The Scarlet R
I saw at Right Wing News that Tom Delay has a new blog, which of course, brought out the trolls in droves. I often get tired of seeing trashy behavior like that exhibited by the commenters like those on display at Delay's blog. John Hawkins gave a few examples of what liberals behave like when they think they can get away with it:
"Oh, by the way I mostly put the blame on your corrupted, twisted,criminal, phycotic,evil existance on your PARENTS who bought your no-good *ss into this world." -- Unregistered Commenter Bill Davis
"Did I mention that you are a f*cking moron?" --Unregistered Commenter john w
"rot in hell b*ch!" -- Unregistered Commenter mike
Here is Tom Delay's reply to John Hawkins for why he started his blog:
Professor Althouse disagrees with Delay and thinks we need to expose the lack of character, intelligence and substance of the lefty commenters:
"Hmmm.... I thought he was going to say that those nasty lefty comments show a lack of character, brainpower, and substance, but he ended up saying the righties should go on the attack. Yeah, more nastiness, that's what we need."
Sadly, I used to agree with views like Althouse's but I am beginning to see that while it is admirable to hold facts and substance above attacking one's opponents views, it doesn't work. The average American may say they hate political sparring and nastiness, but when they go to the voting booth, they don't practice what they preach. It affects them and the decisions they make in the electoral process. For example, in Tennessee, we apparently had one of the nastiest Senate battles around. Polls showed people did not like the nasty attacks and ads but who did they vote for? The guy who they perceived to have the nastiest attacks on the other candidate.
Many times, people mistakenly call me a Republican although I am a right-leaning libertarian. Apparently, labeling one as a Republican gives ammunition to call one sexist, evil, mean spirited or just plain scum. How many times do you hear someone apologizing for having right leaning views -- "Oh, no, I am not really a Republican, I have other views etc." My question is, what if one is a Republican or right leaning. So what? Is that a crime? Are those who are Republicans afraid to speak their views at universities, in academic settings, in the media etc. for fear of being labled something vile? Maybe speaking up and not slinking around in shame would be a better strategy. Maybe taking a strong stand in the media, in universities and with the American people about their views would help people to understand and see them as more normal, not as an aberration--the "conservative" view. Maybe it would just be a view like everyone elses.
It seems like those with views other than liberal must wear the Scarlet R. Well, I will not hide any longer. If people want to call me a Republican, I will wear the label with pride with the R proudly displayed on my forehead whether it really fits or not, just to show my solidarity with those who are oppressed by such labels. Maybe you should too.
Update: Professor Althouse weighs in--and check out the comments to her post, some are very insightful.
"Oh, by the way I mostly put the blame on your corrupted, twisted,criminal, phycotic,evil existance on your PARENTS who bought your no-good *ss into this world." -- Unregistered Commenter Bill Davis
"Did I mention that you are a f*cking moron?" --Unregistered Commenter john w
"rot in hell b*ch!" -- Unregistered Commenter mike
Here is Tom Delay's reply to John Hawkins for why he started his blog:
I think conservatives have to compete in every media that's out there. There are some good conservative blogs, yours included, that are very good and helpful. But, there are not enough of them. We are sorely outnumbered by the left in the blogosphere and I think we've got to compete and I'm trying to be a role model for leadership around the country. They ought to be involved. They ought to have a blog so they can be more personable in communicating our philosophy to the American people. This medium allows us to bypass the liberal media and make a more direct appeal and we ought to be using it. We ought to be involved in movies, we ought to be involved in documentaries, we shouldn't just (let the left have those mediums to themselves). Any time the New York Times writes something outrageous, all of us ought to jump on it and chastise them for it. The left does that to us and if you look at the comments made on my blog in less than 24 hours, they're going to try to shut me down by attacking me. When was the last time the Republicans or conservatives attacked the left for their outrageous comments or outrageous activities? We don't attack. It's time to start attacking and be aggressive about what you believe and fighting for your beliefs.
Professor Althouse disagrees with Delay and thinks we need to expose the lack of character, intelligence and substance of the lefty commenters:
"Hmmm.... I thought he was going to say that those nasty lefty comments show a lack of character, brainpower, and substance, but he ended up saying the righties should go on the attack. Yeah, more nastiness, that's what we need."
Sadly, I used to agree with views like Althouse's but I am beginning to see that while it is admirable to hold facts and substance above attacking one's opponents views, it doesn't work. The average American may say they hate political sparring and nastiness, but when they go to the voting booth, they don't practice what they preach. It affects them and the decisions they make in the electoral process. For example, in Tennessee, we apparently had one of the nastiest Senate battles around. Polls showed people did not like the nasty attacks and ads but who did they vote for? The guy who they perceived to have the nastiest attacks on the other candidate.
Many times, people mistakenly call me a Republican although I am a right-leaning libertarian. Apparently, labeling one as a Republican gives ammunition to call one sexist, evil, mean spirited or just plain scum. How many times do you hear someone apologizing for having right leaning views -- "Oh, no, I am not really a Republican, I have other views etc." My question is, what if one is a Republican or right leaning. So what? Is that a crime? Are those who are Republicans afraid to speak their views at universities, in academic settings, in the media etc. for fear of being labled something vile? Maybe speaking up and not slinking around in shame would be a better strategy. Maybe taking a strong stand in the media, in universities and with the American people about their views would help people to understand and see them as more normal, not as an aberration--the "conservative" view. Maybe it would just be a view like everyone elses.
It seems like those with views other than liberal must wear the Scarlet R. Well, I will not hide any longer. If people want to call me a Republican, I will wear the label with pride with the R proudly displayed on my forehead whether it really fits or not, just to show my solidarity with those who are oppressed by such labels. Maybe you should too.
Update: Professor Althouse weighs in--and check out the comments to her post, some are very insightful.
posted by Helen at 9:44 PM
134 Comments:
You know, I actually agree with Delay. Is it any wonder he was so hated? A fighting spirit is simply not allowed in a Republican. Republicans are viewed as close-minded bigots and spend a disproportionate share of their time rebutting the accusations that are often patently absurd.
One of the most interesting comments on my blog was to this affect,"Dr. Melissa you don't really believe that! Surely, you don't!" As I have many liberal friends, I wonder if one of them posted that in horror at my impertinence for writing something outside of conventional wisdom. When I calmly replied, "Yes that's exactly what I believe", other commenters came forward to say that my view was theirs.
Sigh. When people base their arguments on emotion and not fact, they make powerful arguments. Selling a product rarely works by ticking off the "features". Emotion sells. Republicans need to find a way to sell themselves. The merits of the argument are theirs.
P.S. Sorry this was so long-winded. Good post!
Dear Dr. Helen:
Bravo! The "Scarlet R" is real, and it is a big deal in many places. Rather than simply accept that good people can have different philosophies, we demonize our opponents. And in academia, anyway, there is little to no tolerance for anything other than leftwing groupthink.
Yes, many academics pooh-pooh this, claiming that it never happens (and at the same time, actually writing editorials claiming that Republicans are "less intelligent" than Democrats).
So I have a thought experiment in mind, for left of center academics who think I am wrong.
Professor #1: this person wears a button that says "SEND BUSH PACKING" on his label. On his office door is a bumper sticker stating "NO BLOOD FOR OIL."
Professor #2: this person wears a button that says "I SUPPORT THE TROOPS." On his or her office door is a bumper sticker that says "WHY DO BELIEVERS IN THE RELIGION OF PEACE WANT TO BEHEAD THOSE WHO DON'T?"
Friends, you know that no one will say a word about Professor #1. Even if this person had a bumper sticker on his or her door that read "BUCK FUSH," it would be called freedom of expression (which it is).
But what about Professor #2? Committee assignments? Progress toward tenure or promotion? I hate to tell you what would happen to this professor.
Oh, I have heard from many, many leftist academics that nothing bad would happen to such a professor.
I know better.
And if any leftist academic reading this disagrees, why not try my experiment yourself? Since freedom of expression is paramount, and so common among the tolerant Left?
Go ahead and do the experiment: tell your academic friends you are a born again active Republican, sponsor the student Republican club, speak out in favor of conservative causes. As an experiment, just to prove that academics support all points of view.
No fair telling anyone that you *really* are a progressive leftist. Nope: you need to prove how accepting the academic Left truly is of different points of view, of intellectual diversity.
After you do this for one year, and everyone on campus treats you exactly the same as they did before, that nothing negative happens to you career wise...well, then you get to tell everyone about your experiment. Heck, write it up for Slate. You will have proven that the academic environment is tolerant and welcoming of different ideas.
But it ain't going to happen that way.
So prove me wrong! Put on the Scarlet R and show everyone how tolerant the progressive Left can be.
Just make sure your unemployment insurance is up to date.
Check out this case, just to prove my point:
http://www.thefire.org/index.php/case/726.html
I look around campus, and I see plenty of anti-Republican cartoons on office doors. I don't see any cartoons that oppose the progressive Left "talking points."
Again, Dr Helen: Bravo! One's personal politics should never matter in the workplace.
I like fighting back but in a manner that shows what fools the swearing, cursing liberals are. Before I began my own blog, I posted some comments on a liberal blog and received many of the same responses listed above.
I found it both aggravating and humorous as the liberal blog that I had posted anonymously to belonged to a fellow whose wife shares the same parentage as myself.
