Spicoli: “I think we’re past that point in human evolution where there’s such a thing as winning wars”
posted at 1:58 pm on August 6, 2007 by Allahpundit
Oddly enough, his hero does not agree: he just replaced the head of his military, now the most powerful in South America, with the stooge who used to head up his own personal militia. Sounds good:
Gen. Baduel had criticized Mr. Chavez’s rule as unnecessarily authoritarian. “A socialist regime is not incompatible with a democratic system of checks and balances and division of powers. We must separate ourselves from Marxist orthodoxy,” he said in a farewell speech…
Another recently retired general, Muller Rojas, believes Gen. Baduel’s resignation signals a purge of the high command, which he says has become “highly politicized and partisan.”
The new defense chief, Gen. Rangel, underwent military instruction in Cuba and is expected to merge the regular army with politically directed militias armed with new AK-103 rifles purchased from Russia…
Addressing a group of graduating cadets last month, Mr. Chavez told them: “We are taking the model of the war of resistance, which is the people with the soldiers of our armed forces preparing for the defense of the nation.” The newly minted officers were required to swear to the slogan “Socialism or death” at the commencement ceremony.
Economic “progress” is advancing, too, with a 59-page blueprint for “21st century socialism.” The model calls for a “mix” combining nationalization with private investment. Quote:
“We’re distancing ourselves from the errors committed in the socialism of the past century,” [economic advisor Haiman] El Troudi said. Though El Troudi asserts that capitalism has failed, he said private capital is needed here — as long as it is employed in “a new kind of company that dignifies the human condition.”
Exit question: Aside from Spicoli, which Hollywood tool is going to be the first to lose a fortune pouring money into one of Chavez’s sinkholes?
Update: They don’t call ‘em useful idiots for nothing:
Enlivened by his conversations with Penn, the socialist president lambasted the U.S. government for “destroying the world” with war and warned of brewing economic troubles, saying Washington should do much more for its own poor.
“There could be a revolution there,” Chavez said. “We’ll help them. The United States must be helped because the United States is going to implode.”…
While Chavez made a speech, however, Penn stood at a distance alongside the audience, occasionally jotting down notes. He spoke only when Chavez asked the actor to say a few words.
“I came here looking for a great country. I found a great country,” Penn told the crowd.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Am I right in parsing this as “arrogant prick”:
nailinmyeye on August 6, 2007 at 2:02 PM
I think you could also parse this as “while I think everyone should be the same under socialism, I am more than happy to be a little ‘more’ same, than you are.”
lorien1973 on August 6, 2007 at 2:04 PM
Anytime I hear somebody talk about mankind having evolved beyond the need for war or guns I always ask for the evidence. So far I’ve heard none, although there is an unbelievable amount of proof to the contrary.
FloatingRock on August 6, 2007 at 2:06 PM
The fact that this dipshit even exists is proof that evolution is far from done with people.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 6, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Tell that to John Wayne, Charlton Heston, Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger…
MadisonConservative on August 6, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Can somebody explain to me – in small words, cuz I’m a little slow – how liberals can go on forever about Bush stealing elections, about Bush being a dictator, about the Patriot Act and FISA and wiretaps ….
…. while simultaneously heaping mounds of hot-wet libbie-love on Chavez …. a real dictator for life, who is really putting dissidents and journalists in jail?
Please. Somebody explain this. It’s like watching pro-life Republicans suddenly fawning all over the President of Planned Parenthood. Something ain’t right, you know?
And out of curiosity … how come “dissent is patriotic” in America … but dissent is worthy of jail time in Venezuela … and that’s cool with liberals?
I’m really serious – has anybody seen a liberal explain this? This man is a REAL dictator, he’s the REAL version of the boogeyman they pretend Dubya is … yet they seem almost orgasmic about him. Why?
Professor Blather on August 6, 2007 at 2:09 PM
Okay, I got lost while trying to read his little rant. As DP Gumby would say, “My brain ‘urts!”.
mram on August 6, 2007 at 2:10 PM
One’s a fascist, one’s a communist. And we all know communism “works on paper”!
MadisonConservative on August 6, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Whoops, meant to put quotes around fascist.
MadisonConservative on August 6, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Please please please move there! And stop making crap movies for which you don’t deserve an Oscar. If that country is so great, please, I encourage you to go live there.
wherestherum on August 6, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Liberal hypocrisy knows no bounds. As I’ve said before, the leftists perpetuate everything they claim to fight against–as long as it’s somewhere that’s not the US. Only the US can be the bad guy, you know.
wherestherum on August 6, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Any bets on when the wall goes up?
Theworldisnotenough on August 6, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Charles?
Stankleberry on August 6, 2007 at 2:18 PM
We are all useful tools in one way or another; just not necessarily useful idiots.
captivated_dem on August 6, 2007 at 2:19 PM
Don’t let him back into the country. Please.
Zetterson on August 6, 2007 at 2:21 PM
Now showing in communist countries worldwide,
Dead Brain Talking
fogw on August 6, 2007 at 2:23 PM
The problem is that when you’re talking to a neo-hippy, it’s impossible to express the concept of “winning” a war. To him, that means that everyone on both sides lives a long and happy life. And it wouldn’t do any good to explain to him that war NEVER worked that way – because his version of “history” began when his last pipe hit ended.
But even the most brain-damaged feeb should be able to understand what it means to LOSE a war to people who behead both brides of a gay marriage.
So if he somehow figured out that there actually is a war going on, and he doesn’t think it’s possible to “win,” well that only leaves one possible option now, doesn’t it?
logis on August 6, 2007 at 2:24 PM
Because they’re insane. They love evil, but have to pretend they don’t. Remember, most actors and other entertainers are rather unintelligent. They get fame and fortune and know that they don’t deserve it. They know they are unworthy, so they believe that destroying the society that showered blessings on them is the just thing to do.
We’ll be vexed by these clowns until society goes back to considering them mere hired help to be used and put away.
ScottG on August 6, 2007 at 2:27 PM
And the award for fastest building to be suicide bombed goes to: http://www.arabisto.com/p_blogEntry.cfm?blogEntryID=715
RiteWingFascist on August 6, 2007 at 2:31 PM
It’s been many years, but apparently Spicoli has still not recovered from Madonna f*!king his brains out.
Paul the American on August 6, 2007 at 2:31 PM
Mr. Bush “I know Sean Penn and his ilk think I’m stupid, but even I know that he’s misoverestimated humanity and himself on this one”.
Entelechy on August 6, 2007 at 2:32 PM
Sean,
If you don’t believe in war, what would you call your unending blatherous assault on America?
I’ve been to Venezuela and lived in Central America. The poverty experience their makes 9th Ward New Orleans look like Palos Verdes. Hugo Chavez usurped democracy like a vacuum in his country.
You are a pawn being used in a fool’s mate.
You are the weakest link – Goodbye!
The Race Card on August 6, 2007 at 2:33 PM
And how I miss Ayn Rand to give Spicoli a well-deserved shellacking.
Entelechy on August 6, 2007 at 2:34 PM
Jesus said about the end times,
“And when you hear of wars and tumults, do not be terrified, for these things must first take place, but the end will not be at once.” Then he said to them, “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be great earthquakes, and in various places famines and pestilences. And there will be terrors and great signs from heaven. But before all this they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors for my name’s sake. This will be your opportunity to bear witness. Settle it therefore in your minds not to meditate beforehand how to answer”
Man will never evolve beyond wars until after the Lord returns.
apostle53 on August 6, 2007 at 2:35 PM
I think we’re past that point in human evolution where we need to listen to what actors say.
I look forward to the future utopia of all CG animated movies, no actors required. No more famous overpaid self-important pricks spouting off in ignorant bliss. Oh to dream the impossible dream …
Thomas the Wraith on August 6, 2007 at 2:36 PM
Mr. Hand should have failed him. Why on earth is anyone paying attention to this fool?
Hammerhead on August 6, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Energy independence! To hell with the environment! Let the world burn! That’s what I say. We can go green later.
As long as the world’s idiots and tyrants get to do business with “greedy American businessmen”, they can delude themselves into believing that they are geniuses.
If we stopped buying oil, let’s see how long it would be before the remaining economies prove to be gangsters.
Right now China and Russia compete with us. If we were no longer customers, would the increased available supply go to nice customers at ease with demand?
No. They would be brutes, and suppliers would have to supply just as much oil as they do now, but at the lowest price reached upon our pull out.
Our strategy has been to suck the “big mouths” dry. That plan looks better now that China is in the mix. That’s we we still buy. But I say drop ‘em. Conventional wisdom is that without our demand supply would last longer. This is wrong. So let’s get out now. Coal, Ethanol, Nuclear, whatever!
Agrippa2k on August 6, 2007 at 2:53 PM
It is way past time for us to use the “Oil Weapon”.
Agrippa2k on August 6, 2007 at 2:55 PM
Unfortunately we have not evolved to the point where we can’t lose a war.
Child In Time on August 6, 2007 at 2:57 PM
Dude, know what that sound is?…….
THAT’S MY SKULL!!
bmac on August 6, 2007 at 3:02 PM
Professor, If you don’t mind a straight answer for a rhetorical question:
Liberals hate Bush.
Chavez hates Bush.
Liberals try to outdo each other insulting Bush.
Chavez called Bush “the devil”.
Bad for Bush is good for liberals.
Al Qaeda wants the U.S.A. out of Iraq.
Liberals want the U.S.A. out of Iraq.
A defeat for the U.S.A. in Iraq would be bad for Bush.
Bad for Bush is good for liberals.
Liberals hate Bush.
Ok now I’m just repeating myself. Someone seems to be stuck in circular logic.
TunaTalon on August 6, 2007 at 3:02 PM
My biggest problem is that so many people think that the opinions of actors are important. They are expert liars and deceivers that can make you believe anything they want. The better the actor the easier it is for them to deceive you. Does anyone really know what they are really like? Do they? They are paid to fool us and we eat it up. Are we really the useful idiots for giving them even the smallest shred of creditability? We create them and then whine when they bite us.
jmarcure on August 6, 2007 at 3:03 PM
heh. I love PB’s comments!
lan astaslem on August 6, 2007 at 3:12 PM
I get the circular process, I guess … but in this case, Chavez is so explicitly, openly, unquestionably the exact thing liberals claim, above all else, to be against.
I understand that liberalism is based in hypocrisy, but this goes even beyond hypocrisy. How do they stand it?
How do they call their own President a fascist dictator … rant all day long on the subject … while never being arrested for it or put in a re-education camp … and then cozy up to a real live dictator who is doing exactly that to his own dissidents?
It goes beyond hypocrisy and into some kind of pathology.
Professor Blather on August 6, 2007 at 3:16 PM
So now we can add Evolutionary Biologist to this nutsacks list of credentials?
ronsfi on August 6, 2007 at 3:21 PM
Nobody with a forehead like that needs to be talking about human evolution.
Jim Treacher on August 6, 2007 at 3:22 PM
Exactly.
They make a living pretending to be something they are not. When not on the silver screen, that would include playing the role of an expert on foreign affairs.
fogw on August 6, 2007 at 3:22 PM
My grandparents’ generation knew how to evaluate such things. My grandmother would have said, “you mustn’t pay attention to those Theatre People, dear”.
The term “Theatre People” encompassed deviance, vapidness, stupidity and general worthlessness.
We should bring it back.
NellE on August 6, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Sickening. Hopefully Venezuela will get rid of this thug and he won’t hang on as long as Castro. For the record, I think we need to be doing more to knock thugs like Chavez and Castro out of power, but that is another story.
I would love to see useful idiots like Penn take another visit to Venezuela, post-Chavez, and meet with the real Venezuelans who suffered under his dictatorship. The same goes for the Castrophiles.
reaganaut on August 6, 2007 at 3:30 PM
Now we’ve got it. The pathology has a name: “Bush derangement syndrome”.
It takes quite a bit of compartmentalization but that’s what the pathology does.
Ignore that Chavez abridges freedom of speech and focus on what he says about Bush.
Ignore what would happen if we pull out of Iraq and focus on defeating Bush.
The same people who accuse Bush of cherry picking intelligence to justify the Iraq war are now cherry picking factoids to justify defeat.
The same people who what to impeach Bush for listening in on terrorists calling into the U.S.A. are now cherry picking Chavez’s statements to declare him a “man of the people”.
Human perception is a wonderful thing.
Communication is a wonderful illusion.
TunaTalon on August 6, 2007 at 3:33 PM
This will drive Spicoli (more) nuts.
This will not support his theory either.
Entelechy on August 6, 2007 at 3:34 PM
It can’t be cured. It can only be defeated. Good education is the only answer. That’s why they are the suppressors and the opressors, the exact opposite of progressives, in the true meaning of the word.
Entelechy on August 6, 2007 at 3:40 PM
Tuna, you are confusing liberals with leftists. Leftists have no use for liberty or freedom. So they have no problem with dictators like Chavez. Penn is a leftist.
jihadwatcher on August 6, 2007 at 4:00 PM
Now just stay there and you will make me the worlds happiest person in the world .
Mojack420 on August 6, 2007 at 4:05 PM
Right you are jihadwatcher. Somehow I don’t think Madonna’s ex understands that either.
I’ve been using a single stereotype for both types.
Using stereotypes is much easier than thinking. But that’s a whole nuther story.
TunaTalon on August 6, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Are you sure this wasn’t the DNC leadership at the Yearly Kos?
CrazyFool on August 6, 2007 at 4:34 PM
5 words:
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Brat on August 6, 2007 at 5:11 PM
So the option is what? Loosing wars?
C’mon. If you can get the guys attacking me to stop attacking me then maybe I don’t need to win wars, ’cause my only other option is losing.
Hey, Sean Penn, losing is for losers. Are you a loser?
Lawrence on August 6, 2007 at 5:34 PM
Because they think that he is a champion of the oppressed and the poor. Hence his motives are different from Bush’s even if their policies are putatively the same. Unlike others here, I don’t think this is hypocrisy, but just the logical outcome of rejecting classical liberalism in favor of ideologies that are either quasi-Marxist or Marxist, ideologies that have no qualms about doing whatever is necessary to bring about a proletarian revolution.
Bill Ramey on August 6, 2007 at 6:03 PM
Jim Taggart invested his future in Wesley Mouch & Company.
Sean Pean invested his future with Chavez’s Screwtopia.
And is it just me, or are we all sick and tired of Sean Penn trying to look tough-scholarly-defiant-and-pissed-off all the time?
See!? I am importrant, I scowl all the time because only I know what is wrong in the wrong world and only my great acting skills can fix it! HEY! What the heck, why is there water in our boat??
Duuuuuude, just order a pizza and chill!
Montana on August 6, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Bill you’ve got a nugget of understanding there. In a most general sense it’s the difference between inputs and outputs.
When switching to C-Span coverage a debate with a pol pontificating about the motives (input) of a bill I can be sure they are leftie. If they are complaining about the actual effect (output) of a bill there will always be a ‘R’ in front of their name.
I’m still working on extracting the general from the specific on this observation, but I’m so far right that my view is obstructed.
TunaTalon on August 6, 2007 at 6:15 PM
Brat,
I can’t remember who said it, but a former lefty said something even more ominous than “liberalism is a mental disorder.” He stated that liberalism is a religion.
I think this explains much of their mentality. Adherence to doctrine is more important than the actual results of that doctrine. And I would suggest that maybe the reliance on motives over results is a psychological defense mechanism built up over years of blatantly failed doctrine. Conservatives do not have to ignore the outcomes because the outcomes-of low taxes, school choice (including home schooling), strong families, free markets, emphasis on personal responsibility and accountability, the Second Amendment, etc.-work, and have been shown to work time and time again, place after place. Liberalism can make no such claim.
Lancer on August 6, 2007 at 7:36 PM
Correction, liberalsim can make no such claim truthfully, which of course never stops them. My mistake.
Lancer on August 6, 2007 at 7:37 PM
Try this on for size. How bad do you have to be for Madonna to not be able to put up with you?
I remember watching a little of Inside the Actor’s Studio when he was on. The question If there’s a heaven what would you like to hear. His answer “Here’s an eightball and a hooker’s waiting for you. Come on in.”
PowWow on August 6, 2007 at 8:16 PM
Guys, liberalism is not a mental illness or a religion; it is a political ideology. We need to critique the content of that ideology, not the mental health of those who adhere to it. We don’t like it when the left accuses us right-of-center folks of being mentally ill and rightly so.
Bill Ramey on August 6, 2007 at 8:17 PM
“This guy,” Penn pointed to Chavez “He’s the full hot orator”
Dude… Give ‘em your “Jefferson thought England was, like, bogus” wrap up of the Revolutionary War while you’re down there.
ScottMcC on August 6, 2007 at 8:21 PM
I’m not sure that any of them will. These dictator-kissing fools are surpassingly stupid, but there are a lot of kinds of stupid, and I haven’t seen evidence that they’re stupid in just the way that would be required to actually risk losing their personal funds in an investment like that.
Splunge on August 6, 2007 at 10:06 PM
I agree completely. But I sympathize with those who have had difficulty getting leftists to engage in discussion at the level of ideas, or even state ideas that recognizably comport with their actions. Still, that doesn’t reduce our side’s burden to try for, and to model, something better, does it?
Splunge on August 6, 2007 at 10:09 PM
At the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, some rational (albeit horrifically misguided) folks genuinely thought that centralized control could potentially be a viable economic theory. They saw the economies of scale that could be had through incorporation, and assumed that infinite collectivization might result in infinite efficiency. Back then, America’s leaders were telling people: “Don’t be swayed by the material benefits of Communism!”
But if collectivism was ever really a credible theory, it inarguably stopped being so more than a hundred years ago.
Collectivists retain beliefs founded in their inchoate desire to feel a sense of commune. But their utter rejection of (and even contempt for) any sort of spirituality or personal enterprise creates a void that can never be filled – leaving behind nothing but an insatiable craving for socioeconomic assimilation.
What collectivism degenerated into today – in the 21st freaking Century! – has nothing whatsoever to do with any sort of “ideology.” Karl Marx came up with their last idea a very, very long time ago. Any connection to objective reality was lost way back then. Today, collectivism is absolutely nothing but a cult. And trying to convert its supplicants through mere reason is a fool’s game.
logis on August 6, 2007 at 10:14 PM
“I think we’re past that point in human evolution where there’s such a thing as winning wars” …
I agree. Let’s all put down our weapons and talk. You go first.
deepdiver on August 6, 2007 at 11:17 PM
SOMEbody’s been peeking at the Dhemocrat party platform for this election cycle.
Think of it. This upcoming victory in the GWOT will be exclusively due to the great military, Americans, and the REPUBLICAN party. Never before in history has one political party supported a war by itself, jaw-dropping.
Mojave Mark on August 6, 2007 at 11:23 PM
Bill, I somewhat disagree. I believe Liberalism was once a political ideology, but it has since decayed into a cult–a blind belief, a religion that places its adherents as Numero Uno in their own mind. Why do I say this?
Because, to be a political ideology, you have to use and respect facts, reason and logic. Liberals do not. Liberalism has degraded into a knee-jerk, emotionally unstable, group-think mindset that refuses to learn from its mistakes.
This saddens me because I do no want a single ideology to dominate America–even if it is Conservatism. All ideologies need competition. Regrettably, Liberals do not deliver on that.
Montana on August 7, 2007 at 1:39 AM
Suppose that all liberals are stubborn cusses who refuse to listen to reason. That still does not make them mentally ill or members of a cult. A mentally ill person is someone with a pathological condition that is severe enough to require medical treatment. We cannot throw around terms such as “mentally ill” or “cult” with reckless abandon, or those terms become meaningless.
Again, content is king. Contrary to conventional wisdom, rational persuasion is the only thing that works over the long haul. Telling your opponents that they’re mentally ill or members of a cult is sure-fire way to stifle any chance of rational discussion. In other words, taking the high road is not only the more virtuous path–it’s also the most practical.
Bill Ramey on August 7, 2007 at 1:24 PM
Bill–there is much truth in what you say. However, we should also consider calling the absurb…well..absurd.
It is possible to remain civil without promoting the absurd as equal to the rational. Sometimes, despite the last several decades of politically correct indoctrination, we would do well to be blunt–to calling nutbags nutbags. It’s not nice, I know. It can be stated in more gentile terms, yes. But let’s not continue to entertain the absurd.
Clearly, not all liberals are mentally-ill, in truth, I suspect very few are. Furthermore, I suspect the same number of conservatives are mental cases. Heck, maybe I am one of them!
But Liberalism itself? It has gone nutty.
Simply list the basic tenets of Liberalism–not their propaganda, but the actual policies followed by Liberal leaders and espoused by their adherents.
Some of Liberalism’s basic tenets:
1. More and more taxes
2. Bigger and Bigger Govt
3. Public School > Private school
4. Removal, err, I am sorry, selective interpretation, of the 1st and 2nd amendments (Fairness Doctrine, Hillary’s desire to have Govt controls over Internet content, Liberal infactuaution with U.N. control over the internet and their willingness to subject US citizens and military personel to UN courts, Gun Grabber’s, etc)
5. Religion of Environmentalism that permits the death of thousands (malaria vs use of DDT)
Montana on August 7, 2007 at 2:23 PM
..Clint Eastwood, Jimmy Stewart, Bruce Willis..
aengus on August 7, 2007 at 2:54 PM
Yeah the human race has come a long way since the Falklands War. The human race has evolved so much since 1982.
aengus on August 7, 2007 at 3:01 PM