Obama’s Communist Cover-up Continues
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | August 17, 2008
There must be a deeper and darker secret, in terms of the relationship with Davis and those who knew him, that the Obama campaign is trying to keep hidden.
In a surprising admission that could become a major scandal in the presidential race, Barack Obama’s 40-page so-called “rebuttal” to Jerome Corsi’s book, The Obama Nation, acknowledges for the first time that the senator once had a personal relationship with identified Communist Party USA (CPUSA) member Frank Marshall Davis, a key high-level operative in a Soviet-sponsored network in Hawaii.
But the 40-page report, advertised and sold to the media as a refutation of Corsi’s “lies,” doesn’t identify Davis as a hard-core communist and it dishonestly edits an article about Davis to eliminate references to his admitted involvement in CPUSA activities and make the black revolutionary writer and “poet” look like a civil rights activist.
In fact, Davis was a secret CPUSA member who continued his involvement in the CPUSA or its front activities into the 1970s, when he became Barack Obama’s mentor in Hawaii. Corsi’s book devotes part of chapter three, “Black Rage, Drugs, and a Communist Mentor,” to Davis.
This official Obama campaign cover-up, which attempts to further mislead voters about Obama’s mysterious and controversial background, occurs as serious questions are being raised about Obama’s initial soft line toward the Russian invasion of Georgia. In his first statement on the crisis, Obama failed to directly condemn the Russian invasion. Obama “did not directly blame Russia” for the crisis, the New York Times acknowledged.
Did Obama’s position reflect inexperience in foreign affairs, the influence of advisers, or an ideological tendency to take Russia’s side in global affairs against the U.S. and its allies?
According to the editor of Davis’s books, John Edgar Tidwell, Davis was not only a secret CPUSA member but tried to recruit a prominent poet to the CPUSA. It’s not known if he tried to recruit Obama because the major media refuse to question Obama about his relationship with Davis, and Davis died in 1987.
Curiously, Tidwell, who has access to Davis’s FBI file and his personal papers, has refused to talk about Davis, even to a sympathetic reporter from the Associated Press, saying Davis has been victimized by McCarthyite “smear tactics.” The AP story refused to identify Davis as a CPUSA member and described him only as a “left-leaning” poet and journalist.
For his part, Davis appeared before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in 1956, taking the Fifth Amendment when asked about his CPUSA activities. His lawyer was Hawaii lawyer Harriet Bouslog, another CPUSA member.
The same Senate subcommittee issued a report in 1956 declaring, “Founded in September 1919, the Communist Party of the United States of America is an organization unique in American history. It is not a true political party and differs fundamentally from all political parties in this country. It is in fact a Russian-inspired, Moscow-dominated, anti-American, quasi-military conspiracy against our Government, our ideals, and our freedoms.”
In 1982 testimony, FBI assistant director for intelligence Edward J. O’Malley testified that the CPUSA has been “one of the most loyal and pro-Soviet Communist Parties in the world and has unfalteringly accepted Soviet direction and funding over the years.”
The recent book, Comrade J, based on interviews with a Russian spymaster at the United Nations, documents that Soviet intelligence operations against the U.S. continued even as the Soviet Union collapsed and Russia emerged in its place.
Selective Editing
The Obama report admits that “Frank” was in fact Frank Marshall Davis—something AIM confirmed back in February. But in trying to rebut Corsi’s charge that Davis was a significant negative influence over Obama, the Obama report on page 10 quotes “an article on Davis” that describes him as being involved in the “labor movement” with other “African-American intellectuals” and committed to racial integration and harmony. No title or name of the author of the article is given. The article is simply identified as being from the Western Journal of Black Studies.
We found a copy through Questia, an online library of books and journals. The article, “Frank Marshall Davis: A Forgotten Voice in the Chicago Black Renaissance,” was written by Dr. Kathryn Takara, an Obama supporter who has been critical of Accuracy in Media’s attempt to document Davis’s involvement in the CPUSA and his mentorship of Obama. Takara is a radical poet herself, having written poems in honor of Communist Party member Angela Davis and convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal. She was recently quoted in an Associated Press article that portrayed Davis as a positive influence on Obama and ignored his CPUSA membership.
The pro-Davis quotes in the Takara article in the Western Journal of Black Studies, which are cited in the Obama report, are actually preceded by Davis’s own incriminating words, in which he says:
“From now on I knew I would be described as a Communist but frankly I had reached the stage where I didn’t give a damn. Too many people I respected as Freedom Fighters were listed as Red for me to fear name calling.”
These quotes are carefully omitted from the Obama report. Instead, the report only uses quotes that make it appear as though Davis was not an extremist of any sort.
The Obama report also ignores the Davis quotes in the article in which he talks about the “honor” of being targeted by the House Committee on Un-American Activities and upsetting “the white power structure.”
The Takara article acknowledges that Davis was investigated “due to his associates and involvement in what were considered in the forties to be radical communist groups.”
Davis in Hawaii
On the recommendation of two secret CPUSA members, Paul Robeson and labor leader Harry Bridges, Davis moved to Hawaii in 1948, where he would later become a member of what an official inquiry described as a secret communist underground organization.
Corsi’s book, which is supposedly “Unfit for Publication,” according to the Obama campaign, cites the congressional hearings and documents which identify Davis as a CPUSA member. It also quotes instances from Obama’s own book, Dreams From My Father, in which Obama talks about “Frank” giving him advice about various matters. For example, he tells Obama that blacks have a reason to hate whites. Davis also tells Obama that he should not believe the (expletive deleted) about the American way of life and that he was, in the final analysis, just “a nigger” in America.
Takara’s article, written in 2002, acknowledges Davis’s deep involvement in communist activities. In one such instance, the article says:
“However, by the time he [Davis] returned to Chicago and the Renaissance, he inevitably associated with people connected with the [Communist] Party since they were most likely to be involved in civil rights, labor, art, and the fight for equality…it seems that Davis did join the party for a short time, although on other occasions he denied it.”
So here we have it: in an article cited by the Obama report as authoritative about Davis, he is acknowledged to have been a CPUSA member. But the Obama report doesn’t mention this key piece of information obviously because it confirms what Corsi reports in his book and what AIM has been reporting since February.
In another part of the article deliberately omitted by the Obama campaign, Takara notes that “Davis met Richard Wright through his 1936 participation in the National Negro Congress, which was alleged to be a Communist Front Organization.” Of course, the National Negro Congress was an identified CPUSA front.
Takara says that Davis had some contact with Wright over the years but that “Davis did not see Wright again after openly criticizing Wright’s attack of [sic] the Communist Party following the latter’s defection, although both men held on to the hope of equality.”
Indeed, Davis was so extreme that he attacked Wright for “treason” for breaking with and exposing the CPUSA. Again, none of this is included in the Obama report supposedly rebutting Corsi’s book.
CPUSA Fronts
In yet another part of the article the Obama report ignores, Takara writes that “Davis joined the League of American Writers, a national united front organization for the Communist Party mobilized by the alarming rise of power of Hitler and Mussolini.”
In fact, Davis signed a statement by the League of American Writers in June 1941 opposing war against Nazi Germany at a time of the Hitler-Stalin pact. This was a reflection of the CPUSA line. Davis went from anti-war to pro-war after the Nazis attacked Stalin.
So here we have it: another official acknowledgement by an Obama (and Davis) supporter that Davis was involved in a CPUSA front. But the Obama report doesn’t admit anything of the kind. In fact, Davis’s entire record of involvement in the CPUSA and its fronts is completely covered-up.
Which raises the question that we have asked on numerous occasions: why are Obama and his followers in the media ignoring his documented relationship with a CPUSA member? And why did Obama only refer to Davis as “Frank” in his book?
In an August 5 editorial, drawing heavily on material published by Accuracy in Media about the Obama-Davis relationship, Investor’s Business Daily took issue not only with the concealment of “Frank” in the Obama book but the recent dishonest Associated Press story about Davis and Obama. “If the relationship with Davis was as blasé as the Associated Press makes it sound, why is Obama mum about it? And why did he try to hide Davis’ identity in his first memoir, published in 1995?”
The paper said that Obama had written that “With the exception of my family and a handful of public figures, the names of most characters have been changed for the sake of privacy.” Investor’s Business Daily added, “But there was no need to protect Davis’ privacy. He had long been dead. More likely, the cryptic references to his communist mentor were—and still are— designed to protect Obama’s background from the scrutiny it deserves.”
The shocking thing is that this cover-up is continuing, in the form of the official Obama “Unfit for Publication” report attacking Corsi. The cover-up is now so blatant that an article that is generally sympathetic to Davis has been edited by the Obama campaign in order to delete references to Davis’s CPUSA activities.
There must be a deeper and darker secret, in terms of the relationship with Davis and those who knew him, that the Obama campaign is trying to keep hidden. Otherwise, it would immediately begin to disclose everything.
Gerald Horne, the writer for the CPUSA journal, Political Affairs, who first disclosed Davis’s relationship with Obama and his family, has told the Marxist publication that he is now writing “a history of the radical, Communist and working-class movement in Hawaii.” He explains, “It is not well known, I’m afraid, that before statehood in 1959 probably the most vigorous, communist and radical trade union movement under the U.S. flag was in Hawaii.”
Frank Marshall Davis was a remnant of that powerful movement.
“At some point in the future,” Horne said, in talking about Davis’s influence over Obama, “a teacher will add to her syllabus Barack’s memoir and instruct her students to read it alongside Frank Marshall Davis’ equally affecting memoir, ‘Living the Blues’…
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at
153 Comments
One need only review Obama’s voting record as a U.S. Senator to see he advocates for Socialism.
The tragedy is many Americans are also moving towards the same ideology and that is why he is so popular. The Democratic Party has moved further towards the left with each successive year and could rightly change its name to the Socialist Party.
So for many Americans Obama’s call for “change”, which actually means changing from a democratic republic to a socialist state, is heroic rather than something to be feared.
Great article, no wonder Obama tries so hard to remain free of scrutiny. I am always leery of someone who cannot tell the entire truth and has to creatively edit information like the Obama campaign has done. That has been what the main-stream media has been doing for far too many years.
Thank heavens we now have media sources, like AIM, who will present the other side of these candidates, not just the side that the main-stream media wants us to see. Unfortunately, because of Obama’s popularity, it seems as if not enough people are really paying attention. This guy needs to be exposed for who he truly is. I usually pass on articles like this one and my friends pass them on as well.
Complaining amongst ourselves is not enough, we need to get the word out, and quickly.
Excellent article. The more we learn about Obama’s background, the better. The MSM tries to hide anything that might shed light on this empty suit who fancies himself a great leader.
As yet, nobody has provided any history of Obama having led anything of note. He was an “also ran” in the Illinois Senate, where he would have been expected to make real change at least in his home district of Chicago’s south side. At last check, that area is still plagued by crime and poverty. I imagine he still has those citizens waiting for his promised changes.
You know, all through elementary school, I sat next to and constantly kibbitzed with a classmate, in and out of school, who, years later, was convicted of being a “hit man” for an organized crime family. Does that make me a “murderer”, too ???
Get off it, already! The dead horse is beginning to stink!
All through elemntary school, I sat next to a kid who, when he grew up, was eventually convicted of being a “hit man” for an organized crime family. Does that make me a mrudered, too!
Get off it already! The dead horse is beginning to stink!
Perhaps we need to get the National Enquirer involved in this? It worked with Edwards - finally! Edwards lied and lied, MSM covered it up and hid the story - and the Enquirer brought it out. Obama’s supporters are working overtime covering this up, and will say and do anything to keep the truth from getting out - evidence are these very AIM articles and the vile nasty people that have intimidated, cowed and threatened commenters here with bodily harm. Frankly, last night it got so bad that I stopped just reading the incoming posts and tried to get these people to show just a smidgen of respect to commenters who do not believe Osamabama’s lying surrogates, The resultant was that they became even more vile and then attacked me.
For the new posters here, expect that this discussion will include Mark who states he is Frank Davis’ son, once again going through the same old arguments repeatedly - though he is normally and mostly civil in his language. BUT be careful, because when you are attacked by Brian R Sullivan, he is the most vile man I have ever heard in a comments section. He has the typical liberal attitude that they are ALWAYS right and you are ignorant - and liberals use the word ignorant to describe those that oppose them all the time - but THIS MAN uses a Thesaurus to use every vile word he can to cow and manipulate and intimidate - and he will even threathen bodily harm. That is when I finally posted last night - when he went beyond vile and became criminal. He will try to get your address - DO NOT GIVE YOUR ADDRESS TO THIS SLEAZE - he says he has a Constitutional Right to Confront you in person. If somehow he gets your address, I say you should fear for your life and immediately call your local law enforcement - his vile anger is obviously of someone who is NOT playing with a full deck - deranged comes to mind.
I suspect that the Osamabamaites have dispatched people like this that would normally rant on sites such as Daily KOS, the hate site, to stiffle all discussion of Obama that is negative. But in this case, Cliff Kincaid probably hits the nail on the head better - as there IS a concerted effort by the campaign to hush this up - and that probably does mean there IS a lot more about this and they certainly do not want THAT to come out - whatever THAT IS?
If Sullivan tries to cop this thread like he did one a couple of days ago, with insults and threats, name-calling and blustering, I will again leave and stick to friendly and polite discussions.
I think that after the Brokeback Showdown, Obama is dropping like a rock anyway. He exposed himself as incompetent, unable to come up with concise replies to simple questions, and on the wrong page regarding the beginning of life, the sources of evil, the definition of “rich” and even his own political misscues. He made up a lie about abortion having increased in the past eight years, and about having reached over to join Republicans in the Senate.
Cliff Kincaid is doing a great service by exposing Obama’s communist leanings. I wish we could rate the columns here - He gets five stars from me.
JA Woods - Why is his “mentor” important? Go back and think of how many times your parents said something to you and YOU now use it! OR…something triggers a thought of them and what they told you. Or… IF you have kids they will tell you, OH you say that over and over ....or we have heard this before and they or You to your parents roll your eyes.
The same is true with OB. He developed his philosophy listening to this man. HIs thoughts, reflections, his actions, legislation etc are all attributable to those who “advised” him.
That is why it is important to know. And it important for you to understand how his plans, his thinking, his reflection on life are done with a Marxist and socialistic bent. Further, he had TWENTY YEARS listening to Wright God Damn America and that alone is like brainwashing!
IF you look at his speeches -what does he and Michelle say?: YOU can’t sit on your couch and do nothing? YOU can’t have as large a piece of the pie as you want, You must “sacrifice” for others. Who says? We have DEMOCRATIC choices and those do include doing what ever we want to do. We DON"T need a President telling us what we can eat or when! We don’t want a president who gets into daily lives. HIS/HER job is to run the country - not micromanage daily lives.
Managing lives rather than the country is EXACTLY what HITLER and STALIN did and in Communistic countries to day this is what is done! That is why it is so important JA to see what shapes OB’s thoughts.
OB’s plans to “tax” the rich is marxist pure and simple. WHy is it wrong to make money? Why should he tax profits? They belong to those who earn them!
Why does he think he can get away with doing this? Would you like to be taxed more than the next guy because you happen to have a good job and the other guy doesn’t? Is that fair? Democratic? NO! Its classical Marxism.
IF the DAMN Democrats who are blocking drilling here and drilling NOW would act, - we could be free of debt, free of trade imbalances within a few short years. We could be paying .25 cents a gallon like they do in Saudi Arabia. We could have our trade imbalances corrected and say to HELL with you Saudis and the same to Russia and all other oil producers who “threaten” us by cutting off oil.
Get the book, Globilization, and read the analysis - you also will be screaming at the Democrats and the “group of ten” who are obstructing our resources and our country from benefitting from drilling.
We also have over 300 years of coal which we could use to create ALL the electricity we need anywhere in the US at about 7-9 cents per KW hour. Then, we add to the mix through the use of Nuclear, Wind, Solar, etc etc. And our energy needs will be covered.
BUT….OB votes with his party and Nancy Pilosi in particular could give a damn about the average AMerican. Obama lives in a 1.65 million dollar home with 6 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms for his family of 4. If he wants us to sacrifice, why doesn’t he move to a 3 bedroom, 2 bath home like most Americans live in? He is a DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO Democrat whose change is nothing except higher taxes and government intrusion into people’s lives.
Look at his response to the question asked at the Church debate: Who are the three people you would consult for advice on the administration - his reply? Michelle, (who hates America and has a BLACK inferiority complex), his Grandmother who he called a “typical WHITE person and from whom he is estranged - weird that he would use her when he wouldn’t listen to her when younger - and the SAME OLD SAME OLD STATUS QUO POLITICIANS LIKE TEDDY KENNEDY WHO IS A KILLER AND A COWARD. WOW!! - these are his advisors? What does THAT say about HIS judgment?
That alone should tell you why he will be an awful POTUS and CIC - he is inexperienced, naive, lacks knowledge and is constantly contradicitng himself.
I am not a MCCain fan, but he sucks a lot less than OB who is a communist/Marxist/socialist in disguise who will take our country and trash it!
START reading JA - open your eyes and listen with the intellect God gave you. You will see why advisors that are communistic and hard core and NOT what YOU would want for your kids as mentors and why we don’t need a president with this background!
