Guest Blogging: Matt RobinsonBarack Obama's election and relentless pursuit of health care reform led to the emergence of a new political movement -- the "Tea Party" -- which claims the Obama presidency is reckless and irresponsible in its spending. Their evidence is quite limited and includes the new health care law, priced at $940 billion over 10 years, or $94 billion per year. Never mind the fact that the costs of the health care law are paid for without adding a penny to the national debt.
What I'd like to know from any "Tea Party" member is ... where were you during the Bush administration? The costs of the war in Iraq are now $721 billion over seven years, or $103 billion per year, more than the health care law. And all of the war costs under President Bush were paid for using emergency appropriations outside of the normal budget process. Thus every penny spent on the Iraq war is added to the national debt!
Perhaps "Tea Party" members see war and health care reform as apples and oranges. I agree. The health care bill pays for itself and helps people, while the war adds to the debt and kills people! Assuming we just ignore the war, though, what about President Bush's Medicare expansion in 2003? This law costs $720 billion over 10 years, or $72 billion per year, and every penny of the costs were added on to the national debt. Yet this did not upset you enough to form a "Tea Party" movement.
And what about the $700 billion bailout of big business by Bush? No "Tea Party" movement for that either (in fact, you guys seem to think it was Obama that organized the bailout!). Yet you attack Obama for the 2009 stimulus plan, priced at $787 billion. Criticisms of the stimulus aside, many economists say it did save our economy from a major depression, and it is even helping expand Highway 421 here in Boone!
Your lack of criticism of President Bush is clear proof that your criticism of President Obama is not rooted in principles such as small government or fiscal responsibility but instead in partisan ideology. In other words, you are out in the streets because Obama is a Democratic president, plain and simple. So spare us the "devotion to the Constitution."
Analysis of White house budget data shows that the three presidents who most added to the national debt were all Republicans, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and George H.W. Bush. Yet neither of the Bush administrations prompted a "Tea Party" movement, and you hold President Reagan up to be this godlike figure who supposedly stood for conservative values such as small government and fiscal responsibility. It is just not true.
Almost nothing the "Tea Party" members say can be taken seriously. I'd laugh out loud if it were not so scary and dangerous. There are thousands of angry and uninformed people who actually believe Obama is a socialist, a communist, a Muslim, a totalitarian dictator, a foreign citizen, and even the anti-Christ who wants the terrorists to win! And they're generating societal unease based on these absurd beliefs.
So I ask you again: Where were you during the Bush administration? And the other Bush administration? And the Reagan administration? And why do you believe these ridiculous things?
Additionally I am curious if you know that your movement is led by lobbyist-run think tanks including "Americans for Prosperity" and "FreedomWorks"? These groups are not about fiscal responsibility or small government. They are for getting Republicans elected, no matter what. It's just politics, plain and simple. Finally, why do you even call yourselves the "Tea Party"? You are citizens, and you have representation! So there's no need to dump tea in the harbor!
57 comments:
JW, this is a great editorial. However, you neglected to mention one very important issue: racism. Numerous sources have researched and reported the tea bags indignation with the USA having a multiracial President. If I had a dollar for every acquaintance I've heard mention our "Nigger President" we could have a nice dinner at one of the very expensive restaurants in the Blowing Rock. Our nation is at such such a disadvantage with our wasted trillions in health care and so much of the defense budget is wasted on special interests for no valid security purposes that it's no wonder we're in such trouble. Frankly, I appreciate having a President who's educated and has never been a drunken drug addict. I wonder if the tea bags have any sense of understanding that their beloved W never made a dime on his own until he became the Governor of Texas. My biggest problem with President Obama is that he's going to let the Wall Street criminals get away with damn near destroying our national economy. It's so sad that the tea bags have no idea whom their real enemy is-that would be the corporations the Supreme Court has determined to be "persons."
I'll always remember an editorial Matt Robinson, J.W.'s guest blogger, wrote in "The Fuse", a distantly leftist local news/propaganda paper (much like "The Challenge", and others of its kind). In that particular editorial, the target of Matt's prejudicial attack was any American who would affix a "Power of Pride" bumper sticker, given out for free at Lowe's Hardware, to the bumper of his or her car. It was a truly remarkable editorial (or do I have the wrong Matt Robinson?).
Matt, in that particular editorial, demonstrated a shocking inability to understand and accept ideological diversity. Essentially, he offered different explanations for what might cause a person to place a "Power of Pride" bumper sticker on a car. Every explanation he offered was insulting to the targets of his assault.
By the way, as you know, I do not have a car, and have not had one since 2000. After reading Matt's stereotyping editorial, I went to Lowe's and got two of those stickers, fixing them to two of the main frame tubes of my bicycle.
