posted July 26, 2005 03:57 PM            

Chait finds the fact that the president makes time to exercise "astonishing." He then notes: "My guess is that Bush associates exercise with discipline. ... The notion of a connection between physical and mental potency is, of course, silly. ..."

Really? Not according to the medical establishment and the surgeon general's office, which notes the benefits of exercise. Such as? Better sleep, reduced tension and stress, reduction of high blood pressure, reduction of anxiety and depression, reduced risk of colon and breast cancer, healthy bones, muscles and joints, improved self-image, and generally improved physical health.

For the most powerful man on earth, the man on whose shoulders the fate of the free world rests, the president clearly recognizes exercise is an imperative component to his being able to do the job.

Chait tries to assert his point about the "silliness" of connecting exercise with mental acuity by arguing, "Consider all the perfectly toned airheads in Hollywood — or perhaps, even the president himself." The last time I checked, most actresses in Hollywood are emaciated, they are not "perfectly toned." There is a difference between being thin and being healthy — a distinction lost on Chait and Hollywood in general.

It would be easy to dismiss Chait as just another "journalist" who makes a living hating the president, but there's more to it than that. You see, leftists harbor a personal jealousy of people unlike them.

And who would that be? People considered "on the right" or "conservative," those who have a healthier, happier, more positive view of life. When you view the future with optimism, when you feel you are in charge of your destiny, you're going to be kinder to and take better care of yourself.

The pettiness of Chait's argument reaches its pinnacle of envy with an insistent but unconvincing shout of I-Have-Self-Esteem-Too! in his last gasp. Chait closes by accusing the president's encouragement of exercise among Americans as a further indication of how "out of touch he is. It's nice for Bush that he can take an hour or two out of every day to run, bike, or pump iron. Unfortunately, most of us have more demanding jobs than he does."

Wow, that says it all, doesn't it? Chait is smarter, more clever, is much busier and certainly more important than the president. And he doesn't even need to lift his keester out of his chair! Make no mistake here — the Left is obsessed with one thing: mainstreaming their nihilistic, empty lives. Within their narcissism and desire to be ‘normal,' society must be made to look like them, and let's be honest here — their world of victimhood, depression and hate is not a pretty one.

Consider their political and public leadership — those who are supposed to be the cream of the crop, meant to attract others to their camp, the Role Models. Teddy Kennedy. The Clintons. Lynne Stewart. Barbra Streisand. Whoopi Goldberg. Rosie O'Donnell. Michael Moore. Alec Baldwin. Al Franken. Need I say more?

During my time with the National Organization for Women, one of the (many) things that disturbed me during national board meetings was the fact that many of the women seemed to be allergic to bathing, and especially frightened of the concept of ‘grooming.'

The simplest things reveal that you are in a room full of unhappy people — many were significantly overweight, and by grooming I mean engaging in the simple act of running a brush though your hair, brushing one's teeth, visiting a dentist if need be (at least on occasion), and simply caring enough about yourself to at least attempt to appear healthy.

When I would dare to bring up the issue of appearance (as gently as one could imagine), that notion, of course, was rejected as "surrendering to the male-dominated view of female beauty." Hey, how about surrendering to not being repulsive? That helps every cause, whatever it may be.

Of course, on the Left, one gets lost in groupthink. Personal health, exercise and being aware of one's own body in itself is an indication that you're conscious of yourself. Yet it is personal unconsciousness which is encouraged and fostered in leftist activist and leadership circles.

Being Unhealthy and celebrating the Ungroomed is an art form on the Left. And ultimately, as evidenced by Chait's opinion piece, those who do take care of themselves, and dare to remind society of how things should be, are demonized. Why? Because they serve as a counterpoint to what the Left is not.

You see, it now cannot be ignored that one side of the political spectrum even looks unwell. And how does the Left strive to make that irrelevant? By marginalizing those who are unlike them — the physically healthy, those who actually take care of themselves, are to be mocked and shunned.

