ojai news at The Ojai Post :: blog, newspaper, events in Ojai, California

Michael Urbanek has a dumb down agenda. He has once again demonstrated a strong penchant for yellow journalism. His generalizations and marginalizations reveal the classic strategy that has been used by the GOP for the last 7 years. He accuses folks who do not share his opinion of not listening but it is he who does not listen. The classic GOP strategy: accuse your opponents of what you are guilty of. I recall many on the post asking Michael Urbanek pointed, relevant questions. His response: name calling, denial and ignoring the facts. Michael Urbanek is a cheerleader for mass murderers and his use of public discourse is just a toxic tantrum for the amusement of those who can see what's really going on. Michael Urbanek disrupts intelligent discourse. His ideas fly haphazardly around like a mosquito with deformed wings.

Poor Urbanek. Even Rove and Gonzalez have run for the exits, recognizing that the Bush disaster means if they don't get their cush, plum "private-sector" suck-off-the-government-teat job within the next few months, while they still can claim some influence, they never will - since the Bushies have ruined "conservatism" for at least the next twenty years, and they will be personas non grata for at least that long (we can only hope).

Cheney is the only one staying to the bitter end - but that's because he took his $25 million pay for selling out the American people up front from Halliburton.

At this late stage, after the principals are all running to cash their checks, I thought the only Bush apologists left were the ones who reared their heads to spout in between cruising bathrooms.

But no, there still remain the poor Urbaneks of the world, too busy living their lives, going to work, raising their families, and "accomplishing things" (!) to even THINK, who at this late stage step up to apologize for the scoundrels who have played them so badly all these years, indeed, who have done more than any set of politicians in U.S. history to make it more difficult for all Americans to live life, work meaningfully, raise a family and accomplish things.

Anyway, Tyler, thanks for taking the time to help say what most of Ojai feels about yet another one of these wingnut schmoes who rear their heads to claim they speak for Ojai.

Now, let's get back to work, fixing the damage Bush and the rest of the so-called "conservatives" have wrought. We certainly have our work cut out for us.

Michael Urbanek, instead of spouting, what are you going to accomplish that will help fix some of the damage your heroes have done?

Michael Urbanek wants the OVN to provide conservative commentary? Kelley Feser Eells seems to be about as far to the right as Ann Coulter -- how much farther to the right does Urbanek want?

Actually, I like my news sans bias and editorializing, the way they do it at The Christian Science Monitor. Once upon a time, The Wall Street Journal practiced the same kind of journalism, but that was a long, long, time ago.

Maybe Michael should just stick to AM Talk Radio; that sounds more like his milieu. There, he can listen to wingnut pundits and callers preach to the choir all day long, and he can be sure that no one there will ever say a nice word about the vewy scawy Hillary Clinton.

The pinky show demonstates clearly why Shrub, Cheney et al will be going to jail. It is just a matter of time.

Who reads the OVN anymore?

As a former newsprint junkie, all I can say is that the OVN is what cured me. What a waste of trees.

A bit of appropriate cut 'n' paste, and then to bed:

"If your workplace is safe, if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour work week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights - you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water drinkable - you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family - you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green - you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism - with the support of the American People." from Joe Conason's 'Big Lies'

Hey, since Michael Urbanek is so knowledgeable about conseratives, let's see how he does on the recently posted "Republican Quiz":

http://www.ojaipost.com/2007/08/open_thread_31.shtml#comment-43582

C'mon, Michael, show us your stuff.

Just click my name and you'll get the show, even Michael Urbanek can understand this. It's all about international law. Meow. Is this war legal? You be the judge.

Hey, Micheal, thanks for driving more readers here! Welcome in new readers!

What wrong with name calling? Its a fun way to argue your point ! Conservatives have fun debating but it seems like liberals and secular progressives become very sensitive to being called names.

Pinky!

So great to see you in Ojai, I think I am in love with you. Would you like to get together around a bowl of milk sometime?

You can call me any kind of name you want to. It doesn't hurt me. What it does do, however, is make me realize that I am not dealing with an equal, and that I am dealing with someone who has the emotional maturity level of a 4th grader. You bore me. You cause me to realize that every word I have ever spoken to you has been wasted, and that there is no such thing as logical debate and dicourse with you. You make me realize that neither you nor anyone like you should ever be allowed to run anything, anytime, anywhere. Call me all the names you want to; you won't surprise me by doing so, and you'll jut make my point.
The only thing I'm really sensitive about is suffering certain kinds of fools.

Sigh. Someday, I will remember to check for typos....

Ouch!

Tyler! You first...I never denigrated the ojaipost - just some of the comments. The fact is, I came to the post last week to get reliable info on the fire. I have visited the post many times since the Day fire, so I know what mostly goes on here. But the military recruitment thread got my attention and I decided to join in. People like you and me should know what each other think - and be able to discuss it. Your venue is an asset to the community. Keep up the good work.

Most of the other posts here can be lumped together under the heading: "Thank You For Proving All Of My Points!"

I see that some of you do have sense of humor. You really read the article, saw that the game was on, and zapped me back. Touche'! You also must have observed that I don't take myself too seriously. Come on, lighten up. We all live in this great little place for different reasons - but it wouldn't be the same without all of us. And it wouldn't be as good.

I don't know if I'll come back here often, or if I am welcome. Still, thanks for taking the time to talk about the issue. It was necessary and I hope, productive.

secular progressives? ah, we've a loyal O'Reilly listener on our hands! but the name-link points to hannity.com....

oh well, same talking points.

name-calling is just poor communication, and has nothing to do with political bent. a small child doesn't like to be called names...and the name-caller is usually another small child. when we grow up, we learn all sorts of new words, phrases, complex logic, and communication tools to help us get our points across on more equal intellectual footing, so that the logic and emotion on one side can directly engage the logic and emotion on the other with a healthy line of respect between them.

i think that Michael will not post on this thread, although we can be sure he's watching (hi Michael!). but my fear is that whether he does or not - although especially if he does - "we" will prove his points by jumping him fast and hard, calling names, the whole bit. we've done it before.

i fear also that some well meaning person - let's call her or him an "Ojai Liberal" - will respond in kind with a Letter to the Editor that takes the bait, accepts and believes the barely-veiled put-downs, and again proves Michael's points.

Mike's editorial would have been about one paragraph long if he'd cut out the insults and sarcasm. but what i gleaned from it is this: as a conservative in Ojai, Mike is feeling alone and afraid, and really would like his views to be heard in an open and respectful forum. he isnt getting that from the OVN or the Ojai Post. i'm not suggesting that we bow to Mike's - or anybody else's - wishes...just that we hear his needs. they are valid, and Michael is our neighbor. he's been hurt and afraid for a long time, and it will likely take a long time before he's able to drop that defensive posture and the tactics that he [learned from O'Reilly and Hannity] thinks are working for him. it takes two to name-call properly: one to call names, and the other to believe them.

it might also help to recognize that "lonely" and "afraid" are emotion, not logic. therefore rebutting Michael with all the logic in the world is not going to get very far. were not in that space yet where we can have those discussions. we need to engage on an emotional level first. Mike, i've felt alone and afraid before too, and i know it's not comfortable. respect yourself, protect yourself, and i hope you find a few of us willing to listen and communicate like grown-ups. keep an eye out for the next Cuppa Joe gathering...you may balance the force.

Michael, your "points", such as they are, are not worth further consideration. Your intellectual dishonesty and ability to self-deceive are truly amazing. By "your" I mean you and other "conservatives" of the same bent. I guess that type of cognitive dissonance is required when you wake-up one fine morning here in Ojai and discover that the people/party/political movement you've been a loyal member of has been systematically lying to you and using you for lo' these many years. You, like so many of your intelligent conservative brethren, must be casting about to make some kind of sense of the shambles your dear leaders have made of this country. Rather than looking at the facts objectively and admitting that you have been deceived, you find it easier to simply deny that there is a problem and you attempt to use the same old worn-out talking points against those evil liberals, as if it is their fault. That tactic worked so well for you back in 1988, but the-times-they-are-a-changin'.

