That’s the sort of vitriol that’s “informing” the public today. And it’s hardly confined to the Left.... Crowley goes on to illustrate that the Right is just as guilty, pointing out how some conservatives were saying “that liberals were secretly hoping Saddam Hussein would teach President Bush a lesson in humility.”

So begins the game of moral equivalence. So, in this little quote, let's find out who's playing fast and loose with the truth, shall we?

We've already debated the Bush/Hitler comparison to death on this site. Those who believe it, do so at their own risk, and expose their own ignorance of history. It's probably safe to say that the Lefties at MoveOn.org have made public asses of themselves for spreading falsehoods about terrorism.

How about the Right? The conservative claim that "liberals were secretly hoping Saddam Hussein would teach Bush a lesson in humility"... well, it isn't exactly a secret once it's on MoveOn.org, is it?

Truth Score: Right 1, Left 0
Moral Equivalence Score: invalid

Rush Limbaugh may be many things, but he hits the nail on the head when he points out that you cannot have a civilized debate with liberals.They'll be happy to hold you to the rules that you agreed to, but they don't care about the rules. (Was it Maxine Waters that said so on the floor of the House of Representatives?)

At least us conservatives will admit we are wrong when we are proven or shown to be wrong.

As of yet on the Command Post I have yet to see a single liberal admit he/she was ever wrong about anything no matter how obvious or small.

I am guilty of throwing invective but not because I am right to do it, but I think it is necessary. I know that I am 'wrong' in using anger to combat the left over the Internet. But, I don't care. The Left is completely built on emotional hogwash and it is about time we have some Right Thinking People sling back at them what they have slung at us in our Public Schools, our Mainstream Press, our Movie Film Critcs, our every day way of life as we over hear invective from a liberal ahead of you in line at your favorite grocery store.

It is about time some one from the Right gets a little pissed off from time to time.

But it wasn't always that way, and that's my point. It's degenerated into a "Did too!" "Did not!" verbal battle. While the Dems may be playing low and dirty on a number of points, while the Republicans for the most part haven't, I have no doubt that they will soon. It's gonna be tit for tat. We've seen the previews in Congress over the past 8 years.

Games of moral equivalence are nothing new. What surprises me is twisted logic being applied in the game. While groups like MoveOn and others try to equate Bush with Hitler (which illustrates their frustration with the people because they supposedly "don't get it") some on the right insist that those on the left are nothing more than dictator-loving apologists. While it's true that some small deluded minority are, most aren't. Both sides are wrong because their outlooks shut off dicussion and make compromise at any level damn near impossible.

Regardless of the above, all I'm saying is that I've never seen this level vitriol this early in a presidential election year, and the Republican party hasn't even started answering the rhetoric of the Dems yet. It's gonna be nasty, dirty, and I won't be surprised if it turns a lot of people off of politics, something we really can't afford.

I challenge your score card gus3, because it is theright that is suffering from the "credibility chasm" not the left, as your scurrilous Moveon slander proves. No one supported Saddam in any way. The freakish morphing of anyone questioning or opposing Bush into supporting Saddam is categorically false and revealing.

Theright, forced by the realities of the moment to defend the indefensible, must resort to sensationalism and slime to distort and mask the facts and the critical issues. There is no way to defend the Bush government on the merits.

Bush did lie, and there was no WMD, and certainly no imminent threat from Iraq which is well substantiated, and the ugly truth (did you forget there is a whitewash investigation ongoing), - but the silly slanderous and suicidal clam that “Liberals don’t seem to care whether we are safe or not as long as they control things” is patentally false, totally unsubstantiated partisan slime, and illogical.

Theright resorting to sliming and demonizing individuals on theleft who rightfully question the Bush government as un-patriotic, or anti-American is scurrilous slander and a grievous grossly offensive abuse to our fellow Americans that raised the tempature and friction of the issue - and it is also CATEGORICALLY FALSE.

Lasty Limbaugh is indeed many things - like a liar, a biggot, a racist, a drug addict, a hypocrit, a homophobe, a mysoginist, a partisan slime miester, and scatalogical sensastionalist jackass carnival charactor, and does not engage in civilized debate with anyone.

The sort of partisan sensationalist unsubstantiated slime spewed out by creeps like Limbaugh, and Coulter, Hannity, Robertson et al. has absolutely zero credibility, or genuine relevance to serious political discussion or the many serious issues facing American - they are nothing more than carnival entertainers feeding the insecurities and ignorance of rednecks and fundamentalist christian religious zealots.

Were theright to remove slime, disinformation, partisan evasion, demonization from their politcal tactics (which will never happen) - there is simply nothing to defend or hoist as a triumph. Nothing!!

Theleft is pissed and motivated now, and will not allow the slime dished out by theright to go unchallenged, - so the any hope for civility in the political debate is dependent on theright cleaning up their act - which we all know will never happen.

So get used to it, stop whining, and get your facts straight, because we intend to challenge every deception, every failure, every abuse, and all the negligence until the Bush government is dethroned, and democracy is returned to America.

Lemme get this straight:

Dopefiend Limbaugh using the term "femminazi" = poignant and intellectual discourse.

ONE independently produced volunteer advert comparing bush to hitler = traitorous slime

Got it. Wonder why we cant just debate things even handedly....

dave: Limbaugh uses that term to refer to one well-defined cadre within the feminist movement. And every time he uses the term, he explains who he's talking about. I suspect you don't listen to him, or listen to him as little as possible; otherwise you'd know that.

Of course, for you to refer to him as a "dopefiend" right out of the chute, isn't stooping to the same level, is it?

Simply flinging silly meaningless slime like "...I have yet to see a single liberal admit he/she was ever wrong about anything no matter how obvious or small" - or - "... The Left is completely built on emotional hogwash.." - or - "...they ("libruls" and "demoncrats") don’t care about the rules" proves the point. These are meaningless partisan opinions with absolutely no support, no validity, and no relevance.

Contrast with the hard realities Americans face today at home and abroad - complicated by the ugly facts that rightwingideologues in the OSP and Bush government deceived the American public to justify and pimp the Iraq war, failed miserably to account or plan for the woefully misguided, radically miscalculated occupation and nationbuilding enterprize in Iraq, continue cloaking the costs, timeframes, and ultimate objectives of the Iraq debacle, and incestuous cronies in the Bush oligarchy are profiteering in and from the war, occupation, and reconstruction in Iraq.

That's just Iraq. I do not mention the many legitimate grievances the people hold against the Bush government for deceptions, failures, abuses, and negligence relating to many domestic issues here in America.

The Bush government represents and advances the best interests of cronies in the Bush oligarchy - not the American people.

Truebelievers mindlessly defend the indefensible on purely partisan grounds and completely void of reason, recognition of reality, or truth - and blame or slime everyone else for the crisis they perpetuate.

Forced to confront the ugly facts, troubling reality, and expanding "credibility chasm" of the Bush governments activites and theright has nothing worthy to stand on or defend.

Pretending to hold the moral highground and blaming theleft for the devolution of political discourse is laughable in light of the slime and vitriol spewed out by the underhanded charactor assassins lavislhy funded by the propaganda and disinformation covens on theright.

Theright fosters and rewards the hatemongers, demonizers, slime miesters, and dividers, and theright is diving Americans, and isolating America, - not theleft.

The difference now is theleft is strong and fighting back and all the Bushbadnews in no longer simply swept off the radar. The important questions are being asked, and answers demanded, and theleft will not allow the long and festering list of abuses, deceptions, failures, and negligence of the Bush government and theright to continue unchallenged.

The Bush government is accountable. Buckle up truebelievers - you are about to enter some rough air.

Tony! This one was made for you, wasn't it? Yup. Bush Oligarchy and TrueBelievers. Where have I heard those terms before? Geeesh, Tony. You launch into some of those long-winded discourses, and it's now to the point where I can discount about 90% of everything you say. Could you, like, trim it down and leave off the bashing? If you have a LEGITIMATE argument, post it. If you're going to continue to run-on, you're apt to get ignored. Drag that ShreddingMeister Kerry out of the dark, will you? I've at least ONE American POW that I'd like to make sure is not 'LEFT behind'. And I really don't care how many bottles of Ketchup he has to waste.

"Political Discourse Is No Longer Polite"

And just where have you been? ;-)

The Cleveland/Blaine election gave us
"Ma Ma, Where's my Pa?" from the Republicans
which was responded to after Grover won
by the Democrats with,
"Gone to the White House, ha ha ha!"

Political discourse is not only impolite, it's not even discourse. It's a bunch of invective and accusastions with no facts, truth or reason backing it up. Look, everybody's entitled to an opinion, but that doesn't mean you have to take the opinion seriously. If people are just engaging in emotional diatribes, ignore them 'til they grow up.

Precisely popd.

Ok,
A:No matter what people think, this isnt new. Much like people getting the vapers over Janet Jackson's nipple, compared to Elvis shaking his hips 50 years ago, this is just the next generation experiencing the same issues and reinventing the wheel. Historically speaking, the only time Americans stop bickering is when their lives are on the line, and not even then for very long. For a few months after 9/11 we all felt that way. Now some of the country view 9/11 basically as a natural disaster. Unavoidable and best commemorated and left behind. The other half is trying to go out and kill the people that do these things, pay for it, protect those that do, and affiliate with the people who did this. As well as change the 'root causes' of these murderers by introducing some freedom and hope to the region. The choice is obvious, roll up in a ball of guilt and self loathing and try to fend off the blows you half way think you deserve, or go out and try to reestablish the world in such a way that we are no longer threatened... vis a vis making enemies into friends by finally bringing the concept of liberty to the benighted middle east.
B.The reason that the modern transnational left and the islamofascist fundamentalists have inadvertently come together in so many of their views is that they share one distinct philosophy. That would be the belief that their specific idiologies are sacrosanct, and where they seem wrong it is in fact reality that is imperfect. This has appeared in many ways. Islam is not a religion as we know it today, it is a culture, a government, a code of conduct rolled into one. In its fabric (as opposed to Christianity and its 'give to Caesar what is Caesar's attidute) is the concept that Islam is perfection in all aspects of mans behavior. And if something goes wrong it is because Islam is not being adhered to strictly enough, never because some specific tenant (ie the subhumaness of women as specifically outlined in the Qua'ran) is in error. The modern left is no different. If there is suffering in the world, it is because we are not adhering closely enough to whatever ecological, social, poltical, idiological scheme the left wants to embark on. Failure means we need to redouble our efforts. This is known as the 'escalation of failure', the same reason we keep dumping ever increasing amounts of money into abjecting failing programs like our public education system expecting improvement. For the left, despite all evidence to the contrary and indeed the sum total of human experience, oppression and tyranny are not the greatest root threats to the liberty of the free, but terms like 'arrogance', thats why they're out to get us. These two philosophies share that basic refusal to allow their results be compared with reality. The right has made many mistakes, but the reason it has made so much progress in the past 30 years is that it learns from its mistakes and adjusts. That is why it is currently much more aligned with freedom and liberty as concepts to be spread to the world. None are so blind as those who refuse to see.

Your twisted Manichean logic and scurrilous slime attempting to somehow attach your fellow Americans on theleft with jihadist mass murderers proves my point Mark Buehner. None of your categorically false assertions or partisan opinions regarding theleft or theright have any validity or veracity.

All your partisan suppositions are inherently flawed.

No one on the left views 9/11 " basically as a natural disaster. Unavoidable and best commemorated and left behind." This is partisan opinion, unsubstantiated slime, and entirely false..

And if you camp is " trying to go out and kill the people that do these things, pay for it, protect those that do, and affiliate with the people who did this. As well as change the ‘root causes’ of these murderers by introducing some freedom and hope to the region." - then how do you defend the Bush government shielding of his "good friends" in the House of Saud who aid and abet all the jihadist mass murderers including al Quaida, - or the costly misdirecting of American mliltiary resources, political oxygen and enormous amounts of blood and treasure on a war, and woefully misguided, radically miscalculated occupation and nationbuilding enterprize in Iraq against the wrong Muslims. Iran has nuke capability, Iraq did not - 15 of the 19 9/11 mass murderers were Saudi nationals, - and Iraq was not involved in 9/11 -so please explain the pluralistic and conflicted logic?

The OSP pimps non existant WMD threats for two years to justify and sell an unjust, unnecessary and enormously costly war in Iraq overtly benefiting cronies in the Bush oligarchy, and the CIA busts Kahn, (the father of Pakistani bomb) for selling nuclear goodies to Libya, NK, and Iran - and all is forgiven by the same Bush oligarchy?

The fundamentalism intolerance, hysterical blindness, and pratisan religious fervor you decry in Islam lurks in theright, - not theleft brother.

We on theleft are by nature much more encompassing, discerning, and tolerant. Yet, we confront America's enemies just as fiercely as you, and we (your fellow Americans silly) on theleft will (as we have in every previous war) fight alongside any you on theright in any legitimate confrontation with American enemies. Theleft will defend this nation and our posterity against any legitimate threat. We simply do not abide war for profit.

Afghanistan was necessary and just, Iraq was unnecessary and unjust.

We are simply more discerning and not as eager to run off and lynch or burn at the stake, or invade and colonize a bunch of poor people who happen to be the wrong color, or speak a funny tongue, or worship another prophet, book, and set of principles, outside the dim understanding of the rightwingideologue crusaders and war profiteers in the Bush government.

We support slaying our enemies - we just do not support invading and occupying soveriegn nations, and slaughtering innocent people based on hype and deceptions, - nor do we tolerate marauding the resouces of any foriegn land or people, - or the implementation of any puppet governments beholden to the Bush oligarchy - or the revenge outing of an agency WMD operative whose husband publically debunked an OSP Bush government deceptions, or the invidious cloaking of accounting, - or the radical dividing and redefining of America and our unique experiment in democracy by shamelessly exploiting the horrors and the dead of 9/11 to enrich thefew cronies and cartels in the Bush oligarchy.

You have your opinions, I have mine.

I agree with you Tony on one point - that is at the core self interest is paramount. And that is why I have to throw my lot in with the "rightwingideologue crusaders and war profiteers in the Bush government." At least they are practical. Dont think Manichean think Machiavellian.

Tony,

Just abut everything you abscribe to the Right also fits the Left.

Our invasion of Iraq did not 'slaughter innocents' in the manner you imply. How many civilian casualties were there? How many innocent civilians haven't died since Saddam was deposed? (Yes I know, not really on topic...)

You use every 'button-pushing' term that sounds more like mindless dogma to describe the Left and the Right. This shows you aren't thinking and are instead reacting emotionally, spewing even more vitriol. You are one of the very people I was writing about. I don't care what your political beliefs are. I do care that you either aren't willing or able to actually debate and instead resort to name calling and recitation of 'facts' not in evidence.

There were 7-10,000 innocent Iraqi slaughtered in the war so far, and the number of maimed is many thousands more, - but since the Bush government does not calculate and suppresses information on civilian casualties, and American casualties for that matter,- the true number of maimed and injured will not be known for years if ever.

The point is there were other options to pursue, and American was deceived about the necessity and justifications for the war.

Deposing Saddam (regime change) was never a question, nor was there ever any doubt about America prevailing. - the critical questions, (and questions we were never allowed to entertain prior to the war) pertained to what is the best least costly and bloody means to achieve these just ends, and what were the real costs, commitments, and timeframes involved? America was denied the right to ask these critical questions.

We've adopted Iraq now and there is no way out, so for me the key issue at this point is what kind of Iraq will emerge?

The Bush oligarchy shamelessly profiteering from the occupation and nationbuilding, the erection of a puppet government beholden to the Bush oligarchy will cost Americans enormously in blood and treasure in the shortterm, (200bn already)(another 50-100bn supplemental will be necessary after the election)(and cronies and cartels in the Bush oligarchy are reaping obscene fortunes) - and in the long run will create yet another example of American hegemony and marauding of Muslim oil fueling animosity that will be countered violently in the future.

Our children will burden and hazard the costs of the Bush governments unjust and unnecesary actions in Iraq.

Tony, i gave up on wasting my time conversing with you. You live in a universe of your own with only premises you are willing to accept. It suffices to say that the fact you still dont grasp the concept of bringing democracy and liberty to the middle east as a vaccination for islamo fascism proves my point above. You are the walking talking case study showcasing what I wrote about refusing to accept evidence contrary to your ideology. Study how the Islamocists think and you will find the identical disease.

"There were 7-10,000 innocent Iraqi slaughtered in the war so far, and the number of maimed is many thousands more, - but since the Bush government does not calculate and suppresses information on civilian casualties, and American casualties for that matter,- the true number of maimed and injured will not be known for years if ever."

For anyone that doesnt know Tony yet, this is all you need to know. He doesnt provide evidence (except contraversial left wing web sites) because he doesnt trust major media. He simply ignored or rejects out of hand contrary evidence. He then claims that the fact that he cant produce evidence is simply proof of how the government is suppressing 'the truth'. Classic conspiracy nut. If he cant find evidence for something, it only proves how powerful the conspiracy is.

Perhaps the right honorable Mark Buehner will present the pentagon statistics on Iraqi dead and maimed. He cannot, because there are none, so simply dismiss the statistics that are being tabulated as (left wing), and carry on with the colonization of Iraq.

I "grasp the concept of bringing democracy and liberty to the middle east as a vaccination for islamo fascism" perfectly well. I reject the notion of achieving this objective through military force alone, and by invading and occupying soveriegn nations who did not attack or pose any immediate threat to America to engorge the off sheet accounts of cronies and cartels in the Bush oligarchy.

If democracy emerges in the ME, it will be because of the choice made by the people of the ME. Enforcing democracy militarily and exploiting other peoples resources is tyranny, not democracy.

Bush actions in Iraq will sow the seeds of the same kind of anti-America animosity and vehemence prevalent in the Muslim world, and our children will hazard and burden the costs of Bush governments reckelss, cloaked, and predatory hegemony and profiteering.

America must lead and inspire democracy in the ME, not conquer and enforce empire militarily.

At least 3,240 Iraqi civilians were killed. This from PBS.org, the numbers skyrocket up or down depending on whos political site you go to, Mark is correct on that. 3,240 is a realistic number, mind you im not calling it 'acceptable losses' its just a very likely number unless we start kidding ourselves. That number COULD have been ALOT lower, failures of Intel and some really bad timing racked up some nasty bombing strikes that made us look really bad. We COULD have dropped that number by sacrificing Allied lives, its a simple fact, putting ground troops in harms way in close fighting and waiting to get shot at to find the enemy would have lowered the death count, as would have laxer securtiy precautions at checkpoints, hell for a the first few days they just shot up any car that ignored warnings heading at checkpoints, im not bashing what we did, in case you didnt know boys and girls 'war sucks'. Its not a pleasant thought to immagine trading a few american or allied soldier lives for a few iraqi civillian lives, better PR for more widows and destroyed familes at home, but for the grace of fate that decision doesnt lie with me.

This site is VERY conservative, its frequented by a few liberal regulars and some middle of the roaders, but nobody is changing anybody elses mind, nobody is winning any arguments, hell when we post we pretty much know how everybody else is going to respond. On this site as well as a few others the word 'liberal' is thrown around much like a swear word, or 'leftist' or my favorite 'LLL'. Im sure if i went to moveon.org or a few hardcore liberal sites the word rightwinger or neocon is thrown around with the same venom.

The only thing that bothers me is the generalizations, the majority of the liberals i know arnt sending money to terrorist, or want us to lose the war on terror, hell alot of them even supported the war on Iraq, and none of them consider me a nazi.

And again, Tony chooses to accept only the theoretical dangers and utterly ignore the very real and very demonstrable successes. This is not rational. Iraqis just completed an interim constitution, they are preparing for elections under UN supervision by the end of the year. See, Tony's theory is that unless Iraqis rose up themselves and overthrough Hussein (which he doesnt even broach the bloody failures attempts at this have caused) no democracy will ever be legit. A rational mind would look at it unbiased and judge it by its results, instead of prejudging based on ideoligy. Does Tony mention the current turbulance in Iran that strong argument can be made that the Iraq campaign sparked? No. Or all the reforms going on in other ME countries, and pro-reform protests in such places as Syria? Nope. How about Libya voluntarilly disarming? Doesnt enter the equation. As I said, reality is unimportant. He is an idealist. The reason I line up with the conservatives is that im a stone cold pragmatist. I saw a plan, I saw it executed, and im seeing results. Theory only interests me so far as it can be applied to reality. People like Tony would be (and have been) perfectly content to see the world burn and hundreds of thousands slaughtered so long as their ideology can remain pure and untested against reality. That is how it mirrors Islam.
note Im not saying the mainstream left in any way supports or abets islamofascists, certainly not intentionally. I am saying that they share the same utter rejection of pragmatism, and disdain of introspection.

Modern history has shown that idealists tend to end up with the bloodiest hands. Maoists, Leninists, Hitlerites have all been shining examples of this. Imagine a world with Tony as president. Sensible pragmatism is the essential element for a successful world power. For an example of a very successful power look to the British Empire whose foundation was built on trade yet left an astonishing legacy of goodwill amongst its former dominions. The British were master pragmatists. America now carries on this good work with the British by their side. The Iraq war was a very minor event compared to other struggles and conducted for very practical reasons. It should also not be looked at in isolation but considered along with the big picture of American military reputation, oil supplies, terrorism and elimination of tyranny and much else. The deaths of innocent Iraqis are entirely the fault of Saddam Hussein who ruled like a fool and left his country open to invasion. There is much to be gained from the activity taking place in the ME and indeed it would be a crime not to intervene.

On and on, around it goes.
Analyzing politcal discourse in the late 20th, early 21st century reveals (to me) the long term residual effects of over a century of Marxist thought and analysis. Even if you have never studied Material Dialecticism, many people still use this mode of argument (on the right and left) as they have been habituated to from long exposure.
In short, the ends justify the means: any argument or statement can be seen as 'valid' if it wins the argument, even if it is only partly right, or sometimes false. If it advances your position, it is proper in its use.
"Passsionately held" beliefs are used to trump any questioning of the reality of perception and objective analysis. Whenever I start to here more about so-called "passionately held" beliefs, I pull the plug of interest, because now anything is possible to use as an argument.
Example: "Bush Lied". Perhaps Bush did lie, but as of yet, we have no objective evidence of this. We have statements from various world leaders and intelligence agencies over the past 12 years concerning the state of Iraq's weapons programs.
We (the unwashed public) do not have access to all intelligence collected and presented to President Bush and former President Clinton (while in office) regarding this matter. We have the statements of Dr. Kay regarding his investigations since Saddam Hussein was deposed, and people selectively use the results of this investigation to butress their views. But we do not "know" that Pres. Bush "lied";
we now know that there is a discrepancy between what was believed to be the reality on the ground before the war, and what has, so far, been discovered since then. After the Intelligence Commission recently formed, issues a report on this matter, more fodder for this argument will follow.
Casualties in the war: Military casualties (Iraqi) have been difficult to total as we do not have recent unit rosters/ manpower lists of now disbanded Iraqi army units; no after-action reports from the Iraqi army have been written (to my knowledge). The KIA's in Iraq were frequently spirited away from the battlefield under cover of darkness and buried ASAP, per Islamic culture.
Civilians KIA, MIA are even more difficult to count because of a lack of believable census of Iraq's towns and villages. Someday a reliable number may emerge, but I would tend to believe the lower number given above, simply because the higher the number, the larger outcry of public loss (missing in Iraq accounts) which would be the result in more missing civilians.
Being persuasive in argmentation is more than just swaying emotions of the audience. Facts have to stand up to scutiny and the test of time. The resolution of this crises in American Potlitcal Thought will not be solved at the Command Post, but re-examine your own prejudices and notion of the "Truth" before you are quick to call those who disagree with you a "Liar", "Bigot", "Traitor", etc.

Being a scientist by education and profession, I frequently run up against contradictions between reality and theory. There are no contradictions, but there is frequently mis-application of theory, or poorly designed and measured experiments. Before you are quick to run off the cliff in advancing your conclusions (or accepting those which fit into your worldview), sceptically analyze the internal logic of the "facts" or story to which you subscribe. Remember, reality works. Reality is not a dialectical intellectual exercise in selective usage of the facts. Rejecting reality has real-world consequences: Example, the USSR, which is no more.
Lastly:
If you believe the worst in people, they may just live down to you lowest expectations.

AA, i dindt mean to slight Britain. There can be no mistake that they are one of the most steady forces for freedom and order in the world today. The only reason I leave them out is because I dont believe Britain at this time has the political will to take on these sorts of situations alone. The Falklands are a slightly different situation, that was a direct challenge to Britain herself which could not be ignored, but Im not even so sure that had it happened today the response would have been as decisive. Tony Blair has shown remarkable leadership in this matter, but the question of whether he comes out weaker or stronger in this is certainly in doubt. If weaker, we may have seen the last of British interventionalism for quite some time. The electorate just doesnt seem to be in favor of it. I think that would be sad.

Gus,

Thanks for proving my point about shameless double standards for me.

"Limbaugh uses that term to refer to one well-defined cadre within the feminist movement. And every time he uses the term, he explains who he’s talking about."

I guess "George W. Bush" is not "well defined" enough of a target to compare with nazis? Or just because its aimed at someone YOU support its treasonous slander?

I admit neither case is truthful or constructive political debate. But PLEASE can the hypocrisy. One standard will do just fine, thanks.


Regards,
dave

Dave: I referred to the Bush/Hitler comparison, for the purposes of comparing the supposed "lies" from the Left and the Right. And I did not express any agreement with the comparison. You, on the other hand, directly refer to Rush Limbaugh as a "dopefiend", in the same sentence as decrying his own use of the term "feminazi" as a double standard.

Furthermore, I have never used the term "treasonous slander", or any such term like it, to refer to those who criticize the CiC. I have used very harsh language about those who actively defended the Husseins and their sick, twisted government. But simple criticism of the government and its officials is one of our sacred rights under the First Amendment, as is the right to answer those criticisms. Without it, we would have no Command Post.

When I said you probably didn't listen to Rush Limbaugh, I stated it as a suspicion, drawn from one point you made. You, on the other hand, state as a fact that I support GWB, because I dare to answer his critics on here. Let me state for the record, just so there's no confusion: I don't support many of his domestic policies; I do support his foreign policies, for one simple reason. Those foreign policies will guarantee, better than any foreign policies that I've yet seen, that I can continue not to support his domestic policies.

And you can state that as fact, about me, any time in the foreseeable future.

As for the name-calling, show me where I have called anybody names on this thread, and I will admit to hypocrisy. I haven't even called you any names, have I? I prefer to let evidence speak for itself.

Cincinnatus,

Amen! You've stated the original cause for my post better than I did. Well said!

Gus,

"Rush Limbaugh may be many things, but he hits the nail on the head when he points out that you cannot have a civilized debate with liberals"

One of the things he is is a hypocritical drug addict: rants about how druggies should be locked up, and secretly carries out an addiction of his own. No truth bending there, its just straight fact. "Dopefiend" was my title to wrap up that idea in a catchy manner. Civilized? sorta. Funny? At least to me. :) It just has a nicer ring than "Hypocritical drug addict".

You're right about my bush/hitler point. I lumped you in with the "treasonous slander" set because your opinion seemed so 1 sided to me. Apologies if you dont feel that way. Theres plenty more people that DID feel that way so that comment can be distributed to them.

Actually I was forced to listen to Rush for almost a year when I did my internship at a small computer company. Only 2 other guys in the company that were both "dittoheads" and listened every day. A lot of the hallmarks of destructive debate: spin tricks, derogatory titles, pointless strawman arguments, ranting, pontificating, and obfuscating I first heard on his show. His show should be viewed as entertainment, nothing more. I stopped shooting down Rush's blather when I got the message "we're ignorant and we like it that way." from my bosses. I havent listened to him in about 6 years, so Im not sure if the drugs or something might have mellowed him out.

I AM sure that his genre of entertainment is part of the problem of destructive debate, NOT part of the solution.

DCE,

Somewhat correlary to this, I think, is the decline of moderates in both parties. Two examples that come to mind is (1) the way Dell Miller was demonized by many Democrats for calling for a return to a more moderate position by the party, and (2) the effort to put pressure on Republicans like Olympia Snowe by rightists in their party, up to (I think) paying for attack ads on them in their district.

Unfortunately, the days of folks like Dole and Nunn seem long ago. As the saying goes, if you're a moderate nowadays, it means you're getting shot at by both sides. And without middle-of-the-roaders, there's much less dialogue between the parties, which makes demonizing the "other side" that much easier.

"But it wasn’t always that way, and that’s my point. It’s degenerated into a “Did too!” “Did not!” verbal battle."

What!? Don't give me that 'It wasn't ever this way' garbage. Your right it wasn't. It was FAR WORSE than this!

Don't believe it was far worse than this? Read up again on the presidential campaigning around the Era of President Tyler.

"The freakish morphing of anyone questioning or opposing Bush into supporting Saddam is categorically false and revealing."

Tell that to the various people who blockaded a shipment of supplies for our troops in Iraq.
Tell that to the people who flew over and went into Iraq to make like a Human Shield.

Tell that to people who weren't satisfied with any kind of process in removing Saddam Hussein no matter what it was because whatever the heck it was that President Bush went through would never satisfy them because of their own personal hatred towards Bush.

Tell that to the people who hate President Bush so much that they are happy and thrilled about any and every bad thing happening to America. Tell that to the Democratic Leadership boasting and bragging and anticipating a Terrorist Attack to hit the United States so that Bush's approval ratings would fall.

Tell that to your Liberals who have had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING but ROT GUT instead of logical substance on the issue of removing Saddam Hussein. It was never about which way should we remove Saddam. It was ALWAYS about, "How are BUSH remove Saddam."

Dave: You're right that six years has mellowed Rush on the "drug issue". Since his addiction took hold, he actually hasn't said much of anything about it--according to a friend of mine, who has no credibility on here other than with me.

What you refer to as "spin tricks, derogatory titles, pointless strawman arguments, ranting, pontificating, and obfuscating" is true. However (and this will make me a hypocrite), the "other side" was doing it long before Rush went national. I'll call it "beating them at their own game" in his case. You're also right to refer to him as an entertainer, and I doubt he would disagree with you.

Ultimately, between Rush, Michael Savage, Al Franken, and everyone else, I'd still say we have more freedom of speech and press than just about any other nation on the planet. I invite anyone reading this to show me another nation the wide variety of opinion gets aired so openly. Free Speech for everyone! ;-)

You make a few excellent points Mark, but I'll speak for myself thank you. I accept your innocent Iraqi's slaughtered number.

A few unarmed civilians with no support from the government traveled to Iraq to act as human shields, - not theleft.

No one is happy about "anybadthing" or all the Bushbadnews, nor can we ignore, excuse, or evade blatant abuses, deceptions, failures, and neglect of our leadership.

In a world where the French and Germans are our enemies, and the Saudi's are "good friends" - all the partisan opinions are suspect.

Iranian students struggled for reform well before the advant of the Bush government. What is the all mighty Bush government doing to assist the valiant freedom fighters and democracyloving students in Iran? Not much.

If you believe there is any "pro-reform" in Syria, then you also believe in Tinkerbell, for both are faireytales.

You think pardoning Kahn and Khadaffi is a good thing and Prince Bandar is a "good friend" of America.. Bandar, Khadaffi, Khan outsmart Bush, and each keeps the keys to the bloody Americanhating kingdoms and enjoys Bush government good favor, - but all support mass murderers responsible for crimes against humanity. None should be lauded as a Bush success for political expediency to win an election.


We applaud the successes, the great accomplishments and heroic work of America's unchallengeable military. We also treasure their lives. They are the best of us, and the true defenders of freedom and democracy.

You must accept that many Americans reject our government conducting war, occupations, and naitonbuilding based on shoddy and/or intentionally deceptive intelligence, heaping the enormous costs on the people's unborn children, and profiteering obscenely in and from the predatory process.

The people have a right and a duty to demand accountability from the government, and an accounting of the costs and articulation of the reasons for and objectives of war. Kings cannot simply rush off to foriegn lands, embark on crusades, pillage the peoples treasure, cloak the costs and objectives, maraud the resources of foriegn people and reap outrageous fortunes in the prosecution of war, occupation, nationbuilding, and empire. This is imperialism not democracy.

This is not an America we envision nor one we will countenance. "Not in our name." .

Theleft supports hunting, capturing, or killing every single jihadist mass murderer and those that aid and abet them on the planet - but we will not countenance empire as American policy.

I live in New York, and we do not fear another terrorist attack. We're locked, cocked, and ready to rock, so bring em on, "what's the diference?' Theendsjustifythemeans. Rove and the crusaders in the Bush government are casting a pall upon the land, and repetitively reminding us through the cunning mass marketing of the haunting specter of the evilone lurking in the shadows, demanding the people expend enormous amounts of treasure and the blood of our children on homelandsecurity, warfighting, nationbuilding, and empire. Theright is preaching doom and boom, not theleft. Theright is cloaking and theleft is searching for - truth.

We are a nation divided.

There was never any doubt about who would prevail in Iraq, - the pertinant questions were always why, how much, how long, what do leave behind, what is the ultimate objective, and why are all those Bush oligarchy cronies and cartels reaping such enormous fortunes?

Many Americans were eager to lash out after 9/11. Aghanistan was just and universally supported. We question why so much attention was diverted away from Afhganistan and onto Iraq.

Questions then fell on deafears and venom spit on the questioners.

Iraq is ours now. We have adopted Iraq, - but when or how exactly America will exit Iraq, and how much it will cost in the interim are never articulated or meaningfully addressed by the Bush government. We are left with vague and nebulous promises, partisan hagiograchy, myth, and homilies but no real plan, and zero accountability.

Iran needs our help now and we're focused on Iraq.
Syria is the Walmart of mass murder gangs and weapons trade, the proxy of govenor of the sister black markets Lebanon, and the Bush government is focused on Iraq.

Bin Laden is entrenched in the Peshawar, and the BG is focused on Iraq.

Americans are economically stressed, and the BG is focused on Iraq.

19 jihadist mass murderers, 15 of them Saudi nationals with box cutters struck at the heart of America and changed the world forever on 9/11, and the BG focused on Iraq.

Iraq is the only place in the region we are certain there is NO WMD. All the focus is misdirected singularly on Iraq, and the American people are just now questioning in earnest why? Why did we attacked Iraq in the first place, and why the is math so fuzzy, how long will our troops be in Iraq, what is the objective, and how many hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq are mortgaged on our children's future, is Chalabi a billionare?

Theright exludes theleft from any voice in the government, despite the obvious fact that the nation is evenly split. The selection of Bush is the perfect point. The country is not overwhelmingly conservative, - yet theright presumes and enforces beligerantly that exact idea and agenda, and paints the partisan myths and fictions as facts.

Theleft is forced by the tactics of theright to fight back vigorously and challenge every wrong, so civility, hightone, and polity are not likely in this election.

You can wash the Iraqi WMD deceptions away, and parse the term "imminent threat, and deny the scarespeak propaganda and disinformation mass marketed by the Bush government for 19 months, - but you cannot defend, ignore, or excuse the deceptions, abuses, failures, and neglect of the Bush government.

The Bush government is accountable.

So, Tony. Follow sports or anything at all?

"but you cannot defend, ignore, or excuse the deceptions, abuses, failures, and neglect of the Bush government."

Why not?

Gus,

Who was in the "pandering political rants" genre from the other side before Rush? I have to admit ignorance here. I wasnt into politics much until I graduated college in '96.

Tony,

Never have I seen a better example of "Newspeak" since I read George Orwell's 1984 decades ago.

Just keep pushing those emotional buttons....

Tony I paraphrase an OpEd piece from the WSJ here, but I think this is the proper place:

In the next election 40% of us will vote Democratic, even if the candidate is Mahatma Ghandi. 40% of us will vote Republican, even if the candidate is Ghengis Khan. 20% of us will not decide who we are going to vote for until after the World Series and the Olympics are over with.

Given the reasonableness of those figures and rationale (ie: we are more interested in sports than politics), will you kindly SHUT UP? But I forgot. You ain't a-ccount-able. Blather on, Trollery.

Oh crap, TCP's been forestaed.

You have to kill it. Quickly. It's comments will increase in repetitiveness, length and insanity the longer you let it rant.

Soon you'll be paying most of your site fees to host Tony's long tedious rants. Rants that regular readers and productive commenters will scroll past after reading the first sentence--because Forestaspeak is pretty easily spotted.

Tony, get your own damned blog and stop cluttering up the internet.

Dave: Time Magazine. Newsweek. The evening news. The McNeil-Lehrer Report (let's take your tax money and use it to tell you how horrible you are for succeeding!). They were all ranting about how horrible the USA was for opposing Communism, long before Rush was ranting about how hypocritical Communist sympathizers were.

I could go into greater detail, but I'm at work, and it's already been a looooong week.

Succeeding at what gus3? What success are talking about?

I agree with your math Cap'n DOC. It is the cushy middle that will decide America's future and all the more reason why each and every vote is critical, and why all these issues must be vetted openly so the people can make informed decisions.

I'm gonna take a chance on feeding the... oh, never mind.

Succeeding at your job. Succeeding in being happily married. Succeeding in making sure your kids have a better childhood than you did. And the ones who are successful, are the ones paying big-time into the tax pool that funds PBS, home of Macneil-Lehrer (or however you spell it).

The liberal press for years has tried to lay a guilt trip on middle- and upper-class America for having a better lot in life than, well, just about anyone else. Never mind that the Declaration of Independence states only that "all men are created equal", not that they remain equal forever.

You mention noble successes, and from your lofty perch, these may be realities, but your assertions belie the grim realities facing most Americans 2.3mn of whom have lost jobs and who are exceedingly concerned about thier jobs, who see half of all American marriages end in divorce, and scum sucking lawyers and a pertetuating the destruction of families, whose children are not enjoying a better childhood, and likely not to see a better future.

We are all happy for your better life gus3, congratulations, - but the Bush government robbing from the poor and middle class to feed the super rich is preventing many Americans from any hope attaining of the successes you enjoy.

Tony: Only because you're telling them there's no hope. It's no wonder they're giving up.

grrrr... stupid MSIE. Blanked out the second para of Tony's post.

Tony: show how Bush is robbing the poor to feed the rich, from the IRS's own figures, and then I'll give you some credence. In the meantime, it's already been demonstrated (again, from the IRS's own figures), that the "poorer half" of the nation is paying less than 5% of the total income tax, while the "richer half" pays over 95% of the total income tax. And we have the Democrats to thank for that one.

As for the successes that I enjoy, what do you know of those? Do you know about my junky car getting broken into? How about the fact that I have no furniture, beyond a small wood desk and chair, and an inflatable mattress? That's right, not even a kitchen table. I would hardly call that success.

I suppose the mere fact that I haven't let anyone kill me today is a success, but that's certainly not a success that the Bush government is preventing to anyone else, including millions of Iraqis and Afghans.

gus3

George has thought about why the poor have what you would hardly call success. It's because you're lazy. - link

George is counting on your support in thinking that you're successful because no one killed you today.

i too feel a lot safer knowing that he's at the helm, steering us through this scary world where foreigners could start killing innocent people any ole time...for made-up reasons.

Carl: Did I say I failed? No. Did I say I was poor (one of those Bush was talking about)? No. I only said that I haven't succeeded. What I didn't say was that I just moved three weeks ago, across the country, and am still getting settled in and holding tight until the cash flow begins in earnest. My current situation looks bleak, but I know things are about to get better.

Tony doesn't know that, and is trying to tell me that the country is going to hell in a handbasket and is going to take me with it. But he doesn't know me, and knows nothing about where I am in life. He started out with a supposition about me, but then shifted it to fact, when he had no grounds for doing so. He has given up hope, where I have not.

Even if things around me are going to hell, does that mean I might as well just give up and go with the flow, and let the government prop me up, even if I am still able to work? Hardly. That is the way of cowards.

gus3

I chose my words carefully so as not to assume anything about you or your situation.

i don't know Tony from Adam...but the way i read his posts is that he is full of hope that this country can shed itself from the travesty of the current administration. This is my read (and my hope); not necessarily anything about Tony.

Based on my experiences as a volunteer with appallingly poor folks, i can tell you that being lazy is not what's wrong. Yet we have an aristocratic President who has this "let them eat cake" attitude.

It's further travesty that GWB et al scare the crap out of people and then hold themselves up as the answer. Extortion!

You ignore ONLY 90% of Tony Foresta's
rantings, Doc ???

Man, you have a strong stomach. I can spot
his drivel in the first sentence and ignore all
of it thereafter.

One thousand thanks carl. You are correct that I believe the only true hope for most Americans (those not making more than $300,000.00 a year, or working for Halliburton, United Defense, or any of the Carlyle Group holdings) is in the execution of a peaceful and democratic regime change here in 2004, and restoring democracy to America.

I do not think my commentary is impacting the poor or middle class in any negative way, gus3 and again there is great hope - by removing the deceptive, crony capitalist war profiteers usurping the government and bankrupting, shaming, and redefining America.

I am not interested in your distorted and fuzzy math. The entire tax burden is being invidiously shifted from the highest tax payers which is just, to the middle class which is unjust.

The super rich will never be seriously impacted by an increase in tax rates. A few may have to devise other means to finance thier yacht purchase, but there will be no disruption in their luxuriant lifestyles.

Poor and middle class America's are quite seriously impacted and our lives are disrupted by the radical erosion of social services and entitlements resulting from the starvation of the federal treasury so super rich cronies in the Bush oligrarchy can exploit foriegn workers, export American jobs, cloak profits in off shore subsidiaries, and engorge the offsheet accounts of book cooking CEO's.

The deficit is crushing and unsustainable no matter how hard Bush government apologists attempt to cloak the truth. America is mortgaging our childrens future so the Bush oligarchy can profit obscenely in the present.

I am truly touched by your situation gus3, and we unfortunately share many of the same hardships. Given the difficulties we face, please tell my what on earth could possibly compel you to support the Bush government?

(Warning: this got out of control, and is a bit long-winded. My apologies in advance.)

carl: Working backwards:

"It’s further travesty that GWB et al scare the crap out of people and then hold themselves up as the answer."

Even though (blech--moral equivalence) the Democrats have been doing exactly that for longer than I've been alive? After all, even Carroll O'Connor and Jean Stapleton and Ed Asner were stumping for Al Gore all over the TV in 2000. Does that scare the crap out of you too?

"Based on my experiences as a volunteer with appallingly poor folks, i can tell you that being lazy is not what’s wrong."

Being lazy is what's wrong. The lazy have given up on themselves, and are content to let those around them, and even those 2,000 miles away, prop them up for as long as the system will allow it. I'm not sure in what capacity you were volunteering, but I have known people like this myself. One of them is my ex-wife, who was furious with me for refusing to sign up for unemployment when I lost my job. We had no kids, we each had some savings, and we had no honest need for unemployment. Her attitude is why taxes in California are so high, and part of why she's now my ex-wife.

The easy willingness of many people on the dole is something I deeply resent. It's one thing to need a prop for a couple weeks. It's quite another to go down to the welfare office two days after you move into a new state, so you can sign up, before you've even tried to look for work. Don't scoff, I've seen it happen with my own eyes. The guy that did that is no longer welcome in my presence. The Democratic Party thrives on this kind of professional victimhood, and I will not countenance it.

"[Tony] is full of hope that this country can shed itself from the travesty of the current administration."

I know I'm speculating, but somehow I don't think very many Iraqis and Afghans would agree with that assertion. Even Ed Koch would disagree with it. (Tony, read that and you will understand why I back Bush. And spare me your sympathy; I don't need it.)

"I chose my words carefully so as not to assume anything about you or your situation."

But earlier you said:

"George has thought about why the poor have what you would hardly call success. It’s because you’re lazy."

I have outlined above why I believe he is correct in calling many public money recipients "lazy". And they are failures. And I refuse to associate myself with them, even with such a string of bad luck hanging around my neck. Besides, this also contradicts my first quote from you: Bush is holding us up as the answer. Not himself. Not the government. And only under Bush will I be free enough to fix my situation, as I see fit.

Would you call me a victim? Eleanor Roosevelt said it well: "No one can make you to feel inferior without your consent." And Dr. King: "A man can't ride your back unless it's bent." I am not a victim. Neither am I lazy. Anyone who says I am, speaks out of turn.

I was expressing empathy, not sympathy gus3 and would challenge your speculation about Afghani's and Iraqi's supporting Bush.

I always liked Mayor Koch, - he has a great sense of humor. Unfortunately he like many Bush apologists succumb to the Rove/Bush mind warp imagining Bush as a valiant warrior battling the evilone. Catchy branding campaign, but exceedingly disingenuous.

9/11 happened on Bush's watch, and nothing anyone says or does will ever alter that sad fact. Any president and certainly any democrat would have attacked al Quaida bases in Afghanistan after 9/11, but as Kerry says, we do not fault Bush for what he has done to make America safer, but for what he has failed to do.

No democrat asserts Bush had prior knowledge of 9/11, but many of us do believe there were massive failures, and questionable activities and that the Bush government is accountable.

For me, there is no more grievous treachery than stonewalling, resisting, and refusing to cooperate in good faith with the 9/11 investigation, especially in light of the repugnant fact that the Bush government continues to shamelessly exploit the horrors and the dead of 9/11for political gain. (The current Bush election ads are a repulsive disgusting example)

This appalling abuse is above all others is totally unacceptable.

First, the House of Saud may be "good friends" of the Bush oligarchy, but they are no friends of America, and until the funding and nurturing of jihadist mass murderers abundantly flowing out of Saudi Arabia is addressed and cut off, - America will never be secure. With no money, the jihadist are sexually repressed, psychopathic, primitive ragheads throwing stones. With the lavish funding flowing from myriad sources primarily in SA using our petro dollars, - the kinds of largescale, international, multi-year, multi-dimensional, coordinated, and devastating terrorist operations like 9/11 are not only possible, - they are inevitable. Access to WMD would alter the dynamics radically, - but would not necessarily be critical as 9/11 proved.

9/11 would never have been possible were it not for the abundant funding and nurturing of al Quaida and all the jihadist mass murderers by Saudi Arabia.

Second, Bush deceptively misdirected American military resources, political oxygen, and enormous amounts of treasure and blood away from hunting, capturing, or killing jihadist mass murderers and those that aid and abet them and onto the wrong Muslims in Iraq for the political and economic gain of the Bush oligarchy.

Third - All the Gaza mass murder gangs Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PLFP, al Aqsa, et al. are somehow immune from Bush's nebulous waronterror. Why? How safe will America ever be if these mass murder gangs continue to flourish unchallenged by the Bush government?

Koch, all the truebelievers, and evidently you, believe America is safer under Bush, - where many of us, and I particularly believe Bush reacted immediately after 9/11 like any American president would - but has subsequently made America much less secure by failing to focus on jihadist mass murderers and those who aid and abet them, and advancing the insane delusions of the rightwingideologue Pax Americana neverendingwar and empire agenda, (which existed previous to, but could never be countenanced without 9/11).

Lastly laziness is not confined to any class or culture or political or sexual orientation. A wealthy nation, and wealthy individuals have a responsiblity to care for those less fortunate, and the worlds hyperpower should be the beacon of hope for all the worlds disadvantaged, and certainly our own children.

If the game (capitalism) was fair, and the field level, we would not be having this debate, - but alas niether prerequisite is met, so the poor and middle class require the government to enforce fairplay, and level the field. The rich have every imaginable advantage already and do not need any further entrenchment, insulation, or assistance from the government.

Can you shorten your raving Tony?

It MIGHT possibly make you readable.

What you put down is so BORING
and ALWAYS on the same Track!
That shows a TOTALLY CLOSED
mind.

Tony: Since you can't even see New York's #1 liberal supporting Bush, without ascribing to him some sort of mental illness ("mind warp" you call it), I haven't bothered reading the rest of your post. Your prejudices are too thick.

Sympathy. Empathy. Neither one does me any good, so save it.

Coumo, not Koch is NY's #1 liberal, and no Bush defender. The Rove/Bush mindwarp is not mental illness but rather mesmerism or a kind of mass hypnosis perpetuated by the Bush government to disinform and condition the people through fearspeak into blindly supporting the Bush government.

America has yet to truly accept or resolve what happened on 9/11.

I was in LA last week and amazed at the detachment and desensitization of 9/11. It seems like just another TV spectacle or reality series for many people outside of NYC. Many are woefully misinformed. Here the impact is visceral everyday. Everyday we witness and feel the gaping hole where the WTC once towered over the entire city. Yet, there is a much more balanced appreciation and awareness of the gravity of what happened on that day. NYC does not support the Bush government, and the majority believe the Iraq war will make America and NYC less, not more secure. This message will be delivered en masse during the RNC. Most New Yorkers are appalled at the Bush governments shameless exploitation and mass marketing of the horrors and the dead of 9/11 for partisan political gain. Using ground zero as a backdrop for Bush election commercials in light of the systemic stonewalling, resisting, and failure to cooperate in good faith with the 9/11 investigations is the hieght of hypocrisy, and repugnant.

Koch is a notable exception, but his is a minority opinion among democrats and New Yorkers.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: