Adventure is worthwhile - Aesop

Sunday, September 17, 2006

Despite the insistence of many people that opposition to torture is a liberal/conservative issue, I don’t think it is.  I think that it’s basically a function of authoritarianism more than anything else, though undoubtedly numerous people reading this will disagree.  This email, I think, sums it up nicely.

Hey Lee.

I’ve been reading your blog for awhile now, and I just have to say, you’re right on with telling some of these so-called “conservatives” to go fuck themselves re: Bush/torture. I don’t consider myself “conservative”, and I didn’t vote for Bush either in 2000 or 2004 (abstained both times...), but I am a strong supporter of both the War on Terror generally and the war in Iraq in specific. Sadly, I think the Bush Administration has let this country down as far as national security goes. While the Democrats don’t even bother to talk the talk on the war, the Republicans talk the talk, but when push comes to shove, they’ve consistently failed to prepare adequately for the conditions in Iraq and, as you, Andrew Sullivan, and many others have pointed out, have more or less ceded the moral high ground in this conflict with this sickening dithering regarding the use of torture.

If conservatism still meant what it originally meant—small government, individualism, and free market (though I’m far from a fundamentalist on that particular point), I might feel comfortable calling myself a “conservative” of sorts. However, as you’ve stated many times on your blog, conservatism in this country, at least as embodied by the Republican Party, has become little more than a Christian Socialist movement, and someone such as myself --who believes that there’s really nothing wrong with most drugs, has no problem with what people do in their own bedrooms, doesn’t give two squirts of piss if Janet Jackson showed her nipple on TV, and who views rubbish such as “intelligent design” as little more than thinly-veiled attempts to circumvent the separation of Church and State—obviously has no place whatsoever in such a movement, regardless one their stand on individualism and small government.

All of that, of course, is leaving out the instant disqualification one receives for believing that George W. Bush and his administration aren’t the leaders this country—and the Western world—need at this point in history, as you well know. In some ways it seems reminiscent of the way that one cannot be a “liberal” in this country without believing that Bush is a terrorist and that the War in Iraq is analogous to the German invasion of Poland in 1939.

The Kos-Kidz like to throw around the phrase “rubber-stamp Republican,” and I think the term is actually reasonably descriptive of a lot of so-called conservative Republicans. It’s refreshing to actually see conservatives like you and Andrew Sullivan who refuse to allow yourselves to get sucked into mindless partisanship and stand up for that most important of “conservative” values—individualism. So view this e-mail as something of a “fuck yeah!”

-Vincent
wordvirus.blogspot.com

There are two ways to view this.  The first is that, because a liberal agrees with my position, this is evidence that I’ve abandoned conservatism and I’m some kind of crypto-leftist.  The second is that the idea that conservatives would support this kind of authoritarian empowering of the state is so foreign to the actual message of conservatism—individualism, limited government, etc.—that the only people who oppose it are liberals, libertarians, and classic conservatives.

I believe it is the latter.  I have no doubt whatsoever that most of you will believe it is the former.  It’s a lot easier to swallow than admitting to yourself that you’re supporting something antithetical to your own beliefs.

Thursday, March 02, 2006

Written by some jerk appropriately named “OhBoy.Stupidity!” in the comments to this post.

The writer of this blog has a very poor understanding of Politics. You contribute to MOOREWATCH. You remember MM, right, the guy who sat next to Jimmy Carter at the DNC and yet you claim you can’t see the difference between Bush and Kerry/Gore. Uh, okay.

Okay, stupid.  Nowhere did I say that there was no difference between Bush and Gore/Kerry.  What I did say, and what I have said repeatedly, is that the people who claim that they support Bush because he’s a conservative who cares about national security are fucking delusional, because he’s not a conservative and his record on national security is spotty at best.

Peter King is up for Re-election, is he not? If he really cared about US ports, which he does not, he would have raised the objection, say SIX MONTHS AGO when the deal was first announced. Funny how China is evil when connected to Wal-Mart, yet China operates a bunch of ports in CA. (crickets, crickets, tumbleweeds blowing...)

