|
Post by beth on Mar 25, 2010 13:29:16 GMT
One of my favorite columnists manages, once again, to hit the proverbial nail on the head. If anyone is at all interested in trying to understand what is happening here - this will help. An Absence of Class By BOB HERBERT Published: March 22, 2010 Some of the images from the run-up to Sunday’s landmark health care vote in the House of Representatives should be seared into the nation’s consciousness. We are so far, in so many ways, from being a class act. Some of the images from the run-up to Sunday’s landmark health care vote in the House of Representatives should be seared into the nation’s consciousness. We are so far, in so many ways, from being a class act. A group of lowlifes at a Tea Party rally in Columbus, Ohio, last week taunted and humiliated a man who was sitting on the ground with a sign that said he had Parkinson’s disease. The disgusting behavior was captured on a widely circulated videotape. One of the Tea Party protesters leaned over the man and sneered: “If you’re looking for a handout, you’re in the wrong end of town.” Another threw money at the man, first one bill and then another, and said contemptuously, “I’ll pay for this guy. Here you go. Start a pot.” In Washington on Saturday, opponents of the health care legislation spit on a black congressman and shouted racial slurs at two others, including John Lewis, one of the great heroes of the civil rights movement. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, was taunted because he is gay. At some point, we have to decide as a country that we just can’t have this: We can’t allow ourselves to remain silent as foaming-at-the-mouth protesters scream the vilest of epithets at members of Congress — epithets that The Times will not allow me to repeat here. It is 2010, which means it is way past time for decent Americans to rise up against this kind of garbage, to fight it aggressively wherever it appears. And it is time for every American of good will to hold the Republican Party accountable for its role in tolerating, shielding and encouraging foul, mean-spirited and bigoted behavior in its ranks and among its strongest supporters. For decades the G.O.P. has been the party of fear, ignorance and divisiveness. All you have to do is look around to see what it has done to the country. The greatest economic inequality since the Gilded Age was followed by a near-total collapse of the overall economy. As a country, we have a monumental mess on our hands and still the Republicans have nothing to offer in the way of a remedy except more tax cuts for the rich. This is the party of trickle down and weapons of mass destruction, the party of birthers and death-panel lunatics. This is the party that genuflects at the altar of right-wing talk radio, with its insane, nauseating, nonstop commitment to hatred and bigotry. Glenn Beck of Fox News has called President Obama a “racist” and asserted that he “has exposed himself as a guy, over and over and over again, who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture.” Mike Huckabee, a former Republican presidential candidate, has said of Mr. Obama’s economic policies: “Lenin and Stalin would love this stuff.” The G.O.P. poisons the political atmosphere and then has the gall to complain about an absence of bipartisanship. The toxic clouds that are the inevitable result of the fear and the bitter conflicts so relentlessly stoked by the Republican Party — think blacks against whites, gays versus straights, and a whole range of folks against immigrants — tend to obscure the tremendous damage that the party’s policies have inflicted on the country. If people are arguing over immigrants or abortion or whether gays should be allowed to marry, they’re not calling the G.O.P. to account for (to take just one example) the horribly destructive policy of cutting taxes while the nation was fighting two wars. If you’re all fired up about Republican-inspired tales of Democrats planning to send grandma to some death chamber, you’ll never get to the G.O.P.’s war against the right of ordinary workers to organize and negotiate in their own best interests — a war that has diminished living standards for working people for decades. With a freer hand, the Republicans would have done more damage. George W. Bush tried to undermine Social Security. John McCain was willing to put Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the Oval Office and thought Phil Gramm would have made a crackerjack Treasury secretary. (For those who may not remember, Mr. Gramm was a deregulation zealot who told us during the presidential campaign that we were suffering from a “mental recession.”) A party that promotes ignorance (“Just say no to global warming”) and provides a safe house for bigotry cannot serve the best interests of our country. Back in the 1960s, John Lewis risked his life and endured savage beatings to secure fundamental rights for black Americans while right-wing Republicans like Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan were lining up with segregationist Democrats to oppose landmark civil rights legislation. Since then, the right-wingers have taken over the G.O.P. and Mr. Lewis, now a congressman, must still endure the garbage they have wrought. www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/opinion/23herbert.html?src=me&ref=general
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Mar 25, 2010 13:49:07 GMT
Well, Huckabee is a deranged clown.
I've had great fun on a Christian board I belong to which is overwhelmingly (though mercifully not exclusively) dominated by the religious right.
I've particularly enjoyed pointing out to them that Huckabee's name adds up to 666 so he must be the Beast of Revelation!
As for the contemptible behaviour of the lunatics who made fun of disabled people, they're obviously just a bunch of wimps.
What they need is a good kicking by decent people!
(Sorry, lost my temper just THINKING about the mentality of people who would behave that way!)
|
|
|
Post by Ben Lomond on Mar 25, 2010 15:50:45 GMT
It is this polarisation that one sees in America that is so worrying to me. How CAN presumably intelligent and educated people act is such a manner? One can disagree with a particular piece of legislation, and one can argue for or against it. We have ALL done that. But to go to such extremes; to use absolute hatred, and to detest those who hold differing views....this is so very wrong, and not a little worrying.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Mar 25, 2010 16:05:53 GMT
It is this polarisation that one sees in America that is so worrying to me. How CAN presumably intelligent and educated people act is such a manner? One can disagree with a particular piece of legislation, and one can argue for or against it. We have ALL done that. But to go to such extremes; to use absolute hatred, and to detest those who hold differing views....this is so very wrong, and not a little worrying. To be fair to the American Right though Ned they are perhaps the worse kind of Right Wingers on the planet, but are they THAT worse than the Right anywhere in Europe? Are they a lot worse than the the bitterest parts of the British Right for example? I have seen the same amount of hatred for the poor in this Country. It is not not difficult to imagine the same kind of nonsense in this Country had we not had the NHS for over sixty years. If Labour had attempted to start the NHS today, the Daily Hate and other Tory rags would have had a field day. In fact, you would not have to look hard for people in the nuttier end of the Tory Party who would quite happily scrap the NHS and the Welfare State given half the chance. Dan Hannon has been bad mouthing the NHS in America for the last year, I bet he speaks for more Tories than the leadership would care to admit.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 25, 2010 17:22:29 GMT
thankfully, these are just the nutjobs who are stupid enough to pay attention to the propaganda put out by faux news. these are the fools who detest anyone that doesn't have a yacht docked at the marina and a million dollar house in a gated community. mommy and daddy gave them everything, including a college education, and they have never done an honest day's work in their lives, so they hate everyone who does actually work for a living. you have seen on here with das doing the exact same thing. they are called tea baggers
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 25, 2010 23:43:24 GMT
This moron Herbert makes a fool of himself every time he opens his mouth. This time he says, "At some point, we have to decide as a country that we just can’t have this: We can’t allow ourselves to remain silent as foaming-at-the-mouth protesters scream the vilest of epithets at members of Congress — epithets that The Times will not allow me to repeat here. "
Where was this dipshit when the Iraq anti-war protesters were doing the same thing and making total fools of themselves?
What a complete bozo with zero intelligence. Geez Beth, how could you put up such a lame post?
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 26, 2010 9:58:33 GMT
This moron Herbert makes a fool of himself every time he opens his mouth. This time he says, "At some point, we have to decide as a country that we just can’t have this: We can’t allow ourselves to remain silent as foaming-at-the-mouth protesters scream the vilest of epithets at members of Congress — epithets that The Times will not allow me to repeat here. " Where was this dipshit when the Iraq anti-war protesters were doing the same thing and making total fools of themselves? What a complete bozo with zero intelligence. Geez Beth, how could you put up such a lame post? most of the people on this board are not americans lad. they have a right to know how demented republicans are. beth simply posted a piece that presented the absolute truth about the tea bagger nutjobs, and of course, republicans in general why would you pull up something that has absolutely NO relevance to the subject? in the first place, the people that know we had no right invading iraq and were protesting, were NOT making stupid phone calls with death threats to anyone. get a grip laddie. that wasn't even a good try
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 27, 2010 1:06:53 GMT
Oh Geez Jumbo. Sometimes I think you're a bright guy with some valid points. This is not one of those times. Those anti-war protesters were morons. I'm sorry if you don't like the term but facts are facts and morons is what they were/are. I'm thinking of morons like Cindy Sheehan and worse (the Indymedia crowd and the Pacifica Radio morons like Amy Goodman and prominent international morons like Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky). These people are all dumber than cement.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 27, 2010 9:49:26 GMT
to be anti war is not necessarily moronic..... there are wars and there are wars.......irak and afghanistan are wars that should never have happened...and the reality is they are not actually wars as i understand wars.....its a no win situation
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 27, 2010 12:02:59 GMT
to be anti war is not necessarily moronic..... there are wars and there are wars.......irak and afghanistan are wars that should never have happened...and the reality is they are not actually wars as i understand wars.....its a no win situation you're half right. there was never ANY justification for invading iraq. iraq has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with fighting terrorism, although it does now since dumbya allowed the terrorists into iraq. sadaam killed them when he found them, but dumbya just opened the door for them. that's just the simple reality. afghanistan however, is a totally different matter. the taliban are terrorists and were giving al qeda free access. that WAS a legitimate invasion. the war in afghanistan has not been successful because dumbya was so stupid and invaded iraq, instead of putting those troops in afghanistan as an intelligent person would. there is also the problem, just as in vietnam, of the government tying the troops hands and not allowing them to fight the war. my ol' lady's son is sitting up on a mountaintop on the pakistani border. they can look down and see the garbage coming in through the valley, but they're not allowed to kill them. that is not how you win a war
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 27, 2010 12:09:25 GMT
Oh Geez Jumbo. Sometimes I think you're a bright guy with some valid points. This is not one of those times. Those anti-war protesters were morons. I'm sorry if you don't like the term but facts are facts and morons is what they were/are. I'm thinking of morons like Cindy Sheehan and worse (the Indymedia crowd and the Pacifica Radio morons like Amy Goodman and prominent international morons like Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky). These people are all dumber than cement. that is the problem. you are bright, but simply refuse to open your eyes, instead, choosing to blindly follow the mindless lunacy of the nutjobs at faux news. i don't care much for cindy sheehan at all. i have no use whatsoever for the imbeciles that protest war for the sake of protesting war. NO intelligent person is opposed to war, when it's necessary and for the right reason. there was NO legitimate reason for invading iraq, and it certainly wasn't necessary. there were NO, as in zip, zilch, nada, none, terrorists in iraq dumbya, dickey boy, donny and the lunatics that hallucinated the weapons of mass destruction and flat out lied to the people SOLELY so that they could further the goals of pnac needed to be opposed by every right thinking american
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 27, 2010 14:55:01 GMT
exactly you win a war by fighting a war not trying for hearts and minds...who the hell careas about hearts and minds,,,that comes after you have won and you dont win a war by telling all and sundry what your objectives are and what your doing next...as for afghanistan...we have no reason to be there...nor irak...neither of those two places were of importance before they were invaded..certainly not afghanistan and hussain had irak well under control the enemy is saudi and saudi mindset and saudi money....when you have a snake you cut off its head not bits of its tail
|
|
|
Post by clemiethedog on Mar 27, 2010 15:21:46 GMT
I've protested against the Iraq war. I am a mite disappointed, BM, that you think I am a moron. An older relative of mine had a friend who committed suicide by self-immolation protesting the illegal US military action in Vietnam. To me, he was a heroic figure.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 27, 2010 15:52:54 GMT
I've protested against the Iraq war. I am a mite disappointed, BM, that you think I am a moron. An older relative of mine had a friend who committed suicide by self-immolation protesting the illegal US military action in Vietnam. To me, he was a heroic figure. did he protest the french military action in vietnam? as i said, it depends upon your reasons for protesting. if you are protesting because you are a world peace nutjob, that's what you are. if you are protesting a particular war because it is not justifiable, you are a heroic figure
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 27, 2010 15:54:50 GMT
exactly you win a war by fighting a war not trying for hearts and minds...who the hell careas about hearts and minds,,,that comes after you have won and you dont win a war by telling all and sundry what your objectives are and what your doing next...as for afghanistan...we have no reason to be there...nor irak...neither of those two places were of importance before they were invaded..certainly not afghanistan and hussain had irak well under control the enemy is saudi and saudi mindset and saudi money....when you have a snake you cut off its head not bits of its tail change that to syrians, and you have a point. the saudis are certainly culpable for some things, but, they are one of the more civilized countries in an area of lunatics
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 27, 2010 20:17:52 GMT
I call them as I see them.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 27, 2010 20:23:43 GMT
I saved this article because I thought it was one of the best pieces of journalism that I've ever run across in our national media. In rereading it now, I'm struck once again by how accurate and appropriate it was at the time and how much I'm in total agreement with it now.
Bush's America: 100% Al-Qaeda Free Since 2001
In a conversation recently, I mentioned as an aside what a great president George Bush has been and my friend was surprised. I was surprised that he was surprised.
I generally don't write columns about the manifestly obvious, but, yes, the man responsible for keeping Americans safe from another terrorist attack on American soil for nearly seven years now will go down in history as one of America's greatest presidents.
Produce one person who believed, on Sept. 12, 2001, that there would not be another attack for seven years, and I'll consider downgrading Bush from "Great" to "Really Good."
Merely taking out Saddam Hussein and his winsome sons Uday and Qusay (Hussein family slogan: "We're the Rape Room People!") constitutes a greater humanitarian accomplishment than anything Bill Clinton ever did -- and I'm including remembering Monica's name on the sixth sexual encounter.
But unlike liberals, who are so anxious to send American troops to Rwanda or Darfur, Republicans oppose deploying U.S. troops for purely humanitarian purposes. We invaded Iraq to protect America.
It is unquestionable that Bush has made this country safe by keeping Islamic lunatics pinned down fighting our troops in Iraq. In the past few years, our brave troops have killed more than 20,000 al-Qaida and other Islamic militants in Iraq alone. That's 20,000 terrorists who will never board a plane headed for JFK -- or a landmark building, for that matter.
We are, in fact, fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them at, say, the corner of 72nd and Columbus in Manhattan -- the mere mention of which never fails to enrage liberals, which is why you should say it as often as possible.
The Iraq war has been a stunning success. The Iraqi army is "standing up" (as they say), fat Muqtada al-Sadr --the Dr. Phil of Islamofascist radicalism -- has waddled off in retreat to Iran, and Sadr City and Basra are no longer war zones. Our servicemen must be baffled by the constant nay-saying coming from their own country.
The Iraqis have a democracy -- a miracle on the order of flush toilets in that godforsaken region of the world. Despite its newness, Iraq's democracy appears to be no more dysfunctional than one that would condemn a man who has kept the nation safe for seven years while deifying a man who has accomplished absolutely nothing in his entire life except to give speeches about "change."
(Guess what Bill Clinton's campaign theme was in 1992? You are wrong if you guessed: "bringing dignity back to the White House." It was "change." In January 1992, James Carville told Steve Daley of The Chicago Tribune that it had gotten to the point that the press was complaining about Clinton's "constant talk of change.") Monthly casualties in Iraq now come in slightly lower than a weekend with Anna Nicole Smith. According to a CNN report last week, for the entire month of May, there were only 19 troop deaths in Iraq. (Last year, five people on average were shot every day in Chicago.) With Iraqi deaths at an all-time low, Iraq is safer than Detroit -- although the Middle Eastern food is still better in Detroit.
Al-Qaida is virtually destroyed, surprising even the CIA. Two weeks ago, The Washington Post reported: "Less than a year after his agency warned of new threats from a resurgent al-Qaida, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden now portrays the terrorist movement as essentially defeated in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and on the defensive throughout much of the rest of the world, including in its presumed haven along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border."
It's almost as if there's been some sort of "surge" going on, as strange as that sounds.
Just this week, The New York Times reported that al-Qaida and other terrorist groups in Southeast Asia have all but disappeared, starved of money and support. The U.S. and Australia have been working closely with the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, sending them counterterrorism equipment and personnel.
But no one notices when 9/11 doesn't happen. Indeed, if we had somehow stopped the 9/11 attack, we'd all be watching Mohammed Atta being interviewed on MSNBC, explaining his lawsuit against the Bush administration. Maureen Dowd would be writing columns describing Khalid Sheik Mohammed as a "wannabe" terrorist being treated like Genghis Khan by an excitable Bush administration.
We begin to forget what it was like to turn on the TV, see a tornado, a car chase or another Pamela Anderson marriage and think: Good -- another day without a terrorist attack.
But liberals have only blind hatred for Bush -- and for those brute American interrogators who do not supply extra helpings of bearnaise sauce to the little darlings at Guantanamo with sufficient alacrity.
The sheer repetition of lies about Bush is wearing people down. There is not a liberal in this country worthy of kissing Bush's rear end, but the weakest members of the herd run from Bush. Compared to the lickspittles denying and attacking him, Bush is a moral giant -- if that's not damning with faint praise. John McCain should be so lucky as to be running for Bush's third term. Then he might have a chance.
Ann Coulter June 11, 2008
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 27, 2010 21:23:57 GMT
outright lies and hallucinations is NOT good jounalism lad. as is ALWAYS the case, there's not a word of truth in that entire piece of shyt. of course, that's to be expected when you look at the imbecillic nutjob who wrote it
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 27, 2010 21:30:31 GMT
I call them as I see them. that's the problem. being blind, you don't see reality
|
|
|
Post by beth on Mar 28, 2010 1:57:36 GMT
I call them as I see them. You'll never really see them, das, as long as you're looking the other way. What is that biblical quote? "There are none so blind as those who will not see." ?
|
|