If you value family harmony, you might want to be careful with your insults.
The main role of Republican women is to bear Republican sons, you know...
Dear Anonymous 11:54: so saying that the main role of Democratic women is to have abortions would be awful...or merely a reply to your own unfunny vitriol?
Why not post something useful? Anyone can cast insults.
That was not meant as an insult. It's a common saying you know, meant humorously here.
Know what you're embracing (even in jest) if you're going to tease . It's still ok to tease back right, or have the psychologists in our nanny state busy analyzing little boys at 3 years old outlawed that type of response already? ;-)
And if you don't see any immediate value in my teasingly quoting that phrase here, maybe take some time and think about it? Most humor has an element of truth at its core you'll notice...
See the Democratic women "goal" of having abortions isn't funny in the same way because it's an absurd exaggeration of truth, whereas that other common saying about the role of Republican women being highly valued for producing Republican sons has has a historical truth to it.
Not saying the big "R"'s wouldn't have you Helen; it's a bigger tent these days and you can be productive to them surely in other ways as a functioning tool. Like with your work on social issues and the collateral damaged.
Look, I have been a Republican all of my life, and I have *never* heard that Republican women have to have lots of Republican sons. I suspect more "progressivist propaganda" there.
But I have seen this kind of Leftist nonsense dozens of times: attack Republican ideas with personal attacks, and when called on it---say it is just a joke, and probably the offended party is just projecting.
Think about Rosie O'Donnell's extreme sensitivity to what she perceived as a homophobic gesture, yet she feels perfectly comfortable making racist comments about Asians. On the one hand, incredible sensitivity is required...on the other, why, those nasty old Republicans just cannot take a joke!
Sure some call that sort of thing hypocrisy, but that is another Rethuglican plot, probably due to Halliburton's influence.
Why not avoid rude humor, and try to engage real issues? It might actually lead to communication.
misterfed is correct. The same ad hominem attacks can be found on left leaning blogs/sites as well. Is there not something more we can do than just exacerbate things?
I agree with most conservative positions, proudly. And if Tom Delay wants to start his own blog, he has every right to. But sorry, the guy is a jackass. The world would be a better place if he was still spraying for cockroaches, his original career. Politicians like him are a large part of why the republicans lost congress. In addition to all the corruption, he was a big part of how republicans transformed into the party of spend, spend, spend, a decidely anti-libertarian approach to governance. So, although I do not necessarily disagree with the quote that Dr. Helen posted regarding "fighting back," I am surprised and disappointed she is associating her outstanding blog with this creep. Before I am condemned as another troll, read his Wikipedia entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_DeLay
and ask yourself, would you be proud if your son grew up to be like this person? (I suppose I will now be told how the Wikipedia entry is all a bunch of lies...sigh.)
Patrick,
I am also no fan of Tom Delays but I think the points he made needing more Republican views in the media, etc. and fighting back against negative views of the right were dead on.
anon 11:53
You must be an academic, because you have it pretty much right. I am, and in the academic environment, I find myself leaning away from the left, toward, what?... I don't know. And, annyoingly, I am increasingly regarded with suspicion by my "opne-minded, tolerant" colleagues. Really, I know I am to the left of most regular readers/posters here, but it is becoming more and more common for one of my "friends" to "jokingly" call me a Republican. Well, in all honesty, if Republicans put up a pragmatist in 2008 and the Dems put up someone who panders to the like of my colleagues (who, incidentally "hate" Hilary because she is "so right wing" and suspect Obama because he "actually went to that mega church!!"), I won't put a red R on my head, but the GOP will get my vote. It's a big if, but not outside the realm of possibility.
Anyway, this is an off-topic self-serving rant (sorry, I'm an academic, old habits die hard). So while I have experienced the intolerance of the Left for anything outsider of Leftist orthodoxy, I would like to agree with a previous poster that trolls are found across the political spectrum, as are ad hominem attacks.
Also, the word "liberal" has also come to be seen as a negative classification. David Brooks once used it in a column as the opposite of "right-wing" not the opposite of conservative.
When people like my close-minded, intolerant, Republican-hating colleagues, and the Che-T-shirt wearing, sidewalk-pissing, students chanting "Bush is worse than the terrorists" are called "liberal", by themselves and others, there is a general misunderstanding and misuse of that word.
I would like to propose that the division is not between left and right, but between those that wish to engage people and those that wish to polarize or set themselves and their group apart from everyone else. Many on the Left as well as on the Right claim to be arguing from reason, and insist that the other side is irrational and/or stupid.
I will say this for you folks to the right of me, though. I often get called a centrist. My conservative friends consider it a compliment, and my lefty "friends" spit out the "centrist" epithet when they get frustrated with me. Personally, I take it as a compliment.
Sure, the only nasty commenters on the Internet are liberals. Now I have heard it all! Better think again. Very smug attitude, Helen.
I'm proud to be called a Republican. I think when people assume that means I am a closed-minded bigot that it says a lot more about them than it does me.
My political views are based on principles of smaller government and individual liberty, and what I believe works. When someone tries to turn that into some statement about how I love the rich and white and hate the poor and minority, I wonder if they aren't doing a little projecting.
I spend very little time thinking about class or race, because in my view it is of little importance--yet somehow there are people who try to make that an issue without ever asking me about my views. They assume it from my political party.
I tend to think liberals are simply wrong in their views about what is best for the country, yet I am accused of being evil. Still, there rhetoric, repeated often enough, has some effect--but only by dehumanizing me and generalizing about my views--not by engaging in an honest debate about how best to govern.
In fact the political discussions of the 'generalizers' of both sides rarely get into the expected results of a policy and what we can expect as a nation from a particular idea---but rather how it is simply 'right' or 'fair.' When people invoke fairness or that something is 'for the children' I know they're peddling ideaological junk that won't stand on it's own merit.
One would think that the primary purpose of political speech is to change the opinions of those on the other side of the issue, or at least to move them in the "correct" direction, however one may define that. Today, though, much political speech--especially on the left--seems irrelevant to that goal. It's either (1)an expression of uncontrolled primal rage, or (2)a signal to those on one's own side that "hey, I'm one of you."
I've increasingly noticed in business media a species of drive-by political commentary, in which the writer manages to work an anti-Bush shot into an article on, say, the outlook for orange juice futures. These almost never contain any chains of logic supporting the writer's position; they are mere assertions.
I have been a Republican all of my life, and I have *never* heard that Republican women have to have lots of Republican sons.
You are misinterpreting the common quote. One or two sons is fine; it's how you raise them. To carry on the traditions.
Quality, not quantity. And it's not understood as an insult generally. There's a very important role.
I think Helen and Glenn are just down because there side is losing, and losing with such long-lasting consequences.
Poor suckers -- he actually believed it would work, that the bigger guys always win. Heh!
Yes, as others have suggested, the terms "liberal" and "left-wing" have been bandied about by the right as "bad words" for much longer than what you talk about.
And Tom Delay is "trying to be a role model for leadership around the country"? Right. If the Republican Party agrees with his self-assessment, then that says alot about the Party.
Finally, we can argue about who started this "fire", the Republicans or the Democrats. But if you're going to support Republicans "going on the attack" because "it works", then you can't credibly portray them as the victims here.
Andrea
David,
Drive-by political commmentary--that's a good way to put it. It seems like no matter the situation, someone manages to make a cheap shot at Bush or republicans in general--I generally hear this at seminars I go to or on a sit-com I am listening to for entertainment. I don't want to be hit with these messages. I agree with one of the commenters above that those on the right can be irate on the internet also, but since the left is in charge of most of the media, movies and universities, it is more influential in the mainstream and I think, needs some balance.
I think I need a scarlet C (for conservative) because I am not too happy with those R folks lately.
Trey
My question is, what if one is a Republican or right leaning. So what? Is that a crime?
Unfortunately, to many people, the answer is yes.
Even if you've been able to convince somebody on the left that you're not a racist, not a bigot, not rich and have compassion for the poor, you're still given the Scarlet R because if you vote Republican you're voting for a party that supports bigotry, supports racism, cares only for the rich and hates the poor.
The ironic thing is, these stereotypes are created by the very people who claim to loathe stereotyping.
Trey,
Nor am I--which makes it hard to support a party like the Republicans but the alternative is worse and as the Democratic party becomes more anti-semitic (all very under the table of course), I cannot support them at all, not that my support makes much of a difference either way, but we all do what we can.
My question is, what if one is a Republican or right leaning. So what? Is that a crime?
Between the 1960s and 1970s Republican membership went from a minority affiliation to a stigmatized one. The taboo is very real and ingrained, its source almost certainly the cultural control of the left's.
Give the repeal of the "Fairness Doctrine" and the rise of alternative media another decade to work.
Since Delay doesn't actually write his own blog, the point is moot. I agree with ada, incidentally. The difference is not between right and left, it is those who are willing to discuss issues calmly and those who tar anyone who disagrees with them as freaks or bigots or claiming some sort of huge conspiracy.
Oh Doc Helen,
You so are so beautiful...Amen and a big fat hosanna to you from one of your team mates (we call them home girls in Harlem)...I want two big red Rs...One for the front and one for the back...And here I thought I was an army of one...Let's go out there and stand tall all you R wearing warriors...Just lets not sink to the depts of the weasels...We can fight this particular fight with love and kindness...The other side obviously needs some love and kindness...However, we must be forceful and never back down...Oh happy day; I've found me some mates...Rock on!
Well put, Dr. Helen!
I've been debating in the trenches of a closed community - soccer site 'off topics'- for years and I found fighting back with the same semantics, and bullet points, doesnt work at all.
On the first site, I had those who were on 'our side', but a couple trolls who answered about any serious post with graphic 'trollies'. Only time there was civility was on 'KELO' and of course one of the trolls blamed the conservative justices.
So I started all over with a second soccer site.
Had to get past the charge of 'racist' again. Had to establish "CRED" again .made easier using Ted Stevens.. and had to defend Tom Delay again.
But I'm fighting this fight ALONE... anyone who agrees with me wont post that opinion.
It DOES help that I'm the moderator and show that I dont carry the politics from the one forum to another.. but in a way it's satisfying because I am making these people think.
Delay is a good example; I can compare him to any number of Dems... and I can back up my defense with links to other Ronnie Earle debacles.
But the first rule is you cannot use any link to any media that even smacks of 'Right wing'.
The second is that you cant even think of using the same tactics they use... they are extremely sensitive to those points. Which is why they use them on conservatives in the first place.
You cannot in any way charge Liberals with their inherent racism. All that can be done is nibble around the edges of that.
I'm all for you folks working on the Academia market, but for some of us, dealing with those who've already been inculcated and feel they're as 'informed' as they need be, it's tough sledding but worth it if even ONE is 'converted' to rational thought.
I don't think Tom DeLay is a good model to look toward for how to behave.
I'm not a Republican, although I have voted for more Republicans than Democrats in the past decade. I'm not even a libertarian anymore. Whenever I try on a label to see if it fits, it just doesn't. I have opinions that don't fit often neatly with particular groups, so I'd rather not self-identify with any of them.
Pointing out holes in arguments, seeing hypocrisy in action, and reasoned logical debate persuades me. Attackers - such as Ann Coulter or Tom Franken - make me roll my eyes and close my ears.
I long for civil discourse to return to political discussions. Elevating uncivil discourse is a step in the wrong direction.
Patrick had it right at 1:49 AM.
It's easy to agree with Delay if you look at his comments in a vacuum. Which of course is what he wants. But this is the guy that came up with the K street subversion plan. This is the guy that asked the FAA and FBI to help enforce the Texas gerrymandering power play. This is the guy that pulled all the political strings he could to save himself from criminal indictment.
He's no friend to good government let alone democracy. "Republican" doesn't mean the same to him as it does to us. For him, "Republican" means greed, power, and corruption. I think we'd all be better off just ignoring him, no matter what he says.
Sorry, any vehemence in that last post was directed at Delay, not at the good doctor.
Tired of the constant harping from a close friend I've known for ten years about those 'evil Repugs especially the theocrat Christers' I ended up saying that I was Republican and a Christian (even though I haven't been in a church for almost 30 years) just to see what would happen.
It has been two months now and haven't hear nary a peep from him. For the last five years I tolerated some of the most hateful and vile words and actions (I'm in NYC theater) ever uttered or acted yet the most horrifying thing a person can say in my neck of the woods is either the word Republican or Christian.
It's this bad and the intolerance exhibited by those who believe themselves to be the perfect example of tolerance is appalling.
If you ever wish to rid your life of intolerant and vile bigots simply tell them you are a Republican. Tack on the word Christians and you will insure success.
Patrick,
Could you please be so kind as to point out to me why, exactly, you considered Mr. Delay's prior career as an exterminator to be of the least relevance? Don't worry, I know. I've seen snickered about enough on the lefty blogs. For people who throw out how much their hearts bleed for "working families", folks on the left (I'll make no representation as to your politics) seem awfully comfortable using any association with a blue collar background as a mark of derision.
I to often feel that my side is the horn-rimmed glasses, pocket protecting and suspender wearing nerds trying to fight off the thugs and wondering why we are constantly picking ourselves up off the ground. "Why are my sound intellectual arguments not working against their fists?"
Conservatives seem afraid to fight this battle on all levels. If a group of these fascists jump on stage at some university to shut-down a conservative speaker, why are we not there to push them right back off. Instead we submit, and then cry about it on the blogs and talk shows.
If a bully pushes you, you got to push back because those who have the responsibility to maintain the order are shirking it. And for those who say they are taking the high moral ground in all this, is this true or is there a fear of the blood and spit that exists from being in the trenches?
someone said,
" The difference is not between right and left, it is those who are willing to discuss issues calmly and those who tar anyone who disagrees with them as freaks or bigots or claiming some sort of huge conspiracy."
Well ok but which side is doing the taring?
and throwing the insults?
and coming up with ludicrous conspiracy theories?
and which side has the MSM on its side, and university professors on its side?
And which side has the ACLU on its side to remove any signs of Christianity but help Islam spread like wild fire?
Which side hides its scandals, but puts the scandals of the other side on front pages?
Which side publishes information that makes them border line traitors?
or if you prefer, which side is the New York Times on ?
which side has used intimidation and violence to silence the other side?
Which side finds it funny to wish Bush was assassinated?
Which side cares more about the well fare of Gitmo detainees than about the wellfare of US troops?
Which side compared the glazed chiken eating Gitmo detainees to a Gulag where at least 20 million people died and suffered trmendously?
Which side is offended like no word could describe when one US troop may have allegedly done something possibly not right to one Iraqi but could not care less that Al qaeda is killing and torturing and beheading innocents, pretty much everyday?
Which side defends criminals because they wrote children books?
Which side thinks Castro, Kim Jung are less of a dictator than Bush is?
which side published the Dan Rather memo AND still to this day swears it is fake but accurate?
Which side is saying such ludicrous things as " fake but accurate" ?
Which candidate from what side is still refusing to sign papers that will let us see his military record? ( yes I mean Kerry )
Which side knew in 2005 of what Foley was doing and kept it a secret until last month elections?...
It is nice of you to try to avoid pointing fingers, but it is very obvious to most people that the left is the unreasonable, the impolite, the angry, the less adult, the less mature side.
And if I did not have a headache today I would have come up with even better examples.
Update: Professor Althouse weighs in--and check out the comments to her post, some are very insightful.
First, you need to learn how to actually link to Althouse's comments.
Second, the comment was an anecdote of someone claiming to see something on Lehrer that revealed someone else's anecdote.
That's got exactly as much weight as evidence as my patently bullshit anecdote: Turns out while I was driving through Manhattan this morning, my islamoterrorist taxi driver told me that Glenn loves the ghey and donates to wahabi organizations but that you and other conservative libertarians refuse to let him come out of the closet as a ghey loving wahabi sympathizer.
Now, if you actually had earned that Ph.D you flaunt you would have acknowledged the the comment was worthless right up front. Instead you just want to cry you're a victim.
"Waah Waah Waah, I am a victim!" Dr. Mrs. Helen InstaProfesser.
Pettyfog,
You are not alone--there are so many people who think and feel like you but the media and others want you to feel alone and give up any fight against them. Don't do it. It is a strategy, to isolate people and make them feel that they must be the only one who has a different view. Remember the old Asch conformity experiments from Psychology 101? Where three lines were drawn on a board, all of the same size and subjects were asked what size they were? Three confederates were planted who gave wrong answers and unknowing subjects would often give the same answer even though it was wrong. It is a game that is prevalent on the extreme left (and probably on the extreme right as well). People will agree with information even if it is wrong just to conform and have others like them and accept them. I think that many leftists have a more social orientation and more of a need to be liked which is why they conform easily to the party line and why they also cannot stand any dissent. Keep sharing your views, even if you are alone, for it does not mean that you are wrong just because others don't share them.
You forgot to state which side keeps re-electing their own scandal ridden politicians. Does Kennedy, Marion Barry and Alcee Hastings ring any bells?
Hilarious. Here's one of those fun web quizzes to see how partisan you are...
1) True or false: the bloggers/commenters/etc on "your side" are intelligent, well-spoken, respectful people. Those on the other side are hateful, emotional, nasty little wretches.
How to score this quiz:
If you answered true - you're a partisan.
If you answered false - you might not be.
How ridiculous is this entire post? Louts on the left are no more or less uncouth than louts on the right. If you look into the din and see one side being more civil than the other, then your partisan tunnel vision is preventing you from seeing the whole picture.
Michelle Malkin wrote an excellent book on this topic, titled "Unhinged." In it, she takes look at the asymetry (assymetry?) among the conservative versus the liberal sides, and I think she makes a pretty- good case for concluding that the liberals are the more vitriolic, hateful, and downright violent of the two sides.
This post is so inane it would be out of place anywhere but here.
Doctor, you look so ravishing in red.
Welcome aboard!
I agree with one of the commenters above that those on the right can be irate on the internet also, but since the left is in charge of most of the media, movies and universities, it is more influential in the mainstream...
Ah, but,
Who has been "in charge" of the political climate in the past 5 years.
Don't spend too much time thinking: THE REPUBLICANS. Heh.
You have to start thinking better, "Doctor", if you want to sell your ideas. And another hint: your husband's attitude, and yours as blogger helpmeet, is part of the problem. Indeed!
Acting like a victimized minority to the mainstream majority doesn't work for the great and mighty Instapundit. It's a sickening tactic actually.
If you came anywhere near my 3 year old with your bogus studies -- or are successful in convincing American boys they are being victimized by society -- well I'd have a few choice words too. Maybe keep your weakness-spreading to yourself?
And I'm sorry if it's rude, but the whole idea of your poor health that you've publicized here -- if you can't take care of yourself properly, we're supposed to listen to how you recommend we raise our men (not boys, men)? No thank you. Sick and victimized, like thinking you're bigger than you are -- indeed, is a problem; maybe you should stop diagnosing others and clean up your own house? Good advice for Republicans overall too
You liberals have got it so wrong. The president is right, that's why he's the president. And he has surrounded himself with intelligunt people who, with their vast years of experience in the military and high office, he relies on for the most accurate assessment of the reality of Commie/Facist/Islamo plans to take over the world and take away our guns, just like you chickens want. That's why he's the decider, a do-gooder, and the MSM which is owned by liberal cut-and-runners like GE, Times/Warner, and Rupurt Mirdock are all in bed with the do-badders. He has a secret plan for total victory, so shut up, or else it won't be a secret and the traitors win! Do you want to lose? All this talk about saving lives and money and you never thought about what's good for America - Do you want to lose! I say we back him in whatever he wants to do because it's good for America. Pinheads for Bush say: Re-elect Bush in 2008!
I find it ironic that so many posters are merely proving Dr. Helen's point: Leftist-trolls want to silence anyone who doesn't believe *their* way.
I am also amazed by the number of supposedly tolerant liberals who seem to descend to sexist comments, as well.
I'm not even considering the infantile posts.
Ace you are a righteous freak! Let me back on to Polipundit please! One thing all the posters here should know is that Ace is one of those self-indulgent "alpha" males the "doctor" wants to breed. He's a real sleaze who edits and grafittis others posts and then outright deletes those which show what a real moron he is.
AS far as this crying about Republicans being picked onor marginalized it's ridiculous and is a poorly fitting dress for such toughies.
This kind of whining is what one would expect from those unable to comprehend and accept one's own failures.
xoxo
Sniffles
I find it ironic that so many posters are merely proving Dr. Helen's point: Leftist-trolls want to silence anyone who doesn't believe *their* way.
Point out whow is trying to silence you. Is it the same "some people" who don;t want us to win in Iraq?
You are an idiot.
Sniffles
6 years Republican control of the Presidency.
12 years Republican control of Congress.
Just replaced 2 Supreme court Justices with conservatives.
Get off the victim pity wagon please.
I've been carrying on a running conversation with one of my college friends regarding any number of things. Supposedly not hostile, though he's one of these young leftwingers who believes in all the typical causes. I'm a Libertarian Republican, so I put on a blank face when he says in the same list that he "hates bigots" but detests "evangelical Christians."
So this third guy asks me another night what my beliefs are, and the other just says ofthandedly: "He's a bastard."
DeLay? That French fag?
HAHAHAHA!
The great thing about blogs is that everyone has the ability to start one if they have computer access. No matter the politics or the ability to write... blogging is available.
I must say though, I think I've seen more Liberals saying "No, No, I'm not a Liberal, I'm Centrist" than I've seen Republicans back off of their label.
With Republicans, I've seen more of them saying they are Republicans, but maybe they don't agree with a particular party platform.
I've also seen huge numbers of hawkish libertarians (like yourself and your husband) labeled as Conservative Republicans.
People love instant labels - they'll read one thing on your blog and you'll be pigeonholed for life. I like your "R" though - looks good. *grin*
I'm not conservative. I am registered with the Democratic party.
There. That said, has anyone not pre-judged me?
I would love to say that the Democratic party is more tolerant than the Republican party. But I won't. I've read, and cringed, at words typed by someone that allegedly believes in same rights enshrined in the U.S. constitution as I do. I have also read comments from alleged Republicans which make me wonder "and how does that advance your cause??".
The ugly secret that a few people here have acknowledged is that both the Right and the Left have uncivil elements. To argue anything to the contrary seems counter-intuitive to me.
Personally I oppose zealots of all stripes: Religious, Political, National, Racial, or otherwise. In my life I have found it folly to assume that something is completely true of an entire class of people.
So what am I saying here? I'm saying thank you for the chuckle. Becuase of course, all lefties are intolerant bastards... no wait, that should read all righties are intolerant... hrmm. What I meant to say is anyone that shares a deeply held political belief that is of the opposite spectrum of my own, deeply held, political belief is a bastard.
But that won't become a slogan, it is too long to be catchy.
Dr. Helen is yet another member of the persecuted Republican class.
The poor little dears should never be called upon their rank corruption, power grabs, public thievery, depravity, racism, bigotry, and murderous jingoism.
It's not the fault of the Party of Personal Responsibility, you see? Clinton and the evil Democrats made them do it.
anon:
"6 years Republican control of the Presidency.
"12 years Republican control of Congress.
Just replaced 2 Supreme court Justices with conservatives.
Get off the victim pity wagon please."
So temporary Republican dominance is a valid excuse for trollish behavior? Gee, I wish I could give myself that kind of license to act like a complete, out of control, tantrum-throwing infant every time my political party was on the outs. I'm sure it would be very therapeutic.
Stop whining, Bugs... The American people have made it clear that they are sick and tired of self-serving excuses.
Wow. I don't have time to read the 64 comments ahead of me, so I'll leave this comment, in case no one else has.
I agree that those of us with "right-leaning views" should speak up more, but we seem to be the ones (for the most part) who learned the lessons about respecting other people's opinions or, at least, their right to speak them. And the lessons that taught us civility, as opposed to getting as down and dirty as we possibly can. And yes, I am aware of the notable exceptions, such as those who kill abortion doctors or bomb abortion clinics. They are the *exceptions*, and we can all be thankful for that.
As for speaking up at universities, that can get a very low grade on a paper, for example, even for a brilliant student who also writes well. No, I'm not being boastful, except insofar as I am very proud of my spouse. Those who don't parrot the left-leaning views of the professors don't get high marks. Therefore, it becomes an issue of academic self-preservation.
As for speaking up at universities, that can get a very low grade on a paper, for example, even for a brilliant student who also writes well. No, I'm not being boastful, except insofar as I am very proud of my spouse. Those who don't parrot the left-leaning views of the professors don't get high marks. Therefore, it becomes an issue of academic self-preservation.
Your dumbass husband should complain up the line, otherwise, there's a good chance that, you know, he's just a dumbass instead of someone who's being discriminated against.
Oh, yes, "dumbass" really helps the debate. It changes minds. It illuminates salient points.
Yes, indeedy, you trolls sure are smart!
Tell me again how tolerant the Left is, would you? No fair talking about Republicans. I want to hear how darned tolerant of other ideas the Left is. How they never, ever descend to name calling and insult.
No fair talking about "the other side." Let's deal with yours, now.
(...insert sound of crickets...followed by more insult and misdirection of a trollish nature).
Oh, yes, "dumbass" really helps the debate. It changes minds. It illuminates salient points.
Look if this is all you have to complain about, then stick the bottle back in your face until your diaper is changed. Got a nice life, right? But leftists call you names on-line? Step away from the computer lest you poop again.
My question to Dr. Helen is to ask where her critique of the terrilble "L" word is? Dr. Helen, have you visited a Liberal blog recently, to see the vitriol spewed by the intolerant members of your political party?
At the end of the day, doctor, you've allied yourself with the party that perfected political slander, the party that took complex issues like the decision to go to war and turned them into a series of sound bytes calling democrats cowards, terrorists, and traitors; the party that did such deep and meaningful debate as "flip flopper" and "cheese eating surrendur monkey". And your "liberal" media (a laughable joke, if I've ever heard one) is complicit in lowering the level of that discourse.
I also find it ironic that the causes belli of your latest blog entry is comments posted on a conservative politician's blog. A conservative politican who was indicted for "a charge of criminally conspiring with two political associates to inject illegal corporate contributions into 2002 state elections that helped the Republican Party reorder the congressional map in Texas and cement its control of the House in Washington". So forgive the democratic party if we don't look too kindly on a man who broke the law just because he wanted his party to reign supreme.
And forgive me if I don't have any sympathy about your scarlet R. Democrats have been wearing their "L"iberalism like a hangman's noose for far longer. When the Republican party returns to the principles espoused by its greatest members, Teddy Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, Dwight D Eisenhower, we can talk about how mislabelled your party has become.
I think Dave hit the nail on the head with his second hypothesis. Trollishness does not have its roots in a desire to persuade others or even in a desire to let off steam. It has its roots in boundary maintenance (a discussion of one form of this sociological phenomenon can be found at http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue2/honeycutt.html).
So does almost every other form of hateful speech I know.
There is no particular reason why we would expect conservatives to be terribly different from liberals in this respect. In my experience, all extremists are alike.
I think I've told this story before, but it bears repeating. I attended a Republican caucus a few years back where the local campaign manager for Bush came to fire up the troops. When it came time for questions and answers, quite a number of us objected to negative campaigning and expressed a desire to see the Bush campaign take the high moral ground. The blunt and cynical response was "If we don't define who Kerry is, he will define who Bush is, and we'll lose the election." I fear this is true, based on the revealed preferences of voters who loudly decry negative campaigners and then vote for them anyway, and I don't have a ready answer on how to raise the level of civility. I sometimes think we are long past that point; our civilization is in free fall and the pavement is coming up fast. When I find myself thinking this, it's a good time to go read some Churchill speeches, circa 1940.
Churchill was merciless on the attack. But his attacks were funny and to the point, and maybe even civil in a sense that is hard to explain. Don't see that much in these days of the televised sound bite.
I just want to see more pics of Dr. Helen
When someone says Muslims are violent, Muslims protest violently.
When someone says liberals are angry and like to throw insults,
they protest by throwing angry insults.
( just look at comments above from liberals )
Is it any wonder angry liberals and angry Muslims agree on so many things?
They have the same kind of dysfunctional mind.
Anonymous at 6:23 PM said...
I just want to see more pics of Dr. Helen
I do too, but I was embarassed to say it.
Thanks!
Yep, that "Righteous Bubba" sure can debate, can't he? When confronted with juvenile personal attacks, he responds with...more juvenile personal attacks!
It really proved the superiority of his position.
Hilarious. A post about lack of civility and stereotyping of the other side devolves into lack of civility and stereotyping of the other side. Both sides do it, and both sides seem to think their side is as pure as the driven snow, while the other side is eeeeeevil. I'd like to see both sides quit whining about the other and engage in a dialog. Not going to happen, of course, but a guy can dream.
What Gus misses is that Dr. Helen never started this. And the Leftie-trolls are the ones who are doing it all on this blog (okay, most of it). What is wrong with not rising to the bait, as it were?
What is wrong with disagreeing politely, instead of name-calling? Oh, I get it: being polite is somehow a bad thing.
Go read over the comments. Who *started* name calling, please? And who continues to fling about personal insults like a chimpanzee's poo?
It's all well and good to say that both sides have trolls, because they do. But no "Right Wing Trolls" were starting off here.
It is ironic, given the subject of this whole thread
Arguably, both sides do it. There are plenty of examples, I'm sure. I think, though, that a useful observation would include who is doing it and to what extent:
How many (R) vs. (D) in Congress have insulted a sitting president with actual profanity? Include as much history as possible. Include high-ranking party leaders as well, such as party chairmen/women and past presidents.
Line up the numbers of equivalent insults said by the left and the right (equivalent means that "your argument has no supporting data" is NOT the same level as "you're evil and must die", by the way) in public speech and have a look at where the numbers come in.
Take it any direction you like, but be sure to compare without giving anyone preference with lame excuses like, "everyone exaggerates during a campaign." None of that. If they said it, it counts, though the circumstances of the statements is another item to include when making comparisons.
You will find that there is no moral equivalency at all. "Everyone does it" is pathetic, misleading, and a lovely, steaming crock.
Poor little Republicans!They are destined for martyrdom. Imagine all these mean Dems blaming them for the domestic and international messes of the past six years. The nerve of these evil creatures! Sniff! Sniff!
Well said, Peregrine John.
Oh, sure, folks can trot out stories of how Lincoln was called an ape during a campaign, and Grover Cleveland was accused of having an illegitimate son. The covers nasty campaign practices by both Democrats and Republicans in history.
But Peregrine John is right about the sheer nastiness nowadays. And the correct response is not to tell people who complain to "...take the bottle" out of their mouth (simply amplifying the nastiness), but use other ways to disagree and debate.
The body politic should do better than in the past, not worse.
Yep, that "Righteous Bubba" sure can debate, can't he?
It's trolling, not debating, and when a proposition rises to a level at which it can be taken seriously, I may do some of that. Come on: complaining about the behaviour of the commenters at the blog of yet another disgraced Republican house leader...that's comedy. Republicans demonized? That particular Republican? Heavens-to-Betsy, whatever for?
Gawd, her own nitwit husband spent a fair amount of time assusing anyone who didn't like the Iraq war of being on the "other side" - I assume or hope the guy's wised up - and she's in a tizzy over incivility.
And the correct response is not to tell people who complain to "...take the bottle" out of their mouth (simply amplifying the nastiness), but use other ways to disagree and debate.
Thank you for correcting me. I, a humble traitor in league with the enemy, am not worthy. I apologize for making fun of your boo-hooviness, but, as Ann Althouse says, "One of the main things that draws me to writing about something is the desire to make fun of people who are taking themselves too seriously..."
A reply to an admitted troll is a waste of oxygen, friends. Just ignore this..how should I put it?...nitwit. He enjoys being a puerile little jerkwad.
But then, he is SO very good at it.
Just let it go, Anon.
This character has a blog of his own with only two comments...one of which is his own.
So I think we have identified why this person likes to "make fun" of Reynolds, Smith, and Althouse.
He just craves attention.
Like I said, liberals are in as much denial as Muslims are.
The more they do what we accuse them of doing, the more they deny they are doing it.
Some Muslims use violence to convince us we should not call them violent.
And a lot of liberals use angry insults to convince us we should not accuse them of easely resorting to angry insults.
Not only are they counter productive but they are in deep denial about the whole thing.
Helen,
I disagree with you and Tom Delay, and, strangely for an instinctive liberal, I agree with Anne Althouse. Quality of ideas cut deeper than cut and thrust. When the kind of nonsense appears on my own blog, from left or right, they just get cut.
I'd rather have a smaller number of engaged comments than have to endure swathes and swathes of largely meaningless bile, which sadly the blogosphere commenting sections are over populated with.
Sometimes you even get a half decent conversation: http://tinyurl.com/y7rvly
"Professor #2: this person wears a button that says "I SUPPORT THE TROOPS." On his or her office door is a bumper sticker that says "WHY DO BELIEVERS IN THE RELIGION OF PEACE WANT TO BEHEAD THOSE WHO DON'T?""
Because those are dumb things to say, and they are easily and often rationally deconstructed to their basic elements, which make no sense, yet you KEEP ON SAYING THEM.
Being in favor of 'supporting the troops' does not equal keeping them in Iraq. Many, in fact most, people think a better way of supporting the troops would be to get them the hell out of there, and that they shouldn't have been there in the first place. How is getting them blown up for no definable reason 'supporting' these young men?
Second, just because you don't want to deport/slaughter/quarantine all muslims in the US does NOT mean that you want to hire a fanatical mullah to run the US govt. In fact we want to keep religion out of govt entirely. The reason we keep calling you stupid is because these are very, very simple things to understand, yet you just don't seem to get it.
Welcome to the fold. I suspect you might be more of a mainstream libertarian. Or, a libertarian-leaning Republican.
We're happy to have you aboard.
Eric at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com
Behold the sad litttle Republicans trying to justify themselves...
The poor things are really to be pitied.
Imagine having to be held responsible for the astounding mess of the past six years!
Imagine having to be held responsible for rubber-stamping the worse military venture in US history! One that has so far resulted in about 3,000 deaths and another 22,000 maimed? Never mind the hundreds of thousand of Iraqi civilians?
Imagine rubber-stamping the abysmal incompetence that led to the death of more than one thousand people and the loss of an entire U.S. city?
Heavens to Betsy, as Rumsfeld would quaintly put it.
Who would have thought that we had an incompetent, delusional, ignorant, corrupt, and abysmally stupid government?
Not to worry, Anonymous. This crowd is going to whine ad nauseam. They will try to escape responsibility and blame the Dems or Clinton, or whoever.
Dear Bernard:
I appreciate your comment, but you don't get the point I was trying to make, I think (apologies if I am missing something).
On EVERY college campus (maybe Hillsdale or Pepperdine are different), there are MANY anti-Republican cartoons on office doors. There are MANY professors who spout the most amazingly overstated bile---I had to hear, repeatedly, in one faculty lunchroom that Republicans were "all idiots" and "out for oil." Heck, in one case I sat in a departmental meeting about a potential tenure track hire...and heard that a candidate for a job who listed a religious activity (Catholic, as it happens) was "a fundamentalist crazy" and should not be hired.
She wasn't.
No fooling. These are two or three specific examples. And they had just as little background to them as I have related---the comments were thoughtless, knee jerk, and absolute the norm in academia. Academia is a self-selected group that does not tolerate true intellectual diversity. Freedom of expression is a joke...
It's like an old play on the 60s motto: do your own thing...so long as it is my kind of thing you do.
The point of my original post was NOT that a specific bumper sticker or a particular button made any sense. I was pointing out something sad but true: a faculty member with pro-Republican bumper stickers or buttons would be reviled...while the most ridiculous nonsense from the Left is shrugged off and ignored...or even agreed with (example: several faculty members where I currently teach have bumper stickers on their office doors claiming that the Bush administration planned the 9-11 attacks).
The parking lot is full of Volvos and Priuses with pro-Progressive bumper stickers. The few pro-Republican bumper stickers belong to students. And I have heard stories about pro-Republican bumper stickers being scraped off cars in faculty lots, or defaced with profanity.
Heck, I don't care if you believe me. If you think that the modern campus has freedom of expression, go ahead and do my experiment. Put an old BUSH IN 2004 bumper sticker on your car. Put a sign on your door saying "I LISTEN TO RUSH LIMBAUGH."
After all, your point of view will be respected, and there will be no negative outcome, right?
This is a long post. I just wanted to be clear about my experiment. It is for every well meaning Liberal/Progressive who thinks that (i) academia is open to diverse ideas and (ii) the claims of anti-conservative bias are untrue. If they are untrue, friends---try my experiment.