When did you hear me complaining about China or WalMart?  And as far as objections being raised, there are a number of prominent people who have been raising the alarm about port security ever since 9/11, but we haven’t hardly done jack shit about it.  I guess that’s not Bush’s fault either, huh?

Whether the UAE thing a good deal or not, I have no idea. AND NEITHER DO YOU. All I know is that a great deal of US ports are already populated by foreign companies. That the UAE has become an issue is strictly political, nothing more. In fact, it’s probably good that UAE will run some ports because those ports will be scrutizined beyond belief. If we all heard a Bulgarian co. was running some port operations, the nation would have collectively shrugged as it continued to watch American Idol.

Now, call me crazy, but I don’t recall any Bulgarians flying planes into the WTC.  I don’t have any recollection of Bulgaria’s president threatening to wipe Israel off the map.  Bulgaria doesn’t have an active nuclear weapons program, nor does it have a recent history of supporting Al Qaeda.  So, gee whiz, you’ll have to forgive me if I might want to pay a little extra attention to an Arabic nation taking control of who runs a lot of our ports.  (Or course, any true patriotic American would never question Dear Leader.  He is wise and benevolant and knows all.)

Now, that being said, I agree that the ports issue is becoming politicized.  There are as-yet undiscovered tribes in the heart of the Peruvian jungle who could have told you that this was going to turn into a highly politicized issue.  So why, in the name of Christ, didn’t the Bush administration prepare itself for that eventuality?  As I have read more about the issue I’m far less concerned with a UAE company running some of the port terminals than I am with the overall piss poor security situation that we see at our nation’s ports.  What I object to is the totally inept, incompetent, unpresidential way that Bush handled this whole issue.  This could have been an opportunity to present himself as a master of statecraft, and he ended up looking like a petulant little boy with his “I’ll veto it!” threat.  (Like he’s ever going to veto anything.)

Monday, October 10, 2005

Damn, it’s been a while since I got some honest, dyed-in-the-wool, barking moonbat hate mail!

From: Dave Handy [rhodeislandrevolutionary@gmail.com]
To: Lee
Subject: (none)

STOP USING THE FUCKING HAMMER AND SICKLE YOU GAS GUZZLING, IRAQI KILLING, ENVIRONMENT DESTROYING, REPUBLICAN BASTARD! You know Nothing of it! Open your eyes! its a symbol of the Left, not a right.

Okay, if I’m reading this correctly, Dave is actually offended that I’m using his beloved hammer and sickle in an incorrect manner.

Wednesday, September 07, 2005

Here’s an email from someone heading down to help.

Longtime reader, first time e-mailer - although I have left a comment from time to time. I wanted to let you know that my ANG unit (146th Airlift Control Flight at Channel Islands, Oxnard) has FINALLY been activated to assist with Katrina relief efforts. I’ve been complaining for the better part of the last week that we should have been on the ground there the minute the winds died down.

As a caveat, I will say that Arnold and the Sacramento weenies activated 2 C-130’s with associated air crews last Wednesday, so it wasn’t a total “hurry up and wait” effort on their part - however, two planes and two aircrews is pretty lame if you ask me.

Everything you’ve said regarding the government response to this disaster has been dead on. I’m an old squid like you, but joined the Air Guard after 9/11, partially because I missed being in the military, but also because the Guard (Iraq aside) is here for just these types of emergencies - helping Americans. We have the equipment, we have the planes, we have the people, but we’ve been sitting around for the better apart of a week with our collective thumbs up our collective butts waiting for someone to decide that we were needed.

Keep up the good work - I’ll be in Houston for at least the next two weeks, so I’ll check in from time to time to let you know how things are from that perspective. Lastly, I really need to make time to hook up with you and the other LA-area readers the next time you have a weekend drunk fest!

We really do need to get a weekend drunk fest going sometime soon.  We should do the Reagan library one day, then go out partying that night in Hollywood or something.

I’ve gotten a few emails like this one lately, believe it or not.

Lee,

I thought I should write to encourage you to stay strong in the face of criticism.

It is one thing for conservatives to defend those of similar ideologies from the non-stop lunacy that comes from the Left that sadly passes for political debate these days. However, it is another thing entirely to consider all criticism of certain conservative figures, no matter how legitimate, to be unacceptable. It is far worse to imply that a conservative criticizing another conservative is tantamount to heresy.

