Skip to main content

When our nation was founded, we had men of real character and courage fighting for their nascent America, one in which liberty and freedom trumped the authorative tendencies of the monarchy. Patrick Henry gave words to those efforts:

Give me liberty or give me death!

My, how far we have fallen, with an administration that parlays the incessant fear of its supporters into increased authoritativeness to the point where he now resembles the very despot we fought in our war of independence.

And his supporters bellow, as they cower under their beds:

Here's our liberties, just spare us from death!

These blowhards pretend they are macho even as they piddle on themselves in abject terror from every "boo!" that comes out of Osama Bin Laden's mouth. They like to speak about how tough they are, even though they send others to fight their battles and couldn't last a day in places like Iraq, or Sudan, or the El Salvador of my youth, or any other war-torn nation.

TBogg says:

Now I may not be as "emotionally or morally sophisticated" as Roger L Simon, but then I didn't spend the afternoon of 9/11 flushing away my beliefs and convictions in a piddle-stained panic. So please spare me the "cojones" and "cowardice" locker room speech from the man who is one car backfire away from turning into a fedora floating in a puddle of pee.

You wanna run into the arms of the big strong steely-eyed rocket man? Be my guest. But when he picks your pocket, steals you car and leaves you high and dry in some cheap motel near Waco, don't come crying to me.

The breathtaking cowardice of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists knows no bounds. They hide behind the American flag and our genuinely brave men and women in uniform. It's bad enough that they wouldn't deign to join the boots in the ground in Iraq. But now they make a mockery of our Constitution, for the very values that motivated our Founding Fathers to put their lives on the line to combat the unchecked powers of the British monarchy.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:00 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  God, leave them alone... (4.00)
    they have other priorities ok?  It's not like you ever served or something.

    Subscribe to your most sarcastic news source.

    by therightlies on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 10:57:11 AM PST

  •  To those people... (4.00)
    ...winning wars is all that counts. They don't care about rights, about values, about ideals, about justice, about equality - all they want to do is win wars. It's so absurd as to be childishly ridiculous, and even scarier that these people wield power and influence.

    I'm not part of a redneck agenda - Green Day

    by eugene on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 10:58:45 AM PST

    •  what are you gay or something? (none)
      winning is everything.

      Subscribe to your most sarcastic news source.

      by therightlies on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:02:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  bring it on... (4.00)

        When they lose their sense of awe, people turn to religion. When they no longer trust themselves, they begin to depend upon authority.

        by tws on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 01:42:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Bingo (none)
        Winning is everything.

        Think about that. These people, top to bottom, are losers. They cannot compete to achieve, they cannot innovate to achieve, so they win at anything they can in any way they can.

        To them the smallest win counteracts the largest defeat. All their lives they have escaoed outright failure because there has always been someone with enough clout to pull their nuts from the fire.

        But all they saw was that, in the end, they WON.

        Now they are in a place where there is nobody with enough power to save their terminally stupid asses and they keep playing the same games with the same idiotic attitude, always looking for the WIN!

        They attacked Iraq because it was a "target rich environment", in other words, they could have lots of wins.

        They though Schiavo would be a WIN, so they broke every speed record to get there.

        These people are pathological gamblers; their need to win can never be satisfied and, because of their pathology, they have no way of assessing risk or building and carrying out a strategy.

        But to them it doesn't matter. For the addicted gambler, the $100 WIN!!! outweighs the million dollar loss.

        They ignore the losses and go to ever greater extremes in search of a win, any win, at any value, for any reason. Only the win matters.

        For most of us, fear of loss keeps us relatively sane. I feel more damage from the $100 loss than the euphoria I get from the $1,000 win, so I keep my risks in bounds and I live a relaitvely safe life.

        These people are wired the other way round, and this is what happens when such people get their hands on the levers of the most powerful nation the world has ever seen. And they will destroy it before they acknowledge even a single loss, let alone their responsibility for it.

    •  Get a load of this (none)
      Right-wing Detroit News political blogger J.D. Andary on war with Iran:

      What a great way to start the New Year.

      Sending a carry-out of Babba-Ghanooge Bunker Buster to IslamoFascism's ATM would be neat.

      Does Codepink deliver?

      Can't let Israel have all the fun.

      That's one blog entry that truly speaks for itself.

      Every Saturday, there's a new weekly roundup of Michigan politics here on Daily Kos.

      by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:03:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wrong. (4.00)
      Most of them only care about GOP dominance. These same people attacked Clinton for Bosnia/Kosovo. The fact that he actually won that war upsets them to no end.

      "I was Rambo in the disco. I was shootin' to the beat. When they burned me in effigy. My vacation was complete." Neil Young. Mideast Vacation.

      by Mike S on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:03:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  it be ok (4.00)
      except they haven't won any wars.

      The world will end not with a bang, but with a "Do'oh!"

      by Love and Death on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:04:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Their heart could be in the right place (none)
        Even if I gave them benefit of doubt and actually assumed that they are doing all this for our safety, I just have to look at the numbers spent on creating Homeland Security and then look at FEMA.

        The Right is all blow hards/racists.

        Where is bin Laden? Did they get him?
        Where is Zarqawi? If the progress in Iraq is so good, why isn't he being turned in?

        I don't view war as totally bad. Just that I don't trust the Right to do anything..well..right.

        •  All blow hards/racists? (none)
          Wow.  Just... wow.

          Regardless, there is no cowardice in either party.  The GOP is currently tasked with protecting the American People.  Their hearts are indeed in the right place.

          As for the erosion of Liberty, that can be easily explained.  Very, very few governments throughout history have ever given up power willingly.  Think about it - would you support additional obstacles in the execution of your job?  Of course not.  It is generally for others to keep your methods in check.  Look to the legislature.

          As for Patrick Henry, I don't think most of you would have liked him.  "Give me liberty or give me death".  Very noble.  He would have fought valiantly against the strong federal government that has developed after the Civil War.  He wanted strong local government that pays tribute to a small federal government that serves only for national defence, to resolve disputes between the states, and to protect the most basic of citizen rights.  Everything else was to be left to the states.  Federal social programs, institutions like FEMA, etc. would NEVER have existed if it were up to him.  Government would be small, very small - run by unpaid volunteer politicians.  Not something I suspect most of you would approve of.

          •  Yes.."all" (none)
            And it's not really contrary to reality as you are making it appear.

            Who in their right minds can say that Bush has been protecting America by going into Iraq? Or that his ignorance of the border situation is helping American security? Blow hard Republicans.

            Who consistently espouse a policy of unilateral foriegn military intervention at the cost of men and material? Blow hard Republicans.

            Who is consistently circumventing laws? Watergate? Contragate? NSA spying? And then saying "it's not illegal if the President does it" (only Republican Presidents please)? Blow hard Republicans.

            Who is consistently anti-minority? Racist Southern Republicans. Johnson knew Democrats had lost the South after signing the Civil Rights Act.

            Despite everything corrupted and illegal that they do, who consistently dares to lecture others? Blow hard Republicans. IOKIYAR.

            •  Piece of work... (none)
              To think that all republicans are racists is the dumbest, most unfounded statement I've ever read on this board.  

              Not to mention, making assumptions about people you have never met based on what category they are in, is PREJUDICE.  So congratulations on illustrating your bigotry.

    •  Winning? (4.00)
      Bullshit. Their goal right now is choas and profit.

      They don't care about winning anything if it comes without profit and control/bases for America in the Middleast.


      U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1998 it was 1:418.

      by Lode Runner on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:07:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Winning has NOTHING to do with it (none)
      Its the state of being in a war that compels them. If their war ever is finished, they will be as well. Look at what they've been able to pull on basis of 9/11. It is 1984 come to life.
    •  Bill Maher once said... (none)
      ...I think it was in his I'm Swiss comedy show that he did early last year, that conservatives and Republicans are such sentimentalists--that they love the supposed "glory" of war and the patriotism that they've so falsely affixed to this one.

      As Bill Maher also said, they're really into having a lot of sunshine blown up their collective asses. Like little children, it assuages their frustration with human complexity and, well, just makes them feel better about their pathetic little selves. Oy.

      •  Sentimentality (none)
        It's always at the basis of rightist appeals. Then they work themselves into a frenzy over the sadness/injustice/wrongness of it, and then commit crimes all for the greater good of their sentiments.

        Sad for them, a disaster for us.

        •  Good/helpful posts (both of you!) (none)
          I've been thinking about the components of bad art. Sentimentality really can't be beat. But why IS sentimentality so awful in art? Why, when we notice it, do we notice it with contempt sometimes combined with nausea? I mean, it seems to me those who notice it at all don't usually notice it with mere indifference. We react strongly. Why is that?

          Perhaps obviously, because sentimentality lies about pain. It tries to pull the wool over our eyes about it--it wants to deny reality in order to keep some generally weak-kneed sideliners comfortable. On the other hand if you're NOT completely comfortable with cooking the books--if you're still possessed of a shred of conscience (if you're still remotely human)--then victim or villian, it seems to me lies would always be more hurtful than truth, don't you suppose? If you wanted to induce mental suffering in a murderer, mightn't you tell him a sickeningly sweet, totally fraudulent, happy-ending story of his victim's life over and over again?

