" Apparently since Scott is no longer on staff at UNI he doesn't feel the need to look at both sides of an issue anymore and search for a fair, correct answer. The "proof" that Scott says shows conservatives are angry is not real. I don't know that it actually exists outside of Scott's own little world. Scott's proof isn't. How hard is he not looking to hear the counterparts to every radio and TV personality he listed? No matter how far off the grid Scott lives he surely heard of Al Franken and his NoAir America. I can demonstrate evidence of the anger that Libs feel and everyone can judge for themselves who has more hate in their hearts. Read the bumper stickers of any car, especially all the Subaru's. The Libs are beside themselves that President Bush won re-election and may never get over that one. I defy you to find the same negative, hate-filled bumper stickers that mock the Libs and their friends. I plan on putting a few on my car when Nobama is coronated this fall but that will just be my way of tweaking the Libs and eschewing any fault for what is coming.

We all know what Scott's views are on any subject long before this fingers hit his keyboard. Scott's anger now might be better directed at scraping the Edwards stickers off his 1992 Volkswagon. Is there anyone in the Liberal party, other than Hillary, that isn't having sex? "

" Wait Scott! They're not angry. No, they just like to insult and demean, come up with borderline racist taunting catchphrases, and whip up contempt in their base for certain demographics of people but see, they're not angry. They're just having fun.
Ask Coalplant.
It's those liberals that take it so seriously.

The neoconservatives just like to watch progressives get all worked up in an angry lather when they do silly things like stack the Justice Department with partisan Bible thumpers, filter my tax dollars through self rewarding pet projects, and suspend the Constitutional rights of fellow Americans.
Because according to several of your paper's readers and the Malkinites, Savages, and O'Reillys that stalk people on their front lawns it's all in good fun.

Right.

One can virtually see the smoke coming out their ears and the red bleeding out their eye sockets, when the prospect of Obama as next president and the fight for the middle keeps slipping further through their fingers. Because of their own sloppy, corrupt, huge, overwhelming governing.

But foot stomping outrage is warranted when someone tries to put a Menorah in the lobby of a state building or two dudes wanna get married seven states away.

Yea, I stopped back in for a lark. Kind of nice to see a progressive columnist get a word in edgewise and on a rhetorical level that the cons here can actually understand. No talk of fiscal policy or science concepts this time. "

" Waterloo Reader -
Your entire post could have the words "liberal" and "conservative" swapped and apply to a Clayson article and be 100% accurate.
When exactly does Clayson ever give a non-conservative viewpoint in one of his columns? How about never.
Cawelti hasn't written an article like this in months, so I think in the few paragraphs he has he's got a right to state his arguments from his perspective and let Clayson dutifully come up with the blind left bashing.

So, you contend that the rightwing isn't angry? Define angry.
Go out to Freerepublic, Michellemalkin.com, or Townhall or talk to a couple of my outside business associates who have noted that they'll never vote for an N word for president and tell me again about all this healthy, good natured discourse generated on the right. "

" "Scott's anger now might be better directed at scraping the Edwards stickers off his 1992 Volkswagon. Is there anyone in the Liberal party, other than Hillary, that isn't having sex? "

Is this really a road the right wants to travel down?
I watched Sean Hannity rail and rail about this issue the other night, not realizing that his boy McCain used up his last wife and found a prettier one, Sean's best buddy Rudy Giuliani has done it multiple times, and frequent guest on Sean's program Newt Gingrich did the EXACT same thing to his wife when she was dying of cancer.

You guys really want to push this one? Because I think at some point someone in that liberal press will slip up and make a slim comparison between Edward's loathsome contemptuous behavior to the Republican Presidential candidate.

Also, how long of a list do you need of GOP officials who have engaged in lecherous behavior the past 8-10 years? Those moral highground standard bearers of the values party. "

" Scott , you might be going a bit to far comparing us conservatives to the nut case in Tn.
Next article you write , try to sqeeze in a few more talking points.
my motto " don't worry , be happy" "

" Why are conservatives so angry? In a word...fear. Fear is a powerful motivator. It causes a person to react emotionally and defensively, rather than rationally and constructively. If you want to motivate a person to vote a certain way, you either have to inspire them or make them afraid. Guess which one the leaders of the Republican party and the conservative movement have decided to use?

These past 8 years have been the high water mark of the modern conservative movement, with control of the presidency, the Congress, and the Supreme Court (7 of the 9 justices were appointed by Republican presidents.) If these years had been the unalloyed success that the True Believers profess, they should be able to use inspiration to motivate the faithful to vote them back into office. But since these past 8 years have been an unmitigated disaster, all that's left is to say that the Democrats are bad guys who are out to get you. Pretty sad, really. "

" I wish to thank the Courier for this editorial. It has some explanations for the anger of the radical right that I had not contemplated before.

I have grey hair. And I do not remember our USA being more polarized than it is since the 2000 election. I am also angry not because I am among the radical right. My anger is about what has happened in the last eight years since the 2000 Supreme Court decision to allow George W Bush become our president. Since Bush appointed so many of the group Project for the New American Century to be his advisors and cabinet members, I can direct my anger toward their positions as stated on the website than was recently removed. I had discovered that their neoconic views which failed in the Iraq matter were ill conceived. Their website dues were unpaid and that was because the New American Century project had folded in failure about late 2006. They went out of existence without a whimper. So my anger at the neocons has been eliminated and I have some hope for the future.

Unfortunately the rest of my lifetime I will be reminded of the folly of their national debts which I feel is completely unwarranted because of what happened in the last eight years. Even though we must forgive the neocons and all who support them in the last two elections, let us remember what has happened as we go to the polls this November. Remind the angry left crowds to vote and bring back the happy days of compassionate government and world peace. "

" If anyone doubts that those on the hard right are angry, then go over to the responses to Prof. Clayson's column. The vitriol behind those on the hard right who post there is palpable. "

" It should be pointed out too that there is a semantical element to this notion. The hardright may not recognize their feelings as anger which will invariably have them defensive about this issue.

But like a bully throwing his victim down a flight of stairs while wearing a smile, it's all relative.
Said bully (or rightwing pundit) might be angry inside or whatever but what's on display is really straight hate and cruelty masked in "funny" taunts, jokes, something the right excels in. Another question about Ann Coulter. Is there anyone that can't see the seething hatred boiling under those mean spirited wisecracks?
Throw some disingenuous influence in the mix and you've got a recipe for some radical misconstrued payback. "

" Wow! Scott apparently has no clue as to what conservatism is all about.

To equate a nutjob who kills people to the entire conservative movement is nothing short of defamation. Scott just can't stand the fact that more and more people are becoming conservative-wanting government to do less, tax less and leave them with more money. That really makes liberals angry when they can't spend money to create programs that their fellow liberals can run to "solve" our problems, much as poverty was "solved" and literacy was "solved" in the past. So who's really the angry ones? Sounds like it's Scott-who has to lash out at the the thing that's making HIM mad! "

" All I can say is...It will be an interesting autumn. "

" Some of these repubs do seem angry. Unfortunately he seems oblivious to the fact that their are JUST as many angry talking heads on the dems side. It gets ratings and they're getting rich off of it. What if Sharpton and Jackson quit being angry? They would be out of the press and therefore without thier primary income and fame.
What is surprising to me is how many people jump on board and point fingers. I think 80% of America have similiar views that could be discussed rationally somewhere in the middle. I think the other 20% are getting rich off the differences. "

" iowanews1 wrote on Aug 10, 2008 3:42 PM:
" Wow! Scott apparently has no clue as to what conservatism is all about.
To equate a nutjob who kills people to the entire conservative movement is nothing short of defamation."

I would agree with this. Cawelti shouldn't have even included that wacko in the article.
I do think the Savages and Coulters stir up divisive hatred and are completely irresponsible idiots but they didn't pull the trigger.

But you're confusing the conservative philosophy, which is a noble one with some exception, with the conservative punditry and loudmouths Cawelti is referring to.
I have the utmost respect for fiscal conservatives, although I would like the ones I know well to better understand that there are stark disadvantages between he who inherits his wealth and he who grows up in a Philly ghetto.
My bleeding heartism aside though, social conservatism is a joke, if only because the most vocal cheerleaders of the principles of social conservatism generally can't be trusted for squat and base their entire worldview on one philosophy. And then mangle that philosophy.

This whole notion about how you're being attacked for wanting to save your money and take care of your family is only true in rare cases.
Cawelti is obviously not referring to that.
Recall his examples from right above:

"Finally, the hard right knows what they're against:.liberals/progressives, big government, gays who want to get married, gun control advocates, diversity lovers, pro-immigrant amnesty seekers, equal opportunity pushers, atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, professors and intellectuals. Just using any of these phrases or terms will call forth vitriol and ridicule borne of anger.

But what do they stand for? Small government, wholesome entertainment, man-woman marriage, America always? Yet these seem unreachable, indefinable, or no longer relevant. Damn, that's maddening, eh, cons?"

What does most of that have to do with you demanding to hold on to your hard earned money?

You want us taxed less? Tell those Bush champions to quit supporting expensive, unnecessary wars. Tell your Congresspeople, of both parties, to stop taking our money and stuffing it in freezers or building multi-million dollar bridges in Alaska for a few dozen people. "

" So True! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out. The Cons reached their pinnacle with Dubya and his puppetmaster Dick. Whoever we get next will be way better. Isn't January 2009 here yet? "

" angry...more like annoyed with know-it-all bloggers who don't have anything useful to say, just have to prove they are right and you are wrong... "

" Just another far left wing appeaser, enabler professor like all the rest teaching our young in colleges all over America. Try being a known conservative college student. The profs flunk you for your political and moral idealogy. They don't believe in the First Amendment except as it applies to THEM.
Elect Obama and watch this country go down the tubes, starting with the disarming of our Military. "

" Chester: When you say some of your outside business associates use the N word...do you do business with Jesse Jackson? My only point is that Scott's column wasn't researched very well and the column looked like he sat down to blow it out a few minutes in front of the deadline. "

" Scott, what color is the sky in your world?

I always find it interesting how libs projected their traits upon conservatives as if that somehow will absolve them of their own anger, hate and ignorance. "

" Why are conservatives angry? Speaking for myself, it is not anger. It is pure disgust of the leftist, liberal, anti-american platform. Let me spell it out for you, Scotty.

A is for Abortion. Killing the unborn while rewarding promiscuity is immoral.

B is for Bill of rights. Liberals and socialist want nothing more than to take away our rights as written. The fact that 4 justices actually tried to remove our rights is dangerous and dispicable.

C is for Contempt. The left has nothing but contempt for hard work, investment and success. The jealousy lies with them.

Of course I can go; higher taxation, lower moral codes, bigger and bigger government(US Senate had to privatize their own lunchroom because they couldnt balance its' budget! The US Postal Service is almost bankrupt. how can liberals balance any budget, without changing accounting methods. How can the left manage a public healthcare system)

I'm not angry. I'm disappointed La-La Land and Noo Yawk are filled with people who dont remember 9/11 and are now filled with Hope of a untested, political newcomer with zero experience.


"Finally, the hard right knows what they're against:liberals/progressives, big government, gays who want to get married, gun control advocates, diversity lovers, pro-immigrant amnesty seekers, equal opportunity pushers, atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, professors and intellectuals. Just using any of these phrases or terms will call forth vitriol and ridicule borne of anger."

I love this sentence. The right did not define how liberals look at themselves. You are what you are, and well-deserved.(other than intellectual)

Finally, the last liberal President was impeached due to his cheating perversions. This is a fact, but the left is still angry.

Scotty, trying to package conservatism with a nutjob gunman is pathetic.

Chester, keep up your continual posting to your guy's Opinion page. It shows a great deal about liberal anger. "

" To the gentleman who thinks New Yorkers have forgotten about 9/11:

If I were you, I would not make this accusation to them on the streets of their city.

You might not make it out of there in one piece.

That was a dispicable thing to say, sir. "

" No, it happened to be two white guys. Two white morons I stopped working with real quick.
What a shock though!
I guess there are actually people that use that word with animosity who aren't Jesse Jackson.
What's the world coming to? "

" Chester: IF you were shocked by two co-workers use of the n-word you seem a little sheltered. Please stay away from this thing called "rap music" as it would be too much for you to handle. Also, as a former southerner, I urge you to stay north of the Mason Dixon line. You are not ready for parts of the south. Racism isn't about the color of those that used the N-word, it's about the stupidity of those that use it. "

" Hello Kettle, I'm black!!



(I believe anger has been defined by liberals ever since Bush won. Maybe conservatives are just trying to catch up.) "

" "Examples of their corrosive invective abound, so I won't repeat any here." No surprises here. Why show any examples?
"In effect, they make reasoned debate all but impossible, reducing argument to juvenile button-pushing." Reasoned debate to a liberal is listen to him, then agree.

"Most disturbing is the nutcase who attacked and killed members of a Unitarian church service in Tennessee because he "hated liberals," blaming them for all his troubles." Why bring up the fact that the guy also hated religion? Oh, it ruins the theory, doesn't it? "

" WlooReader:
I played football for East High during the four years I went there. I live a couple blocks west of Logan Av. This year I went to the Rock The Bells concert in Chicago.
My ex-fiance is black.
I think I'm a-ok with the culture. "

" Typical liberal approach, too. Not are you angry, but you're angry, and here's why. And not a clue as to either.
Really, who has the greater fame fro throwing temper tantrums when they don't get their way? Liberals. "

" This columnist is a good example of why the US is divided. Only a nut job lib would agree with the content of the article, and only a nut job con would act as described. Fortunately, these people are the exception, rather than the norm. "

" then I guess the flip side is why are liberals so smug and self centered?? That would help you see why Obama is "the one". : ) "

" chester11 gives us many examples of why we are divided. One of his numerous silly comments, "talk to a couple of my outside business associates who have noted that they'll never vote for an N word for president."

chester11 proves throughout his posts that liberals like him are just as much to blame for division as anyone - even though they don't want to take responsibility for it. chester11 jumps to the conclusion that these comments could only be stated by conservatives, pinning the label of racist onto all conservatives because of his own bias. These two idiots could just as well be democrats (if it happened at all). I have spoken with Democrats (heavy unionized dems) that made the same notion, so your assumption that only conservatives (republicans) could say or think these things are inaccurate. (Sad to say these particular registered democrats are related).

Anyway, chester11, thanks for posting and showing us all how much we have to grow on both sides yet. "

" what a bunch of hypocrites. Another reason I don't contribute anymore. "

" smug and self-centered? No John Edwards has already put a bullet in his political career. "It will help my wife in her battle with cancer if I have an affair with my video-wench." "

" You GO Scott! Those deluded folks (cons) who are swimming the warm waters of righteousness and denial have obviously left reality and don’t know enough to smell the cesspools their heroes have constructed all round the world. "

" don't mind the conseratives,there just trying to save us from ourselves.it kind of reminds me of the times befor the american revolution when the british were incharge.who are we to challange king GW and his annionted merchant followers. "

" How interesting that you brought that up, hillbillytea. I was just reviewing the Declaration of Independence, Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights last night during my supper break. It just reaffirmed my view that the tail has been wagging the dog too darn long. "

" Steady wrote:
"chester11 jumps to the conclusion that these comments could only be stated by conservatives, pinning the label of racist onto all conservatives because of his own bias."

What are you going on about? They were conservatives. The brief discussion we had which led one to say "I'm sorry, there's too many black people out there being racist toward whites so it'll just get worse if we put a N in the White House" and the other to agree with him started as quick political small talk. They wore their persuasions on their sleeves.
I'm sorry I can't tell you different. Do they speak for all conservatives? No. But in this one case that's what they were and who they are and that's the kind of people Cawelti is referring to.
Also, I like how you apparently believe that something like that is so outside the realm of possibility that I just must have conjured it up in my head to come out on an anonymous blog and make a fleeting point.

"These two idiots could just as well be democrats (if it happened at all)."

Yea, they could have been. But they weren't.

I'm well aware Steady, that most conservatives don't use that word. In this case they did. And I got to thinking that I don't really want to do business with a couple of yokels like that.

But, I see your larger point.
Now, try to defend the discourse of the Malkinites, Savages, Coulters, Hannitys, and all the wonderfully balanced rightwing fans of these guys.

If it's not seething anger, what exactly is it? "

" MAC
wrote on Aug 11, 2008 5:59 AM:

" To the gentleman who thinks New Yorkers have forgotten about 9/11:

If I were you, I would not make this accusation to them on the streets of their city.

You might not make it out of there in one piece.

That was a dispicable thing to say, sir. "


What is more dispicable is the way leftists forget about being attacked in our country by cowards who targeted and murdered innocent civilians.
Supporting a candidate who wants only to lose in Iraq and then further endager American citizens by limiting our defenses is disgusting. Perhaps those liberals in New York should understand this better.

Barack Hussein Obama would decimate our military! "

" I am a conservative. I'm not angry. I do read a lot of cynical, angry, and pompous posts here. From both sides of the isle.
I am not angry. I am afraid for our country. One reason is because BO has a great chance of winning. Watch this, does this look like the next POTUS?
http://www.eyeblast.tv/Public/Video.aspx?rsrcID=2036 "

" chester11 wrote:
"Now, try to defend the discourse of the Malkinites, Savages, Coulters, Hannitys, and all the wonderfully balanced rightwing fans of these guys"...Compared to Air America? Franken? Rhodes? And is it seething anger, or rightous indignation? Take away my money, my rights under the bill of rights, my desire to raise my family as I see fit, and I'll get made. What do conservatives take away from liberals? Religious displays? Guns? Earnings? Property? Morals? Do conservatives force acceptance of behaviors on anyone? "

" Let's see which party is the angrier of the two when the conventions roll around. My guess is you'll see/hear more angry libs. demonstrating at the Republican convention than angry cons. at the Democratic convention. That is, if the lib. media is fair and balanced. "

" Those who want to consider consider conservative anger might want to read the book "The Wrecking Crew" by Thomas Frank. In it, he says that anger has been a standard feature of conservatism since forever.

He doesn't seem to spend much time analyzing why they are so angry. However, my conclusion from what he says is that anyone who had the paranoid view of the world that they do, then he or she would naturally be very angry. They firmly believe that they are a minority in a world that's out to get each of them personally.

It's worth a read. "

" You will see more angry libs marching at the Dem convention than the Rep. convention. Watch and see. "

" The point, chester, I was raising is how you knew they were conservatives? Did they tell you they were or because of that comment did you believe they were? If they told you they were, again what is your point?

You came across two idiots, I come across them all the time in my job. You admit in your response that they don't speak for most conservatives, so why bring it up? If you know they don't speak for most conservatives why draw attention to it? Are you using it as a tool to be divisive?

The title of the article is "Why are conservatives so angry?" My point is the one you just made above. If there are angry conservatives out there they do not speak for all onservatives. Well this article, along with the other liberal post's here, attempts to do just that.

What is your response to those that just feel they disagree with your point of view and are not angry? Your quote, "The hardright may not recognize their feelings as anger which will invariably have them defensive about this issue."

Gee, chester, thanks for letting me know how we truly feel. I will fill you in though. It is usually that type of pompous and pretentious attitude that creates anger. I guess I just answered the question of this article.

On a side note: Do you get your Clairvoyant card right away or do you have to be a liberal for a certain length of time?

Are there conservatives eyes that need to be opened, yes, but I contend there are just as many liberal eyes that need to as well. I'll go back to my original post about Cawelti -

Hello kettle! "

" I understand why conservatives are angry. I would be peaved too if my party had nominated someone who supported the current administrations policies as heavy as John McCain does.

Here's an idea, let's nominate a candidate who is so closely tied with one of the least popular presidents in American history.

Great Job Republicans. Thanks for a guarenteed victory in November ACROSS the board.

