Posted on 08/04/2007 7:30:17 AM PDT by chessplayer
If he is, I'm not so sure there is a difference between what he was doing and what the Sgt. was doing.
The accuracy of the model is uncanny don't you think? See the world through these goggles and nothing will suprise you again.
The Left's Eight Commandments
I
Thou shalt create an illusion of invulnerability shared by most members to foster excessive optimism and encourage extreme risks taking
II
Thou shall not allow any member to question the group's inherent morality, instead members shall be encouraged to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions
III
Thou shalt promote collective efforts to rationalize in order to discount warnings, or other information that might lead members to reconsider their assumptions before they recommit themselves to their assumptions
IV
Thou shalt reinforce stereotyped views of enemy leaders as too evil to warrant genuine attempts to negotiate, or as too weak and stupid to counter whatever risky attempts are made to defeat their purpose
V
Thou shalt self-censor any deviation from the apparent group consensus, inclining each member to minimize the importance of their doubts and counterarguments
VI
Thou shalt create and maintain a shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgement conforming to the majority view
VII
Thou shalt apply direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, making clear that this type of dissent is contrary to what is expected of all loyal members
VIII
Thou shalt appoint mindguards to protect the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions
Eddie01 2006; Adapted from Irving Janis '72
Who knew?
“There are good units and bad units in the Army”.
Any veterans care to comment on the moderator’s insult?
“Military or no military rules; this guy was one hothead. No control”
Conservatives argue based on facts. Liberals argue based on emotion. That’s why when you argue with a liberal, they call you names before taking their ball and going home.
I believe the best way to describe them is as whiney brats.
“John Kerry was in Vietnam?
Who knew?”
At least one dead vietnamese kid, but who’s counting right fellas?
“Conservatives argue based on facts. Liberals argue based on emotion. That’s why when you argue with a liberal, they call you names before taking their ball and going home.
I believe the best way to describe them is as whiney brats.”
I’d like to share with you the definition of “irony”.
The Vietnamese kid didn't know either cause he was shot in the back by Kerry
Liberal leaders chose the consensus viewpoint liberals in the general ranks will accept and regurgitate.
Liberals are incapable of changing their view based on logic because to do so would be to run counter to group consensus.
If you a conservative such a situation is desireable in that conservatives celebrate independant thought and approach debate with an open mind.
Liberals on the other hand are under constant threat of losing their group affiliation identity which is more inportant than the truth. They simply must be part of the group and in good standing or their lives have no meaning. Some call this a mental illness, I call it weak minded.
FWIW
Eddie01
Good description.
Yup, That pretty well describes the Kos.
Hidden agenda of the panel is no longer hidden.
lol!
Actually this is correct, as far as it goes. Military members are not supposed to do politics while in uniform. They also cannot run for office while on active duty. (some exceptions for activated reserve/guard). They can ID themselves as military members, but must make it clear they speak only for themselves.
The rules apply mainly to *partisan* political activities though, and so their application to issues oriented events like this is at least questionable.
Still the moderators reaction was also out of bounds, way way out of bounds. It's none of his business, the military member doesn't answer to him, but rather to his branch of service, and of course to his commander(s).
Since they didn't let the Sergeant speak, we don't know if he was going to make a political statement, such as "support George Bush", a policy statement such as "the war is worth fighting" or a statement of the facts on the ground as he sees them such as "the surge is working", or "You assholes are hurting moral, badly" Those statements are all treated somewhat differently under the UCMJ .
But what is "politics"? Speaking on factual subjects is probably not politics in that sense. Supporting particular candidates surely is, and supporting particular courses of action may or may not be.
“Liberals on the other hand are under constant threat of losing their group affiliation identity which is more inportant than the truth. They simply must be part of the group and in good standing or their lives have no meaning.”
Sounds like the Borg.
It's not an insult, although it might have been ment that way. It's a truism. Just as there are bad companies and parts of companies and good companies. In both cases it's a reflection of the leadership... note I did not say management... or lack thereof.
Yes. And they are constantly adapting around our Constitution in an attempt to make the US a European style semi-Communist/socialist nation. Be ever vigilant Luke.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.