‘Rightwing Extremism in Action: Tea Party Houston’

May 2011
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

‘Rightwing Extremism in Action: Tea Party Houston’

26 May 2011

George Rebane

Here's an example of the asymmetry in the violent rhetoric and revolutionary fervor between the left and the right. This video makes clear the palpable violence and hatred of the right. Take a look at these rabid rightwingers; and check out the music that sets the mood. Is this their best shot?

And then check out a good representation of what has become identified as the rightwing credo. How does the self-declared midddle differentiate itself from these tenets?

Last night we saw the screening of 'A More Perfect Union', a compelling depiction of America's Constitutional Convention that produced the document which made us an enduring democratic republic. The film was presented at the NC Board of Realtors' Easterly Hall by those radical NC Tea Party Patriots. When the film ended it was hard to find a dry eye in the SRO hall. Gotta watch 'em like a hawk.

Posted in Critical Thinking & Numeracy, Culture Comments, Our Country

199 responses to “‘Rightwing Extremism in Action: Tea Party Houston’”

Todd Juvinall

29 May 2011

Yeah SteveF, you are just too smart for me.
Paul, I think you need to attend the Tea Party meetings and then listen to them all across the country. Though I am not a member, I think you will see your point is being made by them. Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan and Indiana are states where the beginning of a return to sanity regarding PEU’s are being made.
I do sneak over to the Pelline blog periodically and Frisch writes a totally different mindset there. I think he emulates the woman in “All about Eve”. That is why George is so effective in dismissing his tripe here.

LikeLike
wmartin

29 May 2011

….”So which one of you are going to tell our local school teachers, police and city workers that they are overpaid and are going to lose benefits and their unions are defunct. Talk is cheap, the price of action is colossal. If you have your way someone is going to have to do it….”
I’ll give the speech if you keep the getaway car running.
Realistically, the bond market will see to this. The mismatch between expenses and revenues can only be masked by borrowing for a certain amount of time, and I can see where government borrowing generally could go through a nasty feedback loop where it mostly disappears for a bit.
Remember that a significant amount of the government retiree problem extends into the stock and bond markets themselves. Public employees are firmly latched not only onto the taxpayers, who provide a backstop, but also the continuing high wire act of the values of bits of paper. The irony of CalPERS depending on Exxon Mobil is an amusing side thread.
I think that you could only expect a pixie dust economy to last so long anyway. We have too many retirees, media consultants, .gov middle management, real estate agents, business ‘consultants’, and people on public aid to be supported by those who actually produce wealth, at least to live at the current expenditure rate.
Net-net, most (all?) the current imbalance will be solved in a reactionary fashion rather than via planning. When the engine starts flinging parts, it’s best to get out of the way.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

29 May 2011

In truth I’m less concerned that the right wing freely uses violent rhetoric and apocalyptic imagery and in fact engages in the vast majority of politically motivated violence taking place today, than I am with the intellectual dishonesty that regressives engage in about it.
Unlike Steve, I believe that, as an absolute last resort, violence may be and has proven in the past to be the only solution to despotism and oppression.
I think what I’m really saying is that, when you look at the facts, the right wings reliance on fear and hate as both a tool for organizing it’s forces and then as a weapon against it’s enemies it’s simply an undeniable fact, that violence and threats of violence are a staple of the right wing playbook.
If you all believe in this as much as you use it, why don’t you just stand up proudly and support it? If you don’t, than why aren’t you demanding that it be stopped?
What I believe is clear is that you want to have it both ways.
You want to be able to threaten and intimidate, but you don’t want your political opponents to be able to do it to you in return. This creates a perpetual advantage for you!
Don’t get me wrong, I understand why you want to do this. I’m just saying that progressives need to not buy into your rules and limitations, definitions and parameters.
Rightwing, regressives have done a masterful job of this for about 40 years and as destructive as it’s been for the country, you deserve credit for your nefarious success. Progressives need to shift the terms of the debate and do it with the same effort that you guys have been using all this time.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

