?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

***
WILL SOMEONE GET ME A NEW REMOTE, PLEASE?

It is the most famous line in political science and one every one of us learned in pursuing our degrees. Politics is the struggle for power. It was the first sentence of the first paragraph written almost 60 years ago by Hans Morganthau in his book Politics Among Nations.

Morganthau believed that there were basic principles of human nature and that political systems and philosophies can be formulated that best account for the human spirit. It assumed an element of objectivism and realism. Unfortunately, the new liberalism/progressivism we see today, in my opinion, rather exploits the weakest facets of human behavior, propagandizes rather than educates, divides rather than unites, and conspires to crush free and rational thought - all to accumulate power and create an unnatural and precarious state that is doomed to collapse under it’s own bloated weight.

I am often astounded that so many things that are so obviously self-destructive and harmful can be swallowed so easily. I tend to think it is the result of a kind of self-loathing but I'll save that for another time.

Sorry, these are the kind of thoughts I was free to express when I was getting my degree in college. It was an interesting time for me because there was actual (sometimes heated) discussion of philosophies, current events, history, and real facts rather than mere spin, talking points, and misinformation … although there were indeed the seeds of that too. It has never been so institutionalized as it has today however, with so many enablers and practicioneers, so few objective observers and critics, so much out-and-out bias and misinformation, and so little real dialogue.

But I continue to listen to the “dialogue” such as it is, and I read up on what I can from as many sources as I can handle. Sometimes it’s just fun to sit around and have it come to you.

FLIPPING CHANNELS:

I heard this from John Edwards yesterday: They want to shut me up! *lol* Oh, Mr. Edwards. Come now. Every time I look I see you drawling some new nonsense. AND JUST WHO ARE THEY"? Of course you feel slighted. Hillary and Barack got all the attention this week for their little exchange of insults regarding who’s less naïve regarding international relations. *LOL* Now, you know the media LOVES stuff like that. But “SHUT YOU UP?” Wasn’t it you and Hillary that were just conspiring to shut everyone ELSE up a couple of weeks ago? Be glad no one in the media will ask you about that bit of hypocrisy.

But no … PLEASE continue to speak. The more people like you open their mouths, the more obvious it should become that we’d be in grave trouble should any of you (and the media) ever trick the electorate into granting you the seats of power you so ravenously crave.

CLICK

It’s hard to sleep sometimes.

I watch Charlie Rose a lot. He is obviously a devoted leftist but I think he’s intelligent, knowledgeable in so many areas, affable, and is a good interviewer when he wants to be. Sometimes, when he gets guests like Robert Shrum the other night, his liberal bias leaps to the front and his interviews descend into the depths of mere propaganda as he allows his guest to say the most amazing things, often slipped in so very casually, without challenge.

In case you don’t keep up with such things, Robert Shrum has been a speechwriter and involved in Democratic presidential campaigns for years … usually with poor results. He is, however, well spoken and has certainly seen a lot of political history first hand but, as most of the people of his ilk, in spite of having an incredible perspective, is too often a revisionist of history, a spinmaster, a master of misinformation … and always a self-promoter. After all ... his job is to try to get politicians elected and to create a legacy for himself and his clients.

Listening to him answer questions can be like listening to those “How to interview” tapes/articles where you learn how to respond to common questions and try to make yourself look better than you are. It is one of the reasons most polticians simply recite short speeches when questioned rather than truly answering the questions. It's all canned and pre-tested.

I found the conversations about Gore’s run against Bush in 2000 the funniest. Shrum said that the “real Gore”, the “passionate” Gore was held back because Shrum didn’t push hard enough. *LOL* This is so typical of the narcissistic personality. He WANTED Gore to be more passionate but didn’t do enough to convince him he should. That's how people "apologize" today, pretending to take responsibility, but don't. It's like "I tried sooo hard ... but I should have tried harder." Give me a break!

I wonder if it was Shrum suggested that Gore leave the podium and stand menacingly next to Bush at that debate staring him down. I’ll never forget Bush’s bemused look when he turned to see Gore there , face smooth and shiny with tv pancake makeup, looking like a petulant child picking for a fight - perhaps one of the funniest moments ever recorded in a presidential debate.

Of course, according to Shrum, had either Clinton or Gore been in office when 9-11 occurred, Bin Ladin would have been captured and the world would be a different place today. What? Bill Clinton’s abandonment of the CIA, it's years long decay, his virtual ignoring of attacks on U.S. embassies, the USS Sullivans and Cole, the slaughter in Rawanda, Somalia and the ill-fated Black Hawk Down episode, his serial abuse of women and resulting conspiracies to cover up and attack (you want to talk about Executive Privilege? You've maybe forgotten his use of government lawyers and staff to fight his personal battles and his "Executive Privilege" argument in refusal to have his attorneys' subpoenas honored), are what got us in this position in the first place.

Clinton had Bin Ladin offered to him on a silver platter and refused and later decided that he might suffer in the polls if he went into Afghanistan to seek out these kooks who hide in caves and declare war on the U.S. His CIA missed the boat but we are to believe his “no controlling authority” VP Gore (and people attack Cheney) would have done any more. But Charlie Rose? He just nods adoringly at the altar of liberalism. Maybe he's just forgotten. Of course this all makes wife Hillary qualified in international relations, along with her never-ending revisions of what she thinks and knows about WMD, Iraq, and the war on terror. doesn't it? Real leadership, isn't it? Sad.

CLICK

I’ve been losing sleep over the images of those poor animals tortured by whomever was involved in this Michael Vick case (no I’m not going to say that he’s responsible/guilty like some people do before the evidence is out and verified), and the case of the Connecticut family where a mother and two daughters were allegedly raped and murdered, probably burned alive or the attempt to do so was made, by yet two more homicidal misfits, let loose upon an innocent public by progressive parole boards, lawyers, and do-gooders who think traditional society is the blame and the rights of criminals are more important than the rights of law-abiding people.

I’m waiting for the first surge of typical liberal tripe in both cases: the race card, the perpetrators' abused childhoods, class envy, the “don’t rush to judgment” argument, the “we were only following procedure” excuses that allowed maniacs back on the streets, etc. I’ve already heard (unconfirmed) that some of the most violent information was removed from the information the parole board considered in paroling these two men. I also hear one reporter say the two young girls were abused. ABUSED! Well, isn't that a polite word! Thank you for being so sensitive. Look! If you can investigate “non-crimes” like the greatest legislative body in the world can (as in the recent Gonzalez, Plame-Wilson, etc. fishing expeditions), how’s about investigating how this material was allegedly excised from their records?

Of course, maybe everyone is totally innocent. Maybe the rich doctor father/husband did it. Maybe the U.S. Congress is really acting in the best interests of the people they represent. Maybe the media will give us some facts for a change, and start asking everyone probing questions. Maybe the elites in this country who want to control what we say will wake up. Maybe intellectual honesty will begin to be considered a virtue rather than a hindrance. Maybe people will educate themselves and stop allowing themselves to be suckered. Maybe.

CLICK

***

Hope you got your things together.
Hope you are quite prepared to die.
Looks like we're in for nasty weather.
One eye is taken for an eye.

Don't go around tonight,
Well, it's bound to take your life,
There's a bad moon on the rise.


***

Tags:

Comments

( 2 comments — Leave a comment )
tniassaint
Jul. 30th, 2007 12:25 am (UTC)
Of course you know that NOTHING would make me so happy as to see the dismantling of the two party system. Ed, neither of these groups have a monopoly on sense or intelligence. They call them Parties for a reason... they are having a grand party - both of them... and at our expense.

I hope the lot of them can't sleep at night.
metaphorsbwithu
Jul. 30th, 2007 01:22 am (UTC)
I can guarantee you they sleep very well. Staying up might be a problem (like the all-nighter recently proved).

I don't agree about the Party system though. I think theoretically, the founding fathers were men of true genius, whatever their own faults. Not perfect - but geniuses nonetheless.

"Democracy" and "Federalism" are necessarily messy. If they were more efficient, imagine the harm they could REALLY do.

The problem is the vast majority of people don't understand how government works, and in too many cases elect representatives that reflect the worse in them.

How do you explain how some of the people who rise to these positions do so? And STAY!

When the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid can speak for the Democrati Party (and actually be influenced by the likes of moveon.org)I'd say this Party is in big trouble.

Oh, I heard this morning that not only do 86% of the people disapprove of Congress, but an astounding 71% of them don't like their OWN congresspersons. And it's not just about Iraq, as the commentator implied. It's the same reason so many Republicans were voted out last year ... the people are sick of their foolishness.

Of course, look who they have to blame.
( 2 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2014
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Tags

Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com