To this day, my non-gasoline burning bicycle wears those ignorant, fascist, American flag-ridden bumper stickers proudly. I chuckle every time I park my non-gasoline burning bicycle next to a gasoline burning car with a bumper sticker which reads something like "Bomb Texas, They Have Oil Too", or "What's OUR Oil Doing Under THEIR Soil". I suppose it's an inside joke, but if I'm the only one who thinks it's funny that those stickers are on a freaking car and my bicycle wears American flags, hey, I'm ok with that. It's even funny when Matt drives past me, alone in his car, not biking, not taking the bus, not even carpooling; just one person, burning gas by himself in an automobile, possibly racing somewhere to stereotype his political foes, those closed-minded, environmentally destructive bigots.
In the mean time, I'm happy to let silly people like Matt live out their days thinking they are broad-minded thinkers.
I think the problem is at root, tribalism. We humans, for all our achievements, are still tribal and barbaric at core. The Republicans have manipulated that trait by fostering an "Us against Them" mentality. We need to create a different mentality, "E Pluribus Unum".
In other words we should find common ground with the Tea Party group so they can see who the real enemies are.
I wonder where you cold eat if you had a dollar for every time somebody on Watauga Watch called Bush a liar or a moron. I also wonder if Obama would be President without the 90% vote he got from blacks playing the race card?
JW
Great post I hope a few of the Tea Party Mob will find there way here to read.
I refer to them as a mob because they have a mob mentality , no personal thinking, driven by anger, they have no plan, no ideas, and for the most part no leadership other than the fear and hate media or industry that keeps them pissed off.
Nice post, Matt, and good follow-up EAbbey. I am in complete agreement with you both. The tea baggers have selective memory, and cannot go backwards to anything, unless it was a lib-rel causing problems for them. George 1 was at the top of his game. Reagan, as president, was a passable actor. W. was a complete dufass a liar, and a moron*, manipulated by Cheney, Rove and the band of freedom-theives who nearly brought our country into a depression.
Mike: Your post on something Matt may have written in the past is of no value to this blog. Try again.
LibPOV: You coined the term "mob" and a mob it it. Good writing here and "there." Go get them!
PS: *Somebody owes Mouse a dollar.
Matt,
I invite you to take your message directly to the people. While the Tea Party lives in the now and plans for the future, you again ridicule the average American and dwell in resentment and bitterness for the past. Your message of intolerance has become obsolete.
And once again, as in your bumper sticker editorial, you offer explanations for the ignorance and delusion of anyone who has not seen your light of truth, but your broad mind fails to fall upon the most likely explanations of all. In the case of the bumper stickers, you failed to include the likely explanation that people were fed up with being lectured in leftist politics by the bumpers of your vocal allies, and got those bumper stickers as a response to those who felt free to lecture them. Now, you again fail to recognize the glaring possibility that an awakening to the dangers of excessive debt has occurred, and while these people may have been hoodwinked before, they have emerged from behind their blinders.
I encourage you to take your message of blame and ridicule to the general public. I am sure it will win you much support for your cause, which is what, exactly?
Hey all. This is Matt Robinson, the author of the editorial. Thanks for your thoughts.
As for Mike D., he says I am dwelling in the past but he is the one that is bringing it up by responding to other things I have written. Previous columns have literally nothing to do with the subject of this editorial--the Tea Party movement. And the fact that I drive a car is completely irrelevant to the point of the editorial, too.
What we see here is a person who himself is still not over the past. So let's dwell in for a moment. How about the time you walked by a bunch of peaceful protesters on Highway 321 in Boone saying, "I've got your picture, I've got your picture" (threatening to share them with others who may wish to do us harm). What was that about? Still feeling good about standing behind President Bush in his run up to war in Iraq, now that even you know the war was an unfettered disaster as we predicted.
Or how about the many times you associated with the other young man who physically attacked a female protester for daring to stand against the war in Iraq? He got mad at us because he "fought for our freedom" as a member of the military and he did not think we appreciated it simply because we were protesting a war. Yet, when I got right in his face and said to him, "You fought for our freedom? Well, this is what it looks like!", he just backed down. He had enough courage to assault a female but not enough to stand up to me. Still standing beside that tool?
Finally, I notice that you did not even try to respond to the subject of the editorial. Instead, you dismiss me based on other things I have written and because I drive a car! That is a sign of a very weak mind. You have every right to disagree with my argument, but at least try to understand it before you dismiss it. And at least address it when you dismiss it. Otherwise, I simply will not take you seriously.
My point is these people are protesting spending by a Democrat but never did so against Republicans, even though the Republicans were far worse. Thus they are driven by partisan ideology rather than principle. And my point is that these people are being organized by corporate lobbyists rather that representing a spontaneous uprising. Try not diverting attention from these points if you want to be taken seriously.
Sincerely,
Dr. Matt Robinson
Mike - The tea party lives in the now and plans for the future!??! What the heck does that mean?
The only thing they are able to articulate is buzzwords, including "taxes, freedom, tyranny," with no coherent explanation of what they are talking about. Just like you!
Why do they get their bumper stickers? Tribalism! All they know is that "liberals are bad" and they want to make sure everyone knows they aren't "liberal" They belong to Rush Limbaugh's , and Coulter's tribe and all the other demagogues who are stirring up their emotions and laughing at them all the way to the bank.
