Rachael Maddow Book - Drift - IT'S WORKING GUYS!! THEY ARE SLOWLY GETTING IT!

[FrankRep]

Well, if the anti-war left goes back to the Democratic party, it will be because Obama fulfilled his promise and stuck to his "timeline" for getting out of Iraq. Then he'll say "see? I kept my promise in Iraq, now I will keep my promise to get out of Afghanistan by 2014". Never mind that Obama did the whole Libya thing, and then he sent a couple hundred marines to Africa for some reason.

The anti-war left will stay left (Big Government).

 

[pahs1994]

didn't Maddow just get fired by current tv?

 

[cheapseats]

didn't Maddow just get fired by current tv?

Olbermann.

 

[cheapseats]

The anti-war left will stay left (Big Government).

Can you imagine a Hardright Republican voting DEMOCRAT?

 

[buck000]

I watched the interview on The Daily Show, and was generally getting a "hey, she's channeling Dr. Paul" vibe, until about 3:35 in the vid, where she says after explaining that the Constitution was subverted or citizens lied to because of national security, etc., issues, "We make all of these incremental changes to make it just less hassle, to get around the things we need to get around, to do what we know is right."

That last little phrase at the end gave me pause. It sounded like she agrees that there should be war, national security-based intrusion in our lives, etc. but "they" just need to be a little "better" about doing it.

I try to watch Maddow's show to get a different perspective. I think she's a good researcher (especially when it comes to exposing Republican BS), but her delivery is just so annoying, I can't take more than a few minutes. I can take Stewart's presentation of left-leaning perspectives, couched in comedy, much more than I can Maddow's; she's just not nearly as funny or as impressive as she thinks she is, imho.

She (and Stewart) are still convinced that only Government can solve Really Big Problems. Again, imho.

 

[HigherVision]

Anyone who reads this worthless pig's book is an enemy of liberty as far as I'm concerned.

Word

 

[Cowlesy]

MS-NBC should be renamed MS-Comedy Central, because they're jokes.

 

[pahs1994]

Olbermann.

same thing

 

[angelatc]

Well, if the anti-war left goes back to the Democratic party, it will be because Obama fulfilled his promise and stuck to his "timeline" for getting out of Iraq. Then he'll say "see? I kept my promise in Iraq, now I will keep my promise to get out of Afghanistan by 2014". Never mind that Obama did the whole Libya thing, and then he sent a couple hundred marines to Africa for some reason.

Ya think?

The anti-war movement doesn't actually even exist on a large scale. It never left the Democratic Party - it's a tool of the Democratic Party.

 

[kuckfeynes]

The democratic system works very well. Indoctrinate kids when they are young and naive. Tell them conservatives want them to fend for themselves and liberals want to share the wealth and give them free things and make everyone equal! Don't give them any background in economics or sociology to think this through for themselves. Accentuate Republican warmongering over mid-east oil of the last 2 decades, and just touch briefly on Vietnam and focus mostly on the social issues of the 60s. Voila, Democrats are the peace party. Rinse and repeat.

I could barely believe my ears a few months ago when one of my best buddies that I grew up with in this system, devoutly anti-war in 2003 like myself and our other indoctrinated friends, started JUSTIFYING drone warfare & private militarization as an acceptable alternative to US military boots on the ground. Once you have someone caught in the dichotomy of us vs. them in the battle of lesser evil, it's amazing how volatile deeply held beliefs can be with a little rhetorical manipulation.

 

[cheapseats]

Ya think?

The anti-war movement doesn't actually even exist on a large scale. It never left the Democratic Party - it's a tool of the Democratic Party.

What's the phrase, LIKE A RED-HEADED STEPCHILD?

Better yet...like CINDERELLA among the step-sisters. So ready, waiting TOO patiently, to be the belle of the ball.

In the TOOL analogy, this one has been carelessly left outdoors, growing rusted and dull.

OBAMA ESCALATED AFGHANISTAN. On that "alone", Ron Paul's camp should be able to sharpen, shine AND OWN such Anti War emotion/energy as gathers IN THE MIDDLE.

Fuhgeddabout winning over Maddow-caliber Liberals. Not gonna happen...in the SAME WAY that Hardright Republicans will not be brought 'round to voting Democrat.

 

[JasonM]

The democratic system works very well. Indoctrinate kids when they are young and naive. Tell them conservatives want them to fend for themselves and liberals want to share the wealth and give them free things and make everyone equal! Don't give them any background in economics or sociology to think this through for themselves. Accentuate Republican warmongering over mid-east oil of the last 2 decades, and just touch briefly on Vietnam and focus mostly on the social issues of the 60s. Voila, Democrats are the peace party. Rinse and repeat.

I could barely believe my ears a few months ago when one of my best buddies that I grew up with in this system, devoutly anti-war in 2003 like myself and our other indoctrinated friends, started JUSTIFYING drone warfare & private militarization as an acceptable alternative to US military boots on the ground. Once you have someone caught in the dichotomy of us vs. them in the battle of lesser evil, it's amazing how volatile deeply held beliefs can be with a little rhetorical manipulation.

Well if you had to choose between occupying yemen, oman, libya, and a few other places just for good measure and choosing to accomplish the same objective with drones, which would you choose?

Of course, both choices are two sides of the same coin, which of course means your friend is asking the wrong types of questions.

The first question is, does this even tangibly help us? Is this the only way to go after people who, presumably, are very very bad? Is it really worth spending millions of dollars just to kill a handful of militants? I mean we're dealing with people that consider themselves to be winning if the US had to spend hundreds of millions of dollars and incur the hate of the locals against the US just to kill them. I mean you think the fanatics on the "Religious Right" in the US is bad, they got nothing on the fanatics of the Muslim version of the religious right.

ON THE OTHER HAND!! The American people are allowing the creation of a super national security apparatus to fight these bozos, never realizing that this may one day be used on the American people themselves. No one supporting this thinks they'll ever be labeled a "terrorist" until they find themselves on a watch list they cannot get off of.

What is happening is that the American people are letting themselves be dragged into a nationalized witch hunt just like the era of McCarthyism. The national security freaks know that someone, maybe themselves, will be ruined for life if another epic attack like 9/11 occurs on their watch, so they do whatever they can to keep it from happening.

So they adopt policies and propose changes using logic that tries to eliminate ALL the risk from high risk people at the EXPENSE of people who pose little to no risk to national security. If accepted, that logic very quickly converts any representative form of government into a police state like Syria or Egypt.