Skip to main content

There's a scene in the last of the three Lord of the Rings movies in which valiant hobbit Sam rescues his captive friend Frodo from a tower in the heart of an evil stronghold.  In the process, he kills a good number of orcs.

Did you cry for them?  Did you worry about any orcish widows left waiting by the window?  Little orclings wondering when papa was coming home?

Of course not.  You cheered Sam's courage and didn't give a second thought to the orcs.  Why?  Because... they're orcs.  They're ugly, vile, evil.  The very definition of other.  

Now, wherever I wrote the word "orc," imagine that it said "liberal."

For the last few days, people have been astounded at the fury with which the right wing blogs have gone after the New York Times reporters over the horrible crime of posting photos of vacation homes.  Their agitation seems so over the top that it's difficult to make sense of why such an innocent story should generate such heat.  But it's not really hard to understand -- they think we are orcs.

Conservatives are prone to tribal behavior -- it's practically the definition of the term.  Conservatives like those who conform to a certain dress, a certain way of talking.  Those who shout "ditto" at the proper moment.  They like those who go to the right churches and belong to the right clubs.  More than anything else, they like those who can hate.

The same hatred of others that makes right wing blogs the go-to spot for "we should just nuke the whole Middle East into glass" language, also primes the pump for assaults like that launched against the Times reporters and editors.  You think these guys are upset about sending their followers scurrying after people's families and children?  You forget, these are orc children.  It's not like attacking real kids.

Just listen to the language from the right.  Liberals are immoral supporters of sodomites.  We're lawless thieves who want only to take what isn't ours.  We're traitors.  We're gutless.  We're godless.  We're ugly.

We're orcs.

For liberals, whose nature is to empathize, this is a hard thing to understand.  These are people, just like us, only with different political views.  Sure they are.  Only, they think you are, by definition, a monster.  

No one worries about what they do to orcs.  Anything they do to hurt an orc is a good thing.  There are no limits when you are fighting orcs.  They don't have to be fair.  They don't have to tell the truth.  They don't have to abide by agreements, honor commitments, or hold back at any limit.  Anything goes when you are fighting for the light against the hordes of darkness.

Can't you understand that we shouldn't worry about killing thousands of orcs if it saves one real person?  Hell, can't you understand that killing thousand of orcs is a good thing, even if no one is saved?  This is what makes it okay to listen in on phone calls: they're orc calls.  You can open orc mail, go over orc bank accounts, and break into orc houses without a warning.  Of course you can.  Even thinking that orcs might have some rights is so twisted as to be laughable.

This is what puts the smug grin on Alberto.  This is what adds the swagger to the posters at Little Green Footballs.

An abortion doctor shot in Florida, Matthew Shepard left dangling from a fence, a fifteen year old girl raped and murdered in Iraq -- these aren't things to be regretted.  They're moments to celebrate triumph over the orcs.  Shock and Awe?  Awesome.  Anyone who speaks out too loudly against such events is likely to be seen as looking... hmm, a little orcish.

Anything we do in Iraq or Afghanistan is okay.  All the people there are orcs.  Africa?  Full of orcs.  The French?  Cheese-eating orcs.

Everyone in the media (except for Rush, and Bill, and Sean, and Ann, and all the others who help us in spotting the orcs) are orcs.   If you're reading this on some liberal -- um, make that orcish -- blog, you know you're an orc.

You may see the folks on the far right as people who wandered into a different political space, but they don't see you that way.  They think you're an orc, and if they can hurt the monster, they will.

originally posted at Political Cortex

Originally posted to Devil's Tower on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 09:26 PM PDT.

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

  •  Fighting the orcs is easy (269+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mark, Sharoney, racerx, Sidhe, wozzle, stiela, claude, chautauqua, Canadian Reader, Sharon, Alumbrados, Terri, MediaRevolution, keirdubois, Ducktape, northsylvania, Nathan in MD, eyelessgame, elizsan, Phoenix Woman, TealVeal, alyosha, Rita in DC, gogol, Subterranean, Hornito, Tulip, Delaware Dem, Pandora, Dvd Avins, saraswati, RunawayRose, Maryscott OConnor, Emerson, Debby, Freedomfreak, wu ming, Sherri in TX, LynChi, billlaurelMD, meg, rhubarb, AWhitneyBrown, frsbdg, Rat, devtob, frisco, ZAPatty, theran, sobermom, ilona, Abou Ben Adhem, Sandia Blanca, Jerome a Paris, Cecrops Tangaroa, mrsdbrown1, rickvonw, opinionated, Song Jiang, joynow, Hatu, bronte17, worriedmom, wayward, rktect, JDRhoades, araina, Shadan7, dlcampbe, Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner, susakinovember, metal prophet, Rupert, Glic, boilerman10, jenifera, JuliaAnn, javelina, amberglow, peraspera, wilco920, Fe, Glinda, splashy, dmsilev, ragnark, high uintas, celticshel, sele, emmeke, Janet Strange, kredwyn, jlynne, DeadB0y, Eddie in ME, MTgirl, Noodles, TXsharon, delphine, Mad Dog Rackham, baxxor, Kidspeak, Bulldawg, niteskolar, inclusive, chantedor, sgoldinger, Catte Nappe, robgoblin, Calidrissp, rockhound, papercut, Mrcia, Cliff Talus, grrr, Eddie Haskell, faithnomore, lulu57, ppluto, barbwires, walkshills, Eric Novinson, DMiller, ChiGirl88, Noisy Democrat, KateCrashes, airshipjones, kfred, WisVoter, OrangeClouds115, CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream, Mike Erwin, jcrit, kd texan, bluemajority, bibble, thereisnospoon, greeseyparrot, Sol Fed Joe, gretel, gnutpnut, julifolo, Fabian, paige, ebbak, eej, maybeeso in michigan, Bluesee, Pokerdad, Harkov311, jrooth, DianeNYS, Green Zombie, Unit Zero, el dorado gal, Elise, docangel, wizardkitten, Philoguy, schumann, Alien Abductee, kamarvt, Webster, clammyc, Simplify, Northstar, TN yellow dog, Cmyst, ChemBob, snacksandpop, KiaRioGrl79, reflectionsv37, boofdah, Morrigan, majcmb1, flo58, Pam from Calif, snootless, Gegner, annefrank, lotlizard, sunbro, gkn, UnaVista, kitchen table activist, Pope Guilty, neroden, beaumarchais, Lisa Lockwood, sillia, dsteffen, Alabama Bill, Bruce Mickle, sleep deprived, YukonJack, jay23, Paper Cup, begone, taracar, Audio Guy, coolhappyMax, FrankFrink, Topaz7, keefer55, trashablanca, snazzzybird, BachFan, tommymet, PatsBard, midvalley, BeadLady, FishGuyDave, tonyahky, mooshter, dougymi, compbear, akasha, luckydog, ormondotvos, zigeunerweisen, alwaysquestion, curmudgiana, condoleaser, Battling Maxo, MO Blue, vincula, bunk, myrealname, Andy30tx, middleagedhousewife, JugOPunch, jazzeroo, righteousbabe, fiddlingnero, means are the ends, Brother Love, cohenzee, Appleblossombeck, TransAmerican, Nebraska Outsider, Ptilk, Friend of the court, Hedwig, ms badger, Pandoras Box, Grannus, AntKat, Pyrrhic Victory, One Pissed Off Liberal, old wobbly, darrkespur, BeninSC, Buckeye Hamburger, Julia Rain, kokoro, Cat Whisperer, Loudoun County Dem, blue armadillo, Daisy Mayhem, possum, lexingtonalarm, kmiddle, celticmuse, mkkendrick, Krexent, Positronicus, lemming22, Lady Sybil, left coast lad

    How you fight against someone who thinks you are an orc, without giving into the same sort of hatred they're showing against you, that's a much more difficult problem.

    Fortunately, we're not the first to face it.

    Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

    by Mark Sumner on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 09:29:53 PM PDT

      •  Seconded (resoundingly) n/t (4+ / 0-)
        •  Lame (12+ / 0-)

          Without the slightest intention of "trolling"...why not rewrite "orc" as "republican"?

          The various assertions are those of victimhood.  "Conservatives are prone to tribal behavior".... What about Liberals, or at least the ones applauding loudly to the diary's assertions.

          Look closely in the mirror.   Many of the things you disparage are the same ones you excuse in yourselves.  

          I say this without malice, simply self-knowledge.

          (I assume this will disappear quickly into the troll archives)

          Best regards, really.

          •  It's disagreement, not trolling (23+ / 0-)

            and I respect your opinion.

            My counter to you would be to remember Will Rogers: "I don't belong to any organized party, I'm a Democrat." This is because we're not prone to tribal behavior. This is why it's easy to get the Democrats to split on issues, and Republicans always vote together.

            And for myself, I do not view conservatives in the least way "evil". But I've heard conservative talking heads calling me a traitor for opposing conservative policy. I've been told I should be shot dead, lynched. I've been told I should be sent over to Russia as a commie, or to the Middle East before we nuked it.

            That has nothing to do with political discourse- it is out and out cruel thoughts and behaviors. I have never, and will never say anything of that nature about any conservative, because I believe they have the right to the opinion just the same as you do. I may tell GWB to go fuck himself, but I would never wish him into harm's way- because he is a human being.

            But remember, on this day of days, that dissent is the highest form of patriotism. That means we shouldn't be hanged just because we don't agree with how Republicans feel we should lead our country.

            The "middle of the road" is where the chickens get run over.

            by Eddie in ME on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:08:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  with such a weak quote as that (0+ / 0-)

              You just proved the "tribe" comment.  An organized group would resemble a team or military unit.  A tribe/clan/horde are synonymous with disorganized.


              Best regards,

              •  nice (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                splashy, esquimaux, nyc in exile, peagreen

                Its nice to know that we are no longer considered "Americans"

                I think everyone has forgotten this point.

                republican, democrat, liberal, conservitive..

                above what ever politcal leaning we are ALL americans.

                So I look in the mirror i see an american.... what do you see USAFguy?

              •  Don't change the meaning of the word 'tribe' (6+ / 0-)

                Devilstower meant "tribe" in the sense of an exclusive group not an unruly, disorganized mob. Part of the tribal mentality is that the "others" which are outside the tribe are subhuman and deserve to be treated as such. You'll have to look real hard to find any comments from the liberal blogs inciting violence against all Republicans.

                Don't confuse the blood feud mentality of the Right with the organized teamwork of sports or a military unit. Sportsmanship isn't dead yet. Opposing teams still shake hands before the game.

                •  Take it up w/ Eddie (0+ / 0-)

                  He is the one who associated it w/ disorganized shortly after quoting Will Rogers.


                  •  Um, no he didn't. (7+ / 0-)

                    He associated tribal behavior with being organized...and said that the Democrats weren't. Thus, as stated, they are not as prone to tribal behavior.

                    •  Sicne you aren't organized, but the others (0+ / 0-)

                      are, ergo they are tribes and you are not.

                      Unfortunately, well "organized" is not what a tribe is

                      Tribe - A unit of sociopolitical organization consisting of a number of families, clans, or other groups who share a common ancestry and culture and among whom leadership is typically neither formalized nor permanent.

                      • A political, ethnic, or ancestral division of ancient states and cultures, especially:

                      -Any of the three divisions of the ancient Romans, namely, the Latin, Sabine, and Etruscan.

                      • Any of the 12 divisions of ancient Israel.
                      • A phyle of ancient Greece.
                      • A group of people sharing an occupation, interest, or habit: a tribe of graduate students.

                      Informal. A large family.

                      Apparently Orcs are organized and progs aren't, ergo, progs can't be orcs and thus we can call the other side bad things.

                      My point is that once you subscribe to "the other side is orcs", that you are subscribing to "victimhood". Dance around that as much as you want.

                      Suck it up.  The other side doesn't hate you (at least anymore then the Progs hate the other side).  The whole diary was an whiney act of whimsy.

                      •  thats where your wrong (4+ / 0-)

                        We DO NOT advocate the murder or death of people who disagree with us.

                        Can you say the "other" side does the same?

                        •  Of course....the repubs/conservatives don't (0+ / 0-)

                          advocate your deaths.  


                          If you start citing wussy examples of the red side hating you, I'll start in with the reasons I drifted here in the first place...the ridiculous antics of the Students Against War and the Prog coddling of these kids.


                          If you want to continue this, privately, email is in my bil.  If not, you have the last word.

                          •  Nope, many do advocate our deaths (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharoney, Cecrops Tangaroa

                            I have read many things about that in a variety of places from people that did not realize I was a liberal.

                          •  Someone hasn't (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Cecrops Tangaroa, hhex65, Dave925, jlb1972

                            been reading DKos very long.

                            That's the only explanation I have for this comment.

                            Someone hasn't been paying attention.

                            "We lucky few! We band of bloggers!"--Malacandra

                            by Sharoney on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:12:40 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Horseshit (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Cecrops Tangaroa

                            "We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors"

                            Say what you like, but so far you don't make a lot of sense.

                          •  Who said that? (0+ / 0-)

                            C''s WAY to juicy not to have a name next to it.

                            Lots of things are said the Israel/Palestine diaries, where people are (foolishly) calling the other out.  Is this really any different?

                          •  Ann Coulter (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sunqueen212, jlb1972

                            You can read more of her hateful remarks here.

                            The only thing Republicans do well is take our tax dollars and transfer them to the rich, instead of providing the services we thought we were paying for.

                            by Janet Strange on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:36:52 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That was Ann Coulter (0+ / 0-)

                            at least a close paraphrase

                            (-6.25, -5.23)
                            Hopelessly pedantic since 1963.

                            by admiralh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:40:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sorry (0+ / 0-)

                            That's Ann Coulter.

                          •  That doesn't advocate killing Libs (0+ / 0-)

                            Unless you actually think Rove said that Murtha and Kerry were cowards (he artfully did NOT say that).

                            You are afraid of Virginia (Ann Coulter) Wolf...a cardboard cutout?


                          •  For some reason (0+ / 0-)

                            you remind me of Foghorn Leghorn. Just sayin'

                          •  Maybe (0+ / 0-)
                            But I see a lot of weak people running around saying "oh, the right hates me, they want to kill me, they think I am an orc".

                            Seriously, step back from the D&D table and take a deep breath.

                            They don't care enough about you to get off their butt to kill you.  They...don'

                            But they are laughing.  

                            Really look at the controversy of "Rove" and "Coulter", neither of the two exciting quotes actually says "kill libs".  It's the same game played by many here.

                            Best regards...Y'all,

                          •  Hehs (0+ / 0-)

                   do you define a hate crime? Do yo believe in hate crimes.?

                          •  Or... (0+ / 0-)
                            What isn't a "hate" crime?  Are their "love crimes" or do some merely want special status?

                            (Not a big fan of "hate crimes"....the line blurs.  Crime is easy to define.)

                          •  that the one problem.. (0+ / 0-)

                            ...all of this is creating is alot of hate. Some are doing thier best to blur said lines. That is what happenens when people act or react emotionally without taking a moment to think about what was just said/done and the concequences of thier actions.

                            This type of thing blurs all sorts of lines

                          •  Seriously, without being a smart ass... (0+ / 0-)
                            What is the difference in a gay getting killed because he is gay.... or a straight white guy getting killed because he flirted with another guy's woman...or got killed b/c of drug deal...or a white killed a black b/c of drug deal (not a repeat)...or a jew kills a mexican b/c of a robbery?

                            Someone got killed because of hate, even tho' it was or wasn't racially/sexually/ethnically motivated.  Why is one "worse" than the other?

                            Sometimes, Some Progs here complain that there should be NO moral equivalency between the terrorists and the US soldiers...torture is torture, murder is murder, etc.  So some of the same Progs say that American "hate" crimes are worse than regular crime, and deserve harsher punishments?

                            I know not all progs share the same views, so it isn't fair to assume all feel that way.

                            Back to my original point...the threat isn't any more real than "liberals wanting to kill consevatives b/c the repubs are orcs" (and Coulter is a fascade, IMO)... why does this Diarist get so wussy scared?

                            There are lots of interesting diaries.  This one is only interesting to me b/c I find the level of victimhood, well, amusingly sad.

                            Best regards,

                          •  Im one of the rare breed (0+ / 0-)

                            If a person committed a crime... regardless of mental state.. they should bare the responblitlies of thier actions.

                            To me,I think there is possbility for volience to happen and esclate, right now it appears to be isolated incidences. Does it change how i, just gives me one more thing to prepare for out of infinate amount of possiblitles.

                            History tends to have  way of repeating itself if fail to learn the lesson from the pass. Hopefully this time around we wont reach that exploding point.

                          •  Hate crime can basically be racketeering (0+ / 0-)

                            and that, IMO, is when and where it moves beyond the level of the casual or "impersonal" crime you talk about. Any cop knows the difference between organized and disorganized crime or between individual acting out that goes too far and a lynch mob. Different crimes require different law enforcement measures.

                          •  That is not a good association... (0+ / 0-)

                            Even this non-Prog supports a LOT of anti-terror legislation, but I don't want those procedures to be applied to other non-terror related crime (embezzlement, most drug trafficking issues, porn, muggings, etc.)

                            I think the commentors have already demonstrated that "hate crime", even known by a cop, is poorly defined and (IMO) not truly something that can be prosecuted fairly in court.

                            Thanks for your perspectives and best regards,

                          •  Just to clarify (0+ / 0-)


                            Take care.

                          •  There are already (0+ / 0-)
                            conspiracy laws/crimes.  Racketeering generally opens up RICO (which USED to be applied to organized crime/drugs/gangs).  Racketeering/RICO would not apply to lynch mob or race/sex-orientation beating outside a bar.  IMO.

                            Best regards,

                          •  That's why I said 'can' and 'basically' (0+ / 0-)

                            Lynch mobs are almost never spontaneous and much hate violence is concerted or conspiratorial and therefore, IMO, a particular threat to individual liberty and "quiet enjoyment" and community peace - see the Southern Poverty Law Center. Though, I wouldn't call one drunken bigot impulsively beating up a gay person a hate crime either - assault and battery etc. will do fine for that. But it's a different matter if his buddies are egging him on, could be simple accessory, could be something less ad hoc. Case by case at that level.

                          •  Ah say, ah say, boy! (0+ / 0-)

                            Don't know anything about D&D, pal, if by that you mean Dungeons and Dragons - other than it's supposed to be a danger sign for troubled youths, which I definitely am not (young or troubled).

                            On the other hand, I am old enough and experienced enough to know that things have changed enormously in my 50+ years and that they will keep changing if people who thought it was all settled by a few court decisions don't push back now, though maybe you're really fine with that and like the results so far. Fighting back would start with rejecting sophistic "moral equivalence" arguments like you present, unconvincingly, here. Your man Rove has been very clear about their intention of creating a permanent one-Party system here, and what they've done so far has already shown the usual dreary results of such a thing. And yes the rule of law sometimes means that the momentarily "weak" will be spared from being fodder for the momentarily strong - I'm fine with that as the price of civilized life etc.

                            Your arguments sound like you really believe that anyone who resists them - the momentarily powerful - is a loser or somehow "weak" (which seems to be an particular issue for you), that one should just get with the program and not resist the "strong" or at least well-connected. That's certainly true in the military (dad was career USMC and I had two uncles who were career USAF logrollers), but it won't keep a nation honest or balanced or sustainable. BTW, read more of Coulter's stuff - you're not doing too well arguing from ignorance - and yes she's a Pop buffoon but she moves the Overton Window on TV and that's the point.

                            Maybe you really want to toughen up the libs, and if so I'm with you. I now really want to know about the British guy one commenter mentioned the other day, a right-wing economist who says he's a die-hard Marxist, that Marx was right about everything but he just wants to be on what he bets will be the winning side in the class struggle. Now that is an opponent I can respect.

              •  You must not live where I do (7+ / 0-)

                I live in upstate NY.  The tribes around here have been pretty organized for some time.  

                Ever hear of the Iroquois Confederacy?  I live in the heart of it. They were so organized that a man named Ben Franklin lifted some of their ideas about government to give us our nation.  You may want to rethink your ideas about tribes/clans.

            •  I'm sorry. But I think cons are evil (0+ / 0-)

              Look at the lot on Capitol Hill. They are hate-filled warmongering psychopaths who would love nothing more then to remove all of us Liberals from this earth. They hate you. Do not forget that.

      •  Thanks, Maryscott (7+ / 0-)

        You know how sometimes a post says exactly what you wanted it to?  This wasn't one of those times.  I was writing close to midnight, and ran away with a little metaphor.

        If I'd been more awake, I might have said something like "the worst of the speech on the right has the same effect as the 'Overton Windows' technique used in pushing an issue.  By using extreme speech to dehumanize Democrats, more "moderate" Republicans can operate far outside what would have been mainstream if Rush & co. were not moving the banks for them."  But if I had said that, it probably would have generated a lot less talk

        Thanks for the great compliment.

        Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

        by Mark Sumner on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:09:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Uhhhh (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pyrrho, ormondotvos, ShowMe Indie, USAFguy

        Do you guys know any conservatives? I mean, I personally find myself cursing their names hourly, but come on.  They don't think we're orcs or want to saw our heads off, any more than Red Sox fans want to saw the heads off Yankees fans.  It's a game to them, and we're the opposing team.  That's all.

        •  Yes. And No. (31+ / 0-)

          Yes, I do know conservatives. People I work with and call friends and neighbors and acquaintances.

          They see ME as a human.

          They see "liberals" as orcs.

          In the abstract, I'm the enemy. In the flesh, I'm just Kim.

          They have to remember, when I go all liberal on them, that I'm a human, not an orc.

          That's most conservatives.

          There are conservatives that will never see me as a human, whether I'm their neighbor, coworker, acquaintance, whatever.  I might look and smell sort of human, and they might be forced to treat me as human just for the sake of peace and propriety, but they seethe with hatred for me because they know I'm an orc.

          They would, if they could, do everything to oppress orcs, disenfranchise orcs, put orcs in camps, kill orcs.

          No, this is not a game to them. It's war. It's us or them.

          Some day there will be a tipping point where those conservatives feel it's necessary to stop treating me as human, and start treating me as an orc.

          Some already do: Malkin, Coulter, Limbaugh et al. I'm filth to them.

          I have news for them. If I am going to be treated as non-human, then I'm not going to be an orc. I'm going to be an Uruk-Hai.

          Live the questions. - Rainer Maria Rilke

          by Kimberly Stone on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:06:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  As I said in my comment above (7+ / 0-)

            This is why it's so important that all liberals be open with their family, friends, neighbors and colleagues about their political views.  It's like being gay.  If conservatives are able to objectify "liberals" as someone that they don't know and someone they can hate without consequence to anyone they personally know, it has no personal effect on their life.  But, if wanting to eviscerate all liberals means that it's going to hurt their next door neighbor, who they socialize with and like, who keeps a nice lawn and takes care of their cat when they're away on the weekend, it makes them think twice.

          •  You may think, Oh come on (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            stephdray, jlb1972

            they cannot possibly mean us harm just for our political beliefs.  But couple that with other issues.  Being the wrong color.  Being an uppity divorced woman.  Being an ACLU member.  Being an intellectual.  Being gay.  Being foreign.  Being a Catholic; or, even worse a Muslim or Jew or atheist.  The more strikes  against you, the more easy it is to hate you, dehumanize you, turn you into an Orc who deserves death.

            Maybe your average Joe six pack right wing Republican isn't planning to kill his liberal neighbor, but some who share his beliefs are willing to take them to the next level.

            Have you never heard about the Left Behind video game that's being marketed to Chritofascist 12 year olds?
            In it, you get points for terminating non-believers in New York City.  Not Iraq.  New York City.

            •  cnmbfa (0+ / 0-)

              Maybe your average Joe six pack right wing Republican isn't planning to kill his liberal neighbor, but some who share his beliefs are willing to take them to the next level.

              Some who share our beliefs are "willing to take them to the next level," too.  And do.  There are nuts in every crowd.

              Have you never heard about the Left Behind video game that's being marketed to Chritofascist 12 year olds?
              In it, you get points for terminating non-believers in New York City.  Not Iraq.  New York City.

              I have heard of it, and I've called people ridiculous for suggesting it's some kind of training program.  I really think it's being misrepresented in the progressive community (I don't think you get points for terminating non-believers -- I've read elsewhere that there are penalties for the taking of any human life).  Either way, it's not out yet, is it? We're foaming at the mouth because of hearsay.

          •  Ok, Uruk Hai.. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Cecrops Tangaroa
   you get to kill off Boromir, only to be decapitated by Aragorn.

            There's no way to win the argument of definition if you accept their terms.

            None of us are orcs, on either side.

            I have a lot of friends and family who are Republicans -- from liberal Republicans to wingnuts.  They always treat me well.

            Even if there is some truth in the diary, it isn't doing any good putting it this way.  The way to combat it is to humanize liberals, not demonize conservatives.

