wood burning stoves*
The moose likes Meaningless Drivel and the fly likes Rumsfeld wins Harold Laski Memorial Fellowship Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


Win a copy of Spring in Action this week in the Spring forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Other » Meaningless Drivel
Bookmark "Rumsfeld wins Harold Laski Memorial Fellowship" Watch "Rumsfeld wins Harold Laski Memorial Fellowship" New topic
Author

Rumsfeld wins Harold Laski Memorial Fellowship

Alan Labout
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 100
Here are a few quotes from George Orwell on the issue:
"...In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism., question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, 'I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so.'..."
And also:
"...When one watches some tired hack on the platform mechanically repeating the familiar phrases -- bestial, atrocities, iron heel, bloodstained tyranny, free peoples of the world, stand shoulder to shoulder -- one often has a curious feeling that one is not watching a live human being but some kind of dummy: a feeling which suddenly becomes stronger at moments when the light catches the speaker's spectacles and turns them into blank discs which seem to have no eyes behind them. And this is not altogether fanciful. A speaker who uses that kind of phraseology has gone some distance toward turning himself into a machine. The appropriate noises are coming out of his larynx, but his brain is not involved as it would be if he were choosing his words for himself. If the speech he is making is one that he is accustomed to make over and over again, he may be almost unconscious of what he is saying, as one is when one utters the responses in church. And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favorable to political conformity...."
The link to the entire essay:
Orwell essay

p.s. Sorry to start this new thread....I got locked out of the other one.
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
The other one was closed because I misused articles again.


Uncontrolled vocabularies
"I try my best to make *all* my posts nice, even when I feel upset" -- Philippe Maquet
Anonymous
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 22, 2008
Posts: 18944
Must be I'm missing something. You've hijacked your own thread at the first post? What's Orwell got to do with Rumsfeld???
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
Map: The other one was closed because I misused articles again.
Map, you don't misuse them - you're simply creative in their application
Joe
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Rufus: What's Orwell got to do with Rumsfeld???
Speaking about unknown knowns (or known unknowns), the idea was so prominent, it got further development:
"There are unknown unknowns that will become known, unknown unknowns that may become known, unknown unknowns that may or may not become known and unknown unknowns that we know will never become known. The question is whether the unknown unknowns are inherently unknowable, and if they are not, the challenge is to make sure that the inherently knowable unknowns become known unknowns and, ultimately, known knowns."
(found in http://www.lingvoda.ru/forum/actualthread.aspx?bid=2&tid=803&pg=-1 (warning: mostly Rus. language))
--------------------------------
"I can't think of an answer that's funnier than the original question." -- Joe English
NOT the comp.text.sgml FAQ
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Joe: Map, you don't misuse them - you're simply creative in their application
Politically-correct speech in MD!
--------------------
"This isn't a signature, I just typed in something under a dotted line." -- Pauline McNamara
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
There are unknown unknowns that will become known, unknown unknowns that may become known, unknown unknowns that may or may not become known and unknown unknowns that we know will never become known. The question is whether the unknown unknowns are inherently unknowable, and if they are not, the challenge is to make sure that the inherently knowable unknowns become known unknowns and, ultimately, known knowns.
I agree completely. This is in fact the nature of all pure research. Through careful, quantifiable observation to identify that which we do not know, then through deductive and inductive reasoning to make theories as to what those things are, and finally through experimentation to validate those theories. The end result? Unknown unknowns become known knowns.
Joe
Rufus BugleWeed
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 22, 2002
Posts: 1551
Now that I've read the foot in mouth award thread, I too concur with Pluta. Rumsfeld is truly amazing. My god, the man answers the questions those mindless parrots ask him. And he answers them clearly. How did he ever go so far in politics, I cannot phathom.
I could see myself looking down at a reporter asking a question, shaking my head no with rolling eyes, and going on to the next question.
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
My god, the man answers the questions those mindless parrots ask him.
I couldn't agree more. To ask for evidence of anything is the dumbest thing a homo sapiens can do. "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", so what's the point in asking?
Michael Ernest
High Plains Drifter
Sheriff

Joined: Oct 25, 2000
Posts: 7292

RB: Rumsfeld is truly amazing. My god, the man answers the questions those mindless parrots ask him. And he answers them clearly.
You make it sound as if he's doing us all some great favor. He's a public servant; it's his job to answer questions put to him.
RB: How did he ever go so far in politics, I cannot phathom.
Rumsfeld has not held an elected position since 1969, when he resigned from a fourth term in Congress (from IL) to serve as an assistant to Nixon. Since then his political career is a list of appointments.
RB: I could see myself looking down at a reporter asking a question, shaking my head no with rolling eyes, and going on to the next question.
He does that quite frequently, as do many cabinet members and appointed officials who are asked to answer questions. It's not exactly news.


Make visible what, without you, might perhaps never have been seen.
- Robert Bresson
Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
There was an episode of Saturday Night Live last season that had a spoof of a Rumsfeld press conference on the situation in Iraq. Whenever a reporter would ask him a question, he would answer with a line from Nancy Sinatra's These Boots are Made for Walkin'. Very funny stuff.
Alan Labout
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 100
Originally posted by Rufus BugleWeed:
[QB]Now that I've read the foot in mouth award thread, I too concur with Pluta. Rumsfeld is truly amazing. My god, the man answers the questions those mindless parrots ask him. And he answers them clearly.[QB]

Clearly?! The journalist's question was about as straightforward as it could be; a simple "yes" or "no" would have sufficed. Instead, Rumsfeld chose to display his rhetoro-philosophical bent by constructing a virtually impenetrable sentence. Which is not to say that the sentence is completely meaningless--if you wrestled with it for a few minutes you could find what he meant to say--just that it wouldn't make for as convenient a sound bite as "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." Obviously, Rumsfeld is no fool--especially when it comes to issues of accountability.
Alan Labout
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 100
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
I couldn't agree more. To ask for evidence of anything is the dumbest thing a homo sapiens can do. "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", so what's the point in asking?

Map, are you saying that the U.S. attacked Iraq without any evidence?
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
Hey! Look! We're going to have yet ANOTHER "the Bush Administration sucks and can't be trusted for anything and lied to us about Iraq all along" thread!
What fun!
Joe
Rufus BugleWeed
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 22, 2002
Posts: 1551
I think I heard Don do it live. I thought, yeah. Don should be president.
I love that guy.
"the Bush Administration sucks and can't be trusted for anything and lied to us about Iraq all along"

That's the sad truth. Condolezzeeaaaa Rice is not truly amazing.
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Rufus BugleWeed ]
Alan Labout
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 100
Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
Hey! Look! We're going to have yet ANOTHER "the Bush Administration sucks and can't be trusted for anything and lied to us about Iraq all along" thread!
What fun!
Joe

Joe, if I'd thought that this would turn into yet another anti-administration thread, I wouldn't have started it. What's more interesting for me is how we are made (by both sides of the political spectrum, not only this administration) to believe things about subjects that we ourselves have no direct information or experience about. The specifics of the message are irrelevant to the discussion. I'm sure that you could find examples where Democratic presidents--even Clinton--misled us using vacuous rhetoric, and in fact, such examples would be equally appreciated....
Alan
Michael Ernest
High Plains Drifter
Sheriff

Joined: Oct 25, 2000
Posts: 7292

"It depends on what the definition of 'is' is."
Said with a remarkably straight face, I might add. No mean feat.
Rufus BugleWeed
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 22, 2002
Posts: 1551
Find us another president that said he did not believe in nation building and then blatantly lied in the run up to the most audacious nation building scheme we have ever seen. Find us another president and rebublican administration that calls for smaller government and brings to fruition a 7 trillion dollar entitlement to prescription drugs. Find us another example of an administration that comes in with a budget surplus and turns it and more into the biggest give to the wealthy the world has ever seen.
George Bush and his plan to bankrupt the US is treason.
AW I'm done.
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Rufus BugleWeed ]
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
I'm sure that you could find examples where Democratic presidents...
Undoubtedly. And so could you. I guess my point is that there are people here whom I can count on to slam the Republicans, and others who are pretty sure to slam the Democrats. But it's always done in the name of "truth" or some other higher calling. "Really, I want to talk about XYZ, and just incidentally about how, since your candidate does XYZ, he sucks donkey ears."
It would seem to me that if the goal truly were to address concepts without political agenda, then it would be FAR more convincing if folks with clear political bias used their OWN parties as the examples. This might center the discussion on the issue as opposed to immediately throw the discussion into My Party Mode.
Just a thought.
Joe
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Al: What's more interesting for me is how we are made (by both sides of the political spectrum, not only this administration) to believe things about subjects that we ourselves have no direct information or experience about.
Al, may I ask, did you personally believe there was an urgent need to invade Iraq? I think, the problem has two sides: 1) technical (rhetorical) devices a propagandist uses 2) compliance of propagandee (and this will bring us to psychological part of the problem.
Here is an interesting observation.
Frank Silbermann:
"I, personally, was terrified by the audacity of Bush's intentions, but I decided I had no choice but to trust him -- after being so disgusted by the outrageousness of his critics going into the war."
Page 3 of "Protest Marches"

