The Watering Hole, Saturday, December 20, 2014: Conservative Governance

I’ve often said it’s the ideology of the political people doing things, not the party, that matters. On a national level, the Republican Party is entirely Conservative, with no Liberals in the House or Senate. The Democratic Party, OTOH, has many fiercely staunch Liberals, but it also has Conservatives, especially from predominantly red states, who we call “ConservaDems”, from the Latin word for “assholes.” People almost exclusively attribute to Republicans what should rightly be attributed to Conservatism. When people talk about what a Republican-controlled House passed, they often ignore how much Democratic support that same bill got. And that support usually didn’t come from the Liberal Wing of the party, it came from the Assholes, I mean, ConservaDems. When President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (a/k/a, “LBJ”) passed his New Deal legislation, some prominent millionaires set about to destroy everything FDR (a/k/a “Neil Patrick Harris”) did. They did it because they were Conservatives, and Conservatism is a philosophy rooted in Selfishness, of putting the needs and desires of oneself above all others. It is the antithesis of Liberalism, which seeks to do what’s best for everyone as a whole. The mistake is in believing that the best way to govern a country is to treat both philosophies as equally valid. They are not. When you want to govern a population of lots of different people, you need to think about the group as a whole, not just about the individuals, whose concerns ,must also be considered. Conservatives do not believe in thinking about people as a whole group, but prefer to think of them as a bunch of individuals. I’m not saying there’s no place for a little bit of Conservative thought brought to a search for a public solution to a problem. It actually helps to have people who can say, “But the way you wrote this, convicted sex offenders can still vote in school board elections. Do you want that?” Or something like that. They can help define what the reasonable limits of our public assistance should be. But if you left it entirely up to them to decide, there would be no public assistance at all! And that is where America is headed by giving control of the country to Conservatives. Here’s some examples of the kinds of things Conservatives do when they get hold of public office.

By now you’ve heard stories about Ferguson, Missouri, Grand Jury Witness 40, the one whose testimony staunchly (and a little suspiciously) supported Officer Darren Wilson’s version of events. I say “suspiciously” because she raised money for Darren Wilson’s defense before giving testimony. And because she was a documented liar. [WARNING: Site has photo at the top of Officer Wilson standing over Michael Brown’s deceased, uncovered body. Just thought you should know.] This has not stopped Conservative radio and television entity Sean Hannity from using her perjury testimony words to defend Wilson. Now, one might wonder why a prosecutor would put someone up to testify to a grand jury, whose sole purpose is to decide if enough evidence exists to indict someone, if he knew the person would not give truthful testimony. He must not have known how unreliable a witness she was. Funny thing about that. It turns out he did know. He knew she could not possibly have been a witness to the events of that day, yet he put her forth, without revealing to the grand jury why he knew she was lying, to relay what turned out to be, for all intents and purposes, Darren Wilson’s version of events, as if it would corroborate what he told investigators. Conservatives do not respect the Truth, especially when it proves them wrong. If you know nothing else about how the grand jury process works, you must have heard that you can indict a ham sandwich. All that means is if a prosecutor wants to bring charges against someone so they stand trial, it can easily be done, even if evidence exists of the person’s innocence. So when a prosecutor with a history of being pro-police fails to convince a grand jury that a cop shooting an unarmed man might have committed a crime, you have to conclude he didn’t try very hard. Maybe there’s another ham sandwich out there against whom he will bring charges. In the meantime, that’s what Conservative law enforcement will get you. Expect to hear more stories like this.

Speaking of Missouri, even though women in this country (regardless of which state they’re in) have a constitutional right to obtain an abortion, a woman there must give her consent and convince the person performing the abortion that she is not being forced to have it. But it’s not enough for her to say on her own that she wants to have an abortion. But State Representative Rick Brattin has introduced a bill to be taken up in next year’s session that would require a woman to obtain and present the consent of the biological father before receiving abortion services. The language of the bill says there’s an exception if the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest, but in an interview with Mother Jones Brattin said that the rape would have to be proven.

“Just like any rape, you have to report it, and you have to prove it,” Brattin tells Mother Jones. “So you couldn’t just go and say, ‘Oh yeah, I was raped’ and get an abortion. It has to be a legitimate rape.” Brattin adds that he is not using the term “legitimate rape” in the same way as former Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), who famously claimed that women couldn’t get pregnant from a “legitimate rape” because “the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down.” “I’m just saying if there was a legitimate rape, you’re going to make a police report, just as if you were robbed,” Brattin says. “That’s just common sense.” Under his bill, he adds, “you have to take steps to show that you were raped…And I’d think you’d be able to prove that.” The bill contains no provision establishing standards for claiming the rape or incest exceptions. It also doesn’t state any specific penalties for violating the law nor say whether a penalty would be imposed on the woman seeking the abortion or the abortion provider.

