|
| | 
Grognard fantôme
Last Seen:
Today @ 12:19 AM
Posts: 7,245
Visits: 9,612
|
| | |
| | 
Awesomely awesome
 
Last Seen:
9/18/2008 7:48 PM
Posts: 1,266
Visits: 4,317
|
| | |
| | 
General
Last Seen:
11/18/2008 10:51 PM
Posts: 3,789
Visits: 5,126
|
| | |
| |
Grognard fantôme
Last Seen:
Today @ 12:19 AM
Posts: 7,245
Visits: 9,612
|
| | |
| | 
Day-Saver!
Last Seen:
Today @ 2:01 AM
Posts: 5,299
Visits: 27,191
|
| | |
| |
Grognard fantôme
Last Seen:
Today @ 12:19 AM
Posts: 7,245
Visits: 9,612
|
| ADDIT: Found the proper Aesop's Fable analogy!
So this group doesn't happen to be the Bush administration, or even Tony Blair, does that mean their concerns should be dismissed as complaints and sour grapes?
Ahh, partisanship. I have a proposition for you my friend. It is in the best interest of the Democratic party, if the remainder of the administration of Dubyah, is as SUCCESSFUL as possible, AND, if Democratic leaders do their BEST to appear cooperative, congenial, though always critical, and impartial in WORKING WITH the current GOP majority, not strictly AGAINST it. Gridlock serves no one. Helping the nation to address its problems will abdicate less power to the GOP for the long-term than will continuing to oppose every thing they stand for and do. The Democratic Party, can, and hopefully will, once again have its day in the sun, but not if it continues to be guided primarily by spitefulness, and resentment.
It is in EVERYONE'S best interest, if Saudi becomes more democratic. Just as it is in everyone's best interest if the entire world becomes more democratic, no? Ultimately the debate between left and right is a debate about how to bring about this ultimate dream. Portraying the GOP as a bunch of covert Stalinesuque demons is utterly ridiculous, and fails to convince the majority.
Highlighting only the negative in a development like this, does not contribute constructively, that is why I refer to it as 'sour grapes.' Much like the Democratic side has consistently focused solely on the possibility that Iraq might spiral down, down, down into quagmire, and NEVER become a prosperous, stable, democratic nation. It is almost as if, they spitefullly WANT Iraq to suffer this fate, in order to prove their original opposition to the war in general to have been correct after all. Talk about callousness.
In my opinion, much liberal thinking today is seriously impeded with two irrational tendencies:
First, the tendency to automatically derogate, oppose, and hate, anything that Dubyah or his GOP minions do, say, believe, espouse, or stand for, as being insipid, evil, insidious, and horrific. This is the basis for the vast majority of Democratic Party policy of late. How vapid. How repulsive. How childhish. True enough, the Democratic party is currently marginalized, lacking a strong voice, anything like a majority of representation, but will this sort of behavior increase its influence? In short, the Democratic party, just about since the impeachment of Clinton, has been wracked by a temper tantrum. Many Democratic-affiliated special interest groups (Sierra Club, Green Peace, Amnesty International, most mass media, etc.) have followed their mummy in also pitching fits in hopes that the predominantly non-affiliated and skeptical moderate American voter would be convinced. We have not been, as the last election demonstrates.
Two, a hopeful but irrational belief that peace can be established and maintained through capitulation, and that the SOLE solution to the Jihad problem is to rectify the supposed historical malfeasance of the U.S. in Middle Eastern foreign policy. Fully addressing this point would require an entire book (which I'm working on :p ), but that sums it up.
As it turns out, it appears I have fallen prey to the widespread custom of misusing this particular phrase *sigh,* monkey-see, monkey-do.
In a famous fable by Aesop, a fox declared that he didn’t care that he could not reach an attractive bunch of grapes because he imagined they were probably sour anyway. You express sour grapes when you put down something you can’t get: “winning the lottery is just a big headache anyway.” The phrase is misused in all sorts of ways by people who don’t know the original story and imagine it means something more general like "bitterness” or “resentment."
Sour Grapes
Ah ha! I found the proper Aesop's fable for this analogy with Democrat-Republican bickering! 
There once was a man who had quarrelsome children. Even on his dying day they bickered.
"My last wish," he said, "is for you to bring me a bundle of sticks."
When this was done, he gave each child one and said, "Take your solitary twig in hand and break it."
Crack! Crack! went the dry, old wood as each child broke a solitary twig.
"Now," he said, "bind them together. Tie them, and you'll see how much stronger your brittle twig can be."
The old man passed away. His children never forgot that day. Though they each lived separate, distant lives, Each sister, Each brother, In times of trouble they bonded together like a bundle of sticks, Giving strength to one another.
Quarrelsome Children |
--
"'The front' is wherever you stop running away. Get used to it. This is what modern warfare looks like." K T Cat |  |  |
| |
| |
Day-Saver!
Last Seen:
Today @ 2:01 AM
Posts: 5,299
Visits: 27,191
|
| It is in the best interest of the Democratic party ......CUT
yes Scip, I realize that. You don't have to convince me of that. I've not a problem with this Roberts fellow that Bush has appointed. In fact, I'm hearing more complaints these days from conservative groups than liberals.... Anyways, You quote me on calling out the Bush administration and Tony Blair, but that had nothing to do with partisanship.I may have not expressed myself properly, but it had more to do with the Power that the Bush and Blair administrations have, where as the Saudi opposition group has not power, but merely a voice.
Highlighting only the negative in a development like this, does not contribute constructively
Right. Well, in not looking at any other sources, the way I see it, the article that you referenced us to did a fine job of highlighting the negative with regards to what this group has said. In otherwords, it may have been taken out of context. they dismissed the move, but what else, really, did they say about it?? All we see is a snapshot of their dissent. One sentence. Certainly there's more to the story than that. Consider the source. The BBC migh have some inherent bias in reporting on this group, whomever they may be. Do you even know who this group is? I looked around and couldn't find anything directly, but I did find out about a group called The Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia. Don't know if these are the same gents or not....
UK-based Saudi opposition group mocks US move. |
--
HERE I COME TO SAVE THE DAY! | | | |
| |
| |
Grognard fantôme
Last Seen:
Today @ 12:19 AM
Posts: 7,245
Visits: 9,612
|
| | |
|
|
