Skip to main content

Consider this the greatest book endorsement ever.

I'm a big fan of, and when the book "Over the Cliff," How the Election of Barack Obama Drove the American Right Insane. was announced, I knew I would pick it up at the library as soon as I could.

   But now that I have read the endorsement Rep Alan Grayson (Big D-FL08) just gave it, I want it more than ever.

Rep. Alan Grayson:

   At their hugely popular website ‘Crooks and Liars,’ John Amato and David Neiwert have helped to expose the fact that there is no conservative party in America any more. They show that the right wingers are not conservatives, they are anarchists.

   The only law the right wing believes in is the Law of the Jungle. No schools, no hospitals, no job programs, no nothing. Their idea of nirvana is Mogadishu. See it there, at ‘Crooks and Liars,’ and read it here."

Only Alan Grayson can put something in perspective quite like that.

More below the fold

Now, the question could be, was the American right insane BEFORE Obama was elected, and did they just hide it better, or did Obama's election push them over the edge?

   The American right is, after all, pro torture, anti empathy, against equality, afraid of their own strawmen's shadows, adverse to reality, anti science, anti-intellectual, hate, fear and greed driven mini megalomaniacs.

Image Hosting by

   Okay, in all fairness, some of them are full blown megalomaniacs.

But this quote by the always spot on Grayson should be repeated over and over and over and over.

. . . .there is no conservative party in America any more. They show that the right wingers are not conservatives, they are anarchists.

   The only law the right wing believes in is the Law of the Jungle. No schools, no hospitals, no job programs, no nothing. Their idea of nirvana is Mogadishu.

~ Rep. Alan Grayson FL-08

   Yes, yes they are. The American right wing is sadistic, a pack of sociopathic liars who justify anything and couldn't admit to a free market created environmental disaster if it was gushing oil out of their mouths as they shouted "Drill, baby, Drill!"

   The American right is the party of megalomaniacs. Thank George Carlin that there are people like Alan Grayson, John Amato and David Neiwert who have the guts to call the American right wing what they are, crazy, lawless megalomaniacs who would sell their own mothers to an oil executive or Wall St CEO for the right price.

   With a political Right Wing like this, who needs crazy people?

   I am a huge fan of, and a huge fan of Congressman Alan Grayson. I can't wait to read this book, but after reading the quote by Alan Grayson, I just had to share this with you.

Because it is really us and reality versus the Megalomaniac party. It's about time more people started saying it like that.

    I work for PeanutButterPAC! If you like my articles and want to support Progressive primary and general election candidates join PeanutButterPAC, the PAC that fights back!

    Vote for me to get a DFA Netroots Nation scholarship!

    You can follow me on Twitter at @JesseLaGreca

Crossposted at The Progressive

Originally posted to MinistryOfTruth on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 07:45 PM PDT.


Do you agree with Alan Grayson?

84%118 votes
5%7 votes
8%12 votes
2%3 votes

| 140 votes | Vote | Results

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

    •  Hm...Interesting Question... (10+ / 0-)

      Grandma ExGov TurkeyLover's not - so - veiled racist attacks (direct & supporting) during the 2008 campaign in some ways helped bring to light a reptilian brain that's been a part of the GOP for a lot of years. The actual election, though, brought the bat$hit up to 11.

      "We're all Hispanic Arizonans now." Keith Olbermann, 5.17.10

      by CityLightsLover on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 07:50:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The right believes that (0+ / 0-)

      lawlessness will save us all.  

      The problem in the gulf was caused by laws, not by lawlessness.  The Bushies failed due to laws, not lawlessness.  Wall Street failed due to laws, not lawlessness.  

      In fact, if we just get rid of laws and eviscerate government, all will be hunky dory.  

      Marx argued that the cause of revolution was a condition in which the forces of production (people and resources) were out of sync with the relations of production (existing laws and contracts).  Could it be more ironic that the righties are rejecting all existing laws?  

      Hardly.  In fact, Aristotle argued that the rich were a threat to all constitutions, because they always feel that the laws are holding them back.  The poor always feel that the laws are holding them down.  Hence, both are revolutionary classes, and both are threats to constitutional rule.  

      When the right preaches lawlessness as panacea, they are preaching a 2,000 year old recipe for disaster.  

      The only way to fight them is to strenghten the middle class.  

      More civil service jobs NOW!!!

      Youth lives by personality, age lives by calculation. -- Aristotle

      by not2plato on Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 12:20:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  yup (8+ / 0-)

    If I were to design a trojan horse to bring down the Republican party, it would bear an uncanny resemblance to Rand Paul. - #104758

    by mydailydrunk on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 07:49:47 PM PDT

  •  the weirdest thing of all.. (6+ / 0-)

    is that they think that they're the sane ones.

    BP lies, Gulf dies.

    by steelman on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 07:50:23 PM PDT

    •  They claim they are "conservative" whatever that (4+ / 0-)

      is supposed to mean now. No one can explain it to me because the Republicans haven't delivered it. Ever.

      "Don't knock's just like chess but without the dice" - john07801

      by voracious on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 07:57:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Interesting question, Vor (4+ / 0-)

        I think I'll start asking it of the conservatives I know and run into:

        Define "Being Conservative"

        Or is there a better way of putting it?

        Regardless, It'll be interesting to hear how many different def's I get.

        •  Meh... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WSComn, voracious

          they'll give you the strawman bullshit "small gov'mint low taxes." If they were to stare at you blankly and scratch their asses it would mean pretty much the same thing.

          "Come writers and critics who prophetize with your pen. And keep your eyes wide the chance won't come again." --Bob Dylan

          by Socratic Method on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:24:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I just always ask these righties what they are (5+ / 0-)

          voting for. When they tell me how dumb I am for being a Democrat I tell them to convince me to vote Republican. Give me examples of what they have done that I should support.

          First, the examples never surface or if they do they are always right wing talking points. Second, the person is usually living a lifestyle that goes against what the supposedly stand for.

          An example of this would be a good friend's child who is 20 years old. He was unable to finish classes at community college because he couldn't stand the "liberal" college teachers. The kid just left any class that allowed debate or discussion. So, he signs up for classes so his dad can keep him on their health insurance then he drops them.

          Now, after listening to him rail on "libs" and "dems" and our "lyin' African" in the White House, and our banter about politics I finally asked him how college was going and he told me he wasn't in school and that he was on unemployment because he had been laid off from his job.

          This is a person who had spent the last hour telling me how much he opposed dirt bags on welfare, all Democrats and "Obamacare." I told him that "Obamacare" was going to let him stay on his dad's health insurance without lying about being in school. He still hates it.


          "Don't knock's just like chess but without the dice" - john07801

          by voracious on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:26:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Yee-haw! (3+ / 0-)

    And he didn't even ask for money this time!

  •  I just don't understand what Republican voters (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gravedugger, mama jo, MinistryOfTruth

    are even voting for. What have they seen the party deliver?

    "Don't knock's just like chess but without the dice" - john07801

    by voracious on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 07:56:57 PM PDT

  •  Grayson is almost right (6+ / 0-)

    They aren't anarchists...They are anarcho-capitalists.

    Anarcho-capitalists who believe corporations are equivalent to a natural person.

    Anarchists are one thing...But the republicans have so elevated and fetishized the corporation that they are looking like Mussolini with some Somolia tossed in.

    It is curious to see the periodical disuse and perishing of means and machinery, which were introduced with loud laudation a few years or centuries before. -RWE

    by Gravedugger on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 07:59:25 PM PDT

  •  This is funny (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eileen B, mama jo, MinistryOfTruth

    This was the theme of my own diary today.

    I'm glad Alan Grayson agrees with me.

    Harry Reid: Float like Barney Fife, sting like Aunt Bea.

    by MeMeMeMeMe on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 07:59:56 PM PDT

  •  This is not true (4+ / 0-)

    "Conservatives" are control freaks who don't like to be controlled;

    as opposed to anarchists who are not control freaks, but likewise do not like to be controlled.

    What has been thwarting "conservatives" since 1789? Disciplinary violence from the middle and lower classes, or the threat thereof.

    They ally themselves with true conservatives who fear the entropic effects of said violence, but they aren't content with the middle class morality that governs the current status quo as true conservatives are (see also Barack Obama).

    They would love to turn America into Abu Dhabi or Thailand.

    In this age of falseness, only howls of agony ring true.

    by Paul Goodman on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:01:36 PM PDT

    •  exactly (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      buddabelly, CornSyrupAwareness

      The American right is a myopic, plutocracy-oligarchy, crazy (and not in a good way), narrow-minded, extremely-short attention-spanned, with an even shorter memory, who collectively frown on intelligence and good old-fashioned common sense. They are not anarchists.

      True anarchy means no 'archy' - no striation of society, nobody above and nobody below. It can be organization and/or chaos (simply a certain lack of order), but without heirarchy (or any other archy), and therefore is truly non-violent, because to cause violence is to put oneself above someone else; to make a decision for someone else. What separates libertarianism from anarchy is responsibility and a sense that we're all in this together. Don't insult anarchy with comparisons to the American right.

      I love Alan Grayson, he's one of my faves, but he got this analogy wrong, although everything else is right on target.

      -7.50, -6.87 Bright Pink Smile - a different sort of art blog

      by asterkitty on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 09:20:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Great characterization by Congressman Grayson, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WSComn, MinistryOfTruth

    as always.  Still, if conservatives gain power, they will enforce uniformity.  No dissent.  Everyone marching, saluting, worshiping together.  Cheering Dear Leader.

  •  and subversives n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    CA budget kills the economy and harms so many. Schwarzenegger's actions say it's more terrible to delay tax cuts for oil corporations than pay for child care.

    by anyname on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:07:15 PM PDT

  •  I see what Grayson was going for, but... (6+ / 0-)

    ... in all fairness, the American right cannot really be called "anarchists" either (unless by anarchists we mean the kind of low-rent thugs who ruin anti-globalization protests by breaking windows and burning cars).  Anarchism, at least as it was practiced in Barcelona during the Spanish Civil War (the only time in this century that anarchism has been known to be practiced successfully), society was founded on voluntary cooperation, and it worked.  The American right may like to talk about voluntary cooperation, but they do not believe in it.  It is more accurate, I think, to refer to the American right as "followers of anarchy," which at least in my book is not the same as "anarchist."  An anarchist wants to remove all repressive systems of state and business power, and replace them with a system founded upon cooperation and mutual responsibility.  A follower of anarchy believes in nothing but, as has already been said, the law of the jungle.

    •  I think Grayson meant that Conservatives want (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mama jo, mojada

      economic anarchy, with no rules at all, and a rule of law they only have to apply when they feel like it.

      But that is just my take on it, and they are sociopathic liars, so who knows if even they know what they want

      I work for PeanutButterPAC, join us and help fight for Progress!

      by MinistryOfTruth on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:15:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Agree, this is what Grayson meant (4+ / 0-)

        I think Grayson meant that Conservatives want economic anarchy, with no rules at all, and a rule of law they only have to apply when they feel like it.

        No question.

        A better term would be "corporate libertarian", or "economic libertarian", a la David Korten.

        I understand and don't blame anyone here if they think I'm being picky or obsessive or boring but I hope this will be tolerated.
        I admire Grayson a great deal, so this is nothing against him. He's one Dem I'd  vote for at the speed of light if given the opportunity. The term "anarchist" is just so distorted and misused by almost everyone that I feel compelled to defend the term and not let it be soiled by having it used to describe "corporate libertarians" AKA

        The American right is, after all, pro torture, anti empathy, against equality, afraid of their own strawmen's shadows, adverse to reality, anti science, anti-intellectual, hate, fear and greed driven mini megalomaniacs.

        which is an absolutely accurate description of millions of those who call themselves "conservatives" IMO.
        (I don't call myself an "anarchist" or advocate "anarchism", and I don't claim there is a "pure" or "correct" interpretation, BTW. I just hate seeing it used as a catch-all pejorative).

        Chomsky on the semantics:

        " So libertarian in Europe always meant socialist. Here it means ultra-conservative -- Ayn Rand or Cato Institute or something like that. But that's a special U.S. usage. There [in Europe] it meant, and always meant to me, socialist and anti-state, an anti-state branch of socialism, which meant a highly organized society, completely organized and nothing to do with chaos, but based on democracy all the way through. That means democratic control of communities, of workplaces, of federal structures, built on systems of voluntary association, spreading internationally. That's traditional anarchism. You know, anybody can have the word if they like, but that's the mainstream of traditional anarchism".

        And Emma Goldman:

        "Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations.
        ... individual liberty and economic equality, the twin forces for the birth of what is fine and true in man."

        Illegal Alien: Term used by the descendents of foreign colonizers to refer to the descendents of indigenous people

        by mojada on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 09:00:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I think they were batshit insane long (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    irishwitch, WSComn, MinistryOfTruth

    before Obama was elected. At least those who weren't greedy sociopaths.

    If there is no accountability for those who authorized torture, we can no longer say that we are a nation of laws, not men.

    by MikePhoenix on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:10:25 PM PDT

  •  I have a question for everybody. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    MoT said weird shit to me earlier about his underbelly being like that of a dragon. I laughed so hard when he said it that I included it in my profile.

    And that weirdness is there, for all to see, right above my name now. See it? Look down.

    Yeah. What's that thing called?

    P.S. You are settling a bet here, so answer correctly. :)

    My weakness is my soft underbelly. You know, like on a dragon. -- MinistryOfTruth

    by Colorado is the Shiznit on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:11:55 PM PDT

  •  Not anarchists ... barbarians. (6+ / 0-)

    Republicans oppose the institutions that define our civilization. They are barbarians.

    The invasion of Iraq was a war crime, a crime against humanity, and a crime against civilization. Prosecute the crime.

    by Positronicus on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:23:44 PM PDT

  •  I have mixed feelings (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Perry the Imp, MinistryOfTruth

    I like to see elected Democrats starting to call out the modern right at the moral level it deserves, but Grayson is wrong, this is the natural manifestation of conservativism.  It is a bankrupt and self destructive ideology.  This is what it does when allowed to run amok.

    All the countries that have relatively sane conservatives like Britain or Canada just have conservatives operating in political orders that won't tolerate them acting like they do in the US.  They'll get called on it, so they constrain themselves.  

    We sometimes talk about "Eisenhower Republicans" and wonder where all they all went.  I remmber that Joe McCarthy was an Eisenhower Republican and the Birchers were handing out "Wanted" posters about JFK in Dallas just before his death.  FDR "welcomed their hatred" because there was a lot of hatred to welcome.  Nixon in the tapes is paranoid, racist and vicious.  But he can't show it publicly so he creates the EPA and tries to do a deal on health care.

    At the individual level you can find many nice conservatives who are decent people, but they're nice and decent despite their political views, and unwitting participants in a great vicious scam that is literally destroying the planet.  I don't have to condemn them individually to condemn the ideas and the movement.

    We need to discredit conservativism.  We do that by not pretending that the current crop of lunatics and sociopaths are an aberration or deviation from its true values, they're not.  This is it.

    Help build the Progressive Governing Majority at Open Left

    by Scientician on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:26:38 PM PDT

  •  What's Wrong With Anarchism? (5+ / 0-)

    Seriously.  I would think more people around here would have a better grasp of that particular political philosophy, given that it's one which a reasonable number of progressives see our current actions as a small step towards.

    Certainly there should be enough educated people here to recognize that Anarchism has nothing at all to do with conservativism, much less with America's insane manifestation of it.

  •  I Know a lot of Anarchists (6+ / 0-)

    and that is an awful thing to say.

    They all care about people, and are anti-war, anti-racist, pro-feminist, pro-environment, pro-animal rights, pro-equality, anti-torture, etc. etc.

    Republicans are Nihilists, not Anarchists.

    "Humanity won't be happy until the last capitalist is hung with the guts of the last bureaucrat." - Paris, 1968

    by turthlover on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:38:33 PM PDT

  •  Extremism and Fear (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Unenergy, MinistryOfTruth

    I've said is before and I'll repeat it here. The GOP has become a party of, by, and for extremists.

    1. Neocon - foreign policy extremism.
    1. Christian right -  social policy extremism.
    1. Supply side - economic policy extremism.
    1. Reagan - government policy extremism.

    When you think about it, the only thing those four Republican policy interest groups have in common is that they are extreme, and they had found mutual power under the GOP tent.

    Why the right has become radicalized is open for debate. My opinion is that people are psychologically predisposed to be either on the right or the left (of course, some individual inclinations cross the middle).

    Part of the fundamental psychology of those on the right, IMHO, is the fear of change, and loss of control over change. I believe that this basic emotion drives most of what those on the right say and do.

    When they appear angry, I believe this too is a form of fear. Fear masquerading as anger. Because being angry makes one feel less vulnerable than does plain feeling afraid.

    What greater symbol of change than the election of a black president? What greater fear generator in the mind of a so-called conservative.

    I'm not a psychology professional, these are just my own conclusions based on my layperson's observations and analysis.

  •  This Right Wing Utopia is potentially being (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    asterkitty, MinistryOfTruth

    bought to Australia as the party here has similarly stood in the way of the government implementing any policy by a slim margin in the Senate. This has stonewalled legislation designed to help.

    They are also talking of eliminating unemployment for the under 30's forcing them to take any job offered them.
    Eliminating a planned infrastructure program which would see Gb speed fiber optics to every home.
    Selling off our profitable public health insurance company which sets the benchmark in premium increases yr on yr. No outrageous increases ~ about 10% p.a. mostly because this company is competitive.
    Cutting spending on schools.
    There are a whole lot more, but all basically are aimed at eliminating government from doing anything except collect tax. IOW, international anarchists.

    Common factor legitimizing their stance = Mr Rupert Murdoch's media organization. And not legitimizing because they are better ideas, no, just by convincing enough people through hyperbolic constructs that the existing government is worse.

    Sound familiar?

    Those folks who are trying to get in the way of progress - let me tell you, I'm just getting started. I don't quit. I'm not tired; I'm just getting started.

    by Unenergy on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 08:54:56 PM PDT

    •  Enforced employment? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Unenergy, asterkitty

      and how is that any different than wage slavery?

      I work for PeanutButterPAC, join us and help fight for Progress!

      by MinistryOfTruth on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 09:00:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Coalition considers Gen Y dole ban. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        "I had a very free-ranging discussion with people who were complaining bitterly about the difficulty of getting people to work," he said. - Source

        IOW job in the middle of the desert which they are having trouble attracting candidates to, here's our government to force you to take up something you are really going to be appreciative of OR starve.

        I have seen some push back and I can tell you having worked at a lot of these projects, the last thing you want when you are living in a camp isolated from civilization is someone who doesn't want to be there. They call it going troppo.

        Those folks who are trying to get in the way of progress - let me tell you, I'm just getting started. I don't quit. I'm not tired; I'm just getting started.

        by Unenergy on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 09:09:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Republicans are not... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    irishwitch, asterkitty, mojada

    'conservatives', they are 'reactionaries', rooting for  basically the middle ages (whether they know it or not) in the form of plutocracy, and corporate feudalism, both totalitarian, and casually murderous. Some of them may wake up, but not before it's too late. The only hope for this country is Dems like Grayson, and they're in very short supply, surrounded by  corporate loving DINOs.

    "God is an iron" -Spider Robinson

    by oldcrow on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 09:03:50 PM PDT

  •  I prefer the term "paranoid reactionary" (3+ / 0-)

    because I like the idea of anarchy in the Peter Kropotkin sense, which is that people don't feel a need to be dominated and so they can work and live together much better. It's an affirmation of the goodness in oneself and others and a willingness to work and live cooperatively and live and let live.
    That said, the main thrust of this diary is much needed insight that the right wing in America has gone completely batshit FUBAR. Their aggressive insanity is abusive and pathological.
    Another example is the memo point heard constantly to throw out all incumbents and start over. That's the same as to destroy society and start over, which is the meaning of anarchy that Grayson meant I believe.

    Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge. -Carl Sagan

    by howardfromUSA on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 09:20:48 PM PDT

  •  We need to be damn sure we have his back! (0+ / 0-)


    by potatohead on Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 09:32:54 PM PDT

  •  Perhaps a better title would have (0+ / 0-)


    Over the Cliff, and Right into the Gutter


    As for..

    The only law the right wing believes in is the Law of the Jungle.

    This is less new today than it is more obvious.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site