Who Hijacked Our Country

Friday, May 07, 2010

Woodstock 2010

Hey Man, did you miss the original Woodstock? How about the 25th Anniversary Woodstock wannabe in 1994?

Don’t worry; it’s cool. You can still catch this year’s Woodstock. It's the grooviest one yet Man. It’ll be at the Monona County Fairgrounds in Onawa, Iowa. And the date — well what date do you think, Man??? September 11th, when else Man? Can't get any more symbolic than that.

Our country survived the terrorist attack nine years ago on that date, by those swarthy Muslims from Iraq. And By God we'll survive the daily Assaults On Freedom by this even swarthier Muslim from Kenya who stole our White House, thank you ACORN and George Soros.

It’ll be 1969 all over again. Back then we were all protesting against the War on Vietnam. And this year we’re all protesting against that Kenyan Fascist in the White House and his War on Real Americans.

Insurance companies, banks, oil companies — they’re our brothers and sisters Man. Freedom! If you don’t want a bunch of government bureaucrats — Big Brother! — poking around in your bank account and your health insurance policy, then come to Woodstock 2010. Death to the Fascist Power Structure!

The drug scene won’t be quite as cool this year. But who needs pot and LSD? We’ll have teabags for everyone. Sure our parents and grandparents thought it was groovy, lying there naked in the rain and mud forty-one years ago.

But this year, well picture this: Thousands of us — Patriots! Real Americans! — lying there in a field in Iowa. And we’ll all be Teabagging!

So come on, Patriots. What are you doing this September 11th? Come and join us. All of your friends will be here.

And just wait ‘til you hear the music at Woodstock 2010. Sure, that psychedelic shit was OK forty-one years ago. But those groups all sounded the same. And what kind of talent does it take to just hold a guitar string up next to the microphone and make a bunch of screeching feedback noises? It sounds cool if you’re stoned, I guess. But that was then.

This year, we’ll be featuring both kinds of music — country AND western.

Labels: , ,


Blogger T. Paine said...

Finally! Some change I can believe in! :)

May 7, 2010 at 11:55 PM  
Blogger Suzan said...

Think I'll pass.


Thanks for the thought.


May 8, 2010 at 6:32 AM  
Blogger Randal Graves said...

Hey man, is that Teabag Rock?
Yeah, man!
Well, turn it up, man!

Damn hippies.

May 8, 2010 at 7:57 AM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Wouldn't it be delightful fun for Tea-stock if someone poured them electric koolade instead of Reich Wing koolade?

May 8, 2010 at 9:57 AM  
Anonymous Jess said...

OMG, do they have to keep stealing ideas for evenys from us DFH's and turning it into something really really stupid? O the huge manatee or the humanity whatever. I'll pass though, I would have fit in at the original Woodstock better then this one here, I am CERTAIN of that.

May 8, 2010 at 10:51 AM  
Anonymous Screamin' Mimi said...

I really can't believe anybody takes the Republicans seriously anymore. Not a single original thought, those folks. They hope our country goes all the way down the tubes (they'll help it happen) just so they can be right. Well, they're WRONG.

The idea of their hijacking the Woodstock idea would make me furious if it wasn't so pathetic and laughable.

Grow up, you idiots. Think for yourselves instead of chanting the party line brought to you by Rush, Cheney, Palin and the rest of the lunatic fringe. Really. Sincerely. Before your own stupidity sinks your ship.

May 8, 2010 at 12:01 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Jess and Screamin' Mimi, just to clarify for you both... the Tea Party is not the same as Republicans. That would be rather redundant.

Instead, the Tea Partiers are those of us that are fed up with progressives that have hijacked both parties, and they would like to return the governance of this nation to a more fiscally prudent and Constitutionally thoughtful bunch of senators and representatives accordingly.

You all would know that if you would get your news from other sources than simply Maddow, Olberman, Daily Kos, National Politburo Radio (NPR), the Commie News Network, or other state-run media propaganda sources.

Open your minds a little and at least SEE what the other side says it is instead of just taking the word of the opposition without question.


May 8, 2010 at 2:13 PM  
Anonymous Jess said...

This to me is what Woodstock was about, not old white men wearing tri cornered hats and buckled shoes singing I'm proud to be an American. Don't know if it is the same time frame though.


May 8, 2010 at 2:51 PM  
Anonymous Jess said...

T.Paine, I think you need to look at some polling cross tabs as far as the Tebaggers. The majority identify as republican, from all the polling I have seen bandied around. Ok, so Hatch, Ensign, Coburn, Vitter et al are all progressive or what? Puhleaze, I won't insult your intelligence if you don't insult mine ok. As far as watching or reading things from other places, where would I go? Fox where lying has been an art form for many years, Politico which has already admitted to getting talking points from Republicans like Dick Cheney so they can spread the lies. Maybe Newsmax, again lying is an artform. Sorry, I want facts so I will stick with center or center left run blogs, newspapers and tee vee. CNN has been turning into Fox lite, bringing on people like Erick son of Erick to give news, no thanks. You stick to where you get your news and the rest of us will correct you with facts and data to make sure you get the right information, how is that for a deal? My eyes are opened but I have this particular fondness for truth in reporting. I know, it's crazy librul commie talk, I just prefer it that way, as do many others.

You keep using these words, following the Constitution, but I do not think it means the same to some people that they think it means, h/t Princess Bride. As one example, that whole Patriot Act to "keep us safe" while taking away our liberties to be secure in our home without fear of our phone lines being tapped just because.

May 8, 2010 at 4:16 PM  
Blogger Tim said...

I won't single anyone out here (TP)
but are any of you(TP) birthers?
Not that theirs any thing wrong with that(TP) but it would clear a few things up..
Just saying.........

May 8, 2010 at 6:03 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Jess, you are horribly mistaken if you think you are being provided with just the "facts" from your left of center news sources.

That is the very reason why network news, weekly lefty magazines, major newspapers (NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times etc.) are losing HUGE market share.

People are realizing that they are NOT getting the facts and have stopped turning to those places to get their news.

I'd be curious to hear what "lies" you think come from "right wing" media too.

I am sure there are falsehoods, mistakes, and demagoguery to be found throughout the political spectrum of the media, but I guarantee you that I can find three examples of such from the left for every one you find on the right, ma'am.

And as far as the Constitution goes, I am very well versed in what it says, what the Founders intended in its formation, and the thoughts and acts of our Founders in establishing our federal government and the Constitution.

I'd be willing to bet that there are more than a couple of people that read this blog that cannot even tell you who the primary author of the Constitution was, let alone what the heck it says.

It would seem that people of my age are not as knowledgeable and the younger generations are even less so as to our nation's history and laws.

The Constitution is NOT a living breathing document to be re-interpreted by whomever happens to hold power. It is supposed to provide core principles that are to be followed as intended.

Further, if the need to change an article therein does become necessary, the Founders in their brilliance set up the amendment process with which to do precisely that.

It does not mean that we can just ignore the parts that we don't think are relevant anymore. It doesn't mean that we can find "rights" within it that are simply not there, such as the "right" to abortion.

Further, while I have some serious issues with the Patriot Act, evidently your president does not as most of it is still in tact.

Further, your phone lines etc cannot be tapped without a warrant UNLESS you are in contact with a known or suspected terrorist. Don't talk to the Taliban, al Qaida, etc. and you should be just fine.

By the way, Princess Bride is a great movie! :)

May 8, 2010 at 6:35 PM  
Anonymous Jess said...

Now here is that little preamble, we all learned from either watching the show or in some cases, reruns of Schoolhouse Rock.
We the people of the United States of America, in order to form a more perfect union...to ourselves and our posterity...to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Now unless, these guys were crystal ball viewers, how would they know what might happen in the future? This was the starting point, otherwise we would not have amendments to it, would we?

Wanna talk rights, then let's talk about someone's right to be all over my face with their religion when I am an atheist. What about their rights to pray to one God when there is no evidence of any Gods, never mind just the Christian God. This would be the Bill of Rights, you know the first 10 amendments to that Constitution thing, I simply am to young to know about because it is all historical and stuff. Maybe you have it mixed up the way John(fake n bake) Boehner did at his teabagapalooza with Bachmann.

Who said anything about rights to have an abortion, the courts took that up, the way they should have when it was brought to them. Roe v Wade was not an assault on the Constitution was it? It was upholding a silly woman's constitutional right to privacy, due to the 14th amendment, just like a man has. Something already enshrined in that Constitution for us even though we are just women. You know it is sometimes hard because we don't have the thinking brain men do, we need them to hold our hands and make our decisions for us. Why things always end up in abortion discussion perplexes me. Here is the deal, I am going to assume you are a male, so here is my short but sweet answer to you on abortion. If you don't want to have one, don't, leave me to make my own damn choice about my own damn body. Why men even get involved with it, beyond the sperm donation is beyond me. It is ultimately a decision for a women, her partner if she chooses and her doctor.
So you say it is not a living breathing document. Still think it's a good idea to own people, like the original thinking did? Want to go back to only white, male land owners having a vote and we women/not white land owners can take a flying fuck, even though we are more than 51% of the population here? We can just go ahead and get rid of that pesky 9th amendment that says, paraphrasing, we cannot own people.

Oh and the whole condescending tone, towards those of us that are younger is so very much, totally appreciated, especially by me. People like me, in my twenties, are just really ignorant about all things history wise and what, we should just sit down, shut up and let the elders tell us what to do? HELL to the big no with that one as much as you and some of the people on the right side of the political spectrum may want us to be. I tell you what, you put me up to a Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck et al any day of the week, and I can show you how much young people know about history. It will also show you how ignorant some older people are as far as history goes.

Like I said before, you find your "news" where you find it,the rest of us will find ours and get you the correct information. I am not willing to get into a pissing contect with you, because like one of our former posters you just don't want to listen to reason.

May 8, 2010 at 7:31 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

TP: OK, have fun there :)

Suzan: I will too (again).

Randal: Teabag Rock, God knows what that would sound like.

Dave: Tea-stock, LOL. I could just picture some of those people tripping. Or maybe I'd rather not picture that.

Jess: I'll pass too.

SM: Calling it Woodstock and having it on 9/11 -- what's this "original thought" you speak of? Maybe their ship will sink.

TP: Whether the "media" (in general or a specific news source) is liberal or conservative is subjective. It's in the eye of the beholder. For every person of your political persuasion who says the New York Times or CNN is "too liberal," there's somebody else who says those same publications are "too conservative."

It's subjective. You can't very well hold a piece of litmus paper next to it, see what color it turns and then say "aha, liberal!"

I've seen articles at Yahoo and MSNBC that seem slanted against Obama or a Democratic reform bill; and I don't think "media bias! Yahoo is conservative!"

And I'm sure you're aware of this: when you subscribe to a cable TV service, the most basic bare-bones package includes Fox. If you want MSNBC you have to pay extra. I don't really care, but that gets Fox out to a whole lot more people.

Jess: Cool link. Thanks for the memories -- the Airplane and the Smothers Brothers TV show. I still have the album (Surrealistic Pillow) that those 2 songs are from. I never play my old '60s records any more but I still have them.

Tim: "Not that there's anything wrong with that" LOL.

May 8, 2010 at 7:49 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Jess: Excellent answer. Your comment must have come in while I was typing out my long reply.

May 8, 2010 at 7:52 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Next, I absolutely don't think it is or should have been a right to ever own people either. There were many of our Founders that were vehemently against slavery, but at the price of our nation's unanimous vote for independence (except New York, which abstained) they agreed to the horrible compromise of not addressing this issue at the time.

John Adams was very much against slavery and knew that it would be only a matter of time before we had to face the issue, as did Thomas Jefferson who owned slaves, and we did face that issue eventuallly in 1861 with thousands of lives lost to expiate that sin from our national conscience.

And as you pointed out, the amendment process was used to finally give slaves their rights to freedom, just as the process was intended by the Founders.

That doesn't mean that the Constitution is living and breathing. These changes through the amendment process were supposed to be difficult to pass so that we would not make amendments for "light or transient reasons".

I do not know how versed Governor Palin is in our history, but I guarantee you that Glen Beck is very knowledgeable and would far outstrip most people, including myself.

Lastly, I most certainly am willing to listen to reason, or at least other people's differing view-points, hence my reason for reading Mr. Harper's blog.

Although I am typically diametrically opposed to nearly all of your viewpoints politically, Jess, I have even learned things from you, ma'am.

It is not good to put yourself in an echo chamber of only similar viewpoints, even if you think the opposing sources of those viewpoints are misguided or "lying" as you have said.

You obviously are quite intelligent and have great passion. Look at both sides to either strengthen your own opinions and grow, or to find out where you might perhaps be wrong and grow also.

And please don't assume I am trying to be a jerk towards you or anyone else. I know sometimes I can seem arrogant or sarcastic, but such is not my intention, and I do appreciate your point of view, regardless of whether I agree with it, my friend. Cheers!

May 9, 2010 at 12:38 AM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Tim, no I am not a "birther". Obama meets all of the qualifications for the presidency as stated in the Constitution.

He doesn't have the knowledge, experience, or credentials, but he does have those minimum qualifications.

Jess, I sincerely apologize if I came across as condescending towards younger people.

I simply have seen too much anecdotally to support that conclusion.

My youngest daughter is just set to graduate high school next month. Had I not helped guide her education in history and civics, she would be fairly ignorant about our nation's history.

Before we started she could tell me about Harriet Tubman, Martin Luther King, the destruction of many of our nation's Indians during our westward expansion, and of course the evils of the institution of slavery in the United States.

And while all of those things are important and should absolutely be taught without bias, she couldn't tell me who Alexander Hamilton was, or what was the significance of James Madison, or what the Federalist Papers were.

This seems to be fairly common with many of the people I come into contact with when the subject turns to history, politics, civics etc. That is why I say that many folks don't know American history, particularly younger folks.

It was not a swipe at you as I didn't even know your age previously. My apologies to you.

As for the abortion issue, I won't even bother giving you the litany of the reasons why I am vehemently in disagreement with you on the subject because it would not matter to you, nor would the logic of my arguments and appeals to your heart likely make a difference to you at this point in your life, ma'am.

Suffice it to say that I have been, am currently, and always will work for causes in support of all human life from the point of conception until natural death.

As for your right to be an atheist, I fully support and would defend your right to be so. I would also support someone's right to be a Christian, Taoist, Hindu etc. You have a Constitutional right to your choice of religion or non-religion as you see fit.

You do NOT have a right to not be offended by others when they speak of their religions in public if they so choose.

Likewise you are free to express your views on why you do not believe in the existence of any god even when that offends them, and they cannot do anything to stop you except simply walk away.

May 9, 2010 at 12:38 AM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

TP's pretensions at open mindedness are amusing. His parroting Rush's "State run media" proves he is a dittohead. And this gem, "I guarantee you that Glen Beck is very knowledgeable and would far outstrip most people, including myself", is a hoot. If Glenn(Bush-was-a-progressive)Beck is pouring the koolade, he drinks it.

BTW, it is CORPORATE run media, TP. Really.

Obviously TP idolizes Limbaugh and Beck and perhaps fancies himself as one of the authoritarian right wing propagandists.

I have a fun idea TP. Why don't you run along and fact check Olbermann and Maddow for us. Tell us some truth. We'd love to compare their accuracy and veracity with Beck's and Limbaugh's. (Quoting Fox and other corporate media does not count. And we won't quote NPR.) Factcheck.org and Snopes are pretty objective.

In the meantime try to figure out what John Kenneth Galbraith meant when he said, "“The modern conservative is engaged in one of mankind’s oldest pursuits; finding a moral justification for greed.”

May 9, 2010 at 4:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tea partiers and republicans are not synonymous. Anyone who believes they can get facts from only a couple media sources are foolish, and gullible. You have to get the story from many sources, right, left, and middle of the road, and THEN use some of the brain power you hopefully have, to make sense out of the whole mess. If it looks like a duck...well, you know.

May 9, 2010 at 6:34 AM  
Blogger Tim said...

I've been away sick,so I'm a bit late in commenting. Your comment was brilliant,My hat is off to you. Yes I'm an old Fuck and wear hats. That comment kinda of summed up my feelings on Righties way of thinking.
You are also correct in that theirs no changing or even coming to a point of compromise.

May 9, 2010 at 7:42 AM  
Anonymous Jess said...

T Paine, civics is not being taught hardly anywhere anymore, so bolstering your daughters' education will only help her. I do applaud you for that as a teacher in training. I was in honors History classes all through high school, and was fortunate enough to have parents that showed me more than I was being taught. This is how I learned myself, so she will thank you later.

As far as the apology, don't worry about it, I am usually the baby everywhere I go and sometimes we all forget this here Internet thing, is not made up of all the same demographic as we are. I include myself there, because I can get into current pop/celebrity things and people have NO idea what I am talking about.

The abortion issue, no you won't be able to talk me out of my position on it any time soon. Here is the deal with me and many of my pro choice brothers and sisters. We believe in the woman's right to choose, that is all. It isn't like I or others are sitting here going, ooh I think I will go get pregnant so I can have that abortion. Not at all, I am as against the process as you may be, I just want to have the choice, should I need it, to terminate my own body's growths. I want sovereign rule over my body and not have a group of zealots coming in and saying no, you can't do this because God says it is bad. Appeals to my heart, about a medical procedure that is a heartwrenching decision for a woman to make. No thanks, I have held the hands of a girlfriend while she went through this and saw her heartbreak up close and personal. I don't need an appeal to my heart, but thanks for trying to at least think about doing it.