--------------------
"Let's not beat around the bush" - Joe Pluta
Alan Labout
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 100
Map: Al, may I ask, did you personally believe there was an urgent need to invade Iraq? I think, the problem has two sides: 1) technical (rhetorical) devices a propagandist uses 2) compliance of propagandee (and this will bring us to psychological part of the problem.
Given my previous posts, your question seems almost rhetorical, but to answer it: no, I did not see any real need--urgent or otherwise--to invade Iraq. That said, I have to admit that I might have been persuaded to keep my objections to myself had the administration been less transparent with the rhetoric it used to support its actions. For me, the final straw of condescension came when the State Department issued playing cards depicting Iraq's Most Wanted, complete with evil-sounding nicknames like "Chemical Ali" and "The Butcher of Baghdad"--all of which was about as insulting to my intelligence as anything I'd care to witness on an official level.
I can't say that I'm particularly supportive of either Democrats or Republicans, but at the very least I can say that the consequences of people believing Clinton's lies (those regarding his tryst, at least) are much less tragic than those of believing Rumsfeld's.
...But again we're getting off the subject at hand, which is how we can distinguish propaganda from other forms of information. Or would you say that all information is a form of propaganda of some sort or the other?
Alan Labout
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 100
Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
It would seem to me that if the goal truly were to address concepts without political agenda, then it would be FAR more convincing if folks with clear political bias used their OWN parties as the examples.


Okay, you go first...
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
Okay, you go first...
You started the thread, Al, with a pretty standard polarizing commentary.
Hey, make light of my idea if you want, but frankly I'm getting to the point where I think any chance of honest discussion is being drowned in political BS. In general, statements here are really just about how cleverly one can whack the other's politics than about any real search for meaningful dialog. It's actually quite boring.
Joe
Alan Labout
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 100
Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
Okay, you go first...
You started the thread, Al, with a pretty standard polarizing commentary.
Hey, make light of my idea if you want, but frankly I'm getting to the point where I think any chance of honest discussion is being drowned in political BS.

It was a joke, Joe. Actually, I agree with your idea; it's just hard to imagine that anyone would voluntarily give examples making the people who share his political beliefs look silly. Maybe the challenge would be to find two analagous quotes (both examples of propaganda) arguing opposite sides of the same issue? This way we could focus on the rhetoric without getting dragged into the politics. For example, could we find an anti-war quote using the same technique that Rumsfeld uses?
If so, Map is probably the one who would be best qualified to do this. Hey Map...?
Alan
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Wait, wait, I am still working on answering your n-3 reply...
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Here!
Al: ...But again we're getting off the subject at hand, which is how we can distinguish propaganda from other forms of information. Or would you say that all information is a form of propaganda of some sort or the other?
I somehow managed to stay away from politics for my first years here, it's only after 9/11, when I started (slowly) to accustom myself with the difference between Democrats and Republicans (I am still not sure I got it right). When all this Iraqi craziness started, I couldn't believe my eyes and ears, it's like I was in the Soviet Union again. Now I understand that the short period of time I lived in, "perestroika" and what followed, was not "democracy" how I naively believed. It was a period of chaos, when there is no propaganda only because there is pretty much nothing at all.
Or would you say that all information is a form of propaganda of some sort or the other?
All my deep knowledge of propaganda came from 0394718747 book, and there the author defines propaganda as information which is designed to mobilize the reader for some actions (or at least prevent him from taking actions (see -- I am a sexist pig too! )). The book is interesting; I hesitate to recommend it, though, because the author doesn't bother to support his ideas with any kind of evidence, he just puts on paper what's on his mind. And what's on his mind is that propaganda cannot work in vacuum, it is doomed to use "what's already here" -- national myths, believes, traditions etc. That's why I was so pissed to learn that American children are supposed to retell the Pledge of Allegiance every day -- this is nothing but fertile ground for future propaganda to thrive on.
On the other hand, his idea is that no contemporary society can exist without propaganda. Because no sane man left on his own would go to war -- he has no personal interest in doing so. It takes an art of propaganda to arouse him enough that he would be willing to sacrifice his life for um... whatever it is. Maybe cynically, but true.
This is why I have controversial feelings about this war. Propaganda was shamelessly blatant, but this is the final result that counts. If Iraqi people will have better life as a result (which isn't obvious so far), then all lies about WMD are justified, I would say.
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
That's why I was so pissed to learn that American children are supposed to retell the Pledge of Allegiance every day
This still cracks me up. I love the pledge of allegiance, and I also sing the national anthem before every sporting event I attend - and yes, in school competition, all students are required to stand for the anthem prior to every game.
I assume you consider that to be some sort of mind control as well .
Joe
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Joe: Hey, make light of my idea if you want, but frankly I'm getting to the point where I think any chance of honest discussion is being drowned in political BS.
Joe, you are just pissed about my clever use of your quote in my signature.
--------------------
"Let's not beat around the bush" - Joe Pluta
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Joe: I assume you consider that to be some sort of mind control as well
No, I consider that to be some sort of critical thinking at work. :roll:
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Joe: I love the pledge of allegiance, and I also sing the national anthem before every sporting event I attend - and yes, in school competition, all students are required to stand for the anthem prior to every game.
Ok, I am being arrogant here so you can slap me as much as you want... But I think it’s a lack of experience that makes you, Joe, believe in your national anthem so... so... Well, the exact word is not important.
In fact, I envy you, I wish I could live all my life cherishing one anthem... No such luck.
I remember the day when me and my girlfriend (actually she was my co-worker) were on voting place, it was 1988 or 1989, hard to say now.... First free elections, and we were "independent observers" or something like this :roll: Our mission was to watch how papers are counted, so our "democratic" candidate would not loose because of communistic frauds. After elections ended, the main guy put on an old Soviet anthem, everybody stood up, we two also. When I stood and listened to the old anthem, I had one word "Kafka" in my mind. It was almost like to listen to your enemy anthem, it was just weird. Then they started to count papers, and we watched, and then we wrote down the numbers and called the Center... Yet most people voted for the communist candidate in that district.
They guy whose elections we "checked" was a chief of a big company that employed the best programmers in my city. He died few years later, rumors were he was poisoned, but who knows.
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]
Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
Originally posted by Alan Labout:
no, I did not see any real need--urgent or otherwise--to invade Iraq.

