Sunday Open Thread – August 11th

tomb-of-the-unknown2Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy Name. Thy kingdom come. THY WILL BE DONE, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but DELIVER US FROM EVIL.

For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever and ever. Amen †

About these ads
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to Sunday Open Thread – August 11th

  1. czarowniczy says:

    It’s Sunday in the rural South so I thought we here should be heard from. Hard to think of a better person than Tennessee Ernie Ford hymnself to start the day. Y’all have a blessed day, ya’ hear?

    • WeeWeed says:

      You, too, heah? Love yer gravatar, Z – izzat yer Zaub? :D

      • czarowniczy says:

        Yep, the late Z with one of my great grandsons. When we retired Z needed a job so he took on the kid – I call it a dog and his boy. Z was about 130# in the pic and Jr about 35. Pic is a bit distorted due to the lens I used but Z had a classic GSD head – he’s what GSDs looked like before the American clubs started breeding them down to suburban tract house size.

        BTW, y’all realize that we of an over-50ish age are the last who’ll remember when TV variety shows regularly ended with a hymn like Ford’s used to.

  2. lovemygirl says:

    Another case of injustice. A high school athlete was falsely accused of rape, had his life turned upside down, eventually won out and got the false accuser to admit it (but she didn’t want her to give back the $$$). All eventually is working out but the BGI almost destroyed a life. The good news is he eventually won and is trying out for the Atlanta Falcons.

    $2.6 Million Judgment against Wanetta Gibson for False Rape Case against Brian Banks
    http://www.saveservices.org/2013/06/school-district-wins-2-6-million-judgment-against-wanetta-gibson-for-false-rape-case/

  3. stella says:

    Since Weed hasn’t linked to Clarice Feldman’s piece from AT today, I will. Very interesting critique of Diana West, someone I have thought to be a serious conservative author.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/08/demagogic_writers_and_the_people_who_love_them.html

    • WeeWeed says:

      Thanks, Stella! I iz recovering from the blue screen of death….. :shock:

    • Sharon says:

      Yeah, read this last night before snoozy time. I saw the takedown Ron Radosh did on her new book the other day, so this was an interesting followup.

      I have not read her material, but was aware that she had a track record as a conservative. There’s no substitute for being serious about being careful what we say (that’s it’s true and has foundation) and how we say it (that we don’t use gratuitous language or opportunity–thinking no one will follow up or check).

      A “best lesson” I learned in a Speech 101 class I took in middle age (which was a lifetime ago) was from a young, just out of university instructor. He told the class of about 18 that they would get an automatic fail on any speech they made (or notes turned in) that did not document/resource the “facts” presented. General statements (perhaps made for impact in a speech) that couldn’t be sourced would guarantee a fail. Exaggerations that swerved into untruth, even if they began with a true statement produced the same result.

      Using facts and solid reasoning were necessary in order to pass his class. Any failure to do so, even one time, was serious business, and the class was small enough that he enforced it.

      Each of us, in whatever place we are thinking and speaking and writing from, can “see to these things” and do facts, do truth, where we are. If we don’t believe it matters enough to take the time to do these things as well as we can, we are encouraging and strengthening our enemies. And regardless of the level of our skills or experience, we can certainly choose not to assist them by entering into falsehood, distortion or exaggeration.

      Whatever level of credibility any of us may have, either personally or publicly, has been gained over a stretch of time (like Diana West’s). It’s unnecessary tragedy to let that be wasted in some momentary mind loss and worse still to blow up at an accuser who sheds light on what we have done. This life is very short…there is not an endless amount of time to recover (again and again) from such events.
      ——————————–
      ADD: and I just went back to check up on the comments…a lot of the commenters who HAVE read her material are calling Ron Radosh out big time…and also piling on Clarice. 8O and 8O

      • stella says:

        Clarice says on Facebook that “the commenters there are savaging me”. I left her a supportive message, which she just thanked me for. I think we have to find the truth, which is more important than Clarice or Diana.

        • Sharon says:

          Absolutely. In addition to finding the truth about Diana West’s assertions, it’s a lesson in being able to defend and support whatever a person puts out there to begin with….and that includes Radosh, West and Clarice.

          ADD: And be willing to deal truthfully if something is done poorly or untruthfully.

        • Sharon says:

          stella, both West and Feldman are now participating in the comments….it looks like, for the stage the conversation is at, it’s a “cleaning out the closet” move…. I still find it difficult to qualify if it’s a useful dustup.

          I sort of hate when anyone starts pulling out the “now we conservatives are fighting amongst ourselves and that’s bad” meme. Because the continuum on that one is simply that we have to appoint a decider to tell us when to stop disagreeing with one another?? How is that good???

          “Not fighting” is not the answer. Fighting well is necessary. And that’s a tall order for some.

      • stella says:

        Each of us, in whatever place we are thinking and speaking and writing from, can “see to these things” and do facts, do truth, where we are. If we don’t believe it matters enough to take the time to do these things as well as we can, we are encouraging and strengthening our enemies. And regardless of the level of our skills or experience, we can certainly choose not to assist them by entering into falsehood, distortion or exaggeration.

        There have been times when I felt moved to put pen to paper (or keystroke to screen) and found out through research that what I believed or wanted to convey just wasn’t supported by the facts. The truth is always the most important thing.

    • You’re right. Diana West is indeed a serious conservative author, one of the best.
      That essay you linked to? The writer admits she hasn’t even read the book. How can anyone take an assessment seriously if the criticism comes from someone who isn’t familiar with what the writer says?
      CTH has built its reputation on its meticulous research. So has Diana West. She is a writer of gravitas and accomplishment and that success generates hatred & envy. As the admin of this blog well know.

      It is sad that the level of argument against “American Betrayal” is not based on the merits of her research. Instead it employs the seriously flawed rhetorical fallacies the Left – predictably including our many ex-Communist-turned-conservatives. You know the drill; Obama has used the politics of personal destruction to to destroy every single one of his campaigns’ opponents, right from the get-go.

      Here’s her book’s Amazon page:
      http://is.gd/PgF41g
      And a blurb from her book’s endorsements:

      “Diana West’s new book rewrites WWII and Cold War history not by disclosing secrets, but by illuminating facts that have been hidden in plain sight for decades. Furthermore, she integrates intelligence and political history in ways never done before.”–Jeffrey Norwitz, former professor of counterterrorism, Naval War College
      ——————–
      I just checked: of the 78 reviews of her newest book, 60 are five star & 6 are four star. IOW, 85% of the reviews are very positive.
      For a lesson in how propaganda works, go down to the 7 one-star reviews. Notice how many of them are dated *after* Mr. Radosh began his full-bore attack on the interloper, Ms. West, impinged on HIS area of expertise (Radosh being a leading member of the Old Boys’ Ex-Commie Club), and since her research doesn’t perfectly align with his, she has to be taken down. So out come the minions to spout the gospel.

      And now another one has popped up on American Thinker. But just a coincidence, right? The reviewer hasn’t read the book, but that ignorance is no impediment to calling for a kangaroo court.

      Another way to check: see how many of the reviews on Amazon are by people who actually bought the book.
      Finally, listen to a brief interview where she is asked to tie in Obama’s behavior and the points in her book:

      There are several excellent, though long, interviews on You Tube, everything from Heritage to C-Span. I especially recommend the one at Embery-Riddle o You Tube.

      • stella says:

        Hi! I actually do own American Betrayal (bought the Kindle edition from Amazon a while ago), and have started reading it, though I’m not finished. As I mentioned somewhere in this tangle of comments, we always link to Clarice’s AT pieces on Sundays. You can like them, or not like them, agree or not, they are nonetheless there for discussion. I generally have respect for both women – Diana West and Clarice Feldman. I get the impression that Clarice is concerned more about Diana’s position on Nazi Germany, rather than her position on Communist Russia. I could be wrong, though.

