Posted on 06/07/2010 7:39:50 AM PDT by pabianice
That’s one way to look at it. I think Beckel trusts Islamo-terrorists more than Jews.
Her role as an “unbiased” Journalist with her mystical esteemed place among the White House Press Corp made her Jew Hatred an issue.
She hates Jews almost as much as she hates President Bush and his Family.
The irony here is that Helen and her cohorts support Hate Crime Legislation, but only because they know it would never apply to them or their ilk.
Yes, this is nothing new for him. I recall him on Fox blaming the Israel lobby a few years ago.
” That’s one way to look at it. I think Beckel trusts Islamo-terrorists more than Jews.”
Sure. It is all part of the perversity of “progressivism”.
Digging deep:
The danger of a government with unlimited power [George Will]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2529511/posts
“Today, as it has been for a century, American politics is an argument between two Princetonians — James Madison, Class of 1771, and Woodrow Wilson, Class of 1879.” [snip — starting to sound like Glenn Beck?]
DIGGING DEEP [Monster Ping]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2496737/posts?page=552#552
” ...An overwhelming majority (88%) of the Political Class are confident in members of Congress to handle current economic problems. Nine-two percent (92%) of Mainstream voters don’t share that confidence...”
Think maybe the “beltway unintelligentsia” has it wrong?
Normally, yes.
Thomas Sowell wrote a book about how intellectuals get it wrong [he uses the Chamberlain Appeaser crowd as an example], and yet they are propped up by their peers.
The Divine Right of Intellectuals (Review of Thomas Sowell’s “Intellectuals and Society”)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2422301/posts
” As a result, intellectuals are free from one of the most rigorous constraints facing other occupations: external standards. An engineer will ultimately be judged on whether the structures he designs hold up, a businessman on whether he makes money, and so on. By contrast, the ultimate test of an intellectual’s ideas is whether other intellectuals “find those ideas interesting, original, persuasive, elegant, or ingenious. There is no external test.” If the intellectuals are like-minded, as they often are, then the validity of an idea depends on what those intellectuals already believe. This means that an intellectual’s ideas are tested only by internal criteria and “become sealed off from feedback from the external world of reality.”
An intellectual’s reputation, then, depends not on whether his ideas are verifiable but on the plaudits of his fellow intellectuals. “
Brilliant........no, not the intellectuals....Sowell ;-)
From my home page....
” Here are my modest observations on life 1)intellectuals aren’t 2)consultants can’t 3) Think tanks don’t 4) Conservatives won’t. “
Not only brilliant, but Sowell’s focus is laserlike. This is the heart of their power. Intellectuals are the high priests of their religion.
I had the pleasure to hear Walter Williams interview Sowell about this book. I was out of town on the road; it was months before I remembered to check on it in the web. Glad I did.
Sowell has always had a certain literary gift..he can take the most complex concepts, and render them understandable to the masses.
“Beckel defended Thomas’ remarks as “part of the free speech we Americans enjoy.”
Just as someone like Hannity might be free to say “All ni**ers steal and should go home to Africa,” right Bob?
Bob is a friggin’ moron. Of course a bigot has the right to say bigoted things. And the employer and colleagues of that bigot have every right to fire and shun him or her.
Very clever, beyond what sophists can comprehend.
Right. Many blowhards like to confuse people on purpose to impress them.
Sophists would no doubt refer to me as just another member of the “great unwashed “ ;-)
Sophist: “You’re Big Oil, a secret agent of Halli-bourbon, and you want tax cuts for the rich. Oh and you work for BP.”
” Right. Many blowhards like to confuse people on purpose to impress them.”
They often say things that at first seem vague, but upon closer examination, are absolutely meaningless.
Hahha! I heard the professors debate about Committee on Style during the Clinton impeachment hearing. That was painful. Professor McDonald blew them out of the water. The transcripts I find on it fail to do him justice.
I’m much more worried about
“Big Education”
“Big Government “
“Big Media”
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.