David Frum is such an ***. He claims, in defense of Bush's anti FDR

[applegrove]

tirade, that we all are 'creating a new reality' by celebrating on May 9th. What a double dutch flip-spinner.

Now we have to go back and be taught real history by neocons who admire Hitler and want to tear down our heroes like FDR. Do they never tire of drinking their own piss?

Bush Cherry Picks the truth about the end of the war. Frum tells us we are remaking history when we see it as it has been written about for the last 60 years.

Perhaps I am just bitter to hear that we actually lost WWII. Perhaps I know that it is normal for people to stick their heads in the sand (like we did with neocons at first) when the fascists take over and get with the perpetual wars and the perpetual propaganda.

We stuck our heads in the Sand about Bush - because it was too awful to believe such a bunch of sociopaths had really gotten into power in the USA.

Europe stuck their heads in the sand when Hitler grew in power.

Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz stuck their heads in the sand when it came to Saddam Hussein getting into power.

Seems like the neocons learnt a lesson back in the early 1990s. Now they want us all to take ownership of the same mistake.. but they have to go back 60 years to find examples of it. Unless they want to use present day politics under Bush.. and I don't know why they wouldn't want to use themselves as an example of power fooling populations into appeasement and hoping for the best outcome from a bunch of assholes & efficiency experts. What a bunch of projecting little blowhards . It was their actual neocon policies that messed up the ME by favoring strongmen & elites and not seeing the danger in that.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/2005/05/blogs-memory.html

When do they ever take responsibility for anything?

[RobertSeattle]

1. ABAD

Always Blame A Democrat.

[Inland]

2. All well said. nt

[BillZBubb]

3. Pinhead Bush faults deal at Yalta,

bacause Roosevelt didn't want to go to war with the USSR over Eastern Europe. Yet the macho idiot has done exactly what to "free" North Korea?

It's pretty easy to talk big about starting a war against a formidible adversary like the Red Army of 1945 when you've just "accomplished" your mission against a powerhouse like Iraq, I guess.

The sheeple will lap up Bush's crap no doubt.

[bluestateguy]

4. The Framers of the Constution were worried about people like Frum

Busybody foreigners with undue influence over American foreign policy.

[applegrove]

5. Please - Frum gets his talking point from neocons above. He is one

of theirs. He is a neocon.

[bluestateguy]

6. True, but he is also a Canadian

and in fact continued to be employed as a speechwriter in the Bush White House for several months while NOT a US citizen. I have a problem with that.

[applegrove]

8. I would have more of a problem with the contents of his speeches.

We are all in North America. There is not much I can do about Rove's electoral advice and wedging advice to Harper and the like. Not much I can do when one of our think-tanks comes out with neocon agenda that wants to tribalize us as a people.

[applegrove]

10. "Busybody" is that the same thing as "fancypants"? n/t

[The_Casual_Observer]

7. frum is a babbling bullshit artist. claim to fame is a degree

from Harvard, and like lots of other Harvard grads who went to work writing shitty situation comedies, that pathetic asshole has helped write the one we all live in today.

[alfredo]

9. FDR signed the law that was used against Prescott Bush. Trading with

the enemy was made illegal, seriously cutting into the bush family fortunes. They couldn't make money from slave labor at Auschwitz anymore.

Killing the New Deal and sullying FDR's name is how the bush's are getting revenge.

[applegrove]

11. I could see why a rich little boy like bush would suffer under the family

saga. But, really, this has to do with stealing our totems. Rove sees us as machines like him who are burdened by ideas put into our heads by leaders like FDR. Silly little ideas like compassion and sharing great wealth so all can participate in the windfalls of markets.

What a bunch of fools they are. Like if they degrade FDR we are going to jump their bones (metaphorically) and decide to loose all of our inherent and evolutionary compassion and follow their hollow shell.

So sad, so sad, so sad.

[alfredo]

13. bush is all about power, greed, and revenge.

[applegrove]

14. The people who put him in power are about that. Bush is about acting

important and thinking that is the same thing as doing important things. Bush is the vessel.

[alfredo]

25. You are underestimating him.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. I'm slightly confused - I can see no reference to FDR in that blog

and the only mention of Bush is that he's in Moscow. It's an extended rant on how evil the Soviet Union was. I can't see "creating a new reality" or "remaking history" at all. Is there another Frum piece there that you meant to link to?

[applegrove]

16. He harps on the dates we celebrate VE day. And whines that we

happen to have chosen a date that coincides with the day the Soviets celebrated the end of the war. Then he tells us we make up history because we are needy or something. READ THE LAST SENTENCE. This is pretty interesting commentary and criticism of what people are thinking on a sol-em day of remembrance of the 60th anniversary of the war.

Please!

More commentary & criticism of the 60th anniversary rituals:

And all this on a day Bush bashed FDR (which is exactly what a narrow little bunch of sociopaths would do on a day which is to remember the victory over evil.. and how this must have affronted their sensibilities over in the political wing of the WH where they have been at FDR for months).

And Grover N. gets on the horn and announces that Ronald Reagan is the 'real greatest president' of the 20th Century.

Did any other closely knit group of politicos anywhere on the planet criticize the solem events? Anywhere? Perhaps in the Middle East? Maybe.

Are you saying that Frum does not have his own role to play in the whole propaganda machine? Just like Ann Coulter? Or Mrs. Bush at the dinner last week?

Am I not supposed to see the overall pattern? Like the majority of Americans and people in the world?

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. No, I still can't see anything about making up history there

I think we are reading the same article, but since you're worried about the last sentence, I'll post what I see there:

"Maybe this May 9, 2005, is a time to begin – not just a new blog – but a new work of memory."

Is that what you see? If it is - good. He's talking about a memorial (physical, or artistic) to people killed by the Soviet Union - as the preceding paragraph makes clear. He obviously hates the Soviet Union, and doesn't think much of Russia either - if that's what you don't like about the article, then that's fair enough, but you should have said that. He's annoyed that the biggest ceremony marking the end of the European fighting is on the Soviet day, not the Western Allies' day. But he makes no comment at all about what Bush said in any speech. He doesn't mention FDR. Why do you think that's what the article is about? If anything, there's an implied criticism of Bush for accepting the Russian's day, rather than insisting on the usual Western one.

[applegrove]

31. The 'new work of memory' is perhaps his job as a blogger re-doing

history and interpreting it for us.

Not as somber ceremony on the 60th anniversary..but as always with the neocons..a chance to score some points and find an enemy and besmirch and reason not to celebrate (why let us have a moment to be unafraid - to think of wars ending and times when leaders were men and fought just wars so we could live in peace). Do you see the connection now?

They just couldn't let any part of those ceremonies be. It all has to be put through their own paranoid neocon world view. And they fully admit in the literature.. that it is about replacing reality with their own dam myths.


So on a day when Americans should have felt a little pride in their grandparents or great-grandparents.. and stopped .. and thanked them, we have that replaced by the faults of the WWII allies. How they wished so much for peace they didn't look into the future far enough to see the 50 year cold war.

How dare our leaders of the past not "look into the future and see the gathering storm and evil lurking everywhere" - even though there was not enough proof of it at the time. How dare they not see evil. How dare they not up the anti to a new war. Why as soon as one war stops..another one must begin. The enemies are everywhere.. what a wimp FDR was for going home and assuming peace. Because it seemed obvious to everyone having defeated their enemies that peace would be the outcome.

What silly and naive assumptions we suffer from. And look at how not going to war right away ended up causing trouble.

FDR was a wimp. He wanted peace and social programs. Fool! The allies did not see. They were blind fools. Unlike the neocons who see evil and will attack it everywhere.. (oh except for the North Koreans or anyone else who has a bomb or is very strong).

Have these same neocons who were in power in the 1980s taken ownership of their own dam blindness when it came to Saddam Hussein? Don't you think that that would be timely. Are they not just a little silent on that there issue? Because they tried to use the guy and he just gassed the Kurds with the gas they gave him and tried to build a bomb with the nuclear material sent by the USA. Where is their great wisdom and insight into their own dam blindness? In the Middle East? That affects things now - today? And Saddam Hussein was 35 years after FDR and the West gave into Russia with their kindly eyes and rose colored vision.