          •  This is very accurate (0+ / 0-)

            at least in my experience, which has been all-too-long-and-deep with contemporary conservatives whatever their particular angles. The main feature of modern born-again/corporatist conservatism - rooted in the South & Southwest but spread everywhere in this country - is the refusal of pluralism and thus of accountability. People who are hell-bent on creating a one-Party system a la Mexico or Japan, with all the rights and priveleges thereunto appertaining,  do not respect their rivals or opponents and do not accord them the same rights they would demand for themselves, period. Anyone who says that this is not the goal of contemporary "conservativism" has not been paying attention to their own statements, and they're not kidding or just having a bit of fun with uptight liberals. It really has not mattered at all how un-dittohead-like they may be with a specific liberal neighbor, co-worker, or bedmate. That being said, there are probably plenty of conservatives who, given the plain worldly failures of their Party, are open to something more pluralistic and nuanced - a lot of them seem to have come, however grudgingly, to this site.

          •  'Some already do: (0+ / 0-)

            Malkin, Coulter, Limbaugh et al."

            It's more a game to them than anybody.  I'd wager they don't give a rat's heinie what you believe; that's their act, to rouse the rabble, and it pays very, very well.  

            And as for the personal relationship vs. abstract relationship with conservatives, we're all guilty of that rhetorical generalization.  I probably say "I @#$% hate conservatives" three times a day (four times on Saturday), and I complain about how villainous they are, how they shouldn't be allowed to vote anymore, that a monument should be built to commemorate their outrageous stupidity.  I don't really think they're villainous, or hate them.  And someday, when the media's less enamored with conservative hate mongering, they might monger my hate.  And hearing it might make conservatives fear that I think they're orcs.

        •  Dude (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          splashy, paige, jlb1972

          I wasn't talking about all people who hold conservative viewpoints, not by a longshot. I'm talking about the right-wing blogger crowd and the right-wing talk radio crowd and their ardent fans.

        •  well then, (6+ / 0-)

          what do you make of this, from an earlier diary yesterday

          A former board member suggested that Mona Dobrich [a Jewish mother protesting the intimidation and force of her childrens' participation in school religious activities] might "disappear" like Madalyn Murray O'Hair, the atheist whose Supreme Court case resulted in ending organized school prayer. O'Hair disappeared in 1995 and her dismembered body was found six years later.

          Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

          by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:32:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  To understand the right's view of liberalism, (5+ / 0-)

          just read letters to the editor in various newspapers around the country. Not only do some want to bomb Iraq back to the stone age, but also think Feingold should be removed from the senate for opposing the Patriot Act.

          Too many believe every single literal word that comes from Bush's mouth. A writer in yesterday's paper praised the NSA spying and applauded the arrest of the Miami "Al Queda gang," saying this is a result of the NSA program. His words show he is so frighten that his midwest peace/piece of landscape will be blown up today.

          Likely, it is this writer and others of his ilk who agree that liberals "aid and abet the enemy."

          And isn't it amazing how often we use the sound clips so often repeated from the right? But we know "aid and abet the enemy," "what good are civil rights if you are dead?" and other such sound clips are hollow words meant to scare. Yet so many literally believe every single word spoken by Bush and minions.

          •  Reading posts here (0+ / 0-)

            A conservative would believe that all libs/progs think the right wing is entirely Fundie.

            Not the case.

            A great deal of self-responsibility and the expectation of the same from others which is taken as "hate the poor" by progs.

            The lenses used by each wing, by each TRIBE, is fascinating (along with the actual naivete of each group w/ respect to the other).

            Best regards,

            •  Funny you should say that (0+ / 0-)

              I read all sorts of blogs forums and what not, and what i get out of each of them is what makes them different than the others. I dont compare them since there is no real basis for it.

              I find that when people make snap judgements without and real in depth research and time to really think about what is beings said without thier preconceived notions, some can make real inroads on working together to help all Americans.

              •  Gee Bear, (0+ / 0-)

                Looks like you aught to be replying to paige, since she seems to think ALL consevatives are represented by those who submit letters to the editors.

                I think you and I have WAY too much time on our hands.


        •  I've been threatened directly by conservatives (6+ / 0-)

          Do you guys know any conservatives?


          At work.

          I don't speak to him except when I have to. He has threatened to beat me up twice. The last time was when I was talking to someone else about "taking our country back."

          I'm certain he thinks I'm an Orc.

          (Missouri 2nd Congressional District)

          The Universe is a big place ... perhaps the biggest. -Kilgore Trout

          by fugitive on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:15:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That about says it all. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Cecrops Tangaroa, splashy, Timroff

            We (and the sane conservatives) are capable of making distinctions between "differing opinions" and "nutbars." At work the other day, I got sucked into a three (four when I joined in) way argument about Bush. It became two on two at that point, and was fairly polite for most of it. The two conservatives were arguing that voting for Bush wasn't really that bad compared to Kerry.

            One was saying that she couldn't vote for Kerry because "he didn't stand for anything." The usual thing about at least with Bush, you knew what he stood for. She was regretting that, and as someone who worked for Kerry, I ground my teeth -- not at her, but the consultants who turned a hero twice-over from the 70s into a ball of mush. As a registered Republican, she was saying that the Democrats need to win at least one House or branch to balance out the corrupt types in her own party. I don't think we just can reach her -- I think we already have.

            The other said that Democrats are all Communists. I kid you not.

            Think we can draw a distinction here?

            Oh, and I have yet to see anyone advocate treating the latter sort of righties, even tangentally, as "orcs." Funny, that.

            (/) Roland X

            Hope is a phoenix

          •  Ugh (0+ / 0-)

            I live in MO-01, but used to work in MO-02. I had a couple of rightwing nutjobs I worked with, including the owner, who at one point in '02 gathered the entire together to stress to us the importance of voting for Jim Talent over Jean Carnahan for Senator.

            I'm sure this episode was repeated in countless small businesses all over the country (insert Republican and Democrat as appropriate).

            (-6.25, -5.23)
            Hopelessly pedantic since 1963.

            by admiralh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:46:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  I think you mean well (0+ / 0-)

          but this is simply offensive at least to me, given my upraising in the Civil Rights/Vietnam era in the Deep South in an early religious Right/miltary family with close ties to the oil & gas industry and far-right politics. Some of us have paid enormous dues and have deep, behind-closed-doors experience with contemporary conservativism far beyond any casual social connections. I've also lived and worked in DC for over 25 years, and everyone here knows that what you described was the old way that is long since dead, and it wasn't the Pollyannic liberals who killed it.

      •  Well, yes (0+ / 0-)

        Christian fundamentalists versus Islamic fundamentalists, and both think their way is the only way. This is why I oppose fundamentalism, in most cases, because it ends up saying some downright scary stuff.

        That doesn't mean I don't like the fundamentalists who post here, btw. I don't intend any generalizations, of any sort.

        The "middle of the road" is where the chickens get run over.

        by Eddie in ME on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:10:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Umm... really werid situation at work.. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cecrops Tangaroa

           You see there is 2 registered repubs (me being one) screaming that Bushco is ruining the country and a Fundie Democrat with his head up Bush's butt. The Fundie actually started to threaten us. Thank God he was finally fired for incompentcy (no complaints by me but plenty by others).

    •  Pick an issue because they have none (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      That'll make the biggest difference. Repsonding to them is important, but it's more important to outrun them.

      I've been flogging the idea of social security

    •  You're one cute Orc. (37+ / 0-)
      But seriously, it is frightening.  Hate Radio Rwanda comes to mind.

      But it seems the rest of America is onto this scam, & they're not liking it much anymore.

      Divide & conquer has its limits.  The RW whackos are exposing their privates a bit too much for comfort lately.  It's getting embarrassing.

    •  but, who are 'they' - other orcs ? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cecrops Tangaroa
      •  Nope (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Unless we're all just orcs together.

        Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

        by Mark Sumner on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:50:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  They think that they... (0+ / 0-)

        are Frodo protecting Sam...

        "Computer. End holographic program...Computer? Computer?"

        by kredwyn on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:41:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The root problem with orcs (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        is that they're godless.

        The RW has God on its side. They know that left-wing liberal humanists (like "commies") are all atheists -- even when pretending to be otherwise. That's why red-necks can kill abortionists or gays or muslims with a clear conscience -- "They're all going to hell anyway, so let's just rid of them."

        Liberals are "lawless" and "immoral." Just look: in 2000 Bush ran on a platform of morality -- that was the basis of his appeal to the religious right. And liberals will continue to lose this battle as long as the right can assume the moral high-ground -- that is, as long as liberals don't have a moral platform.

        The right can appeal to God, while liberals tend to fall back on wishy-washy morals from humanism or science.

        Why haven't Democrats been able to formulate a platform of morality? Is it because Democrats are immoral?

        The counter-strategy is simple, really: take the moral high-ground.

        There are lots of examples of the right acting immorally. But why haven't they been called to task on that? -- called to task not on the issues themselves, i.e., not rationally or humanistically (arguments which fall on deaf ears to those who believe themselves to be morally superior), but morally!

        When is the  Democratic party going to stand on its own moral platform? It's not that hard really. We know what the basis of morality is. It's the Golden Rule, known to many religions across the ages (including Christianity) and rationalized by both humanism and modern science:

        Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

        But if we treat them as orcs, that only proves to them that they were right.

    •  not tricky (10+ / 0-)

      you have to engage them face to face, then they have to admit your humanity.

      if you separate from them, if you ostracize those of their clan that act as emissaries and diplomats, then you create the context for demonization.

      it's simple as hell, people just don't want to do it.

      it's simple.
      •  absolutely right (6+ / 0-)

        We engage in the "black hats vs. white hats" thinking too. - a journal of music + the arts + writing

        by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:03:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  not that simple pyrrho, (17+ / 0-)

        I come from a right wing family, so I've lived quite a bit of this.

        first, they compartmentalize--there is the human being that they care about, and there is the person that represents everything that threatens their value system and security base.  many don't need to solve the dichotomy--if they solved dichotomies, they would probably not be fervent right wingers.

        second, on their better days they just think of you as misguided by a confused and weaker worldview/value system, whatever.

        I agree that the primarily rational, it would be that simple.  but so few people are.

        Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

        by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:45:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I come from a right wing family too (5+ / 0-)

          but since leaving for college, I've lived much of my adult life among leftwingers, and they do the exact same things.

          It's human nature to demonize people who appear to threaten your value system and security base.

          It's something that we should all try to rise above if we're to get beyond the "good vs. evil" wrestling match.

 - a journal of music + the arts + writing

          by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:50:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Leftwingers does not = Liberals (11+ / 0-)

            You are no doubt correct about doctrinaire Lefties.

            Liberals, however, tend to believe that
             1. People are basicially good.
             2. "Bad" attitudes & behavior is caused by environmental factors, and can be corrected by better education, therapy, couseling, etc.
             3. Unfortuately, this is often wrong, e.g. "Orc" analogy
               i.e.: "conservative tribalism" is a matter personality and lifestyle.  They enjoy being assholes.
            Lefty assholes too.

            "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." General Nathanael Greene, Continental Army, April, 1781.

            by faithnomore on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:13:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  agreed... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I added something to my post...below.

              "Computer. End holographic program...Computer? Computer?"

              by kredwyn on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:45:33 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  for purposes of this discussion, (3+ / 0-)

              I'm equating leftwingers with liberals.

              I've seen plenty of assholish behavior from liberals.  

              Liberals may view people as "basically good", in terms of humanity in general, but they're happy to hate individuals, e.g., Bush.

              I doubt you'll find many people on DKos who are willing to say that Bush is "basically good".

     - a journal of music + the arts + writing

              by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:53:04 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No, but a lot would probably say (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                splashy, paige, keefer55

                his basic human goodness was damaged by an absent, aloof father, domineering mother, and superior brother.

                And some might actually mean it.

                "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." General Nathanael Greene, Continental Army, April, 1781.

                by faithnomore on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:36:37 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  that would be hateful (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  and just as bigoted in its "liberal" way as a rightwingnut attacking someone because he's gay, or not Christian enough, etc.

         - a journal of music + the arts + writing

                  by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:56:10 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Then we can't win, can we? (3+ / 0-)

                    If we disapprove, we're being hateful.

                    If we try to see the reason someone may be spouting eliminationist rhetoric, we're being condescending and bigoted.

                    Glad you have liberals all figured out. Maybe you and USAFguy should use your mad analytical skillz on the likes of Coulter and Malkin, those paragons of civility and reasonable discourse. You know, the ones espousing death to liberals and concentration camps for undocumented immigrants.

                    If you two haven't already, I suggest you read David Neiwert, a scholar and journalist who has followed the conservative movement over the years and is an expert on the subject of the eliminationist rhetoric that has become an all-too common tool of the right (emphasis mine):

                    The "conservative movement," however, is a decidedly dogmatic political movement that demands obeisance to its main tenets (and exiles those who dissent) and a distinctly defined agenda. Movement followers proudly announce their membership. (In contrast, there is no "liberal movement" worth speaking of -- just a hodgepodge of loosely associated interests.) Importantly enough, their raison d'etre has transformed from the extenuation of their "conservative" impulses into the Machiavellian acquisition of power, usually through any means necessary.

                    The presence of this discrete movement, in fact, is something that nearly everyone who follows the contours of the political landscape is well aware of.

                    For my money, I think Neiwert has encapsulated what Darktower is trying to say in one, neat, eloquent paragraph:

                    It is, frankly, foolishness at this point in time to even vote for a Republican. Not because the party lacks candidates who are utterly unworthy of support; there are, indeed, smart, thoughtful and honest Republicans even still, though they are harder to come by. But even they represent, and remain an integral part of, a party that has become nearly absolutely corrupted by its near-absolute power, and almost permanently tainted by its lust for utter control of the political and social landscape.

                    And accusing the left of the things the right has been doing for years - the old playground taunt of "I know you are, but what am I?" is not a very good counterargument. In fact, it sucks.

                    "We lucky few! We band of bloggers!"--Malacandra

                    by Sharoney on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:00:12 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  it would be a good idea (0+ / 0-)

                      for you to read and respond to what I actually wrote, and not what you wish I wrote.

                      It appears that you would like me to be an apologist for rightwingnut behavior.  Sorry, that's not the case.

                      It appears that you would like me to have said that we shouldn't disapprove of Bush's behavior.  Sorry, that's not the case.

                      It appears, in fact, that you've completely missed the point of what I've been saying in this thread.

                      But at least you got to be sarcastic and nasty and tell me that my argument "sucks".  So it wasn't a total waste of time for you.

             - a journal of music + the arts + writing

                      by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:58:01 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Don't hold your breath for me to say it. (16+ / 0-)

                  This liberal does not give a fleafart for the genesis of Bush's dysfunction.

                  I just want the asshole and his administration of assholes out of office so we can save our country.

                  I don't care about his daddy, his mommy, his brother, his not being breastfed, his anything. On some level, I'm sorry to see anyone brought up without love and comfort. But there's a limit to everything.

                  Short of his being outright abused, there's really no excuse for Bush's behaviour. Even if that were the case, I would point out that there are people who have been cruelly abused, raped, starved, and traumatized who have, in spite of that, grown up to be decent people.

                  Bush had more privileges than most people can even dream of. If I had had 1/10th of his money, connections and prestigious education, I sure wouldn't have turned out to be the sorry sack of shit that he is.

                  I went to a pretty good prep school, pretty good college, and had no connections due to family name or money unless you count the guys who fixed and washed cars on my father's car lot.

                  I was expected to be, and turned out to be, a decent, intelligent, person whose values and moral code are infinitely superior to Bush's.

                  He's a bad person. He's doing evil things. He had every opportunity to be an intelligent and good man, and he blew it. I have no problems judging him, and I have no sympathy for him.

                  Live the questions. - Rainer Maria Rilke

                  by Kimberly Stone on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:17:48 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  That's my take on it, too. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Sharoney, UnaVista

                    I have a saying for that I frequently inflict on my (Jr. High) students (and myself):
                     "You are what you do!."
                    (i.e. There is no such thing as a good person who does bad things. If you do "bad" you are that)
                     I couldn't care less what kind of wonderful person lurks inside of you. I only care about what you do here.
                      Are you honest? Hardworking? Decent to others? Reliable? Those and other things are what matter.

                    I think that is the core of what liberalism should be: taking people based on what they do, not their wealth, religion, gender, sex pref, nationality, religion, etc.

                    But also, being responsible for one's own actions. Failure to insist on this has gotten the old time (maybe not so much now) Liberals into trouble.
                      Sorry Father Flannigan, there is such a think as a bad boy.

                      Now the tribal conservatives need to learn this.

                    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." General Nathanael Greene, Continental Army, April, 1781.

                    by faithnomore on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:18:41 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  But you have always had accountability (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Sharoney, faithnomore, jlb1972

                    Bush has had none.  And so it continues.  But now it affects all of us.

                    When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace. -- Jimi Hendrix

                    by gnutpnut on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 03:21:43 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Bush (9+ / 0-)

                is my personal cross to bear in terms of "praying for my enemy" -- he's right up there with my ex-husband who is also a deadbeat dad and pathological liar. I can count on one hand over the past six years how many times I have genuinely been able to feel some modicum of compassion for either in order to pray for them or understand them.

                But the term "happy to hate" would be incorrect. As a liberal, I recognize that hatred for someone else only harms me emotionally, spiritually, and physically even. And I don't get any pleasure or strength from the knowledge that I am not alone in my feelings towards Bush, IOW, I don't feel strenthened by being part of the "liberal tribe".

                My definition of being liberal is being anti-tribal, anti-competition, and anti-group think.

                I have never been able to warm up to the American emphasis of being #1 in all things. I don't like the idea because it makes everyone else a loser. If we're the winner, than someone else is losing and that just doesn't square with my understanding of the Gospel which for better or worse has shaped my morality.

                This tribal thing which the diarist speaks of

                Conservatives are prone to tribal behavior -- it's practically the definition of the term

                makes perfect sense to me and it is my understanding of the illness America suffers from. It's Lord of the Flies mentality. And the only way you beat that nature is not by fighting back, but by avoiding being in the blowback of their self-destruction.

                "For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" -8.13/-7.03

                by donailin on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:59:46 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  A difference (0+ / 0-)

                You can't hate someone that you pity.

              •  there is nothing in the liberal (6+ / 0-)

                worldview that says you cannot be held accountable for your actions.

                in fact, accountability is part of the liberal worldview.  it's kind of a straw man to say that people on dkos would not see bush as "basically good" (and are happy to hate individuals), and there's plenty of assholish behavior from liberals.

                liberals (and all enemies) are dehumanized by the conservative worldview.  in the liberal worldview, these conservatives (the poor and disenfranchised) are the very ones we are fighting for.

                no straw man argument will equate those two positions.

                Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

                by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:52:21 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  I don't hate Bush (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Do Tell

                I hate President Bush for what he's doing to our country, and on Inauguration Day, 2009, my hatred of him will cease along with his Presidency, when he can no longer do damage to my way of life.

                The "middle of the road" is where the chickens get run over.

                by Eddie in ME on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:14:35 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Sure I hate George Bush (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                splashy, faithnomore, Pandoras Box

                but that was after I saw the damage he's done to the country just before heading out to practice his golf swing.

                I hate anyone whose ignorance of (and disinterest in) the facts leads to tragedy - and then he doesn't care about the tragedy either.

                Before the selection in 2000, I hated bush's ideology but not the man (true, I thought he was rather dull and clownish, and beholden to oil/corporate interests).  

                From his first act to the present, he has consistently failed to do the right thing.  His first act was to cut off funding to clinics around the world who offer abortion or abortion counseling.  Which results in women who want to keep their babies not having pre-natal care.

                And later, he didn't even seem to understand what he'd done.

                He has not done any better since then.  He has consistenly shown himself to be uncaring and callous, over and above incompetent and uninformed.

                I hate that someone like that has the power he does.  It sickens me that he can cause so much damage (short and long term) and no one seems to want to stop him.

                I challenge anyone who "loves" this asshat to take a trip down to New Orleans and see how his ignorance and thoughtlessness has affected the citizens of this nation.

                It's not a knee jerk reaction, not a "mean-spirited" hate for no reason - it's based on his actions, not on his party affiliation.

                •  I have despised him from the first time (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Tonedevil, el cid

                  I learned about the interview he did with Tucker Carlson, where he pitilessly mocked Karla Faye Tucker for pleading for her life from death row. From the moment I learned of this incident, it was all I've needed to judge his character. His every action has been consistent with that image. Oh, and when he gives the camera the finger in a well known photo -- the intensity of the animosity in his facial expression, along with the digital depiction, is frightening.

                  "Eschew obfuscation!"

                  by Pandoras Box on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 03:22:25 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  then they have to admit your humanity (0+ / 0-)

        You must have had better luck than I did all those long years I tried to engage my parents and their lovely friends with me as a viable person in my own right. The best I could get was that I was still a marginal part of a family/clan, like a mentally handicapped person or something. They're playing for keeps. That being said, I agree with what you say in general.

    •  Orcs aren't evil, they are just drawn that way. (16+ / 0-)

      If we called the killers Orca and drew them as whales then we would all love them.

      Once we lable Orcs evil, then its OK to take their resources without compensation, enslave and oppress them, leave them in a condition of desparate poverty where they can't feed, cloth or shelter themselves properly and are desperate enough to work at whatever hard labor we give them, even if that hard labor is in foreign adventures.

      Orcs suffer from malnutrition, often look tired and depressed, dress poorly, don't use proper grooming products, often exhibit the results of poor medical care and many sleepless nights living on the streets or in the gladiator academies.

      Orcs exhibit many signs of mental illness. They seem to prefer Liberty to Security. Many are veterans lamely protesting war.

      Some speak strangely and appear to be paranoid as if everyone is out to get them. Some show symptoms of PTSD. They are substance abusers, crackheads, drunks, homeless degenerates, vagrants.

      Some call Orcs terrorists, but maybe its labeling them illegal, and despicable ruthless, evil, enemy, terrorists that leads to the Orc's and their families being hostile and angry.

      Perhaps its the policy of the Orcs being bombed, kidnapped, tortured, murdered, held without rendition, subject to reprisals and war crimes that lead them to assemble in the angry mobs which terrorize the establishment.

      If its what we are doing that makes the Orcs terrorists, that makes their quality of life so poor that its better to strap on explosives than sell any more of their children into prostitution, maybe there is an alternative that would cost us less in consequences than our present policy that we should kill them all before they kill us.

      Live Free or Die (-8.88 -9.49) IMPEACH

      by rktect on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:26:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  My brother always complained about this. (6+ / 0-)

      And apparently Tolkien caught some guff from his priest for it, too. You can't have characters that are beyond salvation. It ain't fair.

      Neat twist, though-- it never occurred to me that we are the orcs. Who's Sauron, then?

      -9.0, -8.3. A rabid lamb since November, 2004.

      by SensibleShoes on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:53:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Cindy Sheehan (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Cecrops Tangaroa

        Or, just maybe, the Mighty Kos

        Ann Coulter - Living Proof of Necrophilia

        by kamarvt on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:00:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Howard Dean, the mighty ;> (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        who Will Return (coming out 2012).

        Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

        by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:46:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  C.S. Lewis (8+ / 0-)
        argued that the part in The Two Towers where Sam overhears the orcs talking about some "typical Elvish trick" shows that even orcs have some idea of right and wrong ("even trolls love rock-and-roll"?). But considering that orcs are Frankenstein-like genetically-modified travesties of captive elves created by Sauron and his true boss, Morgoth, their "morality" was probably meant by Tolkien to be a self-serving travesty itself. The film of The Return of the King had an interesting sidelight in that the featured orc captain in the siege of Minas Tirith had a congenital "birth" defect, one severely shortened arm and hand (orcish reproduction, BTW, is a mystery in TLOTR, except somewhat for Saruman's urukhai). That orc captain must have advanced through intelligence, and he does assert that the "age of the orc" is at hand. It made me speculate that, if orcs can have "birth" defects, maybe an orc Buddha or Christ could be born and start a mass movement among orcs to compassion and kindness. But then I saw Independence Day as an allegory about the moral superiority of mammalian life, so maybe that's just me ...
        •  With apologies to Darksyde..... (19+ / 0-)

          But Orc and Ogre legends seem to date from pre-history and may be, and I stress maybe, related to the fact that both H. Neandertal, and H. Erectus were both around until about 30,000 years ago.

          Both were fearfully strong, and would have been very "otherly" in appearance.  Admittedly speculative, but as evidence grows that H. Erectus was thriving in South Asia while being extinct in Africa has given rise to the theories that "The Monkeys" and their leader Hanuman from the Ramayana may have been derived from interaction between H. Sapiens, and H. Erectus, which was quite ape like in appearance.  Considering the ancient age of the pre-Harappan civilizations, and the numerous submerged cities stretching from the Rajasthan coast to China which are extremely old, memories and legends of the "old people" would have still been clear in some areas where the submerged cities are yielding artifacts over 10000 years old.

          So, though "Orc" "Ogre" and "Monkey people" may be fanciful creations of gifted storytellers, their basis may be altogether frighteningly real.

