Five Minute Hate: The Republican National Convention
by The Alienist (Member) - published: September 2, 2004
Word Count: 152 Word Bytes: 957 Viewed: 907 times
Category - Rants
© Copyright by The Alienist

(1 votes)

Rating	Rated by

10	lilia

You must login to vote

In an America where, as my friend has recently pointed out to me, Emmanuel Goldstein of George Orwell's '1984' is now renamed Osama bin Laden, we now have the Four Day Hate.

The speeches made at the RNC have been some of the most simplistic, inane and propagandic fluff I've ever been exposed to. I'm not sure which is worse: the trite and faschist things said by the Republifundanazis at this Convention or the dialogue from Star Wars II.

Also, this orgy of propaganda received national network coverage, unlike the Democratic National Convention, which had to rely on public television for the majority of its media coverage.

My belief that the vast majority of Republican believers is essentially unable to perceive or weigh multiple points of view with any objectivity and have no will, desire nor ethic to seek a variety of different sources of information is wholly confirmed.

I now vomit.

------
The Alienist
jhfurnish@yahoo.com

Related Items

My Mother's Power

Can People Really Be This Stupid?

What's with Fundamentalists?!?

Americans: The New Global Intellectual White Trash

The Most Wasted Commodity

My First Tour of Duty in Philadelphia

Raping the Kabbalah - They Can Market ANYthing!

America's Sins Belong to Us All

Thoughts on Pete Townshend

Anthem of Battle, Song of Love

More by The Alienist »

Comments

The following comments are for "Five Minute Hate: The Republican National Convention"
by The Alienist

How can you say that?
NOTHING is worse that the dialogue from Star Wars II!

( Posted by: malthis [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

I hate to tell you
I sympathize with you, Alienist, but I hate to tell you....you better get used to the idea of 4 more years of this hateful horrible administration. If Kerry doesn't get his shit together quickly, and trounce Bush in the debates, the President is a shoe-in for re-election.

( Posted by: Odysseus [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

I'm impressed with myself.
Not only do I spell better and write more correctly than one of my detractors, but I also express myself more intelligently and didn't need to resort to four-letter words.

As I may have pointed out before, my father's ancestors have lived in this land for thousands of years. I don't have to go anywhere and someone as neanderthal as yourself is in no position, especially intellectually, to tell me to shut the f up. Come back when you at least don't sound like an immature, uneducated fool.

You say that if Kerry wins, our freedoms will die. Why? Why is Kerry another Joseph Stalin? When Franklin D. Roosevelt was in office, and he was certainly a socialist, there was no slaughter of millions, and Kerry certainly seems humanitarian enough. Do you really have any idea what you're saying?

Do you have any idea what damage the Patriot Act has done and what damage it continues to do? Do you realize it's a creation of Bush and his colleagues? If you did, you'd realize that it's Bush who is rolling back freedoms. You need to bring some understanding of the issues to the table before you start saying things like this ... especially the way you say them.

Let me give you one word for something you lack: CREDIBILITY.

Furthermore Reagan made Government bigger than it's ever been. Big Government is at least as much of a Republican responsibility as it is a Democratic one, even though they bewail it publicly so often.

Why shouldn't people protest? If from their perspective the president needs to hear what they have to say, the Constitution avails them that right, although under Bush it is being decimated through police brutality and other astonishing legal practices that aren't coming up in most of the media. Why should Bush be isolated from the protests of the people? Why do Repulicans resent protest and dissent so much? Why so much deep resentment of disagreement?

What lies are people beginning to see through in regards to Kerry? There is mudslinging, but nothing has been proven against Kerry. Furthermore, Viet Cong veterans have stated that they saw Kerry participate in combat on the Deltas. And I have one point to make in this regard that should spell it all out:

Bush is known to have had his father pull strings in order to keep him out of Nam. This is proven fact, because he got into the Alabama Air National Guard over a massive waiting list. This is besides the attendance issue.

Kerry was THERE, in Nam, fighting the enemy in his swiftboat on the waters in the fighting zones and taking fire. Even if his decorations WERE bogus, which I do not believe they were - then again I wasn't there - he was THERE, he participated in COMBAT for certain (no one who was on a swift boat managed to avoid taking fire or returning it), and he was a hell of a lot more willing to go than Bush, since he didn't ask his daddy to keep him out of the Nam.

