I think I like the Ghandi quote best of all. I agree that we need to stand up and respond to right-wing b.s., but some of that verbiage is a little too macho for my taste. how 'bout some quotes from upstanding women too?!

thanks for all you do, Rob.  

 

by Debbie Scally (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 98 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 10:25:55 PM

If you can't put the opponent on death row, you should shut your mouth.

Unable to find a useful charge from the Bill of Rights, I consult the UN 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. With 30 Articles with which to work, I can find something to charge the culprit with crimes against humanity.

A rightwingnut can't take a breath without violating one Article or another. If he has actuated his words with deeds, he is dead meat. Anyone who is really interested in prosecuting public officials can do this in his spare time like a hobby. 

 

by Jason Paz (68 articles, 88 quicklinks, 112 diaries, 1386 comments [97 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 11:28:47 AM

Yes, I'm smaller than even that dinky guy, and I have to say that I agree with his approach AND what you say.  These people have become totally dangerous, with unconstitutional private militias who have shoot-to-kill immunity from murdering Americans, and having taken the rights to DICTATE over Americans.  We have no other options besides Ron Paul, and now Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party.  

We have to HIT THEM HARD, be PERSISTENT, and NEVER GIVE UP or we'll lose our country and it could be decades before we get it back.   We will be so impoverished at that point that we'll be lucky to attain to third world status- it is NOW OR NEVER.

by MSchaut (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:27:26 PM

Ron Paul is a fake.

He mouths support for the Constitution, pretends to be a "Constitutionalist," but then lifts NOT ONE FINGER to actually DO anything to support the impeachment of Dick Cheney, preferring to stay in the good graces of the Republican Establishment, the same corrupt set of fascists that gave us Bush and Blackwater. It's clear as crystal that Ron Paul cares not one whit about his oath to "support and defend the Constitution against all enemies ..."

Paul is NOT anything like a "Constitutionalist." If he was, he'd have cosigned the Cheney impeachment resolution, H.R. 799. Paul has no commitment to the Constitution.

Don't be fooled.

Paul is a fake. 

by Chris Borland (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:38:04 PM

. . .I and a whole host of other bloggers back in January exposed Ron Paul's backing by a virtual "Who's Who" of the Extreme Right -- including former KKK leader David Duke and avowed "white nationalists" Don Black and Ron Doggett -- right around the time that Paul's old racist newsletters resurfaced in the mainstream media.

And unlike Barack Obama, who denounced Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and John McCain, who denounced Rev. John Hagee, Paul, has, to this day, refused to denounce any of his racist backers. 

Is it any wonder that the GOP has ignored him (Even though he's still officially in the race, having won a measley 21 delegates)?

by Skeeter Sanders (32 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 78 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 1:16:11 PM

Why should Ron Paul waste his time tilting at windmils? It's the Democrats that you need to point the finger at. They're the ones that control congress & won't impeach the bums:

Democrats Won't Try To Impeach President

The reason for their inaction is that they don't want to take any power away from the presidency. They want to gain that power for themselves. The usual R & D shell game.

"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies."

--Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (1966) 

by Darren Wolfe (15 articles, 401 quicklinks, 141 diaries, 1031 comments [84 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 5:47:17 PM

This is why I think Obama was wrong to distance himself from Rev. Wright--The truth is fierce sometimes. Politicians--bleh!

by Papawhale (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 69 comments [19 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:39:27 PM

, bite them on the snout!

If they rustle your feathers, claw them with your talons.

When the wicked strike you squarely, give them a whack on the trapezoids.

To whom that mocks thee, ask vas mahcstee? amd kick him in the ballasts.

Though the meek shall inherit the Earth, we can't let them charge us

property taxes on the entire estate without evicting the vermin.

Thou shalt not accept the greivous acts of others without their accepting the back of your hand!   

 

So sayeth Wolfus Cicero Ceasar's salad.

by Wolfie (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 33 diaries, 1208 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:39:54 PM

I'm proposing that  Progressives start using the phrase, Failed Conservative Values and tie their critiques of Conservativism to it.

Repeat it over and over again until it becomes as common as the terms Family Values or Traditional Values. 

Try it it.  Make a critique of a conservative policy or action, but tie it back to the deeper conservative values that underlie it.  Then call it what it really is, a Failed Conservative Value.  It's a great conservation starter with Conservatives as well. It leads to fun conversations.  Tell them Conservative Values have Failed.  Be respectful, you are not criticizing them as human beings, but their failed values, (we all have those and need to grow) suggest  they need to start looking for some other values, and make the case for trying progressive values of empathy, caring, community, equality, justice, etc.

To see more progressive values:
http://progressivespirit.com 

for Failed Conservative Values
http://progressivespirit.com/Projects/FailedConservativeValues

I'm off now to Fresno to the California Democratic Council Convention of CA democratic clubs. Will video tape and gather more Failed Conservative Values Stories to share with you.

edwin

by Edwin Rutsch (64 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 155 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:44:40 PM

This comment has been flagged by an editor
Reason: (Inappropriate Content) Reflagged: I, too, find this language highly offensive and inappropriate as a comment to an article. If there is something of substance to be said, perhaps you would like to submit your ideas in a diary report but this comment should be removed from the site. Deborah

EDITOR’S NOTE: While this comment may be construed as offensive, I think for the purpose of this article it is important to show it in order to demonstrate the immense, myopic hated and disingenuousness of right-wingers and allow OEN members to offer their insight to “hit back harder.” - Frank J. Ranelli, Senior Editor OEN

First of all, you're not progressives, your lowlife scumbag communists, fascists, authoritarians, socialists.

...and here are some of my quotes from out of your heroes' mouths:

"Democracy is the road to socialism.” - Karl Marx

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism', they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without ever knowing how it happened." -- Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Party Presidential candidate

"The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism." - Karl Marx

"The democratic concept of man is false, because it is Christian. The democratic concept holds that . . . each man is a sovereign being. This is the illusion, dream, and postulate of Christianity." - Karl Marx

"The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property." - Karl Marx

"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people as long as government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people happily will endure almost any curtailment of liberty." -- Adolf Hitler

 

"Take away the heritage of a people and they are easily persuaded." - Karl Marx

When an opponent declares, "I will not come over to your side," I calmly say, "Your child belongs to us already. . . . What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community." Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945) Source: 1933, quoted in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, "Education in the Third Reich"

What luck for the rulers that men do not think. Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

The press must grow day in and day out — it is our Party's sharpest and most powerful weapon. - Josef Stalin Speech at The Twelfth Congress of the R.C.P.(B.) (19 April 1923)

The victor will never be asked if he told the truth. Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

During his years as Nazi propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels employed a simple, but highly cynical set of rules. He said:

• There is no truth, only what people believe to be true.
• Control people’s perceptions of the world and you can control their beliefs.
• A big lie is as believable as a small one.
• Tell people what they want to hear; give them simple solutions to complex problems, enemies on whom they can blame their discontents, and promises to satisfy their narrow aspirations…

So what part of Goebbels’ cynical philosophy does not describe the overall political approach of today’s Democrat Party? - Paul Hollrah


"The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than a small one." - Adolf Hitler in 'Mein Kampf'

"It would be the greatest mistake, certainly, to think that concessions mean peace. Nothing of the kind. Concessions are nothing but a new form of war." -- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin [Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov] (1870 - 1924), First Leader of the Soviet Union

"The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than a small one." - Adolf Hitler in 'Mein Kampf'

"It would be the greatest mistake, certainly, to think that concessions mean peace. Nothing of the kind. Concessions are nothing but a new form of war." -- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin [Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov] (1870 - 1924), First Leader of the Soviet Union

"One death is a tragedy, but a million deaths are a statistic."
-- Josef Stalin (1879-1953) Communist leader/dictator of the USSR(Who was once openly admired by Amerikan "Liberals," until his murderous ways became public knowledge and he was no longer politically correct.)

