Friday, February 3, 2012

Memory and Irony

The jobless rate has declined to 8.3% according to the latest reports -- well below the Reagan rate and the lowest in three years after adding about a quarter million Jobs this January alone. That's a quarter of a million more in one month than were added under eight years of Republican flim-flam economics. The markets are booming, but we can be sure to hear nothing but sneer, snark, scoff and panicked pessimism from fact-free America and its electronic Svengali, Fox News.

I'm hesitant to make too much of it or to extrapolate too far, but unlike every Republican I talk to, I am willing to remember the Bush years when the air was full of nonsense about how Democrats were pessimists and Republicans were optimists and bullish on the economy. Of course it would be fun to mock the Fox News survey that gave "proof" that Liberals were trying to damage the vibrant economy with gloomy reports during the Bush years and of course the prophets of doom were quite right although not one of Fox's friends seems to remember, because after all, this is Obama's recession and Bush had nothing to do with it and the predictably dilatory nature of the trailing indicator -- the unemployment rate -- proves that it's all going to hell any time now.

A sense of irony would make fertile fields for all kinds of sardonic humor, since with the economy steadily improving, having already this year added more jobs than were added during the entire Bush administration (unless you want to count all the government jobs created by bloating the size and expense of our government,) they're still pretending the man who inherited this disaster caused it. But if there's any essence at all to American Conservatism, it must involve total blindness to the most glaring irony. They're still insisting that continuing what brought it on would end it quickly if only we'd have elected an empty headed beauty contest runner up and a doddering old man who couldn't remember his address but was sure the crash wasn't actually happening.

And while we're talking about irony, do we care to speculate about how many would have been lost if General Motors had disappeared and how many are working now that GM is again the worlds largest automaker? No, that investment is spending, while the massive expenses of Bush's prescription drug plan written by and for the drug companies increases as the population ages isn't even to be discussed -- and of course people are only getting older because of "that Obama's policies" hard as they are to discern. If I were a Republican you can damn well bet I'd be blind to the irony too as well as the outright dishonesty.

Things are looking at least a bit better of late and at a rate proportional to the improvement, the apocalyptic predictions increase. The Mayan end times, the Rapture, the death of the Dollar and the Zombie Apocalypse hold fewer horrors than are being predicted daily as the people who insist every time they hold the White House, that the government cannot create jobs and should not try, scream themselves hoarse nonetheless about jobs, jobs, jobs, dangling that elusive carrot in front of the desperate.

It's a hell of a thing to remember well, and that's why I'm sure amnesia, like ironic obtuseness is a necessary component of the conservative mind. It's a hell of a thing to be the only one to remember that "debt doesn't matter" was the keystone of Republican economics since Reagan and right up to the disaster of 2007 because tax breaks for the people who put all their windfalls into real estate, hedge funds and offshore accounts in Luxembourg, Liechtenstein and the Caymans would boost the economy so much, the debt would wither away in Marxist style.

Jobs, jobs, jobs and debt, debt debt in the relentless Republican ostinato like drumbeats in some dark jungle night, as though debt did very much matter and matter more than the ability to pay it off -- as though paying Bush's bills and saving the financial structure of our country with a far smaller amount of money than the shill for Goldman Sachs Bush used for a treasury secretary were an invitation to disaster rather than fiscal responsibility -- as though a three trillion dollar war to be payed for by magic; massive bailout packages without accountability and unprecedented spending weren't things the Democrats were howling helplessly about for 8 years.

Increased military spending along with an amazing record of eliminating al Qaeda means Obama is "slashing the military." Allowing increased freedom to carry weapons means he's a "gun grabber." Arresting and deporting more illegal aliens than Bush means he's "pro-illegal." Giving most Americans a tax break means he raised taxes, and although every day I have to listen to some Republican blowhard telling me he hates "Obamas policies" not one has been able to come up with a policy that actually exists -- that glib trope having become nothing more than the password to the club they think every white man belongs to.

No, sure they don't remember nor do they see the irony. Like Janus, they look both forward and back to see the easiest way to slither away from accountability and as and if the economy slowly improves and the spectre of Depression recedes, they'll continue to boom and bellow and snicker and sneer without any memory of how they accused Democrats of "hating America" even though all those dire predictions we made for 8 years came true while none of theirs ever materialized.

32 comments:

  1. To compare what Democrats should be doing, to what Republicans blow about, is holding us back from real reform of the Democratic programs and policies that have made the great middle class.
    Ignore, and stop the negativity towards Republicans. Spend our time in more positive and productive efforts to clean up the government.
    Democrats have a responsibility to make more efficient and responsive to the people, the programs they created over the last almost 100 years.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Steve, I'm not a democrat. If more were of your mindset who knows, maybe our country could find its bearings. Of course a greater degree of cooperation from republicans is needed as well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Everything President Obama does must be passed through the Prism of the Alternate Conservative Reality in order to keep the drones and the rubes voting for a Party Wholly owned by the 1%.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't see why exposing the fraud that's dividing us for conquest prevents us from doing a damned thing. Right now we couldn't get a resolution passed to affirm that the Earth isn't flat and it isn't anyone's fault but the Republicans'.

    I'll stop being negative about evil when hell freezes over and perhaps Democratic self flagellation and self doubt and the perverted urge to be polite and accommodating to the demented, the stupid and the malignant are the reason these bastards have had so much success in getting support.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Capt.,

    Well said. Being polite to (or even ignoring) a pack of cynical, deceitful bastards doesn't produce any results since such people always take kindness for weakness. They lie and distort without conscience or remorse, and what they deserve is to be humiliated in the plainest terms every time they utter the false trash they so often do. No, of course Dems shouldn't confine themselves to denouncing the unreasonableness of the unreasonable, but I think we should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Indeed and after all, if we don't expose the lies and under the table machinations, who will?

    The insanity never ceases and they depend on our ignoring or overlooking it or simply not being able to keep up with the volume. Take Orrin the Hatch telling us that Obama thinks he's Jesus because he quoted from the Bible. Does that kind of turd think he's entitled to any respect? Why would we or should we give it to him? I've scraped more respectable substances off my boots and of course shit just lies there, it isn't trying to take over the government.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So your political strategical plan is to vilify the opposition?
    It's not about being polite. It's about chasing the wrong dog, wasting time, and letting the Democratic party get away with not being responsible for its own ideology. Not to mention the government it has created through its own policies.
    But hey, don't let that revenge, or hate be pried from your motivations, even if it is the same action you blast the Republicans for.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "strategical?"

    Sarah, is that you?

    How you get from telling the truth and rebutting lies to "hate" isn't exactly masterful logic -- in fact it's crude, stupid, inept and very revealing of your neon-lit, chrome plated motivations. If you want to be polite to people who are trying to destroy everything you hold dear and sacred and everything you stand for; if you want to remain demur and non-committal in the face of fascism, economic gang-rape and the death of freedom, that's your business, but righting a wrong is not the same as doing wrong any more than 'strategical' is a word and some things are worth hating.

    I hate evil. I hate tyranny. I hate lies and I hate people who apologize for the people who lie, steal and tyrannize and there you have it in plain English. Those people tend not to be the Democrats you'd like to pin the tail on but do tend to be possessed of a gross lack of intellect which you're unlikely to find here other than for the occasional troll.

    I'm sick of false equivalences and the false people who make them and apparently your motivation is to persuade people to lie down and take it. Is it because you're an enemy of truth and justice yourself or just being ungrammatically partisan -- as well as bullshitical?

    This isn't a place where you can slap together a few talking points in inept English and expect not to be dismissed as an idiot, so if you see an opportunity for missionary work here, let me suggest the egress instead.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Republicans are trying to vilify Obama.
    He is destroying America.
    Democrats are trying to vilify Republicans.
    Same difference. To vilify, is to hate.
    A poor strategy showing a lack of character on both sides.
    I doubt my statements qualify as "talking points." I have never heard them expressed on either side.
    You mention nothing about the Democratic responsibility of making their policies and programs work well, which they are not. Republicans would rather eliminate those policies. As long as Democrats do nothing to reform those policies and programs, that complaint remains valid and popular.
    I am not Sarah. Your paranoia is showing. I have a blog. You get to it by clicking on my name. Your attitude tells me I'm wasting my time here. Good luck with your absolutist thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  10. At the risk of being viewed as "bullshitical" the point (the one I believe needs to be made) is that programs engineered (for the lack of a better word IMO) by democrats, and largely valued by all, could and should be ran more efficiently and effectively, and should be a goal of all fiscally responsible people and legislators.

    As to evil... Capt. is correct. One of the worst evils is that of tyranny, closely followed by DISHONESTY. Well, maybe I got it reversed. Because for tyranny to continue to exist (and thrive)it requires a basic dishonesty.

    Dishonesty and the tendency to tyranny is not unique to any specific ideology or political organization. It really boils down to the use of power, more specifically how power s used. I believe it was Lord Acton who said, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

    ReplyDelete
  11. Good one Steve -- if I say Hitler was a murderous monster, then I'm just as bad and have a lack of character. That's a trenchant analysis for sure.

    Are you joking, or are you a joke? And of course your Gumpish humorlessness is another marker, isn't it. No, I don't think you're Ms. Palin, but your English is about as bad - OK, now you get it? Humorous comparison, doncha know. Or perhaps you think she's smarter than a blue-assed baboon or more honest than a Senator from Utah.

    So if you haven't noticed that the right fringe has been trying to use this "fair and balanced" approach wherein Republicans are blameless since Democrats are "just as bad," then your reading is just as bad as your writing. It's not the "same difference' whatever the hell that means in twitspeak and it's not the same thing in English -- otherwise up would be the same as down and good the same thing as bad and we'd all be criminals for locking up murderers. Sorry, but the attempted theocratic takeover of a secular state is not being furthered or promoted or assisted by Democrats and if I were to dignify your overused line of shit by calling a fallacy of distraction that would be the closest thing to praise I could muster. In fact it's so blisteringly stupid as to defy any precise taxonomy.

    But yes, you're wasting your time and mine. And good luck with convincing anyone that shit tastes like chocolate because if you hate shit -- well then you're a hater and you should eat it anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  12. RN, well yes, sure. Anything could run better and the Democrats are very far from having all the answers and I'm a long way from agreeing with many pet Liberal attitudes, but what Gump was saying is that Democratic imperfection of any size means one can't complain about anything the Republicans do. He's trying to say that if I hate crime, I must be a criminal and therefore we just have to be quiet and hand over our wallets and our freedom to liars and cheats and would-be tyrants.

    It's a worse offense to pass that off as logic.

    The Democrats are not trying to shove a degenerate and hypocritical form of religion up our Constitution - it's the Republicans. There is no equivalence there. There is no equivalence to the Republican plan to have for-profit jails that contribute to judges campaigns, to put social security funds into the stock market for Lehman Brothers to take care of, to censor what we read and see, to tell us who we can marry. I could give a thousand examples.

    Yes, there are Democratic proposals that I think may erode freedom unnecessarily but I see many of them as many orders of magnitude smaller in scope. I mean really -- is forcing us to buy more efficient light bulbs quite the same as forcing small children to work in sweat shops and removing the minimum wage? That's just what Steve is selling and I think it stinks.

    If it's "hateful" to point that out, then we have no democracy and what Steve is advocating seems more like "shut up and take it" which doesn't smell like Democracy to me.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Republicans are trying to vilify Obama."

    TRUE that's what I've been saying

    "He is destroying America."

    FALSE even a tube of vaseline wouldn't let you slip that one in unnoticed, you sly fox

    "Democrats are trying to vilify Republicans.
    Same difference."

    FALSE because justified vilification is not the same as unjustified vilification. Vilification for cause is not the same as slander. Get it Einstein? Facts matter - or at least they do to me. Now about that IQ test. . .99 and a half just won't do, as the song goes.

    "To vilify, is to hate."

    FALSE, one can do so dispassionately and more so when the vilification is empty or knowingly false and only "strategical." Doubly FALSE if you're trying to get from a false conclusion to a further conclusion that it's wrong to tell the truth which of course you are doing, much to my amusement.

    "A poor strategy showing a lack of character on both sides."


    Obviously we should have embraced the Nazis - 'twould have been so lacking in character to vilify them. And of course vilifying someone for killing millions is just the same as vilifying the millions you kill. That's exactly what you said. So no moral judgments can be made and there is no good and bad, so let's be nice and passive.

    Either you're a complete idiot Steve, or you're just a very bad salesman selling a very bad product -- oh, that's right -- there is no good and bad, no better or worse, no right and wrong, no truth or falsehood, no good ideas or bad ideas. That would be absolutist!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Since you don't have the intellect to understand what I said, and add your foul mouthed hate towards me to boot, again good luck with your one world view. Keep that ego head in the sand. And no, your blog isn't important enough for me to pretend I'm writing a professional grade correspondence. Again, your ego is showing.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Capt. - I don't mean to offend you in any way. So I hope you will take my comments in the positive spirit in which I mean them.

    1) Your argument is correct in that it is logically developed and delivered. There is no effective rebuttal.

    2) You sound in this instance precisely as Ayn Rand would argue (develop) a response. At least IMO.

    3) You are indeed a worthy opponent with respect to opposition to social conservatism and backwards leaning ideology.

    Not that you need my affirmation or agreement. I'm merely making what I believe are reasoned observations.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thanks, I guess. Ayn Rand? Really? Aaahhrgh ;-)

    I actually didn't see anything in my post that had anything to do with Steve's comment. I was writing about the Republican propensity to forget last weeks' certainties. The habit of making statements in direct opposition to fact and to make up things from whole cloth. The habit of calling Democrats pessimists when things were truly getting worse and optimists when they are getting better and a whole host of other gambits to hide the facts.

    Somehow this is "hate" speech and "vilification" and I should just forgetaboutit as Tony Soprano would say.

    If he had presented one opposing fact I might not have been so irritated; if he had given one honest explanation of how Obama is destroying the country, as he claims -- but instead he's using gambit 27A from the Republican manual and calling me a "hater" whose arguments can thus be dismissed with prejudice and no rebuttal.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Steve,

    I'm sure you're quite right and I am stupid and I suppose I have a one world view if you say so, whatever that means, and an ego head, which is disturbing to contemplate, but really isn't that "vilification" and doesn't that thus render your points nugatory? Just asking, since that seems to have been your assertion here.

    But making haughty, condescending and completely inapposite comments here might give someone the impression of ego overload and moral absolutism -- just some friendly advice.

    ReplyDelete
  18. oh beware to the troll who ventures upon these shores can you say eviscerated, dude was flummoxed wait no he was poleaxed what a beating thank you captain your particular and thrilling foggy acumen really makes my day yes its going to be a super day Brady and the Pats by a touchdown!

    ReplyDelete
  19. I wonder how long it would take you to bring up "Nazis."
    Seems you are the one using talking points. Nazi seems to be the name wacko liberals use to define Republicans.
    You are foaming at the mouth. Going on and on defending vilification as a worthy tool to define the differences between Republicans and Democrats.
    Anger is stopping you from understanding. Ego cements your misunderstanding.
    Intelligent debate rejects anger as a method of clarity.
    It was you who went down the road of being condescending. You defined yourself well when you said, "I'll stop being negative about evil when hell freezes over"
    Enjoy that approach. I'm sure it will help solve our nations problems.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Steve: “Nazi seems to be the name wacko liberals use to define Republicans.
    You are foaming at the mouth.


    I am late to this discussion and have not fully assimilated the various cross currents of this thread. Nevertheless, I have impressions and responses, starting with the quotation above.

    First, I object to all forms of gratuitous and stereotypic liberal bashing as exemplified in this phrase, “wacko liberals.” Unbeknownst to you, Steve (or maybe you have a convenient, self-serving memory), such rhetoric has engendered violence against liberals in the past, and here are a few examples:

    Democratic Operative's Cat Slaughtered, 'Liberal' Painted On Corpse. A cat belonging to the family of Jake Burris, an Arkansas Democratic Campaign Manager, was found butchered and killed with the word “Liberal” painted on the carcass. Burris and his four children found the cat on their doorstep when they returned home last night. One side of the head had been smashed, an eyeball hanging out of its socket.

    Or this story from several years ago, Motives behind the Unitarian Church shooting, Knoxville. On July 27, 2008, Jim David Adkisson entered a Unitarian Church in Knoxville, Tennessee, brandishing a shotgun. He killed two people and wounded seven others. While searching Adkisson's house, investigators found this book: Liberalism is a Mental Disorder [my bold], by Michael Savage. The motive behind the crime: Hatred of liberals and Democrats.

    Or this story, Gun target stickers found in Missouri Capitol offices of five Democratic State Senators.

