May 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

« A Feeling I'm Being Had | Main | What Qualifies as a Mental Problem? »

Comments

Read Chomsky Now

Scott, Scott, Scott....
Where to start?

The short version is "Read Chomsky" - or watch a speech or two. Are there any actions you wouldn't support "in pursuit of its[Israel's] self-interest"? How do you feel about the rule of law? How do you feel about politicide - the killing of an entire national identity? Something to support so long as it is in the self-interest of Israel?

As for Israel not having an enemy it can make peace with - your "feeling I'm being had" should be kicking in pretty strongly at that point.

At the risk of repeating myself - Chomsky, Chomsky Chomsky.

You could make a difference Scott, you could help bring the end of the brutal, illegal occupation closer. Are you brave enough? I think you are.

CHECK YOUR FACTS.

Respect
Stephen.

P.S. I love your work.

ezra

The weapons of mass destruction thing has become a wildcard for Mr. George Bush to declare war on any developed countries.

Well, I think US have weapons of mass destruction too.. Who the heck made the US the valid judge of who can have the toys and who cant? Who is going to tell the US to destroy those weapons? Why do they have them? Why do they have the right to have them and others dont?

You may see clear reasons why US should have them and other countries wont, but believe me, that reasoning is wrong too.

---

About declaring war, allow me Mr. Scott Adams to remind you that the same approach was taken against Iraq, and the fanatics of Al Qaeda has grown exponentially ever since. What do you think would come out from a war with Iran?

Violence only cause violence, and war only cause death and hatred and new wounds to last for decades.

Humanity, and specially such a developed country as USA should know better.

DONT YOU THINK SO?

ASM826

Be more clear. Overthrow the government? Want a different Congressman, President, or Senator? We get to do that every 2, 4, and 6 years. Or are you suggesting overthrowing the Constitution and having another revolution? Do you really think, people being what they are, that we could do any better than what we have?

You have made a living showing how stupid American workers, bosses, and business systems are. What possible reason would you have for thinking a new government built from scratch by the current generation would work any better than Dilbert's office?

The Atheist Jew

David Duke and Rense will not publish this post:) And I'm sure you upset a few radical Muslims who loved your previous post.

Jason Dumler

It's in the best interest of the citizens if what they replace the current government with is better and it can happen quickly enough to prevent small scale social unrest and problems. For instance, if I become unemployed because my employer could no longer exist, then my children can no longer go to college and we become a family of vagrants, then it's certainly not in my best interest.

First you call us stupid, then you egg us on in a revolution against the government, and you'd probably laugh at us when we're vagrants. Nice job! On an internet forum too!

Joe Blow

Like many I thought your blog yesterday was one of the best. I also wondered if you'd (have to) back paddle. You did. (Too bad.)

My 2 cents
JB

AnArmyMajor

We have the opportunity to overthrow the government every two years in elections, but most people are too self-absorbed to vote. It seems we all believe that every politician is a corrupt scumbag, except ours. THIS is why incumbents enjoy a 90%+ re-election rate. If you want revolution, throw the clowns out!!

brian


'Israel won. It isn’t going anywhere'

well, not quite, Scott....That battle is still ongoing. the palestinians and arab israelis are still there, still defending what remains of their country and inheritance, in spite of all efforts to evict them. The situation bears some resemblance to the jews in nazi germany, in the 1930s.

Since US is an invader, Iraqis have every right to drive them out, even if that means killing US soldiers. Is iran aiding the resistance? Who knows.
But its ironic that your critics should condemn Iran for aiding iraq, when US aided israel in something much worse than defence: the invasion of Lebanon.

Free William

Well done Scott not only are the monkeys dancing they are throwing their shit. (I seem to recall you covering an article on this a few months back, you couldn't resist the challenge could you)

huh?

Hi Scotty,

Thanks for clearing up your "sarcasm" rant.
Your musings are still vile and infantile.

You must love the positive affirmation from the comments
of the kool-aid drinking echo chamber, where it's a warm
and snugly cocoon and you can pretend there is no evil in
the world (except of course for EVIL AmeriKKKa and its
Israel masters, yadda yadda yadda).

Enjoy!

(I wouldn't be too smug though, since a disturbingly
high percentage of them credit you with smart original
thoughts - they mustn't get out much).

PS: Hat tip for dragging the poor American Indians into this travesty

Stella

I enjoy you blog, Scott, sacasm, tongue in cheek stuff an' all. There are few people about who are interested in the merits of the argument, and not pounding a position. I find it refreshing. I do find some of your readers comments difficult to take though, and don't understand why people think it's OK to make personal attacks. Hang in there.

Neechee

You rock bro!

garytheyoung

"Sometimes it feels as if the Palestinians are only one Gandhi away from fixing their problems."

More satire, right?

Bill

sad. I used to like reading Dilbert. Drop me a line if you ever make it back to the real world, Scott.

Grungemunky

Many here are talking about elections as an alternative to overthrow, which is a viable option when used correctly, but aren't elections how we got here to begin with? The American people, as a majority: do not care, are misinformed about candidates, or, oh yah, just don't care. I have several friends who are extremely intelligent, but are completely apathetic. Why? Like so many people, they doesn't keep up with what is going on in the world and are just apathetic. People (again, generalization) are too busy watching "reality" television shows and completely ignoring their own reality. Also, we are taught from a very young age to avoid confrontation and to be complacent when confronted by authority (whom WE put into place). We could put in a new president in a few years, but will it make a difference? Probably very little if Congress is opposed to the president. We could replace Congress, but we have the Judicial branch that doesn't adhere to the Constitution either. Oh, and we have a population who can't even name the three branches of government. Voters only see Republican and Democrat on election day, and vote for the party that they supposedly identify with (meaning, whichever party their parents are/were). Yes, if things continue on as they are now, overthrow may become necessary. There is so much to say on this topic, and much to debate, but I will part with a quote from Thomas Jefferson:

"... God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

Thomas Jefferson

Grungemunky

Many here are talking about elections as an alternative to overthrow, which is a viable option when used correctly, but aren't elections how we got here to begin with? The American people, as a majority: do not care, are misinformed about candidates, or, oh yah, just don't care. I have several friends who are extremely intelligent, but are completely apathetic. Why? Like so many people, they doesn't keep up with what is going on in the world and are just apathetic. People (again, generalization) are too busy watching "reality" television shows and completely ignoring their own reality. Also, we are taught from a very young age to avoid confrontation and to be complacent when confronted by authority (whom WE put into place). We could put in a new president in a few years, but will it make a difference? Probably very little if Congress is opposed to the president. We could replace Congress, but we have the Judicial branch that doesn't adhere to the Constitution either. Oh, and we have a population who can't even name the three branches of government. Voters only see Republican and Democrat on election day, and vote for the party that they supposedly identify with (meaning, whichever party their parents are/were). Yes, if things continue on as they are now, overthrow may become necessary. There is so much to say on this topic, and much to debate, but I will part with a quote from Thomas Jefferson:

"... God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

Thomas Jefferson

F. Bernadotte

Words to warm the heart of any zionist: "At some point you have to release on the past and accept the present realities. Israel won. It isn’t going anywhere."

And:

"If Israel had an enemy that it could make peace with, then I might feel different. But it doesn’t, so Israel’s best interests dictate keeping the neighbors too economically weak to purchase expensive weapons, and to control as much territory as possible."

I guess all those horrid negative comments got to you, that right Scott? A pity. For a moment there, I was applauding your courage. Now I pity your fearfulness. I do understand very well, though, why you felt a need to express contrition. However, it wasn't because you confused anyone, Scott. I think everyone, zionists above all, understood your comments very accurately.

And here's some more comments for you.

I was happy to hear that Israel won't allow Palestinians to return to the homes they were forced out of in '48 and '67. And very happy that the U.S. is rescinding the offer to be 'honest' peace brokers between them and Israel. If you let people like that complain about human rights, before long the entire world will want to have international law!

I hate Arabs for all the same reasons you do. For one thing, it's clear they want to "push Israel into the sea". Scholars tell us that in fact both Palestinians and Arab states have made repeated peace overtures to Israel, only to be rejected. What ass-munchers!

Palestinians are always whining about why they have to pay the price for the holocaust, which they had nothing to do with. I say, why can't they just be quiet and accept the present realities? Fuck them, I hate them. Israel wants their land, and they're economically weak. God-damned fuckers.

The worst of it is that Palestinians are arrogantly resisting Israel efforts to demolish their homes, destroy their olive trees, and take their land! I just know that if any foreign nation did that to us, I think we'd agree that the best course of action is to just bend over and accept it. Not that we have that many olive trees. Might is right! (Right?)

If Palestinians think they can be our friends, just by making moral arguments on their behalf, they underestimate our ability to ignore morality, when it's in our best interest. I hate them.

Mike

Interesting that you managed to both offend the Jews and thrill the neo-nazis. Seems a lot of people are just "confused".

We're all looking forward to more interesting patterns you can connect between American foreign policy and various ethnic groups. Maybe something special for MLK day or Cinco de Mayo?

Greg Easterbrook, another public figure whose work I enjoyed, came out with something similarly offhandedly antisemitic. The big diff - he thought about what he said, apologized, and moved forward with his life.

This mealy-mouthed tripe about people misunderstanding you doesn't help any.

Enjoy the new fans, Scott. This is certainly one you'll enjoy telling your grandkids.

Jay

Would it be in our best interest to overthrow the government?
Since you've stated they knew the reason why they attacked
Iran was not true I would infer they lied. Lying isn't
necessarily bad. It depends on what their real motives were.
If they lied because they had to in pursuit of what they
thought were everyone's best interests then they're not
evil. Perhaps a bit misguided. I already know they lie
to us all the time anyway, so I don't think proof of it
changes anything.

insignis

It's curious to me that yesterday's post received overwhelmingly negative comments, but today's are more positive (or at least less...vehement). I gather that people either miserably fail to understand satire, or most of them weren't regular readers and didn't get how obviously different the tone of that post was.

Dunno why, but this caught my eye skimming:

"I don't understand the people who feel the need to tell you (us) that they'll never read you again. Just quit reading dumba**es. We don't need to know where you went and anyone who reads this blog should know Scott isn't going to change his views because of people like you making 'threats.'" -- Lynne

A boycott serves no purpose if the boycotted doesn't know they're being boycotted. Also, the way these are worded make them a promise, not a threat. It is, IMHO, a dumb reason to quit being a Dilbert fan, but if enough people swear off Dilbert for a blog post, even Scott might have to take notice.

angry reader

nice try. still antisemitic claptrap.

Gabriel

All reasonably reasonable, but the thing is everyone read exactly what you wrote.

Best case scenario: You smoked a shedload of crack, then you wrote a whole lot of crap. It's not your fault, you weren't yourself. After the shakes went away you rubbed your eyes and logge on to read the comments on your post. The indignant responses from former fans, you can deal with, but the plaudits from right-wing extremists...yep, definitely a bad move. Best stick to booze in future. So you make a new post explaining youself in as plausible terms as possible, which "scholars" translate as broadly this.

"When I wrote an ironic post dealing with Ahmadinejab's invitation to Columbia, I was really talking about the way neo-cons are trying to goad us into war with Iran. All that wildy irrelevant stuff abot Israel it just... umm ... sort of slipped out. I'm cool with Jews, honest; seriously, my publisher's crawling with them. I'm a relatively apolitical sort of liberal in reality, not some nutter."

Then the urges kicked in, you lit a few more rocks and typed some gibberish about overthrowing the U.S. government before hitting the "post" button.

Middle case scenario: Same, but minus the crack. Essentially: you're a jerk, you pushed things too far, now you're trying to cover it up and you're failing. Laughably so.

Worst case scenario: You're conistent postion is actually that of your first post, but after taking some crack your cognitive abilities became that of an average deranged addict, equivalent to an IQ jump of 17.5. Stoned as hell, you read the ironic piece thought "Damn, Scott, that's some messsed up s**t" and quickly wrote this out to exonerate yourself. The last paragaph is the drugs wearing off and soon you'll be back to, ahem, normal.

suefletch

Scott: I am an American citizen, a non-Jew and yet even I can somewhat stumble thru the facts staring me in the face. Thank God for your right to rant and rave; a right gained by soldiers dying in battle.

Supporting the underdog simply because they're the underdog shows a lack of facts and logical thinking.

I don't believe the Israelis are guiltless when atrocities against the Palestinians are admitted as evidence, however, that said, let's not forget the main point, the atrocities from the Palestinian/Arab front never cease.

What did Israeli athletes ever do to hinder peace when they were executed by Arabs during the 1972 Olympic games?

What do bombing and killing innocent Israeli civilians achieve? It never stops. Mad Arab Mullahs and their dictators rant and rave about wiping Israel off the map. Not exactly a recipe for a peaceful coexistence.

I honestly don't know how Israelis sleep at night. I would be scared sick, and stupid.

My point; if the Palestinian/Arab terrorists are going to keep picking a fight, then standby for consequences.

Unfortunately, they're too gutless to face a soldier when wiping people out is their main objective.

Craig "Fuzzy" Conner

>> Still, the bulk of my sympathies are
>> with whatever group suffers the most,
>> regardless of how much of the problem
>> is their own damned fault.

...this program of the liberal media has been brought to you by the liberal media for the liberal media.

Seriously, who can define "the most" in that context? As your other points say, that's all relative anyway and it's always our/their/everyone's own damn fault.

>> Here’s your hypothetical question of
>> the day:

>> would it be in the best interest of
>> the citizens of the United States to
>> overthrow their government?

It would be in the best interest of the citizens of the United States to do so at the ballot box. Of course we'd have then the same problem we have now: When we broke it, we bought it. We'd do well to elect people who can fix it. (i.e. anyone who can do better than our current Congress which continues to shamelessly waste their opportunities.)

SlowMovingTarget

No.

It would be in the best interests of the American people to speak with their vote. That's what it's for; making revolutions unnecessary.

The trouble will be finding candidates with the capacity of George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. These men did the right thing because it was the right thing, believing America to be a nation designed and constructed to do what is righteous even if it is difficult or unpleasant. (Granted, we've been working with tremendous energy lately to remove our ability to determine what is good and bad, right and wrong.) But more than that, such men as these, such men as James Madison and Benjamin Franklin persuaded others to their cause on moral and rational grounds.

If you would have a revolution, what would take the place of rule of law and representative government, this republic of ours?

If you really want change, the revolution must happen in the schools. Teach children about what America ought to be, and they will build to this vision. Fire the minds of our youth, and we will stumble upon George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. It must not be our current hallucination of "seek not to offend" but it must be rooted in granting freedom to all citizens. Resist the calls to tribalism offered by so-called multiculturalism. Raise our children to partake of and contribute to the culture of freedom built upon the pillars of Western civilization; the birthright of all Americans regardless of genealogy, and the earned right of immigrants who make us better.

Or we can simply continue down the childish path of popularity contests played out in the media, separating ourselves by the clothes on our back and the playlist in our iPod.

/rant

Rhetoric can be fun.

The comments to this entry are closed.