Is Your Entire Country On Crack?

[Emit]

Althecat posted this article last night. Thanks Al! But a couple of us thought it deserved a repost.

It is a concise, sufficiently crass and timely reminder to us all:

Is Your Entire Country On Crack?

By Den Vandron

Speaking as a Canadian who is fond of judicious language, I feel that this situation deserves careful and measured thought. So let me just open with:

Is your entire f*cking country on crack??? Are all you Americans out of your cotton picking minds??? Are you completely freaking delusional? Homicidal? Psychotic? Have you lost any shred of a moral compass? WHAT IN THE NAME OF JESUS H. CHRIST ON A CRUTCH IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!!!!!

Let me offer up one small datum which may completely change the equation for you: According to the CIA (If they have any credibility left.) Iran is at least five years away from a nuclear weapon.

Five years.

Five years is time for diplomacy to accomplish a hell of a lot.

~snip~

Stop and think back five years. What did we have five years ago? A moderate reformist Iranian government making overtures to the United States, rebuilding its relationship with Europe, liberalizing its society, and modernizing its economy.

9/11 comes along, the Iranians are overflowing with sympathy. Mass candlelit vigils are held in Tehran. Iran offers aid and cooperation.

~snip~

And what happens? The Bush administration rebuffs every Iranian overture and does its best to instigate a cold war. Afghanistan is invaded, and suddenly, the Iranians are looking at American troops and allies on their eastern border. Then Iraq is invaded, and American troops and allies on their western border. Then bases and treaties in Uzbekistan, and whoops, there's more American troops and allies on the northern border. The Persian Gulf is filled with American warships and carrier fleets.

Cont'd here: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0604/S00116.htm

ALSO AVAILABLE ON THE FOLLOWING URLS:
http://www.brainshrub.com/canadian-comment-invade-iran
http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/000749.html

edit typo

[LisaLynne]

1. Ive pretty much asked that question every day since Nov. 2000. nt

[Mythsaje]

2. Our LEADERSHIP, such as it is, sure as hell seems like it...n/t

[BurtWorm]

3. Note: You should read the original Yglesias thread on TPM Cafe

to see what this was in reaction to. Not to neocons and theocrats, but to *Democrats* doing their usual, "How do we position ourselves as tougher on national security" schtick. :eyes:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2006/1/14/135611/977

[ellenfl]

4. kick for later! eom

[Marie26]

5. Hey, you all elected Harper.

What's up with that?

[Dogmudgeon]

16. Harper's bad -- but compared to Bush?

The worst that Canada has produced is still a damn sight better than Bush -- or Reagan, or Nixon, or even Bush Sr.

I love America, but sometimes I feel compelled to apologize to Canada. And, these days, to Mexico, too.

--p!

[Marie26]

24. I feel compelled to apologize to the world.

Sorry, world. We messed up.

[shadowlight]

25. Harper got 36% of the popular vote. n/t

[Emit]

26. And

wasn't he funded by a lot of US special interest groups? Thought I read that somewhere.

[shadowlight]

32. I received a strange anonymous email

referring to that. But have been unable to find more info.

[tonka023]

76. The vast majority of Canadians voted for the social left

Harper will be gone in a year, sooner if he doesn't
move to the left. Canada made a vote for change
and sent a message. You can't call it a victory
for the right.

[TrogL]

31. Harper's already lost his so-called base

Half of Harper's success was people "sending a message" to the Liberals. The rest was his fundy base who basically couldn't vote for any other party.

Their vote was based upon one election plank - that Harper would "do something" about gay marriage.

One week after the elections, he announced that he was "putting gay marriage on the back burner".

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Marie26]

56. People never learn

Ah, the old "gay marriage" bait & switch. I wonder if they'll try that again in 2008.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

6. MY country is often stoned or drunk. But on crack? Never. -nt

[BurtWorm]

10. Congrats on your first compatriate to exit the stratosphere

without the aid of vegetable products.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

11. You may edit your post now

[BurtWorm]

17. Thank You, Dirtbag!

:toast:

[sweetpotato]

7. Could you invade please?

I think it would be real nice if y'all Canadians invaded the US and demanded a regime change. I bet the people here would greet you as liberators and throw rose petals at you. If you bring us single payer healthcare, I would greet you with an entire bouquet!

I can learn "Oh Canada" and I like Maple leaves. No hockey for me, though, I'm a Southern gal.

[nonconformist]

15. I totally agree!

What if we kidnapped Celine Dion and whoever your national curling champion happens to be? Would you invade to rescue them, eh? It'd be the honourable thing to do.

And welcome to DU!

[guinivere]

80. Brilliant!

C'mon down, Canadians. Bring some beer and health care plans.

Ice skating isn't hard, Aphopkin. You could be in charge of the Southern Women's Hockey League.

[IndyOp]

8. The US addiction is now, and always has been: WAR

WAR is at least as addictive as crack and will do a hell of a lot more damage -- and that is saying something very serious considering how unbelievable nasty crack is!

:nuke:

[Javaman]

9. well about 35% of our country is...nt

[BIgJohn83]

12. Diplomacy? Who needs Diplomacy when you have Dubya*...

an idiot of Biblical proportion!

[Dogmudgeon]

13. The intelligent feel that they're too hip to vote.

Wa-a-a-ay too many of the intelligent, well-read Americans think of themselves (ourselves) as being too hip to vote. We feel oh-so worldly wise, and like to think we're above anything as vulgar as politics -- because, after all, "there's not a dime's worth of difference" between any two politicians. (And we can't blame our conceit on Ralph Nader, either; Nader was merely preaching to the choir when he said that.)

In both 2000 and 2004 we should have, by rights, stormed the polls and kept Bush in Texas, where the Texans would have eventually wised up and kicked his Connecticut-bred ass back to his brush-infested house on the prairie, a.k.a. "Compound W". But, instead, far too many of us stayed home and said, "it doesn't matter who gets in, they're both bad!"

No, Mr. Vandron, we're not on crack. We've simply "hipped" ourselves into a deep, shit-filled ditch.

--p!

[Emit]

14. Well said! n/t

[Brazenly Liberal]

21. I'm intelligent.

And I'm too hip not to vote.

[RedEarth]

18. Not crack, we have a president who is completely insane

and his radical right followers who are filled with hatred and greed.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

19. we are NOT on crack

we're on crystal meth, cocaine, prozac, ritalin, marijuana, alcohol, caffeine, valium, xanax, oxycodone, ephedrine, nicotine, viagra, claritin, diuretics, laxatives, opioids, nitrates, percasecs, antihistamines, decongestants, steroids, androgen, estrogen, testosterone, GHB, LSC, THC, insulin, antifungals, lipitor, celebrex, prilosec, nexium, toprol, seroquel, and on and on and on

but how DARE you imply that we're not level-headed in our thinking...

[Brazenly Liberal]

20. 30% of us are high on denial

The rest of us take solace where we can.

[katty]

27. 30%+the bush gangstas high on denial and war games

[skids]

22. Crack is so passe. Meth. n/t

[paparush]

23. Crack...hell no...we're on Crystal Meth...

[giant_robot]

28. Not crack. Just good, old-fashioned dumb-ass.

*sigh*

[porphyrian]

29. Crack gets in the way of my pot smoking. - n/t

[hootinholler]

30. Not Crack

Schizophrenia is not a symptom of crack use is it?

I'm looking for industrial sized lithium tab.

-Hoot

[Ksec]

33. Not all of us.

Theres still some who havent drank the Kool Aid/

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

34. Hey, Den Vandron, Go Fuck Yourself Buddy.

Sorry, I don't tolerate when canadians use broad brush smears any more than when americans do. And I'll be damned if I have to listen to a preaching from anybody about these issues as if I and the rest of you are all part of the guilty minded simply for being americans. It isn't americans that are threatening this, it's america's tyrannical leadership. So, dear Den Vandron, if you had asked if our governmental leaders are all on crack there would've been a resounding yes from me. But since you implied it against all americans, you can go fuck yourself, ok?

[BurtWorm]

35. He was responding to DEMOCRATS at TPM cafe

Matthew Yglesias, for example, who began the thread masticating over a good, tough Democratic response to Iran.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

36. I Could Give A Rats Fat Ass. He Can Go Fuck Himself.

I really don't give a shit why he wrote it or where the inspiration came from. Makes no difference to me. But repeatedly he calls out "you" as plural for all americans, and questions americans as a whole, you and me included, as being part of the crack smoking psycho war mongerers. So Matthew this TPM that I don't give a shit. He can go fuck himself.

[BurtWorm]

38. I think you're taking it too personally.

A little too tribally, too, ironically enough.

Maybe you agree with the Democrats he who alarmed him, that "we" have to be tougher than "they" are?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

40. Has Nothing To Do About Agreement. Has All To Do With Prejudice

I don't know who that fucker things he is preaching to me and everyone else like that, acting as if he is all high and mighty and superior because he's canadian, but he didn't address it to THOSE specific dems he disagreed with, he addressed it quite specifically to all of us, in a very condescending and self-righteous way. And for that, he can go fuck himself, period.

[Emit]

46. Whether we like it or not

We are a democratic Republic and we elected politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, who continue to perpetuate the notion that military aggression is a solution to ‘the war on terrorism’ and, at present circumstances, the mess we now face with Iran.

We can nitpick the political incorrectness and prejudice of lumping us all together to death, and perhaps the guy should have added a small disclaimer; but, in all honesty, it makes no difference whether this is a Canadian who offers this criticism of our country or whether it was written by the almighty Goddess herself. The fact of the matter is, and the point the writer makes is, why the heck are Democrats, and supporters of Democrats, even discussing "getting to the right of the Bush administration on Iran" at all? They should be shouting, "The Emperor has no clothes!" 'til they're blue in the face.

BTW, this is the original ‘tail’ spun at Atrios that Yglesias at TPM was referring to...:

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_01_08_atrios_archive.html#113726243140279477

...a scenario which implies that if the Democrats don’t get to the right of Bush & Co. on Iran, then the 2006 election is lost for them. Deja Vu, anyone?

[BurtWorm]

53. That's really too good not to quote from

How It Goes

Winter/Spring - The clone army of foreign policy "experts" from conservative foreign policy outfits nobody ever heard of before suddenly appear on all the cable news programs all the time, frowning furiously and expressing concerns about the "grave threat" that Iran poses. Never before heard of Iranian exile group members start appearing regularly, talking about their role in the nuclear program and talking up Iran's human rights violations.

Spring/Summer - "Liberal hawks" point out that all serious people understand the serious threat posed by serious Iran, and while they acknowledge grudgingly that the Bush administration has fucked up everything it touches, they stress, and I mean stress, that we really must support the Bush administration's serious efforts to deal with the serious problem and that criticisms of such serious approaches to a serious problem are highly irresponsible and come only from irrational very unserious Bush haters who would rather live in Iran than the U.S.

Late Summer - Rumsfeld denies having an Iran war plan "on his desk." He refuses to answer if he has one "in his file cabinet." Andy Card explains that you don't roll out new product until after labor day.

Early Fall - Bush suddenly demands Congress give him the authority to attack Iran to ensure they "disarm." Some Democrats have the temerity to ask "with what army?" Marshall Wittman and Peter Beinart explain that courageous Democrats will have the courageous courage to be serious and to confront the "grave threat" with seriousness and vote to send other peoples' kids off to war, otherwise they'll be seen as highly unserious on national security. Neither enlists.

Late October - Despite the fact that all but 30 Democrats vote for the resolution, Republicans run a national ad campaign telling voters that Democrats are objectively pro-Ahmadinejad. Glenn Reynolds muses, sadly, that Democrats aren't just anti-war, but "on the other side." Nick Kristof writes that liberals must support the war due to Ahmadinejad's opposition to gay rights in Iran.

Election Day - Democrats lose 5 seats in the Senate, 30 in the House. Marshall Wittman blames it on the "pro-Iranian caucus."

The Day After Election Day - Miraculously we never hear another word about the grave Iranian threat. Peter Beinart writes a book about how serious Democrats must support the liberation of Venezuela and Bolivia.

[BurtWorm]

51. Your reaction is a taste of what many Iranians will feel

if the Bushists try anything neocon in their country. Even the ones who can't stand the sight of Ahmadinejad.

Just an interesting aside.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

52. Interesting and Accurate Too.

I agree with you there 100%.

[Zhade]

42. Sounds like the guy hit a nerve.

NT!

[Zhade]

41. USA! USA! USA!

Your mindless "America rulez!" jingoism is showing...

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

43. And You Don't Consider Your Reply To Be Mindless?

See, cause I do, completely.

It has nothing to do with the rah rah spin garbage you spewed. It has all to do with lumping an entire country's citizenship into one big group and criticizing them across the board. See, it is racist and prejudiced in its own way.

Can you imagine if I said "what is wrong with you chinese, you all on crack?" or "what's wrong with you frenchies, is all of your dna flawed?" or "hey mexicans, what's your malfunction?" etc... Wouldn't that be a bunch of bullshit to talk like that? Is it ever appropriate? NO. It isn't. EVER. It is broad brush smearing, prejudicial and ignorant. So please, I don't want to hear your 'has nothing to do with the context of your post but I'm gonna spin the hell out of it anyway so that I can be self righteous and attacking' replies. This is about some stupid fuck criticizing all americans, you and me included. So for that, he can go fuck himself and he can kiss my american ass.

:hi:

[Ksec]

So you dont love this country?

I do.

Call me jingoistic or whatever the Hell you want. I have seven generations of family who helped build this country. I have a say in this debate

[Zhade]

81. "So you dont love this country?" Dishonest strawman.

Please don't put words in my mouth that I never said. Thanks.

[Inland]

48. All insults to Canadians must be in French AND English! nt

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

50. Il Peut Aller La Baise Lui-même

[Vidar]

37. Short answer is yes, though most of us have been disenfranchised.

Don't let it happen in Canada too.

[donco6]

39. I've often wondered if it's just me.

But then I take my Prozak and the world is rosy again.

Seriously, I don't know if we're overmedicated or over-entertained, or just flat out dumb as rocks. I just can't figure out why torches and pitchforks haven't yet descended upon the WH. Is everyone too afraid? Too busy? Just don't care?

[agincourt]

44. What you are seeing is a text book example,

Of why great civilizations fall. The institutions are too corrupted to correct the problem, and the general population is too stupid to take matters into their own hands. They are so dumb they believe the rotten plutocrats words. If some talking pigs anus says we must destroy Iran, then by golly we better. Simple minded children who get their buttons pushed easy.

[Incitatus]

45. No, but this administration and its supporters are. n/t

[smirkymonkey]

47. That Does It - We Must Go To War With Canada!

Blame Canada!

[newspeak]

75. that's funny--just watched Canadian Bacon again!!!!

I laughed as much as I did the first time I watched it. It's worth watching again, especially today.

[tonka023]

77. Remember your history

We beat you last time,
good buddies. Hell,
we burned down the
White House, didn't
we?

Then again, maybe it's
time has come again!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

49. I personally, am not on crack,

but I can't speak for the 59 million or so wackos who voted Republican in 2004. Actually, I'm thinking it's meth.

[Eurobabe]

54. not me personally, but the govt. is wasted...

[Hoping4Change]

55. As a Canuck the only thing I can say about Den Vandron

is that he proves that Canada has its fair share of lame-brained, knuckle-headed idiots. And I think that it is exremely rude of you to post this sophomoric rant on DU. If you find Vandron's assessment so estimable and on point why are are even here at DU? Why waste your time with crack-heads?:wtf:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

57. Thank You For Seeing It As I See It. (i.e. accurately hehe)

So you're saying Den Vandron can go fuck himself too correct? :)

[Hoping4Change]

61. Correct and he should use big pumpkin to accomplish that task.

[Emit]

59. Did you even read past the title?

Or have you read anything pertaining to the context of this piece?

[Hoping4Change]

60. I read it all and I have nothing but contempt for anyone to smear

an entire people for the crimes of a few. WHAT IN THE NAME OF JESUS H. CHRIST ON A CRUTCH IS WRONG WITH Dan Vandron!!!!! He sounds completely freaking delusional, that or on crack. Sounds like he couldn't identify a moral compass if it was in front of his nose with a sign on it.

[BurtWorm]

62. People seem to be having reading comprehension problems tonight.

:eyes:

In context, he was expressing outrage over the idea of American Democrats/liberals joining in the Bushists' game on TPM Cafe. You need to consider context as well as content.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

63. Exactly.But He Chose To Express It By Broadening The Rant To ALL Americans

That's the problem. Yes, he was expressing outrage over the sentiments he found on TPM. But rather than addressing them directly, he chose instead to insult ALL americans in his potentially crack-induced rant. That's where the problem lies. Not in his sentiment, but in his broadening his sentiment to cover an entire nation's population. Hence, why he can go fuck himself.

[BurtWorm]

64. Sorry you were offended, my fellow American.

I wasn't. I knew what he was talking about.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

66. It's Pretty Clear What He Was Talking About, Hence My Reaction.

It wasn't one slip up. It REPEATEDLY called us all out, you included. REPEATEDLY.

I seriously fail to see the disconnect here, or why you keep calling out the context as if it erases the REPEATED slams on all americans. This is a clear cut issue in my opinion.

[ahimsa]

74. FWIW, Den Valdron apologized for the broadbrush..

On January 14, 2006 - 8:53pm tlees2 said:
Please qualify your language. I'm just as opposed to Bush's insanity as you are. so please refer to "some Americans" as a-holes, rather than americans.

On January 15, 2006 - 2:00am Den Valdron said:
My sincere apologies to tlees2. His point is well taken.

Original comment:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2006/1/14/135611/977#comment-83506

[Emit]

84. Valdron said, "My sincere apologies..." Tx for the update.

I'm glad to hear that he acknowledged his mistake of "painting a broad brush" and gave a sincere apology. I was less concerned about that than the message he was sending, but it seems to have offended others deeply. Maybe now we can focus on the heart of the criticism. Thanks for catching that.

[American liberal]

72. I understand and support your position.

Now tell us how you REALLY feel! LOL :)

[Hoping4Change]

65. Are you telling me that 500 million Americans chimed in on TPM

cafe. If you want to criticize someone for ignoring context you should direct your criticism to Vandron who completely ignores context. How do comments made by a handful of people justify an attack on all Americans?

[BurtWorm]

67. Sure. That's what I'm saying. Even though there aren't 500 million of us.

;)

[Hoping4Change]

68. My figure includes the illegals.

:P

[hopeisaplace]

69. Hey..I think all Canucks have the word "HOPE" in their handle...

:hi:

(see, we're not all cranky) :)

[Hoping4Change]

71. That's kinda of wierd, eh?

Wierd that we're not all cranky, given that we are living next to a bunch and delusional crackheads. It makes you wonder. Maybe all we have is hope, hope that without a moral compass those crazy nieghbours won't be able to locate canuckistan.

:hi:

[hopeisaplace]

73. lol, and here's hoping for a big Dem win in their next election

:)

[tonka023]

78. Guess I'm under cover

or perhaps I'm in someone's closet?

[Hoping4Change]

79. Yeah I'd say you have a fairly mysterious handle.

Welcome to DU. How did you find your way to this neck of the wood?:hi:

[Zorra]

58. Pffffft - snap crackle pop---cough cough---Huh, uh.... why?

Is there something wrong?

[Hoping4Change]

70. dry, very dry

:smoke:

[Junkdrawer]

82. Let us be a lesson to you. Do NOT abandon your hand-counted...

paper ballot election system.

[Jacobin]

83. Yes.

Why do you ask? It seems pretty obvious to me.