Search Results for 'Brainwashed Nazi'
There REALLY Ought a be a Law . . .
Former Vice President Dick Cheney has published an unapologetic paean to his war crimes, torture and tortured reasoning in a memoir which he calls; In My Time. Needless to say, some find Mr. Cheney’s alleged memoir a work of fiction and suitable “for supermarket tabloids” and “full of cheap shots.” The book will be out August 30, 2011.
Mr. Cheney and his attack-dog daughter, Liz, have launched another campaign to clean up Mr. Cheney’s image but, Mr. Cheney remains one of the most unpopular politicians in American history with an approval rating going towards the single digits.
In Mr. Cheney’s book he highlights how he counseled bombing Syria to “restore America’s standing among the Arabs.” Apparently, Mr. Cheney’s plans also included the possibilities of nuking Iraq, Iran and Syria to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons to those countries.
I wonder if Mr. Cheney’s memoir mentions the secret CIA assassination squads which he set up and then ordered the CIA to not disclose to Congress as required by law or his advocacy of the illegal use of US troops against US citizens on US soil?
[More . . . ]
Andrew Sullivan pycho-analyses Liz Cheney’s approval of torture
Andrew Sullivan has taken some time to consider why Liz Cheney would approve of the use of torture. For one thing, torture is (amazingly) not shameful to the far right; rather, it’s red meat to them. Sullivan quotes Adam Serwer on this point:
For the GOP, torture is no longer a “necessary evil.” It is a rally cry, a “values” issue like same-sex marriage or abortion. They don’t “grudgingly” support torture, they applaud it.
They celebrate it. Liz Cheney’s unequivocal support for torture methods gleaned from communist China has people begging her to run for office.
And thus, Liz, is given a second reason to defend her father, who should be treated as the war criminal he is. Her first reason, of course, is family loyalty:
Family members are always, and understandably, the last defenders of the criminal. The Cheneys’ natural inability to see Cheney in any reality-based perspective renders them psychologically able, even eager, to defend evil as a force for good in ways more forthright than others. Why this should be a plus for Cheney among the GOP rather than an obvious conflict of interest is part of the right’s current derangement. They too cannot hold the concept of their own moral fallibility in their fearful, clenched minds.
Sullivan’s entire post is well worth a read.
Excuse me . . . my mortality is showing: meditations on life and death
Have you ever wondered why so many Americans wear clothing when it’s warm outside? Are they really covering up for sexual propriety—because of shame? Or could it be that they are wearing clothes to cover up their animal-ness– their mortality? I’m intrigued by this issue, as you can tell from my previous writings, including my posts about “terror management theory,” and nipples.
This issue came to mind again recently when I found a website that allows you to completely undress people. The site has nothing to do with sex, I can assure you, but it has a powerful set of images that raise interesting questions about human nakedness. To get the full experience, go to the website and select an image of a fully clothed person. These are absolutely ordinary looking people, as you will see. Then click on the images of any of these men or women and watch their clothes disappear.
If you are like me, when their clothing disappears, this will not cause you to any think sexual thoughts. If you are like me, you will find yourself thinking that these people looked more “attractive” with their clothes on. For me, the effect is dramatic and immediate, and it reminded me of a comment by Sigmund Freud (I wasn’t able to dig out the quote), something to the effect that we are constantly and intensely attracted to the idea of sex (duh!), but that sex organs themselves often look rather strange to our eyes–sex organs are not necessarily sexy. I think the same thing can be said for our entire bodies. Nakedness isn’t the same thing as sexuality or else nudist colonies would tend to be orgies (which, from what I’ve read, they are not). Rather, sexual feelings are triggered by the way we use our bodies. We do many things that are sexual, and most of these things take some effort. Simply being naked is not an effective way to be sexy.
In America, people constantly confound nudity with sexuality. I admit that the media presents us with many ravishing image of sexy naked people, but the sexiness of such images is not due to the mere nakedness. There’s always a lot more going on than mere nakedness. Consider also, that when people actually mate, they often bring the lights down low, further hiding their bodies.
Then why do Westerners cover up with clothing to be “proper”? I suspect that anxiety about death (not so much anxiety about sex) contributes to our widespread practice of hiding those naturally furry parts of our bodies—those parts associated with critically “animal” functions relating to reproduction and excretion of body wastes.
[More . . .]
Census issues
Here’s a topic I haven’t followed well enough, as became obvious to me when I saw this little gem of a video on Huffpo. I had NO IDEA that one of the reasons Those-Who-Hate-Government-But-Want-Government-to-Manage-Religion-and-Reproduction are threatening not to fill out their census forms is the fear of being placed in Internment Camps. Yep, that maven of legislative insight, Michele Bachmann, warns Glenn Beck of the dire consequences we may well repeat from the WWII era. She also laments the missing “are you here illegally?” question (because of course all undocumented workers would ‘fess right up to that on an official government form).
Brainwashed Nazi.”">Rush Limbaugh IS a “Brainwashed Nazi.”
Brainwashed Nazi.”">
Brainwashed Nazi.”" title="Rush Limbaugh IS a “Brainwashed Nazi.”" />
I’ve long subscribed to a rule which says that in political discourse whichever side calls the other side a “Nazi first loses. The “Nazi rule” means that if you use it, you lose it. The “Nazi rule” holds true almost universally. I say “almost” because the one calling the other a “Nazi first loses unless the first one using the term “Nazi has it right.
Recently, a caller on Rush Limbaugh’s show identified himself as a Republican voter, a veteran and opposed to torture and blamed Rush and his ilk for the recent electoral woes of the Republican Party. The caller, ”Charles from Chicago”, called out Limbaugh for his support of torture and blamed Limbaugh and others which supported torture for why the American people have left the GOP in droves.
Rush begged to differ and Charles called Rush a “brainwashed Nazi.” Rush blamed people like Charles for the Obama win, and didn’t stop there but, called Charles “ignorant” among other things.
First, “Brainwashed” is the intensive forced indoctrination of new beliefs to have them supplant old beliefs.
Connect with Dangerous Intersection
If you click on the Facebook icon (below) and send me (Erich Vieth) a FRIEND REQUEST, you'll receive updates to DI's newest articles. And, of course, RSS is available. DI's Twitter and Youtube links are also below.