Anyone For Tetanus?
Ronald Reagan [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
died five years ago today. Care for a little time for choosing?
K-Lo’s tragically unhip. Let’s help her with her phrasing, to make it more appealing to the kidz:
Ronald Reagan [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
died five years ago today. There’s an app for that.
***************************************
Ronald Reagan [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
died five years ago today. Let’s kick it tizzay down da wizzay style!
***************************************
Ronald Reagan [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
died five years ago today. Step into da A.M., Amerikkka!
***************************************
Ronald Reagan [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
died five years ago today. Just say no to vaseline, bee-yatch!
***************************************
@Ronald Reagan [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
died five years ago today. Sooooo wasted!
about 43,680 hours ago via Twitter
***************************************
I can imagine the nuns:
“Dear sweet Kathryn Jean, a nice child, but a bit, well, not slow, but … off, you know?”
“Yes, & perpetually forty yrs. behind the times. She’ll be one of us, back here in a habit & disciplining the little imps before she knows it.”
Seriously. It was just fucking unbelievable that this far-right reactionary got elected. Just unbelievable. And what’s even less believable is that the country survived.
Say, isn’t that Sydney Opera House in that “Morning in America” ad? I’m almost certain.
At least BJ Queen Nancy could hold her own acting w/ Gary Coleman.
I think you mean to say that his body died five years ago. His mind was gone before Y2K was blown out of proportion.
Hey,
Y2K only appeared to be blown out of proportion to the public because lots of IT guys and old-school COBOLlers busted their asses off to audit and repair everything before the big night. The general public — the end-users of services like mortgage processing, systems automation, power-grids, traffic management, etc. — would have been only indirectly affected in the most likely case under the status quo.
The Great Communicator
by The Psychodots
on the Terminal Boulevard CD
Dumbya meets his maker
Top Twenty Things About Which the Hagiographers Won’t Remind You
Ronald Reagan died five years ago today
‘Bye Ronnie, don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.
Cripes, is K-Lo going to argue for another five days of sack-n-ashes over this creep?
Ah, young and innocent days! If that Diff’rent Strokes episode were filmed today, all the kids raising their hands would have been strip searched on the spot.
Wonder what Dana Plato learned from filming that episode?
But the memory remains. Ours. Not his.
read the title thought it was about this:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/06/06/d-day-anniversary-google-memorializes-tetris
d-day-anniversary-google-memorializes-tetris
Ah, the passion (?) of the wingnuts in finding ways to rage. “GRR GOGLE NOT HONOR VETRANS ANGER RISNG HULK SMASH LIBERALS”
what would they have the logo be? A shredded bloody corpse hanging on barbed wire on Omaha Beach, maybe, or some properly patriotic war-pr0n like that?
On this day I would like to thank Marc Maron and the crew of then-Air America show “Morning Sedition” for calling bullshit at all the fake media grieving for this awful, awful President, and gave an escape for the rest of us with Dead Reagan Monday.
You can listen to the Morning Sedition Crew’s reflections on and clips from Dead Reagan Monday here, where they explain that they were told by the shitty Air America Radio leadership that everyone would ‘go soft’ on Reagan that day, and Marc Maron and crew called bullshit, and commemorated Reagan’s passing with who the fucker was and what he had actually unleashed upon the nation and the world.
Heavens to Betsy. You can download the actual Morning Sedition Dead Reagan Monday as an MP3 file (20MB / 16kbps) by going here and then going to the files “aams060704.mp3” or by clicking here for a direct download.
Ya know, with all the pain and sorrow this anniversary is bringing upon the Wingnut Central High classes of ’80, ’84,’00, and ’04, you’d think they’d be more receptive to DNA cloning and stem cell research.
As it is, all they got is an “amazingly detailed, life-like bronze statue”.
As it is, all they got is an “amazingly detailed, life-like bronze statue”.
And “Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport” (DCA), which I will spend the rest of my life referring to as National Airport. Just as I did before that grade B actor/preznit came along.
When I heard of Ol’ Ronnie’s demise, I compared it to a grown up who had been molested as a child finding out the perp had died- “At least he won’t do that sick shit anymore, to anyone else, the rat bastid.”
As it is, all they got is an “amazingly detailed, life-like bronze statue”.
Did they put statues of dead Guatemalan children at its feet?
Did they put statues of dead Guatemalan children at its feet?
That, or else a symbolic corpse of America.
