Free Republic

So I won't go away, huh? Well, you are the ones who invited me to this dance. I mean, I didn't write to you, I wrote to the WSJ but it was you folks who took it upon yourselves to create this thread, so, perhaps, like Frankenstein's monster, you've created something beyond your control!

Those who complain about Democratic obstruction of Bush's judicial nominees forget that 168 of 174 of these nominees have been approved. That's over 96%, somewhat better than the 63 of 248 Clinton judicial nominees approved. Do I detect the powerful odor of hypocrisy? Or what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander? Or hoist upon your own petard? Choose your metaphor.

Uncertainty is a virtue. It's what's needed if our Constitutional system is to work. If you think you've got Absolute Truth and/or God on your side, you can't see the other's point of view, you can't compromise, and, eventually, you'll end up blowing yourself up in a pizza parlor or starting a crusade or jihad. At best, you'll get gridlock,which is already happening here. Is that what you really want? Sure, the base of each party contains a certain number of true believers (anyone ever read that book by Eric Hoffer? If not, you should!), but I don't think the swing voters appreciate fanaticism. So perhaps, as a liberal Dem, I should wish you all the best, since if you push the GOP into a "no compromise" position, it'll redound to the benefit of us liberals.

Now let's play nice or not at all. I won't call anyone "nuclear waste" or a "chew toy". Can we be mature about this and reserve our invective, if that is what's needed, for our respective points of view? If not, well, I tried!

God bless!

Hal 2004 from Brooklyn

Thanks to those many of you who replied in a rational manner to my comment and to those of you who didn't, grow up! You don't do your cause any good by acting like pre-teens!

Just a few comments:

It seems that many of you don't know what Marxism or Communism is. Rather, you lump all those with whom you disagree in one bunch and apply a label to them. FYI, a Marxist, in a nutshell, is a philosophical materialist who regards class struggle as the motive force of history and who believes that collective ownership of the means of production, socialism,is the next stage of human progress. I don't recall any mainstream Democrat calling for the collectivization or nationalization of America's industries, land, banks, etc. I don't recall any mainstream Democrat denouncing belief in God and calling for the abolition of our 1st Amendment right to worship.

Marx believed that socialism would occur inevitably through the mechanism of history. It was Lenin who believed that socialism required a secretive vanguard to lead the masses and who, in fact, was the father of Soviet totalitarianism. I don't recall any mainstream Democrat who called for or attempted to pass legislation that would abolish the entire Constitution, abolish all our freedoms, provide complete gov't control over all media, set up the Dems as the only lawful political party,provide labor camps and execution for political enemies with a secret police force established to enforce one-party rule etc. THIS is totalitarianism, and it is an absurd stretch to see Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, and even Al Sharpton as advocating these policies.

Why do you have to exaggerate your disagreements with liberals? Abortion is a good example. The Roe decision was authored by Harry Blackmun, a Republican, like Earl Warren, Governor of California before he came on the Court; appointed to the Court by Richard Nixon, another Republican, like Ike who appointed Warren. Yet some of you folks see Roe as some sort of Communist, atheist, traitorous plot to destroy America, just, as I presume, you see the decisions of the Warren court. Have you folks overdosed on John Birch Society propaganda?(Is that Society still around?) Certainly, one could argue these decisions were wrong, but treasonous? Really?

Some of you said that your extreme rhetoric was ony a response to extreme left-wing rhetoric. So, let's see if I got it right: Some liberals and Dems have said stupid, vile lying things, so you are also going to say stupid, vile and lying things. And this makes you better that liberals...how?

I am against stupid, vile, lying political rhetoric no matter who says it. I don't know about the DU (Democratic Undeground?). If that's a website where people compare Bush to Hitler etc. then I don't want to have anything to do with them. Stupidity and acting like a pre-teen is just as bad on the left as on the right.

We do disagree about the 2nd Amendment. I believe its purpose was to grant states the right to have their own militias (remember the part about a "well-regulated militia"?)so that it would not just be the federal gov't that would have an armed force. I believe, therefore, that individual citizens have, at best, a circumscribed right to own their own guns. Now I'm sure that nearly all of you don't agree with my opinon, but, guess what? I really believe that to be the correct understanding of that Amendment as do nearly all the other liberals I know. We don't advocate this to set up a one-world dictatorship!

Finally, some of you need to examine just how you are different from Osama Bin-Laden. He believed that his views are RIGHT, just as right as believing 2+2=4. So if you disagree with Osama, you disagree with TRUTH, you are a liar, an infidel, evil and you must be destroyed. Some of you say the exact same thing; that liberals are "nuclear waste", etc. Tell me, how does that differ from the Al-Qaeda mindset, or the Communist, fascist or Nazi? If you really believe that, then you're no better and you present no viable alternative.

That's all for now. Peace and Love!

From Hal 2004 in Brooklyn

To all my new friends in the Free Republic:

Thank you for your kind comments on my comment to the WSJ on right-wing polarization. Unfortunately,nearly all of you have proved my point.

My solution to polarization is to tone down the rhetoric, something which you folks need to do. I didn't question Jim's sanity or loyalty etc. I did not attack him personally. I only pointed out the damage I believe his intemperate comments cause to political discourse in this country. After viewing your comments, I do have to wonder:Do any of you really care about this country or do you just have nothing to do with your time but take out your frustration at your boss, spouse, etc. on those with whom you disagree politically?

I acknowledge that I don't have all the answers to all political questions and that liberals aren't always right or have perfect virtue. We liberals don't have a monopoly on Truth (an oligopoly, perhaps). Are any of you honest enough to make the same admission about yourselves and your views?

Only one of you noticed that I read conservative sources. Only one other, the one who talked about liberal rationalism and the Enlightenment, tried to give me a sensible response to my comment. For the rest of you, are you so unsure of your beliefs that you can respond to criticism only by indulging in puerile, ad hominem attacks?

For the record:

I am NOT an atheist, Marxist, Communist,
fascist,traitor,crook saboteur, a practicing thespian or vegetarian. I AM a liberal Democrat and proud of it! I do NOT regard George W. Bush as the latest incarnation of Adolph Hitler who personally planned the 9/11 attacks nor do I regard the GOP's purpose as instituting a crypto-fascist Christian theocracy. I do not believe Bush invaded Iraq solely to give a boost to Halliburton stock. I do not believe Bush to be a greater enemy to the US than Bin Laden. I love this country just as much as you folks say you do and I have nothing but respect for our Constitution (I've spent years studying it)and our way of life.

I was only a mile from the Trade Centers on 9/11 and
witnessed the second plane hit the South Tower.I then saw both Towers go down. It was a truly horrifying experience. None of you should have to see something like that. I regard Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda as the enemies of humanity and that Islamism is the greatest threat to our way of life since Soviet Communism.

I am writing this response in an attempt, hopefully not futile, to make you folks see that liberal Democrats like me are not your enemy. We may disagree, and, to be sure, we may phrase our disagreements sharply, but, for God's sake, let's NOT treat each other like garbage.

From Hal 2004 in Brooklyn

P.S. I did not use a sentence fragment in my WSJ reply. I used a statement that followed a colon.