Sunday, October 07, 2007

Imagine No Cindy Sheehan

Cindy Sheehan promised to go away, but she continues to torment the world with her deep thoughts. Here she waxes eloquent about John Lennon's "Imagine".

Imagine no possessions: This is the crux of our problem. Going back to my brothers and sisters at the slot machines in Vegas, pulling almost catatonically on the lever of the One Armed Bandit, for what? To win the “jackpot” of course! How nice is it of the State of Nevada to allow gambling machines in their airports, so we can perchance live the American dream of buying higher stacks of stuff! On a day that George vetoed the health of over six-million children here in America, 16,000 children around the world died of starvation. In a week that we saw murder on a horrendous scale in Burma, more Iraqis were killed or forced from their homes by violence: to wander in the desert, or probably off to Syria where their daughters may be forced into prostitution to help support the family which should be able to live in peace and relative prosperity in their own country. Imagine that.

It was hard for me to imagine or envision peace when I am terrified because BushCo is contemplating even more slaughter in the Middle East in Iran and when Congress, Inc is busy supporting a murderous status quo that hurts humans within all borders, even our own.

Peace will only happen when every member of humanity is guaranteed prosperity, health and security which will not happen when we here in the US can’t even get off our asses to protest a war that is four and a half years and hundreds of thousands of bodies old, now.

We can imagine peace all we want but until each and everyone of us is willing to sacrifice some of our prosperity (because we have already had our security robbed from us by the rotten Republicans and complicit corporate Democrats) true peace—not just the absence of war—will be as elusive as a morsel of truth or modicum of courage coming out of Washington, DC.

Voluntary sacrifice is truly a revolutionary concept here in the United States of America.

So you say you want a revolution? Imagine that.

Why does she hate George Bush so much? He is for voluntary sacrifice also. Bush and Sheehan should spend a weekend working out their differences, then create a bipartisan fascist dictatorship and show us selfish Americans what happens when we do not sacrifice voluntarily. Imagine that.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

I too don't fully understand why the left hates Bush so much. He embraces everything they do only to a slightly less degree and in a slightly different form. Bush is a welfare statist like the liberals, he is a muslim sympathizer like the liberals and he believes in sacrificing American troops like the liberals. What do they hate him for? The only things I can come up with is that Bush wants to sacrifice people in the name of God whereas today's liberals want to sacrifice people in the name of the state or the community, etc. Also, Bush is not a 100% totalitarian as are today's liberals. So really what they hate Bush over is really only the degree of his altruism. Its just not extreme enough for them. As scary as that is.

John Kim

Anonymous said...

Greetings,

In case you are unaware of us, I’d like to introduce you to The Undercurrent. The Undercurrent is an Objectivist student publication mainly intended to be distributed on universities campuses to make more students aware of Ayn Rand. Non-students also distribute our paper, and other good places to distribute are coffee shops (some Starbucks have bulletin boards), bookstores (some have areas for free publications), gyms, and other places.

For more information, please visit our website, http://the-undercurrent.com/

We are now taking orders for our upcoming issue. To order, please go to this link:
http://the-undercurrent.com/?s=distribute or visit our site and click “distribute”.
Articles in the upcoming issue will include:
*an article arguing that the War in Iraq is not, though it should be,
guided by the goal of self-defense.

*an article arguing that medicine is not an entitlement, but a
commodity that should be bought and sold like any other good.

*an article arguing that people put too much weight on statistical
surveys as a guide for action.

*an article discussing and defending the value of corporations

*an article discussing the clash between religion and rational thought

*Two Ayn Rand Institute Op-Eds still to be selected
We will also list your campus club’s or community group’s event or contact info on our calendar. The service is free, just enter information by clicking the "calendar" link on our site, or by clicking http://www.the-undercurrent.com/?s=calendar
Please contact us if you wish to write an article in the future and consider joining our email list.

Distributing The Undercurrent is not a major time commitment. All you need to do is take a few minutes once or twice a week to drop off the paper at a campus newsstand or coffee shop. If cost is an issue, let us know and we will work with you to find a sponsor in your area to pay for your copies.

Please also consider:


(1) Adding our site to your blogroll.

(2) Announcing that we are taking orders for our new issue.

(3) Blogging your thoughts about The Undercurrent, positive or negative. If you feel strongly about the value of the Undercurrent, encourage your readers to get involved with the paper, whether as distributors, officers, or donors.

We also suspect that there are Objectivists who do not think that the Undercurrent is an effective tool for promoting Objectivism. If so, we’d like to hear why. Does it have something to do with TU’s content in particular? Is it more a general issue of the effectiveness of a campus paper as a medium for spreading Objectivism? Or is it the whole activity of campus activism in general that these Objectivists view as ineffective? Whether or not you personally hold any of these views, by starting a discussion on this issue, you can help bring out such arguments, and help us figure out the best possible way to promote Objectivism on college campuses.

(4) Even if you do not have the time or inclination to blog about the Undercurrent, send us a quick private email of your overall impression of our efforts. Are you generally impressed, indifferent, too busy to notice, or disappointed? We are very open to criticism, and sincerely want to hear your thoughts. Private emails can be sent to mail(AT)the-undercurrent.com

Thank you very much,

Eric
The Undercurrent
Distribution Officer

Myrhaf said...

John, the left under Bush is crazier than the Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs Bird. Can you imagine what they would be like under a President who was really committed to laissez-faire capitalism? I believe many would go underground and begin taking direct, violent, revolutionary action. Until one or two of them was thrown in jail for it; then the rest would run off to Canada.

Myrhaf said...

But if you look at this post at Big Lizards, liberal mania might come down to the 2000 election, not to Bush's positions or policies:

http://biglizards.net/blog/archives/2007/10/why_i_no_longer.html

Anonymous said...

Thanks Myrhaf. That was an interesting article as were the comments. I have always walked on eggshells with serious liberals (at college and at work) as well as serious religionists. I am non-confrontational by disposition so I'm not sure it was the 2000 elections that made liberals worse. From what I understand, Regan received just as much hatred as Bush (I didn't really pay attention to politics back then).

Philosophically, I would say that Liberals have embraced altruism to a greater extent than Conservatives. As I see it, the post modern family of ideologies have at their root a desire to destroy the Enlightenment tradition and all that remains of it. Leftism is an anti-Enlightenment movement. But Conservatism is a mix. It has its own anti-Enlightenment elements that are due to religion. But there are some Enlightenment ideas present largely through cultural inertia. (A Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams are two of numerous examples.) So liberals will consistently advocate for policies that are far more altruistic in form. The amazing thing is that today's liberals are not far off from being outright socialists. My liberal friends think that essentially everything should be either provided outright or subsidized by the government. Its as if they have no idea of the history of Russia or China or Cuba or anything. Sometimes when I am in a room full of liberals I feel that I might as well be on Mars. Its funny, I immediately switch into "sports, weather and travel" mode. It amazes me we have the freedoms and wealth in America that we do have when the ideas that are so dominant in the culture are so bad.

John Kim

Inspector said...

"Why does she hate George Bush so much?"

I'll say this much: The answer involves zombies

Harvey said...

Cindy Sheehan (along with Michael Moore and Ralph Nader) is just further proof that the far left can be just as goofy as the far right! How many times do I have to tell you people that?