UnPatriotic
Ladies and Gentlemen, your unpatriotic conservative opposition:
The irony is that this group of America-hating conservatives calls themselves “Americans for Prosperity.” They are neither American nor are they for prosperity, given their joy about America losing an prosperous event. Indeed, we are long past the point where conservatives have made a mockery of “Opposites Day.”
If President Obama said everyone needs to love Jesus, these guys would say that Satan has a lot going for him.
Excuse me — the test of one’s patriotism is now whether or not one supports Chicago as the site for the Olympic Games?
You must be joking, right?
And whatever happened to dissent as the highest form of patriotism? Seems to me that these folks are MORE patriotic than you and Obama because they dissented from having Chicago host the games.
“If President Obama said everyone needs to love Jesus, these guys would say that Satan has a lot going for him.”
As long as BO doesn’t say it in a public building…
Excuse me, RWR. It was not about Chicago. It was about America. That video is of your vile brethen cheering the defeat of America on the world stage. It is disgusting, as are you.
Chicago? America?
It was for the kids…
Got it, DD — America right or wrong, as long as the president is Left.
it’s a shame that after all this, there isn’t actually a reall party to tun too. We are still left with the democrats. but god damn I love watching these people sink to new lows.
my guess is these are the same people that are happy troop deaths are increasing in Afghanistan.
Who wouldn’t be proud to be a epublican.
I haven’t encountered anyone pleased about increasing troop deaths — at least not on the right.
Well, other than a few freaks like Fred Phelps (D-AlGore) and his disgusting brood.
And you will not find anyone on the left pleased about any troop deaths, then or now. If you say that is the case, RWR, you are a liar. But we already knew that.
As for your little comment about “America right or wrong, so long as the President is left”…. my God, you guys are just skilled about projection. First, how can you say that when you always say that we liberals and Democrats hate America and love to find fault with it? Second, that comment is your mindset. You only love America when the President is a Republican and/or a white guy. You hate America now when he is neither.
I love my country always — but not necessarily my president.
And my support for or opposition to the effort to get the Olympic Games hosted by the president’s home town is NOT in any way an indicator of my patriotism or lack thereof.
And as for liberals supporting the deaths of members of the US military:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_PVyDmTkfk6s/R-RzPSy-gTI/AAAAAAAAAnM/Ur-Gq56GqAs/s400/640_portland-march15-2008.jpg
http://www.theodoresworld.net/pcfreezone/vile5.jpg
But I guess you would call that “the higest form of patriotism”.
how do you know those folks are liberal? just because they oppose war?
i think that says more about the opposition, meaning you.
Now THAT must be the most pathetic of all possible responses.
RWR — WHY did conservatives applaud the loss of the Olympics?
WHY?
And did these same conservatives applaud the loss of the Olympics when it was to be held in New York City? (Hint: they didn’t)
WHY?
and that is supposed to support your arguement? These schmucks try to make everything about winning and losing and not about the country. It’s a sad state of affairs that you are defending them. And are happy we didn’t bring the Olympics to the US. It’s really sad, but that’s America for ya.
FWIW-Isn’t the Olympics supposed to be about non-political oversight and just global competition? Anyone ever think having the Obamas advocate or whatever you do to sell your site may have been construed as a bit too intrusive on the political/government side of things? What world leader wouldn’t want the Olympics in their home country? Did the US have to “send” their current pop star now to bring it home? Maybe the OIC is above that, (and believe me having a cousin who works for them, I hold no high regard) that to choose Chicago after such media attention of the Obama/Chicago vetting would only begin to fuel the scrutiny and accusations the OIC continually has to defend and fight.
Joanne… like it or not Barack Obama is the President of the United States. He is your President. He is my President. He will be until at least 2013. He is not a pop star. He is the President.
As President, he is not only the head of government but he is also the head of state. It is unique only to America. Most countries, like the United Kingdom and Israel, separate the two. Queen Elizabeth and President Shimon Peres are the heads of state, respectively, whereas Prime Ministers Brown and Netanyahu are the heads of government. Heads of state are normally sent off to do funerals, anniversary celebrations and events like the IOC meeting (although it must be noted that Japan, Brazil and Spain all had their heads of government in Copenhagen as well as their heads of state).
But we only have one. I suppose the Founders thought that we shouldn’t have a constitutional ceremonial King, and they were right in that, but where they were wrong is in assuming that their descendants would be smart enough to recognize when a President is being a head of state and when he is being a head of government. The latter is political, the former is not.
