You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Culture Wars
Why do Republicans hate America?
2005-01-05
Original contribution. Somebody left it here. I know, it should be on the opinion page...
Yeah. Better complain to the site owner. Line forms over there to the left.
Don't waste your time, he never listens
Republicans must hate this country. What else would explain their blatent disregard for all the things which make the United States of America so great. These things include the garunteed rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
There are no guarantees of result. The Declaration of Independence finds that we're endowed by our Creator with "certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Those are things God gives us, in Jefferson's words. What we do with them is up to us. We can make our lives things of beauty, inspirations to others. We can make our lives a living hell for ourselves and those around us, until someone can't take it anymore and bumps us off. Most people manage something somewhere between the two extremes, with most of us trying for the thing of beauty ideal and falling short. But it's up to us as individuals, not up to the government to ensure the outcome. That's the difference between Dems of all stripes and Republicans — conservatives, neo-conservatives, and libertarians.
This great country of ours stands above the rest because we have tolerance and freedom of speech and religion. It is these freedoms which the Republicans seem to despise the most.
Cite a few examples. While you're doing it, keep in mind that you're on a blog that pokes fun at every group we can find, to include Republicans, run by an agnostic who's never faced a moment's religious discrimination.
These Republicans seem to think that this is "Their" country.
We live here. We live by our values. It's our country. Feel free to live here with us, and adhere to your values. (Cue Woody Guthrie...) But don't try to force the rest of us to conform to your values. Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose.
They also seem to think that those whose opinions differ with theirs should leave the country.
Stay or go. It's your choice.
There is no reason for this, as this country has survived for over 200 years with diversity of opinions.
And continues to somehow muddle along...
An example of the symptom is the Conservative media, including FOX and Rush Limbaugh who thrive on conflict and name-calling tactics. Bill O'Riellys shouting "Shut Up, Shut Up!" is a prime example. He did not want to hear any oposing opinions.
He also has the habit of referring to his guests as "pinheads" to their faces when they're particularly egregious. I'd never do that, preferring as I do to go behind their backs. Have you ever read The Nation? Have you ever listened to Air America? Have you ever been at a function where Chevy Chase or Whoopie Goldberg was the master/mistress of ceremonies? Fox News presents news, and most of its presenters have opinions. So does See BS news, ABC, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC. These presenters' opinions range from mildly liberal to stupidly liberal. National Public Radio, supported with our tax dollars, is usually stupefyingly liberal.The gripe that liberals have with Fox, as well as Limbaugh, Hannity, Laura Ingraham and all the others is that people listen to them. Limbaugh puts on an ego show, but he takes facts and discusses them, interprets them, and is usually right in how things are going to turn out. Such liberals as I've had the misfortune to listen to put on their own ego shows, take positions, discuss them, and usually turn out to be wrong. If your analysis isn't consistently predictive, then it's probably wrong. So maybe you should listen to our side of the spectrum now and then. I'd suggest starting with Jonah Goldberg, at National Review, or Mark Steyn at the Independent, or David Warren's website. Or reading Rantburg on a daily basis. Amazing, how predictable some things are.
It is obvious that the radical right hates the freedoms of this great nation.
As I've just explained, it's not in the least obvious. What's obvious is that we've got a free press and that every end of the political spectrum is free to use it. Complaining because nobody agrees with you — or that 52 percent of the country doesn't agree with you — isn't going to help things. But then, I always thought Spock made more sense than McCoy.
They are attempting a Jihad against the Constitution of the USA.
By demanding it's strict interpretation? Come now!
These 'nut-jobs' are trying to add hate-speech into the constition.
First I've heard of it...
They are supportive of policies which encourage torture and disinformation.
Ahhh... You're referring, no doubt, to the horrors of Guantanamo. Y'see, Guantanamo is chock full of Bad Guys nabbed on the battlefield in Afghanistan. What we tried to do was sort out which ones were Taliban cannon fodder and which ones were al-Qaeda hard boyz. Under the Geneva Conventions, which I'm guessing you've never read, they could have been shot on the spot since they were conducting military operations out of uniform. They are not entitled to the same treatment as prisoners of war. The Germans, Russians, and yes, even the Americans, shot partisans — that's the technical term for them — in the Second World War. They really aren't entitled to the same treatment as POWs. You'll notice that we didn't ship uniformed soldiers captured in Iraq to Guantanamo for internment.

There is a difference between "torture" and mere "rough" or even "harsh" treatment. Since these beauzeaux killed 3000 of my countrymen in an unprovoked sneak attack it doesn't tug at my heartstrings that their treatment might occasionally be "harsh."

As for your complaint about disinformation, that's a valid tool to be used in conducting warfare. As the most famous example, I'd point to Patton's phantom army prior to the Normandy invasion. You have no "right" to know military secrets, or to access to sensitive information. There are declassification rules and procedures in effect so that 30 years from now you can look over the archives — but not while the information is militarily or diplomatically useful.
These vile creatures are trying to usurp the power of the people.
The people spoke in the last election. Your guy lost. Have they changed their mind?
The Constitution of the USA was written to provide a stable and pragmatic government, not a power-hungry king, yet these modern day Fascists are determined to undermine these goals.
Fascism, as I've pointed out here before, is a coherent political system. Its prime tenet is that of the corporate state. It accepts the existence of fairly rigid social classes — something that doesn't loom large in the United States — which are controlled and guided by an all-powerful Leader. Street violence, roving bands of fascisti, was integral to making Fascism work; those were the Blackshirts in Italy and the Brownshirts in Germany. There were also other colors of shirts in other countries of Europe, until they ran out of colors. None of these things are to be found in the U.S.A. right now, though they are characteristic of Baathism. We're fighting against those roving bands of fascisti right this moment, as they kill people to enforce the will of their Fearless Leader. Formerly Fearless Leader was Saddam, nowadays it's Zarqawi. They don't sing the Horst Wessel Song or the Inno dei Fascisti anymore, but they'll be willing to quote you a few verses of the Koran before cutting off your head.
Why do Republicans hate America so much? They must hate our freedoms. Freedom is a concept that the Republicans hate.
You've proceeded from "they must" — a conditional statement — to "they do" without offering any proof...
Diversity and Freedom are looked down upon, and ultimately the Republicans would like to destroy those freedoms.
Republicans enjoy their freedoms quite as much and possibly more than anybody else.
These hate-filled Republicans are the first to claim that the Democrats hate America. I am a Democrat, and I am a patriot.
Ahah. Do you have a definition of "patriot"? Does it include fighting wars to preserve our society?
I will not bend down nor stop talking no matter what. I have a natural right to express my opinions, and those who would like to shut me up can leave this great country.
But you just said it was the Republicans who were trying to run people out? I'm so confused...
I am American and proud, but I am so sorry that the country has a plurality of hate-filled bigots and imbeciles who didn't spend the time in school to learn that America is great because of its diversity and freedom, not in spite of them.
I'm not too sure how much time you spent in school. Most of us here spent the requisite amount of time to earn a diploma, then a bachelor's degree, and probably a master's degree in some subject or another. I suspect there are a few doctorates, though nobody's come right out and 'fessed up. Some of us are lawyers and engineers or in the medical field. Most of us have lived in foreign climes and many of us are multilingual. So most of us aren't ignorant, and the ones who are move on to some other site after awhile. They can't take the witty repartee — too many jokes go over their heads or PD calls them names until they look for greener pastures. You seem to be having difficulty believing that there are people with 3-digit IQs who could disagree with what you see as self-evident truths.

I'm a linguist by training, not an engineer, but I'd suggest that if the facts don't match your theory, then your theory's probably wrong. (Frank, you can check me on that...) Assuming you're still in school, I'd first sign up for a course in modern European political theory, if you can find one that's not taught by a Marxist. That'll at least teach you something about Fascism. I'd take some social psych classes, especially the ones that deal in Groupthink, and a mass communications class. And I'd sign up for a course in logic, if you can find one. I'm not even sure they teach it anymore. Buy yourself a copy of David Hackett Fischer's Historians' Fallacies and read it from cover to cover — you don't have to remember all the terms, you'll recognize the situations when they arise in discourse. Keep the book, never throw it away, and reread it again in six months. And keep in mind that Fischer makes some of the same errors he describes when he's writing as an historian.

Then — but only after I'd done the things I just suggested — I'd go on a reading binge. Read The Nation. Read National Review. Read The New Republic and the Weekly Standards. Apply what you've learned about fallacious thought to the articles as you read them. Read the daily press — lots of hard news articles — and try to fit what's happening into any patterns you might see emerging. Try to guess what's going to happen next. Make sure you get lots of foreign news sources in there, so you're not getting a purely American perspective. Expand your horizons from Daily Kos to include other web sites, like this one but also many, many others.

Keep in mind that mere disagreement with your opinion doesn't mean that the other person is evil or even stoopid. They may be misinformed, or they may be better informed than you and have arrived at their opinions legitimately. The wider your own field of knowledge is, the easier it becomes to decide which applies. It's only when you're willing to change your opinion when proven wrong that the opinions you hold become legitimate.
Posted by:Proud Democrat

#76  My goodness. This thread quite took my breath away. I suspect Proud Democrat will be back, if only to sooth his ego by seeing how many responses his post garnered. So here is one more for him.

PrDem, some of us here, like me, are not Evangelical Christians. Some of us here, like me, are Jews. Some of us here, like me, are even Reform, ie liberal Jews. Some are even atheists or agnostics.

Some of us here, like me, have historically voted Democrat. Some of us, not like me, were even registered Democrats their entire voting lives; I'd always considered myself an Independent.

All of us looked like deer in the headlights as we watched the second airplane hit the second tower, and as we watched the buildings burn and the survivors run. All of us do not consider ourselves victims, because we were not directly injured or killed by the actions of terrorists. (I sympathise with your loss. But you must understand, my dear, you were not the one who died. It is not your wife and children who cry at night because you aren't there.) Some of us escaped from the Towers without serious harm; many of us know someone who was killed by one of the airplanes. And all of us are pooling our knowledge and experience to help Fred analyze the news from all over the world for information that will help clarify the villains and heroes of this War on Terror that was thrust upon us on that horrible day in September 2001, what they are doing, how, and what needs to be done next.

Once upon a time the SS came for my Grandfather. He had already spent six months in a concentration camp for being a leader in the Jewsih community of his home town, and now SS wanted to finish the job. He and my grandmother snuck over the border to Holland that night, and started their lives over. My mother, then a little child of eight, subsequently travelled all by her lonesome with just the contents of her handbag to join them there. When the Nazis followed them to Holland, my mother spent the rest of the war in hiding separated from her parents, lest the entire family be wiped out in one raid. Two weeks of that time Mama lay in a roof gutter four stories up, because there was nowhere else for her to go (luckily, she didn't have to worry about going to the bathroom she says, so long as her head was on the uphill side). After 9/11 I vowed that nobody would be allowed to do the same to my mother's grandchildren.

So, Proud Dem, your "poor me, I'm a discriminated-against minority" stuff won't fly here. Some of us are not only members of your minority, but have suffered worse. You are just lucky True German Ally missed this thread: he spent his youth in a Nazi concentration camp because he was Jewish, then more years in a Soviet Stalag because he was German. Now he advises the German government -- and sometimes upbraids it -- on their policies toward Jews and other minorities in-country, and toward Israel as well. I suspect that after reading your not-so-little screed above, he would have flayed you and rolled you in salt for your presumption, not to mention carelessness with the facts.

I would like to invite you to stick around. Read the articles. Read the comments. Then post, when you have something unique and substantive to add. Rantburg is not simply an opinion forum like the Democratic Underground. We are working hard in our own little way to help fight the War on Terror, and we take that responsibility quite seriously.

Oh, and drop the Republican/Right Wing stereotypes, ok? We have full professors here, professionals including doctors and lawyers, a corporate vice president or two (surprisingly many of whom have worn the uniform to protect your right to make a fool of yourself), a great many current and former Armed Services members, and even a few Intelligence types (probably former Intel, but they aren't telling). And while all of them are ladies and gentlemen, not all of them feel the need always to be nice.

Oh yes, and this little corporate wife, who spent some years dragging her little family behind her internationally posted husband. It was great fun, and I can call you an ass in American, British, German, Dutch and Hebrew. If you want it in another language, just ask: we've even got members who speak Malay and Thai.

Capisc, Landsman?
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-01-06 12:02:37 AM  

#75  no MILF jokes, ok?
Posted by: Frank G   2005-01-05 10:09:30 PM  

#74  Hey mom... Got any apple pie?


Mmmmmm... Pie!
Posted by: mojo   2005-01-05 9:47:56 PM  

#73  Correction to #70: My apologies for calling names. But the incoherent posting does justify the Roget treatmemt
Posted by: mom   2005-01-05 9:40:45 PM  

#72  And the muckster is left with correct word order. Amazing.
Posted by: Brett_the_Quarkian   2005-01-05 9:23:03 PM  

#71  Listen up, PD. mom knows best. Period. Full stop.
Posted by: .com   2005-01-05 9:12:12 PM  

#70  Proud Democrat: Look up Harbrace College Handbook and review Chaper 23, Unity and Logical thinking. You have your work cut out for you.

#19 Barbara: "Maroons" are a culture in Haiti and the Dominican Republic, comprised of the descendants of slaves who ran to the hills and scratched out farms in the deepest jungle. See Roget's Thesaurus for some lovely synonyms for "Folly," "Absurdity," and "Stupidity." "Proud Democrat" fits quite a few of them.
Posted by: mom   2005-01-05 9:04:19 PM  

#69  Damn! 68 comments and no sign of Aris.
Posted by: whitecollar redneck   2005-01-05 9:03:12 PM  

#68  I think the better question is why do liberals hate themselves?
Posted by: Hupereger Clish6229 aka Jarhead   2005-01-05 8:48:14 PM  

#67  ouch
Posted by: muck4doo   2005-01-05 7:53:21 PM  

#66  Do you think it will come back?
Posted by: Crusader   2005-01-05 5:45:51 PM  

#65  The Mayor Intervenes.

9.7
No Ethel or would be near perfect.
Posted by: Shipman   2005-01-05 5:24:57 PM  

#64  Our first Classic of the year. Allahu fubar!
Posted by: Fred   2005-01-05 4:43:54 PM  

#63  ..I support Hate Crime laws because I have seen them.

Ooooh, the "Proud Democrat" wants to control our thoughts probably in addition to a lot of other things about our lives.

Where freedoms are concerned, ain't much there to be proud of.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-01-05 4:25:37 PM  

#62  That was a glorious example of the Art of the Fisk. Fred, this thread oughtta be one for the "Classics" page.
Posted by: Mike   2005-01-05 4:12:43 PM  

#61  "It occurred to Winston that for the first time in his life he was looking, with knowledge, at a member of the Thought Police. "
-- 1984, Ch. 9
Posted by: mojo   2005-01-05 4:12:21 PM  

#60  I love it when the idjits get Fred pissed off ;-)
Posted by: Frank G   2005-01-05 4:07:14 PM  

#59  He don't like the answers, he shouldn't ask the questions.
Nicely done, Fred, but...ummmmmmmmm....wanna watch the bandwidth?
Posted by: tu3031   2005-01-05 4:05:10 PM  

#58  #24 You guys are gutless and spineless.
That's whatcha call an ad hominem attack. You don't like what's said, you attack the person saying it.

All you can do is attack my opinion.
You posted it. Presumably you took the time to read the content on the site, so you have an idea what most of our opinions consist of...

It is absolutely incredible that in one sentence you claim you are not hateful, then in the next attack me...
I'm confused. What's calling us "gutless and spineless" if not an attack? On what do you base your assessment of gutlessness and spinelessness?

You claim to use logic and debate tactics, instead you use mob tactics.
Looks more like mockery and derision than mob tactics.

First, it is obvious that by using the Gay Marriage issue, you are using a hate issue...
Who brought that up?

Oh my, the gays are asking for marriage, it must be bad for whatever reason. They are threatening our marriages. I've been married for over 10 years, and I don't feel a treat from gay marriage... What is the issue?
You're making the assumption there's a "real reason" people don't agree with your opinion. Maybe we just disagree. Marriage has been a man-woman affair for a few million years. Experiments with "alternatives" haven't worked.

I too am religious, but my religion doesn't make a big issue about gays. I believe in seperation of church and state, and as a result I believe that appointing judges whos religion would prevent them from interpreting laws according to their 'religious' beliefs ABSOLUTELY. Religion should not be the issue, but I don't think that erecting a 10 commandments monument is a part of their responsibility to the government, especially in the public courthouse.
I agree, to an extent. The 10 commandments as policy should be a no-no. The 10 commandments as decoration in a court of law doesn't faze me, any more than that image of Justice does. Religious fanatics shouldn't be appointed as judges, but if you cut people out of the running because they have religious beliefs you're left with only atheists and maybe a few agnostics. Atheism, an active belief that there is no god, brings with it yet another belief system. Better to look at the whole person, don't you think?

People are entitled to freedom of religion, but as long as it doesn't interfere with their jobs. For instance, a practicing Jew has a problem because in order to follow the commandments he cannot work through Friday night and Saturday because of the observation of Shabbat.
Some do, some don't. My personal belief is that the idea of a Sabbath (or maybe a small-s sabbath) is a good idea. We've gone from a 5 1/2 day week that my father worked to a seven-day week plus overtime that I work. I don't think that's good for society in the long run, anymore than two months of vacation a year plus public holidays is. But that's my opinion, and until there are lots of other people who share it, Sunday (or Saturday or whenever) blue laws aren't going to make a comeback.

I have seen a plethora of hate filled messages, telling the democrats to get out while they still can. I have seen threats, sadistic pleasure from the right over the pain of the left. I was very happy when Bush 41 lost, but I didn't rub it in the faces of my republican friends.
They didn't require professional counseling, either...

I have seen some dirty namecalling from these right-wing nuts.
The stupidity of that statement takes my breath away.

Also, I am fully for the defense of the country against terrorists. I for one am a victim of 9/11 because my brother died on the 105th floor of the 1st tower.
What are we fighting in Iraq, if not terrorists? What was your opinion on dismantling the Taliban in Afghanistan? What's your opinion on invading Iran and hanging the ayatollahs? What's your opinion on invading Syria and hanging the Baathists? Do you think it would be a good idea to chase the princes out of Soddy Arabia? Much of what we do here at Rantburg consists of considering these very things. The concensus is mostly that terrorism is interconnected, a phenomenon without borders, emanating from the Middle East. It's financed by the ayatollahs and the princes, and it burns cannon fodder from every country were Muslims live. Prior to his retirement, Saddam was one of the financiers as well, along with being an oppressor of his people. The enemy doesn't believe in representative government; they want to be ruled by holy men, but they'll settle for a Fearless Leader. They believe that if you don't do what they tell you to do they should kill you. That's our opinion, based on the facts we see unfolding here every day. What's yours?

I don't support all of the Patriot act, as many of the provisions are not required. If you believe that the Patriot act is above-board, why wasn't it considered and debated before it was passed? I suspect because it contains many provisions which erode civil liberties.
Why don't you get a copy of it and read it? I suspect my hair will have grown back when I wake up tomorrow. That doesn't mean it will.

I am greatly disappointed with Bush and the Republicans response to 9/11. The guy {Bush} looked like a dead duck when he heard the news. He was like a deer caught in the headlamps... Then he fumbled and bumbled, and didn't issue orders he should of. The timeline is pretty clear, and Bush was not a great leader.
That's another ad hominem attack. You're attempting to denigrate him because he had a reaction to the fact that the country was under attack. I had much the same reaction. So did most of the people here. What was your reaction?

Second, the August 6th memo should have been a wake-up call... Instead the president took a vacation. My brother died, in my opinion, because Bush wanted to vacation in Crawford.
In my opinion you're looking for someone to blame it on and make a few political points. There's always a level of threat in the background noise. The trick is to assess which ones are valid and where they're going to occur. Intelligence is seldom "we attack at dawn at coordinates X500 Y400 using two tank divisions." You're assuming superhuman omniscience.

I wanted to see Osama Bin Ladenfucks head on a platter. Instead Bush transformed the 9/11 response into an attack on Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact, the 9/11 invasion plan went back to 1998, when it was discussed in the PNAC plans.
We've got "plans" that include the invasion of Canada and Mexico, the former first being formulated in 1802 and the latter in 1832. Bush didn't attack Iraq after 9-11; he attacked Afghanistan, which is why Mullah Omar is now an unemployed potentate and Binny lives in a holy man's guest house in Pakistan. Much of the leadership of al-Qaeda has been killed or captured or driven so deep underground they're ineffective. Invading Iraq after Afghanistan had passed the control hump was a strategic decision. The next place we invade will be a strategic decision, too. You probably won't agree with that one, either.

I can go on and on... I stand by my assertion that the Republicans hate American freedoms.
You've made the assertion but you haven't proven it.

Where I live, we are able to have our opinions and not be attacked. Rightwing, you are a loser and a primary example of my point. Nobody is dying in Iraq to give me the freedom of speech.
They're dying there to ensure that you keep it. Have you noticed that the Bad Guys blow up people who don't agree with them? Or bump them off in other ways? You're making the assumption that sort of thing will never happen in New Jersey.

I fully salute the soldiers of WWII who effectively put down a threat from Nazi germany. But I wonder about the CIA, why did they employ so many Nazi war criminals?
Probably because they knew where the bodies were buried. I'm sure you're also in favor of the CIA not doing business with thieves, murderers, cut-throats, ladies of easy virtue or other undesirable characters. It does't sound like you've ever had to collect and analyze and act on information that could result in people with turbans cutting people's heads off in New Jersey.

Also, if we are so set on removing credible and perpetual threats, why haven't we done so to other threats including Korea, Iran, and other nations where despotic leaders are in control.
Because Bush prioritized what he was going to do and cracked the easiest nut first. If you think Iraq is bad, wait until we're in Iran. You're going to think that's worse, but wait until we're in Korea.

Crawford, I support Hate Crime laws because I have seen them. My synagogue was burned last year for some reason and it may have been a hate crime. It is not your right to act on your hatred, to hurt someone because of their religion, sex, appearance, whatever.
But there have been laws against arson for at least 1500 years under Common Law. If it's a crime, what's the motive matter? In fact, Perry Mason to the contrary, motive is irrelevant under the law, though intent does count. So if arson's a felony, why do you need an additional layer?
Posted by: Fred   2005-01-05 3:55:27 PM  

#57  :)

I'm a little slow on the uptake, Mark. I'll chew on that one a bit.
Posted by: Jules 187   2005-01-05 3:42:47 PM  

#56  Jules.... I agree; there are tons of different psychological explanations for why loons act the way they do. But to flesh out my idea, and even if you disagree (note Proud Democrat how we get along even though we have different ideas; you should try it some time instead of calling people who disagree with you stupid or evil, or both):

"I hate America; but that is an abhorrant opinion that is largely frowned upon. My opponent is abhorrent. Therefore, my abhorrant enemy (republicans, conservatives, what-have-you) must have that opinion."

"I want to stop people from speaking their opinions (particularly ones I disagree with); but that is an abhorrant and widely reputed position. My opponent is abhorrent. Therefore, my abhorrant enemy (republicans, conservatives, what-have-you) must have that opinion."

....man, just like all hippies; how self important. The narrative is always about their internal drama and self importance. Get thee to a therapist!
Posted by: Mark E.   2005-01-05 3:38:33 PM  

#55  #45: BA....clap, clap, clap. Truer words were ne'r spoken!.

Thanks, 2b! My original quote (#41) gets at the heart of the difference, much like Fred's! The Demos. hear of one instance of one bad act and they must pass a law about it, which brings with it, enforcing regulations and a new gov't agency. Now that time has worn some from the horror of the tsunami, I know feel that we need to cut the cash trough off for public aid and let the private orgs. continue on. Much like Doctors w/o Borders (article posted yesterday) who proudly asked that people STOP sending money, they had enough to deal with the issues they were dealing with, we should send our money to the private orgs. Many people blasted those who called for the gov't to quit raising the bar on our aid, but I think now, we could all agree (or at least, most of us) that it should stop. When programs DON'T work (Social Security, tax & spend, quota/affirmative action programs, etc.), we should be men enough to at least look at it, and say it either needs tweaking or disbanding. The Demos (and the Republicans too) spending other's money on their "feelgood" projects are going to bankrupt us quick! BTW, DC, I'm sorry to hear about your brother! You are in my thoughts and prayers.
Posted by: BA   2005-01-05 3:33:10 PM  

#54  Sorry for the pile-on, guys. That took a while to write!
Posted by: BH   2005-01-05 3:32:59 PM  

#53  You guys are gutless and spineless. All you can do is attack my opinion.

What did you want us to attack? Your fashion sense? You posted a screed in which you called us bigots, imbeciles, nut-jobs and vile creatures, while depositing some very logic-impaired assertions. Some here have chosen to address the charges, while others have chosen to join you in name-calling. This is debate, and some are better at it than others. I would not place myself in the "strong debater" category, nor would I place you.

It is absolutely incredible that in one sentence you claim you are not hateful, then in the next attack me...

Kinda like complaining about the "idiots" and "imbeciles" while praising diversity of opinion.

You claim to use logic and debate tactics, instead you use mob tactics.

Um, no. We each responded individually to your post. That's what happens when you broadcast your opinion to a largish number of people - some of them may choose to respond.

First, it is obvious that by using the Gay Marriage issue, you are using a hate issue...

The gay marriage issue could be debated from a number of positions that don't draw from hate or religiosity, but nobody ever bothers to ask.

I've been married for over 10 years, and I don't feel a treat from gay marriage...

Then perhaps your conclusion that people "feel a treat (sic) from gay marriage" is flawed.

I believe in seperation of church and state, and as a result I believe that appointing judges whos religion would prevent them from interpreting laws according to their 'religious' beliefs ABSOLUTELY.

This sentence makes no sense. I mean, there's no verb. "I believe that appointing judges..." what? Don't leave us hanging, how does it end?

Religion should not be the issue

Maybe it's not. Maybe you are engaging in stereotyping.

People are entitled to freedom of religion, but as long as it doesn't interfere with their jobs.

Don't recall that clause in the first amendment.

I have seen a plethora of hate filled messages, telling the democrats to get out while they still can. I have seen threats, sadistic pleasure from the right over the pain of the left. I was very happy when Bush 41 lost, but I didn't rub it in the faces of my republican friends. I have seen some dirty namecalling from these right-wing nuts.



Also, I am fully for the defense of the country against terrorists.

State how you would do it. Effective answers only, please, no symbolic crap like dropping origami cranes.

I for one am a victim of 9/11 because my brother died on the 105th floor of the 1st tower.

Not to split hairs, but your brother was the victim of 9/11. Not you.

I don't support all of the Patriot act, as many of the provisions are not required.

Please explain how you would do it better. Again, no heartfelt symbolism. We're all about the results.

The guy {Bush} looked like a dead duck when he heard the news. He was like a deer caught in the headlamps... Then he fumbled and bumbled, and didn't issue orders he should of.

I bet I looked like a dead duck when I saw the news too. Actually, I looked like a really f*cking pissed-off duck. Please tell us what orders he should have issued.

Second, the August 6th memo should have been a wake-up call.

What if it had been? What if the Bush admin had reacted decisively to this memo, thus saving thousands of lives? How fast would you have been on the streets protesting Gestapo George's hateful racist tactics in targeting poor, vacationing muslims? Would your brother have been there by your side?

I can go on and on...

I was just thinking that myself.

I wanted to see Osama Bin Ladenfucks head on a platter.

Let us see the plan. Again, no origami.

Where I live, we are able to have our opinions and not be attacked.

Since you consider mere dissent to be an "attack on your opinion", it sounds like there is quite a lack of that diversity of opinion you idolize.

Crawford, I support Hate Crime laws because I have seen them. My synagogue was burned last year for some reason and it may have been a hate crime.

And if it wasn't a hate crime, would your synagogue be any less burnt?
Posted by: BH   2005-01-05 3:29:53 PM  

#52  LOL, eLarson.

Mark E-Oh, I don't know, this one works just as well:

Figuratively, a scapegoat is someone selected arbitrarily to bear blame for a calamity. Scapegoating is the act of irrationally holding a person, group of people, or thing responsible for a multitude of problems.
Posted by: Jules 187   2005-01-05 3:29:05 PM  

#51  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Posted by: Mark E.   2005-01-05 3:20:05 PM  

#50  You guys are gutless and spineless.
And some of us even post under our real names!

All you can do is attack my opinion.
Were you expecting people to say 'That's okay because it's your "truth"?'

It is absolutely incredible that in one sentence you claim you are not hateful, then in the next attack me... You claim to use logic and debate tactics, instead you use mob tactics.
There is no moderator here in the usual sense of debate. There are also no numbers to take and no raising of one's proverbial hand before chiming in. That is the democratic way.

First, it is obvious that by using the Gay Marriage issue, you are using a hate issue...
Who even brought that up? Who is 'using' it here?

(blah blah about Gay Marriage skipped)

I believe in seperation of church and state, and as a result I believe that appointing judges whos religion would prevent them from interpreting laws according to their 'religious' beliefs ABSOLUTELY.
Reading this over and over again, I'm seeing that you DO want judges that apply a religious litmus test in their decisions.

Religion should not be the issue, but I don't think that erecting a 10 commandments monument is a part of their responsibility to the government, especially in the public courthouse. People are entitled to freedom of religion, but as long as it doesn't interfere with their jobs.
Wow... I've never heard of the Job Interference Doctrine before.

For instance, a practicing Jew has a problem because in order to follow the commandments he cannot work through Friday night and Saturday because of the observation of Shabbat.
And reasonable accomodations can and should be made.

I have seen a plethora of hate filled messages, telling the democrats to get out while they still can.
Where? Here? I doubt it. Mostly we just joke about what Drama Queens certain members of the Left have looked like.

I have seen threats, sadistic pleasure from the right over the pain of the left.
See? I mean c'mon... get over it.

I was very happy when Bush 41 lost,
Really? Why?
but I didn't rub it in the faces of my republican friends. I have seen some dirty namecalling from these right-wing nuts.
"right-wing nuts" is meant in only the most respectful sense of the term, eh?

Also, I am fully for the defense of the country against terrorists.
It ought to go without saying.

I for one am a victim of 9/11 because my brother died on the 105th floor of the 1st tower.
And for that, I express my condolences.

(Patriot Act bit skipped...)
I am greatly disappointed with Bush and the Republicans response to 9/11. The guy {Bush} looked like a dead duck when he heard the news. He was like a deer caught in the headlamps...
I'm not ashamed to say that I, too, was like such a deer. And so, interestingly enough, was your candidate, who admitted he was unable to think at all for upwards of 30 minutes.

Then he fumbled and bumbled, and didn't issue orders he should of.
What do you expect those would be, as a clear-sighted member of the Left?

The timeline is pretty clear, and Bush was not a great leader. Second, the August 6th memo should have been a wake-up call... Instead the president took a vacation. My brother died, in my opinion, because Bush wanted to vacation in Crawford.
Wow. That's a pretty harsh conclusion. You can take this advice or not: seek a professional opinion regarding misplaced anger. I'm serious. It will eventually eat you up from the inside. You wouldn't want to come unhinged.

(Macho, cowboy stuff regarding Osama bin Laden omitted)
(Personal responses to other posters omitted)
Posted by: eLarson   2005-01-05 3:17:51 PM  

#49  That was a pretty confusing rant. I'm honestly not entirely certain it deserves a response. But since you have chosen to "throw down the gauntlet" in that tiny corner of the Blogosphere which I call home amongst those whom I consider friends, I suppose a brief and selective fisking of your hostile musings is in order.

1) You guys are gutless and spineless. All you can do is attack my opinion.

Actually, I strongly suspect that most of us are fairly physically brave. Many of us have served in the military, for example, while other Rantburgers such as myself have hobbies which are none to safe (to put it mildly). If you mean intellectually spineless then you haven't spent a lot of time on this site. Also, if you find us incapable of debate you have not spent enough time on this site.

2) You claim to use logic and debate tactics, instead you use mob tactics.

Well, this is a primarily conservative sight ergo there are more of "us" than "you" here.... so you feel mobbed. We are perfectly capable of debate and, I assure you, far more logical than our counterparts over at Democratic Underground.

3) First, it is obvious that by using the Gay Marriage issue, you are using a hate issue... Oh my, the gays are asking for marriage, it must be bad for whatever reason. They are threatening our marriages. I've been married for over 10 years, and I don't feel a treat from gay marriage... What is the issue?

First of all you are making the incredible assumption that everyone at Rantburg agrees on this issue. We don't. Would you like to make a spirited argument in defense of gay marriage? Go for it. I could give you at least three good reasons not to legalize gay marriage that have very little to do with my presumed "hatred" for a group of people who do strange things in their bedrooms. We should argue in the opinions section, though, because that is what we would be doing: exchanging opinions.

4) I too am religious, but my religion doesn't make a big issue about gays. I believe in seperation of church and state, and as a result I believe that appointing judges whos religion would prevent them from interpreting laws according to their 'religious' beliefs ABSOLUTELY. Religion should not be the issue, but I don't think that erecting a 10 commandments monument is a part of their responsibility to the government, especially in the public courthouse.

First of all learn to use a spell checker. People here will take you more seriously if you do. Secondly, almost everyone here is in favor of the separation of church and state in the sense that none of us want America to have a state religion. I think you will find that it was the intention of the Founding Fathers (for God sakes don't call them the "Framers," it's terribly irritating) to prevent our nation from having a Church of England or something along those lines. What they didn't demand was a total expulsion of traditional religious references from all aspects of public life. I'm not religious myself but I despise the ACLU for trying to obliterate all references to God from public life. Also, if you're really Jewish as indicated in your post what's your beef with the Ten Commandments? Our legal system is pretty much derived from them, after all.

5)I have seen a plethora of hate filled messages, telling the democrats to get out while they still can.

Where? What I have mainly seen is a lot of people rolling their eyes at this nonsense. It's funny, man, like when a child throws a temper tantrum because he has lost at a board game. Sure, we'd like for some of you (LLL Hollywood types to be specific) to leave, but since 99.99999% of you aren't going anywhere why would we bother to get that worked up about it? The whole Red State/Blue County thing is overrated anyhow.

6) I have seen some dirty namecalling from these right-wing nuts

Well, if you want to raise the tone a bit start by not calling anyone here a "right-wing nut." That could be considered "namecalling." We are a fairly diverse bunch without any sort of uniform ideology, so hang out a bit and politely participate. Oh, and use that spell checker!

7) Also, I am fully for the defense of the country against terrorists. I for one am a victim of 9/11 because my brother died on the 105th floor of the 1st tower. I don't support all of the Patriot act, as many of the provisions are not required. If you believe that the Patriot act is above-board, why wasn't it considered and debated before it was passed? I suspect because it contains many provisions which erode civil liberties.

I'm sorry to hear about your brother, but blaming us Republicans is pretty counter productive as well as not terribly logical. I'm not a big fan of several easily abused sections of the Patriot Act; it could certainly use some rewriting. A lot of Republicans feel the same way. The rest of your statement is nonsensical: the Patriot Act was publically debated, considered, and passed by both houses of Congress. On CSPAN no less. Last time I checked these houses included Democrats as well as Republicans, so climb down off the high horse.

8) I stand by my assertion that the Republicans hate American freedoms. Where I live, we are able to have our opinions and not be attacked.

Total nonsense. What American freedoms exactly are you talking about? Freedom of speech? Not a Democrat thing if you disagree with them. The right to be secure in your property? Again, Democrats have no problem with seizing and redistributing the private property of others. The right to keep and bear arms? Don't make me laugh. I live in a part of California dominated by Democrats who feel pretty comfortable about attacking me for my opinions; usually verbally, occasionally not. So what? Most people operate under a herd mentality so I'm not surprised.

Oh, Proud Democrat, I see more "I Hate America" bumper stickers of various sorts in one week in Berkeley than most Americans see in a lifetime, so forgive me if I don't find your party very patriotic.
Posted by: Secret Master   2005-01-05 3:15:41 PM  

#48  but piling on is fun!
Posted by: Mike   2005-01-05 3:11:19 PM  

#47  Don't feed the trolls. I think Fred did a pretty solid job of thrashing this post, everything since has been simply piling on.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2005-01-05 3:04:14 PM  

#46  "Democrats make decisions based upon feelings (which can change), but Republicans make decisions based upon facts."

Another one that comes to mind is, "liberals think conservatives are evil; conservatives think liberals are stupid."

Can't imagine why...
Posted by: Dave D.   2005-01-05 2:55:08 PM  

#45  BA....clap, clap, clap. Truer words were ne'r spoken!.
Posted by: 2b   2005-01-05 2:52:39 PM  

#44  Thanks for the back Badanov

No charge. Us evil people must stick together.

No fair! You guys got to carve up Proud Democrat before I even realized he had landed here! *laughs*

At our house we always carve up the turkey equally.
Posted by: badanov   2005-01-05 2:50:04 PM  

#43  No fair! You guys got to carve up Proud Democrat before I even realized he had landed here! *laughs*
Posted by: Crusader   2005-01-05 2:44:42 PM  

#42  Proud Dem-Anything anyone has said to you on this site isn't grave enough to make you stop your argument. The problem is that it seems your points are selective and jump illogically from one to another-which many be why reference to Michael Moore came up-he does much the same thing. Instead of being acting like the people on this site have no right to explain their views, pick a few things said here that you know you can refute and do so. We're listening.
Posted by: Jules 187   2005-01-05 2:32:39 PM  

#41  To throw in my $.02 on PD:

But it's up to us as individuals, not up to the government to ensure the outcome. That's the difference between Dems of all stripes and Republicans — conservatives, neo-conservatives, and libertarians.

That is a good summary of the difference. My favorite however, is: "Democrats make decisions based upon feelings (which can change), but Republicans make decisions based upon facts."
Posted by: BA   2005-01-05 2:24:04 PM  

#40  All you can do is attack my opinion.--

hahaha...*sniff* I know that a libs idea of discussion is to namecall and attack the person, but I guess I never realized that it was because attacking opinions was considered off limits. Who knew? heehee.
Posted by: 2b   2005-01-05 2:21:51 PM  

#39  Double-plus good duckspeak indeed, proud democrat!

Why can't I just live a life like proud demo? Never having to think for myself. My mind just a mishmash of opinions provided by others and cobbled together with no concern for either logic or causality. Every argument would be a parade of virtual 3 x 5 cards pulled from a virtual shoebox. There's something profoundly seductive about such a life. If only...
Posted by: 11A5S   2005-01-05 2:19:52 PM  

#38  Or do you think you deserve a free pass because your brother died on 9/11?

And you're nice, all you want is OBL's head on a platter. I want him handed to the mob, taken to that special room in the basement every inch covered in linoleum w/a sink, drain and antique meat grinder and uncooked pork.

The mix is mixed into the cornerstone of the new WTC.

Posted by: anonymous2U   2005-01-05 2:18:32 PM  

#37  --You guys are gutless and spineless. All you can do is attack my opinion.--

If you didn't want it critiqued, why did you post it?

Doesn't this go back to:..."I will not bend down nor stop talking no matter what. I have a natural right to express my opinions, and those who would like to shut me up can leave this great country.--

11/5/01 - WSJ-Gregg Easterbrook's Free Speech is Never Free, IIRC.

I suggest you read it.

Posted by: anonymous2U   2005-01-05 2:15:10 PM  

#36  Iraq was unfinished business. That's what one gets when one listens to the UN and our "allies" who want "stability."
Posted by: anonymous2U   2005-01-05 2:12:10 PM  

#35  --If you believe that the Patriot act is above-board, why wasn't it considered and debated before it was passed?--

Why don't you ask Janet Reno? Most of it came from her office. It was off-her-shelf and tweaked.
Posted by: anonymous2U   2005-01-05 2:10:11 PM  

#34  Thanks for the back Badanov.
Posted by: Rightwing   2005-01-05 2:03:49 PM  

#33  The guy {Bush} looked like a dead duck when he heard the news. He was like a deer caught in the headlamps... Then he fumbled and bumbled, and didn't issue orders he should of.

Of all of the anti-Bush arguments this one in particular shows me that the person giving it is a complete and total lemming.
Posted by: 2b   2005-01-05 1:56:11 PM  

#32  You guys are gutless and spineless. All you can do is attack my opinion. It is absolutely incredible that in one sentence you claim you are not hateful, then in the next attack me...

Poor baby. Did we hurt your widdle fewwings?

You claim to use logic and debate tactics, instead you use mob tactics.

Youse wanna sit ringside or do youse wanna sit in the back and look at da broads?

First, it is obvious that by using the Gay Marriage issue, you are using a hate issue... Oh my, the gays are asking for marriage, it must be bad for whatever reason. They are threatening our marriages. I've been married for over 10 years, and I don't feel a treat from gay marriage...

I don't feela 'treat from gay marriage myself. I don't even feel a threat, but I am against it. Gays can't even do marriage right. Can't seem to find a willing hetero partnet, why should they be granted a marriage license?

What is the issue? I too am religious, but my religion doesn't make a big issue about gays. I believe in seperation of church and state, and as a result I believe that appointing judges whos religion would prevent them from interpreting laws according to their 'religious' beliefs ABSOLUTELY. Religion should not be the issue, but I don't think that erecting a 10 commandments monument is a part of their responsibility to the government, especially in the public courthouse. People are entitled to freedom of religion, but as long as it doesn't interfere with their jobs. For instance, a practicing Jew has a problem because in order to follow the commandments he cannot work through Friday night and Saturday because of the observation of Shabbat. I have seen a plethora of hate filled messages, telling the democrats to get out while they still can. I have seen threats, sadistic pleasure from the right over the pain of the left.

Not sadistic. Just enjoying watching those who suffer from self inflicted stupidity try to deflect blame from their political shortcomings by transferring them onto their opponents.

I was very happy when Bush 41 lost, but I didn't rub it in the faces of my republican friends. I have seen some dirty namecalling from these right-wing nuts.

Other than the moniker idot and moron I doubt you have seen it from any Rantburger.

Also, I am fully for the defense of the country against terrorists.

That's one liberal in favor of defense. Now, are in favor of carrying the fight to the enemy?

I for one am a victim of 9/11 because my brother died on the 105th floor of the 1st tower. I don't support all of the Patriot act, as many of the provisions are not required. If you believe that the Patriot act is above-board, why wasn't it considered and debated before it was passed? I suspect because it contains many provisions which erode civil liberties. I am greatly disappointed with Bush and the Republicans response to 9/11. The guy {Bush} looked like a dead duck when he heard the news. He was like a deer caught in the headlamps... Then he fumbled and bumbled, and didn't issue orders he should of. The timeline is pretty clear, and Bush was not a great leader.

Watched Fahrenheit 911 did you?

Second, the August 6th memo should have been a wake-up call... Instead the president took a vacation. My brother died, in my opinion, because Bush wanted to vacation in Crawford. I wanted to see Osama Bin Ladenfucks head on a platter. Instead Bush transformed the 9/11 response into an attack on Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact, the 9/11 invasion plan went back to 1998, when it was discussed in the PNAC plans. I can go on and on...

I thinik you just did.

I stand by my assertion that the Republicans hate American freedoms. Where I live, we are able to have our opinions and not be attacked.

I bet if I spoke my opnions where you lived I would be attacked. No sale.

Rightwing, you are a loser and a primary example of my point. Nobody is dying in Iraq to give me the freedom of speech.

Tell it to the Marines. They are killing terrorists precisely so you can shoot youor mouth off and look like an idiot.

