tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7821450983903844905.post5290061753198992910..comments2014-08-27T15:31:25.014-05:00Comments on Overton Window: Chapter Thirty-OneDeekyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08148199460732217808noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7821450983903844905.post-21712158754573735292011-02-16T12:14:40.833-06:002011-02-16T12:14:40.833-06:00I am having such trouble keeping up with who the g...I am having such trouble keeping up with who the good guys and bad guys are here. They all seem to act the same.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7821450983903844905.post-53724252847445910262011-01-13T08:35:32.389-06:002011-01-13T08:35:32.389-06:00Beck once again accusses his opponents of what he ...Beck once again accusses his opponents of what he himself is doing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7821450983903844905.post-43617246668074512832011-01-13T00:51:52.063-06:002011-01-13T00:51:52.063-06:00"There have always been only four kinds of pe..."There have always been only four kinds of people in the world: the visionaries who choose the course, and we are the fewest; the greedy and corruptible—they're useful, because they'll do anything for a short-term gain; the revolutionaries, a handful of violent, backward thinkers whose only mission is to stand in the way of progress—we'll deal with them in short order; and then there are the masses, the lemmings who can scarcely muster the intelligence to blindly follow along."<br /><br />Sorry, Darthur/Glenn; but I would beg to differ with your definition of "revolutionaries". Mohandas K. Ghandi was a revolutionary. His belief that non-violent protest could force the British Empire (or at least what was left of it) to give up it's colonialist claim to the Indian sub-continent was revolutionary thinking at the end of a war where lesser men had reduced violence of a most horrific sort almost to a mundane tool. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a revolutionary. He took up Ghandi's mantle of non-violence and made a nation re-examine it's attitudes toward race and racially-motivated violence. And guess what? Non-violence actually worked in both cases! India today is an independant and semi-prosperous nation (true, it has it's problems -- i.e. the Kashmir border dispute, governmental corruption, etc.) that may hit Superpower status by the end of the decade. And, while there's still plenty of room for improvement, being African-American no longer means an almost automatic risk of lynching from birth, a near-absolute (with rare exceptions) guarantee of hitting a glass ceiling even before reaching middle-management in pretty much any job; and being almost automatically denied access to good schools, hospitals, employment, loans, and even some government services that came without question to most Whites. Revolutionary? You bet! "(V)iolent, backward thinkers whose only mission is to stand in the way of progress"? Only an idiot like you would think that, Beck.<br /><br />A closer term to what you're thinking of would be "Wingnut conservative". But then, I think that you know that...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7821450983903844905.post-90636807393312153102011-01-12T15:28:56.253-06:002011-01-12T15:28:56.253-06:00It's really hard to see where Beck stops and h...It's really hard to see where Beck stops and his villain starts. I'll try to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that all this is his villain's monologue.<br /><br />Which means Beck is a populist, and therefore rejects the idea that 'some men are more equal than others.' Which is cool, so far. He therefore also believes that the mandate to rule resides in the people and not in any external force. OK so far. He also would seem to be saying that no matter how much money you have, no matter how much power you have, you're still no better in the eyes of the republic than your janitor or your housemaid.<br /><br />Uh....<br /><br />Yeah, Beck... so tell us how well that's working out for the Koch brothers? <br /><br />Let's try again. If this is a country where everyone truly is equal, then a myriad (not 'all', but a 'lot') of ideas and beliefs are tolerated and accepted, without bigotry or prejudice.<br /><br />Hmm...<br /><br />Yeah, he doesn't exactly espouse THAT view. So I'm not buying him being a populist. D-, for effort.<br /><br />Hypocritical windbag.Minkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15436111538383318171noreply@blogger.com