Comments on: Earnest

By: Annoy Mouse

Annoy Mouse — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:12:43 +0000

It’s true that Obama espouses this same ideology that cleaves to unions and community organizations that host historical grievances. This “novus ordo” spoils the status quo, which throws order into disorder. The problem with going toe to toe with leftist reactionaries is that while the conservative paternalistically tries to protect order through strength the committed leftist always seeks anarchy. It is no wonder that when they have the firmest grasp of power that they create the most chaos for change, said in another way, change is chaos. Never threaten a leftist with anarchy nor offer it as a gift.

By: Mike2

Mike2 — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:12:19 +0000

235. Marie Claude: Actually there was a lot of American taxpayers' money that was put into Russia after the dismantling of the Soviet Union especially during the Clinton administration but most of it was stolen by elements of the KGB and the oligarchs and ended up funding criminal enterprises all over the globe. This 1993 article from the NY Times is an example.

By: luddy barsen

luddy barsen — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:10:41 +0000

Bohemond/249; And we’ve seen how so very well it worked out for the USSR. And Cuba. And North Korea

Beg to disagree –it has worked out very well indeed for them –the party leaders die of old age, in bed, rich as Croesus, after long, long careers in unchallenged power.

…unless you were referring not to the leaders but to the workers in those paradises, in which case i withdraw my objection, with alacrity.

By: Annoy Mouse

Annoy Mouse — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:59:20 +0000

Luddy,
Russia has long been insecure of her Geography. It stands to reason that she would perfect a system of belief that on the outside espoused “progressive economics” as it was for them another ring of protection around the power of Moscow. Progressive ideas nary made their way into the Party but it played well to the masses for cover in its near possessions. What better justification of central power than to stand for workers justice while occupying the opulent suits of a decadent but vanquished monarchy.

By: Annoy Mouse

Annoy Mouse — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:55:51 +0000

sarc/

By: Bohemond

Bohemond — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:46:37 +0000

“since “social justice” was one of their better inventions”

Oh, puh-leez. “Social justice” is one of the most pernicious political notions ever concocted. Social justice is when you have more toys than your friends, so your friends hit you over the head and take some of your toys away. That way everyone is equal. That’s social justice.

And we’ve seen how so very well it worked out for the USSR. And Cuba. And North Korea.

By: luddy barsen

luddy barsen — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:46:08 +0000

AM, har har. No really, i’m not ‘double standard’. I’m not i’m not i’m NOT! (stamps feet and shakes fist)

re your 247, i’ve read that same notion somewhere recently –that current admin just isn’t any fun for the kremlin boys –it’s insufficiently ‘serious’. The old days of real adversaries –Reagan & Thatcher, say –seemed to keep them more jolly.

By: Annoy Mouse

Annoy Mouse — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:40:10 +0000

It’s funny but sometimes I think the Russians are jealous of liberal US administration policies since “social justice” was one of their better inventions. The mindset of Russians, as far as I can tell, are extremely conservative and I detect a slight nostalgia for the likes of William F. Buckley. Were it true it would be strange indeed.

By: Annoy Mouse

Annoy Mouse — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:34:17 +0000

Is that what happened to you Luddy?

By: luddy barsen

luddy barsen — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:29:04 +0000

AM/ re ‘rouge’ –a couple or three years ago on this site, a persistent anti-OIF commenter named “Double Standard” made the same spelling error –and became ‘Doable Standard’ (among many other chuckles) evermore. It WAS pretty amusing. i think it’s the sight gag (site gag?) of rouge dictators firing rouge missiles.

RW, that’s about the tenth time you’ve observed how much smarter you are than present company. You may be right, but don’t you think it’s time to broaden out a bit, thematically?