[Allan from Fallbrook]

CardiffBaseball: So, Jesse Jackson want so cut Obama’s nuts off because he is advocating education and responsibility to black voters? Yeah, that is terrible. What is Obama thinking?

I won’t go off on my Jackson/Sharpton tirade here, but if Jesse thinks that discussing these topics is “talking down to black folks”, well, he is extremely out of touch with reality. Or he is way more in touch with reality than anyone wants to give him credit for.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

CardiffBaseball: So, Jesse Jackson want so cut Obama’s nuts off because he is advocating education and responsibility to black voters? Yeah, that is terrible. What is Obama thinking?

I won’t go off on my Jackson/Sharpton tirade here, but if Jesse thinks that discussing these topics is “talking down to black folks”, well, he is extremely out of touch with reality. Or he is way more in touch with reality than anyone wants to give him credit for.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

CardiffBaseball: So, Jesse Jackson want so cut Obama’s nuts off because he is advocating education and responsibility to black voters? Yeah, that is terrible. What is Obama thinking?

I won’t go off on my Jackson/Sharpton tirade here, but if Jesse thinks that discussing these topics is “talking down to black folks”, well, he is extremely out of touch with reality. Or he is way more in touch with reality than anyone wants to give him credit for.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

CardiffBaseball: So, Jesse Jackson want so cut Obama’s nuts off because he is advocating education and responsibility to black voters? Yeah, that is terrible. What is Obama thinking?

I won’t go off on my Jackson/Sharpton tirade here, but if Jesse thinks that discussing these topics is “talking down to black folks”, well, he is extremely out of touch with reality. Or he is way more in touch with reality than anyone wants to give him credit for.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Ash: I agree, but I would also offer the observation that the editing to “fit” applies equally to the Left. Case in point would be author Bjorn Lomborg. He had the temerity to question environmental findings, including global warming and its effects, and has been vilified by those on the Left for having the gall to offer an opposing point of view to the “accepted” notion that the “science is settled” (Katie Couric) regarding global warming.

Both Left and Right do this, and it has contributed to the Balkanization of politics, attitudes and mores that we presently confront. Hence your comment about D versus R and fighting one’s way back to common ground.

Back when we were allowed to have a dialogue without it turning into an ad hominem mudslinging slugfest, this sort of productive discourse would have been quite common. My dad was a diehard Democrat, but always encouraged me to think critically, ask questions and make up my own mind. I am a registered Republican, but haven’t voted Republican since Dole in ’96. I won’t be voting Republican this time, either.

I wasn’t trying to dismiss gandalf’s point too lightly. Too the contrary, he has made some excellent points and forced me to think for the first time in a while. America knows how to sell a war like no other country. Remember Hearst’s line: “Give me the pictures and I’ll give you your war” (Spanish-American War, 1898). Little has changed, either before or after. If the administration wants a war, they’ll come up with the means to start one (Tonkin Gulf, anyone?).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Ash: I agree, but I would also offer the observation that the editing to “fit” applies equally to the Left. Case in point would be author Bjorn Lomborg. He had the temerity to question environmental findings, including global warming and its effects, and has been vilified by those on the Left for having the gall to offer an opposing point of view to the “accepted” notion that the “science is settled” (Katie Couric) regarding global warming.

Both Left and Right do this, and it has contributed to the Balkanization of politics, attitudes and mores that we presently confront. Hence your comment about D versus R and fighting one’s way back to common ground.

Back when we were allowed to have a dialogue without it turning into an ad hominem mudslinging slugfest, this sort of productive discourse would have been quite common. My dad was a diehard Democrat, but always encouraged me to think critically, ask questions and make up my own mind. I am a registered Republican, but haven’t voted Republican since Dole in ’96. I won’t be voting Republican this time, either.

I wasn’t trying to dismiss gandalf’s point too lightly. Too the contrary, he has made some excellent points and forced me to think for the first time in a while. America knows how to sell a war like no other country. Remember Hearst’s line: “Give me the pictures and I’ll give you your war” (Spanish-American War, 1898). Little has changed, either before or after. If the administration wants a war, they’ll come up with the means to start one (Tonkin Gulf, anyone?).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Ash: I agree, but I would also offer the observation that the editing to “fit” applies equally to the Left. Case in point would be author Bjorn Lomborg. He had the temerity to question environmental findings, including global warming and its effects, and has been vilified by those on the Left for having the gall to offer an opposing point of view to the “accepted” notion that the “science is settled” (Katie Couric) regarding global warming.

Both Left and Right do this, and it has contributed to the Balkanization of politics, attitudes and mores that we presently confront. Hence your comment about D versus R and fighting one’s way back to common ground.

Back when we were allowed to have a dialogue without it turning into an ad hominem mudslinging slugfest, this sort of productive discourse would have been quite common. My dad was a diehard Democrat, but always encouraged me to think critically, ask questions and make up my own mind. I am a registered Republican, but haven’t voted Republican since Dole in ’96. I won’t be voting Republican this time, either.

I wasn’t trying to dismiss gandalf’s point too lightly. Too the contrary, he has made some excellent points and forced me to think for the first time in a while. America knows how to sell a war like no other country. Remember Hearst’s line: “Give me the pictures and I’ll give you your war” (Spanish-American War, 1898). Little has changed, either before or after. If the administration wants a war, they’ll come up with the means to start one (Tonkin Gulf, anyone?).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Ash: I agree, but I would also offer the observation that the editing to “fit” applies equally to the Left. Case in point would be author Bjorn Lomborg. He had the temerity to question environmental findings, including global warming and its effects, and has been vilified by those on the Left for having the gall to offer an opposing point of view to the “accepted” notion that the “science is settled” (Katie Couric) regarding global warming.

Both Left and Right do this, and it has contributed to the Balkanization of politics, attitudes and mores that we presently confront. Hence your comment about D versus R and fighting one’s way back to common ground.

Back when we were allowed to have a dialogue without it turning into an ad hominem mudslinging slugfest, this sort of productive discourse would have been quite common. My dad was a diehard Democrat, but always encouraged me to think critically, ask questions and make up my own mind. I am a registered Republican, but haven’t voted Republican since Dole in ’96. I won’t be voting Republican this time, either.

I wasn’t trying to dismiss gandalf’s point too lightly. Too the contrary, he has made some excellent points and forced me to think for the first time in a while. America knows how to sell a war like no other country. Remember Hearst’s line: “Give me the pictures and I’ll give you your war” (Spanish-American War, 1898). Little has changed, either before or after. If the administration wants a war, they’ll come up with the means to start one (Tonkin Gulf, anyone?).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Ash: I agree, but I would also offer the observation that the editing to “fit” applies equally to the Left. Case in point would be author Bjorn Lomborg. He had the temerity to question environmental findings, including global warming and its effects, and has been vilified by those on the Left for having the gall to offer an opposing point of view to the “accepted” notion that the “science is settled” (Katie Couric) regarding global warming.

Both Left and Right do this, and it has contributed to the Balkanization of politics, attitudes and mores that we presently confront. Hence your comment about D versus R and fighting one’s way back to common ground.

Back when we were allowed to have a dialogue without it turning into an ad hominem mudslinging slugfest, this sort of productive discourse would have been quite common. My dad was a diehard Democrat, but always encouraged me to think critically, ask questions and make up my own mind. I am a registered Republican, but haven’t voted Republican since Dole in ’96. I won’t be voting Republican this time, either.

I wasn’t trying to dismiss gandalf’s point too lightly. Too the contrary, he has made some excellent points and forced me to think for the first time in a while. America knows how to sell a war like no other country. Remember Hearst’s line: “Give me the pictures and I’ll give you your war” (Spanish-American War, 1898). Little has changed, either before or after. If the administration wants a war, they’ll come up with the means to start one (Tonkin Gulf, anyone?).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: What you’re describing is classic “groupthink” in conjunction with a desire to accommodate the new Administration’s stance on Iraq.

I would strongly disagree with the “eventual peaceful self rule” scenario, though. Unlike Eastern Europe, you have the double whammy of 30 years of brutally repressive rule by Saddam (which, IMHO, was actually worse than what we saw in Eastern Europe with the possible exception of Romania), plus three competing factions, all of whom virulently hate each other.

The other problem is that Saddam really wasn’t all that beaten down. He was taking in millions from the UN Food-For-Oil program, and was working on rebuilding both his military and a WMD program. I don’t think he was cowed by any stretch of the imagination, and I do believe he was plotting an eventual return to glory. Like I opined earlier, he did fancy himself a modern day Salah-al-Din and, like Nasser before him, planned on regional hegemony.

I would completely agree with you on al-Qaeda BTW. Major pooch screwing on our part, along with propping up that bozo Musharraf in Paki. That one is gonna come back to haunt us, as will our continued unwillingness to confront the Saudis and force internal change there.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: What you’re describing is classic “groupthink” in conjunction with a desire to accommodate the new Administration’s stance on Iraq.

I would strongly disagree with the “eventual peaceful self rule” scenario, though. Unlike Eastern Europe, you have the double whammy of 30 years of brutally repressive rule by Saddam (which, IMHO, was actually worse than what we saw in Eastern Europe with the possible exception of Romania), plus three competing factions, all of whom virulently hate each other.

The other problem is that Saddam really wasn’t all that beaten down. He was taking in millions from the UN Food-For-Oil program, and was working on rebuilding both his military and a WMD program. I don’t think he was cowed by any stretch of the imagination, and I do believe he was plotting an eventual return to glory. Like I opined earlier, he did fancy himself a modern day Salah-al-Din and, like Nasser before him, planned on regional hegemony.

I would completely agree with you on al-Qaeda BTW. Major pooch screwing on our part, along with propping up that bozo Musharraf in Paki. That one is gonna come back to haunt us, as will our continued unwillingness to confront the Saudis and force internal change there.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: What you’re describing is classic “groupthink” in conjunction with a desire to accommodate the new Administration’s stance on Iraq.

I would strongly disagree with the “eventual peaceful self rule” scenario, though. Unlike Eastern Europe, you have the double whammy of 30 years of brutally repressive rule by Saddam (which, IMHO, was actually worse than what we saw in Eastern Europe with the possible exception of Romania), plus three competing factions, all of whom virulently hate each other.

The other problem is that Saddam really wasn’t all that beaten down. He was taking in millions from the UN Food-For-Oil program, and was working on rebuilding both his military and a WMD program. I don’t think he was cowed by any stretch of the imagination, and I do believe he was plotting an eventual return to glory. Like I opined earlier, he did fancy himself a modern day Salah-al-Din and, like Nasser before him, planned on regional hegemony.

I would completely agree with you on al-Qaeda BTW. Major pooch screwing on our part, along with propping up that bozo Musharraf in Paki. That one is gonna come back to haunt us, as will our continued unwillingness to confront the Saudis and force internal change there.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: What you’re describing is classic “groupthink” in conjunction with a desire to accommodate the new Administration’s stance on Iraq.

I would strongly disagree with the “eventual peaceful self rule” scenario, though. Unlike Eastern Europe, you have the double whammy of 30 years of brutally repressive rule by Saddam (which, IMHO, was actually worse than what we saw in Eastern Europe with the possible exception of Romania), plus three competing factions, all of whom virulently hate each other.

The other problem is that Saddam really wasn’t all that beaten down. He was taking in millions from the UN Food-For-Oil program, and was working on rebuilding both his military and a WMD program. I don’t think he was cowed by any stretch of the imagination, and I do believe he was plotting an eventual return to glory. Like I opined earlier, he did fancy himself a modern day Salah-al-Din and, like Nasser before him, planned on regional hegemony.

I would completely agree with you on al-Qaeda BTW. Major pooch screwing on our part, along with propping up that bozo Musharraf in Paki. That one is gonna come back to haunt us, as will our continued unwillingness to confront the Saudis and force internal change there.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: What you’re describing is classic “groupthink” in conjunction with a desire to accommodate the new Administration’s stance on Iraq.

I would strongly disagree with the “eventual peaceful self rule” scenario, though. Unlike Eastern Europe, you have the double whammy of 30 years of brutally repressive rule by Saddam (which, IMHO, was actually worse than what we saw in Eastern Europe with the possible exception of Romania), plus three competing factions, all of whom virulently hate each other.

The other problem is that Saddam really wasn’t all that beaten down. He was taking in millions from the UN Food-For-Oil program, and was working on rebuilding both his military and a WMD program. I don’t think he was cowed by any stretch of the imagination, and I do believe he was plotting an eventual return to glory. Like I opined earlier, he did fancy himself a modern day Salah-al-Din and, like Nasser before him, planned on regional hegemony.

I would completely agree with you on al-Qaeda BTW. Major pooch screwing on our part, along with propping up that bozo Musharraf in Paki. That one is gonna come back to haunt us, as will our continued unwillingness to confront the Saudis and force internal change there.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

SDR: I know, I was just yapping back. It is a little embarrassing, though, that that’s the movie I happen to remember the line from.

God forbid I come up with a really cool movie or something.

[Author]

Posts