          So, that's my plug for science and why the study of the pre-Harappan cities is so important for mankind.  If we search for our ancestors, we have to also go to South Asia, and under the sea.

          Bush's lies kill American troops. Any questions?

          by boilerman10 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:07:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  OK, you get a 4 (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            boilerman10, YukonJack

            just for knowing all that stuff off the top of your head.


            "For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" -8.13/-7.03

            by donailin on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:26:27 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Whoa. (5+ / 0-)

            That is informative, amazing, cool, resonant, and about a dozen other things.

            THANK YOU for sharing those thoughts.

            THIS is why I love DK. Intelligent people abound. I learn something every day.

            I'd give you a 4 if I could, but I can't give any ratings because, well, Markos decided I'm an orc.

            Live the questions. - Rainer Maria Rilke

            by Kimberly Stone on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:21:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  So they didn't make it to the Ark? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cnmbfa, jlb1972

            And that's why the Neanderthals and other pre-sapiens vanished?

          •  Very cool stuff, boilerman10 (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Cecrops Tangaroa, boilerman10

            there was a book out a few years ago that I passed on and have always regretted, about "wild man" legends of Europe and their possible roots in real pre-history. Your Asian perspective is wonderful, especially Harappa which I've always found very interesting. But there are submerged cities over 10,000 years old? Or are there pre-urban cultures at those sites with clear cultural connections to later cities? I just finished reading Vine Deloria, Jr.'s Red Earth, White Lies, which is his over-the-top-spiteful championing of Native American "creationism" against the hated white scientists. He claims that Native American legends may recall living mastodons - and even dinosaurs! I kind of doubt he's doing more than just jerking the chain of "white science," but all such conjectures are fascinating.

            •  A recent find off Rajasthan.. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Topaz7, jlb1972

              In about 70 feet of water reveals a good sized port city with almost Assyrian style ramps and stairways and flat "Mastaba" like structures in an orderly fashion.  It is the largest such find since a somewhat smaller but still interesting village style community found in about 65 feet of water off the coast of Kerala.  Vedic temple sites are also known off the coast of Tamil Nadu, and there are similar structures all up the Bay of Bengal side of India, all in 65 to 75 feet of water.

              The interesting thing is that there may have been some sort of ark, but this is much farther to the west in the Tigris and Euphrates valley area.

              The Rajasthan find has been the key to a recent paper I read about how certain building and structure shapes are fundamental to the human condition.  Ramps, stairways, flat topped strucures of stone construction seem basic to humans.  Further, the oldest human remains ever found of a non-fossilized nature were recovered during a drag of the Rajasthan find, and date from before 9800BC.  This blows the timeline for the old testament, and denial will not make this go away.  The layout points to a religion of Vedic origins.  Artifacts found at one site, I think the Kerala site are 12000 years old and were found in a temple complex that has a Vedic style layout.  Looking for the original #1 religion?  It's the Veda.  Not the bible.

              So, what happened to H. Erectus on the sub-continent?  He was likely forced off his range by the advancing ice.  He finished his days on the Indonesian islands it is thought.  By the time of H. Erectus' demise, his brain case capacity had grown to nearly 1200 c.c. with over 900 c.c. as an average.  H. Erectus started out with around 700 c.c. or so of brain, so he got smarter during his long survival reign.

              What happened to the cities?  It is almost universally thought that the melting of the ice in the Himylayas carved out the Rajasthan plain in a river that was at least 25 or more miles wide.  the melting ice all over the world caused steady ocean level increases and since the cities couldn't be moved, they were abandoned.  In the turmoil that the rising oceans caused, the first Harappan civilizations along the Indus took shape and grew to be powerful and these were exceptionally advanced, and well ordered.  We can thank British conceit for not giving the Harappan and pre-Harappan civilizations their proper due.

              As for native creationism, mentioned above, it is indisputedly true that the native Americans hunted Mastodons and Wooly mammoths, had to avoid Smilodon [Saber tooth cats], and I have no doubt that very large forms of Monitor lizards not unlike very large Komodo Dragons and crocodiles were known and had to be avoided by the first Indians, so native American creationism is simply common sense.  There is no mysticism there, except that that has been added.

              So, thanks to everyone who has read this and I hope you will follow the further reseach into the pre-Harappan cities and find it as facinating as I have.      

              Bush's lies kill American troops. Any questions?

              by boilerman10 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:51:43 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  As an aside. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sharoney, barbwires, jlb1972

                We need to remember that the Egyptians gave the "Atlantis" legend to the Greeks.

                The Egyptians were excellent mariners, and would have probably traded with the people along the coasts of the Indian Oceans.  

                It is very likely, and I subscribe to this theory, that the Atlantis legend is really about the demise of a major pre-Harappan capital during the rise of the oceans at the end of the ice age. The long, slow death of the city was fancified into into a story with a moral lesson.  So when you hear Donovan singing "Way down below the oceans, that's where I want to be, she made me...." don't think of the Agean, the Med, or the Atlantic.  Think instead of how the sorrow of a people long ago who watched to ocean devour their beautiful city, left to ponder what they might have done differently to keep the gods from destroying everything they loved and cherished.....from a sandy shore in India.

                Bush's lies kill American troops. Any questions?

                by boilerman10 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:20:51 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Much food for thought, thanks! (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  Deloria is holding out for Stegosaurus though! And he thinks that the mastodon memories may be from historic times (Jefferson thought it possible too) and says that he actually doesn't think it possible for tribal memories to stay intact for 10,000 years or so. Deloria's book seems mostly to be a poker-faced jibe, though it has a lot of great interest. Thanks again.

                  •  The Indians came 25000 years ago (0+ / 0-)

                    from Siberia.  There is no doubt that they hunted Mastodons, Mammoths, and that Smilodons were about.  It was the early Indians who hunted the Mastodon to extinction in North America, and since Smilodon was a specialized predator, he went out with the Mastodon too.  The Mastodon was likely here until around 5000 to 8000 years ago I think it was.  So, it isn't fanciful at all, it's a common sense reality.

                    Oral tradition suffers from one thing only, embellishment.  The plain truth likely went like this: "We came here from Siberia, there were many animals that we hunted, including big Mastodons and Mammoths, and the bravest would try and get the teeth of the big hunting cat with long fangs, but they were very dangerous and we tended to stay away from their lairs.  Life was hard, but the land was clean, though there were some old people of the forest.  But, they stayed away from us, and we did not bother them for they were stronger than any 2 of the strongest men, though gradually we did not see them anymore after some time."

                    Now, simply embellish this with mysticism, and wonder, and realize that with each succeeding generation a little more will be added, and soon you will have a complete cosmology, from A to Z.  That's how oral tradition survives.  

                    Bush's lies kill American troops. Any questions?

                    by boilerman10 on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 06:05:42 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Deloria (0+ / 0-)

                      would jump down your throat about "It was the early Indians who hunted the Mastodon to extinction in North America" - the real point of his book is to attack the Great Kill-Off narrative, and he's pretty convincing on some points (e.g., other smaller, more huntable "game" species survived).

                      •  It's a matter of biology (0+ / 0-)

                        Pachyderms like mastodon and Mammoth had very long gestation cycles, and lenghty growth to maturity time frames.  A reduction of just 2% a year in herd number would have eradicated either large pachyderm in a surprisingly short period of time.

                        What saved the giant pachyderms for so long was the migratory patterns of both the Indians and the pachyderms, but gradually the giants were thinned and died out.

                        Attempts by ID types to explain away 100,000 years of unwritten history, including at least 8,000 years of history involving H. Sapiens and their interaction with H. Neandertal, and H. Erectus are going to reach for the moon for justifications.

                        It is only common sense to understand that the Indians life was a daily grind for food clothing and shelter, but it was a simple life and a predictable one, generally, too.  But when we add ID and religious prejudices into the equation, that which is simple common sense gets worded up and complicated.

                        thanks for the reply.

                        I have to go to work now, but will gladly reply if you leave a comment late tonight.

                        Have a great day!

                        Bush's lies kill American troops. Any questions?

                        by boilerman10 on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 06:27:57 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You too! (0+ / 0-)

                          I thought when I was reading it that there must be some ecology of scale that he's overlooking. I think his "short-scale" Native American-style "creationism" is largely a nasty polemical stance and wonder if 12 years later, given the political changes, he would still endorse it (he hates Christianity), though he's a pretty diehard provocateur and gadfly (the book is a real kick in a lot of ways). I've also been reading Charles Mann's 1491, which seems to show some real  questions about the kill-off scenario among certified scientists. The issue has a lot of political and moral ramifications now, somewhat as with the Social Darwinist misuse of the Yamamamo (sp?) Indian anthropology research - which itself has been severely questioned lately. This is a very enjoyable subject for me, as I'm sure you can tell ;) Later.

                          •  Was unable to get back home until very late. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            Made a mistake above, I said 9800 BC, it's 9800 years, or 7800 BC.

                            I can get too pedantic, but when studying native Americans always to remember to err on the side of common sense.  The Indians were practical, frugal landsmen first, and came by this through millenia of experience.  Occum's Razor seems to have been invented by someone studying native Americans....i.e. the best answer is the simplist....I think it goes.  

                            As for pre-Harappan civilization, we have to unlearn everything that we know from the British, and their archeological expeditions in pre-1947 India.  The unfolding discoveries are refuting a great number of British claims, and further discovery of just how widespread H. Erectus was in southern India continue to be found here and there.

                            So again have a great day, and thanks for the conversation.

                            Bush's lies kill American troops. Any questions?

                            by boilerman10 on Thu Jul 06, 2006 at 04:23:27 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

      •  Definitely Kos (0+ / 0-)

        I feel his malevolent will spurring me on even now ...  How I hate yet love him!

        "When watchdogs, bird dogs, and bull dogs morph into lap dogs, lazy dogs, or yellow dogs, the nation is in trouble." - Ted Stannard

        by jrooth on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:56:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'm no better than they are (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DMiller, asskicking annie

      because I think they are ignorant, hateful and unevolved.

      The Christian Right is neither Witness Every Day

      by TXsharon on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:53:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You destroy them (0+ / 0-)

      for the sake of your children and for the betterment of the world.  It's them or you, good or evil.  There is no justification, only action.

      You don't have to "give in" to anything.  You just have to do what must be done.

    •  An orc-human entente (0+ / 0-)

      is what we need. I have to admit, they of the right sometimes look a little orcish to me, too ... kind of Uruk-hai, mebbe.

      In Middle-earth, you will recall, orcs were descended from elves who had been tortured and mutilated (or in a less commonly accepted explanation, made by Morgoth out of rocks and slime.) I mention this only in order to suggest a path to rejoining our lost brethren, because they can demonize us all they like but we are clearly all made of the same stuff, and can therefore find common ground.

      Also it bears mentioning that orcs are the servants of evil. We've all got to get off that one, too. Everyone believes he is serving good, so if we can just talk about what serving good might mean in practical terms, it could result in progress.

      What I'm getting at is that we of the left are guilty of the same kind of thinking, and we really do have the means to start making a change.

      What happened to the time when we were all one big happy Middle-earth family, USA?

    •  I thought you meant 'easy' (0+ / 0-)

      in the sense that the orcs are pushovers. And they are. Look at how many of them fall in comparison to the "good guys".

      Must read: MLKJ's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail." It will surprise you.

      by AlanF on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:13:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hehe, just remembered my current magnetic (4+ / 0-)

      bumper sticker

      Frodo failed, Bush has the ring

  •  If you're right (11+ / 0-)

    and Rove divide and conquer has succeeded to this extent, then I'm afraid all is lost.

    I live in a largely republican neighborhood.  I can't imagine that my neighbors feel this way.  I surely hope that they do not.  I certainly don't feel this way about them.

    They know my family's politics and political affiliations.  We've had respectful (and occasionally heated) political discussions.  We're still friends and we still socialize.  I don't think they'd socialize with orcs.

    I truly hope you're wrong.

    •  I'd not like to think so, either (30+ / 0-)

      And I certainly don't me "Republicans" when I'm talking about those who see us as monsters.  But those who have bought into this new idea -- political vilification as entertainment, loyalty to the tribe over all...

      Yes, I think that's exactly how they see us.

      Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

      by Mark Sumner on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 09:32:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Call a Dog a Dirty Name (23+ / 0-)

        and then kill it.

        It is a well-known tactic, first invented to describe those evil mammoth-huggers in the next cave over...  

        About the only defense is to stop the current "government by boogyman" strategy (also a well-known tactic).  If they start losing elections, they'll stop doing it.  (The main difference between Republicans and the DLC.)

        •  Yup (15+ / 0-)

          Hitler tactics.
          Turn the liberals into scape goats.  
          Blame them for everything bad.
          Turn them into not-humans.

          •  hitler tactics? (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            pyrrho, Fabian, ebbak, boofdah, possum

            The very use of the phrase "hitler tactics" demonstrates that you are doing the very same thing as what he is describing: calling your enemy a dirty word  to justify hating them.  I think Hitler's tactics were a little worse than posting someone's address.  Just a little.

            I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

            by Krexent on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:53:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Wrong! (and I don't troll rate much as of late) (19+ / 0-)

              Just wrong.

              It's a fine, thoughtful comment, and an historically correct analogy. Hitler did that! Duh? Scapegoating and, dehumanizing groups of people, working with mass media and... - That wasthe evil bastard's modus operandi, his claim to fame, and a key part to his holding power over a somewhat compliant and afraid recently abused nation. The Treaty of Versailles and "Krystallnight' and..

              it was all "Orc."

              Forgive me, I'm sure that your opinion is valid somewhere over the rainbow but..

              Wrong, thanks for playing. Anne coulter should be playing third base for the Nazi World Series and making movies in her off hours.

              Thank you Lord, for this generous rain and abundant lightning. -8.88 -5.08

              by SecondComing on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:24:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You are comparing a mountain to a mole hill (0+ / 0-)

                To say that conservatives are like Nazis is an enormous overexaggeration.

                If looking at your opponents as inferior and using the media to your advantage is enough to be called a "Nazi" then half the people that posted comments in this diary are also using "Nazi tactics".

                Where are there the massacres?  Where are liberals being forced to wear a symbol to identify them?  Where are the politicians making speeches about striking down liberals and killing them (obscure blog references aside).  Where are the signs saying "Don't buy from liberals"?  Where are liberals being denied the right to practice their religion or to have an education, just for being liberal?

                No one's using Nazi tactics here.  You are just dehumanizing your enemy, just as much as your enemy is doing the same to you.  BTW, I am sure plenty of convservatives have called liberals nazis on many an occasion, equally without validity, and equally overexagerrated.

                Classic sign you have no basis for an argument: making Hitler references.

                I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:13:22 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  this is bigger than a mole hill... (10+ / 0-)

                  The Nazis and their tactics didn't pop up over night. It was a slow, persistent, deliberate forging of the idea of dehumanizing the Jews. It took them years to get enough momentum to start "disappearing" individuals, families, neighborhoods. The Christian extremists are convincing "moderate" Christians that anyone not a devout Christian is "evil and going to hell". blah blah blah... I think you serious underestimate their seriousness about stamping out liberal, progressive thought. It's intolerable to them.

                •  Conservatives aren't Nazis (4+ / 0-)

                  but Ann Coulter is. The tactic of reducing your enemy to a state of non-humanity is classic fascist behavior, and since Hitler is the best known fascist there is it makes sense we'd use his name, doesn't it?

                  The "middle of the road" is where the chickens get run over.

                  by Eddie in ME on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:20:04 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  where would you get that idea? (0+ / 0-)

                    <center>Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting</center>

                    Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                    by alizard on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 02:43:11 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  actual platform of American Fascists - literally (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Eddie in ME

                    Just as a reference, I want to first make it clear that these guys are 100% Fascist, we can all call them that, we're not using our terms loosely or jumping the gun and using analogies improperly.

                    Now, do I have everyone's permission to compare the American Fascist Movement to fascists?


                    The following AFM "Platform" is a coherent set of ideas that synthesize American Fascism. The platform clearly states what is or is not Fascism. These are the universal beliefs that embody all those who believe in Fascism, without a distortion of racism like the history books or media portrays.

                    WHAT FASCISM IS NOT:

                    Racism or Nazism:

                    Races, though unique, are equal; individuals, however, are not. Regardless of color, men are not created the same, yet, each may use his or her unique talents for virtue. Beware of neo-nazi organiztations claiming to be fascist, under the guise of "White Nationalism" or self proclaimed "Aryan Fascists".


                    Fascism does not see history as class struggle, and denies that there is nothing to life, and power politics, except what one can put in one's mouth or pocket.


                    Internationalist institutions (economic, hegemonic, or other) cannot be allowed to erode the freedom and sovereignty of nations. The integrity of all cultures must be preserved.

                    Capitalism or Communism:

                    Both Capitalism and Communism are materialist systems that promote degeneracy and crush the human spirit. They consider nothing but man's basest instincts; but man cannot live on peace, land, and bread alone.


                    Democracy has become, inevitably, a popularity contest. Innovative candidates are prevented from rising, for fear of their being "unelectable." Who wins? Democrat or Republican, it's the same man everytime, the one deemed sufficiently bland for mass consumption, or worse: a flashy name with nothing behind it! No wonder we've become apathetic and cynical!

                    WHAT FASCISM IS:

                    Meritocracy or Timocracy:

                    The Degree of which men and women manifest honor and merit in the service of their country is determent of their place in civil society.


                    "Fascism now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism; that is to say, in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect."


                    "Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." OR "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

                    Cooperation or State Corporatism:

                    Though private property and free trade must be upheld and defended, business ultimately serves the greater good of the state, and must be guided towards Just and Noble purposes.


                    If there is such a thing as "good" and "evil", if there is such a thing a a right and a wrong way; is the right way always the popular way, the way a majority votes? No! Usually it is not. The majority votes the easy way: The path of least resistance, and is thus exploited by the current elite. Fascism alone has the moral courage to do the right thing. For the state, no matter what. Above all, a Fascist believes in virtue and will thus tell you the truth, and not just what you want to hear! Truth, courage, integrity!

                    •  Thanks for the comment (0+ / 0-)

                      although after reading that platform I want to go hug a fascist. Can they be any more warm and snuggly with their description of that form of government?

                      The "middle of the road" is where the chickens get run over.

                      by Eddie in ME on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 04:57:18 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Devil in the details (0+ / 0-)

                        With so much right wing populism, you find yourself with a 3 stage reaction.

                        They say two things with which you find yourself surprised to agree (albeit nervously).

                        Then they say a third thing which swings way away from where you thought they were going with the first two things, and you end up not only with something you are opposed to, but to which you just say, "huh?"

                        Take for example, this phrase from above:

                        "Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."

                        No matter how warm and fuzzy the rest of their platform might have been, that one little teeny tiny phrase gives the game up.

                        "Nothing against the state."

                        It's Bush Jr.'s "Unitary Executive" writ even larger.

                  •  Musssolini or Franco (0+ / 0-)

                    would probably be a better match, though.

                  •  Coulter, yes perhaps (0+ / 0-)

                    Coulter does have a lot in common with Hitler's philosphies.  However that was not the comment that was made.  The comment was made as a general response to a diary about ALL "conservatives" in which they were accused of using "Hitler tactics" in dehumanizing liberals.  Coulter is not in a position of power, and does not represent anything but the smallest minority of conservatives.

                    Yes I would say a lot of "conservatives" do look down upon "liberals".  I do not think a lot of them use "Hitler tactics" and I refuse to agree that that was an appropriate remark.  It is in my opinion, as I stated, just as much dehumanizing to "conservatives" to call them Nazis as anything they have done to in return.

                    I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                    by Krexent on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 08:11:15 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  where are the massacres? (5+ / 0-)


                  It can happen here. We have many, many institutions in place, put there to protect us against people like A. Hitler and G. Bush. In this, we are more fortunate than the Germans in the 1930s. So far, these institutions are holding, though they are clearly creaking under the strain. We have Guantanamo, and we have secret prisons in Europe, and we don't know who is being taken there or what is being done to them.

                  If you think comparing Bush to Hitler is unfair, I have this simple thought experiment: Of all the nasty things Hitler did, or ordered done, which among them do you believe would be beyond Bush, had he the power and an objective that said nasty things would serve?

                  The evidence I've seen indicates that Bush is a sociopath. Arguing about whether one sociopath is worse than another is largely pointless. Arguing that one sociopath is similar to another -- well, that might bring some useful insight.

                  I am further of the opinion that the President must be impeached and removed from office!

                  by UntimelyRippd on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 11:43:56 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  wrong, pay attention (0+ / 0-)

                    I did not say comparing Bush to Hitler was wrong... the comment she made was not directed at Coulter or Bush, it was directed at conservatives at large.  I do not consider Bush=Hitler either, but I would say it's at least closer to the truth.

                    I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                    by Krexent on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 08:14:57 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Forgive me, I didn't go to college enough (0+ / 0-)

                  Leni.. What was her germanic "Aryan" last name? Coulter?

                  I'm right, you're wrong - get over it.

                  Thank you Lord, for this generous rain and abundant lightning. -8.88 -5.08

                  by SecondComing on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:11:28 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Every trip begins with a single step n/t (0+ / 0-)

                  Thank you Lord, for this generous rain and abundant lightning. -8.88 -5.08

                  by SecondComing on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 01:01:43 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •   I am not (30+ / 0-)

              calling anyone a dirty word to justify hating anyone.   Hitler was a brilliant propagandist.  I am refering to his propaganda techniques that led to the justification of the murder of the Jews.  He first scapegoated them -- blamed them for the economic collapse of Germany, the loss of the first World War; claimed that they got fat while true Germans suffered, then refered to them as rats, dirty, etc, in general implying that they were sub-human.
              This strategy eventually allowed the general German population to more readily accept the round up and extermination of the Jews.
              Obviously no one is rounding up, sequestering and exterminating liberals. But I do see in what Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter and their ilk have been spewing for the last decade a borrowing of Hitler's tactics to manipulate people into viewing liberals as sub-human.  I do not believe right wingers are sub-human.  

              •  Before Hitler, the church. (6+ / 0-)

                Actually, it was the CHURCH that laid the foundation.

                Check it out.

                Judensau (German for "Jews' sow") is the derogatory and dehumanizing imagery of the Jews that appeared around the 13th century in Germany and some other European countries. Its popularity lasted for over 600 years and was revived by the Nazis.

                The Jews, typically portrayed in obscene contact with unclean animals such as pigs or owls or representing a devil, appeared on cathedral or church ceilings, pillars, utensils, etchings, etc.

                Imagine looking up at the church (which was the government back then) and seeing a stone carving of a pig, and behind the pig, feeding from its anus, is the depiction of a Jew. Imagine that.

                Hitler took it to the ultimate extreme, but the church laid the firm foundation for his scapegoating. For hundreds of years.

                The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits. - Albert Einstein

                by racerx on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:41:38 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Not yet (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                Not rounding up, sequestering and exterminating liberals - yet. They've been very up front about wanting to.

                Doing a bang up job at the rounding up and sequestering, at least, of some other groups.

                •  not yet and not ever (0+ / 0-)

                  Not yet?  As if you expect them to.  I certainly hope you've not demonized nearly half the US population to that degree.  Most of those you call conservative are perfectly kind people who have no desire to kill or hurt anyone.  On the other hand, some conservatives, particularly our administration, are doing abominable things to non-Americans.  If you were to draw a comparison between Bush and his treatment of "terrorists" or Iraqis then yes, there's at least a little to back your up.  But conservatives on a mass campaign to kill off liberals?  Don't even try to argue it, the idea is absurd.

                  I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                  by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:21:00 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  It doesn't take half. (6+ / 0-)

                    It takes a very small percentage to actively take part. The remainder of that "half" need only stare on dumbly, and they will have played their role.

                    I am further of the opinion that the President must be impeached and removed from office!

                    by UntimelyRippd on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 11:46:16 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  then explain this (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    splashy, Pandoras Box

                    Why.. WHY are pundit as broadcasting the idea of poisoning a sitting supreme court judge.. to post detailed information about Editors of newspapers for suppose "treasonistic" reasons.. to go after thier childern. Explain this to me, i really want to hear your justification for it

                    •  because (0+ / 0-)

                      Because you are talking about a few extremists.  This is not in any way whatsoever condoned by the government or huge majority of republicans (99.9%).

                      I assume you are refering to this:

                      "We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee,"

                      Coulter said.

                      Why does anyone even listen to this woman?  She likes nothing more than to work her opponents in a frenzy.  This woman is bonified nut case.

                      The posting the addresses was removed from the site, and it was posted on a fairly obscure blog.

                      In both cases, this is a looooong way from being equivalent to the Nazi government or Hitler.

                      I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                      by Krexent on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 08:04:32 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  I'm generally in no danger (6+ / 0-)

                    from my wingnut neighbors. You're probably not in danger from yours.

                    However, an ongoing propaganda campaign demonizing "liberals" suggests strongly that sooner or later, I'm likely to be in danger from your neighbors, and you're likely to be in danger from mine.

