| To: zamboz who wrote (276) | 6/7/2009 2:45:36 PM | | From: LTK007 | | | | Before i post a couple OLD OLD rants. i want you to click this link.
i consider Harper's Magazine to be as genuine "semi-rad" magazine around.
This is the oldest continuously published Progressive Magazine in the United States, i subscribe to it's printed edition, and once a month i say "O Boy, Harper's is here!!!"
Harper's and CounterPunch are my to favorite magazines of World Affairs and The Human Condition and of certain great fiction writers(CounterPunch i get via E-Mail)
i get SICK at Obaimites that consider themselves progressives--an utterly FALSE claim on thir part, and yet another sign of the decline going on all around us.
So click this FIRST, then the other stuff:)Max 6/7/2009
The cartoon of Obama's holding a "I Have a Dream" Poster is classic.
Message 25561619
The attempt to use Obama happenstance of his color to get people to leap on his wagon one the mosy disillusioning events of my life regards realizing how utterly EASY it is to con people.
"Love Me i am Lib" retards(and there are MANY) that didn't know me, on hearing me say i am NOT going to vote in this election, period, say "Is it because Obama is black? Are you a racist?"
Well i would say "if i am a racist than Reverend Wright is a Racist, hell if Reverent Wright was running i WOULD vote for him." And they would get nervous norvous, it would be like saying "Malcolm X" to a Liberal in the 60s, their basic reaction was FEAR-- they get that look of "that dangerous Black Man'
Hell Reverend Wright is FAR FAR truer to MLK than Obama, so Obama, Hack Politician DENOUNCES him for daring to say America is an Evil Militaristic Empire.
Listen to MLK's condemnations of the NAM war, and then picture Obama doing the same----PLEESE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i got banned from Poet's thread for daring declare the thread was bogus. i give an example of how the Stepford-Liberals banned you in a twink if you dared speak not nicely of Obama.
i have banned from EVERY RIGHT WING Thread and Every Obama is the Man, thread, on SI.
i find it curious that they ban me as fast as the mos def Right Wing Thread do also ban me
Just another sign this country is going to hell.
a post fragment on LeftWing Porch thread just before i was banned, includes a link to the "Scary Kiss" scene from Invasion of the Body Snatchers(the original IOTBS)
<<Fascinatingly sickening it is witnessing people performing mass lobotomies on themselves.
Now than that Obama has Embraced McCain and Lieberman and Emanuel Rahm, i see the One War Party, coming out its closet that any but self lobotomized can see it(But the self lobotomised is the Vast Majority of all Americans, sadly).
Yes , when on SI, i do feel about as lonely, as lonely as Dr.Miles J.Bennell did when surrounded by PODPEOPLE.
Here, C.C, enjoy this as it shows how i feel about ALL OF YOU that have assassinated the ability To THINK Free, be Free, you all that are of THE HERD.
You will get a thrill out this U-Tube video , getting to know what it is like for people like me, THE OUTRIDERS/THE OUTSIDERS/THE UNTAMED/THE FREE THINKERS.
Witness my misery and be satisfied your are but one in the MASS MULTITUDE in the the body of THE HERD MIND that make life for people like me a lonely journey.
We do, however, network, and thus remind ourselves we are NOT wholely alone just close to it. Max
From 1956--the last 3 minutes of a classic movie.
youtube.com >>
*************************************************************
and this fragment with a link
<<a reminder Obama EMBRACED McCain and Lieberman this week while he BANNED Ex-President Jimmy Carter from the Democratic Convention for committing the apostasy of daring to suggest Israel was an Apartheid State.
That fact you all have NO problem with that tells me who you are
You say "Go Obama" for his McCain your IN!and Carter you are OUT!.
