Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Don't Stomp On Me



We remember Rand Paul’s thug Tim Profit was caught on video, stomping a woman’s head to a curb for disagreeing with his politics. It turns out the thug, like most typical bullies, is a crybaby as well. Here’s an exchange between Profit and Dea Riley, the woman running for Lt. Governor of Kentucky.

Thanks to Liberal In Kentucky.
*******
Dea Riley November 15 at 11:27am Reply
Report I received this from Tim Profit today via FB message – Please see below my response.
Dea,
Not sure who you may know but there are a lot of details about my case that is unknown. Ms. Valle from moveon.org has said on msnbc I kicked her in the head and that what I did was premeditated which are both false. She has also stated the reason I attacked her was because we disagree on the issues. That is also false. She doesn't know where I stand on the issues.
1-I think Marijuana should be legalized and controlled.
2-I am against the patriot act.
3-I think the war is unconstitutional.
I would bet we agree on other issues as well. They don't know me but have portrayed me as something I am not.The real reason of what happened was she went after Rand like a crazed person who I felt was a threat to his safety.I am sorry all this happened but there are many other circumstances involved here I cant talk about. I have lived in ky all my life and never been in trouble with the law in this way. 31 years with at&t and bellsouth and not 1 complaint. She broke at least 3 laws and did not get charged. I just don't understand why Ray Larson is doing this to me.
---
Tim,
I'm not one to mince words. I know that you have been a supporter of this campaign, but I feel I should express myself. I don't know you well, but I've met you on a few occasions and I would agree that you're not a bad person as you have described in your message. I also will acknowledge my interaction with you has always been cordial and you have seemed respectful of me in every regard.
I'm not sure my words will help you but I do want you to know that I am expressing myself in the hope that you will embark upon a self evaluation. Frankly Tim, I don't think where you stand on any of the issues is relevant to what occurred. It has been widely accounted that Ms. Valle was spoken to prior to the incident whereas SHE made clear her purpose for attending. One witness on scene told me that many of the Rand supporters where planning on "getting her" when they saw her make her move. I don't understand why it is you kicked her at all in that she was on the ground, but whether she was or not does not justify her being kicked. I don't approve. She was alone and undefended. I think you were caught up in a moment and that moment was recorded on film. As to "they" portraying you as something other than what you are - it is you who committed that act that likely will define you for sometime to come. I cannot offer you assistance. I think Ray should throw the damn book at you and if I know anything about Ray Larson that is exactly what is about to happen.
I think this attitude that she was of threat to Rand Paul is ridiculous but mostly convenient. She had every right to be there and every right to make an effort to capture a photograph and accomplish her mission - as Moveon.org has done so many times before. In these United States Individuals are not required to agree with or behave in any manner as imposed by those of differing opinion. Our liberties extend themselves equally to all. There is no "exception" to this rule. There is no doubt in my mind that the reason she was subdued was to prevent her not from harming Rand Paul but rather to prevent her from accomplishing her political stunt. I don't care if she was paid - again the excuses are irrelevant to the outcome. It's politics - get over it. Your cause is NOT important enough to justify what occurred.
This type of hysterical overly exaggerated expression is nothing more than mob riot. Rand Paul should have returned your campaign contributions as I would have done - immediately. You have served to point out the severity and potential danger of this extreme movement that is enjoys protection under the umbrella of "Tea Party" but I'm certain that is not what was intended by those who organized the initial grass roots effort.
On a personal note if you had kicked me you would have been faced with a far different reaction than the submissive and refrained demeanor of Ms. Valle. I would have done all I could do to beat your ass into the ground with everything I had in me. Guarantee it. I'm afraid I stand with Ms. Valle and wish I had been there to defend her - which is what I would have done and am doing now.
You don't put your hands on women - EVER!
May I suggest the following:
1. Stop defending your behavior there isn't any defense.
2. Apologize to Ms. Valle as well as all those countless thousands who have witnessed your video.
3. Seek counseling and learn to discern between inappropriate and appropriate behavior in expressing your views.
4. Volunteer to serve in a women's abuse shelter, rape crisis center or home for abused children. Then and only then will you understand why it is our society is so repulsed by your behavior and what it leads to.
5. Next time you give money to a cause, contribute to one of the above organizations that benefits those who are truly victimized and truly in danger of having their lives harmed or jeopardized by someone "crazy".
6. Reevaluate who it is you support for office - may I suggest you support someone such as myself who isn't willing to tell you what it is you want to hear to get your vote.
Dea Riley

46 comments:

Weaseldog said...

What a dumb ass.

Playing the victim card? What a wussy.

Weaseldog said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txU55iFG9UA

Tom Harper said...

What Dea Riley said.

Kulkuri said...

It's the Reich-Wing that needs to "Man-Up". They need to face facts like a man and accept reality. Instead they are scared shit-less of anything and everything, including a woman holding a sign!!

T. Paine said...

While I have little use for Ms. Valle and none whatsoever for Moveon.org, Profit is an idiot and his behavior was inexcusable.

He only generates more contempt for himself with his sophmoric excuses.

Beach Bum said...

Profit's unthinking behavior is a prime example of how dangerous a mob can be. While he and a few others have crossed the line I almost daily hear right-wingers at work talk about "what should happen" to liberals, illegals, gays, Arabs, and just about anyone who disagrees with Beck, Limbaugh, and the other assorted freaks that the conservatives are attracted to right now.

Hey, I not condeming all conservatives there are several like Scarbrough and Brooks that present a thoughful case for their positions.

But the freaks have the floor now and if someone on that side doesn't stand up things could get very bad.

Dave Dubya said...

Wease,
An arrogant wussy at that. He wanted the victim to apologize.

Tom,
You don't put your hands on women - EVER,
I wonder if the dolt will get it.

Kulkuri,
As we know, fear, along with anger, is what binds and feeds the authoritarian mindset.

TP,
Obviously Profit and crew also had "little use" for Ms. Valle. They just let it show more. (Not that I'm suggesting you condone their actions. I know you don't.)Their behavior was more than inexcusable. It was cruel, cowardly and criminal. The fact that Rand Paul did not loudly condemn them and return Profit's money speaks to his character as well.

BB,
Yes, this is not "conservatism". This it's nasty extreme cousin, authoritarianism. Your first hand observations confirm the authoritarian mindset. Their anger and fear is fed daily by the likes of FOX, Beck and Limbaugh.

libhom said...

I am so sick of the far right's violence to force its agenda on this country.

libhom said...

I wonder if "T.Paine" is aware of the fact that Thomas Paine was an atheist.

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

Frankly Tim, I don't think where you stand on any of the issues is relevant to what occurred. Spot-fucking-on!

Of course Paine thinks the real victim and MoveOn are worthless,I would expect nothing more from him.

MoveOn, Code Pink and other leftwing groups don't promote their causes like the idiots on the far right-through intimidation and lies.

Watching Rangel's hearing right now..He is one big ole douche nozzle that should lose his job, but fucking won't.

Libhomo- OMG, laughing my brow ass off...I bet Paine didn't know that...but it really doesn't matter what he knows or thinks to me.

Dave Dubya said...

Libhom,
I swear I saw the dark future of America in that video. The Right Wing Authoritarians cannot simply disagree with liberals, they must hate them. Like fascists, their politcs demand scapegoats. This is the fruit of their demonization of liberals. We are nothing but "Marxist" enemies to them.

I can admire our TP if he has read "Age of Reason", and still uses that moniker. It would suggest he respects the separation between church and state.

Dave Dubya said...

Dusty,
Can't you just imagine the howls of outrage if some teabagger got his head stomped by liberals? We'd NEVER hear the end of it. And the retaliation would be even more brutal. We could bet on that.

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

Oh fuck yeah Dave...the good old double standard, and notice how the Corporate Media has dropped this story like a hot rock?

an average patriot said...

I keep telling you you're better than me to remain civil. All I can say is we are in serious trouble. Palin says she can beat Obama and Trump is thinking of running. WTF?

Dave Dubya said...

Jim,
I try to be civil because I once thought a lot like they do. I even wanted to join the Marines. That was when I was a pre-teen though. Yes I was a little rightie before my older brother went to Vietnam. That was when I started to ask questions and read. Thank God I was too curious, and compassionate, to be an authoritarian.

T. Paine said...

First, I absolutely do not condone violence of this sort and Profit should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I don't care what political views one has, this is NOT the way one should handle a dissenting opinion.(And yes, Dubya, I agree that Rand should have denounced him and returned his contributions.)

Dusty, simply because I dislike and think Moveon.org and Ms. Valle are wrong, does not mean that I think they are deserving of being victims of violence, nor should their first amendment rights to freedom of speech be infringed in any way.

If only many of your fellow political travelers that want the fairness doctrine and net neutrality enacted in order to stifle conservative opinion which they despise had the same respect for EVERY American's constitutional rights to free speech!

Next, I give you this quotation from THE Thomas Paine,

“It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences, and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles: he can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author.”

“ The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools, in teaching natural philosophy as an accomplishment only, has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism. Instead of looking through the works of creation to the Creator himself, they stop short, and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of his existence. They labour with studied ingenuity to ascribe every thing they behold to innate properties of matter, and jump over all the rest by saying, that matter is eternal.” The Existence of God--1810

I know a lot of leftists ascribe atheism to Paine. He has written enought that seems to put the lie to that notion. He was most likely a Deist rather than a Christian, not that you would care, libhom.

I am frankly amused and a little saddened at the underlying hate from some of you for anyone that does not ascribe to your political views.

I strongly disagree with and will work as hard as I can against Pelosi, Reid, Obama etc. but I don't hate them. They were all elected by their constituents, largely because people are lazy and don't understand the ramifications of having voted for them (in my opinion).

Nevertheless, they were expected to enact a leftist agenda accordingly. I, while I am still legally able, will point out the fallacy of their plans in the hope of convincing good people of their folly, but in the end the people will decide, as they should, on what course we will take.

Dusty, pardon me, but you seem to have no tolerance for any opposing opinion whatsoever and rather prefer the echo chamber of your own preconceived views.

Dubya, I have indeed read Age of Reason, and do indeed demand a separation of church and state as was originally intended by our founders and articulated in the Constitution.

I do not, however, think that Jefferson's phrase of "separation" nor the founders ever intended for this to mean that no mention of God should ever be allowed by the government or in the public arena. There is gargantuan amounts of evidence to support my contention on this, if one cared to look.

Lastly, I find it funny that I agreed completely with the premise of this posting and was still singled out for ad hominem attacks. Good thing I am a big boy and can stand on the truth! :)
Perhaps those that have such hate in their hearts need to reconsider their actions... after all someone might mistake you for a hateful conservative otherwise. :)

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Thank you for your clarifying comment. I really don’t want to see name calling and personal attacks against anyone here. Politicians and other scoundrels are fair game. Sharing opinions is good, trading insults is not good. I don’t see an ad hominum attack against you here. Dusty’s assessment of your opinion was not so much a personal attack, but a reaction to your prefacing your denunciation of Profit with what could be seen as a mitigating contempt for the victim. Trust me, if Dusty intended to launch an ad hominum attack against you, it would be clear as a bell and as emphatic as an earthquake.

Referring to those of us voting for Democrats as “lazy and don't understand the ramifications” is an opinion much closer to an ad hominum attack.

I imagine old Tom Paine would have preferred being called irreligious to atheist. As with many of us, his faith could not be framed within the confines of church walls. “Yes; there is a word of God; there is a revelation. The word of God is the creation we behold and it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man.”

I’ll drink to that.

The hate you sense has unfortunately been injected into our political discourse by powerful wealthy interests through right wing corporate media. Just recently Roger Ailes of FOX (R) compared NPR to Nazis. That would be just one of the latest examples.

S.W. Anderson said...

Tim Profitt is guilty of assault and battery. Try him, cuff him and stuff him.

His assertion Valle was crazed and going after Paul is absurd on its face. Who are we to believe, our lying eyes or a thug who stomped on a woman who was on the ground, not fighting but just trying to keep from getting hurt worse?

Profitt is about what I would expect an ardent Rand Paul supporter to be: a selfish jerk in poor control of his impulses, a bully, the defective product of a lousy upbringing.

Good for that lieutenant governor candidate for telling him what she thinks of him.

S.W. Anderson said...

T. Paine wrote: "If only many of your fellow political travelers that want the fairness doctrine and net neutrality enacted in order to stifle conservative opinion . . ."

How would those things stifle conservative opinion? I don't think they would begin to do that.

What they might do is interfere with a situation that's common across the country. That is, you've got one or several local radio stations, sometimes all owned by the same outift, and they all run Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Savage, Parshall, and so on, with no progressive programming at all.

A recent caller to a liberal radio talk show I listen to said that in her area, three radio stations run Limbaugh, and two of them stagger when his show comes on. So, for half the morning, all afternoon and early evening, Limbaugh is on in that community. The local stations also run Beck and Hannity. That's political talk radio where she lives.

I don't see the Fairness Doctrine being brought back, unfortunately. But I think that businesses making money using airwaves that belong to the public, liberal, middle of road and conservative alike, should be obliged to offer some balance in their programming.

Weaseldog said...

T. Paine wrote: "If only many of your fellow political travelers that want the fairness doctrine and net neutrality enacted in order to stifle conservative opinion . . ."

I agree with SWA on this point. The loss of Net Neutrality is about paying money to have your voice heard. The Republican Party would have no problem satisfying the money needs of the Republicans that own the media.

Without Net Neutrality, conservative voices would ring the loudest.

And yes, Thomas Paine is thought to be a Deist like his friend Thomas Jefferson.

Thomas Paine was run out of the Colonies by the conservatives of his era, he assailed him credible death threats. He was forced to flee to France where he served in Parliament until he was an old man. Thomas Jefferson finally convinced him to come back to the USA where he died, lonely and embittered.

The debate about bringing the Creator into science was a popular one. On this sole point, it's mistake to assume he's a Christian as every religion has a creation story.

Now having said that, Paine was raised as a Quaker. A Christian sect that well known for it's humanist and non-violent beliefs. Even now the FBI regards the Quakers as possible terrorists because of their mad quilt making skills.

In many ways, Thomas Paine's life was an exercise in opposing traditional conservatism. Had he come to age int he 1960s, he likely would've been a long haired hippy.

I can see our member using his name as a moniker having some ideas in common with the real Thomas Paine, but he adherence to the core conservative values would've put him at odds with the real Thomas Paine.

Weaseldog said...

http://www.csustan.edu/english/reuben/pal/chap2/paine.html

"Paine would produce The Age Of Reason upon his release from prison in 1794 (198). In this work, Paine attributed the cause of controlling governments to organized religion, as opposed to the positive aspects of deism. In addition, he presented biblical scriptures as false, and demonstrated the association between oppressive governments and biblical verse."

TomCat said...

Dea appears to be a Republican of the Tea flavor from what I've found. I commend her integrity, respect her honesty, and wish other Republicans would follow suit.

Dave Dubya said...

SW,
Thanks for addressing TP's unfounded concern over the fairness doctrine, which is long dead, and net neutrality to "to stifle conservative opinion".

It mystifies me that anyone can rationally believe conservative opinion is not the primary business of corporate media and FOX(R). They are by definition conservative, both by their corporate nature, and vested interest in preserving the status quo. They profit from the corrupt campaign finance system, "horse race" coverage of elections instead of examination of issues, wars, and last, but not least, corporate advertising dollars. They are an integral part of our corporatocracy. Only the indoctrinated true believers of right wing propaganda believe the myth of liberal corporate media.

Wease,
You're right. Old Tom Paine shares more common ideas with liberals than conservatives. The big irony that escapes the Right's view is the fact the founders were anti-authoritarian, pro-change, pro-democracy. Today's Republicans and most Democrats would be reviled by our founders. They did not want our nation to be under the boot heels of royalists, or economic royalists.

TC,
Am I the only one to think Riley reacted that way is because she is a woman? As a Republican she was silent. Once prodded by the thug she temporarily left her republican barricade and spoke as a person. I've yet to hear a republican male speak out like that. Most of them goose step behind Limbaugh and say Valle "needed to be restrained".

TomCat said...

Dave, that brings us to the question, how can any woman in her right mind support a party that promotes such behavior?

Dave Dubya said...

TC,
Women in a Right Wing mind are not in their right mind.

Anonymous said...

Some of the common features of descriptions of the behavior of sociopaths that sound like Neo-Cons. And many of the posters here.

###Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
Pathological Lying
##Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
##A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
Incapacity for Love
Verbal outbursts are normal.
###Callousness/Lack of Empathy
###Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.
Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
Irresponsibility/Unreliability
###Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.
Changes their image as needed. Changes life story readily.
Other Related Qualities:
Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
###Authoritarian
Secretive
Paranoid
###Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
Conventional appearance
Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
###Incapable of real human attachment to another
Unable to feel remorse or guilt
Extreme narcissism and grandiose
May state readily that their goal is to rule the world. NOT NEW NEWS BUT...

Anonymous said...

Some of the common features of descriptions of the behavior of sociopaths that sound like Neo-Cons. And many of the posters here.

###Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
Pathological Lying
##Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
##A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
Incapacity for Love
Verbal outbursts are normal.
###Callousness/Lack of Empathy
###Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.
Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
Irresponsibility/Unreliability
###Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.
Changes their image as needed. Changes life story readily.
Other Related Qualities:
Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
###Authoritarian

Anonymous said...

Changes their image as needed. Changes life story readily.
Other Related Qualities:
Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
###Authoritarian
Secretive
Paranoid
###Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
Conventional appearance
Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
###Incapable of real human attachment to another
Unable to feel remorse or guilt
Extreme narcissism and grandiose
May state readily that their goal is to rule the world. NOT NEW NEWS , BUT ...

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

I am frankly amused and a little saddened at the underlying hate from some of you for anyone that does not ascribe to your political views.

Paine, I am married to a republican, thanks for assuming you arrogant nimrod. Your conjecture that there is "underlying hate" among the commenters here towards your rightwing ass tells me you are one paranoid mutha fucka...or you just want to start some shit.

You also say everyone has a right to free speech...so how in the blue fucking hell can Ms. Valle be wrong????? Explain that one dude, because her actions were all about her pov of the candidate and what he stands for. What is she 'wrong' about? For that woman to stand amongst a group of rednecks and teabaggers and not piss herself worrying if they were going to beat the fuck out of her took immense courage on her part, yet you whine here that we hate people of differing opinions...because that is all we are doing here..giving our opinions. An opinion is never wrong, unless it's built upon information that is faulty aka a pack of friggin lies.

At least MoveOn's gatherings, and for that matter Code Pink's, are non-violent and someone like you wouldn't have to fear for his life if he attended one.

MoveOn has a plethora of causes that they give money to, as well as financially supporting educational issues. All their money, or the majority of it, comes from individuals in small amts, unlike the assholes at the Chamber of Commerce.

I fail to see how Moveon has a fucking thing to do with the head stomping of Ms. Valle...so as far as hate goes...yours is out there for all of us to see.

