forum, chaired by the Hudson Institute's Meyrav Wurmser, the Israeli-born wife of David Wurmser (he serves as Cheney's leading expert on Iran and Syria), included a presentation by Un Lubrani of Israel's Ministry of Defense.
Summarizing the sentiment of neoconservative ideologues and strategists, Meyrav Wurmser said: "Our fight against Iraq was only a battle in a long war. It would be ill-conceived to think we can deal with Iraq alone. We must move on, and faster."
JINSA, a neoconservative organization established in 1976 that fosters closer strategic and military ties between the United States and Israel, also has its sights on Iran. At a JINSA policy forum in April 2003 titled "Time to Focus on Iran-The Mother of Modern Terrorism," Ledeen declared, "The time for diplomacy is at an end; it is time for a free Iran, free Syria and free Lebanon."
JINSA, along with CSP, serves as one of the main institutional links to the military-industrial complex for neoconservatives. Ledeen served as JINSA's first executive director and was JINSA's "Godfather," according to Amitay. Amitay is a JINSA vice chair. JINSA board members or advisers also include former CIA director James Woolsey, former Rep. Jack Kemp and the AEI's Joshua Muravchik. After he joined the administration, Feith resigned from JINSA.'s board of advisers, as did Vice President Dick Cheney and Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton."
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Central_Asia_watch/Is_Iran_Next.html
Cheney is AT THEIR SERVICE:
Perhaps this is why Vice President Cheney is a champion of those within the American Jewish Community who choose to support the activities of AIPAC (a foreign spy organization) at the expense of the rest of us.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:24 am"weak-kneed, defeatist ideology"? Hmmm. Old talking points and unsupportable. Sloganeering doesn't work.
As for the Post you refer to, have you ever seen that person post here before?
In light of the rampant criminality, military and civilian blood spilled and treasure squandered for no purpose (show me some purpose), an apparent lack of sympathy, empathy, or mercy coupled with the obscene and unquenchable blood-lust of Bush and his followers, do you think that the comment is all that bad?
Your heightened level of sensitivity to malicious thoughts about one's "enemies" is unexpected and seemingly disingenuous.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:25 amThat lump on the side of McCain's face is his conscience trying to escape.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:28 am"About the trolls at TP.
Trolls engaging themselves in mock-debate/agreement and namejacking should not be tolerated.
However, foul language and traded insults have their place in the debate. For too long, Dems and Liberal/progressives have been bringing their intellects to a fist fight. You know why the right is steamrolling the left? Because they don’t respect integrity - they respect power. That’s why there is such a call for the Congress to stand and fight.
Personally, I believe foul language is the vernacular of the Right wing base, as well as being very useful as a tool to provide emphasis and color. It also tells the thugs on the right that they don’t want push to come to shove.
Here’s what trolls don’t want to hear: If you fu(k with us, at all - no, strike that - if you even think about fu(king with us, we’ll bust your ass.
Mean it when you say it (never forget - they’re cowards that depend on your meekness - they wilt when challenged).
We’d better start standing up to these asshats.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — July 21, 2007 @ 10:58 am"
Foul language is the vernacular of the right-wing base? What websites have you been reading? How many times do we have to hear the sexual innuendo directed towards, and supposed oral habits of, our elected leaders, posted over and over, in graphic terms, and in bold print? And the use of homosexual terms in describing our President and Vice-President would seem to be an insult to those who proudly live the gay lifestyle, and are quite happy and content with that lifestyle.
And as in my post above, I don't see too many posts here wishing sickness and death upon the Democratic leadership in congress, nor towards Democrats in general. However, there's plenty of foul language and dire consequences heaped upon Bush, Cheney, and republicans.
We conservatives prefer to win the war of ideas and beliefs using words and policy, sending our ideological opponents home in political deafeat, but quite alive and healthy. Personally, I wish no ill will toward those with warped ideals and illogical, nonsensical political ideas. I merely think they should be defeated in the polls, and sent back home to live out their lives in the fog of unrealistic idealism they prefer to embrace.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:29 amveritas is absolutely correct. Believe it or not, our government is based on the idea that the PEOPLE are the masters of our representatives. That includes ALL branches and levels of government, including the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President. We fund it, we elect its representatives, and we impeach it, if necessary. The American People are the Government, not the titles like "President" or the individuals that hold them.
There has been a very concerted effort, for many years, to deny us our government and fool us into believing that "they" are the government.. These forces keep rearing their ugly heads and committing horrific crimes in our name. They are pervasive to the core of our structures, appointing themselves and their enablers to posts of such power and gravity that the entire core is rotten. We must not allow them to continue for much longer or else it truly will be too late.
We should do EVERYTHING within our power to end this ugly joke of criminal treachery and remove the sick weirdos who are trying to aid and abet it.
Impeachment is the option that our forefathers, in their enlightened age, set up for us. It does not CAUSE a Constitutional Crisis, it CURES one. It is a simple, peaceful solution to the abuse of power in this country. There is no risk, no loss and no damage done to the structure of our system of government. No individual may take our country from us. No group may take our country from us. The "Great Experiment" is a success, we just need to stick very closely to its foundation.
Take your country back!
1. Grab an old civics book and READ IT, especially the part about the Constitution.
2. Register to vote and then vote in EVERY SINGLE ELECTION, local and national.
3. Learn the names, addresses and phone numbers of your leaders, tell them often about what you want and tell them what you'll do if they disobey you.
4. Hold an elected office. It's your country and your community. It's becoming easier now to hold an office, regardless of what the main stream media tells you.
5. Learn about the issues that are confronting this country and tell a new person about them every day. When people know the truth they almost always do the right thing!
6. Find some peace within yourself and try to give it to everyone you encounter.
6. NEVER GIVE UP.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:32 amPersonally, I wish no ill will toward those with warped ideals and illogical, nonsensical political ideas. I merely think they should be defeated in the polls, and sent back home to live out their lives in the fog of unrealistic idealism they prefer to embrace.
Comment by O. Bigfoot
And in '08, that's just were those corrupted, illogical republicans will be headed.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:33 am"“weak-kneed, defeatist ideology� Hmmm. Old talking points and unsupportable. Sloganeering doesn’t work.
As for the Post you refer to, have you ever seen that person post here before?"
Perhaps I have. There's lots of talk about the "trolls" being one or two people merely posting under several names. There's no reason to think this person hasn't posted here before using the same technique.
I certainly have seen the sentiment repeated over and over.
And still no repudiation.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:34 am"and sent back home to live out their lives in the fog of unrealistic idealism they prefer to embrace."
How's the Freedom Spread? It might taste a little funky, since it's been left out for four years...
July 21st, 2007 at 11:35 amComment by O. Bigfoot — July 21, 2007 @ 11:13 am
Having watched my mother die of cancer, up close and personal, I don't really wish that fate on anyone. That being said, however, it might be a good thing if Bush had to face the prospect of a devastating illness that millions of Americans battle daily. It might make him wake up to a reality that he seems to be totally oblivious to. It could possibly even make him human.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:37 amWow O.Bigfoot, I hit a nerve?
July 21st, 2007 at 11:37 am"We conservatives prefer to win the war of ideas and beliefs using words and policy, sending our ideological opponents home in political deafeat, but quite alive and healthy. Personally, I wish no ill will toward those with warped ideals and illogical, nonsensical political ideas."
Comment by O. Bigfoot — July 21, 2007 @ 11:29 am
War of ideas? You, and the rest of the demented NeoCons temporarily in control of the Executive Branch, can't help but think in terms of war.
The polls would seem to indicated that the bulk of the Americans are sick of the warmongering lifestyle you seem to live. I prefer peace to war, but it is hard to achieve peace with a posturing warmonger.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:38 am#81.....Cancer would merely allow bush to ramp up his death quest for America. In his eyes, "If I cant live no one can".
July 21st, 2007 at 11:39 am"And in ‘08, that’s just were those corrupted, illogical republicans will be headed.
Comment by barfly — July 21, 2007 @ 11:33 am"
And if that actually happens, it will be the political process in action.
Personally, I don't believe it's going to happen that way. Folks are already starting to see through the transparent ideals and unkept political promises of the current Democrat majority. (Personally, I saw through them all along. I'm old enough to have seen this all before.)
If anything, the stage is set yet again for a viable third-party or independent run. All that is needed is viable third-party or independent candidates, which is what has been lacking in the past.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:42 am#83.....It's Unkempt....take a class.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:45 amGee, ya think. The Iraqi's are having problems with giving away 70% of their oil profits for 30 years to the people who have destroyed their country. Those ingrates.
This is why the new mantra from the Bushies is now November, not September is the magic time when we will know whether or not the Escalation is working.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:45 amBrooks is just about the slimiest bastard at the Times. I really can't stand that smarmy prick. I wish he'd just go away, maybe to Fox, where he can take the resident liberal job away from alan colmes.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:46 amThat's all good and fine, if you wish to separate this blog from the rest of reality (something Bush and his supporters are exceedingly good at doing). Truth is, right-wing pundits regularly call for the assassination of liberal polititians, as well as liberals in general.
If the past six years are any indication, "you conservatives" (I am guessing, that to you "conservatives" means Bush supporters) have shown tht you are bereft of not only good ideas, but any ideas.
