And they call Obama anti-American?

1. 76

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   se·di·tion   [si-dish-uhn]  Show IPA
   –noun
   1.
   incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.
   2.
   any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.
   
   Sara Robinson:
   
   "They're telling us that it's time to openly confront the fact that conservatives have spent the past 40 years systematically delegitimizing the very idea of constitutional democracy in America. When they're in power, they mismanage it and defund it. When they're out of power, they refuse to participate in running the country at all -- indeed, they throw all their energy into thwarting the democratic process any way they can. When they need to win an election, they use violent, polarizing, eliminationist language against their opponents to motivate their base. This is sedition in slow motion, a gradual corrosive undermining of the government's authority and capacity to run the country. And it's been at the core of their politics going all the way back to Goldwater.
   
   This long assault has gone into overdrive since Obama's inauguration... We've reached the point where you can't go a week without hearing some prominent right wing leader calling for outright sedition -- an immediate and defiant populist uprising against some legitimate form of government authority.
   
   Moderates and liberals are responding to this rising threat with feckless calls for "a return to civility," as if all that's needed to put things right again is a stern talking-to from Miss Manners. Though that couldn't hurt, the sad fact is that we're well past the point where it's just a matter of conservatives behaving like tantrum-throwing spoiled brats (which they are). When a mob is surrounding your house with torches and telling you they intend to burn it down, "civility" really isn't the issue any more."

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Dan Smithposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Wait, didn't the Democrats condemn everything Bush did?
      
      I'm not defending the republicans (or Bush), but to say that the republicans are evil and the democrats take the high road is ridiculous.  Both sides use the exact same tactics.  The both have no interests other than self-serving interests.
      
      When you praise one party and trash the other, you are playing their game and help perpetuate the problem.

      replyreport
      1. 64

         Ivorwenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Exactly.

         replyreport
2. 76

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   ReealOne
   
   Now we ALL have an obligation to call out the cretins, look them straight on in the snake eyes, and call 'em LIARS AND HYPOCRITES!! It's way past time to park this so called "high road" on the fence, get down in the trenches and fight for change with our Pres. Obama. It's been a really reallly really long time since we've had a POTUS to actually work FOR the people in this country, instead of AGAINST us.

   replyreport
   1. 75

      Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Lock em all up.  How dare someone think they have the right to criticize their govt or their president.  Especially a president that descended from heaven.  A president who was given a complete and total mandate to participate and regulate our lives
      
      These people think they can protest a president and an administration that rules from such a lofty height of ethical ambitions.
      
      
      Lock em up I say!
      
      Sterilize
      
      Euthanize
      
      Whatever it takes to get this country back on its feet.  The time is now to quell dissent and eliminate the opposition to progress.
      
      Our next step should be a global eradication of miscreants and undesirables.  We do not need them.
      
      Off with their heads!!

      replyreport
      1. 73

         Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         "How dare someone think they have the right to criticize their govt or their president. " :rolleyes:x10^23rd.
         
         There's a difference between "criticizing the president" and "calling for armed resistance to federal law." And the difference is pretty darn big.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            The reality is - these people are not victims.  There's huge gun-toting protests in defense of  the right to keep and bear arms.. Wild rhetoric and not ONE proposed law by the federal govenment they can point at limiting the 2nd amendment. And yet these people are convinced they are under attack.....

            replyreport
         2. 75

            Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Tell it to the judge.  Seditionist!
            
            Not that you deserve the right to even see a judge.
            
            Habeus Corpus has outrun its usefullness.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Sedition would apply to the teabaggers arguing for secession.
               
               Sedition would apply to those opposed to the democracy of the United States.
               
               Sedition does NOT apply to criticizing the government or officials of the USA,  but the speaker undermines his credability when those complains are not rational and not supported by fact.

               replyreport
               1. 75

                  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Are you a teabagger?  I know you are an enabler for justifying the criticism of our most intelligent leader.  It is time for a change in this country.  How can our most gracious President lead us to the promised land if you allow simple miscreants to blaspheme his name.  This has to change NOW.  Factsdshmactsd the ends justifies the means.  It does not matter how many people we need to rampage over the goal is in sight and we are going to reach for it.  So either fall in line get out of the way.

                  replyreport
3. 76

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   Bill Moyers and Michael Winship
   The Tea Party Crowd Needs to Wake Up to Who the Real Villains Are
   
   April 16, 2010     
   
   "With all due respect, we can only wish those Tea Party activists who gathered in Washington and other cities this week weren't so single-minded about just who's responsible for all their troubles, real and imagined. They're up in arms, so to speak, against Big Government, especially the Obama administration.
   
   If they thought this through, they'd be joining forces with other grassroots Americans who in the coming weeks will be demonstrating in Washington and other cities against High Finance, taking on Wall Street and the country's biggest banks.
   
   The original Tea Party, remember, wasn't directed just against the British redcoats. Colonial patriots also took aim at the East India Company. That was the joint-stock enterprise originally chartered by the first Queen Elizabeth. Over the years, the government granted them special rights and privileges, which the owners turned into a monopoly over trade, including tea.
   
   Which brings us to what the Tea Party people should have been complaining about this week. The banking industry and corporate America are fighting against proposed financial reform with all the money and influence at their disposal, attempting to preserve a system that would enable them to ransack the country once again.
   
   The GOP's SWAT team -- also known as the United States Chamber of Commerce -- has already spent three million dollars to try to kill or cripple a key part of reform -- the proposed new Consumer Financial Protection Agency. With the Chamber as their front, corporations have bankrolled ads that make it seem like the Red Army is at our doorsteps."
   
   
   Dems are in bed with them too---Big Time! But now's the time to DO something. Or forever hold our peace. Errr, it's the Obama adminstration trying to do this, even though Emmanuel was the biggest recepient of Wall Street funds!
   
   Isn't this something we can all agree on???
   
   there, I'm done!--have a good Sunday everybody

   replyreport
   1. 65

      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      "Isn't this something we can all agree on???"
      
      Yep.

      replyreport
4. 76

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   All this bashing on gvt.--just a smoke-screen to cover for the real criminals?
   
   Seriously...the banks took bail-out money and spent it on bonuses!! Who's fault is that?
   They've been ripping people off for decades...and people scream "it's the gvt."?
   Out-sourcing, off-shoring,fee's, fines....it's business doing that!
   Gvt. is complicit-yes! by giving them favors and looking the other way...But why are banks and business being let off the hook by people?
   
   All that money spent to propagandize is working..and it's only going to get worse after the Supreme Court ruling.
   It's like fighting a behemoth of money, media, and ideologues who have no clue what they are saying! No offense, but....gvt. is taking over?? That is ridiculous. Look who really has all the power here.
   Gvt. is small potatoes trying to reign the behemoth in.
   
   Strange times we're living in. Up really is down and vice-a-versa.

   replyreport
   1. 75

      Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      This is why industry needs to be taken out of private control.  All industry needs to be nationalized.  Who knows better how to run industries then the government.  It will be OK even mandatory that citizens invest in the industries but control must be left up to the government.
      
      This will solve the unemployment problem as well.  You will just show up for your government appointed job.  After work you can relax in your government owned home watching government controlled PROGRAMMING on your television.
      
      
      Oh Utopia you call for me so.

      replyreport
5. 0

   Poppa Bluesposted 14 years ago

   If sedition is free speech against the government, the left would have all been placed in front of a firing squad for treason a long time ago!  Free speech, and free press are the very basis of our democracy. We not only have a right to speak out we have a duty!
   
   How timely this piece of propaganda  by the socialist Bill Moyers comes out to push Obama's financial "reform" as if anything this corrupt socialist government does is "reform". Obama's financial reform bill is just like his health care plan, it doesn't attack the REAL problems that led toward financial ruin, Fanny and Freddie, and the Community Reinvestment Act, and it creates a permanent government funded slush fund for bail outs, yeah that's "reform".
   
   I agree we need to separate money interests from politicians and the only way to do that is to apply term limits to all government offices. If it's good enough for the President, it's good enough for everyone else.

   replyreport
6. 89

   Will Apseposted 14 years ago

   Too many people forget that the political process is the only way they will  ever have of influencing the direction that their country takes.
   
   Undermining the political process is always an attack on democracy.

   replyreport
   1. 75

      Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      Like "the People" know what the best direction for the country to take is  HaHa.  Maybe if you wanted to know what Kate Gosselin wore on Dancing with the stars you could get an educated response.
      
      To let the people make decisions on government is a scary thing.
      Most people do not even know how our fine Democracy works.  They will find out, when 51 percent of us vote to eliminate the other 49 percent. Then they will understand fully!

      replyreport
      1. 51

         mshfr1posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         "Most people do not even know how our fine Democracy works." 
         
