As I have been off the grid for most of the weekend (as I always am when I'm off), I'm kind of catching up. Come to think of it, I'm still catching up on everything. It might be some kind of psychological thing.
So let's start with 2/3 of the title (which I had thought of somewhere in the middle of last week).
Last week saw President Obama, fresh off the Date Nite "controversy" (as it's simply another asinine political ping pong (for both sides)) taking a trip to Egypt to drop a major speech on foreign relations. Now I thought there were good points and bad points (and exaggeration on both sides (thus the AOTW award below). But I'm not going to analyze it, because it's been days, and people who are better word vultures than I have picked it over.
However, a couple of thoughts have come to mind as a result (and the resultant coverage, of course).
First of all, the current crop of dirty raghead terrorists (as opposed to truly peaceful Muslims and even semi-peaceful raghead terrorist sympathisers) despise us because we're the most powerful nation in the world. And we are.
And we should be (despite the thoughts of many).
Here's why. We're one of the greatest nations in the world (as well as the sole superpower) because we value the freedom of the individual above the glory of the state (although this is beginning to change). We are one of the most tolerant countries (especially in the realm of political expression. And we fight wars to protect and free people, not to conquer and gain territory.
(For clarification, this is something we have reached after a couple hundred years in some cases, and there are always exceptions.)
But most importantly, we need to remain the world's superpower because (despite my distrust of our ever-burgeoning government) I trust no other country to be the world's superpower.
Even when we blur lines (the whole interrogation/torture debate, for example) in what is ethical and moral, we have discussions and fight over it. Most countries would just make such vehement dissent "disappear" rapidly. While I wouldn't mind seeing idiots like the Code Pinkos disappear, I sure wouldn't want it to be done by the government (because with the current administration, it would be people like me getting vanished).
Our current enemies in the current war (and despite the ascension and speech of Obama('s teleprompter) and all the good wishes of a lot of deluded people, we're still at war), the dirty raghead terrorists, are the antithesis of this. Not China, because they benefit too much from their relationship with us (and own us too much), despite their horrendous record on freedom. And not the tinhorn dictators (Chavez, the Castros, Kim Jong Il (and I apologize to Hugo, Fidel, and Raul for lumping them with Kimmy)), because they only last so long before they get replaced.
The dirty raghead terrorist uses Islam as a justification for eternal war. This means we have two options: kill them (all of them) or die. It's that simple.
Unfortunately, this fact gets lost far too often. Take the example of the murder of a military recruiter by a raghead terrorist convert. This (unlike the murder of George Tiller) is part of the greater war. And from the independent lone terrorist to a piece of shit suckling off the dirty ti of Osama Bin Laden, there are no real options but to keep fighting them until they are too few to give a shit about.
So back to Obama. These are the realities that our president has to understand. Even in trying to restart relations with the Islamic world, the terrorists will NEVER stop. We can't forget that, and we can't ever relent in pressing our power and concept of freedom around the world. Even if we pull our military forces out of most of the places they are now, our military might, our righteousness of cause (no matter the worst intentions you can find for the president), and our willingness to spend blood and lives to free people is what makes us special and a critical player in the world. To ignore all this and surrender that will be tantamount to killing freedom.
And that much we have in common, despite our copious differences. Which reminds me....
Now I picked these two off my blogroll for obvious reasons. First, they are both pretty damned hyper-partisan (although Shaw almost shows progress in recovery based on my comment section). Both are obsessively supportive of their respective party's president (almost Lewinsky style). Both of them are dedicated to tearing at least three new assholes in the opposing party's president (which means Bush and Obama, based on volume, should never have constipation again. And finally, because putting them together to share this "honor" could almost be considered cruelty to dumb animals (kidding, kidding), and because I'm a sadistic bastard who likes making couples of people who can't stand each other (and usually add something perverted (because I am)).
Now I like both of them (fight for my love, damn you!!!), so they're perfect to rip into for the fun of it to make a point. And that point is simple: It's easy to take political disagreements (which I have almost hourly with Obama and had heavily in the last year of Bush) and turn them into personal vitriol. I know this because I was that way for a long time. And now, I'm trying to take the piss and vinegar out of it.
Shaw, Mike, while I know there are much worse people out there, you two are well read, popular with people of a similar mind, and you both write quite well. And you're both older than me (Shaw, I'll assume 39 be cause that's the youngest x9 I could use), so I figgered you'd all have gotten it by now. To borrow from yet another blogger (the kinder and gentler (and sorely misnamed) Truth101), you guys need to tone down and embrace even your enemies. And the rest of you need to visit them and give them some shit (unless Mike had banned you for some damned reason).
