gene@batman.UUCP (Gene Mutschler) (09/13/85)
[eat it]
The recent kidnapping of President (of El Salvador) Duarte's daughter,
presumably by the communist rebels, led me to wonder if the Left
would rise up with the same sense of outrage that it vented against earlier
right-wing death squads. (Heard from the death squads lately? Just
the Left-Wing death squads, you say? I thought so.)
I wasn't going to hold my breath, but thought that the American Left
would find it politic to do so.
So, I was interested to note during C-SPAN coverage of the House
today (Thu, 12 Sep 85), that Michael Barnes (D-MD), a noted opponent
of Administration policy in Central America, introduced a Concurrent
Resolution in the House roundly condemning the kidnapping.
He was especially concerned about the precedent created and the
spread of violence to the innocent relatives of political leaders.
He called for its unanimous adoption, and I said to myself, "This
is a Good Thing, and good politics for the Democrats in the bargain".
A couple of Republicans made short addresses supporting the Resolution
and all seemed sweetness and light. Then Henry Gonzales (D-TX) got up and
started running off at the mouth about how Duarte deserved it because
the US was such a Bad Country. An obviously embarassed Barnes cut him
off and called the question.
Then they had a roll-call vote. I noted with interest that Gonzales
probably abstained (voted Present). I also noticed that a couple
of Democrats had the nerve to vote against it, although one came to
his/her senses and changed his/her vote. So, I have to say
congrats to the Democrats for not making complete fools of themselves,
although I do wonder who the jerk is who voted against the Resolution.
My guess would be Studds (D-MA), but it's just a guess. Whoever it is,
I think we can presume that if he/she is not in the pay of the KGB,
he/she certainly should be.
What about all of you lefties on the net? Tell me Duarte deserved it.
I dare you.
Not that it matters, as I will be leaving the net in a couple of days
for about six to eight months. It's been real.
--
Gene Mutschler {ihnp4 seismo ctvax}!ut-sally!batman!gene
Burroughs Corp.
Austin Research Center cmp.barc@utexas-20.ARPA
(512) 258-2495gadfly@ihuxn.UUCP (Gadfly) (09/17/85)
-- > The recent kidnapping of President (of El Salvador) Duarte's daughter, > presumably by the communist rebels, led me to wonder if the Left > would rise up with the same sense of outrage that it vented against > earlier right-wing death squads... > > What about all of you lefties on the net? Tell me Duarte deserved it. > I dare you. > -- > Gene Mutschler Of course he deserved it, you running-dog lackey of the etc, etc... Er, seriously, Gene, how come you hold so-called "lefties" to a higher moral standard than your own political bedfellows? Viz: Righties root for the right (forgiving their excesses); lefties root for the left (and ditto). There are very few people on the net who condemn *everybody's* violence, which you, Gene, seem to find the only moral position (and a highly defensible one). My own observation is that most of these are of the bleeding-heart liberal variety (which you'd call "lefties", I probably "righties", but who cares?) than of any other political persuasion. -- *** *** JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** ***** ****** ****** 16 Sep 85 [30 Fructidor An CXCIII] ken perlow ***** ***** (312)979-7753 ** ** ** ** ..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken *** ***
mokhtar@ubc-vision.UUCP (09/18/85)
Subject: Re: The Kidnapping of Duarte's Daughter >> The recent kidnapping of President (of El Salvador) Duarte's daughter, >> presumably by the communist rebels, led me to wonder if the Left >> would rise up with the same sense of outrage that it vented against >> earlier right-wing death squads... >> >> What about all of you lefties on the net? Tell me Duarte deserved it. >> I dare you. >> -- >> Gene Mutschler > Of course he deserved it, you running-dog lackey of the etc, etc... > Er, seriously, Gene, how come you hold so-called "lefties" to a higher > moral standard than your own political bedfellows? Viz: Righties > root for the right (forgiving their excesses); lefties root for > the left (and ditto). There are very few people on the net who > condemn *everybody's* violence, which you, Gene, seem to find the > only moral position (and a highly defensible one). My own observation > is that most of these are of the bleeding-heart liberal variety > (which you'd call "lefties", I probably "righties", but who cares?) > than of any other political persuasion. > ken perlow Gene is cool because he makes it clear that as a "rightie", he need not be worried about mundane, ordinary concerns such as morality and humanity. He is smart enough to know that the true science of politics in its pure form is not bogged down with what is moral and what is not. Being intelligent, he knows very well whose side is the winning side. Why not face the facts! Ken may be a "leftie" but he is no less intelligent. It's not fair to expect the left to carry the burden of humanity if they are expected to exert any influence. Isn't it enough that they haven't been swept into the sea yet? Therefore, Ken smartly relieves himself of the unwanted burden and passes it on to the "bleeding-heart liberal variety". He announces proudly "who cares?"; almost as if he is drawing some magical strength out of not caring. The kind of strength he *knows* the "bleeding-heart liberal variety" does not have. By now, some people may be inclined to think that the possibility exists that I might belong to the "bleeding-heart liberal variety" club. I think that they may actually be right! (What a shame, since I seem to be a reasonably clever fellow!) Perhaps I am not wise enough, experienced enough, clever enough yet! So please be patient with me. I am trying to remedy the situation but you know, my biggest problem so far has been how to try to get rid of my soul since it does seem to get in the way every now and then. Any ideas from more successful people out there? Farzin Mokhtarian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "A man who wishes to make a profession of goodness in everything must necessarily come to grief among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge and not use it, according to the necessity of the case."