|
thejazz: i hope that you were not referring to my post about historians when you asked the other rb about potentials for confrontation/misinterpretation of your posts--i was just riffing off the position that historians came to occupy in the process of collective evaluation of a presidency.
my point was that i know alot of historians and wouldn't necessarily accord a priori weight to what they say simply because they are historians.
reconmike: nice attempt to trivialize opposition to the bush administration by attributing it to some imaginary fashion. i assume this fantasy sequence serves a good psychological effect for you: protecting your politics by reducing opposition to the functional equivalent of pokeman. except of course that pokeman cards were a fashion in the empirical world, and the "fashion" of criticizing the bush administration is only a "fashion" in your head--shaped perhaps by the fast and easy dismissal of dissent you get from the planet limbaugh.
most of the folk who post here in opposition to the bush administration and its policies have been consistently in opposition for some time--even during that period when reactionary dominance was such that critiques of this foul administration would be greeted as treason by the conservatives here.
what has changed is that quite a few of the folk who used to post here from the right have stopped posting since november.
i am not entirely sure why, as there are as many reasons to withdraw from posting as there are reasons to post.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|