Letters to the Editor
Radical founders
July 8, 2008
Advertisement
To the editor:
Your July 4 editorial left out some important realities about our Founding Fathers and the history of our country.
The Declaration of Independence is one of history’s most important statements of dissent. By today’s standards and in the modern vernacular, the Founding Fathers were extremists, radicals and terrorists. They committed what many on this continent and in England believed to be traitorous sedition. They openly encouraged insurrection and then took up arms to overthrow the existing government.
Remember the Boston Tea Party? Those now-revered dissidents destroyed thousands of dollars worth of the property of the British East India Company. Think about how differently those protesters would be characterized today if they were to seize control of an oil refinery or a mortgage bank and commit a modern act of economic terrorism?
We can be proud of our country’s rebellious upbringing. We can and should honor that upbringing with dissent of our own against any and all forms of oppression and tyranny, whether foreign or domestic.
Mike Cuenca,
Lawrence
8 July 2008 at 6:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Brent Garner (Brent Garner) says…
Mr. Cuenca:
Do you recall from your formative years being educated that the reason for the Boston Tea Party was not a protest over tea. Rather, it was a protest over the tax imposed by England on the tea and over the fact that the colonies were not permitted to buy tea from anyone except this company and over the fact that the colonists had no voice or vote in the imposition of the tax? Do you not remember the statement, “No taxation without representation”? In that regard, the Boston Tea Party was NOT an act of economic terrorism as you would like to portray it. Rather, it was a protest against an unjust governmental policy of high taxes, government enforced mercantilism, and a lack of representation in parliment. It has been noted by some scholars that had King George been willing to grant Parlimentary representation to the colonies, then there most likely would not have been an American Revolution. That King George refused to consider such a notion, and it was proposed, led our founders to conclude that the only way they would have a voice in the government that ruled them was to break away and form their own government.
8 July 2008 at 7:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
Interesting, Brent, but it doesn't change Cuenca's point, considering that our government is largely controlled by economic elites, creating a situation not unlike colonial America.
8 July 2008 at 7:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
stuckinthemiddle (Anonymous) says…
well said…
this is one of the best letters to the editor to appear in the LJW in years…
well done…
8 July 2008 at 7:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BrianR (Anonymous) says…
bkgarner (Brent Garner) says…
Mr. Cuenca:
“…the Boston Tea Party was not a protest over tea. Rather, it was a protest over the tax imposed by England on the tea…”
I don't perceive this letter to be about taxation in any way shape or form.
8 July 2008 at 7:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
BrianR, that was exactly the point of BK's comment, which obviously went over your head.
8 July 2008 at 7:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BrianR (Anonymous) says…
It happens sometimes.
8 July 2008 at 8:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
OnlyTheOne (Anonymous) says…
“We can be proud of our country’s rebellious upbringing. We can and should honor that upbringing with dissent of our own against any and all forms of oppression and tyranny, whether foreign or domestic.”
I agree wholeheartedly but the problem is we now have a generation of semi-literates who don't know about the Boston Tea Party or if they do it's from some incorrect, edited in China textbook.
8 July 2008 at 8:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
gl0ck0wnr (Anonymous) says…
I wonder if Cuenca counts pointless discrimination lawsuits against KU as radical dissent? If not, if he wants to take over a refinery… well, good luck with that.
8 July 2008 at 8:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Tom Shewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…
“……considering that our government is largely controlled by economic elites……” -bozo
Yes it's true, our gov't has been taken over by extreme left Democratic elites, Soros being the main one. Howard Dean and the far-left blogosphere has been the mechanism to do the Democratic Party's bidding and dirty work. A party that once loved the Clintons, can you believe, they are far too far to the center for this new breed. And it is not ironic that dissent and rebellion is stirring in the air since the Reid/Pelosi congress with an 11% approval rating took over, like good little marionettes for Soros, moveon, mediamatters and the entire left-wing of the Democratic Party,ie., the corrupt liberal media, the other wing of the Democratic Party who sets their agenda and policy.
Yes indeed, since this shift, dissent and revolution are on the rise.
8 July 2008 at 8:46 a.m.
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
8 July 2008 at 8:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
autie (Anonymous) says…
So if we were all back in time..the 1760's/70's..all the posters identified with the right would be tories and all those with the left would be patriots? Gosh, they didn't even have capital gains tax, health care, Medicare, HUD assistance, income tax, FICA, SS..just a silly little excise tax..what on earth did they have to argue about? Taxation without representation..like my reps listen to me. It was all about the money then and is now. those that don't have much or enough complain and those that do don't won't any change..I think the real issue was patriots then thought the British looked pretty gay in those red coats.
8 July 2008 at 9:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
fu7il3 (Anonymous) says…
Of course, the viewpoint of history is written by those who won. If the Boston tea partiers had been arrested and/or killed, and England had won the war, they probably aren't even remembered.
Good luck on your seizing that oil refinery. My guess is that you'll end up dead or in jail and no one will care.
8 July 2008 at 9:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Tom Shewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…
“You're simply clueless, Tom.”
Translation: I do not know how to address your comments, being that they're true and I have no reasoned argument against them.
8 July 2008 at 9:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
No, you're broken record of “it's all the Democrats” is as silly as it is repetitive.
Yes, the Democrats are complicit in the corruption from big money, in a very big way, but the fact remains that in that game, they are still very much junior partners to the Republicans.
8 July 2008 at 9:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bennyoates (Anonymous) says…
Thank goodness judges, rather than right-wing message board slugs, decide which lawsuits are and are not “pointless.”
8 July 2008 at 9:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
kansas778 (Anonymous) says…
Dissent? What about leadership? Our constitution provides for peaceable revolution; if you don't like something you can vote for the other guy, or run for office yourself.
8 July 2008 at 9:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
barrypenders (Anonymous) says…
Liberal tyranny must be stopped. They want to take over healthcare, ban guns, ban cigs, destroy free speach on the radio. They want to take your money through higer taxes.
This guy is right we need to terrorize like it was 1784.
8 July 2008 at 9:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
See Kevin.
Kevin says: “but, but Clinton”
See Tom.
Tom says: “but, but the Democrats”
See Kevin and Tom.
See Kevin and Tom spin.
Kevin and Tom are dizzy.
The end.
8 July 2008 at 10:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
Tom's Greatest Hits
brought to you by Worthless Media, all rights reserved.
(number of apperances in parentheses)
“…far-left blogosphere” (3)
“George Soros blah blah blah” (7)
“corrupt liberal media” (5)
“Kool-Aid” (5)
“far-left extremists” (6)
“extremist radical left” (4)
“far-left America hating” (3)
8 July 2008 at 10:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
One must wonder, would Tom have considered guys like Alexander Hamilton and James Madison to be the equivalent of the “far-left blogosphere” with their Federalist papers?
8 July 2008 at 10:17 a.m.
Permalink
Clint Gentry (Clint Gentry) says…
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
8 July 2008 at 10:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
screedposter (Anonymous) says…
“I think it must be a form of “projection” that conservatives don't understand the world without a “father figure””
Do you have a Che shirt?
8 July 2008 at 10:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
Good points anxious.
I find it ironic that the only time I've ever read a single word of George Soros is when some rightwinger like Tommy Boy here decides to post a quote.
I think guys like Tom assume that since they get all their information and instructions on how to think from a mouthpiece, that everyone else does the same.
8 July 2008 at 10:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Daytrader23 (Anonymous) says…
My favorite quote from Soros is
“investing has to be boring. If your having fun then your probably not making any money” Meaning control your emotions and think rationally. But of course I'm sure the right wing will come and say investing is bad, a free market system is bad, democracy is bad. Silly right wingers.
8 July 2008 at 10:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
Anxious, what happens at 11 on News Radio 980? Pray tell.
8 July 2008 at 10:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Tom Shewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…
Maybe I am a little premature in my cluelessness. Check back in 5,6,7-10 years and see how clueless I was.
Gotta wonder why the left-wingers of the Dem party would love to have conservative radio censored and trimmed back to per the Fairness Doctrine.
As barry said in his 9:37–—there's your tyranny–liberal tyranny.
So, maybe I am clueless if that makes you feel better.
This is what will wake up the folks–-not the last 7 years of “Bush this and Bush that”.
8 July 2008 at 10:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Clint Gentry (Clint Gentry) says…
“Do you have a Che shirt?” - screed
You mean Che Guevara? Argentinian, radical revolutionary leader that teamed up with Castro to take over Cuba? Fought for freedom in various South American, (and African), nations overthrowing tyrannical despots? Symbol for the struggle of freedom for all native peoples held in poverty by their empirical masters? No, I don't own a shirt…
8 July 2008 at 10:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Daytrader23 (Anonymous) says…
WOW, Someone comes with a rational opinion and then BAMM. Removed because it offended the Rush Limbaugh clones. All he said was think for yourselves people. I guess that's not allowed here in KS.
8 July 2008 at 10:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
chzypoof1 (Anonymous) says…
I love reading all of your political comments. You speak as if the info given to you by your leaders (Rush, Soros, Clinton, etc) is the truth. And like your Popular Vote counts.
Wake up folks, our vote doesn't count. The constitution is trampled on every day by our government. The patriot Act burned it a long time ago.
Good letter Mike. If only others would step up and realize that the “parties” they represent are a farce…they just feed you lies.
Check this site for more “truths” to complain about:
www.cnn.com
poof
8 July 2008 at 10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Clint Gentry (Clint Gentry) says…
“Gotta wonder why the left-wingers of the Dem party would love to have conservative radio censored and trimmed back to per the Fairness Doctrine.
As barry said in his 9:37–—there's your tyranny–liberal tyranny.” - Nancy_Boy
So…The radio waves are inundated with conservative talk radio, and somehow the liberals are the tyrants? If you can convince yourself of that, can you consider yourself a “rational animal”? No, no, no they've got a word for it…”dittoheads”.
8 July 2008 at 10:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
screedposter (Anonymous) says…
“I think it must be a form of “projection” that conservatives don't understand the world without a “father figure””
“You mean Che Guevara? Argentinian, radical revolutionary leader that teamed up with Castro to take over Cuba? Fought for freedom in various South American, (and African), nations overthrowing tyrannical despots? Symbol for the struggle of freedom for all native peoples held in poverty by their empirical masters?”
Just_another_daddy_complex says:
You should get a shirt. Heck, I've got him tattooed on my arm!
8 July 2008 at 10:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
fu7il3 (Anonymous) says…
“You mean Che Guevara?”
I think he actually meant Cher, but he had a typo. Do you own a Cher shirt? The Cher that started out with a short ugly man named Sonny who was her babe that she got and later became a politician while she herself later started dressing in provocative clothing while visiting the military, before becoming a bad actress and acosting the gnats that comprise the paparazzi. :p
8 July 2008 at 10:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
screedposter (Anonymous) says…
Here's change we can believe in!
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/07…
8 July 2008 at 11:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Clint Gentry (Clint Gentry) says…
As my name implies, I am no Idolater…
8 July 2008 at 11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“Gotta wonder why the left-wingers of the Dem party would love to have conservative radio censored and trimmed back to per the Fairness Doctrine”
The fairness doctrine wouldn't prevent conservative radio from being as obnoxiously hateful in spewing their mis- and disinformation and outright lies— it'd just require that all the public be given access to the publicly owned airwaves as a way to rebut their insanity.
8 July 2008 at 11:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
screedposter (Anonymous) says…
“it'd just require that all the public be given access to the publicly owned airwaves as a way to rebut their insanity”
The defender of Chavez's seizure of a radio station in Venezuela talks about freedom…
8 July 2008 at 11:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
screedposter (Anonymous) says…
“Symbol for the struggle of freedom for all native peoples held in poverty by their empirical masters?”
“As my name implies, I am no Idolater…”
You of course are, by my definition.
8 July 2008 at 11:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Tom Shewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…
“…..obnoxiously hateful in spewing their mis- and disinformation and outright lies…..”
Uh-huh, conservative talk has the market cornered on this? We all know what your far-left blogosphere is all about. Fits your above description perfectly…..for half a decade at least.
This LTE is OK, but the underlying message is based on what the far-left blog has been doing–funded largely by George Soros and pals…..known America haters who admittedly want a drastically different America.
Now Iraq is undeniably nearly in the 'win' column and Obama is drifting center to 'fit-in' with the new plans and this really has you and the far-left idealogues ticked off.
Sorry, you guys do not–-absolutely do not have the only reasons available for dissent and radical change.
Maybe I do too. And that is to fight your far-left radical agendas that have been fueled by an irrational hatred for a president.
8 July 2008 at 11:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Clint Gentry (Clint Gentry) says…
thank god no one is listening to you screed…
8 July 2008 at 11:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“The defender of Chavez's seizure of a radio station in Venezuela talks about freedom…”
Given that you have no clearly identifiable point of view on anything, screed, I can understand why you are constantly trying to similarly confuse mine.
But just so others have a chance to understand my point of view, rather than the one screed would like to impose on me, I merely believe that Chavez's seizure of media devoted primarily to almost exclusively to right-wing propaganda neither added to nor detracted from the state of free speech in Venezuela.
8 July 2008 at 11:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“Uh-huh, conservative talk has the market cornered on this?”
When it comes to radio, which along with television is all the the fairness doctrine would apply to, that's pretty much the case.
8 July 2008 at 11:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
duplenty (Anonymous) says…
“Now Iraq is undeniably nearly in the 'win' column ”
!!!
8 July 2008 at 12:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
Bozo, you know full well that conservative talk radio has succeeded brilliantly in the free market, while liberal talk radio has been an abject failure in the same market. As a result, leftists of all stripes - who purportedly believe in free speech - want to shut it down and will make every effort to do so after next January, depending on the results of the November election. It's despicable hypocrisy at its worst.
8 July 2008 at 12:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
chet_larock (Anonymous) says…
Cato, give it a rest. Sheesh! I'm not “shutting you down”. I'm asking you to stop making the same effing point post after post after post, day after day after day after day. Limbaugh, Hannity, etc can continue to spout lies and make horses a—es of themselves as much as they want. No one cares that much about it — except the lunatic fringe. Besides, it makes extreme lefties look better.
8 July 2008 at 12:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
Chet, may I take it then that you do not support the anticipated “fairness doctrine” legislation that has been specifically drafted by Democrats to shut down conservative talk radio?
8 July 2008 at 12:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“Bozo, you know full well that conservative talk radio has succeeded brilliantly in the free market,”
That's because conservative business elements are willing to subsidize it, partly because it supports their political viewpoints, and partly because the listeners on those shows are willing to listen to insulting advertisements for stupid products, and then maybe even buy them.
8 July 2008 at 12:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Jay_Z (Anonymous) says…
Bozo, so liberal talk radio can't obtain similar advertising dollars to subsidize it the same way conservative radio is able to? Why?
8 July 2008 at 12:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
No, Bozo, it's succeeded because a substantial majority of Americans are of a conservative bent, whether or not they agree with the policies of the present Bush administration. The markets have spoken. You may not like what's advertised on conservative talk radio, but millions of other people do and buy plenty of it, which is why conservative talk radio has succeeded and liberal talk radio hasn't. That's how the radio business works, Bozo.
8 July 2008 at 12:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
duplenty (Anonymous) says…
If you think that the “Fainess Doctrine” was drafted to “shut down” anything, then you don't have a clue about radio in this country.
8 July 2008 at 12:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Clint Gentry (Clint Gentry) says…
So let me get this straight “Cato”…Conservative talk radio succeeds because the “markets have spoken”, but “liberal” storehouses, (AKA universities, public schools, and film), must, (and I quote), “teach the controversy”? you're so confused as to become irrational…
8 July 2008 at 12:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
chet_larock (Anonymous) says…
Cato,
“specifically drafted by Democrats…” is a bit disingenous, don't you think, given the long history of the legislation? Whatever, I'm not here to argue that point, but to answer you question- no I don't support it, I think it's a ridiculous waste of time. I realize there's a few high-profile individuals who have mentioned it recently, but I don't think there are enough “loony leftists” in Washington to warrant your concern about it being brought back.
8 July 2008 at 12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“(Right-wing hate radio) succeeded because a substantial majority of Americans are of a conservative bent, whether or not they agree with the policies of the present Bush administration.”
The great majority of Americans don't listen to right-wing hate radio. It's success has nothing to do what a majority of Americans believe, and everything to do with businesses who have a vested interested in making sure the scope of political discussion is very limited.
8 July 2008 at 12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Brent Garner (Brent Garner) says…
Where to begin?
First, obviously, some folks here are a little deficient in the history department. Not too surprising given what passes for history lessons in our schools today. The Founders biggest beef with King George was that they wanted a say in whether or not they were taxed. The “no taxation without representation” was the basis. Other events added to the mix. Yes, the tax in question was miniscule. It was the principle that mattered. These colonists simply wanted the same rights as the British citizens who lived in England. Namely, the right to elect representatives to parliament. However, King George was not about to let that happen. Hence we end up with forced quartering of soldiers in colonial homes, the Boston Massacre, and then 1775 and the battles of Lexington and Concord. No, it was all about having a voice in the affairs of government.
Second, while I understand the allegation that our government is owned by economic elites, I would invite the alleger of such to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that such is true. For if it is true, then one must wonder that so many regulations and laws that business opposes still exist. For example, the ban on off shore drilling.
Third, the LTE writer seeks to establish moral equivalence between the Founders, who were resisting a government in which they had no voice, and any protesters, demonstrators, and, yes, even terrorists today. It is interesting to note that in the cited Boston Tea Party no one was harmed and the only property destroyed was the tea, which, by the way, would not have been destroyed if the royal governor, Mr. Hutchinson had simply permitted the ships to leave without unloading. NOTE: the ship captains had asked for permission to leave. But, Mr. Hutchinson wanted to make a point that these upstart colonists would obey the crown regardless, so he blocked the harbor. The only other property damaged was a padlock which was replaced anonymously later. Can the LTE say the same of the protesters, demonstrators, and terrorists he seeks justification for?
8 July 2008 at 1 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“Bozo, so liberal talk radio can't obtain similar advertising dollars to subsidize it the same way conservative radio is able to? Why?”
Air America attracts advertisers, and the commercials are mostly just as insulting as those on right-wing hate radio, so I usually can't stand to listen past the first commercial break. I suspect other listeners have a similar reaction.
8 July 2008 at 1:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Baille (Anonymous) says…
“partly because the listeners on those shows are willing to listen to insulting advertisements for stupid products”
So conservative radio - meaning Rush and Hannity - flourish because the stupid listeners actually buy the stupid things advertised on the EIB network? Interesting theory. I am not saying it's correct, though. It has to be more complicated than that. But it does square nicely with John Stuart Mills' observation: “Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.”
8 July 2008 at 1:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“Second, while I understand the allegation that our government is owned by economic elites, I would invite the alleger of such to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that such is true. For if it is true, then one must wonder that so many regulations and laws that business opposes still exist. For example, the ban on off shore drilling.”
If you are unaware of the influence of corporate lobbyists, who are well-known for writing the entire text of critical legislation and having it shepherded through by well-financed legislators, you do need to get out more. As far as the off-shore drilling goes, they aren't entirely able to overcome public opinion, so environmental concerns do play an important role there, but only in conjunction with opposing financial interests, such as the fishing and tourism industries.
8 July 2008 at 1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“So conservative radio - meaning Rush and Hannity - flourish because the stupid listeners actually buy the stupid things advertised on the EIB network? ”
Not sure how many of the products they buy, but I think many of the advertisers also just want to support the viewpoints espoused, and drown out competing viewpoints in the process. But even if the listeners don't buy the products, the fact that they will sit through the intelligence-insulting programming is indication that they'll endure the insulting commercials, as well.
8 July 2008 at 1:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
paavopetie (Anonymous) says…
“you know full well that conservative talk radio has succeeded brilliantly in the free market, while liberal talk radio has been an abject failure in the same market.”
This is because liberals either A) listen to NPR, or B) only listen to their iPod. Of all my friends, the only radio any of us listen to is NPR. (We're all moderate or liberal.)
I don't mind conservative talk radio (and Fox News) because I don't listen to it. Some of the stupid stuff they say is amusing, and the mainstream media is starting to pick up on how racist and hypocritical they are.
8 July 2008 at 1:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
75x55 (Anonymous) says…
'If I don't like it, it's stupid'
A truly mature attitude.
8 July 2008 at 1:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
Baille, the name of the man you quote was John Stuart Mill - not “Mills.” Furthermore, you may not be aware that the type of political “liberalism” he advocated bears no resemblance to today's meaning of the sense of that word - it was much more akin to the type of freedom from government coercion that true conservatives in this country have advocated for many years, but which many elected Republicans have failed by their conduct to support, whether they say so or not.
8 July 2008 at 1:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
Paavo, you're right on about NPR listeners. What many liberals listen to is supported by the government, and what many conservatives listen to is supported by the free market. 'Nuff said.
8 July 2008 at 1:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
invictus (Anonymous) says…
WE (Kansas) are just a colony of the elites (new york/washington DC) They are the new King George. And these elites are well above terms like liberal, conservative, democrat, republican. These are just terms given to the commoners so we can feel like we are a part of something and there is a chance for change in the system. And we can bicker back and forth and not set our attention on the imperial powers at work. No meaningfull change has ever come without violent revolution.
8 July 2008 at 1:41 p.m.
Permalink
Baille (Anonymous) says…
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
8 July 2008 at 1:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
chet_larock (Anonymous) says…
Equating right-wing talk radio to NPR is, well, 'nuff said.
8 July 2008 at 1:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
monkeywrench1969 (Anonymous) says…
Bozo
Che was was trying to spread a doctrine in a forceful manner that did no one any good. The Cubans are still not any better than before the revolution, he executed his opponents without due process and the state of Africa is in great shape….right? And China is known for all their humanitarian and evironmental work with their people.
8 July 2008 at 1:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
screedposter (Anonymous) says…
Here's some radical change you can believe in! The Obama-Jungen:
http://bulletin.aarp.org/states/il/artic…
“Obama promised to increase AmeriCorps slots from 75,000 to 250,000 and pledged to double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011.
…
“Obama repeated his pledge to boost the size of the active military. But he also said the nation's future and safety depends on more than just additional soldiers.
…
…
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set,” he said Wednesday. “We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.'”“
–––––––––––––––––––––
Military budget increasing, civilian program “just as well funded” What is that, like 500 billion dollars? Maybe they'll buy the little Obama-Jungen little brown outfits.
8 July 2008 at 2:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
Baille, spelling looks o.k., but the subject involved is philosophy, not history. I'll accept your statement concerning the misplaced apostrophe.
8 July 2008 at 2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
Chet, I wasn't equating conservative talk radio with NPR - just the opposite. It's unfortunate, but not surprising, that you weren't able to see it.
8 July 2008 at 2:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
beatrice (Anonymous) says…
“Remember the Boston Tea Party?”
Not personally, but lets ask John McCain. I'm pretty sure he was actually there.
8 July 2008 at 2:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
“The markets have spoken.”
––––––—
1st Prize - Most Overly-Simplistic View of Free-Market Capitalism.
8 July 2008 at 2:14 p.m.
Permalink
Baille (Anonymous) says…
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
8 July 2008 at 2:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink