@TemplarLeonem I can't seem to get away from your comments, which seem to be an odd mish-mash of lucid, semi-respectable opinions and downright irrational homophobic vitriol. What is your deal man?
Reagan may have been a "feel good" president but that does't make an effective leader. While I appreciated his statesmanship with regards to the USSR, he was an absolute disaster domestically on multiple fronts; and we're still living with the repercussions of his politics.
@cvict6 Gore fought for his country in WW2 and enriched its literature and crusaded to protect the constitution from the ravages of Bush and Obama. A good deal more than you ever will.
@SUpersaiyajinjerkbag ~ and destroying democracy with it. you think conservative reaganism is good? america has been turning into a shit hole ever since. congratulations.
John Birch and segregationist views are not by themselves discrediting...the John Birch society opposed the Patriot Act and the Iraq war...and most people self -segregate all the time...white people almost never move into a 90% black neighborhood, whites refuse to voluntarily be minorities..
@svvmichael1 Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you a childlike buffoon. Keep talking Michael and you'll be digging deeper and deeper. Please don't use your vote.
@1883ross So, you admit that you are an idiot. Your "technique" of making baseless, unprovable "assertions" displays your complete ignorance. And I guarantee you that I and more intelligent, better educated, and more successful than you. So go on being a mindless, liberal lemming and walk right off the cliff.
@1883ross Then you stop hurling mindless Maher cliches at me. If you need help finding a place to get your GED let me know. I'd like to see you get an education and learn how economies work. Then you'll stop being a mindless leftist lemming.
Gore Vidal summed provided an early showing of the singular attack of the leftist movement. When confronted with conservatism allege stupidity and racism. Talk about a weak counter argument. What a sign of the future though, a liberal cannot combat conservatism without twisting or totally recreating the truth and therefore must fall back on allegations that are sure to arouse special interest groups and minorities.
I was hunting with some wimpy math teacher who started arguing politics.
I told him that he wanted more collectivism and I wanted more individualism, and there was no point arguing over the ramifications of those points of view.
@tnekkc Conservatism is the least individualistic of political movements, and that's the great irony. Take a look at all the classic conservative ideas that amount to oldies being aghast at new and institution upsetting movements. The usual uproar about each successive youth movement, from rock n' roll in the 50s to punk to Marilyn Manson, and so on, the anger and closed-mindedness comes from the right. Oh, and the gay comment sort of proves my final point, doesn't it?
@tnekkc Land ownership is a concept the Europeans brought to the new world with them. It wasn't one the native people of North America shared, that is for sure. Also, conservatives tend to be very religious--not exclusively, but certainly more so than liberals. And my bible knowledge (I was confirmed into the Lutheran church, but I'm no longer Christian) tells me there is a load of collectivist ideas just in Christ's teaching. How do you square that with your politics, if you are Christian?
I want those lazy incompetents to starve or be killed by inner city youths, who are animals, because of liberal entitlement laws broke down their family structure.
I don't care about any Arab terrorists.
The problem is liberals; Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Obama, Cavez, Vidal, Castro, and all the other collectivists that say they will make life fair, and then destroy everything.
@tnekkc Well, your mommy taught you some manners, didn't she? You want people you disagree with to be killed??! And calling Hitler a liberal is precious. All totalitarians, no matter what they call themselves, are most certainly not liberal. Stalin may have called himself a communist but no more believed in Marxism than, well, Reagan!
Tell me, what's in your record collection? That says an awful lot about most people, I guarantee it!
@tnekkc Still stuck on the Left vs. Right thing, huh? That's too bad. You do realize that BOTH PARTIES are bought and paid for by special interests, right? And those special interests basically force legislation to pass that only benefits them. BOTH PARTIES are guilty of this.
@tnekkc No no. The conservatives will steal the money and continue their war-mongering. The liberals will continue to take their largest donations from teacher's unions, which keeps tenure alive, which destroys our education system. Both war-mongering and failing education systems are crippling to any civilization.
The argument of which is worse is absolutely moot when you know the root cause of both. Cut at the root, and you get rid of all symptoms. It's not rocket surgery.
Obama has spent more money we did not have than all previous Presidents.
He is a Marxist trying to wreck America, because he hates it.
There will always be wars. We need wars to establish territory. But need them or not, we will always have them, no matter what. If we did not have wars, life would be miserably constipated.
@tnekkc Regarding the war stuff: That's truly a sad outlook on life. And about as incorrect as it is ridiculous. People like you stand in the way of real change.
Obama is just doing what the elite with all the money tell him to. Just like everyone else in Washington. Wake up, man. You sound like a broken record.
@bigpoppabball Sorry, but the best President of the 20th century was Ike. Jimmy Carter comes in a distant second. Reagan was one of the worst presidents of the 20th century, behind only Ted & Franklin Roosevelt.
@dudelikesWoW I think people ought to give Clinton some due as well. After all, he presided over a surplus economy and avoided conflicts abroad generally. But I will agree about Ike and Carter.
@bartonim I hate to say it, because you're absolutely right, but he bombed Middle Eastern countries -every week- during his presidency. Frankly, in my book, that makes him as bad as the Bush's or LBJ.
@dudelikesWoW Well, you do have a point. Of course as Chomsky put it, all post-war Presidents ought to have had the Nuremberg standards applied to them as well, so in that sense Clinton is guilty. Just a bit less so than some, but I acknowledge your point. Thanks!
@jredbar You are mentally ill -- and you know how I can tell? Because everything you write sounds like it is being awkwardly translated into English by Google Translator. Also, the fact that your comments are being removed is ample testament to the fact that there is something seriously wrong with you. DO NOT WRITE BACK!!! I'M NOT JOKING!!! DO NOT WRITE BACK OR MENTION ME AGAIN!!!
@ColumbiaPerna mentally ill? The guy happens to have an excellent command of the english language. Excuse me for butting in on your argument but it does irritate me when people are mocked for being articulate. Regardless of what he had to say, he at least said it in a well structured, coherent manner, better that than "I fink gore vidal iz well gr8"
@alanthe2 A lot of people have an excellent command of the English language -- that doesn't mean they aren't psychotic. You need to learn how to read between the lines, honey.
@ColumbiaPerna I'm not disputing that, If you read my comment I wrote: "regardless of what he had to say, he at least said it in a well structured, coherent manner". Perhaps if you read between the lines a little less and just read the lines, you might have understood my point. I don't care what you were discussing, just don't mock someone for how they communicate, take issue with what they're saying, not how they say it.
@alanthe2 Listen, sweetie. We could sit here all day and play semantics -- but now you're sounding a lot like the psycho -- only a Jewish version. Go away --
Everyone knows that Reagan the man is not the same as Reagan the myth which has been promulgated by the right wing for nearly 20 years. They turned him into some kind of hero when in fact many of the problems with our economy that we face today had a start during his administration. Reagan was no saint, was only an average President. Just as Cheney was the puppet master for GW Bush it is now well known that Bush Sr. was the puppet master for Reagan. Deficit spending, bloated defense, etc...
@TheTubePortal did you watch the Chomsky interview by Marr? now the master has become the puppet and the cycle is complete. (the latter sentence has nothing to do with the interview).
@jredbar In one of your earlier posts you suggested that the conservatives vs liberals controversy is contrived, but I disagree. Those known as "the powers that be" have for almost 50 years been exclusively ultra conservatives who in league with the Federal Reserve work hand-in-hand with the corporate giants seeking to eliminate all hindrances such as taxes, environmental laws, trade restrictions, etc... Liberals though are called commies/socialists/wackos/slackers/hippies/elitist, etc...
@TheTubePortal (disregard me if I sound to you like a conspiracy theorist) that is not to say that we should not be having moral discussions or standing for a side when we believe its just but never should you be confined to a party. we should always be questioning our own motives and whether or not all the facts are present. i do recommend that interview if you have not seen it. it sounded as if you might have.
@TheTubePortal stances within that box can be virtuous but oscillate rapidly and continuously. in conventional liberalism there is a line within forbidden to cross and liberalism is used when conservatism strays from the interest of the elite. there are checks and balances in both parties manipulated by those 'powers'. elite use good intent of man and corrupt or misdirect.
@TheTubePortal forgive me for writing a book here. I sincerely agree with your point to an extent and I was polarized in my previous statement. Yet I view the liberal/conservative party lines to be embedded in a box contrived by 'the powers that be' to diverge the conversation from the more essential questions (and this is where i show my true political ignorance if I have not already) of which I'm not all together certain (pretty lame of me huh).
@jredbar Tthe powers that be, those with the real power, are all conservative, pro big-business, anti-government, etc... and oppose anything that interferes with their profits or their power and will use both to get what they want. If I understand you correctly to say that the typical argument of "liberals are socialist! conservatives are fascists!" et. al. is merely entertainment to keep people blinded from dealing with the real problems, I agree. It's become a team sport, but few jocks read.
@TheTubePortal sorry for posting backwards, if was noticeable. was thinking too hard. half heartedly agree; jocks read, just not between the lines and are easily manipulated, AND in the real world conservatives aren't merely jocks. I have one real point to make with your view and that is, liberals are pro big-business as well.
@TheTubePortal typically the conservative platform is for home grown business (not necessarily local but american) and liberals are in support of technologically advanced international business. where the elite influence comes in as far as the conservatives is the hinderance of unionization among others (i am unsure of).
@TheTubePortal there are so many spheres within sphere here that what you read and watch in the popular media is grossly misleading cause where you find a majority polarizing the issues is where you find corruption, which is found in either camp. there are good and bad liberal and conservative stances. what makes either hard to stomach is the parties unwillingness to just look at facts when realities arise. and that inability is influenced by those elite i keep harping on (sorry bout that)
Wow, thanks for posting Vidal's concerns about candidate Reagan! I wonder if Reagan only being out of the country once will hurt him when negotiating with the Soviets. I wonder if Reagan will bring renewed segregation of the Negroes. These are important concerns to consider!
@jredbar You call me Sir? My name is Columbia, you retard. ! Anyway, you write like a schizophrenic -- I'm sure you are one -- if you have no money, every county has a mental health center.
@ColumbiaPerna Mr. Columbia, could you recommend to me the mental health center preferred by yourself? The only issue you took with my comment was that it respectfully addressed you as sir? that surely appears to be a worthy outlet to direct your anger. I'll take it on omission of denial that all else said was accurate. all insults aside, what was the point of your hateful comment on vidal (of whom i have formed no significant opinion) and what merit did it serve?
@ColumbiaPerna There is an attempt to inject thought with my nonsense which I could accept as being faulted but Columbia, you sound as merely pounding angrily at a keyboard stringing together perversions. I suppose I could be accused of the same. Please if you would, explain to me what coherent issues you take with vidal. You may wish to reply with more hate but thus would merely strengthen a case for ignorance, as your deeper thoughts may prove as well. mull carefully over it.
You people are seriously arguing over 1 minute and 31 seconds of out of context video posted on the same information network you masturbated to aren't you?
@XavierMarkus1 maybe I misrepresented myself a bit. I intended to allude that both hands are present and tag team in and out at agreed upon intervals. Alas yes, there is of course bound to be some jealousy since my penis (can I say penis on youtube) does have a favorite but that detail stays between the parties involved and not even I am privy to that info. you're a peach for indulging my absurd behavior. maybe you want to flag this comment?
@XavierMarkus1 well thanks a bunch. I am perpetually second guessing how close minded i sound on these things. and am constantly compelled to comment even to the extent of my own annoyance. glad to not have offended you! though I do hope someone was.
Gore Vidal is not brilliant. He goes to point out who Reagan had supported in the past, and by doing so tries to discredit him by showing the extreme those people where. Vidal shows himself to be the typical 50's/ 60's political liberal in this bit, pointing out the faults without giving substance to his argument against Reagan. It's as if he shooting spitballs with the wind hoping something sticks to the wall, and in doing so he discredits his target. What he doesn't see is, that he misses.
@XavierMarkus1 how does intending to hit a target discredit that target? and if you are shooting with the wind would that not assist your shot? aligning ones self with extremists implies nothing of that persons character?
@jredbar Videl Spitball is the Practice "Guilt by association". And doing so he shooting them "against the wind." A better way to say it, Videl is the artist who throws something wall, hoping it sticks and calling it art. In this case he tries to discredit Reagan, and he has no ammo deep down. The sad part is, everyone on the extreme of either side ( to include people on youtube) practice this, and they keep missing the target, because of the ignorance of the subject they are critical about.
@XavierMarkus1 I agree, everyone has a tendency toward ignorance. in general even the good intentioned ignore the fact and opt for the truth or spin fact, but truth sits outside of reality. nature recognizes not conservative or liberal ideals. specifics tend to elude me and more emergent properties rest at the forefront. if you were to calculate where these random spitballs hit, would they not reveal a certain fact of the matter? aiming regardless of precision does not make the wind just.
@jredbar I tend to agree about the ideal; " reveal a certain fact of the matter", But it's the matter of how the spitballs hitting the target are intended to interpreted by the audience that Videl is trying to reach in with his argument. In this case, most of the spitballs are not hitting the target, and what spitballs do, did not stick enough to derail Reagan's run for Governor, muchless his run for President later.
Indoctrination disables cogent thought ... how sad. Obvious contradictions and outright lies simply elude the liberal mind. They can dispense nonsensical nostrums, blatant lies and utterly fabricated histories with the same ease most reserve for breathing. How genuinely sad.
@PartnersInGrace Instead of making any effort to have reasonable conversation, you're in the comments dispelling others opinions to make them seem as though they are "nonsensical." One's ego is all too transparent when labeling someone to a negative stigma rather than addressing the complexity of individual ideas. By the way, every piece of history has been written with some bias, it's inevitable. Stop being a sheep and realize that it's not left vs. right it's the elite vs everybody else.
@pawndominance1 Who cares?! Your point is moot. In the end the elite just continue to rule the world. Don't waste yours or anyone else's time with the Left vs. Right pissing contest. It's pointless and counter-intuitive.
@pawndominance1 No, the Left vs. Right debate doesn't matter when both parties are run by lobbyists and special interests. You're just cutting at the branches when you should be cutting at the root.
Get politicians on both sides working for the American tax payer again and that solves the majority of our problems. You're just feeding a pointless debate that has little to nothing to do with the actual problem.
@ChrisCapel1998 ok so you say that the problem is both parties are run by lobbyists--and I agree with you--Then when I say but one side is run by lobbyists ALOT more than the other side--you say no, it doesnt matter. Non-partisan, lets all work together is a non-sense ideology--if there wasnt anything to disagree about then there wouldnt be politics. One side is full of insane people who dont know anything about the policies and the other isnt, you cant just marginalize that distinction
@pawndominance1 My point is this: There's no point in chopping at the branches of the problem when you know what the root is. The fact that politicians on both sides are controlled by special interests IS THE ROOT. Let's fix the root, and then we can point the finger at which party did the most damage.
And by the way, unless you're a Washington insider, I don't think it's possible to know which party is doing more damage. It should be enough that they both are and have been for some time.
@ChrisCapel1998 Yes lets go after the root but the fact that one party represents a lot more of the root is an important one. One side lies and deceives and distorts to get the 60 million poor peasants to come out and vote against their interests. Thats the only way republicans get elected: misinformation-This tnekkc guy is a perfect example. He thinks Obama has spent more than any president--he thinks Obama is a marxist, that Obama is evil--why do you think he thinks these things?
@pawndominance1 And here you sit pointing the finger at the other side. It's an absolute waste of time to have this discussion when both parties are at fault.
Obama just signed a bill that would allow the government to lock up American citizens indefinitely without due process. Bush signed the Patriot Act.