You know what, I do try and look at other points of view, I really do but I cannot stand liars who make things up just for the sake of making them up. This is why I will stick with what I know and go research for myself. I am glad you are here really I am, you are way nicer than another rightie Tom's house had to put up with for a while. Unlike you though, I cannot go to a rightie blog and be given tne respect of having my views aired. I have been banned without so much as a by your leave. It seems to me that happens to many of us on the left side of the aisle. We go to other places, try to have our views aired, then poof, we are gone because the right does not tolerate dissent from their views. As an example, see those tea party candidates that are getting rid of any moderates that may be in the right side of the aisle. No, I think I will stay over on left, lefty world and have the more moderate faction of my own party guide me with things news wise.

Oh man, saying I am obviously intelligent, you really do not know me AT ALL :)

To all you Mom's that may post here Happy Mother's Day and the rest of you mothers, well, you know, Happy mothers day to you too ;)

May 9, 2010 at 8:42 AM  
Blogger TomCat said...

How dare they! I was at Woodstock. I have not attendended a rock concert since, because nothing could ever compare to it. For these prople to mention Woodstock in conjunction with their hate-fest is obscene.

May 9, 2010 at 8:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

T. Paine

"The Constitution is NOT a living breathing document to be re-interpreted by whomever happens to hold power. It is supposed to provide core principles that are to be followed as intended"

I hear this from Conservatives all the time. But anyone who studies Civil Rights knows that it isn't true. You might check how Conservative Courts made a mockery of the 14th Amendment in "Plessy vs Ferguson" and "Santa Clara vs Southern Pacific Railroad", as prime examples. IN each case the courts took a law that was clearly written with a purpose in mind and picked it apart (by calling it the letter of the law) and then used it contrary to what it was written for.

Take the 15th Amendment. Conservative Courts said "OK the law says all citizens have the right to vote (it was written for the ex slaves)but nothing in it say we can't give literacy test and charge poll taxes" - guess who got it - the ex slaves it was written to protect!

In the cases where Liberal Courts eventually (after decades) overturned those decisions they did it by the INTENT rather then the "LETTER"

You may argue it was long ago but you constantly invoke the founding fathers and you should note these corruptions started in the 19th Century and weren't overturned until my lifetime the mid 20th Century - my lifetime - with rulings like "Brown.." and "Loving vs the State of Virginia"

Then Conservatives Screamed (like you are) that the Liberals are twisting the law.

Not to say Liberals haven't done it, but realize that both sides are guilty.


May 9, 2010 at 10:32 AM  
Anonymous Jess said...

Tim, hope you are feeling much better. Tom Cat, they try to take any event of note and turn it to something stupid every single time.

May 9, 2010 at 12:11 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Dubya, I am indeed a proud "ditto head" and not because I need Rush to do my thinking for me, but rather because for a VERY long time he was the only one out there with a voice for conservatism that said what I was already thinking.

The point is that I also listen to NPR and Olberman and have a subscription to the NY Times so that I get a balanced perspective of news and viewpoints.

Hell, the fact that I am reading and commenting on Mr. Harper's decidedly left-of-center blog should tell you that I am indeed seeking out other viewpoints in the attempt to be "open-minded". Can you say the same, Dubya?

The fact that you parrot the left-wing perspective on Beck, suggests that you have not actually spent much, if any, time listening to him. He employs over twenty researchers and several well-respected historians for his radio and TV show. Tell me who on the left does that much!

For the record, Dubya, Rush routinely pays for and publishes his accuracy rating on FACTS (not necessarily opinions) he states on his show. He has proven to have over a 98% accuracy rating as per the independent company that checks this for years now.

I'd like to see Olberman even pay to have someone fact check him, let alone what his accuracy rating might be. I know that I routinely catch him in exaggerations, demagoguery, and outright falsehoods.

Further, Galbraith aside, I would submit to you that the rank and file conservatives simply want to keep as much of their OWN earned money as possible.

The progressives are the ones demanding that the nebulously- defined rich pay ever more in taxes so that they can benefit from the largesse of the federal government accordingly.

Now you tell me, who is the greedy one? The one that EARNS his own money, or the one that covets that other person's money?

May 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM  
Anonymous Jess said...

OMG T.Paine you made me really laugh when you said the Beckster employs fact checkers. He does, really, this is not a trick or anything is it? I am going to go google that to see if it is true. If it was, he would have known George the lesser was not a progressive by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, the other day he was yakking on about how the recycling or something in VA was going to be chipped, when that is not happening the way he said it is. Is that truth or is he just so paranoid from years of cocaine use? He seems to think his speech is being stifled because people like me called his sponsors to tell them he is a racist mysoginistic prick. While he has every right to spout off what he wants, I have that same right to tell who pays him he is a prick. I will give him kudos for one thing. During this past week, he was on Fox and Friends and told those yokels there he thought the Constitutional rights of the NY SUV bomber guy, should not be tossed for convenience. He had to say it twice and as much as it pains me to agree with him, he got that right. He has this thing that everyone is going to be rounded up and taken to camps to be retrained. The guy is whack and that is the kindest thing I could possibly say about him. What is sad though, and I watch him once in a while to see, he is going into mental meltdown right in front of everyone and his bosses don't seem to care about his mental health. I have to admit to watching in the hopes I get to see the breakdown first hand.

You asked who on the left fact checks, I give you exhibit A, Ms Rachel, I am smarter than everyone in the room Maddow. She will even ask her interview subjects did I get this right, if they tell her no she tries to get out of them what it was that was wrong and goes to correcting right away. Olbermann does it too and will come back the next day and correct himself if he gets something wrong, so to say he does not is not truthful. Hell it is lying, another word I wish people would use more. If someone is lying say it dammit, don't be beating the bush with misstatements, misspoken or silly words like that. Lying is lying is lying and it should be called out when done.

Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, while not newsmen, they do get their facts right or they come back and self correct.

Now one thing that does concern me, among the millions. How many "liberal" voices are there on Fox News to correct any factual misreps there might be by the conservative voices? No you cannot use, Hannity saying he is non political or Beck saying the same thing or Bill ( I love my falafels with loofah please) O'Reilly. You cannot use Joe Lieberman, when he goes on their shows as the token liberal, as an example either. So now, with the exception of those, tell me about a progressive voice on Fox, just one. You know, like on MSNBC we have Deutsch, Helicopter Harold Ford, Old man, slavery was good for Africans brought here as slaves, Pat Buchanan and the douchiest of them all, Joe Scarboro(sp) in the morning 3 hours. See, I can get different viewpoints and I don't even need to leave MSNBC, can you say the same about Fox News, I don't think so, really. Since the media market is cornered by mainly right leaning people, it is very difficult for a liberal voice to be heard. I don't give a rat's fart about how the media is supposedly so "liberal" when in fact the total opposite is true.

May 9, 2010 at 3:05 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Nothing is too outrageous or dishonest for the Right. Cheney has the gall to accuse Obama of treason (aid and comfort to the enemy) when HE deliberately lied us into a war as leverage for his personal power and profit for corporate cronies. Lies given to start war with Iraq are documented. 935 times the Bush regime lied to get their war. There’s your real treason. It is the inherent fascism within the corporatist government that shields the war criminals.
Every word spoken by the right is intended to frighten and anger Americans. Why? It is designed to persuade people to vote for the party that represents the economic elite. Yes, greed is a factor. The rich have never been richer and taxed less, and STILL they, along with their indoctrinated dupes, are the loudest crybabies. "Wah, it's socialism”,” Boo hoo, they want to tax the rich”. "Eek a mouse", screams the panicking elephant. It would be pitiful if it were not so comical and a bit too much fascistic. The richest one percent must have EVERYTHING their way, or it’s socialism. There’s their bottom line. They are spoiled, hateful brats.

Meanwhile they want “less government” to clean up corporate oil spills, but it’s ok to tap our phones, monitor our internet and library use. Democratic socialism is demonized because it opposes undemocratic corporatism.
Since the righties love to falsely define liberalism as communism, I will give you a tip. American Republican conservatism is EXACTLY what the top one percent economic elite say it is. Period. It is corporatism. Corporatism is a word you will never hear from the right wing propagandists. This is why they have taken ownership of corporate media to influence gullible voters. Corporate owned media is fact. “Liberal media” is pure right wing propaganda. Remember the media pro war frenzy before the lies were revealed to the public? Remember the NY Times withholding the torture stories before the '04 election?

Look what you defend. You want the economic elite to run the country. You defend a health care system that bankrupts sick people. You defend a system where a citizen’s right of free speech has been re-defined as corporate money in politics. You defend the golden rule, where those with the gold make the rules. Corporations are not persons. Money is not speech. I have to wonder what it is about these words that ring hollow or don’t register with you.
For the life of me, I see a radical right that resembles a cult more than anything else. The authoritarian followers hang on every word of their authoritarian leaders exactly like cult members.

Let me know when you find any of Maddow's lies, buddy.

May 9, 2010 at 3:20 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

You asked, “I am indeed seeking out other viewpoints in the attempt to be "open-minded". Can you say the same, Dubya?” In fact, I do monitor both the right wing media and the mainstream corporate media. Of course I read progressive media as well. Funny thing, though, I’ve not once seen an article by George W. Bush at a progressive site. Can you explain this to me, please.