Do you consider yourself to be in a position, to possess the requisite knowledge, to make an accurate determination regarding the need to invade Iraq?
AL: That said, I have to admit that I might have been persuaded to keep my objections to myself had the administration been less transparent with the rhetoric it used to support its actions.
So the basis of your objection is rhetoric? Have you considered the possibility that what you call rhetoric may actually be convictions?
For me, the final straw of condescension came when the State Department issued playing cards depicting Iraq's Most Wanted, complete with evil-sounding nicknames like "Chemical Ali" and "The Butcher of Baghdad"--all of which was about as insulting to my intelligence as anything I'd care to witness on an official level.
Were these cards released for your benefit? Do you actually believe they were released as a propaganda ploy? For that matter, do you know why they were released? They were released as memory aids to better help coalition forces recognize the people they were after. They weren't for your benefit, they were for the benefit of the troops on the ground. This also isn't the first time the US military has used similar aids. As for the "evil sounding nicknames", these people had these nicknames prior to this war. Additionally the nicknames are used as they are easier for troops to remember than Mohammed Al-Douri or some such name. Or do you object because the nicknames are "evil sounding"? Do you think somebody responsible for using chemical weapons against civilians is evil, or just misunderstood?
I can't say that I'm particularly supportive of either Democrats or Republicans, but at the very least I can say that the consequences of people believing Clinton's lies (those regarding his tryst, at least) are much less tragic than those of believing Rumsfeld's.
Your implication being that the Rumsfeld has told us lies. There is of course no evidence of this (as opposed to Clinton, for exampe). The next thing you imply is that invading Iraq was "tragic". On what do you base this? The fact that one of the 20th centuries most brutal and murderous dictators has been deposed? That millions of Iraqis are now free? That tthere will be no more mass graves filled? That he will no longer use chemical weapons against his people and his neighbors? Just exactly what is "tragic" about deposing Saddam Hussein?
Or would you say that all information is a form of propaganda of some sort or the other?
I can see how legitimate information might be viewed as propaganda, particularly when the receiver of the information does not hold sufficient facts of a given situation, or may otherwise hold some personal bias against the transmitter of the information.
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]
Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
Ok, I am being arrogant here so you can slap me as much as you want... But I think it’s a lack of experience that makes you, Joe, believe in your national anthem so... so... Well, the exact word is not important.
Maybe it is you who has the lack of experience? Just because you may have not had any legitmate reason to feel pride in your particular nation does not mean it is so for everyone else. While you are fond of constantly drawing parallels between an opressed communist society and a free democratic one, I submit that while some of these things may appear similar on the surface, deep down they may really be quite different.
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
But I think it�s a lack of experience that makes you, Joe, believe in your national anthem
Nope, it's just acknowledging the fact that I won the Great Lottery of Birth, and am a citizen of, in my opinion, the freest and most wonderful nation on the planet. I love my country, I love its principals, and I'm not afraid to announce that to the world. My heart really hurts for those who don't have that luxury.
You're hardly in a position to know the joy and honor I feel about my country of birth, Map, since you have no such feelings about your own. For that I am sorry, but your feelings for your country don't give you the right to belittle my feelings for mine.
Joe
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
Joe: (referring to the tradition of standing for the national anthem before a game) I assume you consider that to be some sort of mind control as well

