Roman Moroni: This is fargin war!
Posted on 03/09/2009 8:54:41 AM PDT by BufordP
I know the term “Orwellian” has probably been overused lately, but it is truly applicable. When someone says what he actually means like Rush Limbaugh did a few weeks ago, people are somewhat confused. I have some advice for us all.
Let’s take a look at a familiar phrase:
“I am personally against abortion, but I don’t want to impose my beliefs on others.”
See how comfortably the top rail of that fence fits in your crotch? Now do you know why Arlen Specter walks funny? You recognize the evils of abortion - I mean, who doesn’t - but if killing kids is someone else’s bag, who are you to step in their way?
Let’s take another one:
“I support the troops but I am against the war.”
Very nice. This says, “I really like the general idea of people guarding the gates, just not this particular time in this particular way. I much prefer droppping a few bombs or sending over a missile or two - you know, the Clinton doctrine.” That way one is relieved of the responsiblity of spitting on returning soldiers, while giving themselves cover to do all they can do to make sure they are killed on the battlefield or kidnapped and sent to the Hague after the “Truth Commission” gets through with them.
This brings me to the fatal flaw in Rush’s intellectual honesty. In keeping with the times, he should have said:
“I support Obama but I do not support his mission.”
See? We wish happy and strong children and a wonderful marriage, just the inability to do one single thing he campaigned on. We want him to succeed! Yes he can! With, of course, the exception of any policy he attempts to implement as President of the United States.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Silvie’s Chris Plante ping!
When things are "Orwellian", they are Stalinist.
Don't couch it under "fictionalized" realities. These things have happened and are happeing again. A chill wind blows. Only Susan Saradon's boy toy is not shouting about it.
“I support Obama but I do not support his mission.”
I wonder if this guy actually listens to Rush. Rush has said that many times to mock the libs position on the war.
The problems is not about what Rush said or what he should have said.
The problems are with Obama and the direction he is taking the country. All the discussion involving Rush is nothing but camouflage.
I haven’t been able to listen to Rush the last few months but for a few minutes here and there. So I’ve missed that as well.
Pap. Try this: “I would never buy a Ford but I don’t think the government should shut them down.” There’s as little hypocricy, dilemma, or double-think there as in most of his glib examples.
So you think Savage was really writing about Rush? I on the other hand cannot what until I have the opportunity to say to a liberal with tongue in cheek, “I support Obama, but I do not support his mission.”
Roman Moroni: This is fargin war!
I am hopeful that he does not destroy the entire country, in the process.
However, There is no way that he will ever again be as popular as he was on election day or in January.
Obama was a blank slate, a Rorschach test of a candidate. We tried to paint Obama as a radical, but the guy had no firm record that we could make stick.
That has changed now. The country is going to turn on your boy wonder, and it will take everything liberals like you believe in, right down the tubes.
There’s a difference between having a good argument and making it. This writer’s setup is so poorly thought out that he would have done better by just starting the article in the middle.
Reminds me of “We support the Troops but not support the mission.”
"Orwellian" works for me. Our leftist rulers in the west have access to technology undreamt of by Uncle Joe and his politburo. Stalin would have loved a telescreen in every home. Orwell's fiction is probably a more accurate description of our reality only because our government will be more intrusive and oppressive than Stalin could have hoped for.
__________________________________________
How will you feel when blacula commits US troops to a DMZ between Israel and Gaza with the guns pointed at Israel?
Rush meant what he said and said what he meant.
Personally, I would have used Communist very often.
You and your fargin bastages can gambol.
I put your bells in a sling, you fargin bastage!
Yes!
You weren’t listening. I didn’t say Stalin’s dream. I said Stalinists in the West. They were the shills who railed against the US and UK during WWII (as Orwell himself states) while praising Joseph Stalin at every turn and denying any horrors in the Soviet system.
Stalinist will openly lie to your face. It isn’t about hypocrisy. It is about winning the argument and pushing their own agenda (by any means necessary including lies, distortions, and lies by omission). Our State department was well aware of the tactic.
Stalinists turned off George Orwell (who himself was a Socialist radical who even agitated in Spain) so much that he wrote 1984 and Animal Farm.
The tactics we are witnessing are Stalinist. It is not a term like “Hitlerian”. It’s more akin to the propaganda techniques of Goebbels (regardless of the message delivered or agenda at work). It refers to a method, an approach.
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.