Now, I'm sure Shaw and Mike can agree (gasp) that I'm an asshat for making them the asshats (together (almost lovie-dovie)). Now I'll let the rest of you have at it (and me).
24 comments:
Somehow, I think Shaw and Mike will be secretly pleased to make it on the AOTW.
As for terrorists and all this fighting; if we had reliable alternative energies and can get off the vast oil tit, other countries would follow suit, especially if the alternatives can be made cheaper and more plentiful.
That would leave the Middle East pretty much bankrupt, back living out of tents and unable to afford a sling shot, let alone nukes, missles, etc.
Why always war when there are other, less violent solutions?
Too much testosterone in the world...
our righteousness of cause (no matter the worst intentions you can find for the president), and our willingness to spend blood and lives to free people is what makes us special
This is all very Lee Greenwood of you, but before you go putting us back on that altitude-sickness-inducing pedestal, let's make something clear.
It's all well and good to tout our 'We Are The Sole Repository Of All That Is Good, Holy, And Righteous On This Earth' creed: IF you live up to it.
As long as the US says one thing and does another, it all becomes ever so meaningless, just another propaganda sheet, another publicity ploy.
It's not enough to talk the talk. We also have to walk the walk. This means shit like the torture stuff has to go. If we choose the opposite path, to wit, torturing people but at least being honest about it, we lose our Moral Police priveleges, but at least we're not hypocrites.
our power and concept of freedom around the world.
What I don't like about this statement is that it precludes the validity of anything that disagrees with 'our concepts'. We are not the summum bonum. We have no exclusivity claim on What Is Right. And just because someone disagrees with us, that doesn't make them wrong, necessarily.
What we need to do is find a set of common ideals and morals, a set of common goals, and let everyone work towards them as they will, instead of insisting that The American Way is The Right Way.
This is why people hate us. We give them no credit; it's our way or the highway. The Chinese are one of the oldest civilizations on earth; do we have the first scrap of respect for that culture? Ah, fuck no, we sure don't. We sure got all panty-wadded about the Chinese Communists, didn't we? But now that they've mobilized their attentions towards a more capitalistic economy (so successfully they make 98% of everything you are looking at right now), we resent them for it and consider them even more of a threat than when the comrades were quietly wearing their blue serge and plodding through the Cultural Revolution. What could China do to make us happy, except be a quiet, halfassbackwards third world nation that obeys our every whim and plays yes-man to Washington? In the end, isn't that our definition and goal for the rest of the world? Be quiet, do what we tell you, don't get in our way and for God's sake don't compete with us on any actual basis?
'Freedom' is a relative concept, just like 'success' and 'failure', and all of them are based on perspective.
Patrick, you haven't insulted me by labeling me as AOTW. The insult comes from comparing me with Mike of Mike's America.
I do NOT call people who disagree with me "commies," or "socialists," as Mike does all the time to me. I've stopped visiting his blog because his level of maturity is embarrassing to behold.
And there is no shame in supporting someone one agrees with. None.
You obviously don't read everything I write, because I have said Mr. Obama is NOT perfect in my estimation, but he is a magnitude better than the previous president. This is indisputable by any sane person.
What burns your ass and made you post this bit of nonsense is that I don't criticize Mr. Obama the way I criticized Mr. Bush.
What you fail to grasp, friend, is the obvious reason for this.
If it rings your little bells to label me an Asshat, go right ahead, I've been called worse by bigger and more important hombres than you.
LOL!
Interesting.
Count me as one of the profoundly disappointed who believes without the slightest reservation that Mike is worthy of his very own AOTW. To dilute this prestigious award is to deny Mike his very real accomplishments.
It doesn't easily occur to me what they are come to think of it but I have to say the level of invective, name-calling, and sheer simpleness sets him and his blog (not to mention his four loyal readers) apart from the pack.
Having been banned from Mikes America on more than one occasion I can say that given time I eventually pine for the foot-stomping, hold your breath 'til you're blue & plug your ears and sing level of discourse Mike offers up.
Mike seems to spend a fair amount of time at the highly toxic Flopping Aces, where I have been permanently 86ed, and I miss that aspect of our collegial give and take a very great deal.
Sigh.
Oh. And one other thing. The 'raghead terrorists' don't hate us because we're the most powerful nation on earth or because of 'our freedoms' etc.
