Media Push False Equivalency Between Left and Right Rage

Nearly every morning for eight years, my husband would go into the shower with the news blaring on the radio, and I could hear him over the rush of water grumbling, "I hate George Bush. I hate George Bush." And, occasionally, "Won't somebody kill George Bush?"

Don't call the Secret Service, Newsmax: My husband was, of course, simply filled with rage that Bush had seized office with fewer votes than Al Gore, invaded a country that had never attacked us, killed thousands of our soldiers and scores of thousands of Iraqis, legalized torture, allowed comprehensive government eavesdropping, shipped jobs overseas, and encouraged Wall Street to enrich the few while impoverishing the rest. You gotta yell something sometimes, and who hasn't?

The thing about liberals is they do this standing naked in a shower and come out merely wet and spluttering. The thing about rightwingers is they work themselves up into a similar rage, strap on a .45 loaded with dum-dums, and go to political meetings screaming that something must be done about Adolf Obama--or maybe write columns seriously suggesting a military coup "to resolve the 'Obama problem.'"

And whenever someone points out that the rhetoric on the right could lead to actual violence (as it has, um, a time or two in American history), the Republicans either call you "shameless," "a disgrace," or "dangerous," as House speaker Nancy Pelosi was when she tearfully recalled the deaths of George Moscone and Harvey Milk, or they call you "a nutjob," as RNC chief Michael Steele tagged New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, who wrote that the vitriol out there reminds him of the days just before Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated.

Look, I don't want to whitewash all the left's overheated rhetoric. Antiwar demonstrators carried signs depicting George Bush as Hitler, too (maybe a few more at European demos than at American ones, but still, it happened), and the British fictional documentary Death of a President did stage an assassination of Bush. But when it comes to dangerous rhetoric, any media-borne equivalency between conservatives and liberals is transparently ridiculous.

And not just when Maria Bartiromo (the CNBC anchor who apparently doesn't know you have to be 65 to qualify for Medicare) says (around 4:30) that corporate-sponsored townhall craziness is "exactly what is happening on the other side. I mean, who's directing MoveOn.org?" As soon as polls started coming in showing that Tea Baggery has made the GOP look like a bunch of loons and driven away the center, the Republicans set off on a mad scramble through their Googles to find even the dimmest suggestion of liberal excess against the Bushies to provide a Fair'n'Balanced fig leaf. But it's pretty thin stuff, compared to signs reading "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy" and "We Came Unarmed--This Time." Right now, the Republican leadership is actively pushing the idea that Florida Rep. Alan Grayson's saying the GOP health plan is "Don't get sick and if you do, die quickly," is identical to South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson's shouting "You lie!" during President Obama's health care address to a joint session of Congress.

Can the party that has been screaming about "death panels" for months get away with outrage over a very similar criticism of their refusal to do anything about health reform at all? Probably not, but it isn't hard to see why they feel they need to.

Right, left, center, we all have rage and can lash out--verbally, at least--when we believe our way of life or deeply held beliefs are threatened. But by and large, lefty rage (at least the non-Euro kind) rarely goes beyond the shower curtain. We want the right to be proved wrong (as, indeed, recent political and economic events have shown them to be), in the belief that evidence and logic will help justice to prevail. They, on the other hand--and especially since a black man was elected president--are filled with an exclusionary zeal. They don't want to prove anything about the left so much as they want it removed, defunded, delegitimized, kept off the screen. In a word, killed.

Maybe that's the difference between right and left humor, too. Remember how so many of us said, back in the wardays of Rovian command of the media, that we'd have gone crazy without The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, or Air America's Al Franken and Marc Maron endorsing our own disgust? Instead of actually killing Bush or Cheney, the humor quasi-killed them. Humor both told the truth and delivered the scorn you could find echoed nowhere else in the national discussion.

It's worth remembering that Fox News tried, and failed, at a rightwing version of The Daily Show, knee-slappingly called The Half-Hour News Hour. There's a real difference, say, between Stephen Colbert dismissing comparisons of the Bush administration to the sinking Titanic because, as he told George Bush directly at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2006, it was really more like a flaming Hindenburg, and Glenn Beck dousing a colleague with pretend gasoline and then lighting a match to demonstrate what he thinks Obama is doing to the "average American." One of those is frustrated and funny, and the other is frustrated and very revealing about an instinctive urge.

Comments (197)

1. the humor of the left points to legitimate irony, the difference between the propagandist, distorted, images spun by the right and reality.

   the humor of the right is compromised by its desperate attempt to pull the propaganda wool back over the eyes of the country despite the real pain and suffering their policies have proven to bring.

   also the murderous rage of the right ruins the joke. hard to do good funny stuff when you can barely contain violent, desperate, fantasies.

   "lefty" humor has stemmed from (sometimes sad) irony. the funnies of the right are too full of homcidal rage and the humor is based on a desire to cover up truth that disagrees with ideology.

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/02/2009 @ 12:03pm

2. Well, extremism in speech is par for the course in American history.

   But will point out when it comes to ACTION, the odd thing is...

   modern LEFT-wing extremists go out and break windows in a Starbuck's or more rarer burn down an empty hotel under construction in the Rockies....

   while modern RIGHT-wing extremists....kill doctors and museum guards, set off bombs at Olympics in Atlanta, or blow up Federal buildings in Oklahoma City.

   Posted by Mask at 10/02/2009 @ 12:20pm

3. There are two criteria by which we may draw a distinction between rage that we call justified and rage that we call excessive.

   One criterion is that the cause of one's rage may vary, and we may regard this cause as sufficient or insufficient to justify rage. It is one thing to get angry because people suffer treatable disease without health care because they lack insurance. It is quite another to get angry because a proposed reform of health care may benefit undocumented immigrants. The former cause attests to the generosity of the outraged person, whereas the latter attests to the mean-spiritedness of the outraged person.

   A distinction can also be drawn between real and illusory causes of rage. Outrage over an illusion, such as President Obama's alleged foreignness or illegitimacy, should not be tolerated as much as outrage over a real problem, such as the war in Afghanistan.

   The other criterion is the manner in which rage is expressed. Some outraged people express their displeasure with gestures; others express it with threats of violence.

   Using these two criteria, we can judge clearly between justified and unjustified, or excusable and inexcusable, rage.

   In the foregoing I have omitted any mention of liberals and conservatives. I am confident that every reader who honestly judges recent cases of liberal and conservative outrage according to the two recommended criteria will draw conclusions similar to mine - and to Leslie Savan's.

   Posted by JakobFabian at 10/02/2009 @ 12:26pm

4. Comedy: town-hall meetings filled with highly dangerous, angry, ELDERLY people shouting has me just shaking in my boots! I'd feel much safer outside, say...a G-20 protest where innocent, unemployed, enlightened, and peaceful leftist youth protest in a rational way, always being considerate and respectful to those they disagree with, never destroying any property, never attacking citizens or police, and absolutely never shouting down those they agree with. I'd also feel much safer protesting abortion on a city street corner without ever worrying about being shot to death by a lunatic, pro-abortion drive-by'er! I'd definietly feel much safer at those rowdy town-hall meetings if Obama's boys over at the SEIU (unions) were there to make sure a black man could sell pro-conservative items without having his ass kicked....oh wait, Obama's boys from the SEiU were the ones kicking the poor BLACK man's ass, is that racist? Anyway, you hypocrites on the left make my stomach turn, so I'm gonna go take a shit, wipe my OBAMA, and flush! Fuck Obama!

   Posted by barry25 at 10/02/2009 @ 12:45pm

5. Leslie Savan,

   Excellent example of how to spin things with a one-sided mindset.

   You "declare" that right wing rage is more dangerous than left wing rage. By force of your declaration, it becomes so!

   1. When you talk about your husbands' sentiments in the shower, you forget all the public rhetoric by lefties on the internet towards the right (and the rhetoric that was leveled at George W. Bush) that would make paint peel off of the walls.

   The Nation is a far lefty website but one where the discourse is civil most of the time. Places like Democrat Underground, daily Kos, moveOn.org, etc. are much less civil. How about myleftwing.com?

   When President George W. Bush took a trip to Portland, Oregon at about the time it was looking serious regarding having to invade Iraq, leftist protectors got wind of the route he would have to take to get to the hotel where he would be giving a speech. These people caused a great deal of difficulty during the trip, their faces were literally contorted with rage.........some of these lefties probably would have done physical harm to the President if they had been able to do so.

   2. You embellish reaction on the right to Barack Obama. The actions of some are magically "morphed" so as to imply that a great deal of the right possesses rage, rather than legitimate opposition to Obama policy.

   Remember during the election campaign where it was said that somebody yelled "Kill Him!" (about Obama) during a GOP rally in Scranton, Pennsylvania?

   What didn't get publicized is that further investigation by the Secret Service yielded no concrete evidence that anybody actually did that. It most likely did not happen.

   to be continued

   Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 1:07pm

6. You see nothing wrong with your husband desiring that physical harm come to the President. You see this as a legitimate, understandable expression of rage at the various "wrongs" you think took place.

   You seem to have no ability to understand that it is only you and your husbands' opinion that wrongs occurred, that others do not agree that there were wrongs and that there is a different viewpoint regarding the actions of the Bush administration.

   There is nothing wrong with being in opposition to the policies of the President (well, it was not wrong until January 20, 2009 - now it does appear that it is "wrong") - but desiring physical harm come to somebody is something else again.

   You and your husband need psychiatric help. You have no ability to understand or even consider that your feelings are based on your opinions and that those opinions may be in fact wrong - yet you justify feelings of rage towards someone based on your opinions.

   You make excuses while trying to tell us that leftist rage is harmless but right wing rage is not - even though there is no evidence that sporadic examples of someone who you classify as on the right demonstrating hate is typical of the Conservative movement in general.

   It in fact is not, but you are convinced it is, and I think part of that is just to cover up your sick mental attitude that left wing desires that physical harm come to those they opposed are just "excusable, justifiable feelings".

   In my opinion you should see a psychiatrist and you should identify your husband to the authorities for threatening the previous President.........but you of course won't do that.

   Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 1:16pm

7. couldn't agree more....

   Posted by darladoon at 10/02/2009 @ 1:24pm

8. Ms. Savan:

   "It's worth remembering that Fox News tried, and failed, at a rightwing version of The Daily Show, knee-slappingly called The Half-Hour News Hour. There's a real difference, say, between Stephen Colbert dismissing comparisons of the Bush administration to the sinking Titanic because, as he told George Bush directly at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2006, it was really more like a flaming Hindenburg, and Glenn Beck dousing a colleague with pretend gasoline and then lighting a match to demonstrate what he thinks Obama is doing to the "average American." One of those is frustrated and funny, and the other is frustrated and very revealing about an instinctive urge."

   Thanks for that.

   I suspect most of us --even the most hard-headed-- instinctively know that the "left" and "right" are not simply mirror images of each other, yet the ease with which Bartiromo and others can blurt their nonsense is due in no small part to the rather silly oversimplification of the very terms "left" versus "right".

   To continue with the silliness, we might imagine the left as lobster claw that has evolved into a sophisticated scienticfic instrument ala something on the Mars Rover, and the right simply remains a big fat clumsy claw. And it's attemtping to snip off its left appendage.

   Silly yes, but some truth can be found here.

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/02/2009 @ 1:34pm

9. Scott Roeder

   James von Brunn

   Eric Robert Rudolph

   Tim McVeigh

   Paul Jennings Hill

   John Salvi

   Michael F. Griffin

   Terry Nichols

   James Kopp

   Rachelle "Shelley" Shannon

   Clayton Lee Waagner

   ????

   Posted by Mask at 10/02/2009 @ 1:35pm

10. "It's worth remembering that Fox News tried, and failed, at a rightwing version of The Daily Show, knee-slappingly called The Half-Hour News Hour"

    They really don't need it. I already watch Fox for laughs.

    What Fox should try is serious reporting and journalism.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/02/2009 @ 1:40pm

11. In my opinion you should see a psychiatrist and you should identify your husband to the authorities for threatening the previous President.........but you of course won't do that. Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 1:16pm

    Just when I think that you can't reach further heights of lunacy... you prove me wrong.

    Well... you won that one!!

    Posted by ficheye at 10/02/2009 @ 1:40pm

12. At LS: what is this odd distancing from the population of europe, and specifically the left wing? I have met this before and find it strange and almost sinister.

    I was at the first demo in NYC against the war, I was at the second in Rome and the third in Barcelona. I have talked with many who were at others in London, Paris, Rio, Buenos Aires etc

    And the main difference with how one might look at the various protests is that the police marched everyone away from the UN plaza destination at the New York demo and so one really had no idea what was going on except in the particular part one was in and in the Euro versions the policed for once seemed to be a little bit less heavy handed...

    I didn't notice any more violent insigtments in the eurozone than in NYC, slogans pretty similar, so what is all this distancing about?

    Posted by marilynm at 10/02/2009 @ 1:41pm

13. To continue with the silliness, we might imagine the left as lobster claw that has evolved into a sophisticated scienticfic instrument ala something on the Mars Rover, and the right simply remains a big fat clumsy claw. And it's attemtping to snip off its left appendage. Silly yes, but some truth can be found here. Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/02/2009 @ 1:34pm

    That's funny... and apropo.

    They don't seem to realize that we all share the same body. Nice post, especially "...the rather silly oversimplification of the very terms "left" versus "right".

    I concur.

    Posted by ficheye at 10/02/2009 @ 1:44pm

14. Again, where is the list of moral equivalence showing how dems lie like repub? There is none.

    JF is right, there are major differences in purpose as well. The validity to the consequences from whence our rage originates, the 'why' behind the attraction, has no moral equivalence; there's no symmetry. Case in point, the 2016 Olympic location. Obama's decision to take a few hours to lobby for Chicago garnered major repub leadership disapproval and criticism, while hsuB spent 4 days relaxing at the last one. It seems more often than not, in order for the repubs to win, the USA, especially our poor and working class-- must lose.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/02/2009 @ 1:56pm

15. Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 1:16pm

    Her views are shared by many people SJ. You seem to be incapable of believing that a lot of people utter that in the shower and that a lot of Republican's are uttering it about Obama now. This is what happens when partisan politics is par for the course.

    However to expand upon Mask. He does have a slight point. While Lefty rage might lead to some property destruction it generally doesn't lead to the deaths of people. Mostly they might attack the police and usually that only leads to their own deaths. But it seems that generally speaking when the right get to the point of true violence they kill people. I don't know what the difference in tactics is. But all of the people and groups he is pointing out are true.

    The right brings us abortion clinic bombers, the left brings us PETA people who spray paint fur coats. What is the difference in mentality that leads lefties to attack property and righties to kill a lot of people? I'm not saying this is common amongst the right either because it is not just curious about the few cases that it has happened.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 1:56pm

16. In my opinion you should see a psychiatrist and you should identify your husband to the authorities for threatening the previous President.........but you of course won't do that. Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 1:16pm

    Do you really not know the difference between a threat and a feeling? If I say I wish someone would die or be killed that is not a threat. A threat is saying "I am going to kill someone." If you are going to try to come off high and mighty make sure you aren't completely butchering the language on the way.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 1:59pm

17. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 1:56pm

    Another hypocrisy from the Right....

    some wacked-out PETA person throws paint on a fur coat, suddenly on right-wing radio and Fox the entire PETA organization becomes a "radical and probably terrorist organization"....

    a "pro-lifer" shoots a doctor or blows up bombs in Atlanta and we don't seem to get the same generalizations from them, do we?

    Posted by Mask at 10/02/2009 @ 2:25pm

18. I don't know, I'm very far to the left, but I also think that if violent leftist extremists in the US had more military training like many of their right wing counterparts, they would be just as apt to commit murderous terrorism. Neither side has a monopoly on propensity towards violence, but in our current political climate, the right has greater ability to act on said propensity. We humans seem quite adept at justifying violence towards "the other" regardless of our ultimate political philosophy.

    Posted by entropy at 10/02/2009 @ 2:29pm

19. a "pro-lifer" shoots a doctor or blows up bombs in Atlanta and we don't seem to get the same generalizations from them, do we? Posted by Mask at 10/02/2009 @ 2:25pm

    What, aren't their heroes generally extremist terrorists?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/02/2009 @ 2:30pm

20. a "pro-lifer" shoots a doctor or blows up bombs in Atlanta and we don't seem to get the same generalizations from them, do we?

    Posted by Mask at 10/02/2009 @ 2:25pm

    Have to agree with you here. There are a lot of generalizations on the news about leftist groups but thy rarely seem to generalize their own. But that is consistent with the left too so it doesn't make much of a difference.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 2:42pm

21. Leslie Savan's "False Equivalency" is like a big rock in a soup pot; it adds nothing to flavor, can't be swallowed, and only contributes to static volume.

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/02/2009 @ 2:50pm

22. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 2:42pm

    You get one or two incidents of nails in trees or a hotel set on fire in the Rockiets every 10 years, you suddenly see "rampant rise of eco-terrorism" highlighted on Fox News and the AM radio band and ad infinitum....

    Rudolph blows up a bomb in Atlanta...or Roeder kills a doctor...or McVeigh destroys a Federal building....within the SAME time-frame....and it's "lone nut" and dropped in a week.

    Posted by Mask at 10/02/2009 @ 2:51pm

23. if violent leftist extremists in the US had more military training like many of their right wing counterparts, Posted by entropy at 10/02/2009 @ 2:29pm

    What's preventing them from getting it? There's a clue in there somewhere....

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/02/2009 @ 3:03pm

24. Posted by barry25 at 10/02/2009 @ 12:45pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    I'm sorry, Barry, but I couldn't hear you without the ALL CAPS.

    At least, not over the sound of the crickets and banjos.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 10/02/2009 @ 3:12pm

25. Cccomfo1,

    You indicate that I am acting high and mighty. I believe that is because it is people like Leslie Savan who are acting high and mighty......

    "Feelings" from leftists are OK and understandable, but let somebody on the right make their "feelings" known and they are hit with penalty flags out the kazoo.

    And then it is "morphed" that their "feelings" are representative of the Right as a whole.

    Which is exactly what has happened recently with these tea parties, etc.

    The media has showcased examples of hatred by people identified as being on the Right, and through the showcasing has enabled the implication that a large part of the Right is filled with hate rather than just displaying opinion about policy.

    Mr. Peanut, Jimmy Carter, said that opposition to President Obama is due to racism. Even the President did not agree with him. Now, apparently Carter claims he didn't say or mean that, so the media will proclaim he never said what everybody knows he did say.

    You are correct when you say that some of the expression of feelings is partisan politics, nothing more. The problem is the media twists it so that the Right's expression of partisan feelings is many times described as hate.

    Leslie Savan would have us believe it is the opposite, and is the person with the "high and mighty" attitude, not me.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 3:16pm

26. "And then it is "morphed" that their "feelings" are representative of the Right as a whole. "

    Are you actually saying the right does not do this to the let? Give me a break. Stop playing the victim SJ.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 3:22pm

27. The thugs who just tore up property and committed assault at the G20 protest in Pittsburg can hardly be said to be expressing right wing rage.

    Conservative protests tend to be peaceful, and relatively free of trash or garbage strewn about in the aftermath.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/02/2009 @ 3:23pm

28. The thugs who just tore up property and committed assault at the G20 protest in Pittsburg can hardly be said to be expressing right wing rage.

    Conservative protests tend to be peaceful, and relatively free of trash or garbage strewn about in the aftermath.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/02/2009 @ 3:23pm

29. er, contextual correction:

    a "pro-lifer" shoots a doctor or blows up bombs in Atlanta and we don't seem to get the same generalizations from them, do we? Posted by Mask at 10/02/2009 @ 2:25pm

    What, aren't their heroes generally far right extremist/terrorist provocateurs, far right extremist/terrorist wannabes or simply far right extremist terrorists?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/02/2009 @ 3:24pm

30. Cccomfo1,

    I am not playing a victim....I am simply telling you the way it is..........

    If leftist activists protest, do you see in the news media or in the electronic or print media in general a big massive discussion about the meaning of those protests and how it applies to the left side of the political fence (from Blue-dog Democrat to communist anarchists) as a whole?

    No.

    But with the tea parties, we now have this big national discussion about race....how did that get started? You know full well the left-leaning media enabled the creation of this "discussion" by focusing on things certain ways.

    Yet Leslie Savan tries to "educate" us that the MEDIA is "falsely" saying that there is equivalence between left rage and right rage, wheras the "truth" is that left rage is expression of harmless "feelings" while right rage is dangerous harmful hate.

    Stop trying to defend the B.S.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 3:30pm

31. Cccomfo1 and Mask,

    You two have come to a general consensus and agreement that right wing extremism has been far more harmful and deadly to people and property than left wing extremism.

    This Wikipedia article list the major terror attacks in our history, and you can see that there has been plenty of misery caused by left wing terror groups, with attempts to destroy property and kill people.

    In other words, you both are wrong, left wing extremism has been just as harmful as right wing extremism. Both are represented on the list.

    Of course, the other major component on the list is the one we aren't supposed to talk about (and in Europe many CAN'T talk about without threat of criminal prosecution) ....the element that we are told is no threat (by many here on The Nation, for example)......from people representing the Religion of Peace. I guess that discussion is not the topic of this thread but it is repeatedly a topic here on The Nation.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 3:44pm

32. Stop trying to defend the B.S.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 3:30pm

    I never said what you said wasn't true. Maybe you should reread my post and realize you are playing the victim because every right wing new source does the exact same to leftist gatherings and anyone involved in the left.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 4:04pm

33. Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 3:44pm

    If you look at your list look at the tolls from 1980 on. Granted this list doesn't take into account abortion clinic bombings and the killing of abortion doctors but since 1980 there has been only 2 attacks by leftist groups. The rest have been radical Islam, which in the spectrum of things belongs to the right, and people like timothy mcveigh. The left's anarchists, which were the most violent groups on the left, time is dead, people no longer subscirbe to that ideology and therefore the violence from the left has gone down in this country. You are right, pre-1980 the left had wrought considerable damage but since then the biggest death tolls have mostly belonged to groups of the right.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 4:08pm

34. Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 3:16pm

    You need to step back from your emotions and see what is really at work here.

    This is just a prime example of an opportunity for the left to smugly pat themselves on the back and arrogantly claim that they remain the truly "civil" members of society.

    Even thoughts of killing conservatives are mere "venting"

    The violence against others including property is just as despicable whether it comes from the right or the left. A point emphatically stated by many of the founders. But our leftist friends have their moral equivalency self imposed standard and are not moved by logic.

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 4:18pm

35. the biggest death tolls have mostly belonged to groups of the right.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 4:08pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Unless you count the 40,000,000. babies the leftist have killed, but then human life means nothing to the left until they take thier first breath!

    So breath deeply and thank God your mother was more intelligent than you!

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/02/2009 @ 4:20pm

36. What do you think the media is going to do when, soon, the rage on the left is against the left (assuming Obama and the Democrats who are continuing the wars in Iraq, the Philippines, Columbia; continuing the covert war in Georgia; expanding the wars in Central Asia (Afpac) ; and covertly (at the moment) preparing for a new war against Sudan.

    I know everyone remembers the anti-war struggle against Nixon & the Republicans but does anyone remember the anti-war struggle against Johnson & the Democrats?

    The Democrats (along with their Republican supporters) are now the party of war. So to be against war, progressives must be against the Democrats, even though we were for them in the election. The Republicans and the neocons continue to be who they are (war mongering SOBs) but we in the anti-war movement have to realize that Obama and the Democrats are lying, war-mongering SOBs also.

    And besides all the wars the Democrats are now leading, does anyone think that the Democrats will take a stand against Israel's upcoming forlorn attack on Iran which can result in WWIII. Will Obama order U.S. planes and artillery to stop Israeli bombers from flying through U.S. controlled airspace to attack Iran? I doubt it. Israeli agents are two powerful, not only with the Republican neocons, but also with the phony left Democrats.

    Wars are happening. Wars are looming. Wars are being planned. And it is the Democrats, as the party in power, as the party of order, who are waging these wars. War Monger is a title that fits Obama and Pelosi as much as it fits Bush & Cheney.

    Posted by shadowknows at 10/02/2009 @ 4:24pm

37. See to you gunslinger it's simple. Oh we just invade through Iraq and the gulf and it will be no problem. That's the difference between you and a President. You take into consideration one thing at a time. Any governments leader has to take into account the repurcussions of any action and the effect it will have on our relationships with other countries as well as what favors we will have to call into to make it happen. You see politics on the micro. Presidents have to see it on the macro.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 4:38pm

38. The violence against others including property is just as despicable whether it comes from the right or the left. A point emphatically stated by many of the founders. But our leftist friends have their moral equivalency self imposed standard and are not moved by logic.

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 4:18pm

    Actually this has nothing to do with moral equivalency and who it comes from. You obviously completely missed masks point and therefore took the oppurtunity to act arrogantly once again. His point was that while despicable leftist violence tends to only attack property and is rare. Where as rightist violence attacks lives and kills people and in modern times is becoming more and more common. It has nothing to do with who's violence is ok and who's isn't. But of course you presume yourself to be morally superior to anyone who doesn't share your views because of your arrogance.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 4:42pm

39. Hate against Conservatives is both Intelligent and Patriotic.

    Posted by DPGrassley at 10/02/2009 @ 4:44pm

40. antisocialist,

    You are right--- The economist Thomas Sowell even wondered in a column one time how come leftists do not get dislocated shoulders from all the times they pat themselves on the back.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 4:53pm

41. You are right--- The economist Thomas Sowell even wondered in a column one time how come leftists do not get dislocated shoulders from all the times they pat themselves on the back.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 4:53pm |

    An example of the exact thing you are complaining about. How does feel going through life knowing that everything you say is only contingent upon if someone else shares a different mindset than you? Do you actively say I am going to be a hypocrite now or does it just come out?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 4:57pm

42. Cccomfo1,

    You said (about terror attacks): ".......The rest have been radical Islam, which in the spectrum of things belongs to the right......"

    Radical Islam does not fit on any left-right spectrum, as we know it here in the U.S. or elsewhere in the world.

    It is based on their religion and on their unwillingness to join the modern world.

    They lash out in hate at those they blame for the circumstances they live in driven by their religion and their unwillingness to join the modern world.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 4:59pm

43. Posted by shadowknows at 10/02/2009 @ 4:24pm

    That's a good point. And what about Dems now being "the party of Wallstreet, Big Pharma, and the Insurance industry"? All this talk about the republican party being torn between the so-called moderates and the fringe right-- what about the looming split between Obama's technocratic administration and the people who elected him?

    Posted by MATTMAN at 10/02/2009 @ 5:05pm

44. Cccomfo1,

    I have been criticizing leftists. When was I patting myself on the back (as a Conservative)?

    I am quite partisan in my beliefs, and I freely admit that.

    You are partisan in your beliefs, as demonstrated by opinions you offer up on these threads. There are a few cases where your opinions stray from the traditional Democrat or leftist line, but most of the time your comments are leftist comments.

    Do you admit you are partisan? I ask this because a lot of those on the left (ficheye comes to mind) profess over and over again they are not liberals, while continually expressing leftist belief.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 5:06pm

45. Do you admit you are partisan? I ask this because a lot of those on the left (ficheye comes to mind) profess over and over again they are not liberals, while continually expressing leftist belief.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 5:06pm

    Am I partisan? Sure. I think everyone else. But the difference between my partisanship and yours is that I don't dislike conservatives. I think conservatives to be an important part of this country. I think both sides of the political spectrum are. I don't think either side should be stomped out.

    You may think I am some ultimate leftist but I am not. I am actually farther center than you know. I often play the devils advocate here. But I do the same with my friends who are farther left. I pull my views from multiple places and scoff as much at liberals in my daily life as conservatives. So yes I am partisan but I don't have the same dislike of conservatives as you constantly and unabashedly remind us you have of liberals.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:11pm

46. Right, left, center, we all have rage and can lash out--verbally, at least--when we believe our way of life or deeply held beliefs are threatened. But by and large, lefty rage (at least the non-Euro kind) rarely goes beyond the shower curtain.

    posted by Leslie Savan on 10/02/2009 @ 11:35am

    Really?

    Assassination of President McKinley-anarchist

    Assassination of JFK-Communist Dupe

    Seattle WTO riots

    Miami FTAA riots 2003

    RNC Convention St Paul 2008-anti war and anarchist riots

    http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=5702021

    Seattle Students Violence against military recruiters

    <A mob of Seattle Central Community College students chased military recruiters off campus last month, after a tense confrontation. Now a student anti-war group is stepping up efforts to keep them out for good. The students hurled insults and water bottles, according to witnesses, forcing the recruiters to flee under the protection of campus security officers. There were no reports of injuries.>

    http://tinyurl.com/ydumqu6

    NY Times 2005 reports on violence by the anti-war left against military recruiters or the recruiting stations

    http://tinyurl.com/ydozcuu

    Indy Media praise for antiwar demonstrator's violence

    A man opposed to the war in Iraq will spend the next five years in federal prison for throwing a Molotov cocktail through the window of a local armed forces recruiting station in Vestal, NY, near Binghamton. After serving 5 years behind bars, Brendan Walsh of Endwell, will be supervised for 3 years. A poster on our open newswire writes: "Brendan Walsh is a hero and deserves support. If anyone has or can find an address for him please post it here."

    http://nyc.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/54359.shtml

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 5:15pm

47. Or how about this 19yr old student convicted of slashing the tires on 42 military vehicles

    He also said if he was in Iraq he would kill everyone fighting on the American side, adding that he believed the actions of the government were "unjust and wrong."

    http://tinyurl.com/yckvmoz

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 5:16pm

48. So thats the reason you have no repy!!!

    the biggest death tolls have mostly belonged to groups of the right.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 4:08pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Unless you count the 40,000,000. babies the leftist have killed, but then human life means nothing to the left until they take thier first breath!

    So breath deeply and thank God your mother was more intelligent than you!