Map: No, I consider that to be some sort of critical thinking at work.
You consider the fact that we stand for the national anthem to be critical thinking at work?
Or do you disagree with standing for the national anthem before a game, like you disagree with children standing for the pledge of allegiance before the school day?
Joe
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Jason: Maybe it is you who has the lack of experience?
It could be. Then tell me what experience I lack?
Just because you may have not had any legitmate reason to feel pride in your particular nation does not mean it is so for everyone else.
Oh, I did. I did feel pride in my nation. In fact, I still do, kind of. But then, it's the US of A who saved the World from Fascist threat, or am I wrong? Why do you try to rip me of my well-deserved pride in my nation, any ideas?
While you are fond of constantly drawing parallels between an opressed communist society and a free democratic one, I submit that while some of these things may appear similar on the surface, deep down they may really be quite different.
This is a comforting thought, I agree. So far I did not find any significant difference deep down, sorry to say it. I strongly suspect there isn't any. But I respect your right to believe in my lack of experience.
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]
Michael Ernest
High Plains Drifter
Sheriff

Joined: Oct 25, 2000
Posts: 7292

It doesn't sound to me like she's belittling them. It sounds to me like Map is just surprised at what seems like a certain wide-eyed naivete in what you say.
Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
It could be. Then tell me what experience I lack?

Growing up in a free society. That's not your fault of course. As Joe has said, I just happened to have won the lottery and have been born in one of the better societies this planet had to offer. These early experiences shape us and color our perceptions. Where you see state sponsored brainwashing behind everything, I see free expression.
The bias is quite evident really. One who proudly stands and salutes the flag is brainwashed according to what you would seem to have us believe, while someone who would have a knee-jerk reaction against saluting the flag would be an enlightened free-thinker.
But then, it's the US of A who saved the World from Fascist threat, or am I wrong
You're wrong. It was the Communist threat.
I strongly suspect there isn't any.
That too must be a comforting thought.
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
It doesn't sound to me like she's belittling them. It sounds to me like Map is just surprised at what seems like a certain wide-eyed naivete in what you say.
And please tell me a phrase you find naive. I realize that patriotism and love of country are no longer politically correct among a certain segment of the population, but they're sure as hell not signs of "wide-eyed naivete". If you're going to bandy words like naive around, back 'em up, Michael.
Joe
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Joe Pluta ]
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Joe: Nope, it's just acknowledging the fact that I won the Great Lottery of Birth, and am a citizen of, in my opinion, the freest and most wonderful nation on the planet. I love my country, I love its principals, and I'm not afraid to announce that to the world.
Err.. Ok.
My heart really hurts for those who don't have that luxury.
What???
You're hardly in a position to know the joy and honor I feel about my country of birth, Map, since you have no such feelings about your own.
You think you know what I feel about my country? I cry every time I see anything that reminds me my country. I am becoming an expert in how to stop crying before anybody noticed it. There is 101 recepts to stop your crying, the first is... But it will be lost on you, Joe.
Speaking about "the joy and honor" -- hey, I had all this when I was 12. I cannot say it made me particularly happy, and this is the last thing I regret among what I lost.
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]
Joe Pluta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 1376
Speaking about "the joy and honor" -- hey, I had all this when I was 12. I cannot say it made me particularly happy, and this is the last thing I regret among what I lost.
And yet sometimes it seems that you hate anybody who still has theirs. Why else would you try to take it away?
I still love my country and everything it stands for, warts and all. And I'm a lot older than 12. I've seen the good and bad of my country, far more than you'd probably be able to guess, and I'm able to honestly say that on balance I believe that America is the greatest country on the planet.
Passing on a joy of and duty towards America is something I'll be proud to do. Maybe to you the world is just a big global melting pot and borders are passe, but I'm in no hurry to melt with the world just yet.
Joe
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Joe Pluta ]
 
permaculture playing cards
 
subject: Rumsfeld wins Harold Laski Memorial Fellowship