I fear that some of your readers are becoming exactly like the Hollywood liberals that we so enjoy mocking. People like Andrew Sullivan and yourself should not be derided. You should be highlighted as shining examples of what separates the conservative side of the blogosphere from the liberal side.

I always used to think that this was what distinguished the conservative side from the liberal side, but the way the shock troops have circled the wagons to attack anyone who dares suggest the idea that the system broke down on Bush’s watch, well, it’s made me rethink that position.

Monday, August 29, 2005

Just received this one.

From: joeyblong@frontiernet.net
To: lee

WHAT KIND OF PATHETIC PUSSY DOESN’T ALLOW PEOPLE TO FREELY LEAVE COMMENTS?  LOL

I started making people register to post specifically because the trolling was so bad it was making any kind of regular discussion all but impossible. You know, trolling by people like this asshole, spewing insults written in all caps.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

Well, it’s more of a Hate Comment, from this post, from some jackoff named Rumbear.

Lee,
You are an insolent prick. (no emphamsis added) I have read your drival for far to long.  I am confident that you will brand me a kool-aid drinking Bushite and delete my tome post haste, hell, you have done that when I have disagreed with you in the past! (Hey, where are my balls!) [ed note: look closely at your crotch!] So be it!  You can put whatever label you want on your views...the short answer is...you have no intelligent comment lest some one else take a stand.  You are content to lurk in the BUSHES (like Jesse J.!) until you can spew your venom and sound like an erudite overeducated asshole...which you are quick to deny...your not! (Whew! There’s a breath of fresh air!!) Fuck yu! (Hey, The Chinese version!) Serve your master on some other connection ...I’m outta here!  “Vote GOP in 2006!  Woo hoo!” KISS MY HAIRY ASS!  I"M BETTING THAT YOU WILL BE PULLING THAT LEVER for REPUBLICAN IN 06 AND BITCHIN YOUR SCROTUM OFF ON THIS BLOG THEREAFTER!!!  Fuck you and good nite!  Let the spam begin...............

Why do people who flame me always accuse me of deleting their comments?  I virtually never delete comments, primarily because I prefer to leave people’s idiocy up for all to see, then use it to make fun of them.  Like this douchebag. 

For the record, 2006 is an off-year election.  There isn’t a chance in hell of a Republican winning a Senate seat, so I will be voting Libertarian, a party who has as much chance of winning an election in this state as the GOP.

Sunday, May 29, 2005

From a (non) reader named Diane.

“there is nothing wrong with California that a massive earthquake wouldn’t fix”

You might reconsider the wisdom of such a juvenile, thoughtless remark.  I am sure I’m not the first person who who has followed a link to your site, saw that comment and decided not to read your blog.  I am doing you a favor in taking the time to tell you how simple-minded it makes you look.

Have a safe day,
Diane

My response: Diane, let me put it this way.  If you think that is juvenile and thoughtless, you wouldn’t like my blog anyway.

Regarding this post, I just received an email from some lawyer.

To “Lee” of “Right Thinking from the Left Coast:

Before commenting on a court case, it might be a good idea to read the case on which you are commenting.  Koebke v. Bernardo Heights Country Club is not a case about the 14th Amendment at all.  Koebke is about California Civil Code Section 51, also known as the “Unruh Civil Rights Act”.  The California Supreme Court has granted review of the following questions:

1.  Does California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act prohibit discrimination based on marital status?
2.  Does the Unruh Civil Rights Act’s prohibition of sexual orientation and sex discrimination bar a business establishment from choosing to provide benefits to only those couples who are legally married, so long as California does not allow same-sex couples ot marry?

Nor had the Court of Appeals decided this case based on the 14th Amendment; that court addressed the petitioner’s claims under the Unruh Act and also under San Diego Municipal Code Section 52.9601, et seq.

I recommend that you disclose that you (apparently) wrote your commentary without actually taking the time to read that case you were talking about, read it, and start over.

My response:  Dude, lighten up.  I wrote my post based on the article I read.  I’m not a lawyer.  You, obviously, have a stick up your ass about this subject.  I don’t need to disclose anything because nobody expects me to read the case because (gasp!) I’m not a lawyer.  Whatever the legal justification, 14th Amendment or otherwise, I think my point stands.  If a lesbian is granted the right to have her girlfriend use the club, then it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that some guy is eventually going to file a lawsuit claiming that he is being discriminated against because he is not permitted to have his unmarried female girlfriend use the facilities.

I recommend that you remove the stick from your ass and realize that this is a blog, and not a court of law.  Lighten up, Francis.

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

It’s been quite some time since I got any real hate mail.

To: Lee
From: iac2881 iac2881@terra.com.br
Subject: Americans

Hi,Guys!

I’m from Brazil and after the II Iraq War all, here in my country, thinks that “Good Amerivans are Dead Americans”.

I personally agreed.

And, finally, I wish inform all of you that for every GI dead in Iraq, I open a cold beer. But, friends, don’t die too fast I’m getting drunk.

Bye, Bye!

Happy Al-Qeda!

What would the world do without Brazil?  We’d have to get most of our hookers from some other third-world South American shithole.

Sunday, April 03, 2005

Here’s another email from a reader named Dave.

Lee,

I’ve been a casual reader of your site for, oh, a couple years now, and I just wanted to say that it’s nice to see (what I consider anyway) a true Republican standing his ground on the weathered blogging frontier.

While I consider myself fairly religious, I’ve been getting more and more upset at the GOP for letting itself be taken over by zealots.  Not just any zealots either, but insane-o backwards zealots.  I mean, while I agree with some (and I stress some) of their views, I realize that many people do not, and hence, those views should *not* be part of the Government system.  When did this happen?  I certainly don’t recall it being this way under Bush Sr., or even Clinton.  Can you pinpoint when the tides switched?

Sure they (supposedly) carry a ton of votes, but it makes me wonder why the GOP is bending over backwards to deliver their party to them on a silver platter.  I mean, let’s be serious, do you see a southern Baptist voting for Clinton?  Or Kerry?  Would they compromise their beliefs just to spite the GOP?  I doubt it. (But then again, they are a bunch of vengeful fuckers)

This is going to be an interesting time in politics I tell you.  Both the Democratic and Republican parties have made serious mistakes which have alienated many of their youth voters.  Both parties have sold-out in an attempt to get votes.  In hindsight the Democratic Party should have run Dean.  He actually had concrete views that actually represented the party. But instead they ran a guy who no one in the party liked.  It could have been forgivable if he won, because then they would at least have a sense of victory.  But now they just feel dirty. (And I can’t tell you how good that feels too).  And the Republican party should realize that its heart is in the right place, but its head is straight up its ass.

I see both the Libertarian and Green parties growing.  Whether they will become the dominate parties, or if they just get assimilated by the current parties is yet to be seen.  But hold tight man, I see things getting better.

But they’re probably going to get worse first.

Anyway, this email has gone on long enough.  I figured every little bit of support helps.

Dave.

Thanks Dave.  And there’s actually a pretty simple answer to your question.  President Bush is not a popular president among the general population, and is utterly despised by probably a good third of Americans.  So, going into this last election we had a polarized America, with the left pulling out all the stops to defeat Bush, even running a weak candidate like Kerry.  Rove, being a political genius, recognized that there was a huge untapped pool of voters out there, extremely religious conservatives.  And he knew that while Kerry, with his war record and rhetoric, might be able to persuade some swing voters that he would be an effective leader in the fight against terror, there was no way he could appeal to the devoutly religious southern protestant conservative vote because of his stance on issues like abortion.  So the Bush campaign began actively courting these votes, and a large number of new voters came out to the polls.  These are people who normally don’t vote because they don’t really feel than any candidate represents their views, and for the first time in years they had a candidate who was directly appealing to them.  And Bush won a solid victory. So, now that these voters were courted, it’s time to pay the piper.  And we’re seeing a marked shift in the GOP away from federalist and limited government principles towards more of a feel-good, religious, big government, agenda-driven governance.  And like I’ve said numerous times, this is entirely within their right to do so.  If they want to make this kind of ideological change in the party platform them more power to them.  But by doing so they have shown people like me that they are no longer a party I can consistently vote for. 

I’m a pragmatist when it comes to voting.  The last election the war on terror was my primary concern, so there is absolutely no chance I would have voted for anyone but Bush.  And I’m not saying I’ll never vote for the GOP in the future.  But the Republicans can never take my vote for granted again.  If they want to get their hand up my skirt they’re going to have to take me out to dinner first.

The mailbag has been really interesting lately.  I just received an email from longtime reader DarkWolf, which I’ve decided to post.  I’m going to more or less let it go without comment, letting DarkWolf’s opinions stand as-is, because I think there are probably a lot of people reading the site who share his views.  But there are a couple of points I want to directly counter, as I think he is mistaken in a few significant areas.

Sunday, March 06, 2005

I just got an email from Juandos, who I banned a few days ago.

Your are one sniveling, spineless coward…

Jaundos

Of course.  (And, yes, he actually misspelled his own name.)

Saturday, January 29, 2005

Some numbnuts didn’t like my Sharon Stone post below.

Sharon Stone’s efforts will save human lives. Children who would otherwise die from maliaria will not, because they were given bed netting which their impoverished parents could not afford.  But you do not care about that.  Much too busy being a jerk. “Bed Netting” sounds so inane to the moronic, to the ill-informed.

You do not, will not, care about facts. 

Much easier to make moronic judgements about people doing whatever they can to relieve ANY suffering of which they become aware. And of course you have that cheering squad of registered comment suppliers.  Nary a disagreement among your bunch; like you, sophomoric, self important, self indulgent, judgemental, ungracious, uncaring, idiots. While you and your small minded, testosterone deficient buddies are busy masturbating over some barely post-pubescent would-be actress, Ms. Stone actually DOES SOMETHING TO RELIEVE SUFFERING. Actually makes herself useful. Actually participates in society. 

Since so many people have covered the DDT angle, I’ll just respond that Sharon Stone is a talentless skank.  The best thing she could ever do to relieve human suffering is stop making movies.

Tuesday, December 07, 2004

Commenting on the gutless coward post from yesterday, a reader named Charlotte V. Speer sends in the following email.

This message is for Lee, who used strong words against the young soldier who chooses to take a stand against the war in Iraq.  I could write on and on about how very wrong you are, but you would not be receptive as you are full of anger and of yourself.

Let me just ask you if you have served in the military?  If you haven’t and therefore can not know what is in this soldier’s mind and heart, I suggest you shut your pie hole and leave the stones to be thrown by those who have at least served and know firsthand what a Hell war is.  The war in Iraq is wrong from whatever angle it is viewed.  What a shame that your tunnel vision will not allow you to see that Bush is not your friend.

A former Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity admirer who now sees the ugly truth.

Well, Charlie, allow me to enlighten you.  First off, he’s not a soldier, he’s a sailor.  And, yes, I too served in the United States Navy, just like this guy.  Allow me to relay an anecdote that you might find interesting.

When the Gulf War broke out I was stationed in San Diego, going to sonar school at the Fleet Anti-Submarine Warfare Training Center Pacific (FLEASWTRACENPAC).  There was a fellow student there who, immediately upon hearing that hostilities were beginning, declared himself to be a conscientious objector.  The command removed him from classes and assigned him to work the front desk in the Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQ).  So, every time we walked past this gutless twat we would make sure that we would let him know just what a contemptible scumbag we all thought he was.  He wasn’t taking a brave anti-war stand, he was a fucking coward, and he didn’t have the balls to go and fight when his country called.  The ironic thing was that none of us ever saw any action in the Gulf.  Despite the fact that a number of us called our detailers and BEGGED them to give us a seagoing billet so that we could participate in the operation, the navy decided that the best use of our time was to finish school, and by the time we had done so the war was long over.  But in the long run it was good that the worthless prick showed his true colors before he was ever placed in a combat situation, where someone else’s life might have been in his hands.

One final note:  Charlotte V. Speer sent in this email using a uspis.gov email address.  This, my friends, is the United States Postal Inspection Service.  Showing us the type of dedication and professionalism that the post office is known for, it’s good to see that Ms. Speer is using a government computer to surf the internet during work hours and email websites who dare to offer an opinion that differs from her far left dogma.