[Austin-ghetto-list] Bottom feeding of brainfood

[JIM BALDAUF]

Connie wrote of Roger (and others):

>If I don't repeat Green Party line, you (and others)
insinuate that I'm hopelessly duped, and totally
naive.<

Roger responded of Democrats:

>...their top leader is Al Gore, who has been mysteriously silent on
this and every other political issue. We don't even know whether he is
on speaking terms with Clinton yet.<

YOUR BOTH WRONG!!

1) I doubt that anyone believes Connie's condition is "hopeless" and
"total."

2) Al Gore spoke incisively within the last day or two, bellowing of Bush:
    "He's MY Commander and Chief!"

Talk about leadership! Just take that decisive and unambiguous (almost
Churchillian!) call to combat and compare it to all that mushy wishy washy
peace/love/dove Green talk and it makes me want to recruit Connie to
join Mike in the upcoming "face-to-face" standoff at the Owen's .

Jim Baldauf - "Give Me Moderation Or Give Me Death!"



----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Baker <rcbaker@infohiwy.net>
To: <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Austin-ghetto-list] Bottom feeding of brainfood


> Connie Clark wrote:
> >
> > > > Roger Baker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > According to Mike's thinking, I should take care
> >
> > to quote only from the
> > > > > references that Mike E. considers politically
> > correct -- and according
> > > > > to his cartoon stereotypes of what my politics
> > should be, and what I
> > > > > should read?
> >
> > Somehow Roger, from your past responses to my links or
> > posts, I get the same impression from you!!  If I
> > don't repeat Green Party line, you (and others)
> > insinuate that I'm hopelessly duped, and totally
> > naive.
> >
> > CC
>
>
> First of all I'm a narrow-minded asshole, just as a pre-emptive
disclaimer.
>
> I advocate an alliance with all groups working for peace and better long
> term relationships with the rest of the world, and am willing to march
> side by side with Republicans, liberals, gays, whomever, in the name of
> peace. The peace march of about 1000 yesterday was largely young
> students, with more ISO socialists than Greens, likely.
> There were a smattering of flag-waving Bush supporters -- maybe 15 or so
> in a group.
>
> I'm often at odds with details of the "Green Party line". These
> positions are, however, at least clearly spelled out in the national
> Green platform (including stuff like ending the drug war), and the
> various state platforms at
>
> http://www.greens.org/na.html
>
> And, BTW, do I seem like the kind of fellow who wouldn't question ANY
> orthodoxy, or bite ANY hand obstructing what I see as the path to truth
> -- and speaking freely within a human civilization based on greed
> clouded by self-deception?
>
> (This human tendency toward mass denial is quite easily demonstrated by
> our world energy policy. But aside from that, if you merely knew that
> many otherwise sane people actually believe that god is wiretapping all
> their thoughts and adding up the plusses and minuses to decide on
> whether to cast them into a fiery hell to take his supposedly just
> revenge when they finally die -- to me that constitutes sufficient proof
> in itself that humans must be regarded as a species quite willingly
> guided by the most irrational kinds of self-deception).
>
> Nobody knows the Democratic Party line because there is no Democratic
> Party position on most important issues -- aside to maximize corporate
> soft money intake through the  efforts of Terry McAuliff, Clinton's old
> bagman, and the Democratic Leadership Council. It has been quite a long
> time since the Dems have even mentioned campaign finance reform.
>
> The Dem's position on the recent acts of terror appears to be to support
> GWBush. Their top leader is Al Gore, who has been mysteriously silent on
> this and every other political issue. We don't even know whether he is
> on speaking terms with Clinton yet.
>
> meanwhile, one report on Nader's position on the terror attacks can be
> read at
>
> http://www.mndaily.com/story.php?date=20010926&storyID=3938
>
> The Greens also recently posted a more detailed position on the recent
> terror attacks, which is in my e-mail somewhere. That said, I have
> arrived at my political points of view over decades, with the help of no
> one group. I say what I think. It is a credit to the Greens that they
> have not expelled me so far for speaking my mind, but it is probably
> more of an indication that I have chosen to be associated with a party
> that often reflects my thinking. I dump them in a second if they get out
> of line and support crazy barbaric wars and stuff like that.
>
> And I'll also probably shut up for awhile and listen and pretend to do
> all the stuff normal people are supposed to do. Being a post-aholic
> probably beats being an alcoholic, but it may also mean that you need to
> get a life. -- Roger
>