THEY'RE ALL FOR WAR... AS LONG AS THEY DON'T HAVE TO SERVE!
Here's the breakdown of the Deck of Republican Chickenhawk Cards
Click on a link to preview the cards!
Spades Hearts Diamonds Clubs A Dick Cheney Karl Rove Elliott Abrams Paul Wolfowitz K Richard Perle John Ashcroft Newt Gingrich Bill Bennett Q Sean Hannity Katherine Harris Lynne Cheney Ann Coulter J Rush Limbaugh Bill O'Reilly Brit Hume Roger Ailes 10 Ari Fleischer Phil Gramm Ted Olson Tom DeLay 9 Bob Barr Jeb Bush Bob Dornan Trent Lott 8 Kenn Starr Ken Adelman Saxby Chambliss John Bolton 7 Andrew Card Don Evans Michael Ledeen Roy Blunt 6 Antonin Scalia Steve Forbes Dennis Hastert Tim Hutchinson 5 Mitch McConnell Don Nickles Tony Snow Mark Souder 4 Pat Robertson P.J. O'Rourke George Will Clarence Thomas 3 Gary Bauer Ted Nugent Michael Weiner Dan Quayle 2 Bob Ney & Walter Jones Alan Keyes Jerry Falwell Matt Drudge
And the Jokers:
George W. Bush & Weapons of Mass Destruction!
The Creators share some decks with Michael Moore
Questions? Contact us at: info*chickenhawkcards.com.
posted
Who can guess this author and where he graduated from?
Art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.
- Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftish philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.
-The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.
- Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.
- Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.
-------------------- "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"
IP: Logged |
Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.
-But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology
-Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th centuries.
- The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.
By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strict sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have some such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.
- When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftish anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)
- Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-class families.
- Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology.)
- Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.
- Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.
- Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative," "enterprise," "optimism," etc., play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's problems for them, satisfy everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.
Art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.
-------------------- "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rimasco: I guess you figured it out glass....i never got to read this and was surprised to see how politically motivated and slanted he was
i read some of it along time ago...
spooky stuff...
not as spooky to me as rush limbuagh tho...
rush actually parades around in public acting normal...
at least kazinsky acted like the sociopath he was..
rush says this same stuff... made me wanna puke that my grandaprents turned him on every day...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
Until he found the far right wanted to pay to hear his garbage, Fat Rush the Doper was a terrible failure at everything he tried.
That includes more than one time being tossed out of school for being inadequate and being fired from various jobs and professions.
Kazinsky was NOT a failure academically or professionally (Mathematics Ph.D. from U. of Michigan, faculty at Berkely), just at social adjustment. (I don't mean he was academically or professionally outstanding, just not a dud. Limbaugh was a dud at everything, including social adjuctment.)
IP: Logged |
posted
More of the wat President Bush helps our boys in uniform.
Blame this on clinton too.
George W. Bush - AWOL from Supporting our Troops Links: Americans for Shared Sacrifice The Midwest Web Group Vets for Justice The Retired Military Advocate
Between tax cuts for the rich, war profits for Halliburton, or support for our troops - which does the Bush Administration choose, time and time again?
Bush Administration cuts $1.5 billion from military family housing. The Bush Administration cut $1.5 billion for military family housing, despite Department of Defense statistics showing that in 83,000 barracks and 128,860 family housing units across the country are below standard. ("Nothing But Lip Service," Army Times, June 30, 2003; "House Appropriations Committee Approves $59.2 Million for Ft. Hood," U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards Press Release, June 17, 2003)
Bush Republicans support millionaires instead of military veterans. Bush allies in Congress stopped efforts to scale back the tax cut for the nation's millionaires by just five percent - a loss of just $4,780 for the year - in order to restore this funding for military family housing. ("The Tax Debate Nobody Hears About," Washington Post, June 17, 2003)
Bush Administration underfunded veterans' health care by $2 billion. The Bush Administration's 2004 budget underfunded veterans' health care by nearly $2 billion. ("Vets Health Low on Bush's Priority List," The Hill, September 17, 2003; "Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003; U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs, September 2002)
Bush Administration proposal would end health care benefits for 173,000 veterans. More than 173,000 veterans across the country would be cut off from health care because of Bush Administration proposed budget cuts and its plan requiring enrollment fees and higher out-of-pocket costs. ("Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003)
Bush Administration budget cuts force more than 200,000 veterans to wait for health care. Over 200,000 United States veterans have to wait more than six months for a medical visit because of health care shortages. ("VA Health Care Funding Alert," Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States Press Release, January 31, 2003)
Bush Administration opposed plan to give National Guard and Reserve Members access to health insurance. Despite the war efforts of America's National Guard and Reserve Members, the Bush Administration announced in October 2003 its formal opposition to give the 1.2 million Guard and Reserve members the right to buy health care coverage through the Pentagon's health plan. One out of every five Guard members lacks health insurance. ("Bush Opposes Health Plan for National Guard," Gannett News Service, October 23, 2003)
Bush Administration cuts $172 million allotted for educating the children of military personnel. The Bush Administration's 2004 budget cut $172 million of impact aid funding. Impact aid funding assists school districts by making up for lost local tax revenue from tax-exempt property, such as military bases. These education cuts will especially affect school-age children of troops serving in Iraq who reside on military bases. ("Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003)
Bush Administration tax cut denies military families increase in child tax credit. The families of 262,000 children of military personnel do not receive the child tax credit increase because the plan fails to cover taxpaying families with incomes between $10,500 and $26,625. According to The Washington Post, the House version of the Bush Administration plan "wouldn't help many of those serving in Iraq." One solider who will not benefit is Army Specialist Shoshana Johnson, the soldier and single mother who was wounded twice in the same convoy as Jessica Lynch. ("Ex-POW's Family Accuses Army of Double Standard on Benefit," Washington Post, October 24, 2003; "The New Senate Child Credit Legislation - What It Does and Does Not Do," Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, June 25, 2003; "Whose Child Is Left Behind," Children's Defense Fund, July 23, 2003)
IP: Logged |
posted
I never liked Rush....I dont know how anybody could listen to the guy especially after his oxycodin scandal. Its one thing to be an addict its another to be an addict and rail against them for personal and financial gain
As for Ted..tell me where he was wrong in this passage...
11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftish anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)
-------------------- "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"
IP: Logged |
Prominent Republicans Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert - avoided the draft, did not serve. Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey - avoided the draft, did not serve. Former House Majority Leader Tom Delay - avoided the draft, did not serve (1). "So many minority youths had volunteered ... that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself." House Majority Whip Roy Blunt - did not serve Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist - did not serve. (An impressive medical resume, but not such a friend to cats in Boston.) Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-KY - did not serve (1) Rick Santorum, R-PA, third ranking Republican in the Senate - did not serve. (1) George Felix Allen, Republican Senator from Virginia - a supporter of Nixon and the Vietnam war, did not serve. (1) Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott - avoided the draft, did not serve.
Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld - served in the U.S. Navy (1954-57) as an aviator and flight instructor. (1) Served as President Reagan's Special Envoy to the Middle East and met with Saddam Hussein twice in 1983 and 1984. GW Bush - decided that a six-year Nat'l Guard commitment really means four years. Still says that he's "been to war." Huh? VP Cheney - several deferments (1, 2), the last by marriage (in his own words, "had other priorities than military service") (1) Former Att'y Gen. John Ashcroft - did not serve (1, 2); received seven deferment to teach business ed at SW Missouri State
Jeb Bush, Florida Governor - did not serve. (1)
Karl Rove - avoided the draft, did not serve (1), too busy being a Republican.
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich - avoided the draft, did not serve (1, 2) Former President Ronald Reagan - due to poor eyesight, served in a noncombat role making movies for the Army in southern California during WWII. He later seems to have confused his role as an actor playing a tail gunner with the real thing. "B-1" Bob Dornan - avoided Korean War combat duty by enrolling in college acting classes (Orange County Weekly article). Enlisted only after the fighting was over in Korea. Phil Gramm - avoided the draft, did not serve, four (?) student deferments Senator John McCain - McCain's naval honors include the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross. Why did the Bush campaign smear him so? At least Senators Cleland (D-GA), Kerry (D-MA), Kerrey (D-NE), Robb (D-VA) and Hagel (R-NE) defended him. Former Senator Bob Dole - an honorable man. http://www.bobdole.org/bio/wwII.php Chuck Hagel - two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star, Vietnam. http://www.senate.gov/~hagel/Information/bio.htm Duke Cunningham - nominated for the Medal of Honor, received the Navy Cross, two Silver Stars, fifteen Air Medals, the Purple Heart, and several other decorations Recently entered plea bargain on felony charges of bribery, etc. etc. Senator Jeff Sessions U.S. Army Reserves, 1973-1986 Colin Powell. What are we to make of Powell? On the one hand, a long career as a military manager. On the other hand, accused of covering up the My Lai massacre. Back on that first hand, one of the seemingly sane voices in this administration when it comes to Iraq (or at least he used to be). On the other hand, a clear hypocrite ("I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed... managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units...") Representative Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), served in USMC in Vietnam; wounded in action.
IP: Logged |
posted
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Punditocracy and Preacher-types (See also Media Whores Online) George Will, did not serve Chris Matthews, Mediawhore, did not serve. Bill O'Reilly, did not serve Paul Gigot, did not serve. Bill Bennett, Did not serve Pat Buchanan, did not serve Rush Limbaugh, did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal cyst' [see "The Rush Limbaugh Story" by Paul D. Colford, St. Martin's Press, 1993, Chapter 2: Beating the Draft.]) Michael Savage (aka Michael Alan Weiner) - did not serve, too busy chasing herbs and botany degrees in Hawaii and Fiji John Wayne, did not serve Pat Robertson - claimed during 1986 campaign to be a "combat veteran." In reality, was a "Liquor Officer." Bill Kristol, did not serve Sean Hannity, did not serve. Kenneth Starr, did not serve Antonin Scalia, did not serve Clarence Thomas, did not serve Ralph Reed, did not serve Michael Medved, did not serve Charlie Daniels, did not serve Ted Nugent, did not serve Country Singer Toby Keith, did not serve. (1) Radio Host Phil Hendrie, did not serve.
IP: Logged |
posted
Bond C'mon you still dont get that the Political Party pissing contest is an endless circle?
Clinton didnt serve. And sending cruise missles and troops into foreign countrys are acts of WAR. Just cause the countrys are unable to respond doesnt make it OK.
dont fall into the trap of the people that produce these stats for you to cut and paste.
-------------------- "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"
IP: Logged |
Most of what is wrong in that bit is that Ted, whoever Ted is, is making one false and biased assumption or accusation after another and says nothing else.
His and a great many other's arguments about the word "negro" make a very false assumption about the derivation of the word and its usage in English.
There is indeed a word coming from latin that has been blamed for the derivation of the word "nergo" in English and seems to be the only derivation that those that lean to accepting only the French influence on England as absolute.
However, English remains a Germanic language and, as such, the word "negro" comes most directly from there and from a developement of a word that refers not to African origins or color, but to intellectual capacity. It was in middle and old English (and even into modern English and some other modern Germanic languages) used to describe a person not of deminished or limited intellegence, but of such limited experience or learning that he could not be expected to handle task a certain level of sophistican. For example, there was at one time an official designation of the English Admiralty that said that the term was used to describe one who aboard ship was unable to perform except as a common deck hand.
Those with Latin leanings seem ignorant of the fact that English isn't a latin based language and seem unable to imagine any root for "negro" other than black or dark or african.
Actually, it isn't important how it got here, it is here as it is and we all need to have enough respect for others not to degrade or demean their character or their standing in the world by being too crude or lasy to care.
I still have no idea who Ted might be. But I strongly disaprove of his very ignorant and biased characterizations of those he can't or won't understand.
IP: Logged |
posted
But Clinton never claimed he served or that he had any reason other than choice not to.
All those that Bond mentions brag that they were too important to serve ot claim that they did serve.
And something Clinton never did but all those that Bond speaks of have done is participate actively in calling others, that did not serve for exactly the same reasons as them, along with many that did serve and seriously suffer from that service, unpatriotic and un-American.
They are the hypoocrits, not Clinton.
IP: Logged |
posted
I still have no idea who Ted might be. But I strongly disaprove of his very ignorant and biased characterizations of those he can't or won't understand.
that shows pretty good character...
to be honest rim.. i don't feel much like gettting into "profiling" the unabomber...
and as far as the "service" issue? i think it does matter in determining who the Commander in cheif is.. or should be..
the trooops were portrayed in the media as really feeling good about Bush at first..
they may have for a short while..
but they had no choice...
have no choice...
theirs is but to do or die..
Bush? he's not a public servant...
he's a cleptocrat...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rimasco: Well back to the topic...my point was, theres a deck of Blue cards as well that agreed on the INVASION
That is NOT the truth.
The vote taken in Congress was not to invade Iraq or even to attack Iraq.
The vote was conditional and, thereafter, the republicans ignored the conditions to first, know for certain that Saddam had WMDs, second, that Saddam had those WMDs and was poised and ready, at whim, it use them in attack on the U.S., and third, for all other means to remove the threat of attack on the U.S. by those WMDS be exausted before any attack.
No democrat voted for war in Congress (and no republican, technically) and it is time you stopped the lying about that fat.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
