Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Who's Your Daddy Now?
Angelina
Jolie has
stumbled upon the way to turn conservatives into
Hollywood-lovers: Write an op-ed suggesting that the Iraq surge is
working. Soon after she wrote that, Virginia Rep. Thelma Drake (R)
issued a call for Jolie to inform the nation of the glorious
news.
"Sadly, Ms. Jolie's positive perspective on the current security situation in Iraq has gone largely unnoticed by the mainstream press," Drake wrote in a letter to Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the committee chairman. [Ed - Remember, the column appeared in the Washington Post.]
"Ms. Jolie's experience as a U.N. goodwill ambassador has given her the opportunity to travel to Iraq, speak with our military leadership and gain a ground-view understanding of how our long-term strategic objectives in Iraq and the region are met," Drake said.
Drake's Democratic opponent has (yawn) attacked her on this: "It’s time for serious people to do serious work to bring a sensible and responsible end to the war in Iraq." Her staff points out that Jolie is a UN goodwill ambassador; the commenters on the article point out that commenters on the internet can be stupid. Drake can merely sit and hope that Billy Bob Thornton endorses telecom amnesty.
SIV|3.3.08 @ 9:13AM|#
All well and good, but what does Miley Cyrus think about Colombia's capability to counter Venezuelan air power?
The It Girl|3.3.08 @ 9:21AM|#
Just in case the surge fails Brangelina (2nd and 3rd from right) are running their own counter-insurgency training camp
|3.3.08 @ 9:33AM|#
Would I be cynical if I said that "op-ed" reads as if it had been written by some nameless, faceless, UN functionary trying to get his hand in my pocket?
Jozef|3.3.08 @ 9:35AM|#
Will she punish me if I disagree?
please?
Be careful what you wish for. About a minute after the photo was
taken she broke the punished guy's neck with her bare hands.
|3.3.08 @ 9:41AM|#
The photo engenders goodwill towards Angelina Jolie, if nothing
else.
She's got a long way to go to match
Shirley Temple Black, on and off screen -
She has served our country under four presidents: Richard Nixon
appointed her United States Representative to the United Nations in
1969, for Gerald Ford she was Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana
and later the first woman White House Chief of Protocol, for Ronald
Reagan she served as a foreign affairs officer with the State
Department, and George Bush appointed her Ambassador to
Czechoslovakia. In 1988 she published her best-selling
autobiography.
thoreau|3.3.08 @ 9:56AM|#
Weigal is just shilling for Republican actors!
He's in the pocket of Big Terminator!
JohnD|3.3.08 @ 10:02AM|#
I see the fools are still in attendance here.
Only a fool or a liberal (oops, I repeat myself) would deny the
surge is working.
Luke Johnson|3.3.08 @ 10:04AM|#
I'd like to increase her troop deployments, if you know what I mean.
|3.3.08 @ 10:12AM|#
Hollywood is full of brainless idiots. Except for the ones that
agree with us, then they should be senator, governor or
president.
[/conservative shill]
|3.3.08 @ 10:13AM|#
Only a fool or a liberal (oops, I repeat myself) would deny
the surge is working.
The surge is having a splendid effect. why, just the other day the
President rode triumphantly through Baghdad in an open limousine,
as throngs of adoring Iraqis ululated their appreciation and
showered him with rose petals.
What do you mean, that wasn't the American
President?
Pottsy|3.3.08 @ 10:14AM|#
Only a fool or a liberal (oops, I repeat myself) would deny the
surge is working.
Only a fool would use the argument that the surge is working to
justify the war. This is the problem with the whole thing, from my
perspective. The surge is working, and Iraq will continue
to quiet down over the next couple of years. This will then be used
by future administrations of both political parties to justify
other "nation building" experiments.
|3.3.08 @ 10:18AM|#
That's a pretty good column by Ms. Jolie, about the horrible
refugee crisis this war has created.
I don't see how anyone can read it as a statement that the Surge is
working, though.
Urkobold™|3.3.08 @ 10:27AM|#
MS. JOLIE'S STATEMENT HAS CONTRIBUTED MIGHTILY TO THE SUCCESS OF THE URKOBOLD'S OWN PRIVATE SURGE. OH, YEAH.
|3.3.08 @ 10:29AM|#
As for the question of whether the surge is working, I can
only state what I witnessed: U.N. staff and those of
non-governmental organizations seem to feel they have the right set
of circumstances to attempt to scale up their programs.
That is the one and only sentence in the piece that mentions the
surge. And since bureaucrats always think it's the right time to
expand, it's hardly proof that it's working.
|3.3.08 @ 10:30AM|#
The surge is working, and Iraq will continue to quiet down
over the next couple of years. This will then be used by future
administrations of both political parties to justify other "nation
building" experiments.
When those in power lose a free and fair election, then peacefully
turn over the reins of power, come talk to me about anything having
worked in Iraq. That is the criteria for a stable functioning
democracy, isn't it?
The Lizard King|3.3.08 @ 10:39AM|#
Mr. Mojo surgin', Mr. Mojo surgin'
Mr. Mojo surgin', Mr. Mojo surgin'
Got to keep on surgin'
Mr. Mojo surgin', Mr. Mojo surgin'
Mojo surgin', gotta Mojo surgin'
Mr. Mojo surgin', gotta keep on surgin'
Surgin', surgin'
Gone surgin', surgin'
I'm gone surgin', surgin'
I gotta surgin', surgin'
Well, risin', risin'
I gotta, wooo, yeah, risin'
Woah, ohh yeah
highnumber|3.3.08 @ 10:40AM|#
I think commenters on the internet are intelligent, witty, and engaging.
Colin|3.3.08 @ 10:41AM|#
I've read that Jolie is a big Ayn Rand fan and hopes to star in a film version of Atlas Shrugged.
|3.3.08 @ 10:42AM|#
One of the reason that violence has fallen since the Summer of 2007 is that the ethnic cleansing campaigns were largely completed. How many of those refugees are the "cleansed," and how realistic is it to think they could ever go back to the neighborhoods that are now Shia-controlled?
Jennifer|3.3.08 @ 10:43AM|#
Only a fool or a liberal (oops, I repeat myself)
Whoa! ZING! You da man!
Did y'all notice what he did there? He said "only a fool or a
liberal" and then added a parenthetical which implies they're one
and the same. One and the same! This means liberals are
fools. Boy, if that doesn't put the kibosh on those who say our
Iraqi misadventure is an gigantic clusterfuck, I don't know what
will.
|3.3.08 @ 10:45AM|#
Bizarro Headline...
Entertainers Don't Get Enough Attention About Their Political
Views, Says Republican
|3.3.08 @ 10:47AM|#
What if we mediated a partial partition, with a resulting
federal government? Isn't that a kinda-sorta way out? With Angelina
Jolie as the first premier/president?
If not, I return to my proposal to restore the Ottoman Empire,
which would just mean allowing Turkey to go a little deeper into
Iraq.
|3.3.08 @ 10:56AM|#
Joe's point about the progress of ethnic 're-apportionment'
reminds me of a doctor quoted in one of P.J. O'Rourke's books, who
explained that the crack epidemic would burn itself out in a
decade... because all the addicts would be dead.
(The Iranians must be laughing themselves sick... the Great Satan
couldn't have played this better for them with a Khurasanian
candidate.)
the innominate one|3.3.08 @ 10:57AM|#
JohnD | March 3, 2008, 10:02am | #
I see the fools are still in attendance here.
Yes, you're here. However, that doesn't call for a plural.
TwoIdiotsOneStone|3.3.08 @ 11:05AM|#
Whoa! ZING! You da man!
Did y'all notice what he did there? He said "that doesn't call for
a plural." This implies fools should be singular, meaning only one
fool, which is JohnD! Boy, if that doesn't put the kibosh on those
who may disagree with others on foreign policy, I don't know what
will.
|3.3.08 @ 11:07AM|#
How conservatives could spin that to a "The surge is working" commentary, is beyond me. It's simply another "Poor people in another country need our help" commentary that is oh-so-typical for someone in Hollywood.
Someone Who Doesn\'t Want to L|3.3.08 @ 11:09AM|#
Well, hopefully this article will shut Dondero up about how
Reason doesn't pay enough attention to Angelina Jolie.
Who am I kidding? Next, he'll be complaining that the editors here
aren't paying enough attention to the subtle yet unmistakable
pro-war messages in the new "Sex in the City" movie-film. Or the
one where Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly are step-brothers. Or
Kung-Fu Panda.
GILMORE|3.3.08 @ 11:12AM|#
her article doesnt precisely say the "surge is working" or
comment on military vs. political strategy - just that we need to
continue to pacify the country in order to be able to allow the 2+
million refugees to return home. She argues we NEED to stay there
for humanitarian missions to 'begin' really.
