How could this be true. Hydrogen and helium are what causes blimps to explode not methane and sulfur.

yuk yuk yuk.. oops sorry.. I shouldn't laugh at such tragedy... that was soo insensitve of me.

Someone who is a better computerist than me needs to do this idea:

Could someone create a donation website that can accept funds for the casulties of this campaign. I think we need a way to give hollywood's money to these people. Instead of watching their movies and buying thier books and and albums...let's send them a real message and give the $6 to these guys from now until the "ceasefire" at least. Hey! we are all watching the drama in real time on TV now anyways-- who needs them?

And the award for biggest *#&%)@$ goes to....

Can't believe that guy.

Really enjoyed Steve Martin's comment afterward though.

Thanks for such a great site Scott. Makes my workday a little more enjoyable.

Now I wouldn't exactly call MM a big fat ugly slob, a social zero, and a total idiot, but, well, he is! Hope he's enjoying his day in the sun. He has always been a lousy, no talent comedian, but he stumbled into a crowd of left wing dimo's when pandering to the anti-American scum and the gun control crowd, and they seem to have accepted him. Well, at least he's working again. He is now making enough money to get a bath and a haircut, and is able to get on some higher quality drugs which seems to have helped him lose a few pounds. You have to be pretty pathetic to get BOOed by the Hollywood crowd, need I say more?

Interesting, rec'd by email.... date/origin unknown

Who's Smarter?
by Cindy Osborne

The Hollywood group is at it again. Holding anti-war rallies, screaming about the Bush Administration, running ads in major newspapers, defaming the President and his Cabinet every chance they get, to anyone and everyone who will listen. They publicly defile them and call them names like "stupid," "morons," and "idiots." Jessica Lange went so far as to tell a crowd in Spain that she hates President Bush and is embarrassed to be an American.

So, just how ignorant are these people who are running the country?
Let's look at the biographies of these "stupid," "ignorant," "moronic"
leaders, and then at the celebrities who are castigating them:

President George W. Bush: Received a Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School. He served as an F-102 pilot for the Texas Air National Guard. He began his career in the oil and gas business in Midland in 1975 and worked in the energy industry until 1986. He was elected Governor on November 8, 1994, with 53.5 percent of the vote. In a historic reelection victory, he became the first Texas Governor to be elected to consecutive four-year terms on November 3, 1998, winning 68.6 percent of the vote. In 1998 Governor Bush won 49 percent of the Hispanic vote, 27 percent of the African-American vote, 27 percent of Democrats and 65 percent of women. He won more Texas counties, 240 of 254, than any modern Republican other that Richard Nixon in 1972 and is the first Republican gubernatorial candidate to win the heavily Hispanic and Democratic border counties of El Paso, Cameron and Hidalgo. (Someone began circulating a false story about his I.Q. being lower than any other President. If you believed it, you might want to go to URBANLEGENDS.COM and see the truth.)

Vice President Dick Cheney earned a B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966, both in political science. Two years later, he won an American Political Science Association congressional fellowship. One of Vice President Cheney's primary duties is to share with individuals, members of Congress and foreign leaders, President Bush's vision to strengthen our economy, secure our homeland and win the War on Terrorism. In his official role as President of the Senate, Vice President Cheney regularly goes to Capitol Hill to meet with Senators and members of the House of Representatives to work on the Administration's legislative goals. In his travels as Vice President, he has seen first hand the great demands the war on terrorism is placing on the men and women of our military, and he is proud of the tremendous job they are doing for the United States of America.

Secretary of State Colin Powell was educated in the New York City public schools, graduating from the City College of New York (CCNY), where he earned a Bachelor's Degree in geology. He also participated in ROTC at CCNY and received a commission as an Army second lieutenant upon graduation in June 1958. His further academic achievements include a Master of Business Administration Degree from George Washington University. Secretary Powell is the recipient of numerous U.S. and foreign military awards and decorations. Secretary Powell's civilian awards include two Presidential Medals of Freedom, the President's Citizens Medal, the Congressional Gold Medal, the Secretary of State Distinguished Service Medal, and the Secretary of Energy Distinguished Service Medal. Several schools and other institutions have been named in his honor and he holds honorary degrees from universities and colleges across the country.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld: attended Princeton University on Scholarship (AB, 1954) and served in the U.S. Navy (1954-57) as a Naval aviator; Congressional Assistant to Rep. Robert Griffin (R-MI), 1957-59; U.S. Representative, Illinois, 1962-69; Assistant to the President, Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, Director of the Cost of Living Council, 1969-74; U.S. Ambassador to NATO, 1973-74; head of Presidential Transition Team, 1974; Assistant to the President, Director of White House Office of Operations, White House Chief of Staff, 1974-77; Secretary of Defense, 1975-77

Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge was raised in a working class family in veterans' public housing in Erie. He earned a scholarship to Harvard, graduating with honors in 1967. After his first year at The Dickinson School of Law, he was drafted into the U.S. Army, where he served as an infantry staff sergeant in Vietnam, earning the Bronze Star for Valor. After returning to Pennsylvania, he earned his Law Degree and was in private practice before becoming Assistant District Attorney in Erie County. He was elected to Congress in 1982. He was the first enlisted Vietnam combat veteran elected to the U.S. House, and was overwhelmingly reelected six times.

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice earned her Bachelor's Degree in Political Science, Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her Master's from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in
1981.
(Note: Rice enrolled at the University of Denver at the age of 15, graduating at 19 with a Bachelor's Degree in Political Science (Cum Laude). She earned a Master's Degree at the University of Notre Dame and a Doctorate from the University of Denver's Graduate School of International Studies. Both of her advanced degrees are also in Political Science.)

She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been awarded Honorary Doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, and the University of Notre Dame in 1995.
At Stanford, she has been a member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, a Senior Fellow of the Institute for International Studies, and a Fellow (by courtesy) of the Hoover Institution. Her books include Germany Unified and Europe Transformed (1995) with Philip Zelikow, The Gorbachev Era (1986) with Alexander Dallin, and Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army (1984). She also has written numerous articles on Soviet and East European foreign and defense policy, and has addressed audiences in settings ranging from the U.S. Ambassador's Residence in Moscow to the Commonwealth Club to the 1992 and 2000 Republican National Conventions. From 1989 through March 1991, the period of German reunification and the final days of the Soviet Union, she served in the Bush Administration as Director, and then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council, and a Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. In 1986, while an international affairs fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, she served as Special Assistant to the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1997, she served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender -- Integrated Training in the Military. She was a member of the boards of directors for the Chevron Corporation, the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the University of Notre Dame, the International Advisory Council of J.P. Morgan and the San Francisco Symphony Board of Governors. She was a Founding Board member of the Center for a New Generation, an educational support fund for schools in East Palo Alto and East Menlo Park, California and was Vice President of the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula. In addition, her past board service has encompassed such organizations as Transamerica Corporation, Hewlett Packard, the Carnegie Corporation, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Rand Corporation, the National Council for Soviet and East European Studies, the Mid-Peninsula Urban Coalition and KQED, public broadcasting for San Francisco. Born November 14, 1954 in Birmingham, Alabama, she earned her bachelor's degree in political science, cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her Master's from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981. She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been awarded Honorary Doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, and the University of Notre Dame in 1995. She resides in Washington, D.C.

So who are these celebrities? What is their education? What is their experience in affairs of State or in National Security? While I will defend to the death their right to express their opinions, I think that if they are going to call into question the intelligence of our leaders, we should also have all the facts on their educations and background:

Barbra Streisand: Completed high school
Career: Singing and acting

Cher: Dropped out of school in 9th grade.
Career: Singing and acting

Martin Sheen Flunked exam to enter University of Dayton.
Career: Acting

Jessica Lange Dropped out college mid-freshman year.
Career: Acting

Alec Baldwin Dropped out of George Washington U. after scandal Career: Acting

Julia Roberts Completed high school
Career: Acting

Sean Penn Completed High school
Career: Acting

Susan Sarandon Degree in Drama from Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.
Career: Acting

Ed Asner Completed High school
Career: Acting

George Clooney Dropped out of University of Kentucky
Career: Acting

Michael Moore Dropped out first year University of Michigan.
Career: Movie Director

Sarah Jessica Parker: Completed High School
Career: Acting

Jennifer Anniston: Completed High School
Career: Acting

Mike Farrell Completed High school
Career: Acting

Janeane Garofelo Dropped out of College.
Career: Stand up comedienne

Larry Hagman Attended Bard College for one year.
Career: Acting

While comparing the education and experience of these two groups, we should also remember that President Bush and his cabinet are briefed daily, even hourly, on the War on Terror and threats to our security. They are privy to information gathered around the world concerning the Middle East, the threats to America, the intentions of terrorists and terrorist-supporting governments. They are in constant communication with the CIA, the FBI, Interpol, NATO, The United Nations, our own military, and that of our allies around the world. We cannot simply believe that we have full knowledge of the threats because we watch CNN!! We cannot believe that we are in any way as informed as our leaders.

These celebrities have no intelligence-gathering agents, no fact-finding groups, no insight into the minds of those who would destroy our country. They only have a deep seated hatred for all things Republican. By nature, and no one knows quite why, the Hollywood elitists detest Conservative views and anything that supports or uplifts the United States of America. The silence was deafening from the Left when Bill Clinton bombed a pharmaceutical factory outside of Khartoum, or when he attacked the Bosnian Serbs in 1995 and 1999. He bombed Serbia itself to get Slobodan Milosevic out of Kosovo, and not a single peace rally was held. When our Rangers were ambushed in Somalia and 18 young American lives were lost, not a peep was heard from Hollywood. Yet now, after our nation has been attacked on its own soil, after 3,000 Americans were killed by freedom-hating terrorists while going about their routine lives, they want to hold rallies against the war. Why the change? Because an honest, God-fearing Republican sits in the White House.

Another irony is that in 1987, when Ronald Reagan was in office, the Hollywood group aligned themselves with disarmament groups like SANE, FREEZE and PEACE ACTION, urging our own government to disarm and freeze the manufacturing of any further nuclear weapons, in order to promote world peace. It is curious that now, even after we have heard all the evidence that Saddam Hussein has chemical, biological and is very close to obtaining nuclear weapons, their is no cry from this group for HIM to disarm. They believe we should leave him alone in his quest for these weapons of mass destruction, even though it is certain that these deadly weapons will eventually be used against us in our own cities.

So why the hype out of Hollywood? Could these celebrities believe that since they draw such astronomical salaries, they are entitled to also determine the course of our Nation? That they can make viable decisions concerning war and peace? Did Michael Moore have the backing of the Nation when he recently thanked France, on our behalf, for being a "good enough friend to tell us we were wrong"? I know for certain he was not speaking for me. Does Sean Penn fancy himself a Diplomat, in going to Iraq when we are just weeks away from war? Does he believe that his High School Diploma gives him the knowledge (and the right) to go to a country that is controlled by a maniacal dictator, and speak on behalf of the American people? Or is it the fact that he pulls in more money per year than the average American worker will see in a lifetime? Does his bank account give him clout?

The ultimate irony is that many of these celebrities have made a shambles of their own lives, with drug abuse, alcoholism, numerous marriages and divorces, scrapes with the law, publicized temper tantrums, etc. How dare they pretend to know what is best for an entire nation! What is even more bizarre is how many people in this country will listen and accept their views, simply because they liked them in a certain movie, or have fond memories of an old television sitcom!

It is time for us, as citizens of the United States, to educate ourselves about the world around us. If future generations are going to enjoy the freedoms that our forefathers bequeathed us, if they are ever to know peace in their own country and their world, to live without fear of terrorism striking in their own cities, we must assure that this nation remains strong. We must make certain that those who would destroy us are made aware of the severe consequences that will befall them.

Yes, it is a wonderful dream to sit down with dictators and terrorists and join hands, singing Cumbaya and talking of world peace. But it is not real. We did not stop Adolf Hitler from taking over the entire continent of Europe by simply talking to him. We sent our best and brightest, with the strength and determination that this Country is known for, and defeated the Nazi regime. President John F. Kennedy did not stop the Soviet ships from unloading their nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 with mere words. He stopped them with action, and threat of immediate war if the ships did not turn around. We did not end the Cold War with conferences. It ended with the strong belief of President Ronald Reagan... PEACE through STRENGTH. HOLLYWOOD - WHO NEEDS 'EM!

Amen sister.. But I still like the movies, we just have to ignore them otherwise..

AHA - Amen. Brilliantly put.

Only thing I can possibly add is that the "why do they hate us crowd" ignores the obvious answer.

When the only clue to American culture they get is from the movies and TV, people of the EU, Asia and the Middle East believe that all of America is as immoral as this bunch. They see Jennifer Anniston on Freinds and think all American women sleep with their friends and their friends friends. They see Sean Penn as representative of American men and think they are all half-baked drug addicts. Hollywood is doing a great job of portraying us as a greedy, spoiled rotten, permiscuous, drug addicted country.

We need to get the message across, somehow, that we are, for the most part, hard-working families with high moral values. Unfortunately, we can't look to Hollywood for cooperation in this effort.

By the way, I think deep down the rest of the crowd wanted to applaud Moore, but knew they would take a beating at the box-office. And they need to line their pockets somehow.

He is entitled to his opionion, but he did prove that he is a moron. I agree with what was said above, to be booed by the Hollywood crowd really makes you a chump. He isn't going to be enjoying all the hate-mail and phone calls. Oh, and by saying that the reasons for this war are made up just shows how stupid these people really are (and he is being proven wrong already and we haven't entered baghdad yet)!

Hey, these people have the same right to speak out as my plumber and my barber, and when they get as much sense as my plumber and my barber, I'll listen.

Great post, Scott.

AMEN TWICE but very informative and well said.
also don't watch their movies and see how fast they go away. To Scott great to have you back and I hope the signifigance of Lakehurst is understood that was a long time ago.

oohhh a blimp ! thanks joe.. i missed that connection. duh!

AHA,

That was a wonderful post....!

I enjoy movies,music and television to some extent.

Many of these "Hollywood" celebrities have taken the title of "Artist" because it feels more dignified than the title of "Entertainer". In my mind they are simply Entertainers, not Artists.... Very few of these people will produce anything of artistic weight that will hold up over the course of time. They produce mass consumption entertainment for the purpose of making a living.

They are free to have their opinions, they are free to voice their opinions.

I'm free to not enjoy what they say, thus I will not spend my money on anything bearing their names, until I find their product to be Entertaining.

Radio.

As an avid movie lover I have not missed an Oscar telecast in at least 12 years. However I made a conscious decision to avoid them last night because I couldn't stand the thought of enduring four hours of anti-war ingorance.

I have to wonder, what has happened in the last 50 years that we have gone from Jimmy Stewart proudly enlisting to serve his country to the stars of today voicing uninformed and frequently idiotic opinions? I have only ever observed Hollywood's WWII attitude through documentaries and the like, but it would seem as though the stars of yesteryear understood their responsibility to the country to keep spirits lifted as much as possible and to support and entertain our troops in whatever way they could. This is in stark contrast to the stars of today who feel that their fame and recognition give them an open forum to say whatever they want as loudly as they want. It's not even so much that I disagree with the points they're trying to make (although I do) it's that they show no evidence of fully understanding the situation at hand, or doing any research to back up what they have to say.

Yes, people are free in this country to say and believe what they want, thanks in no small part to the brave men and women in Iraq right now, and those who came before them, however a multi-million dollar paycheck should not give anyone the right to be so much more vocal than the rest of us could hope to be, and especially when their opinions are so uninformed as to have very little merit.

Of course I am speaking in generalities here, and I'm sure there are exceptions in Hollywood as everywhere, however I cannot help but feel that stars should be sticking to what they do best and entertaining us in this time of great stress rather than boring us with their arrogance and self-importance.

OK, rant over. Thanks for listening. I just hate feeling like I'm betraying my country by going to the movies but that's how these stars make me feel.

Ohh the pomposity, and all the useful idiots.... Oh my God, the ratings tragedy, it's just terrible.

Thanks Scott - great marksmanship

Ah, so history does repeat? Certainly, MM should stick to his forte of domestic issues. However, given that a lot of people won't realize the significance of the location for this hot air puncture ( a procedure that should be mandatory for most Hollywood celebrities ) the first thing I thought of while reading this post was Columbia... Here's to hoping they glean some useful information from the data recorder (Columbia, that is, gleaning useful information from MM school of foreign policy would be idiotic at best).

LPB

Scott, again you are right on.
AHA, good post, you have brought the truth to us.
When I think of Michael Moore the only thing that comes to mind is....nothing,blank, emptiness,nonentity,ZERO. When you lie to your self, and to believe those lies, this is a sign of a very sick mind.

These people are encouraged as part of their professional profile to "adopt a cause." It's part of the act, created to promote their publicity...not the other way about. That is the big fat lie. They don't do this for the cause, they use the cause to get publicity. If Sean Pencilhead, Madonna(about as opposite as she can be from the real), MM (myopic moron) , Babs, Mickey Mouse Moore, Marxist el-Sheen, ad nausum are the real representatives of the US and her culture... we should probably be diverting the bombers to NYC, LA, and Miami... Take America back by our Military Might and let the minorities and Muslims start over fresh. (But they aren't...I have to add for the benefit of our few readers with no sense of humor)

It doesn't matter to these celebrities if they are right or wrong or "in between". As long as they can get in front of a camera with it. They will change which ever way the popularity wind blows anyway. The huge incomes and "success American Style" is almost a guilt trip for them. In their own quiet screwed up unfulfilled "Michael Jackson" lives and lonely desperate moments... they know they aren't any smarter. Sometimes even worse off.. or less to show for it all.

The irony to me is this: This "great Satan" perverse image that causes all this so called, anti-American sentiment etc... is actually more their fault by far than the conservative, religious, hardworking, free thinking people who they are always at odds with. It's not Islam or AlQueda, or some ME Tyrant, that is going to destroy the infrastructure of the American Family and comfortable lifestyle, it is this Leftist, Un-Godly, Self-gratifying, "morally liberated," psychobabble growing socialism, that will destroy the very things they use to do it.

If we don't stop patronizing them...and voting for them, it will be our own fault. The really scary thing to me.. is that there so many of these "hanging chads" who can't even read a ballot (or punch it correctly), let alone articulate any real issues without a rubber stamp. They don't have a clue what America is really about. It's tragic that they damn near won the election. As a nation, we should be ashamed to the core that was even close. This does not bode well for the future of America at all.

Aha: That was masterful! You have presented a factual, well-reasoned, logical, and accurate explanation of the reality of the Hollywood syndrome. Sadly, these folks would not have (1) the patience to read the entire piece (2) the intelligence to understand what it says about them, and (3) the desire to correct themselves and their beliefs in the face of all the evidence indicating their error.
When I talk with these types of liberals, I ask them two questions: First, Where were you when President Clinton was moving into Haiti, Kosovo, Serbia, Somalia, and missile attacking Iraq? and, Second, what are your sources of information about all the events upon which you have formed these opinions?
We know where President Bush and his Cabinet get their information. Sattelite fotos, human resources in place in Iraq, defector information, overflight fotos, etc. Just exactly how do Sean Penn, Mike Farrell, and company know all the thing that they profess to know?

Phrog... I live in FLA and let me tell ya, it was a horrifying two weeks... I vowed to get enough voters to vote so that in 2004 there would be NO chance of farce that took center stage.

Really, voter turnout is disgraceful. If the DummyCrats were to get elected in 2004, and we, the sane quiet majority let it happen by not voting in big enough numbers, then that loss will be on US, not them. Let's all encourage everyone to actually VOTE.

Hydrogen burns, Helium does not. Methane burns quite well.

Thank you Joseph, but it was not my piece. I rec'd it on my email and c/p'd it here in its entirety for everyone's edification. I added no comments of my own. It certainly didn't need any embellishment!

I, too, wonder if Slick Willy gave his Hollywood sycophants access to intelligence briefings (isn't that contradictory in this context?) and classified briefings, or allowed Hollywood to make any of his policy decisions (just for s**ts and giggles, you understand) and that is why so many of them now feel they have the inside track on foreign and domestic policy?
It does follow, that if Libs/Hollywood could have cared less about Slick's sleaziness and treason, how could they be expected to care about tortured children in Iraq???

Michael 'Moore', (not his real name, got nickname from eating at, all-you-can-eat diners, and when being thrown out, grunted, 'MORE'), after losing some friends after, 'going off' at last nights Oscar awards, has went in a different direction for support. He has joined the 'Save the Whales Foundation', Moore stated, "This will protect me as well as my fat significant other!" He also said, "I was very disappointed to receive this little statue, I was sure when I heard 'Oscar', there would be bologna involved!" His new book, (Fat, Stupid, Liberal, White Blimps), will be out, as soon as he can find someone dumb enough to back him! OH,---The Humanity!!!!

When hearing this story, President Bush stated, "I hope this is an isolated event, I had no idea that a 'huge bag' filled with hydrogen could be so volitle! We may have to rethink this hydro-powered car idea!"

DARTH! I am sorry for confusing anyone about Verizon. I was referring to Susan Sarandon's use of the peace sign, and trying to make a joke, that she was advertising for Verizon! I have Verizon and am satisfied with them, ---for now. I don't think anyone wants Sarandon, or Moore hawking their products!

A brief response to the piece by Cindy Osborne.

The comparison between the educational backgrounds of Hollywood celebrities and those of the Bush administration is entirely specious.

Many people in the administration have formidable intellectual powers, but there is a difference between intellect and wisdom. Anyone who appears to be acting without the latter is likely to be dismissed as a 'moron', regardless of their past academic achievements. Academic excellence is no safeguard against being misled by a personal agenda into a course of action that is entirely dumb. For example, despite Isaac Newton's genius, he frittered away years pursuing alchemy, an entirely pointless cause.

There are many, many academic heavyeights that are anti-war. These people are very well informed, but are not constrained by the considerations of trying to stay in office. Chalmers Johnson is one example.As for daily updates from the CIA, well some might argue that "CIA intelligence", given their recent blunders, is an oxymoron

Celebrities, uneducated as they are, call it how they see it. Along with most other people on the planet, they see the war on Iraq as another example of an incredibly arrogant and cynical US foreign policy. It's the administration that is out of step with world opinion.

Incidentally, even a casual inpection of Bush's career reveals that he has no history of any real interest in anything more cerebral than baseball. Despite enormous personal charisma and a great way with people, he has no credibility as a thinker. His places at Yale and Harvard were nepotism at it's worst.

Lastly, the comment about CNN is ironic in the extreme. "We cannot simply believe that we have full knowledge of the threats because we watch CNN!". Indeed. The threats in question being those from the US administration. You will never gain a balanced picture from the US media. Curiously, people in the US believe their mass media to be liberal and anti-republican. They are the ONLY people to believe this. Every other western nation sees the US media as the meekest, most lily-livered, most unquestioning corporate leeches to call themselves journalists. They really only rarely question the fundamentals of US policy.

In matters of foreign policy, the administration is increasingly replacing effective long term thinking with schoolyard bullying. This war has lost the US so many friends abroad and citizens will be reaping the consequences of this for years to come. I think the US is a great country. I have visited many times , I know how warm the people are and I honestly fear for them. Sadam was no threat to US citizens and his supposed links with organised terrorism seem to be based on the flimsiest of evidence. There are close to a billion Moslems and it is absolutely clear that the vast majority believe this war to be immoral and unjustified. Not to mention the increasing numbers of non-Moslem people with an axe to grind.That's a scarily large pool of potential opponents.

Tannhauser: if NOTHING else was on the table, that I see NO protesting of Saddam Hussein - rather, Bush-bashing only - renders the "anti-war" folks' argument specious and incredible.

Tannhauser,
Actually many liberals/democrats consider Fox News as Republican. The only reason for that is that they take on anyone and everyone and expose all for what they are.
I don't know where you are from but we had to witness terrorism show its ugly head. I personally helped in the recovery effort and saw the carnage and I don't wish to see it again. If we leave dictators like Saddam in place he WILL give up the WMD to those who will use them on the USA. His cohorts may not be the best at covert ops but they have tried things before (ie the attempted assasination at Bust 41).

The majority of muslims are going to be against the war. For some reason they are willing to protect a fellow muslim even though they bring evil on everyone around them. It is like me saying that someone shoulnd't be arrested because he is a christian like me, it is nonsense.

I will feel safer when we have those weapons under our control.

Michael Moore - the Methane Zeppelin of Hollywood. Great post, Scott.

Hollywood is entitled to their opinions, but they are over-exposed and represent only a leftist fringe of American thinking.

The first time they find a conservative actor, you watch, he'll wind up as president.

Oh, wait, that already happened once... Bruce Willis in 2008!

"there is a difference between intellect and wisdom"

And the Hollywood leftists have neither. Sad, sad, sad...

Tannhauser: in regards to "the war has lost the US so many friends abroad..."

My answer to that is to ask you to check the dates on all the back-stabbing our "friends" have been serving up to us. All the information about the surreptitious anti-American activity by our friends that is now coming to light began long before Bush was in office, never mind waging war with a butcher. What else can one think except that Bush's real offense was prosecuting a war THAT WOULD EXPOSE THE MISCREANTS calling themselves our friends. With "friends" like that.... well, you know how that saying ends.
So. It stands to reason that we could not lose friends we didn't have...
You are evidently from another country. Chances are, your country receives massive aid and trade packages from us along with most other nations in this world.
Do you and your fellow non-Americans even GET how hurt and angry Americans are that we feed and protect you and then you spit on us and burn our Flag?
Do you see Americans burning Flags of other nations the way you always see our Flags being burned?
Do you see Americans dancing in the streets with glee when another nation suffers some kind of catastrophe?
Who does the world call on for protection? America. Then it jeers our military might as arrogrant and imperialistic.
Who does the world call on for relief from famine? Then it claps and laughs when our troops protecting food caravans are dragged through the streets by the thugs who caused the famine in the first place.
Who does the world call on for assistance in a natural disaster? Does anyone call Iraq? Or France?
We in the US work our butts off; we are good, moral people with big hearts and it is OUR young men and women who put their lives on the line again and again - FOR OTHERS. We always have and always will because that's just the kinda people we are. We have a strangely unique view in this world - a view which allows us to empathize with the poor and oppressed ELSEWHERE.
Call us naive, or a nation of boobs, or arrogant - just DON'T call us anymore when you need help.
If all you out there in other countries are now afraid of us... you have reason to be. Because believe you me - bottom line - your underhanded perfidy has caught up with you all and we're done taking ... slaps from your right hand while your left hand is digging in our pockets.

Ive had it up to here (holds hand flat under chin) with the likes of you circus midgets!

Scotty, beam me up!

Tanny
Are we watching the same reality program? Sadam is not a threat to US citizens? If nothing else, late in January, he told the world he had agents in this country and they were armed. Do you think they majically appeared after he knew we had designs on stopping him. He had people here to use them as a threat. How long were the 9/11 sleepers here? Some of US don't take kindly to our framilies, friends and neighbors having a threat like this hanging over our heads. Please don't immulate Frenchie and only use only ancient history and parchment for your intellect. If you have any common sense, watch, listen, and feel the pulse on these current events. And by the way, if it is true we have lost so many friends, [forget] em. Let's impose an isolationist attitude. No more US tax dollars for foreign aid, no more food programs, no more third world communication programs, no more alien college programs, we could on and on and on and on. Get a life Tanny. Obviously you don't like ours so make sure you keep yours

Tannhauser

WHO, IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS HOLY, WOULD YOU BELIEVE REGARDING A THREAT TO YOUR OWN COUNTRY?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Saddam, OBL or your own leader???? Or would you take a poll of other countries first (none of whom have your best interests in mind) to see what they said?????

O MI GOD - I am soooo angry. I am going to go try and regain my composure.

>>"he frittered away years pursuing alchemy, an entirely pointless cause."
This Only illustrates your ignorance ... not his!

>>"It's the administration that is out of step with world opinion."
Finally... and it's about damn time someone woke up! Just becuase you have a mob... doesn't make you right pro or con.. When does it become anarchy?

>>"he has no credibility as a thinker"
At least he beat out the other moron...that's politics I guess. Snivel on! Take comfort you have intellectual freinds... like Hanging Chad.

>>be liberal and anti-republican ... most lily-livered, most unquestioning corporate leeches to call themselves journalists..
The convervatives and "Bush Supporters" share your "world opion" here. Good point.

We have no fear of decent religious Muslims, even into their billions....contratry to popular opinonin. I'ts this insidious socialism that your ilk espouses and perpetrates encroachingly upon all of us that is the real threat. That and the militant fanatical savage fundamentalist terrorists who's religion is Evil.. not Islam... of which there are NOT billions. ONE of these perverts like Saddam Hussein is ONE too many for the world.

People didn't catch it after 9/11.... I kept thinking "doesn't anyone GET IT"

Over and over we heard... "Islam is a peaceful religion....preaches against hurting of innocent people..."

Well, FYI... Islam also preaches that if not a Muslim, then one is automatically an Infidel, and an Infidel is a demon personified, according to Islam. In fact, according to Islam, an Infidel is the absolute worst enemy of Islam and it is the duty of all Muslims to practice jihad against Infidels and if he does not, he won't get his x-number of virgins in paradise etc....

So, my friends, Islam was able to spin....

Please excuse. After re-reading Tanny's rant, I must include one more shot. So many of you liberals try to demonize this administration. Where were you when the last administration bombed an aspirin factory for cripes sakes? How about bombing a civilian caravan pulled by farm tractors in Bosnia? (oops) How about Haiti? MY hunting club could have removed Baby from Haiti and there's only 20 of us. The leader of the last administration deployed our military more times than the last 5 presidents combined. Check it out. I would use the word Clinton in my rant more often, but it makes me physically ill to do so.

AHA is loaded for BEAR!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm gonna print out yer 8:12 post and nail it to my bathroom mirror!!!

WHERE THE bleep IS TANNY??? I'M NOT DONE YELLING YET!

I hear the Oscars are going to be banned from now on, as a "weapon of mass distraction."

Oh dear! I missed it all. I'm so ignorant. I don't know these people. Michael Moore, never heard of him. How shall I ever survive? Jennifer Annisomething??? WHO???

How can I be so ignorant? Because the media industry said if I didn't like the programing I could turn it off. So I did. What bliss. No more stupid jokes and canned laughs, no more absurd movies, no more knownothing newsheads. I have no TV, haven't had one for a long time, don't go to movies. Ahh...the bliss of not watching and listening to these morons. Freedom from Hollywood, oh its great!

AHA,
Typical liberal. They pull their heads back in their hole when the going gets tough. They're afraid to get it cut off.

MIKE MOORE
THE GUY WHO DRESSED UP AS A CHICKEN,FOR HIS SHORT LIVED TV SHOW..AS WITH HIS THINKING CAPACITY
(SHORT)AND IN HIS CHICKEN OUTFIT STOOD IN FRONT OF CORPORATE BUILDING'S AND YELL AT THE SECURITY GUARDS TO LET HIM IN
*************************
RIGHT I SHOULD LISTEN TO YOU MOORE..SORRY I DIDN'T SEE THE PARADE OF BIN LADEN SUPPORTERS AND ACTORS AGAINST AMERICA

AS FOR THE ABOVE POST
Posted by: Tannhauser on March 24, 2003 07:27 PM
************************
WHEN YOU CAN FIND AN ISSUE THAT
( IS NOT A HYPOTHETICAL OPINION )
PLEASE BY ALL MEANS LET US KNOW...
WISDOM DOES NOT SAVE LIVES IN THE BATTLEFIELD
THE PRESIDENTS LEVEL OF EDUCATION IS OF NO RELEVANCE,
HE STOOD UP TO THE STATUS QUO
HE PUT HIS FOOT DOWN,
FORCING THE WORLD
TO PUT UP OR SHUT UP,
THE COLE,
DAR ES SALAAM EMBASSY,
COBART TOWERS
9-11
SADDAMS WMD
AL-QUAEDA
ARE A THREAT TO AMERICA AND MY CHILDREN'S CHILDREN
TO ALL OF YOU PHONY ANTI WAR PEOPLE
WHEN YOU HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN SPEAK UP
FOR NOW SHUT UP

"out of step with world opinion"

Why would we listen to world opinion? Personally, I wouldn't want my country to be as crappy as most countries in the world. Why would I listen to people that live in those crappy countries? That we are out of step with world opinion should be a sign that we're on the right track. Fortunately, we're not out of step with world fact. Opinion isn't relevant.

Well, I sure feel like I could send some heads rolling!!!! It could be called "Bowling for Brains".

I swear! if I hear one more sanctimonious prig expound on what WE should be doing to curry favor with all the little pissant, s****hole countries... GOD! It's bad enough we have to hear this drivel from fellow Americans!

*%^%>>@!

Great response AHA to tranny's psuedo intellectual post.

I didn't watch the A.Awards, but heard about it on the radio. No one has mentioned the most shocking event in the show. Namely, Roman Polanski winning the "Best Director" award.

For those of you who have forgotten or just don't know, Polanski's been living in FRANCE for the last 25 years, in exile.

His crime? He fled prosecution for child-rape. That's right, 25 years ago he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl.

The facts are not in dispute and the crowd wildly cheered when he won the award. A better insight into this crowd you could not ask for.

SUPPORT TEXT FOR:
AHA

Well, FYI... Islam also preaches that if not a Muslim, Posted by: AHA on March 24, 2003 09:06 PM
********************
From The Nobal Qur'an
AL-MAIDAH verse 51
O ye who believe, take not Jews and Christians for friends, they are friends one to another, He among you who taketh them for friends is one of them, LO-Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk

AL-TAUBAH verse 30
Jews and Christians fight against them, how perverse they are
************************
DISCLAIMER:
I will state this is only 2 paragraphs out of volumes of verse, it is up to you to read the entire text, I cast no distinction on any faith God is God,

AMERICA IS OUT OF STEP.... WITH THE WHOLE WORLD

YES

AMERICA IS OUT OF STEP

WAY OUT

AND IN FRONT OF THE WORLD
THE WORLD IS TRAILING IN OUR DUST

Is there NO integrity? Hollywood rewards child-molesters and lefties reward that lounge-lizard Slick with multi-million dollar book deals and speaking fees. To top it off, these feeble-brained cretins WILL NOT raise a protest against someone with the avowed wish to kill us, preferring instead to villify their own leader because they'd rather have a Democrat than Republican as their President.

To be honest, I would rather Forrest Gump, with his internal moral compass pointing at TRUE north, in the White House than ever, ever see the likes of that scoundrel and his trash wife again. God BLESS the class act that is the First Lady now.

Another thing that gets my goat... how many times have we heard the press refer to our President as MR. Bush. Last week, the anchor said President Clinton and MR. Bush in the same sentence!!! How twisted is that?

TEXT - Thank you for your assistance.

TO:
Posted by: Tannhauser

Sadam was no threat to US citizens and his supposed links with organised terrorism seem to be based on the flimsiest of evidence.
_______________________________
The next time you see Saddam ask him who he was with on July 9, 1999 in Salmon Pak Iraq, then ask him why they were training None Iraqi citizens to hijack passenger planes...

Geoffrey,

I saw when Roman Polanski won the award; there was no "wild cheering." There was a very nervous half-assed applause. It was as if they didn't know what to do--confused by their own desire to honor artistry while at the same time distracted by Polanski's shame. They were, as a whole, as gutless and conflicted as you'd expect.

AHA
NO PROBLEM UNITED WE STAND ...

as jp chants and chants :-D
UNITED WE STAND..... UNITED WE STAND

AHA - I think I love you.

Well, I'm off to bed - screaming at imbeciles always exhausts me.

Tuning Spork (SP?),

As I said I did not see the awards, but I did hear on the radio the entire announcement of the best director award by Harrison Ford. It sure sounded like cheering to me, but there I go again, believing my lyin ears... I did NOT however hear Harrison retching in disgust as he lost his lunch/dinner...I also heard NO protests.

I must confess, AFTER I posted, I ran a search on google to confirm my memory. Meant to do that before I posted, but forgot, in my anger at the hollywood crowd.

Just a little digging and I found this article with the whole sorry history of Polanski's shame; http://www.vachss.com/mission/roman_polanski.html

THIS IS FROM MY HOME TOWN OCEANSIDE CALIFORNIA
San Diego County Loses 6 Soldiers in Iraq

1st Marine Division at Camp Pendleton Oceanside California, in San Diego County, were killed Friday during fighting in southern Iraq. One died leading his infantry platoon in a firefight to secure an oil pumping station, The other died in fighting near the port of Umm Qasr. The war in Iraq has repeatedly hit home in the San Diego area, where six of the first Americans killed during the conflict were either stationed or had lived.

Oceanside is my home town Mr.Moore these 6 souls are more American than you or any of your freedom of disgrace speech will ever be, the time to speak out has long past, Mr.Moore you self serving disgusting vile display is unforgivable, you had no right what so ever to use the platform for your views and I know that each of the actors were repeatedly warned not to (prior restraint) ..I say to you as a citizen of Oceanside may God forgive you ..as you slip into obscurity nothing you said was of any value other than to your own self serving political party hate..all of you Hollywood scam artist are as transparent as glass,
You have NO right to protest NONE, ZERO and your hiding behind the cover of the constitution is not a right but a privilege ..a captive audience being propagandized, or better yet heres one , you cant yell fire in a crowded theater,

How about a little legal support,to enforce my viewpoint.. Terminiello vs Chicago 337 U.S.1,69 YOU HAD NO RIGHT OR JUSTIFIED REASON other than self serving politics and your misguided point of view all directed at The President
Moore you are a fraud, a blood sucking leech that has no value what so ever than the joke that you are ..and America told you how they feel

"A radio announcer, broadcasting the event for the CBC,..."

Scott, your satire gets better all the time!

Ha...Ha...I am still laughing. Liked it Scott. I just hope I don't have nightmares about him exploding.The grease fires must have gone on for hours.....

That Mikhail Moore and his Hollywood friends cherish free spech goes without saying.
That they would be afraid to actually go and fight for this freedom is not lost on any of us.
That hundreds of thousands of young men and women volunteered to serve and if necessary fight and maybe(hopefully not!) die to protect this freedom for them is not lost on anyone except Mikhail Moore and his Hollywood friends.
Common decency would suggest that the least they could do is to actually thank our brave military personnel for their sacrifice in trying to defend the very freedom these people hide behind.
I guess Mikhail is to busy railing against his own personal fictions to actually see the relevant facts.

Who the "Academy" picks for their "winners" is as much sick wacko politics as who they love and hate in the national elections. The whole d**n sham scam has always been disgusting to me... same goes for the oscars... if they had any real talent they would probably jealosly dis it...until they learned to suck up properly.

I have to admit...I am nuaseated...the smell of burnt putrid pig fat makes me wretch.

MICHAEL MOORE :

YOU AND YOUR FAMILY ARE A --DISGRACE-- TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH WHICH YOU HAD JUST ABUSED CAME FROM THE --SACRIFICE AND BLOOD-- OF AMERICAN SOLDIERS.

THERES NO WAY YOU CAN JUSTIFY YOUR SPEECH.

YOU AND YOUR KIND ARE --OPPORTUNIST AND SHAMELESS.

GOD SPEED TO ALL AMERICAN AND COALITION SOLDIERS !

GOD BLESS AMERICA !

The world must be turned upside down when the best rapper is caucasian, the best golfer african-american, France accuses the US of being arrogant and the Germans refuse going to war...

If someone has already said this, excuse me, but, I heard a lot of people in defense of the audience at the Oscars, saying, "They were booing Michael Moore, maybe they are not so bad after all!" My answer is, B.S. Most of these people are bad Americans, BUT, they are not stupid! They have seen lately, what the MAJORITY think of the Dixie Chicks, Daschle, John Cougar Mellonhead, etc, and have enough brain cells left, (barely), to want their extravagant lifestyles to continue!
As for Tannhauser, this is an except from his rant/babble:

Many people in the administration have formidable intellectual powers, but there is a difference between intellect and wisdom. Anyone who appears to be acting without the latter is likely to be dismissed as a 'moron', regardless of their past academic achievements. Academic excellence is no safeguard against being misled by a personal agenda into a course of action that is entirely dumb. For example, despite Isaac Newton's genius, he frittered away years pursuing alchemy, an entirely pointless cause.

Thanks Tanny, Remove the first line about 'Many people in the administration', and insert 'MOST College Professors', and you have a good point!

Someone on the radio (Rush?) pointed out that it was the "little" people in the audience, the ones upstairs whose heads (but not faces) you catch a glimpse of as the camera tracks and pans when they go to commercial, that were booing. Did you notice that the "stars" (many of whom haven't done much on- or off-camera in awhile), when the camera was SO close that you could count their well-trimmed nosehairs, held back and just gave M&M; bemused smirks? Think they could smell the scent of "box office poison"? When in doubt, they just sit and grin like the attention-craving critters they are. Thank God actor Jimmy Stewart, ball player Ted Williams, and all their fellows were better than that. (By the way, why was Mickey Rooney shoved upstairs while people who were already candidates for "Where Are They Now?" down in the first 10 rows?)

Anyhow, the whole thing reminded me of a Benny Hill bit. Benny's agent told him that people were booing him. "They weren't all booing", Benny replied. "Some were cheering!" The agent shot back with, "They were cheering the BOOING!" When I heard about it the next day, I sure was.

Why is it that the only cohesive, witty and well-crafted speech was given by Peter O-Toole? Hollywood used to pride itself on it's "class". Apparently this no longer exists as the stars of today do not posess any. Many of them want to be accepted as ordinary everyday citizens, however they do not shop in the grocery store with me or take their stuff to the laundromat or wait on line for anything. They more closely resemble aliens than ordinary people. I too, watch the awards every year and turned it off on many ocassions this time expecially when the blimp himself spoke (well maybe he goes to McDonalds a lot, but other than that, he is not your average citizen). Congrats to Adrien Brody who thanked a member of the armed forces, the least he could do.

"even a casual inpection of Bush's career reveals that he has no history of any real interest in anything more cerebral than baseball."

"His places at Yale and Harvard were nepotism at it's worst."

YEP !

Frenchy!!! And to think, we thought you didn't like us any more!!! Once you started getting proven wrong everywhere you kinda disappeared, pal!!!! What's wrong?!?!?! Don't leave us just because you're wrong! Have some guts, learn from your mistakes, see where you went wrong, and correct your misguided thinking. We know you can do it, Frenchy...Or maybe that's just wishful thinking when considering the likes of you.

Dusty.

Frenchman
You old parchment skinned archivist of ancient history. I, for one, have missed reading your blatherings. I thought maybe one of the regulars on this site finally caused you to keep your head in your liberal hole forever. In auditing President Bush's career, all you and your liberal kind can come up with is nepotism in his education. Frenchy, that's beneath even you. He obviously learned more than than using state police to line up his women. He hasn't taken the easy way to economic surplus by taxing the populus into oblivion. He stands tall in the beliefs this country was founded upon. When the going gets tough, he doesn't turn and run with a white flag tied to his butt like a tail. Sorry, a couple of these are more common sense than nepotism in education and I know you libs don't understand common sense. Frenchy, lets make a list of pros and cons on the last 2 leaders of our country and see which one looks the best.

Frenchman! You are back. We missed you. Thanks for the enlightened statement about Bush. So much for philosophy, youíve reduced yourself to a Bush-Basher.

I can see why you hate GWB so much. With his welfare reform record in TX, how can one be expected to keep people dependent on government? And whatís the deal with these tax cuts? Doesnít he know that by returning $ to the people who earned it through hard work, the government will have less to waste on social programs that are diluted through a huge burocracy?

And with his increased state funding, restoring local control to public schools, improving accountability and fostering competition, the state of public education vastly improved during his term in TX. We donít want our kids getting an education uninfluenced by the liberal academic elite. That would be disastrous! And whatís with the school choice thingÖ people canít make choices. We need the government to do that.

And you are right. What does owning a baseball team teach you about how to organization, private and public relations and finance? Nothing. Neither does 11 years as an energy company executive.

And serving as a F-102 pilot for the Texas Air National Guard shows he knows nothing about the military.

And his poll-driven decisions show he is just interested in his political power, not being a true leader in the face of the most disastrous attack on US soil in history. Heís not interested in national security.

And forget his cabinet. Their intel gathering facilities are third-world and useless. They donít know any more than Barbara Streisand (who has excellent operatives and high-tech satellite imagery to base her intel on).

Once again, you hit the nail in your own coffin, I mean, on the head.

Bobby -

nice post - it's like shooting fish in a barrel, no?

Oui Oui, Tom.

A couple of observations: If Michael Moore really blew up, wouldn't that be called the mother****r of all bombs? Why doesn't the Target corporation sponsor human shields? They could offer a free T-shirt with their logo for each person volunteering to stand in front of our troops or in front of an Israeli bulldozer. I would even contribute to pay for the printing costs. Nice to see Frenchie back, I was almost having withdrawal symptoms from not seeing enough stupid a$$ ramblings.

I have just returned from work and read the various comments and responses to my post. I am amazed at how personally some people take a difference in opinion.

The ad hominem attacks are of no interest. However, I would suggest to Geoffrey that if you are going to imply that someone is a pseudo-intellectual, it is probably best if you spell it correctly. And to Phrog Poet -the response to the Isaac Newton analogy is absolutely bizarre. What part of it are you contesting?

I note also that a contrary viewpoint to the majority is characterised on this board as a 'rant' or as a 'rant/babble'. Curious - I can't see why I am 'ranting', but others with different views are not.

There were a couple of points I would like to reply to.

Some wrote that the US should not be concerned with world opinion. World opinion is not important, who cares what a bunch of s***hole/crappy countries think, and so on. I think that it is that view, more than anything else, that has resulted in the U.S. being a target of terrorists. Why do terrorists want to attack the US and not other wealthy, western (or eastern) countries? Is it because the US is so conspicuously wealthy; is it just jealousy?

I think it is almost certainly because the US has an economic and foreign policy that effectively gives out exactly the message you espoused right here: "We are the USA, we will do as we please, when we please and we have so much military firepower that it really doesn't matter what you think. We will serve US interests and if that is at your expense, well boo-hoo".

I agree with Justin that everything would feel a lot safer if the WMD were under US control (this is purely from a selfish point of view as it would take something extreme to make the US attack my country with WMD). But it just isn't feasible to control WMD in that way - they can pop up anywhere. Some require fairly low-tech operations to wreak havoc. Attacking Iraq is like standing on top of an ant-hill, armed with a barbell, killing as many of those little suckers as you can. All you will do ultimately is get bitten more often.

An alternative approach would be to try and figure out why you are being attacked and then adjust your policies accordingly. For example, even the most conservative amongst this community would have to admit that the USA has supported many immoral regimes and undermined others. The methods used have killed many innocent civilians. So, for many citizens in an ever-growing list of countries, the US is seen as a country that supports acts of terrorism when it suits their purposes.

In response to AHA, I can understand the feeling that the US supports everyone else and gets spat at in response. In some cases, it is certainly true that the US has been called upon for military assistance and has supplied that. I'll leave it to others to list instances of this. But like any other nation, it has only done so with its own interests at the forefront. The whole aid to other countries thing is a bit of a sham, except for contributions from private citizens. Trade concessions are usually tied to a political agenda. Japan would be a good example: in exchange for keeping a controlling interest in the area, Japan was allowed access to US markets. Except that they started to do much better than was expected and it turns out that they have been supported at the expense of US manufacturing.

Aid arrangements with developing countries are invariably designed to control and manipulate their economies. I refer you to Chomsky's "Deterring Democracy" for details. He is kind of strident (and very left wing), and he doesn't always get all the details right, but the general thrust of his arguments is correct.

Anyway, enough already. The isolationist attitude you propose has already happened to some extent. As long as you write off the entire world other than the US as being a bunch of loser countries, that's probably good for everyone else.Though clearly unworthy of your selfless beneficence, you can be sure that few will feel hurt by its withdrawal. It's a shame, because at times in the past, the U.S. has been a real POLITICAL force, without trying to bomb its way to respect.

Good luck in your friendless world. Sincerely: I hope this isn't the terrible blunder in policy that I think it is.

Question:
It is common knowledge that terrorists have targeted the Eiffel Tower for destruction.
Why would that be?
Just curious...

Tannhauser -

What you may be experiencing is a reaction that sometimes occurs when statements are made containing inordinate amounts of dogma, political spin, unsubstantiated attacks and illogical opinions masquerading as "facts". Can you provide some factual basis for your points of view? One of the standard debate tactics is to put forth an idea backed by facts and sources other than discredited hacks, tied together in a lightly amusing yet somewhat biting manner. Try it sometime.

Noam Chomsky? You are kidding, aren't you?

Tannhauser,

While I respect your opinion, it doesn't in my opinion hold any water.

Lets take the issue of wisdom. How does one measure wisdom?

Actors and singers live in a world of words, however, most of the words they use are written by others and interpreted by directors. Over time, actors become better users of language as a result of their exposure to a wider variety of the use of language. They are simply repeating what they've heard, in a context that makes them interact more efficiently with their peers. The ability to formulate intelligent sounding statements and political views, is in my opinion more the result of proximity to a world of words rather than inherent intelligence levels of those spouting such verbose wonderments.

Ms. Osbornes statement points out very clearly, realities that can't be ignored.

1. Intelligence isn't the same as education.
2. Widsom comes from experience.

I would propose to you that while one can be intelligent without being well educated and vise-versa there are well educated people that aren't the among the most intelligent; there is a statistical significance to the "average" intelligence of the well educated being higher than the "average" intelligence of the poorly educated. The process of obtaining an "education" requires a certain level of intelligence, thus one that obtains a higher education is more prone to be intelligent than one that is unable to obtain a higher education.

Hollywood entertainers may be intelligent, but the suggestion is that they aren't that intelligent, as they are not in general as well educated as the leaders of this country. Money and a pulpit do not equate to intelligence. Intelligence rises to the top by default.

Acting and singing is not a difficult profession intellectually speaking. It requires certain basic skills, certain looks and some plain dumb luck to be successful. It does not require an extended education to be successful.

I would wager that experienced and successful actors are quite "wise" in the way's of acting as a direct result of their experience in the business. It is highly unlikely that they have any better insight into politics and military strategy than the average clerk at your local Walmart.

I would wager that experienced and successful politicians, advisors, administrators and public servant executives are probably more wise as a result of their experience in their profession.

I personally feel safer trusting the fate of this country to the opinions of our administration than to the opinions of hollywood actors and singers. In general, the members of our administration are more intelligent, better educated and have greater experience in what they do for a living. If I were to decide to become an actor or singer, I would most certainly rather hear the opinion of a successful actor or singer on what would be the best course of action.

Radio

is there an educational watermark that once crossed allows you to forget humanity?

Tom

I'm not sure I understand your first sentence. Just being dumb, I guess.

In some cases, I would be unable to back up my views with facts. For example, I can't give you any poll that tells you how many people globally view the US as a country that sponsors terrorism. But as someone who lives outside of the US, I can tell you that it's the sort of view that is widely held. I hear it all the time and I see it reported all the time. I suspect that you get insulated from this to some extent unless you go out of your way to look at non-mainstream media.

In many cases, though, yes, I could put to the board plenty of evidence to back up some of my opinions. It's readily available. I could paste in links from websites or whatever.

But there seems little point. I don't think this is a debating site, is it? I may be doing you a disservice here because I don't know anything about the board and I haven't bothered to read a lot of the topics. It seems more like a support group for republicans and/or pro-war people. Isn't the point of the site just to bolster each other and bask in the communal glow fueled by mutual hatred of your opponents? Not that I'm necessarily knocking that.

I stumbled across this board (I followed a link from a hi-fi site, of all things), read a couple of comments and added my own because I couldn't resist it. Of course I would like you to consider an alternative viewpoint, but to be honest, to be more thorough about it seems like a lot of effort for little reward. Isn't the reason that you are here because you have already made up your mind?

I'm only here to pass my humble Norwegian opinion, nothing more. I think I'll move on and let the pack savage my previous post to its heart's content.

Cheerio,

Tannhauser

Norway? Your country wasn't even mentioned by any terrorists.

My mother's father and grandparents came from Poland. (Grandma was born here). At the time, Poland was swallowed up by Russia and Germany. It disappeared some time in the past and didn't reemerge as a seperate country until after WWI, and for all intents and purposes it was AGAIN swallowed whole by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union until the Iron Curtain collapsed during the presidency of George H.W. Bush.

Hopefully there are some Poles out there who can take Tannhauser aside and explain a thing or two about what it means to fight off tyranny. Perhaps someone who has relatives serving in Iraq.

By the way, if you haven't heard the news, the reason why Michael Moore's "friends" (France, and by extension, Russia) didn't want the USA to intercede in Iraq is because they were afraid of what would be found: frilly French panties hanging on Saddam's bedpost, and a naked Russian hiding in the closet.

And WE are sponsoring terrorism?????

>>is there an educational watermark that once crossed allows you to forget humanity?

Excellent point! Humanity isn't a question of education, as humanity existed long before higher education. It's a question of intelligence and the basic human desire to survive.

Educated persons have no higher right to survive than lower educated persons. It's the intelligence of people that determines their right to survive. Quite simply stated, the more intelligent you are, the more likely you are to survive. This goes back to my previous statement. I'll trust the more intelligent to lead me rather than the less intelligent.

Tanny
Backed yourself into a corner on the Japan thing, eh what? Should have deleted and used uh..uh...well I guess there aren't any examples that make your point.

Like many people who've rarely traveled with any extent, your knowledge of foreign lands is confined to what you see on your local TV or read in print/electronic media. This shows clearly in your post. Like many who are so educated, your imagined authority to speak to a nation on behalf of a world is mind-numbingly absurd. Re-read what you've posted sir!

Of course, you are quite welcome to post. But when you make statements such as:

"Curiously, people in the US believe their mass media to be liberal and anti-republican. They are the ONLY people to believe this. Every other western nation sees the US media as the meekest, most lily-livered, most unquestioning corporate leeches to call themselves journalists. They really only rarely question the fundamentals of US policy."

The duty of a free press, sir, is to report, truthfully and factually - not to operate as a mouthpiece for any political agenda. Nations without our long history of a free press may not grasp this. Your strident call for American media to be more like Pravda circa 1973 is noted. As for as your arrogance to claim speak for "every other western nation" - did you mean the governments or the people - just which aspect of every nation are you the spokesman for? As all viewers know, CNN has a distinct liberal bias. It's subtle, and probably lost on foreigners who don't see the subtleties of US politics any more then the average American could grasp theirs. And the British media is no farther left then CNN - sorry, I've viewed them all.

I will accept you calling America "arrogant". You are clearly an expert on arrogance.

I haven't the time to pick you completely apart. But will agree you are right in complaining of the "rant" label. I read you as calm. Misinformed, but quite calm.

Many people in the administration have formidable intellectual powers, but there is a difference between intellect and wisdom.

And Hollywood blabbermouths have none of either.

Americans hear over and over again how the US is considered with disdain the world over.

This sentiment begs the questions
1. How many Americans leave to become a citizen of another country?
2. How long are the lines at the overseas American Embassies for foreign nationals to enter the US with the intention of becoming naturalized citizens?
3. And further, how many foreign nationals literally risk their lives in their effort to come to the US?

Sorry, Tanny, I just can't reconcile the answers to these questions with your assertion that the US deserves the disdain it receives internationally. I don't dispute that it does receive it, I dispute that it deserves it.

The last I'll say about "Der Mooredenberg"

I checked into M&M;'s winning "documentary" yesterday at hollywoodhalfwits.com yesterday. He hacked and spliced a speech by National Rifle Association president Charlton Heston to make it seem as if he and the organization of which I am a proud member are a bunch of arrogant and insensitive sonsofguns. (He also changed history to imply that the NRA was started by the Ku Klux Klan.) He staged several scenes, such as the one showing him getting a gun directly from a bank as a premium for opening an account. (The promotion was real, but the bank didn't actually hand out guns. They were to be picked up at licensed dealers after backround checks.) He even made it seem like you can buy ammo right off the shelf at Wal-Mart of Canada, no questions asked. (As I understand it, you at least need to present identification.)

Someone ought to seriously consider petitioning the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to review the decision to classify "Bolwing for Columbine" as a documentary. "Low-budget, low-brow, direct-to-video-style humor" would be a better choice. Put it on the shelf between "The Olson Sisters" and "Dorf on Golf".

Y'know, M&M; has a real problem with the USA. He's a supporter of the Green Party (which, if it were honest, would call itself the Red Party.) He's one of the few people I know of who thinks that the Los Angeles police all got together to frame a jealous ex-husband with a history of domestic violence for the murder of his ex-wife and an acquaitance who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, even after he made so many mistakes that even Tooty and Muldoon could have solved the crime.

It all makes me wish General Motors hadn't closed the Flint, Michigan plant. M&M; would be attaching doors to Cavaliers or Monte Carlos right now, where he belongs.

I am an American who has lived overseas for the last 15 years. Tanny makes the same mistake that lot's of American expats and others overseas make...he assumes that what other countries think about us should be really important to us. It is only mildly important...very distantly behind many other issues related to our own national interests.

The single biggest piece of evidence that Tanny doesn't know what he's talking about: his implication that baseball isn't very "cerebral"!

Someone in the administration better check to see if Germany sent Moore over here as a weapon of mass destruction. The last time a huge blimp full of gas exploded live on air it was from that country.

Also, the celebrities or Hollywood crowd were not the people booing Moore. The boos came from the seats in the balcony where the more average Americans were. The celebs mostly sat on their hands.

After reading Tanny's latest rants, a couple of things jump out at me. He is no doubt, WELL educated, but as HE says, being an intellectual, doesn't mean you have COMMON sense, as he proves by being here on a satire site, to spew his propaganda! The other thing is, as I pointed out earlier, most (so-called) educated people of his ilk, are either, College Professors, or LEFT Wing, radical Politicans. BTW, I for one, did NOT respect the opinions of Paul Wellstone, and I have NO PROBLEM saying it! He was a, 'stuck in the 60's' hippie/yippie radical, and although I don't wish ANYONE to die, think our Country is MUCH better off without him in politics!

One difference between Dem/Libs, and Republicans. While Dem/Libs STILL cry day and night, that Bush, stole the Presidency, (which is a lie), you don't hear Republicans even mentioning, how Frank Lautenburg, and the Democrats, illegally, put him on the ticket, after they found out Torricelli could NOT win! Funny too, you don't hear ANYTHING about Jim Jeffords anymore. Even the Dems don't have any use for him, NOW!

One more quick thing, Oh Tannenbaum, you said you just got back from work? Don't you mean, you just got back from your anti-war rally?

Nothing but two-bit propaganda from fascist, corporate, mindless gun-loving, racist Amerikkka.

Progressives, take to the streets! Destroy the corporate racists! Bush is out tonight! We'll get Hillary in!

All corporate "property" is plundered from the people. It is your moral duty to destroy all corporate property everywhere. I hereby call for jihad on all corporate interests everywhere. Destroy fascist capitalism! Worldwide socialism now.

Sieze all the guns! Take them now! No guns for racists!

By this time tomorrow we'll be in charge! The genocide of brave, brown-skinned Iraqis is over!

Racists, you've been warned!

We can all take one look at M.Moore and realize why he exploded. It was from all that fast food he has been eating, what a blimpy...

TO:
MichaelMooreisGod
_____ __________

JUST SAY NO DUDE,
STOP DRINKING YOUR OWN BONG WATER

When Michael Moore gives all his money to the poor, and Ted Kennedy, Mike Farrell, Martin Sheen, and Susan Sarandon do the same, they might be worth listening to. Many of the rest of the "artistes" who think that bread and circuses are more important than everything else (hence, they want taxpayer money for displays of bags of urine) and I say: why should anyone listen to you? And our friends the Fwench are turning the other way as Jews are being beaten on Paris streets. Whatta world?

As if our troops didn't have enough to worry about.
http://www.nypost.com/delonas/delonas.htm

[deleted]

First off, I listed my site which can get items to the soldiers. Secondly, I'm a military wife and my husband just returned from over there and is going back shortly. I just found this site, and I'm intrigued. This story wasn't "true" (darn it) but the one about the teachers was? Saying they don't know why the people enlisted in the military? I'm so sick of the anti-war people it's amazing. Mike Farrell says boycotting his stuff is undermining the right of free speech....hmmm how can he say and do what he wants, but if I boycott that is wrong? Am I not free to choose what I want to do?

Becky,

yes, Mike Farrell is free to blather, and you are free to boycott. G-d bless America.

Farrell ain't losing any work, a-haw (and I actually respect him for not being a brain-dead masochist)...
but as fer Sean Penncil-pud complaining that he's losing work because of his "convictions"; yer free to talk, but if someone disagrees they're free to talk, too.

I nearly hurled at the sight of them award-cravin' craven jewel-flashin' red carpet-strollin' glamour-blinded []-haired dregs of humanity. One of them fancy dresses could have paid for a months supply of fresh bacteria-free water for Basra. Does Hollywood's psycho-echo-chamber comprehend that? Nah.....!

Oh, Becky, hope yer man is well and workin'. As a former USAF man m'self I can only say that he's with his best friends (you included).

By visiting this site, I have discovered that it is incredibly difficult NOT to respond when you know someone has posted something inaccurate about you.

So I'm back from a hard day's marching and pushing daisies into rifles to find SUSAN SERIN-DONE's comments, for example. Actually, I've never been on an anti-anything rally (perhaps I should be ashamed to say) and I do in fact have a regular job. You're perfectly right about lacking in common-sense by posting on a satire site, but when I started, I really only read the Cindy Osborne post and a couple of others before I began to see what it was all about.

To GREYHAWK:

1. I know that it appears very arrogant to claim to speak on behalf of the bulk of the world's population. The reason I have this view of world opinion is because it is pretty much all I hear! You could say that that is because I only associate with other candy-a** liberals, but that isn't the case. A couple of instances: (a) my wife and I pretty much always have a foreign exchange student here. I regularly encounter students of varying ages from Germany, Khazakstan, Belarus, Hong Kong, America and so on. They presumably tend to reflect the opinions of their parents and those around them. (b) I have pen-pals and other contacts in Finland, Australia, Norway (c) I am a Norwegian national now living in the UK. For these reasons, I feel I do come into contact with people's views from different countries.
2. It's true that I haven't travelled everywhere, but I have travelled through/lived in /visited France, Spain, Italy, Austria, Norway (obviously), Switzerland, Sweden, UK, Australia (lived there for a year), Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, India, Bangladesh and Nepal. Oh, and the USA many times.Whilst this leaves huge areas I've never been to, again, the opinions I have encountered mostly reflect those I have expressed here.
3. I stand by the statement on US aid and development and trade agreements mostly being designed to keep the third world in its place or to develop as US satellites. If I have some time I will send you some examples.
4. I am exceedingly grateful you have not had the time to unpick me completely. CLearly, I have had a narrow escape from your coruscating wit and insight.

To Tuning Spork: Anyone in their right mind would rather be arrested by a US soldier than an Iraqi one. But there's a difference between the comparative gentleness of the US people and the brutality of the US foreign and economic policies. Gentle when you capture people, but it doesn't stop the administration bombing everyone it feels like.

To AHA: Yes, I agree: they all want to live in the US. I presume that this is because:
(a) the US offers the promise of wealth, or at least an escape from poverty. Remember that it beams alluring images of an idealised lifestyle all around the world.
(b) some people get angry about being on the losing side (in terms of trade agreements and so on). Others just get sick of it and want to move onto the winning side.
(c) some migrants are able to draw the distinction between a charming and warm people and the morally bankrupt pentagon-driven administration. I suppose they figure that it is worth putting up with the latter (particularly as their own government may be even worse) for the other benefits (excellent facilities, freedom of expression, welfare, etc).

OK, last bit of propaganda to vomit forth for now: if you are interested enough, have a look at this site for more anti-war ravings. I warn you, though, you may be sent into an apoplectic rage by its failure to live down to your expectations. I'm sorry to say that there is no liberal shrieking at all - it's all rather well-written and thoughtful:

http://www.zmag.org/45qairaq.htm

In fact, I urge you to check it out right this moment.

Regards,

Tannhauser

For my part, I plan to boycott any film, TV show etc with the above mentioned "stars".
I have despised Jane Fonda since her support of the peace loving North Vietnamese people. As soon as the war was over and the commies in power, they proceded to murder/execute anyone who could read or was educated. They then helped the Khmer Rouge (sp?) in Cambodia to kill a million people. Remember the "Killing Fields"? I don't ever remember Hanoi Jane getting on TV and stating maybe the commies were not such nice guys after all. I have never watched a film with Jane Fonda and refuse to change my mind.
Will one person make a difference. Probably not, Hanoi Jane is very rich but at least I Never supported our enemies, I am not a hypocrit. (Although its not that much of a sacrifice as I rarely can stand TV other than ESPN and the news.)

Danjo
GO MARINES!

I have not entered the fray of attack on tannhauser but must say, based on his last post, you are defined by the company you keep. While you profess to be enlightened by the opinions of many, I am sure that you, like most human beings (an assumption on my part I admit)tend to stay in groups of people that share similar ideologies. Just as conservatives stay together. I hate sterotype, but thorugh my 47 years of life I have come to find similarities in people. you for example more than likely took advantage of your travel and sampled the various substances present in the countries to claim to have visited. I also visited many, many countries, Germany (lived there 5 years total) France, UK, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands, Italy, Greece, East Germany (when there was one), Belgium, Phillipines, Japan, Singapore, Diego Garcia (not a country but a crappy island), Ireland, Switzerland, Luxemburg, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Canada, and Korea. I never found those people who thought like you, it was amazing that i only met those people that expressed opinions contradictory to the ones of those youe met.

I am not from any of those countries, but know the local pride in those countries is just as strong as the pride we have in the USA. Are the United States arrogant, I guess we can say so, but that arrogance comes from being the world's super power, policeman, philanthopist. My complaint with the rest of the world is not that it dislikes the USA, they have that right, but while they are saying negative, nasty things about us they have their hands in our pockets. Keep you hand out of my pocket and you can say what you want. But show me disrespect, don't expect me to be there when you need me. Is this an isolationist attitude? Not at all, I don't think we should close our borders and ingnore the rest of the world. i think we should ALL be friends. But friendships take all sides. Most of the people like you think you have a right to demand our friendship. Screw that!

You want to be my friend than act like it. i don't have to kiss anyone's butt, and neither does the USA. This isn't arrogance, this is pride!

I'm flabbergasted at the stupidity of this M.Moore. He spouts off all that crap at the A.Awards and it is all old news or half-truths and/or lies. He gets booed and when asked about being booed he stated that a couple of people started to boo and then the crowd booed them. What planet does this guy live on?

Oh, and about his documentary, how will taking guns away from law-abiding Americans make everyone safer? Just shows that he is an idiot that cannot think things through so I think he should go back to his triple cheesburger and hurry up and have a massive heartattack (so he can make a documentary of his lawsuit agains Mcdonalds).

Good one Justin, you wrote:

I'm flabbergasted at the stupidity of this M.Moore. He spouts off all that crap at the A.Awards and it is all old news or half-truths and/or lies. He gets booed and when asked about being booed he stated that a couple of people started to boo and then the crowd booed them.

That reminds me of a 'Simpsons' episode when Montgomery Burns had a film made of him, and after it was shown, the audience booed him! Burns asked Smithers, "Are they booing me?" Smithers: "No Sir, they are saying, Boo-urns! Boo-urns!"

Tannhauser:

I don't see anywhere in your latest responce, that you have EVER visited America! In contrast, I HAVE been to France, Germany, Austria, and Canada. I lived in Germany for 2 years, and found them as a whole, very unfriendly, many times 'acting' like they don't understand English, to be CAUGHT, snickering behind our backs! France, the people I encountered looked down their nose at us, except for the ones who were only 'FRIENDLY', as long as their hand was out for our cash! Austria, I was in Burchesgarden, (hope I spelled it right), Have no complaint there, as a matter of fact, these people treated us fine! Canada, seems about 50/50, Some Canadians are GREAT, while others, SEEM to think they are French! Now your turn Tannhauser, ever been to America? Would like to know if your 'Opinion' of America, has ANY validation!

Tannheuser wrote:
An alternative approach would be to try and figure out why you are being attacked and then adjust your policies accordingly.

Tanny, you miss the point. We did.

Tell me, what action could we take against a group of rouges whose goal is the extermination of the United States and Israel? Mass suicide?

The simple fact is that the reason why we are being attacked is because the Middle East is brainwashed by Al Jazeera and the radical Islamic fundamentalists whose only way of "bringing themselves up" is to "take their neighbor down." So much is made about how the US has backed Israel... but we have provided matching funds to Egypt. Why aren't they as powerful as Israel? I'll tell you why: ethics. The Israelis have worked their asses off to build a nation while the Egyptians have done little except complain about Israel.

Meanwhile, we spend more money propping up Islamic governments than any nation on Earth, including fighting a war in the former Yugoslavia to save them from slaughter. Lot of good that did us. Most Muslims probably don't even know we were involved, or that the war ever happened.

I think the policy problem is that for fifty years we've tried to hold onto the status quo and "hope for the best" from the Islamic fundamentalists. The problem is that approach has failed us. Rather than mature and grow into the modern age, radical Islam has clung to its 14th century dogma and fostered a culture of hate, mistrust, and misinformation. Tell me, what channel do I watch in Iraq when I want to watch the British Parliament?

Tannheuser, I think you're obviously intelligent, so I won't stoop to ad hominem attacks, but one thing you are missing from your Norweigan vantage point is the American perspective. Fact is, we were the victims of a massive unprovoked attack. Fact is, we are the world's preeminent superpower. Fact is, your nation is powerless to stop what is going on in the Middle East. I therefore understand why you are afraid of what we are doing: because if we fail, there's nobody to back you. But you are missing the point: we're already under attack, and there's nobody to back us.

Tannheuser, there's been a paradigm shift, best described as "what happens when a religion declares war on a state?" Because that is what has happened, however hard it is to understand. Radical Islam has declared war on the United States. The war cannot be negotiated, because the interests of that religion (conversion or death) cannot be dealt with according to the interests of the state (territory, rule of law).

Our choice is clear, whether the Bush Administration says it or not: we have to create open societies in the Middle East or die trying, because they want to create a closed society in America, or die trying. If we can succeed in Iraq, then that will permanently alter the dynamic with respect to radical Islam. If we cannot, perhaps we are doomed to failure.

I've never been to the Middle East, however, I have been to Newark, New Jersey. They don't speak English there either. I don't know what the opinion of America is in Newark though.

watch out for the muffler.....

Rip,

You're a little off the mark with your point.

Islam's as a religion is the law also. This fact renders part of your argument moot.

Paradigm shift???? Not another "paradigm shift"! Holy Moly.. I thought we finished with the paradigm shifts 10 years ago. That's okay, I'll take my proactive management team and move forward, leveraging my paradigm shifts with the successful implementation of my mission statement.

Hi Darth Chef,

Interesting that we have received such different viewpoints from thoe we have encountered. I think that you are right when you say that we tend to spend time with those whose opinions coincide with our own and therefore it is very easy to gain the impression that one's contacts represent 'everyone'. But in my case, I believe (looking back) that I actually started off as quite right-wing and kept meeting people who had a different view from mine. So I don't think thatI deliberately sought out liberal types. Perhaps I do now, however, though I certainly don't choose my exchange students by their political preferences and they are mostly anti-US (except for the American ones).

I find it quite odd to be regarded as a left wing liberal - I suppose I must be, then.

This was interesting:

"you for example more than likely took advantage of your travel and sampled the various substances present in the countries to claim to have visited"

If you are suggesting what I think you are, then I have to smile. I don't drink alcohol or smoke tobacco or anything else. I like my bodybuilding too much for that. Anyone who looks less like a hippy you couldn't imagine: I have very short hair and I weigh 220 at 5'7". I also drive a gas-guzzling sports car. I know ('cos I've been told) that I look like a complete bonehead.

To say the USA is philanthropic is wrong. I repeat: virtually all US aid comes at a price. I hope to provide something more soon so that you see this is more than just hot air.

Susan Serin-Done,

Not that it matters, but I do say on my previous post that I've visited the States (though only on holidays). I've driven from San Diego to New Orleans and also toured round California (gotta love it), New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Texas, Lousiana, Vermont, Massachusetts (sp?), Cape Cod. I've been to New York and, yes, gazed down in awe and wonder at that 'monument of man unto man' from the WTC.

Rip Rowan - you desrve a longer reply than this, but it's getting late. But I'll just say no, I'm not particularly scared of the middle East or of Jihad. I'm more scared of being caught in the inevitable blowback against the actions of a belligerent superpower running amok. I stick by my ant's nest analogy posted a while back.

Good night.

THE GREAT STATE OF OREGON
***************************

IS NOW READY TO PASS A BILL
ALL VIOLENT ANTI WAR PROTESTERS

SHALL BE DEEMED AS TERRORIST
****************************

The great state of cyberspace is now ready to pass a bill:

*****************************

All those who can't find their caps lock key and turn it off...

shall have their computers taken away until they successfully complete remedial typing lessons.

*****************************

Tanny, you wrote:
No, I'm not particularly scared of the middle East or of Jihad.

Of course you aren't.

Norway isn't the target of Islam's hatred.

My point exactly.

Radio, sorry if I used offensive language. "Paradigm shift", however, is the appropriate term for the concept. Sorry if this raises painful memories of lengthy pointless management meetings for you.

And, no, my argument is not moot at all. I know how the US wages war on a state. How does the US wage war on a religion?

To say the USA is philanthropic is wrong. I repeat: virtually all US aid comes at a price. I hope to provide something more soon so that you see this is more than just hot air.

Nobody thinks this is hot air. I guess I wouldn't say that the US is philanthropic in our current venture. Rather, "well-intentioned."

You know, after World War 1, the Allies created governments in the former Ottoman Empire as best they could. After the war, that Empire was gone. And after four hundred years in the Empire the people of the region were ill-suited to self-direct. It was a trick of fate, really, that modern Iraq was created.

By the end of WWII, the US and Britian had learned the error of trying to take resources by force, understanding that it was usually easier and cheaper to just buy them. And the Middle East was rich in oil. So the West bought the oil, making the region's rulers rich beyond their wildest dreams.

Were we philanthropic? No. We were opportunistic. But we still made billionaires out of thousands of Arabs. It is not the fault of the United States that they were unable to utilize this vast wealth to the betterment of their greater good.

Let's discuss Hussein. We hear all the time how the US "created" Saddam. This is really malarkey. The US did sell a large number of weapons to Saddam. At the time we were faced with the very real possibility of a Greater Nuclear Persia stretching from Afghanistan to Yemen, controlling 2/3 of the world's oil and possessing nuclear weapons. I think this justifies our arms sales to Iraq.

The truth is that Saddam created Saddam. Saddam could have used his nation's vast wealth to build a thriving industrial nation that was the jewel of the Middle East. Instead he sought other goals. His choice. Not ours.

In the end, much of this comes down to values. Many radical Muslims hate the US because they externalize blame for their society's poor decisions. They find justification for their blame-shifting in the Koran.

I am not racist. I think this is simply an area of the world that got booted into the modern era and also handed a multitrillion dollar trust fund. All the resources in the world, but no social system able to manage it. The US is gambling that now, perhaps, enough Iraqis have the skills needed to self-govern. We had better be right. If we're wrong, if they remain a vastly wealthy yet fundamentally self-irresponsible society, we're all pretty much screwed.

Though, you're probably safe in Norway for a while.

AHA,
Great post.

It just proves you don't have to be educated to act. I mean, look at Bill Clinton. He's been acting like an honest man for a long, long time.

Look at france's chiraq, he acts like he's not a slithering thing to be despised by all who walk upright.

Look at saddam. He's acting like he's not scared witless by his impending doom.

Speaking of saddam, Rip, it's OK.
If the new iraqi government screws up, we'll already have really good directions to Baghdad.

>>How does the US wage war on a religion?

Keep an eye on Hillary and her "community".
They do it with socialism and a Liberal court that is willing to legislate from the bench. Insidious little things.. like takeing "Under God" out of the Pledge of Allegince in grammer schools.

But first we have to go to Iraq and give them the right to live. Then they can come along later, with "pro choice" and teach them how to legally kill their babies and stuff.

What the left doesn't get.. is that this is actually the kind of ideology that gives these Islamic fundamentalists their impitus.

I agree with Greyhawk, its the people who don't support that coalition that made this war necessary, If the UN had been unwilling to put up with a scud crud like Saddam from the getgo, instead of patronising the [illigitmate]... we could have won without a war.

Doesn't any of these Saddamites remember why we went into Kuwait in he first place?

Phrog
Hillrod is going to be busy cleaning up that little mess at the Air Force Academy (not kidding) while the menfolk are all busy with the war. Seems that 'Senator from New York' is the obvious choice for such a task...

Tannhauser
Don't mistake my posting to you as anger at you. You raise good points, whether you are a worldly-wise Norwegian currently in the UK or not. I have problems in general with anyone who says "we" or "the world" etc. in their opinions. I think "People I interact with say..." is as far as any of us could go. I think too that this is a great aspect of this site, where you can interact safely with those of opposing views. This is the modern forum - and the analogy to Rome is not lost on me. There are valid comparison points. Empire building, however, is not one of them.

And I think the answers to your thoughtful questions can be found within those same posts of yours.
You reference several hosted exchange students (commendable, by the way) and people you've encountered in numerous travels. Let me speculate that these opinions (which you admit coming from the young are obviously heavily externally influenced) have been held for some time; not just the past six months. Given the numbers you infer I gather this must be true. I would further speculate this growing anti-Americanism pre dates 2001. All Americans felt that vibe back then, some for the first time; it's the "blame America first" crowd. Therefore I dismiss as causal the current war; I see the war as an excuse for those who had made up their minds long ago to say, "I knew it all along".

Now you must forgive Americans as individuals their anger and outrage at the (to them) unexpected attacks from nations they thought were allies. Americans unconditional acceptance of all other nations (until proven unworthy) stems from the fact that we do not have the National Identity that say "Germans" "Italians" or "Norwegians" do. Therefore all Americans feel a kinship with all Norwegians in a way that Swedes do not - can you grasp this? We are the United Nations.

So why the hate? Because the "American" that so many find easy to hate is a straw man, usually represented by whoever is the sitting President. Jimmy Carter may have been burned in effigy in the Middle East more then any other modern US leader.

Who creates this straw man? I hold two groups accountable:
1. Heads of state who jet from palace to palace while their citizens live in huts made of camel dung. The great Satan US is responsible for your pain.
2. Your "media" - and you pointed this out yourself: "Every other western nation sees the US media as the meekest, most lily-livered, most unquestioning corporate leeches to call themselves journalists. They really only rarely question the fundamentals of US policy."
So we agree on the anti-us bias there. See my previous post above on responsibility of a free press. I would add that much of that media is subject to those same heads of state.

Additional responsibility goes to international competitive industries, oil, auto, durable goods who can further the Satan image for their own gain.
And still more discredit for perpetuating the myth goes to teachers and college professors. How easy for them to tell students their future is bleak and hopeless because of the evil US. Of particular disgust are those American teachers/professors who practice this tactic. I have no space here to speculate on their motives.

So don't be surprised by your cousin's angry responses to what they see as unwarranted attacks by someone they loved. These are not the 'straw man' American. These are real people. They march in just cause, knowing that the vilest ëanti-US ë voices will never admit to their relief when regime change in Iraq becomes reality. Knowing that an international cast of craven opportunists will strike before the echo of the last shot fades to make their profit from the endeavor. You can see the faces of their children marching under desert camouflaged helmets: European, African, Asian, Latino, Islanders, Arabs...and on and on.

Yes, we will always love our distant cousins. Of course, I may just be naÔveÖ

"God grant that not only the love of liberty, but a thorough knowledge of the rights
of man may pervade all the nations of the earth, so that any philosopher may set his
foot anywhere on it's surface and say, "This is my country!" ~unknown~

An Iraqi immigrant can come to America today...land on free soil, and say.."This is MY Country." But no American can go to Iraq and do that as long there is a Sadistic Saddam as the "president". It's his country...not theirs, or yours.

The French can do it... but then, they never really mean anything they say anyway, except when they say they hate Americans. go figure? What it really means when people say that... is that they don't like themselves and somehow.. its the US fault they are so miserable and wretched.(to whatever degree)

Another thing you might want to note in all your worldwide scrappeling... the countries who are free and prosperous, and happy, the world over; DO actually recognise that the American influence had great deal to do with it.

I was wondering if anyone else besides myself believes that because we having taken the "melting pot" concept too far in America, we have also let in whatever America-despising races in that want to make some dough. IS it just me, or is it now so politically correct in the U.S. that the blacks, hispanics, and other nationalities have more rights now? Sure, there are these horrible white supremecists that exist here or there, but although I am against racism based on color, I feel alone when I say that essence awards, ebony magazine, black history month, etc. gets on my last nerve. We are so open to all human rights around here that the immigrants (from the middle east, no less) at my college are studying school, some for free, and yet some of them were threatened on campus because they had the gall to stand and cheer in the cafeteria when 9-11 was telecasted on the cafeteria bigscreen? I am sick of them being here, if they aren't so loyal as to be in love with America as I am, they can go BACK, for all I care.
KAE

To sum up my last statements, I don't agree with reverse racism, OR the fact that families from America-dispising countries can still find so much opportunity here. Why do you think the
9-11 plane hiijackers were so easily able to get there licenses on our land?
Kae

Dearest Radio;

Don't make me sic Dilbert on ya.
(lol)

Agree with the post and Rips

Danjo
GO MARINES!

Funny. The UN is supposed to be the worldly protector, right??? The whole world signed resolutions saying Iraq must disarm...I believe the term was immediately in every resolution. Just did a touch more research...quite funny. Resolutions all the way back to UN Resolution 660 were supposed to deal with his disarming, yet 780 resolutions later, we're still dealing with the same old bull. Is it just me? Or is the UN completely useless if the whole world signs something but does nothing to back it up...

Exact wording:

Deploring also that the Government of Iraq has failed to comply with its commitments pursuant to resolution 687 (1991) with regard to terrorism, pursuant to resolution 688 (1991) to end repression of its civilian population and to provide access by international humanitarian organizations to all those in need of assistance in Iraq, and pursuant to resolutions 686 (1991), 687 (1991), and 1284 (1999) to return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals wrongfully detained by Iraq, or to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq,

Excuse me???? So the UN does nothing for decades, yet you call the US (and majority of the "peace" loving nations who back us) illegal when your defunct UN can do nothing to back itself up? Oh yeah....More time...they need more time to lie and laugh at us. WRONG. That time has passed, your own goverments signed the line, yet you pansies won't act. Who is wrong for not doing anything? Who is wrong for doing the right thing?

We all signed those resolutions, we have every right to make him disarm now.
There is no illegality here, everything was done according to the UN, even though they wouldn't do what they said they would.

Dusty.

Rip,

I don't see the US waging a war on Religion. There are some left leaning folks in the US that could be considered anti-religion. Most wars of religion are in my opinion waged by religious people of one variety wanting to kill people of a different religious beliefs because they think their version of "GOD" is mo-betta than somebody elses. That's wonderful isn't it.

Personally, not being religious (man am I in for it now), and being more of a "Humanist" than anything else I can equate too, I'm quite sure that the worlds religions will kill one another for quite some time before they start focusing their attention on us "Humanists"...

I'm not Anti-Religion either, therefore I wouldn't support any war against a religion as a US Citizen.

If this nations Catholics rose up and decided to kill anybody non-Catholic, I would defend myself and others by all means possible and available. Same holds true for any religion or non-religion. If all of the worlds 5 ft-7 tall people decided that anybody that wasn't 5 ft-7 needed to be killed, I'd have a serious issue with 5 ft-7 people. I equate somebody's religion in roughly the same term that I equate their toe-nails. Most everybody has some to a degree and some people paint their different colors.

Really profound eah?

Investigation Update on Moore Blast:
The investigation subsequent to the explosion of Michael Moore at Lakehurst has determined that Moore was leaking hot gas from the rear. This leakage was apparently due to an overabundance and overpressure of this hot gas within Moore's cavernous interior. Apparently, venting of the hot gas through the upper oral cavity was inadequate to reduce the pressure of the gas. The tragedy was caused by Moore's gas escaping through a loose rear seal and ignited from the friction of metal (presumably a lead alloy) rubbing together in Moore's rear. To avoid further mishaps of this variety, we recommend the disuse of hot gas for floating enormous gasbags as well as the removal of lead as ballast from the rear of overinflated dirigibles like Moore.

Tannenbomb,

I know it is hard to identify and fix the problem when you, yourself are the problem. I don't believe, for a minute, that "Joe and Jane Six-Pak" in any of the countries you have visited know of, understand or care one bit about the nuances, terms and conditions of US humanitarian aid. Nor is he aware of any oppression(according to you) imposed on his aility to feed his family each day. Yet, they are the ones making all the noise and burning flags of the US on CNN. WHY??

It is only the elitists of those countries(and you, Sir are an elitist) who feel they are getting the short end of the negotiations and pass that deficiency on to the consumers(insuring that you, personally do not suffer the consequences of your own failings as a contract negotiator) with a healty dose of indoctrination that "you are paying higher prices and getting less for it because of the Americans".

Your(and all the other elitists of the third world{why is there no "second world?}) own whining and complaining about the arrogant, greedy Americans is no less destructive to the future security and way of life of the whole world(including Norway, eventually) as the bloodthirsty "kill all the Americans" dogma of the Mullahs of Isn'tlam.

Dusty,
Our little lost friend Kofi doesn't understand that this war was authorized in 1991 and was legal than. We made an agreement for a cease-fire and that consisted of Iraq abiding by the restrictions (UN imposed) and all other items listed in the aformentioned resolutions. For that agreement we agreed to stop hostilities with the notion that we could start up again if Iraq failed to comply. They have failed to comply so this is really an extension of the Gulf War and is therefore LEGAL.

Radio - tune in, man. What I'm saying is that Radical Islam (in the form of al Qaeda, Hammas, and about 100 other extremist groups) have waged war on the United States.

The question is: what can a nation do to fight back when a religion declares war on it, and the terms are "death or conversion"?

That's the situation we're in. Like it or not.

Hi Traveling Soldier,

That's a somewhat unusual line of argument. Others have questioned whether it is true at all that the US (and of course, the other developed nations) rip off the poorest countries in trade arrangement and 'development' packages. If I understand you correctly, you are saying something quite different, along the lines of 'Well this might be true. But only a few (the 'elite') know that this is the case. By the 'elite' telling the poor, it is stirring up trouble for everyone."

Rather than trying to keep this dangerous knowledge from people in case it makes them bitter and hateful, an alternative solution might be to seek more equitable methods of conducting business. The developed world could easily afford it.

I don't think you can really put poverty down to the failings of third world 'contract negotiators'. As I see it, it's more the case that the developed countries hold all the cards. Especially the US, though the EU is hardly blameless. Third world countries don't have that much to bargain with.

Incidentally, as far as I'm aware, the 'second world' was the USSR and satellites.

Tannhauser,

Actually, there are the "Old World" (Europe/China etc) the "New World" (the Americas). Then came the term "Third World" to refer to countries that emerged in the past century with an industry to trade with and a non-colonial government. As far as I know, anyways.

Tannheuser - I think, as usual, the answer is "it depends." Fact is, "win-win" is a real possibility.

I used to work for a large semiconductor company that had a strategy of placing its low-tech (well, "lower-tech") manufacturing in countries like the Phillipines to take advantage of lower labor costs.

For ten or fifteen years this worked, until the people there started to get sufficiently educated and wealthy that their cost of living started to equal that of the US. So the cost advantage was fairly shot.

So there you go. An interesting example of how the US simultanously "took advantage of" and "lifted up" a whole group of people. A 100% win-win experience for both.

Dear Mr. Spork,

To further illustrate my utter pedantry.

http://geography.about.com/library/faq/blqz3rdworld.htm

"The first world refered to the United States and its allies while the second world refered to the USSR and its allies."

And from

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/General/
ThirdWorld_def.html

"The Second World was the Communist world led by the USSR. With the demise of the USSR and the communist block, there is no longer a Second World."

Rip Rowan:

If the situation you described in your company was the norm, there would be less of a problem. Undoubtedly, there are many success stories like this. However, in my view, the general trend at a governmental level is one of cynical exploitation (apologies to Traveling Soldier for 'whining' again).

Tannenbaum,

My point is that from my limited point of view, US economic/humanitarian aid given to any country is a gift to those people who need it. As the "top dog" of the world, we have an obligation to help those who cannot(frequently due to the oppressive government they strive under) help themselves. Then, those same people we see one day on TV scrambling to get at the food are on TV the next day chanting "death to America", "all my/our problems are the fault of America"! Why? Did the food sour in their stomachs? Was it tainted in some way that made them sick? What is is about our generousity that makes them hate us so much?

The only reason I can conjure is that they are being brain-washed by their own wealth/elite/government who are pissed off because they didn't get a big enough piece of the action! Joe Six-Pak on the street is not aware that there are any cards, let alone who holds them because his total consciousness is consumed in getting to the front of the line at the aid truck.

The only ones getting hurt in this scenerio are the "players" at much higher levels who have time and can devote effort to things other than mere survival. And I don't believe these people are getting hurt, they just aren't getting as fat as they would like, so they rant to the unwashed masses that their misery is because of the arrogant Americans!

I just cannot understand how these people are so personally offended!

Dear Customers at Scrappleface,

Recently we have been recieving a lot of mail concerning Michael Moore and his affliation with Dankin Doughnuts. Mr. Moore is in no way , shape or manner affliated with Dankin Doughnuts.

While we regret the ill timing of the comments that Michael Moore made recently at at the Academy Awards, we are strongly commited to the rights of free speech, and for him to be allowed the opportunity to express his point of view, without threat of harassment, boycotts or physical harm.

Not every one at Dankin Doughnuts agrees with Michael Moore, but we must insist that he be given the opportunity to express himself in a clear and coherent manner without fear of reprisal.

It does go without saying that Mr. Moore has been one of our largest customers for the last 20 years and we strongly feel that without his patronage,we would would have certainly not been able to open our 3 new stores in the greater Flint Michigan area (Open 24 hours a day with convient drive thru), yet this has not swayed our commitment to our deep seated policy of free speech and your rights to buy the best pastry products in the greater Flint Michigin and the soon to be opened store in Saganaw City.

Dankin Doughnuts does not want to be misconstrued, simply because we carry over 200 different types of products, made fresh daily, with over 16 different kinds, of hot refreshing flavoured coffees, made specifically for the hard-working policeman on the beat, the busy-business executive, the mom on the go,or the starving college student, as to having an ulterior motive.

We vehemetly stand behind our convictions and our delicous "world famous" eclairs made with delectable, dark Belgian chocolate.

Not only are we a company that loves our American freedoms and soldiers that defend them,we appreceiate the opportunity to give you the customer over six different types of bearclaws that are sprinkled with brown sugar and are so good they should be called sinfull.

If you wish to make a comment to Dankin Doughnuts regarding this manner or simply request a catalog,please feel free to contact myself or a company representative here at sales@dankindoughnuts.com

respectfully,
Dean McGregory Sr. VP - Dankin Doughnuts

Good one, Dean!!!

Tannhauser,

Well, I'll be damned... Pedantify all you like! I really thought it was true (Old, New, Third..). I think this makes it official: Everything I ever learned in middle school was bull.

Rip,

>The question is: what can a nation do to fight >back when a religion declares war on it, and the >terms are "death or conversion"?

>that's the situation we're in. Like it or not.

As I stated before, I think your point is moot. Islamic Religion isn't a "State" or "Government". Therefore no "WAR" against a religion can exist. Combat and WAR are not the same thing.

How does a state combat a group of religious zealots intent on overthrowing the state? It's a police problem, not a War. You work through the states that are hosting these people and apply police solutions. If the state supports these people, you then declare war on that state.

Radio, tuned in....

I just found this discusssion so correct me if I'm backtracking, butsurely the facct that Bush went to both Harvard AND Yale , when he said that the problem with the French is they have no word for entrepenuer, and didn't know the name of the dictator of pakistan a nuclear power is a sad enditement of the universities. Bush dropped out of the national guard, FAILED in every business attempt he made, and was awarded the precidency by the partiallity of Judges. In the conflict in Iraq what has happened? Yesterday 6 British soldiers were killed fighting Dubya's war. AND WAR IN IRAQ WAS NOT LEGAL! The united states ambassador to the U.N. said specifically before 1441 was passed that this WAS NOT an automatic trigger to war. Otherwise it would never have been passed. And the French you despise as cowards? They are currently leading a totally EUROPEAN taskforce with full U.N. support to the congo, where there are childen armed with guns, to clear up the mess of the united states. Who attempted to install the dictator Mobuto? Who overthrew the democratic regimes of central america? Who gave Saddam his own C.I.A. body guards? Who trained Osama Bin Laden? Who turned argentina from the breadbasket of South America to a broken wreck?Who has not signed the accord ending land mines? Who sctrapped the Anti Ballistic missiles treaty? Who is the only country in the west to excecute children?Who has more gun deaths than any other country on earth? Who had to fight a war over whether slavery was right? Who still subsidises its farmers while not allowing others to do the same? Who has vetoed the most U.N. resolutions? And who constantly expects the west to trot after them still? Take a guess.