ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, July 15, 2013

Where is the Left?

I find it fascinating how the ideological Left is far more concerned about slavery that ended nearly 150 years ago than slavery that is taking place today.  It appears that if they can't blame something on white people, they're just not interested in it:
From the West Coast of Africa to the deserts of Sinai, Bedouin tribes are conducting a human trafficking trade on a massive scale... This man is just one victim of this widespread modern-day slavery, kidnapping, and torture trade in the Sinai desert. There are many pictures and videos of this horrible practice on the Internet. For this story, this Christian man from the African country of Eritrea is going by "Philip," but that's not his real name. CBN News covered his identity for his protection.

"In some cases, we were tortured simply because we were Christians," he told us, his chest trembling slightly as he spoke. "Sinai was always a place for human smuggling, but since around two years ago -- even a bit more -- it started also to be a place of human torture," Shahar Shoham, director of Physicians for Human Rights, told CBN News.
I don't know if you've noticed, but it is readily apparent that everything, including the truth, is nothing more than a useful weapon to the Left.  With a few noble exceptions, for whom I harbor an amount of respect, they just don't appear to have any genuine principles beyond whatever they find useful at the moment. 

This is true of some who are nominally on the right, of course.  You don't need to remind me, I was acquainted with Ken Lay and some members of Bush the Elder's "Houston Mafia".  But it appears to be true of nearly everyone, especially at the grass roots, on the Left.

Labels: ,

187 Comments:

Anonymous keep Smiling July 15, 2013 9:01 AM  

What does the left call a lynching when the person being lynched is hispanic?

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2013 9:04 AM  

Ask Al Sharpton if he would rather spend 500 million tax dollars on fighting slavery abroad, or if he'd rather distribute it in the US as reparations for past slavery.






Anonymous Toby Temple July 15, 2013 9:05 AM  

Where is the Left?

Somewhere out there
Over the rainbow

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 9:11 AM  

And when will they start talking about White African-American president?

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 9:14 AM  

Honestly? Where is the left?

We are the ones working on this. Who do you think "Physicians for Human Rights" is:

"Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) is an independent organization that uses medicine and science to stop mass atrocities and severe human rights violations against individuals. We use our investigations and expertise to advocate for the..."

Does this sound like a conservative organization?

Amnesty, ACLU, Doctors Without Borders - all leftist organizations.

The biggest question is - where are the Churches?

Anonymous NALALT July 15, 2013 9:24 AM  

Snowflake right on cue.

Anonymous Tallen July 15, 2013 9:26 AM  

where are the Churches?

Being persecuted. Derp.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 9:26 AM  

> We are the ones working on this.

You're a very small minority in the leftist community, dh.

> The biggest question is - where are the Churches?

No, the biggest question is: Why are the Churches not taking up arms to defend their people? Christianity is not incompatible with self defense.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2013 9:32 AM  

Zimmerman OT:
IT director fired for pointing out that the Prosecutors office had purposely censored data from Martin's phone in the discovery process -
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/13/justice/zimmerman-it-firing/index.html

Blogger hadley July 15, 2013 9:36 AM  

Google "restavek". Slavery in Haiti has never stopped. Child slavery is common now.

Right after the Haitian Revolution the Haitian leaders re-enslaved the rural population to get them to keep harvesting sugar cane on the Haitian sugar cane plantations.

Without a slave labor force to grow cash crops for them, Haitian Emperors couldn't buy their fancy uniforms, build their castles and fight their endless civil wars.

Your regular everyday African slave in Haiti knew he could pluck bananas out of the trees and survive in the traditional African manner of subsistence living, sex, beer, and music. It took particularly nasty and brutal Haitian Emperors to keep the Haitian plantation/slave system going.

Now they limit their slavery to small children. An improvement, I guess.

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 9:37 AM  

What has the Left ever done for humanity other than stomp it's face over and over?

What about slavery??!! Civil rights??!!! <-- Nothing that wasn't already solved in the Bible and U.S. constitution.

Right/left is a con-game. Conservatives and libertarians in the United States are not after Throne and Alter, or a plutocratic liberal-fascist corporatist democracy (mob-rule) of the neocons, country-club Republicans, and (ironically) the typical Democratic Party voter.

Anonymous TJIC July 15, 2013 9:44 AM  

everything, including the truth, is nothing more than a useful weapon to the Left.

This is exactly the point I made yesterday in a comment on the previous installment of this series:


http://voxday.blogspot.com/2013/07/response-part-vii.html#c95540896630349955

[ to the leftist ] there is nothing inherently good or bad about rewriting rules or about censoring speech. If a witch hunt is done to help leftism (Vox's SFWA situation) it's good. If a witch hunt is done to hurt leftist (i.e. Sen McCarthy's situation) it's bad.

This is what I mean about tactics versus principles.

Blogger tz July 15, 2013 9:45 AM  

@keep Smiling: Amnesty.

Leftism is an addiction to power.

First the idealist wants to do some good, e.g. redress some injustice or help with poverty.

He then discovers the traditional paths and methods are slow and difficult, even though they tend to be effective.

But he cannot wait or considers the good done to be more important than the even greater principles that say not to do evil, or he rationalizes the evil is worth it or can be addressed after the good is done.

At this point he has given himself to the dark side.

So he does the evil - the government takes over and uses blunt force (I'd note the war on drugs is leftist by this definition). It doesn't accomplish the good, while the evils grow.

But when this happens, like a losing gambler that doubles down, he insists on more government control, force, or whatever is necessary, not noticing the evil is already exceeding the good.

And when in power, he is corrupted by it, so to even slow things down would be to admit he was wrong, so he will maintain the evil and increase it indefinitely.

So we get the slow but inexorable cratering of Detroit and the slnking of Chicago, while they celebrate all those nice people including the first black president. Who did what exactly to help the situation (oh, insure his crony banksters would be rewarded for continuing to gut the cities).

So the original good has long ago become empty rhetoric, but the evils are all there, visible like flashing neon signs to see, but to challenge or even point out the emperor is naked is to come under scathing attack for being hateful about whatever topic is mentioned.

I could similarly describe the right's caring about freedom and "capitalism", though they have been the most responsible for destroying both.

The left and right cooperate in keeping power and corruption as they are both the beneficiaries. It is like going to a football game where there is an historic rivalry and suggesting they tear down the stadium - or both taxpayer subsidized stadia. Both teams will fight harder.to keep the subsidy than they fight each other.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 July 15, 2013 9:46 AM  

Funny, there was a recent article on Lew Rockwell about slavery and the start of the Secession War (or the Civil War says the victors):

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/thomas-j-dilorenzo/who-caused-the-1861-65-bloodbath/

Basically, it states that North Eastern communists started the war. Interesting perspective, although not altogether shocking. If there were any kind of justice or fairness in American politics, the New England states would be banned from any kind of high office for a century.

Anonymous buzzcut July 15, 2013 9:48 AM  

I wonder what Eritrean gun control policies are?

http://www.gunpolicy.org/

In Eritrea, civilians are not allowed to possess any form of firearm
Regulation of Automatic Assault Weapons
In Eritrea, private possession of fully automatic weapons is prohibited
Regulation of Semiautomatic Assault Weapons
In Eritrea, private possession of semi-automatic assault weapons is prohibited
Regulation of Handguns
In Eritrea, private possession of handguns (pistols and revolvers) is prohibited

Hmm. I'm starting to see a pattern . . .

Anonymous TJIC July 15, 2013 9:48 AM  

@hadley:

Google "restavek".

Just did. Google Wikipedia article; thanks.

One thing I find hilarious about lefties is that any time one of the "good" groups does something bad (government, blacks, etc.), the immediate instinct is to explain it away as one of the "bad" groups really being behind the sin.

In this article, for example

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restavec

the problem of blacks owning other blacks as slaves is, apparently, really a problem of free trade and globalization (presumable pushed by white capitalists).

It's almost a game reading this stuff.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 9:50 AM  

You're a very small minority in the leftist community, dh.

It's not me, I am not doing anything against actual slavery. On the one hand you have leftist/liberals who are doing something, via various organizations (including the ones linked from the article).

On the other hand, you have conservatives who won't even end slave labor in US possessions like Guam and Saipan.

Anonymous Anonymous July 15, 2013 9:50 AM  

Intersectionality and the alleged hierarchies of oppression have a lot to do with why the left has become so illogical. It's why many feminists refuse to deal with Sharia law and the Islamic oppression of women. They believe Muslims are minorities and religiously persecuted, meaning their victimhood trumps women's rights at the moment. It's the same reason so few antiwar protestors today care about drone attacks and the ongoing war, because the President currently holds the victim card. It's why some people are protesting the Zimmerman results, while completely ignoring the more than 11,000 black kids killed by other black kids, since Martin was shot. Black people hold the victim card, so you aren't allowed to criticize them, even though statistically, they are the ones who have really "made the streets unsafe for our kids."

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 9:52 AM  

So he does the evil - the government takes over and uses blunt force (I'd note the war on drugs is leftist by this definition

Are we living in some bizarro world now where the last 40 years of the drug war wasn't prosecuted with vigor by conservatives who are intent on pretending economics doesn't exist, and that "just say no" is an effective weapon in the war on drugs?

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 9:56 AM  

Not to worry, the left is busy implementing Obamacare in the U.S. A sorry excuse for a health care program by any rational analysis (whether one approaches the issue from the left or the right). It's just pure coincidence that Obamacare makes it tougher for small businesses to compete with large companies by shifting health care costs towards the little players who typically have less generous/more limited health care plans than the large corporations. Pure coincidence. Because rights!

As to the ongoing slavery problem, what's the over/under on a leftist showing up on this thread to cite Paul's letter to Philemon?

Anonymous hardscrabble farmer July 15, 2013 9:58 AM  

"...the problem of blacks owning other blacks as slaves is, apparently, really a problem of free trade and globalization (presumable pushed by white capitalists)."

Of course it is. How could any Black African who engages in slavery be expected to be responsible for their actions when there is some far off shadowy White man demanding that they do so.

In reality slavery is a problem of the Solar system. If there was no Sun and no Earth, there would be no slaves, ipso facto.

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 10:00 AM  

Please, dh. The left has spent more time on Saint Trayvon than they have ever spent on the Sinai.

Can you point to where Obama has talked about this like he did Trayvon? Nope? Then the left is about power, not civil rights.

Sorry! Evidence speaks for itself.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 10:02 AM  

On the other hand, you have conservatives who won't even end slave labor in US possessions like Guam and Saipan.

Not aware of any slavery there, but let's take your word for it. Why haven't leftists (who control the Senate and the Executive, much of the judiciary and the government bureaucracy, the media, etc.) not done anything to end it?

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 10:02 AM  

Obama is more concerned with the human rights of Mohammed Morsi than tortured Christians in the Sinai.

Anonymous The other skeptic July 15, 2013 10:09 AM  

Isn't the problem really women who can't do that stuff but have been indoctrinated to think they should?

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 July 15, 2013 10:11 AM  

Obama is more concerned with the human rights of Mohammed Morsi than tortured Christians in the Sinai.

Nope, it's the policy of the US government. The President is a distraction, a puppet, and the ultimate fall guy. Remember, the President is only in office for at most eight years while the head bureaucrats are there for life. They are the ones who run the US government.

Oh for the years when Presidents fired everyone in government and replaced them with their own people...

Anonymous TLM July 15, 2013 10:12 AM  

The church is busy deciding between using the Willow Creek "church growth model" or joining Saddleback's network organization. Its leaders are too busy learning and implementing Six Sigma in their new corporate models. Who has time for real dangerous missionary work.

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 10:14 AM  

Swiftfox, the USG and Obama are on the same side. Which one made the decision is immaterial to me, they both agree with it.

If you like, just substitute USG for Obama in my post. Either way, the institutional left is the problem, and yes, I realize it did not begin with Obongo.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 10:15 AM  

I suppose Obama doesn't see a problem - if they would just convert to his Islamic faith, they wouldn't be slaves anymore. So obviously they're "slaves" out of their own free will.

Anonymous Dan in Tx (paranoid gun nut) July 15, 2013 10:17 AM  

Buzzcut: ".....I'm starting to see a pattern . . ."

WHAT? Are you insinuating that when the leftists spout that they only want a few common sense restrictions on firearms that they have something far different in mind?! You're obviously a paranoid gun nut! /sarc

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 10:18 AM  

> Oh for the years when Presidents fired everyone in government and replaced them with their own people...

Bush tried that at the Justice department and almost got impeached for it. But it wasn't a problem for Clinton, strangely enough.

Anonymous Salt July 15, 2013 10:21 AM  

More to consider.

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government's mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. So what just happened?

BBG spokeswoman Lynne Weil insists BBG is not a propaganda outlet, and its flagship services such as VOA "present fair and accurate news."

"They don't shy away from stories that don't shed the best light on the United States," she told The Cable. She pointed to the charters of VOA and RFE: "Our journalists provide what many people cannot get locally: uncensored news, responsible, discussion, and open debate."

But if anyone needed a reminder of the dangers of domestic propaganda efforts, the past 12 months provided ample reasons. Last year, two USA Today journalists were ensnared in a propaganda campaign after reporting about millions of dollars in back taxes owed by the Pentagon's top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan. Eventually, one of the co-owners of the firm confessed to creating phony websites and Twitter accounts to smear the journalists anonymously. Additionally, just this month, The Washington Post exposed a counter propaganda program by the Pentagon that recommended posting comments on a U.S. website run by a Somali expat with readers opposing Al-Shabaab. "Today, the military is more focused on manipulating news and commentary on the Internet, especially social media, by posting material and images without necessarily claiming ownership," reported The Post.







Anonymous The Voice Of Reason July 15, 2013 10:23 AM  

Confirmation bias is a disease that infests the left and the right, Democrat and Republican, Christian and atheist. It is evident day after day here on this blog.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 10:24 AM  

It is evident day after day here on this blog.

So, it's confirmed every day for you?

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 10:26 AM  

Dh, Are you really trying to suggest that no churches are trying to help Christians in that area?

Look what i found in about ten seconds:

http://int.icej.org/news/special-reports/torture-camps-sinai

Also, I object to your assertion that opposing human rights violations is left wing. That is typical leftist defamation pablum. You don't have a monopoly on opposing evil.

Anonymous Desiderius July 15, 2013 10:28 AM  

They're not Left.

People have noticed that we're missing an actual Left and are looking to fill the void.

These P.T. Barnums are making quite a bit of hay pretending to do so.

The other thing in short supply is the truth...

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2013 10:28 AM  

dh rages "Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) is an independent organization that uses medicine and science to stop mass atrocities and severe human rights violations against individuals. We use our investigations and expertise to advocate for the..."

Does this sound like a conservative organization?


There are no conservative physicians, dh?
Conservatives are anti science and medicine and for mass atrocities and human rights violations?

Typical leftist smear.

Besides, the PHR does not list ending slavery as one of their issues.

Fail.

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2013 10:34 AM  

dh: The biggest question is - where are the Churches?

Try using a search engine:

Free the Slaves - Faith in Action - Christianity
www.freetheslaves.net/Page.aspx?pid=482‎
This group lives on today in the United Kingdom as Anti-Slavery International, ... Today, virtually all Christian groups disavow slavery, regarding it as immoral ...
African American Odyssey: Abolition, Anti-Slavery Movements, and ...
memory.loc.gov/ammem/aaohtml/exhibit/aopart3.html‎
These groups sent petitions with thousands of signatures to Congress, held abolition meetings and conferences, ... Christian Arguments Against Slavery.
Anti slavery Christian groups congratulated by PM
www.eauk.org › Current Affairs › News‎
Oct 28, 2011 - Prime Minister David Cameron has met with Christian campaign groups to hear about their work and the issues they are facing in the fight ...
Christians Launch Anti-Slavery Efforts for Super Bowl XLV | Her ...
www.christianitytoday.com/.../christians-launch-anti-slavery-efforts-for-sup...
Jan 25, 2011 - In response, several Christian anti-trafficking ministries are working ... It is sad to know that even children are forced to sex slavery,this is ...
Abolitionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism‎
For the British NGO working for the eradication of slavery, see Anti-Slavery ... English Quakers and evangelical religious groups condemned slavery (by then ...
4 - Support Anti-slavery Organizations | Threedom Front
www.threedomfront.com/act/anti-slavery-organizations?pg=4‎
Christian Students Fighting Slavery. ... Support Anti-slavery Organizations. These organizations are working to end slavery all over the world. Use this resource ...
Faith Alliance Against Slavery and Trafficking / Home
www.faastinternational.org/‎
FAAST is a Christian alliance working in collaboration to eradicate human trafficking and restore survivors. Our goal is to equip God's people to fight human ...

Anonymous Desiderius July 15, 2013 10:35 AM  

"The biggest question is - where are the Churches?"

Being nice.

Slavery is messy. Someone might be offended.

Anonymous The Voice Of Reason July 15, 2013 10:35 AM  

No, Markku, "evident"-easily seen or understood; obvious. If I meant to say "confirmed', I would have said it.

Anonymous The other skeptic July 15, 2013 10:36 AM  

Zimmerman Saga was all about Race

Of course. The greater propensity for violence and criminality of African Americans and the need by White Americans and NAMs to protect themselves from that violence.

Of course, Campos wants to disarm us so that leftist governments can control us better.

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 10:37 AM  

People have noticed that we're missing an actual Left and are looking to fill the void.

Ah yes, since the left is idealistic and utopian and its ideals can never be realized, therefore the left is never actually in power so it can never be blamed for anything.

Genius.

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 10:39 AM  

No, Markku, "evident"-easily seen or understood; obvious.

If it is that evident and obvious, then it should be very easy for you to write some factual, substantive and supported posts that prove us wrong.

Go ahead, show is how it's done. We are waiting.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 10:40 AM  

No, Markku, "evident"-easily seen or understood; obvious. If I meant to say "confirmed', I would have said it.

Leftist evil is also easily seen or understood; obvious.

But you say that is a subjective assessment, and therefore subject to confirmation bias?

Right back at you.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 10:40 AM  

> But it appears to be true of nearly everyone, especially at the grass roots, on the Left.

My wife noticed this about the green power folks. Windmills are killing raptors at an alarming pace. But you'd never know it to hear the leftist talk.

> If I meant to say "confirmed', I would have said it.

Whoosh.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 July 15, 2013 10:41 AM  

Bush tried that at the Justice department and almost got impeached for it. But it wasn't a problem for Clinton, strangely enough.

You misunderstand. In the 1800s, the common practice was to remove EVERYONE from the Federal government's employment when the new administration came in. This is one of the reasons why James A. Garfied was assassinated in 1881.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 10:53 AM  

Whoosh.

Indeed.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 10:57 AM  

Not aware of any slavery there, but let's take your word for it. Why haven't leftists (who control the Senate and the Executive, much of the judiciary and the government bureaucracy, the media, etc.) not done anything to end it?
They did. As soon as Obama was elected. Up until then it was Speaker Delay and the previous administration blocking it.

Anonymous Will Best July 15, 2013 10:59 AM  

I think 80% of the doctors I know are some form of conservative. It seems to come about from trying to run a business in a massively regulated industry. Though more and more doctors are giving that up and just going to work for Hospitals as employees. I suspect that will turn them into liberals eventually.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 11:00 AM  

dh, what was going on and what did they do?

Anonymous harry12 July 15, 2013 11:00 AM  

The Voice Of Reason July 15, 2013 10:35 AM
No, Markku, "evident"-easily seen or understood; obvious. If I meant to say "confirmed', I would have said it.


Ah yes! It 'seemed to imply'. Is this VOR person the Canadian Regional Director of SFWA?

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 11:01 AM  

Leftists like to talk about confirmation bias, and always in this nebulous way - never saying what actually follows from it. That we should take their position? Or no position at all? Even the latter is a position, namely that you should never take a position on anything except that one. All equally subject to confirmation bias.

The only thing that follows is that we shouldn't censor opposing viewpoints, since they are likely to bring up points that our own side won't. And that's exactly what Vox doesn't do. Now, say, John Scalzi on the other hand...

Anonymous Will Best July 15, 2013 11:02 AM  

You misunderstand. In the 1800s, the common practice was to remove EVERYONE from the Federal government's employment

Yes well back then the Federal government had like 3,000 employees. A dozen confidants could pound that out in a month.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 11:02 AM  

I think 80% of the doctors I know are some form of conservative. It seems to come about from trying to run a business in a massively regulated industry. Though more and more doctors are giving that up and just going to work for Hospitals as employees. I suspect that will turn them into liberals eventually.

It works the other way too. A friend's wife (GP) is now making house calls. Cash basis only, no credit, no insurance accepted. Business is booming.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:04 AM  

Dh, Are you really trying to suggest that no churches are trying to help Christians in that area?

I am really referring to AMERICAN churches, who are way more likely to spend money and time on big bands, mega-churches, and expensive clothes and cars.

http://int.icej.org/news/special-reports/torture-camps-sinai
Point taken.

Also, I object to your assertion that opposing human rights violations is left wing. That is typical leftist defamation pablum. You don't have a monopoly on opposing evil.

I asserted no such thing. I do assert that the ones doing anything about human trafficking/slavery/torture, are almost exclusively left-wing organizations. If you don't even think the treatment that the original article cites is torture, why would you try to stop it? That's the difference with conservatives. The underlying activity is not a problem to them, why would they try to stop it? Same thing, if you are against international law, against the international treaty process, then really, you have a thin reason to oppose this, except that it's mean.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 11:06 AM  

All equally subject to confirmation bias.

Quite. It is very easy to believe what you want to believe. However, that does not make a particular belief inaccurate. It is merely a facet of human nature to guard yourself against. The truth will always win, eventually.

Blogger Some dude July 15, 2013 11:07 AM  

There was something that bothered me about this post, and I just realized what it is. Its not inconsistent for leftists to ignore slavery, because slavery in some form or another, that is physical coercive control of another human beings time and movement for the benefit and at the command of another smaller group of individuals, is something the left has always been aiming for.