But as I said, make sure your unemployment is paid up.
And Bernard---thank you for politely disagreeing with me. It's much better than the trolling that has been going on, and it makes me respect your opinion more.
The delicate little Republican flowers are having a case of the vapors.
The incoming Congress may actually have the nerve to ask for accountability for the mess created in the past six years.
Imagine that! This incoming 110th Congress is so impudent!
Pass the salts, dear.
Liberals and Democrats are "fools" "anti-semitic"(must be news to the 87% of Jews who voted Democrat in the last election), "weasels", "intolerant and vile bigots", "thugs", "fascists(!)", "the unreasonable, the impolite, the angry, the less adult, the less mature side", "vitriolic, hateful, and downright violent"
That's what I came up with before reading the rantings got tiresome. I didn't detail the trollings of the libs because I believe that those of you on the right are well aware of what's being said there. But no, it appears the right is the civil side. Give me a break. Y'all prove my point again and again.
Hmmm. Funny. I don't seem to see it on this site, Gus. In fact, I see the oh so tolerant Left trying to bully others, insulting others, and generally acting like snotty trustafarian teens.
Sorry if you go to sites where right wing people act like jerks. Again, I don't see it here. I see Lefties acting badly here.
I've seen it happen on both sides. And I've seen people on both sides say they think their side keeps a higher moral tone. I think there are two reasons for this.
First, the people who claim that their side is more reasonable tend to do so in "friendly territory"--a blog that more or less represents their own views. Why get angry at a few nearly incoherent trolls when surrounded by friends? You have home team advantage. Of course you see the best of your side there.
The second reason is that very few reasonable and thoughtful individuals are willing to go defend their case for several days on a comment page completely surrounded by those who will relentlessly oppose them. What's the point? There isn't one, unless you're a fool. Thus, fools are the primary source of opposition on blog comment pages.
If people want to call me a Republican, I will wear the label with pride with the R proudly displayed on my forehead whether it really fits or not, just to show my solidarity with those who are oppressed by such labels. Maybe you should too.
I find the labels "Republican" and "Democrat" rather meaningless for everyone outside of those who mindlessly parrot partisan talking points. For the average citizen going about his or her life, they might generally think of themselves as a "Democrat" or "Republican," but you don't really know much at all from that until you talk to them in more detail.
I generally relate more to libertarianism if I have to pick an ism, but what bothers me more than being called a Republican (yes, libertarian types often - not always - wind up feeling that voting for a Republican is a lesser evil) is being called "right wing." I've been called a "right winger" by a lot of people, and I take big exception to it because it's just not true. I find it as difficult to relate to right-wingers as I do to socialists.
What is true is that I sometimes find common ground with right-leaning (center-right, I guess) people in wanting to prevent leftists from running amok. Leftists, IMO, have imposed themselves more into my life than right-leaning people have.
It amuses me when people act weird when I say I voted for a Republican. In some social settings I actually kind of get off on the way people react like there's something alien about me.
So, though I don't wanna join a party, I guess I'm willing to wear the scarlet letter in solidarity. lol But Democrats can win over my vote! They just won't do it when they get caught up in protectionism, opposing free trade, higher taxes, gun control, etc etc. But I'm not a social conservative at all. In other words, as an Ohio resident, don't ask me to vote for Sharrod Brown, because I never will!
but a conservative, like say, Patrick Buchanan...I don't relate to him at all on most of his issues. His brand of conservativism is as unappealing to me as Dennis Kucinich is on the left. In fact, I think they have more in common with each other. It's just that Dennis Kucinich has actually succeeded in helping to wreck my city of Cleveland.
BTW, one of my favorite essays about conservatives and libertarians (or classical liberals) is Hayek's Why I Am Not A Conservative. Easy to find on Google. If someone wants to understand where I'm coming from, that's a good place to start.
I've gone ahead and frontpaged your coming out of the closet as a "libertarian Republican" at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com.
Again, our movement is PROUD TO HAVE YOU AS A MEMBER!!!
Other libertarian Republicans include: Newly-electe Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, PJ O'Rourke, Ron Paul, Dana Rohrabacher, Neal Boortz, Tammy Bruce, Larry Elder, and Mr. Libertarian Republican himself Dennis Miller. So, you're in good company.
I've gone ahead and frontpaged your coming out of the closet as a "libertarian Republican" at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com.
Again, our movement is PROUD TO HAVE YOU AS A MEMBER!!!
Other libertarian Republicans include: Newly-electe Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, PJ O'Rourke, Ron Paul, Dana Rohrabacher, Neal Boortz, Tammy Bruce, Larry Elder, and Mr. Libertarian Republican himself Dennis Miller. So, you're in good company.
I've gone ahead and frontpaged your coming out of the closet as a "libertarian Republican" at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com.
Again, our movement is PROUD TO HAVE YOU AS A MEMBER!!!
Other libertarian Republicans include: Newly-electe Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, PJ O'Rourke, Ron Paul, Dana Rohrabacher, Neal Boortz, Tammy Bruce, Larry Elder, and Mr. Libertarian Republican himself Dennis Miller. So, you're in good company.
Anonymous,
I, too, see lefties acting badly, however, I took all those quotes from the comments on this site. If you don't see it you've got blinders on. Look again.
I often get tired of seeing trashy behavior like that exhibited by the commenters like those on display at Delay's blog.
Oh shut up, you supercilious twit.
Round up all the Republicans and deport them. It's the only way to be sure.
Eric Dondero,
Thanks for the link--it's an honor. I actually joined the Libertarian party years ago when I was the campaign manager for a libertarian candidate running for Congress in Tennessee. It seems that if one is a libertarian, they get called a Republican anyway, not really true, of course, but like I said, if people want to call me that, why not?
You're a whore helen.
A pretty enough whore, but a whore nonetheless. :-}
Some leftist said above that the Iraq war was the worst in US history,
Here are American fatalities per war,
Mexican War;13,000
Korean war; 54,000
Vietnam war;...58,000
World War I;...58,000
World War II ; ...........408,000
Civil War ;....................562,000
Iraq War;3000
You are angry at something your left biased media created in your mind.
You are angry at something that does not really exist, not in the way you believe it exists.
I could also show you the cost compared to the GDP per war and Iraq is still the least expensive of all US wars.
You are angry at a fabrication, you are angry at a ghost that the left created.
Don't get me wrong, it is still very sad when an American dies in Iraq, but if you look at the big picture as you should when we are talking about war, the Iraq war is not the catastrophic failure the left pretends it is.
Hmmm. Anon (the one above this post) must be a Conservative. You know how they stoop to ad hominum (sp?!?!)attacks that are generally sexualized when someone says something that they disagree with.
But wait, Helen's post was conservative. Never mind.
Trey
Please see this blogger, very fresh, brutally honest libertarian views. I've enjoyed his blog and yours for quite sometime.
http://dogwoodpundit.blogspot.com/
Friend of the USA:
You suck. It's very obvious you don't have any family currently there. My brother will be missing his first child's protecting mouthy, arm-chair chumps (you).
You are angry at something your left biased media created in your mind.
Yeah, there's lots of things created in people's minds. Like the way some talk as if we're on the brink of becoming a Christian theocracy.
Please see this blogger, very fresh, brutally honest libertarian views. I've enjoyed his blog and yours for quite sometime.
http://dogwoodpundit.blogspot.com/
Hey, man, thanks for the link.
One of my fave libertarian blogs is out of Sweden, surprisingly enough. www.johannorberg.net
I'm plugging because he's got so much good stuff to say, and is such a refreshing voice, but for some odd reason his blog rarely gets linked by the bigger American blogs.
This must be a joke. Maybe before you begin whining about how hard it is to be a Republican, you think about all of the people that Republicans have gone out of their way to attack and discriminate against. Who puts gay-hating material on the ballot? Who forces the rest of Americans to conform to evangelical "values?" If you're not a white, upper class elitist (or an idiot, I suppose), you have plenty of reason to hate Republicans.
Whining in a situation like this is tantamount to a guard at Guantanimo lamenting to a prisoner, "I don't think you understand how hard torturing is for me. I mean, It's hard to be hated."
Get a grip. If you're going to be a part of the party that systematically oppresses, lies, and caters to extreme religious viewpoints, then yeah, people are going to hate you. You probably deserve it.
No, only the right wing is full of extremist invective, like "...systematically oppresses, lies, and caters to extreme religious viewpoints..."
Hmmm.
There is the whole pot and kettle argument.
Can everyone not see that all of this thread just supports Dr. Helen's original intent? That while many Republicans don't care for Democrats (and yes, say extremist things that are inaccurate and unfair), many Democrats now label Republicans in a very unpleasant light.
Sigh.
The above post illustrates the leftist mindset. You don't agree with their political policy preferences, therefore you are an oppressor who must be put out of public life and be reviled. Of course *their* ideological values *must* be imposed by force of law and the courts, but God forbid should any idea which disagrees with theirs be included in the debate. Talk about hate speech. The above post is a classic example of leftwing bigotry in action.
Anonymous 11:06:
A Republican whore--I guess I better slap a W along my forehead as well.
Deconstructing Anonymous 1:16 PM:
1. "Who puts gay-hating material on the ballot?" Hmmm. How are those ballot measures doing? DId they win or lose? Were they voted upon by the public, or did a judge decide what is best for everyone else? Do you think you change minds by your angry and exaggerated approach?
