Posted on 10/11/2009 8:06:41 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
This morning, in an interview with CNN's State of the Union, Sen. John McCain (RINO-Ariz.) apparently used some rather choice language to describe the fairly evident future political aspirations of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R-Ak.):
"Will Sarah and I - did we always agree on everything in the past? Will we in the future? No. But let's let a thousand flowers bloom. Let's come up with a winning combination next time."
—http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2360310/posts
With only a cursory glance, it appears from McCain's language that he is merely asking for a second chance -- in 2012? -- with Palin. [And, at first blush, it is easy to dismiss his words as the ravings of a senile old man.] However, as FReeper rae4palin pointed out, the phrase
“Let a thousand flowers bloom” was said by Mao to encourage dissidents to self-identify. Mao then killed them.
—http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2360310/posts?page=26#26
[Or, more precisely, as other FReepers noted, the phrase "let a thousand flowers of bloom" is a variant of a Maoist phrase "let a hundred flowers bloom." In all cases, however, the distinction between the two phrases--Maoist and McCainian--or in other words, the word "hundred" vs. the word "thousand," are irrelevant to the phrase's meaning.]
In fact, this observation was also picked up and expounded upon by other FReepers, including piytar and cripplecreek. The origin of the phrase "let a hundred flowers bloom" (i.e., the actual phrase upon which McCain's particular words were based) is...Chinese Communist Mao Zedong! As FReeper cripplecreek noted,
Let a thousand flowers bloom is a common misquotation of Chairman Mao Zedong’s “Let a hundred flowers blossom”. This slogan was used during the period of approximately six weeks in the summer of 1957 when the Chinese intelligentsia were invited to criticize the political system then obtaining in Communist China.
The full quotation, taken from a speech of Mao’s in Peking in February 1957, is:
“Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts and the sciences and a flourishing socialist culture in our land.”
It is sometimes suggested that the initiative was a deliberate attempt to flush out dissidents by encouraging them to show themselves as critical of the regime. Whether or not it was a deliberate trap isn’t clear but it is the case that many of those who put forward views that were unwelcome to Mao were executed.
The biggest question here is why McCain specifically elected to use a Maoist phrase in connection with Palin's fairly obvious future political aspirations. Certainly, it goes without saying that his choice of words is especially disturbing, given his time in captivity in North Vietnam. [Could it be that the late conservative activist Ted Sampley, who presciently labeled McCain as a "Manchurian candidate" nearly seventeen years ago, was right all along?] Furthermore, upon closer examination of McCain's language, especially in the context of his past actions as a noted RINO and member of the Beltway establishment, it becomes alarmingly obvious that his words constitute nothing less than a veiled threat against Palin, or i.e., the Republican establishment considers her a direct threat to the continuance of their power and will most certaintly attempt to derail her future aspirations, much as Mao encouraged Chinese intelligentsia to speak freely nearly fifty-seven years ago...before executing the ones he disagreed with.
Obviously you have no use for facts. You’re a Republican-American not an American.
Why do do many otherwise intelligent people continually spell *Rogue* as *rouge*? Rouge is what women (used to? Still do?) wear on their cheeks. *ROGUE* is part of the title of Sarah’s book. PLEASE, it’s hard enough to read some posts without this too!
Thanks in advance!
I don't stand much on the hierarchy of sign-up dates but I have no respect for those who have nothing but smarmy insults when they are faced with insurmountable evidence of treason and calumny. If they can overlook all of that then they certainly can't be accused of caring about their country IMO.
More vitriol from the Gay Parade.
Like vampires splashed with Holy Water, they screech at the sight or sound of Sarah Palin.
You know, when MOST folks come here, they show a modicum of respect for posters, ESPECIALLY when said posters are doing what they can to get rid of the total and utter CRAPOLA that resides in the Pubbie party, thus possibly returning it to its small government roots. But when idiots, morons and other assorted RINO trolls come here, they get all aggressive and start attacking the very ones who have our country’s TRUE best interests at heart... like Rabs. I have to tell you, you are starting to look very much like one of those aforementioned idiots, morons and assorted RINO trolls. Perhaps a strong apology is in order here, as you are WAY over the top.
We all, especially on this board, know what’s going on with the One. The PROBLEM is that with RINOs like McLame and YOU hoarding the pubbie party and stopping reform, there is NO WAY to get rid of the rats and restore our Republic. Yet idiots (apparently like you) keep trying to stop reform efforts by attacking the reformers. Too bad it ain’t gonna work any more, isn’t it?
Occums razor would suggest he used it because it is a relatively common expression in our culture that describes a situation in which many competing ideas are allowed to flourish. In this context, the obvious meaning is that he wants to see many different potential GOP nominees present what they have to offer to the primary voters so that the party can pick a winning combination for 2012.