Think I'm being too extreme? Consider Robin Givhan's coverage of John Roberts' family at the president's press conference announcing Judge Roberts as his nominee for the Supreme Court. In her Washington Post story, also on July 22, 2005, titled "An Image a Little Too Carefully Crafted," Givhan eclipsed Chait with an astounding pettiness thought only in existence on the elementary school playground. Givhan actually attacks Judge Roberts' wife and children for being groomed and well-dressed.

"His wife and children stood before the cameras, groomed and glossy in pastel hues — like a trio of Easter eggs, a handful of Jelly Bellies, three little Necco wafers. ... Separate the child from the clothes, which do not acknowledge trends, popular culture or the passing of time. They are not classic; they are old-fashioned. These clothes are Old World, old money. ..."

In other words, the Roberts children should have been dressed in GAP clothes, preferably with a piercing of one body part or another. While Josie, their daughter, would have been more appropriate in a pair of low-rider jeans which make refrigerator-repairmen out of little girls.

President and Mrs. Bush and the Roberts family make the mistake of not pledging allegiance to the decline of culture. They insult the Left by reminding intellectually lazy Slaves to Decay like Chait and Givhan that class, decorum and respect still exist. Tradition, caring for one's family and caring for oneself are still values that prevail.

Is Lynne Stewart to be the new American beauty standard? Is Michael Moore, and the slow suicide of morbid obesity, to be sought after? Is Ward Churchill to be the New Ideal Man? Is the discipline brought by exercise and self-restraint so frightening that we would prefer to have a quadruple-bypass like Bill Clinton?

After all, if you care enough about yourself to resist a Big Mac and Krispy Kreme, you would also have the discipline to resist an intern. Unless, of course, your world is one where there are no standards, exercise is "creepy," and looking good is "old fashioned." Theirs is a world, as Bill Clinton mused, where you do what you want ‘because you can.'

posted July 26, 2005 09:08 PM              

The more you push opinion the harder it will be to get your message across. Try a different approach. I see reason in what you are saying, as well as in what Magus says.

I don't dislike you, I'm just trying to help.

And this isn't in regard to this post, I just see people not listening to you, and I think we should all listen to each other. I never meant to insinuate that one is right.

posted July 26, 2005 10:10 PM            

Don't let Jwhop put words in your mouth. He's notorious for trying to do that. He doesn't agree with any notion that people ought to have an open mind about things.

Welcome to Global Unity, where things are anything but united.

posted July 26, 2005 11:34 PM            

Now Acoustic, if you'd like to address me directly...as I am doing to you...which is the adult way, I'll be all ears to see how you attempt to spin what Magus said about revolution in America. That is, if you are able to keep this on an adult level.

posted July 27, 2005 04:10 AM              

I don't know what Magus means by that, that the United States can't handle being a republic? Is that what he means?

posted July 27, 2005 09:42 AM              

hello bleakbeauty welcome to the Dark Side.

posted July 28, 2005 03:23 AM            

The latest in your string of ironic statements.

posted July 28, 2005 03:32 PM            

quote:

---

You want to preach to me about being more mature, Jwhop?

The latest in your string of ironic statements.

You're the oldest guy in here, are you not? Where's your sterling example of maturity? Please demonstrate for us what you've learned in all these years of interaction with people. Show us how YOU win friends and influence people. Personal attacks, lying, slander, and exaggeration is what we've seen thus far, but that hasn't won any confidence has it?..Acoustic

---

Acoustic, your premise is full of error. The notion I'm here to win friends and influence people is fatally flawed. I'm not into "group think" and never was.

It's obvious you have major issues with your parents Acoustic. So, let me make this clear to you; I'm not your father! Neither is Uncle Sam. Transferring your paternal hostility to others is both juvenile and futile.

Nevertheless Acoustic, here's some school yard wisdom you should have learned on the school yard, at an early age but obviously didn't. So Little Acoustic, if you walk up to little Billy on the school yard and say, "your mother is a sl*t and a wh*re"; Little Billy is going to just beat the living hell out of you! If you further compound your error by running to all your classmates yelling and screaming "Billy hit me, he bit me, he's mean"...look at all my ouchies." Some are going to get around to asking you what you did. When they find out you called Little Billy's mother a sl*t and a wh*re, some of them are going to beat the hell out of you too. When you speak "fighting words" Little Acoustic, expect an adverse reaction....one you won't like.