What about that? Would it not be more appropriate to give themselves as the example of how dark the world really is ... rather than go after dead people and memes in people's hearts on the very anniversary of peace?

They are not killjoys. They are killpeaces.

And they work together in unison to try and spread the virus. So we will all be for perpetual war and everything will be hunky dory. And no poor will exist because they will all move away or fight in wars. And no prison population will exist because they will all fight in wars. And economically give the perpetual stock market a great big kick by using your incarcerated to keep the oil or the water flowing to the great big USA. War war war war war war war.

Down with FDR and wimps. Neocons are real men. And neocons compare themselves and covet the leaders that came before us.. because that is what real men do (instead of inspiring greatness in people). And neocons never take responsibility for our own dam mistakes ..that is for wimps and FDRs. And they don't lead people out of grief after traumas in the USA..they let them fester. Because the neocons are 'real men'. And they really see how the world is. And they go back over history and decide I wouldn't have done that, I would have been perfect (which is easy to do when you never take ownership of your own mistakes & hell-hole called the Middle East 'Kirkpatrick saying no democracy should happen in ME' and all the neocons following).

They are a pathetic bunch of Utopians. Who covet the greatness of others (if they are beloved leaders) and don't take ownership of their own very present and current historical mistakes. They want to teach us how to hate in order for their little bubble world to exist with perpetual wars and perpetual poverty and perpetual markets. And they will now allow us our greatest moments as human beings. Because they don't covet us. We are just a means to an end. And the sooner we get rid of all sentiment.. the better it will be for their ideals.. ideals without any human value of any kind. And that is the place they want to live. Us in fear with no knowledge of safer times. So they hop on over to Europe on 'the day' and tear 'the day' and its meaning apart.

Do you see - why I don't think any of us really need David Frum and his 'new work of memory' and his neocon cabal re-framing everything of importance.

I'm an adult. People you are not capable of taking responsibility for their own actions should not have any attention paid to them. Nor should they to teach us 'new history'. (come on guys.. one time..just admit that you fucked up HUGE in the Middle East in the 1980s..you stank...you ranked.. you had the wool pulled over your eyes...you were vain and xenophobic and you have aggravated the situation there ten-fold with American policy by putting off democracy there).

[bpilgrim]

15. i have no idea what he is talking bout... keeping up with the cartoon WV

can be very challenging when you know more of the story then they focus on.

they live in a cartoon world which has and will continue to have dangerous consequences for us and the world if it is not challenged.


http://images.globalfreepress.com

peace

[applegrove]

17. what does WV mean? n/t

[bpilgrim]

27. "World View"

D'oh, forgot to add that :hi:

peace

[PKG]

18. Neocons admire Hitler now?

Dear god, she's Godwined it before we've even started.
Seriously, do we have a link for any public neoconservative support of Hitler? And no, using his election "strategies" don't count. Hitler didn't invent the idea of demogoguery and fearmongering (look up Demosthenes). One could just as easy call Kerry a Nazi for using a fork and knife when he eats--just like Hitler did! So, ah, do we actually have a source for neocons actually supporting the Third Reich itself?

[applegrove]

19. Please don't ask me a question and then set the rules for how I

have to answer. Forget the public statements of support for Hitler by neocons (not a now thing.. part of their history actually - you know history? "We'll all be dead then"). The neocons will not even admit to being neocons..they will not even admit that they have a name.

Strauss studied Hitler and admired him and his propaganda. So did Karl Rove. They also studied other political 'efficiency experts'.

Look up their histories. And leave the emotive narrative on my posts out - I think most people at the DU can think for themselves. or is that the problem here and why you have to re-frame me.

I think this is a good post to start out the day with. Don't you? I will not be shutting this thread down any time soon.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PKG]

32. Neocons *don't* call themselves neocons, eh?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp

That out of the way:
I personally admire the Third Reich's propaganda. It's brilliant. It takes a man of great intelligence to manage to transform a nation so quickly and so well. Certainly Rove has learned well. But Goering's propaganda is not Goering. And just as we taught our generals the tactics of Napoleon without the narcissism and egocentrism of Napoleon, The Republicans teach their strategists the media tactics of Hitler--which does not imply that they either teach or endorse the messages, ideals, or evil of Hitler.