If you are truly "conservative", you will understand and admit to yourself (and then to everyone else) just how badly you have been used by Bush and his cronies. My suspicion, however, is that you aren't a conservative, but a neocon and/or a fascist - both entirely different political animals.
Here's an example: I believe thet if you tried real hard, you could make the case for some pretty serious crimes committed by the BA. Yet you want to let them "ent back home to live out their lives in the fog of unrealistic idealism they prefer to embrace". This sentiment is in no way, shape, or form "conservative".
July 21st, 2007 at 11:48 am"Foul language is the vernacular of the right-wing base? What websites have you been reading?"
"We conservatives prefer to win the war of ideas and beliefs using words and policy..."
Comment by O. Bigfoot — July 21, 2007 @ 11:29 am
As I'm sure that you are aware, there is a huge difference between the "right-wing base" and "conservatives." True conservatives may prefer to use ideas and civil discourse; the ever-dwindling right-wing base prefers to use baseless, often homophobic, attacks and strawman arguments. And, if you go back in the TP archives to a couple of years ago, you'd see plenty of "right-wing base" hate-filled drivel that would make you wish they weren't labelling themselves as "conservatives". (Anyone remember IRI and his ilk?) In addition, just listen to what the Limbaugh ditto-heads and the O'Reilly fans have to say, it's pretty damned sickening. Do you consider Limbaugh and O'Reilly to be true conservatives?
July 21st, 2007 at 11:50 amI'm new here and I am really surprised at the childishness of most of the posts here. If this is the way it always here, I don't think I will stick around.
I have a question to the people who are responding to the trolls. Why do you do it? What does it gain you. All I can see that it does is allow the trolls to dominate every thread.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:51 amHis fax machine must have been broken this morning.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:53 amIf anything, the stage is set yet again for a viable third-party or independent run. All that is needed is viable third-party or independent candidates, which is what has been lacking in the past.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — July 21, 2007 @ 11:42 am
Any third party you would support would be not interest me at all.
I believe there is much progress in America that needs to be made in order for us to become a nation "of the people, by the people, and for the people." The current politicians, calling themselves "conservative," do not seem interested in that progress.
David Brooks, who has never shown the least interest in progress is now "confused" (the topic of this thread, remember?). That, to me, is a little progress (all though precious little and waaaaaay late!).
July 21st, 2007 at 11:53 am#81…..Cancer would merely allow bush to ramp up his death quest for America. In his eyes, “If I cant live no one canâ€.
Comment by sarah_nav — July 21, 2007 @ 11:39 am
Sarah, of course, being the cynic that I am, I thought about that aspect, as well as the idea that, if Bush really did get cancer, he would be able to make political hay out of his illness. Any criticism of Bush in that case would be considered a personal, politically incorrect attack, and the critic would be 'un-American', 'unpatriotic', and 'inhuman'. So we're screwed whether he actually has cancer or not! :-(
July 21st, 2007 at 11:57 amFirst of all, David Brooks is a complete idiot politically and always has been. He has no clue about much of anything, and his posturing as a right-wing pundit is ludicrous. His present befuddlement is but a glimmer of hope, and I doubt it will last. He should be fired.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:57 amI consider the current meaning of the terms conservative, neocon, republican, right-wing, etc. to be fungible and synonymous with Fascist. I wish there was a more apt term, but I ger tired of typing: conservative/neocon/republican/right-wing/etc.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:00 pmsee #57
July 21st, 2007 at 12:02 pmI consider the current meaning of the terms conservative, neocon, republican, right-wing, etc. to be fungible and synonymous with Fascist. I wish there was a more apt term, but I ger tired of typing: conservative/neocon/republican/right-wing/etc.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — July 21, 2007 @ 12:00 pm
Marcus Aurelius, I have come to the decision to just call 'em NeoCons, and let them sort it out. Labels don't mean much, anyway.
Remember when the current corrupt, crooked president called himself a "compassionate conservative?" If THAT isn't a a persuasive argument that labels are meaningless, especially applied to themselves by NeoCons, I don't know what is.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:07 pmComment by bilbobaggins — July 21, 2007 @ 11:51 am
The troll problem here is much worse lately (the last few months)than it used to be. Some of us regulars are loathe to give up posting here, although many have left for C&L, firedoglake, etc. Often our responding to trolls is out of sheer frustration; sometimes a troll posts something that can't go unanswered (I liken that scenario to when Kerry took forever to respond to the Swiftboaters, look what that cost him); and sometimes it's just plain fun to smack down some of the trolls' idiocies. Doesn't reflect very well on some of us (of course I include myself in this), does it?
July 21st, 2007 at 12:08 pmSo David Brooks is confused. Perhaps that is because he is not capable of long range thinking.
My view is one that I rarely see addressed. Besides the fact that we need to leave Iraq because we are needlessly wasting the lives of brave men and women, an even bigger fact is that staying in Iraq is economically unsustainable. We are already up to our knees in debt with China and other countries because of the Iraq fiasco, so how can we continue to add to that debt with any good conscience. What is going to happen when China demands that we repay our debt. They are not giving us this money, they are loaning us this money.
The step that the Democrats need to take right now is to put George Bush on notice that they will not consider another "emergency funding bill" for Iraq. If Bush wants to continue with this fiasco, he has to put the funding on the books and there needs to be corresponding cuts in the country's budget to pay for the occupation. Once the public really sees how much this is costing us and sees the kind of cuts that will have to be made to pay for the war, we will probably see a 90% polling of people who are opposed to the occupation. And, the first place they need to start with when they need to cut the budget is with Corporate welfare.
I read an article recently that said that if we take the Corporate tax rate back to what it was in the 1970's, we will be able to pay off this enormous debt in a little more than a year. That's a real eye-opener.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:09 pmAnd as in my post above, I don’t see too many posts here wishing sickness and death upon the Democratic leadership in congress, nor towards Democrats in general. However, there’s plenty of foul language and dire consequences heaped upon Bush, Cheney, and republicans.
No death and destruction for the Dem leadership here?
"Of course, this is the same Supreme Court that earlier decided in Kelo that private property rights only matter as long as a private company doesn’t offer a better deal, above or below the table, to local authorities, so one shouldn’t really be surprised. The unelected, black-robed tyrants have a long history of not giving a fig about the Constitution if they don’t like what it says, not to mention a long tradition of usurping the powers of the legislative and executive branch by ruling by judicial fiat. . . .
Try doing anything to those mutilating darlings of the Supremes in order to extract life-saving intel from them, and then wait for the Supreme Whores to decide that you were “humiliating†them in doing so.
Five ropes, five robes, five trees.
Some assembly required."
The blogger Misha of the blog Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler is one of the most linked-to and popular bloggers in the right-wing blogosphere. He's the 42nd most linked-to blogger on the Internet, and he is in the blogroll of scores of right-wing bloggers, such as Michelle Malkin and Captian's Quarters Blog. He wrote a post today discussing the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan and here is what he said:
"Of course, this is the same Supreme Court that earlier decided in Kelo that private property rights only matter as long as a private company doesn’t offer a better deal, above or below the table, to local authorities, so one shouldn’t really be surprised. The unelected, black-robed tyrants have a long history of not giving a fig about the Constitution if they don’t like what it says, not to mention a long tradition of usurping the powers of the legislative and executive branch by ruling by judicial fiat. . . .
Try doing anything to those mutilating darlings of the Supremes in order to extract life-saving intel from them, and then wait for the Supreme Whores to decide that you were “humiliating†them in doing so.
Five ropes, five robes, five trees.
Some assembly required."
nah, there's no death threats, irrational, over-thte-top hatred on the right side of the equation. You guys always come bearing flowers.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:12 pmWell, would you mind then not telling the rest of us what to do or think anymore, A-hole!
July 21st, 2007 at 12:15 pm"The troll problem here is much worse lately (the last few months)than it used to be. Some of us regulars are loathe to give up posting here..."
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — July 21, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
I am one of those, Jane. I usually confront trolls (like calling Bigmouth on his/her dishonesty of claiming to want an "honest" debate) for a purpose.
That purpose is to get back to the topic of the thread, which in this case is David Brooks (Media Putz of the Week for last week) and his admission (at long last!) of being "confused."
July 21st, 2007 at 12:17 pmNo, Jane, it doesn't. Reading this blog is like being in a kindergarten classroom. Most of the troll posts are simply insults like "your mother wears combat boots". It is very discouraging to see people respond to those posts. Actually, I have seen very few posts by a troll that have anything to say that needs to be refuted and the few that do, need to be ignored. If what they post is blatantly false, why correct them. The people who are here to discuss politics know that it is false and the remainder are simply trolls. Their troll posts are not going to change anyone's mind, so why bother responding to them.
I have heard Keith Olberman refer to Think Progress a few times so I decided to come by and check it out. Thus far, I really don't think it is a place where I want to waste my time and energy.
I have written to the site owners asking them why they don't have a registration system and why they don't stop the juvenile postings of several trolls here. I don't know if I will get a reply, but I thought it was worth a shot.
For the most part, I like your posts very much. But, not when you are playing with the trolls.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:18 pm"And, the first place they need to start with when they need to cut the budget is with Corporate welfare."
Comment by bilbobaggins — July 21, 2007 @ 12:09 pm
They can also eliminate the propaganda arms of the Pentagon/DOD. Then get rid of Bush's "faith-based charities" initiative. Plus there's plenty of pork to get rid of. There's load of places where our money is simply being poured down the drain (and into Bush's friends' pockets.)
