The Voices America Needs to Start Listening To

[Rohirrim]

America is going into a hole. And there are cheerleaders who are celebrating that spiral. No. It is not the Left. What is the Left doing? They are working hard to rebuild an America that was torched by the neocons and nearly reduced to rubble. They are working to reestablish America's voice in the world, and to restore sanity after the Bush cabal's malfeasance and attempts to destroy the republic. What is the Right doing? Spewing hate, refusing to help, and attacking any and every effort to undo the damage done. Today, it has been reported that the neocons are supporting Ahmadinijad in the Iranian elections. They want Obama's efforts at diplomacy to fail. They want moderation to fail. They want war with Iran, not diplomacy.

We must start standing up to the hate, or it will drag us all down.


Coulter has made her fortune by generating, fanning, and nurturing hatred and contempt for a variety of people, including liberals, Democrats, gays, foreign nationals, 9/11 widows, feminists, single mothers, Muslims, and any other group she could throw to her disenfranchised readership as shark bait.
-----------------


If O'Reilly had been a serious journalist or broadcaster instead of a sclerotic, chronically-aggravated right-wing rage pimp, he might have had the professional self-awareness or ethical sense to realize that he was putting George Tiller's life in danger over the more than 28 broadcasts in which he used Tiller's name. But O'Reilly, like, for Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and indeed Coulter herself (to name only the gratin of that particular food chain) is neither of those things.

As a group, they are the pop culture equivalent of necrotic carrion beetles, crawling with insectile determination from one infected open wound in the American psyche to another. The wounds include fear of race, fear of foreigners, fear of sexuality, fear of difference, hysterical religious fundamentalism, violent nationalism, and paranoia. They lay their eggs in the infected abrasion, then scuttle away. When the eggs hatch, disgorging rage and discontent, they start counting money.

----------------------

Sarah "Screw the Political Correctness" Palin, on the other hand, seemed right at home. She marched into those same crowds grinning and winking, and "Yoo betcha-ing" like she was onstage at the Miss Alaska pageant. While her supporters waved watermelon slices and stuffed monkeys, Palin talked about who the "real Americans" were, and who was "palling around with terrorists." She refused to address the blatant racism of her fans, or address the obvious exploitation of Obama's middle name, Hussein, and the implication she herself was making with her "terrorist" comments.

---------------------------------

Even FOX's Shep Smith has said he's disturbed by the escalating virulence and menace of the anti-Obama emails the station is receiving.

-------------------------------


There was a time when decency, even honor, was an essential part of the American dialogue in its most ideal form, and part of its very identity. There was a time when our culture would have recoiled in horror at the vituperation flowing unchecked from radios, televisions, and the Internet, instead of applauding it as "common sense," "free speech," or "mavericky," or "a spin-free zone."



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-rowe/the-holocaust-museum-shoo_b_214133.html

[Bob]

I will agree with you that Bush was a lousy president, but do we have to embrace Socialism to save Capitalism? I think Bush communicated that message as well...it was the wrong message under Bush, it is the wrong message and path now.

Now, the parties seem hell bent on wrecking, and taking the resources from healthcare...this is not about party, its about freedom. This is not about saving car companies, banks, or healthcare, iyt is about taking the money and giving it to unions, and to the government.

You may be ok with shreading the Consitution for your party, when your guy is in power but what is going to likely happen, is the mood will shift to the R's in 2010, but the trend toward taking away freedoms will continue, and by then it might be too late. Both parties are progressive, in the real sense, and whan I say progressive I mean they are willing to abuse personal liberties of the people and to consolidate and steal power. The R's were violated, and their misplaced trust -- I personally think their will come a point, when most D's will realize that the reshaping that is taking place is transforming us into something un-American, and not founded in our roots, but in other tradition's roots...

[Rohirrim]

I will agree with you that Bush was a lousy president, but do we have to embrace Socialism to save Capitalism? I think Bush communicated that message as well...it was the wrong message under Bush, it is the wrong message and path now.

Now, the parties seem hell bent on wrecking, and taking the resources from healthcare...this is not about party, its about freedom. This is not about saving car companies, banks, or healthcare, iyt is about taking the money and giving it to unions, and to the government.

You may be ok with shreading the Consitution for your party, when your guy is in power but what is going to likely happen, is the mood will shift to the R's in 2010, but the trend toward taking away freedoms will continue, and by then it might be too late. Both parties are progressive, in the real sense, and whan I say progressive I mean they are willing to abuse personal liberties of the people and to consolidate and steal power. The R's were violated, and their misplaced trust -- I personally think their will come a point, when most D's will realize that the reshaping that is taking place is transforming us into something un-American, and not founded in our roots, but in other tradition's roots...

You're so full of crap you should carry a roll of toilet paper tied around your neck. The policies being pursued right now aren't even close to where America's social policies were in the 70s. To call it socialism is nothing more than fear mongering, which is all the Right has left. And to call it anti-freedom is only more hyperbole. That is the point of this thread. Basically, what the Right is doing is driving people to lock and load. Terrorism. Period. That's what this nutjob did in Washington last week. And as the Right's rhetoric gets more extreme, so will the bloody acts. The Right should take a minute and think about whether or not it seriously wants to incite a civil war. That's where they are headed. I assure you, there are plenty on the Left who are armed to the teeth.

Basically, here's the basic message from the Right: "We lost the election by a landslide. The American people have spoken. But we don't give a ****. If we can't win, then we can scorch the political earth to such an extreme degree that we can destroy this country." The Right is like some jilted, macho asshole who shoots his wife after she divorces him because if he can't have her, then nobody can.

[barryr]

The left has ben spewing hate and BS for years, but now the idiots on the left are concerned about hate when they think it's coming from the other side. Another example, and they are countless by now, of the liberal "ok, when I do it, but wrong for you" attitude. Snobbish pukes can't have it both ways no matter how you try and want it.

[Rohirrim]

More on the dangerous hate mongering coming out of the Right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinion/14rich.html?_r=2

[mhgaffney]

barry wouldn't know left from right if it kicked him in the ass.

[Meck77]

Sure would be nice if states could have more control over their own destiny with less federal interference. At that point people could gravitate to their chosen state where the policies fit them best. Trying to force all 300 million of us to believe in one philosophy just isn't working anymore. It's your fault! No it's your fault! blah blah ****ing blah

[Bob]

You're so full of crap you should carry a roll of toilet paper tied around your neck. The policies being pursued right now aren't even close to where America's social policies were in the 70s. To call it socialism is nothing more than fear mongering, which is all the Right has left. And to call it anti-freedom is only more hyperbole. That is the point of this thread. Basically, what the Right is doing is driving people to lock and load. Terrorism. Period. That's what this nutjob did in Washington last week. And as the Right's rhetoric gets more extreme, so will the bloody acts. The Right should take a minute and think about whether or not it seriously wants to incite a civil war. That's where they are headed. I assure you, there are plenty on the Left who are armed to the teeth.

Basically, here's the basic message from the Right: "We lost the election by a landslide. The American people have spoken. But we don't give a ****. If we can't win, then we can scorch the political earth to such an extreme degree that we can destroy this country." The Right is like some jilted, macho a-hole who shoots his wife after she divorces him because if he can't have her, then nobody can.

Hate and idiocy usually believe in party first over country, and sadly turn to violence to solve problems they cannot articulate well. They like you see your party as good and teh other party as bad -- I think both parties have shown us what they are -- oppressive. But as you seem to embrace that the D's are the good guys, may I remind you of some facts.

I know you dont like the term "Socialism," any more than the word "liberal" because those words have attracted too much light and accuracy to their real & ugly meaning. So, now Hilary changes the word to "Progressive" until enough folks read for twenty minutes or more and discover what facists like Wilson and others in the early 20th century did in oppressing American Liberties and views -- they will change the name to something else, over and over assuming correctly (in many cases) that the uniformed minions will not be introspective enough to even want to know their own history. All that matters is the ideological end game -- damn the truth. Newsweek was reflecting the position they honestly promote and believe most Americans will come to embrace...Socialism. How can you even lie about what the government's intention is after what has happened to the car companies lately? How many un-checked Czars do you need? If your augument is "well Bush did it too" I will remind you that is a 2nd grade response, and does not address the cental issue, that R's and D's are both leading us down a progressive path that would have made our founding fathers, and generations of Americans of years past weep..

Your are right that Americans spoke when they elected Obama, they wanted "change" and "hope" I did too, but I dont think most Americans want to continue to shread the founding documents that keep us all safe, do you?

[frerottenextelway]

Hate and idiocy usually believe in party first over country, and sadly turn to violence to solve problems they cannot articulate well. They like you see your party as good and teh other party as bad -- I think both parties have shown us what they are -- oppressive. But as you seem to embrace that the D's are the good guys, may I remind you of some facts.