BUSH for certain pulled strings to stay out.
KERRY WENT INTO THE COMBAT ZONE and TRADED FIRE WITH THE ENEMY.

That gives Kerry vastly bigger balls in plain sight than Bush, who is really just another chickenhawk.

( Posted by: the alienist [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

Ah...
...Abby Normal's post was deleted. That's too bad, because it was an excellent depiction of the mentality of most Republicans.

I'm sorry everyone missed it.

( Posted by: The Alienist [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

I get so confused...
Alienist,

I deleted my last post because I thought it inarticulate, I was basically having a good old rant about how disgusted I am at basically seeing the British flag out in Iraq, really winds me up!!!

But I get confused when people talk about Vietnam, I come from a culture which says that the US should not have been there in the first place!!! Oh I don't know, it all gets confusing if you are born after the fact because history becomes so much more subjective. Can anyone help me on this?

To be honest I don't think from what I know there is a vast difference between Kerry and Bush, I would ere on caution as Kerry seems to ride on the back of disillusionment over Bush. (I know I can't spell). Is the difference more subtle than I can see?

I watched the lead up to the Republican Party Convention, I am always amused at the 'pop concert' feel to these occassions. Couldn't imagine old Thatcher having that at a Tory conference!!! :-)

Alienist, can I suggest you log onto www.timesonline.co.uk, it is the website for The Times over here in the UK. There are two articles which will interest you:

- First by Simon Jenkins called 'Mr. Putin should know that terrorism always feasts on its own suppression', it has alot of relevance to your personal feelings.
- Secondly the covering of The Replublican Convention.

Take a look.

Alex :-)
-

( Posted by: londongrey [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

differences
Kerry is different from Bush because he:

has demonstrated vastly more concern for the public well-being in his words and actions than Bush;

has lived at least somewhat more like the normal US citizen than Bush or his family;

has no ties to the ascent of Hitler to power, while Bush's grandfather was a financial supporter and business partner of Hitler;

participated in battle whereas Bush did not (I don't believe we should have been in Nam either but if this is an issue to people there it is);

has no connections with people and events that lend themselves credibly to the possibility of Republican conspiracy in planning or facilitating 9/11 and other events;

ad infinitum.

( Posted by: the alienist [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

Thanks
Thanks Namaste, I'll check that out immediately.

Jesccanm, it was a comment to my above article. Immediately after I responded to it Abby Normal (apparently) deleted it herself. I thought staff had deleted it because it was profane and needlessly inflamatory, which it was.

( Posted by: the alienist [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

Enourmous props
I like your rant. Why, you ask? Not just because I agree with much you say, but because you said it intelligently and articulatly. It's easy to just spew hate, it's quite another to state your position with calm reason, which is really the strongest asset one can have in political commentary or debate. The most important thing is that you made it interested and thought-provoking to read. For that, I thank you. Grazi.

( Posted by: Spider [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

actually...
I deleted the comment... as Alienist said it was unecessarily inflamatory and profane.. so I took care of it, as well as a few others I found by other users.. Sorry I didn't keep folks in the loop...

Bart

( Posted by: Bartleby [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

Five Minute Hate
Posting issues aside, I shall make my comments.

Propaganda is propaganda, not matter how uncirculated. The Democrats would fill our homes with just as much propaganda as Republicans. The Democratic party isn't necissarily better. There is a line between declaring your decision based on rational thinking, and just intelligent propaganda. I think your views, Alienist, border on both. Saying how Abby Normal's views were how "Republicans" think made it seem like you're just supporting the Democratic position by default. As if you had made your decision THEN thought up some good reasons. I am not assuming that you did, however, that's is just how it looks.

Regardless, you are right. There is alot of truth in what you say, and accompanied by very intelligent writing. This wasn't the hate-filled stupid rant I had expected. Very very good work expressing yourself. Three cheers from me.

Basically, I ditto Spider's comments.

As a last note: chickenhawk is a really cool word. Great choice of words!

( Posted by: xitwound117 [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

No
I'm sorry that you are so esaly offended. However, I am not sorry for my comment. I'll agree that I came off harsh. In fact I ment to, once I cooled down, to apologise for my harshness. But now, I'm not.