And if you don't think racism is a factor, you don't live in the same world I do.
Bridle
"They belong to Rush Limbaugh's , and Coulter's tribe and all the other demagogues who are stirring up their emotions and laughing at them all the way to the bank."
You nailed it!
Matt:
Glad to read your outstanding editorial (we have met outside the blogisphere.) I am pleased to know that you marched in protest, but saddened to know that Mike D. tried to intimidate the protesters (Hey, Joe, say it ain't so!)
Mike D. -Please say you weren't there.
Bridle: Others have pointed out that the tea baggers are a mob, and as such, mob mentality rules. The one with the biggest mouth (Palin, Beck, Hannity- choose one) rules. It leaderless, with no goals other to complain about taxes and government. I guess we can run our society without those two items.
Palin as leader??? She couldn't handle governor.
Biker - I also protested standing with the group in front of the Jones House more than a few times. At the same time I was working very hard for the support group for our soldiers in Iraq.
LPOV - You have guts to represent the liberal voice on the other site. Thanks for hanging in there.
Every time I read something by Matt Robinson, it leaves me in awe and wishing I could be as clear and concise.
Ahhhh, so now, after being challenged, it is no longer Matt Robinson, but "Dr." Matt Robinson. Elitism drips from your every word, Matt. You are not my doctor. You are simply a dude with an opinion, just like me, and BikerBard, and Liberal POV, and the rest of us. Your intolerance cannot be justified by whatever lofty degree makes you feel superior and more entitled to an opinion than those with whom you disagree politically.
"I've got your picture, I've got your picture"... no idea what you are talking about here, Matt. I did not own a camera at the time, nor did I carry one at the event you reference. Must have been someone else.
Your lengthy post is a big smokescreen to cover up your limited understanding of diversity and inclination to demonize that which you do not understand. Your response carefully avoids the broad criticism of your tactics I have laid before you. Certainly someone with so lofty a title as "Dr." should be able to answer the simpleton ramblings of Mike D. without evasion and obfuscation.
Forget history. Forget your editorial about American flags on bumper stickers and the ignorant fascists who display them. You continue to follow the same pattern in this guest blog. You identify a bogeyman. Then you offer degrading explanations for why he exhibits the abhorrent behavior you describe. But your logic is flawed, and it points, in glowing neon color, to a total lack of appreciation for intellectual diversity.
In your lengthy response, you never discussed, by the way, the substance of my post, that you offer easy explanations that make villains of your foes, but you fail to offer the obvious explanations for their behavior... explanations that don't render your foes an inferior race of humans.
Additionally, you neglected the simple question, what exactly is your cause?
Matt Robinson gets far too much pleasure out of checking "Doctor" on the mail in card for his magazine subscriptions.
Here's to hoping that no one has a medical emergency in his presence. After someone yells "Is there a doctor in the house?" he will immediately raise his hand and then lecture for four hours about the virtues of a single-payer system and the ignorance/facism/racism/Nazi-ism/etc of anyone who resists his ideas whilst the ill slowly wastes away. Even if the patient is headed to hell, hell has to be better than listening to DOCTOR Robinson drone on about whacked out theories that have been proven SO often in the real world.
Mike,
I agree that his usage of the doctor title an ill-fated attempt that he demonstrate his elite status, but an exploration of his credentials shows otherwise. All of his degrees are from Florida State--not even the most prestigious state university in Florida. He may be able to get you FSU football tickets, but would be laughed out of the halls of the Ivy League.
Oooh... someone has title envy. The man earned his title. Picking on him for using it just makes you look petty and resentful.
Mike - You never did answer the question as to what exactly the tea-partiers stand for (besides buzzwords). (Re- my reply to your post, and the link on the blog about the man with the gun.)
LOL at the people upset at the title I earned. And I put it there so people would know it was "that Matt Robinson" (as someone had asked).
As for my cause, it is JUSTICE. Duh. That is why I write criticism of Obama when he makes unjust decisions just like I did Bush. See it is called principled because it flows from the principle of justice.
Finally, Mike, deny it was you for the sake of those here who don't know that Mike. But I know it was you, so I will not play along with your little game.
Now back the point of the editorial in the first place. Not a single criticism of the content of it, huh?
I'll post this again for those who are focusing on things like my title instead of the point of the editorial.
"My point is these people (the Tea Party folks) are protesting spending by a Democrat but never did so against Republicans, even though the Republicans were far worse. Thus they are driven by partisan ideology rather than principle. And my point is that these people are being organized by corporate lobbyists rather that representing a spontaneous uprising. Try not diverting attention from these points if you want to be taken seriously."
Mike D
" You are simply a dude with an opinion, just like me, and BikerBard, and Liberal POV, and the rest of us."
