And that sprang out of the ground for no reason whatsoever? Hardly.
Radicalism springs up when peaceful means have no effect. or there is no outlet for the frustration of injustice.

The Communist Party arose because the aristocrats were blind and deaf to the suffering they were inflicting. .
Castro came to power because of the dictatorship that preceded him.

Conservatives just love to start history at the reaction stage. They have no stamach for what the reaction was a reaction to.

The US is darned lucky to have only radicalism to moan about. It could have been a full fledged revolution.
If you don't like the Chavez's of the world, don't give their like the excuse to rise to power. Or flip back a few pages in history to see how one thing leads to another.Cause-effect/casue-effect/cause-effect.

And that sprang out of the ground for no reason whatsoever? Hardly.
Radicalism springs up when peaceful means have no effect. or there is no outlet for the frustration of injustice.

The Communist Party arose because the aristocrats were blind and deaf to the suffering they were inflicting. .
Castro came to power because of the dictatorship that preceded him.

Conservatives just love to start history at the reaction stage. They have no stamach for what the reaction was a reaction to.

The US is darned lucky to have only radicalism to moan about. It could have been a full fledged revolution.
If you don't like the Chavez's of the world, don't give their like the excuse to rise to power. Or flip back a few pages in history to see how one thing leads to another.Cause-effect/casue-effect/cause-effect.

Introducing torture into the American story does qualify as something above and beyond the usual politics. The chickens will be coming home to roost for some time to come beczuse of that one
Torture as a symbol of his regime is of Bush's own choosng

Introducing torture into the American story does qualify as something above and beyond the usual politics. The chickens will be coming home to roost for some time to come beczuse of that one
Torture as a symbol of his regime is of Bush's own choosng

Correct but somehow you seem to be implying that because Bush has not been in the antiwar/far lefts opinion an average president that he deserves the treatment he is getting and it is therefore not hate but somehow constructive criticism or some such rubbish??????

The facts are simple. Heir, Oberfuhrer, Shrub, Mein Fuhrer, American Taliban, Chimperor in Chief, Emperor, King are legitimate tags? They imply no hate.

You seem to say he is unqualified to be president. If that is so then how do you justify Obama being qualified when he has even less experience then Bush.

I am not defending Bush so much as saying that simply what goes around comes around and you see it everyday here at TMV and elsewhere the hate for all Things Bush. Don't believe me. Just Read Shaun Mullens update on the Bush Torture Regime.

Correct but somehow you seem to be implying that because Bush has not been in the antiwar/far lefts opinion an average president that he deserves the treatment he is getting and it is therefore not hate but somehow constructive criticism or some such rubbish??????

The facts are simple. Heir, Oberfuhrer, Shrub, Mein Fuhrer, American Taliban, Chimperor in Chief, Emperor, King are legitimate tags? They imply no hate.

You seem to say he is unqualified to be president. If that is so then how do you justify Obama being qualified when he has even less experience then Bush.

I am not defending Bush so much as saying that simply what goes around comes around and you see it everyday here at TMV and elsewhere the hate for all Things Bush. Don't believe me. Just Read Shaun Mullens update on the Bush Torture Regime.

Secondly, Neocon, this comment of yours: “The treatment Bush is receiving will be the same that Obama gets.” This sounds like you've made up your mind before the man even takes office! GWB has an established and verifiable record which has accounts for the disrespect he gets. If Obama is our next president, why not withhold judgement until he actually creates a record of governing? If you've already decided, then you've also given up rights to be considered credible in judging him.

The gop fried Bill Clinton for about 6 years. The democrats have went have Bush with a hate filled rhetoric.

What goes around comes around. Barak Obama will be castigated unmercifully. Bill Clinton was a good president and they had him impeached……….You know its coming. Its just a matter if they will actually give him 100 days or start from day one.

Secondly, Neocon, this comment of yours: “The treatment Bush is receiving will be the same that Obama gets.” This sounds like you've made up your mind before the man even takes office! GWB has an established and verifiable record which has accounts for the disrespect he gets. If Obama is our next president, why not withhold judgement until he actually creates a record of governing? If you've already decided, then you've also given up rights to be considered credible in judging him.

