Surreal World Event Discussion by HKCavalier

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Surreal World Event Discussion

POSTED BY: HKCAVALIER
UPDATED: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 15:03
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5068
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, June 26, 2004 4:53 AM

Check out the web video at http://www.georgewbush.com/

What is up with that? Has Bush hired Andy Warhol to be his publicist? What is this doing on an official website? Doesn't
Bush/cheney have anything substantive to say? Does anyone find this string of sound bites particularly damning of any of the speakers (with the exception of the incoherent, hard to read stuff with Hitler)? Is this the state of political debate in this country? Making fun of people for getting emotional about their beliefs? "Coalition of the Wild-eyed?" Really? From watching that video I could accept "Coalition of the Perturbed" or "Coalition of the Rather Frustrated," but wild-eyed?

After my initial shock at the video's bizarre lack of, oh I don't know, any rational point, I begin to find its meaning for myself. It's all pretty Orwellian. One of the observable necessities of totalitarian regimes is to discredit and deny emotion. Emotion leads to dissent, emotion leads to holding your own opinion, all emotion must be channeled into the only acceptible emotion: love of the party.

(Total side note: it's very interesting that the right continually equates hating Bush with hating America, as if Bush and the Neo-cons are America incarnate and not just a faction.)

Getting back to that strange, strange video: labeling these men, who are noticeably upset about what the Bush administration is doing "wild-eyed" is really saying that anyone who opposes us is crazy/flaky/irrational/weak. It's like a bully on the playground laughing at the tears of a boy he just punched.

And to top it off did that "This is not a time for pessimism and rage, this is a time for optimism, steady leadership and progress" stuff sound even just a little like "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Stregth?" Just a little?

May I lay down a few ground rules for any debate in this thread? Well, don't mind if I do:

Please don't post just to say another poster is full of . Bring something of your own to the table, please. Don't copy another post and disect it with a lot of "not necessarily's" and "I never said that's" and "You sir, are an ass's." M'kay? Play along, like we're all very wise and innerestin' people here and impress the lurkers with our wit and sagacity. How 'bout that?

Edit: I just checked it out again and they've added an explaination of sorts, a little preamble to let us know what we're looking at. Kinda mitigate the whole WTF factor, without saying anything of course.

Man-o-man, so Kerry denounced the ad, but didn't denounce people who compare Bush to Hitler. My, that's terrible, must mean that he agrees with the folks who make the comparison! Yeah, and I say Kerry is like the Rick Morranis character in Ghostbusters and Bush hasn't denounced me, so he must agree with me!

Seriously, the press asked Kerry what he thought about the ad and he told 'em. I don't think they asked him what he thought of people comparing Bush to Hitler. Seems even the press have better things to do...

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 8:13 AM

PETERMAC

Dear Hk

Yeah- surreal is the correct word - like something out of 1984. Should I be showing up for my three minute hate?

I can only sit here asking myself what could it possibly mean? Any theories?

Best-
Peter M.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 8:46 AM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.

I suppose it might be more effective if George Bush was giving us "optimism, steady leadership, and progress." I haven't seen much of it though.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 11:34 AM

SOUPCATCHER

I didn't like this when I saw it a few days ago. But it's a tactic that is completely consistent with the strategies that Karl Rove has used in the past. And as a tactic, I think it's high risk/high reward. In some respects it's a brilliant bit of lawyering. I'm reminded of a leading question a prosecuter might use that is then objected to by the defense and the objection upheld by the judge who then instructs the jury to disregard the question. But the goal of the prosecuter is simply for the jury to hear the question and have the information in the back of their minds, not for the question to be answered. Watch the ad without sound, simply watch the images, don't even read the text. What is the message you are left with? The implied message is that all these individuals share something in common.

But of course, that's not the intent of the ad, at least according to the talking points released by the campaign. I get e-mails from GeorgeWBush.com. Not sure how I got on the list. I usually delete them. But here is an excerpt from their most recent e-mail:

Quote:
On Thursday, the campaign launched a web video titled Kerry's Coalition of the Wild-eyed. The video featured Democrats who support John Kerry making negative and baseless attacks against the President. Interspersed in the video were segments of two ads that appeared on a website sponsored by MoveOn.org - a group campaigning for Kerry - in January.
On Friday night, John Kerry's campaign denounced our use of these ads, and called that use "disgusting."
The Kerry campaign says, "The use of Adolf Hitler by any campaign, politician or party is simply wrong."
We agree. These ads, like much of the hate-filled, angry rhetoric of Kerry's coalition of the Wild-eyed, are disgusting.

The rest of the e-mail gives examples of Democrat attacks against George Bush and his administration. As an instrument of plausible deniability the e-mail will probably be effective and will be used by staunch supporters to support this ad. But the take-away message is still the same; all the people in the ad share something in common.

Will this ad be effective? Well that's where the high risk part comes in. I doubt that it will convince any of Kerry's supporters to vote for Bush. If what people take away from this ad is, "People who support Kerry compare Bush to Hitler" then it might disgust moderates and swing them to the Republican ticket. If what people take away from this ad instead is, "The Bush campaign is comparing Kerry and other Democrats to Hitler" then it might disgust moderates and some Republicans who are leery of Bush in general and convince them to stay home in November. Or it may simply have a null effect, which is the result I'm inclining towards.

As a side note, I am intrigued by the tact that the campaigns are taking, at least as evidenced by their web sites. Bush's website leaves no doubt who he is running against, two pictures of Kerry (not counting the ad) and two additional links to rebuttals of Kerry positions. Kerry's website has no pictures of Bush and one press release in which Bush's name appears in the title. There are more pictures of Kerry than Bush on both websites.

I shaved off my beard for you, devil woman!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 12:33 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Clearly, the tone of the Left is mirrored by the hysterical rants of Hitler. He fabricated , with great emotion , a mythical enemy for Germany by blaming the Jews for just about everything.With equally mindless and unsubstantiated zeal, the Gore's, More's and Kennedy's ( not in video, I know ) of the Left have persecuted an assault on Bush that exceeds any rationale. Gore, Kennedy and even Kerry were most supportive for the war, fearful of Saddam and his WMD program when the political climate suited them. However, when it became clear that the economy wasn't going to be an issue for them, they fell back on the only thing they had..... mindless vitriol aimed at Bush.

Is the ad a master piece? Not by a long shot. I think much more could have been done to drive home the intended(?) point. Like quotes from Gore and others detailing how dangerous Saddam is and the need to - if need be - us ALL force necessary to take him out. After 9-11, Bush ( and others ) decided that it was too risky to allow things in Iraq to remain as is. Clearly, THAT is a debatable choice , but to carry it to the extreme and question Bush's motives... demands a far greater amount of evidence. THIS is where the Left's claims come utterly unglued.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 1:45 PM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Clearly, the tone of the Left is mirrored by the hysterical rants of Hitler.

Really? Clearly? I hesitate to respond to your post, AURaptor, but this Hitler line demands comment. I notice that you've posted on several threads in the past hour or so and in each your rhetoric has been, if not a little hysterical at least a bit inflamitory. It's fair to imagine that I've caught you in a bad mood. So if you're just really pissed off and using the website to get it out of your system I'm totally with you on that. Some of the things said by self-described liberals on this site have been pretty over the top. The world is going a little bit crazy these days and I don't know what to do with all my rage and indignation myself sometimes.

So okay, it's all well and good to rant about Adolf Hitler on a bb to blow off steam, but don't you think a video on the official Bush/Cheney re-election website should be a little more responsible? Do you think such comparisons are worthy of public discourse? Do you think they should be comparing prominant American politicians to Hitler on the nightly news, for instance? Or would you compare Gore to Hitler in real life to your friends, family, or coworkers? Do you think that the average Republican (the presumptive audience for the video) would know what you're talking about?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 2:45 PM

QUICKSAND

I fail to see how Hitler's blaming of the Jews (an entire subset of the German population) and Gore's attack on Bush (a singular individual, who was attacked during televised debates because he couldn't answer any of the questions with any authority) are similar.

We're all aware that YOU'RE convinced they're similar, but maybe if you could come back with some facts to back up your Facist rant, AURaptor, we can have a discussion.

As it is, here are the facts: You, the right, are blaming, "Liberals" for everything that is wrong with the U.S. We, the left, are blaming "Bush" for nothing more than being a world-class idiot.

Now I want you to look hard into the deep, lengthy college education I'm sure you don't have, and tell me which one more closely resembles "Mein Kampf." Thanks.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 4:15 PM

HKCAVALIER

Thanks, Quicksand, I thought placing Bush in the role of Jew to the Democrats' Hitler was pretty outrageous as well. Talk about your persecution complex! But it speaks to one of the points I raised at the top of this thread: this peculiar totalitarian-style equation of Bush with the american people. Somehow, an attack on Bush is an attack on America. If you attack Bush, you're committing treason. If you hate Bush, then if follows, as night follows day, that you hate America. It'd be funny if it wasn't so spooky and universally adhered to by the neo-cons.

(Side note: just look at the Michael Moore threads. Michael Moore makes a movie trying to prove that George W. is a bad man and look at all the people who acuse him of hating America because of it. I'm not making this stuff up folks, read the threads!)

If Bush is a whole people, then the comparison is not quite as absurd. But he ain't "a people." He's a guy. He heads a political faction. At the moment, his faction holds power in Washington. There are other factions, for instance, that think Michael Moore is the bee's knees. All of 'em are americans.

What's more, I see a disturbing tendancy to equate rhetorical attacks upon Bush with terrorist attacks upon our Nation. Hey folks, even though it's the same verb, it means two different things. Context, people. Same goes for the word "hate." Plenty of folks may say that they hate our president without 'em planning terrorist strikes against the Whitehouse. But the defenders of Bush will say liberal hate and terrorist hate is the same, Bush and the american people are one and the same (L'État, c'est Bush), and Gore is like Hitler.

Make the pie higher! Put food on your family!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 4:33 PM

JCKNIFE

Bummer, I was hoping this thread would help me explore this problem I'm having with talking feta cheese and the fact that Pac Man is not helping with the lawn mowing like he used to.

BTW, HKCavalier--way to represent old-school. Buckaroo Bonzai is too cool.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 5:12 PM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by JCKnife:
Bummer, I was hoping this thread would help me explore this problem I'm having with talking feta cheese and the fact that Pac Man is not helping with the lawn mowing like he used to.

BTW, HKCavalier--way to represent old-school. Buckaroo Bonzai is too cool.

LOL! Seriously though, your personal struggles with a dairy product and a video game character hardly qualify as a "world event," JC. Unless there's something far more insidious in your story than immediately meets the eye...

HKCavalier

John Valuk is dead, he fell on his head.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 5:28 PM

RICKKER

Ok I've been watching the political threads for some time now. I've just recently put in my 2cents in other threads that were just firefly related. The computer I'me on now has crappy vid so I didn't get a clear picture of the vid. What I can't understand is how can anyone not making 3 million a year or more able to back bush. He has done nothing for this country but divide the people and make the rich richer. Teh Hitler thing brings to mind somethiing thats been on my mind a long time. There are seven deadly sins. This is probably piss a lot of people off but what I have seen is where Hitler was to hate, Bush Jr. is to greed. America is fast becoming a 3rd world country because he and his kind take as much as they can. A friend of mine during a discussion we had said he believed in free trade. Let the jobs go to the best people qualified and whoever is left out learns to be better at something else. Looks good on paper but who in mexico or any other third world country gets better training than anyone in the U.S. Hell communism looks good on paper everyone has an equal number of everything. Our hard earned jobs are being sent overseas to countries where the workers get paid pennies to the dollars because it saves money. Its a good thing to save money, right? When did this nation turn on itself? When did greed become a good thing? This used to be a country where you worked hard to make life better for your family. Where did our heros go? Remember it used to be "It's not what this country can do for you. It's what can you do for your country" now its "What's in it for me" Never follow blindly.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 26, 2004 8:16 PM

QUICKSAND

This is all true, HK, except for one kinda side-note: Bush doesn't actually head anything, he FIGURE-heads his faction. You can't honestly expect me, or even Republicans, to believe that this man sat down at a desk and decided ANYthing on his own.

I *LIVE* in Texas, and trust me, he didn't get elected on his merits. He was elected on his name. And this blame-Liberals-first crap, lemme say something else-- the terrorists sure as hell weren't liberal, ya get me?

Let's all just give each other a big hug, and don't forget to VOTE!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 27, 2004 3:12 AM

JCKNIFE

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
LOL! Seriously though, your personal struggles with a dairy product and a video game character hardly qualify as a "world event," JC.

But see, they're surreal--as implied in the title.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 27, 2004 4:10 AM

KOBAYASHI

Uh, you guys don't understand the video at all. The Hitler stuff wasn't put together by the Bush people, but by the radical left in THEIR TV Ads. The video on the Bush website is simply showing clips of these wackos ads.

Now, I realize that most of you here are leftists, but c'mon... it not that hard to understand what was being show. Don't try to fool people, its not mature.

W04!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 27, 2004 9:48 AM

SOUPCATCHER

Quote:
Uh, you guys don't understand the video at all. The Hitler stuff wasn't put together by the Bush people, but by the radical left in THEIR TV Ads.

I can't speak for anyone else on this thread, but I am well aware of where those two clips with Hitler in them came from. They were posted in January as submissions to a contest sponsored by the MoveOn.org group. I remember the outcry that was raised by the right when 2 entries, out of more than a 1000, directly compared Bush to Hitler. The entries were removed by MoveOn.org and disqualified from the contest. I agree with you that the people responsible for those ads are from the radical left and their work, at the very least, reflected poor taste. But, as is the case with fringe entries, they were never going to win the contest, they were never going to be aired on television, and they were never going to be used by the Kerry campaign. You can go to the website and watch the entries that won to understand my first and second point. The fact that the Kerry campaign is separate from MoveOn.org is my basis for the third point. To sum up: Two entrants to a contest submitted highly negative attack ads on Bush. The Republicans complained. The contest organizers disqualified those submissions from the contest.

Quote:
The video on the Bush website is simply showing clips of these wackos ads.

Now here is where we diverge in opinion. Because I'm more concerned with the collection of clips put together. If all the Bush campaign wanted to do was say, "Here are two ads that compare Bush to Hitler. Aren't those Democrats a bunch of angry loonies" all they had to do was run the original submissions on their site and let people make up their own mind (which they did back in January). But what they did instead was take clips from those two submissions, and intersperse them with footage of various high-ranking Democrats speaking forcefully. And before Saturday, there was no introductory text. They just started off with a title along the lines of, "Coalition of the Wild Eyed" So the implied message was: here are a number of Democrats ranting about Bush, oh, and there's footage of Hitler, too, and then some more Democrats ranting, and at the end was footage of a calm, optimistic Bush with a slogan.

Quote:
Now, I realize that most of you here are leftists, but c'mon... it not that hard to understand what was being show.

I understand perfectly well what is being shown. It's the whole "guilt by association" using images and then the "well, it's not our images" defense. Putting things together in a new way constitutes the creation of a new work. This is an ad created by the George Bush campaign from various sources, but definitely created by them. Ask yourself why?

Quote:
Don't try to fool people, its not mature.

We are in complete agreement.

I shaved off my beard for you, devil woman!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 27, 2004 4:30 PM

JCKNIFE

Okay, I was just goofing around with the "surreal" stuff above but now that I actually read this thread it is hilarious.

The point of this ad is to show how out of touch with reality the far left is. You obviously don't see it that way because you BELIVE the crap being spewed by the talking heads they showed. But trust me, most of the voting public will "get" this ad. I think it's brilliant. Democrats always portray Republicans as the party of "hate" or "intolerance" but really it's the other way arround. How's that for surreal?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 27, 2004 6:10 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Okay. I'll try one more time. Here are the segments of the Bush ad: Al Gore speech, segment from entrant to contest comparing Bush to Hitler, Howard Dean speech, Michael Moore speech, Dick Gephardt (not sure if I spelled that right) speech, segment from another entrant to contest comparing Bush to Hitler, Al Gore speech, and John Kerry speech. Does something about this grouping stand out to you? We have four Democrat politicians, one famous liberal movie maker, and two unknowns. It would be like collecting speeches by Dick Cheney, Tom DeLay, Jeb Bush, George Bush, Rush Limbaugh, and then throwing in clips from videos created by two different unknowns comparing Kerry to Osama Bin Laden and calling it "Faces of the Republican Party." But the way you showed it was: Dick Cheney, clip with Osama, Jeb Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Tom DeLay, clip with Osama, Dick Cheney, and George Bush. And then this was e-mailed out to 6 million Democrats and prominently featured on John Kerry's web site.

It would be terribly disingenuous and Republicans would raise the roof. Of course

you'd probably have to bleep Cheney just like they bleeped Kerry, only more so.

I shaved off my beard for you, devil woman!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 27, 2004 7:05 PM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by JCKnife:
The point of this ad is to show how out of touch with reality the far left is.

Wow, seriously, seriously JC, if Al Gore and John Kerry are on the "far left" who the heck would you consider to be merely on the left? John McCain?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 28, 2004 2:21 AM

JCKNIFE

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:

Wow, seriously, seriously JC, if Al Gore and John Kerry are on the "far left" who the heck would you consider to be merely on the left? John McCain?

Absolutely! Great example.

Can we trade you him for Zell Miller?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 28, 2004 7:33 PM

HKCAVALIER

Hey Rickker,

Welcome to the world of fireflyfan politics.

Thank you for your thoughtful post. It's a sad story we tell, isn't it? I sometimes wonder if it's possible for a government to be ethical. The exploitation of third world workers seems to be so ingrained in our american system, it's hard to imagine how we'll get back to the pride of "made in the U.S.A." Makes me nastalgic for old-school conservativism. These neo-cons have simply replaced "tax and spend" with "don't tax and spend anyway," meanwhile bankrupting every humanistic government program in sight.

Back in World War II americans understood that money didn't grow on trees, that everyone had to pull together and make sacrifices, war had a cost back then. Nowadays, we go to war, spend three billion dollars a month and everything just goes on, business as usual? How on earth can our economy actually be prospering under such conditions? But "actually" doesn't seem to matter anymore. Image is everything now.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 29, 2004 2:12 AM

JCKNIFE

Wow, nice post, HKC! We mostly agree on all that stuff (although I wonder how foreign workers are highly-trained in Rickker's post and exploited in yours).

Here's a statistic for the sake of optimism, and I do tend to be very optimistic about the American spirit and people: we've all heard the griping about American jobs outsourced, but there are more foreign jobs outsorced to U.S. workers than the other way around.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 29, 2004 5:43 AM

GHOULMAN

Niiice posts!

It's really HIlarious how people in the USA seem to misclassify thier political parties. How can Americans not be assured about the positions of the Republicans or the Democrates?

Well, when Americans watch CNN or FOX or any "news" program it always seems to be from one point of view. The view that America can't do wrong and is completely justified in invading Iraq because of the criminal act of war we call 9/11.

But... we learned that Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, or Osama, and to top it all off we learn that (despite screaming warnings of WMD destruction from the White House and 10 Downing St.) Iraq isn't even a mild threat.

And who has the honour of informing America of this? Some fat guy from Michigan.

Well, if it takes a film maker like Moore, who isn't exactly Noam Chomsky or anything, to tell America it's because ... as HKCavalier wrote: And to top it off did that "This is not a time for pessimism and rage, this is a time for optimism, steady leadership and progress" stuff sound even just a little like "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Stregth?" Just a little?

When I turn on the TV and watch CNN... it's an Orwellian dog wag unheard of in the West. The news media language is very precise and evasive. CNN reporters simply don't ask hard questions. I noticed that last week when an Irish reporter asked G.W. Bush the real questions, the White House pressured the Irish to suppress the interview and fire the reporter.

The President of the USA wants to crush free speach when it comes to his governement. Truly un-American!

It all changed in the Media when "convergance" was instituted with the latest wave of "deregulation" (often mistaken by Americans as a reduction of Government... suckers!). This deregulation allowed giant mega-media corporations to push thier political views through all thier holdings. The result is the very same stories, word for word, comeing from your newspaper, TV, and whtever else they cram the "news" into. Naturally, since a mega-media corp. contributed to the Bush Junte than they will promote Bush and the War in Iraq. So much so that they have failed in thier Constitutional Duty as Americans to inform the people. The Fifth Estate.

America has been led down the "Vietnam II" path, as it were, and Americans will still be sent by thier incredibly rich elite (that's Bush, Cheney, and the 1% who have all the money and power... and now, all the news media) to die in Iraq for the next 10 years. Trust me.

And every crazy head-chopping nut looking to hate the West will still be the star of your CNN special report... it's evey terrorists dream come true! And you can thank the American press for that. You can thank the White House for the rest.

btw, as much as I find the Bush ads to be horrific, and I don't mind a comparison to Nazi propoganda as I think the parallels are just too close, I did go over to Moveon.org and... *chuckle*, the Democrate stuff isn't much better! lol!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 29, 2004 7:09 AM

JCKNIFE

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Well, when Americans watch CNN or FOX or any "news" program it always seems to be from one point of view. The view that America can't do wrong and is completely justified in invading Iraq because of the criminal act of war we call 9/11.

Baloney. http://michnews.com/artman/publish/article_4063.shtml

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
But... we learned that Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, or Osama, and to top it all off we learn that (despite screaming warnings of WMD destruction from the White House and 10 Downing St.) Iraq isn't even a mild threat.

Double Baloney!
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/6/25/114037.shtml

http://www.lenconnect.com/articles/2004/06/28/news/news05.txt

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39151

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:

And who has the honour of informing America of this? Some fat guy from Michigan.

I think you mean MIS-informing.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/6/29/121539.shtml

"The Sept. 11 Commission has found that the Bush administration's war on terror has severely impaired al Qaida's ability to organize another spectacular attack against the U.S. homeland by capturing or killing the deadly terror group's key leaders, drying up their financial resources and severely limiting their ability to strategize, plan attacks, and dispatch operatives worldwide."

And, just for fun...
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/6/23/165945.shtml

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 29, 2004 1:21 PM

GHOULMAN

War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it. Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homocidal maniac" - George Orwell

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 29, 2004 3:48 PM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by JCKnife:
Wow, nice post, HKC! We mostly agree on all that stuff

Thank you

Quote:
(although I wonder how foreign workers are highly-trained in Rickker's post and exploited in yours).

Not really. If you read his post, it's his friend that thinks work goes to the best trained workers. Riccker said that in practice the work goes to the cheepest workers.

Quote:
Here's a statistic for the sake of optimism, and I do tend to be very optimistic about the American spirit and people: we've all heard the griping about American jobs outsourced, but there are more foreign jobs outsorced to U.S. workers than the other way around.

My girlfriend is in the shipping industry, at the very heart of the capitalist system. She talks to business people from every corner of the world on a daily basis. I asked her about your statistic today and she just snorted. Neither of us have any idea what you're talking about, JC! What foreign industry would outsource to the U.S.? With all the regulations and minimum wages and unions stinking up the place, you'd think they could get a better deal in any number of less regulated, cheaper, less organized markets overseas. Please, enlighten us, would you?

EDIT: Hold the phone! You talking about weapons? 'Cause yeah, the majority of arms in the world have been made right here in the good ol' U.S. of A. (remember Iran/Contra?)! Sorry for the snarky tone, JC, but I really am not happy about my beloved country's militarism. And it tickles me to think of our exporting of arms as "outsourcing."

It's really my greatest beef with the current admin.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 29, 2004 3:52 PM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it. Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homocidal maniac" - George Orwell

That quote deserves a bump! Clever man, that Orwell. Welcome to my thread, Ghoulman.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 30, 2004 2:46 AM

JCKNIFE

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Neither of us have any idea what you're talking about, JC! What foreign industry would outsource to the U.S.?

Always happy to back up my comments with evidence:

http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/9017866.htm?1c

http://www.tennessean.com/business/archives/04/05/52058247.shtml?Eleme
nt_ID=52058247

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 30, 2004 3:03 PM

HKCAVALIER

Hey JC,

Didn't get into your first url, but I did the second. Thanks.

I gotta say: Japan coming over here to build cars and "get into the very lucrative U.S. markets" isn't exactly what I would call "outsourcing." I don't think that's what anyone who's unhappy with U.S. corporations outsourcing means when they say outsourcing. Strictly speaking sure, but you're really just taking advantage of the most literal meaning of the word. Usage and context account for a lot of what a given word means--ask anyone who's tried to learn english!

Microsoft isn't moving to India because the Indians buy so many computers, and nobody has their paperwork and accounting done in Singapore, to sell spreadsheets to South East Asia. We're talking about exploitation of cheap labor. It's an ethical issue. Should American corporations outsource jobs to cheap foreign workers, while the jobless rates in our industrial centers is so high? And notice: I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to, only questioning if it is really the right thing to do.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE