Skip to main content

A couple of years ago I stirred up the wingnutosphere into a frothy rage arguing that while Republicans like to accuse Democrats of being "terrorist sympathizers", Islamic fundamentalism was more in tune with conservatism than progressive values.

Once upon a time, it was easy for the American Right to smear its opponents on the left -- they could simply equate them with the nation's communist enemies. It didn't matter that the American "left" (Democrats) had more in common with the Right than international communism, the smear was useful.
Now, however, our international enemy -- Islamic radicalism -- is actually the polar opposite of what liberals stand for -- their actions on women rights are deplorable, they insist on theocracy, they loooveee torture and the death penalty, they demand to control the culture (TV, movies, music), they rail against rampant sexuality, they seek to spread their ideology via force, and they have a well-defined black-and-white sense of truth.

Remind you of a certain American party?

That's why hysterical assertions by the wingers that liberals hate America and want the terrorists to win are so absurd. As absurd as it would've been to claim that Reagan wanted the Communists to win the Cold War. The Taliban/Al Qaida/Hezbollah/Jihadists of the world are the exact embodiment of evil in the liberal mind. They are everything we are against, and against everything we are for.

In fact, they are exactly what we see in the Republican Party as the GOP continues to consolidate power -- creeping theocracy, moralizing, us versus them, embrace of torture, the need to constantly declare jihad on someone, hysterics over football-game nipples, control over "decency" on the airwaves, lyrics censorship, hostility to women freedoms, curtaling of civil liberties, and so on.

So it's pretty obvious -- we don't love terrorists. We don't want them to win. For them to win would be to realize our greatest fears. The muslim terrorist is truly the anti-liberal. Like matter and anti-matter.

Republicans, on the other hand, hate the terrorists because they're Muslim. But aside from that, they've got far more in common than they'll ever admit to themselves.

I then took this thought further, comparing how conservatives are like our Islamic enemies here and here. A few samples:

Tolerance

Al Qaida/Taliban: Death to the infidels
American Taliban: Kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity
Liberals: Live and let live

Marriage

Al Qaida/Taliban: Marriage is only between a man and a woman
American Taliban: Marriage is only between a man and a woman
Liberals: Marriage is between any two people who love each other

God

Al Qaida/Taliban: God is on our side and will help us kill our enemies
American Taliban: God is on our side and will help us kill our enemies
Liberals: God may or may not exist and will not help us kill anyone

You get the point.

Now there was a ton of whining about these posts from the usual suspects. But ultimately, this is the bottom line reason we don't like Islamic Fundamentalist AND the GOP -- their moral absolutism, their militarism, and their oppressive efforts to impose their rigid morality on the rest of us.

Today, a Republican state senator in Montana confirmed all of this in pitch-perfect form:

As a Republican state senator in Montana and as a human being, I am offended by Senator Craig's existence. Why oh why are most of the perverts that get caught Republicans? Are there more of them or are they just stupid? The thought of a US Senator chasing love in all the wrong places makes me think longingly of the Ayotollahs in Iran. They would just kill the turkey.

Yup. This guy said what the rest of them think. They want theocracy. They want a system which enforces their prejudices and bigotry. They want a world in which violence is the first and only solution to every challenge.

Again, the only reason American conservatives hate Islamic Fundamentalism is because of the "clash of religions" thing. Otherwise, on the issues, they see eye-to-eye on just about everything.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:53 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
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

  •  My grandmother used to say, "You always hate... (22+ / 0-)

    what you see in yourself the most."

    I think that is why the GOP is so hysterial about finding Communists, Gays, Undocumented Workers and/or the Taliban under their beds.

    The boogeymen are themselves!

    A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who....never learned how to walk forward.-FDR

    by vassmer on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:54:38 AM PDT

  •  "They would just kill the turkey." (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah

    What the hell kind of metaphor is that????

    My new mantra: "Don't buy shit from China."

    by Radiowalla on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:54:43 AM PDT

  •  Careful (0+ / 0-)

    People were calling me a fearmonger and other nasty names for saying similar things.

  •  lords of kobol have mercy (3+ / 0-)

    ohhh sweet mystery of life at last i found youuuuu blogroll

    by terrypinder on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:55:09 AM PDT

  •  Republicofascism (17+ / 0-)

    That's what we're up against in this country.

    Check out my new blog, dedicated to electing our boys in blue: An Enduring Democratic Majority

    by Skulnick on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:55:32 AM PDT

  •  Religion is a powerful weapon (9+ / 0-)

    And very dangerous in the wrong hands.

  •  Classically Rovian (6+ / 0-)

    Accusing the other side of what you are guilty of is classic Karl Rove.  Unfortunately, it worked long enough to get Bush elected and keep the Democrats down.  Hopefully, the people and some of the traditional media are wise to it.  We'll see.

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

    by accumbens on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:55:35 AM PDT

  •  Let's clean our own house first (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DigDug, HoosierDeb

    We have our own purity trolls and let's not pretend that it is otherwise. Naderites, I'm talking about YOU!

    "Lash those traitors and conservatives with the pen of gall and wormwood. Let them feel -- no temporising!" - Andrew Jackson to Francis Preston Blair, 1835

    by Ivan on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:56:29 AM PDT

    •  Ooh, good way to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      epcraig

      get them to vote Democrat, call them trolls and talk about 'cleaning house'.

      (And exactly what did Nader say/do that makes him a leader to 'purity trolls'?  Does he have some anti-gay agenda that didn't get a lot of press?  Last I heard his big thing was consumer safety.)

      Got a problem with my posts? Email me, and let's resolve it.

      by drbloodaxe on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:21:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Evict the collaborators first. (0+ / 0-)

      Humanity is a story that will never end. There Is a Way.

      by Troubadour on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 10:22:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And how bout the nannies that want to ban smoking (0+ / 0-)

      ,violent video games, fattening foods, hate speech,.... Theyre the Taliban too.

      •  This, more than any other reason (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DigDug
        is why I'm opposed to Hillary.  She was, for a long time (possibly still is, I don't know) part of the whole "violent video games cause real life violence" bandwagon.

