It’s been boiling hot . . .

. . . thanks to former Vice President Gore, and I’ve been both busy at work and tired when I get home. The computer room is not air conditioned (all we have are a couple of window air conditioners in the bedrooms) and with it having reached 102ºF (39C) yesterday, I just plain didn’t feel like spending time in front of the ‘puter. Today, Elaine and I are planning on going to the beach.

A picture from out my back window:

97 Comments

  1. Yes indeed, it is really hot, and not just the weather. Our domestic politics are about as hot as they ever get, due to a Congress made dysfunctional by a small minority of House Republicans who have the power to push this nation into default, all over a simple pledge NEVER to raise taxes, or even revenues. Thus, the current version of the Republican Party is a radical party that can NEVER say YES, yes never!!!

    So here is the only solution remaining:

    “PRESIDENT OBAMA should announce that he will raise the debt ceiling unilaterally if he cannot reach a deal with Congress. Constitutionally, he would be on solid ground. Politically, he can’t lose. The public wants a deal. The threat to act unilaterally will only strengthen his bargaining power if Republicans don’t want to be frozen out; if they defy him, the public will throw their support to the president. Either way, Republicans look like the obstructionists and will pay a price. “

    [Added: This "kicking the can down the road" is no ultimate solution, of course. We need the two parties working together immediately to alleviate our fiscal crisis, knowing that it will take hard work and years of disciplined control of spending. The solution must include job creation, otherwise we will never get there, rather, then continue our decline. Or maybe we need a third party which functions with reason, taking the lessons of history into account, willing to tackle these tough problems and discard the political posturing and foolish ideological pledges.]

  2. Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points …

    Gap bridging my ass, you senile fraud.

  3. Son of a gun — a right-wing Christian fundamentalist Muslim-hating gun nut [one of your people] blows up a government building in Norway, then shoots 90+ young people — and there’s not a word about it on your web page.

    Way to be relevant, Dana. Too hot for the computer, indeed.

  4. Following on to my post 09:21, above, there is an option which President Obama can invoke unilaterally, and an option that individual investors should consider exercising this weekend. Check it out!

  5. Here’s a report from a Norwegian Paper instead of the NYT, LAT Filter and spin. Sounds more like OKC:

    http://www.newsinenglish.no/2011/07/23/death-toll-hits-80-may-rise/

    DEATH TOLL HITS 91, MAY RISE
    July 23, 2011

    UPDATED: Norway ’s worst catastrophe since World War II continued to deepen during the night, when the director of the state police announced that at least 84 persons were killed in a massacre at the Labour Party’s annual summer camp. Øystein Mæland also warned that more bodies could be discovered at the site.

    The island of Utøya has been the site of the Labour Party’s annual summer camp for its youth group AUF for decades. On Friday it turned into a bloody massacre scene. PHOTO: NRK/Views and News

    “We still don’t have a final overview over the number of injured,” Mæland told reporters at a press conference around 3am Saturday, around 10 hours after a gunman dressed in a police uniform opened fire on campers on the island of Utøya northwest of Oslo.”Many critically injured are being treated at Ullevål University Hospital in Oslo. A long list of others injured are spread over other local hospitals. We won’t have a complete overview until tomorrow.”

    Mæland added that the situation “affects all of us. This is an incident of catastrophic proportions.”

    The state police director was clearly shaken by the high death toll, which comes in addition to the seven persons confirmed dead so far in the bombing that occurred in downtown Oslo before the massacre on Utøya.

    “There has never been a situation like this in Norway before,” he said. “This is a very dark day for Norway. This is something we have no experience with.”

    Survivors of Friday’s terror on Utøya told gripping tales of how campers approached suspected gunman Anders Behring Breivik, thinking he came from the police as a safety measure after the bombing in the Oslo, only to experience that he shot them in cold blood. One young man told newspaper VG that he saw a girl shot in the head. Others ran for their lives, seeking refuge behind rocks or trees as the gunman continued his shooting spree around the small island in the Tyri Fjord.

    Breivik, arrested by police and charged with the shootings, was described as a 32-year-old member of the Free Masons and a right-wing extremist who hates Muslims. It remained unclear what he thought he could accomplish by gunning down Norwegian teenagers at the Labour Party’s summer camp, but some speculated the shootings were politically motivated. Norwegian Broadcasting (NRK) reported that the gunman reportedly used both a rifle, a hand weapon and an automatic weapon. Police also found explosives on the island that hadn’t been detonated.

    Breivik had been observed in downtown Oslo just before a powerful bomb exploded in the heart of the government complex, killing at least seven others, injuring several more and causing widespread damage to government ministries and surrounding property. Police quickly linked the two incidents.

    Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, who has spent every summer on Utøya since the early 1970s, was informed of the skyrocketing death toll, up from 10 a few hours earlier, and said he was deeply saddened and shaken. The AUF summer camp attracts some of the brightest and most ambitious members of the Labour Party’s next generation, so the massacre means a huge loss to the party’s future. Crisis teams including psychologists and the Red Cross were set up to help survivors and the families of the dead.

    Views and News from Norway/Nina Berglund
    Join our Readers’ Forum or comment below.

  6. Son of a gun — a right-wing Christian fundamentalist Muslim-hating gun nut [one of your people] blows up a government building in Norway, then shoots 90+ young people — and there’s not a word about it on your web page.

    Oh cool — does this mean that whenever a multiculturalist-utilizing-so-that-he-can-exploit-Western values Christian/Jew-hating Muslim blows up whatever, we cal refer to him as “one of YOUR people?” Y’know, the ones you perpetually make excuses for (like our resident terrorist-sympathizer/Jew hater Perry)?

  7. But hey, look at the bright side. It looks as if — for once — you dolts won’t look foolish for attempting to make links that don’t exist (y’know, like you most recently did with Jared Loughner). But unlike what you all do regarding Islamic terror, conservatives aren’t making excuses for this scum.

    We just wish the MSM would quickly label Muslim terror as quickly as they mentioned “Christian” and “right-wing” regarding this putz.

    [released from moderation - pH]

  8. Perry says:
    23 July 2011 at 09:21

    Our domestic politics are about as hot as they ever get, due to a Congress made dysfunctional by a small minority of House Republicans who have the power to push this nation into default, all over a simple pledge NEVER to raise taxes, or even revenues. Thus, the current version of the Republican Party is a radical party that can NEVER say YES, yes never!!!

    That’s just how a repblican form of Government works, representing people who do not want more taxes flushed down the toilet. So then taking an opposite view of the other party, all they can do is tax and spend more. There ya go, an action and reaction. Otherwise it’s a dictatorship.

  9. Son of a gun — a right-wing Christian fundamentalist Muslim-hating gun nut [one of your people] blows up a government building in Norway, then shoots 90+ young people — and there’s not a word about it on your web page.

    It can’t be as scarce as coverage of News Corp’s (Fox News) predilection towards, among other transgressions, phone tapping and bribery of public officials.

  10. Yorkshire, what you posted is a current summary of the tragedy in Norway. I am sure there is much more to be learned about the perp and any others who may have been involved.

    I have been to Norway, spent about a week there, about 10 years ago, and left being very impressed with the people and their country. Moreover, their heritage is impressive, a heritage that has impacted the globe more than ever would be expected from a small country with a such a harsh winter climate. The Vikings their shipbuilding and explorations, the underground resistance to the Nazi’s, the Winter Olympics, the Fjords, and the Nobel Prizes are prominent in my mind about the Norwegians.

    Apparently they do have a strain of extreme nationalists, the likes of our late Timothy McVeigh. In fact, the bombings reminded me of the Oklahoma City federal building bombing, and the American militia movement which still exists.

    It remains to be seen as more details emerge, which hopefully will provide more understanding of exactly what has produced this terror.

  11. “That’s just how a repblican form of Government works, representing people who do not want more taxes flushed down the toilet. So then taking an opposite view of the other party, all they can do is tax and spend more. There ya go, an action and reaction. Otherwise it’s a dictatorship.”

    Yorkshire, I agree with you about the tax and spend proclivity, which is a loser in today’s context. However, I am convinced that the proper step toward solving our fiscal crisis is shared burden, involving appropriate revenue increases and spending cuts. Part of our problem is due to having large tax cuts and large spending increases, as I think you will agree.

  12. It can’t be as scarce as coverage of News Corp’s (Fox News) predilection towards, among other transgressions, phone tapping and bribery of public officials.

    More proof that you don’t actually watch FNC, but rely on the moonbat blogs to tell you what’s (or what’s not) on.

  13. Son of a gun — a right-wing Christian fundamentalist Muslim-hating gun nut [one of your people] blows up a government building in Norway, then shoots 90+ young people — and there’s not a word about it on your web page.

    It can’t be as scarce as coverage of News Corp’s (Fox News) predilection towards, among other transgressions, phone tapping and bribery of public officials.

    Well note, mike g, a couple of days ago Dana had this to say about the Murdoch scandals:

    “As for the hacking scandal in the UK, it’s overblown and really meaningless. Is anyone really surprised that a tabloid newspaper would pull stuff like that to get more information? Note that no one is saying that various Murdock sources got the news wrong, but people are just combitching about how they got their information.”

    I think Dana is hoping that this scandal does not impact the WSJ editorial page or, of course, the FNN propagandists. Let us see if they have been doing any hacking of private voice mails and emails in order to further distort their so-called reporting of the news. Not that I am surprised at Dana’s comment, because it fits in with his well-demonstrated Machiavellian approach to his right wing politics!

  14. Perry says:
    23 July 2011 at 18:32

    “That’s just how a repblican form of Government works, representing people who do not want more taxes flushed down the toilet. So then taking an opposite view of the other party, all they can do is tax and spend more. There ya go, an action and reaction. Otherwise it’s a dictatorship.”

    Yorkshire, I agree with you about the tax and spend proclivity, which is a loser in today’s context. However, I am convinced that the proper step toward solving our fiscal crisis is shared burden, involving appropriate revenue increases and spending cuts. Part of our problem is due to having large tax cuts and large spending increases, as I think you will agree.

    Yes, with this caveat. If you have less money, spend less. You can’t have it both ways. Simple arithmetic tells us that. Your home budget should tell you that. If you have less money, stop spending. If you have a credit card, make sure you budgetted that monthly payment. The Government did neither, has done neither.

  15. I think Dana is hoping that this scandal does not impact the WSJ editorial page or, of course, the FNN propagandists. Let us see if they have been doing any hacking of private voice mails and emails in order to further distort their so-called reporting of the news. Not that I am surprised at Dana’s comment, because it fits in with his well-demonstrated Machiavellian approach to his right wing politics!

    Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points …

    Gap bridging my ass, you senile fraud.

  16. “Yes, with this caveat. If you have less money, spend less. You can’t have it both ways. Simple arithmetic tells us that. Your home budget should tell you that. If you have less money, stop spending. If you have a credit card, make sure you budgetted that monthly payment. The Government did neither, has done neither.”

    Agreed, Yorkshire!

  17. Speaking of heat …

    A lot of truth here, sorry to say:

    “I’ve been mystified in recent weeks whenever I’ve encountered a Republican member of Congress being interviewed and saying that experts think a default wouldn’t be that catastrophic. What sort of “experts,” I wonder, could these people possibly be referring to? We all know there are conservative “experts” in this world who have proved themselves willing to say that Social Security has hurt old people, civil rights have been bad for blacks, trees cause pollution, the planet is in fact cooling—and, of course, “deficits don’t matter,” at least when it’s Republicans running them up. But “default doesn’t matter” is a new breed of crackpotism. Surely no serious person says such things. Well, friend, think again—and understand the intellectual (so to speak) roots of the madness at our door.”

    Time to cool off before it is too late, like > Aug 2nd is way too late!

  18. Son of a gun — a right-wing Christian fundamentalist Muslim-hating gun nut [one of your people] blows up a government building in Norway, then shoots 90+ young people — and there’s not a word about it on your web page.

    Most of the young people killed were attending a Labour Party camp, which means they were liberals.

    Since w1ngnuts have been talking about using violence against liberals for a while, they’re probably quietly applauding.

    It’s been boiling hot . . .
    . . . thanks to former Vice President Gore,

    Let me see… Oh yes –

    “Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points”

  19. If you look at the Norway tragedy, do not look at it throught the eye of living here in the USA. Consider Geert Wilders and VanGogh of the Netherlands. VanGogh was assasinated for speaking ill of islam, Wilders was arrested for hate speech. Look at Denmark where the head political cartoonist penned a cartoon against islam. It caused days of riots in the muddled east. It has put people in hiding in DK. And last consider the recent elections in Finland where the “All Finn” party made great gains due to islam’s inroads there. And look at Norway and why this guy went beserk. Are you seeing a pattern here yet?

    Again do not look at this through the prism of Leftist Political Correctness, but look at it as the Indians in the Plains and when encroachment put them on the side lines. I’ve been in contact with a Finn for 18 years. I was surprised when she wrote about the all Finn Party making great gains in Parliament. Look at France with Paris encircled with islamic slums and police are Verboten, they have sharia law there. Look at Germany trying to get the Turks to go back. The Italians are starting to become a minority in their own country.

    What’s all this, plus the soon to fail European Union? A National Loss of identity. I have friends in Denmark, Finland and the Netherlands. They don’t think of themselves as Europeans first, then national identity second, The Finn is a Finn and she and her family think Finnish first, Scandinavian second, and European third. The same with the Dane. The Dutch Boy tried England, but is back to being a Nederlander now.

    If you put a USA spin to this tragedy, you won’t understand it. If you put a Norwegian first and Scandinavian second, you may get the picture. I don’t endorse it, I understand it.

  20. If you look at the Norway tragedy, do not look at it throught the eye of living here in the USA

    Uh-huh.

    Let’s see – anti-immigrant racism, a willingness to turn violent rhetoric into violent tactics, and a society that allows extremist right-wingers to plot against others…

    No, I can’t see HOW that might apply to the US at all…

  21. Yorkshire, I think you are jumping ahead here without enough detailed information about this alleged mass murderer.

    Here are some of the early details which have been uncovered so far about this man Anders Behring Breivik. It is emerging that he has long had far right nationalist feelings and expressed them freely in the social media, such that Peter Beaumont of The Guardian summed him up thusly: Brevik was a “right-wing fundamentalist with a hatred for Norway’s left, multiculturalism and Muslims”. Consider this in the cite given:

    “What has emerged so far paints a disturbing picture: a Christian fundamentalist with a deep hatred of multiculturalism, of the left and of Muslims, who had written disparagingly of prominent Norwegian politicians.

    Raised in Oslo, he is reported to have attended the same Smestad primary school as Norway’s crown prince, later attending schools in Oslo’s Gaustad and the Handelsgymnasium. Writing later about his teenage years, he would describe racial tension between Norwegians and young immigrants.

    Another significant event was being baptised into the Protestant church of “his own free will” at the age of 15. More recently, however, he had expressed his disgust at his own church. “Today’s Protestant church is a joke,” he wrote in an online post in 2009. “Priests in jeans who march for Palestine and churches that look like minimalist shopping centres. I am a supporter of an indirect collective conversion of the Protestant church back to the Catholic.”

    He was a fan of violent video games and former neighbours said he had sometimes been seen in “military-style” clothing. In the pictures that have so far emerged, Breivik appears well dressed, slender and clean shaven, a picture of the young entrepreneur he wanted to be. His businesses, however, were not much of a success, each one being dissolved after a short while after making a loss, until he established his farm business in 2009 and moved out of Oslo.

    The purpose of his businesses, as Breivik admitted in one posting, was in any case to support his political activities.

    But the man who listed Kafka and George Orwell’s 1984 as his favourite books on Facebook made little secret to friends and others who frequented Christian fundamentalist and far-right websites of his racist views. A member of an Oslo Masonic lodge, reportedly a body builder and a hunter with two registered weapons – a Glock pistol and an automatic rifle – it has been Breivik’s online profile that has, so far supplied the most public information.

    He was a former “youth member” of his country’s conservative Progress party between 1999 and 2004, a party he criticised in one posting for embracing “multiculturalism” and “political correctness” rather than taking an “idealistic stand”.”

    I think this is more about Mr. Breivik than it is about Norway, just as Timothy McVeigh was more about himself and some of his fellow extremists than about America, although it might be a mistake to dismiss the impact of the context in which these people grew up, and how that context may have influenced them and their behavior.

    Both McVeigh and Breivik have in common that they attacked government buildings, having no regard whatsoever for the lives and injuries they inflicted. And then Breivik went one step further with his random killings on Utoya Island. Of course these comments about Breivik are allegations at this point in time.

    More details will be forthcoming, for sure.

    Let us continue to wait for more details to emerge.

  22. Perry wrote:

    Our domestic politics are about as hot as they ever get, due to a Congress made dysfunctional by a small minority of House Republicans who have the power to push this nation into default, all over a simple pledge NEVER to raise taxes, or even revenues. Thus, the current version of the Republican Party is a radical party that can NEVER say YES, yes never!!!

    If it was a “small minority of House Republicans,” then they wouldn’t have the power. That they do have the power is the result of the Republicans being not a small minority, but the majority in the House of Representatives, every last one of them holding his seat because he won an election!

    And how did they win that election? The Clerk of the House of Representatives posts post-election reports on total votes, for each contest individually, and in the aggregate, which you can download here. (Warning: .pdf file.) Out of 86,784,957 total votes cast:

    • 44,593,666 (51.38%) were for Republican Party candidates;
    • 38,854,459 (44.77%) were for Democratic Party candidates;
    • 1,002,511 (01.16%) were for Libertarian Party candidates;
    • 230,764 (00.27%) were for Green Party candidates;
    • 123,841 (00.14%) were for Constitution Party candidates; and
    • 519,043 (00.60%) were for independents.

    The remainder were for very minor party candidates, or were write-in votes.

    Not only did the Republicans win a majority (not just the plurality) of the total votes cast, outdistancing the second-place Democrats by 6.61% of the vote, if I add the Libertarian and Constitution Party votes to those for the GOP, since both of those parties are very much anti-tax and anti-spending organizations, I come up with 45,720,018 votes (52.68%) of the voters casting votes for candidates who have promised to do just what the Republicans are doing.

    In the Senate races, Republicans won 32,680,704 votes to 29,110,733 for the Democrats, plus an additional 1,745,945 votes were cast as write-ins or independent candidacies of Republicans Lisa Murkowski and Charlie Crist in Alaska and Florida.

  23. Perry added to his first comment:

    We need the two parties working together immediately to alleviate our fiscal crisis, knowing that it will take hard work and years of disciplined control of spending. The solution must include job creation, otherwise we will never get there, rather, then continue our decline.

    But, for you, “job creation” does not mean “disciplined control of spending,” but more government spending.

  24. BurninBush wrote:

    Son of a gun — a right-wing Christian fundamentalist Muslim-hating gun nut [one of your people] blows up a government building in Norway, then shoots 90+ young people — and there’s not a word about it on your web page.

    Way to be relevant, Dana. Too hot for the computer, indeed.

    Beeb, I wasn’t home; my darling bride (of 32 years, two months and five days) and I were at the beach, frequently in the water. Sometimes, I do find it far more relevant to spend time with my wife; sorry if that disappoints you.

  25. “If you put a USA spin to this tragedy, you won’t understand it. If you put a Norwegian first and Scandinavian second, you may get the picture. I don’t endorse it, I understand it.”

    Yorkshire, there seems to be more of a “USA spin” (analogy) to this than we Americans would feel comfortable with.

    Information revealed this morning reminds me not only of Timothy McVeigh, but also of David Kaczynski, the Unibomber, because it turns out that this Anders Behring Breivik has also written an extensive manifesto on his views.

    And equally alarming, some of this right wing rhetoric, allegedly linked to Breivik, is prevalent on FNN and the Rush Limbaugh show, and shows up as ideological hatred right here on this very blog.

    Take this as an example:

    “In the manifesto, the author vilifies Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and his Labour Party, which has majority control in Norway’s government, accusing the party of perpetuating “cultural Marxist/multiculturalist ideals” and indoctrinating youth with those ideals. The author accuses the Labour Party of embracing those ideals and therefore allowing the “Islamification of Europe.”"

    Have we read similar rhetoric on this blog, I ask you?

    How much does it take for extreme rhetoric to turn into extreme action? All it takes is one deranged mind!

  26. Perry added to his first comment:

    We need the two parties working together immediately to alleviate our fiscal crisis, knowing that it will take hard work and years of disciplined control of spending. The solution must include job creation, otherwise we will never get there, rather, then continue our decline.

    But, for you, “job creation” does not mean “disciplined control of spending,” but more government spending.

    Gotta get the ball rolling, Dana, otherwise there is scant hope. I don’t want us to go down the same path as the UK is taking, austerity, losing more jobs and reducing GDP growth! We can well afford more stimulus now, then phase in spending cuts once the economy has begun to get on a roll.

  27. Right, Dana, you are fine with a majority governing when it suits your ideology. What about the 2008 mandate?

    Moreover, you approved the Senate Repub minority’s use of the filibuster to thwart majority rule, didn’t you?

    Not only are you inconsistent with your pronouncements, Dana, but you are once more demonstrating your Machiavellian proclivity. I am not impressed!

  28. Right, Dana, you are fine with a majority governing when it suits your ideology. What about the 2008 mandate?

    Moreover, you approved the Senate Repub minority’s use of the filibuster to thwart majority rule, didn’t you?

    Not only are you inconsistent with your pronouncements, Dana, but you are once more demonstrating your Machiavellian proclivity. I am not impressed!

    Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points …

    Gap bridging my ass, you senile fraud.

  29. And equally alarming, some of this right wing rhetoric, allegedly linked to Breivik, is prevalent on FNN and the Rush Limbaugh show, and shows up as ideological hatred right here on this very blog.

    Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points …

    Gap bridging my ass, you senile fraud.

  30. And equally alarming, some of this left wing rhetoric, allegedly linked to Islamists, is prevalent on MSNBC, Pacifica and the Ed Schultz show, and shows up as ideological hatred right here on this very blog via Perry’s anti-Semitism and his support for Hamas/Hizbollah-like terrorist groups..

  31. Perry wrote:

    Gotta get the ball rolling, Dana, otherwise there is scant hope.

    Except, of course, that we did try to “get the ball rolling,” with the 2009 stimulus bill, and unemployment is higher now, 9.2%, than it was in February 0f 2009, 8.2%, when the stimulus bill was passed.

    Unemployment vaulted over the 9% mark two months after the stimulus plan was passed, and has been below 9% for only two months since that time, February and March of this year, after which it started rising again.

    You will, of course, argue that things would have been worse had we not passed it, but that’s just speculation; no one knows what would have happened. But what we do know is that, by the criteria President Obama himself set, it has been a miserable failure.

    President Obama’s minions projected (see page 5 of the linked .pdf document) that, with the stimulus bill, GDP would increase by 3.7% and there would be 3,675,000 more jobs than without it. There is a graph included, which projects unemployment to be 7.0% with the plan, at the end of December 2009, versus 8.8% without it; actual December 2009 unemployment was 9.9%.

    Nor can you complain that the stimulus plan which was actually passed was too small; on page 4, the President’s minions wrote:

    Estimating the aggregate employment effects of the proposed American Recovery and Reinvestment
    Plan involves several steps. The first is to specify a prototypical package. We have assumed a
    package just slightly over the $775 billion currently under discussion. It includes a range of
    measures, all of which have been discussed publicly. Among the key components are:

    • Substantial investments in infrastructure, education, health, and energy.
    • Temporary programs to protect the most vulnerable from the deep recession, including
    increases in food stamps and expansions of unemployment insurance.
    • State fiscal relief designed to alleviate cuts in healthcare, education, and prevent increases
    in state and local taxes.
    • Business investment incentives.
    • A middle class tax cut along the lines of the Making Work Pay tax cut that the President-
    Elect proposed during the campaign.