"If the opposition disarms, all is well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves." - Josef Stalin * The Political Report of the Central Committee, The Fifteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.) (7 December 1927)

"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?" - Josef Stalin

“Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.” - Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870-1924)

for more go here:

http://www.willowtown.com/promo/quotes.htm

 

by Barry Bright (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 27 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:44:44 PM

This is a perfect example of Failed Conservative Values, - Name calling, demeaning talk, put downs, meanness, nastiness as part of an authoritarian value system.  Conservatives make it so easy to point out how their values have failed.  The more they do this the more they prove the point.

by Edwin Rutsch (64 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 155 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:50:54 PM

...that is what they always do. It's called losing the debate! They have no foundation in arguable points or facts to defend their wrongs so they resort to the lowest form of communication.

by Michael Shaw (12 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 439 comments [16 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 7:55:24 AM

I'm afraid the lies are mostly being told by the current administration.

Marx, Lenin, Hitler have never been my heroes, so Mr. Bright's comments can be ignored following his first sentence.

Failed Bush strategies are obvious in our highest ever deficits and debt,  failed policies in Iraq and Afghanistan and N Korea and... the list is too long. 

 Mr. Bright, see you in heaven when your attitude changes... as it inevitably will. Love outlasts hate, and always wins in the end. 

by Jerry McIntire (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 1:51:36 PM

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=862

 

Please, see the above diary entry of mine ' On Busheviks, Bolsheviks and Scum'

It explains who was who and   tells the  at least some of the real story of those whom you know only by quotes.

by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 2:31:41 PM

and then buy a copy of John Deans' book "Conservatives without a Conscience" read it, and look deeply into the mirror. 

by Jack Harrington (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 676 comments [70 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 2:59:45 PM

      "It's one thing for buzzards to circle overhead, but if they start lighting on you, HELL NO!" Jay Farr

by Jay Farrington (13 articles, 2 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 236 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:46:29 PM

As a regular poster on my hometown Gazette, I am among mostly Rush and O'Reilly echo chambers, and I have been hitting them with facts all along. I have a notebook full of post-it notes from 1000's of proof of facts, quotes, and laws that I use as my defense tools. I wish I had organized it but using them so often against the right wingers, I have memorized much of it.

I too am one of those shorties, standing a tall 4'10" and weighing less than a buck ten. However, I have a sword (my words) that knocks them right out of the park in most cases. Some ppl have called me a "chihuahua" which I take offense, but gladly welcome myself as the pest against their redundant shibboleth and lies.

Btw, I couldn't access (AOL blocked?) your third page so I hope you didn't have this quote:

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."~~Margaret Mead

by shirley reese (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 592 comments [98 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:54:17 PM

Like Tom Petty said.

Well I know what's right, I got just one life in a world that keeps on pushin' me around but I'll stand my ground, and I won't back down

by Michael Chavers (53 articles, 0 quicklinks, 15 diaries, 198 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 1:15:26 PM

Barry, you have nailed it; the lie that "perception is reality" wasn't really begun with Hitler's crew, but they made it work in their great brainwash. Now, Karl Rove, considered the top "pundit" on the planet, has swallowed it whole in pursuit of the neocommunist agenda that has ruined our democracy.

All your quotes from Marx indicate you think he and Lenin are the same. Marx and the other early socialists were democratic until Lenin killed them all off and replaced them with the neocons of his time, the Bolsheviks.

Also, you failed conservatives are all out of date still hammering on "liberals." Just to help you catch up on your own propaganda, liberals are all washed up. There aren't any left.

You need to gear up to create hate for "progressives" now. You and Rush are about the only ones still that out of touch.

Here is yours and Karl Rove's neo-national-socialist creed:

        There is no truth, only what people believe to be true.

        Control people's perceptions of the world and you can control their  beliefs.

        A big lie is as believable as a small one. 

       Tell people what they want to hear; give them simple solutions to  complex problems, enemies on whom they can blame their discontents, and promises to satisfy their narrow aspirations...

     Thanks for demonstrating that brainwashing works.

      

 

by Jay Farrington (13 articles, 2 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 236 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 1:39:25 PM

that every  debate, every discussion can be done only after two paramount principles are followed: 1)both sides are on the equal basis and 2) there is at least something in common.  The first one presumes that  there can be no real debate between, say  a regular Joe and Cheney or Bush because  they are on the very different levels, not equal and  unless Bush or Cheney  ACKNNOWLEDGE that they  are on the equal grounds as Joe, the discussion is hopeless.  The second one means that  if there is  nothing in common, like when a multimillionaire tells  you to  be more responsible  with your money,  then there is nothing to discuss.   One of the cases when there is nothing to discuss is when you can recognize that the opponent does not want the truth or seek the truth- the opponent has an agenda, he/she  is doing it for  some particualr malicious goal and  just uses the debate for those purposes. That is very easily recognizable. In such case  the debate is not to be commensed. 

We must understand that  we here are fighting for survival.  Our lives, the lives of our children are at stake.  We cannot afford to be polite, to be tolerant, to be all- inclusive when  malice is on the prowl big time. We  need to  learn to recognize malice and stop it  right and for all.

 

by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 1:54:51 PM

If "hitting back harder at inane right-wing gibberish" is to be the mantra, I say "sure, why not." If it's to be "don't just complain; do something", I say "sure, why not."  If it's  "actions speak louder than words", well, that's probably true too.

Let's start with this little slogan: "the pen is mightier than the sword." Is it fair to extend that theme to the keyboard?

And we've all heard this one: "the journey of a thousand miles begins with one step." Well, paralysis through analysis aside, the journey becomes much longer and much more difficult if that "one step" is a step in the wrong direction. I'll go with "look before you leap."

To me, the idea that action in the streets is somehow implicitly better than thought and writing and discourse is strangely misguided. I don't wish to suggest that we're confronted with an "either-or" choice. Still, it seems to me that before rallying the masses into frenzied confrontation, we might first build a sturdy platform of ideas. We "web warriors" have thus far failed in our mission to do that. The truth is, the left is very badly fragmented. Want some examples?

Try calling for nationalizing Big Oil as I have. Try calling for mandatory restrictions on auto use. Try calling for capping wealth and capping the size of estate inheritances to fight against inter-generational ruling classes. I've written numerous essays on these subjects on various websites. The responses, to say the least, were all over the place. As the old song goes: "And it's one, two, three what are we fighting for? Don't ask me I don't give a damn."

Look at the wide rift between what I'll call the "socialist left" and the liberal Democrats. In fact, look at the rift between those who endorse "capitalism with oversight" versus those who see capitalism, as I do, as inherently undemocratic. If we go to the streets, which vision prevails if we succeed?