You conservatives need to take a lesson in patriotism from Joe Scarborough.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-scarborough/thank-you-mr-president_b_308022.html
DelDem, He is our President, and I will respect the position accordingly. However, his popularity elsewhere in the world aligns more towards the icon status, and not respected world leader. Now before you rip on respected world leader–I qualify that by adding he has no track record, other than a historic election win, of any credible contribution to summit talks, treaty alignments, or defining policy positioning in the global theater. But hey….I can give it time. He is my President too..and I just think he may have overstepped with the Olympic thing.
Joanne–
His performance at the two G-20 summits in Italy and Pittsburgh has been praised. His performance at the UN GA and at the Security Council meeting he chaired on nuclear proliferation has been recognized as a success. Before that, yes, he had no track record. But I am sure your side will criticize him as having no track record throughout his presidency, ignoring the facts as your side always does when they conflict with your opinions.
As for Copenhagen, like I said in the other post it is legitimate to criticize him for taking the time away from other issues to tend to this. You are not unpatriotic or unAmerican is saying he maybe shouldn’t have gone. But get away from the icon popstar criticism. That just sounds idiotic and bitter.
Bullshit Joanne. Republicans do not give Obama credit, but he has been very, very successful in diplomacy. He got Russia to not put missiles in some former Soviet countries by giving up the useless missile shield in the Czech Republic. He got Iran to give up Uranium enrichment, in fact, now Iran will not have enough to build a weapon. Of course, the so-called liberal media is barely mentioning this.
You’re wrong also, Obama was not the only head of state to go. They all went. De Silva of Brazil was present. He was just doing what all the other countries were doing. Did you know Bush also met with the IOC about the Chicago bid? Where was the outrage then?
Republicans don’t like celebrity leaders unless they are Republicans. Look at all the celebrating Sarah Palin’s early book sale numbers. Sarah Palin is a celebrity and Republicans want her to run for president despite her abysmal qualifications for the job.
I’m so tired of Republican pettiness. Overstepping? Pop Star? sigh…
Here’s the real problem: I hadn’t heard very much about Obama’s Olympic trip until the Republicans/Conservatives started having another one of their hissy fits. Seriously, we have to stop listening to their constant whining.
Pettiness is exactly the right word. The leaders of all of the final four countries came to this presentation — largely trying to recreate the buzz that Tony Blair made when London landed the Olympics. And you’ll recall that President Obama wasn’t planning to go until almost the last minute.
And one more thing — does anyone remember when NYC made the final 4 or 5 for the 2012 games? They were knocked out in the first round too and the only people cheering that loss were folks in NYC who didn’t want the hassle or the development.
Nobody cheered New York not getting the Olympics. That’s just a weird and petty thing to do. Republicans right now remind me of small children. They are all about “hey look at me!” even when they are doing something very stupid. In fact, the more people look away the more crazy they get just to get attention.
Still no answer as to why the cheering.
J. says she didn’t want the President to attend the IOC personally; okay. But why cheer the loss?
RWR says patriotism and not wanting the Olympics in the U.S. aren’t incompatible; okay. (however, in an earlier post, he does say that NOT wanting the Olympics possibly means you are more patriotic; consistency is not a virtue, I guess.) Still, why cheer the loss?
Why the cheering? Because they hate Obama with all their tiny hearts and withered souls.
You know what I find astounding – that Republicans actually thinks that this benefits them. No, it doesn’t. It makes you look mean-spirited and petty. It’s snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Good job!
RWR – HA! those protesters, could easily be anarchist-libertarians! just giving you a dose of the usual illogical, “it COULD have been extraterrestrials”, excuse-making that flows from conservatives…..
though your inherent extremity is shown for all of us to see since your point (meaning the photo) relies on taking the extreme and making it the norm. i’m sure, shortly, you’ll provide us with another example of something that’s the norm and you think it’s extreme…..oh yes, like “hardly anyone supports the public option” or something like that….when in reality over 60% polled support it.
i know your game.
LOL, the douchebags got embarrassed. The Weekly Standard changed its post without explanation:
As far as respect for the president is concerned, I will follow the example of all you wonderful liberal patriots here, who provided eight years of examples of what respect for the president looks like.
Gee — some of you are short on your understanding on sarcasm.
For eight years, every time you insulted the president and cheered his failures, you called it “dissent” and labeled it “the highest form of patriotism”. And now, when I throw that line of bullshit back in your faces, you folks accuse me of inconsistencey (meaning you missed my point) and treason (for not falling in line with the Obamacrat party line).
You folks are, dare I say it, a crew of morons.
Not that I think that you’ll get this, but just taking the fact that liberals castigated George Bush always elides the fact that we typically had a reason to.
The made up Iraq War — and the incredible number of lies and half truths that come from that
Taking massive amounts of vacation
PDBs not listened to
Terry Schiavo
Only appearing in public surrounded by people who passed a loyalty test
Politicized terror alerts
It goes on and on. And all the while, the so-called party of principle cheered it all on and tried calling us traitors for it. There was little saying NO just to say NO on the part of Dems (which you can see is the very large number of Bush-sponsored legislation that got passed).
You however, will always and forever be working on false equivalences. Because you will never honestly look at the past 8 years — George W. Bush earned every bit of the reputation he had when he left office. Even your party knows this, as you try to pretend that Bush wasn’t really conservative. The thing is that you can’t have it both ways. Either Bush was a failure (meaning you agree with us) or he was a great President whose policies and actions you largely endorse. And people paying attention will definitely know when you are working from revisionist history or just plain wingnuttery.
So keep pretending that there you are working from equal footing here. You will be called out on it and insisting on the wingnuttery is the easiest way to get excluded from this community. Because there are no principles in Just Saying No while never coming to grips with why liberals (and eventually plenty of conservatives) came to the massive distrust in your party and its record of governing.
So make shit up here to rationalize your brain-dead stances at your peril.
dissent without some sort of logical foundation is not patriotism; it’s just rebel-rousing.
I agree, VC. The “dissent” coming from the GOPers doesn’t have much logic attached to it. The liberals who came out against the War in Iraq (a war which we all now realize was based on lies, making the “treasonous liberals,” umm, 100% correct) at least had a principle they were sticking to. These anti-Chicago, anti-Obama mobs of morons are completely laughable.
Got it cassie — we have to satisfy YOUR standards for dissent for it to be legitimate.
Indeed, I see where you people are headed on this one, so I will sum up your position in six words.
Ein volk.
Ein reich.
Ein Obama.
So are you just going to spam threads with this new piece of stupidity?
MM above gets it — saying no with some logic behind it has enough meaning to be dissent. Just saying no is the usual petulance from you people.
And I note that instead of engaging in the criticism you’ve rolled out one more new piece of deflection. Which — surprise, surprise — is not on topic.
Good points Mike. I have no doubt that the GOP’s “strident idiots making noise” strategy will gain them a solid minority in future elections national elections.
Your argument is that dissent isn’t permitted unless it meets your standards. Seems mighty fascist to me.
Ein volk.
Ein reich.
Ein Obama.
No, not at all. I’m saying “dissent” should have a driving principle behind it (which the anti-war protestors did). The “dissent” that the anti-Chicago, birther-deather mobs are invoking offers no rational, logical argument, therefore it doesn’t really qualify as rational, logical dissent in my book because it’s borne out of sheer nuttery.
You are warned about the spam, RWR.
i say let him keep reminding us how monstrous the right wing is. He is a part of one of the ugliest and pettiest political movements in this country in almost 40 years. let him rep-re-zent…. so we can remember why we are trying to change this country, and what we can never let it become ever again.
@MM
Really good points there…. Of course, when pushed they do run to “He’s spending way too much”, as if they can’t come up with anything more creative than that. Of course, they were happy to cheer Bush’s destruction of the economy…
Whenever conservatives here can’t answer questions, they resort to the name stuff. In less than two days, these threads have had: messiah, over-reaching, facist, socialist (I think they missed communist), etc until we’ve reach some sort of odd association between Obama and speaking German and RWR calling unnamed people on this thread “morons.
When you don’t have anything else to go with, pull out name-calling.
Hey, it worked for you in middle school.
Bite my ass, cassie.
Ye-e-e-e-e-e-e-ch…….
Stay classy, buddy.
But to make my larger point, you folks have declared that failure to support the US getting a friggin’ ATHLETIC COMPETITION is infinitely worse than giving aid and comfort to our enemies during time of war. Don’t you recognize the inherent stupidity of that position?
I was thrilled that Rio got the Olympics for 2016. Indeed, Rio was my first choice.
South America has NEVER hosted the Olympics. Latin America has hosted only one — Mexico City in 1968.
2012 is in London — sending it to two consecutive European cities (especially since Spain hosted the Olympics in 1992) bothers me.
We just saw the 2008 games in Red China — going back to an Asian nation seems a bit much.
The US has had multiple Olympics in the last three decades.
North America has hosted Summer Olympics in 1968, 1976, 1984, and 1996, just to name the games in my lifetime.
And then there are the problems with the Chicago bid — less money being spent, less government involvement, a history of serious corruption (think the Salt Lake games time 10 in the potential for graft), the fact that the city was seriously split about wanting the games, and the serious violence problem in the city and you can see why there is a real question as to the suitability of Chicago.
And yeah, I’m pissed the USOC passed over Houston.
Do you realize the inherent stupidity of not even adequately understanding what DD’s point is?