        I took exception (and still do) that we should censor comments in our daily open thread, and that a comment on the open thread in any way casts doubt upon the veracity of other reporting, particularly since the person who does most of our research isn’t even aware of said comment. I also take exception to your assumption that Clarice Feldman is a liberal, which she most certainly is not.

        • I will say this…all this controversy makes me want to read the book.

        • I didn’t say Ms. Feldman was a liberal. I don’t know her writings so wouldn’t presume to offer an opinion on them. My concern is based on her admission she hadn’t read the book but still wanted to weigh in on a work that is not only difficult to read but is sourced and resourced with dozens of pages of endnotes. Thus, using the old liberal tactic – i.e., “I haven’t read the book, but…” – to address an immensely complicated topic makes her essay questionable. It doesn’t call into question her life’s work by any means, just this particular essay.

          If Ms. Feldman is concerned about what West says about Nazis, could she give us some sources to back up her concerns?

          As for censoring comments, I’ve read my response twice and I don’t see where I said that. Or even implied it. I’m not even sure what your comment policies are.

          Each website has different rules re comments and commenters. For us, the rules are that commenters be civil (no profanity or ad hominem attacks), courteous about other commenters’ views, that they do not advocate violence, and that they cannot be construed as actionable either by our government or by the deep-pocketed Islam lobby. No racial hatred or anti-Semitism either.

          The courteous part is motivated by an agreement we made with homeschooling parents who send their kids over to read specific essays for Western Civ;
          We eschew violence and jihad porn because I have complex PTSD; blood and cruelty trigger an HPA cascade;
          Racial slurs are verboten because I grew up in Florida and I remember too vividly how it was. I was regularly called a you-know-what lover;
          One of our mission statements is to stand with Israel. Some of our readers claim we’re in the pay of Mossad. Others claim we hate Jews. I figure we must be doing something right if those two enemies can’t agree.
          To me, our blog is like our parlor. No one gets to come in unless they wipe their shoes and put on their Sunday manners. So yeah….we sure do censor. Free speech comes with responsibilities…

          • stella says:

            Hi, again, I got the “liberal” impression from your comment It is sad that the level of argument against “American Betrayal” is not based on the merits of her research. Instead it employs the seriously flawed rhetorical fallacies the Left – predictably including our many ex-Communist-turned-conservatives.

            I don’t pretend to know what exactly motivated Clarice Feldman to write this piece, and you could be correct about the critics such as Radosh, but I think she is friends with some of West’s critics, and that may be why. I’m not even sure I agree with anything said in this particular essay of hers. You can disregard my remark about the Nazis, since I think I got that idea from something she posted on FB in the past couple of days, and now I can’t find it.

            Regarding the censoring comment, I have been beaten up ever since I posted this comment, which is simply there for conversation purposes and, as I said, one of us (usually not me) links to Feldman’s AT pieces every Sunday.

            This comment of yours – CTH has built its reputation on its meticulous research. So has Diana West. She is a writer of gravitas and accomplishment and that success generates hatred & envy. As the admin of this blog well know. is what I was referring to, as another commenter has already insinuated that since I posted a link to the AT piece, it will cause us to lose “all the credibility built up over superior investigation into the Zimmerman case”.

            In other words, I appreciate your comments on Clarice Feldman’s opinion piece, but I will not apologize for posting a link to it.

            Regarding commenting policies, I said elsewhere today that on the Open Thread we allow pretty much anything that isn’t hateful, or obscene, or just plain untruthful/libelous.

            ADD: We also don’t allow profanity.

  4. stella says:

    Mind Over Mechanics. This is neat!

  5. rashomon says:

    Whoa. Don’t lose all the credibility built up over superior investigation into the Zimmerman case. I have not yet read West’s work, but have watched/listened to her many interviews. Her major stance is supported by information and documented by the Venona papers; people have long tried to testify to the veracity of Senator McCarthy’s complaints only to be ignored. It is true — cannot be denied — that many huge U.S.-founded corporations and banks played both sides of WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam to enrich their coffers.