         We do not live in a democracy we live in a democratic republic... there is a difference.

         replyreport
         1. 75

            Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I know next you will mention your constytootion.  Decrepit piece of paper.

            replyreport
         2. 61

            Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Please - educate us..If the United States is not a democracy, is there a democracy anywhere in the world? The only  'not a democracy' argument requires a definition so narrow no country that has EVER existed can meet.

            replyreport
   2. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Not when we have an unpatriotic man in the White House seat and self-serving people in the Congress, it isn't.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         'unpatriotic' is a matter of opinion  I beg to differ. As for self serving people in Congress, are you speaking of Mitch McConnell who works for Wall Street??

         replyreport
         1. 62

            Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Plus, he's a Kentuckian!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               You say that like it's a bad thing. 
               
               I'll hav ye know that us Kintuckyins is nice peeple.  Who else wud wave at perfict stranjers when ye just walk down de street?
               

               replyreport
               1. 62

                  Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  They do fry chickens real good.

                  replyreport
      2. 73

         Jeff Berndtposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         So, Brenda, how exactly would a P.A.T.R.I.O.T. A.C.T.?
         
         (And before anyone points it out, I know that Obama hasn't done much to repeal the bad parts of the PATRIOT ACT. It's one of the things I regularly write to my elected officials about.)

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            One can tell a lot about patriotism by telling how a patriot DOESN'T act.   A patriot certainly doesn't try to change the fundamental basis of America!
            
            And as far as the Patriot Act,  I can't imagine any reason Obama would want to change any part of it.  Because it, like the first bailout, is, to him, just another excuse to use the good parts of the Act to increase his own hold over each citizen.   Wait....except he might want to change the immigration rules of course.  He does, after all, want to re-populate America with foreigners so people like me (ya know, parents/grandparents) won't have any influence on the "new-generation", smarter, more "tolerant/diverse" citizens.

            replyreport
            1. 65

               Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               "A patriot certainly doesn't try to change the fundamental basis of America!"
               
               Brenda, what does that mean? What, in your opinion, is President Obama doing to change the fundamental basis of America?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Socialist agenda.
                  Anti-Christian agenda.
                  Anti-sanctity-of-traditional marriage agenda.
                  Catering to the "rights" of terrorists agenda.
                  Ignoring of conservative protests.
                  Downplaying the National Day of Prayer,  until the time comes when he can once again make himself seem like the "savior" by upholding the Day of Prayer (but including Islam in it of course.)
                  
                  To name just part of it.
                  
                  Haven't you been listening and watching this man?
                  
                  I'm a total peon who only watched CNN and Fox for a year now,  and even I can listen when a man outright SAYS he's gonna fundamentally change America.

                  replyreport
                  1. 58

                     Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     That is what he promised isn't it? I mean - the majority elected him - so you have to just suck up the changes that the majority of the country wants. N'est pas?
                     
                     That is democratic isn't it?
                     
                     Say, Brenda - were you wanting to make divorce illegal again?
                     
                     As it should be if you want to follow the Word of God.
                     
                     So - just to recap - you are happy with changing the law to allow you to be an adulteress, but not happy allowing Muslims the freedom to practice their religion in schools or gay people to marry?
                     
                     Did I get that right?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Well he wasn't specific about his promises, and no democracy isn't ignoring 49% of the country to please 51%, at least that's not how it works in America, unless you're an Indian on a reservation.

                        replyreport
                        1. 85

                           livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           What does this mean?

                           replyreport
                  2. 65

                     Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Obama is trying to make some big changes, but not any of the ones on your list.

                     replyreport
            2. 60

               William R. Wilsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               
               
               Are you scared of people who look different from you Brenda?  Is that what this is all about?

               replyreport
7. 0

   sneakorocksolidposted 14 years ago

   Both sides of the table are culpable! That said I remember the call for Bush's head when we entered Iraq! That was free speech also! Free speech is the abilty to disagree without fear of reprisals. Why didn't we call for Mirthas head when he was behaving in a traitorus manner and where was the left when Code Pink was harassing that Marine recruiting office or Patty Sheehan was attacking Bush and taking her protest on the road. Lets not for get how the gay community responded to Prop 8 in California, vadalism is always the answer! Where was the outrage then?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      So true.
      Like the current Administration, the Left is held to no accountability at all.

      replyreport
8. 76

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   No accountability? That's bull!
   If Obama blows his nose, you ask how many commie pinko fags helped him.
   And where were the guns at el Bushbo's rallies? No where to be found.
   You couldn't even wear a t-shirt he didn't like.
   No one in all those 8 years ever called for armed insurrection take-over by force and killing fellow Americans cause they lost an election. Oh Boo Hoo...grow up!
   
