Meh, this inauguration address really didn't do much for me. I thought taken as a whole it wasn't too bad, and I really can't personally take the views of some liberal bloggers myself. Do I find their commentary interesting? Oh sure, like this one about Bush and Nihilism which I wasn't aware of:

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/...gi?ArtNum=82006

And this guy over at coldfury cites that post too, as well as some stuff from Peggy Noonan's commentary (conservative voice on OpinionJournal) and David Horowitz:

http://coldfury.com/reason/index.php?p=113

And I have to admit that I also found this commentary interesting, depicting the many "freedom" citations and equating them more on an economic front:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/01/21/MNG1HAU69V1.DTL

And then of course you have Dave Brock mentioning the Republican commentators highly outnumbering the Democratic commentators in the media:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200501220001

But honestly that doesn't really surprise me nor does it stir up too many feelings of wanting to yell, "BIAS!!!". Not that I don't think that the media listens a great deal more to the Republican Noise Machine or anything - it's just that it was their Party nominee who won, and I believe it is their time to shine in the light. Again I'm not sweatin' it too much, nor do I think too many Dem. supporters should too on that particular point.

But getting back to the coldfury blog, I do think that his last coupla paragraphs in reference to Horowitz are pretty interesting in regards to the neoconservative foreign policy and philosophy. He touched on the fact that there are indeed parts borrowed from the far-left, socialist viewpoint, which I'm sure you'll NEVER ever hear a pro-Bush, neocon supporter ever mumble. Yet the connections in philosophy are pretty revealing.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

Last edited by MisterOpus1 on Jan-24-2005 at 22:29

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 But getting back to the coldfury blog, I do think that his last coupla paragraphs in reference to Horowitz are pretty interesting in regards to the neoconservative foreign policy and philosophy. He touched on the fact that there are indeed parts borrowed from the far-left, socialist viewpoint, which I'm sure you'll NEVER ever hear a pro-Bush, neocon supporter ever mumble. Yet the connections in philosophy are pretty revealing.

quote:

excerpt: (...) But to create requires more than slogans, and it requires an understanding of history, of culture, and of the complex dynamics which underlie all human societies. Moreover, it demands an acknowledgment that one cannot create “freedom” and “liberty” by means of force and coercion. The end determines the means – and if the means are the antithesis of the stated goal, the goal will be forever unreachable. The great danger that now faces us – and that faces the world – is that Bush’s “revolutionary” program has its own terrible logic. His speech yesterday makes one conclusion starkly and terrifyingly clear: he has learned absolutely nothing from the events of the last few years, and that logic continues to drive him. He and his supporters therefore seek further destruction, on a still wider scale – and they may not be satisfied until a worldwide conflagration finally stops them. Of course, such an outcome would also stop all of us, and would put an end to much of civilization. Not coincidentally, it is this same inner logic that causes the overheated statements of Bush’s supporters to grow ever more desperate: as the consequences of their ideas become more obvious, the fiction that their program is “noble” and “idealistic” becomes more and more difficult to maintain. Another result of this same desperation is the increasingly vicious attacks on anyone who dares to challenge them. But it is not those who decline to join Bush’s program of purifying violence and destruction who are the traitors, or the enemy: Bush’s enemy, and the enemy of those who support him, is reality, which stubbornly refuses to accommodate itself to the self-contradictory and therefore self-destroying nihilistic “ideals” which impel Bush to destroy life and liberty, even while he maintains he is defending both. An additional and similarly disturbing truth is that people like Bush cannot be reasoned with, or talked out of their beliefs. Those beliefs are an essential part of their psychological makeup, and to give up those beliefs would be to give up themselves and their very identity, which they will not do. We can only hope that the amount of death and destruction that this program has already unleashed, and which it will continue to unleash for the foreseeable future, will convince enough people to get off this train – and to realize they desperately need another destination. If we continue along our current route, Bush’s fire will certainly “purify” everything in its path – and destroy so much of life and civilization that there may not be a world left to save.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo yeah, just like Churchill, Kennedy, Reagan...who's the tool? there is a reason why the youth don't run the world. thank God.

yet they let chimpanzees like Bush run it? fuck outta here

___________________
*** Sig edited -> image exceeds 50k byte size restriction
http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/19/196003/gayslater.gif

Nuthin' like a bunch of ol' crazy neocons slappin' their President on the ass for such a great speech. To them it really was one for the record books! I dunno if anyone's read Kristol's commentary in the Weekly Standard, but boy he sure did love that address!:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conte...3xwdvu.asp?pg=1

Or how 'bout Kristol's commentary on Faux News Jan. 20th?:

quote:

KRISTOL: So I think it's actually a deep understanding of America's mission. A very eloquent speech, of course. Maybe one of the most powerful speeches, one of the most impressive speeches, I think I've seen an American president give. [...] If I were editing this speech, the only sentence I think maybe I would have changed which was to simply say we are ready to meet, perhaps, the examples of those of our forebears and our forefathers who fought so valiantly in the history of freedom and I think that will play into a sort of sophisticated criticism that "Gee, the president is susceptible to hubris and is too grandiose." But having said that, except for Lincoln, no speech is perfect, and I think he's entitled to a slight slip in one sentence. [...] I've seen Mike Gerson over the past couple of months, and he has been working very hard on this speech. But he has been working with the president on it, and it is a remarkable collaboration.

But Faux didn't sell us short on neocon commentators, no way Jose! How 'bout a little Krauthammer too?:

quote:

KRAUTHAMMER: It was a revolutionary speech in that sense [that American freedom is contingent upon the spread of freedom abroad] and the closest echo is to, really, John Kennedy's speech, his inaugural address where he talked about -- in fact, there's a phrase in this inaugural which is an allusion to a famous phrase in Kennedy's. Kennedy spoke of bearing any burden to assure the survival and success of liberty, and President Bush said that in order to ensure the survival of liberty at home, we have to have the success of liberty abroad, which was an interesting allusion to that speech. The idea is the same. Kennedy spoke in the Cold War and said, only if we stand for the liberty that we have at home ... stand for that abroad, will we succeed against communism and secure our liberty at home. And the president is saying in this struggle against another existential enemy, which is radical Islam and terrorism, we have to spread the democracy as the only realistic way of the changing the culture out of which a 9-11 emerged. And that's a very strong theme -- of course it had a lot of opposition at home and abroad. But it is extremely revolutionary. To speak, essentially, about the abolition of tyranny, which has been a constant in human history for thousands of years, can only be spoken of as radical.

I mean, wow, these guys reeeealy liked this address didn't they?


Well, why wouldn't they? - THEY HELPED WRITE THE FUCKING THING!!!!!:

quote:

The planning of Bush's second inaugural address began a few days after the Nov. 2 election with the president telling advisers he wanted a speech about "freedom" and "liberty." That led to the broadly ambitious speech that has ignited a vigorous debate. The process included consultation with a number of outside experts, Kristol among them. One meeting, arranged by Peter Wehner, director of the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives, included military historian Victor Davis Hanson, columnist Charles Krauthammer and Yale professor John Lewis Gaddis, according to one Republican close to the White House. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...anguage=printer

Now boys, between the moments of pattin' your own asses for a job well done, don't cha think it might have been somewhat important to give this teensy little disclaimer?

Gimme a fucking break. Fucking neocons.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/pla.../jon_10011.html

I knew someone had to count these keywords.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Gimme a fucking break. Fucking neocons.

Fuckin' tree-huggin, responsibility-avoiding, whiney-assed liberal.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Fuckin' tree-huggin, responsibility-avoiding, whiney-assed liberal.

Ahh, you're just pissed because your boy Vick got his ass handed to him Sunday.

Go Eagles!

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Ahh, you're just pissed because your boy Vick got his ass handed to him Sunday. Go Eagles!

This is true. 2 days later and I'm still seething--even though we all saw it coming.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka This is true. 2 days later and I'm still seething--even though we all saw it coming.

Bah, don't sweat it. My KU B-Ball boys got their asses handed to them by Villanova too, and as you rightly said - we saw it comin' too.

Damn Philly teams.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...