July 21st, 2007 at 12:19 pmI have heard Keith Olberman refer to Think Progress a few times so I decided to come by and check it out. Thus far, I really don’t think it is a place where I want to waste my time and energy.
Comment by bilbobaggins — July 21, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
Regardless of what one thinks of the comments, bilbo, I believe the "official" part of the site is still excellent, a great place to find out the latest news on the political front.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:23 pmI have written to the site owners asking them why they don’t have a registration system and why they don’t stop the juvenile postings of several trolls here. I don’t know if I will get a reply, but I thought it was worth a shot.
For the most part, I like your posts very much. But, not when you are playing with the trolls.
Comment by bilbobaggins — July 21, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
Most of the regulars have written many times to the site owners asking for the same thing. Zooey got a response from Faiz recently saying that they are "working on it." Thanks for writing to them, too. At one point some of us staged a walkout, obviously to no avail. We do have many eloquent regulars, so, if you skip the crap, it would be worth your while to visit occasionally.
Thanks for the compliment, and "mea culpa" for the "playing with the trolls." BTW, if you have seen and enjoyed any of my husband's comments, you can read more at his blog. My name is the link.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:25 pmRegardless of what one thinks of the comments, bilbo, I believe the “official†part of the site is still excellent, a great place to find out the latest news on the political front.
Comment by Egreggious — July 21, 2007 @ 12:23 pm
I totally agree Egreggious. I also like BuzzFlash (http://www.buzzflash.com/). I like to have links to sources of information that are usually not emphasized on CNN and MSNBC. I pay little attention to Faux Noise, unless Olbermann calls my attention to it, and then it is just to know that Orally or Inhannity are still making fools of themselves. {:-)
July 21st, 2007 at 12:31 pmBTW, if you have seen and enjoyed any of my husband’s comments, you can read more at his blog. My name is the link.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — July 21, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
Wayne & Jane are the best!
July 21st, 2007 at 12:32 pmWe taxpayers need to know where our hard-earned money is going. It’s bad enough that we’re funding a war that most of us disagreed with in the first place, but this “faith-based†crap is just puke icing on a turd. Americans should not be funding the second coming!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — July 21, 2007 @ 10:56 am
The Supremely Retarded Court took care of that for us!
July 21st, 2007 at 12:34 pmComment by Egreggious — July 21, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
As I've said before, "Pshaw!" :-)
July 21st, 2007 at 12:35 pmWe conservatives prefer to win the war of ideas and beliefs using words and policy, sending our ideological opponents home in political deafeat, but quite alive and healthy. Personally, I wish no ill will toward those with warped ideals and illogical, nonsensical political ideas. I merely think they should be defeated in the polls, and sent back home to live out their lives in the fog of unrealistic idealism they prefer to embrace.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — July 21, 2007 @ 11:29 am
Although I disagree with you let me commend you for posting without the usual name calling adolescent stuff.
As to your point:
1) I do not hold the views of the hate post, and I believe that such speech is abhorrent and undignified, not to mention just wrong. So, I will condemn it while saying people can say what they want.
2) You seem to lump people together under labels that do not apply to a group as a whole. You can find a$$holes on either side of an issue ; they do not define the group with which you associate them, any more than you define moderate conservative thought.
As an example of the republican ideology you commend, is this from a Rebublican/conservative blog...which was quite easy to find, and I am sure is just one of many:
God’s people hitlist : God wants them dead because they harm America!
* Micheal Moore
* Hillary Clinton
* Bill Clinton
* Chelsea Clinton
* Cindy Sheehan (Has publicly repented from her sins - God won!)
* Al Gore
* Al Franken
* Barrack Osama
* Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA)
* Charly & Martin Sheen
* Rick Warren
* Joel Osteen
* Dan Rather
* Sam Harris
* Boris Yeltsin (God Won)
* Cho Seung-Hui (God Won)
* Saddam Hussein (God Won)
* Kurt Vonnegut (God Won)
* George “Greasy Greek†Soros
* Chuck Hegel
* Sheryl GAY Stolberg
* Ryan Lawson
* Charles Darwin (God Won)
* Hemant Mehta a.k.a. The Friendly Atheist
I got this delightful list from an allegedly Christian conservative republican. Does she speak for you?"
http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/blacklist
And add Pat Roberson who publicly called for the death of a Supreme court justice (as did Mann Coulter). It's easy to show examples of extremism from either side. These do not represent mainstream thought. Do they represent your views, as a conservative?
July 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pmI agree with Bigfoot that ideas will win the day, even if the magnitude of the threat by AQ & militant Islamists is constantly minimized and trivialized by many bloggers on the left. Unlike the Cold War, which was always going to be decided by a slugfest gotterdaemmerung scenario, the disease that militants Islamists propagate is more like cancer, and can lie in remission for long periods before metasthesizing outward. Indonesia & Morocco are outliers recently used as bases for strikes into the Philippines and Spain.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:06 pmAnd add Pat Roberson who publicly called for the death of a Supreme court justice (as did Mann Coulter). It’s easy to show examples of extremism from either side. These do not represent mainstream thought. Do they represent your views, as a conservative?
Comment by funkyp
Nice post, funkyp.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:17 pmthe threat by AQ & militant Islamists is constantly minimized and trivialized by many bloggers on the left.
Comment by daveinboca — July 21, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
To balance the scare tactics on the right.
Brooks is confused because the Bush junta does not act rationally.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:17 pmWe have depleted forces that are overworked and under-equipped.
We have not done any damage to the terrorists that have vowed to attack us. On the contrary, we could not have done much more to bolster them, unless we gave them taxpayer money.
What? Terrorists do get taxpayer money.
Yes, not only are we arming the insurgency against us, our support for the taleban in the late 1990s and into the Bush administration helped arm them against us. Now we have allowed Al Qaeda to flourish while we have been distracted in Iraq.
No wonder Brooks is confused. He thought Bush was with the good guys. Clearly not.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 21, 2007 @ 1:17 pm
July 21st, 2007 at 1:19 pmThanks for that!
I agree with Bigfoot that ideas will win the day, even if the magnitude of the threat by AQ & militant Islamists is constantly minimized and trivialized by many bloggers on the left.
Comment by daveinboca
It's always been about ideas, daveinboca. BTW, sometimes when Bigfoot comes here and posts, he's insulting as all get out the instant he shows up. This morning's post is down on his typical vitreol.
I for one don't trivialize the threat posed by militant Islamics. So many times, I simply push back against the rightie who comes here and just starts flaming "libruls" period, and bigfoot has been one of them in the past. Just sweeping generalizations, sneering, and blanket condemnation.
(Damn, I'm being soooo good this morning... NO cuss words!)
I also don't think invading Iraq and slaughtering the locals wholesale is a very good ad for American values in the Middle East, or that you'll stop the next bunch of hijackers armed w/ boxcutters by building more nuclear bombs.
Are radical Islamics a serious problem? Shit yes. They scare the bejeesus out of me. I'm terrified taht they'll get Musharrif one of these days and they will finally have the nuke they want. But, hey, when the American President talks about it being "God's will" that he smote Saddam, is it any different?
July 21st, 2007 at 1:24 pmI used to like this site a lot. I agree with Veritas. The topic supposedly was David Brooks' dilemma with the administration. You can count on both hands the number of people who stuck with that topic. Please stick with the topic at hand.
To Ace, please start your own site--you advance your "little theories" on every site I visit and it is never germain to the topic. Do you have ADD?
July 21st, 2007 at 1:28 pmHere's what you do Mr. Brooks,
Shut the F..........................................
(we now return you to regular programming)
RIP
July 21st, 2007 at 1:31 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
Here's a new dilemma for David Brooks - another Boston Tea Party -Taxation without representation is making the native extremely restless and thinking about withholding. Now that would present an entirely new set of concepts for David Brooks to cogitate on, wouldn't it? No money/no war.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:34 pmAnd I've hard that this is a consideration (not funding a government which no longer represents it's citizenry) along with the formation of state groups to press Congress for impeachment which, after all, IS the will of the majority of the people at this point.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:35 pmIt's always entertaining to discuss personal philosophies vis-a-vis this war, the condition of the Middle East, neocon ideologies, and even theories of relativity; however, it's time for americans to start talking turkey - talking about where all of this money is coming from, how broke we truly are which we will suddenly discover when a Democrat becomes president, etc., etc. Ending the war now is essential to the survival of this country economically. It's also essential that we discontinue the genocidal practice of sending our military heroes to their untimely death. This administration and congress' hands are dripping in the blood of our fallen soldiers and the Iraqi people. They say that karma is a biotch. Well, Bush Cabal....get ready 'cause here it comes!
July 21st, 2007 at 1:39 pmAnyone here at TP "HAD ENOUGH" yet??? This is the new campaign sweeping across the country - signs, billboards, ads simply saying "had enough?". It's working. Sorry Karlie Rovereich! Really sorry.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:40 pmComment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 21, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
I've enjoyed your posts (depite the 'cussing) for some time. I clicked on your name and it linked to another TP post thread, which was full of troll droppings. Why the link?
As for radical Islam, and before you label me 'blame America first' hear me out. Since WWI, the middle east was divided and re-divided, initially by the British, including the formation of the state of Israel by the international community in 1947.
