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?
And beyond that, the FTAA.
Thanks for posting this.
I'll have to assume you are a paid agent of change for the North American Union or an affiliate, seeing that you are a single interest poster. Right?
I'm with Jerry Corsi on this one. Michael Medved is good but is open borders. So of course he'll denigrate what Jerrome Corsi has to say.
Screw the rest. I like Corsi here. I've read his previous material and find it well investigated and documented. No one else that I know of is doing what Jerry Corsi is doing. No one is doing the original spade work
I pledge allegiance to the Sovereign Nation of the United States of America. Not some funky North American Union with Mexico and Canada. I could *possibly* go for much closer ties with Canada but not with that god awful anarchy on our Southern Border
New Year, Old Tinfoil.
In disgust I continued on down the dial 30 minutes later. Thirty minutes of contumelies.
Contumely, n. 1. Rudeness or contempt arising from arrogance; insolence. . . .
Insolence, adj. 1. Presumptuous and insulting in manner or speech; arrogant. 2. Audaciously rude or disrespectful; impertinent.
(American Heritage Talking Dictionary.)
The man totally lost it. The only "light-hearted" moments were his oft repeated claim that SPP supporters were shrill -- he on the other hand was merely passionate.
The man's become a clown. Maybe something in his personal life? Hope he does better in the future.
A couple of days later I'm back -- Hey! it's 2:00AM, what else is there? This time it's the O'Hare UFO. A much milder form of contumely -- I guess he does not have as much money riding on those kinds of aliens. :)
Anyway, the usual ridicule of "believers." Fine. But more evidence that's something is seriously wrong with the man.
He gave the witnesses' estimates of the size of the UFO. Some said six feet, some said 24 feet -- and some said it was the size of a quarter!
He used that to ramp up his attack on a UFO reporting site. "A quarter!" he screamed several times.
Well, Mr. Medved, normal people under control of their emotions knew the description was, the UFO appeared in the sky to be the size of a quarter held at arm's length. Common way of describing something far away.
Revealing about Medved. He had trouble thinking outside the box. Too boringly conventional.
If you've looked no farther than to ridicule the concern over the highway, it's easy to see why our sovereingty is being compromised. The argument is similar to equating Socialism with "increased taxes" only -- overlooking the elimination of God and values from our culture, or the other tenants of socialism.
The highway is merely a part of the concerted effort. What's a tragedy is that it isn't difficult to see; the "oops" regarding our border situation, the trade agreements, encouraging business to continue the practice of hiring illegals, the rhetoric designed to paint anyone who is concerned about our nation's security and survival as a "bigot," the looming Guest Worker initiative that will allow over 100 million to apply for "temporary" status (along with the hypocritical argument that we can require them to go home after a while, and at the same time claiming we cannot deport illegals), the lame impression we are doing anything at all to police our border or that any of our elected leadership cares.
I suppose it's easy to isolate the highway for ridicule as an individual project not tied to the other tenants of eliminating United States sovereignty for the purpose of cheap labor.
lol. Reminds of those old arguments against THE HIGHWAY spanning the E/W United States. My Gawd, the world was gonna end then too. Every state and every little town was sure this was the "end as they knew it".
Right. That was the only focus of my post. It's the "The highway." Focus on the "The highway." Brilliant! < /s>
Oh, right. I didn't address the part where anyone who doesn't agree with you is an idiot. How dare I be so remiss?
The man was out of control. Thus, in his few lucid moments, his claiming the excuse of being "passionate." IMO.
"Passionate" in one of the most retarded words in the English vocabulary. Due to overuse and misuse. Adolf Hitler was passionate.
Old time explorer and anthropology books would often say the people of the southern climes are ruled by their passions
I meant to say that Medved railed against people who in his view are wrong to oppose SPP because 1) it ain't going to happen and 2) if it does happen, it won't hurt our Nation and it's a good thing.
Republican Reagan, 1980: The Time is Now
Constimatooshunalist Corsi, 2008: The Crime is NAU!
You didn't disagree with my post at all. And I didn't call anyone an idiot.
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.