And when they oppose american slavery of black folk, what they are really opposing is the haphazard and inefficient implementation of slavery at the hands of private individals that were not them. They would far prefer to have a slave state controlled by manipulative two faced political hacks and bs artists (themselves)

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 11:08 AM  

However, that does not make a particular belief inaccurate. It is merely a facet of human nature to guard yourself against.

I think it's a feature and not a bug. Normal hysteresis phenomenon to prevent flip-flopping at 50% certainty. You have to cross over a certainty threshold in both directions to change a position.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:11 AM  

dh, what was going on and what did they do?

Literally slave labor, being brought in from China, and being forced to work in clothes factories. The product was allowed to be called "Made in the USA" even. Other workers were paid forced labor rates and basically treated as modern indentured workers.

Republicans across the board were bribed (literally, many went to jail) to look the other way. Legislation to end this practice was lobbied from a Christian perspective to Southern, Christian Reps - as in - "Chineese come from the mainland where they are oppressed and are exposed to Jesus etc". It was really sick.

This is I think best found under CMNI Bribery Scandal.

Anonymous a_peraspera July 15, 2013 11:13 AM  

PHR, Amnesty, ACLU, Doctors Without Borders - all leftist organizations...that don'r ever accomplish anything.

All they do is talk about how terrible, awful white colonialism has screwed up wonderful Africa. Then they buy tons of medical supplies with US taxpayer money, and hand it over to the local dictator. Then he sells the stuff on the black market and buys another Rolls Royce.

Nice organizations there.

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 11:14 AM  

That's the difference with conservatives. The underlying activity is not a problem to them, why would they try to stop it?

Conservatives don't have a problem with the atrocities in the Sinai?

You are full of it, and you know it.

How can you just state your premise again, without responding to the list of orgs posted above by another person?

You really do believe the right loves slavery and pain and death, so only the left tries to stop it, That is DELUSIONAL.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:14 AM  

My wife noticed this about the green power folks. Windmills are killing raptors at an alarming pace. But you'd never know it to hear the leftist talk.

Really? This just isn't the case. The Sierra Club, for example, has a detailed policy (for 30 years) on how to site wind power installations to avoid major impacts to birds. Link: http://www.sierraclub.org/policy/conservation/wind_siting.aspx

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 11:16 AM  

> I do assert that the ones doing anything about human trafficking/slavery/torture, are almost exclusively left-wing organizations.

Tow points, dh. First, that you're wrong. US Churches are in fact always raising money to help other Christians throughout the world dealing with this type of thing. Having gotten my name on those type of mailing lists, I get requests for donations fairly frequently.

Second, the wrong kind of help is worse than none. Is what those "left wing" organizations doing effective? From what I've seen, I'd have to say no.

Now, if you want to start an organization supporting the arming of citizens throughout the world so they can defend themselves, I'm all ears, and my pocketbook is open to the meager extend my current situation allows.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:17 AM  

Bush tried that at the Justice department and almost got impeached for it. But it wasn't a problem for Clinton, strangely enough.

Clinton's move was not mid-term, meaning that all of his picks had to be confirmed by the Senate. Bush had his first picks approved, but then since they were interim picks, his entire selection of US Attorney's was able to serve nearly a full term without confirmation.

That was the problem. A large chunk of the interim appointments were never able to be confirmed by the Senate (and most didn't even try to stay on).

Every President is entitled to his or her nominations, but the Senate must confirm them. Basically, it was a bait and switch.

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 11:18 AM  

Dh, Corporate Republicans are not right wingers. They are status quo supporters of the collusion between government and corporate business.

Their only belief is corrupting government to funnel more money to themselves. Much like the left does, to a much greater extent every single year.

Are you as mad about Pigford? See, we are mad about both. We have somethig called consistency.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 11:19 AM  

> The Sierra Club, for example, has a detailed policy (for 30 years) on how to site wind power installations to avoid major impacts to birds.

And how has that worked, dh? Again, the raptors are being killed. Are you saying the Sierra Club doesn't have any input on the installations actually being performed? I'd think their lawyers would have more clout that that.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:20 AM  

Second, the wrong kind of help is worse than none. Is what those "left wing" organizations doing effective? From what I've seen, I'd have to say no.

That's thin gruel. It's hard to compare one organizations results to another, fictional organizations non-results.

Now, if you want to start an organization supporting the arming of citizens throughout the world so they can defend themselves, I'm all ears, and my pocketbook is open to the meager extend my current situation allows.
Are you talking about individuals or fomenting resistance groups/armies?

Tow points, dh. First, that you're wrong. US Churches are in fact always raising money to help other Christians throughout the world dealing with this type of thing. Having gotten my name on those type of mailing lists, I get requests for donations fairly frequently.
That's great to hear. My main exposure to US Churches are the Catholic church, and the various mega-churches that I've seen around. Both are poor examples of helping in this regard.

Anonymous E. PERLINE July 15, 2013 11:24 AM  

Sun Tzu likes this article. It shows power of lone writer.

Sun Tzu says avoid shitfight with writers club. It has more ammunition to throw.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:26 AM  

There are no conservative physicians, dh?
Conservatives are anti science and medicine and for mass atrocities and human rights violations?

Typical leftist smear.


If you could read better, perhaps you wouldn't make elementary mistakes. I said no such thing. I did say that the organizations actually attempting to do something useful are leftist organizations.

Besides, the PHR does not list ending slavery as one of their issues.

Fail.


They are quoted in the article. That's their involvement.

You failed to answer the question. Does PHR sound like a conservative organization to you?

The concept of conservatism - which naturally eschews international law, which is the basis for "human rights violations" - is inherently against one sovereign dictating how another must treat it's citizens or residents. On what basis do the citizens of one nation have the right to dictate the interrogation, labor conditions, or other details to another, if not via international law?

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 11:27 AM  

The product was allowed to be called "Made in the USA" even. Other workers were paid forced labor rates and basically treated as modern indentured workers.

We've been importing Mexicans (and some from other parts) since 1964 for much the same purpose. A perpetual underclass is useful to both Democrat politicians and the country-club Republicans who run the GOP.

Blogger hadley July 15, 2013 11:27 AM  

"the problem of blacks owning other blacks as slaves is, apparently, really a problem of free trade and globalization (presumable pushed by white capitalists)."

I had a black man explain to me that the only reason the Haitian Emperors continued the Haitian plantation/slavery system is because they needed money to pay the French reparations for the war. And I'm thinking to myself, "... and the impoted silk dresses for the Emperor's wife? And the gold covered Emperor's uniform? And the magnificent palace filled with imported French goodies?"

Really, you don't even need to make this stuff up. With the Internet it's laying all over the ground, free for anyone to pick up and read. The weird thing is that it was all common knowledge 100 years ago, before The Narrative. Thank goodness Google hasn't started censoring books ... yet.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:29 AM  

And how has that worked, dh? Again, the raptors are being killed. Are you saying the Sierra Club doesn't have any input on the installations actually being performed? I'd think their lawyers would have more clout that that.

No, they have virtually no power. Business gets, more or less, what they want in this country.

It stretches credulity to blame the left for problems that left almost uniformly opposes. This is a great example. The right are not the ones opposing wind power. The only wind power projects to be modified or scrapped have been done that way BY THE LEFT. The right are the ones favoring implicit and explicit subsidies to oil, gas and coal power.

Look at one example: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/region/two-big-wind-farm-projects-canceled-in-pennsylvania-636117/

It's LEFTWING groups opposing turbines. It's only PRO-BUSINESS LOBBYING GROUPS that are trying to keep it alive.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:30 AM  

We've been importing Mexicans (and some from other parts) since 1964 for much the same purpose. A perpetual underclass is useful to both Democrat politicians and the country-club Republicans who run the GOP.

Agree. And when there is a chance to chip away at that, it's a good thing.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:33 AM  

Are you as mad about Pigford? See, we are mad about both. We have somethig called consistency.

I am very upset about the corruption of the settlement from something to deal with what was really spectacular and real racism for a real (but smallish) subset of Americans. There is no justification for government discriminating against black farmers. What it turned into was a sham and a huge failure of the judicial branches ability to deliver justice.

Anonymous VD July 15, 2013 11:35 AM  

It stretches credulity to blame the left for problems that left almost uniformly opposes. This is a great example. The right are not the ones opposing wind power.

DH, you know that the leading opponent of windpower in the UK is my man James Delingpole of the Telegraph. Not exactly a leftie.

And the Left came up with wind power program in the first place, to the best of my recollection. Remember, they wanted to use it to replace the nuclear power plants they were trying to shut down.

Anonymous Anonymous July 15, 2013 11:36 AM  

There is no Left or Right anymore, beyond the fact that left=good and right=bad. That is why it is possible to have a Dem President and a Dem Congress and yet if the Gov does anything wrong, it will be the fault of the Right. There need not be an actual Right-winger within 100 miles of DC, they'll find one from our past to blame if necessary. The same is true for churches, good churches are Left, bad churches are Right. Charitable orgs doing good in the world are Left, even when they declare no religious or political affiliations. Because of the laws of intersectionality, even extremist Muslims are lefties, due to the fact that they are perceived to be brown people subjected to religious persecution. Blacks, women, minorities, all Lefties by default. Should one of these special designated Lefties step off the plantation and start thinking for themselves, they will be rendered invisible or harassed into oblivion. There is no greater crime than failing to comply with the ideological rock that the Left is currently attempting to use as their foundation.

Anonymous VD July 15, 2013 11:37 AM  

It's LEFTWING groups opposing turbines. It's only PRO-BUSINESS LOBBYING GROUPS that are trying to keep it alive.

Left/Right is not about business. Corporations are creatures of government. The largest corporations in the world are owned by the Chinese Communist government.

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2013 11:39 AM  

dh

They are quoted in the article. That's their involvement.

They are quoted in the article, yes. Their issue is not slavery, but torture.

Anonymous Myrddin July 15, 2013 11:40 AM  

Generally, the churches in England have always been the vanguard of anti-slavery activity everywhere. Hell, they got their start before the Willie the Kid wandered in with his French-speaking Vikings and messed everything up, though they hadn't achieved abolition by then.

Hell, the Emancipation Proclamation was hand-tailored to keep the English from joining the south in the American Civil War. By making the war about slavery, Lincoln instantly conscripted the churches in England as his propaganda department.

But, as a rule, I don't worry too much about the church in America. Remember, the US began in part as the lunatic fringe of the churches running away from persecution. I support their right to do so, but we've always had a larger percentage of churches that were more worried about feeeelings than the rest of the world.

Nor do I think highly of Conservatives. The Conservatives can be defined as those people who want to conserve the last generation's liberalism. The only groups I'm interested are the groups that say we can -- or at least must -- turn back the clock quite a bit farther in most respects.

In the end, well, my own church has more members in Africa than in the U.S. If they learn to hit back from time to time, we may even eventually get some civilization going over there. As the church in one place passes into darkness, the church in another rises.

But yeah. England is going to have most of the churches actively going after slavery. It's always been the place to be for that battle.

And every country that has ditched slavery at all has been a Christian country, or a country under severe pressure from Christians. You may be on the boat, but it's our boat.

Anonymous Mr. Nightstick July 15, 2013 11:42 AM  

Who are the exceptions?