Not exactly Mike, Dr Matt Robinson has not only certificates to show his knowledge and study in the field Social Justice and Government but a history of publications including letters to the editor for well over a decade with better foresight than most politicians have in hindsight.
http://www.pscj.appstate.edu/faculty/robinson.html
When Dr. Matt Robinson post a comment or a letter to the editor you don't have to agree with him but you should pay attention because he does have a great deal of study in the areas he's passionate about and history has proven him right for more than you.
Many of todays Know Nothings have contempt for professionals like Dr. Matt Robinson and others in the field of science or anyone not buying their silliness of non issues of more gun rights, God and tax cuts will fix all problems. If that doesn't work we can start another war.
Mike I'm afraid your opinions as well as my own don't carry the same weight as Dr. Matt Robinson, however our vote does if that makes you feel better.
Mike D, Jeremy, Mouse, Et al.:
You people are disgusting. Matt EARNED a degree of higher learning, and commands our respect for it. "Dr. Robinson" IS appropriate.
What is YOUR highest degree Mike, and from where? Post it here.
How about the coward Mouse, who cannot think creatively enough to have a name or even a pseudonym? What is YOUR highest degree, and from where? Post it here.
Don't you people DARE to criticise Matt for attaining his advanced degree. THAT is disgusting behavior and unacceptable! Maybe you should go hang out on the other site. Your criticisms will be welcomed there.
I gave you more credit than that, Mike. How disappointing. And somehow, I don't believe your excuse about the camera incident.
"Title envy?" -ABSOLUTELY!
Sadly, people think they are taking a stand for freedom, but they are actually becoming more and more the chattel of the corporate "persons". And now, thanks to the Supreme Court, there will be no fetters on what these corporations can do to sway public opinion in elections. There is the danger that we will all be swept along again, just like in 2000.
Mike D
"You are simply a dude with an opinion, just like me, and BikerBard, and Liberal POV, and the rest of us."
Once again your opinion is incorrect, Dr Matt Robinson may have an opinion just like you and I but his opinion on political science, justice, crime and Society are supported by years of study, well written publications, and historically being correct.
Would you make a similar comment if you had chest pains and you, your co workers and family all had opinions as to what you should do, would their opinions carry the same weight with you as the doctor who had spent years studying and practicing cardiology?
http://www.pscj.appstate.edu/faculty/robinson.html
Feel free to challenge Dr. Matt Robinson's opinions but please stay with the subject not personal attacks.
For the record, I think Mike plays a valuable role on this blog, being the only half-way rational voice of the "opposition". He gives the rest of us "libruls" a chance to polish our debate skills, and isn't ugly about it.
But he needs help staying on point sometimes.
And Mike, if you condemn the resentment and bitterness of the liberals, surely you must also condemn it in the tea party movement. Do you really claim it doesn't exist?
For some reason, my post last night never posted, so I'll try again.
To Mike D: You've hit a new, contemptable low, and I am embarassed on your behalf.
ANYONE who earned a doctorate DESERVES our respect. Apologies to Dr. Robinson for the disrespect shown to you.
To Mike D.: Please post here YOUR highest degree and from where did you earn it? The same goes for you, Jeremy. Please post your highest degree earned and from where did you earn it? And let's not leave out the coward, Anonymous, who cannot even think of a pseudonym. Degree and school, please (not counting high school.) Then let's talk.
Somehow Mike, I think there is still undiscovered history in this protest harrassment thing with Dr. Robinson. Fess up, now.
Finally Mike, Jeremy, and the coward Anonymous, I think you all would prefer to hang out on the "other site." There, they are anti-academics, anti-teachers, and anti-intellectual. They copy & paste, blow smoke out their rears and call this wisdom. You might all fit in nicely.
"Title envy"- so aptly named!
Matt,
It is interesting that your cause is "Justice". Mine is 'Liberty'. Perhaps if we combined our messages, we could show our allegiance to our country by developing some sort of pledge! ;)
The content of your post: 1) Here is the group of individuals I hate. 2) Here is the quality about this group which makes me hate them. 3) Here are some demeaning explanations for why this group believes as they do. 4) Even though I am talking, not to members of the group, but to a community of peers who think in lockstep with me, I will ask the group I hate why they do that which makes me hate them. 5) And oh yes, I am a Doctor.
So the striking similarity between the form of this blog post and your bumper sticker article is off limits because you say so, "Dr." Matt. Ok, got it! Are there any other class policies that you expect me to adhere to, Dr. Professor, sir? Any other limits on speech or expression you wish to impose at this time?
Ok, with your guidelines in mind, content only:
You fail to offer, as a possible explanation for the Tea Party phenomenon, that an awakening has occurred. Before slavery was abolished, slavery was the norm. Before women gained the right to vote, women could not vote, and that was the norm. I can picture your essays now... "Why are you supporting a woman's right to vote now, huh, you idiot?!? Why didn't you support it before before?!?".
This line of reasoning, to you, somehow invalidates the concerns of the group, according to your post.
Matt, people change. Popular sentiment changes. Ideological revelations occur within large populations of human beings.
Perhaps it will just be a passing fad, but perhaps "no more deficit spending" is the new norm. Only time will tell.