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/02/2009 @ 4:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/02/2009 @ 5:18pm

49. The most important point of the article is not being addressed properly in the posts: that the right lacks genuinely funny people! I can only think of one right winger who I think is funny- Dennis Miller. All those other douchebag attempts at humor are sad.

    As for the "left" funny guys- notice that they make fun of democrats just as much. In the latter Clinton years, John Stewart was all over Clinton. Colbert mocks the Obama admin all the time. You don't see THAT kind of bipartisanship from the right.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 10/02/2009 @ 5:27pm

50. Unless you count the 40,000,000. babies the leftist have killed, Posted by BigPasture at 10/02/2009 @ 4:20pm

    I believe studies actually show more pregnancies in areas of the population teaching strictly abstinence only. Which then trends to more abortions, so don't be wagging a finger-- since a lot of openly repub females are secretly wagging the finger at you and getting many an abortion. Perhaps even more than liberal female dems as they are taught sex ed and prevention.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/02/2009 @ 5:31pm

51. r how about this 19yr old student convicted of slashing the tires on 42 military vehicles He also said if he was in Iraq he would kill everyone fighting on the American side, adding that he believed the actions of the government were "unjust and wrong." http://tinyurl.com/yckvmoz Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 5:16pm

    And to you this is the equivalent of say a Timothy McVeigh?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/02/2009 @ 5:34pm

52. Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 5:15pm

    So, you are equating throwing water bottles that don't injure anyone with killing abortion clinic doctors?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:35pm

53. Hate against Conservatives is both Intelligent and Patriotic.

    Posted by DPGrassley at 10/02/2009 @ 4:44pm

    Ah, to be an idiot - and not even a useful one. I pity you. It must be hard being you.

    I would feel the same if you replaced "Conservatives" with "Liberals".

    Posted by freiheit1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:37pm

54. ENOUGH CIVILITY!!!!!! DOWN WITH CIVILITY!!!! Moderates have the blood of all the world's Tyrants on their hands. Moderates are WORSE than Conservatives. Bi-Partisanship is Betrayal.

    Posted by DPGrassley at 10/02/2009 @ 5:38pm

55. Or how about this 19yr old student convicted of slashing the tires on 42 military vehicles

    He also said if he was in Iraq he would kill everyone fighting on the American side, adding that he believed the actions of the government were "unjust and wrong."

    http://tinyurl.com/yckvmoz

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 5:16pm |

    Again you are equating slashing tires and making a threat with the Oklahoma City Bombings.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:41pm

56. Like I said Anti, the vast majority of politically driven deaths have been caused by the right since 1980. You can do research to find that out. And it's by an alarmingly large amount of difference.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:42pm

57. Incidentally, does anyone else here even stop to contemplate how manipulated we are in our divisions these days?

    One might even think it was being done on purpose to weaken us.

    I mean, don't you think its odd that in the 11th hour of one of the most contentious presidential elections in US history, the two candidates huged, held hands and skipped into the Senate to vote to give a trillion dollars to Wallstreet?

    And then here we argue it's a Republican vs Democrat thing?

    Wake up! Leslie Savan is just doing what her media masters want her to do. Fan the flames of division. Why? Because of the fear power has that we shall unite over the truth.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:44pm

58. Again you are equating slashing tires and making a threat with the Oklahoma City Bombings.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:41pm

    you can't be serious about simply dismissing a convicted violent person who claims if given the chance they would kill American soldiers?

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 6:02pm

59. In my opinion you should see a psychiatrist and you should identify your husband to the authorities for threatening the previous President.........but you of course won't do that.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 1:16pm

    Dude, you need to seriously get over yourself. Expressing rage at a President while standing in the shower is very different from blowing up abortion clinics, or bearing a gun to a Presidential address with a sign about blood needed to be spilled.

    Remember when President Bush wouldn't allow protesters within 1000 feet (or whatever)? Obama allows gun toting nutbags to his events.

    Que es mas macho?

    Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:07pm

60. you can't be serious about simply dismissing a convicted violent person who claims if given the chance they would kill American soldiers?

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 6:02pm

    Did I ever say I dismissed it? I am merely drawing a difference between making a threat to violence and successfully killing 150 people and leveling a building. Like I said look at the SUCCESSFUL acts of violence that have resulted or were intended to result in the loss of life and you will find that most of those incidents are from the right.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:08pm

61. Also to SJ. Just because YOU don't consider radical Islam to be on the scale doesn't mean it isn't there. I don't consider anarchists to be liberals. Does that mean I get to take them off the scale? Because if I do then that massively reduces the amount of violence experienced from leftists in the last 100 years.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:16pm

62. Que es mas macho? Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:07pm

    Shhhh!

    CHERMAK is having a Glen Beck moment. If disturbed he could bolt into the underbrush and we'd have to call animal control.

    Posted by ficheye at 10/02/2009 @ 6:17pm

63. How about the Taliban?

    Are they right or left wing?

    Posted by freiheit1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:20pm

64. Hate against Conservatives is both Intelligent and Patriotic.

    Posted by DPGrassley at 10/02/2009 @ 4:44pm

    Ah, to be an idiot - and not even a useful one. I pity you. It must be hard being you.

    I would feel the same if you replaced "Conservatives" with "Liberals".

    Posted by freiheit1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:37pm

    So, who's the real idiot? The one who leads or the one who calls him an idiot and then follows his example?

    Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:25pm

65. you can't be serious about simply dismissing a convicted violent person who claims if given the chance they would kill American soldiers?

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 6:02pm

    Also I can't find what he was previously convicted of. Are you talking about the conviction for slashing tires? Because what he said was said DURING his arrest not after his conviction. On top of that slashing tires isn't a violent crime, it's vandalism. I think what the kid did was stupid and not to be glorified in anyway but you can't even BEGIN to equate that action with Timothy McVeigh.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:32pm

66. How about the Taliban?

    Are they right or left wing?

    Posted by freiheit1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:20pm

    On the spectrum of things the Taliban's method of governing falls into the far far right. The profess to want religious control over a country and lesser forms of totalitarianism. So if you put them on the spectrum then you put them on the far right. The far left would be Chavez, Stalin, Pol Pot.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:36pm

67. Ya that kind of stuff is all over the internet... by now the guy probably has an actively worked case file. It's the same group of people who think that the government is trying to get them. They get so out of control with paranoia and act out, then the government is then actually out to get them for the real crimes they are committing.

    Posted by Milhaus at 10/02/2009 @ 6:59pm

68. and forming a conspiracy to commit sedition is a real crime.

    Posted by Milhaus at 10/02/2009 @ 7:01pm

69. Cccomfo1,

    How are radical Islamists on the right side of a "right-left" spectrum, when it seems they draw their hatred from their Koran, their inability to accommodate to life in the modern world, and their belief that the world needs to be Islamic, and those that don't want to comply need to be dead?

    You are the one that made this original claim (that they are on the right side of the "spectrum") - discuss how this is so.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 7:11pm

70. You are the one that made this original claim (that they are on the right side of the "spectrum") - discuss how this is so.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 7:11pm

    Because they believe in religious and or totalitarian rule. They carry EXTREME forms of conservative ideologies about sex and morality. They are some of the most uptight people on the planet. They believe so much in modesty they believe women should completely cover themselves. If I had to say that fell anywhere then it falls on the right.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 7:34pm

71. Did I ever say I dismissed it? I am merely drawing a difference between making a threat to violence and successfully killing 150 people and leveling a building. Like I said look at the SUCCESSFUL acts of violence that have resulted or were intended to result in the loss of life and you will find that most of those incidents are from the right.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 6:08pm

    What is the difference between someone who threatens to kill and someone who carries it out?

    Opportunity

    you just keep excusing the violence of the left and acting as Ms Savan does as if it doesn't exist.

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 7:53pm

72. Cccomfo1,

    The Right believes in freedom, including the freedom of expression of religion.

    In this country, that means objection by people on the right to how people on the left, through the use of government, have successfully removed religion from public life.

    Things like a nativity scene at City Halls are forbidden now because it is claimed (by those on the left) that represents an "endorsement" by government of a certain religion, and it sometimes is even claimed (by those on the Left) that represents an "attempt" by government to "impose" specific religious beliefs on people.

    None of that is true, a nativity scene at City Halls is simply a reflection of a particular season and the beliefs of people on the community, but nevertheless nativity scenes are no longer allowed.

    In other words, the right does not believe in religious or totalitarian rule - the right believes that government is a representative of the people, not the master of the people.

    The right does not in any way seek to impose religious belief upon others. Certainly, in representative government, people who advocate policy commensurate with what their core beliefs are should be free to advocate and work for the adoption of those beliefs in a free society.

    That is free people advocating policy through the constitutional process in a free society.

    Radical Islam does seem to believe in totalitarian rule.....it intertwines the teachings of the Koran into the governance of the people in a way that does not fit into any political spectrum.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 8:18pm

73. the biggest death tolls have mostly belonged to groups of the right.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 4:08pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Unless you count the 40,000,000. babies the leftist have killed, but then human life means nothing to the left until they take thier first breath!

    So breath deeply and thank God your mother was more intelligent than you!

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/02/2009 @ 4:20pm

    So, let me get this straight: only pregnant people who have a leftward political impetus, whatever that may be, get abortions? Is that correct?

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 10/02/2009 @ 8:38pm

74. IOW, "the left" is taking "conservative" girls and women into the local OBGYN and, gun held to head, forcing terminations. Is that correct?

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 10/02/2009 @ 8:39pm

75. Rather, in the alternative...

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 10/02/2009 @ 8:41pm

76. In other words, the right does not believe in religious or totalitarian rule - the right believes that government is a representative of the people, not the master of the people.

    Posted by CHERMAK at 10/02/2009 @ 8:18pm

    You are really,really struggling with this equivalency thing. Did anyone ever tell all of this to George Bush? There's obviously a good reason why the 'pot calling the kettle black' adage is so overused.

    "The right does not in any way seek to impose religious belief upon others."

    Teaching of creationism? Attempting to put the ten commandments in public areas? 'Seeking' is the operative word.

    Goofball. The first statement of this post, about what the 'right' believes could easily have the word 'left' in place of 'right'. Hows about just putting the word 'Americans'? Oh, of course you'd have to believe in a free and equal country. There's still time!

    Hey, Chermie! srjenkins referred to me as 'marginal right'! But, of course, to you... I am a lib. To you there's only two sides, and there's a fence between us. Hopefully they never let you out.

    Posted by ficheye at 10/02/2009 @ 8:43pm

77. With apologies for the cut and paste:

    RED-STATE / BLUE-STATE ABORTION RATES COMPARED:

    All but one of the ten states with the LOWEST rates of abortion are considered "LIBERAL" :

    Liberal 1 Massachusetts 2.4 Liberal 2 Connecticut 2.8 Liberal 3 New Jersey 3.0 Liberal 4 Rhode Island 3.2 Liberal 5 New York 3.3 Liberal 6 Pennsylvania 3.3 Liberal 7 Wisconsin 3.4 Conservative 8 North Dakota 3.4 Liberal 9 Maryland 3.5 Liberal 10 Minnesota 3.6

    All but one of the Sixteen states with the HIGHEST rates of abortion are considered "CONSERVATIVE" :

    Conservative 35 Texas 5.4 Conservative 36 Alaska 5.5 Liberal 37 Washington 5.6 Conservative 38 Mississippi 5.7 Conservative 39 Kentucky 5.8 Conservative 40 Arizona 5.8 Conservative 41 Florida 5.9 Conservative 42 New Mexico 6.0 Conservative 43 Idaho 6.2 Conservative 44 Alabama 6.2 Conservative 45 Indiana 6.6 Conservative 46 Wyoming 6.5 Conservative 47 Tennessee 6.6 Conservative 48 Oklahoma 6.7 Conservative 49 Arkansas 7.1 Conservative 50 Nevada 9.0

    [Compiled from Center for Disease Control, National Center for Health Statistics; and Election Results from CNN.]

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 10/02/2009 @ 8:47pm

78. a "pro-lifer" shoots a doctor or blows up bombs in Atlanta and we don't seem to get the same generalizations from them, do we? Posted by Mask at 10/02/2009 @ 2:25pm

    What bona-fide right-wing organization did they belong to?

    Posted by twillie at 10/02/2009 @ 11:18pm

79. if violent leftist extremists in the US had more military training like many of their right wing counterparts, Posted by entropy at 10/02/2009 @ 2:29pm

    What's preventing them from getting it? There's a clue in there somewhere.... Posted by hsuBfools at 10/02/2009 @ 3:03pm

    Here's one. Leftist extremists (and non-extremists, for that matter) despise the US so much, they are very unlikely to join a all-volunteer military.

    Posted by twillie at 10/02/2009 @ 11:22pm

80. So, you are equating throwing water bottles that don't injure anyone with killing abortion clinic doctors? Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/02/2009 @ 5:35pm

    I don't think he was, but I would equate killing abortion clinic doctors with killing abortion protestors.

    Posted by twillie at 10/02/2009 @ 11:38pm

81. I don't think he was, but I would equate killing abortion clinic doctors with killing abortion protestors. Posted by twillie at 10/02/2009 @ 11:38pm

    Ba-da-BING!!!

    You have one recent example for the defense. For 500 dollars can you make a list of 'leftist' offenses that equals the number of right wing extremist actions for the last 50 years? The only way that this could have validity is for a list to be made so we can create a percentage comparison. I don't think it can be done. The left is complacent - the right is angry... both are 'sins of omission and commission'. There's people in the middle who just wanna live and let live.

    It's another struggle to justify all the crazy Olympic bombing, racial murdering, abortion doctor killings and assassinations with one example that somehow makes all the rest justified . Wait! Was the Unabomber a 'leftist'? News at 6!!!

    Good point. By Leslie. False equivalency. Back to the tea party!

    Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 01:07am

82. And what 'bona fide left wing organization' did the guy belong to who killed the abortion protestor? Seems a fair question as well.

    Maybe the 'organization' isn't as important as the general headspace there... nuts. Maybe we should find a commonality instead of convenient disparity. It just generates harsh feelings and isn't really productive.

    Lord knows we need a little positive productivity.

    Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 01:15am

83. if violent leftist extremists in the US had more military training like many of their right wing counterparts, Posted by entropy at 10/02/2009 @ 2:29pm What's preventing them from getting it? There's a clue in there somewhere.... Posted by hsuBfools at 10/02/2009 @ 3:03pm Here's one. Leftist extremists (and non-extremists, for that matter) despise the US so much, they are very unlikely to join a all-volunteer military. Posted by twillie at 10/02/2009 @ 11:22pm

    So then the far right's argument is that the far left choosing not to be as efficient at killing as the far right and thus the inequity of the far right insanity is the left's own fault!

    Yep, evolution does make for some wide diversity, as illustrated in the far right new con repub's thinking; or lack there of.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 03:30am

84. How about the Taliban?

    Are they right or left wing?

    Posted by freiheit1 a

    Right wing.

    In re: People showing up at political debates with fire arms, they are goons plain and simple. They are the worst aspect of the American political landscape.

    And when the American people finally wise up and get real gun control. I hope these chromosomally challenged individuals will be the first to get a knock at the door.

