The American Spectator : The Other Side of Genocide

Text Size

The Other Side of Genocide

By Paul Chesser on 12.5.08 @ 6:08AM

Biased reporting understates the evils of the Khmer Rouge's crimes.

It's probably passé for a conservative writer in a conservative publication to whack the America-hating media every time they transgress, so I will do so only briefly before seizing the opportunity to make more important points.

The obligatory bash: CNN's Christiane Amanpour has filed yet another airheaded report (partly carried over from earlier this year) that equates the nipple-ripping, extremity-electrocuting, baby-bashing torture by the late 1970s Khmer Rouge regime with modern-day U.S. waterboarding of detainees at Guantanamo prison. The network heavily promoted her "Scream Bloody Murder" documentary (that aired last night and will several times more), which addresses repeated occurrences of genocide since 1948 when members of the United Nations agreed on a pact to seek the prevention and punishment of such practices. Seems it hasn't done much good, Amanpour asserts.

Speaking specifically to the above point, there is plenty in the history of U.S. foreign policy to criticize, especially the events that led to the rise of Cambodian dictator Pol Pot in the first place. Propping a corrupt, undemocratic regime like Lon Nol's and the bombing campaign that spilt in from Vietnam did not win America any friends, but the atrocities inflicted by the Khmer Rouge can hardly be likened to anything we have done any time in our history. So on that point please shut up, Christiane.

While it's too bad this under-examined issue was placed in her exaggerative stewardship, but it was probably her idea in the first place or it would not be aired. So for that I offer begrudging appreciation.

I wish fellow conservatives, and especially my evangelical brothers and sisters, would move genocide and other like evils that humanity cannot seem to eradicate -- namely trafficking and child exploitation -- up their priority ladder. I understand and agree with the intense emotion against abortion in the U.S., but state-sponsored (or –permitted) massacre, slavery, and the commoditization of children at least equally devalue human life.

Looking at the annual State Department Trafficking in Persons Report, the situation would seem hopeless. The details lay out scenarios only the sickest minds would conceive, much less act upon. Topics include "trafficking for forced begging," "children exploited for commercial sex," "boy victims of commercial sexual exploitation," "child sex tourism," and "street children and trafficking." One excerpt from the 295-page report:

An estimated two million children worldwide face the horrors of exploitation in the transnational sex trade. Child sex tourism involves people who travel to engage in commercial sex acts with children. The lives of such prostituted children are appalling. Studies indicate that each of these children may be victimized by 100 to 1,500 perpetrators per year.

That such activity is so widespread can cause those of us in a seemingly more civilized world to shut it out of our minds. Add contemporary genocide, as we hear about in Darfur, and a good many Westerners might just wish it away as a fiction.

In the midst of such darkness it's hard to be optimistic, but there are reasons to believe people and nations can recover from such circumstances. It can't be expected to happen overnight, but if more freedom lovers nurse it along it could happen faster.

My visit last month to Cambodia showed promise, for example. Thirty years ago Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge emptied Phnom Penh and other cities of its people in its warped, despicable attempt to establish a self-sustaining agrarian society. The country became an everyone's-equal land of peasantry in which opponents of the regime -- both ginned up and real -- were eliminated. About one-quarter of Democratic Kampuchea's estimated 8 million people were killed or starved to death.

Today Phnom Penh is alive. Every day its streets fill with vehicles -- mostly motorbikes -- and pedestrians and vendors cover most of its sidewalks. It seems all of its estimated 1.4 million people are out and about. The poverty persists and much of the city is still in disrepair, but it no longer is the ghost town it was reported to be under Pol Pot.

Cambodia is still recovering, of course, and will for some time. Years of internal war after the Vietnamese forced the Khmer Rouge from power further delayed any hope for rapid restoration. The regime killed off most of its educated population, leaving the country with a much lower literacy rate than its neighbors. Infrastructure and health care are poor. Corruption pervades nearly every level of government, and the country is considered one of the top destinations for child sex trafficking, as well as for forced labor and begging.

But there are many reasons for hope, as urban areas have seen outside investment (especially from China) pour in, and the government thirsts for more. Cambodia is considered more market-friendly than neighboring Laos and Vietnam. And according to the Trafficking in Persons Report, even enforcement and corruption challenges show improvement, noting solid efforts to improve prosecution, protection of victims, and prevention.

Another positive sign I personally witnessed: greater acceptance of religious diversity. Last month the first-ever Cambodia Christian Leadership Conference was held, which drew ministry, church, and house church leaders from nearly every province to Phnom Penh. More than 400 men and women attended with unity and outreach as their goals. In a historic moment Plork Phorn, the nation's Minister of Religion for Christianity, told attendees (in Khmer), "You have my assurance that you will have the freedom to practice your religion in your provinces." This was no small gesture in a country that is 95 percent Buddhist, where many others practice animism, and persecution of Christians (less than two percent of the population) occurs regularly. That only 30 years ago all religion was outlawed makes Plork's statement -- which never could have been uttered even just two years ago -- a near-miracle.

It's achievements like these, many of which are at least partly inspired by free societies like the U.S., that reporters like Amanpour miss. Yes, draw attention to the horrors, but don't forget to show successful ways out. While you're at it, don't manufacture false (im)moral equivalence.

topics:
Cambodia, Christiane Amanpour

About the Author

Paul Chesser is executive director for the American Tradition Institute and a senior fellow for the Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy Alternatives. The views he expresses do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (120) | Leave a comment

Eric Dondero| 12.5.08 @ 7:49AM

Nobody cares Paul. I wish that wasn't the case, but it's the truth. Cambodia and Pol Pot just simply do not fit the liberal template. How the Killing Fields ever got made, and slipped through the liberal media/Hollywood machine, I'll never know. But that's all we're going to ever get on this.

Pol Pot will be forever relegated to "non-important status," in world history, even though he's the greatest genocidal maniac in human history.

Witness: Where are all the Discovery Channel specials on Pol Pot's atrocities? History Channel? NatGeo specials on "Cambodia post-Pol Pot."

Where are all the Newsweek or Time pull-out features, "Remembering the Greatest Slaughter in Human History."

They don't exist.

And I blame Conservatives too. The Right just does not seem interested in the story of the Khmer Rouge either. Perhaps some leftover from the Vietnam era. But for whatever reason Conservatives have just not latched onto the issue.

I've been trying for years to get libertarians interested in Cambodia, and Pol Pot's atrocities, to no avail.

I'm sorry to say Paul, you and I, and perhaps a couple others who are truly interested are fighting a losing battle on Cambodia.

Mark30339| 12.5.08 @ 8:25AM

Concern over genocide, slavery and child abuse are pale in comparison to the world wide kumbaya on protecting whales and ivory tusks. Delusion reigns.

Thomas| 12.5.08 @ 11:10AM

This is just human nature. People do not like to be reminded of the brutality and down right evil in the world. Everyone, except the Jews, wanted to forget the 5 million killed in Nazi death camps. World never acknowledged the hundreds of thousands killed and enslaved in China by the Japanese. No one wants to speak of the 20 million killed in Russia under the Soviets. No one wishes to acknowledge the genocide in Africa, Southeastern Europe, the Middle East and Southeast Asia. Starvation, slavery, cruelty, and barbarism exist across the globe. But, most people do not want to know about it. It is disturbing. And there is little that civilized peoples can do about it at the moment.

The human society is changing. It has gone through many changes in the course of history and another change is upon us. The first recorded civilizations were based upon the city/state. They worked well in bringing the fruits of civilization to a small area, but they failed when it became necessary to effectively govern a large area. City/state based empires grew up and they too proved failures, largely because they failed to instill in the people living farthest from the origination of the empire as sense of belonging. The Gaelic tribes enjoyed the benefits of the Roman Empire, but they never assimilated. Finally these mighty Empires succumbed to internal rot. More conservative nation/states grew up in the vacuum produced by the failing Empires. Each one initially based upon a common societal type. These continued until the next big change, the birth of the United States. The United States is the ultimate of the nation/state. Based not upon common heritage or language or even religious beliefs, it was based upon a concept. The concept of maximum personal freedom in a civilized society. It has proven to be the siren call for most of the world's population. But, there are still those who crave power. For them, the power to dominate others is freedom. They invariably choose to demonstrate that power by enslavement, destruction and death. And it is these people that have to be, at best, defeated or, at worst, contained.

Another change is in the works. Nation/states, largely due to nearly instantaneous communications, have become outmoded. Currently the global society of the planet Earth is on the verge of an evolutionary change from a collection of nation/states to a global unitary society. There are only a few possible models that are viable. One is totalitarianism, either secular or religious. Another is maximum personal liberty in a societal setting. Both are in play, but the first seems to be winning, at the moment. Totalitarian regimes dominate in the Third World and in much of the second. It is now encroaching into the First World nations. Europe is nearing the point where centralized, near totalitarian, control of peoples' lives is a reality. Even the United States, which has been slipping in that direction for the last forty years, is nearing the tipping point. When respect for the freedom, not rights but freedom, of the individual is lost; then centralized control of every aspect of an individual's life is close behind.

If people do not wish to live in a society similar to Nazi Germany, The Soviet Union, Mao's China, the Free Belgian Congo, etc., then it is time to wake up. Return to a society where freedom, not "rights" is the overriding philosophy and the rest of the world will rush to emulate it. But, that process has to start right here, in the good ole U S of A. Whatever we become, as a society, the rest of the world will emulate.

I apologize for the long winded sermon. I know that it is grossly oversimplified, but it bears thinking about.

Anthony| 12.5.08 @ 12:19PM

I'd like to address your first point, since you did a wonderful job on the latter. Being a leftist journalist means never having to apologize, or being held accountable for blatant distortions, propaganda disguised as news, or lies. The leftist narrative is all that's important, and hacks, like Amanpour, will be praised within the leftist MSM's echo chamber for their good work. Remember the recent journalistic masterpieces of folks like Franklin Foer of the New Republic and its reports from phony Baghdad Diarist, Thomas Beauchamp. Remember Ethan Thomas, formerly of CNN, now of Time, who made hysterical claims that the American military were targeting journalists in Iraq. (Too bad that story turned out not to be true) This deranged fool was awarded with a new job at Time Magazine, after even CNN couldn't stomach his madness any longer. Remember Mike Issakoff of Newsweek, whose reckless reports of Koran flushing at GITMO caused the death of nearly 10 people. Not only have these people not been subject to peer ridicule, quite the contrary, they have been embraced for their efforts. Can anybody say a Peabody Award for Dan Rather? In an insane atmosphere such as the times we live in, you can't be suprised that these leftists hack have no appreciation of the atrocities of which you speak. They do not register because they're not the right causes.

Theophilus| 12.5.08 @ 12:28PM

I primarily blame the church for these issues being overlooked. We are the moral conscience of this society, and we have failed the US.

Roger D. McKinney| 12.5.08 @ 1:25PM

Paul: “I wish fellow conservatives, and especially my evangelical brothers and sisters, would move genocide and other like evils that humanity cannot seem to eradicate -- namely trafficking and child exploitation -- up their priority ladder. I understand and agree with the intense emotion against abortion in the U.S., but state-sponsored (or –permitted) massacre, slavery, and the commoditization of children at least equally devalue human life.”

Hold on a minute! Let’s think this through. Conservatives want smaller government yet at the same time want the state to solve all of the world’s problems. It’s time that “conservatives” learned you can’t have your Kate and Edith, too.
The US cannot solve every problem in the world. We need to exercise a small amount of humility. Trying to solve the world’s problems and be the world’s policeman is the chief way the federal government has grown so large. How can conservatives not see that?

On the other hand, if you are advocating private initiatives to work on the problems a great deal is already being done by charitable organizations and missions agencies of churches. If you want more to be done, then send them some more money.

Dustoff| 12.5.08 @ 3:33PM

Who even cares what this woman writes or thinks (Christiane Amanpour) she's never had a problem with these killers. It always the USA fault.

ruth| 12.5.08 @ 4:21PM

I have a hard time even looking at this woman's face. Her arrogance turns my stomach.

Daphne Kenward| 12.5.08 @ 5:02PM

History is written by the victors. The victims story is seldomly told.

What America said about the Russians in Georgia, regarding South Ossetia, was not true, but the whole of USA and Europe decided that Russia was the agressor, another twisted story.

How many Historians write about the American Slave trade and how many billions of people died?.

How is it that America don't write about and speak about their own Genocidal attacks on the Japanese people in Hiroshima, and Nagasaki.

How is it we don't hear about the numbers of dead Iraqi people which I am sure runs into millions.

The truth is seldomly spoken, of mans inhumanity to man. And our levels of sheer wickedness, is worse than that of wild animals, while we hide behind our cloaks of Religion, of all different names, and point the finger at others.

Carpenter| 12.5.08 @ 6:20PM

Daphne,
So glad to see you here again, I was afraid it was going to be a dull day.
As ever, your hysterical exxagerations and misstatements, and your insistence on blaming America for everything give us all a lift. But I miss the paranoia and conspiracy that are usually there. Not really trying today?
No doubt you and every critic of the USA knows the "real" truth about how Russia is innocent of all charges in Georgia. Why don't you enlighten us, and don't forget to substantiate with your sources.
The slave trade was truly evil. How many "billions" did die at the hands of the USA? And how many more would have died if America had not followed Britain's lead in being one of the first to abolish this evil, and at the time, almost universal practice? How many countries still practice or turn a blind eye to it, even today?
How many more Japanese would have died if America had to invade the Japanese mainland to stop the evil the Nippon Co-prosperity Sphere inflicetd on the world?
And finally, how exactly are you sure about the dead Iraqi millions, and who is responsible for their deaths?
Try to be accurate and realistic on these last two because you're delving into historical arenas where memories are still sharp. Wouldn't want you to look foolish or anything!

ruth| 12.5.08 @ 7:47PM

Billions, Daphne? Really? You undercut the point you are trying to make when you exaggerate. Why don't you disclose the name of your country, Daphne? I've read many of your quick, harsh judgements against mine, so why don't you share your country of origin? Let's all see how pure, how loving your nation's actions have been over the centuries. Only fair, don't you think, Daphne?
't

Neil Patel| 12.5.08 @ 8:14PM

The US isn't blameless. The Khmer Rouge genocide ended when the communist government of Vietnam (which was unpleasant but mostly non-genocidal) invaded Camodia in 1978. The US supported a UN resolution in support of the Khmer Rouge during the invasion. In the 1980s, the US gave support to rebel groups (which included the Khmer Rouge) against the pro-Vietnam Cambodian government.

ruth| 12.5.08 @ 8:36PM

No one ever said the USA was blameless! Not everything is our fault, though, either. I am tired for being blamed for everything that goes wrong in this world. It's ridiculous. Communist Vietnam unpleasant? First time I've heard that description!

Alan Brooks| 12.5.08 @ 9:26PM

America had to back Khmer Rouge in opposing Soviet power, by the Khmer Rouge fighting Vietnam. Eventually through trial and error we brought down Soviet Empire.
Russia is a mafia influenced authoritarian country-- good for the Georgians in fighting them. Russia has lost ALL the goodwill it garnered in WWII.

Richard S.| 12.5.08 @ 11:09PM

Daphne's impeccably researched figures inspire us to ever-greater levels of arithemetical scrupulousness. Surely, her assertion that the slave trade resulted in the deaths of billions must be true. The alternative, that Daphne is totally out-of-her-mind insane, couldn't possibly be the case, could it?

Alan Brooks| 12.5.08 @ 11:11PM

Daph,
you're right, we should have left blacks in Africa, so they could kill each other there.
And that way the ones enslaved and brought here wouldn't have become African Americans, they would have remained "savage negroes".

But we cannot discuss it.

S.L. Toddard| 12.5.08 @ 11:22PM

"Speaking specifically to the above point, there is plenty in the history of U.S. foreign policy to criticize, especially the events that led to the rise of Cambodian dictator Pol Pot in the first place. Propping a corrupt, undemocratic regime like Lon Nol's and the bombing campaign that spilt in from Vietnam did not win America any friends, but the atrocities inflicted by the Khmer Rouge can hardly be likened to anything we have done any time in our history"

Pol Pot, through a combination of forced collectivation, slave labor and executions killed between 750,000 and 1.75 million Cambodians.

George W. Bush, through launching the clownishly bungled, pathetically ill-concieved Iraq War killed between 950,000 and 1.2 million innocent Iraqi civilians.

Have a nice day.

S.L. Toddard| 12.5.08 @ 11:25PM

"Hold on a minute! Let’s think this through. Conservatives want smaller government yet at the same time want the state to solve all of the world’s problems."

See that's where you're wrong. Convervatives want smaller government. Neoconservatives want the state to solve all the world's problems.

Alan Brooks| 12.5.08 @ 11:30PM

today's Iraq, unlike Pol Pot's Cambodia, is not a giant concentration camp.
How many slave laborers are there in Iraq today? how many are dying of starvation?
but i'm being rational, and Bob told me not to be-- gets in the way of challenging discussions, you know.

Alan Brooks| 12.5.08 @ 11:35PM

so neoconservatives want the state to solve "all" the world's problems? Really, Todd.
is that a fact? will you be a sucker for your own propaganda?

[no answer]

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 12:32AM

Hey, Todd, care to let us in on the source of your horrific Iraqi casualty figures, or did the voices in your head just conjure them up for you?

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 12:44AM

If we cite the horrific details of torture and savagery in Cambodian slave camps Todd will equate it to the prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. They chopped off heads in Cambodia, we put hoods on prisoners' heads in Iraq; but in a liberal's mind, the good old USA is always the biggest villain of all. Shove it where the sun don't shine, Todd!

Alan Brooks| 12.6.08 @ 12:57AM

in 1979 (actually it started in '78) the humanitarian peace n' love Soviet Army invaded Afghanistan.
Our pals the Russians were still upset that a peace treaty had been signed, a year and a few months before, between Egypt and Israel. Altered the strategic balance.
So by invading Afghanistan they could redress that problem of theirs. In 1978 Vietnam invaded Cambodia, and in 1979 China invaded Vietnam; China was understandably worried that Russia was too powerful.
So Cambodia wasn't all about America vs. Vietnam and Vietnam vs. Cambodia, and America vs. Vietnam.
there were OTHERS involved.

Alan Brooks| 12.6.08 @ 1:03AM

... it wasn't just all about America vs. Vietnam, or Cambodia vs. America, or America vs. Vietnam...

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 2:22AM

Alan, you missed the point. Don't get bogged down by petty facts or details; just know, that no matter the subject, the USA is always at fault. We've even elected a black man whose father was from Africa, but no matter--we are still the Great Satan. I have thought for a long time that liberalism is a form of mental illness. I'm just tired of being exposed to their nut farm antics. Boring.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 8:13AM

Ruth.

America would never consider slave labour, would they? even though your country was built on slave labour, I get surprises every day.

I wonder where America gets her cheap goods, let me guess, China, from their cheap labour camps. One thing is true slavery nevery ended, now it includes the whole world, slavery to a system that tell you what to think and what to eat what to watch what to do. Only yesterday, I heard there are people working for 10 cents per hour in parts of India.

One thing that cannot be ignored, is how selfish some are, are and how much some would like to protect their image, while they trample down all that stands up for justice and freedom.

Yes poverty was invented by those who are rich, and seek nothing more than to entrap, and enslave, and kill to stay in power. Countries and borders are of no importance in their quest to commit genocide on the poor to quash rebellion.

I have seen footage of the extent the state would go to kee Blacks down and in their place in America, the police dogs, the water cannon, and the murders, and the lynchings, the KKK crosses burning on the lawns of any one who dare to say this is wrong or that is wrong, and today are the first to shout about how Christian they are till we begin to speak of the history, of a nation who elect leaders who engineer genocide, and hide behind a flag.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 8:31AM

Ruth.

By the war my Kingdom is not of this world. This kingdom belongs to America, the Super power. To kill and dictate, who lives and who dies, who leads and who follows.

Any country out there fancy having their state destroyed, can disagree, and suffer the consiquences. Saddam was following orders, till he felt bold enough to disagree.

The Skull and Bones men of America and Europe, collects exactly that SKULL & BONES of men.

Joe H.| 12.6.08 @ 10:05AM

I know Thomas was off-topic, but I can't believe everyone is letting his neoconservative foolishness pass without comment, specifically:

The United States is the ultimate of the nation/state. Based not upon common heritage or language or even religious beliefs, it was based upon a concept. The concept of maximum personal freedom in a civilized society. It has proven to be the siren call for most of the world's population.

Our country was based on as much of a common heritage and religion as England, where most of our original colonist came from. It is not a "proposition nation" without a history, culture or people. Even after immigration from many European countries, as late as 1965, when our elites decided to change our immigration laws to elect a new people, our population was 90 percent white.

It's true America has had regional variations since before its founding, but these were mostly based on regional variations in Britain-see Albion's Seed by David Hackett Fischer. There were many variations of Christianity, but almost no religions except for Christianity.

Tim Bunn| 12.6.08 @ 10:45AM

My heart was truly touched by your article. Please be encouraged not to remain silent. Reading over the comments reveal your labor is definitely not in vain. Press on Brother!

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 12:04PM

"today's Iraq, unlike Pol Pot's Cambodia, is not a giant concentration camp.
How many slave laborers are there in Iraq today? how many are dying of starvation?"

I'm sorry, but do you believe that makes any difference to the families of the Iraqis Bush has had killed? "It's not like your son died in a slave labor camp, Ma'am - we just blew his arms and legs off and he bled to death at your daughter's wedding. Some people!"

What an absurd lot of people you all are.

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 12:16PM

"Hey, Todd, care to let us in on the source of your horrific Iraqi casualty figures, or did the voices in your head just conjure them up for you?"

No, I don't care to do that, thank you. I find that game rather juvenile - neocon asks American to provide study or poll cited, American provides neocon studies and polls cited, neocon proceeds to cherrypick study findings, embracing ones that coincide with what he or she wishes the truth to be and discarding the rest as propaganda - like they do with the news on a daily basis.

No, thank you. I've been down that silly road. It ends with the neocon saying "NA-NAH-NAH-NAH-I-CAN'T-HEAR-YOU", and the American recoiling in disgust.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 12:26PM

Joe H.

Have you read about the Charles Dickens era, in England. When some white Anglo Saxons were so poor the only thing they were allowed to keep was their rotten teeth.

Children was out working at the age of 8 and less.
Cleaning chimnies, pick pocketing.
Ever heard about the work houses, where the poor ended up. Or could be arrested for catching a rabbit to eat because everything belonged to the crown.

Heard of Oliver Cromwell, that's interesting. Most of the people who left Europe was due to poverty inflicted by the state on the people.

The people the Americans call the founding fathers, killed 60 Million Red indians, and today boast about their humanity and compassion.

The people in America only learnt one thing, how to kill, mother nature is reacting now.

America is dieing, people forgot how to live, and all they do is kill their fellow man, kill the rivers and trees and life on this planet. They kill the air, rivers and streams pollute every thing they come in contact with, even fields the soil. They have hunted animals to the point of extintion, from these so called Christians there is absolutely nothing they will not poison and kill, these people are the most distructive god forsaken people ever lived on earth.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 12:45PM

Yeah, it's a brave man who can drop cluster bombs on a school full of kids in Iraq. It's also takes a brave Army to use Uranium tipped cluster bombs on the City of Fallugia, full of innocent civilians, and now claim Iraq is now better off that they have no electricity, no clean drinking water. And children are being born deformed due to Radiation from the cluster bombs dropped on innocent people who posed no threat to America what so ever.

Service men and women coming back from Iraq, mentally insane, gone mad from the evil they have committed on these innocent people who live no where near America. Children blown up, no arms no legs.

Saddam was no saint, but what America has done to these people is 1000 times worse.

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 12:58PM

"The people the Americans call the founding fathers, killed 60 Million Red indians, and today boast about their humanity and compassion."

Absurd. The people we Americans called the Founding Fathers did no such thing. Yes they fought wars against Indians and considered them savages, but that total of 60 million is A) simply wrong - at the time of the landing of the Mayflower there were at maximum 3 million Indians on what would become American soil and B) unfair, as the death toll of the American Indian was spread out over centuries and cannot be laid at the feet of the Founders - they were killed long before and long after the Founders strode the stage of this world like the colossi they were.

The Founders deserve all the reverence they get and more, despite that they were men of their time and owned slaves and opinions we now hold outdated and repugnant. The neocons deserve all the more scorn for squandering the glorious tradition of the Founders bequeathed us.

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 1:02PM

"Saddam was no saint, but what America has done to these people is 1000 times worse. "

Quite true. George W. Bush has commanded the deaths of more Iraqi civilians than Saddam Hussein. In addition think about this - Osama bin Laden sent 3,000 Americans to their deaths at the WTC. George W. Bush has sent 5,000 Americans to their deaths in the Iraq war.

By any measure, George W. Bush - that chimpanzee that now pollutes the Oval Office - is a greater scoundrel and villain than either bin Laden or Hussein.

Daphne kenward| 12.6.08 @ 1:42PM

That Chimpanzee George W Bush is moving to Billionairs Row in Dallas Texas, the Hollow I think it's called, he is not selling his Ranch in Craford Texas either, to afford it.

Anybody out there wondering where all the money in America has gone?

Well I have got to say it, S L Toddard, I agree with you 100% on your remark about G W Bush, I thought I was the only person who thought he looked like a Chimpanzee. Bush should be going to the Hauge to stand trial on war crimes, along with Haussein, Kissenger, and their fellow mass murderers.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 2:45PM

Daphne and Todd: liberal clowns blogging here for our amusement. Todd, I knew your claims were specious--you liberals just hurl verbal bombs; nothing you say is true or backed by facts. Your compatriot, Daphne, proves my point, she claims white settlers killed 60 million red Indians already living on this continent and billions of Africans in the slave trade. See what I mean about you liberals and the voices in your heads? Nice feint, Daphne, but it's truly bad form not to reveal your country's name. Makes me think you have something to be very ashamed of. You obviously have no problems spewing your verbal diarrhea, so fess up, where do you live, girl?

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 2:47PM

Todd, the mature one, says President Bush looks like a chimpanzee. Do you really think you should go there, Todd?

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 2:50PM

I think I'm going to contact the Secret Service regarding Daphne's posts, her hatred of George Bush is frightening. She knows everything about him. Creepy.

bruce| 12.6.08 @ 3:43PM

Go, Ruth, go!
These liberals are a hoot, aren't they? I read their posts and I'm always reminded of the famous scene in the sitcom "Cheer's" where Cliff Claven has just completed one of his absurd assertations, and Frasier looks at him and asks, "What color is the sky in your world, Cliff?" Still, I wonder what motivates these liberal twits to read the stories and post their DailyKos factoid-filled comments on a conservative website like TAS?

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 4:10PM

Ruth.

I know every thing because I read serious News, no the one you read. Further more what makes you think I am a liberal? My sweet life is like this, we all don't agree on every thing. Some knows more than others.

If you live in one country, why should it be about liberals, or Republicans, don't you think it should be about policies. When you have a country that thinks, only Republicans should have a voice, can you see how wars are started because in your mind only Ruth is important, and only what Ruth says is true, those who disagree are the enemy.

Honey that is exactly why the world is in the mess it's in. This is a global village and we must promote peace and harmony, I am afraid to say your President did not promote peace and harmony, and he has bankrupted America and the globe on his quest for mass murder and I don't agree with it.
My philosophy is every one has a right to live in peace harmony and freedom not just Americans, but the whole world.

I come from the school of thought that we are here for only a short time, and we must do the best we can to educate, others, and enlighten them to the world of peace and justice, not only for white anglo saxons, but black people, and all peoples of the world.

Science and technology should be shaired in the developing world, education, and health, and developement is something we should promote across the globe.

Ruth what you don't understand is you think as long as America is killing others it's for the good of America, no you are wrong.

For example, lets take family planning, and health education and child development, and education and put them in a block, and invested in that. Can you imagine the rewards, how much do you think your Government spends each year on planns to develope bombs to kill poor African children, and Arabs, and under privileged kids around the world. How much do you think each of those bombs cost that killed the 1.2 Million people in Iraq. if each person murdered by your Presidents comand only cost $1.00 a health programme would not even cost that in a third world country.

You see Ruth my mind is not set on Republicans and Democrats, it is based on something far more important foreign policy. When you go to the book shop try and buy some books on Politics, and good governance.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 4:22PM

I know every thing about G W Bush, I also know about Kissinger and his plans to de-populate the world. And also have copies of the blue print to kill and massacre black people all across africa. Using chemical and biological WMD.

I also know about George Herbert Walker Bush support of Eugenics to kill and massacre people of colour around the world, I am surprised you have not heard about it. Why do you want to cover up for people like that what do you get out of it.

I am a person who want to expose crime where ever I find it even Genocide.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 4:41PM

Why are you so defensive, America is not you, you are not America. You have been brainwashed. Let you into a secret, I don't support no flag, and no country.

What I support is Justice Freedon Liberty, and all the down trodden poor people all across this globe they are my people, and I am their people.

Michele San Pietro| 12.6.08 @ 5:16PM

I think Christiane Amanpour really put the foot in the mouth. Among other things, she herself escaped from a brutal regime, that of the Iranian Ayatollah, in 1979. As for unjustified hate against America, it has reached unbelievable levels, and you have no idea what the situation his over here in Europe. I get insulted every day for liking America, but I will continue to like it, even if I remained the only one in the world. I think you Americans should be merciless on the garbage who only throw shit at your beautiful country.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 5:56PM

Some people only know how to kill, and not how to live. When you learn how to live, you live in harmony with nature. Many people who come to America, are fleaing areas of the world where America have overthrown democratically elected governments, such as Iran,back in 1953. Which gave rise to the Ayatollah, and later the American funded and armed Saddam to attack Iran which resulted in the death of 2 Million Iranians.

Jeremiah| 12.6.08 @ 6:08PM

Mr Chesser --

Excellent post. I think that conservatives do a better job calling attention to all kinds of issues related to slavery and international human trafficking, for which they should be commended.

I also am impressed by the piece's willingness to remind readers that Cambodia's tragedy did not occur in a vacuum, and that our bombing of that country during the "Viet Nam" war certainly helped nothing.

As Mr Chesser anticipates, however, in his first sentences, the bashing of the media is tiresome.

Think what you will about this specific reporter. Journalists risked their lives to bring news out of Cambodia when the "killing fields" were happening (hence the movie, etc.) Journalists risk their lives to bring the news from Iraq and countless other places. I'm sick to death of conservatives complaining about the press.

Without journalists, where do you propose we get our information? How do we make decisions? Do we just trust the government will tell the truth?

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 6:56PM

Daphne, that's fleeing not fleaing. Fleas are nasty little blood-sucking insects of which I am sure you are well acquainted. You are a serious whack-job, Daphne, and whack-jobs like you are dangerous. Where do you live, Daphne? You promised to tell us your country of origin. What are you so ashamed of, why are you so secretive? Why don't you let us know a little about you? Especially since you claim to be such an expert on us.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 6:59PM

Bruce, mental-illness motivates liberals.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 7:07PM

Jeremiah.

It's got to be said very good point, reference to Journalists. It's tragic so many lost their lives in the Iraq war, killed I'm afraid to say by Americans, in an attempt to cover up the massacre in Iraq. Some wre arrested, and infact there is one reporter in Guantanamo bay prison because he was an Arab reporter.

The red cross does a remarkable job too, these are the brave men and women of war.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 7:13PM

Ruth.

why are you so keen on where I live, what if I ask you where you lived, would you give me your name and address and telephone number please.
When you give me your details on line I may give you mine.

Ruth to tell you the truth, I could'nt give a fleas ass where you live it's nothing to do with me, I am not interested. You are upset because what I say you find offensive because you lack the sense to realise I am not speaking to you personally.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 7:21PM

Daphne, you are offensive and it's obvious you are not well upstairs. I cut you slack because I know you are disturbed. Watch what you say about President Bush, however, threats are taken seriously. Get my drift, girl? I don't want your address, not interested. I just want to know your country since you know mine, is that simple enough for you to understand?

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 7:23PM

Ruth.

You are very young, you have a lot to learn, POLITICANS are corrupt, they are the same world over. You think George W Bush is your father, and you love your leader, it's a shame you feel that way, because many Germans felt the same way during the 2nd world war.

You have perhaps never met George W Bush in your life or ever likely to meet the man. You hold on the every word he telly you. POLITICANS are liers, they are the biggest contricksters in the world, thats why people vote for them, they sound convincing, if they did'nt no one in their right mind would vote for them, it's the trick of the game. Once in office they could'nt give a fleas ass about you. You are just another victim of the system.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 7:25PM

Jeremiah, I see your buddy, Daphne, is down with your nut-bag theories. You liberals are all the same.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 7:27PM

At least you learned the proper usage of flea.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 7:32PM

Ruth.