I fully salute the soldiers of WWII who effectively put down a threat from Nazi germany.

Dja get that? He only supports soldiers in wars he approves of. Proof, once again, liberals love dead Americans, especially dead AMerican servicemen/women.

But I wonder about the CIA, why did they employ so many Nazi war criminals?

Ask your democratic -arty why they let that go on, will ya?

Also, if we are so set on removing credible and perpetual threats, why haven't we done so to other threats including Korea, Iran, and other nations where despotic leaders are in control.

Give us time...
Posted by: badanov   2005-01-05 1:50:24 PM  

#31  Roger that Sea, dropped and apology to PD aka .com
a little ways back. Thanks for the clarity. PS Proud Dem, I'm too, sorry for the loss of your brother. I had friends that were lost as well. Opinions are one thing and feelings and emotions run much deeper. My sympathies.
Posted by: Rightwing   2005-01-05 1:44:18 PM  

#30  Rightwing, she thought you were attacking .com, who used to go by PD many moons ago.

I'm sure you were addressing your remarks to Proud Democrat.

It was tons of fun (not) here when half the posters came in as "Anonymous".

****

Proud Democrat, sorry for the loss of your brother. Rantburg started as a direct result of those attacks, and we've been here thrashing out the War on Terror ever since. I invite you to check out Fred's handy timeline.
Posted by: Seafarious   2005-01-05 1:39:59 PM  

#29  Thanks for the clarity Dave D. Nope not going after .com just Proud anti-all things good about America Democrat. Sorry about the confusion. Ask questions then shoot unless we're in Bangladesh.
Posted by: Rightwing   2005-01-05 1:36:57 PM  

#28  PD: If I'm reading your comment #24 correctly, you favor:

(1) a religious test for appointment to the federal judiciary which would effectively exclude any observant, orthodox Christian or Jew, even though the Constitution expressly forbids such a thing; and,

(2) the right of private employers to discriminate against Jews who observe the Sabbath in the same manner as Joe Lieberman.

Doesn't seem very sensitive or nondiscrimiatory to me. 'Course, what do I know. I'm just a vile creature, a gutless, spineless, hate-filled bigot and imbecile acting out of hatred. If I could only think for myself, I'd agree with everything you said. Why, my very act of critiquing you is probably a hate crime.
Posted by: Mike   2005-01-05 1:33:21 PM  

#27  Rightwing, I think there's a simple misunderstanding here: you addressed your earlier comment to "PD" meaning, I assume, this "Proud Democrat" fellow.

But "PD" also happens to be the real-life initials of the fellow who posts here as ".com" and that is who I think Trailing Wife may have assumed you were addressing.
Posted by: Dave D.   2005-01-05 1:32:55 PM  

#26  Trailing wife: I typically agree with most of your posts. The question I have is how can that not make any sense. I have a liberal mindset ranting that their perspective is more patriotic than the "Republican" perspective and why do those hatemongering Republicans hate America? It's clear cut, much of the Republican legislation that the lib's so vehemently oppose was just outlined. I guess you lost me TW.
Posted by: Rightwing   2005-01-05 1:26:50 PM  

#25  Sensitive fella.
Posted by: Shipman   2005-01-05 1:22:22 PM  

#24  You guys are gutless and spineless. All you can do is attack my opinion. It is absolutely incredible that in one sentence you claim you are not hateful, then in the next attack me... You claim to use logic and debate tactics, instead you use mob tactics.

First, it is obvious that by using the Gay Marriage issue, you are using a hate issue... Oh my, the gays are asking for marriage, it must be bad for whatever reason. They are threatening our marriages. I've been married for over 10 years, and I don't feel a treat from gay marriage... What is the issue? I too am religious, but my religion doesn't make a big issue about gays. I believe in seperation of church and state, and as a result I believe that appointing judges whos religion would prevent them from interpreting laws according to their 'religious' beliefs ABSOLUTELY. Religion should not be the issue, but I don't think that erecting a 10 commandments monument is a part of their responsibility to the government, especially in the public courthouse. People are entitled to freedom of religion, but as long as it doesn't interfere with their jobs. For instance, a practicing Jew has a problem because in order to follow the commandments he cannot work through Friday night and Saturday because of the observation of Shabbat.

I have seen a plethora of hate filled messages, telling the democrats to get out while they still can. I have seen threats, sadistic pleasure from the right over the pain of the left. I was very happy when Bush 41 lost, but I didn't rub it in the faces of my republican friends. I have seen some dirty namecalling from these right-wing nuts.

Also, I am fully for the defense of the country against terrorists. I for one am a victim of 9/11 because my brother died on the 105th floor of the 1st tower. I don't support all of the Patriot act, as many of the provisions are not required. If you believe that the Patriot act is above-board, why wasn't it considered and debated before it was passed? I suspect because it contains many provisions which erode civil liberties. I am greatly disappointed with Bush and the Republicans response to 9/11. The guy {Bush} looked like a dead duck when he heard the news. He was like a deer caught in the headlamps... Then he fumbled and bumbled, and didn't issue orders he should of. The timeline is pretty clear, and Bush was not a great leader. Second, the August 6th memo should have been a wake-up call... Instead the president took a vacation. My brother died, in my opinion, because Bush wanted to vacation in Crawford.

I wanted to see Osama Bin Ladenfucks head on a platter. Instead Bush transformed the 9/11 response into an attack on Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact, the 9/11 invasion plan went back to 1998, when it was discussed in the PNAC plans.

I can go on and on... I stand by my assertion that the Republicans hate American freedoms. Where I live, we are able to have our opinions and not be attacked.

Rightwing, you are a loser and a primary example of my point. Nobody is dying in Iraq to give me the freedom of speech. I fully salute the soldiers of WWII who effectively put down a threat from Nazi germany. But I wonder about the CIA, why did they employ so many Nazi war criminals? Also, if we are so set on removing credible and perpetual threats, why haven't we done so to other threats including Korea, Iran, and other nations where despotic leaders are in control.

Crawford, I support Hate Crime laws because I have seen them. My synagogue was burned last year for some reason and it may have been a hate crime. It is not your right to act on your hatred, to hurt someone because of their religion, sex, appearance, whatever.

Good day,
Posted by: Proud Democrat   2005-01-05 1:15:56 PM  

#23  Proud Democrat = Confused Berkeley Student
Posted by: Secret Master   2005-01-05 1:07:51 PM  

#22  Rightwing, that little screed (#20) made no sense at all. Especially when directed at PD.com. What on earth did you think to achieve by posting it?
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-01-05 1:02:47 PM  

#21  The whole thing seems to be based on the clever attempt to use Bush's "they hate us for our freedoms" against Republicans.

The idea would be clever if the fella writing it actually understood freedom and debate and didn't paint with such massive brushstrokes while blindly ignoring his side of the polictical spectrum.
Posted by: Spemble Wholuth6684   2005-01-05 12:18:16 PM  

#20  PD,

I suppose your red blooded American Patriotism was opposed to removing a credible and perpetual threat to US national security. I suppose your Patriotism opposed the Patriot Act which allowed the government to arrest, disrupt and prevent terrorist attacks in the US after 9/11. I suppose you American Zeal will allow for the slaughter of innocent unborn children but cold blooded murderers should get parole in 15 years if they complete their art therapy classes. I suppose your Love of America allows you to sleep at night because WE deserved 9/11 because of our foreign policy and commitment to Israel. Remember PD thousands of brave men and women have died in defense of this nation. They died to give you the inalienable right of speech. Do not make the distinction as Republicans hate America and Deocrats love it. Both parties are well represented in Arlington.
Posted by: Rightwing   2005-01-05 12:02:08 PM  

#19  To sum it up: Wotta maroon.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2005-01-05 11:54:17 AM  

#18  Yawn. Another idiot who can't pull his head out of his ass:

This great country of ours stands above the rest because we have tolerance and freedom of speech and religion. It is these freedoms which the Republicans seem to despise the most.

Freedom of speech? Last I checked, it wasn't Republicans pushing "hate speech" laws and political correctness. Or stealing entire runs of college newspapers...

Freedom of religion? Republicans weren't the ones barring qualified judges from the bench based on their religious (not legal!) beliefs. Or constantly barring people form the public expression of their religious beliefs.

Bah.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2005-01-05 11:18:00 AM  

#17  I wonder if proud was one the thousands of Demonstators in NY protesting and attemping to stop the democratic process of the Republicans nominating their candidate. Did anyone see these types of demonstrations during the Democratic Convention? Now who is calling who a facists?
Posted by: Cyber Sarge   2005-01-05 10:56:15 AM  

#16  If the facts don't match the theory....I always apply an "adjustment" factor. Then they do. Or not :-)
Posted by: Frank G   2005-01-05 10:40:09 AM  

#15  Street violence, roving bands of fascisti

The WTO protest crowd fit that description quite nicely.
Posted by: Steve   2005-01-05 10:31:37 AM  

#14  ...it's up to us as individuals, not up to the government to ensure the outcome. That's the difference between Dems of all stripes and Republicans...

Excellent synopsis.

This great country of ours stands above the rest because we have tolerance and freedom of speech and religion. It is these freedoms which the Republicans seem to despise the most.

When I watch the political talk shows, oddly enough it seems that it is usually the Dems who get insulting, personal, angry. I have no problem with a Democrat expressing his or her opinion, and in those instances that they can prove me wrong or persuade me to another position through calm reason, I will thank them. If I'm wrong, correct me-that's a good thing. But so very few Dems these days seem to be able to do that. Nearly all of them seem to lash out at people personally instead of dealing with the content of their comments. They have a tendency of going off on tangents so that they don't have to address accurate points being made by Pubs.

I won't ask you to leave, Dems, but neither you should try to shout down, shame or intimidate people into adopting your beliefs. If you can't persuade, that should say something to you about your political analyses.
Posted by: Jules 187   2005-01-05 10:08:59 AM  

#13  "I am American and proud, but I am so sorry that the country has a plurality of hate-filled bigots and imbeciles who didn’t spend the time in school…"

I disapprove of some of the lifestyles the left celebrates, but I don't hate anyone, no matter how evil. And all my teachers said I'm quite intelligent.

"They are supportive of policies which encourage torture and disinformation"

The closest we've come to torture was Abu Ghraib, and the perpetrators are being punished.

"I have a natural right to express my opinions…"

And we likewise. If you don't like that you can go to Canada, where they've begun to require left-wing opinions on some issues.

In short, Proud Democrat, your article is, to quote Mike Royko, "…an example of shiftless, lazy thinking. Ugh."
Posted by: Korora   2005-01-05 9:56:17 AM  

#12  this article is a prime example of what happens when you make it too difficult or expensive for these people to get their meds.
Posted by: 2b   2005-01-05 8:57:02 AM  

#11  They are supportive of policies which encourage torture and disinformation

I've said it before and I believe it even more:

Liberals love dead Americans.
Posted by: badanov   2005-01-05 6:57:48 AM  

#10  I am American and proud, but I am so sorry that the country has a plurality of hate-filled bigots and imbeciles who didn’t spend the time in school . . .

Good one, dude. Real persuasive ad campaign you got going there. "Vote Democrat, you ignorant, hate-filled imbeciles!" Yeah, that'll preach.
Posted by: Mike   2005-01-05 6:53:37 AM  

#9  I will not bend down nor stop talking no matter what. I have a natural right to express my opinions, and those who would like to shut me up can leave this great country.--

Neither will I. Welcome aboard. This should be...enlightening.

Now you know how I've felt for ohhh, 25ish years.
Don't like it much, do you?
Posted by: anonymous2U   2005-01-05 1:32:13 AM  

#8  Wowsers. I just followed .com's links and he's opened up a can of DenBeste brand WhupAss™. And he's deadly; .com can put it right between your eyes at 50,000 traceroute pings. Dude, once you get hit with SDB WhupAss™, you're toast.
Posted by: Seafarious   2005-01-05 1:20:17 AM  

#7  Dave -- "reality" is the operative word.
Posted by: Captain America   2005-01-05 1:08:06 AM  

#6  To 'Proud Democat': I do have a doctorate, and I'm just amazed at the stultifying ignorance of your post. Have you no respect for your own ability to learn? You cob together a packet of pish and nonsense, a mass of sentences without a single coherent theme, and send them ... straight to a weblog where wit, style and frank writing are the norm.

As the good .com says, I'm embarassed for you. Grow up. Soon. Please.
Posted by: Steve White   2005-01-05 1:07:19 AM  

#5  Sheesh. Where do liberals get this fascination with straw-man arguments? None of what this clown attributes to Republicans bears any resemblance to reality.
Posted by: Dave D.   2005-01-05 1:06:34 AM  

#4  Oh, Gad, for a minute there I thought I had taken a Left turn to the Democratic UnderbellyGround.

I reckon that since the first born in the New Year has occurred, it only seems fitting to read about the Liberal afterbirth.

Funny thoough, I don't recall any of the Republicans threatening to bolt to Canada or Europe or whatever after the election. No, the Liberiods will stay in the US, turn blue, and make covert postings on enlightened web sites. Have they encountered penis envy?
Posted by: Captain America   2005-01-05 1:03:15 AM  

#3  "conflict and name-calling tactics"

Arrrggghhh! Damn! A pre-emptive strike!

Sigh.

You begin with an opinion and then stack one after another atop it and, apparently, believe you have created a grand edifice of oratory and unassailable logic. You have committed the twin sins of induction and stacking. Your pennance is to stand atop a really big pile of your logic so that you're really close to a high-tension power line. Then do that induction thingy you like so much again. If you do this correctly, you will be free of the urge to post another article. Thank you for your input - and Good Luck. We'll keep an eye out for the bright flash of success.

Oh, and don't be so Proud, I'm embarassed for you.
Posted by: .com   2005-01-05 12:51:18 AM  

#2  Haahahahahahahahaaahahaa, my neighbors are probably wondering why I'm laughing so damned loud.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-01-05 12:35:19 AM  

#1  Hello, Proud Democrat, and welcome to Rantburg. It looks like you put some time into writing this. Most "Proud Democrats" usually just jump right into comments with both guns blazing, so good on you for that.

I agree with most of what Fred (that's the fellow with the yellow highlighter) has to say but I come at the Rep/Dem/red/blue divide from a slightly different angle.

I vote Republican because ever since 9/11, I have been learning what our enemies are saying and thinking.

Yes, America and the Western world in general have enemies. Well-motivated, resourceful, and dedicated enemies. We jest here about their "Stupid Jihadi Tricks" and work accidents, but radical Islam is no laughing matter.

If you do not accept that, then you will continue to lose every election for the rest of the 21st century.
Posted by: Seafarious   2005-01-05 12:16:12 AM  

00:00