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?
Such conservatives ignore the Constitution Party members who win elections if they hold that opinion.
I will tell you this, even though I am forced to guess what you mean by the above comment (I need to refer to someone by title when quoting their words?). A strawman is a logical fallacy, and a common one at that . . . meaning that you should be able to demonstrate that my position* is logically-unsound without any difficulty. The fact that you fail to do so leads me to believe that you do not understand what a strawman fallacy actually is, but rather are using the term to make-up for your unwillingness to argue on the merits.
_____
*Prof. Corsi needs to be reminded that it's not difficult to look-up his previous statements on the topic. In other words, one cannot run about claiming that Pres. Bush has a "secret plan" to dissolve the United States of America without taking the risk of being called a conspiracist. Moreover, one cannot defend himself of the charge by simply stating that the SPP exists. His problem is his contention why it exists.
By insinuating that Corsi made such an argument, you are making attacking a straw man and not any positions of Corsi himself. Therefore, your analogy is untenable.
Revision:
By insinuating that Corsi made such an argument, you are attacking a straw man and not any positions of Corsi himself. Therefore, your analogy is untenable.
I really wasn't planning on buying any insignias but I may now.
The only problem was it had been in dry-dock all that year back in the states. LOL
LOL! Good old capitalism.
Keep telling yourself that.
We get a lot of disinformation due to the fact that we have to wait for years and years via FOIA such as the recent Totalization Agreement with Mexico and the SPP papers. I wonder why the government goes into secrecy with dealing with our neighbor, Mexico?
We the people who pay the bills and have fought the wars for the world, don't have the right to know anymore. Mexico has these rights that we don't have anymore.
RE: "Do you think the "ruling class/government" of Mexico thinks they can actually have a relationship with the likes of Hugo Chavez, Cuba? Iran? Syria? A level playing field? A "comrade" in arms?"
Actually I was thinking of more mundane things along the lines of las mordidas and their role in "greasing" the day-to-day drama of life. Corruption and bribes. Though not ruling-class stuff (they get to do the "really big shew") it is the Mexican milieu.
For a large enough mordida police will look the other way. Thus it's far more than getting your garbage collected. It can buy impunity which means social and political conditions that contribute to abuse and suffering.. even death.
I cannot imagine the varieties of opportunities for million-dollar corruption at the ruling class level -- I don't think that they would even consider giving that up to join a "Community". They would do both, I bet. And I bet most would expect million-dollar mordidas from both.
"This whole process has been a long time coming, sneaking it's way into our daily lives. The creators of this *UNION* knew this idea wouldn't be universally accepted so, they've taken their time in it's implementation.
We also have to be more aware and guard against bills before congress that the globalists have snuck parts of the SPP into other bills. I am referring to the comprehensive immigration bill where it states that we should be guarding the borders of Belize and Guatamala. Go down to 114 and you will see where they want our borders to begin.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN02611:@@@L&summ2=m&
And that's a good point about disinformation. A lot of it is being caused by speculation simply because Washington appears to be reluctant to tell us much -- in straight talk.
Prof. Corsi needs to be reminded that it's not difficult to look-up his previous statements on the topic [the Sun revolving around the Earth]. In other words, one cannot run about claiming that Pres. Bush has a "secret plan" to dissolve the United States of America [the Sun revolves around the Earth] without taking the risk of being called a conspiracist [pre-Galilean biblical astronomer]. Moreover, one cannot defend himself of the charge by simply stating that the SPP [the Sun]exists. His problem is his contention why it exists [to revolve around the Earth].
Here's a little tidbit I wasn't aware of until lately regarding sales tax rebates to foreign shoppers. Looks like the intergration is well on it's way.
http://utopia.utexas.edu/articles/tbr/manifiesto.html
And that's a good point about disinformation. A lot of it is being caused by speculation simply because Washington appears to be reluctant to tell us much -- in straight talk.
This is the reason V. Fox would leak all his information to his people. He knew what the American people didn't know. About 2 weeks after Katrina Bush and Fox met. NOLA is now flooded with illegals. Who would have thought? All of this is totally disrepectful and arrogant on their part aimed at the very people who made the free world free. Mexico has never done anything to make the free world free. They continue to be "me too moochers".
Speaking of Corsi's FOIA request, he railed half the summer that Commerce's foot-dragging was evidence of nefarious intent. Now that he's had the information he requested for months, not a peep is heard. Could it be that he found nothing?
Well on its way since 1787. From your link:
The U.S. Constitution prevents state governments from taxing goods exported to foreign countries. As a result, states must grant sales tax exemptions or rebates on goods sold in the United States and shipped or taken to other countries.
Your McAllen Chamber of Commerce at work. We mustn't charge Mexico with anything. We just let the feds pump billions into this economy yearly.
Thanks for your link. I had heard about this but had never seen it. This article doesn't mention it but they also shop for free health care, free food and all. Then they head back to Mexico.
Read it and find out for yourself.
Read what?
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.