We also need to follow
What you need to do is look at You know, it’s instances such as this that so frustrate American voters who want to be knowledgeable. If it is indeed no big deal to have been acquainted with Frank Marshall Davis, then say so and let it be known. Twelve months ago, I didn’t know anything about the guy. But now, I know he was a communist sympathizer and might have actually been a member of the CPUSA. With the current state of the democrat party, it matters not one whit if Obama was affiliated in some way with someone who might have been a member of the CPUSA as “recently” as 21 years ago, or longer ago. The democrat party is itself promoting communist policies! And I believe that liberals from both sides of the aisle would easily trade policy ideas with current CPUSA members just as little leaguers trade baseball cards.
In other words, we don’t need tenuous affiliations with possible members of the old CPUSA to see the light. We need only the truth of Obama’s intended policies to see that he is indeed a socialist. If his socialist policies , and socialism in general, are good things, then why hide?
It’s hard to argue these days that Obama is the annointed one destined to become our next president. Even the MSM is starting to take stock of their over-coverage of The One. (Washington Post notes that Obama has gotten 3 to 1 front page coverage. The NY TIMES has even shown signs of being lucid recently, instead of the 24/7 propaganda outlet it has been in the past and continues yet.)
It was refreshing to watch the Saddlebrook (?) forum as Obama’s most-used term was “uh,” usually repeatedly as he tried to come up with something plausible. McCain showed no such reticence, but was much more aggressive in giving his views.
Experience does count.
Still, I am a fan of Langston Hughes and others of the Harlem Rennaisance as, where older poetry about urns and other flowery yawns (to me) didn’t move me, Hughes was able to present the black experience in terms that made me feel something, to sympathize with their condition.
Ironically, I was teaching black poetry to largely black classes (many of whom wouldn’t be going to college, so this was their last chance to be exposed to something that was very positive in my life and, hopefully, would be in theirs)...and I was criticized for racism.
Fortunately, the assistant principal was black and appreciated my situation. The text book had ONE black poet, an African, and the vp pointed out to me that many Africans don’t really consider American blacks to be genuine blacks and certainly not Africans.
Gwendolyn Brooks penned a few faves as well:
We real cool
We shoot pool…
We die soon.
I was unaware of the communist connection at the time, but took these poems at face value and was moved. (Pardon if my quote above isn’t exact: I’m quoting from memory.)
On the other hand, you would think that the republicans were bugging ML King’s motel rooms. JFK called King to the White House and told him he had a commie in a high position in his organization: this had to stop.
MLK agreed, but kept the commie on for another year on the (hush, hush, and very) QT, anyway. It was RFK’s Justice Dept that sicced the FBI onto ML King Jr. And, of course, King was a republican.
It would seem that blacks revere King…but aren’t entirely sure why.
Judge Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton on the content (if any) of THEIR character.
Better: Just wait and let God do it. Who are we to judge? God can do a much better job of handling these two “reverends.”
VOXREEASON: Again, who says we can’t judge? We do it all the time! We do that when we vote! We do it evertyime we make a moral judgement or other choices where judgment is incurred!
What OB doesn’t get is that YOUNG Blacks don’t think they are discriminated against! THEY have more opportunity than I did when I was younger and that is due to the maturity of the nation!
FDR/JKF didn’t like BLACKS and asJFK said, HE doesn’t lose sleep over the problems of the Negro. MOST DEMS were anti -black and just recently I read a post where they are “scrubbing” their anti black positions from the “history” of the DEMS. They were also eugenicists who wanted to do away with what they considered inferior beings. When you look at WHO are the leaders of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY TODAY - YOU CAN SEE WHY THE BOOK BANKRUPT CLEARLY SHOWS WAHT DEMS ARE TODAY:
FDR - loved Marxism and Moussilini and ran this country like a Marxist one - didn’t like BLACKS
JFK - didn’t worry about blacks but was rabid anti communist/philanderer
LBJ - created the WELFARE society/philanderer
CLINTON - a do nothing president except for getting rid of welfare/philanderer
CARTER -worst president to date followed closely by Obama if elected! / lies down in bed with terrorist nations or marxist dicatators
SEE a pattern here?
Yes, I do see a pattern Helen! Though I must start out by saying you forgot to put philanderer by FDR - remember his sceretary?
Anyway, I see philanderer by FDR, JFK, LBJ, and Clinton - I see the pattern of Marxism - and then we come to Jimmie - no philanderer, kisses up to all enemies of America, and absolutely dumber than a box of rocks. So your pattern here IS: pick the philanderers over Jimmie Hahahahahaha
Now if we look at Osamabama - I think I can safely say he is like Jimmie in that I have no reason to believe he is a philanderer (besides I suspect Michelle would castrate him if he even tried), though he is like Jimmie and would kiss up to all of America’s enemies, and obviously even more than Jimmie does - and that takes some doing lol And Obama is the most Marxist/Totalitarian/ and Communistic of all the former Democraps.
So the pattern lol IS (the definition of IS is) that if we get a Demo go for the philanderer and not the one who keeps his pants up Hahahahahahaha
YES - when you have to vote with your nose held - its better with philanderer and not the appeaser. Obama in about twenty years MIGHT get the knowledge he needs and MIGHT be good but with MIchelle as mean and evil as she is - I doubt it - unless he starts reading and heeding CLiff Kincaid, Rush Limbaugh and others.
HS
Jack: As a Catholic who practices the religion prior to its takeover in the 1960’s by the Commie/Socialist’s, I want you to know that Brian R. Sullivan’s views are perfectly aligned with the phony church he represents in his posts.
This phony church is nothing more than an arm of the Democratic Party and that is why as a believer, Sullivan can with a clear conscience, support Obama or any other abortion advocate.
Dear Mr.Hansen, As a long time Defense Dept. employee (Naval War College, 1988-91; Institute for National Strategic Studies, 1991-97; US Space Command, 1997-98), I am very reluctant to waste our government’s money. I certainly wouldn’t want some FBI agents to try to interview me and not find me at home. After all, they would waste expensive gasoline and take time away from other cases, all for nothing. So I would appreciate it if you could let me know when they are coming. If you don’t have any idea, could you please ask the agent you contacted to telephone me? I’m going to be out of town from late Sept. to late Oct. and unavialable. But if I know If and when the feds were coming, I could be sure to be home if they were to arrive over the next month. Thanks.
Dear Mr. Slinkiecat (or is it Ms. or Mrs.?), You blindness to you own foilbes continues to astonish me. You state that I have made insults, threats, engaged in name-calling and bluster. First of all, while acknowledging the truth about oneself can be painful, you could try to see yourself as someone with intelligence, good education and knowledge of the real world of international relations, intelligence and warfare views you. To dewscribe you as stupid, ignorant, gullible, biased and paranoid may sound like insults, they actually describe you quite accurately. Secondly, I remain extremely puzzled about what threats I have supposedly made. Please be as complete as possible. Personally, I do see a kind of threat I represent to morons such as yourself: I point out your intellectual vacuity. That, in turn, raises painful notions in your mind, I expect, even if only in your subconscious. At some level, even if you are in deep denial, you must have a sneaking suspicion, that you are detached from reality about the actual events of the past few years and the nature of this ongoing presidential campaign. Worse, you must fear the truth: you are incapable of reason. Your thought processes are shaped by hysteria. That’s quite sad, since what you fear are only fantasies in your tortured imagination. As for name-calling, why don’t you read through your various blogs of the past few weeks. You have constantly. As for my supposed blustering, please give me precise examples. I’m interested in finding out if you know the meaning of the word and, if so, what you consider bluster on my part. I would certainly not want to give anyone the notion that I engage in bluster (“to threaten noisily without the intention or power to make good the threat.”) After all, that’s what the despicable Mr. Hansen does and I surely don’t want to appear to be like him. To a certain extent, this question ties in with my previous one.
By the way, is this the sort of thing you meant that would encourage you to depart from this blog? If so, good riddance you puerile, brainless coward. As King Arthur says in Monte Python and the Holy Grail, “Run away! run away!”
Dear Mr./Ms voxoreason, You misquote Ms. Brooks extraordinarily concise and terribly painful poem. It actually goes: “We be cool // We quit school // Now be June // Be dead soon.” Look it up if you like.
Brian R, you ignorant slut,
>>Dear Mr./Ms voxoreason, You misquote Ms. Brooks…
What part of ”(Pardon if my quote above isn’t exact: I’m quoting from memory.)” didn’t you understand?
You are too ignorant to address me, so please refrain from doing so. I don’t suffer fools gladly.
Have a good, if insignificant, day.
Dear Ms. Elaine, Your theological ignorance and confusion saddens me. Well over 1500 years ago, the Church Doctors expounded a doctrine about divine guidance of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church: it is under the perpetual guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit. Thus, you have fallen into a serious heresy. The Church leaders may fail morally, individual popes may be deeply corrupt but the Church Militant (that’s us) cannot be taken over by Communists (who are atheists, after all). Furthermore, how could the Church have been under Communist control from the time of John XXIII and yet had as its recent leader, the greatest and most successful Supreme Pontiff of all time? I refer to John Paul the Great, soon to be proclaimed a saint. He more than any man caused the downfall of the Evil Empire. Of course, he was aided by many others, living and dead. (How many souls of those murdered by Stalin, now in eternal bliss, implored God to end the murdrous madness of Communism? He who does not see the hand of God in this is blind.) Your inability to think clearly, your stupendous ignorance of Church history, your (possibly sinful) failure to educate yourself is deeply troubling to me.
Furthermore your presumption that you know more about this matter than the present Church hierarcy - you think that the deeply conservative briliant and highly educated Benedict XVI is under Commuhnist influence, when there isn’t even any serious Communist movement any more? - that the theological teachings of the Church fathers is wrong is a mind-boggling display of hubris. Remember, the greatest of all sins, that which led to the damnation of Lucifer and his rebel
angelic associates, is pride. I can’t see into your soul and heart. But I fear from your words you are in mortal peril - I mean of eternal death.
Dear Ms. voxoreason, I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings to point out that you misquoted Ms. Brook’s poem. But you decided to misquote, rather than to look up the correct version. Teh actual text is far more powerful than your misremembered version and I wanted to make that available to those who have never read that astounding compression of tragic feeling. Whose fault is that? Furthermore, by expressing your opinions in public, you are subject to anybody’s reply or retort. That’s the way our Constituion works. And I glory in being a free American protected in my right to express myself on any matter to anybody.
(By the way, in what way did I express ignorance? Do tell. As for “slut,” have you any idea what the word means? Apparently not. Again, you display your ignorance. That’s your problem, not mine. But I’ll try to do you a small favor to improve your vocabulary. Slut: “a dirty, slovenly woman; a woman of loose character; a bold or impudent gilr; a female dog.” Try as I can, I can’t see how any of those definitions could possibly apply to me. If you wish to insult me, try not top insult yourself by displaying your ignorance. dictionaries are useful for writers, even of blogs.
Speak of the devil, Elaine. You no more posted, and the child that single-handedly has changed my belief in the honor and integrity of the USMC, climbed out from under the rock under which he slithers and once again opened his vile viper mouth.
He must certainly be a slick talker though, as I did not think it possible to spout the bile that he expels so easily, and also have the long career with the Corps that he did. Honor Duty Country Corps (something like that) A report card would give you an F in Honor, in Duty to the people of your country maybe a D, your sellout to those that would harm your country - treason - a handman’s rope, and the Colonel I talked with today certainly agree he went over the line on reasonableness, while agreeing with me that at present there is not a thing he can do BUT he did agree that the Corps does not knowing produce such “dishonorable men” - so I guess that’s an F in Corps. The Colonel did say that after viewing the posts he saw, that a report would be added to some kind of file (I think the term he used was a sort of Natl Security file?) and he sincerely doubted if the Major (Sullivan) would ever be able to hold a clearance (Natl Security?) again?
Oh and Sully, you pathetic child, you may see an FBI agent?, but they were more interested in the words coming out of your mouth, especially given the credentials that you state (and I have no reason to doubt them), though they did agree that a reasonable person could think that your threat towards Mr Woods went to the point that it “may” have crossed the line. So I guess you will just have to sit around and wait - I just passed on your various posts, especially of last evening, and they were non-committal on further action, but if I read what the man was saying, it is certainly in a file somewhere now. Oh, and if its any consolation to you, they too were not impressed that someone with your background, would have such a vile mouth.
And I see that your post of today to slinkiecat says that your momma did not put a bar of lye in your mouth overnight - and coming from a man who is a Major (Ret), USMC Reserve, and from googling you, perhaps a military history man that I would have wanted to read before I found out what kind of man you “really” are.
I will give you this - you are correct - I was taught a long long time ago that yes the State Militias (now Natl Guard) had as their forerunners the minutemen of Lexington and Concord, but I was also taught that from these minutemen, specifically from minutemen of the regiment of Colonel John Glover’s Massachusetts Militia came the forerunners of the Corps (Glover’s men were Marbleheaders and fishermen and sailors). It was Marbleheaders that ferried the retreating Continental Army away from New York City, and it was Marbleheaders that manned the boats that ferried the Army across the Delaware. So I guess we are both kind of right?
Dear Mr. Hansen, I sincerely don’t want to waste the time of FBI agents. They have too many more important tasks than to show up at my door only to find me not at home. Please send me the information I requested about the time of their arrival. I don’t want to think that the threats you made about contacting the Feds about my supposed felonies is nothing but an example of blowhard bluster and deep mental confusion. I already have a very low opinion of your intellect and reasoning ability. But by blogging on the matter, you have exposed your attitudes to many others. Surely you don’t want them to hold you in deep contempt, too. Or, on some deep level because of inner guilt and shame do you want to be humiliated? Have you considered prayer?
Voxoreason - I agree!
Brian - You ignorant slut!
This guy just keeps discrediting himself. Call the FBI yourself, felon. I called them and explained the situation, and emailed them your posts, and then talked again to the same agent. I truthfully do not know whether they will call you or visit you, or what - as I said in my last post - and they did say as I stated in that post.
I think I have figured it out though. The Ha Ha House in which you reside just got computers and they let all those that do not eat their checkers and chessmen, play on them every evening, and they (being a government agency) have not figured out yet that they have to supervise you. Maybe if you will let me know which Ha Ha Haven that is yours, I can help you and they can get you one of those wind-up Fisher Price Computers - I hear they got one that sings a song and then a little guy jumps up when the music stops and scares the dickens out of you - please make sure you are wearing diapers before you try that at home or have a whole lot of Toilet Paper available to clean up the mess!
“But the 40-page report, advertised and sold to the media as a refutation of Corsi’s “lies,” doesn’t identify Davis as a hard-core communist and it dishonestly edits an article about Davis to eliminate references to his admitted involvement in CPUSA activities and make the black revolutionary writer and “poet” look like a civil rights activist.”
What article about Davis was dishonestly edited?
Gosh, Kincaid! If you are going to include:
“According to the editor of Davis’s books, John Edgar Tidwell, Davis was not only a secret CPUSA member but tried to recruit a prominent poet to the CPUSA. It’s not known if he tried to recruit Obama because the major media refuse to question Obama about his relationship with Davis, and Davis died in 1987.”
Why don’t you also include Tidwell’s statement:
“Although my research indicates that Davis joined the CPUSA as a “closet member” during World War II, there is no evidence that he was a Stalinist, or even a Party member before WWII. Further, to those attempting to make the specious stand for the concrete, there is no evidence that he instructed Barack Obama in communist ideology.”
Isn’t this a “key piece” of information? Why is it “carefully omitted” from your reports? Instead, your reports only use quotes that make it appear as though Davis was an extremist of some sort. Is this “fairness, balance and accuracy in news reporting,” or are you still stacking the evidence? That’s a rhetorical question, because I see you are still emulating D.A. Nifong, from the Duke lacrosse case, by ignoring exculpatory evidence in your disinformation campaign.
But at least you corrected yourself (for the second time) by stating that Davis told Obama blacks have a “reason,” not a “right” to hate whites. Hopefully, you will not return to repeating that canard once again.
Dear Mr. Hansen, Among your many delusions and illusions is your notion that you know what is American and un-American, that you are in a position to state who is a traitor and who is a patriot, that you understand the foundations of the American system and the threats thereto, that you undedrstand the law and the system under which security clearnces are granted or revoked. But your words indicate just the opposite.
I will review your latest examples of such ignorance and confusion. Do you think that a Marine colonel has any right, ability or authority to report on me, to enter a notation in a file on me, to influence my security clearances? What ignorance! I’m a civilian now, collecting a disabilty pension. The military has absolutely no jurisdiction over me, certainly not in regard to my exercise of freedom of speech. You seem to think we are living in a police state. (But we aren’t.) And if such a person told you that he did have such power, he was either lying or was trying to get rid of you. Even more to the point, it is highly unlikely that he would have a clearance higher than those I have, know what my clearances are, know why I have them and have any information on what I have used them for. Thus, even if he tried to get involved in such matters, he would never know the results or consequences. And, if he is interested in his own record and career, he would certainly not get involved in such dubious matters. (You think he used the term National Security file? You THINK he did? Didn’t you pay careful attention to what the fellow said?) And, what is a “National Security file.” Don’t you realize the guy was humoring you?
As for reporting me to the FBI, so what? As they tried to make clear to you, there is nothing to report over which they have any jurisdiction. They attempted to be nice to you. But you don’t understand what their use of “could” and “may” means, not do you appreciate what their non-committal response indicates. The FBI agent was obliged to listen to you. He was probably interested into looking into my background for reasons of which you have no idea. That’s understandable, again for reasons unknown to you whic I cannot reveal. Of course,since you did contact the FBI, now they have a file on you. Furthermore, under the Freedom of Information Act, I can get a copy of my FBI file (it goes back to 1964.) Anything in it that involves you will have your name blacked out but it would be obvious who made such statements, from the subject and the dates. It will be interesting to find out what you are recorded as stating in my regard. But you did answer my question. I don’t have to worry about any agent wasting the government’s money by arriving when I’m not home. None will call.
You are so mixed up that you have accused me of felonies for stating the truth as I see it, for being a traitor, that is, giving aid and comfort to the enemy in wartime. You don’t seem to realize that we are not in a formal state of war, hence no American can be accused of treason. And if we were at war now, with al Qaeda or the Taliban, you think that I have given aid or comfort to them? If I had the slightest respect for you, I might be offended. But I hold you in contempt, little worm. Instead, you amuse me in that regard, although I am not at liberty to explain why. As for calling me a felon, that really indicates your hopeless ignorance. One becomes a felon only after conviction by a jury for a serious crime and after the presiding judge affirms the verdict. Even that can be reversed on appeal. Surely you remember one of the pillars of our legal system: “Innocent until proved guilty”? I’m not guilty of anything involving the law. But you are obviously either a fool or someone who doesn’t understand the basic workings of our legal system.
Now in regard to other, lesser matters. Do youunderstand what “vile” means? Apparently not. Why did you put “really” in quotation marks? Was that an attempt at emphasis? If so, then you don’t know how to write proper English. (Please consult a dictionary and a grammer and useage handbook. Your ignorant comments on American military history - the Marblehaed boys had nothing to do with the Marine Corps, whatever nonsense is implanted in your feeble mind - no longer concern me. I am interested in what you can’t inform me about in that regard: where did you pick up such nonsense? As for your use of the term “Senior Service”: that refers only to the Royal Navy, certainly not to your former service.
As for your later comments about my mental health, my intellectual abilities, my computer skills and my toilet training, I can only deduce that you are of mediocre intelligence, poor education attainments and have a feces obsession. I would have ignored those deficiencies save for this: I find it interesting to discover how your mind works. Your mental pathologies help me to understand how someone develops the political orientation you display. Your concern with defecation can best be explained by someone far more knowledgeable about psychiatirc problems than I am. I will note, however, that it has been a long time since I have heard an adult make such comments. They same holds true in regard to your statements about children’s toys and mental institutions. I’m no expert in what such weird attempts at humor mixed with efforts at insult reveal. But you aren’t really a mature, responsible adult, are you? Finally, I have several friends who write novels and short stories. I’m going to pass them your blogs. It may be that you will be immortalized in fiction. But, if so, I don’t think you will like the way you would be portrayed.
It does not take a rocket scientist to determine Sullivan that you are absolutely insane. Wow, that America allows you out in public shows how far down the slope we have slipped. The FBI and that Marine Colonel will love your latest rant.
Dear Mr. Woods, I never responded to your confused references to Thomas Hobbes and Thomas Jefferson. Now I will. What, exactly, Leviathan has to do with American liberalism, I don’t comprehend.Certainly, the book is of huge importance in the history of political theory and one of the foundations of modern conservative thought. But it is based on two erroneous notions. Hobbes can be excused for not knowing what archaeology, paleontology and anthropology have reveald about prehistoric, pre-civilized man. But his statement about their lives having been nasty, brutish and short is simply incorrect. Those attributes can be assigned to some of our forebears but hardly all, or even most. Research has revealed a richness, complexity, sociability of culture for many of our ancestors. Just the very recent discoveries about life in the pre-desert Sahara region reveal that. More important, as others have pointed out, is a man worse off being at the mercy of ten thousand others or of one man with the power of ten thousand? Is anarchy worse than living under a Stalin or a Hitler? I suppose the answer varies according to our individual ablities to defend ourselves. But it also explains why this country has liberal institutions and why the Alien and Sedition Acts, chattel slavery, the Palmer raids, the incarceration of Japanese-Americans in 1942 and McCarthyism are now considered stains on our history.
As for Thomas Jefferson disapproving of contemporary American society, he very will might. But while Jefferson was a great thinker and illustrious president, he was a very flawed human being. Had his vision of a largely agrarian American been fulfilled, likely the Union would have failed beyond redemption in the 1860s and, thereafter, the two American republics would likely have been at the mercy of the European powers. Worse, Jefferson’s wealth and privileges were based on his slaves, that hardly gives him much moral authority. But worst of all, his relations with Sally Hemmings began as statutory rape and continued under compulsion. After all, he never freed her during his lifetime. That seems to indicate she would have used her freedom to leave him. In those regards, he seems to have been less than a hero.
As for your argument that liberalism has degenerated into licentiousness, I think that only indicates your moral blindness. You seem to feel nostalgia for another time. But a time of what: back street abortions, racial discrimination, Jim Crow, anti-Semitism and nati-Catholicism, lower levels of public education and health, sexual hypocrisy, maybe even Prohibition? No thanks! You cannot legislate morality. If you try, your produce such monstrosities as the rise of the Mafia in the illegal liquor trade. Furthermore, licentiousness in the eyes of one person is freedom for another. And whose idea of morality would be imposed? I remember the Eisenhower era quite clearly. I do not want to go back to that time of narrow mindedness and discrimination. I wish all Americans to be free, even free to sin. That, after all, is what free will means, the road one chooses to salvation or damnation. Consider the message of Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange. Separation of legality and morality is one the the pillars of American greatness. In that regard, Jefferson was a giant in his time. Today, however,he would be serving life without parole for child abuse, unlawful imprisonment and God only knows what other offenses to human dignity and human rights in regard to his hundreds of slaves.
You appear to be afraid of the future. You seem to want to stop it or reverse it. You can’t. A new and better era in American history will begin in January. And you will afterwards be ashamed, if you have a free conscince and a mind not clouded by sin, of your paranoid fantasies about Obama.
Dear Mr. Hansen, Do you understand the meaning of the word “insane,” that is, psychotic? Please explain in what ways I am deprived of reason.
As for you, would that God the gift would give you to see yourself as others see you. Consider your pitiful satement: “that Marine colonel and the FBI will love your latest rant.” Are you trying to frighten me? With what? Do you think that sending reports on me to anyone has any significance? What, exactly? Do you think I should be oppressed by what you see as authority figures? Why should I care what they or you might think of me? I am free in a way that you seem unable to grasp and which appears to fill you with envious hostility. Your babbling raises certain questions in my mind, not very complimentary to you. Do you believe you have any power over me? Do you think that your ignorant ideas have any influence or significance? These puerile notions only indicate totalitarian thinking on your part. (You do understand what “totalitarian” means, don’t you?) You just don’t seem very bright, nor knowledgeable about how your country operates on any level. I fear that you live in darkness in a spiritual sense, that you entire life reflects the dark night of your soul.
It is clear that my ideas intimidate you. After all, you are a conformist, a follower. You have never had any original ideas, I suspect. Well, to an extent that causes me some pity for you. Not much, I must admit because of your childish vulgarity and dimwitted obnoxiousness. You seem unable to tolerate ideas that you don’t understand. Clearly, you can only respond to concepts or even facts with which you disagree by accusing those who hold them of felony, treason, psychosis or some sinister plot. That, by the way, is not a healthy mentally. But I’m not responsible for your sense of alienation from contemporary American society. You are, at least to an extent. But in a larger sense, you are a victim of forces you don’t understand nor over which you have any control. To put it in the words of another time: “Little man, what now?”
I don’t know much about you. I’m not interested very much, to tell the truth. You are boring and have long since begun to repeat the same nonsensical opinions. That leaves me to surmise the following: You are not very happy. You probably have a job that is not very satisfying. Perhaps you don’t make as much money as you want or find your employment tedious. You seem to have a rather limited intelligence, as I have mentioned. You surely did not get a good formal education. I doubt that you have seen much of the world since your navy days. And what advantage did you take of your port calls? I suspect little but fornication and drunkeness. (Be honest now, at least with yourself.) You can’t understand complex ideas. So, in a time of increasing complexity, you are confused, bewildered, frightened. Yet on a certain level, you entertain fantasies about yourself. Maybe you think - at least on a superficial level - that you have been deprived of the recognition or success you really deserve. Perhaps you are proud of what you blog, not realizing how it only reveals the sadness and even despair in the center of your soul. There are consolations available to you but I imagine you reject them out of laziness or fear of the challenges they present. Have you any appreciation for great literature, music, serious history, philosophy, art or architecture? They can offer even someone like you a degree of comfort. But you would have to overcome your intellectual sloth and terror of the new and unexpected to do so.