"The surge is working" = The situation is "less violent" now than
it was a year ago.
No one disagrees with this.
Are we achieving political reconciliation that will allow us to
disengage? Are the iraqis "standing up so we can stand down"?
Different question. There's a reason the mahdi army has a cease
fire policy in effect. They're happy to let us surge then fade out.
Is that achieving anything other than delaying internal
crisis?
is the surge laying the groundwork for political reconciliation?
Even if we drive the outside jihadists from Iraq, will that prevent
civil war if we leave?
The 'we're winning'! line is a bit oversimplified.
Episiarch|3.3.08 @ 11:13AM|#
Reason should spin off a "Reason: Entertainment Edition" and solely cover celebrities, their brilliant opinions, and how that relates to libertarianism. Just think of the potential readership, Welch.
alan|3.3.08 @ 11:13AM|#
Jennifer,
After reading JohnD's brilliant dissection of dissenting parties
here the USofA, I hang my head in shame that I ever doubted the
competency of the Federal government to partake in any
enterprise.
What was I thinking when I thought Powell's 'you break it, you
bought it' mentality was going to cost us a fortune over many
decades, when all that any one could reasonably have asked of us,
'go in, get the WMD's, take out the politicos responsible and the
Iraqis would have to deal with the consequences of allowing such a
shitty government form in the first place.'
Obviously, this enterprise has been a blessing for us and the world
as a whole with not a dime wasted.
the innominate one|3.3.08 @ 11:35AM|#
TwoIdiotsOneStone | March 3, 2008, 11:05am | #
Whoa! ZING! You da man!
Did y'all notice what he did there? He said "that doesn't call for
a plural." This implies fools should be singular, meaning only one
fool, which is JohnD! Boy, if that doesn't put the kibosh on those
who may disagree with others on foreign policy, I don't know what
will.
Now a plural is required.
JohnD isn't a fool because he disagrees with the others here on
foreign policy, he's a fool because he appears only to be capable
of ad hominem comments and namecalling, which he in turn
deserves, as do you for missing the point.
Mike Laursens of the World|3.3.08 @ 11:45AM|#
As for the question of whether the surge is working, I can
only state what I witnessed: U.N. staff and those of
non-governmental organizations seem to feel they have the right set
of circumstances to attempt to scale up their programs.
Wow! When answering the question whether the surge is working, she
actually defined what she meant by "working". Right there she's
doing much better than 99.9% of people commenting on the surge,
including George W. Bush.
TwoIdiotsOneStone|3.3.08 @ 11:45AM|#
the innominate one, point me toward your non-ad hominem and non-namecalling comments on this thread.
|3.3.08 @ 12:02PM|#
Never mind the name-calling. Is she, by any chance, wearing patent leather jackboots?
|3.3.08 @ 12:08PM|#
Thanks to Jennifer, whenever someone says "The Surge is working" I now immediately think of the 90s soft drink I drank a shit-ton of in high school.
alan|3.3.08 @ 12:12PM|#
Be careful what you wish for. About a minute after the photo
was taken she broke the punished guy's neck with her bare hands.
Yes, indeed. Fear the hands of Angelina!
http://www.wwtdd.com/post.phtml?pk=1778
alan|3.3.08 @ 12:15PM|#
You know, I used a url tag there, what does it take to get that baby to do a flip over?
Jennifer|3.3.08 @ 12:33PM|#
After reading JohnD's brilliant dissection of dissenting
parties here the USofA, I hang my head in shame that I ever doubted
the competency of the Federal government to partake in any
enterprise.
Your shame is entirely justified and does you credit. Had you
bothered to read the words of the wise philosopher Dondero, you'd
realize that the proper way to increase human freedom is to
unthinkingly embrace the directives of a massive, powerful and
potentially corrupt government. (It is no accident that our current
president is a former cheerleader; cheerleading intensifies
freedom.) And had you read the words of Dondero's Beloved Disciple
John D, you'd further realize that doubting said government can
only make you a fool, which is to say a liberal, which is to say
either word works equally well in a given sentence.
|3.3.08 @ 12:48PM|#
I now immediately think of the 90s soft drink I drank a
shit-ton of in high school.
Does anyone else remember Kick? That shit was the shit in junior
high.
|3.3.08 @ 12:51PM|#
I get so confused sometimes.
Am I a bleeding heart liberal fool as I've been called?
Or am I a heartless right wing asshole, as I've also been
called?
I'm getting business cards printed so it's really important that I
get this right.
Eric Dondero|3.3.08 @ 12:57PM|#
The Jolie supports the Troops/Calls Iraq War a success article
was posted at 11:23, March 1 over at Libertarian Republican Blog.
www.libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com Actually, about two hours
earlier at MainstreamLibertarian.com
Not making any accusations here, but it's funny how Reason seems to
be following the curve of other libertarian websites that are a bit
more cutting edge on the news.
Hey Weigel, you been reading my sites and not crediting where
you've been getting your info from?
Jennifer|3.3.08 @ 1:08PM|#
Excellent point, Dondero. If Weigel blogs a story from some
obscure backwoods paper like the Washington Post, the
thought that he found it on his own rather than off your website is
definitely suspicious. I mean, like I'm supposed to believe a guy
who lives in DC and works as a political writer just
happened to read the Washington Post on his
own?
Christ, this magazine's gone downhill ever since Tim Cavanaugh
left.
Jennifer|3.3.08 @ 1:16PM|#
I bet Weigel wants us to believe he sometimes rides the Metro, too. How dumb does he think we are?
|3.3.08 @ 1:20PM|#
I don't know if the "Dondero dump" applies to acting careers as much as it does to political campaigns. It'd be a shame to see Angelina Jolie go the way of Rudy and Mitt.
|3.3.08 @ 1:26PM|#
Jennifer,
Forgive me, but I've used your name in vain in the latest global
warming thread. Not once but twice. I'm so ashamed.
PC|3.3.08 @ 1:34PM|#
"Not making any accusations here, but it's funny how Reason
seems to be following the curve of other libertarian websites that
are a bit more cutting edge on the news."
I guess you saw two ticks on your counter and figured Weigel was
one of them.
|3.3.08 @ 2:01PM|#
I'm feelin' the urge to surge. Oh, yeah. I've got a surge in my
pants! Yeah ...
Oh, it's just too early. I'll come back later.
TallDave|3.3.08 @ 2:16PM|#
He's in the pocket of Big Terminator!
lawlz
It's not like the surge's success is a secret. The numbers are
pretty clear. Pretty much all reasonable observers have agreed it
has created a sea change in the security situation.
Doura is typical of what's going on:
Soon - as a young child approaches - the wary familiarity gives
way to fascination. I may be in the same geographic location, but
I'm not in the same neighborhood. This is not Al Doura, at least
not as I knew it. Where did all these people and shops come from?
Where is all the trash, and the open sewage? Where is the fear -
the deep-seated fear?
...
This is not Al Doura. The Al Doura I knew was the heart of
sectarian violence, with daily body counts in the dozens. As I keep
walking, I pass a busy car wash, and then a fitness center where
young men pump iron and tear-outs of Muscle Fitness adorn the
walls. We pass two new playgrounds, where boys clamber up and down
slides and beautiful little girls play with dolls. A cart vendor
offers me a bag of freshly popped popcorn - but I decline and have
some falafel instead.
I think conservatives are just shocked and awed that someone from
Hollywood actually seemed concerned about Iraqis as something other
than a political club to beat them with.
|3.3.08 @ 2:22PM|#
The Jolie supports the Troops/Calls Iraq War a success
article
WTF? That's some gooooood readin', E D.
Now, tell us the bible is a book about a guy who won a fishing
tournament.
T|3.3.08 @ 2:44PM|#
Christ, this magazine's gone downhill ever since Tim
Cavanaugh left.
It's early and I'm sick, but isn't that a drink?
|3.3.08 @ 3:24PM|#
TallDave thinks we've turned the corner. Again.
So I guess that's that.
Yup, the security situation is back to where it was in 2006, and
there still hasn't been any progress on the political front.
So, obviously, we're about to win.
Kaganspawn|3.3.08 @ 3:27PM|#
Agree with Joe -- I don't read Ms. Jolie's article as endorsing
the surge or the Iraq policy. It means "to those who would argue we
should not devote resources to the refugee problem because of the
chaotic situation there, I disagree." She's trying to be
nonpartisan and neutral on the war. I'm also sympathetic to P
Brooks' comment.
Her hotness or lack thereof isn't relevant to this thread at all.
So why is the hot photo posted with it? Doesn't it discourage the
reader from approaching the article on its own terms? Personally,
my reaction to the photo is like brotherben's, but I still think it
is out of place.
|3.3.08 @ 3:39PM|#
Eric Dondero's complete lack of reading skills (demonstrated again by his total misunderstanding of Ms Jolie's article) show once again that he need to stick to tasks he can handle like collecting petitions in the snow and fetching coffee for congressmen and leave the actual thinking to people who are capable of doing it.
Kaganspawn|3.3.08 @ 3:45PM|#
Pro Lib, yeah, but as much for the H&R commentary as for the articles themselves. Not saying that political discussion and sex are incompatible, just that in this case it stacks the deck to use the picture.
|3.3.08 @ 3:48PM|#
What it looks like to me, Kaganspawn, is that the hawks who like to pose about how much they care about the poor people of Iraq would gladly flush the possibility of bipartisan support for dealing with the refugee problem in order to score a point in the political battle over the war.
|3.3.08 @ 3:52PM|#
FWIW, I thought just about everyone understood that there was
less violence in Iraq now and that the surge had some influence in
the matter. Why, I heard one of those commies on NPR (hey PJ
O'Rourke and Will Wilkinson are honorary commies when they go on
NPR:).
The differences in opinion seem to come up as to whether it's the
surge, Gen Petraus' leadership or the fact that a significant
number of Iraqis have simply gotten tired of killing each other. I
think it's most likely a combination of the three (plus a few I
haven't thought of).
You know, at first I was tempted to dismiss this as a "why should I
care about what some airhead celebrity thinks about the war" thing.
But as I read the article I realized that A. Jolie is clearly not
an airhead but in fact a rather thoughtful and caring
individual.
I also didn't find anything in the article to comfort the warhawks
either. I'm not sure anyone should feel good after being lectured
about creating a humanitarian disaster and being told to fix
it.
thoreau|3.3.08 @ 4:17PM|#
Don't forget the departures of Julian Sanchez and Nick Gillespie. Sanchez brought a real intellectual aspect to it, something that's missing now. It went to hell in a handbasket when Sanchez left.
Kaganspawn|3.3.08 @ 4:20PM|#
Joe, certainly Rep. Drake seems to be misusing the article, but
from this short piece I don't see her posing as being concerned
about the refugee problem, just misrepresenting that a big star
supports the war.
Why has there not been a terrorist attack on the US since 9-11? It
sure as hell is not because of our tough new security, tighter
borders, wiretapping, because G-men caught them all in advance like
on TV, etc. We are still wide open, more or less, and any fool who
is willing to die can take a bunch of innocents with him, see
Virginia Tech. The R's must've spoken through whatever back channel
there is and said in essence, strike the homeland again and we wipe
you out, but here's a carrot, if you want to attack us, here we
are, our fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq. W said, let's fight them
over there so they can't fight us over here. Well, they could still
fight us over here, but they have chosen not to.
Was it worth it? Not by me, not for the billions of dollars and all
the lives lost or destroyed. But we get to pretend there is a
little bubble of safety from the terrorists over the
"homeland".
|3.3.08 @ 4:38PM|#
Kaganspawn,
I wasn't referring to Ms. Jolie, who seems a smart and decent
person. I was referring to the "The Surge Worked!" circus that some
are putting on in response to the column.
Kaganspawn|3.3.08 @ 4:48PM|#
Joe, right, me too. "Her" in the first paragraph of my 4:20 refers to Drake not Jolie. And I won't be hurt if no one wants to touch my guesswork re why no attacks.
alan|3.3.08 @ 4:53PM|#
Well, the hotness of the picture really didn't bother me, as it
is a different world we live in now and that world is one that is,
and 2) the coolness of being a horned rimmed glasses geek died with
Barry Goldwater, Rest His Glorious Soul.
Also, Reason keeps the haute culture stuff on Reason.org.
alan|3.3.08 @ 4:55PM|#
bleh!?!
and that world is one that is,
. . . and that world is one that is, 1) hotter than ever before . .
.
|3.3.08 @ 5:57PM|#
As far as "no attacks," Kaganspawn, civilian violent deaths increased 36% in February over the preceding month.
|3.3.08 @ 5:58PM|#
As a matter of fact, if this keeps up, the hawks are going to have to go back to "We can't leave now, it's a disaster!" instead of "We can't leave now, when we're winning!"
GILMORE|3.3.08 @ 8:51PM|#
Isaac Bartram | March 3, 2008, 3:52pm | #
I also didn't find anything in the article to comfort the warhawks
either. I'm not sure anyone should feel good after being lectured
about creating a humanitarian disaster and being told to fix
it.
while a bunch of your points are...on point here... this one is the
one i was trying to convey to Donderooo, TallDave et al. I really
dont think there's anything here to hoot and holler about. The
triumphalism they tend to express is totally misplaced. Her
emphasis was "this place is fucked - maybe we should put more
troops in so it's less fucked, longer term"
Nothing wrong there, aside from the (arguable) fact that our
presence there helps incite violence, and make the very
'reconciliation' harder
The one dimensional, "we're winning-ists" arent any better than the
"we're losing-ists"... the reality is that things, while better,
are not *good*, and getting from better to good requires a whole
lot more blood and treasure, and its not entirely clear from a
strategic point of view that we can get there by staying vs getting
the fuck out and letting them achieve equilibrium on their
own.
The idea that without us that 'fanatics' will occupy and take over
neighborhoods is their achilles heel. At best their case may work
for the Mahdi army types, but not the Al Q proxies. But there's no
case that long term presence will ameliorate the Sadrists at all.
More likely, it will be some compromise for power sharing that we
wont be thrilled with either way.
Gene Callahan|3.3.08 @ 9:55PM|#
"I'm supposed to believe a guy who lives in DC and works as a
political writer just happened to read the Washington Post on his
own?"
It ALL comes from Dondero -- you didn't know that?
|3.3.08 @ 10:59PM|#
Nothing wrong there, aside from the (arguable) fact that our presence there helps incite violence, and make the very 'reconciliation' harder.
To be sure, GILMORE, there is something I find unsettling about Ms
Jolie's Goody Twoshoes pontificating. Indeed, it does show that on
all sides there is an impulse to use force to do good (which is
why, for example, I remain unconvinced that if Al Gore had stolen
the election and kept Mad Allbright as SecState we would have been
any better off).
My larger points were 1) that she is not as much of an airhead as
we are accustomed to find among celebrities and 2) she made no
statements which the warhawks should find encouraging.
Oh, and that Rittberg is an idiot.
bour3|3.3.08 @ 11:08PM|#
Democrats used to stand up for freedom. At least that's what I
thought. It's why I wanted to be one. But now, not so much. All I
ever hear from the Left is the worst kind of cynicism and identity
politics.
Bleh. Just listening to you, the sheer hatefulness, it's
disgusting. Socialists all.
You honestly make me ill. Your attitude reads as "to hell with the
rest of the world" as long as our so-called allies are pleased with
us. No real leadership at all, but rather follow-ship. Europhiles
eager to follow them into Socialism. Reading your comments is like
wading through a sewer. It puts me off politics altogether. As a
group, I consider you too stupid to talk to, every single
conversation exactly one degree separation from Bush and Christian
derangement.
There. Have at it, Haters. I won't be reading your stupid-ass
predictable responses. Oh, before I go, a preemptive "bite me."
|3.3.08 @ 11:17PM|#
Before we leave Iraq, where we've been for 5 years, could we leave Europe (60+)? South Korea (50+)? Guam (100+)?
GILMORE|3.4.08 @ 12:31AM|#
There. Have at it, Haters. I won't be reading your
stupid-ass predictable responses. Oh, before I go, a preemptive
"bite me."
I think that guy's browser has something wrong with its irony
filter
Man, sometimes its good to get a glimpse of what most blog posters
are like in most other boards...(shudder)... even for all our
occasional feces-throwers, diptards, we're like fucking Washington
Week compared to everybody else. Even the NYT threads (when they
were alive for every article) were like... the Somme of
vituperative spew. Thousands upon thousands of idiots screaming in
the void.
god bless all we've got to deal with is LoneDouche and the
occasional (and thankfully soon to be bankrupt and homeless)
Dondercock
Someone Who Doesn\'t Want to L|3.4.08 @ 2:23AM|#
I'd also like to comment that Ms. Jolie seems intelligent,
thoughtful, and caring.
PLEASE PLEASE LOVE ME ANGELINA!!!!
M.Simon|3.4.08 @ 6:29AM|#
Well let me see. Saddam is gone. The Iraqis have self government
for the first time in a long time.
All goals of the war.
I'm am so glad I'm no longer a member of Libertarians Against Self
Government (Not in our interest Over There).
M. Simon|3.4.08 @ 6:34AM|#
Oh. I wouldn't call you Democrats. That would be cruel to some
Democrats.
Try Communists.
So please explain to me the difference between The Communist
Foreign Policy for America and the Lib version.
We can start with "America out of everywhere" and go from
there.
|3.4.08 @ 7:40AM|#
M. Simon,
This is just an OT question on account of I have seen you around a
lot and respect your opinion.
Isn't this supposed to be a libertarian site? Isn't the magazine
supposed to be devoted to "Reason?" WTF is going on with all of the
lefty commenters who think that insult is argument?
BTW, is there any more news on that Navy fusion project?
TallDave|3.4.08 @ 8:59AM|#
The Navy did pick up funding on Bussard's project. The POPS
(Periodically Oscillating Plasma Sphere) guys (Nebel, Park, etc)
are heading it up.
Details available here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=5367&mid=136500#M136500
and lots more discussion here
http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/index.php?sid=b084a4526dd2f467693d161f6e64fd89
Results from the new team are expected sometime between now and
summer.
TallDave|3.4.08 @ 9:06AM|#
TallDave thinks we've turned the corner. Again.
If you call 5 years of gradual progress in training ISF and
developing a counterinsurgency strategy "turning the corner" then I
guess so. You can see that progress here.
http://www.brookings.edu/saban/iraq-index.aspx
Yup, the security situation is back to where it was in
2006.
Actually, the security situation is better than it has ever been.
Casualties are similar to 2004, but of course the ISF barely even
existed back then. They are handling 10 of 18 provinces on their
own.
and there still hasn't been any progress on the political
front
I don't know if this is wilfull ignorance on your part, or if you
really are this poorly informed. The oil revenue has been shared,
the de-Baathification law implemented. There is still some
wrangling over what powers the provincial governments will have,
but that's liekly to be passed again soon as well.
|3.4.08 @ 11:21AM|#
"...gain a ground-view understanding of how our long-term
strategic objectives in Iraq and the region are met..."
Ground-view is good! Perhaps you could work that into the next
photo. Then we can talk long-term strategic objectives.
TallDave|3.4.08 @ 11:27AM|#
its not entirely clear from a strategic point of view that
we can get there by staying vs getting the fuck out and letting
them achieve equilibrium on their own.
Again, I have to encourage anyone who believes this to talk to our
troops on the ground. You can; the DOD holds blogger conference
calls with people on the ground in Iraq.
http://www.defenselink.mil/Blogger/index.aspx
They will tell you things would be much, much worse without our
troops' presence. The tactical change in the surge has been more
important than the numbers: now our mission is protect
Iraqis.
For 30+ years Iraqis have been ruled by one armed gang or another.
Most would like to move beyond that, but they need armed support to
do so. The CLCs only get enough volunteers to make a difference
after they are confident we will support them against Al Qaeda and
the other militias. Eventually the CLCs are able to hold things
together without our help.
|3.4.08 @ 2:08PM|#
Don't believe one optimistic word from any public figure about the economy or humanity in general. They are all part of the problem. Its like a game of Monopoly. In America, the richest 1% now hold 1/2 OF ALL UNITED STATES WEALTH. Unlike 'lesser' estimates, this includes all stocks, bonds, cash, and material assets held by America's richest 1%. Even that filthy pig Oprah acknowledged that it was at about 50% in 2006. Naturally, she put her own 'humanitarian' spin on it. Calling attention to her own 'good will'. WHAT A DISGUSTING HYPOCRITE SLOB. THE RICHEST 1% HAVE LITERALLY MADE WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. Don't fall for any of their 'humanitarian' CRAP. ITS A SHAM. THESE PEOPLE ARE CAUSING THE SAME PROBLEMS THEY PRETEND TO CARE ABOUT. Ask any professor of economics. Money does not grow on trees. The government can't just print up more on a whim. At any given time, there is a relative limit to the wealth within ANY economy of ANY size. So when too much wealth accumulates at the top, the middle class slip further into debt and the lower class further into poverty. A similar rule applies worldwide. The world's richest 1% now own over 40% of ALL WORLD WEALTH. This is EVEN AFTER you account for all of this 'good will' 'humanitarian' BS from celebrities and executives. ITS A SHAM. As they get richer and richer, less wealth is left circulating beneath them. This is the single greatest underlying cause for the current US recession. The middle class can no longer afford to sustain their share of the economy. Their wealth has been gradually transfered to the richest 1%. One way or another, we suffer because of their incredible greed. We are talking about TRILLIONS of dollars. Transfered FROM US TO THEM. Over a period of about 27 years. Thats Reaganomics for you. The wealth does not 'trickle down' as we were told it would. It just accumulates at the top. Shrinking the middle class and expanding the lower class. Causing a domino effect of socio-economic problems. But the rich will never stop. They will never settle for a reasonable share of ANYTHING. They will do whatever it takes to get even richer. Leaving even less of the pie for the other 99% of us to share. At the same time, they