[tuckrdout]

I know this is a few weeks old. I just ran across it. But, it deserves an answer. Would love for you all to write this fellow and give him a real education! email: crisispapers@aol.com

[freedomcrusader]

Such mutual incivility is more than acutely unpleasant, it strikes at dates to the foundation of our republic.

[MJY1288]

Typical liberal, he starts off trying to assure himself a civil reply by pointing out the names used by the extreme left and right and then goes off on a factually inaccurate tirade that ranks with the worst of the worst. Sorry Mr. Liberal, That Dog wont hunt

[CyberCowboy777]

I hate condescending jerks.

He basically states that he has a well-rounded and experienced life view and his conservative friend has a selfish limited view.

He makes assumptions that he does not backup with facts. (Cheney has do what exactly that we need to hold him responsible for?)

And he neglects to mention that it is the Liberal left that has initiated the "I hate Bush" campaign.

BTW - For a guy that loves the founding documents he was sure to ignore his hate for the 2nd.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

...At no time in my memory, or yours, I suspect, has the rivalry between the two major parties been more mean-spirited and poisonous...

WRONG!

It is almost completely one sided. The screeching howler monkees of the left curse and bark like the psychopathic monsters that they are and the wimpy spinless garbage eating pubs lick their feet.

Where the hell is Preston Brooks when you need him?

[dighton]

These people are full of it.

Look at the second item linked on this page of the crisis papers. So much for "civility."

[Nateman]

At no time in my memory, or yours, I suspect, has the rivalry between the two major parties been more mean-spirited and poisonous.

He must of been alseep during the Clinton years. Too many wrongs after this first one to take anything he says seriously.

[wizardoz]

Dear Ernest:

Everytime your type gets into a position of power, the mass graves start to appear. You bet your ass I hate your guts. I wish you'd burst into flames.

Sincerely, Wiz

[Skooz]

Well, I guess I can throw this out now:

[Billthedrill]

It's basically a pretty cover on a tired, soiled, dogeared copy of the same old misrepresentations and accusations. I note that the author seems to regard "progressive" as respectful of existing institutions. It isn't.

I've seen this tack on the part of the manipulators on the left so many times it's creaking at the knees by now. It's simply this - "you're not living up to your standards, and hence you're a hypocrite. I'll cite those standards long enough to support the accusation but I have no intention of living up to them myself." This line has been pretty hot stuff on campus for the last, oh, forty years or so, but it's a little long in the tooth for the open market.

[austingirl]

Where do you start with something this whacked? He mentions Karl Rove and Dick Cheney are not being responsible and accountable - but for what? He wants his investment portfolio from the Clintoon administration - the economy built on corporate fraud and that was a house of cards destined to collapse just in time for the next administration - the Clintoon economy stole from the future and we have paid for it with three years of retrenching in the markets.

I am not surprised the author is in academia and supported by tax dollars - what a maroon!

[My2Cents]

At no time in my memory, or yours, I suspect, has the rivalry between the two major parties been more mean-spirited and poisonous.

Who's fault is that? Which recent Democratic Administration invented the concept of "politics of personal destruction," and simply wasn't satisfied to beat an opponent at the polls, but had to rip their fingernails out in the process?

The entire Democratic Party is guilty of "projection" and "transference" -- ascribing to others what they themselves are most guilty of.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

I prefer to call myself a “progressive.”
Too damned bad. That title implies progress, which does not exist under your ideology.

[CyberCowboy777]

With this as a mind set you really have to wonder why we don't win more often.

I blame the Alien Abductions really.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Be honest, now: would you trade your investment portfolio today with the one you had when Bill Clinton left office?

Yes I would but because I bailed at the peak 2 years before Clinton left office. But wait now. When did the E-Commerce Boom bust? When did Worldcom, Enron, etc.. establish and run their book cooking schemes? How can the left continue to say that false jobs created in a false environment that started, grew, and began failing under Clintoon are GWB's fault. Is it just because GWB doesn't rub elbows with the Ed Asners of the world or play the sax like crap, that the left hates him so.

[Always Right]

Can you, as a defender of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, support the Patriot Act, and the fact that under its provisions, at least three of your fellow citizens are today incarcerated without charge, without access to counsel, with no prospect of a trial and release – all this in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth articles of the Bill of Rights?

Obviously confuse between the Patriot Act and those being held at Guantanamo Bay. The Patriot Act mostly makes it easier to obtain search warrents, tap phones, etc for those suspected of terrorism.

[weegee]

I think that it deserves a cut and paste response too (that way all libs who email bomb people with this can get a quick response to make them swallow their pride).

That said, this thread got ZOTted (and pulled) the last time this was posted.

[redbaiter]

As a philosopher, my convictions strayed from religious faith of my childhood. You have remained steadfast in your religious convictions. So, of course, we have different views on the relationship of church and state.

What? Why would one person's being religious and another's being irreligious result in their developing different views on the relationship of religion to the state? How does that follow? My theory: This is pure projection. This is the author telling you that if he were religious he would be ramming his dogma down everybody's throat, and that he suspects everyone who is religious of plotting to do just that. By this point the author is weaving like Ted Kennedy on Chappaquiddick bridge, a few grafs later he sails over the side with all that 'stolen election' malarkey.

What a condescending jerk.

[AZPubbie]

There's so many idiotic things in this screed (and a few intelligent ones). Even so, this inanity stood out:

Can you, as a defender of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, support the Patriot Act, and the fact that under its provisions, at least three of your fellow citizens are today incarcerated without charge, without access to counsel, with no prospect of a trial and release – all this in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth articles of the Bill of Rights?

Setting aside, for the moment, whether it's accurate to say that at least three "citizens" are being held, and whether it makes a difference if the "citizen" was captured in a foreign country in the uniform of an enemy combatant - the Patriot Act has absolutely nothing to do with this. Regardless of whether the administration is correct in asserting this power, it is not a power claimed under the auspices of the Patriot Act, but under the Constitutional Power of the Executive Branch to wage war. If you want to challenge it on constitutional grounds, do so (I may agree with you in part), but I really wish that the civil-libertarian left would please quit raising the bugaboo of the Patriot Act to encompass everything that you don't like. It's tough to take these arguments seriously when their premises are built on nothing but crap.

[Always Right]

Conservatives insist upon responsibility and accountability. Can you then allow exceptions by such well-placed individuals such as Ken Lay, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove?

Ken Lay is not a Republican and donated huge sums to the Clintons. Cheney and Rove are responsible for all their actions, they just don't have to bow down to the liberals in the Senate. Creating crap where there is none.

[MegaSilver]

For this reason, I refuse to describe the ideology and policies of the controlling faction of your party as “conservative.” Far better to describe it as “right-wing” or “radical right.”

He almost got it there.

The real problem with the GOP nowadays is that it sucks up to corporations. Of course, the Democratic leaders do that, too, but they like to make people think they don't.

What we need are not moderates, but just... conservatives. People who won't stand for corrupt leadership. People like Ronald Reagan and Barry Morris Goldwater. The Republican Party still has the moral high horse, but the GOP leaders need to stop acting so wussy.