July 21st, 2007 at 1:42 pmThis decision angered the Arab world and led to the Arab/Israeli war in 1948, which led to Israel being established as an Independant State, and Palestine was relegated to areas controlled by Egypt and (trans)Jordan.
Arabs have never forgiven the world for this, and the Palestinians and Israelis have been fighting ever since. The Arab world believes it is a sin that 'Infidels' inhabit and control Arab lands, and it is such thinking that led directly to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, who protested the presence of U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia; the holy shrine of Mecca is located there.
Without getting into the messy details of CIA connections to Osama, Saddam, Iran and all, let's just say we have not dealt fairly and honestly with the Arab world. We have worked with and backed Iran over the years, often behind the scenes, as in Reagan/Bush, and Iran-Contra. We have done the dame with Saddam. We have manipulated these countries overtly and covertly, and many there hate us for those interventions.
Imagine the U.S. being manipulated and subverted by a foreign power, like China or Russia. (instead of the Invisible Government that manipulates us) and then having our natural resources stolen by them.
I do not support acts of terrorism against anyone. Certainly as an American I support this country, but we have meddled in the political affairs of hundreds of countries, usually to steal their resources for American business interests. That is why they hate us. Not for our freedoms, but for our manipulations and underhanded dealings.
"why they don’t stop the juvenile postings of several trolls here.
Comment by bilbobaggins — July 21, 2007"
Most of the juvenile postings come from you liberals. Read any of zooey's posts. She has NEVER said anything that my 15 year old niece couldn't refute. I don't come here to engage in a debate because most of you are incapable of a serious debate. For the most part you engage in rhetoric and name calling. Just read through some of these threads. I come here to expose your nonsense every chance I get and I have a ball!
July 21st, 2007 at 2:07 pmI come here to expose your nonsense every chance I get and I have a ball!
Comment by michael — July 21, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
You too want to lump everyone together. I skip the nonsense juvenile posts because some of the posters here are not only informative, but also provide links to sources of fact. I get a lot of information from these people (there are maybe 6-10 such)
July 21st, 2007 at 2:14 pmThe rest think this is some kind of chat room, and maybe it is, who am I to dictate what people post. If I dig a little, I sometimes find a nugget of gold. sometimes I find a pile of gold; sometimes it's a pile of something else, which I ignore.
I am guessing that those you come here and 'expose' are not on my list of people who really have something to say!
"please start your own site
Comment by tanglewood — July 21, 2007"
As one of your beloved trolls, why would we want to do that? We don't want to talk with people that agree with everything we say. It's much more fun talking to dummies like yourself!
July 21st, 2007 at 2:15 pmIt’s much more fun talking to dummies like yourself!
Comment by michael
And there you go w/ the petty, irrational insults. Okay, tough guy, er tough troll, what do expect to accomplish w/ that comment? Want to start a poo flinging match?
July 21st, 2007 at 2:17 pm"I am guessing that those you come here and ‘expose’ are not on my list of people who really have something to say!
Comment by funkyp — July 21, 2007"
Possibly! But I would certainly include zooey on your list.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:17 pmI come here to expose your nonsense every chance I get and I have a ball!
Comment by michael
So what you're saying is that you're a petty sadist and you get a cheap thrill out of embarrassing people.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:18 pm"Want to start a poo flinging match?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 21, 2007"
My God! Not with you? Did I offend any of you liberals by using a capital G in the word God?
July 21st, 2007 at 2:19 pm"you get a cheap thrill out of embarrassing people.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 21, 2007"
:)
July 21st, 2007 at 2:20 pmDid I offend any of you liberals by using a capital G in the word God?
Comment by michael — July 21, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
No, it's a free country, and you can worship Shiva all you want.
And you know what? We liberals will defend with our lives your right to do that.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:27 pm:)
Comment by michael
And somehow, you're proud of this...
** crickets chirping **
Nothing else going on in your life? Of real value? I've dealt w/ serious sadists (you're kind of a lightweight when it comes to cruelty). They were all individuals who hated themselves so badly the only way they could deal w/ their own self-loathing was to take it out on other people. I actually feel sorry for you.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:30 pmMy God! Not with you? Did I offend any of you liberals by using a capital G in the word God?
Comment by michael
Why would I be offended? It seems you're dealing in broad generalizations as to what you imagine "libruls" to be like. You appear to have a need to depersonalize us all, lump us together under a phony defintion, and then write us all off. May make you feel better about yourself in the moment, but makes no sense to the rest of us.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:34 pm#
“please start your own site
Comment by tanglewood — July 21, 2007″
As one of your beloved trolls, why would we want to do that? We don’t want to talk with people that agree with everything we say. It’s much more fun talking to dummies like yourself!
Comment by michael — July 21, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
That comment was not addressed to a troll, apparently you did not read or comprehend it; must have been too busy congratulating yourself on a snide retort.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:37 pmAce was being referred to, and the complaint was that Ace, in the opinion of tanglewood, goes off-topic with long posts. While true, his posts are among the best-researched and most informative posts on here, and i like reading them, and following links, because they inform.
Like you inform by calling people you disagree with dummies or whatever. Apparently, I can add your name to the list of unworthy posts; and move on and read something more informative. As I do with all trivial posters. My choice, just as you too can choose to move on.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Certain trolls (like Mike) have constructed a comfortable reality, quite divorced from the one we all inhabit. It utilizes cliche' and bombast for warmth, and white-hot hatred for illumination. Too often, though, the intellectual foundation is cracked, and all the rooms' ceilings sag from the weight of moral hypocrisy...
July 21st, 2007 at 2:45 pm"I can add your name to the list of unworthy posts; and move on and read something more informative. As I do with all trivial posters. My choice, just as you too can choose to move on." funkyp — July 21, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
Sounds like a lot of attitude, much more emo than knowledge of the subject under discussion.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:46 pmSounds like a lot of attitude, much more emo than knowledge of the subject under discussion.
Comment by daveinboca
You never replied to what I said.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:51 pmSounds like a lot of attitude, much more emo than knowledge of the subject under discussion.
Comment by daveinboca — July 21, 2007 @ 2:46 pm
Subject under discussion=david Brooks clueless=trolls clueless=daveinboca?
My attitude is that I will skip the rantings of those without anything substantive to say.
July 21st, 2007 at 2:55 pmYou have in no way added to the discussion or my knowledge of the 'subject under discussion'
so are you clueless?
Did you read earlier posts of mine addressing the 'subject under discussion'? Or did you just read the last one and base your conclusion on that? Either way, you added nothing to the 'subject under discussion.
You did not even approach the subject of the post you criticized; just took out a sentence and applied some psycho-babble term to characterize the whole. Shoddy attempt at criticism.
"Shoddy attempt at criticism."
Comment by funkyp
But it sounded authetic - just like the intellectual coward/phony Brooks.
Perhaps that was the point?
July 21st, 2007 at 2:58 pm"authentic" - sorry, I've been prematurely posting quite a lot lately - it's the "typing with two fingers" stuff.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:00 pmSounds like the usual sophomoric attempt to avoid demonstrating your own limitless ignorance about the substance of the discussion and its various ramifications.
"Psycho-bablle? Clueless?
You've been demonstrated to be the name-caller that you denigrate in every post that disagrees with you
July 21st, 2007 at 3:02 pmBut it sounded authetic - just like the intellectual coward/phony Brooks.
Perhaps that was the point?
Comment by barfly — July 21, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
There was a point?
July 21st, 2007 at 3:04 pm"Sounds like the usual sophomoric attempt to avoid demonstrating your own limitless ignorance about the substance of the discussion and its various ramifications."
What "various ramifications" do you see from Brooks throwing his hands up and declaring tacit defeat?
Will this change any "conservative" minds about the way forward in Iraq?
July 21st, 2007 at 3:06 pmThere was a point?
Comment by funkyp
Ask Dave.
It certainly wasn't anything about Brooks...
July 21st, 2007 at 3:07 pmsounds like the usual sophomoric attempt to avoid demonstrating your own limitless ignorance about the substance of the discussion and its various ramifications.
“Psycho-bablle? Clueless?
You’ve been demonstrated to be the name-caller that you denigrate in every post that disagrees with you
Comment by daveinboca — July 21, 2007 @ 3:02 pm
I've already addressed those issues earlier, and you apparently have no rebuttal. You seek to, as many of your ilk, avoid the topic and smear the messenger; it's right out of the Karl Rove play book.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:11 pmPsycho babble refers to your use of 'emo' as if it has any relevance to what I said. You should explain what you mean because the term makes no sense in the context of your comment. So, that's not calling you a name, that's giving a name to the tactic you used.
As for clueless
You shoul re-read the post. I never called you clueless.
I just asked you if you, like David Brooks, the guy and the topic YOU are currently avoiding and diverting, are clueless.
I got my answer.
As I noted, your debating tactics exceed your topical & substantial knowledge of the topic at hand, which you keep changing rhetorically rather than addressing. Another artful dodger on the left.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:21 pmDavid Brooks, is a leading conservative voice; a conductor on the
July 21st, 2007 at 3:27 pmconservative train, whose job it is to comfort anxious conservative passengers, and assure them the train is running on schedule. How disconcerting it must be to these passengers on the Conservative Cannonball, to have the conductor suddenly announce this far into the trip that not only does he have no idea if the train will ever arrive, but he isn't even sure it's on the right track!