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2013 11:43 AM  

dh
If you could read better, perhaps you wouldn't make elementary mistakes. I said no such thing. I did say that the organizations actually attempting to do something useful are leftist organizations..

Speaking of reading better, maybe you should reread what you actually wrote instead of addressing what you think you said.

Anonymous AK July 15, 2013 11:44 AM  

He then discovers the traditional paths and methods are slow and difficult, even though they tend to be effective.

But he cannot wait...


Is this the same short time-preference tendency that makes a civilized technological society less sustainable?

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 11:46 AM  

Dh is STILL pretending there are no Christian orgs opposing the Sinai situation, and he is still refusing to address the orgs posted in response to his assertion?

What a farce, dh.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 11:47 AM  

What it turned into was a sham and a huge failure of the judicial branches ability to deliver justice.

That is the natural result/progression of government. It always reflects the fallible and fallen nature of men. Making it larger and more intrusive only magnifies the effect.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:50 AM  

DH, you know that the leading opponent of windpower in the UK is my man James Delingpole of the Telegraph. Not exactly a leftie.

Didn't know that. The only other opposition I have seen has been of the NIMBY variety.


And the Left came up with wind power program in the first place, to the best of my recollection. Remember, they wanted to use it to replace the nuclear power plants they were trying to shut down.

I have never seen an anti-nuclear person who would answer the question about what power would replace those plants in the first place, so you may be right.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:50 AM  

Dh is STILL pretending there are no Christian orgs opposing the Sinai situation, and he is still refusing to address the orgs posted in response to his assertion?

What a farce, dh.


You're just making it up now. I said no such thing.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 11:50 AM  

On what basis do the citizens of one nation have the right to dictate the interrogation, labor conditions, or other details to another, if not via international law?

On the basis that it is wrong in the absolute, regardless of any laws. And conservatives happen to have a world view that is compatible with this.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 11:52 AM  

As for whether this particular organization is left or right, there's too little information to tell. My guess would be that its mission is outside a left/right paradigm, as it is about helping specific individuals in the here and now. If it were about transforming society so that slavery would decrease, then it would fit in the paradigm. (Since the next question would be about what it should be transformed into.)

Blogger CarpeOro July 15, 2013 11:54 AM  

Just curious, but when dh was wondering where American churches were on the issue, did he read the line in the excerpt about this being news from CBN? Kind of like a blind spot where he can't see the forest for the tree.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:54 AM  

Zeno0, answer the question:

Does this sound like a conservative organization: http://physiciansforhumanrights.org/issues/

I agree their main issue is torture. I presumed that VD was also talking about torture as an issue, since the article he links involves torture to a great deal, i.e. the left is more interested in talking about slavery from 150 years ago than talking about "widespread modern-day slavery, kidnapping, and torture trade in the Sinai desert".

Again, it is a very thin argument to criticize the left for doing not enough, when the conservatives are in fact doing nothing, or as close to nothing, as possible.

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 11:55 AM  

The Left isn't pro-Big-Business?

Seriously?

How would you define "leftwing" dh?

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:58 AM  

As for whether this particular organization is left or right, there's too little information to tell. My guess would be that its mission is outside a left/right paradigm, as it is about helping specific individuals in the here and now. If it were about transforming society so that slavery would decrease, then it would fit in the paradigm. (Since the next question would be about what it should be transformed into.)

Come now: "After 9/11, physicians and psychologists were enlisted by the US government to design, implement, and monitor the use of torture against detainees. At the same time, the global use of torture continues and survivors who seek asylum in the United States face harsh treatment in US detention centers. - See more at: http://physiciansforhumanrights.org/issues/#sthash.8DGFzCJK.dpuf"

Really? It was the neo-conservatives and conservatives who both engaged in, promoted, and celebrated the very top line programs that this organization is against. The entire organization is basically Physicans Against Neo-Conservatives.

Just be honest. Conservatives are less likely to join and donate their skills and times to an organization like any of the left-wing organizations. It's not in the nature of the ideology to support taking collective, direct action. Those are two traits directly linked to leftism.

I guess we are going off track, as I presume that VD was more talking on the ideological side of the operation, and less on the provisional.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 11:59 AM  

Just curious, but when dh was wondering where American churches were on the issue, did he read the line in the excerpt about this being news from CBN? Kind of like a blind spot where he can't see the forest for the tree.
I just read up on the CBN, I guess I don't know what they are. Are they a Church or some sort of other organization?

Blogger The Deuce July 15, 2013 12:00 PM  

keep Smiling:

"What does the left call a lynching when the person being lynched is hispanic?"

I believe the technical term is "justice for Trayvon"

Anonymous Sigyn July 15, 2013 12:00 PM  

The biggest question is - where are the Churches?

Are you kidding? We started it. You guys are latecomers to the game.

That's a bit like starting the race halfway along, and then pointing at the other runners and calling them lazy and weak because they're not fresh like you.

Anonymous Susan July 15, 2013 12:04 PM  

To paraphrase one of the best comments about leftists and tyranny I have ever read, either here or elsewhere,

Leftists only oppose the tyrannies that they are not in control of. And before dh comments about the right on this, I consider the republican party as dem-lite so my comment stands.

Leftists ignoring real and very obvious problems in the world has been going on for decades. For example, feminists will shriek about some women's rights issue here in this Country, but all you hear are crickets when it comes to speaking out with regards to real and horrible issues for women of other nations. Examples abound in Saudi Arabia, Africa, Thailand and so forth.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 12:04 PM  

The Left isn't pro-Big-Business?

I think they are. For about the last 25 years they have consistently favored environmental lobby against business.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben July 15, 2013 12:07 PM  

The Left has favored redistributing resources away from productive enterprise embodied in nuclear power in order to fund businesses that at the present time aren't feasible.

Mr. Leftist, how is destroying the coal industry, admitted by Obama as one of his goals, and jacking up utility rates going to help the poor?

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 12:09 PM  

> That's thin gruel. It's hard to compare one organizations results to another...

True. And since neither of us move in the others circles, neither of us really has a valid basis for comparison. That's why I phrased my comment as a question. Please not that I didn't say the churches raising money were having any real positive impact either.

> Are you talking about individuals or fomenting resistance groups/armies?

Individual, wherever possible. I am a libertarian, after all. And yes, I realize this is against the law in many areas. I'd argue for trying to change the laws, but we both know how far that would get.

> On what basis do the citizens of one nation have the right to dictate the interrogation, labor conditions, or other details to another, if not via international law?

None. But we don't really have that with international law either.

> No, they have virtually no power. Business gets, more or less, what they want in this country.

You're exaggerating, dh. I'm sure the mere threat of lawsuits to stop to project would get them input into the decision making process. Then there's the citizen input at EPA hearings and the like. They've been doing this for years and taken in a lot of donations. If they're still having no input you all should be demanding your money back.

> The right are not the ones opposing wind power.

No. They're proposing traditional energy solutions instead. But strangely enough, the windmills still went up. Since no one on the right supported them, who did?

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 12:10 PM  

Leftists ignoring real and very obvious problems in the world has been going on for decades. For example, feminists will shriek about some women's rights issue here in this Country, but all you hear are crickets when it comes to speaking out with regards to real and horrible issues for women of other nations. Examples abound in Saudi Arabia, Africa, Thailand and so forth.

Really? Jeez, it's just lets make up stories about leftists day. There are all manner of groups of feminists working on these issues in these types of places.

Leftists only oppose the tyrannies that they are not in control of. And before dh comments about the right on this, I consider the republican party as dem-lite so my comment stands.
I agree about the GOP. But about the core conservative case. This is essentially about manifest destiny. The conservatives just want to be left alone. There is no rational basis to expect a conservative to do anything specific about any ill, evil or negative event happening anywhere outside of his or her own sovereignty. Whether that be the next count, state, region, country or continent away. That's the rugged individualism that marks American conservative at heart.

Complaining that leftists are at fault for not doing more is again holding the left to a standard of results that the right and conservatives don't even admit is laudable, or even, worthy of attention.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 12:11 PM  

No. They're proposing traditional energy solutions instead. But strangely enough, the windmills still went up. Since no one on the right supported them, who did?

Business. Windmills aren't some small time operation. They get huge government subsidies (worldwide), and are huge, big business.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 12:13 PM  

Mr. Leftist, how is destroying the coal industry, admitted by Obama as one of his goals, and jacking up utility rates going to help the poor?

It's not in the short-term. The leftist agenda is not necessarily consistent. It is trendy around here to claim that the left has short-time preferences, but across the board on energy, it is the right and conservatives who have short time preferences. It's an unusual inversion.

Anonymous Anonymous July 15, 2013 12:13 PM  

"I just read up on the CBN, I guess I don't know what they are...."

Good grief! It's the Christian Broadcasting Network, which posted an article about some horrors in the Sinai desert and specifically quoted a Catholic nun, the Israeli founded group, Physicians for Human Rights, and a couple of priests. Where are the churches, you ask? I don't know, how about all over the darn article?

Blogger Herb Nowell July 15, 2013 12:15 PM  

@dh
The biggest question is - where are the Churches?

https://www.freetheslaves.net/
http://www.cast.eu.com/
http://mercymovement.com/

They are out there, don't deceive yourself.

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 12:15 PM  

"For about the last 25 years they have consistently favored environmental lobby against business."

BAHAHAHAA. You're a cute kid. Leave cookies and milk out for Santa tonight, OK?

For the rest of us with grown-up ears:

The so-called "environmental lobby" = Big Business.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 12:16 PM  

Just be honest. Conservatives are less likely to join and donate their skills and times to an organization like any of the left-wing organizations. It's not in the nature of the ideology to support taking collective, direct action. Those are two traits directly linked to leftism.

I have absolutely no reason to think so, and if I had to guess, I'd say that of those donating time and money for such efforts (that is, efforts to help real individuals in the here and now), more would identify as conservatives than as liberals.

USA was indeed turned into an evil country on the Republicans' watch, and they did manage to sell it to the grassroots conservatives. I remember the time. The impression I had was that these are Muslim monsters who start their day with beheadings and tortures, and the occasional and rare waterboarding is done only in a "ticking bomb" kind of a situation. And they'll need to be detained at Gitmo for just a little while, until there is time to prove what they have done in court. Seemed fine to me.

But now it seems that the facts of the matter were and are completely different. That doesn't mean my principles were wrong, it just means I was deceived about the facts.

So, yes, opposing Gitmo pretty much proves that this is not an effort from the Republican elite. But as for conservatives in general, it proves nothing.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2013 12:16 PM  

dh July 15, 2013 9:14 AM
The biggest question is - where are the Churches?




you ever notice a red crossbar on a white background? it's a symbol recognized around the world -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Red_Cross

the Red Cross ( the symbolism is no accident ) was founded in 1863 by the same Calvinist who founded the Geneva chapter of the YMCA ( Young Men's Christian Association ) in 1852.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Dunant

the fact that today the Red Cross, YMCA and YWCA are almost completely secular is not a 'fault' of Christianity. as with every single one of original universities in the US ( which were all started as Divinity colleges ), Christians have been driven out from them.

