STAY BEHINDER LOUNGE
It's an AA slogan heard in meetings, but not in the Big Book. I heard it's from N.A. lit, and who knows where they got it--Benjamin Franklin, for all I know.
What I'd like to know is the origin of another AA slogan--80% of life is showing up. Was that Einstein or Woody Allen?
It's from Benjamin Franklin.
Sory, I meant that was for the original quote. I did a search on the other quote and found no reference. So, it would probably be Woddy!
Ok, found it. It is attributed to Woody Allen.
They know the Republicans aren't acting from a logical basis.
They know the Republicans are using the war, as well as the energy issue, as a way to get fithy rich.
They like that money, too.
That's the real reason Biden, Clinton, Lieberman, and even Kerry support the Iraq war.
No reason to look for any other agenda than the almighty dollar, campaign and otherwise.
Because it's not a true two-party system. Democrats and Republicans behave more like partners in a coalition government. When Democrats and Republicans have disagreements, they are not over policies, but over the means to achieve agreed-upon goals.
Folks, I hate to keep saying it, but if you want a true opposition party in this country, you'll have to create it yourselves.
The term is "combine", dr. sardonicus.
The Republicans and the Democrats are now the political parts of the Military-Industrial Combine.
The Carlyle Group forms the financial arm.
"Coalition", "combine", "clusterfuck",whatever...
The term "combine" makes me think either of the soybean fields back in Illinois or of Ken Kesey.
I think the original comes from Bonhoffer
KB, we heard the same thing a few threads back about the Rockefellers. Evidence and reasoning?
I totally agree with Digby that it's stupid to think BushCo would adopt any policy Democrats advocate.
But I strongly disagree that therefore Democrats should offer no alternative policy or alternative position on Iraq, that they should just STFU and be like "hey, it's not our problem, it's Bush's".
My obscenity laden response to Digby's previous post on the subject is in a rare post at the Shysteeblog.
who will be the first democrat to ask-WHERE'S OSAMA?
He owns it, 100%, and everyone of the 2000 American bodies needs to get hung around His neck. And your job is to help do that.
Digby is really good at this sort of restating the obvious stuff. He really gets a head of steam all canned up and lets it rip - and thats fine... and Kev and Ezra and Armondo and Matt and on and on and on will have a circle-jerk-link-athon about how intriguing or or implausible or politically saavy it all is and a thousand keyboards will go clickity clackity all night long....all generally agreeing that it is a fine thing indeed by some measure or another. Hip hip hooray. But who does Digby think hes talking too? We (us lefty blogosphere types) already know this stuff. We already know the Bush admin is corrupt and doesn't care what anyone else has to say about anything. 10 zillion posts on exactly that topic have swirled down the drain since before 2000. People here have written this very same thing hundreds (maybe thousands) of times. In any case...I hope the people who need to read what Digby has to say on some of this stuff will read it... but i'm not really sure they will. Kinda the preaching to the choir factor again...
Granted, watching the Bush administration shoot off their toes one claw at a time is always a thrill. Of course the Bush administration doesn't seem to have a problem clomping around on bloody stumps as it is and their purple fingered boiled ham faced supporters don't seem to mind the slippery gore either. And I certainly hope that at some point each and every one of the Bush admin sleigh ride team is run down by wolves, dragged into a snowdrift, and eaten alive - one bellowing horrible beast at a time. -- but this Digby post as I recall is pretty much a repeat of his strategery prior to the last election. Stay low Dems, hunker down, its Bush's war! (and it is for the most part), its all about the politics --- policy is realistically beyond our reach - no point in even trying -- and all that - the "people" will see them for what they are - and...etc... You know how that tune went the last time. A lot of people will die in the meantime... while the Dems sit around trying to paint their own toenails red. So, I'm kinda with Shystee on this one. Or at least the Dems could operate two fronts in the matter. The political (op-ed) kickass thing. Wes Clark can write a hundred op-eds per day... he did it prior to the last election too... And to be fair some of his suggestions were tried early on. Regional economic investment banks made a play to help with infrastructure projects and economic aid and security and etc... all told to take a hike by the Bushies...
But the Dems, (the elected ones we have now - not retired generals writing op-eds) as Shystee notes in his post linked above, need to unleash some wolves of their own -- in the Congress. At least try... try to force some answers or solutions or policy of their own to put an end to this mess. Even if it involves a full r
Even if it involves a full retreat to higher ground. Even if those policies ultimately go no-where - they can still try. Even if they need to tell the truth for a change and admit that this war really wasn't completely Bush's war because many Dems supported it and propped it up. Admit it and try to make up for the fuck up. It would be a political statement in and of itself and that might provide ammo for Digby's further op-ed warefare charge. Cover all flanks. Otherwise we'll just end up with people like John McCain in 2008, who, on Monday, will make anti-war noises, and on Tuesday will be standing behind GW Bush grinning and waving like a freshly baked cupcake. And the Republicans will announce McCain has had a grand plan to clean up the mess all along - something the Dems never had and never even tried to formulate. McCain/Hagel or Lindsey Graham 2008! And the media will go goo-goo gah-gah for the entire ploy and ...well, they will. Because they always do. And the Dems will run some grifter like Hillary Clintoon alongside some guy with a big fat shiny line of credit....or whatever...and on and on. Its almost too depressing to think about. But someone better think about it quick.
Looks like I'll probably be writing in Bernie Sanders for Prez in 2008. Love it or leave it.
*
also... i'm not sure why Biden's observation is wrong and Digby's is correct. Especially his latest hi-ho to Wes Clark. Seems like the reverse to me. Digby's over there puffing some Wes Clark policy (which apparently isn't really a policy at all, oh heavens no, but rather some slick political manuvering?) - oh yes, sure, thats what we we need - more straight talk like that... jeezis creepies -
...basically arguing that we do the LBJ/Nixon (i have a secret plan) thing until two idiot political parties can work out whos gonna win some big political dance marathon in 2006-08. Thats the nobel cause the Casey Sheehan's of the land died for?... some trophy at a political hoedown? Would you tell that to his mother down there in texas? Or maybe I'm just reading this stuff all wrong...please, someone explain it all to me.
*
Once you've become a pickle, you can't go back to being a cucumber.
Once you've become a pickle, you can't go back to being a cucumber.
what the hell does that mean?
*
Thank you for actually reading my inane post, farmer man. There is always a place for you (and any correntista for that matter) on my guest futon in the Lower Haight, SF. Unless you snore and then we're going to have some issues.
There is a groundswell of righteous anti-Iraq-war sentiment in this country and the Democrats, in typical fashion, are running away from it as fast as they can.
It might be the blogs, Air America, or just having neighbors whose relatives have served and/or died in Iraq, the masses are starting to see the truth.
As the PoorMan remarked earlier this week:
Who, in other words, has the courage to take the popular position?
i'm glad your back shystee... i missed you...just left a comment on your futon...also a couple over at hullabaloo... just now.
*
farmer - it was a 3:30AM I can't sleep non sequitor
It's an AA saying. Once you've become an alcoholic, you don't go back to being a normal drinker.
I don't think the Bidens, Liebermans, and Clintons of this world will go back on their war hawkishness, either. They will always start every sentence about Iraq with "I thought it was right blah blah blah."
I am out of step with you and shystee - I thought Digby's post was spot on.
oh...and by the way...i don't snore... i yell in my sleep.
*
oh, ok THB...i see...never been stuck in the pickle jar... but i see the analogy. Never was a big fan of AA and their Nazi loving slogan shop. ( i have pictures too) As for Digby...hes sorta right on one hand, nothing new there...but all this political gamesmanship is besides the point at this point. Get out of Iraq or at least retreat behind the lines...and then the Dems and Reps can play their weasely political games. It doesn't matter now... Iraq as turned into Picketts charge across the Emmitsburg Road. Wanna bet that dumbass could'a had that one back?
*
We can start with this fact: many of the Democrats, like Bush were supported by financial contributions of more than $2000/ donor. I doubt there are many cockroach people kicking in those kinds of bucks.
It's pretty well established Bu$hCo is run by and for Cheneyburton and the rest of the Carlyle Group, so I won't reiterate that here.
You can pick it apart by industry: in 2004 big financial groups gave around $190 million to the republicans, but $140 million to the democrats. That's a lot of sugar, and powerful incentive to treat them nicely. And it's easy to make it look individual.
Surf around Open Secrets, the source of these data. Admittedly, the DLC and the Clintonistas are far more intelligent than Bu$hCo. It's harder to pin down who exactly gives where, or (aside from the Senator from MBNA) who's got which sugar daddy.
But even Biden can make it look like individual donors. Sort of. But there's no question he's more circumspect than Cheneyburton.
...and sorry to break it into pieces, but that's a way to deal with Haloscan.
AA ain't for everybody, and it changes from place to place, but it saved my life, Nazi slogans notwithstanding.
Wow! My reaction to Digby's piece and Shystee's post and farmer's comments above....
The quote I extracted made a simple point: It's delusional for any Demo or any liberal to think that anything they say will have any impact at all on Republicans; that's not how they operater. At best, all the "serious" "responsible" strategerizing gives the Republicans bi-partisan cover (I keep trying to work out a joke on bi-curious but somehow it just doens't jell...)
The duty of an opposition party is to OPPOSE!
humans hate having to admit they made a mistake.
if georgie happens to take out some of the mealy joementals/bidens i can accept that.
AA ain't for everybody, and it changes from place to place, but it saved my life, Nazi slogans notwithstanding.
yes THB... no doubt its helped a lot of people. the Nazi crack was a cheap shot at the back history of AAs original founder and followers. has nothing to do with anything now... i shoulda not have written that.
*
no offense taken - one of the things appealing to me about AA is it doesn't present itself as "the" solution (the Final Solution?). I've been sober 20 years and am still active, but my very best friend in all the world is a recovered alcoholic who doesn't go to meetings. And I prefer the "pickle" type slogans to the treacle of First Things First Easy Does It Let Go and Let God.
Oh man, farmer, that hurts... Al-Anon really helped me, do I have to become cynical about that institution also? Say it isn't so....
Farmer, that's going to tough. Mr. Shystee needs to catch his z's or he gets crazier than usual.
If you bring a sleeping bag I can set you up on the back porch, but I'll have to warn the neighbors: "If, in the dead of night, you should hear a loud shrieking noise, fear not. It is the call of the Insomniac Blogger."
lambert
I found this about the Oxford Group and their connection to Nazis. The Oxford Group really was only tangentially related to the founding of AA - that is, Bill Wilson (one of the two founders) was 12-stepped (before there were such things) by a guy named Ebby Thatcher, who had used the precepts (scroll down) of the Oxford Group to get sober.
These were, in Bill's words:
We admitted we were licked.
We got honest with ourselves.
We talked it over with another person.
We made amends to those we had harmed.
We tried to carry this message to others
with no thought of reward.
We prayed to whatever God we thought there was.
Not exactly Third Reich stuff.
These precepts eventually formed the basis of the 12 steps we know today. Bill and Bob, the founders, had no direct connection to the Oxford Group.
Thanks THB....
Early AA was based on the precepts of Bill Buchman's (founder) of the Oxford Group and moral rearmament movement.
Bill Buchman (theres a slogan to cure every ill...etc):
To Dr Frank Nathan Daniel Buchman, vigorous, outspoken, 58-year-old leader of the revivalist Oxford Group, the Fascist dictatorships of Europe suggest infinite possibilities for remaking the world and putting it under "God Control". "I thank Heaven for a man like Adolf Hitler, who built a front line of defense against the anti-Christ of Communism, " he said today in his book-lined office in the annexe of Calvary Church, Fourth Ave and 21st St.
"But think what it would mean to the world if Hitler surrendered to the control of God. Or Mussolini. Or any dictator. Through such a man God could control a nation overnight and solve every last, bewildering problem...
"... Human problems aren't economic. They're moral and they can't be solved by immoral measures. They could be solved within a God-controlled democracy, or perhaps I should say a theocracy, and they could be solved through a God-controlled Fascist dictatorship."
(The New York World Telegram, August 26, 1936, quoted in
Hitler and Buchman, Reinhold Niebuhr, The Christian Century, 53:1315-6, Oct. 7, 1936, page 1315.)
*
I stand by my characterization of the relationship between the Oxford Group and the founding of AA.
Hell, the evangelical christians have turned "Turn the other cheek" and "love your enemies" into "Kill the brown people," among other atrocities perpetrated in jeebus' name.
And in sermon on the mount, he said: "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves ... every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit."
next time you're in the twin cities, farmer, I'll take you to a kick-ass meeting.
Burkman was kind of the king of slogans... his relationship to the founding of AA was pretty fleeting... thats why i said that the Nazi remark was kind of a cheap shot. As i recall the early founders of AA (who were at one point friends and associates of Burkmans) actually soon went to some lenghts to distance themselves from him very quickly because of some of his antics.... and the cultish nature of his own aims..but still... check out Burkman... he was a real nutter. His group were missionaries. They were pretty popular in Francos Spain too as i recall. I have some old photos of him and some of his group etc...maybe i'll do a post about it. But, any associations, resemblances to modern day AA is long gone history.
*
Commenting by HaloScan