    (continued ...)

    ReplyDelete
  21. (continued from above)

    Or this story that made national headlines recently, Allen West To Liberals: Get the Hell Out Of The US.

    Several weeks ago, I posted an anniversary retrospective of the Tucson massacre to honor the dead and the injured. In response to that post, a troll left this comment:

    As soon as Gabby Giffords was shot by a deranged lunatic you fucking idiot progressives started screaming "Sarah Palin Target List." So much for civility. The dead cat story's obviously a hoax --- and you dumbshits went ahead and exploited it for crass political game. God, you freak leftists should just die. Fuck you” [my bold] (Posted by Anonymous to THE SWASH ZONE at 11:07 PM, January 24, 2012).

    As recently as last week, I visited a local Democratic Party office in my town. As I was opened the front door, a passing vehicle stopped and the occupied hurled epithets and "a bird" at me before driving off.

    Steve, then you come along and drop disgusting shit like this:

    Nazi seems to be the name wacko liberals use to define Republicans.

    Let there be no mistake. There is an ugly pattern of rightwing violence that targets liberals and Democrats.  It is born of an undercurrent of rightwing talk radio raised to the level of hate speech. The message is chillingly clear: If you are a liberal or a Democrat, you are demonized as unpatriotic, as an enemy of the state - and therefore undeserving of rights, respect, or protection under law.

    It is the same kind of inflammatory rhetoric used for centuries to scapegoat minority groups for the failings of society - leading to persecution, ethnic cleansing, murder, death camps, and slavery. And, yes, this is FASCISM !!!

    Steve, here is what you need to do:
    1 - Acknowledge these examples of partisan hate speech targeting liberals;
    2 - Condemn this kind of incendiary behavior;
    3 - Refrain from gratuitous liberal bashing yourself;
    3 - And apologize for your comment.

    If you are unable or unwilling to do so, then you will be treated as a fly-by troll and comment assassin and treated accordingly.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Of course I condemn this kind of behavior and speech, from either side. I'm not taking sides, even though that's what you want.
    Since liberals practice the same kind of crap, there is no apology necessary.
    Liberal blogs use Nazi, motherfuckers, etc., etc. to define Republicans. I used no such language to define liberals. Your accusation that I used gratuitous bashing against liberals, is a lie. I merely pointed out that defining Republicans as such, is anger and hate. Again not an accepted manner for intelligent debate. Please show me my gratuitous bashing?
    You guys are on the edge. Hard to believe you are going ape shit defending vilifying your opponents.
    I agree I am in the minority. This is how the majority on both sides describe their opposition. It shows a lack of character and brains.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Steve: “Your accusation that I used gratuitous bashing against liberals, is a lie.

    Then what do you call this: “wacko liberals” ???

    Steve: “You guys are on the edge.

    You did not read or comprehend my above comment or reference any of the above links. I do not appreciate wasting my time when fly-by trolls dismiss my words. Nor do I appreciate being harassed in public by fly-by drivers who hurl hate speech at me. Maybe you need to read my comment again, or learn how to read; notwithstanding the hate email that this forum receives regularly. If you cannot acknowledge and validate our experiences with partisan hate speech, then you don’t belong here.

    Finally, “It shows a lack of character and brains.

    Look in the mirror next time.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Wacko liberals is gratuitous bashing? You are funny and stupid.
    You have no standing when you defend vilifying people. You are practicing hate. Comparing Republicans to Nazis, is wacko. It is a spitting in the eye of those who actually suffered under Hitler.
    Because I disagree with your stand does not mean I cannot read. Again your only reply is hate and name calling. Your childish nature shows whenever you open your pea brain.
    You disagree with what I say so you call me names. Again showing a low level of intelligence and hate.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Steve,
    Your above comment constitutes verbal abuse. You are no longer welcome here, and your comments will no longer be posted. BE GONE.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Well guys, As I figured out long ago, and Romney figured out, civility in the face of attack makes one look like a sissy.

    I never lost a campaign when I used negative messages.

    That being said, this "Steve" character is a phony.

    Is that the new strategy "Steve"? Have the right complain about negativity. Where'd you get your orders from dude?

    ReplyDelete
  27. T101,

    This was the most offensive comment of all from Steve: "It is a spitting in the eye of those who actually suffered under Hitler."

