Quote

“You kind of like your nemesis, despite the fact that you despise him. If your nemesis invited you out for cocktails, you would accept the offer. If he died, you would attend his funeral and, privately, you might shed a tear over his passing…If invited, you would go to this person’s wedding and give him a spice rack, but you would secretly hope that his marriage ends in a bitter, public divorce… “But you would never have drinks with your archenemy, unless you were attempting to spike his gin with hemlock. If you were to perish, your archenemy would dance on your grave, and then he’d burn down your house…The satisfaction you feel from your own success pales in comparison to the despair you feel at this person’s triumphs, even if those triumphs are completely unrelated to your life.”

Chuck Klosterman, on the difference between a nemesis and arch-emeny.  So, just to be clear:  Chipper Jones=Nemesis.  Roger Clemens=Arch-enemy
Quote

The similarities between Cho’s psychology and the forces that drive United States foreign policy ought to be startling, and profoundly disturbing: the feelings of vulnerability, victimization, humiliation and rage are the same – as is the determination to restore one’s own dominance through violence and murder. But be sure you appreciate the the chronology and the causal chain that Lifton correctly identifies: just as Cho did not suddenly become a murderer on the morning of April 16, but only reached that awful destination after years of inexorable psychological development along one particular path, so too the United States was not instantaneously transformed into an unfocused, rage-filled international murderer after 9/11. As Lifton states, “The war on terrorism, then, took amorphous impulses toward combating terror and used them as a pretext for realizing a prior mission aimed at American global hegemony.”