Ron Paul vs Ben Stein Dust Up on Terrorism
I don't agree with Ron Paul on a lot of issues, but one of them I do agree with him with is our military presence in the Middle East being one of the causes of terrorism. Ben Stein acts like he's never heard such a thing and the conversation gets pretty heated with Sheila Jackson Lee stuck in the middle. I have a very hard time believing that Ben Stein has never heard that argument made before. Saying you disagree with it is one thing. Pretending you've never heard the argument made is ridiculous.
I agree with something Rep. Lee managed to get in the end there as well. President Obama should do a recess appointment for the head of TSA to combat the Republicans obstructionism.
Transcript via CNN.
KING: Ron Paul, you want to respond first to the congresswoman and then Ben.
PAUL: Yes, I do.
KING: Go ahead.
PAUL: One thing that is missing here is never asking the question what is the motive? He said why he was -- he did it. He said it was because we bombed Yemen two weeks ago. That was his motive. Osama bin Laden said that he has a plan for America. First, he wants to bog us down in the Middle East in a no-win war. He wants to bankrupt this country, demoralize us, as well as have us do things that motivate people to join his radical movement.
It seems like we've fallen into his trap. Why is it off base? Today, when the gentleman indicated that he did it because of the bombing, you know what the administration said? They dismissed it. It can't possibly be so. If you dismiss motivations for why they hate us, we can never resolve this. There's hate on both sides. You have to ask the question, why do they hate? And they usually come up with a reason. And we're foolish not to take that into consideration.
KING: Ben?
STEIN: Well, that's -- I have never heard anything quite like that in my whole life. What he's saying, basically, is we are doing something wrong by defending ourselves. Look, if these terrorists are trying to kill the government of Yemen, we've got to help defend them. They're our friends. We can't just let al Qaeda run wild. If we try to stop them --
PAUL: Why?
STEIN: Why should we stop them? Because they are terrorists and murderers and they're very anti-American.
PAUL: Why are they terrorists?
STEIN: Surely congressman --
PAUL: Why are they terrorists?
STEIN: They're terrorists and murders because they are psychos.
PAUL: They're terrorists because we're occupiers.
(CROSS TALK)
STEIN: No, we're not occupiers. That's the same anti-Semitic argument we've heard.
PAUL: Now that is a vicious attack. You --
(CROSS TALK)
STEIN: It's not a vicious attack.
LEE: Larry, I'd like to respond to some of these points that are being made.
KING: Let's go back to Sheila.
(CROSS TALK)
KING: Look at this, folks. Two republicans going at it. This is fascinating. With a democratic liberal in the middle.
LEE: I can referee between the two of them.
(CROSS TALK)
LEE: Let me referee, please.
KING: All right. Sheila, say something.
LEE: Yeah, let me referee, please. That is interesting.
KING: Both have good points, right?
LEE: They have good points. Let me clarify and try to say that Congressman Paul has a point on our positions that we took in Iraq, which obviously created a very terrible atmosphere, and we all asked the questions what were the results. And, of course, Afghanistan is still a question. But we must be reminded that the terrorists acted under President Bush's clock. And so this can't be an issue of the president's inactivity, per se, and a lack of commitment to the homeland.
But we have to do better. And I believe we need to have behavioral assessment. There was no reason for this individual to have a visa that still was in place until 2010 for them to be able to travel. There was no reason for him not to be detected because of his behavior. Behavioral assessment. We need to make the homeland security of the nation focus. Secretary of Homeland Secretary should be the point person and that person should establish a road map that then allows us to fund and to put resources accordingly. And finally, the president --
KING: Guys, we're out of time.
LEE: The president should put in place the NTSA administrator by way of a recess appointment.
KING: Death, taxes and these three are going to be back tomorrow.
brings out stein, whose only qualification to speak is literacy. stein is an airhead asshat.
Some stuff you can't make up!
I've always wondered why Paul supporters...who distrust our government...wondered why foreigners distrusted our government.
CNN loses credibility every time they trot out Stein.
Ben plays the race-baiting card right out of the gate...disgusting
Wow Ben, that's one of the stupidest fucking things ever said.
or he confused the inane "i am going to end this argument right now" response, because it comes to easily, with the "anti-american" charge
If only more people knew that meddling in the Middle East causes terrorism then we would've never been targeted at all.
Stein's a despicable name-caller and a race-baiter. He can't even back up his statement.
What he said was disgusting and stupid.
But Paul is wrong. I've heard the stuff about "You bombed us, so I've been sent to bomb you."
The dude bought his ticket before the U.S. drone bombed Yemen. Did they see the bombing in the cards and think that they needed to buy a ticket right now so that they could blow up a US jet for a fresh retaliation? Of course not. I'll make an ass out of my self and say that they thought a Christmas bombing in the US seemed like a great thing to do.
The stop measures obviously failed and talk between government agencies and dept. needs to be improved for security's sake.
We have killed well over a million people in Iraq, attempted numerous times to steal their oil (supported by both parties) and have put in place economic policies that have looted the country, we claim that no Iraqi government can change the laws (more fundamentalist "free market" nonsense) how democratic of us, and we attempted to stop the elections and only had to back down when Iraqis rose up (nonviolently at the time) and demanded them (Bremer's "100 orders" gave them few options on an economic level, some democracy). We have been supporting groups that are doing terrorist attacks in Iran and have been for years. We supported Saddam Hussein with weapons (including chemical weapons, which he used on his own people as well) to bomb Iran and actually gave Iran weapons to bomb Iraq. Reagan took Iraq off of the list of “states that support and sponsor terror” so we could give him those weapons, we increased funding to him after he committed some of his worse atrocities. We bombed and blocked food and aid to Iraq that killed over half a million children. I could go on and on endlessly with this. How would you feel if another country did this to America?
Let's not forget too that the US, Britain and even Israel supported the Islamists for decades as a counterweight against the progressive, leftist and radical nationalist movements and leaders (like Nasser in Egypt). Amazing that people don't know, but Israel freaking supported the creation of what would become Hamas, something that they acknowledged later was a huge strategic mistake. Arafat called Hamas a "creature of Israel" and Rabin said, at Oslo, that Israel's support of what would become Hamas was "a fatal error". The US supported the Muslim Brotherhood, which Hamas basically came out of, and the Saudi Islamists (which is one of the reasons that Bin Laden hates the royal family so much). Again, you could go on endlessly with this, including their actions in Afghanistan. Two people who’ve written extensively about this is Vijay Prashad and Robert Dreyfuss. Dreyfuss wrote a book, called "Devil's Game", entirely about this and Vishay Prashad wrote an amazing book about the history of the Third World Project, a part of Howard Zinn's people's history series, called "The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World". His last chapter is entirely about this and focuses on Saudi Arabia.
It isn’t an idea of theory, it is the reality and it’d be obvious as gravity if you were on the receiving end of the far more lethal and widespread state terrorism that the US commits and support throughout the world.
The problem with this interview is that same with most any other issue these days. Ron Paul's comments here are entirely rational and backed up by solid evidence, which means nothing to the establishment. They decide what acceptable debate is, anything that is outside of those extremely narrow parameters is something to be brushed aside. We can see how great a job their ideas are on the economy, the situation was a slow moving train wreck not for a few years but more like 35 or so years. Health care, the environment, war, war war. Their ideas are horrible and never change, but who the hell can get them to listen when they don't have to? YOU have no power. What are you gonna do about it, write an e mail? Why is every defense of perfectly rational comments that come from outside the narrow parameters of acceptable speech something that can fit on a bumper sticker?
glad you pointed out that this goes back way before iraq!haven't heard many people talk about the history of islamic terrorism.
The West might be ignorant to these things but the people in the ME are not. They know this history and are boiling in anger over it, with no alternatives but to turn to the Islamists. The West was pretty successful at snuffing out the left and the progressive forces in the region. The left fought for, and sometimes achieved, things likes increased access to health care, education, women's rights, some elements of direct democracy, etc. The left has been squashed for the most part and there has been a power vacuum. The Islamists have stepped in and provided the social services the left used or would. Sadly, the only alternative right now are the more secular bourgeois neo-liberals, who aren’t religious nut jobs but will sell off their country’s resources at bargain basement prices or will monopolize the benefits of the resources and use it for luxury consumption. Acknowledging this doesn't justify individual acts of terror, they're horrible and always will be. However, individual acts of terror most definitely don't justify our continuing and far more widespread state terrorism, which we support outside of the ME in places like Latin America.
