[Rhodes22-list] Political reply to Ben C - you are kidding?
Benjamin Cittadino
bigben65 at earthlink.net
Sun Oct 26 00:34:55 EDT 2008
Herb;
I think it is important to point out that among the very first quotes you
cite from Sarah Palin as complimentary to her is from her convention
acceptance speech. She quoted a "writer" (presumably a writer she admires)
who said, "we grow good people in our small towns...etc".
An innocuous enough statement, except that it was written by WESTBROOK
PEGLER. We must assume she is a fan of old PEGLER, don't you think? I mean
why choose him to quote from if you don't follow his philosophy. She could
have chosen from thousands of writers complimentary to small town life
(especially since she is so well read and intelligent, according to her
supporters)
Well, Herb look up Sarah's role model will you? He was among the most evil
people ever to walk in this great country. He was a virulent racist and
anti-semite. Ask Brad or Ed, they'll tell you.
The man was a "MORON", and an evil stinking waste of a human body.
Frank Rich had this to say on this subject recently in the NY Times:
No less disconcerting was a still-unexplained passage of Palin’s convention
speech: Her use of an unattributed quote praising small-town America (as
opposed to, say, Chicago and its community organizers) from Westbrook
Pegler, the mid-century Hearst columnist famous for his anti-Semitism,
racism and violent rhetorical excess. After an assassin tried to kill F.D.R.
at a Florida rally and murdered Chicago’s mayor instead in 1933, Pegler
wrote that it was “regrettable that Giuseppe Zangara shot the wrong man.” In
the ’60s, Pegler had a wish for Bobby Kennedy: “Some white patriot of the
Southern tier will spatter his spoonful of brains in public premises before
the snow falls.”
Sarah was sending a mesaage to us Herb. Were you listening? I was. I know
exactly where she stands. Now so do you. If you help her get elected you
will have no one to blame but yourself when she carries out her agenda.
Ben Cittadino
Frank Rich recently referred to this subject in the NYTimes as follows,
hparsons wrote:
>
> No Ben, you're not "on to something". You're picking the worst of her
> statements, and comparing them to the bets of Obama's.
>
> Obama and his campaign public ridiculed McCain because he didn't use the
> internet, with the clear implication it was because of his age. Is that
> the "inspire us to be and do great" man your presenting? I don't think so.
>
> Here's a famous one from Obama:
> "they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like
> them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to
> explain their frustrations."
>
> Not exactly a "unifying" message, especially if you happen to like guns
> or religion.
>
> And even though he doesn't want her included in the election, Michelle
> Obama's now infamos "For the first time, I'm proud to be an American"
> have meaning, and are worth noting.
>
> And Palin responded to both messages (if not the exact words). She said:
>
> A writer observed: 'We grow good people in our small towns, with
> honesty, sincerity, and dignity.' I know just the kind of people that
> writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.
>
> I grew up with those people. They are the ones who do some of the
> hardest work in America … who grow our food, run our factories, and
> fight our wars. They love their country, in good times and bad, and
> they’re always proud of America. I had the privilege of living most of
> my life in a small town.
>
> Now, those words might not inspire the academic elite, but there are
> common people like myself for whom they have meaning.
>
> And you notice, nary a word of sarcasm, division, or mean-spiritedness.
> I couldn't say the same of either of the comments made by the Obama's.
>
> Here are some more from her that say a lot without being divisive, mean
> spirited, or even sarcastic (with one small exception, the last one):
>
> =====
> Politics isn't just a game of competing interests and clashing parties.
> The people of America expect us to seek public office and to serve for
> the right reasons. And the right reason is to challenge the status quo
> and to serve the common good.
> -=-
> The right reason (for politics) is to challenge the status quo, to serve
> the common good, and to leave this nation better than we found it.
> -=-
> Now, no one expects us to agree on everything, whether in Juneau or in
> Washington. But we are expected to govern with integrity and good will
> and clear convictions and a servant's heart.