I'm really sorry I had to dumb this down for you Little Acoustic but when you say, "America repressed Iraqi citizens," those are fighting words and you further compounded your error by accusing every American of being guilty of that repression. Those words are not only vile, nasty and inflammatory, they cross that line into "fighting words" and you shouldn't expect to get away with it unscathed. You got what you deserved for your "fighting words."

Now, as to the issue of winning friends and influencing people Little Acoustic; if I have to make a choice between the truth and making friends, it isn't even a close call. I'll take the truth every time.

Here's some truth for you Acoustic. You live in the most powerful nation which has ever existed on earth, economically, militarily, conceptually, idealistically and in every other way. The United States nor the people of the United States got that way by surrendering to tyrants, tyrants of any stripe. Nor by peacefully demonstrating against those same murderous tyrants and those seeking to kill us. Your juvenile notions about connecting the practical application of Gandhi and Kings' peaceful demonstrations to counter, deter and change the behavior of murderous terrorists who want to kill us would only get us all beheaded.

Your ignorance is colossal, ignorance about your own country, ignorance about foreign affairs, ignorance about human nature and ignorance about the true motives and goals of international terrorists and those murderous tyrants who send them out as their proxies.

As for winning confidence Acoustic; it's you who lack confidence. It's you who attempt to enlist others to back you up...not me. The truth is not subject to a vote Acoustic, truth simply exists, unconcerned about how far you may have your head up where it doesn't belong.

Here's one more truth for you Acoustic. If the borders of every nation on earth were thrown open today, without restriction, that nation you accuse with your vile, nasty and inflammatory accusations, America, would sink under the weight of all the people who would come here. Canada too.

Are you immature Acoustic? Absolutely. You mistake maturity for passivity and acquiescence in the face of outrage and mistake maturity as seeking consensus of opinion to the detriment of the truth.

posted July 28, 2005 05:29 PM              

even i could never get these kinds of vile spitting rants out of jwhop no matter how hard i tried.....talk about ugly.....congratulations, you mustve hit a real sore spot.....

posted July 28, 2005 05:53 PM            

I find it ironic that your schoolyard story talks of consensus, and then you go on to say that you don't need consensus.

I think that it's interesting that you bring violence into this again with your schoolyard analogy. You relate everything back to violence don't you?

What you don't seem to realize is that I'm a pretty popular guy in every circle I exist. Always have been, and my integrity keeps me from the anger of others. When people feel like taking offense from something I've said or done, they generally give me the opportunity to explain myself as I am not generally one to offend. My explanation generally leads to understanding, and that's what rapport is all about. People understanding people.

Also, I have to correct your thinking about the way I used Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr. I was not saying anything about peaceful demonstration in relation to terrorists. To take that from what I said further points to your dellusional way of thinking. As I've pointed out before, and as James Woolsey, former director of the CIA, recently stated in his own terms on the Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson peace with terrorists and with the Middle East will require more than military action.

You are totally immersed in Group Think. Look at the articles you post. Look at the sources for ALL of your information. Trying to define yourself as an independent thinker is a ridiculous notion.

Once again, as in every recent post you've written to me, you've taken what I've said out of context. Either you believe them to be in context on their own, which they're not, or you're trying to convince some secret conservative contingent here. There's no one for you to convince, so you may as well put my words into the context from whence they came.

quote:

---

Now, as to the issue of winning friends and influencing people Little Acoustic; if I have to make a choice between the truth and making friends, it isn't even a close call. I'll take the truth every time.

---

Hmmm...I don't see you as one capable of discerning the truth. I've called you out on every character flaw you've displayed here.