The danger I see with the "this is all Bush's fault" or "smack down those damned neo-cons" or "liberals need to stop getting picked on" is NOT that these aren't all perfectly reasonable perspectives but that it creates a vague implication that "the other guys", i.e. the NOT neo-cons, somehow have a view that will solve the nation's many urgent problems. Are we being asked to enlist in a conflict with those who lack a "solving vision?"

If challenged to "write the battle plan", I certainly don't have all the answers. The overly simplistic "take down a neo-con", however, feels like a dead-end to me. I think those who write here need to find a better way to carve out a platform. No, we'll never agree on every detail of every issue. What I'd like to see, though, is more focus on building a core platform. This platform would start with a foundation of core values and then would prioritize several of the most critical and urgent issues and propose laws and policies to implement the best solutions.

Actions may speak louder than words but greater volume should not be the goal. Words, the right words, the right words that define our vision, speak more wisely than mere action. Speaking first, building consensus, and then acting wisely based on our shared values, should be the goal.  

by welshTerrier2 (7 articles, 3 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 105 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 1:57:46 PM

....and they are all right wing nuts! Rob is absolutely correct. NPR used to have an opinion forum called "How's Bush Doing!" It was immediately taken over by a cadre of GOP cultists of whom some were professional liars!

 I am proud to say that I was among a small handful who simply refused to be intimidated! We gave much better than we got! We exposed as deliberate liars and frauds several who tried to peddle GOP propaganda that had clearly been prepared by GOP consultants, focus groups, slogan writers, proto-Rovians or rove wannabes! 

Do it! Stand up for the truth and expose the frauds for what they are! And TAKE BACK THE WORD LIBERAL! It means FREE!  

 As the Dixie Chicks would say: NOT Ready to make nice! 

by Len Hart (134 articles, 175 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 555 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 2:19:38 PM

But how often do Democrats ever do that? They have not held Cheney-BushCo accountable for anything! They are always playing defense; just reacting to whatever spurious framework the repugs have concocted. Dems allow the gops to define the argument, always.

As those of us who have been children know, when someone starts bullying you on the playground, you hit back with everything you've got - hard. And you call them on their behavior. You don't start tolerating it. 

Of course, the millionaires in the legislature likely went to vastly different schools than I did.... 

by annavanz (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 38 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 11:41:17 PM

Barry,

 

Thank you for that abridged manifesto of radical neoconservative ideologies glibly and vainly dressed up as a disingenuous attempt to link fanatical father figures of the contemporary conservative movement to liberalism. Your non sequitur diatribe crumbles during your first few words – the ad hominem attack – that are a staple for people who lack the ability to advance their position by using false overarching labeling, straw man arguments, name-calling, offensive remarks and anger.

 

Refutations of each and every quote and effete attempt you make to falsely tie liberalism with Marx, Hitler, et al. has already been neatly handled and totally debunked by Naomi Wolf’s Book, The End of America, which categorically demonstrates these traits belong to Right Wing Authoritarians and their supporters. I highly suggest you read it to gain the proper perspective of history before you endeavor to revise the inexorable facts of these past despots again and appear unwise.

 

However, the overt case of projecting you display has one nugget worth exploring. It is interesting that you quote Marx, “Democracy is the road to socialism.” Since you obviously find this quote most germane – you listed it first – let deconstruct it and see what it actually means.

 

Marx’s quote, in the context of how you render it, is indubitably meant as a pejorative to deride liberals. It also demonstrates another revealing sign of a Right Wing Authoritarian personality- a use of double standards in their thinking and judgments. Chiefly, by equating socialism as the end result of a democratic system, by proxy then, you therefore must despise democracy, a system of equality and liberty for everyone.

 

Hence, the obvious question becomes, “Why do you hate democracy so much?”

 

See Barry, your hostility and prejudices – the blatant desire to persecute indiscriminately – are all hallmark elements of a person who, as Dr. Robert Altermyer states in, The Authoritarian Specter, has an immense cognitive dissonance from within; an innate need to inflame intergroup conflict using unconcealed bravado to taunt and attack people.

 

Finally, your contradictory ideas, uncritical acceptance of, and espousing falsehoods, using insufficient and propagandized evidence to supports your intractable beliefs are merely additional proof that conservatives do, in fact, have an enormous disdain for the principles of democracy and prefer autocratic ideologies that support and further tyranny.

Which, as I stated in the beginning, is why you are so familiar with past Right-Wing Authoritarian figures – you secretly have immense veneration for them and actually exult their actions and values.

 

Frank R.
Senior Editor OEN

by Frank J. Ranelli (66 articles, 143 quicklinks, 29 diaries, 383 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 2:31:59 PM

Two quotes that drive me ,

"The hotter the fire the finer the gold" so let's turn up the heat.

Nice creed by Thomas Paine to live by"The world is my country ,all mankind are my brethren and to do good is my religion". Start by asking a neo-con what part of the quote don't they agree with.

And in closing there is a time and place for calm reasoned discussion and a time to start getting loud. If your neighbor's house is on fire and you know they are asleep ,you don't quietly knock on their door and say excuse me  your house is on fire but raise as much commotion as necessary to save their lives. 

a 

by tjb (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 255 comments [9 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 2:36:22 PM

As much as I deplore the current administration, the problem is the system, not US or them, but the Divide to Rule mentality that is at the heart of our system of government.

As long as we continue to fight, we give power to that which we oppose. Rather than take power by proposing what we want, instead we give power by opposing what we have. Giving our attention to opposition gives power to it because it gives them us to oppose.

 

The PTB don't care who is on what side or even what the issue is, as long as we are divided they rule. It has been this way since the faith was propagated from the depths of Rome.

 

Giving power to opposition does not get results. It simply results in wasting a lot of energy while both sides hurl, blame and ridicule the other side while fighting for what they think is best.

 

Both sides have logical and emotional aspects to their argument. However, one side typically arguing emotionally against the logic of the other side, and vice versa. When emotion and logic meet, they don't meet at all, because they don't speak the same language.

 

Emotional arguments will never be won with logic, and logical arguments never convince emotion. Yet we keep doing it. Hit their side with logical facts and figures? Do they hear the logic in the figures, or do feel the emotion it generates? 

 

Too often, their emotional reaction consists of self-righteous indignation due to fear of the logic which, if accurate, means the could be wrong. Fragile egos fear being wrong more than they must be right, but in any case, what is truly right or wrong is completely forgotten. The fear of being wrong, or fear of not being right, threatens their sense of superiority. They cannot acknowledge their fear, but they react in fear which is expressed as anger. 

 

When the anger is expressed to us, we give power to it by coming back with even more logic. The more logic heaped onto emotional flames only burns the emotional conviction even hotter. The hotter they get, the further away they are from becoming aware of their fear of logic, and the more frustrated we get because they refuse to acknowledge the compelling logic of our argument.

 

As long as our egos are attached to our side, we will never make progress.

 

It is not about who is right or wrong; there is no right or wrong.

 

It helps to approach the issue as either 'agree' or 'disagree' which removes the person (ego) from the argument. 

 

In other words, when we agree or disagree, we are automatically focused on the issue, not the person, so they do not feel they are personally being attacked. Thus, they are more likely to be receptive to logic since they are less likely to be emotional.

 

The only thing arguing does is create more argument.

 

Seriously, if US vs. THEM worked, would we be at the end of our rope?

by Drew Terry (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 28 diaries, 125 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 2:40:52 PM

reason does not stand alone and above.. it is a feeling and a value in in itself. IMO

by Edwin Rutsch (64 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 155 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 4:06:08 PM

speak up, speak out, take action to restore the Constitution, uphold the rule of law, demand accountability and the truth, insure checks & balances, commence immediate impeachment hearings, all on behalf of the American people, who want their government to get back to our founding principles as reiterated by Benjamin Franklin when he declared to a reporter after ratifying the Constitution at the Continental Congress "it's a republic if you can keep it".     

by Gene Cappa (43 articles, 28 quicklinks, 113 diaries, 348 comments [33 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 2:57:00 PM

There are plenty of personal attacks in the original article by Rob and by those who posted comments. Why pick on Barry?

When I first came onto the internet I thought that I was a liberal. I read the leftwing news everyday which mostly comes from the northeast. I quickly found that these people are the biggest bigots on the planet and that I am not a liberal but a traditional democrat.

The article written by Rob is meant to appeal to your emotions and get you all worked up. How then can you criticize Barry because he is all worked up and emotional?

The fact is that these European leaders that he talked about are associated with the liberal wing of the Democratic party which is why I am a traditional American democrat whose ideas are not colored by European history like the liberals and Jews out of the northeast.

Why are we not allowed to talk and debate these things? Who are you to say what Americans can debate? I know that the Democratic party was once the party of the Big Tent. Everyone was welcome and every opinion and idea was debatable.

Now we are shamed and demonized and attacked if we dare introduce a topic that is not in the liberal playbook of what is acceptable.

The quotes that Barry gave are therefore VERY pertinent because they evidently are talking about the posters in this thread. Why don't you read them and think about them.

No one of us should be allowed to draw a line and say beyond this you may not go. The democratic party does not belong to any one of you. Its my party too and I will debate and discuss anything I please.

Perhaps you should ask yourselves why this would frighten you.

Liberals are very quick to talk about anti-semites and bigots but if you think about it - it is the white anglo saxon people who have lost the most by America becoming diverse. Its easy for minorities to come here and tell us how we should feel and what we should think.

There have been a lot of ideas brought to this country from Europe by the Jews who came here after WW2. We must now deal with Jewish European history that we had nothing to do with and no control over.

I think that we have to put up with a lot. I think that we are stereotyped, scapegoated, demonized and then told that the party will be run by liberals out of the northeast and we can accept what they dictate or we can become republicans.

I don't want to be a republican. Nor do I choose to be a liberal. I choose to debate people such as Barry because debating and free speech are what America is about and I don't like people to come from Europe and think they can force a new way upon those who founded and built America.

Hows that for standing up and fighting back. Liberals have driven millions out of our party so that we can't even win elections any more. The next election should be easy for democrats but there is a chance that McCain will get elected because of what has happened to Democrats because of the hatred of American culture, religion and heritage.

In the last presidential election the moneybags out of the northeast gave al gore the boot and forced John Kerry off on us. Whether a liberal or a neocon got into the White House our middle east policies would be the same.

Thats what happens when you are willing to walk in lockstep and be told what you can say and what you can't say and what the party stands for.

Somebody has been grooming Barack Obama for a long time to be POTUS. I read a novel "Turning Angel" by Greg Ilies and was stunned to read a comment about Barack since this book was written several years ago beore I had even heard of him.

The noimination process is no longer in our hands. Just as "its John Kerry or George Bush". Now its going to be Clinton or Obama or John McCain.

Why don't the righteous democrats allow Ralph Nader into the debates? Surely Ralph Nader represent the views that liberals claim to hold a hell of a lot more than Clinton or Obama. Doesn't he? Yet the liberals don't own or control him but he sure as hell would be better for America.

Yeah, why don't you stand up and fight back. I think thats a good idea. First you'll have to learn to debate people like Barry rather than reacting like he's evil which of course he is not. He merely opposes the liberals out of the northeast and so do I.

Of course that is my right but they don't see it that way because they expect everyone to walk in lockstep. Don't do it. Thats my advice.

by Barbara Cornett (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:12:05 PM

I wasn't happy to see Barack cave to those who would shove Reverend Wright down his throat.

I have a small problem with "I don't like people to come from Europe and think they can force a new way upon those who founded and built America."

Those who founded and built America--you mean the Europeans? Brits, Germans, Poles, Slavs, Irish, Greeks, Hungarians and even a Frenchman here and there?

The old complaint about the northeast is probably out of date as well. California not progressive?

What burns my butt is Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the Democrat committee chairmen who are unable to come through with what was promised in 2004. Now they want an extension of the mandate--on what promise? To fail us again?

Will Rogers said, “Democrats never agree on anything, that's why they're Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they would be Republicans.”

by Jim Freeman (108 articles, 53 quicklinks, 227 diaries, 386 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 4:20:11 PM

This is a progressive site that allows right wingers to post, if they stay civil. I consider YOU a right winger. Your talk about Jews and Europeans is nothing less than bigotry. Your complaints about the afflictions of the poor, suffering white people in America sounds like something David Duke would say. When's the last time you voted for a Democrat? Then again, you're alot like Hillary Clinton, who bashes Moveon (a group that is not progressive enough for me.)

There are a lot of democrats who have gone over to the dark side-- who buy the DLC's theories that it is better to act like republicans.

You say, "Liberals have driven millions out of our party so that we can't even win elections any more. " Right. Lyndon Johnson passed equal rights rules that cost the Dems the south-- good racist dems.

It was the liberals who fought the idiotic war the moderates supported. It is liberal tree huggers who say we need to do something about global warming and dependence on foreign oil.

Moderates are a little better than conservatives, but they are still half asleep. Is it bigotry to be disgusted by right wing corruption and stupidity?

Failed conservative values, like antipathy to government and tax avoidance are selfish, anti-social, foolish values that reflect the worse in people. A culture is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable members. Conservatives flunk.

by Rob Kall (953 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 9:27:58 PM

Rob - may I ask you a few questions?  You compared me to David Duke.  So lets talk about David Duke.

In the first place David Duke no longer says that he hates blacks or anyone else.  Duke went back to school and got a degree and attempted to better his life.

Duke champions the interests of white people.  Rob

 1.  can you tell me the difference between Duke and Allan Dershowitz who champions the interests of Jews?  Or Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson or Reverend Wright who are black nationalists who champion the interests of black people?

2.  Duke called for the United States to be Aryan.  Please tell me the difference between an Aryan nation and a Jewish state?  Other than the obvious one is Jewish and the other Aryan.

 

  

  

by Barbara Cornett (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 8:16:07 AM

Rob - I am a traditional Democrat.  The last time I looked I was free to hold political views that differ from liberals out of the northeast.

Please tell me how talking about Jews and Europe in a context other than "Jews and the Nazi Holocaust" is considered to be bigorty?  If you can explain this to me than I won't talk about it any more.  I can see no harm whatsoever in talking about European history.  I see no harm in talking about Jews and I would like to know why the subject is taboo???  

We can talk about Reverend Wright, Africa, Christians, Muslims, Arab history, terrorism, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Hague, the KKK, the South, Slavery, Nazis, Jimmy Carter, you name it.  So why am I not to discuss European history when we are bombarded with The Holocaust, memorials of The Holocaust, Jewish suffereing blah blah blah?  

Please explain. 

 If we are forced to make every public decision by first considering  Jews and the holocaust then we should certainly have a right to talk about the fact that we are dealing with Jewish European history.  If I can't talk about it then they shouldn't be allowed to talk about it either.  That would be fine with me.

There were 60 million people who died in World War 2.  Everyone suffered.  

It would be thrilling to never have to talk about it again and I will agree to that if everyone else will.  But the suffering of some should not be singled out and everyone else made into second class victims.

Furthermore - There is an AMERICAN tradition that was developed under the WASP leadership that Americans have valued for over two hundred years - until the liberals came along.  

If you are liberal as you say you are then you will appreciate this.

"I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

That means that you dont come out and announce what other people can or cannot say.  We have free speech.  Our forefathers never said that it was conditioned upon Jewish approval.   If I am wrong I will certainly listen to any argument you have for preventing free speech in America.  I'm all ears Mr Liberal Progressive.

The democratic party has always stood for that saying.  Today the liberals tell us that if we dare say anything they don't like then we're republicans.  Thats not very progressive is it?  Neither the party nor this country belongs to you.

You make fun of me for caring about the poor white people.  Good point.  Being progressive means that you care about the poor and powerless.  Thats what the Democratic party has  stood for since my Father and my Grandfather were democrats.  We are known as bleeding hearts because we care about the poor.

Rather than caring about poor white people tho the liberals out of the northeast have nothing but hatred for us and our religion and therefore they drive people away.  Poor whites are obviously the least educated and the least powerful but we get nothing but contempt from the self righteous liberals.

Liberals are the same as neocons in that way.  Leo Strauss taught that Jews must get rid of the old ruling class elites - WASPs - in order to remove them and take their places.  Does that explain your hated of us?

From my point of view that makes it look like you are the one who is not a Democrat Rob.  Perhaps you are a neocon.  I can only judge the liberal moneybags by what they do.  Such as removing Al Gore and giving us John Kerry.

I agree that the rightwing is the dark side.  But in its entire history it was never so dark as it is now with the Jewish neocons running it.  Right?  And the liberals who control both houses of Congress have done nothing to stop the neocons.

What the liberals have done to the Democratic party the neocons are now doing to the Republican.

Yeah I mourn the loss of WASP power.  Given the poll numbers so do most Americans they just don't know what the problem is but I do.  I wont be posting here for long because no matter how much better educated you are and how much smarter you are you can't debate me. 

You'll do what the "progressive" liberals always do and you will act righteously indignant while you ban me from the site calling me a "Christian" and a "Republican".

 You say President Johnson drove democrats out of the party because of his civil rights efforts.  Could you explain to me why you disagree with white people who oppose black interests politically and yet you support Jews and Israel? 

If I were an ardent Zionist I don't think I would be throwing stones at white people.  Would you like to explain yourself or do you just want to call me names and posture as a saint who is going to save America from the evil white people.  Are Palestinians less than human?  What am I missing here Rob?

You strangely go off on a tangent about liberals and treehuggers.  If you support the enviroment then why did the liberals get rid of Al Gore since he would have been excellent for the enviorment? 

You sold out the enviroment so you could put John Kerry in the White House so he could wage a holocaust against Israel's enemies who couldn't defend themselves from the world's only military superpower.  Isn't that correct?

If liberals are all that then why haven't they done something to change things since they control both houses of congress?

I think it is the liberals who flunk.  They thwart the efforts of real democrats to get anything done.  Isn't it Rham Emanuel who chooses party nominees?  He was born in Israel and served in its military and his Father was an Israeli terrorist?  Now Rham is a kingmaker in the United States government?

Since only 1.7% of the population is Jewish why don't you explain why they have such enormous power in both political parties and our government?  Why do we support Israel since over 98% of the population is non-Jewish and has zero vested in whether the Jews have their own state?

Given the power that Jews have in our media and government why don't you explain why we can't discuss them and their policies and that you work to take away this free speech which doesn't seem very progressive or rational to me???

If there is an issue that you can't discuss - then perhaps you need to exmine it very closely because it might be that there is something very very very wrong. 

When you label EVERYTHING pertaining to Jews and bigotry then you create a playing field that is not level.  All I want is a level playing field.  Thats the democratic way.

I wish to wrest control of the government away from the Jews and liberals and get it back to representing the interests of America and all its people.

Isn't that legitimate?  This is not bigorty this is political opposition.  Which is my right as an American.  A progressive should know that.  If you can't win a debate by using rational thought and reason then there is something wrong.

I am a traditional Democract.  Not a liberal.  Not a new democrat.  Not a conservative democrat, not a republican, a traditional democrat.   It is not up to you to say what I am.  People should stand up to the liberals because they are bigger threat to us then republicans could ever be.

 

 

 

 

by Barbara Cornett (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 9:05:02 AM

Well, fling open the doors to ad hominem attacks. Instead of reasoned argument, let's call people names and spew irrelevant quote after irrelevant quote with no context.

It must be tough being a duped, right-wing idealogue. After all, your little world of fragile ideas is collapsing. You support the likes of Reagan and Bush. Why? Because they preach "smaller government." Both ran up ALL TIME RECORD BUDGET DEFICITS and incurred RECORD SPENDING. And still, you blindly advocate on their behalf.

You think progressives advocate irresponsible fiscal policies? I sure as hell don't. I think any political party that advocates spending more than they take in should be quickly heaved upon the scrap heap of history. That goes for both major parties, Barr. But still, you just love those Republicans. How foolish.

You want to talk a little about democracy? I saw some of the quotes you posted. Well, Barr, here's a little reality for you: our current political institutions cater only to the monied classes. Exactly what form of democracy do you consider that to be? What's your real priority, Barr? Do you favor real "free market capitalism" or do you favor democracy? You see, Barr, you can't have both at the same time. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent every year, Barr, to buy influence in the "democratic halls" of the people's government. Do you think each American citizen should have equal access to their own government or should we retain our current system that somehow magically provides just a wee bit more access and influence to those who can afford campaign contributions or a payroll filled with lobbyists? We used to call it influence peddling. We used to call it graft. Now we just call it lobbying like a bunch of theatre-goers are just outside the auditorium to stretch their legs and discuss the play. How civilized we've become. Slice it anyway you want, it's corruption.

You see, Barr, you think of me as an enemy while I think of your incredible ignorance as the enemy. The truth is that we, the people, can never overcome our corporate oppressors until we awaken the ill-informed Limbaugh-dupes in this country. The truth is, Barr, everything I write about and fight for is totally dedicated to making this country more democratic.

If you're true to the usual script, you probably believe the mainstream media is too liberal. The problem is, Barr, that the mainstream media is narrowly controlled by wealthy corporate interests. Free speech in America? Not on TV, radio or the press. It cost big, big bucks to get out your message. Is that the system of news you think supports democracy? Do you think a highly centralized media controlled by a handful of corporations is likely to educate the electorate on the great issues of the day? You see, Barr, for all your preaching about capitalism's good, you fail to understand the damage overly concentrated wealth and power can do to democracy. When you have corporate controlled media, Barr, you don't have the free flow of information democracy demands.

Militarism has bankrupted America, Barr. You think liberals don't support a strong defense? That's crap, Barr. I support all the defense this country needs. What I don't support is a bloated military-industrial complex that is draining needed resources from other aspects of the country that could help keep us strong. How strong will we be when we bankrupt our treasury by spending more than $1.1 trillion a year on militarism? How strong will we be when other countries outdistance our students in math and science and literacy? How strong will we be when perhaps half of our citizens will no longer be able to afford basic health care? You see, Barr, blindly preaching militarism at the expense of all the other threads in society's fabric leads to some pretty weak cloth indeed. You macho right-wingers don't get that. You think it's all about beating up all the other kids in the playground. It's not.

And of course, Barr, you're probably a global warming skeptic as well. Let's hope you're right. Because if you're not right and if we continue to be offered the same ineffective strategies by BOTH major parties, we could be facing hundreds of millions of deaths, a destroyed eco-system, a destroyed economy and a very, very dark future. I'd rather be safe than sorry, Barr. My view is that powerful and wealthy corporate interests are forcing us into a continued dependency on oil and other fossil fuels. Wouldn't developing a sustainable, affordable, alternative energy policy make a whole lot more sense? But no, you probably call all those wind and solar advocates names like "tree huggers." How foolish.

Well, Barr, you just stay right where you are in your little Barry-caded fantasy world. Perhaps, one day, you'll come to understand that progressives are not the enemy you think they are. Perhaps, one day, you'll come to understand that, like you, progressives currently have very little power to bring about the changes we need. Perhaps, one day, you'll come to understand that there are greedy people in control of our government who seek more for themselves while the rest of us get less and less.

The bad times, real bad times, are just around the corner, Barr. I know you're not ready to accept any of this message right now. When it all goes to hell and the last drops of blood and treasure have been sucked from the nation by the greedy bastards, I have every confidence that even you will awaken to the realities that lie ahead. I just hope it's not too late when you do.

by welshTerrier2 (7 articles, 3 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 105 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:56:43 PM

I started and sold profitable businesses. I bought exotic sports cars. I dated beautiful models and actresses. Bought and sold properties at great profits, I played the stock market, then and quadrupled my investment in one year.

I took pride in my successes, but no joy. I then sold it all and taught at a college. I began to place the money in trusts for my family, when all were covered I put myself on a six figure income by design. I still dated the women, but finally married one of them.

I found something in a dream that precipitated my moves, something I could love. It was to give without taking and to help without reciprocation. I find joy in that. I find hatefulness in avarice, selfishness and am disgusted by those who hold the less fortunate in contempt. Now I teach them and their success, is my balm. I saw a Thing I cannot describe and I asked of it whyfore am I? And it answered by showing me the future and my part of it. I was a part of that Thing. I have joy, peace and love, and I am a part of that Thing.

I see others who are not part of anything or anyone, except those things which are of a material nature, like the fellow who wrote negatively about Liberals and that is so sad. Nothing but things for them nothing of the ethereal, of the mind or soul, for them. Nothing moves them but what they can possess and touch, nothing but that which decays and falls into disuse. How very, very, sad and how very, very, sick and dangerous. We now have one of those running our nation, and that is even sadder, and sicker. 1.5 million death tens of millions of ruined lives and a handful of war criminals who are richer.

 

by Professor Emeritus Peter Bagnolo (144 articles, 1 quicklinks, 95 diaries, 1317 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 5:20:58 PM

I learned long ago that the first option with these pricks is to call in the bombers and just lay down a withering line of fire right off the bat, no foreplay whatsoever. They don't want to debate anyway so it should be a king hell strike meant to humiliate, demean, discredit and mock.

Whatever crawls out of the rubble after that is easy pickings, of course since they are nothing but a bunch of gutless front running pussies they usually just slink off to find an easier target.

Since I have blogged I have NEVER lost a fight with the right wingers.

Right on Rob!

 EE

by Ed Encho (12 articles, 20 quicklinks, 65 diaries, 438 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 6:52:58 PM

Rob,

You said "Liberals and progressives have let right wingers say all kinds of things that are racist, nasty, stupid, dishonest, misinformed or worse."

Care to give some examples? (without getting into the age old Bush/Cheney trashing).

You also said "Tell them they are full of it. Tell them you don't believe they actually buy that stupid nonsense. Tell them they are suckers, dupes, being used by rich people and war criminals."

Don't bother to back up what you say with hard facts! Just tell them they're suckers and dupes. Like all liberals, spouting off at conservatives makes you feel good but it accomplishes very little.

Yes, you guessed it! I am a solid conservative that believes in the power of the individual to achieve and excel on their on without government entitlements. The government has no business taking money from my pocket (by force) to give to someone else. I leave that to my own personal disgression.

Thank you very much.

John

by John Johnson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 7:53:30 PM

I don't need to offer facts. Click on my name to go to my member page and read some of the 700+ articles and diaries I've written in the past three years.

And I disagree. Your selfish greed does not give you the right to keep your money. You use the USA's roads, airwaves, internet infrastructure, phone systems, police, legal system. The more money you make the more you benefit from the infrastructure cited above. So don't tell me you shouldn't pay. Your attitude is parasitic. You want to make profits off of other people who DO pay taxes willingly. Shame on your values. Shame on whoever gave you the impaired conservative values you hold.  Things have changed in America. Over 70% of Americans now reject the way things are being done-- the war, the economy. You hold neanderthal values, resonating with the worst, ugliest right wing talk show hosts and hate mongers. 

by Rob Kall (953 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 9:36:46 PM

Selfish? Believe it or not, I DO pay taxes, and my fair share at that. Furthermore, I believe in helping those in need and those less fortunate than me BUT I do it on my terms and because of free will, not because the Federal government demands that I do so.

I see no point in reading your 700+ diatribes, etc. Just based on what you have said in this column, it translates into "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs".

Shame on me? I'm afraid not, my "progressive" friend. Shame on you!

-John

 

by John Johnson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 9:41:58 AM

Rob,

Some thoughts on your parasites idea:

Parasites: Real and Imagined

by Darren Wolfe (15 articles, 401 quicklinks, 141 diaries, 1031 comments [84 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 7:16:05 PM

but these days Only about my state, county and city taxes.... I no longer, much believe that about Federal taxes. This doesn't mean there are not Federal programs I might support. But they are simply too few (and they are now adulterated and poisoned by the current government) and do not in any way whatsoever balance against what our administrations have put that money towards.... preemptive war, murder, black ops, the secret government, hideousness and sorrow all over the world.... and, of course, to fill the coffers further of the uber rich elites.... (also as well, the Fed.'s owners....) .... oh, and I forgot to mention another... the building of the camps and police state apparatus that will ultimately be my death... I have little doubt. 

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [400 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 10:10:06 PM

You mean the taxes that pay for the Iraq war, much of Halliburton's and Blackwater's contracts, the Bush/Cheney/Gonzales justice department, the supreme court, Guantanamo, hundreds of millions of pork to right wing churches, billions in corporate welfare to big agra and big oil and all the other conservative wet-dreams?

Interesting thought.  

by Rob Kall (953 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 7:33:52 AM

Rob,

From this reply of yours I take it that you pay taxes voluntarily. Does that also mean that you're happy to pay taxes for the war?

My point being that you can't claim that taxes only go to good things. You also have to acknowledge the dark side.

Speaking of the dark side, isn't one definition of stealing that you force someone to give up their money? Sounds like taxation is just another name for theft:

Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Thus the beneficiaries are spared the shame, danger, and scruple which their acts would otherwise involve. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons, and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim -- when he defends himself -- as a criminal.

--Frederick Bastiat

Lastly, your point about paying for roads & other infrastructure is a strawman. I don't know about the conservatives, but the libertarian view is that infrasructure should be privatized & paid for, repeat paid for, like any other service you need.

by Darren Wolfe (15 articles, 401 quicklinks, 141 diaries, 1031 comments [84 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 7:41:33 AM

Rob - where are our tax dollars going today?  My state government is cutting thousands off of TnCare because we are bankrupted.  We are suffering.  We see cuts in education, libraries, health care, and everything else while the cost of living rises and we can't afford to pay our electric bills and buy food.

The University of Tennessee is raising the price of tickets to attend Vol football games! 

Our infrastrucure is crumbling and unsafe while we are forced to bomb Iraq and Iran(because Israel is demanding it - bush and the Jewish neocons will do it) and rebuild those countries with half the trillions of dollars unaccounted for. 

Shame on you Rob.

Why should we pay for this?  We never consented to being ruled by a bunch of Zionist neocons!  Why should we pay taxes only to see them go down a black (very black) hole in the middle east.  Tax the Israelis, they are the ones getting representation.

Not paying taxes is an excellent way to bring down this evil government.  Why should we pay taxes when this money is not being spent on behalf of America or its people.  Why should we pay taxes just to see our Chrisitan children in the middle east killing muslims and being killed by them while we create more terrorism and bring about the Israelization of America? 

Can you explain that Rob? 

by Barbara Cornett (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 9:20:41 AM

Barbara,

You've got to knock off the anti-semitism. Not all neocons are Jews, & not all Jews are neocons or Zionists. Your stereotyping just makes you look bad & undermines the other good points you make.

That said, a good place to start educating people about how messed up government is is:

The Government Racket 2000: All New Washington Waste from A to Z

There's no way any sane person can read this book & still believe in government. 

by Darren Wolfe (15 articles, 401 quicklinks, 141 diaries, 1031 comments [84 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 1:00:28 PM

I have a problem with Pelosi and Reid as well.  Thats my point.  The democratic propaganda tells us they believe one thing but they get into office and do the opposite.

 Pelosi and reid have gone along with everything Bush has requested and kissed his ring in the process.  Bush even goaded the democrats to pull the troops out of Iraq and deny funds to wage the war because he knew they wouldn't do it even tho polls show that is what Americans want.

 When Rob writes articles like the one in this thread he is trying to get everyone pumped and excited rather than engage the brain.

This is how it works.  Its like ads for Championship wrestling.  Put on a big show and get everybody to pulling for one side because they can't stand the other side's candidate.

That way we don't consider that candidate X was forced on us and is no better than the other side. 

by Barbara Cornett (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 8:08:12 PM

I an encouraging progressives to refuse to allow people to say things that aren't true. Like you say

"Pelosi and reid have gone along with everything Bush has requested and kissed his ring in the process.  Bush even goaded the democrats to pull the troops out of Iraq and deny funds to wage the war because he knew they wouldn't do it even tho polls show that is what Americans want."

Not true. I'm not happy with Pelosi and Reid on the war, or impeachment, but they certainly haven't gone along with EVERYTHING. And I have not idea what you are talking about regarding Bush goading them.

Anyway. I've been calling for the need to wake people up for five years, since I started OEN, before the war started. This article is about tough love-- about no longer being comfortably silent. Pelosi an Reid have been hamstrung by republicans, but worse, by bluedog conservative democrats like guess who. They are the reason congress hasn't gotten more accomplished. YOUR blue dogs are the problem.   

by Rob Kall (953 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 9:44:47 PM

Rob how in the world are we to do anything to change what is happening?  In this modern world you would have to own a cable tv news channel to make a difference.

Lets start with who owns and controls the tv news and propaganda machines.  Well lets start with you Rob - you aren't CNN but you have a website and a lot of people who read it.  YOU form opinion.  YOU represent a method for change.

This means that YOU have power but the people you are criticising don't even have that.   So who carries more responsiblity?

Who are the CEOs and the owners of CNN, FOX, CBS, NBC, ABC, etc etc.  These are the people who form opinion.  They are the ones who have power.  No matter what I believe how am I to stand against YOU, much less these  powerful news networks?

 Please explain and by all means when talking about the news networks name names so we'll know who is behind all the propaganda and who has all the control.

Of course the tv news networks could do things differenently.  They have the power to spin things anyway they choose.  They can choose to cause a president to be impeached by going after him as they did bill clinton over Monica.  Or they can ignore real crimes like those of GB.

The news channels could have programs that facilated the public so that we could protest and have a voice.  But they don't do that do they?

So name names and tell  us who controls our media Rob and then we will know who to hold responsible because I don't think they are the same people as the ones you are talking about.  Lets be fair and progressive shall we. 

by Barbara Cornett (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 9:31:11 AM

Barbara, you said "So name names and tell  us who controls our media Rob and then we will know who to hold responsible because I don't think they are the same people as the ones you are talking about.  Lets be fair and progressive shall we."

Thank you for that question to Rob. From what I've seen, specifics seem to be VERY lacking and it's disappointing. By and large I've read a lot of Bush bashing, name calling, wailing of teeth, etc. but very little of any real substance.

Disregarding HOW we got into the Iraq mess (and I do agree, it's a mess), the important question is where do we go from here. Let's stop denouncing Bush/ Cheney et. al. Congress (Democrats included) are just as culpable (maybe more so) for getting us where we are.

Do we "cut and run" as various Liberals have proposed and let Iran take over Iraq then eventually find ourselves in a far worse mess than we're in now? Perhaps, for our own good we need to find a better solution.

Amen to your question concerning the media. Before anyone begins Fox news bashing, consider Bill O'Reilly's interview with HRC. One couldn't get any more "fair and balanced" than that. Contrast it with the pitiful Bill Moyers (PBS) interview with J. Wright. That was enough to make even a liberal upchuck.

-John

by John Johnson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 11:25:04 AM

The problem is not taxes, it is fiat currency that robs the citizens of any gains by confiscatory inflation.

I refuse to pay taxes which pays interest on debt that would not otherwise exist if the government had not been hijacked into establishing the Federal Reserve.

There is no reason for the government to pay interest on debt created out of nothing. The only reason we do is because it benefits the few at the expense of the many.

It is fraudulent and should be the first thing to go. Otherwise, any other reforms will fail in the long run.

Once the US dollar is worthless, we will all be in the same broken boat. 

by Drew Terry (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 28 diaries, 125 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 1:21:32 PM

I am a solid conservative that believes in the power of the individual to achieve and excel on their on without government entitlements. The government has no business taking money from my pocket (by force) to give to someone else. I leave that to my own personal disgression (sic).

 

No problem, John. You are right, let's all keep our money and stop these entitlements right here and now! Here, here!

 

I propose we immediately:

 

- Stop taxation that allows the government to build and maintain roads and highways...that's insane...that is socialized transportation and should be stopped immediately! It's costing me money out of my pocket!

 

 - This 12 billion dollar a month drain going into Iraq is a huge vacuum sucking money out of my pocket. Hell, raising an army is socialized warfare, so let's stop raising armies and put that money back in our pockets, right?!

 

- Parks, public playgrounds, national forests, nothing but socialized recreation...it must be stopped immediately!

 

- Fire and police, now there is a major drag on my wallet. Damn socialized public safety!

