Dean's World Newest Advertiser: George Soros
Dean
I was rather stunned last night when George Soros applied for an ad on Dean's World, with a request that it not be released until noon today. I see only two possibilities here:
1) He is either cluelessly buying ads on random blogs, not caring if some of those blogs are strong and unwavering supporters of our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan (the cynical view), or
2) He's genuinely interested in a dialogue and is inhesitant about trying to draw the attention of war supporters like myself, hoping to persuade us.
If it's the latter, I apologize in advance for my cynicism in advancing the former.
Anyway I had a doctor's appointment so I just got back and released his ad (it's about 1:30 pm). How very interesting the ad, and the associated site, is.
Just so Dean's World readers will know, Soros is the multibillionaire financier who backs hard-left groups like Media Mattes, MoveOn, and other Bush-hating organizations. He seems dedicated to the (in my view profoundly wrong) notion that America causes terrorism against itself by taking an aggressive posture in the War On Terror, and for taking a leadership role when the U.N. (which is dominated by thugs, theocrats, fascists, and communists) will not do it. He also seems to believe that if enough people hear his arguments, they will be persuaded.
In my case, I've been hearing arguments exactly like his non-stop for three years. I'm intimately familiar with them, and I reject them as the views of defeatists and naive doves who foolishly believe that if we're just nicer to people, we won't have a terrorist threat.
Still, free speech is a wonderful thing. I've looked over Mr. Soros' site and, while I may have missed something, it doesn't appear to be filled with Michael Moore-style racism, hate speech, and lies. So I'm happy to take him as an advertiser (I got a whole twenty bucks of Soros money burning a hole in my pocket now! Woo-hoo! Envy me you lesser mortals! That's TWENTY-FIVE GEORGE WASHINGTONS. Don't you wish you were me? I know I do!)
Anyway, if you get a chance, check out George Soros' anti-Bush web site. Who knows? You might learn something.
Although if there's something on his site that you'd like someone like me to examine and rebut, feel free to leave me a comment and let me know. I am genuinely content to let most people read George Soros' site and make up their own minds, for I truly reject the notion that most American voters are sheep. Go ahead, look at Soros' arguments. Do they resonate with you? They don't resonate with me, and I think he's horribly misguided, if sincere. What do you think?
So, when did George's (Washington) value drop to $.80? As in Twenty-five George Washingtons equalling twenty bucks. Of course as effective as Soros has been with the mass quantities of cash he's thrown around this election, maybe his money does have lesser value per dollar. Heh.
But alas, it appeared to me that Soros has fallen into the same trap that many in Hollywood and DC have - they've become totally seperated from the real world. I doubt Soros has anyone to talk to that would offer a dissenting opinion. And hence, he has ended up in a fantasy bubble where probably everything he says is lapped up and met with vigorous head nodding.
I'm not too worked up over it. The ads we get pay us $100-$200 a month, which is incredibly handy when you're on the lower end of he economic spectrum, but it's still just hobby in come.
Good job, Dean.
His 25 bucks gets him space nearly to the election.
You missed one possibility; Soros is trolling for those who drop by conservative*/war supporter blogs, but aren't "committed" yet. He wants to steal 'em for the other side. ;)
*Sorry, bud. Yer stuck with that conservative tag. Maybe you should sport more Che pictures on your outerwear? Heh heh heh...
I am not exactly sure if I would take money from someone like George Soros, especially if I were someone like yourself, in that I beleive you understand his arguments much better than myself.
But, you go for the "Freedom of Speech" route and I must applaud that, just one warning, you may want to put some sort of disclaimer where to new Dean's World visitors can see it.
Those of us who have come to accept the far left is a lost cause and are not familiar with you, may write off your blog as a moonbat lair, and never return.
I know when I visit a blog that they are parroting some moonbat talking point that has been disproven to the point of absurdity, I do not argue, post, or whine, I just delete their link and "MoveOn".
still deciding on goats comic though.....
OK, I'll buy that, just trying to reconcile the twenty bucks in your pocket with the twenty-five GW's out of Soros' pocket. Like Casey and Photon, I'm thinking perhaps Soros' people picked up on the "defending the liberal tradition..." in your site subtitle, without ever bothering to check that "liberal" does not necessarily translate as "leftist" all the time.
If money is no problem and your candidate is going under, then getting your message out almost any way you can to any one you can is just smart. I suspect Soros targeted the bigger blogs to reach a greater number of people instead of targeting leftist blogs (which is kinda preaching to the choir).
For those of you who are not acquainted with his continuous efforts to interfere with our constitutional rights, I will not bore you with the details. Google up his name in connection with the front organizations for the anti-gun crowd whom he finances, and you will know all about him.
But let me tell you all that it gives me special pleasure to know that this man has squandered millions of dollars of his own money on a campaign to promote John Kerry for the presidency of the United States, and that this is a campaign that he is almost certain to lose.
Needless to add, It is my fondest hope that some financial calamity in the world money markets wipes him out in his old age.
That wish constitutes neither slander nor libel. Just malice.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
I could not support the war until I understood the underlying reason for it: a strategic opening move in the war on Islamofascism. The real reason we're in Iraq now is that it's our best hope to avoid having to go seriously nuclear on the Muslim world later. It is, at heart, an extremely humane war, and is being fought to save lives in the long run. Not American lives, Muslim lives. But it took SDB, Wretchard, and others to show me the *real* story of the how and why of the war. Bush didn't do it. For sure the mighty investigative powers of the MSM didn't do it. The blogosphere had to do it.
This is the greatest failing of GWB's presidency, imo. He has failed to adequately communicate to the American people, and to the world, what's really going on. Many supporters might argue that this was necessary, that the overriding issues and strategy could not be intelligibly discussed in public given our MSM and climate of political correctness, but I feel a much greater effort should have been made, and that our continuing failure in this area is our greatest ongoing mistake.
But if Dean doesn't take the money, Soros just keeps it. It's almost a moral obligation to take the money :)
I wouldn't take an ad from Michael Moore, but Soros is just a flake, not flat-out evil so far as I can see.
Ronald: The ads are shown in random order. ;-)
DSmith: One of the reasons that bloggers and political pundits have talked about how our goal is to reform the Muslim world is that (and I have made this time many times before, but it always bears repeating), prior to the launch of the invasion of Saddam's regime, the President could not possibly say out loud that one of the most important goals was to begin a process of reform in that region. If you were reading blogs, certain political publications, certain pundits, and listened carefully, the administration was talking around it but never saying it outright.
Why? Not because the American people wouldn't have supported it. All the stated reasons were perfectly valid (including, by the way, the WMD reasons). We had over a dozen reasons given to us by this administration (despite what the liars say now when they claim we were given only one) but the one they couldn't say was most important of all: we need to clean up that cesspool in the Middle East.
So why not just say that out loud? Because if the Bush administration had done so, they would have instantly lost critical and absolutely vital military support from several regimes, including Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and Syria--which are not GOOD regimes, mind you, but which we were in no position to invade without a greater cassus belli.
I note that, ever since the reconstruction has begun, the President and pretty much everyone in the administration has at one time or another made it clear that their goal is to reform the regimes of the Middle East and that they believe that Iraq is just the starting point to that project. They haven't hidden it, and if the mainstream press were doing its job they would have picked up on it more than they have.
The administration hasn't hidden this. It didn't really even hide it in the year-long buildup for the war. They simply didn't say it outright because if they had it would have been a diplomatic nightmare, and in any case all the other reasons were perfectly valid reasons anyway. Now that it's done, the greater vision is visible to anyone who looks, and isn't being hidden at all. Indeed, here's my prediction for you: Bush will fairly explicitely state that this is his administration's goal when we get to the debate on Thursday.
If you go to the blogs that have big hits or that has a large audience, that audience will judge you right or wrong. Sometimes it is wise to forgo $20.00 for the sake of the long run of those people you want to continue coming here and that is what I think Glenn Reynolds does, Michelle Malkin, Dave Berry and published writer's.
Same thing when you open a business, what will draw customers in and if it is a place for young readers, customers you need to look at the menu. You might want to look at the porn as well because Soros....you probably didn't see things because you are looking through your eyes and not realizing how you could be offending. You and Rosemary stick together on this porn and you should stand together or the house will fall.I sure remember a lot of people standing firm against it when you two posted on her site. This shows women in bondage so I get very mixed signals. Is this family friendly as a few pretty nice people have said? Soros is what Soros is... and he too preys on peoples thirsts, hungers and intimate desires.
Eagle Eyes are Wise.
I think that Soros' intentions are bad, and I don't like the causes that he represents. But everybody has the right to form their own judgements, about Soros, Bush, Kerry, or whomever.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
My comment could have come off judging. Quite the opposite. The first post I went to today was about blogging and Mrs.Du Toit expressed her views about guest bloggers and confusion. When I read peoples thoughts on this I then took a closer look because of the changes/guests that have taken place for the better in both Dean and Rosemary's blogs. They stand together on their views about porn. I was addressing the comments made by many. This seemed to contrdict in my mind and Dean did ask our opinions.
There is nothing at all wrong if I say when I looked at the ad and read the articles I saw aanything at all that bothered me. When I went further I, me and others might see it as women in bondage.
I want good to happen to Dean and Rosemary period. We all have our feelings about porn. good, bad indifferent. In saying sometimes it is best to forgo $20.00 it is simple logic. This is a hobby from what I read. If the plans are long range then published writers as mentioned above are more picky like any newspaper or magazine that wants to represent.
This is a place where I have enjoyed and have pondered and grown in more ways than I can tell you.
I just came via his link to your site and it would be fascinating to know how many other hits you get via the same link.