          Anyway, I realize I'm off topic (or approaching the topic obliquely) but let me lay another idea on you: Personal mortality is alleged to be the single most painful reckoning for humankind; particularly, some say, for those who haven't knowingly come within harm's way. Could it be that's why so many people who haven't experienced combat tend to sentimentalize about it so much? What then explains why a significant number of veterans get caught up in the lies we tell each other (to assuage guilt or whatever) about war? Is it really because the truth is too painful to bear? If that's the case (and it would seem so) it shoots my other theory (art and truth above) all to hell.

          I still say sentimentality can't be beat as enemy #1 of truth (and therefore art, as sophomoric as it sounds). One way to make sure sentimentality never gives you too much trouble is to stay as ignorant as possible--or to put it the other way, the more accurate information you have, the harder the koolaide goes down.

          (Sorry. Out of left field. Thanks for reading. :)

          Is nothing secular?

          by aitchdee on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 12:25:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ah! Deny reality... (none)
            I found what you wrote all very interesting, and though not "political" perhaps uber-poliical.

            The way I look at it, is an awful lot of human behavior can be understood by 2 phenomena, which acount for much in art, politics, and human interaction:

            One, people need attention. It's been shown that infants that are given full attention through the first months tend to grow up healthier, bigger, smarter, and better able to keep their internal balance in later years, so attention is like a food for the soul in a hugely literal sense. (Same holds true for plants and animals.) Bad art is driven by the need to get attention and little else, whereas good art might have that component, but also adds the urge to uncover and/or share something about reality.

            Two, sentimentality is often a self-engineered distraction from the dictates of Conscience. You don't have to look at reality, which can be a painful thing especially when it comes to seeing our own infantile preoccupations.  When you are in the grips of emotion about one or another BIG theme (think Wagner), besides the fact that there's a payoff with sentimentality of that cloying sweet feeling you get, it's simply too much to review one's own behavior. It's a falsification of emotion, overlaid with a "logical" rationale.

            It isn't so much that the truth is too hard to bear, it's that people get unwilling to pay the price for the truth. Example from my life: a Christian friend, who is good to every person she meets, supports Bush and doesn't want to even contemplate his corruption, because the price is she'd have to feel afraid if he really isn't protecting her. So she goes all sentimental when his name is brought up.

            So I think you are onto something actually very important, and continued inquiry into the areas you are looking into will be fruitful for you. Just my 2 cents.

          •  Sentimentality is manipulative... (none)
            and often fraudulent.  And most people, when they find that is lying to them in order to defraud them, react badly to it.  Thus the disdain we feel for bad art.

            For the military, there's a built-in reason for manipulation and fraud.  Military recruits sign away many of their rights -- including the right to preserve their lives.  Throughout history soldiers have stood in lines and gotten themselves slaughtered for little or no personal gain.  Sentimentality is extremely useful in that it convinces soldiers that they want to become cannon fodder.

  •  Bravo...!!! (none)
    It's time to talk like this would be even better if we actually DID revolt.

    I personally, am way past politically correct, can't we work it out, whimpering, simpering, reasonableness.

    The only reasonable thing to do is take these facist down ..legally if possible, with a few extra renditions if all else fails.

  •  I caused a stir at Christmas Day Dinner (4.00)
    when I said how sick I was of everyone trying to scare us to death about everything:  911, Avian Flu, Terrorism, etc, etc, etc.  All the media does is give warnings about unsafe toys, unsafe cars, diseases. Now the Republicans are willing to give away their freedoms on hand of being scared to death about terrorism.  What they need to be afraid of is BushCo and they don't even realize it.  Are they so naive as to think that he is only wiretapping Al Quaida?  
    •  Notice how the imminent, urgent, (4.00)
      almost-on-our-doorstep avian flu lost nearly all its television coverage during the holidays?  Perhaps the station owners didn't want to discourage their viewers from spending hard-earned money on account of a little pandemic (that may or may not be real).

      It's all so transparent it's beyond belief.  Avian flu will be back in the limelight when it's conducive for us to be scared again.

      •  I think they got told (none)
        that if they kept on harping about avian flu, the AMA and whoever makes Tamiflu would not give any money to the Republican party. I suspect that what's left of our public health system was screaming as well.

        Doctors have enough to do, they don't need every person with a little cold to be showing up on their doorstep thinking they have Avian flu and demanding Tamiflu.

  •  thanks for pointing this out (4.00)
    The conservatives I know are the most cowardly people I know.  They tremble at the sight of every non-white face.  They cringe in fear when they see a homeless person.  They are the first to be convinced that some scary non-white person is going to break into their house and rape them.  

    No wonder they're so fixated on going to heaven, because their earthly lives are living hells.

    The idea of "preemption" works quite well for them.  They'd be more than happy to kill everyone who scares them and let God sort them out.  

    And we scare them, too.  Because we don't think the way they do.  That's SCARY.  

    •  My brother... (4.00)
      You just described my brother and it breaks my heart.  He wasn't raised this way, I don't know why he is afraid of his own shadow.

      Recently, my very liberal mother reported to me that she saw Michael Savage's latest book in his living room and Rush Limbaugh's new book in his bathroom.

      :shakes head:

      When the world was born, it was born on fire, and I'm watching it burn.--RealWest

      by hillaryk on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:07:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  They also fear strong women (n/t) (4.00)

      Every Saturday, there's a new weekly roundup of Michigan politics here on Daily Kos.

      by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:10:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The Paranoid Style (none)
      The conservatives I know are the most cowardly people I know.  They tremble at the sight of every non-white face.  They cringe in fear when they see a homeless person.  They are the first to be convinced that some scary non-white person is going to break into their house and rape them.

      Well-said, Nordic!  The neo-con agenda is driven by a lethal mix of hatred, paranoia, and sanctimony.

      "Don't wait to be hunted to hide." - Samuel Beckett

      by aybayb on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:13:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The irony of their pathetic stance... (4.00) that this fear is neverending.  When they do eliminate an enemy they will create another.  They must face an enemy.  In way you can see this playing out with the moderates right now:  they can see themselves losing so they change sides to prevent from losing.  It's sad, really.  Good for us, but it shows how hollow their belief in America really is.  They don't want freedom, they want to win, no matter how hollow it is.
    •  Bingo! (4.00)
      I don't hang out with - or have to deal with - too many conservatives - my family, friends, and coworkers are mostly left-leaning, or at least centrist or apolitical with no love of Bush & Co.

      But I do have one conservative friend...she's actually basically a good-hearted person, despite politics that make me want to barf. And I have to say, you nailed it with the fear issue.  Her biggest problem is that she lives in fear. It's somewhat understandable; she came from a very abusive home, and wound up in many abusive realtionships thereafter.  While she's got a good heart and is in some ways very strong - she thinks she can "take care of [her]self" and all - she is at base a very frightened person.  She keeps multiple loaded guns, and a trained guard dog, in her house, has trained herself to be a good shot, and has a concealed-carry permit so she can have a weapon with her when she goes out. She lives in a perfectly safe suburban home on a busy street in a good, working-to-middle-class neighborhood, but seems convinced that murderous armed criminals may come throught the windows at any moment.

      She has NOTHING - zero, zilch, zip - to gain from neo-con politics; she collects disability, her partner (to whom she is NOT married) does not make enough money to make them rich, and she's a friggin' neo-pagan (go figure that one), but she's a big Bush supporter.  Fear - along with misinformation - is the only explanation.

      It may be profitable for you to reflect, in future, that there never were greed and cunning in the world yet that did not do too much, and overreach themselves.

      by ChaosMouse on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:47:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Simple. Powerful. (none)
    I think this is the issue for 2006.  I'm no politico like most people around here, but if I had to sum up my disgust with Republicans and "white bread America" it is that they are so full of fear.  All of the other problems flow from fear:  racism, war on terror, war on drugs, the rise of the theocracy, gay-bashing, absurd surveillance of all citizens...  all of those problems (and more) could be solved with a real, true leader stepping up and telling us... hmm, how'd that go again?

    The GOP is the party of fear.  

    •  Apologies to Allen Ginsberg (none)
      Simple. Powerful.  I think this is the issue for 2006.  I'm no politico like most people around here, but if I had to sum up my disgust with Republicans and "white bread America" it is that they are so full of fear.  All of the other problems flow from fear:  racism, war on terror, war on drugs, the rise of the theocracy, gay-bashing, absurd surveillance of all citizens...  all of those problems (and more) could be solved with a real, true leader stepping up and telling us... hmm, how'd that go again?

      The GOP is the party of fear.

      "It's them's them bad Rooshans....and them Chinamen....they want to take our cars from out our garages....."

      "Don't wait to be hunted to hide." - Samuel Beckett

      by aybayb on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:39:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oooo, I LIKE this meme! (none)
    It has a Wesley Clark flavor to it.  If you guys are so tough, why are you prancing around looking for a place to hide from the big-bad terrorists?  
    Ooooo, SCARY!  
    Poor little Americans, pissing themselves because some guys took out a couple of buildings.  We all have to get our survival plans ready in case they attack again.  Let's give all our hard earned Freedom to Big Daddy George so he can tell us when we can use the john.  
    Geez, Louise, you'd think Katrina would have snapped them out of it but the fraidy cats are still scared of those brown people with box cutters.  You're more likely to get swept away by a hurricane and where will Big Daddy George be then?  Clearing brush on his ranch.  
    (We'll see how good a job he did if those wild fires continue to spread.)