I mean this is the thing RWR — if you cannot even be honest enough to just come to terms with his actual point instead of going to some knee jerk place where you can pretend to joust with liberals you are wasting your time and ours. DD did not say this:
But to make my larger point, you folks have declared that failure to support the US getting a friggin’ ATHLETIC COMPETITION is infinitely worse than giving aid and comfort to our enemies during time of war
Which is why you are pretty regularly roasted around here. DD is speaking English and if you don’t understand what he said then ask him. Don’t make shit up ad them pretend this is what you are arguing against. There is plenty here to discuss without having to do the work of making up a strawman.
And, BTW, if you don’t like the rules here then just leave. We already get that the name-calling is you without an argument to make.
What I am saying is quite simple: If you cheer the defeat of America, you are not patriotic. Obama did not lose yesterday. Chicago did not lose yesterday. Democrats did not lose yesterday. Liberals did not lose yesterday. Neither did conservatives win yesterday. Instead, we, all of us, all of us Americans, lost.
And you cheered that. Conservatives cheered the fact that America lost. You do not recognize that we are all Americans before we are conservatives and liberals, Democrats and Republican. Your political beliefs come before country. And that is why you fail. That is why you are unAmerican. That is why you are unpatriotic.
And you can take your justifications and your recriminations and shove them up your unpatriotic fat ass.
Progressive Mom….
Unpatriotic liars like RWR hate being exposed for who they really are. Hence the child’s tantrum you have witnesses from him over the last 24 hours.
Like I said – petty. It really is tiresome. Why is this even an issue? Oh yeah… it’s all the Republicans have.
Oh bullshit!
On a matter that is meaningless, I didn’t pull for America to win — and somehow that makes me less patriotic than those who didn’t pull for America to win when it made a difference during time of war.
By the way, what is Chicago’s image in the world today? Might I suggest it is this?
http://www.jookos.com/hosted/8593/graphic-video-honor-student-beaten-to-death-on-cam-by-chicago-gang.html
Might I suggest that such things have more to do with the defeat of the Chicago Olympic bid than the fact that some of us can’t stand the under-qualified guy in the Oval office?
“it made a difference during time of war.”
A war that was sold to us BASED ON LIES. You continually neglect that. CONTINUALLY. Goddamn. Let me put it like this. War=more severe than Olympics. People came out AGAINST a war we NOW KNOW was 100% BASED ON LIES. That is RATIONAL dissent, IMO.
YOU PEOPLE make a stink about a sitting president PROMOTING our country’s desire to host the Olympics and you take PRIDE in tearing him down for involving himself in something George Bush involved himself in last year. That is irrational and SILLY “dissent.”
You people are fucking nuts. 100%.
Let me toss a question out to you.
I live down here in Houston.
We have a great many US citizens of Hispanic ancestry here in Houston.
When the Mexican team played the Team USA in soccer here recently, many of those individuals were openly rooting for the Mexican national team.
Are they unpatriotic? UnAmerican? Do you condemn them?
Just to clarify, I actually don’t agree with DD’s position that those rooting against the Chicago games are unpatriotic. I think the whole use of “unpatriotic,” as popularized by people of your political stripes over the past eight years, is utterly ridiculous.
I don’t generally like using labels to describe people with whom I disagree. I don’t feel you people are unpatriotic or unAmerican. I do believe some of you are fucking crazy, though.
This is apples and oranges.
And it is you deflecting this conversation to a place where you are more comfortable defending your brand. Just deal with the topic at hand.
Calling political opposition “unpatriotic” or “unamerican” is childish and utterly moronic.
I guess no one (RWR) has heard of the “no-go” regions for policia in Rio?
RWR doesn’t understand the difference between “rooting for” and “cheering against”.
Well, I’ll try one last time: On topic:
The conservatives in the above video were not “rooting for” Rio, Madrid or Tokyo (although one or two might be able to find those places on a map).
They were cheering against their own country.
Please, explain that. Cheering against their own country.
Please don’t deflect into talking points about the war, people with intellectual disabilities (Crew of morons), or Cassie’s rear end and your fantasies.
I am dealing with the topic at hand.
Rooting against the USA in regards to international athletic contests is unpatriotic and unAmerican. After all, in the case I noted above, these people cheered every time the US failed to stop a goal — just like some folks failed when the US didn’t get the Olympics.
And after all, you’ve made it clear that you don’t mean that partisan opposition to the President is unpatriotic and unAmerican, and that you don’t mean that opposing the policy of the administration with regard to international affairs is unpatriotic and unAmerican, so the athletic thing is the only possibility left.
Unless you are really proposing that the proper attitude of Americans under the current regime is:
Ein volk.
Ein reich.
Ein Obama.