I do respect that you have oppinions of your own, but time and time again you will come in path of people that disagree, but that is no reason that you should prejudge their intelligence. You sounded like you were a quite eliquently spoken person. But you have proved that that thought was wrong. Even before I ever commented on anything you've done you were unkind to me, so don't expect me to have such a nice disposition twords you.

( Posted by: AbbyNormal [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

When?
When was I unkind before you commented on anything I've written?

I'm pretty sure I've never met you in realspace.

( Posted by: the alienist [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

Whoa sorry..
It was either my first or secound rant. You were rude. I don't know if you ment to come off that way. You commented on my spelling, that's not what angered me, it was the way you said it. Others were much nicer. I'm esaly angered. I'm working on that. By the way, I don't know if I submitted it, but I think I just submitted the same comment that you just replyed to.lol.I re-worded some things. I ended it nicely, just so you know, if it doesn't show up anyway.

I hope you don't think I think you're a terrible person. I don't that's just one little bump in any agreement we might have. I'm sure we'd get along better if you or I worte something about music(which I did, but that's not the point.) and the other commented on it. You seem to be a rock type of person, I am.lol. Music and films we might agree on.

Anyhoo, I did not mean to start off on the foot with you. I'm sure we have ideas that are the same. Just not politics.

With hope,
{AbbyNormal}
By the by, if this comes off a bit creepy, it's not ment to.lol.

( Posted by: AbbyNormal [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

examining the wreckage
My, oh my, it's that time again, isn't it? Can't we just get along? But seriously, I agree with you Alienist; Bush and his supporters seem to be especially sensitive to criticism or dissenting opinion. To go a bit further on a limb, I don't REALLY believe the electorate is so neatly divided, unless I happen to be in some sort of Democrat enclave or there are a lot of closet Republicans. You said it was well known that G.W. had his papa pull strings to keep him out of Vietnam. According to Ben Barnes, who was the guy that kept the sad sack stateside, he was not contacted by H.W. Busch. I know, I know; this is a semantic exercise, but that is the official story.
Keep up the good work, Alienist. Right or wrong, you are allowed to express yourself. This sort of vigorous and healthy debate can actually lead to something that approaches truth and compromise. Our founding fathers were certainly no strangers to dissent and disagreement. They were often sharply divided over big issues, like we are today. Somehow, it all works out.

( Posted by: brickhouse [Member] On: September 3, 2004 )

Moore
I know some things about Moore and was close to a situation where he proved he was an ass.

He's not a perfect Leftie by any means, and he doesn't always do a pristine job of presenting facts, but I'd be just as wary of books that claim to debunk him 100% as I would, whatever one's position, of his movies; the other side naturally wants to debunk him.

( Posted by: the alienist [Member] On: September 4, 2004 )

Alienist/Abby
As I ALMOST always do, I agree with much of your rant. For me, you hit the nail on the head when you said that (some)Republicans aren't open to other people's ideas and opinions(paraphrasing of course)! That seems to be the major difference in the Parties in my opinion. Abby, I'm not trying to be rude or unkind here, but your arguments about intelligence would be far more credible if you used spell check or perhaps a dictionary. This is truly constructive critism not a personal attack...sincerely Amy(arc)

( Posted by: arc [Member] On: September 4, 2004 )

5 min. Hate
Judging by the response, this is undoubtedly an effective rant. Heck, it's dripping with frustration and anger. My only criticism would be of the fourth paragraph, where I would say that insulting your reader, and I'm probably as guilty of this as anyone, is not the best way to get them to see your side of the issue. Then again, this is a rant and that's probably not your goal anyway.

As for Michael Moore, Jessica, he's a lot like Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Rielly, Novak, and Fox News in general. He's a propagandist...and I've never heard a single liberal site everything he says as fact. Moore, like the conservatives I mentioned, are entertainment and you shouldn't believe anything he says hook line and sinker anymore than you should those conservatives, let alone Anne Coultier and Laura Ingram...whew, they wouldn't even be allowed near a pen if they weren't supported by conservatives.

That said, most of the biggest criticisms I've heard of Fahrenheit 9/11 I feel are patently false and are bigger distortions then the ones they accuse him of making...but that's for another time and place.

Pythagoras

( Posted by: Pythagoras [Member] On: September 4, 2004 )

Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Login:
Password:

Staff Blogs: