• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    jmac on Wordle Playing Update
    Propertius on Speculating About What is…
    William on Wordle Playing Update
    William on Speculating About What is…
    Beata on Speculating About What is…
    Beata on Speculating About What is…
    jmac on Wordle Playing Update
    jmac on Speculating About What is…
    Propertius on Don’t waste your breath
    Propertius on Don’t waste your breath
    riverdaughter on Don’t waste your breath
    Propertius on Don’t waste your breath
    Propertius on Don’t waste your breath
    riverdaughter on Don’t waste your breath
    jmac on Don’t waste your breath
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    January 2011
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Open Thread
      Use to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts.
  • Top Posts

failure to discriminate

In case anyone has forgotten, there are still people out of work

Tucson.  I hope this is the last day we beat this dead horse.

In the past week, I have stayed away from TV and radio and most blog sites.  At first it was because I was tied up with something else that needed my full attention.  But as a the week wore on, I deliberately stayed away and only read an occasional piece in the NYTimes regarding the progress of Giffords’ recovery.  And here is the result of my deliberate isolation from the media frenzy:

  • We will probably never know the true extent of the poisonous atmosphere of Arizona politics on the shooter’s state of mind.
  • Regardless of what anyone says to the contrary, the poisonous atmosphere of Arizona politics and general right wing media craziness can not be ruled out as a contributing factor.  The little I know about the shooter’s word salad indicates that *something* had seeped in.
  • Gabrielle Giffords is a politician and she is a Democrat.  To suggest that politics had NOTHING to do with it is absurd.
  • Regardless of whether or not the infamous Palin map had anything at all to do with the shooting, vandalism, red faced furious constituents getting in Giffords’ face during meetups or the general fear of being labeled a liberal or a Democrat in Arizona, the fact that the map was connected with her website as part of a campaign to “target” supporters of the healthcare reform bill is unbecoming and irresponsible for any politician on either side of the aisle.  There is no excuse for that map.  Oh, I can see a lot of people twisting themselves into pretzels trying to come up with one but give it up already.  Have some standards.
  • I don’t care if the left is going nuts on TV.  I don’t watch TV news specifically because there’s too much histrionics.  I don’t want my emotions to be manipulated.  I advise readers here to turn the gasbags off.
  • I’ve been critical of the way Obama’s campaign organization treated half his party during the 2008 campaign.  I hated the way the media and DNC went along with it.  It wasn’t enough that I was a liberal.  No, I had to be called old, uneducated, a racist and then treated as if my vote didn’t count because I was a woman and I’d get with the program in the end anyway.  His campaign tactics were an indication of the way he was to govern.  He doesn’t care what voters really think and he feels comfortable ignoring us.  That’s why I will NEVER vote for Barack Obama.  I advise others to reject him as well.  If you feel you have no other option, you don’t have a very high opinion of yourself.
  • Sarah Palin doesn’t need our protection or support.  She made that perfectly clear in her video.  She has thrown her lot in with Glenn Beck.  GLENN BECK, people.  That’s who she gets her spiritual and  political advice from these days.  In case some of you have forgotten, it was Glenn and Rush and the whole Fox News establishment who has been pounding on liberals for the past 20 years to make sure we are afraid to say what we believe.  The right is going to continue to pound on us because that is what they do.  They hate us and want to make sure we don’t ever have a voice.  I’m not going to hand Sarah a mallet.  She is not our friend.  She is what she is.  That doesn’t make her a monster.

If the left wants to make it worse for itself, there’s not a whole lot I can do to stop it.  I can’t control other people’s behavior, I can only control my own.  I’m not joining on either bandwagon.  I’ve had enough.  I’m sick of being treated like an outcast by both parties.

If the right is so determined to exonerate Palin or the right wing media from the vitriol, they owe it to the rest of us to present evidence and a detailed study proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that their over the top, angry, irrational demonization of liberalism is not now or ever has been responsible for the intimidation of a group they have been trained to hate.  Otherwise, I’m going to look at the fact that the right has cornered the media market in many states, including Arizona, and conclude that the hatred of liberals is correlated to that market share.

I’ve never seen so much denial in my life.  The right was happy as all get out to stomp all over us before this shooting.  If it really had nothing to do with it, and I’m not saying it did, why not just admit that it was fun while it lasted?  Sarah and Glenn aren’t apologizing.  Take credit for the poison.  You deserve it!

But if you’re tired of it, like I am, turn off the TV and the radio.  Step away from the fight.  If you are an FDR type Democrat in Exile like me, this doesn’t have anything to do with you anyway.  It’s just two anachronistic, legacy parties going at each other.  It has very little to do with how people are living today.  It won’t get more people employed, fix our crumbling infrastructure, punish the bankers or end a war.  It is a major distraction.


180 Responses

  1. As they say, the investigation is ongoing. The evidence so far suggests a mentally very unstable shooter who, if he had any political leanings, was to the left and not the right. I have no interest in rallying for conservatives. I’ve been a liberal my whole life and I plan to stay that way. I also believe in facts and the truth.

    • I’m not going to get into an argument over this because I am still uninfluenced by the media
      But I will say from personal experience that there are a lot of people who sound both Left and Right who are picking up signal in their environment that had lead to confusion and irrational statements
      And these people are not paranoid schizophrenics. So, no matter what youve been hearing, I advise you not to jump to any conclusions.

      • I am not jumping to conclusions. That is the point. Not jumping to conclusions about what “caused” this shooter to go on his rampage.

    • if he had any political leanings, was to the left and not the right.

      I’d say that depends on what the meaning of “left” is and which of loughner’s apparently millions of friends the media is talking to:
      He became intrigued by antigovernment conspiracy theories, including that the Sept. 11 attacks were perpetrated by the government and that the country’s central banking system was enslaving its citizens. His anger would well up at the sight of President George W. Bush, or in discussing what he considered to be the nefarious designs of government.

      “I think he feels the people should be able to govern themselves,” said Ms. Figueroa, his former girlfriend. “We didn’t need a higher authority.”

      That’s ron paulish if anything.

      • Yup, or Ralph Naderish…he’s always railing against the Fed, or LaRouche, or an anarchist who doesn’t like any politician in particular, or the voices in his head may have been the antichrist. I’ll wait for the investigation.

      • Sounds like an anarchist. I despise them.


  2. Well, RD, there is a larger issue at stake here. There is a pattern of assigning female politicians an irrational amount of power and evilness. It doesn’t matter which side of the aisle it is coming from, it’s all the same damn thing. Whether the culture is accusing Hillary of murdering Vince Foster or of threatening President Obama with her JFK references, or people calling Pelosi the greatest evil to ever walk the face of the earth, or people blaming Palin for the acts of a madman, or the madman himself viewing Gifford as so dangerous she must be destroyed. The common denominator in all these cases is an irrational fear and hatred of women. It’s so pervasive and so strong in our culture it doesn’t care about your politics or your level of sanity, it just permeates everything.

    And the more we separate into tribes and bicker over who is to blame, the right or the left, the more it is able to continue. I don’t care what politics Gifford or Palin subscribe to, they are both women and this is a civil rights issue. They both deserve to be able to participate in the political process free from harm and death threats. To not speak out for them both is to condone a pattern of threats and violence that has kept women out of the political process all over the world.

    • yttik ~ I’ve been watching from the sidelines unable to articulate over this issue. This is very well said and what I could not put into words. Thank you.

    • AMEN, yttik!

    • Honk!