    -3.63, -4.46 "Choose something like a star to stay your mind on- and be staid"

    by goldberry on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:04:41 AM PST

    •  mostly agree, except... (4.00)
      I do think saying "...some guys took out a couple of buildings" unnecessarily belittles 9/11. And by doing that, you sort of play into the wingnuts' hands.

      I think we can all agree on what a horrible, massive act of destruction 9/11 was, and that terrorism is an ongoing threat and concern, without having to live in constant fear of it. There's a big difference between common sense precautions and taking appropriate actions, and living in a police state.

      It's like, crime is a reality, but I don't walk the streets in a suit of armor for fear of being assaulted by strangers.

      -8.25, -6.26 ain't "schadenfreude" if the bastards deserve it. this is infidelica...

      by snookybeh on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:21:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good points. (none)
        It's also worth pointing out that people like me who live in a city that is undoubtably a target are less afraid than someone living in bumfuck Oklahoma. People in LA and NYC mostly laugh at the people who are so a'scared of being blown up in a place with one traffic light and 3 stop signs in their whole town.

        "I was Rambo in the disco. I was shootin' to the beat. When they burned me in effigy. My vacation was complete." Neil Young. Mideast Vacation.

        by Mike S on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:29:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wasn't Oklahoma City The Target (none)
          Of a terrorist attack?

          Fear is something Conservatives obviously have in abundance.  Unfortunately, reading this thread, it is apparent that a chest pumping manifestation of fear also infects some of us.  

          Folks it is time for us to take stock. We have to face the future with resolve.

          •  The Oklahoma Terrorist Was Home Grown (none)
            First thing the police and press did was spread some mis or dis information about some Arab looking types that had been seen in the vicinity. Turns out it was good soldier Tim... whose real story has never been told... I read his lawyer's book, very interesting... especially the parts about how the government did not want to really dig too far into the whole deal... and how McVeigh was not the Lone Ranger he was painted to be, and I am not talking about Terry Nichols... some of those folks are still loose, probably helping organize the good border watch vigilantes so we don't have to worry about them illegal brownies slippin' in to do something subversive like work....
      •  I thought about that (none)
        before I wrote it.  I certainly do not mean to trivialize the act or the pain of the survivors and their families.  
        However, I think what the fraidy cats lack is a sense of perspective.  To them, EVERYTHING is frightening.  They can not distinguish between rational fears and irrational fears.  The possibility that a terrorist is going to blow up some large edifice in your town while horrific, is extremely remote.  
        So, I accept your critcism as legitimate.  But how do we begin to ground these people, decrease their heart rate and get them to stop panicking?  
        BTW, as I was watching Get Color on HGTV the other day (yes, I am a shelter magazine junkie too), the host explained how the color red causes a momentary increase in heart rate.  We should pay attention to how the Bushies use the color red in their presentations.  

        -3.63, -4.46 "Choose something like a star to stay your mind on- and be staid"

        by goldberry on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:40:58 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  In a nutshell (none)
    well said!

    a puddle of piss. Is that what I smee.?

    inspire change...don't back down

    by missliberties on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:04:49 AM PST

  •  Pretending (none)
    They are only pretending to be cowards, so they can institute changes to control everyones behavior. It is just part of the technique to use fear.

    You didn't think they really believe themselves, do you?


    A President in his own league. The Bush League!

    by Tuba Les on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:05:43 AM PST

    •  I know this is snark (none)
      but it is actually close to the truth. The GOP has been trying to scare the shit out of people in order to win elections. But the only people they succeeded with was their own people.

      It's more evidance of their cultish party. Their leader tells them they must be very afraid. The leader of the cult is never wrong so they become afraid. Now they will do and accept anything their leader tells them to do because they are all a'scared.

      "I was Rambo in the disco. I was shootin' to the beat. When they burned me in effigy. My vacation was complete." Neil Young. Mideast Vacation.

      by Mike S on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:16:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not just scare people (4.00)
        Scaring people is part one.  Part two is the "they're all crooks, they're all the same, can't trust government (even though 'government' is 99% hard working, honest, not-paid-enough-either people).  

        When people hate government, don't trust it, think it's some alien thing instead of being by,  of and for the people they don't vote, don't want government programs and replay the 'I'm better off investing my own money' meme.

        Fear, and hatred of the government.  Fear, and feelings of helplessness.  That's the entire GOP approach in a nutshell.  Pathos.

        Impeachment begins in the House.

        by raisin on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 01:12:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  yes! (none)
          well, said! and that's the insidious heart of the matter.

          when you have people convinced that government can't do anything right... they don't require that you do.  if republicans started talking about good government, citizens might start noticing they can't seem to provide any.

          The person who says it can't be done should not interrupt the person doing it. --Chinese proverb

          by isis2 on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 04:41:58 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  well said, Kos (none)
    that's pretty much how I feel. It never ceases to amaze me how one former friend of mine, previously apolitical, turned into a blithering wingnut after 9/11, and now is completely obsessed with Islamic terrorists.

    That, and Bill Clinton's role in every ill ever befallen this country.

    He reminds me of the people that Dylan sang about in songs like "Talkin' John Birch Society Blues." Just replace "reds" and "commies" with "Arabs" and "Muslims" and it's exactly the same.

    -8.25, -6.26 ain't "schadenfreude" if the bastards deserve it. this is infidelica...

    by snookybeh on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:06:49 AM PST

  •  Part of me thinks... (4.00)
    They are so afraid because they are trying to limit something like what Heinlein talked about in Starship Troopers, and something that is happening as we speak.  Specifically, that veterans will come back and start speaking against the wars they were sent off to fight, and the people that sent them there.  Witness the numbers of Iraqi Vets that are planning on running on the Dem side next year, rather than the Rethug side.
  •  Oooh (none)
    I just looove it when you talk tough! That is not sarcasm it is affection and English humour just in case communication is not clear. By the way does anyone else but me think Bush looks downright sick?  face all scratched up and as thin as a rail?  that is when he will be at his most dangerous.
  •  they're pathetic (none)
    They'd rather live safely in a police state than endure a little uncertainty for the sake of freedom.

    If we don't have freedom, then what the hell are we defending ourselves from in this "war on terror"? Our lives are worthless if we cannot live them without having to worry about our own government spying on us and threatening our every move.

    We could prevent EVERY crime, including terrorism, if only we gave up all of our freedom. Who among us is willing to pay that price? Not me, that much is certain. Because we are not, we must accept that there is some risk of crimes befalling us - including terrorism. We must live with the knowledge that our way of life makes these things possible - that we can never be completely secure so long as we have some measure of freedom.

    I would rather die in a terrorist attack that went undetected because of my freedom than remain safe in a police state.

    I've got the guts to pour a little risk into my Cheerios every morning, and take the chance that maybe, just maybe, I'll pay the price for my freedom today. Maybe somebody will slip through the cracks because I refused to be monitored 24/7. Maybe a plot won't be uncovered in time because I wouldn't have my phone calls tapped. Maybe I'll die today because I wouldn't allow the government to watch, arrest, or imprison people without a warrant.

    Those are chances I'm willing to take, because my freedom is worth it. Is yours?

    •  So True (4.00)
      If New Yorkers were as pathetic as Bush and his wild pack of fear mongers, NYC would have been a ghost town on Sept. 12, 2001. But we picked ourselves up and went back to our daily routine of riding a potential terrorist target to get to our jobs in commerce centers that were (and remain to this day) potential terrorist targets. We all understood that returning to the lives we knew before 9/11 involved facing these fears and living in spite of them. Our way of life and the ideals to which we hold true are worth the effort. Why is this such a difficult concept for Bush & Co. to grasp?
  •  Rovian in its brilliance (4.00)
    Maybe I'm slow - as in both moving and witted - but the idea of labelling the conservative right as cowards is a brilliant, I dare say, Rovian move.

    Of course, it's been done on an individual level with respect to military service or, more accurately, lack thereof, but not in a sweeping fundamental way that harkens back to the founding of this country.  The claim based on military service is a weak one as there are many who refused to participate in the Vietnam War, but were not cowards.  This is why the criticism of Bush and Cheney never stuck - there are loads of guys, both liberal and conservative, who could be painted with the same brush.  But to call someone a coward for not standing up to the principles that freed this country from tyranny and built this democracy is quite a different thing.

    If only the liberal politicians were so bold to play this card ....

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:08:19 AM PST

  •  Pardon my ETL-(English as third language) (none)
    Give me my dessert and give me my plate
    Let them take the libery, that's what in fate
    How long will the country last at this rate


    What's the use of happiness? It can't buy you money- Henny Youngman

    by sheep in wolf clothing on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:12:03 AM PST

  •  Tyrants are always afraid... (4.00)
    and their synchophants, as well.

    And they should be afraid, for they are often just one leaked document away from a firestorm of dishonor! Free men have no need of fear. They are free!


    Our nation has terminal cancer. We must become skilled in patient, implacable oncology: we must place our finger on the locus of the pathology, and EXCISE IT!

    by QuoVadis on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:12:42 AM PST

  •  The most fervent Bushite (4.00)
    I've met was a guy who was obviously fearful beyond reason, something I "got" about him before I knew his politics. He's a strong guy, in his prime, and physically unafraid - does construction work, plays team sports - but he's afraid for his family, especially of other people.