29 May 2011

Hey Todd how about you cite some specific examples? If I have been inconsistent in my message I will seek to clarify. Still, I will take you on, in public, on neutral ground in a moderated debate any day of the week. It would be like taking candy from a baby…
….or perhaps we should just let it lay…too personal for you I suspect.
By the way Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Maine, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Florida and perhaps even New Jersey are just a few of the states I would expect your allies to be losing when the current Governors come up in 2012 and beyond. I expect moderate Republicans or Democrats to take almost all of those positions back. The public is becoming very aware of the false aphrodisiac properties of tea.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

29 May 2011

You haven’t been inconsistent in your message Steve, (not that you need me to tell you that!)
Todd is a typical regressive in that he’ll just say whatever he’s going to say, regardless of the facts and frankly I’ve come to the conclusion that he’s irrelevant! There’s no point wasting time and energy on someone who cannot and will not listen or hear what you’re trying to say. Actually I think there will come a time when the regressives will be begging to do business with people like you, because they’re going to find themselves either having to deal with the Steve Frisch’s of the progressive movement or people who will be a lot less reasonable and forgiving.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

29 May 2011

Don’t get me wrong Mike, I agree that there are times when political violence may regretfully occur, and people may be forced to chose ‘which side are you on’. I know I will chose the side of individual liberty. I am just not willing to rush to the American apocalypse that many here seem to seek. The two are completely inconsistent. I do find it amazing that one could simultaneously cheer the divide and claim the mantle of patriot.
As I said above, if we do reach the ‘great divide’, American exceptionalism and the core values that founded our country are gone.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

29 May 2011

I get (and respect) what you’re saying, Steve!
I sincerely believe that the regressives (for all their talk about patriotism) really believe in the (re) establishment of an oligarchy aided and abetted by a Fascist governmental apparatus.
In the end I believe they’ll fail, because there is a vast and growing army of the disenfranchised and poor (I come into contact with them everyday) that will someday storm the gates of the enclaves.
This is something that these would be “masters of the universe” haven’t fully understood yet.
They think that they’ll be able to protect themselves through payoff and oppression, but it won’t work forever.
And maybe that’s the way it needs to be. What isn’t acceptable (at least to me) is to continue to play the game according to their rules and dictates.

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 May 2011

gjr to PaulE: “The next step here is for you or someone from your cohort to now suggest that I do just that, step out as an individual critic and name some teachers.”
PaulE to gjr: “No George, I wouldn’t ask you to do that.”
PaulE to all: “So which one of you are going to tell our local school teachers, police and city workers that they are overpaid and are going to lose benefits and their unions are defunct.”

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 May 2011

The left is always telling the crowd they are in front of what they think that crowd wants to hear. Frisch does this on the different threads but the underlying theme is still of an ignoramus whereever he blogs. Too easy to defeat so they go to a like minded loony blog on the left to regain a sense of self. I have debated enough liberals and have whipped their heinies so it is not necessary to teach another one a lesson.
Thornton is another lefty who has a selective memory and refuses to acknowledge the terror his ilk have thrust upon the people of the planet for 250 years. Until he comes up with a rational thought here, we all simply laugh at him. I remember 1964 when I was the only kid at Jr. High over on Park Avenue who supported Goldwater. The democrats did the Daisy ad claiming he was going to blow up the world. Now the left uses Goldwater as some sort of liberal benchmark to justify some of their issues. Seems the left is simply a bunch of nuts who say and do anything to win.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

29 May 2011

What’s quite telling is that the man “who was going to blow up the world”. Is in fact a “liberal benchmark” when compared to today’s extremist Republican party.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 May 2011

Now that is typical leftwingnut tortured logic. Keep it going, we are guffawing.

LikeLike
wmartin

29 May 2011

“Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have.”
“Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism”
“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is “needed” before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents “interests,” I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.”
-AuH20
Not bad for a Jewish storekeeper’s son who never carried cash and drove an AMX.
Those who view government as the answer, regardless of right or left orientation, might as well ignore that he ever existed. Goldwater was from a different time and a different nation, the statists have the bit in their teeth.