(out of respect for Dave, I toned down this rant.)

Dave Dubya said...

Anonymous,
Thanks for the DSM-style profile. While I have no doubt one or two people who previously commented here fit that profile, I wouldn't characterize anyone in this thread as a sociopath. Sociopaths are like authoritarians on steroids. Usually they reveal themselves by agitating for its own sake, along with name calling, lying, and use of hate filled words.

Most of our opinions are directed at the more visible sociopaths in powerful positions. Although sociopaths are in almost every walk of life, politics, law enforcement, mercenary jobs and the military are prime vocations for the sociopathic inclined. Like South Park's Cartman, they demand we "respect" their "authoritay".

Bloggers are small fry in comparison. We're just the peanut gallery.

Dusty,
Thanks, now TP can see a real example of ad hominum. Let's hope he can see where he may have triggered such a response.

Let's try to play nice, kids.

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

I will now go quietly to my tv,forgoing any more comments on this thread, and watch some football, round ball and nascar. ;)

LORD TRUTH 101 said...

I agree with what Dusty said.

Teeluck said...

What Tom Harper said at the top :)

T. Paine said...

Anon's psychological profile could easily be a summary of certain politicians on either side of the political aisle. I won't bother naming names.

Dusty, I said that I think Valle and Moveon.org are wrong on the issues. Valle had every right to be at the Rand Paul rally in protest, regardless what I or anyone else thinks about her politics. What was done to her was absolutely wrong.

In deference to Dubya, I won't even bother addressing the rest of your rant.

As for Code Pink being peaceful and non-violent, if I recall correctly, I seem to remember several instances of intimidation and vandalism. For instance, I seem to recall a brick/rock etc being thrown through the window of a military recruiting office in the Bay area early on in the Iraq war.

If I cared, I am sure I could find other examples too. That being said, I would imagine that most of Code Pink's members are indeed peaceful protestors, so I won't tarnish the entire group as violent simply because of a few fringe members.

Dave Splash said...

Another example of conservatives refusing to accept responsibility for their actions. I thought the GOP was the party of "personal responsibility." That's so 1990s, right?

Is there any way that Obama could be blamed for this? If so, just go ahead and do it. The media will lap it up.

Weaseldog said...

T. Paine said.. "I seem to recall a brick/rock etc being thrown through the window of a military recruiting office in the Bay area early on in the Iraq war."

I can't help but be reminded of the opinion of a poster on another forum that Dave and I comment on.

That person listed a series of violent attacks, perpetrated by liberals. These violent attacks included spray painting buildings, trespassing, cutting fences, tearing down signs, breaking windows. He went on to argue that this level of violence is far worse than any violence committed by Right Wingers / Conservatives.

I pointed out that Timothy McVeigh, Osama Bin Laden, the various abortion clinic bombers, Joseph Stack and many others, that are self proclaimed conservatives, actually killed people. Even serial killers tend to be conservatives.

Our liberal basher agreed with us, and continued to argue that liberals throwing bricks through windows were committing a far worse form of violence as violence against property than conservatives committing violence against human beings. that painting graffiti on a wall is a far more horrible crime than Timothy McVeigh slaughtering all of those children, when he set that bomb off in front of the Oklahoma Federal building.

Do you agree with that poster that destruction to property is a far worse crime than killing people by flying airplanes into buildings?

T. Paine said...

Weasel, your equating of Islamofascist terrorists with American conservatives is beyond hyperbole and is downright grotesque.

Of course I don't condone McVeigh, abortion clinic bombers, or anyone else that takes a life without just moral cause. Those things are certainly far more horrific than any property crime by orders of magnitude.

Has the "debate" really gotten that skewed that you sincerely believe otherwise of 99% of conservatives?

Weaseldog said...

T. Paine said, "Weasel, your equating of Islamofascist terrorists with American conservatives is beyond hyperbole and is downright grotesque."

