John Andrews & Co. Still Love Rummy

3 thoughts on “John Andrews & Co. Still Love Rummy”

1. I used to pepper John’s blog with comments like these:
   =========================================================
   John: You should never ask the people that got you into the problem to get you out of it.

   That could be the Republican Party’s epitaph. We forgot what made us Republicans. Ronald Reagan put it thusly:

     I think the Republican Party should take the lead and, as I say, raise that banner and say this is what we stand for. And what we stand for would be fiscal responsibility. … I think that it should be a government, or a party, that has a position that makes it plain that even though there are social faults that may lead to people turning to crime the individual must be held accountable for his misdeeds. That on the world scene we’re going to do whatever is necessary to insure that we can retain this free system of ours; in other words, we will maintain a defensive posture that is sufficient to deter aggression.

   Team Bush has spent our money like drunken sailors (except, as Reagan pointed out, the sailor spends his own money), fired federal prosecutors for attempting to hold individuals like Tom DeLay and Duke Cunningham accountable for their misdeeds, and mired us in a needless elective war. In short, Republicans are acting like the Democrats used to.

   That we continue to follow this son of a Bush off the proverbial edge of the cliff like a horde of crazed lemmings under the guise of “supporting the troops” is a national disgrace of unparalleled proportion. All empires fall in this fashion, and we deserve to fall on account of our inability to learn the lessons of history.

   The sensible Republican loves his country, but fears his government. And if at this point, you are not thoroughly appalled, you probably aren’t paying attention.
   ========================================================
   Suffice it to say that John promptly censored them on the basis of content (I disagree with John).  He is, like any other pompous autocrat, a dogged defender of his right to free speech.  It does not surprise me in the least that Andrews and Claremont would honor a man who is arguably the least honorable person in the world. 

   Log in to Reply

2. I know what you mean, Oscar.  John really hated it when folks called attention to his hypocrisy.  John wrote:

   Air America was abuzz on Thursday with flippant calls about assorted misdeeds we can now blame on Khalid Sheikh Muhammad – killing Anna Nicole, shaving Britney’s head, formulating New Coke, etc. Randy Rhodes, the acid-mouthed host, was having a little contest to ridicule Khalid’s confession of planning 9/11 and 30 other terrorist attacks. Ha ha.

   Smug denial is some people’s response to the Islamofascist design for destroying the United States, Israel, and the free world. But we at Backbone Radio respond with defiance and determination to repel this threat and defeat this enemy at all costs.

   What’s now known about KSM’s crimes and intentions, by the way, became public only because our country values individuals and their rights so highly – leading to one branch of government checking another even in wartime and even where enemy combatants are concerned.

   Three responses that got deleted:

   “Civil rights”: things you no longer have in this Third World banana republic euphemistically known as America.

   President Reagan understood the indefeasible connection between human rights and freedom, that all human rights are individual in character, and the often vast gulf between a politician’s words and his deeds. As he noted, our Founding Fathers held that each individual has certain rights so basic and fundamental to his dignity as a human being that no government may violate them, and that we as citizens have a right to expect our courts to enforce them. “They proclaim the belief – and represent a specific means of enforcing the belief – that the individual comes first, [and] that the Government is the servant of the people, and not the other way around.” Ronald Reagan, Speech (to the National Strategy Forum), May 4, 1988. But he rightly observes that in the real world, many do not enjoy these rights: Some governments “make elaborate claims that citizens under their rule enjoy human rights,” … but “[e]ven if words look good on paper, the absence of structural safeguards against abuse of power means they can be taken away as easily as they are allowed.” Ronald Reagan, Speech (Proclamation of Human Rights Day), Dec. 10, 1987.

   The only rights you actually have are the ones you can enforce at need. And as long as our judges remain totally unaccountable for their actions, they are free to refuse to enforce them at a whim. Accordingly, your “rights” have been taken away. Judge Bork called it a “judicial coup d’etat,” and as usual, he was right.

   In point of fact, you would have more “rights” in Sarajevo, as the former republic of Yugoslavia is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its optional protocol – which provides for transnational adjudication of rights violations. Like the old Soviet Union, the United States only signs human rights treaties….

   I tend to agree with Randi on this one, John. It is generally understood that confessions obtained via torture are notoriously unreliable, and that we have been engaged in torture (in Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, and by farming out some of our prisoners). We don’t prize the rights of our own citizens any more – to say nothing of those of our enemies.

   As for the alleged “Islamofascist design,” we made war on them first. Do you deny that we overthrew the only indigenous democracy in the region (Iran, under Mossadegh)? Do you deny that we installed the Shah, and the Ba’athists? Do you deny that we engineered the massive land-theft known as Israel? Do you even doubt that we should have fought back, had they done to us what we have done to them? Or do you consider Kelo v. City of New London to be a prerogative of the modern state?

   We should cut Israel loose, and now. Nations do not have friends; they have interests – and ours does not lie with a pack of land-thieves.

   Funny you should mention Wilberforce, John, as you treat me like they treated him.

   The economic forces marshalled against Wilberforce took pleasure in not just frustrating his project but also flushing his career down the toilet. Once seen as a future Prime Minister William Wilberforce was transformed into a `nutter’. Such was the force of malice aimed at him even John Wesley advised Wilberforce, unless he had a direct telegram from baby Jesus asking him to lead the fight against slavery, he should give up before he became a grease stain.

   My crusade is for civil rights for everyone. As long as you are not afflicted, you proclaim that everything is “great” in this Third World banana republic. Well, I suppose it’s great if you own the bananas…. 

   Log in to Reply

   1. I left several pointed but entirely respectful comments on his blog over the last year, and he deleted them.  Or probably he has Kathleen LaCrone do it for him.

      Now all his blogs say “No Comments.”  Just the way he likes it.

      John Andrews is way, way off in the Republican weeds anyway.  He’s literally following Tancredo around like he’s a lost Deadhead who saw Jerry’s ghost.  It’s funny.

      Log in to Reply