Our Partners |
 |
 |
|
||
| North American Center for Transborder Studies Arizona State University |
Americas Society- Council of the Americas |
Kansas City, Missouri International Affairs and Trade Office |
Posted on 01/05/2007 10:48:25 AM PST by jmc813
Conservative blogger John Hawkins of Right Wing News has now decided to join Michael Medved in a new ad hominem attack by using a disparaging adjective to call me a name (“kooky”) and placing me No. 3 in the list of the 20 “people on the right” he finds most annoying.
Hawkins places me between No. 2 Mark Foley, whom Hawkins characterizes as a “page-molesting pervert,” and No. 4 Duke Cunningham, the congressman Hawkins notes is “going to jail for 8 years after taking a bribe.” I am honored to be included on any list John Hawkins wishes to create. But, as far as I can determine, my offense to Hawkins involves writing with the scope of the 1st Amendment, an offense that Hawkins considers somewhat worse than taking bribes, but not quite as bad as making salacious approaches to underage male employees.
I first want to thank Hawkins for his continuing campaign to draw attention to my arguments.
Second, I wonder how much additional writing I will have to produce before Hawkins reduces himself to the “liar, liar” ranting stage Michael Medved exhibited in his recent emotional tirade published on Townhall.com. I guess I will have to read more of Hawkins’s writing to determine if I find his views annoying, but upon introspection I find I have no emotional reaction whatsoever, even to his characterization that I am somehow “annoying” to him. Perhaps President Bush drew solace that he was listed seven positions below me on Hawkins’s “most annoying” list. I apologize to President Bush that Hawkins could not find a better pejorative for him than “incompetent.” Clearly in Hawkins’s hierarchy to be “kooky” in writing a political commentary is much more annoying to him than to be merely “incompetent” in conducting the affairs of the nation’s highest elected post.
Arguing that my writings advance a “completely moronic North American conspiracy theory,” Hawkins linked to an old post he had written on his blog last summer. In an exchange published in July on HUMAN EVENTS’ Right Angle blog, I answered these and other objections raised by Hawkins. The exchange ended when Hawkins chose not to respond. Hawkins has never answered my last specific rebuttals published on the blog. Merely repeating his initial arguments would be considered “non responsive” in traditional debate theory.
Besides, I have never argued a “North American conspiracy.” The European Union and the Euro are realities today, not a conspiracy theory. So too, North American integration is proceeding rapidly right now, fully documented, as the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America attests if you reference the Department of Commerce website SPP.gov. Equally, the Trans-Texas Corridor is proceeding rapidly, as documented by the Texas Department of Commerce website. If either the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America or the Trans-Texas Corridor is a conspiracy, the conspiracy is being perpetrated by government officials on their public websites.
We will grant that the now public writings of those who advanced the European Union, such as the memoirs of EU intellectual architect Jean Monnet, confess after the fact that a stealth method was pursued to create the European Union. As Christopher Booker and Richard North, co-authors of the 2003 book, “The Great Deception: A Secret History of the European Union,” write that Jean Monnet “knew that only by operating in the shadows, behind a cloak of obscurity could he one day realize his dream.” Architects of North American integration, such as Robert Pastor of American University, breathe new life into stealth politics when suggesting openly that a new 9/11 crisis may be just the event needed to advance his agenda for creating the “North American Community” he openly professes.
At any rate, I invite Hawkins to resume his debate with me. To make the process easy, we will link to the exchange. Seeing that I wrote the last rejoinder there, the next move appears to be up to Hawkins. Is Hawkins up to calm, rational debate, or does he want to leave his comments at the level of calumny, an ad hominem attack which always belies an inability to win the argument any other way?
My writing has been aimed at making sure that North American integration does not advance to the point where a North American Union emerges after what may be a decades-long incremental process. I want to be sure that the United States does not follow the template set in place by how the European Union and the euro emerged over some fifty years, driven by an intellectual elite and evolving step-by-step from an initial, seemingly innocuous continental steel and coal agreement.
What is it exactly that Hawkins finds annoying—that a NAU and the Amero could be the end result of the North American integration currently happening, or that I might suggest the Bush Administration could be following the Jean Monnet path intentionally?
If IBM made all those advances then why did they release Y2k changes for their utilities to handle YY as YYYY?
Sure saved a lot of application program changes.
In another reply you said that I "segwayed" from the 1970s to Y2k. You don't believe that there was a lot of old code from as far back as the 360 abd 370 days still in use in the late 1990s?
Changes and replacements were made throughout the lifetime of the legacy systems. Few took care of changing dates -- you could not just modify part of the system as you made other changes to that part. It had to be done system wide plus in many cases it had to be coordinated with systems that interfaced. No one wanted to do it until they had to.