Religious fundamentalists are by definition, 'Conservatives'.

Or would you argue that Fundamentalist Christians are not conservatives?

Would you argue that Timothy McVeigh was a far better person because he's a Christian, than a Muslim who uses explosives to kill children?

I appreciate that you don't condone murder. That is good to know.

But in the end, do you stick to your assessment that liberals are the worst terrorists because they ruin property, as compared to conservatives, which overwhelming represent the murderous terrorists?

Dave Dubya said...

Dave,

Welcome to "Rants".

Yes, we know it's "Obama's Recession" and the debt is now Obama's fault. HE'S the one destroying America. And this is all because Bush wasn't "conservative" enough. Bush was a progressive according to Beck. Far too many "conned-servatives" drink that koolade. This also explains why we are on course to fascism. Most people don't have to believe this crap. History shows it is enough for the loud and aggressive authoritarian minority to accomplish this.

Wease and TP,
There is no debate that right wingers are far more inclined to violence than left wingers. War, torture, warrantless surveillance, and Bush’s tragic “selection” over the will of half a million American Voters are also fruits of the right. Social security, the GI Bill, family leave, workplace safety, unemployment compensation and Medicare are the fruits of the left.

This is where the stereotypes like heartless conservatives and bleeding heart liberals are formed.

Since Reagan, debt and deficit have been greater with GOP presidents than Dems, so the Right's "fiscal responsibility" ruse is there to see for anyone willing to look for the truth.

T. Paine said...

Weasel, I am about done with you.

If we are going to play progressive vs. conservative hyperbolic games, so be it.

Look at how many hundreds of millions of people have been killed by progressives such as Lenin, Stalin, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Castro, Che etc etc etc.

Even Hitler was a national socialist.

Now I don't equate all of these absolutely vile people with 99.99% of today's progressives, but your nonsense, Weaseldog, of going to the far extremes of equating Muslim terrorists with todays conservatives is equally disgusting. It weakens rather than makes any meaningful point you may have had.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
I don't see where Wease "equates" terrorists with conservatives. He said religious fanatics are conservative, and that is the truth.

"Now I don't equate all of these absolutely vile people with 99.99% of today's progressives." Yes you did. You called those vile people progressives. They were not. Progressives do not start wars and they do not commit mass murder. “Conservatives” have done these things. That is also the truth. I’m not saying regular Americans who believe they are conservative would do such things. Bush and Cheney personally claimed to be conservative. McVeigh claimed to be Christian. I would blame the Right’s deliberate twisting of the meanings of liberal, progressive and conservative for this entire argument.

And the fact that religious fanatics are conservative is nowhere near the hyperbole and absurdity that Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler were "progressives". This is a perfect example of the Right's tactic of re-defining terms. They cannot win a debate using mutually agreed upon definitions. They need to unilaterally define not only words, but reality. That is pure hate talk from Limbaugh and Beck. They are shaping a right wing reality. No reasonable person who is not frightend or angry would buy into that nonsense.

Progressives are not communists and they are not fascists. More truth.

That talk plainly incites fear, anger and hatred in the uninformed people. It is fascistic and shameful. But fascists have no shame. It's easier for them to demonize progressives and accuse everyone who disagrees with them as being Marxists, than to provide any constructive efforts, or resources for the public good.

T. Paine said...

Dave, their were even those on the American left that supported the uptopian agenda of the Soviet Union etc in their plan to supposedly equalize everyone.

Socialism and communism are definitely leftist and progressive.

That is not re-defining a term, my friend. That is history.

LORD TRUTH 101 said...

And there are those on the right that thought Hitler was good other then the Holocaust thing, right Mr. Paine?


You are getting kooky Bro.

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

Kooky? I say it's batshit crazy territory.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
You are correct that many American leftists were hopeful that early Russian Communism would prove to be beneficial for the people. Remember Russians were under the cruelty of monarchy before Communism. In some ways it did help people. Healthcare and literacy were improved. But civil liberties, progressive values, were quashed. There is no more progressive organization than the ACLU. They fight for rights that do not exist under Communism or Fascism or Neo-Con Republicanism. Do you get that? I mean really?

Do you know GW Bush’s grandfather supported Hitler and was violating the Trading With the Enemy Act with his cozy business deals with the Nazis? If I were as dishonest or as duped as ditto-heads and Becker-heads I would be insisting conservatism is fascism. Same utter lack of logic and meaning.

Now there you go again with the Limbaugh/Beck kool-ade, proving my point that the Right must re-define terms. Show me a dictionary that defines communism as progressive. You can’t, and you know it. Progressive means improving the conditions for the majority. Your authoritarian leaders don’t give a damn about the majority. They are regressive. They support rule by the economic elite. That my friend is history, and unfortunately,the present.

Many more Americans on the right supported the Nazis. Oh yes. That is also history. They had Nazi rallies in Madison Square Garden. Yes they did. Where’s your evidence of similar sized pro-Communism rallies? And you can’t cite the “Rally to Restore Sanity” even though it was bigger than the ever-so-white-and-right Beck/Palin rally to restore “honor”. The implication was clear. Only “conservatives” may claim honor, and are the real Americans. Never mind honor is bestowed, not claimed.

Fascism is still alive and well in America. And every fascist will identify himself as conservative. That I can promise you. No one is more conservative than Communists or Fascists wielding power. They do not want change. They do not want less power. They do not want workers’ rights. They do not want more freedom of speech or assembly for the masses. They do not want people to have the right to vote. Equating progressives with communists and fascists is insulting and stupid. It takes no thought to parrot the hate mongers.

I wish you could find some light between the Limbaugh/Beck propaganda and your views. Do you have the courage to question your authoritarian leaders? I fear you do not. I fear you hold to radical right wing beliefs like a Moonie’s faith in Bush family friend Sun Myung Moon. Yes it is comforting and reassuring. If you believe everything Bush/Cheney and Limbaugh/Beck say you are securing for yourself a prime position in the new Thought Police. You will believe liberals are traitorous commies who need to be locked in camps or executed. This is where your beliefs are headed. History teaches this if we pay attention.

Dave Dubya said...

TP, Continued:

Here is some antidote to that kool-ade.

Progressive:

1. Moving forward; advancing.
2. Proceeding in steps; continuing steadily by increments: progressive change.
3. Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods
- American Heritage Dictionary

1. of or relating to progress
2. proceeding or progressing by steps or degrees
3. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) (often capital) favouring or promoting political or social reform through government action, or even revolution, to improve the lot of the majority: a progressive policy
- Collins English Dictionary

Here are some historical features of real progressivism at the state level:

Robert La Follette’s term as governor of Wisconsin (1901–6) was a model of progressive reform. He won from the legislature an anti-lobbying law directed at large corporations, a state banking control measure, and a direct primary law. Taxes on corporations were raised, a railroad commission was created to set rates, and a conservation commission was set up.
In state after state, progressives advocated a wide range of political, economic, and social reforms. They urged adoption of the secret ballot, direct primaries, the initiative, the referendum, and direct election of senators. They struck at the excessive power of corporate wealth by regulating railroads and utilities, restricting lobbying, limiting monopoly, and raising corporate taxes. To correct the worst features of industrialization, progressives advocated worker's compensation, child labor laws, minimum wage and maximum hours legislation (especially for women workers), and widows' pensions.

- The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia

Do you really demand the removal of all progressive measures? Social Security, Medicare, unemployment compensation, Food and Drug safety, OSHA, child labor laws, public transportation, parks, public health, anti-discrimination and racial de-segregation, civil rights, family leave, etc.? Come on, really? Is your compassion restricted to only your family, and to the wealthy and powerful? Bleeding heart liberal that I am, I have hope, and compassion, for you.