    • Oh, PLEASE. Sarah isn’t a dainty flower. Give her some credit for not wilting under the intensity. She’s made her bed, let her lie(lay?) in it.

      My job in life is not defender of Sarah Palin. If the left wants to disgrace itself, there’s nothing I can do to stop it. Just because the left us in her case does not mean I have to come to her rescue, especially if she doesn’t meet my personal standards.

      It’s not ALL about sexism.

      • Lie. Bravo, Riverdaughter, for this and for the original post. I am a woman, not a victim. I can’t get with the “all women are victims and must be defended whatever they do” programme.

      • I’m not sure we’re trying to “protect” Sarah Palin, At least I’m not. I am trying to expose the hypocrisy of letting male politicians use violent rhetoric to foment aggression toward their opponents and disallowing a female candidate to do the same. IMO, it’s a form of gender repression.

        Also, I think you should include as an aggravating factor that Giffords is a woman politician. Just as Laughner was exposed to angry political rhetoric, he was also exposed to the angry sexist rhetoric our culture and politics are steeped in. And given that he wrote “Die Bitch” on the letter Giffords sent him and also posted pro-rape comments online, he appears to have internalized our cultural misogyny.

        • “he was also exposed to the angry sexist rhetoric our culture and politics are steeped in. And given that he wrote “Die Bitch” on the letter Giffords sent him and also posted pro-rape comments online, he appears to have internalized our cultural misogyny.”

          You are so correct!

        • Right, no one complained about the potential violent impact of Obama saying, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we’ll bring a gun.”

        • YES.

      • It’s not all about sexism, of course. But there is a lot of sexism.

        Calling Palin out for aligning herself with Glenn Beck is of course completely appropriate. (Yech!) Ditto disagreeing with her pSaying that she has blood on her hands because of the map and the “Don’t retreat, reload” slogan (as the NY Daily News specifically alleged), is likely wrong and I think driven by PDS. There are louder and uglier voices on the right that we should be highlighting. (Like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Bachman, Sharon Angle..) So why has the focus been on Palin?

        When I think that misogyny is rearing its ugly head– from the right or the left — no matter the target, I do speak up. I do it not for the sake of the particular target, but for women in general.

        But there are more important issues to discuss and it is your blog I am visiting.


      • oh come on RD, no one is suggesting she is a hot house flower. And yes she has made her bed, it’s just that her bed is not that different than any one elses. No matter how you may want to spread the blame around and not appear to be protecting Palin, the fact is that she has done nothing to deserve these accusations. Her campaign map was not out of the norm. Must we all give constant disclaimers about not supporting Palin just because we can see that the Obama campaign borg at work here.
        I AM a liberal and in fact I am so liberal I have always felt all women deserved to be defended when unfairly attacked and that people who do not agree with me politically are still people.
        And yes we can know to what extent it is reasonable to believe she had anything to do with JL’s behavior if we understand anything about the type of mental disorder this kid is likely to have. Even if ugly politics egged him on, it is likely that ugly politics on the left was just as responsible. So singling out one person for blame is nothing, in my opinion, but pro-active 2012 sliming.

      • You say:

        Oh, PLEASE. Sarah isn’t a dainty flower. Give her some credit for not wilting under the intensity. She’s made her bed, let her lie(lay?) in it.

        Replace Palin with HIllary in that quote.

        Remember idiot Markos saying, “Clinton doesn’t deserve fairness”.

        Isn’t that a famous quote saying, “first they came for …”

        Finally, how the Hollywood types and the media are screaming ‘political rhetoric’, but also go nuts if you try to discuss violence in the movies and video games, and music. Then they conveniently claim that there is no evidence that images of violence and rape in videos and games contribute to violence and demeaning of women.


        • You’re right. It’s not about who they’re doing it to this time — it’s about what they’re doing every time.

    • Well said, Yttik. It seems that most USAmerican males are absolutely terrifed at even the thought of a woman in a position of power. We are deprived of the leadership of exceptional inidividuals like Hillary by unwarrented fear and willful ignorance.

    • It is a civil rights issue. I don’t defend Palin or Hillary or Pelosi out of a wish to protect them — I defend them against scurrilous attacks out of a wish to protect myself.
      If powerful women like them can be called b*tches who deserve to die (which happens every day on the net), how much more a regular powerless woman like me? Like my two girls?
      There’s got to be a line somewhere, even if the target is Batsheba, Lilith, and Baba Yaga rolled into one.

      • Of course every woman shoud be defended from misogynistic attacks. But every woman (particularly women in public life) should be held accountable for her political actions and rhetoric.

        I think Hillary Clinton is a gift to this country, but I still hold her accountable for her current role in continuing needless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. I’m more ambivalent about Pelosi’s political contributions, though she has done some good things in her career, but I still hold her accountable for her role in ramming through the piece of cr*p conservative for-profit health insurance support act. And I even have respect for how much Palin has achieved personally, but I can hold her accountable for the fact that basically all of her policy positions are based on falsehoods, and that she has aligned herself with people like Glenn Beck who spew vile attacks at all kinds of people, etc.

        Just because a lot of people out there, including a lot of people on the left, can’t walk and chew gum at the same time doesn’t mean we can’t.

        • Agree. Still doesn’t mean Palin was a factor in the Tucson shooting. We let the investigators sort that out. We don’t immediately jump to conclusions that she was to blame for the shooting and take her to the gallows across the whole internet. That’s what progressives were doing in the 7 days following the shooting. The investigation had hardly even begun. I’m just sharing what I saw…not directed at you dk.

          • I agree, Three Wickets. The evidence for a direct link between Palin and Loughner has yet to be established. This is not being in denial; it is wanting the facts before condemning someone as an accessory to a crime. Until we get more facts on the case, I will leave it at that.

            What I am seeing is that (1) the Left’s premature accusations are putting Palin and her family once again in danger. Charles Blow’s article in NYT describes the Left’s reaction as hysterical and intent on a witch hunt. Indeed, some on the Left (Olberman, Mathews, DK, etc.) are on a witch hunt.

            “The Tucson Witch Hunt”

            (2) that women politicians are still being made out to be straw-women for all evils on both the Right and Left;

            and (3) that BO has used this occasion to reignite his image and as a campaign rally.

        • “Of course every woman shoud be defended from misogynistic attacks. But every woman (particularly women in public life) should be held accountable for her political actions and rhetoric.”
          Exactly. I’m sensitive to sexism in any form because I have five grandaughters and one great grandaughter, each of whom I would like to know have the same opportunities that my grandsons have to fulfill whatever potentials they have. I do not think they should receive special treatment simply because of gender, just fair, inpartial treatment. As far as politicians are concerned, you always have to keep an eye on the boogers, whatever their gender, politics being mainly the art of compromise–which means they’ll more than likely give away something you or I want in order to get something somebody else wants, eventually. And I don’t think Hillary Clinton is perfect–according to legend, there was only one perfect human being–but I think she’d find the idea that she is perfectly laughable, and that’s a big plus in my book. I firmly believe that if she’d become president in 2008, we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re facing now.

          • I don’t think Hillary Clinton is perfect..

            Neither do I…not sure I know anyone who does, and I’m a pretty big supporter. 🙂

          • “I firmly believe that if she’d become president in 2008, we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re facing now.”


    • I hear ya. I know assault and murder scares the hell out of me, and everyone else in our society.
      It is horror. On the other hand, it seems more people are concerned about LAW than about lives.
      And when these horrors happen inside of the law, it’s okay. As in a solider just following orders and bombs away on women and children.

      Yes it is true, we need to speak out.

      Like the homeland security system we have in place, it doesn’t make us any safer, does it?

    • Good point: uppity women as … focal points?

      If P___n’s crime is allying herself with Beck et al, why is everyone talking about her instead of about Beck et al?

    • Agreed, yttik.

  3. Interesting that you say you cannot control other people’s behaviors and then go on to state that Palin should be apologizing for the acts of a ranting schizophrenic.

  4. I don’t care if the left is going nuts on TV.

    Well, I don’t much care, either, but if the rhetoric of the right is pertinent to the discussion of the political climate in this country, how is the rhetoric of the left not pertinent also?

    It seems to me that it’s not fair to hold each and every conservative responsible for each and every thing that some RW gasbag says, and demand group accountability and apology, whereas we on the left can dismiss our hateful lunatics (including many in the press) and claim they are “not really one of us”, or don’t matter.

    This is why I am a firm believer in personal accountability, not group culpapility. But if one is going to go the group culpability route, it seems that one ought to at least be consistent.

    • I do demand group accountability. If you don’t like it, too bad.

      • Riverdaughter, you have a great blog here and I’ve been impressed with it since the beginning. However you seem to be very angry lately and you are starting to sound like a fundamentalist liberal, basically evangelising your beliefs as superior to others… that you alone are right while others are wrong. You seem unwilling to be tolerant of multiple points of view, even though almost all of them are within the liberal-indepent range. And you’ve been picking on WMCB recently as part of that trend. What’s with that?

        • 1.) I have a right to be angry. Anyone who was thrown under the bus in 2008 and has watched while a Democratic party, Congress and president has thrown it all away in the past two years while most everyone I know is unemployed or about to be, has a right to be angry with this ridiculous back and forth.
          2.) As stated yesterday, this blog is not the Tea Party auxilliary blog. I don’t support the Tea Party or Sarah Palin and almost from the first day of its existence, I have discouraged readers and former Clintonistas from associating with it because it is a front group for movement conservatism. I’m not saying Tea Partiers are stupid but at this point, they should be under no illusions about the Tea Party’s goals
          3.) In case you haven’t noticed, this is my blog. It is my right to say whatever I like here in whatever tone of voice whenever the spirit moves me. You are under no obligation to read it. I’m not here to make you happy or comfortable or to reaffirm your point of view.
          4.) This is a liberal blog. Period. Those who have any other ideas are sadly mistaken. Frankly, there are too many conservatives hanging out here thinking they can dictate the terms of discussion. Don’t make me prove them wrong.
          5.) I truly resent the pressure generated by this event to accept that there is only one or two legitimate points of view. I reject that. Completely. Not everycritcism of Palin is motivated by misogyny. I have a perfectly rational reason to be disgusted with her map and disappointed with her independent of whether the map had anything to do with the shooting. I have been disgusted with the right wing noise machine for more than a decade. I dont need to hear any media gasbag to tell me how to think and I don’t need anyone on this blog to tell me how to feel about Sarah. I hate the demonization of the left but I am not engaging in it.
          Now, I suggest those of you who seem determined to change my mind about something I arrived at independently to back the fuck off.
          I assure you that there are others who feel the same way that I do, who are not foaming at the mouth and ready to string Sarah up who do not appreciate it when we are not allowed to have our own points of view without someone telling us we’re wrong. Ad far as I can tell, we’re the only ones who have got it right and the rest of you have lost your minds.
          Turn off the TV and get a grip or go away.

          • I love your blog, Riverdaughter. I’ve been a reader (lurker) here almost from the day it was created and will continue to be here as long as the site exists, and that’s because of you and your insightful posts, as well as the quality of your writing. In my opinion, you come very close to being the perfect human being I just denied exists. Thank you for being here and for creating a site where many of us feel at home, among friends.

          • ..there are too many conservatives hanging out here thinking they can dictate the terms of discussion.

            I haven’t seen any dictating…and I try and read every comment. Too many conservatives? Self identified conservatives like Afrocity haven’t been here in over a year. Everyone else is disenfranchised left or independent as far as I can tell…respectful intelligent commenters who don’t agree on everything but who debate with civility. Unless you think there are rushbot or freeper moles who are regulars here. The couple of names you’ve called out during the past few days, I disagree with you strongly, but I’m never confused about whose site this is and that we are all guests.

          • Brava, RD. I for one am getting pretty sick of this repetitive meme across from the right-wing blogosphere and those who would drop the meme on liberal blogs that Hillary Clinton = Sarah Palin.

            Not in a New York minute. In fact, the comparison is absolutely laughable.

          • You response to my comment has nothing to do with me or what I said. You don’t know me and in your self righteous anger you are projecting your stuff all over the place. I have not seen all these conservative commentors that you talk about here. This blog is and always has been a liberal blog and I haven’t seen much Tea Party support here (although some have tried to be more tolerant about their existence). So honestly I don’t really know why you are so angry at commenters. However, you ARE the blog owner and have the right to act and feel and say whatever you want. I wish you well and I will return to lurker mode.

          • “…this ridiculous back and forth,” as you so insultingly characterize it, is the reason most of us are here, and I thought it was the inability to engage in any kind of meaningful back and forth at the Cheeto that was the impetus for you to start The Confluence in the first place…?

            As for your crack about television, I’ve been relying on blogs like the DU and now TC for all but local news for years, and I’m sure I’m not the only one. Patronize much?

          • Would there be a difference if Palin were not allying with Beck but instead ‘using’ Beck, as is probably the case vice versa? Without advocating her specific causes (which seem generally to be GOP standard, regrettably), isn’t she currently getting IOUs for future activities, now or future?

          • Would there be a difference if Palin were not allying with Beck but instead ‘using’ Beck, as is probably the case vice versa?

            She’z in hiz studio, stealin’ his fanz.

        • Triple honk.

      • no, you seem to only demand group accountability from the right. If you truly demand group accountability then we, as liberals, people on the left, democrats etc.. are accountable for Obama and his gang of goons, including Olbermann and Tweety and his frat boy speech writer. Then there is that whole mess of the Edwards campaign. We allowed that to happen too I guess.
        I am not taking that on.

    • Agreed, WMCB.

  5. ” I’m sick of being treated like an outcast by both parties.”

    WOW, really? Personally I’m thrilled to be treated as an outcast by both parties! I’ve come to look at both parties as a cross between a corporation and a religion, whose purposes are gaining money and power and believers to support that. Ideals are only accomodated on rare occasions despite what may be said in political speeches. Both parties use professional propagandists (PR people, political cosultants, etc) to get re-elected – there is propaganda on both sides. Ya know… it used to be almost impossible for me to see the Dem/liberal propaganda in the days when I was still a “believer”. But now I am an unbeliever and an independent and I don’t trust any of them (and now I’m pretty adept at spotting liberal propaganda too). Though I do consider myself fortunate to live in Massachusetts which does a pretty good job of living up to at least some of the classic liberal ideals.

    Also I decided after the 2008 primary debacle and the COMPLETE FAILURE of the netroots to make any useful changes, that I would no longer waste my energy projecting my ideals onto a political party becuase politics is and always has been about power first, and ideals only if they serve those in power. I decided to stop wasting my time and energy being angry at a reality I personally have no control over. Instead I have chosen to view political reality with my sense of humor fully revitalized and in the context of history. My study of history the past 6 years has helped me detach from the political drama/soap opera because I have actual facts and knowledge instead of the propaganda mill of the MSM.

    I used to participate on the projection of “good” onto liberalism and “evil” onto conservatism until I realized that meant I was a tool of the propagandists game. that’s what they want… for the people associated with each party to believe that their party is good and the other is evil. That’s how they maintain the power of their brand and get people to vote for them even when it’s against their self interests (both parties do this). When I became an unbeliever and took myself of the “wheel” (of political karma) I felt a huge relief. But most people are so trapped in the Left-Right-center paradigm they don’t know how to deal with people like myself who have rejected that game. I rarely comment on political blogs because I know how much folks on blogs tend to be BELIEVERS and us unbelievers are often not welcome as we do not share the loves and hates of the believers. We prefer the truth and humor and a detached perspective.

    Enough rambling, bye now!

    • What a great comment and specially these two parts because so much of the drama really is about projection:

      I would no longer waste my energy projecting my ideals onto a political party becuase politics is and always has been about power first, and ideals only if they serve those in power.

      I used to participate on the projection of “good” onto liberalism and “evil” onto conservatism until I realized that meant I was a tool of the propagandists game. that’s what they want… for the people associated with each party to believe that their party is good and the other is evil.

      • I think this is conflating “liberal” with “Democrat,” which I don’t think RD is doing.

        • Until liberals are seen to publicly repudiate Democrats, I don’t see how the distinction can be made.
          (Although I don’t think it is all Democrats frankly, just the Obama Democrats that need to be repudiated.)

          • Maybe I wasn’t clear. What I meant was that this is conflating liberal in the sense of an ideology, with Democrat in the sense of a group of people. In other words, this is personalizing ideology.

            I am liberal. To me, that means I believe generally in liberal solutions to social and political problems. I don’t think that liberal and conservative solutions to those problems are equal. Generally, I think that the liberal solutions are the correct ones, and conservative ones are incorrect. I make no apologies for that, and I base these on facts (e.g. global warming), empirical evidence (e.g. single payer/heavily government regulated health insurance) and morality (e.g. women’s rights, gay rights). I think people who believe otherwise are wrong. And I make no apologies for that.

            I’m not going to speak for RD, but that’s what I took her to mean in her post.

          • As a self-identified lefty, what I think is lacking in liberal policy is a clear solution to the problem of corruption. Liberal policy doesn’t even seem to acknowledge the problem of corruption when it is what is currently killing us all.

          • votermom. You hit the motherlode. Corruption is the major problem.

          • Valissa’s comment was an excellent one, but I think the conflation is of “liberalism” with people who call themselves “liberals.” Many (not all, or TC wouldn’t exist) who identify as “liberals” still support Obama, and avidly so. There’s also conflation with “Democrats”, true.

            Liberalism — a set of principles which I refuse to yield the definition of to either Obama fans or corporate Democrats who just use it as cover to rob us blind — is about improving society for everyone. Then there’s a group of people who call themselves liberal, many of whom occasionally profess classical liberal ideals but act completely opposite. The tribe is different from the principles. Like Valissa, I’m happy to be rejected by both tribes, because neither is operating on any principles, liberal or not.

  6. I don’t often agree with TC these days but this is an excellent post, RD. Thanks.

  7. If you are an FDR type Democrat in Exile like me, this doesn’t have anything to do with you anyway. It’s just two anachronistic, legacy parties going at each other.
    Perfectly said. And talk about major distraction. That’s what it is. Both sides are playing it to the max.

    • Can we have a political party that is dedicated to the greater good of the people? The country is huge and the special interests of powerful groups in all the millions of regions contend for a slice of the taxpayers’ pie. Multinational corps. have been given more than their share of power by the Supremes. The issues are so complex at one level and so simple at another, higher level. People need decent wages, if not fulfilling jobs, basic security, a way to be connected to their communities, meaning that is not monetized, educational opportunities to increase consciousness. II don’t think we have a real left or real right party in this country, and most people would be in the middle. We do have scream machines on TV, which exists to hold you to the next commercial. I turned it off long ago.

    • Thanks, DandyT and Riverdaughter. My sentiments exactly. We “FDR-Dems in Exile” are so sick of being tarred and feathered. I personally don’t care if anyone believes that RW rhetoric was the cause of the Arizona shooting – if it wasn’t, it was going to happen soon. As for the ‘left taking any responsibility’…it’s not like there are only 2 groups…there are 3 groups, as I see it. The Right, the Obama Left and we FDR’s. The odious Right and the Obama Left spew their hate non-stop and show no signs of stopping. RD is right – THEY should accept the responsibility for creating this toxic atmosphere – even if it is never ‘proven’ in court that it was a direct cause for Arizona. And, yeah, they should apologize (fat chance for that)….at no time should we. I think some of these posters here are accepting blame just because the Right says we should and there is a kind of hang-dog mentality with we liberals – like we half-way believe every criticism they throw at us…battered wife syndrome or something. Not me!

      How do I know all this? Well, I have been living in a swamp of right wingers all my life (grew up in Oklahoma – raised by Clinton haters) and I know how hard it is to have a conversation with my family – can’t, in fact. Every occasion for the last 20 years has been an excuse for an attack.

      What we have here is a whole lot of posters buying too much into how the Right pigeon-holes the Liberal and a failure to stand up for what I know in my heart is right. What are you guys trying to do? Make the Right ‘like’ you???? HA!!!!

    • I have to say, two anachronistic, legacy parties going at each other has EVERYTHING to do with me. Why? Because those fuckers are the ones in POWER. If some populist third party that supports rainbows and puppy dogs and universal healthcare pops up, I still won’t give a shit until it shows any indication of HAVING AN IMPACT. They’re the ones driving the bus, and we’re the ones underneath. It has EVERYTHING to do with us.

    • I guess the reason I defend Palin and other conservatives is that I see them or their issues being vilified to the point that smart people lose reason and that plays right in to the hands of people who want your vote without having to do the right thing to get it,
      I remember about 10 years ago I got a DNC appeal for money in the usual form they send it. First they ask you if you want a whole laundry list of imaginary bad things to happen because conservatives are evil;;; “do you want every child in America to be taught that Facism is good? Do you want fundamentalist women haters to teach health classes in your child’s school”.
      Then they ask for a donation as if any of those things were being proposed.
      At the end there is always the signature of some democrat you like. You know that they never saw the letter. It is all about making you part of the club and to do that there has to be people left out of the club.
      It reminds me of the “he man girl haters club”.

      I think RD that you really are tired of being on the outs and it must seem like those of us who take a different tack than you do are making you look bad. That’s why the disclaimers about not supporting Palin and the tea party are more frequent theses days.
      Not everyone has the stomach for defending those they disagree with. After a certain point you just want that person to go away.
      But the idea that Palin could be somewhat sort of responsible, that’s just sloppy logic. She is either responsible or she is not. IMO she is not and that doesn’t make me a “right leaner”.

  8. RD, your comments are solid and well expressed. For those of us who consider ourselves FDR Democrats wandering the wilderness [and no, that does not need an explantion], we will continue to call the BS for what it is.

    I agree on rhetoric as a contributing factor in these violent outbursts, that despite all the brouhaha and screeches by Republicans, the tragedy in Tucson ‘was’ political by the very nature of those involved [Giffords was and remains a US Congresswoman and she was targeted] and finally that both parties make sorry spectacles of themselves but Republicans cannot pretend that their viciousness over the last 20 years has been anything but vile.

