America's Useful Idiots

Giuseppe Cesari, ‘The Betrayal of Christ’ 1596-97 Galleria Borghese, Rome

 

UPDATE: America's Useful Idiots Part II

Glenn Greenwald posits that the Bush administration is exaggerating al Qaeda's threat to the United States for purely partisan gain. Now "Al Qaeda has a good friend in the White House" and the account of  the latest revelation by the Administration of the LA terrorist plot is bogus according to Glenn. "So I'll just celebrate the Great Rescue along with my fellow grateful citizens." [linked to of course Hinderaker and Malkin]. Amidst the celebrations, though, one can't help but marvel at just how ridiculous and inane these scary terrorist plots appear to be even when they are deliberately depicted so as to achieve the maximum possible scare value. Here is how the President described the plot."

Despte being a good blogging friend and not only a talented blogger but someone whose opinion I respect despite disagreeing with it, Glenn has sold out as far as I am concerned, and his blind loyalty to the liberal cause of sabotaging the Administartion with whatever means available at any given time, has gone too far down the road of opportunistic reasoning. He is now simply dancing to the tune of the Daily Kos audience, and it is very disappointing to watch.

During the last few months he has attempted to pulverize the talented John Hinderaker: "...digging into the deceitful, pompous morass of Powerline is highly unpleasant work...opting instead for propaganda, falsehoods and deliberate issue distortions of the type dripping out of John's post", and Jonah Goldberg where he accuses the Christian right of wishing to establish a theocracy: "Can't you smell the fear oozing from every word? Goldberg is petrified that the Christian theocrats -- with whom he thinks he can maintain an alliance in order to be protected -- will be angry if their theocratic agenda is pointed out and criticized. So Goldberg, driven by this fear, wants everyone -- and especially Jews -- to keep quiet about it and just lay low, lest the Christian Right's anger spills over to Goldberg, too".

The brilliant Jeff Goldstein, and where Glenn is hypocritical in the way he holds Jeff to a higher moral standard vis-a-vis his commenters whilst cheerfully allowing dozens and dozens of his own bile spewing commenters practically at every post. The relentlessly courageous and talented Michelle Malkin  is of course the first in the firing line, where he spares no punches in keeping with the sadly familiar malicious attacks witnessed daily at Atrios: "If you are someone still in need of dispositive proof that Michelle Malkin is one of the most un-American, liberty-hating, disturbing creatures around, please see this rancid post of hers, where she calls for Rep. Lynn Woolsey to be barred from inviting anyone to such speeches in the future because someone she invited wore a t-shirt which was critical of The Leader". He gives me a mild side kick, whilst growing in popularity as the champion of America's Useful Idiots.

I  have the feeling that as a result of the NSA Hearings having thus far not gone according to plan, Glenn is moving into the 'Islamic Fascism is not enough of a threat to warrant excessive precautionary measures' field, which he conveniently connects to the President's partisan agendas. Glenn seems to have a business plan, perhaps he has aspirations to enter politics and pitch for the Senate. His posts have become a barrage of personal attacks on conservative bloggers which were not present pre-love affair with Daily Kos, Atrios, Digby and Crooks and Liars where he plays to the audience beautifully. Like a masterful marketer he adjusts the marketing message according to the most prevalent demand of his consumers and tailors it to suit the latest liberal sound bites.

Whilst there is absolutely nothing wrong with having a strong opinion, as I certainly do, it strikes me as suspicious when the emphasis appears to be more on reflecting the most commonly held 'flavor of the day' Liberal sound bites, whilst pandering to the frenzied hype, and the reader's baser instincts

How the NSA Hearings will be resolved is very much still to be determined, and according to him its resolution depends exclusively on the course of action chosen by his Useful Idiots. Gonzales' purpoted defense of the President would have created several potent opportunities for the Useful Idiots to ensure that the Administration is held accountable for its "repeated and deliberate acts of law-breaking", but it is increasingly looking as if though their victory has been swept away from under their feet again. So now they must move back to what they consider the Republicans' holy land, and desecrate it with as much viciousness as they can muster.

It is clear that Glenn does not consider al Qaeda to be much of a threat at all to the United States. Neither do many of his compatriots on the left. That is the major reason why the American people do not trust them with their safety and will keep on electing Republicans.

We now have the ability to put remote control cameras on the surface of Mars. Why should we allow enemies to annihilate us simply because we lack the clarity or resolve to strike a reasonable balance between a healthy skepticism of government power and the need to take proactive measures to protect ourselves from such threats? The mantra of civil-liberties hard-liners is to "question authority" -- even when it is coming to our rescue -- then blame that same authority when, hamstrung by civil liberties laws, it fails to save us. The old laws that would prevent FBI agents from stopping the next al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi were built on the bedrock of a 35-year history of dark, defeating mistrust.

More Americans should not die because the peace-at-any-cost fringe and antigovernment paranoids still fighting the ghost of Nixon hate President Bush more than they fear al Qaeda. Ask the American people what they want. They will say that they want the commander in chief to use all reasonable means to catch the people who are trying to rain terror on our cities. Those who cite the soaring principle of individual liberty do not appear to appreciate that our enemies are not seeking to destroy individuals, but whole populations.

And when they do we will be united again and there will be no left or right there will simply be STRAIGHT AHEAD....for a while until we forget again....and so it will go on, but at what price and with how many innocent lives lost...

Whilst one can somehow excuse Glenn's inability to accept that the President was not only justified in ordering the international surveillance program, but kept his instructions within the law, and his constant regurgitation of the left mantra, whereby the Attorney General's word during the investigation has been put in question, one cannot excuse his utter ignorance when dealing with matters of national security.

The line of argument which Glenn provides is feeble and smacks of partisan reflex action disapproval of the President rather than providing us with any irrefutable and succinct argument to back his scurrilous allegations, which amount to The President manipulating the public and fabricating information on past foiled terrorist plots in order to keep up the fear in order to.....well I am not sure what the latest conspiracy theory is, but presumably to rally behind the President in support of his intelligence gathering methods....or better still, simply believe him.

I wonder what the actual point is? We do not have an enemy? We are not in danger and should not keep our vigilance up, and should relax into let's all live in peace together and love each other? We have not had a serious threat in the last five years therefore we will continue not to have any serious terrorist induced disasters? The President is fabricating information regarding thwarted attacks in order to keep the fear factor up? The Attorney General is lying to protect his unlawful President, who in turn lies to the American people to justify our presence in Iraq?

One of his commenters delivers a slam dunk, Glenn has been inviting for some time:

One can only hope he and his allies in the Democratic Party continue with this line of attack through November. The result will be an electoral triumph for the Republicans.

You see, Glenn, al Qaeda really is a threat to the United States. As such, we must do everything in our power to thwart their designs to foment mayhem and promulgate murder. You may not understand this, but most Americans are more than willing to sacrifice our civil liberties and much more so than we have done so far in this effort.

Have you ever heard of the term "Useful Idiot"? The term was used most recently by Anthony Brown in The British Times:

Elements within the British establishment were notoriously sympathetic to Hitler. Today the Islamists enjoy similar support. In the 1930s it was Edward VIII, the aristocrats and the Daily Mail and it's owner  ; this time it is left-wing activists, The Guardian and sections of the BBC. They may not want a global theocracy, but they are like the West’s apologists for the Soviet Union — useful idiots.

Islamic radicals, like Hitler, cultivate support by nurturing grievances against others. Islamists, like Hitler, scapegoat Jews for their problems and want to destroy them. Islamists, like Hitler, decree that the punishment for homosexuality is death. Hitler divided the world into Aryans and subhuman non-Aryans, while Islamists divide the world into Muslims and sub-human infidels. Nazis aimed for their Thousand-Year Reich, while Islamists aim for their eternal Caliphate. The Nazi party used terror to achieve power, and from London to Amsterdam, Bali to New York, Egypt to Turkey, Islamists are trying to do the same.

The two fascisms, one racial and one religious, one beaten and the other resurgent, are evil in both their ideology and their methodology, in their supremacism, intolerance, belief in violence and threat to democracy.

The London bombings revealed only to those in denial the extent to which Islamic fascism has taken root. But we have a long way to go until we reach the level of understanding in mainland Europe. With one of the smallest Muslim populations in Western Europe, just 3 per cent of the total, Britain has been able to afford a joyful multicultural optimism. Other countries, with far bigger Islamic populations, from France to Germany to the Netherlands, have had to become far more hard-headed.

The support of Islamic fascism spans Britain’s Left. The wacko Socialist Workers Party joined forces with the Muslim Association of Britain, the democracy-despising, Sharia-law-wanting group, to form the Stop the War Coalition. The former Labour MP George Galloway created the Respect Party with the support of the MAB, and won a seat in Parliament by cultivating Muslim resentment.

When I revealed on these pages last year both the fascist views of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the fact that he was being welcomed to Britain by Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, it caused a storm that has still to abate. Mr Livingtone claims that Sheikh al-Qaradawi is a moderate — which he is, in the same way that Mussolini was.

The BBC and The Guardian regularly give space to MAB to promote sanitised versions of its Islamist views. John Ware, one of the BBC’s most-respected reporters, spent years trying to make a programme on Islamic fundamentalism in Britain, but was repeatedly blocked by senior editors who feared it was too sensitive. Last month it emerged that The Guardian employed a journalist, Dilpazier Aslam, who is a member of the Hizb ut-Tahrir, an Islamist group that wants a global theocracy, and is described by the Home Office as “anti-Semitic, anti-Western and homophobic”. The Guardian used Dilpazier Aslam to report not just on the London bombings, but on Shabina Begum, the Luton schoolgirl who, advised by Hizb ut-Tahrir, won a court case allowing her to wear head-to-toe fundamentalist Islamic clothes.

The tale illustrates Britain’s naivety in many ways. Hizb ut-Tahrir is still legal, despite being banned in many European and Muslim countries, and despite President Musharraf of Pakistan pleading with Britain to ban it after it plotted to assassinate him. The useful idiots of the Left insisted that Ms Begum’s victory was a victory over Islamophobia, but even the Muslim Parliament of Britain gave warning that it was a “victory for fundamentalism”, bringing Shariah law one step closer.

In France, by contrast, the government ban on wearing the hijab, or Islamic veil, in schools was widely supported by the Left. It is impossible in France for radical Islamists to dupe useful idiots into supporting a pro-hijab campaign presenting it as pro-choice, as they did in Britain — because in France, the Left knows that the Islamists believe Muslim women should be compelled to wear the hijab.

Here the Government talks about deporting extremist imams, but does nothing. In contrast, France has deported ten radical imams in the past two years, with another one deported to Algeria last week, and ten more are under police surveillance. In France, no mosque is off limits to the police. While Britain welcomes Sheikh al-Qaradawi, Germany last week deported an imam who simply supported the Muslim Brotherhood. In Bavaria alone, 14 “hate preachers” have been deported since November 2004, and a further 20 have received notifications of deportation.

The Netherlands and Denmark, worried about the growth of ghettoised Muslim communities, have promoted integration, with the Netherlands insisting that those wanting to become immigrants take a test of Dutch language and the nation’s values before they are even given a visa. Both countries have clamped down on inter-continental arranged marriages — which are thought to comprise 70 per cent of Muslim marriages there, as in Britain — on the ground that they promote the creation of separatist communities. Such measures are barely on the radar in Britain.

Even post-bombing, Britain has a long way to go in its understanding of Islamic fascism. The tragedy is that we start daring to understand it only when innocent lives are lost.

It is difficult to distinguish between the response to this article by The Muslim Association of Great Britain and any other liberal blog full of accusations of right wing racism and misconceived ideas of liberty within a society where appeasement is the policy of the anti-government paranoids.

Powerline notices my post: "I greatly enjoyed Alexandra von Maltzan's disquisition at All Things Beautiful on certain players at large in the debate over the war on Islamist terrorism: "America's useful idiots.". Memeorandum features it here, Pajamas Media NSA files here, and National Journal's Hotline. 

UPDATE: My friend Glenn Greenwald answers to my post here: "That is why I say that whatever else these Bush followers are, they are not conservative." The ht is of course given to the Uber 'Useful Idiot' Daily Kos' Stand Strong.

My answer to his post is called America's Useful Idiots Part II.

UPDATE I: Rick Moran responds to Glenn and elaborates on the left's "slavish devotion to superficiality".

UPDATE II: Decision 8 responds to Glenn (in it's entirety):

"Glenn Greenwald is a blogger on the move…he’s become a hero on the left (justifiably) because of his work on the NSA eavesdropping story, particularly for his groundbreaking work on the Dewine legislation that would have modified FISA. He’s posting in very heady territory this days, with a spot at the Huffington Post, and big promotion from Kos, and that means big traffic and a guaranteed audience.

Kudos, then, for all of the above, and rest assured this is not a personal attack - but Glenn, hanging out in the asylum too long has got you thinking like the lunatics. The quality of Mr. Greenwald’s work is in a free-fall, and I can only assume the pressure of performing for these monkeys has gotten to him. His latest is a remarkably one-sided explanation of the ‘Cult of Bush’ that would have you think that conservatives have sold our souls to the devilish president, never mind Harriet Miers or the Gang of 14 or the recent statements of Bill Frist, George Allen, Arlen Specter, and other Republicans who have been quite openly critical of the Administration lately.

Then there are the blogs such as this one, the other members of the Coalition of the Chillin’, the RINOs, etc., etc. It’s the worst kind of broad brush tarring, devoid of nuance, and not only unfair, but almost completely inaccurate. It’ll play well with the Huff’n'Puffers, Glenn, and the Kos Kidz are no doubt erecting statues in your honor already…but you’re smarter than this, and you know it. Step back, and regain your sanity and your soul, before it’s too late…"

UPDATE III: Charles Johnson @ LGF responds to the same post (in it's entirety):

In a deadly dull semi-coherent rant about “Bush followers,” Glenn Greenwald (who describes himself as a champion of free speech) ineptly attempts to smear LGF:

"The rhetoric of Bush followers is routinely comprised of these sorts of sentiments dressed up in political language – accusations that domestic political opponents are subversives and traitors, that they ought to be imprisoned and hung, that we ought to drop nuclear bombs on countries which have committed the crime of housing large Muslim populations."

Glenn Greenwald is a liar. I have never said or written such a thing, because that is simply not my opinion. It’s a cheap, sleazy, intellectually lazy smear, setting up a straw man and knocking it down. But that’s par for the course in the dishonest, ethically-challenged childish babbling that passes for leftist “debate” in this modern age.

UPDATE IV: Andrew Sullivan delivers no surprises here,and even less here

UPDATE V: The Tin Foil Hat Brigade and Still Blamimg The Victim is Sigmund Carl & Alfred's response to Glenn.

UPDATE VI: Jonah Goldberg responds here and here, and Media Lies asks 'Who Is Glenn Greenwald?'

UPDATE VII: My friend Tom Maguire is also having a heated debate with Greenwald, with some serious blogging volies being thrown both ways.

Another response @ Publius Rendezvous. and The Fly @ The Flying Lumber Yard. who is very familiar with Glenn's writing takes him to task.

Scott @ Powerline has more on when Carter spied,, and Ed Morrissey when he spied and then lied. Washington Times reminds us that he publicly rebuked President Bush's 'warrantless eavesdropping' program this week during the funeral of Coretta Scott King despite the fact that he used similar surveillance against suspected spies.

That gives a very strong precedent for Bush's argument that both Article II and the AUMF against Al-Qaeda gives him the authority to surveil international communications that may involve American residents without a warrant. It certainly has more common-sense standing than the case against Truong and Humphrey, which the 4th Circuit upheld and for which the Supreme Court denied cert, giving it the authority of precedent. It also shows what a complete hypocrite Carter has become in his bitter pursuit to damage George Bush in any way possible.

I wonder where all the Democrats who hailed stare decisis during the Alito and Roberts confirmation hearings have gone.  My guess is that we won't hear from them about this precedent.  via The Anchoress. More @ John Stephenson's, PoliPundit, Pajamas Media (NSA files), The Fly, California Conservative, Gateway Pundit, Rhymes With Right

Power Line of course noted this case much earlier in its argument for the NSA program.

UPDATE VIII: From Ed Morrissey:

That revealed the Democrats as less than honest about their sudden outrage and appeared to take the wind out of their sails for a moment. Later, they attempted to argue that the nature of the program kept them from expressing their concerns, but that doesn't fly. As Hoekstra notes, they never objected or even questioned the authorization during the briefings themselves, when they could speak freely and discuss the program. They never questioned the program during closed-door sessions of the Intelligence Committees, either, when the ranking members would be free to speak among themselves, at least.

The electorate didn't get fooled by the rhetoric, either. A clear majority supported the surveillance, with or without warrants, and believed it to be within the war powers granted to the President by the AUMF. After all, in what war have we ever required the executive branch to get warrants for espionage against the enemy? And as non-wartime precedents became more well known, especially US v Truong and Humphrey involving Jimmy Carter's warrantless wiretaps in peacetime, the public has not budged in its support for the NSA surveillance.

Now Democrats need to make the NSA program and their hysterical attacks against the President ancient history. They now want people to think that they've supported the surveillance all along, but just want to craft legislation to support it. In truth, all they had to do was to propose that legislation when the Times published the existence of the program, but Democrats instead chose to use it as a political club to beat up the Administration. That effort backfired, and now they need that legislation to avoid being seen as lacking seriousness against terrorists -- a judgment that they have only reinforced in this latest kerfuffle.

Meanwhile, public support for the NSA surveillance program is growing and the Patriot Act is very much alive, and sailing through congress. Glenn Reynolds let's it rip on CNN about their apparent cowardice: "You guys have blown it. My beliefs are offended when gangs of ignorant thugs burn embassies, and where is the respect for my beliefs? Do I need to burn embassies to get respect for my beliefs? Because that's the message CNN sends. The message they send is, We will reward violence. And you're going to get more of what you reward, that's how it works."