I appreciate it, as does the rest of America! "

" "Then there's the Iraqi war, which seems to have been started under false pretenses,"...are we still hanging on to that myth? Gee, I guess being angry with juveniles who can't read war resolutions and actual history is what Cawelti is talking about. Yes, I get angry when liberals attempt to change history. "

" "First, reality no longer supports their worldview. Conservatives believe in hierarchies, top to bottom. God's up at the top, followed by white males (for conservative Catholics, the pope, bishops and cardinals), followed by women, minorities and the lower classes in general. It's a medieval worldview, and for generations it informed politics worldwide." I'm angry at this statement, because it is a blatant lie. "

" "Was Ann Coulter ever good-natured?"...she was attacked by some manly liberals while giving a speech at a college with a pie. Who, again, is angry? Liberals who believe in freedom of speech (for me, not thee, obviously). I don't recall Ann ever throwing anything at anyone. "

" "Second, their "conservative" leadership. Righties helped elect a full-bore conservative government who took charge for four years. In that time, almost nothing happened that made sense from their perspective. Government grew ever larger without taxes being raised to pay for it, and now China, no less, owns much of our debt. That's not a liberal or conservative policy, it's just dumb. And their conservative leader made it happen, fearing the "T" word more than the "D" word." What a moronic statement. A full bore conservative government wouldn't have done all that. We elected a moderate government with lots of RINO's. And doesn't raising taxes actually lower revenues? "

" "Finally, the hard right knows what they're against:.liberals/progressives, big government, gays who want to get married, gun control advocates, diversity lovers, pro-immigrant amnesty seekers, equal opportunity pushers, atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, professors and intellectuals." Wow, what a mouthful. I don't think we have a problem with gays who want to get married, as long as the definition of marriage isn't changed. That's where the problems start. Trying to change the definition of marriage, and forcing the rest of us to accept that against tradition and our beliefs. As to diversity lovers, what's that mean? We're against racism, in all forms. Even against whitey. And finally, as to professors and intellectuals, it just depends on what they're selling. Ward Churchill comes to mind. And I don't think we care for gun control advocates because they support crime and violence. Gun control advocates are the criminal's best friend. "

" the war in Iraq was started under false pretenses--we, and the united nations, were told that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and that Iraq was an imminent danger to the security of the United States!
Arguing whether the war is legal or not is understandable because it depends on interpretation--but to argue this war was not started under false pretenses is flat-out wrong and a revision of history. "

" Please do not confuse me with MR T.

While I would have preferred Romney , I will support McCain ,especially in light of the alternative.
And I am " HAPPY" & a consevative.
Honestly , I'd have to say most " ALL OF YOU " sound angry to me. "

" “xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 7:59 AM:
Take away my money, my rights under the bill of rights, my desire to raise my family as I see fit, and I'll get made.”

What do you mean by all this? And I know you meant “mad”, not “made”.
Money: Yes, Democrats raise taxes traditionally, while Republicans lower them. You don't want the government deciding where your hard earned dollars go, right? In theory, I agree with you. I've mentioned before that welfare queens make me as sick as they make you. But this unchecked capitalism has led to NAFTA, globalization which keeps wages stagnant as wages are whittled down with each rotation around the globe, rampant exploitation of health care, and the lined pockets of elected officials by corporate lobbyists. And don't try to pretend that it's equal opportunity corruption. The GOP is notorious for being friends with big business. Shoot, they're proud of it.
Yea, unions are corrupt too, but not on the level of GOP big money corruption.
Which all comes down to this executive sitting on that board and all of them serving the other big golden parachutes while the company, and it's workers' pensions, goes down in flames.

Additionally, I maintain that in your ardent animosity towards the idea of taxation in all it's horrible Stalinistic forms, you are in turn defending Americans who have contributed pretty much nothing to our positive national identity, such as Paris Hilton.

And, with all your bluster about Democrats and their high taxes you have never acknowledged (while I've been here) why it's OK for the Bush Administration (conservative) to take my hard earned money as well and lavishly spend it. I pay taxes too, xdfred. What gives you the high ground to gripe constantly about where your tax dollars go and I'm supposed to just shut up and accept that mine are squandered on things I don't agree with? You don't agree with socialized domestic care? I don't agree with preemptive, ridiculously expensive wars. Especially those that have yet to produce an objective benefit.

How is your desire to raise your family being tampered with?
Name two examples. Seriously, I'm not trying to badger you. You can't swat your kids on the behind? Yea..you're probably right, it's an intrusion on your parenting. I wonder though, (and I know I'm just speculating on one of your answers) is that one fairly modern legal protocol to the benefit of the many, at the detriment of the few?
There is probably something I'm not thinking of as well.

“Xdred said:
What do conservatives take away from liberals? Religious displays? Guns? Earnings? Property? Morals? Do conservatives force acceptance of behaviors on anyone? "

Here's one of my biggest beefs with conservatives.
Conservatives have a tendency to think iron bars are the answer to most of society's ills. They take away freedoms.
I know your thoughts on drug usage. You should meet a few recovering addicts. Some of them are the most positive, spiritual, caring, hardworking, decent, law-abiding people you'll ever meet in your life.
I believe conservatives try to push their, what I believe are impossibly stupid, religious beliefs into governmental policy.
The stuff in the science classes makes ME angry.
I'm also not going to exaggerate and say it's a regular occurrence. But how should I feel if I live in Kansas and my children have to learn what I believe are fairy tales in what should be a thought provoking classroom focused on academia and inarguably researched data? Those instances might not be exactly overwhelming, but us progressives get a little paranoid when we see it start to gain popularity amongst those who...just aren't informed or bright enough to know better.

Morals: I've mentioned before the long line of high profile GOP officials caught with their pants down. For every one Bill Clinton I can give you Newt Gingrich, Henry Hyde, Ted Haggard, Mark Foley, and Laura Schlessinger.
And for every one John Edwards I can give you: John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Bill O'Reilly, David Vitter, and Larry Craig.
And that's seriously just off the top of my head.
Do you realize how dumb you guys sound when you say that Republicans are the party of morals? I mean, why isn't it a big deal to you when Rush Limbaugh, who was adamant that drug users get "sent up the river", gets popped with hundreds of oxycontin pills he's having someone else get illegally? Why does that NOT BOTHER YOU? But you want to be the hangman for someone selling a joint.

You are the ones that keep ranting about the horrible value system of Democrats. The burden is on you, man. Do some research of self proclaimed conservatives who have engaged in hypocritical, morally deviant behavior vs. self proclaimed liberals, take a step back and be honest with yourself, and post a reply.

xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 3:45 PM:
" "Then there's the Iraqi war, which seems to have been started under false pretenses,"...are we still hanging on to that myth? Gee, I guess being angry with juveniles who can't read war resolutions and actual history is what Cawelti is talking about. Yes, I get angry when liberals attempt to change history. "

You keep clinging to the old adage that Democrats voted for war too. I don't care who voted for it. They were both wrong. It seems though that conservatives now are the only ones that won't admit it.

"xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 3:50 PM:
" "Was Ann Coulter ever good-natured?"...she was attacked by some manly liberals while giving a speech at a college with a pie. Who, again, is angry? Liberals who believe in freedom of speech (for me, not thee, obviously). I don't recall Ann ever throwing anything at anyone. "

The idea that you think Ann Coulter is not completely unhealthy and filled with hate is problematic. So two college kids pelted a cream pie at her? That's got nothing on the invective she's spewed for the last decade. She possesses an evil and cruel mind, and I've read her books, and on just one subject she insinuates endorsement for people being locked up on completely circumstantial evidence and hearsay.
The people that are subjected to those un-American policies have their lives ruined, their family's lives are materially and emotionally changed forever and Ann Coulter roots that kind of policy on.

“xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 3:55 PM:
A full bore conservative government wouldn't have done all that. We elected a moderate government with lots of RINO's. And doesn't raising taxes actually lower revenues? "

As I see it, the RINO's are not the ones who got caught with their hands in Jack Abramoff's pockets. In fact, I don't recall Chuck Hagel ever once participating in any of the rampant corruption the fat, bloated 109th Congress indulged in.
I don't suspect anyone will ever think of the 109th as anything BUT ultra Conservative. You know, the one that contained all those Abramoff beneficiaries, Denny Hastert and the two million dollar road construction near his investment property, Ted Stevens and Don Young's bloated pork projects, Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay indictments, as well as the Terri Schiavo circus which also wasted my tax dollars, rubber stamps for Bush, and broken records for getting the least amount of bills written during the least amount of days in their House and Senate seats.

“xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 4:04 PM:
" "Finally, the hard right knows what they're against:.liberals/progressives, big government, gays who want to get married, gun control advocates, diversity lovers, pro-immigrant amnesty seekers, equal opportunity pushers, atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, professors and intellectuals." Wow, what a mouthful. I don't think we have a problem with gays who want to get married, as long as the definition of marriage isn't changed. That's where the problems start. Trying to change the definition of marriage, and forcing the rest of us to accept that against tradition and our beliefs. As to diversity lovers, what's that mean? We're against racism, in all forms. Even against whitey. “

You pulled out a couple examples from his list. There are a lot more that you didn't respond to.
And I'm sure you are against racism in all it's forms but, and again total speculation, when you see a kid with some baggy jeans and a skull cap, and you're being honest with yourself, does that make you uncomfortable xdfred? And don't just kneejerk reply and get....angry. I'm just asking. Because for a LOT of conservative minded people I know (who share a lot of the same ideas you jot down each evening), that look generates a varying amount of disgust in them. For whatever reason.
How about two Hispanics talking to each other in Spanish..You down with that? I'm not talking about on the job. I'm talking about in line at Burger King. Or wherever.
How about a woman wearing a headscarf walking through Walmart?
I'm just asking. I'm not trying to attack you. I'm just asking you to give an honest reply.
Because I think the instant reaction of a lot of conservatives to people who are different then them tends to be revolt, anger, and contempt. Based usually on a generalization and a disdain for all, because of the actions of a few of those demographics mentioned above and beyond. Not all conservatives. Not all for dang sure. But many. And those are probably the ones Cawelti is talking about. "

" for some reason leftys want to bring in the conspiracy theories and say Bush created the false pretenses. Perhaps Iraqis fooled our and Europes intelligence agencies, perhaps not.

now Prove anyone lied or made this up? You can not. Continuing to suggest that this conspiracy exists only proves how idiotic the left is.

As fat as TimBrackett bringing up the UN.Ha!! What a do nothing facist organization that is. It is a joke and we should kick that crazy group out of the US!

Time for the libs in this country to try building the nation, instead of bringing her down! "

" Well chester does it again with another blanket statement:

chester asks, "And I'm sure you are against racism in all it's forms but, and again total speculation, when you see a kid with some baggy jeans and a skull cap, and you're being honest with yourself, does that make you uncomfortable xdfred? And don't just kneejerk reply and get....angry. I'm just asking. Because for a LOT of conservative minded people I know (who share a lot of the same ideas you jot down each evening), that look generates a varying amount of disgust in them. For whatever reason."