Thanks for defending me you all. I appreciate it.
But I don't take criticisms from Mike personally. I mean, I know the guy and what he is really about. Somehow I hoped he would have grown up a bit since our previous interactions over the war in Iraq, and perhaps that he had learned something important for supporting such a horrific policy even though people like me told him it was a mistake and would cost us dearly (not to mention Iraqis who have died by the hundreds of thousands).
But alas, he has not. Instead, he wants to attack me for previous letters, for the fact that I drive a car (weird), etc., and say bad things about me like I am
"elitist." Funny thing is the editorial was not about Mike, it was about the Tea Party movement, and I was hoping maybe some of them might respond to my questions.
I repeatedly asked him to stay focused on it, but to no avail.
Finally, to the anonymous poster who said bad things about FSU, FYI, FSU has the top rated criminology program in the state of Florida and is among the top 10 programs in the whole country. Nice try though!
Mike D.: I'm STILL curious and interested. What is YOUR highest degree earned and from where?
I also pose this challenge to Jeremy and the coward Anonymous.
Dr. Robinson: Keep their feet to the fire, sir.
So Mike, We have two competing hypotheses about the tea party. Your hypothesis is that it is the beginning of a movement toward fiscal responsibility. My hypothesis is that it is a mob mentality fostered by demagogues for political gain.
My evidence is that the people who are now promoting and identifying with the movement are the very same people (Republicans) who were OK with deficit spending when Republicans were in power. They are in fact the very same people who inherited a balanced budget and immediately began to destroy our fiscal stabilty by giving the surplus to the wealthiest classes, by starting two wars, and by deregulating all the institutions that were supposed to protect us. More evidence is the remarkable level of nastiness and hatred displayed by these demonstrators against people of color. Most telling is that the Republican leaders of the movement have never denounced such ugliness. (As far as I know)
When I see the tea party protesters protesting against the two wars that have cost a trillion dollars so far and have caused so much misery for no discernable gain; when I hear them calling for the corporations that have profited by these wars to pay their fair share in taxes to cover the cost, then I might give credence to your hypothesis. So far, the tea party protesters look like people who are perfectly OK with government oppression, as long as it happens to someone else. They are perfectly happy to collect their Medicare, and Social Security, but damn if they want to give up some of their precious money so someone else might enjoy the same comforts. When you come up with any evidence that tea partiers give a flying fart about anyone but themselves, I'll consider your hypothesis.
Juris Doctor, The University of Pennsylvania. I'm an Ivy League guy, but nice try Bikerbard.
"My point is these people are protesting spending by a Democrat but never did so against Republicans, even though the Republicans were far worse." Robinson
Absolute Bullshit. Conservatives did not support Bush's spending, and it was your democrats in control of Congress who passed the last 2 spending bills under him. True, Congressional Republicans were beyond irresponsible in spending as they did before losing control of Congress.
As for "Republicans were far worse", that totally removes any credibility from your posting.
I know you won't like the link, but too bad.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Obamas-trillions-dwarf-Bushs-dangerous-spending.html
Read it and weep. All we need is a hike in interest rates for Treasury Bills to lure foreign buyers and we will be accelerating this debt to astronomical numbers.
Oh, and the dems have had Congress for over 3 years, and the White House for over a year, when are you going to actually do something about the economy?
What an arrogant post - the editorial and your post here. Pathetic. So you say that tea party followers and members have not criticized Bush? There you are wrong, because we have - and publicly. You also say that republicans are driven by partisan ideology while, of course, democrats are driven by principle. Spoken by someone who has no ability at all to see another view point but his own. That, in a nutshell, is complete arrogance and proves you cannot be taken seriously. Just because you have "Dr." at the beginning of your name does not mean you are guided by any great knowledge or authority that you seemingly think others do not have. I am a tea party follower and proud to be one - I also criticized President Bush over many things - the Iraq war not being one of them.
Matt, narrow minded and lacking wisdom would be how I would describe this editorial, and nearly any one I have ever read by you.
w
Bridle,
Ron Paul won the straw poll at the CPAC conference. Whether there has been a corporate conspiracy to mobilize the masses or not, the fact remains that fiscal responsibility is what the Tea Party movement has come to demand, and the power of its message, much to "Dr." Matt Robinson's chagrin, is ascending. Neither corporate America's profits, nor Matt's PhD, nor your kind heart can change that.
I will not argue with you that there were 'check all one column' Republicans involved in the birth of the Tea Party. Would you expect there to be none? Republicans account for nearly half the population of the country. But regardless of how it started and who expected it to become what, it has become what it is, and its membership grows everyday.
Mike D.
Basically all you do with your posts is defend ignorance and criminality. Do you have any solutions to the problems the intelligent people discuss on this blog? You keep saying that we should consider the proposals of the opposition to solve these problems. Do you realize that the oppositions "solutions" are exactly what got us into this national mess to begin with? The Republicans of our Congress are totally owned by the top 5% and, sadly, are too many of our Democratic members of the Congress. If you have the ability-go back to the beginnings of Reaganism and see what's happened to the real USA-that would be the dwindling middle class. (If you're not rich and vote for a Republican, you're an IDIOT!!!!)