And “Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport” (DCA), which I will spend the rest of my life referring to as National Airport.
Glad to see that my brother and I aren’t the only ones who still do that.
Woody’s link upthread reminded me that one of the great accomplishments of the Reagan administration was the creation of Al Quaeda!
Thanks, Ronnie!
hell no, i ain’t forgettin’ !!!
When they unveiled the statue, did Nancy suck it off? Or were there too many 20-year-old frat boys in the way?
I am not smart enough for this blog because somehow you tricked me into actually watching that repulsive asshole again. (I do miss the cowgirls, though.)
How to detect a DC native:
1. Mention Reagan Airport or Reagan National Airport.
2. Listen politely while they tell you it is National Airport with great emphasis on National.
The fact that the Rethugs had to bully Metro into spending millions to change all the signs tells you everything you need to know about those fuckers.
Ronald Reagan [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
died five years ago today. But let’s dig him up, just to be certain.
Finding the bottom of the barrel miles above me:
Ronald Reagan [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
So, just how long does rigor mortis last anyway?
One of my favorite Reagan moments is his administration using a radio-controlled mine to blow up and murder a truckload (thirty) of Nicaraguan coffee pickers. Reagan’s administration was hoping this terrorist act would prevent the completion of the Nicaraguan coffee harvest (by terrorizing coffee pickers) and throw the Nicaraguan economy into depression. Did I mention this was a terrorist act?
Alzheimer’s is a hell of a drug.
Tetanus? I’m thinking rabies.
Ol’ Rompin’ Ronnie sure did love him some fascists – just ask the good old boys of the WACL.
Reagan got misty-eyed as he honored the fallen soldiers … at Bitburg.
Nevar forget.
Wingnuts made an All-American hero out of someone who laid a wreath for the fucking Waffen-SS & called them “victims” – the very same folks who gleefully slaughtered some of their own kin. Obama’s going to have to promote eating infants alive to match that kind of sick-fuck folly.
Did I mention this was a terrorist act?
As I was just a youngun during the Reagan administration, I turned to teh Gazoogle. I love the premise of this paper in Critical Criminology, which I’m now reading:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/525w035g00338125/fulltext.html
And on this day of solemn remembrance, K-Lo bought a new set of batteries for Steely Ron.
And on this day of solemn remembrance, K-Lo bought a new set of batteries for Steely Ron.
Ok, that’s bad…but nothing will ever erase “two brillo pads fighting over a hot dog…but not just fighting…fighting to the death” from my wounded psyche.
As it is, all they got is an “amazingly detailed, life-like bronze statue”.
How is that any different than the “real” thing, except perhaps more life-like?
I sincerely believe America would have been better served had an “amazingly detailed, life-like bronze statue” been in office from 1981-1989.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you and good evening. The sponsor has been identified, but unlike most television programs, the performer hasn’t been provided with a script. As a matter of fact, I have been permitted to choose my own words and discuss my own ideas regarding the choice that we face in the next few weeks.
I have spent most of my life as a Democrat. I recently have seen fit to follow another course. I believe that the issues confronting us cross party lines. Now, one side in this campaign has been telling us that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity. The line has been used, “We’ve never had it so good.”
But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn’t something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector’s share, and yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in. We haven’t balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We’ve raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world. We have 15 billion dollars in gold in our treasury; we don’t own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are 27.3 billion dollars. And we’ve just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.
As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We’re at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it’s been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well I think it’s time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.
Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, “We don’t know how lucky we are.” And the Cuban stopped and said, “How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to.” And in that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there’s no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.
And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man’s relation to man.
This is the issue of this election: whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I’d like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There’s only an up or down: [up] man’s old — old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.
In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the “Great Society,” or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they’ve been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say, “The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism.” Another voice says, “The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state.” Or, “Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century.” Senator Fulbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as “our moral teacher and our leader,” and he says he is “hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document.” He must “be freed,” so that he “can do for us” what he knows “is best.” And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as “meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government.”
Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as “the masses.” This is a term we haven’t applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, “the full power of centralized government” — this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don’t control things. A government can’t control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.
Now, we have no better example of this than government’s involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years. Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled. One-fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85% of the farm surplus. Three-fourths of farming is out on the free market and has known a 21% increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce. You see, that one-fourth of farming — that’s regulated and controlled by the federal government. In the last three years we’ve spent 43 dollars in the feed grain program for every dollar bushel of corn we don’t grow.
