If you click "Continue Reading..." you will see an email I received this Christmas Eve.
I have told you about my friend who mailed me Fahrenheit 9/11. I signed up for a music list and she hijacked the distribution. She is sweet, advanced in years and has some health problems. I don't know the details but I very rarely respond and never respond aggressively.
Today she sent a NYTimes story (via TrueMajority.org, which I assume is a site dedicated to conclusive proof that President Bush really did win Ohio...) titled "U.S. Cutting Food Aid Aimed at Self-Sufficiency." In the spirit of Christmas I will not comment on the possibility that subtle bias exists in that headline.
I expect that I am the only one on the list that did not write in Kucinich in 2004. But here is a response that so pleased her, she shared it with the whole list. I think it is so whacked out as to be funny. But please be forewarned -- if you do not to endure hateful rhetoric on Christmas, then don't click
___________ has never commented before on any of my "political" emails!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey there.
You know, I don't find anything surprising at all in this "president's"
behavior... he's going right along with his party, which believes, for
some reason, that poor people all want to be that way, and are doing
everything that they can to stay that way.
Remember how it was Reagan who told us how the homeless families we saw
suddenly (during his time) all deserved to be that way? He made it very
fashionable to hate your fellow American, blame him if he hit hard
times, and NOT to give a damn about anyone but yourself. He truly
brought out the worst in our thinking, and these idiots we have now
worship him like he was someone worth paying attention to. I find our
current state to be quite indicative of his (Alzheimer's induced)
thinking, and they think that is just wonderful.
They are the ones who passed welfare "reform", something that was only
costing us 1% of the budget, yet it was the thing blamed for the
downfall of America. And the vast majority of that went to families
trying to raise children on next to nothing, with no real way to get out
and get a damned job in the first place.
These people have NO shame. They have NO compassion. What the hell ever
happened to George the first's "Kinder, Gentler America"? It is doing
just what they want, turning us back to the 1900's when there were NO
unions, NO ability to protect yourself against anyone with more money,
and NO ability to ask the gov't for help of any kind. These morons LIKED
Herbert Hoover, he did NOTHING to help anyone. That is why W is so
intent on having just the same kind of legacy as Hoover.
That being said, are you really surprised at W's actions, here? I'm more
surprised that ANY of the repubs think it's a bad idea.
But just remember, if a politician's lips are moving, he's LYING. Plain
and simple. IMHO, we should take ALL of them out and push them into the
ocean, and see how THEY like being up the creek without a damned paddle.
Maybe it would teach them a little compassion, though if they were all
out there sinking, I doubt that anyone with a brain would do much except
let them drown. They have proved that they deserve it.
And that is my statement on this topic. I just hope that the dissenting
voices win out and show this asshole in office that he is just making
things worse for all of us. But to be honest, if this group was so
willing to screw American children, why would they give a damn about
those in other countries? They see it more like if they kill off all the
kids everywhere, there won't be any future terrorists. In his twisted
brain, W thinks he's making us all safer.
JEEZ, don't get me started on this kind of thing! I just found out the
other day that we as a country spend a whopping 14 cents of every $10.00
on the rest of the world. Is it any wonder that we are looked at with
disdain by the rest of the world? Japan used to be on the bottom of the
list in terms of international assistance to other countries, and now we
beat them hands down. We are supposed to be showing the world how it's
done, and we are just pitiful. We don't care about our own citizens
anymore, and now we have taken that ideal to the rest of the world.
By what stretch of the imagination do these people call themselves
Christians? They are the LEAST Christ like people I've seen since the
Nazi's. I can't believe just how hypocritical they are, and they prove
it to me almost every day. It's driving me crazy day by day, and it just
amazes me that they don't see just how pig headed they are. They are
also the least AMERICAN people I've seen in my life.
The big difference between "them" and "us" is that we have always
thought that Americans should discuss things, and come up with the best
ideas from that discussion. We WANT people to have other ideas, that is
how you learn. They want NO discussion, they want you to fall in line
and believe what they do, and YOU ARE EVIL if you don't think like they
do. They have NO acceptance of other ideas, they have NO respect for
anything other than their own way. Anything that they disagree with is
automatically wrong, no discussion allowed. THIS IS TOTALLY UNAMERICAN.
Where would this country be if we hadn't been born of argument and
discussion? We'd have a king, and would be just another country in the
world instead of the one place that damn near everyone in most countries
wants to come to.
Can I stop now?
[ummmm, yeah -- jk]
UPDATE: My response (which got me kicked off the list):
In the spirit of the season, I will respond as well!Posted by jk at December 24, 2004 02:10 PMPeople starve because of bad government – not lack of US Federal largesse.
Examine the Heritage House Index of Economic Freedom (http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/countries.html ) the freest countries are the wealthiest.
Your friend is no fan of President Reagan, but I’d suggest you both consider the improvement of GDP and life quality in the countries that have escaped Soviet Communism: Estonia is now ranked as the 6th freest country and the report says “The economy continues to grow: GDP increased by 6.4 percent in 2000 and 5.4 percent in 2001. Today, Estonia has the most advanced information infrastructure among the formerly communist Eastern European states.”
Real estate is rapidly appreciating in Kabul and Baghdad it is too soon to tell, but I believe liberty is clearly an important component to ending poverty.
I don’t understand why you and your friends who don’t trust the government to act on anything other than self-serving financial interests suddenly want these same people managing charity and giving. One would think we might find a rare bit of common ground in wishing that the Feds would get out of the charity business so that we might better direct out portion of the efforts.
Merry Christmas, I hope somebody gives your friend the gift of sedatives
What did you write to her that prompted this, and what are you going to write in (polite) rebuttal? She needs to look in the mirror and see if every word she wrote in her last paragraph doesn't apply to her and "us" just as well as to "them." Finally, if America is so bad under this "asshole" then why does "damn near everyone in most countries" want to come here?
Posted by: johngalt at December 26, 2004 10:07 AMThis little bit of Christmas Vitriol was the work of her friend, commenting on the original story she mailed out; she forwarded it to us because it was so good and wise.
I did make a polite rebuttal, saying that "Bad governments cause poverty, not a lack of US Federal largess." I included a link to the Heritage House index of Freedom and mentioned how closely it correlated to economic advancement.
Playing on the criticism of President Reagan, I pointed out that Estonia was now ranked sixth in freedom and that maybe our 40th President had a hand in this. And, that Estonia has seen huge increases in GDP for several years.
Well, I thought it was nice. She replied that she's no longer going to send me political emails because she "only sends those to people for whom she has hope." It was a very angry letter which saddened me. Her mailings are very emotional -- she believes everything she reads on the wacko lefty and enviro sites. And she gets very upset. I contradict her more in hopes of calming her down than converting her to a GOP vote. C'est la vie. (C'est la guerre!)
Yes, one could point out the "everybody hates us/everybody wants to come here" inconsistency or, considering the fruit of my effort, just enjoy this:
"The big difference between "them" and "us" is that we have always thought that Americans should discuss things, and come up with the best ideas from that discussion. We WANT people to have other ideas, that is how you learn. They want NO discussion, they want you to fall in line and believe what they do, and YOU ARE EVIL if you don't think like they do. They have NO acceptance of other ideas, they have NO respect for anything other than their own way. Anything that they disagree with is automatically wrong, no discussion allowed."
Yep. Someday, maybe us will be as tolerant as them…
Maybe you could send her stuff now unsolicited!
Posted by: AlexC at December 26, 2004 08:06 PMSo she "only sends those to people for whom she has hope" of what? Hope of "having NO discussion [and] fall{ing] in line and believ[ing] what [she does], and you are EVIL if you don't think like [she] do[es?]" What's the deal? Does she "have NO acceptance of other ideas, [and] NO respect for anything other than [her] own way?"
One gets the impression that "anything [she] disagree[s] with is automatically wrong, no discussion allowed."
:)
Posted by: johngalt at December 27, 2004 11:22 PMThis made me sad but it is turning to moderate pique.
The other thing that occurred to me was comparing my letter with her friend's. His letter is naught but steaming bile, adding zero to the discussion. My letter was not Luther's theses, but I did try to add to the discussion. Her friend's letter gets sent around as worthy of sharing with the whole group -- mine gets me kicked off the list (yes, likely a blessing).
I added my response as an update. If anybody cares, click "Continue Reading..." again.
I do have to say that your response does come across as uncharacteristically beligerent, JK. "Sedatives?" Ouch!
Posted by: johngalt at December 28, 2004 12:54 PMOkay, the "sedatives" phrase can be misconstrued. For the record, I meant it playfully. I must also point out that she doesn't know me and surely suspects the worst from a man of my stripes.
Yet compared to the other letter, I still find my missive positively Ghandian...
Posted by: jk at December 28, 2004 01:55 PM