Churches and their members continue to donate hundreds of millions every year to relief efforts all over the globe. the problem being that it's usually on a church-by-church or missionary-by-missionary basis, these contributions typically get disparaged by leftists as not being 'big' enough to matter.

conservatives donate FAR more of their own income ( as a percentage and in absolute terms ) for charitable work than liberals do ... and this is borne out EVERY TIME a study is done on the issue.

but dh still wants the Right to defend it's "inaction".


the FACT, dh, is that slavery was made illegal by international law EXCLUSIVELY due to the effort of Churches and Christian organizations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Slavery_Society



dh July 15, 2013 11:14 AM
The Sierra Club, for example, has a detailed policy (for 30 years) on how to site wind power installations to avoid major impacts to birds. Link: http://www.sierraclub.org/policy/conservation/wind_siting.aspx





so fucking what? the issue isn't the physical location of the farms, it's the rpm of the old style blades. they turn too fast for the birds to see them. being unable to see them, the birds fly right into them.

http://www.cfact.org/2013/03/18/wind-turbines-kill-up-to-39-million-birds-a-year/

the new style, HVLS turbines such as are being installed around Van Wert Ohio are the only kind of turbine which can alleviate the bird strike problem.
http://www.ohio.com/news/local/wind-turbines-rise-above-flatlands-of-western-ohio-1.239271



dh July 15, 2013 11:29 AM
It's LEFTWING groups opposing turbines.




absolute, complete, unadulterated bullshit.

the conservative groups have been opposing ALL of this 'green' stupidity as a boondoggle and funding pipeline for Leftists ( Solyndra being only one of the most egregious examples ) since their inception.




dh July 15, 2013 11:29 AM
It's only PRO-BUSINESS LOBBYING GROUPS that are trying to keep it alive.




there would not BE any significant 'windfarm industry' if not for .gov enviro spending IN THAT SECTOR.

let's review:
*Leftists campaign to spend tax money to create entirely new 'green' industries which CANNOT be supported by the market
*Leftists then rush to create and staff these 'green' 'businesses'
*the Leftists controlling these 'businesses' then spend money on lobbyists in order to 'defend' their 'legitimate' 'business' interests
*dh accuses said 'business lobbying groups' of being 'pro-business' ( and hence, of the 'right' )

and we're supposed to defend the RIGHT?

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 12:16 PM  

> For about the last 25 years they have consistently favored environmental lobby against business.

False dichotomy, dh. The fact that they want to control businesses doesn't make them anti-business. It merely means they want to be the ones dictating things.

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 12:16 PM  

Noticed you dodged this (typical):

How would you define "leftwing" dh?

Blogger RobertT July 15, 2013 12:22 PM  

Most leftists, like most rightists, are not doing anything related to their beliefs. Leftists not fighting racial tension in the South or the hood, they're obviously not working against slavery and torture in the Sinai. And they're certainly not donating to good charitable causes. If they thought of the Sinai at all, there'd probably a medal involved. They're just living their lives, hopefully as upwardly mobile young people, and voicing their opinions as they form the majority consensus. These people are exactly as VD describes them, although I can't think of the exceptions he cited.

Anonymous Harsh July 15, 2013 12:23 PM  

@dh

You're going to wear out your keyboard, son.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2013 12:25 PM  


Again, it is a very thin argument to criticize the left for doing not enough, when the conservatives are in fact doing nothing, or as close to nothing, as possible.


Utter horseshit and you know it. Multiple comments above have provided you with links and descriptions of conservative organizations working against such evils. Your failure to acknowledge them is only indicative of your lack of honesty.

The conservative churches' opposition to such practices comes from a moral, Christian basis. What is your basis for opposing slavery and torture?

Anonymous Heh July 15, 2013 12:29 PM  

It's LEFTWING groups opposing turbines. It's only PRO-BUSINESS LOBBYING GROUPS that are trying to keep it alive.

Left/Right is not about business. Corporations are creatures of government. The largest corporations in the world are owned by the Chinese Communist government.


But... but... everyone knows that Big Media is Right Wing, because it is owned by eeeevil Big Corporations, which are always Right Wing!

Anonymous Daniel July 15, 2013 12:33 PM  

I am the descendant of a relatively famous slave - one whose biography was a bestseller and a book known to be in the possession of a young Abraham Lincoln, who has been featured on the History Channel, and has had the movie rights purchased by Stephen Spielberg.

I'll tell you something: it's quite a dime to drop on the unsuspecting leftist hoping to make me feel guilty about the past.

Anonymous Harsh July 15, 2013 12:36 PM  

The so-called "environmental lobby" = Big Business.

This

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 12:37 PM  

Hmm. And Daniel's post goes to that great Blogger comment cemetery in the sky. :( Yet another victim of the unknown bug that's been biting posters for the past few weeks (or is it months now).

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 12:41 PM  

This is all right out of Goldberg's book, Tyranny of Cliches, by the way.

When Progressives supported eugenics -- it was left-wing until it wasn't.

Ditto for segregation (Woodrow Wilson).

"Marriages for all" is the cause célèbre today, until Mormans start talking about pologomy.

Anonymous Daniel July 15, 2013 12:43 PM  

All it was was this:

As the descendant of a relatively famous slave, one whose biography was a bestseller in the 1820s (a book that was in the small library of a young Abraham Lincoln), who has been profiled in a two-hour long History Channel documentary, whose movie rights have been purchased by Spielberg, it is rather fun to drop that dime on any leftist who tries to guilt me about the past.

Anonymous Catan July 15, 2013 1:09 PM  

There is no rational basis to expect a conservative to do anything specific about any ill, evil or negative event happening anywhere outside of his or her own sovereignty. Whether that be the next count, state, region, country or continent away. That's the rugged individualism that marks American conservative at heart.

Speak for yourself. You aren't a conservative, so don't put words in their mouths.

You confuse Government and Society, like all liberals. You think, that because they do not want government force leveraged to "solve problems", that they don't try to help anyone.

You are a jackass for making an assertion like that. Christians here in the south are some of the most helpful, thoughtful people there are. Or do you think those Democrats packed in US cities are kinder and more generous?

You're just making it up now. I said no such thing.

Then give us your response to the orgs we listed instead of ignoring them.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben July 15, 2013 1:15 PM  

dh, how do you know wind and solar are good investments? Are you God? You are acting like a fool if you believe that you know what's best for everyone else in terms of what types of power they should be using.

Do you realize that wind and solar require massive amounts of environmental degradation to dig the rare earths out of the ground that are required to build them?

You want to talk about time preferences? You're the same bunch that opines about how saving money is bad for the economy (paradox of thrift).

Do you truly believe government bureaucrats are as inventive as entrepreneurs? That if they just shuffle paper and bark orders at the truly productive that there will be some sort of utopia?

Anonymous Mike M. July 15, 2013 1:15 PM  

In any event, Vox is right. Hypocrisy is present on the Right, but it's spotty - and we're ashamed of it.

To the Left, hypocrisy is a feature, not a bug. And they have no shame whatsoever about indulging it in their lust for power over their neighbor.

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2013 1:24 PM  

There is no rational basis to expect a conservative to do anything specific about any ill, evil or negative event happening anywhere outside of his or her own sovereignty.

Google "missionary". Google "history of abolitionism".

And don't come back here with your ignorant babbling until you've read every single search result in detail.

Anonymous Harsh July 15, 2013 1:25 PM  

There is no rational basis to expect a conservative to do anything specific about any ill, evil or negative event happening anywhere outside of his or her own sovereignty. Whether that be the next count, state, region, country or continent away. That's the rugged individualism that marks American conservative at heart.

Only a damned fool would believe that.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 1:38 PM  

You see that word "rational" there? What leftists mean by it is basis that is compatible with leftist world view.

God isn't rational, remember?

Anonymous Godfrey July 15, 2013 1:51 PM  

There is no left and right. There are only naive and skeptical (i.e. "street wise").

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2013 1:53 PM  

dh: Zeno0, answer the question:

Does this sound like a conservative organization: http://physiciansforhumanrights.org/issues/


It sounds neither conservative nor "progressive" as it is based on physician's concern for the health and well being of humans. I see no reason to claim it as leftist.

If you were just concerned that VD was using it as a conservative org., then ok. I did not read that into his post, but you must have.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 1:58 PM  

How would you define "leftwing" dh?

Leftwing, or leftist/liberal? Not the same.

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2013 1:59 PM  

dh:

This is I think best found under CMNI Bribery Scandal.

I did. Apparently you don't know the difference between immigration fraud and labor exploitation and slavery.

Anonymous The Voice Of Reason July 15, 2013 2:03 PM  

“If it is that evident and obvious, then it should be very easy for you to write some factual, substantive and supported posts that prove us wrong.”

And you would be willing to admit that you were in error if your criteria was met???


“But you say that is a subjective assessment, and therefore subject to confirmation bias?”

A simple remark was made. There was no subjectivity in that statement. Right back at you.


“Leftist evil is also easily seen or understood; obvious.”
“And conservatives happen to have a world view that is compatible with this.”
"There are all manner of groups of feminists working on these issues in these types of places."

Default buttons pushed. Duly noted.


“The truth will always win, eventually.”

Now we are getting somewhere. What “truth”?


“Leftists like to talk about confirmation bias, and always in this nebulous way - never saying what actually follows from it. That we should take their position? Or no position at all?

Remove “leftists” with “people”.

“Even the latter is a position, namely that you should never take a position on anything except that one. All equally subject to confirmation bias.”

Human beings are prone to process information from one particular lens, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives, when developing a position. Does that define YOU, or are you willing to step back, carefully consider that information that runs contradicts to your beliefs, and reformulate your position?

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 2:11 PM  

"Leftwing, or leftist/liberal? Not the same."

Don't be a slippery bastard.

Tell us the distinction of any of above, vs. "right-wing"?

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 2:20 PM  

are you willing to step back, carefully consider that information that runs contradicts to your beliefs, and reformulate your position?

Absolutely.

But as I pointed out, the only way this can be helped in general is not to censor opposing viewpoints. And that is exactly what Vox doesn't do. And what the opposing side does as a policy.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2013 2:36 PM  

i am amused that dh has NO response to even a single one of my points.


this is a lot like talking to Shetterly yesterday.


c'mon dh, you've done better than this in the past.

the Left created every aspect of the enviro problem that you're now blaming on the 'right'.

because, business be 'right', yo.

was Solyndra 'right wing'? how not? wasn't it a 'business'?

Al Gore made himself a personal fortune in the hundreds of millions of dollars by establishing and then participating in the carbon exchange scams ( which have since collapsed ). does this not make him a 'business man'?

if not, how not?

if so, by YOUR metric, doesn't this make fucking Al Gore of the 'right'?

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 2:44 PM  

but dh still wants the Right to defend it's "inaction".
I think you are conflating Christian with Right. They are not always the same. But nonetheless, you can fast forward to today, where the conversation is centered.