Senator Humphrey last week charged that Barry Goldwater, as President, would seek to eliminate farmers. He should do his homework a little better, because he’ll find out that we’ve had a decline of 5 million in the farm population under these government programs. He’ll also find that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress [an] extension of the farm program to include that three-fourths that is now free. He’ll find that they’ve also asked for the right to imprison farmers who wouldn’t keep books as prescribed by the federal government. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation and resell them to other individuals. And contained in that same program was a provision that would have allowed the federal government to remove 2 million farmers from the soil.
At the same time, there’s been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees. There’s now one for every 30 farms in the United States, and still they can’t tell us how 66 shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace and Billie Sol Estes never left shore.
Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy, but how — who are farmers to know what’s best for them? The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program. The government passed it anyway. Now the price of bread goes up; the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.
Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights [are] so diluted that public interest is almost anything a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes from the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a “more compatible use of the land.” The President tells us he’s now going to start building public housing units in the thousands, where heretofore we’ve only built them in the hundreds. But FHA [Federal Housing Authority] and the Veterans Administration tell us they have 120,000 housing units they’ve taken back through mortgage foreclosure. For three decades, we’ve sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan. The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency.
They’ve just declared Rice County, Kansas, a depressed area. Rice County, Kansas, has two hundred oil wells, and the 14,000 people there have over 30 million dollars on deposit in personal savings in their banks. And when the government tells you you’re depressed, lie down and be depressed.
We have so many people who can’t see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they’re going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer — and they’ve had almost 30 years of it — shouldn’t we expect government to read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn’t they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing?
But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater; the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we’re told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than 3,000 dollars a year. Welfare spending [is] 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We’re spending 45 billion dollars on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you’ll find that if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally among those 9 million poor families, we’d be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year. And this added to their present income should eliminate poverty. Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.
Now — so now we declare “war on poverty,” or “You, too, can be a Bobby Baker.” Now do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add 1 billion dollars to the 45 billion we’re spending, one more program to the 30-odd we have — and remember, this new program doesn’t replace any, it just duplicates existing programs — do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain there is one part of the new program that isn’t duplicated. This is the youth feature. We’re now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps [Civilian Conservation Corps], and we’re going to put our young people in these camps. But again we do some arithmetic, and we find that we’re going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person we help 4,700 dollars a year. We can send them to Harvard for 2,700! Course, don’t get me wrong. I’m not suggesting Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.
But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles. He told me of a young woman who’d come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer earning 250 dollars a month. She wanted a divorce to get an 80 dollar raise. She’s eligible for 330 dollars a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who’d already done that very thing.
Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we’re denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we’re always “against” things — we’re never “for” anything.
Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.
Now — we’re for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we’ve accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.
But we’re against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those people who depend on them for a livelihood. They’ve called it “insurance” to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme Court and they testified it was a welfare program. They only use the term “insurance” to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that Social Security as of this moment is 298 billion dollars in the hole. But he said there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble. And they’re doing just that.
A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary — his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee 220 dollars a month at age 65. The government promises 127. He could live it up until he’s 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now are we so lacking in business sense that we can’t put this program on a sound basis, so that people who do require those payments will find they can get them when they’re due — that the cupboard isn’t bare?
Barry Goldwater thinks we can.
At the same time, can’t we introduce voluntary features that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence that he had made provision for the non-earning years? Should we not allow a widow with children to work, and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband? Shouldn’t you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under this program, which we cannot do? I think we’re for telling our senior citizens that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds. But I think we’re against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory government program, especially when we have such examples, as was announced last week, when France admitted that their Medicare program is now bankrupt. They’ve come to the end of the road.
In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested that our government give up its program of deliberate, planned inflation, so that when you do get your Social Security pension, a dollar will buy a dollar’s worth, and not 45 cents worth?
I think we’re for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we’re against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world’s population. I think we’re against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in the Soviet colonies in the satellite nations.
I think we’re for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we’re against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We’re helping 107. We’ve spent 146 billion dollars. With that money, we bought a 2 million dollar yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenya[n] government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought 7 billion dollars worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.
No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So, governments’ programs, once launched, never disappear.
Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.
Federal employees — federal employees number two and a half million; and federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation’s work force employed by government. These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man’s property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury? And they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine. In Chico County, Arkansas, James Wier over-planted his rice allotment. The government obtained a 17,000 dollar judgment. And a U.S. marshal sold his 960-acre farm at auction. The government said it was necessary as a warning to others to make the system work.