Most important and significant, you fear death. Of course, we all do. And as we grow older, the sense of dread grows. Some fear physical annihilation as oblivion, some as the preface to standing before divine judgement. some as leading to eternal torment. But you, I suspect, have a special temporal dread: that, as you lay dying, you will be faced with the meaninglessness, emptiness, wastefulness and insignificance of your earthly life. That, too late to do anything about it, you will realize you have squandered your time as a man. That is a terrible feeling to confront. “Timor et tremor usque ad mortem.”
But it’s not too late. True, death comes like a thief in the night, we know not the time nor the hour. But you likely have some or more years left of mortal existence, maybe even decades. It’s not too late. You can save yourself. YOU can save yourself. But, for the love of God, take a stand FOR something, not against all the trends that so terrify you. Otherwise you will be “A dio spiacente ed ai nemici suoi.” Adieu.
Brian R. Sullivan, for my edification, are you of the belief that only Roman Catholics are truly Christian and that other denominations are heretics in danger or mortal peril, i.e., eternal death? This serious question is in response to your post #18 to Ms. Elaine.
Bob
Brian R: By the way, in what way did I express ignorance? Do tell. As for “slut,” have you any idea what the word means? Apparently not. Again, you display your ignorance.
Ignorance is a relative thing. One of the classic moments of the early Saturday Night Live shows involved a Point/Counterpoint segment in which Dan Ackroyd and Jane Curtain “debated.” In one famous sketch, Dan retorted, “Jane, you ignorant slut.” That was the reference that you obviously missed.
If you would like, you can knock off a few hundred words that may or may not mean anything to anyone.
Dear Mr. Ms. or Mrs voxoreason, I find it difficult to follow your reasoning. Perhaps you might adopt a new pseudonym like “voxindeserto” or “voxaroundtheclox.” One reason I find your statements confused and confusing is this previous statement by you: “You are too ignorant to address me, so please refrain from doing so. I don’t suffer fools gladly.” But now you ARE asking me to address you. What do you want, what you stated before or what you are asking now? Furthermore, if you don’t suffer fools gladly, how do you abide yourself?
To answer your questions: Like almost anyone else who lived in New York City and was under the age of thirty when SNL began, I certainly remember the Ackroyd/Curtin exchanges. But if you had paid attention to my previous blog to you, you would have noticed that I saved you the trouble of consulting a dictionary. Ackroyd addressed Curtin as he did because he was speaking to a female. “Slut” can’t refer to a male, unless who does so is inventing new meanings for words. Are you familar with the term “slut’s wool”? It refers to the balls of dust that gather under furniture, that bear a certain resemblance to sheeps’ wool. Since housecleaning was long considered woman’s work, the phrase suggested that such dirt indicated that a housekeeper or maid was a slut for letting such accumulate. That is one example out of many indicating not only your ignorance but your mental laziness. You can discover the meaning of words in a dictionary. But you don’t seem to use one.
Other examples: Your misquote of the Brooks’ poem. It is extremely pithy. The poet compressed her meaning into a very few words. Almost every one has multiple meanings. Perhaps her major point is that those who despise education, those who think that it is “cool” to drop out of school in the African-American community run a very high risk of winding up dead at an early age. (The grammar in “We be cool” is obviously that of uneducated African-Americans.) But for some strange and probably revealing reason, you misquoted by stating “We shoot pool.” Do you think Brooks was warning about the dangers of hanging out in pool halls? That’s hilarious! Also, you left out “Now be June.” Brooks was evoking an image of young men dying in the late spring or summer of the year but also in the spring or summer of their lives. In other words, you don’t seem to have understood what she meant, even though a confused memory of her powerful words remained in your mind. This probably indicates you don’t know how to penetrate into the several meanings of great poetry. As further indication of that, you state that you were unaware at the time you (tried) to teach that poem of the “communist connection.” What does the politics of a person have to do with poetic genius? Should we not read Ezra Pound because he was a Fascist? How about Vladimir Mayakovsky or Isaac Babel? Their poetry is off limits because they were Communists? What ignorance to shut your mind off like that. Finally, you stated that you took Brools’ poems at “face value.” To read a great poem and only appreciate it on the most superficial level (“face value”) is truly a sign of base ignorance. Great poems have many layers of meaning. That’s what makes them great and provides one reason literary critics continue to study poems that may be hundreds (eg. Shakespeare, Milton, etc.) or even thousands of years old (Homer, Hesiod, etc.). Such works offer insight and wisdom that can’t ever be fully plumbed. Furthermore, they often make allusions to other great poems or to events at the time they were written. To appreciate that, you need to have a wide knowledge of literature, history, languages and so forth. That’s not to argue that only learned people should read poetry. But it does indicate that you probably have a hard time understanding the full, rich complexity of great literature. In this regard, I’ll leave you with an example. Shakespeare’s Sonnet 73 begins: “That time of year thou mayst in me behold // When yellow leaves or none or few, do hang // Upon those boughs which shake against the cold // Bare ruins where late the sweet birds sang.” To what recent historical event does the poet refer? What does he mean by “sweet birds”? (Hint: he does not mean little feathered animals.) You can begin to educate yourself in these regards by reading some of the classic works of poetic criticism and by immersing yourself in the great poems. But that takes hard work and great intellectual vigor. You don’t seem to have done that. Thus, your ignorance has left your life poorer and shallower than it has to have been. There’s still time, however.
As far as some other examples of your ignorance: Use of “Saddlebrook” when you meant “Saddleback.” That’s especially noteworthy because you didn’t have to go any further than this blog collection to discover the right word. You used “sympathize” instead of “empathize.” You misused “ironically.”
But your comments on Africans and African-Americans really underline your ignorance. Obviously, you have never been to West Africa. The relationship between people living there and African-American visitors is far, far more complicated than what that fellow told you. For example, consider the history of Liberia and Sierra Leone. (If you don’t know about that, you could try reading some histories of those countries.) In addition, the situation is even more complex because of a third group: Afro-Caribbean people. Their cultural attitudes, the ties they enjoy with both W. Africa and N. America, make the question of who considers whom “really black” or authentically African far more nuanced and internally contradictory than you appear to imagine. If you had spent sometime in one of the large W. African cities, like Dakar, Abijan or Lagos - as I have - you might understand this to some extent. In those giant cities you encounter these three streams of the African diaspora (including many rural people from those countries who have flooded into those places in search of work) and can observe their interaction and range of attitudes toward each other.I realize that was probably and remains financially impossible for you. But you don’t even seem to have done any serious reading on the matter, instead relying on someone else’s error-filled oversimplifactions. Wha tdoes that indicate? In a word, ignorance.
Yu wrote: “It would seem blacks revere King…but aren’t entirely sure why.” To put it in the vernacular: “Are you nuts?” Have you discussed this idea with enough African-Americans to gain a sense of what that ethnic group’s attitudes about King are? It seems not. Instead, you made a blatantly ignorant and condescending comment that stuns me.
You end by stating “Who are we to judge?” That’s really funny in a dark manner. All your blogs are judgemental from start to finish. Phyisicn, heal thyself.
I could offer you much more explanation of why you seem so poorly educated and living in a mental fog. But this must suffice.
Dear Mr. Benitez, Your ignorant anti-Catholic opinions and attitudes amaze me. You live in a country with tens of millions of Catholics, yet you have little or know understanding of their beliefs. Have you ever considered looking at the latest American catechism? It might - just might -teach you something.
But to answer your stupendously uninformed question. 1) Why not read a book about the decisions and conclusions of the Second Vatican Council? 2) According to Church teaching, a Christian is one who has been baptized. In a more general sense, however, Catholics consider all those who believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God and the divine savior of the human race to be Christian. Heretics (Protestants) and Schismatics (Orthodox Christians unaffilated with Rome) are certainly Christians. But the Church teaches that those who are cut off from the sacraments and from the teachings and guidance of the Church to face greater obstacles to salvation than Catholics. Furthermore, as John XXIII, John Paul II and Benedict XVI have written and expounded, non-Christians are also able to enter the Divine Presence - again, with greater difficulty. As for me, I fully accept the teachings of my church in these matters. I must state, however, that you could have easily instructed yourself in these matters. There have been numerous newspaper articles about these questions over the past few years, in reprting about statments issued from the Vatican. I don’t think that you have been living like a hermit for the past several decades. So why haven’t you educated yourself in these matters? I’m not a catechist, after all - although you are asking me to act like one.
Brian R: I find it difficult to follow your
reasoning.
Then don’t. Waste somebody else’s time with your nonsense. I would say you probably have better things to do, but you obviously don’t.
I gotta go see a man about a dog.
Mr. Sullivan your verbosity is tedious and meaningless. Write a book if you are so inclined. These blogs are for those who are interesting and have something to say on the topic. Usually brief and to the point. You sir, are boring and obnoxious. Have a great day…....somewhere else
To Jack H Hansen from post on 8/18/08 @ 2:33. You do not have to give your address (or any other information) to anyone in this forum. Only people who have been charged with a “criminal offense” have a right to confront their accusers. This right is found in the 6th Amendment.
So, don’t let anyone try to bully you into giving them something that they are not entitled to have.
”... All your blogs are judgemental from start to finish. Phyisicn [sic], heal thyself. ...” -BR Sullivan
Your blogs are somewhat interesting sir when you’re taking pride in your apparently extensive reading, but are less so when you delve into psychoanalysis. I’d say (my opinion, mind you) is your above-quoted phrase is classic projection.
While I find some of your non-psychoanalytic conclusions interesting I still have difficulty understanding how Obama “trips your trigger” so to speak. Listening to his speeches and looking at the economic “plans” his crew have put together for him, his considerable “Present” (non)voting on issues, his apparent inability to carry a coherent thought without a teleprompter, etc. I judge the guy to be a lightweight and unsuitable from either an experience or a philosophical perspective to be Commander in Chief and Chief Executive.
Philosophically he’s a collectivist and statist it seems. On the political compass he would be well into the upper left quadrant (socialist authoritarian). To me he is antagonistic to Capitalism. Capitalism creates wealth; collectivism destroys wealth. How can that be a good thing?
Thanks Shirlyn - and I do know that, and would never give out my address. My post was to warn others about Brian R Sullivan. This vile man, as you can see from every single time he gets online, has single handedly cowed, intimidated and threathened many commenters on the AIM site. And last night he was of course at it again, as he was the night before.
I have tried to do and say anything I could to get this sleazebag to go away like a bad smell and have not been successful - and of course brought vile langauge from Sullivan upon myself for my efforts. My post was in the hopes that others, and especially new posters, would not have to go through what some have when Sullivan rants.
He was very successful last night, as it was down to Mark, the son of Frank Davis, myself and Sullivan - every single other commenter left the site after being berated by Sullivan. And I finally left when it bacame apparent that this man is either absolutely insane or a plant by Obama, and just will not willingly leave where he is not wanted.
Perhaps he is an Obama plant, especially when we see that he has been so successful in driving off posters - he was able to close this site down last night. And as Cliff Kincaid has stated, the Obamaites are working overtime trying to stop the free discourse of information that is negative to Obama. It takes just one vile person like Sullivan at each Conservative site and they obviously reek havoc to free discussion.
I have been in contact with Cliff Kincaid, and he passed it on to the Chairman of AIM, in the hopes we can get this sleaze to take his toys and go away. Free Speech is one thing, but this man goes way way beyond what is reasonable. I know if I went on the hate site, Daily KOS, and just respectfully discussion my thoughts, I would be driven away, banned, my Conservative ideas would be labelled hate speech, and the vulgarity from those at the site would probably make me think Sullivan is a choir boy. So it is only reasonable that Sullivan needs to go from this site as he does not understand the word respectful and almost all he utters is vile bile towards all that disagree with him - and everybody on this site is disagreeable to him.
If AIM wants people to comment on articles on this site, then they will recognize that this man is running most people off and is not conducive to free discussion. I have no problem with anti opinions to Cliff’s articles, and that is what free discussion is all about, but this man believes he is on a mission to shut up all those he opposes and he certainly does it in the most vile manner.
I know I probably speak for many when I say that I would like to be able to state my opinion and comment on the AIM articles and not be spoken to in return for that like I am some ignorant idiot. This man has an advanced edition of the Thesaurus - as I do believe he knows every single word for ignorant and idiot in the English language - even the slang words that are not necessarily in any dictionary or Thesaurus. The recipients of his bile and vulgarities almost all have to feel intimidated, cowed, and he is not above actually threatening - as if I was Mr Woods, a poster on this site, I would have felt threatened after his comments of a few days ago - as I do believe he wanted to confront Mr Woods in person and I sure felt he wanted to do bodily harm.
If AIM wants to keep comments as a function of their site, they need to address this, as I am tired of Sullivan, as I am sure many others are, and it would be far easier to just unsubscribe than have to put up with this. ON ANY monitored site, this man would have been banned days ago and his rants would be deleted - and HE knows this. This being an unmonitored site, he knows he is pushing it far beyond what is reasonable.
Jack, I found Mark’s stuff tiresome, but learned to ignore it. Sullivan’s stuff can get tiresome also; you might try ignoring it.
Of course Mark’s stuff can be tiresome, but he is not nasty and mean, and therefore I have no problem with him.
And YES, the simple solution is to just ignor Sullivan, and the way many commenters on this site ignor him is to just leave the site, and THEN free discourse of opinions and comments STOP completely. I ignored him all Saturday, and all Sunday, until later in the evening when his vile sleaze finally went in my mind to the point it went beyond reasonable - he threathened Mr Woods. And I realize that at that point it was none of my business, but as a regular commenter on this site, for the good of the site (in my thinking), I made it my business, logged on and commenced on my mission to get this sleaze to just leave.
So Yes, Elaine, and Mr Galt, I can ignor him - it is easy - but then I lose my site to freely discuss - as last night, EVERYONE left after being berated by this man - I even finally left myself. It was then down to Mark and Sullivan - and guess what - they are the two that are most against the topics being discussed. So we can ignor them and let them win? They shut down a Conservative leaning discussion site.
What are we to do when they shut down all Conservative sites? We sure aren’t welcome on their sites - what we say and believe is called Hate speech!
And if you have noticed it, the topic we are here to discuss, is being ignored right now mostly - and why - because of the antics of the insane Brian R Sullivan.
Jack: I’m new here but you know it isn’t unusual for nut cases to be on every blog.
How about if we all ignore Sullivan and any other loonies and just keep to the subject ourselves so that those who may be inclined to leave may be inclined to stay.
It doesn’t take long to weed out the loons. Usually one or two posts and then you skip over anything they have posted.
Please don’t let him upset you. That is his goal and you don’t want him to win.
Sounds good to me Elaine, I tried it other ways, and that didn’t work, so I am with you. Though I do still worry that he will get others new like yourself to leave after being intimidated, and my hope is that we lose no posters because of him.
Mr. Sullivan, I asked you a straight forward honest question as to whether or not YOU believed that only Catholics were Christians, not what the 2nd Vatican Council or the Pope taught. By the way, I sincerely doubt you’ve even read the complete 2nd Vatican Council documents, if at any of it. But are you now claiming to be a Canon Law and 2nd Vatican Council expert? If so, I wonder, have you ever read the New Testament completely including Paul’s statements about salvation and what was the proof of a Christian?
As my father, uncle, and aunt were Catholics, I was quite aware of the current Catholic denomination’s teaching about other Christian denominations and even though I’m a Protestant I greatly respect the late Pope John Paul II and the current Pope. To me they’re strong Christian who are to be regarded as Archbishops. By the way, my aunt is a nun. So much for my anti-catholic animus, but I do understand your need to lie about others views. But what of your animus to those who even dare ask you to clarify a simple position? I’d ask you to apologize but I doubt that word is in the vocabulary or nature.
Like most political and religious demagogues you needed to resort to an an hominem attack. You’ve done that with all who’ve disagreed with you, resorting to name calling and veiled threats and have refused to answer simple questions. Furthermore, your responses remind me of dialectics. You might have a PhD, although I found no direct references to you on the internet, and you might have been a Marine Major, but in light of your pugnacious animus you’re neither an intellect nor a gentleman. However, you’re quite aliterate.
Dear Mr. Benitez, I can’t teach you to read. I wish you would learn, however. It would make your life a bit easier. But if you will read the sixth line up from the bottom in blog to which you refer, you will find the answer to your question about what I believe. Furthermore, you seem oblivious to what I have written about my acceptance of Church teaching. How more clear can I get?
As for the rest of your inane comments. What gives you the idea that I consider myself an expert on Church history? I have only read about it, discussed it with people more knowledgeable than I and remembered what I learned. What possibly led you to the conclusion that I claim to have read every document released by Vatican II? I have, however, read a good deal about it and I was living in Rome through the final portion of the conference during the pontificate of Paul VI. Since I became friendly with a number of American and Italian priests - and one bishop -in attednance, they told me a bit about what was going on behind closed doors. No secrets, of course, but the tenor of discussions. Your expressed animosity puzzles me. As far as I can figure out, since I know more than you do on the subject, that intimidates you. I can’t help that, only you can. The fact that you have Catholic family members tells me nothing about your personal attitudes regarding the Church. I can only judge from your words, which indicate both animus and ignorance in its regards. Why don’t you re-read your recent blogs? Look at the questions you posed to me. Then consider the attitudes they suggest. Beyond that, I can’t help you to think any more clearly. What I do suspect, however, is that you think you can somehow pose a question about the Church that would either embarrass me or serve to discredit the Church. Each time you fail, you get upset. Well who’s problem is that. How about trying to act like an adult?