    Do some research before taking sides with Radosh, Reeves and others who use the same tactics as those who called “racist” every time Zimmerman was supported.

    • stella says:

      I am reading her book. Make up your own mind. Those who are critical of her have credibility too. Should we suppress any speech that is critical of Ms West? Would that serve the truth?

      ADD: Here’s another AT piece on the subject that was published yesterday. You may agree with this one:

      http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/08/reds_under_the_beds_diana_west_cant_sleep.html#ixzz2bfrfN5W2

    • stella says:

      Additional background: We always post Clarice Feldman’s AT articles. Agree or disagree – Clarice is a respected conservative.

      • rashomon says:

        Stella, I already told you I read Reeves’ comments. My point concerns criticism WITHOUT reading or listening to West’s thesis. I still — and this is my main point — do not understand what West’s critics seem to find so problematic about her position that the U.S. government had people who were socialists/communists/Marxists/Facists in high positions influencing the choices that our leaders made…and probably still do. This is old news for many; West is just throwing it out again. One more time. Maybe, just maybe, someone will pay attention to the pertinent points.

        “Respected” people, conservative or not, treat others with respect.

        • stella says:

          They can disagree and I think it has been done respectfully. After all, they are historians. Where I take issue with you is this remark:

          Do some research before taking sides with Radosh, Reeves and others who use the same tactics as those who called “racist” every time Zimmerman was supported.

          This is an Open Thread, not a post. Many things are shared here that I do not necessarily agree with, and there will be things with which you do not agree. It is an open forum and here we are free to share as long as it is not hateful, or obscene, or just plain untruthful. That includes admins.

          Are you advocating that we should censor that with which you do not agree?

          ADD: You admit you haven’t read the book. Why don’t you do that, then come back and express your thoughts on the subject?

          • rashomon says:

            I will read the book. Presently, another member of the family with 23 years of service in the military is sitting in the next room reading it while he’s on leave and commenting to me.

            I never asked you to censor anything. To the contrary, this site serves its readership by presenting various opinions. You “thought” Ms. West to be a “serious conservative author.” Have you changed your mind?

            • stella says:

              Well you told me I shouldn’t post a comment that disagrees with your point of view, nor should I express an opinion that might be critical of Diana West unless I “do some research”, so what should I call that other than a call for censorship? As for my thoughts about Ms West’s conservative credentials, I haven’t finished the book yet, so I can’t comment yet. I am sure your family member has impeccable credentials and I thank him for his service, but I presume he was not alive during WWII, since he is home on leave. If he was, then I withdraw that comment.

              • rashomon says:

                No, but he was part of interpreting the classified info made available in the early 1990s from the former Soviet Union.

                Peace, Stella. I don’t want to lose the importance of West’s content due to my inability to communicate appropriately.

        • stella says:

          Reeves is on West’s side, right? That’s what I got from the article at AT.

    • Sharon says:

      A comment in a thread (on the open thread yet) certainly cannot cause “all the credibility” to be lost that was “built up” on the Zimmerman case. Good grief.

      If it can, then we admins had jolly well better jump on the censorship of comments lest one should sneak through that destroys the credibility that THE CTH HAD BEFORE THE ZIMMERMAN CASE. BTW, our ‘credibility’ didn’t start with that. If it had, with the wall-to-wall attacks, at ALL levels, that we sustained for months and months, prior “non-credibility” would certainly have been used against us in the physical attacks, the legal attacks, the doxing, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

      This is a conversation in a Tree. Some times in a conversation things are said that turn out not to be so. No?

      The one thought I have about the Zimmerman case and what’s in the threads is that we never again allow any mention of any name beginning with Z or any legal/criminal case involving anyone whose name begins with Z. In any thread. I’m kidding. Partly. :(

      • rashomon says:

        Sorry, Sharon. The Zimmerman case was a war well fought and, in some ways, won. I don’t know that the Zimmerman family will ever regain a normal life.

        The topic Ms. West has approached is one that I believe deserves consideration without the diatribes by Reeves, Radosh and Horowitz. It’s not that they are presenting facts that dispute her findings; they are attacking her personally. Those who only read headlines will presume she is presenting fiction, which is not true.