There is no valid political viewpoint but Conservatism, and Ronald Reagan is its' Prophet!

Yeah, you're all suddenly Reagan Republicans - how convenient!

if the posters/readers today will take a step back you'll notice the consequence of an editorial 'oversight' -- where gender and personality were not sufficiently taken into account in the creation of the Ojai Post authors group.

the vast majority of the postings and comments at the OjaiPost are from men,
and to a great extent are combative and argumentative.

not that the Ojai Post is not a ten times better vehicle for dialog and integrity, than obviously the Ojai Valley News -- whose only purpose is promoting the disinformation of the corporate state, dumbing down the Valley's children --

yet most of us here in Goddess Moon, I suggest, do NOT fear and avoid the companionship of women, the presence of woman's heart and mind.

I, for one, do not feel that I need to seek out more and more masculine company, and certainly not companions on the 'dumbward' spiral ...

if that was the case, I would be a subscriber to the Ojai Valley News.

Let's all hold hands and sing Kum-ba-ya

The only thing I get out of Urbanek's rant is that, at this late date, he sort of shyly asks that he get "respect" - by which he clearly means nothing other than "acceptance" - of his point of view as valid.

But when Michael Urbanek urges Bushy "conservative" talking points, in these United States he deserves only "respect" for his right to express odious, idiotic, discredited views. Even he should recognize that his right to express his odious, idiotic, discredited views does not give him a right to respect for those views, or a seat at the table of serious discussion. He should be happy that "liberals" - by which he apparently means anyone with a brain, of whatever political stripe, who recognizes idiotic views for what they are - celebrate his right to speak, and simply do what is American in reaction - namely, call his odious, discredited views what they are, and attempt to engage him in an actual conversation that might lead to some greater understanding. (See the prior thread on military recruiters, where again and again Urbanek was asked serious questions that engaged his point of view - questions which he refused to answer, preferring instead the despondency of name-calling.)

As with anything, if Urbanek wants respect, he ought to consider trying to earn it.

(I am always amazed at what a difficult time so-called "conservatives" have with that concept. Why do they believe they are entitled to things they are unwilling to earn?)

To Michael - Of course you are welcome here. I can't say that the readership won't push back if you write about politics - its the nature of the beast.

Regarding this, "I never denigrated the ojaipost - just some of the comments." You denigrated the commenters and the readers in general. It might have been good-natured conservative-style ribbing, but you took it to the OVN, to a forum where we don't have the ability to respond. So I brought it home to my playing field, where we can have a conversation about it. Funny how you used a passive, one-way medium to argue that we need to have a conversation. Still, its nice to see that you took my response in stride, and I hope that my critique stuck to the subject matter at hand, and didn't make it personal.

To Millennium - the creation of the Ojai Post authors group was not a single moment in time - it's a living growing organism. By my count, its twenty men and eight women, which is weighted to the Y chromosome more than I like but is hardly a vast majority. I have invitations out to a couple women who I think would be great additions.

As to the level of participation, I agree that would weight towards men too, but it really depends on the individual thread.

Might I extend an invitation to our female authors to continue to participate, as your voices are much appreciated and needed in the Ojai community.

XX here. I didn't read the OVN editorial, and frankly I didn't read all the previous posts all the way through. What grabbed my attention was from Tyler's original:

Conservatives, says Urbanek,"are living their lives, going to work, raising their families and accomplishing things. This will come as a shock to most Ojai folks, but conservatives don’t want to run anyone else’s lives."

From my female perspective, the Conservatives sure do want to run my life. They use lot of moralistic gobbledy-gook to couch it all, but control it is: They want to prevent me from having an abortion should I be desperate enough to feel that is an appropriate choice. They want to control who I marry - that person better have a penis by golly. Let's not even get into subtler means of control: the wage discrepancy (74 cents on the dollar, people) or the constant fight for longer maternity leave and time off to care for sick children.

There. See, women can be just as inflammatory as men!

You go, girl!

Yep Heather, you focus on one more right wing canard that, along with the rest of Urbanek's so-called points, is long past due for retirement. Whatever our chromosomes, most of us our blessed with eyes, ears and brain, and if we are using those, we know that it is precisely the right wingers who do indeed want to do nothing but "run anyone else's lives." And that is all they do, and that is all their program consists of, all day long.

"I mean, man, on one side you've got a set of values that's doom, death, degradation and despair, being dealt out of the cards of the bottom of the deck by a gray-faced man who hates you. And on the other side you've got a girl, running through a field of flowers, man, half naked and laughing in the sunshine. Now, you offer those two alternatives to a child. The child is not going to go for that gray-faced dude with the cards, man. The child is too smart to make that mistake."

[David Crosby, Journey Through The Past, 1973.]

Heather, you have it all backwards. This existence is one of inclusion. Speaking only for myself, it's true that I don't listen to people jumping up and down, yelling and screaming that someone else should pay their way. But anyone, regardless of lifestyle, is welcome. Live your life as you see fit, with whom you desire. Just take care of your own stuff and use the tools available to succeed however you want. Don't expect the some level of government to provide for you. We can and should afford to take care of the truly needy - those who cannot help themselves. The rest of us should just get to work and take care of our s**t.

And Heather, I have more at stake than most people regarding gender-based pay discrimination. I want my daughters to have a fair shot.

XY - David Crosby is great, man. Still has an incredible voice...

I've come out of my usual lurking mode to comment!

Heather most certainly does not have it backwards. She paints an accurate portrait of popular/dominant conservative (or right-wing if you prefer) thought and actions in this country.

I hold degrees in political science and history. I am well aware of the fact that there are numerous strains of conservative thought and I've had many a stimulating conversation with moderate or "old school" coservative types. They are usually pretty reasonable folk. But Mike, are you claiming that the type of conservative thought Heather described is somehow insignificant in politics today? I would assert that they are the dominant force in the GOP, and that fact produces consequences many of us "liberals" (and a fair number of traditional conservatives) are concerned about.

As for ruminations on "this existence" - that's all well and good. Personal philosophies are wonderful things to develop and live by. The larger political landscape is connected to personal philsophies but there are not one in the same. Perhaps I've missed some connecting thread, but you seem to conflate the two in your post.

The conservative politics Heather speaks of seek to oppose the very personal philosophy you espouse. Moral judgments about how people live their everyday private lives are a major part of their worldview and legislative/judicial agenda. Do you see that?

Best,

Mike, In what way do you have more at stake than I do regarding gender-equity in pay? Aren't there others out there with daughters who care as much as you do?
Did I say anything about anyone paying my way? I think I said moralizing conservatives should get OUT of my way.

Mike, In what way do you have more at stake than I do regarding gender-equity in pay? Aren't there others out there with daughters who care as much as you do?
Did I say anything about anyone paying my way? I think I said moralizing conservatives should get OUT of my way.

What's happening with Urbanek's posts here are exactly the reason right wing hate radio and the usual "conservative" approach is to avoid any engagement, or any format that permits dialog. Now Michael Urbanek is concerned about gender-based pay inequality. He wants government programs to help those who cannot help themselves. And he does not want to micro-manage anyone's lifestyle just because they are different.

All of these things are of course diametrically opposed by the ideologues who run his party and claim to represent him in government and in the media.

If Mike Urbanek thought about it, I can guarantee he also wants single payer health care, now. He wants a functioning court system that enforces the rule of law, so that everyone can actually have some reason to count on being able to play by the same rules. He wants a functioning public education system and programs that help allow opportunities for those who merit it and will put in the effort.

In short, like the vast bulk of Republican voters who vote reflexively and fall too easily into their party's invitation to avoid thinking about what they really want at all costs, when given an opprtunity to consider facts and alternatives, Mike Urbanek will find that at the end of the day he is a progressive. He's a Dennis Kucinich voter, if he'll only wake up to acknowledge his own core beliefs.