> -=-
> I came to office promising major ethics reform, to end the culture of
> self-dealing. And today, that ethics reform is the law.
> -=-
> And among the many things I owe them is one simple lesson: that this is
> America, and every woman can walk through every door of opportunity.
> -=-
> I am a Washington outsider. I do not have those allegiances to the power
> brokers, to the lobbyists. We need someone like that in Washington,
> someone committed to the American people and implementing their will,
> not the power brokers’ will.
> -=-
> I believe in the strength and the power of women, and the potential of
> every human life
> -=-
> Every child, of every ability, is to be cherished and loved and taught.
> Every child provides this world hope. They are the most beautiful
> ingredient in our sometimes muddied up world. I am committed to our
> children and their education. Stepping through “the door” is about more
> than passing a standardized test. We need kids prepared to pass life’s
> tests–like getting a job and valuing a strong work ethic.
> -=-
> This one, though a little bit sarcastic, sums up MY attitude about
> Obama's "style"
>
> But listening to him (Barack Obama) speak, it's easy to forget that this
> is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or
> reform, not even in the state Senate.
>
> Personally, I believe what you're doing is looking for excuses on why
> you dislike Palin that sound better than the truth of "She messed up our
> plans for an easy victory"
> //
> Brad Haslett wrote:
>> Ben,
>>
>> Yeah, you're on to something. When my wife listens to Obama she hears
>> Chairman Mao.
>>
>> Brad
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Benjamin Cittadino
>> <bigben65 at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> You know Brad,Herb and Ed, I have been trying to think of a way to
>>> express my
>>> biggest problem with Palin. I think I may have the germ of an idea, not
>>> fully formed yet but I'd be interested in your reaction. Ross Perot,
>>> crazy
>>> little bugger that he was, did have a point when he said that one of the
>>> most important jobs of the President was to make use of the "bully
>>> pulpit"
>>> that the office provides. The Pres has no legislative or judicial power
>>> but
>>> it is the power of inspiration and advocacy, and the power to make
>>> Americans
>>> feel good about themselves, and/or become motivated to meet great
>>> challenges
>>> as a nation that makes the office so important.
>>>
>>> Think about listening to FDR, Kennedy, Reagan and Bush Sr. These men
>>> moved
>>> us to handle the challenges of their times. Clinton was such a man as
>>> well.
>>> When we listen to Barak Obama speak, I believe most Americans hear
>>> similar
>>> inspiration. Even you men, if you could forget what you think you know
>>> about his past, if you just LISTEN to the words, he makes everybody who
>>> listens to him want to be and do great.
>>>
>>> When people listen to Ms Palin, half are inspired to hate the other
>>> half.
>>> In the words of "W", she's a divider not a uniter. Her sarcastic and
>>> mean
>>> spirited references to real Americans vs. THE OTHERS, is a call to the
>>> worst
>>> in each of us, a call to blame THEM for our troubles.
>>>
>>> Do you see? Do you hear it? Am I on to something here?
>>>
>>> Ben C.
>>>
>>> TN Rhodey-2 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Herb, I do see the difference. I also understand the scholarship is not
>>>> for
>>>> raising your kids. Do you see that? You ignored that part of my post. I
>>>> wonder why?
>>>>
>>>> My definition would includes the most prestigious scholarship i am
>>>> aware
>>>> of.
>>>> Can you name a more prestigious academic scholarship? You respond to my
>>>> post
>>>> but never answered the question. I do agree that more people seek a HS
>>>> diploma than a Rhodes Scholarship. You will argue the silliest things.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway iyou agreed with main point....a Rhodes Scholarship does not
>>>> make
>>>> one
>>>> a good person or president.
