Letters to the Editor
-
Thomas Jefferson Derangement Syndrome
“While he acknowledges that some past Presidents were also hated..”
Yes, Berkowitz did mention “John Adams hatred” but what he didn’t mention was just who John Adams hated: Thomas Jefferson.
“If there is a law about progressive presidencies it is not that they run in recurring cycles like a regular alignment of the planets, but that in their efforts to create a new consensus they become the object of intense opposition. The opposition fails to distinguish between hatred of the man and hatred of his politics. And an attack on morals has always gone hand in hand with an attack on politics. Members of what became Thomas Jefferson's party were hounded, fined, and imprisoned under the Alien and Sedition Acts signed by President John Adams--"the reign of witches," Jefferson called it. Jefferson himself was assailed as a godless anarchist, a sexual mauler, an adulterer, a betrayer of friends, a chronic liar, and, lastly, a keeper of a black concubine.” ~ The Clinton Wars, Sidney Blumenthal
Now if I was imprisoned for supporting Thomas Jefferson, I suppose I could work up a good case of “John Adams Derangement Syndrome” - on a good day, anyway.
Berkowitz’s attempt to paint “Bush hatred” as something “new” or different does not withstand even a cursory glance at history.
http://hnn.us/articles/1473.html
-
The bottom line, Mikes
...is that by using Democrat Party instead of Democratic Party (the actual name), you are aligning yourself with those members of the GOP who have used a war of words and labels against the Dems. (That abbreviation seems to be okay.)
A few years ago, there was a big brouhaha, long since forgotten except by folks like me) when some GOP ad tried using "subliminal" messages, including a fraction of Democrats, which faded to "rats."
Many members of the GOP still continue to use Democrat Party now, ranging from the likes of McCain to Bush, even though they know it's incorrect. Is disliked. And is an irritant. Just one more signal from the GOP that they really don't want to "get along."
-
The BDS test.
Here's the test... have you ever written anything positive about Bush?
If not, you are suffering from BDS. Anyone so afflicted cannot admit the possibility that Bush has done anything worthwhile at anytime, in any way. It's a worldview that cannot be broached by reality without doing severe damage to the patient. Also often accompanied by delusions of grandeur and infatuation with totalitarian dictators.
Also described as prejudice, bigotry. -
Leave Bush Alone!
http://thebluevoice.blogspot.com/2007/11/has-glenn-greenwald-drunk-ron-paul-kool.html
-
Yes!
Shooter... The BDS test.
Here's the test... have you ever written anything positive about Bush?
He'll be out of office soon and never president again!
-
@Brian Stegner
Candidate Giuliani Names Berkowitz to Foreign Policy Team
http://tinyurl.com/397avt
If the Wall Street Journal is a waste of time because no one reads it, and it need not be paid any attention to, Mr. Stegner, why then did Giuliani's Foreign Policy adviser bother to post his op/ed on the pages of the WSJ?
-
Aw, Shooter
That last little rant was one of your more deranged posts, and that's saying something.
The fact is, that Bush hasn't done anything worthwhile, since birth, and the immense damage he has inflicted since sleazily usurping undeserved power has made him, quite simply, one of history's great malefactors.
From his expensive but utterly squandered education, to his sadistic childhood and adolescent "pranks," his reckless drunken escapades, his multiple business failures, gleeful executions, and his uninterrupted trashing of America's image, finances, military, etc., to call the guy a loser is far too charitable.
That's not derangement, that's getting adequate blood to the brain.
-
@shooter242
Here's the test... have you ever written anything positive about Bush?
If not, you are suffering from BDS. Anyone so afflicted cannot admit the possibility that Bush has done anything worthwhile at anytime, in any way.
That doesn't make any sense at all. The use of a clinical-sounding term (it's a "syndrome") combined with your attempt to apply a "test" suggests a rational framework for the accusation that does not exist.
Even if you had asked if someone had ever thought or said anything positive about Bush (and I have done that), it's still nonsense; history is filled with polarizing figures for whom some cannot find a kind word; this is not any kind of "syndrome" (and certainly not "derangement"); it's simply the nature of debate. But to apply the "test" to someone's writing is even more illogical because it ignores the selection process that writers employ when gauging what merits their written criticism. (For example, an ombudsman at a school "only" discusses wrongdoing; this is his or her job, not any kind of syndrome.) Some commenters on blogs only chime in when they've figured out a way to attack the majority opinion on the blog; I'm sure you're aware of examples of this. In none of these cases is "balance" required or expected, nor is it evidence of the absense of any "derangement syndrome."
Of course your backup argument is the usual cobbled-together effluvia (designed to expose "hypocrisy"); I won't go into it except to point out that even if every instance you cite is correct it does nothing to alter anyone's cumulative assessment of Bush.
-
The BS test
Here's the test...have you ever written anything negative (or, hell, scratch that, let's just try objective) about Bush...or admitted you were wrong...or responded in any substantive way to any of the zomgwtfbbqpwnages you get here on a daily basis and without which my day would seem several hours longer, thank you very much for playing?
I'd write something positive if I could find a single goddamn thing that hasn't been at the very least overshadowed by everything else this administration's been responsible for. And he's responsible for the administration, so he gets the call. Ta-da.
-
Scooter digging for dirt
The BDS test.
If not, you are suffering from BDS. Anyone so afflicted cannot admit the possibility that Bush has done anything worthwhile at anytime, in any way.
-- shooter242
Bush was coordinated when he threw a fine ceremonial 'first pitch' from the pitchers mound to the catcher at home plate. Most of those ceremonial first pitches bounce in the dirt, or are lobbed from half way between home plate and the pitcher's mound. The ceremonies are usually embarrassing spectacles.