Discussion:
Civility Project ends
Add Reply
Barb May
2011-01-14 03:24:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The Civility Pledge

* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.

"The worst e-mails I received about the civility project were from
conservatives with just unbelievable language about communists, and some
words I wouldn't use in this phone call," he said. "This political
divide has become so sharp that everything is black and white, and too
many conservatives can see no redeeming value in any liberal or
Democrat. That would probably be true about some liberals going the
other direction, but I didn't hear from them." -- co-founder Mark
DeMoss, a Republican and prominent evangelical Christian
--
Barb
Ubiquitous
2011-01-14 16:46:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Hypocrisy noted. And you posted this off-topic article here because?

---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Barb May
2011-01-14 17:04:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Hypocrisy noted. And you posted this off-topic article here because?
Oh, the irony!
--
Barb
Steve Newport
2011-01-15 06:52:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv (Barb=A0May) Oh, the irony!
---------------------------------------
SN: There is no bigger hypocrite than Mike "Ubiquitous" Weber.
trotsky
2011-01-15 13:39:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Newport
---------------------------------------
SN: There is no bigger hypocrite than Mike "Ubiquitous" Weber.
Or, put another way, he's the most ubiquitous hypocrite.
Steve Newport
2011-01-15 20:48:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@email.com (trotsky)
Mike "Ubiquitous" Weber: the most ubiquitous hypocrite.
---------------------------------
SN: Should be his sig.
Ubiquitous
2011-02-04 10:43:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
The website of Common Cause describes the group as "a nonpartisan, grassroots
organization dedicated to restoring the core values of American democracy,
reinventing an open, honest and accountable government that serves the public
interest, and empowering ordinary people to make their voices heard in the
political process."

The bio of Common Cause's president, Bob Edgar--a former Democratic
congressman from Pennsylvania--informs us that "under Bob's leadership, Common
Cause is championing a number of critical issues and reforms, including the
public funding of political campaigns at all levels, election reforms that
make voting more accurate, secure and accessible, improved ethics at all
levels of government, redistricting reform and a diverse and open media."

It all sounds very high-minded. How's it working out in practice?

On Sunday, Common Cause hosted a panel discussion called "Uncloaking the
Kochs," which, according to the Common Cause website, "was followed by a rally
outside the posh Rancho Las Palmas resort where the Koch brothers were holding
one of their political strategy meetings." The Koch brothers' support of
free-market causes makes them enemies of "democracy," in Common Cause's view.

Christian Hartsock, a videographer who contributes to Andrew Breitbart's
BigGovernment.com, attended the Common Cause rally and produced a devastating
four-minute video of his interactions with the Common Causer supporters.

His coverage of the rally opens with an ingenuous twentysomething white woman
holding forth: "There's a devastating influence in our country, and it's
coming from fear and anger and widespread misunderstanding of what's actually
causing the problems in our society. And I think that the racist Tea Party is
one example of that, and it makes me feel ashamed to be an American."

This is followed by clips of Hartsock's other interactions with Common Cause
ralliers, some of which we've transcribed:

Hartsock: After we impeach Clarence Thomas, what do we do with him?
Let's keep it real.

Middle-aged white man with mustache: Put him in--put him in--put
him back in the, um--put him back in the fields. I mean, he's a
scumbag.Hartsock: Yeah!Mustache: He's a dumb sh-- scumbag. Put
him back in the fields!

Hartsock: But what about Alito?

Mustache: Alito should--Alito should go back to Sicily.

Hartsock: Yeah. But what about Fox News?

Mustache: Fox News? That's a mis--misappropriation of the English
language. There is no news on Fox.

Hartsock: So what do we do with them?

Mustache: Break Rupert Murdoch. Never--never give him a dime. I
never turn on Fox, I never give a cent to Rupert Murdoch, and
every day I vote with my dollars.Hartsock: What do we do with
Roger Ailes? What do we do with Roger Ailes?Mustache: Roger Ailes
should be strung up and--but, ah, I don't know. Kill the bastard.

[Change of scene]

Hartsock: Justice for Anita Hill. What do we do?

Young woman with sunglasses and nose ring 1: We cut off his toes
one by one and feed them to him. . . .

[Change of scene]

Hartsock: What do you say we do with Clarence Thomas after we
impeach him?

Young woman with sunglasses and nose ring 2: Bad things.

Hartsock: Like what?

Nose ring 2: I dunno, 'cause I'm all about peace, but I would
say torture.

[Change of scene]

Hartsock: [After] we impeach Clarence Thomas, what do we do with him?

Middle-aged woman with squeaky voice: What do we do with him?
String him up. And his wife, too. Let's get rid of Ginny.

Hartsock: And then what?

Squeaky: Start all over. Scalia, uh, who are the other a--h---s?
I'm sorry.

Hartsock: No, it's OK.

Squeaky: Yeah.

Hartsock: String 'em up, eh?

Squeaky: String 'em up.

Unidentified off-camera male voice: No Koch, no way!

Squeaky: Thomas--Thomas, his wife, Scalia, Roberts--oh my God!

[Change of scene]

Hartsock: After we impeach Clarence Thomas, what should we do
with him?

Unidentified off-screen male voice: [unintelligible]

Young man with sunglasses: I don't want to--

Young woman with unpierced nose: I can't say that. I don't want
to be on camera saying that.

Hartsock: Saying what? You can say--you can say anything, we're
all friends.

Sunglasses: Hang him.

A caveat is in order. As is often the case with material published on
Breitbart's websites, Hartsock's methods would be unethical by the highest
standards of institutional journalism. By framing his queries in the first
person plural--"what do we do . . .?"--he arguably crosses the line between
asking questions and goading his sources. At least one of his comments--"we're
all friends"--is plainly deceptive.

That said, it appears from the video that the violent and racist sentiments
originate with the Common Cause supporters; Hartsock prompts them with
relatively innocuous cues about impeachment and Anita Hill. And there is no
question that the Common Causers express their ugly sentiments with great
relish.

Further, the formerly mainstream media, in their determination to cast the Tea
Party movement as violent and racist, have frequently violated their own
ethical principles--among other ways, by reporting uncorroborated claims as if
they were established fact ("Tea Party Protesters Scream 'Nigger' at Black
Congressmen," reads a March 2010 McClatchy Newspapers headline) and even by
lying outright (Paul Krugman's false claim, in the New York Times no less,
that Michele Bachmann had used "eliminationist rhetoric").

We'd venture to say that Hartsock has provided more evidence that Common Cause
is a violent, racist movement than all the media put together have done
vis-à-vis the Tea Party.

To be sure, there is no reason to think that Bob Edgar or other officials of
Common Cause advocate violence against Supreme Court justices or media
executives, that they approve of such violent fantasies, or that they
personally hold racially or ethnically bigoted opinions. But Common Cause does
describe itself as a "grassroots organization."




---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
trotsky
2011-02-04 13:44:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
The website of Common Cause describes the group
Plagiarism alert.
Barb May
2011-02-04 23:53:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
The website of Common Cause
Common Cause has nothing to do with The Civility Project.

The Civility Project was started by conservative activist Mark DeMoss
and it asked governors and members of Congress to sign a pledge. Four
years later DeMoss shut down the project after securing pledges from
only three members of Congress.

DeMoss said this in his press release:
"Perhaps one of the most surprising results of this project has been the
tone and language used by many of those posting comments on our website
and following articles on various media websites about the project. Many
of them could not be printed or spoken in public media due to vulgar
language and vicious personal attacks. Sadly, a majority of these came
from fellow conservatives."
--
Barb
Ubiquitous
2011-02-05 01:00:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
The website of Common Cause describes the group as "a nonpartisan,
grassroots organization dedicated to restoring the core values of
American democracy, reinventing an open, honest and accountable
government that serves the public interest, and empowering ordinary
people to make their voices heard in the political process."
Common Cause has nothing to do with The Civility Project.
Nonresponse noted.

Over the weekend Common Cause held a rally in California at which
numerous supporters of the self-styled "grassroots organization" were
caught on video advocating violence against Supreme Court justices and
media executives--including calls to lynch the high court's only black
member.

"Common Cause's 40 year history of holding power accountable has been
marked by a commitment to decency and civility--in public and private,"
begins a press release from the organization yesterday. Yet in contrast
with SarahPAC, which removed from its website its famous map of targeted
districts after the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords,
CommonCause.org's homepage still prominently features a photo and
denunciation of Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, who were
among the objects of the Common Cause supporters' violent--and, in
Thomas's case, racist--fantasies.

The press release is framed as a condemnation of the Common Cause
supporters--or, in the group's unwieldy description of them, "a few of
those attending the events around a gathering Common Cause helped to
organize Sunday near Palm Springs." The statement goes on:

Anyone who has attended a public event has encountered
people whose ideas or acts misrepresented, even embarrassed,
the gathering. Every sporting event has its share of "fans"
whose boorish behavior on the sidelines makes a mockery of
good sportsmanship; every political gathering has a crude
sign-painter or epithet-spewing heckler.

Everybody does it? Think it through and you will see that this is a
stunning indictment of the American left.

To begin with, it is not true that everybody does it. As we noted
yesterday, the formerly mainstream media have spent the past two years
trying to depict the Tea Party as precisely the sort of racist, hateful,
violent political movement that Common Cause appears in the video to be.
That media effort has failed, not for lack of will but for lack of
evidence. If everybody did it, the Tea Party would do it, and if the Tea
Party did it, you would have read about it in the New York Times.

In claiming that everybody does it, Common Cause is committing the
fallacy known as hasty generalization: drawing an overbroad conclusion
based on a statistically insufficient sample. A famous example from
politics is the apocryphal quote attributed to the late Pauline Kael,
film critic of The New Yorker: "I don't understand how Nixon won.
Everybody I know voted for McGovern."

In reality, Kael was more self-aware than that. What she actually said,
as reported by the Times in December 1972, was: "I live in a rather
special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon." But you see
how the fallacy works: By her own account, Kael led a parochial life,
seldom venturing outside her "special world." If she _had_ mistaken her
circle of acquaintances for a representative sample of Americans, she
would have been mystified by the election outcome.

It seems clear that the people who wrote and approved this press
release--who are anonymous except for Mary Boyle, vice president for
communications, who is listed as "contact"--also live in a rather
special world. They are basing their generalities about "anyone who has
ever attended a public event" and "every political gathering" on their
own experience.

That is to say, the monstrousness seen at the Common Cause rally is
within the typical range of behavior _at the sort of political
gatherings that Common Cause executives attend_. That is much more
damning of the left than the Common Cause rally taken in isolation.

There is another rich irony to Common Cause's "condemnation" of its
rally's participants. The purpose of the event was "to call public
attention to the political power of . . . corporations, their focus on
expanding that power, and the dangers it presents to our democracy."
Common Cause is targeting Justices Scalia and Thomas because they voted
with the majority in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the
2010 decision that--as Common Cause put it in a fund-raising appeal last
year--"inexplicably gave corporations the same rights as individuals" to
engage in political speech.

(As an aside, if the guys at Common Cause think Citizens United is
inexplicable, perhaps they failed to read the court's carefully reasoned
57-page opinion. It was written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, whom Common
Cause "inexplicably" does not target in its hate campaign.)

Common Cause's position is that only individuals, not corporations, have
the right to free speech. So what is Common Cause? As we noted above,
its website describes it as a "grassroots organization." But that term
has no legal meaning. As Common Cause's "Frequently Asked Questions"
explains, the group is a "a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, tax exempt
organization." A corporation, just like Citizens United.

So here we have a corporation that advertises itself as a "grassroots
organization" while exercising its First Amendment rights to advance the
position that corporations do not have First Amendment rights, only
individuals do. Some individuals, participating in the corporation's
"grassroots" rally, exercise their First Amendment rights in ways that
harm the corporation's image. The corporation responds by exercising its
First Amendment rights to denounce those individuals for having
exercised their First Amendment rights. And it does so in its capacity
as a faceless corporation, by issuing a statement for which no
individual--not even CEO Bob Edgar--takes responsibility.

For the sake of truth in advertising, Common Cause should change its
name to Hypocrisy Hub.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Barb May
2011-02-07 19:28:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
The website of Common Cause describes the group as "a nonpartisan,
grassroots organization dedicated to restoring the core values of
American democracy, reinventing an open, honest and accountable
government that serves the public interest, and empowering ordinary
people to make their voices heard in the political process."
Common Cause has nothing to do with The Civility Project.
Nonresponse noted.
You falsely claim I didn't respond, but as I correctly pointed out, your
attempt to link the Civility Project with Common Cause was totally
bogus. There was nothing more to say.

Then you have the audacity to post yet another Taranto column without
any attribution.

As usual, Taranto attempts to make a mountain out of a molehill in
pursuit of his right-wing, corporate-fellating agenda. He lied about the
Common Cause press release which stated in unambiguous terms, "We
condemn bigotry and hate speech in every form, even when it comes from
those who fancy themselves as our friends." Taranto's characterization
of the press release, "Everybody does it?" is an outrageous lie. Common
Cause correctly pointed out that most large public gatherings attract
kooks. That is a statement of fact and NOT equivalent in any way to
saying "Everybody does it."

Taranto is a serial liar and you're his butt boy.
--
Barb
Tom
2011-02-24 18:47:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
   * will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
   * will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
   * will stand against incivility when I see it.
The website of Common Cause describes the group as "a nonpartisan,
grassroots organization dedicated to restoring the core values of
American democracy, reinventing an open, honest and accountable
government that serves the public interest, and empowering ordinary
people to make their voices heard in the political process."
Common Cause has nothing to do with The Civility Project.
Nonresponse noted.
You falsely claim I didn't respond, but as I correctly pointed out, your
attempt to link the Civility Project with Common Cause was totally
bogus. There was nothing more to say.
Then you have the audacity to post yet another Taranto column without
any attribution.
As usual, Taranto attempts to make a mountain out of a molehill in
pursuit of his right-wing, corporate-fellating agenda. He lied about the
Common Cause press release which stated in unambiguous terms, "We
condemn bigotry and hate speech in every form, even when it comes from
those who fancy themselves as our friends." Taranto's characterization
of the press release, "Everybody does it?" is an outrageous lie. Common
Cause correctly pointed out that most large public gatherings attract
kooks. That is a statement of fact and NOT equivalent in any way to
saying "Everybody does it."
Taranto is a serial liar and you're his butt boy.
--
Barb
Douchey Ubi goes through life with his fingers permanently in his ears
all the while saying na na na na na over and over.

It makes one wonder what he uses to type.

Tom
Not Sure
2011-02-25 00:03:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tom
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
   * will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
   * will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
   * will stand against incivility when I see it.
The website of Common Cause describes the group as "a nonpartisan,
grassroots organization dedicated to restoring the core values of
American democracy, reinventing an open, honest and accountable
government that serves the public interest, and empowering ordinary
people to make their voices heard in the political process."
Common Cause has nothing to do with The Civility Project.
Nonresponse noted.
You falsely claim I didn't respond, but as I correctly pointed out, your
attempt to link the Civility Project with Common Cause was totally
bogus. There was nothing more to say.
Then you have the audacity to post yet another Taranto column without
any attribution.
As usual, Taranto attempts to make a mountain out of a molehill in
pursuit of his right-wing, corporate-fellating agenda. He lied about the
Common Cause press release which stated in unambiguous terms, "We
condemn bigotry and hate speech in every form, even when it comes from
those who fancy themselves as our friends." Taranto's characterization
of the press release, "Everybody does it?" is an outrageous lie. Common
Cause correctly pointed out that most large public gatherings attract
kooks. That is a statement of fact and NOT equivalent in any way to
saying "Everybody does it."
Taranto is a serial liar and you're his butt boy.
--
Barb
Douchey Ubi goes through life with his fingers permanently in his ears
all the while saying na na na na na over and over.
It makes one wonder what he uses to type.
Tom
Wow, two cocksucks in this thread alone, "Tom." Way to keep your cover
going :)
Tom
2011-02-25 21:35:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Not Sure
Post by Tom
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
   * will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
   * will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
   * will stand against incivility when I see it.
The website of Common Cause describes the group as "a nonpartisan,
grassroots organization dedicated to restoring the core values of
American democracy, reinventing an open, honest and accountable
government that serves the public interest, and empowering ordinary
people to make their voices heard in the political process."
Common Cause has nothing to do with The Civility Project.
Nonresponse noted.
You falsely claim I didn't respond, but as I correctly pointed out, your
attempt to link the Civility Project with Common Cause was totally
bogus. There was nothing more to say.
Then you have the audacity to post yet another Taranto column without
any attribution.
As usual, Taranto attempts to make a mountain out of a molehill in
pursuit of his right-wing, corporate-fellating agenda. He lied about the
Common Cause press release which stated in unambiguous terms, "We
condemn bigotry and hate speech in every form, even when it comes from
those who fancy themselves as our friends." Taranto's characterization
of the press release, "Everybody does it?" is an outrageous lie. Common
Cause correctly pointed out that most large public gatherings attract
kooks. That is a statement of fact and NOT equivalent in any way to
saying "Everybody does it."
Taranto is a serial liar and you're his butt boy.
--
Barb
Douchey Ubi goes through life with his fingers permanently in his ears
all the while saying na na na na na over and over.
It makes one wonder what he uses to type.
Tom
Wow, two cocksucks in this thread alone, "Tom." Way to keep your cover
going :)
You're the expert on cocksucking,
omarenofeloniousdouchebagfredsnotsureofhisgenderpreference:

http://discharges.org/h/1106/

Especially, your own.

Tom
Ubiquitous
2011-02-27 13:41:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Common Cause has nothing to do with The Civility Project.
Common Cause provides some levity with a press release that begins as
follows:

Common Cause isn't expert on the fiscal challenges facing
Wisconsin or how the state should answer them. But it's
clear that the course chosen by Gov. Scott Walker, a bill
to end long-held collective bargaining rights for government
employees, reflects the political agenda of one his most
generous campaign contributors.

"We have no basis for our opinion, but we're going to issue a press
release anyway, because corporations are bad!" These guys are college
know-it-all hippies [1]: "You're playing into the corporate game! See,
the corporations are trying to turn you into little Eichmanns so that
they can make money. . . . The corporations run the entire world."

[1]: http://www.southparkstuff.com/season_9/episode_902/epi902script/
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-02-24 02:32:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"The unions should make their voices heard and push back hard," editorializes
the New York Times, one of the few newspapers to support the Wisconsin
antitaxpayer revolt unreservedly. "Push back hard" must be a macro on the
computers over at the Times editorial page, which demanded back in August that
supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque "push back hard" against ordinary
Americans. In the meantime, of course, the Times has delivered many a pious
lecture on the evil of "incivility" in politics.

It's quite striking the way almost every lie the left ever told about the Tea
Party has turned out to be true of the government unionists in Wisconsin and
their supporters:

• Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist signs
likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators. Left-wing journalists are
making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers Toppled a Dictator in Egypt,
but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read the headline of a Washington Post
column by Harold Meyerson last week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a
Madison crowd chanting, "Kill the bill"--which was said to be violent and
invidious a year ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.

• Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison, posted a
video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in support of the
unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting verbatim), "whoever video
taped this has no life and should be shot in the head." Unlike Frances Fox
Piven, Althouse has never advocated violence, but don't expect the Times to
give this the kind of coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received
threatening emails.

• Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake grassroots
movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic National
Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the 2008 Obama
campaign--is playing an active role in organizing protests." A blogger at the
OFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To our allies in the labor movement, to
our brothers and sisters in public work, we stand with you, and we stand
strong." We've also received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry, MOO, we're
working at home today.

• Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a majority in
the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state, taking advantage of the
body's rules to deny the majority a quorum. The Indianapolis Star reports that
Democrats from the Indiana House are employing the same tactic. Even Barack
Obama, when he was an Illinois senator, usually voted "present."

• Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea Party
signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them are teachers!
Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for Negotiatins [sic]." Also, some of the
teachers' tactics--in particular, fraudulently calling in sick and exploiting
other people's children by enlisting them as protesters--seem not only
unethical but calculated to repel the public. One blessing of low standards
for public school teachers is that it ensures many of them are not bright
enough to stage an effective protest.

The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by the
Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.


---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the 21st
century."
tomcervo
2011-02-24 02:36:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
   * will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
   * will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
   * will stand against incivility when I see it.
"The unions should make their voices heard and push back hard," editorializes
the New York Times, one of the few newspapers to support the Wisconsin
antitaxpayer revolt unreservedly. "Push back hard" must be a macro on the
computers over at the Times editorial page, which demanded back in August that
supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque "push back hard" against ordinary
Americans. In the meantime, of course, the Times has delivered many a pious
lecture on the evil of "incivility" in politics.
It's quite striking the way almost every lie the left ever told about the Tea
Party has turned out to be true of the government unionists in Wisconsin and
Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist signs
likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators. Left-wing journalists are
making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers Toppled a Dictator in Egypt,
but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read the headline of a Washington Post
column by Harold Meyerson last week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a
Madison crowd chanting, "Kill the bill"--which was said to be violent and
invidious a year ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.
Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison, posted a
video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in support of the
unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting verbatim), "whoever video
taped this has no life and should be shot in the head." Unlike Frances Fox
Piven, Althouse has never advocated violence, but don't expect the Times to
give this the kind of coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received
threatening emails.
Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake grassroots
movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic National
Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the 2008 Obama
campaign--is playing an active role in organizing protests." A blogger at theOFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To our allies in the labor movement, to
our brothers and sisters in public work, we stand with you, and we stand
strong." We've also received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry, MOO, we're
working at home today.
Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a majority in
the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state, taking advantage of the
body's rules to deny the majority a quorum. The Indianapolis Star reports that
Democrats from the Indiana House are employing the same tactic. Even Barack
Obama, when he was an Illinois senator, usually voted "present."
Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea Party
signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them are teachers!
Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for Negotiatins [sic]." Also, some of the
teachers' tactics--in particular, fraudulently calling in sick and exploiting
other people's children by enlisting them as protesters--seem not only
unethical but calculated to repel the public. One blessing of low standards
for public school teachers is that it ensures many of them are not bright
enough to stage an effective protest.
The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by the
Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.
---  
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the 21st
century."
Non attribution (James Taranto, if the overall sweatiness of the prose
is an indicator) noted.
Get back to us when you can string three sentences of your own
together.
Ubiquitous
2011-02-24 02:54:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tomcervo
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
   * will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
   * will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
   * will stand against incivility when I see it.
"The unions should make their voices heard and push back hard," editorializes
the New York Times, one of the few newspapers to support the Wisconsin
antitaxpayer revolt unreservedly. "Push back hard" must be a macro on the
computers over at the Times editorial page, which demanded back in August that
supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque "push back hard" against ordinary
Americans. In the meantime, of course, the Times has delivered many a pious
lecture on the evil of "incivility" in politics.
It's quite striking the way almost every lie the left ever told about the Tea
Party has turned out to be true of the government unionists in Wisconsin and
Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist signs
likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators. Left-wing journalists are
making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers Toppled a Dictator in Egypt,
but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read the headline of a Washington Post
column by Harold Meyerson last week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a
Madison crowd chanting, "Kill the bill"--which was said to be violent and
invidious a year ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.
Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison, posted a
video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in support of the
unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting verbatim), "whoever video
taped this has no life and should be shot in the head." Unlike Frances Fox
Piven, Althouse has never advocated violence, but don't expect the Times to
give this the kind of coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received
threatening emails.
Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake grassroots
movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic National
Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the 2008 Obama
campaign--is playing an active role in organizing protests." A blogger at
theOFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To our allies in the l
our brothers and sisters in public work, we stand with you, and we stand
strong." We've also received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry, MOO, we're
working at home today.
Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a majority in
the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state, taking advantage of the
body's rules to deny the majority a quorum. The Indianapolis Star reports that
Democrats from the Indiana House are employing the same tactic. Even Barack
Obama, when he was an Illinois senator, usually voted "present."
Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea Party
signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them are teachers!
Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for Negotiatins [sic]." Also, some of the
teachers' tactics--in particular, fraudulently calling in sick and exploiting
other people's children by enlisting them as protesters--seem not only
unethical but calculated to repel the public. One blessing of low standards
for public school teachers is that it ensures many of them are not bright
enough to stage an effective protest.
The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by the
Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.
Non attribution (James Taranto, if the overall sweatiness of the prose
is an indicator) noted.
Strawman noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
tomcervo
2011-02-24 03:35:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tomcervo
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"The unions should make their voices heard and push back hard," editorializes
the New York Times, one of the few newspapers to support the Wisconsin
antitaxpayer revolt unreservedly. "Push back hard" must be a macro on the
computers over at the Times editorial page, which demanded back in August that
supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque "push back hard" against ordinary
Americans. In the meantime, of course, the Times has delivered many a pious
lecture on the evil of "incivility" in politics.
It's quite striking the way almost every lie the left ever told about the Tea
Party has turned out to be true of the government unionists in Wisconsin and
Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist signs
likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators. Left-wing journalists are
making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers Toppled a Dictator in Egypt,
but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read the headline of a Washington Post
column by Harold Meyerson last week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a
Madison crowd chanting, "Kill the bill"--which was said to be violent and
invidious a year ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.
Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison, posted a
video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in support of the
unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting verbatim), "whoever video
taped this has no life and should be shot in the head." Unlike Frances Fox
Piven, Althouse has never advocated violence, but don't expect the Times to
give this the kind of coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received
threatening emails.
Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake grassroots
movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic National
Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the 2008 Obama
campaign--is playing an active role in organizing protests." A blogger at
theOFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To our allies in the l
our brothers and sisters in public work, we stand with you, and we stand
strong." We've also received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry, MOO, we're
working at home today.
Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a majority in
the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state, taking advantage of the
body's rules to deny the majority a quorum. The Indianapolis Star reports that
Democrats from the Indiana House are employing the same tactic. Even Barack
Obama, when he was an Illinois senator, usually voted "present."
Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea Party
signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them are teachers!
Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for Negotiatins [sic]." Also, some of the
teachers' tactics--in particular, fraudulently calling in sick and exploiting
other people's children by enlisting them as protesters--seem not only
unethical but calculated to repel the public. One blessing of low standards
for public school teachers is that it ensures many of them are not bright
enough to stage an effective protest.
The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by the
Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.
Non attribution (James Taranto, if the overall sweatiness of the prose
is an indicator) noted.
Strawman noted.  Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
That's one sentence short. Maybe you could tell us why you don't like
to credit a source you so clearly admire, unless, incredibly, you
actually think people will believe YOU wrote that?
Get back to us when you have more than a cut'n'paste and a macro in
response.
Not Sure
2011-02-24 20:45:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tomcervo
Post by tomcervo
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"The unions should make their voices heard and push back hard," editorializes
the New York Times, one of the few newspapers to support the Wisconsin
antitaxpayer revolt unreservedly. "Push back hard" must be a macro on the
computers over at the Times editorial page, which demanded back in August that
supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque "push back hard" against ordinary
Americans. In the meantime, of course, the Times has delivered many a pious
lecture on the evil of "incivility" in politics.
It's quite striking the way almost every lie the left ever told about the Tea
Party has turned out to be true of the government unionists in Wisconsin and
Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist signs
likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators. Left-wing journalists are
making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers Toppled a Dictator in Egypt,
but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read the headline of a Washington Post
column by Harold Meyerson last week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a
Madison crowd chanting, "Kill the bill"--which was said to be violent and
invidious a year ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.
Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison, posted a
video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in support of the
unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting verbatim), "whoever video
taped this has no life and should be shot in the head." Unlike Frances Fox
Piven, Althouse has never advocated violence, but don't expect the Times to
give this the kind of coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received
threatening emails.
Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake grassroots
movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic National
Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the 2008 Obama
campaign--is playing an active role in organizing protests." A blogger at
theOFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To our allies in the l
our brothers and sisters in public work, we stand with you, and we stand
strong." We've also received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry, MOO, we're
working at home today.
Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a majority in
the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state, taking advantage of the
body's rules to deny the majority a quorum. The Indianapolis Star reports that
Democrats from the Indiana House are employing the same tactic. Even Barack
Obama, when he was an Illinois senator, usually voted "present."
Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea Party
signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them are teachers!
Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for Negotiatins [sic]." Also, some of the
teachers' tactics--in particular, fraudulently calling in sick and exploiting
other people's children by enlisting them as protesters--seem not only
unethical but calculated to repel the public. One blessing of low standards
for public school teachers is that it ensures many of them are not bright
enough to stage an effective protest.
The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by the
Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.
Non attribution (James Taranto, if the overall sweatiness of the prose
is an indicator) noted.
Strawman noted.  Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
That's one sentence short. Maybe you could tell us why you don't like
to credit a source you so clearly admire, unless, incredibly, you
actually think people will believe YOU wrote that?
Too scared to address what was said, eh? Maybe you should go on a
lengthy rant about how the New York Times is respected, joke :)
Post by tomcervo
Get back to us when you have more than a cut'n'paste and a macro in
response.
Tom
2011-02-24 18:48:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tomcervo
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"The unions should make their voices heard and push back hard," editorializes
the New York Times, one of the few newspapers to support the Wisconsin
antitaxpayer revolt unreservedly. "Push back hard" must be a macro on the
computers over at the Times editorial page, which demanded back in August that
supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque "push back hard" against ordinary
Americans. In the meantime, of course, the Times has delivered many a pious
lecture on the evil of "incivility" in politics.
It's quite striking the way almost every lie the left ever told about the Tea
Party has turned out to be true of the government unionists in Wisconsin and
Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist signs
likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators. Left-wing journalists are
making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers Toppled a Dictator in Egypt,
but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read the headline of a Washington Post
column by Harold Meyerson last week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a
Madison crowd chanting, "Kill the bill"--which was said to be violent and
invidious a year ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.
Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison, posted a
video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in support of the
unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting verbatim), "whoever video
taped this has no life and should be shot in the head." Unlike Frances Fox
Piven, Althouse has never advocated violence, but don't expect the Times to
give this the kind of coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received
threatening emails.
Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake grassroots
movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic National
Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the 2008 Obama
campaign--is playing an active role in organizing protests." A blogger at
theOFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To our allies in the l
our brothers and sisters in public work, we stand with you, and we stand
strong." We've also received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry, MOO, we're
working at home today.
Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a majority in
the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state, taking advantage of the
body's rules to deny the majority a quorum. The Indianapolis Star reports that
Democrats from the Indiana House are employing the same tactic. Even Barack
Obama, when he was an Illinois senator, usually voted "present."
Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea Party
signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them are teachers!
Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for Negotiatins [sic]." Also, some of the
teachers' tactics--in particular, fraudulently calling in sick and exploiting
other people's children by enlisting them as protesters--seem not only
unethical but calculated to repel the public. One blessing of low standards
for public school teachers is that it ensures many of them are not bright
enough to stage an effective protest.
The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by the
Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.
Non attribution (James Taranto, if the overall sweatiness of the prose
is an indicator) noted.
Strawman noted.  Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
Douchitude noted. Get back to us when you pull your head from your
ass.

Tom
Dano
2011-02-24 19:41:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Strawman noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
Douchitude noted. Get back to us when you pull your head from your
ass.

Tom

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would anyone give a shit what Ubi posts or thinks?
Tom
2011-02-24 23:52:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tom
Strawman noted.  Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
Douchitude noted. Get back to us when you pull your head from your
ass.
Tom
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would anyone give a shit what Ubi posts or thinks?
Well, I don't really. I just like typing douchitude! ;-)

Tom
Just Plain Nasty
2011-02-24 23:06:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tomcervo
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
   * will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
   * will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
   * will stand against incivility when I see it.
"The unions should make their voices heard and push back hard,"
editorial
izes
Post by Ubiquitous
the New York Times, one of the few newspapers to support the
Wisconsin antitaxpayer revolt unreservedly. "Push back hard" must be
a macro on the computers over at the Times editorial page, which
demanded back in August
that
Post by Ubiquitous
supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque "push back hard" against
ordinary Americans. In the meantime, of course, the Times has
delivered many a pio
us
Post by Ubiquitous
lecture on the evil of "incivility" in politics.
Yadda-yadda-yadda....
Post by tomcervo
Post by Ubiquitous
---  
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of
the 21
st
Post by Ubiquitous
century."
Puhleez! Obama has already proven himself to be FAR worse than Jimmy
Carter. Where have you been the last two years?
Post by tomcervo
Non attribution (James Taranto, if the overall sweatiness of the prose
is an indicator) noted.
Get back to us when you can string three sentences of your own
together.
I have to agree with this one point: if you're going to quote other
people, include the citation, not just the quote. You look like you're
trying to take credit for someone else's work when you post their words
as if they were your own.
--
Just Plain Nasty - Sometimes, the truth hurts.
Barb May
2011-02-24 18:50:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
When will you get it through your pea brain that the civility pledge was
created by a Republican for members of Congress, not the media and not
the general public?
. Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist
signs likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators.
Those signs are plants by far-right agitators.
Left-wing
journalists are making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers
Toppled a Dictator in Egypt, but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read
the headline of a Washington Post column by Harold Meyerson last
week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a Madison crowd chanting,
"Kill the bill"--which was said
Said by whom?
to be violent and invidious a year
ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.
Bullshit.
. Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison,
posted a video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in
support of the unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting
verbatim), "whoever video taped this has no life and should be shot
in the head." Unlike Frances Fox Piven, Althouse has never advocated
violence, but don't expect the Times to give this the kind of
coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received threatening
emails.
Threatening emails are far more serious than what some boob wrote in the
YouTube comments. You want to talk about threatening comments? Take a
look at the comments section of any right-wing blog or even Yahoo news
stories. There's a mountain of violent rhetoric posted every day by
right-wingers. But let's ignore all that and point to one comment on
YouTube so we can make yet another false equivalency argument.
. Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake
grassroots movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic
National Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the
2008 Obama campaign--is playing an active role in organizing
protests." A blogger at the OFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To
our allies in the labor movement, to our brothers and sisters in
public work, we stand with you, and we stand strong."
Ooooh. Yeah, saying "we stand with you" -- that's an "active" role.
We've also
received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry,
MOO, we're working at home today.
MoveOn holding a rally in support of Wisconsin teachers is not an
example of "Partisan AstroTurf."

Unlike the Teabaggers, the union protests in Wisconsin aren't being
bankrolled by right-wing lobbyists, think tanks and partisan hacks.
. Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a
majority in the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state,
taking advantage of the body's rules to deny the majority a quorum.
The Indianapolis Star reports that Democrats from the Indiana House
are employing the same tactic. Even Barack Obama, when he was an
Illinois senator, usually voted "present."
Do they also have fillibuster rules in Wisconsin that allow a minority
to kill a bill that the majority wants? That was how the Republicans in
the US Congress refused to accept election results.
. Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea
Party signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them
are teachers! Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman
holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for
Negotiatins [sic]."
Oooooh. One photo of a misspelled sign. Yeah that proves that all
teachers are just as stupid as teabaggers -- not.
The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by
the Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.
And if you don't see it you'll manfacture it, just like you did with the
bogus signs, and the bogus YouTube "threat"
--
Barb
Not Sure
2011-02-24 20:47:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
   * will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
   * will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
   * will stand against incivility when I see it.
When will you get it through your pea brain that the civility pledge was
created by a Republican for members of Congress, not the media and not
the general public?
. Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist
signs likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators.
Those signs are plants by far-right agitators.
You'd think for someone who lies so much, you'd be better at it.
Sorry, fatass :)
Post by Barb May
Left-wing
journalists are making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers
Toppled a Dictator in Egypt, but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read
the headline of a Washington Post column by Harold Meyerson last
week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a Madison crowd chanting,
"Kill the bill"--which was said
Said by whom?
to be violent and invidious a year
ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.
Bullshit.
. Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison,
posted a video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in
support of the unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting
verbatim), "whoever video taped this has no life and should be shot
in the head." Unlike Frances Fox Piven, Althouse has never advocated
violence, but don't expect the Times to give this the kind of
coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received threatening
emails.
Threatening emails are far more serious than what some boob wrote in the
YouTube comments. You want to talk about threatening comments? Take a
look at the comments section of any right-wing blog or even Yahoo news
stories. There's a mountain of violent rhetoric posted every day by
right-wingers. But let's ignore all that and point to one comment on
YouTube so we can make yet another false equivalency argument.
. Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake
grassroots movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic
National Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the
2008 Obama campaign--is playing an active role in organizing
protests." A blogger at the OFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To
our allies in the labor movement, to our brothers and sisters in
public work, we stand with you, and we stand strong."
Ooooh. Yeah, saying "we stand with you" -- that's an "active" role.
We've also
received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry,
MOO, we're working at home today.
MoveOn holding a rally in support of Wisconsin teachers is not an
example of "Partisan AstroTurf."
Unlike the Teabaggers, the union protests in Wisconsin aren't being
bankrolled by right-wing lobbyists, think tanks and partisan hacks.
. Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a
majority in the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state,
taking advantage of the body's rules to deny the majority a quorum.
The Indianapolis Star reports that Democrats from the Indiana House
are employing the same tactic. Even Barack Obama, when he was an
Illinois senator, usually voted "present."
Do they also have fillibuster rules in Wisconsin that allow a minority
to kill a bill that the majority wants? That was how the Republicans in
the US Congress refused to accept election results.
. Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea
Party signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them
are teachers! Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman
holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for
Negotiatins [sic]."
Oooooh. One photo of a misspelled sign. Yeah that proves that all
teachers are just as stupid as teabaggers -- not.
 > The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by
the Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.
And if you don't see it you'll manfacture it, just like you did with the
bogus signs, and the bogus YouTube "threat"
--
Barb
Rhino
2011-02-24 22:55:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
When will you get it through your pea brain that the civility pledge was
created by a Republican for members of Congress, not the media and not
the general public?
So the Civility Pledge is a good idea for Congress but a bad idea for the
media and the rest of the public?
Post by Barb May
. Extreme rhetoric. The Wisconsin Republican Party has produced what
Mediaite.org calls an "incredibly effective" video juxtaposing liberal
complaints about allegedly extremist Tea Party rhetoric with unionist
signs likening Gov. Walker to Hitler and other dictators.
Those signs are plants by far-right agitators.
Please provide just one shred of proof for that allegation....

And how did those demonstrators wind up carrying those Walker=Hitler
signs? Guns to their heads perhaps?
Post by Barb May
Left-wing
journalists are making similar invidious comparisons: "Workers
Toppled a Dictator in Egypt, but Might Be Silenced in Wisconsin" read
the headline of a Washington Post column by Harold Meyerson last
week. The other day on CNN we saw scenes of a Madison crowd chanting,
"Kill the bill"--which was said
Said by whom?
to be violent and invidious a year
ago, when "the bill" was ObamaCare.
Bullshit.
In other words, it's true. Whenever you hear something you don't like
because it "hurts the cause", you dismiss it as bullshit.
Post by Barb May
. Violence. Blogress Ann Althouse, a state employee based in Madison,
posted a video of municipal salt trucks blowing their horns in
support of the unionists. A YouTube commenter responded (quoting
verbatim), "whoever video taped this has no life and should be shot
in the head." Unlike Frances Fox Piven, Althouse has never advocated
violence, but don't expect the Times to give this the kind of
coverage it gave Piven's claims that she had received threatening
emails.
Threatening emails are far more serious than what some boob wrote in the
YouTube comments. You want to talk about threatening comments? Take a
look at the comments section of any right-wing blog or even Yahoo news
stories. There's a mountain of violent rhetoric posted every day by
right-wingers. But let's ignore all that and point to one comment on
YouTube so we can make yet another false equivalency argument.
. Partisan AstroTurf. That's the Beltway term referring to a fake
grassroots movement. Politico reported last week that "the Democratic
National Committee's Organizing for America arm--the remnant of the
2008 Obama campaign--is playing an active role in organizing
protests." A blogger at the OFA website, BarackObama.com, writes: "To
our allies in the labor movement, to our brothers and sisters in
public work, we stand with you, and we stand strong."
Ooooh. Yeah, saying "we stand with you" -- that's an "active" role.
We've also
received emails from MoveOn.org, which says it's holding a
pro-unionist rally outside our offices later this afternoon. Sorry,
MOO, we're working at home today.
MoveOn holding a rally in support of Wisconsin teachers is not an
example of "Partisan AstroTurf."
Unlike the Teabaggers, the union protests in Wisconsin aren't being
bankrolled by right-wing lobbyists, think tanks and partisan hacks.
Here's another opportuntity to provide proof for your allegations.

And congratulations on using Teabaggers rather than the proper term, Tea
Party supporters. You've just offended all the gay people that actually
practice tea bagging. Strange, given the Left's normal obsession with
political correctness and NOT offending gays. I guess sensitivity has
certain limits, huh?
Post by Barb May
. Refusal to accept election results. Although Republicans have a
majority in the Wisconsin Senate, Democrats have fled the state,
taking advantage of the body's rules to deny the majority a quorum.
The Indianapolis Star reports that Democrats from the Indiana House
are employing the same tactic. Even Barack Obama, when he was an
Illinois senator, usually voted "present."
Do they also have fillibuster rules in Wisconsin that allow a minority
to kill a bill that the majority wants? That was how the Republicans in
the US Congress refused to accept election results.
. Stupidity. Remember "Teabonics," a photo album of misspelled Tea
Party signs? The unionists can't spell any better--and some of them
are teachers! Althouse got one photo of what we think is a woman
holding a sign that reads "
'Open for business' = Closed for
Negotiatins [sic]."
Oooooh. One photo of a misspelled sign. Yeah that proves that all
teachers are just as stupid as teabaggers -- not.
The one exception: So far we haven't seen any evidence of racism by
the Wisconsin unionists. But we're watching for it.
And if you don't see it you'll manfacture it, just like you did with the
bogus signs, and the bogus YouTube "threat"
Wait a minute, you just said that YouTube threat was there. Now you're
saying it's bogus. Which is it? And where is your proof that the signs
were bogus?

And how about those doctors who wrote sick notes for the union
demonstrators who were out demonstrating? Nice observance of professional
ethics, don't you agree?
--
Rhino
Ubiquitous
2011-02-24 10:43:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
The rhetoric around Wisconsin's government labor dispute is getting more
violent. NHJournal.com reports that Rep. Michael Capuano, a Massachusetts
Democrat, said this yesterday at a Boston "solidarity" rally: "I'm proud to be
here with people who understand that it's more than just sending an email to
get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and
get a little bloody when necessary."

The Boston Globe reports that the union crowd responded to Capuano's
exhortation with "cheers, whistles and applause" and that Capuano, issued a
written semiapology: "I strongly believe in standing up for worker rights and
my passion for preserving those rights may have gotten the best of me
yesterday in an unscripted speech. I wish I had used different language to
express my passion and I regret my choice of words."

It will not surprise you to learn that Capuano is another "civility"
hypocrite. On Jan. 9, the day after a madman in Tucson, Ariz., got a little
bloody, the Globe quoted him: "What the hell is going on? There's always some
degree of tension in politics; everybody knows the last couple of years
there's been an intentional increase in the degree of heat in political
discourse. . . . If nothing else good comes out of this, I'm hoping it causes
people to reconsider how they deal with things."

As Michael Barone notes, public-sector unions "are a mechanism by which every
taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party," Capuano's party:

Unions, most of whose members are public employees, gave Democrats
some $400 million in the 2008 election cycle. The American Federation
of State, County and Municipal Employees, the biggest public employee
union, gave Democrats $90 million in the 2010 cycle.

Follow the money, Washington reporters like to say. The money in
this case comes from taxpayers, present and future, who are the
source of every penny of dues paid to public employee unions, who
in turn spend much of that money on politics, almost all of it
for Democrats.

Capuano's rhetoric at yesterday's rally was not just violent but
authoritarian. He urged _government employees_ to "get a little bloody"--to
commit violent acts against citizens, as if this were Libya. As we noted
yesterday, public sector "collective bargaining," in which public officials
"negotiate" with the unions that helped elect them, is essentially a
conspiracy to steal money from taxpayers. Capuano, it seems, would like to
escalate that to armed robbery


---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the 21st
century."
Barb May
2011-02-24 18:26:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
The rhetoric around Wisconsin's government labor dispute is getting
more violent. NHJournal.com reports that Rep. Michael Capuano, a
Massachusetts Democrat, said this yesterday at a Boston "solidarity"
rally: "I'm proud to be here with people who understand that it's
more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and
awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody
when necessary."
"Get a little bloody" implies putting yourself in a place where you may
be victimized. It doesn't mean victimizing others.
Post by Ubiquitous
As Michael Barone notes, public-sector unions "are a mechanism by
which every taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party,"
By that logic big corporations owned by right-wingers are a mechanism by
which every consumer is forced to fund the Republican Party.
--
Barb
Just Plain Nasty
2011-02-24 22:37:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
The rhetoric around Wisconsin's government labor dispute is getting
more violent. NHJournal.com reports that Rep. Michael Capuano, a
Massachusetts Democrat, said this yesterday at a Boston "solidarity"
rally: "I'm proud to be here with people who understand that it's
more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and
awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody
when necessary."
"Get a little bloody" implies putting yourself in a place where you may
be victimized. It doesn't mean victimizing others.
Riiiightt.... Because our beloved union members would NEVER EVER initiate
a little violence themselves. They are only ever VICTIMS of Right Wing
Nazi types.
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
As Michael Barone notes, public-sector unions "are a mechanism by
which every taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party,"
By that logic big corporations owned by right-wingers are a mechanism by
which every consumer is forced to fund the Republican Party.
Uh, no, because consumers are free to boycott a big corporation that they
don't like. For instance, if you don't want to buy a Ford because you
ahve problems with their ethics, you can buy a Honda or Volkswagen or
whatever. But there are no alternate state governments within a given
state. You can't just go to an alternate DMV if you don't like the way
your state treats you when you they renew your licence.
--
Just Plain Nasty - Sometimes, the truth hurts.
Barb May
2011-02-25 19:07:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Just Plain Nasty
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
The rhetoric around Wisconsin's government labor dispute is getting
more violent. NHJournal.com reports that Rep. Michael Capuano, a
Massachusetts Democrat, said this yesterday at a Boston "solidarity"
rally: "I'm proud to be here with people who understand that it's
more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and
awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody
when necessary."
"Get a little bloody" implies putting yourself in a place where you
may be victimized. It doesn't mean victimizing others.
Riiiightt.... Because our beloved union members would NEVER EVER
initiate a little violence themselves. They are only ever VICTIMS of
Right Wing Nazi types.
I'm taking the statement at face value. If you want to claim the
statement implies the opposite of its face value you'll need some proof.
Post by Just Plain Nasty
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
As Michael Barone notes, public-sector unions "are a mechanism by
which every taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party,"
By that logic big corporations owned by right-wingers are a
mechanism by which every consumer is forced to fund the Republican
Party.
Uh, no, because consumers are free to boycott a big corporation that
they don't like. For instance, if you don't want to buy a Ford
because you ahve problems with their ethics, you can buy a Honda or
Volkswagen or whatever. But there are no alternate state governments
within a given state. You can't just go to an alternate DMV if you
don't like the way your state treats you when you they renew your
licence.
There are no alternatives to the oil companies if you want to drive and
no alternatives to Big Pharma if you need to take life-saving medicines,
and there is no alternative to using natural gas unless you replace all
of your appliances and stop using all other electricty. And those are
just three examples of industries where there is no real choice and
where your money goes to support primarily one political party

It's a lot easier to move to another state or influence a state
government than it is to go without gas, medicine and electricity
forever.
--
Barb
Ubiquitous
2011-02-28 10:12:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
While reporting outside the Wisconsin state capital, FOX News
correspondent Mike Tobin is struck by a pro-union protester.
The demonstrators were chanting "FOX News lies."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/02/27/fox_news_correspondent_gets_hit_during_live_broadcast_from_wisconsin.html
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Tom
2011-02-28 15:44:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
   * will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
   * will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
   * will stand against incivility when I see it.
While reporting outside the Wisconsin state capital, FOX News
correspondent Mike Tobin is struck by a pro-union protester.
The demonstrators were chanting "FOX News lies."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/02/27/fox_news_correspond...
LOL! That's laughable.

He is stating as fact why the protesters are shoving their signs in
front of the camera, whereas any reputable reporter would ask the
protesters why they are placing their signs in front of the cameras.
He's making himself the story.

BTW, who him? What was he or she wearing? Got no answer? Are we to
take his word that an alleged assault took place off camera? And if he
was assaulted, why didn't he call the police.

Nice try... unfamiliarity with reality noted. Get back to us when you
have some facts.

Tom
Ubiquitous
2011-03-02 10:38:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
The Boston Herald reports on more martial rhetoric from Bay State
officials:

Politicians and taxpayer advocates blasted Gov. Deval
Patrick's labor czar yesterday for attending a pro-union
rally and declaring "war" on Wis. Gov. Scott Walker's
collective bargaining crackdown--saying the administration's
open union support doesn't serve taxpayers' interests. . . .

Patrick officials scrambled to distance themselves yesterday
from comments by state Department of Labor chief George Noel,
who told the crowd at a union rally Saturday: "Make no mistake
about it. We are at war."

It's not a literal war, like the one Muammar Gadhafi is waging against
Libyans, but it is worth noting that some government officials see
themselves as being engaged in combat against taxpayers and on behalf of
unions representing government employees.

Back in Wisconsin, Oshkosh's Northwestern reports that the local
Democratic assemblyman was forced to apologize "for comments he made on
the floor of the Assembly following a vote on a contentious budget
repair bill":

Rep. Gordon Hintz, D-Oshkosh, called Rep. Michelle Litjens,
R-Winneconne, Monday morning to apologize for his comments
that Litjens described as containing an obscenity and the
words "you're dead." Last week, he accepted responsibility
for being issued an ordinance violation for visiting a
massage parlor in Appleton that was the subject of a
prostitution sting.

Milwaukee radio host Charlie Sykes reported that Hintz told Litjens,
"You're f---ing dead."

Remember back in January when liberals kept telling us how much they
deplore "violent" and "eliminationst" rhetoric? Neither do they.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-03-02 10:38:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
The Boston Herald reports on more martial rhetoric from Bay State
officials:

Politicians and taxpayer advocates blasted Gov. Deval
Patrick's labor czar yesterday for attending a pro-union
rally and declaring "war" on Wis. Gov. Scott Walker's
collective bargaining crackdown--saying the administration's
open union support doesn't serve taxpayers' interests. . . .

Patrick officials scrambled to distance themselves yesterday
from comments by state Department of Labor chief George Noel,
who told the crowd at a union rally Saturday: "Make no mistake
about it. We are at war."

It's not a literal war, like the one Muammar Gadhafi is waging against
Libyans, but it is worth noting that some government officials see
themselves as being engaged in combat against taxpayers and on behalf of
unions representing government employees.

Back in Wisconsin, Oshkosh's Northwestern reports that the local
Democratic assemblyman was forced to apologize "for comments he made on
the floor of the Assembly following a vote on a contentious budget
repair bill":

Rep. Gordon Hintz, D-Oshkosh, called Rep. Michelle Litjens,
R-Winneconne, Monday morning to apologize for his comments
that Litjens described as containing an obscenity and the
words "you're dead." Last week, he accepted responsibility
for being issued an ordinance violation for visiting a
massage parlor in Appleton that was the subject of a
prostitution sting.

Milwaukee radio host Charlie Sykes reported that Hintz told Litjens,
"You're f---ing dead."

Remember back in January when liberals kept telling us how much they
deplore "violent" and "eliminationst" rhetoric? Neither do they.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-03-02 21:36:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Blogress Ann Althouse reports that the public-sector union protesters in
Madison, Wis., are becoming increasingly violent and unruly:

As the protest drags on and protesters are sleep-deprived
and frustrated and tired of nothing happening but standing
around chanting and listening to drum-beating for hours on
end, logic and proportion is flopping away. There was some
serious aggression yesterday.

You saw [Althouse's husband, Laurence] Meade's video where 2
over-aggressive protesters interrogated a couple of nice ladies
who drove into Madison just to stand quietly, in the sea of
Walker-haters, and hold their pro-Walker signs. In the video,
you can hear that the 2 protesters are not making that much
sense, and when Meade tries to mediate--meadeate--for them,
other protesters in the area close in on Meade.

There's very tense confrontation, and it flips into paranoia
and incoherence. At 4:35, you hear a woman say, "Are you a
plant?" At 4:57: "I think we know you're a Walker plant?" At
5:00: "You [are a Walker plant] on this gathering and we can
tell." At 5:17, a large man barges into Meade and grabs the
Flip camera, and actually gets it out of Meade's hand. No one
in the crowd does anything to help Meade in this assault, and
Meade grabs the man's arm and wrests the camera out of his
hand. This man says "Get your hands off me," as if he's a
victim. After he assaulted Meade, he acts like he's the
peacemaker and says--referring to Meade and the 2 pro-Walker
women--"They are fools and idiots and just ignore them." He
continues to bump his large body into Meade as he's saying
that. A woman says, "These are Walker plants." . . .

But he's not a plant. He's a human being. An individual human
being. And so are all the protesters, but I fear they are
losing their grip on that reality.

Watching the events in Wisconsin, a lot of people have to be wondering why
Gov. Scott Walker doesn't just order police to clear out the capitol, which
these protesters have been occupying. The answer may be that Walker is
engaging in Gandhi-style nonviolent resistance, waiting out his opponents and
giving the public an opportunity to see their true colors.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Barb May
2011-03-02 22:05:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Blogress Ann Althouse reports that the public-sector union protesters
As the protest drags on and protesters are sleep-deprived
and frustrated and tired of nothing happening but standing
around chanting and listening to drum-beating for hours on
end, logic and proportion is flopping away. There was some
serious aggression yesterday.
You saw [Althouse's husband, Laurence] Meade's video where 2
over-aggressive protesters interrogated a couple of nice ladies
who drove into Madison just to stand quietly, in the sea of
Walker-haters, and hold their pro-Walker signs. In the video,
you can hear that the 2 protesters are not making that much
sense, and when Meade tries to mediate--meadeate--for them,
other protesters in the area close in on Meade.
There's very tense confrontation, and it flips into paranoia
and incoherence. At 4:35, you hear a woman say, "Are you a
plant?" At 4:57: "I think we know you're a Walker plant?" At
5:00: "You [are a Walker plant] on this gathering and we can
tell." At 5:17, a large man barges into Meade and grabs the
Flip camera, and actually gets it out of Meade's hand. No one
in the crowd does anything to help Meade in this assault, and
Meade grabs the man's arm and wrests the camera out of his
hand. This man says "Get your hands off me," as if he's a
victim. After he assaulted Meade, he acts like he's the
peacemaker and says--referring to Meade and the 2 pro-Walker
women--"They are fools and idiots and just ignore them." He
continues to bump his large body into Meade as he's saying
that. A woman says, "These are Walker plants." . . .
But he's not a plant. He's a human being. An individual human
being. And so are all the protesters, but I fear they are
losing their grip on that reality.
Althouse sent her husband into the middle of an anti-Walker protest with
the intention of stirring up trouble so it could be videotaped. There
was no "tense confrontation" "paranoia" or "incoherence." The two women
were asked why they were there and what they hoped to accomplish. They
were not subjected to any ill treatment. The camera was not "grabbed" or
taken away from Meade, but it was pushed away when it was put too close
to someone's face, invading their space. Meade was not "assaulted" and
he continued videotaping the entire time.
Post by Ubiquitous
Watching the events in Wisconsin, a lot of people have to be
wondering why Gov. Scott Walker doesn't just order police to clear
out the capitol, which these protesters have been occupying. The
answer may be that Walker is engaging in Gandhi-style nonviolent
resistance, waiting out his opponents and giving the public an
opportunity to see their true colors.
We're seeing once again the "true colors" of the right-wing propaganda
machine.
--
Barb
Ubiquitous
2011-03-10 17:15:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Death threats against Republicans...

http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/117732923.html

MADISON - The State Department of Justice confirms that it is investigating
several death threats against a number of lawmakers in response to the
legislature's move to strip employees of many collective bargaining rights.

Among the threats the Justice Department is investigationg is one that was
emailed to Republican Senators Wednesday night. Newsradio 620 WTMJ has
obtained that email.

The following is the unedited email:

Please put your things in order because you will be killed and your familes
will also be killed due to your actions in the last 8 weeks. Please explain
to them that this is because if we get rid of you and your families then it
will save the rights of 300,000 people and also be able to close the deficit
that you have created. I hope you have a good time in hell. Read below for
more information on possible scenarios in which you will die.

WE want to make this perfectly clear. Because of your actions today and in
the past couple of weeks I and the group of people that are working with me
have decided that we've had enough. We feel that you and the people that
support the dictator have to die. We have tried many other ways of dealing
with your corruption but you have taken things too far and we will not stand
for it any longer. So, this is how it's going to happen: I as well as many
others know where you and your family live, it's a matter of public records.
We have all planned to assult you by arriving at your house and putting a
nice little bullet in your head. However, we decided that we wouldn't leave
it there. We also have decided that this may not be enough to send the
message to you since you are so "high" on Koch and have decided that you are
now going to single handedly make this a dictatorship instead of a
demorcratic process. So we have also built several bombs that we have placed
in various locations around the areas in which we know that you frequent.
This includes, your house, your car, the state capitol, and well I won't
tell you all of them because that's just no fun. Since we know that you are
not smart enough to figure out why this is happening to you we have decided
to make it perfectly clear to you. If you and your goonies feel that it's
necessary to strip the rights of 300,000 people and ruin their lives, making
them unable to feed, clothe, and provide the necessities to their families
and themselves then We Will "get rid of" (in which I mean kill) you. Please
understand that this does not include the heroic Rep. Senator that risked
everything to go aganist what you and your goonies wanted him to do. We feel
that it's worth our lives to do this, because we would be saving the lives
of 300,000 people. Please make your peace with God as soon as possible and
say goodbye to your loved ones we will not wait any longer. YOU WILL DIE!!!!
Reply Reply to all Forward



---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-03-15 03:09:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"Wisconsin's Governor Wins, but Is He Now Dead Man Walker?"
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2058601,00.html

---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st
century."
Barb May
2011-03-15 16:13:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"Wisconsin's Governor Wins, but Is He Now Dead Man Walker?"
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2058601,00.html
And you posted this off-topic article here because?
Your hypocrisy is often quite stunning and this is just the latest
example.

1. Tell us, Ubi, what does a stupid article title from Time have to do
with TV?
2. Why do you keep dredging up the Civility Pledge when Republicans were
the ones who torpedoed it?
3. Do you have any proof that Time ever signed on to the Civility
Pledge?
4. If not, then what does it have to do with the Time article?

The answers are:
1. Nothing.
2. Because you're an idiot.
3. No.
4. Nothing.
--
Barb
Ubiquitous
2011-03-16 00:15:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"Civility" turns out to have been the most evanescent political fad
since . . . well, we don't remember the previous one either. The other
day Time magazine's website asked: "Wisconsin's Governor Wins, but Is He
Now Dead Man Walker?" The writer, Dawn Reiss, noted without evident
disapproval that outside the Wisconsin Capitol "chalk outlines around
fake dead bodies etched with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's name
remained in dismembered parts."

Did Scott Walker lose by winning? Wisconsin's government employee unions
certainly succeeded in raising a backlash, and it's possible they'll be
able to keep it going long enough to do some damage to Badger State
Republicans. Elsewhere around the country, however, government unions
are finding themselves on the defensive.

In Tallahassee, the Associated Press reports, "a Florida Senate bill
that prohibits union dues from being automatically deducted from public
employees' paychecks has barely survived a vote out of the Community
Affairs Committee." The AP notes that "union foes have dubbed the
measure the Worker Gag Bill"--and the AP adopts that Orwellian moniker
in its headline.

Even the liberal media can't always be counted on to take the unions'
side. Suffolk County, which includes Boston, recently abolished two
minor Revolutionary War holidays, Evacuation Day and Bunker Hill Day.
But a Boston Globe editorial notes that the move will end up costing
Boston $1.5 million. The reason? The holidays are still in union
contracts, so that the city will have to pay overtime to get employees
to work those days, an absurdity that, even the ultraliberal Globe
notes, "can only further the continuing backlash against public-employee
perks."

And guess what state capital is the dateline for this Washington Post
story: "Thousands of union members rallied before the State House on
Monday night, vowing to protect their employee pensions and public
school funding." Annapolis, Md., where the governor and both legislative
houses all are Democratic.

What's more, Baltimore's WBAL-TV reports that "Anne Arundel County
Executive John Leopold signed into law Thursday a measure giving the
county government more power over its public safety union":

The County Council will now have the final say if a contract
cannot be reached.

"The unions are going to be struggling, and we'll take what
we are given with very little or no recourse," said Fraternal
Order of Police President O'Brien Atkinson. . . .

"I think it's very close to what's happening in Wisconsin.
There's a complete and utter disregard for the Democratic [sic]
process. There's a complete disregard for collective bargaining,
which is in our county charter and in the Maryland
Constitution," Atkinson argued.

But WBAL notes that "the move puts Anne Arundel County in line with what
the majority of Maryland counties do with union negotiations." It seems
clear that Wisconsin is leading, not bucking, a nationwide trend.


---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
trotsky
2011-03-16 12:59:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"Civility" turns out to have been the most evanescent political fad
since . . .
Whom are you plagiarizing?
Barb May
2011-03-16 18:38:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"Civility" turns out to have been the most evanescent political fad
since . . .
Whom are you plagiarizing?
The usual -- James Taranto
Ubi should be paying him royalities.
--
Barb
trotsky
2011-03-16 21:49:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"Civility" turns out to have been the most evanescent political fad
since . . .
Whom are you plagiarizing?
The usual -- James Taranto
Ubi should be paying him royalities.
Sadly, those royalties may just be in sexual favors.
Ubiquitous
2011-03-22 19:10:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"Civility" turns out to have been the most evanescent political fad
since . . .
Whom are you plagiarizing?
Deflection noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-03-22 00:10:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Blogress Ann Althouse, a university of Wisconsin law professor, is half
of the husband-and-wife team that has done a better job than any
journalist of reporting on the skirmish in Wisconsin over government
union privileges. Yesterday she posted a link to a bizarre threat
against her and hubby Laurence Meade that was posted on Scirbd.com:

We will hang up wanted posters of you everywhere you like
to go. We will picket on public property as close to your
house as we can every day. We will harrass the ever loving
sh--out of you all the time. . . . Because we aren't
anti-social, life-denying, world-sterilizing pieces of human
garbage like the two of you. WE WILL F--- YOU UP.

It goes on at much greater length, but that gives a taste. It's
threatening, eliminationist and unhinged, and it includes what appears
to be Althouse and Meade's home address.

BigGovernment.com's Dan Riehl managed to snag an "exclusive interview"
with the author, who sounds (and looks--the photo is quite something!)
considerably less threatening than his rant:

Shankman is currently unemployed, claims to not be a member
of a union and says he most often works as a dishwasher when
employed. He insists that he does not advocate for violence
and in some ways sought to distance himself from his
"manifesto," while also acknowledging authorship. He says
he's done with the issue and was simply giving voice to
thoughts and rhetoric he "regularly hears in the street."

"I'm done with it," said Shankman, adding that he intends
to pull back some from social media. However, he did not
back away from the manifesto, claiming he wanted to elevate
the idea and that if others in Madison wanted to embrace it,
then so much the better.

So he's a passive-aggressive twerp, an uncredentialed Brian Leiter.

To judge by his Facebook profile, he is a sort of Big Labor groupie: a
"volunteer" for both the AFL-CIO and WEAC, the Wisconsin teachers union,
along with Ian's Pizza, a Madison parlor that cashed in on the
controversy by delivering pies to protesters and thugs at the Capitol,
paid for by "supporters from all 50 states--as well as Bosnia, China,
Egypt, France and 20 other countries," according to the New York Times.
(Incidentally, do labor unions really use "volunteers"? That seems a bit
exploitive and hypocritical.)

Althouse herself does not seem to feel threatened, and she notes that
Shankman has hurt himself more than her. "I really do feel sorry for
these young people who screw up their internet reputation," she wrote
this morning:

People, take a lesson from what you've seen on this blog
in the last month. There have been 2 incidents of young
men--relatively young men--writing on the internet,
threatening me. If I post about it, even if I don't put
their names in the post, but it comes out in the comments,
anyone Googling their names is going to stumble into the
ugly thing they wrote.

Even if you have no human kindness at all and care only
about yourself, how can a moment of passion be worth all
the damage you do to your reputation? Do you think a
potential employer who reads something like what we
discussed here and here would consider hiring you?

You may think you are really just a harmless guy with "good
politics," having some fun, and you may not care at all
whether you scare me or not, but you are hurting yourself.
Out of self-interest alone, you need to stop.

But this is far from the only threat to come from government unions and
their supporters in recent weeks. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports
that "the office of Sen. Dan Kapanke (R-La Crosse) said the senator has
been subjected to damage of personal property and has received
threatening statements in the wake of mass protests in recent weeks over
Gov. Scott Walker's budget-repair bill."

Vickie McKenna, a Wisconsin talk-show hostess, posts on her Facebook
page a threatening letter to a man named Randy, apparently a private
citizen who supports Gov. Walker:

I will be making a visit. When I show up, you can tell me
that you are an a--h--- and am [sic] sorry what you did.
Or, you can continue to spew your hate, and I will mess
you up and leave you lying in a pool of your own blood. . . .
This will not be a random act of violence.

The writer of the note claims to have a criminal record and certainly
seems more menacing than Shankman. BigGovernment.com has a compilation
of "20 days worth of the death threats, vandalism, and intimidation
practiced by pro-union thugs" in Wisconsin.

"Why isn't the mainstream media talking about the death threats against
Republican politicians in Wisconsin?" asks Lee Stranahan, a
self-described "pro-choice, pro-single payer, anti-war, pro-gay rights
independent liberal" who has also worked with conservative publisher and
provocateur Andrew Breitbart.

Indeed, it was less than three months ago that the attempted murder of
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords prompted the New York Times and others to
lecture the country about the dangers of "incivility" on the right--even
after it was known that the suspect had no recognizable ideological
motivation. To quote the infamous Times editorial:

It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular
madman's act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members.
But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly
their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for
the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of
these threats, setting the nation on edge. Many on the right
have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political
power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or
bureaucrats. They seem to have persuaded many Americans that
the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the
people.

Here is the concluding line from another Times editorial, published one
month ago today, denouncing Gov. Walker for proposing to curtail
government union privileges:

The unions should make their voices heard and push back hard
against this misguided plan.

"Push back hard" is not literally a call for violence, but it's not much
of a stretch to say that Jim Shankman and the others were following the
Times's exhortation. Not only does the Times act with disregard for the
truth, it does not even follow the standard of civility it falsely
accuses conservative media figures of violating.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-03-27 00:17:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Hey, how's that "civility" thing going? Blogger Jordan Rickards has
video of Sen. Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, speaking at a
rally for Planned Parenthood, a government-subsidized group that
performs abortions and other services. Quoth Lautenberg:

The Tea Party Republicans in Washington claim they're concerned
about the budget balance. But it's a disguise! It's not true!
It's a lie! That's not [what] they want. They want to--they want
other people not to be able to have their opinions. They don't
deserve the freedoms that are in the Constitution, but we'll
give them to them anyway.

In one sense, "They don't deserve the freedoms that are in the
Constitution" is a trivial truth. Those freedoms are a matter of right,
not desert. But Lautenberg's emotional message is unmistakable. He
_resents_ that his political opponents have constitutional rights--and
he says so just before complaining that "they want other people not to
be able to have their opinions." Projection, anyone?
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Barb May
2011-03-28 17:27:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Hey, how's that "civility" thing going? Blogger Jordan Rickards has
video of Sen. Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, speaking at a
rally for Planned Parenthood, a government-subsidized group that
The Tea Party Republicans in Washington claim they're concerned
about the budget balance. But it's a disguise! It's not true!
It's a lie! That's not [what] they want. They want to--they want
other people not to be able to have their opinions. They don't
deserve the freedoms that are in the Constitution, but we'll
give them to them anyway.
In one sense, "They don't deserve the freedoms that are in the
Constitution" is a trivial truth. Those freedoms are a matter of
right, not desert. But Lautenberg's emotional message is
unmistakable. He _resents_ that his political opponents have
constitutional rights--and he says so just before complaining that
"they want other people not to be able to have their opinions."
Projection, anyone?
As usual, your hero James Taranto has twisted words around to the exact
opposite of what they actually were in order to serve his right-wing
agenda. Lautenberg first said teabaggers don't want others to have
opinons contrary to theirs. Then he said, "They don't deserve the
freedoms that are in the Constitution, but we'll give them to them
anyway." In other words, teabaggers don't deserve the freedoms they
would deny to others.

Taranto claims "...don't deserve the freedoms" came before "..don't want
others to have opinons" but the proof that he is lying is contained in
the paragraph right before his false claim.

If nothing else, this is proof positive that right-wingers are so
ignorant that Taranto feels safe in telling a giant fib without anyone
actually noticing that the statements he quotes are the opposite of what
he claims.

You keep embarrassing yourself Ubi because you don't bother to read this
crap BEFORE you post it.
--
Barb
Steve Newport
2011-03-29 00:22:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv (Barb=A0May) You keep embarrassing
yourself Ubi because you don't bother to read this crap BEFORE you post
it.
---------------------------------------
SN: I doubt that he reads much.
Barb May
2011-03-29 18:12:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Newport
yourself Ubi because you don't bother to read this crap BEFORE you
post it.
---------------------------------------
SN: I doubt that he reads much.
I'm wondering if he is an actual person or just a badly programmed bot.
--
Barb
Steve Newport
2011-03-30 04:53:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv (Barb=A0May) I'm wondering if Ubi is
an actual person or just a badly programmed bot.
----------------------------------------
SN: Sadly, I think he's a badly programmed person.
trotsky
2011-03-30 12:49:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
an actual person or just a badly programmed bot.
----------------------------------------
SN: Sadly, I think he's a badly programmed person.
To paraphrase Christian Slater in the movie "Broken Arrow", "he's got a
head full of bad wiring."
Ubiquitous
2011-04-19 09:54:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Sarah Palin spoke at a Tea Party rally in Madison, Wis., Saturday, where she
expressed support for reformist Gov. Scott Walker. The Associated Press's Todd
Richmond was on hand to make excuses for labor monopoly thuggery:

The tea party crowd cheered and the counter-demonstrators booed
as Palin stepped to the microphone. She said she was proud
Wisconsin conservatives prevailed against union "hatred and
violence"--even though none of the protests in Madison ever
became physically violent and only one person was arrested
Saturday, for disorderly conduct, police said.

The protests might not have become "physically violent," but there were
numerous death threats against politicians and even college professors who
dared criticize the labor monopolies Gov. Walker is attempting to break up.
And if anyone can find a similar disclaimer in an AP story about claims of Tea
Party violence, we'd love to see it.

Richmond's Madison dispatch also contains this gem:

Capitol Police estimated about 6,500 people converged on the
building Saturday, but said it was impossible to tell how many
were tea partyers and how many were labor supporters. The Capitol
Police is a division of the Wisconsin Department of Administration,
a Walker cabinet agency.

How often does the AP call into question the authority of, say, a federal
agency by pointing out that it is part of "an Obama cabinet agency"? Not
often, we'd guess.

---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the 21st
century."
trotsky
2011-04-19 12:31:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Sarah Palin spoke at a Tea Party rally in Madison, Wis., Saturday, where she
expressed support for reformist Gov. Scott Walker. The Associated Press's Todd
The tea party crowd
All forty of them?
Ubiquitous
2011-04-20 08:39:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
This weekend's Tea Party rally in Madison, Wis., drew familiar figures
like Sarah Palin and Andrew Breitbart, but perhaps the most interesting
speaker was a 14-year-old girl named Tricia Willoughby. Tricia wowed,
among others, Rachael Larimore, who writes for Slate.com's ladies blog,
XX Factor.

"What's impressive is her strong voice, her confidence, and, let's face
it, her youth," Larimore writes. "The Tea Party is often seen as being
made up entirely of cranky middle-aged people who don't like paying
taxes. But here is a smart, engaging young woman speaking with the poise
of someone older."

Showing considerably less poise is the bitter, pudgy middle-aged man
featured in a YouTube video of the left-wing counterprotest. "Go home,
you little brat!" he shouts at the 14-year-old, struggling to make
himself heard over his comrades' boos and noisemakers. "Who the f--- are
you to lecture me, you little brat?!"

Apparently the Pudgester is taking a cue from former Enron adviser Paul
Krugman, whose New York Times blog post the morning of the rally was
titled "Civility Is the Last Refuge of Scoundrels." Yesterday he
followed up with a column titled "Let's Not Be Civil." Wait, weren't
Krugman and the newspaper that employs him issuing demands for civility
just a few months ago? Nah, we have always been at war with Eastasia.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
trotsky
2011-04-20 13:39:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
This weekend's Tea Party rally in Madison, Wis., drew familiar figures
like Sarah Palin and Andrew Breitbart, but perhaps the most interesting
speaker was a 14-year-old girl named Tricia Willoughby.
And when you know how to cheat at the polls, like they do, that makes
her of voting age too!
Ubiquitous
2011-04-20 08:41:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
From the Des Moines Register, here's a story at once hilarious and
infuriating:

A case of mistaken identity has entangled a small family-owned
Des Moines company in union protests and led to a death threat.

Angry callers are mistaking Koch Brothers, a Des Moines office
supply firm, with the brothers who own Koch Industries, the
global energy conglomerate. Billionaires Charles and David
Koch have fought Wisconsin unions, financed the tea party and
opposed climate change rules.

Dutch Koch, president of the Des Moines company, wants everyone
to know he's not one of those Koch brothers, and he's not
politically active.

"I initially thought it was humorous to be confused with a
multibillionaire," he said, but then a death threat was left
on his answering machine. Koch reported the call to the FBI,
which he said traced it to a California man.

Death threats are just a way of life for these union thugs, aren't they?
We blame Paul Krugman
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-06-03 09:50:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
From Scott Raab's just-posted Esquire interview with departing New York Times
executive editor Bill Keller:

Raab: I'm going to have the "gelato drowned in espresso." [To
Keller] So you've got a baseball bat in your hands and one free
swing--and Jayson Blair, Judy Miller, and Rupert Murdoch are
lined up for you. Which one do you skull?

Keller: I think I've answered enough questions that I'm entitled
to say "No comment" to that one.

In case you need a refresher, Blair is a former Times reporter whose
fabrication and plagiarism helped discredit Keller's predecessor, Howell
Raines, making Keller's ascension possible; Miller is a former Times reporter
who went to jail to protect a source in a bogus "leak" investigation that the
Times editorial page egged on out of antipathy for the Bush administration;
and Murdoch is chairman of News Corp., a rival news organization.

In January, Keller said this: "It is true that the national discourse is more
polarized and strident than it has been in the past, and to some extent, I
would lay that at the feet of Rupert Murdoch." Yet as far as we know, Murdoch
has never entertained questions about whether he would like to commit violent
acts against Keller or other New York Times Co. executives.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-06-20 02:35:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"In an explosive tirade that fired up some demonstrators and embarrassed
others, a national union leader went nuclear on Gov. Chris Christie,
calling him a Nazi over and over," Newark's Star-Ledger reports from New
Jersey's capital of Trenton:

"Welcome to Nazi Germany," Christopher Shelton, a top
official at the Communication Workers of America, told
thousands of protesters today outside the Statehouse in
Trenton. "The first thing that the Nazis and Adolf Hitler
did was go after the unions."

In an extreme example of disaffection with both parties,
Shelton also went after Senate President Stephen Sweeney
(D-Gloucester) and Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex).

"Adolf Christie's generals," he called them, because both
are backing a bill that would increase pension and health
benefit costs for public workers.

Hey, where are the New York Times editorialists and the No Labels people
and all the other holier-than-thou types who just a few months ago were
prissily demanding more civility in politics? It's almost enough to make
you doubt their sincerity.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Stephen Newport
2011-06-20 05:33:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The 'most consistently misinformed media viewers'
By Steve Benen
I'd be remiss if I didn't also flag this gem from Jon Stewart's
appearance on "Fox News Sunday" this morning. He was explaining that he,
as a comedian, doesn't deserve credibility in political media, and it's
ultimately the result of "the disappointment the public has in what the
news media does."
Chris Wallace rejected the premise, arguing that Fox News viewers
"aren't the least bit disappointed" with what their preferred network
does. Stewart's response was an important one.
"In polls," Stewart said, in a surprisingly angry tone, "who are the
most consistently misinformed media viewers? The most consistently
misinformed? Fox. Fox viewers. Consistently. Every poll."
Wallace then changed the subject.
I suppose I can't blame the host for that, because what Stewart said
happens to be true. Fox News' minions "aren't the least bit
disappointed" with what the Republican news network provides, but
they're not actually learning anything about current events or the world
around them.
The quantifiable evidence is overwhelming. Eight years ago, just six
months into the war in Iraq, the Program on International Policy
Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland found that those who
relied on the Republican network were "three times more likely than the
next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions =97 about WMD in
Iraq, Saddam Hussein was involved with 9/11, and foreign support for the
U.S. position on the war in Iraq."
As Ben Armbruster noted a while back, "An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll
out [in 2009] found that Fox News viewers were overwhelmingly
misinformed about health care reform proposals. A 2008 Pew study ranked
Fox News last in the number of 'high knowledge' viewers and a 2007 Pew
poll ranked Fox viewers as the least knowledgeable about national and
international affairs."
The problem is actually getting worse.
In December, PIPA published a report, this time on "Misinformation and
the 2010 Election" (pdf). The point was to measure Americans'
understanding of a variety of key developments that news consumers would
likely be familiar with. As was the case eight years ago, Fox News
viewers were "significantly more likely" to be confused about reality.
Researchers found that Americans who paid more attention to the news
were more likely to know about current events. But Americans who relied
on Fox News were "significantly more likely than those who never watched
it to believe":
* most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points
more likely)
* most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the
deficit (31 points)
* the economy is getting worse (26 points)
* most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30
points)
* the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)
* their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)
* the auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)
* when TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)
* and that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31
points)
This point, in particular, seems especially noteworthy: in some cases,
regular Fox News viewers would have done better, statistically speaking,
if they had received no news at all and simply guessed whether the
claims about current events were accurate.
What's more, this isn't necessarily about party affiliations =97
Democrats who watch Fox News were worse off than Democrats who relied on
legitimate news organizations (though Dems who watch Fox News were still
less confused than Republicans who watch Fox News).
It would take an unlikely twist of self-reflection, but at a certain
point, Fox News and its audience might take a moment to ponder why these
viewers are so wrong, so often, about so much. That almost certainly
won't happen, of course, in part because the network and its viewers
aren't quite informed enough to realize they're misinformed.
That said, Wallace is certainly correct in his observation: the
network's viewers "aren't the least bit disappointed" with what Fox News
airs.
Why would they be? Ignorance is bliss.
Steve Benen is a contributing writer to the Washington Monthly, joining
the publication in August, 2008 as chief blogger for the Washington
Monthly blog, Political Animal.
PaxPerPoten
2011-06-20 08:14:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"In an explosive tirade that fired up some demonstrators and embarrassed
others, a national union leader went nuclear on Gov. Chris Christie,
calling him a Nazi over and over," Newark's Star-Ledger reports from New
"Welcome to Nazi Germany," Christopher Shelton, a top
official at the Communication Workers of America, told
thousands of protesters today outside the Statehouse in
Trenton. "The first thing that the Nazis and Adolf Hitler
did was go after the unions."
He forgets to mention that the entire world was being inundated by the
Communist/Bolshevik labor Unions and they were break legs in the streets
to force recruitment and how to vote in national elections.
It took the German brown shirts to out violence the Commie Bastards.
Is that what Christopher Shelton has in mind for America? The Unions
have already destroyed *all* of Americas heavy industry.
Post by Ubiquitous
In an extreme example of disaffection with both parties,
Shelton also went after Senate President Stephen Sweeney
(D-Gloucester) and Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex).
Tell Shelton to eat shit and you become a patriot to America.
Post by Ubiquitous
"Adolf Christie's generals," he called them, because both
are backing a bill that would increase pension and health
benefit costs for public workers.
Typical piece of shit, whiny Unionist.
Post by Ubiquitous
Hey, where are the New York Times editorialists and the No Labels people
and all the other holier-than-thou types who just a few months ago were
prissily demanding more civility in politics? It's almost enough to make
you doubt their sincerity.
I will give the first $10 toward shipping Shelton to where his kind sent
our Jobs. I am sure he can unionize well in China.

I really hate that asshole has the name Shelton. I know a number of
Sheltons and unlike him, they are honorable people. And work for their
bread!@
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Barb May
2011-06-20 17:29:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Neal Boortz:
"we got too damn many urban thugs, yo"
"you need to have a gun"
"and we need to see some dead thugs littering the landscape in Atlanta"
--
Barb
Ubiquitous
2011-06-28 22:50:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Glenn Beck went to Bryant Park Monday night for a showing of Alfred
Hitchock's "The 39 Steps". But that was not the only showing he saw.

"It was a hostile situation," Beck described of his family's movie
night; his wife, Tanya, had wine "kicked intentionally on to her back,"
leaving her "completely wet," he said on his radio show Tuesday morning.
He further said that his wife and daughter were greeted by a man
pointing his fingers and yelling "We hate conservatives here!" when they
got up to use the restroom.

"If I had suggested -- and I almost did -- wow, does anybody have a
rope? Because there's a tree here. You could just lynch me. And I think
there would've been a couple in the crowd that would've!" The
conservative radio-host recalled.
"I apologize to anybody who had their movie experience wrecked because
of the people that found it so necessary to spew hatred," Beck said,
"but there's nothing I can do about it."

He noted that he was "...A little surprised that nobody -- nobody -- in
the crowd said 'knock it off. Just, stop. Just be cool. I don't agree
with the guy, but just be cool.' "

Beck doesn't wish this kind of treatment among anyone, even his enemies.
"All through the evening, I wanted to say to you today, please, please,
please don't ever treat anybody like that. If Van Jones comes and sits
right next to you, please don't treat anybody like that."

Describing the crowd as the "most hateful people I've seen," Beck
attributes the unfortunate experiences of last night to a demographic of
"arrogant 25-year-olds." He said:

"All I could think of about the people around me all
night was I feel sorry for you. I really feel sorry for
you... you are so lost... and so convinced that you are
absolutely 100% right, and you are helping build a system
that is fueled by hate. You're being used and you don't
even know it. And by the time you wake-up, it may be too
late for you to get out."

Beck also claims that for liberals questioning the existence of an
"escape route," the answer is "yes."

Story continues below
"Doesn't matter what happened in the past, brother," Beck said. "Doesn't
matter what 'ya thought. Doesn't matter what 'ya even did. What matters
is that you're here now."

"My family and I will accept you with open arms."

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/videos/?uri=channels/451373/1393587
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-07-08 09:41:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
As Republicans in Congress and the president negotiate over raising the
debt ceiling, liberal commentators are, as they so often do, adding to
the quality of the debate based on the rigor and care of their
arguments. For example, the Washington Post’s Richard Cohen compares the
GOP presidential field as “a virtual political Jonestown.” Then there’s
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, who – when he’s not complaining about the
incivility of Republicans – finds time to describe the GOP as “the
Wahhabis of American government.” Not to be outdone, Tina Brown of
Newsweek and the Daily Beast refers to Republicans in Congress as
“suicide bombers.”

All in the name of elevated public discourse, of course.

It’s hard to know whether these pundits understand how stupid and
childish their rants are, or whether they’re so blinded by their
ideology they don’t understand it’s not really appropriate to refer to
people with whom you disagree on taxes as Wahhabis, suicide bombers and
members of a death cult.

Either explanation isn’t terribly encouraging. And it would be nice if a
few liberals who pretend to care about the quality of our political
dialogue – at this point I’d settle for one – might point out, in the
gentlest way possible, this kind of ad hominem attack isn’t necessary or
helpful.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-08-04 21:10:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
By George Neumayr

In 2009, the Obama administration dropped the phrase "the war on terror,"
revealing a reluctance on its part to call terrorists "terrorists." The liberal
establishment shows no such reluctance when describing Tea Partiers. "[T]hese Tea
Party guys are, like, strapped with dynamite," said former Obama administration
official Steven Rattner?. New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman calls them the
"Hezbollah faction" of the GOP.

Others described them as muggers, carjackers, jihadists, suicide bombers, and
hostage takers. The only pause in this stream of invective came when these critics
of the Tea Party welcomed Gabby Giffords? back to the House of Representatives.
The inimitable Joe Biden?, who had agreed with these descriptions of the Tea Party
earlier in the day, reminded Giffords of his "two craniotomies" and declared them
"both members of the cracked head club." Perhaps Biden offered other thoughtful
words of comfort to Giffords but those weren't recorded.

No sooner had the pleasantries with Giffords ended than liberals resumed their
attacks on the Tea Party. The ferocity of the criticism, were it directed toward
any other group, would probably lead liberals to call for a new hate crime
category. Just last week, the Eugene Robinsons of the press were blaming the
Norway shootings in part on what they see as the intemperate rhetoric of the right
about militant Islam.

They saw no irony in savaging the Tea Party, amidst misty-eyed tributes to
Giffords, because civility for them is not a moral concept but an ideological one.
"Civility" is synonymous with the advancement of liberalism, so nothing they could
possibly say about Tea Partiers, no matter how nasty, conflicts with it. On the
other hand, Tea Partiers, according to this logic, are inherently uncivil for
refusing to argue within the narrow parameters of debate set up by the
establishment.

That in itself is enough to make Tea Partiers the "Wahhabis of American
government," as Chris Matthews put it. There is no need to engage their arguments,
of course. Could they be right? Could the debt-ceiling deal be a non-solution that
lulls America into more dangerous complacency? These questions are impermissible;
refusal to accept the bipartisan consensus alone establishes their guilt. Notice,
however, that the establishment media was careful not to describe the Democrats
who opposed the compromise in such harsh terms. New York Times columnist Paul
Krugman? wrote that the Tea Partiers had in effect said, "We'll blow up the world
economy unless you give us exactly what we want." But more Democrats than Tea
Partiers ended up voting against the final bill. Krugman himself opposed the final
bill, so presumably he was ready to "blow up" the world economy too.

The assumption underlying these insults is that the Tea Party harbors an extreme
and lawless ideology. In reality, it merely proposes fiscal prudence and respect
for the law and Constitution. The recklessness in U.S. politics comes not from the
Tea Party but from the establishment as it runs up trillions of dollars in debt.

The hysterical descriptions of the Tea Party are a measure of the establishment
liberals' panic at a broadened debate and more constrained spending. They prefer
the good old days when debt could skyrocket without dispute (it had been lifted
over seventy times without debate, they pouted, as if that were a good thing).
They find it outrageous that a group without ties to special interests would
threaten the federal monies accorded theirs.

All the terms of invective used against the Tea Party more accurately capture the
banditry and indulgence of the establishment. What is "responsible" about spending
money that the U.S. government doesn't have? What is "balanced" about running up
debt at a slightly lower rate?

The only compliment the Tea Party has received from the establishment is a
backhanded one: Obama and company are now congratulating themselves for making
"tough choices" they would never have made without it.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
David Johnston
2011-08-04 21:59:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
By George Neumayr
In 2009, the Obama administration dropped the phrase "the war on terror,"
revealing a reluctance on its part to call terrorists "terrorists."
Actually it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
Stephen Newport
2011-08-05 06:15:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@block.net (David=A0Johnston)
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight against an
emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Thanatos
2011-08-05 14:27:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Stephen Newport
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight against an
emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused disaster
events".
trotsky
2011-08-05 15:06:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Stephen Newport
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight against an
emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused disaster
events".
Which teabagger told you that one?
David Johnston
2011-08-05 16:04:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Stephen Newport
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight against an
emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused disaster
events".
Which nobody is doing.
Thanatos
2011-08-05 18:24:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by Stephen Newport
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight against an
emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused disaster
events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
Barb May
2011-08-05 18:59:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy. Napolitano used the term once while
addressing Congress and she explained why when asked during an interview
with Der Spiegel:

SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as
Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism."
Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your
country?

Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from
terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I
referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but
it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear
toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.

Of course the far right propaganda machine immediately jumped on that
and started lying about it, because they profit from the politics of
fear. Then the far-right echo chamber takes over. Eventually it is
picked up and repeated endlessly by the useful idiots who often add
their own twist to make it an even bigger lie -- like you just did.
--
Barb
Thanatos
2011-08-05 23:19:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo circulated from DHS HQ which mandates that
we use the term "man-caused disaster" in place of terrorist attack in
all official correspondence.
trotsky
2011-08-05 23:24:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo circulated from DHS
All the anonyshits?
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 17:31:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo circulated from DHS
All the anonyshits?
Epithet noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.

--
"Admittedly, conservatives give as good as they get. The difference
between us and [leftists] is that we can argue as well as inveigh.
They can only hurl invectives." -- Don Feder
trotsky
2011-08-06 19:46:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo circulated from DHS
All the anonyshits?
Epithet noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
No, Ubi, that is a real argument--even you are an anonyshit (like you
are) you can claim all kinds of bullshit things like you get memos from
Homeland Security. I hope this clears it up for you.
Stephen Newport
2011-08-06 20:10:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@email.com (trotsky)
claim all kinds of bullshit things like you (Ubi) get memos from
Homeland Security. --------------------------------------------
SN: And winning debates. LOL.
Thanatos
2011-08-06 21:53:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Stephen Newport
claim all kinds of bullshit things like you (Ubi) get memos from
Homeland Security. --------------------------------------------
SN: And winning debates. LOL.
LOL! Newport's apparently still under the delusion that anything that
occurs in this newsgroup qualifies as a 'debate'.

How cute.
Barb May
2011-08-06 16:00:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
--
Barb
trotsky
2011-08-06 16:04:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 17:33:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
trotsky
2011-08-06 19:46:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
Is this TV or musicals related, Ubi-Pubie?
Thanatos
2011-08-06 21:54:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
Is this TV or musicals related, Ubi-Pubie?
Why would musical-related topics be relevant in this newsgroup?
trotsky
2011-08-06 22:03:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
Is this TV or musicals related, Ubi-Pubie?
Why would musical-related topics be relevant in this newsgroup?
Because of his stupid attempt to re-direct the follow up. Is this stuff
moving to fast for you, Thanny that thinks with his fanny?
Thanatos
2011-08-07 02:50:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
Is this TV or musicals related, Ubi-Pubie?
Why would musical-related topics be relevant in this newsgroup?
Because of his stupid attempt to re-direct the follow up.
So when someone tries to redirect follow-ups, that somehow makes
musicals on-topic for rec.arts.tv?
trotsky
2011-08-07 11:29:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
Is this TV or musicals related, Ubi-Pubie?
Why would musical-related topics be relevant in this newsgroup?
Because of his stupid attempt to re-direct the follow up.
So when someone tries to redirect follow-ups, that somehow makes
musicals on-topic for rec.arts.tv?
You're confused, Thanny. Have one of your gay lovers try and explain it
to you please?

Or did you program your computer to respond to me as stupidly as
possible? LOL.
Thanatos
2011-08-07 16:37:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
Is this TV or musicals related, Ubi-Pubie?
Why would musical-related topics be relevant in this newsgroup?
Because of his stupid attempt to re-direct the follow up.
So when someone tries to redirect follow-ups, that somehow makes
musicals on-topic for rec.arts.tv?
You're confused, Thanny. Have one of your gay lovers try and explain it
to you please?
Ah, more homophobia. How refreshing.
trotsky
2011-08-07 22:35:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
Is this TV or musicals related, Ubi-Pubie?
Why would musical-related topics be relevant in this newsgroup?
Because of his stupid attempt to re-direct the follow up.
So when someone tries to redirect follow-ups, that somehow makes
musicals on-topic for rec.arts.tv?
You're confused, Thanny. Have one of your gay lovers try and explain it
to you please?
Ah, more homophobia. How refreshing.
Please let me know when you grow the necessary testicles to respond to
the gist of the post.
Thanatos
2011-08-08 05:11:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by trotsky
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Geez, Barb, he was talking about himself and his two other brain cells.
Talking to yourself again, "trotsky"?
Is this TV or musicals related, Ubi-Pubie?
Why would musical-related topics be relevant in this newsgroup?
Because of his stupid attempt to re-direct the follow up.
So when someone tries to redirect follow-ups, that somehow makes
musicals on-topic for rec.arts.tv?
You're confused, Thanny. Have one of your gay lovers try and explain it
to you please?
Ah, more homophobia. How refreshing.
Please let me know when you grow the necessary testicles to respond to
the gist of the post.
So when you issue countless mindless 'alerts', that's responding to the
gist, but when I point out your rampant homophobia, it's not.

Explain how that works, why don't you? It ought to be amusing.
Stephen Newport
2011-08-07 07:18:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@email.com (trotsky)
his stupid attempt to re-direct the follow up.
---------------------------------------
SN: Ubi is still sending me fake violation notices for what he (often
incorrectly) thinks are off-topic posts.
trotsky
2011-08-07 11:37:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
his stupid attempt to re-direct the follow up.
---------------------------------------
SN: Ubi is still sending me fake violation notices for what he (often
incorrectly) thinks are off-topic posts.
Hey, at least he's got a hobby. Some people collect stamps; Pubie
harrasses people on Usenet.
Ronnie Bateman
2011-08-07 19:28:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Hey, at least he's got a hobby. Some people collect stamps; Pubie
harrasses
Here's where Trotsky would write "What?"
Post by trotsky
... people on Usenet.
One just has to be mentally ill to be this blatantly hypocritical.

I don't think "Trotsky" would even have a reason to go on living if
Ubiquitous and Rich left Usenet. We'd probably hear one of those "Lone
Gunman Kills Nine, Then Himself" stories within a week.

Ubiquitous doesn't even harass people. He may push a lot of obnoxious
political topics onto the newsgroup, but he's not chasing after
individual posters -- like Trotsky does *every single morning*, the
moment he wakes up.
Thanatos
2011-08-07 20:22:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article
Post by Ronnie Bateman
Hey, at least he's got a hobby. Some people collect stamps; Pubie
harrasses
Here's where Trotsky would write "What?"
... people on Usenet.
One just has to be mentally ill to be this blatantly hypocritical.
I don't think "Trotsky" would even have a reason to go on living if
Ubiquitous and Rich left Usenet. We'd probably hear one of those "Lone
Gunman Kills Nine, Then Himself" stories within a week.
No, that would require a certain amount of physical locomotion. trotsky
is so immensely fat, that raising the Ho-Hos from the plate to his mouth
winds him.
Post by Ronnie Bateman
Ubiquitous doesn't even harass people. He may push a lot of obnoxious
political topics onto the newsgroup, but he's not chasing after
individual posters -- like Trotsky does *every single morning*, the
moment he wakes up.
trotsky
2011-08-07 22:51:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
In article
Post by Ronnie Bateman
Hey, at least he's got a hobby. Some people collect stamps; Pubie
harrasses
Here's where Trotsky would write "What?"
... people on Usenet.
One just has to be mentally ill to be this blatantly hypocritical.
I don't think "Trotsky" would even have a reason to go on living if
Ubiquitous and Rich left Usenet. We'd probably hear one of those "Lone
Gunman Kills Nine, Then Himself" stories within a week.
No, that would require a certain amount of physical locomotion. trotsky
is so immensely fat, that raising the Ho-Hos from the plate to his mouth
winds him.
It's your fixation on fantasies of my naked body that makes me think
you're a flamin' homosexual.

I'm just saying.
Thanatos
2011-08-08 03:27:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
In article
Post by Ronnie Bateman
Hey, at least he's got a hobby. Some people collect stamps; Pubie
harrasses
Here's where Trotsky would write "What?"
... people on Usenet.
One just has to be mentally ill to be this blatantly hypocritical.
I don't think "Trotsky" would even have a reason to go on living if
Ubiquitous and Rich left Usenet. We'd probably hear one of those "Lone
Gunman Kills Nine, Then Himself" stories within a week.
No, that would require a certain amount of physical locomotion. trotsky
is so immensely fat, that raising the Ho-Hos from the plate to his mouth
winds him.
It's your fixation on fantasies of my naked body that makes me think
you're a flamin' homosexual.
Who the hell said anything about you naked?

Jesus Christ... even suggesting that should be a hate crime.
trotsky
2011-08-08 11:27:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
In article
Post by Ronnie Bateman
Hey, at least he's got a hobby. Some people collect stamps; Pubie
harrasses
Here's where Trotsky would write "What?"
... people on Usenet.
One just has to be mentally ill to be this blatantly hypocritical.
I don't think "Trotsky" would even have a reason to go on living if
Ubiquitous and Rich left Usenet. We'd probably hear one of those "Lone
Gunman Kills Nine, Then Himself" stories within a week.
No, that would require a certain amount of physical locomotion. trotsky
is so immensely fat, that raising the Ho-Hos from the plate to his mouth
winds him.
It's your fixation on fantasies of my naked body that makes me think
you're a flamin' homosexual.
Who the hell said anything about you naked?
Jesus Christ... even suggesting that should be a hate crime.
You don't even have the balls to show any self awareness, Thanny.
Anonyshit alert.
Stephen Newport
2011-08-07 23:44:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@email.com (trotsky)
Pubie harrasses people on Usenet.
---------------------------------------
SN: And by e-mail.
Thanatos
2011-08-06 16:51:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy.
Yes, it is. We all got a memo
Bullshit
Well, there's the well-reasoned response we've all come to expect from
you, Barbie.
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 09:15:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy. Napolitano used the term once while
addressing Congress and she explained why when asked during an
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress
as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism."
Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your
country?
Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from
terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I
referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but
it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear
toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.
You do realize that when you make an argument, you're sppsd to offer
evidence that proves your point, not disputes it, right?
Post by Barb May
Of course the far right propaganda machine immediately jumped on that
and started lying about it, because they profit from the politics of
fear.
I do love when the left accuse others of what they routinely practice.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Barb May
2011-08-06 16:00:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy. Napolitano used the term once while
addressing Congress and she explained why when asked during an
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress
as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word
"terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a
threat to your country?
Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat
from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word
"terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps
only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from
the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks
that can occur.
You do realize that when you make an argument, you're sppsd to offer
evidence that proves your point, not disputes it, right?
If you weren't such a moron you'd be able to tell the difference between
official policy and one statement.
--
Barb
Thanatos
2011-08-06 16:50:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy. Napolitano used the term once while
addressing Congress and she explained why when asked during an
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress
as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word
"terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a
threat to your country?
Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat
from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word
"terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps
only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from
the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks
that can occur.
You do realize that when you make an argument, you're sppsd to offer
evidence that proves your point, not disputes it, right?
If you weren't such a moron you'd be able to tell the difference between
official policy and one statement.
When the Secretary makes a point of saying something like that, and
expanding on it, then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 17:29:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
.
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy. Napolitano used the term once while
addressing Congress and she explained why when asked during an
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US
Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the
word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a
threat to your country?
Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat
from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word
"terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps
only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from
the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all
risks that can occur.
You do realize that when you make an argument, you're sppsd to
offer evidence that proves your point, not disputes it, right?
If you weren't such a moron you'd be able to tell the difference
between official policy and one statement.
When the Secretary makes a point of saying something like that, and
expanding on it, then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
The things leftist and their sock puppets do when they've lost the
debate, is it not?
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Stephen Newport
2011-08-06 21:55:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous)
leftists and their sock puppets
---------------------------------------
SN: ZZZZZZ. As opposed to you and yours?
trotsky
2011-08-06 22:19:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Stephen Newport
leftists and their sock puppets
---------------------------------------
SN: ZZZZZZ. As opposed to you and yours?
Ubi uses penis puppets, but the application is somewhat different.
Barb May
2011-08-06 18:14:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
Until you post some proof of this memo I'm saying it's bullshit and the
burden is on you to prove otherwise.
--
Barb
Thanatos
2011-08-06 19:56:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
Until you post some proof of this memo I'm saying it's bullshit
and the burden is on you to prove otherwise.
You can say whatever you want. Like most of the drivel that flows out of
your keyboard, it's entirely inconsequential.
Barb May
2011-08-06 21:28:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
Until you post some proof of this memo I'm saying it's bullshit
and the burden is on you to prove otherwise.
You can say whatever you want. Like most of the drivel that flows out
of your keyboard, it's entirely inconsequential.
So you have no proof -- and you're projecting again.
--
Barb
Thanatos
2011-08-06 21:54:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
Until you post some proof of this memo I'm saying it's bullshit
and the burden is on you to prove otherwise.
You can say whatever you want. Like most of the drivel that flows out
of your keyboard, it's entirely inconsequential.
So you have no proof
Nope. And couldn't post and internal memo even if I had it on hand.

But I know the truth, and despite all your bluster, you do, too.
Barb May
2011-08-07 17:09:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
Until you post some proof of this memo I'm saying it's bullshit
and the burden is on you to prove otherwise.
You can say whatever you want. Like most of the drivel that flows
out of your keyboard, it's entirely inconsequential.
So you have no proof
Nope. And couldn't post and internal memo even if I had it on hand.
You don't have the memo because it doesn't exist. If it were a
department policy that terrorist attacks will now be called "man-caused
disaster events" there would be proof of it readily available to anyone.
Instead, all we have is one statement from Napolitano that the far right
has lied about.
Post by Thanatos
But I know the truth, and despite all your bluster, you do, too.
Yeah, I know the truth: You got caught in a lie -- again. And you'll
never admit it.
--
Barb
Thanatos
2011-08-07 18:48:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
Until you post some proof of this memo I'm saying it's bullshit
and the burden is on you to prove otherwise.
You can say whatever you want. Like most of the drivel that flows
out of your keyboard, it's entirely inconsequential.
So you have no proof
Nope. And couldn't post and internal memo even if I had it on hand.
You don't have the memo because it doesn't exist. If it were a
department policy that terrorist attacks will now be called "man-caused
disaster events" there would be proof of it readily available to anyone.
Keep living your fantasies.
trotsky
2011-08-07 22:39:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
then issues a memo department-wide requiring it
official communication, it's policy.
Until you post some proof of this memo I'm saying it's bullshit
and the burden is on you to prove otherwise.
You can say whatever you want. Like most of the drivel that flows
out of your keyboard, it's entirely inconsequential.
So you have no proof
Nope. And couldn't post and internal memo even if I had it on hand.
You don't have the memo because it doesn't exist. If it were a
department policy that terrorist attacks will now be called "man-caused
disaster events" there would be proof of it readily available to anyone.
Instead, all we have is one statement from Napolitano that the far right
has lied about.
Post by Thanatos
But I know the truth, and despite all your bluster, you do, too.
Yeah, I know the truth: You got caught in a lie -- again. And you'll
never admit it.
The thing I find most amazing about all this is that must have been some
point where Thanny thought of himself as some sort of Usenet impresario.
Now he's just a gasbag whose every post screams, "Hah, made you look!"
Ubiquitous
2011-08-08 08:43:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
You got caught in a lie -- again. And you'll never admit it.
Well, there you go accusing others of what you practice again!
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 17:26:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight
against an emotion.
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused
disaster events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
No, it's not official policy. Napolitano used the term once while
addressing Congress and she explained why when asked during an
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US
Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word
"terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a
threat to your country?
Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat
from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word
"terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps
only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from
the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks
that can occur.
You do realize that when you make an argument, you're sppsd to offer
evidence that proves your point, not disputes it, right?
If you weren't such a moron
Oh, the irony!

Ad hominem noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.

--
"Admittedly, conservatives give as good as they get. The difference
between us and [leftists] is that we can argue as well as inveigh.
They can only hurl invectives." -- Don Feder
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
trotsky
2011-08-05 23:18:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by Stephen Newport
it revealed a realization on their part that you can't fight against an
emotion.
------------------------------------------
"You can't declare war on a tactic."
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused disaster
events".
Which nobody is doing.
Nobody except Homeland Security. It's official policy.
Cite?
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 09:11:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Thanatos
Post by David Johnston
Actually it revealed a realization on their part that you can't
fight against an emotion.
Yeah, much better that we call terrorist attacks "man-caused disaster
events".
Which nobody is doing.
Wrong.

SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as
Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism."
Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your
country?

NAPOLITANO: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from
terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I
referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but
it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear
toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Thanatos
2011-08-04 22:34:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
All the terms of invective used against the Tea Party more accurately capture
the banditry and indulgence of the establishment. What is "responsible" about
spending money that the U.S. government doesn't have? What is "balanced" about running
up debt at a slightly lower rate?
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html

This idiot goes on and on about how people who just want the government
to stop acting like money is infinite are "addicts" but they never stop
to consider that perhaps it's the morons who can't stop spending money
we don't have in increments of no less than $10 billion that just might
be displaying the classic signs of addiction.
trotsky
2011-08-05 12:06:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Ubiquitous
All the terms of invective used against the Tea Party more accurately capture
the banditry and indulgence of the establishment. What is "responsible" about
spending money that the U.S. government doesn't have? What is "balanced" about running
up debt at a slightly lower rate?
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.
Case in point--Thanny the teabagger!
Stephen Newport
2011-08-06 05:08:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.
----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Thanatos
2011-08-06 15:39:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.
----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 17:43:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.
----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
TROLL-O-METER

5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity
Stephen Newport
2011-08-10 09:18:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
From: ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous)
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.
----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Thanatos
2011-08-10 14:06:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.
----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
trotsky
2011-08-10 14:49:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.
----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You are a
stupid piece of crap.
Barb May
2011-08-10 18:38:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally
ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You are
a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does not equal
"psychologists" and the psychologist in question actually didn't claim
that, "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending is mentally ill." That's just another example of right-wing
embellishment that makes the entire story a big fat lie.

Meanwhile O'Reilly routinely brings on supposed "experts" in body
language and other non-verbal communication to undermine whatever his
guests have said in the previous segment or to speculate on what people
Bill doesn't like are "really" thinking, i.e. interpreting Sonya
Sotomayor's "blink rate", telling us Obama has "contempt in his eyes,"
that Hillary Clinton exhibits "evil laughter," and describing Katie
Couric's "sexual body language" during an interview with former Sen.
John Edwards.
--
Barb
trotsky
2011-08-11 00:17:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally
ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You are
a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does not equal
"psychologists" and the psychologist in question actually didn't claim
that, "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending is mentally ill." That's just another example of right-wing
embellishment that makes the entire story a big fat lie.
Meanwhile O'Reilly routinely brings on supposed "experts" in body
language and other non-verbal communication to undermine whatever his
guests have said in the previous segment or to speculate on what people
Bill doesn't like are "really" thinking, i.e. interpreting Sonya
Sotomayor's "blink rate", telling us Obama has "contempt in his eyes,"
that Hillary Clinton exhibits "evil laughter," and describing Katie
Couric's "sexual body language" during an interview with former Sen.
John Edwards.
John Edwards? Pervert Bill must have been insane when she was
interviewing Palin.
Thanatos
2011-08-13 00:08:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally
ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You are
a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does not equal
"psychologists" and the psychologist in question actually didn't claim
that, "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending is mentally ill."
Yes, he did. That's what the Tea Party stands for and that's what he
described as a mental illness.
Barb May
2011-08-13 02:10:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is
mentally ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You
are a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does not
equal "psychologists" and the psychologist in question actually
didn't claim that, "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued
profligate spending is mentally ill."
Yes, he did. That's what the Tea Party stands for and that's what he
described as a mental illness.
BASHIR: What is the effect giving people their way all of the time? How
does it shape our thinking behavior if by being adamant and dogmatic we
get our way?

PEELE: "They are adamant about achieving something that's unachievable,
which reminds us of a couple of things. it reminds us of delusion and
psychosis."

To a bagger like yourself the above quote might seem to mean the same
thing as "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending is mentally ill." but in fact it's not the same thing. Peele's
comment was a general concept and not directed specifically at the Tea
Party. It was about people who expect to get their way all the time.

We know that the above comment was not specifically about the Tea Party
because of what was said next:

BASHIR: But going back to the Tea Party in this country. Do you think
that having achieved their goal, no new taxes. instead of this actually
making them think about compromise in the future? It's actually simply
going to harden them so this kind of battle this, kind of standoff, this
kind of face-off is just going to become routine in Washington.

PEELE: Well, i'm looking at one goal beyond. they want no new taxes
because they seek some kind of idyllic past. No new taxes won't bring
them, won't bring them economic recovery so they will have to turn their
attention to some other supposed method of attaining that until they go
through all of them. Perhaps they can push through all of them. perhaps
people become discontented and perhaps they will become discontented and
people are likely to get riled up, and it could become a very angry
movement could, potentially become a violent movement.

So here Peele says Tea Party seeks "some kind of idyllic past" and if
they are frustrated they could become very angry and potentially
violent. But note that he says nothing about them being mentally ill.

Clearly Bashir was trying to lead Peele farther than he was willing to
go but considering what was actually said, Ubi's characterization is an
outrageous lie. Likewise The Weekly Standard's headline; "MSNBC Host,
Guest Consider Whether Tea Partiers Are Addicts, 'Delusional'" is also
an outrageous lie.
--
Barb
Thanatos
2011-08-13 02:36:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is
mentally ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You
are a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does not
equal "psychologists" and the psychologist in question actually
didn't claim that, "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued
profligate spending is mentally ill."
Yes, he did. That's what the Tea Party stands for and that's what he
described as a mental illness.
BASHIR: What is the effect giving people their way all of the time? How
does it shape our thinking behavior if by being adamant and dogmatic we
get our way?
PEELE: "They are adamant about achieving something that's unachievable,
which reminds us of a couple of things. it reminds us of delusion and
psychosis."
To a bagger like yourself the above quote might seem to mean the same
thing as "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending is mentally ill."
The Tea Party opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending.
Peele claimed that such things are 'unachievable' (which is idiotic) and
that sticking to those principles is the equivalent of a psychotic
delusion.

So ends the Civility Project.
Barb May
2011-08-13 19:04:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is
mentally ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You
are a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does not
equal "psychologists" and the psychologist in question actually
didn't claim that, "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued
profligate spending is mentally ill."
Yes, he did. That's what the Tea Party stands for and that's what he
described as a mental illness.
BASHIR: What is the effect giving people their way all of the time?
How does it shape our thinking behavior if by being adamant and
dogmatic we get our way?
PEELE: "They are adamant about achieving something that's
unachievable, which reminds us of a couple of things. it reminds us
of delusion and psychosis."
To a bagger like yourself the above quote might seem to mean the same
thing as "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending is mentally ill."
The Tea Party opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending.
Peele claimed that such things are 'unachievable'
No, he didn't.
Post by Thanatos
(which is idiotic)
and that sticking to those principles is the equivalent of a psychotic
delusion.
No, he didn't.

I posted the actual quotes so that your interpretation of what he
"meant" would not be mistaken for the truth and yet you continue to
repeat the lies as if it didn't matter what the truth is. You deny being
a teabagger, but in cases like this that denial really rings hollow.
Post by Thanatos
So ends the Civility Project.
It ended a long time ago.
--
Barb
Thanatos
2011-08-13 23:46:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is
mentally ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-
ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You
are a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does not
equal "psychologists" and the psychologist in question actually
didn't claim that, "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued
profligate spending is mentally ill."
Yes, he did. That's what the Tea Party stands for and that's what he
described as a mental illness.
BASHIR: What is the effect giving people their way all of the time?
How does it shape our thinking behavior if by being adamant and
dogmatic we get our way?
PEELE: "They are adamant about achieving something that's
unachievable, which reminds us of a couple of things. it reminds us
of delusion and psychosis."
To a bagger like yourself the above quote might seem to mean the same
thing as "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending is mentally ill."
The Tea Party opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending.
Peele claimed that such things are 'unachievable'
No, he didn't.
Yes, he did.
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
(which is idiotic) and that sticking to those principles is
the equivalent of a psychotic delusion.
No, he didn't.
Yes, he did.
Post by Barb May
I posted the actual quotes so that your interpretation of what he
"meant" would not be mistaken for the truth
No you purposefully and inaccurately spun his quotes to pretend he was
referring to something he clearly was not.

If Peele wasn't referring to the Tea Party candidates' fiscal positions
when he claimed "they are adamant about achieving something that's
unachievable", to what exactly is he referring?
Post by Barb May
and yet you continue to repeat the lies as if it didn't matter
what the truth is.
Behold the irony.
Post by Barb May
You deny being a teabagger,
Well, considering there's no such thing as a 'teabagger' in this
context, I would think that would be self-evident. Leave it to you to
complicate the obvious.
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
So ends the Civility Project.
It ended a long time ago.
Yeah, no shit. This is just dawning on you?
Barb May
2011-08-14 01:20:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone
who opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is
mentally ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-
ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC?
You are a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does
not equal "psychologists" and the psychologist in question
actually didn't claim that, "anyone who opposes tax increases
and continued profligate spending is mentally ill."
Yes, he did. That's what the Tea Party stands for and that's what
he described as a mental illness.
BASHIR: What is the effect giving people their way all of the time?
How does it shape our thinking behavior if by being adamant and
dogmatic we get our way?
PEELE: "They are adamant about achieving something that's
unachievable, which reminds us of a couple of things. it reminds us
of delusion and psychosis."
To a bagger like yourself the above quote might seem to mean the
same thing as "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued
profligate spending is mentally ill."
The Tea Party opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending. Peele claimed that such things are 'unachievable'
No, he didn't.
Yes, he did.
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
(which is idiotic) and that sticking to those principles is
the equivalent of a psychotic delusion.
No, he didn't.
Yes, he did.
Post by Barb May
I posted the actual quotes so that your interpretation of what he
"meant" would not be mistaken for the truth
No you purposefully and inaccurately spun his quotes to pretend he was
referring to something he clearly was not.
Nope. And you continue to lie about it.
Post by Thanatos
If Peele wasn't referring to the Tea Party candidates' fiscal
positions when he claimed "they are adamant about achieving something
that's unachievable", to what exactly is he referring?
*people* who get "their way all of the time."

Your ASSunption is not present in the actual quotes or the video. Bashir
clearly says *people* who get "their way all of the time." There was no
reference to the Tea Party by anyone prior to Peele's comment about
"delusion and psychosis."

Right after "delusion and psychosis." was this:
BASHIR: But going back to the Tea Party in this country.

If you watch the video there is no break between the quotes. Nothing was
edited out. They went directly from "delusion and psychosis" to "going
back to the Tea Party in this country."

I know you want to ignore that part because you'll never admit you are
wrong. And yet there it is. How do YOU explain it?
--
Barb
gangle
2011-08-14 10:53:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone
who opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is
mentally ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-
ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC?
You are a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does
not equal "psychologists" and the psychologist in question
actually didn't claim that, "anyone who opposes tax increases
and continued profligate spending is mentally ill."
Yes, he did. That's what the Tea Party stands for and that's what
he described as a mental illness.
BASHIR: What is the effect giving people their way all of the time?
How does it shape our thinking behavior if by being adamant and
dogmatic we get our way?
PEELE: "They are adamant about achieving something that's
unachievable, which reminds us of a couple of things. it reminds us
of delusion and psychosis."
To a bagger like yourself the above quote might seem to mean the
same thing as "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued
profligate spending is mentally ill."
The Tea Party opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending. Peele claimed that such things are 'unachievable'
No, he didn't.
Yes, he did.
Post by Barb May
Post by Thanatos
(which is idiotic) and that sticking to those principles is
the equivalent of a psychotic delusion.
No, he didn't.
Yes, he did.
Post by Barb May
I posted the actual quotes so that your interpretation of what he
"meant" would not be mistaken for the truth
No you purposefully and inaccurately spun his quotes to pretend he was
referring to something he clearly was not.
Nope. And you continue to lie about it.
Post by Thanatos
If Peele wasn't referring to the Tea Party candidates' fiscal
positions when he claimed "they are adamant about achieving something
that's unachievable", to what exactly is he referring?
*people* who get "their way all of the time."
Your ASSunption is not present in the actual quotes or the video.
Bashir clearly says *people* who get "their way all of the time."
There was no reference to the Tea Party by anyone prior to Peele's
comment about "delusion and psychosis."
BASHIR: But going back to the Tea Party in this country.
If you watch the video there is no break between the quotes. Nothing
was edited out. They went directly from "delusion and psychosis" to
"going back to the Tea Party in this country."
I know you want to ignore that part because you'll never admit you are
wrong. And yet there it is. How do YOU explain it?
If he tries at all, it will have to be sans logic.

trotsky
2011-08-13 11:57:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Barb May
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally
ill. ----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
Yes, they are.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-guest-call-tea-partiers-ad
dicts-delusional_581987.html
So in your toilet bowl you call a mind "MSNBC host" = MSNBC? You are
a stupid piece of crap.
Well that one is debatable but certainly one psychologist does not equal
"psychologists" and the psychologist in question actually didn't claim
that, "anyone who opposes tax increases and continued profligate
spending is mentally ill."
Yes, he did. That's what the Tea Party stands for and that's what he
described as a mental illness.
Teabagger alert.
Ubiquitous
2011-08-10 09:19:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who opposes
tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally ill.
----------------------------------
SN: No, they're not.
TROLL-O-METER

5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 17:41:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Thanatos
Post by Ubiquitous
All the terms of invective used against the Tea Party more
accurately capture the banditry and indulgence of the establishment.
What is "responsible" about spending money that the U.S. government
doesn't have? What is "balanced" about running
up debt at a slightly lower rate?
MSNBC is now bringing on psychologists to claim that anyone who
opposes tax increases and continued profligate spending is mentally
ill.
Case in point--Thanny the teabagger!
Epithet noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.


--
"Admittedly, conservatives give as good as they get. The difference
between us and [leftists] is that we can argue as well as inveigh.
They can only hurl invectives." -- Don Feder
Ubiquitous
2011-08-05 23:51:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Did Vice President Biden liken Tea Party Republicans to terrorists in a
meeting with House Democrats? Eyewitnesses say yes, but he denies it,
Politico reports:

Biden was agreeing with a line of argument made by Rep. Mike
Doyle (D-Pa.) at a two-hour, closed-door Democratic Caucus
meeting.

"We have negotiated with terrorists," an angry Doyle said,
according to sources in the room. "This small group of
terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money."

Biden, driven by his Democratic allies' misgivings about the
debt-limit deal, responded: "They have acted like terrorists."

Biden's office initially declined to comment about what the
vice president said inside the closed-door session, but after
Politico published the remarks, spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff
said: "The word was used by several members of Congress. The
vice president does not believe it's an appropriate term in
political discourse."

Whether Biden said it or not, all parties seem to agree that Doyle and
perhaps other House Democrats did. And plenty of prominent elite
liberals have sounded the theme. It's become commonplace on the opinion
pages of the New York Times, where Joe Nocera rants:

You know what they say: Never negotiate with terrorists. It
only encourages them. These last few months, much of the
country has watched in horror as the Tea Party Republicans
have waged jihad on the American people. . . . Their goal,
they believed, was worth blowing up the country for, if that's
what it took. . . . For now, the Tea Party Republicans can
put aside their suicide vests. But rest assured: They'll have
them on again soon enough.

Last Wednesday Thomas Friedman described the Tea Party as the GOP's
"Hezbollah faction." The same day Maureen Dowd approvingly quoted "some
Democrats" as describing the Tea Party as "the Republican 'Taliban
wing.' " (In fairness we should note that the Times's Roger Cohen
registered a partial dissent: "Hatred of Muslims . . . is a growing
political industry. It's odious, dangerous and racist.")

And it's not just the Times. NewsBusters.org quotes liberal Bloomberg
columnist Margaret Carlson: "There's a nihilist caucus which is,
'Listen, we want to burn the place down.' I mean, they're not, they've
strapped explosives to the Capitol and they think they are immune from
it." NewsButsers also notes a cartoon from David Fitzsimmons of the
(Tucson) Arizona Daily Star depicting President Obama ordering Navy
SEALs to stage a bin Laden-style raid on the House side of the Capitol.

Politico itself got into the act, running two op-eds last week on the
theme: "The Tea Party Taliban" by Martin Frost (a Democratic
ex-congressman) and "The Tea Party's Terrorist Tactics" by William
Yeomans, former chief counsel to Sen. Ted Kennedy. Mary Jo Kopechne's
former chief counsel could not be reached for comment.

Hey, what ever happened to civility?

That's not a rhetorical question. Back in January, after a madman shot
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and a crowd of her constituents, gravely
wounding her and killing six, the liberal elite briefly developed an
obsession with the supposed dangers of uncivil political rhetoric.

Before a suspect had even been identified, as we noted Jan. 10,
Fitzsimmons, the Tucson cartoonist, was on CNN blaming "the right in
Arizona" for "stoking the fire of heated anger and rage" and making the
attack "inevitable." Fitzsimmons later apologized, but former Enron
adviser Paul Krugman did not. Sources inside Krugman's head told him
that the Tea Party dunnit:

For those wondering why a Blue Dog Democrat, the kind
Republicans might be able to work with, might be a target,
the answer is that she's a Democrat who survived what was
otherwise a GOP sweep in Arizona, precisely because the
Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist.

These stories were false--which didn't stop the Times from publishing an
editorial scapegoating conservatives for the Tucson shooting after it
was clear the suspect had no recognizable political motive. And Krugman
not only did not apologize for his error but dowdified a quote from Rep.
Michele Bachmann so as to charge her falsely with employing
"eliminationist rhetoric."

There were many other examples, including Hendrik Hertzberg of The New
Yorker, who complained of "shocking vituperation and hatred, virtually
all of it coming from people who call themselves conservatives." When
his fellow liberals falsely accused conservatives of mass murder,
Hertzberg was unshocked. Newsweek's Jonathan Alter had Giffords's future
all planned out:

Sad to say, if Giffords had died, she would have been mourned
and soon the conversation would have moved on. But Giffords
lives, thank God, which offers other possibilities. We won't
know for weeks or months whether she can function in public.
If she can, she will prove a powerful referee of the boundaries
of public discourse--more influential, perhaps, than the
president himself.

Then it was February, and the liberal elite lost all interest in
policing "the boundaries of public discourse." The faux goo-goo group
Common Cause held a rally where participants urged the lynching of
Supreme Court justices. Liberals--including at least one Democratic
congressman--employed actual violent rhetoric against Wisconsin's Gov.
Scott Walker, whose state budget reforms stripped government employee
unions of many of their expensive privileges.

And now, of course, all of liberaldom is likening the Tea Party to
terrorists. But really, that message is entirely consistent with the one
in January, and indeed with the message the liberal elite has been
propagating since the early days of the Obama administration: that the
Tea Party is illegitimate.

"Terrorist," "racist," "uncivil," "insane," the list goes on--in this
context, these words have no real meaning. They are mere epithets. The
Obama presidency has reduced the liberal left to an apoplectic rage. His
Ivy League credentials, superior attitude, pseudointellectual mien and
facile adherence to lefty ideology make him the perfect personification
of the liberal elite. Thus far at least, he has been an utter failure
both at winning public support and at managing the affairs of the
nation.

Obama's failure is the failure of the liberal elite, and that is why
their ressentiment has reached such intensity. Their ideas, such as they
are, are being put to a real-world test and found severely wanting. As a
result, their authority is collapsing. And if there is one thing they
know deep in their bones, it is that they are entitled to that
authority. They lash out, desperately and pathetically, because they
have nothing to offer but fear and anger.

The House erupted in applause as Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords
returned to DC and voted in favor of the bill. It was her first
appearance on Capitol Hill since being shot last January.

Meanwhile, some wonderful news: Thanks to America's superlative medical
system, Rep. Giffords has recovered sufficiently that she returned to
Congress last night to cast a vote on the debt deal. She looked frail
and shaky as she exchanged greetings with colleagues from both sides of
the aisle, but she also talked and waved and seemed completely alert.
Even watching at home on C-Span, it was hard not to be moved. "The
#Capitol looks beautiful and I am honored to be at work tonight,"
Giffords tweeted last night.

Giffords voted "yes" on the bill--the one to which the Tea Party
"terrorists" had forced the president to agree
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-08-06 23:51:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
Froma Harrop, who oversees the "Civility Project" of the National
Conference of Editorial Writers, had penned a column in which she
referred to Tea Party Republicans with what struck us as uncivil
language: "engaged in economic terrorism against the United States . . .
like the al-Qaida bombers . . . delusional . . . dream of restoring some
fantasy caliphate . . . terrorists . . ignoramuses . . . destructive
children . . . extremists."

Harrop, who bears an uncanny resemblance to Baroness Catherine Ashton,
responds on her blog. She explains that "I see incivility as not letting
other people speak their piece. It's not about offering strong opinions.
If someone's opinion is fact-based, then it is permissible in civil
discourse."

Her defense, if we understand correctly, is that her opinion is "fact
based" because Tea Party Republicans are literally terrorists:

As far as the facts are concerned, I stand my ground.
Terrorism is not confined to physical attacks. In May, The
Wall Street Journal reported this:

"The Pentagon has concluded that computer sabotage coming from
another country can constitute an act of war, a finding that
for the first time opens the door for the U.S. to respond
using traditional military force."

And

" 'If you shut down our power grid, maybe well [sic in Harrop
post; the original said "maybe we will"] put a missile down
one of your smokestacks,' said a military official."

Blowing up the U.S. economy to make a point would be an even
more serious attack, in my book. And that's what the tea party
saboteurs were threatening. They are what they are.

There are three obvious problems with this. First, nobody was
threatening actually to blow anything up; that is but a metaphor.
Second, computer sabotage is a crime; voting against raising the debt
limit, even if doing so is unwise or destructive, is a legitimate
exercise of a democratically elected lawmaker's authority.

Third, does Harrop really mean to suggest that military action would
have been appropriate to force Congress to raise the debt ceiling, or to
punish it for having failed to do so? We don't think so, but if she
isn't, the analogy falls apart.

She would have been better off just admitting that the column was
foolishly intemperate.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-08-09 21:54:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
By Aaron Goldstein

When one considers the casualness with which left-wing politicians and
media figures use words like "terrorist," "jihad" and "Wahhabis" to
describe the Tea Party, one cannot help but wonder what shapes such
attitudes in the first place.

In order to satisfy such curiosity, it is necessary to spend time among
liberals, socialists, communists and self-described progressives. I
realize this is not the way a lot of conservatives would want to spend
their morning -- much less their afternoon or evening. Yet when in a
political conflict, especially one that is likely to shape the very
future of this country, it is most helpful for conservatives to know our
adversaries as well as we know ourselves.

This is what motivated me to wake far earlier than usual last Sunday
morning and travel across the Charles River to the People's Republic of
Cambridge to attend a discussion about the Tea Party sponsored by the
Ethical Society of Boston. The organization describes itself as "a
non-theistic humanistic religious and educational fellowship inspired by
the ideal that the supreme aim of human life is working to create a more
humane society." So of course when a woman named Mary said she was
curious about the Tea Party, another woman replied to her, "I hope
you're not coming for a positive view." Ah, so it was going to be that
sort of discussion.

The discussion was facilitated by a bearded gentleman named Gaston. By
his own admission he did not consider himself "a very good facilitator"
and made it very clear he held the Tea Party in little esteem. But he
promised to "stand back." His earlier modesty notwithstanding, Gaston
ensured all views were heard and even tried to find areas of common
ground between "progressives" and Tea Partiers, albeit unsuccessfully.

Of course, a vast majority of the participants held the Tea Party in
very little regard. A gentleman named Marvin described Tea Party
activists as "irrational" and said their political positions "aren't
ideas but a string of words." For good measure, he threw the Koch
Brothers into the mix. A woman named Sheila chimed in and said that Tea
Party activists weren't so much irrational as they were "simplistic"
because they didn't take technological advancements such as the Internet
into account (despite all evidence to the contrary). A man named Bill
characterized the Tea Party as "white, right religious types." Another
man named John said the Tea Party members who had been elected to
Congress were "dangerous persons" because their opposition to the debt
ceiling bill "put us on the brink of disaster." To which I queried, "Are
the Democrats who voted against the bill also dangerous persons?"

Yet a recurring question came up during the course of the discussion:
"What motivates the Tea Party?" During the break, I was approached by
Sheila and we had a pleasant conversation. I made a point of asking her
if she either personally knew or had met any Tea Party activists. She
replied in the negative. I suggested that it if she and others wanted to
know what motivates Tea Partiers that it would do them no harm in
talking to them. "Oh, I don't need to talk to them to know what they're
about," she replied. "There's plenty of information around that I can
read."

"So what do you read?" I asked. Sheila retorted, "I read the New York
Times, the Boston Globe and the New Yorker."

Well, I had to ask. After all, this would be the same New York Times in
which Thomas Friedman described the Tea Party as a "Hezbollah faction"
bent on taking Republicans "on a suicide mission." Alas, The Gray Lady
can always be relied upon to assess the Tea Party with language both
rich in restraint and in sobriety. But to give Sheila her due she did
make a point of saying that she not only liked Jeff Jacoby, the lone
conservative columnist at the Boston Globe, but that she also liked his
column last week in which he chastised Friedman and others for their
incendiary language against the Tea Party.


Yet for every left-winger who acknowledges that their leading lights are
capable of directing them towards darkness there are a thousand
liberals, socialists, communists and self-described progressives who are
perfectly content to equate Tea Partiers with terrorists. When Marvin
took me to task for defending the Tea Party members who voted against
raising the debt ceiling, I asked him if he honestly considered them to
be terrorists. "Yes, because they instilled fear into people," said
Marvin. "But surely there is a difference between someone who casts a no
vote in Congress and someone who navigates an airplane into a building,"
I said. Marvin nonchalantly quipped, "It depends on how you use the word
terrorist." So in Marvin's world (and that of many leftists in this
country), there is no difference between those who want limited
government and those responsible for the attacks of September 11, 2001.
If this isn't a sad state of affairs nearly a decade removed from that
act of evil, then I don't know what is.

I made a point of reiterating publicly what I said privately to Sheila.
If progressives really want to know what the Tea Party is about, then
they should go talk to them. You don't have to agree with them, but just
hear them out. Gaston seemed quite amenable to this idea and suggested
that the Ethical Society reach out to the Tea Party. However, other
members threw cold water on it, suggesting that they had more pressing
matters to attend to (like combating racism and promoting humanism). Of
course, how is it that you can promote humanism if you don't view people
who embrace the Tea Party as human beings?
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-08-09 23:43:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
"Unless things change and Obama can run on accomplishments, he will have
to kill Romney," an unnamed "prominent Democratic strategist aligned
with the White House" tells Politico.com. Of course he is referring to
character assassination rather than the literal kind:

The onslaught would have two aspects. The first is personal:
Obama's reelection campaign will portray the public Romney
as inauthentic, unprincipled and, in a word used repeatedly
by Obama's advisers in about a dozen interviews, "weird."

"First, they've got to like you, and there's not a lot to
like about Mitt Romney," said Chicago Democratic consultant
Pete Giangreco, who worked on Obama's 2008 campaign. "There's
no way to hide this guy and hide his innate phoniness."

A senior Obama adviser was even more cutting, suggesting that
the Republican's personal awkwardness will turn off voters.

"There's a weirdness factor with Romney, and it remains to
be seen how he wears with the public," the adviser said,
noting that the contrasts they'd drive between the president
and the former Massachusetts governor would be "based on
character to a great extent."

Assuming Romney is the nominee, this seems as plausible an attack as
any. Certainly he is vulnerable to the charge of being "inauthentic and
unprincipled."

On the other hand, does Barack Obama, the president from the faculty
lounge by way of Hawaii, Indonesia and Jeremiah Wright's church, really
want to run a campaign on the question of who is more "weird"? Campaign
operatives tell Politico they are looking for inspiration to President
Bush's campaign against John Kerry, the haughty, French-looking
Massachusetts Democrat who by the way served in Vietnam. But Obama
running as a regular guy is about as credible as _Kerry_ running as a
war hero.

The Politico story also mentions in passing that "Obama remains
personally popular." No doubt there are numbers to back up this
assertion, but every time we see it, we can't help thinking that Obama
is about as "personally popular" as Willy Loman was "well liked."
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Ubiquitous
2011-08-10 00:02:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Barb May
The Civility Pledge
* will be civil in my public discourse and behavior.
* will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them.
* will stand against incivility when I see it.
If you've been holding your breath waiting for civility diva Froma
Harrop to apologize for calling Tea Party members terrorists, you may
want to exhale. Apparently she is not going to do this. Yeah, you might
have guessed, but Harrop has weighed in with another defiant blog post.

Harrop, whose resemblance to Baroness Catherine Ashton is downright
frightening, sees in yesterday's stock-market decline confirmation "that
the tea party is poison to America and its economy." Although she admits
she "can't argue with its members," she can call them names, and she
does just that, insulating herself from any return fire by keeping
comments on her blog closed. Along with "poison," her latest epithets
include "national wrecking party" and "swarms."

Harrop, who heads the National Conference of Editorial Writers, quotes
one of her employees, "Civility Project" director Frank Partsch,
explaining what the group means by "civility":

Let's give some individual thought to what incivility is and
what it is not. Let's be thinking about where we, individually,
might draw the line between robust, hard-hitting, withering
commentary and, on the other hand, cheap-shot, below-the-belt
incivility. Most of us know that effectively scoring on a point
of argument opens us to the accusation of mean-spiritedness.
It comes with the territory, and a commitment to civility
should not suggest that punches will be pulled in order to
avoid such accusations.

It's possible that a good part of the audience isn't ready
for the finer distinctions. So our commitment to civility may
have to involve, in part, building up the understanding that
not every smartly-targeted rhetorical barb is an automatic
example of incivility.

So promoting "civility" means "building up the understanding" that
mindless name-calling isn't uncivil so long as they say it's OK. The
National Conference of Editorial Writers portentously proclaims the aim
of the Civility Project is to "raise the quality of the national
conversation." In practice, however, Harrop and Partsch are settling for
the lesser but still worthy goal of supplying the national conversation
with some comic relief.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Loading...