>>>>
>>>> Wally
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 1:46 PM, Herb Parsons
>>>> <hparsons at parsonsys.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Ben's Definition - "single most prestigious, competitive, sought
>>>>> after,
>>>>> challenging, and rewarding academic honor…"
>>>>> Wally's Definition - "a highly sought after ACADEMIC scholarship"
>>>>>
>>>>> I do hope you see the difference between the two. I'd be willing to
>>>>> make
>>>>> a bet with anyone on here, ANYONE. I'd be willing to bet that there
>>>>> are
>>>>> more people seeking a high school diploma in any one year than there
>>>>> are
>>>>> seeking Rhodes scholarships. I think a HS diploma would be a much more
>>>>> sought after honor.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's the problem with hyperbole. People get so caught up in saying
>>>>> things that they quickly lose track of what they are saying.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, the real point to this is:
>>>>>
>>>>> Does having gaining a Rhodes scholarship make on more qualified for
>>>>> the
>>>>> white house? I don't think so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> TN Rhodey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ed, Perhaps you are letting your opinion of Clinton tarnish the
>>>>>>
>>>>> achievement
>>>>>
>>>>>> of a Rhodes Scholarship. As Ben mentioned it is a highly sought
>>>>>> after ACADEMIC scholarship. This is not his definition this is
>>>>>> reality.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Is
>>>>>
>>>>>> there a more prestigious post graduate scholarship offered?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A Rhodes scholarship is not awarded for raising a family or imparting
>>>>>>
>>>>> your
>>>>>
>>>>>> approved values. It is nothing like Mormons sent abroad.....they
>>>>>> were
>>>>>>
>>>>> not
>>>>>
>>>>>> selected for their mission based on academics. Many who achieve the
>>>>>>
>>>>> academic
>>>>>
>>>>>> honors you mention are later selected for a Rhodes Scholarship.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Most seem to recognize that a Rhodes Scholarship is awarded to the
>>>>>>
>>>>> cream
>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>> the academic crop. Beings a Rhodes Scholar does not guarantee high
>>>>>>
>>>>> morals,
>>>>>
>>>>>> post graduate achievement, or groom one for future presidency. I
>>>>>> wonder
>>>>>>
>>>>> how
>>>>>
>>>>>> many Rhodes scholars own Rhodes sailboats?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wally
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 7:51 AM, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar…" "Surely you realize this post
>>>>>>> graduate
>>>>>>> grant is the single most prestigious, competitive, sought after,
>>>>>>> challenging, and rewarding academic honor that a college graduate
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> receive. Please tell me you accept that fact."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ben in American it is acceptable to have people with other opinions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>> It
>>>>> is
>>>>>
>>>>>>> understood that one opinion is not necessarily the absolute
>>>>>>> epiphany.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So as to your statement, I will accept what you said about 'a Rhodes
>>>>>>> Scholar' as fact to you. And that is your opinion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My opinion is not the same and my values are not the same. And I
>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>> Americans who share my opinion, and may know some who share yours.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As for the part that part that says, "single most prestigious,
>>>>>>>
>>>>> competitive,
>>>>>
>>>>>>> sought after, challenging, and rewarding academic honor…" I suggest
>>>>>>>
>>>>> that
>>>>>
>>>>>>> may be true, but only to those who seek that specific type
>>>>>>>
>>>>> recognition.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your definition does not include 'Scientific Achievements' of an
>>>>>>>
>>>>> academic
>>>>>
>>>>>>> nature. Your definition does not include 'Achievements' of
>>>>>>> economic,
>>>>>>> religious, social (to include community) and a plethora of
>>>>>>>
>>>>> achievements
>>>>>
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> may have other or different academic measurements.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I give the Rhodes Scholar the same or equal weight as cum laude
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>
>>>>> summa
>>>>>
>>>>>>> cum laude, or other academic honors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In summary, while it is nice to have some who go to another country
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> study
>>>>>>> for a year or two, I do not limit my recognition of important
>>>>>>>
>>>>> achievement
>>>>>
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> that group. I am not a Mormon, but their practice of sending young
>>>>>>>
>>>>> men
>>>>> on
>>>>>
>>>>>>> missions to different parts of this country or other countries
>>>>>>>
>>>>> accomplishes
>>>>>
>>>>>>> a similar education.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A researcher who finds important medical facts about diseases to me
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>
>>>>> an
>>>>>
>>>>>>> equal or greater achievement. than a Rhodes Scholar. And, note that
>>>>>>>
>>>>> this
>>>>>
>>>>>>> can be accomplished in an Academic laboratory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A young lady who finds a husband and has several children and
>>>>>>> imparts
>>>>>>>
>>>>> into
>>>>>
>>>>>>> those children important societal values to me is a higher
>>>>>>> achievement
>>>>>>>
>>>>> than
>>>>>
>>>>>>> your Rhodes Scholar.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, we do not agree. Others are free to agree with you. What we
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> talking about is the difference between 'Conservative' values and
>>>>>>> liberalism.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ed K
>>>>>>> addendum, ""A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one
>>>>>>>
>>>>> of
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>>> high virtues of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in
>>>>>>> danger,
>>>>>>>
>>>>> are
>>>>>
>>>>>>> of higher obligation." Thomas Jefferson
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Benjamin Cittadino wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tootle;
>>>>>>>> I recently called Bill Clinton a genius in defending my position
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> it
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> is not her accent that makes Sarah Palin a moron. Clinton has a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> pronounced
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> accent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As you must have known , but perhaps have blocked from your memory,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> Bill
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar. Surely you realize this post
>>>>>>>> graduate
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> grant
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> is the single most prestigious, competitive, sought after,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> challenging,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and rewarding academic honor that a college graduate can receive.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> Please
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> tell me you accept that fact.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bill Clinton speaks in complete, gramatically correct, coherant
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> English
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> sentences. His paragraphs have a beginning, a middle and an end
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hang
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> together as eloquent expressions of a complete thought.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bill Clinton can talk for hours on esoteric subjects of foreign and
>>>>>>>> domestic policy, without notes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He is spontaneously witty, charming, quick, and isn't afraid to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> appear
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "intellectual". He is utterly unafraid to be challenged on any
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> subject
>>>>> by
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> anyone, and is a persuasive advocate for his point of view.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sarah Palin spouts transparently canned lines, which almost always
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> include
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the words, "maverick, soccar Mom, pit bull, Joe six-pack, hockey
>>>>>>>> mom,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> real
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> americans, and/or you betcha" over and over. She has one talent,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sarcasm,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and it is no wonder to me why she is so popular with some of the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> folks
>>>>> on
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> this forum.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She wants to be VP to a man who has had multiple bouts with serious
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cancer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and is of advanced age.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not alone in my assessment of this person. David Brooks and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> other
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> right of center writers like Peggy Noonan and others feel exactly
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> way. I'm in good company in my assessment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who thinks she is not a moron? As far as I can tell, only afew
>>>>>>>> hardy
>>>>>>>> souls on this forum. Well, good luck with that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ben C.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PS- for purposes of this discussion I define moron as a person of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> obvious
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> intellectual incapacity who is also mean, nasty, sarcastic and adds
>>>>>>>> nothing to the public discourse. It is a function of both attitude
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> AND
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> aptitude.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PPS-Yes Tootle I know that makes me a moron in your eyes. I can
>>>>>>>> live
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> with
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tootle wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is he getting the thirst for 'politics'? Maybe the governorship
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> say,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Illinois, Pennsylvania, Virginia ... sounds like he as an audience
>>>>>>>>> waiting...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ed K
>>>>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p20149918/WigeeBoard.jpg
>>>>>>>>> WigeeBoard.jpg
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Bullshit-and-the-Art-of-Crap-Detection---Political-tp20148504p20163445.html
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Bullshit-and-the-Art-of-Crap-Detection---Political-tp20148504p20167906.html
>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bullshit-and-the-Art-of-Crap-Detection---Political-tp20148504p20170359.html
Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list