        I will refrain from mentioning any topic beginning with Z. (Back atcha!)

        • Sharon says:

          Nah….that’s ok. Just hit a hot button. …..I’m agree that the Zimmerman family will never regain normalcy. How could they.

          Thanks. ;) (uze zs az dezired!)

    • Menagerie says:

      Whoa. Don’t lose all the credibility built up over superior investigation into the Zimmerman case.

      How is this possible in this specific conversation? You are saying that simply posting a piece that is controversial to some people, including yourself, could damage the credibility of well over a year’s worth of work on a trial that has no connection to this conversation, most of it done by a man who is not involved in this conversation, as well as some commenters on this site who are also not involved. I am afraid that I am unable to follow that leap of logic.

  6. MKP says:

    I guess it is pretty much understood that Obama was not born in the USA. I looked and looked, I could not find the link below anywhere on TCH so I’m sharing it. The day Senator Obama was elected, the Kenyan Parliament broke session to celebrate. While the document of the session’s minutes doesn’t clear up the birth certificate, it clearly shows their thrill of having a “Kenyan ruling the USA” as well as overcoming the obstacles of “his tribe” and “his decent.”

    This may or may not be handy one day
    http://www.parliament.go.ke/plone/archive/archive-10th-Parliament/hansards/official-report-05-november-2008/view

    • stella says:

      I’m afraid I agree with Evelyn Waugh (probably because I have a punctuality problem), but I admire the Swiss people who, apparently, do not have that problem.

      • ZurichMike says:

        For one of my notoriously late guests (a non-Swiss), I always tell her that dinner starts at 12:00 (when in fact I’ve told everyone else, who are Swiss, that it starts at 12:30). She is therefore now always on time.

    • Menagerie says:

      I am unaware of my Swiss ancestry, but it must be there. At long last, there is an explanation for me. My husband is more fanatical about punctuality than I am. His Irish ancestors must have crossed up with some Swiss sailors. I consider being late one of the most awful insults you can offer to people, individually or collectively. It says you do not value the other person’s time, and that you are superior to them. IMO, of course. Which happens to coincide with actual fact at an amazingly frequent pace. :wink:

      • WeeWeed says:

        Myself. I am “on time” to the point of being ar about it – nothing makes me madder than “I forgot…..” or “I got up late” or American Airlines without a call…

    • ZurichMike says:

      Old joke: You’re waiting for a train and glance at your watch and realize the train’s scheduled arrival is off five minutes. Either it’s not a Swiss train, or not a Swiss watch.

      The Swiss are very punctual. Wasting time (yours or theirs) is a huge social and professional blunder. If you are running late for anything, you should call and announce your expected arrival with a profusion of apologies, and apologize again when you arrive, and when you leave, and when you send your thank you notes. It’s REALLY IMPORTANT to be on time. In fact, being on time is actually being late. If the meeting is at 9:00, you don’t show up at 9:00. You are there, in your seat, with your coffee, and your laptop ready at 9:00. If you are invited for lunch at 12:00. You should show up at 11:57 and take three minutes to get from your car to the front door. OK, maybe the latter is a bit exaggerated, but you get the point.

      Just like it’s important on Switzerland to dress up and act like a worldly, sophisticated customer when entering high-end stores in Zurich to buy overpriced handbags, instead of schlepping around in a track suit and jogging shoes (Oprah call your office) and just assuming that everyone speaks English and knows who you are. By the way, the European press is now mocking Oprah BIG TIME calling this event tongue-in-cheek “Purse-gatel”. LOL!

      • Sharon says:

        At what point do the expectations about either clothing or punctuality destroy relationships? Or do they?

        I’m always punctual….don’t have a clothing budget, but clothes I gotz is all clean and suitable for a gittin’ old person.

        • ZurichMike says:

          Expectations about punctuality in Switzerland are probably more important than expectations about clothing. I only think it would destroy a relationship if the failure to be punctual were deliberate, frequent, but unpredictable as to actual time of arrival. You would probably lose invitations and by extension, the social interaction that accompanies these events. At work, however, you would probably be fired for such continued behavior.

          As for clothing, being presentable is fine for 95% of life in Switzerland, including most restaurants. Of course, there are still some restaurants that require men to be in jackets and ties, and women in dresses or gowns, like in any big city of note. Most of Switzerland has adopted the “business casual” look for all occasions. Oddly, people here do not really dress up for weddings — I am always shocked at how shabby people can be at church weddings! Not even their Sunday best!

          If you’re going to the opera, you might want to put on your Sunday best, however worn. But if you’re going shopping for a $38,000 handbag made from select portions of endangered alligators like Oprah was, I probably wouldn’t want to be your friend anyway. :-)

          I have the men’s standard for almost all occasions: black slacks and shoes, white shire and tie, and a well-tailored blazer (dark for the winter, light for the summer). I don’t go to fancy events, so I don’t have a tuxedo — nor would I want to attend an event that required that.

          Again, no one is going to treat you poorly because you are modestly dressed, even if you entered a high-end store just to look. But you probably will not be able to touch or try on. It’s the expectation that *you* bring to wanting to be treated in a manner beyond your ability to pay (in a shop, it’s about profit and your perceived ability to pay).

          But if you come to Zurich, no matter how you are dressed, I will show you around (and even take you by the Tom Ford boutique where Oprah had her meltdown), and then we’ll have good food at one of many nice restaurants, or better still, a homecooked meal by yours truly!

          • Sharon says:

            If I’m going shopping for a $38,000 handbag, ZM, you can know I’d be dealing with problems far more serious than what I’m wearing! Thanks for the food invite…I think a homecooked meal would be the way to go. I vill vatch you build it. :)

  7. stella says:

    Latest from Sunny TV:

  8. stella says:

    As someone on Facebook commented, this sounds an awful lot like what Joe Wilson didn’t find in Africa:

    Mugabe signs a secret deal to sell uranium to Tehran

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/africa/article3839144.ece

  9. Hullo, dahlings!

    I’m meant to be cleaning. It’s not working.

    Six hours to True Blood!!!

  10. LandauMurphyFan says:

    Dunno if this joke has been posted here before, but you’ll prolly enjoy it anyway.

    A Marxist, an Islamic extremist, and an illegal alien walk into a bar.
    The bartender looks up and says, “What’ll you have, Mr. President?”

  11. finai says:

    Evil and arrogance: Letter from Dick Durbin to some 300 businesses and organizations that had supported the American Legislative Exchange Council, according to Roll Call.

    “I write to seek information regarding your company’s position on ‘stand your ground’ legislation that was adopted as a national model by an organization called the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC),” Durbin wrote
    After noting that the letter’s recipient had previously supported ALEC, Durbin got to the heart of the matter.
    “I am seeking clarification whether companies that have funded ALEC’s operations in the past currently support ALEC and the model ‘stand your ground’ legislation,” he said.

    One of Durbin’s targets, The Goldwater Institute replied in its Aug. 9 letter,

    “Have You No Sense of Decency?” and then went on to say,

    “That was the question posed by attorney Joseph Welch that historians credit with ending Senator Joseph McCarthy’s witch-hunt.

    http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/08/11/sen-durbins-letter-provokes-outrage-have-you-no-decency-81375?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BizpacReview-TodaysStories+%28BIZPAC+Review+-+Conservative+Political+News+and+Opinion%29

  12. stella says:

    This isn’t new, but I never saw it before. You might like it!

  13. ctdar says:

    Ok despite how many golf rounds & professional lessons he’s had these pics & video clip just show how bad Obama’s golf game really is. Look at his putt stance and the way he haphazardly chipped the ball toward the hole.
    He has been playing golf all these year in office in name only, “GINO”
    Which begs the question what exactly has he been doing during those “outings”?
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2389359/President-Obama-tees-Marthas-Vineyard-vacation-game-golf.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s