Coincidence? I Think Not.

This appears to be an interesting week for coincidences. Two interesting ones come immediately to mind.

First, in the I’m Really Not Gay, Make Me Your Veep department, Florida Governor Charlie Crist has announced he is engaged … to a woman (remember, this is Florida, not California). A confirmed bachelor for the past 29 years, Crist has been the subject of at least some speculation as to his sexual preferences. Now, I’m not saying Charlie is really gay (not that there’s anything wrong with that) but isn’t the timing just a little too perfect? Certainly makes him a more “acceptable” choice for VP (particularly from a GOP point of view).

Second, in the I Just Happened To Be In The Neighborhood department, John McCain makes a trip to Colombia and many in the media scratch their heads. Why in the world would he go to Colombia when he’s got millions of American voters to win over in less than four months? Ahhh but while he is there a truckload of hostages are rescued from Colombian radicals and he is given the scoop on it before anyone else, thereby confirming his status as a world leader. Hollywood screen writer John Ridley remarked on Thursday’s “Morning Joe” that the timing seemed awfully odd. I have to agree with him. McCain’s got folks in his campaign with Colombian connections. It is not farfetched at all to surmise that John was given a wink-wink nudge-nudge that if he showed up in Colombia this week, there might be something in it for him. If there is any truth to it, it takes media manipulation to a whole new level.

Of course, the other thing that these coincidences highlight is that we have been lied to by our government so many times that we don’t take any news at face value anymore. Sometimes an engagement is just an engagement and a trip to Colombia is just a trip to Colombia.

Or is it?

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Coincidence? I Think Not.

  1. Crist is a RINO, which is a match for McCain – who is a liberal, too. That liberals are duplicitous regardless of what party they are in is no surprise at all.

    A liberal is going to get elected either way. It’s ‘heads you win, tails I lose.’ You won the election back in March. I can’t understand your angst.

    I will take issue with the idea that McCain went to Columbia to see if the rescue might go right. That is pretty far fetched. It’s Weekly World News thinking.

    Uribe was betting that he could get FARC to move the hostages by helicopter which is never done for exactly this reason. It was a crazy long shot, especially with Chavez next door, funding FARC and having press conferences about how he was going to ‘free’ the hostages to embarrass Uribe.

  2. I consistently hear this “lied to us” phrase.

    I’m guessing it is much like listening to Alan Greenspan testifying. The news reports reported him to be obtuse, vague,and unintelligible. I listened to him and he was the paragon of clarity.

    Then again, he was ( is ? ) an Objectivist, and I understand Objectivism. His words expressed concepts alien to Statists, liberal and conservative alike.

    I figured that if the news people could hear him as I did, they would have to quit their jobs, for they couldn’t be fit company for their co-workers anymore.

    I spent July 4th and 5th trying to communicate the American view of their government to Canadians on 6 different blogs. They all thought they understood me, but only one actually did. I didn’t have any way to express what I was saying in a way they could hear.

    I used the image that the government is my guard dog. That’s not even an uncommon view in America. Canadians could not get that they owned their own guard dog. Couldn’t see in on the page before them.

    Canadians are subjects not citizens, and that’s as clearly as I can put it. For Americans, sovereignty lies in the people. For Canadians, Queen Elizabeth is the sovereign. Try explaining to them that the Queen doesn’t even get to cut in line in a grocery store in America. They will fall back on how gracious she is – and I understand she is gracious – and be blind to the truth, that the Queen would get put back at the end of the line by any scruffy old lady whose feet hurt.

    Getting back to President Bush, nobody will say he is an effective communicator. He’s not. Take that “They hate us for our freedom” line. It’s a pointed, precise, and accurate statement, but the President never gave it context so it was almost universally misunderstood.

    To all the liberals who repeat the “lied” meme, I understand why you’re doing that, but you’re wrong. You are flatly, absolutely wrong. I can’t help you beyond telling you to rethink your prejudices and listen to the words President Bush actually uttered.

    There hasn’t been the slightest meanness. There wasn’t a moment of being divisive. There hasn’t been even a fib. You’ve been hearing things that weren’t there.

    If I knew how to say it, how to explain it so you could hear it, I would.

  3. AP reported 550 tons of Yellowcake has been removed from Iraq in the last few days, from Saddam’s Nuke program, you know.

    So, We’ve found the links between Saddam and terrorist groups, the chemical weapons artillery rounds with the chemical loads in barrels beside, the nuke program, the mobile chemical weapons plants and debunked the cute cover stories for them.

    We found the observed drone, the rape rooms, and the plastic shredder that Saddam used on people.

    We found the mass graves, and even found Saddam and put him in a grave.

    In every particular, we have found the cited basis for the conquest of Iraq – and more. The news of it was trickled out in low key, off-cycle reports.

    Bush lied, eh? Liberals were the voice of truth? I think not.

  4. Ecclesiastes, of all the Bush quotes to lean on, I’m astounded you pick “They hate us for our freedom.” Is it possible that they hate us because we don’t mind our own damn business and stay out of their country? Now I won’t deny there may be a crack pot or two who truly have a problem with democracy and want to see it destroyed, but to make that the sole reason for the Iraq quagmire misses the point big time.

    From previous posts, I’ve gathered you are if anything, a Libertarian. Ron Paul (my favorite Republican presidential contestant) says we not only don’t belong in Iraq, we should get the hell out of all the other countries that we presently “occupy”. This is the Libertarian view. In fact, I’m greatly dismayed that we have Bob Barr running independent instead of Ron Paul. If Ron Paul was running, we’d have an interesting race. I’d probably still vote for Obama, but at least there would be a choice.

    Getting back to the root of your post, even with all the information in your second comment, there is still no proven connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. Still no proof that Iraq posed a grave danger to us when we attacked them. In an interview on “60 Minutes” Douglas Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy at the time we went to war, talked about his new book. I found it interesting that the 60 Minutes profile ended by saying he is donating all book proceeds to Iraq veterans and their families. A bit of guilt here perhaps?

  5. Going back to the root of my post, President Bush never claimed there was any connection between 9/11’s execution and Saddam. What would constitute proof for you of Iraq being a grave danger to the US is entirely your decision. I was satisfied.

    Of course the conquest of Iraq was preemptive. Was there any confusion about that? Preemptive military action is the Bush Doctrine. You didn’t miss that, did you?

    As far as donating something to somebody, that’s salesmanship. The Publisher is still going to take its share. Maybe this part of a multiple book deal.

    I’m not buying the book, if that’s what you’re asking.

  6. I had a long post that wordpress isn’t accepting.

    Is there an e-mail address I should send this to?

  7. I am libertarian with a little ‘l’.

    I believe that the war on drug and the war on poverty were mistakes. I believe that all substances should be legal to have and manufacture.

    All the laws enacted to pursue the war on drugs should be repealed, including controls on money transfer.

    Government substance abuse facilities should all be shut down.

    The message should be simple: drugs are poison, without exception. XTC is a poison. Tylenol is a poison, Swallowing too much poison will kill you. If you want to die, that’s sad, but that’s not the government’s business. We will let you die. Goodbye.

    Libertarians, however, as much as they love Thomas Jefferson, don’t like Thomas Jefferson. I present the case of the Barbary Pirates. Ron Paul loves his country, but he’s not big on protecting it.

    Regarding Islam, I didn’t send you those other URLs because that is to invite you to play in *my* backyard. I am happy with letting you have home field advantage. Islam is just not an topic you’re prepared for. Better that you excel at what you already do.

    You have said twice that you would post serious blog entries, one on racism and another on Obama’s platform. I await them.

    You have already seen my best on Obama. There isn’t another heavy criticism held in reserve. I don’t think Obama or his positions have been seriously challenged yet, Running against Hillary was a cakewalk. Sadly, as McCain and Hillary are not discernibly different to me, I don’t know that the rest of the election will be any different.

  8. Ecclesiastes says “Islam is just not an topic you’re prepared for. Better that you excel at what you already do.”

    There is no doubt that when it comes to detailed religious discussion, you have me at a disadvantage. I cannot quote Christian scripture much less the Koran. However, where I must differ with you is that I believe that virtually every religion (especially including Christianity) when taken from a fundamentalist view is an exercise in hateful exclusivity. I see little difference between the minister telling me I will go to hell if I do not heed “the word”, and the Muslim holy man calling me a criminal if I do not recognize Allah. All these belief systems at a fundamentalist level claim to be the only valid system and predict dire consequences for non-believers. (For my readers, I am in part responding to an e-mail sent to me by Ecclesiastes that he was unable to post due to length.)

    Just as there are moderate Christians, I must believe (although I cannot provide citations) that there are moderate Muslims, who take what nourishment they can from the Muslim “salad bar” and leave the more extreme stuff behind. If you go back and read my take on Rev. Wright, you’ll understand my “salad bar” theory of religion.

  9. rutherford,

    You can have any theory you like, but you are speaking in ignorance and on purpose.

    Take that “moderate Muslim” proposition. The non-Muslim equivalent *isn’t* a moderate Christian, but a moderate American or – more closely – a moderate Greek. Greece has a state religion and proselytizing will get you in jail there. Ask your local Jehovah’s Witness. Islam is a religious *nation*, not a religion. The word for it is ‘ummah’. Wikipedia has a decent entry for it.

    Yes, there are moderate Americans, moderate Greeks, and moderate Muslims. This is exactly how your compartmentalized thinking fails you. Islam doesn’t work the way you think at all.

    Tell me how “fundamentalist” Buddhism has hateful exclusivity? Or “fundamentalist” Wicca? Is there any kind of Hare Krishna except “fundamentalist”?

    Here is the quick answer to the difference between a Christian preacher telling you that you will go to hell and a Muslim telling you that you are a criminal: Salman Rushdie. Theo van Gogh. Ayan Hirsi Ali. Geert Wilders. Islam has a system of courts to decide your guilt and sentence, in the here and now. It executes people every day. The only scripturally sanctioned sentence in a Christian Ecclesiastical court is excommunication.

    Oh yeah, and the World Trade Center, just in case you hadn’t read up on the reasons Osama bin Laden gave. Find the original, not some talking head’s report.

    This isn’t about be having you at a disadvantage. This is not a place for argument. You already know I have an agenda, and this is too important for my agenda to prejudice you.

    If you have a problem with my testimony, discard it. You don’t believe it, fine. That was the warning I gave first.

    I ought to complain. OK, I will complain.

    I know what I’m talking about. You have flatly said you don’t know what you’re talking about. Therefore your theory is superior to mine. Is that what you just said?

    This is exactly the problem. You make it personal. because you and I disagree on other things, I can’t help you. Really. It’s not possible for me to help. my involvement invokes your prejudice.

    This is too important for this kind of behavior. You’re a smart guy. Use Google. Figure it out.

  10. Ecclesiastes, are you making a distinction that Muslims will kill non-believers in the “now” while Christians will only condemn you to pain and suffering in the “after”? Perhaps Christians are more “evolved” than Muslims? Weren’t millions killed in the Crusades? Wasn’t heresy once punishable by death? Muslims do not have a monopoly on violence in the name of religion.

  11. Rutherford,

    You are still thinking ‘religion’ and not ‘nation’.

    This is something you’ll have to teach to yourself. It’s too important for it to get bogged down in whether *I* am right or wrong.

    I sent you a few good links and my best advice. Listen to what Muslims say to each other. Think outside the box.

  12. A Red State Update a liberal can enjoy:

    Yep. I think the Republicans should run a muppet instead.

  13. I have to admit, that was damn funny. Even I must confess to some disappointment as Obama moves ever so slightly to the middle.

  14. The problem with liberal criticism of John McCain is that it is … well … weak. Y’all dislike him lately, which is real switch in the love you felt from the 2000 primaries up to when Thompson dropped out, but you don’t have the visceral disgust that a conservative has.

    To wit:

    It’s an oldie, but it gets the point across.

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s