They hate us because of our politics. Palestine. Our support of the Saudi royal family. Egypt. Etc. Etc.
But don't take my word for it. This is a real eye-opener and whomever hasn't read it. most of us I'm certain, should.
http://www.amazon.com/Messages-World-Statements-Osama-Laden/dp/1844670457
ASS- hat of the month Shaw Kenawe..period
Hero of the Month Mike
Rocky: That's why I put them together.
And I absolutely agree that their vast repositories of oil is the only thing that gives them the power they have.
Saty: At least I'm not singing it (badly).
Now I'm not saying we always live up to the ideal (and I'm sure you can quote the blemishes). But it's either our ideal or someone else's that's going to lead the world. And I'd rather it be ours rather than, French surrenderism, or Chinese totalitarianism, or (worst of all) Islamic tyrrany. It's a matter of striving for a better world for all of us that matters, not whether we fuck up.
That's not to say that everything America wants is 100% correct. But there are universal things that are good and evil that we champion, real freedom being the big one.
'Freedom' is a relative concept, just like 'success' and 'failure', and all of them are based on perspective.
Freedom with modifiers is relative. Freedom itself is the ability to conduct yourself how you see fit, abridged only when you interfere with another's right to do so. That's the ideal.
And can you name a country that is (ideally) freer than ours? If so, I'll keep it in mind for the next couple of decades. At the rate we're going, it might be the best thing to get out.
Dear Sweet Shaw: Patrick, you haven't insulted me by labeling me as AOTW. The insult comes from comparing me with Mike of Mike's America.
I know. :)
(this is where you respond with a "you suck" and a smile)
But it was either you two or Judge Sotomayor for being so "trippy" that she's in a cast. Plus, I wanted bigger targets that could handle the asshattery. Thus the poetic jab. But look at it this way, you share the spotlight of AOTW with President Obama, Caroline Kennedy, and Nancy Pelosi. And Me. Oh, and Rush and Sean Hannity (who's still pissing me off with his shitty music choices).
Besides, you both take each other's choice for President too personally. Thus you get to be representative.
Arthur: I'll let your comments on Mike stand without further comment from me.
As for why the raghead terrorists hate us, our power and our freedom are intrinsically linked with our politics (and not just Democrat/Republican BS).
INGTTIAM: Obviously you missed the point as to WHY they got the award together (other than my pleasure in tomenting them both by pairing them).
Not hard to figure out why you missed it though. Here's a hint: it's not about their political POV.
Patrick: But it was either you two or Judge Sotomayor for being so "trippy" that she's in a cast.
Apparently, I'm an Asshat even in that respect. You've got mail.
Yeah, and you commented between the time I read and responded to it (while at work because kids are so distracting), which was after I dropped the above comment.
And I'm restraining myself from saying "See you in the 'fall'" right now. Mainly because I hope you get better. :)
I've been real kind and gentle to you since I became kind and gentle Patrick. And all I rate is a kiss my ass honorable mention?
Your judgement disappoints me Patrick. I was even going to email you once in hopes you would sign me up for some porn sites. Then you said you wouldn't do that either.
Your disrespect calls for an inkind response...
ABORTION! ABORTION! ABORTION!
Now let that be a lesson to you.
"Obama is NOT perfect in my estimation, but he is a magnitude better than the previous president. This is indisputable by any sane person."
On substance, their Foreign Policy positions are virtually the exact same. A number or recent Op-Eds in publications that are the furthest thing from bastions of conservatism have even declared as much.
Domestically, it's merely a matter of degree. Bush had his bailout packages and so too does Obama have his.
Now, you may very well be falling all over yourself and singing the praises of Obama's incessant desire to "invest" in our nation's future.
But the facts of reality will one day catch up with you. And the facts are these:
The money to pay for this excessive domestic spending is going to have to come from somewhere. The debt will come due eventually.
101: Well, the kind and gentle thing kind of took you out of the AOTW category. Nevertheless, your inkind response requires my usual response to such things:
You suck so very much, ya damned milkylicker! :)
Soapster: You've explained why Shaw was one of the two recipients of the AOTW.
Now I just need Mike's wit to shine through....
What the hell is a milkylicker?
And Soapbax Dude is correct about the spending that started with his buddy, shit. It started back with Reagan and his tax cuts lead to more revenue except when stuff happens and Democrats blah blah and deficits go apeshit but Cheney says Reagan proved they don't matter so Clinton finally gets them under control then Bush gets elected and fucks everything up so Obama inherits the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression and has to spend shitloads to save the financial institutions from collapsing and creating a 55 trillion dollar catastrophe.
So I don't just blame Bush. I blame Reagan and the rest of the deluded right wing Reagan worshippers. I hope you're satisfied.
Deficits aren't always inherently bad. When you buy a house, are you not looking at a huge deficit right then and there when you sign on the dotted line? Indeed you are.
The premise is that your investment is going to increase in value and so it makes sense as a long term investment.
Growing the deficit to provide tax cuts works to boost the economy and the prosperity of America because the added capital will flow where it can get the biggest return on investment.
When you grow the deficit so that you can ramp up public works projects and other government bullshit, you don't grow yourself out of a recession because once the economy gets going again, any new capital is consumed by government.
Capitalists invest for an economic return. Politicians invest for a political return.
And just as things are possibly having a glimmer of hope, the fucks at Big Oil are going to ramp up prices to suck out any disposable income anyone might have otherwise used to further stimulate the economy, destroying whatever gains we've made. Again.
Am I the ONLY one who sees this shit?
101: Since you asked, I'll suggest Googling it. And I'll claim victory by confusion!!!
Saty: Am I the ONLY one who sees this shit?
You're not the only one. Why do you think I make fun of all the people that group various companies into BIG ANYTHING. You seem to assume there's no correlation between their costs and the price of gas, especially when it's nationalized oil companies and other countries that can influence the supply. And of course, the danger of government takeover in this country (which will suit Obama either way as long as the prices go up (one of his oft-stated goals in the process of creating a "clean energy" (command) economy).
That and I like laughing at fallacious assumptions.
"Growing the deficit to provide tax cuts works to boost the economy and the prosperity of America because the added capital will flow where it can get the biggest return on investment."
Bush had eight years to get this return. No my friend Soapboxgod. What happened was our Nation lived large on the credit card and now those responsible are doing their best to blame President Obama.
And in the end, look at the few that really benefitted from the Bush tax cuts and deficits. Not me or my good friend Patrick. Our homes and IRAs looked good for a while but not now. It was hedge fund managers and CEOs of big corporations that reaped billions.
Keep defending them though. I'm sure they feel bad enough for all the working people's IRAs and 401Ks that took a big shit. It must give them comfort that there are a few who still buy into their line of tax cuts for the wealthy benefits everybody.
And, why might we suppose it didn't work when Bush did it??
Because, and if you'd been following the discontent of folks like Patrick and myself you'd understand this perfectly, the incompetent fuck spent like a drunken sailor (which is really unfair to drunken sailors).
And for the record, I'm "defending" no-one other than any individual who acquires their wealth through rightful means and subsequently aspires to retain as much of it as they can.
I'm well aware of the grotesque manner in which the big wigs on Wall Street (in conjunction with the Federal Reserve) created money out of thin air to feed their own salacious appetites.
That is an unjust and immoral act that I do not advocate nor do I condone.
Conversely however, that the Bush tax cuts benefitted those in the upper echelons of the economic pie more so than perhaps you personally may have benefitted does not concern me. Seeing as how those in the upper tiers shoulder a disproportionate amount of the tax burden, it stands to chance that they should in turn benefit disproportionately.
And the Bush Administration saw to it that the tax cuts benefitted the uberwealthy disproportionatly. And for good measure it spent as if taxes had been raised to be sure plenty of money, albeit borrowed, printed, whatever, was being spent. It kept interest rates incredibly low to prop up a stock market to unsustainable levels.
I don't know what we're arguing here now SBG. It seems we agree.
On that we do agree. If I'm not mistaken, where we part ways is that I chose not to double down on the practice (presuming you voted for Obama).
Socialist Shaw is an asshat for sure. All the more so because her views are so malleable that you can gently manipulate her so easily.
But if being tough as nails and twice as smart gets me labeled as an asshat, I'll proudly wear it.
P.S. I've sprouted a whole new crop of barking moonbats in case you need more to add to your collection.
This new bunch almost makes Socialist Shaw look sane.
SSD: "What could China do to make us happy"
Retreating from Tibet, and stopping the constant threats to destroy Taiwan would do it for me.
Truth said: "And the Bush Administration saw to it that the tax cuts benefitted the uberwealthy disproportionatly."
What "benefit"? After the tax cut plan was put in place, the rich, as before, were paying a much higher percentage in taxes than the non-rich.
Post a Comment