Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

From: lightsearcher1
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 9:28 am
Subject: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

Flaming Lefty denounces Flaming Leftist:

"As with Vietnam, this is becoming an emotional battle between ideologues who, as usual, don't give a damn about the truth. -- Kucinich seems to be one of those." - Richard Cohen, February 2003

P.S. -

"Despite a long antiabortion record, which he recently (conveniently?) renounced, he has been featured in the Nation, a venerable and respected liberal magazine." - Richard Cohen, February 2003

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Tuesday, February 25, 2003
THE WASHINGTON POST

by Richard Cohen

"Liar" is a word rarely used in Washington. This is not because the town lacks liars but because the word is so unambiguous -- so lacking in customary fudge -- that its use was long ago forbidden by, of course, consensus.

So it was particularly shocking, not to mention refreshing, to hear Richard Perle on Sunday call Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) a liar to his face. I paused to see if the Washington Monument would crack down the middle.

It did not. Moreover, Kucinich himself seemed only momentarily fazed by Perle's sharp right to his integrity and went on, indomitable demagogue that he seems to be, to maintain that the coming war with Iraq will be fought to control that nation's oil.

Kucinich, a presidential candidate, has made this charge before, and when Tim Russert asked him on "Meet the Press" to back it up, here is what he said:

"I base that on the fact that there is $5 trillion worth of oil above and in the ground in Iraq, that individuals involved in the administration have been involved in the oil industry, that the oil industry would certainly benefit from having the administration control Iraq, and that the fact is that, since no other case has been made to go to war against Iraq, . . . oil represents the strongest incentive."

But it is not true that no other case has been made for war with Iraq.

In fact, many cases have been made -- some persuasive, some not. Some were made by George Bush, some by Tony Blair, some by Republicans and some by Democrats. If you don't impose a deadline for the war, then the case for it was even made by the U.N. Security Council's Resolution 1441, endorsed, as it happens, by France. I don't think France, not to mention Syria, would have voted to secure Iraq's oil for America's energy companies.

Kucinich's accusation was too much for Perle, a Pentagon adviser and Washington's uber-hawk.

He called Kucinich's argument "a lie."

"It is an out-and-out lie," he said. "And I'm sorry to see you give credence to it."

But Kucinich, who must have studied logic in France, came roaring back. -- "Well, if America is not at threat, then what is this about? And many people are wondering: 'How did our oil get under their sand?' "

A better question is: How did this fool get on "Meet the Press"?

The answer is disheartening. Not only is Kucinich running for president, but he has emerged -- along with former Vermont governor Howard Dean -- as the darling of antiwar Democrats who will have much influence in the Iowa caucuses. George Bush's war -- whether for a better world or more SUVs -- may well be fought hand to hand in the Iowa snows.

As for Dean, he too had something to say about Iraq over the weekend. Along with most of the other presidential candidates, he appeared before the Democratic National Committee and started right off with Iraq: "What I want to know is why in the world the Democratic Party leadership is supporting the president's unilateral attack in Iraq?"

If Dean was referring to the original congressional resolution, then maybe he's technically correct. But if the verb "is" means what it usually does, then he is just plain wrong. Britain supports the United States. That makes it bilateral. And Spain would make it trilateral, and Italy and Poland and the Netherlands and the Czech Republic make it multilateral. Whatever may have been Bush's initial preference, he did wind up going to the United Nations -- and, it seems, going and going and going. Why is Dean saying something so unilaterally wrong?

Because something truly awful has happened. The looming war has already become deeply and biliously ideological.

By that I mean that the extremes on both sides -- but particularly the war's opponents -- no longer feel compelled to prove a case or stick to the facts. As with Vietnam, this is becoming an emotional battle between ideologues who, as usual, don't give a damn about the truth.

Kucinich seems to be one of those.

He may be largely an unknown, but in liberal circles he's something of a hero. Despite a long antiabortion record, which he recently (conveniently?) renounced, he has been featured in the Nation, a venerable and respected liberal magazine.

It's impossible to know whether Kucinich believes what he said or was merely repeating a lie because others believe it.

Either way, if he and his fellow antiwar candidates are going to turn a complex debate into an ideological brawl, then one outcome of the potential war will not be in doubt:

The Democratic Party will lose.

. . . . . . . . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62679-2003Feb24?language=printer

...................................................................................................................................

From: lightsearcher1
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 9:32 am
Subject: re: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

In last Sunday's London Observer, Nick Cohen made this incisive observation in the course of reviewing a book by an obscure left-wing author:

"Whatever other crimes it committed or covered up in the twentieth century, the Left could be relied upon to fight fascism. -- A regime that launched genocidal extermination campaigns against impure minorities would be recognised for what it was and denounced. Not the least of the casualties of the Iraq war is the death of anti-fascism."

The left once apologized for communism...but communism, evil though it was, at least was premised on a universalist vision of a better world.

Why does the left now defend fascist regimes?

Because they're no longer for anything; what's important is what they're against: America, Israel, "Eurocentric" civilization.

The motto of today's reactionary left ought to be "The enemy of my country is my friend."

http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110004447

...................................................................................................................................

From: lightsearcher1
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 9:39 am
Subject: Re: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

TREASONOUS DEMOCRATIC LEFTIST WATCH --

Preface:

"I had a horrible feeling in my stomach this morning when I saw that Hussein had been capatured (sic)." - recent post at DemocraticUnderground.com

PART ONE

Even as the Fourth Infantry Division was capturing Saddam, the NEW YORK TIMES was publishing this gloomy editorial on Saturday:

"Isn't this about where we did not want to be at this point? -- While the Bush administration says things are going well in Iraq, the news from the American-led occupation is looking like a catalog of easily predictable, and widely predicted, pitfalls."

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART TWO

Grass-roots Dems are unable to contain their gloom over the wonderful news of the apprehension.

Here's a post by someone called ikojo at DemocraticUnderground.com --

(quoted verbatim...)

"I had a horrible feeling in my stomach this morning when I saw that Hussein had been capatured.

This is a BIG boost for *. This will be used in campaign literature. It will make Dems and others who opposed the war look bad as well. I don't regret opposing shrub's war of aggression on Iraq but it sure will be hard for the candidates now, unless they press the Where's Osama issue but since a majority of Americans already believe that Hussein was behind 9/11/01 it hardly matters.

All of a sudden I am not confident he will lose in 2004.

Please boost my confidence in shrub's defeat in November 2004.

Look what he has going for him right now:

- Dow over 10,000

- Hussein captured

- The pug CONvention is going to be in NYC around the time of the 9/11 anniversary

-A complacent and compliant right-wing corporate controlled media all too willing to act as an arm of the pentagon and white house press room.

- His administration did what his daddy did not, supposedly captured Hussein.

The conspiracy theorist in me says that if this is REALLY Hussein then why didn't * and his media minions not wait until Monday to announce his capture?"

. . . . . . . . . .

[End Treasonous Democratic Leftist Watch]

...................................................................................................................................

From: dottie zold
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 9:53 am
Subject: Re: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

TREASONOUS DEMOCRATIC LEFTIST WATCH --

Again, really too much. As if, because you dare to think about other ways other than war, you are not loyal to your country and your world. And this is the message of Michael the real country has no boundaries. Each of us is more than the country we are born in and that's what makes the rightwing Christian group as transparent as they are. Claiming to be on the side of Jesus when in actuality they are doing all they can against his message. They are dividing instead of uniting. War and Hate are easy. Peace requires dillegence and great thinkers to find the way.

May Michael be with us always,
Dottie

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:07 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

At 18:53 19.12.2003, Dottie wrote:

Claiming to be on the side of Jesus when in actuality they are doing all they can against his message.

Exactly. The derogatory expression "bleeding heart liberal" is a blasphemy against the Mystery of Golgotha, where the heart of Christ bled on behalf of humanity, overflowing with compassion for humanity. Instead, the Religious Right construct a Jesus of their own, the well-armed merciless executioner and judge who does not forgive sins, but sends people to the gallows and invades countries with armies, trampling down children, like the tribal deities of the Old Testament. These "Christians" are the spiritual kinfolks of Muslim fundamentalists who decapitate their sinners in their town squares for sexual indiscretions.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: dottie zold
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:26 am
Subject: Re: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

Tarjei wrote:
These "Christians" are the spiritual kinfolks of Muslim fundamentalists who decapitate their sinners in their town squares for sexual indiscretions.

Hi Tarjei
Or like the early Jews and Christians for that matter. We can't forget the stonings of women who were accused of Adultry in the near past can we? Unfortunately the Islmaic world will catch up to greater civility only when the West finds a more loving couragious manner in which to lead the world and its brothers. I say unfortunately because I don't know if there are enough Gandhis and Kings in the world to ensure this outcome.

:)
Dottie

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:38 am
Subject: The "Christ" of the Religious Right

At 19:07 19.12.2003, I wrote:

The derogatory expression "bleeding heart liberal" is a blasphemy against the Mystery of Golgotha, where the heart of Christ bled on behalf of humanity, overflowing with compassion for humanity. Instead, the Religious Right construct a Jesus of their own, the well-armed merciless executioner and judge who does not forgive sins, but sends people to the gallows and invades countries with armies, trampling down children, like the tribal deities of the Old Testament.

In 1965, Bob Dylan is sang about this very false "Christ" in "Tombstone Blues" :

Well, John the Baptist after torturing a thief
Looks up at his hero the Commander-in-Chief
Saying, "Tell me great hero, but please make it brief
Is there a hole for me to get sick in?"

The Commander-in-Chief answers him while chasing a fly
Saying, "Death to all those who would whimper and cry"
And dropping a bar bell he points to the sky
Saving, "The sun's not yellow it's chicken"

That's John the Baptist and his Commander-in-Chief Christ in a nutshell according to the Gospel According to the Religious Right and the Pentagon.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: dottie zold
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:39 am
Subject: Re: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

Tarjei
Exactly. The derogatory expression "bleeding heart liberal" is a blasphemy against the Mystery of Golgotha, where the heart of Christ bled on behalf of humanity, overflowing with compassion for humanity.

Oh jeez Tarjei, you are right! Oh what thoughts to be armed with when having this conversation. Wow.

Dottie

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:54 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

At 19:39 19.12.2003, Dottie wrote:

Oh jeez Tarjei, you are right! Oh what thoughts to be armed with when having this conversation. Wow.

And while I'm at it, I'll give you another one: The infamous right wing slogan "No Free Lunch for Anybody" - not even for starving children - is a blasphemy against the fourth sign (or miracle) by Christ: The feeding of the five thousand. The Religious Right is utterly anti-life, anti-Christian, brutal, unforgiving, vindictive, murderous, and misanthropic.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: dottie zold
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 9:45 am
Subject: Re: Koo-Koo Dean & Koo-Koo-Sinich

Post:

Why does the left now defend fascist regimes?

Because they're no longer for anything; what's important is what they're against: America, Israel, "Eurocentric" civilization.

Rightwing propaganda clear and simple. No ifs ands or but about it.

The Right is trying to hook the Democrat party to socialists, implying that they stand for nothing. Mostly because what they stand for means nothing to the Right. I've been invited into the Republican meetings, hoping to bring me into the fold, because I am open to listening to their arguments without calling them fanatics. Propaganda and nothing more. The mere fact that they put their ego before their beliefs here in California shows what they truly stand for and it has nothing to do with morals or they would have voted for McClintock. Just a stupid silly nitpicking school yard fight. Little boys playing grownup.

Dottie

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:01 am
Subject: Political propaganda

At 18:45 19.12.2003, Dottie wrote:

Rightwing propaganda clear and simple. No ifs ands or but about it.

I'll have to second that impression. It's a polarization of the weird kind, colored by hostility so strong that the thoughts behind the political positions become blurred.

Traditionally, the radical left has stod for dynamic change and new ideas while the conservative right has been holding back in order to conserve established institutions and values so they are not torn apart too quickly and thoughtlessly. A healthy society will find a harmonious balance between the left (Lucifer) and the right (Ahriman).

When a biased and unflexible position is assumed on the political left or right, attacking a caricature of the opposite wing with a vengeance, the balance flies out the window.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
 

December 2003/January 2004

The Uncle Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files

Anthroposophy & Anarchism

Anthroposophy & Scientology

Anthroposophical Morsels

Anthroposophy, Critics, and Controversy

Search this site powered by FreeFind