I agree that donation size is not the best barometer of commitment. I believe that the studies do bear out that the left/right charity gap is real and a problem. However, I am not as willing as you to give the churches a "pass". You have huge swaths of population who are nominally Christian, but who instead of engaging in the sort of laudable acts you ascribe to them simply worship the idol of celebrity, pop culture, and excess.

the FACT, dh, is that slavery was made illegal by international law EXCLUSIVELY due to the effort of Churches and Christian organizations.
This is not a strong argument to the "now".

so fucking what? the issue isn't the physical location of the farms, it's the rpm of the old style blades. they turn too fast for the birds to see them. being unable to see them, the birds fly right into them.
There are multiple issues, including height and siting. It is not only RPM. The point being, the people opposing rampant uncontrolled industrial wind power are not on the right, they are on the left. Any right wing opposition is not ideological, it's opposition in the same way that Coke opposes Pepsi.

Solyndra
You need to read more. There was no prior opposition to Solyndra by the right. It was ex-post facto. In fact, many many many conservatives have their hand out on this. Regardless, you'll get no argument with me. Market distortions in industry should be phased out, not increased.

and we're supposed to defend the RIGHT?
I agree that it's a boondoggle. But opposition to that is coming only from the left, ideologically. Any opposition to it from the right is not out of ideology or principle, but to spite competition. I.e. they want all the government cookies, and don't want their competition to get any. It's the same thing with oil, gas, etc. The government here, just like all over the world, supports energy production with massive implied and direct subsidies. The only opposition to this, fighting it on the grassroots, is from the ideological left.

You confuse Government and Society, like all liberals. You think, that because they do not want government force leveraged to "solve problems", that they don't try to help anyone.
You failed to read. What I said is that there is NO REASON TO EXPECT them to do anything specific. Yes, they may in fact do something, but you have no expectation that they will do anything. It is entirely up to the individual. I grok the difference between the government doing it vs. individuals or society doing it.

You are a jackass for making an assertion like that. Christians here in the south are some of the most helpful, thoughtful people there are. Or do you think those Democrats packed in US cities are kinder and more generous?
Helpful and thoughtful have nothing to do with it.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 2:44 PM  


Then give us your response to the orgs we listed instead of ignoring them.
Yeah, there are a bunch of them. Many are not based on the US, so that's interesting. Otherwise I am glad I was largely wrong. I have a warped point of view that imagines churches to be basically poor.

You want to talk about time preferences? You're the same bunch that opines about how saving money is bad for the economy (paradox of thrift).
Are you disputing the paradox is real?

Do you truly believe government bureaucrats are as inventive as entrepreneurs? That if they just shuffle paper and bark orders at the truly productive that there will be some sort of utopia?
I have never met a leftist who would claim equity of inventiveness. But I will happily argue with you that there are many functions where inventiveness is not a positive trait. I would be happy with a financial industry of dull, German-like clock punchers than the inventive folks on Wall Street. I guess I don't follow the connection.

It sounds neither conservative nor "progressive" as it is based on physician's concern for the health and well being of humans. I see no reason to claim it as leftist.
There really is no way that you can read their issue list and imagine them as anything other than a liberal organization. They are explicitly using calls to science and reason to fight conservative designed policies.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 2:51 PM  

i am amused that dh has NO response to even a single one of my points.

Bob, I have a really hard time following you, but I did respond to the points you have made. They are a little irrelevant, I think, because they are asking me to defend something which I haven't said.

the Left created every aspect of the enviro problem that you're now blaming on the 'right'.
because, business be 'right', yo.

I guess I just don't follow your argument...

was Solyndra 'right wing'? how not? wasn't it a 'business'?
I don't think the ideology of either left or right groups would promote Solyndra style malinvestment. Regardless, it is explicitly a pro-corporate big business subsidizing policy that created the mess. A policy that elements on the left and right wish to promote. The only argument you get from either side is who wins and who loses.

Al Gore made himself a personal fortune in the hundreds of millions of dollars by establishing and then participating in the carbon exchange scams ( which have since collapsed ). does this not make him a 'business man'?
Yes, he is a capitalist. Has anyone claimed elsewise? What are you asking me to defend?

if so, by YOUR metric, doesn't this make fucking Al Gore of the 'right'?
Just so you know. Gore is not some sort of messanic figure on the left. I am not sure what you are trying to prove.

If I missed anything, happy to try again.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 2:54 PM  

Tell us the distinction of any of above, vs. "right-wing"?

Left-wing = favoring government, collective actions and policies, in extreme, communism

Right-wing = favoring individual, small scale actions and policies, in extreme, anarcho-capitalism or possibly neo-feudalism


Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 3:01 PM  

> But opposition to that is coming only from the left, ideologically. Any opposition to it from the right is not out of ideology or principle, but to spite competition.

Incorrect. Libertarians are considered "right" by most on the left, remember.

> I have a warped point of view that imagines churches to be basically poor.

Churches in wealthy areas tend to have a lot of money to use. They don't tend to accumulate it though. So wealthy or poor doesn't really apply.

> There really is no way that you can read their issue list and imagine them as anything other than a liberal organization.

As you have noted, liberal does not equate to left any more. The new term the leftists themselves have chosen is progressive.

> ...it is explicitly a pro-corporate big business subsidizing policy that created the mess. A policy that elements on the left and right wish to promote.

Do you actually expect to get any argument from the regulars here about that?

> Just so you know. Gore is not some sort of messanic figure on the left.

In your particular selections of leftists, maybe not. He seemed pretty popular a short 12 years ago.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 3:04 PM  

In your particular selections of leftists, maybe not. He seemed pretty popular a short 12 years ago.

As a moderate democrat / republican. Never as a leftist. The guy would be damn near called a Nazi in most leftist countries. Or even france.

Anonymous Sigyn July 15, 2013 3:07 PM  

Yeah, there are a bunch of them. Many are not based on the US, so that's interesting. Otherwise I am glad I was largely wrong. I have a warped point of view that imagines churches to be basically poor.

Any point of view that allows you to demand that churches engage in government-scale action while believing them penniless is warped.

Left-wing = favoring government, collective actions and policies...

Right-wing = favoring individual, small scale actions and policies


Replace "individual" with "local" and you're closer to right. You also missed the distinction of right-wing actions being voluntary, versus the left wing preferring to use the government to FORCE people into doing or supporting the actions.

Which is a kind of slavery.

Which is why the left at large isn't so big on ending it.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 3:09 PM  

Illlustration from an article by "chief policy officer and Washington director of Physicians for Human Rights"

Gee whiz, sure does look left-wing to me, and not at all bipartisan.

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 3:13 PM  

dh ... Please explain "neo-feudalism" ... what does this term mean? Cause it smells like yet another bullshit term you've pulled out of your arse.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 3:18 PM  

dh ... Please explain "neo-feudalism" ... what does this term mean? Cause it smells like yet another bullshit term you've pulled out of your arse.

It means hierarchical, small political entities headed by an individual or small group of people with relatively more power than the population, who live under the protection of the hierarchy. I assure, I did not make it up. It is often used as a slur, but it is not inherently "negative" anymore than "feudal" is a slur.

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 3:19 PM  

"It means hierarchical, small political entities headed by an individual or small group of people with relatively more power than the population, who live under the protection of the hierarchy. I assure, I did not make it up"

Examples???

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 3:22 PM  

Or if dh indeed is willing to take the position that the illustration looks left wing, then what of his previous claim some months ago that one of Obama's accomplishments was stopping US torture? Does this then mean that his words were bullshit even according to leftists?

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 3:22 PM  

Replace "individual" with "local" and you're closer to right. You also missed the distinction of right-wing actions being voluntary, versus the left wing preferring to use the government to FORCE people into doing or supporting the actions.

Yes, agree that local would have been better. It is not explicitly individual, but can often come out that way.

And agree, leftism implies that eventually government control comes by force or co-ercion by threat of force. The same is also true of right-wing, except, that you can replace force with violence, along the lines of "Order and liberty is regulated, by violence, when necessary".

Which is a kind of slavery.
Agreed. Leftist government implies that you are less than totally free, and that at some point, you will be required to either forfeit the protections of government, or suffer violence from it.

Which is why the left at large isn't so big on ending it.
I doubt there is as much thought given to it as that, except maybe at a very elite level.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 3:27 PM  

Or if dh indeed is willing to take the position that the illustration looks left wing, then what of his previous claim some months ago that one of Obama's accomplishments was stopping US torture? Does this then mean that his words were bullshit even according to leftists?
I believe if you recall, I have said repeatedly that this is a major failure. However empty, Obama at least WANTS to close Guantanamo. Congress has actively refused his attempts to do so, defunding it and attaching law to prohibit any attempt to close it. So while he is responsible, he is not solely responsible, for keeping it open. I did say that when given the choice between a person who bragged he wanted to double Guantanamo, or a person who said he wanted to close it, I would prefer the person who closed it.

Secondly, the criticism about Obama from PHR is not bipartisan, it is explicitly left-wing. It is criticism that Obama has moved to far right from previous left-wing policies and promises. It is not staking out a middle ground, it is trying to move him back to the left on this issue. It is an attack from the left.

If you pay attention, the left, which is a small slice of the Democratic party, is actively unhappy with Obama on this and many many other issues (namely, secrecy, torture, rendition, war on terror, military spending, and corporatism).

Despite the right protestations otherwise, Obama is far closer to Dick Cheney (same foreign policy, same drone policy, same gay rights police) than not.

Anonymous The Voice Of Reason July 15, 2013 3:33 PM  

"But as I pointed out, the only way this can be helped in general is not to censor opposing viewpoints. And that is exactly what Vox doesn't do."

So far, so good.


"And what the opposing side does as a policy."

WHO is the opposing side???

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 3:33 PM  

Examples???

Colonial America. Pre-Civil War plantation life. Northeastern communes (for example, Shakers). Political entities which are not-centralized, organized for protection of the many, with a hierarchy recognizing concentration of power in one or a few (as in a family). Also, the Edwardian era in England would probably also qualify.

Anonymous Mr. A July 15, 2013 3:42 PM  

"Colonial America. Pre-Civil War plantation life. blah blah blah "

So in other words, "right wing" groups of maybe 4-7 people in Internet forums... or mostly entirely in your head.

Thanks for playing. Maybe the rest of us can talk here in the real world.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 3:45 PM  

So in other words, "right wing" groups of maybe 4-7 people in Internet forums... or mostly entirely in your head.

Thanks for playing. Maybe the rest of us can talk here in the real world.


Sorry whats your complaint? Pick a different word if you have feel hurt over the word feudal.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 3:51 PM  

Secondly, the criticism about Obama from PHR is not bipartisan, it is explicitly left-wing.

From the article:

Physicians for Human Rights and a bipartisan expert task force documented that medical staff were complicit in torture by monitoring medical 'redlines' during the interrogations, and providing interrogators and their superiors with the moral fig leaf that a doctor was monitoring the water boarding sessions.
---
Still taking the position that it isn't bipartisan? That the most natural way to interpret that sentence is "us leftists, and those bipartisan guys"?

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2013 3:51 PM  

dh July 15, 2013 2:51 PM
I don't think the ideology of either left or right groups would promote Solyndra style malinvestment.




holy fucking shit.

how many years have the Democrats been demanding .gov spending on solar / wind / wave action / etc? because it's 'good' for the environment. and because that's where the 'tech jobs of the future' will come from?

NO wind farm is 'profitable' without .gov subsidy.

NO solar farm is 'profitable' without .gov subsidy.

NO wave action farm is 'profitable' without .gov subsidy.

these are ALL "industrial sectors" wholly created by LIBERAL POLICY. do you fucking understand that? THEY WOULDN'T FUCKING EXIST WITHOUT GOVERNMENTS SPENDING MONEY ON THEM.

Solyndra be damned, that's just one corporate entity. THE ENTIRE FUCKING ENVIRO FRIENDLY ENERGY PRODUCTION SECTOR COULD NOT EXIST WITHOUT ENVIRO DEMANDED GOVERNMENT SPENDING.




dh July 15, 2013 2:51 PM
Bob, I have a really hard time following you,



mostly because i'm destroying the foundation of every single one of your arguments and to 'follow' me means that your entire argument collapses.





dh July 15, 2013 2:51 PM
Yes, [Al Gore] is a capitalist. Has anyone claimed elsewise? What are you asking me to defend?
...
Just so you know. Gore is not some sort of messanic figure on the left. I am not sure what you are trying to prove.





ah. i see.

advocation of huge expenditures of government moneys and the creation of completely government funded industries and exchanges is 'capitalist'.

i'm not even going to bother quoting your own definition of left/right back at you.

at this point you're just flat out lying.



welcome to the left, everybody.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2013 3:54 PM  

because Al Gore is a capitalist politician of the right:
http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s10e06-manbearpig

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 3:55 PM  

WHO is the opposing side???

All, and I mean all, forums on an opposing side to this one, be it on race realism, leftism or evolution that I have heard of here along the years. But maybe you will say confirmation bias again? Fine, then present us a forum where we will not be censored for the content of our claims (a straightforward set of rules for behavior, enforced across the board is obviously fine) and we will investigate. Perhaps even become regulars.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 3:58 PM  

Poisoning the well, because it is fun:

Dh will in effect argue that of course they would pretend to be bipartisan, as leftists always lie when it is profitable.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 4:01 PM  

Poisoning the well, because it is fun:

Dh will in effect argue that of course they would pretend to be bipartisan, as leftists always lie when it is profitable.


It is dangerous to be partisan. Come now, surely you don't disagree with that. When one side gets in power, they defund you 25 times, look at ACORN. When the otherside gets in power, you get audited (see: IRS).

Bipartian = non-threatening.

This is a losing line of battle for you to fight Marku.

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2013 4:05 PM  

dh: returns to his vomit:

There really is no way that you can read their issue list and imagine them as anything other than a liberal organization. They are explicitly using calls to science and reason to fight conservative designed policies.

You just did it again. You must have a learning disability.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2013 4:05 PM  

no true liberal!


la la llllaaaaaaa llaaaaaaa la! i can't hear you!

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 4:06 PM  

> As a moderate democrat / republican. Never as a leftist.

The VP of Bill Clinton as a moderate democrat/republican. What have you been smoking, dh?

> The guy would be damn near called a Nazi in most leftist countries.

The US isn't most left countries, dh. :)

> However empty, Obama at least WANTS to close Guantanamo.

In his first term, I was willing to give him the benefit of a doubt on that. At this point, I simply don't believe him.

> Despite the right protestations otherwise, Obama is far closer to Dick Cheney...

Yes. But only in his statist tendencies. He's still very much left wing.

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 4:08 PM  

This is a losing line of battle for you to fight Marku.

I'm starting to think that this is Loki-style stand-up comedy.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 4:16 PM  

Solyndra be damned, that's just one corporate entity. THE ENTIRE FUCKING ENVIRO FRIENDLY ENERGY PRODUCTION SECTOR COULD NOT EXIST WITHOUT ENVIRO DEMANDED GOVERNMENT SPENDING.
Agreed. But the point is, that no one is trying to pick losers. Both right and left corruption lovers think they can choose the winners. And we all know they can't. Energy subsidies are rampant in all sectors of production (maybe not hydro, I dont know anything about that really).

these are ALL "industrial sectors" wholly created by LIBERAL POLICY. do you fucking understand that? THEY WOULDN'T FUCKING EXIST WITHOUT GOVERNMENTS SPENDING MONEY ON THEM.
Yeah, I got it. But guess what. It's the nominal conservatives who started them. Who they hell do you think pushed ethanol requirements and subsidies. You think it the environmental types? Right. That's what I thought. You can't create the system of hand outs and then whine when your magic calf doesn't get any more feed. That's exactly what you are doing - whining that the other guys boondoggle got preferred spot at the trough. It doesn't change the fact that it's a boondoggle, but it does change your responsibility matrix.

Solyndra be damned, that's just one corporate entity. THE ENTIRE FUCKING ENVIRO FRIENDLY ENERGY PRODUCTION SECTOR COULD NOT EXIST WITHOUT ENVIRO DEMANDED GOVERNMENT SPENDING.
Yeah, I don't know why you would bring up an example that brought massive pre-bankrupcy political capital from the right and the left. On the right, you had anti-China fervor and backdealing, and on the left you had pie in the sky environmental fables.

mostly because i'm destroying the foundation of every single one of your arguments and to 'follow' me means that your entire argument collapses.
Maybe. But I think it's that you are bringing up things, and then next post saying, to hell with that example. Solyndra as an example. Perhaps if you restate your claim I could better answer you to your satisfaction. I was leading towards the point that the left are the only ones, from an ideological perspective, fighting against the "green" industrial lobby. It is not the conservatives, who are, when they do bother to oppose it all, arguing strictly from a sore-loser stand point. I can't really tell what your response is to that.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 4:16 PM  

You just did it again. You must have a learning disability.

I do. Whats the problem again?

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 4:22 PM  

The VP of Bill Clinton as a moderate democrat/republican. What have you been smoking, dh?
Hey, guess what, Bill Clinton is not a liberal either. He is a Southern Democrat, also known as.. a democrat. Exactly like Gore.

Clinton was more to the right policy wise than most Republicans are today. Anti-gay marriage, pro-balanced budget, pro-welfare reform. Same thing with Al Gore.

The US isn't most left countries, dh. :)
Right. Put it this way, an average Democrat, the left party in the US, are to the right of the UK Conservative party back bencher.

In his first term, I was willing to give him the benefit of a doubt on that. At this point, I simply don't believe him.
True. Agreed. However, given a person lying about wanting to close it, and a person lying about wanting to double it, I choose close it lie. That's the nice thing about leftists, we recognize the lesser of two evils is still less evil.

Yes. But only in his statist tendencies. He's still very much left wing.
You'll find lots of statists in funny places, but this isn't true. Not only in statist positions, but also all over foreign policy as well, social policy, and even tax policy.

Blogger Doom July 15, 2013 4:24 PM  

While I am glad we got rid of slavery, it doesn't work well in the long run, I don't care about some other nation having it. It'll be their ruin unless very tightly managed. And, for the most part, people who are slaves sort of should have seen that coming. Political, social, military, ethical, moral, and economic weakness, on top of ignorance/illiteracy in the bulk of what should be the productive (majority) classes, and... you get what you got here. It's simply bound to happen.

Idle hands and empty bellies lead to hard things.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2013 4:25 PM  

Al Gore, no true man of the left.

not if you consider him on the international level.

what's that? he got a Nobel prize for his environmentalism?
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/

that's not international, you twit. that's just Norway. Norway is provincial as all get out. you ignorant buffoon.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2013 4:29 PM  

> Clinton was more to the right policy wise than most Republicans are today.

The republican leadership? Sure. The republican party membership? Not even close.

> That's the nice thing about leftists, we recognize the lesser of two evils is still less evil.

So do I. I merely prefer voting for non-evil and do so whenever possible.

> ...but this isn't true. Not only in statist positions, but also all over foreign policy as well, social policy, and even tax policy.

Foreign policy I'll grant. There his Muslim roots take over. Social policy: Increase government spending on social programs. Tax policy: Increase taxes on the "rich". Both of those are liberal positions.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 4:31 PM  

bob--

ah. i see.

advocation of huge expenditures of government moneys and the creation of completely government funded industries and exchanges is 'capitalist'.


and "no true liberal"

I am making no such argument. I am point out to you that Al Gore's support, largely, is from the center-right of the Democratic party. This is the pro-big business, pro-tobacco, pro-gun side of the fence. His support on the left is tepid. Look, all you have to do is go over to DailyKos. Search for the Al Gore tag, and see what I mean. Depending on the topic, you are likely to find 50/50 split for support among him in the left beliver category.

I know this is difficult for you to understand, but you will readily find that the left is not exactly as monochromatic as you would like to imagine. The Left, the ideological left, is deeply uneasy with Al Gore on many issues, ranging from his treatment of women (very poor), his record with Sequoia Partners (very poor), his Silicon Valley connections, especially Apple and their IP/human rights issues, and especially his sale to Al Jazeera and his windfall reaped from grassroots content and publishing. Namely, support for him on the left is deeply divided.

Finally, I would just point out that you are foolishly overreaching. Your claim of "entirely government industries" is farcical and idiotic. Just one example: http://www.crunchbase.com/company/solyndra. You can see the private investment, which was roughly 50% of it's total funding.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 4:33 PM  

Social policy: Increase government spending on social programs. Tax policy: Increase taxes on the "rich". Both of those are liberal positions.

Really? Name 1 conservative or Republican president who has decreased social spending.

Name 1 conservative or Republican president who balanced the Federal budget.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 4:37 PM  

Al Gore, no true man of the left.

not if you consider him on the international level.


What is it you think you are arguing?

Anonymous Loki Sjalfsainn July 15, 2013 4:39 PM  

I'm starting to think that this is Loki-style stand-up comedy.

I have not yet begun to sockpuppet.

No, truly, dh is no puppet of mine.

Anonymous Loki Sjalfsainn July 15, 2013 4:40 PM  

Really? Name 1 conservative or Republican president who has decreased social spending.

Name 1 conservative or Republican president who balanced the Federal budget.


Better yet, name one conservative president.

Anonymous The Voice Of Reason July 15, 2013 4:42 PM  

"All, and I mean all, forums on an opposing side to this one, be it on race realism, leftism or evolution that I have heard of here along the years. But maybe you will say confirmation bias again? Fine, then present us a forum where we will not be censored for the content of our claims (a straightforward set of rules for behavior, enforced across the board is obviously fine) and we will investigate. Perhaps even become regulars."


Points of clarification..."an opposing side to this one"? What does "this one" particularly refer to? Who are the "opposing side(s)"-- a particular ideology opposite of "this one", or all forums that embrace any ideology opposite of "this one"?

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 4:44 PM  

What does "this one" particularly refer to?

This blog. Vox holds many different positions, so an "opponent" doesn't necessarily mean opposing all of them, just one aspect will suffice.

Anonymous dh July 15, 2013 4:44 PM  

Bob K.--

I re-read your whole commentary. I think you sort of exploded around the point where I mentioned environmental policy.

Is your core problem that I claimed that all the opposition to much of the "pro-environment" lobby is actual coming from the left-ideology your problem?

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben July 15, 2013 5:30 PM  

dh, you are making a good case for limited government by admitting that when you have large government expenditures inevitably big business and big government will collude to rip everyone else off.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2013 6:08 PM  

dh July 15, 2013 4:37 PM
What is it you think you are arguing?




i'm not arguing anything at this point.

i'm just laughing my ass off that every single person we point out as "Leftist" according to your own definition", you immediately turn around and claim that, nope, that's not a Leftist.

you're playing the "Who/Whom" game.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who,_whom%3F

you note that someone is 'capitalist' or 'businessman' or some such thing and immediately decree that this person is 'of the Right'. regardless of their actual personal philosophies or political activities.

such as if they are hard core Marxists conducting operations for the Kremlin ( read the section on Armand Hammer ):
http://independence.net/gore/

Anonymous The Voice Of Reason July 15, 2013 8:03 PM  

"This blog. Vox holds many different positions, so an "opponent" doesn't necessarily mean opposing all of them, just one aspect will suffice."

Yes, of course, opposing one position held by a person of a particular ideology. But what about completely opposing an entire ideology?

Blogger Markku July 15, 2013 8:15 PM  

Yes, of course, opposing one position held by a person of a particular ideology. But what about completely opposing an entire ideology?

I don't understand the question. In specific, I don't understand how those two are different.

Anonymous Writers Gawking At Vox July 15, 2013 8:40 PM  

"With a few noble exceptions, for whom I harbor an amount of respect, they just don't appear to have any genuine principles beyond whatever they find useful at the moment."

You bonehead.

You've just described all members of the political class...those individuals who concern themselves with impacting policy to their own satisfaction; those individuals who think about politics; those individuals who believe they understand human nature enough to have an opinion. You've described the human trait of rationalization.

Anonymous Loki Gawking at Gawky July 15, 2013 11:25 PM  

You've just described all members of the political class...those individuals who concern themselves with impacting policy to their own satisfaction; those individuals who think about politics; those individuals who believe they understand human nature enough to have an opinion. You've described the human trait of rationalization.

And?

Blogger Eric Wilson July 15, 2013 11:40 PM  

While my favorite comment was Bob K's explitive laden Solyndra rant, I do admire dh for hanging around. Though some of the things he says make me cringe.

Anonymous dh July 16, 2013 7:35 AM  

i'm just laughing my ass off that every single person we point out as "Leftist" according to your own definition", you immediately turn around and claim that, nope, that's not a Leftist.

I don't think you have comprehended, or I have failed to state, my point. It is like claiming Vox is a neo-conservative because he is not a Democrat. The things don't follow. The "left" is larger but thinner than many, including I think you, imagine. Where you think Al Gore is revered by the left, he is not. The same thing is true of Pres. Obama and former Pres. Clinton. They are left of the American right, but that doesn't make them leftist on every policy or any specific policy.

It's like when people claim Obamacare is socialized medicine. It is not the imposition of the free market, but in fact, it is not socialized medicine. It is quite literally the furthermost thing from it. It is actually more like fascist medicine. What they probably mean to say is that Obamacare is a leftist program, which is true. When people say they are against it, it can be coming from several different directions. Here, the consensus (if there was one) is that it's anti-freedom, which is true, and it changes the nature of the relationship between government and the people, and that it is a wealth transfer from the producer generations to the pensioner generations. All these things are true. Among traditional GOP conservatives, the opposition is not ideological for the most part, it's simply political. They don't care ideologically that you have to buy insurance, they already support Social Security Insurance, which is identical in practice. They don't care ideologically that government is going to pay for health care and distort the market, they've been on board with that for 40 years. Everything else is political window dressing. From the left, you have opposition that the policy is a corporate giveaway, and that it's a boondoggle for insurers who are simply skimming dollars off the pie without actually insuring anything. Pointing out that there is disagreement and dissatisfaction with the policy is not saying that Obama isn't left-wing, or isn't a liberal.

You can apply the same template to all the other things which angered you.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 16, 2013 4:44 PM  

dh July 16, 2013 7:35 AM
It's like when people claim Obamacare is socialized medicine. It is not the imposition of the free market, but in fact, it is not socialized medicine. It is quite literally the furthermost thing from it. It is actually more like fascist medicine.



i want you to pay VERY CLOSE ATTENTION HERE.

i'm going to quote something you posted earlier:

dh July 15, 2013 2:54 PM
Left-wing = favoring government, collective actions and policies, in extreme, communism

Right-wing = favoring individual, small scale actions and policies, in extreme, anarcho-capitalism or possibly neo-feudalism




BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION
Fascism and National Socialism are OF THE LEFT.

BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION
any, *any* politician of EITHER PARTY who advocates larger government is OF THE LEFT.

BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION
even ( especially? ) 'businessmen' who advocate government intervention and largesse are OF THE LEFT.

interestingly, i don't think many of the Ilk would actually choose to dispute ANY of those assertions. the problem is that you are thrashing about madly trying to do everything you can to avoid the obvious consequences of your own definitions.

either revise your OWN DEFINITION or admit that you have been checkmated.

Anonymous dh July 16, 2013 5:18 PM  

Fascism and National Socialism are OF THE LEFT.

Agreed.

any, *any* politician of EITHER PARTY who advocates larger government is OF THE LEFT.

This is a failure? Larger than what? You cannot use a comparative word to make a judgement of where some falls, you must use a descriptive word. Any politician who advocates "LARGE" government is of the left. LARGER is wrong. (i.e., you could have perfectly libertarian government, and someone who is also libertarian comes along and recommends that you pay the 1 employee $1 dollar more than they current are paid. This is "larger" government. It is not in itself a left-wing policy). On a more real level, some policies will result in a "larger government", or rather, a "BIG government", but more liberty, and more individual freedom. A government that protects personal property rights is a government with courts, and various methods of real property management and titles and various "paper pushing" functions. But, it is more free than a government which does not enforce personal property rights, and leaves it up to people with more or bigger guns to take what they want or can get. So, as long as you are being specific, your definition, on it's basis, is not entirely correct.

even ( especially? ) 'businessmen' who advocate government intervention and largesse are OF THE LEFT.

I think if you left it at largesse, I would be inclined to agree. Largesse, by the nature of the word, is ill-gotten. However, as I pointed out above, intervention is not a precluding factor to liberty, to freedom, to the right-wing definition I gave. A certain amount of government is required to effect that system.

either revise your OWN DEFINITION or admit that you have been checkmated.
I don't agree. Your definition is faulty.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 16, 2013 6:35 PM  

part 1

it's not my definition.

it's YOUR definition. i only quoted you and applied it.

by your definition, the .gov enviro spending is Leftist. which conforms nicely to the fact that there would be NO .gov enviro spending had the enviro's not, you know, demanded it and successfully campaigned for it to be implemented into law.




dh July 16, 2013 5:18 PM
Largesse, by the nature of the word, is ill-gotten.



absolutely, positively NOT TRUE.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/largesse
1.generous bestowal of gifts.
2.the gift or gifts, as of money, so bestowed.
3.Obsolete . generosity; liberality.

you need to spend some quality time with a dictionary. i'm super cereal about this.



dh July 16, 2013 5:18 PM
A certain amount of government is required to effect that system.


you find an Anarchist and you argue that point with him.

until such time, your comment is a non-sequitur.

is an American Constitutionalist 'to the Left' of an Anarchist? *by your definition*, certainly. i don't know of any Anarchists around these parts. as such, ( Austrian School, US Constitutionalists ) we're the most Right wing people you could talk too.



bob k.
Fascism and National Socialism are OF THE LEFT.


dh July 16, 2013 5:18 PM
Agreed.


you have already stated that Obamacare is 'fascist' and, thus, agreed that Obamacare is Leftist. because, remember now, Fascism is "of the Left". you have defined it so AND you have asserted it so.

the enviro 'industries' and 'businesses' are of exactly the same category, Fascist entities of the Left. BY YOUR DEFINITION AND ASSERTION.


dh July 16, 2013 5:18 PM
Where you think Al Gore is revered by the left, he is not. The same thing is true of Pres. Obama and former Pres. Clinton.



i don't give a fuck if a card carrying CPUSA Communist / Mother Jones / WSWS reader doesn't 'revere' these people. it doesn't have any bearing on whether or not the adjective Left applies to them. Right/Left is a continuum, your definition already made it clear that you agree with this.

you, yourself, have already asserted that Communism may be the most extreme example of Leftist ideology.

Marxists not liking x because x is 'insufficiently revolutionary' in no way means that x is NOT revolutionary or 'not Leftist'.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 16, 2013 6:35 PM  

part 2

dh July 16, 2013 5:18 PM
Among traditional GOP conservatives, the opposition is not ideological for the most part, it's simply political. They don't care ideologically that you have to buy insurance, they already support Social Security Insurance, which is identical in practice. They don't care ideologically that government is going to pay for health care and distort the market, they've been on board with that for 40 years.



why do you think that describing a Nixonian RINO ( we're going the same direction as the Democrats, we'll just take a lot longer to get there ) applies here in any way?

i just got done pointing out to you that BY YOUR DEFINITION, rino Repubs are Leftist in the previous post.


most here are Strict Constructionist or Originalist adherents to the US Constitution and have no issue with characterizing the main stream and country club Republicans as Leftist. we do it all the time ourselves.

that's what RINO ( Republican In Name Only ) implies.

that your definition accomplishes the same thing is just icing on the cake.

come to the dark side, we have cookies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty89tGwDLuM




dh July 16, 2013 5:18 PM
However, as I pointed out above, intervention is not a precluding factor to liberty, to freedom, to the right-wing definition I gave.


in the matter of the enviro industries? it most certainly is.

where did that money come from? how many man-hours of production were forcibly seized by .gov and thrown away on completely non-viable ... i can't even call them commercial ... ventures? how many years were added to the indebtedness of future generations?

for what? to establish fascistic ( as per the actual economic theory AND YOUR DEFINITION, not the pejorative ) enviro 'companies'?

and now you try to claim that Left environmentalists criticizing Left fascist enviro companies is a problem for ... me? you need to take it up with the Left enviros who passed the laws which spent the money to create the Left fascist companies.

me? i'm the one who never wanted the fucking things to exist ( to the extent that public money pays for it ) in the first place. i'm the one who was yelling that it was a boondoggle and means of pipelining taxpayer wealth to FotA ( Friends of the Administration ). i'm the one who pointed out that .gov funding would be diverted to lobbying for additional .gov largesse ( just as happens every year with teacher's unions ). we of the Right were here a LONG fucking time before anyone on the Left started pretending to have an issue with them.


that's what pissed me off so much. your whole assertion, vis a vis the enviro corps, is a bald faced lie.

AND AT SOME LEVEL YOU KNOW IT'S A LIE OR YOU WOULD NOT HAVE DEFINED LEFT / RIGHT AS YOU DID.

Anonymous Blume July 20, 2013 6:20 PM  

Sharpton shouldnt get a choice. Both options are bad. Foreign intervents are how we got in this financial mess. The money is better spent stoping human trafficing in the states or on infrastucture. Not, thrown away on wars that make the us even more unpopular and accomplish nothing in the long term or given to blacks to spend on useless junk like 200 dollar air jordans.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts