Tom Delay, American Taliban?

[headscratcher4]

Thought this, from yesterday's Washington Post was interesting...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/07/AR2006040701942.html

May need to register to access.

Possibly, the real "American Taliban" is not yet in Jail.

"And now, DeLay says he prayed long and hard before God made clear to him that He no longer wants DeLay to represent Texas's 22nd Congressional District. Instead, DeLay says, his God wants him to be a messenger -- on a much broader scale. And we will see DeLay constantly smiling as he delivers his message because in his heart he knows that we hopeless sinners will always hate the messenger."

[Charlie Monoxide]

Is there some Buddist god of power, corruption and money. If so, that was the "god" that Delay is referring to.

He wants to be a messenger of the lobby sort. They make much more money than those other messengers with tight shorts, tattoos, piercings, and riding bicycles.

Charlie (Bush'll give him a medal) Monoxide

[Ipecac]

Wow. What a delusional, corrupt, hypocritical, arrogant, fundamentalist scumbag. I'm glad he's leaving Congress and I hope to never hear his name again but when he's convicted.

[Ipecac]

DeLay's America would acknowledge that the Constitution was inspired by the Bible; it would promote prayer and worship, and would stop gun control, outlaw abortion, limit the rights of gays, curb contraception, end the constitutional separation of church and state, and adopt the Ten Commandments as guiding principles for public schools.

Prayer and worship and the Ten Commandments. Guns.

It never ceases to amaze me that the Christian right supports such a weird combination of contradictory issues.

[Ziggurat]

Possibly, the real "American Taliban" is not yet in Jail.


Overt religiosity from politicians makes me uncomfortable, and I'm opposed to a lot of the political goals of religious conservatives. But Delay as the "American Taliban"? We need a second version of Godwin's law. Really, if you can't criticize Delay without trivializing the true horror and barbarity of the Taliban by equating the two, you're just being lazy.

[jj]

Overt religiosity from politicians makes me uncomfortable, and I'm opposed to a lot of the political goals of religious conservatives. But Delay as the "American Taliban"? We need a second version of Godwin's law. Really, if you can't criticize Delay without trivializing the true horror and barbarity of the Taliban by equating the two, you're just being lazy.

Well, Ziggy, I think that it's premature to suggest he IS the Taliban, but I don't think it's at all unreasonable to suggest that he wants to BE the American Taliban. Look at the whole "Christian Reconstructionist" movement, of which he is an obvious part (I don't care if his name shows up on the rolls, he goes 10/10 in action), what they desire, and what their end goals are.

Then go read what the 1950's were like with the Red Scare, and multiply that to the point it gets 20% of the population, and that is Delay's personal wet dream.

For where people like Delay appear to head, you might check out a fiction book (it's a bit of a wade-through-this-book, I fear) called "Handmaid's Tale" by Margaret Atwood. Yes, it's speculative fiction. No, I don't think it's too far off what we see as a desired state of affairs from the radical right.

[Ziggurat]

Well, Ziggy, I think that it's premature to suggest he IS the Taliban, but I don't think it's at all unreasonable to suggest that he wants to BE the American Taliban.

So it's not unreasonable to suggest that Delay wants to institute summary public executions, to beat women for dressing improperly, and to kill people for their sexual orientation? Because that's what the Taliban did regularly, and that's what comparing Delay to the Taliban means. Sorry, jj, but I guess I've got a different definition of the word "unreasonable" than you do.

For where people like Delay appear to head, you might check out a fiction book (it's a bit of a wade-through-this-book, I fear) called "Handmaid's Tale" by Margaret Atwood. Yes, it's speculative fiction. No, I don't think it's too far off what we see as a desired state of affairs from the radical right.

Bwahahahahahaha! Oh boy, that's rich!

No, I haven't read it. But I've seen the movie. And it was good fiction. But I wouldn't call it "speculative fiction" any more than I'd call 2001: A Space Odyssey "speculative fiction".

[headscratcher4]

Overt religiosity from politicians makes me uncomfortable, and I'm opposed to a lot of the political goals of religious conservatives. But Delay as the "American Taliban"? We need a second version of Godwin's law. Really, if you can't criticize Delay without trivializing the true horror and barbarity of the Taliban by equating the two, you're just being lazy.

Sorry, if he seeks to eliminate seperation of church and state, there is little difference between DeLay and the Taliban. He envisions a state run fundumentalist interpretation of the Bible...how is that different (save for the object of worship) from what the Taliban did in Afghanastan?

I'll admit I can be lazy, but ultimately, DeLay is a subversive and subversive of mine (and I think your) liberty and freedom to belive or not believe.

I don't feel there is any particular reason to cut him much slack here....

[headscratcher4]

"So it's not unreasonable to suggest that Delay wants to institute summary public executions, to beat women for dressing improperly, and to kill people for their sexual orientation? Because that's what the Taliban did regularly, and that's what comparing Delay to the Taliban means. Sorry, jj, but I guess I've got a different definition of the word "unreasonable" than you do."

What do you think the fundumentalist Christian state that DeLay envisions would look like? Methinks your accurage description of the Taliban is right on target with the vision of all to many Fundumentalist Americans.

[Ziggurat]

What do you think the fundumentalist Christian state that DeLay envisions would look like?

Utah.

Methinks your accurage description of the Taliban is right on target with the vision of all to many Fundumentalist Americans.

Sure. But "all too many" could be just one. But how many Christians in the US do you think actually believe in something so extreme, and what evidence do you have for that beyond paranoia? I've never met anyone like that, I haven't even seen anyone on TV like that, and I sure haven't seen Delay make any comments to suggest he believes in anything nearly so radical. All I see is you hyperventilating, because you can't keep your criticism of Delay (who I personally think is a schmuck) in any kind of reasonable perspective. It's as if you think your argument gets stronger by making a more severe accusation. It doesn't. It just gets more shrill.

[UserGoogol]

No, I haven't read it. But I've seen the movie. And it was good fiction. But I wouldn't call it "speculative fiction" any more than I'd call 2001: A Space Odyssey "speculative fiction".

Er, 2001 was speculative fiction. Speculative fiction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speculative_Fiction) is a term which has come refer to genres which "speculate" about hypothetical worlds. Science fiction, fantasy, dystopian novels, alternative history, and whatnot. It was also invented by people in the science fiction community who were pissed off and decided that they wanted a new name.

[headscratcher4]

Utah.


... But how many Christians in the US do you think actually believe in something so extreme, and what evidence do you have for that beyond paranoia?

Some polling I've seen suggests its a third. And I have met Americans who believe exactly that.

BTW...how many Germans believed that the Jews were evil and should be exterminated? Remember, Hitler was elected (with support of just over a third, if I remember correctly). Not that DeLay is Hitler...yet (though he was an exterminator in his previous life).

[Ziggurat]

Sorry, if he seeks to eliminate seperation of church and state, there is little difference between DeLay and the Taliban.

Do you honestly think that Delay is planning on banning Muslim prayer, that he wants to tear down every mosque from Seattle to Miami? And what you seem determined not to understand is that even were he to do so, that it STILL wouldn't make him the equivalent of the Taliban. Do you deny that there's even a difference between Saudi Arabia and the Taliban, or is it all just one blur to you? Can you not comprehend that even a country which doesn't permit the construction of a single church hasn't sunken to the same levels of primitive depravity that were the hallmark of the Taliban?

He envisions a state run fundumentalist interpretation of the Bible...how is that different (save for the object of worship) from what the Taliban did in Afghanastan?

Does he? The author says, "Afterward, I told DeLay I was somewhat troubled by the idea that he essentially wanted to remold the government to meet his fundamentalist Christian worldview." That's the closest the article gets to saying that this is what Delay wants: it won't even come out and state this, but only floats it as an "idea". But is it what Delay wants, and if so, what IS Delay's fundamentalist vision? The article is, to be charitable, vague on this point. Would he outlaw divorce? Would he ban adult movies? Would he mandate the teaching of creationism? What, EXACTLY, does he want? We don't really know, but the author made sure it all sounded extreme, however vague it was. I think you've been snowed.

I don't feel there is any particular reason to cut him much slack here....

You misunderstand why I'm jumping all over you. I'm not doing so to protect Delay, I'm doing so because WE need to be able to put things in perspective. We need to be able to recognize true and absolute evil when it rears its head. We need to be able to understand the difference between opponents who might harm our interests (which is really your complaint against Delay) with enemies who want to destroy us absolutely. That kind of seemingly simple perspective is far more lacking today that it should be. And a flippant willingness to equate a US congressman to one of the most brutal and backwards regimes in the history of mankind is just another example of that loss of perspective. Cutting Delay slack is not what I care about.

[Ziggurat]

Some polling I've seen suggests its a third.

Got a source? Because I don't believe that for a second.

And I have met Americans who believe exactly that.

"That" belief being what, exactly? That women should never work, or be seen in public without a male escort? Or that gays should be executed by crushing them with a stone wall? Or how about public stoning for adulterers? What beliefs, exactly, did these Americans you knew espouse which made them equivalent to the Taliban? Details, my man, details!

BTW...how many Germans believed that the Jews were evil and should be exterminated? Remember, Hitler was elected (with support of just over a third, if I remember correctly).

No, he was appointed. Jeeze, get your Nazi parallels straight.

Not that DeLay is Hitler...yet (though he was an exterminator in his previous life).

I guess I didn't even need to propose a Taliban version of Godwin's law - the original came in handy after all.

[jj]

"So it's not unreasonable to suggest that Delay wants to institute summary public executions, to beat women for dressing improperly, and to kill people for their sexual orientation? Because that's what the Taliban did regularly, and that's what comparing Delay to the Taliban means. Sorry, jj, but I guess I've got a different definition of the word "unreasonable" than you do."

What do you think the fundumentalist Christian state that DeLay envisions would look like? Methinks your accurage description of the Taliban is right on target with the vision of all to many Fundumentalist Americans.

I think that the radical right (the far out loonybins, among which I include Delay and a few other prominent politicians, no, not W, I'm undecided there what he stands for, if anything) would be right at home in a Taliban-like country. Yes, including public executions, subjugating women, shooting gays, etc.

Think of Fred Phelps here, yes?

[headscratcher4]

I give.

I can't source it, and I am the first to admit faulty memory or having misread something.

And, yes, again, I've screwed up my "Nazi" parallel. Nazi's won a third of the vote or more, Hitler was appointed.

I have played fast and loose with my analogies and let my fear of fundumentalist religious nuts run rampant.

Mia Culpa.

[jj]

But how many Christians in the US do you think actually believe in something so extreme,


You do realize that it doesn't take many, especially when they hide their agenda until elected. Or don't you?

Look at the way that the creationist lobby is invading schoolboards, running "stealth" candidates, etc, and then coming out for banning science outright. (N.B. banning clear, factual discussion of evolultion is banning science in my book, and they don't want factual discussion.)

[Chaos]

*snip*
No, he was appointed. Jeeze, get your Nazi parallels straight.
*snip*

Hitler and his associates did get about 30-32 percent of the votes in the last free election in January ´33.

[Mephisto]

Sorry, if he seeks to eliminate seperation of church and state, there is little difference between DeLay and the Taliban. He envisions a state run fundumentalist interpretation of the Bible...how is that different (save for the object of worship) from what the Taliban did in Afghanastan?

I'll admit I can be lazy, but ultimately, DeLay is a subversive and subversive of mine (and I think your) liberty and freedom to belive or not believe.

I don't feel there is any particular reason to cut him much slack here....

You got an AMEN from me! Isn't it funny how good "God-Fearing Christians can also be crooks? Isn't it funny how this adminstration claims to be led by Christ yet when was Christ ever an advocate for war or torture? Isn't it funny how long it took for everyone to realize this?

[Ziggurat]

You do realize that it doesn't take many, especially when they hide their agenda until elected. Or don't you?

Oh. I see. You've divined their diabolic secret plot, and are now trying to alert a sleeping nation to the impending doom of religious mania about to sweep the nation and turn us all into Pat Robertson's slaves.

But Delay WAS elected - where's his record of acting like the Taliban? I guess political analysis is more fun if you're allowed to attribute hidden agendas even to politicians who have already served office. Like all those Stalinists running as progressive democrats. Or the reform party candidates who really want to build landing strips for gay Martians in Des Moines.

But whatever. Go ahead and paint Delay with the worst possible label you can think of - after all, who needs any perspective or sense of proportion once you've established opposition to him and his policies?

[jj]

Oh. I see. You've divined their diabolic secret plot, and are now trying to alert a sleeping nation to the impending doom of religious mania about to sweep the nation and turn us all into Pat Robertson's slaves.

But Delay WAS elected - where's his record of acting like the Taliban? I guess political analysis is more fun if you're allowed to attribute hidden agendas even to politicians who have already served office. Like all those Stalinists running as progressive democrats. Or the reform party candidates who really want to build landing strips for gay Martians in Des Moines.

But whatever. Go ahead and paint Delay with the worst possible label you can think of - after all, who needs any perspective or sense of proportion once you've established opposition to him and his policies?


Sorry, you're the only one who is proposing conspiracy theory here.

I'm simply pointing out the facts about things like stealth candidates for school boards, etc. Go read your LOCAL newspaper for that, if you like.

If you think the facts point to a conspiracy, you're free to make the case. I simply think it's a dishonest, unethical tactic being adopted by people who want to push science out of the classroom.

ETA: I missed your last straw man. If you think this is the worst thing I can think about Tom Delay, you have a really rotten imagination. Why, pretty soon he'll be hiring thugs to go disrupt his opponents' press conferences. I wonder if they'll wear brown shirts. Oh, wait. Godwined again! :p

[Regnad Kcin]

Mia Culpa.Italian chicks are hot!

[BPSCG]

"Taliban" is becoming the new "fascist." "Fascist" long ago lost any meaning the word ever had, and it now is simply a word the left uses to tar anyone they don't like.

The left has gotten bored with "fascist", so now they tar the right with "Taliban." Google "Taliban wing" and you get almost six million hits, usually followed by "of the Republican party."

If you're going to compare your Republican political opponents to Islamist murderers, then you have no right to complain about Carl Rove.

[jj]

"Taliban" is becoming the new "fascist." "Fascist" long ago lost any meaning the word ever had, and it now is simply a word the left uses to tar anyone they don't like.

The left has gotten bored with "fascist", so now they tar the right with "Taliban." Google "Taliban wing" and you get almost six million hits, usually followed by "of the Republican party."

If you're going to compare your Republican political opponents to Islamist murderers, then you have no right to complain about Carl Rove.

Ok, first, I'm a moderate, so you can't blame "the left".

Second, you don't like how it looks to me, change your party so it doesn't look like the Junior Mint version of the Taliban.

Third, putting words in "the left"'s mouth. Gosh, I wonder who did that before?

[Tony]

Overt religiosity from politicians makes me uncomfortable, and I'm opposed to a lot of the political goals of religious conservatives. But Delay as the "American Taliban"? We need a second version of Godwin's law. Really, if you can't criticize Delay without trivializing the true horror and barbarity of the Taliban by equating the two, you're just being lazy.

And the apologists begin.

[Tony]

Do you honestly think that Delay is planning on banning Muslim prayer, that he wants to tear down every mosque from Seattle to Miami?

If he had the power to do so, and the power to silence/placate/eliminate any opposition to it, Yes. The man is a loon and hates America on a fundamental level.

[Tony]

Think of Fred Phelps here, yes?

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Most of the fundies are exactly like Fred Phelps, the only difference is that Phelps has the balls to be honest about his views.

[Chaos]

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Most of the fundies are exactly like Fred Phelps, the only difference is that Phelps has the balls to be honest about his views.

Either that, or everyone else has the necessary brains to be dishonest. ;)


On the other hand... why be dishonest? I mean, Hitler wrote this book, you see, where he explained what he was going to do if he was elected. And they STILL voted for him. And afterwards, EVERYONE, in Germany as well as elsewhere, claimed they had no idea what Hitler was up to.

[Ziggurat]

Sorry, you're the only one who is proposing conspiracy theory here.

I'm simply pointing out the facts about things like stealth candidates for school boards, etc. Go read your LOCAL newspaper for that, if you like.

Let me try to explain it for you as simply as I can, because evidently you couldn't pick up on my point before. Those "stealth" candidates weren't stealth once they got in office. They enacted their plans, they tried to push creationism, and we know that because of what they ACTUALLY did. Now Delay got elected to office. But the complaints being aired in the original post have nothing to do with what he ACTUALLY did while in office, but instead are based on vague fears about what someone thinks he might want to do in the future but for some unstated reason never tried to do while he WAS in office. Can you honestly not understand the distinction there? How clueless are you?

ETA: I missed your last straw man. If you think this is the worst thing I can think about Tom Delay, you have a really rotten imagination. Why, pretty soon he'll be hiring thugs to go disrupt his opponents' press conferences. I wonder if they'll wear brown shirts. Oh, wait. Godwined again! :p

No, jj. Again you completely miss the point, like clockwork. If Delay were like the Taliban, he wouldn't just send thugs to break up his opponents' press conferences, he'd send suicide bombers as journalists to kill said opponents at their press conferences. THAT is what Delay would be willing to do if he was really like the Taliban, because that's what they actually did. It is not my failure of imagination here, but your failure to understand what the comparison actually means, and why I'm criticising that comparison.

[Ziggurat]

If he had the power to do so, and the power to silence/placate/eliminate any opposition to it, Yes.

So do you have evidence to this effect? Or is this really only your fear?

Run, Tony, run! The fundies are coming! The fundies are coming! Flee before they baptise you!

[BPSCG]

My, my, look who's now making excuses for demonizing one's political opponents. He who was so upset about the "off-year election spin cycle..."

Ok, first, I'm a moderate, so you can't blame "the left".A moderate who seems to direct his fire only towards the right...

Second, you don't like how it looks to me, change your party so it doesn't look like the Junior Mint version of the Taliban.Sorry, your hallucinations are your own business; I have no control over how things look to you.

Now, if you have no problem with referring to Republicans as "Junior Mint Talibans," then, as a moderate, you should certainly have no problem referring to the Dems as "Junior Mint Terrorists", and shouldn't mind when people refer to "the terrorist wing of the Democratic party..."

[Zbu]

One thing everybody is missing is that a lot of Republicans push the Christian Hard-Right agenda without really believing in it, solely to gain power. While I doubt they give two cents about the Christian woo, the part they do believe in is the lack of questioning those in charge which Christianity supports (one big God controls us all without rhyme or reason for his actions, anybody?). If anything, the Repubs are just your bog-standard powermongers who are piggybacking their lust for power on a religious group and their delusions. If you want to be completely fair, the Dems also do that to the middle and lower classes as well.

[headscratcher4]

"Taliban" is becoming the new "fascist." "Fascist" long ago lost any meaning the word ever had, and it now is simply a word the left uses to tar anyone they don't like.

The left has gotten bored with "fascist", so now they tar the right with "Taliban." Google "Taliban wing" and you get almost six million hits, usually followed by "of the Republican party."

If you're going to compare your Republican political opponents to Islamist murderers, then you have no right to complain about Carl Rove.


Your point is a good one and a fair one. Though, I note, it is not only “liberal” and “leftists” who leap to pejoratives like “Taliban” or “Islamo-facists” to describe those whose policies they oppose (indeed, supporters of the Administration have never shied away from using terms like AlQeda lovers, or other terms to describe their opponents -- but, it is a sort of political chicken and the egg thing, I am sure).

Clearly, as a description of DeLay and his “politics,” Taliban is unfair. Taliban describes a foreign, religious/political configuration that has nothing to do with the American political scene. No, Tom DeLay is not an “American Taliban.” In the future, though I am sure I will not fully succeed, I will endeavor to avoid such rash, polarizing statements.

No, from now on I will use the only word that truly describes Tom DeLay as he is and what he stands for – Republican. Tom DeLay embodies, in every sense of the word, the modern, Republican Party – what it wants, how it operates, how it manages the branches of government it controls, the kind of people it attracts and what a modern Republican believes. He wouldn’t have become the Majority Leader were not that the case.

So, as I said, I will seek to banish “Taliban” and “Fascist” from my lexicon when it comes to main-stream American politics. Words are important. I will describe Mr. DeLay as what he is – a proud Republican and a moving force for over a decade of Republican politics, policy and aspirations.

In that way, it is clear that Mr. DeLay’s vision of himself, his role in government, his belief in the narrowing of the separation of church and state are all firmly rooted in the Republican Party that he has built and expanded over the last ten years, the party that he has helped lead to formal control of two branches of government.

So, the argument shouldn’t be over whether Mr. DeLay is a “Taliban,” but whether modern Republicanism and its embrace of millenial politics and fundumentalist Christian vissions is good for America. Again, given how far DeLay was able to ascend, given his power and influence, given the people he has promoted and supported (including the President), given his vision and aspirations (personal and political) it seems clear that in an American context, at least, Mr. DeLay sees himself and the Republican Party as the party of God (NOTE in an Islamic sense, but in a pure, Texas, all-American, rock-ribbed, Jerry Falwell-approving Republican kind of way).

Thanks for keeping me honest.

[Cain]

I've never been fond of the rhetorical term "American Taliban" -- so it stood out when Richard Dawkins used the phrase in his documentary (titled "Root of All Evil").

[jj]

A moderate who seems to direct his fire only towards the right...


Yep. Haven't seen the left have much influence lately. Have you?


Sorry, your hallucinations are your own business; I have no control over how things look to you.


Still with the medical diagnoses? I guess you need to personalize things, eh? Or is it just that you sincerely can't imagine anyone disagreeing with you?


Now, if you have no problem with referring to Republicans as "Junior Mint Talibans," then, as a moderate, you should certainly have no problem referring to the Dems as "Junior Mint Terrorists", and shouldn't mind when people refer to "the terrorist wing of the Democratic party..."

Now, of course, that's another deceptive statement. I don't see Dems running around with IED's. I don't see them hijacking airplanes and crashing them into buildings.

I do see Repugnicans trying to ban abortion, mandate religion in government, and govern from a religious point of view, and what seems like such a short-sighted point of view one almost has to conclude that their beliefs are coming from the "final conflict" paradigm.

So, your deceptive statement stands completely refuted by those two simple paragraphs. Oh, and if you DO see a Democrat trying to fly a plane into a building, let me know, I'll trash that person too.

[jj]

But the complaints being aired in the original post have nothing to do with what he ACTUALLY did while in office, but instead are based on vague fears about what someone thinks he might want to do in the future but for some unstated reason never tried to do while he WAS in office. Can you honestly not understand the distinction there? How clueless are you?


So, we are not to take the person's words and actions as suggestive of their future behavior? What you suggest is purely and simply that we must forgive any action that Delay has taken in the past, including his sending supporters to break up a press conference for a competing candidate (ala brown-shirts) very recently, and give him a clean bill of health going forward?

That's absurd, and you knew it when you said it. You would have everyone excuse all of his past behaviors, even though he is not in the least apologetic, and is clearly continuing in the same fashion as he's always continued.

You're ridiculous.

And, of course, you need to stop confuting the Taliban with Al-Quaida in your second paragraph, but of course, your doing so would completely put the lie to your confused apologia for Delay's brownshirts.

[Tony]

So do you have evidence to this effect? Or is this really only your fear?


Evidence for what? That Tom Delay would impose his religion should he gain the type of power I describe? Why don't you pony up evidence for your position. Where is your evidence that he would respect the human, civil and indivdual rights of Americans should he acquire the power I describe?

Run, Tony, run! The fundies are coming! The fundies are coming! Flee before they baptise you!

I understand your need to bury your head in the sand. It's hard coming to terms with reality.

[jj]

Evidence for what? That Tom Delay would impose his religion should he gain the type of power I describe? Why don't you pony up evidence for your position. Where is your evidence that he would respect the human, civil and indivdual rights of Americans should he the power I describe?


Let's see.

He uses force when he can get away with it.

He appears to have cheated with campaign funds.

He ruthlessly uses underhanded tactics to further his agenda.

Heck, Tony, why shouldn't we trust him completely?


I understand your need to bury your head in the sand. It's hard coming to terms with reality.

I'm tempted to suggest he thinks he'll get a piece of the pie when Delay takes over. That's ridiculous, of course, Delay would never give even a piece of mouldy pie to anyone and he probably knows that, so he's not really thinking that.

[Ziggurat]

Evidence for what? That Tom Delay would impose his religion should he gain the type of power I describe? Why don't you pony up evidence for your position. Where is your evidence that he would respect the human, civil and indivdual rights of Americans should he acquire the power I describe?

Wow - you REALLY don't understand what I'm saying. In fact, you seem to be trying as hard as you can to NOT understand it.

I'm not trying to defend Delay. I'm pointing out that the comparison to the Taliban is extreme, and constitutes an extraordinary claim. The burden is on those who support the claim, because it is extraordinary. Headscratcher himself, the one who started the thread and first made the comparison I objected to, has already conceded the point that the comparison is not warranted and that he can make his criticisms without resorting to it. Why you seem determined to cling to the comparison is, I admit, quite beyond me.

I understand your need to bury your head in the sand. It's hard coming to terms with reality.

What reality is that, exactly? A purely hypothetical reality? Even by your own standards, you're talking about what you think Delay would do IF had power there is no reason to believe he can ever get. Whatever that is, it's not reality.

[Tony]

I'm not trying to defend Delay.

Yes you are. You just want us to pretend that you're not.

I'm pointing out that the comparison to the Taliban is extreme, and constitutes an extraordinary claim.

That is your personal subjective opinion. The comparison is neither extreme nor extraordinary.

Headscratcher himself, the one who started the thread and first made the comparison I objected to, has already conceded the point that the comparison is not warranted and that he can make his criticisms without resorting to it.

His post obviously went miles over your head.

Why you seem determined to cling to the comparison is, I admit, quite beyond me.

Apparently so.

[BPSCG]

Yep. Haven't seen the left have much influence lately. Have you?But much of your tarring of Delay as "American Taliban" has to do with what (you believe) he would like to do, not what he has done. So what would the Democrats like to do that you object to?

Now, of course, that's another deceptive statement. I don't see Dems running around with IED's. I don't see them hijacking airplanes and crashing them into buildings.And I don't see Delay or any other Republicans sawing people's heads off or crushing them under walls or blowing up ancient statues of Buddha or giving aid and sanctuary to international terrorist organizations.

[jj]

And I don't see Delay or any other Republicans sawing people's heads off or crushing them under walls or blowing up ancient statues of Buddha


Um, they haven't seized power at the minute, remember?

Now, about John Ashcroft and that statue?

[Ziggurat]

So, we are not to take the person's words and actions as suggestive of their future behavior? What you suggest is purely and simply that we must forgive any action that Delay has taken in the past, including his sending supporters to break up a press conference for a competing candidate (ala brown-shirts) very recently, and give him a clean bill of health going forward?

Nothing of the sort. What I merely request is that the criticisms actually have a little perspective. I did not object to criticism of Delay, his goals, or his actions: I objected to the specific comparison to the Taliban, because it was quite frankly unwarranted. And Headscratcher conceded the point, saying:

"So, the argument shouldn't be over whether Mr. DeLay is a "Taliban," but whether modern Republicanism and its embrace of millenial politics and fundumentalist Christian vissions is good for America."

I did not attack Headscratcher for this argument, and not out of any oversight. I let that statement stand because I don't have a problem with him making that argument. I would not have a problem with you making a similar argument. But that criticism is a far cry from calling him the "American Taliban". I am not defending Delay, I'm trying to respect the actual victims of the Taliban by not trivializing the horror they lived through with stupid and unwarranted comparisons.

That's absurd, and you knew it when you said it. You would have everyone excuse all of his past behaviors, even though he is not in the least apologetic, and is clearly continuing in the same fashion as he's always continued.

You're ridiculous.

I'm ridiculous? Because you somehow think I did something (excused Delay's behavior) that I never did? Sorry, but I'm not the one with a problem here.

And, of course, you need to stop confuting the Taliban with Al-Quaida in your second paragraph, but of course, your doing so would completely put the lie to your confused apologia for Delay's brownshirts.

http://www.theestimate.com/public/092101_defense1.html

"If the attack on Mas'oud was a Bin Laden operation, and the use of Arabs to carry it out, as well as the suicide bomb, would seem to point in that direction, then it suggests that the Taliban have become not merely the protectors of Bin Laden, but perhaps that he has become a key operational planner for them as well. The fact that a Taliban offensive immediately followed the blast makes it unlikely that the Taliban (or at least Taliban Amir Mullah Muhammad 'Umar, who has a marriage link with Bin Laden) did not know about the attack on Mas'oud in advance."

I don't think I am confusing the two. I think the two were deeply intertwined on an operational level, and that the asassination should be thought of as a joint operation. But tell me: who are these Delay brownshirts of whom you speak? You presented them in a previous post as fictional (as a hypothetical example of what you thought Delay could do worse than the Taliban, not as an example of what he actually does), but now you're arguing as if they're real. Is your sanity derailing before our eyes, are you just spouting rubbish because you can, or what's the deal?

[Ziggurat]

Um, they haven't seized power at the minute, remember?

That's convenient.

John Kerry wants to force Americans to work on Stalinist collectivised farms. He's kept that agenda secret, and hasn't tried to implement it yet because he hasn't seized power at the minute.

It's a bad argument, both against Kerry and Delay.

[Tony]

That's convenient.

John Kerry wants to force Americans to work on Stalinist collectivised farms. He's kept that agenda secret, and hasn't tried to implement it yet because he hasn't seized power at the minute.

It's a bad argument, both against Kerry and Delay.

Except with Kerry, it's completely and totally unfounded. But you already knew that. This is just more of your shameless apologizing.

[nightwind]

Yes, the analogy could be made, in that the Taliban and DeLay both represent extremes in the way that they think. It would have been people such as DeLay who presided over witchcraft trials and the burning of witches, etc.

[Ziggurat]

Except with Kerry, it's completely and totally unfounded. But you already knew that. This is just more of your shameless apologizing.

Comparing Delay to the Taliban is completely unfounded too - so I guess there is a difference, you apparently don't know that. The only evidence to that effect so far is your statements that you believe he would be willing to do things like execute homosexuals and adulterers - and sorry, but you're simply not credible on that. If you've got anything that resembles what I like to call "evidence" (look it up if you don't know the definition), then feel free to offer it. But that hasn't happened yet on this thread.

[Ziggurat]

Yes, the analogy could be made,

The analogy WAS made, which rather obviously requires that it "could be made". My point is that it's not justified.

in that the Taliban and DeLay both represent extremes in the way that they think.

You think the mere fact that the word "extreme" gets used to describe both justifies the comparison? How little you understand the depravity of the Taliban or, if you do understand, how little respect you have for the millions of victims of the hell they created. It's the equivalent of calling the neighborhood bully "Hitler" because they both represent being mean, or your teacher a Nazi because she's too strict. I have little time for such shallow thinking.

[headscratcher4]

I have little time for such shallow thinking.

Well, I think we've shown that's not true... ;)

[Ziggurat]

Well, I think we've shown that's not true... ;)

OK, you've got me there. :blush: I have time, even though I should be doing something else.

[Tony]

Comparing Delay to the Taliban is completely unfounded too

No it's not. It's extremely appropriate to compare religious fundamentalists who want their religion to be law to religious fundamentalists who want their religion to be law.

If you've got anything that resembles what I like to call "evidence" (look it up if you don't know the definition), then feel free to offer it.

Translation: I'm gonna hide my head in the sand and apologize for republicans while pretending I'm being skeptical.

[Ziggurat]

No it's not. It's extremely appropriate to compare religious fundamentalists who want their religion to be law to religious fundamentalists who want their religion to be law.

And it's entirely appropriate to compare mean people to mean people. My second grade teacher was a Nazi.

Takes more than that, Tony. The Taliban were notable for much more than the fact that they turned their interpretations of religion into law. Tibet did the same thing too, before the Chinese came in. So does the Vatican (they're a sovereign country, after all). Even if you want a more direct comparison with other Islamic fundamentalist states, Saudi Arabia and Iran also implement Sharia, and while those two places are pretty miserable too, they're still much better off than the hellhole the Taliban created. So why isn't Delay being called the American Grand Ayatollah? Maybe because Taliban is a more extreme label, and hey, why not just throw out the most extreme label? Doesn't cost you anything to ratchet up the rhetoric.

Translation: I'm gonna hide my head in the sand and apologize for republicans while pretending I'm being skeptical.

Funny thing, I haven't offered any apologies or defense for ANYTHING Delay has done.

[jj]

And it's entirely appropriate to compare mean people to mean people. My second grade teacher was a Nazi.


Really, she touted a line of nationalistic superiority, the country's authority over other countries, "control" of dissent, and all that? Really?

So why isn't Delay being called the American Grand Ayatollah? Maybe because Taliban is a more extreme label, and hey, why not just throw out the most extreme label? Doesn't cost you anything to ratchet up the rhetoric.


Because an Ayatollah avows being a religious leader, and Delay hides behind religion, but claims to be a politican rather than a religious leader?


Funny thing, I haven't offered any apologies or defense for ANYTHING Delay has done.

So what do you think of his overt religiousity?

[Ziggurat]

Really, she touted a line of nationalistic superiority, the country's authority over other countries, "control" of dissent, and all that? Really?

Wait, are you finally catching on to my point? I can't quite tell.

Because an Ayatollah avows being a religious leader, and Delay hides behind religion, but claims to be a politican rather than a religious leader?

Which is also a difference between Delay and the Taliban, since the Taliban also proclaimed themselves openly as religious leaders. I can't quite tell if you're starting to see things my way (I don't think either comparison is good), or if you're just reflexively arguing against what I said because I wasn't clear enough.

So what do you think of his overt religiousity?

It kind of creeps me out. And I really, honestly, have absolutely no problem with people criticising it. It's the specific comparison to the Taliban which I think is unwarranted, and which I have been objecting to here.

[jj]

Which is also a difference between Delay and the Taliban, since the Taliban also proclaimed themselves openly as religious leaders. I can't quite tell if you're starting to see things my way (I don't think either comparison is good), or if you're just reflexively arguing against what I said because I wasn't clear enough.


Well, what's worse, an open Taliban or a covert one? :)

(Actually, the question is serious.)

[Nyarlathotep]

Well, what's worse, an open Taliban or a covert one? :)

(Actually, the question is serious.)

The point that is getting lost, here, though, is that it is a matter of degree.

A fundy might want to make it illegal for a teenaged mother to have an abortion, even in cases of rape and/or incest. This is bad.

For those fundie to be Taliban-esque, though, they would have to be proposing that not only should abortion be outlawed, but the girl should be executed publically for having sex out of wedlock. This is far worse.

This is why I think it is silly to call any politician an 'American Taliban' unless they actually propose such policies. DeLay, as bad as he may be, has to my knowledge, not sone so.

Hyperbolic rhetoric ultimately hurts the side making it more than it helps, imo.

[headscratcher4]

Hyperbolic rhetoric ultimately hurts the side making it more than it helps, imo.

Who said that? Former Senator Max Cleland?

[UserGoogol]

The analogy WAS made, which rather obviously requires that it "could be made". My point is that it's not justified.



You think the mere fact that the word "extreme" gets used to describe both justifies the comparison? How little you understand the depravity of the Taliban or, if you do understand, how little respect you have for the millions of victims of the hell they created. It's the equivalent of calling the neighborhood bully "Hitler" because they both represent being mean, or your teacher a Nazi because she's too strict. I have little time for such shallow thinking.

I'd say it's more like calling an anti-semite a Nazi. It's still hyperbolic, but it's not quite as hyperbolic as you describe. The defining characteristic of the Taliban was that they were a bunch of crazy religious fundamentalists who had a theocracy taken to the most despicable extreme. Thus, it is quite natural to extend religious fundamentalism to them.

It's also linguistically comparable to the phrase "witch-hunt." Not a whole lot of people were hanged during McCarthyism, but it's still a witch-hunt because of the whole atmosphere of the scene. Similarly, even in their wildest dreams the religious right probably doesn't imagine going quite as far as the Taliban did, but they're still a group which feels that religion should be a guiding force of government.

I suppose it all depends on how you look at the Taliban. If you think that the atrocities of the Taliban are so awful that the Taliban cannot be used as a metaphor without conjuring up memories of women being stoned for showing their shins, then yeah, it's a bad choice of words. If you can think of the Taliban without thinking of the atrocities, then the Taliban becomes simply a recent notorious theocracy, and using it as a metaphor becomes far more reasonable. Still an obvious appeal to emotion, but all poetic language involves some of that.