throw back a few tax deductable crumbs and call themselves 'humanitarians'. Cashing in on the PR and getting even richer the following year. IT CAN'T WORK THIS WAY. Their bogus efforts to make the world a better place can not possibly succeed. Any 'humanitarian' progress made in one area will be lost in another. EVERY SINGLE TIME. IT ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT WORK THIS WAY. This is going to end just like a game of Monopoly. The current US recession will drag on for years and lead into the worst US depression of all time. The richest 1% will live like royalty while the rest of us fight over jobs, food, and gasoline. Crime, poverty, and suicide will skyrocket. So don't fall for all of this PR CRAP from Hollywood, Pro Sports, and Wall Street PIGS. ITS A SHAM. Remember: They are filthy rich EVEN AFTER their tax deductable contributions. Greedy pigs. Now, we are headed for the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time. SEND A "THANK YOU" NOTE TO YOUR FAVORITE MILLIONAIRE. ITS THEIR FAULT. I'm not discounting other factors like China, sub-prime, or gas prices. But all of those factors combined still pale in comparison to that HUGE transfer of wealth to the rich. Anyway, those other factors are all related and further aggrivated because of GREED. If it weren't for the OBSCENE distribution of wealth within our country, there never would have been such a market for sub-prime to begin with. Which by the way, was another trick whipped up by greedy bankers and executives. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. The credit industry has been ENDORSED by people like Oprah, Ellen, Dr Phil, and many other celebrities. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. Now, there are commercial ties between nearly every industry and every public figure. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. So don't fall for their 'good will' BS. ITS A LIE. If you fall for it, then you're a fool. If you see any real difference between the moral character of a celebrity, politician, attorney, or executive, then you're a fool. WAKE UP PEOPLE. ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. The 1% club will always say or do whatever it takes to get as rich as possible. Without the slightest regard for anything or anyone but themselves. Vioxx. Their idea. Sub-prime. Their idea. NAFTA. Their idea. Outsourcing. Their idea. The commercial lobbyist. Their idea. The multi-million dollar lawsuit. Their idea. $200 cell phone bills. Their idea. $200 basketball shoes. Their idea. $30 late fees. Their idea. $30 NSF fees. Their idea. $20 DVDs. Their idea. Subliminal advertising. Their idea. The MASSIVE campaign to turn every American into a brainwashed credit card, pharmaceutical, love-sick, celebrity junkie. Their idea. All of which concentrate the world's wealth and resources and wreak havok on society. All of which have been CREATED AND ENDORSED by celebrities, athletes, and executives. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. So don't fall for their ' good will' 'humanitarian' BS. ITS A SHAM. NOTHING BUT TAX DEDUCTABLE PR CRAP. Bottom line: The richest 1% will soon tank the largest economy in the world. It will be like nothing we've ever seen before. and thats just the beginning. Greed will eventually tank every major economy in the world. Causing millions to suffer and die. Oprah, Angelina, Brad, Bono, and Bill are not part of the solution. They are part of the problem. EXTREME WEALTH HAS MADE WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. WITHOUT WORLD PROSPERITY, THERE WILL NEVER BE WORLD PEACE OR ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL. Of course, the rich will throw a fit and call me a madman. Of course, their ignorant fans will do the same. You have to expect that. But I speak the truth. If you don't believe me, then copy this entry and run it by any professor of economics or socio-economics. Then tell a friend. Call the local radio station. Re-post this entry or put it in your own words. Be one of the first to predict the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time and explain its cause. WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.
|3.4.08 @ 4:39PM|#
"""now our mission is protect Iraqis."""
Yes, the war has been over, we have been on a peace keeping mission
for a while. It's much closer to the ole UN "blue helm" missions of
years past that was loathed by many. But as long as we don't call
it a peace keeping mission people will back it.
economist|3.4.08 @ 4:43PM|#
"true",
I don't know what to say, except that you're a fucking retard. If
you want to debate me on your claims, feel free, I'll be glad to
answer. But since I have a suspicion you won't, why don't you go
fuck yourself instead?
economist|3.4.08 @ 4:45PM|#
On another note, "true", I could have gotten across the same message you wanted to get across in three words: Rich people bad.
|3.16.08 @ 3:11PM|#
Uh! THANK GOD! A Hollywood actress having slightly conservative views??!? Oh my god who finally educated her?
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245