Next, please state how I reframed you or attached any nonpresent emotion to your post.

Finally, I wasn't setting restrictions on your response, I was telling you that the answer that seemed most likely for you to give was by and large invalid. Like I said: you can use a strategy a man used without admiring that man. I'm not going to keep tripping over my shoelaces because Hitler tied his.

[applegrove]

37. Here is what I can remember from this morning. I'm in bold

Neocons don't call themselves neocons? That out of the way: actually I come from Canada where we had neocons in power in the 1990s in Ontario where they tried to bankrupt the government and put the poor out on the street. It was awful. And they, a tight little movement that they were, would scream bloody murder anytime someone tried to identify that group of like-thinkers. They drop the race bomb again and again. They started doing it about 6 weeks ago in the USA and Robert Novak, a defender and a broadcaster.. could not wiggle out of using the name neocon..because there is no other name. Let's not even go into how hard it was to give them a name (the politics that hath no name) in the beginning.

I personally admire the Third Reich's propaganda. It's brilliant. It takes a man of great intelligence to manage to transform a nation so quickly and so well. Certainly Rove has learned well. But Goering's propaganda is not Goering. And just as we taught our generals the tactics of Napoleon without the narcissism and ego-centrism of Napoleon, The Republicans teach their strategists the media tactics of Hitler--which does not imply that they either teach or endorse the messages, ideals, or evil of Hitler. so when you took issue with me saying neocons admired Hitler you were what..saying they admired his methods completely but not the outcome? Your story has changed from the title to the body of your text. I guess I should call the MSM journalist so they can "studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'' I didn't think Suskind's interviewee had 'reality changing from one paragraph to the next..but I don't know do I.


Next, please state how I re-framed you or attached any non-present emotion to your post. I cannot remember exactly.. and cannot be bothered to go back. Here it is: "Dear god, she's Godwined it before we've even started".


Finally, I wasn't setting restrictions on your response, I was telling you that the answer that seemed most likely for you to give was by and large invalid. Like I said: you can use a strategy a man used without admiring that man. I'm not going to keep tripping over my shoelaces because Hitler tied his. you demanded public news in my response - when you asked for my response. You gave me a line on where I could get information from. Neocons are always rule-makers aren't you just - you all and BTK. My gosh..I've spent enough time with you Repuke role-players to know obfuscation when I see it. I wasn't born yesterday.

[PKG]

38. Hey, nice bolding.

So you're saying that all neoconservatives reject the label of neoconservative, despite the fact that the Weekly Standard, edited by William Kristol, chair of PNAC, uses the term 'neoconservative'--and that just Friday, here at an Olin Center lecture University of Chicago, he repeatedly referred to himself as such--because some Canadian right-wing pols didn't want to be called neocons. And as for 'giving them the name'--they first

Nice use of induction. And as for "it took so long to give them a name!" Irving Kristol referred to himself as neoconservative in 1979, so no dice there.

On to Hitler. I was saying that neocons admired his tactics in one arena of his reign--that of public relations. That does not equate to love or admiration of the man. I can believe that Attila the Hun could tell a really good joke and admire his joke-telling ability--and even try to copy it--without copying the rape-and-pillage, scourge-of-God aspects of his personality.

Next. I cannot remember exactly.. and cannot be bothered to go back. That's some argument there. "I dunno."

On to Godwin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_Law
That's a usually-humorous reference to Godwin's Law of Internet Discussions. Not reframing, not placing emotion. Calm down.

And I didn't ask for 'public news.' I asked for a neocon 'publically supporting Hitler.' Public support is a man admiring another man. Hell, it could even be a 1962 interview in Boys' Life for all I care. I just want a neocon going on record with something like support of Hitler. A link to another writer saying "Neocons like Hitler" doesn't prove anything. I asked for a neocon saying "Yes, I like Hitler," believing this is the only adequate proof of the assertion that a political rival admires the most manifestly evil man to walk the Earth.