You can read, you can correct me where I've made spelling errors, right. I have told you I don't live in your country, I have told you, I worship no flag. I support no political party. How much clearer can I make it to you I have no interset in supporting man. Politicans are no more than well organised crooks.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 7:37PM

Ruth.

Stop, think, this is not a personal thing, it's about peoples opinion. We all don't have to agree, it's called freedom of expresasion.

You can't tell me what to think, no more than I can tell you what to think.

And the good thing about it is I can express my opinion and you feel we should not be abled to express our right to freedom of expression. But these are values we must encourage, and values we must maintain, or else we become no more than animals.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 7:40PM

Opinions are different from blatant lies. You just don't know the difference.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 7:45PM

Why are you so defensive about revealing your country? Because your self-righteous insults would be undermined, right? You are being deceitful by hiding this information, and I find it amusing, because you claim to be so superior to everyone else.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 7:54PM

Ruth.

You should be a fly on a wall in high places to hear what other politicans think of that Moron G W Bush, most people the world over thinks he is the biggest idiot ever lived. Darling get over it.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 7:58PM

Ruth.

You really want to know my country. My Country is PLANET EARTH at this moment in time, the same as yours. Ever heard the word global village, ever heard of global warming, we shair the same prospects, extintion.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 8:11PM

Ruth.

You have the misfortune to live in a country, where information is not as freely available as where I live. So the unfortunate thing for you is you dont know what is a lie from what is actual facts.

Ruth what you need to do is look up the facts, when you find out what you support and why you will have a better understanding of what POLITICS is about, I can tell from your concerns you are young and you are confused you dont have access to information you have no concepts of the number of wars America has waged against the rest of the world or why.

Most of the wars since the 2nd world war has been started directly or indirectly by the United States.

Ruth I really can't be bothered with you any further it's silly, you are about 20 -21 perhaps younger you are perhaps some right wing nutter for all I know and will never see reason.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 8:27PM

Daphne, you talk about your country but you won't name it--you are a fraud.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 8:44PM

I would like to know why America was supplying chemical gas to kill the Kurds, in the oil rich areas of Iraq. Aiding and abetting Genocide against the Kurdish people. Using American gas, American guns tanks bombs. All WMD supplied by the USA.

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 9:01PM

"Daphne and Todd: liberal clowns blogging here for our amusement."

This statement speaks to the simplicity of the neoconservative - the world is black and white, good and evil - just like professional wrestling. I criticize the anti-American agenda of the neoconservatives, ergo I must not be a neoconservative, ergo I must be a "liberal", since there are only two political philosophies on earth - neoconservatism and social-justice liberalism.

Some day, Ruth, long after you pass through middle and high school, you may - if you're lucky - learn that the world is a complex place, with people of all sorts of different political persuasions that don't exactly fit into the two little boxes you're currently using to categorize the entirety of political thought. For instance, I am a *conservative* - I believe in the Rule of Law, I believe in a small, unintrusive federal government bound by the limits set by that law, I believe in states rights as per the 10th Amendment, I believe the Department of Defense is a department of defense rather than aggression, I believe in a trade policy that benefits America first, and I believe in a foreign policy which has as its primary - indeed, its only - purpose protecting the liberty, property and tranquility of the citizens of these United States. I believe our soldiers are too precious a resource to send to their deaths fighting phantoms concocted by the minds of paranoiacs. It is not the responsibility of the guardians of our Republic to die abroad forcing our way of life on peoples who neither want nor deserve it.

The neoconservative/anticonservative can grasp none of this. Soldiers, to them, are playthings - g.i. joe dolls they can send out and cheer on as they "fight the bad guys", and that they have their arms and legs blown apart, that they bleed to death in a desert halfway around the globe means nothing to them - indeed, soldiers themselves mean nothing to them - because they get to play at "patriotism", and wave their flags and treat the whole sad spectacle as though it were all being played out for their entertainment and nothing more. Do they hate the troops? No, they just don't care about them one way or the other. To believe that something as paltry and cheap as "Iraqi democracy" is worth the lives of five thousand American soldiers - well, I think it says all you need to know about the neocons. Selfishness, hubris, gross, repugnant arrogance and an ignorance of the world so stupefying in its breadth and depth that it truly is awesome in the literal sense - these are the calling card of the neoconservative. Witness the wonders they have wrought – on the Constitution, in Iraq and Afghanistan, at Guantanamo Bay, and on the world economy – and despair.

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 9:05PM

"Todd, the mature one, says President Bush looks like a chimpanzee. Do you really think you should go there, Todd?"

Speak plain, Ruth. You mean to say you believe black people are monkeys? Or do you lack the courage to speak true?

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 9:17PM

"I think I'm going to contact the Secret Service regarding Daphne's posts, her hatred of George Bush is frightening."

How pathetic. The fall of the Soviet Union has somehow led to the rise of Stalinism in the United States. Our intelligence agencies spy on our own citizens without warrants, our President - that troglodytic horse's ass and across-the-board failure - claims the power to detain American citizens on American soil and cage and torture them for the rest of their lives without trial, and now simpering, ignorant, craven slugs like Ruth threaten to turn in the names of political dissidents to our own American KGB, presumably so they'll be sent off to one of Bush's gulags and silenced.

This in the "freest country on Earth" - so free that we imprison more of our citizens than any nation in the history of the world - including the USSR.

Alan Brooks| 12.6.08 @ 9:38PM

alrighty, i wont get bogged down in details.
The Russians and Chinese are the ones responsible for the Khmer Rouge. The Communists started it, not us. The Communists invaded Cambodia first, not us. We made mistakes, but ours' werent nearly as bad as the other countries involved.

okay? that's it.

Alan Brooks| 12.6.08 @ 9:46PM

Toddard, the reason we have so many people in prison is we have more freedom, so people misuse that freedom.
And our socialist schools breed stupid people who commit crimes.

from now on i'll be simple and try not to use bigs words.

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 9:58PM

"Toddard, the reason we have so many people in prison is we have more freedom"

Everybody got that?

Thomas| 12.6.08 @ 10:16PM

I am sorry to be so long in responding to Joe H, but I have been busy today.

I realize, after being labeled a neoconservative, that this is just a waste of time, but here goes.
Joe, take a look at the writings of the founding fathers of this nation. They were all virtually unanimous in their definition of this country as one based upon liberty. All could come and be free. This tradition was carried on through the Civil War period, the War To Free the Slaves. Abraham Lincoln, in the Gettysburg Address, described this nation as "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to that proposition that all men are created equal." This theme is carried out throughout the history of this country. Historically, this nation has welcomed people from virtually every nation and ethnic group on the planet. This is something that can be said for few nations and none of those has freedom and equality for the general population as its stated reason for existence.

No, I stand by my statement that this country was not born of a common ethnic heritage, or even religious beliefs. If that had been the case, the Revolutionary War would never have occurred. Because we would have been Englishmen, and Englishmen do not revolt against the Crown. It was born of a desire for individual freedom. And many of the people of this nation have struggled to guarantee that freedom for the last 223 years.

Think what you will, but there is a reason that the poor, the downtrodden, the oppressed and the adventurous move to this country and seek citizenship. Dictators and those in power in foreign countries who hate the United States do so because the principles upon which this country was founded are, themselves, a threat to the power these despots hold. In fact, the most virulent haters of the United States can be found living within her borders. Why anyone would hate their fellow citizens for wishing to exercise their freedom is beyond me, but that is fact.

I have no trouble stating that the United States is the ultimate culmination of the nation/state. But, the era of the nation/state is coming to a close. The world, largely due to instantaneous communication, is drawing closer together. The next step in social evolution is near, a united planet. It will be neither easy nor painless, but it will either come, or the human race will return to the Stone Age.

Daphne Kenward| 12.6.08 @ 10:29PM

Ruth may not like the facts, because she is one of these flag waving battery chickens, who only see the world in shades of grey, spend their lives tunnel visioning. People who live in the real world make their own decisions.

Ruth thinks people should be brain washed to agree with her ideas. Never looks up anything just condems every one who dont agree as stupid or mad.

Ruth is the type of person who would argue with a SERVICE man or WOMAN who has just come back from Iraq who has seen it first hand.

Ruth is young and immature, she reminds me of the Hitler youths. Thinking not required just agree.

gavin| 12.6.08 @ 10:30PM

ooh more am spec daffeytacks gotta love the stalin worship

Alan Brooks| 12.6.08 @ 10:42PM

Toddard,
people ALWAYS misuse liberty, and "it" often becomes criminal; now you dont put all criminals in prison, but enough.
(im doing kindergarten konversation so not to be too 'rational'.
USSR under Stalin had less crime because the regime killed or gulaged criminals, among others-- to say the least. We do the best we can in america.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 10:45PM

Todd is Daphne's evil twin, or is it the other way around? Whatever, they are both haters and should be dismissed. Todd, I knew you would take the bait. So predictable! YOU are the monkey!

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 10:50PM

Daphne, flag waving battery chickens? What a leftist freak you are; like Toddard but with a better grasp of the English language.

Greg| 12.6.08 @ 11:00PM

Daphne Kenward, you are an idiot.

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 11:12PM

"Toddard,
people ALWAYS misuse liberty, and "it" often becomes criminal; now you dont put all criminals in prison, but enough.
(im doing kindergarten konversation so not to be too 'rational'.
USSR under Stalin had less crime because the regime killed or gulaged criminals, among others-- to say the least. We do the best we can in america."

My god - the failure of the American public school system made manifest before our very eyes. Do you know what "rational" means, and after you look it up could you explain what rationality has to do with the level (or lack thereof) of sophistication in discourse? You implied that you were lowering the level of sophistication of discourse "so not to be too rational". What word did you actually mean to use instead of rational? Or is English not your first language?

That being said, your argument is "We are less free because we are more free". Dress it up how you will, but that's your argument and the absurdity of it cannot be obscured. The country that cages more of it's people than any other - the country that denies freedom to more of its citizens than any other in history CANNOT - categorically - be the "freest country on earth". Sorry.

Also, though, this says something significant about another arrogant claim made by those on the lower rungs of the American intellectual hierarchy - that America is the "greatest" country on earth. If America imprisons a higher percentage of its citizens than any other in history, then it goes without saying that Americans have a higher tendency towards criminality than any other nation in history. How could we make the claim to be "the greatest country on earth" when we are the most criminally inclined people in the history of the world?

And this speaks as well to the ignorance and arrogance (the two go hand-in-hand more often than not) of the neoconservatives - Americans are both an unfree and criminal people... and we wish to impose that glorious tradition on other peoples by force of arms!

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 11:15PM

"Todd is Daphne's evil twin, or is it the other way around? Whatever, they are both haters and should be dismissed. Todd, I knew you would take the bait. So predictable!"

Yes, another predictable "liberal", eh Ruth? Your piercing insight is simply astounding. What prescience!

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 11:21PM

Yes, Toddard, the failure of the 'Liberal" American public school system. Its demise is a perfect example of the uselessness of your bonehead philosophy. I don't know how you can see through your spittle-flecked computer screen to post your comments. You must go through a lot of Windex.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 11:23PM

You didn't finish the best part of my post, Toddard. You are the monkey!

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 11:30PM

"Yes, Toddard, the failure of the 'Liberal" American public school system. Its demise is a perfect example of the uselessness of your bonehead philosophy."

Do you know what "Liberal" means, Ruth? There is simply no definition of the word "liberal" that describes my political philosophy in any way. I am a conservative - see my explanation above, it might enlighten you as to what a conservative actually is. The word "liberal" can be applied, however, to neoconservatism, with its penchant for massive government expansion and interventionism, profligate spending and the belief in the perfectibility of Man through government action.

Alan Brooks| 12.6.08 @ 11:33PM

Europeans saying America caused Cambodian genocide?
But Europe causing WWI and II? oh no, that was a mistake. it was in the past. DO NOT remind us Russians of what we did up 'til 1989.
Und nicht remind ve Germans Vhat ve did 1914-18, or 1938-45. Ja?
we needed the bad Americans to come to Europe and save us, but that was in the past. Dont live in the past unless its us bringing up Americain imperialism. If its French imperialism today on the Gold Coast, thats okay because ze french zay are so sweet unless you go to Paree and then zay are snobs you see.
and so what if Napoleon invaded all those countries he was a good imperialist who liberated so many people and millions of deaths are okay even if you make mistakes--unless you a chimpanzee like zat snobbish George Bush with his wine and cheese parties in the white house he is not loving like zee French, we are kind to everybody but dont stay too long in our country as we like to keep it ze way it is, old buildinks and all zat.
but you Americains you are so old fashioned you live in zee past but look what you did to Cambodia 35 years ago you imperialist NON-FRENCH chimpanzees...

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 11:40PM

Bust out your Windex again, Toddard, you're going to need it. You, sir, are no conservative--you hurl false accusations without proof and you are WAY too much of a hater. You are definitely a liberal--I can smell you from here.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 11:43PM

Alan you've said that your family is liberal--doesn't Toddard sound like a liberal to you: You know, all angry and rage-filled? Certainly not very TOLERANT!

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 11:44PM

"Joe, take a look at the writings of the founding fathers of this nation. They were all virtually unanimous in their definition of this country as one based upon liberty. All could come and be free."

Except the hundreds of thousands of slaves, you mean.

"This tradition was carried on through the Civil War period, the War To Free the Slaves."

Are you speaking of two different wars? I know of the Civil War, but have never heard of a "War To Free the Slaves". Lincoln himself said many times that this was not the purpose of the war against the Confederacy. To whit:

"If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it"
- Abraham Lincoln, letter to Horace Greeley, Washington, August 22, 1862.

"Abraham Lincoln, in the Gettysburg Address, described this nation as "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to that proposition that all men are created equal."

That's interesting. He also said this:

"I will say, then, that I AM NOT NOR HAVE EVER BEEN in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races---that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with White people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the White and black races which will ever FORBID the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the White race."
-Abraham Lincoln September 18, 1858.

"This theme is carried out throughout the history of this country. Historically, this nation has welcomed people from virtually every nation and ethnic group on the planet."

That is factually false. Until the Immigration Act of 1965 there were quotas imposed on immigration that heavily favored immigrants from Western Europe so as to reinforce and cultivate our Western European heritage and culture.

"This is something that can be said for few nations"

Indeed - it cannot be said for ours.

"No, I stand by my statement that this country was not born of a common ethnic heritage, or even religious beliefs. If that had been the case, the Revolutionary War would never have occurred. Because we would have been Englishmen, and Englishmen do not revolt against the Crown".

Also false. The Founders to a man thought themselves Englishmen. It was after much deliberation, and with much pain and hardship that they broke with the crown.

S.L. Toddard| 12.6.08 @ 11:51PM

"Bust out your Windex again, Toddard, you're going to need it. You, sir, are no conservative--you hurl false accusations without proof and you are WAY too much of a hater. You are definitely a liberal--I can smell you from here."

So you believe a "liberal" is "someone who hurls false accusations without proof" and is "a hater"? What sort of American, I wonder, could blunder through life blathering half-understood slogans and buzz-words like "liberal" without actually knowing what the word "liberal" MEANS. Not understanding what "conservatism" is, or grasping - even in a remedial way - the distinction between the two? Honestly - I really do find that suprising. Obviously, that you are ignorant of the finer points of political philosophy and geopolitics in general is plain for all to see, but to truly be unaware of what "liberalism" is - that's an achievement. I mean that - bravo.

ruth| 12.6.08 @ 11:54PM

Toddard, you must be skinny because of all the calories you burn as you build up that crazy anger and rage toward your country. You must be the life of every party you attend what with all that GOD given charisma of yours. What a doll baby.

Alan Brooks| 12.6.08 @ 11:58PM

we do have a couple million people in prison, but the other 300+ million are very free, we let people pour in here through the border! China IS a prison. And yes yes we get cheap stuff from China but so does Scandinavia-- those white beautiful pretty people with their nordik heritage. kiss kiss.
but like Daffy, i cant be held responsible for my posts here because i went to publik skools-- thanks to my lib parents-- so i'll stop the nice bs and just write:

TODDLERD you FAKE CONSERVATIVE TODD-TARD, your kids would have been proud of you!

Alan Brooks| 12.7.08 @ 12:14AM

Toddlerd, this is a conservative site, not phony-"nice" we are the world smoochie woochie touchie feelie-weelie site.
You gotta make up your mind, you cant be both lib and con, think carefully and then PLOP OR GET OFF THE POT!!

ruth| 12.7.08 @ 12:15AM

These freaky liberal posters just bring out the smart-ass in me. Sorry, I can't help it. It reminds me of a verbal foodfight--like the real foodfight in the movie Animal House with John Belushi. Damn, he was funny--died way too young.

ruth| 12.7.08 @ 12:19AM

Toddard is too messed-up, too chaotic to be a conservative. He reminds me a lot of some of my crazy, angry liberal siblings. (we won't go there). God bless him, I hope he finds peace.

Alleena| 12.7.08 @ 12:22AM

Ruth,
Don't waste your time trying to open closed minds. Some of the posters here ooze hate and especially hatred for this country. Their foolishness doesn't upset me anymore. It bores me. They will never grow up and discuss things like rational adults. They are fundamentally immature and irrational.

They will take and take from this country and then turn around and spit on it. It's the kind of people they are.

Alan Brooks| 12.7.08 @ 12:25AM

no you are right and so is bob-- blob told me not to be too rational, so lets tell the phony liberal to make up his educated little toddtard mind.
its up to him. just like its not the worlds fault my parents were libtards who thought Nicole nagged OJ too much,
its also not the worlds fault toddlerd's head is spinning around trying to decide if its lib or con.

ruth| 12.7.08 @ 12:49AM

Alan, your parents must be freaking out now that OJ went to jail. Thanks, both of you, for your kind words--I am just so worried for our country, but I also know its all in God's hands or I would go seriously nuts.

S.L. Toddard| 12.7.08 @ 1:06AM

"Toddlerd, this is a conservative site, not phony-"nice" we are the world smoochie woochie touchie feelie-weelie site.
You gotta make up your mind, you cant be both lib and con, think carefully and then PLOP OR GET OFF THE POT!!"

Make up my mind? What have I ever said that is even remotely "liberal"? Oh my. You... you really don't know what the word means either? I mean in the political sense, obviously.

In all sincerity I would advise to you the same thing I did to Ruth - learn the definitions of these words, truly grasp the distinction between "liberal", "conservative" and "neoconservative" and do it *before* you get out of high school. There is nothing more dangerous than an uninformed voter. Look what happened in 00 and 04.

Jeremiah| 12.7.08 @ 1:25AM

*Yawn.

Anyway.....there was a topic.

I don't think many people blame the U.S. for the Khmer Rouge.

Conservatives need to understand, however, that we have a duty to scrutinize our own country's actions far more rigorously and mercilessly than other countries. That's the essence of moral thought.

We did play a role in the distabilization of Cambodia. Nobody disputes this. During the bombings we killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians and toppled a democratically elected government. That power vacuum was filled by the Khmer Rouge after Viet Nam invaded.

We weren't directly responsible for the Khmer Rouge. But we contributed.

Jeremiah| 12.7.08 @ 1:30AM

That is..."blame America first" isn't necessarily a bad thing. We should --- at least -- scrutinize our own country first and find our own faults and weaknesses first.

You can't believe how stupid some of you people sound:

China and Russia did something bad! No....it can't be! How shocking! Bad? China? Russia?

I mean, what are you people, completely retarded? Of course China and Russia do wicked things: they're totalitarian militaristic nightmare states.

But if you don't mind we're going to keep this country from being like that and that means we're going to question hell out of our government -- including Sarah Palin. Relentlessly. With a free, impious, irreverent, and aggressive press.

Joe H.| 12.7.08 @ 1:30AM

Thomas, I have been busy all day as well, but now I see you are not just a neoconservative, but something infinitely worse: A transnational progressive.

S.L Toddard is correct when he points out the quotas imposed on nonwhite immigrants prior to 1965. I would like to see the Immigration Act of 1965 repealed and go back to the 1924 Immigration laws. It should be as plain as the nose on your face that inviting muslims into western countries is inviting a form of genocide known as jihad into them.

Alan Brooks| 12.7.08 @ 1:53AM

of course we contributed Jeremiah, but many people do blame America FOR THEIR OWN PROBLEMS..
ive travelled all over and Scandinavia is good, but not for long! globalization will ruin it.

BTW do you know what kind of a backstabbing weasel Norodamned Sihanouk was? do you have any idea?

Alan Brooks| 12.7.08 @ 1:56AM

Sihanouk did FAR more than Lon Nol or Nixon or Kissinger to destroy Cambodia.

ruth| 12.7.08 @ 2:47AM

Geez, people, stop your navel-gazing and get out of the past. You sound like a bunch of old farts fibbing about your glory days. Wouldn't it be nice if we could have one day of "ONLY SAY NICE THINGS ABOUT YOUR COUNTRY, THE USA? How about One Hour? Perhaps you freakin' liberals could be positive for five minutes. Dang, you really are downers, and you have lousy self-esteem.

Brian| 12.7.08 @ 12:35PM

The homosexual lobby is a major constituent of the Democrat Party and they have no problem whatsoever with pedophilia.

The gay lobby if it had its druthers the age of consent would be abolished entirely, so forget about Democrats ever caring about the exploitation of children. To Democrats, old perverts like Barney Frank molesting children is just "love" in one of its many forms.

S.L. Toddard| 12.7.08 @ 12:52PM

"The homosexual lobby is a major constituent of the Democrat Party and they have no problem whatsoever with pedophilia."

I didn't know that. Could you link to any statements made by "the homosexual lobby" that back that claim up? Even one?

Jeremiah| 12.7.08 @ 1:53PM

S.L. Toddard --

I think you miss the point. Brian is clearly a Democrat waiting to come out of the closet -- just as soon as that "age of consent" gets lowered. Until then, he's biding his time trolling the internet -- and mens' bathrooms.

Don't worry, Brian! There's always hope, and one day "the homosexual lobby" will set you free.

Daphne Kenward| 12.7.08 @ 2:37PM

Obama has reveals his stimulus package that could exceed 1 Trillion dollars, as the economic crisis deepen, and will continue in 2009.

America will have to leave Iraq, due to the recession, that 10 Billion per month could be used to create jobs and reduce the debt, but the 10 Billion perhaps don't even touch interest payments on the huge debt that has been ran up under George W Bush.

It seem the other side of Genocide, is recession followed by depression. The car manufacturing industry has collapsed across the globe, and will result in millions of job losses, world wide, which will have a snowball effect putting several businesses to lay off workers.

The last time we has such a deep depression was in the 1929 crash, followed by the 2nd world war. The Jewish people became the centre of that war.
This time I think if there is a 3rd world war it will be centred around the Muslims.

Will Muslims be rounded up and treated in the same way as the Jewish people is the question. Where is this depression taking us, and who will be its victims?.

Daphne Kenward| 12.7.08 @ 2:47PM

Homosexuality has nothing to do with Party affliliation, it's not Democrat, it's not Republican.

Homosexuality in ROME was normal, all nations who became decadent have had this problem, the same problem existed in in Sodom.

Thomas| 12.7.08 @ 4:15PM

Lets see, where to begin.

"Joe, take a look at the writings of the founding fathers of this nation. They were all virtually unanimous in their definition of this country as one based upon liberty. All could come and be free."

Except the hundreds of thousands of slaves, you mean."
The fact that slavery was a fact on the American Continent at the time of the evolution does not alter the founders espousal of freedom. This was to lead to the Civil war some 85 years later.

"This tradition was carried on through the Civil War period, the War To Free the Slaves."

"Abraham Lincoln, in the Gettysburg Address, described this nation as "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to that proposition that all men are created equal."

That's interesting. He also said this:

Once again accurate. but what you leave out is that the succession of the Confederate States devolved, almost entirely due to the popular anti-slavery mood in the non-slave states. The Missouri Compromise began the legal opposition to slavery in the United States in 1820. This was carried farther through out the next forty years with the Wilmot Proposal (1846), the Compromise of 1850 [whose incorporated "fugitive slave act" swung public reaction in the North even more to the side of abolition] and finally the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1845, which led to open warfare between slaveholding and abolitionist factions. While it is true that the War was ostensibly fought over state's rights vs. federalism, the popular reasons can be directly traced back to the abolition of slavery. Lincoln was primarily interested in re-establishing the Union. If the practice of secession had been allowed to stand, it is very likely that even more states would secede for a variety of reasons.

"This theme is carried out throughout the history of this country. Historically, this nation has welcomed people from virtually every nation and ethnic group on the planet."

I guess that the large groups of Chinese and Mexican immigrants living in the West, especially California and New York prior to 1965 sneaked in.

"This is something that can be said for few nations"

Indeed - it cannot be said for ours.

As you pointed out, in 1965, the "quota system" was changed to allow for a significantly larger number of non-European immigrants. Prior to that, there was a significant influx of non-English speaking European immigrants into this country. These peoples hardly qualified as WASP's.

Also false. The Founders to a man thought themselves Englishmen. It was after much deliberation, and with much pain and hardship that they broke with the crown.

Prior to the Revolutionary war this was true. They petitioned for redress of grievances to the Crown on several occasions. The lack of redress was what caused them do break from English rule. But, it is easily argued that they did not thing of themselves as Englishmen, rather as Colonials. The Crown apparently regarded them similarly. Remember, during this time if you couldn't walk from your home to the capital of your country without crossing the territory of another country, them you were not truly considered to be part of that country. The American colonies were not considered part of England, but rather a foreign territory to be exploited.

Has the practice of government in the United States always been conducted in a high minded manner? No. But, the values espoused in the documents of this country force the populous and its leadership to evolve into a freer society. It has only been the last 50 years that have seen a reversal of that evolutionary trend. And that reversal has come form the government, not the people.

Neil Patel| 12.7.08 @ 8:44PM

I'm amused how the posts went from being about the Cambodian Genocide to about homosexual sex.

And I didn't realize our country shouldn't be criticized because some people's feelings may be hurt. If we can't criticize our country, how can we make it better?

And I agree with Thomas when he said that our country is more welcoming to outsiders and minorities. I doubt, for example, that a western European country would elect someone of Obama's hertiage as their leader.

ruth| 12.8.08 @ 12:06AM

Neil, I don't have a problem with constructive criticism, often it is a good thing, but do you really believe that tacit acceptance of pathological, hateful and untrue accusations against your country is prudent? You may not care--but I do. I know our nation is not perfect, but I also know that Americans are fundamentally decent. It's too bad that many of us are so spoiled and ungrateful--it's a damn shame that we don't care about our country more.

Joe H.| 12.8.08 @ 8:51AM

I forgot to ask Thomas something. If Englishmen would never revolt against the crown, what do you call the revolution of 1688? Your knowledge of history is sorely lacking.

Also, the vast majority of the Mexicans in America were here after we took over a large chunk of former Mexican territory with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Purchase, and with the annexation of Texas. Very few immigrated. Also there were no great numbers of Chinese immigrants.

Daphne Kenward| 12.8.08 @ 10:20AM

Thomas and Joe H.

For your information on English History, on of you claimed the English would never rebel against the Crown, are you convinced of that?.

Ever heard of Oliver Cromwell, he lead the Puritans in Parliament before the Civil war, assumed command of anti-royalist forces after victories at Edgehill (1642) Marston Moor (1645) Demanded execution of King Charles the 1st.

Cromwell declared a Republic after the Kings Execution in (1649) There is some English History for you.

Neil Patel| 12.8.08 @ 3:12PM

To Thomas:

While Lincoln definitely had some racist views (most whites were racist), he was nevertheless rather non-racist for the time. For example, this quote you cited:

is out of context because it is followed by this in the same speech:

I say upon this occasion that I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position that the Negro should be denied everything.

". . . Notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the Negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence-the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects-certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal, and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man."-Abraham Lincoln, debating with Douglas in Illinois, 1858

It is also likely that Lincoln sounded more racist than he was during the debate because that era to be not-racist would be political suicide.. Fredick Douglass, a black abolitionist found Lincoln to be non-racist:

"In all my interviews with Mr. Lincoln I was impressed with his entire freedom from popular prejudice against the colored race. He was the 1st great man that I talked with in the U.S. freely, who in no single instance reminded me of the difference between himself and myself, of the difference of color, and I thought that all the more remarkable because he came from a State where there were black laws."

In contrast, the vice president of the Confederacy, Alexander Stephens, who helped write the Confederate Constitution stated that the basic principle (and the main reason for succesion) behind the Confederacy was both slavery and racism:

"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution—African slavery as it exists amongst us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution... Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind—from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics."
-Cornerstone Speech 1861

Daphne Kenward| 12.8.08 @ 5:20PM

I noticed the comments switched to OJ Simpsom, former football player and actor.

O.J Simpson, is a stupid man. There are millions of attractive Black women in America, he finds himself a gold digger. He could'nt believe the gold digger would dump his stupid Black ass. I think there is one law America should adopt is it should be illegal for Blacks and Whites to marry and produce kids.

Simpson flirted in the face of reality, he was now paying a tramp to have sex at his expense, and could'nt accept it killed his former wife and lover, and in my view should have been in prison years ago.

Daphne Kenward| 12.8.08 @ 5:35PM

President Lincoln, was a good President. But the fuss that is being made now needs to be brought into reality.

The extent of LINCOLN'S precoccupation with the slavery question after 1854 is evident in the definition of the democracy of the time, and age.

The White house was built by slaves, and one thing is obvious, for a people that is seen as inferior, they build an artistic building that has stood the test of time.

Daphne Kenward| 12.8.08 @ 5:50PM

All Black men should marry Black women, when a Black man has made it, as a football player, or a Golf player such as Tiger Woods, what is wrong with Black women. They go and give the money back to White women who would not give them a second glance, if they had no money.

Tiger Woods does not help charity, does nothing for Black people. Tiger Woods is a scum bag, never forget where you are coming from.

Why was Simpson worring about how many Black people was members of the Jury, he made up his mind that now he had money Blacks was scum.
Why should Blacks support a Coconut. Or an Uncle TOM.

It's like Kobie Brient, which another white tamp came close to destroying his career, when he had a pretty Black girlfriend. Black men needs to know one thing Tramps are tramps, white or black find educated women, like Obama, pretty,educated and know where she is going.

Daphne Kenward| 12.8.08 @ 6:00PM

Neil Patel.

Where has there ever been a white person who never had a racist agenda. You would have to go back to the ROMAN EMPIRE.

The British Empire was not just an Empire it taught and encouraged RACISM and still does, now it has also began to promote Religious hatred.

You don't have to live in America or Britain or any where in Europe to suffer Racial and Religious hatred. You could be in India or Pakistan and they have plots to kill you for one reason or another, these days it's Terrorism.

I know who the TERRORIST are do you?.

S.L. Toddard| 12.8.08 @ 6:06PM

Neil Patel,
I posted those Lincoln quotes not to demonize the man, but to demonstrate that neither Lincoln nor the Founders considered "all men" equal. Even the quotes you posted affirm that.

The fact is that at the time of the founding America was an Anglo nation. The people of America shared a common heritage and bond in their shared Anglo-European culture. When "all men are created equal", they simply were not referring to Africans or Asians or Mohammedans. That is not to speak ill of them - these were men of their time, and cannot be judged by the measures of ours, and we can not project our values backward in time and impose them upon the Founding Fathers.

In short, the Founders were not multiculturalist egalitarians in any sense whatever.

S.L. Toddard| 12.8.08 @ 6:08PM

^^ that should read "When they wrote "all men are created equal"..."

Daphne Kenward| 12.9.08 @ 10:38AM

S.L. Toddsard.

All men are created equal, depends on whose yard sitck, it's being measured.

Daphne Kenward| 12.9.08 @ 11:07AM

The question that people need to face is the question, how did America arrive at this moment intime. 2008.

America act as an Empire, never declared it's self as an Empire, and one of the shortest lived Empire in the history of the world.

If we looked back to 1942 -45. I think one of the things that stands out, is the distructiveness of the Americans, in it's dealings with other parts of the world. Never built but destroy, and the distructiveness, has now become the down fall of a Empire though never declaring it's self as an empire.

The difference between the British Empire, and the Roman Empire, was they buit countries up even if only later to destroy them. India was one of the places we could learn from.

The last place was Palestine controled by the British, later gave it to the Zionist. It's one of the worst decisions ever made and still haunts the world to this day. It has removed peace and turned the Middle East into a continuation of the 2nd world.

What is obvious is no one has been recording the death toll, which run's into many millions of people.

The African continent has a low scale war going on for at least 60 years, producing famine, desease, and poverty, which result in millions of death each year, but no one see it as Genocide, because the people are black.

There is the tanks, the guns the land mines, and one could say how does poor countries aquire thes weapons, while people should be growing food, to feed their children they are fighting and running from place to place.

Who decides to arm these people, to kill their own citizens, normaly the same people who claim they are trying to help.