Alarming News

July 31, 2009

Comment of the Day

“No. No more healing. This is a country, not an extended episode of Oprah or a very special episode of Blossom.”

-Hot Air commenter Myrenovations

Posted by Karol at 07:37 PM |
Technorati Tags:
Comments

Is Obama still President? What a joke.

Posted by: Peach at August 1, 2009 at 3:52 pm

Barack’s theme song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acgMMLI1peU&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fsomanyshrimp.com%2F&feature=player_embedded

Posted by: Robert at August 1, 2009 at 3:58 pm

Surely years must pass, and history is the only way to judge Obama? That’s what Dick and George and Rummy said about what they did.

Posted by: May Dupp at August 3, 2009 at 6:48 am

Right, May. And no one judged them during their 8 years. Very docile opposition they had.

Posted by: Karol at August 3, 2009 at 10:19 am

May Dupp,
What Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld did in foreign policy (Iraq) is unique in modern history, thus, the passage of time is necessary to judge its consequences.
However, the application of government take-overs of industries is NOT unique among modern history, thus, we already CAN judge its consequences…Cuba, North Korea, the collapse of the former Soviet Union, the ascendancy of nations (Poland, Latvia, Georgia, et al) that were squashed under the iron fist of the former Soviet Union, etc.
Communism, socialism, acquiesence to evil tyrants, et al, does not work as well as free markets and fighting evil.
But you can continue to dream !

Posted by: IamTheWalrus at August 3, 2009 at 2:09 pm

Shorter Walrus “I drank the Koolaid, and it was good!”
You don’t think there’s a history of big countrys invading smaller, weaker ones? Or a history of the USA doing this also?
Your responses to the Republican history mantra show you to be good disciples.

Posted by: May Dupp at August 3, 2009 at 3:01 pm

We’d better get used to president’s like Obama, as we’re turning into a nation of overweight Oprah fans. We’re outnumbered. Instead of trying to fix the system by voting, we’ve got to admit that it’s broken beyond repair,and quit propping it up.

Posted by: Gene Arrington at August 3, 2009 at 5:14 pm

You know, MD, you’re absolutely right. It was absolutely shameful of we Americans to invade Kuwait in 1990 and kick out the Emir. Wait, I meant, to invade Kuwait in 1991 and kick out Saddam after he had, in fact, so righteously conquered it. Yeah, that’s it.
Or maybe you’re considering WWII-era Germany, Italy and Japan to be “smaller, weaker” countries?
Not to say the U.S. hasn’t done bad things, but our sins are far more than outweighed by the good we’ve done. I personally feel that now that they’re no longer under a tyrant’s boot, Iraqis as a whole will get the hang of this thing called “freedom” and wind up teaching us a thing or two.
Remember that the American colonies had four difficult years after formal recognition of their independence. It’s never easy to build a new nation.
I think Bill Buckley put it best in 1970:

Imperialism suggests the domination of a country for the commercial or glorious benefit of oneself. The Soviet Union began its experience in imperialism not merely by jailing and executing people who disagreed with it but by systematic despoliation. In Czechoslovakia, for instance, they took one, two, three billion dollars’ worth of capital goods and removed them physically to the Soviet Union. Far from doing anything of the sort, we did exactly the contrary; we sent our own capital goods to places like France and England and Spain and Latin America. I can’t think of any country that we’ve “dominated” or “imperialized” — in the sense in which you use those words — that is worse off as a result of its experience with America than it would have been had we not entered into a temporary relationship with it.

…I will assent to the proposition that South Vietnam has been harmed by America’s efforts during the past five years only to somebody who would say that France was harmed by the efforts of the Allied armies to liberate it during the Second World War.

Now I don’t agree with his stance on defending South Vietnam, but I threw that in to be fair.

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 3, 2009 at 9:54 pm

May Dupp,
So what you’re inferring is that Cuba, North Korea, and the former Soviet bloc are historical evidence that communism works ?
That’s so silly.
Also, we didn’t “invade” Iraq in order to pillage and plunder its resources and annex it as part of our nation, a la the Soviet Union did to so many eastern European countries.
Rather, we deposed an evil dictator (Saddam Hussein), and have hopefully put the Iraqi people in position to be a self-determining, functioning democracy.
The verdict is still out on that. However, the verdict is in regarding communism and socialism—it has failed.
The USA has spilled the most blood and spent the most treasure in order to free other peoples and nations from oppression.
Not Switzerland, not Norway, not Venezuela, not Jordan, and not China—the USA has.
And the money and engineering we invested in order to help re-build Japan and Germany following WW2 is unique in history.
It’s interesting how you feel America is such an awful country, yet you still choose to make it your home, rather than one of those utopian paradises such as Cuba or Venezuela.
I hear Saudi Arabia is a fantastic place to live, particularly for non-conformists such as yourself.
Happy Trails !

Posted by: IamTheWalrus at August 4, 2009 at 1:01 am

To all of the questions; No. You’ve made easy inferences that I’m somehow denouncing the war in Kuwait (a war the Al-Sabah family tricked congress into taking part in with testimony from one of their lesser (I mean female) family members. They got Europe in by leveraging the stock markets of those countries).
Your knowledge of history is either lacking or just selective. We’ve been invading people since the times of stealing Texas and screwing over the Native populations to take their lands. Even if you overthrow a tyrant, even if you are welcome, if you stay and run the place, it’s invaded. The British Empire, the Ottoman. the same.
Special koolaid kudos to Walrus for the parade of strawmen he created.
Perry, saying our sins are outweighed by the good things we have done sounds like something Robespierre might’ve said. That may be your opinion; I cannot agree.

Posted by: May Dupp at August 4, 2009 at 7:30 pm

I love it when liberals employ CYA.
“You don’t think there’s a history of big countrys invading smaller, weaker ones? Or a history of the USA doing this also?”
That’s what you said. So tell us exactly what you meant before we go any further. The first part is true, but why should the U.S. be held for the sins of other nations? Or are you really lumping the U.S. in with all the European imperialism that subjugated Latin America and Africa? Because as far as the U.S. invading smaller countries…where are they? Guam?
Andrew Jackson, who I’ve sometimes called the last Democratic president worth voting for, did have blood on his hands from the Trail of Tears. No one is denying that we’ve done some bad things ourselves, but even the Indians were killing and enslaving each other for thousands of years. Blaming whitey is only part of the picture.
If you want to talk about what the Spanish conquistadores did, or what the British military did, that’s a different story. English settlers arrived in what are now Virginia and Massachusetts, built villages where the natives hadn’t settled, and found themselves attacked with arrows and tomahawks for their troubles. Later on, they expanded westward and built upon land that nobody owned. By popular tradition, American Indians didn’t have a philosophy of land ownership, anyway, so they didn’t have a claim.
Confrontations were often bloody, but it was as much from the warfaring Indian tribes (like Iroquois, Sioux, Apache, Navajo, who were fond of attacking weaker tribes long before Whitey showed up) as it was from the U.S. government (with the backing of the military) encouraging homesteading. So try to be objective, instead of this 1960s/1970s historical revisionism where everything is Americans’ fault.

the times of stealing Texas

You had better not say this to a native Texan, ever. It’s not because their history is a great source of pride, but because you have no idea of Texas history. The United States didn’t “steal” it from anyone.
Texas is the only part of the United States that won its independence as its own sovereign state before joining the Union. “Republic of Texas,” you know: it was its own nation after winning its independence from Mexico. That independence didn’t come by peace, either, in case you’re not familiar with Santa Anna’s brutality.
The residents of the Texas region primarily wanted independence from Mexico. Joining the United States was not a corresponding or necessary component of the desire for independence; many who fought at the Alamo, at Goliad, at San Jacinto, were fighting for their own independent nation, not for joining the United States. So to say the U.S. “stole” Texas is either disingenuous or ignorant of history.
You’re not a member or sympathizer of La Raza or La Reconquista, are you?

You’ve made easy inferences that I’m somehow denouncing the war in Kuwait (a war the Al-Sabah family tricked congress into taking part in with testimony from one of their lesser (I mean female) family members.

Are these our inferences, or in fact your direct insinuations? We’re asking what you could be possibly talking about, when you’re directly accusing the U.S. of invading “smaller, weaker” countries. Talk some specifics. Be a man and don’t resort to such hedging.
You did, after all, ask, “Or a history of the USA doing this also?”
Now, there was no “trickery” about Kuwait. Saddam Hussein had captured American citizens, refused to release them, then moved them around as human shields. That’s called an act of war, in case you didn’t know.

They got Europe in by leveraging the stock markets of those countries).

Yeah, those Kuwaiti Super-Duper-Praise-to-Allah-Ultrashort 200000000000000X ETFs were powerful instruments, weren’t they!
Good lord, I guess you really believe that. Stop reading the likes of Thierry Meyssan.

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 6, 2009 at 1:41 pm

Oh, and comparing me to Robespierre? Laughable. I won’t even call that a nice try. Robespierre believed in subjecting the individual to the wishes of the state, whereas I hold the individual supreme.
To use a different saying, all I said is that the U.S. is far more sinned against than sinning. It’s a plain fact. This country’s history isn’t perfect, but where are our colonies? Who did we invade in order to steal the natural resources?

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 6, 2009 at 1:58 pm

Thanks for that history lesson (yawn). It’s amazing how you can read everything from a libertarian perspective. Sad too.
Miss Al-Sabah gave evidence of babies being thrown out of incubators by the Iraqi invaders. Not a dry eye in the house. The Kuwaitis owned (for example) 25% of BMW at the time, and they used their potential sell-off of all their stocks. But you keep believing what you believe if it gets you through the day.
“More sinned against than sinning”. A pox on your King Lear sirrah. Nice of you to blow wind and crack your cheeks.
Your hilarious justification of overkill (essentially they did it too!) reflects the libertarians inability ever to become a serious political force.

Posted by: May Dupp at August 6, 2009 at 5:56 pm

It’s amazing how you can read everything from a libertarian perspective. Sad too.

Like how you read everything from a big government and/or anti-American perspective?
Thanks for admitting you can’t deny the truth of why Texas fought against Mexico, namely that there was no “stealing” involved.

Miss Al-Sabah gave evidence of babies being thrown out of incubators by the Iraqi invaders. Not a dry eye in the house.

Yes, but even that story would have been insufficient to involve American military forces. We hear of genuine atrocities in the Sudan, yet we haven’t gotten involved. It’s because there’s nothing that directly involves us.
What mattered in 1990 is that Saddam had kidnapped American citizens. This is irrefutable. It was a tactical blunder on his part: if he hadn’t kidnapped Americans and Europeans, toothless UN resolutions could have continued for years.

The Kuwaitis owned (for example) 25% of BMW at the time, and they used their potential sell-off of all their stocks. But you keep believing what you believe if it gets you through the day.

This is one of the most absurd claims I’ve ever heard, even from your kind. Do you ever think about the conspiracy crap that’s fed to you, or do you just swallow it up?
Think about it. BMW is one company. One. BMW could disappear off the face of the planet and yet not devastate European stock markets like you think happened.
Stock declined were because the world, you may recall, was in a recession.
Good lord. You probably believe all the BS about the GOP organizing all these town hall protests.

“More sinned against than sinning”. A pox on your King Lear sirrah. Nice of you to blow wind and crack your cheeks.

Any flatulence came from your insufferable cunt of an oral orifice, wench.
Where has the U.S. sinned? Show me the occasional mistake, and I’ll show you the history of a nation that repeatedly fought tyranny around the world. Show me a village we shot up, and I’ll show you a country we liberated.

Your hilarious justification of overkill (essentially they did it too!)

Which is not at all what I said, and you know that. Once again, you can only resort to LIES. Because you are a LIAR by nature.
Answer the question: where is all this U.S. imperialism you insinuate? What small countries have we invaded, or territories pillaged for their natural resources?
We won’t hold our breath. When pressed for specifics, your kind can never be forthcoming.

reflects the libertarians inability ever to become a serious political force.

How utterly ignorant of you, again. The real reason is that libertarians love individual freedom too much, and too many Americans (you especially) are worshippers of the state.

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 7, 2009 at 1:32 pm

All I’m hearing is that “Lonely” song from Team America.

Posted by: May Dupp at August 10, 2009 at 1:39 pm

Never saw the flick. I’ve wanted to from the time it was announced, but I never got around to it.
Did you have a point? Any rebuttals? I guess not, and I’m not surprised; this is just like you.

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 11, 2009 at 11:38 am

What’s the point, Kim, er Perry? Have you ever changed your political opinion based on what you have read on a blog? Or even conversations? I doubt you have. Like your religious faith, your politics seem set and impervious. Oh, and you’re a dick.

Posted by: May Dupp at August 11, 2009 at 6:51 pm

What’s the point, Kim, er Perry? Have you ever changed your political opinion based on what you have read on a blog? Or even conversations? I doubt you have.

Actually, yes. Not so much a blog as just having conversation, and not a radical or 180-degree change, but let’s just say a particular friend upstate nudged me in the direction I was somewhat headed toward. I had an idea of the light but didn’t quite grasp it.
If you bother to check my blog at the beginning, you’ll find quite a number of differences between then and now. I was still a little conservative but managed to shed it off in favor of radical libertarianism. At some points I was embarrassingly apologetic for Bush.

Like your religious faith,

Which you know nothing about, so you can shut up about that.

your politics seem set and impervious.

I was quite a Marxist in my teens, caught up in that foolishness of “equality.”
So what does that say about your idiot presumptions about me?

Oh, and you’re a dick.

You’re ever the fuckwit, you contemptible little coward of a cunt. Why should anyone ever pay attention to all your LIES?

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 13, 2009 at 12:02 am

#If you bother to check my blog#
Oh, hilarious! No, I’ve skimmed it, but it’s long and dull. Your comment traffic gets harangued or excluded by you -the blog equivalent of “La la la, I can’t hear you”.
All the Libertarians bar none I’ve encountered love to talk, but they’re just GOP fan boys.

Posted by: May Dupp at August 14, 2009 at 3:47 am

Oh, hilarious! No, I’ve skimmed it, but it’s long and dull.
Which is to say that you don’t understand most of what I write about, but that isn’t surprising. Arguing things based on liberty and free market economics is clearly above your comprehension level, but you’ll understand that I won’t dumb down my blog for your sake.
I have my favorite posts on the right side. Though I haven’t updated that in ages, it’s a good place for you to start.
Your comment traffic gets harangued or excluded by you -the blog equivalent of “La la la, I can’t hear you”.
Not in the least. When I’m right, I’m right — and I won’t let the point go if someone else continues to argue on my turf.
You should look beyond the recent trolls, some of whose comments (the filthy and vile ones) never saw the light of day. With the others I simply dished it right back. I’m sorry you don’t understand the difference between these intellectual rejects’ spam and my blog’s standing invitation to fruitful discussion.
What’s amusing is that you claim I pretend not to hear, but it’s patently obvious that you refuse to read. My style is all about never ignoring a point: I’ll refute everything line by line, word by word if I must.
All the Libertarians bar none I’ve encountered love to talk, but they’re just GOP fan boys.
Then you know no libertarians — no real ones, at least. I’ve pointed out for a long time that you have people who claim to be libertarian but really aren’t (q.v. the recent thread), which has diluted the definition of the world. Sean Hannity once said, “We’re pretty libertarian on this show.” Others, like Larry Kudlow, talk about free markets but actually want government intervention when businesses fail.
A real libertarian (small l), like me, wants the benefits of individual freedom and accepts the risks that I might screw up with no government to help me. I’m no “GOP fan boy,” except for Ron Paul. It’s easy because I have no political allegiances whatsoever: not to a party, not to a person, and I don’t even pledge allegiance to the U.S. flag.

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 14, 2009 at 1:32 pm

No, it’ll be that Flag with the Cross on, being a Southern Baptist, for the christian united states?

Posted by: May Dupp at August 14, 2009 at 6:21 pm

No, the flag that represents me is the “Don’t Tread On Me” with the coiled snake. And that flag doesn’t require me to pledge allegiance, either: it represents me, not requires me to follow it.
Unlike powers on earth, Jesus doesn’t need me to “pledge allegiance.” That’s done by a state of mind, not mere spoken words.
By the way, did you know that the Pledge was written by a socialist Baptist preacher?

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 16, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Post a comment