I know you dont like the term "Socialism," any more than the word "liberal" because those words have attracted too much light and accuracy to their real & ugly meaning. So, now Hilary changes the word to "Progressive" until enough folks read for twenty minutes or more and discover what facists like Wilson and others in the early 20th century did in oppressing American Liberties and views -- they will change the name to something else, over and over assuming correctly (in many cases) that the uniformed minions will not be introspective enough to even want to know their own history. All that matters is the ideological end game -- damn the truth. Newsweek was reflecting the position they honestly promote and believe most Americans will come to embrace...Socialism. How can you even lie about what the government's intention is after what has happened to the car companies lately? How many un-checked Czars do you need? If your augument is "well Bush did it too" I will remind you that is a 2nd grade response, and does not address the cental issue, that R's and D's are both leading us down a progressive path that would have made our founding fathers, and generations of Americans of years past weep..

Your are right that Americans spoke when they elected Obama, they wanted "change" and "hope" I did too, but I dont think most Americans want to continue to shread the founding documents that keep us all safe, do you?


LIBERALISM/JEWRY/MARXISM was the formula
used by Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin D. Roosevelt, both
Democrats, to betray their Nation.

They’re marching us to a non-violent fascism. Or to put it another way, they’re marching us to 1984. Big Brother. … Like it or not, fascism is on the rise.

Suppose you asked leftists to make a list of all the things that were wrong with society, and then suppose you instituted every social change that they demanded. It is safe to say that within a couple of years the majority of leftists would find something new to complain about, some new social "evil" to correct because, once again, the leftist is motivated less by distress at society's ills than by the need to satisfy his drive for power by imposing his solutions on society.

.

[Bob]

The left has ben spewing hate and BS for years, but now the idiots on the left are concerned about hate when they think it's coming from the other side. Another example, and they are countless by now, of the liberal "ok, when I do it, but wrong for you" attitude. Snobbish pukes can't have it both ways no matter how you try and want it.

When you disagree with the ideologically intolarant its always "hate." I hear in 32 there were a few hateful Jews in Berlin as well ...

Just look how hateful Prejean was...boy and the way she said she believed in traditional marriage like the President...simply hateful stuff -- said with such venom as well -- she should be made an example of....and any plummer who says peep as well -- get on your brown shirts.

[uplink]

After talking with family members who frequently watch Fox Political shows, I'm amazed at all the things they believe about the Obama admin. This is only going to get worse.

Seems this hate-mongering will define the republican party in the years to come, instead of real and novel ideas. Too bad since a creative rethink of
the party, as only a defeat can foster, would be so productive.

[BABronco]

:thumbs: :thumbsup: Sure would be nice if states could have more control over their own destiny with less federal interference. At that point people could gravitate to their chosen state where the policies fit them best. Trying to force all 300 million of us to believe in one philosophy just isn't working anymore. It's your fault! No it's your fault! blah blah ****ing blah

[Spider]

Sure would be nice if states could have more control over their own destiny with less federal interference. At that point people could gravitate to their chosen state where the policies fit them best. Trying to force all 300 million of us to believe in one philosophy just isn't working anymore. It's your fault! No it's your fault! blah blah ****ing blah

On some things yes , but as a trucker , well let me put it like this , Colorado has certain laws pertaining to Us truckers , for example permits , lets say I am 10'6 inches wide , in Colorado I have to shut down at Curfew , meanwhile in Utah I have no curfew , and in New Mexico I have curfew + I cant not move on the weekends , So States do have a lot of control , more then you think , Another example , In Colorado I am allowed 80 K ( without a permit ) on the main Interstate , 85k on State highways ( without a permit ) New Mexico , Wyoming , Utah do not honor this , Colorado ,Utah , Wyoming , Montana , will recognize a 3 axle trailer , while Ill.,Indiana , Ohio , will not , but I can haul more weight per tandem in Illinois ,then I can in Kansas or Missouri, Nebraska is just flat out ****ed up , I wont even go there .......
Do you see how having 1 rule of law to follow would help ?
And these are just the basics , there is alot more ............

[Spider]

This got me to thinking , States rights , I know in some states my truck is considered my home and work place ( office) I can carry a fire arm if I choose to do so , in other states I cant , Montana has different Gun laws then Wyoming , South Dakota has different abortion laws then Colorado , so Does Wyoming , So I am asking what are the Federal laws the States have to follow ?

[Garcia Bronco]

So I am asking what are the Federal laws the States have to follow ?



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

[Odysseus]

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

Good points. My issue is the people continue to abdicate their responsibility and blame everyone and everything around them. I am not claiming to believe that in some bygone era citizens were better than now but we don't seem to care about what is essential and real.

[orinjkrush]

Our oaths are to the Constitution.

Not to the Rs or the Ds. Or socialism or capitalism or any -ism.

We need to get back to the Constitution and only the Constitution.

[Garcia Bronco]

Good points. My issue is the people continue to abdicate their responsibility and blame everyone and everything around them. I am not claiming to believe that in some bygone era citizens were better than now but we don't seem to care about what is essential and real.

There has to be balance, that's all. Some things need federal attention, but we also must remember that different locales, regions, states, and sections of this country have different needs. We cannot have laws they hinder their economic growth. The right answer is not always evident or easy. I could make examples for Federal intervention and examples when it's not justified.

[Bob]

After talking with family members who frequently watch Fox Political shows, I'm amazed at all the things they believe about the Obama admin. This is only going to get worse.

Seems this hate-mongering will define the republican party in the years to come, instead of real and novel ideas. Too bad since a creative rethink of
the party, as only a defeat can foster, would be so productive.

I can’t speak to what your relative’s believe or their level of ignorance, but when there is real news about someone the mainstream media are ideologically inline with, it is sad that so little is reported. It is dangerous for everyone when the media aligns so heavily with various parties.

For example have you heard about the fact that Obama illegally fired an attorney general last week, and was required to give 30- days notice to congress and a reason. Obama didn’t -- he fired him after one day of first contact regarding his intention, and gave no reason -- the law passed in 2008 required that the 30 day notice be given to congress so they could not be as easily be strong-armed by the executive branch -- and this attorney who was canned, was only guilty of investigating a former NBA star and Obama supporter (Kevin Johnson) turned mayor who was using resources illegally of Americore -- the job of providing over-site of bailout monies being spent ... is one of the purviews of these attorneys -- I guess another message is being sent. Again – THEY DID SOMETHING ILLEGAL – and are firing a guy who was doing their job to protect us from misuse of funds!!!

[Bob]

Our oaths are to the Constitution.

Not to the Rs or the Ds. Or socialism or capitalism or any -ism.

We need to get back to the Constitution and only the Constitution.

Amen! But the ballances built into the Consitution would seem to support most aspects of capitalism...and the rights of the individual over the collective.

[Spider]

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

I understand that , but I am asking what law have the Feds passed that States must follow .....The increased speed limit for example , states dont have to raise the Speed limit , they can option out of it , it will just cost the state fed funds ...........

[SJ Bronco]

It seems to me when it comes to state rights, we seem to pick and choose which rights the state should decide. For example, the current administration is discussing taking certain states rights away, just as the last administration did. I think either we need to sit down and discuss what the government is in charge of in the way of rights, or separate into 50 countries. I don't think we can just let the states decide everything. They have shown throughout history to have a destructive tendency to oppress and dictate instead of decide fairly, causing the government time and money when they finally HAVE TO step in. For example, the righties may not like gay marriage, but we sure as hell didn't appreciate the Bush administration raiding our LEGAL marijuana farms. I also know that we as a country are held accountable for what happens in ALL states. I'm not going to let them vote back Jim Crow in the southern states, even if i don't live there. So where do we draw the line? I think it's time to decide that once and for all.

[SJ Bronco]

I can’t speak to what your relative’s believe or their level of ignorance, but when there is real news about someone the mainstream media are ideologically inline with, it is sad that so little is reported. It is dangerous for everyone when the media aligns so heavily with various parties.

For example have you heard about the fact that Obama illegally fired an attorney general last week, and was required to give 30- days notice to congress and a reason. Obama didn’t -- he fired him after one day of first contact regarding his intention, and gave no reason -- the law passed in 2008 required that the 30 day notice be given to congress so they could not be as easily be strong-armed by the executive branch -- and this attorney who was canned, was only guilty of investigating a former NBA star and Obama supporter (Kevin Johnson) turned mayor who was using resources illegally of Americore -- the job of providing over-site of bailout monies being spent ... is one of the purviews of these attorneys -- I guess another message is being sent. Again – THEY DID SOMETHING ILLEGAL – and are firing a guy who was doing their job to protect us from misuse of funds!!!

Link, I want to read this story

[Garcia Bronco]

It seems to me when it comes to state rights, we seem to pick and choose which rights the state should decide. For example, the current administration is discussing taking certain states rights away, just as the last administration did. I think either we need to sit down and discuss what the government is in charge of in the way of rights, or separate into 50 countries. I don't think we can just let the states decide everything. They have shown throughout history to have a destructive tendency to oppress and dictate instead of decide fairly, causing the government time and money when they finally HAVE TO step in. For example, the righties may not like gay marriage, but we sure as hell didn't appreciate the Bush administration raiding our LEGAL marijuana farms. I also know that we as a country are held accountable for what happens in ALL states. I'm not going to let them vote back Jim Crow in the southern states, even if i don't live there. So where do we draw the line? I think it's time to decide that once and for all.


It's already in the Constitution.

[SJ Bronco]

It's already in the Constitution.

The constitution didn't foresee the problems of modern society.

[SJ Bronco]

It's already in the Constitution.

I also noticed that with the whole gay rights issues, the constitution is begining to feel a little vague in some area's..

[Garcia Bronco]

The constitution didn't foresee the problems of modern society.

If the power is not specifically delegated to the Federal Governemnt it does not belong to them period. Only by Constitutional Amendment can any power be given.

[Garcia Bronco]

I also noticed that with the whole gay rights issues, the constitution is begining to feel a little vague in some area's..

It's not the Constitution or Federal Governemnts business about who gets married. Their only job is to enforce the contract of the Union as a legal document. That's it. It is unlawful for the Federal Governemnt to recognize any marriage when you get technical about it.

[SJ Bronco]

It's not the Constitution or Federal Governemnts business about who gets married. Their only job is to enforce the contract of the Union as a legal document. That's it. It is unlawful for the Federal Governemnt to recognize any marriage when you get technical about it.

So you feel it's wrong for the federal government to interfere with social issues? Also, how do you feel about the Feds raids on California's Marijuana industry?

[Garcia Bronco]

So you feel it's wrong for the federal government to interfere with social issues? Also, how do you feel about the Feds raids on California's Marijuana industry?

I feel it's only proper for the Federal Governemnt to get involved with issues specifically denoted in the Constitution.

Now, I don't nkow about these raids, but if the pot was leaving the state then under the commerce clause the Feds have the right. If the pot stays in the state then the state law applies.

[Garcia Bronco]

I understand that , but I am asking what law have the Feds passed that States must follow .....The increased speed limit for example , states dont have to raise the Speed limit , they can option out of it , it will just cost the state fed funds ...........

Well for example, laws regaeding equal protection under the 14th amendment of the Constitution have to be followed. The feds have no right to regulate speed limits on state roads.

[Spider]

Well for example, laws regaeding equal protection under the 14th amendment of the Constitution have to be followed. The feds have no right to regulate speed limits on state roads.

But we dont get equal protection , on anything , Money = Better police protection , better lawyers , better healthcare , better schooling , I agree if you got the money , you should get these things , I am just pointing out it isnt equal protection ...........And the Feds own the interstates ....... The Feds pay to repair them ..........State Highways the feds dont own ........

[SJ Bronco]

I feel it's only proper for the Federal Governemnt to get involved with issues specifically denoted in the Constitution.

Now, I don't nkow about these raids, but if the pot was leaving the state then under the commerce clause the Feds have the right. If the pot stays in the state then the state law applies.

Under the Bush administration the feds where routinely raiding pot farms that were supplying the medical marijuana facilities. A practice Obama put a stop to almost immediately) The were also raiding medical treatment facilities for the same reason.I think Obama has shown he leans toward states rights almost exclusively. (something i disagree with him on)

[SJ Bronco]

But we dont get equal protection , on anything , Money = Better police protection , better lawyers , better healthcare , better schooling , I agree if you got the money , you should get these things , I am just pointing out it isnt equal protection ...........And the Feds own the interstates ....... The Feds pay to repair them ..........State Highways the feds dont own ........


I have to disagree with you there spider. I think money entitles you to more and better consumer products, but not to government run things such as schools and police, and hopefully soon, health care. We all pay taxes, we should all get these things equally..

[Bob]

This got me to thinking , States rights , I know in some states my truck is considered my home and work place ( office) I can carry a fire arm if I choose to do so , in other states I cant , Montana has different Gun laws then Wyoming , South Dakota has different abortion laws then Colorado , so Does Wyoming , So I am asking what are the Federal laws the States have to follow ?

Good question....

I didnt know that Montana had any gun laws... ;)

I have always thought it was a states issue, but that there are a few Federal rules, like that one cannot have fully automatic machine gun for example...

[Bob]

I understand that , but I am asking what law have the Feds passed that States must follow .....The increased speed limit for example , states dont have to raise the Speed limit , they can option out of it , it will just cost the state fed funds ...........

I hate that kind of crap, because it erodes states actual autonomy -- bailout money given to states could be used the same way... and I think it will be used to bribe -- if California takes Fed money for a bailout, their screwed if they ever say "no" to the feds.

[Bob]

Link, I want to read this story

Sorry for the delay, you may already have read this elsewhere by now:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Whats-behind-Obamas-sudden-firing-of-the-AmeriCorps-inspector-general-47877797.html

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You're so full of crap you should carry a roll of toilet paper tied around your neck.

That pretty much sums up the right in a nutshell. :giggle:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://bartblog.bartcop.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/great.jpg