 |
Re: Judge rules for UP in border drug dispute
Author: Dr Zarkoff
Date: 12-31-2011 - 15:10
Someone posts:
>if you follow N. Gingrich's political policy, the judge(s) that issued this decision will be impeached because N. Gingrich (assuming he is elected President) will regard these judges as "activists)
To which I spoke about our Constitutional system not working in this fashion. If the whole of a society is to trust the law, the rule of law has to be rational, otherwise it eventually becomes little more than Vishinksy presiding over a Moscow Show Trial or Roland Freisler (who secretly admired Vishinsky) hectoring the German officers who tried to blow up Hitler. To date, the USA is the most admired country in the word with respect to the rule of law, all because of the separation of powers concept in our Constitution.
Then someone mentions the Dems marching in lock-step:
>Unlike the Dems, who goose step to every whim of their party's leadershi
To which I mentioned that the GOP is far worse in this respect (Astro-turf vs Grass Roots), along with Newtie, and Rush the Drug User, both of whom talk out of both sides of their mouths. This in turn set of MeMyselfAndEye like a Roman candle, and he jumps in with a defence of R. Lumbaugh which is patently grounded more in belief than factual reality.
This went back and forth along the lines of "Rush is right" [because] "He has been the number 1 talk show host in America for 22 years straigh." To which I compared him to Hilter, who was the "#1 talk show host" in Germany for about 15 years, in order to demonstrate that being #1 in no way implies "truthfulness" or "grounding in reality". I've been accused of not listening to him, which I have. When I was in Vietnam, I occasionally listened to Radio Peking just to hear what they had to say. Their rants about "the Nixon Government" and "the General Motors government" don't sound all that different than Rushy's stuff -- all you have to do is change a few proper names and some nouns here and there.
Anyone who has a reasonable command of grammar, syntax, and logic, and has even marginally followed current events over the last 40 years, is quite capable of figuring out in rather short order that Rushy baby plays fast an loose with the truth, bending it to fit his prejudiced agenda. Others have said more or less the same thing in their posts.
Next, MeMyself says I should read "The Secret Knowledge: On the Dismantling of American Culture", by David Mamet, presumably because in it, he "authenticates", or at least offers "factual support to", Rushy's grand pronouncements . So I looked up some reviews, in which direct quotes show him to be out to lunch too, in fact further so than Rushy, which is difficult to comprehend because Rushy has obviously hogged the lunch wagon pretty well.
>From Rush to the Vietnam War and Nixon/Kissinger. Can you say "unhinged"?
You brought up Memets' book, not me, which opened up the discussion to his book. I'd never heard of him before, and based on his quotes, NOT the reviewers comments, he's just another nutcase.
How're the bruises on your noggin doing?