As for reading the New Testament, I have read it through many times. It’s not very long, after all. Now I am probably really going to intimidate
you some more. Since I had to learn Attic Greek in high school (first Xenophon’s Anabasis, then the Odyssey), I figured I might as well continue in college. There, I took a course to learn the New Testament in Koine Greek, quite a bit simpler. Since then, when I have read portions - such as the Epistles - I have read them in the original. Now the difference between that and English translations is not so great. But the different Christain sects have commissione their own translations. Why? To support their own doctrine. Take the Lutherans for example. Given the huge importance of the Epistle to the Romans on Martin Luther, they offer somewhat differnent take on the words than translations used by the Catholics or by the Anglicans in the King James version. The result is that it is very difficult to conduct an objecive discussion of doctrinla points when people argue from different translations. It becomes even harder if I discuss my reading of the Greek original with someone of any faith who can’t read Greek.
I need to lie about other’s religious views? Why? How? More to the point, if you are a Christian
you feel comfortable about telling me I commit he sin of lying? How could you possibly know that? That comes pretty close to blasphemy in my book, that is a man claiming to know what only God can.
I can hardly apologize for writing the truth as I see it. In your case, you don’t seem to be able to comprehend a good deal of what I write. You often seem confused. You want me to apologize, I take it, because you aren’t very smart. Well, I could offer you my sympathy for your lack of intelligence. But you are still responsible for what you write and think.
Do you understand what “demogogue” means? I hardly think that applies to me. Please explain. As for not answering simple, direct questions, which? I have done my best. But you seem annoyed that I didn’t give you the responses you expected or wanted. Nonetheless, if you pose them again, i will either point out to you where I have already answered or will try again. But I fear I will still face tha problem of your inability to understand me.
As for ad hominem attacks, that’s hilarious. these blogs are filled with outrageous, ignorant, hopelessly confused ad hominem attacks on Obama, his wife and numerous other Democratic politicians. That is everyone’s right, of course. But I’m not doing that. I simply describe people and their opinions as I see them. Since so many are ignoramuses, I so call them that. Furthermore, I have, I must admit, another purpose. To those who display their ignorance, I point that out, including you. You find that offensive? well, educate yourself. If you can’t, then why not give up expressing so many stupidities?
If you can’t find references to me on the internet, it would likely be that you don’t know how to do so. Get on Google and type in “Brian R. Sullivan.” (Remember to use the quotation marks.)
Finally, I don’t understand what you mean by “you’re neither an intellect nor a gentleman” Do you mean “intellectual”? As for gentleman, in the strictest sense of the word, no American can be one. The Constitution forbids American citizens from having titles. If you mean that I’m not polite, you are right. I have no interest in being being polite to people whom I find despicable and deliberately blind to the facts. On a blog where most writers make nonsensical attacks on people they have never met, charge them with offenses which are the false accusations of liars and moral degenerates, have hoplessly ignorant opinions abut matters they don’t understand, accept the fairy tales produced by right-wing con artists and refuse to educate themselves, how else can I react. I call ‘em as I see ‘em. Except that in my case, I know whereof I blog.
Finally I don’t make threats veiled or otherwise. What I have said is if you make false acusations about me or call me dishonorable, then have the courage to say it to my face. Given what I have revealed about myself, it should be easy to find me. If you can’t afford to come, let me know where to find you. You find that a threat? If so, you are unable to think clearly.
Finally, what does the word “aliterate” mean?
Hey you all - instead of yelling at EACH OTHER -how about a laugh instead. Read this and react to MEXICO - and other countries who expect us to do their job: Enjoy!!
MEXICO IS MAD AT ARIZONA
—- Mexico is angry at the influx of Mexicans into Mexico!
The worm has turned. Wait till Arizona ships a bunch more back
home…the yelling will be deafening.
The Mexican State of Sonora is angry at the Influx of Mexicans into Mexico. Can you believe this? Can you believe the nerve of these people?
Nine state legislators from the Mexican state of Sonora traveled to Tucson to complain about Arizona’s new employer crackdown on illegals from Mexico.
It seems many Mexican illegals are now returning to their hometowns and the officials in the Sonora state government are ticked! A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora was in Tucson on Tuesday to say the State of Arizona’s new employer sanctions law will have a devastating effect on the Mexican state.
At a news conference, the legislators said Sonora, Arizona’s southern neighbor, made up of mostly small towns—cannot handle the demand for housing, jobs, and schools it will face as illegal Mexican workers in Arizona return to their hometowns without jobs or money.
The law, which took effect January 1, punishes employers who knowingly hire individuals who don’t have valid legal documents to work in the United States. Penalties include suspension or loss of a business license.
The Mexican officials are ticked off because their own citizens are returning to their hometowns, placing an extensive burden on their state government.
Mexican State Representative Leticia Amparano-Gamez, who represents Nogales, has some nerve. She wants to tell the state of Arizona how the law will affect Mexican families on both sides of the border. “How can they pass a law like this?” asked Mexican Rep. Amparano- Gamez. “There is not one person living in Sonora who does not have a friend or relative working in Arizona,” she said in Spanish. “Mexico is not prepared for the tremendous problems it will face as more and more Mexicans who worked in Arizona to send home money, now are jobless and returning to hometowns in Sonora.” Then she added, “We, Sonora and Arizona, are one family, socially, and economically.”
Wrong. The United States is a sovereign nation and its states and its citizens are not responsible for the welfare of Mexico’s citizens. It’s time for the Mexican government to stop parasitically feeding off of the United States and start taking care of its own citizens. All our states should pass a law like Arizona.
Maybe that’s the answer since Congress will not do anything.
Dear Ms./Mrs./Ms. vox, I can fully understand that you have a difficult time following my reasoning. That appears to be because you can’t think logically or consistently. First you demanded that I cease to communicate with you, then you asked me to answer your questions. I responded to your latest request. I answered your questions about your displays of ignorance as completely as I could. In particular, I tried to explain how to read adn understand a poem in particular and poetry in general. But that created a problem for you, doesn’t it? You were faced with explanations you could not comprehend. But that’s not my problem, is it? Perhaps you might try to communicate with your new dog. there are some good books that explain how to do that.
Dear Ms. O, Did you inspire “The Story of O”? If you did, could you describe your experiences in more detail? If you find me tedious, it might be because you don’t have the slightest idea what I write about. In case it hasn’t occured to you, I feel an obligation to point out that you and others are incapable of understanding and judging the issues confronting us at the moment. I find your blogs reminiscent of old John Birch Society publications. You know, don’t you, where the Birchites accused Pres. Eisenhower of being a Communist agent? Now it’s the same old conspiracy nonsense put in new bottles. True, that helps the ignorant to explain things going on that they can’t understand. But it certainly doesn’t provide any solutions, does it? This free speech business can be annoying, can’t it. How about circulating a petition to abolish the First Amendment?
Sullivan, Brian R. A Thirst for Glory : Mussolini, the Italian Military and the Fascist Regime, 1922-1936. Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1984.
No doubt Mr. Sullivan, this Author is the person that has caused such a ruckus in this forum. Mr. Sullivan, I appreciate your intelligence and definetely demur to your superior knowledge in all things political and warlike. But, your agenda is not mine, nor is it most of the others writing their thoughts on these subjects. They have the right to do so in peace without your untoward and bombastically rude and abrasive rubukes of their intelligence. I have known truly brilliant people in my life. Those wonderful people that I am proud to call my friends would never use their superior knowledge to blast other people in a public forum for their views. They have far too much class for such crass behavior. I respect your accomplishments, and I am sorry for your poisonous character. You must be a very unhappy man to have to strike out so rudely at others in order to feel good about yourself. Tis a pity.
Hi again Jack. When you first warned about Mr. Sullivan I didn’t even read ANY of his posts because I felt it was a waste of my time so I don’t know anything of what he has been saying - and I really don’t care what he has to say. I don’t pay attention to
August 18 at 1:01 am | #1 | Link
You know, it’s instances such as this that so frustrate American voters who want to be knowledgeable. If it is indeed no big deal to have been acquainted with Frank Marshall Davis, then say so and let it be known. Twelve months ago, I didn’t know anything about the guy. But now, I know he was a communist sympathizer and might have actually been a member of the CPUSA. With the current state of the democrat party, it matters not one whit if Obama was affiliated in some way with someone who might have been a member of the CPUSA as “recently” as 21 years ago, or longer ago. The democrat party is itself promoting communist policies! And I believe that liberals from both sides of the aisle would easily trade policy ideas with current CPUSA members just as little leaguers trade baseball cards.
In other words, we don’t need tenuous affiliations with possible members of the old CPUSA to see the light. We need only the truth of Obama’s intended policies to see that he is indeed a socialist. If his socialist policies , and socialism in general, are good things, then why hide?