2. "Who forces the rest of Americans to conform to evangelical "values?" Excuse me, but I missed the memo that forces everyone to attend Baptist services. On the other hand, we can't have Christmas trees in public places in Seattle. Who is forcing other people to do things here? You like it when judges "force" people to do what you want. Is that right?
3. "If you're not a white, upper class elitist (or an idiot, I suppose), you have plenty of reason to hate Republicans." Ah, the "idiot" term again. Bravo! But more to the point, how do white rich upper class elitists vote? Like most of Hollyweird, to take an example? Or George Soros? I suspect you paint with a broad brush, but then, you are an angry person.
4. "Whining in a situation like this is tantamount to a guard at Guantanimo lamenting to a prisoner, "I don't think you understand how hard torturing is for me. I mean, It's hard to be hated.". Oh, yes, the two cases are identical. Puh-leeze. And you accuse REPUBLICANS of whining? Oh, and on the subject, do you really mean torture at your interestingly spelled "Guantanimo"?
5. "yeah, people are going to hate you. You probably deserve it" Sigh. Hating people with whom you disagree, instead of engaging and discussing it with them. Very noble. Once again, you just prove Dr. Helen's point.
Look, pal, you can believe anything you want. You hang out in a big group with similar thinking people, so it's not a surprise that people with whom you disagree become eeeevvviiiiil to you. But look at your overstatements and exaggerations.
I think you should make friends with a Republican or two and--gasp!---learn to listen to a point of view that roughly half the population shares. You don't have to agree, no. But you might understand a point of view different from you own, and not a rare one at that.
And before you attack that different point of view as being "stupid," I would remind you that you have already established that being "elitist" is a bad thing.
Hey, 2:14, give the Angry Troll a break. Guantanimo is a fake but accurate spelling of Guantánamo.
Don't let facts get in the way of your feelings!
"If you're not a white, upper class elitist (or an idiot, I suppose), you have plenty of reason to hate Republicans."
As opposed to working class heroes like Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and other rich white elitist guys and gals that festoon the Democrat party.
Dr. Helen,
I don't think you are a whore or a republican. I actually take you at your word, even though you once blogged something that I responded rather negatively to. A post you are using on your FAQ AND you read on the podcat to demonize democrats. I have a very dark sense of humor and find the constant use of my screed rioutously funny.
P.S. The new photos look beautiful, and very sexy. The lighting, poses and colors are exquisite. Tell Glenn he should stop wasting his time jerking off his computer and get into professional photography, seriously.
Michael W.
Is that really you or a fake? Do you really have that kind of dark humor? Why?
Some anon Shakespeare wrote: "Who puts gay-hating material on the ballot?"
A fair question. The answer, nobody!
Now your Nazis, they were gay-hating. They killed them. Straight white American males stopped them. Some gay folks helped too I bet.
But voting to keep marriage a man/woman thing does NOT equal gay hating. See, tolerance and acceptance are not equilavent. In the same way, disapproval and hate are unrelated.
Gassing homosexuals = hating, voting against gay marraige = disagreeing.
Thus endeth the lesson.
Trey
Perhaps the Angry Troll is just filled with Guantanimosity?
Dear Dr. Helen:
Much as I appreciate anonymity, perhaps it isn't a good idea, since "michael w." is skating pretty close to getting cyber-creepy.
Brrrr.
OK, speaking of cyber creepy, the ad for LethalLady.com is kinda creeping me out. Not that there is anything wrong with grandmoms in patent leather stormtrooper outfits per se, I just prefer to not look at them. And it is difficult to avoid said deadly nanna when she is flashing on the right side of my screen. I mean, it would be one thing if I directed my browser toward manslaughtering sextagenerians, but I don't. So I feel vaguely oppressed by the vicious aging boomer to my right. Am I alone in this?
Trey
Trey,
I was wondering about that ad myself, not really sure of what the woman is doing--selling stuff, trying to get women over sixty to be sexual? It's a mystery. But hey, whatever makes her happy. She seems like a nice woman when you read her bio.
You are so right! We Republicans are such victims! Rove, DeLay, Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Perle, etc., have *never* used negative tactics or taken unfair advantage at any time during the 6 consecutive years in which they've had complete control of all 3 branches of government, and their supporters have never slandered or maligned opposing political candidates like Al Gore! It breaks my heart the way those mean Dhimmicrats treat us! They are *so unfair*!!!! We are just like the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto, or Ralph Macchio in The Karate Kid!
Dear Anonymous 7:20:
Yawn.
Your dreary and hamhanded attempt at irony aside, I'm more concerned that *every* time a rightwing type points out something awful a leftwing type does, the ONLY response is the juvenile "...well, Rethuglicans are worse...."
Puh-leeze.
Example: lots of people here on the right do NOT approve of Anne Coulter's histrionics. I have yet to see a leftwing type on this blog say, for example, "Yes, you are correct: Charlie Rangel is just being a jackass."
To folks like you, the Left is ALWAYS correct, and the Right is unmitigated eeeeevvviill, like Angry Troll above who thinks he is being forced to attend Baptist services daily.
So it's the hypocrisy you display that grates.
But you will only reply by chanting your usual "Rove, Halliburton, National Guard, Rove, Halliburton, National Guard, no blood for oil."
Again: yawn.
I figured you and INstyHusband already got yourselves "W" tattoos. Fanboy/girl
Wow. That last one really did elevate debate.
Isn't it nice to have Lefties show everyone just how juvenile and ignorant they are?
Helen is not a lefty.
---------------
Helen said...
Anonymous 11:06:
A Republican whore--I guess I better slap a W along my forehead as well.
Yeaaah, it's Republicans who are oppressed in this country!
Such tragedy! It makes racism, sexism, classism and homophobia look like shallow bitchfests!
Rosie O'Donnel makes fun of Chinese people by going " ching chang chong" on air before millions of viewers.
Nothing happens.
A republican used the word " macaca".
He lost his elections.
Yes the right is oppressed.
>>"It makes racism, sexism, classism and homophobia look like shallow bitchfests!"
GOB: Given what racism, sexism, classism, and homophobia really mean in this country, they ARE shallow bitchfests!!
To convince, the Greeks had it right: You must engage them with Logos, Ethos, and Pathos. Logos: Reason with facts and logic. Ethos: Values, by tradition and religion. Pathos: Emotions via sympathy, or empathy. Roughly a third will be convinced by each.
Ethos is the most neglected, but is actually the one that is approached by nasty commercials. When you catch someone doing something wrong, (Say attending a Playboy party with numbers of loose women in attendance) that is the way you point out that your candidate did not do wrong. Making a positive argument in Ethos is hard, unless your candidate has a history of philantropic activity, and that has its own cost in inciting jealousy.
scarlett r for republican. haha.
i'm in the middle of biotech.
yeahh word.
P.S. - new picture equals superr gorgeous. = ).
Hi Professor Stokes,
Shouldn't you be getting back to class?
It's baffling that a member of the party of Little Green Footballs and Red State would somehow decry the incivility of liberal blogs/commenters.
That's rich, Helen.
Is your blog always this humorous?
The Right is at a disadvantage because the Left simply wants power more. Leftists can throw multi-year temper tantrums over manufactured scandals (remember the whole Joe Wilson/CIA leak stuff which turned out to be nothing). Meanwhile the Democrats run around completely out of control calling our troops stupid, attacking Walmart, leaking info about legal covert programs, opposing photo ID on election day so they can cheat, etc... and the Republicans rarely raise a peep while they just sit back constantly on the defensive.
As a right leaning Libertarian myself, I'm trying to think of one reason why I'd prefer the Republican Party. For the first time in forty years I voted for a Democrat this last election. It seems to me that the Republican Party is populated by neocons and fundamentalist Christians who have a much different agenda than conservatives.
Isn't Tom Delay under indictment? I'm very disappointed in the way the 109th congress conducted itself. Conservatives need to retake the Republican Party.
This was by far the most insightful thing I've ever heard anybody say.
You are so right. Republicans would never attack Liberals. They would never try to turn Liberal into a disparaging word. They would never use Liberal as an attack against other candidates.
So why are they treated as if being Conservative was a bad thing?
It's not their fault that all the conservative policies implemented by the Bush administration have failed. That's the fault of the damn liberal media for only reporting the failures rather than the successes. I mean we hardly ever hear about all the schools being built in Iraq, yet we hear about the slaughters of dozens of people daily. That's because Liberals hate America!
Thank you for this perspective. Without people of such wisdom and intellect, I just don't know how I'd live my life.
Blah... after reading both sides of this little debate, I hate to bring up the fact that when I engage in political discussions the terms "leftist," "Stalinists," "traitor" and so on are used against me, even though I am not espousing anything close to it.. I am a moderate that leans left on social and right on economic but to those die-hards on the right, I am a wannabe Soros-Moore groupie... lately the term "Nazi" has been used against me...
On the other side, the die-hards on the left are more than willing to let loose their cannons of "bigot," "Bushite" and so on...
what does this mean? From my experience it means that neither side has an exclusive on attacks... just watch/listen to Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Michael Moore, Ann Coulter, Al Frankin or any of those hyperbole whores... you will see that the art of creating names and divisions is very much alive on both sides of the aisle...
what does this mean? From my experience it means that neither side has an exclusive on attacks...
Clearly you have misinterpreted the meaning. For if you are getting attacked by both sides, this is obviously proof positive that you are doubly wrong.
See a true centrist is never wrong. They are neither here nor there. They are neither winning, nor losing. They are above the ground and below. In the sky and under the water. All at the same time.
You are neither. You are combining the worst elements of Stalin and Hitler, something no true centrist would ever admit to.
* Tom DeLay showed up on June 6, 2004 to thwarth a Congressional Investigation into CPS/Foster Care. Lutheran Social Services showed up with him SENSKE the lawyer, (Lutheran Social Services has the largest contracts in Texas for foster care), they also manage the Fort Bend sugarland area foster homes affiliated with Tom DeLay! State audits with Foster Care contractors show!
1.) Misappropriation
2.) Backdating
3.) Know way of knowing services BILLED ever provided.
They thwarth a Congressional investigation into massive fraud, and FAKE DEATH REPORTS in Foster Care...........we found out why! The Republicans sponsored and backed LIFE INSURANCE to be taken out on Foster Care children....it was not easy finding it either....they stuck it in the backend of a VETERANS BILL PA 105-311, Sponsored and backed by Republicans! Isn't this illegal!!! Isn't this like taking LIFE INSURANCE out on a patient! ANSWER YES! Who is collecting on LIFE INSURANCE: GROUP FOSTER HOMES linked to Politicians - where is all the life insurance money going!!! They are suppose to only use on funerals they are giving CHEAP FUNERALS!!! Also you will find the companies gave donations to campaigns/PACS befor legislation was passed/put through. Also ASK WHY PERVERT Mark Foley was in charge of Missing and Exploited Children when thousands of Children are missing out of Foster Care and this was exposed at the Congressional INQUIRTY that was then evidence brought to DC and Tom DeLay showed up and thwarth an investigation, You will find he sponsored legislation to move children across STATE LINES after this evidence was presented! You will also find the Nigerian children found were from Houston ADOPTED FROM FOSTER CARE! Look at Adoption agencies receiving STATE FUNDS, HOW COME KEN LAY was giving to Spaulding Adoptions when they receive STATE FUNDS, and Foster Care Adoptions are Federally funded??? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE, ASK WHICH adoption agency adopted the kids and the woman worked for Haliburton how come she was NOT CHARGED WITH CHILD TRAFFICKING! LEARN THE SYSTEM. They also use FAKE PSYCHOLOGIST SCAM on parents, and use Non Profits with Government employees to collaberate fake testimony, they have cops/ social workers and judges on the Non Profits, the Judges Cannons says this is a BIG NO NO they still do the Judges spouce has the contract for Therapy, the Judges spouce is then Supeanaed to testify for state to take children. Contracts in the county illegally amended 11 times from $10,000 to over $500,000, learn the system. NOTE: City Councilmen in same county busted for CONTRACT BID RIGGING!!! LOW BALLING CONTRACTS! They use Non Profit affiliated lawyers to break in vehicles of parents who find out to much, and use police officer as a lOOK out! Police work with CPS, CPS and Police officer both sit on Non Profit that collaberates FAKE TESTIMONEY, that Non Profit has changed its name the other cop, with same name CAUGHT MOLESTING NURSE BUSTED, guess what same name as cop on NON PROFIT. They use fake Xrays, over and over to convict parents, Psych test, they use produces false postitives, don't take their Psych test they have it rigged anyway you answer questions produces a diagnosis. SEE HOW SCAM WORKS!!! They also use correctional officers/juvenile to stalk and harrass, and politicians relatives if you do too much like us they send Russian guys two with MUSLIM last names to make DEATH THREATS! One didn't speak English what kind of job does he have. We ran Counter Survellance we were STALKED BY PEDOPHILES, TWO WERE BUSTED RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH, Republicans, and LAWYERS ALL REPUBLICANS, AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS AND CPS, plus investigators! Why!!! WE ACCIDENTALLY FOUND OUT THEY WERE STEALING MILLIONS> WE ARE CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS! If you want to know what is going on READ "RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH" and "NAZI DOCTORS" you KKKers, Grand Dragons, Grand Wizards, Pedophiles, and NEO NAZI's NAZI linked folks have joined forces with Mafia international! SEE TESTIMONY http://www.familyrightsassociation.com
http://www.txcfr.org/
http://www.hope4kidz.com
http://www.liftingtheveil.org/falsification.htm
childGestapo.com
http://www.fightcps.com
http://www.fcr4kids.org/newsletters/September_October%202004%20FCR%20Newsletter.pdf
http://www.familyrightsassociation.com/users/media/expose/expose4.pdf
Hitler used Special Courts, you will find they were called Peoples Courts, I present to you the CPS Special Courts, FAMILY COURTS, cases are funneled through many counties to one selected county, with certain judges getting cases, SAME AS HITLER RIGGED IT! THEY WERE TRIBUNALS, The protective orders were punishment. You will find that Hitler used T4 program to kill the adults, and drugs to kill children. You will find the CPS REAL REPORTS of deaths has Child deaths under NATURAL CAUSES/MEDICAL! LEARN THE SYSTEM! They had a big problem in Tennesse too, Federal lawsuit, against the State, the Psychologist/Social workers linked to this. They have alot of RACIST IN SOUTH, its against the minorities/poor/disabled etc. You will find the T4 program by Hitler was named after the location on a MAP. The TMAP program, drug program is out of Austin and they ran around country and lobbied 13 states on it. The state guy took $1 million and the money is still missing and he is uncharged. The FAKE DEATH REPORTS ARE WAY OFF BY Thousands of percentage points while DHS shows FAKE reports of deaths in State care going down the spiked up like CRAZY after the life insurance legislation. The Keye tv investigation tells how they kill the kids using drugs not recommended by FDA not recommended for adults, they poison them and make it look medical .....you're psychologist crones are involved int the cover up. The Medical examiner falsified 2000 cases, he was hired because he did good job falsifying in another state, they move them accross state lines. READ AND LEARN THE SCAM! http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/judi_chaseII.htm
It's the fear-society dynamic described by former Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky:
Fear societies are inevitably composed of three separate groups: True believers, dissidents and doublethinkers. True believers are those who believe in the ideology of the regime. Dissidents are those who disagree with that ideology and are prepared to say so openly. Doublethinkers are those who disagree with the ideology but who are scared to openly confront the regime.
Fear societies, heavy and lite
Google "National Organized Crime Operating in Child Protection System" It is by Roger Brown the Sociologist.
Also http://www.sierratimes.com/02/10/18/ednm101802.htm
*Good article and it explains why it is done, also the Ex FBI testified kids were being flown overseas from CPS care from Colorado, to NYC to Europe to be used for Brothels to begin work. This was part of the testimony that Tom DeLay thwarthed with the Lutheran Social Services guy, didn't DeLay take trips to Russia too. The parents over there been complaining their children are being child trafficked too, isn't their economy mostly being run by mafia now, they caught the two pedophile Russian Orthodox priest in Texas finally, they were money laundering too. Big surprise. Why did Tom DeLay pass the legislation to move foster children accross State lines after the evidence clearly stated a problem with Child Trafficking foster children, CPS/Foster care accountability. Who owns the foster homes in the Fort Bend area, they are managed by Lutheran Social Services. I guess public will eventually figure out scam someday!
"I am a right-leaning libertarian."
I have always thought you were more conservative than Glenn. I consider myself a libertarian-leaning Republican.
It is interesting how attacks are usually from liberals against conservatives; however, conservatives are proud of who they are and liberals try to hide it.
Hi Helen,
The fact of the matter is that today's majority neocon Republicans are just as responsible for destroying America as the socialist Democrats. While each party seems to disagree on most social and moral issues, the dirty little secret is that the majority in both parties are now in complete agreement on the five big issues that someday will transform the U.S. into a bankrupt police state living under U.N. rule. Those five issues are globalism, open borders and the North American Union, big government, environmentalism and multiculturalism.
As far as both parties are concerned, the real end-game is global government and an end to national sovereignty. In this scenario, issues like gun control and abortion rights are just window dressing designed to make us think we have a choice when, in reality, both wings of the Demopublican Party are hell bent on leading us into global communism under U.N. control.
If you're true libertarian then you should drop the "R" label like a hot potato. I trust that you'll be voting for Ron Paul in the primaries?
Time is running out for American liberty. If we don't wise up and reject the neocons for being the liberal fascists turncoats that they actually are than we will both live to see the day that America becomes just another banana republic who's constitution and bill of rights was completely overwritten by international law.
Also, Fox News is quite insidious because it subtly makes liberalism, globalism and fear mongering seem acceptable to otherwise conservative people. In this way, our best and brightest have been hopelessly corrupted. It's gotten that bad.........
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
173liveshow視訊美女173liveshow視訊美女視訊聊天室v6 0080視訊聊天室080視訊聊天室0401 影音視訊聊天室0401 影音視訊聊天室168 視訊聊天室視訊聊天室lover99168 視訊聊天室uthome 視訊聊天室uthome 視訊聊天室546 視訊聊天室546 視訊聊天室免費視訊聊天室免費視訊聊天室club 意難忘視訊交友club 意難忘視訊交友免費 msn 視訊交友 0982視訊聊天室免費 msn 視訊交友 0982
Post a Comment
<< Home