| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
R. S. Refugee
Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Location: Shangra La, ROK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Some say yes? Those would be the morons in the crowd, eh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChuckECheese
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Who?!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gamecock
Joined: 26 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Everybody says nice stuff about recently deceased folk...and Americans love hyperbole. Maybe we're just nice that way. Remember when Richard Nixon died? You would have thought he was right up there with Lincoln the way the press talked at the time of his funeral... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| He might have been the greatest President of the 70's. It's debateable, but I could see the argument. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gamecock wrote: |
| Everybody says nice stuff about recently deceased folk...and Americans love hyperbole. Maybe we're just nice that way. Remember when Richard Nixon died? You would have thought he was right up there with Lincoln the way the press talked at the time of his funeral... |
Hell, look at the rewriting of history the neo-cons did when the senile old *beep* died. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thebum
Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Location: North Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| no, he wasn't. *beep* him, and Reagen too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Ford, just emerging from the building, was vulnerable despite heavy security protection. Sipple noticed a woman next to him had pulled and levelled a .38-caliber pistol as Ford headed to his limousine. Reacting instinctively, Sipple lunged at the woman, Sara Jane Moore, just as her fingers squeezed the trigger. It was enough of a jar, however, to deflect her aim and cause the bullet to veer five feet wide of its mark. Had it not been for Sipple's action, the bullet could have struck the president in the head."
Secret Service immediately commended Sipple for his action at the scene, while Ford thanked him in a letter. Unfortunately, Sipple became not only an instant hero but an instant victim as well. The media not only hailed and celebrated his deed, they also disclosed his private life. Though he was known to be a homosexual by various fellow members of San Francisco's gay community, Sipple had not publicly "come out of the closet." His sexual identity was something he had always kept a secret from his family. He asked the press reporters to leave him alone, making it clear that neither his mother nor his employer had knowledge of his sexual orientation.
"Despite his wishes, gay activist and politican Harvey Milk, publicly proclaimed Sipple and said his act "will help break the stereotype of homosexuals." Gay liberation groups petitioned local media to give Sipple his due as a gay hero. Then columnist Herb Caen published the private side of the ex-Marine's story in the San Francisco Chronicle. Six other papers ran the column as well. After discovering her son's secret, Sipple's mother reacted to the public harassment she began to endure by cutting off contact with him."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Sipple
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| He might have been the greatest President of the 70's. It's debateable, but I could see the argument. |
If that's referring to Nixon, I could certainly see the argument, at least from a liberal standpoint. You've got the opening to China, the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency, and cuts to defense spending. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Octavius Hite wrote:
| Quote: |
| Some say yes? Those would be the morons in the crowd, eh? |
Did you read the Counterpunch piece? It actually makes a fairly compelling argument, from the left-wing perspective. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| ...the Counterpunch piece...makes a fairly compelling argument, from the left-wing perspective. |
I read it. It is a standard, U.S.-centric, extremely cynical piece, On the Other Hand. And the reference to Ford as "the greatest president" is sacrcastic sneer -- but I doubt you need me to remind you of this.
I have always seen both Ford and Carter as caretaker presidents -- but for Carter's getting the Cold War going again and his Camp David negotiations, that is.
This kind of writing, however,...
| Counterpunch wrote: |
| ...the foolish U.S. response to the capture of the U.S. container ship Mayaguez by the Khmer Rouge on May 12, 1975. As imperial adventures go... |
...bores me. It is that typical and too-oft repeated by malcontents like R.S. and his monosource.
North Korea invades the South? The far left alleges the United States induced this for the military-industrial complex's benefit.
9/11? If the W. Bush Administration did not perpetrate it, then, still , there is little more to know about it than Washington really benefitted from it and cynically used it as pretext to grease the military-industrial complex.
Now, at Ford's death, Counterpunch reminds us that the Mayaguez incident was merely "an imperialist adventure...a foolish U.S. response..." Ford's advisors were "rabid" and "bellicose." And Ford himself was a hypocrite.
Pyongyang and Seoul, al Qaeda and bin Laden, and now even the Khmer Rouge are incidental agents to such historical events. Really, they had little to do with anything, right?
A war starts in Northeast Asia...U.S. imperialism. There's your answer.
Terrorist attacks...just an American pretext. There's your answer.
Khmer Rouge seizes a U.S.-flag vessel in international waters, and executes three United States Marines...just another foolish American imperialistic adventure. There's your answer.
It grows tiring always hearing that when anything happens, even when someone hostile attacks the United States or United States interests, that it is still American imperialism at work. There are no bad people in the world, only misunderstood, good-willed people and organizations like Hezbollah. We are racist for failing to consider their point of view sympathetically. On the other hand, the U.S. govt deserves only our contempt, as it is always not only wrong, but the cause of all that is wrong.
"Simplistic" does not even begin to account for this bile-filled myopia.
As I have said before, it is the Six-Degrees-of-AntiAmericanism game. Name anything, anywehere, and the far left will hatefully blame the despised United States for it.
Now people are spitting on a dead president's grave. They are the "humanitarians" and "peacelovers," right? Good for them.
A while ago Manner of Speaking commented that it was as if someone in a mental institution called all the other patients and invited them to post their random thoughts here. I am beginning to believe him.
Last edited by Gopher on Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:51 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| regicide wrote: |
| It is important that we use this opportunity to publicize the role he played in both the cover-up of the assassination of JFK and Watergate. |
Is that so?
Prosecuting a dead man. Very well. Cite your evidence... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are three topics on Gerald Ford two of them should be locked isn't there a six week rule regarding topics?
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| He might have been the greatest President of the 70's. It's debateable, but I could see the argument. |
If that's referring to Nixon, I could certainly see the argument, at least from a liberal standpoint. You've got the opening to China, the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency, and cuts to defense spending. |
The "greatest President of the 70's" refers to Ford, in response to the claim that he was the greatest President ever. But the "debateable" part refers to either Nixon, who also helped give Affirmitive Action a big push, or Carter, who at least wasn't Nixon or Ford. Hard to say which of the three I'd prefer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
