Fairweather

i was assuming that, like KK, you are okay w/ the idea that some nations, like some people, are fundamentally better/more enlightened/more worthy/less crazy/etc than others - if so, that IS in conflict w/ a basic jeffersonian concept (which admittedly, he was hardly the best messenger for ) It's disingenuous of you to lump all of these attributes together. Better? certainly not. More worthy? no. More enlightened? yes. Less crazy? absolutely. Not sure Jefferson (or Paine or even Rosseau) would include these latter two in the natural rights column. If I'm wrong, I will stand corrected. But I suspect you've revealed something here that can be distilled down to the whole opportunities/outcomes thing. Would you have encouraged FDR to share material and details of the Manhattan Project with Axis leaders in the name of nation-state equality?

Jefferson's larger hypocrisy goes a long, long way toward esssplaining the modern american liberal psychosis. so, just to get you on the record here then, you admit the entire foundational american ideal of equality for all is bullshit? i'm fine w/ talking to cynical assholes, so long as the cards sit square upon the table. your country, right or wrong, and you and yours more deserving within that country. i'm sure that's a grand place to occupy. the nice thing about being an atheist is not having to defend angels - ole'tj, a man i much enjoy discussing on and who's school i spent many of the best days of my life, was no god, but a politician, the very meanest sort of demi-god - he had some sublime ideas, good guiding-rods as we ramble on into the future - plenty of flaws to pick from too - obama could literally be his son. the ideal is the issue though. you either believe in the ideal of equality, that noble goal which does in fact fly in spite of nature's fashion, or you shut the fuck up when the "star spangled banner" gets played, see? WTF are you babbling on about? Not saying I dislike Jefferson or his big ideas. In fact, he's on my very short list of unpigeonholeables like Orwell or Teddy or Ed Abbey. But the fact that folks of a certain political persuasion (yours) like to cherry pick Jefferson amuses me to no end. For example, his arguably tacit, after-the-fact support of Shay's Rebellion is probably something you don't like to bother with. That whole tree of liberty refreshed with the blood of tyrants from time to time stuff, ya know.

You're right, I could have chosen my words better. Not trying to defend the Soviet communist dictators in any way--bastards all. Especially Stalin. But I certainly don't think the people of the former USSR are or were "savages". Just people trying to get through life like the rest of us. The point I was trying to make was that Soviet leaders cared about their own physical survival in some manner. And since they weren't big professors of any sort of afterlife, it stands to reason they wanted to extend their lives as long as possible. Iran's leaders--including the now-gone Ahmadinejad--have professed a belief that their rewards lie in some sort of glorious afterlife. They have also stated publicly that Israel should be wiped off the map. They cannot be trusted with nukes, and I hope that BeBe takes out their program before it's too late. It's hard for me to fathom the darkness that steers someone like Ivan into moral equivalency arguments. Just plain dumb.

You have repeated this here numerous times and you should abandon this argument once and for all. By this logic, first amendment press freedoms should apply only to hand-set type printing presses--and post-1787 television, radio, internet, and other modern social media should be subject to strict government control.

I trust Kruschev, Reagan, or Mitterand with a nuclear arsenal any day over Ahmadinejad or his successor. The military doctrine starting from the 50's in the entire Warsaw pact was small nuclear strikes followed by armored divisions within 4 hours. So much for your trust to russians. The doctrine you speak of was limited to Europe--more specifically, the Fulda Gap. Little to do with the intercontinental MAD strategy that saw nuclear-armed ships, aircraft, and submarines with specific target lists on patrol 24/7/365 for nearly fifty years. I still believe that we were safer back in the days when the nukes were held exclusively by the US, USSR. We kept them in check; they kept us in check. And we both cared enough about the collective fate of our citizens to avoid a nuclear catastrophe. I'm not sure this is true for the kooks running Iran.

Jefferson's larger hypocrisy goes a long, long way toward esssplaining the modern american liberal psychosis.

Beware, for he is a man of many disguises and passwords. He is sometimes revealed as Ivan's doppelganger by his distaste for all lower case and his insatiable love of self.

I think you're confusing a secular country (which we are largely not) with secular government (which we have). Easy enough?

Um, because even the Iranian people know their religious leaders are fucking insane? Still, gotta love your self-loathing lib thang. And that endless harping obsession with "fairness." Either way, your malady is likely more a sign of inculcation than an indication of a well considered opinion. Well, anyhow, there is the whole secular government (we) versus islamic government (them) perspective. Micro level, this is to say, I don't feel the least bit the hypocrite knowing that the alcoholic-insane-evangelical-antisemite-wifebeater guy who lives down the street doesn't have guns and I do. Makes for better sleep. Even if it's not technically fair.

I doubt his chain-smoked lungs could supply his legs with the O2 needed to tackle the 520 bridge. Besides, who needs a bicycle when you can fly a taxpayer-funded 747 to your personal ATM.

I was think'n it was you.

AKA, the day Obama gave the mullahs a green light to finish their bomb.

Muir with la hija tomorrow. It's gonna be cold if she wants breaks.

I'm gonna spread around some fucking happiness here if it kills me. Here's a cool random happy story.

haha, how in the world do you manage that unrealistic hippy dream? Do you have to stick your fingers in your ears and try not to look around too much? Washington and Colorado. The only two places where this is legally possible.

I was not. I was deliberately blaspheming your messiah and mocking both you and all his followers.

[video:youtube]dKia7Xj34MQ

Ah yes, thank you for the chance to both revisit this late-summer gem and for the opportunity for a 'teachable moment'. You see Fairweather, the humor in the post derives from what we call a 'play on words'. The word 'stroke' carries a double meaning here, taking on its usages both to hit a baseball and to denote a cerebrovascular accident. The wordplay here takes on a playfully sardonic dimension when considered in the context of the Mariners' continued mismanagement and epic suckitude under Wedge, who as it seems, was more interested in sucking on chili dogs and Kools during his tenure than bringing this ragged shitstain of a franchise close to something remotely resembling .500. I hope that helps. Leftylib compassion for fellow human being. Now I get it! It will be also much funny when the cigarette-smoking shistain suckituder in the White House who is presently resemble .360 strokes out in similar way. I will make satire and irony then because stroke is also golf 240 times to be lazy and stroke is also ego which is him. This will be triple irony wordplay and you will laugh too surely.

And how's that different from what you're working with now? You're probably right. For example, I failed to recognize any humor at all in your post earlier this summer:

...or did your grandpa speak German?

There's this concept in linguistics called universal pragmatics. This is to say, I could learn to speak fluent Russian, but lacking a deeper connection with its cultural context it's not likely that I would ever recognize irony or satire when I heard it.

My, how they do hate Oregonians.

Trespass with the understanding that you will be arrested and/or cited. Challenge the fine and take an assigned court date. Hire a good attorney with experience in public land use issues--one who knows how to/has no qualms about using the media. Who knows, maybe this thing could get dialed all the way back to 1864.

I'd almost feel guilty swinging at it.