Comments on: Our White House Maoist (Bumped)

By: jeremiah06

jeremiah06 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:44:49 +0000

RE: And your point is?

Take out Obama because he’s in a position to give orders at the present,and plus he is unlike the other four. And you have a clear picture.

By: casper

casper — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:52:37 +0000

jeremiah06,
“she is naturally in a position to give orders, just like Mao was, and like Hitler was, and like Stalin was, and like Lenin was, and so on.”

And like Reagan, both Bushes, Obama, Clinton, and Palin were. And your point is?

By: jeremiah06

jeremiah06 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:28:39 +0000

hand on.. I mean.

By: jeremiah06

jeremiah06 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:27:56 +0000

Casper,

How you think also determines how you will do your job. Mrs. Dunn will probably never do anything hands, that’s a given … because she is naturally in a position to give orders, just like Mao was, and like Hitler was, and like Stalin was, and like Lenin was, and so on.

By: casper

casper — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:51:36 +0000

observer20,
I understand your point, but wouldn’t it make more sense to point out things that Dunn has done as part of her job that one disagrees with than to make a huge deal about a single statement she made. I am much more concerned about how someone does their job than a political philosophy they might are might not adhere to. That’s why I vote for people rather than parties.

By: observer20

observer20 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:27:02 +0000

casper,

I understand your point, but I also want to emphasize that seeing what they want to see also includes not seeing things that they don’t want to see. So while it is entirely plausible that people are simply highlighting this quote because they want to harass the administration, it’s equally plausible that others will completely ignore its potential significance because they don’t want to recognize any criticism.

By: casper

casper — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:23:38 +0000

observer20,
“Then you must understand that, from a conservative/libertarian perspective, whereas Dunn, as a representative of the current administration supports and defends the large-government goals of Obama and as well as praises people such as Mao, that it seems to be a forming pattern.”

I think people see what they want to see, whether it’s the truth or not. A lot of people on both sides are more interested in playing “gotcha” than in debating the issues that face this country..

By: observer20

observer20 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:11:27 +0000

casper,

Then you must understand that, from a conservative/libertarian perspective, whereas Dunn, as a representative of the current administration supports and defends the large-government goals of Obama and as well as praises people such as Mao, that it seems to be a forming pattern.

And because of that, your nun analogy makes no sense to those people. Has Dunn visibly supported any nun-like systems? Not that I’m aware of.

And, indeed, people are reading into statements, but that is a natural human action and can shape political futures. This isn’t an exact science.

By: kmg1

kmg1 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:57:55 +0000

No, js, I think you have a thing for Orly. The argument you presented just cost her $20,000.

By: casper

casper — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:57:21 +0000

observer20,
“When does “one or two things” become a pattern?”
When a person repeats the same things over a period of time and in different circumstances. For instance, I have no problem labeling js02 a birther, since he repeats the brither nonsense every day and has for over a year. However, I wouldn’t label Rush as a military hater because of the “phony soldiers” comment he made a couple of years ago.

“Dunn saying Mao is a “favorite political philosopher” implies she admires him in general, not just because he did something different.”

The key word is “implies”. She also included Mother Teresa as a favorite political philosopher. Does that imply that she wants to become a nun? If so, why aren’t people putting as much weight on that part of her statement as the other? I think people are reading into her statement what they want to read into it.