Why Some Libnerals Deserve Contempt

[SuperScout]

Your observation that the Liberal-Anarchist Party is alive and well is also on-target. Sadly, this group seems to be taking over the Democratic Party - that spinning sound you hear is the likes of Sam Rayburn, John Nance Garner, and other traditional Democrats rolling over in their respective graves because of the abdication of the current Democratic party leadership to these anarchists. Far be it from me to impugn the character of every Democrat - that certainly wasn't my intent. I do find it more than simply dismaying that the far left turn the party has taken shows up more as anarchists and anti-Americanism than in anything positive.

[Keith_Hixson]

In the state of Washington we had a couple of Great U.S. Senators that were Democrats. Jackson and Magnuson. They were conservative but also loyal to the Party's Tradition of being a representive of the common person on the street. They would be rolling over in their graves at recent turns of extreme liberalism (I don't like to call it liberal because that is an insult to old fashion liberals) in the Democratic Pary. My daughter said, "we need more parties in the United States." Let the Ultra Liberals have their own party and the Ultra Conservatives have their own party then we'd know exactly what the candidates stand for.

The ultra liberal tree hugger, peta supporter, anarchist should have their own party then we would all know exactly what their philosophies are.

Keith

[Gimpy]

Er, sorry, I meant SUPER---he, he, he.

There you go again. STILL ridin that "one horse poney", ain't ya!

Now you see WHY I don't come around here much anymore.

and before you say it----yea, I pretty much "bash" the other "side" of the political spectrum frequently as well. BUT, and I defy you to prove DIFFERENTLY! Probably 98% (or more) of MY accusations and condemnations of the "REPUBS" are SOLELY directed at their piss-poor record of deception, denial and disgusting LACK of support of miliatry veterans (another point of factual information I defy you to subvert with your right-wing rhetoric).

No, I DO NOT---REPEAT---DO NOT--agree with that "jerk" you've mentioned in your "piece" afformentioned.

I AM a LIBERAL and damn PROUD OF IT! I am NOT proud of some (just a few however) of the other "liberals" in this country, or elsewhere for that matter, for some of their outrageous behavior and/or comments they've exibited. But, they have a RIGHT to their OPINION----Just as you do.

But, it appears that YOU on the other hand are in "lock-step" with most of the radical of right-wing extremists that your "party" has to offer---no MATTER that their outrageous record of piss-poor performance against the very majority of "us" veterans that you "rail" to so support yourself????? How in the name of hell can you DENY that these so-called "patriotic, flag-waving, so-called Christians of the moral right" are donig nothing BUT screwing the eyes out of us while "waving that flag"?????

YOU my friend need to find another "poney" to ride for awhile---you're wearing this one out!

Best regards----

[SuperScout]

If you will be so digitally dexterous, and page back up to the original title, you will note that I'm not impugning the intellect, loyalty, or body temperature of every liberal. Yet you other the other hand, are still riding your one trick pony (it's spelled without an "e") of condemning every Republican ever since they laid waste to Georgia. And I'm glad to read that you don't agree with the writer from Salon.com, but have yet to see any of your Democrat brethen utter one word in opposition to his venomous and obvious hatred of our American military. And yes, even this America-basher has the right to speak his piece, but that doesn't make his utterances any less repugnant, reprehensible, and revolting. Before you fall from your self-righteous perch as the self-anointed and only true defender of veterans' rights and benefits, you might be pleasantly surprised of what I have done behind the scenes to mobilize veterans to lobby for and to campaign for our just due. Now go back out to pature and ride your pony.

[Gimpy]

Since you're so "spell check" correct. You might want to go back and check your OWN. Libnerals?? Pature????

Seems we both possibly suffer from the same malady, huh??

At least we have SOMETHING in common.

BTW---I commend you on whatever efforts you may have employed to UNDO the abomination(s) against the veterans population (disabled or otherwise) that your repugnant (opps, I mean republican) brethren have heaped upon us.

Hmmmmmmmmm, you may have sumthin thare bout thet thare "layin waste to my glorious homeland of Jawga"---

Naw---I'm over that. It's just that the "NEW" repugnant party (damn I did it again!) is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO damn far to the RIGHT it's starting to look a little like that little Austrian fellers political party of the 1930's and 40's. Now don't get me wrong---I'm NOT sayin that ALL republicans are like that---just the so-called leadership of this current "bunch" of "cowboys" and Wall street "phenoms" and their coporate, theiving cohorts!

Whoops---I guess I better watch out, huh? There I go sayin bad things about ol Gee-Dubya again---good thing I don't have a career in country music or the movies---HUH?

[Gimpy]

Since you asked ME to "go back and read what you wrote"---you might like to try that exercise for yourself to see WHY I "responded" with such "vigor"!

And I quote, "you will note that I'm not impugning the intellect, loyalty, or body temperature of every liberal." Your words.

Yet in your OWN words again in your ORIGINAL post, and I quote , "Gary Kamiya, executive editor of the left-leaning Internet journal Salon (www.salon.com), confirms what some Americans have only suspected: Liberals were cheering for the enemy in Iraq." end quote! Your words again!

You my friend are implying and accusing that "Liberals"---ALL LIBERALS were in fact "cheering for the enemy"---and I damn well take exception to that PONY-$HIT!!! (did I spell THAT right????)

[SuperScout]

Did I write that, or was I quoting the author? Hmmmm. Hint: I was quoting the author.

And in case you haven't noted, there are many in the C&W music scene and in other entertainment fields, who are supporting the President. It is really sad that you have stooped to the level of the ultra far left in comparing the President to Hitler. Your grasp of history and of reality are slipping.

[Gimpy]

My "major" WAS world history?

Want to examine some "similarities" between "that" time and circumstances and some of the current adminstrations "tactics".

Let's see now.---Germany 1930's and 40's---In times of war, they said (the Nazi party) there could be only "one people, one nation, and one Commander-in-Chief" ("Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuher"), and so his advocates in the media (radio personalities & some movie directors & producers) began a nationwide campaign charging that critics of his policies were attacking the nation itself!
Those questioning him and those policies were labeled "anti-German" or "not good Germans", and it was widely suggested and reported that they were "aiding the enemies of the state" by failing in "patriotic necessity" of supporting his policies of "total war" against the terrorists Nations attempting to "undo" the "peace loving democratic people of Germany". It was one of his most effective ways of to "stiffle dissent" and pit wage-earning people (from whom most of the German army came) against the "intellectuals and liberals" who were critical of his policies.

Nonetheless, once his "small war" of annexation of Austria was successfully and quickly completed, and appearance of "peace" returned---voices of opposition were raised again in the Homeland. The almost-daily release of news bulletins about the dangers of terrorists communists cells wasn't enough however to rouse the populace and totally suppress dissent.

A "full-out War" was necessary to divert public attention from the growing rumbles within the nation about disappearing dissidents; violence against liberals, Jews, and union leaders; and the epidemic of "crony capitalism" that was producing empires of wealth in the corporate sector but threatening the "middle class" way of life.

About a year after his "annexation" and "liberation" of Austria from it's "decadent & evil regime" Germany invaded Czechoslovakia: the Nation was now fully at war, and all internal dissent was deemed "un-patriotic", "aiding and abetting the enemy" and was therefore suppressed and eventually "outlawed" in the name of "national security"! It was the END of Germany's first experiment with "democracy".

As I conclude this little "review" of history, there are a few things worth mentioning and remembering. By the time of his successful and brief action to "liberate" Austria--in which almost no German blood was shed BTW---. Hitler was the most beloved and popular leader in the history of his nation. Hailed around the world as Time magazine's "Man of The Year".

However, today, as we face financial, political and international crises, it's useful to remember that the ravages of the Great Depression hit Germany and the United States alike. Through the 1930's and 40's however, Hitler and Roosevelt chose very different courses' of action to bring their nations back to power and prosperity. Germay's response was to use government to "empower" corporations and reward the society's richest individuals and their families, privatize most of the "commons" (some services previously ran by the government) under strict "party" supervision, stiffle dissent, strip people of individual constitutional rights, and create an illusion of prosperity through continual patriotic propaganda that promoted expanding the "need" for more war!

America (Roosevelt) on the other hand passed minimum wage laws to raise the middle class living standards, passed and ENFORCED anti-trust laws to diminish the power of corporations, increased taxes on corporations and the wealthiest individuals, created Social Security, and became the "employer" of last resort through programs created to build national infrastructure, promote the arts, replant forests and improve the nations water and energy supplies.

Lastly, reflecting again on "that time" and it's similarities to "our times". The American Heritage Dictionary (Houghton Miffin Company) gave us this definition of the form of government the German "democracy" had become become through Hitler's close alliance with the largest German corporations and his policy of "suppress dissent" and using "war" as a means to keep power: the "definition" is as follows--
"fas-cism" (fbsh'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership and interests, together with belligerent nationalism."

Now don't get me wrong---I'm NOT saying that Gee-Dubya is another "Hitler" and ALL republicans are "facists"----But, I AM saying that those among us that are NOT "aware" of what "history" WAS ----may well be aiding it's "resurgence" by blindly supporting all that is being suggested by the leadership in Washington now! Just because we support our "brothers in arms" does NOT mean we must agree with our country's leaders "reasons" to send them into "harms way"! Sadly, I feel some among us have fallen into that "trap" of "blind faith" in some of our leaders decisions.

Anyway---that's enough "History" for today, Super---still think I'm "slipping"? If so, it's back INTO reality my friend.

Maybe you're sniffing to much of that "mesquite" smoke on your Bar-B-Que down yonder in "Cowboy" land to gret a REAL grasp of "reality", huh??

Have a good one------------------

[blues clues]

oh gimpy old Hitler also said that after the czec. take over that he had no one else to fight,now where have we heard that before.

razz

[1IDVET]

In my opinion, the democratic party has shot itself in the foot, whilst it was in their mouth, during this adventure in the Middle East.
They will be trying to recover from this for the next 2 elections at least.
I think that California's leftists are also going to be in for a rude awakening in the next elections as well.
Dollar to a donut on that.
The liberals have taken this fine state into a $35 billion deficit, think the voters won't notice?
Think the voters won't notice who was against this even after success?
Can the dem's fix it? I don't think they can.
I think they have sealed their fate.
Chalk one up for the good guys.