    I happen to still be a Democrat in sensibility though I am not an Obama supporter. That does not make me or anyone like me a traitor to the country. As for corruption? There’s plenty of that to go around on both sides of the aisle. And yes, all the yelling, the theatrics from the political shock jocks is a major distraction to solving any real problems. The banks are still playing casino games with American taxpayer money, unemployment is still gargantuan, our jobs are still being sent offshore and wage inequality is the greatest it’s been since the late 1920s.

    Enough is enough.

  9. So, who’s gonna primary bho the fraud? He is the installed puppet of George Soros, Wall Street, GE (owner of NBC) and Disney (owner of ABC) and other big money oligarchies and the biggest campaign crook in my lifetime. Who are all you wanting to support in 2012?

    • Agree, BO is the installed puppet of Corporate America.

    • Sadly, a real people’s candidate wouldn’t be able to rise high enough in either party’s organization, and if she did, would be eliminated in some way. Hillary was able to get high enough to win the nomination in terms of votes because of her special circumstances, but was bludgeoned before she could win the prize.

    • You’re only three years old? Remarkable language development you got there.

    • anyone but Obama. If worst comes to worse I will write in Al Gore, Hillary Clinton or myself.
      Who are you supporting?

      • I’d join a massive draft Hillary campaign, well organized, knowledgeable of all state election laws, with plenty of volunteers to poll watch, challenge illegal voting immediately and call out George Soros and his corrupt Sec. of States project that colluded to steal the nom from Hillary. Other than Hilllary, I’d support Russ Feingold.

        Let’s see if any Dem. liberals have a spine this year. This is where I agree with Palin–primaries need to be contested. It’s part of American democracy.

  10. ” It’s just two anachronistic, legacy parties going at each other. It has very little to do with how people are living today. It won’t get more people employed, fix our crumbling infrastructure, punish the bankers or end a war. It is a major distraction.”

    That much I can agree with. But what do you want Palin to apologize for? War rhetoric in politics, seriously? did she invent that? Involvement in anyway in the Arizona shootings? Get a grip.

    • When she joined forces with Beck, I stopped taking her seriously and lost all respect for her.
      I want her, but not just her, to apologize for making it unsafe to be a liberal in certain parts of the country, for breaking up families and for shouting us down not with their ideas but from the sheer volume of their incendiary rhetoric.
      And any politician, no matter what party or persuasion, should NEVER put a map on their site with crosshairs on it. That doesn’t meet my standards of mature behavior or concern for the physical welfare of others.
      It doesnt matter if the shooter ever saw it. I have standards. That’s why I didn’t vote for Obama. I don’t let people off the hook for disrespectful behavior towards their voters and constituents and neither should anyone else who follows politics.
      We fail to hold these people up to high standards and we get stuck with callous opportunists who don’t do anything positive for the country and then we wonder why our politicians all suck.
      I’ll tell you why: it’s OUR fault. We accept the excuses and the spin and lower the bar.
      She won’t apologize. And from here on out, I feel no obligation to defend her.

      • Well the Lefts attempt to dump responsibility for the Arizona tragedy on Palin looks like an attempted witch burning to me. I don’t think she stands out from any other politician. Dems have had target maps, the word “campaign” is a war metaphor, Daily Kos man had a target map and published a column titled “Gifford is dead to me”. I guess when you say

        “I want her, but not just her, to apologize for making it unsafe to be a liberal in certain parts of the country” that would cover my concern but seriously I don’t see how Palin got singled out of the screeching crowd, so it seems like a witch burning to me.

        • Remember when Hillary was solely responsible for the war from her one little vote? When women are always held to a higher standard they will always fall short.

          Palin doesn’t have to apologize for being a garden variety republican. That doesn’t mean I am going to agree with her on issues…. I’m just not expecting her to act any differently than other republicans.

        • That’s my only issue, too. Why just her? Didn’t Olbermann say something on his TV show that someone should take Hillary out to a shed and only he come out? And the Obama bring a gun to a knife-fight comment? Both parties perpetrate this and have escalated the violent discourse. Is one side relatively less to blame than the other? How do we make those distinctions? Frank Rich’s Sunday Times column was outraged at all the right’s verbiage but made not one mention of similiar behavior from the left. So there’s this denial that “our” side doesn’t do this, only “your” side–from BOTH parties. It doesn’t solve anything.

        • Speaking only for myself, if Palin’s being singled out it might be because she’s the one who’s quite possibly running for president and she’s the one who’s speaking up.

          • Yes, that AND what passes as lefty media can’t resist talking about her (Palin).

          • spammy got me!

          • They said the same thing about the witch burning that Hillary got.

            IF only democrats had a little bit of bl**?y spine to talk about actual issues. To ridicule Palin’s ideas or talking points on taxes, or that cutting taxes magically generate revenues. There are tens of issues that can be picked and debated. For such discussion, see: Clinton, William Jefferson

            But democrats can’t have that, can they? They have picked up the Bush model of demonize and concur.

        • Forgive me, but don’t you see that you aren’t really responding to RD but rather changing the subject? Saying that the Obamabots are doing it too does not let Sarah Palin off the hook.

          RD is not burning Palin at the stake. She is trying to hold her accountable. I mean really, what is wrong with that?

          • Accountable for what. The shooting? Because we have more information than the investigators and we have been deeply studying all the evidence which we have only just begun collecting and we just somehow know what motivated Loughner? Sounds premature to me.

          • Yes, exactly, Three Wickets.

          • No, not the shooting. But for the toxic right wing rhetoric, the alliances with Glenn Beck, and for the crosshairs poster.

            In other words, what RD said in her post.

          • How do you plan to hold her accountable?

          • I don’t mean to suggest that RD is holding Palin Alone responsible for the crazy rhetoric, because she quite obviously isn’t. But a lot of people are sure holding Palin up as patient zero on this, and that’s patently ridiculous. It’s like picking one guy out of a riot for prosecution.

            In addition, I think that the political rhetoric in this country is rude and uncivilized, but usually a far cry from incitements to violence (although exhortions to “get in their faces” seemed a little over the edge to me). Overall, I think this political rhetoric argument is a red herring at best, and at worst an attempt to justify limits on free speech.

          • She went on Beck’s show, so what? How does that make it her fault that JL is a mentally ill person who never should have been sold a gun? He had fixated on Giffords long before Palin ever came on the scene.
            The map graphic had NOTHING to do with his shooting spree. He would have shown some evidence of fixation on Palin if that were the case.
            I think there are two things going on here. The media is back in the business of rehabbing Obama’s image now that he is playing nice with the republicans (like he wasn’t before?) and more importantly big business. In addition, they can not have a person like Palin getting in the way because they know she can not be controlled. As long as they have Obama in line they will protect him.

  11. I have read TC almost daily since 08 always hoping to read what RD has to say. I like how she says it loud and clear and stand by them. Sadly very few people I interact with daily do that anymore.
    This is an excellent post and thank you.

  12. lot,s of people are mad.including me.it gets my Red headed Irish up 👿

  13. I agree Riverdaughter. I feel left out of the political system, pushed aside and devalued as a human. You revive my need to push back.

    • well as long as you hate the people you are supposed to hate and rethink any objections you have to Obama, you can get right back in to the kool kidz klub. Get your sippy cup ready for that free kool aid.
      Or you can continue to think for yourself and continue to be on the outside. Its cold out here but I prefer the clean air and clear head I have for continuing to oppose the privatization of the democratic party.

  14. RD, I read your post, and to me it says that you don’t care what the facts are, you will believe A, B, C … because that’s how you see it. You are not along in thinking like that.

    • Wow…Dario? what is going on here, RD?

      You know, I have a feeling we are all just so sad. Sad that all our efforts were in vain and we were hideously abused by people we thought were on our side, sad to have so many others shouting so loud that nothing we say can be heard, sad to think that we may be helpless to make any meaningful changes…lots of things to be sad about. As a result, are we turning on each other to vent our anger and grief?

      It just seems to me that we don’t really have a direction to go anymore…all this emotion and drive and no where to direct it.

      Just remember my friends, this is The Confluence….a haven for our aching hearts for over 3 years now?

      Take care of each other.

  15. Typo. correction:
    You are not alone in thinking like that.

    • I think what it boils down to is that many people’s attitudes about their own political beliefs are akin to many people’s attitude about their own religious beliefs. I’m right, you’re wrong; my side good, your side evil. I think the media is to blame for this polarization. Money is to be made from it. Politics has turned into a version of the World Wrestling Federation.

      I’m guessing that the increasing number of voters who are registering as Independents shows that most individuals can’t be so tidily pigeon-holed as right or left. It’s not that simplistic. They may have right-leaning views on certains issues and left-leaning views on other issues. I know that befuddles the partisans but it’s true. And like I said, if we want to assign blame, let’s assign some blame to the media who promotes this simplistic dichotomy.

      For what it’s worth, outside of the actual victims of the shooting, it’s the media that will incur the most damage. They’ll be seen as hacks and shills and the distrust they engender will only increase, if that’s possible.

      • I think what it boils down to is that many people’s attitudes about their own political beliefs are akin to many people’s attitude about their own religious beliefs. I’m right, you’re wrong;

        I try to stay away from beliefs. A person has the right to believe that the Earth is flat, Creationism, or whatever if those beliefs make him happy.

        Wrong assumptions rarely lead to the right conclusions. We can all agree that the right wing discourse is not helpful and it is mean and should be stopped. But what does that have to do with the price of tea in China.

      • For what it’s worth, outside of the actual victims of the shooting, it’s the media that will incur the most damage. They’ll be seen as hacks and shills and the distrust they engender will only increase, if that’s possible.

        Hope so. If there are any P___n fans who didn’t distrust the media already. Or just fair-minded people who didn’t distrust them already.

  16. I am not trying to start a fight here, I admit I am not a Democrat, but I wanted to toss out an idea. Feel free to rip it to shreds.

    I think our government may be beyond retrieval, sold out to Corporate America. We pay very high taxes but all we get is debt service and that is all we are likely to get. I think reform might be a waste of our time so I think quarantine of corruption, graft and waste may be the best we can hope for. Perhaps Liberals should form services groups outside of government to further their goals of a more fair society. So work to pay as little taxes as possible and spend the saved money on projects like micro loans, student support, a basic health plan option etc. I’m thinking taking the government out of it could make these goals a reality. In a way that is what Gates and Buffet have done, resist paying money to the government but set up their own foundation to to further orphan or liberal causes.

    • the only problem I see with that is that we will never have the money to compete with the people you list, Gates and Buffet. They will have things their way if we do not support a government who makes rules and laws to protect the people. I know we don’t have that now, I think there is going to have to be a revolution of sorts before we can control the government again. But I have BIG differences with Bill Gates and the things he is doing in education.

  17. I might add that it’s the self-serving media that’s to blame for distracting people away from the economy and the wars. Apparently they feel it’s their duty to protect Obama.

    • well sure, he is back in line with their corporate masters, now he must be protected.

  18. Joe Cannon has a post in a similar vein today. Whatever certain segments of the left may aspire to and strive toward, few have yet attained the level of sheer vileness that has become pervasive on the right. Read some of Cannon’s quotes and realize that this is what Palin is aligning herself with when she enters into an alliance with Beck and his ilk.

    • Wow, I didn’t expect to see Flannery O’Connor ::

      Loughner himself was a self-proclaimed atheist, of the sort familiar to Flannery O’Connor readers: The perpetually enraged God-denier whose loud, inarticulate blasphemies mask a secret longing for the blood of the Lamb. Only someone raised in a culture of fanaticism would mount a rebellion of this sort. Both Jared Loughner and Hazel Motes might have turned out differently had they lived in a community where moderation has a voice; alas, in Arizona, the ultra-right controls the mainstream media and the ultra-ultra-right controls the samisdat alternative. When all trails lead back to the same place, confused young people have nowhere to go. Except when they go crazy, as Loughner did.

      Of course Loughner became a right-winger between 2006 and today. He had no other frame of reference.

      • The NYT reports that Loughner was a Bush-hater and a 9/11 truther so now I’m trying to figure out how Cannon thinks that makes him a rightwinger. Reminds me of that line in Alice in Wonderland: “When I use a word it means just what I want it to mean, not more and not less.”

        • Because there is an element of the radical right that is even further right, and a great deal firmer in their convictions, than GWB. They start with the New-World-Order/UN-is-a-Commie-plot conspiracists and continue to move right through the Dominionists till they get to the libertarian anarchists, which is where Loughner seems to fall. Bush and his corporate masters are actually to the left of these guys and very much for a world-wide corporate political entitiy to suck up the wealth into their own coffers.

          • Why is it then that every truther I’ve ever come across on the web calls themselves leftists.

          • Haven’t the foggiest. But Joe Cannon bans them from his site, regarcless of where they fall on the left/right spectrum.

          • Riverdaughter, it is hardly fair to allow me to become a subject of discussion if I cannot respond.

          • Looks like I CAN respond.

            “The NYT reports that Loughner was a Bush-hater and a 9/11 truther so now I’m trying to figure out how Cannon thinks that makes him a rightwinger…”

            No-one in his right mind would place Alex Jones on the left.

            This comment is part of the right’s disingenuous practice of pretending that everyone who ever said anything against Bush must be liberal. Hardly!

            We must come to grips with the fact that the John Birch Society and its ideological heirs are coming to a new prominence within conservatism. The Birchers have denounced most Republican presidents and politicians, as well as the CIA. Yet they can only be described as far right.

            “Why is it then that every truther I’ve ever come across on the web calls themselves leftists.”

            Looks like you don’t get out much, Three Wickets.

            Once again, I would point to Alex Jones and his band of right-wing loons — Kurt Nimmo and so on. Jones reaches millions of people, far more than any other “truther.” You simply can’t pretend that he does not exist.

            Lots of Ron/Rand Paulies were “controlled demolition” cranks — so much so that Ron Paul had to distance himself from his followers. In blog post, I discussed the case of Debrah Medina, tea party candidate for Texas governor; her candidacy collapsed when she would not distance herself from the truthers.

            Jim Marrs, of Texas, is a prominent truther. I met him once, and actually kind of liked him. A real character. But I would hardly call him any kind of liberal — at least not these days. He promulgates every crappy right-wing conspiracy theory ever concocted, including some really vile stuff.

            I don’t know Professor Steven Jones’ politics as well as I ought, but since he is a prominent Mormon — well, need one go on?

            Much of the early “controlled demolition” work was done by Holocaust revisionists — a breed that perfectly exemplifies my basic point that there are right-wingers who are so far to the right that they despise Bush. Key names here would be Cristopher Bollyn and Eric Hufshmid. Basically, these guys are neo-Nazis, although they would probably deny the charge. The Barnes Review is another Hitler-friendly journal (with ties to the old “Spotlight” publication) that did some early promotion work in this area.

            In my blog post I note the strong links between the Tea Party movement and the 9/11 truth movement. In particular, I mention the Tea Party Patriots for 9/11 Truth, a group which openly allies itself with the John Birch Society.

