MORE ask Uncle Lowell, the Progressive A**hole!

You know you want it. cheerleader-lowell

Dear Uncle Lowell, Why do “progressives” hate America so much? Why did they spit on the troops returning from ‘Nam and call them baby killers? Signed, one of the many confused readers of your blog.

Well, Confused, back in the day the cultural elites of the time opposed the war. The Rosie O’Donnells and the Bill Mahers and the Dixie Chicks and the MSM of that time (think Jane Fonda, Walter Cronkite, Pete Seeger) conned us into believing it was cool. It seemed like the thing to do at the time. Everybody was doing it! [Ok, since this is John Doe’s blog, I can’t blatantly lie–just some of us were doing it. Most of the same ones who now are leaders and shakers within the Democrat party.]  Sure, we feel badly about it now, and we want to pretend that it never happened. Heck, I even had cousins who fought in Nam, therefore, all is forgiven. Did I mention I had cousins who fought in ‘Nam? That’s why it’s okey dokey for me to pal around with the same people who spit on our warriers returning from ‘Nam!Sincerely, Uncle Lowell.

Dear Uncle Lowell, why do all the posts at your blog site seem to come directly from the DNC without even any attempt on your part to think, to actually add any input, or to advance the argument? Are you a tool of the DNC? [Ok, I confess, I made this one up myself, John Doe]

Dear John, now that you asked, I do take my marching orders directly from the DNC and/or the Va Democraps, and occasionally from other blog sites who get their marching orders from them. Thinking for yourself isn’t really encouraged at blogs like mine. We “like-minded” sheeple  “independent thinkers” just like to get together and echo what we all are told that we believe. It’s worked so far. We won!  Better a cohesive block of non-thinkers who support a cause than a non-cohesive block of true independent thinkers, that’s what Komrade Obama always said when he was a “community organizer.”

Dear Uncle Lowell, why are you so fixated on Rush Limbaugh? Anonymous at the EIB network.

Dear Rush, I can’t help it, Obama says attack Rush to keep the populace from considering the horrid Porkulus Plan, that is what dimwits like me will keep doing until further notice.  Don’t blame me, my cousins fought in Vietnam! And my grand pappy was an honest hardworking American citizen who didn’t depend on welfare, blah blah blah, so whatever I say and do is excused, I guess. Sorta. [Ooops. Serious malfunction for a moment there, return to script, Lowell, you can do it.] Rush sucks. Republicans suck. Democrats are good. Thank  you for playing, Uncle Lowell, the Progressive A**hole!

76 responses to “MORE ask Uncle Lowell, the Progressive A**hole!

  1. Honestly, I thought you and Francois Tremblay were the same person. I still think that might be the case, you both scored amazingly close on the test you provided… And you both seem to be very much alike in your thought processes.

    Now as to the Viet Nam Memorial, what do you have against honoring these Veterans? I was, like you, in high school at the end of this conflict, and I had in high school debate and in Model United Nations argued for the effort in Southeast Asia. Our Veterans who gave so much were certainly not given the support and appreciation which they so deserved. So I ask you once again, what problem do you have with the Ladies Auxiliary of Chimney Rock VFW Post # 9660 having arranged for this event to memorialize these worthy individuals?

  2. Oh yes, and your picture proves to all that it is fortunate indeed that our three daughters look like their beautiful mother.

  3. and now that several hours have passed and you in a cowardly fashion have refused to engage in any debate or conversation whatsoever…

    Please let everyone know why you so stridently avoid any real discussion on the issue at hand and seek to distract by personal attack from an issue which you obviously find uncomfortable to discuss.

  4. Dang, and now we get to drag on in an embarrassing fashion whilst you try to figure a clever response. Several hours later…

  5. Your clock isn’t even accurate by the way. At least get your technology right. Please?

  6. Sheesh, Lowell, I was playing poker last night. I know it seems like I live on this blog but I really do have an alternate life. [Won $1,400 by the way.]

    Notice I never said you were one of those who spit on the troops? I said you are pal- ing around with them. You know as well as I know that the liberals did it, and now they control the Democrap party. Tom Hayden, Jane Fonda, hell I’d bet money that bitch Pelosi was out spitting the rest] Tell me that doesn’t give you pause.

    And this variation of “my cousins fought in Nam” argument is getting old. Doesn’t matter that you “argued for the effort in southeast Asia.” You sleep with dogs you get fleas.

  7. “Honestly, I thought you and Francois Tremblay were the same person. ”

    What the hell? A rabid (real leftist) Anarchist and a dyed-in-the-wool Conservative look the same to a brain-dead (wanna-be leftist) Liberal? Guess Liberals aren’t very observent, huh?

  8. Bwahaahaa! I like you Francois! You are dumb as a post politically, but you sure have Lowell pegged, and you speak your mind instead of mamby-pambying around. Lowell probably still trots out the tie-died T-shirt in fond memory of the “good old days” when he could pretend he was a radical.

  9. An extremist is an extremist is an extremist.

    What can I say, you all look alike to me.

    Seriously though, I was only jabbing a bit at my friend John by comparing the two of you. Wasn’t nice of me to do at all so, my apology John.

  10. Oh, and congratulations on a successful poker night.

  11. Of course to you “extremist” is a slur term, you’re a wannabe leftist. You probably believe that buying organic vegetables and having a gay friend makes you a radical, so when you see actual radicals you have to berate them.

  12. Ok, Francois, you have Lowell pegged (and no doubt me, too), so I’m interested in a dialogue. How did you come to be a radical? What were the influences that caused you to believe what you do? And what happens if you get your wish for anarchy? I’ve got my firearms, but I don’t have a stock of food hidden away…

  13. One thing about extremists is their inability to see detail. Probably why they’re so extreme.
    I have no desire to be a leftist, if you’re enjoying yourself then have fun.
    But it is the extreme, on both ends of the spectrum, who are pulling apart the fabric of our society.
    I just want to get the work done.

  14. First, to be honest with you, I don’t really think dialogue can lead anywhere if the two people do not share at least some fundamental premises. I am pretty sure you and I don’t have such a commonality, so it’s not likely to get anywhere.

    That being said, I have no objection to answering questions, of course.

    “How did you come to be a radical?”

    After thinking about this, I can’t really give you a specific answer. There was no specific event that led me from “totally normal person” to “radical.” I was suspicious of authority and established norms from the youngest age, but I also accepted a lot of things. My parents and my schooling were not really a big influence in one or the other direction. I think it was mainly a slow process of coming to various conclusions over more than ten years, first about religion, then about government, and then on about society in general.

    “What were the influences that caused you to believe what you do?”

    I was an Objectivist for a few years, which is a shameful part of my past, but I did take one important thing from it: a strong belief in the unfettered potential of the human mind. I was also involved in atheism for a number of years, which influenced my thinking about morality and ontology. Then I became an “anarcho-capitalist” for a while, until I realized the idealized and fradulent nature of their bill of goods, and rejected capitalism altogether.

    “And what happens if you get your wish for anarchy?”

    I have no desire for anarchy to happen tomorrow, because it’s obvious that, as long as people believe in control, they will simply appoint new and stronger governments in order to counter any such occurrences. My wish is for every individual to reject the indoctrination he’s been subject to and be able to live in a way that suits his own values, not anyone else’s values. Anarchy, which is to say global cooperation and rejection of control as a way to deal with each other, will follow from there.

    “I’ve got my firearms, but I don’t have a stock of food hidden away…”

    I support firearms, so you’ll get no objection there. And I support food even more!

  15. “I just want to get the work done.”

    Translation: “I wish you guys would shut the fuck up so we can pass the wannabe-socialist laws we want to pass.”

  16. Sorry, I made a mistake. I didn’t mean “a strong belief in the unfettered potential of the human mind,” but “a strong belief in the potential of the unfettered human mind.” You probably got the gist of it either way.

  17. Nope, I meant it how I said it.

  18. Francois, I doubt that we share any fundamental premises, but I do like the way you have Lowell figured out. And you don’t mince words. One thing about Lowell, he is a politician wannabe so he has a hard time saying what he means. Even if he doesn’t realize it.

    It sounds to me like you are a libertarian on steroids–no offense. I’m just trying to pidgeon-hole you so I can understand in my own shallow way where you are coming from.

    Can you point to any civilization anywhere that is closest to what you consider the ideal toward which you strive? Or portions thereof? I’m really interested, but may not be able to continue this until the a.m. (I have too much authority in my life…)

  19. “It sounds to me like you are a libertarian on steroids–no offense.”

    That’s probably a fair way of saying it, as a generality. However, Libertarianism in the American sense (like Ron Paul, say) is the ideology I find the most absurd, politically. They are trying to implement anti-political results by using political means. I am against all political means, whatever the expressed purpose.

    “I’m just trying to pidgeon-hole you so I can understand in my own shallow way where you are coming from.”

    Oh well you have plenty of anarchist stereotypes available already. The bomb-throwers, the communist pawns, the infantile thinkers who simply wish to overthrow systems out of frustration. However, you should know that I don’t throw bombs, I am not a communist, and I am not frustrated. So you’ll have to find another stereotype. 😉

    “Can you point to any civilization anywhere that is closest to what you consider the ideal toward which you strive? Or portions thereof?”

    You mean at present time? No. There is no civilization that I know of that is anywhere close. This is why I believe evolution, not revolution, should be the priority.

  20. I axe because I am an idealist but also a pragmatist. If sumtin don’t work I discard it. If something works, even if imperfect, I might keep it around. I think it speaks volumes that you can’t point to ANY civilization that y0u can point to that has implemented your philosophy that has actually “worked.” Doesn’t mean you are wrong, just means that, maybe, just maybe, you are off on a wrong tangent. Ever consider that?

    p.s. I’m glad you don’t throw bombs. But oh, well, I can shoot bombthrowers, so no biggie.

    p.p.s. I don’t get “They are trying to implement anti-political results by using political means. I am against all political means, whatever the expressed purpose.” Try to speak ignorant English for us pagans?

  21. “I axe because I am an idealist but also a pragmatist. If sumtin don’t work I discard it. If something works, even if imperfect, I might keep it around.”

    That’s a fair way of seeing it.

    “I think it speaks volumes that you can’t point to ANY civilization that y0u can point to that has implemented your philosophy that has actually “worked.” Doesn’t mean you are wrong, just means that, maybe, just maybe, you are off on a wrong tangent. Ever consider that?”

    Um, how exactly do you expect an anarchist takeover to “work” in a world that is dominated by States that will gladly shoot you if you try to take down one of their own? And, as the recent Somali example demonstrates, States will do anything to restore one of their own, even arming and financing their own terrorists enemies.

    There were some attempts to boot-start anarchist societies, such as the Spanish Revolution (ended by the Spanish Civil War) and the French Revolution of 1968 (ended by the threat of military force by De Gaulle).

    “I don’t get “They are trying to implement anti-political results by using political means. I am against all political means, whatever the expressed purpose.” Try to speak ignorant English for us pagans?”

    They are trying to make people free (well, their idea of freedom) by playing the democratic game. No one has ever been made free by trying to “reform the system.” They are rightly laughed at by conservatives and liberals because they don’t understand the role of government. The role of government is not to protect people or make them free.

  22. Ok, now you are losing an open minded potential convert. Instead of talking in codes, tell me what the hell you REALLY mean. You had no problem speaking your mind when you told Lowell what up. HELL YES I expect an “anarchist takeover” to “work”. If not, why bother? I won’t buy a pair of shoes that don’t fit, either. What, you want Nirvana plus before your political philosophy will work? Why bother? The USA, although not “perfect” in your mind, has “worked” quite well for the past few decades. Why buy the unknown Francois says it will work, eventually, when we have a hey it already works, sorta instead?

  23. “Ok, now you are losing an open minded potential convert.”

    It is not my intention to convert you, and I find such activities to be absolutely useless. Whatever the ideology, either you believe its principles or you don’t: when people change their minds, they merely clarify the idea in their head of what those principles are. I can tell you what my political principles are, and you might say “I agree” or “I disagree,” but I can’t make you believe in them if you don’t.

    “Why bother? The USA, although not “perfect” in your mind, has “worked” quite well for the past few decades.”

    I’m guessing we have very different definitions of “working” then. This is probably one of the fundamental premises I mentioned before. I believe that the taking and expanding of power is a failure, not a success. If that was what anarchism was about, I’d reject it in a heartbeat.

    If, once we take down all the monopolies and the corporate structures and the bureaucratic armies, people are free and still want to live in the way they live currently, then they’d be perfectly free to do so. We just don’t want any part of it. We think there’s better ways to live and relate to other people than constantly trying to control each other and form hierarchies so we can control each other even better.

    “Why buy the unknown Francois says it will work, eventually, when we have a hey it already works, sorta instead?”

    If it works for you, then believe in it. However I think you should clarify for yourself what exactly you mean by “working.”

  24. Francois Tremblay,

    Describe for me please how an anarchist bridge would be built or maintained? Or perhaps how an anarchist hospital would operate? Or a water treatment plant? Or a football team? Or a construction crew?

    You seem to be so ready to give yourself over to some “ism” or another. You’re looking for answers from ideas someone else came up with to represent you. Why not think for yourself? I know John will likely go into fits by my having said such, but then again John gets his walking orders from talk radio, so one can only expect so much… But I do love you John, make no mistake.

    Your view of anarchy assumes a respect of another’s opinion or existence. In anarchy my friend there is no such thing. The big powerful entity will dominate the little fellow. Period… This is the absolute beauty and genius of the American form of government. It provides for the protection of the interests of the individual against another group or individual’s desires.

    At the same time, our government (the United States) and our psyche (the American People) allows for and promotes teamwork toward a commonly valued goal while at the same time promoting and rewarding individual effort and intellect. Not something anarchy is given to cultivate.

    You should reread Ayn. You haven’t quite gotten the concept of the virtue of selfishness. She was a bit sideways on some things, but she provided a very valuable point of view…

  25. Lowell, do you project much? Let us review the properties you have attributed to me or anarchism:

    1. I’m looking for answers from ideas someone else came up with to represent me.
    (funnily enough, you have no idea who I am or how I arrived to my “answers,” and yet you see fit to insult me)
    2. There is no respect of another’s opinion or existence in anarchism. The big eats the strong.
    3. Anarchism does not cultivate teamwork towards a commonly valued goal while rewarding individual effort and intellect.

    1 probably describes you to a T, just by taking a look at your blog.
    2 describes our capital-democratic system perfectly: “the big eat the small,” in all areas of life, be it corporate, economic, social or political. “Might makes right” is its guiding principle. As for respect of opinion, none of that exists in democracy. Only a system based on consensus and plurality can respect everyone’s opinions. (and no, I am not talking about multiculturalism, which is the sissy liberal version of plurality)
    3, once again, describes our capital-democratic system perfectly (profit-seeking, power-seeking, no reward for individual effort).

    “You haven’t quite gotten the concept of the virtue of selfishness. She was a bit sideways on some things, but she provided a very valuable point of view…”

    I agree that your ideology fit the “virtue of selfishness” perfectly, as much as you deny it and try to project it on me.

    “Describe for me please how an anarchist bridge would be built or maintained? ”

    There is no such thing as an “anarchist bridge” any more than there is a “statist bridge.” The State does not build bridges, private companies, private individuals, build bridges. The actions required to build bridges do not change whatever one’s political ideology is.

    I know you were raised in the delusion that the State actually produces, but that’s not true. The State controls production through its economic and legal power, but it does not produce itself.

  26. Hmmm…

    The dictionary describes anarchy as such:

    anarchy
    One entry found.

    Function:
    noun
    Etymology:
    Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek, from anarchos having no ruler, from an- + archos ruler — more at arch-
    Date: 1539

    1 a: absence of government

    1b: a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c: a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

    2a: absence or denial of any authority or established order

    2b: absence of order

    Your words:
    “Only a system based on consensus and plurality can respect everyone’s opinions.”
    These words imply a system, Einstein, which would by necessity preclude the anarchist ideal.

    “There is no such thing as an “anarchist bridge” any more than there is a “statist bridge.” The State does not build bridges, private companies, private individuals, build bridges.”

    Bullshit.

    While there is no such thing as an anarchist bridge, in that you are correct,
    there exists across this United States, and across Europe and Asia, bridges which have been built by state fiat. In the United States these bridges have been built by private companies, who have been paid for by Americans of enough foresight to appreciate the benefit such projects would be to their progeny…

    “(funnily enough, you have no idea who I am or how I arrived to my “answers,” and yet you see fit to insult me)”

    No, I don’t pretend to know you, is not your own description accurate in this regard to represent who you are?

    You say:
    “2. There is no respect of another’s opinion or existence in anarchism. The big eats the strong.”

    What?

    And one thing further, you have conveniently ignored the concept, which has provided much of our gain as a society, of teamwork.

    Please tell me, explain to me, the workings of anarchy and team?

  27. I don’t mean to dominate conversation on your blog John. I’m sorry.

  28. “These words imply a system, Einstein, which would by necessity preclude the anarchist ideal.”

    Stop making a mockery of yourself by pretending to define your opponent’s position. Anarchism does not preclude the existence of systems. It precludes the existence of hierarchies. Not all systems are hierarchies.

    “there exists across this United States, and across Europe and Asia, bridges which have been built by state fiat.”

    Let us hope you are not so braindead that you actually believe that “state fiat” literally build bridges, and that you meant this as a metaphor. Please tell me you meant it as a metaphor.

    “is not your own description accurate in this regard to represent who you are?”

    I have never described myself as “looking for answers from ideas someone else came up with to represent me,” so I don’t know what you’re going on about.

    “And one thing further, you have conveniently ignored the concept, which has provided much of our gain as a society, of teamwork.
    Please tell me, explain to me, the workings of anarchy and team?”

    Look in your own life. Is there any occasion where you worked as a team with someone else without there being a hierarchy or coercion to force you to do so?

    If not, I’m sorry that your life is so dreadful.

    If yes, then you don’t need to ask me: you already know the answer.

  29. My life is pretty good. I am blessed actually.

    “Look in your own life. Is there any occasion where you worked as a team with someone else without there being a hierarchy or coercion to force you to do so?”

    Yes Francois,
    Quite often actually… In fact, most always…
    I don’t do well with coercion.

    Perhaps your description of your ideal of anarchy would be helpful? Because I don’t think you mean what you think you mean.

  30. “I have never described myself as “looking for answers from ideas someone else came up with to represent me,” so I don’t know what you’re going on about.”

    Ummm…

    Who then were you talking about with the following?:

    “I was an Objectivist for a few years, which is a shameful part of my past, but I did take one important thing from it: a strong belief in the unfettered potential of the human mind.

    I was also involved in atheism for a number of years, which influenced my thinking about morality and ontology.

    Then I became an “anarcho-capitalist” for a while, until I realized the idealized and fradulent nature of their bill of goods, and rejected capitalism altogether.”

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s