LawTalkers - The babyjesuschristsuperstar on Board: filling the moral void of Clinton’s legacy

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)

- Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - The babyjesuschristsuperstar on Board: filling the moral void of Clinton’s legacy (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=719)

Fitzgerald's Deep Throat?

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
That would be kind of fascinating in its own right, but I would think that being the traitor within the Bush admin isn't the best way to fund your long-term retirement.

Oh please. There are a million different factions in the world. And if someone is pretty near the end of their career, and has the bucks, they can leak shit about the leaks purely for the personal satisfaction. For instance, I gotta believe that a lot of principled Rs hate, HATE, HATE Karl Rove. Like, Lindsay Graham and John McCain. Not that I'm suggesting they are the leakers, but Rove is a disgusting slimy turd who is exquisitely hateable. And who couldn't kinda despise a guy who still goes by "Scooter" even though he passed 50 a long time ago? Fibby McLibby.

edited again to point out I changed my avatar, if only temporarily, kinda for Hank.

Fitzgerald's Deep Throat?

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
And who couldn't kinda despise a guy who still goes by "Scooter" even though he passed 50 a long time ago? Fibby McLibby.

You wouldn't be so quick to be hateful if you knew that, IRL, I go by "Binky", would you?

Fitzgerald's Deep Throat?

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
You wouldn't be so quick to be hateful if you knew that, IRL, I go by "Binky", would you?

I would be twice as hateful, Skippy.

Deserving of a read . . . (Or; Why I like Lileks, part 851)

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
"I never “got into” Vonnegut, or “dug” his work like my “buds,” several of whom pronounced his work as “intense,” so I am not particularly bothered to find he applauds suicide bombers, and thinks they experience “an amazing high.” In the literal sense, perhaps; it’s possible that skull fragments may reach the third floor before they carom off a balcony and patter back to earth.

I should note that Mr. Vonnegut’s comments, reported in the Australian, were made while touring to promote a collection of anti-Bush essays, and as such all attempts to refute them is intended to suppress his freedom of speech. It goes without saying he will be spending his senior years naked in a cell, fighting rats for a scrap of bread, writing brave quatrains on the wall with a shoelace-tip dipped in rat’s blood, awakened daily at 4 AM with bright lights and the national anthem. Such is life in Chimpsuit McHallihitler’s America. But I press on; this dissent isn’t going to suppress itself. "

. . . .

"They are dying for their own self-respect," he said. "It's a terrible thing to deprive someone of their self-respect. It's like your culture is nothing, your race is nothing, you're nothing."

Personally, I think it’s a worse thing to deprive someone of their own self-life. While I grant that people who go to a wedding party in a Jordon hotel are just asking for it (Insert obligatory come-back about the US mistakenly bombing a northern Iraqi wedding party here) you have to admit that it’s better to be alive, even if you have to deal with VOA satellite transmissions telling you your race is nothing – so worthless, in fact, that it deserves a democracy like Iowans and Britons and Japanese. Oh, we could just nuke your cities and take your oil, but we hate you so much we’re going to stay here and bleed and force your warring factions to hold subcommittee meetings on the constitutional process. It's bored our people to tears; now it's your turn."

. . . .

Vonnegut suggested suicide bombers must feel an "amazing high". He said: "You would know death is going to be painless, so the anticipation - it must be an amazing high."

Mr. Vonnegut – again, a patriot whose dissent is being cruelly ground into the nurturing earth before your eyes – seems to think that suicide bombings literally happen in a vacuum, an unpopulated space where the bombers just pop like soap bubbles. It may be painless for them – alas – but it is not painless for the victims. You’d think such an obvious observation would go without saying, but we are dealing with an intellectual. What Vonnegut calls brave – blowing yourself up so you can fly up to the great Bunny Ranch in the sky and rut with fragrant houris blessed with self-regenerating hymens – does not exactly compare to the bravery required of the survivors.

Anticipating murder for the glory of God must be an amazing high. Most people understand the emotional motivation that animates these people, but don’t spend much time on it, anymore than they wonder about the joy a child rapist feels when he has the kid in the woods. It’s one thing to consider it; it’s another to luxuriate in your considerations. An amazing high. "

More . . .

I don't have the full context here, so it's hard to draw any hard conclusions, but I will note that Vonnegut has in the past been the author of many peices that were satire in the true Swiftian sense.

In any event, the bit about depriving suicide bombers of their self-respect is obviously satire, intentional or not.

Fitzgerald's Deep Throat?

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
You wouldn't be so quick to be hateful if you knew that, IRL, I go by "Binky", would you?

I have a hard time buying this. If you were really a Binky, you would hold a high enough rank in the Administration that you would have self-outed long ago.

Is this true: Ann Coulter claims.....

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
I think you are wrong here. Not sure but pretty sure. In Das Kapital I think Marx pointed out that an intellectual elite would have to represent the workers interest. How else woud a dictatorship of the proletariate work?

I think this is a fair summary of my understanding of Marx:

Marx's "dictatorship of the proletariat"

Before 1875, Marx said little about what in practice would characterize a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” believing that planning in advance the details of a future socialist system constituted the fallacy of "utopian socialism." Thus, Marx used the term very infrequently.

When he did use it, the term "dictatorship" describes control by an entire class, rather than a single sovereign individual (dictator rei gerendae causa), over another class. In this way, according to Marx, the bourgeois state, being a system of class rule, amounts to a 'dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.' In the same sense, when the workers take state power into their hands, they become the new ruling classes. The workers, in other words, rule in their own interest, using the apparatuses of the courts, schools, prisons, and police in a manner required to prevent the bourgeoisie from regrouping and mounting a counterrevolution. Marx expected the victorious workers to be democratic and open in dealings with one another. Theirs is to be a dictatorship of and by, not over, the proletariat.

According to Marx, after the proletariat would take state power, it will aim to eliminate the old social relations of production, and replace these relations by placing the means of production and state apparatus under proletariat control, thus paving the way for the abolition of class distinctions and a classless communist society. He viewed the "dictatorship of the proletariat" as only an intermediate stage, believing that the need for the use of state power of the working class over its enemies would disappear once the classless society had emerged.

Although Marx did not plan out the details of how such a dictatorship would be implemented, earlier in The Civil War in France (1871), his analysis based upon the experience of the Paris Commune of 1871, Marx pointed to the Commune as a model of transition to communism.

Later, Frederick Engels, in his 1891 postscript to the Civil War in France stressed the dismantling of the state apparatus, the decentralization of power and popular democratic control over and management of civil society. The pamphlet praised the democratic features of the Paris Commune, arguing that the working class, once in power, had to "do away with all the old repressive machinery previously used against it itself," and that it must "safeguard itself against its own deputies and officials, by declaring them all, without exception, subject to recall at any moment."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictato...he_proletariat

Quote:

Yes true communism was never achived, because true communism mean not government. But where I think we might disagree is I am pretty sure every communist believed that you need to move through a dicatorship of the proletariate (and had to discard liberal democracy) to get there.

No, I'd agree with that. I think before the October Revolution, many intellectuals believed in a Marxist, populist "dictatorship of the proletariate." I think in the 20s and 30s a few still believed, but many more believed that Lenin was correct, that as an intermediate step centralized power in the form of a true dictatorship was necessary to shepard in the true will of the people, although this was to be a temporary measure (but might last a generation or two).

Quote:

I had heard the corruption refrain about other precommunist government but never Karensky's government.

The Karensky's government was not in power long enough to be corrupt. It might have been a great thing for Russia, had it survived.

Quote:

The only thing Lenin improved was he got out of the war (of course giving up the entire Ukraine to do it) but besides that everything got worse for the Russians after the Bolshevik takeover. Massive famines, outbreak of disease, massive executions, labour camps etc.

I'm not sure this is true. Lenin and Stalin did a lot of bad things. Horrible, terrible things. They also dragged a giant backwards agrarian/serf based economy into the 20th Century. When the Bolshevieks took over, they overthrew (more or less) an essentially feudal society. Less than a generation later they beat the United States into space. Twice.

Also, it is pretty clear that it took a while for news of the horrors of Stalin took a while to filter out of the USSR (which, after all, controlled internal communications and was very good at propaganda), and when they did, people started distancing themselves from communism.

Quote:

I like that: Temporal Chavinism. But these people were promoting the idea of ending democracy. Throwing away the Bill of Rights. Destroying the American system of government. I don't care when it occurred, it was wrong and dangerous. I don't give Washington and Jefferson a walk on Slavery and I don't give these people a walk because there were plenty of people who did not fall for this B.S. If you flirt with throwing away the US constitution and ending civil liberties, don't expect society to welcom you with open arms.

Many people believed that communism represented a new, better way. An opportunity for utopia in contrast to what appeared at the time to many to be a failed experiment in classical democracy. America was (and is) a flawed, unfair society dominated by the rich. A few might have to die, but for many, at least as a hypothetical, that was acceptable.

(Note: These people were wrong. I am sympathetic to some of their thoughts, because at one point I shared at least some of their idealism. But I have seen first hand the effect of communism, or at least Sovietism. I believe the "transitory" period between capitalism and communism is an impermiable barrier against communism. I believe communism, true communism, is impossible, because the workers are no more likely to live and work in harmony than anybody else. America has its flaws, but it is, in my opinion, the greatest nation in the world. It is simply stunning how incredible our country is. The idea of it's violent overthrow (or for that matter, peaceful) is repugnant to me. But Marx spun a good yarn.)

Fitzgerald's Deep Throat?

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
You wouldn't be so quick to be hateful if you knew that, IRL, I go by "Binky", would you?

Binky!

Better than Nuts!?

Fitzgerald's Deep Throat?

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
That would be kind of fascinating in its own right, but I would think that being the traitor within the Bush admin isn't the best way to fund your long-term retirement.

The traitors who leaked Plame will probably end up ok. So will the traitors who misled our country into an unnecessary war.

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Robert Kennedy would have been 80 years old yesterday.

How old would Mary Jo have been?

Penske-style post!TM

Is this true: Ann Coulter claims.....

Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc
I think this is a fair summary of my understanding of Marx:

Marx's "dictatorship of the proletariat"

Before 1875, Marx said little about what in practice would characterize a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” believing that planning in advance the details of a future socialist system constituted the fallacy of "utopian socialism." Thus, Marx used the term very infrequently.

When he did use it, the term "dictatorship" describes control by an entire class, rather than a single sovereign individual (dictator rei gerendae causa), over another class. In this way, according to Marx, the bourgeois state, being a system of class rule, amounts to a 'dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.' In the same sense, when the workers take state power into their hands, they become the new ruling classes. The workers, in other words, rule in their own interest, using the apparatuses of the courts, schools, prisons, and police in a manner required to prevent the bourgeoisie from regrouping and mounting a counterrevolution. Marx expected the victorious workers to be democratic and open in dealings with one another. Theirs is to be a dictatorship of and by, not over, the proletariat.

According to Marx, after the proletariat would take state power, it will aim to eliminate the old social relations of production, and replace these relations by placing the means of production and state apparatus under proletariat control, thus paving the way for the abolition of class distinctions and a classless communist society. He viewed the "dictatorship of the proletariat" as only an intermediate stage, believing that the need for the use of state power of the working class over its enemies would disappear once the classless society had emerged.

Although Marx did not plan out the details of how such a dictatorship would be implemented, earlier in The Civil War in France (1871), his analysis based upon the experience of the Paris Commune of 1871, Marx pointed to the Commune as a model of transition to communism.

Later, Frederick Engels, in his 1891 postscript to the Civil War in France stressed the dismantling of the state apparatus, the decentralization of power and popular democratic control over and management of civil society. The pamphlet praised the democratic features of the Paris Commune, arguing that the working class, once in power, had to "do away with all the old repressive machinery previously used against it itself," and that it must "safeguard itself against its own deputies and officials, by declaring them all, without exception, subject to recall at any moment."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictato...he_proletariat

No, I'd agree with that. I think before the October Revolution, many intellectuals believed in a Marxist, populist "dictatorship of the proletariate." I think in the 20s and 30s a few still believed, but many more believed that Lenin was correct, that as an intermediate step centralized power in the form of a true dictatorship was necessary to shepard in the true will of the people, although this was to be a temporary measure (but might last a generation or two).

The Karensky's government was not in power long enough to be corrupt. It might have been a great thing for Russia, had it survived.

I'm not sure this is true. Lenin and Stalin did a lot of bad things. Horrible, terrible things. They also dragged a giant backwards agrarian/serf based economy into the 20th Century. When the Bolshevieks took over, they overthrew (more or less) an essentially feudal society. Less than a generation later they beat the United States into space. Twice.

Also, it is pretty clear that it took a while for news of the horrors of Stalin took a while to filter out of the USSR (which, after all, controlled internal communications and was very good at propaganda), and when they did, people started distancing themselves from communism.

Many people believed that communism represented a new, better way. An opportunity for utopia in contrast to what appeared at the time to many to be a failed experiment in classical democracy. America was (and is) a flawed, unfair society dominated by the rich. A few might have to die, but for many, at least as a hypothetical, that was acceptable.

(Note: These people were wrong. I am sympathetic to some of their thoughts, because at one point I shared at least some of their idealism. But I have seen first hand the effect of communism, or at least Sovietism. I believe the "transitory" period between capitalism and communism is an impermiable barrier against communism. I believe communism, true communism, is impossible, because the workers are no more likely to live and work in harmony than anybody else. America has its flaws, but it is, in my opinion, the greatest nation in the world. It is simply stunning how incredible our country is. The idea of it's violent overthrow (or for that matter, peaceful) is repugnant to me. But Marx spun a good yarn.)

Thanks for clearing that up. Don't let anyone ever say you can't learn something from this board. What strikes me about this is how just a little oversight on Marx's part caused such a huge disaster. If Marx had just laid out in more detail what the state should be like during the proletariate phase we may have avoided over a hundred million deaths.

This is like the butterfly flapping its wings causing a hurricane on the other side of the world. Marx was probably thinking about detailing how the dictatorship of the proletariate would be structured but then his wife probably told him to empty the trash and he forgot all about it. He probably thought that dictatorship of the proletariate was self explanatory and blew it off.

Laziness lead to mass executions.

I realize it is possible that Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot could have all happened anyway, but I believe if Marx laid out a specific structure of how the government would work during this intemediary phase then it would have been very difficult to ignore it.

Can we get a little more detail on that Vonnegut thing?

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
Can we get a little more detail on that Vonnegut thing?

He is ancient and borderline senile (but I have him in DP so he ain't dying:(), and hates Bush and the war. He said what he said and he meant it.

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
He is ancient and borderline senile (but I have him in DP so he ain't dying:(), and hates Bush and the war. He said what he said and he meant it.

I am a huge Vonnegut fan, but his last book was a fucking rip-off. Not only was it extremely bitter, but unbelieveably repetitive of his previous writings. Almost every cute anecdote in it had been written (by him) previously in one of his works of fiction. I was very disappointed. He's one of my literary heroes. Unfortunately, he may now be senile.

ETA: Do you see how this is done, Republicans? This is how you criticize someone you have supported, even though it pains you to do so. I could have toed the Vonnegut line, but I would not have been truthful with myself had I done so. People with a blind allegiance are crazier than even old man Vonnegut. DOWN WITH THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM!

Quote:

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
ETA: Do you see how this is done, Republicans? This is how you criticize someone you have supported, even though it pains you to do so. I could have toed the Vonnegut line, but I would not have been truthful with myself had I done so. People with a blind allegiance are crazier than even old man Vonnegut. DOWN WITH THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM!

Funny, this is the exact same method I use. Your problem is, you keep waiting for R's to make this same mea culpa with regard to the "Bush lied" BS, and it's not gonna happen, because it's the "Bush lied" that's the lie.

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Funny, this is the exact same method I use. Your problem is, you keep waiting for R's to make this same mea culpa with regard to the "Bush lied" BS, and it's not gonna happen, because it's the "Bush lied" that's the lie.

I really wasn't looking for a substantive response.

Quote:

Oh, I must have missed something in the news lately? When did we find the stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, the reconstituted nuclear arms program, the aerial drones, the mobile weapons labs, and the connections to OBL?

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.

Quote:

Tell it to the turkey. He looks a little nervous about "the pardon."

Bush lied! Marshmallow is fried!

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...d-bush.184.jpg

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Oh, I must have missed something in the news lately? When did we find the stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, the reconstituted nuclear arms program, the aerial drones, the mobile weapons labs, and the connections to OBL?

We didn't. Surprised everyone, eh? Madeline, Billy, Al, Jacques, Francois, Vlad - pretty much the whole crew. What part of "lie" do you need explained?

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
Tell it to the turkey. He looks a little nervous about "the pardon."

Bush lied! Marshmallow is fried!

MY kind of President would look down, say "screw this, I love turkey", and whack off its head.

Quote:

Dude, according to Cheney, your party negligently believed the lies told by Bush and voted for the war. Thus you are being dishonest by questioning it now.

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
Tell it to the turkey. He looks a little nervous about "the pardon."

Bush lied! Marshmallow is fried!

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...d-bush.184.jpg

Bush is soft on turkeys. He pardoned two of them.

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
Tell it to the turkey. He looks a little nervous about "the pardon."

Bush lied! Marshmallow is fried!

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...d-bush.184.jpg

In a spirit of bipartisanship, here's President Truman and a turkey:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/holiday/th...ind-l-398h.jpg

I think that the guy on the right (spanky, perhaps?) is saying "better stuffed with bread than Red."

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
In a spirit of bipartisanship, here's President Truman and a turkey:

Okay, here's Kennedy with one:

http://images.usatoday.com/news/_pho...nedy-kerry.jpg

(Sorry, too easy. I have no self-control.)

Quote:

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
Dude, according to Cheney, your party negligently believed the lies told by Bush and voted for the war. Thus you are being dishonest by questioning it now.

You do realize saying Vonnegut is a good writer means you can't be taken seriously here.

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
We didn't. Surprised everyone, eh? Madeline, Billy, Al, Jacques, Francois, Vlad - pretty much the whole crew. What part of "lie" do you need explained?

The Germans didn't believe it:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...home-headlines

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You do realize saying Vonnegut is a good writer means you can't be taken seriously here.

Not true. I take my kids seriously.

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
We didn't. Surprised everyone, eh? Madeline, Billy, Al, Jacques, Francois, Vlad - pretty much the whole crew. What part of "lie" do you need explained?

May have fooled 'em, but they didn't start a war. The administration routinely ignored information that indicated strongly SH no longer possessed WMDs. Reckless disregard for the truth equals a lie.

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You do realize saying Vonnegut is a good writer means you can't be taken seriously here.

Well, at least people have a reason not to take me seriously. With you, we don't need one. No one listens to old men anyway. You and Bilmore are basically dead. The world has passed you by.

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
May have fooled 'em, but they didn't start a war. The administration routinely ignored information that indicated strongly SH no longer possessed WMDs. Reckless disregard for the truth equals a lie.

Cool. So, acting on incorrect information makes it a lie?

I was right. You don't know what it means.

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...d-bush.184.jpg

Next FEMA head? How much did he contribute to the campaign?

Quote:

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
The Germans didn't believe it:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...home-headlines

how come they supported sanctions against Iraq?

Quote:

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
Well, at least people have a reason not to take me seriously.

"Hi, I'm Bill, and I'm an . . . ." First steps. Always special.

Quote:

With you, we don't need one.

It's good to know your bases, at least.

Quote:

No one listens to old men anyway. You and Bilmore are basically dead. The world has passed you by.

You kneel down to my wheelchair and look me in the EYE when you say that, boy.

Quote:

dim wit. Those countries are all ignoring Iran now. They're afraid to do anything against any Islamic country because they know their immigrants will tear their countries up. If Bush had ignored Sadaam he should have been impeached.

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Cool. So, acting on incorrect information makes it a lie?

I was right. You don't know what it means.

No. He cherrypicked the intelligence to make his case stronger than what it actually was. Same as if you don't point out opposing authority in your next court brief. A president leading a nation to war should at least be held to the same standard for intellectual honesty as a trial attorney. Apparently, you don't think so. That is not cool.

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
"Hi, I'm Bill, and I'm an . . . ." First steps. Always special.

It's good to know your bases, at least.

You kneel down to my wheelchair and look me in the EYE when you say that, boy.

Well done. I was pretty sure you and/or Hank were going to take me seriously. I still have hope for Hank.

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
http://www.whitehouse.gov/holiday/th...ind-l-398h.jpg

I think that the guy on the right (spanky, perhaps?) is saying "better stuffed with bread than Red."

I'm sorry -- the look on that guy's face just cracks me up.

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
how come they supported sanctions against Iraq?

They are a very strict people.

Yes, Tom, I hold the power of life, death, and the freezer compartment.

More presidents and turkeys.

Ford never struck me as a cruel man, but this seems a bit like taunting to me . . . .

http://www.whitehouse.gov/holiday/th...87-15-398h.jpg

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
I'm sorry -- the look on that guy's face just cracks me up.

Is this picture a fisting reference?

Happy Thanksgiving

Presidents and turkeys?

http://www.sacredcowburgers.com/paro...anksgiving.jpg

Penske-style post!TM