Your comments regarding Matt Robinson (Dr.) are totally asinine and reflect your semi-literate ignorance. I have a Ph.D and you don't-you can't even know what goes into achieving a doctorate. You are simple a blathering blowhard. In the USMC we had a term for people like you-PUKE!!!
Matt,
My posts have been on subject, whether you recognize it or not; however, I must digress to defend your school. I am a Hurricanes fan, but my little sister graduated from FSU, my father got his undergraduate and Masters degrees from FSU, and my deceased grandmother went there when it was an all women's college. It looks a bit like a big fire station, and I can't pull for the 'Noles on Saturdays, but otherwise it is a fine school.
And you may think you know me, but you don't. You know a person whose fundamental Constitutional right to free expression was aggressively violated by the life partner of one of your colleagues. You know a person who stood up to that oppressive authority, and coincidentally interfered with your political crusade in the process.
Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot. I will tell you, in no uncertain terms, that I'm not going to treat you like you are worth any more than any other human being. To me, the opinion of the farmer holds no more or less value than that of the lawyer, professor, auto mechanic, bartender, musician, etc... we have all been learning, along our own paths, from the day we were born until this moment. BikerBard can lick your boots and play Eric Berne's "Gee, You're Wonderful Professor" game, but I value people based on what they demonstrate of themselves to me. I like BikerBard and Bridle very much. We don't agree on everything, but really, who does?
I meet very, very few people who really rub me the wrong way. Your colleague's ex was a truly awful human being.
Beyond that? Good people are good people, regardless of their political beliefs. I can separate political disagreement from personal dislike. Can you?
Bridle
Well, said! How about posting that over on Watauga Conservative where the Tea Party Mob hang out?
Hey Mike:
I'm still waiting for you to post your highest degree earned.
Or is your silence the obvious answer?
"I have a Ph.D and you don't-you can't even know what goes into achieving a doctorate. You are simple a blathering blowhard." - EAbbey
Priceless
Mike, thanks for proving that I really do know you. So the ex-girlfriend of one of my colleagues (and fellow protesters) upset you. This justifies you threatening us? Being friends with another young man who assaulted us? And in defense of the Iraq war, one of the greatest mistakes in US history? And I am to take you seriously? Really?
The funny thing is I agree that spending is out of control. But my priorities, based on my sense of justice, are different. We just disagree about what to cut. Let's cut the Pentagon budget. Half of it is unnecessary anyway. We could do a lot with that money! Let's not start stupid wars. The $3 trillion we will spend on Iraq before it is all said and done could have doubled the salary of every cop and teachers in the US, or provided health care for everyone, or gotten all states out of debt, etc.
To "W" I only say this:
Your signature, "W" should go right in the middle of George Bush's name. Oh wait ... It does!
You said: "I also criticized President Bush over many things - the Iraq war not being one of them."
So you still think that was a good idea? Wow! Hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis and approaching $1 trillion spent already, and you did not criticize him for that? Sad, truly sad.
LPOV - Thank you. I can only take so much of the other site - have to view it sparingly to keep from getting very depressed.
OK Mike. Your silence on the issue of your college degree speaks volumes. After 5 of your posts, all avoiding the questions I posed to you, we get it. I'll stop pressing you for information.
Now, don't criticize others who persue a degree of higher learning.
Or do so on the other site where it will be welcomed.
Again, Matt, you believe that if you write it it is true. Hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis on our hands - that's pure bull*$&# and you know it. Of course the former Iraqi government had nothing to do with deaths - a UN report at the time in the late 90's put the death of Iraqi children at 5,000 per month at the hands of the oppressive government. You forget about that because it's convenient to say that the US is to blame for all the deaths in Iraq. Just because you say it was a bad idea does not make it so. The shame is that press your leftist views on students. What would you do if you had a bright class full of tea party followers? I am sure you would give them endless grief because they did not agree with you and make the class unreasonably difficult because what you think is always the correct way to think. Of course, that is no different than most of the people who post here. I rarely come to the site anymore, but you have to be called on your extreme bias. Yes, I know, it's called an editorial for a reason. In your arrogance it is doubtful that you can see other sides to the same issues, but maybe when you grow up and gain some wisdom and experience other than what comes from a book you will. And you keep repeating that you stand on principle - well, guess what, so do I.
BikerBard, you're a bully--plain and simple. Lay off of Mike--it doesn't matter where his degree is from, or if he even has a degree. He wasn't going after those who pursue higher education, he was going after Matt Robinson's self-projected air of superiority.
Biker, where is YOUR Ivy degree from? Are you a Yalie? A Son of Harvard? A Princeton man? Do you pledge your love to Brunonia? (Haha.) Or, better yet--are you a Penn man? Can I put my arms around you as we join in a chorus of "The Red and the Blue?"
