Comments on: Mea culpa! Mea maxima ahhhstickitupyerjacksie …

By: SG

SG — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 02:03:36 +0000

“He’s a conservative anti-fascist I knew it! I could tell by his hatred of gays! Send him to the recliner”

By: John Emerson

John Emerson — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:52:02 +0000

I, for one, support the legalization of the dread Comfy Chair. Horrible, yes, but we’d only use it on horrible people, like Pitkin, for example.

By: Barry

Barry — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:05:24 +0000

“fascist! you’ll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes!”

Posted by SG ·

No, it’s liberal fascism. He’ll be first on the massage table.

By: abb1

abb1 — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:56:34 +0000

Hugs and kumbaya administered by trained professionals are most powerful weapons, Genosse Emerson. Make no mistake about it.

By: John Emerson

John Emerson — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:54:14 +0000

I have serious doubts as to whether Lemuel is a liberal fascist at all. I suspect that he is one pof our sworn enemies: a weenie liberal. All the hugs and kumbaya with none of the jackboots.

By: SG

SG — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:04:24 +0000

fascist! you’ll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes!

By: abb1

abb1 — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:37:28 +0000

Why can’t we all get along, sing a song, raise the flag and march where Hillary and The Party lead us?

By: SG

SG — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:50:43 +0000

Oh No! A liberal fascist factional split! Hugs at 10 paces as the 5th Fascist International face off with the New Liberal Fascist International! And the ultimate cause of the split is of course, the matter of diversity – which we all know is fascism in its purest form. When there is so little racial diversity that there are no trolls, should we force other liberals to become trolls? Well do I remember the day when the seemingly invincible Axis of Hugs fell apart over this controversial issue…

By: John Emerson

John Emerson — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:14:24 +0000

Sorry, Lemuel. You go your way and I’ll go mine. You prissy bastard.

By: lemuel pitkin

lemuel pitkin — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:13:36 +0000

I do confess to enjoying debating trolls.

And I confess to thinking that’s an extraordinarily stupid pastime for a clearly intelligent person. Stick with the garden gnomes, is my advice.

By: abb1

abb1 — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:50:09 +0000

He seems to believe it might.

By: Hidari

Hidari — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:53:22 +0000

Yes but Chavez’ plane won’t crash tomorrow. I guarantee you that. That’s the point.

By: abb1

abb1 — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:51:19 +0000

Well, first of all, I’m a typical petit bourgeoise guy, I do not consider myself a radical of any stripe nor do I have any contact whatsoever with any radicals. None of the generalization above (true or false) are relevant here.

Now, c’mon, Hidari. We both know that the US government (the executive branch) is an extremely power and well-organized force. Chavez’ plane might crash tommorow and that’ll be the end of Chavez; these things have happened before.

The US has huge economic and political power. The US is indeed (at the moment) behind most of everything; that is not paranoid, that’s common sense and common knowledge. Almost any decision taken by almost any world government or international organization is checked and double-checked against a possible reaction from Washington. It’s not “the supreme unbeatable Empire”, but it is very strong. At the moment. And, as far as I can tell, for the forseeable future.

By: Hidari

Hidari — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:26:55 +0000

You see Abb1 you do exhibit what I see as one of the key flaws of the radical left (something which another commentator pointed out). If Iraq had turned out to be a ‘success’ then this would have proved that the Americans are omnipotent. However if Iraq is a ‘failure’ then this mysteriously also proves that the US is omnipotent. In fact every single thing can on the planet can be explained as ‘the Americans benefit from this’. Indeed, as you argue above, American failures apparently prove that the US is even stronger than ‘we’ thought.

I know this is a popular line amongst the radical left but it is actually extraordinarily disempowering. Since the US becomes this almost religious force, moving in mysterious ways throughout the world, what is the point of fighting it? (Interestingly, proto-neocons like James Burnham used to talk about Russia in the same way).

The fact is that the US can NOT defeat Chavez. I know that ‘cos they tried and the coup failed. They would try again, but they are bogged down in the middle east. Moreover, again, the US made an effort to attack Iran but it failed because their own intelligence agencies rebelled, mainly because Iraq has been such a fiasco.

I know with the paranoid ‘The US are behind everything, they control the vertical, they control the horizontal’ mindset everything can be explained, and, yes, I know that the British Empire ‘failed its way upwards’. Every ‘defeat’ somehow led to an increase in British power…..for a while. To be more specific, it led to an increase in British power until it didn’t.

I do sometimes suspect that there is something to be said for the old cliche that American nationalists and the radical left are ultimately united in their belief that the US is the supreme unbeatable Empire that will last forever. As I hardly need to remind you, they said the same about Rome.

By: SG

SG — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 00:26:57 +0000

Sewage workers of the world, Unite