I would say hit'em straight but we all know you are gay!
I played nine this morning. Shot a 38. Feeling pretty good about myself right about now!
Originally Posted by WTF
Noam Chomsky is an idiot if he thinks Jefferson advocated for a highly progressive income tax. I don't believe it. He spoke about property taxes in a letter to Madison, but that was concerning property inequality in France. Chomsky is taking things out of context and making stuff up. Like many on here do. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuyChomsky is a blatant liar -- that makes him a blatant idiot.
One of the authors – a Chomsky peer – on that list is Oliver Kamm: a very vocal critic of Chomsky and his work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_KammHaving taken a course from the now dead Sam Huntington, who I knew a little, I can tell you he wasn't well respected among his peers or colleagues. He was a gross exaggerator and polemicist in the mold of other Harvard morons like Nadav Safran, Henry Kissenger, Laurie Mylroie, and countless others. And that was well before he blew up what little prestige he had left by publishing "Clash of Civilizations," which spelled the end of his career.
January 26, 2005
Chomsky and the Vietnam War - a study in propaganda
In my comment about Noam Chomsky earlier this week, I advanced three propositions. First, his central political notion is not about Vietnam, or Timor, or Palestine: it is that the US is equivalent to Nazi Germany. Secondly, his handling of source material is dishonest. Thirdly, these characteristics are not recent developments, but date back to his earliest political writings. In this post I shall provide an example that illustrates all these points simultaneously. . . .
http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2...and_the_1.html
Another on that list is Samuel P. Huntington – an original source – that Chomsky purposefully misquotes:
A Frustrating Task
February 26, 1970
In response to:
After Pinkville from the January 1, 1970 issue
To the Editors:
In the space of three brief paragraphs in your January 1 issue, Noam Chomsky manages to mutilate the truth in a variety of ways with respect to my views and activities on Vietnam.
. . . . By omitting my next sentence—”Peace in the immediate future must hence be based on accommodation”—and linking my statement about the Viet Cong to two other phrases which appear earlier in the article, Mr. Chomsky completely reversed my argument. (Incidentally, the phrase “direct application of mechanical and conventional power” is not mine, but one which I quote from Sir Robert Thompson. Mr. Chomsky, however, does not see fit to recognize these distinctions of authorship.) . . . .
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/arch...strating-task/
And then there is the eminent scholar Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.’s analysis at:
http://www.paulbogdanor.com/chomsky/schlesinger.pdf
Here’s an excerpt:
Originally Posted by I B Hankering
wtf ... if you are ever in the Tyler area, or want to take a weekend golf vacation with a couple of friends, this was one of my favorite places to play ... Little Augusta, seriously.Me likey allot. Will check it out come Fall. To hot to play this month!
http://www.gardenvalleytx.com/
carved out a 73 ... had a stiffie all the way back to Big D Originally Posted by CJ7
Me likey allot. Will check it out come Fall. To hot to play this month!plan on 36, pal. and take an extra sleeve of eggs .. or two
I play early morning and mostly just 9 holes when it is this hot. Originally Posted by WTF
..
Having taken a course from the now dead Sam Huntington, who I knew a little, I can tell you he wasn't well respected among his peers or colleagues. He was a gross exaggerator and polemicist in the mold of other Harvard morons like Nadav Safran, Henry Kissenger, Laurie Mylroie, and countless others.Your response doesn't diminish the lie Chomsky perpetuated by deliberately misquoting Huntington..
Harvard's international affairs faculty is the most aweful and least peer-reviewed of any. MIT on the other hand has Lucien Pye, Stephen Miller, Stephen Meyer, and a host of real scholars [not political hacks and liars] who's papers are all peer-reviewed.
MIT is the publisher of International Security, the world's foremost national security journal. Harvard has nothing.
As for the other toads you put forth who allege Chomsky lies, they are similar midgets and liars themselves.
Chomsky has been ACCUSED of lying by disreputable scoundrels, but has never
been proven to have lied about anything by any distinguished, peer-reviewed scholar.\
Chomsky is the founder of modern linguistics.
He is the Einstein or Fineman of his field. Only when that field remains "linguistics". When Chomsky ventures into politics and history, Huntington, Schlesinger, Kamm and others have called him what he is: a liar.
He is without question the highest of acdemians when it comes to integrity, whether you agree with his analysis or not. Chomsky deliberately lies, misquotes and omits pertinent, mitigating information in order to further deceive the ignorant and misinformed. Chomsky has no integrity. Originally Posted by theaustinescorts
Watch Chomsky skewer Bill Buckley with the facts about Vietnam in the 1960s.Did you post the right video? No one was skewered in this. It was a pretty reasonable discussion. Buckley was no more obnoxious than usual, but he held his own, as did Chomsky.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0k9aTeoDBxw
Buckley can do nothing more than hurl insults at Chomsky because he's been run circles around with the truth. Originally Posted by theaustinescorts
are you sure, an idiot? he maybe a blantant liar, but he's a brilliant one. look at how many he's managed to fob off his lies on. I'd say that's brilliant.Only an idiot would so unabashedly state such easily reputed lies. But, another author makes the same claim you do: "America’s Dumbest Intellectual" by Stefan Kanfer @ http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_...cas_dumbe.htmlOriginally Posted by dilbert firestorm
Only an idiot would so unabashedly state such easily reputed lies. But, another author makes the same claim you do: "America’s Dumbest Intellectual" by Stefan Kanfer @ http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_...cas_dumbe.htmlpoint taken.
Foreign Policy’s Daniel W. Drezner writes: "Noam Chomsky, egomaniacal liar" @ http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2005/03/24/noam_chomsky_egomaniacal_liar
A young intern, Peter Seabrook (defending author Daniel Flynn) writes: "Chomsky: Scholar or Sap?" @ http://www.academia.org/chomsky-scholar-or-sap/
Here is a particularly revealing book review:
http://www.sydneyline.com/Anti-Chomsky%20Reader.html
Originally Posted by I B Hankering