RELATED: 'America's Useful Idiots Part II'
 

Comments

[Red Stater]

Great piece.
I did a smaller take on Useful Idiots and wanted to let ya' know I linked to your articles on the subject.
thanks,
Red

[AlanDownunder]

Prevalent US conservatism is no longer conservatism (instance the deficit), prevalent US christianity is no longer Christianity (instance Schiavo, or the USMC proudly depicting on its website a tank in Iraq called "New Testament"), prevalent US science is no longer science (climate change, evolutionary biology), prevalent US constitutionalism is no longer constitutionalism (just keep reading Greenwald) and US governmental integrity and competence (can't have the latter without the former, and how many GOP bigshots have pled or been found guilty of corruption) is a thing of the past. So, soon, will be the US middle class if Bushenomics is not put into reverse. Bin Laden didn't cause any of that. He was just the spark that touched off the whole reeking combustible mess. Bush was going to invade Iraq, Bin Laden or no Bin Laden. WMD, Al Qaida linkage and spread of democracy were pretexts and no subsequent attempt to give a justification approaches rationality (merely emphasizing the comparative evilness of an "evil doer" doesn't cut it). Neither do unvoiced justifications involving either oil or Israel. Bush/Rove/Cheneyism and its adherents will be seen as the biggest perversion yet of what the US used to stand for.

I read above talk of winners and losers. Apart from the insanity of such talk assuming such absolutist proportions, it fails on its own terms. By behaving as it is, the US is losing big by any measure on innumerable fronts (Latin American elections, hypersensitivity to oil scarcities, gulf weather) the least of them being losses to terrorism.

[Michael van der Galien]

And we're back to the good times...The all mighty voice of the left is accused of... sock puppetry

[Michael van der Galien]

Mark,

it's always nice to see how the losers in the world blame those who are successful and have money for... being successful and having money.
Instead of insulting Alexandra, you'd better ask her for money so you can buy yourself some food today.

I wonder, how's the hard knock life working ya?

[Alexandra]

Dear Mark,

Thank you for the compliment.

In your next life perhaps you can come back with at least two working neurons in your cranal cavity, and I'll come back as an impoverished bimbo. For the time being though, we are both stuck with what we've got.

[Mark Cabal]

Must be nice to be a moneyed little bimbo who can afford the time to write such drivel.

[Darrell]

Dumb Ox,

"The two most feared enemies of socialism are history and reason." -- Mark Steyn

Amen.

[Ron Jon Bovi Jovi]

I'm with Rad Geek. I'm not willing to sacrifice my civil liberties.

I would like to see some kind of evidence backing this statement up: You may not understand this, but most Americans are more than willing to sacrifice our civil liberties and much more so than we have done so far in this effort."

Certainly you don't mean the half of the US population that believes the US should never spy domestically without a warrant?

http://www.pollingreport.com/terror.htm

[Rad Geek]

Alexandra, you may think that the following comment is a "slam dunk." I think it's the height of political immorality. Viz: "You see, Glenn, al Qaeda really is a threat to the United States. As such, we must do everything in our power to thwart their designs to foment mayhem and promulgate murder. You may not understand this, but most Americans are more than willing to sacrifice our civil liberties and much more so than we have done so far in this effort."

I have no problem with an individual American who is "more than willing" to sacrifice her or his own civil liberties and much more so than she has done so far in "this effort." That's your bag; if you want to trade off living your life at the permission of others in order to gain more in the way of bodily safety, I won't get in the way. The problem is that that's not all they're proposing when they talk about "sacrificing our civil liberties." What they mean, and what I object to, is that they are "more than willing" to sacrifice other people's civil liberties, and more specifically my civil liberties, and much more so than they have done so far in "this effort," whether I like it or not. That you have no right to "sacrifice." It's not yours to give.

[druidbros]

Well, I hardly know where to begin. I guess I will begin here.
You may not like what some of the progressives have to say but thats because you set up a straw man and call him 'liberal'.
Glenn is exactly right about the'Cult of Bush'. I have a BA in religion and a MLA with 1.5 years of seminary. So I speak with a good deal of experience. There is a faction of conservative Republicans (usually called neo-cons) who think Bush can do no wrong. They exhibit all of the traits of a cult.

See..http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/checklis.htm

"The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.

‪ Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.

‪ Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).

‪ The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).

‪ The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).

‪ The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.

‪ The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).

‪ The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).

‪ The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt iin order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

‪ Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.

‪ The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.

‪ The group is preoccupied with making money.

‪ Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.

‪ Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.

‪ The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group."

You can complain about being pigeonholed all you want but until you stop dismissing the critisism of the administration as simply 'Bush hatred' you will be acting the part of a cult member.

And dont forget the verse which says...

You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.

It also indicates in the greek of the verse (the original language)...

You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you mad.

[Semanticleo]

NXNW;

That has been bothering you all this time?

It's a line the Actor Curt Jergens spoke
to a refugee he was forced to join in his
retreat from the Nazis. He played a Polish
General who was arrogant and felt superior to
the refugee played by Danny Kaye.

To make a long story short, they became good
friends and parted as the General concluded;
"More and more I like this Yacobovsky"

If you require more explanation, Alexandra
is the condescending General and I am Yacobovsky.

I also remember more pleasant exchanges between
us if you care to reminisce in the archives.

Via Con Dios.

[Phillybits]

The article you mentioned from DailyKos is not Stand Strong. The article is "Free Republic On FISA 11/30/2000 (A Trip Down Memory Lane)". and the writer of that post was "Stand Strong."

Judging from the comments here, as well as elsewhere, it would appear that most people who have commented in opposition to Greenwald's piece are completely missing the point, yet all the while those same comments, both here and elsewhere, are simply reinforcing the premise that Greenwald sets forth.

It's truly a beautiful thing.

[Rest of the World]

God, Americans are stupid.

[Random Guy]

No American wants another terrorist attack to happen. However, fortunately for the country, the majority of Americans AREN'T prepared to sacrifice their civil liberties for a false feeling of safety.

[North by Northwest]

Semanticleo,

Actually my memory is quite clear on the fact, that it was each and every time you who started making sniding and cutting remarks first when you disagreed on the issues, which, when addressed by other commenters, including Alexandra, you either didn't respond to or verbally waved off. My beef with you is your scorpio tail, which all too evidently is meant to sting on a purely personal level in a setting where you seem to feel safe to have your vengeance since your last exchange in December, piggy-backing on far too many Daily Kos/Crooks & Liars devotees we are forced to endure here today. As Kenny correctly remarks, most of this here isn't a debate, just shouting--thanks D. Ox for pushing back ;-). Anyway, Semanticleo, just go and reread the thread and notice where you felt it opportune to add your 'pique'; at least now we know that this was meant sarcastically?

[Pinko Punko]

We'd still have you over for dinner, but even if you love Johnny H. and he's your best bud, please save brilliant for someone actually brilliant. Please. He's a buffoon. He might be a lovable and cuddly and snugglebuggle of a guy, but he is not brilliant. He's not even smart. He's like the cutest box of rocks you've ever seen.

[Dumb Ox]

Thanks Kenny for the elaboration, I'm honored.

As you suggest, I think even the original Dumb Ox would grab a club or rapier, whatever the context allowed, to defend the honor of a lady.

I cannot reveal any other details of my exuberant posts here.

Clubbing seemed to me to be the order of the day. Although my dear patron saint always believed in reasoning over force, he also taught that self-defense and the defense of others was justified.

Not to mention, he thought that heretics should be executed. After all, they executed counterfeiters, how much worse is counterfeiting the truth and imperilling souls? Goes the argument.

And as far as provoking those fellows on the other side, it seems to me that they shut up pretty lickety-split when confronted with facts, however sarcastically presented.

But thank you again, really, for your understanding and kind words. I share your concern for calm debate, genuine dialogue.

The Quixotic Ox has left the building.

Yours truly,
D. Ox

[Kenny Pierce]

My dear Ox,

I'm not saying you oughtn't to be engaging in chivalric mud-wrestling, only that (1) anybody who winds up mud-spattered should pay it no mind, and (2) I'm not inclined to join in myself. I very much like Austenesque repartee all in the spirit of a good time's being held by all, but there is too little cleverness and too much naked malice in this comment thread. A flame war need not be childish, but this one pretty much is, in its absence of genuine wit. You guys are all using clubs; I prefer rapiers, that's all. I agree that you have waded in on the level that others had set (the tone is quite different from your usual, and I might add excellent, posting), and more power too you if you get a kick out of the moshing. I'm just not planning to be in the pit myself.

I like chivalry, myself, as long as the lady in question doesn't object (an important caveat, as anybody who has dealt with New Jersey feminists will attest). I would make the following mild comments, though not at all wishing to spoil your fun:

1. If your goal is to keep them from harassing a lady, then what you're doing is mildly counterproductive, in that it stirs people up rather than shutting them up. As you observe, it is always possible to continue to hurl abuse by simply ignoring whatever inconvenient logic or facts are posted by the other side. Thus your chivalry is rather quixotic, though I admire its spirit.

2. Since you have chosen to honor St. Thomas by your choice of handle, it's perhaps worth observing that the only thing more astonishing than the brilliance of his reasoning, is the absolutely unbroken charity of his tone. But then you are seeking not to persuade others of a viewpoint, but to defend a lady from attack; so perhaps it's irrelevant. If you were using another handle it wouldn't even occur to me to mention it.

Respectfully,

KP

[Dumb Ox]

Bravo JPD! If that doesn't put the capstone on the tomb of bile out of which these ghouls have been crawling to attack with mere ad dominam insults the uber-smart Alexandra, nothing will.

Check out his blog to see from whence he speaks.

(Tarzan yell!)

Sorry to have been "policing" this post so assiduously the last 24 hours, but some things bug the heck out of me...

[JPD]

This is a reprint of a one of my posts at http://thecoldlightofday.blogspot.com/...go there to see the picture associated with it...

This post is particularly directed to Bob Perdriau.

Bob, I have read Col Boyd's work (and William Lind and Thomas Hammes) so I know what 4th Generation Warfare (4G) is. And having read all that, if you still do not believe Islamic fundamentalism is a threat to the civil liberties you hold so dear, then you are as I say below, a "happily uniformed, not burdened by the facts, head in the geopolitical sand" jackass.

I suggest you hop a plane and fly over to the sandbox and check it out for yourself.

I did...for three years.

________________________________________________

On February 9th, Shi'ite Muslims all over the world "celebrated" Ashura, a religious observance in which they flagellate themselves to simulate the pain, suffering and death of Imam Hussein, grandson of the Prophet Mohammad, who, according to Islamic tradition, was killed in AD 680 at Karbala, a city in modern day Iraq, in a battle for the leadership of the faith.

If, after observing:

1) this Islamic "festival",

2) the Islamic world's stunningly hypocritical reaction to that Danish newspaper's Mohammad cartoon ridiculousness (you should see the cartoons in Gulf newspapers depicting Christians and Jews in such a wonderful light on a daily basis), and

3) the Iranian government's quest for "peaceful nuclear power" despite their vast oil reserves (somewhere on the order of 90 billion barrels worth) put within the context of their President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's now infamous and all too truthful rant to "Wipe Israel off the map!",

you do not yet understand the immense danger fundamentalist Islam poses to the civilized world, then you are either:

1) a "happily uniformed, not burdened by the facts, head in the geopolitical sand" jackass, or

2) a fundamentalist Muslim yourself.

Just for correlation, compare this "celebration" to the Christian (read "prodominatly western and democratic" here) celebration of Easter, a philosophically similar religious observance mourning the passing and then celebrating the resurrection of a prophet, conducted in, shall we say, quite a different manner.

Sure, the egg thing is a bit silly, but then again so is slicing your skull open with arrestingly large Mameluke sword to show your depth and breadth of religious devotion. People get committed to a rubber room for less...

I would invite all of you who subscribe to the "Islam is a peaceful religion" nonsense to Riyadh's Deera Square, affectionately known by westerners living in the Kingdom as "Chop Chop Square", this Friday at noon to witness Sharia law in action.

You are bound to see something exciting like a beheading, a stoning, or some other delightfully quaint and unmistakably tribal form of punishment that Qur'anic-based law exacts of the recently convicted.

Or if you are really lucky, the prisoner has committed something particularly egregious (like, for example, printing cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammad in a rather unflattering light?) and has been sentenced to something rather innocuously called Al-Had, in which the prisoner is affixed to a wooden X mounted in the ground and partially beheaded while the crowd cheers Allah Akbar, "God is great", then mobs the executioner in order to shake his hand and congratulate him for enacting "God's will".

And, before you ask...no, I am not making this up.

Certainly sounds like a religion of peace to me. Let's help spread the word on the utopian tendencies of this much maligned and misunderstood religion populated by bushy bearded pacifists who want nothing but world peace.

Who's with me?

[Dumb Ox]

I have posted and replied with a tone that approached that of Alexandra's attackers, but I answered with facts and flawless logic, if also a bit of sarcasm. I never have let a woman be assaulted, phsically or verbally, in my presence. That's just the way Ox's are brought up, though it has led to more than one black-eye (on the other guy). Call it childish if you will. J.D. and Ph.D. but still a child at heart! Not bragging, just facts.

[Kenny Pierce]

Alexandra,

Logged on to catch up on and comment on this thread and at the end am left wondering why you are still bothering.

The emotional temperature in here is irretrievably Romper Room. If you're paying the slightest attention to any of the invective being hurled in either direction, then you are grossly overreacting. This isn't a discussion, it's a childish flame war.

I don't think I'll play, myself...at least, not the game the participants here seem to be playing. Though, I admit that Diane makes me feel playful with her comment, "Do you feel safer and are you better off then before bush? If you are rich the answer is yes. If not, you are joing the growing number of disenchanted Americans whose lives have gotten worse under Bush." It reminds me of a letter I felt compelled to blog just the other day...

P.S. My personal favorite of the various snide attacks: It "is interesting that many who suffered under Communist totalitarian governments ended up with thought processes that, as Freud would say, constitute and identification with the aggressor, tacitly embracing political and general philosophies that are, at heart, fascist in nature." If you have read The Gentle Act of Verbal Self-Defense, you will instantly recognize the verbal abuse pattern. If you are familiar with American political invective, you will instantly recognize the complete inability to grasp what life under genuine fascism (if the spewer is a Democrat) or socialism (if the spewer is a Republican) is truly like, and thus the complete absence of anything remotely resembling a sense of proportion. A champion of a comment, that.

[Dumb Ox]

p.s. This is a blast. Although a bit unsporting. It's like shooting fish in a barrell -- with a bazooka!

Not one person has addressed the facts I have cited. I guess they're still choking on them.

ha, ha, ha (maniacal laughter)

[Dumb Ox]

"Don't know much about history" is their anthem, Alexandra.

Socialism's fatal flaw is that socialists are impatient children. They want their goodies NOW.

No perspective, no prudence, just will and ego.

[Alexandra]

Diane,

I am speechless at your blog and cannot believe that you are buying this administration's lying and total disregard for the cherished principals that our country was founded on.

Why are you speechless? Why not simply wait and see what transpires during the investigation, or will you even then say that it was biased in some way and not accept the results. I am prepared to accept the results of that investigation, are you?

I appreciate that Nixon would have been a bad experience for you, but what does that mean in relation to what is happening now? As I said wait and see. If the matter was as simple as Glenn would have you believe you would not have Bush in office today, and impeachment would not be a simple rhetoric but a fact. Therefore as I said wait and see what the investigation you wanted will yield.

Yes I feel safer in answer to your question, and I am grateful every day that I do not have Al Gore sitting in that office today, not with Ahmadinejad knocking at my door. I am simply sorry that it may take the loss of more lives for the liberals to wake up to the fact that decades of ignorance finally have caught up with us. This is my considered opinion, which contrary to frequently asserted or implied belief above, is actually rather moderate; just not moderate on the issue of Islamofascism. Incidentally, the main issue of this post, which Glenn chose to ignore entirely.

There are many things wrong with every administration at any one time. Bush & Co are no exception, but, again, to put it in simple terms, I happen to believe that they are doing the right things abroad at the right time for the benefit of all of us. And only history will be able to proove either you or me right or wrong.

[Huan]

cannot talk to the (Bush) Deranged with logic, facts, or reasons.

[Dumb Ox]

Repeating over and over that he lies is not an argument based on facts. Did you miss the fact that everyone else in the world with the same and with independent data believed Saddam had WMD? What is the matter with your brain?

Did you miss the fact the the Duelfer report stated not only that all the programs were in place to pick up WMD the day sanctions ended (which France, Russia and China were pushing for)? Did you miss the fact in the Duelfer report that convoys of trucks are on satellite images heading into Syria in the days before the invasion? Did you miss the fact that 100,000 children per year were dying in Iraq because Saddam was diverting oil for food money to build his palaces, his army, and to bribe France, Russia and China?

What, I repeat, is the matter with your brain?

The economy is booming, home ownership (especially among minorities) is at an all time high, unemployment is at record lows.

What is the matter with your brain? Pull it out of the ass of Moveon.org, Michael Moron, and Daily Kos. See now, doesn't that fresh air feel good.

NOT one fact! You people should be ashamed. Lying liars! Ooops we forgot, only Republicans can be those. (Note the double negative, if you had ever learned any grammar you would get my joke.)

[RL]

Diane and other miserable leftists,

aircanada.com
(great-deals on one-way tickets)

We won't miss you !

: )

[Diane]

WHat we liberals want is an honest government that does not lie about the reason for going to war and who serve the people, not big business.
I am speachless at your blog and cannot believe that you are buying this administration's lying and total disregard for the cherished pricipals that our country was founded on.

I was around for nixon and the republican's denial of the lies and deceit that went on in the government when he was president.

Open your eyes and question what this government is doing and more importantly NOT DOING.
Do you feel safer and are you better off then before bush?
If you are rich the answer is yes. If not, you are joing the growing number of disenchanted Americans whose lives have gotten worse under Bush.

[Dumb Ox]

Is there no end to lib ignorance and hiding from facts?

Has one person dared to refute my evidence that Clinton and Carter had more pervassive and unrestricted warrantless surveillance programs?

Laughable. When the next attack comes, oh sure we'll hear the usual ranting from the left. They can ONLY negate. Homosexual onanism and abortion to not amount to a national security proposal (quite the opposite).

Where you err (mindless friends) is that after the next attack, Anti-Sedition laws will be enacted (as Lincoln, Wilson and FDR - that's Franklin Roosevelt for you dopes, all lib heroes did) and you'll be in jail where you belong.

So Alexandra scores on this point as well: the Democrats will indeed be finished for 30 years as the party of treason.

Answer the Lincoln, Wilson and FDR FACTS before you shoot off your fat mouths again.

[Erikthered]

Here's Greenwald's response:

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/02/do-bush-followers-have-political.html

[Semanticleo]

NxNW;

You misunderstand me if you believe my brush
broadly paints Alexandra as well as thoughtful
commenters such as yourself and Kenny.

Although I have had disagreements with you,
we have been able to respect one another's
opinions, attitudes and beliefs.

My words are directed to Alexandra, whose
brittle persona rejects, out of hand, those
who disagree with her on her 'hot buttons'.

If you view an attack upon her as an attack
upon yourself, sobeit. My intent is clear.

[RL]

Standing in the middle-of-the-road is a dangerous-activity,
because those who choose this unchallenging and easy path
have a tendency of getting run-over.
(ie. the spineless "R Senator" from RI who is going to lose
his seat to a democrat, who unlike himself, has at least one
or two core-beliefs)

The fact that he voted against an Italian-American Supreme
Court Justice(Alito), when his constituency is compromised
of one of the Italian-American strongholds in America
(Providence, RI) demonstrates how much of a fool this
"moderate" and spineless character is.

If you're ever visiting Providence, don't miss-out on
enjoying a delicious and satisfying meal at Camille's on
the hill. Those of you who are inclined to enjoying a glass
(or two)of fine wine especially won't regret visiting Camille's.

[Huan]

No ideology is tolerant or particularly welcoming of another ideology that seeks to refute, counter, or eviscerate it. This is only natural and thus a strawman argument construct.
All ideology will seek to up-play items that support it, and downplay items that challenge it.
And all ideologies will have extremist viewpoints

But I, as a moderate, am amused by the lack of truthfulness and factuality of many suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome.

[North by Northwest]

Semanticleo

Sorry, it's two-faced brownnoser.

BTW, what you call 'Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder' others call passionately held beliefs, something you liberals should know all about, no?

As to 'Platitudes', try your new-found hero's attempt to sidetrack away from dealing with the main issue in Alexandra's post by invoking the most tired of all liberal platitudes these days: "Blind loyalty to Bush". Whenever an opposing opinion is hard or uncomfortable to refute, it gets instead ridiculed and labeled as slavish adherence to party doctrine. Merit, validity or otherwise substantive components are thus neatly circumvented. We all do it at times, but none do it better than successful litigators! Glenn's response to Alexandra's post couldn't be a better example of dodging the bullet by (a) thinly veiled ridicule and by (b) diverting the discussion away from a potentially slippery slope into areas of assumed expert knowledge, wholly unrelated of course. You all fell for it hook line and sinker.

[RL]

Playing politics with the national-security of Americans and
America is not funny.

But then again, the demorats ceased being funny after their
"royal" president kennedy publicly declared that he was one
with the people of Berlin before a huge German crowd.

[dgbellak]

Charles Johnson? Nearly every word out of his mouth is a dishonest deflection. In your update containing his defense, he implies that Greenwald accused Charles of saying such a thing as "ought to drop nuckear bombs...". The name "Charles Johnson" is nowhere to be found in Greenwald's post, so Johnson is calling Greenwald a liar over something he never said. Did you read Greenwald's post, Alexandra? He was referring to the "rhetoric of Bush followers" which can be found in abundance in LGF's comments. Though not quite as pithy as Glenn Reynolds, Johnson doesn't say much in his posts. He leaves most opinions to his rabid commenters who often leave hundreds of responses to each thread, many of which are far worse than Greenwald's generalized statement. Johnson is clearly a fool; calling Greenwald a "liar" is disengenuous at best.

[North by Northwest]

Semanitcleo

How two-faced you are: When you have all your cronies around you you deny your own knowledge about this blog--how many times your very own arguments have been addressed with the patience of Job as well as those of any of your fellow commenters of liberal persuasion.

The only thing that is debasing the quality of the comments in this thread are in fact the mostly immature vociferations à la daily Kos and Crooks and Liars, NOT because of a disagreement of fact or political orientation.

For you to assign Solominic wisdom to most of these liberal commenters is farcical. Remember what you are saying: Solomon proposed cutting the baby in half, and then to give it to the woman who showed concern for its life. It is telling that you seem to view your own style akin to such wisdom; I certainly don't and your fellow commenters today most certainly didn't display any of it either.

[Semanticleo]

My commnet to Greenwald after linking to
Alexandra's "updates';

Alexandra tends toward hysteria on
some subjects, and her OCD on the
'Muslim Problem' is one of those.

You were charitable to someone who
calls you friend, and proceeds to
hyperventilate a venal screed which
artfully includes a classic painting
of "The Betrayal of Christ'.

The right wing ideaology is not
tolerant of well written and thoughtful
publication when it
eviscerates the large intestine
of their platitudes. It is the
highest complement when they
attack you. It usually means
they are threatened and know you
are onto them.

[Semanticleo]

Greenwald says;

I want to leave the personal issues to the side and examine a few of the substantive issues raised (unintentionally) by Alexandra’s post.

'Nuff said.

[Dumb Ox]

Oh, Gee?

Why has no one responded to Carter's and Clinton's warrantless surveillence programs???

You flacid wimps.

Do the fact's bother you?

There's hope for you, please wake up. Stop being perverts and become patriots.

Guess what, our country protects perverts, the Moslems will kill you!

Duh, duh, duh.

Dumb Ox

[Dumb Ox]

Mere Mortal, you are merely destined to disintegrate into oblivion. Fine, pax vobiscum.

Arguing with you guys is like dueling with an unarmed man.

Instead of facts, you offer rhetoric from Time. Fine. And then total Bullshit (that's what it is) talk about Clinton v. Bush work on terrorism.

Duh, Richard Clark, Bush critic DOES NOT SUPPORT YOUR CRAPPY CRAP. Read the freakin' book. Read more news than you have up your behind. I'm getting madder and madder at all this insane, studpid, mindless, demented, frankly just plain evil, junnk. Stuff it!

I've got no patience with dumb lib ignoramuses like you.

Zing.

[Dumb Ox]

Please, Puh-Lease, stop with the "Democratic" when talking about the party of abortion and homosexual onanism, dear friend. Democrat, period. No minor point, they are about as Democratic as Lenin, Stalin Trotsky and Hitler.

[mere mortal]

"You see, Glenn, al Qaeda really is a threat to the United States. As such, we must do everything in our power to thwart their designs to foment mayhem and promulgate murder. You may not understand this, but most Americans are more than willing to sacrifice our civil liberties and much more so than we have done so far in this effort."

I suppose my only response to this can be a quote from a Time Magazine article, which in turn quotes a former Democratic administration official, and ask how anyone could honestly believe that Republicans are more credible on the issue of terrorism and al-Qaeda than Democrats:

Berger attended only one of the briefings—the session that dealt with the threat posed to the U.S. by international terrorism, and especially by al-Qaeda. "I'm coming to this briefing," he says he told Rice, "to underscore how important I think this subject is." Later, alone in his office with Rice, Berger says he told her, "I believe that the Bush Administration will spend more time on terrorism generally, and on al-Qaeda specifically, than any other subject."

The Clinton administration did the work on this issue, Bush and his administration did not, they seemed to prefer missile defense and the more glamorous state-vs-state conflicts.

[Alexandra]

I have three UPDATES in the main text, which link to right leaning bloggers' responses to Glenn's post.
From Rick Moran here, from Decision 8 here, and from Charles Johnson @ LGF here.

[Dumb Ox]

I've lost my patience.

Bob Perdriau, how did you get so immoral?

3000 people, no problem!

Do you know that there were 100,000 children per year were dying under Saddam Hussein and the Oil for Food program?

No, you didn't.

All of your reidiculous dancing around is pathetic friend. Gay-loving, abortion-loving, commie-loving Democrat policies are no substitution for reality. Be frank for once.

Sorry to be so blunt, but this diatribe from all of the lefties on this post has made me sick.

Do you really consider any of the looney sources you cite as authorities? Hilarious.

Stop with the "oh we are against terrorism too, but this is the wrong policy" crap, all of you. It's a freakin' ruse and the the talk radio, blogosphere world knows it.

I'm not gonna put up with your deception anymore!

I'll fight it here or on my blog!

Come and get me you Nazi Dem devils!

[RL]

if there is one thing that leftists can't stand/
"tolerate", it is brainy and beautiful women
who subscribe to a Judeo-Christian weltanschauung.

as evidenced by the imbecilic nature of far too
many of the above posts, this is like putting a
bright-red sheet in front of a Spanish bull with
large cojones.

it drives them totally batty Alexandra.

You just gotta love it.

Keep up the good work !

Buona Sera.

: )

[Bob Perdriau]

Alexandra,

I read your post titled "America's Useful Idiots". I have to say that I do not agree with a single thing that you said. "The relentlessly courageous and talented Michelle Malkin "? Barf. "...digging into the deceitful, pompous morass of Powerline is highly unpleasant work." ( By Glenn Greenwald). That has just got to be true but it is not your opinion.

"It is clear that Glenn does not consider al Qaeda to be much of a threat at all to the United States. Neither do many of his compatriots on the left. That is the major reason why the American people do not trust them with their safety and will keep on electing Republicans."

Well, I agree with Glenn - al Qaeda is not much of a threat to the United States. What are we talking about? Ten thousand people at most? Hell, call it 100,000. These jerks are not a threat to the US on anything like the scale Bush portrays.

Where did our fighting spirit go? We get hit. We lose 3,000 people and a few buildings. Was that nice? No. Is that worth sacrificing civil liberties for? No. Is it an incident that should make us cower in fear as Bush would have us do? No. Is it an incident that should make us sacrifice treasure and economic progress on the uncertain chance it will happen again? No. Is it an incident that should make us take our shoes off getting on a plane? No.

Will it happen again? Likely. Expect more fighting. Expect more death and loss. See this opinion:

http://d-n-i.net/lind/lind_2_01_06.htm

This little incident (9/11) is dwarfed by the damage done in the Civil War, WW I, WW II, etc. Frankly I think al Qaeda is a mere piss hole in the snow compared to threats this country has faced and overcome in the past.

I do not understand why the American people have let Bush scare the shit out of us over this issue. We are in a fight so let's fight. Let's also remember that we are fighting with an adversary that can bring the fight to us on their terms whenever they want. This crap about fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here is just that - crap. And don't get me started on what a flim-flam the Iraq was is.

We are in a fight but instead of fighting we are taking off our shoes, creating "no fly lists", trampling on our civil liberties, wasting billions on all kinds of jerk-ass government "plans" and "super agencies" that can't find their way into a flood and generally acting like chicken-shits.

I am of the "left" and I think we should fight. If the country continues to follow the failed part time National Guard 1st Lieutenant who purports to lead us the country will lose this fight.

Note that I do not use the term "war". We are in a fight, not a war. Well, we actually are in a 4G type of war but you know nothing about what that means and have likely never heard the term let alone understood it. So I'll just use fight. Maybe you can understand that.

Here, if you care to learn something, is a Tom Peters interview on the subject of the biography of John Boyd.

http://tinyurl.com/a68vx

I'll post this response to your blather on my blog later tonight or early in the morning.

http://tinyurl.com/dqmc2

Bob Perdriau
bobp@marketwriter.com

[Dumb Ox]

Oh I am not ashamed to be a serial blogger.

I'm so tempted to rip into the other mind-numbed libs who feel so free to spew uneducated bile around.

Where shall I begin?

(Mind you I have already destroyed Boing!!!! such that he should never show his ugly face on the internet again! Note that insane libs always use multiple exclamation marks instead of evidence and reason.)

Bungled each program?

Ox puckey!

The economy is booming, unemployment is at record lows, house ownership at record highs, graduation rates up (notwithstanding the idiot Kerry's lunacy), progress in Afghanistan and Iraq. Don't give me that bs answer that it's not fast enough--I'm tempted to say something very un-Ox-like to you. There have been no attacks, when we know they have been trying.

Duh, duh, duh. Wake up you dopes. You are tied to gay sex, abortion, drugs, hating religion, that's all you got!

And a pocket full of exclamation marks.

Laughable if it weren't so dangerous.

I want to convert you dopes to facts and reason!

Become Ox-men and Oxettes.

God bless.

D. Ox

[Dumb Ox]

After I shot the second volley up your sorry turn-tail behinds (can you say: cut and run?), it occured to me that I missed one detail, the absurd allegations about selling technology to China under Bush 41.

Here's well over 20 articles, from the NEW YORK TIMES, about Clinton sales of military and missile technology to China.

http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/index-pulitzer-china.html

What a pitiful dope you are. Hope you all find God and begin a new relationship with the truth.

I was tempted to refer to the NYT (which I read) as your "bible" but I have no doubt you read nothing but Mother Jones (which I also sometimes read), Michael Moore's website, Moveon.org, and other bloggers with diseased morals.