Beating The Dead Horse Of Right-Wing Racism

I’m sure by this point that most people who are political types have already formed an opinion of the matter of tea party racism and to the larger issue: if the Republican political strategy includes pandering to racist Americans.

I repeat again and again, too little avail, that not all tea party members are de facto racists.

I found it very unfortunate that so many on progressive side of politics were so quick to call Rand Paul a “racist” for expressing a standard libertarian point of view in regards to the Civil Rights Bill and the ADA. (Private enterprise craps rainbows is the short version of this pure libertarianism ideology.) Those perspectives are not racism, though they do tend to excite the racists out there. This alone, it is vital to point out, is not enough to place a person on the wrong side of the core issue of racial sensitivity or a lack thereof.

It is very easy to throw out a label, like “socialist” or “commie pinko,” but it’s harder to back it up. That was frustrating to see the left-wing doing the same unintelligent labeling based on ignorance that the right-wing has honed to a daily art.

I hear the sentiment more and more that people want to do away with labeling, but I only want to do away with all the negative labeling. I don’t see how we can escape the principal of using labels on groups of people as we so often do in politics. Something must have a name to become a movement, without a name to describe whatever ideological bent we are talking about it would be impossible to even discern accurately between them all.

The labels we choose to recognize ourselves by, and attribute to ourselves, are obviously the labels by which we wish to use and have function for us. I feel that we ever get beyond labels it will because all people stopped using them, and not before.

Then we come to issue of the dreaded label: racist. I’ve never been one to take away any fine glory from calling another person racist, but I also cannot simply remain silent as I witness specific cases over and over again.

There are many fine conservatives and even honest tea party-types out there, but they are the most hushed and pushed into the corner minority of the right-wing I’ve ever seen. Wherever these people be, I hear very little from them or of them.

***

My first experiences with the tea party were seeing a small protest with one sign reading:

“It‘s the White House, not the Black House”

No n-words, no overt racist slurs, no neo-Nazi symbols … just this kind of rhetoric. I found it to be racist in nature, in my personal opinion at the time.

Now Janeane Garofalo was downright mean on Keith Olbermann’s show, but I won’t link that video or repeat any of that here. But did she speak intelligently about the tea party with Rosie O’Donnell so I find it likely she was playing to the YouTube crowd with that one.

My complaints are more to the inclusion of fringe groups known for racism like the John Birch Society in CPAC as to the conservative side and the acceptance of “Birthers” (for lack of a better term) into the tea party side. These actions, and the glorifying of characters like Beck and Limbaugh who incite racial hatred for profit, amount to a very “toxic stew” to borrow a bit of their language.

I never said everyone right-wing was a racist, what a wild claim that would be! I’ve said people who did specific things, like write a sign about the “Black House” or suddenly find a love for the term “commie-socialist” (which makes zero sense by the way), are looking like they are motivated by white racism.

Am I supposed to say “in my opinion” like every other sentence or something?

We just has this opinion about comparing Obama to Hitler passed around and discussed like it was rational by Sara Palin and other far right extremists. Helen Thomas expressed an opinion in a manner I found distasteful and crass, but everyone seemed to forget she is was an opinion journalist.

Though how we state our opinions is important, I realize this well.

So I avoid the term ’teabaggers’ as much as possible (recently) and make a strong effort to declare what I present in the manner of an opinion be understood as an opinion.

But without getting too twisted into a pretzel here:

We all have to remember that you don’t get to control what other person’s opinion of your opinion is.

I personally believe the problems here are tied exactly to that, like the days of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Making statements in a vacuum, from any side of politics, is just getting really annoying.

I’ll back it up, we can have a Constitution quote-off over SB1070 or a Wiki-battle over Southern Strategy Republican racism. I do it all the time, it’s not a new thing it just happens in lightning speed transactions these days instead of “let me go home and grab a few books and we’ll pick this up later.”

I find myself desiring an Edward R. Murrow like figure to appear in our times … we desperately lack that kind of brutal and much needed honesty today. Perhaps more than ever.

***

(No horses were harmed in the course of this posting.)

Political Facebooking

Many people use the Internet in many different ways. This Social Networking Internet has become incredibly popular in recent years and the majority of that which I am involved in is the Facebook side of the Social Web.

More often than not I'm not using this platform in a highly political fashion. Commenting on political groups and sending personal messages to people inflaming political hatred against me or others.

Quickly I am seeing this is all just a road with no end. I only end up "blocking" people as they only lie and deceive even when confronted in a respectful and fact-based manner. This leaves me thinking that it's all pointless to be civil and be fact-based in the first place.

It's possible that much of the dishonesty and vile rhetoric is more tied to the nature of the "no consequences" Web, but I don't think so. I think the art of political debate itself is dead, murdered by the Tea Party and Fox News. Without facts and without any interest in civil discourse on both sides of a debate, the debate is by its very nature non-productive exchanges of name calling and ad hominem attacks of other natures.

How often do people question your faith, or lack thereof? Think on this for a minute. Now realize that on this Easter Weekend I have had some vile Facebooker question my faith. And for what reason? Because I called him out on spouting bigotry.

People want me to be meek, to be "Christian" in my words. I think not. I see all this vile fringe underground of politics coming to surface and I will fight the racist code speak, the outright bigotry, the partisan lies and the anti-American rhetoric. If they want to use their KKK tactics of ganging up on me and hiding behind the sheets of their fake accounts and fake names then so be it.

I shall be the stone that weathers the storm, and if I must die or be made a straw man or made an enemy of civility in the process then so be it.

I see not the strength to stand fast on the Left-wing. I see a lot of good people backing down or letting a pack of comedians lead the way when they are not the best people to bring forth the important issues.

The big part about Facebook that is highly deceptive is that many believe either that people are full of it and being insane or hyperbolic anytime they say anything online, or they believe that Facebooking is the answer to getting their voice out. In all honesty I am no different in the real world than I am online with only minor exceptions.

Some guy is currently trying to pick a fight with me, and I'm not joshing around when I'm trying to set up a time and place to just have the brawl. I don't care. Not anymore.

As the war criminal George W. Bush once said:

"Bring it on!"

A Leggy Sara Palin Newsweek Cover

Politically-speaking I could not disagree with Sara Palin any more.

However, I would like to say that this woman has taken an amazing amount of hard-blows from the left. It would be more impressive in her own personal character if she refused to play the victim over the matter, but there is no doubt these things occur.

I am for focusing on the facts, as I see them at this time.

The fact is it makes no sense what Sara Palin said to Oprah about her reasons for leaving the governor’s office in Alaska.

This notion that her political advocacy would be hampered by resigning from office due to fact that ethical violations would have been filed is absurd.

The only logical conclusion that can be drawn from her statement is that her political advocacy would promoting something widely recognized as unethical due to fact that if your cause is just and more motives only non-violent advocacy of ideals you have nothing to fear in defending your case should you be called to question for your actions.

The Governor of Alaska has many, many times the ability to effect social change and promote political advocacy of a private citizen relying on namesake leftover from the 2008 Campaign.

The facts of the matter are that the former-Governor of Alaska still refuses to give a cogent or logical reply to a simple question.

Sara Palin also retains that the simple question, “What do you read?” is somehow an insult on her.

This was a great opportunity for Sara Palin to promote her local newspaper and other press outlets that may go under-looked. She instead continues to only be vague about rather simple questions.

Now putting all that aside, I don’t think that taking an image from Runner’s World on the cover of Newsweek was a very wise move.

This just feeds into the false notion that Sara Palin doesn’t get a “fair shake” in the “liberal media.”