                    Dehumanization works a lot better on people you don't know.

                    People who are ordinarily kind, decent people are not when roused into an angry mob.

                    Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                    by alizard on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 02:46:43 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  And I was in a group of these (3+ / 0-)

                    "perfectly kind" people on Sunday night for a community July 4th celebration when Curtis Sliwa (who I didn't know was invited) whipped up these normal, "kind" people into a liberal-hating mass. Do I think they wanted to kill their neighbors? No. Did they want them to feel bad and outcast? Absolutely.

              •  please (0+ / 0-)

                Perhaps you are not trying to call anyone a dirty word, but the fact is, you succeeded in doing so.  Just because Hitler was brilliant does not mean that everyone and their Uncle doesn't consider being called Hitler one of the worst possible insults imaginable.  How would you feel if you were compared to him?  Outraged, and with good reason.

                Spouting hatred has occurred throughout all of American history.  It is called free speech.  It does not make one Hitler.  The comparison of "conservatives" to Hitler in their treatment of "liberals" is like that of comparing a spoon to an axe.  They may both be made of metal, but you'll never cut a treat down with the spoon, or eat soup with the axe.

                I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:17:48 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Gonna try one more time, (8+ / 0-)

                  then I'm done.

                  I agree with you: it is absurd to argue that "conservatives [are] on a mass campaign to kill off liberals."  Somewhere someone may be arguing this, but I am not.  

                  You accuse me of the fallacy of "false generalization," taking an observation valid to a part and applying it to the whole.  The hate propaganda seen in Germany at the time in question and used to de-humanize the Jewish population bears some resemblance to the demonization voiced by the "pundits" mentioned, and used to de-humanize "liberals."  That is all I'm arguing, and it is a valid argument.

                  It is irrelevant who is or is not outraged by the comparison, including "every body and their uncle."

                  Criticism of the specific analogy is relevant; outrage against statements not made is not.

                  •  I will acknowledge this (0+ / 0-)

                    That yes, some pundits have used tactics that very slightly resemble Hitler... but is a long, long way from what he did.  I still think it is a not good metaphor, and it distracts more than it draws attention to the actual events.

                    Also, I did not see where you were referring to particular pundits or other individuals.  When you use the word "they" in response to an article regarding the way "conservatives" think I assume you are referring to "conservatives".

                    Now that I understand your intended meaning a little better, I am not as completely in disagreement, but I am certainly not going to be convinced it was appropriate.

                    I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                    by Krexent on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 08:20:43 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  I want the worst insults imaginable for Bush. (3+ / 0-)

                  He is one of the worst human beings to have shared the planet with me, in these four+ decades. Just because he wears a nice suit and comes from a good, wealthy American family, and has managed to become president, and has never been caught with a dead rape victim in his freezer, doesn't make him less evil than he is. And I can see no bottom to his abyss.

                  You don't want to hurt his feelings, that's your business. You want to believe there is any crime he wouldn't visit upon anyone in his way, given opportunity and expedience, that's your business. I believe differently, and I believe that every single day bears witness to my belief.

                  I am further of the opinion that the President must be impeached and removed from office!

                  by UntimelyRippd on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 11:50:57 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  You are wrong (26+ / 0-)

              The dehumanization of political opponents -- which is precisely what this post is about -- was the core of the Nazi's message in the 1920s and 1930s.  There is a very close parallel between the rage they exploited -- which came from Germany's apparently incomprehensible defeat in 1918 -- and what the hard-right reactionaries have done here in the United States -- where the rage comes from America's apparently incomprehensible defeat in Vietnam.  That the rage is confined to a minority of the population makes no difference, because it is felt with an intensity that makes up for its numbers.

              Many posters including myself (and a non-poster, George Soros) have pointed to the alarming similarities between what has happened in the United States over the past 15 to 20 years and what happened in Germany after World War I.  The differences of course are huge and important, but at the psychological and political level the similarities are frightening.  That the dehumanization of fellow citizens (other than Blacks, let us never forget)is central to the reactionary movement.  The big difference is that it is not focused on a religious or ethnic group the way the Nazi's hatred was focused.  That's a big difference, but it doesn't obliterate the movement's underlying emotional content.

              •  rage (0+ / 0-)

                Rage has occurred many, many times in history... In the US and otherwise.  Hitler existed only once, and never this in country.  I don't think we're anywhere near that, though we are definitely in a place that is disturbing and outrageous in many ways.

                I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                by Krexent on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 08:22:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  There's a great article... (10+ / 0-)

              That Kenneth Burke wrote back in the 50s/60s. It's called "The Roetoric of Hitler's Battle.'" In it he analyzes Mein Kampf in order to "discover what kind of 'medicine' this medicine-man has concocted, that we may know, with greater accuracy, exactly what to guard against, if we are to forestall the concocting of similar medicine in America."

              He wrote it as a cautionary, which included analyzing the tactics Hitler used to sway his audience to his ideas. Those tactics are, according to Burke, something worth guarding against so as to prevent them from continuing. He notes back then, how easy it is to fall into them. He also points out that those tactics are already being used.

              Many of them started out as small and subtle with a ramping up as he went along.

              "Computer. End holographic program...Computer? Computer?"

              by kredwyn on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:56:52 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Terror Tactics (0+ / 0-)

            "People are strange
            when you're a stranger

            Faces look ugly when you're alone."

            "Everybody should get from street."

            Run screaming to your house, double bolt the door.  Hate Americans.

        •  They've BEEN losing elections for quite awhile. (9+ / 0-)

          Yet they're still in power.  Funny how that works.

          •  When 'fighting against orcs', (9+ / 0-)

            the right-wing believes that breaking the law, breaking treaties, and cheating are okay.  With the Neocons and the Republican politicians, the ends justifies the means.

            This "ends justifies the means" thinking is something the right-wingers share with totalitarian governments.  And most Republican politicians have no respect for the law, as it applies to them.  The GOP believes in accountability only as it applies to other people.

            The GOP is the party of hypocrites and criminals.

            -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

            by sunbro on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:18:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  will they? (12+ / 0-)

          I imagine it will be a few more years, but in other countries groups who use the sort of eliminationist rhetoric being used by elements on the right don't just give up when they lose elections. These people believe they are effectively on a mission from god to purify the world. They may not say that explicitly, at least not in mixed company, but that is fundamentally what they are all about. It's a belief system that can be used to justify anything.

          "The power to dominate rests on the differential possession of knowledge" -Foucault

          by Jett on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:34:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Indeed, the area where I live is dominated..... (4+ / 0-)

        by right-wingers, with lots of red-neck farmers and ranchers too (not Jon Tester types!). Their local newspaper publishes with a complete right slant, and functions more like an arm of the chamber of commerce and the Repug Party. The local radio station runs Hannity, Rush, Savage (Weiner), and others of their ilk, 24 hours a day. They keep voting for, and because they compose a majority around here, electing, the most mindless, idiot, Bush-bot, servile Repugs you've ever seen.

        You've hit on it DT.

        In trying to counter them, whether it be a bumper sticker on my car (which is cause to be chased and "flipped-off" around here), a call-in to the radio station, a LTE to the local rag newspaper, or trying to sign-up new Democrats at the shopping center, I, and the few others who do the same, are attacked as if we were........ (gasp) ORCS!

        Funny though,
        ....I always thought THEY were the Orcs!

        And I think I am right.

        -7.00/-4.77 "Public campaign financing, media reform, and ballot integrity, are all necessary ingredients for a healthy democracy!"

        by Hornito on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:01:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  They don't feel that way about *you* (11+ / 0-)

      After all, they know you, and know you're human.  It's the nameless liberals, the nameless Arabs that are orcs.

    •  He is (0+ / 0-)

      Don't worry, he is right and wrong.  He is right that some think this way, but wrong to say all do.

      I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

      by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:59:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  !00% correct (15+ / 0-)

    Your theme, I believe, goes hand in hand with the recent (IMO brilliant) diary describing how Conservatives see issues coming down to a matter of "who" rather than "what".

    Behold the Lambs of Kos

    by greeseyparrot on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 09:38:01 PM PDT

  •  And they don't think Bin Laden is an Orc (22+ / 0-)

    Or else they would still be trying to hunt him down

    WASHINGTON, July 3 — The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

    The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

  •  Brilliant! (4+ / 0-)

    They really do!
    Man this diary needs some recco's. So, Okay, I Write

    by IsraelHand on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 09:39:37 PM PDT

  •  us or them (6+ / 0-)
    what strikes me is the "us or them" mentality these people have.

    I don't know how to break that or dent it or what to do about it.

    I'm kind of stalling for time here...They told me what to say. George W Bush, 03-21-2006 10:00 EST Press Conference

    by Tamifah on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 09:44:30 PM PDT

    •  I spent the weekend with 'us' (11+ / 0-)

      I was "them" among the "us" this weekend and somehow managed to bite my tongue. It hurt, it really did. But I was outnumbered and sure as hell didn't want to be perceived as one to "ruin" the weekend for my brother before he's shipped off to Iraq.
      I'm still trying to figure out how to diary the experience.

      •  for diary (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        My suggestion is to try different points of view - if you have problems with yur point of view, try someone else's POV.  You could make a composite POV also.

        We must never lose it, or sell it, or give it away. We must never let them take it from us.

        by Fabian on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 03:44:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Suggestion on what to do about it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      boofdah, possum

      Don't adopt it yourself, and eventually, "they" won't either.

      I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

      by Krexent on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:58:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  well (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        when you're talking about a group of people that you're not a part of, you have to have some sort of way to describe them

        and "them" and "they" are the english words for that

        ok that sounds like something bush would say that's fucked up

        but anyway

        i think it would be more precise to say that I'm floored by the "Us first at everyone else's expense" attitude I see a lot of from the right wing crowd

        I'm kind of stalling for time here...They told me what to say. George W Bush, 03-21-2006 10:00 EST Press Conference

        by Tamifah on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:41:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  the reason I quote (0+ / 0-)

          The reason I quote "conservative" "liberal" and in this case "they" is because I fail to recognize that such groups exist in reality.  There are people who self-describe themselves as belonging to one of these sides, but I don't believe believe there is any clear definition of where one group ends and another begins.  They are more concepts then true divisions.  Both words fail to ever describe anyone accurately and both serve to create an artificial separation between people who likely do agree on a good many things.

          It's certainly your right to use any word you wish, I am just implying that I don't fully agree with it.

          I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

          by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:52:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Not Orcs...Easterlings... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    javelina, greeseyparrot, boofdah, eru
    Dunlendings, Corsairs of short, the "other". Auslander. Vermin.

    This is what the Republicans brand the liberals of this country as...orcs are the sub-humans that exist outside the borders of this nation.

    People in Eurasia on the brink of oppression: I hope it's gonna be alright... Pet Shop Boys: Introspective

    by rgilly on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 09:55:13 PM PDT

  •  Obviously, they're wrong (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    papercut, boofdah, majcmb1, Karmafish, Jimbob, jay23

    We're not the Orcs, they are.

  •  Not Orcs, Jews (11+ / 0-)

    The rightwing hates the NYT because they say it's a Jewish-run conspiracy machine, spitting out propaganda.

    That's what the conservative people I know say about the NYT when they criticize it.

    Orcs, Jews, it's all the same to Bush's rural rightwing nutzoid base.

    This isn't about liberals, this is about racism, and the fact that the GOP is defined by racism, and can't survive without it.

    •  Bingo (3+ / 0-)

      Take the the SWIFT bank records story. Roughly the same story also appeared on the same day in the LA Times, WSJ and WaPo, but the flying monkeys only descended on the NYT. Why? Those papers aren't emblematic Wingnut dogwhistles for "New York Jews" like the NYT is-- and, sadly, that's what its about.

      Destiny: A tyrant's authority for crime and a fool's excuse for failure. --Ambrose Bierce

      by kingubu on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:15:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  and blacks in New Orleans (15+ / 0-)

      my aunt this weekend:
      "Isn't it about time FEMA stopped supporting New Orleans? Has it been a year yet? How long do we have to keep paying them?"

      •  Holy shit! (0+ / 0-)

        "Leave the gun ... take the cannoli." -8.38, -7.69

        by Balam on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:49:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  yeah, I'm sure that's what my face said (6+ / 0-)

          but my mouth kept quiet
          I was surrounded by them all weekend, even went to church with them and thought my head would explode.

          •  Mine would pop like a tomato with a firecracker (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            theran, splashy, boofdah, zigeunerweisen

            in it if one of my relatives talked like that around me.

            "Leave the gun ... take the cannoli." -8.38, -7.69

            by Balam on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:59:00 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Sorry (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            splashy, papercut, nehark, fiestygrrl, keefer55

            But I disagree with what you did. If you have the facts then speak up! Do you really want your family to remain ignorant and in the thrall of Faux News and Thrush Limburger? Yes, you may piss them off but you might also get them to think; particularly if they consider you an integral supportive family member (in a general non-political sense) and respect you. I personally have had enough and refuse to let bigoted, GWB-supporting, or "America right-or-wrong" type drivel pass unchallenged in my vicinity. If all the Democrats and independents (including our elected officials) would speak up with the truth and the facts we'd actually appear to stand for something.

            Life isn't a battle between good and evil, it's a battle between signal and noise.

            by ChemBob on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:58:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I was in a delicate situation (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              splashy, jlb1972

              The reason for my visit was to see my brother one last time before he left for Iraq. I wanted to keep my political views out of it because I didn't want to be targeted as the one who "ruined" the family gathering for my brother. Most of them know I'm the "godless liberal" in the family.

              The last thing I wanted was to upset my brother. There was enough tension and anguish as it was.

              Had it been under different circumstances, I would not have been able to keep quiet, damn the consequences.

              Being in hostile territory and picking a fight would not have been cool. I had to endure a 4+ hour ride back with some of these people, as well.

              Also, had they been in MY home, I would have told them what idiots they were.

              They find it easy to dismiss my views because:

              1. I don't go to church
              1. I am a single parent, never married, so that automatically makes me a "sinner" and, therefore, less of a person
              1. They know I've been living in Liberal Land for the past seven years so they consider ME out-of-touch

              Again, I didn't want my brother's last memories of me before shipping off to war to be bad ones, nor did I want the rest of the family to find some way to blame ME for anything that might have gone wrong. They would have, believe me.

              Maybe you'd have handled the situation differently, even if your own kin had been preparing for war, but you don't know unless you've been there, watching your brother cry at the thoughts of being away from his wife and 3 kids and the rest of his friends and family for at least a year.

              This situation called for diplomacy, not idiocy.

              •  Sorry again (0+ / 0-)

                Sorry for the difficulty of your situation and the temporary loss of your brother to Iraq. I hope he stays safe and well there. Why in Zeus' name did he sign up for the military? Is the rest of your family so out of touch that they supported him joining? Your bullet list of 3 facts about yourself indicate to me that you are a thinking human being; perhaps that is their real issue with you. I wasn't trying to offend you, just put a fire in your belly to speak openly to them henceforth. Frankly, I'm just so frustrated with everything going on that I don't know what else to do other than encourage everyone to speak up at every opportunity to counter the right-wing spin machine.

                Life isn't a battle between good and evil, it's a battle between signal and noise.

                by ChemBob on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 02:53:53 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm the most outspoken person in my family (0+ / 0-)

                  They usually EXPECT an argument from me. But this time was different.

                  Actually, my brother signed up for the military when we were in college, back in 1987 or 1988. He signed up then for the college money, from what he told me. I thought he was nuts, but then again, I understood the draw of having college paid for because our parents weren't well-off enough to afford giving all four of us kids a full ride. Both he and I (and later one of our sisters) went to college with full tuition scholarships--his for leadership, mine for academics, and my sister's for theatre and music.

                  Anyway, he served in the reserves then re-upped a couple more times. He eventually got into the National Guard, which is where he is now. His unit helped with the recovery and clean-up in Mississippi after Katrina devastated the coast. He just got word earlier this year that they were needed in Iraq. Kuwait, actually. First they were told it was for troop pullout. Now they're saying it's to help build a base. I just hope they don't change their mind from one of these and end up sending them to Baghdad or one of the unstable areas.

                  I totally understand where you're coming from. I did ask him about equipment and expressed my sadness that so many Guard units were overseas after Katrina, and so was their equipment. He knows I'm a liberal and I figure he knows I'm against this war. It was just not the time nor place to get on my soapbox.

                  But that doesn't mean I won't take the opportunity to express myself in future family gatherings. I have already heard a lot of crap from my grandmother about how sad she is that he's having to go. Next time she says that, I'm going to have to tell her it's her damn fault for voting for the warmongerers Bush and Cheney.

          •  was the church service full... (0+ / 0-)

            of patriotic symbols?  If so, you should look atthis.  Maybe you should look at it regardless.  Might be cathartic.

            "It's time for America to get REAL." -- Matt O. []

            by billlaurelMD on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:54:31 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  My oil matron cousin from NOLA said same (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        peraspera, splashy, keefer55, jlb1972

        She's Croesus' little sister
        She's followed the oil to the UK and an African country
        She knows the Cheneys socially
        She is a major Bush donor and went to his inauguration
        She lives in a NOLA suburb, and

        She was glad when "those people" were relocated to Baton Rouge and other parts because the crime in NOLA went down.  She made a remark like Babs' and said they're making out pretty well on the FEMA dime.  And she spoke as if we all just naturally saw it her way.

        •  as if we naturally saw it her way (0+ / 0-)

          same with my aunt

          I didn't say anything directly addressing her idiotic comment, but the conservative, war-supporting guy across the table from me DID. He said they're still cleaning up and thousands of people still don't have a home to go to.

          I added that they're still doing recovery in some areas, and no, it's not quite been a year, but almost.

    •  Bush's family... (5+ / 0-)

      ....are old-school anti-Semites. Bush himself might not be, but old Prescott Bush was good friends with the Nazis.

  •  But you're describing a small percentage (15+ / 0-)

    I agree the base of the republican party is pure hatred, but you're really only talking about a minority here.  It's exposing the base's hatred and irrationality to the other 'conservatives' that is the key.  We're not in a battle to 'win the hearts and minds' of the talking heads. Rants from the wingnutosphere like this really only help us.  After a while, any rational conservative gets just as sick of the crazies as we do.  

    If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

    by Nebraska Outsider on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:00:14 PM PDT

  •  They painted themselves into this corner (15+ / 0-)

    now they've resorted to demonizing anyone who disagrees with them...rather than admit to being wrong.

    Are there millions of them or will Rush's sole disciple make the six o'clock news with the byline, "Man shot dead by police after attempting to run down patrons standing in line at a local Starbucks"?

    Your point is well taken, the rhetoric is getting dangerous and we need to watch our backs.

    It can always be said we live in interesting times but never did I foresee times like this!

    Parties divide, movements unite.

    by Gegner on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:03:24 PM PDT

    •  Demonizing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Both sides have been demonizing each other long before today... and will likely do so long after.

      I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

      by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:02:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe. But moral equivalence? I think not. (8+ / 0-)

        Try this little test: post a comment on dKos in which you wish a painful, violent death for a highly demonized Republican or Right Wing thug.

        Care to guess how long before it's thoroughly decried -- and sent to the Hidden Comment page?

        "One does not discover new lands without consenting to leave sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andre Gide

        by pat208 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:58:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  no difference (0+ / 0-)

          Did you know the same exact thing would happen on every major Conservative blog as well?  And that the only reason it didn't happen was because the one comment to hunt liberals that I was able to find was on an incredibly obscure blog, of whom more people visited as a consequence of the reaction then ever saw it previouosly?

          I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

          by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:23:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  let me remind you of what happened (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            opinionated, peraspera, splashy, alizard

            when protesters personal info was posted on a conservitive blog AFTER said protester requested said information not to be published. They received death threats and the like.. So there IS a difference how how reactions are on both sides.

          •  you live in a perverse fantasy world n/t (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Oh God, I haven't read your book; I'm sure it was divine
            Especially the part where you turned water into wine

            by nasarius on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:31:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Wrong. Consider the 9540 Google hits (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sharoney, Mike Erwin

            ...on right-wing blogs for "Saint Pancake" -- as an appellation for Rachel Corrie.

            You have to wonder if even Gandhi would have stood a chance against people who take the death of a non-violent protester as an occasion to gloat and dance on her grave.

            People forget there are TWO heroes in the famous picture of the Chinese man in front of the line of tanks: the protester, AND the person in command who stopped the column to argue with him.

            If the latter hadn't had the courage to go human to human in that situation rather than just following the program (disobedient persons = orcs = collateral damage), the man would have simply been run over, like Rachel Corrie.

        •  You're right (correct, that is) (0+ / 0-)

          While on FReep et al, they'd all reply "me too!"

          "Question authority and the authorities will question you." Now more than ever!

          by armadillo on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:50:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Thats why I'm a progressive (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fabian, Elise


    by naufragus on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:08:42 PM PDT

  •  You're right (13+ / 0-)

    But that kind of tribalism is (unfortunately) the more normal state of affairs through history. It's liberals with our curious willingness to empathize and consider the viewpints of others that are the peculiar ones. The wingers are just continuing the millenia-old traditions of savagery.

    No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a part of a continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, [America] is the less

    by Alien Abductee on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:10:49 PM PDT

    •  You're right (7+ / 0-)

      And I think there's an idea in there I can't quite articulate... I've written about paradigm shifts before, but maybe this is really the shift and I missed it.  Is there any continuing value in tribalism (or nationalism)?  Can we really discard those notions and learn to embrace the other, to erase all the borders traced on our ental maps?

      If we can do it, should we?

      Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

      by Mark Sumner on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:34:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think we can, but they won't let us. (8+ / 0-)

        You speak of a paradigm shift, I know what it is, and have been trying to shout it from the rooftops for some time.

        The tribal system requires an 'other'. 'Til recently the other has always been another race, country, or creed; human beings. Then it became the very social structure that kept us together; government. Now they are the government, so it can't be that. It has to be liberals.

        The paradigm shift you and I are looking for, DT, is the corporation.

        It is the one non-human entity that is ripe for labeling as the other, not only is it ripe for labeling, it is also truly the other.

        It is what everyone hates: the christians, the poor, the disadvantaged; the entire planet hates it.

        Once we go there we can transcend this tribal BS.

        Ignore the base, hide our values, and chase the swing voter and we not only lose, but we fall farther behind.

        by k9disc on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:51:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  the value in tribalism or nationalism (13+ / 1-)

        is in the degree that either motivates us to expand our idea of self to include more people, to love our neighbor as ourself. seen from the perspective of a widening circle, they are useful tools; seen from a defensive, inward rejection of outsiders, they are an obstacle to be overcome.

        crimson gates reek with meat and wine/while on the streets, bones of the frozen dead -du fu (712-770)

        by wu ming on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:12:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  A liberal education (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        papercut, boofdah, ms badger, Julia Rain

        I see a lot of the problem being the decline of the public education system and of the very idea of public support for education. The tide toward egalitarianism and a liberal view of the other has gone out. We have an increasingly stratified society, and what it brings along with it is a more restricted view of education and what it's for. We have a retreat into the tribalism of religious schools and homeschooling. For the rest, teach-to-the-test education and a place at the bottom of the hierarchy. No need for anyone but the elite to be taught to think and evaluate other points of view.

        Perhaps my view is a little dark this evening.

        No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a part of a continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, [America] is the less

        by Alien Abductee on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:22:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Went to church with my girlfriends mom (13+ / 0-)

          on mother's day.

          Big megachurch with televised services. They had a rockin' band, real hip.

          Anyway, they were talking about Adam and Eve and the apple.

          I was struck with the idea that wisdom and knowledge was a gift from the devil.

          Anybody have any opinions on that?

          What does that mean for education? What does that mean for those seriously involved in these megachurches?

          I got to stop writing tonight. I am sounding a little crazy.

          Oh well, I'll just chalk it up to lack of sleep and no food.

          Ignore the base, hide our values, and chase the swing voter and we not only lose, but we fall farther behind.

          by k9disc on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:29:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I asked that question when I was eight years old (11+ / 0-)

            and was subsequently thrown out of churuch. I wondered why, if knowledge came from the devil, did everyone tell me it was so important to go to school.

            Unfortunately, most people never ask themselves these questions, because they are subconciously taught not to think for themselves, but to do what their church says.

            •  they did you.. (0+ / 0-)

              they did you a big favor huh?

              An 8 year old learning the lesson of intolerance.

              My DH asked questions at catechism class and then, when he refused to stop asking questions, he was sent to see the bishop.  His mom took him to the bishop (probably hoping for an exorcism scene no doubt). He asked the same questions of the bishop and was told that he was inpertinent and to go home and behave.  He went home to a good whipping by his mom.

              He wasnt welcome back into catechism class and thus his "soul" was saved :-)

            •  Again back to education (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              It seems to me a shift has happened re the purpose of education. At some point in the recent past we stopped seeing education within an Enlightenment frame, as a means to acting as a full human being and an informed and responsible citizen. In that view, education involves questioning everything, reflecting on everything in order to find truth, or at least better ways of living. Now people are being educated more for the purpose of becoming workers - to make a living. Questioning is suppressed in this corporatist paradigm because it doesn't add to the bottom line.

              No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a part of a continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, [America] is the less

              by Alien Abductee on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:01:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  You're not crazy (0+ / 0-)

            You should try Milton. He had a few opinions on it...

            No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a part of a continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, [America] is the less

            by Alien Abductee on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 11:47:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  more recently, try Rice or Leven (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Alien Abductee

              Memnoch, the Devil


              Satan: His Psychotherapy and Cure by the Unfortunate Doctor Kassler, JSPS

              have something to say about this.

              So, perhaps, did Mick Jagger.

              I am further of the opinion that the President must be impeached and removed from office!

              by UntimelyRippd on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:01:01 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  I've been a long time out of church (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Alien Abductee, jlb1972

            so correct me if I'm wrong, but said apple supplied 'knowledge of good and evil'.

            I interpreted this as being an almost Taoist sentiment of the problem of language and its inherent divisons and classifications. I.e., the attempt to understand the divine through purely human or corporeal means is a futile one. By engaging in the intellectual nitpicking of the inexhaustible aspects of creation (every new concept, like 'good', instantly creating its opposite) we fail to apprehend the whole, which is God. Or whatever.

            Actually, it's sort of like Derrida. Binary systems (like language) by their very nature prohibit definitive, all-encompassing conclusions. They strand us in ambivalence and doubt.

            The best Taoist line on this subject is something like:

            "What knows the world is mind. There is nothing the mind cannot know. The mind is one. If someone knew it, there would be two. Going from one to two is the origin of all delusion."  

        •  Elite to be taught? (0+ / 0-)

          To think and evaluate other points of view?

          I don't think so.  I believe their idea of themselves, as "elite", is that they do not have to think, and other points of view have no value, are beneath notice and have no right to exist.

          •  Technocrats (0+ / 0-)

            Governors always need an elite class of technocrats to manage the governed - people who can actually think and understand how others think in order to anticipate problems and deal with them. The governors themselves can stay as ignorant as they want, though that catches up to them sometimes.

            No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a part of a continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, [America] is the less

            by Alien Abductee on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 11:38:17 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  while that can be a workable government (0+ / 0-)

              model, when the "elite" is defined as "the good old boys network" instead of the competent, you get. . . the Bush Administration.

              Though I'm seeing more and more of this at the corporate level.

              While leaders who are boobs have existed as long as the need for leadership has, somebody who's reality-based has to be in decision-making positions... or the system lasts only as long as its inertia will carry it.

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 03:09:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  this work is (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hrh, Alien Abductee, condoleaser

        demonization as counter demonization.

        I don't think you intended that, but that's how it adds up to me.

        too see what you have seen can lead to only one proper conclusion... to engage the humanity of your adversary, but this metaphor inflames the needs to attack them, to protect our children.

        Do you see that?  It will make a lot of people feel "good"... a rush, a painful rush with an associated down.

        no offense intended, I understand you to be a very good person.

        •  I'm as flawed as the next person (9+ / 0-)


          However, what I want to suggest is that we don't see them as orcs.  There's a substatial difference in the tone and the quantity of vile being slung left and right.  Part of that may simply be the fact that they possess all the talking heads on TV.  I think part of the reason for that, part of the reason Air America hasn't been as successful as some people would like, even though there are certainly as many on the left as on the right, is that liberals really don't like to hate.  

          The desire to hate the other is part of what made people gravitate to the sides they're on.  That, I think, is the "theory" I'm putting forth.

          Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

          by Mark Sumner on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:23:35 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I see that (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            hrh, greeseyparrot, Alien Abductee

            I understand.

            And it's totally true, you are describing the "fighting monsters" framework, and accurately. But by invoking that, you take part in it, involuntarilly if need be.

            "Beware when you fight monsters, lest you become one", that's the warning to those that fight orcs, saying "they think they're monsters" means "they have become monsters".

            I don't think this has anything to do with your imperfections at all, just how meaning works.  It is clear to me, especially from your first comment as well, that you did not intend to demonize them, but it happens automatically.

            Ideas don't just sit in words, doing what they did on the stage of a blog or essay, they keep working after, in the minds of readers.  Logical conclusions draw themselves.

          •  I see your point--clearly. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            you are looking for the solution--but we have to get to the moment of truth before we explore creative and effective ideas of how to disengage the enemy.

            it's naive for us not to acknowledge staunch conservatives as "the enemy" in this context.  to refuse to acknowledge that is to dismiss the english language and no more.  and the first rule of engagement is, "know thy enemy".

            I'm glad you wrote this, because this thought has been something I've tried to clarify for myself.

            that is a great point about Air America:  I've tried listening--just a few times--and it kills my brain.  I find myself going yeah, I got it, shut up.

            we are better than that--so how do we fight it?

            for some, the answer will lie in the continued proper framing of issues (net neutrality was a hit, for example, bringing over the christian coalition and nra alongside w/, but for others, they still need "an other".  I've got k9disc's comment stuck in my head, about corporations being "the other".

            Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

            by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:16:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  how do we combat being treated... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Devilstower, papercut

              as "the other" then?  One possibility, though extreme, of what happens when you don't "counter-demonize" might be the Holocaust.  I for one am not interested in testing out that possibility.

              "It's time for America to get REAL." -- Matt O. []

              by billlaurelMD on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:05:56 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  you turn the real enemy (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                billlaurelMD, nasarius

                into "the other".  corporations, corruption, poverty.  this might be the insight on how to frame these issues.

                Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

                by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:23:20 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  not from what i have seen in my own research (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nika7k, papercut, ms badger, old wobbly

      people get ugly in times of conflict, but mindless eliminationalism and closed-minded tribalism are not default positions throughout history by any stretch. both angels and devils are present in our collective history, and people cross boundaries as often as they form ranks along them.

      crimson gates reek with meat and wine/while on the streets, bones of the frozen dead -du fu (712-770)

      by wu ming on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:10:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Of course there's good and bad (6+ / 0-)

        And there will always be people who go against the ugly tide in every time and place. But torture, for example, has been an acceptable feature of justice systems through much of history. Likewise, imprisonment at the whim of the leader. We're right back there. It's not what I would have ever believed possible when I think back over just my lifetime. To be replaying McCarthyism and Snopes trials and robber barons - it's like some brief bright bubble has burst and we're back in the darkness that was always there.

        No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a part of a continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, [America] is the less

        by Alien Abductee on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:49:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Amen.. (0+ / 0-)

        You should come to one of our town meetings.. you describe one of them with perfect clarity.  And this happens on a regular basis.

  •  True, but also revealing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    scrutinizer, condoleaser

    It is true that many people think that of "liberals" and non-Americans as a separate species... orcs if you will, or simply "Them".  They who are not like us, and therefore inferior.  This is a very basic human tendency, to define the boundaries of your tribe, to protect that which is within those boundaries, and to defeat or eliminate that which is outside of them.  It is the classic concept of "Us vs. Them."

    While your diary makes a good and valid point that this phenomena occurs and is indeed being applied regularly to people who are called "liberals" and to non-Americans, you are also making a grave mistake.

    You, by defining "conservatives" as "they" and by lumping them all into this same pattern of thought and behavior (treating liberals as monsters) are actually making the same exact mistake as the people of whom you are speaking.  Certainly not to the same extent as those who may see you and I as monsters, but you adding fuel to the fire of bigotry and categorization, nonethelsess.

    Some "liberals" see "conservatives" as monsters, some "conservatives" see "liberals" as monsters.  Some see them all as humans.  Some people don't see anyone as conservative or liberal, and just see them as people.  I would be such a person.

    I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

    by Krexent on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:12:25 PM PDT

    •  I don't want to draw a line (14+ / 0-)

      I'm a miserable tribe member, beset with doubts and afflicted with a tendency to enjoy a good argument.  If it were up to me, I'd welcome the "others" into the cave and we could all wave our fists and shout loudly and draw nasty cave paintings about one another.  And then, in the morning we all shake hands and go out to hunt up some mammoth.

      I'm just afraid these guys would think they could save the mammoth trip and boil up a little liberal stew instead.

      I really do believe that there's a qualitative and quantitative difference between the kind of discourse coming from the right and the left at the moment, and that in a large part it's reflective of the difference between the underlying assumptions of liberalism and conservatism.  Of course, that could be entirely a product of my own distorted perspective.  I don't think that's true... but then, I wouldn't, would I?

      Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

      by Mark Sumner on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:22:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The question is (7+ / 0-)

        Are we waving our fists and shouting at each other and making those nasty cave paintings or are they getting ready to start eating us.

        The anonymity of the Internet lets some people act out their most primitive desires that they would never do if we were standing in front of them.  Most wingers I know back down from the extreme rhetoric in person.  It's the point that they start acting out these killing fantasies that we need to be worried about.

        I think it will happen soon, although I hope I'm wrong.

        if (Kos) doesn't like what goes on here, he can start his own damn website! - Major Danby

        by Green Zombie on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:26:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  awareness (0+ / 0-)

        Well you are definitely far more aware of this psychological tendency, and being beset with doubt helps to keep an open mind.

        But of course there's some difference between the two groups, or else, they wouldn't be two groups.  Admittedly there are many who seek to fit in with their perspective "side", but I'm sure there's plenty of independent thought occurring on both the right and the left.    

        Also I have seen more than a few suggestions that "conservatives" should be outted as well, in revenge... hopefully it won't occur, but it would not be a great shock to me if it did.

        You know, on the other hand, I really need to start frequenting some of the "conservative" blogs and see just how hateful and rabid they really are.  Perhaps there is truth to it.

        I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

        by Krexent on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:14:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The list of 'respectable' Republicans (7+ / 0-)

      . . . decrying the call to hunt down innocent children is where? The vastness of the silence is worthy of broad condemnation and deep concern expressed in this diary.

      •  From the first diary of the first blog I found... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hrh, Noisy Democrat, boofdah, ms badger

        I registered on and immediately found this at the top of the posts:

        Just in case this is too complex, let me break it down further: if indeed some obscure blog encouraged all five of its readers to go looking for NYTimes reporters, we have the following things to say:

        1. This was bad. We no like.
        1. We have no idea what this has to do with us.


        Just out of curiosity, I did a very mild amount of research. I went to the obscure blogger in question to determine if he'd ever gotten more than 500 hits before the lefties lit him up like a Christmas tree - can't seem to access his sitemeter page. So I went and checked out the TTLB ecosystem - he's not in the top 4720 blogs, and then I got sick of looking. According to Technorati, literally all this guy's traffic is coming from the lefties who are griping about him. I can't find an identifiable right-wing blog who has linked him on this. On his front page before yesterday, no post had more than five comments, and a great many had no comments. It leads me to wonder exactly how many hours Glenn Greenwald spent looking for some right-wing blog who had said something irresponsible like this.

        Admittedly not very eloquent, but certainly not silent either.

        Next I went to Michelle Malkin's site...

        Conservative readers have asked me to publish the private home addresses of NYTimes reporters, editors, and photographers.

        My response: NO.

        I refuse to do it. I strongly urge others not to do it. Your home is your castle. It should be, anyway. There are some legitimate, narrow circumstances under which publicizing a private home address makes sense (the Kelo case, for example, or the counterprotest at Justice David Souter's New Hampshire home, or documenting the erosion of the California coastline). But "For The Hell Of It" is not one of those reasons, in my book.

        She doesn't seem even aware of the part about hunting people down, at least it's not mentioned anywhere.  Either way, it would seem that many Conversatives are opposed to the "outtings" and disagree with them.

        I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

        by Krexent on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:50:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They are refusing to acknowledge their (7+ / 0-)

          own complicity in whipping up the phony outrage over the NYT's real estate puff piece. "We have no idea what this has to do with us," is a bald-faced lie and/or a sign of utter amorality. Glenn Greenwald has the story about how events unfolded.

          "I strongly urge others not to do it," is a far, far cry from anything approaching condemnation. Malkin published the names and addresses of student anti-war protesters on her site and kept them up after she was told they had been threatened. Even if one were to assume that your implausible assertion of Malkin's ignorance is true, this does not begin to justify her blindly ignoring the train wreck that resulted from her her own vitrol.

          "It leads me to wonder exactly how many hours Glenn Greenwald spent looking for some right-wing blog who had said something irresponsible like this."

          Horowitz is hardly an obscure figure. From one of Hunter's comments:

          Horowitz -- there's the interesting case. It was a reporter under him, someone whose work is found both at Front Page and Discover the Network, that first published the personal info of the photographer he was attempting to intimidate. Too far, or does Horowitz think that was a perfectly valid action to take?

          Children were the targets of these vile vermin. This utterly despicable and reprehensible conduct has no place whatsoever in any society that has the slightest pretense of being civilized. Republican silence on the subject of their own culpability remains deafening.

          •  they demand you denounce (0+ / 0-)

            ward churchill.

            did you denounce your ward churchill today?

            be very specific in your condemnations, that's the way of a free nation.

            in my opinion  only.

            •  not even close (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              Ward Churchill is association by same vague area on the political spectrum. That's absurd.

              This is association by specific tone on a specific issue. Have you read what Malkin and others wrote about it? It wasn't very surprising to see some idiot say they should "hunt down" the NYT photographer.

              Oh God, I haven't read your book; I'm sure it was divine
              Especially the part where you turned water into wine

              by nasarius on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:39:46 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Ward Churchill's dishonesty and offensive words (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              el cid

              . . . were not inspired by Democratic leaders or progressive bloggers frothing at the mouth non-stop with blanket demonization.

              What types of offensive speech should be protected by academic tenure and how it should be properly handled is a separate discussion. It is in no way analogous to prominent Republicans' relentless calls of treason and traitor against any who would dare criticize them.

              •  my point (0+ / 0-)

                guilt by association, all broad brushes, are tools of ignorance only.

                I do not envision all conservatives as thinking I'm an orc, but then, I engage them in conversation regularly, and am aware of how to assert our humanity into our national dialog.

                It's one of the few things regarding which I wish people were "more like me".  Mostly I just wish people would be themselves...

        •  I haven't really searched for a link, (0+ / 0-)

          but according to Hunter she was very much a part of this happening.

          Michelle Malkin has so far issued no correction, and is for now ignoring the fact that, once again, a story she hyped and over-the-top actions she incited were based on false information. Again.

          clearly she's smart enough to back out as though she was judicious about this from the start.

          Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

          by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:24:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I don't know (0+ / 0-)

        I don't read right wing blogs.

  •  great diary... (0+ / 0-)

    But you should have posted everything as lib-BRUL, as Rush would say.  


  •  ROCK ON!!! And FUCK YOU all ROVITES!!!!!! (0+ / 0-)

    Wonderful stuff. And I wish someone would kick William Bennett in the balls.



    Somewhere in Texas a Village is missing its Idiot.

    by RoddieH on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:24:05 PM PDT

  •  Not Orcs, Morlocks. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wu ming, amberglow, nasarius, Elise

    John Hodgman said so on the Daily Show back on the May 17, 2006, show.

  •  Chomsky and Zinn on LOTR (5+ / 0-)

    This is one of the funniest things I've ever read on the internet:

    I know it's not exactly on-topic, but it's still genius.

    To be on-topic: I don't know if you can fight someone who thinks you are an orc except to build a metaphorical mirror that can show them who the orc really is. Assuming you are fighting someone capable of rational self-reflection, which I fear we are not.

    "The power to dominate rests on the differential possession of knowledge" -Foucault

    by Jett on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:28:20 PM PDT

    •  that'll NEVER WORK (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      you can't "prove they are the orc".

      that is the way of conflict and civil war only.

      I still maintain most of those that think that conflict and civil war are the answer are pampered naive children that are not the type to march in the street to mearly appear earnest, let alone fight in them.

      The solution is to engage and discover.

      Discover what?

      Discover the humanity of your adversary, and they will discover yours as well.

      This is a fact, the only way.  The only possible way, and it works.

      But sometimes you have to fight?  Sure sometimes, and those that really know when that is, when you HAVE TO, don't speak lightly of it.

      Such as myself.

      •  how? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Discover the humanity of your adversary, and they will discover yours as well.

        That seems to be a complete non-sequitir. How does the first lead to the second?
        What has the left ever done to deserve the vitriol and lies directed at them? The outrage over the NYT "Escapes" puff piece is the most recent and most absurd example of how anything will be torn to shreds.

        Just a few weeks ago a diary decrying the use of the term "trailer park trash" hit the rec list. There are undoubtedly some shriekers who contribute nothing here on dkos, but the overall tone seems to be good. Contrast this with LGF, where everyone enjoys giggling over the death of Rachel Corrie.

        Oh God, I haven't read your book; I'm sure it was divine
        Especially the part where you turned water into wine

        by nasarius on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:47:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes - Right-wing bloggers (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          el cid

          ...refer to Rachel Corrie as "Saint Pancake", as I remarked upthread. 9540 Google hits on "Saint Pancake" -- hardly a sign that those using this phrase have any scruples about dancing on the graves of (even non-violent Gandhi-like) political opponents.

        •  non sequitur (0+ / 0-)

          no, discovering a persons humanity, an adversaries humanity, is a mutual thing, it happens simultaneously.

          It comes from engaging in respect... seeking what you can respect of another person's character.  Contrary to the broadly ignorant strokes that mobs would paint crudely... people do have redeeming qualities, and their humanity is common... lack of humanity of any sort is the exception.

          The outrage you condemn, that I also condemn, is not universal throughout a group of inhumane orcs.

  •  Ha! Cheese-eating Orcs indeed! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stand Strong, Elise

    "Leave the gun ... take the cannoli." -8.38, -7.69

    by Balam on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:33:56 PM PDT

    •  Cheese-eating orcs (5+ / 0-)

      who saved our asses in the War of Independence.

      Every time a wingnut brings up how ungrateful the French are for rescuing them in WWII, let that one fly...

      Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

      by Simplify on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:54:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah! If it wasn't for the French we'd all be (7+ / 0-)

        speaking Eng... um ... you know what I mean.

        "Leave the gun ... take the cannoli." -8.38, -7.69

        by Balam on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:01:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Let's thank France for Independence Day (8+ / 0-)

          It seems we never forget to make fun of France when it comes to mentioning WWII.  Oh, ha ha, we saved your asses.  

          (Note that no one in the USA ever, ever mentions the partisan French fighters who fought the Nazis while official France collaborated -- after all, many of the Resistance were Socialist and Communist, so they weren't real people.)

          Yet we seem to forget that without France, there would be no United States of America.

          But then, this is just like politics in the US:  we expect France and its people not only to be grateful for US intervention in WWII, but for them to be therefore be eternally and slavishly in agreement with every knuckle-headed thing our government does in our name.

          I guess what many in our country want are not allies, but stooges.

          •  And yet, (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            greeseyparrot, Simplify, el cid

            we were quick enough to betray our alliance with them by signing a separate treaty with England, when our alliance with the French precluded that.

            If the majority can vote away my rights today, then they can vote away yours tomorrow.

            by grada3784 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:48:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You and I can remember allies if gov't doesn't (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              greeseyparrot, Simplify, jlb1972, Balam

              One of the U.S.' major goals after WWII was to help the postwar governments arrest, spy on, expel, and otherwise break up the very partisans who had fought the Nazis all across Europe and who massively helped us with area denial and intelligence.

              But then, many of them were Socialists and Communists, so even if they did give up their lives to fight the Nazis they were still Communist scum in our foreign policy establishment's eyes.

              You know, I'm not sure, but if I had been a Frenchmen who ran to the hills and gave up everything I'd ever had and watched my friends die and dedicated my life to fighting the Nazis, never knowing we would win, and then after helping win WWII have our big ally come in and punish me, and instead be all friendly with the pro-Nazi Vichy types, it just might leave a bad taste in my mouth.

              But that's probably just me.

          • eternally and slavishly in agreement (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            el cid

            You talk like that's a bad thing.


  •  That's it (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stand Strong, Elise

    that's how to understand a conservative

  •  I really like the Elder Scrolls Orcs (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Devilstower, Jett, Harkov311, Elise

    They are fun to play, and a challenge to kill.  Even for my level 50 Breton battlemage.
    And while I also like your Orcish analogy, it seems to me that this isn't new.  It's been the xenophobe's M.O. for many long years-They are more human, more moral, more valid than you or I or the "illegal alien" or the Iraqi baby or "fill in oppressed minority here"...  

    •  Yeah Elder Scrolls (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I beat Oblivion just a short while ago.  Even on my tricked-out comp it chugged in places, but oh so worth it!

      And to address the analogy, it seemed to be one that Tolkein himself acknowledged.  He once said, I believe, "in WWI we were all orcs."

      All your vote are belong to us. Warner/Feingold 2008

      by Harkov311 on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:01:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  How 'liberal' became a dirty word. (26+ / 0-)

    Conservatives have succeeded in demonizing liberals by reviving certain very powerful memes from antisemitism. Open expression of antisemitic stereotypes against Jews is no longer socially acceptable, but the impulse towards this kind of thinking is still widespread in this country, and conservatives have learned how to feed it and exploit it by redirecting these stereotypes against other out-groups.

    Thus liberals are "rootless cosmopolitans" incapable of genuine love of country; they are "parasites" trying to rob the honest working man; they hate Christianity and seek to destroy it; they are materialists, hostile to the realm of the spirit; they are pornographers, out to destroy the family and corrupt children; they are pursuing a world state; etc. The single most powerful of these stereotypes-- the one that has been most useful in turning Americans against liberals-- is the "blood libel": in supporting abortion rights liberals aim at the mass slaughter of innocent infants.

    These stereotypes are centuries old, deeply rooted, still very powerful. Those who peddle them-- the Coulters, O'Reillys, Buchanans, Robertsons-- know what they're doing. They absorbed antisemitism with their mothers' milk, practiced it secretly all their lives-- and they're overjoyed they can again indulge in it publicly, for profit, simply by employing "liberal" as a codeword for "Jew."      

    •  'Rootless cosmopolitans'= Jews (7+ / 0-)

      At least, in some places, that's the euphemism, lest you be accused of anti-Semitism. And god only knows that conservatives have never been friends of Jews.

    •  Liberals as the new Jews (11+ / 0-)

      Yes.  Darn it, you make me want to say "ditto."

      What's happened over the last decade is that all the "armory" once employed by racism has been recycled for political purposes.  In fact, there's nothing to Rush and Coulter but the same arguments that once would have been employed against Jews, or Blacks, or Irish.

      While it's easy to see the talking heads as just a side effect of the problem, I'm more and more convinced that this sort of division as entertainment is the problem.

      Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

      by Mark Sumner on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:44:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  NYTimes is seen as a Jewish paper too (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        theran, hhex65, nasarius, boofdah, eru

        --their shorthand is NYC=Jewish, and SF=gay.

      •  OK. Now this is creepy... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rhubarb, boofdah

        I had a dream several years ago...

        We were performing at a park, and there was fireworks, or so it seemed.

        Next thing I knew people were running and screaming. I thought,"I don't remember the park being so close to the armory."

        It was tanks and small arms rolling over people.

        Horrible, horrible dream and I remember it so vividly. I thought of it when I was composing my GBCW diary in my head while driving, and you just conjured another spirit of mine.

        We will be doing a show tomorrow in a park in Michigan.

        Thanks DT.

        Damn late night blogging.

        Sleep tight all...

        Ignore the base, hide our values, and chase the swing voter and we not only lose, but we fall farther behind.

        by k9disc on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:21:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The new Jews? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Devilstower, nasarius

        Try the actual Jews.  Conservatives are typically trying to say one of the following things or something similar:

        ``Jews are causing my problems from the top down.''

        ``Blacks are causing my problems from the bottom up.''

        ``Immigrants make me feel inadequate.''

        ``He's gay.''

        ``She's upptiy.''

        ``I don't want my daughter having sex with black guys.''

        ``I am concerned that this Jesus thing isn't working.''

        Mapping typical conservative words on to these is an interesting exercise.

        Fake Canadians are total hosers.

        by theran on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:42:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  liberals are the new jews... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eru, Legolas

      as neocons are the new nazis...

      We've completed the circle of hatred.

      I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

      by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:06:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Speaking of orcs (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jett, nika7k, Pam from Calif, annefrank

    Someone once asked me if I had learned anything from going to war so many times. My reply: Yes, I learned how to cry.
    Joe Galloway

    by BOHICA on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:38:55 PM PDT

  •  Why is welfare bad? (6+ / 0-)

    Because the Orcs will get it too.

    Why is immigration bad?

    Coz it lets the Orcs in.

    etc etc etc

  •  Destruction of Social Capital (8+ / 0-)

    Back in the day, folks belonged to organizations that bridged political differences.  This made it difficult to demonize:  sure that guy's a liberal but dammit he's carrying the bowling team on his back so he's alright.

    Two things that are destroying social capital:

    1.  atomization
    1.  megachurches

    Atomization has been going on since the 1950s (Robert Putnam blames it on TV--maybe he's right).  Megachurches have destroyed many of the remaining community based organizations and of course have replaced them with a monolithic Christian conservatism.

    "This machine kills fascists"--words on Woody Guthrie's guitar

    by Old Left Good Left on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:40:48 PM PDT

  •  I recently drove down to Florida, and was just (17+ / 0-)

    shocked by the tone and tenor of Right Wing Radio.

    It was totally unreal. They really want blood.

    I was this close to writing a GBCW diary about how stupid them Dems were for not taking this threat, and it is a serious threat, seriously.

    I believe you are right about the word liberal translating to orc. We were subhuman and all of their language was dehumanizing. It was really scary. And this was from not only the RW blowhards, it was coming from the 'church' which made it even more scary.

    Well I got back and thought better of writing that diary and conveniently shoved it to the back of my mind.  

    Your post reminded me exactly how scared I was, not cowardly fear, cold unfeeling fear; the kind that makes you want to get ready for the last stand.

    Sorry to be so dark, and serious, but that is exactly how I felt, and this diary spoke in a metaphor that is the perfect fit.

    I have been thinking that the Rabid Right is ready to stomp, and I feel that way again. Anybody else waiting for the next shoe to drop?

    Ignore the base, hide our values, and chase the swing voter and we not only lose, but we fall farther behind.

    by k9disc on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:45:31 PM PDT

    •  The Stand (9+ / 0-)

      Well, if that's the case, we should hold the next Yearly Kos in Boulder, rather than Vegas.

      •  King's best book bar none. (0+ / 0-)

        I prefer Micheal Crichton, especially his fiction on so called "Global Warming."

        then again since I was born in Vegas, I like Hunter S Thompson and John O'Brien and consider Crichton and King and Clancy all useful tools for mindless entertainment..

        Thank you Lord, for this generous rain and abundant lightning. -8.88 -5.08

        by SecondComing on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:32:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  you LIKED the Creighton book on.. (0+ / 0-)

          on (against) global warming?  You prefer that over The Stand?  Yikes.  

          Isnt that like comparing real literature to a propaganda pamphlet?

          HST will forever live in my heart :-)

          •  Rest assured, it was 'snark.' (0+ / 0-)

            I tned to get ahead of myself and write diametrically opposed to what i was attempting to communicate and occasionally don't put the snark tag on it.

            for instance - por exemplo - Teenaged children approaching adulthood have the freshest and most openminded outlook and they are the planet's future means in SecondComingVoice:

            "The damn idiot teenager ate an entire bottle of aspirin and I had the pleasure of taking him to the hospital and stay awake way past my bedtime and I was already insomniac worrying my sorry white butt off over some godforsaken thing like "Global Warming" and even TV tennis didn't work the next morning and Toni Morrison writes well but can't put me to sleep and.. and having nameless doctors send me another bill that I refuse to pay due to elitist Republicans that have taken over a flawed but functional nation and I really will shoot...

            Something like that.

            Happy 4th of July. I gotto go and meet a female Democrat that has been e-mailing me incessantly regarding an obscure race to unseat a rooted asshole Republican but maybe she's cute or has connections or..

            Never stop.

            We need our country back for our kids even for people born sterile or heaven forbid folks that didn't procreate.

            Thank you Lord, for this generous rain and abundant lightning. -8.88 -5.08

            by SecondComing on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:07:00 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  On Rightwing radio talk shows (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      there are entire segments committed to mocking liberals and liberalism and of course - laced throughout their programs. The Rightwingers Hate list is so long from years of conditioning that the inciting by MaulkinCo could very well create a tragedy.

      "YeeHaw!" is not a foreign policy.

      by annefrank on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:45:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Redstate overdose (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      It sounds like you ventured into a thicket of good old red state hate.  You cant just mainline it without some preparation like you did.  You also cant be so harsh on the Dems in FLA because they were not in the streets rioting against right wing radio the day you drove through town.

      Sure, there is plenty of malaise you could blame them for but its hard to rise out of that context, as if scales fell from the eyes in one moment.

      Its not easy as all that.  Besides, there are constitutional issues around limiting even the flatulent utterances of a blithering fool, such as you heard on your trip into the sudetenland.

    •  that's a diary (0+ / 0-)

      I'd be very interested in reading.  I can't listen to Air America--it sounds like ranting to me--I would never be able to listen to right-wing radio.

      but it's important to be aware.

      Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

      by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:30:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  you should try... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tmo, k9disc, papercut, greeseyparrot

        Thom Hartmann.  He rants occasionally, but ... he's also extraordinarily thoughtful about the times we are going through now.

        What exactly is it you don't like about left-wing ranting?  Stooping to the right-wing's level?

        "It's time for America to get REAL." -- Matt O. []

        by billlaurelMD on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:09:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I should disclose that I haven't heard much, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I don't have xm--but I'm always on the road as a consultant, so I rent cars with xm.  I'm not sure who all I've listened to beyond rachel maddow and randi rhodes.

          this is what I don't like:  they have adopted the neanderthal radio format of everyone tripping over each other to agree, as well as the rant and shock format.  

          the first time I listened, it was a few dj's (? not sure who they were) analyzing religion, and it was a  headache-y, pointless conversation--they were trying to "reclaim religion", if I recall--but they sounded so impressed with themselves when they were just annoying and vapid. it was late at night and I was headed from the airport to the hotel, and I remember thinking, please lord, don't let this be air america.

          colbert is entertaining.  it doesn't seem as though air america have found anything that would stand on its own entertainment or other value.

          for the right wing, it's not a problem; they love the drivel that feeds their inner rage (sorry for stereotype).

          but I think a lot of people on the left will ask for more.

          what are your thoughts on air america?  I was actually looking into getting satellite over the weekend--and was leaning towards siruis for howard stern rather than xm.  but xm has a live feed mp3 player now, and siruis won't have it until Q4.

          do you think air america is heading towards quality?

          Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

          by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:41:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Randi is not one of my favs... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            for the reasons you cite. Rachel Maddow is good, actually; she's pretty fact-based rather than rant-based.

            I actually got Sirius radio to listen to Air America before they did their XM deal.  I listen to a mix of progressive radio in DC and Sirius left. The progressive radio carries lots of Air America programming.

            "It's time for America to get REAL." -- Matt O. []

            by billlaurelMD on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:53:04 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  k, good to know (0+ / 0-)


              Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

              by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:55:50 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  There are other good programs (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                on the weekends (for instance, Thom Hartmann, RFKJ and Mike Papantonio). And yes, Rachel Maddow is great. Stephanie Miller (Jones Network, but carried on my AAR station) is entertaining but fairly empty. As for the rest of them (Ed Schultz, Al Franken, Randi Rhodes), huge egos and poor listening skills make me regret every time I give them another try. Randi can sometimes connect the dots with blinding insight, and Al sometimes has good guests, but you have to sift through a lot of garbage to find it.

                Must read: MLKJ's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail." It will surprise you.

                by AlanF on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:09:36 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  i know how you feel (0+ / 0-)

      a couple of years ago there was this rightwing nut who made my life a living hell. he was a customer at a store I was working at and was always nice but once he discovered my political leanings he became obsessed with trying to convert me. followed me, waited outside my place of work, came to my house, did things to my car, etc... it was really scary but what i remember most was how he'd call me and accuse me - as a liberal and therefore representative of all things evil - of destroying the country by supporting gay marraige, a women's right to chose, etc. he even accused me of causing forest fires because of my wanting to save trees???, anyway ... it was so weird but he was so emotional that it scared me! most of the time i had no idea what he was so upset about. it was like he'd listen to rightwing radio, which he admitted to and it would get him all hot and bothered so he'd call the only "orc" he knew and let loose all that toxic hate. (he's also one of those "support bush" callers you hear on C-span's Washington Journal - one of the crazy ones from PA)

      anyway, i know how you feel because that's how i felt and it has always made me curiousas to how i could make someone hate me so bad that he'd want to hurt me simply over a political viewpoint. creepy!

  •  Excellent and interesting point (7+ / 0-)

    Have you watched many children's shows? The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and the Mighty Morphing Power Rangers always ended up battling robots. Tolkien's protagonists battle orcs and the uruk-hai. It is essential to make the mass-destroyed enemy into non-humans, or the viewers cannot enjoy the slaughter.

    My children are grown now, so I'm not sure what is popular with the kids. But you can bet that their cartoon war heroes aren't slaughtering human beings with families and causing collateral damage that involves death and injury to children. And that's how the MSM really contributes to recruiting, like a time bomb set to explode in fifteen to twenty years.

  •  one of the best moments in LOTR (11+ / 0-)

    is sam's reflection on the slain man of harad, wondering whether he'd rather be home, whether he had a family, etc. tolkien couldn't bring himself to have empathy for orcs, the fact that he problematized the easy dehumanisation of war is worth emulating, and extending as best as one can.

    you nailed it, DT. they do see us as orcs. as best as we can, we should remember that as bloodthirsty as their rhetoric can be, we must not fall into such a mindset ourselves, and we must remember that their motivations are all too human.

    crimson gates reek with meat and wine/while on the streets, bones of the frozen dead -du fu (712-770)

    by wu ming on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:02:21 PM PDT

    •  Not to be technical (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wu ming, Mike Erwin, Fabian, boofdah, jlb1972

      But Tolkien's orcs were man-made monsters(they didn't have families), so I'm not so sure that it's a matter of Tolkien not bringing himself to have empathy for them so much as he just didn't have empathy for them and didn't intend them to be pitied because of what they are and represent.

      Otherwise, I like your response.

      •  Orks and Orkishness (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wu ming, boofdah, jlb1972

        Tolkien doesn't stick with one explanation. In some places he says they are created from dead matter, in others that they were bred, tortured, and corrupted from Elves (and later Men). (Of course the latter explanation would corrupt the corruptor more than the corruptee.)

        AFAIK, the Orks represent first, peril, and second, anti-role-models. Orkish virtues (courage, toughness, etc.) are neutral; Orkish vices (no compassion, reckless destruction, etc.) are evil.

        Narratively, the Ring, Sauron, Saruman, the Nazgul, the Orks, etc. all appear as enemies; thematically, power, power, power, Wraith-ishness and Ork-ishness all are our enemies.

        No returns for privilege; full returns for labor! Labor has a right to all that it creates.

        by Mike Erwin on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:46:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Tolkien had a problem here ... (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AlanF, wu ming, papercut, Mike Erwin, jlb1972
          knew it, and couldn't resolve it. Were Orcs made by the Dark Lord? Then evil is creative. Were Orcs really corrupted Elves? Then Orcs have souls. And so on.

          What happens on DailyKos, stays on Google.

          by Jon Meltzer on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:49:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Tom Shippey (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            papercut, Mike Erwin

            Tom Shippey discusses Tolkien's view of evil in his excellent book J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century.  In short, Tolkien tries on both medieval views of evil, first, the Boethian view that evil is simply the absence of good, and second that evil is the opposite of good (I can't remember whose idea that was -- I'm in Europe right now and horribly jet-lagged...)

            Tolkien's orcs talk, and don't necessarily look like monsters.  They think they're doing the right thing.  Chilling, and very recognizable, actually.

          •  Not About Orks (0+ / 0-)

            The stories are about the world, various heroes, and their choices. Since Tolkien never tells us why the Orks fight, how the Orks live, etc. we can only speculate. Still, what little we see can serve as an anti-role-model, can't it?

            No returns for privilege; full returns for labor! Labor has a right to all that it creates.

            by Mike Erwin on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:23:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  It's both (0+ / 0-)

            In the whole of Tolkien's work, there were orcs who were once elves but corrupted by Melkor;  and there were the orcs that Saruman/Sauron created.

      •  Orcs bred, and how (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wu ming

        Despite the movie shots of the production of Uruk-Hai, the Orcs were in fact bred, did breed, and did so with great efficiency, and since they retained the immortality of their Elvish origins, Orc population control was a big issue that was usually solved by neverending war between Orcish chieftains.

        Hey, Republicans: We Brought It On. :)

        by cskendrick on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:36:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  csk - (0+ / 0-)

          this is interesting, is it from The History of middle Earth? I've never seen this account. Tolkien changed many things in his overall muthology as he went along, and this is one I'd like to know more about.

          •  From the Silmarillion... (0+ / 0-)

            (This is paraphrased, but I think I got the voice of Tolkein down pretty well.)

            When the first dark lord, Melkor (whom the Elves call Morgoth), learned of the awakening of the First Children of Illuvatar, he had several of the Elves captured and made into his slaves. He broke them, and bred them, and corrupted their nature through pain into the race of Orcs, who hate Elves above all living things it is said, because they recognize in their distant cousins what they should have been, and became not.

            Hey, Republicans: We Brought It On. :)

            by cskendrick on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:27:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  I object to 'they' (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wu ming, possum

      they is a broad brush

      groups are largely abstractions, when we speak of them this way.

      "they" don't think we are orcs, certain insane people may, and certainly this diary is about a real phenomenon, demonization, it is also and exercise in demonization at the same moment, ironically, and unintentionally, I suppose.

      How widespread is this insanity among conservatives?  Well, widespread, but not total.

      What pisses me off is the way to solve this is to learn the humanity, to have diplomacy and cultural exchange.

      If the answer were really to fight, the fight will not be mounted by people that think going to the street to have your free say is obsolete!  Where will the battles be held?

  •  Thanks for expressing my thoughts so well (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peraspera, middleagedhousewife

    Democrats have been the Enemy for the past 25 years! And you're correct - any amount of corruption and evil is justified because their crimes are insignificant compared to beating back the Enemy and maintaining full control of the government.
    In Dengre's latest diary (which should be on Rec list) is an email from Abramoff to the CNMI folks - identifying Democrats as the Enemy in order for him to gain another business deal.

    "YeeHaw!" is not a foreign policy.

    by annefrank on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:39:12 PM PDT

  •  Let's not euphemize. (13+ / 0-)

    They dehumanize us because they can't win on logic, common sense, or empathy.  They dehumanize us to manipulate public opinion against us.  

    They don't think we're orcs.  Many of them would probably admit, if forced to, that liberals are human beings deserving rights, privileges and protections equal to conservatives.  They use dehumanizing rhetoric  against us because they believe that winning is everything, that the self is more important than the community, that truth is fungible and that ethics are for losers.

    I simply think it;'s better to state the truth as nakedly as possible before resorting to metaphors, euphemisms or exemplum.

    "... Just so long as I'm the dictator." - GWB, 12/18/00

    by Bob Love on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 11:40:22 PM PDT

  •  Cheese-eating orcs (0+ / 0-)

    Not only are they French, but they eat CHEESE!

  •  Imagine the little raped girl was white? n/t (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Glinda, nika7k, pat208, nehark, armadillo, el cid

    Thank you Lord, for this generous rain and abundant lightning. -8.88 -5.08

    by SecondComing on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:07:57 AM PDT

    •  and blonde, and missing in Aruba (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SecondComing, Glinda, nika7k, Fabian, armadillo

      then there might be coverage, even round-the-clock fascination.

      •  There's something here that I've been missing... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SecondComing, el cid

        ...brought to light by this diary. Looking at the WWI and WWII propaganda posters, I finally made the connection with the Aruba White Girl stories. Sheesh. Here I thought they were just trying to distract! (Call me slow. Very, very slow to catch on.)

        The United States of America has become One Giant Funny Farm.

        by nehark on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:30:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Funny girl? Animal Farm? (0+ / 0-)

          Human Animal hybiyds?

          When Streisand dies and Orwell rolls over. They both giggle and have unnatural coffin ghost sex.

          And George W. Bush is spinning on a skewer in hell over an American Flag that just keeps burning on American-Made Oil-Based Halliburton Briquets with Dick the Mick Cheney turning the very scalding handle.

          I'm remeniscing towards the pre 9-11 days when illicit sex was what the French made fun of us..
          Tthe rest of the civilized world has crayoned us the insane folk. I don't want to have to move and be an expatriot this 4th of July.

          I just want to turn my flag right side up is all.

          Thank you Lord, for this generous rain and abundant lightning. -8.88 -5.08

          by SecondComing on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:20:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Rec for the Grisham reference. n/t (0+ / 0-)

      "One does not discover new lands without consenting to leave sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andre Gide

      by pat208 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:48:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm not an orc, I'm an Orca (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nika7k, papercut, boofdah, TalkieToaster

    I swim in a big sea and eat little green footballs when I occasionally mistake them for little brownosing Republicans.

    Thank you Lord, for this generous rain and abundant lightning. -8.88 -5.08

    by SecondComing on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:11:00 AM PDT

  •  Dehumanizing the 'Enemy' (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peraspera, nehark, TalkieToaster, possum

    has got to be the oldest trick in propaganda.

    And it's damn scary how much it's getting done in the "United" States these days.

    •  but bolson (0+ / 0-)

      so is, "they would kill your children and think nothing of it"

      it's step one in preemptive tradition.

      •  A couple of quick points (4+ / 0-)

        First, I didn't say "they would kill your children and think nothing of it."  I did say they would endanger the children of those working for the New York Times and think nothing of it -- because that's exactly what they were encouraging people to do.  You're arguing against a point I didn't make.

        Secondly, I'd actually like to think this was just a game of perspective -- they think we're monsters, we think they're monsters -- I don't really believe that's true.  I think there's a great difference between the type of rhetoric used on the right and that used on the left.  Just to pick one example, I've yet to see the calls for anger against those counties that cooperated in the war in Iraq.  Have you ever seen a "Bomb England" bumper sticker?  Now, how about "Bomb France?"  I don't think refusing to acknowledge a difference between the nature of the discourse represents clear vision, I think it represents willful disregard of the kind of language being used on the right.

        Finally, I don't think anyone is advocating "going to war in the streets."  I'm certainly not.  I like to stick with Thomas Moore on these matters:  I wish "none harm."  I say "none harm." I do "none harm."

        Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

        by Mark Sumner on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:39:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  the implication is not subtle (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          hrh, greeseyparrot

          you did say, over and over, they think we're orcs and point out that this is what they use to justify killing us without concern, you even mentioned children.

          I don't see how or why you would deny that aspect... I did not invent it.

          Furthermore, I don't blame you, I see you wrote an essay on demonization, a compelling one.  But the conclusion I see is a real one, it's in this work.

          As for the taking it to the street, that too is a logical conclusion, not of this essay, but of the ideological isolationism which pervades the blogs now, especially in the hearts and minds of the most popular bloggers.

          If people don't want to work with their adversaries, what is left but conflict.

          Nothing.  When we win every seat in congress and the Republicans can't raise more than 45% of the vote anywhere, what then?  Do we ignore them?  Are they ever to dissappear... will we merely ignore thier concerns then?  What exactly, will we do, if we don't engage them, some time?

          My view is characterized as a weak one... often, as though I'm motivated by kindness, as if the peaceful protesters of the past, such as Gandhi or MLK were movitavated by kindness to choose peace in order to take it easy on their adversaries.

          But the truth is, they did it because it was NOT easy on their adversaries... isolation leading to conflict is not frightening to them, nor very powerful.  We literally cannot win that way, but we go down that path, certainly, now.

          •  pyrrho, I totally disagree with you (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            papercut, greeseyparrot, nehark

            you have to understand the nature of the opposition before you counter.

            understanding the nature of the opposition is not becoming the opposition.

            I've seen you say a few times that there is a logical conclusion to this diary, but there is not.  I think that is the scientist translating symbols and calculating it out.  no actions are advocated here, and this awareness can translate into many actions--one of which is engaging the enemy creatively, and another, as another comment advocated, is using knowledge of this mentality to advocate corporations as "the other" to turn against.  

            using corporations as a stand-in enemy for tribalists who need one-I find that an immense insight, a terrific connection.

            it's useless politic to say, don't condemn the enemy lest you condemn yourself.  

            pragmatism is not a luxury anymore, it's a necessity.

            Q:"You've called Bush a loser." A:"And a liar." Q:"You apologized for the loser comment." A:"But never for the liar, have I?" - Rolling Stone with Harry Reid

            by alivingston on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:41:13 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  well put but... (0+ / 0-)

              ... bottom line is, I refuse to visualize conservatives as universally have dehumanized me and my children such that they will tear me and mine down without regard... it is an insane type of nut prone to that, an insane type of nut that all ideologies must keep their eyes out for and work to clean out...

        •  devil (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I don't give compliments lightly.

          When I said in an earlier comment that I know you to be a very good person.

          I mean that, literally, you are a great person.

          I have no doubt in my mind that you do not intend the statement I have drawn from your work here.

          But you are not the owner of the metaphors you invoke, and they draw conclusions without your permission.

        •  even more cowardly... (0+ / 0-)

          they want others to do the dirty work so that they can disown it..."But I didn't KNOW they'd kidnap Sulzberger's kids!"

          "It's time for America to get REAL." -- Matt O. []

          by billlaurelMD on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:13:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  So, they think they are weak underdogs (6+ / 0-)

    When they have power in:

    1. White House
    1. Senate
    1. House
    1. FDA
    1. FCC
    1. EPA
    1. Public Education System
    1. Military
    1. Voting System

    Pardon me, but one cannot claim that their situation is analogous to any kind of triumph of good over evil or david v goliath when they are proven to have the upper hand from the get-go.  Please remind anybody who tries to pass this shit off on you.  

    Assassin: Its worse than you know. Malcolm: It usually is. 宁静

    by TalkieToaster on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:52:56 AM PDT

    •  There must be no dissent whatsoever (12+ / 0-)

      For right wingers to feel that 'equality' has been established for them, there must be 100% extreme right wing authoritarian dominance of every last social institution of the country.

      And I'm not snarking here:  the right brooks absolutely no dissent.

      Sane people might think a majority was an indicator of power;  to a fundamentally undemocratic movement like the right wing, you must have complete dominance.

      It's not enough, for example, for your church to be left alone to do its own work.  No, the fundamentalists have to make sure that every child is taught whatever nonsense some particular denomination believes -- after all, anything else leads straight to Satan's influence.

      It's not enough to invade and occupy a large oil-rich nation in the Middle East;  there must be no one, no one, who in any way evaluates the situation objectively.  Reporting any facts whatsoever is treason for them.

      This is not a game for them:  they aren't just cynically manipulating the image of the victim for their own benefit.

      No, they really, really believe that if anyone out there is allowed to oppose them then they risk failure.

      •  I think this is an unfair characterization (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        It's certainly true of many wingnuts, fundamentalists, and amoral professional-loudmouths like Malkin, Coulter and O'Reilly.  

        But I think there are reasonable people on the right and there always have been.  See my comment yesterday about the guy I knew in the State Department.  We haven't heard much from these people in recent years.  They've gone into their shells and are trying to figure out what to do, now that the Republican Party is descending into madness.  I suspect many of them are contemplating changing parties, like advisorjim did.

        We've heard anecdotes here on DKos about, for example, rightwing gun-shop customers who are coming around and realizing that Bush is a disaster.

        So to make grand sweeping generalizations about "The Right" is a mistake.  By painting them all with the same brush, you're not making it any easier for them to change their minds and follow their consciences.

        This is one of the problems with the "Us vs. Them" mentality. - a journal of music + the arts + writing

        by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:49:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe wrong phrase but movement right inhuman (5+ / 0-)

          Maybe I should have said something like the "movement" or "far" right.  I'm not sure what term I would use.

          Look, I understand that a lot of long time Republicans -- a colleague, your neighbor and sweet ol' Grampa are potential converts.

          And sure, every now and then you get a former right-wing robot who breaks away, like David Brock, who used to be once of the mouthpieces of the movement right wing.

          Yet the funny thing about David Brock (the Media Matters guy who used to be a hateful right-wing propagandist by his own admission) is that he uses his conversion to argue that yes, there is indeed a hideous, monolithic right wing movement with an identifiable set of structures, and yes they are a tiny minority, and no, they aren't looking to be your friend.

          People working for the Olin Foundation or James Dobson would look for your friend in the State Department and get him fired on any trick they could.  They are genuinely mean, nasty people, who desire something for this country which is fundamentally disgusting.

          Just because we are dedicated to finding the best human nature in the largest number of people, neither let us hallucinate that there hasn't existed a coherent, far right, conservative movement of well-funded insiders who have consistently been working for the last 40 years to achieve not only an electoral majority but a roll-back of the New Deal reforms and of what they view as an "excessive" amount of civil rights and cultural innovations.

          I'm completely open to the critique of using the wrong short hand and phrases.

          If you suggest some nice short phrase for me to use, talking about those nasty, crazy, undemocratic movement right wingers to differentiate them from ordinary, human, non-pod-people who simply believe right wing things, you suggest it and I'll probably use it.

        •  You are somewhat correct (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          In your emphasis that you cannot make sweeping generalizations of "the right", and that many are as horrible as the few were reacting to.  However, you are wrong in thinking that people like your friend in the State department are silent.  They are posting blogs.  But 1) Most people at kos aren't reading those blogs and 2) the few that make nasty comments get all the attention.  Angry "liberals" feed the Coulters and the Rushes as much as their hateful audiences do.  We give them the attention and the reacion that motivates their supporters and keeps their wallets full.

          I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

          by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:32:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  10. Supreme Court n/t (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alivingston, nehark, TalkieToaster

      "One does not discover new lands without consenting to leave sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andre Gide

      by pat208 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:00:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Dehumanization of Opposition (7+ / 0-)

    Yes, I agree, and this is well put, that the Republicans engage in massive, wholesale, propagandistic dehumanization of anyone who disagrees with them.  I believe this single behavior, which is quite important and shocking, is the number one reason why many see Conservatives (at least as defined by the modern GOP) - as a serious threat to our Republic today and as having fascistic overtones in their behaviors and beliefs.

    Of course, mainstream Democrats don't use that kind of language, which is a serious part of the problem.  Inability to speak clearly is one of the biggest challenges to being able to communicate effectively.  We are very self-reflective and self-absorbed, and therefore unable to discuss what is really happening to our country.

    By the way, I think the Orcs don't have kids because they are not natural creatures though they are "humanoid".  So one didn't have to worry about young orcs or even Uruk-hai "children" and "wives" at home any more than one would worry about the orphaned children of vampires or werewolves one kills.  They are "born" of the undead.  Orcs actually are defined in different settings as "goblins", "demons", "hell-devil", "ogre", "devil-corpse" and undead elves of mystical origin, as was shown in the Two Towers when Saruman births his new army.  See, Orcs and Uruk-hai.  See, Uruk-hai warrior -Shagrat in the tower of Cirith Ungol.

    And get this, this discussion of Saruman at Wikipedia:

    His voice and speech were extremely convincing, more powerful than mere rhetoric. When he focused this power on a person or a group of people, he could sway their hearts, plant fears and sow lies as he pleased. Depending on the willpower of the listener, this spell could last as long as the speech did, or it could take root in them and last forever.

    Need I say more?  Of course, this book was written just after and during the context of World War II, by a man who endured the horrors of World War I.  Saruman was surely a reference to real evil - the evil to manipulate the hearts of humanity to do evil to other people.

    But it is true that the army of undead Orcs, fearsome devil like creaters, allowed for them to be disregarded and killed en masse, without moral consequence.  But that is fiction, and when people dehumanize groups of other real people - in real life - that is a form of true evil - not fiction.

    •  true evil lives especially in our dreams (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      papercut, jlb1972

      How are Sauruman and Sauron any less real than Hitler or Bush?  We monkeys use fiction in ways that very closely approximate reality (when read and inculcated as a transient reality).. fiction is an important world where we name and characterize and chew on the realities around us.

      Much of the LOTR is telling it like it was, is, and how it could be.

      I dont feel like a halfling so much as a very tired resident of a village along the boundry between Gondor and Mordor, waiting for Sauron to really get down to business.

  •  I am definitely an orc. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    12 years of meth will do that to you.

  •  From the movie Schindler's List: (8+ / 0-)

    "That's not just good old-fashioned Jew-hating talk.  It's policy now."  That a government could have this as its official position.

    That just gave me chills and has stayed with me ever since.

    "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary."-Handmaid's Tale

    by JLFinch on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 03:37:30 AM PDT

  •  it's almost as if... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cookiebear, hrh

    ... they are orcs?

    What you say has some truth to it.

    But there are those on the left that see orcs.

    If you try to cooperate with them, people from the wings of both parties will tell you don't do it, they're monsters.

    Demonization, is not, oh I wish it were, just a thing of the right.

    not a bit.

    •  They're not orcs (4+ / 0-)

      I've yet to see the post from the left suggesting that conservatives should all die, or that they were in league with those who want to destroy our country.

      If I se such a post, I'm going to be disappointed -- and frightened.

      Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

      by Mark Sumner on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:03:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You haven't been reading this site long, have you (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        For some time, the Right Wing radio listeners were referred to as GOP Orcs.

        Or Grand Orc Party.

        Even Maryscott, whom I respect a lot, got into the act.  There were photoshops with Rove's face on an orc.

      •  you've just posted (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        that they will kill our children and think nothing of it.

        these things are done... accidentally, with other thoughts in mind.

        you invoke a metaphor of demonization, a compelling one, but it has many logical conclusions you miss, and so it often is.

        I've seen such things, but I'm sensitive to them.

        •  Did I? (7+ / 0-)

          Please find me that statement.

          I said they would harass the children of those working for the New York Times and think nothing of it, because they believe the "liberal" New York Times workers are not worth defending. There's a long way between that and "evil conservatives are coming to eat your kids."

          I'm not trying to demonize those on the right.  I'm not.  In fact, that's exactly the point: I don't think they're monsters, but I think that they think I am (and so would my high school English teacher should she look at that sentence).

          Dealing with someone who thinks you're a different species doesn't mean suggesting symetrical violence, but neither does it mean ignoring the issue.

          Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

          by Mark Sumner on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:46:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Anger = dehumanization (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            When I read, say, Ann Coulter's venomous spew ... I wouldn't wish real harm on anyone, but I really do start to see her as subhuman. I can't empathize with a single syllable of her writing, much as I try, I can't come up with anything like common ground. It shames me to be standing on the same soil. It takes real effort to remember that Coulter, Hannity et al. are regular flesh-and-blood people with normal feelings and thoughts and lives and family.

            •  That brings up another point - liberal anger (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I've talked about this a lot here.  Many, many liberals cherish their anger and rage.  They think that somehow being angry is "doing something".  But it's not.  It can lead to doing something, but most often, it's a distraction and a waste of energy.

              It also leads, as you observe, to dehumanizing the opposition.  And to becoming like the opposition.

     - a journal of music + the arts + writing

              by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:05:38 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I've seen quite a few of them (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rhubarb, superba, DMiller

        The venomous hate directed toward rightwingers on this site (and others) is remarkable.

        It tends to be directed at prominent figures such as Bush, Cheney, Rove, and of course Ann Coulter and her set.  

        For example, the comments about Rove being raped in jail, and Ann Coulter 1) having had a sex change or 2) needing to be fucked, have been so prevalent that many posters have complained about them.

        "Progressive"?  Gee, I don't think so.

        There have also been some horrible comments about the military.  

        And we don't deal well with alternative viewpoints - people who counter our "party line".  Because of our antiwar slant, we can't trot out the "You're in league with the terrorists!" canard.  But we do tend to have a similar "If you're not with us, you're against us" mindset.

        Again - hardly "progressive". - a journal of music + the arts + writing

        by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 04:54:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Bullshit. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:


          When such remarks are made here (half by GOP trolls, IMO), they are pounced on by the community, and most end up in the Hidden Comments page.

          "One does not discover new lands without consenting to leave sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andre Gide

          by pat208 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:02:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nope, they aren't (0+ / 0-)

            I guess you haven't been paying attention.

   - a journal of music + the arts + writing

            by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:19:24 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Try this: (0+ / 0-)

              Post a diary about Ann Coulter, universally hated here, and fantasize a violent sexual encounter, perhaps ending in her death. (Make sure to add a Tip Jar!)

              Set your stopwatch before posting, and don't take any medications that will slow your response.

              Your demise would have been faster when we each had more than 2 donuts per day, but you'll see what I mean. Sure you'll get a few loser morons (and GOP plants) throw in a "right on," but the whole lot of you will soon be motoring down the AutoBan.

              "One does not discover new lands without consenting to leave sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andre Gide

              by pat208 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:31:50 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I doubt it (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                superba, lgmcp

                Look at this disgusting post from yesterday:

                I was waiting for that word (0 / 0)
                She is the cleanest little twit to douche through Jesus Christ since, well, since douching through Christ became fashionable. Big feet to walk on water. That gal can plane. She's a tribute to long blonde hair, mini skirts, long legs, tiny pouty little piehole, almost extraterrestrial looking. But wow what a heart, what a following, what a shtick. Ann Coulter, talk about witches, I imagine her thighs are no strangers to the warm glowing burnish of girthy broom stick snuggly pressed between them. Please no hat and just a mini skirt. May Ann ride the turbulent winds of her incessant blow hole to death. May she remember how much wind she had and how bad she blew, pursing tiny shriveled lips, fading like a blonde balloon let go by the fingers of life to fart her last wind from beneath that little mini skirt. And so God gave us a blonde bitch to hate. How convenient

                Nobody trollrated it.

                I was the only one who responded.

       - a journal of music + the arts + writing

                by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:40:58 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  That one came relatively late to the party... (0+ / 0-)

                  ... after plenty of other morons had been rebuked about gender & sex references, etc.

                  Again, selective use of evidence on your part. If you were inclined, you could find plenty of Ann Coulter digs in the HC trash can.

                  Why this need to trash the community norms?

                  "One does not discover new lands without consenting to leave sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andre Gide

                  by pat208 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:52:50 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  why do you have this need to attack me? (0+ / 0-)

                    I gave you one very recent example which proves my point, and you accuse me of "selective use of evidence".

                    And now you claim I want to "trash the community norms".  Sure, right.  Paranoid much?

                    I stated that we don't deal well with anyone who doesn't toe the party line.  Thanks for providing such a cogent example of this behavior.

           - a journal of music + the arts + writing

                    by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:11:28 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  this is in somewhat bad taste, but ? (0+ / 0-)

                  yes, this is a personal attack on coulter, but on the other hand, it doesn't exactly exhort anyone to violence. it doesn't fantasize about any sort of "real" bad ending for coulter.

                  i'm interested by the reference to douching through Christ, though I'm not exactly sure what it means. it does, however, bring to mind this little note from  Jefferson to Dr. Thomas Cooper, in November 1822:

                  DEAR SIR, -- Your favor of October the 18th came to hand yesterday.  The atmosphere of our country is unquestionably charged with a threatening cloud of fanaticism, lighter in some parts, denser in others, but too heavy in all.... In our Richmond there is much fanaticism, but chiefly among the women.  They have their night meetings and praying parties, where, attended by their priests, and sometimes by a hen-pecked husband, they pour forth the effusions of  their love to Jesus, in terms as amatory and carnal, as their modesty would permit them to use to a mere earthly lover.

                  I am further of the opinion that the President must be impeached and removed from office!

                  by UntimelyRippd on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:24:51 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Forget it Pat, it's Polynesian Town...n/t (0+ / 0-)
            •  Thhx, hhex. Short on donuts anyhoo. n/t (0+ / 0-)

              "One does not discover new lands without consenting to leave sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andre Gide

              by pat208 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:27:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Are you insinuating that I'm a troll? (0+ / 0-)
                Out with it.

       - a journal of music + the arts + writing

                by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:15:24 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No. But making trollish commentary. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  For example, going out of your way to argue the point (which would be welcomed by the Right) that this is a community that would tolerate over-the-top attacks on Republicans, comparable to the violent rants of the worst of the Right, which is the context of this diary.

                  We are not the same as them.  I see daily evidence that the community tries to be self-policing to the worst of it, without being overly sensitive and doctrinaire. If you think dKos is as intolerant (of either violence, or ideological impurity) as RedState or FreeRepublic, out with it!

                  Do a search on Ann Coulter, for example. (Yeah, I know you did -- but go further than trying to find an example of a rude comment being unsullied. She elicits more comments than any other GOP personality. Who can keep up?)

                  Posters who go after her gender ("Mann Coulter" "Adam's apple" yada yada yada) or who have expressed violent thoughts about her have been pummelled. People who merely want to puke on her get off relatively lightly. And all is well in the world.

                  "One does not discover new lands without consenting to leave sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andre Gide

                  by pat208 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:31:48 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  oh please (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    It's too bad that some in this community can't tolerate any criticism whatsoever without screaming "trollish commentary".

                    Your post is a perfect example of the "If you're not with us, you're against us" attitude I mentioned in my comment.

           - a journal of music + the arts + writing

                    by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:47:07 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

  •  A shoutout to all my orc brethren (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Thanks for this.  A very apt analogy.

  •  Isn't it ironic (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    that many of the neo-cons who are responsible for the Iraq debacle are themselves Jewish,Wolfowitz,Perle,Libby,Feith,Kristol etc,yet there is no doubt in my mind that the Coulters,Hannitys,Limbaughs etc are anti-semitic deep in their heart of hearts and their hatred for liberals is a form of substitution for their hatred of Jews.

    I would love the know what William Kristol and David Brooks,as Jews,really think about Ann Coulter.

  •  red county, (0+ / 0-)
      I live in a county that elected the first dem to the state legislature in 30 years, NH.  I have been contemplating running an ad in the local paper and adding "Painting Liberally" to the add.  Hoping to get work from liberals.  Because i am angry at Republican indifference to war, stolen elections and thier bubble world.  I don't have caller id but i'm wondering how many wingers will leave a message on my machine.  I realize thier our good and bad on both sides but i don't want to do them any favors.  And i am enough of an ego maniac to think that working for them is a favor, skill level and all, don't really think they deserve me. Orc on.

    Democracy is not a spectator sport

    by Sophie Blue on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 05:22:26 AM PDT

  •  Let me say this about that (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZAPatty, peraspera, papercut, nehark, ms badger

      A couple of old saws come to mind. First, "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence." A charitable attitude that doesn't apply here - you can have malice and incompetence. In fact there's probably a cause and effect relationship here. They have so much malice because they're incompetent at so much - but it can't be their fault, so it always has to be someone else who is responsible. They need orcs to explain why things always go wrong for them.

    Second, "Never argue with stupid people. First they bring you down to their level, then they beat you with experience." We're certainly seeing that every time they get called out on their stupidity. Irrational responses, changing the subject, twisting the facts, and just screaming louder - if they respond at all. It's not for nothing we call their media machine the vast right-wing echo chamber. They try to compensate with volume for what they lack in sense.

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:04:49 AM PDT

    •  But how to counter the falsehoods? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      neroden, xaxnar

      I agree with their stupid/shouting louder etc part.

      But take this for example:

      1. SC approves of Delay's redistricting: that's the SC being "responsible".
      1. SC disapproves of indefinite detention: OMG!!! ACTIVIST JUDGES!! TRAITORS! LIBRULS HATE AMERICA(and Bush)! DIE JUSTICE STEVENS, DIE!!

      So if we let them to perpetuate these lies in a vaccuum, that was let do with talk radio, they'll overwhelm us.

      •  Action-Reaction (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

            I agree we can't just let them spout off without some response. But, trying to outshout them ain't going to work because they have the big megaphone. Being polite and respectful isn't cutting it either.

          It helps if you can hit them with irrefutable facts and statements that put them on the defensive. I had a discussion with a couple of guys who fell back on those conservative lies that government doesn't work, they're all corrupt, etc. etc. and thank goodness people were finally realizing it.

            I came right back (summarizing here) with"Government isn't corrupt - people are corrupt. Government is a tool, and you want that tool in the hands of people who know how to use it, people who act responsibly. What do you expect when you put the government in the hands of people who don't believe in government? Who won World War 2? Who built the atomic bomb? Who says government can't work?"

        They were kind of taken aback, and mumbled "well things were different back then."

        Damn right they were different.

        I may expand this into a post - it ties in with something I've been cogitating on re the 4th of July.

        "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

        by xaxnar on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:20:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Division of community (5+ / 0-)

    Since the inception of the "Right Wing Radio" about 25 years ago,this nation has been under attack from within by those who wish to annihilate all other political action, thought and discourse.
    I have heard statements made "we're at war with the liberal agenda and liberals themselves" only to then hear the next sentence "just kidding" so many times that I know the only untruthful part is the "just kidding".
    It is a shame but, that's is where we are today.
    Good people reasoning with good people can change this situation.
    This is out nation's challenge. Not only to protect our nation from those who seek our nation's demise from without.
    We have to neutralize those those fellow Americans that,in the name of patriotism, would tear asunder our nation from within.

    Political pardons are unacceptable Mr Bush,and so is hiding your daddy's secrets behind exectutive orders,free the truth now.Econ 3.50&Soc. 5.79

    by wmc418 on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:07:30 AM PDT

  •  We aren't Orcs, they are (0+ / 0-)

    mcjoan is the new Armando

    by TeresaInPa on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:35:40 AM PDT

  •  In one of his books... (5+ / 0-)

    Kenneth Burke notes that the term Liberal was applied by the Jesuits to a school of thinkers, now known as liberals. According to Burke, they had hoped that by defining/branding them as Liberals, those thinkers would be draped in the licentious connotations of libertine, and immoral, behaviour.

    "Computer. End holographic program...Computer? Computer?"

    by kredwyn on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:37:46 AM PDT

  •  Are you listening to yourself? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DMiller, Krexent

    Your characterization of conservatives is every bit as orcish as they supposedly claim liberals are.

    Don't go becoming the thing you despise.

    "The great lie of democracy, its essential paradox, is that democracy is first to be sacrificed when its security is at risk." --Ian McDonald

    by Geenius at Wrok on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 06:52:44 AM PDT

    •  Clearly, I'm not getting the point across (13+ / 0-)

      Far from casting them as orcs, I'm saying... they're not.  However, the dialog is not as balanced as they would like to believe.

      I'm positing that the rhetoric on the right is more violently hateful than that on the left.  Now, I could be completely wrong.  Perhaps I've only been very selective in my reading.  Perhaps there is a portion of the left out there that's pounding out the "we should just bomb Britain for going to Iraq" and "I would cheer if everyone on the right died" messages -- the messages that go well past the "I hate neocons" into the "I want to kill all the neocons" range.  Maybe they're out there.  But I haven't seen them.  Most particullarly, I haven't seen them from people who are supposedly leaders in the community.  I haven't heard those messages on my TV.

      I do not believe that it's wrong to note that the language used by the right is disdainful not just of the left's positions, but of their right to exist.

      Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

      by Mark Sumner on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:06:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  one thing to remember (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Devilstower, hrh

        Is that if you go on almost every "neocon" site you wiil find nothing about killing liberals... the one site that did advocated hunting people down was a very obscure blog, not even in the top 500 most frequented.  Therefore, it would take but one obscure "liberal" blog to make a similar comment and your entire thesis would be proven wrong.  The comments here alone show a clear vehemence towards those who have conservative views.

        I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

        by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:50:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Why is their rhetoric more 'violently hateful'? (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        latts, opinionated, peraspera, DMiller, neroden

        I've often wondered this as I've noticed it too.

        Hardcore Bush supporters that I've met are rabid, mean, and angry as hell.

        I think that the Hannity's, Limbaugh's and Coulters of the world are appealing to the lower nature of humans.  By setting up an "us versus them" mentality and a competition you appeal to a lot of people.

        Thanks for the great diary and analysis!

        -6.88 -7.38 "A Government that makes peaceful revolution impossible, makes armed revolution inevitable." - John F. Kennedy

        by CTLiberal on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:00:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think the portion of the left (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        that would have cheerfully called for the armed overthrow of the government and the drawing and quartering of the neocon movement has, for the most part, dissolved in the United States.  It was present in the '60s and parts of it are still around in the form of the socialist party, but it's still not the extremely radical left that you saw back then.  It's simply ... gone.

        •  Sigh. Even in the 1960s ... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          opinionated, Eddie Haskell, jlb1972

          ...that part of the left which argued for armed revolution and destruction of the U.S. was a teensy fraction of both the left and even a smaller portion of the overall antiwar movement. Certainly those of us on the left made gigantic errors in rhetoric, analysis and strategy in the 1960s and '70s, but repeating the media caricature of the left serves no good purpose other than to smear.

          A question, WHICH "socialist party" are you talking about?

          •  Death to the fascist insect (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Meteor Blades

            ..that preys upon the life of the people!

            Say, I have an idea.  Let's kidnap a rich heiress and hide out for a few months.  

            Yeah, that'll teach 'em!

            Cinque very much.  I'll be here all week for 20 to life... try the chipped beef on toast.

            The most un-American thing you can say is, "You can't say that." -G. Keillo

            by Eddie Haskell on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 02:36:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  If a liberal (7+ / 0-)

        or democrat said something like "the 9/11 terrorists should have gone to the Wall Street Journal building" there'd have been a lynch mob from the right.

        coulter says it about the Times and the right ignores it.

        They call us treasonous every day for standing up for the Constitution.  They call our war heroes cowards, women who stand up for women's rights "feminazis", victims of disasters who as for help "whiners", and anyone who disagrees "hates America".

        I'm sorry, but you don't hear that from the left.  The closest it gets is comedy like TDS, Colbert, Bill Maher.  And even then there's never any "they hate America" or "they should be hung for treason" crap.  

        There's just no parity here between how liberals/dems speak and how conservatives/reps speak about one another in the media.

        The left calls bush clueless and incompetent, complete with a roadmap of cluelessness and incompetence.

        The right says we want terrorists to win, we want soldiers to die so we can be self-righteous about it, we want to corrupt and destroy the nation with our gayness or our femaleness or our non-whiteness or our environmentalism or our "naive" quest for diplomacy and peace.

        It's not the same.

    •  Well..possibly not.. (0+ / 0-)

      ..since I have more pity for their perpetual state of hatred towards others, rather than hating them for it. I will laugh at their idiocy, I will shake my head in disgust at their lockstep movement but I don't hate them.

      Venom and hate is truly rewarded on the Right. Take a look at where Ann Coulter is versus where Ted Rall is.

      Do I exaggerate?

      •  quite right (0+ / 0-)

        You are quite right, but I think venom and hate is encouraged on the left as well.

        I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

        by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:51:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sure but it isn't employed as a movement tool... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Aug6PDB, greeseyparrot

          But look at where we stand today. Let me give you an example:

          In the 2004 debates, Bush referred to Kerry as the "liberal Senator from MA". Isn't MA an American state? Isn't Bush the President of folks in MA? Aren't the gays and liberals in MA, American? What point does it serve to highlight a group of people in negative light?

          Has anyone yet made conservativism a dirty word? Said that all the problems faced by America are due to conservative traitors in Texas and South Carolina? Or that terrorists are growing stronger because conservatives are inept and incompetent in their efforts to fight them?

          Instinctively, liberals are loath to confront conservatives using their own methodology. I fear that eventually we will have to, they have pushed the spectrum of political discourse so much to the extreme.

          •  our own dirty word (0+ / 0-)

            Sure, liberal is used as a dirty word.  But have our own dirty words that we use as well, when we wish to.  And we wish to often.  Wingnuts or neocons ring any bells?  There's a variety of other deprecating terms as well.

            I think instinctively "liberals" assume that they are more human than their opponents, that they have superior tactics.  I think the same is true for "conservatives" as well.  At the same it is also instinctive for both groups to use any insult and belittlement of the opposition that is possible to gain the upper hand.  Both sides use the end to justify the means.

            Btw, the solution to liberal not being a dirty word is to not be ashamed of it.  Not to find something to shout back that insults them more.

            I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

            by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:38:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The difference is that (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Devilstower, araina, Aug6PDB

              "liberals" is used by the right for everyone from Hillary and Joe to Kennedy and Kerry and everyone in between.  Dean (who was at one time the DLC's darling) was villified for being "liberal".  

              "Liberal" is used, well, liberally, which is why the DLC theory is always doomed to fail - no matter how republican-like your candidates are, they will be called "liberal" because they're not republican.

              And it's a commonly, openly used term - used during elections, used in campaign commercials, used in everyday language and on pundit shows and even on the floor of the congress.

              On the other hand, you may read about "wingnuts" and "neocons" here, but you'll rarely hear a dem use those words on the floor of the congress (they've just recently started saying "neocons").  You won't hear dems on talk shows calling reps "wingnuts".

              Liberal has become an acceptable way to villify "us" (and not all of us here are liberal) on the left.  Neocons and wingnuts are not terms applied to all republicans, or all conservatives.  And they're not used the same way.

              You won't see a mainstream campaign ad that says "McCain aligns himself with neocons and wingnuts" but you see ads saying "Dean is a latte-drinking liberal".

              •  The word is nothing more than its meaning (0+ / 0-)

                The word liberal is an insult only so long as the public and those who are called liberals perceive it that way.  It is used as a tool whenever possible by those who seek to undermine their more liberal opponents and dismiss their words and actions as being that of some sub-human.  Nonetheless, this particular word has gained power because of its perception by the public.  I don't think anyone convinced the public that liberal=bad just by repeating it over and over(although it may have contributed somewhat).  I think the public came to feel this way for a variety of reasons... part propaganda, part fact.

                I have no doubt that if the word conservative was seen as an insult it would be used widely as one.  Since it is not, we have had to invent other terms.  They haven't become popular, but as the tide turns against the conservative movement in this country (if it does) you can expect they will.

                I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

                by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:30:05 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I disagree (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  I think "liberal" was made to be an insult, not because you or I were ashamed of the label but because conservatives, over decades have deliberately associated that word with say, treason/failure/surrender/anti-Americanism etc etc.

                  And I don't think we have to invent new terms. I think we should hit them at the bedrock of their ideology which is conservativism and point out to folks that this ideology stands for failure, incompetence and over-reaching government influence into private lives.

        •  Most of the encouragement (0+ / 0-)

          seems to come from the right, as far as I can see.

          •  I guess we see differently (0+ / 0-)

            It seems to me to be plastered all over the place on this website... it seems to be full of hatred and venom.  And there are even greater examples of it elsewhere.

            I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

            by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:24:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  The problem, as I see it: (5+ / 0-)

        I will laugh at their idiocy, I will shake my head in disgust at their lockstep movement

        This is how we've reacted since the right-wing hate movement began. People in Washington apparently responded the same way. Laugh it off. Misguided and comical. But now, they've got the upper hand of power in every American Institution and they're causing America to be lost. It's not a joke. Laughing at the rhetoric no longer saves us from it. What is to be done? Do we fight them, or do we allow their world-view [we're good, everone else evil] to swallow us?

        The United States of America has become One Giant Funny Farm.

        by nehark on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:55:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed..see my last post (0+ / 0-)

          We made the mistake of hoping that people would see their poisonous rhetoric for what it is and they did not and we have O'Reilly, Hannity, Coulter, Malkin, Savage etc etc as mainstream figures for conservative dialogue.

          I will still not call them traitors or parasites or terrorist-lovers but I will do my best to make light and poke holes in their CONSERVATIVE ideology. People should automatically equate CONSERVATIVE with incompetent and dangerous. That's my personal goal. And I think it is still higher than Coulter and Malkin who want to deport folks.

          •  but (0+ / 0-)

            But conservative doesn't mean incompetent and dangerous.  It means favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.  And the more you try to equate two completely different terms, the more anyone who identifies themselves as conservative will not listen to you.

            Call the incompetents incompetent.  Call the dangerous ones dangerous.  Call Rush out for his ideology of hatred.

            If you want to prove the superiority of your views then spread your views in a superior way. If you want to decry venom and viscious tactics, try reason and compassion.

            I have brought many people who have a more conservative view point to consider my perspective without ever once insulting them or belittling them, and I have never seen any conservative change their views based on those tactics.

            I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

            by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:45:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            • goes beyond incompetence (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Meteor Blades, Aug6PDB

              The Grover Norquist school of conservativism prefers government to abandon its responsibilities to the poorest and weakest and leave some segments of the country to regulate themselves, which I believe would lead to abuse.

              Therefore, I think conservativism goes beyond incompetence; at least the kind we see being discussed today. I think people should know of the pitfalls of conservativism as an ideology.

              I understand what you are trying to say: you are essentially saying that honey nets more flies than vinegar ;). I get that.

              But at some point of time, one has to lay down a choice and we have to define the distinction between liberalism (the libertarian liberalism as Kos wrote about) and conservative ideology.

              Once folks start to use labels..this is what you get.

        •  Yes (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Yes we fight them.  But we fight them without hating them, without demonizing them, and without using tactics that only drive them further away from our views.  How will you win support by attacking the very people whose support we need to win over?  Change through hatred brings more hatred.  No matter who does the hating or how vile the hated is.

          I respect all beliefs... and I am willing to consider anyone's opinion.

          by Krexent on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:40:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            ...but how does one fight such dishonesty? If I face this in a personal relationship, I just walk away. Can't be done here.

            At work, faced with unreasonable name-calling [you awful liberal--HA,HA,HA]--I simply say I disagree and state the facts. Maybe this is the only thing to be done.

            In a meeting, the big joke of the day was how to kill homosexuals. I asked the guy next to me--not a mean person--just a member of the "cool crowd,"--"do you really advocate murdering homosexuals?" "Oh no," he said, surprised at my question. "We're just joking around." I don't know. Maybe we just have to stop them now and then and ask them to reconsider what they're saying and what they're trying to do.

            Read Tom Tomorrow.

            The United States of America has become One Giant Funny Farm.

            by nehark on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:58:44 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Two groups. The leaders of the right ... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            ...(those in power) and the followers of the right.

            We are not going to win over the leaders, and our fight against them must be directed toward the reality of politics, which is about power. Tactics toward them must, of necessity, be different than tactics designed to persuade voters to swing toward our side. I agree about not hating, but if by not hating you mean not being tough, not stomping these leaders every time they come up with a new lie (about us, about the war, about their own faux patriotism), then I do not agree.

  •  Fascism (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peraspera, Aug6PDB, neroden, ms badger

    This inability to see the other as human is the hallmark of fascism and of some that supported communism (others were well meaning and naive or supported it within a more democratic and tolerant framework).

    These people that see liberals (the French, Muslims) as orcs and the strong links they have to the U.S. government (via the Vice Presidency, for example) are why the world is rightly frightened of the United States and what it could become.

    The world has only rarely been dominated by a single hegemonic power and here we have dominated by one that is perhaps one terrorist attack away from complete moral lunacy (despite having a majority of citizens that are sane, many of whom do not vote at all and are so overwhelmed that they can imagine that none of this is any of their business).

  •  Did you know that Gettysburg was July 1-3? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Devilstower, tmo, Abou Ben Adhem, DMiller

    I think we still need healing from that one.

    "Over 51,000 Americans were casualties in the three-day battle, men commemorated by President Lincoln that November in his historic Gettysburg Address."

    That is why we loved Lincoln so much, he said no Orcs died here.

  •  Speaking as an Orc (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    delphine, Anna M

    I'd like to sink my gnarly teeth into into Coulter's neck and pull out her Adam's apple.

    Some other orc can do Rush.

    George W. Bush is just like Forrest Gump. Except that Forrest Gump is honest and cares about other people.

    by easong on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:55:51 AM PDT

  •  Orc = Iraqi? (0+ / 0-)

    Baaaa! Baaaa! :::Chomp!::: Beat Doc!

    by InquisitiveRaven on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:58:42 AM PDT

  •  self-righteousness (6+ / 0-)

    Anything goes when you are fighting for the light against the hordes of darkness.

    That goes for our side, too.

    We do happen to be on the side of the angels, at this point in history (which is why I'm a left-leaning Democrat).  But we have to guard against excusing our excesses and ignoring our faults.  We also have to guard against hating the other side too much.  We are as susceptible to the allure of the "Two-Minute Hate" as the rightwingnuts are. - a journal of music + the arts + writing

    by hrh on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:06:27 AM PDT

    •  Thanks for saying this, hrh. (0+ / 0-)

      It always disturbs me a little bit to go through threads like this because I see the same hatred coming from our side that comes from theirs.  

      I know a lot of smart, kind, funny, lovable people who aren't liberals, and I struggle all the time with being very angry at them for supporting Republican crap and loving them simply for who they are.  I think they probably go through the same thing, and so we both end up walking that delicate line.  The minute either side falls into calling the other an absolute is the minute we lose sight of each other's (and our own) humanity.

      Jesus is coming soon to apologize for allowing the Republicans to breed. -homemade bumper sticker, Tulsa, OK

      by tryptamine on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 08:54:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Well we have the LOTR 'King' on our side (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Devilstower, delphine, el cid

    Viggo Mortensen (AKA Aragorn) visited Camp Casey in Texas to offer Cindy Sheehan his support.  He also spoke out against the war and the Bush administration in several Charlie Rose interviews on PBS. And he went to one of the anti-war protests in DC. He's also a mighty fine looking man (cough):

  •  Zug zug! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cream Puff

    I come from the orcs
    We eat with spoons and forks.

  •  2nd Amendment. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Although I don't believe the right has gone that far yet, it's never a bad idea to have a good quality rifle and know how to use it.

  •  Perfectly put. (6+ / 0-)

    If you want a view into the mind of some of what we are fighting, listen the the calls on CSPAN in the morning. The hatred is so strong you can feel it.

    What really kills me is the special hatred they reserve for Jimmy Carter. Just the presence of a real Christian frightens them. Imagine if Jesus really did return.

  •  I wonder why someone who posts as Devilstower (0+ / 0-)

    would be thought poorly of by Christians?

    If we're the ones who are supposed to be wise and understanding and in touch with human nature and science, why don't we understand that this is the nature of humans:

    We have very strong (evolved) tribal tendencies, especially under stress, like having the middle of your biggest city blown all to hell.

    I'm sure that demonizing the right will make them all loosen up and get lovey with us. Yeah, right.

    I think there is no other way than to follow our principles, otherwise, we become them, and then why disagree, civilly or not?

    They're not orcs. Neither are we. We're humans, they're humans. We disagree about the technicalities of governance, but they tend, perhaps, since they're wrong on the facts, and insecure, to go all ballistic.

    Passive aggression, like saying they think we're orcs, ain't gonna solve the problem. It may slightly explain it, but that isn't how I read it.

    God government or good government. You decide.

    by ormondotvos on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:15:28 AM PDT

    •  What do Christians have to do with it? (9+ / 0-)

      It happens that I'm a Christian.  A Sunday School teacher, in fact.  Heck, I'm a born-again, dunked in the creek, don't drink or dance Southern Baptist.

      Devil's Tower is a national monument.  It happens that I worked in the area for years, visited the park many times, and fell in love with the place.  I even wrote a book about it.  If you have a problem with the name, raise it with the Park Service.

      And I see nothing "passive agressive" in pointing out that the extreme right feels it's okay to call for the death of liberal judges, liberal politicians, and liberals in general.  That they do this both on the radio, and on television shows watched by millions.

      Theobromine -- does that come in chocolate?

      by Mark Sumner on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 10:25:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Today has been an education (0+ / 0-)

        in just how far we still have to go, in the education of our own.  If I replied to every single backward lunkish comment...

        Remember, most of these people got their political upbringing in the Reagan-Bush era.

        Manifesting largely in an ability to think clearly beyond the first two words of a slogan, or to determine the positive direction a conversation (or movement) should go in.

        I'm just happy for the many around here who show they've managed to shake off the effects of that polluted environment.

        If a thousand men were not to pay their tax bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State...

        by HenryDavid on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 01:02:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Next you'll say you've visited Hell's Kitchen (0+ / 0-)

        or maybe even Satan's Kingdom, VT.

  •  The argument that liberals (5+ / 0-)

    are the "same" because they hate george bush is specious.

    First, we "hate" or villify george bush because of what he's done not because of who he is.

    Who he is just adds to the equation, for it's tough to accept that a total fucking moron has been handed the keys to the kingdom and has set about to destroy it from within, and no one can stop this total fucking moron from doing so.

    Second, just think about the Clinton impeachment.  Plenty of dems stood against Clinton (yeah, self-serving bastards every one of them!) over something trivial, whereas you can't find a republican in congress willing to come out strongly against the crimes and frauds and failures of this administration.  Maybe Chuck Hagel, or Ron Paul (who's actually more of a libertarian).  Forget Specter - he blusters but always caves.

    Instead, they strive to cover it all up, refuse to look at it, even if it means people suffer or die or lose their jobs or go without health insurance or are thrown into economic ruin trying to buy their medication.

    Delay gets indicted and they rally behind him, change the rules so he can stay in power, give him a hero's sendoff.

    Jefferson gets busted and the dems take away his power and rebuke his behavior.

    Getting liberals to agree on anything is like the proverbial herding cats.  By the very definition we embrace many different ideologies - just not the republican ones.  

    I don't think the poster here is talking about any old republican you meet on the street.  Republicans respect the Constitution and Rule of Law.  There is a contingent of lawless "republicans" (ahem) who feel they are "right" and any means are okay.

    No matter who is hurt in the process.  Because we're orcs to them.

    And the rest of the republicans in congress, inexplicably, simply go along.  

  •  Silly me. (0+ / 0-)

    Did you cry for them?  Did you worry about any orcish widows left waiting by the window?  Little orclings wondering when papa was coming home?
    Of course not.

    Silly me.  By this point, I thought this post was about the Bush administration's attitude toward American soldiers dying in Iraq....


    by AdmiralNaismith on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 11:13:30 AM PDT

  •  HEY! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Hey! Brogg not hate Libbralz! Why you talk bad about Orcs?


    by AdmiralNaismith on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 11:16:33 AM PDT

  •  great post -- people are not our enemies (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    there has been a lot of bad behaivior historically by both the right and left- think of the communist dogma that also labelled class enemies as inhuman.

    Devilstower did identify a kind of coarseness of attack and dehumanization of liberals which has been growing in America-- driven not by ordinary people, but by leaders, including media leaders-  who repeat and give credence to the attacks --i.e. the liberals are traitors, dissent is unpatriotic etc.

    We need to remember that our job is to influence regular americans, who decidedly don't share this view of liberals as orcs.  Our most effective way to do this is to wean them away from their leaders who are so destructive--partly by showing how wrong they have been, but also by offering something better.

    A more complete post might start with they call us orcs, but then claim actually we are selfless hobbits, just doing what has to be done because we are here, and so are our enemies.

    •  People most certainly are our enemies (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'reilly and the rest of the neo-neonazi cult of the right.

      Would you have said the same of Mengele or Hitler or their servants 65 years ago? Or of Duvalier et al more recently? There indeed are willing servants of true evil in the world. Its time some of us woke up and realised it.

      We have no Democratic Party. It's financed by the same millionaires and billionaires as the Republicans. K Vonnegut

      by cdreid on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 02:41:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  'the people' are not our enemies (0+ / 0-)

        You mis-interpreted what I said-- or I wasn't clear.  the leaders of the kill liberals movement are definitely our enemies, and I support everything you say about fighting them.

        but we are fighting for something-- a new democracy in america that represents the common good, not the rape of the land by the richest .001%.

        In this battle, the vast majority of people--even people unwittingly accepting some of this filth that liberals are traitors, are who we need to gain--and that was what I meant--

        the evil people are the actors;  the Malkins etc., not the people who just listen to their filth.

        •  I disagree (0+ / 0-)

          Without a Nazi party there could be no Hitler. Without Nazis there could be no nazi party.

          Would you suggest KKK members and skinheads arent the enemies of minorities? Only their spokesmen?

          You cant make everyone like you.....

          We have no Democratic Party. It's financed by the same millionaires and billionaires as the Republicans. K Vonnegut

          by cdreid on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 09:03:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Another way is to reclaim the word Liberal (0+ / 0-)

      and attach it to flesh and blood. Rightwingers I come accross are surprised when I calmly claim to be a Liberal who loves her country. The fact that I'm not pissing on the Bible, eating babies, or foaming at the mouth seething of hate also goes a long way.

  •  Civil War (0+ / 0-)

    Notice how all of the brouhaha raised over Iraq gets quickly turned into a domestic dispute used to label different liberal consitutencies as "traitorous"?

    They've fired on Fort Sumter, again, and they're inviting us to just pack up and leave.

    It might be a good idea to begin to operate as a nation of overlapping regions, overlapping in varying areas of law, taxation, social security, and military policy.

    In other words, someone has to act like the adults around here.

    If a thousand men were not to pay their tax bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State...

    by HenryDavid on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 12:57:16 PM PDT

  •  To Pyrrho and Krexent (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Janet Strange, Aug6PDB

    You're of course right that we can't afford to become like those who demonize us by demonizing them in return. I only ask that we watch our backs.
    There are four reasons I'm nervous:

    1. The memes they're playing with are potentially very destructive. We've seen what fruit they've born before.
    1.  Their rhetoric is escalating (calls for gassing the editor of the NY Times; pressing Congress to legalize torture; organizing students to spy on their professors a la Pavlik Morozov).
    1. Their program is failing, and spectacularly-- their New American Century is already in ruins-- and they need scapegoats more than ever before. They're soon going to need "traitors" to blame for the collapse of their Iraq adventure.
    1. They have the power to do pretty much whatever they want. They have nearly full control of government, media, schools, and workplaces.

    I too believe most people are fundamentally decent (conservatives as much as anyone else). But recent history shows a few well-placed worm-tongued sociopaths can frighten and flatter the mass of decent people into doing monstrous things.

  •  When (0+ / 0-)

    When are you (we) finally going to learn to stop CARING why psychotic sociopathic wingnuts dont like us.

    I dont CARE why they dont like us/me. I dont spend time on it. I spend my time, when i have the opportunity to hear one of them dare spout their nonsense in my presence, disembowelling their reason de etre.

    The only way to defeat bullies is to battle them. And destroy them. To hell with trying to understand why they are scum. Accept it and apply the appropriate remedy.

    We have no Democratic Party. It's financed by the same millionaires and billionaires as the Republicans. K Vonnegut

    by cdreid on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 02:38:20 PM PDT

  •  It's worse than you think (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    el cid

    The orc-like treatment of liberals by the Repubs may be much more than just a philosophical divide. In the book about the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero, "The Word Remains," there is a chilling passage about the fact that counter-insurgency theory, propagated through the School of the Americas, and carried out in El Salvador, portrayed anyone with a liberal political philosophy--or even anyone SYMPATHETIC or even neutral toward them--made that person subject to the death squads. That's right, the death squads. And this was the philosophy as practised during the time of Jimmy Carter, before things really hardened into the neo-conism under Ronnie Reagan. Chew on that for a while.

  •  Jews were orcs in WWII Europe (0+ / 0-)

    Subhuman vermin, made us easy to stamp out. Great post, Devilstower.

  •  One of my favorite scenes in the LoTR movies (0+ / 0-)

    ...namely, in Return of the King, was during the final battle, in which the swift and gutsy Eowyn clandestinely mounted a horse with two swords in hand and slashed the kneecaps and the underbelly of the giant elephants attacking Gondor, so that her greatly-outnumbered Rohanim comrades would be better able to fight the opposition.

    One of my favorite elements of the LoTR trilogy, thus, is that the series did not have one definable leader or hero figure (although some literary types argue that Frodo and Aragorn share that role). In reality, however, I saw the series as being a collaborative movement against the forces of evil. Everyone played his/her part in ensuring that the evil Sauron and Saruman were defeated--the Rohanim, the Gondor rebels, the hobbits who were accompanying Frodo (particularly Sam), the elves, and also Eowyn the clandestine warrior who took out the king of the Nazgul. Each individual played a role in a team effort to pool resources and talents to defeat the enemy.

    In a way, that's how I see us grassroots Democrats and liberals fighting the "giant elephant"--we may not have the monolithic war-chest of money and resources that the Republicans do; but we have spirit, guts, persistance, strength in our convictions, sense of teamwork, and a growing voice "inside the gate"--and outside of it as well. What can be more Democratic (with both a little and big D) than that? :)

  •  Here's a Post That Says It All (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I had made this post in a previous diary:

    I came upon this piece of disgusting rotted tripe quite by accident (the image showed up in Google Image Search).

    Some months later, abortionist  David Gunn,  was shot by Michael Griffin as he attempted to enter the building where he was scheduled to murder approximately 30 pre-born babies. Shelley commented on Michael Griffin's action in her computer diary:

    He didn't shoot Mother Teresa, he shot a mass murderer such as Saddam Hussien  or Hitler. I don't even think it is accurately termed 'murder'. God is the only one who knows whether Gunn would ever have repented or if he would have killed another 5,000 babies and probably 3 or 4 more women who probably weren't Christians either.

    Although Michael Griffin was condemned by many Christians, Shelley Shannon stood by him.  She wrote:

    I'm not convinced that God didn't require it of Michael to do this. It is possible. I'm praying God will push more of us 'off the deep end'...

    and:  "He is definitely a Christian."

    The action taken by Michael Griffin caused Shelley to spend time in prayer and deep reflection on her position.  She believed that God could not lead her to do anything sinful, even if it seemed to be sinful to the world.  Her course of action was clear.  Like Phinehas, and Jael, and even Samuel of the Bible, the righteous thing to do was to  meet deadly force with equally deadly force. The babies were innocent, the abortionist was not. The choice was simple, living babies or a dead abortionist.

    This is a culture of revenge and death.

    "[T]hat I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake."

    by Heronymous Cowherd on Tue Jul 04, 2006 at 07:03:14 PM PDT

  •  I have just one thing to say: (0+ / 0-)


  •  I heard this somewhere (0+ / 0-)

    One must be careful when fighting orcs, lest ye become one.

    The most dangerous untruths are truths moderately distorted. ~Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

    by elephty on Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 12:33:20 AM PDT

  •  No Iraqi ever called me Orc (0+ / 0-)

    The wingnuts think we're the enemy. They kill non-US_Citizens overseas, but they call them friends. We're the enemy. To Rush, to O'Reilly, to Coulter... we're the enemy.

    And I'm getting to think their Elvish asses are my enemy too.

    He's a Uniter!

Meteor Blades, JD SoOR, pontificator, Malacandra, Devin, Deep Dark, IsraelHand, HigherPie, racerx, wozzle, spyral, Jett, Alumbrados, MichaelPH, easong, Terri, tmo, Ducktape, northsylvania, RedMeatDem, Nathan in MD, mwjames, eyelessgame, Phoenix Woman, Odysseus, tundraman, TealVeal, smithbm, eleming, Rayne, alyosha, teacherken, bluecayuga, Rita in DC, gogol, Subterranean, Hornito, joejoejoe, Doctor RJ, grumbleberries, Kimberly Stone, Delaware Dem, mikeb42, Roland X, Pandora, AdmiralNaismith, esherard8, saraswati, RunawayRose, BenMurphy, dengre, Stoy, still working it out, KumarP, Freedomfreak, Sherri in TX, billlaurelMD, tacet, bramish, Ralfast, ripzaw, tamens, LEP, mahigan, AWhitneyBrown, cmk, frsbdg, RKS, Rat, frisco, ZAPatty, theran, ilona, voltayre, Abou Ben Adhem, Sandia Blanca, PanzerMensch, madwayne, Jerome a Paris, zeitshabba, redtravelmaster, Cecrops Tangaroa, Soy Lechithin, mrsdbrown1, rickvonw, tsurube, Hose B, Hatu, bronte17, Joe Sixpack, araina, Shadan7, bonddad, nyceve, Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner, Ti Jean, Kraken, metal prophet, Rupert, KMc, stevetat, Glic, boilerman10, jenifera, JuliaAnn, CanisMaximus, javelina, amberglow, bincbom, wilco920, Fe, BruinKid, chrisfreel, rioduran, splashy, antirove, high uintas, Alna Dem, celticshel, sele, Cardinal96, ends with space, k9disc, Janet Strange, hhex65, kredwyn, Moody Loner, Stand Strong, jlynne, darylt, MTgirl, PatrioticallyIncorrect, alivingston, TXsharon, Mad Dog Rackham, besieged by bush, exiledfromTN, baxxor, Kidspeak, Bulldawg, niteskolar, DSC on the Plateau, dwahzon, chantedor, nika7k, snakelass, Calidrissp, rockhound, papercut, Mrcia, RenaRF, grrr, Eddie Haskell, sommervr, faithnomore, 4jkb4ia, lulu57, Rxtr2, Dave925, walkshills, TomB, horatio in il, Bluefish, Noisy Democrat, nasarius, Sam Loomis, KateCrashes, airshipjones, Curt Matlock, Da Buddy, OrangeClouds115, CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream, Steven D, Dr Seuss, HK, DarkSyde, ANKOSS, kcurie, rickeagle, kd texan, bluemajority, Captain Doug, Irish Patti, bibble, rickroks, guyermo, greeseyparrot, Sol Fed Joe, oortdust, Gowrie Gal, sxwarren, julifolo, Fabian, ebbak, mediaprisoner, Bluesee, farleftcoast, Harkov311, pattyp, jrooth, kingubu, Green Zombie, jfdunphy, Unit Zero, el dorado gal, Elise, enough, docangel, LarisaW, LisaZ, subtropolis, Tamifah, liberalcheesehead, Alien Abductee, elkhunter, TN yellow dog, terrypinder, Thorby Baslim, ChemBob, juliesie, snacksandpop, Hugo Estrada, KiaRioGrl79, reflectionsv37, Sophie Blue, boofdah, eru, buckeyedem08, Morrigan, majcmb1, flo58, Pam from Calif, GreyHawk, Rudini, annefrank, lotlizard, sunbro, gkn, dspivak, Thaddaeus Toad, marescho, kitchen table activist, Anna M, neroden, wiscmass, beaumarchais, dsteffen, sleep deprived, Jimbob, tjfxh, Land of Enchantment, grada3784, jay23, salvador dalai llama, taracar, martini, Coherent Viewpoint, Legolas, coolhappyMax, JosephAZ, trashablanca, snazzzybird, BachFan, Thundergod, Do Tell, midvalley, awakenow, BlueInARedState, tonyahky, Whigsboy, mooshter, dougymi, compbear, Esjaydee, KDANTEATER, luckydog, Irishkorean, global citizen, alwaysquestion, Ordvefa, Battling Maxo, armadillo, betsyross, MO Blue, vincula, el cid, Jax, middleagedhousewife, zeke7237, jazzeroo, va dare, righteousbabe, fiddlingnero, Stripe, means are the ends, wiscow, Democritus, TransAmerican, Friend of the court, markthshark, Pandoras Box, old wobbly, sylvainsylvain, tigercat, Buckeye Hamburger, Julia Rain, kokoro, anotherdemocrat, Cat Whisperer, Loudoun County Dem, Daisy Mayhem, possum, celticmuse, Positronicus

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site