----- Original Message ----- From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 2:26 PM Subject: re: brin: My big salvo
> At 12:03 PM 10/11/2004 -0700 d.brin wrote: > >I will happily take brickbats and/or criticism about it and/or > >suggestions for more material. Just kindly do not quote me except > >when citing words and opinions that I actually say. > > A low blow. The only word I quoted before was "officially." The point > of the quote was to draw attention to the fact that the sort of > millenialist movement you were describing is far too decentralized to be > accurate described as having "official" positions. > > Never mind the fact that the passage in question of yours was found to be > demonstrably false. As even Nick Arnett, noted, George Bush has *not*, > quote, "openly" espoused the millenialism you described. > > As I noted in follow-ups this egregious error on your part led to some > mistaken interpretations, in my case it was my mistaken - albeit perfectly > honest - interpretation that you were criticizing Christianity, since > "Chrisitianity" is a far better match for an ideologoy "openly" espoused by > President Bush than millenialism. > > >Last week, the Bush-Cheney campaign launched TV ads, and Bush in his > >political stump speech has been, attacking Kerry for proposing a > >"Kerry Doctrine" that would consist of a "global test" before launch > >a pre-emptive war. That line of attack is based on this comment from > >Kerry in the first debate: > > > >"No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded -- and > >nor would I -- the right to preempt in any way necessary, to protect > >the United States of America. But if and when you do it, Jim, you've > >got to do it in a way that passes the, the test, that passes the > >global test where your countrymen, your people, understand fully why > >you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that > >you did it for legitimate reasons." > > > >It struck me that I had heard of that "global test" before. Imagine > >the attack ads the Bush-Cheney could come up with based on this line: > > > >"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one > >people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with > >another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and > >equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle > >them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they > >should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." > > > >http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/ > > > >What a bunch of wusses those Founding Fathers were! "... a decent > >respect for the opinions REQUIRES that they declare the causes which > >impel them..." [snort] Dubya wouldn't feel "required" to seek out > >the "opinions" of the French and other foreign America-haters, I can > >tell you that! > > This is pretty pathetic, even by your standards. John Kerry did not mean > by "global test" that America must simply make a "declaration of causes." > Hell, even George Bush agreed we should do that - that's why Bush wanted > FIFTEEN MONTHS after the "axis of evil" speech before attacking Iraq, which > is why he sought unanimous passage at the United Nations of Security > Council resolution 1441, and why he sent Colin Powell to the United > Nations to lay out the causes that were leading the US to take its actions. > > John Kerry, of course, meant by "global test" that America must not just > lay out its causes, but that we must get some form of international > approval - beyond the approval of getting at least 21 out of 30 formal US > Allies to support the Iraq War as Bush did, and apparently beyond getting > UN Security Council approval as we did during the first Gulf War (which > Kerry voted against.) > > >===== > > > >The monsters have a huge advantage going in, folks. With home bases > >in Confederate and rural states, they get up to 30 extra electoral > >votes. > > 30 Extra? I'm not sure it is 30, but Bush has the advantage that his voters, on average, have higher weighed votes than Kerry voters. > So? Bush got a higher percentage than Clinton did in 1992..... The point is that he got less than Gore did in 2000. More people wanted Clinton than wanted either Bush or Perot. Fewer people wanted Bush than wanted Gore. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