Where to begin?

Lies aplenty. Both Limbaugh and Beck say Obama is a socialist and a Marxist. That is flat out wrong. There are your two lies for each of them. Even Ron Paul tried to tell the conned-servatives this truth. "The question has been raised about whether or not our president is a socialist," Ron Paul said at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference . "I am sure there are some people here who believe it. But in the technical sense, in the economic definition of a what a socialist is, no, he's not a socialist. He's a corporatist, and unfortunately we have corporatists inside the Republican party and that means you take care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country."

Beck DID say Bush was a progressive. That is like saying Obama is a socialist. Both are patently false.

Ok, your turn. All you have to do now is find ONE instance where Rachel Maddow is as wrong (without a correction) as these two. I’m being more generous than your challenge to Jess with “but I guarantee you that I can find three examples of such from the left for every one you find on the right, ma'am.”

I’ll wait.

May 9, 2010 at 3:20 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Jess, I appreciate the fact that even those that are for keeping abortion legal often do not want to go through the procedure.

I am one that doesn't condemn those that have made the heart-wrenching choice of having an abortion. On the contrary, I feel profoundly sorry and take pity on them as typically, even if one does not believe that they are aborting a baby, there is often times something instinctual that makes that choice exceptionally difficult, as I suspect was the case with your friend.

I do have a lot less sympathy for those that choose to abort time and again as a form of birth control, however.

Jess, further I can definitely understand and appreciate your not wanting to take the abuse of going to a "right-wing" blog.

I was sorely disappointed when I first started blogging because I expected abuse (and often received it from the left) but I expected more from my fellow poltical travelers on the right and figured they would not be so nasty to those that disagreed with them. Sadly that is often not the case.

I typically will not even respond to hateful comments directed towards me. I have my own "conservative blog" and at the risk of breaking protocol and with Mr. Harper's indulgence, you are more than welcome to freely air your views on mine anytime.

I cannot say that we will agree, or that I won't make you angry with my postings, but I absolutely appreciate opposing viewpoints. That is how I LEARN, and hopefully so do others.

I have one gentleman who is a devout lefty that when he first started commenting was full of hate and discontent, probably because of the way he was treated on other right-wing blogs like you stated were your experiences.

Now that he knows that I am not going to belittle or attack him personally, we end up having some pretty interesting debates.

That is what I am after with this whole process. I don't want fools that only spout hateful rhetoric, and are not even open to the possibility that they may be wrong on a given issue.

I think we as a nation need to have civil debate, especially when we are in disagreement on vital issues. Sometimes we can find common ground and sometimes we will just have to agree to disagree. It doesn't mean we have to be cruel to each other though.

Erik, first let me say that I sincerely appreciate your civil discourse, sir. While you and I have different perspectives, there is still much in common. I can definitely appreciate your reasoned questions and responses.

That being said, I do agree that the court has also been guilty of interpretting the Constitution to fit right-wing standards in the past that were not the intent of the founders.

It is a damned sin that when slavery was abolished with the 15th amendement in 1870 that it took until 1964 for the 24th amendment was ratified to abolish poll taxes that, as you pointed out, were often used against Americans of color. Let me say that this legislation was passed those with strong support of the Republicans and it was often the southern Democrats that were opposed to it.

I cannot disagree with your point there. Furhter, I am not FOR the Republicans or AGAINST the Democrats. I am against the progressive movement that seeks to undermine the Constitution, and that is where I will continue to focus my energies, albeit it feels as if it is in vain nowadays in many ways.

May 9, 2010 at 3:30 PM  
Anonymous Jess said...

Don't forget this too, T Paine, ERA STILL has not been ratified and that was in the 1970s. That shocked me after I found that out. I thought I was an equal citizen, apparently I am not to this day.

We have Tom Tancredo recently saying Prez O won, because we don't have a literacy test. I believe he said something to the effect of, the people who cannot spell vote, voted in a president who is a committed socialist idealogue, which is totally lying. I for one, would LOVE him to be socialisitc but he is not. Now here is another one, that is frequently on Big Ed's show in the afternoon. Where is his equivalent on Fox News? No need to answer me because there is none and we all know it.

I'll check out your blog. Like you say, I may not agree but I will check it out for myself.

While I don't agree with abortion being used as birth control either, it is NONE of my business why it is being used, only that it be there for that person who wants to use it as such. I'm not going to judge anyone, for not wanting to carry a child if that is their decision. If we had better sex education there would be less and less abortions. The funding that has been put into abstinence education, is just really silly, because it has been proven time and time again abstinence ed is not working. I'll tell you one other thing, I have been at Planned Parenthood as an escort and have seen from both sides the fight. I can tell you one personal story about a fairly devoted Chritian woman that had been attending a "save the zygote" outside one such clinic one week and the very next month said woman is escorting a daughter into the clinic for an abortion. So here is this woman, saying, no YOU cannot have the choice available to you, but I want my kid to have it. Little hypocritical isn't it, especially when this woman asks me not to say anything to her, if I saw her at any other protests she and I may be at together. I have seen her more than once at a clinic in the city on the anti choice side. Will I say anything to her, nope. I won't even look in her direction because she is a liar and a hypocrite. I tend to not have a lot of love for people like that in my vicinity. See she wants me to suffer through 9 months of carrying something I amy not want to carry, but oh no, when it is me or mine, we can do whatever we want. See the disconnect there?

I don't know if you are aware of this, but Orrin Hatch stuck funding in the HCR bill, which he did not vote for by the way, for abstinence ed. People will have sex, it is a natural occuring thing and they should have all the information available to make good choices.

You keep saying the progressive movement to usurp the Constitution. That is Glenn Beck talk right there. I have seen him, more than once, say this on his show. What progressive movement is trying to do this so I can go see for myself?

May 9, 2010 at 5:23 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Jess, I actually said that Beck employs researchers and historians. I assume the purpose of which is to validate facts too.

While I don't fully agree with Beck's characterization of Bush junior as a progressive, I must admit that Bush did have some progressive tendencies.

Until Obama, he grew the federal government the largest amount in a generation. He expanded entitlement programs, including the massive drug benefits program, and he spent wildly on all manner of things not expressly authorized by constitutional law. I'd say in that respect that he was somewhat progressive.

That is a huge part of the reason that the Tea Party came into being. If the GOP had stayed true to conservatism, there would not have been any need for the Tea Party.

Just out of curiosity, Jess, what has Beck said that was racist or misogynistic? And by the way, I applaud your saying that he has a right to say what he will regardless!

So many times those on the left in particular don't want to grant that first amendment right to free speech to us evil conservatives. And I also agree that you have a right to complain to those buying advertising on his show, although I honestly don't know of any examples of racism etc that you asserted.

As for Maddow, I will take your word for it, as I admittedly don't watch her show. After Olberman I typically need to go take my blood pressure medicine. :)

Fox News has many people that are left of center in their employ. Right off the top of my head, I give you Juan Williams and Mara Liason (both from NPR). Also Geraldo Rivera is an employee.

Even Hannity for his debate panel always has at least one of the three panelists that is a lefty.

Susan Estrich is a huge left-winger who is often on Fox, although I do not know if she is a pundit or employee.

I am sure there are many more as well.

Used to be that Hannity's show was Hannity and Colmes, but Colmes was such a weak-ass liberal that he couldn't even hold his ground with the liberal side of the argument.

Too bad, because I often find Hannity to be just a little too smug anyway and a serious leftwing mind to challenge him would be a good thing.

May 9, 2010 at 6:01 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Dubya, you are truly funny if you think it is only the right that uses every word to frighten and scare people. Look at Obama saying how we must pass TARP or the economy will collapse, or we must pass healthcare so more people wont die. THOSE, sir, are the lies.

Further, the top 5% of wage earners in this country pay over 50% of the federal tax burden. The bottom 50% of wage earners in this country pay less than 5% of that burden as per the non-partisan Taxfoundation.org. The numbers vary slightly from year to year depending on tax law, but that is the gist of it.

So for you to cry in your implications that the rich don't pay their fair share is utter nonsense.

I don't hate the rich nor the poor. I have yet to ever be offered a job by a poor man though.

You think it is okay for unions to have PAC's and "free speech" but the corporations that Obama and the Democrats demonize are not allowed to defend themselves through their own free speech? Such was the case until the recent SCOTUS decision.

The media is by and large corporatist, but you are kidding yourself if you don't think they are left biased.

Remember when CBS's Dan Rather came up with that forged document about Bush, right before the presidential election in an effort to discredit him and throw the election into Kerry's favor?

Turns out a blogger proved that the document was false within a day or so. Rather still didn't back down on his false charges. I think even Jess would agree that this was a LIE!

The double standard in the media is amazing. Sandy Berger can stuff his pants full of classified documents embarrassing to the Clinton administration and the media will bury the story pages back in the paper, if covered much at all.

