But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow White House communications director Anita Dunn praises of Mao Zedong as one of her favorite "political philosophers." [rquoter]Mau-Mauing the Maoist Flak-Catcher 19 October 2009 James Morrow One of the first rules of public speaking is, "be careful whom you quote". If you're a reasonably educated human being, therefore, it should be obvious that you don't cite Pol Pot if you're giving a speech about agricultural policy, and you don't look to Adolf Hitler, vehement anti-smoker that the was, for words to back up an address on the evils of tobacco. Nor should one, if addressing a group high school students (or anyone else, really), refer to a man whose reign of terror resulted, conservatively, in the deaths of 60 million people as one of your favourite political philosophers - which is just what White House Communications Director Anita Dunn did recently. Watch the tape - it's pretty damning. Or if you don't feel like wading through the speech, here's the choice bit: "In 1947, when Mao Tse-tung was being challenged within his own party, on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all odds against you, and Mao Tse-tung said 'You fight your war and I'll fight mine.' Think about that for a second, you don't have to accept the definition of how to do things and you don't have to follow other people's choices in the past." Even if it was a joke, it was not a funny one. Indeed, it sounds more like outright admiration for a man whose perverse brand of anti-intellectual Marxism that was simultaneously brutally centralised yet scarily anarchic gave his countrymen the horrors of the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, and a gulag system that exists to this day. (Perhaps this is why Barack Obama was so quick to snub the Dalai Lama?) Look, forget the Obamas' long-standing friendship with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. The fact is, the Obama White House is rapidly becoming a big tent for the sort of cranks who set up card tables on the fringes of growers' markets and pass out hand-xeroxed fliers. Yes, 9/11 "truther" Van Jones lost his "green jobs" czar role, but that leaves plenty of largely unaccountable individuals like science advisor John Holdren who used to advocate forced abortions and a "planetary regime" to control population, or legal advisor Harold Koh. Koh, let's not forget, is the high-ranking legal advisor who has spoken out in support of sharia law, discounted the notion of the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land (he prefers global, transnational arrangements), and written the still-confidential advice the Obama administration has used to brand the constitutional removal of Honduras's Chavezista president "a coup". In this depressing context, it's no wonder Anita Dunn fits right in. All the more reason for her to be kicked out.[/rquoter]
Ah, another data point that proves Glenn Beck runs your world. I'm sure this has nothing to do with Dunn calling the Fox News Channel an arm of the GOP and not a news organization. Really pathetic. Here's Media Matters: NYTimes... More from Dunn... And for good measure...
since i don't listen to, or watch, beck, i can't comment on his alledged comments, but VDH always writes cogently. http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGQ3ZmE0Njk2YmFkMjc2YTgwYzAzYTBhYmQ0YjI3ZWM= [rquoter]Now We Know Why He Passed on the Dalai Lama [Victor Davis Hanson] I am not a big fan of saying that officials should resign for stupid remarks. But interim White House communications director Anita Dunn's praise of Mao Zedong as a "political philosopher" is so unhinged and morally repugnant, that she should hang it up, pronto. Mao killed anywhere from 50 million to 70 million innocents in the initial cleansing of Nationalists, the scouring of the countryside, the failed Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, Tibet, and the internal Chinese gulag. Dunn's praise of a genocidal monster was no inadvertent slip: She was reading from a written text and went into great detail to give the full context of the remark. Moreover, her comments were not some student outburst from 30 years ago; they were delivered on June 5, 2009. Her praise of Mao's insight and courage in defeating the Nationalists was offered long after the full extent of Mao's mass-murdering had been well documented. Mao killed more people than any other single mass killer in the history of civilization. So where do all these people, so intimate with our president (Dunn is the wife of his personal lawyer), come from? A right-wing attack machine could not make up such statements as those tossed off by a Dunn or a Van Jones. There seems to be neither a moral compass nor even a casual knowledge of history in this administration. And now we have the avatars of the "new politics" claiming it's okay to praise Mao's political and philosophical insight and his supposed determination ("You fight your war, and I'll fight mine") because Lee Atwater supposedly once evoked Mao too. Ms. Dunn should simply duck out of her D.C. suburb and ask any Tibetan or Chinese immigrant in his 70s and 80s what life was really like in Mao's China.[/rquoter]
That was quick. What an idiotic article to start it off with by basso. Of course basso will claim to not watch Beck, or at least not regularly. The end result doesn't matter because he comes away with just as much misinformation. Too bad he hasn't learned to discern real information from bogus information on the web. It must be hard being so gullible. I wonder what kind of internet safety information basso is able to give his children.
Dude, speaking of "irony," you bought the fake Rush quotes hook line and sinker. Spin it however you want, but there's a huge difference between simply quoting someone and holding them up as one of the people you "turn to most."
Actually if you read that thread I did not. I never gave creedence to the fake ones and only addressed the accurate ones. Just because I posted against Rush doesn't mean I bought any of the inaccurate quotes attributed to him. There are plenty of legitimate ones. You should read more carefully before accusing me of something. But to take a closer look, it would appear that since you never addressed the inaccurate ones and simply ignored all the quotes because a few were not correct, you are missing out on the whole truth.
Can you comment on the prominent GOP members quoting Mao as well (read rimrocker's post), and describe why it's not as bad as Dunn quoting him? Perhaps something other than just a link and a quoted article? Some thought maybe?
i have no thought on any of the "republicans" quoted, once of who is deceased, and cannot speak for himself. he did make good barbecue however. i will say that what's objectionable is not the act of quoting, but how she framed the quote. to characterize Mao, who may have philosophized (i have a copy of the little red book somewhere, bought from th back of rolling stone, in 1974), as a philosopher, w/o putting the rest of his life in context, is what is offensive. it's easy to understand, really, and there is no defense for her remark, unless one has a particular political axe to grind, or is willfully obtuse.
When conservatives use language like "Mao's reign of terror" or "Mao was a mass murderer who killed 60 million of his people" -- are they mainly referring to his failed economic policies which resulted in famine? Or are they talking about Stalin/Hussein style state terror?
Basso! STOP posting please. You too FFB! Quality post are being ruined by this boards hate for you two.
Dunn did not just quote Mao, she said he was one of her "favorite political philosophers" and someone "I turn to most". Here is the whole quote. I doubt that Mao is one of her favorite political philosophers. She was just quoting Mao to make a point. It was just a stupid way to frame the point. She uses the excuse that she is being ironic, but there is no irony at all in the statement. So that leaves two excuses. She is either a poor writer/communicator, or she does admire Mao. Either way she should probably be fired.
The only way you could believe this is if you are a wingnut with an anti-Obam agenda. Her comments were tame and calling for her resignation over this calls for a rolleyes the size of Florida.
