Obama's WH Communications Director Anita Dunn Looks to Mao Tse Tung for Guidance

Because most ruthless, homicidal dictators are geniuses in disguise. For example, Hitler almost took over the world. You gotta be pretty smart for that shit.

Two great political (and just in general) philosophers for me: Charles Manson and George Carlin.

There's nothing to fear but fear itself. If you always associate 'good' with 'good' and 'bad' with 'bad' you're going to be stuck in the same minute, cyclical bullshit forever.

 

You seem quite confused. I'd like to know who you are actually pointing out when you say Obama hires individuals who look to people like radical communists for moral guidance?

Honestly, I think she might have went too far by quoting Mao, because how exploitable it could be by uneducated conservatives, such as Beck. I'm sure she doesn't support everything Zedong has done, but he's done so many revered things in the past without a doubt.

 

Comparing Hitler to Mao is just laughable. You're going no where with this argument. Whether you like it or not, whether you're right or left, Mao was an intelligent man. The women didn't say she looked at Mao is a role model for ethics and morals. You've been watching too much Fox News. Change the channel.

 

Come on OP, if you're gonna use a video, at least use one from a credible source. fox news? haha, couldnt help it.

and if that hitler admirer was able to save our country from the impending doom we've placed ourselves in financially, then i could give two squirts of shit less who he admires, it'd be worth it to me, i don't have to talk to the piece of shit, why would i care if he helps me in the long run? not that im saying obama has or will save us. hell, i voted for ron paul. haha

and shouldnt this be in politics?

 

Wow, that wasn't even a good misused snippet. She's already going on to explain what she meant and disclaim certain aspects when Glenn cuts her off. And what's wrong with the quote she used? "You fight your war, I'll fight mine." Seems like good philosophy to me and actually exactly what our founding fathers established as a precedent. When was adrmiration of Mao himself ever menioned? She liked certain aspects of his opinions. She used one GOOD quote by him.


I don't believe the bible to be true, good, or intelligent and believe that it has caused much more crap than Mao could have, but I still use certain quotes from it. If there's a statement that fits your philosophy why not use it? She didn't ue the quotes Glen did, so why in the fuck did he even bring them up? It has no bearing to the philosophy she was speaking on at the time.

 

sounds like she has some bad cottonmouth in that video.

 

haha, she has cottonmouth and glenn beck has dickinmouth

 

It's funny when he, of all people, asks if anyone knows the true life of Benjamin Franklin

 

Maybe we should try and invent our own political philosophies..or is that too hard for people????

WHy are we listening to the words of men who failed, and failed miserably..

without a doubt, hitler and mao were evil evil evil evil men..who butchered and killed to sate their own insecurities of being ousted from power..

fuck them..and all their phiosophies..

but people are generally who they look up to..and if you look up to mao..for any reason, political, social, or moral..your a fucked up motherfucker..who i really dont want any part of.


and im generally pretty leftist..btw..so dont slash me as some neo-con jackoff..

its not about bipartisan..see this is why..are founding fathers were opposed to a two-party system..and desired multiple parties to greatly respresent the variety of our country

 

they may have failed, but they got a lot closer than most people.

are you saying that if i agree with one philosophy that you have, and quote it, then i will adapt your beliefs and essentially become you? i dont recall anyone saying that they 'look up to' them, just that they were intelligent leaders.

 

I don't know if you could say they may have "failed". The Chinese revolution really jump-started a dead country/economy into a world superpower which what it is today.

 

I can't rationalize Hitler's concentration camps, nor can I rationalize Stalin's cruelty. You saying "you guys can rationalize anything" is just a poor argument for the conservative side. You have to face the facts, and if you don't want to- then you're headed for a dark road

 

are you incapable of accepting one idea or philosophy that a person has without accepting all of them? can you not separate small parts of good from evil?

 

Mao once called for the body politic to remain forever in a "Permanent Revolution": That the struggle for good government, whatever its' system, is to always be evolving, for a fight to always be looming. That seems to me like a pretty good political philosophy. It's something Jefferson specifically wrote into our Constitution. And in a land like China where leaders were/are seen as gifts from the gods, Mao's ideas (plagiarized from people like Paine and Franklin) were the foundation of a country that now leads the world in finance and manufacturing. That's no small feat considering where China was just three generations ago.

When people fail to grasp history with any meaningful perspective, and only use historical fact as a vice to spin modern subjects, ignorance prevails.

The OPs argument (and I'm being nice here) is akin to saying: "Hitler put 'Gott Mits Uns' (God is Great) and a Christian Cross on their uniforms, therefore, all Christians are like Nazis".

It is staggeringly stupid.

 

A series of tragic miscalculations along with some outright butchery. Without going into too much detail (because clearly you see even a discussion of Mao as evil), the biggest difference in Mao and Lenin, or Marx, or Stalin, was his contempt for intellectuals. They were the first to go, and without them all the building projects, communes, and industrialization he wanted was impossible. Mao's movement began with peasants, not skilled workers. Mao didn't consult any experts before he implemented communal back-yard refineries. He didn't know all they'd produce is pig iron. He killed all the metallurgist. They'd read 'too many' books.

And there lies the beautiful irony of your protest. You and Mao are a lot alike. You both think there is such a thing as too much education, too much learning, too much philosophizing. You don't do intellectual exercises, you live in a world of absolutes.
Mao=bad
Therefore everything Mao said=bad.
You don't learn the real lesson of Mao because you think talking about Mao is akin to promoting peasant labor camps.

The Sec. said two of her favorite political philosophers were Mother Teresa and Mao. She points to a very important lesson both tried to teach, a lesson you seem to have missed: we have to fight our own wars. You don't get to decide for all of us if Mao has any “redeemable quality”. Everyone must make up their own mind and to do so SHOULD be a battle….a permanent revolution of the mind. If you're not doing that, if you're just posting videos from hack-ass TV shows in place intellectual curiosity or discourse, you may lead us all to a world like Mao created.

Human suffering exists everywhere. Every political or social revolution in history lead to massive amounts of suffering, America's, Israel's, India's, and yes, even China's. 70 million people died in WWII, that's a lot of suffering, I like to think some “redeemable qualities” came from that. 100 million Native Americans have made way for this “beacon of light on a hill”.