I get the funny feeling that daveinboca is BoudinBob. there's a certain similarity to the rhetoric and maneouvers used. Just a hunch.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:29 pm"As I noted, your debating tactics exceed your topical & substantial knowledge of the topic at hand, which you keep changing rhetorically rather than addressing. Another artful dodger on the left."
Comment by daveinboca
No artful dodging from Dave. He just ignores uncomfortable questions. Or do you now care to answer mine? Look back, you'll find it.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:30 pmAs I noted, your debating tactics exceed your topical & substantial knowledge of the topic at hand, which you keep changing rhetorically rather than addressing. Another artful dodger on the left.
Comment by daveinboca — July 21, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
That's right Dave, by addressing your points and responding to them with my own points, I am not addressing the issue you keep avoiding. How can I not see that? And by pointing out to you that you still, even in your latest post, have not shown you even KNOW what the subject of the discussion is, I am again avoiding the topic of you avoiding or not knowing what the subject is.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:34 pmBy the way, it is about the cluelessness of David Brooks, and many of those who post here. Is that you?
"we have meddled in the political affairs of hundreds of countries, usually to steal their resources for American business interests. That is why they hate us. Not for our freedoms, but for our manipulations and underhanded dealings." funkyp
Just how do you justify a statement like the above without removing your aluminum-foil duncecap? You obviously have never lived and worked overseas in either a US Gov or private capacity. Do you teach special-ed or something that can't be challenged by your captive audience?
The vast majority of business contracts between US & foreign companies or governments are honored in full and renewed. The few that run into trouble are catalogued in leftist cheat-sheets for ready use as agitprop. And usually in the case of the latter, it is the foreign partner who cheats or breaks the contract. Not always, and that's what gives lefty adjunct flunkies their poli-sci 101 agitprop bullet points.
And so David Brooks is confused. From that you build sand-castles of spurious "thought" and silly polemic unworthy of an adjunct prof in a community college?
July 21st, 2007 at 3:35 pm"by addressing your points and responding to them with my own points, I am not addressing the issue you keep avoiding. How can I not see that? And by pointing out to you that you still, even in your latest post, have not shown you even KNOW what the subject of the discussion is, I am again avoiding the topic of you avoiding or not knowing what the subject is." funkyp
Your quote above is worthy of a Jon Stewart monologue on the silliness that silly know-it-alls expose when they get caught way over their empty heads.
And just what would that "subject" you keep prating about be, since your inane post about US foreign policy that I keep fisking for its many absurdities seems itself to be off-topic?
July 21st, 2007 at 3:40 pmYou know, it's been fun but I've wasted a lot of time trying to get someone with troll-like behavior to address the topic at the top of this thread, or to even address what I consider to be legitimate points.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:42 pmInstead, we get the right wing diversion tactic, and somehow the thread is about me?
Got stuff to do.
Dave in Boca.
What are you, 15?
You use big words but you cannot debate or even grasp the topic at hand.
Your reading comprehension seems a little low, and I suggest you start at the top of the thread, and read slowly. Then try to get the point the article, and subsequent posters are making. Then, form an independent thought, either agree, or disagree. Perhaps you could say why you agree/disagree, but it's not necessary. But, if you want to address the topic by going off topic, well, that's avoidance behavior (psycho babble for you) and indicates you either can't or don't get it.
Get it?
"And so David Brooks is confused. "
Comment by daveinboca
Stripped of the irrelevance, it boils down to this. Brooks is announcing his turmoil at a critical juncture, and it seems someone is trying to pettifog Brooks' confusion...
July 21st, 2007 at 3:43 pmOoh, looks like you're sick of being spanked and have run out of names to call me, and are now going to run to the sandbox to play with your own age cohort. Guess the adult table was too much heavy lifting for a lightweight of your multiple weaknesses, and inability to respond with anything except cry-baby wailing about topics and subjects.
You've been de-pantsed, spanked, and your lil butt is shiny red....
Go off now and say it was all about you, when I kept responding to your specious shallow fact-challenged "arguments," which displayed equal amounts of ignorance and arrogance---sort of the left benchmark on this particular thread.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:47 pmSince I asked Dave repeatedly about Brooks, and was ignored, I'll just have to mark him down as a willfully ignorant person, who isn't worth wasted keystrokes.
What a hypocrite.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:50 pmbarfly
I was responding to the spurious thread-line of what can't be called thought which funkyp kept talking about. You have no clue as to my own problems on Iraq. I was just responding to his [and your] dishonest portrayal of the responses to your own polemical posts.
Any problems with discourse encountered here seems to be with your inability to actually portray responses as anything other than personal attacks on you, which fits the narcissistic fact-averse mode of thinking you and your buddy funky appear addicted to.
Yeah, funkp says I'm 15---quite an argument, wouldn't you say?
July 21st, 2007 at 3:53 pmComment by daveinboca
And an intellectual light-weight - as evidenced by his weak argumentation, I might add.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:55 pmI'll be back when the trolls offer something other than trite hyperbole.
Adios.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:56 pm"I’ll just have to mark him down as a willfully ignorant person" by a dishonest fraud and impostor----oh how am I going to get to sleep tonight---I evaded the Brooks phenomenon while displayed the limitless awesome ignorance of a couple of leftie grifters full of attitude and bereft of factual knowledge and experience.
Happens every day, since this thread is full of phonies who call anyone with facts and arguments a "troll" or "15" or the ultimate encomium of being a "willfully ignorant person," which is a badge of pride when it comes from a shill like barfly.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:56 pmOoh, now I've scared away barfly too, because of my "trite hyperbole." Two down, but they'll be back, like their robotic hero in that movie they seem to believe is their vocation.
The only thing you clowns have terminated is your credibility.
July 21st, 2007 at 3:59 pmInteresting that barfly and funkyp are too cowardly to put their link on this thread. Fits in with their other character defects, I guess.
Or am I being a "troll?"
July 21st, 2007 at 4:00 pm“I really have no clue. So I almost have no judgment on what we should do, stay or go. I really am so confused.â€
... whereas before, with less information and hindsight, he was cock-sure.
What an irredeemable eedjit. What a farkin' tool.
Would it be impolite to ask him when he intends to resign, go become a cloistered monk, and trouble us no more?
Cheers,
July 21st, 2007 at 4:06 pmThe vast majority of business contracts between US & foreign companies or governments are honored in full and renewed. The few that run into trouble are catalogued in leftist cheat-sheets for ready use as agitprop. And usually in the case of the latter, it is the foreign partner who cheats or breaks the contract. Not always, and that’s what gives lefty adjunct flunkies their poli-sci 101 agitprop bullet points.
Comment by daveinboca — July 21, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
The truth will give me my bullet points. refute them if you can.
I guess the wholesale looting going on in Iraq doesn't count with you, so let's address U.S. corporate history.
I need to move on, but you actually woke up and addressed an actual post of opinion/fact. And your distortion of the truth deserves a reply, and some facts, which by your comments, you may be unaware of. You may want to sit down, and give me a minute to access unimpeachable sources, like our own governments' documents.
The CIA and other government agencies have routinely worked to undermine regimes unfriendly to U.S. interests (read corporate interests). Take Guatemala, and the unimpeachable source, our own records.
National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 4
CIA and Assassinations:
The Guatemala 1954 Documents
by Kate Doyle and Peter Kornbluh
These documents, including an instructional guide on assassination found among the training files of the CIA's covert "Operation PBSUCCESS," were among several hundred records released by the Agency on May 23, 1997 on its involvement in the infamous 1954 coup in Guatemala. After years of answering Freedom of Information Act requests with its standard "we can neither confirm nor deny that such records exist," the CIA has finally declassified some 1400 pages of over 100,000 estimated to be in its secret archives on the Guatemalan destabilization program. (The Agency's press release stated that more records would be released before the end of the year.) An excerpt from the assassination manual appears on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times on Saturday, May 31, 1997.
The small, albeit dramatic, release comes more than five years after then CIA director Robert Gates declared that the CIA would "open" its shadowy past to post-cold war public scrutiny, and only days after a member of the CIA's own historical review panel was quoted in the New York Times as calling the CIA's commitment to openness "a brilliant public relations snow job." (See Tim Weiner, "C.I.A.'s Openness Derided as a 'Snow Job'," The New York Times, May 20, 1997, p. A16)
Arbenz was elected President of Guatemala in 1950 to continue a process of socio- economic reforms that the CIA disdainfully refers to in its memoranda as "an intensely nationalistic program of progress colored by the touchy, anti-foreign inferiority complex of the 'Banana Republic.'" The first CIA effort to overthrow the Guatemalan president--a CIA collaboration with Nicaraguan dictator Anastacio Somoza to support a disgruntled general named Carlos Castillo Armas and codenamed Operation PBFORTUNE--was authorized by President Truman in 1952. As early as February of that year, CIA Headquarters began generating memos with subject titles such as "Guatemalan Communist Personel to be disposed of during Military Operations," outlining categories of persons to be neutralized "through Executive Action"--murder--or through imprisonment and exile. The "A" list of those to be assassinated contained 58 names--all of which the CIA has excised from the declassified documents.