    I lost ancestors in the Holocaust and am especially sensitive of how hate speech is used to incite violence against people. Furthermore, I gave the above troll at least four (4) examples, along with links and citations, of hate and violence targeting liberals. You would think the troll would at least pay me the courtesy of reading the references instead of talking past ... adding his own insults for extra spice. Of course, he is a phony.

    Q.E.D.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Steve - In case you come back and check this comment thread.

    I am a self described fiscal conservative, social libertarian with strong classical liberal influences. I admire certain aspects of Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism. I am also a atheist.

    So how will you categorize me? What is my political identity?

    This a liberal "progressive" site. The description of liberals as "wacko liberals" pigeonholes everyone who is inclined to liberal political thought as stupid or ignorant. It negates the validity of any and all liberal thought process. Or perhaps more accurately stated it negates any thought process, valid or not, that disagrees with your own.

    Steve, A word of caution and friendly advice from a former independent conservative (whatever that means) who knows from experience... This community is one of intelligent and knowledgeable individual, ones who I often disagree with politically but respect for what they offer to the debate to make this nation a better and more prosperous country for all.

    Rather than come here to "teach the community a thing or two" come here first to understand before expecting to be understood, to paraphrase (I believe it was) Steven Covey. Forgive me if my memory has failed me.

    At any rate, growth comes through increasing ones knowledge and understanding, from this process eventually comes wisdom. Wisdom is not easily achieved, it requires patience and A constant striving to improve ONESELF. Labeling those who hold different views as "wacko" anything in fact limits and stunts ones own growth.

    Much more can I say. But this would be a good start for you to contemplate. That and the comments by others whom you offended.

    As I said, I agree with the contributors here perhaps 40 - 50% of the time. At one time it was maybe .001%. Then I took the blinders off and decided to consider substance rather than ideology. I'll leave the rest to you...

    ReplyDelete
  29. Here's the rub; the jobless drops to 8.3% and Boehner proclaims Obama has failed because it is not UNDER 8%. Jobs are coming back to America and in my state of North Carolina we are seeing some very promising growth in several different sectors but the GOP candidates ignore all this and just continue on with their tired old rhetoric of Obama fails.
    To simply sit quietly and allow such blatant lies to be spewed into the masses without calling bullshit would be a disservice to my fellow citizens and to my country. So, no I don't see any up side to ignoring the GOP and allowing them to continue to stir their groupies into a destructive slathering mob. EVERYTHING we hold deasr in this country depends on us standing up for truth.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Rocky,

    That is entirely true -- and if the unemployment rate were to drop to under 7% (though I guess that's unlikely before the election), they would shriek that that number is outrageous and all Obama's "fault." ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING they say is about getting themselves installed in the majority, and anyone who believes a word of it was born yesterday and went to bed early.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I'm very late to the discussion, but in support of our Captain, I thought this said it clearly and succinctly.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Steve, were he the type prone to self examination, or even a small modicum of honesty, would acknowledge that the Republicans were not being compared with Nazis, but rather that my mentioning them as an extreme example of evil was a way to demonstrate the idea that there are things so strongly to be opposed by all good people that the very noxious gambit of dismissing opposition by calling righteousness wrong is not only without merit, not only reprehensible, but offering such a fatuous fallacy as a logical position puts one in support of evil.

    There is humor here, since of course Steve lapses into paroxysms of frustrated, angry ad hominem which would by his own assertion render his entire argument worthless -- as it in fact has been all along.

    And thanks RN.

    Truth,

    As I pointed out, the Right complained LOUDLY about the negativity of the Economists and historians who said we were being set up for another 1929, calling us "America Haters" and now they're complaining that our optimism in response to better economic developments makes us "America Haters" and as we see with Steve, even noticing the contradiction makes me least a "hater." I see a pattern here and hater or not, it's not flattering to Steve or to the Republican insurgents, for whom he stands.

    I will credit him with one success, he's managed to take the discussion of my post off the table even if he won't admit that accusing someone speaking the truth of hate speech in a small voice is of itself hate speech.

    Argumentum ad Obamanum anyone?

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil discourse from all people but express no obligation to allow contributors and readers to be trolled. Any comment that sinks to the level of bigotry, defamation, personal insults, off-topic rants, and profanity will be deleted without notice.