fbpx

Type to search

Right-Wing Extremism: Not Just For Radicals Anymore

Featured Post Memo Pad National News Politics

Right-Wing Extremism: Not Just For Radicals Anymore

Share

On Sunday, it will be 20 years since the morning a bomb destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City and took 168 human lives. Nineteen of those lives belonged to children.

Maybe it takes you by surprise that it has been so long. Maybe you wonder where the time went. And maybe you remember…

…the ghastly pictures of that building, the front of it sheared away.

…the firefighter emerging from the rubble, tenderly cradling that dying baby.

…the bloody and lacerated people wandering dazedly from the wreckage.

…the breathless speculation that surely the culprits had to be Muslims.

And maybe you remember, too, that sense of vertiginous shock some people felt when we got our first look at the man who planted the bomb and discovered him to be, not a swarthy Muslim with a heavy beard and hard-to-pronounce name, but a clean-cut, apple pie-faced young white man named Timothy McVeigh. People could not have been more nonplussed if Richie Cunningham had shot up a shopping mall.

But the tragedy was to contain one last surprise. It came when we learned why McVeigh committed his atrocity. It seems he hated the government.

That revelation was our introduction to a world whose very existence most of us had never suspected. Meaning the so-called patriot movement, the armed, radical right-wing extremists who refuse to recognize the authority of the nation’s duly constituted and elected government. Maybe you remember the news reports of how they spent nights and weekends drilling in the woods, playing soldier in anticipation of the day ZOG — the Zionist Occupied Government — ceded the country to the United Nations and soldiers of the New World Order came rappelling down from black helicopters to seize everybody’s guns. Maybe you remember how crazy it all sounded.

But that was then. Twenty years ago, the idea of anti-government resistance seemed confined to a lunatic fringe operating in the shadows beyond the mainstream. Twenty years later, it is the mainstream, the beating heart of the Republican Party. And while certainly no responsible figure on the right advocates or condones what he did, it is just as certain that McVeigh’s violent antipathy toward Washington, his conviction that America’s government is America’s enemy, has bound itself to the very DNA of modern conservatism.

It lives in Grover Norquist’s pledge to shrink government down until “we can drown it in the bathtub,” in Chuck Norris’ musing about the need for “a second American revolution,” in Michele Bachmann’s fear that the census is an evil conspiracy. It lives in dozens of right-wing terror plots documented by the Southern Poverty Law Center since the 1995 bombing, including last year’s murder of two police officers and a Walmart shopper by two anti-government activists in Las Vegas. It lives in Cliven Bundy’s armed standoff with federal officials.

These days, it is an article of faith on the political right that “government” is a faceless, amorphous Other. But this government brought itself into being with three words — “We the people” — and they are neither incidental nor insignificant. Our government may be good, may be bad, may be something in between, but as long as we are a free society, the one thing it always is, is us. Meaning: a manifestation of our common will, a decision a majority of us made. We are allowed to be furious at it, but even in fury, we always have peaceful tools for its overthrow. So there is never a reason to do what McVeigh did.

We all know that, of course. But 20 years after the day they brought babies out of the rubble in pieces would be an excellent time to pause and remind ourselves, just the same.

(Leonard Pitts is a columnist for The Miami Herald, 1 Herald Plaza, Miami, FL, 33132. Readers may contact him via email at lpitts@miamiherald.com.)

Photo: Standoff at Cliven Bundy’s ranch, Nevada. Screenshot via YouTube/The Alex Jones Channel

Tags:
Leonard Pitts Jr.

Leonard Pitts Jr. is a nationally syndicated commentator, journalist, and novelist. Pitts' column for the Miami Herald deals with the intersection between race, politics, and culture, and has won him multiple awards including a Pulitzer Prize in 2004.

The highly regarded novel, Freeman (2009), is his most recent book.

  • 1

247 Comments

  1. bernieo April 15, 2015

    The “liberal” media plays along with the fiction that terrorists are Muslim. Tim McVeigh and other anti-government terrorist are completely ignored. When they do act it is dismissed as a nutty lone wolf (like the guy who flew his plane into an IRS building) or mental illness. Yet they obsess about the possibility of Islamist lone wolves being radicalized online. Most people have no clue just how many attacks by domestic terrorists occur – which is just how the right wing wants it. If there were more publicity their dangerous, inflammatory anti-government rhetoric would become a lot less popular if more people knew the danger it poses.

    Reply
    1. FireBaron April 15, 2015

      Much of that comes more from Fox than from other “liberal” media branches. You may be surprised just how many news papers and TV news outlets (local stations, mind you) that are now owned by News Corporation, Tribune and other conservative media operations.
      To me, the biggest irony of News Corporation is the largest shareholder in that company NOT named Murdoch is a Saudi Prince who also finances Wahabi Schools, where many of the preachers these terrorists follow are trained!

      Reply
      1. charleo1 April 15, 2015

        Indeed, why all the vitriol, and saber rattling against Iran? The Saudi’s, Shia rival in the Mid-East? Some like John McCain seemed disheartened, and down right apologetic, over the Saudis having to do their own bombing in Yemen. “A lack of leadership,” he called it.

        Reply
        1. oldtack April 15, 2015

          It’s called Oil, Investments and Power. Saudi Arabia is the Power in the Middle east. They control OPEC and they have a lot of influence with the Oil magnates in the States. Bin Laden was from -Saudi Arabia. 19 of the terrorists on 9/11,2011 were from Saudi Arabia. The news media are quick to quote percentages of foreign fighters with ISIS but they NEVER mention the percentage of Saudi Fighters in Syria/Iraq and Yemen.

          Saudi Arabia is our chief adversary in the Middle East and we dance to their tune. OIL , INVESTMENTS, MONEY.

          Reply
          1. charleo1 April 15, 2015

            Well sure! Saudi Arabia is important, I get that. And also, oil, investments, and money darn near run the government here in this Country. I get that too. But, one would think we would allow ourselves a smidgin of sovereignty. After all, the Saudis need us at least as much as we, or our European trading partners need them. And there’s a lot better ways to use the 6 or 7 trillion dollars we would spend invading Iran to please the Sunni Arabs in the Mid East. Or it would seem, even the big monied interest here. Given what military action would do to our’s, and the World’s economy, and that region of the World in general. Just trying to figure this out. There must be some angle I’m missing?

            Reply
    2. idamag April 16, 2015

      The terrorists in the south were not Muslim. They were illiterate bullies.

      Reply
  2. Dominick Vila April 15, 2015

    The deliberate accumulation of arsenals, the rise in hate groups, and the overt demonstrations against anything institutional, such as government, laws, the rise of ethnic minorities and women to positions of authority, or anything that does not conform with the preferences of a not so small segment of our population should not be ignored any more. A trend that has been with us throughout our history, but that went into over drive in the 1980s, cannot be dismissed or considered a manifestation of socio-political disagreement. It will not be long before members of these groups infiltrate our law enforcement agencies (they already have), our national security agencies, and the military. If that happens, we will be a short step away from civil war or, worse, a coup d’etat by the most radical members of our society.

    Reply
    1. Elliot J. Stamler April 15, 2015

      Once again, Dominick, I find your thinking is exactly in accord with my own and so I know we must both be geniuses. I don’t always agree with you by any means..you are more liberal than I am..but you have made me today feel less alone. I’ve been writing and stating for some years now, based on my deep and long-standing avocational study of history, we are slowly and inevitably descending into a second civil war. I know having lived thru it the current divisions are much more and deeper than those during the Vietnam war. As in the case before the civil war, the chasm is now, in Frank Rich’s marvelously incisive comment: “the issue is not any longer what policies the government should follow, the issue is what kind of a country we shall be.”
      This was precisely the mindset in the years leading up to the civil war-anyone who reads the histories of those times, the times of Fillmore, Pierce and Buchanan will see the frightening similarity.
      Dominick, what do you think?

      Reply
      1. Dominick Vila April 15, 2015

        I agree. I would add that a contributing factor for the rise of radicalism is the indifference of the masses. This is far from unprecedented. Let’s not forget how quickly Hitler and his gang of nuts moved from their meeting in a Munich brewery to controlling an entire country and imposing an ideology seldom seen in the annals of history.

        Reply
  3. Darsan54 April 15, 2015

    As I have long suspected, ‘we’ be crazee.

    Reply
  4. bobnstuff April 15, 2015

    We in this country are building an industry around government hate and miss trust. This industry has it’s own media outlet and a number of group promoting it. I remember
    when love of country a loyalty was taught in schools, we all pledged allegiance ever morning. Anti government speech was once something congress would investigate, now they spend their time and our money trying to destroy the President and block his every action. What is this country coming to and when are we going to say stop? When are we
    going to elect people who believe in government and in our country? When are we going to throw in jail the traitors that are calling for the over through of the government?

    Reply
    1. jmprint April 15, 2015

      So true.

      Reply
    2. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

      I never expected to see an elected member of congress say to our president, any president “You lie”
      The blatant disrespect, the absolute disregard for the greater good parallels what has been presented as entertainment. Reality shows featuring the most ignorant of our population and many of the elected officials play like the cast of Hee Haw.

      Reply
      1. kenndeb April 15, 2015

        We do not have a President, we have a tyrannical Emperor that lies, and disregards our laws and Constitution.

        Reply
        1. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

          Fix yourself a clorox cocktail.

          Reply
        2. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

          You are correct…YOU YOU YOU don’t have a president…all you have is a warden and a psych pro to monitor your every move.

          Reply
          1. kenndeb April 15, 2015

            YOU YOU YOU don’t have a President either. What you have is a liar and a fraud.

            Reply
        3. Frank KIng April 15, 2015

          Your inane, mindless babblings have no credibility except in your own clouded view of reality. The man in the WH is the complete opposite of your little right wing diatribe.Try some of your right wing heroes–they may conform to your idea of tyranny. The malfeasance/misfeasance, incompetence and mismanagement by the right wing has created the mess at home and abroad that this President and the rest of us endure to this day that will never be resolved by this President nor his successors. So go work some other side of the street. You’re tiresome and annoying. on this blog.

          Reply
      2. idamag April 16, 2015

        This has been a congress of firsts. We never had one say, the day after inauguration, “The Republicans number one goal is to make Obama a one-term president.” They have done nothing but obstruct.

        Reply
  5. Alvin Harrison April 15, 2015

    Although I cannot support armed revolution, I have to admit that I, a progressive have to agree that our government needs significant changes. I has been subverted by the rich and powerful and no longer serves the needs of the people. It is there to exert the control of the Corporate /1% over every facet of our lives and to enslave us in a system that uses us up and discards us like so much trash. We could change this if we stopped seeing our fellow citizens as the enemy. Blacks are not the problem, Brown is not the problem. Whites are not the problem. GREEN is the problem. Between the buying of our leaders and elitist corporate lobbies we are being legislated into slavery.

    We have to fight back…and we can do it with our votes…..Once we wake up and see who our real enemy is.

    Reply
    1. bobnstuff April 15, 2015

      If they keep us fighting against each other they can get away with anything they
      want. Add in the misinformation system and the 1% have control.

      Reply
      1. idamag April 16, 2015

        You got it. Divide and conquer.

        Reply
    2. walter77777 April 15, 2015

      In jiu jitsu the student is taught that the opponent must be allowed to defeat himself. We see from history that radical governments (like China, Cuba, and Vietnam) have not been born from democracies; they have been spawned by dictatorships.

      When the working class proletariat has hope they continue to be willing to accept the exploitation, but when there is no hope for peaceful change they will organize to overthrow the oppressors.

      W

      Reply
      1. jmprint April 15, 2015

        I’m all for overthrowing the Patriots, the oppressors.

        Reply
        1. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

          A group who had no voice on their own and had to hijack and ultimately fracture another political party is going to implode on it’s own. It’s just a matter of time.

          Reply
  6. Kurt CPI April 15, 2015

    Obviously the Timothy McVeigh nutjob form of “resistance” (killing innocent people) is unthinkable. But to suggest that it’s not the Constitutionally guaranteed right of the people to oppose the government, oppose government treading where it has no right, or to actively engage in peaceful “rebellion” or “resistance” is to read the parts of the Constitution that fits one’s philosophy and ignore those parts which one deems not worthy of mention. The writers of the US Constitution made certain that “We the People” had the rights, means, and legal standing to rebel if government became too oppressive.

    Reply
    1. jmprint April 15, 2015

      “if government became too oppressive.” The funny thing is that the Patriots are the oppressors.

      Reply
      1. BOC April 15, 2015

        Patriots? What a misleading label, or shall we call it ‘a cover’ for who they really are. It certainly isn’t a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion. If this were true, they wouldn’t be rebelling against the very government which, provides them protection from enemies both, foreign and domestic.

        Reply
    2. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

      Oh puhlease….Creating Road Warrior film scripts is one thing. Refusing to be a productive, gainfully employed, law abiding citizen is another. Posts like yours are a joke. You the people are not supporting anyone’s rights but your own selfish little ideas of narcissism on steroids.

      How is it so many people considered the 90s to be one of the most prosperous eras and the 2000-2008 to be the most corrupt?

      You don’t get to resist on other people’s tax dollars. You don’t get to work a grand total of 5 years, retire at 40 years old and spend your “retirements” whining, complaining and bitching till the cows don’t even bother to come home.

      Every society abides by laws in order not to have what we have today, a bunch of spoiled asshats all showing off their Ramboisms. You want to raise your kids to be militant little snot nosed punks? Go ahead. But when your governmental resistance causes death and mayhem in our streets, we pull out our tax dollars and watch the Confederacy crumble.

      Reply
      1. whodatbob April 15, 2015

        Prevent the Idiots from gaining control. But do not suspend the Bill of Rights, as most of the post suggest, to do so.

        Reply
        1. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

          The idiots will not have the power they’ve had since the GOP took control in 2000. The minute Bush/Cheney were elected, the GOP became drunk on power.

          Now, people in this country will be reluctant to vote GOP with the prospect of the Koch boys running the government from a back room.

          The belligerence, arrogance and militancy of the GOP is directly a Koch corporate operative out of their CEO playbook. That WAS when the Koch’s thought they could out buy the election.

          They are soon to learn that the $2 million they hand the GOP plus the rest of millions they are bundling won’t buy the presidency for the GOP…not this time. This is the swan song for the Koch boys and it’s “Do or die,” for them and they know it.

          Reply
          1. kenndeb April 15, 2015

            Go pet your cats. All you ever do is spout the current regime propaganda, as do the rest of the mindless liberal drones.

            Reply
          2. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

            “Go pet your cats?” THIS THIS is your version of intelligence? I don’t “spout”…anything I can’t prove in a court of law.

            As for you robotic wind up toys of Conservatism, try again. Whistle Dixie or sing “I wish I was in the land of Cotton.” That ought to activate that stupid, “ignernt” brain of yours.

            You’ve been soundly trashed by so many on these threads and yet you insanely insist only you know it all? You are the only one who has the right to an opinion? You are the only one who is going to ram your ideological BS down everyone throats?

            A tad overkill even for a nut freak like you. But, DogPatch is a kind of La La land where you sit around with nothing to do while the money from Liberal states flows to DogPatch.

            Need you proof of how much the freeloaders in conservative states are taking in federal revenue, there’s the .gov site that will show that every one of the red states gets more than the $1 they pay in federal taxes while the blue states get barely more than 65 cents…Which proves, you double dealing, corrupt little asshat that MY taxes support you CONS. Just not for much longer.

            Nothing will please me more than watching you and the Koch asshats go down in flames come 2016.

            Reply
          3. BillP April 15, 2015

            Eleanor what did I tell you about feeding the trolls, especially this moronic one. You will notice that all of his comments are one or two sentences with the emphasis on calling President Obama an emperor. If you continue to feed them they will not go back into the holes they have crawled out of.

            Reply
          4. kenndeb April 15, 2015

            Stupid old lady. How many times do I have to tell you I live in NY.

            Reply
          5. BOC April 15, 2015

            A man with nothing to constructive to say.

            Reply
          6. idamag April 16, 2015

            he/she has nothing intelligent to say.

            Reply
          7. whodatbob April 15, 2015

            Hope you are correct. I was pushing back against all the post that want to limit FREE SPEACH!

            Reply
          8. BOC April 15, 2015

            “the GOP became drunk on power?”
            They started dismantling everything and deregulating everything in sight. Results: Too many to list them all.

            Reply
          9. idamag April 16, 2015

            And when you have rat poop in your canned fish and are eating diseased meat, thank the anti-government nuts.

            Reply
      2. BOC April 15, 2015

        The 2000-2008 were the most government and economic corrupt era in decades in the USA. The middle class in society was and still is under attack by republicans and right-wing extremists.

        Many committing economic suicide and don’t know it until its too late. Those who discover this later end up destroying their families because they can’t recover the quality of life they once enjoyed.

        There is currently a genocide taking place where the head of the household kill their family members and later, themselves. Recently a guy eliminated his family but not himself, what a coward.

        Reply
      3. idamag April 16, 2015

        Usually, when they talk about rights, it is the right to have jim crow laws.

        Reply
    3. whodatbob April 15, 2015

      It is amazing how many people want to suspend parts or all of the of the Bill of Rights when they disagree with the expression of freedom of another guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. What hypocrites!

      Reply
      1. BOC April 15, 2015

        That’s why they keep double-standards in the ‘ready’ position, instituting it when they suspect no one (majority) is looking.

        Reply
    4. charleo1 April 15, 2015

      Yes, and those Rights to civil disobedience, and peaceful rebellion were certainly respected by the Whites in Selma, weren’t they? Or, the flag waving, “Patriots,” who demanded the Vietnam War protests of the 60s, go to jail. Or, in the case of the more recent anti-corporate, Occupy Movement. Who the Right suggested they quit obstructing traffic, take a bath, and get a job. But were much more accommodating, (far less pepper spray,) to the gun toting Fox News orchestrated, anti-government, Tea Party. Supposedly all about the gov. suddenly getting all tremendously tyrannical, with the election of a Black man to the Presidency. Well, that man is still there. And the anti-gov. nuttery, and faux outrage, hasn’t gotten any more believable, or palpable.

      Reply
      1. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

        BRAVO!

        Reply
        1. BOC April 15, 2015

          They just can’t figure out how to get ahead of that black man in the white house. They’ve become very careless in their attempts to derail him. They keep digging a deeper hole for themselves, discovering in this process that it’s getting dark and they have no light.

          Reply
        2. charleo1 April 15, 2015

          Thanks!!!

          Reply
    5. BOC April 15, 2015

      When was Government most oppressive, during the: R. Reagan, W. BUSH, or now, the Obama era?

      I’d say 43, hands-down.

      Reply
      1. Kurt CPI April 16, 2015

        No disagreement. But Pitts is an all or nothing advocate (of everything). His article suggests that any dissent is equivalent to anarchy. He has every right to express his point of view, even when he’s (frequently) off the tracks of journalism out into the fields of fanaticism. At least this article concludes with the revelation that there are means to “peaceful overthrow”. And I agree – as long as we can vote we have the means. But it now requires millions of dollars to run for high-level political office. Abe Lincoln wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance of being elected today. So the rich get richer, the powerful guard their power with their money and influence. We the people languish in dependency bliss and permit it all to happen while we kick back and watch dancing with the stars (pass the bong please).

        “I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical” – Thomas Jefferson commenting on a small regional armed rebellion. (http://www.earlyamerica.com/early-america-review/volume-1/jefferson-letter-madison/).

        Reply
        1. BOC April 16, 2015

          Yes, he has every right to express his point of view, but not his dreams like he’s attempting to do here.

          Reply
  7. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

    Hatred of the government comes from many sources including government representatives on both sides of the aisle. In their zeal to prove to their constituents that they are doing their job, they demonize government agencies by inferring “they” are the enemy, inept, incompetent etc to make themselves look like the hero. I know this from personal experience having dealt with congressional inquiries in the course of my job. The reality was the agency was following the law these very same people wrote and approved. There’s a couple on both sides current and retired who use this tactic on a regular basis because they didn’t have the guts to tell their constituent that they were in the wrong. In the end they had to anyway but they went through the motions of demonizing the agency or agencies involved and wasted time, money and resources when they could have just told the constituent the truth to begin with. I have to say it’s mostly the republicans who have done this on a regular basis for a very long time and not only created animosity in people’s minds but fueled it. They create an “us against them” mentality when they in fact are on the front lines of “them” because they helped create the very law in question but want to separate and protect themselves from the realty Continued attempts at division is not an effective way to govern.
    It’s no different than the republican news media stirring up people with blatant lies and half truths by repeating them over and over with impunity.
    It’s especially dangerous when you have people with a “wild west mentality” who aren’t especially sophisticated and see things in black and white.
    Government agencies aren’t the enemy. They enforce the laws created by the very representatives elected by the people. Those very representatives are a very big part of the problem. Their agenda is not the greater good, it’s all about them and staying in office.

    Reply
    1. jmprint April 15, 2015

      Very well said.

      Reply
      1. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

        Thank you.
        I think we’re all pretty sick of it.

        Reply
        1. johninnv April 15, 2015

          Speaking from the battle lines in Bundyland, the local City officials in Bunkerville and, as of last night, the neighboring City of Mesquite support the Bundy mentality. Sad. Disgusting. Embarrasing.

          Reply
          1. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

            I use to live about an hours drive south of you and drove through Bunkerville on the way to Brianhead in the winter. Or Mt. Holly (steeper deeper cheaper) 🙂
            I lived there when the water level at the Dam was so high they opened the flood gates. and moved back East in 2000. I go back annually and shed a few tears when I see the level of the lake now. But I digress.
            There’s a lot of militia types and the gullible who buy into the rhetoric. I’d say more in Idaho, and Oregon though. In any case they are all mouthy and full of false bravado when armed and in groups. It is sad but they are still in the minority and by no means represent the good people of NV.

            Reply
          2. idamag April 16, 2015

            I live in Idaho. We have nuts, here, too. The aryan nations are gone. After they ran a woman and her son off the road and beat them up, the SPLC sued and sent them elsewhere. I think there are more sane people than nuts, here, but the nuts are the loudest.

            Reply
          3. BOC April 15, 2015

            I guess it’s safe to say, don’t drink the [kool-aid] water there.

            Reply
    2. Leftout April 15, 2015

      Many laws and agencies are set up not, by and for the people ,,but for political opportunists /lobbyists . The citizenry find out later after some one “READS”‘the promulgations , that these new enactments are intrusive to most , except the cronies . The seeds of distrust of governments resultinin a Call for reforms and revolt since the common man is LeftOut

      Reply
      1. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

        That’s true but people can and do effect change on a daily basis by their involvement. It doesn’t require revolts or pretend patriot games. It requires some effort and grass roots organization.

        Reply
        1. Leftout April 15, 2015

          There are ready gunslingers on both sides , Waco massacre, the Ruby Ridge , Boston Tea Party, Indian Wars, traffic stops for looking neanderthalish like me.

          Reply
          1. BOC April 15, 2015

            Justification does not excuse a cowardly act.

            Reply
          2. Leftout April 15, 2015

            Justification…..there is a constant oppressiveness of government , redistribution of Monies as entitlements , this is really annoying for hard working people. That is why government should be restricted in its activities……the reason for the American Revolution……people came here for freedoms and yet rules began intruding into self reliance. We have accumulated 10 Trillion dollars in debt, I f my math is correct , that is $30.000 for each American in their pockets. Would you not be able to use a min of $30,000 for each in your house hold. It is not a problem of rich people one per centers.)If you taxed all of their wealth it would still not pay for the wasted programs and give aways to non friendly foreign government that we are today experiencing. Some one is stealing somewhere. We must dissolve congress and start over , eliminate all laws and agencies after 1780. Keep it simple.

            Reply
          3. BOC April 16, 2015

            10 Trillion? Yeah! That’s about what W.Bush and Cheney spent on the dual wars. 2001-2009 was oppressive government, but you guys turn your heads to this reality, that these den of thieves never were prosecuted.Individual 401K’s and nest egg retirement accounts raided and never restored by the republicon’s who took the money.

            Reply
          4. Leftout April 16, 2015

            But the manipulated stock market gained back all losses. The unemoyment is down because it has to rebound , but now many are forced to taking two 30 hour jobs at less salary . The bodies looking for work went down but the number of jobs is still too low to get the other job seekers in the program. All were hogged up by aggressive 30 hour types.
            I was not a war hawk , the Iraqis are too lazy to fight for their own rights…. too many years of dictatorial entitlement mentality ruled their lives… No creative thinking when oil money is given away to silence the masses. Not unlike the U.S. In many quarters…. Hmmm. ?
            The Iraqis should be made to pay for our gracious tutoring in trying to build them
            Into a better way of life. There are many in these ME countries that want to break out and be more self reliant . Go figger.

            Reply
          5. BOC April 16, 2015

            No! Republicans never gain back all of the losses under W. Bush. POTUS 44 slowly turned around a economic comeback, despite GOP/TP ‘Obstructionism’. And countered some meltdown i.e. GM, Chrysler ETC.
            Yes, the job market is still in recovery mode from the W. Bush years, no doubt about it.

            Reply
          6. idamag April 16, 2015

            Ruby Ridge – a man is shooting at government agents and they shoot back. WACO, like all meglamaniacs, David Koresh destroyed that compound, just as Hitler committed suicide and Jim Jones. Why were the government agencies at WACO? An escaped child told them about David Koresh having sex with children as young as 10. The authorities were trying to save the children. My own take on it is that David Koresh had the compound set up that if the authorities were closing in – boom!

            Reply
          7. Leftout April 16, 2015

            All of these instances could have been solved in better way , Davis Koresh was seen coming into town many and could have been apprehended as well Ruby Ridge. ATF and DEA cowboys are hyped up and have led sheltered lives and see not much std deviation from expected outcomes. I had a small vial of powdered phenobarbital locked in a safe for experimental reasons and when told they went ape. They were going to round up everyone . One time an overheated hot plate was smoking and caused some stench, hazmat teams dressed for Mars were called as everyone was looking at it smoke away. A student came
            Down the hall looking perturbed as
            If looking for something critical and saw his hot plate. He excused himself and grabbed the device with bare hands and took it back to his lab. Typical of them EPA, ATF and DEA types. Go figger.

            Reply
    3. mike April 15, 2015

      Yes many sources of hatred for the govt..
      December 12, 2014 Bill Ayers with Fars.
      Ayers was a co-founder of the radical left-wing Weather Underground terror group. Over a three-year time period, he participated in the bombings of the NYPD headquarters (1970), the U.S. Capitol building (1971), and the Pentagon(1972).

      Ayers told the Fars News interviewer that the United States political system is “united in their commitment to US military supremacy and world domination.”

      Ayers, who sat on the board of the Woods Fund in Chicago with U.S. President Barack Obama took time to laud the Occupy movement. “Occupy generated a powerful and enduring metaphor: the 1% and the 99%,” Ayers explained.

      He explained the current U.S. engagements overseas as a “manufactured scapegoat… to prop up the imperial dreams of the 1% as they orchestrate conquest and organize occupation around the globe.” He added, “this is a war for oil, for easy resources and cheap labor, and for markets, and dominance everywhere.”

      Reply
      1. charleo1 April 15, 2015

        The Occupiers bombed no one. But did the unpardonable, by changing the conversation from one of how much of our scam will the Middle Class be stuck with paying? Versus, how destructive to the economy, has been the tremendous gap that has developed between the uber rich, and everyone else? As for as Ayres, like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or Rice, he was never charged, nor convicted for his crimes. And his association with Obama was coincidental at best. Not even a photo to plaster all over the Right Wing News, and run on a never ending loop to back up their lies. What a tool you continue to be for the one’s who would scrap you off the bottom of their $600. Italian Loafers.

        Reply
        1. BOC April 15, 2015

          🙂

          Reply
        2. mike April 15, 2015

          Coincidental!!! Really?

          http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/obama.ayers/

          http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB122212856075765367
          here’s more:
          Charges against Ayers were dropped after the FBI was accused of using illegal wiretaps. Ayers wrote in his 2001 “memoir”, Fugitive Days, that he regretted that his group “didn’t do enough” back then in regards to the almost 30 plus bombings his group took credit for. Ayers later became a professor in Chicago and the founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an offshoot of the Annenberg Foundation.

          Reply
        3. idamag April 16, 2015

          I belong to the occupiers. We have never been violent. We have never resorted to ugly, childish name-calling. We are non political. Our quest is to get money out of politics. Myself, I am apolitical. I can find fault with Democrats and Republicans. However, I don’t consider the nazi turned John Birchers turned T-party real Republicans. They are as anti-government as the nazis were in Germany.

          Reply
    4. Kemosahbee April 15, 2015

      There may be a few on the ‘left side’ but compared to the right they’re not worth mentioning. ‘Mostly republicans’ as you note further down is closer to the truth.
      Only R’s believe government is the problem
      Only R’s want to ‘starve the beast’ so as to destroy the ‘socialist’ safety net programs while lobbying for more defense $
      Only R’s believe that government has little to no role in environmental protection
      Only R’s continue to coddle the worst elements in their party, throwing to the wind the wisdom of William F Buckley who chastised and virtually single handedly relegated the John Birch screwballs, who are now just about the mainstream of R thinking, to the fringe of society for a generation.

      I could go on but you get the point. What really gets me is that once Obama was elected on the heels of Bush and crew driving the US and world car off the road, they somehow thought they had a right to obstruct instead work with BO. They have proven themselves over and over to be nothing more than egocentric narcissists who even in the face of verifiable data (see tax cuts DON’T create jobs) continue their true believer philosophical psychosis ‘for the party’ in essence, as they surely hold the partly above country, instead of working with the D’s with the sense that just maybe they have a good idea or 2. But I digress…

      Yea, and mainly it’s the R’s railing to their constituents against the IRS, HHS, DOE, FBI, DHS, FEMA etc. There’s a certain mindset that needs scapegoats for all their woes – R’s are experts in tapping into that and in turn getting folks to vote against their own best interest and yes, their main objective is to stay in office and continue collecting those golden goose eggs. Right on that front. I’m no huge fan of the D’s either – I like to think of the R’s as heartless and the D’s as spineless. To me that about sums them up. To a large degree they’re all bought and paid for – that’s the real issue. Until Citizens United is rolled back and campaign financing is reformed nothing big will change. Sure the D’s are better than the clueless R’s on many fronts, but not so much on a few of the main ones. The powers that be enjoy all of this ‘low level’ bickering – it takes our eye off the prize.
      Rant over.

      Reply
      1. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

        I agree with most of your points. Great rant. 🙂
        All this low level bickering does serve a purpose though. It energizes a good number of people to get involved. The more they hear the right’s message and hear the mentality of those they represent, the more determined they are to vote and make contact with their elected officials. While I would quibble about the term spineless, I can’t say I haven’t used that term myself in spite of my affiliation.

        Reply
        1. Kemosahbee April 15, 2015

          You’re right – ideally for sure. Unfortunately I fear, see the 2014 turnout – lowest since 1942, that many more are turning off rather than ‘tuning in’. I fear it needs to get significantly worse before it gets better. History, and not even too distant history, tells us that populist sentiment when bubbling over in a given direction is what gives rise to real change. Even Obama, a student of history, has said as much.
          And ‘low level’ isn’t meant to diminish things that are obviously very important like gay rights – and other social issues that have a real impact on peoples lives and where the parties have clear lines drawn between them. I guess I mean larger economic issues. Seemingly clear party divisions in some ways, see minimum wage, but not much in the way of meaningful change seems to get done.

          Reply
      2. BOC April 15, 2015

        “There may be a few on the ‘left side’ but compared to the right they’re not worth mentioning?”

        Very Correct and it goes without saying.

        Reply
      3. Allan Richardson April 15, 2015

        Even the CROOKS among Democrats still want to do things with tax money to help those who need it, even if they want to keep some for themselves. But the very BASIS of Republican ideology is to allow, and even help, the wealthy to steal from working poor and middle class people, and THEIR crooks steal EVEN MORE from those who have little to make themselves wealthy. So I’ll take a crooked D over an “honest” R any day.

        Reply
        1. Kemosahbee April 16, 2015

          well yea – lesser evil I guess. There’s that line about choosing the lesser evil is still choosing evil. But I figure the way to better and more progressive choices is paved by more and more good people choosing the better of the available options. As much as I often hold my nose. It’s a process.

          Reply
    5. BOC April 15, 2015

      There you have it, ladies and gents. The definition of ‘Selfishness and Greed’. Well done, Carolyn1520

      Reply
      1. Carolyn1520 April 15, 2015

        My pleasure BOC!

        Reply
        1. oldtack April 15, 2015

          Great informative blog Carolyn.

          Reply
    6. idamag April 16, 2015

      Most of this blatant anti-government started with the revenuers and culminated with civil rights.

      Reply
  8. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

    The real problem is war. 2 generations of kids since the 90s have grown up with constant barrages of war, war, violence, violence and gun fire to the point where they no longer understand the concepts of P E A C E….remember that word?

    That was before war became a major source of profit. You can also blame the prison industry states that manufacture prisoners to fill prisons to the brim to whine for more tax subsidies. Then, these prisoners are released and become street criminals.

    All so the wealthiest men in the US can boast, brag and slit each other’s throats to become the top dog?

    Reply
    1. mike April 15, 2015

      Now you left out Johnson and the Vietnam war and the 50,00 plus who lost their lives or Clinton’s war or better yet his lying to the American people “I didn’t have sex with sweet Monica”. You remember kids saying “it’s was all right to lie, because the President Clinton did it.”

      Reply
      1. charleo1 April 15, 2015

        And how many died as the result of Clinton’s lie about a BJ? And of Bush’s lie, about WMDs?

        Reply
        1. mike April 15, 2015

          No one died but much greater destruction happened with his lies.
          There you go again with Bush. Why hasn’t Hillary said she was lied too? Or Kerry? Reid? Biden? Feinstein? the list goes on.

          Reply
          1. charleo1 April 15, 2015

            With who’s lies? Clinton’s? You’re daft. Hillary Clinton did say the Congress was mislead on Iraq. And it’s a well known, well
            documented fact, the Bush Administration set out to mislead Congress, and the Nation on the necessity of invading Iraq. Destruction: 600,000 Iraqi dead, 2.5 million Iraqi displaced, 4500 American dead, 30,000 wounded. Cost to taxpayers: 3 trillion dollars. Geo-political result: An ally for Iran.
            Clinton’s destruction: One blue dress.

            Reply
          2. mike April 15, 2015

            Keep trying!!!

            Reply
          3. Carolyn1520 April 16, 2015

            The entire country was misled by Bush’s lies.
            Only MORON Mike would think those who voted in favor should have accused the president of lying before they voted.

            Reply
          4. Independent1 April 15, 2015

            You really have absolutely no sense of morality do you?? You are about as low a form of life as I’ve ever encountered. You have absolute no shame with your absurd assertions!! You are the Devil himself!!!

            Reply
          5. mike April 15, 2015

            You should ask Billy Boy Clinton about morality. None of this would have happened it had kept his you know what in his pants with Monica and all the others.

            I am far from the Devil, more like an Angel.

            “The Devil himself”, now that is hysterical.
            LMAO!!! No, ROFLMAO!!!

            Reply
          6. Independent1 April 15, 2015

            Well, at least I know now for sure that you’re as big a liar as the average RWNJ!! You’re clearly no Angel or anything remotely related to one.

            Reply
          7. mike April 16, 2015

            You are such a silly little person, with about as much “cred” as a dead cockroach.

            Reply
          8. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            Comments like that coming from someone that every nonRWNJ poster on the NM knows just crawled out from under a rock – really doesn’t mean much – does it???

            Reply
          9. mike April 16, 2015

            You just keep me laughing with your inane remarks. You still have ” no cred”.

            Reply
          10. Carolyn1520 April 16, 2015

            How long have you been so repressed?
            “his you know what…”‘
            LMAO

            Reply
          11. mike April 16, 2015

            Repression is all yours!!
            Just trying not to be too graphic for your virgin eyes and ears. 🙂

            Reply
          12. idamag April 16, 2015

            When it comes to morality: the 8th commandment says, “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” It doesn’t say, thou shalt not lie. Therefore, it makes a person responsible for repeating lies. If you break one commandment, you break them all. So therefore, Bill Clinton is no more immoral than Mike.

            Reply
          13. Kemosahbee April 16, 2015

            you really aren’t looking if you can’t find criticism from those folks re being misled into Iraq. And add delusional to lazy if you somehow equate some fanciful ‘destruction’ caused by lying about a bj as compared to lying about starting a WAR where hundreds of thousands were maimed and killed and a region destabilized for generations.

            Reply
          14. mike April 16, 2015

            Keep working on trying to make a point. Some day you might get it.
            Clinton just cheapened and lowered the office of President. He lied to his Cabinet, lied under oath, lied to the American people “I did not have sexual relations with that women, Miss Lewinsky” 7 months later had to go on TV and admit he lied to all and had to produce a DNA sample.
            You seem to forget he tried to get Monica to “evasive” in her testimony. The Constitution says that the President is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the US and here is Clinton telling Monica to lie.
            It might be an inconvenient truth to you but that is the history of the first sitting president to testify about his own conduct while in office.
            All he had to do was keep his you know what in his pants. Pretty simple. We all know he is a womanizer. PS: don’t forget Kathleen Willey and Billy Boy in the WH.

            Reply
          15. Kemosahbee April 16, 2015

            That the issue was PURSUED by Republicans is an inconvenient truth that is a stain on this country – even that is worse than what Clinton did let alone your absurd notion that Clinton caused more destruction than Bush lying us into the Iraq debacle which resulted in crazy casualties. Your pearl clutching drama was so serious that while Clinton was impeached by the republican loonies in the house, the Senate couldn’t even muster a simple majority let alone 2/3 for a conviction. And soon after Clinton’s approvals went up and today he’s by far the most popular living ex POTUS. Oh the horror.

            You’ve shown yourself to either be crazy or simply not very serious – certainly unworthy of any further discussion.

            Reply
          16. mike April 16, 2015

            That’s only in your eyes!!
            The stain was lying to the American people. Bill Clinton, a lawyer, the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the country chose to lie under oath, to the people. He cheapened the office, himself with his lies.
            Keep trying that Bush thing. Now how many democratic leaders have said they were lied too?
            We will be seeing all this drama playing out in the next few years.

            Reply
          17. Frank KIng April 16, 2015

            The shock of the gross criminal negligence by the Bush/Cheney administration prior to and during the attack in Ny that murdered 2983 of our people while at work and the horror of it all was still on the minds of Americans and Bush/Cheney used it to create a mess at home and abroad with lies, deceit and chicanery. With media hype and the administration’s deception to start a war with “shock and awe” the right wing bungled the mission into Afghanistan allowing it to fester for another to confront, then started a misguided mismanaged venture into Iraq allowing it to fester for another to confront while undermining a once viable economy at home.. As for Benghazi, it happened in an area of the world where wild Jihadists and crazed sectarian fundamentalists are more than willing to murder their own as well as foreigners. It pales in comparison to the right wing’s attempts to escape responsibility and accountability for the loss of life in NY. The hypocrisy is obvious. Forget your obsession with sex. It has warped your view of the real problems we face in this nation trying to recover form right wing malfeasance/ misfeasance that led to the problems we encounter today that may never be resolved in you lifetime.

            Reply
          18. mike April 16, 2015

            The question is when are you going to quit being so obsessed with Bush?

            As to “attempts to escape responsibility and accountability for loss of life in NY” just shows how delusional and full of hate to make such an asinine statement.

            Tell me exactly when, where, and how the attack was to happen that Bush ignored. If you had read any of the briefings before 9/11, even you would know that the chatter was there but not one person in the different agencies knew the when, where, and how. There was not one concrete fact. No one walked into the briefing and had specific knowledge of an attack.

            Only warped view on the real world is you.

            Reply
          19. Frank KIng April 17, 2015

            More than chatter, there was a prior attack in NY, briefings by the Clinton administration on terrorism at home and abroad by the that Bush chose to ignore because it wasn’t that important, a written warning of a an imminent attack within the US held by the air-head, C.Rice, which was ignored because the incompetent administration left for a month’s vacation before the attack. What followed was the biggest calamity in foreign affairs and domestic economic activity that are still galactic problems today. I have read some of your comments on this thread and your vitriol and caustic remarks lack the pious quality you claim while condemning others for theirs. Sorry right wing Bumpkin, the attack in NY occured on right wing watch so don’t seek to escape accountability. Credibility is your problem.

            Reply
          20. mike April 17, 2015

            There you go again, you make statements and can’t back them up with facts.
            Name the when, where, how the attacks were going to occur. Give specific briefings that show our intelligence community knew the where, when and how. They didn’t, even the deputy to Clark admitted that there were never specifics.
            My comments are in reply to the vitriol from the others that post on this site. So get off your high horse. left wing Bumpkin.
            Your ignorance is your problem.
            As usual, you are just another of the UN’s, uninformed, unmotivated to know the truth, unenlightened, unintelligent.
            Produce the documents that US intelligence passed on to the Bush the when, where, and how.
            Maybe you are another mental midget like Indepenedent1 that said “Bush knew the attack was coming and left the WH to escape to safety”. Talk about ignorance!!

            Reply
          21. Frank KIng April 17, 2015

            Hey, stupid, the facts are these: 2983 of our people lost their lives due to gross criminal negligence prior to and during the attack on the towers in NY on 9/11, 2001. The administration in control of the government was republican who always claimed they were the first on defense which is a myth of galactic proportions. The apology from Clark to the nation was an admission that the inept administration didn’t consider terrorism as important as their political/economic goals which turned out to be just as incompetent as their “war on terrorism” You right wing hacks never want to accept your responsibility for this disaster and keep harping on Benghazi for what ever political advantage there is to be gained. Hypocrisy is your only tool. If ignorance is bliss, you must be in a constant state of euphoria.

            Reply
          22. mike April 17, 2015

            Document that the Bush administration knew When, where, and how the attacks would occur.
            Here you go, you ignoramus!!

            There were more details, as laid out by one of Tenet’s top analysts, known in the book as “Rich B.” Tenet recounts his aide telling Rice and others, “The attack will be ‘spectacular.’ and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities and interests. ‘Attack preparations have been made,’ he said. ‘Multiple and simultaneous attacks are possible, and they will occur with little or no warning. Al-Qaida is waiting us out and looking for vulnerability.”

            Rice, Tenet wrote, reacted positively to the briefing and asked her counter terrorism adviser, Richard Clarke, if he agreed with the assessment. Clarke said he did, and Tenet said he and his aides left the meeting feeling that Rice understood the threat. However, he wrote, the White House never followed up on the presidential finding that Tenet had been asking for since March, authorizing broader covert action against al-Qaida. That finding was signed by President Bush on Sept. 17, six days after the attacks.

            Roger Cressey, who was Clarke’s deputy and is now an NBC News counter terrorism analyst, says one thing that is missing from Tenet’s description of the events is that the intelligence pointed to overseas attacks. although CIA did tell officials that they couldn’t discount an attack on the US homeland.

            “Everything we had (from US intelligence) pointed overseas, specifically to the Gulf,” he said. “There was no actionable intelligence that pointed to the homeland. What we did know, and what we told domestic agencies, was there was “a disturbance in the force” and we were very worried about an attack.

            Reply
          23. Frank KIng April 17, 2015

            Security Advisor Rice had received a warning of an imminent attack within the US a month before it occured. Center on that threat. We had a previous attack in NY and the goal of bin Laden was to attack where he could get the most “bang for the buck” and the Towers offered the best venue. I can’t offer an explanation on the ineptness of Bush/Cheney’s CIA or other of the administration’s agencies. The only observable fact is that the disaster happened where it happened before in NY even with a written warning in the hands of the “Security Advisor. As far as they were concerned it was going to happen in the Grand Canyon. What was NORAD’s excuse? As an apologist for this bunch of incompetent dolts, you win the prize for duplicity.

            Reply
          24. mike April 17, 2015

            As usual your selectivity is showing. The was little to no information of an attack on the homeland. Silly Bumpkin!!!
            The lack of intellectual honesty is all yours.
            One more time: Roger Cressey, who was Clarke’s deputy and is now an NBC News counter terrorism analyst, says one thing that is missing from Tenet’s description of the events is that the intelligence pointed to overseas attacks. although CIA did tell officials that they couldn’t discount an attack on the US homeland.
            One last time, show the rest of the world the briefings that Bush was told where, when, how it was going to happen in the homeland, as you claim.

            Come on country Bumpkin, give it to us.

            Reply
          25. Frank KIng April 17, 2015

            As usual your right wing stupor continues to avoid a warning in writing of an imminent attack on US soil. The warning was ignored in favor of vacationing. You keep harping on an overseas attack which never occured. The effort of the incompetent administration. should have been concerned with domestic targets with NY as the center of concern. That was the target and that’s where the calamity happened. it happened before and exceeded bin Laden’s “wildest dreams”. You rely on a failed administration’s security people for information. Bush claimed he had more important matters than terrorism and the adminstration reflected the lack of concern until 9/11. There must have been plans for your how, when, where because a written warning could not be ignored even by the Bush incompetents with NY leading the list. If there wasn’t, then gross criminal negligence is still viable. NORAD had concerns about planes flying into buildings. Rice was so surprised when it happened, she began looking for another job.

            Reply
          26. mike April 17, 2015

            One more time: Roger Cressey, who was Clarke’s deputy and is now an NBC
            News counter terrorism analyst, says one thing that is missing from
            Tenet’s description of the events is that the intelligence pointed to
            overseas attacks. although CIA did tell officials that they couldn’t
            discount an attack on the US homeland.
            One last time, show the rest
            of the world the briefings that Bush was told where, when, how it was
            going to happen in the homeland, as you claim.

            Still waiting for all that documentation that backs up your position. Now at what briefing did the US intelligence agencies inform Bush Administration where, when and how the attacks would occur. Not even a smidgen of specific intel was ever given, just lots of chatter, with experts saying they were looking for it to happen overseas.

            You should probably give up on all that gobbly gook nonsense you keep trying to say are facts.

            You just look more ridiculous each post.

            Produce the document!!

            Reply
          27. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            “Clinton just cheapened and lowered the office of President.”

            Is that why today Bill Clinton has a 60+% favorability rating from the American public?? You are as delusional as it comes!! The vast majority of Americans know full well that politicians are human just like all of us and are sometimes going to be enticed into relationships that are not the best; but they also know, that those relationships are basically NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS AS LONG AS OTHERWISE THE POLITICIAN IS LOOKING OUT FOR THEIR BEST INTERESTS AND THE INTERESTS OF OUR COUNTRY!! WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING BEING A RWNJ YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT – POLITICIANS THAT ACTUALLY LOOK OUT FOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS AND OUR COUNTRY’S BEST INTERESTS!!!

            Reply
          28. mike April 16, 2015

            Pew Research 2014: 84% of Americans feel infidelity is unacceptable. I wouldn’t expect you secular progressive to have a moral compass.
            He should have kept it in his pants but he didn’t. He lied under oath, to the American people, to his cabinet.
            60% means nothing,lets see the poll and questions asked.

            Reply
          29. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            Who do you think you’re kidding?? Those are the 84% of Americans who say – Do as I say not as I do. Clearly, far more than 50% of Americans may say those things just like Gingrich, when they’re actively involved in an elicit relationship!! Get real!! Like I said – you’re dumber than a rock believing that BS!!!

            Reply
          30. mike April 16, 2015

            Oh poor baby having a hissy fit, aren’t you!!!

            Reply
          31. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            Sure, and those are the 84% of Americans who said infidelity is unacceptable because Pew called when their spouse was there looking over their shoulder as they answered the survey questions.

            Reply
          32. mike April 16, 2015

            Another inane post by you.

            Reply
          33. idamag April 16, 2015

            And to cap off their dishonesty, they gave no-bid contracts to Halliburton subsidiaries. There is no bottom on those peoples’ sinking.

            Reply
          34. Carolyn1520 April 16, 2015

            What greater destruction happened with Clinton’s lie?

            Reply
          35. mike April 16, 2015

            Really?? Not surprised at the question coming from you.

            Reply
          36. Carolyn1520 April 16, 2015

            Not surprised you can’t answer it MORON Mike.

            Reply
          37. mike April 16, 2015

            You being a secular progressive with no morals it would go over your little head.

            Reply
      2. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

        I remember Nixon resigning for his lies and lies of omission about WaterGate…Do you? I remember the dirty little secret Reagan kept about sending his VP Bush (41) to Iran to delay the release of the Iran hostages…Do you?

        I remember Bush ’41 bailing his son, Neil’s Silverado S&L out of bankruptcy using YOUR tax dollars, do you? Not to worry…That was Strike One for the Bush Bankruptcy Boys….Little Georgie bankrupted his Arbusto Oil and then Neil was back at it again with Brother JEB when the bankrupted the Miami Federal in 2001. Do you remember that?

        Did you remember the lies about the WMDs? How on earth can a dipshit like you compare lying about an issue as serious as WMDs to get a war in Iraq to the Viet Nam war? By the way, 4,000 Americans in NY, PA and the Pentagon lost their lives because your dipshit President Cheney chose Iraq as his major source of Halliburton payback. Don’t bother to deny the deal between Cheney and Halliburton…It’s a known fact by most of Halliburton’s “former” employees. Why else did Cheney make sure his former company got a no bid contract? Did you remember that?

        The total number of Iraqi civilians killed by Blackwater and the US? The tense of thousands…So the next time you play with numbers, you need to consider the total death toll of Iraq…a NEEDLESS war and $6.5 TRILLION war. Remember that fat mouth.

        Why not just admit you are a coward who only uses selective memory to try and prove baseless points you can’t prove in any US court.

        Reply
        1. mike April 15, 2015

          Now did Hillary believe there were WMD’s, or Biden, Schumer, Kerry, Feinstein. etc.. Did they vote for the war?? Did they ever accuse Bush administration of lying?? LMAO!!!
          Nice try but again no cigar,

          Reply
          1. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

            Several years ago on PBS, there was a documentary you can’t possibly hope to deny. The documentary showed Cheney walking an attache case (brown leather) to Bush office. It contained the documents Cheney said supported the presence of WMDs in Iraq. All of the GOP always vote for war whether they are going to send idiots like you to the Middle East or avoid sending their own kids to be killed and maimed…as Bush did when he claimed to be helping his father’s campaign during Viet Nam to avoid being drafted.

            The fact is that Bush in 2004 stated publicly that he had been “misinformed by an Italian informant” whose name has never been mentioned to this day.

            Nice that you like to ignore the glut of military industrialists from red states like VA, WY, AZ, OK and TX who overwhelmingly supported Bush’s lies about the WMDs.

            How the hell would Hillary know Cheney had a secret deal with Halliburton and Blackwater to get the Iraq war on no bid contracts for these two Cheney campaign donors? Bush didn’t even know that Cheney masterminded the Iraq war long before GWB was even president. Why the hell do you think they would make Cheney a Halliburton CEO for 2 and only 2 years before he became the VP?

            In fact, once again liar boy you make a complete idiot of yourself. The 9/11 Commission publicly castigated Rice for that “misinformation” and proved there never were WMDs in Iraq. So..do you want to know the real reason Cheney was hot to get a war in Iraq? Besides his need for campaign donations and a GOP presidency?

            His chums GHWB and Rummy both had a vendetta going with Saddam Hussein back before GHWB ever left the Reagan VPship. Apparently, GHWB had a deal for arms in Iran (Iran ContraGate) at the same time that Iran planned to use those arms against Iraq. That’s when Saddam Hussein had enough of GHWB’s CIA tactics and decided to take Iraq matters in his own hands. GHWB was livid.

            So..Cuban Revolution? Thank the Bush Dynasty. All that BS about sanctions? Punishment for confiscating the Bush Cuban sugar and tobacco plantations? Saddam Hussein? Sonny boy got even with him for betraying his Daddy. You don’t seriously think Bush Jrs CIA magically found Hussein underground in one day do you?

            Reply
          2. Dominick Vila April 15, 2015

            Don’t forget what happened to Valerie Plame when her husband, Ambassador Wilson challenged W’s claim that Iraq had nuclear weapons, what happened to the Dixie Chicks, the way Bush-Cheney dismissed an IAEA report indicating that all the WMDs that Reagan gave Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war had been destroyed; and what happened when the CIA suggested removing a claim of Iraqi nuclear weapons from a SOTU address because there was no evidence to support that claim, and Cheney put it back in.
            Never mind the deregulation that contributed to the ENRON, AIG, Lehman Brothers, Bernie Maddof; and the irresponsible tax breaks and mismanagement that brought the U.S. economy to its knees.
            Who does the GOP blame for that mess? Members of the party that were out of power, and W’s successor, presumably for saving our economy in spite of obstacles admitted by Mitch McConnell, the man who ordered the raid that ended in the death of the mastermind of 9/11; capturing Al Libby, the man responsible for the terrorist attack against our consulate in Benghazi; and the man responsible for restoring our international credibility.
            Bear in mind that the reason for the outrageous claims, and accusations of lying, are desperate efforts to establish a parallel between what the GOP did when they were in control of the WH and Congress, including the worst foreign terrorist attack on U.S. soil in history, by comparing a chapter of our history that we should all forget, with make believe crises that don’t amount to a hill of beans.

            Reply
          3. charleo1 April 15, 2015

            Extremely well said Dom! Thanks!

            Reply
          4. idamag April 16, 2015

            And, remember Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld have been convicted of war crimes in Malaysia and Norway and several other countries have warrants for their arrest if they ever enter those countries. And the diptin harps on a sexual encounter or an unfounded claim – Benghazi.

            Reply
          5. mike April 15, 2015

            Now is this the same attache case that Bush 41, as Director of CIA, used to throw the Shah under the bus??? LMAO!!

            Just more of your diarrhea of the brain. Your whole post is one of delusion and a little old lady having a tantrum. You really are living in the past.

            Reply
          6. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            It’s not Eleanore living in the past worthless!! It’s you living in total denial of reality!! You are about as totally clueless as any low IQ conservative can get!!! If you were any dumber you’d have to go back and redo kindergarten where you obviously flunked out of!!

            Reply
          7. mike April 16, 2015

            ROFLMAO, again. You really crack me up with your stupid comments.

            Reply
          8. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            I Know!! Just like kenndeb who equates the truth to propaganda – you equate the truth to ‘stupid comments”. Keep on with the denial LOW IQ IDIOT!! BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT YOU ARE – DUMBER THAN A ROCK!!!!!!

            And it’s not just me that’s saying you’re LOW IQ, many studies have proven that the vast majority of conservatives are conservative just Because they’re too low IQ to deal with progressive ideas!!

            Even LiveScience has proven that through it’s studies – YOU’RE A CONSERVATIVE BECAUSE YOU’RE JUST PLAIN DUMB!!!

            Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice

            There’s no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

            The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

            “Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood,” he said.

            http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

            Reply
          9. mike April 16, 2015

            See how easy you make my point. Starting a new laugh.

            Reply
          10. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            Keep on living in your own fantasy land dumbcoff!! You deserve to live in La La Land!!

            Reply
          11. mike April 16, 2015

            Still laughing dumbcoff.

            Reply
          12. idamag April 16, 2015

            You are arguing with an ideologue. Truth will not matter. You will get more sense out of arguing with a rock. I have never heard a rock say something stupid. If Jesus, himself, came to that diptin and told him he had to give up the Republican party or him. He would choose the party. He has already chosen the party over his country.

            Reply
      3. BOC April 15, 2015

        This reads like this guy is “grasping at straws’.

        Reply
        1. mike April 15, 2015

          He’s a good guy but wrong.

          Reply
      4. bobnstuff April 15, 2015

        A gentleman does not talk about his sexual relations with a women. Plus ask any school girl and they will tell you a BJ isn’t sex. This whole thing would have never made the news thirty years earlier and as far as I’m
        concerned it shouldn’t have then.

        Reply
        1. mike April 15, 2015

          No, Clinton just lies under oath. Who ever said he was a gentlemen?? We know he was a womanizer!!!

          Reply
          1. bobnstuff April 15, 2015

            The point is he should have never been ask the question in the first place. Things like that once was don’t ask don’t tell. It’s none of our business. By the school girl definition of sex he didn’t lie.

            Reply
          2. mike April 15, 2015

            Bull Roar!, to both of your statements. He lied under oath! He is a known womanizer!

            Reply
          3. bobnstuff April 15, 2015

            Since half the presidents of the 20th century had mistresses you believe that Clinton should be treated differently? It had nothing to do with his office and in the past it was not talked about. It only became an issue when the witch hunt of the republicans came up empty and a gentleman never tells.

            Reply
          4. mike April 15, 2015

            The media, specifically the WP and Graham/Ben Bradlee, kept Kennedy out of the news.
            Once Clinton was outed and it was known by the public, it was fair game. Clinton lied under oath and to the American people.
            Clinton was a womanizer and Hillary enabled him in doing it. Period.

            Reply
          5. bobnstuff April 15, 2015

            What about Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Johnson, and Bush the first? All had affairs. No one cared except their wives and in FDR’s case his mother. You don’t think the other party know
            about them? The only house investigation was Clinton. No hearings,nothing for all the others.

            Reply
          6. Independent1 April 15, 2015

            And how about the fact that the guy on the GOP side that was pushing the hardest for invading Bill’s privacy is now a 2 times adulterer, who dumped one wife while she was on her sick bed, and was involved in a real affair during the whole time he was making a big deal out of Monica and Bill.

            And then this creep has the nerve to run for president and has a big chunk of the supposedly Christian-right thinking seriously about voting for this outright sinner!! Wow!! And Mike, who supports all these fake Christian hypocrites (making him a hypocrite himself) has the nerve to make an issue out of Clinton’s quasi affair!!

            Reply
          7. idamag April 16, 2015

            Yup, he had to divorce his disabled wife in order to marry the woman he was engaged to.

            Reply
          8. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            I don’t think many bloggers here are condoning what Bill did, but if we castigated every politician, or founding father, for being a womanizer, or getting involved in questionable relationships, very few politicians and even our founding fathers would not be getting some form of condemnation.

            Reply
          9. charleo1 April 15, 2015

            If Clinton took a dump, Congress held a hearing on it. Appointed a Special Prosecutor. Subpoenaed his proctologist. And ask, Why did he flush the evidence?? And, what is the President hiding???

            Reply
          10. idamag April 16, 2015

            Love it! When our embassy was attacked during Reagan’s Administration, 175 people were killed. We came together as a nation, outraged against the perps and not the president. Then the subversives got stronger and are looking for something with their big magnifying glasses. If they can’t find anything real, they will make something up. They are a disease to Democracy.

            Reply
          11. mike April 15, 2015

            Now which one got caught and denied/lied on TV that he never had sex to the American people.

            Reply
          12. bobnstuff April 15, 2015

            What party decided that it was important enough to hold hearings about it. They all got caught or we wouldn’t know about it. The republicans can’t win on leadership, policies, or governing so the have to try to take out the democrats any way they can. All honor left the republican party around the time
            of Reagan.

            Reply
          13. mike April 15, 2015

            Did Bill or did he not have sexual relations with Monica in the WH while president???

            Was he involved with many other women in the past???

            Your wasting your time.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXdNYXMQoy8

            Reply
          14. bobnstuff April 16, 2015

            Slick Willy was a womanizer before he became President, Everyone knew it and he was still elected. What married man is going to say “Sure I got a BJ from a twenty some woman.” What I want to know is why the republicans are so interested what happens in peoples sex life and in their bedrooms. Wouldn’t their time be better spent fixing the tax code or coming up
            with a immigration policy that can be enforced. The republican party has a dirty mind. People are dying because our roads are falling apart and congress doesn’t care but let an Ambassador get killed because he does stupid things and they will keep holding hearings till the cows come home.

            Reply
          15. mike April 16, 2015

            I could care less what they do in their bedroom. He got caught and lied to the American people.
            “Ambassador does stupid things gets killed” what a crock of s$$t. Do you know why he was in Benghazi? No!! Go read Hicks testimony, learn something for once.
            We will never know the full truth until Hillary turns over the server. Until she does, you sure in the heck don’t know a damn thing.

            Reply
          16. bobnstuff April 16, 2015

            “The Board found that Ambassador Stevens made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington, per standard practice,” said the report. “Timing for his trip was driven in part by commitments in Tripoli, as well as a staffing gap between principal officers in Benghazi.”

            Who reports to Washington about the security in a country? The ambassador of course.

            Reply
          17. mike April 16, 2015

            Again go read Hicks testimony. Then make your statement “independently of Washington”.
            You still haven’t answered why he was there.

            Reply
          18. bobnstuff April 16, 2015

            Hicks said why. But it was the Ambassadors choice as to when and how. Yes, he was asked to establish a permanent outpost but he was the one who made the choice to go that day with that level of security. The house has tried seven time to prove something different but can’t.

            Reply
          19. mike April 16, 2015

            And why did he meet the Turkish Ambassador??
            Stevens was given less than 19 days to finish task as I remember his testimony.
            Many questions unanswered and the American people need to know.
            We know for a fact the video that for 2 weeks they claim was the cause, was proven false.

            Reply
          20. idamag April 16, 2015

            Why do you talk to that “hate the Democrats, they enacted civil rights, nut.

            Reply
          21. ericlipps April 16, 2015

            Mike, stop bullshitting us. If Hillary “turned over the server” and nothing incriminating was on it, you’d just say it had been scrubbed. You don’t need evidence; you’ve made up your mind already and will believe only what confirms your existing opinion. And if nothing does, you’ll keep insisting it’s the truth anyway.

            Reply
          22. mike April 16, 2015

            It is all about perception and at this point her refusal to turn the server makes her look guilty, not only by some democrats but republicans and independents. Remember it won’t be the left that elects her thevleft needs the independents. Her numbers are dropping, why???
            We will never know because she believes this will all blow over and business as usual. But that won’t happen in a election year. She can’t give good answers why she had her own email addresses or the server. We find out this week that Issa sent her a letter in 2012 asking if she was using private emails, she never replied.

            http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/darrell-issa-hillary-clinton-personal-email-use-2012-116992.html
            Watch her eyes in the video, she never looks directly at the press, press was at her eye level. Her eyes were always up and away as if she was hiding something. Watch at about the 11:10 to see where the press was located. Right smack in front of her.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAx384JGSGk

            Reply
          23. idamag April 16, 2015

            It titillates him.

            Reply
          24. charleo1 April 15, 2015

            Yes, Clinton had a tryst. And that makes him what percentage of
            the total married male population? And correct me if I’m wrong. But whatever Hillary decided to do within her marriage, was strictly nobody’s business but her own.

            Reply
          25. mike April 15, 2015

            Clinton was the president of the United States, got caught having an affair while in office. Lied to American people, and under oath. What is so hard to understand, he got caught.
            You seem to forget this was not the first time Bill got caught. Why did she stay around?? POWER!!!
            No question they have a weird marriage.
            Now look where she is now running for President. Without Bill she would be nothing, it is all about the Clinton machine. Wake up!!

            Reply
          26. idamag April 16, 2015

            The lie about WMDs caused and is causing a great loss of life and we will be paying for it for a long, long time.

            Reply
          27. Carolyn1520 April 16, 2015

            You’re so on point. Let’s see.
            I lied about WMD’s and that has cost us how many deaths and disabilities
            or
            I lied about an affair with a woman and it didn’t affect the way I did my job and it affects only 3 people.

            Which one had the most negative effect on the nation?

            Kind of a no brainer unless you happen to be a MORON.

            Reply
          28. ericlipps April 16, 2015

            Well, I wouldn’t all Clinton a “gentleman,” but there’s little doubt that the Republicans were getting desperate. Whitewater had gone nowhere, Paula Jones’s lawsuit was on its way to being dismissed “with prejudice”–meaning she couldn’t bring it back to court, and the assorted other bogus “scandals” the GOP had ginned up were dying out one by one.

            That’s why GOP’ers originally tried to claim Clinton had sexually assaulted Lewinsky. If they could have made that charge stick, they could have revived the Jones lawsuit too. When they couldn’t, they bulled ahead anyway with lesser sexual accusations.

            And yes, I know Clinton ended up paying Jones (or, mostly, her lawyers) $850,000 to drop the case. After its dismissal by a district court, Jones and company rushed to appeal and got a three-judge panel to agree, two to one, to overturn the dismissal. Jones had originally asked for $2 million and a public apology and was talked down by her lawyers, but it was made clear that the deep pockets behind Jones’s suit were prepared to spend millions to get a judgment against the President. Rather than continue fighting it out for months in court while simultaneously facing impeachment hearings, and possibly being spent into bankruptcy in the process, Clinton essentially paid blackmail.

            Reply
          29. ericlipps April 15, 2015

            He “lied under oath” in response to a question no one else would have been, or ever should have been, asked under oath. And by the way: in the typical divorce proceeding, one side or the other is always lying, usually about sex. It’s almost unheard of for this to be treated as perjury even when it’s exposed (pardon the pun).

            Reply
          30. mike April 15, 2015

            Thanks for the chuckle.
            What your brain can’t figure out is that Clinton was caught, plain and simple.
            He lied to the American people and again under oath.
            Womanizing was his MO and Hillary was his enabler, End of Story.
            Nothing else matters.

            Reply
          31. ericlipps April 16, 2015

            If lying to the American people were a crime, Clinton would have plenty of company in the dock. That’s not to say it’s excusable, but why single out Clinton? Because he had the gall to actually win the White House despite being a Democrat? He’s just the first to be forced to testify in court about it, and he was forced to for expressly political reasons.

            As for womanizing being Clinton’s “MO,” that’s an interesting choice of expression. His “method of operation” to accomplish what, exactly? (Besides sex.) I’ve already covered the oath business.

            And “nothing else matters”? Surely what he did in his official capacity matters more than his sex life, or his lying about it.

            What your brain can’t figure out tis that the Lewinsky business was a last desperate effort by Republicans to unseat a man they had tried and failed to defeat in two elections. Ironically, if they’d succeeded, they’d have gotten Al Gore as president.

            Reply
          32. mike April 16, 2015

            He had to admit he lied to the American people of his personal conduct, that the fact!
            What he accomplish was the need for more women that Hillary.
            His conduct is already being seen by the American people, not by the right but the left-SNL. It will continue and the good old “Clinton fatigue” is back.
            PS: Hillary is not a very good campaigner. Bill will be right beside her, his conduct will play over and over in the minds of people and this very weird marriage based on power.

            Reply
          33. idamag April 16, 2015

            When Clinton signed civil rights, as governor of Arkansas, the bigots went to work on him. None of the allegations were proven. Indiscretion in the Whitewater thing was not proven either. If a Democrat gets elected, the wingnuts will do anything to discredit him or her. The suspicious things about the Lewinksi affair are these: She sidles up to him in his office and asks him to feel her new thong panties. (BTW, how many men would fall for that?). Then the thing happens. A play-by-play description is given to Miss Ugly so it can be taped. In that description, Monica tells Linda where the blue semon stained dress can be found in her closet. How many women have ever set the stage that well. Ladies, if you had a conquest, did you tell all the itty bitty details to your friend? Men, if a woman grabs your hand and puts it under her skirt to feel her thong panties, what will you do?

            Reply
          34. idamag April 16, 2015

            Clinton was a Democrat, therefore, anything he might have done in error is bad, bad, bad. Clinton’s folly was allowing himself to be seduced. As a president, he should have known better. It was something between him and his wife, not the entire nation.

            Reply
          35. Independent1 April 16, 2015

            And by the way dumbcoff. Monica admitted that she threw herself at Bill; it wasn’t Bill that initiated the relationship. That relationship is NO PROOF he’s a womanizer. She seduced him!!! And admitted it!!!

            Reply
          36. mike April 16, 2015

            Hey Dumbcoff, so what if Monica threw herself at him, doesn’t mean he has to accept her advances.
            As I have said before, Hillary was his enabler so the knew he could have affairs with no consequences until Monica.
            You really are pathetic spinner of the facts, he had multiple affairs. He was a womanizer.
            Gennifer Flowers — a model and actress whose claims of a long-term affair nearly wrecked Clinton’s first run for the presidency in 1992. (Clinton denied her claims at the time, but under oath in 1998 he acknowledged a sexual encounter with her.

            Monica Lewinsky — intern at the White House, whose affair with Clinton fueled impeachment charges.

            Dolly Kyle Browning — A high school friend who said in a sworn declaration that she had had a 22-year off-and-on sexual relationship with Clinton.

            Elizabeth Ward Gracen — a former Miss America who said she had a one-night stand with Clinton while he was governor — and she was married. She went public to specifically deny reports he had forced himself on her.

            Paula Jones — A former Arkansas state employee who alleged that in 1991 Clinton, while governor, propositioned her and exposed himself. She later filed a sexual harassment suit, and it was during a deposition in that suit that Clinton initially denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky. Clinton in 1998 settled the suit for $850,000, with no apology or admission of guilt. All but $200,000 was directed to pay legal fees.

            Reply
          37. SecludedCompound May 11, 2015

            LOL, this old sadsack is still pissed off that Clinton basically made every Republican point on economics moot, and Obama’s just done it a second time.

            It must suck knowing you’re going to be the hated minority in a few years and know that there’s nothing you can do about it.

            Age out, sadsack!

            Reply
          38. mike May 11, 2015

            Only in your mental midget mind. Thanks for the laugh.

            Reply
        2. idamag April 16, 2015

          That lying sackof. I never heard any kids saying, if Clinton did it, it was okay. He must be a doddering old fool. When Clinton lied, no one died. If Clinton had answered honestly, then he would have been a cad to rat on the seducer. We have had convicted war criminals in charge and that doesn’t bother some as much as a little dalliance does. What hypocrites. I am not afraid of philanderers, but I don’t trust hate groups.

          Reply
  9. Elliot J. Stamler April 15, 2015

    Amazing – for once I fully agree with Leonard Pitts. As when on the very rare occasions I agree with Antonin Scalia, I shall have to review my thinking in ensure my brain hasn’t been hacked.

    Reply
    1. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

      One woman I know as a FB friend, lives in the same town near Bundy. She told me that Bundy’s cattle is stolen. He doesn’t even own the cattle he’s using federal land for grazing.

      Bundy is proof positive of that Wild West BS “might makes right.” No…sorry…the Constitution says it doesn’t.

      Reply
      1. kenndeb April 15, 2015

        More lies from a liberal? So surprising.

        Reply
  10. ps0rjl April 15, 2015

    If that line of cowboys includes Clive Bundy then the right wing is certainly praising a known crook and thief. While all other ranchers are respecting the rules regarding grazing their cattle on federal lands, this man is ignoring the rules completely. If he is one of the heroes of the right wing extremists, then their cause is not to overthrow the government but rather to have a government they and only they control. God help most ordinary citizens who at times complain about the government, because these extremists will certainly be worse for all the rest of us if they and their kind get to run the government. Can anybody say Nazi Germany?

    Reply
    1. charleo1 April 15, 2015

      Fascist will be Fascist, Anarchist will be Anarchist, and Racists will be Racists. And sometimes they find common ground, and cause. This time, his name is Cliven Bundy.

      Reply
      1. Xenophon April 17, 2015

        I object to anarchists getting put in that list as finding common ground with fascists.

        Reply
    2. Xenophon April 17, 2015

      Also remember that Bundy went to court to press his claim to the land and lost, and then decided the appropriate response was insurrection.

      Reply
  11. Eleanore Whitaker April 15, 2015

    The right wing is losing ground and they know it. First of all, they can thank themselves for the attempt at government take over they thought they’d hand to Charley and Davey Krotch. Now, no one will dare vote GOP for fear the Krotch boys will run the government from a back room. Proud of yourselves?

    As for the hicks, rednecks, fatnecks, fat guts and the rest of the Grand Pubbahs of Upper Butt Crack in Dogpatch, their culture of living entirely in the past in not one we can hand to our kids as their future. Nor do we intend to allow lazy butt red staters to live off our tax dollars while they send our kids off to war and sit on those double wide butts.

    Reply
  12. Jeff Bottaro April 15, 2015

    Mr. Pitts: Our government is, to an unprecedented extent, in the hands of bank and corporation alike; this can be evidenced by such a broad array of independent things as to be beyond the scope of the present discussion.
    The tectonic forces that mounting against you and your kind will, upon their unfoldment, strike you as preternatural.

    Reply
  13. wjca April 15, 2015

    It must be obvious that Timothy McVeigh was an “isolated incident.” (See your previous column.)

    Reply
  14. howa4x April 15, 2015

    This is what you get 20 yrs later from Charlton Heston’s speech to the NRA faithful that the Jackboot thugs of the government would have to pry his gun from his cold dead hands. the difference now is you have disillusioned young men returning from service in Iraq/Afghanistan very angry and with no job prospects. The problem is now they believe all the republican claptrap about the gays, women, Latino’s taking over and environmentalists taking away jobs, but one day those who birthed this will come to regret it. that will be the day when they realize that it is the 1% shipping the jobs out, and making them work for serf wages. . Once they feel the full effects of climate change especially on their children. Then we will see who those guns are aimed at

    Reply
  15. Allan Richardson April 15, 2015

    The entertainment media seem to be catching on. That “liberal” series “NCIS: Los Angeles” had an episode this week dealing with the white supremacists who organize in prisons and plot terrorist attacks when they get out. It was a relief to see a drama in which an undercover agent helps break up an Ayran supremacy cell for a change, instead of always being a foreign (Islamic, Eastern European or North Korean) threat.

    If average moderate taxpaying Americans can see how extreme these ideologically based criminal gangs are (the fictional one in this story was called the Aryan Supreme Authority), the “conservatives” will lose their votes and support.

    Reply
    1. Whatmeworry April 15, 2015

      You mean like NAACP, SCPLC, NAN, Planned Parenthood, NAMBLA, to name just a few

      Reply
      1. Daniel Max Ketter April 15, 2015

        I believe in all those organizations. I am pro abortion, as a woman has a right to choose to remove a fetus, just like I have a right to remove a boil off my fat keyster. The NAACP and Dr Sharpton promotes civil right and fairness, something white bigots try to take away from black people.

        Reply
      2. ericlipps April 15, 2015

        That’s quite a smorgasbord you’ve got there: civil rights, women’s rights and of course a group advocating homosexual sex with minors. Do you seriously think all these groups are the same, or allied?

        Reply
      3. Independent1 April 15, 2015

        It’s getting time that you gave a call to Bellview and let them know that you’re needing to be readmitted; apparently the isolation in that trailer of yours is really getting to your mind. You’re comments are really getting increasingly more and more psychotic and off in never, never land!!

        Reply
  16. Whatmeworry April 15, 2015

    Nice try…McVeigh bombed the fed building in retaliation for WACO as well as Ruby Ridge. Where not 1 fed was arrested or fired. Janet Reno should he been indicted and sent to prison.
    If you wan to see real govt hate look at Ferguson and the riots that occurred after a righteous shooting

    Reply
    1. Daniel Max Ketter April 15, 2015

      Why those feds at WACO did the right thing in burning down those fascist urban terrorist at Waco and those punks at Ruby Ridge got what they deserved. The hate at Ferguson were those badge wearing bigots who murdered a young boy in cold blood.

      Reply
      1. kenndeb April 15, 2015

        Punks at Ruby Ridge? You certainly do believe all the BS your regime has told you, don’t you, Comrade?

        Reply
        1. Daniel Max Ketter April 16, 2015

          Ok, homicidal gun worshiping psychotic punks. Happy?

          Reply
        2. Independent1 April 17, 2015

          Yeah!! Aren’t you just proud as punch that a couple of those psychotic maniacs that were in the Bundy standoff actually ended up killing a few people in a Wal-Mart and a Home Depot?? How do you explain that away dirtbag?? It only goes to show just how depraved Bundy and his illicit cohorts really are (and you too by the way)!!.

          Reply
          1. kenndeb April 17, 2015

            You mean the liberals that posed as conservatives to further the agenda?

            Reply
  17. paulyz April 15, 2015

    Nice try on deception Leonard Pitts. Trying to portray Americans that are rightly upset with the excessive Socialist growth & deficit spending of an out-of-touch with the People, Federal Government, as “radical” right-wingers, in hopes of getting even more growth, debt and power.

    Reply
    1. Independent1 April 15, 2015

      Wow!! You RWNJs just love to throw around the “Socialist growth – blah, blah, blah) don’t you?

      Tell you what. I’m going to list 5 socialist organizations or things that we depend on every day. And there are 70 more you can view. Since you seem to be a ‘Socialist’ hater – tell us which of these ‘Socialist’ things you’d do away with:

      1. The Military/Defense – The United States military is the largest and most funded socialist program in the world. It operates thanks to our taxpayer dollars and protects the country as a whole. From the richest citizens to the homeless who sleep under the bridge. We are all protected by our military whether we pay taxes or not. This is complete socialism.

      2. Highways/Roads – Those roads and highways you drive on every single day are completely taxpayer funded. Your tax dollars are used to maintain, expand, and preserve our highways and roads for every one’s use. President Eisenhower was inspired by Germany’s autobahn and implemented the idea right here in America. That’s right, a republican president created our taxpayer funded, national highway system. This was a different time, before the republican party came down with a vicious case of rabies that never went away.

      3. Public Libraries – Yes. That place where you go to check out books from conservative authors telling you how horrible socialism is, is in fact socialism. Libraries are taxpayer funded. You pay a few bucks to get a library card and you can read books for free for the rest of your life.

      4. Police – Ever had a situation where you had to call the police? Then you have used a taxpayer funded socialist program. Anyone can call the police whether they pay taxes or not. They are there to protect and serve the community, not individuals. This is complete socialism on a state level, but still socialism all the same. Would you rather have to swipe your credit card before the police will help you?

      5. Fire Dept. – Hopefully you have never had a fire in your home. But if you have, you probably called your local taxpayer-funded fire department to put the fire out. Like police, this is state socialism. You tax dollars are used to rescue your entire community in case of a fire. It use to be set up where you would pay a fee every month to the fire dept. for their service. If you didn’t pay, they let your house burn down. Sadly, a man from Tennessee had this exact situation happen to him in 2011 because he didn’t pay his $75.00 fee. I guess that small town in Tennessee would rather let people’s houses burn down that resort to evil socialism. So don’t take for granted the fact that you have a 24/7 fire dept. to put out your burning home thanks to socialism.

      70 more of them here:

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/29/1078852/-75-Ways-Socialism-Has-Improved-America?detail=emailclassic

      Reply
      1. idamag April 16, 2015

        paul has no idea of what the word socialism means, Back in them thar backcountry it has been bandied around by anti-government people to bully everyone else. Fire Departments, schools, police departments are also socialistic program. I am sure paul will opt out of ever taking social security as it was one of Roosevelt’s programs that the right wingnuts were screaming was socialism and should be abolished. They are getting closer. Then there is Medicare. Paul has too much pride to take medicare and he will pay his parents’ medical bills before he will let them take it.

        Reply
        1. paulyz April 16, 2015

          Only trouble with these Federal Government programs is, they are going bankrupt, they take our money, then tell us when & how much we can have back, & when we die early, we can’t leave it to our heirs. Also, it was never meant to be a persons main source of income, but for some help in old age. I know the earl,iest people that got on these programs made out great, paid almost nothing for it, but got lots out, like a pyramid scheme. Now, 2 workers for every one on S.S. And, don’t conveniently forget, Obama & the Democrats took &716 BILLION from Medicare, for Obamacare.

          Reply
          1. Independent1 April 17, 2015

            Every word is nothing but an outright lie or a distortion of the the truth!! You are about as clueless as it gets!!!! Go stick your head in the mud somewhere will you!! You don’t have clue about what you’re posting!! It’s all BS!!!

            Reply
          2. Paul Anthony May 11, 2015

            No BS about it. Facts are facts. Your opinions are your opinions.
            Facts are true. Your opinion…not so much.

            Reply
          3. Independent1 May 11, 2015

            I don’t make posts from opinions!! Any comments I post are based on facts THAT I CAN BACK UP!! Paul the Idiot has never once posted a reputable source to back up even one of his outlandishly biased idiot comments – all of which are absolute HOGWASH!!

            And if you agree with him, then you’re clearly nothing more than one more RWNJ sheeple of Faux News, Rush Limbag and the rest of the right-wing propaganda network!!!!!!!!

            Reply
        2. Paul Anthony May 11, 2015

          When our parents reached retirement age, both my brother and I were self-employed and paying more into SS/medicare than they were receiving. I WISH I could have opted out and paid their medical bills!

          Reply
      2. paulyz April 16, 2015

        There you go again with meaningless chatter. Who the hell ever said we don’t need certain things for the People. The Constitution was for only a few necessary functions of the Federal government, like a National Defense, certain things that individual States “granted” the Federal Gov., the rest left to the States, better able to handle their particular needs & much more close to their Citizens. Obama, the Democrats though, want Federal Control of most issues which are better handled by the States, transforming our Country into a Federal Government, out of touch, Socialist rule. There are actually 70 plus members in the Democrat Party that are members of the Communist Party of America, and that group praises Obama & his growth of Socialism, which eventually come due, with zero money for it. Tell us then how great it is.

        Reply
        1. Independent1 April 17, 2015

          Talk about BS!! That’s all you know how to post!! Every word of the above post is a fabrication of reality!!! I’m not even going to bother to respond to your nonsensical diatribe beyond this!!!

          Reply
          1. paulyz April 17, 2015

            Of course you can’t respond because you have ran out of BS trying to answer facts. That is typical of Liberals.

            Reply
      3. Paul Anthony April 18, 2015

        Police, fire, libraries and most roads are built (and paid for) by state and local governments, not the federal government.

        The Interstate Highway System that Eisenhower created was not built for us – it was built for the military and paid for out of the DOD budget. Prior to the Interstate hwys, US routes were local streets with US route numbers posted on them (remember Route 66?). They meandered all around the country, connecting every city and town. But they were too narrow to move ICBM’s from where they were built to the silos that would house them. The new, straight, wide highways were needed for the movement of military troops and equipment and connect military bases while usually bypassing cities and towns. Part of the legislation that authorized the construct states that the government can restrict civilian use in cases of national emergency. We only get to use them when the military doesn’t need to.

        Reply
        1. SecludedCompound May 11, 2015

          Lol; winger tries to parse socialism, makes fool of self, story at 11.

          Reply
    2. Independent1 April 15, 2015

      And if you’re not pleased about deficit spending, write the GOP a letter since it’s 3 GOP presidents – Reagan and the 2 Bushes who are responsible for more than 90% of America’s current 18 trillion in debt!!! Obama has reduced deficit spending further and faster than any president in history: Reducing deficit spending from 1.4T per year that he INHERITED FROM BUSH 2, to under 400B/yr in only 5 budgets!! No other president has come close to accomplishing that!!!

      Reply
      1. idamag April 16, 2015

        This person does not look at the real numbers, only those that are put on hazi hate sites that cannot stand a Black man in the white house.

        Reply
        1. paulyz April 16, 2015

          Typical race-card Liberal moronic statement. By the way in case you haven’t noticed, the Republican Party has 2 Cubans, 1 Black, 1 Woman, & 1 Indian running for the Presidency, while the Democrats can only come up with an old, White, rich, & troubled candidate. Great diversity.

          Reply
          1. Xenophon April 17, 2015

            I too have black friends.

            Reply
          2. SecludedCompound May 11, 2015

            Do you feel like you have to trot them out every year to prove that you have them like the Republican party does, before it casts them aside for the white man they always knew that they’d nominate? XD

            Reply
          3. Xenophon May 11, 2015

            My comment was a joke

            Reply
      2. paulyz April 16, 2015

        Your so full of MSNBC talking points it’s incredible. When Obama took office, the National Debt was $10.6 Trillion, now $18 Trillion, an increase of $7.4 Trillion in just 6 years, and mostly under Democrat control. So how the hell do expect any credibility whatsoever bringing up Bush & Reagan? Most Liberals like you can spit out just about anything they like, because most Liberals reading what you “claim”, will automatically assume you must be right over a Conservative. I believe you yourself know what you say is pure BS, or you really are uninformed & gullible.

        Reply
        1. Independent1 April 17, 2015

          First of all nutcase: the 10.6T does not include the 1.4T of deficit spending in Bush’s last budget which ran till 9/30/09!! Which brings the total for Bush to an even 12T.

          And then there’s the little matter that beside that 1.4T of deficit spending budget, America was still heading into a depression when Obama took over because Bush so devastated our economy that America was losing 800,000 jobs/month when Bush walked out of the oval office. It was only Obama following through with the auto bailout and applying close to 800B in stimulus that virtually every economist agrees is what kept America out of falling into the GOP’s 2nd created world-wide depression.

          So you really have to add that 800B of stimulus to Bush’s tally since it was something necessitated by his administration allowing the worst financial disaster in American history to happen on their watch. (And since I don’t own a TV – I am not regurgitating MSNBC or any other news outlets talking points – I AM STATING FINANCIAL FACTS THAT I HAVE COMPILED!!!!). So Bush at this point has responsibility for our debt being 12.8Trillion including the Stimulus that was needed to slow down a freight train of job loses – which the stimulus did – it caused the 800,000 lost jobs to reverse within 10 months. All this before Obama even created his 1st budget.

          Now considering that Obama has brought down spending faster than any president in history, the increase in America’s debt during his 6 years HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SPENDING AND NOTHING TO DO WITH OBAMA!!

          The debt increase over the past 6 years IS ALL ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE THOUSANDS OF COMPANIES THAT WENT BELLY UP AND THE MILLIONS OF WORKERS WHO LOST THEIR JOBS THAT WERE PAYING MUCH MORE THAN THEY ARE TODAY – ALL BECAUSE OF BUSH AND THE GOP!!!

          America’s debt is still going up because TAX REVENUES are still down. And because legislation Bush and the irresponsible GOP Congresses during his 8 disastrous years passed one piece of unfunded legislation after another some of which is still running up our debt.

          You GOP-loving creeps just keep wanting to blame Obama when virtually every bit of America’s debt increase since Clinton passed about 5.6T of debt to Bush Jr IS ALL BUSH JR’S RESPONSIBILITY – EVERY CENT OF IT!!!!!!!

          Reply
          1. paulyz April 17, 2015

            Once again, Democrats had COMPLETE control of Congress during Bush’s final 2 years, when the Dodd/Frank sub-prime loan fiasco happened.

            Reply
          2. mike April 17, 2015

            Looks like you misspoke again!!!
            I already knocked your attempt at putting all of Obama’s spending on Bush in 2009 after Bush was gone and Democrats controlled all branches.
            Now you try this lack of revenues, what a joke your are. Revenues have never been higher.
            Read and weep, dumba$$!!
            http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

            Reply
          3. Independent1 April 18, 2015

            I didn’t misspeak – you’re the one who misspoke! Even your taxpolicycenter shows that tax revenues for 2009 and 2010 were down almost 1 trillion dollars. And that outlays were up in 2009 by the 1.4 trillion that Bush added to HIS BUDGET!! And that since then OUTLAYS have been almost flat as tax revenues have begun to rise during the recovery still being down more than 200B even in 2013!!

            I defy you to identIfy one piece of legislation that has driven up spending aside from the Stimulus which Obama signed TO KEEP AMERICA OUT OF A DEPRESSION!! And is clearly chargeable to Bush!!

            Fact is that the average budget changes over the past 6 years have averaged under 2%/yr while Bush averaged 8%/yr budget increases for his disastrous 8 years – and even his Dad averaged 5.3% budget increases and Reagan for his 2 terms over 6%!!

            There is NO WAY, that you can lie your way into foisting the increases in our debt ON OBAMA!!

            And just to bust one more of your lies – the Dems have only had control of both houses of congress for less than 1 year in the past 20 years!! The Dems had filibuster-proof control of the Senate starting on 1/1/2009 and a Dem President only since 1/20/2009 and Ted Kennedy died on 8/15/2009 (less tha n 8 mos after Obama was inaugurated) destroying their filibuster-proof control of the Senate because the idiot voters in Mass. replaced Ted with Scott Brown a Republican!!

            And since it’s the Congress who sets the spending, and the GOP has had enough votes in the Senate to prevent the Dems for doing any spending THE GOP DIDN’T LIKE!! If anyone is to blame for the rising debts, and it isn’t Bush – then it’s Emperor Mitch who has used the fake filibuster more than 425 times since 2010 to make sure ONLY THE LEGISLATION THE GOP APPROVED OF HAS GOTTEN PASSED!!!

            SO YOU CAN Stuff YOUR LIES!!! LIAR!!!

            Reply
          4. mike April 18, 2015

            I see you have the same delusional problem with revenue as you have with Bush and 9/11.

            What you ignored again is the chart of revenues historically.
            You said: “America’s debt is still going up because TAX REVENUES are still down.” The operative word is STILL.

            http://www.taxpolicycenter.org

            2008 revenues were 2,524.0 (in billions)

            2009 revenues were 2,105,0

            2010 revenues were 2,162.0

            2011 revenues were 2,303.5

            2012 revenues were 2,450.0

            2013 revenues were 2,775.1

            2014 revenues were 3,021.5

            Loss of revenues don’t even come close to 1.4 trillion. “The 1.4 trillion that Bush added to HIS BUDGET!!”, you claim.
            Only an intellectually dishonest person would try and put Obama’s 2009
            spending on Bush even though Bush was not in office when all the
            spending bills were passed.

            If you had taken the time to look,REVENUES have increased every year except 2009, with 2014 being the highest revenues ever.

            Debt is going up because of spending, not the lack of revenues.
            One more time for you to read and know the facts.
            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09

            I defy you to show where I talked about all this mumbo jumbo filibuster proof crap.

            I would give up on that 90% of debt thing, it doesn’t pass the smell test.

            Reply
          5. Independent1 April 18, 2015

            You can’t even read a table of numbers!!

            The 1.4 Billion deficit Bush created is shown for 2009 in Column 3 – 1.4B…Outlays jumped by 600B from 2008 to 3.517T while revenues plummeted by 463B from 2524B to 2105B..

            Tax revenues hit 2568B in 2007 and then started falling by 44B in 2008; then 463B in 2009, then were 406B lower in 2010 than in 2007, then were 265B lower in 2011…etc. Etc with Tax revenues being down by over 1.2T while OUTLAYS were up partly because so many people were drawing unemployment and because we were still paying for wars THAT BUSH STARTED!! And still giving people tax breaks WHICH BUSH HAD PASSED AS UNFUNDED!!, and We were still experiencing shortfalls in Medicare – including the Medicare DRUG BENEFIT THAT BUSH AND THE IRRESPONSIBLE GOP ADDES AS UNFUNDED!!! AND ON AND ON!!

            LEARN HOW TO READ A TABLE OF NUMBERS!!!!!!!!!

            Reply
          6. mike April 18, 2015

            Your whole premise is that Bush is at fault for the recession which is categorically wrong. If happened on his watch but the Bush administration was not the only reason. If you had been intellectually honest and read the article, and there are many more, that no party, Clinton or Bush, regulatory agencies, Federal Reserve or banks were without fault.
            As to your statement that revenues are STILL DOWN, read the report again this time you try and learn how to read numbers. 2013-14 revenues are exceeding 2007. Plus you never qualified the dates you were referring to as still down. This discussion has been about the debt since Obama took office and under his watch.
            As to the 2009 budget deficit you keep showing your dishonesty, both presidents are responsible, but to try and put all Obama’s own spending at Bush’s expense just shows how much of a dishonest partisan you continue to be.

            Reply
      3. mike April 17, 2015

        A deficit occurs when annual government spending is greater than its revenues. When a government overspends resulting in a deficit, it must borrow money to stay afloat. Currently the US the government has over $18 Trillion in US Debt. This is the result of years of overspending. Of the $18 Trillion in US Debt, $13 Trillion is debt owed to the public but $5 Trillion is debt the government owes to other government agencies, like Social Security, where the government borrowed from these agencies when it needed money. The $13 Trillion in debt owed to the public is due to deficit spending and the accumulated interest payables related to the large amount of debt.

        Per http://www.whitehouse.gov, the accumulative total for all US Deficits combined was $11.6 Trillion through the end of 2014 (see Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (–):1789–2020). This $11.6 Trillion along with accumulated interest payables are what account for the $13 Trillion in US debt outstanding.

        A closer look at the deficits recorded at http://www.whitehouse.gov shows that the Obama Administration has accumulated more in deficits in six years than all prior years combined!

        At the end of 2008, the accumulated total of all US Deficits for all administrations since 1789 was $5.3 Trillion. For the six years 2009 through 2014, the Obama Administration has racked up an impressive $6.3 Trillion in deficits which are now more than all of the accumulated deficits before he took office.

        The GW Bush Administration racked up $2.0 Trillion in deficits in the 8 years it held the realm (2001 – 2008). The highest annual deficit the Bush administration amassed over its eight years was a $459 Billion deficit in 2008, a record at that time. This is far less than each of the Obama years. The Obama

        administration holds the record for the top six annual budget deficits all accumulated in its first six years, with more than $1 Trillion deficits in each of its first four years alone.

        There are people that say the Obama Administration is not to blame. Proponents of the current administration argue that because the US fiscal year ends in September, the $1 Trillion ‘Stimulus’ bill passed by Democrats and signed by the Obama administration in early 2009 should be associated with the Bush administration. This is clearly nonsense since it was passed after Obama was sworn in and Bush was long gone.

        Alternatively, most of the TARP funds created in 2008 to ‘stabilize’ the economy and loaned by the Federal government to banks, auto companies and government entities FNMA and Freddie Mac were repaid by these entities in years after 2008 when the first loans were made. The bailout money loaned was $614 Billion and the government receipts to date from these loans are $667 Billion. The Obama administration has benefited from the payoff of these one-off loans since 2009, and would have reported even higher deficit spending over the past six years without these inflows.

        Without a doubt and as clearly shown on its own White House website, Obama is king and world record holder of US deficits.

        More of your lies about the meltdown.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/20/business/worldbusiness/20iht-prexy.4.16321064.html?pagewanted=all

        Reply
        1. Independent1 April 17, 2015

          And like I said dumbcoff, no other president ever inherited first of all a budget with 1.4T in deficit spending: nor a situation where tax revenues were depleted by almost 1 trillion/yr because the previous president allowed the economy to destroy not only a number of very large corporations that had been in existence for about 100 years, but which also resulted in thousands of smaller companies going belly up along with as many as 14 million job holders, and millions of Americans who were in the throes of losing their homes. All of this totally devastated the TAX REVENUES!!

          The deficits had nothing to do with spending!! Spending today on an inflation adjusted basis is the lowest in 60 years but we’re still running deficits!! Why!! Because tax revenues are still depressed!! It’s all Bush’s fault!! Take your idiot comments and cram then you know where!!!!!!!

          Reply
          1. mike April 17, 2015

            Numbers don’t lie and especially if they are from the whitehouse.gov.. Obama lies but numbers don’t. An inconvenient truth but numbers say a lot.
            You said: Reagan and the 2 Bushes who are responsible for more than 90% of America’s current 18 trillion in debt!!! How can that be when debt was at 10 trillion when he took office and Obama has added 8 trillion of the 18 trillion. Wouldn’t 90% of debt be close to 16 Trillion? How can that be when Obama has added 8 trillion.
            As to melt down:
            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09

            Reply
          2. Independent1 April 17, 2015

            Numbers don’t lie: IT’S YOU THAT LIES!!

            Reply
          3. mike April 17, 2015

            LMAO!!!
            Prove me wrong douche bag.
            Explain how you arrived at the 90% of the 18 trillion debt is the fault of 3 republican presidents when Obama inherited 10 trillion and he has added 8 trillion of the 18 trillion. Explain the numbers old boy. 90% really???

            Is this another of your “Bush knew about 9/11 and left the WH to be safe moments??

            Reply
          4. SecludedCompound May 11, 2015

            You stopped counting the month before Obama took office. You basically divested bush of any fault in the enormous hole in revenue and MASSIVE spending that followed his second term.

            That’s intellectually (and mathematically) dishonest, and you know it.

            Reply
          5. mike May 11, 2015

            I guess you can prove my numbers wrong, so lets see you do it.

            Reply
          6. Paul Anthony April 18, 2015

            Numbers don’t lie, but liars use numbers. Yours don’t add up. Face it, math is not your strong suit.

            Reply
          7. paulyz April 18, 2015

            Liberals refuse to EVER acknowledge any facts when they don’t jive with their ideology. That is why I don’t waste to much time trying to prove how wrong they are. But it is always good to get the facts out there so maybe some Liberal minded folks check it out & become informed with the truth.

            Reply
          8. Independent1 April 18, 2015

            That’s one of the funniest things I’ve heard from you RWNJs on this blog: Implying that you don’t post what you call facts because those of us nonRWNJs refuse to ever acknowledge any facts!!! Wow!! That’s hilarious considering you and your RWNJ friends wouldn’t understand TRUE FACTS IF THEY SLAPPED YOU IN THE FACE!!!

            You RWNJs live on lies, distortions of the truth and fabrications of reality – otherwise known as PROPAGANDA!!!

            Why do you suppose that it’s been proven time and time again that idiot RWNJs that listen to nothing but Faux News ACTUALLY KNOW LESS ABOUT THE TRUE NEWS THAN PEOPLE WHO DON’T EVEN TAKE THE TIME TO WATCH ANY NEWS???

            BECAUSE ALL FAUX NEWS BROADCASTS IS LIES, DISTORTIONS OF REALITY, FABRICATIONS OF THE TRUTH AND ON TOP OF ALL THAT – EVEN CENSORS WHAT THEY BROADCAST TO BE SURE IT’S NEVER ANYTHING THAT SHOWS ONE POSITIVE THING THAT OBAMA OR THE DEMOCRATS EVER DO!!!!!

            WAKE UP YOU CLUELESS PIECE OF GARBAGE BEFORE THE GOP HAULS YOU OUT TO SEA ON A GARBAGE BARGE!!!!!

            Reply
          9. paulyz April 20, 2015

            Thanks, you’ve just proved my point with you angry tirade. By the way, MSNBC is dropping like a rock in viewership, while FOX is gaining rapidly, because “most” people now understand how they have been misled & lied to by the Left. But I don’t believe there is any hope for people like you.

            Reply
          10. Independent1 April 20, 2015

            Yeah right!! But what you’re failing to point out is that while MSNBC, CNN and other ‘NEWS SITES’ actually broadcast news, Faux News is an ‘ENTERTAINMENT CHANNEL’ that does nothing but broadcast PROPAGANDA and that succeeds in making the American population EVEN MORE IGNORANT OF WHAT’S ACTUALLY HAPPENING IN THE WORLD.

            And NUMEROUS STUDIES HAVE PROVEN THAT!!

            PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY SUCKERED INTO WATCHING FAUX NEWS PROPAGANDA, ARE EVEN MORE CLUELESS OF REALITY THAN PEOPLE WHO DON’T EVEN TRY TO STAY UP WITH THE NEWS!!! NOW ISN’T THAT JUST GREAT!! FAUX NEWS MAKES PEOPLE STUPID!!! DON’T YOU LOVE IT!!!

            From Forbes:

            Fox News Viewers Uninformed, NPR Listeners Not, Poll Suggests

            “Because of the controls for partisanship, we know these results are not just driven by Republicans or other groups being more likely to watch Fox News,” said Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson and an analyst for the PublicMind Poll. “Rather, the results show us that there is something about watching Fox News that leads people to do worse on these questions than those who don’t watch any news at all.”

            Take a look at how badly Faux News listeners do in comparison to even MSNBC and even to people who don’t watch a news outlet:

            From Poynter.com:

            http://www.poynter.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/news-sources-fdu.jpg

            http://www.poynter.org/news/mediawire/174826/survey-nprs-listeners-best-informed-fox-news-viewers-worst-informed/

            It’s really gotten to be sad, when Americans are so suckered into supposed ENTERTAINMENT, that they’ll ENTERTAIN THEMSELVES JUST SO THEY CAN MAKE THEMSELVES MORE STUPID!!!!!!!

            Reply
          11. Paul Anthony April 18, 2015

            “Spending today on an inflation adjusted basis is the lowest in 60 years but we’re still running deficits!!”

            Where did you pull that fictitious number from?

            Reply
        2. SecludedCompound May 11, 2015

          It’s amazing that you think you can leave out the damage that the Bush administration did as if Obama was starting from zero, and not the biggest Republican caused hole in revenue since Hoover.

          I can’t decide if you’re actually dumb enough to believe your own line, or if you just think you’re fooling other people marginally dumber than you.

          Reply
          1. mike May 11, 2015

            I didn’t leave any of the Bush Damage out, just pointed out to you and the progressives think it was all done by Bush. Your selective thinking shows you are another of the dishonest ideologues on this site.

            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09..

            No party, individual is without blame.

            Far from dumb, just keeping the facts in the correct perspective which you progressives can’t accept.

            Reply
  18. idamag April 16, 2015

    The active nazi parties, the KKK, and the John Birchers, hated the government and actively sought to overthrow it. Their offshoot, the t party is doing it now. The common enemy of the nazi party, John Birchers, and the KKK, was the communists. They scared people into thinking communists were coming out of the heat vents in their homes. Once they had them scared, they owned them. States Rights people were born out of the civil rights movement. They did not want the government to say they had to stop lynchings, killings, beatings, and oppression of the Black people. Of course, the bullies also thres around the word, socialist. I hear the same words from the subversive bullies as I heard then. No matter what name they call themselves they are still fascists.

    Reply
    1. Xenophon April 17, 2015

      They’ve also created the counter-narrative that fascism is born out of lefty politics, in clear contradiction of the last 70 something years of political theory.

      Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.