- trying to affect arguments using emotion instead of logic (bullying)
- taking words out of context (lying)
- being rude, malicious
- name-calling
- promoting violence
- acting immaturely in dealing with others
- not understanding human nature
- using unconfirmed sources of information
- demonizing the democratic half of the nation

If you showed that you'd improved in any of these areas it might indicate that you have the ability to learn the truth. The fact that you haven't changed your ways an iota seems to indicate that you are fixed (in the astrological sense) beyond reason.

posted July 28, 2005 07:14 PM            

The fact that most here are on the left, the left who constantly, incessantly bashed Bush for everything from his appearance to his spiritual nature. I wouldn't expect them to line up on any other side but the leftist side. There are a few here who are conservatives, but we don't gang up. Your speech, your ideas and your sources you choose to post are testament to your state of mind. The fact...if I take it as fact that you don't know the political leanings of those you put forth here as experts is also testament to your leftist leaning because they are too and what they say strikes a responsive chord with you.

Your talk of being popular doesn't sway me Acoustic. I'm popular too, in the circles in which I choose to associate. I don't have to compromise any principles there. Now you, Acoustic think popularity is a goal. It isn't, and I don't strive for popularity.

You are certainly hung up on violence. I told you what violence is Acoustic and you keep bringing it up. Violence should be done to those who are not innocent of wrong doing. Terrorists are not innocent Acoustic and you put Americans in the very same category by declaring Americans guilty of repression.

You continue to lie about my taking what you say out of context. I have you exactly bracketed in the right pew Acoustic. You are a leftist.

Now Acoustic, you said violence only breeds more violence and cited street gang violence and retaliation as your proof. I want to remind you that I asked you about all the follow-on wars between the warring nations of WWII. When are you going to get around to answering?

You put forth phony arguments Acoustic as a cover for the terrorists. Phony arguments for leaving Saddam alone...Iraqi citizens might be harmed. The entire range of arguments leftist put forth to protect their communist friends and the terrorists are phony arguments. The target is the United States and any lying argument which gives Uncle Sam a black eye are cheered. The collaboration between leftists and terrorists is well established and they do share a common enemy, the United States.

You say you're not one to offend, yet your denunciation of the United States is offensive in the extreme as is your lying about the US and US citizens. What you don't seem to understand is that by declaring Americans repressive for permitting the US to go after Saddam, you opened the door to the same charge against Iraqi citizens...who cannot be presumed to be innocent..given they tolerated Saddam and didn't overthrow Saddam when he invaded Kuwait, when he gassed the Kurds and when he gassed the Iranians. Of course, that's not my view but it logically follows given your assessment of US citizens.

Only a total airhead believes peace with terrorists is even possible, let alone desirable. The airheads of the left give terrorists cover by blaming the US and western civilization for their actions. This is the very same message coming off the radical mullahs and it's the same message off your keyboard. This is an ideological and religious war and the sooner the airheads of the left get that, the better. This is not a war between the West and Islam or Muslims. It's a war declared by radical fundamentalist terrorists against the Great Satan and the rest of western civilization.

I've heard more truth and wisdom from teenagers Acoustic than anything you've had to say. You're out of touch with reality. I know you don't like the articles I post, they make you squirm; they report what the radical leftist dimocrats are attempting to do and also what they have done. You're going to see a lot more from NewsMax Acoustic.

You have no character with which to be judging the character of anyone Acoustic. If you had an honest bone in your body and a shred of character, you'd pack up and leave the United States. You'd be much happier too Acoustic because the adults are not going to let you or any of your radical leftist friends anywhere near the decision making process. This is a representative government and all the screeching, whining and pants wetting by radical leftist dimocrats are not going to win them the majority in the Senate, in the House or the White House either. With each passing week their screeching gets louder...a sign of desperation. With every denunciation of America, American military personnel, American foreign policy and the American economy, dimocrats look more foolish and desperate.

trying to affect arguments using emotion instead of logic
You're the one attempting to put the touchy feely, illogical arguments forth
taking words out of context (lying)
You're the one lying about your political leanings and the source of your leftist rhetoric.
being rude, malicious
There is nothing more rude or malicious that accusing the United States and American Citizens of repression.
name-calling
Calling you a leftist is accurate. If you don't like the label, change your leftist rhetoric
promoting violence
Killing those who are attempting to kill the innocent is exactly the right response to terrorists and terrorism.
acting immaturely in dealing with others
The right response to others is to tell them the truth and to point out when they are lying.
not understanding human nature
You are so detached from reality Acoustic that you do violence to the English language when you talk about human nature. You are clueless.
using unconfirmed sources of information
The sources I use Acoustic are far superior to the tripe you post from your favorite leftist airheads. At least the sources I use are attributed to stories on major news services or it's clear they are opinion pieces. You post opinion pieces and expect it to be accepted as truth.
demonizing the democratic half of the nation
There is nothing democratic about the dimocrat party. The party has degenerated into a bunch of far leftist radical special interest groups. When that so called half of the nation you mentioned hears these radicals you put forth as democrats they vote against their ideas.