   Your party is old and out-dated. This is a new time.
   These are young people who already will go broke paying for your care....leave them alone!
   Let them run this country for a change....you've had your turn. And managed to mangle it up pretty well too.
   
   
   Left it better for your kids than you had it? Bwahahaha.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You mimic Obama's views quite well, but he speaks in a much more stilted, robotic manner.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Hysterical.
         
         

         replyreport
9. 0

   Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

   I don't understand why people want to analyze it to death.
   
   A man plainly states his unpatriotic and immoral intentions publicly,  and yet people continue to say "nah, he didn't mean it that way",  or make other excuses for him.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      No analysis. We just don't agree with you.

      replyreport
   2. 62

      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      We make excuses for you don't we?

      replyreport
10. 76

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    I would like to know when anybody called for insurrection..showed up at Bush rallies with guns, called him anti-American....
    In fact, any time Move On had a rally in Washington, they were patrolled with military-like precision.
    Always a big police force out and about to let the protesters know they were being controlled.
    Anyone with a gun would have been taken out immediately, and people would have said, "good thing".
    Don't forget, Cindy Sheehan was ARRESTED for wearing a t-shirt to a Bush speech.
    
    You can't see a difference in how this is going?
    
    It's one thing to criticize a president, but to come out and say....MANY of them....PUBLIC officials, that Obama wants to destroy America?
    
    This is not the same AT All!
    This is way off base and way out of line.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       A recent poll shows that 52% of Americans believe Obama is moving America closer to socialism. This isn't a poll in some right wing extremist newspaper it's a NYT/CBS poll!
       
       http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/64245
       
       So when people say Obama wants to destroy America, what they mean is he intends to transform our country into a European style socialist democracy, which is what I believe he means when he says he wants to "fundamentally transform" America. I think his vision is supported by the legislation he has enacted and the agenda he is pursuing. So I don't think that notion that he wants to destroy our country is "over the line" though it may be a bit of hyperbole.

       replyreport
11. 76

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    hmmm, transform....good, positive, uplifting.
    destroy....bad, bad, bad.
    
    yeah--I see the connection. NOT.
    
    Deliberate demonizing. Remember they want to destroy Obama....that is their goal.
    You have strayed off the mark my friend. You forgot their ultimate aim, as blustered out by their biggest mouth: I WANT HIM TO FAIL.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Transform isn't necessarily a good thing, and destroy isn't necessarily a bad thing. One can destroy child pornography and most would consider that a good thing, and once can transform a child into a sex slave and most would consider that bad, so you have to look at things in context.
       
       So when Rush said he wanted Obama to fail, he was talking about Obama's transformation of America into a socialist country and I think at least half of Americans would agree with Rush. Democrats have a kinder and gentler view of socialism and don't seem to mind sacrificing other peoples' freedom for entitlements paid for with other people's' money. Many of us view that as bad...bad...bad!

       replyreport
       1. 62

          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          And those of you who think that way will gladly return your Social Security checks, not allow medicare to pay your hospital bills, put out your own fires, and build your own roads, leaving the Socialist highways to those who understand the basics of living in a civilized society as opposed to a Darwinian anarchy.

          replyreport
          1. 0

             Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Ah yes always take it to the extreme. Actually I'd be happy to take MY money back from social security plus a nominal amount of interest, say equal to the average of a savings bond over the last ten years, and they can end the program. They can also end medicare and medicaid for all I care and give me back my money on those too. We have a volunteer fire department here, it's paid for with property taxes and I don't have a problem with that. We also pay taxes for road maintenance and I don't have a problem with that either, except for the corruption, and bribes for securing contracts. I would like to see the government divorce it self from education since it does a terrible job of it at a ridiculous cost. I'd also like to see the government pass a law that prevents cops and other government workers from being forced into a union. Unions are very bad for tax payers.
             
             See, I'm not against government, I'm just against government doing things that are better done by private industry. Given a choice though between communism and anarchy, I'll take anarchy.

             replyreport
             1. 62

                Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                YOU calling anyone else an extremist?
                
                

                replyreport
                1. 0

                   Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   Excuse me? Where did I call anyone an extremist?

                   replyreport
12. 76

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    Yes, we will be waiting for all of you to return the money from the big bad guvmint.
    That includes all the mouth-pieces.... especially them.
    They have made millions on the public air-waves...socialists if ever there were some. Public property used for private gain. tsk tsk
    It also includes all the seniors in my moms building who harangue about "socialized medicine"....
    Stop using it then!!!!
    
    or, as the old saying goes:
    
    Practice what you preach.

    replyreport
13. 60

    Padrinoposted 14 years ago

    I think its uniquely American to want to overthrow a tyrannical government.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Yeah - The French would never think of something so radical......
       

       replyreport
       1. 87

          rebekahELLEposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          they just go on strike.

          replyreport
14. 60

    mcrowposted 14 years ago

    I'm not sure who peopel are refering to here but I've not heard Hannity,Rush,Beck or Levin ask or tell people to commit violence or to suggest that it's OK to.
    
    In fact, Beck often says that people should be peaceful in their fight against Obama's policies.
    
    It' funny how the liberals pick out 1 or 2 people out of millions and point them as an example of the group. I've never met a Tea Party member who talked about anything like you suggest. However, I do remember the RNC convention being here in the Minneapolis area and the Liberals smashing windows and starting fires in the street and one group made human waste bombs they planned to throw at police & convention goers.
    
    Do I think that's what most liberals are for? NO. So why do you guys always label 1 or 2 people in a crowd as reprisentative of the whole?

    replyreport
    1. 60

       William R. Wilsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Just one example, Sean Hannity calls Ted Nugent a "friend and frequent guest" after showing footage of Nugent holding up a gun onstage and saying "Obama suck on my machine gun."
       
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYmFAwhmqaU

       replyreport
15. 60

    Padrinoposted 14 years ago

    The French revolution occurred after the American revolution, so the French took a unique idea and copied it.

    replyreport
16. 76

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    Following Fox's violent rhetoric, mother blames network for son's alleged Pelosi threats
    April 07, 2010 10:53 pm ET
    
    Beck stated: "When do we ever run those who are bankrupting our country and literally stealing our children's future out of town? Grab a torch." [Glenn Beck, 1/6/10]
    
    Fox News contributor Dick Morris asserted that because President Obama's policies are "internationalist ... [t]hose crazies in Montana who say, 'We're going to kill ATF agents because the U.N.'s going to take over' -- well, they're beginning to have a case." [Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, 3/31/09]
    
    Beck aired a graphic portraying Obama and Democrats as vampires and said, "The government is full of vampires, and they are trying to suck the lifeblood out of the economy." Beck then suggested "driv[ing] a stake through the heart of the bloodsuckers." [Glenn Beck, 3/30/09]
    
    Beck: "To the day I die, I am going to be a progressive hunter." Telling his listeners that they "are going to learn so much on Friday," Beck compared himself to "Israeli Nazi hunters" and commented, "I'm going to find these big progressives and, to the day I die, I'm going to be a progressive hunter."
    
    By the way, I put poison in your -- no, I -- I look forward to all the policy discussions that we're supposed to have -- you know, on health care, energy reform, and the economy. [Glenn Beck 8/6/09]
    
    Conservative media frequently accuse progressives of "raping" Americans
    
    Limbaugh invokes rape to describe Obama's attitude toward business
    
    Limbaugh: Obama is "raping" the banks
    
    Palin's remarks about Obama's so-called anti-American policies and re-Load and ....what? What do you do after you re-load???
    
    *****
    Should I go on....cause I could. It goes on and on and on. Day after day after day. Night after night after night.
    
    They are culpable for any violence. They are egging it on, and enjoying it.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       mcrowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Very, very nice framing you do there, not to mention the situational ingorance of metaphors.
       
       Obviously, they are not being literal and often not even serious when they say these things but the snippets make it look like they are.

       replyreport
       1. 76

          lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Do you listen to any of them? I can't, it makes me sick. Just listen to them and then see what you think. They ARE being literal. They want blood on the streets if they can't get their way.
          
          They serve their corporate masters very well.
          google Palin and see where all her sarahpac money went...
          Corporate shills doing the bidding of Robber Barons. IMO
          
          Because IF they were on the level, they would have been complaining a long time ago, and they would have approved of the Bush war protesters. And they would never call a president anti-American.
          Just what do you think they hope to gain from that?

          replyreport
          1. 60

             mcrowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Chris, I listen to them everyday. No, they are not being literal.
             
             For instance the who "rape" thing. Do they mean liberals are going around and pulling women out of people's homes and literal raping them? You have to be kidding if you really think that's what they mean.
             
             In many people's opinion liberals are taking liberties and taxes in an act of plundering and abuse which by definition is alternate definition of the term. They are forcing people to buy insurance, forcing people to pay the way for others...ect.  Wether you agree or not that , that is what is happening is up for debate but that's how many conservative feel about the situation.
             
             Granted, they use the term "rape" because they know the liberals will be all over it and it's great buzz for the show, but the defition is clearly the alternate one, not the primary one.

             replyreport
             1. 76

                lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Rape is a violent term. That's why they use it. They want to incite violence.Pretending to pour gasoline down someones throat is a violent image. re-load is a gun term. poison is death. drive a stake throught their heart is a double whammy---demonizes AND adds the touch of violence.
                
                btw---as someon who has been raped...I resent that big bloviator using that term to describe the president.
                And I also think he would never use it to descibe a white man. there's another double-wammy for you.
                Same as Kerry Healy did here when she ran for governor....implied that the black man running--Deval Patrick, might rape you in the dark.
                
                they are so disgustingly superior and snobbish stuck up and low-down-dirty-tactics....how you can like them is really really hard for me to understand.

                replyreport
                1. 60

                   mcrowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   Oh...I get it, we're back to the "conservactives are racist" arguement again. When all else fails cry racism.
                   
                   I don't see how anyone can have any shred of self respect or be independant minded and be liberal, so we're in the same boat, I think.

                   replyreport
17. 85

    livelongerposted 14 years ago

    In a democracy, there is no need for revolution or overthrow. Those who advocate it when there is a democratic process that works fine would probably be more comfortable in Cuba than in the United States.
    
    Don't think you're being represented? You were outvoted at the ballot box. Better luck next time.

    replyreport
    1. 62

       Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       THE US IS NOT A DEMOCRACY!!!!!
       
       Just thought I'd get that in before the trolls "educate" us.

       replyreport
       1. 85

          livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Heh. I'll clarify: a "representative democracy."

          replyreport
          1. 62

             Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Yeah but you SAID Democracy!  Typical Socialist backtracking.  Why don't you move to Cuba and worship Chavez?
             
             Rant Rant Rant
             
             Spew Spew Spew
             
             See?  We don't even need those guys.  We can get talking points from the same sources they do.
             
             

             replyreport
             1. 85

                livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                True. I'm doing the usual coverup for a clearly anti-American, pro-AlQaeda Kenyan president, who has subscribed to the Gay Agenda.
                
                Assorted irrelevant scripture, assorted irrelevant scripture.

                replyreport
                1. 62

                   Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   Much to the embarrasment of the State's populace, Arizona just passed a law aimed at Obama that requires presidential candidates to provide documentation of citizenship.  As one dissenting State representative put it: "laws like this are rapidly making Arizona the laughing stock of the nation".

                   replyreport
                   1. 61

                      Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      Is there a Constitutional  procedure where we ask them to secede?

                      replyreport
18. 76

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    What don't you get??? Gun references....demanding to show up at rallies strapping guns...."I want our side armed and dangerous" ....Re-load....what don't you get?
    Who needs to be shot before you understand what these people are all about?
    Now Murdoch wants to retreat?
    Too late. You can't leave the scene of a crime. You are guilty!

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Padrinoposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Question How many law abiding citizens have killed someone with a firearm? Police Officers not included.
       
       How many shootings by mass murderers have occurred at a Gunshow?

       replyreport
       1. 62

          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          You are correct.  Mass murderers manufacture their own guns.

          replyreport
          1. 62

             Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Nah, they use muffins

             replyreport
    2. 59

       JWestCattleposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       At this point, it is very clear and easy "to get" your motives.  I'm surprised anyone bothers to address anything you say.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          LegendaryHeroposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Amen!

          replyreport
       2. 61

          Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          You just did.

          replyreport
          1. 0

             LegendaryHeroposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             So what?

             replyreport
          2. 59

             JWestCattleposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Yes, I did, silly me, pointing out incessant rantings not worthy of response, by giving a response, silly silly me.....are we in primary school mode?

             replyreport
             1. 62

                Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Elementary

                replyreport
                1. 59

                   JWestCattleposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   

                   replyreport
19. 76

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    Mass murderes? How about just someone mad enough that Obama wants to take away his freedoms and kill his gramma?
    How about someone who's mad that Obama hates America and is really a muslim terrorist?
    You think all this ugly rhetoric is harmless don't you?
    You don't consider that people believe it. That guns are readily available and easy to get.
    Reagan was shot at, Kennedy killed, what is it you're not getting about this dangerous game the tea-bag leaders are playing?

    replyreport