Mark,

It's about as tasteful as the Republican party of Montana supporting a neo-Nazi,ofcourse, they were against him, before they were for him, and now back to being against him. Shawn Stuart should make quite an addition to the multi-faceted views of the 'Big-tent' occupants. LOL

Is it wrong to bring up David Duke right now too?

LOL. Pot...YOU'RE BLACK!

LOL. Pot...YOU'RE BLACK!

Pee Wee? Is that you?

Are you serious, Mark?

OK,

You're anti-abortion. In 2001 a white supremist group sent hundreds of abortion clinics letters containing what was said to be anthrax (but was not).

Looks like the anti-abortion movement was completed then... white supremesists threatening legal clinics with death.

How are those fleas treating you?

OR

Timothy McVeigh. Remember Waco? Remember the ire brought down from many on the right on the Clinton administration for what occurred? Well, someone did something about on April 19, 1995.

If you know anything about the neo-white supremist movement in America, you know that it's strongly anti-government. It's no surprise that they oppose the war. Just as they were opposed to the government's actions in Waco and just as they are opposed to the government allowing abortion.

Trying to say those who oppose the war are wrong because the KKK opposes it may be one of the weakest arguments I've heard from you (and that's saying something). It's like saying those who criticized Clinton and Reno were wrong because McVeigh agreed with them. Or that those who oppose abortion are wrong because people sent those letters.

It's just a dishonest, lazy argument.

Are you serious, Mark?

OK,

You're anti-abortion. In 2001 a white supremist group sent hundreds of abortion clinics letters containing what was said to be anthrax (but was not).

Looks like the anti-abortion movement was completed then... white supremesists threatening legal clinics with death.

How are those fleas treating you?

OR

Timothy McVeigh. Remember Waco? Remember the ire brought down from many on the right on the Clinton administration for what occurred? Well, someone did something about on April 19, 1995.

If you know anything about the neo-white supremist movement in America, you know that it's strongly anti-government. It's no surprise that they oppose the war. Just as they were opposed to the government's actions in Waco and just as they are opposed to the government allowing abortion.

Trying to say those who oppose the war are wrong because the KKK opposes it may be one of the weakest arguments I've heard from you (and that's saying something). It's like saying those who criticized Clinton and Reno were wrong because McVeigh agreed with them. Or that those who oppose abortion are wrong because people sent those letters.

It's just a dishonest, lazy argument.

So now anyone who is against the idiotic war in Iraq is somehow equated with the KKK?

Nice smear, Mark. I guess that means that a majority of Americans are KKK associates since a clear majority is against the war.

It's just a dishonest, lazy argument.

You better get another goat, son, looks like Mark got that one. Do you have any argument other than this equivalency stuff? Anything?

What a pathetic smear to say the "left" has any association with the KKK because we are in agreement - although for very different reasons - on one issue.

If I applied the same guilt by association fallacy to "conservatives" and right wingers I could group you with all sorts of evil people. But I won't.

However, it is curious that radical Islam and even Osama bin Laden both share many opinions regarding gay rights as do "mainstream" Republicans. Bush's ol' pal bin Laden also wished to have the Ssecular regimes out of power in the Arabic countries. So you have OBL himself in your camp favoring the invasion of Iraq.

What does "taste" bitter is the ugly rhetoric that has displaced adult conversation in this country. But then we do not have adults running it right now.

Wade

Nice smear, Mark.

Two goats in one shot. Good shooting, Mark.

Hilarious, the leftists occupy common ground with the most vile and despicable group of people this coutry has (and I am actually not referring to the Democrats) and the best the can do is sputter "but, but you guys...."?

This is why the leftists will lose this year. You morons are on the same ground as white supremacists, Castro, Chavez and most, if not all, of the terrorists (leave Iraq now! Who said this Murtha or Hussein?)

I breathlessly await trAsh's and Blarney's sophmoric replies...

"You better get another goat, son, looks like Mark got that one. Do you have any argument other than this equivalency stuff? Anything?"

Do you have anything to add? I made my point. You have one?

Hilarious, the leftists occupy common ground with the most vile and despicable group of people this coutry has (and I am actually not referring to the Democrats) and the best the can do is sputter "but, but you guys...."?

This is why the leftists will lose this year. You morons are on the same ground as white supremacists, Castro, Chavez and most, if not all, of the terrorists (leave Iraq now! Who said this Murtha or Hussein?)

I breathlessly await trAsh's and Blarney's sophmoric replies...