            I could go on and on.

            The point is this: I have named names. Those who say that the truthers are left-wingers generally do not name names.

            You certainly cannot name any left-wing “turthers” with the prominence of Alex Jones or Medina.

            Really, which lefties CAN we mention?

            Philosophy professor Jim Fetzer may have once been a progressive of sorts. These days, he seems to be neither right nor left; he comes from some unearthly dimension where those terms no longer have meaning.

            Cynthia McKinney never embraced the bombs-in-the-building thesis. But she gets lumped in with that crowd — unfairly.

            Really, the only name that comes to mind is David Ray Griffin. He seems to be a fundamentally decent man who has latched onto an unfortunate idee fixe.

            Three closing thoughts:

            1. Trutherism is, I admit, a source of schism within the right. The issue created a gulf between Palin and Alex Jones. (Obviously, Palin cannot hope to achieve the presidency if she gives the truthers any credibility.) But let us not pretend that liberals stand on either side of that chasm.

            2. The “controlled demolition” canard is a classic example of a meme that began on the neo-Bircher far right (with Bollyn, Dick Eastman and that crowd), then migrated leftward. Around 2004-2005, a certain type of young “progressive” ninny was naive enough to believe that anyone who argued against Dubya just had to be cool. They embraced the CD mythos, and they were so freaking obnoxious that they soon discredited themselves. The better-educated progressives eventually recognized that they had to staunch the spread of the virus.

            3. My comments here are restricted to the “bombs in the buildings” canard, which is the only 9/11 conspiracy that anyone ever cares about these days. There are a lot of other questions about the events of that day that remain unanswered — for example, why didn’t the administration heed the advance warnings given by so many other countries? Those questions were rendered un-askable when the “controlled demolition” ninnies commandeered the argument and began behaving like odious fanatics.

            Oh, one LAST last thing: Just because I know about these people doesn’t mean that I think as they do! Audubon studied ornithology; that doesn’t make him a bird.

          • I don’t think Jared Loughner can be placed anywhere on the political spectrum unless it’s the spot marked “Here there be monsters”

          • Welcome to the east coast Joseph. Hope you’re settling in ok.

          • Joseph, I won’t disagree that there are many wingers on those crazy conspiracy camps about such things. But my feeling is just because this really crazy, likely schizophrenic guy glommed onto a few familiar paranoid delusions does not indicate a political bent. It seems pretty clear he was apolitical during this recent crazy period, and according to most around him, left wing before that. As much as I like the idea that crazy = right, I don’t think it’s accurate here.

        • You know what? Everything is circular and there’s a lot that the far right and the far left have a meeting of the minds on. Remember the polls back in 2004 that said Bush wasn’t conservative enough? Those radical conservatives have a very similar way of thinking in the end.

      • Did you read his post? He directly addressed those very issues. There’s a whole section addressing those two facts.

        • There wasn’t a link so I may have been confused as to the quotes or who said what. Could I please have a link to the article? Thanks.

        • I agree with Land O Lincoln’s comment on that post.

          • You agree with Land O Lincoln’s because maybe you have a tendency to stick to the facts to arrive at your conclusions, but that’s not the approach of those who want a certain conclusion. In those cases, emotional issues serve better because it doesn’t matter what the facts are. That approach, with screaming, has worked for the right wing for decades now.

      • Oh crap. I knew the “A” word would eventually be dragged out.

      • he became a right winger? Where is the evidence of that? There is evidence he became an anarchist, but not a right winger.

    • Thanks Okasha…I love Joe Cannon. I hope RD hops over to read this latest post….some others should as well.

    • Ugh…talk about paranoia and mind control rhetoric. No thank you. I don’t need conspiracy theorists doing my thinking or defining truth and reality. Same reason I don’t need fundie evangelists running my mind.

      • Joe Cannon is no conspiracist. If you read that into his post, you misread him. If you refer to the people he’s quoting, you didn’t make yourself clear.

    • well of course Joe thinks so, and I am sure he only found the worst republican quotes and least offensive democratic quotes.
      I do not care what the media, any of them have to say on this subject. On the other hand if someone on the right were to make a list of quotes, it would look very different. In addition, the left is much sneakier with their nastiness. Does Joe quote anything that was said about the Clinton’s by the CDS impaired Obots or the Obama campaign itself? Does he include any of the sexist crap they threw at Palin? How about the woodshed comment by Olbermann?

  19. I’ll leave Joe Cannon and others to their own paranoia. Just read for the umpteenth time MLK’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”.


    • 🙂 I agree. I thought 60 Minutes did a creditable job with the issue. CBS does a better job than most. I just don’t like Couric.

      Hand guns in the hands of the mentally unstable should be the issue, not guns, not Glocks, or the price of tea in China.

      • I don’t know. I think gun control is pretty damn relevant here. As is the treatment of the mentally ill. Could just be me, though.

        • Imagine if everyone had focused on those two issues instead of you-know-who. What would the wing-nut counter-arguments be?

          Guns don’t kill people, crazy people with guns do!”

        • Arizona has little or no gun control laws. I expect they will change that. Most other states have the laws they need on the books but might have lax communication between government entities. For instance they do not require back ground checks on people buying guns.
          Every time liberals start talking about “no one needs”.. one gun or another to clips that hold more than ten rounds etc… we lose a huge part of the democratic party and independents who carry guns and support the 2nd amendment as written. It is one of those issues that democrats ten to over reach on just like republicans do on abortion rights.

  20. When I visited here supporting Coakley against Brown, most of the posts I saw were anti-Coakley and seemed to think the Tea Party was worth supporting at least at that time. I’m glad that wasn’t permanent.

    If Hillary were to run again, Oblerman et al would attack her again, and some Independents would believe him. Now he is attacking P___n. By showing that his attacks are false now, we can damage his credibility for the next time he attacks Hillary.

    • I’m surprised by your comment that people here supported Brown. That’s not what I remember.

      Attacking the left and the media for its attack of Palin does not mean one supports Palin. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think Palin’s polices would be disastrous. That’s not to say that Obama’s policies are not disastrous either.

      • er, not what I remember either. Far from it, the front-pagers were definitely for Coakley (iirc of course), and I was all over that election and certainly do not remember support for Brown.

        bemused you may be confusing non-support of Obama’s policies with being “pro Brown”.

      • I remember it well, expressed my dismay, and pointed out to friends that I feared TC might be an extremely subtle and patient right-wing astroturf operation. Very glad RD has made her position clear and unequivocal.


        • You are an idiot.

        • If that’s the case, BB must have been quite the mole.

        • “extremely subtle and patient right-wing astroturf operation”

          Based on what exactly? With the goal of what?

          It’s a baseless and insulting accusation. And the next time it’s said, I’ll delete it.

          • With the goal of what?

            Moving millions and millions of votes of course. Maybe all 18 million of them, lol.

          • Always thought this site was a place for intelligent thoughtful discussion and debate, not an operation for moving votes.

          • Why am I being singled out? I made no “accusation.” I was simply supporting the original assertion that there was a lot of support for Brown over Coakley on this site. There was, those of us who remember it weren’t imagining it, and it caused me to question the political goals of this site. For the record, those sentiments were definitely supported on the FP by the same front pager who is often at the epicenter of controversies here. I have no interest is dredging up old crap. I still enjoy reading TC. It just irks me that the recent past is so quickly forgotten. So I related my own recollection and the effect it had on me. Clearly I am not the only one who has had concerns. Why else would RD have felt the need to reiterate that TC is a liberal blog?

          • You’re being singled out because your insulting comment was the one that cost me the last of my patience with that accusation.

            The Confluence never supported the Tea Party.

          • For the record, those sentiments were definitely supported on the FP by the same front pager who is often at the epicenter of controversies here. I have no interest is dredging up old crap.

            Got proof?

            Search our archives and bring back some proof.

        • I feared TC might be an extremely subtle and patient right-wing astroturf operation

          Sorry, but that’s ridiculous! It’s also what was said about all PUMA blogs and about us who supported Hillary on TM etc even before the word PUMA was invented — invented here at TC, so upon this site be blessings!

          • I think what you saw during the Coakly fiasco was anger at her for abandoning her opposition for the crappy healthcare plan and her sudden drop in the polls that corresponded with her change of heart on that issue. I am not sure support of Brown was the motive, just that we felt like Coakly’s loss should give Obama a message.

        • YAY! Soon RD will be invited to the best sippy cup kidz parties.

    • I live in MA, and I didn’t support Coakley in the general (I didn’t support Brown either). The reason I didn’t support Coakley is because she backtracked on her opposition to the Health Insurance Bill. She had it right the first time – the bill was too conservative, not only for as an economic matter but as a matter of women’s, and human, rights.

      You may have leftist in your screenname, but there was nothing leftist about that bill. It was a bill that Republicans supported in the 90s, i.e. conservative. The only thing that has changed is that now the current Democratic leadership advocates conservative policies. For a while, Coakley looked like she would buck the trend, but she caved. Granted, I can understand why…the pressure must have been tremendous. But, she paid the price for caving.

    • BB and some others didn’t like Coakley caving on the HCR bill. This was based in part on their direct experience with Romneycare. In the end, I recall BB saying she voted for Coakley.

    • Interesting that people being anti-Coakley, who took the time to state why (because they were actual liberals), would be perceived by you to be pro tea party or pro Brown. Kind of like the way real liberals were treated when they complained during the primaries that Obama was conservative. People seem to have trouble discriminating the difference.

    • People were angry at Coakley. They protest voted as a means of demonstrating their distaste about the healthcare debacle. VOTING for someone is not the same as SUPPORTING them.

  21. Thanks for posting this, Riverdaughter. This blog was straying into “delete it from my RSS feed” territory. I appreciate your setting the record straight about where you, and many of the rest of us, come down.

    • good little RD for stepping back in to the fold and making yet another disclaimer about Palin. Now she doesn’t have to be shunned and scorned.

  22. I really hate to see Americans fighting among each other over Sarah Palin – this only serves the Wall Street interests who have taken over our country.

    Instead of fighting over Palin – who in my view would have major difficulty getting mainstream Republican support, we could be trying to find common ground in doing something really worthwhile:

    1. Ending the war in Afghanistan and Iraq and closing 900+ military bases around the world
    2. Abolishing the Federal Reserve (and getting rid of the banking/Wall Street crisis in the process).

    How do we do this? By getting behind Ron Paul for the Republican nomination (and making sure no nutter shoots him in the mean time). I believe there are enough Republicans left who remember when the grassroots ran the Republican Party at the precinct level – before corporations took it over. Anyone remember Phyllis Schafly (A Choice Not an Echo)?

    I know many of my progressive and liberal friends would want to shoot me for saying this – but fortunately they don’t believe in 2nd amendment remedies.

    In case people don’t recall, Ron Paul was the first Republican to correctly label Obama as a “corporatist,” rather than a socialist. See http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2010/04/13/ron-paul-my-kind-of-gadfly/

    • Oh for fuck’s sake. Loony clean-up on Aisle three.

    • Without a doubt, the war machine needs to be pulled back. But with the govt, a military base seems to be a support structure for the corporate interests. So how do you unravel that clusterfu**? You pull at one string, it hits them all, and they circle the wagons.

      Anyway, the heckling Ron Paul received during the primaries, for telling the truth about the financial problems prior to the crash, was interesting. Both liberal and conservative news media got on the same page quick where he was concerned.

      Compare him to Dennis Kucinich and I thought both would still be standing with their principles. However, Dennis and that infamous plane ride, left Ron Paul standing alone. Truly, I never thought that would happen.

      Kucinich turning in his liberal creds, over the Republican, for profit, health care bill, pushed by Dems.

      The world is upside down.

    • Paul might have been right about Obama, but he is also a right wing crack pot who is opposed to reproductive choice.

  23. I give Ron Paul his praise on his stances on the US Drug Policy & foreign Policy .. we depart on everything else ..

    Ron Paul has more in common with the conservatives than Liberals. . that’s why he is a registered Republican.

  24. Unfortunately there are a lot of us on the left that have nothing in coming with liberals – and certainly nothing in common with Obama. There are a lot of us who feel the wars in the Middle East and true banking reform are the key issues in the 2012 election. In fact we thought they were the key issues in 2008 – and we thought Obama was with us. Obviously we were badly mistaken.

    • yes, the Nader loving/Clinton-gore hating left who helped Obama get the nomination. I thought you guys might have shown up sooner or later admitting your mistake.
      I am sorry if you do not fall in to that category but you are certainly in the same Genus.
      We could have had Gore, we could have had Clinton (who despite the rhetoric is both more liberal and more populist than both “Bill and Obama).

  25. I turned off TV and radio news in 2008, and never went back–and I don’t miss it at all. I think it’s true that the emotional manipulation of that kind of media is more corrosive than reading news in black and white. I don’t miss it at all, and if I do catch a snippet as I walk by in an airport or something it only confirms how toxic and inane it all is. Even the ‘benign’ happy news stories are phony and manipulative. I’m done for good.

    • yes, unfortunately most people do listen to them so I feel obligated to at least tune in to see what the big story of the day is.

  26. As usual, I roll my eyes 🙄 at other posters on TC talking about “The Left,” as if the USA had a Left worth mentioning.

    The Democrats would be considered a conservative party in any other Western democracy. The Republicans would be considered fascists and/or lunatics.

    No genuine Leftists hold any real power in the USA. I reckon even Bernie Sanders would be considered centrist, or center-left at most, in any other Western democracy.

    When Avakian and other fringe characters of his ilk have zillionaires willing to lose vast sums of money to spread their nonsense, in the same way that the Kochs, Murdoch, etc. subsidize the right-wing loons, then I’ll listen to talk about Da EE-vil Left.

    When Leftist terrorists start piling up the same kind of body count as the militia nuts and anti-abortion nuts of the Right have been piling up for the past 30 years or so, then I’ll listen to talk about Da EE-vil Left.

    Until then, talk to the hand. 😛

    • honk!

    • yes, most of us are liberals rather than “leftists” thank God. Leftists, in the attempt to punish the Clinton/Gore administration for heaven knows what, gave us bush and obama.

      ps… most of western Europe have governments just as centrist as the US. Any leftist influence has long since been marginalized.

      • No, the European govts. are closer to being genuinely centrist than the US govt. The DINOs are “centrist”, as you say, only by the warped standards of the USA. The DINOs are actually non-crazy Right, as distinct from the crazy Right GOP.

        When the nations of Western Europe dismantle their welfare states for the common citizen and we see the same kind of widespread abject poverty in, say, the Scandinavian countries that we see in the USA, I might agree with you. Until then?

        “You say toe-MAY-toe, I say toe-MAH-toe…” 😛

      • Leftists, in the attempt to punish the Clinton/Gore administration for heaven knows what, gave us bush and obama.

        Not me. Clintonista from 92, Deep Ecology forever.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: