How should we deal with a dangerous lunatic?
The game that is known as diplomacy with North Korea has been in full swing again lately, and yes, it seems like a blow-by-blow repeat of past misadventures. North Korea ramps up tensions, the rest of the world replies with sanctions, and North Korea responds to that with threats of mass destruction toward its enemies. Then, the rest of the world typically bows down to North Korea by offering aid, and the North Koreans agree to stop their offensive practices, whether it be creating nuclear fuel, testing nuclear weapons or test-firing missiles. Then, the whole diplomatic dance begins again a few months down the road. Right now, the United States, China and Russia are trying to push North Korea back into multi-nation talks, but President Obama is letting it be known that recently approved U.N. sanctions will be strictly enforced. That prompted North Korea to announce that it will unleash a "thousand-fold" military response if pushed too far. The question is, what could we do differently? It's not as if we can talk rationally with North Korea's leader, because Kim Jong Il is a nut case. And now, he's talking about turning over control of the backward, starving, military-controlled nation to his youngest son, who is all of 26 years old. An all-out, unilateral attack on North Korea by the United States certainly wouldn't be looked on with approval from China and Russia, and one can only guess what the fallout, literally and figuratively, would be from such a move. We could try to enforce a blockade against North Korea to stop outside goods from reaching the country, but one can be sure that Kim and his military would not be the ones to suffer from a resulting shortage of food and other products. We could always hope for a coup led by the military, but as we've seen in the past, you never know what you're going to get when that happens. The new military leader could be a person who cared about the plight of his people and was open to good relations with other nations, but history shows us that is highly unlikely. You're most likely just trading one despot for another. But, all things considered, maybe an internal meltdown is our best bet. It's hard to imagine the next guy being any worse.
Labels: Foreign affairs, Government
posted by Brant at
11:48 AM
75 Comments:
How to deal with N.K.? Pull our troops out of the south! I can remember about 3 years ago the youth of the S.K wanted us out, the elder people remembered the war they wanted us to stay. Well, pull our troops out and let that side of the world deal with them. As a broke nation fighting two wars do we really want to get into this mess right now? Let China, S.K and Japan handle their messy backyard. Rumsfeld sat on the board that won the contract to provide the design and key components for the reactors!! Pull our troops out of S.K. and then head hunt in Washington for the people that stand to make profit off war. Like it or not, we have been sold out Brant.
Right now, if I would have to name an ANTI CHRIST.. it would be Rumsfeld. Everything that man comes near turns to a huge pile of steamy crap! That man has blood stained hands.
Apparently, Kim Jong Il is a movie fanatic, and had a director kidnapped from (I think) Japan whose work he enjoyed. He was brought to North Korea specifically so he could make movies for the Exalted Leader, or whatever the heck they call him there.
--Brad Hundt
By the way, even though North Korea has a hard time feeding its own people, it does have a humming p.r. apparatus. If you want to check out press releases from North Korea, go to www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm.
I got a kick out of the release that slammed the U.S. for its "brigandish and preposterous sophism."
--Brad Hundt
These third world scrap heap countries are such a dilemma for us... How do you sufficiently break something that is already so broken? It's like driving a bulldozer through a junk yard... if you carpet bombed NK, you'd just be rearranging the rubble and killing some civilians...
I doubt that NK, even WITH nuclear weapons, could launch a thousand fold response to a wedgie. I say we knock down that half built phallic hotel they have there... and then play the same game with them that I used to play with my dog when he tried to hump my leg...
My dog was relentless in his pursuit of leg rape... I'd be sitting there and he'd come over and try to mount my leg. I'd palm his face and push him away. That stubborn bastard would go through this routine for 20 minutes of trying to hop on my leg and I'd just keep palming his face and denying him. Do the same thing to NK... park a few aircraft carriers and battle ships in international waters... they try to launch a missile, the launch pad blows up before it clears the tower. They try to get a plane airborne, the plane blows up before the rear landing gear leaves the pavement... i mean gravel runway.
If a tank moves, it blows up.
did think to many under educated people in greene and washington would make a post on a global event. football they can cover. a local case, they got that... something outside the boarder they are asleep behind the wheel and that is what Fedzilla wants!
didn't*
pays to proof read! SORRY MR.NOVAK
I like being under educated people. I can look up their skirts.
And now I see that there are rooms to rent in North Korea? What does a boarder pay for a pad in NK?
priguy, you know you're the perfect one! border!!! and your sexist comment about looking up a womans dress was direct reflection on your redneck racist population in SW PA. (johnny murtha) You had nothing to add to the post about N.K, you posted just to get a rise out of someone. YOU SIR, ARE A PEST!
Sir, I know pests. I grw up with them. I work alongside pests. Priguy is no pest.
I still wonder what gives the US and other big nations the right to say that NK and Iran can't have nukes when we have states like India, Pakistan and, for that matter, Russia and the US, sitting on them. But that's another question.
It's a real dilemma how to handle these countries, because I think it has been amply proved over the last two decades that the US can't be the world's policeman. When was the last time we "intervened" with positive results?
We don't need to be stuck in NK,SK, Iraq, Afghanistan and who knows where else when we have problems right here.
You make a good point. We have no problem with unstable countries such as Pakistan and India having nuclear arms. We ignore the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons. Yet we go ballistic, figuratively, when one of Israel's neighbors starts developing a nuclear capability. In a similar vein, we maintain a ridiculous embargo against Cuba, yet we look the other way when countries such as Russia and China commit much greater human rights abuses. Consistency is not our strong suit.
I am a firm believer in proofreading. The peeking comment was a joke. Learn to laugh a little. I do not live in southwest Pennsylvania and I think Murtha is an absolute moron who should be removed from office.
And thanks for the support, anonymous.
As for North Korea, my solution is to nuke them until they glow, but that's not a viable option so the debate continues...
I love how you equate North Korea and Israel. There is no moral equivalence between the two. What is your issue with Israel having nukes?
that is the uneducated ansewer PRIguy. Just nuke the hell out of them! You are quick to send other peoples kids to war, have you ever been in a war? I have, so has my wife. So has most of our friends and family.I don't know if you ever served your country, nor do I care cause your ansewer to nuke the people of N.K. for what their leader has done shows you share the same lack of judgement as the leaders of N.K. and Iran.
I don't find Israel to hold any great moral superiority.
Anonymous:
What IS the moral equivalence litmus test for acquiring nuclear weapons?
Who gets to decide whether a country should or shouldn't have nukes?
I clearly stated that my solution was not a viable one. That's my "ansewer" and I'm sticking to it.
Priguy, you sir are a p.o.s! you figgggure it out. people like you that pick out typo's make other people with a fast thinking mind not want to post.
This is always so much fun!
Brant:
I don't find Israel to hold any great moral superiority.
They have moral superiority in that region since they have had the tech and never used it. They had many reasons, and never pulled the trigger.
We're the only country that has ever dropped a nuke. Just because you haven't lobbed a nuclear weapon at someone doesn't mean you're morally superior. It may just mean that you know damn well that if you did so, somebody else might annihilate you. It's called mutual deterrence. Israel is not some sort of squeaky-clean utopian society.
Damnit, you all usurped the point that I was trying to tease out of this thread! Shucks, slow on the uptake.
My point was going to be that we police the world because we don't want someone to actually USE the technology, yet we are the only country to have ever actually USED the technology...
But really... it seems like we fight like hell to keep people from getting the goods, but once they do, it's like WELCOME TO THE CLUB!
Good Heavens! I didn't realize that I was dealing with one of them there fast-thinking minds. Please accept my gracious apology.
It's amazing how a little cynicism can elicit such anger.
I never remember Israel saying "we are going to push another nation into the sea". nor did I say they were a squeaky-clean utopian society. When all of you neighbors are against you, and want you out of the region, you do what you have to do to. Remember WWII, our grandfathers fought and died for these people. To let it all go to pot now would be pissing on their graves. Just think if Canaduh put guns on their navy ship and started preaching hate towards the United States, at the sametime Mexico bought an f-22 preaching the same. We would do the same as Israel. We would spy, fight, and protect the hell out of borders. Just think, one out of every 12 Mexicans that cross the border everyday with a bomb on their back blowing up markets, maybe a bus... we would do everything possible to stop it just like they have.
I never explicitly said to another person that "I am going to kick your ass"... but I sure have done some things to make other people say that to me :-)
I don't believe making a comment like "nuke them till they glow" means that you are willing to send everyone off to war. I personally find that sarcasm and humor are a way to keep me sane. I work in an ER and if I didn't have a sense of humor (albeit very often politically incorrect), I would cry myself to sleep every night. Law enforcement, firefighters, and emergency medical professionals tend to have what is known as "gallows humor". It is our defense mechanism against constant depression. And it does not mean we don't care... just the opposite, we tend to care too much sometimes. There are obviously times when it is inappropriate to joke about a situation and I would be the first to call you on it, but I don't believe this is one of those cases. And before anyone gets upset about my concern for the military... I am a military brat and have the utmost respect for them. My father was career USAF and served in Vietnam. I have 2 nephew who between them did 5 tours in Iraq and can trace my military heritage back to the American Revolution.
Bridget, making a comment like nuke them, and not send in troops shows your lack of a military mind! You must have been W's defense secretary. I remember rummy the dummy rumsfeld didn't secure Baghdad and that didn't turn out to well for the citizens of Iraq!
For "gallows humor", I was a 92m in the USA Army. I've seen it all and I don't care to ever see it again. I don't walk around making stupid jokes about nuking another country that would lead to the murder of 100 thousand plus! Guess my gallows humor dried all the way up. Tends to do that when you have done my job. At the best, peace time I was stuck in a mourge doing autopsies on gangbangers, during war, well you can just think of the things I had to pick up.
I think the real problem is that we didn't secure Afghanistan before starting a foolish war in Iraq.
I never proclaimed to have a "military mind". And I wasn't defending the plan of nuking and not sending in troops. I think you misunderstood my intention. I was saying that I think "nuke them till they glow" was pure sarcasm and not serious, hence the not sending in troops. Everyone has a different sense of humor and I personally was not offended by PRIguys comments. As for gallows humor, I unfortunately still do see alot, on a regular basis, and up close and personal. And just to be clear.... when I am with patients and families I am 100% professional. That is something I don't compromise on. 75% of my sarcastic or joking comments are at my own expense. And as for W's defense secretary... I don't think so. I am not a fan of his and the first time he said nucular to me I would have had to send him an English for Dummies textbook.
Brant, how do you fight a 30 thousand people that have no respect for the laws of war? The geneva convention only rules the United States in these wars. I'm going to be blunt. If the United States would grow some balls and fight wars the way wars are fought to be won, we wouldn't have half the problems that we have. If we unleashed the United States Army and the USMC onto our enemies the same way that we are trained to fight, half of the ankle biters wouldn't dare. Till we have people like George C. Marshall running the show instead of "spooks" from the CIA that have no idea what war looks like we are doomed. Can you say General Schwarzkopf? I think we knew that Iran was going to be a problem when the Iraq war started, know your military strategy? What a great way to nail a semi powerful country, from the north and south. We lost 50 thousand Americans in the Korean war.. Koreans and China lost something like 1.75 million. Do you think they want to go down that road again with the American battle harden troops we have today? I don't want to see it, I don't like war, nor do I want to teach about it on a blog with a bunch of chicken hawks.
Let's say Israel decides to nuke Iran just to prevent Iran from nuking them someday. What do we say? "Bad Jews! Can we have Iran now?" So NK nukes SK just to prevent SK from nuking them someday. Why is that different?
The Jews are morally superior to the Muslims. Because the Jews have the means to eliminate the Muslims but choose not to the are morally superior. Do the Muslims ever compromise? They want the Jews exterminated. Should the Jews only be half dead? The aren't morally equivalent.
That's a bit of a generalization... Pakistan is 70% Muslim and they are a nuclear-armed country. So, are Israeli Jews morally superior to Pakistani Muslims?
The fact remains that regardless of the rhetoric that occurs between nations and ideologies, the United States is the only country to have actually used nuclear weapons... And again, regardless of how you feel about Nagasaki and Hiroshima... does that make Israeli Jews morally superior to American Christians?
The choice to go Nuclear wasn't made lightly. It saved millions of American men's lives. I think it was the correct choice.
...which is why I took great pains to emphasize "regardless of how you feel" about those bombings...
Is Israel morally superior to the United States for not using their nuclear weapons?
The two situations in time are not comparable although we didn't want to exterminate Japan we wanted to not have to invade Japan. I don't think Israel is morally superior to the US. I think the US and Israel are superior to Muslims.
So, what you're saying is, you're a bigot.
What about US muslims?
Are israeli jews superior to US muslims?
You see how this kind of assertion just spiderwebs into all kinds of greyness?
Ok, Insert Hamas for Muslim.
When you have no where else to go claim bigotry. It is your M.O.
There are plenty of fine, upstanding citizens who belong to the Hamas party... That's the thing about Hamas... they are like a coin... on one side, you have suicide bombers and rockets and terror...
On the other side, you have social services, elected officials, and legitimate political claims...
But anyway, I am glad to see that you have augmented your blanket statement that Jews are superior to Muslims so as now to assert that Jews are superior to a political party (Hamas)-- that is a slightly more reasonable...
ellipses, has hamas ever came out and condone any attacks that their "political party" has done? don't try to spin this. hamas was a terrorist cell before it was a political party. there is only one side to that coin, it's a trick coin, tails on both sides!!!
ellipses, also can you imagine democrats using black panthers to block votes??? that should be an act of terrorism. wait, they did do that. no different then hamas. Here is what I do know.. they have been fighting forever.. we don't have a dog in the fight so I don't care. Yet we are America and most of our politicans have dual citizenships to America and Iseral. So our political leaders will always lean that way. Till Barrack HUSSEIN Obama aka Berry.
Obama won by what, 10 million votes? I don't think a stray, goofball Black Panther member in Philly carried that much weight. And to compare that to terrorism carried out by Hamas members just makes you look like an idiot. You're still trying to come to terms with that black man being your president. It's evident in the way you highlight HUSSEIN in your post. Don't worry. Time will heal the wounds to your psyche. And "most of our politicians have dual citizenship with American and Israel"? You're spending way too much time at wingnut.com.
Brant you list the ones that don't have dual citizenship and i'll list the ones that do. As far as you spinning this into a race issue, just like a leftwing freak always does is shameful for you and the newspaper that you write for. The one that uses the race card first is usually the racist in hiding! HUSSEIN was highlighted to show his muslim roots. The sameway the people of MO wasn't allowed to talk about during the election. How about the GOVT. coming out and saying veterans are terrorist. How about the GOVT. coming out and saying protest is a low level of terrorism? Ron Paul bumper sticker? GOING TO JAIL. You are a terrorist. WAKE UP!! Whenever has another admin. has ever grabbed up so much of the pvt sector? GM,banks, health care. I can go on. How about the next big thing GE!? Hey why don't you walk out on your grandfathers gave and spit on it. Wake the f'up. that is all I want you to do. I'm not a wingnut.com'er I'm a person that reads more the OR! Spooks use that tactic, did you sell out Brant? Spooks use wingnut comments, or conspiracist nut. I'll call you out, your a chicken hawk sell out. You want to call me an idoit? Lets get our boots dirty, o yeah! HOOAH.
Brant, black panther members plus Acorn! don't forget that organization, getting sued in how many states for voter fraud!??? I know it's a right wing conspiracy!?
didn't think you would make a post. next time i'll write slower cause I know you don't read fast. o i know you have a life! I know, you took your family out to dinner or some dumb ass reason. Don't pick fights you can't handle!
Just got back from an abbreviated night at the Wild Things game. I'll have a detailed reply for you tomorrow. In the meantime, please take your meds and take off that silly tinfoil hat.
Back when JFK ran for prez, they highlighted the hell out of his catholicism. I'm surprised they didn't print John FITZGERALD Kennedy to highlight his potato-eating, whiskey swilling, wife-bashing Irish heritage.
Anyway, any country that uses nukes has no call to claim moral superiority, at least no more than the gun-toting whites had against spear chucking Africans and arrow-shooting Native Americans.
Please don't use the term "moral" when you're talking about war. Am I more moral if I shoot you in the ass instead of the groin?
silly tinfoil hat? lol.. you sound like a kid on the play ground... " you just wait till my big brother gets here". this blog is over. you are smashed. i'm done. you are a joke on this subject. SMASHED! I won't ever read another post on this subject. YOU SO WIN. LOL. You know what is funny I can smash you on most of your post... it will become "Brant getting smashed on the news". that is what is lacking in sw pa a strong 3rd party. don't worry brant, we retire in a cpl years ( my wife and I) from the military, if there is freedom of the press left I will run you out of town, unless I can get a good deal on a townhouse in ft. walton bch. till then you are still a freaking joke. We use to have a little song in the Army, "pick up your weapon and follow me" but i'm sure your to scared.
HAMAS IS A JUST A POLITICAL PARTY JUST LIKE ISLAM IS JUST A RELIGION. HAHA HOW FUNNY. ISLAM IS A JUSTICE SYSTEM, ECONOMIC SYSTEM UNDER THE CLOAK OF RELIGION. JEWS AND CHRISTIANS ARE MORALLY SUPERIOR BECAUSE THEY LET WOMAN SHOW THEIR FACES AND DON'T STOME RAPE VICTIMS. IS THE SUPERIOR ENOUGH FOR YOU?
To The Anonymous One:
1) I'm an Army veteran (peacetime), have a nephew who did two tours in Iraq and I am highly supportive of our military men and women.
2) I agree with you about the need for a strong third party. The Libertarian Party has a great opportunity to gain ground, but only if it stays true to its belief in staying out of people's private lives. If it allows itself to be controlled by the Christian right, as the Republican Party has done, it will fail.
3) Offhand, I don't know of any U.S. politician who has dual American/Israeli citizenship. If you have a list, do share it with us.
4) Obama's Muslim roots? Just because Obama was exposed to the Muslim religion as a child doesn't mean he holds Muslim beliefs now. My parents exposed me to Christianity, and those "roots" failed to gain any purchase.
5) The "veterans are terrorists" claim: The report, which I believe was initially undertaken by the previous administration, merely says that ex-military people might have an inclination to attach themselves to certain extremist groups. It's pretty clear that the militia movements in this country and groups such as that seem to draw a lot of people with military backgrounds. No one ever said that all ex-military people are terrorists, but they might be more inclined that the average person to buy into the "they're coming to take our guns" claptrap.
6) As far as government involvement in the private sector, would you have preferred the collapse of the banking and finance industry, along with the immediate demise of Chrysler and General Motors, developments which would have put millions out of work and potentially created an economic armageddon that would have made the Great Depression look like good times?
7) Why would I be inclined to spit on my grandfather's grave? I do, however, pee off my back porch with regularity.
8) It's good that you read more than the O-R. So do I. But one has to be selective and also understand that a lot of what one reads on the Internet is hogwash.
9) Your fixation with the Black Panther incident and the HUSSEIN in President Obama's name does suggest to me that you have problems with people of color and those with non-Christian religious beliefs.
10) I'm a spook? You mean like Casper the Friendly Ghost?
11) I'm a chicken hawk? No. You see, chicken hawks are people with no military background who like to send others into war. You know, like Cheney and Rumsfeld.
12) I didn't call you an idiot. I said only that your statement made you sound like one.
13) I'm not trying to be harsh, and unlike you, I'm not angry. But I'm also not going to let patently ridiculous, false statements go unchallenged.
14) I'm not sure how you're going to use freedom of the press to run me out of town, but if you have visions of starting your own newspaper, I'd advise you that that's not a wise business move in these times.
15) I thank you and your wife, sincerely, for your service to our country.
16) Have a great weekend.
I apologize ahead for steering this somewhat off topic, but I get steamed everytime I see or hear about Obama's so called "Muslim roots". I'm not quite sure why that is such a concern. It really shouldn't matter if he were a practicing Muslim, or a Jew, Mormon, Buddhist, Hare Krishna (spelling?), or Atheist. Religion shouldn't come in to the equation at all. I don't vote for somebody based on their religious beliefs and they shouldn't make decisions based on them either. I hope that in my lifetime I am able to see that happen, but I'm not holding my breath.
Sadly, Bridget, there are millions of people in our country who wouldn't vote for someone who was not a member of a "mainstream" Christian religion. Heck, the Republican Party was wary of Mitt Romney because he's a Mormon. Granted, the Mormon church got its start as a very strange cult, and it still has some "interesting" practices, but if I thought Romney was the best guy to lead the country, I wouldn't be worried about how he spends his Sunday mornings.
Yeah,Jews and Christians allow their women to show their faces because they subjugate them in other ways. They allow their women to go get blown up in war, too. That's morally superior, all right. Some of the early Christians directed women to stay silent and obey their husbands. Sound suspiciously Muslim to me. Just to satisfy everyone, I guess we have to have a transgender president whose name is Billy Bob Adolf Boris Mohammed Grace Ghandi Buddha Joseph Smith Jesus Juan Pryszblyawiczski.
Yes, our culture is morally superior. We have advanced to treating women and other cultures equally. Because they are treated equalby us doesn't mean they treat us equal.
"Just to satisfy everyone, I guess we have to have a transgender president whose name is Billy Bob Adolf Boris Mohammed Grace Ghandi Buddha Joseph Smith Jesus Juan Pryszblyawiczski."
Could you imagine the size of the bumper stickers for that campaign? Would have to stretch across the entire back bumper!
If you honestly believe Brant that the United States and western tradition is not superior to Muslim tradition as evident in the state of human rights in most Muslim states, then you and briefcase wonder Ellispes need to experience the treatment of the press, women and general rights in the middle east.
The moral equivalincy that has developed from left wing thought is an unfortunate outgrowth of American pecularism as those in the baby boomer (and some later individuals) could not deal with the unfairness of the world as it is.
The result was the outgrowth of pacifist movement that becomes intersestingly enough angry, abrasive and violent in their words if not action, when anyone challenges their world view.
Also of interest is the fact that most publications mirror their communities, but under the leadership of Park and the gang, the OR has gradually (not so gradual anymore) moved more and more away from the region it represents. A long term recipe for disaster, but one that many of us have awaited for years due to their failure to investigate the mess that Washington County has become under their watch.
Keep up the left wing rant.. Some of us love watching it
What does "brief case wonder" mean?
Here are the top 10 countries in terms of their christian populations:
1 United States 189,983,000
2 Brazil 170,405,000
3 Mexico 96,614,000
4 China 86,801,000
5 Philipines 72,225,000
6 Germany 60,712,000
7 Nigeria 54,012,000
8 Italy 47,704,000
9 France 45,505,000
10 Congo 42,283,000
History is littered with the corpses of those who failed to agree with the superiority of Christianity. The faith was spread, or imposed, at the point of a sword. Sounds much like today's radical Muslims. You might consider that ancient history, anonymous, but we still have people who use their 2,000-year-old religious texts - written by people who were comparatively ignorant - as a pretext to discriminate against gay people, and it wasn't that long ago (within my lifetime) that you had some so-called Christians using the Bible as evidence that black people should be subservient. And even today, despite centuries of "progress," women are still second-class citizens in the Catholic Church. They might not have to wear veils, but they sure aren't treated as equals. If you want to talk about moral standing, I'd say that based on the people I've come in contact with over the past few decades, atheists are decidedly morally superior to Christians, especially those who like to call themselves "conservative."
By the way, Cody, we all got a tremendous kick out of your column last week, particularly the assertion that "the problem is that America for 220 years before the coming of Obama was just fine."
First of all, did you mean 233 years? As of July 4, that's how many years it's been since the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
But I think Native Americans and African Americans would vigorously disagree with the idea that everything was "fine" in America during the last couple hundred years. And what about that minor unpleasantness that was the War Between the States? Or the Depression?
--Brad Hundt
Why are women second class citizens in the Catholic Church?
Laughable. Are you trying to equate not being able to be a priest to the stoning of rape victims? Now tell us that being against gay marriage is being anti gay.
Ask and ye shall receive. I never equated women's treatment in the Catholic Church with stoning. I simply stated that women are still not on equal footing with men in the Catholic Church. If you can't serve as a minister, or priest, in your chosen religion, you're not equal. And, yes, if you oppose equal rights (marriage rights) for gay people, you ARE anti-gay.
Ok, thats laughable.
You've been Knotted.
(picture Brant receiveing noogies)
Heehee.
I completely did a 180 on this while going to get my sammich for lunch...
I had incorrectly read an insinuation that "Christian" countries are superior to Muslim countries... but I don't know that that assertion was overtly made... Because the most recent part of the thread involves stoning women... On this point, a secular United States certainly is superior to a muslim country... and is equally superior to a christian country... since a "real" christian country would do a lot more stoning than what the US does currently...
Christian countries, Muslim countries... really any country that is foundationally mythological... is a peg lower than a country based on rule of law and a logical and humane crime/punishment system.
Whatoh!
To anonymous:
The best you can come up with is "that's laughable." I think I know the reason: It's that you can't make an intelligent, fact-based counter-argument. C'mon Cody, or Cody's lackey, you can do better than that. Or maybe not.
Hey E,
Our country is built upon the notion that our rights flow from God rather than a king or government. Shhh, don't tell anyone.
Tied in a knot?
Ah yes... "God-given"... which is really a lay-term for "natural"...
You can refer to Ben Roethlisberger's God-given talents... meaning that he has physical abilities that he was born with... without it being a religious debate.
Besides, "god" is such a vague term... Are we talking about the God that came to earth via the womb of a 13 year old virgin only to live about 33 years and be executed on a rude cross, spend 3 days in a cave and then rise bodily from the dead? Is that the God that gave me the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Or are those just natural rights of man?
Its God, or god...Whichever you prefer. The mythical being greater than you or the King or our federal government. That God.
In your opinion.
What kind of god creates a universe, then lets evil rule it for thousands of years, planning to "fix" things in the end. Why not just let things be groovy from the get go?
You can't create fear, repression and dependency among the populace that way.
Is atheism our national religion?
I wish! maybe in another 200 years or so...
Why do you assume that Cody -- or Cody lackey -- is posting opposing viewpoints here? Are you tracing anonymous posters and then outing them?
Although he certainly needs spellcheck and reporters who are actually writers, Cody's paper, I think, is a public service by and large.
He probably can't afford to hire staff, so he has to rely on freelance writers and people with certain agendas.
Still, he has managed to scoop the O-R, along with other daily papers, on some pretty bigtime issues involving local government.
He also played a part in exposing John Pettit's questionable behavior, to say the least.
I honestly believe that he keeps some politicians in line because they fear exposure by him if they do wrong. He seems to be able to tread in places that larger papers dare not.
Officials don't seem to fear the O-R in the same way and that's what's wrong with this paper.
I'm not saying that this paper should be like Cody's, but the willingness to placate officials rather than having the bravery to expose them will cost you credibility.
At least Cody has the nerve to go after these people. When was the last time the O-R exposed anything important? Oh, that's right, Washington County has no corruption to report. Sorry, I forgot.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home