| |
|
| |
logomachy--1. A dispute
about words. 2. A dispute carried on in words only; a battle of words.
logomachon--1. One who argues about words.
2. A word warrior.
|
|
| |
|
| |
2004-10-23
But wolves are natural Republicans!
The new Bush/Cheney ad that is getting so much buzz is playing on TV here in Pennsylvania. See Wolves at the Bush/Cheney Web site.
My thought when I saw it was “I want more wolves” . I like wolves. Wolves are definitely free-market Republicans. They have strong family values, believe in competition and coöperation, and kill the weak to feed their young.
I used to tell my kids that wolves are good because they eat whales (nasty, barnacle-encrusted, glabrous beasts, traitors to their class (Mammalia), which had struggled for eons to evolve into terrestrial quadrupeds—-whales just gave up; and their songs sound like Paul Winter on a bad day, and they look like Michael Moore on a good day). When the whales swim upstream to spawn, I told my children, wolves crouch on the banks. They reach out with their bushy tails and tickle the whales’ blow-holes. The whales sneeze and flip over on their backs, and the wolves pounce on the whales’ soft underbellies and devour them.
Uuum . . . maybe more information than you need.
Anyway, I liked how the pack perked up, and headed off down hill to deliver some lupine whup-ass when the narrator talked about America being weakened by Kerry and the Democrats.
|
2004-10-21
PC Christians suck up to NGO mujihadin murders
From an e-mail: The Presbyterian Church USA has started a campaign to disinvest from companies that sell equipment used in the bulldozing, dynamitings, and other crimes committed by Sharon in the Israeli-occupied territories. . . . The leftie-sanctions lobby has finally got the nerve to put the Likud/Israel in the category of Apartheid South Africa. The money impact is irrelevant, but the political symbolism is big, if it catches on. Why would the Presbyterians do that? Are they doing it to apologize to the Religion of Peace for the Great American Internecine Christian Murder Spree of 1861-1865, where Christians slaughtered Christians, thereby depriving the Peace Martyrs of their rightful pleasures?
Or are they are retaliating for all those Christian babies used to make matzos?
Or did the Board of Presbyters see an apparition of St. Rachel Corrie wrapped in a banner inscribed "Don't Caterpillar Tread on Me"?
Or have they just adopted the faux Quakerism of the bien-pensant? From this high-toned posture they can view any conflict between civilization and murderous barbarians as though it were a football game with only one team on the field, absurdly and criminally conducting a frantic offense and defense against . . . nothing. Just as 20 years ago the USSR was a big nothing.
How wonderfully pure it must be up there among the angels! How attractive is the prospect of getting there before the rest of us! Liberal political correctness is a regular Jacob’s ladder for those too good for this Earth. And it takes so much less work (energy, you know!) and is more environmentally friendly than the Tower of Babel, with the bricks, and the ladders, and the yecchy crowds with their cheesy ARA lunch wagons.
Anyway, my friend should be ashamed of himself, peddling such propaganda: - What are the objects of the gerunds “bulldozing” and “dynamitings”? Villagers’ houses? Smuggling/infiltration tunnels and routes? Terrorist refuges and firing positions? Does it matter?
- What “Israeli-occupied territories”? Israeli occupation of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza ended long ago. They are occupied by the UN and Palestinian Authority now.
Perhaps the Presbyterians will disinvest from the countries that sell the PA and PLF arms and the companies that supply the UN “relief” effort, which has turned a bunch of largely free-will refugees into a “people” of third-generation psychotics. - What ”crimes committed by Sharon”? What is this Larouchean fixation on Sharon and Likud? (Lyndon LaRouche, by the way, now has street-corner stands announcing LaRouche’s support for Kerry. The Spheres tremble.)
Sharon and Likud are not some alien force imposed on Israel; they are the government of a parliamentary democracy, in which all citizens, including Arabs, are enfranchised. Comparing the government to South African apartheid doesn't touch just Likud. It declares the entire existence of Israel to be illegitimate, especially since Sharon and Likud have popular support.
Sharon’s approval rating dropped to a near-record low this week. But a lot of the disapproval is by people who think Sharon is not hard-line enough, who don’t like Sharon’s plan to remove settlements in PA territory. Sharon and Likud would still trounce Peres and Labor in an election.
Al Jazeera’s report on the PCUSA’s disinvestment program is copied here.
A pro-Israeli report contains this evidence that some of the Presbyterian elders have already attained the Nirvana of bien-pensant Cloud-cuckoo Land:The meeting between Sheikh Nabil Qauq, the leader of Hezbollah in south Lebanon, and a delegation of 24 leaders of the U.S. Presbyterian Church currently on a fact-finding tour in the Middle East, was broadcast Oct. 17 on Al Manar, Hezbollah's satellite television network. During the broadcast, at least one member of the delegation was shown praising Hezbollah.
Elder Ronald Stone, who identified himself as representing the East Liberty Presbyterian Church in Pittsburgh, said, "As an elder of our church, I'd like to say that according to my recent experience, relations and conversations with Islamic leaders are a lot easier than dealings and dialogue with Jewish leaders." Elder Stone went on to praise Hezbollah: "We treasure the precious words of Hezbollah and your expression of goodwill towards the American people." . . .
Since its founding in 1982, Hezbollah has been responsible for hundreds of attacks against Israelis and Americans, including the 1983 suicide bomb attack on the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, which killed 200. Hezbollah also attacked the Israeli Embassy in Argentina in 1992 and the Israeli cultural center in Buenos Aires in 1994.
|
Democrats think we’re stupid
The other day a friend told me of a bumper sticker he had seen:
If You Can Read This, You’re Not My President. Kinda clever, but it doesn’t tell us much about George Bush. The Democrats say that about nearly all Republicans. And they believe it. Really. No matter what else they believe. No matter what else they say.
Just about every Republican presidential candidate that I can remember—that’s back to Eisenhower—has been tagged as stupid by the Democrats. You could extend the list through Wilkie, Coolidge, and Harding. Nixon and Hoover are exceptions. They were evil.
For the Democrats’ mouthpieces in the press, that was the pre-shaped storyline. Conversely, the Democrats think it a self-evident recommendation, which they point out ceaselessly, that their guy is well-educated, brilliant, so erudite, cultured—writes books and speaks French: Stevenson, Kennedy, Carter, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, Kerry.
Are there Republicans on the hirsute back-slope of the bell curve, who circled the wagons and are still waiting for the Indians, who are two sparks short of a campfire?
Sure. But all Republicans, especially presidential candidates? As the deconstructionists put it, the idea is over determined. There is too much evidence, and it all boils down to the fact of being a Republican.
The standard story probably tells us more about Democrats’ psychology than Republicans’ IQs. Democrats need to believe that they are the smart ones.
So it is fun to watch what they do when they have to come out of the ivory-covered towers of their minds and deal with the real world. They do things like suing to overturn laws that require voters to vote in their neighborhood polling places. (The Florida Supreme Court (aka “SCoFla”) and a district judge in Colorado have rejected the Democrats complaints. See the Washington Times.)
And why did the elite Democratic voters need to be allowed to sow their wild votes with such multilateral randomness or whimsicality? In the Florida case, “labor unions argued [that the law] unconstitutionally deprived residents of the right to vote if they did not know their polling place”.
Think about that for a moment. My first question is, why bother? It sound like they’re just a bunch of dumb Republicans.
|
2004-10-20
Real Readers
Logomachon is starting to get some traffic, small but steady. I appreciate it. Please use the comments or an e-mail to let me know what you think, even if you are just agreeing with a post . . . even if you are a relative.
Amplifications, disagreements, whatever, are always welcome.
Thanks,
Seán
No oil for pacifists.
|
|
|
|
