More Shame, More Sorrow?

Again, something from Lew Rockwell that simply cannot be trusted. Some of you never learn. Unreal ...

 

Let us in on the secret of the real Lew Rockwell. Any reason why you don't trust him?

 

Other than providing an outlet for the Bush hating wacko Roberts?

(Shrug)

 

Isn't life grand? What on earth are all of you who debate the goodness of the Bush administration or lack thereof are going to do in 17 months when he is a faded memory? Oh, I know. you can debate the goodness of the Hillary administration.

 

Oh, I see . Did this guy destroy all the false hopes that neo-cons had for the failed Bush regime? Oh why can't youse guys just quit bashin good ol' Lew.

 

Because I have never seen him make a good argument and have seen him distort facts. He should not be trusted.

 

great line. a definition of sarcasm :thumbs:

 

Another one of your generalizations without evidence. You have not laid your case out for discrediting Lew Rockwell, why would anyone want to take you at your word?

 

Lew Rockwell is a credible source of presenting certain views. I have used him several times as a source connected with term papers in college where one must present both sides. To say his arguments are faulty is not so. He presents certain opinions about certain issues, and is considered a credible enough source to be allowed on term papers.

It is kind of like giving an "expert" opinion on the Iraq war and never served one day in the armed forces.

 

==I think that is a bit of an over-statement. I would consider the reign of some of the old Roman Caesars to be much more evil than Bush's presidency. I think of Nero and Gaius as two that certainly surpise this administration in evil.

Of Gaius, Suetonius states:

"He loved watching tortures and executions; and, disguised in wig and robe, abandoned himself nightly to the pleasures of gluttonous and adulterous living" (pg155)

"Gaius made parents attend their sons' executions...having invited another father to dinner just after the son's execution, he overflowed with good-fellowship in an attept to make him laugh and joke" (pg165)

"He never kissed the neck of his wife or mistress without saying, and this beautiful throat will be cut whenever I please" (pg168)

"Any good-looking man with a fine head of hair whom Gaius ran across - him himself was bald - had the back of his scalp brutally shaved" (pg169)

"He never missed a chance of securing loot: setting aside a suite of Palace rooms, he decorated them worthily, opened a brothel, stocked it with married women and free-born boys, and then sent his pages around the squares and public halls, inviting all men, of whatever age, to come and enjoy themselves. Those who appeared were lent money at interest, and clerks openly wrote down their names under the heading 'Contributors to the Imperial Revenue'" (pg173)

"Because of his baldness and hairiness he announced that it was a capital offence for anyone either to look down on him as he passed or to mention goats in any context" (pg177)

Need I go on? I can quote section on Nero and others, I could also talk about Stalin and Hitler. How about Herod?

My point is that we must be careful when making statements like the one made above. History is full of rulers (etc) who were much more wicked/evil than this administration.

 

==I suppose one's answer to that would be determined by their opinion of Lincoln's original motives.

 

==I think he is guilty of an extreme overstatment. Bush's policies maybe misguided, and maybe causing great pain and grief, but I don't consider him to be one of the world's most evil leaders/presidents/administrations (etc). One of the most misguided? Yes, but not the other. I think we could go down a list of people who were thousands of times more evil than Bush. I happen to pick on Nero and Gaius but there are thousands more we could examine. I think of current day rulers in Iran, North Korea, China, various warlords, and others who are together willfully killing thousands (if not millions) of people around the world today. Bush's war in Iraq, while misguided, has noble motives. He truly wishes to spread democracy and freedom. While I believe those goals to be misguided, unrealistic, unconstitutional, and disasterous, I have no doubt that his motives are as pure as a Washington DC politicians motives can be. I don't believe Bush is an evil man. Hitler, Stalin, Nero, and others were truly evil.

 

Or he could be following Machiavelli and Strauss' advice and repeating the "Noble lie" again and again. If he really cares so much about spreading "democracy" then why is he doing everything he can to stifle it here at home and centralize power in the executive?

More advice from some "great leaders" of the past. Who were they?

 

Me neither but they did put false flag terrorism to work for them. How's bout a history lesson on that Martin?

 

That ain't saying a lot. That bar is set really low, you know. :tear:

Ed

 

==Yea, but the quote said "human history":

"In the administration of George W. Bush, the Republican Party has achieved the greatest combination of idiocy and evil in human history"

 

==I don't support Bush or the war in Iraq. I thought that would be clear enough from my statement:

"While I believe those goals to be misguided, unrealistic, unconstitutional, and disasterous, I have no doubt that his motives are as pure as a Washington DC politicians motives can be."

Certainly does not sound like a ringing endorsement to me. In fact it almost sounds like a insult :thumbsup: .