 

- Oh, almost forgot, what the hell is with the U.S. government delivering the mail? That is socialized communication for fucks sake! Where the hell is UPS and FEDEX when you need them!

 

Yes, John, let's leave all things up to your discretion and see just exactly how you get to work, where your kids will play, who will answer the 911 call when someone robs your house, who will defend the nation in case of a real  war and certainly, by all means, spend that $12.95 to mail a letter or a bill via UPS instead of licking a 41-cent stamp.

Ps. Oops, almost forgot. Its "discretion" not "disgression." Must be a Bush, No Child Left Behind thing...proper spelling and all.

by Frank J. Ranelli (66 articles, 143 quicklinks, 29 diaries, 383 comments) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 9:29:53 PM

Mr. Ranelli,

In reply to your nonsense I'm borrowing the quote from Abe Lincoln posted by Mr. Tom Murphy:

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt," - Abraham Lincon.

To attack someone based (in part) on a spelling error is over the top and confirms the above posted quote.

-John

by John Johnson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Monday, May 5, 2008 at 2:03:24 PM

First off let's get some FACTS on "Liberal verses Conservative". These concepts are based on ideology. Here's  definitions from the American Heritage Dictionary.

 Btw, I am a proud liberal and I haven't backed down, scurried from the term and continue to believe in the term. I am a registered Democrat but once I was a Goldwater Republican. When the right winger fundamentalists demonized the word Liberal, I didn't run away from the term like Pelosi and Hoyer and the bunch. I "stayed the course" of the Founding Fathers--they were as Liberal as you could get. Proof? The constitution and they wanted it more Liberal but they had some challenges they left for later times. Read the Federalists papers and some of their diaries, documents etc. They were Liberal. I changed course when Reaganonmics had come to pass. Sat out his second election. Voted for Clinton and now know who he really is and his Hillary as well and don't like them.

Btw, my dictionary got me through college (non traditional student-10 yrs ago)with Honors and I find it is quite accurate.

Liberal: Having and expressing values or policies that favor civil liberties, or following political views that favor civil liberties, democratic reforms and the use of government power to promote social reforms

Conservative: Tending to oppose change--favoring traditional views, values- cautious, restrained, of or pertaining to conservative Judaism.

Barbara, you can call me slanderous notions, but I find you confused about your stance. The House is divided and even the repubs house is divided. There are 4 groups actually. The Blue dog Democrats are more like republicans. The Moderate republicans are more like moderate democrats..."Centrists", one might say. There are the Paul repubs, which are actually much like the Liberals on the Dem side except for the "social" concerns.

And as the other "conservative" poster, can't remember your name right now, I absolutely resent your notion of "entitlements" and I think you don't live in reality. I can prove that you are so far detached from the real world I live in, that actually your comment pisses me off but ignorance is typical. I learned to say that a lot posting on a thread that has mostly Rush Limbarf echo chambers on it. What's your porposal to take care of crippled ppl that have dead parents and no family? Just lock them away in storage? Go backwards to the orphanage type facilities...the Jack Nicholson 'flew over the cookoo nest' era? Put them to death, Hitler style? What about the BILLIONS of dollars of "subsidies" (entitlement money) that Oil companies get (which, by the way, has surpassed any entitlement other than the Medicare D plan--insurance companies, Pharmaceutical companies have raked in BIG time on that......bankrupted U.S., one could say)??.

SO tell me how YOU would handle the poor handicapped ppl that can't work? How about the Soc Sec "entitlement" for old poor ppl? What would you do with them so you can keep all your money?

I have news for you, Bush is going to take all of your money, land and everything, or McCain, our next President. Hey, they don't allow UHauls with your stuff in it in heaven. Stuff is stuff. Stuff won't set you free or bring you love. Stuff is a temporary FIX. Period.

So if you want to cut me off of my "entitlement money" which ain't jack crap and I get purdy dern hungry sometimes, then go ahead but make a National goddamn law that allows me euthanasia, Okay buster?

MLK had a plan to solve poverty but they shot the guy before it even got a start. Neocons don't want less ppl poor, they want MORE ppl poor. What happens to their control when there isn't any poor ppl, or low income ppl? They have less control. In fact. the "corporate King" would rather turn us all into slaves with less freedom. Work us cheap, stick me away in a cement hotel, and do away with public education so they can keep their money and dum-down society...makes a submissive society. The police dept is a social entity that is paid with taxes, shall we close all those down so we can put more money back in your poor little pocket?

Btw, I have a brother that doesn't even talk to me, because he is afraid I might take money from his pocket as well. We haven't spoke at all since 1999. He would never be burdened with a crippled sister and he most certainly doesn't want to share his money (he is fairly well off).

That's a difference of conservatives and Liberals. I want to help my fellow citizens and the poster doesn't. I bet you'll spend a helluva alot more on gas this whole year than you will taxes! Maybe...I don't know if you drive.

by shirley reese (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 592 comments [98 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Friday, May 2, 2008 at 10:30:14 PM

There is a reason The Revolution: A Manifesto is #1 on Amazon. Get educated.

A "Liberal" today just seems to be a Libertarian with little to no understanding of economics, the Constitution, or ethics in general. 

It really sucks. I don't agree with those "Right-wingers," but I certainly do not think most of the "Progressives" are on the right track, either.

Simply put: your Parties are lame. 

by Ferdinand (17 articles, 4 quicklinks, 39 diaries, 259 comments) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 1:42:28 AM

I see the intentional infiltrations of the far right wing into both parties as being lame. The deliberate attempt to move us further and further to the right while perpetuating the lie that this is being moderate.

by Michael Shaw (12 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 439 comments [16 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 8:16:03 AM

"The first and great commandment is, Don't let them scare you."

-Elmer Davis, 1890-1958

Radio Broadcaster

by John Sanchez Jr. (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 1793 comments [148 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 6:39:44 AM

sounds a lot like my father. He was only 5 feet 4 but when he was young they used to call him the kid with the fast hands. One of the lessons he taught me is if I'm ever confronted by a group of people who are harassing me, pick out the guy with the biggest mouth and kick his ass. I see the neocons as that same group of punks. The only difference is all of them have big mouths and just as my pappa taught me I never back down. Oh and in case I forgot to mention it, pappa was a liberal.

by Michael Shaw (12 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 439 comments [16 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 7:47:19 AM

"I am saying to hit back verbally harder than you have before... Remaining silent should no longer be an option. These are times, when if you CAN respond, you should."

Versus...

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt," - Abraham Lincon.

It's one thing to speak and quite another to speak convincingly. I sense an intense political correctness or PC underlying the "concerns" that Rob and others have with "right-wing" rantings. And PC is THE primary reason why we have such a deep division between left and right today. PC falsely promises compassion that's only masquerades a power shift - if not grab - however subtle it may seem.

If you're an idiot, you're an idiot - not a thought-deficient or perspective contrained individual. Just extrapolate that example to the silliness that exists today and it's no wonder that we are in the heap of dung that exists today between political philosophies.

The more PC's use is pushed and mandated (mind you, primarily by the left and not the right), the deeper the split will become between the parties - I can promise that outcome.  Which do you want more - symbolism or substance in your speech?

"I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong," - Abraham Licoln.

Using that as a guide should (at the least) make you sleep soundly at night.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2103 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 8:51:44 PM