Article

2004-08-26 Home Front: Politix

Read John Kerry's out of print book,THE NEW SOLDIER, online for FREE

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by rex 2004-08-26 02:54|| || Front Page|| [11127 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Thanks Rex was looking forward to reading this.

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2004-08-26 10:30:12 AM|| 2004-08-26 10:30:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 The pdf files are on a server in Niue, a South Pacific Island country. Download it quickly. No telling when Kerry's lawyers can hire a dugout canoe to row them there to threaten a lawsuit!!

Posted by BigEd 2004-08-26 11:20:04 AM|| 2004-08-26 11:20:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 1. I guess you think your innuendo is very funny, #1. It's not. One might also say that you don't have any interest to read the online version of Kerry's book since you bought it in the 1970's when you were a Democrat.

2. I got news for you. My parents were midwest farmers [ie. stalwart conservatives] and I've been raised as a conservative since day #1. I am not a pseudo-when's it's convenient-self serving-conservative-today-liberal-yesterday like some people are. My father and my uncle both served admirably in WWII, so my family have always respected the military,unlike some people whose "appreciation" of the military is a new attitude they picked up after 9/11.

3. I've contributed money to the Swift Boat vets because of their past service to our country and because of their courage to speak up now and derail Kerry's candidacy. How much money have you sent to the Swift Boat Vets for their battle against Kerry. ZERO? All "supportive" talk, no $?

And it was on the Swift Boat Vet's site where I saw this link to Kerry's book in the discussion about the Unfit for Command book.

The book is valuable, Douffus, because it is in Kerry's words. He cannot wiggle away from what he said in print.

4. I pay my dues to post on this site. I do not attack anyone until I am attacked first and then I react defensively as anyone would. I've been attacked at various times as being anti-semetic, a misogynist, a John Bircher, and a Democrat.

I issue you a challenge and let's put $ on it. Ask the mods to find anything I've posted [and not what you have "read-into" or "interpreted" with your teeny tiny minds]that are examples of any of the afore-mentioned names you and your pals call me and I will donate $100 to RB. But if you cannot find such evidence in my posts, then you donate the $100 instead.

Ready to take the challenge? You have $ on the table? If not, then I suggest you focus on discussion of posted links or articles and stuff your character assassination tricks into your heavily used bag of high school pranks.

Posted by rex 2004-08-26 1:46:17 PM|| 2004-08-26 1:46:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 I think I missed something. How was Sarge's comment an attack, rex? I read it as sincere, or at worst a mild slam on Kerry and the likely abundance of misinformation that the book contains.

Or maybe I'm just stoopid.

Posted by Chris W. 2004-08-26 1:50:54 PM|| 2004-08-26 1:50:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 time for your pill, rex.

Posted by B 2004-08-26 1:54:08 PM|| 2004-08-26 1:54:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Read John Kerry's out of print book,THE NEW SOLDIER, online for FREE

...and worth every penny!

Posted by Raj 2004-08-26 2:00:06 PM|| 2004-08-26 2:00:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 And rex - I think you jumped the gun on Cyber Sarge. I think you owe him an apology, but that's just me.

Posted by Raj 2004-08-26 2:01:42 PM|| 2004-08-26 2:01:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Rex, thanks for confirming something: WTF are you talking about?????

Posted by Frank G 2004-08-26 2:02:38 PM|| 2004-08-26 2:02:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 I hear Abbie Hoffman is putting out a re-release, called "DON'T STEAL THIS BOOK!"...

Posted by mojo 2004-08-26 2:08:32 PM|| 2004-08-26 2:08:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Oops. I do owe CyberSarge an apology. I read it initially as:

"Thanks. Rex was looking forward to reading this."

My only defense is that a handful of individuals have attacked me on and off on this site, but particularly this weekend, with ad hominems that had no factual basis. So I misread CyberSarge's post was just continuing the same back handed compliment, sniping.

Once again, CyberSarge, I apologize for taking your #1 post as a back stab like the other posters were doing the past few days.

Not putting punctuation and the only capitalization being T and R, caused me to read your comments as 2 separate sentences.

Posted by rex 2004-08-26 2:16:12 PM|| 2004-08-26 2:16:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 I don't know what sort of arguments you've gotten into on the Burg, rex, but most of us know who's an idiotarian and who is not. You are not. Discourse among people who are on similar pages is good for the mind.

Posted by Chris W. 2004-08-26 2:19:12 PM|| 2004-08-26 2:19:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 on the same page? You obviously missed the weekend posts where rex forgot to take his pills. All those little, green, three-eyed, neoconservative, boogey men coming out from under his bed. It wasn't pretty.

Rex may believe he is a conservative. But he's really just a whiner who complains that GW isn't doing it right. He doesn't have any solutions, just complaints.

Before you launch on me, I suggest you go back and reread his melt-down.

Say, rex. Who are you voting for this election?

Posted by B 2004-08-26 2:31:35 PM|| 2004-08-26 2:31:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 time for your pill, rex

The red pill or the blue pill?

Posted by badanov 2004-08-26 2:39:45 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2004-08-26 2:39:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Apology accepted Rex! I was lost there for a moment. In your defense my typing and grammer SUCK! I am looking forward to reading it. I started today at work and just the Intro is strewn with errors and lies. Did anyone ever check the validity of the stories? Some seem very outlandish.

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2004-08-26 2:44:52 PM|| 2004-08-26 2:44:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 The book was a collection of Soviet propaganda partially re-written by "Americans" like Kerry. It's no surprise the claims seem outlandish -- they were INTENDED TO. The hope was that they would get repeated enough that people would start believing them.

Thanks to Kerry, they did.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2004-08-26 2:54:24 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2004-08-26 2:54:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 badnov - lol!!!

Posted by anon 2004-08-26 3:37:34 PM|| 2004-08-26 3:37:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Thank you,CyberSarge.

Ah yes I see that one of the ad hominem attack artists has emerged from under the rock that's known as home. Perhaps in another decade, B, you will learn to how to spell your name in full...easy now, B...don't blow out those precious few brain cells you have by attempting to do too much.

As for "melt down", how apropos that a shrill catty hysteric like yourself should project onto me your own behavior. I discussed the material in the articles this weekend. OTOH, you and and your side kick pal, ZF, made catty comments ad anuseum about what horrible person you think I am and what you think I meant deep between the lines. And you continue to do so on this thread. Never focused on ideas, just loose cannon personal attacks on me.
B: You obviously missed the weekend posts where rex forgot to take his pills. All those little, green, three-eyed, neoconservative, boogey men coming out from under his bed. It wasn't pretty. Rex may believe he is a conservative. But he's really just a whiner who complains that GW isn't doing it right. He doesn't have any solutions, just complaints. Before you launch on me, I suggest you go back and reread his melt-down. Say, rex. Who are you voting for this election?

The crowning moments of "meltdown" this weekend on 2 discussion threads was when your group of emotionally driven basketcases,who know nothing about politics outside how to snipe and backstab, discovered that neoconservatives were in fact liberals in the not too distant past and that they [ and you very likely] voted Democrat before 9/11.

Then there was the other classic "meltdown" moment when you and your pals shrieked at me for being a traitor for agreeing with an article questioning the how the Iraq War is being handled by the suits in DC[none of whom are elected representives of the voters btw] I think ZF even went so far as to fantacize shooting me in the back if he had the opportunity and then I posted an article quoting Wm. F. Buckley, a traditional conservative, on his retirement distancing himself from the neocon "intellectual whizkids" and the mis handling of the Iraq War. Poof. Melt down, yes, that's what happened to you handful of hear no evil, see no evil neocon sheep. Yes, I savor the 2 "meltdown" moments of you guys so much I will link to the Kristol and Wm. F. Buckley comments again. Sigh, how sweet it is.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=3000&R=785F27881"The Neoconservative Persuasion: What it was, and what it is. by Irving Kristol
08/25/2003, Volume 008, Issue 47 Weekly Standard
...ever since its origin among disillusioned liberal intellectuals in the 1970s...Viewed in this way, one can say that the historical task and political purpose of neoconservatism would seem to be this: to convert the Republican party, and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to governing a modern democracy...It is not a "movement," as the conspiratorial critics would have it. Neoconservatism is what the late historian of Jacksonian America, Marvin Meyers, called a "persuasion," one that manifests itself over time, but erratically, and one whose meaning we clearly glimpse only in retrospect...Such Republican and conservative worthies as Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, and Barry Goldwater are politely overlooked.[as 20th century heroes] Of course, those worthies are in no way overlooked by a large, probably the largest, segment of the Republican party, with the result that most Republican politicians know nothing and could not care less about neoconservatism...Neocons feel at home in today's America to a degree that more traditional conservatives do not. Though they find much to be critical about, they tend to seek intellectual guidance in the democratic wisdom of Tocqueville, rather than in the Tory nostalgia of, say, Russell Kirk...This is surprising since there is no set of neoconservative beliefs concerning foreign policy, only a set of attitudes derived from historical experience. (The favorite neoconservative text on foreign affairs, thanks to professors Leo Strauss of Chicago and Donald Kagan of Yale, is Thucydides on the Peloponnesian War.)...Finally, for a great power, the "national interest" is not a geographical term, except for fairly prosaic matters like trade and environmental regulation. A smaller nation might appropriately feel that its national interest begins and ends at its borders, so that its foreign policy is almost always in a defensive mode. A larger nation has more extensive interests. And large nations, whose identity is ideological, like the Soviet Union of yesteryear and the United States of today, inevitably have ideological interests in addition to more material concerns...

Leo Strauss and Toqueville are idols of the neocons [yuk, yuk how do you say "deceive the public and its rulers if you think you are right" or noblesse oblige without thinking of Strauss and Toqueville respectively?]And how you all feel about the USA being considered an "idea" not a real thingie with real borders and real history with real national interests? Or that as Republicans and traditional conservatives, you are going to be "re-educated" by the smarter than you neocons, even if it means against your will. Or how do you like the idea of being part of a "persuasion" that pops up every now and then over time -will it be the Democrat Party this year or the Republican Party? Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets. Woohoo, who are the self serving arrogant idealogues in this picture?

Then there are the words of a "divide and conquer whining anti-semetic traitor" [as I was referred to for saying basically what Wm. F. Buckley says] http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/29/politics/29buckley.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5070&en=3bb45eaa1ff9f60d&hp&ex=1093320000
"National Review Founder to Leave Stage"
By David D. Kirkpatrick June 29, 2004 NYT
...In explaining his decision, Mr. Buckley said he had taken some satisfaction in the triumph of conservatism since then, though he expressed some complaints about President Bush's unconservative spending and some retrospective doubts about the wisdom of invading Iraq...As for conservatism today, Mr. Buckley said there was a growing debate on the right about how the war in Iraq squared with the traditional conservative conviction that American foreign policy should seek only to protect its vital interests. "With the benefit of minute hindsight, Saddam Hussein wasn't the kind of extra-territorial menace that was assumed by the administration one year ago," Mr. Buckley said. "If I knew then what I know now about what kind of situation we would be in, I would have opposed the war." Asked whether the growth of the federal government over the last four years diminished his enthusiasm for Mr. Bush, he reluctantly acknowledged that it did. "It bothers me enormously," he said. "Should I growl?"...

P.S. For your information, I have always supported the Republican Party. I've never voted Democrat in my entire life. Can you say the same, B?

Posted by rex 2004-08-26 5:06:25 PM|| 2004-08-26 5:06:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 I think we need to spend more money on cheap ass bold fonts.

Rex.... you're cool... but you have that taint of jolly john bircher, buchanonite, jew-hater. I may be wrong, we'll see. BTW good conservative farmers are the backbone of our country and we need to maximize our farmers income. Via direct subsidy or trade barriers. The peanut and tobacco programs point the way to greater farmer income. The candidate that demands parity will get my vote.

Posted by Shipman 2004-08-26 5:22:40 PM|| 2004-08-26 5:22:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 In honor of Berlusconni's strength, I'll be using all italics tomorrow

Posted by Frank G 2004-08-26 5:24:20 PM|| 2004-08-26 5:24:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 [ignore]

Posted by B 2004-08-26 9:01:08 PM|| 2004-08-26 9:01:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Shipman, you said it all for me--rex sounds like a buchananite, a Jew-hater and blamer and a Far Far Far Right Winger (so far right, they practically meet the far Left coming around the bend).
My dad was from a homesteading farm family and he served in WWII in Germany, spending at least 3 years far from his home in East Texas.
(A family souvenir was the Army-issued Christmas card he sent to his sister: "Merry Christmas from the Railsplitters...somewhere in Germany, 1944!")
Although he died when I was a child, he was a proud Democrat and thought LBJ and Medicare were great.
I like to think that I could have converted him to the GOP.
I was born patriotic: my mother tried to make me be born on July 4, but I wasn't ready for 4 more days.
And I had an ancestor in the Revolutionary War, making me a Daughter of the American Revolution, as well as ancestors that have fought in all our wars since, including the Civil War on the wrong side (Dixie!) and an ancestor massacred at Goliad in 1838 in the battle for Texas independence, making me a Daughter of the Republic of Texas, too.
So, my patriotism was hardly launched by 9/11 only violently reinvigorated after the Clintoons made it illegal for 8 years.

Posted by GreatestJeneration 2004-08-26 9:03:29 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-08-26 9:03:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Oh, and rex, William F. Buckley's not right...although it gives the NYSlimes great glee to chronicle both his differences with the Bush Administration and his retirement!

It's not the purpose of RB to provide a forum for us to prove our Conservative orthodoxy to you or really yours to us.
Clearly, you don't feel comfortable with your own views so you try to convince the rest of us.
That's not working, as Cyber Sarge quite dispassionately remarked the other day and all he did here was simply thank you (then you went ballistic....)
You really should give Fred that $100 anyway--you've used plenty o' bandwidth.

Posted by GreatestJeneration 2004-08-26 9:10:40 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-08-26 9:10:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Rex, please user proper html anchor href tags and hide those long URLs.

And lets not get into the neocon rant Rex, its counterproductive. Wait until after the election.

This arguing distracts us conserviaticves of all stripes from the real problem: that a lying, extreme liberal is lined up to become president behind false premises and a complicit mainstream media that is covering for him.

Save your intellect, time and venom for the real evil: John Kerry and the MSM.

Posted by OldSpook 2004-08-26 9:56:45 PM|| 2004-08-26 9:56:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 rex sounds like a buchananite, a Jew-hater and blamer and a Far Far Far Right Winger
Prove it or shut your character assassin pie hole.

a. Re: Pat Buchanan
I don't demonize Buchanan for his isolationist views just like I do not demonize Michael Savage for holding similar views. They have both hold very right wing but upfront views. Neither man "hides" his position in PC language. Some of their views I agree with, some I don't. Buchanan is a Catholic and Savage is Jewish. How can you say I'm anti-semetic if I criticize/agree with some ideas but not all views that both men hold?

b. Re: anti-semetism
I don't feel that Jews should get a "free pass" from criticism if they are incompetent. Big deal-is that such an anti-semetic position to hold?Some of you feel that Jews are not individuals, that they are a group who are sacrosanct and to be protected from criticism. Balserdash! If a person is a public figure and separates himself from the general population, he/she is fair game for being judged/criticized. I don't view Jewish public figures as being perfect and free from committing errors in judgement.

I have said that I admire Ariel Sharon. I was especially moved by an article about Sharon written a year or so ago by Victor Hansen when he likened Sharon to Ajax, an under valued hero. I think Mark Steyn rocks[he is of Jewish descent] and another favorite journalist of mine is Barbara Amiel, also Jewish.

However, I do not admire Paul Wolfowitz. He is incompetent and should be fired. Wolfowitz brings the same dangerous whizkid naivity to the Iraq War as McNamara[a Catholic btw]did to the Vietnam War. By the same token, I also criticized Paul Bremer for his applying his PC state department mentality to Iraq. Bremer is a devout Catholic.He was not the best man for the job.

So how exactly am I only "blaming" Jews?

I do not admire Arthur Schulzberger Jr. or George Soros, both Jews, who are doing everything in their power to erode the US position in fighting Islamofacism. Both men have eroded support of Israel by supporting the Democrat Party with material as well as moral support. In as much as you Jen shreik about NYT and Moveon.org, not once has it ever crossed your feeble mind to criticize the 2 men who call the shots at the NYT and Moveon.org.

c. Re:Far Far Far Right Winger
Because I want border control and immigration moratorium? Silly me. I am in good company. Check the latest Gallup polls about what the majority of Americans want re: immigration and closed borders.

However, I don't go around yapping 24/7 about dropping a MOAB on Iraq or nuking Saudi Arabia like you and some of your mindless pals.

d. Cyber Sarge quite dispassionately remarked the other day and all he did here was simply thank you (then you went ballistic....)
You don't read. Cyber Sarge and I ironed out the mis-communication.

e. You really should give Fred that $100 anyway--you've used plenty o' bandwidth.

I defended myself against B's back biting comment in post #12. Talk about wasting bandwidth...who asked you for your 2 cents anyways? What did you contribute to the discussion of the Kerry book link? Zero,as usual, you forgot what the original article was and merely plopped 2 posts of ad hominems. I'd suggest you are several quarts low on "objectivity."

f. As for bold lettering, I find it is necessary tool to get the attention of normal posters who might want to carry on a dialogue with me, since you and your pals continually rush to "bury" the content of my posts with a deluge of emotional blather. Fyi, I contribute dutifully on a monthly basis to RB. I just gave money to the Swifties this month and I plan to contribute to the K-9 units in Iraq next week. I'm doing my bit to support RB and the military. What about you? Oh, yes, you have that blog thingie that is such a big help to the military in Iraq and Afghanistan...riggghhttt.

Posted by rex 2004-08-26 10:36:24 PM|| 2004-08-26 10:36:24 PM|| Front Page Top

02:13 179
12:31 Rantburg
12:36 Rantburg
09:58 danking70
02:51 Super Hose
02:43 Super Hose
02:41 Super Hose
01:28 Classical_Liberal
00:15 Sock Puppet of Doom
00:12 Sock Puppet of Doom
00:03 SteveS
00:01 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:48 Alaska Paul
23:43 Atomic Conspiracy
23:37 Zhang Fei
23:29 CrazyFool
23:27 Anonymous6185
23:27 ed
23:24 crazyhorse
23:23 OldSpook
23:23 Rafael
23:23 OldSpook
23:22 Anonymous6185
23:21 OldSpook