Political Ideology as Mental Illness

A couple of months ago one of my most loyal readers and political opponents introduced into the comments section of this blog the ideas of one Lyle H. Rossiter Jr., M.D.. Dr. Rossiter, a psychiatrist, published a book in 2005 entitled, “THE LIBERAL MIND: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness” in which he went to great lengths to “prove” that liberals are clinically, mentally ill.

Being very stingy with my time and money, I was not going to invest either fully in this book. Fortunately, Dr. Rossiter gave me a wealth of excerpts on his website from which to draw conclusions. Even with that said, I could only bear to read a small portion without regurgitating the turkey sandwich I had for lunch. Dr. Rossiter gets off on the wrong foot by misappropriating a term from his own profession. He claims, humans are by nature, bipolar. Now, anyone who has watched a week’s worth of Dr. Phil knows that bipolar disorder is synonymous with manic-depression, a condition characterized by alternating states of heightened euphoria and desperately dangerous depression. Dr. Rossiter tosses this definition to the wind and replaces it with the notion that humans are at once autonomous and socially cooperative. The fact that a psychiatrist writing about mental illness would come out of the chute misusing his specialty’s own jargon is a harbinger of things to come. In fact, Dr. Rossiter begins the book by defining things. Well of course. How else can he pull an argument out of his butt unless he first sets up all the parameters that justify his argument.

From the Table of Contents, one gets the impression that Rossiter is going to talk in human developmental terms and be pretty strict about keeping his “diagnosis” of the problem with liberalism clinical. But Rossiter just engages in the same heightened rhetoric of your average card-carrying conservative. An example:

Like all other human beings, the modern liberal reveals his true character, including his madness, in what he values and devalues, in what he articulates with passion. Of special interest, however, are the many values about which the modern liberal mind is not passionate: his agenda does not insist that the individual is the ultimate economic, social and political unit; it does not idealize individual liberty and the structure of law and order essential to it; it does not defend the basic rights of property and contract; it does not aspire to ideals of authentic autonomy and mutuality; it does not preach an ethic of self-reliance and self-determination; it does not praise courage, forbearance or resilience; it does not celebrate the ethics of consent or the blessings of voluntary cooperation. It does not advocate moral rectitude or understand the critical role of morality in human relating. The liberal agenda does not comprehend an identity of competence, appreciate its importance, or analyze the developmental conditions and social institutions that promote its achievement. The liberal agenda does not understand or recognize personal sovereignty or impose strict limits on coercion by the state. It does not celebrate the genuine altruism of private charity. It does not learn history’s lessons on the evils of collectivism.

What the liberal mind is passionate about is a world filled with pity, sorrow, neediness, misfortune, poverty, suspicion, mistrust, anger, exploitation, discrimination, victimization, alienation and injustice. Those who occupy this world are “workers,” “minorities,” “the little guy,” “women,” and the “unemployed.” They are poor, weak, sick, wronged, cheated, oppressed, disenfranchised, exploited and victimized. They bear no responsibility for their problems. None of their agonies are attributable to faults or failings of their own: not to poor choices, bad habits, faulty judgment, wishful thinking, lack of ambition, low frustration tolerance, mental illness or defects in character. None of the victims’ plight is caused by failure to plan for the future or learn from experience. Instead, the “root causes” of all this pain lie in faulty social conditions: poverty, disease, war, ignorance, unemployment, racial prejudice, ethnic and gender discrimination, modern technology, capitalism, globalization and imperialism. In the radical liberal mind, this suffering is inflicted on the innocent by various predators and persecutors: “Big Business,” “Big Corporations,” “greedy capitalists,” U.S. Imperialists,” “the oppressors,” “the rich,” “the wealthy,” “the powerful” and “the selfish.”

The liberal cure for this endless malaise is a very large authoritarian government that regulates and manages society through a cradle to grave agenda of redistributive caretaking. It is a government everywhere doing everything for everyone. The liberal motto is “In Government We Trust.” To rescue the people from their troubled lives, the agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. With liberal intellectuals sharing the glory, the liberal politician is the hero in this melodrama. He takes credit for providing his constituents with whatever they want or need even though he has not produced by his own effort any of the goods, services or status transferred to them but has instead taken them from others by force.

I’ve bold-faced the more incredible parts of this drivel. Notice the references to redistribution and collectivism. Oh yes, liberals are socialists. Notice the accusations of no moral core. We are rude, scapegoating, anti-family, baby killing non-citizens. And to top it off, we actually think poverty and prejudice might play a role in social inequities. How insane of us! If we accept as fact all of Rossiter’s characterizations, perhaps liberals are crazy? A rude, scapegoating baby killer sounds pretty pathological to me. Unfortunately, at least in the excerpts I read, Rossiter simply engages in name calling with no facts to back him up, much less any real clinical analysis from a psychiatric perspective.

This book has argued that with good enough childrearing in a culture committed to ordered liberty, the natural thrust of human development produces an individual who is at once autonomous and mutual, a self-reliant source of initiative and voluntary collaboration in the activities of everyday life.

With this quote, we get to the core of Dr. Rossiter’s theme, as best I can find one. The only reason we have criminals is lousy parents. The only reason we have poor children is lousy parents. In a culture committed to “ordered liberty” all of society’s ills are cured. Rossiter’s view of “ordered liberty” is pretty much the “people must be forced to be free” idea except he is very careful to draw the line on how much order to enforce. Order can only be enforced to the extent that it does not piss off the “haves”. In Rossiter’s world, order exists to preserve success, not to give everyone an opportunity for success. Anyone lacking this special balance of autonomy and mutuality just got the bad luck of the draw in the child rearing department. Tough tittie. And don’t dare complain about it you immoral whiner. And in particular, don’t expect help from the perfectly balanced. They are not your parents. Your parents sucked and you are screwed.

Rossiter spends more than 400 pages advancing his theory of liberal insanity. Well two can play at that game and psychology professor Jonathan Haidt does a far fairer job of it. Haidt advances the theory that we all are born with five pre-programmed categories of moral values and these values are influenced throughout our lives. These values have political ideological correspondents. Of the five, Caring and Fairness are important to both conservatives and liberals, liberals slightly more so. However the other three values are much more important to conservatives. They are Loyalty, Respect and Purity. Liberals are open and therefore comfortable with change. Conservatives are closed and more comfortable with tradition and the status quo. These are deep-seated values found within these groups. The inability of the two groups to communicate with each other can be tied to these very different value systems. Another way to summarize the difference, says Haidt, is:

Liberals speak for the weak and oppressed; want change and justice, even at the risk of chaos.

Conservatives speak for institutions and traditions; want order even at cost to those at the bottom.

And so there we have a perfect assessment of Rossiter’s perspective and why he nauseates me. The prioritization of order over the welfare of those less fortunate is simply incompatible with my wiring. And Haidt says we are wired with our particular mix of the five moral values. He presented his views in 2008 at the annual TED idea exchange gathering.

But notice where Haidt concludes his argument. Unlike Rossiter who condemns liberals to a diagnosis of pathology, Haidt suggests that we need both forms of mental wiring (not illness) for a successful society. He claims, I think correctly, that conservatives and liberals form the Yin and Yang and are in fact symbiotic even though we so often think of them as at cross purposes.

The only value I see from Lyle Rossiter’s argument once you strip away the insults is that political ideology is not completely a choice made by weighing the pros and cons of the different positions. Our political preferences stem from deep-seated views of the world and morality. Optimal solutions can only be arrived at when we work together to strike a balance between social activism and respect for tradition. The answer is not for one side to label the other mentally ill. Sadly, Rossiter had the potential to write a significant work on how our nature effects our politics and he wasted it on overblown partisan rhetoric.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

Update: I took the questionnaire that Haidt mentions in his video. These were my results. (The first bar in each cluster is me, the second bar is liberals and the third bar is conservatives.)

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

381 thoughts on “Political Ideology as Mental Illness

  1. There is a questionnaire mentioned in the video at http://www.yourmorals.org. I took the survey and here is where I came up on the five foundations of morality:

    Caring: 4.7 out of 5 — mattered more to me than the libs or conservatives who took the survey.

    Fairness: 4.3 mattered more to me than the libs or conservatives who took the survey.

    Loyalty: 3.3 mattered more to me than conservatives and much more than liberals

    Authority: 2.5 mattered more to me than liberals but not even close to as much as conservatives

    Purity: 1.7 mattered more to me than liberals but not even close to as much as it mattered to conservatives.

    Take the questionnaire and see where you stand.

  2. I think libs talk a great game about “compassion” – until it comes to their own pocketbook. Liberals are very compassionate – with talk and other people’s pocketbook. I see you liked my links, hey? 😆

    I’m honored. No doubt in my mind liberalism is a mental illness.

    And so there we have a perfect assessment of Rossiter’s perspective and why he nauseates me.

    And further confirmation to me that Dr. Rossiter is absolutely correct. 🙂 The more the liberal ass smokes, the more truth has been laid bare. Nothing could be more sure.

  3. I need to go to B. Dalton and buy this book. The excerpts were so good, that I need to make a small investment.

  4. Unfortunately, at least in the excerpts I read, Rossiter simply engages in name calling with no facts to back him up, much less any real clinical analysis from a psychiatric perspective.

    Oh please. If you want a good indicator of “facts”, take a look at what liberals do control – namely “public schools.” Rossiter does a great job of clinical analysis – exactly what he is trained to do.

    I can identify one bigger reasons for our psychological makeup – a belief in complete truth and a higher being. That is why are we here, what is our purpose, who do we answer to, and who is the ultimate arbiter of truth. Libs believe in the infallibility of man – at least their idea of man.

    I say history says otherwise… 😉

    And Rutherford – I noticed in your Twitter Account, that you’re back to slamming Christianity. No problem, but is does beg one question.

    Why are you not so brave here, where we can challenge your moral authority?

  5. Of the five, Caring and Fairness are important to both conservatives and liberals, liberals slightly more so. However the other three values are much more important to conservatives. They are Loyalty, Respect and Purity. Liberals are open and therefore comfortable with change. Conservatives are closed and more comfortable with tradition and the status quo. These are deep-seated values found within these groups. The inability of the two groups to communicate with each other can be tied to these very different value systems. Another way to summarize the difference, says Haidt, is:

    Liberals speak for the weak and oppressed; want change and justice, even at the risk of chaos.

    Conservatives speak for institutions and traditions; want order even at cost to those at the bottom.

    Rutherford, I confess that I like seeing you dwell on such concepts, but I am disappointed that you stopped the analysis when it reached a conclusion you found flattering.

    I think it might do you some good to meditate on the meaning and nature of justice. I know you have this notion that man can successfully define morality without incorporation or recognition of the divine, but to do so is to set your sights on a moving target; without a fixed frame of reference, your definitions will necessarily change with the desires of 50%+1. In such an environment, no definition can have a true meaning.

    “Justice” by most definitions has a moral component-whether morally right, or morally righteous, and yet morality has to be established by a common frame of reference. While you might like to disagree, the morality that is the basis of western law and culture is very much informed by the judeo-christian tradition. The Justice informed by that morality cannot exist in chaos, because chaos is the absence of order, while judeo-christian thought is by its nature unchanging and therefore resistant to chaos.

    Further, if I understand your favored scholar, the justice he illustrates is about indivdual equity, rather than the concept of according a basic dignity to all. This concept is not supported by the judeo-christian tradition, because individual equity requires an examination and determination of how to treat each person on a case-by-case basis, rather than according the same respect and deference to all. No society can be said to be based on equality if its justice requires dispirate treatment between its indivduals.

    As for your wiring necessitating the welfare of “the unfortunate”, it is commendable. However, it becomes far less so when you believe that you have the right to extract from others to meet what you perceive as the needs of “the unfortunate”. You can give until it hurts, and frankly, if you believed in Christ, the combination of the two would no doubt set you in good stead. However, when the participation of others is compelled, it is no longer charity, and it robs others from the freedom to follow their own consciences regarding the rendering of charity, because they have been co-opted by your priorities.

    I also caution against listening too carefully to pyschologists who claim to have insight into the idological and political workings of society. That particular discipline abandonned its credibility when they “decided” on the definitions that went into the DSM-IV. The minute that diagnoses became subject to external pressures, political correctness, and individual predilections of the deciders, it found itself possessing as much credibility as another notes scientific discipline: phrenology.

  6. And on a lighter note, a joke:

    A scientist, drunk on his own understanding, got wrapped up in the belief that he could create life from lifelessness. In a fit of arrogance, he challenged God to witness his planned demonstration to serve notice that man no longer needed him.

    To his surprise, God showed up. The scientist quickly recovered his composure, and God looked him in the eye and said “You can start at any time.”, a twinkle in his eye.

    The scientist crouched down with a beaker, and scooped up some of the soil. As he stood to turn to his lab table, he heard God behind him say “Ah Ah Ah…you have to make your own dirt!”

  7. More spot targeting of the failures of modern day liberalism by our esteemed doctor. Try as they might, these can not be denied:

    Modern liberal agenda’s collective causes have undermined the rights of the individual and his growth to adult competence; undermined the integrity of the family as the primary civilizing and socializing entity in society; and undermined the proper function of a modern society, that of providing an overarching social structure for lives to be lived in peace and freedom.

    Modern liberalism has achieved these destructive results through relentless rhetorical, legislative and judicial attacks on the autonomy and sovereignty of the individual; on the natural human tendencies toward cooperation, mutuality and altruism; and on the principles of moral realism distilled over centuries of western civilization.

    The liberal agenda has fostered government dependency instead of self-reliance; government direction instead of self-determination; moral indulgence and relativism instead of moral rectitude; coercive collectivism instead of cooperative individualism; indentured servitude instead of genuine altruism.

    In favor of various collective causes, modern liberalism has succeeded in displacing the individual from his rightful position as the primary economic, social and political unit of society. It has undermined the sanctity of marriage and the cohesiveness of the family. It has undermined the natural harmony that exists between individual, family and community. It has weakened the obligations of promises, contracts, ownership and property rights. It has disconnected rewards from merit and desert.

    It has corrupted the moral and ethical basis for civilized living. It has polarized the population into warring classes with false claims of victimization and villainy and contrived needs for political rescue.

    With enormous growth beyond the definition of government and its functions set forth in the U.S. Constitution, modern American liberalism has created the idealized parental and administrative state and endowed it with vast managerial, caretaking and regulatory powers. History records the inevitable result of such expansions of government power: individual liberty and the peaceful coordination of human action are severely compromised or lost altogether.

    *

  8. I need to go to B. Dalton and buy this book. The excerpts were so good, that I need to make a small investment.

    Better yet, forget B. Dalton and just visit my Amazon store

    http://astore.amazon.com/4youranew-20

    That’s a win-win. You get your book and I get a finder’s fee. It’s the least you can do since I clearly made your day with those partisan Rossiter quotes! 😉

  9. You didn’t make my day with any of those quotes, but I will try and buy my books through your “store.”

    And I am beginning a masters program, so I’m talking about a lot of books. 😉

    (I usually buy them through Amazon, anyway. So why not?)

  10. That’s a win-win. You get your book and I get a finder’s fee. It’s the least you can do since I clearly made your day with those partisan Rossiter quotes!

    Always self-servitude with a lib. 😉

    I’ll go take a look cheapskate. What’s it get you? Seven cents, or something?

    I just figured with shipping, it was more expensive – tightwad that I am.

  11. My biggest problem here is professional. The guy is playing fast and loose with the definition of mental disorder. A behavioral characteristic must be both statistically unusual and personally maladaptive to be considered a mental disorder according to DSM-IV (and the various earlier DSMs as well).

    Liberalism is neither rare nor maladaptive – so I find it difficult to understand how this guy would claim it to be mental illness. I haven’t checked for professional opinions on the book – but I can bet the guy is being widely criticized.

    — hp

    P.S. A few years back some equally idiotic guy tried to claim that G.W. Bush was a sociopath, based on certain patterns in his speech. People like this really give my discipline a bad name.

  12. Hippie,

    He (Nate) reads to me like a bore and vulgar shill for the Democratic party – the blogs comments are worse. But he’s a perfect hack for the burgeoning bankruptcy of the NYTimes.

    Your ilk keep talking about the “nut jobs” on the right. That, my friend, is wishful thinking.

    And with this Arizona doohickey, I think it only goes downhill from here for the Dims. But then, I don’t hold the American voter in high esteem either. After all, they were willing to vote for the most unqualified and Marxist candidate in American history under the “profundity” of “YES WE CAN” and “HOPE & CHANGE.” The waters haven’t calmed, the seas haven’t healed, but then I guess there is always random chance. 😉

  13. LOL Tex … it probably would be about 70 cents unless of course you wanna buy a new wii or something … maybe a Kindle? 😀

    I never thought about the shipping ,… good point … besides you probably need the exercise going down to B. Dalton. All you do is sit on your ass all day commenting on this blog. 😉 (You can see I’ve mastered the fine art of the sell.)

  14. And Rutherford – I noticed in your Twitter Account, that you’re back to slamming Christianity. No problem, but is does beg one question.

    Why are you not so brave here, where we can challenge your moral authority?

    If I’m thinking of the same tweet that you’re thinking about, there was nothing there that I haven’t said here several times. It concerned the old US is a Christian country meme which if you recall, BiW and I have gone back and forth on quite a bit. The tweet had to do with a couple of atheists who host a cable access show in Austin, TX. These guys would piss you off big time … heck they practically piss me off and I’m a religious skeptic.

    Anyway they were debunking the US is a Christian nation and the Constitution is a Christian document meme. They have another episode where they rant about the hypocrisy of the phrase “judeo-christian”. They consider it a snow job by Christians to look inclusive when history shows they’ve persecuted or been apologists for persecutors of Jews for centuries. Like I said, you’d LOVE these guys.

  15. These guys would piss you off big time … heck they practically piss me off and I’m a religious skeptic.

    Oh, I listened to them. I even commented at their website. I have a funny feeling it won’t be me who is left red assed. 🙂 Two of a million fools.

    They still haven’t been able to explain to me all those churches that predate our country up and down the 13 colonies, the chaplains in the military, the Congress opening up with prayer, etc…so you’re going to have to convince me that an obviously religious people, many legacy of the Puritans and the Pilgrims, somehow were willing to nominate a bunch of deists to lead the country. It’s complete bunk – but necessary to fulfill prophecy. Things have never been clearer for me. Really. 😉 Don’t know when, don’t really know how. But I’m absolutely sure, though I am not capable of explaining how.

    They’re only a slicker package of salesmanship than you are. If they truly weren’t troubled and as boastful as the portray themselves, it wouldn’t bother a mention.

    Besides, atheists are deluded. They spend an inordinate amount of time trying their best to convince the masses of something that doesn’t exist.

  16. Tex said: And with this Arizona doohickey, I think it only goes downhill from here for the Dims.

    I saw an interesting poll the other day – before the AZ ruling came out. It said that only about 25 percent of the population was actually angry over illegal immigration – and that 25 percent was predominately made up of uneducated white males.

    Uneducated white males are already in the tank for whatever candidate the GOP throws up there – so I suspect this ruling will have little impact on voting.

    So – what is it about dumb white guys, anyway?

  17. Uneducated white males are already in the tank for whatever candidate the GOP throws up there – so I suspect this ruling will have little impact on voting.

    Funny. I knew a metric assload of uneducated white males who didn’t hesitate to throw the lever for the Dims.

  18. Uneducated white males are already in the tank for whatever candidate the GOP throws up there – so I suspect this ruling will have little impact on voting.

    You mean like union employees?

    There are two universes. The one Hippie and Dregs from JournO(bama)list live in – and the one everyone else inhabits.

    P.S. – Some of the dumbest people I’ve ever met have PHD behind their name. Some of the smartest people I’ve known never graced the halls of overrated higher education. And that is the truth…

  19. “I saw an interesting poll the other day – before the AZ ruling came out. It said that only about 25 percent of the population was actually angry over illegal immigration – and that 25 percent was predominately made up of uneducated white males.

    Uneducated white males are already in the tank for whatever candidate the GOP throws up there – so I suspect this ruling will have little impact on voting.

    So – what is it about dumb white guys, anyway?”

    This is using faulty logic.

    For starters, who says the 25% that is angry over illegal immigration is the same 25% that is uneducated, white, and male? I’m educated and illegal immigration has been one of the most important political issues for me for quite some time.

    Also, are you not aware that the GOP has been just as guilty as any other party regarding illegal immigration? I can assure you that the first 25% you mentioned are well aware of it. It is why many of them refused to vote for John McCain.

  20. For starters, who says the 25% that is angry over illegal immigration is the same 25% that is uneducated, white, and male? I’m educated and illegal immigration has been one of the most important political issues for me for quite some time.

    It was in the cross-tabs for the poll. Overall, 25 percent were angry – but among uneducated white males it was something like 38 percent. Only 10 percent or so of educated white females were angry.

    This is from memory – I will have to find a link to the poll.

  21. Funny. I knew a metric assload of uneducated white males who didn’t hesitate to throw the lever for the Dims.

    Only 41 percent of white males voted for Obama (I don’t have the breakdown for educational level within that group.) – so I suspect you also know an metric assload who didn’t vote for him.

  22. Do tell.

    Well, BiW, one thing that bothered me was the guys took a caller and when the caller defended the existence of God by asking who holds all the planets in place, the guys laughed at him… quite derisively I might add.

    This guy was basically saying that if you go out into space and look at our planet, you are filled with wonder and how could God not be responsible for that. The atheists basically told him to read a science book and learn about gravity.

    As I’ve said before, one reason why I refuse to identify as atheist is that they are as arrogant if not more so than the dude who tells me I’m hell-bound. I see no evidence of God. I see evidence of stuff we can’t explain and some stuff that I think we will never be able to explain. But I don’t know for sure that God does not exist. And no, I’m not fence straddling or hedging my bets. I can’t prove a negative.

    When someone tells me God speaks to him, I can doubt this with every shred of my rational being, but I can’t say definitively that God didn’t speak to him. Where I part ways with organized religion is when they tell me that I must behave a certain way in keeping with the teachings of their God.

    Anyway, I digress. I do find these Austin TX atheists entertaining and I do understand their rage at being demeaned by people whom they think believe in a fairy tale. But I don’t like their arrogance.

  23. Rutherford,

    You know what comment you make that I find most strange and superficial?

    That you say you see no evidence of God (more specifically, a Creator). There is no physical construct that could have created our universe – a universe of such size and immense power, that after 14 billion years is still expanding. And since we are sure the universe finite, I’m literally perplexed how you could come to such a conclusion.

    It literally boggles my mind because I believe everything you see, you taste, you hear, you feel proves the existence of a Creator.

    In essence, what you are saying is “I see all of creation but I’m not sure there is a Creator.”

    For a reasonably smart human, sometimes even to me incredibly perceptive of emotions and trends, I find you completely clueless to the most obvious. Perhaps that is why I find you an interesting character.

    Those atheists you found are so shallow in their “science”, I found myself laughing at them. I need to tell them that. 🙂

  24. This is so fucking hilarious. What, are the same folks who vetted cabinet appointments doing the vetting for White House guests?

    This is so damn funny!!!

    White House Reacts to Guest’s Criminal Past

    (CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA) — In his daily press briefing Thursday afternoon, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the White House would have never invited Leslie Macko to pose with President Obama had they known about her criminal past. Macko, a Charlottesville resident, stood next to President Obama as his example of the need to extend jobless benefits.

    “We need to extend unemployment compensation benefits for women like Leslie Macko, who lost her job at a fitness center last year, and has been looking for work ever since. Because she’s eligible for only a few more weeks of unemployment, she’s doing what she never thought she’d have to do. Not at this point, anyway. She’s turning to her father for financial support,” Obama said in his speech.

    Macko was once employed at ACAC Fitness and Wellness Center in the Albemarle Square Shopping Center. However, in April 2009, a month after being found guilty of prescription drug fraud, she lost her job as an aesthetician in the spa at ACAC.

    CBS19 learned Thursday that Macko, who appeared in the Rose Garden with President Barack Obama on July 19, has had more than one run-in with the law. In June of 2007, Macko was charged with grand larceny. The charge was reduced in court to petit larceny, and she was sentenced to two years probation.

    ACAC CEO Greg Wells tells the Newsplex that Macko was not terminated nor discharged because of any illegal activity, but Wells would not comment on the condition of her termination.

  25. In essence, what you are saying is “I see all of creation but I’m not sure there is a Creator.”

    Did you ever think that God had himself a good chuckle after he made laminin, Tex?

    I can just see him saying to himself ‘THIS’LL blow their minds.”

  26. Tex if you can conceive of a God, why can’t I conceive of a universe that was not created in the first place? A universe that always was and always will be. When you say the universe is finite, I don’t know whether you’re talking about space or time but I’m not sure it is finite in either dimension. In fact, I have no more proof of that than I have of God.

    I think it troubles you and the rest of man kind that some things may never have had a beginning nor will have an end. And the most perplexing part of this is that you believe that after you die you will go to heaven for eternity …. infinite right?

  27. The guy is playing fast and loose with the definition of mental disorder.

    Oh HP … it is worse than that. He starts off his book, right off the bat, misusing the term bipolar. Now I could accept the average political hack using bipolar to fit his argument but a friggin psychiatrist? The minute I read that, I knew we were headed for lots of “fast and loose”.

  28. And on a lighter note, a joke:

    BiW, good joke. Here’s one I’ve always liked.

    Two guys go golfing, one very pious. The first guy swings his club and makes no contact with the ball. “Oh sh*t I missed.”

    His pious partner says “you really should not swear like that.”

    At the next hole potty mouth swings wildly again. “Oh sh*t I missed.” Again, his partner says, “you really shouldn’t swear like that. One day God is going to strike you dead for it.”

    At the next hole, our unskilled golfer misses the ball a third time and declares “oh sh*t I missed.” The skies begin to rumble and a huge lightning bolt descends from the heavens and strikes his pious partner dead.

    Shortly thereafter, a deep voice from the sky says ….

    Oh sh*t I missed!

  29. Another good one

    If you don’t know GOD, don’t make stupid remarks!!!!!!

    A United States Marine was taking some college courses between assignments. He had completed 20 missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the courses had a professor who was an avowed atheist, and a member of the ACLU.

    One day the professor shocked the class when he came in. He looked to the ceiling and flatly stated, “GOD, if you are real, then I want you to knock me off this platform… I’ll give you exactly 15 min.”

    The lecture room fell silent. You could hear a pin drop. Ten minutes went by and the professor proclaimed, “Here I am GOD, I’m still waiting.”

    It got down to the last couple of minutes when the Marine got out of his chair, went up to the professor, and cold-cocked him; knocking him off the platform. The professor was out cold.

    The Marine went back to his seat and sat there, silently.

    The other students were shocked and stunned, and sat there looking on in silence. The professor eventually came to, noticeably shaken, looked at the Marine and asked, “What in the world is the matter with you? Why did you do that?”

    The Marine calmly replied, “GOD was busy today so He sent me.”

  30. Rutherford,

    I think you’re purposely being obtuse in your denial, but to each their own. It is what separates us in our conclusions.

    Of course, it won’t be two weeks and you’ll be spouting something about Hippie Power science and evolution, and shaking your head with Hippie and Graychin about random mutation driving the creation of man – men who all agree in the Big Bang and finiteness.

    And you missed Rossiter’s context of bipolar dork. He isn’t talking about the disease but contrasts – like in Janus-faced policy. He even uses that term in his excerpts, which I had to look up. As I feel confident in using the term “Big Bang”, I also feel confident than a trained psychiatrist would understand the medical condition bipolar.

  31. BIC,

    About laminin, according to Scopes this is all bogus stuff. 🙂

    I remember looking up laminin while taking histology and according to “SNOPES”, a blatantly irreligious piece of junk (I’ve got other examples that are better) is was just “accidental” and “common” in the shape of a cross.

    So I looked it up again tonight and they’ve added to the debate the cross might not have been in a “T” shape. 😉 I don’t know what “cross” means to the authors of laminin, but they really ought to review mathematics and Webster’s before they publish some of their stuff.

  32. OFF SUBJECT:

    Anyone else getting a hoot out of Obama Motor’s new roll out of the Volt? How about that range, hey? 😆 40 miles on one tank of “electric gas”, all for the cheap price of, of, of

    $41,000.00 smackers?

    Wasn’t it Rich Lowry who said, “Liberals have difficulty predicting history?”

  33. Hey, Graychin is still alive and well. Still the old, crusty coward with no traffic at his “Two Useful Idiots” blog too! Here’s his threat to me. 😆 The comment about never editing or deleting is the biggest lie I’ve heard since Robert “Baghdad Bob” Gibbs opened his mouth yesterday. How can you not love somebody this cordial?

    I have never deleted or edited any of your previous comments, but that can change in an instant. The choice is yours. You can: 1) behave respectfully and courteously in someone else’s home like your mama taught you, showing us how superior good “Christians” like you are to heathens like the Dog and me; 2) get booted; 3) best of all, take a hike right now and spare yourself all that Faux outrage that is the very heart of your persona when you inevitably do get edited and booted.

    What will it be?

    Alll I did is present two theories as to why Oklahomans rejected a “black candidate” for a “white” panhandler (or something) for Dimocratic Representative to lose against Dr. Tom Coburn. 😐

    Now, can you imagine the censoring, group think, fascist, blog moderator treating me so disrespectfully after me having the love in my heart to check that the old fart was still breathing? (No such luck). 🙂

  34. I “syndicate” my articles to a couple of other venues. Here is a comment I got yesterday on this article that I thought you guys would appreciate. Sadly he signed himself “anonymous”. At least you guys have the courage to use pseudonyms! 🙂

    Problem is, you aren’t positioned to argue, since if the mentally ill could analyze, we wouldn’t need shrinks, would we? Besides, I agree, liberals aren’t mentally ill, they’re criminally insane.

  35. Graychin has not commented on this blog since the day I asked him to comment on the Think Progress video (which he never did).

  36. He’s posting at his blog so I guess so.

    Defending the liberal policies just got too much for him, I guess. Easier to run back to his echo chamber where discussion consists of preaching to the choir and disappearing comments.

  37. I just realized something interesting…..

    I believe that both the former Soviet Union and Maoist Communist China politicized the definition of “mental illness” to include any anti-state behavior.

    In fact….

    http://globalpoverty.change.org/blog/view/in_china_ideas_of_mental_illness_move_beyond_class_struggle

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3026648.stm

    Now – I would never draw a comparison between what this idiot is doing and what was done in totalitarian dictatorships – would I?

  38. Now – I would never draw a comparison between what this idiot is doing and what was done in totalitarian dictatorships – would I? — HP

    Considering totalitarian dictatorships- from Hitler to Stalin to Moa- stem from the left, no.

    I’ve said it before, conservatives aren’t the ones proposing a fairness doctrine, or looking at restricting political free speech in general.

  39. Considering totalitarian dictatorships- from Hitler to Stalin to Moa- stem from the left, no.

    Ahhh…..

    OK – I just had this same argument at Alfie’s and I am getting tired of it – but it is a pet peeve.

    Indeed communist/socialistic disctatorships stam from the left.

    Fascism – particularly Hitler’s fascism – stems from the right.

  40. Dude….it was called National “Socialism.”

    It’s not rocket science, professor.

    Even the “national” part started off on the left. Nationalism was reviled by the old conservative guard in Europe. Bismarck hijacked nationalism and hand cuffed it with the interests of the Kaiser.

    The rest is history.

  41. Fascism was actually kind of hated by the true conservatives of Germany. That’s why Hitler never had the trust of many of the old Prussian guard.

    Why did Hitler turn on the SA? The very boots that stomped him into power.

    Because they were radical, non-conservative, kooks (the leadership almost all homosexuals as a side note). The Prussian conservatives needed a bone to be thrown at them. So the radical Brown Shirts were offed, and the Prussian military class reluctantly got on board.

  42. “This discussion reminds me of Foucalt.”

    I never understood one sentence that guy wrote. Not even one phrase.

  43. “I never understood one sentence that guy wrote. Not even one phrase.”

    The only reason I can is because I was assigned a book entitled “Foucalt for Beginners,” which was not written by him and was in a format similar to the “…For Dummies” series.

    I didn’t end up agreeing or disagreeing with him. But it did give food for thought that I continue to digest.

  44. And why this all reminds me of Foucault is because Foucalt opined that so-called “experts” are allowed to classify people in binary ways that give the expert power over others and that one of the tools of the expert is the diagnosis of “mental illness.”

  45. DR – of course I know that it stood for National Socialism. Duh! FOX can call themselves “fair and balanced” and it doesn’t mean they are.

    Nazi fascism was based on two principles: Extreme nationalism and institutionalized racism. I guarantee you, neither of those is a left-wing policy. In fact, they are far more akin to right-wing policies – especially the nationalism part.

    I am happy to own the “bad guys” on the left – the socialists and communists. However, I am not going to take the blame for the bad guys from the right – the fascists. You guys get to answer for them.

  46. Huck said: And why this all reminds me of Foucault is because Foucalt opined that so-called “experts” are allowed to classify people in binary ways that give the expert power over others and that one of the tools of the expert is the diagnosis of “mental illness.”

    I am also reminded of a book I read back in the 80s called “Not In Our Genes” that argued, among other things, that “mental illness” is a creation of the ruling class used to keep the proles in their place.

    The authors were socialists, unsurprisingly.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes

  47. In fact, they are far more akin to right-wing policies – especially the nationalism part.

    Cheap cheap cheap shot.
    I think this is an area that really drives me craziest and can somewhat echo Hippies position but from a different angle.
    Seriously, the “ism” concepts of controlling the masses is not a right left thing.

  48. Indeed, Alfie. They are tools of anyone interested in controlling the masses. And those types are certainly not exclusive to any 1 alignment.

  49. I got to give kudos where they are do. Call it a left-handed compliment.

    As much as I disdain Hippie and Rutherford’s general horseshit propaganda and Trig Palin bashing, never once has either modified a comment of mine at their own blog, nor have they threatened to. I like guys from the Left that will stand toe-to-toe and do battle. It says something about their character.

    I give you two for having some balls that pussies like Graychin never had. You’ll stand by what you post when challenged, no matter how wrong-headed you are. 🙂

    Now maybe you Conservatives understand why I said Graychin was the biggest, whiniest polished turd I had ever met on the net and had to bait his old ass over here to debate in a fair arena.

    On Graychin’s own “Two Useful Idiots” blog, you don’t stand a chance after he modifies or deletes anything that doesn’t suit his liking. I’ve never read a bigger coward.

  50. I am happy to own the “bad guys” on the left – the socialists and communists. However, I am not going to take the blame for the bad guys from the right – the fascists. You guys get to answer for them. — HP

    We did, it was called WWII. Neville Chamberlain belongs to you.

    I don’t have it handy, but a study was done that did indeed show that the Nazi’s were akin to the left.

  51. Gorilla – think about it a moment. Nationalism is embodied in “rah rah our country is the best lets wave flags and sing patriotic songs” patriotism. Those are decidedly not things that liberals do. In fact, the right commonly criticizes us because we don’t do enough of it. Any time people on the left criticize America we are told that we hate our country and that we aren’t real Americans yada yada.

    Nationalism is rooted in conservatism. In fact (going back to the discussion on Alfie’s) – in theory communists/socialists don’t believe that nations should even exist. It should all be one big worker’s paradise with no national boundaries.

  52. Now maybe you Conservatives understand why I said Graychin was the biggest, whiniest polished turd I had ever met on the net and had to bait his old ass over here to debate in a fair arena.

    I am saddened…. just the other day I held the title as the worst propagandist. I realized I would eventually be replaced…. I just didn’t expect it to happen so soon….

    😉

  53. Hippieprof,

    Nationalism has only recently been identified as something you find on the right.

    Even after WWI, nationalism was seen as something progressive and left. It was usually associated with the “volk” and demagoguery.

    The most famouse pioneers of nationalsim were leftists. Look up a guy called Mazzini in Italy. This guy is sometimes called the grand father of nationalism.

    Hell, even Mussolini was a beat writer for a Marxist newspaper.

    Do you know how Hitler joined the National Socialists? He was a short timer in the army and was being sent to spy on leftist political rallies to kill off the rest of his enlistment. I believe one of them was called the German Workers Party. He joined that one and renamed it later.

    Study the failed revolutions of 1848. Nationalists vs Conservatives. Hell, the King of Prussia turned down being Emperor of Germany becuase he didn’t want a crown given to him from the gutter (masses).

    So, by 1930, nationalism was still something new.

    Sure, Marxists hated nationalism (until Stalin jumped back on the bandwagon when the “fatherland” needed some motivation)

    As for racism, how is that historically something from the right?
    Eugenics was a progressive thing. Social Darwinism a leftist thing.

    Hell, old school conservatives believed in multi-national conglomerate states where people are loyal to the king and church-far from racists.

    European Imperialism was embraced by all social classes while the “White Man’s Burden” was something embraced on both the left and the right.

    Even today, Venezuela is one of the most jingoistic states on the planet.

    You’re historically incorrect.

  54. In fact, I’d say nationalism became something usually associated with the right only after WW2.

    I could get into this in much more detail, but I don’t even think the professor reads what I write.

  55. I think this is about the third time I’ve had to explain this Hippie. I hope you pull the wax out of your ears, or the veil from your eyes, or the shit from your brain. Libs always need a simple example so there is no misunderstanding. 😉

    Both you and Graychin are dishonest RANK PROPAGANDISTS – Rutherford to a little lesser degree. But not one time have you or Rutherford edited, modified, or deleted one of my comments (at least not that I’m aware). I don’t consider you an asshole; enemy maybe.

    Graychin is a TURD, A PRICK, A BULLYING COWARD (so I bully back), AND A PERFECTED AND PATHOLOGICAL LIAR.

    In otherwords, I could drink a beer with you and share a laugh. Though I wouldn’t waste my gas or purposely seek him out, if Graychin happened to waddle across my path, I probably wouldn’t hit the brake. Does that make any sense?

  56. I’d have a beer with R, even if he studiously avoids addressing the hard questions I put to him. 😉

    I’d have a beer with HP, but only if we mutually agreed NOT to discuss politics.

    I’d drink a case with DR, but I suspect that’s just a Michigan Thing.

    And I’d gladly knock drinks back with Tex, Gorilla, and Huck.

  57. Rabbit said: I could get into this in much more detail, but I don’t even think the professor reads what I write.

    Actually, I do read what you say – unless I miss something accidentally.

    I actually think you make some good points here, and I have to think through how I respond.

    I suspect you would enjoy having a beer with me….

  58. Jonah Goldberg does a beautiful job of explaining the similarity and analogies of the American Left in his brilliant book:

    Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning

    For instance:

    They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities — where campus speech codes were all the rage. The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist.

    Now, does that sound like the American Right or the Pinko Left who hate America?

  59. Tex, quoting Goldberg:

    They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs.

    Except for Jews – unless we count concentration camp labor as a guaranteed job…

    They confiscated inherited wealth

    Especially from Jews…

    and spent vast sums on public education.

    Except for Jews…

    The Nazis declared war on….. euthanasia

    Except for attempts to euthanize an entire race…

    and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities

    Yes – a quota of zero Jews

    Himmler was an animal rights activist.

    Yes – why conduct experiments on animals when Jews were readily available?

    Now, does that sound like the American Right or the Pinko Left who hate America?

    Welll…. ummmmm…. take a look at what is going on in Arizona and get back to me.

  60. Does Rutherford drink beer?
    Hippie I’d have a hard time having a cervaza with you with comments like

    Welll…. ummmmm…. take a look at what is going on in Arizona and get back to me.

    flowing.

  61. Uhm Hippie, 🙂

    Now I’m not attributing these to you personally, but…

    Substitute Christian for Jew in #73 and you wouldn’t be too awfully far from what many of your most rabid fans of Obama wish. You think somebody like Graychin wouldn’t be calling for heads if we weren’t the majority? You ever read many of these atheist activists that Rutherford loves to quote?

    The fact they only represent maybe 10% of the U.S. population
    is the only thing keeping them from feeding people to the lions.
    You’ve changed the semantics a bit over 70 years, but not much the end result.

    Abortion – euthanasia
    Embryonic stem cells – eugenics
    Freedom from religion – Catholic Church persecution (see ACT UP)
    Racial quotas – affirmative action

    Want me to go on?

  62. Welll…. ummmmm…. take a look at what is going on in Arizona and get back to me.

    More breathless hyperbole?

    I know, let’s allay everyone’s fears of violations of the law Democrats’ fears that they cannot buy votes from the in-state illegals and just make it a sacnctuary state.

  63. Welll…. ummmmm…. take a look at what is going on in Arizona and get back to me.

    Do you really equate enforcing federal laws to concentration camps? If so, I can understand your confusion.

    Need I remind you of who invoked internment 70 years ago? I’ll give you a hint in case your history rusty.

    He’s the Dimocrat party’s equivalent to Jesus and he rolled around in a wheel chair.

  64. Tex said: Do you really equate enforcing federal laws to concentration camps? If so, I can understand your confusion.

    No – of course not. I probably shouldn’t have been quite so hyperbolic – especially since you all seem to be concentrating on that final line rather than to the major part of the post – which attempted to show that Nazi policies – although perhaps superficially progressive – were based on a system of nationalized racism that was anything but progressive.

    (BTW – for those who say I never say I was wrong – I just did. The last line of #73 was indeed over the top)

    I do take exception to your idea that eugenics and genetic engineering were liberal/progressive policies. Their origins (with Galton) were in fact rooted in an attempt to find a scientific justification for racism.

    Also – embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with eugenics.

  65. Also – embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with eugenics.

    I would say it does – if you believe like I do that there is great value to an embryo. If you believe like most libs do, it is nothing but a product of conception you wouldn’t understand my analogy.

    I’ll go one better and circle back. Fair question Hippie.

    Do you believe if she were alive today, Margaret Sanger would be registered as a Republican or Democrat?

  66. Is it out of line to say Eugenics presents noticeable variations depending on location?
    I think I can offer something that explains my position.When people say stuff like:
    I do take exception to your idea that eugenics and genetic engineering were liberal/progressive policies.
    and the counterpoint isn’t some of the “confusion” based on Eugenics having had an elitist/academic spin early on?

  67. and the counterpoint isn’t some of the “confusion” based on Eugenics having had an elitist/academic spin early on?

    Great point Alfie – a little forgotten fact that the Left never bothers to mention is Germany was not the parent company of eugenics.

    No, they were preceded in large part by extensive research and financing by American corporate philanthropies, in league with some of America’s most respected scientists from Yale, Harvard, and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics’ racist aims.

    I wonder today if they would be registered Republicans or Democrats, another question I have for Hippie.

  68. Alfie asked: the counterpoint isn’t some of the “confusion” based on Eugenics having had an elitist/academic spin early on?

    That is an interesting point. Indeed, eugenics was (and is) associated with elitist attitudes of racial and cultural superiority. However, I think you err if you are assuming that elitism is just a liberal thing.

    Tex said: Great point Alfie – a little forgotten fact that the Left never bothers to mention is Germany was not the parent company of eugenics.

    Tex – quit putting words in my mouth – I never made any such claim. Eugenics actually began in England with Galton, and was carried on by his protege Karl Pearson (he of the correlation coefficient). I have an interesting quote from Pearson from the early 1930s praising Hitler for his grand eugenic experiment.

    Eugenics was imported to the US largely through the efforts of Spencer, where it was embraced by 19th century robber barons who saw Social Darwinism it as a justification for their activities.

    The biggest push for eugenics in America came from the developers of the first intelligence tests – which started around the turn of the century with the importation of the Binet test from France. Standardized intelligence testing was indeed viewed as a eugenic tool – suited to restrict immigration of undesirables, to screen the mentally dull into the infantry in WWI, and eventually to restrict breeding.

    Psychology is indeed a liberal discipline – but the eugenicists and intelligence testers are considered to be on the far right wing of the discipline. Their main opponents come from the far left of the discipline – see for example the book “Not in our Genes” I references earlier in this thread.

    .

  69. Uhm Hippie,

    You’re becoming paranoid and ultra-sensitive. Did I mention you by name when I used the generic “LEFT?”

    And I don’t buy this baloney for a minute.

    Psychology is indeed a liberal discipline – but the eugenicists and intelligence testers are considered to be on the far right wing of the discipline.

    No, no, no…your IQ test comes straight out of liberal academia. I know exactly who constructs the “grading scales.” I’m not going to let you worm out of this one.

  70. HEY RUTHERFORD,

    Since Graychin is now back to his old ways of censoring and booting, I need to correct an absolute lie told by the polished turd and his useful village idiot assistant.

    Graychin told you Senator Coburn is not nearly as popular in Oklahoma as he is nationally. Uh huh, so you’ll get the answer, I will answer that challenge here in case the Head Village Idiot deletes me from his blog:

    Yeah Rutherford. That’s why Coburn will win by probably 35-45 points. That’s how unpopular the “people who know Coburn.”

    Matter of fact Rutherford, Coburn in overwhelmingly district of which Graychin lives unseated a Democratic candidate 16 years ago he’s so unpopular.

    Now Graychin, if telling the truth gets me booted, boot me.

    And so you’re “assistant” doesn’t go unchallenged with his usual untruths, just as recently as this week I’ve commented at both Alfie and Hippie’s blog.

    This is the only one that invokes censorship.

  71. Tex asked: Do you believe if she were alive today, Margaret Sanger would be registered as a Republican or Democrat?

    Tough question, Tex. She had opinions on both end of the political spectrum.

    She was a feminist and a champion for woman’s rights – which would put her in the democrat camp. Her advocacy for the use of contraception would also generally place her on the left – though largely because the far right tends to object to birth control. Of course, she also considered herself a socialist – and you don’t find many of those on the right.

    On the other hand, she was anti-abortion and pro eugenic sterilization, and those attitudes are markedly right of center.

    These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics’ racist aims. I wonder today if they would be registered Republicans or Democrats, another question I have for Hippie.

    Tex – I don’t how they would be registered. It is quite difficult to project the political views of one era into another era. If he were alive today, Lincoln would most certainly be a Democrat, for example.

    I can tell you something pretty definitive about our recent eugenicists, though. Remember The Bell Curve? Herrnstein and Murray (1994)? One of the authors – Ricahrd Herrnstein – actually spent the majority of his career doing work in my sub-specialty – and in fact is generally credited as the founder of the branch of quantitative analysis I do professionally. Anyway, Herrnstein was always know for his unusually conservative political views. His co-author on The Bell Curve – Charles Murray – is generally classified as a libertarian or as conservative – certainly not a liberal.

  72. Nationalism is rooted in conservatism. In fact (going back to the discussion on Alfie’s) – in theory communists/socialists don’t believe that nations should even exist. It should all be one big worker’s paradise with no national boundaries. — HP

    And Hitler’s world conquest was????

    No – of course not. I probably shouldn’t have been quite so hyperbolic – especially since you all seem to be concentrating on that final line rather than to the major part of the post – which attempted to show that Nazi policies – although perhaps superficially progressive – were based on a system of nationalized racism that was anything but progressive. — HP

    Or maybe it was something more along these lines: Conservative German state uncomfortable with the progressive agenda of the Nazi party, so the Nazi’s used a common prejudice of the European continent as a vessel through which to serve their hemlock.

    I do take exception to your idea that eugenics and genetic engineering were liberal/progressive policies. Their origins (with Galton) were in fact rooted in an attempt to find a scientific justification for racism. — HP

    And were primary tenets for leftists like Margret Sanger and the segregationist Dem party. Please, don’t be obtuse to these simple facts. Eugenic concepts still linger in pro-abortion rhetoric and just because you don’t call it specifically eugenics, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t follow those precepts.

    Eugenics was imported to the US largely through the efforts of Spencer, where it was embraced by 19th century robber barons who saw Social Darwinism it as a justification for their activities.

    The biggest push for eugenics in America came from the developers of the first intelligence tests – which started around the turn of the century with the importation of the Binet test from France. Standardized intelligence testing was indeed viewed as a eugenic tool – suited to restrict immigration of undesirables, to screen the mentally dull into the infantry in WWI, and eventually to restrict breeding.

    Psychology is indeed a liberal discipline – but the eugenicists and intelligence testers are considered to be on the far right wing of the discipline. Their main opponents come from the far left of the discipline – see for example the book “Not in our Genes” I references earlier in this thread. — HP

    Is the oversight of Sanger’s role in eugenics in America an intentional oversight on your part? It is rather inconvenient that one of the champions of the left is so embroiled in the application of eugenics for racist and class warfare. Yet I never hear of you on the left calling her out. In fact, quite the opposite as we had the Chin, who ignored her racist and eugenic callings with deflections of her birth control stances. For her, birth control was passive eugenics- and not an alternative to the active application of eugenic techniques, like forced sterilization, etc.

  73. No, no, no…your IQ test comes straight out of liberal academia. I know exactly who constructs the “grading scales.” I’m not going to let you worm out of this one.

    Sorry Tex. Yes – academics tends to be liberal. There are conservatives in academics though – and amongst those are the folks who created IQ tests – and particularly the ones who continue to argue for the genetic origins of intelligence.

    The hereditary view of IQ has been heavily criticized by the most liberal of academics. Leon Kamin, who uncovered Cyril Burt’s fraudulent research – is an avowed socialist. Biologist Stephen J. Gould – another critic of IQ testing – was widely known for his liberal views (though I suspect you are aware of this).

  74. My Gawd Hippie. Just when I think you can’t be more dishonest, you top it. You can’t be this dumb…you literally have to lie to yourself to believe this. From your ignorant hyperbole to flat out falsehoods, you’ve become a real disappointment. Not unlikable – just a huge disappointment. When you first appeared, I really thought you more reasonable.

    she was anti-abortion and pro eugenic sterilization, and those attitudes are markedly right of center.

    Margaret Sanger anti-abortion? You’ve got to be shitting me? Margaret Sanger? The founder of Planned Parenthood?

    The modern day abortion rights movement began as the American Birth Control League in 1921. Its founding members were Lothrup Stoddard, C.C. Little and Margaret Sanger.

    If he were alive today, Lincoln would most certainly be a Democrat, for example.

    And you’ve got some proof of this? Give me a break. 🙄

    Where in the world do you get your “facts” from? I’ll make a prediction. There isn’t a Conservative on this site that isn’t going to laugh at you over that last post. And you’ve got this one coming…

  75. Nope Hippie. I’m beginning to think you have been so enmeshed in liberal academia for so long, you literally have lost any lick of sense you once I’m sure held.

    You don’t have this one right either.

    Henry Herbert Goddard introduced the idea of IQ tests to America. Goddard was a prominent American psychologist and eugenicist in the early 20th century.

    A Stanford psychologist, Lewis Terman, revised the test to expand its usability by adding questions appropriate for adults, and establishing new standards for average performance at each age.

    Now, guess what party affiliation that Terman was a part? I’ll give you a hint. It generally starts with a “P” for you and and “L” for Rutherford.

    http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119661154/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

  76. Margaret Sanger anti-abortion? You’ve got to be shitting me? Margaret Sanger? The founder of Planned Parenthood?

    Yes, Tex. Sanger was personally anti-abortion. From the wiki article on Sanger:

    In a chapter from Woman and the New Race (1920) entitled “Contraceptives or Abortion?,” Sanger wrote, “While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.”[30]

    Roger Streitmatter has claimed that Sanger’s opposition to abortion stemmed primarily from a concern for the dangers to the mother rather than moral issues.[31] Nonetheless, in her 1938 autobiography, Sanger notes that her 1916 opposition to abortion was based on the taking of life: “To each group we explained what contraception was; that abortion was the wrong way—no matter how early it was performed it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way—it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun.”

    In a 1916 edition of Family Limitation, Sanger advised women douche with boric acid and to take quinine to prevent implantation. She wrote further, “No one can doubt that there are times when an abortion is justifiable but they will become unnecessary when care is taken to prevent conception. This is the only cure for abortions.”[33]

    You will find lots of conservatives who will deny this little tidbit – but her view is pretty clear.

  77. No one can doubt that there are times when an abortion is justifiable but they will become unnecessary when care is taken to prevent conception

    Like forced racial sterilization…

  78. Tex said: Nope Hippie. I’m beginning to think you have been so enmeshed in liberal academia for so long, you literally have lost any lick of sense you once I’m sure held. You don’t have this one right either.

    Tex – you are getting insulting again. I teach this stuff. I could lecture you on Terman and Goddard for hours, without notes.

    I am curious where you get the idea that they were progressives (the link you provided didn’t open for me)?

    Goddard, for example, is famous for standing in line at Ellis Island, claiming that he could identify the feeble minded just by looking at them. Curiously, the “feeble minded” were commonly Eastern European in origin. Goddard would go on to “prove” their feeble mindedness by asking them questions in English. When they couldn’t answer in English, he felt himself vindicated in his assessment. These are hardly progressive views.

  79. Like forced racial sterilization…

    But…. Gorilla…. forced sterilization isn’t a liberal view. That is my point about Sanger. Her politics are inconsistent.

    BTW – you asked earlier why I give her a pass. The non conspiratorial answer is she is off my radar screen. My interests in eugenics are based on its academic origins – which largely reside within Psychology. That line of inquiry started well before Sanger was born – so she really does not figure into the picture for me. That doesn’t mean she isn’t important – but her stuff is outside my area of expertise.

  80. An honest answer.

    Still, I think her promotion of the idea, coupled with her role in liberal ideology, is more than a little problematic.

  81. I think this might be the first time the word “douche” has ever been used here in a serious retort outside of maybe an insult.

  82. Oh please Hippie – Planned Parenthood itself calls Margaret Sanger the founder and claims her as one. Everyone knows Planned Parenthood was and is the number one abortion provider in the nation, under the guise of “family planning.” I don’t know how it can become any clearer than that, no matter how much you libs try to rewrite history.

    From Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366:

    Always to me any aroused group was a good group, and therefore I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…As someone came out of the hall I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses. I waited another twenty minutes. It was warmer and I did not mind so much. Eventually the lights were switched on, the audience seated itself, and I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.

    Direct from Planned Parenthood about Margaret Sanger:

    Planned Parenthood is rooted in the courage and tenacity of American women and men willing to fight for women’s health, rights, and equality. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, is one of the movement’s great heroes. Sanger’s early efforts remain the hallmark of Planned Parenthood’s mission:

    * providing contraception and other health services to women and men
    * funding research on birth control and educating specialists and the public about the results
    * advancing access to family planning in the United States and around the world

    Women’s progress in recent decades — in education, in the workplace, in political and economic power — can be directly linked to Sanger’s crusade and women’s ability to control their own fertility.

    “The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

    “Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”

    “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population…”

    “Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need … We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.” – Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood

    Let me see if I get this right Hippie – your proof, if you will. A eugenicist that is “pro-life?” A speaker for the KKK is anti-abortion? Even black fetuses, right? That is what you are asking me to swallow?

    I think it is time you hear Margaret Sanger in her own words Hippie. Listen closely about what Ms. Margaret thought of abortion, and how she muffles it because she was afterall, an “academic elitist.”

  83. Hippie,

    I’m absolutely sure you could lecture me on these shysters as well as lecture me on “emotional intelligence”, more psychobabble from your ‘esteemed’ field.

    You’re one of them.

    The problem is that you’re so immersed in your narrative and dogma, and the group think of the group you run with as attested to be your constant whining and hyperbole of the one TV channel that challenges your politic, you don’t recognize the fallacy and lies of your own beliefs.

    Personally, I don’t believe your own core tenets that terribly strong. You seem to waffle in your acceptance and rejection, because it is always phrased with “I don’t necessarily agree with all of…”

  84. Tex……I don’t scoff at the idea anymore. It was prophetic of you. In fact, I think you even called the shot before the collapse.

    That being said, that article totally lets Bush off the hook.

    “When it came, George W. Bush stood up for America, albeit sometimes clumsily.”

    Bush “stood up” for banks and Wall Street not America. I think he was freaked out just like Wall Street knew he would be. And they got the free pass that they always knew they would get, hence their behavior.

    That rushed bail out, supported by Obama, was the biggest act of thievery in world history. A fiat fucking delivered to our kids.

  85. Tex said: Oh please Hippie – Planned Parenthood itself calls Margaret Sanger the founder and claims her as one. Everyone knows Planned Parenthood was and is the number one abortion provider in the nation, under the guise of “family planning.” I don’t know how it can become any clearer than that, no matter how much you libs try to rewrite history.

    Tex – this is silly. As I said to Gorilla, I am no Margaret Sanger expert. She is, as I said, generally off my radar screen. But – if she says in print that she is against abortion I have to take her word for it. That isn’t rewriting history.

    Yes – planned parenthood provides a lot of abortions, and Sanger is their founder. That doesn’t mean that then adopted Sanger’s views on abortion though, does it? Remember, Sanger died in 1966 – a time at which abortion was illegal across the US. Thus, it would be difficult to argue that Sanger had an influence on current Planned Parenthood abortion policies.

  86. To HP from #64:

    This is from Mein Kompf, Volume Two – The National Socialist Movement, Chapter I: Philosophy and Party.

    But a general conception of life can never be given an organic embodiment until it is precisely and definitely formulated. The function which dogma fulfils in religious belief is parallel to the function which party principles fulfil for a political party which is in the process of being built up.

    Therefore, for the conception of life that is based on the folk idea it is necessary that an instrument be forged which can be used in fighting for this ideal, similar to the Marxist party organization which clears the way for internationalism.

    This is the goal pursued by the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

    The folk conception must therefore be definitely formulated so that it may be organically incorporated in the party. That is a necessary prerequisite for the success of this idea. And that it is so is very clearly proved even by the indirect acknowledgment of those who oppose such an amalgamation of the folk idea with party principles. The very people who never tire of insisting again and again that the conception of life based on the folk idea can never be the exclusive property of a single group, because it lies dormant or ‘lives’ in myriads of hearts, only confirm by their own statements the simple fact that the general presence of such ideas in the hearts of millions of men has not proved sufficient to impede the victory of the opposing ideas, which are championed by a political party organized on the principle of class conflict. If that were not so, the German people ought already to have gained a gigantic victory instead of finding themselves on the brink of the abyss. The international ideology achieved success because it was organized in a militant political party which was always ready to take the offensive. If hitherto the ideas opposed to the international concept have had to give way before the latter the reason is that they lacked a united front to fight for their cause. A doctrine which forms a definite outlook on life cannot struggle and triumph by allowing the right of free interpretation of its general teaching, but only by defining that teaching in certain articles of faith that have to be accepted and incorporating it in a political organization.

    Therefore I considered it my special duty to extract from the extensive but vague contents of a general world view the ideas which were essential and give them a more or less dogmatic form. Because of their precise and clear meaning, these ideas are suited to the purpose of uniting in a common front all those who are ready to accept them as principles. In other words: The National Socialist German Workers’ Party extracts the essential principles from the general conception of the world which is based on the folk idea. On these principles it establishes a political doctrine which takes into account the practical realities of the day, the nature of the times, the available human material and all its deficiencies. Through this political doctrine it is possible to bring great masses of the people into an organization which is constructed as rigidly as it could be. Such an organization is the main preliminary that is necessary for the final triumph of this world view.

    You were saying about nationalism?

    Continuing…

    Volume Two – The National Socialist Movement
    Chapter II: The State

    By 1920-1921 certain circles belonging to the present outlived bourgeois class accused our movement again and again of taking up a negative attitude towards the modern State. For that reason the motley gang of camp followers attached to the various political parties, representing a heterogeneous conglomeration of political views, assumed the right of utilizing all available means to suppress the protagonists of this young movement which was preaching a new political gospel. Our opponents deliberately ignored the fact that the bourgeois class itself stood for no uniform opinion as to what the State really meant and that the bourgeoisie did not and could not give any coherent definition of this institution. Those whose duty it is to explain what is meant when we speak of the State, hold chairs in State universities, often in the department of constitutional law, and consider it their highest duty to find explanations and justifications for the more or less fortunate existence of that particular form of State which provides them with their daily bread.

    There is quite a good deal of truth in all this. But that is the very reason why we ought to see that in the future there should not be such a wide difference in the scale of remuneration. Don’t say that under such conditions poorer work would be done. It would be the saddest symptom of decadence if finer intellectual work could be obtained only through the stimulus of higher payment. If that point of view had ruled the world up to now humanity would never have acquired its greatest scientific and cultural heritage. For all the greatest inventions, the greatest discoveries, the most profoundly revolutionary scientific work, and the most magnificent monuments of human culture, were never given to the world under the impulse or compulsion of money. Quite the contrary: not rarely was their origin associated with a renunciation of the worldly pleasures that wealth can purchase.

    It may be that money has become the one power that governs life today. Yet a time will come when men will again bow to higher gods. Much that we have today owes its existence to the desire for money and property; but there is very little among all this which would leave the world poorer by its lack.

    It is also one of the aims before our movement to hold out the prospect of a time when the individual will be given what he needs for the purposes of his life and it will be a time in which, on the other hand, the principle will be upheld that man does not live for material enjoyment alone. This principle will find expression in a wiser scale of wages and salaries which will enable everyone, including the humblest workman who fulfils his duties conscientiously, to live an honourable and decent life both as a man and as a citizen. Let it not be said that this is merely a visionary ideal, that this world would never tolerate it in practice and that of itself it is impossible to attain.

    Sounds an awful lot like from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Again, this is very much in line with socialist dogma. Imagine that, the Nationalist German Socialist Party.

    Listen, reading Mein Kompf always disgusts me, but the point is pretty clear- Hitler’s premises were in line with and are cut from the same cloth as liberal ideology.

  87. Maybe the nail in the coffin:

    Volume Two – The National Socialist Movement, Chapter IV: Personality and the Conception of the Folkish State

    The folkish philosophy is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its view of life.

    If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a philosophy of life. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.

    You’re right, racism was a central part of Nazism, but I think its importance was that it differentiated Nazism from Marxism. Hitler was certainly narcisistic enough to know that he didn’t want to owe his political philosophy to someone else.

    At the end of the day, they were just two peas in a pod.

  88. Gorilla – I am glad you quotea passage in which Hitler openly advocated racism – I was in the process of putting together my own list.

    But then, I am simply amazed that you conclude:

    At the end of the day, they were just two peas in a pod.

    That is like saying “if it wasn’t for the racism thing the KKK would just be good old Americans” – when of course it is the racism that defines them.

  89. We’re talking about two things here, racism and socialism. They are not mutually exclusive.

    The difference between Nazism and Marxism is that the Nazi’s were racist, but they were still Marxist.

  90. LOL … Alfie hit on something. The only reason everyone wants to have a beer with me is that it would be such a cheap date. I don’t drink beer. 🙂

    But I’d gladly slam back a root beer or ginger ale with any of you guys. 😉

  91. Ahhhh BiW …. Ironside was probably the show with one of the best opening themes around. That weird siren sound before Burr gets shot is fantastic.

    That was the era of the disabled hero. Anyone remember James Franciscus as Longstreet? Of course their last names just coincidentally related to their conditions. God I love TV! 😀

  92. While, they were both two peas in a pod in terms of barbaric totalitarianism, I don’t really see the Nazi’s as Marxist.

    A central theme to National Socialism was the success of small business owners. They were socialist in terms of big business, but in no way were calling for a world revolution where the proletariat rises up and to form a global commune. Both were influenced by Hegel, I suppose, but Hucking would be the guy to explain that one.

    Marxism and socialism isn’t one in the same.

    Of course, our conversation on this is bordering on the same ones that chubby, nerdy Rolling Stone writers have over whether the early Cure were punk or new wave.

  93. Gorilla asked: Are you saying that Marxists can’t be racist?

    Of course Marxists can be racists – but according to their philosophy they shouldn’t be. Hitler, on the other hand, actively avows racism. To me, that is a huge difference. It is also the reason I get upset when anyone suggests that fascism is a left-wing doctrine.

  94. Of course, our conversation on this is bordering on the same ones that chubby, nerdy Rolling Stone writers have over whether the early Cure were punk or new wave.

    I live for pearls like this. F*cking classic. ROTFL

  95. They were new wave.

    And when we have our beers I have to drink that MGD 64 shit (which I have yet to actually try) because of this damn diet I’m on.

    Then again, that’s what Tequila is for….

  96. This whole Nazi/Socialist/Racist/Marxist/Leftist thing has gotten too deep for me to swim in. A simple observation:

    What I see happening in this conversation is Hippie identifying certain characteristics (like nationalism and racism) as right-wing. Therefore anyone exhibiting those characteristics must be right-wing. But the opposition is stating that these folks were left-wing. So Hippie is saying the behavior is defined by the political ideology and everyone else is saying that the behavior defines the ideology. And on top of it all, as Hippie pointed out, we are trying to apply political labels across time frames that are inconsistent. No wonder my head is swimming.

    I’d have to read up some more on Lincoln before I declared him a modern day Democrat. Clearly he was somewhat more racially enlightened than many of his peers, a trait we now associate with Dem’s. But let’s not forget that Dem’s only got this attribute post 1968.

  97. Of course Marxists can be racists – but according to their philosophy they shouldn’t be. Hitler, on the other hand, actively avows racism. To me, that is a huge difference. It is also the reason I get upset when anyone suggests that fascism is a left-wing doctrine. — R

    Oh fuck you. So only those on the right can be racist? Jeremiah Wright, the New Black Panther Party, etc, etc, etc are just misunderstood.

    Pray tell, where in the philosophy of conservatism is racism ingrained dogma? Get pissed, your anger doesn’t forgive the fact that Hitler’s ideology was centered around a socialist premise.

  98. I’d have to read up some more on Lincoln before I declared him a modern day Democrat. Clearly he was somewhat more racially enlightened than many of his peers, a trait we now associate with Dem’s. But let’s not forget that Dem’s only got this attribute post 1968. — R

    No we fucking don’t. Dems went from the hard bigotry Jim Crow and segregation to the soft bigotry of low expectations.

    What’s so sad in all of this is that you continue to buy into it. Lincoln would never be a Dem because he would recognize this.

  99. What I see happening in this conversation is Hippie identifying certain characteristics (like nationalism and racism) as right-wing. Therefore anyone exhibiting those characteristics must be right-wing. But the opposition is stating that these folks were left-wing. So Hippie is saying the behavior is defined by the political ideology and everyone else is saying that the behavior defines the ideology. And on top of it all, as Hippie pointed out, we are trying to apply political labels across time frames that are inconsistent. No wonder my head is swimming. — R

    R, I’ve pointed out specific annotations from Mein Kompf that totally refute HP’s claims. The only thing we agree on is that Nazi’s were racist, yeah, well so are dems. I’ve also pointed out that Hitler stated that the only difference between Marxism and Nazism was the racial aspect.

  100. From 106:

    If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle [the significance of race], if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground.

  101. DR, I refuse to let the left take the higer ground of racial tolerance when they have- and indeed continue to be- been the greatest obstacle to racial equality. Period.

  102. “I’ve also pointed out that Hitler stated that the only difference between Marxism and Nazism was the racial aspect.”

    He says without the racism, Fascism would be just another brand of socialism competing against Marxism. Meaning, they would be competing against Marxism on their “own ground” or amongst the various socialist movements, of which there were literally hundreds in Germany at the time.

    You can find other passages in Mein Kamph talking about the importance of German mom and pop stores. It would be the modern equivalent of an anti-Wall-mart rant. Clearly, the success of an entrepreneurial middle class doesn’t remotely jibe with Marxism.

  103. “Dems went from the hard bigotry Jim Crow and segregation to the soft bigotry of low expectations.”-R

    Now that is classic. I’m going to steal that and use it as my own.

  104. I am a Socialist, and a very different kind of Socialist from your rich friend, Count Reventlow. … What you understand by Socialism is nothing more than Marxism. — Adolf Hitler, spoken to Otto Strasser, Berlin, May 21, 1930.

  105. I always like reading the anti-slav parts. It’s a trip that the guy basically saw me as not a white man. As vermin fit to only be a slave.

    How crazy that his ultimate goal was to give Germans “living room” in Eastern Europe where they would live happily ever after by enslaving the entire Slavic population.

  106. F.A. Hayek in his Road to Serfdom (p. 168) said:

    The connection between socialism and nationalism in Germany was close from the beginning. It is significant that the most important ancestors of National Socialism—Fichte, Rodbertus, and Lassalle—are at the same time acknowledged fathers of socialism. …. From 1914 onward there arose from the ranks of Marxist socialism one teacher after another who led, not the conservatives and reactionaries, but the hard-working laborer and idealist youth into the National Socialist fold. It was only thereafter that the tide of nationalist socialism attained major importance and rapidly grew into the Hitlerian doctrine.

  107. A quick side note here:

    I have said on many occasions that one of the reasons I join in these debates is that I learn things. This current discussion is a good example. I have learned a lot of things about National Socialism I had not before realized.

    I really do learn a lot more by talking to people who disagree with me than by talking with people who agree.

    A sincere thanks to everyone.

  108. Regarding HP’s comment in 132, I must admit that this gang is capable of elevating the discussion to heights I would never have expected. Kudos to all … even though my head is swimming a bit. LOL

  109. I must admit that this gang is capable of elevating the discussion to heights I would never have expected.

    “R”,

    That’s because you and Hippie have always run in the minor leagues of liberalism, even if you made it into Triple A liberalism. 🙂

    Think of it stepping into the Conservative world and making in to the “show.” 😈







    Just teasin’ there HIppie.

  110. That’s because you and Hippie have always run in the minor leagues of liberalism, even if you made it into Triple A liberalism. 🙂

    From you, I’ll take that as a compliment. 😉

  111. From you, I’ll take that as a compliment.

    As you should. 😉 Hey, guess what I did this week?

    For the first time in seven years, one month, and two days, I typed a resume. I don’t know what I am going to do with it, but I felt “good about myself.” 😐 I think you libs have rubbed off on me a little – it built my self-esteem without amounting to anything. 😈

  112. I don’t know. Lincoln certainly exhibited some traits I see in modern-day Democrats…he sought to protect Federal Power, even in the face of it being at odds with the rights of ostensibly co-equal sovereigns, and for him, the condition of blacks allowed him to make good lipservice when they were merely means to an end for him:

    “I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be “the Union as it was.” … My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views. I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.”

  113. Owww BIC,

    That’s going to chap some asses that Lincoln was cast any light but sacred. It doesn’t fit the story line. 🙂

    Not to minimize Abe as he was a great President no doubt, but that paragraph alone is one reason I have always thought that Lincoln, though undoubtedly one of the best, was in no way the greatest.

    I reserve the opinion to nominate our first President as the best President.

  114. “I reserve the opinion to nominate our first President as the best President.”

    Seconded.

    I often have to fight back emotion when I think about how awsome George Washington was.

  115. I think that one of the best leaders we had didn’t shine until he started his post-Presidential career.

    John Quincy Adams during his time in the House of Representatives showed more integrity and intestinal fortitude on the subject of slavery than any other single politician before or since.

  116. Gorilla said: R, I’ve pointed out specific annotations from Mein Kompf that totally refute HP’s claims. The only thing we agree on is that Nazi’s were racist, yeah, well so are dems. I’ve also pointed out that Hitler stated that the only difference between Marxism and Nazism was the racial aspect.

    Indeed you did – that is one of the things I was referring to when I said I have been learning new things here. I haven’t looked at Mein Kampf in over 30 years – and I had forgotten (or perhaps never learned) about the passages you cite. I do question your interpretation of the “nationalist” passages – but you are correct that Hitler believed his philosophy to be socialist.

    But – here is where the problem lies for me. Hitler is promoting “racist socialism” – but to me that is an oxymoron. On paper, socialists should all be absolutely equal – everyone is the same in the one big worker’s paradise. Hitler wants a socialist paradise – sure – but only after he enslaves or outright eliminates the inferior races. By definition, that is not socialism.

  117. On paper, socialists should all be absolutely equal – everyone is the same in the one big worker’s paradise.

    Of course, this is one of the crashing failures of socialism/communism/marxism…everyone is supposed to live in equality of condition. Yet somehow, some people always manage to be more equal than others…much like public servants who don’t have to be part of the same health care regime that they would force upon those whom they serve.

    Odd, that…

  118. Hippie I don’t mean this as a gotcha moment or anything negative but…
    when you say:

    …should all be absolutely equal….

    I wonder….
    Do you want to live in a socialist,communist utopia?

  119. I like Washington because he was so giving. While he was not killed in the sevice of our nation, he certainly gave his life to it. He’d have rather spent his days at home, but the country kept calling and he kept answering that call. At a time when perhaps there was no other man on the face of the earth capable.

    And then to have the sense to walk away from it when there were others who became capable.

    He was truely The Indispensible Man.

  120. “By definition, that is not socialism.”-hippieprof

    All socialist ideologies sacrifice individuals in order to achieve collective utopia.

    Just a matter of who.

    Hitler thought purging Jews would work. Get rid of Jews and everyone else would fall into line by defualt.

    Marx and Lenin called for a “dictator of the proletariat” who would purge all with differing political outlooks. Eradicate reactionaries, the bourgeoisie and Christians and everyone else will fall into line by defualt.

    Hence Stalin starved 5 million Ukrainians who had a thing for making money selling beats. Talk about a holocaust under the radar!

    Mao starved 30 fucking million to make society more modern!

    30 million!

    Trifling over the racial aspect of Nazi’s in order to find something a couple degrees more distasteful about a swastika compared to a hammer and sickle is pointless.

    Race, political ideology….Commies, Fascists…they all have the same shit in common. Purge motherfuckers in order to get to the desired collective.

  121. Rutherford,

    I think that “dust mite” comment wasn’t applying to Elric but me. 🙂

    Truthfully, Dawg is so pitiful, he’s harmless. His intellect doesn’t rise to the level of insult. The stupid SOB told me he had a PHD in Physical Chemistry. 😆 Of all the subjects to claim and lie about. The imbecile might as well have said rocket scientist or brain surgeon. I figure when somebody is that obvious in his delusions, it probably is time to back.

    I only like to bully the bullies. 😉

  122. But – here is where the problem lies for me. Hitler is promoting “racist socialism” – but to me that is an oxymoron. On paper, socialists should all be absolutely equal – everyone is the same in the one big worker’s paradise. Hitler wants a socialist paradise – sure – but only after he enslaves or outright eliminates the inferior races. By definition, that is not socialism. — HP

    Actually, DR answered this perfectly. I think the argument of Hitler’s racism is splitting hairs compared to Mao’s or Stalin’s persecution of unwilling participants. Part of me also believes that the xenopobia of Europe in General, and particularly in Germany, made the Jews a convienent target/strawman for what Hitler intended.

  123. Tigre,

    Dawg’s first two or three insults cast at me on the T-World blog had the words like “dummey”, “rediculus” and “rotts the brian” as in his favorite insult ‘Faux News rots the brain.’

    It was so comically off-kilter, I thought it was somebody really clever with great parody for a brief time. 🙂

  124. I like the qualities Huck points out for GW. I believe Lincoln came from harder beginnings,had an as great love and vision for the country and as President faced the division of said nation.

  125. John Quincy Adams during his time in the House of Representatives showed …

    And John Q died with his boots on … collapsed on the floor of the House if I am not mistaken.

    I do find it fascinating those Presidents whose post-Presidential lives mattered more, either to the nation or to themselves. William Howard Taft was another example … much more proud of being Chief Justice than he was of being President.

  126. The Washington FDR comparison seems odd to me. Washington, very rightly, wanted to avoid the appearance of monarchy and this greatly influenced his decision to stop after two terms. FDR was the first President to ever challenge the two term traditional limit and I’m sure that aside from ego, he was motivated by wanting continuity of leadership through a terrible Depression and a World War. Obviously the country wanted that continuity also. FDR gave his life for his country. There is no telling how much longer he might have lived if not for the pressures of his extended term of office.

    I agree that Washington was the best possible first President we could have had. I like some of the unsung heroes though. For example, Chester Alan Arthur. The man who killed James Garfield was seeking political appointment under a then corrupt system. Rutherford B. Hayes had started reforms in this area but it was the assassination of Garfield that greatly influenced his successor, Chester A, Arthur to sign into law sweeping civil service reform. This was made all the more noteworthy by the fact that Arthur himself had been a product of the “spoils” system and had to reject the very system he had supported just years earlier..

    American history is full of Presidents whose names don’t trip easily off the tongue but who made great contributions. That’s why I enjoy reading historian’s ranked lists of the Presidents to see what surprises might be in there.

  127. FDR undoubtledly wanted continuity of leadership, but unlike Washington, he did not have confidence in the ability of the American people to manage their own affairs. Hence the consolidation expansion of federal power and the micromanagment of details which prolonged the Depression in the US.

    A smiling tyrant is still a tyrant.

  128. Obviously the country wanted that continuity also. FDR gave his life for his country. There is no telling how much longer he might have lived if not for the pressures of his extended term of office.

    Don’t be so sure. It was very apparent to me that the FDR had amassed enough power to have claimed the throne – in fact, until FDR won overwhelmingly in 1936, he was way behind in the polls until he bought votes through public slush and won going away – the same kind of power that Obama is attempting to amass.

    That part about wanting continuity? FDR wasn’t cold two years before the 22nd amendment was proposed and ratified a few years later.

    FDR was never the saint that the Left attempts to make him out to be – nor IMHO was a particularly effective President, contrary to leftist historians who have controlled the narrative the last sixty years have taught all of us.

    FDR prolonged the Depression as BIC stated, sustained a ten year slow down with his inept fiscal policies, was slow to react during Hitler’s march to destroying Europe, was rumored to have had ties to the mafia, and taunted the Japanese into striking at Pearl Harbor – not to mention his wife was a loon.

    The election of Obama has opened many eyes, not just about how pathetic he is, but a little research into determining FDR was a tyrant too. That ought to be enough to piss you libs off a little.

  129. I looked at this book briefly. It is a typical ideologue book – where they start out with the conclusions and work backwards. Total garbage.

  130. Here we go again …. Tex, while I know you enjoy exuding charm, do remember that I alone get to actually tell folks to “take a hike, maggot”. Dog is welcome here as long as he can swim with the sharks.

    Dick, my favorite homicidal clown, Tex used the old “you don’t get any traffic” routine on me years ago. You can ask him … it doesn’t phase me. I’m not competing with HuffPo or Drudge or even your esteemed blog. To some degree I compete with myself and my traffic has increased over the years so I’m a pretty happy camper. (Uh oh … that may not be good …. in the movies every happy camper gets murdered by …. wait for it … the homicidal clown.) 😀

  131. Dog … to get back to your comment … yes, I get the same impression as you of Rossiter’s book. Start with your conclusion and then do whatever you can to work your way backward.