Dear God, you're falling apart at the end. I'm a Repuke in league with BTK? I'm a Neocon and Roleplayer? A Rulemaker? Butcher, baker, candlestick-maker? Obfuscate? Demonstrate! Don't hate, liberate! Generate a double date! It's the end of the world as we know it!

[applegrove]

39. I am bold again!

So you're saying that all neoconservatives reject the label of neoconservative, despite the fact that the Weekly Standard, edited by William Kristol, chair of PNAC, uses the term 'neoconservative'--and that just Friday, here at an Olin Center lecture University of Chicago, he repeatedly referred to himself as such--because some Canadian right-wing pols didn't want to be called neocons. And as for 'giving them the name'--they first

Nice use of induction. And as for "it took so long to give them a name!" Irving Kristol referred to himself as neoconservative in 1979, so no dice there. Michael Kinsley did a great article on it. Neocons have been trying to duck being labeled..and identified.. at periodic intervals.. for 25 years. When it took place in Canada that was in the 1990s. It also took place 5 or 6 weeks ago in America..but sputtered out after a week. So if last week Kristol referred to himself as a neocon..he is a big boy that one

On to Hitler. I was saying that neocons admired his tactics in one arena of his reign--that of public relations. That does not equate to love or admiration of the man. I can believe that Attila the Hun could tell a really good joke and admire his joke-telling ability--and even try to copy it--without copying the rape-and-pillage, scourge-of-God aspects of his personality. yes you have made that analogy many times today. If Eva Braun blinked that does not mean I should not stop blinking.. I know, I know.. you can expand and collapse arguments. Good for you. If scientists did that you could measure the cost of Nova Scotia with a string and it would come out with a much bigger circumference that Russia (NS has many, many inlets). But we don't expand and collapse arguments unless we are trying obfuscate (like you use is) or for drama at times (but this would be rare) or if we are trying to undo obfuscations (like I do... I may have to collapse down a blown up argument some neocon makes..you know.. punch through to the truth and let the air escape). Doesn't matter where I go. Discussing the issues with a neocon is never about the issue itself.. but always about them setting up 'new assumptions & parameters' to suit the point they want to make. Your point was : "so neocons admire Hitler now". Yes that was my point. Glad you agree. So back we are to neocons & I guess Rove admiring Hitler and how Hitler marched millions into a place they wouldn't have wanted to go.. and they did it because he had control over them. So you personally admire control over the people to put your own agenda through..even if it is not good for them. Like Disraeli said: " conservatism is organized hypocrisy". Really, neocons could have just stopped there with Disraeli.. but no..on to Hitler and love of propaganda..which in case you do not know is illegal to be used on US citizens domestically.

Next. I cannot remember exactly.. and cannot be bothered to go back. That's some argument there. "I dunno."I went back and searched your quote

On to Godwin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_Law
That's a usually-humorous reference to Godwin's Law of Internet Discussions. Not re-framing, not placing emotion. Calm down. yes your post title came out against my premise that neocons admire Hitler. Then your first line emotively exclaims I am in some sort of mess(how I do not know or do not care). And then you agree with me. "were you the one who talked to Ron Suskind?".

And I didn't ask for 'public news.' I asked for a neocon 'publicly supporting Hitler.' Public support is a man admiring another man. Hell, it could even be a 1962 interview in Boys' Life for all I care. I just want a neocon going on record with something like support of Hitler. A link to another writer saying "Neocons like Hitler" doesn't prove anything. I asked for a neocon saying "Yes, I like Hitler," believing this is the only adequate proof of the assertion that a political rival admires the most manifestly evil man to walk the Earth. you asked when had neocons ever supported Hitler in a public way. Which is not what i had stated. I said nothing about it being public. You tried to define the parameters of how I could answer and thus making it into something I not be able to answer. Once again - obfuscation. That is called rule-making.

Dear God, you're falling apart at the end. I'm a Repuke in league with BTK? I'm a Neocon and Roleplayer? A Rulemaker? Butcher, baker, candlestick-maker? Obfuscate? Demonstrate! Don't hate, liberate! Generate a double date! It's the end of the world as we know it! the reference to BTK is about the rule-makers not following their own rules. A common thing that sociopaths do. BTK is a good example: a stickler for details on lawn & pet by-laws who took everyone he could to court and try and win...but you had murdered several families when nobody was looking. We find this 'one set of rules for the 'rule-maker' and another set of rules for their opponent.. to be a common tool of neocons. Likely something they picked up in all that Hitler study. I think BTK clarifies that 'truth' about rule-makers pretty clearly. Sorry if you do not like the 'full circle' comparison.. try studying & practicing the political & media tools of people not deranged next time. Just a thought! But BTK does 'blow up' as an example. Could it be that I too was blowing up my arguments to make a point?(you collapsed down your arguments to ridiculous levels). Am I not allowed to do this? Because you do it. And once again.. if I am not allowed to use the same rules & practices you do..then it is one set of rules for you..and one set of rules for your opponent. And that would be out of the tool-bag of the sociopath one more time. So accept the comparison to BTK or else I will just have to compare you to ... BTK again.

[JimmyJazz]

21. Is that a picture of Nixon shaking hands with Elvis in your avatar?

o'kay?

[PKG]

33. Yes.

o'kay.

[Bridget Burke]

22. Prescott Bush invested in the Third Reich.

Some stories say it was just for money, not particular affection for Hitler. Good investment--that "slave labor" thing was just a coincidence.

And "Trading With the Enemy" charges were filed in October 1942. So the Bushes not only ignored the invasion of various countries by Hitler--but the fact that we'd actually been at war with the Axis for almost a year.

[applegrove]

23. This has less to do with a family beef and more to do with not allowing

a liberal hero to be thought of without 're-framing' for one second.

How pathetic that Bush (Rove), Grover, Frum all took these sol-em ceremonies as a chance to hit back at the liberals they hate. And how sad. Sixty years since that awful war. And they see it as nothing but an opportunity.

[PKG]

35. A man making immoral business deals

in no way implies his grandson will support and admire the man with whom he secretly sold his soul.

[applegrove]

36. I agree. They have been after FDR (our totem) for months in one way

or another. They want to tear our world down and replace it with their own.

See my post on 'following the bouncing ball'. I expand on one idea of what could be the end game. Don't know.. but the timing is right.

Has to do with attaching FDR to the mistake of letting the cold war happen ... and the cold war will be how the neocons explain their mistakes in the Middle East for the last 25 years (after every other continent in the world was getting democracies and the Middle East did not and the neocons were the ones to stop it..wherever they saw it and work through Saddam Hussein).

Saddam's trial is coming up. He will talk about his relations to Cheney, Bush Sr., Wolfowitz & Rumsfield.

So they need to hide behind the 'mistake of the 'cold war' which is FDR's fault. They also came to the neocon conclusion that Hitler was Woodrow Wilson's fault. Apparently when a neocon makes a mistake..it is always a Liberal's fault somewhere.

I don't know but that may be what they are building up to with all this FDR and Soviet talk.

[bpilgrim]

28. there's a LOT more to it than that

though i do think we have to realize how many people are ignorant to the facts of the matter.

peace

[applegrove]

30. Oh I agree that tanking FDR is part of a grand strategy. I just think

it is poetic that the neocons go after FDR for the mistakes they themselves made in Iraq in the 1980s. And then they scold him for the same mistakes they made.

Shows a distinct inability to take responsibility and a distinct need to pass on responsibility for all failures to some 'scapegoat'.

On a number of levels..the attack on FDR is just so sad.

[Deep13]

26. FDR did not give away ...

... Eastern Europe. The Soviets already had it. It was occupied by the Red Army. All FDR and Churchill did was recognize that reality. Besides, under the cruel and uncivilized morality of war, the Ruskies who had sacrificed more than anyone to defeat the NAZIs had a right to the spoils.

[applegrove]

29. Not to mention that the USA people didn't want to rescue the 'old

Europe' from Nazis in the first place..they had to be attacked before they would join the war. So why would anyone expect America, the people, to sign up for WWIII and save easter Europe?

[Swamp Rat]

34. Just doing his job for the BFEE