        Kinda leaves a sour taste in my mouth.  There's a big difference between having the government look out for its citizens health and running a nanny state, but I'm not sure she understands what that difference is.

        The true measure of a man's character lies not in how he treats his friends, but in how he treats his enemies.

        by FunkyEntropy on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 06:31:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hmm... (5+ / 0-)

    As a Republican state senator in Montana and as a human being...

    Is it possible to be both?

    "Success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives." --George W Bush, May 2, 2007

    by mspicata on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:56:53 AM PDT

  •  He SAID that? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geotpf, boofdah, drbloodaxe, HoosierDeb

    Wow, just, wow.  Death to the queers.  And here we were all upset with Tweety just for shoving one.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:56:54 AM PDT

  •  "turkey"? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    semiot, boofdah, jamesia

    this would be the "leave it to beaver" strain of fascism, I guess...gosh darn turkeys!

  •  They hate us for our freedoms. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shadetree mortician

    To paraphrase what Jon Stewart said about the gay marriage ban ballot initiatives, America isn't about taking away rights from people.  

  •  They ARE the Taliban and would probably be (6+ / 0-)

    like Al-Qaeda (someof them), if they truly do everything they'd like to.  I mean, the Christians burned MILLIONS of people at the stake in their "heyday" between 1000-1600.  Four hundred years of terrorism and tyranny.

    I'm sorry, but does anyone doubt that SOME (not anywhere close to a majority) would participate in shit like that if they had totally and unbridled free rein?

    My gay ass would be toast...and not in the good way.

    My cat died from tainted Chinese pet food. I will never buy Chinese products again and will NOT be watching NBC's coverage of the Beijing Olympics.

    by HillaryGuy on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:58:01 AM PDT

    •  how free we are (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      boofdah, Pandoras Box

      depends on how much power people like that state senator have. They're always a minority, but often embed themselves in positions to have disparportionate influence.  They've definitely got way to much right now.

      •  that's the playbook we should replicate as good (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Neon Mama

        progressives.  hey, if we aren't a majority - and, call be a foolish optimist but i think we secretly are - then let's get power anyway.  FDR did it and so did LBJ.

        My cat died from tainted Chinese pet food. I will never buy Chinese products again and will NOT be watching NBC's coverage of the Beijing Olympics.

        by HillaryGuy on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:08:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hmmm (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          decembersue

          Grants to help progressives relocate from dark blue enclaves en masse to sparsely populated states to swing them blue?

          Gorgeous countryside out there to boot, as long as you're not tied to a big city.

          Got a problem with my posts? Email me, and let's resolve it.

          by drbloodaxe on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:28:55 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Good idea. (0+ / 0-)

            California can spare people to colonize the rest of the West, and also Alaska.  Oregon and Washington seem to be progressing nicely on their own, but I strongly advocate Californication of Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, and Idaho in the lower 48.  Alaska has so few people it would be a pushover, and damn it's beautiful (when it's not whited out).  Should be some fun and games in NV cracking the casinos' control of everything, and an equally delicious time dismantling Mormon Church control in Utah politics.  

            Someone should set down a colonization foundation and subsidize Democrats moving to these places.  Not me, of course--too much work.  But someone.

            Humanity is a story that will never end. There Is a Way.

            by Troubadour on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 10:34:54 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Millions? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HillaryGuy, Involuntary Exile

      What book are you getting your numbers from?  Compared to the sizes of the populations in that era, that would kind of indicate they did more damage via auto-da-fe than plague.

      Seems a tad high to me, even granting the 600 year stretch.

      BTW I'm sorry about your cat.  We just threw out a 10# bag of chicken jerky dog treats that we found out a number of stores were recalling because of melamine (sp?) contamination.  Been taste testing them on several brands of treats that at least claim to have been made in the US, but with them using wheat from China in the food, it's hard to escape it unless you grow your own darn food these days.

      Got a problem with my posts? Email me, and let's resolve it.

      by drbloodaxe on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:26:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wikipedia... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Geotpf, HillaryGuy

        ...cites studies which estimate the number of executions of witches at between 35,000 and 60,000. There are around 12,000 executions which are definitively recorded.

      •  thanks for that, :) (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mmcole, Neon Mama

        I will no longer buy any food that is NOT made in America.  It's just not worth the risk.  Even some bones (for my Chihuahua that he loves) made in Thailand I have stopped buying.  Though China is fuckign sleazy, other countries may have lax standards, too.  I'm just not risking my dog at this point.

        When I said millions, I meant all deaths b/c of the religion, not simply the burning.  Hey, I'm gay, we are a little dramatic at times!

        My cat died from tainted Chinese pet food. I will never buy Chinese products again and will NOT be watching NBC's coverage of the Beijing Olympics.

        by HillaryGuy on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:41:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Totally OT thanks for tip on poison chicken jerky (0+ / 0-)

        dog treats.  

        Thanks, drbloodaxe, you may have saved my dog's life.  I hadn't heard about the Wal-Mart recall of chicken jerky dog treats.  I don't buy anything at Wal-Mart, but I buy chicken jerky dog treats in bulk from dog.com.  I thought I was being good to our dogs by buying a product that is supposedly 100% natural chicken, no additives, and shocked that it might contain melamine.  Your comment sent me directly to the Google.  I'm still looking for information on the brand I give my dogs (Beefaeters), but in the meantime I came across an article about the FDA "sternly warning" Iams (but not leveling any fines or  widely publishing any public warnings) in March for putting chromium tri-picolinate in their Eukanuba Veterinary Diets Restricted Calorie kibble.  (It's also in the wet Restricted Calorie and the Eukanuba Veterinary Diets Optimum Weight Control kibble.)  FDA had disapproved the additive because it is mutagenic, but Iams put it in anyway.  Iams agreed to stop putting it in the dog food but didn't know how much of the bad product was "still out there."

        Well, wouldn't you know that I bought a 35 lb. bag of the stuff on Aug. 5th.  I've been feeding the Restricted Calorie kibble to my absolutely fabulous, 10-year-old border collie mix for over 18 months now and during that time I have noticed behavioral differences which I attributed to other environmental factors.  I'm horrified that, out of love for her, I could have been poisoning my dog with kibble that can cause tumors and chicken jerky that can cause kidney failure.  She's got an appointment with the vet tomorrow and will have a complete blood and urinalysis work-up.

        Who'd have thought that a comment about American Taliban would have led to valuable information on the possible poisoning of my pets.  You may have saved my darling Ginger's life, drbloodaxe.  I'm not sure what I'll be feeding her in the future but I've already decided to make my own chicken jerky treats from locally raised organic chickens from my co-op.  I may decide to buy no pet foods whatsoever and make everything for the dogs at home from fresh, organic ingredients.  I can't thank you enough.

        •  Woot (0+ / 0-)

          I finally wrote something on here worth the time to write it :)

          Yeah, I'm actually vegetarian these days, but I'm still buying meat, cause I figure chances are actually a bit better that 'human grade' foodstuffs are less likely to be contaminated (I hope) than 'pet grade'.  So my beagles eat chicken and steak (depending on which is on sale) while I'm munching down soy faux meat products.  If you've got good meat prices, and do the math, it's amazing how often regular cow/chicken is actually cheaper than most of the 'dog treats'.

          Of course, I'm in a part of the country where it's easy for stores to get meat locally at a good price from local farmers, and we can easily get things like eggs from uncaged and 'organic' eggs.  Not much point in saving them from weird preservatives only to have them getting tons of antibiotics and growth hormone instead.

          And ours love all sorts of stuff.  Bananas and carrots are special faves, but the female beagle also loves grapefruit and lettuce.  We do a bit of cheese, but the male may be developing dairy allergies, so that might have to go.

          Got a problem with my posts? Email me, and let's resolve it.

          by drbloodaxe on Tue Sep 04, 2007 at 01:12:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I wouldn't flatter them. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HillaryGuy

      I cannot agree with the claim that conservatives in America are like Al-Qaeda.  They are much worse.  Al-Qaeda at least has the common decency to attack the capitalist status quo and attempt to change things for themselves-- conservatives in America are not even fighting for change, they are fighting for their own continued economic, military, and cultural dominance over the world.  I can respect a revolutionary, I cannot say the same for capitalists, imperialists, or reactionaries.

      Rejection of the state is a precursor to the only freedom that is attainable.

      by Vodalus on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 12:01:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Original American Taliban (11+ / 0-)

    Excerpted from "American Taliban."

    Updated January 25, 2007 and April 19, 2005 (originally published November 24, 2004)

    The "War on Terror" has provided Americans with a helpful introduction to theocracy. The fight against Al Qaeda, the war on the Taliban, and the growing tensions with the regime in Iran has offered a quick primer on the hallmarks of the religious state. First is the rule of religious authorities, whether it be Bin Laden’s new Caliphate, Mullah Omar’s Taliban regime, or the mullahs in Tehran. Second is the imposition of the faith’s sacred texts as law, in these cases, some variant of sharia law of the Koran. And last is the direct involvement of the state in the most minute and deeply personal aspects of individual lives, enforced by religious police, informed by spies, and punished severely (and often publicly).

    Now thanks to the Bush administration, a Republican Congress and the conservative ascendancy, Americans need not travel to Kandahar to learn about the perils of theocratic rule. Right here in the United States, a network of politicians, religious leaders, "faith-based" organizations and (literally) their amen corner are working overtime to make a particularly onerous concept of Christianity the de facto law of the land. Armed with the Bible in one hand and the Patriot Act in the other, George W. Bush and his GOP jihadists threaten to fundamentally change the role of government in monitoring Americans’ lives, liberties and even bodies.

    Meet the American Taliban...

  •  Taliban == rightwing GOP (10+ / 0-)

    They are two side of same coin really.

    1. Use God as an excuse to kill people
    1. Use fear and terrorism/threat of violence to achieve political end (it's just a question of budget size.)
    1. Torture, kidnapping, thuggery, cheat, steal, corruption, ...
    1. social conformity dictated by holy book and dubious interpretation.
    1. Have killed and will kill more people in the name of God, Country and whatever else.
    1. Islamic state, Christian nation. Everybody else must die.

    ... Just remember, Taliban is the result of modern psy-op in Afghanistan, we created and train them with ISI. They maybe using 8th century language, but all their techniques are straight right out of counter insurgency and propaganda manual.

    Use Tor and PGP on the net. (google it)

    by fugue on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:00:16 AM PDT

  •  Should be said loud (3+ / 0-)

    and clear.  These are right wing regimes in the middle east.  

    "We will get fooled again" Me

    by givemhellHarryR on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:00:23 AM PDT

  •  We can hope (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    larryrant, semiot, boofdah

    that the moderate evangelical part of Christianity will now reassert itself and reign in their more intolerant brothers.  I have known many fundamental Christians that did not speak out against the bigotry and hatred that has characterized so much of religion in America.  Maybe now it will start to change.  I sure hope so.  Maybe now we will start judging people by their actions, not their religion or their race.  

  •  Give the Montana Jihadist (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Neon Mama, Vodalus

    points for being honest.....

    Conservatives actually love al Qaeda--it gives them a villain to justify their militarism; it is just one giant video game of Doom to conservatives--and they love, love it!

  •  Eric Hoffer wrote in "The True Believer" (0+ / 0-)

    Usually the strength of a mass movement is proportionate to the vividness and tangibility of its devil.

    We might also expect that the intensity of feeling among adherents to a movement may be proportionate to the bloodthirstyness of their imagination in regard of putative "followers of the devil."

    Certainly Rove knows this, that Rudy's "double Guantanamo" and Bush's "nuclear holocaust" are mere mother's milk to the American Taliban and its fellow-feelers in American Wingnutistan.

    The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings. -- Julius Caesar, I.ii.

    by semiot on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:02:48 AM PDT

  •  Attacking homos is just good old fashion (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Caldonia, drbloodaxe, Neon Mama, brein

    boys being boys. Just ask Tucker Carlson.

    And I don't buy his excuse that he was being physically assaulted by the guy.some guy was trying to indicate he wanted to have sex with him, do you really think he would have put his arms around Tucker or extended a fist? It just doesn't happen that way. At worst the guy might have exposed himself, which I don't condone, but that's not what Tucker originially stated happened. Only when Tucker was called to the mat by gay groups, Media Matters, and the blogosphere did he turn this into a physical assault. And if he had made it clear originally that it was assault, do you really think Abrams and Scarborough would find it just sooo hilarious. His new version of what happened in the bathroom doesn't hold water.

    Baaa! She's unelectable! Baaa! She's GOP-lite! Baaa! She wears army boots! Baaa!

    by John Campanelli on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:03:02 AM PDT

  •  Correction: (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    larryrant, epcraig, boofdah, Neon Mama

    Marriage is between any two consenting adults not currently married.

    No kiddies and polygamy, thanks.

    A Vote For John Edwards Is A Vote For Yourself. Iowa Underground

    by ThunderHawk13 on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:03:16 AM PDT

    •  Wait a minute, now you are picking on (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      darrelplant, floBlueflo

      Polygamy?   America is based on BIBLE law, dontcha know?  The Talibangelist swear its true. Founding fathers in bible had multiple wives and concubines.  Wives donated sevant girls (slaves) to their hubby to make babies for them. Who knew surrogate moms were okay? Bible guys married both sisters to increase the herd.
      Eve was cloned from Adam, right? Human cloning must be made legal.
      Maybe Mormon Mitt is what we really need to bring back real Bible believing laws. Why did America outlaw polygamy anyway --- if we are bible based?
      Bible had god ordering genocide to split pregnant bellies, to kill all male children to end the seed line, to only save the lesbians (girls who had not "known" men).  Wow, let's get biblical law so we can stone disrespectful teens. Look at what America COULD be if we went back to those "family values."
      {For slow thinkers visiting site -- SNARK, which this is, means it is a joke -- not proposed as realistic national policy.}

      De fund + de bunk = de EXIT--->>>>>

      by Neon Mama on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 10:10:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nice Catch (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah, drbloodaxe, jamesia, brein

    Can you imagine endorsing death for a fairly tame sexual proposition?

    They are the American Taliban. Is the prospect of 76 virgins in Paradise after a suicide attack any crazier than the Rapture believed by the Christian right?

    As Dennis Miller said (before he lost his way): "Come on. Seventy-six virgins? If I have to take one for the team I want at least one pro."

    Canada - where a pack of smokes is ten bucks and a heart transplant is free.

    by dpc on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:04:06 AM PDT

  •  Dinesh D'Souza (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    semiot, ikonen

    Isn't he a conservative who basically makes the same argument that republicans and islamic extremists see eye to eye.

  •  'any two people' (7+ / 0-)

    is not actually what liberals believe because it implies, for example, that middle schoolers and/or twin sisters should be able to get married if they want, which nobody believes.  There are rules for marriage in any society, but despite what Dobson says, that's not what this issue is about.

    The liberal position on 'marriage' is that (1) government should not discriminate and (2) a strong America depends on thriving communities (e.g., not heterosexual parenting).

    (writing a chapter on this at the moment...)

    ---
    ***Buy my book, support progressive writing! Framing the Debate, in stores now...

    by Jeffrey Feldman on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:05:40 AM PDT

  •  Oh, boy. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    larryrant, epcraig, The Raven, drbloodaxe

    I hope you wear your beekeeper netting when you go around hammering on hornets' nests. ;)

    And I totally agree with every word. I've been saying the same thing for years. The "Christian Right" and the "Islamic Right" agree in principle on most things except who to worship/respect ... Jesus or Mohammed.

  •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

    And he doesn't even examine the first part of his question.  The reason "most of the perfects that get caught are Republicans" is that they are the ones in the closet.  Closeted gays have to sneak around in bathrooms and whatnot to hide their "problem".

  •  Is his identity confirmed? (0+ / 0-)

    I don't doubt that there are many conservatives who feel this way. That said, the comments on that sosforests site could be posted by someone else under that name, right?

    Before I post this all over the place, I just want to be sure this is accurate information.

  •  Conservatives Without Conscience (8+ / 0-)

    Seriously, anyone who wants to know the fundamentalist mind needs to read John Dean's book. It doesn't matter whether you're talking about the Taliban or the Christian right, or the Republicans, the Right Wing Authoritarian mindset Dean lays out explains so much about how they think.

    "Keep raisin' hell!" - Molly Ivins---------- "The truth shall set you free, but first it will piss you off!" - Gloria Steinem

    by MA Liberal on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:08:15 AM PDT

  •  Dinesh D'souza Agrees EOM (0+ / 0-)

    Be humble and respectable, but above all just be flexible. -- Gumby

    by SteamPunkX on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:08:26 AM PDT

  •  Yup! n/t (0+ / 0-)

    "We must become the change we want to see." -Gandhi    PublicChristian.com

    by larryrant on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:09:56 AM PDT

  •  Indeed, (0+ / 0-)

    we deplore who you are not what you do.

    We're all entitled to our own opinions but we have to share the facts.

    by pamur on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:11:18 AM PDT

  •  It's the law. (8+ / 0-)

    Most gays I know like a good time, but aren't compelled to seek sex in public toilets.  Can't help but think of all the laws that have beat hell out of gays and other minorities over my lifetime and what state Sen. Senfronia Jackson said during TX gay marriage ban debate:

    We have worked hard at putting our prejudices against homosexuals in law. We have denied them basic job protections. We have denied them and their children freedom from bullying and harassment at school. We have tried to criminalize their very existence.  But, we have also absolved them of all family duties and responsibilities: to care for and support their spouses and children, to count their family's assets in determining public assistance, to obtain health insurance for dependents, to make end-of-life or necessary medical decisions for their life partners --- sometimes even to visit in the hospital, even to defend our own country. And then, we can stand on our two hind legs and proclaim, "See, I told you homosexual families are unstable."

    HERE. (Read the whole thing.  It's great.)  Small wonder you get out of bounds conduct (and what Craig did was way out of bounds) when law has been used in this manner.  Go to Holocaust Museum and check out how the Third Reich rose after changes in law to marginalize minorities (Jews, gays, gypsies, mental defects, etc.)

    This website is astonished when TX refuses to kill a likely innocent man on death row yesterday.  Because we've been told since Nixon to hate criminals so much (forget the criminal conduct by our recent and now former chief law enforcement officer as well as Pres., Veep, etc.) because they're easy pickings.  No lobbies for cons (although that's starting to change).  And the race and gays cards have been played to a fare thee well as Repub election strategy since late 60s.  

    The right absolutely has to have an "other" to hate and marginalize to keep power.  Anybody'll do, just make sure they are weaker and can't easily fight back (think Saddam Hussein v. U.S.) Dems, on the other hand, tend to take the higher road on trying to give reasonable help to less advantaged and to use government, within reason, to that end.  Put me in the latter camp.

    "Lawyers, I suppose, were children once." To Kill A Mockingbird

    by DC Scott on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:12:08 AM PDT

  •  A post I did post-Bill Sali earlier this month (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    larryrant, semiot, One Opinion

    basically agrees with you about this being a clash of fundamentalisms - although I genuinely believe religion, in its less extreme incarnations, has been and can be a force for good. A snip:

    Bill Sali is a victim. You might say that the real victims in this saga are Keith Ellison, the first Muslim congressman, or the man who first said the Hindu prayer in the U.S. Senate.

    But Sali is is the real victim. He is a victim of his fundamentalist Christianity and its inflexible view of the world. (An aside here about the words "evangelical" and "fundamentalist." They are not interchangeable, and I believe it is critical that we use the word fundamentalist to describe Sali and other Christian zealots, because it helps explain that they share the same mindset as fundamentalists of other religions, including Islam.)

    He is a victim of fast-changing U.S. and world demographics that leave Sali and other fundamentalist Christians feeling like events are spiraling out of their control. While many Christians see love and compassion as the roots of their religion, Sali's faith - though he may personally feel God's love - is driven by fear: fear of other religions, fear of women, fear of gays, fear of change, fear of foreigners - fear, period. And Sali may also be a victim of a life lived in southern Ohio and exurban Idaho - places where people just don't meet a lot of people who don't look and think pretty much as they do.

    http://redstaterebels.typepad.com/...

    Coming this fall: DemocracySpace, a nonpartisan blog for community activists and public officials.

    by Red State Rebel on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:12:20 AM PDT

  •  I missed those diaries (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks for reposting links :)

    Got a problem with my posts? Email me, and let's resolve it.

    by drbloodaxe on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:15:29 AM PDT

  •  Great Diary (7+ / 0-)

    Every conservative and republican of any flavor should read this and carefully consider whether an Islamic government or a liberal one would be more in accord with their values.

    The only caveat I'd add is that, ultimately, all of us are answering a single question:

    Do you believe that human beings are fundamentally bad?

    Note that to answer in the negative is not to claim we are essentially good. Your position could be neutral - most people I know tend to think that heredity, education and environment have a lot to do with character.

    But if you answer in the affirmative, chances are you're a conservative. You want a big daddy in the sky who will judge and punish. You want an authoritarian government who will judge and punish. You want women to be punished for being women. So an Islamic state would actually be a pretty sweet deal.

    Every day's another chance to stick it to The Man. - dls.

    by The Raven on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:17:19 AM PDT

    •  My faith teaches the inherent worth and dignity (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      boofdah, The Raven, floBlueflo, brein

      of every person. Yes, we all miss the mark to varying degrees. But this is the bedrock of most liberal religion, no matter what the stripe: that we are all worthy,  that we all have dignity, and we ought to treat others as we'd like to be treated.

      Fundamentalists see the world in black and white, so it's impossible for them to accept that every life has shades of grey.

      Coming this fall: DemocracySpace, a nonpartisan blog for community activists and public officials.

      by Red State Rebel on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:38:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Markos - your comments dovetail nicely with this (0+ / 0-)

    most recent diary by our favorite, Lance Dutson. It is of interest how Dutson remains the go to blogger in Maine news reports despite that his site has zero traffic. Check out the number of comments his diaries receive.

    "Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." -- Winston Churchill

    by Spud1 on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:18:33 AM PDT

    •  And I will add: notince the tactic Dutson uses, (0+ / 0-)

      calling someone an extreme leftist without actually defining it. Whereas, I think we understand exactly what "American Taliban" means.

      "Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." -- Winston Churchill

      by Spud1 on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:20:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  They know it too... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah, ibonewits, brein

    Every time a conservative resorts to the "what about the poor, oppressed Muslim women?" line to justify trying to bomb their burquas off, they're trying to paint liberals as hypocritical for not caring about women's issues if the women are Muslims.  The entire premise of the argument revolves around an implicit acknowledgment that liberal values are in more direct opposition to Islamic extremism than conservative values.  

  •  kos - (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ibonewits

    I've been pointing that out for years now to everyone that would listen.  I love it when I do the point by point comparison when discussing this with conservatives.  It puts them on the defensive so fast, it's amazing.

  •  If you have not yet seen (0+ / 0-)

    ...the BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares, do so right away.  It speaks directly to Kos' point, and does with facts.

  •  markos man crush (0+ / 0-)

    i've got one.

  •  Agree 100 percent, Kos. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah, ibonewits

    The difference between the Islamic Fundamentalists and Christian Fundamentalists is only one of degrees.

    (And I'm a Christian, albeit a moderate one who doesn't want to kill people who disagree with me or force people to live under laws dictated by my religion.)

    •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

      It's also about modernity and history. The mainstream christian world was very violent and intolerant 600 or more years ago. The fundie-republican part of it wants to almost go back to those days.
      Islam is a newer religion (by 600 years) and that part of the world was underdeveloped until the last 100 or fewer years. The whole idea of rationality and science, something American fundie-republicans are fighting againsy still, at least had a 200 year head start in the west.
      So much of the difference lies in the fact that we are in a different stage o develpment and history. But that of course doesn't keep certain yahoos from wanting to refute science and rational thought and go back to the bad old days.    

  •  So now most Americans are like terrorists? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vodalus

    Anyone who opposes gay marriage is now like Islamic terrorists? That's a pretty myopic and hyperbolic view of both the marriage and terrorism issues. Just because you scream righteous indignation at opposing viewpoints, and label any dissenters as terrorists does not give any validity to what you say. It's amazing how you've adopted the tactics of those you so often rail against. Should we now call you Bill O'Kos?

  •  As Lincoln said (0+ / 0-)

    "God cannot be for or against the same thing at the same time"

    "What is the most important thing in life? People, people, people." -- Maori proverb

    by mkfox on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:37:38 AM PDT

  •  It's classic projecting of the shadow. (5+ / 0-)

    It's Jungian for a way of denial and it's so obvious.

    Seeing in others that which you hate in yourself, so you can go on hating and have some queasy feeling you're still ok.

    You hit it Kos, Republican aka The American Taliban are nothing more than Christian Terrorists.  Equally if not more dangerous.

    These thugs blame Democrats for the problems, labeling them as weak and how they hate America, where as the opposite is true.  The criminals are the ones who really hate America by trying to implement a "Christian Talibanesque Non American" way of life in this country in lock step to that which we see in the Middle East and simply won't leave us alone to live our lives.  They simply hate as much if not more than the terrorists we're fighting over there.

    They hate freedom,
    They hate America,
    They hate liberty,
    They hate that women have a say,
    Shit they hate women in general,
    They hate gays,
    They hate African Americans,
    They hate Latin American,
    They hate Muslims,
    They hate Hindus,
    They hate other sects of Christianity,
    They hate our Constitution,
    They hate privacy,
    They hate Bill Clinton,
    They hate fair elections,
    They hate equality,

    All things that make this country what it is and what it was supposed to be from the get-go.  And we need to take it back.

    "Don't let the might of the Christian right, fuck it all up, for you and the rest of the world!" Roger Waters - Leaving Beirut

    by Ex Real Republican on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:40:55 AM PDT

  •  Completely agree with you Kos (0+ / 0-)

    Right wing/religious fundamentalism is not a problem only in the Muslim faith, or the Jewish faith, it's also a problem in the Christian faith. They share pretty much identical ideologies, and are the polar extreme of fundamentalism.  

  •  If a Democrat said... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah

    ...what Dave Lewis said, s/he'd be arrested for advocating violence against a US Senator.

  •  Thank you, thank you, thank you... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    epcraig

    This is what I've been saying all along. America is not perfect and needs to be set in order, but I've never understood slamming the US then defending any of the Islamic governments since they stand polar opposite to what progressives want.

    A bad day under constitutional democracy in the US, is better than any day under a theocratic democracy/monarchy.  

    "No his mind is not for rent, to any god or government. Always hopeful yet discontent, he knows changes aren't permanent. But change is." -Neil Peart

    by Boisepoet on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:47:09 AM PDT

  •  George Orwell made a similar comments back when (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ibonewits, Judgment at Nuremberg

    That Stalinists and Fascists actually had more in common with each other than either had with liberals/social democrats.

    Chief among their similarities was their disdain for "bourgeois civil liberties"

  •  A. MEN. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah

    I promised my family they won't see me dragged from my home by men in black, dangling off ropes from helicopters. www.thejoshuablog.com

    by Junglered1 on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:53:40 AM PDT

  •  Tolerance? Why not acceptance? (0+ / 0-)

    I am so deeply upset at the use of the word "tolerance", and the many people that are still using it all of these years after it was first introduced.  We wanted our children to be tolerant of the differences between the people of our society, so schools everywhere promoted tolerance, which was a good thing to do at the time.  

    I find it highly insulting all of these years later that we haven't gotten past "tolerance" to "acceptance".  We should be sooooo, way past, "tolerance", so what I ask of everyone today, and forward is to change the word "tolerance" to "acceptance". Maybe somewhere in our near future this will actually come about.

    •  Why Not? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ibonewits, floBlueflo

      Perhaps I'm a wet blanket but I don't think that's realistic. Take amish people for instance. I think these people are completly backwards. I don't understand any of it. I don't want to celebrate the way they live their lives. It would be disingenuous if I did because I think it's completly nuts.

      This being a free country however, I don't need to understand their lifestyle choices. If they choose to live that way and it makes them happy, your correct that I should be big enough to say Salute and God Bless. If I can't bring myself to do that however I need to mind my own business and respect their rights to pursue hapiness and live their own lives how they see fit.

      Most of these fundies are total zealots in what they believe in. Perhaps I'm wrong but I think it's a fruitless exercise and waste of time to attempt to get them to accept any kind of morality outside of their own narrow, antiquated, patriarchical definitions. Life is too short. In fact, to be perfectly honest I don't really approve of their morality or their lifestyle choices.

      So I think the concept of tolerance has some utility. If fundies want to live their lives like total nutjobs, it's really none of my business. What the fundies don't understand, and need to be made to understand, is that they need to respect the right of others to pursue happiness, even when that pursuit conflicts with their own definition of morality. So let's not throw "tolerance" on the shitpile.

  •  This Point Must Be Made 500 times a day every day (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah, Judgment at Nuremberg

    Until it finally sticks.

    It's an airtight, irrefutable, devastating argument that destroys one of the foundational frames of right-wing discourse in this country.

    Why is it not made at every turn?  This is OUR DEVASTATING WEDGE ISSUE, which can be used to split the dead-ender nutcases from people who are still capable of reflection and a sense of shame.

    I made this point when Bill O'Reilly fantasized about San Francisco being blown up by terrorists as a just punishment for municipal restrictions on recruiting in high schools.  Whenever this kind of argument is made, it must be instantly reframed to reveal that the rightwing viewpoint ALWAYS FULLY COINCIDES with that of the religious extremists/terrorists that they claim to be so opposed to.

    How hard is it to ask:

    "Why does Bill O'Reilly talk of radical Islamic terrorists as agents of justice?  What does this tell us about Bill O'Reilly and his view of justice? Why is he inviting them to destroy a city full of innocent Americans?  How can a man who so proudly identifies with the viewpoint and aims of terrorists claim to be a patriot?

    "Our papers don't purtend to print o'ny wut guv'ment choose,/ An' thet insures us all to git the very best o' noose." -- J.R. Lowell

    by Fatherflot on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 10:13:09 AM PDT

  •  Absolutely 100% correct (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah

    Same regressive, fundamentally anti-human and anti-freedom ideas, different decorations.

    Palpably Extant: the death of the 4th estate.

    by spencerh on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 10:14:35 AM PDT

    •  Differences (0+ / 0-)

      The differences are based mainly just on culture (republicans are born here, Taliban there) and where we are in history compare to them (modernity hit here a few hundred years sooner).
      But the basic predispositions and attitudes toward life are the same.
      Does anyone doubt that if Herr Karl Rove were born in Germany in 1900 that he'd love to work for or with Goebbels?
      Or Tom Delay, imagine him. Would he be a social democrat in jail? Would he join the army, the brown shirts or would the skull and crossbone wearing black uniforms look most appealing to him? What ministry would the exterminator prefer to work? Or Cheney?
      Dubya is the only one that wouldn't quite fit. He's too much of a pants pissing coward who would never dirty his own hands, plus the nazi's had no use for Trojan horse type politicians like him as they had Adolf just be more direct.    

  •  Well If your commentary earlier in the week holds (0+ / 0-)

    Than this guy must be REALLY gay. Like that guy who shot Kevin Spacey in American Beauty.

  •  I've been saying this for four years now (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah

    and every time I do I get a lot of people assailing me with responses about how there are "sensible Christians" and I should stop generalizing.  I know there are "sensible Christians" out there.  Unfortunately, when the Christian tanks begin rolling through our cities one day I have a feeling that being "sensible" won't stop them.

    May His Divine Shadow fall upon you.

    by Magnus Greel on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 10:18:55 AM PDT

  •  Marriage is between any two people (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ibonewits, drmah

    Why the "two" person limit?  As long as the persons involved are consenting adults, why the numerical limit?

    •  Isn't that Romney's Morman Philosophy? (0+ / 0-)
      •  There are a lot of polygamous religions (0+ / 0-)

        Mormonism is just one of them. There is a movement here in the USA of people who call ourselves "polyamorous," who believe that it's possible to love more than one person at a time.

        Limiting marriage to only two people is using the secular legal system unconstitutionally to enforce Christian doctrines on the rest of us.

        That ancient SCOTUS decision against polygamy in Utah was a very bad one and will eventually be overthrown.

        First, oversight; second, investigations; third, impeachments; fourth, war crimes trials!

        by ibonewits on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 11:05:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Simple (0+ / 0-)

      "Marriage" is a legalistic and economic concept in civil society. Limiting it to 2 people can be argued from an economic perspective.

      If you want to be with more than one person, you can enter into a number of non-binding multi-party relationships like Polyamorous relationships, or you can simply enter a normal open relationship (or marry one person and have an open marriage).

      Marriage is not required to have a relationship with people.

      Palpably Extant: the death of the 4th estate.

      by spencerh on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 01:29:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Everything They Fear, They ARE (3+ / 0-)

    Every single obsession of the right reveals exactly who they are:

    Their obsession with wars and warrior culture reveals what pathetic cowards and weaklings most are.

    Their obsession with religious fundamentalism and terrorism reveals their own revulsion for democracy, pluralism and tolerance.  (see this)

    Their obsession with homosexuality reveals their deep-seated insecurities about their own sexual identities.

    Their obsession with families, marriage, etc. and their insistence on having the state uphold these institutions through law reveals their own loss of faith in them.

    In short, everything they fear, they are.  Everything they hate, is what they see in the mirror and in their own hearts.  They hate themselves for being weak, cowardly, sexually-confused, unfaithful little goose-steppers.

    Never forget that all the energy that goes into their attacks is generated by this fundamental hypocrisy and its violent repression.
     

    "Our papers don't purtend to print o'ny wut guv'ment choose,/ An' thet insures us all to git the very best o' noose." -- J.R. Lowell

    by Fatherflot on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 10:26:17 AM PDT

  •  Islamism is More Diverse than We thinK (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Judgment at Nuremberg

    I agree broadly with what Kos is saying, but if unless Ron Paul wins the election and the United States is planning to never have anything to do with the Middle East again, we need to break with the all Islamic movements are cut from the same bloc of evil as Osama bin Laden that neocons have promoted. It is as if we stuck the Sweedish Social Democrats and the Khmer Rouge in the same category because they were both Marxists.

    There is a big difference between an actual terrorist network (Al Qaeda), a mass national/sectarian movement that uses terrorist tactics as a means to broader goal (Hamas, Hizbollah) and non-violent Islamic political parties and movements (like in Turkey and Eqypt).

    •  Block of evil? (0+ / 0-)

      I think we need to do more than that-- we need to realize that Al-Qaeda's actions do not warrant the "evil" label.  The 9/11 attacks were an attack on the capitalist tyranny that has been imposed on the rest of the world for fifty years.  The United States has committed atrocities in Korea, Vietnam, Peru, Nicaragua, and Guam, not even going into the Middle East.  It was high time someone struck back and gave American citizens a taste of their own medicine.  Al-Qaeda certainly has the moral high ground when compared to the vast majority of our legislators.

      Rejection of the state is a precursor to the only freedom that is attainable.

      by Vodalus on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 03:18:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  And I do believe that the American Taliban (0+ / 0-)

    will turn to terrorism to achieve their goals after 2008, once it is clear that their hope of a theocracy is ended.  And it is a damn good thing that we will have the Patriot Act to use effectively on these creatures.  

  •  You might find my essay interesting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Judgment at Nuremberg

    A Call to Arms, on my website.

    Fundamentalist thinking patterns are the same, whether they are Jewish, Christian, Islamic, or Marxist, and they are all a threat to the rest of us.

    First, oversight; second, investigations; third, impeachments; fourth, war crimes trials!

    by ibonewits on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 11:00:45 AM PDT

  •  What about their economic practices? (0+ / 0-)

    Which two groups of people revel in economic inequality and which one group strives for fair opportunities in the market place? I think the answer is quite obvious.

    The Al Qaida/Taliban : Cloak themselves in a particular brand of social/religious populism only to better serve the continuation of their massive economic inequalities.

    American Taliban : Just watch Bill O' trumpet "the folks" yet at the same time be as pro-corporatist welfare for anything from tax regulations to private health care, despite the blatantly obvious horrible impact it has on most of "the folks".

    Liberals : Void of social/religious preferences. Every person should have equal representation under the law, and thus should have equal opportunities in the market place. Even if that means restricting the run away and improper influence of a few at the top. Heaven forbid democracy actually work for the people who participate in it.....

    I'm new here. I tried going through the comments and the other posts to make sure I didn't say something someone else already did. If I missed it, sorry for being redundant!  

  •  hate to say his name (0+ / 0-)

    now i know why conservatives scare me so much.and about the one that hollers the loudist might be one. well check out b.o.r what does he holler the most about. think about it

  •  I weas starting to wonder if I was crazy (0+ / 0-)

    As a recently declared political science major and a newcomer to Dailykos, I was starting to wonder if I was crazy for having the exact same ideas that were expressed in this article. I was wondering if I was some crazy wingnut for noticing parallels between the ideologies of the far-right and Islamic fundamentalism. Thank you for letting me know that I'm not the only one who's observed this.

    Now I just wish I had the first clue in hell as to what I should do about it.

  •  More like this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DigDug

    Kos, this is beautiful.

    This is exceptionally beautiful.

    A brief review of my archive material will make clear I am not your uncritical cheerleader.  But this is outstanding.

    More like this please.  Every goddamn day.  Make the theocrats eat it.  I hope you buy a steel boot just for the purpose of kicking theocrats hard in the nuts.  We all should.

    Bravo.

  •  DAM RIGHT (0+ / 0-)

    My 70 year old grandmother who is from Arkansas, but lives in Connecticut calls the southern baptists the same thing.

  •  Be careful about lumping and labeling... (0+ / 0-)

    I'm not one to defend Republicans, but there are degrees of hatred, and degrees of reasons to hate.

    I would call Xtian fundie Republicans the equivalent of Islamists who would impose their religious bigotry on non-Muslims and moderate Muslims by non-violent means. Both groups certainly deserve our hatred.

    However, violent Islamist jihadis are the equivalent not of your average bible-thumping Republican - they are actually quite analogous to KKK and neo-Nazi filth. These groups deserve several orders of magnitude more hatred.

    Democratic candidates who appear to be kissing the asses of people who can't tell the difference between a nazi piece of shit or its jihadi soulmate and a typical Republican and hate all equally aren't going to as well as some Kossacks might think in flyover states - Iraq quagmire or not.

  •  How creepy! (0+ / 0-)

    I mean, I think Craig is creepy, but I sure don't want to "kill the turkey."

    tragically un-hip

    -5.88, -6.82

    by Debby on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 12:58:51 PM PDT

  •  I think this may be my favorite kos post. (0+ / 0-)

    This and the libertarian democrat ones (even though I dont completely agree with him about what libertarianism is).

    This is a great post though. It deserves a tip jar. +4

  •  Kos - This is the key (0+ / 0-)

    Kos,

    Thank you for this article. If more persons understood the above issues the world would be a better place.

    The day we see people picking American churches to give up their belief in Satan is the day I will sleep better. Many churches have become political rallying places for the Republican Party. Because of this I believe they forfeit their right to privacy.

    Please keep writing about the link between the American Fundamentalists’ churches and  Islamic Fundamentalists.  I’m convinced the only way to get rid of one is to get rid of both.

    Jon Gordon (linkage)

    "Upward, not Northward" - Flatland, by EA Abbott

    by linkage on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 01:33:00 PM PDT

  •  Just one adjustment... (2+ / 0-)

    God
    Al Qaida/Taliban: God is on our side and will help us kill our enemies

    American Taliban: God is on our side and will help us kill our enemies

    Liberals: God may or may not exist -  and even if he does, His own law says Thou Shalt Not Kill

       
    One of the best Onion pieces ever: God Angrily Clarifies 'Don't Kill' Rule:

    "I don't care how holy somebody claims to be," God said. "If a person tells you it's My will that they kill someone, they're wrong. Got it? I don't care what religion you are, or who you think your enemy is, here it is one more time: No killing, in My name or anyone else's, ever again."

    ...

    "I tried to put it in the simplest possible terms for you people, so you'd get it straight, because I thought it was pretty important," said God, called Yahweh and Allah respectively in the Judaic and Muslim traditions. "I guess I figured I'd left no real room for confusion after putting it in a four-word sentence with one-syllable words, on the tablets I gave to Moses. How much more clear can I get?"

    "But somehow, it all gets twisted around and, next thing you know, somebody's spouting off some nonsense about, 'God says I have to kill this guy, God wants me to kill that guy, it's God's will,'" God continued. "It's not God's will, all right? News flash: 'God's will' equals 'Don't murder people.'"


    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that His Justice cannot sleep for ever. - Thomas Jefferson

    by Lashe on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 02:05:37 PM PDT

  •  You're exactly right Markos. (0+ / 0-)

    And the sad thing is, that a large part of the right is too god damned stupid or distracted to see it for what it is.

    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." -Nathanael Greene

    by tarheelblue on Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 02:28:49 PM PDT

  •  Yep. The only argument is which book to use. (0+ / 0-)

    They want theocracy. They want a system which enforces their prejudices and bigotry.

  •  Battle the Ameriban, help Montana get the blues! (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks for the link, MM. Just thought I would post Left in the West's ActBlue page, so you all could pitch in to the candidacies of our state-wide 2008 races. It's never too early to give -- especially to William Kennedy, who's taking on the ultra-conservative Dennis Rehberg...

    Help save America!

  •  How do you know the senator wrote that comment? (0+ / 0-)

    How can that be verified?  Anyone could say they were  Dave Lewis.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site