    Posted by koroviev at 10/03/2009 @ 05:16am

85. Ms. Savan is correct. Liberals were not "after" Bush to "destroy" him after the 2000 election. You never heard a left-wing elected official quip that they wanted to destroy the Bush presidency. Left wingers started getting angry over policy (things that matter).

    Right wingers, by contrast, have been out to 'destroy' Obama from day 1. For most of the crazies, this has little to do with policy. The scary part is right-wing elected officials sp0ut this craziness.

    This is why any moral equivalency between rage on the right versus rage on the left is, itself, loony.

    Posted by erazma at 10/03/2009 @ 07:16am

86. The bottom line is liberals did this whole "death threat against the President" thing during the Bush years. Entertainers, protestors, and yes, even government officials, all did it.

    Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it is no longer a joking matter.

    When conservatives do it, it is really a glimpse into their darker souls. When conservatives do it, it is scary because a lot of them actually know how to use firearms.

    Liberals, on the other hand, generally have about as much competency with firearms as they do changing the motor oil on their cars or fixing a flat without calling roadside assistance on their cell phones.

    At least that's what people seem to be saying here. The Double Standard Abideth...

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 08:26am

87. Show me the right wing equivalent in tea parties and town hall protests to these:

    http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

    Of particular interest, go down to the 18th picture there and have a look at a mother showing her 5 year old daughter how to play "pin the Molotov on the police car". I swear I'm not making it up.

    And were the L.A. riots an example of right wing violence, or left wing violence?

    Or the lesser one in Cincinnati a few years back?

    Or any "globalization" summit protest that turns nasty and violent?

    Come off it.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 08:42am

88. Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 3:16pm

    Lets take a look at it from this angle...in general the "right" uses The Bible and the Ten Commandments as their guides.

    The "left" eschews such rigid structures, being atheists or passive xtians.

    I have pointed this out before, but, when a group uses the Ten Suggestions as a guide, then ignores them or excuses those in The Party that break those rules, the Shame should be greater as they have set the bar height. Is this how Jesus has asked you people to act?

    To go forth and blow up kids in a day care center because they happen to be in a federal building makes the fires at ski resorts kind of pale in comparison, don't you think?

    Again, in general, the "left" had some pretty solid evidence that Bush was running amok. He started two wars without plans, leaving them both unfinished, he kidnapped Americans, Europeans and Asians and a t least one Canadian, held thousands without cause torturing m,any of them, wiretapped American citizens without warrants or reasonable cause, Signed , what was it...700 signing statements regarding laws passed by congress. Bush was born with silver spoon in his mouth, never really acomplished much in life, certainly not on his own merits

    Obama was born black via a single mom, went to prominent schools based on his merits, rose to become a Senator and president, wants to straighten out the morass of health insurance, save jobs and asks that people put aside their anger and hate and FIX problems. For that he is called a fascist/communist/socialist all at the same time, called Hitler/Saddam/Pol Pot. A fairly large portion of God fearing xtians still believe that he is not a US citizen.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 09:26am

89. "Mr. Peanut, Jimmy Carter, said that opposition to President Obama is due to racism. Even the President did not agree with him. Now, apparently Carter claims he didn't say or mean that, so the media will proclaim he never said what everybody knows he did say. "SJCHERMAK

    Do you have a nutism problem?

    Why don;t you compare the actions and results of Carter after his presidency to that of say...Messiah Reagan, Bush I and Bush II?

    Why don't you compare what Carter inherited to what Obama inherited. Do you see anything? Kind of like my state of MI, Granholm inherited a fricking mess from 12 years of Republican Engler and 25 years of republican congresses. But, all the ills seem to be granholms fault. Obama inherited two wars and a financial crisis from the guy you voted for,why is it Obamas fault that entropy exists?

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 09:31am

90. How many people were killed by leftists attacking ideology during Bushs reign?

    So far I count 3 dead from the right.

    A doctor providing legal services.

    A census worker serving his country.

    A security guard at the holocaust museum.

    Under Clinton it reached a peak with the deaths of hundreds of children. Will you ass clown wait until it happens again, then talk about "lone wolves" or " a few bad apples"? Or will you do the right thing and talk down your side before it is too late?

    Leftists have rage, rightists have rage combined with fear, a belief that God is behind them and an extreme view of the 2nd amendment. A bad supersized combo.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 09:39am

91. I can only think of one right winger who I think is funny- Dennis Miller.

    he may have been funny at one time, he may have been an actor at one time. now he's about as funny as Ann Coulter.

    but, tastes vary.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/03/2009 @ 09:50am

92. Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 08:42am

    "Who is America's worst nightmare, Obama or Osama ?"

    "Obama on our soil as he and his buddies destroy our Constitution and Osama on foreign soil as he plans our destruction from the outside using those within."

    Palin supporters yelling "Kill him!"

    website featuring "OBAMANATION: Anti-Obama Tees, Anti-Obama Hoodies, Anti-Obama Stickers, Anti-Obama Buttons, and more Anti-Obama Gear "

    The use of the term "Obamanation" by multiple posters at The NAtion blogs.

    Keeping ones kids out of school lest they become "indoctrinated" by such Marxist ideals as: work hard, study hard, stay in school.

    Telling your kids that the president is a Marxist Muslim that is trying to destroy the country.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 09:53am

93. crabwalk,

    Once again, a distorted picture from you of events, based on your ideology.

    Your litany of events during the Bush administration, where you claim you on the left had "solid evidence" of the administration running amok, is your opinion only....your "evidence" is the opinion of others on the left.

    You discuss the "silver spoon" you believe George W. Bush had in his mouth ---- then list the accomplishments of Barack Obama as though they are all based on merit and hard work.

    You say "rose to become a Senator and President"........you forgot his time in the Illinois legislature..........and the time he was a Soldier for Stroger.......President Obama's path to the top was certainly aided by the Daley and Stroger machines, in Chicago and Cook County........

    You would have us believe that Obama got where he is completely on his own, while George W. Bush did not.

    Your attempt failed.

    You then say President Obama is trying to fix health care......you forgot to mention he is trying to do that by putting socialist medicine in place to provide Americans with the mediocre health care Canadians and Europeans "enjoy".

    You say he is asking people to put aside anger and hate but you forgot to mention that he expects people to do that by complying with his agenda......no principled partisan opposition allowed....

    You forgot to mention the Obama worldwide Apology Tour, slamming his own country and contritely telling others in the world we will now meekly comply with their agendas and demands.

    You seem to leave out a lot when you make your posts.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/03/2009 @ 09:53am

94. crabwalk,

    I no sooner make my post then there is another inaccurate one from you.

    You talk about Palin supporters saying (about Obama) "Kill him!"

    You forgot that did not happen. I believe I refuted that up above. You certainly know that investigations showed no evidence that anybody actually shouted that.

    You talk about the attempt by Obama to indoctrinate school kids.

    When Obama did broadcast to the kids in school, it was a watered down version of what was originally intended.........because parents and others complained......which you imply is wrong to do.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/03/2009 @ 09:58am

95. SJ claims that racsim has no part in the Obama hatred. Why then did people scream at others wearing Obama T-shirts "You better git yur nigger lovin' ass outa here."?

    Monday, June 23, 2008

    Sen. Barack Obama's historic victory in the Democratic primaries, celebrated in America and across much of the world as a symbol of racial progress and cultural unity, also has sparked an increase in racist and white supremacist activity, mainly on the Internet, according to leaders of hate groups and the organizations that track them.

    Neo-Nazi, skinhead and segregationist groups have reported gains in numbers of visitors to their Web sites and in membership since the Illinois senator secured the Democratic nomination June 3. His success has aroused a community of racists concerned by the possibility of the country's first black president, they say.

    Check out stormfront.org, SJ.

    "You forgot to mention the Obama worldwide Apology Tour, slamming his own country and contritely telling others in the world we will now meekly comply with their agendas and demands. "

    opinion?

    Naw, SJ, I am sure it is fact that Obama "slammed" the US. Have you noticed that foreign relations are better now than under your mans reign of error? Have you heard any news out of Iran lately? Seems they have agreed to do something Bush could not get them to do.

    Saying Obama had help from Chicago machine politics is equivalent of having daddy congressman, daddy head of CIA and daddy president? Using a legacy to get into Harvard, Yale and TANG equivalent to Bill Ayers?

    Again, SJ, The Right claims the works of JC as their guide, they claim to have the Holy Spirit. They set the bar high, why can't they clear it? They are BETTER than us, you say so yourself. Why can't they ACT better?

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 10:02am

96. "When Obama did broadcast to the kids in school, it was a watered down version of what was originally intended.........because parents and others complained......which you imply is wrong to do.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/03/2009 @ 09:58am"

    what was "watered down"? Are you saying that holding your kid out of school is better than taking your kid to a G-20 rally?

    What proof did you post about the "Kill him" rally?

    Are you saying that Bush DID NOT wiretap American citizens?

    Are you saying that Bush did not kidnap a Canadian citizen, have him transported to Syria where he was tortured?

    Are you saying that Bush did not hold US citizens without warrants and charges?

    Are you saying that Bush did not hold over 500 people at GITMO, without charges EVER being filed, then released them?

    Are you saying that Abu Graib was "a few bad apples" but PETA is a good representative example of "the left"?

    Are you saying that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are OVER, finished and won with functional democracies working?

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 10:09am

97. I am alos curious at the time frame...it seems to me (opinion SJ!!!!!!) that it took quite a while for "the left" to get worked up over Bush. It took about a month for the whacko right to go on a rampage against their new Commander in Chief...after telling us FOR YEARS to HAVE RESPECT for THE OFFICE. Especially while we are at war.

    What happened to your respect for the office of President, SJ? Are you trying to help Usama undermine your country? Don't you think he delights in Tea Parties?

    nope, no racism here: "Oct 11, 2008 ... Man At Palin Rally Displays Monkey Doll Donning Obama Sticker"

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 10:16am

98. After reading the post here, and the myriad examples of left and right actions...

    I am left with the obvious conclusion that Mankind was made in Gods image.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 10:18am

99. crabwalk,

    You are acting like an overflowing commode.

    First off, here is the proof you demand about the "Kill him" remark.

    October 17, 2008 Secret Service says "Kill him" allegation unfounded

    By Andrew M. Seder aseder@timesleader.com Times Leader Staff Writer http://www.timesleader.com/news/ breakingnews/Secret_Service_ says_Kill_him_allegation_unfounded_.html

    (link may contain extra spaces after pasting into browser)

    As far as the rest of your stuff, there have been postings in the past here on The Nation by Conservatives that have shown the warrantless wiretapping was legal.

    We were (and still are) at war against terrorism....things you believe are wrong were in fact not wrong.

    Foreign relations are not better now under Obama....you must have missed French President Sarkozy's remarks the other day about Obama and Iran......obvious disdain and disbelief in his remarks at what the current administration is doing.

    I guess relations with Russia are "better", because we caved in to what they wanted and got nothing in return! Of course the Russians would be happy!

    Any "agreement" with Iran is to be taken with a grain of salt - history has proven that a lot of agreements over the years just bought time for the evildoers....and enabled them to continue their intentions......remember PM Neville Chamberlain achieving "Peace in Our Time" before World War II?

    You highlight Obama hatred. Of course, there is some hatred towards Obama.....it is not reflective of Conservative opinion in general.....it is not typical of Conservative opinion in general......and that opinion is disagreement and opposition to the Obama agenda, not hatred towards the man.

    You say it took a while for the left to get "worked up" over Bush. Not true- opposition was from Day one.

    Posted by sjchermak at 10/03/2009 @ 10:40am

100. It's fairly impossible to debate with people that do not tend to even believe in evolution and science, much less easily understood and documented facts.

     New con repubs turn the facts upside down and inside out, deny they did that, then discredit the facts as being inside out and upside down. Reality comes second to their goals.

     The hsuB/cHeney admin is a perfect example of that way of going about trying to govern; a fragile mental formula for creating a state of schizophrenia rather than bettering our collective/holistic reality. Ever try arguing with a fantasy; a schizophrenic? You essentially step into their fantasy. It's a damn fantasy after all and the really real problem is believing anyone can argue with it without stepping into it.

     There is a straitjacket, meds, electric shock, etc., but reasonable discourse and logic alone obviously hasn't changed their fantasy, but is destroying our nation.

     The long range cure for schizophrenia are meds. One can understand their meds as the bridge/reality regulators. Helps the schizophrenic interact with our collective reality, enable seeing facts as facts and not their own singularity, being an intellectual vacuum; simply goal oriented sans understandable moral outcome equivalencies.

     Problem is-- most schizophrenics won't stay on their meds and it's the reasoned observers' responsibility to monitor their 'off' periods and get them back on their meds. Sometimes however, it requires that schizophrenics be restrained in order that they not do harm to themselves and others.

     At this point new con repubs are schizophrenic, require restraint and meds. There is no discussion that will function to bring them into reality. Only one that spreads their disfunction and paranoia.

     http://psychcentral.com/disorders/sx31t.htm

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 10:47am

101. Obama was born black via a single mom, went to prominent schools based on his merits, rose to become a Senator and president, wants to straighten out the morass of health insurance, save jobs and asks that people put aside their anger and hate and FIX problems.

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 09:26am

     You left out all his associations with unsavory characters in the Chicago political machine. His lies about friends like Ayers. Going to a hate-filled church for 20 years...and then lying about never hearing the hate, and then distancing himself from his pastor of 20 years.

     You left out the sweet deal of job his wife got. And the raise she got when he became a U.S. Senator to $350,000 a year for reasons nobody explained. A job so important they decided not to fill it again when she left. Obvious way to funnel money to the Obama family. We'd know more about that, doubtless, but the media sent all their reporters to Wasilla.

     You left out that he won most of his elections by badgering his opponents out of the race trhrough lawsuits or pressuring the release of information, rather than just facing them in elections fair and square.

     He isn't trying to "fix" healthcare. He's putting it on the road to socialized medicine. As he told an audience in 2004 that was his goal.

     He's got an ego the size of all outdoors and absolutely no executive experience to justify that arrogance.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 10:54am

102. I look at all the yelling on both sides of the political spectrum, and it is disheartening.

     But look at the Iraq war, which distracted us from having the resources in Afghanistan to kill Bin Laden when we had him trapped in the tora bora mountains. A failure that could ultimate result in 9/11 looking like a minor blip in world history.

     While there was no creditable evidence that Saddam, madman or not, was involved in 9/11.

     And I look at George H W Bush, who said when asked why we didn't go to Baghdad in Gulf war 1 said "It would be a disaster". And so it is. For he understood Iraq was a quagmire of 1300 year old religious hatreds, held together by a dictator. Which blew up in Bush Jrs face. Because he didn't know that Sunnis and Shias hated each other in the worst hatred of all - religious hatred, for 1300 years.

     Partywise the the Democrats, for all their failings, have been the party of the common man so many times. Ever more so since Pr Johnson passed the civil rights bill to end the virtual slavery of Black people called segregation. Which instantly flipped the southern culture to the republicans. Backed by their religious extremist total control mentality.

     And the root base of the republican party has two parts.

