Hunting The Muse

I can only attribute it to paralogia. An otherwise sane man can kick his child to death and insist the kid must still be alive because he did it with sneakers on.

An otherwise sensible person can call for the silencing of dissent, the lifeblood of democracy, and still call himself a patriot.

One thing people should understand--we have soldiers on the ground who feel the same as Randi Rhodes. She's ex-military (USAF, I think.) She doesn't hate the soldiers in Iraq. She does hate the way they've been under-equipped, under-staffed, and undermined by the White House. They're getting screwed over, and she's one of the few media voices genuinely concerned about them.

Liberals aren't the ones forcing soldiers' families to put on bake sales so they can buy armor for their loved ones. Dissent at home isn't what set off the stop-loss order. Exhausted as they are, some soldiers have been on combat duty in Iraq for as much as 18 months. And they've just been told they're not going home until the year 2030.

IIRC Randi Rhodes was the first to voice any outrage on the Friday afternoon of the stop-loss order.

And now we have a patriotic soul demanding that her voice be taken off the air.

I hope Chattipaula doesn't intend to silence our soldiers whenever they gripe about their mission... which still isn't accomplished, BTW.

Lord, save us from amateur patriots.

It's not that liberals hate this country. In fact, the extreme opposite is true. We love our country even more than those who wave flags all day and scream about how patriotic they are. The difference to me, is that we love our country as a parent loves a child. We see the potential that exists, we see the truly amazing possiblities that this child holds. But when we see how it wastes those opportunities, squanders the great gifts bestoweed upon it, we get angry and disappointed. This nation's founding principles are wonderful. The promise of freedom, and absolute equality are the highest standards to which we should all strive. Seeing this president, seeing this congress pursue their own agendas of forcefully changing the world to suit their own ideological views makes us outraged.

So of course we criticize. Of course we get angry and yell. And what is thrown back at us? The same retorts that we levied back to our own parents as teenagers. Why do you hate me so much? Why are you always yelling at me? Why can't you just accept me for what I am?

Why? Because we know what you *could* be, and that's not what you are now.

I COULDN'T BELIEVE IT WHEN I CAME ACROSS THIS EMAIL ABOUT RANDI RHODES. THIS TAKE ON HER RHETORIC ON THE AIR PARROTED EXACTLY WHAT I SAID AFTER HEARING HER. I WAS INSTANTLY TAKEN BACK TO SCENES FROM MOVIES OF PAST WARS WHERE TOKYO ROSE FILLED THE AIRWAVES WITH HER PROPAGANDA TO TRY TO DEMORALIZE THE TROOPS. THE AMAZING THING ABOUT HER PROPAGANDA IS NONE OF IT IS BACKED UP BY FACTS. SHE ACTUALLY SAID THAT JESSICA LYNCH WAS CAPTURED BY THE ENEMY BECAUSE.....THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION FAILED TO GIVE THE TROOPS EQUIPMENT SUCH AS BODY ARMOUR, AND HUMMVIES WHICH COULD GO THROUGH THE SAND! RHODES SAYS THAT LYNCH WAS CAPTURED BECAUSE SHE GOT STUCK IN THE SAND. EVERYONE KNOWS THAT HER VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT AFTER TAKING A WRONG TURN FROM THE COLUMN AND THEY WERE AMBUSHED, KILLED OR CAPTURED. I AM CONFIDENT IN THE FACT THAT AIR AMERICA HAS NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL BECAUSE OF IT'S CONSTANT ANTI BUSH ATTACKS BY ALL THE "HOSTS" IT WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO FUND ITSELF ON ADVERTISEMENT, THANK GOD IT IS NOT PUBLIC RADIO.

Charming. An all-caps rightwingnut that links to a porn site.

Right and Medina's site is better

LOL Ironically we have a hot redhead too, our webmistress. No, really, she's overheated. Totally hates the summer heat. Buy our CD and you'll hear everyone's favorite Tunesmith gargle Jell-O. ;)

Hello Bushies (Mort, et al). Rant away, just repeat what the right-wing talk show screechers continue to spew. I.E. - If you have a beef with George W. in any way, you must be a traitor, a terrorist sympathizer. Anti-American. Probably gay, too. Truth is, George W. is laughing all the way to another hopeful "election." He is nothing like he is advertising himself - he simply sells a smiling, righteous face, while peddling his influence for the benefit of a rich and powerful few. If he is Christian, I am Santa Claus. He then misleads, obfuscates, and stonewalls when questioned, and if you really make trouble, his gang will sick the dogs on you. Ask Richard Clark, Joe Wilson, or anyone else who tries to stand up for the truth, a truth that Bush might not like. Look at what is happening (Freedom of Information, EPA, SEC, Labor, FDA, Insurance, etc., etc. - all with foxes in charge of the henhouse). You have every right to support Bush, of course - there is no law against being stupid. Why not proudly announce you like to drink cyanide, too? Makes as much sense. But our rights are getting fewer all the time. The fear is that if Bush and gang are re-elected, things will get only worse.

Well hi Santa, I see you've been using the Thesaurus you gave yourself last Christmas.
I think your comments reveal the frustrations you have because of the way President Bush carries himself, seemingly not letting the leftist's hateful comments bother him. I believe he does listen to, and respect, people who have a different point of view. Now as for those who support him, I think they are also frustrated. They constantly hear these hateful, sarcastic comments such as you yourself have made. I don't think Republicans think that different points of view mean you are a traitor or anti-American, and they welcome intelligent debate. If you come on as an arrogant ass, however, you will create a hostile return. Calling people stupid shows your haughty nature and will never create harmony. I am very curious as to your religious persuasion. Might you be an, um, atheist?

I for one would relieved if more conservatives, Republicans, neocons, or anyone else welcomed intelligent debate. This country needs it, more than ever.

President Bush bites an Irish TV journalist's head off. Dick Cheney tells Senator Leahy what to do with himself. Talking heads on the airwaves accuse liberals of being traitors, Communists, or worse...when they're not belittling them or distorting hard data.

What happened to that promise to elevate the tone of politics in this country?

If you detect sarcasm in my words, I can only plead bitterness. The bitter taste of broken promises. No more lies, no more false hopes or haughty, superior tones.

I'll sign off now before anyone asks me, "Have you now or have you ever...." The cross around my neck hangs heavily enough, thanks.

well i gotta tell ya boys and girls .... smoke 'em and bring 'em bush ... may put out that down home country corn pone but he ain't nuthin' but a kittbunkport kowboy.

speakin' of flip flopin' ... it seems the great uniter has turned into the devine divider.

anyway you slice it war is hell ... and the iraqi war is a war of choice not necessity.

our boys and girls are being killed and maimed and our treasury drained because of little george's choice to take out Saddam as opposed to dealing with the war on terror .... what was he said recently "osama bin laden, i don't know where he is and i don't care!"

since the invasion of iraq .. little george has made the US of A a recruitment poster for the terrorists.

have you read "Bullets won't win this war, alliances will" by Jay Bookman of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Published on: 06/28/2004?

looking for a common sense piece on this mess we are in .... trip on over to the AJC and check out the opinion pages.

hugs and kisses to all!

i remain as always,

grouchy in west texas

WHAT?? Your lower case unsophistication is quite a trip, phony boy, I can almost hear your drawl. But seriously....man did the President owe you on a bet 'cause you're way out there. No wonder you're grouchy. In reading Mr. Bookman's article, I see his point of view that "we cannot uninvade", therefore we won't know what that out come would have been, but he certainly uses his imagination in quite a few scenarios about what will happen. I must say they are all so negatively spun. How do you live this way, so pessimistic? But then look at the source. Fact, we went to war with Iraq. Fact,we captured the evil dictator. Fact, the evil dictator's sons are dead. Fact, we turned over sovereignty to the Iraqi people. Fact we built up their schools, infrastructure and lives to a better point then before. Alliances, I think not, bullets did it. Why are you so against winning and so for whining.

Oh yes, Abu Graib was a vast improvement. I'm not against winning. I'm against winning dirty.

War is ugly by its nature, of course. Turn a guy's face into a donut filling before he does it to you. Staying sane and alive is hard enough in a combat theater.

But loose-lipped civvies are bound to make it worse by cheerleading the acts at Abu Graib. Winning a war and doing good works doesn't entitle us to moral laziness. Thanks to some brilliant acts of stupidity and depravity, most of the region is turning on us and Saddam the psychopath looks like a martyr.

We don't have the moral high ground anymore. And neither do you.

I think you know it too. Otherwise you wouldn't be hiding.

This is an observation and not really a comment of a substantative nature. Has anyone noticed how the female talking heads and spokeswomen for liberal ideology are fat, frumpy, butchy, and driven only by talking points? Why are all the hot women conservative (Coulter, Ingraham, even the lesbian Tammy Bruce)? Is is because liberals are aligned so heavily with femi-nazi's, therefore they care little about appearance, grooming, and hygiene? Anyway, Randi falls into that category, so I thought I'd add that as a meaningless contribution to a boring site.

If Ann Coulter turns around too quickly, her adam's apple could fly out the front of her throat.

I have a feeling Mike's definition of "grooming" includes at least four layers of base.

ob-ser-va-tion [n.]
1. The act of noting and recording something, such as a phenomenon, with instruments.
2. The result or record of such notation: a meteorological observation.
3. A comment or remark. See Synonyms at comment.
4. An inference or a judgment that is acquired from or based on observing.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

If you think this site is boring, you must think America is boring. Mull it over while munching on the goats trotting over your bridge.

Predicting the actions and reactions of Liberals has become so austere that it is an inane endeavor. Even while prefacing my remarks and submitting a benign posting, I was able to tap that conspicuous emotional nerve that is so prevalent in the liberal constitution.
I listened to about ten minutes of Randi Rhodes because I wanted to derive some measure of undertanding before giving a blanket indictment of Air America. Also, I thought that with their bankruptcy imminent, I would try to find information regarding her on the internet while some still exists, bringing me here. Making note of a pattern of offensive physical qualities of Liberal pundits, offended Mr/Mrs/Miss Medina, who cleverly offered a definition of the word "observation" from some friend's dictionary.
Medina should note that: 1. He/She is not very original. 2. Your definitions were not inconsistent with my usage and context. 3. Your argument regarding the congruency of this site with America is non-sequitur logic. How can one logically propose that America, a land with arbitrarily drawn national borders, consisting of hundreds of millions of citizens, attitudes, and perspectives is represented by this one small, dull site, and that any criticisms and observations of one are correlative with the other?
Liberals fail miserably at the intellectual Habits of Mind. In Mr/Ms Medina's case, these would be: Managing impulsivity, thinking flexibly, striving for accuracy and precision, and communicating with clarity. Again, the response was predictable, but I hope didactic for Medina, who is probably at this very moment searching for typos.

Mike. Seriously. You're straining yourself.

TuneSmith. Seriously. You are a guy who knows what "base" is. I had to ask. No strain required here.

I retract that statement. You might not be a guy. That makes more sense. That and you don't think Coulter is a babe.

Coulter's just got a bit too much testosterone for me, but it's okay - I don't fault you for going for that sort of thing.

Quite right. I’m sure Mike and Mr/Ms Coulter will be very happy together...assuming matrimony between them is still legal when they seal the bond, of course. I’ve even got some handy marriage vows you can use:

“Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul”

Oh, BTW. Seven typos, four false premises, a cute three-pronged ad hominem attack, and mild paralogia. Three Hail Mary’s and an act of contrition. Go and pass gas no more.

Gotta love that Mike and I do. Chattipaula here. I came across this site the same way you did. Via Randi Rhodes (Bagdad Randi) and my contempt for her "show". I tried Mike, I really did, to understand the "L"'s, and even reason with some. But grammar and spelling kept getting in the way. I really had my full of the insults and alas the last insult of me hiding, because I called them whiners, showed me their true colors once again. So I've been observing occasionally, and now you've put a smile back on my (rather pleasant looking, so I've been told) face. I know Joe's busy now, marking my comment. Let me know my grade. By the way did you see the site Medina is hiding behind? On second thought, not worth your time or talents. I know you must be great at chess. Keep that wonderful brain busy. Hmmm... gotta love those Republican brains.

If I’m hiding, I must need lessons. I don’t hide behind aliases. I use my name, such as it is. I link to my business, the Afterhell audiodrama, which cast and crew are all proud of. Ain’t no thang if it ain’t your thang. Dark fantasy/horror isn’t for everybody. And unlike our President or Vice-President, I don’t use offense as a first resort in any sense of the word. Your face is lovely, I’m sure. It’s your manner I take issue with. Insulting people is hardly a genuine attempt at understanding them, let alone discourse. That is what characterizes neocon rhetoric including yours and Mike’s. It’s not the discourse of grown-ups. It’s the smartmouthing of spoiled children, basing everything all their thoughts on emotions and self-gratification, distorting facts to gain advantage, eschewing ethics for the quick endorphin rush that follows any shouting match. If you honestly want to understand liberals, you wouldn’t resort to such tactics. And I for one find it difficult to take seriously anyone who does.

Oh, yeah. You get a C-plus. I’m grading on a curve today.

Liberals don't hate America. We hate those who harm America. Those who make a mockery out of the constitution and the bill of rights. Liberals defend democracy. Something the Republicans have been trying to destroy.

I do not always agree with Randi Rhodes's thinking or technique. I have heard similar behavior in radio talkers such as Rush Limbaugh. I don't listen to Limbaugh anymore.

As an example of that which Randi Rhodes has condoned, I take exception with christian students prosletyzing fellow highschoolers with candycanes inscripted with christian messages _bait_ because I know that this is unconstitutional. It would make me resentful of them. I wouldn't have much respect for them. I would likely think that they were being put up by a "Student Led" adult person. As an Atheist, I would be offended by them and would take action against them or the persons purpetrating this incursion.

If there was a preacher at a hellfire church and she or he and saw young people handing out "The ORIGIN OF THE SPECIES" by Charles Darwin, before the TIME of the Sermon--on church grounds--that preacher would most likely intercede. It probably would not matter that "It was done _before_ the sermon. The Darwinners would lose out.

Sometimes, when in doubt, transpose a few terms and see if you return with a value of TRUE.

I don't think I would wait two hours on a telephone to tell Randi Rhodes that I figured she was not being ecumenical when she thought that this candy cane business was okay, but was really her simply caving into a further encroachment on civil rights by the christian right. I might have to dodge her steamroller.

Ms. Rhodes seems passive-aggressive, touchy-feely in this vein. This is a turn-off. What is this really--TradesVille?

I was a member of the ACLU in the past. I am considering re-joining. However, I take issue with the possibility that this organization actually defended this candycane thing as they did with that Religious Land Use Act.

Many Jews left the ACLU when it defended the right of neonazis to perform a public march. In this and elsewhere I find neonazis out-of-step with humanity. I hate 'em--but I have a good understanding of The Bill of Rights, and side with the ACLU in its decision here.

Like the ACLU, Ms. Rhodes may not be perfect--the cliché of course being that no one and nothing is perfect--but I regard her as a contender well worth listening to in this theater of Talk Radio. I also think the ACLU is a good organization--otherwise, I wouldn't waste my time with them.

Liberty, democracy, art, science--or any other endeavor of humanity are all processes. You cannot capture them and impress them into a block of granite. Life is all a process. Randi Rhodes and folks whom I disagree with much, much less are all a part of this process.

For those who would attempt de-feminizing Ms. Rhodes I would caution that you have not fully found the meaning of the word femininity. I would assert that she is more a woman whose character you may want to learn. I am glad to know she is with Air America.

There are many right wingers who insist that liberals are traitors, unpatriotic, treasonous, etc. for criticizing the federal government. They say that Randi Rhodes is "Baghdad Randi" or another Tokyo Rose.
These extremists are not patriots, as they insist, but nationalists. They like the idea of a right wing America whose president bullies its own intelligence agencies, ignores inconvenient facts, lies to the public and insults those traditional allies who disagree with him. They think that if you put an American flag pin in your lapel and deify your military, you're a patriot. They don't seem to care much about the thousands of innocent Iraqis who have died in this war. Those who point out the arrogance, incompetence and dishonesty of this administration are accused of betraying the troops. These are the same folks who criticized Clinton for deployment of troops in the Balkans. They didn't seem concerned about supporting the troops then. They're not always wrong, but they do tend to be poorly informed.
I think the greatest act of treason that has occurred in the past twenty-five years was the deliberate disenfranchisement of thousands of Florida voters, carried out by Katherine Harris in the 2000 election. She was the Florida Secretary of State and chairman of the Bush campaign in Florida. I have no doubt that she and Jeb Bush knew that thousands of legitimate voters would be prevented from participating in the 2000 election. If George Bush were a true patriot - instead of a cynical oligarch - he would have conceded the election, acknowledging this injustice and affirming the critical importance of the right to vote.
The second most treasonous incident occurred when a white house official, yet to be identified, leaked Valerie Plame's name and occupation to columnist Robert Novak. Plame's husband, Joe Wilson, who had been ambassador to Iraq during the elder Bush's presidency, had been sent to Africa to investigate allegations that Iraq had attempted to buy yellow cake uranium from Niger. He was not paid for this trip, although our government did provide airfare, lodging and meals. After investigating, he reported that the allegations were baseless. The Bush administration disregarded his report because it undermined the claim that Iraq was trying to develop nuclear weapons. When Wilson reported this situation in an op-ed piece, someone in the white house "outed" Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a measure of revenge.
Ironically, Plame was an undercover CIA employee who was involved in monitoring WMD programs in the Middle East. By exposing her, the Bush administration not only endangered her, it endangered her contacts and sources in the Middle East. It also ended Plame's ability to work in this field.
What could be more treasonous and unpatriotic than exposing and endangering a career intelligence officer and her contacts?
And if the president is a patriot, why hasn't he disclosed the staffer's identity?
The people who criticize Randi Rhodes don't believe in the core values of our constitution and our culture. Instead, they believe that might makes right, that our nation is entitled to take whatever it wants, whenever it wants, and that anyone who objects is, by definition, unpatriotic. These folks don't value democracy; they value an authoritarian government that plays to their prejudices and fear.
It's a really depressing state of affairs!

Randi Rhodes audio clip on killing Bush link here
Air America's Randi Rhodes program, comparing George W. Bush to Fredo Corleone. She's openly lamenting that Poppy or Jeb hasn't taken the president on a "fishing" trip, and blown his brains out. Give it a listen. Does this qualify as "hate radio"? click here to listen http://www.cynicalnation.com/randi1.mp3