Last February 19th at the University of Minnesota, Norman Thomas, six-times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said, “If Barry Goldwater became President, he would stop the advance of socialism in the United States.” I think that’s exactly what he will do.
But as a former Democrat, I can tell you Norman Thomas isn’t the only man who has drawn this parallel to socialism with the present administration, because back in 1936, Mr. Democrat himself, Al Smith, the great American, came before the American people and charged that the leadership of his Party was taking the Party of Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland down the road under the banners of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin. And he walked away from his Party, and he never returned til the day he died — because to this day, the leadership of that Party has been taking that Party, that honorable Party, down the road in the image of the labor Socialist Party of England.
Now it doesn’t require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the — or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.
Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues. They want to make you and I believe that this is a contest between two men — that we’re to choose just between two personalities.
Well what of this man that they would destroy — and in destroying, they would destroy that which he represents, the ideas that you and I hold dear? Is he the brash and shallow and trigger-happy man they say he is? Well I’ve been privileged to know him “when.” I knew him long before he ever dreamed of trying for high office, and I can tell you personally I’ve never known a man in my life I believed so incapable of doing a dishonest or dishonorable thing.
This is a man who, in his own business before he entered politics, instituted a profit-sharing plan before unions had ever thought of it. He put in health and medical insurance for all his employees. He took 50 percent of the profits before taxes and set up a retirement program, a pension plan for all his employees. He sent monthly checks for life to an employee who was ill and couldn’t work. He provides nursing care for the children of mothers who work in the stores. When Mexico was ravaged by the floods in the Rio Grande, he climbed in his airplane and flew medicine and supplies down there.
An ex-GI told me how he met him. It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War, and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas. And he said that [there were] a lot of servicemen there and no seats available on the planes. And then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, “Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such,” and they went down there, and there was a fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane. Every day in those weeks before Christmas, all day long, he’d load up the plane, fly it to Arizona, fly them to their homes, fly back over to get another load.
During the hectic split-second timing of a campaign, this is a man who took time out to sit beside an old friend who was dying of cancer. His campaign managers were understandably impatient, but he said, “There aren’t many left who care what happens to her. I’d like her to know I care.” This is a man who said to his 19-year-old son, “There is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness, and when you begin to build your life on that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have, then you have a real start.” This is not a man who could carelessly send other people’s sons to war. And that is the issue of this campaign that makes all the other problems I’ve discussed academic, unless we realize we’re in a war that must be won.
Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy “accommodation.” And they say if we’ll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he’ll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer — not an easy answer — but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.
We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, “Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we’re willing to make a deal with your slave masters.” Alexander Hamilton said, “A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one.” Now let’s set the record straight. There’s no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there’s only one guaranteed way you can have peace — and you can have it in the next second — surrender.
Admittedly, there’s a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face — that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand — the ultimatum. And what then — when Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we’re retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the final ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary, because by that time we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he’s heard voices pleading for “peace at any price” or “better Red than dead,” or as one commentator put it, he’d rather “live on his knees than die on his feet.” And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don’t speak for the rest of us.
You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin — just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard ’round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn’t die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it’s a simple answer after all.
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, “There is a price we will not pay.” “There is a point beyond which they must not advance.” And this — this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater’s “peace through strength.” Winston Churchill said, “The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we’re spirits — not animals.” And he said, “There’s something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.
We’ll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we’ll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.
We will keep in mind and remember that Barry Goldwater has faith in us. He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.
Thank you very much.
Go watch “A Time for Choosing”. It will help you recover from the mental illness of liberalism.
Go watch “A Time for Choosing”. It will help you recover from the mental illness of liberalism.
“To this day, this speech is considered one of the most effective ever made on behalf of a candidate. However, Barry Goldwater still lost the election by one of the largest margins in history.”
Go watch a 42 year old load of obsolete, outdated horseshit.
Watch “A time for choosing”, it will infect you with the disease of conservatarditis.
Right now in Brit-land the BBC is broadcasting an hour long pangyric to the loathsome William F. Buckley, presented by the equally scummy Portillo ( if you dont know who that is, consider yourself lucky). Hilariously, one of WFB’s confreres asserted that Reagan was a deep thinker and this could be easily detected by reading his various newspaper columns and speeches. No examples were given.
The wit and wisdom of Ronald Wilson Reagan (666) is best captured in the film, Bedtime for Bonzo.
That is, if one could consider “The wit and wisdom of Ronald Wilson Reagan” a single thing. Otherwise, are.
Fapfapfapfapfap OOOH TAKE ME, dead fascist, TAKE ME!
That speech won me the election! Thanks, Ronnie!
Is that the speech he gave after honoring nazi stormtroopers?
Food For Thought = Drunk on Bunk.
For K-Lo, everything Republican is the good ship lollipop.
One of these eternities I will dub the VHS of this onto a DVD & figger how to put it on the web, ’cause of the swell blurry X-generation images, but for the moment, from 25 yrs. past:
Nuke the Kremlin
I’m not there
Brezhnev’s concrete
In Red Square
Push the button
If you dare!
Reagan! (4x)
GIve the country
Bombs or bread
Have to feed
The living dead
How ’bout a welfare
Check instead?
Reagan! (4x)
Mommie’s system’s
Breaking down
MX silos
In your town
B-1 bombers
In the ground
Reagan! (4x)
Now we’re in
El Salvador
“Blood & Guts”
Is back for more
Refugees
Upon our shore
Reagan! (4x)
Hundreds killed
In Lebanon
Still the fighting’s
Going on
What the hell’s
The problem, Ron?
Reagan! (4x)
Nancy-Nancy’s
At his side
Tells him not to
Compromise
Looks at him
With empty eyes
Reagan! (4x)
Sieg Heil, baby!
©1983 Sheepskin Songs
I have nothing to add (beyond FY Ronald Rotting Corpse Reagan) but I’d like to say I’m posting this comment over my new wireless connection. I ROXXORZ11
Crap, not nearly as long as the demented one’s un-asked for speech. I am seriously considering printing that from my new printer to use it as ass-wipe.
But I have too much respect for my shitbox.
Ubu, we’ll be passing by your pad later to record all your key-strokes. Cheers!
Twenty-five years hence some future version of K-Lo will write similar crap about Bush because he single-handedly won the war on terror and spread democracy to the Middle East. K-Lo herself will be long gone by then having made medical history as the first case of death by masturbation.
read the title thought it was about this:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/06/06/d-day-anniversary-google-memorializes-tetris
I hate to stereotype people, but when I was Googling something yesterday and saw the Tetris logo, the thought immediately crossed my mind: “Which nimrod is going to get bent out of shape about all the things they think the company should recognise?”
Heh… indeed. DESTROY ALL HUMANS. Heh… indeed. DESTROY ALL HUMANS.Heh… indeed. DESTROY ALL HUMANS. Heh… indeed. DESTROY ALL HUMANS.Heh… indeed. DESTROY ALL HUMANS. Heh… indeed. DESTROY ALL HUMANS.Heh… indeed. DESTROY ALL HUMANS. Heh… indeed. DESTROY ALL HUMANS.
as the first case of death by masturbation.
We’re not buying the new David Carradine theories, then?
Results 1 – 5 of 5 for “dalek vibrator”. (0.18 seconds)
DO NOT WANT.
Also, note the lack of a special Google logo to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Isaiah Berlin’s birth. ARE YOU OUTRAGED?
@D. Aristophanes: That was me. My bad.
K-Lo herself will be long gone by then having made medical history as the first case of death by masturbation.
I hope I don’t need to remind anybody of that fun-lovin’ repig known as “Reverend Two Wetsuits N’ A Dildo”?
We’re not buying the new David Carradine theories, then?
You mean the One Night in Bangkok Hypothesis?
BTW, here is a piece of trivia that would be nice to know if, say you ever ended up on “Jeaopardy”:
google returns 61,500 hits for “K-Lo Vibrator”
I hope you folks know you’ll be recieving a bill from me for the Boraxo and the wire brushes I need to scrub this thread from my brain.
Hey Kiddo,
Man who go through turnstile side-ways going to Bangkok!!
Hey Kiddo,
Man who go through turnstile side-ways going to Bangkok!!
The single most hilarious thing the ol’ Gipper ever said in his entire show-biz career. His earnest assertions that he never dyed his hair run a distant second.
Here’s a high concept bit of alternative history. The germans had intelligence that the allies intended to invade in summer of 1944, and intelligence that it would be a Calais and intelligence that it would instead be at Normandy. So knowing that it was coming, and when it originally was seen to be Normandy, they CHOSE to believe that was a feint and the the true invasion was at Calais, in spite of the eyewitnesses as to the strength of the attack. Rather than accept the evidence of their senses, they denied reality in favor of a scenario which fit their unjustified certainty of success. And the germans embraced that certainty in spite of the consolidation of the invasion, right up to the time of the crossing of the Rhine. Do you think that there might be democratic senators from Arizona and Texas in 2011?
On the Tetris/D-Day thing: http://bit.ly/bsq8P
Via Jesse Taylor. Money quote:
“It seems today is also the 25th anniversary of Tetris, a Soviet video game. I had never heard of Tetris”
From the comments section at the above link:
“Our brave soldiers fought and died (on D-Day) so they liberate Europe from the Obama of the times.”
Love the Tetris article, particularly how Obama must have been behind it, because D-Day was about “fighting the Obamas of the day”. Indeed, like Obama, Hitler’s primary concern was with keeping whitey down.
I can just imagine Obama calling up Sergey and Larry and telling them to run the Tetris image today or he’ll send his special battalion of ninja ACORN activists to wreck shop down at Google HQ.
ugh. xpost.
Apparently
“Even the crowning of Gustav Vasa as King of Sweden in 1523 is more important than D-Day, according to the overseers of the online establishment.” [hysteria not mine].
I consider myself fortunate to live in a reality where Google is a bunch of smuentrepreneurs whose ideas won customers in the marketplace, rather than an oppressive “online establishment”.
“Smuentrepreneurs” is the approved spelling according to WordPress.
George F. Will wrote:
The pressure to politicize the economy is spreading.
=======================================
Oh for FSM’s sake, somebody fetch G.F.Will his feinting couch.
The economy has always been politicized. The car companies owe much of their dominance over other modes of transportation in the USA due to political decisions. For instance, President Ike created the Interstate Highway system.
Also, they owe many of their recent problems to political decisions. In the U.S., insurance and health care companies have been allowed to create a health care system that benefits themselves, at the expense of everybody else.
And G.W. Bush’s Administration benefited energy companies at the expense of everybody else…with their invasion of Iraq, among other things.
But most of all, G.W.Bush’s Administration let financial pirates rape our economy, and it is on their behalf you now cry your FAUX tears.
Drop dead, discredited hypocrite.
~
6/6/2009 8:23:12 PM
Maybe I was too nice?
somebody fetch G.F.Will his feinting couch.
Even if it was unintentional, that’s a very clever typo.
Not an oppressive online establishment?!?!?! Are you not aware that Google is an important part of Gustavus Vasa’s master-plan for the imposition of worldwide Swedish-Lutheran tyranny?
Ronald Reagan Remembered
To give Will the benefit of the doubt, he apparently lives in a setting in which jeans are some sort of signifier and uncommon enough to stand out. Maybe time in his world stopped when folks stopped tying onions to their belts.
I really don’t think they’ll be happy until Google replaces its logo with a picture of Ronald Reagan in an American flag Speedo giving the thumbs-up to a soldier that’s prying the fingernails off a dude in a turban.
Of course, that’d be their every-day logo. The Memorial Day one would just replace the entire front page with a picture of George Bush’s junk from his Mission Accomplished photo-op.
I admire President Reagan, who was a decent man and a true champion for freedom and democracy. We all mourn his passing and celebrate his life. He is one of the Americans I admire most, one of the politicians whose style and substance I studied to get where I am. May I lead the nation with the same kind of wisdom and decency President Reagan showed throughout his long, successful, political career.
One of these days we’ll have a real man for a President, who won’t be afraid to point out what colossal idiots most of his predecessors were.
@M Bouffant: Well, we had a president who wasn’t afraid to blame his own intelligence failures on his predecessor’s penis. Baby steps.
While searching for my favorite Reagan speech I found this sweet dollop of delicious, delicious schadenfreude.
An outing from The Corner.
Phil Hartman, RIP.
Makalaka Hi Maka Hiney Ho.
“Tax reduction bills have been passed to benefit the higher income brackets alone.”
He says that like it’s a bad thing!
It’s sort of depressing to hear how little the issues and party positions have changed in 60 fucking years.
Shorter Time for Choosing:
I fought Commies in a Movie once. Also! I’m a bit of a crank.
Holy fuck, Ed Whelan is an asshole.
Hey did y’all know that, accordin’ to Gordon Brown, the D-Day landings were made at OBAMA Beach?
Aw, shucks, an’ all this time I thought it was OMAHA Beach!! Welp, better git crackin’ on rewritin’ them thar hist’ry books!!!
Publius has responded.
I, for one, am surprised Fast Eddie didn’t publish his home address, phone number and the tags from his car. He’s as incompetent a hitman as he is a writer.
Hey, didja know that I have never ever once used the wrong word, or a similar sounding word for the correct word, or ever, ever made a typo, or any other mistake ever, & that only President Obama & P. M. Brown have ever, ever, ever done such things IN ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY111!1
Therefore, they must be space aliens who can’t talk good, & we should subject them to vivisection ’til we find the lizards inside their fake bodies.
When he heard, “Reagan for Governor,” Jack Warner was rumored to have replied, “No, no, Dennis Morgan for Governor. Ronald Reagan for Best Friend.”
blumf flurp blarft
What a jerk Ed Whelan is. If anything, anonymity allows for a freer, more honest exchange of whatever the fuck it is being exchanged here in the blog-o-sphere, as long as it’s kept civil & there aren’t accusations of idiocy & cowardice (Are you listening, Ed?) because someone shows you up for the partisan moron you are.
That is, anonymity keeps personalities out of it & keeps everything on a higher spiritual plane (“That is so high I can’t explain.”) until the loser starts playing dirty.
What is the penalty for squealing, again? If Mr. Whelan is not the coward he claims publius to be, maybe he should stand up & take his medicine, as well as reveal his (anonymous, we note) source, who is doubtless scum as well.
Best part, of course, is Mr. Ed’s unawaredly ironic “who’s the hitman now?”
I wish Willy F. was around to see what they’ve done to his rag. That would be some sweet schadenfreude.
Who will out Whelan’s source?
Seriously, though, I can see another outing war on the horizon. I, for one, welcome it. Starting with AllahPundit. A knight can dream, right?
Jesus, Whelan is triumphant about it, as if having someone tell him someone else’s real name and then broadcasting it is like climbing a fourteener or something.
If anything, anonymity allows for a freer, more honest exchange of whatever the fuck it is being exchanged here in the blog-o-sphere, as long as it’s kept civil & there aren’t accusations of idiocy & cowardice (Are you listening, Ed?) because someone shows you up for the partisan moron you are.
Since when have Ed’s ilk supported the freer, more honest exchange of anything?
Ironic is not nearly strong enough. It’s beyond projection. Even from his perspective, it makes zero sense. “Hitman?” For politely declining to comment on his identity? That’s not a response, that’s random screeching and poo-flinging.
PeeJ–What makes you think William of Buckley would have objected? Buckley was clever, well bred, well read, and had a sense of personal style. By most accounts he was a kind and generous man to people he knew personally and did not regard as enemies. He probably tipped well and was kind to the help.
But one need only refer to one of the “RIP” columns Buckley wrote about someone he disliked who had passed away to understand that there was no personal depth to which Buckley wouldn’t sink to settle a grudge. It’s possible (but inaccurate) to say that Buckley calling Vidal a queer (and, incidentally, losing not just that debate but most debates in that series embarrassingly badly) was theatrics. But the sorts of personal attacks to which Buckley frequently resorted in print against his enemies (including the elder Kristol) showed not a trace of conscience or personal honor. Hell, I’m a fan of the guy, but he was a first class son of a bitch. And being a first class son of a bitch who is an Exonian and a Yalie doesn’t make you less of a son of a bitch.
Which is to say that, uh, one might have thought that, er, vis a vis the bygone age in which the, er, notion of, uh, amour propre was still in what one might call, uh, for lack of a better word in English, the ascendancy it would have been unlikely that, uh, with regard to Buckley or uh his ilk, one might have been so willing to refer to the recently deceased as, uh, a uh, a “frigid little jew girl” the way Mr. Buckley did to Ayn Rand in his, for lack of a better word, published eulogy for her and, whether he was uh, according to what we might call our sentimental impulses, right or wrong vis a vis Ms. Rand, it is nevertheless safe to say that, uh, as Augustine might have said, perhaps did say, in his Confessions (which we read on uh, a warm Autumn day back at uh school in, er, Connecticut or wherever), that particular act falsifies the moral claim one might make with regard to Buckley and that uh, the violation of the sacrosanct suffices to belie and belittle the character of, uh, an individual however, er, expensive and, uh, disheveled his sweater and however toothy his grin.
I wasn’t saying he would object to what they are doing. The inarticulate, oafish way they’re going about it, though, would drive him nuts. Hence my freudenly schade.
Probably true.
there was no personal depth to which Buckley wouldn’t sink to settle a grudge
Another reason that filthy rich people who don’t answer to anyone should be eaten, & every penny they’ve stolen from the workers should be kept from their vile, inbred offspring, & returned to the masses.
Corn Dogs for everyone!
For a small sum of money I am prepared to set up a website to act as a front-end for Google, that would replace the insouciant logos with ones more to Jesse Taylor’s taste. A version of LMGTFY, in other words, but with added parental-protection features. Perhaps that would assuage his sense of victimised oppression, and his concern that other people have priorities different from his.
Psst: Jesse appears to be a good person. It’s Van Helsing you want to extract money from. And steaks.
I’ve been seeing troll posts expressing awe about the fifth anniversary of Reagan’s death, and I can’t tell if they think it’s one of his greater accomplishments to stay dead for five years, or if they are expecting him to do something else.
I don’t remember him being popular with anyone but the media and really old people who didn’t recognize the Alzheimer’s because they had it too.
I have two things to say about Ronald Reagan, both about foreign policy, neither of them good:
1. I look back now and realize that 1982-3 were the scariest years to be alive in my entire life.
2. There is no way he can ever be forgiven for falling for Edward Teller’s bullshit at Reykjavik.
Put Alzheimer’s, astrology, AIDS, and every other fucking thing he did (as well as the “October Surprise” horseshit) aside. He scared the living shit out of a seven-year-old boy who was just aware enough to realize that the world was a heartbeat away from incineration.
Just to pile in on William F. – it is such a joy to witness his Viet Nam debates with Chomsky. ‘Cause Willie F stepped up with his typical patrician air and definite skill in clothing misdirections and excuses in exquisite phrases – and Chomsky just ***took him apart***.
It was truly awesome. Youtube it.
They put a crown upon a jackass
Recorded every bray
The commentators told us what it was
he’d meant to say
But when the time came for him
As it must sooner or later
Above his tomb they wrote
“Here lies the Great Communicator.”
Vicious, stodgy, hypocritical and proudly intellectually vacant, the evil Ronald Wilson Reagan was this nation’s Tiberius, and the 5 year anniversary whitewashing of his sepulcher won’t disguise the stink issuing from it. Even if one gives him credit for ending the Cold War (through nuclear brinksmanship), there’s the little matter of his policies at home and abroad. He was lucky not to end up in stir for what he did in the Iran/Contra debacle, and if you want a memorial to his career, just look at bleeding Baghdad. I’ve hated him ever since they made him governor: “If you’ve seen one redwood, you’ve seen them all”, “If there’s going to be a bloodbath, let it start here” (said in regards to a student uprising at Berkeley). The many years he spent in diapers playing with his drool is supposed to be mitigation for the amount of suffering he caused, but it isn’t. Say, if people want to revisit those happy years, why don’t they go have another look at Watchmen–that film and the book its based on sums up Reagan’s era beautifully. Blood on a happy face badge–there’s your Reagan.
Oddly enough the Chomsky Dissection did’nt come up in the BBC love letter. We were informed that WFB changed his mind on civil rights but not, of course, given any examples of the racist bilge he emitted when the issue could have gone either way.
Now why should the Beeb underwrite a vanity project about such an obscure ( to the British ) figure? Because the BBC mangement suspect that Britain will have a Tory government within 18 months and by indulging Portillo ( a semi-detached member of the shadow cabinet) they hope to avoid privatisation.
In a few months I predict we’ll be treated to the wonders of the Laffer curve as explained by David Cameron ( who’s a big fan of Arthurs)
another jim: Interestingly enough, when I talk about the Buckley/Chomsky debates with conservatives, they are equally convinced that Buckley completely devastated Chomsky.
yum yum yum! Reagan is good for something after all!
Djur, I think it’s Buckley’s inflappable self-righteousness that impresses them so. He was, after all, a man who could never be wrong, at least in his own mind.
Naming anything except a garbage dump after Ronnie Rayguns is a disgrace to the nation. I’m sorry to say that his signature is on both my B.A. and M.L.S. diplomas from UCLA, and even sorrier that his statue is now where Thomas Starr King was and still ought to be, in the Capitol.