If anything the “liberal media,” which is a misnomer, doesn’t get enough objective critics who focus on facts where many are clear to raise.
In a previous post I said that people should pick up a copy of that Newsweek with the Anna Quindlen and disgraced Governor Mark Sanford to read, so you could get a grip on what the heck is going on right not in politics.

As for this issue of Newsweek, I suggest instead buying a National Inquirer instead.

MediaMatters.org has covered this issue quite well:

Making matters worse is the equally offensive headline Newsweek editors chose to run alongside the photo -- "How Do You Solve a Problem like Sarah?" -- presumably a reference to the Sound of Music song, "Maria," in which nuns fret about "how" to "solve a problem like Maria," a "girl" who "climbs trees" and whose "dress has a tear."

Now, this photograph may have been completely appropriate for the cover of the magazine for which the picture was apparently intended, Runners World. But Newsweek is supposed to be a serious newsmagazine, and the magazine is certainly not reporting on Palin's exercise habits.

I don’t believe Sara Palin is a viable candidate for any major political office.

Her disinterest in facts and honesty being the reason for this.

Call me strange, but I don’t think Sara Palin’s legs are “news worthy.”

I’m just saying that things like this Newsweek cover are fodder for all these false-news hounds out there painting on their wild canvas.

This is a Tea Party, and I am The Mad Hatter

Oh yes, my friends.

This is the real tea party, right here and now.

But this is not a party about taxes, this is the tea party that exists through the looking glass.

This tea party is about our society, and the many ideas surrounding it.

Some of which includes talking about taxes.

This tea party has a March Hare, he claims to himself to have started the Tea Party. He speaks of taxes and government much, but the March Hare is a fool and a liar.

I will stuff him in the tea pot, because he is a stupid fool.

This is the true tea party. For I am true to my role of Mad Hatter in our political hyperbolical insanity-solution to the madness we made.

In my ideological youth, I feel I must declare, I was much like the March Hare.

I spewed forth of bizarre concepts from "anarchism" to "libertarianism" to "stupidity."

But in my growth to see the middle of battlegrounds, I have gone quite mad as well.

---- CHANGE PLACES! ----

If anyone calls me a "progressive" I shall spill hot tea on your lap.

I am a "liberal." As in "liberty."

There is no doubt that forward-thinking and scientific reasoning is what prevails when the effect of the fumes subside upon my brain. But a vague label, I shall not embrace.

This is a place of "progressive religious views" and "Progressive Reformist views" but without my little attachment on the "progressive" I am most miffed.

This brings us why some of you are asking me again and again why I stuffed the March Hare in the tea pot and will not let him out despite his protests.

It is because he enjoys saying "socialist" to me in a label and I find him disgusting for it because I have debated real-life socialists, politely, and he becomes confused sometimes about listening to others after he opens he mouth. The March Hare takes his tea inside the tea pot because he likes it there. Nobody can hear him because he refuses to hear anyone else and that's the end of it!

---- CHANGE PLACES! ----

Most things come down to where you want your government and not your specific feelings toward government itself. Like a great many other products, hate & fear sell quite well on the open-market. This is one of the reasons I am quite mad, quite mad indeed.

I have no interest in profiteering off lies, though I am quite capable of creating them at whim.

The Mad Hatter is insane to stick up for the poor and the working-poor. I am quite mad indeed to underscore the commercialized news-media tearing down our United Statesry.

It is not popular to be here and there instead of there and thee.

I could expound upon "federalist expansion" and such, but even the word "transparency" is lost on most.

This Obama offers not a full & complete transparency, but he has done more than any in my lonely memory.

This quite originally-sound idea of town halls became a place for madness the likes of which even I cannot condone, in too many cases.

But this Obama let's The March Hare run wild!

Then again ... he made not be as mad as I.

---- CHANGE PLACES! ----

We have a corrupt-media enterprise termed “Fox” running wild in our lands.

They have worked to spread ethnocentrism, false-nationalism, false-Christianity and recently false-news reports.

The way how this works is you either care, or you don’t.

You either look into the work of non-mad peoples who have studied this, or you don’t.

The clanging of the tea pot lid gets very loud around this issue. Once again, he does not listen but he claims he is while he prepares a slander designed just for you.

False advertising. Every single time they use the “Fair & Balanced” label for themselves and also to any person on Fox News who tries to absorb that label for themselves.

This practicing of Foe-News might be fun, even gloriously so, but we have torn down our press to the state it was when political parties owned the only newspapers.

The Feed of Fox, taken as a solitary fluid, is just a biased disease from upside-down world.

One must weigh what the Fox Red Meat against credible news and find if they squeezed a little of the story in there.

---- CHANGE PLACES! ----

Democracy is a burden, not a blessing!

Democracy requires that not just the mad, but the many, must participate in politics.

The challenge is placed on the citizen, on you and me, to know the difference and have the hard facts.

It would be far easier to shrug off all decision making some “elites” somewhere and be done with it.

Though I’ll take this, I see a big flaw that I am mad to point out: too many people have no idea what they are talking about when they speak of policy or history.

The solid fact of the matter is you cannot mandate people to stop voting against their own interests anymore than you stop political activists twisting the truth.

What this system of government cannot abide under is sheer ignorance of the people.

In order for this crazy idea of representative government, or democracy, to survive it must maintain an ethical press and an ethical news-media.

Today we face a Media Industrial Complex right along with the Military Industrial Complex, and a host of other issues, and I see nothing of the deep contemplation and information gathering needed in far too many of us.

This populous of peoples must be using these brains and using the benefits of good journalism.

This whole notion that we chose to decide serious matters in part by the people assumes the people are actually paying attention in the first place.

---- CHANGE PLACES! ----

The structure of the political-world changed in this country. Somehow spreading intolerance, racism, bigotry and superiority over others became a political stance.

There is also the issue of the stupid.

I may be mad, but I am not stupid. I know the difference between hard facts and nonsense that insults Americans everywhere.

Some in this nation have decided that racism, hatred, religious-zealotry, bigotry and deception are the new status quo.

These people have nothing to do with conservatives, they have to do with bitterness and shame alone.

Even one as mad as I still seeks to draw a line between those who seek to sew violence and hatred versus those who simply disagree.

Sometimes it is important, only for a moment, to isolate out a certain voice. A voice that has the answers to these driving questions of:

“Is that true?”

“Is all this banter really based on something?”

No, it’s all fabrications and excuses to hate.

But it has to do with how they are doing this version of blather. They have no grounds to stand in ignorance of facts and silent under The Bush then spray venom under The Obama.

They call me crazy but you can’t be wrong about an opinion, you can only be wrong on the facts.

Misquoting the Constitution is another trait of The March Hare that earns him a tea pot in which to take his tea.

When one is mad you read all these little papers that say these things.

…

I feel I have exhausted myself.

In truth, all are welcome to the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party.

But beware to the people who refuse to take the U.S. seriously and accept wild theories in place of something you can show me to be true.

This Mad Hatter has never had much tolerance for arrogant rejection of facts.

Am I Too Liberal For “Liberaland”?

Pretty much since the thing started I have been a member of Alan Colmes’ website “Liberaland” as the user: EricG.

Both this username and all other usernames I create linked to my email have been deleted, or so it would seem.

Recently, I have tried posting on this website under my Facebook account under different usernames. All these attempts at posting on the this supposedly “come one, come all” political-talk website have been removed by website moderators, or so it would seem.

I seem to be free to access the Alan Colmes' Facebook page, as of now, and comment in that fashion rather than on the original blog post.

I sent an angry email that I already feel bad about. The Alan Colmes Radio Show is one of the few worthwhile programs on all of Fox News Talk, entirely thanks to the primary author of the blog in question. In terms of confronting real social issues and covering politics, I have no issue whatsoever with Alan Colmes or his website.