The nationalists, the leftists and other radicals wanted crazy things, like having oil fund needed economic development and the elites go ape $hit. After all, it is OUR oil under their ground, whether they know it or not. We also wouldn't want a bad example for other oil rich countries to follow (like Venezuela. We care so much for democracy, which is why we give the worse human rights violator in the hemisphere, Venezuela's neighbor Colombia, the most military aid of any country in the region and support the very groups in the country who commit most of the atrocities and export most of the drugs to the US. Both things admitted by our government and human rights organizations).
It's really sad that everything I'm saying is 100% true. It would be nice if I was simply an "anti-American leftist” and not someone pointing out painful truths about my country.
.
They made the same point on Aljazeera. They had a panel, and the consensus I was hearing was that the war against Iraq that the U.S. started on false pretenses is al Qaeda's primary recruiting argument.
One thing is for sure. Al Qaeda "labs" will be working on making a working detonator. So long as we telegraph that we won't screen for these type of explosives, we can expect another attempt, and we're out of second chances. (We had our first chance with the shoe bomber, and now with the underpanty bomber.)
So, it looks to me like full image body scanners are inevitable.
an insult. Please do not take it that way, but you really need to read up on your history of the middle east. Meddling by the US and before that Britain have made any country there very wary of the west and in many cases rightfully pissed off.
Are you aware that the Shah of Iran was installed after the US gov forced the removal of a democratically elected president in 1952?
bush/cheney are going to bring democracy to a region who had 60 yrs earlier?
To say what happened in Iran has nothing to do with what happened in Iraq is very dangerous thinking. It's the equivalent of saying an invasion into Mexico by China won't affect the US.
Please read up on this, it's critical.
I know about the meddling. But in this specific case (we're talking about the underpants bomber and not generalizing for the sake of making Paul's point relavant, right?) Paul claims that the reason for this specific attack by al Qaeda was because of the drone attack on Yemen. That's the message this specific bomber gave for his attack. You are reading the news and reports on this specific event, aren't you? Or are you generalizing for the sake of all al Qaeda attacks on the US? The problem is, the reason for this specific attack doesn't pass the smell test because the bomber bought his ticket before the attack on al Qaeda in Yemen. That is all I'm saying.
Now. If you'd like to use a sweeping generalization for al Qaeda aggression against the US, other western nations as well as attacks against the Pakistani government, Southeast Asia, eastern African nations, etc. you are welcome to do so, just don't use it for this case because it doesn't fit.
The underpants bomber probably had a whole laundry list of grievances against America, of which the latest drone attack on Yemen was the most recent and hence most easily brought to mind even though his course was set (ie ticket bought) before the drone attack. To dismiss the causes of his radicalization by quibbling over when he bought his ticket is smug, foolish, and doomed.
already had a flight to the US for other reasons and the drone attack occurring after he bought a ticket was simply the trigger to put an attack plan in motion?
Nobody had identified what his initial purchase of the flight ticket to the US was about.
He has said that he tried to destroy the aircraft in response to the drone attacks in Yemen.
It doesn't mean that he hadn't planned to fly to the US before that with something else in mind.
"Or are you generalizing for the sake of all al Qaeda attacks on the US?...If you'd like to use a sweeping generalization for al Qaeda aggression against the US…"
Did you ever stop and think about what al Qaeda IS? It isn't like a political party, a think tank or anything else. Actually, very few like minded groups called THEMSELVES al Qaeda until the West and the Western media started to use the term as a blanket comment to cover all individual acts of terrorism coming out of these types of Islamist terrorist groups. That’s a fact. Now, any like minded group can CALL themselves "al Qaeda" and the media gleefully plays along. Explaining the complexities of the real world, if it flies in the face on conventional wisdom, is not the corporate media’s strong suit and it isn’t in their interest. The video this thread is about is a perfect example: Ben Stein articulates the types of ideas that fall into the narrow range of “acceptable debate”, according to the corporate press.
There ARE Islamists, most on the left are horrified by their actions and aims (at least in part because the left has been one of the main targets of these groups, with the help of the US and similar countries). However, why are their actions and aims increasingly attractive, especially to young people, in the ME? Forget the nonsense conventional wisdom that falls apart the second you decide to think for yourself.
If another country, say Iran, first started to threaten the US openly, which is by itself against international law and the UN Charter. Then started to carpet bomb the US because the US was run by a bunch of war mongering, religious fanatics that could but probably wouldn’t attack Iran (this isn't just a thought experiment unfortunately), they call this pre-emptive war don’t they (?) and killed a few million people as a result (proportionally the same), who also in the past overthrew our government and installed a dictator who killed hundreds of thousands of people over about two and a half decades, had given Mexico weapons to bomb the US, then gave the US bombs to kill Mexicans, overthrew other nearby Christian and/or Western countries (like Canada, England, Australia, amongst others), shut us off from the outside world so a few million people (including a couple million children) starved, forced economic policies on us that destroyed our economy, then invaded us again based on lies and killed millions more, left depleted uranium everywhere (increasing cancer rates), then they had their corporations come and take over our industries and resources, then wrote laws (that they said we could not change even if we wanted to) that 80% of us were against and these laws destroyed the economy, do you think the fundamentalists and the militarists would grow in size and popularity here? Do you think anti-Iranian sentiment would explode? It's so obvious that it is stupid to ask, yet most Americans can't even lift a finger to put themselves in other people's shoes. They're so used to being bullies that they can't understand what it feels like to be bullied. My thought experiment is just a taste of what we’ve done to countries like Iraq and Iran, but I could use other horrors to drive the point home.
It isn’t for the sake of al Qaeda, whatever you think that is, it’s to explain the situation we’re in and what we’re facing, not the bumper sticker view of the world the elites and the corporate media have.
I’ll tell you though. I really don’t understand why so many working people give a damn about, and let their thought process be so influenced by, the corporate media and these two broke ass parties. Have they done ANYTHING right and logical? How many times have these parasites lied us into war then openly profit off of the war WE, and not they, fight in? How many times have they blatantly lied about every major issue we’re facing? Working people in places like Latin America know that when they watch their equivalent they are watching and listening to nothing more than the mouth pieces for the out of touch rich. Here, we seem to think that some of them represent us. Why? In what way have they shown or proven this?
Ben Stein is on television because Ben Stein is on television.
Ben Stein’s finest moment (a singularity, I believe) speaking the late John Hughes words, will be broadcast tonight at 10:00 PM EST on TCM – ‘Ferris Beuller’s Day Off.’
For the rest of his life he has been a waste of skin.
He's been searching for Beuller all these years.
He rolls around in his own fetid ooze barking senselessly. Why in God's name would anyone ever interview him for anything besides, maybe, comic relief, is beyond me.
Why in God's name would anyone ever interview him for anything besides, maybe, comic relief, is beyond me
Ya, it's pretty crazy. I think it's because there's no on-going emergency to exploit this holiday so they bring on Stein to create an emergency in the CNN studio.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
What an inane piece of shite Ben Stein is.
'Talk to the hand'
is spot on (on this topic), and the obama admin is falling into the same imperialistic trap his predecessors fell into--and it won't end pretty.
and ben stein, radically overrated as a conservative intellectual, demonstrates JUST how asinine the reichwing theory of terrorism is: "they're terrorists and murders because they are psychos"
The "because they are psychos" explanation is pretty ridiculous.
"Psycho" is a medical condition. Stein is arguing that an entire region of the planet suffers from a serious medical condition to explain away why they want to attack us???
* There are two types of Republicans: millionaires and suckers.
"Mugsy's Rap Sheet": Recording history for those who seek to rewrite it.
-its the result of 70 years of U.S. meddling in the mid-east, setting up and/or supporting horrible leaders; remember the Shah of Iran and his torture chambers? Remember Hussien and his etc.? And don't forget the Saudi's. And then we've been funding Israel with apparently No-Strings-Attached for decades. We know they'd behave themselves if we turn the money-spigot off, but we sit silent while they work to viciously wipe-out the Palestinians.
But OH NO! The A-Rabs hate us for our freedom. Give me a break.
"They're terrorists and murders because they are psychos."
He might as well have said "They're smelly". Grow up, Ben.
First of all, its nice to see people stop referring admirers of Ron Paul as 'Paulbots' and 'Paultards'. In political debates he does what few GOPs do: He dodges the same old talking points (Obama wants to treat this guy the same as someone who held up a 7/11), doesn't imply bigotry (Nazi policies, Anti-Semitic explanation), or use often bigoted code words (San Francisco values, Chicago politics).
Like most people here, I disagree with 95% of what Paul has to say, but not because I think he's a big, dumb, poopyface. But because America is a diverse country with diverse viewpoints. Check out Jon Stewart's interview with him. Even he basically says 'I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'
Too bad so many other GOPs are motivated by their sheer hatred of anyone who doesnt let them do whatever they want all the time.
Agreed. I'm not into Paul's ideas on domestic policy, but on foreign policy, he's amazingly insightful and right on. We need to mind our own damn business and stop trying to become an empire.
Also, I was very pleased to see him verbally bitch slap Rudy Giuliani during the 2008 Republican primary debates. That egotistical maniac needs to be put down a peg or two.
palestinians?
or is wondering about his viewpoint anti-semitic?
Let's face it: The United States is very good at blowing things up. We have spent trillions of dollars over the years to be even better at blowing things up. Because of need to blow things up, we fail to see that by building things like schools, houses and bridges we can actually make friends around the world.
I remember at the end of the movie, "Charlie Wilson's War", where then Congressman Wilson asks for a measly $5 million to build schools in Afghanistan after we had spent billions to "fight the Soviets there" and all of the other Congressmen tell him to go fuck himself. It is just not in our national nature to build things, we prefer to blow them up.
Election 2012: Be Educated! Be Active! Vote!
www.PhoenixJustice.com
we just keep throwing fuel on the fire.
How exactly Ben? Because he disagrees with you and you're Jewish. Basically your ancestors have been occupiers for...for..forever when it comes to people with brownish skin?
is intended to be a factual statement
Ron Paul has been spot on when it comes to foreign policy.
Too bad nobody listens to him...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fHfdSi-GDo
"They're terrorists!" "They're psychos!" "Anything else is
anti-SemiticUn-American! "Repeat as often and as shrilly as necessary.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
The one lone politician who does speak out for real liberty, Ron Paul, is derided in the MSM as a "kook" and a "nutcase."
success as a speechwriter for Richard Nixon.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/12/29/dec...
LimpBalls
I'd rather dip my laptop and my lap in hydrochloric acid than log on to a foxnews website. Besides, they'll probably be charging for that "privilege" real soon.
BTW Isn't Ben Stein an unethical crook? Why isn't he in jail? Oh, yes right....Rethug.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=114872&s...
And thus the recruitment of more Afghani's etc. to want to join in on the "Blowback" against the U.S. These killings of innocents make all of us here in "The Homeland" LESS SAFE....NOT MORE.
Anybody remember during the Republican presidential debates when Ron Paul mentioned the concept of Blowback and all Giuliani could do was to laugh....nervously. McCain and Romney and Huckabee and Tancredo and Thompson joined in the mocking. "Har, har, har...listen to that nutty geezer talkin' about "Blowback".
Then Ron Paul got the dig in that it was the CIA's own term that had been explained in their analysis of the events of 9/11.
"Had any of you bothered to read it". - Ron Paul
Crickets......
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
If you started bombing Canada, you'd see some hockey sticks flying around... is all I'm sayin'. ;)
far left loon >.<
Hey, hoser, quit bombing our country, aye? What's that aboot...geezzz? (My wife is from Calgary - we just got back from a wonderful time in the Great White North.)
I've seen some stuff, man. And some thangs...
We have been monkeying in the world forever. Putting our puppets in place until they screw us and then we cause a riot and remove them. They remain until we can no longer control them. This happens over and over again in many countries. That is why the world hates us.
Ron Paul is right on. "Bring them home, keep them home." Pete Seeger.
Ben Fucking Stein? What the fuck does he know about terrorism?
IS a terrorist!
Blowback. (silence) ...Why, I've never heard such a thing.
(counter with) "They're psychos." Brilliant reasoned analysis.
far left loon >.<
Like the time he went on Canadian TV and said he couldn't find any scientists that could explain to him why lightning falls from the sky.
He really said that.
-the Christmas underpants bomber was more like a joke on the US. Even the WTC & Pentagon attacks were largely symbolic. Bin Laden and his group became heros to a lot of the world.
But there is little advantage to Bin Laden in killing a planeload of people, just out of meanness. But he must enjoy scaring us- and no one had to die.
If the poor (underwear-bomber)fool didn't realize he'd fail, I bet his "handlers" did. Our enemies must be Laughing Their Asses Off.
They fully wanted that plane to be downed. Unfortunately, it takes an idiot to volunteer to do the task. So, he might have been incompetent. But I would count on his "handlers" working on making a more reliable detonator.
blah blah blah
important journalism
Ben Stein will only depart from the RAY-publican
talking points once every four years when he gets
drunk at the convention. He was visibly drunk
when he called VP nominee Sarah Palin backward,
or was it backwoods? Guess we'll have to wait
till 2012 for another attack of truth.
It didn't take him long to invoke Godwins Law
and reflexively do the anti-Semite dance that
neocons just LOVE to do even as a first resort.
Ron Paul is right but he is mostly wrong and
this time is no exception. His isolationism
cannot stand up to reality.
The US is too bankrupt and too unhelpful to intervene anywhere in the world.
The world can certainly handle its own problems or consult its neighbors, the UN, or other charitable organizations for assistance.
demands we reject isolationism.
Sounds good to me.
far left loon >.<
Wanting to close the US military bases across the globe and bring our troops home does not make him an isolationist. It makes him an anti-imperialist.
But of course that seems unlikely because the MIC and the US govt. have too many "interests" worldwide.
"US interests" is and always has been access to natural resources and access to markets.
It has nothing to do with overthrowing evil dictators. (Half the time, the US props up evil dictators, and provides torture camps too.)
far left loon >.<
intelligence gathering
"Wanting to close the US military bases across the globe and bring our troops home does not make him an isolationist. It makes him an anti-imperialist." - noitaluspacne
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
...Criminal Court that make him an isolationist. He's against them.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Paul supports neither Single Payer health care or the Public Option.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
We have our own courts and our own laws that apply only to us.
No organization or country should have jurisdiction over another.
...the families of those executed after WWII by the US for war crimes.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
The US govt. should apologize for its interferences (unlikely, I know) and then completely stay out of meddling in other country's affairs.
The US should apologize to those who perpetrated the Rape of Nanking, the Holocaust and unspeakable medical experimentation. Because all of those who were killed and/or maimed, though human, weren't victims in the US.
Bravo.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
I misunderstand what you're saying.
We should remain in the ICC because...
...peoples of a nation that breeds war criminals to bring their own to justice.
Hell, I'll bring that down from the international level to the state level: Philadelphia, Mississippi ring a bell?
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
, if the law was moral and had teeth we ( as the largest, most violent and active military in the world) would be in deep shit and would have stop relying economically on war like we do. It doesn't and the ICC or anything like it will never work because the most powerful can't be stopped and don't give a damn.
I belive strongly in state soverignty, which is entirely impossible if the countries that have the means to destroy by force the sovereignty of the weaker countries act as violently as they do.
with what he just said?
“The US should apologize to those who perpetrated the Rape of Nanking, the Holocaust and unspeakable medical experimentation. Because all of those who were killed and/or maimed, though human, weren't victims in the US.”
Explain how the saying the US should apologize for ITS horrible actions and interference in other countries is the same as saying the US should say sorry for crimes THEY didn’t commit.
He said a basic, elementary moral truism that should be obvious, if you believe in state sovereignty and you have a moral outlook on the world. Big IFS in the US these days, even amongst the general population. If you disagree than you'd obviously be ok with Iran bombing the city around Lockheed Martin (cause those bombers could conceivably be used against Iran) and supported groups in the US who might do a coup who word work with, say, Iran and try to benefit them more than the people in the US, right? If the bombing kiled a few thousand people it would just be an "unfortunate accident" and Iran would give its heartiest apologies to the families of the victims or something.
I guess we should assume that since we’re the US it is assumed we’re always right and do what we do for moral and justifiable reasons, history be damned.
Damn, Ben Stein is dumber than a sack of doorknobs. I'm with Ferris, if this guy taught at my school I'd get a better education ditching class.
Would that be the same Ben Stein who made a documentary a couple of years back about the evil conspiracy evolutionists have waged against "Creation Science"?
Would he be the same Ben Stein who was fired from his position as a business columnist at the NY Times because he was shilling for FreeScore.com, a bogus credit score website that was prosecuted for abusing credit card information?
Would he be the same Ben Stein who was commencement speaker and recipient of an honorary degree at Liberty University in 2009?
I wonder . . .
I simply cannot watch or listen to anything Ben Stein says. He's a mean spirited, self serving little man who does not rely on facts, race baits and viciously attacks his counter point when things don't go his way. I watched a bit of Larry King last nite and he complained that Obama was wearing a polo shirt while talking about the failed attempt on xmas day. It was childish and stupid!
And to think, he gave us "bueller, bueller"
Oh bull - SHIT!
You mean, "Let me steer this discussion onto safer ground."
God forbid Ron Paul might actually draw out the "antisemitism" canard for all to see.
Well , Ben had to get a gig some how .
Insanity , it is what it is , there is no understanding it .
News.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
why the FRACK is Ben Stein qualified to talk with elected officials on a mainstream television show?
Larry King is weak.
King is a total pansy. This is all madness. Anytime anyone starts to talk about what is really happening a wall of denial and obstruction goes up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=go6TiLIeVZA
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecMVvGenOA8
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Why does Ben Stein get to have an opinion on terrorism, esp. one that is wrong?
...for not being caught slackjawed when Stein threw the "grenade" as Scott Ritter calls it.
to Ron Paul.
They actually agree on more than they disagree.
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
Medical-Kucinich :"I am the co-author and co-sponsor of HR 676, the Conyers/Kucinich bill, which will provide for true universal, single-payer health care. All residents of the United States will be fully covered for medical, dental, vision, mental health and long-term care. There will be no deductibles, no co-pays, and no insurance company employees whose job it is to deny you coverage so their company makes more money."
Medical-Paul: "So what are we doing now, or at least Obama is proposing, that we turn the people that have service on insurance and make them join the governmental programs that everybody is unhappy about, so it doesn’t make any sense. It’s a total failure to run anything by bureaucracy. It always costs more and the services are always less favorable, so for us to pursue government solutions to a problem the government created is sort of reminds me of the TARP bailouts and you know what we do financially. So medical bailouts by more government when government created our managed care system of 35 years will only make things much worse."
Paul-Kucinich on military policy: (I'll take it on faith that they are closest on this issue.)
The biggest distinction I can see is on civil rights.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html
http://fitnessfortheoccasion.wordpress.com/20...
To refresh, the Supreme Court held that the Commerce clause entitled the Congress to regulate commerce so that it wouldn't discriminate on the basis of one's race. The alternative view, a view seemingly held by Paul is that a "freedom of association" approach should prevail. Such an approach would allow, for example, hotels to exclude Negroes from occupying vacant rooms.
Paul: "The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. "
(Let's just tell those ni##ers to F#ck off).
I'll just take it on faith that Kucinich doesn't share this approach. This Ron Paul infatuation is the dangerous approach of being a one issue person. At the very least, pick your single issue carefully. Because Paul is correct on a couple of issues, that doesn't mean he's correct on every issue. And the white supremacists aren't supporting Paul for no reason at all.
I really like to see an end to mentioning Kucinich and Paul in the same breath.
Blame Kucinich.
Naw..
"Paul, the libertarian doctor-congressman from Texas, holds diametrically opposed views from Kucinich's on abortion, health care, and taxes, so, according to a Paul spokesman, a joint ticket "would never work," but the two candidates do agree on ending the war in Iraq and protecting civil liberties."
So, out of the horses mouths, the two are not compatible. That is why I'm discouraging any representation that the two are interchangeable.
infatuation.
We were warned to remove our people and troops from the Holy Land back in the 90's. The U.S. decided it was badass and left them there despite warnings. Now they have a war created by dumbasses and they are followed by millions of American dumbasses. Glad I don't fly. GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST HOLY LANDS. We have no business there.
Republicans are liars and simply cannot be trusted.
You can always tell when a persons argument is lacking. They immediately make it about something other than what you are actually talking about. Any time some ass hat says the words anti-semitic I am reminded of the distortions used by Israel to commit war crimes against the Palestinians in the name of protecting themselves. YEs that's right ... as in last years attack where 12 Israelis were killed and 1600 Palestinians including innocent women and children. Sorry ass face Stein. You suck.
to say he "never heard anything quite like that". Bull Shit! That argument has been made countless times, what f'ing mental cloud of delusion is he living on?
Goodnight, Frau Blücher
And what's with the Stupid Commentators ... let them go at it. ALl these bozos did was fill up the time with stupid. I'd love to see Stein get into a real fight with Paul .... Stein is such an incredible piece of goo.
I cannot abide this man long enough even to listen to a single program segment he does. He is arrogant, condescending and I think he is Israeli 1st & American 2nd - that is the feeling I get from some of the stupid, fool asinine things he says....I keep thinking "Who the hell is this man, and why should anyone care what he says about anyting...?" I don't get it why he is on political talk shows....his opinions are irrelevant and there are SO many other more qualified people who could offer so much more in the way of political discourse....why do they wast time with this jerk?
Woody McBreairty
is it because he is infuriating?
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
shows his true loyalties right at the start. "STEIN: No, we're not occupiers. That's the same anti-Semitic argument we've heard."
Anything the US does in the mideast is good for Israel, except if it's something like stopping illegal settlements by Jews. Then of course the whole planet is antisemitic.
ben's loyalties will always be to Israel first and the US if it they're sycophantic enough to Israel.
No one has a solution to terrorism.
but I can tell you--everything we've done so far has not worked.
Osama bin laden has got everything he ever dreamed of and more.
The US is on the brink of oblivion.
stuck in 2 wars, trillions of debt etc..
we need to change direction fast.
throwing money and guns at it isn't working
and is putting us in a deep spiral.
Good ole joe lieberman wants a new war in yemen.
thats about the stupidest idea I've heard.
let's see, then we can go into iran.
yeah sure-let's fight 4 different wars
hitler was stupid enuf to fight 2 wars on 2 different fronts.
we may be stupid enuf to fight 4.
heaven help us.
"Don't blame me, I voted for Ron Paul"
-BeeSting, 2008
..since he used to think he was. He's a Game Show Host and an arrogant one at that.
And YES, obl has won in every sense of the word thanks to w and his crime family. Should've got in, got the bad guy and left but NOOOOOO..we had to go all nation-building and invading and making it less safe for America didn't we w? You f-ing a-hole! When w is in jail, we'll all be safer. When ALL the troops are home, we'll be safer. If we have to go in again, we go to WIN and not occupy. That was another w mistake; occupying instead of fighting.
Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"
Every commercial with Ben Stein is a reminder of why I don't want anything to do with Comcast. With people like Palin and Michele Bachmann running loose, it's hard to say who gets the crown as dumbest conservative celebrity but the girls are at least _unintentionally_ funny. Stein is an annoying and time-sucking black hole of non-value.
Ron Paul = Our last real hope as a true republic. Stick to the Constitution as our founders advised if we are to survive in the form intended.
The guy wants to do away with the Department of Education...
which basically means creating even more Republicans...
a rainstorm of continuing 911's.
Legitimate or not...a grievance is still a grievance.
Let's pretend that a small group (we'll say, 20) of terrorists based in America carry out an attack on Canadian soil. The Canadian government decides to send military forces into America to find and kill more of those terrorists. In doing so, thousands of American citizens are killed, some are incarcerated and tortured by the Canadian military.
If that happened, I'm pretty sure that American "extremists" would take it upon themselves to retaliate and carry out acts of "terror" in Canada.
We (Canada, America and its allies) don't spend enough time asking ourselves WHY these acts of terror happen. Maybe if we made more of an effort to mind our own business and stopped acting like this planet's police force...
what would happen if Iran patrolled the Gulf of Mexico...
and shot down an American passenger jet?....
Like GHW Bush said after that July 3rd 1988..."I will not apologize for America...I don't care what the fact are".
only argument is that the jihadists are "psychos". No rational points to be made, only that our enemy is psycho. Then he filibusters the whole conversation with delusions of antisemitism. I hate that fucking tard. Man I'm glad I don't have cable anymore.
Stein tried to slander Paul that is not trivial as your headline suggests. Stein is challenged directly in a post at Bsproof.net for this hateful smear.Read it! http://bullshitproof.net/?p=525
Comments are closed on this entry