« A Peak At A Possible McCain Foreign Policy Team | Main | A little refuge from reality »

America's Covert Enemies

Michael Barone's article today addresses the liberal elites' efforts to destroy our faith in America:

These are the ideas that have been transmitted over a long generation by the elites who run our universities and our schools, and who dominate our mainstream media. They teach an American history with the good parts left out and the bad parts emphasized. We are taught that some of the Founding Fathers were slaveholders -- and are left ignorant of their proclamations of universal liberties and human rights. We are taught that Japanese-Americans were interned in World War II -- and not that American military forces liberated millions from tyranny. To be sure, the great mass of Americans tend to resist these teachings. By the millions they buy and read serious biographies of the Founders and accounts of the Greatest Generation. But the teachings of our covert enemies have their effect.


Of course, this distorts history. We are taught that American slavery was the most evil institution in human history. But every society in history has had slavery. Only one society set out to and did abolish it. The movement to abolish first the slave trade and then slavery was not started by the reason-guided philosophies of 18th century France. It was started, as Adam Hochschild documents in his admirable book "Bury the Chains," by Quakers and Evangelical Christians in Britain, followed in time by similar men and women in America. The slave trade was ended not by Africans, but by the Royal Navy, with aid from the U.S. Navy even before the Civil War.

I have never understood why the elites despise America so much. There isn't a country today or anytime in history that gives them the freedoms that America does, yet according to thier version of history, oppression only came into existence after July 4, 1776.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference America's Covert Enemies:

» Flopping Aces linked with The Other Front

» In Search Of Utopia linked with Heh...

Comments (67)

I have never understood ... (Below threshold)

I have never understood why the elites despise America so much.
Because they are marxist socialists. America is rich amongst nations of poor, therefore it is a villain.

Why is it that some of you ... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Why is it that some of you on right speak in simplistic and sweeping generalizations? What an uttlerly stupid post by the author.

Whos exactly is "they" (who teach with the good parts left out). Give us names. Give us examples. Give us the books they teach this from. What history textbook has left out that slave owning Founding Fathers wrote proclmations on universal liberties and human rights?

Other societies had or have slavery? So that somehow justifies or
excuses our history of slavery? I was always taught that America was better than that. That we held ourselveves to a higher standard than the rest of the world.

What textbook, what history book, what teacher doesn't teach that millions of were freed from tyranny in WWII.

When you make your srguments like sound bites or bumper stickers, e.g "love it or leave it" et al you have no cogent point or argument to make.

If ever there was a piece of wingnut drivel Pruestap's piece is.

We didn't just marxist/comm... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

We didn't just marxist/communists but people that were pulling for the Soviet Union.

During the McCarthy era they learned to go underground. Even the ACLU disavowed their ties to Communism. From then on, they stealthily worked towards Communism one slice at a time.

But also in conjuction with that, in order for the Soviet Union to succeed, the US must fail. This began the Anti-American branch of the Leftist movement. Not all Lefties had the conscious goal of advancing the Soviets by hamstringing the US, they got sucked into their propaganda. So Anti-Americanism became entrenched in the extreme left.

When the Soviet Union fell, the hopes were dashed among a good portion of the pro-Soviet communists. But much of the purpose for things like Anti-Americanism were hidden or masked from other communists/socialists in the first place from many members. They had that rationalized Anti-Americanism for other reasons. So although the Soviets fell, they had no reason to abandon their anti-Americanism. The pro-Soviet wing probably had some who wanted revenge. Or see the US as an obstacle to a future resurgence of Communism.

That is why they want to maintain the status quo with various dictatorships around the world. Only under such a system, it is believed that Communism can find furtile ground. A violent popular revolution that can be hijacked into a Communist dictatorship.

Iran has had for a long time a sizable Communist movement. If the US descimated the Iranian government and rebuilt Iran, what chance would the Communists have of siezing control?

Why is it that some of you ... (Below threshold)
bushsucks:

Why is it that some of you on right speak in simplistic and sweeping generalizations? What an uttlerly stupid post by the author.
Post by Hugh

Hugh,

Right-wingers always speak in the most simplistic of terms because they have to create an "enemy" that their constituents can blame all of their problems on. Using the term "elite" is another way of doing this. The strategy is as old as the hills, but works very effectively when dealing with people who's mental capacity is limited. It's why they like Bushie McFlightsuit so much - he's as dumb as they are.

You're spot-on. A piece of crap posting by Priestap (but at least she's consistent).

"I have never understood wh... (Below threshold)
JB:

"I have never understood why the elites despise America so much. There isn’t a country today or anytime in history that gives them the freedoms that America does"

Freedoms are nice, but they'd prefer total power.

' I was always taught that ... (Below threshold)
LJD:

' I was always taught that America was better than that. That we held ourselveves to a higher standard than the rest of the world.'

A perfect example of brainwashing by liberal public schools... let the self-hate begin!

Hugh,We have to sp... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Hugh,

We have to speak in simplistic (terms) and sweeping generalizations, because that's all many on the left can understand. Unfortunately, it's still over your head.

I went to 19 years of schoo... (Below threshold)
Rob Filomena:

I went to 19 years of school and sure I learned that some of the Founding Fathers were slave holders, but it was right alongside the exultation of American liberties and reverence to the accomplish of those same founding fathers, etc. American history, like the history of any nation, has not always been pretty, but llearning that dark sides exist along ith the light cannot be a bad thing. Why are so many right wingers so afraid to embrace some of the uglier truths about our history? This doesn't make us less patriotic, it makes us smarter and helps us learn from the successes and failures of those that came before us. it's OK for America not to be perfect. We love it anyway.

Rob

"Right-wingers always speak... (Below threshold)
JB:

"Right-wingers always speak in the most simplistic of terms because they have to create an "enemy" that their constituents can blame all of their problems on."

Yeah, and left-wingers are oh-so-nuanced.

Bush lied. War for oil. Halliburton. Corporate greed.

Sheik:And you wing... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Sheik:

And you wingnuts have the nerve to call the left effete and elite after your response.

Can't support the drivel Priestap posted so make a "bumper sticker" reply. I'm underwhelmed.

"Why are so many right wing... (Below threshold)
JB:

"Why are so many right wingers so afraid to embrace some of the uglier truths about our history?"

We're not. We just tend to keep things in perspective, instead of wallowing in self-loathing and "we're as bad as they are" moral equivalence as many on the left do.

BTW: I'm sorry, but the "el... (Below threshold)
Rob Filomena:

BTW: I'm sorry, but the "elite" label is totally lost on me. GWB is the son of a former president, Skull and Bones, grandson of a Senator and an oilman. Does it get more elite than that? I think the right needs some new buzz words.

JBAnothrt banal, t... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

JB

Anothrt banal, trite and inane bumper sticker response.

I'm with you, Sheik Your Bo... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

I'm with you, Sheik Your Booty.

It really comes out of some sort of self-hate. It should be a diagnosable disorder alongside BDS.

And, as he strongest and wealthiest nation in the history of civilization which also promotes human freedom and dignity, it is too much that we should not have been "held back" like many poorer countries, in their minds. But we were not held back because we did not hold ourselves back--we created a free and open society the world had not even imagined in 1776.

There will always be those poor souls to whom much has been given, but who refuse, for whatever reason, to appreciate this wonderful country and her excellent, generous countrymen.

Hugh: if the shoe fits...</... (Below threshold)
JB:

Hugh: if the shoe fits...

Trite enough for you?

Bush lied, people died. No war for oil.

I suppose those are deep, nuanced, highly insightful positions on US foreign policy. They're not coming from the right, you know.

What's your response to that?

Does Hugh have the same pas... (Below threshold)
JB:

Does Hugh have the same passionate response to left-wing bumperstickers, I wonder? Or rather, I don't.

Why is it that so... (Below threshold)
MikeB:
Why is it that some of you on right speak in simplistic and sweeping generalizations?

Right-wingers.. sweeping generalizations... see next quote... first line.

Right-wingers [b]always[/b] speak in the most simplistic of terms because they have to create an "enemy" that their constituents can blame all of their problems on. Using the term "elite" is another way of doing this. The strategy is as old as the hills, but works very effectively when dealing with people who's mental capacity is limited. It's why they like Bushie McFlightsuit so much - he's as dumb as they are.

Yes, you're so above doing something like creating an "enemy" to blame all of your problems on (Bushie McFlightsuit). I hear that those with limited mental capacity really latch on to this... frequently employing juvenille tactics such as mispelling someone's name (Bushie) as an apparent insult. Man, you really nailed it on this one.

- MikeB

You have made a rare error.... (Below threshold)
chsw10605:

You have made a rare error. The slave trade was stopped only in the UK and US possessions. It was legal in Brazil until 1884. It was legal in most parts of Africa and southeast Asia until the age of European colonization, and even then it was more honored in the breach in the more remote areas. Lastly, the East African/Arabian slave trade was legal up until the 1960's, and many insist that it is still being practiced today.

Ever notice that you can te... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Ever notice that you can tell when someone does not like to hear the truth. ((hint-hughie)

Hey, stop tossing around th... (Below threshold)
LJD:

Hey, stop tossing around that term 'founding fathers'. Every one knows it is sexist, discriminatory, and a harmful reminder of the racism applied by these aristocrats.

The proper term is 'Framers'.

Also blacklisted is 'Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys'. The proper terminology is 'Green Mountain People'.

Also, every person of U.S. citizenship must be properly referred to as a (hyphenated)-American. Unless of course, you're white, then you're just a potential contributor for the reparations.

Good grief. As usual these ... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Good grief. As usual these posts (and I will take my ownership here) have degnerated into name-calling and "oh, I got you on that one" nonsense.

In my original response to what I still think is a piece of drivel written by Priestap I asked for supposrt of the position he took. Who are the teachers, what are the textbooks that support his points and what are the schools who teach it?

It's be nice to get back to the point of the post. I take it that since no one is defending the post that it is not defensable with FACTS.

"The American Pageant" is a... (Below threshold)
Clay:

"The American Pageant" is a college textbook that is used in Advanced Placement (AP) United States History courses across the US. The authors' interjection of adjectives throughout this tome makes it a revisionist masterpiece.

One example of the authors' 'American-hating' bias is in the treatment of US expansion. The glorification of native-Americans is quite apparent - "Two remarkable Shawnee brothers, Tecumseh and the Prophet, concluded that if this onrushing tide were ever to be stopped, that time had come." - while the treatent of U.S. Presidents is rather negative. Examples include: James Monroe - "Never brilliant, and perhaps not great" and James Polk - "Methodical and hardworking but not brilliant."

There's many more examples, but I've probably already thrown too many pearls before swine. Folks like Hugh will remain in the dark no matter how much truth you show them.

Translation: I got my ass k... (Below threshold)
JB:

Translation: I got my ass kicked, so time to change the subject.

Notice Hugh's weasely passi... (Below threshold)
JB:

Notice Hugh's weasely passive voice "posts have degenerated." As if he had no responsibility there.

The American Pageant A Hist... (Below threshold)
Clay:

The American Pageant A History of the Republic
Eleventh Edition

Authors:
Thomas A. Bailey
David M. Kennedy, Stanford University
Lizabeth Cohen, Harvard University

Taught at:
University at Albany
Columbia
Indiana University
University of Vermont
University of North Carolina
(that's just 2 pages of Google. There's more)

Thanks for your response Cl... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Thanks for your response Clay. Other than the sarcasm i appreciated it. I still challenge anyone to support Priestaps's position that the "elites" omit teaching that slave owning Founders wrote procalamations about civil liberties. Also his point that "we" are not taught that millions were freed fom tyranny in WWII.

Those are his points. Those are the points I challenged for support. Can you support those points?

JB;
Can you read? And yeah man, if you feel a need to have won, well then I guess you did.

In Hugh's defense, he did t... (Below threshold)
Clay:

In Hugh's defense, he did take partial responsibility for the digression.

Clay, Honestly, th... (Below threshold)
Frank Joy:

Clay,

Honestly, those are pretty weak examples. That hardly smacks of anti-American bias, but seems more like gentle editorializing (I don't condone this, by the way, but it's relatively harmless - perhaps those indians were remarkable and Polk not brilliant). If you have better ones, I'd be interested in reading them otherwise, I wouldn't consider those rock solid justifications for the author's post which smacks of O'reilley-esque anti-intellectual drivel.

Hugh is quite critical of K... (Below threshold)

Hugh is quite critical of Kim's post, but fails to note it quotes from an article by Michael Barone who is decidedly not considered by most objective observers of the press to be a "wingnut".

Hugh then uses the same type of bumper sticker slogans and generalities against Kim that he accuses her of using against elites.

Hugh's contributions are critical to be sure, but not very enlightening.

I think he can do better.

In my 18 years of schooling... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

In my 18 years of schooling, I never received the kind of one-sided education you cite. I was taught both the good and bad things that were done—the internment of Japanese-Americans AND the liberation of Europe.

I'm sure there's all kinds of "educators"—some who teach only the good stuff Americans have done and some who teach only the bad stuff. Both types are lousy teachers. But I never had them as my teachers...

Well, yeah. The book is fu... (Below threshold)
Clay:

Well, yeah. The book is full of examples of the authors' bias. Geez, we can go on all day.

Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, and the Democrats are cast as champions of "small-government". The Whigs, on the other hand, were the evil "big-government" party of business. Included in David Kennedy's The American Pageant, are comments that characterize Henry Clay as a "big-money Kentuckian," while Jackson was the "idol of the masses." One is led to believe that Jackson's stuffing federal money into his cronies' pet banks constituted "virtuous, industrious production." So, as Pilate asked, what is truth? Even when adjusted for population, government employment and spending grew steadily throughout the Age of Jackson.

The American Pageant authors couldn't rein in their disgust for The Gipper either. Reagan "was no intellectual," according to The American Pageant. Daniel Goldfield, who authored a textbook called American Journey offered his own opinion on Reagan in his book: "critics questioned [Reagan's] grasp of complex issues." In The American Pageant, Reagan's overwhelming trouncing of Jimmah Carter was explained away by citing low voter turnout and weaknesses in 1984 in Mondale, rather than seeing waht both victories really were: a rejection of liberalism. In The American Pageant, photo captions of the Reagans at a formal ball remind us of his wealthy supporters. And, The American Pageant authors can't seem to get a handle on supply side economics. They go out of their way to present a distortion of federal debt and deficit levels in the 1980s so as to ignore the positive results of Reagan's tax cuts. Twice, the charts used in the textbook fail to adjust dollar amounts in "real" terms. Nowhere in the text was Reagan given credit for defeating communism. Who ended communism, according to the textbook? You guessed it: it was the "great" Russian "leader," Michael Gorbachev.

Now, can I go back to work? As far as I'm concerned, this topic is done. I don't need to read anymore on this leftist volume of history.

First of all, I don't know ... (Below threshold)
Chris:

First of all, I don't know which "objective observers of the press" you read, but Michael Barone certainly is a wingnut. Press critics may not use that term because that's not the way they write, but Barone is as rock solid a supporter of the right's failed policies as you'll find.

Second, Clay, it hardly supports your point to characterize statements in a textbook, rather than quoting them. Frankly, I don't trust your interpretations. And can you really deny that "critics questioned [Reagan's] grasp of complex issues?" Even many in his own party questioned his intellectual abilities. I was no Reagan fan, but he did have other qualities, like the strength of his convictions, that his followers admired. Are you suggesting he was totally above criticism?

And since when is favoring one President over another a sign of hating America? There is absolutely no logic there. If saying that Jackson was superior to Henry Clay makes one an anti-American, I can only conclude that what your saying is that support for Jackson makes one an America-hater. Or are you suggesting that students should be taught that all Presidents were equally brilliant and without flaws? Or should we only say that about Whig and Republican presidents?

Chris:You betray y... (Below threshold)

Chris:

You betray your biases as far as Barone is concerned. Unless you can cite one mainstream journalst who has criticized him for holding outlandish rightwing views, I will take your critcism for what it is worth.

Yes Clay, please go back to... (Below threshold)
Frank:

Yes Clay, please go back to work. We'll let you know when our textbooks resemble those in a 3rd world dictatorship, where students are regailed with the stories of our leaders' unquestioned genius and unfailing wisdom, whih seems to be what you'd prefer.

Reagan wasn't an intellectual.
Mondale was a weak candidate.
Andrew Jackson was popular

This is bias?

Whos exactly is "they" (... (Below threshold)
yo:

Whos exactly is "they" (who teach with the good parts left out). Give us names. Give us examples. Give us the books they teach this from. What history textbook has left out that slave owning Founding Fathers wrote proclmations on universal liberties and human rights?
-- Hugh

Not to be too much of a raving asshole, here, Hugh, but aiming your questions/blame/what have you towards Kim is blatantly idiotic, and I'm surprised none of your detractors have pointed it out to you, already:

KIM DIDN'T WRITE THE ARTICLE ....

Asking her to justify the points made by Barone is ridiculous.

"If ever there was a piece of wingnut drivel Pruestap's piece is."

--Hugh

If ever there was an example of liberal "not getting the point" Hugh's is.

--Yo

(word)

Yo,The fact that K... (Below threshold)
Rob:

Yo,

The fact that Kim used a post to pass along this article can be interpreted as an endorsement of the views stated in the article. Cutting and pasting with a couple of lines of editorial nonsense thrown in is what is passing for journalism these days in the blogging world. Threfore, it is appropriate to demand some kind of basis for the poster's endorsement.

If bloggers want to be considered real journalists, then they need to be accountable for what they write, or pass along, including checking the validity of facts in a story they are picking up, or at the very least, having the vaguest sense of a factual basis.

Not doing this is exercising the same kind of irresponsibility for which these blogs are always assailing the MSM

Kim,You wrote: "I ... (Below threshold)
Nahanni:

Kim,

You wrote: "I have never understood why the elites despise America so much. There isn’t a country today or anytime in history that gives them the freedoms that America does, yet according to thier version of history, oppression only came into existence after July 4, 1776."

Well, Dr. Sanity has the answer for you.

http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2006/08/covert-war-and-intellectual-garbage.html


What matters in the postmodernist's convoluted thinking is not truth or falsity--only the effectiveness of the language used. Lies, distortions, ad hominem attacks; attempts to silence opposing views--all are strategies that are perfectly satisfactory if they achieve the desired effect. Ideas and reason must make way for reification of feelings; and freedom is replaced by thought control.

If you wonder why our nation seems so divided and why there is so much animosity and emotional hysteria directed against traditional values and ideas upon which this country was founded, you need look no further than the pervasive and unrelenting trickle down of postmodern theories and thinking in education, art, politics and all the social areas of life. Even science has not been immune from the nihilism and anti-reason, anti-reality agenda of the postmodernists.

If you want to understand why nothing seems to make sense; why language is abused and words don't seem to have the same definitions anymore; and can sometimes even mean the opposite of what they used to; why photographs can lie; why contradictory discourses and distortion of truth; and ad hominem attacks and a distinct reluctance to face reality are all a part of the "reality-based" community--you need look no further than postmodernism.

And finally, if you want to understand why that which is truly evil --embracing death, slavery, and nihilism--is now presented and even trumpeted as the "good"; then you would do well to understand the psychology and ideology of the covert enemies of America--and of civilization.

Because only then will you be able to take out the garbage.

If bloggers want to be c... (Below threshold)
yo:

If bloggers want to be considered real journalists, then they need to be accountable for what they write, or pass along, including checking the validity of facts in a story they are picking up, or at the very least, having the vaguest sense of a factual basis.

-- Rob

Good points; however, I'm not sure if Kim is blogging here in lieu of being a journalist. I think what she's doing (and I'm not tryin' to speak for ya' Kim) is saying "here's an article I read, and here's a pithy comment to go along with it. Why don't you, the reader, go read the article, yourself?"

It is her responsibiilty to let you now where the article came from, who the author is and really, honestly, nothing more.

If I were to follow your logic, if I'd recommended to you a movie. You go see this movie, and you didn't like it, I'd be responsible for the lame script, or acting, or sound editing when I simply said that you might enjoy seeing it.

I'd suggest that there's wh... (Below threshold)

I'd suggest that there's what is taught and then there's what is done with it.

Teaching the bad things about America is important, even vital. Where the problem comes is what to do with that information. Now, at least one person up there accused the right, or some people on it, of not wanting the bad stuff taught, of not wanting to admit it. Where does this idea come from? Frankly, it's working backward from conclusions... which both sides are doing.

The "right" (or some portion thereof) insist that we have every right to make moral judgements about other societies. We get to say that hanging young men for being gay is wrong. Owning women is wrong. Sniping civilians at a religious event is always wrong. And no matter the motivation for the violence, blowing up (or trying) passenger airliners makes you an evil person.

The "left elites" (or some portion thereof) echo what Muslim Unity said in another comment thread, that *all* cultures are unique and deserve respect. In application this "respect" means not calling their practices unacceptable, judging them, saying when they are wrong and evil and doing something about it if necessary. WE CAN'T JUDGE OTHERS.

Or as Hugh said, "Other societies had or have slavery? So that somehow justifies or
excuses our history of slavery? I was always taught that America was better than that. That we held ourselveves to a higher standard than the rest of the world."

You'll notice an assumption... that justification is being sought by pointing out other country's practices. It's not. It's this assumption of NEEDING a justification before action or judgment can be undertaken that is the difference. Add to that the "higher standard" which is simply short-hand for the doctrinal belief that we can not judge others but must always ONLY judge ourselves.

Higher standards for us means lower standards applied to the behavior of others. We shouldn't *expect* others to behave in a civilized manner or call them on it when they don't?

This isn't a matter of *content* of History classes. It's a matter of application. Neither application requires that we *don't* examine our own society. One application requires that we *only* examine our own society.

Yo is right, Rob. Nice try... (Below threshold)

Yo is right, Rob. Nice try though. You are trying to defend Hugh and that's a tall order.

The notion that the phenomena Barone describes just doesn't exist is, I am afraid, a losing argument. Certainly in universities all over the country, that sort of rhetoric is accepted as conventional wisdom.

vnjagvet,Barone's ... (Below threshold)
Rob:

vnjagvet,

Barone's "phenomenon" is a right wing talking point and has been for years (I guess this passes for "conventional wisdom" in conservative circles). he criticism goes back to 60's campus activism and the writings of Grimasci and Marcous, etc. I have no doubt that there is anecdotal evidence of it throughout the system, but nowhere in the article or any of the above responses is there any real justification for the authors summary claims, and the examples given above have been shown to be less than convincing. Hatred of American? Institutional Anti-Americanism? Revisionist History? Are the examples Clay stated above all you have on this? is there more, or is it more just a "feeling" you get?

You say I'm on the losing side of the argument, but you're arguing with nothing at all behind you and it's hard to take you seriously. How are your opinions formed anyway?

Hey Yo!! (Bet you never h... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Hey Yo!! (Bet you never heard that before).

Geez man the person posts a piece from an article and accompanies it with: "Michael Barone’s article today addresses the liberal elites’ efforts to destroy our faith in America..."
Then ends the piece with: "I have never understood why the elites despise America so much."

So, you're saying she doesn't agree with Barone's points? She is merely posting them for our edification? She's tring to start a dialogue? What a ludicrous argument you make. Of course she's endorsing those points. Even a dimwit liberal like me can figure that out. Maybe only a dimwit rightie can't.

I repeat like I have several times. Where's the evidence? Where's the facts. I hear a defeaning silence from the righties, followed by insults and a change of subject.

Hugh, you ingnorant slut,</... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Hugh, you ingnorant slut,

I'm positive your publicly schooled bias won't allow you to trudge through this reference-laden summation of the problem.

Ignorance and bias in American history as taught by our public school system has produced droves of dumb f*cks such as yourself to vote for socialist democrats hell bent on turning this country of ours into a welfare state.

Hey, Hugh! (Sorry, man .. ... (Below threshold)
yo:

Hey, Hugh! (Sorry, man .. doesn't have the same feel to it - but, give me credit for tryin')

Of course she's endorsing the article, in its conclussion. I still don't see how she's culpible of defending each and any point Barone makes.

Again, I can say that I love a particular porn and can agree with the statement being made; but, that doesn't mean I'm responsible for explaining why the director chose to use so much astroglide.

The ending comment: "I have never understood why the elites despise America so much." ... doesn't really endorse the article so much as it reveals Kim's negative feelings towards "elites."

If you look at her statement further, you could also assume that she may not fully understand Barone's minor points, either; but, does she have to? Not really. This is a blog, not a newspaper. She can post and say whatever she wants.

Maybe, to Rob's point, had Kim wanted to represent herself as a journalist, she may have either made a comment similar to yours, or she should have contacted Barone and posed the same question(s). But, again .. this is a blog. The standards are a bit different.

Repeat all you want, I'm still not seeing the crime.

Yo,Thanks for your... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Yo,

Thanks for your reasoned response. We don't agree about the tenor of the post and that's OK. I read Barone's entire article and she quoted a relatively small portion of it, so I interpret that to mean she is endorsing those points. Perhaps she can respond at some point and let us both know. If she is endorsing them I make the same challenge: please supply specific facts.

As for Red Fod,

Have you taken your meds yet today?

Red Fog,Your name ... (Below threshold)
pharcyde:

Red Fog,

Your name is perfect.

Your link was a joke, more of the same baseless drivel. What of the public school system that produced all of the "dumb f*cks that voted the current administration into office? I supose all of the liberal bias in our education system made that possible?

Go back to your van down by the river.

If she is endorsing them... (Below threshold)
yo:

If she is endorsing them I make the same challenge: please supply specific facts.

That's up to you. Personally, I don't really care if she does or doesn't. It's her post, it's her opinion and I'm more than happy with what she's posted.

If anything, I find it beholden upon someone wanting to challenge, to present her with evidence to the contrary and let her address that.

But that's just me. Please don't take that as any sort of afront to you or your opinion.

Yo,Maybe it's that... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Yo,

Maybe it's that liberal elite education I received from Jesuits. But I was taught that when I make an assertion, it's up to me to support it with proof. Nice chatting with you though - a breath of fresh air to just discuss things.

hugh

Hugh,well of cours... (Below threshold)
Yo:

Hugh,

well of course it's up to the person to supply the proof. However, it's also preferred that the person doing the challenging doesn't start off in such a bombastic manner.

All due respect to the Jesuits (and to you, as well), but I don't think they taught you to be belligerent.

;)

... and I say this with the full knowledge and humiliating confession of having gone bombastic, myself, on oh, too many occassions.

Hugh,Ummm, Oooooka... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Hugh,

Ummm, Oooookayyy.

In your first comment, you used the terms/phrases 'simplistic', 'utterly stupid', and 'wingnut drivel'.

Then you want to talk about a 'breath of fresh air'!

Either you are double jointed or you've got one heck of a whiplash!

Did the Jesuits also teach you ad hominem first and reasoned debate second? Somehow I doubt that.

Well gee Yo and Sheik I tho... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Well gee Yo and Sheik I thought I had repented and tried to turn my posts into a discussion rather than bombast. Apparently, I didn't get on bended knee.

And no, the jesuits didn't teach me as hominem first. Sometimes my passion gets the better of me, especially when I perceive a post that condemns "all" of any persuasionr/ace/religion.or belief as I perceived the story that started all this. And I admit sometimes I fall into the same trap.

I think now, the Jesuits might be proud of me

Hugh,I was being a... (Below threshold)
yo:

Hugh,

I was being as cathartic as I was corrective; no bended knee required.

I mean, ... didn't the " ;) " convey that?

Damn smiley faces always letting me down.

Again, I've gone bombastic too often, myself. You're cool in my book.

Yo

Careful Yo, your fellow tra... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Careful Yo, your fellow travelers might think you're getting too touchy/feely.

hugh

Nah, I'm good. As miniscul... (Below threshold)
yo:

Nah, I'm good. As miniscule and as black as the left imagine them to be, conservative hearts do have room for forgiveness.


... just not for Jimmy Carter.

Hugh,Repentance du... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Hugh,

Repentance duly noted and accepted. :-)

I would really like for there to be more discussion and less bombast. However, if you peruse the posts here long enough, you will see that there are quite a few of the left persuasion who come here frequently and their only contribution is to spew bile, vitriol, and hate. Sure, there are some of the right persuasion whose first tendency is toward bombast as well. But, as this is a center-right blog, that is somewhat easier to overlook/ignore.

It would be better for us all if we could debate, even heatedly, and 'agree to disagree' without so much venom, and part company on friendly terms. (How's that for touchy/feely?)

Here's a bumper sticker you might like better:

"Heat without the hate is how we debate"

Why is it that some of y... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Why is it that some of you on right speak in simplistic and sweeping generalizations? What an uttlerly stupid post by the author.
Post by Hugh


Hugh,
Right-wingers always speak in the most simplistic of terms because they have to create an "enemy" that their constituents can blame all of their problems on. Using the term "elite" is another way of doing this. The strategy is as old as the hills, but works very effectively when dealing with people who's mental capacity is limited. It's why they like Bushie McFlightsuit so much - he's as dumb as they are.


I love the smell of irony in the morning...

My personal favorite from m... (Below threshold)

My personal favorite from my AP US History course was the very first book we used. Say it with me now, everyone:

A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present by Howard Zinn.

The book speaks for itself.

Hey lookie everybody, the i... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Hey lookie everybody, the in-house elites - Hugh (aka Lee) and "yo" - have formed a mutual admiration society or more poignantly remembered by them now as a self-gratifying CIRCLE JERK ... and 'jacked the post.

pharcyde,What of ... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

pharcyde,
What of the public school system that produced all of the "dumb f*cks that voted the current administration into office? I supose all of the liberal bias in our education system made that possible?

If I swap names, I can talk like a cartoon monkey too. Like, what of the private school system that produced all the smartrt folks that allowed the current administration into office? I suppose all the money in private education made that happen? Jeepers, sophomoric debate is exciting and fun, Shaggy! But stay in skool because you're not ready to understand.

This post is exactly on poi... (Below threshold)
AndyS:

This post is exactly on point. I was part of the education. Fortunatly, my parents taught me too. Why does American academia and media so hope for our destruction?

Red Fog,It must be... (Below threshold)
pharcyde:

Red Fog,

It must be fun to make no sense, call people names and still claim to have an almost mystical understanding of the facts that the other silly children simply cannot, or as you say, are not ready to understand and yet provide no basis whatsoever for what you're saying. Insanity is trancendence, I guess. Teach me, please

pharcyde

"It must be fun to ... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

"It must be fun to make no sense, call people names and still claim to have an almost mystical understanding of the facts that the other silly children simply cannot, or as you say, are not ready to understand and yet provide no basis whatsoever for what you're saying. Insanity is trancendence, I guess. Teach me, please"

I'll teach you, you stupid a!@#$%*&, but first you have to understand you're not as smart as me and don't have as firm a grasp on any subject as I do. I'm smarter than most people who post here and that you can take to the bank.

Yes sir. Sorry about that. ... (Below threshold)
pharcyde:

Yes sir. Sorry about that. I understand now. Thank you for your patience and please don't give up on me, teacher.

That last post by "Red Fog"... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

That last post by "Red Fog" is an imposter. Can someone tell me how to prevent the use of my moniker or is that just allowed here at Wizbang?

Red Fog,Only the a... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Red Fog,

Only the admins of the site could do anything about that.

Whether they do anything or not, impersonating someone like that is very bad manners.

I guess you're right.... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

I guess you're right.

Red Fog

It all boils down to the le... (Below threshold)
ALW911:

It all boils down to the left equals guilt.

A few rotten apples got into the american military and did bad things at Abugrab and Guantonimo, and I should feel guilty.

Over 100 years ago slavery was practiced in America. I wasn't alive back then, but being a white American I should feel guilty.

My president and congress (including the Dems!) made a "mistake" about a country developing WMD (never did find out how the 3000 Iraqis in those mass graves died from sarin), we invaded and I should feel guilty.

My SUV is creating too much CO2 and contributing to global warming. The current cycle of solar activity contributes most of the heating but I should feel guilty.

Is anyone else sick of getting hit with the lefties lies and guilt trip?!?!?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy