Rob Jensen wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:16:49 -0800, Mickey
> <mickey_and_edith@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> Rob Jensen wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:57:32 GMT, Mickey
>>> <mickey_and_edith@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ares, God of War wrote:
>>>>>> Overall he has said on his show repeatedly that he is with the
>>>>>> republicans.
>>>>> If you really watch his show he has said a number of times
>>>>> to conservative/republican guests "So how are we going to
>>>>> win in November?"
>>>> Sorry if you don't understand sarcasm. This sort of remark, is,
>>>> unfortunately,
>>>> what masquerades as a sense of humor for Chris.
>>> Now, that's just you being an apologist for Matthews, Mickey. He
>>> pulls this **** day in and day out, year in and year out. It's not a
>>> joke, viewers and non-Repug pundits don't take it as a joke, so don't
>>> pass it off as one.
>>>
>> Rob, you and the rest of the clods, who name any Democrat who disagrees
>> with your silly ideas a DINO, are just unhappy, unsuccessful fascists.
>
> Oh, I'm going to ignore your invocation of Godwin's Law for a moment
I used the G word, not the H word. Godwin was not invoked.
>
> In fact, Tweety did a backhanded apology on tonight's Hardball, go
> lookee at:
>
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/17/tweety-apologizes-sort-of-for-outlandish-remarks-about-hillary/
>
He also recently made a comment on Late Night t.v. likening the various
Rep. candidates to ****'as, Sunnis, and Kurds.
> And even his attempt to do so, whether you think he's sincere or not
> (I'm giving him the benefit of a very *huge* doubt), he's
> acknowledging that *he* ****ed up in one of those backhanded, "I'm
> sorry you feel that way" sort of way.
>
> BTW, please look up the definition of "fascist" while you're at it.
I'm quite aware that fascist used to refers just to right wing
organizations, but common, present-day usage includes "authoritarian or
intolerant views or practices" independent of nominal political
affiliation. In fact, a book went on sale last week entitled "Liberal
Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the
Politics of Meaning." So, you might want to keep up with the times and
forget about "The Times" ("all the news we can invent whole cloth").
Though I would not use it as a cite in a serious factual discussion,
Wikipedia is a pretty good barometer of contem****ary usage. Their
definition begins with:
"Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a
mass movement) that considers individual and social interests
subordinate to the interests of the state or party."
So, which party deserves the label depends on which party one believes
is more motivated by self interest than core principles. So believing
the Democrats are any less susceptible to fascistic tactics or thought
is naive, at best. It's like the song "Loch Lomond": "you take the left
road and I'll take the right road..." both paths arrive at the same
destination. One could make the sensible argument that today's political
climate empowers the fascistic elements of both parties. Of course, that
take a liberal mind set. (BTW, if you want to be a real stickler for
detail, you might observe that the intersection of Liberal and liberal
is almost a null set, these days.)
> Despising a person and thinking that he's a hypocrite for not
> upholding in practice the values that he says he values is not any
> sort of demonstration of fascism toward Matthews, it's simple and
> well-deserved derision.
But who gets to define what those core values are? You? Now that is
truly risible.
The Other Mickey
|