What I am saying is rather simple: warn me or block me. Don’t let me post my truthful thoughts and then continuously delete all my comments because I expressed opinions you didn’t enjoy. (Not like web-admins give a damn anyway.)

This is very much like my problems with Fox News (that seem to be the real reason I am being moderated while neoconservatives are perfectly welcome) in that it is fine to be exclusionary and rigid in your website / radio show / television show but completely dishonest and completely unethical to claim you have open doors when in fact you close them shut if you see specific issues being brought to the forum.

The Alan Colmes Radio Show is another matter entirely.

If I want to whine in Alan’s ear about this later tonight, nothing is stopping me.

If you call that show, most likely, you will be on Fox News Talk not long thereafter. Alan puts everyone on the air, just about.

I commend his radio efforts, fully.

However, I warn other liberal-bloggers out there that you may be moderated in your comments as I have and fed the round-about in terms of the whole matter.

I am not removing Alan Colmes from my Blogroll, but I might suggest only that the website is not as much as an open-forum on politics & issues as my own blog is. Which is a shame because it is an excellent website in every other respect.

--

The unspoken big rule here is:

Don’t talk about the network.

Hush child.

Didn’t you hear? Fox News and Fox News Talk are not held accountable to the public like the rest. They get a special pass to spread misinformation, misquote former-presidents, spread hatred and race bait.

Here is what disturbs me:

Liberalism is about speaking truth to power.

So what does one do when that power is wielded by the network?

I’m supposed to ignore that, am I?

No thanks. I love this country and love the truth too much to stand silent as a radical right-wing lobby disguised as a news network lies to public in every promo, in every slogan, and in any possible clever way they can.

--

It is always possible I am mistaken, but I believe “Liberaland” has become one more Fox News Apologist Hotbed. You are welcome to come and chat stream or comment on a post, but if you want to talk about Fox News or any version of it you will be pulled without notice.

I suppose I am making a Net-Neutrality argument more than I am trying to drive anyone away from a fun blog. Hardcore Net-Neutrality, though, it most certainly is not.

--

I cannot control another’s work nor would I want to, but my weblog is entirely open-forum and I practice Net-Neutrality. The only thing I truly moderate would be spam and the incitement of violence against others. As you may or may not have noticed, I have comments of all types of opinions other than my own approved. I leave them open as long as possible and try to reply to everyone.

I can claim the “come one, come all” were I ever to promote this website the way Alan Colmes does on his Fox Radio time-slot.

This is also true of his radio show as well.

But my experiences with his website are more like: “come here, go away.”

Perhaps they should re-name it: “Don‘tTalkAboutFoxLand”

…

It just rings to me of this Fox-Conservative way of politics and dealing with people:

You came come in the tent and even not fawn all over me too, but if you say certain things I believe are not true with stern conviction then you are banned.

And like I’ve said before many times: you just hear people out and if they have nothing but flames to share they have nothing to say and the people who are making fact-based arguments that you don’t like are very, and obviously, different from screaming nut-jobs.

Anyway, that’s my beef. I feel it to be a very dishonest thing to do.

Some people do need to be called out when they have the facts plain wrong and refuse to even address the matter rationally, but they are merely misinformed and adamant about remaining as such.

None of this involves throwing them out of the tent. It’s more about addressing matters like Joe Wilson’s unpatriotic outburst and venomous tongue, and the blind-hatred stewed up for liberals everywhere than it is about whatever the tea-baggers have to say.

--

This is just my little internet-tale of woe.

It is a minor one, at that.

Chances are they want me transferred to the Facebook section of his internet handiwork because I am a self-admitted “radical.”

Radical peace and radical disarmament.

So all this label-bashing coming from the people that Alan Colmes sits across the table from on Fox News applies to me just fine.

Here I am destroying his whole point about “liberals are not radicals.”

I realized long ago there are many definitions and degrees of liberalism.

I guess I am just too liberal for Liberaland these days.

So be it.

=========================================

UPDATE:

Joel, the moderator who "could give a damn" according to me, has sent me an email that closes the matter for me.

If anyone reads my comments you'll see this was what I was asking for the moment they started treating me differently than the other users of the website.

Joel is a good man. I wish him well.

Here are his words to me:

Eric, You’re not helping your case by falsely claiming that you were banned because of comments about Fox. That claim is easily disproven by countless posts that have been allowed – and continue to be allowed – on Alan.com by people of all views about the network. You were warned that you were crossing the line
on a post that had absolutely nothing to do with Fox. When another commenter mentioned that to you on another post, after you again went overboard, your response – instead of considering whether your own behavior was appropriate – was to make a personal insult about me. Obviously you have no interest in civil discourse, so your comments are no longer welcome.

Joel

We see here that he is stating that I am indeed banned but I have posted recently and admitted to my bad behavior.

Essentially I forgot that it wasn't time to impersonate Glenn Beck and I should reserve such banter for this website.

The truth is I was out of line in the first place, but I have also endured vicious attacks on that same website.

One does not negate the other any more than my feelings of justification only in my anger over the hate I allowed myself to spew forth.

--

So am I too liberal for "Liberaland"?

We'll see ... looks like "no" but maybe not.

Bipartisan Blogging Dies at Birth

When I first set forth to imprint myself upon the wildly evolving beast of the blogosphere I held with me a tenuous goal: to create a fully bipartisan blog.

A place that would be both policy and ideology neutral, yet dealt in real news topics.

While the value of this concept in itself still appears quite sound in my mind, I discovered through personal experience that throwing that concept away was the best thing I ever did for my blog as a rank amateur in the mix. (Still working on that.)


Blogger tis I:

My posting entitled “Ann Coulter Still Sucks” was one of first impressions unto this wild animal of internet-posting that I can claim to my credit. Every word of that is partisanship, I am completely unashamed.

My posting entitled “The Libra-Scorpio Cusp” is enjoyed by many. I point out an internet inconsistency between websites and briefly address my feelings on Astrology.

Recently I was honored to have received an Editor’s Pick on Open Salon for what accounts to the end result of these bipartisan efforts of mine.

I thank the Editors of Open Salon for the honor in being selected.

In course of presenting the issue of Jimmy Carter’s words concerning race in America, I unconsciously fell into my routine of trying to revive the lost art of bipartisanship.

I presented the words of Alan Wilson rebuking the words of Carter directly as to any racial motives in his father Rep. Joe Wilson’s outburst.

I withheld the words of what I view as righteous indignation and retained myself to news-commentary.

However, my truly Bipartisan Blogging is dead. I fully intend to address every issue that I view as significant regardless of the possible offense drawn from that perspective.

Once you mix an opinion with a platform, you get punditry. Once the opinion is interjected into the Left versus Right Debate, it is already too late.

What remains within me though are the principals of striving toward fair play and equal consideration of alternative perspectives, and still with my own case intact. The value of this bipartisanship effort is lost, but the spirit remains intact. The reason being for this loss, in my view, has to do this the source from which it comes.

Despite all reports to the contrary, I am not a big deal.

The person to revive journalistic standards in the United States, is not I.

I instead must cry out into the wilderness to capture this beast, while those within the press need only touch a laptop. So is the way of things. But while ‘truth’ can be subjective, the facts are not.

--

“You can have your own opinion, but you don’t get to chose your own facts.”

--

I make a great many declarative statements in the course of blogging, formed primarily from simple political and media analysis, which accounts to online punditry.

But I believe strongly in full disclosure of the fact that I am a liberal and freely admit it may alter my world view in some cases.

But the facts don’t lie, and I believe in the growing majority of cases the facts are on my side.


Pointing Fingers:

It could be said that I am extremely critical of the right wing in US Politics.

If one were to ever take the time to read backwards into my blog it can be found that I have tried to draw a line between "Thinking Conservatives" and "Limited Conservatives".

Other times I have directly defended the specific quotes of both Carrie Prejean and Rick Warren.

Treading this line in not some political game on my part, but rather my honest opinion on those matters.

I believe that is what we have escaped from in the madness of mass computing and super-fast news-cycles. Partisanship sells books as much as it moves blog-hits, so perhaps some of these political shock jocks like Ann Coulter would rather be reasonable in her arguments, but it simply doesn’t pay the bills.

The truth being what is lost in this exchange, and I think that sort of thing is a shame.

I would much rather have a discussion in disagreement than just label others as “tools”, “fascists”, “un-American”, or “racists”.

But that creation of mine that might cross party lines, and maybe bring sanity to the mix to see what happens will have to wait for a another day. The raw truth of opinion should not replace factual evidence. Such is the road to tyranny.

So I have taken another road. I drew a line in the sand that allows me to say what I will of Republicans, or Democrats.

For instance, the Republican Party is currently self-destructing and the Democratic Party has dropped the ball on health care reform.

Such statements embody my current stage in blogging evolution.


Finale:

The spirit of political bipartisanship and the need for balance remains within me, but the middle ground is now mainly unattainable without the acceptance of false claims and baseless assertions. Any critical review of facts debunks most conservative mantras.

There is much to be said for ideological differences enhancing a debate but when the debate is centered around misrepresentations and sweeping accusations of assumed wrong-doing there simply to no room in which to move in.

I will most likely continue to be mistaken for a conservative by both machines that dictate ad banners and internet users alike, but this just a by-product of my attempt to split everything down the middle.

To me, most these differences are best settled in the voting booth at election time.

But if the accuracy of the information we receive is suspect and unverifiable then we have a responsibility as citizens to recognize this fact.

This tense political and social division has forever been an element of American Life, but I believe that the situation is amplified by media-giants who profit from the repetition of partisan smears of any person or group.

I can only pray for a day of more a more honest and non-biased form of journalism catching the eye of the American public, but I don’t see it happening anytime soon.




Eric Lightborn

http://ericlightborn.blogspot.com

http://twitter.com/EricLightborn

September 29th 2009

Alan Colmes -- Talk Radio

Dick Cheney Fails To Understand American Values

Former Vice President Dick Cheney continues to obfuscate the truth and tarnish the name of all Republicans by means of standing up for cruel and unusual punishment of military detainees.

Appearing on FOX News Sunday recently, the former Vice President continued to advocate a dangerous and sick agenda by claiming pride for the torture and prisoner mistreatment that occurred under The Bush Administration.

Beyond this outrageous fact Cheney made a statement that I see as a direct affront to very heart of American Values, like he has never done before.


WALLACE: “So even these cases [of interrogation] where they went beyond the specific legal authorization, you're OK with it.”


CHENEY: “I am.”

This was a true testament to how divorced Dick Cheney remains from any understanding of our national standards of justice and our mutual values as a people.

Cheney clearly declares that he cares nothing as to the pursuit of justice to those that break the law under the blanket of authority claiming to pursue justice themselves.

This country does not accept any person or body to be beyond the law and Cheney insulted this nation by supporting the notion that supporting illegal actions under government supervision are acceptable in a free nation of laws.

Alan Colmes on The O'Reilly Factor

Find more videos like this on Alan Colmes Radio

Ruefully Ambivalent

Sure as the sun gonna shine tomorrow you can bet your bottom dollar that I'll still be ruefully ambivalent about this tragedy before us.

Just like how someone else gets invited out to a drink with someone, you can bet that I had that moment and got over it in the same breath.

Like all the beautiful candies of misery that once drove me so wonderfully insane are now nothing but sour grapes, my spirit allows for little to enter it these days.

And frankly I like it. This is a good change.

Some rude person decided to flip me off the other day, and I didn't even react. The girlfriend of this person was staring at me in the mirror of her car in mild disbelief. I think she might have been inexperienced with ruefull ambivalence in action.

I don't care. Make your stupid gestures. Be part of the hostility and insanity that is killing our culture and destroying our society.

The fact of the matter is this is the strongest position one can possibly hope to take.

The only downside is the lack of pleasure. Even getting what I want is hollow and predictable therefore it holds no elation nor prize to achieve.

Some people have to make this choice. Lest we become monsters that plague the lives of others.

Bigots Against Islam Run The Republican Party

The hatred of others based on their faith is the favored tactic of the Anti-Obama Republicans in this current political climate. If this hatred was directed at another religion the whole of the American public would reject this bigotry as unpatriotic and down right sick. This propaganda and lies about Islamic faith is tolerated by Republicans because many Americans chose to believe lies, such as the misnomer that the majority of Muslims are in fact terrorists, in place of speaking with their fellows whom may be more directly connected to the truth of the matter than a pack of lying pundits.

Racism against Arabs and bigotry against Islam seems perfectly acceptable to millions of Americans, while racism against Blacks and bigotry against Christians or Jews is downright unacceptable. These Republican Americans and their conservative counterparts seem to believe that civil rights extend only to certain colors and certain faiths.

These disrespectful and partisan Americans put into question their dedication to the principals of non-discrimination in our society. Until major representatives of the Republican Party denounce this bigotry and racism in their ranks they remain in my mind a continued threat to peace and national security in the United States of America.

People Who Voted McCain Hate Obama, Big Surprise

I follow politics on both sides of the coin.

In my view the turning point for the McCain Campaign was the selection of Sara Palin.
The Thinking Conservatives removed their support in droves while the Limited Conservatives found a new poster-child for Partisan Logic.

Aside from the racism allowed to crop up in the Republican Campaign and the market crash under a Republican President, the Conservative Americans who actually think about their positions for longer than the span of a thirty second sound byte could not accept the ‘Say it so, Joe’ Logic and the overall presentation of John McCain’s pick for VP.

Many asked themselves and openly begged the question:

“If John McCain made this bad a decision for Vice President, then how can we trust him to make the right decisions on the war on terror.”

I am trying to draw a connection between the Obama-Hate Committee found on right wing radio and FOX Broadcasting with the vague demagogue figure of religious and moral authority found in the Governor of Alaska and her bid for the vice-presidency in 2008.

I think this group is just loud, and well-funded. Most, if not all, popularity of extremist presidential bashing from the Media Republicans comes from people who want theocracy and the destruction of American Liberty in the name of unfounded ideologies.

There are of course exceptions and a rare pack of conservatives can formulate a fair review of the Obama Presidency thus far, but they increasingly move into the minority as Media Hacks and Partisan Pundits rule the conservative-media.

Rush Limbaugh is Dr. Evil

The Radio Comedian Rush Limbaugh is best understood as a real-life version of the character Dr. Evil from Austin Powers.

Plotting and scheming in some ceramic bunker with his inner-circle of minions, his many Snurgly clones of course, gathered round to hear his daily machinations delivered via flashy jumpsuit!

In The Comedian’s case the issue is just to constantly stay in the news and stay relevant to someone, somewhere.

A lot of people seem to think we need an Anti-Limbaugh, or an Austin Powers, to appear and vanquish this foe. I think that Dr. Evil’s Empire falls apart when people start catching on to his game.

It’s all a house of cards of his own making. His own minions would throw him away if he ever had a level-headed view of anything to do with President Obama. The jackals would consume their master in a heartbeat if he stepped off his ‘ordained’ path even in the slightest.

So Dr. Evil plays his game and works his magic but when people can see the same of tired bag of tricks again and again, they tend to catch on.

“Pet my Snurgly! Pet him!”