liberal psychedelic drug pushers

[TNRighty]

This is in response to Medican's post a few days ago.

As for that philosophical gobbledygook definition of Liberalism, I'd classify that as a bunch of aimless thoughts and fifty dollar words ammounting essentially to nothing.

You said when talking about history, "When you look back through the perspective of today you have to admit we sure travel through it lost." And that quote could not better sum up the foreign policy decisions of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, both of whom's ignorance and inaction put America in great danger. Oh wait, I'm sorry, Jimmy Carter's boycott of the Olympics was a rock solid stance against Communism.

You refer to terrorism as a "boogeyman", as if its a figment of our imagination. Ask the 3000 people who died in the WTC attacks if this is real or not. And as for your remark that terrorism is "tenuous", I hope you're right, but its not going to go away on its own. Like Communism, it has to be defeated. It will be tenuous so long as we have leaders in this country who recognize the grave threat of terrorsm and take action to eliminate it.

Your post is characteristic of the liberal "do nothing" policies concerning threats to our national security, and if history has taught us anything its that the "do nothing" philosophy accomplishes nothing and ony puts us in more danger.

What did Clinton do about terrorism? Nothing. Damn that worked well. Carter? Ditto. If your sick of seeing Republican presidents take us to war, perhaps you could start by criticizing your Democrats for putting us in that postion in the first place.

[TNRighty]

Additionally,

Terrorism and Communism are not fads that fade away with time like bell-bottoms or disco music. They are cancers on mankind, and if ignored will spread. You don't defeat these evils by waiting them out. You defeat them with strength, resolve, and most importantly freedom.

[Archbishop Johnson]

Dear Abbot Wood,

A thousand "amens!" to your erstwhile post. May the remainder of this glorious Lord's Day be full of rejoicing for you, your parishioners, and your lovely white kitten, Saint Luke.


Blessings, prayers, and chocolate truffles,

AB Johnson


PS: I've purchased a new golf cart, under the name of the Diocese, for use at the local country club. I'm in the process of repainting it (black and red) with new decals, "HolyMobile". Took some of the latest contributions from the Free Will offering and got a few new heads for the nine and six irons and plan to be out on the course sometime next week. It should be quite illuminating and refreshing, one ball per confession.

[dan67]

tnrighty said:

Additionally,

Terrorism and Communism are not fads that fade away with time like bell-bottoms or disco music. They are cancers on mankind, and if ignored will spread. You don't defeat these evils by waiting them out. You defeat them with strength, resolve, and most importantly freedom.

I totally agree with this. I would only add that the war on terrorism must not only include a portion of military force, but also the force of truth. The hearts and minds of the terrorist must be won over too!

[ArchBishopWood]

Dear dan67,

I offer you what most shall never have the pleasure of receiving, a confrontational confession:

Have you begun smoking crack?

Have you been frequenting the ghetto booty and thusly contracted a bout of syphilis?

Were your parents related?

I offer this most personal of inquiries not with the aim of humiliation, but with the hopes of your atonement and hopefully ushering in its closure with a phase of spiritual and intellectual rebuilding.

When one totes the party line with such earnestness they run the risk of not only falling out of line with true intellectualism, but figuratively falling into the primitive palms of the Prince of Darkness. To mindlessly parrot the talking points of a low-browed puppet the likes of a member of the Bush family (in this case the "hearts and minds" argument) is not only an insult to the free-thinkers who frequent Rantweb Parish, but it actually insults the mettle of your own consciousness (which, with the regal rebukes of your prior posts, has been exhibited to be sorely lacking). You shall ultimately find yourself trapped within a neuropathic Abu Ghraib. Your Parietal Lobe will soon be forced to pose for pictures performing fallatio on your Cerebral Cortex.

The hearts and minds of "evil-doers" can't be won over for the simple and pronounced fact that they cease to exist. The only proven way to win over those hearts and minds is by painting the streets of Mosul, Fallujah and Bahgdad with them. Your chaste bishops were devising Catholic doctrines in support of an intense, thorough and hopefully final bloodletting of the entire Muslim race, while our fellow knights in white satin were occupied playing footsie with the altar boys. This proposal shall be revealed in upcoming missives.

Until then, stay clean and Catholic,

Archbishop Wood

[midcan5]

TNrighty typifies the Maoist thought I noted above. Notice how he forgets the terrorism of Reagan / Bush period (lots) and how Clinton entered office and the terrorists tried to take down the tower, had they had more explosives or a better plan they could have killed 50 thousand. Did anyone hear Clinton blame Reagan / Bush for their obvious poor policy. No. What he did then was establish a strong force as noted by Richard Clarke. Again TNR neglects history or even reality as the terrorism then was from the right, McVeigh its biggest. And it seems to be missed that 911 happened during Bush jr administration while he looked elsewhere. The 911 report spells out the failure of this administration and while the Maoists of the right have a history they hear/learn on the radio others know that blame needs to be placed where it belongs. Again readers need to recognize that America was founded on liberal policies and not the negativity of the right which can only blame others and offers no real policy.