If i were to stay here i would strangle to death in the dark waters of hypocrisy from you 'Love us, we are safe, we are good, we are rattle no cages, we LOVE are new KING, we follow we follow we follow, we are the New American; the Unity of the Far Right and The Center"
As i say this thread should be changed to the Centrist Porch, it being called the Left Wing Porch is a bad joke.
i leave you to your false GAWDS.
i give another link
i doubt you will click
Once you see the post starts with this <<CG, i collect names of Israeli jews that are strongly oppositional to where Israel has been and where it is going, these the jews SHOUTED DOWN by the Fanatic Ultra-Zionist--so when i charge this shouters as Judeo-Nazis, i am talking about a group that captured both the power in Israel and the U.S., and it is this FANATIC group that Obama is EMBRACING, and that is UNACCEPTABLE to me, as a human being.
the rest of the post
Message 25190075
Max>>
********************************************************
So here is where i hide out now, regards Obama as this a world where people like me are can strongly relate to "Dr.Miles Bennell's" situation
|
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: LTK007 who wrote (277) | 6/7/2009 5:17:03 PM | | From: zamboz | | | | Max,
Sadly, your link to the Scary Kiss scene did not work. I tried to search it but did not find it.
I like Jimmy Carter. He does try to tell it like it is. There is a certain honesty and decency to him that did not always work well in the Presidency. He made some hard decisions that angered his own party. Things like removing fixed pricing on natural gas. And he is honest on the Middle East. He says 1 + 1 = 2 and everyone goes nuts. It is PC to say 1 + 1 = 3 or some other nonsense.
Though I am more optimistic about Obama than yourself, I think the guy has to stand on his own. He has to take the criticism when due. Liberals are slowly waking up. If they want their agendas taken care of, they are going to have to stand up and make some noise. And you know what? Obama and Rahm Emmauel are not gonna get their feelings hurt. This is the big leagues.
Rick |
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: LTK007 who wrote (275) | 6/7/2009 6:05:08 PM | | From: Crimson Ghost | | | | Russ Winter and Steve Saville who have been very good this year, both think the stock market now has much more downside risk than upside potential.
Given the big rally we have had I doubt new lows are in store this fall. Still I suspect we will retrace about half the rally with the S&P 500 dropping to the 800 area by August/September. |
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2) |
|
| To: zamboz who wrote (278) | 6/7/2009 6:55:15 PM | | From: LTK007 | | | | It's tragic the copyright thugs have been storming through UTube ripping everything out, even if it is as great a movie of Invasion of The Body Snatchers, all the way back to 1956 version--easily the greatest version..
This movie had many sources on Utube, one source had "The scary kiss" scene--the scene where Kevin McCarthy kisses Dana Wynter and her lips are frozen, cold/ no reaction,and Kevin Screams "they got you!" and she says yes Kevin, come join us--then the mad run into the nearest big city --the trailer is BS promo, the way they promoted this movie--including a huge lie "see as this panic moves from city to city sweeping the nation" RUBBISH--the movie ENDS BEFORE that actually happens--one the great aspects of this movie
It has been remade twice, the second one starring Donald Sutherland starts where the first one ends, Kevin McCarthy is in traffic banging on car windows "Screaming Your Next"--in one of those cars is Donald Sutherland.
So the second version starts where the first version ENDED.
This is a movie i believe is a one that can not ba a NOT see--an absolute MUST SEE, imo.
They do have its original trailer, so you actually get a glimpse of the close-- you get the idea of "Your Next!" scene that Kevin resprises at the open of the 1986 version--very CLEVER, and much appreciate by fans of the original.
i would buy this as a DVD in a twink if i didn't have every pulse of this already movie embedded in my mind---
i do have "my age" shock when i realize this major event in motion pictures is lost in the shadows of history for the young.
The campy and misleading trailer, but worth looking at.
youtube.com
<<Though I am more optimistic about Obama than yourself,>>
i am patient, you will feel the kick in the teeth eventually----you simply don't GRASP "it is all BS, now--you are living in'
But i am SURPRISED this remains your STAND as you have been exposed to so much and you STILL think GOOD OPTIMISTIC THOUGHTS of OBAMA----that in truth is just re-inforcing how POWERFUL the grip is on people REFUSING to think we are HNOT in a one party BS plutocracy.
Rick someday you will realize the seriousness of all this, your learning experience ahead will be painful.Sorry about that but that is how this will play out.
But i learn from you just how just severely people have fallen asleep, when someone as seemingly awake as you, is just missing the point.
You prove to me, this will end BADLY.Max
Rick, hen wil you be next? As Dr. Miles Bennett screams, and you shuffle your feet and say "Ah fiddle-dee-sticks" and like i STILL feel really good about Obama being OUR LEADER your still into the GOODNESS of This Hack POLITICIAN/this vacuous SMOOTHIE. And yes this is a democracy.
You still BELIEVE.
Yes you have got The Faith.
YOU WILL NOT ENJOY THIS BOARD, RICK,not AT ALL.
As i do NOT have your FAITH. Max |
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: LTK007 who wrote (280) | 6/7/2009 8:28:27 PM | | From: zamboz | | | | There could be worse, Max. Like more nutzo Republicans who totally dis science and whose only answer to economic problems is cutting taxes, free trade, deregulation and espousing that government can do nothing good at all. More anti-intellectuals would be living hell. Palin's pastor detected a witch in his home village in Africa. She believes all that crap. McCain is bad enough, but Palin could have been prez. We have to consider things that could have happened. At least there is more of a game in Washington. It is not a nice game. And understand that I have been disappointed. Like I said, progressives are wising up that Obama is not friendly to everything they want. They are going to have to fight for what they want. Libs expected to be hand fed.
Whatever the case, I am interested in the truth. I do not come to these boards to find agreement.
Just added "Body Snatchers" to my Netflix queue. It has been too long since I have seen it. And my daughter and son-in-law will enjoy it. "Ran", Kurosawa's interpretation of King Lear, will have to wait. I am a Hamlet guy anyway. When I finally get to the final act, all will be tragedy. <g> |
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2) |
|
| To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (279) | 6/7/2009 8:50:13 PM | | From: LTK007 | | | | CG, here is an end of a long essay about TheShoah/Holocaust by Tony Judt, he dedicated this essay to Hannah Arendt for her relentless commitment to write "To Disturb The PEACE, to BREAK with Conventional Wisdom, and write things that caused outrage" Such as her essay on the Banality of Evil.
Here Judt dares to write it is time for the Jewish Powers to cease and desist screaming Holocaust CONSTANTLY when ever they think they are under attack, Judt even suggests that The Holocaust be withdrawn as a MANDATORY subject of of study.
He is dedicating this to Hannah Arendt as he is writing this in the NYRB and knows it will cause outrage, you can just imagine how AIPAC reacted to this article--whew!!!
well i will just here give Judt's words without comment, this from the 2/14/2008 NYRB.
i will just add this for those that do not know Tony Judt is Jewish, and once a firmly committed zionist.
and thus give this quote that starts his essay.
"The first work by Hannah Arendt that I read, at the age of sixteen, was Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil.[1] It remains, for me, the emblematic Arendt text. It is not her most philosophical book. It is not always right; and it is decidedly not her most popular piece of writing. I did not even like the book myself when I first read it—I was an ardent young Socialist-Zionist and Arendt's conclusions profoundly disturbed me. But in the years since then I have come to understand that Eichmann in Jerusalem represents Hannah Arendt at her best: attacking head-on a painful topic; dissenting from official wisdom; provoking argument not just among her critics but also and especially among her friends; and above all, disturbing the easy peace of received opinion. It is in memory of Arendt the "disturber of the peace" that I want to offer a few thoughts on a subject which, more than any other, preoccupied her political writings." Tony Judt
**************************************************************
From his eassay The Problem of Evil in Post-Europe
<<But in recent years the relationship between Israel and the Holocaust has changed. Today, when Israel is exposed to international criticism for its mistreatment of Palestinians and its occupation of territory conquered in 1967, its defenders prefer to emphasize the memory of the Holocaust. If you criticize Israel too forcefully, they warn, you will awaken the demons of anti-Semitism; indeed, they suggest, robust criticism of Israel doesn't just arouse anti-Semitism. It is anti-Semitism. And with anti-Semitism the route forward—or back—is open: to 1938, to Kristallnacht, and from there to Treblinka and Auschwitz. If you want to know where it leads, they say, you have only to visit Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, the Holocaust Museum in Washington, or any number of memorials and museums across Europe.
I understand the emotions behind such claims. But the claims themselves are extraordinarily dangerous. When people chide me and others for criticizing Israel too forcefully, lest we rouse the ghosts of prejudice, I tell them that they have the problem exactly the wrong way around. It is just such a taboo that may itself stimulate anti-Semitism. For some years now I have visited colleges and high schools in the US and elsewhere, lecturing on postwar European history and the memory of the Shoah. I also teach these topics in my university. And I can report on my findings.
Students today do not need to be reminded of the genocide of the Jews, the historical consequences of anti-Semitism, or the problem of evil. They know all about these—in ways their parents never did. And that is as it should be. But I have been struck lately by the frequency with which new questions are surfacing: "Why do we focus so on the Holocaust?" "Why is it illegal [in certain countries] to deny the Holocaust but not other genocides?" "Is the threat of anti-Semitism not exaggerated?" And, increasingly, "Doesn't Israel use the Holocaust as an excuse?" I do not recall hearing those questions in the past.
My fear is that two things have happened. By emphasizing the historical uniqueness of the Holocaust while at the same time invoking it constantly with reference to contemporary affairs, we have confused young people. And by shouting "anti-Semitism" every time someone attacks Israel or defends the Palestinians, we are breeding cynics. For the truth is that Israel today is not in existential danger. And Jews today here in the West face no threats or prejudices remotely comparable to those of the past—or comparable to contemporary prejudices against other minorities.
Imagine the following exercise: Would you feel safe, accepted, welcome today as a Muslim or an "illegal immigrant" in the US? As a "Paki" in parts of England? A Moroccan in Holland? A beur in France? A black in Switzerland? An "alien" in Denmark? A Romanian in Italy? A Gypsy anywhere in Europe? Or would you not feel safer, more integrated, more accepted as a Jew? I think we all know the answer. In many of these countries—Holland, France, the US, not to mention Germany—the local Jewish minority is prominently represented in business, the media, and the arts. In none of them are Jews stigmatized, threatened, or excluded.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there is a threat that should concern Jews—and everyone else—it comes from a different direction. We have attached the memory of the Holocaust so firmly to the defense of a single country—Israel—that we are in danger of provincializing its moral significance. Yes, the problem of evil in the last century, to invoke Arendt once again, took the form of a German attempt to exterminate Jews. But it is not just about Germans and it is not just about Jews. It is not even just about Europe, though it happened there. The problem of evil—of totalitarian evil, or genocidal evil—is a universal problem. But if it is manipulated to local advantage, what will then happen (what is, I believe, already happening) is that those who stand at some distance from the memory of the European crime—because they are not Europeans, or because they are too young to remember why it matters—will not understand how that memory relates to them and they will stop listening when we try to explain.
In short, the Holocaust may lose its universal resonance. We must hope that this will not be the case and we need to find a way to preserve the core lesson that the Shoah really can teach: the ease with which people—a whole people—can be defamed, dehumanized, and destroyed. But we shall get nowhere unless we recognize that this lesson could indeed be questioned, or forgotten: the trouble with lessons, as the Gryphon observed, is that they really do lessen from day to day. If you do not believe me, go beyond the developed West and ask what lessons Auschwitz teaches. The responses are not very reassuring.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no easy answer to this problem. What seems obvious to West Europeans today is still opaque to many East Europeans, just as it was to West Europeans themselves forty years ago. Moral admonitions from Auschwitz that loom huge on the memory screen of Europeans are quite invisible to Asians or Africans. And, perhaps above all, what seems self-evident to people of my generation is going to make diminishing sense to our children and grandchildren. Can we preserve a European past that is now fading from memory into history? Are we not doomed to lose it, if only in part?
Maybe all our museums and memorials and obligatory school trips today are not a sign that we are ready to remember but an indication that we feel we have done our penance and can now begin to let go and forget, leaving the stones to remember for us. I don't know: the last time I visited Berlin's Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, bored schoolchildren on an obligatory outing were playing hide-and-seek among the stones. What I do know is that if history is to do its proper job, preserving forever the evidence of past crimes and everything else, it is best left alone. When we ransack the past for political profit—selecting the bits that can serve our purposes and recruiting history to teach opportunistic moral lessons—we get bad morality and bad history.
Meanwhile, we should all of us perhaps take care when we speak of the problem of evil. For there is more than one sort of banality. There is the notorious banality of which Arendt spoke—the unsettling, normal, neighborly, everyday evil in humans. But there is another banality: the banality of overuse—the flattening, desensitizing effect of seeing or saying or thinking the same thing too many times until we have numbed our audience and rendered them immune to the evil we are describing. And that is the banality—or "banalization"—that we face today.
After 1945 our parents' generation set aside the problem of evil because—for them—it contained too much meaning. The generation that will follow us is in danger of setting the problem aside because it now contains too little meaning. How can we prevent this? How, in other words, can we ensure that the problem of evil remains the fundamental question for intellectual life, and not just in Europe? I don't know the answer but I am pretty sure that it is the right question. It is the question Hannah Arendt asked sixty years ago and I believe she would still ask it today. That ends the Tony Judt esay.
Notes
[1] This article is adapted from a lecture delivered in Bremen, Germany, on November 30, 2007, on the occasion of the award to Tony Judt of the 2007 Hannah Arendt Prize.
[2] "Nightmare and Flight," Partisan Review, Vol. 12, No. 2 (1945), reprinted in Essays in Understanding, 1930–1954, edited by Jerome Kohn (Harcourt Brace, 1994), pp. 133–135.
[3] For a harrowing instance, see Jan Gross, Neighbors: The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne, Poland (Princeton University Press, 2001).
[4] For a fuller discussion of this shift in mood, see the epilogue ("From the House of the Dead") in my Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945 (Penguin, 2005).
[5] To be sure, Catholic thinkers have not shared this reluctance to engage with the dilemma of evil: see, for example, Leszek Kolakowski's essays "The Devil in History" and "Leibniz and Job: The Metaphysics of Evil and the Experience of Evil," both recently republished with other essays by Kolakowski in My Correct Views on Everything (St. Augustine's, 2005; discussed in The New York Review, September 21, 2006). But in the metaphysical confrontation memorably portrayed by Thomas Mann, we moderns have typically opted for Settembrini over Naphta.
[6] Essays in Understanding, pp. 271–272.
[7] See Idith Zertal, Israel's Holocaust and the Politics of Nationhood, translated by Chaya Galai (Cambridge University Press, 2005), especially Chapter 1, "The Sacrificed and the Sanctified.">> |
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: zamboz who wrote (281) | 6/7/2009 9:15:26 PM | | From: LTK007 | | | | If you understand me AT ALL you would already know i consider these words as a dangerous COP OUT << There could be worse, Max>>
i have argued with strength, and with some , what is obvious to me mathmatical logic, that Lesser of two Evils as a point of making a choice is AS DANGEROUS A CONVENTIONAL WISDOM amongst the human race.
You are are one those people, and i DISDAIN that "Logic"---it is not logic, it manifest wimpitude of mind to believe such SH-T.
i now quote what i just put in my last post to CG.
The words of Tony Judt.
"But in the years since then I have come to understand that Eichmann in Jerusalem represents Hannah Arendt at her best: attacking head-on a painful topic; dissenting from official wisdom; provoking argument not just among her critics but also and especially among her friends; and above all, disturbing the easy peace of received opinion. It is in memory of Arendt the "disturber of the peace" that I want to offer a few thoughts on a subject which, more than any other, preoccupied her political writings."
i will NOT ever allow myself, because i like person, EVER lessen my words
Such as it "it manifest wimpitude of mind to believe such SH-T."
i will NOT lower myself again to give the mathmatic logic to why i am, as the last time i did i realized had had written that incredibly was not grasped by certain others as i was MOCKED.
It was the mocking of me by people that WANT to remain STUPID.
A dedicated LAZINESS of mind.
It should be OBVIOUS the choosing of the lesser of two evils leads directly, just more slowly to The Greater Evil.
i myself, of myself, actually can NOT comprehend minds that don't get this, but it is obvious the VAST VAST majority can't grasp this--so welcome friend, you have plenty of company in your "it could be worse', you are ONE WITH THE VAST MAJORITY.
Now go back to the President Obama thread, and be a weenie wimp wimp "Love me i am a Liberal" and leave this RAD alone.
Max
|
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: zamboz who wrote (281) | 6/8/2009 1:52:24 AM | | From: LTK007 | | | | Rick i should state that i got an e-mail that supports your view.
i will not identify this poster.
i end up saying i am placing you and this person on ignore, and say why.
Ignore does not mean BANNED.
<<You obviously agree wirh Rick.
i have thought about this DEEPLY, years, i need not reconsider.
i will go to my grave refusing to agree with the choosing the lesser of two evils argument as rational.i call it Sophie's Choice. Sophie was always comprising , did not have fixed values, in the end she got the choice of choosing which of her children dies.
One MUST NOT vote if both candidates are counter to one's deepest values.
By voting the lesser of two evils is to support the continuual degeneration of the human race.
i retract NOTHING
If this country had a committed group to refuse to vate when there is no real choice could lead to a revolution.
But Bing/Farrell in that Terminator/Twitter post presents the reality, such that this revolution to greater values will NEVER happen.
"10. You'll forget ... you can fight back, but the will is gone
Bing ends gently: "We just forgot all this stuff. Stuff? What stuff?" ... fade to black."
Your post was a superflously polite way of saying i am "full of shit" Believe me i don't need coffee and to reconsider my post to Rick
So, O.K., we have an understanding.
You like living by LOWER STANDARDS than i.That's your choice.
Like Rick, you will learn in time, what your support of "This Democracy" and thus your support of this plutocracy will end.
We are heading for a bad end.
i must demonstrate the depth of my conviction by placing both and Rick on ignore.
Peace, Max
p.s. the putting on Ignore is the ONLY way i can get the message out, i have deep conviction that the good hearted OPTIMIST can't can't handle, as they still have The Faith in Political Man.
Why communicate??? There is no reason, there is an ABYSS between us, why waste words in debate?????
i will later dig up a brilliant article from Harper's describing how utterly fallacious the idea we have democracy in the U.S. and depicts this country is but a process of a diseased political system.>>
John Foster Wallace view that in the end the POTUS becomes a Madison Avenue product is at hand.>>
|
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: zamboz who wrote (285) | 6/8/2009 9:15:43 AM | | From: zamboz | | | | That said about lesser of evil arguments, it is important to recognize what has not happened. Taleb says as much. What has not happened: a new Dark Age where government gets populated by those who believe the earth is only 6,000 years old. We were close to that. The Justice Department was being staffed by those people who graduated from Pat Robertson's "law school."
Another thing that did not happen. Wall Street did NOT get Social Security like they wanted. You can bet it all would have been plowed into those AAA CDOs. Maybe the party would still be going. I mention this because some argue that the Wall Street oligarchy has complete control. They do not. |
| | Obama Watch | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| |
