Could the Press Grow a Spine?

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will roll up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

On 24 Jun 2004 14:17:03 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will roll up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?


Arthur Kramer

Actually, Art, you shouldn't be using Purple Hearts as a measure of
valor. They demonstrate either bad luck, or if garnered in groups, a
level of combat incompetence.

I've got an SSM and five DFC's, but no PH. I'd rather win than lose.
I'd rather America prevail than the Islamic fundamentalists. I'd
rather retain national sovereignty than subject us to the whims of the
UN. I'd rather carry my own weapon and defend myself. I'd rather
individual responsibility than a welfare state. I'd rather keep my
earnings and make my own spending choices. I'd like higher standards
rather than affirmative action.

Any questions?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 6/24/2004 7:53 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 24 Jun 2004 14:17:03 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will roll
up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?


Arthur Kramer

Actually, Art, you shouldn't be using Purple Hearts as a measure of
valor. They demonstrate either bad luck, or if garnered in groups, a
level of combat incompetence.

I've got an SSM and five DFC's, but no PH. I'd rather win than lose.
I'd rather America prevail than the Islamic fundamentalists. I'd
rather retain national sovereignty than subject us to the whims of the
UN. I'd rather carry my own weapon and defend myself. I'd rather
individual responsibility than a welfare state. I'd rather keep my
earnings and make my own spending choices. I'd like higher standards
rather than affirmative action.

Any questions?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8



There are those who will do nothing for anyone under any circumstances
regardless of need. Then there are those who are more concerned and helpful to
those in need. Your mileage may vary. There is nothing heroic about greed.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

And there is nothing Benevolent about Stupidity, Comrade.

Steve Swartz




"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 6/24/2004 7:53 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 24 Jun 2004 14:17:03 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will
roll
up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?


Arthur Kramer

Actually, Art, you shouldn't be using Purple Hearts as a measure of
valor. They demonstrate either bad luck, or if garnered in groups, a
level of combat incompetence.

I've got an SSM and five DFC's, but no PH. I'd rather win than lose.
I'd rather America prevail than the Islamic fundamentalists. I'd
rather retain national sovereignty than subject us to the whims of the
UN. I'd rather carry my own weapon and defend myself. I'd rather
individual responsibility than a welfare state. I'd rather keep my
earnings and make my own spending choices. I'd like higher standards
rather than affirmative action.

Any questions?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8



There are those who will do nothing for anyone under any circumstances
regardless of need. Then there are those who are more concerned and
helpful to
those in need. Your mileage may vary. There is nothing heroic about greed.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

In message , Ed Rasimus
writes
On 24 Jun 2004 14:17:03 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:
Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?

Actually, Art, you shouldn't be using Purple Hearts as a measure of
valor. They demonstrate either bad luck, or if garnered in groups, a
level of combat incompetence.

I'd call them good luck myself, but then my (limited) experience was
infantry where *we* were the targets. (This isn't meant to denigrate
groups like armour and aviation: just because the enemy is targeting
your platform rather than you personally; doesn't make you safer,
because the overmatch in weapons involved and for aircraft the problem
of a long fall to follow, tends to produce much more an "escaped unhurt
/ killed with no chute" dichotomy)

I've got an SSM and five DFC's, but no PH. I'd rather win than lose.
I'd rather America prevail than the Islamic fundamentalists. I'd
rather retain national sovereignty than subject us to the whims of the
UN. I'd rather carry my own weapon and defend myself. I'd rather
individual responsibility than a welfare state. I'd rather keep my
earnings and make my own spending choices. I'd like higher standards
rather than affirmative action.

Any questions?

Yes, but they're quibbles rather than arguments. I'd argue details of
many of those statements while agreeing with them overall.

--
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
Julius Caesar I:2

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 22:46:22 +0100, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:

In message , Ed Rasimus
writes

Any questions?

Yes, but they're quibbles rather than arguments. I'd argue details of
many of those statements while agreeing with them overall.

But, then you've proven yourself to be a rational individual who
offers greater depth to the discussion than simple name calling or
sloganeering.

As I regularly tell students, political questions are complex and
nuanced. They usually exhibit two opposing positions with deeply held
convictions. The hard part is to rise above the pig-wrestling and
listen to the other side's argument, demand that both sides offer fact
and reason, then make objective rather than subjective choices.

Ain't easy.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Ed Rasimus wrote:

As I regularly tell students, political questions are complex and
nuanced. They usually exhibit two opposing positions with deeply held
convictions. The hard part is to rise above the pig-wrestling and
listen to the other side's argument, demand that both sides offer fact
and reason, then make objective rather than subjective choices.

Ain't easy.

Has it *ever* actually been that way though?

I'm reading a bio of Ben Franklin (for months now) and am at
the point where he loses his seat in the PA Assembly due to
efforts of "The Proprietors" to oust him.

The Proprietors were basically the Penn family that owned
PA, ran estates there exempt from taxes, etc, etc, etc.

A pamphlet war against Franklin made outrageous claims
(some based on seeds of truth) that put modern political
debate and especially ads to shame.

This sort of character assassination in the guise of
political debate was common political currency from the
founding of the US right up to the late 1800s when electioneering
seemed to become more civil (though still filled with the
smoke filled, back room wheeling and dealing). Washington,
Adams, Jefferson and Jackson seemed especially victimized
by this sort of politically driven, savage personal attack.

Sitting back and coolly considering the evidence for a
decision seems more the realm of scientific method and
even that gets nasty at times.


SMH

In article , Stephen Harding
wrote:



This sort of character assassination in the guise of
political debate was common political currency from the
founding of the US right up to the late 1800s when electioneering
seemed to become more civil (though still filled with the
smoke filled, back room wheeling and dealing). Washington,
Adams, Jefferson and Jackson seemed especially victimized
by this sort of politically driven, savage personal attack.

Ah, but the rhetoric of the day, if carried into modern times, might be
a bit redeeming. Compare Cheney's recent anatomical comment to that
from John Randolph of Roanoke about Henry Clay: "Like a rotten mackerel
by moonlight, he shines and stinks."

Even turn-of-the-twentieth-century would do:

Speechifying Repreentative: "I'd rather be right than President!"

Speaker of the House Vinegar Joe Cannon: "You, sir, are in no danger of
ever being either."

regrettably, political discussions are difficult with a president
that, by his own admission "doesnt do nuance". [sigh] GWB is a good
candidate to be a student of yours.

Ed Rasimus wrote in message . ..
As I regularly tell students, political questions are complex and
nuanced.

On 28 Jun 2004 21:52:18 -0700, (w.a. manning)
wrote:

regrettably, political discussions are difficult with a president
that, by his own admission "doesnt do nuance". [sigh] GWB is a good
candidate to be a student of yours.

Ed Rasimus wrote in message . ..
As I regularly tell students, political questions are complex and
nuanced.

You seem quite eager to jump in here, without apparently having much
preceding in the discussion.

Your quote regarding the President, while accurate, is taken out of
context. The reference is to dealing quite clearly with enemies such
as Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. He makes things quite clear to
them and wants them to understand that his message requires no great
degree of reading between lines and searching for limits. This is
quite appropriate.

When it comes to foreign policy, he seems to be quite nicely equipped
to deal with the complexities of international relations. And, most
importantly, he has surrounded himself with quite competent advisors,
most notably Colin Powell and Condeleeza Rice. His direction of the
orderly transition of sovereignty back to the interim Iraqi government
might be a case in point.

(You'll probably next want to bring up the "I don't read the papers"
comment. I'd suggest then that with the drivel recently coming out of
the NYT and WP that the policy choice might be a good one. With the
assets of the NSA at his disposal, he might not need to get the
interpretation of some ax-grinding left-wing editorialist to have
sufficient information to make good decisions.)

Elsewhere you've commented on my statement that I don't tolerate
poseurs and wannabes. You suggest I apply that to the President's
National Guard service where over a period of five years and several
months he attended USAF pilot training (I'm familiar with the rigors,
having graduated myself and then having spent four years as a flight
and academic instructor), having completed the necessary survival
schools (also familiar), and having qualified in a single-seat,
single-engine Century series jet to perform operational missions
(again, intimately familiar). I've discussed the President's flight
performance on several occasions with a close friend and F-105
100-mission pilot who served as the President's instructor pilot when
he attended UPT. I've got no problem with the President showing up in
Nomex and a G-suit--he's earned the right.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8