    The total stimulus plan cost was projected to be $787 billion (and it has risen since then), and every one of the five bullet points included were part of the program as passed.

    At the bottom of page 12, the report said:

    A well designed recovery plan will not only create numerous jobs, but also many jobs paying
    good wages and providing full-time employment.

    If that is what they said, and numerous jobs, many of which were good paying, full time jobs, were not created, then, by their own criteria the President’s recovery plan was not well designed.

    Why shouldn’t we use as the scoring for President Obama’s job performance the criteria he set forth himself?

  32. I could not agree more with this comment by the Norwegian Prime Minister:

    “When I heard the Norwegian Prime Minister Stoltenberg respond to the attacks by saying “You will not destroy us, you will not destroy our democracy and our idea for a better world,” I felt a great sense of relief and some pride in being a progressive-liberal European. If the ultimate goal of right-wing extremists is to undermine our core values and try to force our hand by giving up the tolerant and open societies we have built in Europe, we cannot let them win. “

    I think this applies to us as well, because we have right wing extremists here intent on undermining our core values, thinking that their “core” values are all there are!

  33. How much does it take for extreme rhetoric to turn into extreme action? All it takes is one deranged mind!

    And a pair of balls – which is why the w1ngnuts here only have to worry about being picked up and tortured as possible supporters of terrorism rather than as terrorists themselves.

  34. Perry wrote:

    Right, Dana, you are fine with a majority governing when it suits your ideology. What about the 2008 mandate?

    Moreover, you approved the Senate Repub minority’s use of the filibuster to thwart majority rule, didn’t you?

    Unfortunately, despite Republican filibuster attempts, President Obama and the Democrats actually got the vast majority of their programs passed into law. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act? Yup, that was passed! The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009? Yup, that was passed, too! The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act? Passed. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009? Passed.

    Of course, y’all tried to make something of the Republicans’ (not very successful) filibuster attempts in the 2010 elections, yet the voters gave the Republicans a six seat gain in those elections (seven, if you count Scott Brown’s special election victory earlier in the year), with 3,569,971 more votes than they gave to Democratic candidates in the aggregate Senate races. And if the 2012 elections turn out the way Republicans hope they do — and we have a good chance, given that Democrats will be defending 26 Senate seats while the Republicans have only 10 seats up for re-election — I suspect that you will forget all about your “filibusters are anti-democratic” rhetoric beginning 3 January 2013.

  35. Perry wrote:

    How much does it take for extreme rhetoric to turn into extreme action? All it takes is one deranged mind!

    To which the Phoenician added:

    And a pair of balls – which is why the w1ngnuts here only have to worry about being picked up and tortured as possible supporters of terrorism rather than as terrorists themselves.

    The two P’s are, as you’d expect, attempting to tie the actions of Anders Breivik with American conservatives on this blog, as though we are all just one temper tantrum away from blowing up buildings and killing people. It’s typical liberal dishonesty: they try to tar their opponents with the actions of the most extreme person they can find, something which Perry even once admitted was their tactic. Yet look at what we have actually been writing: we have been big supporters of using actual elections to kick out our current President, we have been big supporters of using actual elections to unseat Democrats in the Congress and the state legislators.

    One wonders — well, not really — what the reaction of the two P’s in a pod would be were I to write an article sating that the actions of Major Nidal Malik Hasan proved that no Muslims should be allowed to serve in the United States Army or possess firearms, or that his actions were indicative that virtually any faithful Muslim in this country could pick up a gun and start shooting. Such would be unfair, such would be a tainting of the innocent by association, when no real association even existed, such would be discriminatory and irrational and unAmerican, and, of course, totally wingnutty.

    Perry, of course, has been very upset that his support for a Palestinian state is taken as being anti-Semitism and support for terrorism. Yet why should we not link him with the obvious anti-Semitism of this woman, photographed at a “Gaza War Protest and Anti-Israel Rally” in San Francisco? If the two P’s believe that it is both fair and reasonable to use the actions of the Norwegian nutcase to conflate our positions with his actions, why would it be unfair and unreasonable to state that, because they do not support Israel and its policies, they must be no different from the idiot in this picture?

  36. Perry says:
    24 July 2011 at 08:44

    “If you put a USA spin to this tragedy, you won’t understand it. If you put a Norwegian first and Scandinavian second, you may get the picture. I don’t endorse it, I understand it.”

    Yorkshire, there seems to be more of a “USA spin” (analogy) to this than we Americans would feel comfortable with.

    Perry you said you spent a week in Norway. We spent 11 months with a Dane living in my house. We spent 5 months with an Austrian who lived in the neighborhood at the same time visiting the Dane. My son spent a year in HS with a Dutch kid. We had an exchange student from Finland for two long weekends (as in Thursday to Sunday). We went to Denmark and lived with the family for 10 days, and we went to Finland and stayed with that couple for a weak. What I’m saying we did not do a bus tour to see the sights. We saw how they lived and discussed, not some narrator telling us a HC Andersen Fairy tale (but we visited HC Andersen’s home in Odense, DK) All in all what I found out, that in spite of the EU (which is a fairy tale) they do not have a mind set of EU first, then their country. With us, we will defend the USA, they will defend Denmark, Austria, The Netherlands and Finland first, not the EU.

  37. Yorkshire wrote:

    All in all what I found out, that in spite of the EU (which is a fairy tale) they do not have a mind set of EU first, then there country. With us, we will defend the USA, they will defend Denmark, Austria, The Netherlands and Finland first, not the EU.

    It took a long time for Americans to become Americans first, and not Virginians or Georgians or Marylanders. But we had a reasonably common history and an almost common language — though I still have problems understanding these damned Yankees! — and the various European Union nations do not have those things. It might not ever be in the cards for the French and Germans to be part of the same nation.

    We can look just to our north to see the problems. After all of these years, there are still tensions between the Francophone and Anglophone Canadians, and there is a sizable minority of Québecois who would like to separate from the rest of Canada.

  38. DP wrote:
    It took a long time for Americans to become Americans first, and not Virginians or Georgians or Marylanders. But we had a reasonably common history and an almost common language — though I still have problems understanding these damned Yankees! — and the various European Union nations do not have those things. It might not ever be in the cards for the French and Germans to be part of the same nation.

    We can look just to our north to see the problems. After all of these years, there are still tensions between the Francophone and Anglophone Canadians, and there is a sizable minority of Québecois who would like to separate from the rest of Canada.

    There are four Canada’s when you scratch the surface and the itch. The Native Canadians in the land of Nunavit (and it’s how they feel has no need for the confederation. The Maritime Provinces would join the USA. Quebec lives in a world of its own. And the Western Provinces dislike the eastern ones and would go it alone.

    On another website they was showing the three USA Power Grids: The Eastern, the Western, and then TEXAS.

  39. If the two P’s believe that it is both fair and reasonable to use the actions of the Norwegian nutcase to conflate our positions with his actions, why would it be unfair and unreasonable to state that, because they do not support Israel and its policies, they must be no different from the idiot in this picture?

    Bingo, Dana. But it’s precisely like the calls for the “new civility” — they only work one way. Conservatives are ones who need to be civil, while “progressives” can be as hateful as they damn well please.

  40. The two P’s are, as you’d expect, attempting to tie the actions of Anders Breivik with American conservatives on this blog, as though we are all just one temper tantrum away from blowing up buildings and killing people. It’s typical liberal dishonesty: they try to tar their opponents with the actions of the most extreme person they can find

    Because the American w1ngnut movement shares important characteristics with this extremist.

    Or did you think we’d forgotten how two of your stalwart heroes held down and stomped one unarmed women, or how the people on this board engaged in half-hearted apologetics for that?

  41. And, sure enough, American W1ngnuts are already trying to whitewash the nutter:

    A quite clear picture of Anders Behring Breivik emerges from this collection of his online posts. I thought the following quotes were reasonably representative; they are edited slightly for English usage.

    These snippets portray a Geert Wilders-type of cultural conservative, very opposed to ethnocentrism as a strategy, very positive about the Vienna School, pro-Israel, and also very hostile toward Muslims. Breivik sees Islam as eventually taking over Europe via differential fertility if nothing is done, noting historical data on other areas (e.g., Turkey, Lebanon). He has a 1100-page book, titled 2083: A European Declaration of Independence, suggesting his actions were intended to call attention to himself as a way of publicizing the book and maximizing its impact. See also the video below which cites the book (also now featured in the video corner.)

    In general, however, it must be said that he is a serious political thinker with a great many insights and some good practical ideas on strategy (e.g., developing culturally conservative media, developing youth organizations that will confront the Marxist street thugs, gaining control of NGOs). It could well be that his silence on Jewish hostility toward Europe and the West and his rejection of ethnocentrism are motivated by his strategic sense.

    [repaired link problem - pH]

  42. Phoenician in a time of Romans says:
    24 July 2011 at 12:23

    The two P’s are, as you’d expect,

    Oh, disappointed again. Thought it would be the 1995 writings. :-(

  43. Perhaps the Phoenician ought to research what he cites: they self-proclaim to be radical, and even though the article is pro-Israel, there are snide anti-Semitic undertones as well.

    ‘Cos w1ngnuts are never anti-semitic?

  44. “It’s typical liberal dishonesty: they try to tar their opponents with the actions of the most extreme person they can find, something which Perry even once admitted was their tactic”

    Apparently you don’t recognize sarcasm when you encounter it, Dana. Perhaps in the future I should label it so as not to be taken literally.

    Sorry, but the rhetoric coming out of the right wing media, you know, the likes of FNN and Rush Limbaugh & Co., on a daily basis, is atrocious. Moreover, I haven’t seen liberals attend meetings and rallies openly packing heat. God knows how many were concealed. Tell me all about the left wing militia, Dana, and I’ll tell you about those on the Right. Then shall we talk about assassinations of leaders on the political left in the ’60′s?

    Since we are subject to right wing mocking and threats on a daily basis, is it too much of a stretch to imagine a deranged mind going off just like this Norwegian Rightie.

    Consider this from today’s Guardian:

    “Two years ago, anti-terrorism officers in Britain warned of a growing threat from rightwing “lone wolves”. At the same time, the US department of homeland security warned of the way in which the wider economic climate and election of the first African-American president could result in confrontations between rightwing extremists and government authorities “similar to those in the past”. These past events included the bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma that killed 168 people.
    The events over the weekend directly challenged the idea that rightwing extremism is only a minor security threat.”

    As I pointed out before, you definitely have such inflammatory rhetoric appear frequently on your blog. I refuse to believe that you are unaware. What will it take, a feather, to push said perps over the edge? You tell me, Dana.

    This rhetoric of hatred from the Right should be out of bounds on your blog, as you have called for civility in the past, but then refused to follow up when your request was not honored. Why is this, Dana?

  45. Meanwhile, do you remember the w1ngnuts screaming that voter ID laws were so NOT for the purpose of voter suppression?

    Welllll…

    The Wisconsin legislature is finalizing a bill to close ten Department of Motor Vehicle centers located in Democratic districts within the state. The money saved will be used to extend operating hours at DMV centers in Republican districts. These cuts come on the heels of new voter ID laws that require voters to present a state-issued photo identification card at the poll booths.

    The Wisconsin Republicans, led by Governor Scott Walker, have passed a myriad of unpopular bills that have alienated the public, specifically the public employees whose right to collectively bargain was stripped, their pensions cut and many of their jobs lost. Walker, who has strong ties to Koch Industries, Americans for Prosperity and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has served as the poster child for conservative policy in the nation.

    And then, when the Democrats call foul, Walker and his ilk shrug and claim their motivation is purely economic, not political. And we just shake our heads and move on, because, really, what can we do?

    This story shows just how stupid neoconservatives think the public really is. Walker and his ilk pass a bill requiring voters to present valid photo identification at the polls. Then, in the same breath, Walker and his ilk propose a bill to close the identification issuing centers (the DMV’s) in the Democratic districts, making ID’s more difficult for low-income voters to obtain.

    Dana, of course, doesn’t mind voter suppression efforts or even outright electoral fraud – as long as his side wins. Ask him.

  46. Sorry – last para was part of quote

    [fixed last para - pH]

  47. Sorry, but the rhetoric coming out of the right wing media, you know, the likes of FNN and Rush Limbaugh & Co., on a daily basis, is atrocious. Moreover, I haven’t seen liberals attend meetings and rallies openly packing heat. God knows how many were concealed. Tell me all about the left wing militia, Dana, and I’ll tell you about those on the Right. Then shall we talk about assassinations of leaders on the political left in the ’60?s?

    Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points …

    Gap bridging my ass, you senile fraud.

  48. Well well well. It seems the Norwegian was inspired by the Unabomber.

    Using a far-left nutjob as inspiration. Kinda shoots Herr Censor’s usual pablum asunder, as usual. But I’m sure he’ll soldier on with his copy and paste and talking points, against all evidence, much like he did with the 3/5 Compromise.

  49. Well well well. It seems the Norwegian was inspired by the Unabomber.

    Using a far-left nutjob as inspiration.

    The cite you give quotes the Unabomber as stating “One of the most wide spread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism,”

    You really are a complete m0ron, aren’t you?

  50. Perry:
    As I pointed out before, you definitely have such inflammatory rhetoric appear frequently on your blog. I refuse to believe that you are unaware. What will it take, a feather, to push said perps over the edge? You tell me, Dana.

    This rhetoric of hatred from the Right should be out of bounds on your blog, as you have called for civility in the past, but then refused to follow up when your request was not honored. Why is this, Dana?

    And you sit there and believe the Left Wing Blogs are pure as fresh snow.

  51. Perry wrote:

    “It’s typical liberal dishonesty: they try to tar their opponents with the actions of the most extreme person they can find, something which Perry even once admitted was their tactic

    Apparently you don’t recognize sarcasm when you encounter it, Dana. Perhaps in the future I should label it so as not to be taken literally.

    Actually, I recognized it as a moment of absolute honesty from you. And, given that you are using that tactic again, on this thread, I’d call that corroboration, not sarcasm.

    As I pointed out before, you definitely have such inflammatory rhetoric appear frequently on your blog. I refuse to believe that you are unaware. What will it take, a feather, to push said perps over the edge? You tell me, Dana.

    This rhetoric of hatred from the Right should be out of bounds on your blog, as you have called for civility in the past, but then refused to follow up when your request was not honored. Why is this, Dana?

    So, you decry “inflammatory rhetoric” on this site, and imply that ’twill take but a feather’s push to put another Timothy Mcveigh in actual attack mode, yet claim that we are not civil here? You have tried to blame Jared Loughner’s actions on conservative blog comments, then blamed Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Karl Rove and the late Lee Atwater as well (and the Phoenician tried to blame Sarah Palin), claimed that some “one on here who might be but a heartbeat away from doing the same thing (killing an abortionist) himself,” and though you claimed that “characteriz(ing) John’s flashing of photos of ‘unattributed, mutilated fetuses’ as the actions of a terrorist” is not the same thing as calling him a terrorist, and criticized Eric for saying that you had, in fact, called Mr Hitchcock a terrorist for publishing pictures, but, of course, Eric was right, because you did say, “labeling John a terrorist is appropriate in this case of his displaying mangled fetuses in my opinion.” You also said, directly addressing Mr Hitchcock in another comment, on another thread, “You certainly are a terrorist,” as well as admitting you called him a terrorist here.

    The evidence is clear, Perry: to you, someone who makes a case strongly is a terrorist or an enabler of terrorists or someone who provides psychological or philosophical ammunition for terrorists.

    Yet that seems to work in only one direction in your mind, only when someone makes a conservative argument. When it came to Major Nidal Hassan, the Fort Hood shooter, you blamed “too easy access to weapons,” as well as his superiors’ decisions to deploy him to Iraq. But somehow, through a comment search for “Nidal,” I couldn’t find one comment from you which suggested that the jihadist rhetoric from the Islamists in general or Anwar al-Awlaki in particular might have pushed Major Hassan into shooting innocent soldiers and civilians. That would seem to be a logical inconsistency on your part, at the very least.

    How ’bout the Palestinians? You continually tell us that the Palestinians, including the Hamas group which has, as part of its Charter, the complete elimination of Israel, have a just cause, and wrote, “On ‘excusing’ Palestinian terrorism, the way I would put it is ‘understanding’ Palestinian terrorism.” You also wrote, “Is it even any wonder that extremists like Hamas and Hezbollah arise and become attractive to these downtrodden Palestinians? I don’t condon their behavior, but I understand how circumstances have created these forces, just as is happening in Iraq as a response to the Cheney/Bush insurgency,1 and that the Israeli leadership does not want a negotiated settlement,2 completely dismissing the fact that Hamas says that such is completely unacceptable, said that, because Israel took military action against Hezbollah rocket attacks, “Israeli hatred for Arabs is quite obvious from their actions,”3 and that you “have great sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians, very little for the Israelis, except for great sympathy for them and their ancestors who suffered due to the Holocaust.”4 Of course, you did admit that the Palestinians hate “the Jews,”5 but said, “The hatred is on both sides, but to me the long overlooked Palestinian side is way past due for compassion, retribution and return, including the pre-1967 boundaries.”6 (Emphasis mine.)

    Now, if you believe that “inflammatory rhetoric” on this blog might be the feather which will push these perps over the edge, why couldn’t we just as easily say that your comments, here, on the Colossus of Rhodey, and perhaps elsewhere, have encouraged, enabled and perhaps even provided the last straw which pushed a Palestinian over the edge, to become a suicide bomber destroying an Israeli shopping center or something like that?

    You see, Perry, you can’t have it both ways. If you want to tell us that it’s us awful right-wingers and our rhetoric which leads men like Anders Behring Breivik to blow up government offices and mow down children at a day camp, then you also have to say — assuming that you are logically consistent — that the rhetoric from the left encourages the Palestinians and the jihadists to make their terrorist strikes.
    ______________________________

    1. Individual comments on The Colossus of Rhodey do not have separate links. The link embedded is to the entire article, including all of its comments; the comment quotes was posted on June 7, 2007 at 08:49 AM [back]
    2. Ibid, comment posted on June 1, 2007 at 06:15 PM [back]
    3. Ibid, comment on June 1, 2007 at 08:30 AM [back]
    4. ibid, comment on May 28, 2007 at 11:16 PM [back]
    5. ibid, comment on May 31, 2007 at 06:22 PM [back]
    6. ibid, comment on May 31, 2007 at 06:22 PM [back]
  52. York wrote:

    Could be a possible misspelling: Gaping Bridges???

    What is a gaping bridge, a denture which is missing some teeth? :)

    The reason that the url for Bridging the Gap, the name Perry selected for his site, is actually http://gapbridging.com/ is because there were were no forms of bridginggap or bridgingthegap that were available as .com sites; I could have set one up for Perry using a different extension, such as .org or .us, but that could cause problems. It took some time to settle on the url chosen.

    Perry was out of town when I set up the site for him; it was done entirely on my own, without consultation.

  53. Dana Pico says:
    24 July 2011 at 19:11 (Edit)

    York wrote:

    Could be a possible misspelling: Gaping Bridges???

    What is a gaping bridge, a denture which is missing some teeth?

    Standard maintenance for PennDOT Bridges. 8-)

  54. Those who argue that Americans must silence or moderate their political speech lest the most unstable individual in society somehow be pushed to violence are nothing less than fascists opposed to the First Amendment. Let the free people of this country speak their minds freely and without reservation — and to hell with these would-be censors!

  55. Dana has to explain:
    So, you decry “inflammatory rhetoric” on this site, and imply that ’twill take but a feather’s push to put another Timothy Mcveigh in actual attack mode, yet claim that we are not civil here? You have tried to blame Jared Loughner’s actions on conservative blog comments, then blamed Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Karl Rove and the late Lee Atwater as well (and the Phoenician tried to blame Sarah Palin), claimed that some “one on here who might be but a heartbeat away from doing the same thing (killing an abortionist) himself,” and though you claimed that “characteriz(ing) John’s flashing of photos of ‘unattributed, mutilated fetuses’ as the actions of a terrorist” is not the same thing as calling him a terrorist, and criticized Eric for saying that you had, in fact, called Mr Hitchcock a terrorist for publishing pictures, but, of course, Eric was right, because you did say, “labeling John a terrorist is appropriate in this case of his displaying mangled fetuses in my opinion.” You also said, directly addressing Mr Hitchcock in another comment, on another thread, “You certainly are a terrorist,” as well as admitting you called him a terrorist here.

    Dana, this what you reached:

  56. Well, York, I take heart at the fact that the wall you have pictured is showing some very old, worn bricks and clear degradation of the mortar joints. :)

  57. Thanks for the welcome.

    And I’ll be the first to concede that there are some limits on speech under the First Amendment (obscenity, slander, libel, and the like) — but those limits do not include limits on political speech merely because the least stable among us (someone like Perry, perhaps) might engage in criminal conduct as a result.

  58. The cite you give quotes the Unabomber as stating “One of the most wide spread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism,”

    You really are a complete m0ron, aren’t you?

    Except that, those of us in this country who actually know about the Unabomber know that he espoused myriad tenets of typical contemporary leftism: primitivism, green-mindedness, and he dug Al Gore’s book Earth in the Balance.

    In actuality, the Unabomber was paradoxical nutjob — but since you and Herr Censor are all about making every possible connection between conservatism and terrorism, then using the Unabomber as one counter is more than apt.

    Dolt.

  59. Hube-wubey – “primitivism” is the right’s schtick this decade.

  60. You see, Perry, you can’t have it both ways. If you want to tell us that it’s us awful right-wingers and our rhetoric which leads men like Anders Behring Breivik to blow up government offices and mow down children at a day camp, then you also have to say — assuming that you are logically consistent — that the rhetoric from the left encourages the Palestinians and the jihadists to make their terrorist strike

    Dana, you are wasting your time by trying to use logic and facts on people who are either insane or else so rabidly ideological that facts and logic simply don’t work with them.

  61. Hoagie, 10 March 2011:

    Unfortunately, Dana responded with a George Bush answer. My answer is: we don’t distinguish. When my father arrived in Normandy in 1944 he shot every German he came across, whether or not they were Nazi’s. When my uncle Tom flew his B-17 over Berlin he bombed everybody, not just Nazi’s. When a country declares war on you they are all your enemy. When a religion declares war on you they too are all your enemy. Until such time as moslem’s either surrender or declare they will kill their own terrorists in the name of world peace, I say kill them all and let Got sort them out. That’s how you win, anything else is doomed to failure.

    And not one single w1ngnut here took Hoagie to task for makign that comment…

  62. “The evidence is clear, Perry: to you, someone who makes a case strongly is a terrorist or an enabler of terrorists or someone who provides psychological or philosophical ammunition for terrorists.”

    It all depends on what making a case “strongly” means, Dana. On this point, we obviously do not agree, and you have brought out here some of the issues upon which we disagree. That’s fine with me!

    In general, I observe that the typical rhetoric from the extreme right, like Rush & Co., like FNN, definitely enables extreme behaviors in some weak minded or unstable people like Jared Loughner, even like several participants on your own blog here. Our nation’s concerned citizens cannot afford to tolerate this rhetoric without commenting on it. This is exactly what I do on here. That you do not agree is obvious. I have no problem with that, but I do think it is my duty as an American citizen, just like you, to push back, so push back I will continue to do. Fortunately, you do grant me that privilege. Thank you for that!

  63. And Dana, on your continued insistence that the First Amendment is an absolute, fellow teacher Greg (RWR) reinforces my point when he wrote:

    “And I’ll be the first to concede that there are some limits on speech under the First Amendment (obscenity, slander, libel, and the like, ….)”

    Exactly right, Greg. Another example would be the restrictions on free speech imposed by a judge in a court of law, or that the Speaker of the House imposes on the gallery as well as on the members themselves.

    Don’t you think it’s time for you to abandon that position, Dana?

  64. “And not one single w1ngnut here took Hoagie to task for makign that comment…”

    Hoagie-John went way overboard on that one, PiaToR. Let’s see what he says about that now!

  65. In general, I observe that the typical rhetoric from the extreme right, like Rush & Co., like FNN, definitely enables extreme behaviors in some weak minded or unstable people like Jared Loughner, even like several participants on your own blog here. Our nation’s concerned citizens cannot afford to tolerate this rhetoric without commenting on it. This is exactly what I do on here. That you do not agree is obvious. I have no problem with that, but I do think it is my duty as an American citizen, just like you, to push back, so push back I will continue to do.

    Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points …

    Gap bridging my ass, you senile fraud.

  66. Hube-wubey – “primitivism” is the right’s schtick this decade.

    Even if that was accurate, the Unabomber’s actions are not part of this decade.

    Moron.

  67. Meanwhile

    As stunned Norwegians grappled with the deadliest attack in the country since World War II, a portrait began to emerge of the suspect, Anders Behring Breivik, 32. The police identified him as a right-wing fundamentalist Christian, while acquaintances described him as a gun-loving Norwegian obsessed with what he saw as the threats of multiculturalism and Muslim immigration.

    “We are not sure whether he was alone or had help,” a police official, Roger Andresen, said at a televised news conference. “What we know is that he is right wing and a Christian fundamentalist.”

    Gee, now which part of the American political landscape does that sound like, I wonder…?

  68. Meanwhile

    As stunned Norwegians grappled with the deadliest attack in the country since World War II, a portrait began to emerge of the suspect, Anders Behring Breivik, 32. The police identified him as a right-wing fundamentalist Christian, while acquaintances described him as a gun-loving Norwegian obsessed with what he saw as the threats of multiculturalism and Muslim immigration.

    “We are not sure whether he was alone or had help,” a police official, Roger Andresen, said at a televised news conference. “What we know is that he is right wing and a Christian fundamentalist.”

    Gee, now which part of the American political landscape does that sound like, I wonder…?

    I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to note that a strain of islamophobia emerged here in our USA post 9/11, which Cheney/Bush exploited with their Iraq War, and which Obama has exploited by his huge escalation in Afghanistan. Thus, this fear is still alive, most certainly.

    This brings me to alleged mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik, who is characterized as a nationalist, and as right-wing fundamentalist Christian. Attach to that the fact that he is anti-Islam, all this pretty well sums up who this man was politically.

    I cannot help but wonder what the inner thoughts about this man are alive within our own right-wing, fundamentalist Christian, anti-Islam folks. Except for his mass murdering, (a valid assumption?), is it possible that there is silent agreement here with the ideology of this man? At this moment, it would not be politically correct to voice these feelings, but I believe these feelings are definitely there.

    This person Breivik (nationalistic, fundamental Christian, right-wing) brings Adolph Hitler to mind. On a smaller scale, did not Breivik allegedly attack for political reasons, bombing government buildings, murdering political enemies, like Hitler did? Breivik and Hitler, it is a mindset, and there are similarities in my mind.

    So I do wonder whether we have a similar mindset alive and well in our own country, just undercover at present. Do we?

  69. I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to note that a strain of islamophobia emerged here in our USA post 9/11, which Cheney/Bush exploited with their Iraq War, and which Obama has exploited by his huge escalation in Afghanistan. Thus, this fear is still alive, most certainly.

    Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points …

    Gap bridging my ass, you senile fraud.

  70. Gee, now which part of the American political landscape does that sound like, I wonder…?

    Gee, let’s see …. the one which perpetually makes excuses for Islamist terror and bashes Jews/Israel every chance they get?

  71. “Hoagie-John went way overboard on that one, PiaToR. Let’s see what he says about that now!”

    No Perry, I did not go way overboard. I said (as I explained) what I grew up saying. It is (was) not meant to be taken literal. If you or Pho did take it literal then both of you are morons. I can see Pho being a moron, but et tu Perry? You really never heard that term used? Or have you always thought it was meant to be taken as fact? I understand that a person from a backwater country may not have heard the term; “Kill’em all and let God sort’em out”. Stands to reason, he’s from a backwater country. And to actually understand it does not mean to actually kill’em, well that’s just too deep for him.

    It means “take no prisoners”, “failure is not an option”, “never surrender”. Got a problem with that sort of philosophy? Or are you so caught up in your ideology common sense never takes over? That’s how a cluck like Pho confuses the weak of mind. By focusing on “a phrase” rather than the point behind the phrase. BTW, they (moslems) believe “kill us all and let god sort us out” and they actually DO mean it literally. Do you really believe Christians want to kill everyone?

    I rtead this murderous cluck was a Freemason. I’m a 32nd degree Freemason, does that mean I’m a crazed psycho waiting to kill unarmed people? Oh, wait. Not only am I a Freemason but I’m a Christian and a conservative too. I guess by your reasoning I’m a hair away from genocide. I also read he was anti-islam. Then how come he killed a bunch of people who were not islamics? I’m anti-communist and I can honestly say the only people I killed were communists, not capitalists. And I did it on the battlefield, not an island full of unarmed kids. And I did it to protect my fellow Americans, not to kill just for the sake of killing.

    “Way overboard”, indeed. Only to those so stupid or close-minded they can’t read between the lines and who want to play “gotcha” rather than face the facts.

    And I was going to answer; “Gee, now which part of the American political landscape does that sound like, I wonder…?’, but Hube beat me to it. It’s funny how you leftists can get away with saying “don’t paint ALL moslems….” and yet infer “All Christians” with a straight face. Hell, Im not even sure this nut was a Christian, are you? Cause I read in The Guardian he was a “non-believer” as far as religion was concerned. Of course they also said he was anti-moslem and yet he didn’t kill one moslem, did he? Perhaps he was anti-Christian like Pho. Maybe Pho could be the next one to “Go off”. Ya think?

  72. “This person Breivik (nationalistic, fundamental Christian, right-wing) brings Adolph Hitler to mind.”

    Really? And what part of the teachings of Christ did Hitler employ? Hitler was nationalistic all right. Nationalistic socialist! And NO Christian would ever believe in a twisted cross. The fact that YOU believe we could is an affront to ALL Christians. You are a bigot.

  73. ““This person Breivik (nationalistic, fundamental Christian, right-wing) brings Adolph Hitler to mind.”

    Really? And what part of the teachings of Christ did Hitler employ? Hitler was nationalistic all right. Nationalistic socialist! And NO Christian would ever believe in a twisted cross. The fact that YOU believe we could is an affront to ALL Christians. You are a bigot.”

    A bigot? Really, Hoagie-John. Do you know what the word means?

    Hitler claimed to be a Christian. Breivik claims to be a fundamental Christian. Both performed dastardly acts. So claiming to be a Christian does not make one so. At least we should expect a person who so claims to make efforts to obey the teachings of Christ. Do you, Hoagie-John, or do you go around calling people bigots to try to make a point of similarity between two madmen? Or are you trying to defend Breivik? I’m confused about your message, Hoagie-John. Please clarify!

  74. Don’t be confused Perry. My message is simple: if you equate Hitler or Breivik with Christianity you have no understanding of Christianity. I don’t give a rats ass what a person “claims” to be. It’s what he “is” that counts. Both of those clowns are phuckin’ murderers. That’s what they are, not what they “claim”.

    You’re the one who wrote: “This person Breivik (nationalistic, fundamental Christian, right-wing) brings Adolph Hitler to mind.”
    I didn’t. The inference is that you see him as a fundamentalist Christian. And even worse, a bastard right winger! I see him as a nationalist-socialist-athiest murdering pig. But that’s just me. Hell, I’d figure he’d be your hero after all he murdered Christians, not moslems.

    And if you don’t like the word “bigot”, don’t be one. But if you are one, as you leftists would say “embrace it”. It’s not a problem, it’s an “issue”. Perhaps you’ll get “closure”.

  75. Hoagie: Amazing, is it not? How often do we hear that al Qaeda et. al. do not represent “real” Islam, yet here is Perry, right here at CSPT, attempting to equate Christianity to Hitler and Breivik.

    The outlandish hypocrisy knows no bounds, I’m afraid.

  76. I don’t know Hube. Perry, in one breath says ” Breivik (nationalistic, fundamental Christian, right-wing) brings Adolph Hitler to mind.” Then jumps when I call a spade a spade and use the word bigot. Go figure. I didn’t equate him to Pol Pot. It was he who equated Breivik to my Christian beliefs, and Hitler to boot!

  77. No Perry, I did not go way overboard

    You advocated declaring 1.5 billion people your “enemy” based solely on their religion, and killing them all. That’s not way overboard?

    It is (was) not meant to be taken literal.

    Was there some metaphorical substitute for “kill them all” we are not aware of? Did you mean, perhaps, “buy them icecream” by using that phrase?

    You meant it literally. You just meant it as a sign of frustration and didn’t expect it to be taken seriously because you know you lack the means.

    When a neo-nazi says “Kill all the Jews” he is expressing exactly the same ugly sentiment as you, Hoagie, and you deserve to be treated with the same contempt as that neo-nazi. There’s nothing metaphorical about it.

  78. Hoagie writes:

    Don’t be confused Perry. My message is simple: if you equate Hitler or Breivik with Christianity you have no understanding of Christianity. I don’t give a rats ass what a person “claims” to be. It’s what he “is” that counts. Both of those clowns are phuckin’ murderers. That’s what they are, not what they “claim”.

    This is the same person who wrote:

    Unfortunately, Dana responded with a George Bush answer. My answer is: we don’t distinguish. When my father arrived in Normandy in 1944 he shot every German he came across, whether or not they were Nazi’s. When my uncle Tom flew his B-17 over Berlin he bombed everybody, not just Nazi’s. When a country declares war on you they are all your enemy. When a religion declares war on you they too are all your enemy. Until such time as moslem’s either surrender or declare they will kill their own terrorists in the name of world peace, I say kill them all and let Got sort them out. That’s how you win, anything else is doomed to failure.

    What a goddamned hypocrite you are, you genocidal freak.

  79. Let’s just emphasise that again.

    – Islamic terrorists commit mass murder. Hoagie screams “Kill all the Moslems!”

    – Christian terrorist commits mass murder. Hoagie screams “How dare you associate this man with Christianity!”

    There’s a word for that.

  80. “Don’t be confused Perry. My message is simple: if you equate Hitler or Breivik with Christianity you have no understanding of Christianity. I don’t give a rats ass what a person “claims” to be. It’s what he “is” that counts. Both of those clowns are phuckin’ murderers. That’s what they are, not what they “claim”.

    You’re the one who wrote: “This person Breivik (nationalistic, fundamental Christian, right-wing) brings Adolph Hitler to mind.”
    I didn’t. The inference is that you see him as a fundamentalist Christian. And even worse, a bastard right winger! I see him as a nationalist-socialist-athiest murdering pig. But that’s just me. Hell, I’d figure he’d be your hero after all he murdered Christians, not moslems.

    And if you don’t like the word “bigot”, don’t be one. But if you are one, as you leftists would say “embrace it”. It’s not a problem, it’s an “issue”. Perhaps you’ll get “closure”.”

    ….

    I don’t know Hube. Perry, in one breath says ” Breivik (nationalistic, fundamental Christian, right-wing) brings Adolph Hitler to mind.” Then jumps when I call a spade a spade and use the word bigot. Go figure. I didn’t equate him to Pol Pot. It was he who equated Breivik to my Christian beliefs, and Hitler to boot!

    No, Hoagie-John, you are so anxious to attack that you are not paying attention to what I wrote!

    I “equated” Breivik to Hitler, not to being a fundamental Christian as you claimed.

    Moreover, I merely repeated how Breivik and Hitler characterized their religion, fundamental Christian/Christian, so pull your pants back up.

    So your use of the word “bigot” is misplaced/misunderstood.

    Moreover, if you care to characterize my position, you ought to start with quoting me, not with twisting my words, which you have been doing consistently today.

    Is this the only way you Righties on here can communicate, by twisting words and personal attacks? What about simply debating the issues, Hoagie-John?

    I swear it’s in the genes!

    PS: I thought I did you a favor via my email sent you a few days ago, so far not even acknowledged. There’s a character issue right there, Hoagie-John! [Where is your class?]

  81. “No Perry, I did not go way overboard.”

    Yes you did “go way overboard”, Hoagie-John, as PiaToR has well pointed out here.

    So who is the bigot with a remark like you made?

    Now you are back-tracking. Well I’m glad to see that. I’ll now take you at your word, as I did when you first made that horrible statement. You need to get your act together!

  82. On the Breivik is a Christian issue, let us look at his own words:

    “At the age of 15 I chose to be baptised [sic] and confirmed in the Norwegian State Church,” the 32-year-old Breivik wrote. “I consider myself to be 100 percent Christian.”

    Do we take him at his word?

    Do you take John Hitchcock at his word?

    Clearly Breivik is a Christian terrorist!

    But there is more nuance than just this blanket statement. For a discussion, check out the link provided above for an intelligent discussion of the issue.

  83. “PS: I thought I did you a favor via my email sent you a few days ago, so far not even acknowledged. There’s a character issue right there, Hoagie-John! [Where is your class?]”

    Perry, I’m sorry but I must have skipped over your email. I went back and still can’t find it. Please accept my appology it was not deliberate, must have just deleted it. If you would please send it to me again I’ll keep my eye out for it. Again, I’m sorry and you know my eyes aren’t what they used to be so I actually do miss a lot of stuff.

  84. Perry wrote:

    And Dana, on your continued insistence that the First Amendment is an absolute, fellow teacher Greg (RWR) reinforces my point when he wrote:

    “And I’ll be the first to concede that there are some limits on speech under the First Amendment (obscenity, slander, libel, and the like, ….)”

    Exactly right, Greg. Another example would be the restrictions on free speech imposed by a judge in a court of law, or that the Speaker of the House imposes on the gallery as well as on the members themselves.

    Don’t you think it’s time for you to abandon that position, Dana?

    Nope! I see no wiggle room at all in the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” does not and should not mean, “Congress shall make only a few laws . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”

    I’ve put it to you and the rest of this audience twice now: if you believe that the freedom of speech should be restricted for whatever important reasons you find, why are you unwilling to support amending the Constitution to allow such? Why would you rather make an end run around the Constitution, and “interpret” the First Amendment to mean something other than what it says?

  85. Okay Perry and Pho. I have explained before the phrase I used is common where I grew up. I now formally appologise for using it, I retract it, I unown it, okay? Need I fly to Delaware and Christ Church to kiss your girls asses or can we get past this one lousy phrase? I assume neither of you have ever used a poor choice of words to make a point, right? I mean, come on ladies, get over it already.

  86. Understood, John. I have resent the e-mail, using your wife’s e-mail, which is the only one I have. Could be that was the problem.

  87. Okay Perry and Pho. I have explained before the phrase I used is common where I grew up. I now formally appologise for using it, I retract it, I unown it, okay? Need I fly to Delaware and Christ Church to kiss your girls asses or can we get past this one lousy phrase?

    Thank you for the apology.

    However, there’s a very real point being made about your assumptions which the phrase <only illustrates. I will keep on using it as an example when you keep on displaying those assumptions.

    Seriously, consider very carefully the above point:

    – Islamic terrorists commit mass murder. You get angry and blame all Muslims.

    – Christian terrorist commits mass murder. You get upset with anyone pointing out that he’s a Christian.

    Do you not see your inconsistency here? Does it not lead you to reconsider participating in, for example, the stupidity over the “Victory Mosque” bullsh1t?

  88. So you accept my apology but will keep throwing it in my face if it helps you make a point about “my assumptions”? Well, the only thing I can do then is to not post here if you think that way. Because I will not constantly defend myself over something I’ve already apologized for. You sound like a chick who caught her boyfriend flirting with another girl. She “forgives” him but every time he farts she starts with “just like the time you flirted with….”. You win, I loose and I’m done.

Comments are closed.