     One is those who worship their demi-god named greed, Which was what befell wall street. Doesn't the Bible warn us that money is the root of all evil?

     And the republican Southern bible belt Religious ultra- christians, who'd make America a theocracy. Twisting the very meaning of Jesus Life into what would morph into a religious tolitarian state like Saudis Arabia. Which spawned with their own ultraconservative religions 9/11, the Taliban and Bin Laden.

     And create the End of America as we know and dream it should be.

     Posted by SteveMD2 at 10/03/2009 @ 11:30am

103. er, At this point new con repubs are schizophrenic, require restraint and meds. There is no discussion that will function to bring them into reality-- only one that spreads their disfunction and paranoia.

     Obviously I am talking metaphorically for the most part.

     However, what would be the equivalent to meds for the schizophrenic-- to serve as the bridge for the new con repubs to be led back to a common reality to recognize facts as facts?

     Strict compliance to what type of regulation and laws would be a sufficient medicine to serve new con repubs?

     A cure anyone?

     Hint: new con repubs slander the facts... To the point of disseminating treason, a national security priority maybe?

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 11:33am

104. Posted by SteveMD2 at 10/03/2009 @ 11:30am

     Welcome to the blogs. Hopefully your next post will actually contain facts instead of radical left propaganda

     Posted by antisocialist at 10/03/2009 @ 12:24pm

105. Liberals, on the other hand, generally have about as much competency with firearms as they do changing the motor oil on their cars or fixing a flat without calling roadside assistance on their cell phones. "-CITIZEN CARRIER

     No generalizations here. I invite you to slink around my home at night to test my accuracy.

     "You left out all his associations with unsavory characters in the Chicago political machine. His lies about friends like Ayers. Going to a hate-filled church for 20 years...and then lying about never hearing the hate, and then distancing himself from his pastor of 20 years. "Same source.

     Do you mean the unsavory characters like those that served on the Annenberg board? I can see how you would see these people as "unsavory":

     "The Annenberg Challenge was funded by Nixon Ambassador and Reagan friend Walter Annenberg. Republican Governor Jim Edgar, who wrote to Walter Annenberg to encourage the creation of the Challenge, joined Mayor Daley to announce the formation of the Challenge and his administration continued to work closely on education reform with the Board. John McCain has praised an initiative funded by the Challenge. The Challenge's work is still carried on today through to the bipartisan Chicago Public Education Fund, which coordinates closely Chicago Public Schools CEO Arne Duncan and Mayor Daley to improve teacher performance and has included such board members as Illinois Republican Party Chair Andrew McKenna."

     And of course, as we are discussing equivalence, how about GWB's friend Prince Bandar? Do you know what Mr. Bush called the prince of the Saudi Regime, the Saudi regime that promotes Anti-Israelis and Anti-American "collectivism" in it's state funded schools?

     Unsavory.

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 12:26pm

106. Radical Islam does not fit on any left-right spectrum, as we know it here in the U.S. or elsewhere in the world.

     It is based on their religion and on their unwillingness to join the modern world.

     They lash out in hate at those they blame for the circumstances they live in driven by their religion and their unwillingness to join the modern world.

     Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 4:59pm

     You could very well be describing the Christian right in this post

     Posted by Balrog at 10/03/2009 @ 12:31pm

107. The right does not in any way seek to impose religious belief upon others

     Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 8:18pm

     <cough>Bullshit<cough>

     Posted by Balrog at 10/03/2009 @ 12:32pm

108. "Vice-President George H. W. Bush returns from his trip to the Middle East, where he has passed along a message to Iraq to step up its air war against Iran (see July 23, 1986). The covert machinations nearly become public knowledge when US embassy officials in Saudi Arabia, learning of the Saudi transfer of US arms to Iraq earlier in the year (see February 1986), question the Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar. Bandar, fully aware of the arms transfer, tells the officials that the transfer was "accidental""

     CITIZEN CARRIER, did you have any concerns about the US supplying Saddam Hussein with weapons via the Muslim Saudi dictatorship back in 1986?

     Why not? I would think those two countries would be considered unsavory.

     SJCHERMAK, the warrantles wiretapping of Americans was SOOOO legal that congress had to pass retroactive immunity.

     Why?

     Were you not concerned about the unconstitutional activities then? You are concerned that Obama might overturn the const, but you encouraged a flagrant violation of #4.

     Why?

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 12:32pm

109. Liberals, on the other hand, generally have about as much competency with firearms as they do changing the motor oil on their cars or fixing a flat without calling roadside assistance on their cell phones. "-CITIZEN CARRIER

     This liberal is rated as an expert by the NRA...of which I am also a member.

     Posted by Balrog at 10/03/2009 @ 12:33pm

110. The right does not in any way seek to impose religious belief upon others

     Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 8:18pm

     Did you actually write and believe this SJ?

     Have you never heard of Judge Moore and his stone tablets?

     Ever heard of Dover Pa?

     2004 Barna poll:

     Support For Changes in Public Policy, According to Seven Key Faith Groups

     Make Christianity the official religion of U.S.

     32%-all aldults

     66%-Evangelicals

     44%-non-evangelical born again

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 12:43pm

111. "Partywise the the Democrats, for all their failings, have been the party of the common man so many times. Ever more so since Pr Johnson passed the civil rights bill to end the virtual slavery of Black people called segregation. Which instantly flipped the southern culture to the republicans. Backed by their religious extremist total control mentality."

     Posted by SteveMD2 at 10/03/2009 @ 11:30am

     Party of the common man, huh?

     I thought the Supremes ended segregation with Brown v. Board of Education. And, Johnson's Great Society? It destroyed the African-American two-parent family as a viable entity.

     Thanks for posting, though.

     Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 12:46pm

112. At this point new con repubs are schizophrenic, require restraint and meds. There is no discussion that will function to bring them into reality. Only one that spreads their disfunction and paranoia. http://psychcentral.com/disorders/sx31t.htm

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 10:47am

     CHERMAK!!! Get back in your room!!!

     "The right does not in any way seek to impose religious belief upon others."

     Stop teaching this stuff to the staff!!!

     "...the right does not believe in religious or totalitarian rule - the right believes that government is a representative of the people, not the master of the people." (Haw!)

     As I said before, this is what AMERICANS believe, not just 'the right'. I swear that you are reading IMPERIUM by Francis Parker Yockey... the stuff you spew is really indicative of that headspace.

     And about that overflowing commode... the rightists here cannot win on this particular issue. There is overwhelming evidence that 'the right' is far more complicit in hate speech and violent actions than the complacent left. Tim McVeigh, Richard Poplawski and others... Glen Beck, Michelle Malkin, Michelle Bachmann, Mark Levin, Billy Cunningham, Rush Limbaugh... the list is long and damning...

     Why the man in the shower should be reported to the police is just another example of your distance from reality and rational thought. Accept what your 'side' is responsible for.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 12:47pm

113. This liberal is rated as an expert by the NRA...of which I am also a member.

     Posted by Balrog at 10/03/2009 @ 12:33pm

     I quit the NRA when they lost common sense.

     Rated expert, attended Olympic training Center in Colo Springs, discipline: shooting.

     Change my own oil, rebuilding a 1972 240z, fabricate anything you need out of metal.

     OOPS, another steroetype run amok.

     But, we KNOW that liberals:

     Are mentally diseased

     Have no moral guide

     Are less than people

     Have no shame

     So, they will do despicable things.

     What is the excuse from the party of God?

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 12:49pm

114. BTW, CITIZEN, I am also self employed, live in a rural environment, did not attend a "liberal" university, have no advance degrees, drive a 4X4 and a V-8, occasionally vote republican, supported welfare reform...

     so, if you have any more sweeping stereotypes to flog, keep them to yourself, just as I ask my cousins to not call their Commander in Chief that" damned nigger!".

     But, there is no racism at the bottom of their difference of opinion, SJ taught me that.

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 12:54pm

115. CITIZEN CARRIER, did you have any concerns about the US supplying Saddam Hussein with weapons via the Muslim Saudi dictatorship back in 1986?

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 12:32pm

     I think I was in the 7th grade in 1986.

     What I DO think is that most, if not all, of what America did or did not do in those days must be viewed through the realpolitik of the Cold War. 1986 was only four years after the Iranian hostage crisis. So I'm supposed to feel bad that we backed Iraq against Iran? Like we just backed the Northern Alliance against the Taliban? Or the Mujahideen against what was at that time, the world's greatest state sponsor of terrorism, the Soviet Union? Well, I don't.

     Much how like we were allies with Joeseph Stalin during WWII, because we deemed Germany to be the worse threat.

     And we tend to deal with the Saudi royal family, as much as I despise them, because they are pretty much the only thing standing between the stability of that country and the wahhabi fundamentalists of their country.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 12:56pm

116. "Maybe the 'organization' isn't as important as the general headspace there... nuts. Maybe we should find a commonality instead of convenient disparity. It just generates harsh feelings and isn't really productive. Lord knows we need a little positive productivity." Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 01:15am

     I agree. Libs and proggys could start the ball rolling by not portraying righties as the only violent extremists.

     "Leftists have rage, rightists have rage combined with fear, a belief that God is behind them and an extreme view of the 2nd amendment. A bad supersized combo." Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 09:39am

     Oh, but let's not forget. The only presidential assasination attempts in the last 45 years have been by leftie wingnuts, on Repub presidents. So, the rightists are carrying guns, sure. They're just not using them.

     Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 12:58pm

117. Compare the US Air Force to Saddam's Iraqi Air Force, Clear Channel's hard right powerhouse to - what Katie Couric asking Palin, "What do you read?" Neocons need asymmetrical war to win. Reality and facts don't do it. One of the biggest facts they work hard to obscure is exactly, as Savan points out, this addiction to false equivalency. Don't look at the man behind the curtain! Over here! It's shock and awe. Amazing huh?

     Please don't pause to consider how ridiculous it is to use war words and symbols when you bomb the crap out of a 3rd world country with no air force. Explains BTW, the whole Grayson flap. Hilarious -- same ol' just don't look at the jerk behind the curtain! Palin: Obama supporters are unAmerican. These past few months have been an easy to track "conservative" delusional projection hate sequence: he's a celebrity-racist-Muslim-birther-socialist-redistributionist in chief, Anti-Christ, etc.

     Which national parks should we close, sell to multinationals? Which regulations - on toys, medical equipment, building materials, engineering standards are unAmerican?

     Should we let elevator companies police themselves or is it OK to have a REGULATION that the tensil strength of the elevator safety cable handle more than several fat people as they dangle from the 50th floor?

     Posted by winyahn at 10/03/2009 @ 1:11pm

118. "website featuring "OBAMANATION: Anti-Obama Tees, Anti-Obama Hoodies, Anti-Obama Stickers, Anti-Obama Buttons, and more Anti-Obama Gear " The use of the term "Obamanation" by multiple posters at The NAtion blogs. Keeping ones kids out of school lest they become "indoctrinated" by such Marxist ideals as: work hard, study hard, stay in school."

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 09:53am

     And "Obamanation" scares you, why? He is the President of the US, thus the cutesy contraction of Obama Nation to Obamanation. Seems pretty innocuous.

     If you want, I can come to your house, and chase all the monsters and neocons out from under your bed. See how nice us right-leaning moderates are?

     Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 1:13pm

119. All I'm hearing here is spluttering from the right.

     There's no real defense against the dark arts.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 1:21pm

120. so, if you have any more sweeping stereotypes to flog, keep them to yourself, just as I ask my cousins to not call their Commander in Chief that" damned nigger!". Posted by crabwalk at 10/03/2009 @ 12:54pm

     Yep, I'd hate to be spreading sweeping stereotypes around. Like here...

     "Leftists have rage, rightists have rage combined with fear, a belief that God is behind them and an extreme view of the 2nd amendment. A bad supersized combo."

     Because we both know liberals did not express fear during the Bush years. Or even now, in this blog, as we ruminate on the fear that conservatives might actually act on their anger. No, that's not fear. We also know that liberals never pass or promote legislation on the basis of fear, like Al Gore with anything relating to global warming.

     Another?

     "Again, SJ, The Right claims the works of JC as their guide, they claim to have the Holy Spirit. They set the bar high, why can't they clear it?"

     Wow, and all this time I was claiming the works of Russel Kirk, Edmumd Burke, Milton Friedman, Buckley, Reagan, Thatcher and others as my guides! And all this time it was Jesus! Thanks for setting me straight about myself.

     I would consider your dislike of stereotypical statements more sincere, if I had the impression the sincerity was backed up by personal example. From what I see, it hasn't been. Going after stereotypical statements by other posters about ANY group would tend to give you more credibility in this regard too.

     But I notice a lack of it.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 1:35pm

121. And more spluttering.

     This time espousing the merits of right wing literature and how it is a foundation for factual reference which somehow gives merit to these points of view. (Each of these authors have been discredited as much as they have been glorified for their extreme views).

     The figures are not available on the numbers of sales for 'Mein Kampf', although it is still a bestseller in Germany.

     Not too long ago 50,000 copies were sold in Turkey, where it is very popular.

     Amazon does not release information regarding sales numbers of this book, but has stopped mailing all orders to Germany, although the ordered books may be sent elsewhere. It is still a popular book there as well.

     So, a lot of people still love this book. Does that make it a credible reference to live by? One can only wonder how many people in America read this book.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 1:59pm

122. Oh, just to clarify my sarcasm...

     My above post is a good example of false equivalency. I may change my mind when Palins book is finally released.

     While there's no data directly linking right wingers to ' Mein Kampf' it's odd that Glenn Beck seems to be wearing a Nazi uniform on the cover of his book. Food for thought at the very least. Are aryan hate groups classified as 'right wing'? See how muddy the waters get? In the 1940's they were part of a 'socialist' regime.

     So the leanings of EITHER side, but mostly those on the right, are becoming blurred more and more each day in a mysterious metamorphosis of fear and misconceptions.

     Health care for all is 'socialism'. Oh, but Hitler stated that the destruction of the weak and sick is far more humane than their protection. And some of that is what may happen without a public option.

     Approximately 45,000 people a year die because of no health insurance. So who is actually a socialist at that point? It's clear that the people using the name as an epithet don't really understand what it means at all. Alan Grayson, in an unfortunate reference to the holocaust said conservatives just wanted people to die more quickly. He screwed up massively with the reference to the holocaust, but he got the other part right.

     Is all the false equivalency leading up to one massive morphing into a terminally screwed up society? The suspense is killing me.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 2:58pm

123. Oh, but let's not forget. The only presidential assasination attempts in the last 45 years have been by leftie wingnuts, on Repub presidents. So, the rightists are carrying guns, sure. They're just not using them. Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 12:58pm

     Is that your attempt of an equivalence to a Timothy McViegh?

     BTW, you do know that Ted Bundy like Charles Manson, was a repub, if you're considering Fromme's attack on Ford as political.

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy

     http://tinyurl.com/ye6cmaf

     http://tinyurl.com/y8nxo4k

     Plus as well, John Hinckley, was a repub with close connections to the Bush family and started out by stalking Carter to assassinate. Remember the movie 'Taxi Driver', Jodie Foster...

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hinckley

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 3:02pm

124. Again, the far right new con repubs live in a schizophrenic alternative universe that bares little resemblance to the one where know facts aren't revised simply to fit their goals.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 3:12pm

125. Which in turn harms and causes chaos in our real world.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 3:13pm

126. "Is that your attempt of an equivalence to a Timothy McViegh?" Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 3:02pm

     No. That's me stating that the only people shooting at presidents, are shooting at Repubs.

     "BTW, you do know that Ted Bundy like Charles Manson, was a repub, if you're considering Fromme's attack on Ford as political. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy http://tinyurl.com/ye6cmaf http://tinyurl.com/y8nxo4k Plus as well, John Hinckley, was a repub with close connections to the Bush family and started out by stalking Carter to assassinate. Remember the movie 'Taxi Driver', Jodie Foster... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hinckley"

     You actually linked to "yahoo answers"?! Laughable, but at the same time a little disturbing.

     Lefty wingnuts love flinging mud. And if they fling lies with the same enthusiasm? Hey, the truth is relative to lefty wingnuts. As long as you fight the good fight against "THE MAN".

     Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 3:38pm

127. "While there's no data directly linking right wingers to ' Mein Kampf' it's odd that Glenn Beck seems to be wearing a Nazi uniform on the cover of his book. Food for thought at the very least. Are aryan hate groups classified as 'right wing'? See how muddy the waters get? In the 1940's they were part of a 'socialist' regime. So the leanings of EITHER side, but mostly those on the right, are becoming blurred more and more each day in a mysterious metamorphosis of fear and misconceptions. Health care for all is 'socialism'. Oh, but Hitler stated that the destruction of the weak and sick is far more humane than their protection. And some of that is what may happen without a public option. Approximately 45,000 people a year die because of no health insurance. So who is actually a socialist at that point? It's clear that the people using the name as an epithet don't really understand what it means at all. Alan Grayson, in an unfortunate reference to the holocaust said conservatives just wanted people to die more quickly. He screwed up massively with the reference to the holocaust, but he got the other part right. Is all the false equivalency leading up to one massive morphing into a terminally screwed up society? The suspense is killing me." Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 2:58pm

     And, so much for "positive productivity"....

     Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 3:45pm

128. No. That's me stating that the only people shooting at presidents, are shooting at Repubs....You actually linked to "yahoo answers"?! Laughable, but at the same time a little disturbing. Lefty wingnuts love flinging mud. And if they fling lies with the same enthusiasm? Hey, the truth is relative to lefty wingnuts. As long as you fight the good fight against "THE MAN". Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 3:38pm

     "The only presidential assasination attempts in the last 45 years have been by leftie wingnuts, on Repub presidents."

     Twi, you've just now proven, by perfect example, how far right new con repubs will totally ignore facts for the questionable info and revise even their own statements to achieve goals which in themselves are even questionable due to the very fact that they're not based on any facts!

     Recall all the times dIck cHeney revised his statements by saying he never said something that was on tape of him stating what it was he said he didn't. As well as his pronouncements that the VPOTUS wasn't in the executive office... just so he didn't have to comply with a rule/law.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 3:53pm

129. Oh, twillie... yoo hoo...

     I'm lamenting the lack of productivity on BOTH sides. I'm going back and forth, pointing out that EVEN THOUGH IT'S MOSTLY COMING FROM THE RIGHT... (didn't want you to miss that part, because it's true, not just a negative comment), both 'parties are to blame for the chaos, fear, and misconceptions that abound. A shared dysfunction. But you just see it as an attack on you and yours.

     Spluttering. And I'm not talking about the entire conservative establishment.

     Just those here who have nothing in their bag of tricks - so they nitpick. There are democrats against the public option. But you take some of the comments to mean 'my side'. That's what has to go. We're all on the same side. Once we realize that we may have some 'o that 'positive productivity' that you are showing such disdain for.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 4:06pm

130. What is the difference between someone who threatens to kill and someone who carries it out?

     Opportunity

     you just keep excusing the violence of the left and acting as Ms Savan does as if it doesn't exist.

     Posted by antisocialist at 10/02/2009 @ 7:53pm

     Actually Larry you seem to have chosen to ignore that fact that like I said, violence commited by anyone is disgusting. But you don't choose to see that instead you choose to go with you bigoted opinion of me. The boy had oppurtunity. If he wanted to kill troops he could go to a military academy with a gun. You have to be able to see the difference between someone who talks the talk and who will actually walk. If that kid wanted to kill American troops there is plenty of oppurtunity. Hell if he wanted to he was 19 he could easily have flown to Iraq.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/03/2009 @ 4:22pm

131. adical Islam does seem to believe in totalitarian rule.....it intertwines the teachings of the Koran into the governance of the people in a way that does not fit into any political spectrum.

     Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 8:18pm

     No SJ What you are doing is greatly confusing the difference between the right in THIS country with the right in the rest of the world. The right in this country is considerably left of the right int he rest of the world. Radical Islam fits on the spectrum in the right. They don't believe in governance by the people they believe in governance by religious leaders. How many examples of that do we need?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/03/2009 @ 4:24pm

132. EVEN THOUGH IT'S MOSTLY COMING FROM THE RIGHT... (didn't want you to miss that part, because it's true, not just a negative comment), both 'parties are to blame for the chaos, fear, and misconceptions that abound. A shared dysfunction. But you just see it as an attack on you and yours. Spluttering. And I'm not talking about the entire conservative establishment.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/03/2009 @ 4:06pm

     I'm lamenting the fact that a poster will tearfully lament the lack of "productive positivity", then go right on flinging the mud. It's kind of like, when the Dems plead for "bipartisanship", they really mean, "Agree with our side."

     Sorry to disappoint, but I don't see it as only "an attack on you and yours."

     Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 6:58pm

133. "Twi, you've just now proven, by perfect example, how far right new con repubs will totally ignore facts for the questionable info and revise even their own statements to achieve goals which in themselves are even questionable due to the very fact that they're not based on any facts! Recall all the times dIck cHeney revised his statements by saying he never said something that was on tape of him stating what it was he said he didn't. As well as his pronouncements that the VPOTUS wasn't in the executive office... just so he didn't have to comply with a rule/law."

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/03/2009 @ 3:53pm

     Ouch! You caught me! I know how much you must love dropping cHeney (capital H? Trouble with the shift key?) into a totally unrelated post, but really! See my revisions below:

     Why Sara Jane Moore shot at Ford: "The government had declared war on the left. Nixon's appointment of Ford as vice president and his resignation making Ford president seemed to be a continuing assault on America." (wiki)

     From Squeaky Fromme: "IF NIXON CAN STEAL THE COUNTRY, AND SELL IT OUT THE BACK DOOR WHILE THE C.I.A. TRACKS BLOOD ALL OVER THE WORLD AND THE POPE SHAKES HANDS ON THE DEAL--WHAT IS JOE GONZALES DOING IN JAIL FOR STEALING BREAD? WHY IS GEORGE BROWN GOING TO PRISON FOR DOPE? " -from squeakyfromme.org. Yes, that's right - squeakyfromme.org. Even fringe leftie wingnuts have their own web pages (hsuBfools.org?)

     Hinckley: Declared insane. Therefore, most likely leftie wingnut.

     Does that satisfy your concerns?

     Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 7:25pm

134. The most amazing thing is, Obama is very little different, substantively, than Bush. So why the hell is the right so pissed off? Could it be something much more primative and sociopath, like, say, eh, the color of his skin?

     Posted by DejaVu at 10/03/2009 @ 7:31pm

135. -Right wingers, by contrast, have been out to 'destroy' Obama from day 1. For most of the crazies, this has little to do with policy. The scary part is right-wing elected officials sp0ut this craziness.

     This is why any moral equivalency between rage on the right versus rage on the left is, itself, loony.-

     Posted by erazma at 10/03/2009 @ 07:16am

     Actually... They started well before 'day one'...

     But yes... their 'racism' and violence take the shape of a general scapegoating... much like the false justice we have witnessed so often in the south...

     And that's what they were banking on...

     (Pun intended)

     Posted by ttr at 10/03/2009 @ 7:57pm

136. Well DejaVu, part of the dislike IS the hypocrisy of continuing Bush policies after spending a campaign criticising them. And instances when Senator Obama criticized the "executive privilege" that he is now loathe to give up.

     But lets not discount mere reasons of style as a factor in the dislike as well. No kids were ever led to sing the praises of a President like they are doing with Obama.

     "Mmmm...mmmm...mmm..."

     Yeah, I don't like that. And no, I wouldn't like it for ANY President. The Cult of Personality surrounding this man is reason enough. Because it was never based on anything of substance. The cult is based on the "promise" of what he represents.

     And that stupid damn stimulus bill? We were told if we didn't pass it, unemployment could reach 9% next year.

     Just a few months after passing it, and we're damn near to 10% THIS FRIGGIN' YEAR.

     No, his skin color has nothing to do with it. Any man with his experience and background would be just a bungling regardless of skin color.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 8:01pm

137. "...and Glenn Beck dousing a colleague with pretend gasoline and then lighting a match to demonstrate what he thinks Obama is doing to the "average American." One of those is frustrated and funny, and the other is frustrated and very revealing about an instinctive urge."

     The time honoured adage, "a picture is worth a thousand words" is in operation here and a bit of play acting indicates, I suggest, nothing more sinister than a familiarity with communication skills.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 10/03/2009 @ 8:29pm

138. by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 8:01pm...

     Yes... the economy is that bad. Bear in mind, however, that Obama did not create the situation... or preside over the conditions that formulated it... he is only now 'charged' to deal with it... and it is one of the most severe downturns in this nation's history... 'given' to him, and all of us, as it were... as a gift.

     Making him the 'fall guy' for eight years of 'structured economic mismanagement' is bound to eventually fail... and is patently foolish.

     ...and yet it is woefully evident that this is the 'preferred' outcome for the right... period.

     Team players... fight their 'apparent' opponents... regardless of the changing global criterion... often forgetting their culpability in the creation of the unpleasant economic conditions of the present... often ignoring the changing politics of the 'game'... often playing a game that no longer exists at all... because it was once was sanctioned by the king.

     Posted by ttr at 10/03/2009 @ 8:40pm

139. At least this one has come far enough along to recognize it is rage, not race, fueling the Town Hall Tet offensive. Only last week hapless Jimmy ‘the rabbit' Carter was, sigh, saying he knows southern white racist hatred when he sees it, by God, he ought to, he's lived down there with it most of his life, and he's seeing now. LOL gurgle sputter drool. Now here's Ms. Savin saying, it's more like how the two sides hold their rage….and there's NO comparison. Just none. Any media-borne equivalency between conservatives and liberals is transparently ridiculous.

     Yep, her guy can voice death threats in the shower – I never did at Bush, but did at others, especially Jewish ones like Perle and Wolfawitz -- but DON"T LET HIM GET CAUGHT MOUTHING OFF OUT THERE OUTSIDE THE GHETTO!

     These types were the ‘liberal' Vietnam war protestors, in the 60's. Further back "The good Germans". I have long told my blogging buddies that these will be the ones who usher the ‘uncooperative' vaccine<=poison blood refusiniks into the cattle cars, this time around.

     Meanwhile, real, honest-to-God extremist right wingnuts, with their over heated rhetoric and violent manifestations, have got lefty's number. In spades, one might say, heh heh. They don't have to do a thing, now, to wax strong off ‘the left's' projective craziness, except watch out for stings and false flag ops. Even Rush Limbaugh can't keep them from imploding; and ‘Jon Stewart's' The Daily Show shock-freeze photo gig is loosing shtick. Forced to fall in line behind mandated genocide H1N1 vaccine, the craven nothingness of MovedOn.arrgh making-the-world-safe-for-octomoms, the blackness of the President's skin becomes a useful meme-proxy for the neocon multicults.

     The Nation,of course (tbc)

     Posted by jones at 10/03/2009 @ 8:55pm

140. The Nation, of course, would be above all that, and some are, but not this women-of-the-world-united front. Something about male psychology really needs explaining to them, beyond the hyped anti-phallic ‘gun toten' rapist-killer Daddy in their head they always unconsciously defend against, like Jews abhorring Nazis (re-projected as over-emphasized "right wing" comparing Obama with Hitler; a few did – correctly, if the comparison was through swine flu vaccine as blood poison).

     Coming back: what this jack-‘o-lantern ‘left' gets, at the feeling level, is the rage. For the umpteenth time, that is the core psychological phenomenon serious analysis must start from. PERVADING "BOTH SIDES". It is the common ‘equivalence' between the two sides Savin INSISTS! MIND YOU! there is NO equivalence between -- the rightwingnut being SO much worse.

     Echoing from back in 60's rap session land can be heard B U L L S H I T

     Posted by jones at 10/03/2009 @ 9:01pm

141. ...the previous king... the one that broke all the rules.

     'Tis an arduous task before Obama... and he needs us... and we all need a new national focus that induces a shared purpose in our absolute and fundamental need for the prosperous re-engagement of America's once profound 'means of production'.

     Right... Left... who really cares...?

     It's all distraction. We need an economy... an infrastructure... we need jobs... we need a future.

     The joy of work yet escapes us.

     Posted by ttr at 10/03/2009 @ 9:13pm

142. "It's all distraction. We need an economy... an infrastructure... we need jobs... we need a future. The joy of work yet escapes us." Posted by ttr at 10/03/2009 @ 9:13pm

     No worries! An item on NPR today: A study that showed mortality rates in the US were lower in the Depression than in the booms before and after it.

     So, in the interest of gratitude and reconciliation, I want all Lefties here to thank Bush for their prolonged lives.

     And I want all Righties to thank Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.

     Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 11:32pm

143. So... if we keep fighting amongst ourselves... about meaningless quasi-partisan differences... and continue to refuse to be realistic about our currently unsupportable workforce...

     ...we'll all live forever!;^)

     Posted by ttr at 10/04/2009 @ 12:18am

144. Posted by twillie at 10/03/2009 @ 7:25pm

     Moore was a bookkeeper for P.I.N., a Women's Army Corps recruit and an FBI informant when she attempted to assassinate Ford.

     Yep, sounds just like a liberal-- not.

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Jane_Moore

     Squeaky Fromme was part of the Charles Manson "family", which believed that they were the chosen supreme white rulers over the blacks living in the USA. Their plan was to manipulate blacks into a race war taking out their white ruling competition. 'Helter Skelter.'

     Yep, sounds again just like a liberal-- NOT.

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynette_Fromme

     And one more time, John Hinckley and his family were repubs with close connections to the Bush family and he started out by stalking Carter to assassinate. Remember the movie 'Taxi Driver', Jodie Foster...

     Insane of course, repub of course.

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hinckley

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/04/2009 @ 01:49am

145. New con repubs are a constant distraction; obstructionists bent on blocking any purposeful correction of what it is they broke the last 8-12 years+, namely our nation and a large part of the world.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/04/2009 @ 02:07am

146. And we tend to deal with the Saudi royal family, as much as I despise them, because they are pretty much the only thing standing between the stability of that country and the wahhabi fundamentalists of their country.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/03/2009 @ 12:56pm

     The ruling family IS the wahibi fundie crowd. They support it, it keeps THEM in power.

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 09:29am

147. The most amazing thing is, Obama is very little different, substantively, than Bush. So why the hell is the right so pissed off? Could it be something much more primative and sociopath, like, say, eh, the color of his skin?

     Posted by DejaVu at 10/03/2009 @ 7:31pm |

     Naw, describing him as "that damned nigger" isn't racist!

     Do you know that Obama is going to issue in a new socialist/Marxist government? We know this because he has proposed sweeping socialist reforms such as....what again? 5% covered by a public option.

     What else?

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 09:33am

148. "Hinckley: Declared insane. Therefore, most likely leftie wingnut. " TWILLIe

     See, lefties are inherently insane, twilllie has joined the club that tells us this. Therefore lefties are not responsible for their actions.

     What is the excuse for those that follow "Russel Kirk, Edmumd Burke, Milton Friedman, Buckley, Reagan, Thatcher and others as my guides! "

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 09:38am

149. Actually, the House of Saud catches a lot of flak from the wahhabi fundamentalists in Saudi Arabia.

     In case you missed it, a wahhabi fundamentalist just tried to kill one of the Saudi princes with a bomb hidden in his recal cavity.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/04/2009 @ 09:41am

150. Yes... the economy is that bad. Bear in mind, however, that Obama did not create the situation... or preside over the conditions that formulated it... he is only now 'charged' to deal with it...

     Posted by ttr

     Yes. I am critical of the way he and the Democrats have chosen to deal with it.

     This stimulus package is just another bungling belief that you can strip 800 billion out of the private sector--where it would've been spent and invested all by itself without any help--and then put back into the economy by the government. This time, to build turtle paths, fund a $2 million upgrade to a border station that averages 3 customers a day on the Saskatchewan border, spend millions of dollars on SIGNS to TELL US ABOUT THE PROJECTS, and numerous other projects that were not spurred by a need created in the private sector.

     The economic equivalent to believing you can take a pail of water out of the deep end of the pool, carry it around to the shallow end (while spilling small amounts on the way), pour it back in, and expect the level of the pool to rise.

     And the fact we're close to 10% unemployment when this stimulus was supposed to hold us under 8% shows the stupidity of the keynesian crap. Now we've got higher unemployment and $800 billion more of debt to boot.

     And let us not excuse the role of the Democrats in this crisis either. Frank and Dodd and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Demanding that banks make risky loans to credit risks for political reasons. Both parties own this one. And the Democrats threatening to filibuster any attempt to rein in Fannie and Freddie cannot be ignored.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/04/2009 @ 09:55am

151. I am still interested in the flip flop by "the right" in regards to protesting the Commander in Chief during war. If memory serves many cons that post here were outraged at "the left" for holding demonstrations against the president during war time.

     What changed?

     Or, is more likely that this is just another case of "Family Values" being a flexible policy?

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 09:56am

152. I find it interesting how the leftist here when citing acts of violence fail to mention the actions of Mr Ayers and his wife . Or the words of Reverend Wright . The bottom line is this , if the left continues to dismiss the legitimate concerns and fears of those who are expressing their dissatisfaction with the direction the President and democrats are attempting to take this country , Then we all will see some real anger when they are voted out of office in 2012 and 2014

     Posted by limoman at 10/04/2009 @ 10:00am

153. Look at the wonderful ethos of "the right"

     Dave is not alone in his hobbies, just look at how many moral conservatives come to The Nation to fling poo..

     Really, HSUB, I'm only a humble real estate salesman.......I just blog for fun (and to piss off liberals)

     Posted by davebarlett at 07/06/2007 @ 4:20pm |

     Our good reverend said that he enjoys filling his SUV with LOTS of gas...because it pisses of liberals.

     Is that what this country needs? People that go out of their way to piss of others, while decrying the actions of those people?

     Come on cons, be the better people you claim to be. I can't help myself, I am (evidently) a liberal and am therefore inherently stupid, insane and unable to help myself. Are you folks able to show us a better way, or are you just like the "left" that you hate so much?

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 10:06am

154. Posted by limoman at 10/04/2009 @ 10:00am

     What was Bill Ayers convicted of again?

     What really is the difference between Wright and Robertson/Dobson?

     Is like getting ACORN in the limelight while ignoring KBR?

     Like writing about welfare queens but ignoring the growing income gap in the USA?

     Remember, this blog is about equivalence.

     Tire slasher is equivalent to Oklahoma.

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 10:12am

155. "Squeaky Fromme was part of the Charles Manson "family", which believed that they were the chosen supreme white rulers over the blacks living in the USA. Their plan was to manipulate blacks into a race war taking out their white ruling competition. 'Helter Skelter.' Yep, sounds again just like a liberal-- NOT."

     On the contrary! Sounds quite liberal.

     "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynette_Fromme And one more time, John Hinckley and his family were repubs with close connections to the Bush family and he started out by stalking Carter to assassinate. Remember the movie 'Taxi Driver', Jodie Foster... Insane of course, repub of course. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hinckley" Posted by hsuBfools at 10/04/2009 @ 01:49am

     Hinckley's FAMILY was Repub. Not him. He was insane. Like I said.

     Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 11:48am

156. "See, lefties are inherently insane, twilllie has joined the club that tells us this. Therefore lefties are not responsible for their actions. What is the excuse for those that follow "Russel Kirk, Edmumd Burke, Milton Friedman, Buckley, Reagan, Thatcher and others as my guides! ""

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 09:38am

     Sorry, crabwalk, didn't mean to offend you. I was just bear-baiting one particular lefty. I don't think all you lefties are insane. Just a few. Like those who perseverate.

     Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 11:55am

157. Ditto heads... perseverate... and repeat.

     They 'hook up' with the reigning hate monger... which ever one happens to be frothing at the mouth with accusative contagion... and with little or no actual and balanced research... continue the cycle of hatred with violence orientations... whether figurative or 'warish'...

     About face...

     Forward... march!

     We've been going in the wrong direction as a culture for so long... even the 'enlightened' among us are meandering, mentally disjointed, and confused about our 'true condition'...

     ...like the 'bumpkin' chewing a piece of grass who ponders for a moment and then says... "you can't get there from here"...

     At the local TA meeting, people are getting together... and one by one... each person gets up to begin the ten step process 'back to democratic citizenship' by openly declaring...

     "Hello... my name is John... I am a totalitarian... and I need help... "

     Posted by ttr at 10/04/2009 @ 12:26pm

158. "What was Bill Ayers convicted of again?"

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 10:12am

     He's the one who goes around saying, "Guilty as hell and free as a bird" and "We should've set more bombs".

     No, he wasn't convicted because of a technicality. But even he admits he did the crime.

     "If memory serves many cons that post here were outraged at "the left" for holding demonstrations against the president during war time.

     What changed?"

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 09:56am

     What I was outraged about:

     http://zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

     And who wouldn't be?

     I do know one thing that has changed. We're stil in Iraq and Afghanistan and the protestors seem to be hiding in an undisclosed location. Except for Sheehan, who is now treated like a leper by the people who used to exalt her.

     I don't mind protest over the conduct of a war, but once troops are committed, calls to leave before the job is done (also known as surrender) or cheerleading for the enemy to kill more Americans (see my link), are certainly fair game for ridicule.

     If Republicans are criticising Obama over Iraq and Afghanistan, it is purely from the context of wanting a war-winning policy. Liberals, such as Harry Reid, couldn't wait to declare defeat. And did on more than one occassion.

     That's the difference.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/04/2009 @ 12:48pm

159. Do you know that Obama is going to issue in a new socialist/Marxist government? We know this because he has proposed sweeping socialist reforms such as....what again? 5% covered by a public option.

     What else?

     Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 09:33am

     And how does your hyperbole here compare with, say, the survey that found 35% of Democrats believe(d) Bush had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, with an additional 26% calling themselves "unsure"?

     Wouldn't that be on par with the the "birther" believers?

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/04/2009 @ 12:57pm

160. The thing about liberals is they do this standing naked in a shower and come out merely wet and spluttering. The thing about rightwingers is they work themselves up into a similar rage, strap on a .45 loaded with dum-dums, and go to political meetings screaming that something must be done about Adolf Obama

     ********

     SO the actions of one person can be ascribed to every other person in their group. So I know a black person who stole something so that means all black people are theives. And I know one Hispanic person who is lazy so every Hispanic person is lazy and I knew a woman who was too hysterical to lead a corporation so all women are too hysterical to be CEO.

     Ms Savan, how are your ugly sterotypes and different than the stereotypes minorities have been fighting in the US for decades?

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/04/2009 @ 1:22pm

161. On the contrary! Sounds quite liberal.

     Hinckley's FAMILY was Repub. Not him. He was insane.

     Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 11:48am

     Because as we all learned from the teabaggers-- hanging with white supremists is so so liberal.

     And Hinkley's family giving tons of money and friendship to hsuB's family, had nothing to do with their son's stalking Carter first and then Raygun. Yep, we can believe in new con repub great sense of 'connecting the dots'...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/04/2009 @ 1:23pm

162. Furthermore...

     Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn, these acquited terrorists are celebrities on the left.

     The Weather Underground

     The Black Panthers

     The Symboniese Liberation Army

     Che Guevera

     Mumia Abu Jamal

     The Left has a much more storied history of celbrating and threatening violence than the Right does.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/04/2009 @ 1:34pm

163. "... don't mind protest over the conduct of a war, but once troops are committed, calls to leave before the job is done (also known as surrender) or cheerleading for the enemy to kill more Americans (see my link), are certainly fair game for ridicule. "

     No. Then you will get some lying bastard to commit them so that other pathological liars and psychotic killers can be paid as mercernariers to make whoever supports them, or what they lie and kill for, serial terrorizers of America, Christianity and humanity itself. Not deserving to live, even if they have the guns, money and coilwire enclosures to keep on doing so. That's the difference. Whoever pays pathological liars and psychotic killers to make everyone else enemies of the rest of the world are the enemies 'domestic' in this country.

     Posted by jones at 10/04/2009 @ 1:37pm

164. Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 11:48am

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/04/2009 @ 1:23pm

     Twillie and husBfools,

     I've heard that Hillary was a Goldwater Girl before rebelling against her parent's political beliefs.

     One-time beliefs don't tell the whole story about every action in their lives.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/04/2009 @ 1:41pm

165. ttr,I really liked this post: "We've been going in the wrong direction as a culture for so long... even the 'enlightened' among us are meandering, mentally disjointed, and confused about our 'true condition'..."...

     ...followed by "you can't get there from here".

     I've been pondering how to split off those from the old "right" who are guilty of no more (but of no less) than having been steamrolled by 'Femininazi' ditto-heads et al, and who still retain a spark of soul a future America we put together might use. There are some good Christian paleos, Russell Kirk and all (no Milton Friedmans, evangelical mega-churchers or NWO nuts, some Niburu expectors, such as me, pondering Sol Niger (an actual force of blackness tracing from Vietnam war/60's; not just darkness due to absence of light).

     First, we've got to split the 'liberals', and the international globalist WWW types off from the Necessary Left (the good guys), forced to oppose the soleless sol niger Right. These can always be defeated, if exposed, since they don't fight for anything but money and will switch sides when loosing. But they have to be confronted as such. This purging would begin with back-door collaborators pitching 'bipartisanship' sting after making what it stands for suicidal, Ex. T. McCauliff, Lieberman, AIPAC, AEI...

     This is the new V for victory, the only possible outcome of true Americans splitting off maggots: The Left+: those opposed to the Vietnan war from the 60's (minus black-flag agent-provocateur psyops) AND The Right+: those who hate Bush, Repubs, NWO christians, 'the unborners', downstate NY capitalists and Catholic-Jewish controlled paramilitary secret service agencies preparing to crack down on vaccine refuseniks. That is The True Nation's new coalition.

     Posted by jones at 10/04/2009 @ 2:55pm

166. DBFT, so the equivalency then with Hinckley's stalking Carter and attempt on Raygun is Hilary's stalking of Goldwater and attempt on dems? Or is it that any repub wacko automatically becomes a dem when when exposed, which then means that Rump Limppaw, Hammity and Colder, etc., plus the teabaggers are all really dems?

     Good luck with flushing that pile of poo not stinking up the rest of the house as your commode floweth over...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/04/2009 @ 2:59pm

167. I don't think all you lefties are insane. Just a few. Like those who perseverate. Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 11:55am

     So... what was that about 'lefties flinging mud?' People who perseverate are insane? Twillie, twillie.

     When you read someone's entire post and avoid the urge to take statements out of context you may end up with a better understanding of what's being said. Just a suggestion. There's still time to apply some of that productivity. I've been critical of both left and right with my posts. Whatever you're thinking just ain't so.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/04/2009 @ 3:33pm

168. by jones at 10/04/2009 @ 2:55pm...

     Not questioning your intentions... I still wonder if there will be anybody left standing after you have finished pigeon-holing, labeling, presuming, and excluding people?

     We need an economy... and we need all these people you have 'issues' with to participate in it, and prosper.

     Your 60's Macho rebellion ended in '74... 35 years ago.

     Make room for women... or get out of the way...

     Posted by ttr at 10/04/2009 @ 5:43pm

169. "When you read someone's entire post and avoid the urge to take statements out of context you may end up with a better understanding of what's being said. Just a suggestion. There's still time to apply some of that productivity. I've been critical of both left and right with my posts. Whatever you're thinking just ain't so."

     Posted by ficheye at 10/04/2009 @ 3:33pm

     "positive productivity" is your bag. I didn't say I agreed with you. I think of my job here, as putting a stick in the spokes of every arrogant, condescending liberal who puffs out their chest and says "I'm better than those (insert epithet for a conservative here)! We're for the people! And against The Man!"

     Being a liberal does not make that true, as much as you wish it did. People are conservative because they are convinced it's the best philosophy. People are liberal for the same reason.

     Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 8:51pm

170. "What was Bill Ayers convicted of again? What really is the difference between Wright and Robertson/Dobson? Is like getting ACORN in the limelight while ignoring KBR? Like writing about welfare queens but ignoring the growing income gap in the USA? Remember, this blog is about equivalence. Tire slasher is equivalent to Oklahoma." Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 10:12am

     Well, crab, I accepted the challenge. I looked for equivalency. Couldn't find it. 168 killed in Oklahoma City. The closest leftist attack, was 38 killed in the Wall Street Bombing of 1920.

     So you and Leslie are right. Left-wing terrorists are much more humane than right-wing terrorists. You and Leslie should be very proud for pointing that out to us all. Because that makes it so clear that Liberalism is the one true faith, right? Congratulations.

     Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 9:10pm

171. Twillie and husBfools, I've heard that Hillary was a Goldwater Girl before rebelling against her parent's political beliefs. One-time beliefs don't tell the whole story about every action in their lives. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/04/2009 @ 1:41pm

     Sorry. Sometimes, things get off-track here. Originally, I was trying to convince libs here not to get to worked up about righties bringing guns to Obama's rallies, by noting that only Repub presidents have been shot at in last 45 years.

     Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 9:15pm

172. I think of my job here, as putting a stick in the spokes of every arrogant, condescending liberal who puffs out their chest and says "I'm better than those (insert epithet for a conservative here)! We're for the people! And against The Man!"

     Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 8:51pm

     Oh. You mean you're an asshole. Got it.

     I'm no better than you - I never even inferred it. In fact, it seems that it's the other way around.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/04/2009 @ 10:28pm

173. rebublicans are liars, criminals and cowards!!! Nothing else....

     Oh... they are TRAITORS!!!!

     Posted by Tiger2Lover at 10/05/2009 @ 04:46am

174. Hinckley's FAMILY was Repub. Not him. He was insane. Like I said.

     Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 11:48am

     Maybe he was insane because his family was Republican. Just a thought.

     ****

     Posted by sjchermak at 10/03/2009 @ 10:40am

     How is life in mom's basement these days, Chermobyl? If you clean up your room, maybe she'll make you some Fluffernutters. Yum.

     Posted by kennyboy at 10/05/2009 @ 05:27am

175. Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 9:15pm

     That makes sense.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 10/05/2009 @ 07:30am

176. Posted by sjchermak at 10/02/2009 @ 3:44pm

     I'll play the game...just tell us the rules.

     If we ignore the last 25 years or so of radical libertarian (McVeigh) or radical anti-abortion (Rudeolph, Hill, Salvi, etc.), and go back to the 60s and 70s to dig up the "Weather Underground" and "Symbionese Liberation Army".....

     can we go back further?

     If so, any way you can figure out how to claim that the Ku Klux Klan was a bunch of "left-wingers"???

     Posted by Mask at 10/05/2009 @ 07:32am

177. I'm witnessing a severe case of mass-selective memory here. This is from the Bush/Kerry campaign race ALONE...

     1) In Madison, Wis., someone burned an 8-foot-by-8-foot Nazi swastika on a homeowner's lawn, which had been decorated with Bush-Cheney signs. The vandals used grass killer to spray the hate symbol (it's OK, Bush-hating trumps environmentalism). Several other homes nearby were vandalized.

     2) In Orlando, Fla., Democrats stormed the local Bush/Cheney headquarters, and the ensuing melee resulted in physical injuries to at least two Republican campaign workers. The liberal protesters justified their actions -- including ramming the head of one of the workers into an office door -- by blaming President Bush's "negative campaign."

     3) In Knoxville, Tenn., someone shot into the Bush/Cheney headquarters. Shots were also fired into Bush/Cheney offices in Huntington, W. Va., and Florida.

     4)The GOP office in Gallatin County, Mont., was vandalized twice in less than a week. Republican offices in the Seattle area, Spokane, Wash., Canton, Ohio, Fairbanks, Alaska, and Edwardsville, Ill., have also been burglarized and/or vandalized.

     5) On an Alaska-bound flight, a drunken Kerry supporter went ballistic after harassing a female Bush supporter and refusing to calm down at the request of flight attendants.

     6) In Gainesville, Fla., police arrested a Democrat accused of punching the chairman of the Alachua County Republican Executive Committee in the face at the town Republican headquarters. The accused, David McCally, also punched a life-sized, cardboard cutout of President George Bush. McCally is a community college instructor whose specialty is social and behavioral sciences.

     Go ahead, keep lying to yourselves and everyone else, it's what you do best.

     Posted by Hellvis at 10/05/2009 @ 08:41am

178. And then there're these... ---- A little after 10 am Thursday morning (October 21, 2004) police were called to the Republican Party headquarters in Lake Havasu in response to a bomb threat phoned. Volunteer coordinator Patti Silvestri took the call from a person she described as a male voice of indeterminate age.

     "I answered ‘good-morning Republican Headquarters this is Patti may I help you,' and he said I just want you to know that place will be blown-up," said Silvestri. -----

     Three-year-old Sophia Parlock cries while seated on the shoulders of her father, Phil Parlock, after having their Bush-Cheney sign torn up by Kerry-Edwards supporters on Thursday, Sept. 16, 2004, at the Tri-State Airport in Huntington, W.Va.

     ---

     Avon, CO - someone used a chainsaw to cut out the middle of a Bush/Cheney campaign sign on private property.

     ---

     PADDOCK LAKE -- A man wearing women's clothing was apprehended Friday on the route for President Bush's motorcade, authorities said.

     Officers found the 57-year-old man was wearing women's clothes and had a loaded gun and knife in his vehicle.

     ---

     Guardian columnist Charlie Brooker:

     "On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?"

     Not enough parity, huh? Ignorance perseveres.

     Posted by Hellvis at 10/05/2009 @ 09:22am

179. So, Savan, do you and your hubby make bomb threats while nude in the shower too as a necessary but harmless expression of rage? Do some reasearch before splattering your ignorance around like it's the hottest new thing in interior design.

     Posted by Hellvis at 10/05/2009 @ 09:30am

180. I don't know, I'm very far to the left, but I also think that if violent leftist extremists in the US had more military training like many of their right wing counterparts, they would be just as apt to commit murderous terrorism. Neither side has a monopoly on propensity towards violence, but in our current political climate, the right has greater ability to act on said propensity. We humans seem quite adept at justifying violence towards "the other" regardless of our ultimate political philosophy.

     Posted by entropy at 10/02/2009 @ 2:29pm

     Blaming military training for the right's ability to act on its propensity towards violence is a slander of everyone on the left who served honorably in our nation's military. If anything, military training, and certainly experience with combat leads most people, regardless of their ideology, to shun violence for the rest of their lives. If someone who served in the military is subsequently oriented towards violence it is not because they served, it is because they have been stimulated to violence by right-wing rabble-rousers and/or recruited into right-wing gangs. In the 60s and 70s we had some violent inciting rabble-rousers and, indeed, some violent left wing gangs, but I don't see too many of them out there today. They faded away as the war in Vietnam closed. Violent lefties have been reduced to anarchist juvenile delinquents (anti-G8 protesters) and Green loonies (ELF). On the other hand, disguised KKK clans and right-wing militias have not been been discouraged by the establishment right-wing nor by our law enforcement agencies. Violence on the left seems to emerge when our national leaders go to right-wing extremes. Violence on the right, however, always seems a a built-in part of the right wing politics.

     Posted by dont_know at 10/05/2009 @ 09:31am

181. Posted by Hellvis at 10/05/2009 @ 08:41am

     Curious to read those stories in their entirety.

     Mind telling me where you found them...i.e. a link to the website?

     Posted by Mask at 10/05/2009 @ 11:03am

182. "I think of my job here, as putting a stick in the spokes of every arrogant, condescending liberal who puffs out their chest and says "I'm better than those (insert epithet for a conservative here)! We're for the people! And against The Man!" Posted by twillie at 10/04/2009 @ 8:51pm

     "Oh. You mean you're an asshole. Got it. I'm no better than you - I never even inferred it. In fact, it seems that it's the other way around." Posted by ficheye at 10/04/2009 @ 10:28pm

     I wasn't referring to you in particular. Rather, to posts like the one immediately below yours:

     "rebublicans are liars, criminals and cowards!!! Nothing else.... Oh... they are TRAITORS!!!!" Posted by Tiger2Lover at 10/05/2009 @ 04:46am

     Got it?

     Posted by twillie at 10/05/2009 @ 12:48pm

183. Posted by twillie at 10/05/2009 @ 12:48pm

     Good thing we'd never see a right-winger being arrogant and condescending, huh?

     BTW, ever read any of Rio/Big Posture's stuff???

     LOL

     Posted by Mask at 10/05/2009 @ 1:23pm

184. "Good thing we'd never see a right-winger being arrogant and condescending, huh? BTW, ever read any of Rio/Big Posture's stuff??? LOL"

     Posted by Mask at 10/05/2009 @ 1:23pm

     We have, and I'm sure we will in the future. And I'm sure you'll be there to jam a stick in their spokes, as you have in the past. You take the conservatives, Mask, and I'll take the libs. Deal?

     Posted by twillie at 10/05/2009 @ 1:34pm

185. Posted by twillie at 10/05/2009 @ 1:34pm

     Sure....and as noted at the start of this thread on when the political extremism becomes more incendiary than just rhetorical....

     I'd end up defending the guys who called Bush a "Nazi" at an anti-war rally....

     you'd end up defending the guys who call Obama a "Nazi" at a "Don't let Gov't get its hands on my Medicare" rally....

     but are packing assault rifles to his appearances as well!

     Posted by Mask at 10/05/2009 @ 1:58pm

186. OF LESLIE'S ARTICLE:

     It was good of Leslie to feign objectivity by mentioning the left's Bush-Hitler comparisons. Of course, they are so well known she couldn't ignore them. Other than that, there is no comparison? Really?

     How about the lefty professor who in Colorado who ridiculously compared the victims in the Trade Center to "little Eichmann's"

     Or Sidney Portiers implying Colin Powell's chattel like subservience to his Washington Masters.

     How about "Hey, Hey LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?"

     Or campus riots and burnings in effigy of anyone not liked?

     I could go on with many more, but I won't. The point is a leftist-right wing comparison is not ridiculous. Neither have a monopoly on smarts or stupidity.

     Thing is, the Right has taken a page from the Left's playbook with their demonstrations: They're supposed to be the Silent Majority. Protests in the Street, an expression of patriotic dissent and an exercise of 1st amendment rights when the Left does it, is something the Right doesn't do. Only now they are, and the Left just doesn't know what to make of it. So they call it pre-violent fanatical screaming steeped in racism when it is Right Wing based. What hyprocrisy!

     Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 10/05/2009 @ 3:30pm

187. "I'd end up defending the guys who called Bush a "Nazi" at an anti-war rally.... you'd end up defending the guys who call Obama a "Nazi" at a "Don't let Gov't get its hands on my Medicare" rally.... but are packing assault rifles to his appearances as well!"

     Posted by Mask at 10/05/2009 @ 1:58pm

     Mask, Mask. No need to worry about the assault rifles. It's like I said on another thread, Obama has nothing to worry about. The only presidents who have been shot at in the last 45 years have been Republicans.

     And anyways, I won't be defending the one fringe righty who called Obama a "nazi", or the one fringe righty who said "Keep your government hands off my Medicare"

     Posted by twillie at 10/05/2009 @ 7:21pm

188. http://tinyurl.com/y9c7ttp

     http://tinyurl.com/ybagq79

     http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/509.pdf

     http://tinyurl.com/q9lm8p

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/05/2009 @ 11:09pm

189. Posted by hsuBfools at 10/05/2009 @ 11:09pm

     So, hsuB,

     Are we on track for a natural evolution to the 'S' word? It won't be pretty, but is it possible that unfettered capitalism has just plain run its course after damaging so many of the things that we know?

     Or will it be 'The New World Order theme park and internment camp as predicted by Alex Jones and Glen Beck (meister)?

     Stay tuned. News at 12.

     2012.

     (This'll get me some flames! Haw! :)

     Posted by ficheye at 10/06/2009 @ 01:25am

190. Posted by ficheye at 10/06/2009 @ 01:25am

     Oh the links were just noting the slightly higher number than the "one" twi was laying out there as saying Obama was some form of extremist.

     That it may be back-firing, as some people will believe anything, and in this case, that socialism must be ok-- as Obama seems to be ok, is just icing on the cake of the argument for greater FCC regulation of the air waves and stiffer fines for unsubstantiated malicious libel.

     I think what's wrong with our country-- 1st is the amount of lying taking place unabated. I understand the slippery slope, but there's just as much negative consequence on this side of that balancing act; as we can clearly see trying to sprint through the muck. And I'd rather err more on the side of getting to the truth than not.

     Killing the truth via a million lashes isn't a form of entertainment-- it's clearly politically driven malicious propaganda meant to negate the truth; baring false equivalencies to the nth degree..

     Perhaps finding proof, just the facts, rather than creating them out of whole cloth, will provide for an investigative reporting come-back?

     All I know at this point in our history, access to mass media-- isn't helping us progress, but rather creating chaos where almost none should exist.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2009 @ 08:41am

191. Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2009 @ 08:41am

     You are a wise man. Everyone in media (and elsewhere) seems to bee practicing some form or coercion. People lie to themselves, and then willingly accept the lies of others as we all mightily resist this tide of reality coming our way.

     Are we just like a chrysalis; will we eventually morph into a new form of life and emerge different, changed for the better? Some of us have absolutely no power, either. All we can do is watch, keeping our heads down as we make our observations on forums such as these.

     Keep up the faith. Good post. We need more like that. These columns are too often filled with spittle flecked flaming; I'm guilty of that as well. It's a form of amusement I guess, but sometimes the discourse completely disappears and all we have left is a muddy alley leading nowhere.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/06/2009 @ 11:20am

192. (Come on conservatives...) Are you folks able to show us a better way, or are you just like the "left" that you hate so much? Posted by crabwalk at 10/04/2009 @ 10:06am

     Exactly. All you have to do here is express a ray of optimism and suddenly, out of the woodwork, come the shit flingers and naysayers who are ardently professing what a piece of crap you must be.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/06/2009 @ 11:59am

193. You are a wise man..., but sometimes the discourse completely disappears and all we have left is a muddy alley leading nowhere. Posted by ficheye at 10/06/2009 @ 11:20am

     I have my moments, way too brief they may be..., but more often than not I'm wading through the muck myself as well.

     And yet because none of us have a different choice but to continue, what an experiment could happen if we each expressed no distance from our conscience than perhaps the balance of what we clearly acknowledge might defend a lie? (paraphrased somewhat from somebody... I'm pretty sure.)

     Why is it so hard to state a suspicion as such, rather than as a fact? Do we perhaps fear the truth so much that we embrace a lie for comfort maybe? Really? Instinct, for survival, lust, desire... group dynamics, what organ, hormones, chemical instruction, persuades us into such insanity overriding logic and good will to defend something we do not clearly understand?

     I say better to stare falsehood down than to be possessed by it.

     Easier still to share the burden of learning!

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2009 @ 2:36pm

194. I say better to stare falsehood down than to be possessed by it.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2009 @ 2:36pm

     That's really good. We need more constructive philosophy just like this on this here blog.

     Oh, I could spend all day flaming chermak and twillie, but what's the use? I'd just be leaving out bigpasture and happy. So little time.

     Might as well say something.

     Posted by ficheye at 10/06/2009 @ 4:53pm

195. After taking a half hour to read the 294 previous posts, I have something to say to all the posters:

     You all have WAY too much time on your hands. Get away from your computer and actually DO something. Anything. No one cares what you think - or what I think, either. Posting to blogs won't change a thing, in any direction. So quit wasting everyone's time, shut up and try to make a difference. As for me, I'd like my half hour back.

     I'm done - and I won't be back.

     Posted by butcherboy at 10/06/2009 @ 11:43pm

196. I'm done - and I won't be back.

     Posted by butcherboy at 10/06/2009 @ 11:43pm

     Ha Ha. Good one. Back to the abattoir, I suppose.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 10/07/2009 @ 04:22am

197. I say better to link to a survey from April 2009, than pretend that the honeymoon is not over.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2009 @ 2:36pm

     Posted by twillie at 10/07/2009 @ 6:47pm