And then there is this Great Democrat

GOP 4 Me,

If you're anti-abortion, you occupy the same ground. It's a rediculous argument. A lazy one. One a 10-year old would make. KKK is against the war thus being against the war is wrong.

It's about the most dull-minded argument one can make.

LaMano,

And then there is always Strom '40 more terms' Thurmond.

"Hilarious, the leftists occupy common ground with the most vile and despicable group of people this coutry has"

Um, not "leftists" - most Americans, red staters and blue, believe the war in Iraq was a mistake. Why do you continue to smear the American people? Are you calling us all racists? It's just like you Bushians to play the race card ;)

I'll bet if you ask the KKK'ers, you'd find that most are Bush supporters. So does that somehow mean that Bush supporters in general are KKK sympathizers?

Well, I guess Mark doesn't have anything else to write about. With his cult leader totally awol while the MidEast goes up in flames, with democratic Lebanon being assaulted by the weapons of a superpower, with Iraq bombings this week being the worst of the entire conflict, and with oil set to jump $80, what else can Mark do but smear America?

Hate doesn't have to take a side of the fence, it is already well established on both sides.

Just because the KKK is holding an anti-war raly does not mean they are ready to hold hands with the liberal left, it simply means it is the way they got their permit and attract more attention to themselves.

To be honest, at least the people in the KKK openly admit their hate insted of the majority of Americans who (left or right) keep it behind a smile.

Anyone, left or right, who would shout out "Look the KKK is siding with " is either forgetting the last time the KKK sided with them on an issue.

Mark,

It's not often that I'm in agreement with our president, but when after reading this post he described you as a "damn shitheaded numbskull," I was forced to admit that I was in complete agreement with him!

Keep up the abysmal work, Mark!

"Hilarious, the leftists occupy common ground with the most vile and despicable group of people this coutry has"

Um, not "leftists" - most Americans, red staters and blue, believe the war in Iraq was a mistake. Why do you continue to smear the American people? Are you calling us all racists? It's just like you Bushians to play the race card ;)

I'll bet if you ask the KKK'ers, you'd find that most are Bush supporters. So does that somehow mean that Bush supporters in general are KKK sympathizers?

Well, I guess Mark doesn't have anything else to write about. With his cult leader totally awol while the MidEast goes up in flames, with democratic Lebanon being assaulted by the weapons of a superpower, with Iraq bombings this week being the worst of the entire conflict, and with oil set to jump $80, what else can Mark do but smear America?

Hey Conservatives!!
Well if it's allys you guys are looking for these people call themselve yours.

http://cofcc.org/photoalbum/displayimage.php?album=lastup&cat=0&pos=1

http://cofcc.org/photoalbum/displayimage.php?album=topn&cat=3&pos=1

http://cofcc.org/photoalbum/displayimage.php?album=topn&cat=3&pos=3

http://cofcc.org/photoalbum/displayimage.php?album=random&cat=0&pos=-11

And here you can learn a little more about YOUR friends.

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/CCCitizens.asp?xpicked=3&item=12

Now are we to assume because these guys agree with you on flag burning and immagration that you are allied in everything?

One way to determine how close you've come to hitting a nerve on these sorry leftists is to watch for their reaction. Mark, I don't know if you figured how close your mortar shell hit, but there are leftist body parts everywhere. Great shot. Eugenics-->Planned Parenthood-->Abortion on Demand-->Genetic Engineering--->Stem Cell research--->Master Race--->Nazis --->KKK--->Democrats. Bird of a feather...

"Um, not "leftists" - most Americans, red staters and blue, believe the war in Iraq was a mistake. Why do you continue to smear the American people?"

Right, I'm feeling squirrelly today anyway, so might as well channel Foamy the Squirrel.

Warning -- mucho profanity follows. If such offends y'all, skip. If the moderator thinks it don't belong, feel free to take it down.

'Most Americans believe', huh? Oh really? Says who? You? Are you a fuckin' mind reader? Do you have a big shiny bald head and sit in a fuckin' wheelchair and listen to what's inside other peoples' heads all day? How the fuck do you keep losing if you really have such big-ass magic powers, then? Are you really that stupid? You can magically know, for one-hundred-percent certain, what the majority of the American electorate is really feeling, and yet you still can't win one single fuckin' election?

You are full. of. shit! You are a self-important pathetic loser whose ego is so large that it could be used as a sombrero for the entire planet Earth! Because you believe what you wwnt to believe, you automatically *have* to have everybody else supposedly feeling the same as you! News flash, ya *moron*! You have been losing for six. fuckin'. straight. *years!* Never mind all the polls, and the editorials, and all the stupid fuckin' grinning media idiots behind their fuckin' desks trying to tell the people what they should fuckin' believe while they keep one eye on their ratings bars and the other eye on their big fat checks from Michael fucking Soros! It don't fuckin' work! Every time you guys actually have to go out to the polls and actually get real live votes from real live voters, you fuckin' lose!

The people really all believe like you believe, huh? Then how come all your favorite politicians still haven't been elected President yet, huh? Riddle me that, Batman! And until you can, shut the fuck up!

/Foamy off

Was this debate? Fuck no. It was a pure-on emotion-filled rant. But hey, it made me feel better and it might amuse a reader or two, so, I'm not feelin' too guilty about it.

"Um, not "leftists" - most Americans, red staters and blue, believe the war in Iraq was a mistake. Why do you continue to smear the American people?"

Right, I'm feeling squirrelly today anyway, so might as well channel Foamy the Squirrel.

Warning -- mucho profanity follows. If such offends y'all, skip. If the moderator thinks it don't belong, feel free to take it down.

'Most Americans believe', huh? Oh really? Says who? You? Are you a fuckin' mind reader? Do you have a big shiny bald head and sit in a fuckin' wheelchair and listen to what's inside other peoples' heads all day? How the fuck do you keep losing if you really have such big-ass magic powers, then? Are you really that stupid? You can magically know, for one-hundred-percent certain, what the majority of the American electorate is really feeling, and yet you still can't win one single fuckin' election?

You are full. of. shit! You are a self-important pathetic loser whose ego is so large that it could be used as a sombrero for the entire planet Earth! Because you believe what you wwnt to believe, you automatically *have* to have everybody else supposedly feeling the same as you! News flash, ya *moron*! You have been losing for six. fuckin'. straight. *years!* Never mind all the polls, and the editorials, and all the stupid fuckin' grinning media idiots behind their fuckin' desks trying to tell the people what they should fuckin' believe while they keep one eye on their ratings bars and the other eye on their big fat checks from Michael fucking Soros! It don't fuckin' work! Every time you guys actually have to go out to the polls and actually get real live votes from real live voters, you fuckin' lose!

The people really all believe like you believe, huh? Then how come all your favorite politicians still haven't been elected President yet, huh? Riddle me that, Batman! And until you can, shut the fuck up!

/Foamy off

Was this debate? Fuck no. It was a pure-on emotion-filled rant. But hey, it made me feel better and it might amuse a reader or two, so, I'm not feelin' too guilty about it.

Chuckg,

How does it feel to be nothing more than entertainment? And really bad entertainment at that...can someone please turn the channel to Teletubbies now?

LOL...Putz!

"How does it feel to be nothing more than entertainment?"

Well, given that's exactly what I set out to be when I posted today, it feels pretty. damn. fucking. good. Like I just nailed a bullseye.

Thank you, and fuck off.

Chuckg,

Your diaper must be wet, you might want to go get mom to change it.

peace be upon you

Oh, come on. If you're going to abandon your pretense of moral hoity-toity and get down in the gutter right alongside with the irreverent jackass what is at present pretending to channel the spirit of a psychotically angry cartoon squirrel (who is not my creation but a product of the genius of the folks at Ill Will Press, for the record), then the very least you could do is actually be entertaining about it. Come on, think of an insult that actually shows some talent above the two-year-old.

zzzzzzzzzzzz

Geez, is there no monitoring of this site any more? i.e. Chuckg, the Rev.

I have been to a lot of National Parks recently and have noticed several sites set upand labeled as First Amendment Rights Area.

In Yellowstone they were protesting the treatment of bison that leave the park grounds. They can be shot.

In Rocky Mountain they are protesting a proposal to allow controlled hunting of elk to thin out the herd.

So I am not really suprised that the KKK is going to be allowed to demonstrate. It's like the way I deal with the very Reverend. Let him rant and ignore him.

zzzzzzzzzzzz

Finally, a leftist says something that reflects their intelligence...

In Yellowstone they were protesting the treatment of bison that leave the park grounds. They can be shot.

I hear they taste pretty good, too. Them savage injuns used to kill 'em by the thousands. Made Teepee's out of their hides.

In Rocky Mountain they are protesting a proposal to allow controlled hunting of elk to thin out the herd.

Nothing wrong with thinning the herd. Too bad we can't do it with libs.

So I am not really suprised that the KKK is going to be allowed to demonstrate.

You forgot "brothers." Like in "KKK brothers."

It's like the way I deal with the very Reverend. Let him rant and ignore him.

And, oh, it really hurts. No, really...

Chuckg,

I prefer Vertigo, and Warren Ellis' stuff myself, its much funnier than the crap you're trying to pull off, if you really want to rant, then get a gun, and go to Iraq and shoot something, i'm sure they would appreciate the help.

Well, I see we have another potty mouth showing us, yet again, the intellectual limits of the neorad positions. F this, F that, it seems to be what passes for political discourse within the ranks of the far far radical Left.

No, before Tom and others start whining about being tarred with the same brush they placidly sit back to watch others wield, not all Democrats have to resort to vulgarisms in efforts to communicate. But then not all Democrats are fever-swamp radicals, either.

So, what do we have here? There is the oft-claimed but seriously flawed assertion that most of the country thinks going into Iraq was a mistake. Wrong. Admitting that some mistakes have been made in the war is a far cry from saying we never should have gone in the first place. It is, actually, merely admitting that this is a war, and wars by definition are impossible to predict and impossible to make mistake-free.

Also, most Americans understand that Iraq was not a static situation. (Chucky, that means it was not an unchanging or unchangeable situation.) We understand that it is not and never could be a case of waiting three years and having Iraq unchanged at this time in 2006. We understand that waiting till 2006 would have presented us with a whole new collection of problems, a collection which very possibly would include attacks on US soil using chemical, biological, or even radiation weapons.

If the Left really could access a parallel universe, one in which they could look at life on a split screen with the current situation on one side and what would have happened on the other, they might be in a position to make some valid claims. But even then they would have to admit,should they decide to give fairness a try, that in 2002 we had to make decisions based on what we knew at that time, and on what were reasonable projections of both possible and likely scenarios for the future based on that information.

Right now, on the side of finding the work we are doing in Iraq both valuable and increasingly successful, we have the military who are there, most of the leaders of the country, and millions of people who see the advantage of establishing a secular representative government in the heart of the Middle East.

On the other side we have foul-mouthed insulters like Chucky, the Usual Suspects of rabid Bush-haters who would revile him for finding the cure for cancer, Cindy Sheehan, the Hollywood self-appointed elite, gutless politicians who don't even consider the ramifications of either winning or losing in Iraq but merely want to use the war to further their own aims, and now the KKK.

So why get so wound up about pointing out the company you are keeping, oozing eye and potty-mouth?

I think Matt made a good point. And the ever-oozing eye proved it by dragging DAvid Duke into it. A nut rejected by his party, dredged up out of history, to prove....what? That the Republican Party has had some idiots in it, too? Big surprise, TEO---as if we have not already acknowledged, ad nauseum, that as long as any political party consists of human beings it will have some wackos in it. The difference is, YOUR party is being absorbed by its lunatic fringe, and increasingly defined by it, while OURS rejects and/or ignores ours, keeping them out there on the fringe where they belong.

zzzzzzzzzzz... oh, uh sorry. Did I miss anything?

were you saying something Chucky? Yes, right... some profanity-laced gurgling about "mind reading."

Anyway, sorry to rock your carefully constructed world. But don't feel bad - blowing a gasket like that is a normal reaction in the face of clear evidence that you've been living in a fantasy world with an ever dwindling minority of Faux News viewers. You're just suffering from a case of "reality whiplash" (and its related syndrome "Realitus Isa Bitchus"). You'll be OK - just breathe deeply, and when you're ready, slowly open your eyes.

I dont think some people here read.

Mark wrote: "every single shade of lunacy has now signed up." "a movement taking in all sorts of diverse opinions."

He was NOT saying all liberals or all peace activits are part of the KKK. He was saying, here is another nutjob group joining the left peace movement.

What a bunch of over sensative little girls here.

Almiranta,

You're lost baby, go back to sleep...Chucky isn't left, and I doubt he is even right, he is just lonely...but thanks for confirming my previous hunch that you just don't read anything you write about. LOL

Actually, Chuck's just amazed, and amused, that you all totally forgot what you originally came here for and got locked up arguing with a guy who admitted from post one that he was completely taking the piss. Seriously, who's the bigger fool, the fool what imitates a psychotic cartoon squirrel or the fools who all devote so much effort to rebutting him?

And yes, what I did does fall, directly, within the definition of 'trolling'. *shrugs* Well, we all fall to the Dark Side once in a while. I'll try not to make a habit of it. *g*

Almiranta,

Can you believe what swamp of meaninglessness Brown Eye Open has fallen into? Total random words with zero thought. Mark really knew how to get 'em going.

What a bunch of over sensative little girls here.

Well put, Butch.

Any KKK rally in the name of the "anti-war" movement is just a way for the KKK to make their message sound more appealing to the American public. The real reason the permit was granted was because it is not only precedent of the Supreme Court, but is required by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. No matter how appalling the message that the Ku Klux Klan brings, a peaceful rally cannot be denied on the grounds of free speech. It has nothing to do with any so-called "left-wing" anti-war movements.

Give a little Help to your Italian friends

Our country has a new government which pretend itself democratic but is trying to move into a socialist dictatorship.

Violations of the rules of the democracy happens every day and the magistracy is used as an arm against the political opponents.
The Communists that are 60% of the coalition of left want to vote against the financing of the military missions in Afghanistan and Iraq, sorry if we will not be able to respect the promises made to your country.
The commanders of our Internal Security Services who helped the CIA to capture a terrorist are now moved from their role and inquires because what they did has been considered illegal.
The government has moved the commanders of the financial police that were inquiring on the red cooperatives.
These are some of the things that happen in our country.
Please read our blog for further information, if you want publish our appeal, take it read to your politicians, help us to convince our politicians to respect the democracy.

God Bless You

So, Mark, have you officially joined the Army of God yet, or are you still just a cheerleader form the sidelines? They oppose abortion and hate gays--on religious grounds, even--and therefore are just like you--abortion clinic bombings, applause for the killing of gays, the whole shebang. Eric Rudolph? He's your good buddy--a right-wing Christian terrorist who loves Christ and hates abortion. Just liek you, Marky! After all, you and all your Big Tent buddies have laid down with these dogs by your *snicker* "logic," so these are your people, right? These people are the end result of your ideas, right? You have a whole lot in common with them, so you must be one of them, right?

Go ahead and pretend that's not the argument you're making. No, really, go ahead. I love to watch you flail.

Almiranta says:

"There is the oft-claimed but seriously flawed assertion that most of the country thinks going into Iraq was a mistake. Wrong. Admitting that some mistakes have been made in the war is a far cry from saying we never should have gone in the first place."

Oh really?

All polls sourced to http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

ABC News/Wash Post Poll 6/22 - 25:
"All in all, considering the costs to the United States versus the benefits to the United States, do you think the war with Iraq was worth fighting, or not?"

Worth Fighting: 40%
Not Worth Fighting: 58%

CNN Poll 6/14 - 15
"In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?"

A Mistake: 54%
Not A Mistake: 42%

LA Times/Bloomberg Poll 6/24 - 27
"All in all, do you think the situation in Iraq was worth going to war over, or not?"

Worth It: 41%
Not Worth It: 54%

Almiranta says:

"There is the oft-claimed but seriously flawed assertion that most of the country thinks going into Iraq was a mistake. Wrong. Admitting that some mistakes have been made in the war is a far cry from saying we never should have gone in the first place."

Oh really?

All polls sourced to http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

ABC News/Wash Post Poll 6/22 - 25:
"All in all, considering the costs to the United States versus the benefits to the United States, do you think the war with Iraq was worth fighting, or not?"

Worth Fighting: 40%
Not Worth Fighting: 58%

CNN Poll 6/14 - 15
"In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?"

A Mistake: 54%
Not A Mistake: 42%

LA Times/Bloomberg Poll 6/24 - 27
"All in all, do you think the situation in Iraq was worth going to war over, or not?"

Worth It: 41%
Not Worth It: 54%

This is a typical argument for mark...

Here's the mark lib for his arguments:

[insert radical group] sides with the left about [insert issue].
How does it feel, liberals, to be with [insert same radical group].

Need I bring in Fred Phelps and gay issues?

This is a typical argument for mark...

Here's the mark lib for his arguments:

[insert radical group] sides with the left about [insert issue].
How does it feel, liberals, to be with [insert same radical group].

Need I bring in Fred Phelps and gay issues?

All polls sourced to...

What about the ones in November 2000, 2002, 2004. Those seem to be the ones that like ya know, totally count, dude.

Donkeys continue to try to operate on polls, normally called the Clinton approach to government. Polls said Dean was unstoppable. Polls said Gore would win in a walk. Polls said Kerry had it in the bag. Polls said that dingbat Busby in CA50 would win. Except for one small problem, the only ones that count told the opposite story.

Or is there a President Gore or President Kerry that I missed somewhere? Polls. Believe them if you must, and go down to defeat again in November as you most assuredly will.

Anybody can repent and be saved,right? As long as these folks are not only anti-war, but pro-Peace, this may be a sign that non-violence is taking hold. Peace

Rev Scaremonger -

"Polls said Dean was unstoppable. Polls said Gore would win in a walk. Polls said Kerry had it in the bag. Polls said that dingbat Busby in CA50 would win."

Um, I'm not aware of any polls that can ever indicate that someone is "unstoppable", especially with months to go before an election. In any case, polling in the days just before the Iowa caucus clearly showed Kerry was surging and had surpassed Dean. Whadya know, the polls accurately reflected voter sentiments.

No, polls didn't show that Gore would "win in a walk." In the days leading up to election day, almost all polls showed a slim Gore lead well within the margin of error. Whadya know - Gore won by 0.5% of the popular vote. Once again, the polls accurately reflected voter sentiment.

No, no polls I have ever seen showed "Kerry had it in the bag". Neither Kerry nor Bush ever built a large lead in the polls from July onward. In the last few days leading up to election day, nearly all the polls showed it a statistical dead heat, or Bush with a very slight lead. Well, whadya know, Bush won by a slim 2.4% (lowest margin of victory by a sitting president ever) - the polls once again fairly accurately reflected the thinking of the population.

Polls are a snapshot of what the voters think at a given moment. Polls cannot predict what they will think in the future. Right now, and for the past 6-8 months, a clear majority of the American people feel that the Iraq invasion was not worth it. That could change - in a year or two, a majority might feel the exact opposite. In any case, I was not predicting the outcome of any future elections surrounding the issue of the Iraq war - I was merely refuting Almiranta's assertion that most Americans do not currently think Iraq wasn't worth it.

I was merely refuting

But you didn't refute anything. The polls are worthless. They are notoriously biased. They routinely poll people whose opinions they already know and avoid those with opinions they don't like. They do push-polling. They word questions to get the answers they want.

Most people I know, if approached by a pollster, would say, "get lost, you creep." Of course, most of the people I know are conservative - well, based on my poll anyway.

Nice try at a backtrack though. Wrong, but nice try anyway.

Aarontime,

Its a well known fact that the MSM do not currently think Iraq wasn't worth it. They are also the ones who create and finance the polls. The polls that I have seen ask questions designed to get the response the media want. The other method is to skew the sampling toward the left, which has been shown to be the case on numerous occassions. So we read your 'polls' with a high degree of sckepticism.

BTW: I note that you conveniently avoided answering my question on the Media Bias thread which asked why you and your leftists friends always take the position of defending the position of the Muslim terrorists.

Aaron,

You should be ashamed of yourself, you know very well that 'reality has a known liberal bias'

Now, get back to coddling your terrorist, while pissing on a burning flag, and eating embryos...uhm, I mean future people, I mean voters.

Phnxbmed,

Seems to me that the conservative position of a war between the ideals of a militant-East and a liberal-West is the same line OBL was pushing. So why is your position the same as terrorists?

I feel like doing a Mark-lib...

[Insert radical group or person] supports [insert hot button issue].

[Insert individual or group of people] supports [same hot button issue].

[Same individual or group] is of the same mindset as [same radical group or person].

Lets try it:

Fred Phelps supports banning gay marriage.

Mark Noonan and other conservatives support banning gay marriage.

Mark Noonan and other conservatives are of the same mindset as Fred Phelps.

Don't you guys see how flawed that logic is?

Don't you guys see how flawed that logic is?

Sure we do. Who made it up again? It does look like the template for leftist moral equivalency mantras. Nah, you just made it up, right?

Aarontime:

And historians tell us that no more than 40% of colonists supported the American Revolution in 1776. Plus we know that a solid majority of Americans opposed entry into WWII as late as November 1941.

Simply goes to show that a majority can be wrong about the potential cost/benefit of a war.

Georgia, Fascist not conservative. Bill Clinton is a conservative. Peace

Here is a typical Lefty error by errortime:
"Gore won by 0.5% of the popular vote."

See how sneakily he slipped that in? I don't know if he is so deluded he thinks the popular vote means a win, or if he just likes to keep regurgitating one of the favorite Left meals of a few years ago---guess it still tastes pretty good to the devotees.

First, Gore won the popular vote, based on the votes that were counted---which is NOT a "win" except maybe for the ego. The funny thing is, when your guy wins the popular vote, you say it means something. When our guy wins the popular vote, you say it is meaningless. But there is no accurate "popular vote" because once a state gets a vote count that cannot be changed, regarding its Electoral College commitment, it stops counting votes like military ballots and absentee ballots.

That worked out great for you guys in 2000, because you were able to toss out so many military ballots and then claim Gore won the popular vote. But we will never know if he did or not.

But when we talk about requiring that all correctly executed ballots be counted, no matter whether or not the tally will affect the Electoral College commitment of the state in question, it is the Left rising up in its patented OUTRAGE.

I'd guess, given the military disgust with Gore, that their votes, if counted, might very easily have given Bush the "popular vote" in 2000 as well as the Electoral College.

steve, I don't know if you work or not, or ever have. Your rhetoric is distinctly Welfare-Kid sounding.

But if you have ever gotten a paycheck, how many of those checks were from the "poor"?

If you rent (just a guess..) is your house owned by someone who would be classified as "poor"?

If you own a house, was it built by someone who would be called "poor"?

Ever go to movies? How many of them were made, or distributed, by the "poor"?

The guy who owns the trucking company that ships your organic lettuce and Birkenstocks might qualify as "rich". How do you think it would be better to discourage him from building a nice big efficient trucking company---and employing hundreds?

You seem to have a computer---did some "poor" guy build it in his cardboard box on the street, or was it put together by a company owned by someone who is "rich"? And who, by the way, is supporting all those people who build, market, sell, and ship those computers.

Even if you are as virtuous as you claim, I'll bet the bike you ride (instead of driving, you know) was built by a (gasp!!) CORPORATION---whose executives might be called "Rich" by your standards.

So if you get rid of all those who are "rich" (which, going by usual neorad standards, are all who have more than you do) then how is your life going to be better? If no one can benefit from his own labor, investment risk, creativity, or vision, and if the successful are punished by having their revenue confiscated by a totalitarian Leftist state to be redistributed, just how do you think the economy, and the country, will benefit?

Name one socialist country that has flourished. Just one. Get back to me on that---I don't have time to wait.

In the meantime, look up the term "pyramid scheme".

When all else fails connect the Left with the KKK, right Mark?

Connecting the Left with peace wasn't workin to well right? LOL.

Mark,

Grand Kleagle was the title held by the senior DEMOCRAT senator from Virginia Robert KKK Byrd. I think Grand Dragon was the title you were looking for.

From the vitriolic comments on this topic from the lefties I would say you have hit a nerve.

Funny they would be upset holding hands with the KKK in an anti-war demonstration when they have been voting an "x" KKK Kleagle into office for 60 years...yeah I know lefties your gonna say Byrd left the KKK years ago. But, didn't Byrd filibuster the Civil Rights Amendment...yeah he quit the KKK...right, I know, Uh-Huh.

"Georgia, Fascist not conservative. Bill Clinton is a conservative. Peace"

SUSA,

Perhaps you should stop and think - if people as out of it as the KKK are ant-war, then just perhaps the anti-war concept isn't as valid as you thought?

Just a suggestion, you know? The unexamined life isn't worth living, Susa...

The donkeys find a solution to their "problem"

That fella on the right, why that's Grand Kleagle Bobby "String 'em up" Byrd, a fine example of a DemocRAT.

The donkeys find a solution to their "problem"

That fella on the right, why that's Grand Kleagle Bobby "String 'em up" Byrd, a fine example of a DemocRAT.

if people as out of it as the KKK are ant-war, then just perhaps the anti-war concept isn't as valid as you thought?

You are using the most insane logic ever....and for you that is saying a lot. Quakers also hold that position. Are they then "invalid".

Step back Noonan. I know the testosterone on this blog is running high. But you aren't putting your life on the line for your religous fanaticism.

The unexamined life isn't worth living

Explain yourself, then. I mean, if you have the time to do so between supporting abortion clinic bombers who, like you, oppose abortion because of religious reasons. Or perhaps you should stop and think--if people as out of it as the Army of God are anti-abortion, then just perhaps the anti-abortion concept isn't as valid as you thought?

Don't get mad at me, Noonan. I just quoted your very own logic--in your very own words--right back at you. If you want to get mad at that, get mad at yourself.

[i]Chuckg,

Your diaper must be wet, you might want to go get mom to change it.

peace be upon you[/i]

And who wanted to watch Teletubbies, now? Hmmm?

You are using the most insane logic ever

So is Ashcan't a Nazi or a white supremist? Or both? I think it must be Nazi, since I think they had a little "broke-ze-back" going on during those long campaigns of exterminating the evil Joooooz. So Ashcan't, you got the hots for Adolph or Bobby Byrd? Which one? Or Both?

Mark, The KKK are still the KKK. Your the person you should be examining your life. Your grasping at straws, perhaps we should stop wearing white because the KKK wears white, right Mark? If the KKK is doing it maybe we should rethink wearing white, right Mark? Your stupid. You don't know yet how far below you are to me, you should be looking up to me and listening to the wisdom I give you, not the other way around.

The KKK are still the KKK.

Another stroke of pure genius from the Left. Let's try some others out using that template:

"The Powerless Democrats are still the Powerless Democrats"

"The Clueless Left is still the Clueless Left"

Yea, nice template you've got there...

perhaps we should stop wearing white because the KKK wears white

Must every attempt you Leftys make result in some stupid strawman equivalency? Mark said that the KKK has joined sides with your bunch of anti-war Lefties. Is that not the truth? He then said that perhaps, if your "movement" is attractings such cretins as the KKK (of which a prominent Democrat used to be a Grand Kleagle), perhaps you should re-examine your movement. Since that requires an actual look at reality, you eschew that and resort to these stupid straw man "arguments," which are, by debate standards, fallacies. Finally, he asked how it "tasted" to have to consider the KKK in your fruit salad? Well? Does the KKK agree with you? How does if feel? Who else does? I can think of a few:

Hamas, Hezbollah, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, that kook president of Iran, and of course Dominique de Villepin, who is a man, to name a few.

"Since that requires an actual look at reality, you eschew that and resort to these stupid straw man "arguments," which are, by debate standards, fallacies."

Your talking about debate standards, Rev? What a joke...

I find it very ironic you accussed me of being a hateful person when you're the one spending all day in here insulting "democRATs."

By the way, by debate standards, the "equivalent" argument is good. It's why it keeps being used. KKK is not a barometer of who is right and wrong in this country. I'm sure neo-nazi's are for building a fence and deporting all illegals. That in itself does not make the position wrong. Rational people can argue that policy without having to resort to comparing people to neo-nazis.

Your talking about debate standards, Rev? What a joke...

Transparently, you resort to insult rather than refute the statement - because you can't.

I find it very ironic you accussed me of being a hateful person when you're the one spending all day in here insulting "democRATs."

"accussed?" Is that a Freudian slip or a typo? I think you have me wrong. I don't hate DemocRATs, I despise them. If they were on fire, I wouldn't piss on them to put them out. Hope that clears it up for you.

By the way, by debate standards, the "equivalent" argument is good.

Again, you display your ignorance. Equivalence "arguments" are distortions of the truth; finding equalities where none exist. These is a gigantic difference between analogy where the work "like" is often used, and equivalence "arguments" where "is" is the operative word. And as one of your heroes once said, "It all depends on what the meaning of the word IS is." You also prove another point, leftists, lacking any real logical basis, resort to (and believe it valid) moral equivalences to rationalize their "logic." This is also called a "slippery slope" argument and is indeed another fallacy.

KKK is not a barometer of who is right and wrong in this country.

Sure they are. They're bad people with some pretty screwed up ideas. And now they're agreeing with you guys. You may not like it, but they do.

Rational people can argue that policy without having to resort to comparing people to neo-nazis.

Walk like a duck, quack like a duck, yer a duck. Or as a singer once said, "You brung her, you dance with her."

"Transparently, you resort to insult rather than refute the statement - because you can't."

"Equivalence "arguments" are distortions of the truth; finding equalities where none exist."

I'll tackle both of these at once. I did refute your argument by saying the "equivalence" argument is a good one. KKK protesting the Iraq war is the equivalent of them agreeing with Minutemen and anti-illegal immigration forces. The same with anti-abortion forces. In debate standards, citing that the KKK agrees with an opinion of your opponent is not a good argument. As I said before, it's weak and lazy and rather dull-minded.

Which is why the KKK is not a barometer of who is right and wrong in the country. They often attach themselves to debates that reasonable people can argue about.

"I don't hate DemocRATs, I despise them. If they were on fire, I wouldn't piss on them to put them out. Hope that clears it up for you."

Again, I find it very ironic that you have accused me of being a hateful person.