    He once mentioned to me, offhandedly, that the SUV he was driving had been bought in part because he was protecting his kids from being killed in a traffic accident, and I found myself wondering how we all had managed to reach adulthood, back in the days before such vehicles existed. Of course, that was before I saw his "second car" - a Hummer (by the way, we both live in a major city).

    So, I guess I should not have been surprised, when I asked him who he was planning to vote for for President, he said, "Oh, Bush! That's a no-brainer".

     Yup. No brain - but  very active adrenal glands.

    -8.25,-8.36 As long as I count the votes, what are you going to do about it? - William Marcy Tweed

    by sidnora on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:13:22 AM PST

    •  It's almost comical (4.00)
      He's a strong guy, in his prime, and physically unafraid - does construction work, plays team sports - but he's afraid for his family, especially of other people.

      Didja ever notice that, INVARIABLY, these 'rugged individualists' are motivated (they say) by "protecting my family".  They will NEVER confess to being afraid for their own lives.  Even in their most craven hunker-down mode, they insist on appearing butch.

      "Don't wait to be hunted to hide." - Samuel Beckett

      by aybayb on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:23:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah, protecting his own kids (none)
      But putting everybody else's in even more danger. Very nice. Very Christian of him.

      Instead of slowing down, not tailgating, and practicing more defensive driving, he goes out and buys a vehicle that'll destroy a normal passenger car.

      That's just how Red Staters think: My life is worth more than yours. Works on all levels, including national. 2000 US citizens dead is more important than killing 100K Iraqis. Cause who gives a rat's ass about them.

    •  I point this out all the time (none)
      Our entire generation (boomers) should be dead.

      We rode bikes without helmets. In traffic.
      We played in the street. In traffic.
      There was lead in the paint, lead in the gas, lead in the pipes.
      Everything was sprayed with all manner of now-banned pesticides.
      All our schools had tons of asbestos in insulation, and it was used in tons of other things.
      Our rivers and streams were way more polluted than they are now. (I remember seeing suds in Pennypack creek and dead fish in the Delaware)
      We walked and rode our bikes all over the city, at all hours, without parents.
      We rode public transportation without adults.
      We rode in cars without anti-lock brakes, seat belts, and airbags.
      We didn't have our own TVs, heck, lots of us didn't even have our own ROOMS.
      Our parents and teachers didn't have much sympathy for our 'fragile' self-esteem - they didn't hesitate to yell at us, to give us bad grades, and to expect us to do what we were told. And they didn't hesitate to punish us when we didn't.

      And somehow, we survived. ;-)

  •  The Myth of Safety? (4.00)
    For the life of me I'll never understand why some fools will buy the GOP line that they are the party of strength, the whole time that self same party is the National Advocacy Organization for Fear and Trembling!  When I was a kid the folks down the block actually reinforced walls in their home to make it a bomb shelter. Lord Knows those Commies might just come any time now. Fervent Republicans those folks! Maybe we're seeing the progeny of those people? Those mortally afraid of The Others. Sometimes those others were kids in tie-dyed t-shirts, sometimes professors with unpopular opinions, and all too often people with darker skin and unfamiliar accents.  The one thread that ran through all their fears was that Someone Somehow was going to make them uncomfortable.

    Ok, life's uncomfortable. City streets have muggers and country fields have snakes. The west coast has earthquakes, the mid west has tornadoes, the north gets blizzards, and the south has hurricanes. Gonna' sit in the sw corner of your basement all year waiting for the tornado?

    The other problem's materialism. Interwoven into that fear was that the Other was gonna' get something the quiverers wanted. College education for the kids? Tax dollars? Jobs?  Whatever? Been broke before, might be broke again, but being broke is a real object lesson in differentiating between what you WANT versus what you actually NEED. Sounds like the cowardly keyboarders can't make that distinction yet.

    So, I guess I'll tolerate a little more of their drum beating. But just because they can beat their drums doesn't necessarily mean they ought to be leading the band. I'll reserve my respect for those who have actually served in the armed forces, for those who advocate for the welfare of all Americans (not just the top 1%), and for those who can raise kids and feed the family working two regular jobs and hiking to the bus stop every morning.

    •  You know what? (none)
      Most military vets and their families aren't as scared as the neo-cons.

      Part of that is because they come in contact with lots of different people, either because they live in a foreign country (imagine that!) or because they have neighbors of varying nationalities and religions.

      The other part is because they're the ones whose ass is going to be on the line if there's a war. They KNOW what's likely to happen if there's a terrorist attack with WMD of any kind. They know what precautions are likely to work, what aren't, and when to take them.

      My Dad was part of the Japanese occupation force, and was in Nagasaki after the bomb. He KNEW what damage it could do, and how much area one bomb (of that era, anyway) would destroy. He always kept at least a 1/2 tank of gas in the car - because that would get us out of the city. Of course, I think part of that was just for my Mom's peace of mind, because I think my Dad also realized that we wouldn't have enough time to get that far. ;-)

      The problem now is that the scaredy-cats have no frame of reference, since the vast majority of them have never been in danger of anything more than a fender-bender. And they all think they're superman. Or God.

  •  How many Americans (4.00)
    over the past 2 1/2 centuries have died so that we would be able to have the freedom and liberty the founders planned?

    Will we now break faith with those heroic dead Americans?

    Or will we take the dawn of a new year as an opportunity to say with Abraham Lincoln:

    It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

    "You have to accept whatever comes and the only important thing is that you meet it with courage and with the best you have to give." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

    by marylrgn on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:15:13 AM PST

  •  Well Eisenhower said (4.00)
    If you want security go to prison, there you get meals and health care, the only thing missing is freedom. I think Ike knew a thing or two about waging & winning war without throwing our civil liberties down a rat hole.

    Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought- John F. Kennedy

    by vcmvo2 on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:15:25 AM PST

  •  The trouble with reading (none)
    too much, too fast, is that in skimming your main entry, Kos, I read this

    the very values that motivated our Founding Fathers to put their lives on the line to combat the unchecked powers of the British monarchy

    as if it were this

    But now they make a mockery of our Constitution, for the very values that motivated our Founding Fathers to put their lives on the line to combat the unchecked powers of the Bush monarchy.

    It's all about fear--of change, of the other, of the different, of loss of control. Someone should tell them that the only constant in the universe is change, that anything that doesn't change soon dies very dead.

    The degree to which you resist injustice is the degree to which you are free. -- Utah Phillips

    by Mnemosyne on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:15:58 AM PST

  •  I've been thinking the same thing lately (none)
    I have started thinking of Bush as the Boo-President.

    He gets up and makes a speech and says "BOO" (more accurately 9/11, Islamofascist, Bin Laden, Al-Zarqawi) and all the good little followers cry out "save us O Mighty Bush"

    The Republicans have a fundamental problem with telling the truth - Howard Dean.

    by NYC Sophia on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:16:44 AM PST

  •  sing it, Kos! (none)
    Most rightwingers are wimpering little mama's boys who have been taken in by the pathetic performance of one of their own.  Because they're such pants-wetting pansies, they NEED to believe in snivelling preppy coward George W. Bush's idiotic imitation of Ronald Reagan's imitation of a cowboy.  

    They NEED to believe that callow Yale cheerleader Georgie Bush is a macho man who will protect their precious asses from the evildoers.

    Bush as a protective leader is a sick joke.  The thousands of 9/11 victims attest to that.  He's too busy playacting the part of a leader to, you know, BE one.  Being a leader means having some moral character, not demanding that your comfy pillow be taken along on all your trips so you don't get all cranky during your nap.

    Rightwingers will sell out America at the drop of a hat.  In fact, they've done just that over the past few years.  Cowards AND traitors.

  •  What a pathetic contrast (none)
    to FDR, a truly great and fearless man, who, when his nation faced a truly grave threat, told them, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself".

    -8.25,-8.36 As long as I count the votes, what are you going to do about it? - William Marcy Tweed

    by sidnora on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:23:01 AM PST

  •  As I've asked before... (none)
    Why is it that if you "volunteer" to risk your life in Iraq in the name of "preserving our freedoms," you're a hero. But if you stay right here and "volunteer" to risk your life rather than surrender our freedoms, you're a terrorist sympathizer?
  •  Here is how to frame the argument (none)
    In my excursions through the conservative blogs the talking point is that they are willing to give up their Fourth Amendment rights in order to be "safe" from terrorists.  This cowardly response is all they have in order to maintain the illusion that Bush is a worthwhile president, even as he defies the Bill of Rights.

    Here is my response.  Terrorists have killed about 3000 Americans.  But guns legally in the hands of Americans kill many times that number every year, and in countries where guns are not commonly owned by citizens, the statistics on gun deaths are practically non-existent.

    If absolute "safety" is the goal, then would those willing to sacrifice the Fourth Amendment be even more willing to sacrifice the Second?

    I didn't think so.  So how do they explain the contradiction?

    •  That's a good one to air.... (none) Repub controlled areas:  "if Bush is going to take away the Fourth Amendment, when is he going to abolish the Second?"

      Why not?

    •  Devil's advocate (none)
      I don't know about your numbers. Statistics on gun violence tend to be inflated by the anti-gun lobby, who ignore the details of suicides, and, more importantly, justifiable instances of self-defense (Gawd I love those stories) while including those numbers in statistics cited in the course of telling the story of a 3 year old who shot himself with Grandpa's gun. (Or, who shot GRANDPA with Grandpa's gun. Which actually happened, in Ohio, I think it was. Grandpa had the cocked and loaded .45 in the magazine catch on the side of his armchair. Hey, you! Out of the gene pool!)

      Then, I found this

      It seems statistics show over 2,600 people were killed in cell phone-related auto accidents last year. These cell phones--apparently of their own volition--caused thousands of people to crash their collective cars into one another, wreaking havoc and leaving bloodstains all over the otherwise pristine interstates. Some regions have already banned the use of cell phones while driving. Sort of a "How many children must die?" reaction, I suppose. Sound familiar? Yet, according to one article, people are willing to put up with this "sad statistic" for the "safety and convenience" of having cell phones."

      The left needs to quit beating the anti-gun horse. It doesn't work. It doesn't energize enough of the base to justify alienating the portion that it does.

      This is gonna get me blasted all over this board. People are gonna hate me. But I'll tell, anyway.
      In '92, I lived in Stockton, CA. And in that general election, I voted a straight Democratic ticket- with one exception.

      Patti Garamendi was the Democratic candidate for the House. She had a lot of good ideas, but she ran on a strong anti-gun platform.  Can't hang with that. She figured the issue would play well in the wake of the Cleveland School shooting - the first school shooting in the history of this country, in my own hometown, committed by a maniac using a gun he bought in Oregon, because the California laws in place kept him from being able to buy a firearm in his own state.

      So I voted against her. I met her and her husband John and shook her hand at the county Democratic Party victory celebration that night (Don't..stop...thinkin' about tomorrow), told her I was really sorry she got beat, she was a nice, well-meaning lady, and I didn't tell her that in her case, and her case only, due to her gun control stance, I'd broken ranks and voted for her Republican opponent.

      You may have heard of him.

      His name is Richard Pombo.
      I have to live with that.

      Goddess help me.

      Sign me-

      guilt-wracked wiccan.

      Things fall apart-the center cannot hold...The best lack all conviction While the worst are full of passionate intensity (-9.25\-7.54)

      by kestrel9000 on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 03:31:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think you missed my point (none)
        I wasn't appealing to the "anti-gun lobby."  I wasn't making an argument against the Second Amendment, which is just as valid as the Fourth.

        I'm not in favor of giving up either the Second OR the Fourth Amendment.  I was pointing out the hypocrisy of a right-wing position that giving up in the name of safety a civil right to be free from warrantless searches is a disingenuous argument unless one is also willing to give up the right to keep and bear arms in the name of even more safety.

        Our society suffers a lot more gun-related losses each year than terrorism deaths, and in countries where there are not so many guns, the death rate from guns is (duh) much lower.  I have known people who have been killed by guns, but I have never known a terrorism victim.  No matter what the actual gun-death statistics, and I haven't looked them up, they have to far outweigh terrorist deaths.

        Guns are more of a danger to me than terrorists, but I support the rights of those who want one to own one, and I still think the government should be able to articulate a constitutionally sound reason if they want to look at my private communications.

        •  Everything you say is true....... (none)
          ...but I'm sure deaths by motor vehicle accidents also outweigh terrorist death statistics. Cars are also more of a danger to you than terrorists. Or guns, for that matter.

          Be that as it may, I am loath to give the right-wing anything they can twist around, although I intend to  
          attempt to use that argument at the next available opportunity. It's a good one.

          The problem with it, though, is it can be a show-stopper, especially here in the South. You bring up the Second Amendment (or for that matter, US v. Miller) and they immediately start screaming about their cold dead fingers, and suddenly you're not talking about FISA stautes or the 4th Amendment at all anymore. Unfortunately.

          Things fall apart-the center cannot hold...The best lack all conviction While the worst are full of passionate intensity (-9.25\-7.54)

          by kestrel9000 on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 03:52:45 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Don't forget booze (none)
            there's more deaths do to alcohol in 1 year than there are deaths do to every illegal drug through out recorded history. All these "safety" laws are retarded because you give up freedoms for something that isn't effective.

            "Every deal has a patsy. If you don't know who it is, you're it."

            by MrFlesh on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 07:47:14 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Katrina (none)
    I still don't understand the fear.  The worst event this year had nothing to do with external terrorists.  We have already lost one major American city,  and seem to be trucking along like nothing happened.  Whats so scary about some small group of Muslim extremists?
  •  Sadly (4.00)
    the fear being used is what will destroy us, not the terrorists.

    Fear of what? A bomb? Bombs cannot kill our constitution, our laws, our way of life.  What can destroy us is fear of protecting our rights, enough fear that we give up those rights, which is exactly what the terrorists want.  

    Terrorism only works when those targeted become fearful.  I won't give into fear of terrorism, rather I will continue to fear the GOP that is much more of a threat to our way of life, our rights and our constitution.

    "September 11, 2001, already a day of immeasurable tragedy, cannot be the day liberty perished in this country." Judge Gerald Tjoflat

    by SanJoseLady on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:35:47 AM PST

  •  Talking to Reptilian Brains (none)
    Reptilian Brain: everybody's got one, and that's the brain that Bush, Cheney and Rove like to address. Whenever someone is thinking with the reptilian brain, they are in basic survival mode, where the focus is on fear, hunger, flight-or-fight. This part of the brain isn't equipped to handle logic or abstract ideas, or complex emotions like love, compassion, shame.

    Thom Hartmann gave some examples of appeals to the reptilian brain in Cheney Speaks to the Reptile Brain.

  •  BushCo and his chickenshit neocon (4.00)
    sycophants hate the constitution.  To them, the protections of the separation of powers are impediments to their single-minded desire to pad their own and their friends pockets with tax money out of everyone else's.  Their cult-like adherence to the corporate religion forbids even the smallest consideration of the public good at large.

    Elections, the constitution, freedom of speech, and political dissent are all throw-away formalities getting in their way of shifting the tax burden to the middle and lower classes and setting in granite the current wealth structure of corporate America.  

    They trumpet words like the war on terrorism, security, economic health and patriotism while systematically dismantling government's ability to achieve these aims.  They are liars and hypocrites.

    Conservativism is a pestilence on government.  

    "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

    by Five of Diamonds on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:41:02 AM PST

    •  throw-away formalities (4.00)
      I couldn't agree with you more if I were a conservative myself, which I'm begining to suspect may actually be ocurring to honest-to-goodness conservatives. Their genuine convictions have been upended, co-opted and perverted by this band of bandidos who call themselves -- patriots.

      Somebody please, K.O. this Administration!

      by onp67 on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:07:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  GOP are cowards (none)
    Well said - and I think it speaks to something that lies at the heart of what differentiates liberals / progressives from modern-day Republicans.

    We have faith. Lots of it. They say we don't have any, because it is what we have the most. We have far more than they have:

    • We have faith in our liberties, and that Americans can decide for themselves life's major issues. They fear freedom, and so think it should be legislated, or done away with.

    • We have faith in the future. They fear the future.

    • We have faith in technological and cultural progress. They want to return to a (not-so-glorious) yesteryear.

    • We have faith in our laws. They fear the laws won't let them do what they want so they bypass them.

    • We have faith in America's ability to attract the best and brightest from all shores. They fear "them", so they want to put up fences to keep them out.

    • We have faith that providing both economic incentive and a level playing field gives real opportunity to most Americans. They fear that their tax dollars are being given away.

    • We have faith that working with the International Community makes us stronger. They fear looking weak by relying on others.

    Our faith lies in our values, real American values:

    • Liberty and the Rule of Law
    • Social Justice and the American Dream
    • Security at Home, and Leadership Abroad

    I know this flies in the face of a Reality-Based approach. But that's the whole point. Playing to fear, Republicans have shown they can win elections. But they haven't made things better for people.

    Without playing to a strong vision of a better future, Democrats have shown they can lose elections.

    Bush: Worse.Than.Nixon.

    by res on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:48:42 AM PST

    •  you may be very confused (none)
      I recommend that you begin reading a newspaper every once and a while, the positions you describe as good are most closely held by Republicans. I think you are projecting much like Howard Dean when he implied that conservative Supreme Court justices decided against property rights in Kelo v. New London (the court's conservatives dissented, it was the Ginsburg-Kennedy faction that authorized expansion of eminent domain)

      First, there is a widely-held view that Republicans keep winning elections simply because there is no positive future outlook from Democrats. Republicans offer solid actions while Democrats insist they have a plan--without disclosing it.

      Second, insisting that Democrats thnik people can decide for themselves life's major issues is foolish as well, libertarians are far more closely aligned with the Republican Party (i.e. former Libertarian Party presidential nominee is now House Republican, libertarian states like New Hampshire generally support Republican candidiates).

      And although some Republicans take a hard-line stance on immigration, it is the economic-conservative Republican members who are pushing for more H1B visas and guest worker plans.

      Finally, I don't get the sense that Republicans are actively trying to undo all of the laws about executive power and authority. I don't want to Clinton-bash, but you should know that this type of surveillance has been going on before President Bush took office. The fact is, right or wrong, career national security officials clearly want to be using the maximum powers the law allows. A decision was made that intercepting calls originating in or going to a foreign source believed to have terror links was within the law.

      I don't think the original post has much explanatory power. Unless by 'we' you were referring to is for Republicans, I think your reply is in opposition to the records of legislative action.

  •  Right on! (none)
    Every wingnut I've ever met has been a cowardly sack of shit.  Think about it.  They're scared of people of color, foreigners (notice the recent groundswell against illegal immigrants), gays, strong women, intellectuals, non-Christians, unionists, and anyone who rattles their bloated, narrow world just a wee bit.

    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." - William Pitt

    by blueinnc on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:49:57 AM PST

  •  The scaredy cat party (none)
    Bush supporters are a bunch of scaredy cats.
  •  Not to mention... (none)
    ...that they're determined to surrender our liberties to a man who has demonstrated repeatedly that he is neither able nor willing to exert himself to protect us in return...

    "...the big trouble with dumb bastards is that they are too dumb to believe there is such a thing as being smart." -- Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

    by Roddy McCorley on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:54:58 AM PST

  •  I'm sure... (none)
    ...I'm bringing up a none-too-popular point here; but, like it or not, I see a parallel with the 'Anybody But Bush' sentiment in the past two elections.  

    We are seeing an up-dated version of it looming over the current political landscape.  There are those who swear that our present danger is unprededented in American history and so dire that, in order to avert an apocalypse we must all abandon any principle or argument and vote for the likes of Hillary Clinton or ANY Democratic nominee no matter how much we are offended by his/her character or his/her positions on issues.

    Just a little food for thought while we wax indignant over the moral/ethical cowardice of those ridiculous conservatives.

    "Don't wait to be hunted to hide." - Samuel Beckett

    by aybayb on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:02:33 PM PST

    •  The only people (none)
      that want Hillary as President are the DLC and corporate America.

      There isn't one single significant portion of the real American population that would prefer Hillary to someone like Clark or Feingold... or even guys like Edwards.

      Hillary has no significant support other than from the CEO's. At least I don't see it.

      Middle America hates her for her marriage of convenience and her cynicism. And liberals hate her for selling out to try to rescue her crap reputation.

      Only way she gets any sort of nomination is if she buys it.

      U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1998 it was 1:418.

      by Lode Runner on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:11:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  that's a good point (none)
      even if it may not belong here.  :)

      Your fears usually create exactly that WHICH you fear.

      Pushing John Kerry as the "electable" candidate is a perfect example.

      (pushing the "flame Nordic" button now).  

      But yes, that is why these "moderates" are so infuriating.

      I've never seen, in my lifetime, a better opportunity to literally crush the life out of the Republican Party, and what do we see in our own party?  Lieberman and Hillary and Bayh and all these pansy-ass complicit little scaredy-cats.  


  •  one shouldn't forget the right's fouler sex (none)
    ... machoette malkin, specialK-lo and of course coultergeist.
  •  Republicans have always been cowards... (4.00)
    just look at who's served in the military.

    None of these guys. Rummy? Please... He served in no more dangerous a way than Gore.

    Republicans are cowards. Always have been...

    The leaders are all about money and profit for CEO's... and the base is just dirt ignorant or CEO's themselves.

    Republicans are cowards... but I think it's really more that cowards are Republicans, vote Republican.

    Because they're afraid of heterogeny. They're afraid of real competition in the marketplace. They're afraid of death because their Faith is fake and contrived. They're afraid of foreigners because they're just mostly bigots... they were raised that way.

    I never understood why people would give away their rights and civil liberties just because Dick Cheney is incompetent and got us attacked on 911. I guess people think that being aggressive and stupid is more effective than being wise.

    Well, Clark and Democrats showed Republicans how to win a war. Republicans have never won one. Ever.

    Because they don't know how to fight them... and they don't know how to start them.

    Republicans like Cheney are cowards. Give away my rights because Dick Cheney is an incompetent moron who got us attacked on 911 after years and years of peace under a Democrat?

    F that.

    I'll just vote for Democrats who actually know what they're doing.

    U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1998 it was 1:418.

    by Lode Runner on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:18:52 PM PST

    •  4.4 million Republican cowards (4.00)
      and here's the proof:

      Fewer than 2% of the 4.5 million spoiled cry-baby hypocrites who voted for Bush in 2004 who are between the ages of 18-24 are serving in Iraq.

      If just 2% more would sign up... for a whopping 4%... that'd add another 100,000 troops and we could probably secure the place.

      6% and we surely could.

      If Republicans wanted to win this war they could.

      They just don't have the guts or the integrity to do it.

      Par for the course. That's why Republican always lose wars. For one... the reasons behind their wars are never legitimate enough for real people to send their real children.

      As usual, Republicans want the poor to fight their battles for them... because they're scared. They're crybaby cowards. Well... no big surprise there. The Republican party in 2005 doesn't stand for anything but bigotry and corporate greed. Not one single solitary thing else.

      Here's my old diary on the stats concerning these cowards.

      U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1998 it was 1:418.

      by Lode Runner on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:31:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  GOP - The "Daddy" Party (none)
    ... like, for instance, the Daddy from "Say Anything," who stole from grannies and eventually ended up in the fetal position in the bathtub.


    Trying To Maintain Rationality
    econatheist's bloggity blog blog

    by EconAtheist on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:46:47 PM PST

  •  Personally... (4.00)
    I'm always drawn back to the truth of Michael Moore's movies.

    Over time, we discover that F911 was pretty much spot on.

    Over time, we discover that the fear in America portrayed in Bowling for Columbine is pretty much spot on.

    It's sad that Americans hate Moore so much for holding up a mirror to their ugly mugs...

    talk about projection.

    More than anything... I think America feels guilty. And that's where the fear comes from.

    Because most Americans realize the crimes we've committed... the crimes against Native Americans, African Americans, the poor all over the world... all these crimes just so we can watch our big t.v.'s and be gluttonous, apathetic couch potatoes, while people worldwide suffer and die because of the dictators we prop up... or the aid we refuse to pony up.

    I think Americans are laden with guilt... and we all fear retribution for our crimes.

    That's what I think is going on.

    Some people can face their fears and want to change things. We're the Democrats. The liberals.

    Some people can't face their fears and retreat into bigotry and mindless unprovolked lashing out. But they don't have the guts to fight for themselves... as always, they have to send the poor to fight their phony battles for them. They're the Republicans. The Conservatives.

    That's America in 2006 in my opinion.

    Americans need to get real. They need to face the facts... face their fears... and get real.

    U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1998 it was 1:418.

    by Lode Runner on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:47:45 PM PST

    •  Spot On! (none)
      That's how I see it also Lode Runner. I found myself agreeing with most of your post through out this diary.
      •  Many people seem to... (none)
        they just don't seem to vote. Or they're targeted to keep them from voting.

        People that work in fast food joints and other crap jobs where they can barely make ends meet don't vote, or don't get to. Gang members don't vote. The working poor don't vote... their bosses know to make it difficult. Because they vote Republican. It's pretty obvious we need a National Voting Holiday. We need lots of National Holidays... 2 weeks a year? That's no lifestyle people! It's pathetic.

        My point being, in 2006 average Americans don't get to vote.

        If normal folk did vote...

        we would discover, just like Michael Moore explains with stats, beginning on page 169 of "Dude, Where's My Country?"...

        America is a hell of a lot more liberal than we are told by our corporate media.

        And if normal folks would vote on the real issues rather than on Cheney's scare tactics and phony "orange alerts" during election time... (ie if the POTUS vote wasn't as Wes Clark says, a propagandistically misinformed gut-check vote on National Security...), his statistics on issues like abortion, guns, world poverty, etc... they would all play out to elect Democrats...


        And that's why Republicans can only win by creating terrible problems, fake illegal wars, terrorism, and then scaring the American public into voting for them based on misinformation and propaganda.

        That and stealing the elections with black box voting that Howard Dean can hack in 20 seconds on national t.v.

        Got that America? That "Heehaw" guy can hack your voting machines in 20 seconds.

        You happy with that? Republicans seem to be. Now why would that be? Because Chuck Hagel ran the voting machine company he won his election on? Maybe...

        (ps... I like Howard Dean and respect him quite a bit for his acknowledgement of corporate influence being such a problem with our Democracy. That's why all my donations get filtered through him in the form of Democracy Bonds... each month).

        U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1998 it was 1:418.

        by Lode Runner on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 04:21:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  They are cowards, of course, (4.00)
    but they also celebrate the cult of the real man, the manly man.  Look at the guys the put forth as role models - Ahnold, Ronald Reagan, John Wayne - all wannabees, or pretend-to-bees.  It all springs from a particularly destructive, but not exclusively, American myth.

    The Nazis celebrated an ideal of perfect aryan manhood.  Himmler was a pigeon-chested runt.  Goebbels was diminutive and club-footed.  Hitler was a pastey, unmuscled lump of veal with a suspiciously prominent schnoz (although he had actually served in combat).

    I took the measure of these guys a couple of years ago while watching Max Boot, fresh back from an imbed in Iraq, hold forth on the utter manliness and wholesomeness of the war.  He told Charlie Rose breathlessly of being asked by a young lieutenant to hold his .45 on a hapless, blindfolded Iraqi prisoner.  Boot's, shall we say, excitement was evident.  It was as though Dad had given him a surreptitious sip of beer.  I was both embarrassed and revolted.

    Funny - 'embarrassed and revolted' pretty much sums up my decade thus far! - Kicking against the pricks since '98!

    by chuckvw on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 12:50:06 PM PST

  •  Conservatives (4.00)
    are afraid of anything they don't understand which is a lot, they are afraid of change ergo they are afraid of the future, which is why they want to turn back the clock into the supposed good ole days.

    I have news for them, the good ole days haven't happened yet, I realize that scares the cons but actually cons don't fit in with a democracy, all they do is stunt the natural growth a democracy would have if it was left to natural economic and curtural influences, in con America politics is the anchor America must drag along.

    As is always the case, the cons have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future, and as usual they will take credit for all the positive things that entails, the negative details are Clintons or the lefts fault.

  •  red scare (none)
    worked well for conservatives in the past. Its an old model. Lock yer doors the Indians, Jews, Blacks, Commies, Gays, long haired hippies are coming to steal your children and rape your property. They just added Islamic folks to the front of the boogyman list.

    "Or you may be in a similar situation, and if you're in a situation like that, there's only one thing you can do:

    Walk into the shrink wherever you are, just walk in, say, "Shrink, . . . you can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant", and walk out.

    You know, if one person, just one person, does it, they may think he's really sick and they won't take him.

    And if two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them.

    And if three people do it! Can you imagine three people walkin' in, singin' a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? They may think it's an organization!

    And can you imagine fifty people a day? I said FIFTY people a day . . . walkin' in, singin' a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? Friends, they may think it's a MOVEMENT, and that's what it is: THE ALICE'S RESTAURANT ANTI-MASSACREE MOVEMENT! . . . and all you gotta do to join is to sing it the next time it comes around on the guitar." -Arlo Guthrie

    Disclaimer: No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced.

    by mollyd on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 01:33:22 PM PST

  •  They are cowards, all of the republicans (none)
    That is why they are so afraid of blacks, Jews, Hispanics, poor people, Buddhists, Muslims, Native Americans, anyone who is the slightest bit different than they are. They pretend that they want to cut funding for these people in need because they feel a man should feed his own family, but in reality, if every single person who is not like the republicans fell off the face of the earth, they would say it is an improvement.

    I know - I have a lot of them in my family and ex-friends.

    Republicans to Americans: "Are there no prisons?...And the Union workhouses?...Are they still in operation?"

    by adigal on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 02:47:24 PM PST

  •  Fearful... chickenhearted... whiny... paranoid.... (none)
    What was the Gropinator's term?


    Oh yeah!


    (love the Return to Sender sticker)

    "I desire what is good. Therefore, everyone who does not agree with me is a traitor." King George III

    by ogre on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 03:26:17 PM PST

  •  Treading on Constitution (none)
    Amendment VII
    In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
    This is where it all started when a jury trial cost too much for twenty dollars they should have just changed the constitution, to the new amount what every it is. But it is alright it don’t effect me why should I care.

    Amendment IV
    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    Do you remember great war on drugs when it was so important that they could search your car, truck or body  for drugs. It was alright to take your cash money if the police thought it was drug money. It won’t happen too me. It won’t happen to me why should I care.

    Amendment I
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Oh fuck why are those shit heads fucking with the constitution. We must never let hem words be used and we can never let them be used where children can hear the. How about them little blue pills commercial for erectile dysfunction    you can last 30 min. or longer are you can have a erection for 24 hours. Why not say what you mean.  No terrorist would dare fuck with me because I don’t use the word fuck. And remember the next time you don’t like the language and if you try to stop it, hello  Mr. are miss  Bush  we don’t like that part of the Constitution so lets not enforce it

      Amendment X
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

    I don’t like illegal drugs so what do I care if they unlawfully take that right away from the people and the state
    I don’t like guns so let them pass all the laws they want to make them unlawfully.
    The Constitution is a document that can be changed but it is very hard to change it was not an ease document too write. (Read the Federalist papers Anti Federalist papers) So if every one gives up a little And respects every ones little bit it will work out great. What I am trying to say don’t fuck with my rights and I won’t fuck with yours. Let the Constitution stand, for it stands for you and me, or is it I.
    The first amendment should be amended section one and section two. Section two reading any one guilty of taking or trying to take an American citizen Constitutional right or rights shall be charged with a felony and serve not less than one year or no more than ten years in prison.

    Men who think they are great seem to allways kill the inocent. Nations that think they are great seem to allways start wars. THEY ARE NOT GREAT JUST STUPID

    by roxnev on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 03:30:11 PM PST

  •  Amen Kos... (none)
    I keep telling my right wing family that it takes a whole lot more courage to believe in keeping our liberties than it does to give them up in the name of safety. As a matter of fact, I just used the "give me liberty or give me death" comment today, asking if it sounded familiar to anyone. No response, but they all think my husband and I are nuts anyway.

    The repugs are bullies, plain and simple. They act tough, talk tough and push people around but back down as soon as something or someone looks stronger than they are.

  •  I found another quote... (none)
     The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.

    Patrick Henry

    I'm thinking also of the rest of the statement regarding Henry and the liberty or death quote:

    The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.

    Then there's Thomas Jefferson:

    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

    Kentucky isn't such a bad place. Come visit my home: Democrat From Kentucky

    by Stithmeister on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 07:34:16 PM PST

  •  My Letter To Mike Dewine (none)
    Probably a waste of time, but he IS my Senator:

    To the Senate aid reading this email getting ready to mark a chit mark on one side of an issue or not and listing my name under an appropriate form letter to send in response, I ask that you take this email a little more seriously and make it real clear to Senator DeWine how critical this issue is.

    For the record, I am a Democrat and will support Senator DeWine's opponent in November, but as long as Mr. DeWine is my senator, I expect his office to take my comments seriously.

    I am sophisticated enough to know Senator DeWine will do his best to support President Bush and his party's position on issues - that's natural. But Mr. DeWine has shown he is capable of disagreeing with the White House - that's integrity.

    9/11 was the most shocking day in the lives of many Americans, certainly mine. It had a profound impact on us all. On that day and for many days that followed, we ALL were AMERICANS, not Democrats or Republicans. For that matter, most of the world "were Americans" as one paper in Paris suggested as the world stood with us in solidarity.

    I am confident the President usually means well in the decisions he has made since 9/11 and he is sincere in his desire to protect this country.

    Mature people know (as you do Senator) that there are many forces in government and politics, many competing interests, and they are not always noble - in fact they are often quite self centered - whether that be individuals or groups.

    Geo-politics is also full of intrigue and ulterior motives.

    We can debate the President's unilateral policy where we now as a country will strike first rather then wait to be attacked. We can debate the President's real motives for going to Iraq.

    But sir, I hope and pray you CHERISH the United States Constitution. I hope and pray you realize that that precious document is what separates us from rogue nations and barbarian dictatorships - that we truly are a nation of laws, not men.

    I want you to really think back to the founding of our country and how precious was freedom and liberty from GOVERNMENT TYRANNY to our forefathers. Think back to when Patrick Henry said "Give me liberty or give me death". Or Benjamin Franklin who said "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

    We hear the world has changed since 9/11. It certainly has. We are slowly becoming a nation who gives into fear and are willing to give up liberty for a false sense of safety. Sir, Osama bin Ladin is winning, he is turning our precious nation into a police state, a dictatorship.

    I will not debate the real motives of the White House in their grab for power, I'm sure you and I would disagree.

    But I really hope you see the critical seriousness of the President's blatant abuse of power in bypassing Congress and the judicial branch under the pretext of Commander 'n Chief to spy on Americans.

    Sir, I do not want the Republican talking points in response to this email - that The President is trying to protect this country under an insidious war on terrorism and he needs all the tools possible to fight this battle.


    Let me repeat that in case it was not clear - I AGREE.

    So I do not need that talking point in response. Please do not insult me that way.

    What I need you to understand and what I want is a SINCERE answer to THIS question -

    If President Bush did not have what he needed to fight terrorism under the current FISA provisions, which INCLUDE RETROACTIVE approvals of wiretaps, why did he not seek additional authority from Congress?

    On the one hand, the Attorney General and others said the President has warrentless wiretap authority under Article 2 of the US Constitution and the September 2001 Congressional Emergency Authority and then in another instance the Attorney General admitted the White House thought about getting additional authority but "did not think Congress would approve it". Which is it?

    The critical nature of our government as designed by our forefathers is checks and balances between three equal branches of government. These checks and balances are not abrogated in a time of war. And I really hate calling the battle against terrorism a war because you and I both know, that so-called war will last decades and if that is the basis for extraordinary executive power, that will go on indefinitely.

    Is that what you really want? Some of the most sincere leaders in world history have become despots under "emergency circumstances".

    I don't know about you Senator, but I weep when I think what is happening to this great land of ours.

    I expect you as a member of the Judiciary Committee (as well as the Intelligence Committee) to examine these acts by the executive branch - to ask the hard questions, even if those questions may damage the White House or your party. Show the country you are an American before you are a politician. Have the courage to lose support within your own base by standing up for the principles enumerated in our great Constitution. Do not let Osama bin Ladin win.

    I know a Republican Congress would not impeach and convict the President, even if he truly broke the law. I am not naive. I do not even expect a censure. Heaven forbid.

    I would hope, at a minimum, there are enough leaders in your party (hopefully you are one of them) who will at least fully expose these actions and decide whether the executive branch overstepped their authority and say so or give the executive branch further authority as was intended with the Patriot Act.

    If you and your party cannot do EVEN THAT, then you might as well just go home - Congress is a worthless impotent branch of the government. Let's just crown the President and get it over with.

    Now I wait to see if I get no reply, a form letter, or a serious reply that shows you or your aide actually considered what I had to say.

  •  Hence, these memes.... (none)
    The idea is to make clear that BushCo, with Media's help, is granting bin Laden his wish by helping him to terrorize us. They are, really, accomplices. And there's no way around that.

    --It's unseemly for the President [or other] to be so shaking in fear that he's forgotten his oath to the Constitution.

    --If they could stop quivering in fear for a moment, they'd see that bin Laden wanted to frighten us into surrendering our freedoms. Why are they going along with bin Laden?

    --And just where is bin Laden? The antrax terrorist?

    --It's time they stop helping the terrorists to spread their terror in America. [good for media as well as politicians]

    --They need to remember they took an oath to serve the Constitution, not their Master. [said of subserviant judges and legislators]

    --Where FDR told the people that fear is our worst enemy as we went to war, the Republicans try to scare us every chance they can, giving bin Laden just what he wanted.

    --The Fear President. The Republicans have become the Party of Fear.

  •  A synergy has cemented itself between (none)
    the press looking for sensationalism and Corporation Bush Fascism - it's a feeding frenzy of fear and panic; yet somehow the press never seems to pick up on the fact the it's Bush and the GOP that are in charge.

    Somehow, everytime it's Bill Clinton's fault, or the obstructionist Democrats, or the French .. it's never the fault of the GOP leadership in the WH or in the House or Senate.

    What's really disturbing is that we are potentially being led into the bad situation: the little boy cries wolf over and over again, and we are shutting him out.

    He deserves to be shut out, but as incompetent as he is, someday it's possible he could be finally telling us {or trying to} the truth.

    How will we be able to tell?
    There's a scary thought, right there!

    "Rovus Vulgaris Americanus" nasty soon-to-be-indicted co-conspirator. -7.63, -9.59

    by shpilk on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 09:51:40 PM PST

  •  THANK YOU (none)
    Thank you for saying this.  I have thought it for some time.  What a bunch of sniveling, whining cowards these are.

    Go hide under your beds, Republicans.  Let the adults lead now.

  •  follow the money and the power (none)
        Conservatives afraid?  Yes, it is one thing to have authority at some level on the food chain, but quite another to be an authoritarian in the slime pit. I continually ask myself, how in the hell do these bastards get away with a near pathological flood of lying, blaming others, lame excuses, and just outright idiocy. I remember in the 50's or 60's a writer, Gordon Allport did a study on these authoritarian types.
    It was quite revealing about one of the key elements of their personality, "prejudice." They do not enter their unconscious mind to seek solutions to their own living problems, so instead it is all about projection onto others, their own unresolved conflicts. I see this clearly with conservatives in the admininstration and the congress. They seem to function better if they have an "enemy" or a "scapegoat" to pin their own problems on. This is a diversionary tactic called denial. If they fear something or someone "attack with outrage and mudslinging.
          Bush is a prime example of the addict out of control, DENIAL, RATIONALIZATION, and DELUSION.
    Bush has committed a criminal offense, by spying on Americans that usually find this extremely offensive. When he admitted he had ordered the NSA to spy on Americans, he was not admitting this out of courage and conviction , but out of a calculated effort to spin around the damage. Rove seems the most likely advisor in this. Always do a 180 on any accusation by your opponents. Turn the potential scandal on its head, and then make your opponents seem like they actually have committed the crime of treason for even attempting to question the President in the first place.  I believe this moral and criminal
    quagmire that is the true Bush Legacy, but in the end justice and truth will surface to triumph over corruption.
    The light can not be buried under a bushel  indefinitely but must be displayed from the highest hill.
  •  Good line of argument (none)
    It's time the pissed off middle class started demanding a little more fearlessness in defense of The Constitution.

    Time to fight back against enemies of our Constitution, foreign and domestic.

    The Fighting Democrats, an army of many.

  •  Decline and Fall (none)
    of the .......... Empire
  •  Republican's New States Mottos (none)
    I hear that the Republicans are proposing some new state mottos,

    For Iowa, instead of "Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain," the Republicans are proposing "Our liberties we don't really care about, and our rights we'll give away."

    For Alabama, instead of "We dare defend our rights"  "We dare NOT defend our rights."

    For Arkansas, instead of "The people rule"  "King Bush Rules"

    For Delware, instead of "Liberty and Independence" "Alive in a Police State"

    For New Hampshire, instead of "Live Free or Die"  "Live in a Police State or Die"

  •  But, but , but there are terrorists out there (none)
    thousands of terrorists, no millions of terrorists trying to kill us.

    Be afraid. Be very afraid. Be enormously afraid.

    The Only One who can protect us is Our Dear Leader, Prezinent Bush.
    He is spying on us for our own good.
    He is stealing our pensions for our own good.
    He passed that Pharma Bill for our own good.
    I am so scared I think we should do WhatEver Bush says,
    cause he talks to god, and I trust him.
    heh, heh, heh, heh, heh.

    Have another drink of propaganda Kool-Aid, Mr Krempskey, Mr. Danger, the bravest of brave the Gamecock, and and the super fighting hero, the streiff.

    The Viet Nam war is over. All that left is you ghosts dead set on revenge.
    Oh yeah and Dick Cheney. He never got over it either.

    inspire change...don't back down

    by missliberties on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 07:57:52 AM PST

  •  cowards (none)
    funny thing is, these cowards expect the biggest coward of all to protect them. george bush RAN AWAY on 9/11, they seem to have forgotten that. rather, they choose not to remember.
  •  Why are conservatives so afraid? (none)
    Don't forget the heroes of the 82nd Chairborne...
  •  From Virginia, of all places... (none)
    Thursday, December 29, 2005
    What kind of man is Bush?
    Tim Abbott

    Abbott, of Hillsville, served in the U.S. Army from 1970 to 1974 and is a tutor at New River Community College.

    I grew up during the Cold War, in the aftermath of World War II, and I am a Vietnam-era veteran, so through my life I have heard a lot about freedom.

    I was raised at a time when the portraits of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln hung in schools and evoked patriotism. We were taught that we should emulate their ideals in thought and deed. They were the examples of principles such as individual conscience, political liberty and social justice.

    Washington was the father of his country. He led the Revolutionary army, telling his officers to treat prisoners of war "with humanity," and, like Cincinnatus, voluntarily stepped down from the presidency.

    Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, stating that all men have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

    And Lincoln was admired for his thought, humor and compassion. He wrote with malice toward none and charity for all.

    Against these men and their successors were the fascist and communist dictators. In the photographs, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Josef Stalin and Francisco Franco strutted in military uniforms. Their concerns were not liberty, but national security and the national interests. All who opposed them were traitors and cowards.

    Today we have other wars -- the war against terrorism and the Iraq war. Once again we are told these wars are about protecting our freedom.

    Al-Qaida, we are told, wants to destroy us. Perhaps that is true, though it is hard to see how it is capable of such a feat. President Bush has called al-Qaida and Islamic fundamentalists "Islamo-fascists."

    Bush talks a lot about freedom, courage, transparent government and the rule of law. He talks.

    His speeches are carefully choreographed before audiences of his faithful -- often Christian fundamentalists or, to paraphrase Bush, Christian-fascists -- and they must sign loyalty oaths to Bush. He speaks before audience after audience of soldiers and sailors who cannot speak except as directed by the White House.

    Others before whom he speaks may ask no questions. He runs from journalists, as we have seen in China, even on those rare occasions that he speaks before them.

    Even worse, he has paid journalists to say good things about him and his policies. He also produces propaganda from government offices that he offers as news reports. And any protests against his policies are diverted well away from his sight and hearing.

    In his Mission Accomplished foray, he wore a military uniform, something no president has done since Washington, and Washington only wore the uniform to quell a rebellion.

    Around the world he has replaced the Soviet Gulag with the Bush Gulag, where men may be tortured.

    He refuses to divulge the energy industries' influence upon his policies and the records of his Supreme Court nominees.

    He refuses the United Nations access to question prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and refuses the Red Cross access to prisoners at CIA black sites. Furthermore, he threatened to veto legislation against the torture of prisoners even as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice conveyed a "don't ask, don't tell" torture policy to the world.

    In Iraq, he took us into an unnecessary war.

    He uses fear, intimidation, distortion and lies. I cannot tell whether the man cannot tell the truth or he doesn't know the truth.

    From these few examples of many, what kind of man is Bush? Is he like Washington or Lincoln? Or is he a man of another kind? Not a Cincinnatus, but a Tarquin.

    When I think of Bush, I do not think of liberty and courage, compassion and justice. No, I think of arrogance, greed and lies. He is a thug, a buffoon and a coward. Not only is he incompetent, he is corrupt.

    He is of a kind with the dictators; a strutting, sanctimonious buffoon who talks democracy but acts like Saddam Hussein. Bush might differ in degree from Hussein, not having been in power as long, but in behavior, with torture and the corruption of government, they are of a kind.

    While al-Qaida is an enemy of the values and principles of the United States and Western civilization and must be confronted, it can do no more than kill people and destroy property.

    Bush can subvert our principles and institutions. He is the greater enemy.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site