[Tolik]

Orson Scott Card - PING  [please freepmail me if you want or don't want to be pinged to Orson Scott Card political articles]

[Tolik]

Orson Scott Card is one of the best Sci-Fi writers. His Ender's series are enormously popular and translated to many languages. His websites attract attention of readers from all over the world.

Since 9/11 he wrote many political essays. He is a conservative democrat of Zell Miller type (there are still few left) who is upset with hijacking of his party by the Left. His articles are more inline with the FreeRepublic spirit than with his own political website: http://www.ornery.org/index.html  that is heavily populated by American- and other Leftists who are delightfully annoyed by Mr. Card's conservatism. He does not post on that site and its moderated by somebody else.

Links: his articles discussed at FR: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/k-orsonscottcard/browse  and archived here (it is a must go place for all new to OSC political writing): http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/index.html

His literary, non-political website: http://www.hatrack.com

His fresh articles appear in the Rhinoceros Times, Greensboro, NC: http://www.rhinotimes.com/greensboro/  (before being posted permanently on his The Ornery American website). Read his books/movies/and everything reviews: http://www.hatrack.com/osc/reviews/everything/ 

His "About" page: http://www.hatrack.com/osc/about.shtml

[Valin]

Of course, they regretted the deaths of so many innocents, and of course they were outraged at those who committed the act.


I wonder if they did/do?
/1/2 sarcasm

[thulldud]

Fifth, and perhaps most important, the widespread false belief that George W. Bush is a war-loving madman actually works to our advantage. If they really believe that he is itching for a chance to go after them, they may well take the steps that are necessary to avoid invasion.

I have a question about this one. I think it possible that there is no such widespread belief that W is a trigger-happy warmonger, rather there is a belief that such a belief is widespread.

Was that convoluted enough?

These days we've seen so much hypocritical posturing that we've forgotten what true conviction looks like. Feminists rant about "sexual harassment" for years and then suddenly, we are treated to the late-breaking insight of "one free grope", courtesy of the exact same feminists. Lawyers decry the stonewalling defense of denial upon denial used by a President of one party, but when "they" become President, suddenly stonewalling is no longer stonewalling.

It's a sign of the times. No proposition is held to be true or false in itself, it is merely useful or not. "Truth" is an illusion; in its place there is only power (especially the power of volume!)

So it is with allegations about W and others. The speakers need not actually believe the charges to repeat them. They merely count on the charges being believed. Or, at least, seeming so.

This is just a guess I have, a guess I have no way to check at the moment. But in the present case, I suppose that it would mean that, no matter how much the Syrians and Iranians claim to believe that W is aiming the guns at them, what they really believe will be seen in their actions. Then, too, they may not be subject to the effete intellectual paralysis that is endemic in the West. When they say they "believe", they might actually mean it.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[flutters]

Thanks for the ping. Excellent article.