Can you imagine if Condi Rice, or God forbid, Karl Rove were to have done so? The NY Times would have been calling for him to be put in

Further, if you were so damned pissed about the Patriot Act under Bush, why aren't you upset that Obama has not totally dismantled it yet, as he promised he would?

I guess that issue disappeared from the media spotlight when Bush left office too.

Dubya, I would politely suggest that you look at what it is YOU are defending. It certainly doesn't seem like it is individual liberties and freedoms to me, sir.

May 9, 2010 at 6:42 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Dubya, I am tempted not to bother even responding to your diatribe, sir. You accuse me of talking points and yet you turn around and say things that are right out of the DNC playbook.

Not that Cheney even had the POWER to take us to war as VP, but how in the hell do you think he lied us into war, sir?

The entire Western World thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and had we not telegraphed our pending invasion by months, I suspect we would have found all sorts of evidence.

As it was, the WMD's that were documented as UNACCOUNTED FOR, were probably shipped to Syria or elsewhere and will likely come back to haunt us someday.

If you will recall, Dubya, even France and Hillary Clinton both agreed with the conclusion that Iraq had the unaccounted for weapons. It was hardly a Cheney fabrication for personal profit and glory.

Our congress, including many Democrats voted the authorization for Bush jr. to enforce U.N. resolution 1441 because even that corrupt and inept world body agreed that Iraq had WMD's.

Here is an excerpt of the text from that resolution, "Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometres, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,"

So put away your tired talking points which are little more than lies from the left after the fact.

Further I would absolutely argue that Obama is a Marxist/Socialist if you look at what those words actually mean and stop with the knee-jerk reaction assuming that the words are meant only as perjoratives.

I'll say it again, when the President takes over private industries, tells them what products or services to provide, dictates salaries of executives, ignores debts owed to their vendors, and gives unearned financial interests to the union, what the hell do you call that, sir?

When you mandate that citizens must purchase healthcare simply because they are living, how is that not dictatorial if not Marxist?

Those are not lies or school yard names that Beck, Limbaugh, or even I use in reference to Obama. They are descriptive words that have an accurate meaning.

May 9, 2010 at 6:42 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Jess, whether you think that a fetus is its own sentient being or just a mass of tissue is irrelevant in my mind. If left to God's plan, or nature if you prefer, the mass of cells will grow into a human with all of the potential for greatness with which any human is born.

I wonder how many amazing scientists, artists, teachers, doctors etc never got a chance at life. Have we aborted the future doctor that would find the cure for cancer or aids?

Even in our founding document as a country we the people were promised that this country was founded so that we could pursue LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. (I guess that doesn't include unborn life.)

And the fact that the baby inside is alive and can feel pain makes this even more terrible to my mind.

I personally believe the un-born baby is also endowed with a God-given soul. I absolutely respect your right to not believe this. But since I do believe this to be true, I have to earnestly defend this innocent life or answer for not doing so to God.

The equivalent for you, perhaps, would be for you to stand by when somebody smothered or shook a one year old to death. I know you wouldn't allow that to happen, if you had the power to stop it.

That doesn't mean that I will degrade, abuse, or act hatefully towards those that do get abortions, but I will try to be compassionate and persuasive so that they choose otherwise.

I am deeply saddened that this hypocritical lady of which you spoke didn't have the courage of her own convictions. That is very sad indeed.

I wasn't going to keep commenting on this topic, but you kept coming back to it, ma'am. Hopefully you can understand where I am coming from here, though, Jess.

May 9, 2010 at 7:03 PM  
Anonymous Jess said...

Here ya go TPaine for a starter course. From the San Francisco Examiner. Sarah Palin should be in a kitchen somewhere and just basically be quiet. I did search through Fox but shockingly enough I cannot find this there. Hmm, wonder why, no not really I don't.

The only people we are hearing about in Katrina are the scumbags. Hmm wonder what he could be talking about there. I don't since white people only "found" food and water to survive, while my brown brothers and sisters were doing some serious "looting" for the same survival.

Asking keith Ellison in an interview if he was a terrorist because of those "some people say" people that only exist in the minds of Beck, Rush and certain news people.

I could not find the racist thing I was looking for so I will concede on that,for the time being, but will call him a misogynistic prick still. If and when I find the racist thing, I will post it in the appropriate place.

Juan Williams, please, he would not know left from a hole in the ground. He may have been, at one time a long time ago, but not anymore. Geraldo Rivera, only thing I know about him, he opened a safe and Al Capone or something like that.

May 9, 2010 at 7:08 PM  
Anonymous Jess said...

Ouch, TARP was origintated by Bush when Paulson came to congress begging on his knees, his words, to get some coin or the world would end as we know it. Not in a good way like that old 80s song but in an Armageddon, fiery crash type way. People ARE dying without access to health care TPaine. They are and there is no getting around that. Yes you can go to the emergency room which by definition is for emergency, but you cannot get dialysis for kidney ailments on a continual basis or cancer treatments.

I have had 2 miscarriages, to me those are spontaneous abortions. Cannot tell me any different. My body rejected something that it did not want in there for whatever reason. We could ask the same thing about those. Did my body reject the future first female president? Probably because my yet to be borns will be very special you know :) Hard to say, because it has happened already and there was nothing to be done. Same thing with a woman choosing to abort medically. Whether or not part of her decision is, wow I wonder if I do this, will I be getting rid of a future Nobel winner. You cannot deal with things that might be, you have to deal with how things are, otherwise you are second guessing yourself to death and it will make you crazy. I totally understand where you are coming from believe me. One of my closest friends in the world, has the exact same view as you do. We just agree to disagree on this particular subject, because neither of us will be moved to the others opinion and that is okay. I know when I go to that anti-death penalty protest, she will be right there standing beside me, fighting for the right to life of the person we are there for.

May 9, 2010 at 7:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

T Paine said:

“Let me say that this legislation was passed those with strong support of the Republicans and it was often the southern Democrats that were opposed to it”

You just fell for one of the biggest Republican lies about the Civil Rights era. It was very easy to blame it on the Southern Democrats because they were the most vocal. But in fact they had help from the Midwestern and Southwestern Republicans. Barry Goldwater said in his 1960 book “The conscience of a Conservative” that while he favors Civil Rights for Negroes, he doesn’t believe telling the state of Mississippi how they could treat them”
No- Conservatives weren’t racist, they just believed in strong state’s rights. Luckily they weren’t put to that test (in other words no one came and lynched Goldwater’s family).
So Barry Goldwater was the against the Civil Rights act, so was Ronald Reagan (“bad bill!”, “can’t legislate morality”) and others. Reagan become Governor campaigning for a State Ballot to allow Landlords to Discriminate in Housing (thrown out for being unconstitutional)
If Republicans were the big Civil Rights Supporters as you say then surly you know about 1964 when the Goldwater anti-Civil rights conservatives beat out the Rockefeller Liberals and Goldwater carried only the deep south states in the election. WOW! Now why would you think all those Southern Democrats would vote for a Republican? Maybe because the Republican’s had an Anti Civil rights stance.
This lead the way for the famous Nixon Southern Strategy which brought those disillusioned Southerners into the Republican Party. Did you know that arch segregationalist Strom Thurmond didn’t trust Nixon and wanted Reagan in 68 instead (what an endorsement)? Gradually the Liberals and the Progressives of the Party (including the California Delegation) were driven out.

I invite you to Google a series of lectures Jack Kemp did in the 90, stating how he believes Conservatism and Civil Rights can mix. He points out that if Conservatives like Reagan truly believe that the Civil Rights bills were bad bills and if they truly believed in Civil Rights then why didn’t they try come out with any bills of their own – instead of trying to defeat every one that came along? Did you know that Nixon had promised the South he was going to appoint Supreme Court Justices to overturn “Brown”? His first two appointees were for that purpose but shot down by the Senate.

Jacks nickname became the “Bleeding Heart Conservative”

No Sir, Conservatives and Republicans were (are) no friends of Civil Rights


May 9, 2010 at 11:19 PM  
Blogger TomCat said...

Erik said “Let me say that this legislation was passed those with strong support of the Republicans and it was often the southern Democrats that were opposed to it”

You are correct, Sir, but those Dixiecrats, as they were known then, left the Democratic Party because of that defeat. They are now the GOP base.

May 10, 2010 at 11:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


I was quoting T Paine and replying to him.


May 10, 2010 at 12:01 PM  
Anonymous Dr Kiss Injure said...

The American "hippie" movement was the death knell for the New Left. Thanks, in part, to willing and self-acknowledged CIA MK-ULTRA guinea pig Ken Kesey.

Baby Boomers, esp American, are a pathetic lot really.

May 10, 2010 at 1:51 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Dr. Kiss,
And just what generation developed the PC or mac you are using to spew such nonsense?

Speaking of nonsense..

Rather was deceived on the documents. Bush's refusal to take a physical, elitist, privileged assignment to the "champaign unit" of the Guard, etc.is all true.

So nobody dies due to lack of healthcare? Well, Rush, I mean TP, here are just a few of Limbaugh's lies on health care alone. Anything not direct lie is blatant fear and anger mongering.

Have a look:
"this health care plan and the entire Obama agenda is frighteningly close to the National Socialism policies of Nazi Germany.”
"Look who is acting Nazi-like anyway? Who is it that's sending out thugs to beat people up at these meetings?...It's the Obama White House."
Quoting Bernie Sanders, who said, "'Does Barack Obama want to kill off the old people or the disabled?' That is insane," Limbaugh responded, "It's not insane. It's going to happen! It's going to happen."
"On page 16 of the House bill, it's right there, and you've heard people quote from it. I'm going to summarize it, page 16: private insurance will become illegal. Insurance companies cannot write new policies, people will lose their existing policy if they change jobs, if they change coverage, or if they change prices. Once any aspect of your private health insurance changes after this bill goes into effect, you can't renew it. You have to go public option."
August 10, 2009, "you will lose your private insurance and your doctor. It's on page 16 in the House plan."
When a woman at a town hall meeting told Sen. Arlen Specter that the House bill would let a 74-year-old man with cancer die without treatment, Limbaugh agreed: "she's reading from the bill. She's got it there, and he says it's a 'malicious rumor,' and it's not."
"There are people who are actually fearful that if they are Republicans they will be discriminated against in terms of health care because this is such an ideologically political administration that does have a bunch of enemies."
"You are going to get treatment based on how much some government agency or bureaucratic thinks you're worth. Who knows how that's going to be decided, the degree to which you have a sickness or an illness or a disease, your age, are you working or not, are you a drag on the system anyway? Did you vote for Obama?"
"This kind of fear that's arrived, invasion of privacy, they'll know everything about me. They're going to know that when they get your medical records digitized, which is going to be part of national health care under the guise of facilitating your care. But the purpose will actually be for them to know and to be able to blackmail you or use whatever information they have about you and your treatment."
"Sarah Palin has rocked 'em with that one because she's dead right. They are death panels."
“He (Obama)admitted he's going to wipe out private insurance."
"I have not said one lie about what Obama's plan is."

And Cheney: "pretty well confirmed" that an Iraqi intelligence officer met with September 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta shortly before the attacks. On the September 14, 2003, edition of Meet the Press, Cheney repeated his claim that Iraq and 9-11 are linked, saying: "If we're successful in Iraq ... we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9-11."

I think you owe me a few more Olbermann or Maddow lies, my friend...Or I'd say your bluff has been called.

May 10, 2010 at 4:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

T Paine

I know you are busy, but I'm still waiting for a reply of Conservatives and Civil Rights


May 11, 2010 at 8:00 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Are you still here?

Here's a couple more doozies from Rush. I would assume you agree, since Rush never lies.

Limbaugh: " "We don't retract anything we do here because we never lie and make things up on this program"

"Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate"

On his May 4 program, Rush Limbaugh said: "Guess what? Faisal Shahzad is a registered Democrat. I wonder if this SUV had an Obama sticker on it. Faisal Shahzad is a registered Democrat."

All true, right?

Let's see some of those Olbermann/Maddow lies, please.

Let me help you out. Here are the transcripts.


Without you to enlighten us, we are lost. ;-)

May 12, 2010 at 9:56 AM  
Anonymous Dr Kiss Injure said...

"Dr. Kiss,
And just what generation developed the PC or mac you are using to spew such nonsense?"

Nonsense? One only need skim through this comments thread to have a real appreciation for what, to paraphrase Aleister Crowley, can be best understood as the meaningless malignancy of the cranial centered false head.

Stacked and heavy weighted up top - just like "we," the one-eyed patriarchy, like 'em. They fall over much easier that way.

As for computers and the (DARPA created continuity of government and intelligence gathering apparatus) "internet," I'd be more than happy to send you a telegram or snail mail if you'd like.

May 12, 2010 at 10:35 AM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Dr. K.
Every generation has proven itself to be cursed with dangerous idiots.

We just glorify them more now.

Kesey was not a boomer, by the way.

May 12, 2010 at 12:14 PM  
Anonymous Dr. Kiss Injure said...

The U.S. Baby Boomer generation extensively utilized the inverted runic symbol for "life" (in other words, "death") and was told to called it a "peace symbol."

Additionally, they were told it was "hip" to drive around in German manufactured automobiles, designed, in part, by Adolf Hitler.

"Peace and Love Flower Power Children" also congregated on "Haight" Street in San Francisco.

It's quite obvious to me this was someones idea of a sick prank. Fascists have historically been notorious evil pranksters.

The CIA at the time, through their study of Huxleyan methods for world "stability;" in addition to the funding of humanistic psychologist Carl Rogers and later New Age Christ channeling scribe William Thetford, were also "into" "peace and love" - as a means of social engineering and controlled "revolution" of course.

Furthur Reading:
What Were the Sixties?



May 13, 2010 at 11:31 AM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Dr. K,
There was no conspiracy behind Hippies driving VW's on Haight Street. This is simply due to the fact that these were the cheapest places to rent and vehicles to drive.

LSD was abandoned as an instrument of social control because, like hypnosis, it was unpredictable and ineffective.

"Orne said he would only be disturbed about CIA attempts to use hypnosis for the control of agent behavior if they were successful. "I know too much about hypnosis for me to be disturbed about this; because, as is made clear in umpteen papers and umpteen lectures, hypnosis is an extremely ineffective way of controlling behavior."

Good old corporate American media has proven to be the best social control. Look at the outstanding job of propaganda done by Fox and Limbaugh. The brainwashed masses eat it up. "Bush is a progressive" and "Obama is a Marxist" prove it.

Hippies are the group least influenced by the corporate media. If anything the hippie counterculture has had a positive effect on society. Environmental awareness, social justice, and peace activism have all grown from their efforts. Their views are the exact opposite of militarism and totalitarianism.

LSD proved to be unexpected blowback from the government's experiment.

May 13, 2010 at 2:06 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

3.)Olbermann and Maddow both have claimed that the Arizona immigration law was passed due to the racist intent of the Arizona government and its citizens. Considering that the Arizona law specifically gives ONLY the power to enforce the existing and yet unenforced federal law, this is preposterous. Further, it has since been altered in order to clarify specifically against racial profiling. Lastly, 70% of Arizonans approve of the law, and there is no damned way that seventy percent of the state is racist. This is one lie for each of these stooges.

4.)I caught Olbermann and Chris Mathews spew the White House lie about how Obamacare would not cause rationing and would reduce health care costs. Once again I will show how this is false, Obama knows it is false, and his minions in the press should also know it is false.

When one adds 30 million new people to the health care rolls, thereby increasing the amount of patients needing access to doctors, and then you provide disincentives to doctors by telling them what they will be able to charge for certain procedures and how much they can be reimbursed by insurance, you will inevitably have doctors leaving the profession through retirement, attrition, and disgust; therefore, you have significantly more patients now being treated by significantly fewer doctors. Simple supply and demand economics tells you that increased demand for fewer services will result in the cost of those services to go up and increased waiting for those services to be provided (i.e. rationing will occur based on need, or possibly political contributions to the DNC down the road.) There are two more lies for you for a total of six thus far.

6.)See the link for another Olbermann lie regarding Fox News: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpPesCjgGzM&feature=related

7.)And here are seven lies “from the left” from the father of lies:


8.)And another: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rLcG8GKM8g&feature=related

9.) Finally, Olbermann made the comment not too long back of how his was the highest rated cable show, when that is patently false. O’Reilly regularly beats the prime time line up of Maddow and Olbermann etc combined EVERY single night, and that often times includes the re-runs of these left-wing ideologues shows on the same nights.

Dubya said "Ok, your turn. All you have to do now is find ONE instance where Rachel Maddow is as wrong (without a correction) as these two. I’m being more generous than your challenge to Jess with “but I guarantee you that I can find three examples of such from the left for every one you find on the right, ma'am.” I’ll wait."

And for clarification, if you re-read my statement, I said lies told from the left”. I didn’t mention Maddow as I seldom watch Maddow and my challenge was in reference to the “left” accordingly.

I am curious how you are going to attempt to discredit these lies or better yet find more (or any actually, as you haven’t provided any credible ones thus far) demonstrably false lies from the right. Regardless, enjoy sir.

June 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Dubya, sorry it took so long to get back to you on this “challenge”. Needless to say, I have been exceptionally busy. Your comments are in quotes below.

"Lies aplenty. Both Limbaugh and Beck say Obama is a socialist and a Marxist. That is flat out wrong. There are your two lies for each of them."

No sir. You are wrong. Webster’s dictionary defines Marxism as: the economic and political theories of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels that hold that human actions and institutions are economically determined and that class struggle is needed to create historical change and that capitalism will ultimately be superseded by communism.

Let me see… Obama starts out as a “community organizer” in order to generate hate and discontent amongst the poor to rise up in class struggle against the upper class and the institutions of capitalism.

Next, Obama as president seizes PRIVATE corporations and banks, fires executives, dictates what products they can make and services they are to provide, dictates what salaries the executives are to be given, ignores the debts of the companies in reference to those financing the debt and gives an unduly generous amount of control and assets to the workers via the unions. Sounds like text book Marxism to me!

There are plenty more examples of Obama as a Marxist, but those alone are enough to make my point and reject your first two “lies”.

Dubya said, "Beck DID say Bush was a progressive. That is like saying Obama is a socialist. Both are patently false."

Bush was a progressive in an economic sense, if not a foreign policy one. Federal spending and the expansion of nearly all aspects of the federal government occurred under his asinine stewardship.

He expanded the socialistic Medicare Program with the prescription drug benefit and thus added the largest new component to its spending since its inception. This, despite the impending insolevency of the program even sooner than social security will be.

These facts alone make for a very arguable case that Bush was indeed an economic progressive.

So thus far of your three examples presented, you still have not come up with a valid unarguable lie.

Nonetheless, in return I will still give you the following:

1.) Olbermann has constantly and consistently pointed out on his show of how the Tea Party is racist and no people of color are a part of it. I give you this link as proof of his lie.

2.)I also heard Olbermann say on his demagoguery extravaganza he calls a show that Beck had attacked Obama’s kids after having said that all politicians kids should be off limits. His proof was that Beck posed a question of what the first lady and the President’s girls had learned while sitting in the pews of Reverend Wright’s church.

Hardly what anyone but the most thin-skinned of individuals would call an attack on the presidential offspring, particularly when the Beck video referenced showed Beck asking the question in concern for the daughters.

June 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM  
Anonymous Jess said...

""I also heard Olbermann say on his demagoguery extravaganza he calls a show that Beck had attacked Obama’s kids after having said that all politicians kids should be off limits. His proof was that Beck posed a question of what the first lady and the President’s girls had learned while sitting in the pews of Reverend Wright’s church.""

You do know that Beck last week on his radio show, was making fun of Malia Obama for asking her dad had he plugged the hole yet right? He went on and on about "is this the education level they are at" doing it in a baby voice for more than 5 minutes with his radio co star. This was after he had been complaining about one of $ister $arah's kids being used in the media. Her kid put herself in the media, by getting speakers fees for certain things, so she can be taken to task. Palin used her kids as props through the election and then went on to say, no you cannot say anything about this, that or the other. In other words, you must do as I say not as I do. Double standard exists for republicans and democrats and that is just a fact.

June 6, 2010 at 11:53 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Jess, assuming that what you say is true (and I am not doubting that) then Beck was wrong and owes an apology to Presdent Obama and his daughter.

June 7, 2010 at 6:51 AM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Yes, Jess was right. It was no mere passing remark, either. Your man Beck showed just how downright MEAN to children he can be.

BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy? Daddy? Daddy, did you plug the hole yet? Daddy?
PAT GRAY (co-host): (imitating Obama) No I didn't, honey.
BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy, I know you're better than [unintelligible]
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Mm-hmm, big country.
BECK: (imitating Malia) And I was wondering if you've plugged that hole yet.
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Honey, not yet.
BECK: (imitating Malia) Why not, daddy? But daddy--
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Not time yet, honey. Hasn't done enough damage.
BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy?
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Not enough damage yet, honey.
BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy?
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Yeah?
BECK: (imitating Malia) Why do you hate black people so much?
GRAY: (imitating Obama) I'm part white, honey.
BECK: (imitating Malia) What?
GRAY: (imitating Obama) What?
BECK: (imitating Malia) What'd you say?
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Excuse me?
BECK: (laughing) This is such a ridiculous -- this is such a ridiculous thing that his daughter-- (imitating Malia) Daddy?
GRAY: It's so stupid.
BECK: How old is his daughter? Like, thirteen?
GRAY: Well, one of them's, I think, thirteen, one's eleven, or something.
BECK: "Did you plug the hole yet, daddy?" Is that's their -- that's the level of their education, that they're coming to -- they're coming to daddy and saying 'Daddy, did you plug the hole yet?' " Plug the hole!
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Yes, I was doing some deep-sea diving yesterday, and--
BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy?
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Yeah, mm-hmm, mm-hmm, I was doing--
BECK: (imitating Malia) Why--
GRAY: (imitating Obama) Yeah, honey, I'm--
BECK (imitating Malia) Why, why, why, why, do you still let the polar bears die? Daddy, why do you still let Sarah Palin destroy the environment? Why are -- Daddy, why don't you just put her in some sort of a camp?
If you think reading looks repulsive, you shoul HEAR the sniveling noxious tone he used.

Note the Freudian slip: "Why do you hate black people so much?"

Beck is a racist and a liar.

That should remove all doubt about your #2 claim on Olbermann.

I'll be back.

June 7, 2010 at 3:57 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...


Please provide the quotes like I have. Links are fine for verification, but please don’t make me jump around to find your allegations.

As for the Dallas tea party, I checked for photos.

I saw ONE black guy in the crowd and ONE wealthy black guy speaking here:


And then there’s this:

Dale Robertson, a Tea Party activist who operates TeaParty.org, is getting stung for an old photo — taken at the Feb. 27, 2009 Tea Party in Houston — in which he holds a sign reading “Congress = Slaveowner, Taxpayer = Niggar.”

Ring a bell?

It wouldn’t be too difficult to find more racist teabagger signs.

If the crowd had no racists they would have demanded that person leave, or at least condemned him. Not a peep.

There’s our proof of racism, and that in no way teabaggers are representative of the American people.

There goes your #1 claim on Olbermann .

June 7, 2010 at 4:38 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Before you go clouding the discussion with "clarification", please allow me to set the record straight here.

You just said, "And for clarification, if you re-read my statement, I said lies told from the left”. I didn’t mention Maddow as I seldom watch Maddow and my challenge was in reference to the “left” accordingly.”

This is what you said to Jess on May 8,

"I'd be curious to hear what "lies" you think come from "right wing" media too. I am sure there are falsehoods, mistakes, and demagoguery to be found throughout the political spectrum of the media, but I guarantee you that I can find three examples of such from the left for every one you find on the right, ma'am."

Here was my challenge to you on May 9. "I have a fun idea TP. Why don't you run along and fact check Olbermann and Maddow for us. Tell us some truth. We'd love to compare their accuracy and veracity with Beck's and Limbaugh's."

I offered you a link to transcripts when you said you didn't watch her. I thought it would be fun to compare the two primary figures of the left and right. Now you want to throw it wide open...or what? You righties love to change rules in mid game.

In a reasoned debate there needs to be clear definition of terms. Obama is not a Marxist. (Remember Ron Paul said Obama was not even a socialist, but a corporatist.) The government bailed out failed businesses, Obama did not “seize” any of them. Are you telling me Obama gave out those Wall Street bonuses? If he did, that would not be very Marxist. If he didn’t give the bonuses, then he didn’t “seize” them.

And Bush is NOT a progressive, both by definition and behavior. Progressives do not want to privatize Social Security, start wars, and de-regulate Wall Street, Big Oil, and Pharma, NONE OF THEM DO. I see no need to belabor the absurdity of your argument.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. – Voltaire

Then you said, "I am curious how you are going to attempt to discredit these lies or better yet find more (or any actually, as you haven’t provided any credible ones thus far) demonstrably false lies from the right."

Ah, did you completely miss where I gave you at least a dozen quotes of Limbaugh health care lies?

Do Death Panels ring a bell? Helloooo??

June 7, 2010 at 8:24 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Dubya, I concur that Beck was out of line with that satirical piece he did. That was not cool.

That being said, he is NOT a racist or a liar. Beck routinely stands up for people of color. The fact that he criticizes the president is not due to his color but rather due to his policies.

Did you know that recently Beck did a segment on his TV show celebrating our Founding Fathers that were BLACK. These were folks that made siginificant contributions to the founding of our nation, and yet had been practically erased from our history books. This is not something a racist would be doing, sir.

Is Beck ever wrong. I am sure he is, but being wrong and knowing you are wrong and saying it anyway is the definition of a lie. Beck, in my experience, has not shown to be a liar.

June 8, 2010 at 9:27 AM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Your defense of comrade Obama is weak, Dubya. The fact that you quote Rand Paul as your defense is proof of this. I guarantee you wouldn't take seriously nearly anything else that came out of Paul's mouth.

As for the bonuses, that was written into the contracts for the AIG executives, with Geithner's approval. Remember the flap about that? When one is a member of the politburo one has to pay off ones cronies.

Everything else I said stands and you cannot discount it. It IS Marxism, sir.

As for Bush, he is indeed a "economic" progressive, which was the context in which Beck has called Bush this in the past. Again I refer you to Bush's propensity to add power to the executive branch, add new departments to the federal government, expand socialistic Medicare programs, and spend up until Obama the most money of any administration in the expansion of government in US history.

Again, if Bush had a "D" behind his name, the liberals would have been ecstatic about the growth of centralized federal government. Bush was indeed a fiscal progressive.

Finally, when it comes to health care and the inevitable rationing of medical services that WILL happen as per my previous explanation as to the causes of this, then logic would dictate that some government official would be in charge of determining who gets the necessary medical care first.

If someone is 40 and can still provide tax revenue once healthy again, they are of more value to the regime than say an elderly 80 year old needing a heart valve transplant.

The decision will be made to provide resources to the 40 year old at the expense of the less-productive-to-society 80 year old accordingly, thereby giving you at least an informal default death panel. Rush was following the logical conclusion of this evil usurpation of private health care. It is not a lie. Unless we can repeal this abomination, time will unfortunately prove me right.

June 8, 2010 at 9:50 AM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Okay, here we go.

#3 - No “lie” quoted.
#4 – No “lie” quoted.
#5 - No #5
#6 - No timeline for verification.
#7 – Campaign promises are not lies, until he is out of office or does the opposite.
#8 – The “No lobbyists” promise. That’s right; he went back on his word. Now if you want to bring up politicians’ lies, you are already way behind the Bushies, 935 lies about Iraq alone.


Those Lies led to the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. But again, that would be altering our agreement and opening up an infinite back and forth.

# 9 - No “lie” quoted.

June 8, 2010 at 1:09 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...


You defend Beck with, “That being said, he is NOT a racist or a liar. Beck routinely stands up for people of color. The fact that he criticizes the president is not due to his color but rather due to his policies.” Really? What kind of rich white man calls a black man a racist who “hates white people”? A racist white man, that’s what kind.

That kind of crap is meant only to incite hatred, racial hatred. His later stuff was pure back-pedaling. And don’t forget his little Freudian slip, "Why do you hate black people so much?"

You just can’t let go of that absurd “Bush was a progressive” thing can you? So Bush is the same as me? That would mean Bush and I are both a “cancer on America” too, right? Really? What a hate monger.

This is what Beck said.

"I think he’s done exactly what George Bush was doing, except to the times of a thousand. I mean we’re talking about a progressive. And George Bush was a progressive. It’s the difference between a steam train and the space shuttle."

I guess a steam train is exactly the same as the space shuttle, too, eh? I guess that depends on exactly what “exactly” means.

Bush was a progressive, Reagan, who raised spending and grew debt, was a progressive. Nader is a progressive. I’m a progressive. The very meaning of the word is demolished. This is a classic right wing propaganda technique. It is the very Orwellian doublespeak we saw with Bush the “progressive” saying, “I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace.”

Either give it a rest or at least tell me Bush and Reagan are cancers on America. You can’t have it both ways, as much as you’d like to. Give it a rest.

“Fiscal progressive”. There you go again, writing your own dictionary. This is utter nonsense and you know it. If Beck never said this you would never have parroted such foolishness. The same goes for Obama the “Marxist”. Come on.

Where is the lie, again, with a hypothetical statement about the future? We have REAL death panels now, rationing and denying health care to thousands of sick people. They’re called insurance companies.

You people amaze me. You claim to be Christian, yet your version of the Golden Rule is those with the gold make the rules. This is what you defend, the servants of Mammon.

June 8, 2010 at 4:14 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Dubya, I knew this was going to be an exercise in futility. If I were to provide you video proof of EVERY lie said by leftist media types and provided similar incontrovertible proof of the right being slandered or taken out of context, you would STILL not believe it.

I will waste no more time accordingly. I am sure you will claim victory accordingly, and that is fine, despite the fact that I am certainly not admitting defeat. Those that have seen, read, and heard the truth with their own senses know it to be so.

Your blind faith and support of a political agenda and the fellow travelers that adhere unflinchingly to it, even when straying from common sense or common decency, is quite amazing. I might as well be debating with the walls of my office as they are more apt to look at things with a greater degree of objectivity, sir.

I find the unceasing and errant criticism of those wishing to keep more of what they earn, living their lives under the liberties provided by our country, worshiping or not as they are inclined, and not wanting to be dictated to by some "all-benevolent" federal government who only wishes to serve the common good (as they define it) to be extremely distasteful.

The world has indeed turned upside down when a President has sat in a church where the pastor has preached racist theology for the past twenty years, but those Americans that criticize that president for any reason are called racists by the left. (Glenn Beck for instance.)

The same is true when those that bust their tails working hard, taking risks, sacrificing much to finally make a financially successful living are called greedy by those that are able-bodied but rather not work and then complain that the evil rich are not providing for them. Tell me, who is the greedy one here? He who produces, or he that is able to produce but would rather just take?

Further, if one were to spend an order of magnitude more than what his income is for his family, he would be deemed foolish and financially irresponsible, and yet that is the exact course of action dictated by the left in regards to how are federal government should proceed.

The bottom line is that whatever the right calls "black", the left will respond and say, "NO! It's white!" (and vice versa in all fairness.)

Woe to those who call good, evil and call evil, good!

For today, I have grown weary of this dichotomy though. Cheers!

June 9, 2010 at 10:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Climbing on about candidate's kids, Rush Limbaugh called Chelsea Clinton "Uglier then Amy Carter" then rose to the defense when Democrats wanted to point out Dick Cheney's hypocrisy of having a Lesbian Daughter on the the payroll while trying to deny her rights.

It was a double standard back then was well


June 9, 2010 at 4:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

T Paine

"The world has indeed turned upside down when a President has sat in a church where the pastor has preached racist theology for the past twenty years, but those Americans that criticize that president for any reason are called racists by the left. (Glenn Beck for instance.)"

If we on the "left" have not answered that question, it's because we are still waiting for an answer from the "right" why they have patronized racist right wing ministers like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Lou Sheldon, Billy Graham and others with far more influence and reach then Wright?

We ask how come you went to bat for Racist Bob Jones University to allow them to use their biblical beliefs to segregate and still get a educational tax exemption?

Why GW Bush not only appeared at a rally there, saying he supported them but then nominated the federal attorney that defended Bob in the Supreme Court for a federal judgeship when she clearly said she believed in Bob Jones right to discriminate long after the fact.

And we've been asking that question for years

If you want to talk about racist ministers and they company you keep, you conservatives have a lot more to answer for

June 9, 2010 at 4:28 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Futility indeed. "those Americans that criticize that president for any reason are called racists by the left. (Glenn Beck for instance.)"

Wow. Such a perfect picture of reverse imaging by an authoritarian mindset! Imagine the power of indoctrination behind those words, written while knowing in reality that a white man named Beck said Obama hates white people and is a racist.

The psychological elements of denial and projection are clear. You project racism leftward while denying Beck's obvious racism.

I provided many, deliberate and provable lies. You have provided none but campaign promises outside our stated terms. You failed the challenge. We knew it before it began, because you have to believe the lies.

I believe you identify with the anger to the point where you believe it must be true.

Limbaugh: "I think liberals are a scourge. The whole theme of this program today has been how liberals are destroying virtually everything." May 11, 2010

Rush Limbaugh: "The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there. It's natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is."

And this: "Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate"

And this: LIMBAUGH: "There are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived or at any other time in history. Does this sound like a record of genocide?" (Told You So, p. 68)

REALITY: According to Carl Shaw of the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, estimates of the pre-Columbus population of what later became the United States range from 5 million to 15 million. Native populations in the late 19th century fell to 250,000, due in part to genocidal policies. Today the U.S.'s Native American population is about 2 million.

And this: LIMBAUGH: "It has not been proven that nicotine is addictive, the same with cigarettes causing emphysema [and other diseases]." (Radio show, 4/29/94

And This: On his May 4 program, Rush Limbaugh said: "Guess what? Faisal Shahzad is a registered Democrat. I wonder if this SUV had an Obama sticker on it. Faisal Shahzad is a registered Democrat."

If you really believe this is all true, you are in a cult. You are conned.

Or maybe you really know the difference, and you're actually a wealthy agent of the corporatocracy promoting the disinformation.

If that’s the case let me put out some real information. You will of course ignore it because you’d rather others did so as well.

Here are the fruits of conservatism in US Government since Reagan.

Average Pretax Income In Dollars

Bottom 20% / Top 1%

1980- $15,500 - $504,200
1985- $14,800 - $675,900
1992- $15,500 - $817,700
2000- $17,100 - $1,508,500
2006- $17,200 - $1,743,700

Share Of Income (Percent)

Pretax Income

Bottom 20% / Top 1% / Top 10%

1980- 5.7 % - 9.1% - 30.5%
1985 - 4.8 % - 11.5%
1992- 4.4 % - 12.3%
2000- 4.0 % - 17.8%
2006- 3.9 % - 18.8% - 41.6%

Most Americans are on the losing end of your belief system.

You speak of good and evil. Let me ask you then. What is the good you find in the lying, hateful voices of the right? Are you sure of the goodness in the deliberate inciting of anger and hostility towards the opponents of Authoritarian rule by Big Money?

June 9, 2010 at 5:42 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home