By the way — you might just be interested in this analysis of why the Chicago bid failed.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/brian_cazeneuve/10/02/rio.2016.day.after/index.html?iref=werecommend
Or at least you might be interested if you are interested in what really happened, not just scoring political points against your opponents by (falsely) claiming to be better Americans and more patriotic than they are.
You are still arguing with your strawmmen RWR and invoking your spam again. There will not be a third warning.
I am interested in why the bid failed, and the IOC voting process, and the tight VISA restrictions we have in this country, coupled with the scandalous bribery scandal during the 2002 games and the over corporatization of the 1996 games all contributed to us losing the bid.
But RWR, for the love of God, why do you care about those reasons? You have written comment after comment about how you are happy we lost they Olympics and you blame Obama for that loss. You don’t care why we lost the games, you only care that we did lose the games and you care that that loss hurt President Obama, and fuck America if she got hurt in the process. That is all you care about.
We’re not the ones who played politics with the Olympics. That would be the Republicans. This should have been a non-issue – just like it was when Bush did the same thing – unless you can link me to the Dem. outrage at the time. The fact that this is just the latest in an endless stream of Republican temper tantrums speaks volumes. Trying (now) to turn this into a debate on the merits of Chicago is lame, and a massive fail… but you know that.
Again, RWR, Cassandra is right. You’re invoking these BS strawmen. It doesn’t matter WHY the bid failed. Doesn’t MATTER at all. What matters is that those people in that hall — along with hundreds of thousands of other wingnuts who received their talking points from thugs like Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin — CHEERED once it was announced that Chicago was out of the running. WHY DID THEY CHEER? WHY?!?!?!
We all know the answer Mike. Everything is political to them. Party and partisanship comes before love of country and civility. To them, America losing the Olympics means Obama lost the Olympics, and the latter matters more to them then the former.
Where did I blame Obama for losing the games? Where did I make a single comment that indicated i was happy about it because it hurt Obama? The closest I came was noting that the “all about me” speeches given by the Obamas were not at all helpful to the cause of getting the games.
And ultimately, who gives a damn about the US not getting the games? How are we diminished by not getting them? Were we diminished when the 2012 Games went to London and not NYC (which also would have been a better choice than Chicago)?
It seems to me that the only folks who see teh US as diminished are those who have found that their false messiah (once again) has failed at something he has set out to do. And so you are now lashing out at your political opponents who don’t share your dream of ein volk, ein reich ein Obama.
And do your worst, cassie — I really don’t care. I’m addressing the arguments being made, while your problem is that you don’t like the answers I’m giving. You would much prefer that I say “I hate America because we’ve got a n!66er president and the nation won’t be pure again until he has been gunned down like a dog.” The problem is that I and millions like me don’t believe what you and your ilk fantasize we believe. I won’t confirm your strawman argument because it isn’t true.
As for those who criticize Obama going to Copenhagen — ask them, because I’m not one of them. I did believe it was a silly exercise given that I never expected Chicago to win, and I do find it interesting that he spent over a million dollars in taxpayer funds in an attempt to advance the USOC’s bid, but I’m just happy that he took the time while there to do the people’s business by finally meeting with General McChrystal about one of his core duties — seeing to the US national defense.
And yes, I do find it hypocritical that folks at a site that spent years ripping on George W. Bush dares to now claim that opponents of Obama are less patriotic and less American than they are. After all, the Left spent the last eight years arguing that attacks on the patriotism and Americanism of political opponents were off limits.
“Where did I blame Obama for losing the games? ”
I’m not saying ***you*** did!! I’m saying the types of people you CONTINUALLY defend did! Stop defending indefensible, childish, petulant behavior. Again, the anti-war protestors at least had a rational, just cause. What is the “cause” behind cheering the loss of the Olympics to the USA?!?! Stay with me here!
RWR — as long as you’re on this Third Reich kick, I can’t take anything you say seriously. Everyone on the thread is trying to answer you like you really want a discussion, but we’re long past that…you left reality around the “moron” comment.
So here’s the short version, based on your comments:
You love Rio. You hate Chicago. Chicago has crime, so it’s bad. (Rio has none? But I digress) You love Republicans. You hate Obama. Republicans are qualified to run the country. Democrats aren’t. You are a magnificent patriot. Anyone who votes Democratic is a traitor. You love the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. And probably anywhere else. Except if Obama starts it; then it will be wrong. Every Democrat is against the troops. Obama is a Communist. A Marxist. A Facist. A Nazi. A Chicagoan. A Democrat.
Oh, and we’re all “morons”. Except possibly for Cassie, whom you would like to have bite your ass.
We get it. Just copy and paste this into every thread from now on and save yourself the trouble of any thinking. Besides, with that German-language crap, you’re almost there.
Oh, and if you really want your ass bitten, you can probably drive to Florida and find Mark Foley, if you’re young enough for him.
Perhaps your best comment ever, PM.
And to echo MM’s point – if the Weekly Standard thought that their opposition to the games coming to Chicago was based logical, rational reasoning, why did they scrub their own article?
PM nails it. You came here to defend the indefensible and then got your feelings hurt when everyone else wouldn’t play along.
So here’s the short version, based on your comments:
If you really believe that, you aren’t nearly as clever or literate as you think you are.
You love Rio.
While I think Rio is a great city, I wouldn’t say I love it. Better interpretation — I think that Rio was a better choice for reasons outlined above. Clearly the IOC agrees with me.
You hate Chicago.
Actually, I love Chicago. I spent 20 years of my life living in and around Chicago, or within a few hours drive of the city. All other things being equal — and as much as I love my new home here in Houston — I’d much rather have lived out my life in the Chicago area. Oh, and one other thing — Go Cubs!
Chicago has crime, so it’s bad. (Rio has none? But I digress)
Chicago has a major crime problem at this time, with more Americans being killed in Chicago in an average month than are being killed in the Iraqi theater of operations during the same time period. And unfortunately, Chicago’s crime problem has just been highlighted internationally by a particularly brutal and senseless killing.
You love Republicans.
Most of them, but certainly not all.
You hate Obama.
No — and I trust the judgment of my former seminary classmates who now have parishes on the south side of Chicago when they say he is a nice guy who I’d love to have a beer with while watching a football game. I also trust their judgment when they say he is as oily as most Chicago politicians.
Republicans are qualified to run the country. Democrats aren’t.
Not quite my position — I just generally trust Republicans more than Democrats to run the country. But I would sleep better if the president were named Hillary Clinton than I do with a president named Barack obama, because I have greater confidence in her experience and judgment.
You are a magnificent patriot. Anyone who votes Democratic is a traitor.
I accept that most Democrats are patriots — just ones who have made some erroneous judgments on politics. I like most Democrats — so much so that I married one and would not trade her in for anything, despite political disagreements and major health problems that have kept us from having kids and left her a semi-invalid.
You love the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. And probably anywhere else.
I hate war, having seen up close what it does to the men and women tasked with the defense of our nation — and to their families, including the one I grew up in. However, I consider Iraq and Afghanistan to be conflicts that were in the national interest — and agree with Barack Obama when he says it is a war of necessity (which seems to be only on alternating Tuesdays and Thursdays).
Except if Obama starts it; then it will be wrong.
Yeah — because he will probably listen to Zbignew Brezinski and start a war with Israel. Or he’ll ally with Castro, Chavez, and Ortega and attack Honduras.
Every Democrat is against the troops.<
No, not all of them. Joe Lieberman springs immediately to mind.
Obama is a Communist. A Marxist. A Facist. A Nazi.
No — but I’m not so sure about some of his vocal supporters — including some folks here.
A Chicagoan.
Which I don’t consider to be a bad thing.
A Democrat.
Which can be — and usually is when combined with the previous characteristic.
Hope that slays PM’s strongman.
keep fucking that chicken RWR.
btw as per your Reich bullshit. You’re absolutely right. Your dissatisfaction with the current DULY ELECTED GOVERNMENT is EXACTLY the same as the suffering seen by members of my family, some of whom survive today, at the hands of a REAL dictator.
you are despicable, sitting there in middle America, think you know what oppression is, try to paint yourself as someone who has no freedom. you know nothing.
fuck
you
DD and UI — thanks. I usually try never to rant. But when the discussion isn’t going his way, RWR likes to run under the cover of nasty name-calling, and then run back in with some kind of silly argumentation, only to run back to name-calling.
I’m tired of it; I don’t care for the term “moron” (which is a substitute for retard, and that conversation has been had) and I find the aggressive, sexualized taunting uncalled-for.
I suspect the next missive from RWR’s place in the clouds will be a blow-by-blow nitpick of my rant without any name-calling but plenty of snarkiness and no substance to the issue — and no explanation for all the German.
But I’m sure he’s a patriotic American who brought up the President’s race and his possible assassination only as an academic exercise, which is why he put it in quotes, and then said he didn’t subscribe to it.
Here’s something that some people might say: “Anyone who disregards the President’s safety as casually and callously as some posters on the Internet do should get to play Russian roulette with their own guns. With bullets in all chambers.” Some people might say that….
sigh.
ARGH — I WAS RIGHT.
(With teenagers at home, I don’t get to say that often, so let me say it again….)
I WAS RIGHT!
The eyerolling irony from RWR’s post:
If you really believe that, you aren’t nearly as clever or literate as you think you are.
Hope that slays PM’s strongman.
You should stop working so hard to presume to be ohsosuperior to the people here until you can actually deliver on that.
Strongman indeed.
RWR, of course, missed the point of PM’s great post — but that was expected. But this stuff comes to an end:
No — but I’m not so sure about some of his vocal supporters — including some folks here.
If you can substantiate this business of people here being Nazis, Fascists, Marxists or Communists then you should do that. In some detail. Otherwise you are back to name-calling as a substitute for actually actually trying to hear what people say here. And a long thesis of crap you made up won’t do.
If this is all you got then keep it to yourself. Next time you pull this crap you are gone.
Fine, PM, I’ll give you the explanation for the German.
After eight years of liberals doing their best to divide us as a nation AND their constant ridicule of (and rejection of the policies of) the sitting president of the United States, we now have those same leftists demanding that all Americans fall in line behind the elected leadership of the United States and support the policies of that president because failing to do so is unpatriotic, unAmerican, and will lead to our failure as a nation.
In other words, not only is dissent not patriotic, so is party politics and failure to defer to the leader.
What you are demanding is that Americans live according to the belief that we are one people, under one government, with one leader — which was best expressed in the 1930s as “Ein volk! Ein reich! Ein Fuhrer!” I considered using a comparable phrase in Russian, but most of you would have had no clue as to what it meant. Perhaps I should have quoted Mao instead. The goal was to shock you and cause you to reflect on what you are really calling for.
SPECIAL NOTE TO a. price: You misinterpret my intent in using that phrase. I hope my explanation above is sufficient. My apologies for the offense I gave to you personally.
Yeah, that’s right, cassie. Only your side gets to call names.
Typical of the sort of liberal hypocrisy you spew.
And sorry I clicked the wrong word when I did spell-check. Glad to give you something so substantive to whimper about, since you lack any sort of serious intellectual response to what I wrote.
And FYI: I no longer take you — or your warnings — seriously.
While I’m at it, I offer you this for your consideration — a post that I believe may answer some of your questions.
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/10/03/roland-martin-is-a-moron/
To be clear, I root for America, therefore I root against Barack Obama. Mr. Martin spends his time rooting for Obama and, in the cult of personality that is the left, conflates that with rooting for the country. This will end badly for the left. The cult of personality always ends badly for the left. It’s just a shame so many suffer first.
understood, RWR. thank you for the explanation.
there are however FAR too many protesters who mean to compare themselves to people who actually went through the Holocaust by making Fuhrer references to Obama.
but again, thank you for the explanation
i will say however, there was a drive to be united as one people, with one government, and one leader under Bush after 9/11 and for the following years.
Yeah, but you will concede that 9/11 was something of a special case. And no one insisted that Americans had to unite behind each and every policy of the administration — including on relatively unimportant and peripheral crap like sports competitions — or be branded unpatriotic, unAmerican, and treasonous.
the issue is, many people are opposing the olympic thing simply as an excuse to oppose Obama… which is not unpatriotic, but it IS childish. As much as i feel very strongly that Bush was the worst president we ever had, i didnt always reject whatever he wanted simply because he was Bush.
You have to at least concede that Obama wants what he considers best for America… i did the same for Bush….. and To oppose something just because you have decided to disagree with the president no matter what may not be anti american, but it sure as hell doesn’t help anyone.
it is a very proud thing ot host the olympics… i personally think Rio was a good choice, they could use the revenue more than we could….. but im not trying ot turn the decision into a reason to cheer for revolution.
“What you are demanding is that Americans live according to the belief that we are one people, under one government, with one leader — which was best expressed in the 1930s as “Ein volk! Ein reich! Ein Fuhrer!” I considered using a comparable phrase in Russian, but most of you would have had no clue as to what it meant. Perhaps I should have quoted Mao instead. The goal was to shock you and cause you to reflect on what you are really calling for.”
RWR — There’s far too much passive-aggressive crap in this for me. (And I won’t even go into the adolescent whining.) I didn’t demand anything, and no one on this thread demanded that we are one people, whatever the hell that means. And we DO only have one government. We’ve got this constitution, you see, and it only allows for one government. And, in fact, our constitution calls for one leader. Just one at a time. So what the hell are you talking about?
And I would get the Russian. I don’t give a shit about Mao. And I have no idea what this has to do with the topic. But I hope it made you feel good and superior, because it didn’t make any sense to anyone else.
I am asking: why did the people in the video applaud? (This is the one thing I have consistently asked.) Your answers, variously are:
They really, really like Rio.
They really, really dislike Chicago, for a variety of reasons.
They have somehow equated not giving the Olympics to Chicago as payback for liberals who didn’t and still don’t like the war in Iraq, and who said mean things about Bush.
Huh? That last one is where I get off the illogic train. Chicago linked to Obama linked to the war linked to war protest liked to not liking Bush…. huh?
That kind of silly group-think is totally in lock-step with hatred for the Democratic party and president in power, and it has nothing to do with the Olympics.
And that is EXACTLY how totalitarian regimes get to power. Hatred. They don’t work from a position of “we love our leader.” Totalitarian regimes gain power from a position of “we hate our enemies and we need to do everything to defeat them.”
In other words, your history-invoking theory is backwards. It wasn’t love of Hitler that propelled Hitler. It was hatred for what the West did to Germany. It wasn’t love of Lenin that propelled Lenin; it was hatred for the excesses of the Czar. (Oh, please, don’t give me the essay on the 5 other reasons these guys came to power; BUT, they didn’t come to totalitarian power because they were loved. They rode in on the wave of hate of the enemy.)
It isn’t any love for Obama that would create a whiff of totalitarianism in the U.S. It’s the hatred that the right-wing is promulgating against anything liberal, progressive, Democratic, non-Christian, and non-white (you brought up race in this thread, bub) that has the ability to create an atmosphere accepting of totalitarianism, if history is to be believed.
So … “The goal was to shock you and cause you to reflect on what you are really calling for.” It is you who is calling for a totalitarian regime in this county; you who want lock-step reverence for all things in the conservative world; you who want no dissent, no change, no progress. You want the sieg heil for the conservative point of view. That’s why the German keeps coming up.
And it is your side that is advocating getting armed and getting violent. Your side that is questioning the legitimacy of this presidency. Your side that is talking about leaving the union.
So don’t lecture me about reflection. Look in the mirror.
So, your “explanation of the German” is your Fox news revisionist history of the world. And right there you can see your problem. As Mike noted (and you won’t even acknowledge) is that most liberals had reasons to oppose GWB rooted in the man’s policies and behavior. The Iraq war was started based on lies, continued based on lies and was used for extensive fearmongering among you Fox news types. We already know now that it was all lies. And yet you can’t even begin to consider that opposing known lies might be a good thing. Lies that we can document until the cows come home.
9/11 was NOT a special case. People came together because it was in their interests to — but let us NEVER forget that plenty of the folks looking for reasons why jihadists might be after us were said to be “blaming America”. The folks throwing this charge around never gave the people looking for causes any hearing or benefit of the doubt — because that might get in the way of the blood lust. And it was you people throwing that shit around. It was you people with the with us or against us crap that stayed divisive even when the lies became apparent. Or let’s get to Terry Schiavo. Most of the country was obviously against interfering with this woman and yet your party damn near created a reality show out of it. Or how about the Tom Delay/Duke Cunningham/Jack Abramoff axis of corruption? You people went for the divisive pretty much on your own and now you want to blame Democrats for the daily failures of your party to govern.
Just stop with the BS. If want you want to do is make charges without substantiation, spew the revisionist history and generally fall back on the usual GOP stupidity when called out on it then you need to be at Red State — where they will cheer you on and validate your worldview. You will got NONE of that here and you can ignore whatever warnings you like. Just don’t be surprised at the outcome.
@cm “where they will cheer you on and validate your worldview”
There they will just ignore him. The conservative mindset is a more like a collective. Their high priests (Beck and Rush) control thought. Real thinking is discouraged. Does one of the Borg get singled out for cheering when exhibiting the ability to think?
That’s why he’s here. He’s not really one of them, but only wishes to be. A mind is a terrible thing to waste, isn’t it RWR? It must be a terrible thing to be a smart person in the party of stupid.
“Comment by Rhymes With Right on 3 October 2009 at 2:37 pm:
Your argument is that dissent isn’t permitted unless it meets your standards. Seems mighty fascist to me.
Ein volk.
Ein reich.
Ein Obama.”
what an ass.
I was at the Dachau camp 10 days ago and saw a prick walking around in a White Pride shirt.
Was that you, RWR?
ARE YOU SERIOUS?! i cant believe they would have let that motherfucker in. you can get arrested for that in Germany. I’d have tried to kill the guy
hows life in the ghetto RWR? or are you hiding in some kind liberal’s attic? just remember, when Obama sends you to “camp” you wont be getting your valuables back….. that’s how bad it is right?
dead serious.
holocaust museums are frequented by white supremacist and neo-nazi groups all the time because they’re one of the few places where these insecure losers can see artifacts and handiwork of their heroes. the folks working at the camp confirmed this.
i do know that all nazi shit is banned in germany. though the term white pride, however obvious in it’s connotation, can be explained away as being tantamount to wearing a latin or african pride shirt.
These people are absolutely disgusting. not to get off topic or anything, but I wonder how all that ego-masturbation works when they are denying it happened the whole time.