The gop fried Bill Clinton for about 6 years. The democrats have went have Bush with a hate filled rhetoric.

What goes around comes around. Barak Obama will be castigated unmercifully. Bill Clinton was a good president and they had him impeached……….You know its coming. Its just a matter if they will actually give him 100 days or start from day one.

The origin can be found in the 1960s radicalism of liberalism in the USA and the rest of the West. No “big bang” moment can be identified but the year 1968 is suitable if one has an unreasonable demand for more precision.

The origin can be found in the 1960s radicalism of liberalism in the USA and the rest of the West. No “big bang” moment can be identified but the year 1968 is suitable if one has an unreasonable demand for more precision.

* * *
“Are conservative incapable of bad form?

Actually no. Remember that when President Obama takes office. The treatment Bush is receiving will be the same that Obama gets.”

The probably is near zero, based on years of experience with Bush and Reagan versus Carter and (yes) Clinton. (Divergence is possible during the most heated moments on conservative talk radio, but their personalities are nowhere as crazy as the likes of Randi Rhodes.) No rational person would bet it would be anywhere close to the same thing.

* * *

“SEIZE and NATIONALIZE the oil companies and the gasoline refineries”

Only idiots like Hinchey (”Social Security will be more valuable in the years to come if we leave it alone”) and the late Gus Hall are in favor of such radical nonsense, even if it was on childish peoples' lips during the Iranian revolution-related energy crunch. (Maybe a few even thought of it during the 1970s, but they are on the true fringe.)

* * *

“If a police horse is incontinent on Main St, some will automatically blame the lefty radicals.”

C O R R E C T I O N : Some will say “It's Bush's fault!” (like Bhutto's assassination)

* * *

“If Obama is our next president, why not withhold judgement until he actually creates a record of governing? “

He won't have handlers and likely won't be cloistered as Bush is (with Cheney doing much more and often doing what Bush should be doing himself if he could), and it will be intriguing to see who he brings with him to run his administration and the executive branch. It will be many retreads (Carter-Clinton) and fixtures in DC, despite the superficial packaging of “change” that fools only the fool-able; he doesn't dare move much farther left (Krugman as Treasury Secretary???) or most normal, decent Americans will revile his administration (Clinton's lesson learned).

* * *

“I used the word hate because I think there is a difference between civil protest and using profanities and insults in the manner these protesters did.”

The Left, while using “hate” to describe its opponents (and dishonestly placing themselves on a higher moral plane when they're usually lower, appealing to base instincts and motives, many darker), in fact has on its far end the truly hateful — these people hate Bush and hate others such as the Religious Right (they're silent about the radical elements of the Religious Left and blatantly political black churchmen like Obama's pastor that he's trying to elude by broadening his religious appeal currently).

Or as another author put it, the hatred is simply the most extreme form of 1960s-radical “therapeutic alienation.” It's a good end in and of itself to consider the USA bad, evil, wrong in various ways (even when in the case of these people they are wrong almost 100% of the time). This is just the most pathological variant of it. (Kind of like the much-smaller radical right who links gays, whom God hates, and deaths in the Iraq war along with AIDS due to religious transgressions. It's mentally diseased nonsense.)

* * *
“I can also understand why a president who so rarely allows himself to be exposed to a genuine, representative cross-section of society is sought out by his detractors where and when opportunity permits”

You cannot honestly blame Bush for this and you are ridiculously superficial if you merely call these extremist scum “detractors” as if they were the same as those who wrinkle their nose or scowl (or in my friend in DC's case, sprint away from the Presidential limo in DC as if it contained toxic waste or something dangerously radioactive) when they see or hear, or hear of, Bush. These radicals are hardly mere “critics” or “detractors” any more than Lee Harvey Oswald was of JFK.

* * *

“Has not the mantra of the antiwar been that WE ARE IN IRAQ FOR OIL.”