[midcan5]

Dan, Pay no heed to these bishops as they are bishops in cyber space only, they are actually rant web posters having what they consider fun.

[groucho]

dan67 said:

Micah 2; 4-6 On that day a satire shall be sung over you

Right on!!!
A perfect description of Jimi Hendrix's version of our National Anthem. And the audience was too f*cked up to know the difference - or recognize the satire; how are you going to connect with a bunch of stoned people, unless you find a way to reach them so they can comprehend?

Jimi's interpretaion might have been "unique," but the song was STILL the National Anthem, no matter how distorted. And the hippies dug it - that's the real satirical element.........

and there shall be a plaintive chant: "our ruin is complete, our fields are portioned out among our captors, and no one can get them back!'"

Sounds an awful lot like what Max Yasgur's neighbors were saying during the festival, if lawsuit depositions are any indication.......

[ArchBishopWood]

The hours in my blessed bungalow have been seeming to pass at a snails pace today, so indulge me as I revisit a prior point.

Dearest Dan of the Damned,

To illustrate my later point and hopefully educate you in the absolute basics of warfare, let me play an online puppet show of sorts.

I believe it was the straight-talking, wise-cracking, all-knowing Patriot who personified Muslim rage in "Ali Ahmad on his ten foot camel". Lo, with the help of a well placed 5.56 mm round Ali Ahmad would surely fall like a proverbial "sack of shit" (excuse my French Lord), but what on God's green earth gives you the idea that he could be felled by a one million Harlem boy choir bellowing the chorus of "Glory, Glory, Hallelujah"? The nuns at my Catholic boys school reigned with a more solidly iron fist (which may not be saying much). As a knight of the Church I wholeheartedly believe in miracles, but this notion is one of pure, unregulated madness and nothing more. As far as the Muslim race goes:

Ditch the heart, bring the hurt!

As far as the heretic midcan goes, he wouldn't know a bishop from a hole in the ground. He is the one you should surely pay no heed to as he is Satan in the cyber-flesh.

As always most sincere blessings,

Abbot Wood

[TNRighty]

Medican,

Let me get something straight. You're telling me Clinton established a "strong force" against terrorism? Were you asleep during the 1990's? Please give me ONE example of Clinton taking a strong stance against terrorism. And I guess Jimmy Carter took a strong stance against Communism.

The first American victory over terrorism came during the Reagan administration, the first day of the Reagan administration to be exact. During his campaign against Carter and during his tenure as President-elect he took a firm stance on terror, and the hostages were released upon him taking the oath of Presidency. That's no coincidence. I will agree however, that during his Presidency there was more he could have done to fight the growing terror threat, but in his defense we were fighting Communism, a fight that required all of our military and economic resources.

What really amuses me about your post is the fact that you accuse Reagan of doing too little to fight terrorism, yet during the 80's it was people like you who opposed every single action he took to fight Communism! And you would have done the same had Reagan singled out terrorism as the great evil of the time. Don't you see the hypocricy and inconsistencies there? You hate Reagan, and that is the overriding idea of your post. Had Reagan chosen terrorism over Communism as the greatest threat to our nation, people like you would have opposed him on that like you opposed him on his fight against Communism, and today you'd be bashing him for not doing enough to combat Communism.

Being a Clinton supporter, you have no grounds on which to criticize anyone for their lack of action.

Maoist? Maoism is the Chinese equivalent of Leninist and Marxist Communism, born under the rule of Mao Tse Tung. How in the hell can you rationalize calling me or Bush a Maoist? I don't normally resort to personal insults, but excuse me if I call you a complete imbecile.

[Archbishop Johnson]

TN Righty,

Just wishing you and yours a holy Tuesday. Keep looking upward.



AB Johnson

[midcan5]

TNR, you prove my point too well, the hostage release had been planned much earlier, that it happened when Reagan came into office is coincidence. Read the history. Was Carter weak? Hard to say as you are applying Monday morning quarterback skills to the analysis, had the rescue been successful he would have been looked at differently and we may not have the myth of Reagan. And I feel with Reagan began our decline into a country that cares only about business and corporate power and not about freedom or justice. Being in corporate America gives you a different experience a different perspective.

Reagan was ? on terrorism actually I doubt he knew much about it, just one example of many is how he cut and ran in Beirut. But no need you will not believe it nor read it. Google it sometime. As far as communism again the long history of oligarchy and many other people had more to do with collapse than R did. Actually if you remember his times honestly he put the nation in dept which poor Bush sr suffered his voodoo economic policy remember it's the economy stupid. Of course the myth will continue because money supports ideas that support it.

Yes, the Maoists are the closet group to you guys. There are Fascist elements as there always are in right wing philosophy but key items are more Maoist than F. Chief for me is the web of believers who repeat the standard or the slogan of the minute. The last election was wonderfully full of propaganda Mao would have been proud of. Of course there is not an exact fit, there never is but you can see the elements of the right in the text below. Substitute words of Rush and others and you will see the similarity.

ps Bush is on TV and just gave another lie to reality, he mentioned Libya and again told what can only be called an untruth. But again the real is hardly a part of this administration.

Maoist theory

Unlike the earlier forms of Marxism-Leninism in which the urban proletariat was seen as the main source of revolution, and the countryside was largely ignored, Maoism focused on the peasantry as a revolutionary force which, he said, could be mobilised by a Communist Party with "correct" ideas and leadership. The model for this was of course the Chinese Communist rural insurgency of the 1920s and 1930s, which eventually brought Mao to power. Furthermore, unlike other forms of Marxism-Leninism in which large-scale industrial development was seen as a positive force, Maoism made all-round rural development the priority. Mao felt that this strategy made sense during the early stages of socialism in a country most of whose people were peasants.

Unlike most other political ideologies, including other socialist and Marxist ones, Maoism contains an integral military doctrine and explicitly connects its political ideology with military strategy. In Maoist thought, power comes from the barrel of the gun, and the peasantry can be mobilized to undertake a "people's war." This involves guerilla warfare using three stages. The first stage involves mobilizing the peasantry and setting up organization. The second stage involves setting up rural base areas and increasing co-ordination among the guerilla organizations. The third stage involves a transition to conventional warfare. Maoist military doctrine likens guerilla fighters to fish swimming in a sea of peasants, who provide logistical support.

encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Maoist

[TNRighty]

Medican,

Your words are so typical for a liberal...it is a "coincidence" that Iran released hostages on the VERY DAY Reagan took office. It was only a "coincidence" that Communisim was defeated during Reagan's Presidency. Saddam Huessein's day's were numbered for sure, but I guess it is just a "coincidence" that it happened while Bush was president. I think you honestly believe that anything good accomplished by a Republican president is simply a matter of "coincidence. Sorry, but "coincidence" is what happens when opportunity meets preparation and action.

Clinton had the opportunity to take bin Laden. The Sudanese had him on a silver platter. All Clinton had to do was take action, and the capture of the worlds most dangerous man would have been yet another great "coincidence" in your book.

My point is, you make or break your own "coincidences".

Arch Bishop,

A blessed Tuesday to you as well.

[TNRighty]

Furthermore,

When you set a goal, work hard, and stick to your strategy for accomplishing that goal, it is no simple coincidence when that goal becomes reality. Whether we're talking about defeating communism and terrorism or securing your personal finances, the same concept applies. Things like that are achieved by forethought, proper planning, and fortitude.

Sure, some things happen for little or no reason and with no effort or planning, such as winning the lottery on your birthday. You could call that a coincidence. Or perhaps having the chance to snab bin Laden despite the fact that you did not so much as lift a finger to fight terrorism. That my friend would be a coincidence.

Its like during the movie Dumb and Dumber when the Hawaiian Tropic swimsuit model bus pulls over on the side of the road and tells the two main characters that they are looking for a couple of young studs to participate with them in their cross country tour. The fellas tell the girls that if they just keep going east they will come to a small town where they can probably find some willing volunteers. The girls on the bus look at them disappointingly and then drive off. At that point, Jim Carrey's character says, "Oh, we're so stupid!!!" They chase the bus and it pulls back over with a couple of girls hanging out the window, and Carrey tells them, "Sorry we told you to go East, but the town is to the West." Just as Clinton did, this is the same as not cashing in your lottery ticket...although I doubt ole Willy would've turned down the Hawaiian Tropic babes.

As for your claims about Reagan ruining our national economy, need I remind you that when he took office we had double-digit inflation and double-digit unemployment? It was so bad that people were financing homes on 18% interest rates. In 1979, when adjusted for inflation, gas was the equivalent of about $2.80 in today's dollars. Reagan inherited the worst economy this nation had seen since the great depression and the biggest national security threat since WWII, and under his leadership we succeded in fixing/defeating both. Our nation was in better shape when he left than when he took office, and it wasn't just a coincidence.

[Archbishop Johnson]

TN Righty:

Just wishing you and yours a holy Wednesday. Keep looking up.


AB Johnson