    Someone earlier in the thread, maybe it was HP, asked if anyone important had endorsed the book. Well if you look at the testimonials on the web site, the answer is no. However I seriously think this is just a matter of poor PR on Rossiter’s part. The book is a cathartic read for lib-haters, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, just to name a few would go orgasmic over this book. I don’t know why Rossiter didn’t try to get better endorsements. Perhaps he did and the “big guys” felt he reached too far and failed?

  132. Oh Tex, since you’re being “persecuted” over at The Great Spot, I just wanted to reassure you that one of your comments went into moderation tonight because you spelled your email address wrong and WP didn’t recognize you. Your email addr is one place you don’t want to make typos. 😉

    Another house keeping reminder for those of you who end up in moderation every now and then. I’ve set the link limit at 3. So if your comment has 4 or more links in it … to moderation hell you shall go. If you don’t want to wait for me to get around to approving it, simply break your comment into two or more chunks to stay within the 3 link limit.

    I don’t do this to be a PITA. It really does help catch spam that the built in spam catcher misses.

  133. Yes Rutherford, comments by experts is a very important thing to pay attention to. Has a given book been picked up by the field or not? Or is it just hate radio and thier ilk?

    Other obvious examples george Reker’s book on gays. Although in his own way he as an “expert”.

    Or the Singer book that Heartland Institute was handing out on “Global Cooling” What a joke. You would have at least thought that with thier Exxon budget they could have had a good printing job – and at least traded my contact information for it. As it was it was just out laid out for free in an unmanned exhibit booth.

  134. By the way Rutherford the vacuous comments about me or anything else don’t bother me. They say a lot about the poster and nothing about me. I just ignore the comment – and if it is a pattern I ignore the poster entirely. Since they do it to pump thier own pathetic egos it is the best thing to do.

  135. Rutherford, if you want someone of ‘The Mange’s’ “immense talent” perusing and commenting on your board, who am I to argue? He’s Yahoo commenting quality and I think that makes the “Mange” a perfect compliment for your posts. 😈

    Now, onward to more important matters:

    Do you know what La Bomba’s massive approval rating is my state “R”? Recognizing that I do live in the reddest of red states, therefore making it the wisest of states, MaObama strolls into today with a whopping 27% approval rating, with 70% of the population now rating the man of “No Hope of Change” an epic failure. 🙂 This is doubly good news in that it further drives the proverbial stake through the heart of Graychin Van Lumberjack, who still not recognizing that not only does the lumberjack preach about the evils of racism live from Aryan Community Center, but that his hero is about as wanted as a streaming Rutherford Lawson Live audio.

    Even in the great state of Oklahoma, there are more registered Dimocrats than Republicans, therefore making President La Bomba, Graychin Van Lumberjack and “The Mange” about as popular as Mohammad and Al-Qaeda in our neck of the woods.

    I believe it is our resident animal 800lbs Gorilla who is fond of telling you fools, “Be careful what you wish for.” Clearly, Mr. Gorilla has ascertained quite clearly and correctly that Dear President Obama may have been the greatest thing that has happened for Dimocratic opposition since the Most Reverend and Honorable Ronald Reagan took residency in the WhiteHouse.

    P.S. – I’m surprised a free speech proponent, your one redeeming quality besides the ability to absorb a punch, would minimize a censoring mass of blubber like Graychin. Speaking of bi-polar messages…

  136. P.S. – I’m sorry I can’t type my email address correctly. But I kind of like the little toothy PacMan look. 🙂

    You’ll note it has now been corrected – and unlike Graychin, I never suspected you of “moderating” comments. More so, if you did, you wouldn’t lie about like the blubbering coward either…

  137. I think I proudly mentioned that my little brother is a brand new pharmacist. He is going through a mini life-crisis now that he has started his job.

    He thought he would be helping people and making good money.

    He’s got the good money part down, but he aint helping people.

    What does he do?

    Get thousands of people high every week on the tax payers dime. 90% of his job is giving vicodin to people in the hood. Thousands of people. Fast food style. It’s not even subtle. They come in saying “give me that Watson. I want that Watson.” (They don’t like generic brand)

    That’s Medicaid, folks. Opiate of the masses. Fucking literally!

    It’s like working at a McDonald’s. He doesn’t say that it happens sometimes. Or a lot of times. Distributing vicadin pretty much IS his job.

    He says abuse of pain killers is just as bad in blue collar neighborhoods. The only difference is GM pays for those pain killers, as opposed to you and me. Or wait a minute…we own….never mind.

  138. Rabbit, sad to hear that. But to me there is an even more troubling aspect of that story. And I blame a lot of that on federal policy. This is what happens when you create dependencies on government – no hope, no aspirations for betterment, no future. And Rutherford believes it a good idea to provide more of it.

    The reason those people are popping the pills is to mask the pain. Just a more effective mask than a bottle.

    Not only is it bankrupting the country, putting all of medicine in a bad light, making glorified pill pushers of pharmacists and doctors, but the worst part is that it is literally destroying and wasting the lives of those popping the pills.

  139. DR said: Trifling over the racial aspect of Nazi’s in order to find something a couple degrees more distasteful about a swastika compared to a hammer and sickle is pointless….. Race, political ideology….Commies, Fascists…they all have the same shit in common. Purge motherfuckers in order to get to the desired collective.

    Sorry about being so slow in responding to this – yesterday was pretty busy.

    You are probably very very right here – quibbling about which murdering dictator is worse is probably a waster of time. None of them rise above the lowest of the scum.

    What does still bug me, though – and the reason I seem unable to let go on this issue – is that I get REALLY tired of the right wing suggesting that liberals somehow support the goals of fascism – particularly Nazi fascism. We don’t, and we never have.

    There are some modern day liberals (NOT me) who think that gee, if we just find the right balance we can make socialism work.

    You don’t hear any modern liberals pining for the days of fascism – thinking that all we need to do is get the balance right…. and – not wanting to open another can of worms here – when we do see modern neo-Nazi movements they tend to come from the right, not the left.

    So, yeah- it is probably good to let this part of the conversation die for now – but if I know me I will go off screaming again the next time anyone accuses the left of being pro-Nazi.

  140. Tex said – regarding DR’s pharmacist story: This is what happens when you create dependencies on government – no hope, no aspirations for betterment, no future. And Rutherford believes it a good idea to provide more of it.

    DR – this does indeed suck. Sadly it isn’t anything new. Over 30 years ago a member of my family – a pharmacist – ran a pharmacy and had a profitable drug pushing business on the side. The entire operation as on the verge of being busted but – perhaps fortunately – he died right before the bust came. Long-term drug abuse was certainly a factor in his death.

    Tex – I don’t get how you blame this on the government. The little drug ring required several physicians willing to write the scrips, and several pharmacists willing to dish them out. It was all based on money and greed – and their own drug habits. How is the state somehow responsible for that?

  141. dawg asked: Yes Rutherford, comments by experts is a very important thing to pay attention to. Has a given book been picked up by the field or not?

    I can assure you that the book will not be picked up by any experts in Psychology. As I mentioned earlier, he plays very fast and loose with the definition of mental illness – and it goes down from there. Experts will most certainly not be pleased at his attempt to make political points based on very dubious psychological content.

  142. Hippie,

    Did you not read where the patients were coming and what it how it was being charged? I think you need to reread Rabbit’s post again.

    And before you ask, yes the doctors are being either gutless, unscrupulous, or most likely both. Believe, I know even better than you that not all doctors are saints.

  143. Oh, and BiW informed me that you’re of mongrel heritage (your President’s phrase, not mine) the other day.
    If this is true, let me know so I can check all possibly racist statements at the door.
    I’d hate to offend somebody who voted for a person based on the color of his Communist preferences.
    Shit! Did I say that out loud?

  144. I don’t think any country has come up with a solution to the drug problem. The government has certainly not helped it any. “War on Drugs”, draconian jail sentences – don’t work. I have known addicts – few if any belonged in jail – they were victims. Don’t blame pharmacists or Mexicans or Colombians either. They are meeting a market need. Want to take the wind out of thier sales? Legalize – but I can’t say that has worked so well either. As I say i have seen no solution.

  145. I can assure you that the book will not be picked up by any experts in Psychology.

    No matter, though I don’t agree with your assessment that “NO” psychologists will picked up upon and I am personally aware of at least two “PHD experts” in psychology that gave me reference in the first place. And they would be the first to admit they aren’t near as qualified to make diagnosis about mental illness as Dr. Rossiter either.

    Psychologists are simply not in the same ball park as psychiatrists in training or education. I know this is not what a trained psychologist wants to probably hear, but psychologists have limited ability to write prescriptions and then only with the consent of the attending physician, generally have limited knowledge of neural anatomy, have little or no access to PET, CT, or MRI scans,and receive far less practical training in the underlying medical aspects of medicine.

    In addition to medical school, a psychiatrist also has three years of residency in practice. And we see Dr. Rossiter’s professional accomplishment titled M.D. in Psychiatry.

    I suppose we could debate on practical ability of diagnosis of behavioral aspects, but from a professional perspective this is like comparing a minor league ball player to the “show”, a CPA to second year accounting student, an engineering tech to a licensed engineer. Truly Watermelons to grapes… 🙂

  146. Tex said: Did you not read where the patients were coming and what it how it was being charged? I think you need to reread Rabbit’s post again.

    DR also said the problem was just as bad in blue collar neighborhoods. Hell, I suspect it is just as bad across the socioeconomic spectrum. Remember Limbaugh’s little addiction?

    Even with Medicaid someone still has to write the scrip….

    But – Dawg is right – it all comes down to demand. If we could manage to cut the demand a whole lot of problems would suddenly clear up.

  147. There is one and only one practical solution to the “War on Drugs.” I am convinced supply can not be stopped.

    Therefore, the only practical “War on Drugs” is to curb the demand. And in our morally depraved, permissive and humanistic, evil and godless society that “progressives have wrought”, I hold out little hope of curbing demand anytime soon.

    Ironic how “progressives” lambasted BushHitlerMcChimp over battling terrorism on foreign soil, but gladly welcome terrorists on our Southern Border providing their necessary fix.

    They still haven’t tied two-and-two together.

  148. Psychologists are simply not in the same ball park as psychiatrists in training or education.

    Tex – you are right – Psychologists are far better trained.

    Psychiatrists get perhaps one relevant class during medical school. Those who eventually go into residency are statistically the bottom of the barrel in their med school classes.

    Graduate school in clinical psychology is more difficult to get into than med school. Students in clinical receive 4 intense years of training, plus an internship.

    You also seem to think that the ability to prescribe drugs is the key to therapy. A PA can be trained use the PDR – so there is little need for Psychiatrists.

    Come on Tex – you KNOW psychiatrists are the laughing stock of the medical profession. It is a profession made up of those who could barely hack med school.

  149. Hippie. You missed the “Medicaid” part of Rabbit’s post – 90% of it. And that is jointly funded by the state and federal governments, and is managed by the states. That’s about “as government” as government gets.

    While Limbaugh and addict and I can not excuse him or any Hollywood air head either, those addicts are paying their way to be addicted…

  150. Graduate school in clinical psychology is more difficult to get into than med school. Students in clinical receive 4 intense years of training, plus an internship.

    Uh huh. Is that why there’s a “clinical practicing psychologist” on every street corner where I live? The difficulty of becoming one?

    They’re about on par in reputation with homeopathic practitioners of medicine and Scientology church counselors.

  151. Come on Tex – you KNOW psychiatrists are the laughing stock of the medical profession. It is a profession made up of those who could barely hack med school.

    If my experience in med school means anything, I found far more psychiatrists weren’t quacks or the bottom of the class, but far more frequently liked the hours. Making $150K a year and working 30 hours a week would have suited me, though I never gave much thought to the field. 😉

    Besides, some of the worst and most arrogant doctors I’ve met ranked at or near the “top” of their class. The practice of medicine is far more than the ability to spit out facts or pass a board review as I’m sure you are aware – and a big bitch I had while taking the medical school curriculum.

    Surprisingly, so many doctors have come to this same conclusion, that the medical school curriculum is changing as we speak with more focus on clinical and patient care than determining which unpronounceable protein makes up the hemi-desmosome.

    If I learned one thing from medical school, it was this very simple fact. You can be an absolutely brilliant student (and many are) and still be a jerk, dangerously incompetent, and a royal pain in the ass made worse by profession and professional reputation.

    Though not the rule in my class, a few of the attendees rated on Graychin level asshole and arrogance levels. One girl I still regret not putting her teeth in the back of her throat. I can not imagine what their quality of her patient care will be, but if I happen to get her, I will demand they pull the plug.

    And I reminded my very smart daughter, who is at least ten times as academically bright as her old man, who will be attending medical school of this fact.

    Education and knowledge are one thing – but in the end, patients would much prefer a doctor with a positive attitude, cheery demeanor, the ability to communicate on layman’s terms, and a good dose of empathy than a high board score. 😉

  152. “Yes Rutherford, comments by experts is a very important thing to pay attention to.”

    “I can assure you that the book will not be picked up by any experts in Psychology.”

    There’s a loaded term if ever there was one.

    What’s an expert? Someone who tells people what they want to hear? And who gets to decide someone is an expert?

    ” The little drug ring required several physicians willing to write the scrips, and several pharmacists willing to dish them out. It was all based on money and greed – and their own drug habits. How is the state somehow responsible for that?”

    All of those people you mentioned want to be paid. Where does a serial pill-popper get his money to pay them if not by a government-funded entitlement? I’ve known addicts, too. And most of them are not functioning enough to support a drug habit for long-term without some form of indirect government financial assistance along the way.

    “Don’t blame pharmacists or Mexicans or Colombians either. They are meeting a market need.”

    Since when is filling a market need a defense for an illegal action?

    Illegal arms dealers fill a market need.
    Hired killers fill a market need.
    Kiddie porn peddlers fill a market need.
    Sex slave traders fill a market need.

    Shall we just ignore them all in the name of free market capitalism?

    “But – Dawg is right – it all comes down to demand. If we could manage to cut the demand a whole lot of problems would suddenly clear up.”

    That’s not going to happen. Next.

  153. Go back and read some history on the prohibition of alcohol. Didn’t work. A major source was through Canada – could not be stopped. Result was repeal from prohibition. The smuggling and Al Capone stopped – no money in it. And folks still drink. Would it be healthier to stop it? Yes, and tobacco too but we learned on lesson. Still have not learned it on drugs. There are places in the US where possession of a small amount of pot is a “traffic ticket” . I’ve been there – no more druggies on the street than in Tulsa.

  154. PS you do not become yourself when you defend hack writers – next.

    Is anybody here capable of deciphering gibberish and would like to take a shot at explaining the above?

    Did anybody hear mention prohibition Mange?

    Rutherford, you’ll note the “Yahoo like quality submittal” of the above post. You’ll probably want to display one in the stuff of legends, maybe even post a copy in your banner. 😐

  155. Classic.

    The person who’s big contribution is ” As I say i have seen no solution” is going to tell me I am wrong.

    Neither criminalization, decriminalization, or legalization has been effective at curbing demand. But who cares, I’m wrong anyway?

    As your history lesson to a graduated history major pointed out, attempts at curbing demand have been historically fruitless. So why are you still saying that is what needs to be done, and how am I wrong in saying it won’t work?

    “Go back and read some history on the prohibition of alcohol.”

    Yeah, you go do the same. Take special care to read the section on why we had prohibition in the first place. You’ll see that it was a failed attempt at curbing demand. Which was my exact point that you can’t decide if you want to argue for or against.

    “There are places in the US where possession of a small amount of pot is a “traffic ticket” . I’ve been there – no more druggies on the street than in Tulsa.”

    Are you not aware that there are other drugs than pot? Shall we decriminalize or legalize meth? Heroine? OTC drugs? All are very lucrative to a dealer simply filling a market need.

    “PS you do not become yourself when you defend hack writers – next.”

    Hey Breitbart. Care to point out the exact quote where I have defended any writer so that I can see the context of your allegation and defend myself against it?

  156. P.S. You do not become yourself when you defend criminals with comments like “Don’t blame pharmacists or Mexicans or Colombians either. They are meeting a market need.”

    (P.P.S. Notice the difference in our 2 comments? That’s how the game is played here.)

  157. “Hey Breitbart. Care to point out the exact quote where I have defended any writer so that I can see the context of your allegation and defend myself against it?”

    Every other comment here is defending that book – pick one.

    “As your history lesson to a graduated history major pointed out, attempts at curbing demand have been historically fruitless. So why are you still saying that is what needs to be done, and how am I wrong in saying it won’t work?”

    “Your history also shows curring supplies does not work…”

    All I see implied here is the typical failed enforcemnt solutions. How many years has the “war on drugs” been failing? Flog that dead horse some more.

  158. “Every other comment here is defending that book – pick one.”

    I don’t care what others have done. You accused me and I am asking you to show me specifically where I have done what you have alleged.

    Are you going to do that, or are you going to take the Think Progress path and apply what others have done to your allegations of what I have done?

    “All I see implied here is the typical failed enforcemnt solutions. How many years has the “war on drugs” been failing?”

    That’s because it isn’t being faught properly. Sealing the border tighter than a penguins ass would be the first start. Treating incoming drugs, and those who are bringing them, as a threat to the national security of this country, and acting accordingly, would be the next.

    But I am sure they guy who has no solutions will tell me those are wrong, too.

  159. Flog that dead horse some more.

    Why do I picture some four-toothed bohunk, with Skeezer skunk hair, living in a two room mobile home by “hisself” when I read this man?

    YEEHAW! Damn Mange Dawg. Can’t you claim some other state when you post? 70% of Oklahoma provides a collective gasp when you provide your version of Hillbilly Ebonics under that ID.

    Bartlesville, OK, an otherwise beautiful town that my parents once called home, is mortified.

    I think you’re one of those People of Walmart types:

    http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/

  160. “I don’t care what others have done. You accused me and I am asking you to show me specifically where I have done what you have alleged”

    I named no names – sensitive much.

    “That’s because it isn’t being faught properly. Sealing the border tighter than a penguins ass would be the first start. Treating incoming drugs, and those who are bringing them, as a threat to the national security of this country, and acting accordingly, would be the next.”

    Typical regressive “solution”. Hire more cops, pass more laws, bulid more jails – yes sir! Punish punish punish. Save your money.

  161. I don’t doubt that we could put a dent in the drug trade by executing people for possession of even small amounts of drugs – the way they do it, for example, in Singapore.

    But – do you folks really want a Singapore-style police state here?

  162. Fascism is always the regressive solution. Authoritarian top down state – all obey, all fall into line…

  163. Tex, the difference between psychologist and psychiatrist is lost on the Rossiter thesis since I saw no evidence of any biological argument offered by him … hence no way medication, for example, could “cure” liberalism. 😉

    Rossiter’s book is purely political with the dishonest promotion of his credentials to lend undeserved credibility to his work.

  164. “Rossiter’s book is purely political with the dishonest promotion of his credentials to lend undeserved credibility to his work.”

    Exactly – there are a whole series of those books which the right uses to “prove” thier preconceived notions. Not unlike what they get on Faux and hate radio every day.

  165. What does still bug me, though – and the reason I seem unable to let go on this issue – is that I get REALLY tired of the right wing suggesting that liberals somehow support the goals of fascism – particularly Nazi fascism. We don’t, and we never have. — HP

    I could go on.

    Now, this is what I find utterly absurd.

    HP Comment #80: No – of course not. I probably shouldn’t have been quite so hyperbolic – especially since you all seem to be concentrating on that final line rather than to the major part of the post – which attempted to show that Nazi policies – although perhaps superficially progressive – were based on a system of nationalized racism that was anything but progressive.

    We’ve actually covered this in this thread, demonstrating that Hitler’s ideas were very much in line with socialist theory.

    HP comment #57: Nazi fascism was based on two principles: Extreme nationalism and institutionalized racism. I guarantee you, neither of those is a left-wing policy. In fact, they are far more akin to right-wing policies – especially the nationalism part.

    I am happy to own the “bad guys” on the left – the socialists and communists. However, I am not going to take the blame for the bad guys from the right – the fascists. You guys get to answer for them.

    It is in fact this last sentence about “owning” bad guys that I think drives the myth that fascists belong to the “right”. They don’t, and yes, you get to own them too. You get tired of suggestions of fascist support? The left has been trying to pawn Hitler’s Reich on the right for decades, literally rewriting history to make it fit their narrative. You go apoplectic when Obama gets a Hitler stach- yet I’ll bet a million to one that you never said a single word to the left-wing protesters who did far, far worse to Bush.

    Period.

  166. “I named no names – sensitive much.”

    No, your unnamed comment only followed mine as you and I were engaged in discussion and included the word “you.”

    Here’s the thing, troll. As opposed to your blog, we have more than just 2 people who belong to the same circle-jerk here. As such, when you make an accusation against someone, you kind of need to specify you you are addressing.

    Especially if you are addressing someone other than the very person you had previously been enaging in discussion.

    “…Hire more cops…”

    It’s called job creation. Isn’t hiring more government officials the answer to everything?

    “…pass more laws…”

    The answer is not to pass more laws. The answer is to enforce current laws. Liberals never seem to understand that.

    And the last I checked, crossing the border illegally for any reason was against the law. Trafficing drugs was against the law. Has that changed that we need to pass more laws to do those things?

    “…bulid more jails…”

    We don’t need to build more jails. There would be plenty of jail space if worthless dregs on society who are spending their lives in prison were put out of everyone’s misery and executed.

    “Fascism is always the regressive solution. Authoritarian top down state – all obey, all fall into line…”

    I’m going to remember this steaming pile of cry-baby horseshit when I am being penalized by TurboTax Tim for not having health insurance.

    “I don’t doubt that we could put a dent in the drug trade by executing people for possession of even small amounts of drugs – the way they do it, for example, in Singapore.”

    Did someone recommend that or did you just throw it out there as a red herring?

  167. “Fascism is always the regressive solution. Authoritarian top down state – all obey, all fall into line…”

    I’m going to remember this steaming pile of cry-baby horseshit when I am being penalized by TurboTax Tim for not having health insurance.

    Here, here!!!

  168. “When does the puppy stop regurgitating left-wing talking points?”

    He’s Graychin’s co-blogger. Need I say more?

    Unfortunately, we seem to have traded down, as Graychin is much better at this game than is his mutt.

  169. He’s Graychin’s co-blogger. Need I say more?

    Unfortunately, we seem to have traded down, as Graychin is much better at this game than is his mutt.

    That is probably giving “The Mange” too much credit. He’s Graychin’s toe-sucking sycophant and toady. Graychin gives “The Mange” limited abilities – even Graychin can’t trust “The Mange” not to embarrass him.

    How f***ing low is that? 😆

  170. Umm Rutherford,

    The fact that Dr. Rossiter set you off speaks volumes. You’ve got a degreed and licensed professional that certainly lends Dr. Rossiter far more credibility than your worthless, irrational, unprofessional, hack like, and shill opinion. After all, Dr. Rossiter was speaking about you too. 😈

    And though I consider you my blog buddy, I can second Dr. Rossiter’s accurate diagnosis for your mental instability, general rubedom, naivety, and rotten ability to be the least bit objective.

    I would rate that you score at least a 98.6 on the Palin Derangement Syndrome Scale – a sure sign of mental illness.

  171. Obama in January:

    Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.

    Obama in August:

    You may not even want me to come to your district.

    😆 😆 😆

    Classic!

    Man, I had forgotten that goober had been bragging about what a stud he was. The only thing worse that the above admission is his golf game.

  172. Authoritarian top down state – all obey, all fall into line…

    You mean like being “nudged” by people who think I shouldn’t be able to drive my car, and therefore have no problem with creating conditions that lead to $5 a gallon gas, who think I use too much electricity and therefore target the coal industry, or people who think I use too much water and therefore dictate how much water my toilet uses to flush, or the government that cannot even keep track of medicare money, but demand to know my BMI so they can monitor what I eat?

    Or are you talking about the people who believe that they have the authority to dictate what happens on every single body of water in the country? Or perhaps the people who think that “At some point, you have made enough money.”?

    Maybe the people who think that children aren’t even worthy of classifications as “persons” until they have been alive for several years? Maybe the people who think that they can dictate whether or not a farmer can grow a crop for exclusive use on his own farm because that somehow participates in commerce?

    Dawg, the biggest authoritarians in the game are the leftist twatwaffles who cannot wait to impose their will on everyone else when they get the power to do it. It is nothing less than tyranny, and the death of a thousand freedoms at the very bloody hands of regulation.

    Now go be a manure merchant somewhere else. Nobody is buying here.

  173. The answer is not to pass more laws. The answer is to enforce current laws.

    But then Democrats would have to represent those who actually pay the freight. And that might mean that they would actually lose their stranglehold on power that they have from preying on those whom they have made dependent on them. Unpossible!!!

  174. Gorilla said: You get tired of suggestions of fascist support? The left has been trying to pawn Hitler’s Reich on the right for decades, literally rewriting history to make it fit their narrative. You go apoplectic when Obama gets a Hitler stach- yet I’ll bet a million to one that you never said a single word to the left-wing protesters who did far, far worse to Bush.

    I don’t know how many times I have to repeat myself – I didn’t think it appropriate to compare Bush to Hitler either. I apologize that I wasn’t blogging at the time – otherwise I would be able to cite places where I said it at the time. In fact, if you have followed any of my self revelations you would realize I didn’t even consider myself a liberal back in those days.

    Man – it gets hard for me to drop this…..

    In the negotiations leading to the Munich pact…. who favored appeasement? Chamberlain…. and he was a…. conservative. Why fought against appeasement? Daladier… and he was a…. Radical Socialist.

    In the present day, neo-nazi groups are associated with which end of the political spectrum? That would be the right wing….

    Look – I think we can agree that comparisons of American Presidents to Hitler are uncalled for – but I will not tolerate the suggestion that the left gets sole ownership of all the bad guys.

  175. I honestly believe if we legalized marijuana and secured the border, we could put a huge dent in the war on drugs to the point of winning.

    If weed was legal tomorrow, how many people here would go by an 8th?

    I wouldn’t. You either out grow out of the shit or grow the shit. For the latter, weed becomes a hobby like wine tasting.

    I’m sure eventually I would buy an 8th of some White Widow, just for shits and giggles (no pun intended). The novelty of buying legal high grade bud would be cool, I guess, once or twice.

    I’d take a couple hits and then remember that i have out grown the stuff.

    Once every two years or so, my 4 brothers and I sneak off and burn one after some family get together. Play trivial pursuit and giggle a little bit.

    If I was single and bored, and wanted to be fascinated by the discovery channel, I’d probably still smoke weed.

    I honestly only used the drug in the past to listen to music or watch learning shows.

    I used to enjoy gulping down beers and banging big fat chicks.

    I used to enjoy gulping down Whiskey and fighting big fat dudes.

    But weed just made me think the universe was pretty cool on an other wise boring Saturday night. Made me want to learn stuff.

    Life fascinates me now in other ways and I just don’t think about doing it. Too busy. Active dude. A Dad.

    For me, it really is already kind of quasi legal. I could call a buddy and have it delivered to my house within the hour. But I don’t.

  176. I see this:
    In the present day, neo-nazi groups are associated with which end of the political spectrum? That would be the right wing….
    And I see the SPLC drivel and I really have to ask…
    Where is neo Nazism a right of center thing? Seriously?
    This is a grand lie perpetrated by the Left.
    The Right as a rule and evidenced by condemnation from the Left trends pro-Israel. How the F@#$ does that jive with neo Nazis?
    The Right likes law and order. Terrorist acts from loonies is related to the right how?
    The Right does indeed believe in limited government and taxation. They also spend as well as the next guy and what they spend is tax money.
    I am so sick and tired of people painting lunatics as right wing.

  177. W.O.D. has been a financial joke and a dire assault on humanity. Blanket legalization too tends to be a financial joke and is definitely an assault on humanity.

  178. In the present day, neo-nazi groups are associated with which end of the political spectrum? That would be the right wing…. — HP

    No. If they are using the writings of Mein Kampf, then no, they are following socialist theories. This is another myth the left peddles. Because they’re racist they’re from the right? Bullshit.

    Where do the race hustlers live? On the left.

    Who drags race into every discussion? The left.

    If you want to disavow them, then by all means, disavow. But fucking bite your tongue the next you think that come from the right.

    Hitler; then Mein Kampf= a racist ideological dogma based on socialismm; then Nazi= the Nationalist Socialist Party of Germany; then Neo-Nazi= radical racist organizations operating off of the teachings of Mein Kampf and the Klu Klux Klan, which was created by the Demacrat Party; therefore the right?

    Bullshit. Every last aspect of this comes from the left. Feel free to disavow, but you leave me and the right out of it.

  179. Hey Mange? How many people have you read here that want a Fairness Doctrine? How many Conservatives here have suggested shutting down MSNBC or the NYTimes as dangerous? How many here have cheered a President stiffing Chrysler bond holders and what side were they from?

    You want to give us Mange the side that’s fascist again?

  180. P.S. – I’m surprised a free speech proponent, your one redeeming quality besides the ability to absorb a punch, would minimize a censoring mass of blubber like Graychin. Speaking of bi-polar messages…

    With very few exceptions I don’t tell folks how to run their blogs. If I comment and they censor me, I have the right to never return, or take my chances with another comment. Gray and Dog can run their blog however they please.

  181. Oh, and BiW informed me that you’re of mongrel heritage (your President’s phrase, not mine) the other day.

    I’ve got news for you Dick. 99% of us are mongrels and I have no doubt you are too. Just a matter of what mix your brand of mutt is.

    As for why I voted for Obama … his being black was in my view a nice historic bonus but my primary reason was that he reflected my political outlook. He could have been polka-dotted, or looked like a homicidal clown and I still would’ve voted for him if he reflected my political outlook.

  182. The answer is not to pass more laws. The answer is to enforce current laws. Liberals never seem to understand that.

    Ahhhh Huck, the very point I’ve been making about the redundant AZ immigration law. But for the smack at libs, I’m so glad to see you finally agree with me. 😉

  183. I would rate that you score at least a 98.6 on the Palin Derangement Syndrome Scale – a sure sign of mental illness.

    Yeah Tex, I must admit I’m crazy for Sarah. She outdid her previous “refudiate” today when she appeared on Fox News Sunday and told Chris Wallace we are in the midst of a “codundrum.”

    I say we draft Norm Crosby to run for Pres in 2012!

  184. Alfie, I think I see a major logical flaw in your argument with HP. Let’s look at it this way.

    All ducks are birds.
    Donald is a bird therefore he must be a duck … WRONG!

    No one said all right-wingers are neo-Nazi’s. HP said, correctly I think, if you look at the average modern day neo-Nazi or KKK member for that matter, you’ll find a right-winger … someone who has probably voted GOP a good number of times.

    It’s the same problem you have with the Tea Party. All Tea Party members are not racists. Some are. And if i meet a racist I’d be more surprised to hear he’s a Democrat than that he is a Tea Party member.

  185. “Ahhhh Huck, the very point I’ve been making about the redundant AZ immigration law. But for the smack at libs, I’m so glad to see you finally agree with me.”

    Jan Brewer agrees, too. She’d have rather had the federal government enforce the laws in its books. But it has refused to do so for years and years.

    Rutherford, if your house was broken into every night, and your calls to the police went ignored, how long would it take you to take matters into your own hands?

  186. “And if i meet a racist I’d be more surprised to hear he’s a Democrat than that he is a Tea Party member.”

    You know what this is called?

    Prejudice.

  187. “I honestly believe if we legalized marijuana and secured the border, we could put a huge dent in the war on drugs to the point of winning. ”

    As my last comment on that tangent I’ll just say that I agree with this.

  188. “No one said all right-wingers are neo-Nazi’s. HP said, correctly I think, if you look at the average modern day neo-Nazi or KKK member for that matter, you’ll find a right-winger … someone who has probably voted GOP a good number of times.”

    Would be too much to ask if you or the good professor have a shred of anything to back this up?

    Because my guess (which I admit it is) is that if you look at the average modern day neo-nazi you will find an anarchist who has never voted because he wouldn’t want to participate in the process.

  189. Rutherford you’re logic is the logic of a liberal who believes in the right left axis and who MUST paint the right as uber authoritarian fascists,so it is flawed to say the least.
    The right left straight line is absolutely false. The compass graph is a tad better but the questions are absolutely biased and inane.
    Neo Nazis are a hate group who I too doubt on an individual basis are registered voters.
    The KKK isn’t likely to support globalization,amnesty lite,zionist hugging etc. so I don’t know about supporting the GOP. I imagine they could lean GOP on immigration but I know the Klan has members that are blue collar union folk so….????
    Clearly we’re painting with some broad brushes here but those with biases are worst.
    I’m gonna do a post on this subject.

  190. Yeah Tex, I must admit I’m crazy for Sarah. She outdid her previous “refudiate” today when she appeared on Fox News Sunday and told Chris Wallace we are in the midst of a “codundrum.”

    Exactly – your last four twitters have been about Sarah Palin, including taping her while you watched Fat Albert with your daughter.

    I’m telling you as a blog friend, your obsession is a form of sickness. If I were your wife, I think I would begin wondering if you’ve slipped into some sexual delusions.

    Honestly Rutherford, I’ve never seen such a one trick pony…it really is a sign of a form of mental illness.

    But I do thank you for lending more credence to the types of things that Dr. Rossiter was talking about with respect to liberalism. He mentions this too. 😉

  191. I’m sitting here reading the headline news today about Al Gore, John Kerry, Maxine Waters, Charlie Rangel, the Volt, Obama Care, JournO(bama)list, and the like. And I can’t get over this fact, contrary to what the Hippie Prof., Rutherford, and blog censors like Graychin are a part: and deny.

    The Democratic Party is a bevy of Marxists, Leninists, anarchists, Maoists, Euro-”soft”Socialists, black nationalist/liberation theologists, and a smattering of other leftist, statist, collectivist, thug unionists, and “redistributionist” splinters.

    I’m not sure there is a sane person left in the whole lot. Tell me Dr. Rossiter isn’t right after the last couple of weeks when the news is considered.

  192. Ahhhh Huck, the very point I’ve been making about the redundant AZ immigration law. But for the smack at libs, I’m so glad to see you finally agree with me.

    It would only be redundant if the Feds actually enforced it…something that they have clearly indicated that they have no interest in doing in their pleadings in the case.

  193. Rutherford…dude….just listen to what neo-Nazi’s say themselves!!! I have a short wave radio and hear all kinds of fringe group crap. The Nazi’s have a couple shows on there. They HATE Bush.

    They HATE Republicans.

    Repeat.

    THEY HATE REPUBLICANS

    You guys are soooooooo wrong it’s funny.

    Nazi’s have been and always will be off your simpleton political continuum of left/right.

    We spent all weekend explaining to you guys Nazi ideology,and it bounces off your heads.

    It’s amazing to me that you guys have these constructs.

    As for the comment about Tea Party members vs Dems in terms of racism…..utter bunk!

    Never mind La Rasa and The Black Panther types…have you ever hung out with Teamster Union/UAW bosses? Racist jokes non stop! The old Union guard have many people racist as all hell, you dummies!

    LOL

    I hate to say this, but you guys are either the most insecure turds on Earth or plain old twits.

  194. “I hate to say this, but you guys are either the most insecure turds on Earth or plain old twits.”

    Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt.

  195. Rabbit They HATE Republicans.

    Yeah – perhaps – but guess what – they hate Obama and Democrats even more.

    Geez – I can’t believe we are even having this discussion. Never once in my life have I heard of white supremacist and neo-nazi groups described as anything other than right wing.

    Lets use the Aryan Nations group as an example. On what side of the political are they to be found?

    Here is an Aryan Nations poster:

    http://www.aryannations88.com/Take_Back_America.pdf

    Note the points it makes: America is a Christian Nation. Aliens running across the border are ruining America. What side of the political spectrum makes those points RIGHT HERE IN THE COMMENT SECTION OF THIS VERY BLOG.

    Here is another one:

    http://www.aryannations88.com/cont_deesFlagRevised.pdf

    Hmmm…. and who is the enemy here? Obama – with a bust of Marx behind him.

    Here is an Aryan Nations poster celebrating diversity of sexual orientation…. not.

    http://www.aryannations88.com/SaveMarriage.pdf

    Yes – I hear LOTS of liberals saying the things you see in that poster. Conservatives of course are big fans of homosexuals and gay marriage. Sheesh…..

    Here is a copy of their brochure. Read through it. If you take out the overtly racist parts it reads just like talking points from the GOP.

    http://www.aryannations88.com/PAMPHLET_blue.pdf

    I wasn’t able to find an Aryan Nations poster promoting gun ownership rights – but you know as well as I do how they stand on that issue.

    Don’t dare call me either “insincere” or a “twit” Rabbit. Neo-Nazi groups may hate Republicans – but if you take the racist sections out of their platform it just sounds like the good ol GOP.

  196. I’ve got news for you Dick. 99% of us are mongrels and I have no doubt you are too. Just a matter of what mix your brand of mutt is.

    Actually, I’m a purebred. Got papers and everything.

    As for why I voted for Obama … his being black was in my view a nice historic bonus but my primary reason was that he reflected my political outlook. He could have been polka-dotted, or looked like a homicidal clown and I still would’ve voted for him if he reflected my political outlook.

    Good answer, but I spoke of his communism, not his skin.
    Thanks for for making a few things clear for everybody.

    And Rutherford, I really have come to respect you. At least you try, which most Liberals can’t seem to manage.

  197. Huck – yeah – looks like it is. Too many links…. Rutherford will get to them eventually.

    The links are to flyers on the Aryan Nations website. It is full of lots of racial hatred, yes – but in addition to their racial hatred we have the following:

    — claims that the US is a Christian nation.

    — claims that illegal immigrants are ruining our nation

    — claims that Obama is shredding the constitution

    — claims that Obama is allied with Marx

    — attacks on gay marriage and on homosexuality in general

    — claims that our schools are not educating anymore

    — claims that our legal system allows criminals to run rampant

    — claims that our nation has veered away from the intent of the founders and framers.

    You can check these out for yourself when the comment makes its way out of moderation.

    I am sure you will recognize that all of those are GOP talking points – many of which have been voiced by conservatives right here on this very blog.

    If you strip out the overt racism, neo-nazi groups sound just like the good ol GOP.

  198. …and never mind that one of the founders and still one of the leaders of F.A.I.R the out fit behind the Arizona immigration law is a proven Nazi – with photos to prove it.

  199. Hippie, that was not the denial to which I was referring.

    “Never mind La Rasa and The Black Panther types…have you ever hung out with Teamster Union/UAW bosses? Racist jokes non stop! The old Union guard have many people racist as all hell, you dummies! ”

    That is.

    I notice the point that Republicans are largely in favor of support for Israel is continuing to be ignored by those attempting to connect neo-nazis to the GOP.

    I’d like to see a link that shows neo-nazi support for that policy.

    The same goes for the point that the GOP has continued to put forth the meme that illegal immigrants do the work Americans don’t want to do.

    Got a link to show neo-Nazi support for that Republican policy?

    “with photos to prove it.”

    Then prove it.

  200. I notice the point that Republicans are largely in favor of support for Israel is continuing to be ignored by those attempting to connect neo-nazis to the GOP.

    I am not sure what the position of American neo nazis is on Israel – yes, they absolutely hate Jews, but the hate Arabs too. I suspect that if they could get all of the Jews and Arabs out of the US they wouldn’t have much of any position on Israel/Palestine.

    BTW – I want to clarify a point someone made earlier, suggesting that liberals are anti-Israel. Helen Thomas aside, I don’t believe that most liberals are anti-Israel. We differ from conservatives because we generally feel that both Jews and Palestinians are responsible for the mess. Nobody has clean hands in the conflict.

  201. February 2009 report by Southern Poverty Law Center examined Tanton’s written correspondence[17] highlighted alleged connections between Tanton’s immigration-reduction efforts and white supremacist, neo-Nazi and pro-eugenics leaders.[18]

    The introduction to the report reads:

    FAIR, CIS and NumbersUSA are all part of a network of restrictionist organizations conceived and created by John Tanton, the “puppeteer” of the nativist movement and a man with deep racist roots. As the first article in this report shows, Tanton has for decades been at the heart of the white nationalist scene. He has met with leading white supremacists, promoted anti-Semitic ideas, and associated closely with the leaders of a eugenicist foundation once described by a leading newspaper as a “neo-Nazi organization.” He has made a series of racist statements about Latinos and worried that they were outbreeding whites. At one point, he wrote candidly that to maintain American culture, “a European-American majority” is required.[19]

    A 2002 Southern Poverty Law Center report[20] listed 13 immigration-restriction groups, which they claim were founded and/or funded by Tanton.

    American Immigration Control Foundation – AICF, 1983, funded
    American Patrol/Voice of Citizens Together – 1992, funded
    California Coalition for Immigration Reform – CCIR, 1994, funded
    Californians for Population Stabilization – 1996, funded (founded separately in 1986)
    Center for Immigration Studies – CIS, 1985, founded and funded
    Federation for American Immigration Reform – FAIR, 1979, founded and funded
    NumbersUSA – 1996, founded and funded
    Population-Environment Balance – 1973, joined board in 1980
    ProEnglish – 1994, founded and funded
    ProjectUSA – 1999, funded
    The Social Contract Press – 1990, founded and funded
    U.S. English – 1983, founded and funded
    U.S. Inc. – 1982, founded and funded

    know who you defend or assocaite with…

    http://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/pdf/static/splc_nativistlobby_022009.pdf

  202. The Southern Poverty Law Center is a shill organization for the Left-wing of the Dimocratic Party with about the same credibility as Media Matters. You might as well throw in the ACLU and La Raza to prove your point Mange.

    And your Jew hatred is showing Mange…. a large part of what motivates that pea-sized brain.

  203. Fred Phelps, former Dimocratic nominee from Kansas, makes all of these points

    – claims that the US is a Christian nation.

    – claims that illegal immigrants are ruining our nation

    – claims that Obama is shredding the constitution

    – claims that Obama is allied with Marx

    – attacks on gay marriage and on homosexuality in general

    – claims that our schools are not educating anymore

    – claims that our legal system allows criminals to run rampant

    – claims that our nation has veered away from the intent of the founders and framers.

    Great article showing that unbelievable hypocrisy of not lunatic fringe groups which Hippie desperately tries to tie to Conservatives, but main stream leaders of the Dimocratic Party.

    Deny any of these points – not about the radical fringe. These are your leaders boys.

    http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2010/08/01/the-party-of-the-rich/

  204. If you want a rational Jewish view of Israel look up J-Street.
    The most rabid neocon Jews are in the US. They enable the worst elements in Izrael which block rational conversation from happening.
    Most in Israel are much much less didactic.

  205. Give it a rest Tex – so you can find a fringe democrat with conservative views.

    Lets make it more personal. I have heard you personally voice every point I make in 250. I don’t think you have made any secret of your political views.

    Remember, I am not calling you a nazi. I am making the bloody obvious point that – stripped of the overt racism – neo nazis spew GOP talking points.

  206. (1) This is a Christian Nation
    (2) Illegals are ruining this country
    (3) Have “attacked” gay marriage and homosexuality.

    I believe I have said this was a nation founded by mostly Christians. Big difference. Believe I have also called the Constitution a purposely secular document since we departed at least in part for reasons of King George. Believe I have also argued ad infinitum that the privatization of faith was never the Framer’s intent which is your, Rutherford’s and the feckless Graychin Van Lumberjack’s intention. The fact that two of the three make some amends by trying to “act religious” makes it all the more nauseating and phony. Mange doesn’t count because he’s too stupid to formulate anything beyond he’s hungry and the computer is on.

    I believe I have said on many occasions I sympathize with the illegal Mexican’s plight, believe I said I’d be climbing the wall too, believe I said we ought to streamline the process, believe I said we should make it more affordable for poor citizens, believe I said those here legally and waiting get first dibs, and said as much on the previous thread.

    Does “attack” now equate to “does not approve?” Exactly who have I harmed by voicing my opinion, no matter how strongly?

    Believe I’ve called Obama a “statist” and “social democrat” when not calling him Bongo, La Bomba, Jimmah Carter Redux (no longer fitting as Zero is worse), ZerObama, or MaObama, Marxist – you know, serious conversion – and believe I can easily prove that to anybody objective which doesn’t include you.

  207. Best Headline of the Week and what happens when “a liberal opinion magazine written by liberals who don’t want to admit they’re liberals” watches their smug faces plastered by the free enterprise right hook.

    WaPo Unloads Newsweek for $1; Buyer Clearly Overpaid

    Another lib icon bites the dust.

    Muwahahahahaha…

  208. stripped of the overt racism – neo nazis spew GOP talking points.

    Sniff … sniff… that is some smelly s$%^ !!
    So If I go to various anarchists,black bloc,ELF,and Communists and point out the linkage to the Democrat Party line but say…
    Without the overt hate,overthrow,yadda yadda I’m making the same quality point???

  209. I heard Bernie Goldberg tonight make a good point with which I agree.

    The word “racism” has been so mischaracterized and/or so misused by the race pimping libs, especially the white ones, the word doesn’t strike fear in the hearts of good people anymore.

    I predict the same conclusion for “homophobic” in the near future.

    Hell, I laugh at Hippie when he tries to characterize me as either one. Maybe we all do owe Obama a thank you for bringing to light the failure of progressives and how phony the utopia of liberalism really is. 🙂

  210. “…and never mind that one of the founders and still one of the leaders of F.A.I.R the out fit behind the Arizona immigration law is a proven Nazi – with photos to prove it.”

    Still waiting to see these photos.

  211. Bville says: “The most rabid neocon Jews are in the US. They enable the worst elements in Izrael which block rational conversation from happening.
    Most in Israel are much much less didactic.”

    WTF? Stereotyping. Borderline anti-semitism? Sounds like hate speech. Unflattering comment about a minorty class? From a lib? Who would’ve thunk it?

    Izrael? Izrael?? You have a Phd?

  212. Izrael? Izrael?? You have a Phd?

    I told you the lying SOS couldn’t spell CAT if you spotted him the C & the A. 🙂

  213. Well everybody. The genius Dawg has exposed us. We, along with about 60-70% of the US population that support the AZ law, are really members of the KKK. How’d they find out?

  214. Tex, you sure have a lot of energy when it comes to responding. This stuff makes my brain hurt. It also explains the Nobel Prizes handed out to Gore and Obama.

  215. Tigre,

    You can always tell when the weather sucks, or I’m bored. But today, I have a better excuse. So bored, that I actually applied for a job today for the first time in seven years. 🙂

    I’ll leave Rutherford’s account open all day sometimes – and check it every couple of hours. Today, I’ve been having router problems and have been using Rutherford’s site as a test for the modem and router. I’m frequent, but not usually this frequent.

    I’m afraid those times might be coming to a close, though. I think Rutherford is too, because he’s pretty infrequent anymore. Like you, I’m burning out on the blogs – one reason I started harassing Graychin – that and he’s an asshole. What will Rutherford do without me? 😈

    Bet I get more enthused come the first week of November.

  216. HP … many apologies for taking so long to approve your comment. At least you understood why it went into moderation hell.

    I’ve been heads down all day building another WordPress based web site so I’ve been neglectful of comments. At least BiW was able to get my attention by joining Twitter. 😉

  217. Dude… I just saw your pic on Twitter.
    Not only are you one homely looking cocksucker, but… Damn..
    Forget it

    Dick, ask anyone around here … I’ve never made any bones about it … I have a face for radio. Then again, this critique coming from a clown with blood dripping from his head? 🙂

    Oh btw …. I do appreciate the compliment earlier in the thread. I know they will be few and far between so I’m cherishing it while I can. 😉

  218. I told you the lying SOS couldn’t spell CAT if you spotted him the C & the A.

    Not laughing at you Dog, but that was funny. Never quite heard it put like that before Tex. Oh, I need more slang translation … I know SOB but SOS? Last I heard that was Save Our Ship.

  219. Rutherford, You know why I love Dick, the bloodied clown (note I added the title – I didn’t need you wise asses accusing me of truly loving men like Hippie has tried on occasion).

    Because Dick makes me look angelic in nature! 😈 And you thought I played rough and tumble? I’m playing touch football compared to Dick’s rugby. 😆

  220. Somewhere earlier in this thread, Rabbit basically said Mao, Stalin and Hitler were all scumbags so why are we splitting hairs on which philosophy was behind lots of folks dying. Once again, Rabbit wins the clarity award for the thread. I can’t argue with that one.

  221. Nah Tex … Grady Warren (if that is his real name) is not a racist … he’s an assh*le. Let me count the ways:

    1) He parrots the melodrama about Obama that you do. It’s nutty hysteria. Obama is at worst mediocre. He is hardly revolutionary. The country looks a whole lot like it did 18 months ago. Why do you think so many libs are disillusioned?

    2) Grady cares about the black man. I appreciate that. (LOL). He points out how Barack is hurting the black community. I almost fell for it until ….

    3) He said white folks are fed up. Here he once again goes off the reservation. White folks are no worse off now than they were before (well …. barring the increase in unemployment … but then minorities bear a lot of that burden).

    4) Then he really puts the cherry on the sundae by comparing Mexicans and Chicanos to rats.

    Yup, a real winner there Tex. Glad you’re proud to claim him as one of your own. 😉

  222. Alfie said: So If I go to various anarchists,black bloc,ELF,and Communists and point out the linkage to the Democrat Party line but say…

    Go right ahead. I will own the crazies on the left – even though I don’t subscribe to their radical positions.

    What I will NOT do is own the crazies on the right, too.

  223. Yup, a real winner there Tex. Glad you’re proud to claim him as one of your own.

    HEY! Unfair. 😆 I didn’t claim him. I just thought he was funny. Parasites, leeches, mooches, and rats. What’s not to love? 🙂

  224. Tex, I spent two weeks ago re-writing my professional web site. Had it built on “Website Tonight”, a product on the GoDaddy hosting platform. Really sucked. So two weeks ago I rebuilt it using WordPress. Since I’m starting a new division of my business (since the first division isn’t making any money), I’m putting together another web site this week for that side of the business. Both sites include blogs so by the time I’m through, I’ll be writing posts for three blogs, this one and two “professional” ones.

    Let me know how your job search goes. Depending on whom you talk to, resumes are everything or resumes are nothing. Sheeeeeut, I’ve received more conflicting advice over the past three years, it’s mind boggling. I hate to sound cynical, but it’s a matter of luck and who you know. So network your ass off my friend if you’re really interested in getting back to work.

    P.S. Don’t worry, only guys like Andrew Breitbart would publish that you “love Dick” out of context. 😉

  225. Yellowdog, is this picture featuring a blurred bald man supposed to be the big proof?

    You can’t even tell for sure who it is.

    It may be the guy. I’m not saying it isn’t. And I actually don’t care all that much if it is. But I can’t tell who it is from that from this picture.

  226. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2009/jan/16/george-bush-approval-ratings-america

    Two lowest ranks POTUS ever- Dubby Bush and Nixon.
    Note the article on Obama is about Afganistan. Look even a bit below the numbers and you find much of the unhappiness about Obama is from progressives. Many think the US should have left Afganistan in 2002. Many are not happy because the health bill was not stronger, becuase there is no energy bill, no election finance reform, less stimulus than needed, no constructive immigration reform, because Obama has not called out the Party of NO much more forcefully. The progressives should have expected that – Obama was the centrist Dem candidate – in spite of the way the regressives like to paint him.

  227. On resumes. My wife writes them professionally. There is a lot to it. Not many do it right. Difficult to do without some neutral input.
    Keys – no more than two pages – an appendix if you have lots of publications. A focus on “what I can do for you Mr Employer”
    Customize for each application – the generic ones are easily IDed.

  228. Well, the Libs are going to be happy. The mosque will defile sacred ground next to the former WTC. I can’t tell a lie, I suppose constitutionally there isn’t much we can do to stop it. But, constitutionally, I also have freedom of speech to say the following:

    1. This sucks
    2. Thank you “moderate” Muhammadans, your sensitivity sets an example for all the world to see.

  229. DR, how you can buy into this bullsh*t is beyond me. The “mosque” (it’s mostly a community center) is blocks away from Ground Zero … can’t be seen from Ground Zero … can’t see Ground Zero from it. So right off the bat it’s a manufactured controversy. Why don’t we remove all mosques from Manhattan island because of their proximity to Ground Zero? Pure foolishness.

    Second, if Ground Zero is so f*cking sacred why is it still a f*cking hole in the ground after almost ten years? Where’s the memorial?

    You see I don’t even need to broach the argument that the mosque represents the fact that terrorists cannot shake our commitment to freedom of religious practice. That’s a valid point too, but unnecessary because the whole controversy is manufactured by a bunch of hypocrites.

    DR, you’re one of the smartest guys on this board and frankly, sometimes you disappoint me.

  230. Dog I’ve heard the resume advice. Here’s the counter-advice: the resume is only the technical paperwork required to be taken seriously. You don’t even lead with a resume. You find someone you know within the company you’re pursuing and you get a referral to the hiring manager. Once you’ve nailed an interview by request, then you submit the resume as reinforcement.

    I’m not saying you’re wrong …. just pointing out that I’ve been told everything from soup to nuts about finding jobs and the only solid interview I’ve had in three years was because I networked my way into it.

  231. Actually that avatar is from the movie Zombieland.

    Ahhhh BiW, why’d you have to go and ruin our image of Dick as blogger by day and homicidal maniac by night? You’re no fun, no fun at all. 😦

  232. While I personally have no problems with the proximity of that mosque to Ground Zero, many do. And I can respect their opinion on that.

    I find it unfortunate that it can’t/won’t be moved to another location. Forcing the issue does the opposite of what we are told the mosque is supposed to do, and will only serve to foster bad feelings around an already touchy situaion.

    I think this decision is a mistake. A mistake by the Muslims responsible for the mosque and a mistake for the city of NY that is approving it for that location.

  233. “Hey Gorilla hate to break it to you but 50% now have a favorable view of Obamacare. ”

    Which means 50% don’t.

  234. “R”,

    They ain’t going to have a 50% approval rating after they read that link I just posted. And I don’t anymore believe 50% approve of Bongo Care than a man in the moon either. I’m willing to wait about 90 days to see just how popular Mr. Bongo is.

    Buwahahahahahaha…

  235. Rutherford. You make some decent points. That being said, mosques ARE “community centers.” I lived in Arab neighborhoods, trust me, it’s a mosque. You think hearing Adhan at the site of Ground Zero is no biggie. I do. Again, i don’t think the mosque should be stopped, in all honesty. This is America. But, make no mistake about it. The Muslims know what they are doing. Rutherford, tell me this. Why are they hiding where the money is coming from?

    I lived close to this one for a couple years. The Yemenis were too much to take…had to get out of there. Ask the Lebanese….they got the hell out too!

  236. “R”,

    I did an interesting little summary of “historical approval rating” and discovered just how useless they really are. For instance, Harry Truman, who I personally consider one of the greatest Presidents of the 20th century left with an approval rating closely matching Nixon’s. We don’t rate him that way anymore.

    More surprisingly, if we are to go on historical approval ratings upon leaving office as indicator of success, one of the most popular and successful Presidents in recent history is Gerald Ford, who I personally consider the worst of the Republican Presidents in the last 100 years – worthless. If historical approval ratings upon leaving office are really what matter, then Dwight Eisenhower would be considered one of our greatest Presidents ever. Though a real war hero, I don’t consider Eisenhower but average either.

    If we both are to be honest, there have been really only two Presidents in the last century or so that could be considered lasting transitional figures say after Teddy Roosevelt – ones that have had lasting effects no matter which side of the aisle you represent: (1) FDR and (2) Reagan. Truman, who history now judges as a very courageous President, would have been considered one of the most unpopular upon leaving office – and anyone of sound mind surely could not consider Truman worse than either Ford or Carter, both who are now remembered as bumbling idiots.

    I agree with you that historical approval ratings to a fickle and forgetful audience are mostly meaningless.

  237. Rabbit,

    It doesn’t surprise me that Rutherford doesn’t understand why the idea of a 13 story mosque two blocks from Ground Zero is so egregious. You’ve got to remember these libs like Rutherford believe America is in large part to blame for 9/11.

    Rutherford has no idea how much of an affront this is to clear thinking Americans and especially the families of those who lost loved ones – those that have at least a rudimentary understanding of sharia and its consequences.

    This is spitting in the face of anyone who loves America – and I know of at least two Muslim Americans who believe the same thing. My Muslim neighbor said it was a stupid and arrogant thing to do. Let them build the mosque. It will serve as a reminder to most that Islam is a tyrannical way of life and will keep the fires raging.

  238. “R”,

    Let me know how your job search goes. Depending on whom you talk to, resumes are everything or resumes are nothing.

    Well, I’m not pushing to get a job as staring next month there’s much to be done around here. I will tell you that I got my final job via the resume route.

    What I have found most effective (besides knowing someone) is to structure the resume to be the perfect fit for the job description.

    Yesterday, I realized that I had a few glaring weaknesses for the job I applied. On many parts, I was more than qualified – almost too qualified; on others, I had no practical experience whatsoever.

    It really depends on what they believe the most relevant factors to hiring. I don’t expect to get hired, but I would be surprised if I didn’t get an interview.

    P.S. – My neighbor, out of the blue, asked me if I would be interested in applying for this job or I still wouldn’t have typed a resume. 😉

    As only a guy like you can appreciate, you understand my hesitancy about returning.

  239. Yes you are certainly correct about resumes prof. Networking is how I got my last job. I whippied up the resume in one night after it was clear that a coming meeting was really a job interview.

  240. Depends on the company – some won’t let the hiring manager get involved until HR has screened them. Dumb – yes, true never the less.

  241. “50% now have a favorable view of Obamacare”

    …and rising. Note that the GOP leadership dropped the repeal mantra after about two weeks – won’t happen – ever. A new political third rail. The facts are that HCR has been in place for months now and the world has not ended. the benefits are starting to kick in yielding ever more support. Will there be changes? Yes it will get stronger with time. Public option? One payer? Coming.
    Speaking of third rail notice how Ryan’s Bill – introduced by him in February has all of 13 sponsors – no house GOP leadership. DOA. Proposing cuts in Medicare or Social Security is political death. Regan figured that out. So did Bush. I know that teh GOP are slow learners but…they do read polls.

  242. Yeah, you guys are right. BongoCare is real, real popular.

  243. Polls….I can’t believe I’m wasting a comment on this.
    Kaiser poll is nothing to stick a feather in. There are any number of credible polls showing 50% approve of some level of repeal.
    As for the HCR as we have it. Almost NOTHING has gone into effect and those that think what HAS been implemented is a plus for their side should look up between now and 2011 and watch the train that is coming to hit you. When the costs,fees,taxes kick in. When the clinicians bail and employers punk out you will see higher numbers against. It is the sad truth about Americans that they don’t car too much until you touch them,especially in the wallet.

  244. Hippie Professor, just for you.

    Sadly the WSJ article doesn’t mention another influencing phenomenon. I call it “Admiration of Ignorance”, to twist the WSJ title a wee bit.

    Only in a society that cares less and less about facts and science and academics could:

    1. evolution be summarily dismissed by some who receive no ridicule for their unquestioning dismissal of it
    2. climate change is summarily dismissed by some who receive no ridicule for their unquestioning dismissal of it
    3. Sarah Palin is not only allowed to speak in public and attract large audiences but she actually gets to run for Vice President.

    No, Tex, sadly intelligence is not valued the way it once was. Folks can say pure gobblydeegook and we say “mmmm, that’s worth considering.” NO .. it’s NOT…. it’s gobbledeegook.

    Like I tweeted yesterday, there was a time in this country when Sarah Palin would have said “codundrum” while reading stats off her hand and Chris Wallace would have stopped the interview and demanded the twit’s mic be cut off. Those days are behind us.

    And just to prove I’m being fair … let’s not forget the Dem who thought Guam would capsize if too many people were residing there. Yes, he got a chuckle or two in the media but how did he get into a position of power in the first place? No requirement for minimal intelligence … that’s how.

    It’s easy to blame the university system but the WSJ ignores the dangerous societal trend that contributes to disdain for higher education.

  245. How close is too close to Ground Zero? Seriously. If the mosque were seven blocks away, would we care? Yes … we would if people with an axe to grind made an issue of it.

    If people visiting Ground Zero to memorialize their loved ones (at a sadly neglected hole in the ground ten years later) could see this mosque, I might understand the furor. I would still take the religious freedom argument but I would understand the discomfort. This is a manufactured problem … and yes I believe Dog is right that the most vocal folks about this never visit NYC.

  246. Funny how you never mention your brilliant hero’s pronunciation of CORPSEMAN three times as indicator of mass stupidity. Can you honestly top that one? 🙂

    Rutherford, there was a time that real intelligence was recognized. What passes today for intellect is in many cases sheer foolishness.

    You’ve got your script flipped on your first two charges. It’s not the theory of evolution that is questioned, but the rational skepticism. And I can’t believe you’re still defending global warming, from all the falsification of data to Bulbous Gore becoming a billionaire from your foolishness and buying a home directly on the coast.

    Your problem is Rutherford you buy a load of crap from the right party because of politic and not good science, never giving thought to your party is wrong.

    I give you credit for staying on message and stubbornness, but I laugh that once you’ve been exposed as fraudulent, you still stay on message.

    And I hope you noted that undergraduate education at Hawwwvard was used as indicator of mediocre education and a common secret amongst the Ivy League brass. 🙂

  247. There is a difference between “many” and “most.” Many just means a lot. Most means more than 50%. A master’s student shouldn’t have to explain that to a phd.

    You can also feel free to give a shred of proof to this allegation:

    “Most NY GOPers are fine with it.”

    Here’s my proof you’re full of shit.

    “New York City voters oppose 52 – 31 percent a proposal by a Muslim group to build a mosque and cultural center two blocks from Ground Zero, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. Another 17 percent are undecided.”

    Prove me wrong.

    “That must me a Faux Noise “many’ .”

    Think again, windbag.

    Boston Globe: “The prospect of an Islamic center so close to ground zero is, not surprisingly, controversial. Many relatives of Sept. 11 victims are strongly opposed.”

    ABC News” “The proposal to build an Islamic center and mosque just blocks from the city’s most hallowed ground has divided survivors of the nearly 3,000 people who perished on Sept. 11, 2001, with many families vehemently opposed to plan.”

    You’re talking out of your ass…as usual.

  248. All too true prof. Bushco purposely tried to twist science for thier own politcal ends. Well science is not about politics – but verifiable, repeatable data. Luckily agencies like EPA and NOAA are out of the hands of idiots. Legitimate climate experts are pretty much in 100% agreement now and the “climate-gate” scandal has been debunked. “So called “intelligent design” is pretty well dead after costing a couple a bible thumping school boards $1,000,000. I see the ID museum – in TN was it – is going out of business. Even most thumpers could not stomach dinosaur riding cave men.

  249. “and yes I believe Dog is right that the most vocal folks about this never visit NYC.”

    Then you don’t know shit, either.

  250. “Legitimate climate experts are pretty much in 100% agreement now….”

    Why do I get the feeling that any climate change “experts” (there’s that word again) who are in disagreement are deemed to be not legitimate?

  251. Where’s graychin? This tradeoff is bullshit. Frankly…you suck at this.

    You aren’t ready to play ball here.

  252. Huck,

    In dealing with THE MANGE, formerly known as Dawg, there are only two ways to deal with his abject stupidity. Ignore him, which most do, or take the lower road and point fingers while laughing at him like I do.

    Mange is Graychin’s sycophant and idiot assistant. Obviously, Graychin Van Lumberjack has either taken vacation, gotten burnout from being corrected time and again, or even he possibly could have reached his zenith of Mange’s imbecility.

    But you’re right. One can only swallow so much of the lies, exaggerations, distortions, and delusions. Mange has obviously gotten off his leash and is wandering about.

  253. I’m all for rational skepticism Tex. I know enough to know that evolution is still a theory and I don’t fault those that question it. I used the word “summarily” very deliberately. I do disdain those who deny evolution without asking the proper questions. The kind who say “I know I didn’t come from no ape.” I call that ignorant.

    And don’t worry … I won’t pull a ban-Elric-move because I’m being ignored …. BUT you guys are avoiding my points regarding the mosque (with the exception of DR).

    Again … how close is too close?

    And how about this. I don’t want another damn house of Christian worship built in Kansas after that pro-life christian nutjob killed that abortion doctor. Why should that doctor’s relatives have to see a symbol of the religion that got their loved one murdered?

    See how dumb-f*ck stupid that is? The mosque is the same thing. Islam did not kill 3000 Americans. About a dozen loony tunes fulfilling their version of biblical instruction did it. I know you guys say Islam is “special” in its evil but I have news for you. Every religion in the wrong hands leads to really scary crap going down.

  254. “Does that mean you are unwilling or unable to back up your talk with facts?”

    It means that your modus operandi is to always ask for more information. Most of what I quote is common knowledge to those who don’t live thier life in the echo chamber.

    Grow up. Go do yor own home work – you might learn something.

    Just don’t even ask in the future – it’s not forthcoming.

  255. It means that your modus operandi is to always ask for more information.

    I’d like to modify that statement to say … the MO is to ask for more information, which never satisfies the requester.

    The great thing about the debates here is that everyone quotes from their fav sources and condemns the other guys sources. The result is always stalemate, albeit entertaining stalemate.

    Case in point … Tex says the Southern Poverty Law Center is a liberal propaganda organization. So is the New York Times, the Washington Post, and probably NPR unless they happen to print/broadcast something that strikes Tex’s fancy. 🙂

  256. Good googly moogly. The NAACP today is taking a victory lap over some law Obama signed today making sentencing for crack cocaine more in line with that of powdered cocaine.

    Yes … that’s where we need to put all our energy … into making sure that crack addicts get a fair shake. WTF????? How ’bout spending the energy preventing people from getting addicted to crack in the first place?

    Sometimes I just want to throw up my hands in despair. 😦

  257. Amen. Never mind that the Southern Poverty Law Center lists left wing wackos, ACLU has been known to defend right wing hate groups, and Media Matters will call out left wing media if deserved.

  258. Rutherford, when’s your next radio show? I have to put a voice with this blog.

    And what’s up with having a problem getting a job? Are you that very screwed over, unemployable 45-55 years old?
    If so, I feel for ya.

  259. NYC mega mosque:
    This should be a different post but I know how Rutherford feels about that stuff.
    Its not a phony outrage byd. The mosque/community center etc. is only two blocks away. It is most likely funded by Wahabbists. It is unlikely the ASMA will be able to maintain the integrity of the place once it is in full operation.
    In that light it is a lose lose situation both for the West and Muslims here in the West.
    As for who doth protest the most. Reports I see all contain references to victims families including firefighters,so I don’t buy ino the lack of local concern. Outside money and message amplification? Absolutely! but then again everyone is kind of connected in this.

  260. Off base on the crack thing Rutherford. No question addiction would best be stopped but inequity in sentencing for two versions of the same drug – was heavily biased against blacks.
    I question the need for druggies being in jail at all. Send them to rehab. The punish thing has not worked and it won’t.

  261. The NAACP has become a total farce over the past five-ten years.
    They’re now kinda like the Union. Manufacturing bullshit in their quest to try and stay relevant.

  262. “This mosque and Islamic center were approved by the local neighborhood advisory board and have the backing of the mayor. To an alarming extent, the opponents are mostly Republican politicians — Palin, Lazio, Gingrich and even congressional candidates in other states. They pretend to have the courage of their convictions, but the truth is otherwise. When it comes to convictions, they have none at all. ”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/02/AR2010080203721.html?wpisrc=nl_pmheadline

  263. @331 I don’t read Rutherfords comment as complimenting your previous. If you are interested in discussion you either need to provide data,since the blanket common knowledge thing is kind of weak,or accept it when the blanket card is played on you.

    As for NAACP and crack sentencing. Its actually about reviewing the fairness of mandatory sentences. Although I don’t buy that crack sentences were higher because whitey snorts there is something to be said about allowing justice to look at 5 grams of a drug as 5 grams of a drug no matter the form.

  264. ‘…everyone quotes from their fav sources and condemns the other guys sources”

    “Cohen is an idiot” <<<Point made.

    probably didn't even click the link. Why bother.

  265. Crack sentences were higher becuase crack cocaine rightfully scared the shit out of everybody back in the day.

    The introduction of crack sparked a major urban crime wave as gangs had to fight it out for territory.

    That being said, I agree with the ruling. It didn’t intend to be that way, but the laws turned out to be ridiculous when compared to the possession of powder.

    Things were so distorted, that I see this as one of the rare cases where the NAACP had a legit beef.

  266. “Actually I did and read the article.”

    If you had you would know he was not an idiot.
    Your comment was vacuous though…

  267. Of course, people are entitled to their feelings, and feelings regarding Sept. 11 are still raw.

    From Messr Cohen.
    Everything else in the piece speaks to how he fails to have the convictions he accuses others of lacking.

  268. Oh I get it. I don’t bow to some ideologue that you’d gladly go down on and I’m wrong. I’m done with you.

    Just when you think we couldn’t be saddled with someone possessing less intellectual integrity than the Chin, we get the Dawg.

    Kind of like setting the shampoo on the floor of the shower and getting a pink sock for your trouble.

  269. Anyone proclaiming America to be warming up to Health Care is a fool. This is the “phony war” stage of the health care debate as we wait years for the damn thing to be fully implemented. Mark my words, liberals, a storm is coming your way that you will not be able to handle.

    The biggest cluster fuck in American history and I guarantee you lib bloggers will have “gone fishin’ signs up at your blogs when America lights it’s torches.

    Hilarious that you guys think government won’t screw this up. The faith you guys put in bureaucracy amazes me becuase I know you know the short comings of bureaucracy from your corporate experiences. This is Big Gov. The Godzilla of Bureaucracy. It’s gonna suck donkey balls!!!!!!

  270. Guys,

    You got to remember with the Dawg. Not only is he none too smart, but he’s a notorious Jew and Christian bigot, a pathological liar, an uneducated bohunk, a lackey, a hack and worst of all a lib.

    Any one of these makes you certifiable. Bundle them and you’ve got an abortion in the first degree.

    The tragic part is somewhere out there is its mother. Imagine what she must think? Can you possibly imagine the grief and regret?

    I think we should stop for a moment and have a moment of silence for Dawg’s mother.

  271. Palin, Gingrich many other wingers on the same page as Osama. Are YOU?

    “This seems like such an obvious point, but it is apparently not obvious to the many people who oppose the Cordoba Initiative’s planned mosque in lower Manhattan, so let me state it as clearly as possible: The Cordoba Initiative, which is headed by an imam named Feisal Abdul Rauf, is an enemy of al Qaeda, no less than Rudolph Giuliani and the Anti-Defamation League are enemies of al Qaeda. Bin Laden would sooner dispatch a truck bomb to destroy the Cordoba Initiative’s proposed community center than he would attack the ADL, for the simple reason that Osama’s most dire enemies are Muslims. This is quantitatively true, of course — al Qaeda and its ideological affiliates have murdered thousands of Muslims — but it is ideologically true as well: al Qaeda’s goal is the purification of Islam (that is to say, its extreme understanding of Islam) and apostates pose more of a threat to Bin Laden’s understanding of Islam than do infidels.”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/08/if-he-could-bin-laden-would-bomb-the-cordoba-initiative/60833/

  272. Dawg,

    All we know for sure is that as usual you are wrong, this is an affront to put a mosque within one block of ground zero to the families of 9/11, 9/11 was an attack on America in the name of Islam, and 9/11 was not simply a localized event. If this were a 13-story church and 19 Christians had committed this atrocity in the name of “Jesus”, you’d be apoplectic about now.

    You’re not only incredibly stupid and a maggot – you’re a hypocrite to boot.

  273. Palin, Gingrich many other wingers on the same page as Osama. Are YOU?
    What a dirty twisted shitbag statement that is. It is not only patently untrue it reeks of hyper partisan fanaticism.It shows a guilt of the writer that the writer would try to smear onto others.Absolutely shameful.
    I find it ironic how you use a quote that mentions the ADL. If you missed it they’ve come out against the center.
    LAstly you seem to think Daisy and her Hubby can rise above. Well there are many mosques around the world who thought their member could. There is a large and controversial mosque in Boston which had many say they could. They have all failed sadly to the detriment of all mankind. To have a large center that will inevitably be targeted by bigots AND jihadists 2 blocks from WTC….It just boggles the mind someone can be so ignorant to the implications.

  274. If the Muslims are truly interested in this being a reconciliation, then have them follow the model that Newt Gingrich suggested and turn it into an interfaith alliance. Put in a synagogue, a mosque, and a sanctuary.

    Bill O’Reilly was right. Though the current Japanese residing right now at Oahu had absolutely nothing to do with Tojo and the adoption of the Shinto religion and “emperor”, they would have never dreamed of building a monument 1000 ft. from the U.S.S. Arizona memorial and the outrage would have ended the conversation immediately.

    This whole bluff from libs like Dawg and Rutherford is bogus and they know it. They have adopted the line from secular idiots masquerading as Jews named Cohen in the name of politic.

    P.S. – the Imam leading this charge refuses to condemn Hezbollah or Hamas as terrorist organizations. That is all you need to know about intent.

  275. Alfie,

    That “pithy” remark is one of about five arrows shaped like boomerangs that dumb ass has in his quiver that is used over and over again.

    He fails to recognize the log in his eye of quoting people like Butch Madcow, as if somehow Butch is “peace loving” while AM radio hateful – Racial being peace loving like Hamas.

  276. Jesus Christ……

    Asking for a link to support a baseless comment is not asking for “more” information. It’s asking for any information.

    Hell, I can sit here all day long and talk out of my ass if that’s the kind of dicussion group we want here.

    Obama coke-whored his pretty mouth in the back of a limo. And there are pictures to prove it!

    The sun will rise in the west tomorrow. Any legitimate climatologist knows this.

    Experts prove the earth will spin the opposite direction next year.

  277. “And don’t worry … I won’t pull a ban-Elric-move because I’m being ignored …. BUT you guys are avoiding my points regarding the mosque (with the exception of DR).

    Again … how close is too close?”

    I’m not ignoring you. I already said I didn’t have a problem with its proximity. Are you ignoring me or do you need to look up the definition of “proximity”?

    (I’d have offered you a link to the definition, but I’m not going to waste my time backing up what I say here anymore.)

  278. This will be quick as I’ll be off the net for a couple weeks. Time to get some beach time in the Bahamas. Ahhhhh, I’m relaxed already…

    But, before I go, a couple parting shots.

    This may or may not matter to you R, but the guy pushing the mosque is also a proponent of Shariah law. That’s all it takes for me to be against it.

    I’ve been watching the commentary of the Dawg, and I must say, I’m not impressed. In fact, I think the hip hop moniker of the “dawg” is a bit too flattering and completely unearned. I’d say “bitch” is more in order, because clearly, he’s somebody’s bitch. Talking point after talking point has been spewed. At pretty much every challenge, he has run away (like a bitch) and refused to back up his claims. He’s the uneducated twin of the Chin, which is saying something considering how ignorant the Chin is.

    The Osama comment was over the top. If you were in front of me, I’d knee-cap your ass. Aside from the complete incoherency of the comment, it is just factually inaccurate. Enemy of Muslims? Listen, he’s not queasy about collateral damage, but to say he is an enemy of Muslims is pretty stupid. And before you make some comment about my knowledge of Islam, I’ve forgotten more about UBL and Islam than you’ll ever know.

    I’m looking forward to R’s next post. I’ll wager it’ll be something along the lines of how Rangle’s and Water’s ethic charges are racist and that Pelosi’s House is still the most ethical Congress evah!!!!!!

    See you in a couple weeks…

  279. “Yes … that’s where we need to put all our energy … into making sure that crack addicts get a fair shake.”

    That’s understandable. Most blacks are crack addicts. That’s a proven fact.

  280. “I’m looking forward to R’s next post. I’ll wager it’ll be something along the lines of how Rangle’s and Water’s ethic charges are racist and that Pelosi’s House is still the most ethical Congress evah!!!!!!”

    It sure as shit won’t be about the black guy who fired up 8 of his co-workers today because he claims they were racially harrassing him.

    “We gonna have to start killing some white folks! And they babies!”

    Sound familiar? Have we reached another teachable moment?

  281. “And before you make some comment about my knowledge of Islam, I’ve forgotten more about UBL and Islam than you’ll ever know.”

    You aren’t a legitimate expert.

    /s

  282. …making an ignorant comment like that proves it…
    Osama would not bother with the US at all if the US was not messing around in Israel. As it is the US has assisted him immensely. He had no presence in Iraq before 9/11,

  283. Wrong. Al Queda only started talking up Israel after the 9/11 attack. Pre-9/11, their main beef was over Americans, particularly females, being stationed in Arabia during Desert Storm.

    So, if you want to be an “it’s our own fault” guy, site the first Gulf War.

    Your liberal bunk should go like this: “Osama would not bother with the US at all if the US was not messing around liberating Kuwait.”

    There ya go. I fixed it for you. Pro bono, boner.

  284. It doesn’t matter how many times we ask dawg to prove his point…he’ll just grin like an idiot, take off his hat, and show us the top of his head.

    Too much credit BIC. He’ll take another drink out of the toilet and lick his ass.

    And this is Graychin’s only friend. 🙂

  285. Anybody want to bet who Omar Thorton pulled the lever for – of course, he was accusing them of racism.

    Thank you Rachel Maddow – you were right about the Timothy McVeigh type leading to mass murder.

    Unfortunately you dumb bitch, you were pointing the wrong way when you made your accusations.

  286. Rutherford, when’s your next radio show? I have to put a voice with this blog.

    And what’s up with having a problem getting a job? Are you that very screwed over, unemployable 45-55 years old?
    If so, I feel for ya.

    No need to wait for the next show …. just go to the RL Show link at the top of the page and hit the play button. Every show is archived. We’re live 3pm EDT on Sundays.

    49 years old … you guessed right on that one. Hopefully not unemployable although I have my days when I wonder. 🙂

  287. So a ton of comments on, I was wondering, in a very post specific manner (shocker),whether it was mentioned or known that there was a paper put forth back in the day that looked at conservatism as a mental issue?
    Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition 2003 Jost/Glaser et al

  288. I offered the one I did since it seemed to have some controversy secondary to NIH funding. I thought along those lines it perhaps even served in some way to motivate Rossiter.

  289. “I offered the one I did since it seemed to have some controversy secondary to NIH funding”

    yeah like “climate-gate” Wingers trying to squash scientific results that did not please them.

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s