.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Bully Pulpit

The term "bully pulpit" stems from President Theodore Roosevelt's reference to the White House as a "bully pulpit," meaning a terrific platform from which to persuasively advocate an agenda. Roosevelt often used the word "bully" as an adjective meaning superb/wonderful. The Bully Pulpit features news, reasoned discourse, opinion and some humor.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Ricky's Back For More

Nice try, but way off the mark.

I think not. Bull's eye is a better evaluation.

For example, oh i don't know, maybe the slave trade.

There's that history thing again. Your arguments will work better if they are based on what really happened versus what some liberal history professor (or high school teacher) told you. The Chinese had a centuries old history of slavery before the first white European ever thought of buying or selling people. As for the African slave trade, the vast majority of black Africans were sold into slavery by other black Africans. It wasn't a matter of the white Europeans introducing a new idea, it was more like the white Europeans were just new customers. And I'm not sure how you can paste slavery on white imperialism, or any other flavor of imperialism for that matter. Imperialism is the subjugation of sovereign nations under a single, usually foreign rule. Slavery is no more or less inherent in imperialism than any other geo-political system. Indeed, your precious Chinese communists practice economic slavery today.

How about the financing of both sides of the Iran/Iraq war so they would decimate each other: making it much easier for us to get OUR oil and gas from under THEIR land.

Are you complaining about white imperialism or about Machiavellianism? Once again, that kind of strategy is not limited to whites. In fact, it is a time-honored military strategy that was practiced before white Europeans had ever forged their first bronze weapons. And you make it sound like we stole oil from the Arabs. Last I knew, we pay them pretty handsomely for it. Saddam didn't exactly build Uday's palace from the proceeds of sheep sales.

I merely said that they could have (& probably still could) if they wanted to. BUt they don't because they don't seem to be as ignorant, arrogant, and/or short-sighted as most white cultures are.

You're confusing motive with opportunity, Ricky-boy. Also the motives you ascribe to the Chinese are pure speculation on your part. In fact, actual history (once again) puts lie to your claim. The Chinese lived in a feudal system until the late nineteenth century. No purely feudal system has ever been able to practice any sort of imperialism simply because it lacks an imperator. The Chinese had a nominal emperor, but the warlords were free to remove him at any time, despite his professed deity. That's not much of an imperial system. The Chinese were so weak and degenerate that they were eventually conquered utterly by the armies of a tiny island off their coast, also known as Japan. No, the reason the Chinese never conquered to world was not because they chose the high moral ground, it was because they couldn't even conquer themselves.

...i don't think whites are inherently evil....just inherently ignorant and greedy.

Guess what, Ricky-boy? That makes you a racist. That makes you ethno-centrist. Yet, somehow, you will still insist that Mark Steyn and I are racists, even though neither of us ascribes any inherent attributes to any race or ethinicity.

...i'm sure they'll be willing to keep throwing you (& me) their table scraps!

Well if these are table scraps, I'll have some more, please. Sounds like you're bitter, Ricky. What happened? Didn't that career in underwater basket weaving or social work or conservative baiting turn out to be one that supports you in the manner you would like?

1 Comments:

Blogger Rick Miller said...

It would be nice if you liked to debate things other than semantics; because that sort of debate definitely gives advantages to fast-typing computer dorks?

What makes you think that the Chinese are precious to me? Because i use their cultural patience as a comparison to our impatience? I ascribe no "moral high ground" to them at all; you are just inferring that. In fact, the probability of it all is that the Chinese are just waiting for us stupid white people's world domination to run its course. They know that we will mess it all up with our impatience and greed, and then all 2 billion of them will be there to pick up the pieces of our broken world power.

And so you know, i'm an equal opportunity racist: I think all humans in general are inherently stupid and greedy! White people are just real "in-your-face" about it; as you have so brilliantly demonstrated for us.

I never said we stole all of the oil from the Arabs. Actually what has occurred is that we have financially and militarily propped up dictators, then we pay said dictators to sell us their oil, and then said dictators horde that money for themselves and their extremely wealthy families. The disparity between the rich and the poor in Saudi Arabia and Iraq serves as perfect example. But i use the word "we" very loosely. By "we" i mean wealthy oil execs who were born wealthy & do their damnedest to stay that way by lobbying the US govt so stringently that they almost always get thier way. Who was on Dick Cheney's "energy task force"? Well we don't know because the Supreme Court ruled that he didn't have to tell. Must be those liberal, activist judges huh?

Hey, financially i'm doing just fine (great by many standards), i'll take some more table scraps too! But i'm not so brain-washed in conservative ideaology that i can't tell the difference between the main course and the scraps!

And as far as your thread on slavery goes: Your version of histroy is obviously the "white man's version." I'll leave your words alone though, because your argument brings to mind that old saying: "You can't win an argument with an ignorant man!"

But on the other hand we do agree on something......Bush is a fool!

Tuesday, December 06, 2005 4:18:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home