Some Conservatives may argue that if there is no penalty for not doing these things, then why worry about it? That’s not the point. Why write the law that way at all if it really doesn’t matter to you whether or not he woman is telling the truth? Unless, of course, your entire point is to humiliate and dominate a woman already going through a very difficult decision. A decision she has every legal right to make. Because we already know the truth doesn’t matter when you’re a Conservative. Brattin defended his bill by claiming it was an attempt to protect men’s rights. That’s nice, except Roe v. Wade protected a woman’s rights, not a man’s. If any such right existed in this situation, it surely would have been part of the debate from the beginning. It hasn’t because it doesn’t. You won’t hear many Liberals introducing bills like this..

And if you think Conservative governance is bad from the beginning of life, it doesn’t get any better at the end, either, especially when it’s a “legitimate death” at the hands of the state. If you don’t know this already about me, I am adamantly, 100% opposed to the use of capital punishment anywhere in the world, but I am especially opposed to its use in a country supposedly built on the idea of personal freedom (if you listen to the Conservatives.) There is 0% justification to execute someone for a crime he did not commit, but Conservatives on the Supreme Court don’t think that’s a problem. Nor are Conservatives particularly concerned about how cruel an execution is, as evidenced by Oklahoma’s refusal to stop using a drug in its lethal injections that doctors have warned is inadequate to do the job it’s supposed to do. After botching the execution of Clayton Lockett, 21 inmates have asked the courts to suspend further execution using lethal injections. One of the drugs used, which is supposed to make the condemned unconscious, doesn’t perform well enough to be used in operations (where you don’t want the patient waking up to find out his insides are opened up) and would be “problematic” to use in executions. The drugs that would be best for this purpose, if you still want to go through with killing someone that badly, are sold in Europe, and most European nations refuse to sell them if they know they’ll be used in carrying out executions. Good for them. What Oklahoma Government Murderers are failing to remember is that lethal injection was supposed to be a more humane way of killing someone because they would be unconscious for the part where they are killed. That point is entirely missed when the condemned is wide awake and totally aware of the effects on his body. Liberals care about this kind of thing. if you’re going to have executions at all (and there is no evidence that it does any good at deterring others from committing the same crimes), then don’t be like the people you say are the worst in Society. Conservatives, who respond better to negative stimuli, don’t get that a killer who knows someone else is getting executed for his crimes, is not in the least bit deterred from killing again. So you can expect more people to be put to death and, because it is inevitable if you’re going to execute people, more of them will be innocent of the crimes for which they are being executed, which doesn’t serve Society at all.

This is our daily open thread. Feel free to discuss the disease that is Conservatism, or anything else you wish to discuss.

The Watering Hole, Monday, September 8th, 2014: Huh?

I guess I’m a glutton for punishment, but over the weekend I was looking at the TP thread about Dick Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson’s recent appearance (apparently as a religious/foreign policy expert?) on Sean Hannity’s RWNJ lovefest, er, ‘news program.’ Robertson was asked about the situation with ISIS, or, more correctly, ISIL. (The full transcript, if you can stomach it, is here.) Here’s the pertinent excerpt of Robertson’s response:

“In this case, you either have to convert them which I think would be next to impossible. I’m not giving up on them but I’m just saying either convert them or kill them, one or the other…I think converting them, maybe has that time come and gone… [I’d] much rather have a bible study with all of them and show them the error of their ways and point them to Jesus Christ…however if it’s a gun fight and that’s what they’re looking for, me personally I am prepared for either one.”

At the TP thread, after reading way too many comments (including this gem: “The next attack in U.S. the only people that will Truly stand against them are Christians”)   expressing the idea that ISIL is coming to a neighborhood near you soon – or they’re already here – and we’ll all be beheaded in our beds, so as a good christian nation we should just kill them all, this started:

Dennis Terry ·
“If the liberals had these murderous animals coming into their house, they would do just as Phil suggested, and so would I. We ARE our brother’s keeper, and we should stand in the gap for the innocent and protect them from the murderous bullies that vow to dominate the world. We should get rid of them while the numbers are still on the lower end of the spectrum.”

Me ·
“”If the liberals had these murderous animals coming into their house”

All of you hate-filled “christian” fearmongers keep using this type of argument. Do you believe what some of the R politicians are saying, that ISIL warriors are coming through our southern border disguised as refugee children? Get a grip, and realize that some of the warhawk macho ‘we’ve got the TRUE god so let’s kill all of those fanatics who are killing for THEIR “true god.”

I have no more fear of an ISIL hit squad invading my house than I do of your god striking me dead for not believing in him. I’ll sleep peacefully tonight while you all wet your beds.”