I love that chester has been posting. chester again tries pinning another label upon conservatives when it is clearly chester that harbors these types of feelings towards others.

chester, don't get...angry. Just take a good look at yourself because there are a LOT of liberals that do carry these terrible feelings and hold in their hatred. It is good seeing you get it out. "

" Crimony Hetfield.........

Do you ever change it up a little?

libs, barack hussein obama, leftys, libs, libs, barack libs hussein, leftys, obama, hussein, libs, barack libs obama, leftys. "

" You couldn't be more right "mister T"... I would certainly hope to be confused for you. Maybe hetfield can simply refer to me as Mr(hussein)T. "

" "Steady wrote:
I love that chester has been posting. chester again tries pinning another label upon conservatives when it is clearly chester that harbors these types of feelings towards others."

Yea. Clearly. "

" chester11 wrote on AUG 12, 2008 9:19 PM:
" “xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 7:59 AM:
Take away my money, my rights under the bill of rights, my desire to raise my family as I see fit, and I'll get mad.”

“What do you mean by all this? And I know you meant “mad”, not “made”. Good catch. Thanks.
Money: Yes, Democrats raise taxes traditionally, while Republicans lower them. …The GOP is notorious for being friends with big business. Shoot, they're proud of it. “ And why not? Look around you. If it weren’t for big business, we would be another third world country. And Democrats are in bed with the unions and environmental whackos. What’s your point?
“Yea, unions are corrupt too, but not on the level of GOP big money corruption.” Really? I doubt it. Corporations provide goods and services. Unions shut down factories and price us out of markets. They used to protect workers. Not anymore.
“Which all comes down to this executive sitting on that board and all of them serving the other big golden parachutes while the company, and it's workers' pensions, goes down in flames.” No envy here.

“Additionally, I maintain that in your ardent animosity towards the idea of taxation in all it's horrible Stalinistic forms, you are in turn defending Americans who have contributed pretty much nothing to our positive national identity, such as Paris Hilton.” So you hate Paris. Big whoop. But I get the picture. You think high taxes should be used to punish those that have more than you do.

“And, with all your bluster about Democrats and their high taxes you have never acknowledged (while I've been here) why it's OK for the Bush Administration (conservative) to take my hard earned money as well and lavishly spend it…..” I’m not OK with excessive taxes, regardless of who puts them in place. My big problem is how the money is spent. We were supposed to follow the Constitution with regard to government spending money.”

“How is your desire to raise your family being tampered with?
Name two examples. Fighting Parental notification for abortions. Attacks on home schooling. Successful Voucher programs stopped to appease teachers unions. Teaching obscenities in school instead of reading writing, arithmetic. The Stalinesque stifling any counter arguments to the flawed THEORY of evolution.

Here's one of my biggest beefs with conservatives.
Conservatives have a tendency to think iron bars are the answer to most of society's ills. They take away freedoms.
I know your thoughts on drug usage. “ No you don’t. You know my thoughts on drug dealers. “You should meet a few recovering addicts.” You mean you know I haven’t? “Some of them are the most positive, spiritual, caring, hardworking, decent, law-abiding people you'll ever meet in your life. ‘ So?
“I believe conservatives try to push their, what I believe are impossibly stupid, religious beliefs into governmental policy.” You’re not going to get anywhere insulting other’s beliefs.

“The stuff in the science classes makes ME angry. “ Good. Maybe Cawelti can write about angry liberals next.
“.. But how should I feel if I live in Kansas and my children have to learn what I believe are fairy tales in what should be a thought provoking classroom focused on academia and inarguably researched data?” What you believe to be fairy tales is irrelevant. All conservatives want are all points of view taught with no bias. So called secular progressives stifle any contradictory theorys.

“Morals: I've mentioned before the long line of high profile GOP officials …..And that's seriously just off the top of my head.” Big dfeal. But when leftwingers get busted, they still remain in office and the media protect them.
“Do you realize how dumb you guys sound when you say that Republicans are the party of morals?” I’ve never said that, and it would be foolish to believe so. But I believe the Democrat party is the party of no morals.

xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 3:45 PM:
" "Then there's the Iraqi war, which seems to have been started under false pretenses,"...are we still hanging on to that myth? Gee, I guess being angry with juveniles who can't read war resolutions and actual history is what Cawelti is talking about. Yes, I get angry when liberals attempt to change history. "

You keep clinging to the old adage that Democrats voted for war too. I don't care who voted for it. They were both wrong. It seems though that conservatives now are the only ones that won't admit it. ‘ Read the war resolution.

"xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 3:50 PM:
" "Was Ann Coulter ever good-natured?"...she was attacked by some manly liberals while giving a speech at a college with a pie. Who, again, is angry? Liberals who believe in freedom of speech (for me, not thee, obviously). I don't recall Ann ever throwing anything at anyone. "

“The idea that you think Ann Coulter is not completely unhealthy and filled with hate is problematic. So two college kids pelted a cream pie at her? That's got nothing on the invective she's spewed for the last decade. She possesses an evil and cruel mind, and I've read her books, and on just one subject she insinuates endorsement for people being locked up on completely circumstantial evidence and hearsay. “
So you equate a physical attack and attempt to stifle speech the equivalent of harmless writing?

“xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 3:55 PM:
A full bore conservative government wouldn't have done all that. We elected a moderate government with lots of RINO's. And doesn't raising taxes actually lower revenues? "

“As I see it, the RINO's are not the ones who got caught with their hands in Jack Abramoff's pockets. Irrelevant.”

“xdfred wrote on Aug 12, 2008 4:04 PM:
" "Finally, the hard right knows what they're against:.liberals/progressives, big government, gays who want to get married, gun control advocates, diversity lovers, pro-immigrant amnesty seekers, equal opportunity pushers, atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, professors and intellectuals." Wow, what a mouthful. I don't think we have a problem with gays who want to get married, as long as the definition of marriage isn't changed. That's where the problems start. Trying to change the definition of marriage, and forcing the rest of us to accept that against tradition and our beliefs. As to diversity lovers, what's that mean? We're against racism, in all forms. Even against whitey. “

“You pulled out a couple examples from his list. There are a lot more that you didn't respond to. “ Unlike you, I have a life besides this blog. Time is limited.
“…when you see a kid with some baggy jeans and a skull cap, and you're being honest with yourself, does that make you uncomfortable xdfred?” Nope. Just cautious. If a person wants to look, sound, and act like a thug, he shouldn’t be surprised if he is treated like one. And what does this have to do with racism? Your hypothetical didn’t mention skin color

“How about two Hispanics talking to each other in Spanish..You down with that? How about a woman wearing a headscarf walking through Walmart?” Stupid questions. I was born and raised in the inner city of Chicago. Different cultures abounded. Why should that bother anyone?
"....Because I think the instant reaction of a lot of conservatives to people who are different then them tends to be revolt, anger, and contempt. " Flawed belief. Behavior counts for more than appearance. Character does as well. But liberals, being racist in thinking, can’t understand that. Group identity is the result of racist thinking. "

" there are no conspiracies here. the bush administration asserted there were WMD's and there were no WMD's! I see no conspiracy. I see facts!
There is absolutely no way around this matter. There were no WMD's. Thus, Iraq was not an immediate (or near future) threat against the security of the United States. Therefore, we should not have gone to war with Iraq.
It is a cut-and-dried issue. No matter how much those who support the Bush administration try to spin it, the issue is simple and the truth is the war was not necessary. "

" timbrackett
wrote on Aug 13, 2008 1:24 PM:

" there are no conspiracies here. the bush administration asserted there were WMD's and there were no WMD's! I see no conspiracy. I see facts!
There is absolutely no way around this matter. There were no WMD's. Thus, Iraq was not an immediate (or near future) threat against the security of the United States. Therefore, we should not have gone to war with Iraq.
It is a cut-and-dried issue. No matter how much those who support the Bush administration try to spin it, the issue is simple and the truth is the war was not necessary. " Sigh....for the umteenth time, read the war resolution. Also, if you're going to quote the Presdient, please do so accurately. The president said we need to act BEFORE Iraq becomes an imminent threat. You can't be held responsible for your errors, being an angry liberal and all. Cawelti should write an article on angry liberals.
Actually, you can be held responsible. "

" xdfred @ Aug 13, 2008 4:10 PM said, "You can't be held responsible for your errors," referring to the teeny-weeny mistake W made in deciding to invade Iraq.

Once upon a time, I served in the Navy. When at sea, I came to feel that anyone who has command at sea has got the best job in the world. But, I soon learned there is a down side to having that command. It's that if anything goes wrong, that's the end of your command and your career.

It seemed harsh to me at first. Eventually, though, I figured out that if you are given command at sea, you are to make damn sure that nothing ever goes wrong. That's why Navy captains tend to become a bit testy when someone is caught smoking in an ammunition magazine. Whoever did it always think that, "the old man is flipping out." But the "old man" knows that if the ship blows up because someone was smoking in an ammunition magazine, it's going to be his tail end that the Navy will come after.

Just a few months ago a carrier had a fire that burned out a couple of compartments. Apparently, the compartments had become a tad messy. Both the Captain and XO were relieved. They both did there best, I'm sure. But the Navy didn't give them command just to do their best. They got command to make sure that there were no screw-ups. There was a screw up to they got relieved.

It's my opinion that the same rule should apply to the President of the United States. If he is going to send men to die, then he jolly well needs to be sure that he hasn't made a mistake. W made a mistake and he needs to pay for it. (And, I've never heard of a Navy Captain who is relieved of command ever say, "the old man is just flipping out." W should have been relieved of command for the mistake he made. It's done by impeachment. "

" Well, after the Democratic leader was killed today in Arkansas can anyone argue with this point? "

" timbrackett
wrote on Aug 13, 2008 1:24 PM:

" there are no conspiracies here. the bush administration asserted there were WMD's and there were no WMD's! I see no conspiracy. I see facts!
There is absolutely no way around this matter. There were no WMD's. Thus, Iraq was not an immediate (or near future) threat against the security of the United States. Therefore, we should not have gone to war with Iraq.
It is a cut-and-dried issue. No matter how much those who support the Bush administration try to spin it, the issue is simple and the truth is the war was not necessary. "

The resolution states why Bush, Congress, and our allies went to war. The entire response however was due to the post above where libs constantly say bush lied and this illegal war. Poppeycock.

I see now conservatives are again put in the same basket as the nut case down south who killed some liberal. how do the libs explain what Ayers did? that sounds pretty angry to me.

Ayers is one of the good barack hussein obama's advisors to this day. "

" I don't want to ruin the thread (as if they aren't ruined well before this every single column) so I won't copy and paste everything but just quickly..

xdfred wrote on Aug 13, 2008 10:41 AM:

If it weren’t for big business, we would be another third world country. And Democrats are in bed with the unions and environmental whackos. What’s your point?
“Yea, unions are corrupt too, but not on the level of GOP big money corruption.” Really? I doubt it. Corporations provide goods and services. Unions shut down factories and price us out of markets. They used to protect workers. Not anymore.
*I like how once again you just say things like “What's your point?.” and convince yourself that's a substantive reply. You sound like Nancy Grace.
Yea, xdfred, the trade of goods and services is obviously one of the flagships of America, and life in general.
However, Proctor and Gamble, Exxon, Boeing, News Corp., Viacom, Wal-Mart...I think these corporations have a little more influence over government officials than labor unions and Greenpeace. If you can't see that, you got more problems than I even initially thought.
And the corrupt backscratching sends jobs overseas, prices fixed, and wages stagnated. I never do get an answer from you as to how patriotic you think American companies shipping hundreds of thousands of jobs a year overseas is.

X = “Which all comes down to this executive sitting on that board and all of them serving the other big golden parachutes while the company, and it's workers' pensions, goes down in flames.” No envy here.
*Who said anything about envy, genius? I possess a normal set of ethics and here you are waving your pom-poms about the trashing of companies that reward failure CEO's and destroys pensions and by suggesting that I'm envious of that kind of thing says quite a bit about you.

X = “I’m not OK with excessive taxes, regardless of who puts them in place. My big problem is how the money is spent. We were supposed to follow the Constitution with regard to government spending money.”
*I'm not following you here. “We were supposed to...”. Who was supposed to? Who are you referring to? Explain yourself, because it would seem that you're attacking someone and I can't figure out who.

X = “How is your desire to raise your family being tampered with?
Fighting Parental notification for abortions.
*Fair enough. I don't disagree with your position there.
X = Attacks on home schooling.
* Attacks by whom? You mean just insults or actual legislation to enact changes that would affect your ability to home school?
X = Successful Voucher programs stopped to appease teachers unions.
*I'm torn on school vouchers, so I can't give a strong opinion on that one.
X = Teaching obscenities in school instead of reading writing, arithmetic.
*Obscenities huh? Have you spent any significant amount of time in a modern school in years? Are you really that brainwashed to think that so many schools are teaching obscenities? What obscenities? You hear about some isolated incident in Berkeley and like a complete tool jump to the conclusion (no doubt with some illiterate right wing pundit's help) that all schools are infected. Seriously, what frame of reference do you have for any of this? You know what dude, given your intellect, maybe you know it first hand.
X = The Stalinesque stifling any counter arguments to the flawed THEORY of evolution.
* Yea, all them fossils are chicken bones discarded from angels. Didn't you pout once about the lack of eye sockets in the fossilized record? Except you were dead wrong and refused to look into ocular development? Wasn't that you? Yea, you're still wrong.

X= I know your thoughts on drug usage. “ No you don’t. You know my thoughts on drug dealers.
*Ok, I apologize.
X= “You should meet a few recovering addicts.” You mean you know I haven’t?
* I don't know. I assume since you jump to conclusions regularly about everyone here you don't agree with, that I'll go ahead and do the same about you.
X= “Some of them are the most positive, spiritual, caring, hardworking, decent, law-abiding people you'll ever meet in your life. ‘ So?
*Well, whatever dude. You wanna walk through life a hate filled misanthrope, have at it. I'm sure you're a real barrel of fun to be around.

X= “I believe conservatives try to push their, what I believe are impossibly stupid, religious beliefs into governmental policy.” You’re not going to get anywhere insulting other’s beliefs.
*But it's ok for you, right? Also, I'm not talking about spirituality. I'm talking about twisted religious doctrines and the insane attempts to spin Jesus into some supply side, judgmental, war-mongering ape.
X=“The stuff in the science classes makes ME angry. “ Good. Maybe Cawelti can write about angry liberals next.
* Good one! .

X=“.. But how should I feel if I live in Kansas and my children have to learn what I believe are fairy tales in what should be a thought provoking classroom focused on academia and inarguably researched data?” What you believe to be fairy tales is irrelevant. All conservatives want are all points of view taught with no bias. So called secular progressives stifle any contradictory theorys.
No, it is relevant. Because in the same manner that you don't want your kids (or your older siblings or whatever..) learning about sex ed too early (which I don't either), I don't want my kids learning in school that the universe was formed in a few days by a designer. An angry designer who then had some drama with a snake and some nekkid people because inevitably that will lead to the peripheral teaching of Christian doctrine and it doesn't have close to the observable evidence that universal expansion and evolution theories do.

X= But when leftwingers get busted, they still remain in office and the media protect them.
* What a powerful retort. This happened with Bill Clinton. But all the lecherous, corrupt, unethical behavior of the GOP – yea, they're all in jail, aren't they Xdfred? Why don't you look at something besides Free Republic once in awhile?

X=“Do you realize how dumb you guys sound when you say that Republicans are the party of morals?” * So, you weren't one of those GOP hacks who said Republicans were going to return honor to Washington? I'll take your word for it.

X= Read the war resolution.
*And what? Change my mind that the Iraq War was the biggest foreign policy blunder in American history, at best? And a horrible loss of life and treasure, at worst? I told you, I don't care what the bs justification was for that chickenhawk adventure. It was terrible and everyone with high level knowledge who endorsed it should be ashamed.

X= Ann Coulter
So you equate a physical attack and attempt to stifle speech the equivalent of harmless writing?
*I actually do agree with you here. I'll backpedal a little. You're right, in this day and age two guys running on the stage like that could be frightening for the speaker. None of it changes what a piece of scum I think Ann Coulter is, but you're right.

X=“As I see it, the RINO's are not the ones who got caught with their hands in Jack Abramoff's pockets. Irrelevant.”
*Oh. Ok. Thanks for expounding on why that's irrelevant. I guess that given all your other powerful and cerebral rhetoric we should just take your word for it.

X=“You pulled out a couple examples from his list. There are a lot more that you didn't respond to. “ Unlike you, I have a life besides this blog. Time is limited.
*Dang! How do you know so much about me when, per your defensive postings above, I couldn't possibly know anything about you?
Do you need help with mundane chores or is there a service that your family pays for?
Also, as if you're not pretty much the most prolific poster here.

X=Flawed belief. Behavior counts for more than appearance. Character does as well. But liberals, being racist in thinking, can’t understand that. Group identity is the result of racist thinking. "
*I like that new conservative meme. Liberals are racists. You know why that is, Xdfred? Because like with a lot of things, conservatives don't understand what racism is and what it's not. You seem to think that racism is welfare, racism is a minority taking pride in his culture and ancestry. Not say, feeling an inherent sense of superiority solely based on one's skin color in comparison to others. Especially when that individual with the superiority complex holds institutional power over the minority of choice. No, now everyone else is racist but the neocon! That way they can deflect and dismiss the accusations towards their chosen affiliations, those that have been infested for years with actual f racists..
Dude, I'm never going to change one iota of your thought process, and I'm sure you'll readily agree in the next post. But just know that you are a lightweight. "

" here is the irony. i'm not an angry liberal. i'm a moderate. i was raised in a strict pentecostal home. i did a lot of grass-roots campaigning for former congressman nussle. i supported bush in 2000. i supported the war in iraq up until the point where i realized there were no wmd's! i believe the tax cuts could have worked if not for the expensive war in iraq!
i am not a liberal.
but the bush administration lied to us about the reasons we needed to go to war with iraq and then embroiled us in a costly, unnecessary war.
so i began to re-think some things. and once i stopped being a sheep of the gop/religious right i realized that my the democratic party and my christian values have more in common than the gop/abortion issue. i'm still a moderate, but when it comes to my faith and my political positions i feel Senator Obama will be our best option as president. "

" and P is for Punishment......Obama says a child would be a Punishment....what is America if not the Legacy of our Children. Angry you are ...right! And my tax dollar goes to destroy that legacy once Obama gets in office. "

" Cross:
"...W made a mistake and he needs to pay for it...." and that mistake was?
And save the bogus stories. Reading your posts one has to assume you have done everything at least once. "

" CHESTER11 for VP

LOL... j/k "

" Chester:
"I like how once again you just say things like “What's your point?.” That's because you have trouble making one. A lot of trouble. Especially when you get into an anti corporation rant.

"I think these corporations have a little more influence over government officials than labor unions and Greenpeace.." Then why aren't we drilling for more oil? Either our politicians are influenced by environmental whackos or bought by OPEC. Neither one is an American corporation, is it?

" I never do get an answer from you as to how patriotic you think American companies shipping hundreds of thousands of jobs a year overseas is." Jobs going overseas has nothing to do with patriotism. In case you haven't noticed, our exports are up and our unemployment is still the envy of Western Europe. So is our standard of living.

"...per your defensive postings above..." What in the world is a defensive posting?

Abramoff was paying everybody off. That's why I said irrelevent.

As to evolution, how accurate is carbon dating? And you say I'm wrong about fossils and eyes, but no counter argument. Run and hide on this one.

"I like that new conservative meme. Liberals are racists." It's not new. Your warped definition of racism is. It would be wrong to push people to not vote for Barack Hussein Obama because he is black. It would be just as wrong to push people to vote for Barack Hussein Obama because he is black.

"Dude, I'm never going to change one iota of your thought process, and I'm sure you'll readily agree in the next post. But just know that you are a lightweight. " This is funny. No, you can't change my thought processes. Add that to your list of failures. Lightweight? Are you out of high school yet? "

" timbrackett
wrote on Aug 14, 2008 3:02 AM:

" here is the irony. i'm not an angry liberal. i'm a moderate...." Why does everyone want to claim not being a liberal, even liberals.

"democratic party and my christian values have more in common.." Wow! Democrats have made a sport out of attacking Christian values. You must not have any. Real ones, anyway.


"my faith and my political positions i feel Senator Obama will be our best option as president. " You obviously don't know very much about him. "

" Bracket "but the bush administration lied to us about the reasons we needed to go to war with iraq and then embroiled us in a costly, unnecessary war.
so i began to re-think some things. and once i stopped being a sheep of the gop/religious right i realized that my the democratic party and my christian values have more in common than the gop/abortion issue. i'm still a moderate, but when it comes to my faith and my political positions i feel Senator Obama will be our best option as president. "

'Your' democratic party? and 'your' christian values? Alot of different things I could say but I wont. One thing however, I dont know of ANY Christian value that allows for unborn babies to be killed for no reason.

Anyways, Barack Hussein Obama would continue to support this insidious act, along with Pelosi, Harken, Clinton, and Kennedy. Absolutely a disgusting and inhumane action that continues to lead to the defraying of our values. Next thing you know, we have gays marrying, uh, oh yea. right. "

" I read many of these postings & can you imagine risking your life thoussnds of miles from home & family to read in your hometown newspaper that you have been mislead on purpose & your service is misguided.
Why don't all you Bush haters spare us the rhetoric & spend your time & intelligence investigating the meaning of the word gratitude. Maybe if we ALL got behind our soldiers ,we could get this war behind us. "

" what is the difference between "killing an unborn baby" and being responsible for the killing of thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians in iraq because of a misguided, unnecessary war (Bush)? "

" if i were a soldier and i was reading this page i would take pride in the fact that i did the job that was asked of me, but as a soldier i would understand my responsibility is simply to follow orders regardless of my personal opinion. and if i disagreed with the orders i had been issued over the past five years i would cast my ballot for new leaders who are not as prone to issue misguided orders that involve me in an unnecessary war.
but i would still be proud of my service, because i would have every right to be proud.

Our soldiers are the best!!! "

" I don't know necessarily if conservatives are angry as much as they are frustrated with the biased media in this country. I read many newspapers and there is definitely a liberal bias in most papers. Throw in the nut jobs in Hollywood, your Donna Wood's of the world, and the regulars who send editorial letters about the same stuff over and over again referencing Bush, Cheney, neocons, useless war, you name it, and it is easy to see the frustration. "

" xdfred @ Aug 14, 2008 8:56 AM said, "Cross: 'W made a mistake and he needs to pay for it....' and that mistake was?"

Somehow, I think you know the answer. But, just for everyone who is hopelessly out of touch, the answer is that he send American soldiers to die in a war started on a lie.

On that subject, here's some additional sage observation:

“…few die well who die in battle…. Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the king that led them to it; whom to disobey were against all proportion of subjection.”

-- Shakespeare Henry V, Act IV, Scene 1

xdfred also said, "And save the bogus stories. Reading your posts one has to assume you have done everything at least once."

Yep. And some things I've done two or three times. "

" I guess President Bush must have been the only person in the world who thought Iraq had wmd? Oh , no that's right he knew they didn't have them & lied to all of congress who voted for the Iraq war.
He fooled all of them ,so he could get the oil & help his oil buddies.
He surely will go down as the worst President ever, taking the honor away from President Carter.
The thing I don't get is how a guy this dumb was able to pull this off & fool some of the countries greatest & brightest into voting his way.
Boy this is making me happy getting this all off my chest. So I'd also like to blame him for the high oil prices , global warming ,the economy ,health care , ,hurricanes , flooding ,this is great...as the song gos ," I'm feeling good".
Lastly , I also want to blame him for anything that happens in 2009 & 2010 , because the problems are all going to carryover. A new President & congress will need at least 2 terms to fix all the bad things President Bush has done. "

" mister t @ Aug 14, 2008 11:21 AM said, "I read many of these postings & can you imagine risking your life thousands of miles from home & family to read in your hometown newspaper that you have been mislead on purpose & your service is misguided."

I'm quite sure they have already figured that out. When I was in Vietnam, I figured it out. We all did. And so do the troops in Iraq. "

" timbrackett
wrote on Aug 14, 2008 1:34 PM:

" what is the difference between "killing an unborn baby" and being responsible for the killing of thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians in iraq because of a misguided, unnecessary war (Bush)? "

Well, there's lot's of differences, but I'll point out just one. No one set out to intentionally kill thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians. That wasn't the objective. In fact, our military uses smart weapons and technology to avoid as much collateral damage and civilian casualties as practical. And did you take into account the thousands upon thousands upon thousands Saddam Hussein Obama, oops, Saddam Hussein was murdering as a past time. They found the bodies. BTW, is there such a thing as a guilty civilian? "

" "...And so do the troops in Iraq....." You mean the ones who keep re-upping for additional tours? Those? "

" cross1242-maybe it didn'tbother you what was going on back home during Vietnam ,but it sure did me. "

" timbrackett
wrote on Aug 14, 2008 1:34 PM:

" what is the difference between "killing an unborn baby" and being responsible for the killing of thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians in iraq because of a misguided, unnecessary war (Bush)? "


This is absolutely the most appalling, disgusting post I have read on this board.

Let's see. One, our common enemy(both cons and libs voted for war) are using civilians as shields, and worse yet, dressing as civilians, then blowing themselves up taking as many civilians and troops as possible.

Next, one of the horrors of war is the fact that innocents do die. I am sure soldiers are not targeting them for kicks.

And, a final point. Abortion is a decision that women make to end a life purposely because it takes some work to deliver a baby, then takes alot more work to raise a responsible person. Abortionists are choosing their lifestyle over unborns, and are doing so selfishly.

I doubt any soldier anywhere purposely kills civilians for kicks or for selfish reasons.

The good barack hussein obama thinks killing babies is ok. may god have mercy on his soul! "

" mister t @ Aug 14, 2008 5:56 PM said, "cross1242-maybe it didn't bother you what was going on back home during Vietnam ,but it sure did me."

It didn't bother me a bit. It's not to hard if one really believes in freedom and not conformity. "

" mister t @ Aug 14, 2008 3:27 PM said, "he knew they didn't have them & lied to all of congress who voted for the Iraq war"

BINGO! That's absolutely right.

The only thing that we still don't know for sure is WHY he was dead-set on going to war with Iraq from the first day of his Administration. "

" It sure looks like Scott nailed it right on the head with this column. Don't see what else really needs to be said. "

" X="I think these corporations have a little more influence over government officials than labor unions and Greenpeace.." Then why aren't we drilling for more oil? Either our politicians are influenced by environmental whackos or bought by OPEC. Neither one is an American corporation, is it?
*Actually, as far as referring to the green lobby, you make a decent point here. I'll admit that I didn't really think about that off the top of my head last night when I responded to your first post. I agree that our country needs to drill in ANWR. The thought makes me sick, as well as the thought that there will be 400 million people in America in the next 30 years, all more wasteful than this generation.
I hope you you and your friends can acknowledge though that not all “environmentalists” are like Dumpster Muffin. Many, like myself, are avid fisherman and hunters. And I've never been there or anything but it will be painful to watch a significant part of such a beautiful place like Alaska's wildlife reserve get razed by machines.

X=" I never do get an answer from you as to how patriotic you think American companies shipping hundreds of thousands of jobs a year overseas is." Jobs going overseas has nothing to do with patriotism. In case you haven't noticed, our exports are up and our unemployment is still the envy of Western Europe. So is our standard of living.
*Exports are up. Slightly. Know part of the reason for that? Because Americans aren't buying squat and foreign dollars are buying more of our cheaper and cheaper products. And our people are being paid dramatically less to produce those products. Because someone in Indochina will produce them for a fraction of the base wage for the American worker. And those products still count as U.S. exports, my friend. Also, I think it's a little presumptuous to brag about the U.S. unemployment rate right now.

X="...per your defensive postings above..." What in the world is a defensive posting?
*That's when a “lib” reader speculates about an aspect of your lifestyle, xdfred, and you flip out and tell them “you don't know anything about me!” and then proceed to create a fleshed out profile of someone who disagrees with you five posts later.

X=Abramoff was paying everybody off. That's why I said irrelevent.
*That's not true. Republicans were beneficiaries of Abramoff's money probably 50 to 1 over Democrats. I know your right wing sites spun it up for you guys so you could feel better about it but it's a straight up lie. Sorry pal.

As to evolution, how accurate is carbon dating? And you say I'm wrong about fossils and eyes, but no counter argument. Run and hide on this one.
*Who could legitimately argue that carbon dating is an EXACT science? We haven't lived for four billion years so monitoring organisms real-time is a tad difficult.
Nonetheless, living things harbor radioactive isotopes during their lifespans and when they die they lose a universally tested and agreed upon percentage of those isotopes with each passing moment. We look at the carbon isotopes. Granted, it has to be estimated as some very, very slowly decaying isotopes cannot be tracked in our lifetimes for millions of years. But dead things don't grow new carbon isotopes so it's feasible to calculate the number of decaying ones over several years compared with a vibrant specimen of the same genus.
Anyhow, even if it's not an exact science it's a pretty darn believable, realistic, and frankly, cool one. And that's just a remedial summary of what it is but what is your theory then? What is the alternative? That the Earth is 5,000 years old? Seriously, where do your beliefs lie on this issue? How old is the planet, xdfred? Don't run and hide.
Also, there is evidence of ocular development for millions of years in the fossil record. Do you know how amazing the natural vision enhancements in different species has progressed over the many, many years of man and creature's Earthly existence? Read about birds and insects and the constantly evolving visual changes some species have undergone. Or, just read the Bible again, stay stuck in your narrow thinking patterns, and go judge a group of people today in some silly delusion about doing God's work..

X="I like that new conservative meme. Liberals are racists." It's not new. Your warped definition of racism is. It would be wrong to push people to not vote for Barack Hussein Obama because he is black. It would be just as wrong to push people to vote for Barack Hussein Obama because he is black.
*I don't know who you're speaking of. Maybe Al Sharpton or someone....I don't know. I think Al Sharpton's an idiot. The majority voting for Obama are doing it out of total disgust for this administration and the GOP hogs at the trough over the past eight years.
Also...you have absolutely not a shred of a sliver of an idea of what true racism is. I don't think for one second you're a racist. I think you'd vote for Michael Steele if he were running.
But you have no clue what racism really is and that neoconservative spin y'all have come up with is stupid and offensive. "

" I took into account the innocents who died under Saddam. I also took into account the innocents who have died in the darfur region of sudan and those who have died in nigeria and those who have been tortured in zimbabwe and the dissenters in china, etc. during the bush administration. yet, we did not invade these countries to "liberate" the oppressed. "

" Hello All: Have followed the responses (I do every week) and have been surprised by both the quantity and (for the most part) quality. Most of my columns aren't polemics, so they don't generate much. I try to write to inform and entertain more than to polarize.

Still,I'd be happy to respond to anyone who wants to carry on a dialog about the issues raised here (including liberal anger--just watched documentaries about both Al Franken and Ann Coulter) but I don't want to do it here. It's not fair for me to be "known" with so few of you being identified. Being anonymous changes the nature of the debate; personal pot-shots threaten to overwhelm, as this forum reveals.

So if you care to, e-mail me at cawelti@forbin.net, and I'll be happy to dialog.

--Scott Cawelti "

" timbrackett
wrote on Aug 14, 2008 11:42 PM:

" I took into account the innocents who died under Saddam. I also took into account the innocents who have died in the darfur region of sudan and those who have died in nigeria and those who have been tortured in zimbabwe and the dissenters in china, etc. during the bush administration. yet, we did not invade these countries to "liberate" the oppressed. "

So which is it? More war, or less? "

" .....Alaska's wildlife reserve get razed by machines... ANWR is a glacial ice cube. The pictures leftwingers show are southern Alaska. No one is talking about drilling there. Why should drilling for oil make you or anyone sick? Oil spills, like Exxon Valdez should, but drilling?

...brag about the U.S. unemployment rate right now... As I said, still the envy of Western Europe. "

" ...Republicans were beneficiaries of Abramoff's money probably 50 to 1 over Democrats.... Probably doesn't cut it. He paid everybody off he could.

....they lose a universally tested and agreed upon percentage of those isotopes ..... huge extrapolation error factor in Carbon dating.

....How old is the planet, xdfred? Don't run and hide.... I honestly don't know. I believe it to be less than 100,000 years old, but I don't know. And neither do you. If you look at the fossil record, the timeline of fossils abruptly end. Evolution wouldn't result in that.

...there is evidence of ocular development for millions of years in the fossil record.... No there isn't. You couldn't prove that if you tried.

....I think you'd vote for Michael Steele if he were running.... Definately. Or another Clarance Thomas. In a heartbeat.

...But you have no clue what racism really is... So what is it? Isn't racism the consideration of a persons race with regard to how you deal with him/her due to the flawed concept of racial superiority? "

" cross1242
wrote on Aug 14, 2008 9:08 PM:

" mister t @ Aug 14, 2008 3:27 PM said, "he knew they didn't have them & lied to all of congress who voted for the Iraq war"

BINGO! That's absolutely right.

The only thing that we still don't know for sure is WHY he was dead-set on going to war with Iraq from the first day of his Administration. "


OMG the liberal conspiracy theories are back! Bush created 9-11 and then went after everyone is dad couldnt get.

Prove any of this? Certainly if this was true Bush would have been impeached just like Slick Willy. Of course you cant because it just aint true!

Barack Hussein Obama however will reopen this case. He will lean on Ayers, his soon to be announced Bombing Czar. Ayers knows a thing or two about bombing so he will find Bush's fingerprints plane fragments still buried at ground zero.

This is just as True as the Cross spin. "

" obviously, i am on the record as supporting less war. i would also like to be clear that i support necessary wars. i still support the war in Afghanistan.
but some seem to have forgotten why we went to iraq and come up with new reasons. if we are really to be liberators and nation-builders, then lets get on with it because there are a lot of nations in need of liberation.
the undeniable fact is that the case for the war in iraq was wmd's. there were no wmds. no amount of spin and revisionist history can change this fact! "

" timmybrack,

What did Afghanistan ever do to us??? "

" timbrackett
"undeniable fact is that the case for the war in iraq was wmd's. there were no wmds..." You are the one with the revisionist history problem. Read the war resolution, then gripe. "

" hetfield @ Aug 15, 2008 9:48 AM said, "Bush created 9-11...."

hetfield, neither I nor anyone else that I know of has said that. And, in response to 0/11 we went into Afghanistan after Al Queda.

But, there was NO Al Queda in Iraq (then -- but there is now). Even before W could locate Afghanistan on a map, he was talking about going after Iraq.

Why?

I don't know. And all I've ever heard is speculation.

The war that W lied us into was the one in Iraq. And, for that, he should have been impeached, convicted, and thrown out of office. That's the penalty that should apply when you send off people to die for reasons you have to lie about and have yet to tell us the real reason. "

" Xdfred -

The development of eyes did not necessarily take the millions and millions of years that other developments took. There are fossils of near identical organisms found in the same geographic regions some of which had no traces of photo receptors and others which had the most simplistic retinal constructs.
When stuff started crawling out of the ocean, there was this thing called the Sun to contend with speeding along the formation of eyes.

There is a multitude of fascinating information available on the subject but you're not going to look. You're stuck on stupid. And you're proud of it and that's what's so pathetic.

You think the planet and the universe(?) is a few thousand years old and then somehow act like you have some authority on these issues.

If you are an ambassador for conservatism, then do you understand why we sometimes look so condescendingly down on the philosophy?

Well, probably not... "

" coalplant @ Aug 15, 2008 12:17 PM said, "timmybrack, What did Afghanistan ever do to us???"

At the time of 9/11 the Afghan government was run by the Taliban. We told them that if they catch OBL and other Al Queda and turn them over to us, we'd be happy. They said "no." So, we went into Afghanistan to go after OBL and Al Queda and that necessitated going after the Taliban that ran the place too.

So, to answer your question directly, Afghanistan protected Al Queda and they attacked this country.

Unfortunately, W told our troops to forget OBL and move on to Iraq before our job there was done. "

" Cross,
Oh so Afghanistan never directly attacked us but some thugs living in that country did. I see how you liberals are so supportiv of that war. Afghanistan never attached us but its OK to kill them.
Iraq on the other hand committed acts of war by regularly shooting at our planes and defied the liberal savior United Nations, but thats OK because it's apparently Ok to kill Afghans but not people from Iraq.

Obama in 08
Cross says he's uppity and not a US citizen,,,just when and who from the Clinton campaign got to Cross "

" 2 words for those who think the liberals have no hatred:

Daily Kos "

" "coalplant wrote on Aug 16, 2008 6:01 PM:
" Cross,
Oh so Afghanistan never directly attacked us but some thugs living in that country did. I see how you liberals are so supportiv of that war. Afghanistan never attached us but its OK to kill them.
Iraq on the other hand committed acts of war by regularly shooting at our planes and defied the liberal savior United Nations, but thats OK because it's apparently Ok to kill Afghans but not people from Iraq."

You just throw dirt just to throw it don't you? (..and you're not in the slightest way original or clever when you do it.)
Now, you're saying that going to Afghanistan was wrong? Basically just to pick a fight with Cross, right?

If any war in the 21st century was justified, it'd be that one. It's pretty unanimous throughout the country, liberal or conservative, that military force was just and necessary.
Can you imagine if we didn't go after the Taliban who were harboring OBL and giving us the finger in the process? The people of this country would've never forgiven the Bush Administration. The Afghanistan government supported a man and his crew who killed 3,000 Americans in one day. And you're singling out Cross and in your typical juvenile fashion, taking an absurd position because you have all sorts of things wrong with you. "

" Why isn't this a headline??? This is the first time McCain and Obama are tied. We hear about polls ALL the time in the press, somehow, when McCain starts gaining, mums the word. That may be why repubs are angry.... they can't get a fair shake.
http://www.gallup.com/HomePage.aspx "

" Chester Chester Chester,, so much anger spouting from your little mind and you have claimed all week how open minded and tolerant you are.
My support of either military engagement is not important as I am more interested in the pretzel like contortions folks like yourself and Cross have to put yourselves in to continue your blind hatred of our current president. Yep, in your mind innocent Afghani civilians can die to sate your blood lust over 9/11 but under no circumstance shall we ever go to war unless we have 3000 civilians killed on our soil. Is that the correct number for you open minded and enlightened liberals,, or is it 3004 now? Maybe it would need to be 3010 if there were alot of the type of Americans you don't like?
Yeah your the clever and original one Chester,,, better find a new blog over at Kos to steal more of your original thoughts from

Obama in 08
His number is 220 million "

" thinkaboutit wrote on Aug 17, 2008 12:36 PM:
" Why isn't this a headline??? This is the first time McCain and Obama are tied. We hear about polls ALL the time in the press, somehow, when McCain starts gaining, mums the word. That may be why repubs are angry.... they can't get a fair shake.
http://www.gallup.com/HomePage.aspx "

Yea. I think it got lost in the shuffle somewhere between all the chatter about Jerome Corsi's flailing new bag of excrement and how John Edwards cheated on his wife and neither of the POTUS candidates ever did.
You know, now that the Jeromiah Wright controversy has died down a little. "

" "...The development of eyes did not necessarily take the millions and millions of years that other developments took...." And you know this because?
"There are fossils of near identical organisms found in the same geographic regions some of which had no traces of photo receptors and others which had the most simplistic retinal constructs...." Nope.

"When stuff started crawling out of the ocean, there was this thing called the Sun to contend with speeding along the formation of eyes....." Why would stuff crawl out of the oceans?

"...There is a multitude of fascinating information available on the subject but you're not going to look....." You think I haven't?
"..You're stuck on stupid. And you're proud of it and that's what's so pathetic..." Sound like you're the one who's stuck. What happened to question everything? Explore all possibilities?

"...You think the planet and the universe(?) is a few thousand years old and then somehow act like you have some authority on these issues..." Wow, an authority? I'm just posting what I think, based omn what research I've done. You're the one acting like an authority. And failing at it.

"..If you are an ambassador for conservatism, then do you understand why we sometimes look so condescendingly down on the philosophy?..." Oh, I understand. For religion to be effectively smeared, the THEORY of evolution has to be absolute. And for that THEORY to have any chance at all, the earth has to be millions of years old. Secularists have been lying about the experiments that prove the THEORY of evolution for decades. A famous farce was one involving moths, which were painted and glued to trees to prove how they evolved. So, since evolution is just a THEORY, it should be open to discussion and examination. And altrenatives should also be explored, but not to so called free thinking liberals. If it doesn't follow the party line, it should be squashed. Stalin would be proud....of you and others like you. And you wonder why those of us who value religious freedom and honest scientific inquiry get angry with the censorship you and yours weakly try to push on us? "

" "..Jerome Corsi's flailing new bag of excrement ..." The voice of the left, by kos and company. BTW, the book is doing quite well.

"...how John Edwards cheated on his wife..." Actually, the story is the lying, cover up and payoffs. And where the payoff money came from. "

" Iraq War:
The Bush Administration acted on the basis of intelligence conclusions that were shared by previous administrations and foreign governments. President Bill Clinton justified Operation Desert Fox because of the threat posed by Iraqi's WMD's.

A Bill Clinton quote, "Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors; he will make war on his own people. And mark my words he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them."

Clinton’s National Security Council advisor Sandy Berger warned, "Saddam will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” Vice President Al Gore said in 2002, "We know that [Saddam] has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." And so on and so on.

The intelligence services of Britain, France, Russia, Germany, and Israel, among many others, held the same opinion of Iraq. French Foreign Minister stated to the UN Security Council "Right now, our attention has to be focused as a priority on the biological and chemical domains. Regarding the chemical domain, we have evidence of its capacity to produce VX and Yperite." The German Ambassador on NBC’s “Today” "I think all of our governments believe that Iraq has produced weapons of mass destruction and that we have to assume that they still have—that they continue to have weapons of mass destruction.” And so on and so on.

The Bush Administration may have been wrong about Iraqi WMD's, but so were many other governments and few have been accused of lying. The accusations of lying comes from the pure hatred of the left.

Did Bush lie? Well the Senate Intelligence Committee's in 2004 and 2005 issued statements that they did not think so. "The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities. …"The Commission found no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs."

Those that believe Bush lied and conjured up this war will think so no matter what. It is just the way they are, but then they admit how much smarter Bush is than the ENTIRE WORLD (including themselves). I don't believe Bush is smart enough to pull the hoax off or lie good enough to fool everyone. Who is? Who needed to world, especially close neighbors, to think/believe Iraq had WMD's? Saddam did. Saddam, I believe, was the source of his own demise. "

" Steady, you win the award for post of the day. That is a great summary, and I believe that's exactly what happened. "

" " Steady, you win the award for post of the day. That is a great summary, and I believe that's exactly what happened. "


Agreed "

" "Coalplant wrote: Chester Chester Chester...etc, etc."

*You are such a tool. LOL! If you were say, my brother, I might be worried about your bizarre claims but you're just some random dude on another internet thread. Do you really think I'm angry, Coalplant? Really? I just call you out regularly. That's not necessarily anger. It is however, almost unnecessary, as you do a fantastic job embarrassing yourself with every bumbling post.
And, you keep harping on this tolerant/open-minded thing I supposedly said. You're a hardcore neocon and I'm generally not that tolerant of hardcore neocons. When did I say that? Oh wait. You're a super Democrat who hasn't laid out even one stance on an issue but wants us all to take his word for it that that's what he is. This way you can throw mud (and poorly) from your dubious position at liberals and then claim "I'm a Democrat!" absurdly because you think that gives you a pass.
Do you EVER make a lick of sense, dude?
How many times do I have to bust you out in front of all these nice people?

"My support of either military engagement is not important as I am more interested in the pretzel like contortions folks like yourself and Cross have to put yourselves in to continue your blind hatred of our current president."

*No kidding? So, you find less importance regarding our U.S. military activity and you know, wars, than the attitudes of two internet commentors out of like the two billion throughout the world? And WE all take the internet too seriously. But not you.

"Yep, in your mind innocent Afghani civilians can die to sate your blood lust over 9/11 but under no circumstance shall we ever go to war unless we have 3000 civilians killed on our soil. Is that the correct number for you open minded and enlightened liberals,, or is it 3004 now? Maybe it would need to be 3010 if there were alot of the type of Americans you don't like?"

*Does anyone here agree with the above statements made by Coalplant? He casted them in sarcasm but you get the general idea of what he's saying. The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was wrong, and I have blood lust for wanting it to happen and if you agree with it then you must as well. Who here, conservative or liberal, took great pleasure in the civilian deaths in Afghanistan? Because if you agreed with that war you must have, according to Mr. Intellect here.
Seriously Coal?
I'll tell you what. Let's change it up once. Why don't you go ahead and tell us your opinion on the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan once instead of just flame-throwing? Was it justified? What do all your years of Democratic thinking tell you?
Do you ever lay down an opinion on anything that's not just a counter-opinion? A very inarticulate counter-opinion.. "

" Xdfred - I just read your post after a long day. I'll respond to the evolution thing later, although it's utterly pointless.

Consider something real quick though.

If millions of celestial bodies have been detected millions of light years away, and the space around them expands at the speed of light pulling each one further and further away from the other, how could any of them possibly be younger than 100,000 years old?

Even if God sneezed out the universe, it took these galaxies a very, very, very long time to separate at such intense speeds and to report back the mind-boggling distances they are from one another. This rock we live on. It's old. Even your rustic ideas are not as old as this planet. The dirt under your feet? Old. The Earth's oceans? Old. You? Old. The oil we battle so intently for...how do you think it got there? Is it unicorn ink? The black blood of trolls and magic elves?
No dude, I think it's long dead organism remains crushed over millions of years under layers of high pressured Earth and extreme temperature.

But believe all the silly fairy tales you want, Xdfred. I reckon that's YOUR cross to bear. "

" Chester...Yes, you have an inbred need to have all people classified and sorted into little compartments so you can keep them all in their place in your utopian society. I understand I don't fit your Kos/moveon definition of a Democrat and that your boiling from your inability to articulate your hatred that people like me are allowed to be democrats and are allowed to vote.
As I said my opinion of the current military operations we are engaged in is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You have to come to grips with your own hypocrisy towards the use of our military, and personally you do not have the mental faculties to do that.
And really demanding I post something for you,,, Is that the message board version of you stomping your feet like a little brat.

Obama in 08
No matter how hard Chester tries he cannot take my vote away "

" "..No dude, I think it's long dead organism remains crushed over millions of years under layers of high pressured Earth and extreme temperature...." Think carbon density. How much carbon is in a jungle, which is mostly water. Now, how much carbon is in an oil field, per acre. Now, forces supposedly drove the organic material down. Yet forces drive oil up, so why the switch?
"....If millions of celestial bodies have been detected millions of light years away, and the space around them expands at the speed of light pulling each one further and further away from the other, how could any of them possibly be younger than 100,000 years old?..." And we know they are light years away because???? And the space around them expands??? What expansion are you talking about? "

" "....But believe all the silly fairy tales you want, Xdfred...." What's it to you what I believe? Sorry, Goebbels, but you don't get to dictate what's correct thought and what isn't. Want a silly fairy tale? Gun control reduces crime and violence. That's a silly fairy tale. So's the THEORY of evolution, in my opinion. Yet Barack Hussein Obama is a hard core supporter of gun control. So, who believes silly fairy tales. "

" Grrrrrrrrrrr! "

" xdfred wrote on Aug 19, 2008 9:30 AM:

"....If millions of celestial bodies have been detected millions of light years away, and the space around them expands at the speed of light pulling each one further and further away from the other, how could any of them possibly be younger than 100,000 years old?..." And we know they are light years away because???? And the space around them expands??? What expansion are you talking about? "

I don't know what to say to any of this.

Oh yea..
You (or someone else I guess. Definitely someone else after the above statements) could read Walter Gehring.
And be amazed how mollusks, sea urchins, and primitive worms have shown ocular progression, and yes I'm sorry to break it to you..worms have been found with two cell eye formations up to modern advanced retinas. Or those famous fruit fly/mutated "small eye" mouse gene studies.
But whatever. You go on copying Neal Boortz articles and calling that an argument and believing whatever crazy stuff you believe. "

" chester11
wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:17 AM:

"I don't know what to say to any of this." This pretty much sums it up for you, doesn't it.

"But whatever. You go on copying Neal Boortz articles and calling that an argument and believing whatever crazy stuff you believe." Only a real loser pretends at giving permission to voice opinions. Game, set, match.

"...read Walter Gehring...." Since you don't have the title, I'll assume you haven't read the book yourself. Too many big words, perhaps?

If evolution is totally 100% science proven, why is it called a THEORY? And why oppose other theories? Maybe you should watch Ben Stein's movie. "

" xdfred wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:36 AM:

"But whatever. You go on copying Neal Boortz articles and calling that an argument and believing whatever crazy stuff you believe." Only a real loser pretends at giving permission to voice opinions. Game, set, match.

LOL! Yea..Game, Set, Match...

At what, exactly? That evolution is a folly? You just beat me at that? Really?

Tell me what your theory is. I believe in evolution. Are there holes because of the impossible nature of some observational aspects of it? Sure, there are. But I'd be interested in knowing your position on these matters and what kind of observational evidence you have, and which of our theories have a higher ratio of logic to mythical dogma.
I believe in universal expansion. I'm sorry you don't know what that is but game, set, match - you sure showed me!!
I believe there are trillions of stars within trillions of galaxies, trillions of miles away and that there are trillions of species out there who endured the end of civilizations due to a nearby supernova. I believe in the Big Bang theory. I believe in math and science, the theory of relativity, rationality, the laws of physics. I believe that our planet is about 400 million years old. Those are just a few of my beliefs.

What are your beliefs, Xdfred?

And what kind of proof will you have? "

" Chester
"..And what kind of proof will you have?.. " About the same amount as you do. "

" chester the curious:
"What are your beliefs, Xdfred?" This is actually a very interesting question for two reasons. What is your motive for asking it? To try to prove I'm wrong? You obviously live for that sort of thing. But it is interesting for another reason that gets back to the topic of this column. Evolutionists, academics, and liberals in general are afraid to have an open debate on evolution. Hence the censorship. And hence the anger. An ISU astrology professor was fired because he alluded to intelligent design in his writings, not his teachings. This happens everywhere. Schools primarily. And the stench raised when a school wants to teach some form of intelligent design as an alternative theory is so stalinesque. And the whole point is to discredit religious belief so liberals can claim we have no one to answer for except the state. So yes, I'm angry about that, Chester and Cawelti. "

" Chester,
Where did the very first living cell come from? Even the great Richard Dawkins couldn't answer that one. Yet ask that question in a school when the THEORY of evolution is being taught and watch what happens. "

" Wow after reading all these comments on here chester11 is just owning you guys. I like how someone tried to make a comment that, here comes another blanket post by chester. thats the ignorance you people have and it shines like a spotlight at foxnews. If a liberal outsmarts you, which happens pretty much everytime, you throw an insult like a little child getting a last word in. And chester11, your view on fairytales in school is great. keep up the good work buddy and run for office someday to shut these witch hunting tall tale believing neocons up. "