Is the WaPo "running a story based off of selective quotations and gross mischaracterizations from a handful of memos -- carefully picked from the some 20,000 written while Rumsfeld served as Secretary"? Or does this story "shed light on [the] brusque management style" of "a defense secretary disdainful of media criticism and driven to reshape public opinion of the Iraq war"?
IN THE COMMENTS: Joel writes:
Let me see if I have this straight, we can get the memos of a defense secretary in a time of war before the administration he worked for is even out of office, but we cannot get the memos of the first lady 7 years after her administration is over?
पोस्ट्स
१८९ टिप्पण्या:
The problem with snowflakes: although the first one can really grab your attention, eventually you don't focus on any one individual flake as they overwhelm you with drifts. So you end up surrounded by a drift of memos from Donald -- but do you pay attention to any of them?
And to argue that we are surrounded by violent extremists: while it may be true, it doesn't match with my (and I'll wager most Americans') experiences overseas, where I treated with courtesy. It's hard to argue for something when observations run counter to the argument.
I'm sure the answer depends on whether you are a Democrat or a Republican.
For myself, I credit Rumsfeld's lifelong service to his country, but I think he was too stubborn to change at the end of his term as SecDef, and it took replacing him to get a working strategy (the surge) in Iraq.
Media criticism just means it doesn't fit the narrative.
What are the media doing about the ``narrative'' meme? There's no narrative on it yet.
It could be followed back to soap opera, but that doesn't fit the narrative.
``Study shows media audience mostly dysfunctional women.''
You won't find it in the NYT.
And yet : Diana's Death Resonates With Women in Therapy made it in, long ago. A single straw, is all, and then nothing more.
"And to argue that we are surrounded by violent extremists: while it may be true, it doesn't match with my (and I'll wager most Americans') experiences overseas, where I treated with courtesy. It's hard to argue for something when observations run counter to the argument."
That is because most people who travel overseas go to places like Paris and London which have become Disneyland for the upper middle class. They never go to places like the Muslim suburbs of Europe much less a place like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Most Americans live fat dumb and happy and have no idea what is really happening in most of the rest of the world and have no clue that there are a lot of people out there that your really don't want to meet. May that ever be so and may Americans continue to have the luxury of not knowing how deep dark most of the world really is. But for that to happen someone has to, to borrow a phrase, stand ready so that peaceful people can sleep at night.
Let me see if I have this straight, we can get the memos of a defense secretary in a time of war before the administration he worked for is even out of office, but we cannot get the memos of the first lady 7 years after her administration is over?
Bravo Joel. A great one for a future commercial.
May that ever be so and may Americans continue to have the luxury of not knowing how deep dark most of the world really is.
Oh, pray tell. Do tell us about your adventures among the darkies and how duplicitous and dangerous they are--especially the ones taking over Europe. I bet it won't be long before Cedarford shows up to tell us about the impending Jewish threat.
but we cannot get the memos of the first lady 7 years after her administration is over?
There we go, let's bring up the Clintons. They are always to blame for everything.
Note how it's always the liberals who resort to racist language first.
"adventures among the darkies"
Nothing racist there.
An interesting man. I think that in the end, in a couple of decades, when he is long dead, he will be seen as one of the greatest Secretaries of Defense. He took the job to reengineer the military, and he left with that job mostly complete. But then he had to fight a war or two while he was doing that, and ended up doing a juggling act that few alive could have accomplished.
Yet, it was time for him to go when he did. Iraq needed another, fresher, viewpoint, which it got. And the fresher viewpoint and new approach is so successful that a lot of Iraqis are now saying that the war against al Qaeda (in Iraq) is won.
"Make the American people realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists."
After watching the last Democrat debate, this is very clearly the one unifying element of all the Democrat candidates for president, that the American people need to realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists - Republicans and the Bush Administration.
"She says she'll stand up to President Bush on Iran; she just said it again," Mr. Edwards said. "And in fact, she voted to give George Bush the first step in moving militarily on Iran, and he's taken it. Bush and [Vice President Dick] Cheney have taken it. They've now declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization and a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction. I think we have to stand up to this president."
Absolutely. Because we all know that Bush and Cheney are the real threat, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard aren't a terrorist organization, but nothing more than a social welfare agency feeding starving children, and why don't we try to understand their problems, and let's send them ambassadors to tell them that Bush's cowboy foreign policy is over...
Vote Democrat - The Mullahs Only Want the Bomb.
Nothing racist there.
At least you recognize racist language when you see it. Now if you could only learn to recognize sarcasm.
He took the job to reengineer the military, and he left with that job mostly complete. But then he had to fight a war or two while he was doing that, and ended up doing a juggling act that few alive could have accomplished.
If by "reengineer" you mean break, I guess this is an accurate statement. Otherwise, this statement is so laughably wrong I can only assume you must be on some incredibly powerful mind- and reality altering substances. I seriously hope you are institutionalized, because you are most certainly a danger to yourself and others.
Your sarcasm is racist.
Your sarcasm is racist.
No, John's comment was racist and ill-informed and I used sarcasm with racist language in it to point that out. I doubt John has ever left the country--even to visit the "Disneylands" of Paris and London which he claims to know so much about (because his characterization of both cities is so ignorant he has obviously never been to either one).
He is one of the fat, dumb and paranoid Americans, like Ann, scared shitless of foreigners, especially Muslims, by the likes of Rumsfeld, who is all too willing to sacrifice the principles and freedoms of this country.
So Freder, you believe that John is wrong and that the Muslim world loves us, and is in fact a happy, safe place for Americans to visit?
No, John's comment was racist and ill-informed and I used sarcasm with racist language in it to point that out.
No, the sarcasm was racist, too. It dehumanized Others in the attempt to impose your ideology on someone who is ignorant. Exposing ignorance is all well and good, but using racist language is not, and your obligation to your worldview is less onerous than your obligation to the human race.
Joel, that was a brilliant observation.
I wonder who Hillary is protecting by not releasing her memos. You think it might be Socks?
So Freder, you believe that John is wrong and that the Muslim world loves us, and is in fact a happy, safe place for Americans to visit?
"Love" is too strong a word, and any increased animosity over the last few years is due more to the actions and missteps of the administration (not that everything they have done is unjustified) rather than the successes of AQ. Of course some of the Muslim world, as is some of the non-Muslim world, is far from happy.
But yes, overall, most places in the Muslim world are safe for Americans to visit.
"No, John's comment was racist and ill-informed and I used sarcasm with racist language in it to point that out. I doubt John has ever left the country--even to visit the "Disneylands" of Paris and London which he claims to know so much about (because his characterization of both cities is so ignorant he has obviously never been to either one)."
I lived in Europe for three years and I would wager I have spent more time in Paris and London than most people on this thread. They are Disneyland for upper class Americans. You know more know what is going on in Europe by visiting the centers of these cities than you know about America by visiting Park Avenue. Outside of these cities there are large Muslim ghettos full of very alienated and disposed people. There are places outside of Paris where the police won't even go save the occasional paramilitary style raid to keep the locals somewhat in line. Not all Muslim neighborhoods are like that. I lived in a predominately Turkish suburb of Frankfurt and never once had a problem, although my German friends thought I was nuts. But when people like Theo Van Gogh are being murdered and a majority a Muslims in Britain think the country should be under Sharia law, there is clearly something else going on there besides what nitwits like you see on vacation.
As far as the Muslim world goes, I have been there to. I spent 6 months in Iraq and before that had been to Kuwait and Dubai and Israel. Lots of middle-eastern Muslims are wonderful people who want nothing more than what we have. Lots of them are not so wonderful. Why is it racist to admit the truth about what some people believe? Where do you think people like Muhammad Atta came from? Mars? Is Osama Bin Ladin popular in many quarters of the world because of his charm and good looks?
The roots of extremism and anti-westernism are obviously complex. But it does no good to deny their existence or worse yet call those who point out the obvious racist.
Feder,
You are the classic example of the Western Hipster dofus. You may have traveled some but you were no doubt totally oblivious to the world around you when you were there. You visited as a tourist and found the locals to be no doubt charming and quant. All the while you had no idea what those people's lives were really like or what the majority of the people you dealt with and took your money really thought of you. You are the equivalent of some rich person denying the existence of MS 13 because after all your gardner and maid are Latin American and they are wonderful people and would never do anything like that.
"Love" is too strong a word, and any increased animosity over the last few years is due more to the actions and missteps of the administration (not that everything they have done is unjustified) rather than the successes of AQ."
Yes because Muslims were just enthralled with the fact that the US kept 10s of thousands of troops in the Muslim holy land of Saudi Arabia. Further, there were so many missteps by the Administration from January 2001 to September of 2001 that caused the 9-11 attacks to be cheered in many quarters of the middle-east. The Muslim world has been harboring grievances against the West and the US in particular for decades now. It is a debatable how justified those grievances are but to say that the majority of the animosity or even a significant minority of the animosity is the result of this administration is to be so ignorant as to boggle the mind.
Well I have lived overseas for many years, and visited London and Paris many times.
1) Both cities have become disneyfied. They are essentially tourist traps these days. Neither is representative of the country they rule.
2) Most non-Americans view the United States with disdain, (the French with outright contempt) and these are our allies. hey do embrace lefty leaders more than rightwing ones, but then that's because they expect the leftys to behave like Europeans, not Americans.
3) A large part of it is the whole crabs in a bucket phenomena. They realized they are trapped in failed economies and political systems, and are trying to drag us down into the bucket with them. For christ's sake, they couldn't even handle the break up of Yugoslavia without American intervention. Europe's military is a joke....and the fact that we allow them the luxury of having such a pitable military allows them to subsidize their socialized economies. Notice that despite how much the europeans seem to want us out of Iraq, none of them ever say a word about us getting out of Germany, Italy and the UK?
4) The world is indeed a dangerous place. Ask the North Korean and Japanese sailors on the two ships the US navy saved from pirates this weekend.
5) Remember Islam sees the Iberian Pennisula, and the Balkans as far as the gates of Vienna as rightfully theirs, and are quite sincre and determined in their efforts to return them to the Islamic fold.
6) The world is definitely dangerous, and anyone who thinks that the US or a Republican administration is the danger is either ignorant, a fool, or most dangerous of all...a delusional partisian.
As one who has worked up to 60 miles behind guerrilla lines in half a dozen south and central American countries ... let me assure you, militant muzzies aren't the only "violent extremists" out there.
Y'all probably don't even know that Hezbollah is working closely with FARC in Colombia. Now backed by Chavez in Venezuela, and operation a training camp on the Brasil-Paraguay border.
Did anybody even notice Mr. Rumsfeld's four-day trip to Paraguay? Well, you weren't supposed to. Ole Rummy knew what he was doing, even if it pissed off the old Army cold warrior types still waiting for a Russki tank thrust through the Fulda Gap.
And, oh, 'madisonman' and others, of course you won't notice [your "non-existant"] extremists, because their Job-One is to blend in. !clue
The phrase "Make the American people realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists" is only sinister if one begins, like Feder seems to, with the assumption that we are not surrounded in the world by violent extremists. If one, however, believes these violent extremists do exists this effort is one more of education than control and manipulation.
For almost thirty years Muslim extremists have been both vocally caling for the destruction of the U.S. and intermittantly backing up their words with violent and deadly action. On 9/11 this combination of desire and capability reached a pinnacle. I, for one, do not see how anyone cannot logically conclude that there is a critical mass of violent extremists in the world that posess both the desire and capacity to greatly and adversely affect the U.S. through violent means and that key among their aims is to improve their capabilities.
You are the classic example of the Western Hipster dofus. You may have traveled some but you were no doubt totally oblivious to the world around you when you were there. You visited as a tourist and found the locals to be no doubt charming and quant.
Well first off you are wrong about me too. I have more than travelled "some". I have lived in both Germany and England and my parents and brother live in England now (Birmingham and London). My other brother has lived in Central America and the Middle East.
So don't tell me that my less grim attitude about the world is out of ignorance.
"I, for one, do not see how anyone cannot logically conclude that there is a critical mass of violent extremists in the world that posess both the desire and capacity to greatly and adversely affect the U.S. through violent means and that key among their aims is to improve their capabilities."
Uh, oh, there is more of that violently extremist neo-con propaganda again.
If only the sheeple would realize our inability to sign the Kyoto Treaty and reauthorize SCHIP is what causes the rest of the world to hate us, we could stop all these wars. But since there is only 446 Days, 01 Hours, 31 Minutes, 43 Seconds (and counting down...) left in the Bush Administration, if we elect a Democrat president, that's how much time we have until al Qaida will stand down, the Mullahs will give up their dream for the bomb...
.....the darkies and how duplicitous and dangerous they are--especially the ones taking over Europe.
Mask is slipping there Freder. Racism bad. Inclusiveness, tolerance good.
Just trying to help.
Freder is an example of the WaPo mindset, one shared by liberals and the rest of the MSM.
This critical distinction obscures all others. Either you believe we are at war with a ruthless and violent enemy intent on destroying the West, or you think nothing of the sort exists.
Follow the latter meme, and you solve crimes like random bombings and murders. Nothing at all is to be made of their Islamic ties. To mention their shared aim is called racism.
I cannot see any compromise between these views. One sees danger in Islamic terrorism, the other sees danger in those seeing that danger.
Ole Rummy knew what he was doing, even if it pissed off the old Army cold warrior types still waiting for a Russki tank thrust through the Fulda Gap.
He may have pissed off the old Army cold warrior types but he gave the old Navy and Air Force cold warrior types practically everything they wanted. E.g., the Air Force got the ultra expensive--too expensive to get shot down--F-22, a plane designed to counter a threat that may never have existed, and even if it did, the threat disappeared more than fifteen years ago.
"An interesting man. I think that in the end, in a couple of decades, when he is long dead, he will be seen as one of the greatest Secretaries of Defense. He took the job to reengineer the military, and he left with that job mostly complete. But then he had to fight a war or two while he was doing that, and ended up doing a juggling act that few alive could have accomplished."
I disagree completely. I know a lot workers at DoD and all are glad "Rummy" is gone. He ran roughshod over the military and destroyed the morale of the DoD employees with his dictatorial management style.
He was good at PR, and office politics - but thats it. Bush has refusal to go outside his families circle of favorites to staff his administration - even when better and more qualified men were available.
Joel said..."Let me see if I have this straight, we can get the memos of a defense secretary in a time of war before the administration he worked for is even out of office, but we cannot get the memos of the first lady 7 years after her administration is over?'
You consider the memos of a First Lady who hasn't occupied the White House for over 7 years...more important than those of the man who ran the Defense Department during the execution of a war that's continuing to this day?
Do you think the families of the dead and wounded American soldiers are as concerned about Hillary's memos as they are about how Rumsfeld and Company were "selling" the reasoning for the invasion and war itself?
Do you think the American public is more interested in her memos than the the way our country is viewed throughout the world or the almost trillion dollars we will have poured into Iraq by the time Bush leaves office?
The Hillary memos story is just that...a purely "political" sidebar to detract from the real issues that face America...and most here already know that...but they're too damned stubborn to admit the fact that the entire Iraqi situation has been mishandled right from the start.
*Oh, and if Hillary's memos are SO important...why haven't we ever seen the transcripts and list of attendees from Dick Cheney's energy policy meeting right at the start of the administration's time in office?
*Why didn't everybody here also call for transcripts or under oath testimony from Rummy, Rove, Cheney, Condi, Libby and others during the "leak" investigation or the U.S. Attorney fiasco??
*Why is the administration continuing to hold off on providing hundreds of pages of paperwork relating to Abramoff's visits and contacts in the White House?
Are Hillary's memos REALLY what we should be focusing on right now?
Are Hillary's memos REALLY what we should be focusing on right now?
I think we should be focusing on why we can't get a really hot female presidential candiate like Argentina did.
(deep sigh)
I always like to bring out this list when people start talking about how safe it was for Americans overseas, back before 9/11.
Item: 30 May, 1972. Members of the Japanese Red Army Faction, acting on behalf of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, open fire at Ben Gurion Airport, killing 26 and wounding 78. Many of them are American citizens from Puerto Rico
Item: 2 March 1973. Two American diplomats are taken hostage and murdered by at the US Embassy in Khartoum, Sudan; it is thought members of the Fatah faction were responsible, and that PLO leader Yassir Arafat gave the order for the murders.
Item: 23 December 1975 : Richard Welch, the CIA Station chief in Athens is murdered in front of his house by the Greek N17 terrorist group.
Item: 11 August 1976. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine attacks the El Al terminal at the airport in Istanbul, Turkey. An American citizen is among the 4 killed.
Item: 1 January, 1977. The ambassador to Lebanon and the US Economic counselor are kidnapped by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine at a checkpoint in Beirut, and later murdered.
Item: 4 November 1979. A radical Islamic student faction seized the US Embassy in Tehran, and hold 66 diplomats and American citizens hostage. Thirteen are released, but the others are held until January of 1981.
Item: 17 December 1981: Italian terrorist group “Red Brigades” kidnaps a senior US army officer in Italy, BG. James Dozier; he is rescued by Italian police forces.
Item: 19 August 1982. Two American citizens are killed when the PLO bombs a Jewish restaurant in Paris, France.
Item: 18 April 1983. A truck-bomb kills 68 at the US Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon. Hizbollah, with backing from Iran is held responsible.
Item: 23 October 1983. A truck bomb destroys US Marine HQ in Beirut, Lebanon, killing 241 Marines. Hizbollah, apparently with the assistance of Syrian intelligence, and Iranian financing.
Item: 18 January-20 September 1983. In Beirut, Lebanon, the president of the American University (an American citizen) is assassinated. The head of the CNN news bureau is kidnapped, but escapes. A political officer from the US embassy is also kidnapped, but he was never released, and his body never found. A suicide bomb on the US Embassy killed 23. A van full of explosives detonated near the US Embassy annex in Aukar, Lebanon kills 2 Americans and a number of local employees and bystanders.
Item: 15 November 1983. The head of the Joint US Military Aid Group-Greece, US Navy Captain George Tsantes, along with his Greek driver is murdered on his way to work by the terrorist group N-17.
Item: 3 April 1984. A US Army NCO, Robert Judd is attacked while driving between JUSMAGG and the American air base at Hellenikon by the terrorist group N-17. He is injured, but survives.
Item: 12 April 1984. A popular restaurant near Torrejon AB, Spain is bombed. 18 US service members are killed. Hisbollah, again.
Item: 4 December 1984. Hisbollah hijacks a Kuwait Airlines flight en route from Dubai to Karachi. Two American passengers are murdered.
Item: 2 February 1985. Bobby’s in Glyphada, a bar popular with American service personnel in Athens is blown up with a small suitcase bomb. No one is killed, but many injuries.
Item: 14 June 1985. TWA Flight 847, from Athens to Rome was hijacked by Hisbollah. A US Navy diver returning from a TDY was murdered and his body dumped on the runway.
Item:8 August 1985. A car loaded with explosives is driven into a busy parking lot at the American base at Rhein-Main, and detonated. Two are killed, twenty injured. The Red Army Faction claims credit. It is thought the murder of an American soldier several days previous was done to secure his ID card, and facilitate moving the car bomb onto a guarded installation.
Item: 7 October 1985. The cruise- ship Achille Lauro was hijacked by members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. They threw an elderly disabled American man into the ocean. His wheelchair was thrown in afterwards.
Item: 27 December 1985. Terrorists from the Abu Nidal organization shoot up the El Al offices at Rome’s international airport. Seven Americans were among the 87 killed and wounded.
Item: 30 March 1986: A bomb exploded on a TWA Rome/Athens flight. Four Americans were killed, although the aircraft landed safely in Athens. The Fatah group was held responsible.
Item: 19 June 1985. Four off-duty Marines assigned to the American Embassy in San Salvador are murdered by local terrorists, while sitting at a table at a sidewalk café. They were in civilian clothes at the time.
Item: 5 April 1986. An explosion at a nightclub in Berlin popular with American service personnel kills three and injures 191. Two of the dead and 41 of the wounded are service personnel. The Libyan government is held responsible.
Item: 5 September 1986. Abu Nidal terrorists hijack a Karachi/Frankfurt Pan Am flight, and divert it to Cypress, demanding the freedom for three convicted murderers in exchange for the lives of the passengers. They eventually kill 22 of them, including two Americans.
Item: 9 September-21 October 1986: Three American citizens, two of them associated with the American University in Beirut are kidnapped. Two of them are held for 5 years by Hisbollah.
Item: 20 October 1987. An Air Force NCO and a retiree are murdered just outside Clark AB, in the Philippines.
Item: 27 December 87. An American civilian employee is killed in the bombing of the USO Club in Barcelona, Spain.
Item: 17 February 1988: Colonel William Higgins, USMC, while serving as part of the United Nations Truce Supervisory Organization in Lebanon, was abducted by Hisbollah. The US refused to negotiate, and Colonel Higgins was excecuted.
Item: 28 June 1988, a defense attaché to the American Embassy in Athens, US Navy Captain William Nordeen is murdered by the N-17 terrorist group, using a car bomb
Item: 21 December 1988. Pan American Flight 103, from Frankfurt to New York, was blown up over Scotland by agents of the government of Libya. Most of the 259 passengers are Americans. Another 11 people are killed on the ground.
Item: 21 April- 26 September 1989. An American army officer is assassinated in Manila, and two military retirees are murdered just outside the gates of Clark AB, the Philippines.
Item: 13 May 1990. Two young enlisted men are found murdered, outside Clark AB, the Philippines.
Item: 7-18 February 1991: Members of a far-leftist Turkish group kill an American civilian contractor at Incirlik AB, and wound an Air Force officer at his home in Izmir.
Item: 12 March 91: Air Force NCO, Ronald Stewart is killed by a car bomb in front of his house, in Athens, by the N-17 group.
Item: 28 October 1991. An American soldier is killed, and his wife wound by a car bomb at a joint Turkish-American base in Ankara. The Turkish Islamic Jihad claims responsibility. at October 28, 1991, Ankara, Turkey. Victor Marwick, an American soldier serving at the Turkish-American base, Tuslog, was killed and his wife wounded in a car bomb attack. Two more car bombs in Istanbul kill an Air Force NCO, and an Egyptian diplomat. The Turkish Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attacks.
Item: 5 July 1992. In a series of incidents in southeastern Turkey, the Kurdish PKK kidnaps 19 Western tourists, including one American. They are all eventually released unharmed.
Item: 26 February 1993. A bomb in a café in downtown Cairo kills three. Two Americans are among the injured.
Item: 8 March 1995 Two gunmen armed with AK-47s open fire on a van belonging to the US Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. Two embassy staffers are killed, one injured.
Item: 4 July 1995. A Kashmiri militant group takes six tourists, including two Americans hostage, demanding the release of Muslim militants held in Indian prisions. One of the Americans escapes, and the militants execute a Norwegian hostage. Both the American and Indian governments refuse to deal. It is assumed the rest of the hostages were killed in 1996 by their captors.
Item: 13 November 1995. A car bomb in the parking lot of a building that houses a US military advisory group in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia kills seven person, five of them American citizens.
Item: 25 June 1996. An explosive-laden fuel truck explodes outside the Khobar Towers housing facility in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 19 American military personnel are killed, and 515 persons are injured. A group identified as the Saudi Hizbollah is held responsible.
Item: 12 November 1997. Four American employees of an oil company and their Pakistani driver are murdered by two unidentified gunmen, as they leave the Sheraton Hotel in Karachi, Pakistan.
.
Item: 7 August 1998. Car bombs explode at the US Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, and at the US Embassy in Dar es Sala’am, Tanzania. 292 are killed in Nairobi, including 12 Americans and injured over 5,000. The Dar es Sala’am explosion kills 11 and injures 86. Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida network claims responsibility.
Item: 28 December 1998. Sixteen tourists, including two Americans are kidnapped in Yemen. One hostage and a Yemeni guide escaped, and four hostages were later killed when local authorities closed in.
Item: 12 October 2000. A small boat laden with explosives rammed the USS Cole. The explosion kills 13 sailors and injures 33.
I lived for three years in Greece, and six in Spain, from 1982 to 1991... and yes, I was in the habit of looking under my car, before I started it up in the mornings...
Either you believe we are at war with a ruthless and violent enemy intent on destroying the West, or you think nothing of the sort exists.
Well yes Pogo, I don't believe that the number of Muslims who are determined to destroy the west and reestablish a caliphate including Spain and the Balkans all the way to Vienna is a much larger proportion of the Muslim population than Christians who believe that the U.S. should be a white nation and that it is currently controlled by a Jewish Cabal (people like Cedarford).
In fact, I bet if polls were taken, American attitudes about Muslims and the Muslim attitudes about Americans would be disturbingly similar. There are way too many people on this site alone who are willing to treat Muslims as less than human.
Hillary's government health care system would have led to the early deaths of tens of thousands who would have become slaves to the government.
Yes, her files are very relevant. Who knows what other disasters she has planned.
"There are way too many people on this site alone who are willing to treat Muslims as less than human."
Wrong. Completely, fully, sadly, and murderously human.
Hillary's government health care system would have led to the early deaths of tens of thousands who would have become slaves to the government.
What complete and utter nonsense. Every other developed country in the world has some kind of universal government mandated healthcare (what you inevitably call "socialized"). All of them spend at least 50% less on health care than this country does while ensuring everyone is covered. Most of them have better outcomes than this country by almost any objective measure (e.g., infant mortality rates, longevity, heart disease, etc.).
Sgt. Mom, a list worth noting. How do those deaths compare to the total numbers of Americans traveling abroad during the time? How does that death rate compare to, say, Saudi Arabians traveling/living abroad, or to people living, just living, in Memphis? Those statistics might be more persuasive than a list that shows people sometimes are unlucky in a not risk-free world.
Are you more likely to die from infrastructure failure in the US or from a terrorist attack? How then should US tax monies (that are finite) be best spent?
Here's the kind of insane, right wind rivel you can find here every day of the week:
Sloanasaurus said..."Hillary's government health care system would have led to the early deaths of tens of thousands who would have become slaves to the government."
TENS OF THOUSANDS of Americans would have DIED...because of Hillary's health plan???
SLAVES TO THE GOVERNMENT???
C'mon...is this guy for real??
Well yes Pogo, I don't believe that the number of Muslims who are determined to destroy the west and reestablish a caliphate including Spain and the Balkans all the way to Vienna is a much larger proportion of the Muslim population than Christians who believe that the U.S. should be a white nation and that it is currently controlled by a Jewish Cabal (people like Cedarford).
Well, they DO seem to have a greater operational capacity.
Lucy had felt Rummy flaring up last night and now she knew why. That dammed hemorrhoid was in the news again and she had felt it coming. It was a warning for today and sure as shooting Althouse was posting Rummy’s vile ichor for commentary. She hated Althouse. She hated those who supported Rummy. Today was going to be a great day to be a hater.
(From Chapter Five of “Hate Me, Hate You, A Tale of Despair and Loathing in The 21stCentury.)
Well, they DO seem to have a greater operational capacity.
This is true. They also have wealthier backers. And remember OBL himself was trained and supported by us when he was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan. If we were just a little bit more forward thinking about who we were backing, instead of just saying "oh, they hate commies, they must be good", we might not be in the pickle we are in today.
Of course, we never learn. Horrible regimes in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are our best friends because they claim they are with us in the war on terror. We even blanched at criticizing Uzbekistan because we needed their airbase.
>>Every other developed country in the world has some kind of universal government mandated healthcare (what you inevitably call "socialized"). All of them spend at least 50% less on health care than this country does while ensuring everyone is covered. Most of them have better outcomes than this country by almost any objective measure (e.g., infant mortality rates, longevity, heart disease, etc.).
First off, they also have different diets, ie heart disease. Asians, for example, have lower levels of heart disease because their diets are low in fats and are rich in vegtables and fish. That has nothing to do with socialized healthcare. China's healthcare (who also have lower levels of HD) system is on the brink of collapse, as is Britain's, France's (where nearly half of your income is taken form you in taxes), and all of the other utopias you envision. The costs of such a system are exponential and ever-increasing, and they will never have enough public money to fund them. Ever.
Healthcare is not free, no matter what rhetoric you dress the concept up in. Somebody is going to have to pick up the tab, and fleecing taxpayers is not going to sustain the system. They'll just leave if the tax burden get soo high.
Besides, socialized health care is responsible for many deaths and for many people not getting the treatment they need because it inevitable leads to the rationing of care. If something is "free" to those who don't have to pay for it, they're going to take more of it. This leads to an infinite demand with a very low supply (doctors), so what you get is rationing. Done by the government.
If you talk to any doctor who's been to China, for example, they'll tell you that people wait for months or years to get treatments as critical as heart transplants or other vital emergency treatments. And guess what? They don't get the treatment because there's a line of millions waiting to recieve their turn in the "free healthcare" system.
And that doesn't get into the enormous costs of sustaining such a system. Again, it is not "free." The US spends more on Health and Human services than on anything else, including the military, already, and that's going to get worse as the current Boomers retire into the entitlements they're set up for themselves to be paid for by others (which won't be). When the system breaks from the glut of people utilizing the "free" services while there is not a proportional amount coming in to sustain or balance out the costs, it fails.
And that's apparently what the Democrats think passes for a solved problem. Just like SOcial Security,
It. Doesn't. Work.
"If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free." - PJ O'Rourke
Sorry for the spelling atrocities.
A "brusque" management style in the military.
O, heavens. I feel dizzy.
LUCKYOLDSON,
Mrs. Clinton points to her role in the administration as one reason that she is competent to be president of the united states, you know, the leader of the free world, the person who will follow George Bush as the Executive in the Global War on Terror.
To answer your questions, yes, I do think that any chance of shedding light on Mrs. Clinton's role in the Clinton administration in the leadup to 9-11 and allowing the American people to make a more informed decision in the voting both should be a primary concern. Certainly moreso than doing an after action report on a retired SecDef who will never hold an administration post again.
I think that the families of those that died in terror attacks and subsequent wars in afghanistan and Iraq would be particularly interested in any light the documents could shed on Hillary's role or lack of in the Clinton Administration's reactions to the various terror attacks and use's of the military during the clinton administration. That is not to mention what the back story is on her trips and visits with other country's dignitaries and her relationship with the state department during her years as first lady.
Why is the Bush Administration portrayed as secretive when they release these memos, yet Hillary cries victimhood to politics when someone wants to review her past to judge her worth for future office?
Is it that offensive to you, to allow the American people to make an informed judgement?
Freder:
"..... And remember OBL himself was trained and supported by us when he was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan."
You're full of it. There's no evidence of OBL getting any US training or support.
If you've got a cite let's see it.
See Wright's "The Looming Tower" for the best and most reliable analysis of OBL's journey to jihad.
How do those deaths compare to the total numbers of Americans traveling abroad during the time?
Most likely statistically insignificant. That said, the greater point is that they were not random but rather targeted attacks specifically on Americans which is a big difference.
Fact of the matter is, whether Clinton it be or Bush or even Jimmy Carter, this country is despised by a good chunk of the world. Whether it’s political, cultural or economic, who ever is running the show is irrelevant. Clinton may have been wildly popular with our Euro friends but it’s clearly evident by the list that the Muslim world still wanted us dead.
Honestly I think nothing less than a complete withdrawal from the entire region, and that includes aid to the likes of Jordan, Egypt and yes, Israel, this country will continue to be the target of Islamic terrorists.
I know its not a popular concept among most conservatives but I am truly in favor of a more isolationist policy, particularly with respect to the ME. When a good chunk of the world views you as an imperial hegemon and historically speaking we’re nothing of the sort, you’re pretty much fighting a losing battle.
Freder said: All of them spend at least 50% less on health care than this country does while ensuring everyone is covered.
Coverage and receiving care are two separate issues Freder. I currently have private health insurance now, however, there is no guarantee that if I get disease X I will receive appropriate and timely medical care. I have no reason to think it would be any different under a government funded health care mandate. There are plenty of Canadians who are ‘covered’ yet seem to find their way to the US to obtain medical care. How many Americans are running to Ontario for open heart surgeries?
Providing universal coverage is fine and dandy. When you all come up with a way to increase supply to take on the additional 40-45 million more un-insured without sacrificing quality, you let me know. Oh and I’m sure the additional 10-15 million ‘undocumented Americans’ will somehow be left out?
F,F:
I don't believe that the number of Muslims who are determined to destroy the west and reestablish a caliphate including Spain and the Balkans all the way to Vienna is a much larger proportion of the Muslim population than Christians who believe that the U.S. should be a white nation and that it is currently controlled by a Jewish Cabal (people like Cedarford).
If you truly believe this statement you are simply ignorant of the teachings and practices of Islam. It is not a central tenet of Christianity that the U.S. is a White nation and that it is controlled by a Jewish cabal. Central tenets of Islam do include:
1) All lands that were once Muslim must be restored to Muslim control.
2) All Muslims have a duty to work towards reclaiming these lands, using violence and deceit if necessary.
Remember, Islam means submission, and a Muslim is one who submits. Merely questioning these tenets is a form of apostacy, and punishable by death according to Sha'riah.
F-22, a plane designed to counter a threat that may never have existed
Oh, you mean like in the western Pacific and the Straits of Taiwan? I guess we could never justify a need for air superiority in that part of the world, could we?
Without wading into the battle about whether other places are nice or not, I'd just like to point out what an insane statement this is:
Make the American people realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists.
The world is not any more evil then it's ever been. The views of it's many peoples are not any more "extreme". Religious violence is not new. In short, we are not surrounded by violent extremists, or, if we are, we always have been.
It's propaganda for the idea that perpetual war will make the world a safer place. This comes down, as does every single iraq war/terrorism debate I've seen here, to whether you believe that our invasion of Iraq has made us more or less likely to be attacked by terrorists.
I guess it's pretty obvious that I think "more". Regardless of what side you come down on, this quote presents us with a sour little truth. There will always be someone to go after. We will always be "surrounded by evil". Perpetual war won't fix that, and will likely make it worse.
Luckyoldson said...
"[Are] the memos of a First Lady who hasn't occupied the White House for over 7 years...more important than those of the man who ran the Defense Department during the execution of a war that's continuing to this day? ... Are Hillary's memos REALLY what we should be focusing on right now?"
Donald Rumsfeld isn't running for President. Hillary is. Thus, the answer is yes: materials shedding light on the decisionmaking processes and character of someone we need to evaluate and decie whether to vote for are more directly relevant in this time than memos that are of exclusively historical interest.
Hoosier Daddy said...
"I think we should be focusing on why we can't get a really hot female presidential candiate like Argentina did."
It's a matter of opinion that we don't have one now. ;)
A fun little game theory thought-experiment.
Two men are in a room.
Man A believes that if he doesn't kill Man B, Man B will surely kill him. We don't know anything about Man B.
Neat, huh? The only thing we know for sure is that Man A is a killer.
Gahrie's summary of the "central tenets of Islam" presents a skeptical observer with a parallel situation. We can doubt whether violent aggression is built into the worldview of the average Muslim. We can't say the same of Gahrie's.
No.
We cannot doubt whether violent aggression is built into the worldview of numerous self-declared militant Muslims.
I don't think average Muslim is even a meaningful phrase, except as a straw man.
It's not a straw man, because Gahrie isn't arguing that the problem is the "self-declared militants". He is arguing that the problem is Islam.
I don't think average Muslim is even a meaningful phrase, except as a straw man.
So why not start here Pogo, in America. There are close to 6 million Muslims amongst us -- surely you're more concerned about Muslims here, than in Holland or France, no? What are they waiting for, do you think -- they've been so quiet up to now...
I am not arguing that violent aggression is built into the worldview of the average Muslim. I'm not arguing that it is built into the religion of Islam.
What I am arguing is that Islam demands the return of once Islamic lands to Islamic control, and justifies the use of deceit or force to do so.
I am further arguing that Islam does not allow Muslims to renounce, dispute or even question the tenets of islam, on pain of death.
And at last I am arguing that to try and make a tortured comparison to some imagined Christian directive in favor of white supremacy or anti-semetism is simple and pure ignorance.
Freder ... hmm, Freder? Where have I heard that name before?
Wasn't that the name of the traitor brother in Godfather? You know, the sycophantic, effeminate weakling that sold out his family? The one they dumped in Lake Tahoe towards the end?
Wait. No, that was Fredo. Oh well.
Same difference. Who cares?
What are they waiting for, do you think -- they've been so quiet up to now...
The right moment.
So Freder, you believe that John is wrong and that the Muslim world loves us, and is in fact a happy, safe place for Americans to visit?
No kidding. I served Somolia, escorting food convoys to starving villages that were being exploited by rival militias. My platoon alone saved thousands of lives. In return, Al Queda and radical Islam targeted us for murder because we had "violated" muslim lands.
...still wishing I had the power to air-drop a gaggle of Moonbat "liberals" into Syria...
Freder ... hmm, Freder? Where have I heard that name before Wasn't that the name of the traitor brother in Godfather? You know, the sycophantic, effeminate weakling that sold out his family?
Freder is the "liberal" who insists I can't waterboard a captured terrorists to save my platoon from an IED... but when its his city at risk, his family in jeapordy, all-of-a-sudden he wants an exception.
Modern Liberals - they don't really believe in the things they lecture us about
There are close to 6 million Muslims amongst us -- they've been so quiet up to now...
If quiet means that they haven't pulled off another 9/11 ok. Then again, there have been numerous domestic plots that have been thwarted.
Personally I think the radical element within this country is probably very very small. We have a tendency to assimilate better than say our European bretheren who talk a good game on equality but don't practice it as well as we do. That's not to say we don't have our extremists but I'd wouldn't think twice walking the streets of Dearborne, MI as opposed to some of the banneliues of gay Paris.
I do question the sincerity of many who seem to fall all over themselves anytime Islam's 'peacefulness' is brought up. I wonder if it were Christian extremists were blowing up things and beheading people in the name of Jesus if they'd be as forgiving.
Britain's, France's (where nearly half of your income is taken form you in taxes), and all of the other utopias you envision. The costs of such a system are exponential and ever-increasing, and they will never have enough public money to fund them. Ever.
We spend about 17% of our GDP on healthcare, the next closest country is France, where they spend about 11%. Britain spends about 6%.
It's amazing that you compare our healthcare system to China's. Just amazing.
As for government spending on healthcare it just barely surpasses defense spending by about 1% of the budget. And since the "emergency" appropriations for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and some defense related programs (e.g., defense related NASA items, much of the intelligence budget, and the DOE weapons and naval nuclear fuel production) are not included in the defense budget, it is actually higher than official defense spending acknowledged by the government.
Wasn't that the name of the traitor brother in Godfather?
You know about as much about film as you do about Islam.
I wonder if it were Christian extremists were blowing up things and beheading people in the name of Jesus if they'd be as forgiving.
Lord knows that after Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City, and the Olympic Park bombing I wasn't advocating that we torture, suspend habeas, and detain indefinitely extremist right wing Christian separtists.
...still wishing I had the power to air-drop a gaggle of Moonbat "liberals" into Syria...
I'm going to take a page from the book of York:
I'm impressed, I'm impressed
When that gorilla beats his chest
I fall to bits
I confess
I admit I'm impressed
When the torpedo in the vest barks his orders
I'm impressed
And I find that my head's nodding yes
Though my legs are not following
I'm inspired by events
To remember the exits in back of me
I'm impressed, I'm impressed
When that gorilla pounds his desk
I fall to bits
I confess
I admit I'm impressed
Through generalissimo's request
I can't help but feel impressed
On the one hand he'll
Give you five good reasons to follow him
On the other hand
You see nobody leaving the stadium
I'm impressed, I'm impressed
By that Godzilla's flaming breath
I fall to bits
I confess
I admit I'm impressed
When the tornado from the west crushes buildings
I'm impressed
And I find that my head's nodding yes
Though my legs are not following
I'm inspired by events
To remember the exits in back of me
I'm impressed, I'm impressed
When that gorilla beats his chest
I fall to bits
I confess
I admit I'm impressed
When the torpedo in the vest barks his orders, I'm impressed
-I'm Impressed, They Might Be Giants
So don't tell me that my less grim attitude about the world is out of ignorance.
Who said your view is any less grim? You just prefer to attribute murderous intentions, racism, and religious extremism to all peoples equally. I'd say your view is more grim, if anything.
Freder is the "liberal" who insists I can't waterboard a captured terrorists to save my platoon from an IED
I'm not the only one. The military says you can't either. You really need to read up on your Field Manuals.
And I never said there should be an exception, only that I could envision the use of a necessity defense at the trial of an accused torturer. There is a big difference.
Freder Frederson said...
"We spend about 17% of our GDP on healthcare, the next closest country is France, where they spend about 11%. Britain spends about 6%."
And we hear every day about Americans fleeing the failing American medical system to Britain and France for the latest and greatest in medical treatment. Oh, that's right, I guess it's the other way around. Perhaps if they spent more of their GDP on healthcare they'd be halfway competitive with the U.S. in terms of developing new treatments, therapies and drugs.
Thus, the answer is yes: materials shedding light on the decisionmaking processes and character of someone we need to evaluate and decie whether to vote for are more directly relevant in this time than memos that are of exclusively historical interest.
But Simon, doesn't such an attitude run contrary to your views on executive privilege? What about the sanctity of the president's decision making process?
Freder: And I never said there should be an exception
No. You did. When its your family/city at risk, you want someone like me to violate any laws against "torture" to save your sorry butt, with a wink/nudge that you and your kind will support a pardon after the fact.
Sorry, not falling for that one. Hope you have some radiation sickness pills on hand.
Bad link.
Not impressive.
LOS,
Let's see, Hillary is running on the basis that her experiences as co-president during the 1990's give her the executive experience needed to be president but you think we should not be interested in what went on then. That makes as little sense as most of the rest of your postings.
UK cancer survival rate lowest in Europe
By Nicole Martin
24/08/2007
"Cancer survival rates in Britain are among the lowest in Europe, according to the most comprehensive analysis of the issue yet produced. England is on a par with Poland despite the NHS spending three times more on health care.
We have good evidence that survival for lung cancer has been compromised by long waiting lists for radiotherapy treatment."
Number one in cancer survival among all nations, all cancers, men and women?
The USA.
I wonder if it were Christian extremists were blowing up things and beheading people in the name of Jesus if they'd be as forgiving.
Of course not. When was the last time you heard a "liberal" bemoaning the threat of radical Islam to Separation of Church and State?
"Liberal": Christianity is the greatest threat to the 1st Ammendment; radical Islam should be tolerated.
"Liberal" Homosexual: What do I care if Arab homosexuals are being buried alive by radical Islam? I'm not going to enlist to defend my "principles" - I'm only playing the victim card for my own benefit.
"Liberal" Feminist: Why should I enlist to fight against Arab women being burned to death for speaking their own mind? I think sexual discrimination is horrible, but only when its applied to me [and the perp is not Bill Clinton].
Liberals - They Don't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About
The percent of GDP spent on healthcare is an intriguing question. I've found it very difficult to ascertain where the various claims actually come from. It's also very unclear what is actually counted when calculating health care expenses. For example, is hospice care counted as a health care expense or not?
The second issue is that a many people come to the US for medical procedures, many of them quite expensive. Not only does this add to the gross health care expenditures in the US, but it subtracts from those expenses in their native countries.
What percentage of US health care expenditures are due to defensive medicine? (I find the claims that the cost is very minor to be utterly bogus, especially since I've been on the receiving end of this nonsense.)
I'm also curious how much is spent on dubious claims. Statins, for example, simply don't do what big pharma claims for most of the population.
Fen
Nice to know you care so deeply about Arab feminists and homosexuals.
You've come a long way baby ;)
"• Key benchmarking indicators show that between 1990 and 2002, R&D investment in United States [pharmaceutical sector] rose more than fivefold, while in Europe it only grew 2.5 times.
• In 1990, major European research-based companies spent 73% of their worldwide R&D expenditure on the EU territory. In 1999, they spent only 59% on the EU territory. The USA was the main beneficiary of this transfer of R&D activity.
• The latest data on new molecular entities (period 2001-2005) show the predominance of the US which has now become the leading inventor of new molecules in the world (61 against 51 for Europe)
• The top 20 companies worldwide shows the leadership of US companies. In 2005, nine (9) of the top 20 pharmaceutical companies in the world are of American origin (against 8 for Europe).
• US companies significantly increased their share in the world's top selling medicines. On the top 30 worldwide products in 2005, 21 originate from the US against 8 from Europe.
" ***
Freder Frederson said...
"But Simon, doesn't such an attitude run contrary to your views on executive privilege? What about the sanctity of the president's decision making process?"
First, the question posed by LOS wasn't whether Rumsfeld's memos ought to be released, it was whether a review of Hillary's papers are more important and relevant to us at this time than a review of Rumsfeld's. The question assumes the availability of both, but in any event, since I took the position that Rumsfeld's papers are of less immediate relevance, I don't see how you could infer that I want them released.
Second, I don't remember ever opining on the issue of executive privilege. Perhaps you could refresh everyone's memory by pointing to the comment or post of mine that you have in mind as being in tension with the one you just quoted from?
Liberals - They Don't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About
Fen, you have a very short memory. It was the liberals who were concerned about the Taliban, especially their treatment of women, long before 9/11.
Oh, I ought to say, third: unless you think the WaPo obtained these memos by dumpster diving, what application does executive privilege have to memos that the executive has constructively consented to the release of?
Freder Frederson said...
"It was the liberals who were concerned about the Taliban, especially their treatment of women, long before 9/11."
Which is why under the Clinton administration we liberated the women of Afghanistan from gender apartheid by military force. Oh, wait, we didn't. I guess it must be that familiar and uniquely liberal form of "concern" that involves saying you're concerned and doing nothing about it that has the slightest risk of being effective. I'm sure you personally signed an internet petition urging the taliban to be nicer, Freder. You're a hero. Be the miracle.
Key benchmarking indicators show that between 1990 and 2002, R&D investment in United States [pharmaceutical sector] rose more than fivefold, while in Europe it only grew 2.5 times.
Got numbers on how much their investment in marketing rose or how many of these wonder drugs are copycats or slight modifications to existing drugs to extend patent protections?
Moonbat: Fen, Nice to know you care so deeply about Arab feminists and homosexuals. You've come a long way baby ;)
For starters, I've ALWAYS cared about the rights of American homosexuals and feminists, despite your fantasies re "neo-nazi" conservatives like myself. What I find ironic is that you and your kind don't really care about homosexuality and feminism when it doesn't serve your own interests.
Typical Liberal. Your devotion in Civil Rights is based entirely upon your own selfishness. Screw everyone else, you've got your victim card and that's all that matters to you. You would NEVER risk you own life to defend your so-called "principles". Weasel Chickenhawk.
Same old liberal hypocrisy: They Don't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About
Else, why are you wasting bandwidth here instead of facing Al Queda over there, hypocrite?
Fen, you have a very short memory. It was the liberals who were concerned about the Taliban, especially their treatment of women, long before 9/11.
Never hit my memory. Who were these "liberals", and WHEN did they speak out against discrimination of women?
Perhaps they held a silent memorial, because I never heard the press amplify their concerns...
Got numbers ...?
at the link
I know a lot workers at DoD and all are glad "Rummy" is gone
I would take that as a better indicator of his success than his failure.
Timing is important in war--I doubt the surge would have been as successful 2 years ago. The Sunnis are now disgusted by AQ in Iraq and the US military seems much less bad.
I'm sure you personally signed an internet petition urging the taliban to be nicer, Freder. You're a hero. Be the miracle.
LOL. I'm sorry, but Simon is on point. I don't recall ANY liberals complaining about the Taliban...
Liberals: They Don't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About
/sorry, but I could write a book with that as the title....
Let me see if I have this straight, we can get the memos of a defense secretary in a time of war before the administration he worked for is even out of office, but we cannot get the memos of the first lady 7 years after her administration is over?
Or the governor of Texas nearly twenty years after he stopped using coke...I mean, left his office...
I'm sure you personally signed an internet petition urging the taliban to be nicer, Freder. You're a hero. Be the miracle.
Well we did go into Bosnia and Kosovo (without the loss of a single troop in combat), about which the right bitched endlessly. But of course if anyone complains about the decider's decisions now they are a traitor.
For the record Fen, I never called you a neo-nazi. You did.
Again, glad to see you care about gays -- so much so you think they should be able to serve in the military fighting against militant Islam. Right?
"I know a lot workers at DoD and all are glad "Rummy" is gone
I would take that as a better indicator of his success than his failure."
People in DoD hated Bob McNamara too. No doubt you would have loved him.
In fact Hillary! may put Waxman in at DoD, thereby causing even lower morale and massive turnover, making you even more happy. I guess the fewer experienced, high skilled workers the better. And our enemies will love it too.
So Bush just mentioned Bin Laden today. First time since I can't remeber when. Apparently, the motherfucker is as dangerous as Hitler.
Which of course begs the question -- it's been seven years. How come George hasn't caught the SOB?
You know, it's almost like he's not even trying....
From a 2000 World Health Organization press release:
The World Health Organization has carried out the first ever analysis of the world’s health systems. Using five performance indicators to measure health systems in 191 member states, it finds that France provides the best overall health care followed among major countries by Italy, Spain, Oman, Austria and Japan.
...
The U. S. health system spends a higher portion of its gross domestic product than any other country but ranks 37 out of 191 countries according to its performance, the report finds. The United Kingdom, which spends just six percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on health services, ranks 18th.
in----And remember OBL himself was trained and supported by us when he was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.
Repeated lefty myth alert!!!!!
Read the Looming Tower. OBL had nothing to do with the US when he was in Afghanistan. Additionally, his "Arabs" were looked down upon by the Afghans and were not an effective fighting force there.
Otherwise this comment was quite accurate /sarc
Thw WHO numbers automatically skew negative if there is no centrally planned health care system. So their calculation is worthless. And I call bullshit, given the cancer data.
Women's deaths soar in NHS midwives crisis
By Sophie Goodchild, Jonathan Owen and Ian Griggs
04 March 2007
" Record numbers of women are being harmed or dying as a direct result of childbirth in what doctors are labelling a "crisis" in maternity care.
There has been a rise of 21 per cent in deaths of pregnant women in the care of NHS maternity services. Deaths over the past three years now total 391, up one fifth on the comparable period, and 17,000 women have suffered physical harm while on labour wards."
garage mahal: For the record Fen, I never called you a neo-nazi. You did.
True. But your fellow liberals have, and I don't recall you or any other "liberal" EVER coming to my defense.
BONUS ROUND: When was the last time anyone on this forum heard the Left denounce radical Islam for its persecution of homosexuals and women?
HINT: The Left Doesn't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About
/really, I could write a book with that title.
Fen,
As if preventing all terrorism and liberating Iraq from Islam weren't a tall enough order, you've made the entire enterprise contiguous with a war on liberalism generally!
I hope someday all your dreams come true. May your political opponenets tumble from helicopters!
But it almost seems like the liberals are winning. We are talking about pulling out of Iraq, just when it was all shaping up. And things don't look good for 08. Why, in a decade or so, much of the Southwest will speak Spanish, taxes on the most productive americans will be through the roof, and the turban'd menace will be bearing down hard.
We need a hero Fen. So hop in your helicopter, buddy. We've got a whole lot of no-good Americans to drop on Syria. That'll show 'em.
That'll show everybody.
On the other hand, maybe the reason that Pretzelcoatl hasn't caught Osama after seven years is that he's just fricking incompetent.
Record numbers go abroad for health treatment with 70,000 escaping NHS
28 October 2007
"Record numbers of Britons are travelling abroad for medical treatment to escape the NHS - with 70,000 patients expected to fly out this year.
Andrew Lansley, the shadow health secretary, said the figures were a "terrible indictment" of government policies that were undermining the efforts of NHS staff to provide quality services.
The findings come amid further revelations about the Government's mishandling of NHS policies, and ahead of official statistics that will embarrass ministers.
On Wednesday, figures are expected to show rising numbers of hospital infections. Cases of the superbug Clostridium difficile, which have risen five-fold in the past decade, are expected to increase beyond the 55,000 cases reported last year.
New research shows that growing NHS bureaucracy has left nurses with little time to see patients – most spending long periods dealing with paperwork."
/echo. Its SO ironic. Check the archives here if you must...
BONUS ROUND: When was the last time anyone on this forum heard the Left denounce radical Islam for its persecution of homosexuals and women?
Freder Frederson said...
"Well we did go into Bosnia and Kosovo (without the loss of a single troop in combat), about which the right bitched endlessly."
In England, it was the left bitched endlessly about it (I was in college at the time), but of course, I recognize that you're correct that in America, those missions were met with hostility. The left was wrong then (as always), and in that instance, in my own humble opinion, so was the American right.
Joel says: " Joel said...
LUCKYOLDSON,
Mrs. Clinton points to her role in the administration as one reason that she is competent to be president of the united states, you know, the leader of the free world, the person who will follow George Bush as the Executive in the Global War on Terror.
To answer your questions, yes, I do think that any chance of shedding light on Mrs. Clinton's role in the Clinton administration in the leadup to 9-11 and allowing the American people to make a more informed decision in the voting both should be a primary concern."
So when Romney, Thompson, Rudy and McCain say she has no experience actually running the show or making important decisions...we should not believe them...because YOU believe she was somehow instrumental in the decision-making at the White House for 8 years...as First Lady?
And that's more important than the head of the Department of Defense, selling the war as a fucking "bumper sticker?"
Try selling that to the families of the fallen and wounded.
True. But your fellow liberals have, and I don't recall you or any other "liberal" EVER coming to my defense.
No problem. I don't think you're a neo-nazi.
More like crypto....
As if preventing all terrorism and liberating Iraq from Islam weren't a tall enough order, you've made the entire enterprise contiguous with a war on liberalism generally!
Well, forgive me for expecting "liberals" to be at the front of a war that defends women and homosexuals from religious extremism. My bad, I guess Liberals Don't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About
Fen said in response to : "garage mahal: For the record Fen, I never called you a neo-nazi. You did."
"True. But your fellow liberals have..."
I don't think I ever have, but I do think you're a right wing moron doesn't read enough to know shit from Shinola.
christopher: No problem. I don't think you're a neo-nazi. More like crypto....
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
And btw, I'm assuming you stand against radical Islam opressing homosexuals and women, right? Or are you only against it when it serves your own self-interest?
dick...and I do mean DICK,
You can't have it both ways, weenie.
YOUR side of teh aisle keeps harping on her complete LACK OF EXPERIENCE making decisions, running the show, etc...yet YOU and others here suddenly feel they should see her memos...because...SHE WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN RUNNING THE SHOW.
*And I don't remember seeing any response to why we haven't seen the transcripts of Chenmey's energy meeting, under oath testimony by Cheney, Rove, Meiers, etc,.
Any reason why you're so interested in 7+ year old memos, but don't care about what I've just mentioned?
LuckyTroll: I don't think I ever have
Just yesterday you did. But thats fine. I don't expect anything more from the likes of you. OBE.
Lucy’s dog, Rasputin, had been run over by a Halliburton truck and Lucy was pretty sure the truck driver wore a cowboy hat. It was Bush, it had to be. He had personally killed Lucy’s dog. There was no longer any doubt in her ever-loving mind that Bush was responsible for 9 -11. If a man could run over your dog, there was no evil he couldn’t accomplish. Lucy added trucks and cowboy hats to her hate list. BLOW ME she typed and then clicked on the publish button.
(From Chapter Six of “Hate Me, Hate You, A Tale of Despair and Loathing in The 21stCentury.)
/echo
BONUS ROUND: When was the last time anyone on this forum heard the Left denounce radical Islam for its persecution of homosexuals and women?
Fen,
How do you survive without knowing or being friends with any liberals?
You talk about them as if they are mass murderers or traitors or unpatriotic assholes.
I have plenty of friends and acquaintances who are very conservative, discuss and argue with them, but I don't think they're the fucking devil incarnate...as you apparently do of liberals.
What would certainly be considered "liberals" at the time...founded this country, Fen...did you know that??
It was Thursday afternoon and Lucy woke up sober for a change. It was a rare occurrence and cause for a shower. Lucy entered the stall and lathered up. She used Lava hand soap because she liked the way it made her skin feel really clean. Lucy shaved her left leg but not her right. She had not shaved her right leg since 2002. She had vowed not to shave it until the Rethugligans were removed from power. She hated the right. She continued typing, Dick...and I do mean DICK…………
(From Chapter Seven of “Hate Me, Hate You, A Tale of Despair and Loathing in The 21stCentury.)
Fen asks: "When was the last time anyone on this forum heard the Left denounce radical Islam for its persecution of homosexuals and women?"
Fen...liberals denounce anybody who persecutes homosexuals, woman or anybody for that matter.
Where do YOU come up with this insanity??
And how do you deal with people you know...who aren't conservative?
As I said before; you talk about liberals as if they are murderers, unpatriotic, un-American, etc.
BONUS ROUND: When was the last time anyone on this forum heard the Left denounce radical Islam for its persecution of homosexuals and women?
I think it's touching that you care so much for gay and women's rights as long as it's in muslim countries.
Here, of course, not so much.
Fen said..."Just yesterday you did."
I did?
When?
And btw, I'm assuming you stand against radical Islam opressing homosexuals and women, right? Or are you only against it when it serves your own self-interest?
Fen can't even say if gays should be able to fight in the military against militant Islam. Talk about a hypocrite.
christopher said..."I think it's touching that you care so much for gay and women's rights as long as it's in muslim countries. Here, of course, not so much."
Boy, you hit that right on the nose.
As if Fen gives a flying fuck about gay or women's rights here in America.
He just loves to bitch and whine about "liberals"...
Lucy loved to belittle people. It made her feel strong and she also liked the attention her potty mouth brought her. Her signature non-cursing phrases were, “What a hoot!” and “DUH.” Her dad had often said, “What a hoot!” when he watched six year old Lucy try to roll him a joint and her brother had always said, “DUH” to just about anything little Lucy said. She hated both of them.
(From Chapter Eight of “Hate Me, Hate You, A Tale of Despair and Loathing in The 21stCentury.)
Christopher,
Eric Rudolph lived largely off the grid in the United States for five years before he was finally caught, the entire time he was on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list. The FBI knew within 50 miles where he was, but couldn't nail him down.
Do you really have to have it explained to you how inaccessable a security-obsessed folk hero in the Himalayan foothills is, who won't use sat phones or other electronics and is protected by tribesmen who would rather die than give him up?
I think it's touching that you care so much for gay and women's rights as long as it's in muslim countries. Here, of course, not so much.
Here, women aren't being murdered in honor killings, hung for being "unchaste," stoned for adultery, killed for trying to form women's rights groups, or being sexually mutilated as children.
And gays? Iran "doesn't have any gays," and they have the executions to keep it that way. Much of the Mideast has a similar philosophy.
Gay/women's rights are a very minor issue here in the U.S. compared to their plight abroad.
Dave said..."Gay/women's rights are a very minor issue here in the U.S. compared to their plight abroad."
I'm not sure that is that's actually true.
Many Mideastern countries have no problem with either, since they don't address or discuss such matters like we do, and many times when surveys are done, the women say they follow the laws of the land, regardless of what WE might think of them.
You know...contrary to what many here think...we're NOT the arbiters of the world...and yes, before Fen jumps in...I fully realize we serve as the police of the world in many regards.
Lord knows that after Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City, and the Olympic Park bombing I wasn't advocating that we torture, suspend habeas, and detain indefinitely extremist right wing Christian separtists.
Interesting, Mr. Frederson. So, when people are living peacefully at home, come under a violent assault, and respond by defending themselves, you consider them to be morally equivalent to terrorists who blow up occupied buildings.
The Department of Justice under Clinton ruled that the FBI acted under unconstitutional rules of engagement at Ruby Ridge, and a court acquitted Randy Weaver for all his actions taken during the siege. And you want to lump the Weavers in with Timothy McVeigh.
Your credibility just went up in smoke, Mr. Frederson. The only question is, is it your factual credibility because you opine in ignorance of the matters you speak on, or is it your moral credibility because you genuinely believe that the wives of "right-wing separatists" should be killed under unconstitutional rules of engagement while holding their children?
Fen can't even say if gays should be able to fight in the military against militant Islam. Talk about a hypocrite.
No. That never came up - I Do think gays should be allowed to serve in the military [provided all berths are unisex].
Note that my question is STILL unanswered by the "liberals" on this board: When was the last time the Left denounced radical Islam for its persecution of women and homosexuals?
HINT: Not even in the last six months, because The Left Doesn't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About. Their ONLY interest in Civil Liberties is playing the victim card to advance their own self-interests. "We have our Civil Rights, screw everyone else".
Parasitic hypocrites. Geez. There's STILL time for one of you "liberals" to come out and take a stand against radical Islam... Clock starts now... tick tock tick tock. Any of you "liberals" have the balls to step up and be counted here?
Darren Duvall said..."Do you really have to have it explained to you how inaccessable a security-obsessed folk hero in the Himalayan foothills is, who won't use sat phones or other electronics and is protected by tribesmen who would rather die than give him up?"
You have a point, but with Rudolph we also didn't have access to 1,000's of bombing sorties or 140,000 soldiers and another 150,000 Blackwater mercenaries on the ground.
[.... tick tock tick tock]
"Liberal" hypocrites just DYING to defend their "principles" against radical Islam. Not.
Anyone on the Right surprised?
Fen says...again: "The Left Doesn't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About."
Lecture WHO about?
WHO in the left are you referring to?
Thw WHO numbers automatically skew negative if there is no centrally planned health care system. So their calculation is worthless.
Untrue. The World Health Organization assessment is the best comparative analysis of the world's health systems.
WHO’s assessment system was based on five indicators: overall level of population health; health inequalities (or disparities) within the population; overall level of health system responsiveness (a combination of patient satisfaction and how well the system acts); distribution of responsiveness within the population (how well people of varying economic status find that they are served by the health system); and the distribution of the health system’s financial burden within the population (who pays the costs).
Steven,
First of all, Korish was a maniac pedophile...and if you were to actually do any research...you'd know that.
And as for the situation that unfolded...he could have acted like the Christian he said he was...surrendered his flock...and nobody would have died...but he didn't.
Oh, and do you have any similar thoughts on:
People who kill doctors who perform abortions?
How about people who stand outside abortion clinics and tell women that they're murdering their children?
Or preachers telling the families of soldiers who died in Iraq that they died because of homosexuality in America?
Or people who scream at families of gay soldiers who die, telling them it's because they're gay?
Any problems with any of that?
When was the last time anyone on this forum heard the Left denounce radical Islam for its persecution of homosexuals and women?
As a liberal, I denounce any group that persecutes homosexuals or women. I'm sure almost all liberals agree with this simple principle.
Lucy had tried to be a lesbian once but she couldn’t find a female willing to have sex with her. Not counting herself she had only had sex with two people in her entire life. John her husband and James his boss. She hated men and she hated women, in fact she hated just about everything and everybody. “Cheney made me this way,” she snarled as she reached for her jar of pistachios. She hated Cheney the most. "They're murdering millions as I type and you blithering idiots don't even care!" she screamed.
(From Chapter Nine of “Hate Me, Hate You, A Tale of Despair and Loathing in The 21stCentury.)
no one: As a liberal, I denounce any group that persecutes homosexuals or women.
Wow. After six months, we FINALLY get a denunciation from a "liberal", even if its in general terms...
I'm sure almost all liberals agree with this simple principle.
Really? Because you are the FIRST liberal in at least six months to denounce the oppression of homosexuals and women by radical Islam [and I'm being generous, because your denunction was general, not specific]
Any other "liberals" want to step up and be counted?
Thought not. Because The Left Doesn't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About
LuckyTroll: Lecture WHO about? WHO in the left are you referring to?
Haha. This from the "liberal" who claims the Clinton scandal was just about a blowjob. Thats right, for the Left sexual discrimination [Jones], sexual assault [Wiley], and trading sex for jobs [Lewinksy] is just about sex. "Forget about the 1994 Crime Bill's Violence Against Women Act, we didn't mean for it to apply to Democrats like Bill Clinton"
Just more evidence that The Left Doesn't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About. Else, explain to the rest of us how much you care about arab homosexuals being buried alive, or arab women being burned alive by radical Islam for the "sin" of speaking their mind or showing too much ankle.
Thought not. Frickin parasitic chickenhawks. You got your Civil Rights, screw the rest of the world, right?
Fen,
Repeat it enough and you'll get an answer, I guess.
I'll say that I deplore the way women and gays are treated in much of the world. To the extent that it's horrible, I abhor it.
I'm positive you'll call me a coward for it, but I, like most Americans, don't believe that invading every country where horrible things happen is a good idea.
I know I sound like a pussy, but when I squint hard and the light is just right, I can make out a tiny little sliver of gray area between moral objection and full-blown unilateral military invasion and occupation.
Seems like there might've be option or two in there. If the American Left isn't condemning Saddam enough for you, maybe it's because it sees 3000 dead soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis as high price to pay for a hanging.
Why did he do it?
"It was a guy trying to get his green card essentially, in Germany, and playing the system for what it was worth," says Drumheller. "It just shows ... the law of unintended consequences."
"Curve Ball," as he was known in intelligence circles, and discovered he was not only a liar, but also a thief and a poor student instead of the chemical engineering whiz he claimed to be.
Curve Ball is an Iraqi defector named Rafid Ahmed Alwan, who arrived at a German refugee center in 1999. To bolster his asylum case and increase his importance, he told officials he was a star chemical engineer who had been in charge of a facility at Djerf al Nadaf that was making mobile biological weapons.
More than a hundred summaries of his debriefings were sent to the CIA, which then became a pillar - along with the now-disproved Iraqi quest for uranium for nuclear weapons - for the U.S. decision to bomb and then invade Iraq.
The CIA-director George Tenet gave Alwan’s information to Secretary of State Colin Powell to use at the U.N. in his speech justifying military action against Iraq.
Fen,
You need psychological assistance.
And an education would be nice, too.
What would certainly be considered "liberals" at the time...founded this country, Fen...did you know that??
The key words in the above passage are "at the time". None of the Founding Fathers would be considered a liberal by today's definition, and most of them would consider the title and insult worthy of a challenge to a duel.
Now that the Left has so completely demeaned the term liberal, they are moving on to the term progressive. Why they are unwilling to settle on the most accurate term, socialist, is beyond me.
Freder Frederson said...
If by "reengineer" you mean break, I guess this is an accurate statement. Otherwise, this statement is so laughably wrong I can only assume you must be on some incredibly powerful mind- and reality altering substances. I seriously hope you are institutionalized, because you are most certainly a danger to yourself and others.
Are you seriously going to accuse someone of taking mind altering substances and then proclaim that this very person should be institutionalized because they made a statement you don't agree with? Is this how you approach an argument based on an opinion you don't like? I can understand telling the guy he's wrong, but to go the extreme of literally accusing him of drug use and mental instability and being a danger to other because of this opinion speaks volumes of your seeming reaction of irrationality to opposing points of view.
Lucy was pissed again. In a huff, she had stomped home from work after that bastard Rodney King had asked her to wake up. King, a slim, tanned butthole from Indiana was her latest supervisor and didn’t understand the rules of the game yet. Lucy slept at work so she could blog at night and that was her right. As a civil servant Lucy had sucked at the federal teat for almost thirty years and did what she damned well pleased. Didn’t he understand she had to defend freedom and democracy? She hated him.
(From Chapter Ten of “Hate Me, Hate You, A Tale of Despair and Loathing in The 21stCentury.)
Methinks Lawgiver has a tad too much time on his hands.
Try masturbation...it works for Fen...and it's one of the few times in your life you'll be making love to someone who actually loves you.
(Woody Allen)
If anybody here seriously believes that fen gives a rats ass about civil rights for women and gays in this country, let alone in the muslim world, then I'd like to interest them in some bridgefront property in Brooklyn.
"Make the American people realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists."
Yes, they're called right wingers.
LOS,
That was the whole point. She screwed up the healthcare issue so badly that even the democrats wouldn't vote for it. She took over the ed task force in Ark when it was ranked 47th in the country, spent so much money they had to raise taxes and the result was that the test scores went down and the state was ranked 49th in the country. Great executive experience there.
The whole point of checking the records was to determine if she did anything at all to gain executive experience. From what we know as of now the answer is no and yet she claims all this experience she got as co-president. I guess you are just scared we will check and find out what a loser she is.
I read the excerpted comment by joel making the simply awfully stupid remark i guess pertaining to Hillary and the 7 years.
I suppose it is funny on some level, such as "hey, pull my finger"....but the real issue is Mr. Rumsfeld and his memos.
If you wish to drag Ms. Clinton into this for some yucks then you choose what you choose but I might suggest you that if you can yuck yuck off these memos and be stupidly dismissive of them, then the country is in deep trouble and you are to blame.
Fen declares "Because you are the FIRST liberal in at least six months to denounce the oppression of homosexuals and women by radical Islam"
This is just mystifying. What tool are you using, Fen, to keep track of all liberals and their utterances over the past six months? To what sources, and in what contexts, are you looking? How exactly do you determine this very precise statement, that here, on Althouse's blog, roost on the moon is the "first liberal in six months...etc"?
Beth:
"What tool are you using, Fen, to keep track of all liberals and their utterances over the past six months?"
After-hours access to the Bush administration's vast database of extraconstitutional surveillance for recreational purposes is a perk of membership in the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. ;)
I miss Rumsfeld's press conferences. It was nice to see idiotic questions answered by someone who clearly felt the questions were idiotic.
He did a good job in Afghanistan, but a lousy job in Iraq. I wouldn't want him back in the top slot, but surely there's some job he could have that would let him insult half-witted reporters every week or so?
Are you seriously going to accuse someone of taking mind altering substances and then proclaim that this very person should be institutionalized because they made a statement you don't agree with? Is this how you approach an argument based on an opinion you don't like?
I take mental health very seriously. When someone makes statements that are so removed from reality I truly fear for his safety (and of those around him).
Fen,
I don't know what the hell you are talking about. I am vehemently opposed to the oppression of women and homosexuals by anyone, including radical islamists. That you claim no liberals have ever said this is completely dishonest. In fact we covered this upthread.
Freder,
"the threat disappeared more than fifteen years ago."
I'd be more cautious about gratuitously insulting Mr. Putin--you never know who is reading on the Intarweb.
Steven,
"Your credibility just went up in smoke, Mr. Frederson."
I take it you're new around these parts? I wouldn't have said Mr. F. had enough credability at this point to make enough smoke to be noticable. (See his earlier jibe cited above.)
"When someone makes statements that are so removed from reality I truly fear for his safety..."
Statements such as, say, calling Glenn Reynolds a "genocidal maniac"?
Beth: This is just mystifying. What tool are you using, Fen, to keep track of all liberals and their utterances over the past six months? To what sources, and in what contexts, are you looking? How exactly do you determine this very precise statement, that here, on Althouse's blog, roost on the moon is the "first liberal in six months...etc"?
I'm looking at all MSM sources and all comments on this blog by so-called "liberals". Really Beth, its not a difficult task - peruse the comments here for the last year, I'll be surpised if you can find ONE denunciation from the Left re the oppression of homosexuals & women by radical Islam that wasn't prompted by some "nazi" like me.
If not, put up or shut up. Provide links to "liberals" making a stand against radical Islam. My bet is it didn't make page 18 of your "enlightened" MSM.
Freder: I don't know what the hell you are talking about. I am vehemently opposed to the oppression of women and homosexuals by anyone, including radical islamists.
Vehemently? Yeah right. Anyone else here surprised that Freder "vehemently" stands against oppression of homosexuals and women by radical Islam? What a joke. Freder, if you are so "vehement", why is this the first I've heard of it? Even better, why haven't you enlisted to fight against radical Islam? Chickenhawk? You aren't prepared to risk your own life for the "principles" you claim to champion. You got your Liberty, screw everyone else, right?
Easy answer: Because The Left Doesn't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About. They only support liberal causes to feel good about themselves, to justify their selfish lifestyle, to own victim status for political traction. They want and woman's rights and gay marriage and free helth care, sure - but only for themselves, selfish parasites. The "little brown people" in the Middle East are on their own.
Gahrie is on point - true Liberals would be ashamed by today's Left.
Freder: That you claim no liberals have ever said this is completely dishonest. In fact we covered this upthread.
No, "liberals" only come out to denounce radical Islam when shamed and prompted by the likes of me. If you guys REALLY beleived in liberalism, you would be on the frontlines of political discourse, denouncing Islam until the rest of us grew tired of hearing you rant. Again, I urge you to take up my bet - search the archives here and link to ANY denunciation from the Left that was not prompted by the Right.
C'mon liberals, please tell me how much you "care" for the oppressed.
christopher: If anybody here seriously believes that fen gives a rats ass about civil rights for women and gays in this country, let alone in the muslim world, then I'd like to interest them in some bridgefront property in Brooklyn.
Given the chance to denounce Islam, Christopher instead chooses to engage in fallacious equivalence. Hey Christopher, the rights of women and homosexuals are SUPPOSED to be a major plank in your party's platform. But again, someone from the Right has to remind you, and we see that The Left Doesn't Really Believe In The Things They Lecture Us About
Seriously, I'm betting the ONLY reason you give a rat's ass about women's right or homosexual rights is because you are one of them. Selfish weasel. You'll whine about your own Civil Liberties, but won't lift a finger [or even a sentence] to extend those principles to others.
What a farce. Liberalism used to stand for something. Now its all about self-interest groups promoting their own agenda while turning away from similar oppression of others. Selfish American Parasites.
Hey, anyone can play: find the last post here by any "liberal" denouncing the oppression of women and gays [that was not prompted by the Right].
I'm bettting at least 6+ months ago...
Sorry, still laughing over Freder's insistence that he has "vehemently" opposed radical Islam's persecution of women and gays.
Funny, because all I've heard from him is how waterboarding is evil, Bush is evil, Christians are evil, etc.
Yah, its SO evident how concerned he's been re radical Islam. You'd almost expect he'd be harping on it every day. You'd be wrong. In fact, find me ONE day he's denounced radical Islam without being prompted by the Right. I'll consider silence to be an admission of his shame.
Fen,
The ultimate arbiter of who thinks what.
Right wing nutcase.
Put up or shut up LuckyTroll. When was the last time you or any other "liberal" on this forum denounced radical Islam's persecution of women and gays? They bury homosexuals alive, throw them in a ditch and bulldoze a ton of bricks onto them. They set fire to women who have the audacity to speak their own mind. And yet, your "great theat" is George Bush.
Oh thats right, I forgot - you think this war is elective. You're pissed that all the war spending is taking away from your free government health care and your taxpayer-funded trannie operation. Yeah, the Left really has its priorities together - free gender reassignment for Lucky, and let the "little brown people" in the Middle East suffer tyranny to enable your cheap oil economy.
Selfish Bloated Amercian Parasites.
Please, tell us again how much you "BELIEVE! in World Peace". That should rationalize your bloated existence for a few more days, yes?
Fen, you provide nothing to indicate what you're searching for, and what you mean by "repudiate." If you take a little time, you'll find feminist groups, for instance, actually doing things, not just making windy statements on some sort of monthly schedule. The Feminist Majority Foundation's website describes their work in Afghanistan--where they were calling attention to the Taliban long before 9/11/01--to improve the status and safety of women there. That includes actual efforts in the country, and lobbying here at home. I work with a professional women's group that has branches in many countries in Europe, Asia and Africa, and they consistently advocate against such practices as cliterectomies, refusal of medical exams to women in areas that practice Sharia law, and so forth. They put their money out to do it, by funding healthcare and education, microloans, immigration help, and more.
I can't name a single human rights and gay rights groups that don't loudly protest when Iran or Egypt or Saudia Arabia hangs or beheads gay men, or when Israeli religious fundamentalists try to stop gay rights groups from meeting or marching.
Your benchmark just doesn't make sense. You pull "six months" out of your ass as some sort of meaningful measurement. You don't give any clue what you're searching for, and restricting your searches to the "MSM" doesn't make sense. Go to the websites of activist and rights groups. Go to non-mainstream media. If the MSM isn't covering these issues, that's certainly not what you're trying to prove here.
Finally, I don't know what to make of your need to see "repudiations" in blog threads. What more useless activity can there be than posting "I repudiate X!" in a blog thread. Who friggin cares what blog readers blather about in any given six month period?
Fen says...again: "Put up or shut up LuckyTroll. When was the last time you or any other "liberal" on this forum denounced radical Islam's persecution of women and gays?"
As I said yesterday, I know of no "liberal, leftist, lefty" or whatever you want to call them, that doesn't fully denounce radical Islam's persecution of women and gays. Nor do they support any such thing among any group of people of religion.
I really have no idea where you come up with this insanity, other than your usual sources including: Rush, Sean, Ann, Michael, Glenn and a few other right wing heroes of yours and some others here. (And please, no more of the standard; "oh, I never listen to them" bullshit.)
Why not provide any evidence that any "liberal, leftist, lefty" here or elsewhere DOES support or does not denounce what you describe above.
This is just another of your ridiculous charges that are not supported by fact.
I call it for what it is: A FLAT OUT LIE.
beth,
We actually agree about Fen and his inane charges.
Hard to believe we're on the same page...at least for now.
Beth: Fen, you provide nothing to indicate what you're searching for, and what you mean by "repudiate."
I guess you failed to notice the three times I asked someone to link to the last time any "liberal" on this forum denounced the radical Islam's persecution of women and gays without being prompted by the Right? Here it is again, take up the challenge:
When was the last time any "liberal" on this forum denounced the radical Islam's persecution of women and gays without being prompted by the Right?
Did you see it that time Beth?
Excellent post, Beth.
Fen, have you "denounced" slavery in the last 6 months? Have you spoken out against the Sudanese genocide?
Put up or shut up, Fen. You are a coward who likes genocide, case closed.
I'll make it even easier for you Beth, when have you ever denounced radical Islam's persecution of women and gays on this forum?
See, Roost is confused: people like you and him claim that woman's rights and gay rights are a central principle of your politics, but the only time you guys bring it up is to use it as a cheap shot against Bush or the GOP. Are we to believe that you "care" so much about these issues, that when given a platform to slam Islam you instead choose to exercise that speech to slam Bush?
And Roost you poor thing, if I spent all my time attacking Clinton and Democrats re slavery and genocide, then you would have a point. So its my belief that you guys on the Left don't really believe in these things, not unless its specifically tied to your self-interest or can be exploited as a political prop.
Its pathetic how far true liberalism has fallen. If ANY should be denouncing Islam from the rooftops 24/7, so much so that their voices and protests could not be ignored by the media, it should be Liberals. Instead, people like me have to remind "liberal" what they claim their prinicples are. And I think the sad truth is that today's liberals have no real principles - they're no better than race-hustlers exploiting issues to gain political power.
Well, Fen, I'll admit I'm confused. Can you spell out your argument in a series of steps that don't include huge gaps of logic and unfounded assumptions?
Right now, it looks like this:
I am an occasional commenter on a message board where the "War on Terror" is occasionally discussed.
I apparently don't believe that "slamming" the 2nd largest religion in the world is worthwhile.
___
All leftists believe in nothing.
So yeah, a little confused.
LuckyTroll: I call it for what it is: A FLAT OUT LIE.
No, its not a lie. If there was no shred of truth behind it, you and Beth and all the other Lefties on this board wouldn't have your panties in such a wad over it. A genuine liberal would be laughing in my face, would have reams of links denouncing what he/she sees as the greatest threat to those principles they claim to champion.
I held a mirror up to you guys, and you only lash out because you've been forced to see your true self. Else, why are you guys so emotional about it? Its not a lie, your own actions reveal you see the truth of it.
Especially you LuckyToll - you can't defend yourself because you've NEVER attacked Islam here for persecuting women or gays. The ONLY time you bring those issues up is as a punch-line to slam your political opponents with.
Otherwise, provide a link....
So yeah, a little confused. Can you spell out your argument in a series of steps
1) I'm a liberal. I believe in women's rights [unless Clinton is the one sexually harassing her] and homosexual rights. Vehemently.
2) Radical Islam buries homosexuals alive, burns women alive for merely speaking their mind. But I wasn't aware of this until Fen pointed it out. [yawn]
3) But you'll never find me complaining about oppression of women or gays by radical Islam. Besides, War is bad, m'kay? I'm more obsessed with gay marriage [for me] and DADT [for me]
4) In fact, the only time you'll see me bring up these issues is when I want to bash the other side of the aisle for political gain.
5) See, I'm not REALLY that into rights for women or homosexuals, I just claim to be so I can feel good about myself [and occasionally bash the Right].
6) Those women and gays being oppressed by radical Islam? Sucks to be them. I'm really only into this whole "minority rights" thing as a brand label. Its so hip and cool. Like Che.
7) I'm a liberal. When I lecture you about civil liberties et al, pay no heed. I don't really believe in any of it, not when it could make a difference. Its just a political prop.
That's not an argument, Fen, that's saying stupid things in a stupid a voice. You'll knock 'em dead at recess.
It may be the way you see the world, but it isn't convincing anyone.
Well Roost, the evidence is here on this very blog: find ANY comment from the Left denouncing the persecution of women and gays by radical Islam [that's not prompted by the Right].
When you come back empty-handed, tell me again how much the Left "cares" about homosexuals and women when they can't exploit them to bash their enemy [Bush, not radical Islam].
Take all weekend if you like. I was being generous with the 6 month figure I gave Beth. I doubt you'll find any in the past year.
A genuine liberal would be laughing in my face, would have reams of links denouncing what he/she sees as the greatest threat to those principles they claim to champion.
A-ha! See? When we stop the name-calling and make with the substance, we get somewhere!
Here is a big assumption that you've obviously been making: Everyone "knows" that Islam is the greatest threat in the world.
I'm not saying that Islam is or isn't. But you're operating with the understanding that everyone believes it is. And that's definitely false, right?
So right away, we've got a problem. In accounting for why other people disagree, you've left out that they might not know as much as you do about Islam. You've explained it entirely in terms of wickedness and cowardice. But it could be ignorance, right? Maybe the left doesn't know as much about Islam as you.
If we could assume everyone knew everything that you know about what an evil religion it is, then you might have a more coherent argument that all leftists are cowards who believe in nothing.
But don't forget, Fen, some of us on the left might just not know as much you. About Islam. Maybe we're just as courageous, we just never learned as much as you have. About Islam.
Here is a big assumption that you've obviously been making: Everyone "knows" that Islam is the greatest threat in the world.
I don't see how its a big assumption, and your text should read: Everyone "knows" that radical Islam is the greatest threat to women and homosexuals in the world.
Yes, I'm assuming people who actually champion women's rights and homosexual rights would be aware of this... Did you NOT know what radical Islam does to women and gays? If not, why not?
You're kinda making my point - if liberals really gave a damn about these issues, other than exploiting them as a punchline, wouldn't the media airwaves be saturated with warnings and protests to raise awareness to the threat?
In short, why aren't liberals lecturing me re the threat of radical Islam to women and homosexuals, instead of the other way around?
Roost on the Moon,
Fen doesn't know squat about Islam.
He's a bigoted redneck who gets 99% of his bullshit via Rush and the gang.
Fen's new word for he day: "denounced."
Every day he has a new one.
Yesterday it was: "huh?"
I just did a quick search Fen, and Beth is right. Liberal groups do condemn this stuff. It's very easy to find groups typically considered left (like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International) condemning Iran and Syria.
But it could be that one reason you aren't finding what you're looking for is that "Radical Islam" isn't a country, rogue government, army, or any other concrete entity. These abstract condemnations don't even have a reason to exist unless they help you see the problem more clearly. But Radical Islam is a catch-all term applied to violent fundamentalists after the fact. It's both way too broad and way too specific. It's a nebulous, pragmatically useless term. It's like declaring Evil the enemy.
I'll make it even easier for you Beth, when have you ever denounced radical Islam's persecution of women and gays on this forum?
Fen, that's just weird. Why would this forum be someplace I'd just show up one day and declare "I denounce radical ....!"? I don't run around the streets wearing a sandwich board declaring that, either. But neither of those facts support your belief that liberals and leftists don't care about the rights of women and gays.
This blog, as a forum, is absolutely meaningless in the pursuit of women's rights in fundamentalist Islamic nations. No one's shaking in their boots over in the Caliphate because Fen's denouncing radical Islam over at Althouse.
Beth,
Thhe contrast between these two sentences is kind of interesting:
If you take a little time, you'll find feminist groups, for instance, actually doing things, not just making windy statements on some sort of monthly schedule.
I can't name a single human rights and gay rights groups that don't loudly protest when Iran or Egypt or Saudia Arabia hangs or beheads gay men, or when Israeli religious fundamentalists try to stop gay rights groups from meeting or marching.
Is there a difference between "making windy statements and "loudly protesting"? I can't see one. Offhand I would guess that the rulers of Iran, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia could not possibly care less if gay activists in America are "loudly protesting" their latest execution of a gay man. Frankly Americans don't care either, since those groups have cried wolf over so many non-events that few people pay attention to them anymore.
As you noted, there are some groups who do more than talk, like the FMF. But it is worth noting, don't you think, that the FMF didn't actually DO anything in Afghanistan until after the United States went in and shot the men who were running the country. In short, what good they've been able to do is entirely the result of the policies of people like Rumsfeld and Bush. This is particularly ironic given that, so far as I can tell, the FMF neither supported a war to remove the Taliban nor expressed thanks that it had happened.
Still, you're right that left-wingers do complain about these things. What they don't do, in my opinion, is offer useful solutions to the problem.
But it is worth noting, don't you think, that the FMF didn't actually DO anything in Afghanistan until after the United States went in and shot the men who were running the country.
I don't know that that's true. The FMF website describes their response to the Taliban as beginning in 1997.
In response to your other question, I'd call bloggy comments "windy" and more public lobbying "loudly protesting." Whether you find either an effective action is up to you. The distinction was an attempt to make some sense of what Fen was looking for.
Fen, that's just weird. Why would this forum be someplace I'd just show up one day and declare "I denounce radical ....!"?
Because you claim to champion women's rights and gay rights. Because those topics pop up here quite often. As does conversation re radical Islam. One would think such a "champion" such as yourself would mention something about it, if even in passing.
Worse, you and your fellow Lefties DO show up here often and "denouce" the persecution of gays... by Bush and the religious right, not radical Islam.
Reveals your priorities. You only champion "causes" as a prop to bash your political opponents with. We'll never hear you champion them against a much more lethal threat. Thats why I think so much of the Left is fraudulent.
In short, what good they've been able to do is entirely the result of the policies of people like Rumsfeld and Bush.
Policies like refocusing our forces to Iraq, and away from Afghanistan, where women are now as at risk as they were before the invasion of Afghanistan?
Beth: Policies like refocusing our forces to Iraq, and away from Afghanistan[?]
No Beth, policies like liberating some 25 million muslim women in Iraq and Afganistan in the first place.
And perhaps if "champions" like yourself were willing to back your rhetoric with action, we would have enough personel and resources to handle both those fronts...
I'm not sure if you're playing coy or really don't understand my point. Here's a fun exercise for you if you can find the time [and if you "care"]:
Research the anti-apartheid movement here in the US in the 1980's. I remember it leading the news for months on end. I remember the Left shouting from the rooftops to denounce it, article after article, newscast after newscast. I remember protests in the streets demanding sanctions against South Africa. And this wasn't even a cancer that posed a threat of spreading in Eurpe and the US.
Now contrast that activism with Leftist behavior re the persecution of gays and women by radical Islam.... The last lefty prose denouncing Islam's treatment of women that I can recall was on FDL almost a year ago.
Or just hold a poll here on this forum - "based entirely on comments from left-wingers on this blog re gay rights, I see them as primarily interested in:
A) Gay Marriage [~65%]
B) Reversal of DADT [~30%]
C) Other related gay issues [~5%}
D) Radical Islam murdering gays [0%]
Worse, you and your fellow Lefties DO show up here often and "denouce" the persecution of gays... but by Bush and the religious right, not radical Islam.
Beth: [Bush] Policies like refocusing our forces to Iraq, and away from Afghanistan, where women are now as at risk as they were before the invasion of Afghanistan?
Case in point. Given the option to bash Bush or bash radical Islam... was her choice ever in doubt?
Fen said...DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE, DENOUNCE...
*And sometimes he even misspells it...
Steven,
First of all, Korish was a maniac pedophile...and if you were to actually do any research...you'd know that.
What does David Koresh, who was at Waco in Texas in 1993, have to do with the assault on the Weavers at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992?
And you have the chutzpah to say I should have done research?
I'd write it off as mere ignorance, but I can't quite make myself do it. If Weaver had been a black Muslim separatist, I have the feeling you'd remember that he was a victim of entrapment by federal agents on gun charges and his wife was killed by an unconstitutional assault by the Bush (41) Administration FBI. You just don't give a damn because he was white and Christian and right-leaning.
By the way, I'm a pro-choice atheist. You want to bet much money on what I think of, say, bombing abortion clinics? Or harassing people by claiming a tragedy is a punishment by God for anything?
Latest Polling:
Do you think things in this country are:
1) Going off in the right direction - 24%
2) Off on the wrong track - 74%
3) No opinion - 2%
Yep, that Democratic Congress is really screwing things up, Luckyoldson.
So, still not sure who Randy Weaver is?
The problem with your "gotchas" Fen is that they only work out of context. I clearly blame the Taliban and fundamentalist Islamic forces for what's happending to women in Iraq. What I don't do, which burns you up, is agree with you when you argue that the only people helping women in these countries are the Bush admin and the forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's not me keeping us from having sufficient forces in Afghanistan, it's the decision of this administration to use 9/11 as a smokescreen to invade Iraq, unprepared for the results.
I don't blame Bush instead of Islamic fundies, I blame them both.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा