Post #14,236
10/19/01 8:53:50 PM
|
Evil Evildoers Of Evil
[link|http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2001/10/19/notes101901.DTL&type=printable| How to feel calmly patriotic and yet not the slightest bit reassured by Bush & Co.] By Mark Morford, [link|http://www.sfgate.com/|SF Gate] Columnist Friday, October 19, 2001 This much is true: It really is possible to love your country and value your freedoms and still believe the government is full of fools and prevaricators and BS artists and Dick Cheney. Really.
It is still possible to feel warmly patriotic in personal and important ways and yet believe the military and the generals and the war machine do not have your best interests at heart and really couldn't care less what those interests are anyway but thank you for sharing now please sit down and do as we tell you and by the way, thanks for all the flags and the money.
[...]
When Bush employs phrases like "bring the evildoers to justice" over and over, 17 times in one speech alone, and he furrows his brow like a serious Muppet and offers carefully scripted reassurances deliberately lacking in polysyllabism and detailed explanation because that would be, you know, complicated.
[...]
But perhaps that's too harsh. Unfair. He's the president, after all. He is a Good Man. He's our leader right now, he's doing his best and he's all we've got. This is our rallying cry, our motto: He's all we've got. There's your bumper sticker. And there he is.
Except for Cheney, which isn't exactly reassuring. No one has ever seen this man's mouth actually move. No one can take one look at his oddly spiritless and wan figure and not think, oh dear God, that man is running on fumes. From a bunker. With ropes and pulleys.
But you're not supposed to. In fact, you really aren't allowed to criticize the president or the veep right now, not supposed to feel strangely leaderless and adrift, not permitted to look upon the events of the past weeks with much wariness or bitterness or a disquieting sense that we're setting things in motion that have no predictable outcome -- ugly, subterranean, hateful things that could last years and will surely cost billions and will deeply entrench the nation in a bizarre and poisonous shell game with shadowy opponents of largely unknown capability and do you hear that? That soft roaring? That's the sound of the GOP-stroked military machine, quietly cheering.
Never mind the staggering multibillion-dollar political mess in Saudi Arabia that fueled bin Laden's network for years, or the enormous oil fields that are desperately vulnerable to terrorist attack at any moment. Never mind the US government's outright rejection of new advancements in alternative fuels to get us away from oil and out of the Gulf entirely.
[...]
There is more than one way to respond to the horror of Sept. 11. And there is more than one kind of patriotism. We forget this. You do not have to rally around Bush and tolerate Cheney's chthonic creepiness and wave a frantic flag and believe every scripted half-truth that drizzles out of the Pentagon, applaud the nonstop attacks on an already demolished nation. Pro-America does not mean pro-war. Or pro-Bush. Or anti-Afghanistan. Or pro-little-flags-on-SUV-antennas.
It means thinking independently and getting better informed and filtering your news very carefully and realizing that just because one version of the American aggro attitude is currently being ramrodded down society's throat doesn't mean you have to swallow.
[...]
After all, this is America. Amen. --
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?
|
Post #14,238
10/19/01 9:01:49 PM
|
Observation.
Good piece...because its true.
Whether I agree with it or not....
BUT...
At one point, ALOT of people were clamoring for better, more organized, less bureaucratic types to lead the country...like businessmen who ran successful corporations...Lee I was bantered about...Forbes' tries to give this impression...
Now we have one as a veep...and the press consensus now is that we have one...his type is "spiritless" at its most kind.
Does anyone wonder why no qualified, really good candidates will EVER make the White House?
Anyone with any sense of self-worth at all would realize that they can make tons more on the outside, probably do just as much >real< good and NOT have to put up with this kind of press day in and day out for the better part of 5 years (9 if they're lucky and get reelected)
Just a rant
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #14,255
10/20/01 12:18:48 AM
10/20/01 12:46:58 AM
|
Seems a remarkably consistent observation
for anyone who's plan derived from the idea that society is meant to conform to, almost exactly but not quite precisely.. whatever the Economic Model assigns as their duty.
So then - they all do it for *money* ??? Less money - less talent available. That's It?
(or.. could there be other, Corporate reasons kinda pre-vetting certain umm selectable ones, then.. after soft$ media 'campaigns' later.. these happen to float to the top? With some regularity?)
Nahhh. Couldn't be. Undemocratic that!
Every vote counts*. And obviously: anyone can become President.
This IS Murica, after all.
* eventually, sometimes with a little help from friends.
[Almost forgot: clearly our Ideal for that Model *would* come from the bizness ranks, and buy the model - lock stock & barrel. Yes, remarkable consistency throughout.]
Just checkin. Say, for a $10M guaranteed return, there's this little job I have for you.. (sorry, no details - what else do you need to know: the money's there.)
Ashton Election Constructions Ltd.
Pay Me, You Win and so do I
(Yes! now that you ask - we Do have NDAs;
Wouldn't run an election without one)
|
Post #14,314
10/20/01 2:30:58 PM
|
But the country isn't a business.
While I can understand wanting someone who understands fiscal responsibility and budgetting and forcasting and all.....
This is a country. With lots of different people with lots of different ideas with lots of different needs.
|
Post #14,315
10/20/01 2:39:27 PM
|
You I'll respond to...
but Ashton seems to want to miss my point a little too often...
The point being that no matter who we get and from what backround the come...
it is getting harder and harder to identify qualified folks that will actually persue the highest office in the land.
Colin P has stated as much...he will work for the government in any poition they feel he is needed...but he has (and will probably continue to do so) refused to run for elected office. He has chosen not to endure the scrutiny placed upon those folks by the rabid dog we still call the "free press".
How many supremely qualified candidates will we never see because of this.
That was it...my observation...for what its worth.
GW...press has successfully made the guy an idiot.
Al Gore...policy wonk with no personality.
Insane McCain
etc...
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #14,342
10/20/01 7:07:44 PM
|
Well hell, if *That's* all you meant,
how could you possibly imagine anyone'd disagree? But check your phrasing again, word by word, OK? Your response above is a horse of a different saddle.
I'd just like to find out if - you think the business model has any serious, possibly fatal limitations - and if you just might have thought up something a bit saner than the present case where:
"Bizness Enterprise" is the automatic Solution, whatever the Problem, and however it's parsed. Because that is what I hear you returning to, like a homing pigeon.
{Sheesh}
Ashton
|
Post #14,343
10/20/01 7:28:19 PM
|
Check the government.
Does the President actually DO anything?
Or, rather, does the President actually do anything that would AFFECT the lives of anyone in a position to run for President?
The President can and does affect the lives of the lower 50% of the income population.
But anyone politically able to run or financially able to buy the Presidency would be better off buying a Congresscritter or a critter's position.
In other words, what incentive is there for the best and brightest to become President?
|
Post #14,333
10/20/01 4:44:14 PM
|
Old line:
Those who want the office aren't qualified for it in the first place.
Or words to that effect.
Regards,
-scott anderson
|
Post #14,498
10/21/01 10:08:59 PM
|
You mean...
Those most capable of getting themselves into said office may well be the least suitable...
Wade.
"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"
|
Post #14,500
10/21/01 10:13:11 PM
|
Most capable, most interested in, etc. :-)
Regards,
-scott anderson
|
Post #14,506
10/21/01 11:06:38 PM
|
Someone commented...
"Ask people what they want in their leaders. They'll tell you things like honesty, integrity, faithfulness, intelligence, compassion, hard working...
How do we select said leaders? Popularity.
That's right. Your leaders are the high school president and VP. Popularity contest."
Addison
|
Post #14,511
10/22/01 12:41:07 AM
|
So scary.
"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"
|
Post #14,543
10/22/01 10:04:26 AM
10/22/01 10:06:48 AM
|
What was that hierarchy...?
Somewhere, sometime long ago before the mists of my mind became more like a tooley[sic?] fog, I vaguely remember something about a hierarchy of desires or hierarchy of motivation, or somesuch. Money was cloe to the top but not actually at the top; power was at the top.
For one motivated at that level, "that they can make tons more on the outside," is not important. These guys want power; purely and simply, the ability to tell someone else what to do, but not have to do that themselves.
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
Edited by jb4
Oct. 22, 2001, 10:06:48 AM EDT
|
Post #14,552
10/22/01 10:25:52 AM
|
Maslow possibly?
[link|http://teach.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/maslow.html|Hierarchy of Needs]
Is that what you're thinking of?
-----
Steve
|
Post #14,594
10/22/01 1:38:46 PM
|
No, that wasn't it...
...It doesn't directly address the drive to acquire money, power, and all that base stuff (at least, no directly).
But thanks! I didn't really expecte anyone to try to locate such a link. You're a gennelman and a scholar.
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #14,258
10/20/01 12:41:59 AM
|
Whew.. there for a few days I thought,
..If I don't buy a flag and stick it outside, soon - well accidents happen, and while cinderblock is pretty fire resistant - this IS Murica and I've see lots of previous stuff and I don't see the present stuff bein any
more cerebral, in fact (have you ever thought This odd thought ??) there really does seem to be such a thing as a reduced attention span + impatience! (at. the. same. time.)
Thanks. Nice rant. Won't affect those in the throes of visceral valedictorianism, of course. Still - comforting fer us folk allergic to mobs.. least us ones a bit out of the big city.
A.
Will send this little note of cheer to friend in NC. who is already near apoplectic on - carefully studying the body language of the Selected Leader..
|
Post #14,349
10/20/01 8:46:16 PM
|
On the subject of flags
I dont have on because they wont let me have a flagpole here. Besides where were all the patriots before Sept 11th. They sneered at flag wavers. I refuse to join a herd just because. When they all wear out and everyone puts them away my will go out and up.
thanx,
bill
tshirt front "born to die before I get old"
thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
|
Post #14,403
10/21/01 4:32:50 AM
|
Ha
I love the way he spins "the American People" into every sound bite. What the hell is he, a telemarketer?
BTW Ashton, you wimp, that's spelled "American".
|
Post #14,541
10/22/01 9:59:28 AM
10/22/01 10:07:59 AM
|
How do you pronounce that, again?
There is more than one way to respond to the horror of Sept. 11. And there is more than one kind of patriotism. We forget this. You do not have to rally around Bush and tolerate Cheney's chthonic creepiness and wave a frantic flag and believe every scripted half-truth that drizzles out of the Pentagon, applaud the nonstop attacks on an already demolished nation. Chthonic?!? What the hell is that? How do you even pronounce it? Assuming it's not a typo, someone needs to take that guy's thesaurus away from him, until he learns to use it for good, and not evil. jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
Edited by jb4
Oct. 22, 2001, 10:07:59 AM EDT
|
Post #14,575
10/22/01 12:56:06 PM
|
Re: How do you pronounce that, again?
Word of the Day for Thursday May 27, 1999:
chthonic (THONE-ik), adjective:
dwelling in or under the earth; also, pertaining to the underworld
"Driven by d\ufffdmonic, chthonic Powers." --T.S. Eliot
"The chthonic divinity was essentially a god of the regions under the earth; at first of the dark home of the seed, later on of the still darker home of the dead." --C. F. Keary
"The chthonic imagery of Norine's apartment, which..was black as a coalhole and heated by the furnace of the hostess' unslaked desires." --M. McCarthy
"Two great and contrasted forms of ritual: the Olympian and the Chthonic, the one a ritual of cheerful character, the other a ritual of gloom, and fostering superstition."
From dictionary.com
Regards,
Hugh
|
Post #14,595
10/22/01 1:42:34 PM
|
I see...so the 'ch' is silent as in "fred"...
All smart-assness aside, thanks for tracking that down.
It does, however, reinforce my premise that we will never achieve western-European levels of literacy in the English-speaking world until we bite the bullet and "regularize" english spelling. It is entirely possible that this is the only case of a silent 'ch' en the entire English language.
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #14,605
10/22/01 2:07:37 PM
|
yacht
Don Richards,
Proud recipient of the ABBA.
|
Post #14,611
10/22/01 2:25:49 PM
|
Fair enough...
...I shoulda said: The only word in English that starts with a silent 'ch'.
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #14,623
10/22/01 2:58:50 PM
|
Yer rite :-)
At least as far as I know (pedantic soul that I am). And I think yacht is the only word containing a silent ch that doesn't start with the ch.
Don Richards,
Proud recipient of the ABBA.
|
Post #14,664
10/22/01 7:08:39 PM
|
Cthulhu._________________________OK OK but it's close! :-\ufffd
|
Post #14,699
10/22/01 10:03:14 PM
|
:-\ufffd yerself!
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #14,659
10/22/01 6:59:39 PM
|
Uhmm... I think you're overlooking something:
(That's pretty much the exact opposite of "overseeing", BTW! :-) Jim Bea...ushmill: ...we will never achieve western-European levels of literacy in the English-speaking world until we bite the bullet and "regularize" english spelling. Speaking of "western-European" -- isn't that exactly what the English are?!? And *they* can reed and right English! So that ain't it. Christian R. Conrad
The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
|
Post #14,700
10/22/01 10:06:39 PM
|
Yabut, so can we...equally poorly!
In fact, they still can't spell color or defense or theater or specialize...
;-)
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #14,736
10/23/01 5:28:41 AM
|
"emote muah" ...
(The LRPD is being contrary: "RESISTANCE IS USELESS!")
|
Post #14,839
10/23/01 7:05:27 PM
|
Not so! Below: "We are the superior beings!"
|
Post #15,065
10/24/01 10:15:20 PM
|
Reredundunduncey --
Robert A. Heinlein suggested that one of the attributes of a successful society is a certain amount of looseness in the corners.
The contradictoriness of the English language (in which, as noted, overlooking and overseeing mean something quite different, whereas fat chance and slim chance mean the same thing) gives us all much to think about, even in ordinary discourse. Selection among multitudes of synonyms, and the occasional oddball word like chthonic, give English speakers a certain... flexibility. Rather poetic, in a way.
I've considered for years that one of the reasons English is successful over French is that, when it came time to write dictionaries, ours was compiled by a choleric, disorganized party animal, whereas the French appointed a Government commission.
Regards,
Ric
|
Post #15,067
10/24/01 10:19:24 PM
|
Besides, English in some ways includes French.
Alex
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. -- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
|
Post #15,111
10/25/01 10:49:43 AM
|
Same ideas in David Brin's work.
The idea that a flexible language is a key differentiator between creative, growing cultures and stodgy, inflexible unchanging ones.
Regards,
-scott anderson
|
Post #15,119
10/25/01 12:46:42 PM
|
Re: Reredundunduncey --
Don't misunderstand...I agree with you completely.
I just wish we'd figger out how to spell this creative masterpiece we've created/discovered/inherited.
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #15,183
10/25/01 11:32:35 PM
|
Brin is part of where I got the idea
but more a matter of ... phraseology and word choice :-)
And yes, English includes French as a subset. Likewise German -- I have German friends who insist that English is just badly-pronounced German.
I once listened to some Germans trying to invent a proper Deutsche phrase for "vignetting", meaning in this case the effect that shows up in wide-angle lenses, where the edge of the photo is less exposed than the center; caused by more glass in the light path, plus greater distance from the lens to film on the edges than the center. They hashed it over for several minutes. Finally I told them to adopt the English-language custom of linguistic imperialism -- if you need a word, and somebody else has it, expropriate the sucker!
And isn't it interesting that except for "bed", furniture -- sofa, divan, pillow, others -- is Arabic?
Regards,
Ric
|
Post #14,955
10/24/01 11:52:30 AM
|
Thanks for the nod. :)
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly by the chain of their own ideas;...despair and time eat away the bonds of iron and steel, but they are powerless against the habitual union of ideas, they can only tighten it still more; and on the soft fibres of the brain is founded the unshakable base of the soundest of Empires."
Jacques Servan, 1767
|