Both sides are corrupt. Until you stop special interest funding to BOTH parties, the ratio of corruption is moot. Fighting about who's worse is what the elite want.
@pawndominance1 In short: I'm talking about an issue that is absolutely non-partisan. (a congress corrupted by money) This is all about common sense. A plain-as-day conflict of interest that anyone can get on board with, regardless of party, religion, race, class or creed.
@PartnersInGrace do you not realize that the spectrum between left and right is contained within a stratum of the super elite? any bickering is essentially a fools game, busy work and only serving to the interests of those who hold real power. or so iv'e heard said. who is your partner? and what grace do you intend to achieve here? greatest of respect intended.
Only a Lefty could view this nonsense (and cowardice ... where's the rebuttal) as effective. This is precisely the sort of pseudo-intellectualism, patent dishonesty, indolence and effeteness that so markedly characterizes the Left and leaves thinking observes not merely unimpressed but distrustful and disdainful of them.
@PartnersInGrace And only a close minded Righty could agree with your bigotry and not recognize it for what it is...a fear of change. It is precisely your type of racism and bigotry that is harbored deep within Conservatism and denied so poorly. It is Conservatism that promotes distrust and disdain...not Liberalism. Go back to school and get an education.
@PartnersInGrace what you said is the typical-sounding view of liberals by right-wing ideologues (and their view is very off on a lot of things, to say the least) I thought the right hated anything remotely intellectual (and Gore Vidal is an intellectual ,not a "pseudo"-intellectual. At least people on the left don't see things in terms of black and white (literally and figuratively) like Conservatives do - people on the right have a viewpoint and RIGIDLY stick to it no matter how wrong they r
"We may be heading not for general breakdown but for an epoch as horribly stable as the slave empires of antiquity. James Burnham’s theory has been much discussed, but few people have yet considered its ideological implications - that is, the kind of world-view, the kind of beliefs, and the social structure that would probably prevail in a State which was at once unconquerable and in a permanent state of 'cold war' with its neighbours." George Orwell (1945)
That's it? This was at best a biased opinion with a unqualified piece of fact laced in, but peeled like an onion? That's a huge stretch. You show me Vidal in a debate with Reagan and we'll see who gets peeled.
Reagan was an average president. He was great, when it came to outspending the Soviet Union and wrecking Leninism. Obviously the USA had deeper pockets and a better credit line than the Soviets did. In this way, spending us trillions into debt for the first time EVER, Reagan avoided WW3 between Russia and the US. However, especially in the years post-Reagan, extreme deficit spending has continued to dog and handicap the United States. Obama is merely Reaganesque, when he borrows 2 trillion.
@ebonics4everyone I am Canadian and even I know that Reagan didn't want to increase spending by that much, he was just to kind or foolish to think that the democrats under Tip Oneil would cut spending as promised in exchange for some bending on defense projects and tax cuts by Ron.
How are Straw Man arguments against Reagan to be held as brilliance? Seems to me it would take a frothing zealot to buy into something as transparent as this.
"How are Straw Man arguments against Reagan to be held as brilliance?"
...What in this clip is a straw man? I having trouble how anything Vidal says could qualify as a straw man as he's not trying to knock any argument down, be it real or made up.
Were you meaning to say the things Vidal said are not true? If so that is a different thing then a straw man argument.
@alamaklt Perhaps so. But doesn't that overwhelmingly characterize the community of the Left?
Mind, these are the same sort that offered up Lenin, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao and Castro as the "geniuses of our times". Amongst such people, slavishly transparent zealotry is a virtue.
@DrCruel "geniuses of our times" - You see much of that is out time and context. Any person for who's anti-plutocracy and against centralised elites would correctly initially laud many of those people as they replaced even more centralised plutocratic dictatorships that came before them.
@CmdrTobs Really? What sort of "anti-plutocracy" did Stalin represent? Mao? What what Lenin did to the democratic Duma meant to "abolish plutocracy"? In what possible way?
Please. We're talking about people who established and rallied behind brutal plutocracies, not abolished them.
@Fuctmentality No doubt. "Right wingers" like George Orwell didn't understand the malleability of language - about how the prime example of the perfect Marxist utopia one day could be a "rightist, reactionary state capitalist regime" the next. "Right wingers" simply don't know how to use hypocrisy and selective interpretations of the truth to get what they want.
But not a sophist cretin like Gore Vidal. That guy knows how to lay it down thick. His sycophantic fans love him for it.
@DrCruel Orwell the reformed anarchist & democratic socialist? The man who hated hierarchical social structures. Seriously Mao, Stalin, Lenin all headed regimes that had strict hierarchical social structures, thus they were right wing.
@Fuctmentality Yes, exactly. That "rightist". Because he was declared a traitor by the mainstream Left.
Seriously, Leftists aren't even remotely consistent when they declare people to be "Rightists". It all goes along with the rest of their hypocritical, self-serving religion masquerading as an ideology. Standard policy for them is to declare any of their scams that have run their course to have actually been "right wing state capitalist regimes" all along. They're habitual con artists.
Victor Gollancz (because of Orwell's criticism of Stalin during the Spanish Civil War)
Kingsley Martin (because Orwell refused to join in solidarity with Left fascism)
T. S. Eliot (because Orwell's Animal Farm appeared to be critical of the Stalinist regime)
None of this is a secret. Orwell was marginalized and ousted, because he wouldn't accept Bolshevik dominance within the Left. He was "rehabilitated" only after he was safely dead.
@Fuctmentality I admit it's a bit redundant, as fascism is essentially a reform of Marxism. In this context, I'm talking about Bolshevism (under Stalin and his successors, basically a form of Russian national socialism). A modern form of Left fascism would be the present government of the PRC.
In fascist regimes, business people are not killed outright but are allowed to exist as appendages of the state apparatus. In a Left fascist regime, such a state calls itself "Marxist".
@DrCruel That's just it though, fascism is always right wing, & no where near marxism. What you're talking about is red fascism, which is again right wing. & I know of no state that has ever called itself "Marxist", not the USSR, Not PRC, none of them have.
@Fuctmentality In regards "Leftists", I want to distinguish between the meaningless hypocrisy of Leftist ideology and what Leftists do in actual practice. In practical terms, Leftists are not part of a "dichotomy" (thus, there is no established "Right" in opposition), but are more like a transnational for-profit criminal mafia.
I base my judgement on the activities of the vast majority of Leftists, which range from sedition-for-profit to the welfare industry to organized drug trafficking.
"It's not hard to see why Orwell is the darling of the ruling-class newspapers mentioned above. He may genuinely have attempted to provide a critique of Stalin’s USSR ``from the left’’, but all that he actually produced — in Animal Farm at least — was a banal piece of ruling-class propaganda.
Animal Farm thus fails utterly as a critique of Stalinism `from the left’... "
-Alex Miller, "Orwell’s Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four" (2008)
@DrCruel Your logic is utterly fatuous, as well as totalitarian, that because some members of the 'left' marginalized and denounced Orwell that automatically forfeits his sincerely held socialist beliefs. In your reading of Orwell you've clearly mastered the concept of doublethink. Going by your line of thought might we not argue that National Socialism was a right wing ideology considering most leftists marginalized and ousted fascists? You cannot have it both ways.
@PierreBayle1697 Not my argument, just chipping in, although Orwell was a committed socialist at one point I believe he became greatly dissaffected with socialism at one point and this continued for the rest of his life.
@fragman08 This is a myth. He became disappointed with the way many British socialists were supporting tacitly Stalinism. He had, after all, seen it destroy the Spanish Revolution. He died in 1950 so he never saw the Hungary repression and the turn away from Stalin, which would have lifted his spirits. He remained a socialist to the end, it's clear in his letters.
@DrCruel "It is superfluous for Conservatives to claim Orwell as an ally in the Cold War...Indeed, he is credited with coining the term 'cold war', in a paragraph that deserves quotation. On 19 October 1945, in an essay entitled 'You and the Atom Bomb’ he drew attention to both the military and the political dangers inherent in a weapon that, not merely unprecedentedly destructive of the innocent, could only be wielded by an elite"
- Christopher Hitchens 'Why Orwell Matters' (2002)
gore's half-assed comments about the 60s apply to many living democrats today, just another example of the intellectual dishonesty of the left and gore in particular. Regarding gore's comments that reagan turned to the right after marrying nancy -- he turned away from the left much earlier, when he the president of the screen actors' guild and saw first hand the radical agenda leftist promote.
Using Reagan's movie career to illustrate his character is a bit like using Vidal's homosexual acts to symbolize him. Classic liberal tactic - attack the man, avoid the issue.
@netjunkie9 You don't have to attack Reagans movie career to prove he had no character, in fact, you don't have to go any further than his lies to his supporters about being an anti-tax conservative, he robbed himself of greatness when he raised taxes 11 times. I'm sorry to burst your bubble by bringing facts into this, but . . .
@imaginativelads at the time of this clip Reagan was just getting into politics - Vidal knew nothing about the man but that didn't stop him from being a drama queen on the subject. And as far as Reagan as a president, anyone who was actually alive during the Carter administration can appreciate what Reagan was able to accomplish.
@pughdafis he's choosing to criticize someone's personal life - something that has nothing to do with the subject being discussed. It's what liberals tend to do when they're backed into a corner or can't think of anything relevent to say.
@thedavidwilson bro, argumentum as hominem is totally appropriate when the legitimate target of attack is the man, as opposed to his particular opinion. wildly spamming the terms "strawman" and "ad hominem" is what children do.
@KrisdashPaul Hi "bro", My mistake. I though Vidal was presuming to have substance in his speech. If it is just insulting someone then it is totally in character for him. Maybe someday he he will be ready address the substance of Reagan's decisions and choices he made.
btw insulting someone furthers no intellectual or rational debate so this speech is kind of a waste of time.
@thedavidwilson don't you know how television works? nobody has substance. substance doesn't sell; it doesn't make ratings. only acid does. i am not making any comment on what should be, only what is.
@gmomechomskylives
The person you sre talking about appears to have left.
A syalker nutjob started harassing them all over yt.
(I had a subscription to TL, The channel is closed now).
The nut used TempIarLeonem. See how close? So that might explain the split personality thing.
AmericansforFreeIran 1 day ago
Reagan brought America put of the defeatist malaise of the Carter years, and for this alone deserves credit.
I wonder how old some of these Ronniebashers actually were during Reagan's presidency...most haters were still in di-di's at the time..
Vodal lives in France now, very apropos. EVERYONE there bashes America.
TemplarLeonem 1 week ago
@TemplarLeonem I can't seem to get away from your comments, which seem to be an odd mish-mash of lucid, semi-respectable opinions and downright irrational homophobic vitriol. What is your deal man?
Reagan may have been a "feel good" president but that does't make an effective leader. While I appreciated his statesmanship with regards to the USSR, he was an absolute disaster domestically on multiple fronts; and we're still living with the repercussions of his politics.
gnomechomskylives 2 days ago
Reagan was America's greatest President if you happened to be wealthy and white
fyadcorp 2 weeks ago 4
What the hell has Gore Vidal ever done for this country?
cvict6 4 weeks ago
@cvict6 ....lul.....
esherp 3 weeks ago
@cvict6 what the hell did Mandela do for his country South Africa?
LodovicoAriosto1 3 weeks ago
@cvict6 Gore fought for his country in WW2 and enriched its literature and crusaded to protect the constitution from the ravages of Bush and Obama. A good deal more than you ever will.
MenOfLetters 2 weeks ago
@cvict6 He never made inane posts on Youtube
fyadcorp 2 weeks ago
i remember first hearing gore vidal back in the day and going wow, there are still some sane people left with a voice.
tomitstube 1 month ago
Reagan was the best president in american history for destroying liberalism
SUpersaiyajinjerkbag 1 month ago
@SUpersaiyajinjerkbag ~ and destroying democracy with it. you think conservative reaganism is good? america has been turning into a shit hole ever since. congratulations.
tomitstube 1 month ago 4
@SUpersaiyajinjerkbag we were nearly $3 trillion in debt when reagan left office.
GabrielMynd 1 month ago
John Birch and segregationist views are not by themselves discrediting...the John Birch society opposed the Patriot Act and the Iraq war...and most people self -segregate all the time...white people almost never move into a 90% black neighborhood, whites refuse to voluntarily be minorities..
wotan237 1 month ago
All I saw was a man lying about another man...wow, a liberal hero, LOL.
svvmichael1 1 month ago
@svvmichael1 What an off-hand, zero-research, lazy comment. You don't have a right to be ignorant.
1883ross 1 month ago
@1883ross WRONG. My comment is well-researched. Vidal's and yours are ignorant, lazy and stupid. Debate over.
svvmichael1 1 month ago
@svvmichael1 Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you a childlike buffoon. Keep talking Michael and you'll be digging deeper and deeper. Please don't use your vote.
1883ross 1 month ago
@1883ross So, you admit that you are an idiot. Your "technique" of making baseless, unprovable "assertions" displays your complete ignorance. And I guarantee you that I and more intelligent, better educated, and more successful than you. So go on being a mindless, liberal lemming and walk right off the cliff.
svvmichael1 1 month ago
@svvmichael1 "And I guarentee you that I and more intelligent...than you" Clearly. And stop quoting Glenn Beck cliches at me.
1883ross 1 month ago
@1883ross Then you stop hurling mindless Maher cliches at me. If you need help finding a place to get your GED let me know. I'd like to see you get an education and learn how economies work. Then you'll stop being a mindless leftist lemming.
svvmichael1 1 month ago
Carry your gun, wanker. What is so precious about that? You have lost your other eight lives because you welcome violence into your world. Farewell.
bartonim 1 month ago
Gore Vidal summed provided an early showing of the singular attack of the leftist movement. When confronted with conservatism allege stupidity and racism. Talk about a weak counter argument. What a sign of the future though, a liberal cannot combat conservatism without twisting or totally recreating the truth and therefore must fall back on allegations that are sure to arouse special interest groups and minorities.
MrWalshy26 1 month ago
like Vidal would ever live among blacks. what a snob.
knightschwartz 1 month ago
Gore sucks, and that's a fact.
tnekkc 2 months ago
@tnekkc Why don't you offer to debate him and prove your point? Even in his advanced years, he's rip you a new one.
bartonim 1 month ago
@bartonim
I was hunting with some wimpy math teacher who started arguing politics.
I told him that he wanted more collectivism and I wanted more individualism, and there was no point arguing over the ramifications of those points of view.
Likewise with that aging gay liberal.
tnekkc 1 month ago
@tnekkc Conservatism is the least individualistic of political movements, and that's the great irony. Take a look at all the classic conservative ideas that amount to oldies being aghast at new and institution upsetting movements. The usual uproar about each successive youth movement, from rock n' roll in the 50s to punk to Marilyn Manson, and so on, the anger and closed-mindedness comes from the right. Oh, and the gay comment sort of proves my final point, doesn't it?
bartonim 1 month ago
@bartonim
I want to carry a gun per my rights.
Who wants to steal my rights? Liberals.
I want to keep the money I earn with a minimum of taxes?
Who wants to steal my money? Liberals.
I want to use my land.
Who wants to steal my land rights? Liberals
The list goes on and on of individualism vs collectivism.
Back door Marxism is back door Marxism.
tnekkc 1 month ago
@tnekkc Land ownership is a concept the Europeans brought to the new world with them. It wasn't one the native people of North America shared, that is for sure. Also, conservatives tend to be very religious--not exclusively, but certainly more so than liberals. And my bible knowledge (I was confirmed into the Lutheran church, but I'm no longer Christian) tells me there is a load of collectivist ideas just in Christ's teaching. How do you square that with your politics, if you are Christian?
bartonim 1 month ago
@bartonim
I am an individualist.
I do not want to share anything with liberals.
I want those lazy incompetents to starve or be killed by inner city youths, who are animals, because of liberal entitlement laws broke down their family structure.
I don't care about any Arab terrorists.
The problem is liberals; Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Obama, Cavez, Vidal, Castro, and all the other collectivists that say they will make life fair, and then destroy everything.
tnekkc 1 month ago
@tnekkc Well, your mommy taught you some manners, didn't she? You want people you disagree with to be killed??! And calling Hitler a liberal is precious. All totalitarians, no matter what they call themselves, are most certainly not liberal. Stalin may have called himself a communist but no more believed in Marxism than, well, Reagan!
Tell me, what's in your record collection? That says an awful lot about most people, I guarantee it!
bartonim 1 month ago
@tnekkc Still stuck on the Left vs. Right thing, huh? That's too bad. You do realize that BOTH PARTIES are bought and paid for by special interests, right? And those special interests basically force legislation to pass that only benefits them. BOTH PARTIES are guilty of this.
Until we fix it, nothing will change.
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
@ChrisCapel1998
I realize you cannot get elected without corruption in the form of low life welfare or corporate welfare.
But it is a choice between eating dog doo doo and strychnine.
The liberals will steal the money and wreck the economy. The conservatives will steal the money and allow the economy to grow.
tnekkc 1 month ago
@tnekkc No no. The conservatives will steal the money and continue their war-mongering. The liberals will continue to take their largest donations from teacher's unions, which keeps tenure alive, which destroys our education system. Both war-mongering and failing education systems are crippling to any civilization.
The argument of which is worse is absolutely moot when you know the root cause of both. Cut at the root, and you get rid of all symptoms. It's not rocket surgery.
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
@ChrisCapel1998
Obama has spent more money we did not have than all previous Presidents.
He is a Marxist trying to wreck America, because he hates it.
There will always be wars. We need wars to establish territory. But need them or not, we will always have them, no matter what. If we did not have wars, life would be miserably constipated.
tnekkc 1 month ago
@tnekkc Regarding the war stuff: That's truly a sad outlook on life. And about as incorrect as it is ridiculous. People like you stand in the way of real change.
Obama is just doing what the elite with all the money tell him to. Just like everyone else in Washington. Wake up, man. You sound like a broken record.
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
@ChrisCapel1998
Obama has not just surrounded himself with evil men, he is evil.
tnekkc 1 month ago
@tnekkc Good Lord you're an idiot. Please don't vote. (unless it's for Ron Paul.)
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
damn gore vidal was a sexy motherfucker
MarcusTheReverent 2 months ago 6
"Reagan hats all welfare programs."
Uh, why do you think he was the best President of this century?
bigpoppabball 3 months ago
@bigpoppabball haha so true
MrKingvanilla83 3 months ago
@bigpoppabball Sorry, but the best President of the 20th century was Ike. Jimmy Carter comes in a distant second. Reagan was one of the worst presidents of the 20th century, behind only Ted & Franklin Roosevelt.
dudelikesWoW 2 months ago
@dudelikesWoW I think people ought to give Clinton some due as well. After all, he presided over a surplus economy and avoided conflicts abroad generally. But I will agree about Ike and Carter.
bartonim 1 month ago
@bartonim I hate to say it, because you're absolutely right, but he bombed Middle Eastern countries -every week- during his presidency. Frankly, in my book, that makes him as bad as the Bush's or LBJ.
dudelikesWoW 1 month ago
@dudelikesWoW Well, you do have a point. Of course as Chomsky put it, all post-war Presidents ought to have had the Nuremberg standards applied to them as well, so in that sense Clinton is guilty. Just a bit less so than some, but I acknowledge your point. Thanks!
bartonim 1 month ago
Comment removed
JackBootCharlie 3 months ago
Nehgro?
help4343 3 months ago
Too many thick people in the comments with zero knowledge of political history. Or anything else much.
nakedmambo 3 months ago
Oh my goawd...he is such a cutey-pie.....!!
hereisthankappan 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The path that Gore Vidal preaches leads to tyranny. It's absolute, there is no right or left, only up or down!
orbithesun1 3 months ago
Comment removed
jredbar 3 months ago
@jredbar You are mentally ill -- and you know how I can tell? Because everything you write sounds like it is being awkwardly translated into English by Google Translator. Also, the fact that your comments are being removed is ample testament to the fact that there is something seriously wrong with you. DO NOT WRITE BACK!!! I'M NOT JOKING!!! DO NOT WRITE BACK OR MENTION ME AGAIN!!!
ColumbiaPerna 3 months ago
@ColumbiaPerna mentally ill? The guy happens to have an excellent command of the english language. Excuse me for butting in on your argument but it does irritate me when people are mocked for being articulate. Regardless of what he had to say, he at least said it in a well structured, coherent manner, better that than "I fink gore vidal iz well gr8"
alanthe2 3 months ago
@alanthe2 A lot of people have an excellent command of the English language -- that doesn't mean they aren't psychotic. You need to learn how to read between the lines, honey.
ColumbiaPerna 3 months ago
@ColumbiaPerna I'm not disputing that, If you read my comment I wrote: "regardless of what he had to say, he at least said it in a well structured, coherent manner". Perhaps if you read between the lines a little less and just read the lines, you might have understood my point. I don't care what you were discussing, just don't mock someone for how they communicate, take issue with what they're saying, not how they say it.
Also, please don't call me honey again.
alanthe2 3 months ago
@alanthe2 Listen, sweetie. We could sit here all day and play semantics -- but now you're sounding a lot like the psycho -- only a Jewish version. Go away --
ColumbiaPerna 3 months ago
Comment removed
jredbar 3 months ago
Comment removed
jredbar 3 months ago
Everyone knows that Reagan the man is not the same as Reagan the myth which has been promulgated by the right wing for nearly 20 years. They turned him into some kind of hero when in fact many of the problems with our economy that we face today had a start during his administration. Reagan was no saint, was only an average President. Just as Cheney was the puppet master for GW Bush it is now well known that Bush Sr. was the puppet master for Reagan. Deficit spending, bloated defense, etc...
TheTubePortal 3 months ago
@TheTubePortal did you watch the Chomsky interview by Marr? now the master has become the puppet and the cycle is complete. (the latter sentence has nothing to do with the interview).
jredbar 3 months ago
@jredbar In one of your earlier posts you suggested that the conservatives vs liberals controversy is contrived, but I disagree. Those known as "the powers that be" have for almost 50 years been exclusively ultra conservatives who in league with the Federal Reserve work hand-in-hand with the corporate giants seeking to eliminate all hindrances such as taxes, environmental laws, trade restrictions, etc... Liberals though are called commies/socialists/wackos/slackers/hippies/elitist, etc...
TheTubePortal 3 months ago
@TheTubePortal (disregard me if I sound to you like a conspiracy theorist) that is not to say that we should not be having moral discussions or standing for a side when we believe its just but never should you be confined to a party. we should always be questioning our own motives and whether or not all the facts are present. i do recommend that interview if you have not seen it. it sounded as if you might have.
jredbar 3 months ago
Comment removed
jredbar 3 months ago
Comment removed
jredbar 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheTubePortal stances within that box can be virtuous but oscillate rapidly and continuously. in conventional liberalism there is a line within forbidden to cross and liberalism is used when conservatism strays from the interest of the elite. there are checks and balances in both parties manipulated by those 'powers'. elite use good intent of man and corrupt or misdirect.
jredbar 3 months ago
@TheTubePortal forgive me for writing a book here. I sincerely agree with your point to an extent and I was polarized in my previous statement. Yet I view the liberal/conservative party lines to be embedded in a box contrived by 'the powers that be' to diverge the conversation from the more essential questions (and this is where i show my true political ignorance if I have not already) of which I'm not all together certain (pretty lame of me huh).
jredbar 3 months ago
@TheTubePortal yes the elites would be considered conservatives. yet they exist outside of what we see as the conservative party.
jredbar 3 months ago
@jredbar Tthe powers that be, those with the real power, are all conservative, pro big-business, anti-government, etc... and oppose anything that interferes with their profits or their power and will use both to get what they want. If I understand you correctly to say that the typical argument of "liberals are socialist! conservatives are fascists!" et. al. is merely entertainment to keep people blinded from dealing with the real problems, I agree. It's become a team sport, but few jocks read.
TheTubePortal 3 months ago
@TheTubePortal sorry for posting backwards, if was noticeable. was thinking too hard. half heartedly agree; jocks read, just not between the lines and are easily manipulated, AND in the real world conservatives aren't merely jocks. I have one real point to make with your view and that is, liberals are pro big-business as well.
jredbar 3 months ago
@TheTubePortal typically the conservative platform is for home grown business (not necessarily local but american) and liberals are in support of technologically advanced international business. where the elite influence comes in as far as the conservatives is the hinderance of unionization among others (i am unsure of).
jredbar 3 months ago
@TheTubePortal there are so many spheres within sphere here that what you read and watch in the popular media is grossly misleading cause where you find a majority polarizing the issues is where you find corruption, which is found in either camp. there are good and bad liberal and conservative stances. what makes either hard to stomach is the parties unwillingness to just look at facts when realities arise. and that inability is influenced by those elite i keep harping on (sorry bout that)
jredbar 3 months ago
Wow, thanks for posting Vidal's concerns about candidate Reagan! I wonder if Reagan only being out of the country once will hurt him when negotiating with the Soviets. I wonder if Reagan will bring renewed segregation of the Negroes. These are important concerns to consider!
timmoreland 4 months ago
@timmoreland History is always relative. Right?
jredbar 3 months ago
Gore Vidal is an old queen! He's had more hustler meat in his mouth than a dog rustling through Larry Flynt's garbage can.
ColumbiaPerna 4 months ago
@ColumbiaPerna Your point sir? Meat is delicious! I'm confident your mouth is full of it currently.
jredbar 3 months ago
@jredbar You call me Sir? My name is Columbia, you retard. ! Anyway, you write like a schizophrenic -- I'm sure you are one -- if you have no money, every county has a mental health center.
ColumbiaPerna 3 months ago
Comment removed
jredbar 3 months ago
Comment removed
jredbar 3 months ago
@ColumbiaPerna Mr. Columbia, could you recommend to me the mental health center preferred by yourself? The only issue you took with my comment was that it respectfully addressed you as sir? that surely appears to be a worthy outlet to direct your anger. I'll take it on omission of denial that all else said was accurate. all insults aside, what was the point of your hateful comment on vidal (of whom i have formed no significant opinion) and what merit did it serve?
jredbar 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ColumbiaPerna There is an attempt to inject thought with my nonsense which I could accept as being faulted but Columbia, you sound as merely pounding angrily at a keyboard stringing together perversions. I suppose I could be accused of the same. Please if you would, explain to me what coherent issues you take with vidal. You may wish to reply with more hate but thus would merely strengthen a case for ignorance, as your deeper thoughts may prove as well. mull carefully over it.
jredbar 3 months ago
You people are seriously arguing over 1 minute and 31 seconds of out of context video posted on the same information network you masturbated to aren't you?
aerophyte 4 months ago
@aerophyte To keep it fair and balanced I argue over the politics of the porn I watch and use both my right and left hands alternately.
jredbar 3 months ago
@jredbar My question is, do you know which hand you use on which night, and most of all, does the other hand get jealous?.
XavierMarkus1 3 months ago 5
@XavierMarkus1 maybe I misrepresented myself a bit. I intended to allude that both hands are present and tag team in and out at agreed upon intervals. Alas yes, there is of course bound to be some jealousy since my penis (can I say penis on youtube) does have a favorite but that detail stays between the parties involved and not even I am privy to that info. you're a peach for indulging my absurd behavior. maybe you want to flag this comment?
jredbar 3 months ago
@jredbar ROTFLMAO!!!... Flag it no, infact I want commend you for being a good egg and having a sense of humor. I did vote it up. I staute you.
XavierMarkus1 3 months ago
@XavierMarkus1 well thanks a bunch. I am perpetually second guessing how close minded i sound on these things. and am constantly compelled to comment even to the extent of my own annoyance. glad to not have offended you! though I do hope someone was.
jredbar 3 months ago
Gore Vidal is not brilliant. He goes to point out who Reagan had supported in the past, and by doing so tries to discredit him by showing the extreme those people where. Vidal shows himself to be the typical 50's/ 60's political liberal in this bit, pointing out the faults without giving substance to his argument against Reagan. It's as if he shooting spitballs with the wind hoping something sticks to the wall, and in doing so he discredits his target. What he doesn't see is, that he misses.
XavierMarkus1 4 months ago
@XavierMarkus1 how does intending to hit a target discredit that target? and if you are shooting with the wind would that not assist your shot? aligning ones self with extremists implies nothing of that persons character?
jredbar 3 months ago
@jredbar Videl Spitball is the Practice "Guilt by association". And doing so he shooting them "against the wind." A better way to say it, Videl is the artist who throws something wall, hoping it sticks and calling it art. In this case he tries to discredit Reagan, and he has no ammo deep down. The sad part is, everyone on the extreme of either side ( to include people on youtube) practice this, and they keep missing the target, because of the ignorance of the subject they are critical about.
XavierMarkus1 3 months ago
@XavierMarkus1 I agree, everyone has a tendency toward ignorance. in general even the good intentioned ignore the fact and opt for the truth or spin fact, but truth sits outside of reality. nature recognizes not conservative or liberal ideals. specifics tend to elude me and more emergent properties rest at the forefront. if you were to calculate where these random spitballs hit, would they not reveal a certain fact of the matter? aiming regardless of precision does not make the wind just.
jredbar 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jredbar I tend to agree about the ideal; " reveal a certain fact of the matter", But it's the matter of how the spitballs hitting the target are intended to interpreted by the audience that Videl is trying to reach in with his argument. In this case, most of the spitballs are not hitting the target, and what spitballs do, did not stick enough to derail Reagan's run for Governor, muchless his run for President later.
XavierMarkus1 3 months ago
Comment removed
luminakids 4 months ago
Indoctrination disables cogent thought ... how sad. Obvious contradictions and outright lies simply elude the liberal mind. They can dispense nonsensical nostrums, blatant lies and utterly fabricated histories with the same ease most reserve for breathing. How genuinely sad.
PartnersInGrace 4 months ago
@PartnersInGrace Instead of making any effort to have reasonable conversation, you're in the comments dispelling others opinions to make them seem as though they are "nonsensical." One's ego is all too transparent when labeling someone to a negative stigma rather than addressing the complexity of individual ideas. By the way, every piece of history has been written with some bias, it's inevitable. Stop being a sheep and realize that it's not left vs. right it's the elite vs everybody else.
luminakids 4 months ago 16
@luminakids to tell you the truth i dont think its the elite, i think its the super elite. maybe your elite is the same thing as my super elite.
MrKingvanilla83 3 months ago
@luminakids yeah but the right wing is alot more for the elite than the left is--you cant just ignore this huge discrepancy
pawndominance1 2 months ago
@pawndominance1 Who cares?! Your point is moot. In the end the elite just continue to rule the world. Don't waste yours or anyone else's time with the Left vs. Right pissing contest. It's pointless and counter-intuitive.
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
@ChrisCapel1998 so the facts dont matter? What are you talking about
pawndominance1 1 month ago
@pawndominance1 No, the Left vs. Right debate doesn't matter when both parties are run by lobbyists and special interests. You're just cutting at the branches when you should be cutting at the root.
Get politicians on both sides working for the American tax payer again and that solves the majority of our problems. You're just feeding a pointless debate that has little to nothing to do with the actual problem.
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
@ChrisCapel1998 ok so you say that the problem is both parties are run by lobbyists--and I agree with you--Then when I say but one side is run by lobbyists ALOT more than the other side--you say no, it doesnt matter. Non-partisan, lets all work together is a non-sense ideology--if there wasnt anything to disagree about then there wouldnt be politics. One side is full of insane people who dont know anything about the policies and the other isnt, you cant just marginalize that distinction
pawndominance1 1 month ago
@pawndominance1 My point is this: There's no point in chopping at the branches of the problem when you know what the root is. The fact that politicians on both sides are controlled by special interests IS THE ROOT. Let's fix the root, and then we can point the finger at which party did the most damage.
And by the way, unless you're a Washington insider, I don't think it's possible to know which party is doing more damage. It should be enough that they both are and have been for some time.
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
@ChrisCapel1998 Yes lets go after the root but the fact that one party represents a lot more of the root is an important one. One side lies and deceives and distorts to get the 60 million poor peasants to come out and vote against their interests. Thats the only way republicans get elected: misinformation-This tnekkc guy is a perfect example. He thinks Obama has spent more than any president--he thinks Obama is a marxist, that Obama is evil--why do you think he thinks these things?
pawndominance1 1 month ago
@pawndominance1 And here you sit pointing the finger at the other side. It's an absolute waste of time to have this discussion when both parties are at fault.
Obama just signed a bill that would allow the government to lock up American citizens indefinitely without due process. Bush signed the Patriot Act.
Both sides are corrupt. Until you stop special interest funding to BOTH parties, the ratio of corruption is moot. Fighting about who's worse is what the elite want.
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
@pawndominance1 In short: I'm talking about an issue that is absolutely non-partisan. (a congress corrupted by money) This is all about common sense. A plain-as-day conflict of interest that anyone can get on board with, regardless of party, religion, race, class or creed.
ChrisCapel1998 1 month ago
@PartnersInGrace do you not realize that the spectrum between left and right is contained within a stratum of the super elite? any bickering is essentially a fools game, busy work and only serving to the interests of those who hold real power. or so iv'e heard said. who is your partner? and what grace do you intend to achieve here? greatest of respect intended.
jredbar 3 months ago
Only a Lefty could view this nonsense (and cowardice ... where's the rebuttal) as effective. This is precisely the sort of pseudo-intellectualism, patent dishonesty, indolence and effeteness that so markedly characterizes the Left and leaves thinking observes not merely unimpressed but distrustful and disdainful of them.
PartnersInGrace 4 months ago
@PartnersInGrace And only a close minded Righty could agree with your bigotry and not recognize it for what it is...a fear of change. It is precisely your type of racism and bigotry that is harbored deep within Conservatism and denied so poorly. It is Conservatism that promotes distrust and disdain...not Liberalism. Go back to school and get an education.
greenarcher180 4 months ago
@PartnersInGrace what you said is the typical-sounding view of liberals by right-wing ideologues (and their view is very off on a lot of things, to say the least) I thought the right hated anything remotely intellectual (and Gore Vidal is an intellectual ,not a "pseudo"-intellectual. At least people on the left don't see things in terms of black and white (literally and figuratively) like Conservatives do - people on the right have a viewpoint and RIGIDLY stick to it no matter how wrong they r
Claronium780 4 months ago
I'm not a friend of the negroe either.
clinicalreaction 5 months ago
"We may be heading not for general breakdown but for an epoch as horribly stable as the slave empires of antiquity. James Burnham’s theory has been much discussed, but few people have yet considered its ideological implications - that is, the kind of world-view, the kind of beliefs, and the social structure that would probably prevail in a State which was at once unconquerable and in a permanent state of 'cold war' with its neighbours." George Orwell (1945)
PierreBayle1697 5 months ago
That's it? This was at best a biased opinion with a unqualified piece of fact laced in, but peeled like an onion? That's a huge stretch. You show me Vidal in a debate with Reagan and we'll see who gets peeled.
mint1850 5 months ago
What an annoying fag
prrolg 5 months ago
Reagan was an average president. He was great, when it came to outspending the Soviet Union and wrecking Leninism. Obviously the USA had deeper pockets and a better credit line than the Soviets did. In this way, spending us trillions into debt for the first time EVER, Reagan avoided WW3 between Russia and the US. However, especially in the years post-Reagan, extreme deficit spending has continued to dog and handicap the United States. Obama is merely Reaganesque, when he borrows 2 trillion.
ebonics4everyone 5 months ago
@ebonics4everyone I am Canadian and even I know that Reagan didn't want to increase spending by that much, he was just to kind or foolish to think that the democrats under Tip Oneil would cut spending as promised in exchange for some bending on defense projects and tax cuts by Ron.
EasyEs 5 months ago
You'll notice that they don't have intellectuals on TV anymore -- too dangerous -- so instead they give us Dem party hacks like on MSNBC...
MEpianist 6 months ago
It is very odd to watch this, expecting laughter from someone in the background but hearing nothing. Almost like he's reporting news.
rachelmdw 6 months ago
1876 was the price I paid for gas once. I thought of Burr when I saw it written
on an Eskimo Pie package.
monkeybutler20 6 months ago
How are Straw Man arguments against Reagan to be held as brilliance? Seems to me it would take a frothing zealot to buy into something as transparent as this.
alamaklt 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alamaklt
"How are Straw Man arguments against Reagan to be held as brilliance?"
...What in this clip is a straw man? I having trouble how anything Vidal says could qualify as a straw man as he's not trying to knock any argument down, be it real or made up.
Were you meaning to say the things Vidal said are not true? If so that is a different thing then a straw man argument.
Anyways, what is wrong with what he said?
jimbrown257 6 months ago
@alamaklt Perhaps so. But doesn't that overwhelmingly characterize the community of the Left?
Mind, these are the same sort that offered up Lenin, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao and Castro as the "geniuses of our times". Amongst such people, slavishly transparent zealotry is a virtue.
DrCruel 6 months ago
@DrCruel "geniuses of our times" - You see much of that is out time and context. Any person for who's anti-plutocracy and against centralised elites would correctly initially laud many of those people as they replaced even more centralised plutocratic dictatorships that came before them.
CmdrTobs 6 months ago
@CmdrTobs Really? What sort of "anti-plutocracy" did Stalin represent? Mao? What what Lenin did to the democratic Duma meant to "abolish plutocracy"? In what possible way?
Please. We're talking about people who established and rallied behind brutal plutocracies, not abolished them.
DrCruel 6 months ago
@DrCruel Um it was the rightwing that promoted Mussolini. & Stalin, Mao Lenin, & Castro all are right wing figures.
Fuctmentality 6 months ago
@Fuctmentality Oh yeah, I forgot. Leftists are habitual hypocrites and liars too.
DrCruel 6 months ago
@DrCruel How so?
Fuctmentality 6 months ago
@DrCruel Oh yeah I forgot rightwingers don't understand the concepts of hypocrisy & truth.
Fuctmentality 6 months ago
@Fuctmentality No doubt. "Right wingers" like George Orwell didn't understand the malleability of language - about how the prime example of the perfect Marxist utopia one day could be a "rightist, reactionary state capitalist regime" the next. "Right wingers" simply don't know how to use hypocrisy and selective interpretations of the truth to get what they want.
But not a sophist cretin like Gore Vidal. That guy knows how to lay it down thick. His sycophantic fans love him for it.
DrCruel 6 months ago
@DrCruel Orwell the reformed anarchist & democratic socialist? The man who hated hierarchical social structures. Seriously Mao, Stalin, Lenin all headed regimes that had strict hierarchical social structures, thus they were right wing.
Fuctmentality 6 months ago
@Fuctmentality Yes, exactly. That "rightist". Because he was declared a traitor by the mainstream Left.
Seriously, Leftists aren't even remotely consistent when they declare people to be "Rightists". It all goes along with the rest of their hypocritical, self-serving religion masquerading as an ideology. Standard policy for them is to declare any of their scams that have run their course to have actually been "right wing state capitalist regimes" all along. They're habitual con artists.
DrCruel 6 months ago
@DrCruel whom exactly declared Orwell was right wing? give names please?
Fuctmentality 6 months ago
@Fuctmentality After only a short bit of research:
Victor Gollancz (because of Orwell's criticism of Stalin during the Spanish Civil War)
Kingsley Martin (because Orwell refused to join in solidarity with Left fascism)
T. S. Eliot (because Orwell's Animal Farm appeared to be critical of the Stalinist regime)
None of this is a secret. Orwell was marginalized and ousted, because he wouldn't accept Bolshevik dominance within the Left. He was "rehabilitated" only after he was safely dead.
DrCruel 6 months ago
@DrCruel What exactly is left fascism? & Aren't you in essence declaring that all "leftists" are something based on the actions of a few?
Fuctmentality 6 months ago
@Fuctmentality I admit it's a bit redundant, as fascism is essentially a reform of Marxism. In this context, I'm talking about Bolshevism (under Stalin and his successors, basically a form of Russian national socialism). A modern form of Left fascism would be the present government of the PRC.
In fascist regimes, business people are not killed outright but are allowed to exist as appendages of the state apparatus. In a Left fascist regime, such a state calls itself "Marxist".
DrCruel 6 months ago
@DrCruel You are right that Marxism will always descend into totalitarianism. However Marxism does not represent the whole of 'the left'.
WishCRUS4D3R 6 months ago
@DrCruel That's just it though, fascism is always right wing, & no where near marxism. What you're talking about is red fascism, which is again right wing. & I know of no state that has ever called itself "Marxist", not the USSR, Not PRC, none of them have.
Fuctmentality 6 months ago
@Fuctmentality In regards "Leftists", I want to distinguish between the meaningless hypocrisy of Leftist ideology and what Leftists do in actual practice. In practical terms, Leftists are not part of a "dichotomy" (thus, there is no established "Right" in opposition), but are more like a transnational for-profit criminal mafia.
I base my judgement on the activities of the vast majority of Leftists, which range from sedition-for-profit to the welfare industry to organized drug trafficking.
DrCruel 6 months ago
@Fuctmentality Then again ...
"It's not hard to see why Orwell is the darling of the ruling-class newspapers mentioned above. He may genuinely have attempted to provide a critique of Stalin’s USSR ``from the left’’, but all that he actually produced — in Animal Farm at least — was a banal piece of ruling-class propaganda.
Animal Farm thus fails utterly as a critique of Stalinism `from the left’... "
-Alex Miller, "Orwell’s Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four" (2008)
DrCruel 6 months ago
@DrCruel Your logic is utterly fatuous, as well as totalitarian, that because some members of the 'left' marginalized and denounced Orwell that automatically forfeits his sincerely held socialist beliefs. In your reading of Orwell you've clearly mastered the concept of doublethink. Going by your line of thought might we not argue that National Socialism was a right wing ideology considering most leftists marginalized and ousted fascists? You cannot have it both ways.
PierreBayle1697 5 months ago
@PierreBayle1697 Not my argument, just chipping in, although Orwell was a committed socialist at one point I believe he became greatly dissaffected with socialism at one point and this continued for the rest of his life.
I may be wrong though.
fragman08 5 months ago
@fragman08 This is a myth. He became disappointed with the way many British socialists were supporting tacitly Stalinism. He had, after all, seen it destroy the Spanish Revolution. He died in 1950 so he never saw the Hungary repression and the turn away from Stalin, which would have lifted his spirits. He remained a socialist to the end, it's clear in his letters.
nakedmambo 3 months ago
@DrCruel "It is superfluous for Conservatives to claim Orwell as an ally in the Cold War...Indeed, he is credited with coining the term 'cold war', in a paragraph that deserves quotation. On 19 October 1945, in an essay entitled 'You and the Atom Bomb’ he drew attention to both the military and the political dangers inherent in a weapon that, not merely unprecedentedly destructive of the innocent, could only be wielded by an elite"
- Christopher Hitchens 'Why Orwell Matters' (2002)
PierreBayle1697 5 months ago
"Where is the rest of HIM?" -- ah, the Vidal toss-off aside! Splendid.
ATsarIsBorn 6 months ago 2
gore's half-assed comments about the 60s apply to many living democrats today, just another example of the intellectual dishonesty of the left and gore in particular. Regarding gore's comments that reagan turned to the right after marrying nancy -- he turned away from the left much earlier, when he the president of the screen actors' guild and saw first hand the radical agenda leftist promote.
dsanthony 6 months ago 2
@dsanthony What is the agenda "the left" promote? What dangerous power is it that must be battled?
RSFO 6 months ago 3
anthony demello
animalman1122 7 months ago
awful misleading title meant to draw in viewers. youtube needs a "this uploader is a moron" button.
zackhanscom 7 months ago
He is an affected asshole. I hate hearing him speak. That is why I turned off his annoying voice within ten seconds.
greenranger8100 7 months ago
Using Reagan's movie career to illustrate his character is a bit like using Vidal's homosexual acts to symbolize him. Classic liberal tactic - attack the man, avoid the issue.
netjunkie9 7 months ago
@netjunkie9 You don't have to attack Reagans movie career to prove he had no character, in fact, you don't have to go any further than his lies to his supporters about being an anti-tax conservative, he robbed himself of greatness when he raised taxes 11 times. I'm sorry to burst your bubble by bringing facts into this, but . . .
you lose.
imaginativelads 7 months ago
@imaginativelads at the time of this clip Reagan was just getting into politics - Vidal knew nothing about the man but that didn't stop him from being a drama queen on the subject. And as far as Reagan as a president, anyone who was actually alive during the Carter administration can appreciate what Reagan was able to accomplish.
netjunkie9 7 months ago 2
@netjunkie9 symbolise him? wouldn't that be just a a statement, or are you homophobic?
pughdafis 7 months ago
@pughdafis he's choosing to criticize someone's personal life - something that has nothing to do with the subject being discussed. It's what liberals tend to do when they're backed into a corner or can't think of anything relevent to say.
netjunkie9 7 months ago
@netjunkie9 i didnt disagree with that, i was just pointing out the negative tone of your stating his homosexual acts.
pughdafis 6 months ago
@pughdafis the only negative tone is that in the video which was my point.
netjunkie9 6 months ago
@netjunkie9 ok, fair enough.
pughdafis 6 months ago
Sounds mostly like an ad hominem attack. That is what little children do.
thedavidwilson 9 months ago
@thedavidwilson bro, argumentum as hominem is totally appropriate when the legitimate target of attack is the man, as opposed to his particular opinion. wildly spamming the terms "strawman" and "ad hominem" is what children do.
KrisdashPaul 9 months ago
@KrisdashPaul Hi "bro", My mistake. I though Vidal was presuming to have substance in his speech. If it is just insulting someone then it is totally in character for him. Maybe someday he he will be ready address the substance of Reagan's decisions and choices he made.
btw insulting someone furthers no intellectual or rational debate so this speech is kind of a waste of time.
thedavidwilson 9 months ago
@thedavidwilson don't you know how television works? nobody has substance. substance doesn't sell; it doesn't make ratings. only acid does. i am not making any comment on what should be, only what is.
KrisdashPaul 9 months ago
@thedavidwilson You mean your children after you fuck 'em right.
malkooth 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thedavidwilson You mean your children after you fuck 'em right.
malkooth 2 months ago
the cooleest mean bitchy fag that ever was. that tongue is a razor!
fishpawsable 10 months ago
look at the poison these liberal commentaries on here spill.
WintersWar 10 months ago
nice to hear some truth