Clearly Acoustic, I think you are flying under a false flag. The ideas you've put forth here would be denounced by Johh McCain, the candidate you "say" you would have voted for. Clearly Acoustic, if you voted, you voted for your ideological twin, the traitor John Kerry.

posted July 28, 2005 07:14 PM            

quote:

---

As for winning confidence Acoustic; it's you who lack confidence. It's you who attempt to enlist others to back you up...not me. The truth is not subject to a vote Acoustic, truth simply exists, unconcerned about how far you may have your head up where it doesn't belong.

---

There's a lot misspoken here. I obviously don't lack confidence. Why should I?

As for enlisting others to back me up, it's hardly necessary. Your reputation's no secret around here.

It's interesting the motive behind it, though, isn't it? See, I see all your posts bashing the left as an attempt to accomplish something. Why do you post here? Do you think people are going to be silly enough to take an education from NewsMax or Ann Coulter? I think you do it in an effort to try to change perception about the left, because you hate people on the left. As you've noticed, though, no one seems particularly convinced. Instead of just giving up and letting another conservative take over, you just keep posting. You must have some need to aggitate.

quote:

---

Are you immature Acoustic? Absolutely. You mistake maturity for passivity and acquiescence in the face of outrage and mistake maturity as seeking consensus of opinion to the detriment of the truth.

---

Seeking consensus is, in a way, a sign of maturity (read Seven Habits of Highly Successful People for more on this -it's called synergy). Maturity is much more than that, though. Maturity can be seen as understanding that there are different points of view on issues. Maturity can be seen as not jumping to conclusions. Maturity can be seen as conducting oneself with integrity in order to gain the trust and confidence of others. Maturity can be seen as wisdom. Remember that Serenity Prayer?

quote:

---

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

---

posted July 28, 2005 07:36 PM            

I think John McCain would appreciate my straight talk, and be a little embarrassed that good, reasonable people have to be subjected to a radical rightist. I know if I were a conservative I'd want to distance myself from you based on the way you act around here. I continue to watch McCain whenever possible, and he certainly reaches out beyond party lines. I don't think you have such a trait.

Furthermore, as a sign of your inability to handle the truth you tried to claim that your media sources are more truthful. Sure your stories cite other stories from major news services, but, like in the case of the liberal talking about Bush exercising too much, the story it's linked to is an opinion piece. So you've in essence put up two opinion pieces together. That's not truth. That's opinion. In other of your opinion pieces it may cite major news stories, but instead of putting the major news story you decide to put the spun article out. Doesn't speak too well of you, does it?

posted July 28, 2005 08:15 PM              

a bit of a tangent but ... it made me a little sad to see Gandhi and King written about in that context.

quote:

---

Your juvenile notions about connecting the practical application of Gandhi and Kings' peaceful demonstrations to counter, deter and change the behavior of murderous terrorists who want to kill us would only get us all beheaded.

---

Many people died following those two great Lights. Hey, come to think of it, Gandhi and King died too. I notice lately that the more cynical amongst us sometimes belittle the pain endured by members of those two movements. *sigh* Just a bunch of childish pansy as*ed peace lovers, I guess.

posted July 28, 2005 09:03 PM              

quote:

---

You have no character with which to be judging the character of anyone Acoustic.--jwhop

---

posted July 28, 2005 09:04 PM            

There goes also your wrong headed leftist theory that terrorists should not be killed but instead understood. Terrorists don't need a legitimate reason to kill. If they did, they wouldn't be killing Iraqi civilians and children in Iraq. Killing terrorists will not prolong the war, will not persuade others to join them, will not provide terrorists a recruiting tool.

Your real motive Acoustic is to give terrorists cover for killing...it's our fault, the west's fault, America's fault.

It isn't killing terrorists which is a recruiting tool Acoustic. It's brain dead moron leftists blaming America and the West which appear on the news in the Middle East. See, they say, even they admit their evil in abusing the Iraqis, in torturing captives, withholding water and essentials of life. Those arguments are made by you Acoustic and other radical leftists who are on the wrong side.

Just in the event you can come up with any wars between WWII participants in the last 60 years Acoustic, post it here and I'll be all eyes and ears. Otherwise drop your bullsh*t touchy feely argument against killing terrorists wherever and whenever we find them.

posted July 28, 2005 09:14 PM            

As an exercise TINK, how long do you think Gandhi or King would have lived if they opposed Saddam, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Kim Jong-il or Castro? How long do you think it would take for the Mullahs and Clerics in Iran to kill them for their peaceful protests against their restrictive and terrorist regimes?

posted July 28, 2005 09:22 PM            

Bush and Saddam, equivalents in your book Petron?

Terrorists beheading civilians equivalent to abuses of terrorists Petron?

Do you have any perspective Petron?

At least that's a step in the right direction Petron.

posted July 28, 2005 09:35 PM              

I think maybe you misunderstood me. I think maybe you jumped to a conclusion. I was not making a case for employing Kings philosophy with Osama and his friends. I think you're are quite right in pointing out that our defensive measures must be appropriate to the offensive actions taken against us. Although I must ask, do you think the people taking part in lynchings were "basically humane and decent people"? Did you find southern segregation laws humane and decent? Of course King did believe in the humanity and decency of all people, even the ones attacking him, and therein lies the success of his movement. He appealed to the inherent nobilty and goodness of the innocent bystander - and the only way to do that is to be noble and good. (but AG already wrote that post) Basically he got the pity vote, didn't he? I wish the Palestinians would try it. Of course, many lives would be sacificed in the process but .....

posted July 28, 2005 09:46 PM              

WAKE UP
Come on!
Uggh!

Come on, although ya try to discredit
Ya still never edit
The needle, I'll thread it
Radically poetic
Standin' with the fury that they had in '66
And like E-Double I'm mad
Still knee-deep in the system's Xxxx
Hoover, he was a body remover
I'll give ya a dose
But it'll never come close
To the rage built up inside of me
Fist in the air, in the land of hypocrisy

Movements come and movements go
Leaders speak, movements cease
When their heads are flown
'Cause all these punks
Got bullets in their heads
Departments of police, the judges, the feds
Networks at work, keepin' people calm
You know they went after King
When he spoke out on Vietnam
He turned the power to the have-nots
And then came the shot

Yeah!
Yeah, back in this...
Wit' poetry, my mind I flex
Flip like Wilson, vocals never lackin' dat finesse
Whadda I got to, whadda I got to do to wake ya up
To shake ya up, to break the structure up
'Cause blood still flows in the gutter
I'm like takin' photos
Mad boy kicks open the shutter
Set the groove
Then stick and move like I was Cassius
Rep the stutter step
Then bomb a left upon the fascists
Yea, the several federal men
Who pulled schemes on the dream
And put it to an end
Ya better beware
Of retribution with mind war
20/20 visions and murals with metaphors
Networks at work, keepin' people calm
Ya know they murdered X
And tried to blame it on Islam
He turned the power to the have-nots
And then came the shot

Uggh!
What was the price on his head?
What was the price on his head!

I think I heard a shot
I think I heard a shot
I think I heard a shot
I think I heard a shot
I think I heard a shot
I think I heard, I think I heard a shot

'He may be a real contender for this position should he
abandon his supposed obediance to white liberal doctrine
of non-violence...and embrace black nationalism'
'Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to
pinpoint potential trouble-makers...And neutralize them,
neutralize them, neutralize them'

Wake up! Wake up! Wake up! Wake up!
Wake up! Wake up! Wake up! Wake up!

How long? Not long, cause what you reap is what you sow