Or are you just a blowhard like Matt Robinson with a degree from a second rate public university and an unearned sense of superiority?
"So the ex-girlfriend of one of my colleagues (and fellow protesters) upset you." - "Dr." Matt Robinson
Matt,
Have you no shame? You make it all sound so benign, but you know so much better than you lead on. How about a little honesty? I was a student!!! You were a professor!!! You had an ethical responsibility to protect me, yet here you sit, defending your cronies who used students to fight their political battles, and infringed on the Constitutional rights of a student who dared dissent during their protest (with full advisement of my rights and permission from the Dean of Students). You ought to be embarrassed and ashamed, not smug and condescending.
My civil rights were aggressively and physically violated by one of the adult leaders of the organization which sponsored that protest. She ripped up my sign in front of my face while screaming obscenities at me! Is your concept of the student/teacher relationship and the ethical responsibilities of a teacher so warped that you would describe that as "the ex-girlfriend of one of my colleagues... upset you."???
You know I never received an apology? Not from her, not from him for her behavior, not from anyone.
And you expect me to show you some great respect for your PhD? I'll tell you what. Arrange a sincere apology from either one of them, convince them that what they did was unethical and wrong, and ask them to convey their understanding to the young man they victimized, and I will call you "Dr. Robinson" with respect and without a hint of sarcasm from now on.
BikerBard,
Some other people with Doctoral degrees whose ideas you may wish to treat with a great deal of respect:
Virginia Foxx
John Bolton
Henry Kissinger
Condoleezza Rice
Newt Gingrich
Michael Savage
Mitt Romney
and just for kicks:
Josef Mengele, the Angel of Death, had a PhD in Anthropology ;)
W - A moderate estimation of excess mortality in Iraq provides convincing evidence of over 150,000 violent deaths as a result of the American invasion.
This doesn't take into account the terrible toll of injuries, and disease and disruption of society.
Can you please explain why you believe attacking Saddam Hussein's regime was worth the devastation of that country, destroying our economy, inflaming all the Muslim nations against us, and weakening our national defenses? The neighboring regime of Saudi Arabia is much worse in terms of human rights abuses, as are many many other countries across the planet.
To W:
See how easy it is to prove you wrong:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html
The methodology in that study is the same as we use in the US to establish the number of crimes in the US.
Or if you really want to know the truth, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ8-tYEcRCI
That film is informed by the facts that you just don't know.
As for my teaching, I follow the Faculty Handbook which says my primary job is to tell the truth as I see it. And I did have a tea party guys in one of my classes this term. He added a ton to the class because he always challenged me. I listened to him, he listened to me, and I countered him when I thought he was wrong. He was graded based on how well he understood the point of the class, not on whether he agreed with me. And after his final exam, he came up and shook my hand and said, "Thanks for the class. It was by far the best one I had this semester."
You can have your opinion, sir, but not your own facts. And that is the problem with the Tea Party folks, they have so few facts and carry around so many falsehoods.
You should be ashamed of your ignorance. The price of your ignorance is we get to be ruled by evil men.
Mike
Wait, are you talking about the time you had the bull horn and were counter-protesting by the Jones House? So you were being louder than the people who were speaking?
If what you said happened did happen to you, then that was NOT a violation of your constitutional rights. The Constitution protects your speech from GOVERNMENT restiction, not the actions of a private citizen. I'm sorry you don't understand that.
But again, if what you said happened actually happened, then you should have called the police, because that is assault when someone touches you or rips a sign away from you. Remember when your buddy pushed a female protestor? We called the police. Know why? Because that is assault!
Either way, I never did anything to you, and I never resticted your rights. In fact you came to one of our meetings and no one even asked you to leave. Free country, right?
Finally, the bottom line is this all started with your reaction to my editorial about the Tea Party movement. And you have not refuted one single fact I wrote about, not one. And if you come to the defense of those people on the streets who believe some pretty crazy stuff, I'll just have to assume you share their crazy beliefs (Obama is a freedom hating, totalitarian loving, socialist born in another country).
"that was NOT a violation of your constitutional rights. The Constitution protects your speech from GOVERNMENT restiction, not the actions of a private citizen. I'm sorry you don't understand that." - "Dr." Matt Robinson
"(7) Rights of others. The educator shall not willfully or maliciously violate the constitutional or civil rights of a student" - CODE OF PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE AND CONDUCT FOR NORTH CAROLINA EDUCATORS
Matt,
You can split hairs all you want, but the basic truth remains that what was done to me was morally and ethically wrong, and you are defending it. Where is your 'Social Justice' when it pertains to someone you consider a political foe?
What you saw at the Jones House was my carefully researched and planned response to what had been done to me at the previous action sponsored by your colleagues.
If I ever receive a simple apology from the perpetrators and an admission that what was done to me was wrong, I'll let it go forever, and you can hold me to my promise. Yet here you are, seven years later, still justifying the unjust while claiming to stand for justice. It boggles the mind.
MikeD, Have you ever noticed that the more one insists on his title being used to show respect, the less that person deserves respect?
Examples: Matt Robinson, Barbara Boxer
You are going to site one study done in less than a 2-month span of time that is supported by the ultra leftist Human Rights Watch? And also, we don't cite crime statistics by interviewing families over a short time frame such as 50 days and call the statistics legitimate enough to cover 7 years. I know you know that. I guess the study just basically ignored the previous ones done by the UN (and even by UN standards this one is excessive). How convenient it is to say that if we had not removed the oppressive government that harbored terrorism then these 655,000 people would have lived? Really? You believe that? Now you are the one who seems sad and misguided. What you say is "truth" is not always so just because you say it is. But then again, that is the mantra of the left - keep repeating it until people think it is true.
I sure hope the faculty handbook does not say that you should teach the truth as you see it. Since I don't have one in front of me at the moment, I cannot say it doesn't. Again, despite your arrogance, the truth as you see it is not always the truth. If you only read from the left, then that is all you understand. There is a whole different world out there with lots of truth - and you not believing it doesn't change that. I think you should be the one ashamed of your ignorance. Your arrogance has a way of blinding you.
Mike,
Listen, I did not see it, I did not hear it, I was not witness to it in any way.
I owe you nothing.
And you holding on to it after all this time says what? If you want some friendly advice, forgive. I know those who hurt you are not holding on to it, so the only one still being hurt by it is you. Forgive, and move on, finally.
And what about the wrongs you did? Did you ever apologize to those you hurt by your actions out on the street? Have you ever apologized for defending a policy that killed more than 4,000 Americans, injured 300,000 more (including psychological injuries), hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and cost us about $1 trillion so far (remember that war -- the one in which we were supposed to be greeted as liberators, and the one that was supposed to pay for itself?? -- you defended those in power who made these claims). Wanna' apologize for being part of one of the worst foreign policy decisions in US history?
Funny how this all came up in response to an editorial about the Tea Party folks. And the main point of the editorial still stands, which I guess you still want to defend?!?!?! Weird.
I think it's time to let this thread die. Some people will just never see the light.
All I can say is that I assure you that I have studied the issue of the Iraq war closer than most, I've read the studies about the death toll, etc., and we cover it thoroughly in my 9/11 class. Anyone who is unaware that at least 100,000 and possibly 700,000 people have "prematurely died" due to our invasion is simply not informed of the facts. And anyone who stands behind the decision to invade after all the damage it has done (in spite of the good), is, in my humble opinion, morally bankrupt.
Thanks for your thoughts all, and I wish you well.
Matt - you have no humble opinions - they are all based on arrogance and your misguided sense of superiority. I'm glad you studied the war more than most - good for you. Since you have done that, then obviously you know that hundreds of thousands died at the hands of the former government and we had nothing to do with deaths. To blame the US for ALL those deaths since, is, in my humble opinion, pure ignorance. And you need to know a lot more about someone before you call that person morally bankrupt, which you certainly do not.
Matt,
I am happy to forgive someone who has wronged me, should that person accept responsibility and seek forgiveness.
You have the connections and the position to bring justice, even after seven years. You could turn to your friends and colleagues and say "Listen, you did this guy wrong. You ought to go apologize to him." They could choose to follow your advice or not, but you would have helped to bring justice.
If you would consider doing such a thing, I would be most humbly grateful.
Is it your responsibility? Absolutely not.
Do you have the influence to make it happen? Very likely.
Mike,
Again, since I was not involved, it is not my place to initiate anything. But I am sure that if you called one of them, he or she would gladly meet with you so you guys can settle this.
You can then even apologize for what you did, too!
It's called restorative justice. And everyone wins.
Peace!
Matt Robinson
Why would Mr. Robinson use numbers from the preliminary CBO report instead of the actual revised numbers?
Mike D (Dicker) is trying hard to revive his old tricks and continue his hypocrisy. As co-founder of High Country Peace and Justice, a local organization with broad community membership that operated between 2001-2005, I can attest to Mike's tactics. While blindly extolling his love of freedom of expression and diverse viewpoints, he instigated the following incidents against HCPJ: (1) he used Nazi-style Brown Shirt tactics to try to disrupt public presentations at the Watauga Co. Library and the Jones House, where HCPJ had permits/permission to use such facilities; (2) he, indeed, took photos of me (and others), yelling in my face that he was "sending your photo out on the internet to places where you will not be able to defend yourself;" (3) he and a friend came to a peaceful, silent protest on a street corner in Boone and screamed at members of HCPJ and his friend assaulted a female; (4) he stood outside Sanford Hall where my office is located, telling students that they should beware of "the communist" on the fourth floor; (5) in violation of ASU's computer use policy, he threatned the president of the High Country Students for Peace and Justice and we had to call the ASU police who spoke with him about possible suspension (and worse) from the university. The list goes on and on. Like so many others, he hides his fascist inclinations behind burkhas of empty rhetoric about freedom, diversity, liberty, etc.
Post a Comment