The Smallest Minority

Um...Kevin...just want to check in and make sure that you don't actually think that Barack Obama wants to put the US under Communist rule.

Funny, though, we sort of are with all the spending you boy has done in the last eight years.

And rather than chase ghosts of Christmases past, why not a post on the Alaska Secessionist movement?

No, Mark, I don't think Obama wants to put the U.S. under Communist rule.

Yes, I'm quite aware that the Bush Administration has merrily marched us in the direction of socialism, most especially with the current bailout.

But do I think Obama intends to expand on that socialism?

Come back tomorrow and read the Quote of the Day.

Funny, though, we sort of are with all the spending you boy has done in the last eight years.

Funny, have you noticed all of Kevin's posts critical of this?
Have you not noticed all the times DJ, or Russell, or Kevin or I pointed out to you that Bush was hardly a "conservative icon"?
You missed all of that, and yet you still want to comment like you know what's going on? (Or, are you being dishonest about those criticisms we directed at Bush?)

make sure that you don't actually think that Barack Obama wants to put the US under Communist rule.

Because you say so. Even with the above example for how much you've missed in your "analysis".
This is where your utter lack of credibility does you in. You can't claim that you know something, thus we must respect it.
You ignore many things that are just uncomfortable to your entrenched ideology. Like the above. Why does Bush have such a low approval rating? Because you leftists automatically rate him 0, without any regard to anything he's done (including advancing most of your pet projects), and we rate him low because of his lack of conservative nature, and his not-total support for the Constitution. Just as McCain, who doesn't like Bush, and neither were "conservatives" in 2000.
You ignore all of that, all of us pointing it out to you, in favor of what your uneducated first impression was.
You may have forgotten I already have. But we haven't. You lie when it's convenient for you. You fail to be able to do analysis on data. And you lie other times.
You hadn't done what you claimed, and what you wanted credit for. You got a 0 on it, so to speak, and yet you wanted credit for 100. That's just the latest of many blunders - but it's a very good example and I thank you for it.
Because it demonstrates that you can't and won't do basic background work - and will lie about it.
So either you can't, won't, or didn't. Doesn't matter. We can't trust you now even if you did

So when you say check in and make sure that you don't actually think whatever it is - from you it's not proof of anything, and actually might be proof of exactly the opposite. This is why credibility matters, why you don't see the rest of the commenters here lying about easily-proven things.

Our credibility matters to us.

Barack Obama wants to put the US under Communist rule.

He won't call it that.

When Victor Belenko defected from the Soviet Union in 1975, part of his acclimatization was explaining the US system. When they explained about welfare, food stamps, and Social Security, he became agitated. "You are closer to True Communism than the Soviet Union!" he's said to have exclaimed in some distress. (At the time, "True Communism" was the plan/path that all the propaganda in the USSR was pushing. Previously, it hadn't been True Communism, and that's why there were problems. But we're moving to True Communism! And then everything will be perfect! (Do it again! Only HARDER!))

You're incapable of judging the degree of socialism that Obama supports. And even if you were, we couldn't trust your answer.

25 million people, Mark. That's the sort of discussion that Obama's hand-pickers were seriously discussing at one time. By the way, Socialists? They always - always - shoot the teachers 2nd. Right after the local politicians.

But I'm sure you don't have anything to worry about. After all, you say you have no ideology. But 25 million. That was their plan. And they've never changed their goals in all this time. Just their methods.

And now they see Obama as their best shot to that goal.

You'd think, even you would see something worrisome about that. Even you.

What's the Alaska Secessionist movement got to do with anything? Even if it was relevant, how on earth would it compare with the intended slaughter of 25 million people?

They always - always - shoot the teachers 2nd. Right after the local politicians.

And people who wear glasses. Hope you're not wearing specs, Mark.

Yeh Barack might not want to do that so obviously and specifically at this time, but Bill Ayers did plan for that - and since he recently said that he believed he didn't do enough, it sounds like he still thinks it's a good idea. Mark would probably have emerged from the re-education center unscathed, if he weren't happily ensconced as a high level apparatchik running the place.

"how on earth would it compare with the intended slaughter of 25 million people?"

The Weather Underground slaughtered 25 million Americans? I must have fallen asleep that....decade.

In regards to the Khmer Rouge, I think you might want to look at their origins of what country had a part in creating their power base.

"You missed all of that, and yet you still want to comment like you know what's going on?"

Yes, U-J, as I stated before, it is

"a gestalt of Markadelphia. He is a stereotype, a classical example of a person with a particular personality disorder. He wants desperately to be "one of the guys," to join in on intellectual discussions and be accepted as a deep thinker, a person who really has a handle on the truth.

"His problem is that he runs head first into two brick walls: 1) he is not an intellectual deep thinker, rather he is an intellectual cripple who not only does not understand logic and rational thought, he does not understand the need for or benefits of logic and rational thought; and, 2) his ego cannot withstand the trauma of admitting error. So, he commits error after error as he dances his way around admitting error. The cliche is that he digs the hole he is in ever deeper, piling the dirt back upon his own head, all the while never admitting that the hole exists. He is a caricature right out of Monty Python. The abyss that yawns before him, which he dare not look into, is that he cannot ever admit or correct any significant error or the whole edifice of his self-esteem will come crashing down upon him."

You have just seen validation again.

DJ:
Right. I was trying to point out to him why you'd said that. I had that in the back of my mind. Trying to point out to him that again, he's proving you right with his inability to actually think for himself.

But even then, the fact that Ayers, Dohrn, and their crowd are enthusiastically behind Obama ought to give even Mark doubts.

25 million?

Well, the cities were getting a bit crowded anyway, right?

"'How on earth would it compare with the intended slaughter of 25 million people?'

The Weather Underground slaughtered 25 million Americans? I must have fallen asleep that....decade."

Keyword: "intended."

But, hey, if the sentence doesn't fit, you must ...not read it, I guess.

I must have fallen asleep that....decade.

Mark:
If we figured that you were asleep every time you didn't know about something that happened.... we'd think you were Snow White after eating the apple.

Did Pol Pot achieve in a smaller scale, what the Weather Underground did not, or at least, not yet?

This William Ayres slug is a disgusting POS.

how on earth would it compare with the intended slaughter of 25 million people?"

The Weather Underground slaughtered 25 million Americans? I must have fallen asleep that....decade.

Did you miss the word "INTENDED"?

I can't believe this is getting a pass even from you. A group of extremists in this country had every intention of slaughtering 25 million people for political expediency, and they are linked in a nontrivial way to someone vying for the position as leader of the free world. Good God, Mark, HOW CAN YOU NOT BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS?

And, again, what does the Alaska Secessionist movement have to do with anything? I'm guessing this is a lame attempt to divert the discussion to a faux controversy over Sarah Palin.

In regards to the Khmer Rouge, I think you might want to look at their origins of what country had a part in creating their power base.

At worst, what you're suggesting is that the U.S. inadvertently -- and with good intentions (something that usually warrants a pass from your type) -- created the conditions that gave rise to the Khmer Rouge. The U.S. did not slaughter two million Cambodians in an attempt to create a primitive peasant utopia. Communists did. But unfortunately for you the idea that the U.S. created the Khmer Rouge is a canard. The Chinese had more to do with their rise to power than anyone else.

But since you don't think communism is evil, it's just an "alternative viewpoint," why would it matter to you who created them?

And rather than chase ghosts of Christmases past, why not a post on the Alaska Secessionist movement?
Unless I am missing something, the Alaskan Secessionists didn't want to fucking imprison and kill 25 million people just because they didn't agree with them. Sweet bleedin' Barnabus, you are disgusting.

And people who wear glasses. Hope you're not wearing specs, Mark.

Being bespectacled myself, this would concern me, BUT...

I wear glasses to correct my eyesight.

I correct my eyesight so that I can shoot back.

Wow. 25 million people. You're going to give those folks a pass because they're on your team, Markadelphia? Oh, you're right... Palin's suspected involvement in the Alaska Separatist movement is MUCH more important. And you wonder why your comments draw contempt here? You howl in outrage at Bush's handling of the war and the casualties it has caused, but were your buddies in power, the carnage that they envision - that you apparently don't seem to object to - would make it pale in comparison. Go big or go home, right?

"Good God, Mark, HOW CAN YOU NOT BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS?"

I'm not concerned about it because people on the right have outrageously turned the Weather Underground, a group of weak, ineffective nincompoops, into a group that rivals Al Qaeda in the vain hope of justifying their moronic belief that Barack Obama is a terrorist or has sympathy for terrorists.

The word "intended" is immaterial. You are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill, largely due to a massive amount of denial...denial of the fact that the people we should fear, as far as domestic terrorism goes, are from YOUR side of the aisle, not mine. Have you honestly looked at the Alaska Secessionist Charter? How are the things they say about America different from what the Weather Underground says? Or from some things written here?

"But unfortunately for you the idea that the U.S. created the Khmer Rouge is a canard."

This is the kind of crap I have to fight against every day. It is a "lie my teacher told me" and is prevalent in virtually all textbooks in high schools today. President Bush recently blamed the mass killings on the withdrawal of forces from Vietnam. Complete bullshit.

Historians have cited the U.S. intervention and bombing campaign (spanning 1965-1973) as a significant factor leading to increased support of the Khmer Rouge among the Cambodian peasantry. Historian Ben Kiernan and Taylor Owen have used a combination of sophisticated satellite mapping, recently unclassified data about the extent of bombing activities, and peasant testimony, to argue that there was a strong correlation between villages targeted by U.S. bombing and recruitment of peasants by the Khmer Rouge. Kiernan and Owen argue that “Civilian casualties in Cambodia drove an enraged populace into the arms of an insurgency that had enjoyed relatively little support until the bombing began,[3]. In his study of Pol Pot’s rise to power, Kiernan argues that “Pol Pot’s revolution would not have won power without U.S. economic and military destabilisation of Cambodia” and that the U.S. carpet bombing “was probably the most significant factor in Pol Pot’s rise.”

Kiernan has several books on this topic. I recommend reading them if you want a more accurate picture of what all of you hold to be a potential outcome of our future.

There is no doubt that China was involved and, for the record, I don't accept communism as simply an alternative viewpoint. Great evil has been done in the name of just about ever "ism" there is...including capitalism. Just because I am not hyper over reactive (e.g. lighting a candle under my 8 x 10 glossys of Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixon) in regards to communism doesn't mean I don't recognize its potential threats and dangers...just as a look at the things that we do and question them.

How are the things they say about America different from what the Weather Underground says? Or from some things written here?

How many people were killed by the Alaska Secessionists?

This is the kind of crap I have to fight against every day. It is a "lie my teacher told me"

What of the lies you tell us every day? You think you're frustrated? (And there's a big difference between the growth of the Khmer Rouge... but again, that's details you can't understand.)

You're supposed to be a teacher, and you spread lies to us daily. You refuse to apologize for whoppers, and then demand apologies from us!

You need to call Alanis. That's ironic.

Show me where in the Alaska Secessionist Charter it says that they want to carve up 25 million people who don't agree with them.
Sure, the Weather Underground were a bunch of weak, ineffective nincompoops but then so was Lenin's crew until a confluence of events gave them the opportunity.
In a sane world, this kind of crap in one's background should absolutely kill any presidential shot, but thanks to kool-aid drinkers like yourself, Markadelphia, it's just a "molehill". These people have had a lasting longterm influence in your guy's life, and the fact that you could care less about it so long as your team wins this go-round is contemptible.

This is classic Markadelphia.

He quotes a statement from someone else:

"... how on earth would it compare with the intended slaughter of 25 million people?"

Then about it, he states:

"The Weather Underground slaughtered 25 million Americans? I must have fallen asleep that....decade."

This is fundamental dishonesty, and to a degree one usually finds only in a politician of the caliber of George Galloway, or a reporter of the caliber of Maureen Dowd.

He goes on to say:

"The word "intended" is immaterial."

It is the purest hypocrisy, the purest double standard. U-J describes it perfectly

"You're supposed to be a teacher, and you spread lies to us daily. You refuse to apologize for whoppers, and then demand apologies from us!"

It's still more vindication, isn't it?