Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston

~~~

~~~

A Metaphor for the GOP

Monday, June 15, 2009

Ayatollah Khamenei Calls for Investigation into Irregularities in Iran's Election


The Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has called for an investigation into irregularities in Iran's recent election. Whether this move is meant to tamp down an increasingly violent reaction to what many see as a fraudulent election or just a stalling tactic, remains to be seen.




According to reports, the rural, poorer, undereducated parts of Iran overwhelmingly voted for the radical anti-America and Holocaust denier,Ahmadinejad, and the cities where younger, more affluent and better educated Iranians live, voted for the more moderate, Mousavi.





TEHRAN, Iran – Protesters battled police over Iran's disputed election and shouted their opposition from the rooftops Sunday, but President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dismissed the unrest as little more than "passions after a soccer match" and drew his own huge rally of support.

Just after sundown, cries of "death to the dictator" echoed through Tehran as thousands of backers for Ahmadinejad's rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, heeded a call to bellow from the roofs and balconies. The deeply symbolic act recalled the shouts of "Allahu Akbar," or God is Great, to show opposition to the Western-backed monarchy before the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The scenes summed up the showdown over the disputed elections: an outwardly confident Ahmadinejad exerted control, while Mousavi showed no sign of backing down and could be staking out a new role as powerful opposition voice.

His charges that Friday's vote was riddled by fraud brought sympathetic statements from Vice President Joe Biden and other leaders. Mousavi made a direct appeal with Iran's ruling clerics to annul the result, but the chances were considered remote.

With his wide network of young and middle-class backers, Mousavi could emerge as a leader for Iran's liberal ranks and bring internal pressure on Ahmadinejad and Iran's theocracy to take less confrontational policies toward the West.

42 comments:

Dave Miller said...

It will be interesting to see if this has a chance of moving forward, or will be crushed like so many past "revolutions" in other countries.

Shaw Kenawe said...

The fact that it is happening at all give one reason to hope.

TRUTH 101 said...

I posted this at Swash Zone also. Is it really our business to get involved in Iranian elections? Nothing will change fundamentally because the same ayatollahs will be in charge. And we didn't want them interfering in our suspect election in 2000.

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

T101, since when is "following" an election termed "interference?" The last time we interfered in an Iranian election, a democratically elected president got killed, complements of our CIA, and a dictator came to power ... earning us decades of Iranian animosity. Been there, failed that.

Nevertheless, we follow this election with interest because the outcome may change the future course of events in the Middle East. Iran's "Internet" generation seeks closer ties with the West and more "liberalism" at home. If we alienate this generation, the damage done in the last half century can never be undone.

The Octopus hath spoken.

TRUTH 101 said...

This is more a note of caution Octo. John McCain is calling for President Obama to condemn the result. If you thought my words were directed at you or the Swash Zoners I apologise for not being clearer.

Christopher said...

Isn't this a bit like the US Supreme Court investigating itself after the stolen presidential election of 2000?

TRUTH 101 said...

I have no problem with God despite my affinity for atheist run blogs. It's the wackos that claim to speak for God I distrust and despise.

SarahG said...

I've been saying this for 6 months that it wouldn't be long before the liberals turned on Obama and Wished Bush was back, the tough assed no shit cowboy who let the world know who's the boss on this planet.

Here is what that dumb ass said.. "President Obama isn't nearly liberal enough for HBO's Bill Maher. On Tuesday’s Situation Room on CNN, Maher repeated the focus of his rant on his show last Friday night about how Obama hasn't been adequately aggressive. When Wolf Blitzer asked what he was most disappointed about with President Obama, the HBO host went into full denial mode: “Barack Obama is not a socialist -- he’s not even a liberal....this country needs a left wing. It doesn’t have it, and part of the reason is the media.”


As much as I can't stand Bill Maher, he is the first liberal to say it out loud. last Friday..
Maher has done more to hurt this great country with his "progressive" policies than any previous POTUS in HISTORY! Bill's show on HBO is loaded with Lib guests and every seat in his audience is filled by F'ing Libtards! And who more than Maher epitomizes the "angry old white guy"? I canceled HBO with my cable company and sent HBO an email and told them why. I suggest everyone else do the same. I know some will say to just change the channel but how else can you demonstrate ones' displeasure with its programming? I don't miss it at all.

Christopher said...

"And who more than Maher epitomizes the "angry old white guy"?"

Oh, Rush Limbaugh? Bill O'Reilly? Sean Hannity? Michael Savage? Lou Dobbs? Pat Buchanan?

They come immediately to mind.

Me, Myself, And I said...

And the Obama camp is silent!

Cutiepies World said...

Christopher said...

"And who more than Maher epitomizes the "angry old white guy"?"

Oh, Rush Limbaugh? Bill O'Reilly? Sean Hannity? Michael Savage? Lou Dobbs? Pat Buchanan?

They come immediately to mind.


And thank God they do. At least some people have the balls to speak out.

Lynne said...

As usual, you don't tell the whole story; Maher said that he did wish Obama had a little of Bush's kickass attitude but that Bush had terrible ideas, which is true. Also, he didn't mean ANY of that in the context of foreign policy, he meant that he wished Obama would ignore the Republicans who are trying to block his policies and say to hell with them. Read the whole thing. Of course the illiterates skim over it and pick out one piece they like and quote that.

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

SarahG, you visited Pamela’s blog and left the exact same comment. Then you visited Shaw’s blog and left the exact same comment. Pamela’s post is about the Palin/Letterman gaffe. Shaw’s post is about the Iran Election controversy.

In either case, your comment is OFF-TOPIC. Where in your comment do you discuss either issue? It does not seem to matter if the blog is conservative or liberal, you are an equal opportunity troll in either context. Inasmuch as Pamela’s blog is about issues of concern to Pamela, and Shaw’s blog is about issues of concern to Shaw, why do you insist on insinuating yourself into these conversations by making yourself the center of attention? This is NOT ABOUT YOU.

Arthurstone said...

SarahG-

I've yet to meet a liberal in Seattle (and this place is absolutely crawling with them) too upset with President Obama. People realize it will take a lot of time to begin to undo the disastrous results of years of GOP policies. And for certain I've yet run into anyone who 'Wished Bush was back'. But if you find comfort in such flights of fantasy, so be it.

As for Bill Maher the liberals I know don't take their political cues from TV and radio entertainers. That is a distinctly right-wing phenomenon.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Sarah G.,

I left a comment over at your blog asking you not to come here and vent your spleen on something we are not talking about.

You and other rightie blogger accuse Liberals of being arrogant and then invade their comment sections with off-topic rants and name-calling.

If you're trying to make an off-topic point, please use YOUR OWN blog to do so.

Pot, meet kettle.

You guys just don't get it.

SarahG said...

Shaw Kenawe said...
"Sarah G.,
I left a comment over at your blog asking you not to come here and vent your spleen on something we are not talking about."

Hum, the last time I heard, this was still a free country, you asked, I didn't listen..
Sue me!

SarahG said...

(O)CT(O)PUS said...
"SarahG, you visited Pamela’s blog and left the exact same comment. Then you visited Shaw’s blog and left the exact same comment"

And so what?

Is there some kind of law against that that I may not yet have heard?

Or did MR. Obama just pass a new "Executive Order" about that also!

Shaw Kenawe said...

Sarah G., you and Sarah Palin don't undertand the 1st Amendment.

Free speech has to do with the US Government stopping citizens from saying what they want to. But even that right has restrictions.

You can be arrested for saying the word "bomb" in an airport or on an airplane, and you can't go around saying you want to kill the president, either. Or yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater.

Or come to someone's private blog and act arrogantly, name-call, and change the subject.

I have the right to delete any comment I find offensive, and that is not infringing on your 1st Amendment rights.

It's probably not important that you don't know this about our Constitution, but the fact that Sarah Palin still doesn't is disgraceful.

You have a post up on your blog about not being able to have a discussion with Liberals, but maybe if you tried paying attention to the subject and not hijack a comment thread, maybe we could do so.

Bob said...

Shaw Kenawe said...
"Sarah G., you and Sarah Palin don't undertand the 1st Amendment"

I think that Sarah does indeed understand.
And as for this being a "private blog"

I don't think so!

"You can be arrested for saying the word "bomb" in an airport or on an airplane, and you can't go around saying you want to kill the president, either. Or yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater"

OK, Sarah, don't do any of those things! LOL And you won't get arrested.

Bob said...

Shaw said: "I have the right to delete any comment I find offensive, and that is not infringing on your 1st Amendment rights."

Yes you do... And Sarah has the right to say whatever she wants to. And risk it being deleted.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Bob,

You may be deliberately misunderstanding me. This is a private blog in the sense that I set it up, and it is not run by a corporation, union, or the US Government, but a private individual.

I'm not talking about privacy.

Christopher said...

Cutiepie opines:

"And thank God they do. At least some people have the balls to speak out."

And which of these stalwart GOPers do you celebrate most?

1. Rush Limbaugh, the 400lbs. junkie and pedophile?

2. Bill O'Reilly, who settled a sexual harassment lawsuit by his former producer, Andrea Mackris?

3. Sean Hannity, who regularly defends racists and white supremacists?

4. Michael Savage, who wishes his critics "die from AIDS?"

5. Lou Dobbs, who despises every Mexican he's met or not met?

6. Pat Buchanan, who joined with that Christian gasbag who joined Rev. Jerry Falwell to help push FOX News' ridiculous "war on Christmas?"

TRUTH 101 said...

Shaw: you know you're like a sister to me. You also know my affinity for women from Massachusettes. Please. Don't run the righties off. The only thing standing between them and the complete brainwashing at the hands of the Limbaugh/Beck/Cheney cabal is folks like you and me spreading truth and wisdom throughout the blogeshere.

To run these poor deluded fools off is like handing their souls over to to the Devil himself. If not for them. Then engage them for the children.


Bless you for your service to rational thought Shaw Kenawe...

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

SarahG: "Is there some kind of law against that that I may not yet have heard?"

There is such a thing as good manners, polite discourse, and respecting personal boundaries. Adults do try to teach these to their children. Clearly, your level of maturity resembles that of a child.

Shaw Kenawe said...

TRUTH 101, bro, you and the other reasonable commenters are always welcome here.

What I don't understand is the wingnuts who come here and complain about the subjects of my posts, or that I'm not critical enough of Mr. Obama, or that I refer to the president as Mr. Obama.

I've even drawn the wrath of this little fellow who has taken it upon himself to hold me up as the epitome of a bad girl blogger while behaving in a most execrable manner and commiting a blogging faux pas. Tsk. Tsk.

He cribbed my comments from other people's comments section and accused me of things I have not done or written, all based on his own brand of paranoia, misinformation and inability to be rational.

His need to be perceived as some sort of blogging hero has, instead, exposed him as nothing more than a common bully.

A bully is a deeply insecure person who derives pleasure through ridiculing people in public.

How small his *cough* self-esteem *cough* must be.

His commenters are tripping over their two right feet trying to ingratiate themselves with this little guy.

What he has done is proven that there is nothing that interests a wingnut as much as a Liberal.


The post about my blog has given the little lad 60 hits (to date), more than any other so far in June!

They like me! They really like me!

Instead of mocking me, he's made me the Queen of His Blog!

LOL!

Christopher said...

Shaw,

Speaking of Republican hypocrites, did you see the story about rising GOP star, Sen. John Ensign of Nevada and his affair with the wife of his campaign staffer?

But here's the kicker.

Ensign also happens to be vehemently antigay marriage and supported then-President Bush’s call for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage because he believes such a ban is needed "to protect the institution of marriage in America."

FOFLMAO!

Christopher said...

Phantom Man,

Perhaps you don't read past a 6th grade level?

Reread the thread tower and stop when you get to the reference to the "angry old white guy." This is what I replied to.

BTW, I wasn't aware that Janet Napolitano and Hillary Clinton met the definition of "angry old white guys?" Do you know something about their anatomy the rest of us don't know?

PhantomMan said...

Christopher said...

"BTW, I wasn't aware that Janet Napolitano and Hillary Clinton met the definition of "angry old white guys?"

That's news to me... I always thought that they were!

bluepitbull said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Shaw Kenawe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaw Kenawe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaw Kenawe said...

To PhantomMan,

What a brave guy you are. You and bluepitbully are so intimidated by a female Progressive blogger that you are compelled to trash her in other people's comments all over the blogsphere?

Do you know what the definition of a bully is? It encompasses what you and bluepitbully have done to me.

Bullies are scared, pusillanamous little punks who feel empowered only when they publicly heap ridicule on others.

Every schoolyard has its bully, and now, apparently so does the blogsphere.

You obviously don't have the cajones to paste your insults about me here in my own blog, but instead do the cowardly thing and post them elsewhere behind my back.

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

I direct these remarks to Bob, SarahG, Pitball, PhantomMan, and others who troll these blogs for sport.

Know this: When you visit blogs such Progressive Eruptions and the Swash Zone, there are human beings behind the posts and comments. People who suffer the same problems of living and survival as do all human beings on this planet.

Right now, several writers at The Swash Zone are struggling with family emergencies. One has a relative at home in the last stages of terminal cancer. Another has a parent in the last stages of a deadly nerve disorder. One is bereaving the loss of a parent. Two have personal health problems. All have lost a friend or family member in the past year.

There are trolls who think The Swash Zone is about pretense and ambition. Blogging for us is an outlet, a diversion, an intellectual challenge, and an opportunity to engage in the issues of our world. Nothing more, nothing less.

Our writers do not appreciate trolls who use our forum as a billboard for graffiti, for name-calling, for invective, and the Internet equivalent of road rage.

We support our conservative friends too, especially those engaged with similar struggles. We share with our conservative friends not just a common interest in politics but this human bond … mutual respect.

Many of our writers have stressful jobs. When they come at night, the last thing they need or want is to contend with trolls, loud-mouth louts, and childish sandbox bullies.

Trolls have a callous disregard for fellow human beings. They troll for sport and for narcissistic self-gratification at the expense of others. Some are abusive and sadistic. That is why we have a comment policy that clearly defines the rules of discourse, and why we delete comments when trolls come here to attack us.

These blogs are OUR COMMUNITY, not yours, and trolls have no rights here.

bluepitbull said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TREXPRESS said...

Why is it that just because we don't share opinions, we are trolls?
I'm a blogger who has done my share of name calling yes, but I have also been on the other end and received much of the same.. ... I know I'm being blunt with my opinions but why not?
Please address the same post you wrote above to your Buddy Truth101 who relentless name calls republicans in almost everyone of his posts.

Thank for your time and have a wonderful day.

TREXPRESS said...

YOU GET ONLY ONE GUESS WHERE THIS POST CAME FROM!


"So after eight years of Bush/Cheney fuck ups, I'm supposed to forget them and embrace the right's view that anything that doesn't come out of the mouths of jokers like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter is anti American?"

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

TREXPRESS: "Please address the same post you wrote above to your Buddy Truth101 who relentless name calls republicans in almost everyone of his posts."

Actually, I have. Many times. Even in private e-mails. That is why T101 changed his moniker to Kind and Gentle T101 for a brief time.

TREXPRESS: "Why is it that just because we don't share opinions, we are trolls? I'm a blogger who has done my share of name calling yes, but I have also been on the other end and received much of the same...."

Actually, we do welcome other opinions and state this specifically in our comment policy. Pamela and Jennifer, for instance, are considered friends of the Swash Zone. Look at our Link List. You will find them listed there. Pamela and jennifer are considered friends because, although we disagree on issues, we are always mutually respectful and trust each other. We have spirited arguments that never get personal, never degenerate into stereotyping or arguments of false equivalence. Most importantly, we avoid antagonizing. It makes a difference.

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

By the way, TREXPRESS, here are two links you might want to read: Hatred101and When trolls attack.

The first is written by Pamela in support of an earlier comment made by me about online abuse and harassment. The second is written by Rockync, a Swash Zone writer who supported Pamela’s effort.

As you can see, these two posts, one written from the Conservative side and the other from the Liberal side, are mutually collaborative and supportive. This is why Pamela and I consider ourselves friends and sometimes collaborators … NEVER adversaries.

If you look at Rocky’s post, you will find the discussion where I take T101 to task.

The reason why Spitball is not welcome at the Zone is because he is predatory, caustic, and hostile. Life is too short to waste our time on him.

TRUTH 101 said...

Trexguy: and anyone else that is mildly intersted, I as most of you do this because we like to. I have zero delusions about making a living or being a hero.


I have made an attempt to tone down my rhetoric at the suggestion of my friend Octopus. And I will always welcome his advice on becoming a better blogger. But although it's no secret how much respect I have for Octo, you would do just as well to tell me if you have issue with me instaed of tattling on me to Octopus.


Realx Brothers and Sisters. We can all get along.

rockync said...

I'm a little late to the party; internet server problems. (sigh)
I think the subject of what we use our blogs for and how trolls detract from that has been pretty well covered even though that was NOT the topic of the post.
I just want to point out that this blog as well as the swash zone have a comment policy in the upper right hand corners.
If you stick to the topic of a post and refrain from the meaningless trollish rhetoric that has no real basis, whether we agree with you or not, we can engage in debate and discussion.
But these are our blogs and if you don't play nice, you get deleted.
Trolling and stalking are sick behaviors and if anyone can't stop, then I suggest they seek professional help.

Pamela D. Hart said...

I have another post titled: "Thumper's Mother was Wise." Her words: "If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all," are words I try to follow, not just in the blogoshpere, but in real life, as well. As Octo mentioned, we are friends that disagree civilly and I see no reason why others can't do this also. We are ALL people who have families, i.e. wives, husbands, kids, friends, pets, jobs; we all know what it's like to feel the pain of losing a loved one or the humiliation of losing a job; the joy of finding love or the happiness of opening a gift and finding that one thing we so desired. What makes us so different? Nothing, except our political views. Do we have to be so ignorant to one another? Is that really necessary? Can’t we express ourselves without insults and ignorance? Trust me, if I can do it anyone can. I’m as opinionated as one can get and I manage to get along with just about everyone. Maybe give it a try, just a CHANCE, and see what happens. You will still have the same political views, but you may find that the other side isn’t as mean and evil as you first thought.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Amen, Pamela.