Booman Tribune





Proud member of

The Liberal Blog Network

a FeedBurner Network


Advertise in The Liberal Blog Network

Subscribe to this network

A-List Blogger

Find textbooks at Alibris!

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Learn the real story behind the WMD in Iraq:

The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism
by Ron Suskind

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

DaveW recommends:

I Am a Strange Loop
by Douglas Hofstadter

Need some laughs?

I Am America (and So Can You!)
by Stephen Colbert

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End
by Peter W. Galbraith

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES

Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos
by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.


SOTW-120x90
Download Sleeper Cell on iTunes (Better than "24") Download Weeds on iTunes (Hilarious 1/2-hour adult comedy starring Mary-Louise Parker) Download Late Nite with Conan O'Brien on iTunes
John Belushi - SNL
Download South Park on iTunes
Verve Vault

James Hunter - People Gonna Talk:
James Hunter - People Gonna Talk
icon


Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")



Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)


Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)


"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen


The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review


BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual

$79.95 * Sale: $59.95


Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)


The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!


The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan


Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----


Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review


Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey


1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus



Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"


Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)


The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids

by Madeline Levine


Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com

:





We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Alibris - Books You Thought You'd Never Find
Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:
www.Patagonia.com


Display:
none of this seemed to be contradictory or discordant

From the speech:

You don't defeat -- you don't defeat a terrorist network that operates in 80 countries by occupying Iraq. You don't protect Israel and deter Iran just by talking tough in Washington.
Is there anyone who doubts that the US would not have occupied Iraq if the neocons didn't think that that was the way to "protect Israel"???

There's a contradiction, in two consecutive sentences. So much for change. Obama's slogan should be "Fine-tuning you can believe in."

Change we can't believe in. No we can't!

by Alexander on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 12:49:32 AM EST
Actually, I don't see the contradiction at all.

You don't defeat al-Qaeda by invading Iraq and you don't protect Israel by talking smack against Iran.

Where's the contradiction?

by BooMan on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 12:54:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Why is Alexander here, sigh.

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes
by Real History Lisa (lpeaseRemoveThis@gte.net) on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 01:14:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So, you want me to leave? I can do that. But then how would that make you any different from the Republicans, other than having a difference in taste?

Your saying that I do not belong here signifies that you have a limited tolerance for rational argument. The difference between you and Bush supporters is that you have a greater tolerance level for rational argument. But both of you are alike in that your tolerance runs out more quickly than it should.

Change we can't believe in. No we can't!

by Alexander on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 03:05:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Fortunately you don't have access to the keys to this place because if you did it would rapidly turn into a monotonous wasteland of party enforced delusion and conformity. Statements like the above are a little odd coming from someone who themself was unfairly ranctioned and silenced at daily kos for pushing the boundaries of their srictly enforced conformity.

Green Grass and High Tides Forever
by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 05:09:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
sanctioned and silenced

Green Grass and High Tides Forever
by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 05:11:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The comment was not about censoring him. It was asking why he is here, because he clearly doesn't share Democratic values. I've read his comments for a while and it's clear to me he's just here to sow dissent.

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes
by Real History Lisa (lpeaseRemoveThis@gte.net) on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 10:27:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think he's here to speak his mind. If that's dissent, so be it. I don't think there's a rule against dissent here. His opinion was disputed in comments and settled. Your accusation of "sowing" dissent is something completely different.

But maybe you're right. He could be here to clandestinly pick off otherwise intelligent members who are so weak in their convictions that he finds it easy pickings to build his army of anti Obama crusaders. This is likely only one site in many that he's infiltrated and in that case you should be commended for smoking him out of his hole.

Bravo!

Green Grass and High Tides Forever

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 10:45:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Eh, no biggie.  Let him rant, sometimes these folks do this on purpose hoping to get booted.
by RollaMO on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 10:54:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The contradiction is that the second sentence implies that the Bush administration "protects Israel ... just by talking tough". But it didn't just talk tough: it invaded Iraq, a main if not the main reason for which was protecting Israel. And as far as the Israel lobby is concerned, "defeating a terrorist network..." is more or less synonymous with "protecting Israel".

Thus, the two sentences appear not to contradict each other only if you disregard (1) it was thought that invading Iraq served Israeli interests and (2) "terrorism" as used by US foreign policy makers can usually be glossed as activity perceived to be harmful to US and/or Israeli interests. You have to read beneath the text. Isn't that what you post-modernists do? ;-)

Change we can't believe in. No we can't!

by Alexander on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 01:30:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
you're talking out of your ass.

First of all, the two sentences are independent, not part of one logical construction.

Second of all, Bush invaded Iraq for his own petulant reasons, and protecting Israel wasn't near the top of the list.  If you had asked Israel they would have told us to invade Iran.  

Your argument does not make sense.

Obama intends to protect Israel.  He intends to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons.  Maybe you disagree with those policies but they are not contradictory.

by BooMan on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 01:39:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I seem to have hit a raw nerve.

You do not appear to be familiar with The Fall of the House of Bush. Craig Unger shows how Bush only developed his animus against Iraq after he started getting briefed by neocons as he was being groomed for his presidential run. Israel wanted us to invade both Iran and Iraq; Iraq was seen as the first step.

And, since you apparently haven't heard, "protecting Israel" and working for the best interests of the American people are contradictory.

Change we can't believe in. No we can't!

by Alexander on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 02:01:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No. You seem to be illogical. And troll-like.

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes
by Real History Lisa (lpeaseRemoveThis@gte.net) on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 02:10:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
so, you think protecting Israel is contradictory to protecting America?  I'd say that depends on the policy that we have.  It's not inevitable at all.

I'd evaluate his policy in its totality.

by BooMan on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 02:30:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think it's perfectly obvious that "protecting Israel" conflicts with US national interests. (I won't use the tendentious phrase "protecting America", since the main threat that America needs to be protected from is itself.) If it wasn't for (1) Israel having been created as a byproduct of British imperialism; (2) Israel having decided that the only way it can deal with its neighbors is from a position of absolute military superiority, as opposed to dealing with its neighbors diplomatically, through realpolitik; (3) the US giving unconditional support to Israel, no matter how much Israel violates international law -- the US would really have no significant conflict at all with the Arab world. They have oil; we have hip pop culture. What's the problem? According to the economic theory that both American parties embrace, there is no reason why America and oil-rich Middle Eastern countries cannot just trade amicably, and leave it at that, were it not for Israel. Mearsheimer and Walt make basically this point.

Obviously, Obama's policy should be evaluated in its totality. It's just that I was very taken by Clinton and Gore's victory speeches in 1992, only to be really let down. So far, Obama has given no indication that he will be any different.

And now that we're at it, I have a problem with this whole "change" meme. To say that you want change means that you accept the present situation on some level. Why couldn't Obama have chosen the slogan "Let's get this country back on track?" He never says that Bush has radically moved the country in the wrong direction, since that would require him to point out that the "war on terror" is bullshit. But Obama speaks of the "war on terror" as a rational, legitimate activity.

Change we can't believe in. No we can't!

by Alexander on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 02:57:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't believe the statement was contradictory, but share your frustration that he has not given us any real signs that he will truly change policy, particularly on Israel.  I also disagree with those who claim Israel played no role in our decision to invade Iraq.  Read Richard Perle's "A Clean Break: A New Strategy For Securing the Realm", but I think they do it out a real fear of retaliation fro m likudnik groups.  Unfortunately we must just cross our fingers that the real policy will be better than the rhetoric, and prepare for massive street protests if it is not.

Stray Roots Message Board,Thus far unmoderated! Dameocrat Blog
by StrayRoots (dameocrat@STUFFTOREMOVEpeacemail.com) on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 04:50:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Is there anyone who doubts that the US would not have occupied Iraq if the neocons didn't think that that was the way to "protect Israel"???

Yes, I doubt that. They had many motives and protecting Israel was probably #50. You are letting your hatred of Jews show. Are you a Palestinian?

by The Voice In The Wilderness on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 05:32:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So, there are no anti-Semites other than Palestinians, according to your logic. What are you smoking?

My problem isn't with "Jews", or even Israel. It's that given the immense problems that the United States faces, I don't see why the task of "protecting Israel" should show up in a US presidential candidate's nomination acceptance speech.

The Israel lobby is just another lobby, like the multitude of corporate lobbies. My main problem with Obama is that he has shown no sign of being ready to challenge lobbies to fight for the public interest. (But as Booman has noted, if he had shown such a sign, he would not be the nominee.)

Change we can't believe in. No we can't!

by Alexander on Fri Aug 29th, 2008 at 11:10:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Menu
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended World Diaries


Booman Tribune Homepage
admin@boomantribune.com
powered by Scoop

A-List Blogger

Blogarama - The Blog Directory

More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.

Listed on BlogShares

© 2007 Booman Tribune