The Bush administration is considering changing its approach to current challenges, besides turning the country into a police state, invading other countries, and counting on G-d.
Perhaps it will consider some lessons of the past six years:
1. Ignorance about foreign cultures leads to disaster.
2. Ignorance about nature leads to waste and suffering.
3. A strong army, no matter how much favored by G-d, cannot solve our problems.
4. Placing bounties on the heads of enemies reflects our inherent trust in money. The ineffectiveness of bounties in the Third World suggests a different set of values there.
5. Hate and fear are expensive and painful substitutes for understanding and reason.
6. Don't trust people who cannot admit mistakes or who think they speak for G-d.
7. Selective use of facts misses the forest for the trees.
8. When all else fails, try asking someone who knows more than you. If you can't find someone more knowledgeable, you haven't looked very hard.
9. Majorities that legislate away minority rights are called mobs.
10. Disease, ignorance, poverty and injustice are our enemies, not Republicans, Democrats, Muslims or the press.
Kurt Lauenstein
Greensboro


Comments (16)
There's a parallel in current US policy to this quote and it bothers me:
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
Posted by hugh
|
December 15, 2006 8:23 AM
Excellent letter, Mr. Lauenstein. I just wish the people who really need the message were open to it. I am afraid they are not.
Posted by Beadbaby
|
December 15, 2006 8:26 AM
A lot of wisdom in this letter, Mr. L. I thank you for speaking it to us, the N&R audience. Would that those in most need of it could tear themselves away from their paranoia to think it through for a little while.
Posted by nemo0037
|
December 15, 2006 8:44 AM
Thank you, Mr., Lauenstein, for the obligatory Friday morning Bush-hating letter.
Why don't you tell us how you really feel about AlGore and Kerry losing?
Posted by jcackbar
|
December 15, 2006 9:16 AM
9. Majorities that legislate away minority rights are called mobs.
I agree. Smokers are being pushed out of restaurants, public places, etc. Eighteen year old's can't buy alcohol. I'm not allowed to shoot the Canadian Geese that poop on my lawn. I don't have the right to prayer in school. Gosh, the list goes on and on.
Posted by nitpicker
|
December 15, 2006 10:16 AM
This is undoubtedly the BEST LTE we have seen in this newspaper in months! Kudos to you Mr. Lauenstein.
Notice how "cack"bar can't refute one single point in the letter, but compartmentalizes it as "Bush bashing". Of course, he holds up his part of the 21% who still think Bush is doing a super job as President!
So "cack"bar, what IS it that endears you to such an ignorant, yet arrogant, leader??? What, pray tell, is it about this man that holds you spellbound?
Posted by DemonDeacon
|
December 15, 2006 10:23 AM
It's interesting to read about the senator from South Dakota and all the hubbub about the democrats losing control of the Senate.
Is it me or does it just seem stupid that the governor would appoint a replacement for a Senator?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/15/johnson.ap/index.html
Posted by nitpicker
|
December 15, 2006 11:09 AM
"Why don't you tell us how you really feel about AlGore and Kerry losing?"
I tell you how I feel, Ackbar:
When Al lost, I really didn't care, not knowing much about GWB.
After 9-11, I really like GWB, until he started rattling sabre at Iraq. Meanwhie Osama was still loose (stil is isn;'t he?) and Hans was doing an effective job holding Iraq at bay. At that poinr, I got nervous about George, and starting asking folks what we doing going into Iraq.
Shortly after we invaded, I read "Hubris". Here was a guy that had spent years tracking Osama, stating they were screwing up getting the 9-11 bad guys - and then I became obsessed - since reading perhaps a dozen books on the topic and until very recently following the news very closely.
By spring of '04 I really hated what was happening, especially when things were clearly going down hill fast, GWB was in the lala land of ignorant denial, and fools like JCAchbar were calling "unpatriotic" anyone was standing up for a more conservative and thoughtful approach - you know like GWB is reported to be doing now.
When Abu Garave happened, I nearly cried - I thing "Jesus Christ" (in profanity) were my first words. It was the worst thing for our ernest efforts, far beyond what most Americans comprehend - even to this day.
Fall '04 came around, I could not belive Kerry was the nominee - what a baffoon! I screamed at the TV and wrote him letters, giving hom some great campaign ideas and telling him he was blowing it and Bush was about to be re-elected.
He're my favorite ignored idea, to counter the swift boat ads: Half a Billboard with an x-ray of a leg, showing the schrapnel he carries and labled "Kerry's War Record". The other half of the Billboard with an x-ray of teeth, labled "bus's War Record".
While Kerry was a baffoon, Bush being re-elected was an incredibly terrible thing for America - because the war was then "proven" as a good thing - when it clearly it was going down hill even faster. My God how ignorant did one have to be to miss that!
When I read Osama's pre-election message - the one withheld because it might contain "secret codes" ... when it fact it was a lucid explanation of his beliefs and rationale - including specific hatred for Bush and the Carlyle group ... I starting flippin' out.
I'm still flippin' out, now - 2 more years later - it seems America is finally waking up - but it's probably too late to avoid the pending tremendous damage.
Posted by James D. Rockefeller
|
December 15, 2006 11:59 AM
James,
The "cackbar" can't separate the facts from the fiction. That 21% must be a real interesting group of folks. Doubt many of us would want to spend too much time with ANY of them.
...and where is that Osama Bin Ladin? He's probably holed up somewhere near Murphy, North Carolina with Mr. Produce! LOL!
Posted by DemonDeacon
|
December 15, 2006 12:07 PM
Nitpicker, you hit the nail hard on that one. The left presumes to have a lock on moral superiority, but is standing ready to take the "choice" they so revere away from anyone not in their pseudo-protected classes.
Bush, by the way, is more like tne neo-libs in delivering the desires of the left by default. The Republicans lost so much in this election, not because the left had any salient ideas, but because the Republicans forgot how to be conservative.
Observe! the rise of the Libertarian!
Posted by W J Ellis
|
December 15, 2006 12:26 PM
"Hans was doing an effective job holding Iraq at bay."
Was that before or after the build-up of US military in Kuwait?
Posted by Trish
|
December 15, 2006 12:55 PM
nitpicker, I generally support the rights of minorities. Occasionally, however, the rights of the few must bow to the rights of the many. Smoking is disallowed in many public places because it is a health hazard to other people, as well as a fire hazard. Shooting Canada geese on your lawn is prohibited because the chance of hitting people or pets is too great. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it illegal to discharge a firearm in Greensboro except to defend oneself or at a firing range?)
Sometimes the rights of the minority should take precedence. I think organized school prayer falls under this heading, unless the school in question is parochial. What right do I have to tell someone else how to pray "correctly"? Like Carol, I think the moment of silence is the best way to handle that.
I do agree, however, that eighteen-year-olds should have the right to drink alcohol. If they are mature enough to go to war and to vote, they should be able to drink.
Posted by Beadbaby
|
December 15, 2006 1:50 PM
Spring 2003, Trish. He was being played with, shell-game style, "Inspect here today, Hans, you can't go there until tomorrow." But to do that tooks Saddam effort, and the satelites were picking up any gear movement .. we had 'em tied up, Trish.
Slow, annoying, effective, and jeeze ... accurate too!
Posted by James D. Rockefeller
|
December 15, 2006 2:08 PM
beadbaby,
I was just pointing out the fallacy in making such general statements like number 9. Just call it a slow day.
Actually, the reason you can't shoot Canadian Geese is because they are a protected species (although the other reasons you mentioned are probably valid in Greensboro). Whenever I see one (or 50) crossing the road, seemingly without any attempt at hurrying, I wonder if they don't somehow know that they are protected.
Posted by nitpicker
|
December 15, 2006 2:11 PM
If I were King, beadbaby, the drinking age would be 25. Hard if not impossible to enforce, but it's the right thing to strive for.
Many studies have shown first that the brain is not fully developed until a little past that time, and secondly that mind altering drugs taken before the brain is fully developed do significant damage.
Good well known examples would include crack babies and fetal-alcohol syndrone.
Posted by James D. Rockefeller
|
December 15, 2006 2:12 PM
James,
Your post reminds me of what Jimmy Carter said about smoking. Both his mom and his dad smoked, but his dad took him into a small room and made him promise to not try a cigarette until he was 21. On Carter's 21st b'day, he was in the Navy and went out and bought a pack of cigarettes, lit one up, smoked and then threw away the rest of the pack. According to Carter, his dad knew what we all know today--if you wait until you are older, you will never smoke.
(Well apparently some will always smoke no matter what---"because it's hard to quit"LOL!
Posted by DemonDeacon
|
December 15, 2006 4:53 PM