LikeLike
wmartin

29 May 2011

OTOH:
“A lot of so-called conservatives today don’t know what the word means,” he told the Los Angeles Times in a 1994 interview. “They think I’ve turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That’s a decision that’s up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders or the religious right. It’s not a conservative issue at all.”
“You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.”
“I don’t have any respect for the Religious Right. There is no place in this country for practicing religion in politics. That goes for Falwell, Robertson and all the rest of these political preachers. They are a detriment to the country.”
AuH2O
You know, I can live with that. Maybe a decent political platform is to normalize gays in the military, legalize abortion, and ignore churches in politics. At the same time, we can fire 50% of the government.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

29 May 2011

Mike I honestly think we may have worn them out. I noticed that when I gave Todd the chance to take me to the rhetorical woodshed he chickened out. My wife always told me, big talk, small feet, if you know what I mean.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 May 2011

SteveF, I took you to the woodshed and you failed the test. Dream on.

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 May 2011

Gentlemen, gentlemen, please …

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

29 May 2011

OK I concur George….back to the point…

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 May 2011

Okey-dokey. Sorry George

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

29 May 2011

They’ve been worn out since the start, Steve.
The facts are the facts, the proof is there for all to see and if a few tehadists want to keep denying it, that’s their business. They just can’t blatantly ignore reality and then say (with no sense of irony) that they’re qualified to lead.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 May 2011

It would appear the leftwing can’t take a request as well as the rightwing.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 May 2011

George
I’m not sure what you were trying to say by reprinting some of my scribbles in your last re-blab to me. First of all your suggestion that individual teachers be singled out by some kind of citizens group or individuals is so inappropriate that it doesn’t deserve serious response. I was affirming that no one is likely to ask you to be grand inquisitor for teacher dumping that you suggested you might be asked to do. However, the question whether local teachers and government workers are generally over compensated is hinted at but never stated. Is anyone out there ready to put their name behind that allegation. If not, we can assume that they are fairly compensated and the whole conversation is theoretical with no real examples. When we bring these questions home there is a strange silence.

LikeLike
RL Crabb

29 May 2011

To get back to the point of left/right violence, it seems that reconciliation is becoming close to impossible. After watching these threads go round and round in the same circle for years now, I wonder how much longer it will be before we reach the breaking point? You can only shake the champagne bottle so long before it explodes. No one can say when or which side will commit the violent act that starts it, but unless cooler heads prevail, we are headed for the mother of blow-ups.
It’s something I never hoped to see in my lifetime, and little wonder that those of us who are older fear it the most. Both sides are doing their best to scare the bejesus out of the elderly in advance of the upcoming election, in the hope of gaining the advantage. And isn’t it always the old who concoct the wars, leaving the young to do the actual killing?
Maybe they will fool us this time. Maybe they will say “NO!” to this insanity and find their own answers to the tough questions my generation seems baffled by.

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

29 May 2011

“A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have” was from Gerald Ford, not Barry Goldwater.
By the way, the famous Goldwater “daisy” ad was perhaps the first modern savage partisan attack ad, and it worked. The person responsible for it was Bill Moyers, who managed to become known as an ‘independent’ and impartial PBS journalist, at least among liberal journalists. I don’t think conservatives or libertarians bought into that.

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

29 May 2011

RL, from the Wisconsin and Greek experiences, I suspect if violence erupts, it will be from the decidedly left of center public employee unions enraged when state and local insolvencies hit the fan and the gravy trains come to a halt.

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

29 May 2011

‘legalize abortion…’
How much more legal does it need to be?

LikeLike
RL Crabb

29 May 2011

Greg,
Unions?…Maybe, but what will the right do if they lose the next election?

LikeLike
wmartin

29 May 2011

..was from Gerald Ford, not Barry Goldwater.
By golly, you’re right. I see it’s also attributed to Reagan and to Jefferson. Perhaps there’s an ur-quote in Latin, but I doubt that the Romans could imagine a government as pervasive as ours. The quote does have that nice Sorensenesque twist ala:
Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
And of course abortion is legal, although somewhat regulated. I’m more making the point that a system with more personal freedoms and less bureaucracy could be made to work but is, of course, impossible.
On a more serious note, two thing that have come up here, the first being the response of the civil service (also being the armed branch of society) to iron rice bowl cutbacks, the second being the howling mobs of needy poor that Mr Thornton refers to, are things that I think about a bit for any future planning.
Divining the entrails is hard, but it’s a good idea to stay away from fast moving social change. Things end up in strange places when the moorings are loose.

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 May 2011

Bob – what will the right do after losing the next election? NOTHING.
Paul – I have already put my name below the kinds of statements I think you are referring to. Could you please draft something that I should sign so as to satisfy you that conservatives are not hiding behind a “strange silence”?
Good points wmartin.

LikeLike
RL Crabb

29 May 2011

Nothing? You must admit there’s quite a bit of pent-up anger out there. Should the left win the contest of demagogery and convince the “sheeple” that they are the better shepards who will lead them to fields of clover, honey and free health care, you’re saying the right will roll over?
Of course there are avenues other than armed rebellion. Everyone with money could head for New Zealand or Mars. Isn’t that the Ayn Rand scenario?
And by the way, I like wmartin’s comments too. It’s nice to have a fresh voice amid all the screeching.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

The quote in question was from the 1770/1780’s. Adapted a bit to fit into V for Vendetta more recently. I have always attributed it to Thomas Jefferson.
Crabb:
New Zealand has an immigration age limit so you old fogies should have planned ahead. I believe the cut off is 50 years of age. Seems they don’t want retirees to immigrate in for nationalized health care without paying decades of taxes.
And thank God that a “great divide” is possible without bloodshed/armed rebellion.

LikeLike
RL Crabb

30 May 2011

I’m not so sure the great divide theory would happen without violence. India and Pakistan tried to do it, and it was pretty messy. I mean, since California is a blue state, are you going to pack up and leave?
Or do you think you can do it county by county, or neighborhood by neighborhood? Shades of Yugoslavia.
It’s a cute notion, but the reality is that we’d better figure out how to get along if we want to survive.

LikeLike
stevenfrisch

30 May 2011

Precisely Bob, there is no practical way to achieve the Great Divide, thus it is a quaint fantasy. That is what I have been saying all along!

LikeLike
George Rebane

30 May 2011

Have we really put our minds to devising one or more practical ways to achieve the Great Divide? Can we also identify which ways are unpractical? As I have shown in these pages, this “quaint fantasy” was neither originated here, nor is it sequestered only in these mountains.
The fundamental problem is that you want what is mine, and I want what is mine. It appears that neither of us wants to compromise. That one side wants to dismiss the problem will not make it go away.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

I will grant you that the average American currently has ‘too much to lose’ to accept the great divide concept; despite being extremely polarized.
However, what happens when the producers perceive themselves to be working simply to feed the moochers? What happens when the entitlement programs are forced to make cuts? In other words, a great divide debate becomes ‘less fantasy’ when there is nothing left to lose.
I would move from CA in a heartbeat. I have researched this options many times (every April 15th for the past 10 years) to no avail.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

Alabama is looking for new residents!

LikeLike
wmartin

30 May 2011

“I mean, since California is a blue state, are you going to pack up and leave?”….
Essentially, only the coastal parts. If you think about it, state lines west of the Mississippi are a bit contrived, aside from river boundaries and the odd mountain range. I’m not sure that they always suited the political and economic geography that grew beneath them.
If political belief systems tend to follow population density, and rule sets + hierarchical organization naturally increase as lbs of human flesh per sq ft increases, it wouldn’t surprise me to see group boundaries pop out.
Just thinking out loud, and this could all be BS of course, an interesting angle to modern US society might consist of a couple of tendencies. The first is, assuming you’re not a cornucopian, that resource depletion and population growth will increase the value of goods produced in sparser (ie., more conservative areas). This assumes that Google and Facebook aren’t able to produce food and raw materials out of pixels.
The second is that the place formerly occupied by US cities, that of the value added given by manufacturing, has largely moved overseas. There used to be a colonialist relationship between cities and rural areas in this country, but the cities seem to have mostly given up on their part of the relationship. What seems to remain (mostly) is financial services, government, and the vampire companies that live in Northern Virginia and Maryland.
So, where does that leave you over time. Potentially, an increasingly valuable hinterland which is governed over by an urban nomenklatura but receives little in return. Lotsa opportunity for tension there, especially given the social (and racial I suppose) differences there.
Do you end up with Mr Thornton’s Poor Person Army heading to the countryside to liberate the things owed them? Dunno. But you can expect to see weird things happen if times ever got really tight.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

Last I checked Alabama was still required to pay Federal Income tax, SS Tax, Medicare Tax, state income tax, etc.. Alabama has never even made my top 10 list.
George has the right question(s).
Have we really put our minds to devising one or more practical ways to achieve the Great Divide? Can we also identify which ways are unpractical?
Couldn’t a state, like CA, just use voting districts (which have been gerrymandered) as great divide lines?

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

OK, maybe you should try Somalia. It’s pretty much “every man for himself” there.
I think it would be a great example for a bunch of “Randers” to go and create their perfect privatized state somewhere and see if it works. What a beautiful way to show the superiority of said philosophic and economic model.
All the “producers”, will flock to the new frontier and all those “moochers” will be “left behind” to figure out what to do in the absence of divine capitalist guidance.
I think it’s a great plan and you guys should jump on it immediately, before some other brave souls take out the patents and copyrights!

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

30 May 2011

How “blue” would California be after insolvency forces a federalization, especially if Democrats control the legislature (pretty much a constant over my lifetime) and the Governor’s office when it happens? I suspect the rats here are also smart enough to desert a sinking ship.
The next election will be the first with new districting that many hope will end the uncompetitive gerrymandered districts that have been the rule.
RL, I’ve no doubt GR is right on; the Right will grumble but put up with an election loss in 2012 without violence. I don’t believe the BS the likes of Thornton are throwing into the fan as the rabble most likely to throw a violent tantrum are on the populist left.

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

30 May 2011

Thornton, do you talk that way to your right wing friends?
A better question might be, do you have any friends on the right? Cultivating a friendship or two might do you a world of good, you’d be less likely to go on these flights of stereotypical fantasies if you were actually on a friendly first name basis.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

You fellows need to get over yourselves.
I find it absolutely amazing that you have no problem with stereotyping, when you’re doing it, but can’t deal with it when someone does it back to you.
But that is the story of the regressives isn’t it!

LikeLike
Paul Emery

30 May 2011

George
I think there’s more to it than whether you get to keep all your stuff.
Check out the Real Wealth of Nations by Riane Eisler http://www.rianeeisler.com/rwon.htm to get more of an idea of what I feel are the true priorities and responsibilities of citizenship in this or any other country. She proposes an alternative economy called Caring Economics that I believe is the future of a civil culture. This is from Wikipedia but I believe it fairly well describes her direction.
“Eisler proposes that we need new social categories that go beyond conventional ones such as religious vs. secular, right vs. left, capitalist vs. communist, Eastern vs. Western, and industrial vs. pre- or post- industrial, which she notes do not describe the whole of a society’s beliefs and institutions.
She has coined the term dominator culture to describe a system of top-down rankings ultimately backed up by fear or force. One of the core components of this system of authoritarian rule in both the family and the state is the subordination of women — whether in Nazi Germany, Khomeini’s Iran today, or in earlier cultures where chronic violence and despotic rule were the norm.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

Paul, what about the liberals less enduring categories (used here on RR) like “Regressives” or “deaf” or “Deluded” or “Deceptive”?

LikeLike
George Rebane

30 May 2011

MikeT has for some time now used “regressives” to denote people who are not progressives or who don’t hold to other forms of collectivism. Most specifically he applies that appelation to those of us professing conservative, classical liberal, and/or libertarian values and ideologies. It is a pointedly nasty name for his ideological opposites.
The very semantic of ‘regressive’ in the modern sense assigns a reprehensible condition to its target, similar to what I have intended in the selective use of ‘raghead’ in these pages.
This method of expressing himself is another example of the asymmetry between the left and the right. My (our?) calling people ‘progressive’ is in tune with the label that they have long applied to themselves. In their minds it is a salutary address that calls forth a rich literature and history of progressive thought and action.
The same may be said for collectivism (a formal term that umbrellas several differentiable ideologies), socialism, liberalism (modern), communism, and so on. The adherents of these bodies of thought have proudly wrapped themselves in their respective labels.
One wonders what feelings or emotions do the MikeTs seek to invoke in readers against us who are tagged with the label ‘regressive’ in his exhortations.

LikeLike
RL Crabb

30 May 2011

As always, it seems the conservative version of a divided nation is giving all the resources to the conservative faction and leaving the liberals with the cities. And you wonder why I think you’re “deaf”, “deluded”, or “deceptive” when you actually think you could pull that off without a fight.

LikeLike
George Rebane

30 May 2011

But Bob, no conservative here wants to take with them what is not already theirs. And I don’t know anyone here who is assured that such a separation can be ‘pulled off’ without violence. That is only a hope backed by a good faith invitation to develop some peaceful approaches.
At what point would such a fight begin when I want only what is mine, and you also want what is mine?

LikeLike
George Rebane

30 May 2011

Paul, you may be making an excellent suggestion here. Those who want to impose Eisler’s Caring Economics (love that label) should give it a try. You and yours should be able to have a piece of land where that experiment can be conducted.
But please don’t try to force the entire country at gunpoint to put all their societal eggs into such a basket, for many will believe it leads to bloodshed. Therefore limit how much ground will be so soaked; leave the rest of us in our misery.
And if by some happy chance Eisler has discovered our Shangri-La, then all will see the results of that more limited experiment and rush to apply its nostrums to their own lives.
[For readers interested in the short course about Caring Economics, please go to – http://caringeconomics.com/ ]

LikeLike
wmartin

30 May 2011

“As always, it seems the conservative version of a divided nation is giving all the resources to the conservative faction and leaving the liberals with the cities. ”
I’m partly making the point that cities result in liberals, although maybe that’s a bit of Lysenko-ish gibberish.
You can make the argument that in modern America, the cities are indulging in a trade with the countryside that consists of swapping food/fuel/raw materials/and (increasingly) manufactured goods for stuff like banking and publishing, and the latter has less value than you might think. Imbalances always get addressed eventually.
It could be that in the Litle Red Hen Society, that perhaps the best move is to spend less time worrying about how your neighbors’ resources are to be spent and to think about ways to make yourself useful around the farm.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

Actually, George, I think “regressives” is an apt term to describe the program that you advocate. Basically you want to “regress” the nation to a point in time where the wealthy had all the power and controlled virtually every aspect of society. You apparently want to use the tern “conservatives”. Frankly I don’t know why, since I can’t see anything “conservative” about what you guys are proposing. When you get right down to it, the most applicable term to use might be “regressive-extremists”.
Once again what we really have here is the desire (from regressives) to have a one sided debate. A debate were you get to craft the language that can be used and the terms under which it can be used. Your continued use of the term “communist” or “socialist” or for that matter “liberal” (as it’s widely used today) are examples of what I’m talking about.
And on another note, Bob is right!
The idea of “compromise” when the vast majority of regressives use it, means “you agree completely to give us everything we want, for nothing in return”.
And on an even further note, when it comes to “taking what is theirs”, shouldn’t we have an accounting of how much of “what is theirs” is only “theirs” because they used what is “ours” to get it? After that we can come up with an appropriate fee and payment. Then they can take what is “truly” theirs and move along!

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

Now you just have to love a story about the KKK telling the “God Hates Fags” people to take a flying leap!
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/30/arlington.cemetery.protesters/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

LikeLike