Dennis Terry ·
“Jane E. Schneider First of all, I will not be wetting my bed at night, I am NOT losing sleep over them or liberals, nor am I a “hate filled” Christian. Who the heck died and gave YOU the right to look down your self righteous nose at us when you know nothing about us? I might possibly be the best friend that you ever had. Why are you so angry? I am my brother’s keeper and I want ISIS stopped at any cost to protect the innocent people over there. Is that hating? I think that it is loving the innocent and being forced to destroy evil. I don’t WANT anyone to die, but with these animalistic beings, the only choice we have to stop them is by killing them, just like we did Hitler, or any other murderous personification of evil. If they would live and let live, we could all live together in peace, but these radicals will NOT do that- they have a WELL KNOWN agenda of world domination, so you must know very little about them. Do you NOT think that these people going around cutting people’s heads off and raping the women and cutting off the children’s heads and putting them on poles….do you NOT think that they are acting like cold blooded animals? Do you NOT believe in evil? Do these people NOT fit your definition of evil? Why are you so venomous toward Christians instead of ISIS? Doesn’t that strike you a bit odd? It does me. And YES, if you had a murderer or a rapist come into your house at night, you would either WISH that you had a gun to protect yourself, your children or other loved ones, OR you would call someone with a gun (police), and hope that they made it there in time. If not, you would be a fool…….but wait a minute… don’t believe in God, so, according to the Bible, you ARE a fool from the get-go, for a fool hath said in his heart that there is no God. You can sit there and marinade in your hatred for Christians and all other things spiritual instead of directing your anger toward the REAL evil, you have that right., but you are foolish for doing that.

Me ·
Dennis Terry, I went to Catholic school for 13 years, was raised by very devout parents who actually exemplified Christ’s teachings better than the majority of “Christian” leaders and “Christian” pundits on TV. The very idea of killing anyone for their religious beliefs is abhorrent and a complete contradiction to everything Christ said. That was how I was brought up.

Today’s U.S. religious leaders are a whole ‘nother kettle of fish, and nothing that they are preaching these days has anything to do with actual morality and ethical behavior. And just because they no longer do their conquering crusades with swords or torture devices does not mean that they’re any less dangerous than any other religious fanatics. They have lost their own spirituality, their own morals, their own souls, for power and money and domination of others. The only real difference between U.S. religious fanatics and Middle-Eastern religious fanatics is their methods – both of which I reject.

If you and the other “Christian” commenters here think that your religious views are being attacked, too bad, we “godless liberals” have been under deliberate coordinated attack since at least the ’50s, when “In God We Trust” was added to our currency to distinguish the supposedly-god-fearing U.S. nation from those “godless commies.” So we’re pretty sick of it, because we DO have morals, and family values, and we work hard and pay taxes, and we’re patriotic, too.

[Please keep in mind that it’s 2:00am here in NY, so I’m tired and jumping around a bit, since you decided to ask me “20 questions”, not all of which I’m going to bother to respond to as they have nothing to do with the topic of the thread.]

I do believe in evil, but not in the satan/biblical way; I believe that some humans either lack or have a particular DNA section that makes them sociopaths. Obviously, people such as those in ISIL take that to a higher level, and I am not defending them in the least. I’m just sick and tired of the hypocrisy of so-called Christians who use their religion as a shield and a weapon, and cannot see that the more they advocate for violence, the less Christ-like they become. Not to mention the danger that they put the U.S. in, loudly calling for their own version of jihad, which does not go unnoticed around the world. But that aspect never seems to bother the growing number of xenophobic and insular U.S. citizens.

I don’t hate all Christians; like Ghandi said, “I like your Christ, but I don’t like your Christians.” If someone who claims to be Christian acts like the Christ that I learned about, I’m just fine with that, I applaud them. Just because I believe that most organized religions are a menace and hinder human progress, doesn’t mean that the particular set of moral values ascribed to Christ is dangerous, it’s the exact opposite. But these days I guess Christ isn’t described as the “Prince of Peace” anymore, right?

You can sit their with your own shield and weapon of your “Christianity” telling me that I’m the high and mighty one looking down my nose at you, but you’re the one marinating in your own assholier-than-thou [HT Zooey] stew telling me that I’m the fool “from the get-go” for not believing in your god and your holy book. You mind your own soul, and I’ll mind mine, thankyouverymuch. Goodnight.”

~ later, not as a reply ~

Dennis Terry ·
Look, I was minding my own business and from out of nowhere, you started attacking me and my God and Christianity, and making very goofy accusations which you had NO clue about. And THEN, you made the stupid statement of “’we’ve got the TRUE god so let’s kill all of those fanatics who are killing for THEIR “true god.” “ What? Where did that come from? It has NOTHING to do with Who I follow or what god THEY follow- ISIS needs to be stopped, NOT because they are Muslim, but because they are vile, evil , murderous thugs, so why did you say something that bizarre to start with, and why did you attack me instead of them? I haven’t murdered anyone or cut off anyone’s head!

Then you said, “And just because they no longer do their conquering crusades with swords or torture devices does not mean that they’re any less dangerous than any other religious fanatics.” Again, a stupid statement- Protestants never engaged in the Crusades, that was strictly a CATHOLIC doings, and what dangers do Christians have in store? Post the 10 Commandments in our schools to teach them moral values to protect society and to keep them from a life of crime? Or teach abstinence instead of having babies out of wedlock? Or lead some prison inmates to the Lord so that they stop their lives of crime, and become law abiding citizens? Or give Hope to the Hopeless? OMGosh! Call the National Guard! What happened to you to make you so angry about religion, Christianity in particular?

Then you said- “So we’re pretty sick of it (being attacked), because we DO have morals, and family values, and we work hard and pay taxes, and we’re patriotic, too.” But you are an atheist, so why do you have morals? Aren’t you a biological accident from some primordial slime? Aren’t morals God’s values? They aren’t biological in nature. The Bible talks about people like you, having a FORM of Godliness, but denying the Power thereof. This is going to sound mean, but I don’t intend for it to. I am GLAD that you had some wonderful parents that taught you morals, and that you are honoring them for that, but you need to get your priorities straight about what you are going to believe. If you are an atheist, act like an atheist and give up EVERYTHING pertaining to God, including morals and values.

Why are you liberal atheists “under attack”? Because a small, handful of atheists go out of their way to take Prayer and Bible out of school and our sporting events and our graduation ceremonies and are trying to remove ALL aspects of Christianity from society, even though the VAST MAJORITY do NOT want them removed. We KNOW that Christianity teaches those same morals that you are so proud of having, taught to you BY CHRISTIAN parents, and we know that THAT is WHERE your parents got them from to teach to you in the first place! Can’t you see the hypocrisy there? You have morals and values, that YOU ARE PROUD OF, TAUGHT TO YOU BY CHRISTIAN parents, yet you want to prevent other people from being taught those same vales and morals that you seem to hold so dear! The Bible, once again talks about atheists who in the Last Days will call GOOD-EVIL, and will call EVIL-GOOD.

You say that you believe in Evil, but NOT in a Biblical way, but evil “IS” a moral judgment FROM God. From an atheistic, evolutionary point of view, we are animals, and animals do whatever they do, there is NO right or wrong, good or evil- THOSE ARE moral judgments, straight from a Moral God. The atheistic, evolutionary view is, Survival of the fittest, kill or be killed- THESE are natural events and actions WITHOUT God, without Morals. THAT is why atheistic regimes and dictators murder multiple-millions of their people, their subjects, to make examples out of them to keep the rest in line to maintain their death grip on their selfish, atheistic power.

And then you sink to your atheistic true colors by calling me, “assholier-than-thou “ comment. I would NEVER say that to you, and I believe that your atheism is overshadowing your “moral” upbringing.

I don’t understand the double mindedness, and double standards of atheism, or why you work so hard to fight against something that you claim to NOT believe in. There are people who believe in unicorns- I DON’T believe in unicorns or UFO’s so why in the world would I waste my time fighting them for their beliefs? Something to consider- WHAT IF, the Bible “IS” TRUE, and where the Bible says, If God is NOT your Father, then you are of your father, Satan, what if- your hatred toward Christianity and all things pertaining to God is actually a SPIRITUAL matter, and you atheists are pawns, being used by Satan and not realizing it? That’s something to consider.”

Adm Andrew J. Walker ·
“Good arguments my friend. An atheist wouldn’t actually have the time to debate a religious article because they would see it as a waste of time (a total rejection of all forms of theology or anyone who practices them.) It sounds like this guy is looking for justification for deviating from what he was taught growing up by attacking others. The goal is to see if his arguments stand, so that he can feel better about his decision to reject what he or she learned at an early age.

So basically the comments on the message board are his or her way of dealing with repressed feelings of anxiety about the afterlife. Better not to let someone drag you into a circular debate that at its root isn’t actually about religion, or the lack-there-of, at all.

What I am really saying is that there are some mommy/daddy issues here.”

Dennis Terry ·
“Adm Andrew J. Walker I believe that is very perceptive of you. But atheists do this all the time, and the person I was talking to, there is a double mindedness that she is proud of, yet hates and wants to destroy, all at the same time, so something else is brewing underneath the surface it seems. I truly believe that it is spiritual warfare, and these people, as I said, are being used as pawns, and have no idea of what is REALLY going on. She said things about the Catholic church which I wonder is the root of her hatred, and if so, I can understand it, as the CC has ALWAYS had many, multiple conflicts with the Bible, and a history of unBiblical, unhealthy, spiritual issues. Thanks for the comment my friend!”

Becky Marsland-Hill ·
“Wow, that is spot on Dennis……I am sorry someone attacked you. But those are truly words of wisdom you replied back”

Dennis Terry ·
“Becky Marsland-Hill Thanks Becky. I’m not saying that I am perfect or that I am wise in anyway, but I “DO” know God and He wants us to take a stand against evil and to help others in need. God Himself waged wars against evil doers to protect the world, and His people. He also had a lot to say about those who would reject Him and His incredible sacrifice to purchase our Salvation. This person was spewing hatred toward the Christianity for the Crusades, and that was bogus. It was NOT Christianity- it was the leadership of the CATHOLIC church, of which she, herself was raised! The leadership of the CC was NOT acting as agents of Christianity- they were engaged in unGodly activities such as murdering Christians, and burning the Christians and anyone else who DARED to disagree with them at the stake. They went around in the Crusades and other areas DOING EXACTLY OPPOSITE OF WHAT JESUS TAUGHT! They were doing exactly what atheists have always done- silence those who disagree with you, however you have to do it, and isn’t smart enough to see that she is hating Christianity for what the atheists were doing, under the guise OF RELIGION! Anyway, I feel so sorry for people like her and wish her well”

Wow – just wow.  As badmoodman commented on this last week, “Irony facepalms itself, then throws up its hands in unconditional surrender.”  Perfect, bmm.
This is our daily open thread, please talk about anything you want to.  I’ll just be over here banging my head against the wall.

OPEN THREAD: Guns don’t kill people, pressure cookers kill people.

All cartoons are posted with the artists’ express permission to TPZoo.
Paul Jamiol
Jamiol’s World

Good morning, Zoosters.

This is the open thread of the day, until a better one comes around.

So, have a cup of your favorite brew, sit down and unload whatever comes to mind.

The Watering Hole, Saturday, March 2, 2013 – Bull Hannity

By now, you’ve probably heard about the heated exchange between Fox “News” Channel host Sean Hannity and Rep. Keith Ellison (D, MN-5) on Tuesday night last. Hannity’s inner bully was on display that night, from his arrogant way of asking the congressman to repeat what he said (in an attempt to intimidate him into not repeating it), to his condescending tone of voice, and then to his talking over his guest in an effort to silence him. In case you missed it, here’s as full a clip of the segment as I can find. What’s important to note is the context in which the interview took place. You’ve probably heard all about the things Ellison said to him, but what you probably didn’t hear is why Ellison decided to say the things he did. Hannity opened the segment with a mash-up of President Obama giving the same speech in two different locations, while playing “O Fortuna” in the background. (“O Fortuna” is that scary, ominous-sounding, mood-setting music that’s very popular in movies and commercials.) Several times, he said the president was fear-mongering and even called him “President Panic” more than once. Watch it for yourself and see if you don’t agree that Ellison was right to be bothered by how he was introduced.

For at least the next three nights, Hannity invited various black conservatives on to make fun of Ellison. What was lost on Hannity and his guests was that what Ellison said about Hannity was true: Hannity is a liar. He spoke to former Congressman J.C. Watts the night after (sorry, I haven’t found a clip of the whole segment yet). The night after that, Hannity invited two people on his program to talk, primarily, and almost exclusively, about famed racist and anti-Semite Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. It was the same guilt-by-association argument often used to smear Obama during the 2008 campaign. First they set it up by bringing up a past association between Ellison and Farrakhan (since then denounced by Ellison), and then spent the rest of the segment talking about what a horrible person Louis Farrakhan is. (And he is a horrible person.)

But Hannity couldn’t let it go there. The next night he invited two more people to continue the character assassination of Congressman Ellison.

Sean Hannity is not only a bully, he’s a bullshitter. Media Matters found ten examples of outright lies Hannity told his audience, and NewsHound’s Ellen found more to add to the list. And maybe I missed something, but when I listened to the clips, I did not hear Hannity refute a single thing Ellison said. Instead, he employed the tactic of attacking the person, not what he said. Hannity lied when he said he wanted to talk about the sequester because in the times when Hannity did try to speak, he wanted to ask Ellison about things other people said. All-in-all, I believe the fact that Hannity had to spend the rest of the week attacking Ellison’s character shows how rattled and insecure he was by what the Congressman said. He could have simply ignored it and moved on, but he instead chose to do what bullies often do – bad-mouth his foe after he’s gone. And speaking of Hannity…

In the words of John Cleese:

Aping urbanity.
Oozing with vanity.
Plump as a manatee.
Faking humanity.
Journalistic calamity.
Intellectual inanity.
Fox Noise insanity.
You’re a profanity,

And, just for fun, here John Cleese joins Keith Olbermann to discuss, among other things, Bill O’Reilly and Sen John McCain’s Freudian Slip of addressing a campaign crowd as “my fellow prisoners.”

ADDENDUM: It occurs to me that there may be some confusion regarding Hannity’s “I’m a registered Conservative” comeback to Ellison. Like Hannity, I live in New York State (don’t worry, I’ve never run into him), and here in New York we have a Conservative Party and a Liberal Party. Many times, the Conservative Party will nominate the same person the Republicans do, and the Liberal Party will nominate the same person the Democrats do. We also have a Working Families Party that nominates liberals and progressives, and I usually vote for the Democrat on that line if they’ve nominated the same person. Otherwise I’ll usually vote for the Democrat. I’m trying to get people elected to Congress on other parties besides the two major ones. Anyway, to prove he voted, Hannity once tweeted a picture of his ballot. Then he found out doing so was against the law. There’s a story about it here.

This is our daily open thread. Feel free to discuss Sean Hannity and bullying in general, Rep Keith Ellison and courage in general, or any other thing you wish. Just don’t hurt me.

All The Dopey People

Ever wonder why some people think the stupidest things? Maybe the people they’re listening to aren’t all that smart.

All The Dopey People
Original Words and Music “Eleanor Rigby”, by John Lennon, Paul McCartney
Additional lyrics by Wayne A. Schneider

Ah, look at all the dopey people
Ah, look at all the dopey people

Billy O’Reilly
Spits out the lies from a search
Of the websites he’s been.
Lives in a dream

Works on the TV,
Wearing his hate that he keeps
In the heart of his core.
Who is it for?

All the dopey people,
Where do their views come from?
All the dopey people,
Where do they all go wrong?

Hannity’s Ego
Writing the words Continue reading

The Cowardice of Conservatives

News Hounds has uncovered a gem. If you want to know what today’s Conservatives are like, just listen to the people who claim to speak for them. Now, I have a hard time understanding how Conservatives think (which inspired me to write “Conservative” below), and I just can’t reconcile the nonsense I hear out of people like Sean Hannity and Mark Levin, and the philosophy of Conservatism I heard preached by conservative giants like Barry Goldwater. One thing Goldwater always said Conservatism was about was Continue reading

Sean Hannity consents to be waterboarded for charity!!

Sean Hannity is another of Fox News personalities that won’t call waterboarding torture.  Instead, he answers in this video “I am for enhanced interrogation.”  When asked if he was ever waterboarded by Grodin, his response was, “No, but Ollie North has.”  I’m lost, what in the hell does North’s being waterboarded have to do with Hannity being waterboarded???  Talking to someone about their experiences being tortured is a whole different animal than being waterboarded yourself.  Grodin asked Hannity if he would consent to be waterboarded, Hannity’s response, “I’ll do it for charity. I’ll let you do it. I’ll do it for the troops’ families.”

Having Grodin in this video made it bearable to watch.  In the end, he calls Hannity a fascist.  You will see Hannity cuts him off and talks over him.  Hats off to Grodin for having the moral fortitude to tolerate Hannity at all.

Tea Bag Party

Well, a whole bunch of people (or so we are told) will be out having their Tea Bag Parties on Wednesday, April 15th. Supposedly these folks are going to be protesting government spending, or taxes, or something they don’t like. No matter what they’re protesting about, it’s a good bet that almost everyone of them will be getting a tax cut under Obama’s new budget (though it’s hard to convince them of that.) Fox News Channel is planning threatening to cover the protests, so we’ll get to see the mixed bag of nuts that plan to attend.

Anyway, I wondered what attending one of those things would be like, and with the help of Rick Nelson’s “Garden Party”, it might go something like this…

Tea Bag Party
Original words and music “Garden Party”, by Rick Nelson, 1971
Additional lyrics by Wayne A. Schneider, 2009

I went to a Tea Bag Party to demonstrate with my new friends
A chance to shout obscenities and raise our voice again
When I got to the Tea Bag Party, they all played the game
No one recognized me, I didn’t sound the same

But they’re so right wing, They honed their hatred well
You see, they can’t please anyone, so they got to please themselves

People came from miles around, cable news was there
Bill-O brought his goon squad, it was tragic ev’rywhere
‘N’ over in the corner, much to my surprise
Continue reading

Polls Show Majority Reject Media Blaming Obama For Economy

Americans are not succumbing to the idiocy, of the Right-Wing Media biased coverage of the Economy.  Even though Rush Limbaugh is leading the charge for the Republican Party by screeching, “United States of America is under assault, it has always been under assault. But it has never been under assault like this, from within.” It’s nice to know the only ones listening are radical conservatives.

In response to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll showing that only 26 percent of the public blames the Obama administration for the country’s economic situation, Media Matters for America released the following statement:

“This poll shows that despite what they are hearing from the media, the public overwhelmingly blames banks, business, and the Bush administration, not President Obama,” said Erikka Knuti, a spokeswoman for Media Matters. “The media have repeatedly attached Obama’s name to the economic crisis and all but erased the role of the previous administration from their coverage. The American people aren’t falling for it.”

The Washington Post/ABC News poll, released on March 31, asked respondents who they thought “deserve[d]” the most “blame” for “the country’s economic situation.” Results for who deserved a “great deal” or “good amount” of blame are as follows:

  • 80 percent said banks and other financial institutions
  • 80 percent said large business corporations
  • 72 percent said consumers
  • 70 percent said the Bush administration
  • 26 percent said the Obama administration

Continue reading

Fox News: GOP Governor laughs at suggestion of Palin being future star

This is from the Hannity and Colmes show, which features Republican Governor Mark Sanford.  Not only does he laugh, but he starts naming off many other possible rising stars for the Republican Party.

Media Matters – Toxic Radio Hosts

Media Matters does an outstanding job showing the trickle-down effect from Rush and Hannity really does work.  It gives the conservative regional radio hosts justification (in their minds) for the misinformation that they spread to their listeners, who in turn post on the internet and send these lies or smears to their co-workers.  Here is their summary:

Beyond the echelon of widely known conservative radio hosts with national audiences lies a vast network of lesser-known syndicated and regional radio hosts who have become key components of an echo chamber for conservative talking points and falsehoods. Like their better-known counterparts, these syndicated and regional radio hosts have played active roles this election season in promoting falsehoods and smears in an all-out effort to foment hate and distrust among their listeners for President-elect Barack Obama. While the hosts vary in the degree of vitriol they spew and in their ratio of rebuttable falsehoods to unbridled smears, Media Matters for America and Colorado Media Matters have identified common themes that many, if not all, have promoted over the past year.

The Project for Excellence in Journalism recently released a report, which garnered considerable media attention, concluding that Sen. John McCain received much more “negative” coverage than President-elect Barack Obama during the campaign. But in purporting to compare the media’s coverage of the two candidates, PEJ did not consider talk radio, saying: “Talk radio stories … were not included in this campaign study of tone.” But, beyond arguable flaws in PEJ’s methodology, no study of the “tone” in the media’s coverage of this presidential campaign is complete without inclusion of conservative talk radio. Several of the radio hosts monitored by Media Matters (their shows are described in detail below), as well as their guests, engaged in an all-out effort to foment hate and suspicion of Obama among their listeners, promoting the most baseless and farfetched of smears and advancing falsehoods — including about Obama’s religion and background — that have taken hold among a substantial percentage of the electorate.

The problem is that these regional talk show host’s actually convince their listeners that this is factual information.  I know this to be true because, I had members of my family and friends that were receiving emails that were watered down versions of Limbaugh all the time.  How I found out is, they would forward me these vile emails that I would respond to with facts and links to the actual truth of the matter.  All of them were trying to find out the truth, so they could respond to what they had received by email.  Here are some great examples of what Media Matters uncovered.

Continue reading

Sunday News Highlights

U.S. Believes Nuns have a Habit for Terrorism

Two Roman Catholic nuns jailed for non-violent action against nuclear weapons were also listed as terrorists by US authorities. Link.

Tax rebate, Food Stamp Money possible in Aid Plan

After consulting with Barack Obama, Democratic leaders are likely to call Congress back to work after the election in hopes of passing legislation that would include extended jobless benefits. Link

Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers Put the Smack-Down on AIG

Okay, this is about a day late, but what the hell, it’s still funny. On Thursday, Saturday Night Live aired a special 30-minute midweek episode. Link

Alaska Pollock Fishery near collapse: Greenpeace

Stocks of Alaska pollock, a staple of the U.S. fast food industry, have shrunk 50 percent from last year to record low levels and put the world’s largest food fishery on the brink of collapse. Link

Fox News’ Faux Documentary sets New Low

Sean Hannity’s Sunday report, ‘Obama and Friends: The History of Radicalism,’ relied on innuendo and guilt by association to label the Illinois senator a dupe of the shadowy forces of the left. Link

Continue reading

Hiding Sarah Palin in Plain Sight

add to : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Why is there such tight control on media access to the Alaska governor and vice presidential nominee? Could it be because–she doesn’t even have the “acceptable” knowledge of current events for serious interchanges with reporters? Or, is that the campaign needs to groom and prep Palin more for questions like: What do you believe is the root of the terrorist problem in Pakistan? Do you believe in evolution? Also, should we teach creationism in the public schools? Those are some questions, I would like answers to from a potential Vice-President with her extreme views.

Mr. McCain’s selection of an inexperienced and relatively unknown figure was unsettling, and the campaign’s decision to keep her sequestered from serious interchanges with reporters and voters serves only to deepen the unease. Mr. McCain is entitled to choose the person he thinks would be best for the job. He is not entitled to keep the public from being able to make an informed assessment of that judgment. Ms. Palin’s speech-making skills are impressive, but the more she repeats the same stump speech lines, the queasier we get. Nor have her answers to the gentle questioning she has encountered provided any confidence that Ms. Palin has a grasp of the issues.

If Sarah Palin’s first interview with Charlie Gibson revealed anything, it was how unprepared she was for foreign policy questions. The fact that she didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine was-shows she doesn’t read a newspaper or gather information from news sources on the internet. This is not someone I want making decisions about Iraq or Georgia.

Her answers to Sean Hannity of Fox News-the unofficial cheerleader for the GOP-not only did not instill confidence–but Fred Hiatt from the Washington Post found them “hardly reassuring.”

“Retreat is defeat in Iraq,” as she told Mr. Hannity, is a slogan, not a vision for how to proceed. On Russia, Ms. Palin said, “What we have got to commit to also, especially when we talk to Russia — no Cold War. We have got to know that our mind-set needs to be opportunity for pressure and diplomacy and sanctions if need be as we keep our eye on a country like Russia.” What sanctions does Ms. Palin have in mind?

Continue reading

Savage, Hannity, O’Reilly Terrorists?

add to : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

On Sunday, Jim David Adkisson entered the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church during a children’s musical and began firing a 12-guage shotgun. The results were two people dead and six wounded.

According to the Knoxville News, the police stated that Adkisson wanted to kill liberals and because he couldn’t kill the elected officials, he would instead kill the people he said voted them into office.

Adkisson targeted the church, Still wrote in the document obtained by WBIR-TV, Channel 10, “because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country’s hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of media outlets.”‘


Inside the house, officers found “Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder” by radio talk show host Michael Savage, “Let Freedom Ring” by talk show host Sean Hannity, and “The O’Reilly Factor,” by television talk show host Bill O’Reilly.


Adkisson, 58, of Powell wrote a four-page letter in which he stated his “hatred of the liberal movement,” Owen said. “Liberals in general, as well as gays.”

I wonder why Mr. Adkisson has yet to be labeled a terrorist. He went on a rampage and killed Americans because of his beliefs about our government. He walked into a church and shot people because he felt they elected liberals. As such, this is an attack on the way America is governed. And as such, this should have been labeled a terrorist attack.

But it has not.

When domestic terrorist Timothy McVeigh was tried for his role in the Oklahoma City bombings, it was introduced that he had clippings from a book entitled “The Turner Diaries.” “The Turner Diaries” is a novel popular on the anti-government right.

One of those clippings had this phrase highlighted: “But the real value of all of our attacks today lies in the psychological impact, not in the immediate casualties.”

Another highlighted phrase read, “We can still find them and kill them.”

It’s apparent that hate is what drove this both McVeigh and Adkisson. And that hate was, in part, fueled by the rantings of the right-wing media “darlings” who continuously espouse intolerance and lies and distortions of what “liberal” means.

If you can’t watch clips online, Rush Limbaugh states, about the Virginia Tech shooter:

If this Virgina Tech shooter had an ideology, what do you think it was? This guy had to be a liberal. You start railing against the rich… This guy is a liberal. He was turned into a liberal somewhere along the line. So it was a liberal who committed this act.

The right wing blame all the ills of our country on “Liberals” but never because of their own hate-filled speech. Care and concern for any fellow man is considered Liberal – which they have been quite effective in turning into a dirty word. But Neo-conservatives who preach war and beg for nuclear war, are good. I am at a loss at the kinds of cognitive leaps that are made to connect caring into hate and war into a blessing.

Jim N. at TalkingPointsMemo put up an interesting post relating to Adkisson:

Below I have listed one quote from the (Adkisson’s) letter. Can you guess which one it is?

1. Liberalism IS a confirmed Mental Disorder.

2. Yes, and when free thinking American Patriots take back this country, one of the first orders of business will be to deal with all of you idiotic, liberal, bleeding heart, anti American traitors appropriately

3. We have a traitor among us. GET A ROPE

4. The revolution I spoke of will not be North against South, but will be free thinking American Patriots against anti American traitors such as you, aks/ablaze, and the rest of the bleeding heart, liberal idiots

5. you anti American, liberal traitors still refuse to face the facts, and continue to live in a state of brainwashed, blind denial..

6. Muslims are a cancer on this planet, and guess what? I’m not joking 1 bit.. I say drop a nuke on the mid-east and then stuff pork up their *ss’s!

7. I think pink is great color for liberals, that and yellow

8. Liberals are a cancer on the world.

9. Why is it that spoiled kids of prominent people always become liberal and bitter, but have never made much of a difference in anything

10. [I have a] stated hatred of the liberal movement

11. As a veteran I say to you be thankful for the anonymity the internet gives you, there are probably more than a few ex-military on this site that would get gratification from a face-to-face with you, but you are not worth going to jail for. You are despicable and disgusting. Go see your proctologist, you may be developing brain damage. Now FOAD!

12. Why don’t we test out your real courage and pick a nice quiet dark spot to meet so i can bust your jaw. No more words, Just you, me, and blood. You talk awfully tough on the internet now let’s test out what your REALLY made of.

The statement written by the gunman was number 10. (One of the mildest statements from the list) Your next question should be: where did you get the rest of these quotes? The answer is simple.

Every quote (other than #10) listed, came from a MYFox Local website from across the country.

The right has become an outlet for all the anger and hatred which people in our country feel – for whatever reason. Out of a job? Blame liberals, not Bush policies. Lose your house? Blame liberals. Salary sucks? Blame liberals. Hey, you can even blame liberals for a slump in box office revenue!

Does anyone out there remember how Hitler came to power? He blamed Jews for all the woes of their society. He had a Ministry of Propaganda. We have liberals and Fox News.

But for us, it’s all the fault of the liberals, the ACLU and George Soros!

I found the statement by MissMollyHussain at ThinkProgress to be an amusing read:

This will surely bring out the people who would like to see these hateful people banned from the airwaves and banned from writing books. We already have laws against libel and laws against slander, but laws against inciting violence have always been a bit murky.

The first amendment has always been one of our most cherished freedoms. But where should the line be drawn? Are Savage, Hannity, and O’Reilly deriving any joy from what their books have wrought? Probably not — in fact, they will most likely do their utmost to downplay any role their books had in this violence, alleging that Adkisson is a total nutcase and their books wouldn’t have made any difference. In fact, the ACLU would most likely defend their right to write whatever crap they want.

Oh the irony should the ACLU defend Hannity, Savage or O’Reilly for encouraging domestic terrorism.

h/t: Wayne A. Schneider