Yes, it's true Mao came up with the expression, and used it disingenuously, but that hasn't stopped it from becoming a benign, commonplace metaphor in American culture. Just as making trains run on time isn't even just because Hitler did it, a metaphor isn't evil just because Mao came up with it.
Of course, reading a sinister meaning into benign expression, and then using it to spin all kinds of wacky conspiracy theories is much more fun that giving it the most obvious meaning, so carry on. I hope your tinfoil hat that fits well!
Ahhh...
McCain-Feingold?
McCain-Kennedy?
McCain-(insert favorite democrat name here)?
Seems that McLame is more democrat than some Rats. Gee, maybe THAT’S why many of us loathe him. Not to mention his put down of the POW families back in the day, where he was complicit in ensuring that many of MY BROTHERS would never, ever see home again. How’s THAT for a good reason?
Go get a life, Bob... of your OWN. Same for McLame. He’s screwed over too many others’ lives to stay where he is ONE MORE WEEK, let alone another term.
BTTT
That weirdo.
He’s gonna be fun when senility sets in. Hopefully he won’t be in the Senate anymore when that happens.
Was that before or after the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
One thing this thread makes abundantly clear is that conservatives and those who wish to return this country to its Constitutional moorings and founding principles are locked in a to-the-death struggle against TWO domestic enemies: the openly-acknowledged socialist Left, and the covert, fifth-column, socialist Establishment Right(which isn't "Right" at all).
Both of these camps view, quite correctly, anyone or any group which advocates a return to limited Constitutional government as a mortal threat to their power, and will do absolutely anything to destroy them. They are, and always have been, playing for keeps, and are now terrified that millions of those Americans for whom these elites have such contempt are now waking up and deciding it's necessary for them to do the same...
Huh?
One thing this thread makes abundantly clear is that conservatives and those who wish to return this country to its Constitutional moorings and founding principles are locked in a to-the-death struggle against TWO domestic enemies: the openly-acknowledged socialist Left, and the covert, fifth-column, socialist Establishment Right(which isn't "Right" at all).
I see, so McCain is part of the "fifth-columnm socialist Estblishment Right" just because he won't endorse Palin right now, and wants to wait until he's had a chance to see what other candidates might be out there. Do I have that right?
First, you deserve the "Obscure Name-Drop Reference Of The Week" award. I have one of Dr. Bush's books in my library, I know exactly who he was, and I therefore understand that your attempted allusion is irrelevant. This is a political and philosophical issue, not a scientific one.
From a logic perspective, it's an interesting "datum" which has no correlation to the decades-long pattern of utterly revealing and absolutely damning "data" which comprises John McCain's words and deeds throughout his public political career.
Your "datum" is an irrelevant outlier and attempt to distract and focus attention on that irrelevancy instead of connecting the dots of all the other "data" and the pattern thus revealed.
Uh...no. McCain's a RINO because of the way he "reaches across the aisle to his "friends", the DemocRats" and because of the way he has voted and shown bipartisan support for socialist and other legislation that endangers our republic.
That, plus he's either too stupid to be conservative since he mistakenly 'thinks' that ANY of the DemocRats are his ""friends""....or...if any DemocRats really ARE his friends, then McCain is a traitor and in bed with them, which is pretty much the problem I've had with him ALL ALONG. (ergo my nickname for him, Snake/Maverick McCain)
SCREW McCAIN!
McCain is lying manipulative bottom feeding scum.
McCain can forever go F#$% himself.
How’s that for an ‘obsession’?
Don’t forget to clean up your mess before you zoom back to Andromeda.
Yeah...and it sorta figures...since the leftists picked him ‘for us’.
Huh?
It's a reference to a quote by Senator Blutarski. Look it up... /g
I see, so McCain is part of the "fifth-columnm socialist Estblishment Right" just because he won't endorse Palin right now, and wants to wait until he's had a chance to see what other candidates might be out there. Do I have that right?
No, you don't. It's way too early to endorse anyone. Palin, or any other prospective candidate, will rise or fall according to their own actions between now and the next election. My comments are directed at the rampant and vicious dishonesty on this forum by those whose efforts seem to be solely devoted to using easily verifiable lies and insinuations to tear down candidates, mostly Palin, but others sometimes get the dishonest criticism treatment as well.
Palin may or may not be the right choice to lead - time will tell. However, I'm fed up with the deliberate factual lies, insinuations, attacks on her family, and attempt at character assassination being directed at her. I would feel the same if such unfounded criticisms were directed at any other candidate or figure.
The problem you have with McCain and others such as Romney, Pawlenty, etc. is that the bases for those criticisms are so easy to document... /g
Forget it, he's rolling.
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.