Do even those idiots still believe that? Have we only seized the oil fields and sealed them off (tthe way we _failed_ to seal Iraq's borders!) and let the rest of the country fend for itself all these years? [sigh] Do they believe that we're that way in the entire Middle East, even though we didn't seize the oil fields there in 1973?

* * *
“Are conservative incapable of bad form?

Actually no. Remember that when President Obama takes office. The treatment Bush is receiving will be the same that Obama gets.”

The probably is near zero, based on years of experience with Bush and Reagan versus Carter and (yes) Clinton. (Divergence is possible during the most heated moments on conservative talk radio, but their personalities are nowhere as crazy as the likes of Randi Rhodes.) No rational person would bet it would be anywhere close to the same thing.

* * *

“SEIZE and NATIONALIZE the oil companies and the gasoline refineries”

Only idiots like Hinchey (”Social Security will be more valuable in the years to come if we leave it alone”) and the late Gus Hall are in favor of such radical nonsense, even if it was on childish peoples' lips during the Iranian revolution-related energy crunch. (Maybe a few even thought of it during the 1970s, but they are on the true fringe.)

* * *

“If a police horse is incontinent on Main St, some will automatically blame the lefty radicals.”

C O R R E C T I O N : Some will say “It's Bush's fault!” (like Bhutto's assassination)

* * *

“If Obama is our next president, why not withhold judgement until he actually creates a record of governing? “

He won't have handlers and likely won't be cloistered as Bush is (with Cheney doing much more and often doing what Bush should be doing himself if he could), and it will be intriguing to see who he brings with him to run his administration and the executive branch. It will be many retreads (Carter-Clinton) and fixtures in DC, despite the superficial packaging of “change” that fools only the fool-able; he doesn't dare move much farther left (Krugman as Treasury Secretary???) or most normal, decent Americans will revile his administration (Clinton's lesson learned).

* * *

“I used the word hate because I think there is a difference between civil protest and using profanities and insults in the manner these protesters did.”

The Left, while using “hate” to describe its opponents (and dishonestly placing themselves on a higher moral plane when they're usually lower, appealing to base instincts and motives, many darker), in fact has on its far end the truly hateful — these people hate Bush and hate others such as the Religious Right (they're silent about the radical elements of the Religious Left and blatantly political black churchmen like Obama's pastor that he's trying to elude by broadening his religious appeal currently).

Or as another author put it, the hatred is simply the most extreme form of 1960s-radical “therapeutic alienation.” It's a good end in and of itself to consider the USA bad, evil, wrong in various ways (even when in the case of these people they are wrong almost 100% of the time). This is just the most pathological variant of it. (Kind of like the much-smaller radical right who links gays, whom God hates, and deaths in the Iraq war along with AIDS due to religious transgressions. It's mentally diseased nonsense.)

* * *
“I can also understand why a president who so rarely allows himself to be exposed to a genuine, representative cross-section of society is sought out by his detractors where and when opportunity permits”

You cannot honestly blame Bush for this and you are ridiculously superficial if you merely call these extremist scum “detractors” as if they were the same as those who wrinkle their nose or scowl (or in my friend in DC's case, sprint away from the Presidential limo in DC as if it contained toxic waste or something dangerously radioactive) when they see or hear, or hear of, Bush. These radicals are hardly mere “critics” or “detractors” any more than Lee Harvey Oswald was of JFK.

* * *

“Has not the mantra of the antiwar been that WE ARE IN IRAQ FOR OIL.”

Do even those idiots still believe that? Have we only seized the oil fields and sealed them off (tthe way we _failed_ to seal Iraq's borders!) and let the rest of the country fend for itself all these years? [sigh] Do they believe that we're that way in the entire Middle East, even though we didn't seize the oil fields there in 1973?

Looking at it another way, one could say that you are criticizing a symptom without considering the causes of the disease.

Looking at it another way, one could say that you are criticizing a symptom without considering the causes of the disease.

Neocon, I am still awaiting a response to the comment/question I posed to you earlier…

Neocon, I am still awaiting a response to the comment/question I posed to you earlier…