| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BrainFromArous
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
USA
102 Posts |
 Posted - 04/21/2006 : 9:17:35 PM
|
At least since the late 1970s, the Left's standard response to anyone who disagreed with them on "Affirmative Action" or anything related to it was to scream "Racism!"
"Sexist!" and "anti-Woman!" was the reply of choice for anyone who didn't agree with legal abortions 24/7, no questions asked, on the government's dime.
And let's not forget "Fascist!", the all-time favorite, all-purpose accusation against anyone even one step to the right of the Leftist yelling it.
The Left is at least - AT LEAST - as guilty as the Right of constructing and employing a political rhetoric built around hatred, ad hominem and slander.
**********************
Boards don't hit back.
(Bruce Lee) |
 |
|
|
BrainFromArous
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2006 : 9:28:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by TheFoywonder
Malkin has balls? Should pundits of either the liberal or conservative variety be applauded for being a controversy monger? Malkin's a perfect example of why I describe most political debates as being the equal to pro wrestling. She's completely blind to her own ideology, constantly spews inflammatory stuff designed to get certain people/group angry, and then both revels in the uproar she's caused while at the same time crying about the level of vitriole she recieves. Her only contribution to the discourse is more discourse. The Michelle Malkin's of the world of both the liberal and conservative side of political spectrum shouldn't be praises, they should be marginalized.
Nonsense. Malkin's books INVASION and IN DEFENSE OF INTERNMENT are both solid work. Indeed, the nigh-hysterical reactions they have provoked (esp IN DEFENSE) are as entertaining as the books themselves.
As for "balls," well, she has prominently featured the infamous Mohammed cartoons and continues to link to them at the very top of her site... which is more than CNN and the New York Times did, that's for sure.
As for being blind to her own ideology, that is occasionally true. But if that's a "marginalizing" offense, we're going to have to shut down the Internet.
**********************
Boards don't hit back.
(Bruce Lee) |
|
|
|
TheFoywonder
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
833 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2006 : 10:24:06 PM
|
IN DEFENSE OF INTERNMENT - a book she freely has admitted she wrote because finding a way to justify one of the nation's most shameful past actions makes it easier for her to argue in defense of Guantanamo.
Sorry, bunk is bunk.
Now Playing in Foyeurism at Schlocktoberfest.Com:
2 TURBO 2 TEEN - Turbo Teen returns one last time!
Plus: B-WARE THE BLOG is alive at http://www.livejournal.com/users/foywonder |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/26/2006 : 02:46:05 AM
|
My statement about hatefulness and hypocracy relates to Malkin's readers (Here, for instance: [url]http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004740.htm[/url]) who have been deriding the CPT's faith from the comfort of their armchairs. I'm not a religious man myself, but I think impugning someone's deeply held beliefs is a pretty grave insult, and the ridiculousness of the situation--chickenhawks sneering at people who actually have the guts to work in seriously dangerous territory for the sake of their faith (they're one of the only human rights organizations working outside of the "Green Zone"--falls pretty squarely in the "hateful and hypocritical" camp as far as I'm concerned.
We seem to be on shifting ground here when talking about hatefulness. Someone can rationally and calmly, even politely, espouse views that are exponentially more hateful than a bucketful of C-words. If we're asking whether the left is more ANGRY right now? I might agree with that, as a broad generalization. Still don't agree that folks on the right weren't every bit as angry during the Clinton years, though. And hatefulness is a different horse altogether. When Pat Robertson says that feminists are witches who kill their children or Jerry Falwell blames 9/11 on homosexuals, that's a lot more hateful than someone getting into a lather about Bush's policies, no matter what the invective. And no, I don't consider a two-time Republican presidential candidate and the one-time leader of one of the larger conservative lobby groups in American history to be fringe figures.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
Asta Kask
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Sweden
263 Posts |
Posted - 04/26/2006 : 03:29:11 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ken HPoJ
Say what you will for Malkin, she has balls.
I just want to point out that this could be seen as an oxymoron. You may now return to your scheduled flamewar.
- Who is John Galt? - |
|
|
|
Neville
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Spain
1590 Posts |
Posted - 04/26/2006 : 11:22:48 AM
|
| Thanks KurtVon, that information is very interesting (re: what he posted like a week ago; sorry but I haven't read this thread in a long time). |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/26/2006 : 3:03:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asta Kask
quote:
Originally posted by Ken HPoJ
Say what you will for Malkin, she has balls.
I just want to point out that this could be seen as an oxymoron.
I think it's a hateful thing to say about Malkin. Shame on you, Ken.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
BrainFromArous
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 02:30:08 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by TheFoywonder
IN DEFENSE OF INTERNMENT - a book she freely has admitted she wrote because finding a way to justify one of the nation's most shameful past actions makes it easier for her to argue in defense of Guantanamo.
Sorry, bunk is bunk.
Now Playing in Foyeurism at Schlocktoberfest.Com:
2 TURBO 2 TEEN - Turbo Teen returns one last time!
Plus: B-WARE THE BLOG is alive at http://www.livejournal.com/users/foywonder
Really? She said exactly that, or is that your spin? Source, please. :)
**********************
Boards don't hit back.
(Bruce Lee) |
|
|
|
Matrixprime
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 7:48:18 PM
|
I know that after 9/11, she was advocating forced conversions to christianity for all muslims. She made the infamous 'towelhead' comment at a public speaking forum. Al Franken, in one of his books, had the research team he had pick apart some of her observations, if you're willing to trust his objectivity. PErsonally, I've skimmed her books and she makes Senator McCarthy look mildly concerned by comparison. From reading her articles and observations, she's an inch away from advocating Hitler.
Hannity sounds reasonable, but he'll lock onto one phrase or quote and hammer it at someone. The other day on his program, one of OJ's lawyers called in for something, and he hammered him at whether or not he personally felt OJ was innocent (and wouldnt accept the comment he was proven innocent) until the guy hung up. He talks about democrats and liberals as if they were an organization of satanic, soulstealing, moneygrubbing scum, but if given a Republican who does something bad goes out of his way to excuse the behaviour.
I'll give one Hannity/Coulter observation. When the Duke 'scandal' broke out, he was silent. UNTIL it was revealed the state prosecutor was a democrat up for reelection. Since then, he's constantly brought up how according to his expert review of the evidence, they're innocent, and constantly brought up the scummy behaviour of her friend, the fact she's a stripper and single mother, and her past behavior. He hammers on her being a stripper/single mother/prior conviction, calls strip club patrons weirdoes (three times this afternoon alone) - but when someone called up and said they felt that he was compromising his claim to neutrality by falling into the Duke side just as severely as the prosecutor fell into the woman's side, he hung up on the gentleman. WHen he had Coulter on the phone the other day, she hammered similar points.
Now, I've read the articles and I don't know who did what. I think the prosecutor made a mistake by being so outspoken in the press, but beyond that everythings a bit too muddled. Just because its in the press, doesnt make it 100% accurate, especially when the press corps is like the game of Telephone these days (like the mining tragedy, where people started announcing they all lived). And I hesitate to label the woman a victim right away, because that word implies guilt. But I do not look at the fact she was a stripper or a single mother as something that should count against her. And, if I felt the media was out of hand, I wouldn't constantly carry on about those 'possibly innocent boys' and 'the supposed stripper victim' as he does.
Hannity is a great speaker, whether or not you agree with him; using 'boys' to describe college students and 'stripper' to refer to the possible rape victim, is a great way to shift opinion.
Now, I'm a registered republican. 2000 I voted Bush, 2004 I voted Kerry. In light of Kerry's recent misspeaks, I'm sorry I voted for him, but in light of Bush's behaviour I'm not too thrilled with him either. Sometimes I agree with Hannity's observations, sometimes I don't. I like Al Franken, though I don't always like his opinion, and while I detest his methods, I commend Michael Moore for getting people riled enough to talk about a subject (I hated how he in Bowling for Columbine he corralled Charlton Heston with that picture, as if Heston shot the little girl).
Malkin's name came up in this thread. I haven't read enough of/from her to form a full opinion, though I've seen enough to dislike her on the grounds of finding her arrogant, and having the same kind of obnoxious smirk that I wish I could slap off Tom 'XENU HAD MY BABY' Cruise.
So no one comes after me guns a-blazing (I bruise easy), a quick runthru on my politics:
Personally, I don't fully trust anyone who gives an 'opinion' on politics as a job other than Jim Phillips (the Phillips Phile, a local show now on XM). I think the only honest politician is a dead one, and thats only because they can't lie anymore. I thought Clinton did a good job but lacked morals, and I think Bush is a decent person, but is lacking the intellectual ability to do the job without strong support; unfortunately, all he has now are either rabid supporters (Rice) or creepy looking sidekicks (Cheney; sorry, he scares me). I value Henry Rollins, George Carlin, and Lewis Black's opinions more'n any politician. I would vote for Guliani/McCain ticket in a heartbeat, but I will never vote for another Bush. I live in FL, and Jeb - who was initially very levellheaded - has taken a turn for the worse this term.
I also usually avoid political discussions; depending on how this one progresses, I may stick to that policy going forward :)
Bah Weep Granna Weep Ninny Bahn - Universal Greeting
Est Solarus Oth Mithas - Solamnic Knight Pledge
And now its me too:
http://matrixprime.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Matrixprime
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 7:54:21 PM
|
I should add, because as memory serves McCarthy is a fun topic for the Esteemed Host.
I don't argue there were communist spies; I don't disagree with the statements that some actively sought to harm this country. I don't disagree with the idea that something needed to be done, and that some of what did happen served a good purpose.
I do think McCarthy was wildly overzealous. I think he may have operated out of an honest desire to protect his country, but I think he functioned on a level that resembled the inquisition. On a broader stroke, I think that before Nixon, he was the first major source of damage to the public trust of politicians. He didn't just put the fear of God into the enemies of America; he put the fear of God into almost everyone who felt he could reach them because he was as relentless as Jaws, and half as friendly. I think that at the most optimistic, a fair percentage of his targets were innnocent, and I feel that if he hadn't been such a zealot, more spies WOULD have been found, because so many people wouldn't have been so obstinate to him or congress.
Bah Weep Granna Weep Ninny Bahn - Universal Greeting
Est Solarus Oth Mithas - Solamnic Knight Pledge
And now its me too:
http://matrixprime.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Tork_110
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
360 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2006 : 09:34:45 AM
|
| You know what we need? A Coliseum. That'll help let people let off a lot of steam. We could even put it on TV and call it The Real American Gladiators. |
|
|
|
Ericb
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
648 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2006 : 11:49:09 AM
|
Yeah, and have to-the-death bouts like Limbaugh vs Moore, and O'Reilly vs. Franken. Let'em put their money where their mouths are.
"I reserve the right to look as well as be boring." - Robert Fripp |
|
|
|
BrainFromArous
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2006 : 5:38:44 PM
|
O'Reilly vs Franken would be more along the lines of a little kid's hair-pulling and biting fight. Neither man looks like he's ever thrown a punch in his life.
Coulter is occasionally clever, but morally loathesome and hooked to sound of her own voice like a junkie to smack.
Malkin, while not perfect, is leagues above Coulter.
**********************
Boards don't hit back.
(Bruce Lee) |
|
|
|
Capt. Nemo
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
630 Posts |
Posted - 04/30/2006 : 01:44:32 AM
|
Hey Matrix,
Can you give an example of McCarthy's overzealousness? |
|
|
|
Matrixprime
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 04/30/2006 : 4:55:45 PM
|
Cap'n:
McCarthy's record is well known; whether or not someone felt it to be extreme is subjective, I'm learning through the threads here. I've also learned from this forum that, more than anything else, McCarthy is a hot button subject, and as I enjoy these forums, and our Esteemed Hosts site in general, I don't want to ruin that (I also don't want to derail the thread). I will only mention that, due to the part that makes me proud to be an American, you can be anything you want, and you have that right so long as it doesn't run contrary to public welfare (so, being Muslim is ok, being a Terrorist Tactic Extremist isn't) While some Communists may have been spies, many were simply Americans exercising what they thought was their freedom. I've had friends with Communist leanings, one who was a contradiction (Registered Anarchist), a few Democrats, some Republicans, and even a few political atheists. Anything that makes people afraid to be who or what they are in this country is a sin against the countrys foundations.
I will be honest too, and say at the moment I'm at a disadvantage; I don't normally delve much into politics; I'm more interested in ancient history or war analysis than recent history, so specific examples don't spring to mind (I don't want you to think I'm just passing the buck).
I'll leave it at this:
If anyone can offer up books that are A)relatively easy to find, and B) not written by a lunatic, outlining a view of McCarthy that is contrary to what I've always felt was a general opinion, I would be more than happy to give it a read. I am a voracious reader (Just got back from the store with another weeks worth in fact) and I'll read anything.
Any books written by Malkin, Coulter, Hannity, Michael Savage, or heavily endorsed by them, fall into my lunatic bin. Dry historical books are just fine with me.
Back to on topic:
One thing I should have mentioned in the beginning is that they're ALL insane; the second they flag themselves proudly as Left or Right, they've lost it. George Washington, during his time in office, said that political parties would be a threat to the nation, and he was right.
It shouldn't matter if its a Republican ticket, or a Democratic ticket. What matters is right or wrong. People who vote line ticket (only republican, etc) are worse than people who don't vote at all. And the truth is, most politicians go where the money and votes are. Republicans will block Republican bills, Democrats will endorse Republicans. I've heard Democrats come on Hannity's program to denounce their own party. A Republican candidate will 'act Democratic' if his district becomes predominantly Democratic, just to receive the votes.
As I listen to the radio, I hear Hannity discuss 'the Democrat Agenda' and how the Republicans can defeat the Democrats Strategy come election time. When you get that far in sway with an ideology, you've lost your grip. It's not war, its money and jobs.
The public isn't exempt from my anger; many don't want to think for themselves, so they figure out if they're Republican or Democratic, and line ticket. They don't want to read, to understand.
I can't do anything about it, though, so I continue to vote my way. I vote for what I think is right, and I don't care if I vote for or against 'my party' (Republican).
If people don't want to think for themselves, then maybe Democracy is just as much a failure in practice as Communism was.
/rant off.
Bah Weep Granna Weep Ninny Bahn - Universal Greeting
Est Solarus Oth Mithas - Solamnic Knight Pledge
And now its me too:
http://matrixprime.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked