Thursday, May 2, 2013

My Back Pages; Chapter 11: A March March in DC or The Left Becomes Exanimate







Fuck chronology. We'll piece it together eventually. Meanwhile here is a memory from 1982 - some events within a larger series of events that soured me on leftist politics. They may seem petty and personal to the hearer but how do we "decide" what our politics will be? Once one commits to a point of view is it a life-time dedication, a bargain one makes with oneself? Is it true, Lou, that "anyone who ever had a heart - they wouldn't turn around and break it; and that anyone who ever played a part, they wouldn't turn around and hate it?" Seems right to me - the people I grew with hang on to their 60's notions as if losing a cherished world view is the equivalent of losing one's face or name.....

.....It is March 1982, a year into Ronald Reagan's presidency. I was having a second serious enthrallment with leftist political activism, admittedly more due to circumstances of timing rather than any sort of deep intellectual/philosophical growth or rebirth. You see, in 1980 my fledgling (five-year) fling with the Pharmacy field finished fairly spectacularly, finally careening headlong off a cliff in a fiery crash-and-burn career-ending, marriage-ruining finale. But that's another story. I found myself suddenly single, and working as a clerk in a Harvard Sq. record store (fired forthwith for failure to find filchers). Not wanting to let my pharmaceutical facility fester, I also volunteered at two phone-in "hot-lines": the Poison Control center at Boston's Children's Hospital; and "Project Place" a sort of hippie crisis community center that had been operating since the '60s. They also used to run a free ambulance service, and one time saved my life. So, to repay the debt, add some richness to my disconsolate, penurious and now humdrum life without the drug bonanza available to pharmacists, (and hopefully get laid), I saddled up. Left wing politics and helping the homeless were not honestly my top priorities, but were not at all anathema to me yet, either.

At Project Place I worked the phones once or twice a week and quickly became their resident drug expert, helping to train new volunteers. At one time the phone answerers talked folks down from bum acid trips, but by the 80's the counselors were more social workers for the homeless and semi-destitute, and ad hoc shrinks for those having relationships problems. The bulk of the hotline calls though were midnight phone masturbators, neurotic insomniacs, or just lonely or frightened people with little to do.

Most of the dozen or so paid staff and the 50-100 active volunteers were dedicated leftists, the majority female. Nice. What I did not realize that in my absence since the early '70s, the fairer half of "the movement" had "gone lezzie" and I had as much chance of seduction with most Place girls as with the neighborhood kittycat. More with the cat, actually. Not all were gay, though, and I did score a new girlfriend and other friends and eventually met Sarah, my wife, through a friend of a PP friend.

So, it was through that association that I participated in efforts opposing US policy in Central America, in particular El Salvador, which at the time was having a little right-wing death-squad problem. It was to me a sort of Vietnam War redux, so I delved into the policy issue with fervor and outrage. Barry, born again bellicose baby!

So, 3/26/82 it's me and my friends on a big bus to DC to take part in the CISPES (Committee in Support of El Salvador) protest march. Holy 1969! I was excited. On one side - the righteous masses; on the other- Reagan and the El Sal Prez, the caudillo José Napoleón Duarte (who famously during a speech pulled out a machete and sliced a watermelon in half to illustrate his moderate opponents: green on the outside, red [communist] inside). We the people didn't stand a chance, but that had never stopped me.

After a long overnight bus ride from Boston common where I smoked from my backseat perch to everyone's displeasure, we arrived hungry. At a restaurant with my comrades, I ordered hearty fare: cheese 3-egg-omelette, fried brown potatoes, a rasher of bacon, juice and coffee. To my seatmates, this made me a sort of throwback - apparently my eating habits were a source of bemusement to the lefty ladies who I liked. I thought they were kidding but not so, I was seriously being criticized for being a Neanderthalic unhealthy male. Sue D. had brought her breakfast with her in a plastic container: an un-appealing clotty mass of cottage cheese whose whey part and watery part had apparently separated over the hours. It slid onto her plate in glops. Okay, enjoy.

The "march" was next, a cold blustery two-mile walk to the demo site through uninhabited city canyons (it was a Sunday and DC was as deserted as the moon, save for the demonstrators and the occasional cop car. Shops were shuttered and the route was eerily empty of pedestrians). "Leaders" set the pace and led the walkers in shouted, cadenced slogans such as "the PEOPLE u-NITED will never be da -FEATed" and the corresponding español. The echoed chanting to no-one seemed to me hollow and vapid and quite ineffectual so I discontinued my verbal efforts, drawing squinty, furrowed looks from fellow marchers, as if from a nosy aunt for failing to participate in a church service hymn.

 We approached the rally     (http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/workersvanguard/1982/0302_02_04_1982.pdf )  from the north but found it cordoned off with entry permitted only from the south, we were told, I'm still not sure why. The barrier was flimsy though, merely ribbon suspended from pylons, making it tempting just to duck under.
"You better not" said my companion.
"C'mon" I said "No one cares" making a smooth move under the bunting.
But someone did care.
"Hey!" said an alert sentry, one of the "peace police" whose job it was, evidently, to channel all marchers through the correct entrance.
"You can't come in this way" he remonstrated, denying reality.
"Whadya mean? I just did." turning on the wiseacre style, finally having some fun.
"All demonstrators must enter from the south side" he said in the bland, firm, but essentially unanswering manner of security guards everywhere.
"Fuck that, my feet are tired." I said unmoved. My friends remained on the other side of the barrier, pleading looks on their faces.
As the guard walked toward me I noticed the shoulder banner that identified him as "Peace Police", but clasping a clipboard he looked for all the world like a camp counselor, and about as intimidating. For one insane moment I expected him to blow a whistle and tell me to go back to the bus and wait.
He approached, fingering his belt walky-talky as if packing heat. This cat really takes his job seriously, I thought.
"You have to move now!" his voice cracking.
"Okay, I'll move" I said and stepped 6 inches to one side (thinking somehow of Jackie Gleason as Minnesota Fats in "The Hustler" telling the George C Scott character to move his chair at an all night pool game, and his compliant but defiant 2-inch adjustment). My pals outside the fencing looked forlorn. Now up ran two more peace marshals who seemed eager to use their people skills, but I slipped back through the periphery.

We entered the correct way and I saw that the set-up was less a mass demonstration than a sort of protest bazaar with tables, booths, and vendors stretching back toward where the speeches were to be given. One supposes that after passing some kind of lefty "litmus test", table-station groups paid "rent" to CISPES to help defray the costs. I imagine even the veggie-burger guys had to have some sort of left-wing bona fides.

With time to kill I told my friends I would wander around and meet them back at the veggie-burger stand. At some point I came upon a lady manning (or womanning or womynning) a "Maoist Women" table with various books and tracts for sale (like fish in water no one questioned the incongruity or irony of the event's mercenary flavor). She was striking, if only for her tight-fitting red sweater, emerald eyes, and erect posture. I was eager to see what wisdom or perspective she had to offer. After a brief period I realized she wanted to talk, but not engage in conversation. She spoke in a monotone, looking fixedly at a point in the air. She did not respond to my questions or comments in any understandable way. As she gabbled on in a kind of specialized argot that used key-words such as "dialectic" and "hegemony" repetitiously, I could see that spittle had formed around her lips. The spittle had congealed, describing a white line, and peeling back from that white line was a black line of still older spittle, making a kind of crusty double orb around her working mouth. Her green eyes I noticed now were fully glazed over, giving them a cataracted and unfocused appearance - like one may see in an old dog, or somewhere else I could not quite extract....

The "Maoist Woman" droned on - imperialism this, colonialism that, world domination the other thing, but with no rhythmic sense, as if she were reading aloud from a book she did not comprehend. It struck me as an epiphany! She was psychotic - schizophrenic - like people I had seen on mental wards and in insane asylums! Alarmed, I backed away from Ms. Chock-full-of-nuts. From that point on, I have no recollection of that weekend except a vague impression of anti-climactic soporific speeches.

When I returned to Boston, I looked in The Globe for coverage (The Globe was still a decent rag then). It was there, but buried deep - 20,000 March in DC to End War in El Salvador - just a wire service pick up and there was not even the usual accompanying "local angle" human interest piece such as Jamaica Plain family rides to Washington to Promote Peace in Their Homeland. Nothing. It hit me then - what a complete waste of time this had become - as rote as a post-sneeze Gesundheit, and about as effective in preventing that which preceded it.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Think Progress - a Stinking Pit of Hate Masquerading as "Progressives"

Repost with typeface unscrambled
Italics connote quoted comments.....

Last week, there was one of those stories that briefly flare on-line in which a pol, or someone tie-able to one, utters an indiscretion (on tape or otherwise), which is picked up and reduplicated in hopes of eliciting embarrassment from the target, and an epiphany from the public, in which hypocrisy and mendacity is sharply illustrated by the political foes of the storytellers.


     This time the gudgeon was Jay Townsend,  a campaign spokesman and self-styled "communications coach" for freshman  Rep. Nan Hayworth (R-NY), who flagrantly tweeted or facebooked valuable lessons in the use of figures of speech, including metaphor and both senses of parrhesia: the speaker makes full use of his 1st amendment rights and the speaker seeks forgiveness for doing same.  Perhaps thinking he was still posting  as mstrRight on Breitbart, Mr. Townsend boyishly blurted out his latest campaigning ambition, in which "acid" would be hurled at "some [unnamed] female democratic senators."  An instant classic.

     Even a simple soul unschooled in rhetorical devices would, dollars to donuts, apply common sense and assume, given the context of a word jockey talking oppo, that Townsend was speaking figuratively. The folks over at ThinkProgress.com and their battery of commenters however strongly prefer a literal interpretation, and cite Townsend's words as compelling proof that Republicans, who are axiomatically "waging a war on women" are now seriously considering adapting Taliban methods as well, exposing their callous nature and lack of sympathy for actual victims of honor crimes such as acid attacks. The ThinkProgress article thoughtfully provides a link to an ABC Good Morning America story that implies acid attacks on women are mostly committed by total strangers, and that random bunging of caustic liquids is a growing problem.

 (TP, founded in 2004 as an outlet of the think-tank Center for American Progress. It's long time editor-in-chief, Faiz Shakir, was tapped by Nancy Pelosi just last month to be her "director of New Media". TP claims to "provide a forum that advances progressive ideas and policies". )
(Note: Mr Townsend's head has since rolled for his indiscretion.)

The message board crackled that day with (mostly female) indignation:

disgusting

Bobby Kendrick   Top Commenter · Works at Orange County Health Care Agency
OMG what is wrong with these GOP thugs?

Anger:

Addy Mcquiston ·  Top Commenter · Works at PaintSome Pottery
This man is a disgusting piece of trash.

May I suggest bile? For that is what I am filled with upon reading this stupid, stupid man's words.

Even Fury:
What in all the name of all that is holy is wrong with this man? I am speechless with rage!

The topic seemed to take on great import:
Listen, and understand. The GOP is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

Poster "Zoey Kay" had an explanation:
They became hateful the day that someone who is "not like them" won the Presidency. All those still hiding in their closet of hate suddenly started coming out.

"Pam Palmer" fairly bristled with anger, waxing hard into calls for harsh punishment:   Sounds like this guy advocates some of those 'middle-eastern remedies' to deal with Democratic women. I have never heard anything so disgusting and reprehensible coming from someone in the political arena in my entire life. This guy should be arrested immediately and charged with inciting hate crimes. There is obviously nothing too low for a right-winger to sink to. This shows the world just what kind of people they are; dangerous radical extremists who should be locked up.

Okay.

This fellow fails to see the irony in his call for revenge:

Michael Williams ·  Top Commenter
Anyone need any more evidence re: the Taliban/Republican mindset?
Republican=Taliban.
When do we "hurl" ammunition at these cretins?

Another man is looking around for his lost post:

ThinkProgess removes post? Seems my earlier post has been removed. Freedom of Speech as long as it is the correct speech?

But it's how the TP board contributors deal with doubters that is the shocking subject of this essay. The intellectual dishonesty of the article's author, Annie Rose-Strasser, regarding the nature and origin of "honor crimes" compelled me to join the fray that day, being careful to keep the tone unprovocative:


"Hello.
ThinkProgress finally alludes to the horrific practice of acid tossing, even conceding that it is "gender-based violence". Gone unmentioned is the society that perpetrates these crimes (Islam) and the supporting body of laws, which authorizes or excuses such backwards forms of "justice" like acid mutilation and "honor killings" (Sharia law). So the real war on women continues to be ignored by self-identified progressives. 
Taking a little piece of poorly worded overheated written rhetoric and conjuring up some kind of offence is an obvious stretch of the truth for politic purposes. Making it into a crime is just over the top. Way over. Read the words of the guy [posting] under me here, Robert Levi Marenda: "Jay Townsend must be charged with inciting violence and a hate crime. It is time to take off the kid gloves with these fascist Republicans and enforce the laws that are already on the books. Why should any of us obey any of our nation's laws if those laws do not apply to Republicans. We the People demand the rule of law be restored."
Well, over here I guess this is just a run-of-the-mill comment, but from the point-of-view of a normal sensible person, it borders on the psychotic.
(And by the way, I don't suppose any of you guys listen to the John Bachelor show, but just to tell you Nan Hayworth is a frequent guest and she is well spoken and a very nice lady.)
Please, people, do your homework on Islamic societies treatment of women and maybe you would give these injustices, real injustices, some attention from the left.
Thank you."

My observation was not well received.

The first responder at least tried to engage:

Barry, you confuse a cultural issue with a religious issue. They are NOT the same. You then extrapolate that anyone who doesn't spout intolerance for a religion that YOU don't agree with, must be pro-honor killing. That is incorrect. You will find that BILLIONS of Muslims do not commit atrocities against women. If I use your reasoning, I can conclude that Christians are terrorists because a few fundamentalists have committed equally atrocious acts.

Condescending and logically flawed, but somewhat on point, which is more than can be said for the ripostes dispensed by one "rmurray" aka Ron Murray, one of TP's "Top Commenters" (how one obtains such a distinction and the benefits, if any, attached, is nowhere to be found on the site, and remains a mystery).  Mr Murray appears to be the most frequent poster, appearing on almost every page as far back as one chooses to go, as there is no index. (A google search for "ron murray" and "thinkprogress yielded over 2400 hits.  We met Ron and his themes in a previous blog post.)

This time he threw out some off hand swipes:

rmurray·  Top Commenter
Ah, yes, the false equivalency deflection argument, used by weak, stupid conservative traitors since time began.

rmurray·  Top Commenter
Miranda (sic), unlike you, Tilles, is a patriotic American. If you want to be a Muslim radical, go for it.

Mr. Murray, and his cohort Robert Levy Marenda, play the role of board enforcers, keeping the forum free of incorrect thought, castigating any doubters with a blistering accusations and vile names.  This duo seemingly envisions themselves as latter day guardians of the truth - self-styled constitutional scholars who set the tone - keeping up the level of hate and anger, and entering the particulars of the case against those they see as traitorous.  They wrap themselves in the cloak of the super-patriot a la The Minutemen far right group of the 60's. The writings of these two gentlemen are notable for their breathtaking close-mindedness, and a complete lack of empathy for those deemed, God help you, Republicans. These are the "Crazy" George Zimmermans of the 'net, always on patrol in their little gated community on the lookout for evil in the form of unPC thoughts, with the same shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later M.O.

Their methods are not that different from usual internet board tactics:

1) Use of derisive appellations often by deliberate alterations of words: rethuglicans repubTEAturds teabaggers

2) Impugning a poster's intelligence, often by pointing out typos or other errors as evidence of their weak intellect: James DeBorde is pitifully uneducated. Stats show that rethuglicans lack the ability for deep thinking. He's a good example of that theory. ...Jack Seckel - You do not get to decide what a political party calls itself. You are a barbarian Jack, and you belong behind bars until you die of old age. You are nothing but a fascist propagandist and we are sick of it. You wingnuts have crossed the line and we aren't going to put up with it anymore.... You're a liar, and stupid enough to think we don't know that. Typical teabagger.... 

3)Accusations of racism: Gwendolyn Lewis-Rouse ·  Top Commenter · Carlow University   Sandra Goetz Stop your lying. You whites are sick people and until you stop your hate your (sic) fools are going right to hell...Sandra Goetz Hell is getting ready for you racsit (sic) haters. ...Edward Bruce Williams Please spear (sic!) me. Your (sic) racist and your (sic) party can not help themselves from their hate toward people that do not look like them... Tea baggers white people in this country have no tolerant (sic) for other races and every day they continue to show us they have no tolerant (sic) for anybody that is not white like them. ...

Edward L Carter II: You can try to walk this back all you want, Rivers, you racist scumbag, you are blaming the victim, AND Rivers (he's not a real Hispanic), you are a racist apologist for Racist Zimmerman, AND a racist apologist for racism in America!

4) Discredit the commenter by using an alleged contradiction or fib: Ron Murray:
Well, that's the Republican way. Ad hominem logical fallacies in place of truth and facts. And if the post were either half or twice as long, the Republicans would still be sub-human pigs at the trough.

5)Accusations of treason - this is big theme here at thinkprogress that I have not encountered before. The language used is odd, with a scripted almost legalistic quality as if the users were attempting to lay down some paper trail or constitutional basis for potential future actions.

Words of Ron Murray (RM):Too bad, jamie. What excuse were you going to come up with for republican treason and destruction of America this time?

Of course they will. They will do anything to hurt President Obama - right up to and including destroying this country to do it.

Freedom of speech? You don't deserve it, you are trying to destroy the Constitution and all American freedoms. go cry some more, pansy.


We see high dudgeon, righteous indignation, and rapid condemnation for even the flimsiest deviation from the grim orthodoxy of the group.  These guys make the Ox Bow Incident lynch mob seem judicious.

RM: I'm with him. My tolerance for the conservative republican Taliban has run out, as has my tolerance for the Constitution-shredding, hateful, bigoted, racist, homophobic, misogynistic, anti-American right in general.
Robert Levi Marenda (RLM): I am also willing to be less tolerant. It is time to stop tolerating Republican criminality. Round them up, lock them up, and throw away the key. I see no reason to further tolerate Republican fascism. It is past due time to restore the rule of law and crack down on conservatism so hard, the Republican Party can hold their meetings behind bars instead of in them.
Marie Harris ·  Top Commenter
Robert Levi Marenda [she is responding to Marenda here-the name shows up when you 'reply' to a post] When? I am more than ready!
RLM: Marie Harris - If I may borrow a bit from Ghostbusters, there will be a sign. I wish I knew what kind of sign, but it will be obvious and the wingnut roundup will begin in earnest


.
Another veiled threat from another "top commenter":
 Listen I know we all look alike to you rednecks but I want to take your guns and kill you, not Obama. he's actually trying to help you. I'm trying to END YOU. For good.

By the way, last year's shooting of Congresswoman Giffords is still attributed to the the tea party or GOP by various TP posters as if they have a seperate reality from the rest of us: Frank F. O'Barski - Shameless. They are painting targets on their enemies, and Gabriele Giffords was just the first victim of their vicious hatred.

There is a propaganda technique called "reversal of reality" and it is generously employed here:
These guys aren't going to stop until there's blood in the streets, they've taken so much now that there insane with greed RM: conservatives are scientifically proven to be stupid in comparison to liberals. conservatives are also fearful, easily manipulated, and make lemmings look independent. And if you doubt that, read your own drivel. 

Robert Levy Marenda's stuff ranges from the merely nasty to the downright menacing:



Maryanna Price ·  Top Commenter · Wolfson College, Oxford
I quit Girl Scouts (Brownies) when I was a kid because we sang lame camp songs that barely rhymed, weren't allowed to build the fires ourselves (the dad chaperones had to do it), only went "camping" in cabins and weren't allowed to have knives. If ONLY I had stuck in longer and gotten my abortion and indoctrination badges!
Reply · 11 · Like · Follow Post · February 24 at 11:32am

Robert Levi Marenda ·  Top Commenter · University of Wisconsin–Whitewater
You probably weren't allowed to have a knife, because the rest of the girl scouts teaches knife safety, and they all learn how to use a knife properly. As for claiming that the Girl Scouts indoctrinates children or advocates for abortion, you should be ashamed of yourself. What kind of immoral excuse for a person are you Maryanna? You make me sick Maryana. You are a disgusting propagandist Maryanna, and you deserve to spend the rest of your life behind bars for it.
Reply · 2 · Like · February 24 at 2:59pm



Robert Levi Marenda ·  Top Commenter · University of Wisconsin–Whitewater
It does appear that there are a lot of Christians, Catholics and other fundies that need to be rounded up, disarmed and deprogrammed, but I don't advocate for shooting any of them, but I am willing to adapt if that's what they want.
Reply · Like · Follow Post · 14 hours ago

Robert Levi Marenda We need to start prosecuting Republican terrorists.

Robert Levi Marenda ·  Top Commenter · University of Wisconsin–Whitewater
Ed McClure - Are you even for real? You bear false witness against Scott Merrick, and then threaten him with "replacement", which sounds like a death threat. I am going to flag your comment and refer it to law enforcement.
Reply · Like · March 10 at 12:34pm



Robert Levi Marenda:  Charles Ivy - You are a disgusting fascist Charles. I hope you get rounded up when we finally decide to make you wingnuts take responsibility for your actions.

Charles Ivy - I am not a Nazi, and you bear false witness against me again by claiming otherwise. You clearly do not know right from wrong. You need to be rounded up, disarmed and deprogrammed. You are sick Charles, you have a diseased mind. Please seek mental health counselling before you hurt yourself or someone else 


Similar words to a different person: You bear false witness against me again. Why are you willing to sin for your ideology? If you don't know right from wrong, please get yourself into a mental health facility when you can be helped. You could very well be mentally ill Gary.

Sometimes Messages are in response to posters whose posts no longer exist, as if they had been purged, but sloppily:

Tim Cavanaugh - You already have commented to a guy who you think is dressed up like a rabbit, therefore you are a liar.

Worse yet, since you have already been told it is not a rabbit suit, you are bearing false witness against me.

Why are you willing to lie and sin for your ideology Tim? Don't you know right from wrong? Just exactly what is wrong with you? 

Robert Levi Marenda: Demanding accountability under the Constitution, and, to nobody's surprise, Clay the fascist little coward lies like a rug about it. Nothing like rightwing traitors in our midst, like little lord clay, the coward of the county. 

Wingnuts can't even read well enough to understand the rights of a free people under the Constitution, as Clay proves with every ignorant, fascist, goose-stepping, Nazi reaction to Americans doing what they've always done: insisting on their rights. Clay, you're a truly unAmerican little freak. 

Robert Levi Marenda :  Clay Stringer claimed the protesters were demanding free education and in so doing, bears false witness against all those students. You can always tell a wingnut by the fact that they are willing to sin for their ideology. They are Satan's children. 

RLM pedantically sums up his philosophy:  Hate is the cornerstone of the Republican propaganda message. Republicans hate woman, blacks, Hispanics, non-Christians, non-Americans, homosexuals, drug users, liberals, progressives, Democrats, socialists, Marxists, communists just to name a few. Republicans are just as hateful as Nazis, and use hate for the same reasons the Nazis did.....

Mr Murray is not above resorting to innuendos, inanities, contradictions, crude vulgarities, or even profanity to make his points:

Sorry for your brain-damaged treason, you loser. Rioting will come, when good Americans have had enough of the right's greed and treason. And, as you always do, you will lose.

rmurray·  Top Commenter (signed in using yahoo)
Jared Pachefsky, his point is the same as your head: empty and stupid, and a lie as well. america is a free Market nation, jared, you ignorant fool. Ask any of your teabagging buddies, if you can get their dicks out of your mouth....
Deal with it , you fat little moron

rmurray·  Top Commenter (signed in using yahoo)
Jim Brai , nobody ever accused you of being decent, because you're not. Racism is antiAmerican, antiChristian, and antiHuman. You're just a piece of walking garbage. Poor white trash, the worst of America. Black people are far superior to you and your kind.


That last insult is beyond the pale.


     Enough! What's going on here? These boys don't really respond, discuss, or even expound on their own philosophy - they issue terse bulletins from on high - wielding "top commenter" badges like some loony-ass internet sheriffs, all in a take-no-prisoners, brook-no-compromise, seek-no-negotiations style.

     To me, it's a study in pure rudeness, simply on a human level.  Normal people just don't treat other people that way. Moreover, a basic sense of humor seems so completely missing (except in its basest form - crude taunts sometimes with the laughs spelled out in capslock) that they seem blind to the irony of their own contradictions and the self important stylistic quirks that render the rantings parodic.  These folks seem so without mirth that they not only lack humor, the lack the ability to recognize it.

     As persuasive political propaganda, this stuff is piss poor. TP fails as a recruitment site because only heretofore hardcore haters will feel kindred to this unwelcoming club.  Persuasion begins with reasoned arguments and a modicum of respect for the adversary if not their point-of-view. Logic and elements of debate are used here, but only in a twisted way that aims to confuse.  I only feel exasperation however - at the breathtaking chutzpah of their blatant  misuse of language.

     This may seem like a modern kind of civil discourse, but it's actually a kind of negative writing.  Here, the writer regards the reader as an opponent, and engages in a kind of lexical sleight-of-hand, or verbal Ju-Jitsu, using words that obfuscate, or have many possible meanings, in order to confuse, deflect attention or keep the user off-balance.  Negative writing is of course the exact opposite of what a good writer does which is to elucidate a concept for the reader or clearly communicate information. A good writer does not need to be vituperative or solicit hatred through emotional manipulation.

     Once one is accustomed to the boorish style and the opprobrious content, the messages and responses here often have a generic nature and a sometimes odd, off-topic quality, as if text were generated by an AI software 'bot responding to key words, occasionally emanating hilariously (or frustratingly) inapplicable remarks. (This isn't unique to this message board.  Every Yahoo equity stock chat-room seems to have a top dog guy long and a "troll" short [who pump and ridicule the company, respectively]  that post so prolifically people suspect they get paid by the unit.)

I made several attempts to engage Mr Murray with reason, but I was unable to coax him any reflection on the tone or content of his work:

Mr Murray. Hate is an emotion you seem intimately familiar with, sir.  You're here every day, pounding people. I understand you have a strong sense of right and wrong, and ideas of morality that are clearly well developed. That trait is one that distinguishes people from animals I think, along with the ability to communicate unambiguously with language. Would you say empathy is a necessary human attribute, as well? What if the animal/self-preservation part of the brain is at odds with the human/empathy? Then morality is applied if it is expeditious. Perhaps that is why you treat people so shabbily around here - the  greater good justifies it. Is that why, when a guy stumbles in with a remark or query, you chop him up like dried spaghetti and eat him alive? That's then a guy who'll slink away and never come back. Even  potential sympathizers are turned off.
You could have a much better chat-room here if you and the other big dog on the block, Mr Marenda, would let folks up for air once in a while.  It's my impression that many other contributors are intimidated by the pure malevolence of your message and the overbearing bossiness with which it is delivered. perhaps what you interpret as respect or admiration, Mr Murray, is simply out-and-out fear, as when a guy in your neighborhood has a gun, you like him....


This is what I'm talking about Mr Murray. You have to stop treating people this way. Not every voice, even on the far left, is in concordance with your unforgiving political views. Okay maybe this Mr McCutchen you already knew (he has the TC badge, how do you achieve that anyway?) But to what end do you browbeat a newcomer, and slap him down in such negative terms it sometimes verges on parody. Either way it's rude. Remember there are good points and bad points to every person. I drive a cab in Boston and meet all kinds of people from all walks of life, and if I'm in a good mood, I talk to my fares and I see nice normal people. In a bad mood, not so much. You get the point? You're always in a "bad mood".
Sorry to single you out Mr Murray but you seem to be a leader so maybe if you tried to be nicer, others may show more forbearance too.
And by the way, I voted for Obama and then the first thing he did in office is raise the butt tax a buck a pack. I'll never forgive him for that. Anti-smoking laws and people is about number five on a 10 reasons I left the left list.

The only response:
rmurray·  Top Commenter (signed in using yahoo)
Barry Tilles,STFU. Nobody cares about your idiocy.



I hit reply:

Barry Tilles
rmurray Hey man, c'mon, why are you mad?


..and received the following:
rmurray·
Who's mad, Barry? Wingnuts are "mad", I'm angry at the treason and hatred on the right. I'm mad because you idiots are helping the GOP to destroy America. Why are you all traitors?

Okay I really could not get anywhere with Murray, and everyone else seemed to have me on "ignore" as if I were putting up discordant notes that could disrupt the comity of the group.

Over 40 years (I'm 58) I've both gradually and epiphanically moved away from left and abjured progressivism as it has developed itself.  Perhaps it is partly 60's nostalgia, but it is mostly resentment at what I feel is the left's abandonment of principles that engendered such vexation in me when reading ThinkProgress.  Absent here are the elements of open-mindedness, intellectualism, scholarship, and erudition that define the old (pre-1966) left, as well as the mysticism, naive idealism, and gleeful high-spiritedness of the late '60's, or certainly none of the proto-libertarian precepts of the group of back-to-nature folks that came next. These DIY individualists eschewed arcane philosophies and hippy-dippy communalism to build communities that reflected the spirit and style of the American pioneer West.

I can't figure this crowd out.  Perhaps these are the 80's leftist arnacho-punks, all grown up. Stern aficionados of hardcore, an angry tuneless musical sub-genre popular in the Reagan/Thatcher years,  were so disdainful of anyone outside their clique, they made the movement self-limiting.

So what do we make of all this - the bombast, the eye-glazing repetition, the narrow focus, the seeming inability to form relationships or to communicate any emotion save anger?  It somewhat evokes autism to me, with apologies to actual sufferers and their families. Or the label "Irish Alzheimer's": you forget everything but the grudges. How about paranoia, cynicism and off-the-wall delusions of schizophrenia?

The deepest, oddest, impression one gets is that of a biblical fundamentalist, particularly odd since "fundies" are cited by our friends as the epitome of right-wing intolerance.  But the stern old testament type idiosyncratic phrases, the vengeful day-of-judgement and rapture allusions, the stiff, archaically phrased accusations of "bearing false witness" evoke early American Calvinism, with its strict division of mankind into "the elect" and "the damned".

We last encountered cynicism this pervasive back when the Occupy movement imbued us with their "message." But this gang doesn't seem that interested in Occupy - just happy with President Obama and quite defensive about him, and furious that the Republicans are standing by to take back power and roll back Obama's "initiatives", such as each year's $1 trillion gov't giveaway (called the "stimulus" in 2009, then just subsumed into the main US budget).  So the thinkProgress gang turn out not to be radical insurgents, but moderates - just regular bread-and-butter Democratic party members who are really really pissed. Who knew?

To me, discourse of this kind is dangerous for the country, as well as being a bad example for those who aspire to amiability.















Thursday, November 1, 2012

We Rob Banks (part 1)





Standby, Massachusetts, for Senator Elizabeth Warren. Warren's deployment of the technology of negative writing has manipulated  the electorate into supporting a hard-core leftist criminal gangster whose ambition is the shakedown of the US financial and banking sector possibly resulting in effective nationalization. The axiomatic suppositions emitted by the Warren campaign suffuse the public consciousness as if a billion nanobot drones were programmed by some magic host to spiral into the ear and infect the rational brain. The victim may feel as if his or her ideas were spontaneous, but they are really the product of this modern media fee-faw-fum - Ephesian letters for the internet age.

It's too bad that Senator Scott Brown himself, or his campaign handlers, fell victim to these brain-worms, ceding all philosophic ground to the Warren gang, only differing in the methods used to secure "the middle-class" and "women" from  imaginary dangers.  Brown's nebbishy me-tooism only served to advance the false premises extruded by the leftist haters of free markets and individual responsibility.

Warren rose to prominence on the back of the financial crisis of 2008 through her rigged "studies" of bankruptcies uploaded with the veneer of Harvard University scholarship to land as a work-through-the system  plant for the Occupy Wall Street "movement".  She worked her plan for an agency the would attach  like a vampirish parasite to the US financial system - her baby: the CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), slipped into the the (finance reregulatory) Dodd-Frank bill like a Trojan Horse - a new bureaucracy, with almost unlimited power and zero congressional oversight, set to bleed the banking system for the beneficiaries chosen by Warren and her kleptocracy of  redistributionist racketeers.

So here she comes: cue the hip hop - it's "Occupy" Liz-Z, political gangstah. Seen on TV news clips leaving campaign events with the requisite "entourage" of toadys and bootlick suck-ups, the Professor is taking bank robbery to a new level. Willie Sutton, in an apocryphal, but probably false, quote said he robbed banks "because that's where the money is". Sutton, John Dillinger, Jesse James - these were American independents, but they were anachronistic players: bringing off two-bit one-at-a-time hauls. The Italian mob, and later our own Whitey Bulger brought modern business methods to financial malefaction by imposing a hierarchical structure to regional outlaw enterprise. "Occupy" Liz-Z thinks bigger - way bigger. Next to her, the Brinks gang were pikers - small time hustling jokers - like the Charlestown junkie bank-jobbers who were so predictable that the Staties merely had to wait to pop them on their post-caper arrival at the bottom of the old spiral City Square ramp off the Tobin bridge.

Last month, the largest heist in history - $25 billion - was pulled off by a gang of state attorneys general, Democrat legislators, the CFPB and other government bureaucrats.  It was called a "settlement" in the polite, face-saving way that a mafia hood allows drug dealers to pay "rent", or his plug ugly stooges to sell "protection" to mom and pop shops. It is a refined advancement of the political tradition that allows solicitation of "contributions" from a union boss who in turn leans on rank-and-file for "dues", and "negotiates" with contractors.

Our pallid paladin deemed the $25 billion a good start: "the beginning, not the end".

Yeah, it's an old fashioned shakedown. You ain't seen nothin' yet.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Can the World be as Sad as it Seems?



It's 11 years after 9/11, and Islamism is on the march, again. Really it has never let up, but the swerve and bend of world events and a barbarous anniversary attack on U.S. diplomats has by commodious vicus of recirculation served to focus our attention. 

All actors are returning to the stage in this theater of the absurd. Leading actors from the top of the Islamic pyramid - the high mucky-muck mullah from Uupper Buttcracki, the Krazy Kat in the big black hat, aka Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khameni himself, Twelver and no nice guy by all accounts; Khameni's  Fars state news agency; Egypt's "newly democratically elected President" and Muslim-brother-in-chief Mohamed "Spare Tire" Morsi - down to the angry males thronging the Arab Street (how come Arabs are the only ones that get to have a "street"?) - all parties playing their roles as if dress rehearsing for Allah himself. No shitting around. Guest stars include the US State department, scrums of lapping yapping reporters, old fart liberal columnists, with choral backup by the self appointed, self involved, self righteous nasty nags of the leftist blogosphere. Oh yeah, our Democrat president and his Republican rival Romney, guided, of course, by their invisible stage-whispering  handlers, have made cameos, too. 

What are the the elements that make up our act? A tragicomedy in which we are subjected to a fatuous domestic display of mealy mouth obeisance: apologizing, excusing, bowing and scraping in hopes of expiation of the collective guilt assigned and accepted for a heretofore obscure snippet from an unfinished film which purportedly says not nice things about the historical figure known as "the Prophet Mohammed". Which film clip has elicited wrath among Mohammedans as automatically as a post-sneeze Gesundheit, and as seemingly mindlessly as an electrically induced spasm in a pithed frog. The Prophet's teachings, as written in The Koran, and codified into Shariah law, have been used by Mohammedans to keep their fascist institutions of oppression in place across hundreds of years for hundreds of millions of unlucky souls. Why would anyone say not nice things about him?





Here at home, the trumped up, holier-than-thou, tut-tutting indignation over the perceived disrespect, and the calls for the punishment of the film clip's creators (and even some not responsible for it, but deemed guilty due to past imprecations) are emblematic of a society that has evidently discarded its core values and picked up a virus which turns its victims into irrational purveyors of PC mush. Under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution it is not your fucking business what movies people watch or what movies they make. "Blasphemy" is not, has never been, and never will be a crime in the US, unless the liberal left somehow classifies it as "hate speech" and such statutes were upheld by the SCOTUS.

Comb the 'net for five minutes and one can find enough direct attacks on Islam to fill a library. Why do you think that is? In the West, we express outrage through words, not murderous "demonstrations" of demented, frenzied mobs. The First Amendment was put in place to protect unpopular speech - words or ideas that are not locally renowned.  The notion that foreign enemies would demand apologies and even arrests for commentaries perceived abroad as offensive would not have occurred to our forebears.

It would also not occur to me to engage in rioting if, say, I stumbled upon a video originating in say Assbaki, Pakistan which portrayed, say, Moses as a bloodthirsty homo. Nor would anyone with any common sense, but that doesn't seem to stop leftists from imputing hate-mongering Islamophobia upon any critic of Islam, and then pointing at them the finger of blame for the violence perpetrated by those who cite hurt religious feelings as the motivation for their rage, and as the reason for their inability to constrain their behaviors to within civilized norms.




If there is any hate-mongering going on, it is result of the structure of the Muslim faith.  Muslim laws that keep women oppressed; Muslim laws that hang gay people from cranes; that deign to control every aspect of life; that prescribe death for "apostates" - those unfortunate enough to have Muslim parents and wish to have a mind of their own. No Mrs. Clinton, Islam is not "a great religion".  It is a scourge.

When a person or persons engage in flag-burning, mobbing a diplomatic mission, or similar aggression far short of actual murder, exponentially more disrespect is being shown for those who they target than merely producing a critical or even a scathingly blistering commentary, book, movie etc.  The only unacceptable "intolerance" here is the Islamic nasty habit for hypersensitive ridiculously excessive responses and bogus claims of injury to any (but not all -  the presentation must make the so-called malicious material seem out of the ordinary) art or media depictions deemed disagreeable.  There is a direct line between the death Fatwa issued by Islam's big dogs against Salmon Rushdie in 1989 (and just this week the bounty was raised to $2.3million); to the savage murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh for his own cinematic censure of fundamentalist Islam, Submission; to the idiotic "cartoon riots" that resulted in deaths in 2005. It is difficult to wrap one's head around the concept of people going on a killing rampage OVER SOME LINE DRAWINGS!  Another sad episode that falls into the you-can't-make-this-stuff-up category is the "Sudanese teddy bear blasphemy case."


Here's an idea fellows: put on yer big boy britches and get used to taking a modicum of shit, or stay off the internet. Apparently your mothers did not relay the lesson that "sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me". Grow a pair, grow some skin, grow up - the world is saying "pretty please".

Does it not occur to these lunatics that mass protests with their wildly inappropriate hyper-sensitive over-reactions and silly demands for repression of free speech or "respect" for the peculiar idolotries of their world-view only serve to highlight their insanity, popularize the media they endeavor to suppress, and lend credence to the content of that they wish to excise?

These violent behaviors bring to mind psychopathies similar to self-hypnotic inducement of aggressive seizures of the central nervous system or the sudden allergy-like sensitivity reactions seen in fulminating rabies. These guys don't need Friday prayers, they need a trip to the ER for a haldol shot followed up by 90 days observation.

Unless, that is, it is all an act. Given the stupidity of these uneducated rioting jerks, I don't rule out that it is not, but one must be a bit credulous to believe that the world is full of semi-retarded religious fanatics with hair-trigger tempers who so easily cede free will to appear as herky-jerky puppets, stylized, like ballet dancers from hell. This can't be the optimum way to obtain the dignity they claim to cherish.

So, perhaps this was a plot coordinated by national enemies in a way that is calculated to keep us off balance. Taking advantage of the current charged politics, the foreign actors may reason that each side will blame the other. With good reason. The left has let loose a barrage of commentary in effect bolstering the Islamic narrative: decrying the violence, but attributing it to callously or even deliberately provocative right- wing "Islamophobic" Christian or Jewish extremists, who are at best demeaned as irresponsible kooky cranks who should be ignored, or, more likely, painted as out-and-out hate criminals who should be prosecuted and sent to the clink. For their part, some on the right have acted as if the misbehaving mobs get their marching orders straight from Obama "The Muslim-in-Chief" or, slightly more rationally, with the complicity of the O administration or, the cynical default, that perhaps our gov't is disorganized and incompetent, or even maybe just doesn't give a shit.

United we are not.

Certainly the Libya assault was planned. Our ambassador was lured to the Benghazi consulate and intentionally set up for an assassination organized and directed by a Jihadist group (it is said) as retaliation for the killing of a top al-Quaeda dog Abu Yayah al-Libi , and carried out on intentionally on September 11 by a trained military force using heavy weapons. The phony film was a pretext, a decoy, a sleight of hand. Allegedly, the ambassador was finished off with a brutal rape and suffocation. The left would have us believe that these boys were only letting off steam after enduring a humiliating internet insult.

Just like the 9/11 twin towers attack the assault on the Benghazi consulate is a follow-up to a failed first attempt back in June.

It is reported that the Marines had guns but no bullets. Were they expected to pistol whip any aggressors?

Given the negative reviews (based on descriptions, and for some careful reporters, actual viewings of the 14 minute youtube trailer) handed down for "Innocence of Muslims"  by such top film critics as Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, The New York Times, a faceless tweeting bureaucrat at the State Dept, and even President Obama, the movie-going public might want to look elsewhere for a good flick about Islam. Old school fans may want to check out the epics Lawrence of Arabia and Khartoum  (which showcased the charming Arab custom called head-on-a-stick). Modern anti-Islamic documentaries include the two Dutch entries Submission, for which effort the filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was brutally killed, and especially Geert Wilder's Fitna. Wilders is the brave Dutch politician whose efforts to push back against the Islamization of Europe have resulted in his being dragged before a Dutch court for a hate crimes trial (charged with "insulting religious and ethnic groups") and, naturally, a fatwa demanding his assassination.

Much has been made in recent days over the exact ethnicity of the rascal who financed or created the now infamous trailer for "Innocence of Muslims".  Egyptian Copt or Israeli Jew? Home grown hater or transplanted troublemaker? Many man-hours and journalistic shoe-leather have gone into this intrepid inquiry, but sorry, no one cares. Unfortunately, to the the aggressive "leaders" of the Islamic world and the uneducated trash that follows them, such fine distinctions (Egyptian Coptic Christian vs. American-Israeli Jew) are meaningless. The only classification they recognize is crude: Muslim or non-Muslim.


People who are so hysterically predictable to anger at certain "trigger words" are asking to be needled. But layer a high-strung insecure brainwashed fanatic with a sociopathic borderline personality and the result is an extremely dangerous individual. Now add the synergy of the mob, whipping itself into a murderous frenzy as if it was one group-think pulsating insectile organism. This is Islam. Come celebrate diversity with me.

Islam and its tenets is incompatible with the modern Western values of democracy, freedom, and individual human rights. And it's a political system that intends to control all dimensions of  human life. 


And now in some kind of kindergarten mentality we must regard this mindless brainwashed revolting savage philosophy as equal to our own traditions and way of life, and refrain from "insults" and "disrespect". Islamists  appear to care less for real life than they do for symbols, lies, and obeisance to false prophets, so what's to respect?

 
Now, hundreds of millions of people are trying to drag the rest of the world back to an animal existence. The worst part is, in the name of multiculturism we are inviting the wolf and all his brainless nonsense right into our living room.









Thursday, September 6, 2012

The Professor Gives a Lecture


Speaking before the crowd of Democrat power brokers and their sycophants, die-hard left wing fanatics, and a slew of stupid people bused in to puff up the crowd, Professor Elizabeth Warren sank to a new nadir of negative speechifying. Not since the cold war has there been a similarly fanatical, ideologically motivated speech, and then only in Communist countries.

Warren pushes a bullying brand of deep cynicism that plays off of the basest human qualities: ignorance, lazy thinking, class envy, gullibility, insecurity and out-and-out fear. It is predicated on urban legends, outdated tropes, ossified grudges, and 70's-style conspiracy myths. This sort of "worst of" greatest-hits type stump speech could have been arranged by a software program: a mealy melange of vapid banalities, boilerplate bromides, and hackneyed trite shibboleths we've heard till our ears bleed this silly season.

With absolutely no facts or evidence to support her misanthropic world-view this nasty dishonest arrogant left-wing jerk and liar simply points at a group of people and swears out a slander: "The system is rigged". In other words "They robbed you". Who "they" are is not articulated so you fill in the blank: millionaires and billionaires, rich people, corporate "multinationals" as the phonies like to say, along with Romney, Ryan, and their gang of  teabagging repugs.

This is rabble rousing of the most degrading sort. If the entire "system" is "rigged", the citizen is disburdened of all responsibility for anything that has gone wrong. If the whole shebang is cooked, one can reason, honest efforts are futile, and all kinds of treacherous immoral behaviors can be justified: petty corruption, gaming the system, or simply throwing in the towel and applying for every benefit and freebie one can connive.

This aggressive garbage encourages failure, sloth, resentment and it eschews personal responsibility. Warren keeps an arm's length from her Occupy troops but she has admitted setting the mental table for those lost souls and hardened ideologues who would cause our destruction.

All the other tired stereotypes were there last night too:
"where billionaires pay their taxes just like their secretaries do" -- A smarmy misleading smear without coming right out and saying it thus avoiding any "fact-checkers".

"No, Gov. Romney, corporations are not people. People have hearts, they have kids, they get jobs, they get sick, they cry, they dance..." Women love that line evidently. Pass me a barf bag.

"He wants to give tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires. But for middle-class families who are hanging on by their fingernails? His plans will hammer them with a new tax hike of up to 2,000 dollars." Repeat ad infinitum

More lies: "For years, families had been tricked by credit cards, fooled by student loans and cheated on mortgages." Lizzie to the rescue: "I had an idea for a consumer financial protection agency to stop the rip-offs. The big banks sure didn't like it, and they marshaled one of the biggest lobbying forces on earth to destroy the agency before it ever saw the light of day"  Good grief. With "protectors" like these, who needs attackers?

She got it all in: "Cayman Islands" "oil companies guzzle down billions in subsidies."Middle class"

This "speech" was a mealy stew of distortions, falsehoods, innuendos, and stone cold lies. Warren is apparently the kind of sociopathic liar that could commit a crime and then calmly pass a polygraph or a Sodium Amytal session.

Pray that this shameful wretch loses so she can no longer pollute the political discourse of our great nation.

Friday, August 24, 2012

Elizabeth Warren: GOP, Scott Brown "against women"

Like a drowning, panicked, rabid dog, Warren is desperately snarling and flailing about, spewing a propagandistic lie so breathtakingly arrogant that only those totally brainwashed loons such as those that read and comment on the Huffington Post and thinkProgress will pretend to buy it. And that only includes out-of-state residents unfamiliar with the gentlemanly Brown and his lovely wife and daughters. 

Warren reminds me of a fat little spoiled brat who just got sent to her room and is beginning the wailing and stomping ritual that she thinks will reverse the decision. 

I've never seen a more mendacious and dishonest candidate for office in any race, local or national. Like the George C. Scott character in "The Hustler" her stock in trade is feeding on other peoples' weaknesses and lack of knowledge, and hopes to profit by it. I don't know which is more frightening - the possibility that she may schizophrenically believe in her own flapdoodle and self-styled paladin persona, or actually has the chutzpah to flat out demagogue in such an obviously specious and slimy way.

Let me get this straight Ms Warren - because one nobody from nowhere congressman 1200 miles away made some careless and stupid statements, ALL Republicans including the moderate Brown are adjudged to be guilty of the same blasphemous remarks by association. Wishing a hallucination real doesn't make it so honey, sorry.

Even sensible Democrats are realizing this. Scott Brown will win in a landslide.

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Akin thrown to the wolves for unPC blather

Evidently, respect for the core Western value of freedom of speech does not apply to the parasitic, pseudo-intellectual scum that describe themselves as "progressives". The anti-freedom mob of PC fascists can concoct dubious racist conspiracies regarding "code words" and "dog whistles" to besmirch conservatives, but when a Republican white male lets loose with some old wive's tale he may be as freely attacked as if he was serial murderer. Actually, a real killer garners more deference than a loose-lipped man of power as even the craven pols on Congressman Akin's side of the aisle join in the lynch mob. 

Remember when the Harvard Univ. president, Larry Summers had the audacity to broach the issue of differences between the sexes (regarding under representation of females in tenured positions in science and engineering)? What a concept - men and women distinct by nature - I never heard of such a thing; but you would think by the reaction he had had an illicit and tawdry liaison with a young intern. Never mind, bad example. Summers was subsequently run out of Harvard U. on a rail, "censured" by a gang of dishonest, reverse prejudiced, dried up crusty maggots who hide behind their own tenured degree status as supposedly society's brightest and most enlightened.

What an sloppy collection of narrow minded double standards these folks harbor. Nancy Pelosi can talk about seeing ghosts and apparitions as if she were ready to get fitted for a rubber room strait-jacket, and no one says a word. Harry Reid, the top dog in the Senate belches up completely unsubstantiated rubbish and what do we hear from the Left? Nada. Joe Biden? Pick anything he says. And, as a final instance, Presidents Obama's team as much as accuses his rival of murder. Crickets. It's a one-sided game all the way.

This is how fascism operates - the aggressive people going counter to the first amendment intimidate, castigate and threaten those who dare to speak their minds. Liberals are superficially high-minded, but really just opportunistically stick with the side that seems stronger and can help them financially. Are you listening Elizabeth Warren? 

Their market value is nil and the malevolent bile they spew is a stinky pile of institutionalized garbage.