Our Partners |
|
|
|
||
| North American Center for Transborder Studies Arizona State University |
Americas Society- Council of the Americas |
Kansas City, Missouri International Affairs and Trade Office |
You appartently did not read my entire reply. That was the exception, not the rule, in my experience which, besides the experience listed above, includes major corporations and the state of California through the decades of the 1980s and 1990s (as a contractor mostly).
RE: "My contention all along has been that the Y2K thing for most [large mainframe] apps . . . that used dates in any fashion was more evolutionary rather than revolutionary."
You mean the dates were fixed over the lifetime of the legacy system? I bet not why would corporations and government spend so much to fix the problem in the 1990s?
Well this is way off subject of course.
That's quite a hypothetical situation for a party that does not exist.
I do find this all rather reminiscent of Medieval times, when sellers of Saints relics and pieces of THE TRUE CROSS were fobbed off on people. It's the state of BELIEVING, even when facts should make one not believe at all, that I find remarkable, in this day and age. But then, people still fall for the PIGEON DROP...which is almost as old a con, as the earliest of recorded history.
This thread is about people who make insults and baseless attacks on conservatives for their investigative reporting.
You just provided another example.
bump
Oh by all means, do write to "Washington"! It might make you feel better; or not. All you'll get back is some standard "thank you for your letter" letter. LOL
Kind of sickening, isn't it?There is nothing like "liberal arts" colleges.
I have checked some of your links to the above post to Jim. You must be a conspiracy nut to have put all the links together./s LOL Unfr!gg!n real.
The NAACL was established in 1993. I didn't know that as they have the borderless map on their home page which I guess started in 1993 with NAFTA. That kind of says it all. Just loooove that free trade, don't we? But remember you are a kook with your head out of the sand.
I guess our taxes pay for all the bureaucratic crapola. Can you imagine having a job that all you have to do is to look for problems that may or may not happen. What a waste Pastor and all these people are.
I read one of the articles about aging and the "window of opportunity" they have in getting people trained for health care jobs. Haven't we been doing that for the last 200 years? You know, nurses and doctors or did free trade invent the training in these fields? S/ It looks like the patients will have to learn how to say "bed pan" in different languages now. What a mess that could be! LOL
You provided a good example, too, in #128.
Thanks for the link. I just read the article and did not see anything unusual except it appears that there is the awareness that there could be military action here.
"The goals of this exercise were to improve the DOD’s capacity to manage a series of extreme events; improve seamless interaction of DOD with interagency response, validate authorities, strategies, plans, policies, procedures, and protocols," [said the] Senior Plans NCO. "It emphasized a sustainable, systematic, integrated DOD exercise program to support the national strategy for homeland defense."
Well one extreme event I hope the Army is preparing for is another "Peace with Horror" (misnamed, Peace with Honor).
If our forces and our allies get screwed by Washington again I hope the armed forces along with federal, state, and local law enforcement and home land security, are ready to look hard at the "defend against domestic enemies" thing in their respective oaths. Then proceed to arrest the whole lot of the swamp creatures.
. Every two-hundred-year-old republic is entitled to at least one patriot-dictator. Hey! that's history's rule.
Problem is, I like the Hardy Boys. And Dr. Jerry writes all this hysterical over-the-top stuff, but bases it on solid research. So waddaya gonna do, shoot the guy because he ain't no Charles Dickens or Herman Melville? This style issue is costing Dr. Jerry many points among the self-proclaimed intelligensia ... like this odd duck, Medved.
As far as SPP goes, it ain't gonna happen next month. It's in the study phase. It took our European cousins 60 years to put together this interesting Christian Democrat version of the Holy Roman Empire called the EU. Probably take just as long to cobble up some sort of North American Union.
Problem I have is that our beloved government is not exactly forthcoming with vital info on just what it is they are planning for our next century. The SPP Website is not exactly light reading ... in fact, speaking of the Hardy Boys, it's just as scary and even more confusing.
BTW, the EU worked out great for Europe's poor countries,Ireland, Portugal, and Greece, which until recently received massive subsidies. Ireland especially is a whole new ball game and used the money to drive a true economic revolution. But in this hemisphere,except for us and Canada, everywhere else is a combination of dirt-poor and/or poorly organized. Couldn't use the money to get anything done even if it fell from the sky.
The Government figures this SPP concept to be a tough sell, so they are being fairly secretive about it. Eventually, we'll have to vote on it ... but in the meantime they are softening us up with undemocratic bureaucratic maneuvers and regulations.
Check out post #98.
How much tinfoil are you actually wearying, right now? :^)
None.
That's quite a hypothetical statement, since the party does exist.
I guess that your Congressman is not Wally Herger. All emails answered within about a month with a personal, detailed, germane snail-mail letter. But I know what you mean.
I have a blue button-up shirt that is unbuttoned, revealing a T-shirt with an eagle and American flag that says
"Proud To Be American
God Bless America"
I suppose that qualifies as mid-change, to be completed by buttoning the shirt. It has nothing to do with tin-foil :) .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.