PBSUCCESS, authorized by President Eisenhower in August 1953, carried a $2.7 million budget for "pychological warfare and political action" and "subversion," among the other components of a small paramilitary war. But, according to the CIA's own internal study of the agency's so-called "K program," up until the day Arbenz resigned on June 27, 1954, "the option of assassination was still being considered." While the power of the CIA's psychological-war, codenamed "Operation Sherwood," against Arbenz rendered that option unnecessary, the last stage of PBSUCCESS called for "roll-up of Communists and collaborators." Although Arbenz and his top aides were able to flee the country, after the CIA installed Castillo Armas in power, hundreds of Guatemalans were rounded up and killed. Between 1954 and 1990, human rights groups estimate, the repressive operatives of sucessive military regimes murdered more than 100,000 civilians.
But I'm sure you can refute that, so let's try with author and International Banking community expert John Perkins who wrote "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" and recently released "The Secret History of the American Empire"
Are you still reading Dave, because I know proof is more important to you than political ideology? Anyone bored by long factual post might want to move along here, I feel the need to validate!
Here's a quote or two from John:
Perkins writes, "The book was to be dedicated to the presidents of two countries, men who had been his clients whom I respected and thought of as kindred spirits - Jaime Roldós, president of Ecuador, and Omar Torrijos, president of Panama. Both had just died in fiery crashes. Their deaths were not accidental. They were assassinated because they opposed that fraternity of corporate, government, and banking heads whose goal is global empire. We Economic Hit Men failed to bring Roldós and Torrijos around, and the other type of hit men, the CIA-sanctioned jackals who were always right behind us, stepped in.
JOHN PERKINS: Basically what we were trained to do and what our job is to do is to build up the American empire. To bring -- to create situations where as many resources as possible flow into this country, to our corporations, and our government, and in fact we’ve been very successful. We’ve built the largest empire in the history of the world. It's been done over the last 50 years since World War II with very little military might, actually. It's only in rare instances like Iraq where the military comes in as a last resort. This empire, unlike any other in the history of the world, has been built primarily through economic manipulation, through cheating, through fraud, through seducing people into our way of life, through the economic hit men. I was very much a part of that.
OHN PERKINS: Well, I was initially recruited while I was in business school back in the late sixties by the National Security Agency, the nation's largest and least understood spy organization; but ultimately I worked for private corporations. The first real economic hit man was back in the early 1950's, Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of Teddy, who overthrew of government of Iran, a democratically elected government, Mossadegh’s government who was Time's magazine person of the year; and he was so successful at doing this without any bloodshed -- well, there was a little bloodshed, but no military intervention, just spending millions of dollars and replaced Mossadegh with the Shah of Iran. At that point, we understood that this idea of economic hit man was an extremely good one. We didn't have to worry about the threat of war with Russia when we did it this way. The problem with that was that Roosevelt was a C.I.A. agent. He was a government employee. Had he been caught, we would have been in a lot of trouble. It would have been very embarrassing. So, at that point, the decision was made to use organizations like the C.I.A. and the N.S.A. to recruit potential economic hit men like me and then send us to work for private consulting companies, engineering firms, construction companies, so that if we were caught, there would be no connection with the government.
But my real job was deal-making. It was giving loans to other countries, huge loans, much bigger than they could possibly repay. One of the conditions of the loan–let's say a $1 billion to a country like Indonesia or Ecuador–and this country would then have to give ninety percent of that loan back to a U.S. company, or U.S. companies, to build the infrastructure–a Halliburton or a Bechtel. These were big ones. Those companies would then go in and build an electrical system or ports or highways, and these would basically serve just a few of the very wealthiest families in those countries. The poor people in those countries would be stuck ultimately with this amazing debt that they couldn’t possibly repay. A country today like Ecuador owes over fifty percent of its national budget just to pay down its debt. And it really can’t do it. So, we literally have them over a barrel. So, when we want more oil, we go to Ecuador and say, “Look, you're not able to repay your debts, therefore give our oil companies your Amazon rain forest, which are filled with oil.†And today we're going in and destroying Amazonian rain forests, forcing Ecuador to give them to us because they’ve accumulated all this debt. So we make this big loan, most of it comes back to the United States, the country is left with the debt plus lots of interest, and they basically become our servants, our slaves. It's an empire. There's no two ways about it. It’s a huge empire. It's been extremely successful.
JOHN PERKINS: Yeah, and it was, you know? And when the National Security Agency recruited me, they put me through a day of lie detector tests. They found out all my weaknesses and immediately seduced me. They used the strongest drugs in our culture, sex, power and money, to win me over. I come from a very old New England family, Calvinist, steeped in amazingly strong moral values. I think I, you know, I’m a good person overall, and I think my story really shows how this system and these powerful drugs of sex, money and power can seduce people, because I certainly was seduced. And if I hadn't lived this life as an economic hit man, I think I’d have a hard time believing that anybody does these things. And that's why I wrote the book, because our country really needs to understand, if people in this nation understood what our foreign policy is really about, what foreign aid is about, how our corporations work, where our tax money goes, I know we will demand change.
And here's what a reviewer said of his recent book:
Perkins reveals the secret history behind the events that have defined our world, including:
* The current Latin American Revolution and its lessons for democracy
* How the “Defeats†in Vietnam and Iraq benefited big business
* The role of Israel as Fortress America in the Middle East
* Tragic repercussions of the IMF’s “Asian Economic Collapseâ€
* US blunders in Tibet, Congo, Lebanon, and Venezuela
* Jackal (CIA operatives) forays to assassinate democratic presidents
From the U.S. military in Iraq to infrastructure development in Indonesia, from Peace Corps volunteers in Africa to Jackals in the Indian Ocean, Perkins exposes a conspiracy of corruption that has fueled instability and anti-Americanism around the globe. Alarming yet hopeful, this book provides a compassionate plan to re-imagine our world.
Okay, Dave refute the facts. Don't impugn my character, or the character of John Perkins, just refute the facts about Guatemala nad the general sense that the CIA, NSA and other agencies do not carry out the corporate wishes abroad.
July 21st, 2007 at 4:09 pmAllende in Chile. Attempts against Chavez in Venezuela.
Old enough to remember Vietnam? I am, and we, assassinated the Prez of S. Vietnam to install our guy. Look it up, I'm not your researcher.
And as with the long posts by ace, there is a lot of truth out there for anyone with the guts to look at it. It is much easier to change the subject than to try to defend the lawlessness at the very top of our 'Democratically elected" government.
Bravo, at least Arne has the bravery to put up his website link, even if his comment is "off the subject," or what was the subject, anyway!?
Yes, I think we should get out of Iraq, but if you have ever lived in a war zone, and I have twice, situations DO CHANGE, Arne, even though out there in Stanford, you live in a Plato's Cave of Absolutes!!!
So being confused is a sign of honesty, something in short supply on the left coast.
July 21st, 2007 at 4:10 pmI', re-reading All The Best Men by Evan Thomas and probably know more than you ever will about the CIA, having worked with them as an FSO in several countries.
Just as I thought. You read one book and now you're an "expert." I've read a hundred and I'm not, but I know much more than you on just how complex the world is.
And you've pulled out one of those leftist cheat-sheet agitprop books I told you about,[but you probably didn't bother reading the post] that show the times the CIA failed. The KGB & Sov Military Intelligence committed ten times the "crimes" leftie agitpreppies like Perkins point out were done by the CIA. But you'll never read those books, like Powers The Man Who Kept the Secrets about Helms, who I knew personally, and Iran. Or Legacy of Ashes. Or Sabotage. Or a lot of books that put context on cartoons like you and Perkins propagate as facts.
Consider yourself spanked again!! Back to your sandbox!
July 21st, 2007 at 4:17 pm"You're in a context, post-September 11 where everybody is blaming you for not bring all the information together, to think about a theory of how the World Trade Centers got blown up. So you want to be aggressive in connecting the dots. They were aggressive and they did take this Niger thing seriously. But to me, that's what I want my president to be doing in those circumstances because nuclear bombs could be months away in Iraq."--David Brooks July 18th 2003
July 21st, 2007 at 4:18 pmOoooh, SOMEone likes the smell of their own farts.
July 21st, 2007 at 4:23 pmOh, by the way, when I was political/military officer in Saudi Arabia, Kermit Rooseveldt's son stayed at my house as a houseguest. He would know more about Iran than Perkins or other sock-puppets on the spooky paranoia fringe of the covert establishment would ever know about Iran.
A couple of my CIA friends are buddies of Larry Johnson, if you know who he is, and they and I correspond often enough with mutual respect, as we know that we disagree from a data base of actual experience and broad knowledge.
Neither of which you, Perkins, or any lefty agitpreppies on this thread seem to display, despite your vigorous rhetorical exertions.
And it looks like you're changing the subject, ha ha ha!
July 21st, 2007 at 4:23 pmConsider yourself spanked again!! Back to your sandbox!
Comment by daveinboca — July 21, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
Spanked by, as I suggested in my post you would, impugning the source, and claiming you have superior knowledge.
July 21st, 2007 at 4:30 pmI guess you win, because the facts you have listed (none) certainly refute the facts of a man you just libeled, who was on the inside and finally got tired of the evil he was doing in his country's name.
And if you really are connected as you suggest, you would not be posting here, and it's no wonder you resist the truth because your associations with "Helms" and whoever, were to promote the ends I listed in my post. To pave the way for corporatocracy (oops, democracy) your CIA buddies assassinated and disrupted democratically elected governments.
Iran Contra. Heard of that. It is in the record of our congress. Yeah, i know, congressional records and CIA documents=leftist agitprop. Who's believing the propaganda you are spewing?
Gotta go, it's been real (but not real enlightening).
I’, re-reading All The Best Men by Evan Thomas
Comment by daveinboca — July 21, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
I don't know what you're reading: the name of the book is "The Very Best Men"
Don't even know the name of the book you claim to be re-reading.
That sound you hear is the last breath of credibility leaving your body.
Ahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!
July 21st, 2007 at 4:33 pmHe wasn't confused when he shamlessly cheerlead for the invasion in 2003.
July 21st, 2007 at 4:36 pm"And if you really are connected as you suggest, you would not be posting here," funkybs
Above, another non-sequitur from a certified bantamweight.
Oh yeah, Torrijos & Roldos died in 1981 & Mossadegh was ancient history who defeated himself, like many egomaniacs, and then was made a folk-hero by nincompoops like Perkins, who probably got a bad personnel evaluation and decided to cop out by calling his country names like a lot of incompetents or eff-ups [like Larry Johnson] do. And it got a [un-named] good book review? Wow!
You cite "facts" which I already said might be true, as the Arbenz, Allende, Mossadegh and other episodes were not good. But remember Stalin your buddy was still looking at Azerbaijan back then and Mossadegh was playing footsie with Tudeh, if you know what that is/was.
Clowns like yourself have no context to put books like Perkins, which I would rank with screeds like Osama's favorite by a bookworm in DC who wrote a fabulous fact-challenged jeremiad about the US taking over the world. Check that one out too in your Amazon excursions!
You appear gullible, to say the least, and naive to give you more credit than you're probably due. Go off and play with yourself or your rug-rat pals in the sandbox and I suggest Hogwarts is where you would thrive once you get out of pre-school.
July 21st, 2007 at 4:43 pm"Don’t even know the name of the book you claim to be re-reading."
Quod erat demonstrandum as to the substance/content point I was making in my last post. You are the silliest lil fellow, fun to beat about the head and shoulders, but tiresome and ultimately a shallow bore.
Get thee to thy sandbox, go!
July 21st, 2007 at 4:47 pmYou appear gullible, to say the least, and naive to give you more credit than you’re probably due. Go off and play with yourself or your rug-rat pals in the sandbox and I suggest Hogwarts is where you would thrive once you get out of pre-school.
Comment by daveinboca
Somehow, I doubt you're who you claim to be. You wouldn't come here and post like this. Sorry, you don't have nearly the credibility you fantasize yu do. Talk about desperate.
July 21st, 2007 at 6:40 pmInteresting that barfly and funkyp are too cowardly to put their link on this thread. Fits in with their other character defects, I guess.
Or am I being a “troll?â€
Comment by daveinboca (http://www.daveinboca.blogspot.com/)— July 21, 2007 @ 4:00 pm
Dave, what you are is a blogger with too much time on your hands. Thanks for linking to your blog. It was very revealing.
Your blog is filled with hatred for those with whom you disagree, so you come here because you want to flame in here.
That by definition is a trolll. You fit the profile.
So, I am writing this to you, but also to TP to ask them to bar you from this site permanently. You belong on a non-progressive site.
July 21st, 2007 at 6:46 pmWhat a twit.
He's probably beginning to use his own brain, thinking for himself and not simply believing the propaganda from the Bush administration.
One problem, there's nothing up there!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thus no ideas but cobwebs and dust.
July 21st, 2007 at 6:46 pmMy letter to TP re. daveinboca:
I writing to complain about a poster on thread for the topic titled "David Brooks: ‘I’m so confused’ about what to do in Iraq." Filed under:
Posted by Faiz at 8:00 am
Here is my latest exchange with him:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting that barfly and funkyp are too cowardly to put their link on this thread. Fits in with their other character defects, I guess.
Or am I being a “troll?â€
Comment by daveinboca (http://www.daveinboca.blogspot.com/)— July 21, 2007 @ 4:00 pm
Dave, what you are is a blogger with too much time on your hands. Thanks for linking to your blog. It was very revealing.
Your blog is filled with hatred for those with whom you disagree, so you come here because you want to flame in here.
That by definition is a trolll. You fit the profile.
So, I am writing this to you, but also to TP to ask them to bar you from this site permanently. You belong on a non-progressive site.
Comment by hterrya — July 21, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the 4:00 pm post, daveinboca has continued to flame. This thread, and all threads need to be cleaned of this kind of behavior.
Thanks.
July 21st, 2007 at 6:55 pmInteresting that barfly and funkyp are too cowardly to put their link on this thread. Fits in with their other character defects, I guess.
That's rich. I don't have a link. I guess I'm just some guy with an opinion, but no agenda.
July 21st, 2007 at 7:07 pmSince the 4:00 pm post, daveinboca has continued to flame. This thread, and all threads need to be cleaned of this kind of behavior.
Thanks.
Comment by hterrya
Just checked out his "website". Just petty insults and hysterical rightwing vitriol. Probably trying to boost himself into the upper echelons of "blogdom" so he can afford to move out of his mom's basement and afford his own dresses.
CIA? War zones? Riiiight...
July 21st, 2007 at 7:09 pm"Just petty insults and hysterical rightwing vitriol....so he can afford to move out of his mom’s basement and afford his own dresses" Rep for Stupidity
Hilarious, since many of my posts are criticized by right-wingers for less than total fervor for their cause. Plus I own two homes and have a wife and teen daughter. Get a family and then spew your airhead nonsense.
"This thread, and all threads need to be cleaned of this kind of behavior." hterrya
Yes, you'd love to cleanse all dialogue and factual commentary and nuances from your blow-dried brains. I get a lot of cowardly fecal billets doux from craven lefties whose neuro ruts are clogged with funkybs type "experts" like Perkins. All posted anonymously, as they can't hold their own in civil discourse.
"Your blog is filled with hatred for those with whom you disagree" terryya
If your vocabulary was wide enough, I would use the word "disdain" and "polemical vigor" instead of hatred, but I doubt you would understand all those syllables.
funkybs, You aren't smart enough to realize it, but you do have an agenda---it seems to be making a fool of yourself.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:14 pmHilarious, since many of my posts are criticized by right-wingers for less than total fervor for their cause. Plus I own two homes and have a wife and teen daughter. Get a family and then spew your airhead nonsense.
I don't believe you in the least.
Get... a family... and then spew your nonsense???
WTF is this supposed to mean?
July 21st, 2007 at 8:38 pm#165 daveinboca:
Bravo, at least Arne has the bravery to put up his website link, even if his comment is “off the subject,†or what was the subject, anyway!?
Yes, I think we should get out of Iraq, but if you have ever lived in a war zone, and I have twice, situations DO CHANGE, Arne, even though out there in Stanford, you live in a Plato’s Cave of Absolutes!!!
Ummm, speaking of "subject", Dave, the subject here is not whether situations change, but rather whether Brooks can be dead-sure way back when but not know his a$$ from a hole in the grounf about the very same subject and issues now. Let us posit for a moment, arguendo, that he did know it all back then, and that he was in fact absitively, posolutely right, but the "situation changed" in the interim, and now he's just confoozed. I'd venture to say that's prima facie evidence that in fact he didn't know WTF he was talking about back then (and certainly didn't anticipate any possibility of a "changed situation", much less inevitability of such [[which is pretty much my view even back then]).
We were f*cking right back then, he was wrong, and nowadays the best he can say is "Why am I so confoosed?" I'd veture it's beacuse he's an eedjit and a hack.
Cheers,
July 21st, 2007 at 8:50 pm#165 daveinboca:
BTW, you're wrong too. I'm not "in Stanford" nor do I live near Stanford.
Cheers,
July 21st, 2007 at 8:52 pmIdiocy & Hackery are visible every night on Keith Olberboy & Co as well as B O'R. You choose your poison, I'll choose mine---and hopefully we'll all live to be eighty fit as a fiddle!
I do have the chops to know that the flackery on this thread just hates to have any dissent, informed or otherwise---an old left tradition going back to Uncle Joe....
I assume you DO live on the Left Coast!
July 21st, 2007 at 9:35 pmInteresting that barfly and funkyp are too cowardly to put their link on this thread. Fits in with their other character defects, I guess.
Or am I being a “troll?â€
Comment by daveinboca
I don't have a blog to flog, like some whores. Your content-free posts are a fine example of "conservative thought" such as it is. Still ducking my question, I see. Predictable.
July 21st, 2007 at 10:30 pmI'll repost my question for Dave:
What “various ramifications†do you see from Brooks throwing his hands up and declaring tacit defeat?
If you're too afraid to answer, I'll understand ;)
July 21st, 2007 at 10:34 pmComment by daveinboca — July 21, 2007 @ 9:35 pm
Looks like your website hasn't caught any flies holmes, so you're here to shill for it and get a few hits. Pretty strange too that a married man, such as you profess to be, would be hanging out here "spanking" the posters... maybe you should change the theme of your site, get a little kinky wit it dogg
July 21st, 2007 at 10:55 pmThis is disorienting. Change to Media Matters format please.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:01 pmIf he is confused he should shut up until he figures it out. When I'm confused, I keep my trap shut until I figure it out, but not Brooks. He just keeps talking no matter what his mental state.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:30 pmAFTER CHEERLEADING THE MURDER OF SOME 4,000 U.S. TROOPS (mostly all Gentiles) the MAIMING OF SOME 30,000 or so MORE GENTILE TROOPS and the MURDER of some MILLION OR SO INNOCENT IRAQIS, BROOKS COULD START BY APOLOGIZING FOR HIS COMPLICITY IN THIS HORROR.
July 22nd, 2007 at 12:11 am"What “various ramifications†do you see from Brooks throwing his hands up and declaring tacit defeat?" barfly
Ah, another wish projected onto being the father of a thought. Brooks did no such thing, though it's hard to convince gullible naive clueless nitwits that that isn't your p.o.v. Ramifications in this case are the apparent willingness of the Anbar Sunnis to throw out the crazed AQ foreigners, mostly hated Saudis, from their homeland. You zombie knucklewalkers all missed that cuz good news is outside your loser paradigm. Y'all want to lose, don't you, so the USA fits your own life pattern of hopeless loooozeer career paths. Especially if you're academicide nobodies and smarty-pants teeny-dorks.
Oh, pls turn me into Faiz for such terrible posts outside the pattern of your silly scurrilous shallow specious spurious arguments against this administration.
I personally don't like GWB myself, but watching twittering moonbats and whack-job nutroots like the Repub of Insolence do their on-line wanking, I simply felt compelled to contribute a bit of contrarian obfuscation, if you catch my drift.
And Repub of Sillywalks, I find it sooo hurtful that you find me not believable in the least. And the lord of fleas, "I don’t have a blog to flog, like some whores" has such nasty asides to dump on this thread. And the "Pretty strange too that a married man, such as you profess to be, would be hanging out here “spanking†the posters…" cierro de boca metrosexual does pick up on my naughty innuendoes....very perspicacious for a typical psycho projection type.
I do hope that Faiz finds me unfit for this gracious company....!
July 22nd, 2007 at 1:10 amcierro de boca metrosexual does pick up on my naughty innuendoes…
Comment by daveinboca — July 22, 2007 @ 1:10 am
That's what 'm sayin' holmes, your website is deadly, dreary, dull... spice it up, get some of those naughty innuendoes (sic) into the mix... No offense dogg, but you've got two women in the house. Why not, e.g., set up a webcam and do that spankin' thang for real...
July 22nd, 2007 at 1:38 amYou fit right into my mindset, yo cierre! I'll meet you on YouTube & let me know on my site where & when we can tear the leather off the sun!
The pathetic collection of leftardo human experimenters whom Astrologers call those cursed with having the awful birthmark of "Neptune in Libra." meaning those susceptible to every sort of light-headed whimsical vagary of mood and temperament taken seriously, were also cursed with being hailed as the vanguard of the Age of Aquarius. Seems these vacant degenerates actually believed their press and acted out a hilarious GENERATIONAL DEGENERATION because they were predisposed, if you believe their astrological Neptunian karma, to believe the shallow, spurious, specious silly folderol that passed as their specific destiny. Some resisted, most did not, leaving us with poop, I mean pop, heroes like Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Boob Dylan, and a whole panoply of early demisers worthy of being the yang to their parents' yin, or vice versa. Janis, and dozens of other early bloomers faded before noon of their life trajectories.
The Weekly Standard has a good run-down on just how good these young Gen-X and Gen Y are compared to their slacker drugged-out squalid forebears. The lotus rises from the fecal material is the Oriental way of comprehending how the new generation of winners has been spawned by a human-garbage sleaze-dump mound of self-serving narcissistic bio-mass which has given itself over to the most ridiculous autistic solipsistic self-referential solecisms since the age of Incroyable et Merveilleuse, back in the 1790s. Please google for the reference.
Luckily for the French, after that they found a leader who had a pair, and could keep their country from being overrun by silly bantamweights like the Islamist froth-mouth hysterics and their in-country fifth column at the NYT, WaPo, and broadcast networks.
Oh, that we in the USA should be so lucky two centuries later!
July 22nd, 2007 at 1:50 amHere's a tidbit to cierre su boca on Incroyable et Merveilleuse: this will get your tiny schwansctuke up! Bear in mind that perruque is a wig and nudite veut dire "buck naked."
Une fureur de divertissement s'est emparée de la société du Directoire. Depuis que la Terreur est terminée et que l'on a démonté la guillotine, la jouissance est à l'ordre du jour. Ne faut-il pas rattraper le temps perdu? Les jolies femmes cèdent à la mode de l'antiquomanie : robes à la Diane ou à la Flore, tuniques couleur chair largement ouvertes sur le flanc et au décolleté généreux. On se vêt, ou plutôt on se dévêt de tulle, de gaze ou de linon transparent qui ne cache rien des formes. L'exposition des produits de l'industrie nationale organisée en 1798, témoigne de cet engouement pour le luxe.
La nudité est à l'ordre du jour : après l'ère des sans-culottes est venue celle des sans-chemises ! Mais le grand luxe de ces Merveilleuses - c'est ainsi qu'on appelle les beautés du temps - c'est la perruque, ou plutôt la multitude de perruques, car il en existe pour toutes les heures du jour : généralement blondes, on en voit des noires, des bleues, des vertes …
Et les cavaliers de ces dames? On les nomme les Incroyables, ou plutôt les Incoyables, car ils jugent élégant de supprimer les r (le R de Révolution , de Roi ou ceux qu'on entend dans Terreur) et même toutes les consonnes, devenant ainsi presque inintelligibles. Ces godelureaux arborent des accoutrements excentriques : habit vert à grands godets, taille pincée, large culotte, énorme cravate sous laquelle le menton disparaît. Ils ont le nez chaussé de grosses lunettes et sont coiffés en « pattes de chien », leurs cheveux tombant sur les oreilles. Leurs parfums à base de musc leur valent aussi le surnom de « muscadins ». Le bicorne sur la tête, ils tiennent en main un gourdin qu'ils appellent leur « pouvoir exécutif » et grâce auquel ils peuvent tenir le haut du pavé. Malheur à qui ne leur céderait pas la place!
Cette jeunesse dorée, qui dépense sans compter, se retrouve à Paris dans tous les lieux à la mode : théâtres, tripots, glaciers, Tivoli ou Frascati, allée des veuves aux Champs-Élysées ou galerie du Palais-Royal. La danse est à l'honneur et les bals publics pullulent. Élégants et élégantes se vantent de fréquenter les plus renommées des « Merveilleuses » : Mlle Lange, Mme Tallien, Mme Récamier, ou deux créoles très recherchées, les citoyennes Beauharnais et Hamelin. Leur protecteur, Barras, est un personnage influent auquel il est bon de faire sa cour : il donne d'ailleurs des fêtes d'un luxe inouï, où se presse une société disparate : royalistes et jacobins repentis, grandes dames et courtisanes. Les mœurs sont libres : on divorce pour se remarier et redivorcer au plus vite. Cette classe de nouveau riche, que la vente aux armées et l'agiotage a enrichi, devait connaître une mise au pas et un certain regain de sobriété et de pudeur lors de l'avènement du premier consul[1].
July 22nd, 2007 at 1:58 amLuckily for the French, after that they found a leader who had a pair, and could keep their country from being overrun by silly bantamweights like the Islamist froth-mouth hysterics and their in-country fifth column at the NYT, WaPo, and broadcast networks.
Oh, that we in the USA should be so lucky two centuries later!
Comment by daveinboca — July 22, 2007 @ 1:50 am
You sound like that Ct_V1 on some bad speed...
Your music reviews seem a little harsh... What have you composed BTW?
As for your site, I can see a performance art thing, where you swim through garbage and eat feces, acting out your commentaries on modern culture... Something different anyway.
July 22nd, 2007 at 2:02 am#
"This is disorienting. Change to Media Matters format please."
Comment by Tman — July 21, 2007 @ 11:01 pm
Yes, commissar apparatchiki nomenklatura excellence, we will shift from that tricky disorienting "marketplace of ideas" experiment so hurtful to "progressive though" ASAP. This will keep our peecee honey flowing in a continuous drip-mode conducive to our conditioned-reflex patterns brought on by perfectly modulated bio-feedback uninterrupted by silly interruptions of truth & facts, because they punctuate our perfect equilibrium.
Apologies to Orwell, Aldous Huxley plus the author of Doors of Perception, oops, that's Huxley again.
Oh please, Faiz, ban those nasty trolls toute de suite, si-il vous plait! And sorry to disorent the perfect repose of Tman, whoever Tman may be, if that happened by my imperfect offerings.
July 22nd, 2007 at 2:18 amdaveinboca,
If you want top quality trolls, I'm talking hard-hitters like, The Joker, Flaco, Mr. President, CT_V1, Future Troll, MAF54, No-one in particular, Billy, Boudin Bob, and countless others, send an email to:
July 22nd, 2007 at 3:55 amthetrollconsortium@gmail.com
Tell 'em Kalashnikov sent you and your first trolling is 50% off!!!
Oh, poor David, he is so confused. He is confused because he has no convictions about anything like morality, truth, justice, equality, democracy, the rule of law. He relies on a government like the Bush administration to fix his convictions for him. He should be grateful that he has a Big Brother at the top to tell him what to think, say, do and feel.
July 22nd, 2007 at 8:41 am