The Dems were getting to me, so I stopped reading/watching news. I will be back when I get back into town on Sunday.
Reader Interactions
75Comments
Comments are closed.
Come for the politics, stay for the snark.
Tide comes in. Tide goes out. You can’t explain that.
Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.
Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?
The Supreme Court cannot be allowed to become the ultimate, unaccountable arbiter of everything.
Marge, god is saying you’re stupid.
They were going to turn on one another at some point. It was inevitable.
The willow is too close to the house.
The arc of the moral universe doesn’t bend itself. it’s up to us.
Donald Jessica Trump found guilty as fuck – May 30, 2024!
I am pretty sure Katy Tur wasn’t always such a bootlicking sycophant.
I like you, you’re my kind of trouble.
The problem people have with Biden’s age is the color of the VPs skin.
Pessimism assures that nothing of any importance will change.
Republicans: The threats are dire, but my tickets are non-refundable!
And now I have baud making fun of me. this day can’t get worse.
Fight for a just cause, love your fellow man, live a good life.
Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.
“woke” is the new caravan.
Republicans don’t trust women.
Hi god, it’s us. Thanks a heap, you’re having a great week and it’s only Thursday!
Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.
He imagines himself as The Big Bad, Who Is Universally Feared… instead of The Big Jagoff, Who Is Universally Mocked.
There are a lot more evil idiots than evil geniuses.
Fundamental belief of white supremacy: white people are presumed innocent, minorities are presumed guilty.
You are here: Home / z-Retired Categories / Previous Site Maintenance / IF You Can’t Say Anything Nice
Mason
I feel your pain.
Slartibartfast
Come back when you’re recharged. It’s never worth tying yourself in knots over.
IXLNXS
Start drinking. It help you stay detached. Or at least keeps you drunk enough, passing out is possible despite the thoughts running through your mind.
CadillaqJaq
I’ll drink to what IXLNXS said… enough booze and the thoughts merely stagger through your mind.
Flagwaver
Hang in, John. Don’t let the fact that the world is populated by fucktards like Michael Moore, Richard Ben-Veniste, Ted Kennedy and (shudder) Hillary Clintoon blind you to the fact that it is ALSO populated by millions of honest, reasonable, hard-working, non-idiotarians, who just want to get through their days, earn some shekels to support their family, and NOT FUCKIN’ GET BLOWN UP BY SOME DISH-TOWEL WEARING CAMEL-HUMPER. But, then, Michael Moore LIKES camel-humpers . . . being one himself, and all.
Relax, have a drink, and come back to us.
The Bobs
NOT FUCKIN’ GET BLOWN UP BY SOME DISH-TOWEL WEARING CAMEL-HUMPER
Ahh ,Republicans, the party of racists, and proud of it!
Flagwaver
My, my, we’ve been visited by a morally superior Democrat type. Hey, The Bobs, I’ve got a quiz for you – Of the last 100 or so terrorist bombs that have been detonated world-wide, what percentage of them were set off by each of the following:
1. Christians of any ethnicity;
2. Buddhists of any ethnicity;
3. Irishmen of any religion;
4. Brazilians of any religion; and
5. Islamic Arab males between the ages of 16 and 34???
Fucktard.
sean
i guess some people didn’t read the title of the post….
Rick
“If You Can’t Say Anything Nice”
As Alice Roosevelt Longworth would finish the title: “…come sit next to me.”
Cordially…
Jeff G
I’ll cheer you up, John. Here, this ought to do it.
BJK
Flagwaver, you are such a credit to your party/regime/Reich. I bet you wear your Hitler Youth brown shirt with pride, bowling, rotating the tires on my BMW, and coming home to your wife after I’ve given her the taste of a real man’s dick.
Jeff G
Well, you’re a real dick alright, BJK.
Ask yourself what it is you’re objecting to, then reread your post. Pay specific attention to “party/regime/Reich,” “bowling,” rotating tires, etc.
Flagwaver
Dear BJK,
For someone who likes to accuse others of stereotyping/racism, you certainly rang all the stereotype bells that you LLL’s think of when you think of Republicans.
Unfortunately, you didn’t come within a mile on ANYTHING.
Tell you what, BJK, I’ll make you a little wager, and let John be the judge. I’ll bet you I paid more money in friggin’ income tax last year than you MADE.
Oh, and by the way, asswipe . . . most educated people are aware that the Nazis were SOCIALISTS. But, then, “educated people” would exclude MOST of the membership of the Democratic Party, wouldn’t it? Particularly those who graduated from the public-school-bureaucracy hellholes that your party has created out of the public education system.
Crawl back under your rock, pinhead.
Flagwaver
Oh, and by the way, BJK, I notice neither you nor your soulmate The Bobs had any SUBSTANTIVE response to my question. How many of the last 100 terrorist bombs detonated around the world were detonated by OTHER THAN Islamist Arabs?????
I hear the crickets chirping in the deafening silence.
The Bobs
Flagwaver,
What about your soulmate Tim McVeigh? Maybe that doesn’t fit into your “last 100” category. It certainly fits into a top 100 category.
How do you know tha arabs that set off bombs are islamists? By definition?
Flagwaver
Well, I’ll be damned – the LLL’s finally respond. Not intelligently; that would be too much to expect. But they do respond.
Let’s see, typical leftie bullshit.
1. McVeigh. A coward and a crumb, but NOT a Republican. He was a fringe nutcase, with, basically NO support in the U.S. He did, however, as ample evidence has been adduced to demonstrate, quite likely have help from foreign sources, most likely Islamist. Oh, yeah, and by the way, that is ONE example, NINE years ago . . . oh, yeah, and it has Islamist fingerprints on it. But, that is your ENTIRE FREAKIN’ ARGUMENT, isn’t it, numbnuts?
2. I know it’s a little much to expect a LLL to actually friggin’ READ THE PAPER, but you might try reading the charters/manifestos of Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, al-Qaeda, PFLP, the Chechen “rebels,” Maqtada al-Sadr’s bunch of freaks, and the nutjobs who touched off the little present in Madrid. “How do you know tha arabs that set off bombs are islamists?” Umm, because THEY say they are???? And cite that as their primary motivation for their cowardly crimes?
Again, chickenshit, ANSWER THE QUESTION! What percentage of the last 100 terrorist bombs world wide were set off by OTHER THAN Islamist Arabs?
Either get an education, or STFU.
Kimmitt
Let’s put it a different way:
How have the citizens of Christian countries, such as Ireland, behaved different from the citizens of Muslim countries, such as Lebanon, when living as conquered?
Ireland is a free country because of terrorist attacks against the Brits in 1930 — targetted assassinations and other forms of guerilla warfare. Terrorism is the inevitable result of colonialism, and the fact that the Muslims are under the boot due to an accident of history doesn’t change this simple fact.
Kimmitt
sorry, in the 1920s and 30s.
Flagwaver
Gee, Kimmitt, if you ignore history, detail, context, and actual FACTS, squint hard enough, and view the world through your patented “FactProof”(TM) liberal lenses, that analogy might ACTUALLY make some farkin’ sense.
But, since I am subject to none of these debilitating conditions . . . it looks sorta like your septic tank backed up all over John’s nice, clean blog.
In the first instance, gimme the 411 on all the “occupation” of Arab countries . . . by persons other than Arab dictators, that is. And, if you even MENTION Iraq, you not only earn fifty quadrillion fucktard idiotarian points, you actually automatically lose the game.
Second, a careful examination of the “terrorist” tactics of the IRA makes it fairly clear that FOR THE MOST PART (and I freely admit this qualification is NOT universal as to their activities – but it remains true in the aggregate), they directed their attacks against (i) British military, (ii) “loyalist” or British controlled police and paramilitary, (iii) British or British loyalist governmental authority.
Now, the reality is that there is not a SINGLE “occupied” Arabic Islamist state in the world today . . . and I expressly and intentionally include Iraq . . . IF you exclude occupation by Arab dictators.
So, your half-assed, PC, moral equivalency BULLSHIT is just that – it has no relevance, it bears no relationship to reality, and it is nothing more or less than disgusting apologetics for indefensible barbarity.
But, then, you lefties have never had a problem with indefensible barbarity, from Marx, Trotsky, Lenin and Stalin through Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro and a host of others. In fact, the bloodier and more barbaric your leftist dictators, the more frantic you are to cover for them.
“Useful idiots,” indeed, you dictator-felching terror apologist.
Flagwaver
Oh, and by the way, Kimmitt, while I admit that it is basically chickenshit to comment on such matters as grammar and spelling, I find it amusing as all hell to be lectured at by some idjit that would actually write a (more-or-less) sentence which includes “. . . How have the citizens of Christian countries, such as Ireland, behaved different from . . . ”
Try “differently than” next time, ‘tard. Public school graduate?????????
Chris P
I know I’m opening myself up to being called a “fucktard” or a “public school graduate” by Flagwaver, but here goes. (Like the majority of Americans, my parents couldn’t afford to send me to a private school so I did my best with what I had and graduated with honors from a *gasp* public school! I also graduated from a state university instead of a private college. I guess that makes my opinion uneducated and worthless in Flagwaver’s eyes.) I reiterate portions of my post from April 14, when John booted burnplant from this site:
“Attention fellow posters:…Profanity-laced insults aimed at others do not help your argument nor contribute one iota of worth to the dialog. Nobody seriously interested in getting at the truth of an issue wants to see a dozen posts back and forth between two bloggers bantering on like immature schoolchildren.”
Posted by: Chris on April 14, 2004 09:18 AM
Flagwaver, even if you throw documented, historical facts out there for all us ignorant public school graduates, very few will take your arguments seriously when you present them in your usual belligerent fashion. I, for one, am more likely to look at another’s viewpoint with an open mind when their argument is presented clearly, intelligently, and POLITELY rather than as a hostile, insulting rant. But hey…it’s a free country, do as you please.
Remember, an empty vessel makes the most noise.
Jane
You’re the third blogger in a few days to take time out….Iraq notwithstanding, it IS just an election. The degree of anger on both sides in the blogosphere is quite remarkable and cannot be sustained for six more months (much less for four more years by the losers).
Flagwaver
Chris,
I take your comments at face value – that you are trying to be constructive and “elevate the debate.” And I apologize for the “public school” crack – although, actually, I too graduated from a public high school. I just found it interesting to be lectured at by Kimmitt and some of his leftie friends when (i) they had their facts pretty much completely wrong, and (ii) if you will notice, they started slinging the insults first. I was the one that got called a Nazi, Brown Shirt, etc., for pointing out the obvious and factually correct. I responded in kind . . . although, I will admit, with slightly more creativity and venom than the tired old “all conservatives are Nazis” meme. (Get some new material, BJK, that shit was old when I was a kid.)
But, having said all that, and having given you your props for your good intentions, Chris, I have a couple of questions:
1. Have you noticed any tendency on the part of leftists to open their minds in response to more measured dialog? I haven’t. Being nice, or being obnoxious; neither seems to penetrate their fact-proof fog.
2. I know that, in general, civility is equated with “good manners” and “good behavior,” but is that paradigm necessarily correct? Is it “good behavior” to treat factually incorrect and potentially harmful speech and arguments, and those who make them, in a civil manner?
I have four kids. I have ONE priority when it comes to national defense/foreign relations: Protect the security of the United States (and thereby protect the lives of my children), and strive to increase the numbers of democratic (preferably free market) states in the world (which is a strategic concommitant to the first priority – there are NO historical examples of a democratic state commencing a war on another democratic state.) All else is at best wasteful of resources, which could be better devoted to these priorities, and at worst an actually harmful course, by moving us further away from these goals. I think it is objectively, factually obvious to any but the most stupid (Michael Moore), unrealistic (Spain and Zapatero), venal (Chirac and the U.N.) and/or partisan (Kimmitt, BJK, Oliver Willis, Joshua Marshall, Atrios, et al.) observers that our current actions are advancing BOTH of those priorities. I have little patience for the bleats of the stupid and the unrealistic, and NO patience for the bleats of the venal and the blindly partisan.
And, before Kimmitt jumps in and labels my support of the Bush Administration FOREIGN policy (or at least the broad outlines of it) as “blindly partisan,” you should be aware that I am NOT a Bush supporter – I may very well vote Libertarian, or write in Steve Forbes, this year. I WILL NOT vote for John Fuckin’ Kerry under ANY circumstances, but that don’t mean I’ll vote for the Bush.
Anyway, Chris, no insults intended to you . . . but it’ll be a cold day in hell before I’ll apologize to the likes of Kimmitt and BJK.
Ken Hahn
Kimmitt, it might help to study a bit of Irish history. Ireland became independent just after World War I. The terrorism by the IRA in the 20’s and 30’s was directed at Northern Ireland. As a matter of fact IRA terrorism to this day is directed at Ulster, which is still part of the UK. Ireland owes its indepence to a traditional revolutionary indepence movement. Terrorism is usually counterproductive in a nationalist sense.
Rewriting history to acchieve political correctness or to justify the enemies of the United States is a long tradition on the left. It will continue because the facts deny your fantasies. Inventing history to defend your concept of Ireland is an insult to the Irish. Don’t hijack the efforts of Irish patriots to justify terrorism.
Hipocrite
John Kerry: “I consider the oppourtunity to serve in Vietnam an extremely important part of being in the armed forces and believe that my request is in the best interests of the Navy.”
George Bush: “I do not volunteer for oversas.”
Flagwaver
Ken,
Can’t argue with your history, but I have to take issue with one statement (or at least the implications thereof). I agree that Irish “terrorism” is NOT analogous, either in context, execution or aim, to the current Islamic terrorism around the world, or the “uprising” (pfeh!) in Iraq, but I CAN’T hang with calling terrorists “patriots” WHATEVER their ethnicity, politics, religion or goals. Neither the British Army in Northern Ireland, nor the IDF on the West Bank, are difficult to find. If you want a fight, go to it, but leave the civilians the fuck alone. I would happily cap a “terrorist” whose cause I ardently BELIEVED in, if said terrorist was bombing civilians.
Whatever your goals, motivations, etc., that is just WRONG.
But I agree with you taking Kimmitt to task on his revisionist history. As you point out, however, it is of a piece with the Left’s treatment of all inconvenient facts – spin them, deny them, re-write them, or just ignore them, but NEVER, EVER change your politics in response to mere FACTS.
The Bobs
Flagwaver,
You seem to have missed the point about calling McVeigh your soulmate. You are motivated by hatred, just as he was.
Flagwaver
The Boobs,
You read ALL my posts, and that’s what you took away?? And you believe yourself able, based solely on reading my posts, to understand me sufficiently to know what “motivates” me??
In addition to your towering arrogance, you are truly one stupid, ignorant, blind troll, aren’t you?
FOAD.
Terry
Very well stated, Flagwaver.
I was about to write something correcting the fiction posted by Kimmitt re Ireland when I scrolled to your and Ken’s posts. I couldn’t add anything to what both of you said, other than to observe that Kimmitt is sometimes emblematic of many on the Left who simply make things up when the actual facts are inconvenient to their point of view.
lumburgh
If no other con will do it, I will. Flagwaver, though your arguments may have some merit, your style is so grating, it turns even me off. Dems are not the enemy: they’re the opposition. You’d do well to remember that. We’re all Americans here.
I will not have my party tarnished by your foetid rhetoric.
ps: you can’t felch a dictator. Felching is an activity. Perhaps a dictator could participate in felching, but as you have it, it’s wrong.
Flagwaver
Dear lumburgh,
Gee, I was under the impression that this was John’s blog. I will, of course, obey any restrictions our host, Mr. Cole, chooses to place on participation in this blog (or, of course, elect not to participate). I don’t consider myself under any obligation to constrain myself to suit your sensibilities.
PARTICULARLY when I was RESPONDING to being attacked (I equate being called a Nazi and a racist with being attacked) by BJK, Kimmitt and The Boobs.
Furthermore, I disagree with your categorical statement that “Dems are not the enemy.” Of course, most Democrats are loyal, honorable Americans. Some of the comments made by, for example, Terry McAuliffe, Michael Moore, Barbra Streisand, Atrios, and others, about President Bush, his administration, our efforts in Iraq, etc. DURING THE PROSECUTION OF A MILITARY ACTION truly give “aid and comfort” to our enemies in Iraq and elsewhere. That makes them, IMHO, my ENEMIES. And I will treat them as such. To my mind, they are, to some extent, by encouraging our enemies and possible future terrorists, endangering my children. I will treat such folk as a I see fit.
Your grammar lesson is in error. Yes, felching is an activity; however, it is an activity, like giving a blow job, which must be performed to/on another person. One who performs the act of felching a dictator is, indeed, a dictator-felcher, and can be described, properly, as a dicator-felching . . . whatever.
Finally, “I will not have my party tarnished by your foetid rhetoric.”? YOUR party???? So, you have been appointed to determine who may and may not be a member of the Republican Party? Guess I’ll resign.
Stop taking yourself so freakin’ seriously, would ya?????
IXLNXS
I consider leaders who lie to the country. Who reward friends and contributors with lucrative contracts. Who lead us into wars based on bad or trumped up intelligence. Wel I consider these people enemies of America.
And if any proof comes out that indeed they knowingly committed these acts, I think it tantamount to treason and should be punishable by death.
As to actors voicing their opinions publicly. I say great. At least free speech isn’t illegal yet.
And it reminds me that those currently and office and quite a few of their supporters would like to take this right away from people they don’t want to have it.
Makes me think these kinds of people are very unAmerican. That maybe they should move.
Flagwaver
Gee, first I get Lumburgh lecturing me on decorum, then I get IXLNXS lecturing me on . . . his latest drug hallucination, apparently.
In the first instance, dipwad, READ Woodward’s book. There’s a REASON that the Bush Campaign website links the book. In the “money passage,” even WOODWARD, no Bush supporter, indicates that Bush questioned Tenet and McLaughlin after they presented their case, told them it was weak, and was assured that the WMD case was “a slam dunk.”
“Bush lied” doesn’t cut it with anyone except Bush-haters and partisans.
More than that, Bush was quite straightforward, in the runup to Operation Iraqi Freedom, about referring to ALL of the grounds for the military action, which include Hussein’s human rights abuses, his state support of terrorism, the fact that he was in direct violation of 17 U.N. resolutions AND the terms of the cease fire which ended Gulf War 1 (in and of itself, that alone was casus belli). Some tin-eared partisans didn’t LISTEN to what he said, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t say it.
Now, as to your abysmal LACK of knowledge of the Constitution, please understand that the U.S. Constitution guarantees your freedom of speech ONLY from government intrusion. I’m free to interfere with your speech any damn way I please, subject to your (non-existent) ability to stop me, and applicable criminal statutes.
Yes, actors and other idiots (even YOU, mirabile dictu) have an absolute legal right to spout their blather . . . but I have no obligation whatsoever to either countenance it or respect it.
So, if y’all don’t like what I have to say, I guess you can either come try to stop me (I’d ENJOY that!), or just STFU.
Don’t go away mad, just go away.
Terry
If “lumburgh” is anything other than a regular visitor to atrios, Hesiod and DU, I will be SHOCKED. The limits of his intellectual capabilities, as evidenced by his inability to form a correctly spelled sentence, are manifestly the signs of one from the nether regions of the Loony Left. And “IXLNXS” is merely another tinfoil hat wearing paranoid, as a quick visit to his site will demonstrate.
Flagwaver
Well, Terry, until you mentioned it, I hadn’t bothered to look at IXLNXS’s website (I’m not normally a masochist), but after your comment, I just HAD to look.
What he lacks in intellectual capacity, he more than makes up for in lack of design expertise, bad taste, and plain old tinfoil-hattedness. Having seen his “creative” writing, I won’t bother to read or respond to his posts – calling him a troll is an insult to trolls.
As for Lumburgh, he DOES sorta have that “I’m an intellectual Democrat, and I can’t spell or construct a simple declarative sentence” thing going on, doesn’t he? My bad for taking his “I’m a conservative” stuff at face value.
Actually, I have no problem having very cordial and civil debates with extreme lefties – so long as they are rational. (I know, that sounds like a contradiction in terms, but there are some lefties whose assumptions are such that their policy analysis DOES flow logically from their underlying assumptions. I’m STILL trying to get my head wrapped around how they derive the assumptions, however. Probably better that I DON’T understand.)
But, Lumburgh notwithstanding, I feel absolutely NO obligation to be civil to a barking moonbat – particularly one who STARTS his conversation with me by calling me a racist and a Nazi.
If John says I have to be a “good boy” with such on his blog . . . well, it IS his blog, and I’ll do my best to follow the rules – or I’ll leave – but I wouldn’t insult my host by trashing his rules in his “house.” Short of that, however, I calls ’em like I sees ’em. And BJK, Kimmitt and The Boobs are ignorant, fact-challenged partisan jerks, IXLNXS is a barking moonbat, and lumburgh is either a clumsy impostor, or a really poorly-educated Republican with a Mrs. Grundy complex. Fie on the lot of them.
They DESERVE Kerry! The rest of us, however, do not.
Joe Gandelman
Let me guess: all that blank space is a list of Dennis Kucinich’s useful ideas.
Flagwaver
Well, in marked contrast to John Effin’ “Windsock” Kerry, I DO have to give Dennis his props – that loonie actually, sincerely BELIEVES the crap he spouts. Gotta respect a man that can build a completely contra-reality “reality” to inhabit, and remain true to it, without ever letting the light of the world shine in.
Ol’ Dennis could be one hell of a science fiction writer, if he put his “mind” to it. If the mind-control satellites didn’t zap all his “good” plots ideas, that is.
But, you gotta give the Dems credit for this . . . this year, they came up with the FUNNIEST damn group of morons to run for President that you could imagine. I mean, Dean, Moseley-Braun, Kucinich, Sharpton, Edwards, Kerry and Graham????? Gephardt is partisan and boring, but at least he has a vague, part-time relationship with reality. Joe Lieberman is a pretty good guy, albeit almost as boring as his erstwhile runningmate, AlBore. But the rest of them range from complete moonbats like Dennis to race pimps like Sharpton, to Teddy Kennedy’s bitch, Kerry . . . and THESE people are supposed to be taken seriously as potential presidential candidates??? Wow.
Robin Roberts
Actually Ken, you didn’t get your history correct. Ireland ( with the exception of Northern Ireland ) aka Eire became independant after WWI because of the Irish resistance against the British by the “IRA” throughout the island. Of course, the IRA of the ’20’s was different from the IRA of the ’60’s onward.
burnplant
Wow, I can see why I got banned from this joint.
With folks like “flagwaiver” breaking off gold like this:
“FUNNIEST damn group of morons to run for President that you could imagine. I mean, Dean, Moseley-Braun, Kucinich, Sharpton, Edwards, Kerry and Graham?????”
and
“…a really poorly-educated Republican with a Mrs. Grundy complex”
There’s no room for trolling. (by the was, Flaggy, why is “poorly-educated” hyphenated? Are you being satirical? Cause that’s real good if you are…
Anyway, let’s raise the bar here folks.
Ken Hahn
Flagwaver, sorry if I gave you any impression that I equate terrorists with patriots. In rare cases like that of the Irgun there are some people who may be both, but terrorists are more generally nihilists that nationalists. Some terrorists grow up to be patriots but it’s very unusual.
Robin, the IRA of the pre indepence era was revolutionary and underground. A few terrorist acts were committed in its name. The IRA post independence became more radical and terrorist. Kimmitt refered to the 20s and 30s when the IRA was fighting for annexation, not independence. In fact the IRA model assures us that if Palestine ever acchieves independence, its underground organizations will become even more terrorist than they are today.
History is too important to prostitute to any ideology. As we learn more we can write better accounts but those corrections are cheapened by those who invent facts.
Kimmitt
I was wrong to refer to the 20s and 30s; the correct statement was, as was so thoroughly stated, the 10s and 20s. This is totally irrelevant to my larger point which described the tactics used by the Irish to convince the British that independence was the lesser of the evils offered them.
“Now, the reality is that there is not a SINGLE “occupied” Arabic Islamist state in the world today . . . and I expressly and intentionally include Iraq . . . IF you exclude occupation by Arab dictators.”
Okay, this is just stupid. The Allies occupied pretty much everything the Ottomans had after WWI, which created a more or less unbroken line of colonized Islamic and mixed peoples stretching from Morocco to Indonesia (Thailand being a fascinating exception). The colonizing powers drew national boundaries which had nothing to do with ethnic borders, and they brutally put down various rebellions. When they left during the decolonialization process following WWII, they put into place friendly puppet regimes, not anything resembling democratic groups. Of course, with any such an enormous melange, there will be variation; Malaysia, India, and Bangladesh are relatively free, while Indonesia started well, then collapsed badly, and is now doing quite a bit better.
But we’re talking about the Arab states, and we have a sad, sad history there. We drew lines there based on absurd administrative boundaries that the British used to handle former Ottoman territories. Algeria was a horror piled on top of horrors. We’ve backed the House of Sa’ud, the Shah (okay, not precisely Arab, but very close by), Mubarak, and countless other strongmen. And the Occupied Territories, for all manner of reasons, are just that — occupied by a foreign power.
The Arabs have been free of direct colonial rule for less than fifty years and used as pawns in our Cold War chess game for the vast majority of the time afterward. The Palestinians are an occupied people. It is hardly suprising that there are indigenous movements against both their direct oppressors (the shieks, the strongmen, and the Israelis) and their backers in the West, most notably the United States.
And yes, I was a product of public schooling. You goddamn brownshirt fuck.
Flagwaver
Well, apparently I struck a chord with dear Kimmitt. “You goddamn brownshirt fuck.” Excellent invective, Kimmitt. NOT. As I tried to educate one of your dumbshit liberal colleagues above, all educated folks know that the Nazis were SOCIALISTS.
Strike one.
You went through a long, rambling, biased, semi-accurate historical description of what the Allies did to the Ottomans post WW II (What’s the matter, Kimmitt, you didn’t like what the Allies did to your fellow anti-Semitic, Nazi assholes?), which is IN NO WAY relevant to my comment. The Ottomans were not all, or even largely, Arabs, and many Arab states were not part of the Ottomans.
Then you go on to discuss the nastiness we inflicted on the Arabs by dividing their lands up along OTHER THAN ethnic borders (only you race pandering Liberals think of race/ethnicity as being the be all and end all) and installing friendly “puppet” governments, without ever discussing the fact that NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THESE GOVERNMENTS IS STILL IN POWER.
Strike two.
So, YES, in fact, you have tacitly admitted that NOT A SINGLE OCCUPIED ARAB COUNTRY EXISTS TODAY. But, as interesting an admission as that was, Kimmitt, it is NOT responsive to my original question, which you and your liberal friends CONTINUE to dodge, like the cowards that you are. HOW MANY of the last 100 terrorist bombs set off around the world were detonated by OTHER THAN Islamist Arabs????
Strike three.
Kimmitt, you’re out. Not that you were ever in, of course, you whining, puling, whimpering liberal sack of shit with delusions of adequacy. Go back to defending Stalin, Mao and Fidel. You won’t be any better at that than you are at this, but at least you’ll be playing on your home field.
Oh, and Kimmitt? Any time, any place. You liberal wimp.
Oh, and who’s this burnplant character? We KNOW what plant he’s burning . . . that much is obvious to even the most casual observer. No, burnplant, we don’t need a troll, and if we did, one of your meager talents would not answer. Hook up with Kimmitt and go pleasure each other – it’s about the limit of either of your abilities.
IXLNXS
So as Flagwaver has framed the argument so shall I follow.
Republicans are idiot fucking bastard children of inbred hicks.
The only reason Bush got elected was because the vote was fixed and the idiot right wing side of America believed it was time to stage a coup on America using the dim witted Son of a bitch Bush Jr as their poster boy.
If you disagree with anything I just said you must be drunker than your average wife beating republican secretly gay child touching freak.
Isn’t it nice to have this discussion that relys soo heavily on fact and so little on personal invective. To you Flagwaver I salute you for taking these conversations to a higher standard of discourse.
Fucking idiot.
GrantR
How ironic, a thread entitled “If You Can’t Say Anything Nice” and this is what we get.
At least John had the sense to just take a few days off for a breather.
Ken Hahn
Kimmitt, my point was simple. You do not know when it happened. You do not know how it happened. How in the world can you believe that I’ll accept you know why it happened. You do have a point on irrational borders. It applies mostly to Africa, not the Middle East. The exact borders in most of the Arab world don’t mean much since they’re drawn through areas where no one lives. To draw borders that reflected tribal, ethnic, linguistic and religious divisions would have left the Middle East a Balkanized patchwork of 100 countries. The British and French left borders that were for the most part defensible. Had they Balkanized the area, it would have lasted only until the Shah’s armies reached the Nile. Or perhaps Ataturk’s, or maybe even Stalin’s. In any case, the Arabs would not have benefitted.
I’m also a product of the public schools. but in an era that taught some history. I’m not a big fan of Bush. He’s basically a RINO. I’d rather there was a conservative or a libertarian running, but that doesn’t seem to be likely this year.
Slartibartfast
Can we now dispense with the ad homs, both polite and rude? I’m pretty sure John wouldn’t stand for this sort of thing, if he were watching.
Assholes ;/
Flagwaver
Slartibartfarst,
I will assume that you are more knowledgeable about John’s sensibilities than am I, and I have already indicated that I will abide by whatever standards John sets for HIS blog. If I can’t call Kimmitt names, I can live with that (beating him up with his lack of knowledge is fun enough), but I want to point out ONCE AGAIN, that the ad hominem was commenced against me by The Boobs and BJK. I was responding to be called a racist, a Nazi, etc. I’m happy to abide by the “rules,” whatever they are – but, then I will expect others to do the same. Is that fair?
Ken Hahn,
Hear, hear!! I WISH we could get a real conservative, or even a (small L) libertarian, but what we have is Bush. As feeble as he is, I can live with his Prescription Drug Benefit, “No Child Left Behind” redistributionist crap to preserve his forthright approach to fighting the War on Terror – as I am convinced that a Kerry presidency would be a DISASTER on that front. You show me the candidate who would give us Bush’s foreign policy and Steve Forbes’ economics, and I’m all there for it.
Slartibartfast
It’s not my place to say, Flagwaver. It really wasn’t my place to say anything to begin with, but I thought what the hell, might as well tone down some of this crap so John doesn’t have the aftermath of a shitfight to clean up. Silly me.
I was actually more disappointed with Kimmitt; I know that he ought to know better. But…[Forrest]That’s all I have to say about that[/Forrest].
lumburgh
I can’t remember the last time i was at either atrios’s or hesiod’s site and i’ve never been to du. But since Flagwaver can’t form a sentance without gratuitously swearing at someone and I say its disgusting, Terry says I must be a liberal who can’t spell (what error did you find, BTW). Impressive.
Why do either of you insist on impugning anyone who doesn’t like your tone, which, as everyone with a modicum of courage has noted, is poisonous? The only respose thus far is you whining, “They started it!”
The simple fact is, I’m tired of the loudmouths. Screaming does note equal debate. You’re angry someone called you a Nazi? Lay off calling Arabs “camel humpers,” it only makes you sound like a bigot.
It’s a bit too late to ignore you, but next time, I surely will. I’d also advise everyone else to do the same.
Chris P
That was my intent too Slartibartfast (although it really wasn’t my place to say anything either) when I posted further up the thread. Unfortunately we appear to be whispers in a maelstrom of malcontent.
Flagwaver
Let’s see, I’ve indicated twice that I’ll follow WHATEVER rules John has for the site, but no one has indicated that there are any such rules. Chris and Slartibartfarst seem to be trying to elevate the discussion, which I have no problem with (but let’s elevate EVERYONE – if it’s considered acceptable practice for The Boobs, BJK and Kimmitt to come trolling in throwing around the “Republicans = Nazi” meme, without being answered in kind, that’s kind of silly).
Lumburgh, PLEASE ignore me. Based on your posts, you don’t have anything to say that I’m interested in – whether you are a disguised DU denizen or not.
Slartibartfast
Well, Flagwaver, I see it like this: the best way to get a troll to come back and say something ELSE irritating, is to acknowledge that he said something to begin with. Not that I always ignore them, but I do put in a solid effort.
Again, not telling you how to behave. Just a thought.
IXLNXS
“to preserve his forthright approach to fighting the War on Terror”
Oh give me a break. He and his have made a major screw up of the entire thing. I was against it yes, but anyone can recognize they really screwed up.
Now heres where I give a concession. It’s like a give and take where discussion agree equally on facts.
I doubt John Kerry and his crew would have done or could do any better. This is not an endorsement for Bush. What this is is a demonstration of the sorry state American politics are in when these two are the best we have to choose from.
Chris P
I’m not telling you how to behave either, Flagwaver (as I indicated in my first post when I wrote “…it’s a free country, do as you please.” And also in my personal e-mail to you.) And as for my comments, they DID apply to everyone (as I indicated when I wrote “Attention fellow posters…”). Believe me, I’m not singling you out. But you’re not helping matters any by sinking to the level of those who would disparage you.
I’m relatively new to the site so I don’t know if John even has any hard and fast rules for posting. I wouldn’t be surpised if he implemented some after this embarrassing display of scurrilous behavior.
CadilaqJaq
“What this is is a demonstration of the sorry state American politics are in when these two are the best we have to choose from.”
No shit… I rarely agree with IXLNXS but so far in this segment I have twice. I voted for Bush in 2000 because frankly, Gore nauseated me… and Kerry is looking worse.
I’ll hold my nose in November 2004 and hope/pray/wish that maybe in four more years, God willing, someone shows up that is worth the respect of the office.
(Okay, that’s perhaps too much to hope/pray/wish for…)
Davey
Good for you. I stopped watching cable news a long time ago.
StuckInOregon
After watching the ongoing blog debate the past few days, I find it hard to dispute the facts, That no matter how you look at it when zealots are given free range to exchange ideas the first thing oout of the shoot is name calling. As a independent in this election, I have taken the time to look at both Kerry’s and President Bush’s ideas. I am a Navy veteran who served four different conflicts.
I could really care less that Kerry served in Vietnam. That was thirty years ago get over it. Since then he has been Edward Kennedy’s hand puppet. What ever Big Eddie told him how to vote he did. Kerry was tossed up in front of the American people because he is bland and totally wishy-washy. He votes with his finger in the air. He waits to se which way the polls are going before he votes so as not to offend anybody. As for allowing the United Nations into helping with the war on Terrorism, that is truly a joke. When that body bows to terrorists and supplies dictators witht he funds to purchase weapon systems at the cost of their own people there is something wrong. Face America is going to have to go it with a limited number of allies. The big three France, Germany, and Russia. Were to busy lining their pockets with Saddam’s money to really worry about what happened to us on 9/11. Secretly I wouldn’t have been surprised that they weren’t secretly happy that we were attacked. They have been placating terrorists for years. Sorry about the Tangen. I would like just once for Kerry to actually come out and say waht he stands for. I am still waiting. With The President I know where he stands. I have my disagreements with Bush Policies concerning immigration and Health care for the elderly. I also believe the the so called underprivledged do not desrve any more hand outs. Let them actually work and quit getting fed ant the public trough. I work hard for my money and I don’t want to see some fat lazy person living on welfare get anymore of my money just cuz they can’t find a job as a CEO of some corporation.I don’t want the illegal aliens given a free pass when they are in this country illegally. I want to see the border security tightened. I want to see teh elderly that have earned some care in their twilight years some dignity and respect. You have to remember that when they retired the economy grew while their eranings after retirement did not.
Sorry about the long rant but I would like to see the exchange of ideas on blog and cutout the name calling and the abuse. Remember the title if you can’t say something nice……
Flagwaver
And a hearty, “Amen, Brother!” to StuckinOregon!
I’m not a fan of Bush, but Kerry is Ted Kennedy’s sock puppet. Bush got it mostly right on the WoT, which should, in a rational world, be the NUMBER ONE priority of the federal government. So, as painful as it is, I can’t see any rational alternative to voting for Bush – quod erat demonstrandum.
Slartibartfast
John Kerry: Because Paying More Tax Ought To Be Compulsory.
Flagwaver
Slartibartfarst,
A clever reference to Kerry’s failure to pay the “voluntary” portion of the Mass. income tax, I assume? Does anyone know if the corpulent, alcoholic senior Senator from Taxachussets paid the voluntary portion? Inquiring minds want to know.
Kimmitt
“The exact borders in most of the Arab world don’t mean much since they’re drawn through areas where no one lives.”
…except in the hot spots — Iraq/Iran, Iraq/Kuwait, Kurdistan, and Israel/everyone. And I defy you to tell me that Israel’s borders are or were anything resembling defensible; Israel’s current intransigence is based almost exclusively on the impossibility of defending itself through anything other than extremely aggressive approaches.
I can understand the desire for simplicity, but the fact of the matter is, some of those borders are extremely artificial, and in an age of nationalism and tribalism, that leads more or less inevitably to repression and/or conflict.
And all of this is irrelevant to my larger point, which is that all ethnic groups which have been denied self-determination which have had access to guerilla and terrorist tactics (i.e. post-WWI) have engaged in the exact same practices. It has nothing whatsoever to do with being Arab, Chechen, Salvadoran, Sri Lankan, or Irish. It has to do with the nature of asymmetric warfare, and we’ll all be a hell of a lot better off once we realize that we don’t have to subjugate 1/5 of the world’s population to be reasonably safe. Much the opposite; all we really have to do is not be complicit in their subjugation.
Slartibartfast
I make no pretense at cleverness, but yes, you have it right. And I have no idea whether Kennedy paid the extra; I’d predict that he hadn’t.
CadillaqJaq
Kimmit, are you relating the war on terrorism to subjugation: to bring under dominion; conquer. To make subservient?
StuckInOregon
There is a difference between the War on Terrorism and subjugation. Why should we kowtow to a bunch of zealots no matter what religion they are. They have commandeered a religion just so they could kill and maim and if you have been watching and talkining with the vets coming back from Iraq and Afganistanyou would see that they are going after soft targets, women,children and other none combatants. Why do they do that so they can cause the populace to to be fearful.Everytime they come up against our military the terrorists lose. If the leadership of the terrorists networks want to really inpress me, let them strap bomobs to their asses and go to Allah. No instead they send ignorant men, boys and girls who are told that the evil Americans are the cause of state of ignorance and not the mullahs and imans and other assorted asswipes that are getting rich off their asses.The first large terrorist that comes to live for me is that Palistenian asswipe Arafat. The liberals and college students think that he is greatest statesman of his time and he is nothing but a terrorist. Palistenian my ass he was born in Egypt. The only reason he claimed to be Palistenian was so he could kill and get rich off the backs of his so called people.
Bin Laden is a billionaire made that way by his family. You don’t see them dieing for the cause. They have to much to lose. So they send the ignorant.
Kimmitt
“Kimmit, are you relating the war on terrorism to subjugation: to bring under dominion; conquer. To make subservient?”
What I’m saying is that the current security situation the US faces (I’m really rather tired of the “war on terrorism” metaphor; it reminds me too much of the “war on drugs” metaphor, where we give up all our civil rights indefinitely, because neither drugs nor terrorism as a concept are ever going away) does not require us to conquer and subjugate every Muslim country.
Yes, terrorists go after soft targets, be they Christian IRA terrorists, Muslim Arab terrorists, or various Sri Lankan terrorists. That’s how terrorism works. It has nothing to do with “camel humpers” or any of the other idiotic bigotry characteristic of the Right. It has to do with human psychology and the structure of modern societies.
Flagwaver
Kimmitt,
In deference to my new compadre, Chris, I am going to try the “open hand.”
Your thesis seems to be that subjugation breeds terror. If I am misstating your thesis, please elucidate.
If this is your thesis, please try to explain the following apparently dissonant date points:
1. The 9/11 terrorists were, for the most part, middle or upper-middle class children of privilege in their respective societies.
2. The bulk of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi. Saudi Arabia is perhaps the oldest reigning government in the Middle East, and, other than the fact that it is totally dictatorial/autocratic INTERNALLY, has been subjugated by NO ONE within the lifetime of anyone currently living in Saudi Arabia.
3. The IRA terrorists that you are so fond of using as examples did NOT, for the most part, target civilians (either initially, when “the Troubles” first began, or later, when dealing with the modern status of Eire). They targeted, primarily, police, military and government targets, as well as Protestant paramilitary organizations. Not to laud them – they are cowardly scum, like all terrorists – but to point out that their actions are NOT analogous to those of bin Laden, Rantisi, Arafat, etc.
4. If it is your premise that the Israelie are “subjugating” the Palestinians, how do you reconcile the fact that Arafat is an EGYPTIAN, and never lived in “Palestine” in his sorry-ass life?
Unfortunately, your thesis only works if you know no history, and ignore non-conforming data points. That is, it isn’t worth the bandwidth it took to post it.
One day, I hope you wake up and smell the coffee. Unfortunately, the rest of us may not have a lot of patience with you until you do. You are a PRIME example of an idiotarian, and, whether you like it or not, your existence and your spew, to some extent, strengthens our enemies, and for that, I despise you.
Ken Hahn
The US and the West could totally withdraw from the middle east, Israel could be destroyed and the non-Muslim minorities in the Arab world could all be slaughtered, it would not stop terrorism there. The hatred and violence are a result of shame. Arab Muslims, along with Iranian and other bordering people know that their society has failed. Short of total surrender and conversion to Islam, nothing will satisfy the terrorists. They resort to terrorism because they do not believe we are equal or even human. The vast majority of Arabs are oppressed, not by the west, but by their fellows.
We cannot withdraw unless we want the middle east as a terrorist sanctuary. It is not our presence in the middle east that enrages them, it our mere existence. You can try to understand them but unless you start by understanding that their hate is irrational and unappeaseable, you will fail.
The terrorists are adult human beings and I support their right to be held responsible for their actions. Not expecting decent behavior from Arabs is a form of contempt and racism.
Kimmitt
“Unfortunately, your thesis only works if you know no history, and ignore non-conforming data points.”
Nah, I presented my case. It doesn’t conform with your bloodlust, so you used a bunch of irrelevant crap to try to swat it away.
Slartibartfast
Now, Kimmitt. As hominem should be reserved for when you’re completely out of intellectual ammo.
Or, for when you’re just too lazy to make an actual argument.
Kimmitt
“Or, for when you’re just too lazy to make an actual argument.”
Badda-bing. We’re well into “not worth the effort” territory.
IXLNXS
Cue my entrance.
CadillaqJaq
Kimmit posted:
“What I’m saying is the current security situation the United States faces (I’m really rather tired of the “war on terrorism” metaphor; it reminds me too much of the “war on drugs” metaphor, where we give up all our civil rights indefinitely, because neither drugs nor terrorism as a concept are ever going to go away) does not require us to conquer or subjugate every Muslim country.”
Allow me to soften the metaphor to say it’s apparent that we have an ongoing “Problem with Terrorism.” Then let me ask: other than invading Saddam’s Iraq, (which IMO, doesn’t fall in the “conquered or subjugated” category) what leads you to believe that every other Muslim country is in our gun sights? Above all, when did we “give up all our civil rights indefinitely?”
(Assuming that you and I live in the same country.)
I agree that neither terrorism nor drugs as a concept (or reality) will go away some time soon, but using the tiresome “War on Terrorism” metaphor again, where would you have that battle take place? In the Middle East or across from the East River?
Kimmitt
“Then let me ask: other than invading Saddam’s Iraq, (which IMO, doesn’t fall in the “conquered or subjugated” category)”
We conquered Iraq. We may have some intention of handing it off at some point (Cheney’s Energy Task Force to the contrary), but we are currently the ruling and occupying power in Iraq. Washington decides how Iraq votes in OPEC. Washington decides when elections are held and how we go about doing so. That’s the, you know, reality on the ground.
“using the tiresome “War on Terrorism” metaphor again, where would you have that battle take place? In the Middle East or across from the East River?”
It’s a weird hypothetical. Here’s another one: Would you rather lose a thousand soldiers in Iraq or ten civilians in Joliet? Alternately, would you rather spend %100 billion on munitions and supplies, or lose $100 million in rails and disrupted traffic? They’re not answerable questions; the only real answer is, “Whichever is more consistent with the overall security of the United States, in the context of acting morally, given the specific situation.” I mean, it’s not like our security is the only concern; we don’t think it would be appropriate to decimate the hometown of any suicide bomber in order to deter such attacks.
But again, the “War” metaphor implies a beginning, a middle, and an end. We’ve been dealing with terror for decades. Bin Laden is an exceptionally gifted practitioner, so we need to take him out, but past that, we will be dealing with terror — of various stripes — for decades to come. The idea is to deal with it well. In the meantime, we have a shining city on a hill to maintain.
StuckInOregon
I am sorry, but to state that we are the cause of the terrorism is like stating that we (USA) cause the sun to rise and fall at will. We have been fighting terrorists since the days of Vietnam, what do you think the Viet Cong started out as. Hell McVeigh was a homegrown terrorist, so is a serial rapist and murderers for that matter. What we are talking about is state run terroism. The USSR was one of teh biggest backers of state run terrorism in the worlds. They train, supplied weapons gave them finacial support to help them destabilize countries so they could come in and and help set up Stalinist governments. Hince Cuba, Angola, and other various puppet governments. When the USSR fell apart it is now feeling the fruits of it own labors with all the terrorisms that is going on with in its own borders. Unforunately when people are told that America and other Rich successful countries are the cause of improvished nations the weak willed and uneducated begin to believe the crap they are told. Then when certain well educated individuals can hijack a religion as use that as a cause for them to strike out so the masses can’t see how much their own religion and governemnts has failed them you end up with the situation that we find our selves facing.So you are tired of hearing it called the War on Terrorism. What name would you like to use. To be honest with you. Being ex-military and srving in some of those countries I would like to know how many of the left wing individuals that have been writing on this site have actually been to the Middle-east. I traveled over there alot and I blame the fanatic religous leaders and in it for the money government officials for the blame .It is easier to control a people when you can turn the populace’s hate to an outside source and say that is somebody elses fault and not the countries own. The Palistian and Isreal is a good example of this. In the time that Isrel was created a State of Palistine was also to be created and the ruling Palistinian governement said NO. so in comes Arafat. Isreal is keeping the Pallistians in Refuge camps. They are apartment building not tent cities. Why didn’t the countries surrounding Isreal give the Palistians some land because they knew ther calim was false.
Anton Toomus
Fuckwads like John Kerry are going to lie and lie and lie, so to expect anything but the truth from the leftwing morons is a bit much of a stretch.
Take some time off, and wait until Kerry drops to 10 points behind in the polls. Democrat desperation will only increase – and get far funnier.