You are here:
Recent comments
Search
Recent comments
-
3 years 33 weeks ago
-
3 years 33 weeks ago
-
3 years 33 weeks ago
-
3 years 33 weeks ago
-
3 years 36 weeks ago
Common Misconceptions
Books by Jay
Conflict and Conciliation: Faith and Politics in an Age of Global Dissonance
Despite the peaceful foundations of global monotheistic religions, the broad diversity of interpretations can lead to a sharp paradox regarding the use of force. Inevitably, we must ask ourselves: How can those who ascribe to peaceful beliefs suspend their own moral foundation to beat the drums of war? ... read more
A self-indulgent blog for people just like me - PhD, author, photographer, entrepreneur, husband, father, music-lover, and uber-geek. More about Jay
Admitted Draft Dodger
Criminal Military Deserter during wartime--Undeniable-
Criminal Cocaine snorter
Criminal Drunk
(admits in office to being a recovering drunk)
Alleged Criminal Insider Trader
Alleged adulterer
Pathological Liar (undeniable)
When asked to run for public office said -
"I don't have any qualifications to be Governor. I have never done anything. I am a product of the media"
Copycat of Hitler--
"God told me to invade to get rid of those terrorists before they attacked us"
Exact words of Bush on Iraq and Hitler on Poland.
clarence swinney
Families--50% end in Divorce
Adultery--studies have show adultery by 60% of married men and 40% of married women.
2004 study of women separated from spouse show 45% admitting to adultery during separation.
Gay--2-6% of adults admit to being Gay.
50--60--45-40----2 to 6%
sort of lopsided virtues.
clarence swinney
Stop being led by the nose thru divisive issues.
The people are most concerned with their individual Standard Of Living(sol).
D refuse to promote the many good things they have achieved for all the people.
-------------------- SHOCK & AWE------------------------
----------DEMOCRATS CREATE WEALTH AND JOBS-----------
1.From Harding In 1921 to Bush in 2003
2.Democrats held White House for 40 years and Republicans for 42.5 years.
3.Democrats created 75,820,000 net new jobs -- Republicans 36,440,000.
4.Per Year Averageâ€â€Democrats 1,825,200---Republicans 856,400.
5.Republicans had 9 presidents during the period and 6 had depression or recession.
6.Republicans had a recession/depression in 177 months and Democrats in 32 months.
7.DOWâ€â€1928 to 2003â€â€Stock market gained 11% average per year under D presidents versus 2% under R presidents. Small Cap stocks gained 18% as yearly average under D and minus 3% under R.
8.GDPâ€â€grew by 43% more under Democrats.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparing Democrat’s hero-CLINTONâ€â€versus Republican’s hero--REAGAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.JOBSâ€â€grew by 43% more under Clinton.
2.GDP---grew by 57% more under Clinton.
3.DOWâ€â€grew by 700% more under Clinton..
4.NASDAQ-grew by 18 times as much under Clinton.
4.SPENDING--grew by 28% under Clinton---80% under Reagan.
5.DEBTâ€â€grew by 43% under Clintonâ€â€187% under Reagan.
6. DEFICITSâ€â€Clinton got a large surplus--grew by 112% under Reagan.
7.NATIONAL INCOMEâ€â€grew by100% more under Clinton.
8.PERSONAL INCOMEâ€â€Grew by 110% more under Clinton.
SOURCESâ€â€Bureau of Labor Statistics (www.BLS.Gov)--Economic Policy Institute (EPI.org)â€â€Global & World Almanacs from 1980 to 2003 (annual issues)
www.the-hamster.com (chart taken from NY Times)
National Archives History on Presidents. www.nara.gov
LA Times 10-11-00 on Market--www.Find articles.com
A vote for a Republican is a vote for Less Success.
A vote to reduce the Standard of Living for all Americans.
Clarence Swinney-Political Historian-Lifeaholics of America-Retired
Please submit comments to cwswinney@netzero.net or P.O. Box 3411-Burlington NC-27216
R lose big time on SOL issues.
Depending on where he was positioned in the building he could've died from blunt force trauma which doesn't do much damage to the outside of the body but is even more deadly than penetrating trauma. If he was beaten, his face probably would've been more messed up. I do find it hard to believe they intubated him(ie secured an airway)because it's unlikely he would've survived 28 minutes without medical intervention. (I'm a long time NYC ER nurse, so this is my educated guess.)
And I really couldn't agree more. My intent is not to justify the actions of war criminals any more than I would give credence to Nazi's who were "just following orders." Once people reach the point that they are a danger to those around them they need to be incarcerated until they are safe to be around, and they need to work the rest of their lives to atone for the evils they committed.
However, my point is to not simply excuse those who create the conditions under which atrocities occur simply because they weren't the performative instruments of the actual act. A Pentagon, White House, and American Public who knowingly and purposly ignore the rule of international law for the illusion of security or, even worse, retribution, must also bear responsibility for the monsters they create.
Of course we have to have sympathy for people in the terrible situation that you describe. Of course we are being manipulated. But my understanding of humanity shatters the moment that somebody successfully argues that situations exist in which we can justifiably lay down the responsibility we must normally accept for our actions: I don't think that we ever can. Furthermore who takes responsibility for determining the situations which warrant this?
Of course, there are mitigating factors that must be considered, and I agree that atrocities are an inevitable consequence of the war mentality. But to justify these actions in this way merely deflects from the issue, I think, and in some way cheapens it.
This linguistic discrimination is very deliberate on the part of the higher-ups. In America in particular, word association seems to have become their favorite game - well, at least the power of language to shape schemata and ideology hasn't been underestimated. By using certain words only for certain groups of people, these groups become more and more separate in people's minds, until we have what we have now: a concept of terrorism which proposes human beings who are not human beings, to whom our own concepts of humanity need not apply. (Because they're evil Islamic terrorists.) On the other hand, people don't WANT to divorce their identity so entirely from the psycopath you mention. On some level, he's one of our own.
The concept of terrorism has become the concept of an external threat to dominant society.
So Zarqawi is dead. That particular maniac won’t be running around anymore and who could knock that? But I’m not going to let you feel like everything is kittens and cotton candy when it’s not. I’m trying to help, dude. This isn’t about partisanship, it’s about the fact that Rumsfeld’s and BushCo’s strategic approach to this war is dead, dead wrong. I’m trying to be specific about how and why. In the process, I’m trying to offer something constructive to the debate rather than sit idly as a vacuous cheering section for yet another false hope.
The insistence of some to snatch a defeat from the hands of an important victory in the war of terror just bemuses me.
From media blogger Ron Franscell @http://underthenews.blogspot.com
Today, a plaque was placed at the site of Hitler's Berlin bunker -- and his death -- by German historians. Some people complained that neo-Nazis might now use the site as a shrine to one of the great criminals of all times. More than 60 years later, we worry about Hitler's symbolism.
Ironically, today we also hold the corpse of Musab al-Zarqawi. Presuming we will not desecrate him any further than dropping two 500-pound bombs on him, how does one dispose of the body of terrorism's great symbols? If you give him back to his people his symbolism will transcend his mortal coil. If you toss him in a dumpster, it doesn't say much about who we are.
What should be done with a monster's corpse?
Wasn't it the entire GOP's talking point in 2000 that it didn't matter that Bush, etc were so dumb because they would surround themselves with smart people?? Who the hell let that one slip by? Democrats problem is that they are the smart kids in class that are force to dumb themselves down to deal with the GOP cretins. I mean, how do you talk to somebody like Bennett and actually try to have a serious discussion? You can't, because Bennett and co. are not using logic to frame the debate, they are using ideology and propaganda and lies.
I needed to take a shower after I watch this episode!!
I found it amazing as well that Bennett chose to even show up. John Stewart smoked him! John Stewart rocks! That conversation with Bennett reminds me of David Letterman's last interview with Bill O'Reilly.
Makes you wonder, though. What dumbass in the GOP invited Steven Colbert to speak at the White House Correspondents' dinner? Whoever he was, he was pretty ignorant....but I'm glad he did invite Steven.
What bozo posted a video of Steven Colbert on a Tom Delay supporter web site, a video in which Colbert "defends" Delay?
All I can say is, I'm glad there are such ignorant bozos in the GOP....makes them look even dumber!
Did you watch the same interview as I did? I saw a woman who never got to bed last night, dressed in a slutty cocktail dress and spouting off about family values. I saw the vile venom of Ann Coulter coming completely unglued as the MSM is finally waking up to her vacuous arguments. I think even Bush would have looked like a genius sitting next to her!
this girl made matt lauer look like a fool.
Check this.
Unfortunately, the cover dates back to May 2002, and is therefore to be considered Old News.
"Mr. Fleischer recalled a virulent period with the media (and Democrats) in May 2002 after a New York Post headline proclaimed that "Bush Knew" in advance about the Sept. 11 attacks.
"That was a vicious explosion that lasted a week," he said. "But the president calculated the press would go too far, and they went so far in their accusations that the country was far more inclined to believe the president than the press." Several polls at the time showed President Bush maintaining his high approval ratings of 75 percent throughout the episode.
"The public perceives the press not as watchdogs but as attack dogs," Mr. Fleischer said."
He knew - and nobody cared.
Nice blog, too. Thank you!
The US was one week into an exercies looking for hijackings whan 9/11 happened
Brilliant post at:
http://aravosisblog.blogspot.com
or go to everydayactivism.blogspot.com to find out more.