Perhaps The Last Word On Pat Roberston, Haiti

Maybe he feels bad about pretending he didn’t have any horse in race when it came to whether or not the Jesus Taliban was going to murder people in Uganda.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/30/warren-uganda/

I found this an interesting explanation of “extremists”, or those we think of as extreme.
.

“Both the liberal and conservative camps harbor extremists who favor revolutionary changes. Liberal extremists are often called radicals while conservative extremists are often referred to as reactionaries. Extremists push an agenda that makes the majority of people, regardless of their beliefs, uncomfortable. Often, the actions of extremist groups push through social or legal barriers. Some extremists engage in unlawful activity—such as the destruction of private property— in order to further their agenda and garner media attention for their cause. Many resort to violence.

The liberal extremist Theodore Kaczynski killed three people and injured twenty-three during an eighteen-year period in the 1980s and 1990s. The Unabomber—as Kaczynski is called—sent bombs through the mail to people he considered enemies of the Earth. One of the Unabomber’s victims was Gilbert Murray, president of the California Forestry As- sociation, a timber industry group. Kaczynski believed that Murray and the timber industry were contributing to the destruction of the environment. Another victim, Thomas Mosser, an advertising executive, was falsely accused by the Unabomber of helping Exxon clean up its public image after the disastrous Exxon Valdez oil spill in March 1989. In Kaczynski’s manifesto, he advocates a revolution whose object “will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis for the present society.” Many analysts like Ralph R. Reiland argue that Kaczynski took the ideas of environmental groups such as Earth First! and pushed them to the extreme. Far left radicals like Kaczynski, he notes, take the ideas of other extremists and violently act on them. Reiland writes: “In short, the Unabomber was no intellectual loner.”

Leftist radicals are by no means the only extremists who promote violence, however. Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, two right-wing extremists associated with the militia movement, were convicted of blowing up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in April 1995, killing 168 people in the process. McVeigh and Nichols—like others from the militia movement—mistrust government just as Kaczynski does, but for very different reasons. Militia members assert that the government conspires to deprive people of their constitutional rights. Those involved in the militia movement contend that it is necessary to maintain a body of armed citizens and a stockpile of weapons in order to defend the people against a tyrannical government. In addition, many within the movement believe that the government protects minorities at the expense of white males. According to John M. Swomley, president of Americans for Religious Liberty, militias “are anti-abortion, anti-homosexual, and tend to accept fundamentalist white-supremacist and anti-Semitic theology as well as the subordination of women.”

As the above examples illustrate, left and right wing extremists— while holding antithetical views—often arrive at similar solutions to perceived problems. Both Kaczynski and McVeigh mistrusted government, for instance, and both used bombs as a means of challenging the status quo. The straight line that illustrates the political spectrum, in fact, often turns into a circle with extremists from the right and left occupying the same position. While the Unabomber did not go so far as to call for the abolition of government, other extremists on the left do. Anarchists, for example, believe that government is oppressive and always undesirable. They advocate a state ruled by no political authority. In this regard they are in agreement with those from the militia movement. However, while the aim of anarchists is to turn over the means of production to the workers in order to achieve an egalitarian society, many of those in the militia movement desire a return to the days when white men had more authority and control.

Some commentators argue that extremist views—but not extremist actions—such as those held by Kaczynski and McVeigh can benefit society by acting as a catalyst for change. For example, Marc E. Fisher, a political and religious analyst, contends that Jesus Christ was considered an extremist in his time. Fisher argues that Christ’s doctrines of brotherly love and forgiveness, however, “began a movement that would eventually change the lives of millions, indeed billions, of people” for the good. Many detractors also considered 1960s civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. an extremist. King turned that label around, asking those who would maintain racial segregation: “Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?”

Neither Jesus nor King advocated violence. However, many would argue that extremist ideas—while perhaps stimulating— inevitably lead to violent and hateful actions. For example, while members of the environmental group Earth First! do not publicly endorse violence, some commentators contend that individuals like Theodore Kaczynski nevertheless feel encouraged by the group’s ideas to commit violent acts. And while not everyone in the militia movement advocates the bombing of federal buildings, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols evidently felt that the ideas espoused by militia groups justified the bombing that killed scores of people. At their worst, extreme ideas can lead to the deaths of vast numbers of people, as witnessed by the millions killed in World War II as a result of the hatred spewed by Adolf Hitler.”

.
http://www.enotes.com/extremist-groups-article
.
The appeal here is, and the hope we can also contain the media-types like Michael Sherer from baiting us, one against the other…Just like Rush and Pat, Michael simply demonstrates a type of tabloid-type of journalism. We just would like you to report on the news, Michael.
.
I am sure you abhor what Theodore Kaczynski did just as much as I abhor what Timothy McVeigh and his group also did.
.
But, to equate all conservatives as “Timothy McVeigh-like”, is simply unfair, stupid and creates a further divide in any discussions between those of us who are trying to make change happen.
.
While we differ greatly on many things. One thing I am sure of that you or I will not resort to some type of violent confrontation in order to prove our point as both McVeigh and Kaczynski both did.
.
Rush Limbaugh is nothing short of an entertainer. A radio personality who is nothing different than Jon Stewart or other comedians who perpetuate a snarky joke which people respond to.
.
So far as Pat Robertson is concerned, I believe Alzheimer’s has set in (my opinion), an perpetuated the more delusional aspects of his mind with regards to God, and the potential retribution of God on Man. People will see through his statements, and they may think it’s God’s actions, but quickly realize that is not true. But, there are many people who will accept it, and I am not one to sit back and say they are crazy for doing so, I have witnessed unexplained miracles, believe in God and will never say it is not possible. Not in this lifetime.
.
As you will never be able to be held accountable for the actions and statements of people like Sheehan, the Code Pinks, and other various left loons, nor can I be held responsible for the likes of Pat Robertson or Rush Limbaugh. That is what America is all about. The diversity of opinions. Which is what also makes this such a great country to live in. The freedom to speak out. If I do not do it in a way that is sane and rational, my time up on the soap-box will be short, as eventually rational people will prevail and I will no longer have an audience.
.
But, I do appreciate your civil as well as insightful comment.
(A comment back to 53_3’s comment in a different thread. I thought it was worth repeating, and also one of Michael Sherer’s other more outrageous postings to this blog).
.
See more at http:www.newfreedomblog.com

That’s http://www.newfreedomblog.com
.
Enjoy

Pat Robertson needs to go away. His comment was awful. There’s no spin that can justify it.

A wolf in sheeps cloathing. I sometimes wonder of Robertson isn’t the devil himself.

Now the left can go back to savaging Palin, Bush or Beck.

Why would that sanctimony be the last word? How about:
Drop dead, Pat.
or:
Go to hell, Pat.
or:
oh, wait, comments are moderated aren’t they?

None of the extremists you list compare to Limbaugh or Robertson. They are not merely garden variety extremists. Unlike the other people you list, these two broadcast across the nation daily. They have hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of followers that take their word as gospel (so to speak). None of the others you list have that kind of reach or influence.
.
Robertson has his own network. He also has his own university. Over 150 Regent University law school graduates were placed in the Bush administration and the ideology they brought with them affected the entire country. Robertson even ran for president on the gop ticket and received a substantial number of votes.
.
Limbaugh calls himself an ‘entertainer’ because if he called himself a journalist or political analyst he would have to answer for his daily fabrications and prevarications. It’s like Fox News absolving itself from all of the falsehoods it broadcasts by saying that the falsehoods were broadcast on shows that weren’t the ‘real’ news shows. If Limbaugh were merely an entertainer, members of the gop wouldn’t routinely have to grovel before him when they have the poor judgment to criticize something he says. Many consider him the de facto head of the republican party.
,
You can suggest that Roberson’s behavior is excusable because he’s old. But that argument ignores the fact that he’s been behaving this way for decades. Remember when he blamed the 9/11 attacks on gays? And Falwell agreed with him.
.
Yes, they have a free speech right to express themselves. We also have a free speech right. We have the right (actually, an obligation) to condemn their despicable speech and behavior.

I can appreciate your concerns, bob, however I also believe what you profess as a means to “shout down” those you disagree with is simply a form of oppression which goes totally against the founding father’s ideals of Freedom of Speech
.
You do have the choice to listen or not, right? To turn off your radio or TV, right?
.
When your threat to freedom is shouted out, that is when we see erosion into our basic freedoms occur. That is when we see things like the “Fairness Doctrine” being tossed around as a way to “make things more fair”. It is purely an assult on our freedoms.
.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2009/01/26/mrcs-bozell-obama-assault-conservative-talk-radio-has-begun
.
When do they then come after my site on the internet to stop me? When do I get shouted down? When do your liberal views over shout mine just because you do not like what I say?
.
If you truly meant what you say, you would simply disagree. You would shut off your radio or TV. You would post your own blog site in competition of my own.
.
I am confident that the founders would not believe in any shape or form of a “Fairness Doctrine” what-so-ever.

Let me get this straight. When Robertson and Limbaugh express their opinions its free speech (in bold font!). If I express my opinion about what they’ve said its oppression.
.
How do I get off of the oppression list and onto the free speech list?
.
BTW – I never advocated ‘shouting down’ anyone. That sort of tactic (which we saw used extensively by teabaggers to disrupt town hall meetings last fall) is wrong. I said we have a right and obligation to condemn — not ‘shout down’. I explicitly stated that Robertson and Limbaugh have a right to free speech (as loathsome as their speech may be).

I’m sorry, Michael, but I don’t speak Tweet. You’ll have to translate. On second thought, don’t. Anything Twittered isn’t worth my time.

I also believe what you profess as a means to “shout down” those you disagree with…
.
bobcn1 is pointing out the false equivalence you made when comparing Sheehan to Limbaugh. Your ‘Freedom of Speech’ rant is a transparent and weak attempt to change the subject.
.
…is simply a form of oppression which goes totally against the founding father’s ideals..
.
Condemning hateful speech and pointing out that someone is lying is suppression of free speech? Disagreeing with you is oppressing you?…and that, if you take issue with something like Robertson’s Haiti remarks, you should just let it go, turn off the television instead of voicing your displeasure?
.
I am confident that the founders would not believe in any shape or form of a “Fairness Doctrine” what-so-ever.

“Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.” – Thomas Jefferson

Given that, how do you think that the fathers of our country would respond to a Press that presented news slanted to a particular point of view? Would they encourage the inclusion of a wider range of thought or only want to hear information provided from the perspective of, say, the royalists?

And here I was, thinking that the most significant aspect of the Haiti disaster was how it would affect Bill Clinton’s return to the spotlight.

The meme that Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer is over. His remarks yesterday about Obama using the tragedy of Haiti to pander to his light and dark skin brothers was just the last example of his hate speech.
Limbaugh spends hours every day spewing hate. The only people he entertains are those that see the world like he does: cynically and intolerantly.
Was his demeaning of Michael J Fox entertaining? There are so many examples of his hate mongering. I can’t find them amusing.
Also, the right hate talkers have such a large megaphone and participants:
Michael Savage
Glenn Beck
G Gordon Libby
John Gibson
FOX Morning Show
Sean Hannity
Bill O’Reilly
Lou Dobbs
Ann Coulter
Michelle Malkin
Cal Thomas
Matt Drudge
Human Events
Moonie owned Washington Times
Dick Army
Erick Ericson
and on, and on and on. They make McCarthyism and Father Coughlin look naive in comparison.
Protestors will now invoke the msm and Olbermann and Maddow…Not equivilent.

Rick Warren is one of the most hypocritical of the evangalist, money machine. He has been forced to denounce the Ugandan homosexual death sentence after he and other righteous preachers provoked the Ugandan government and churches into their intolerance.
Warren is one of the most dangerous of the pious brigade. He puts on a smiling, benevolent face, promotes his Purpose Driven Life, asks for money.
He and all other televangelists have no accountability for the money they raise. Their funds are tax free and accountability is protected, so they say, by the separation of church and state.
It is time we taxed churches and demanded accountability for the use of their donations.

“None of the extremists you list compare to Limbaugh or Robertson.”

.
As opposed to Van Jones, Rev Jerimiah Wright, or Cass Susteen?
.
There are “boogey men” all over the place. Both from the right, and the left.
.
Give Freedom a chance. I am confident that it will prevail, unless we attempt to pass legislation to restrict it.
.
The liberal blog-o-sphere is repleat with many liberal “extremists”. I am confident that they will continue to grow and flourish despite all the Rush Limbaughs or Pat Robertsons of the world.
.
And, you can “point fingers” at those on the right, just the same as I can also point fingers at yours. But, if you truly meant what you say and wanted more people to believe in your opinion, you would simply say…
.

“Yea, there are kooks and loons on both sides, but more rational and sane individuals will prevail”

.
Otherwise it is mere hyperbole, and not anything I like to engage with.
.
Have a nice day!!

newfreedom: What an ironic name to use for posting.
Your site freely admits it is conservative. You never address the fact that conservative speech has a much bigger megaphone. Rev Wright does not have an national radio show or even a national cable presence. Van Jones and Cass Susteen are boogie man the right invented. They too do not have access to the right wing resources.
And, no one here is suggesting censorship of the vicious right. We are using our right to disagree with their malignant, daily propoganda.
Can you tell us who funds and supports your blog? If you alone are its creator and sustain it, more power to you. Just curious.

“Protestors will now invoke the msm and Olbermann and Maddow…Not equivilent.”

I am not sure why you think they are not equal. If you are talking about talk show folks , then yes I might agree for one reason. The left has nothing to say or that anybody gives a sh*t about what they say. They failed nobody cares.

freeinpa: Another one of your responses devoid of fact but imbued with ignorance

No discussion about Pat Robertson is complete without the observation that ABC/Disney considers the ABC/Family brand important enough that they are now obligated to provide this particular pathogen a vector to spread his disease far and wide. Old Walt is hopefully spinning in his grave…….

“We’ve already donated to Haiti. It’s called the U.S. income tax.”
Another funny, amusing, entertaining comment from Limbaugh today. Now I know he does this to provoke and entertain his neanderthal listeners, but I still can find it disgusting.

“What an ironic name to use for posting.
Your site freely admits it is conservative.”

.
You don’t think a conservative can believe in freedom?
.
So far as who supports my site, it is basically bought and paid for out of my own funds, thank you. I do get some ad revenue, but it is miniscule.
.
I just strongly believe that we are headed in the wrong direction, not just by the current political party in power, but by both political parties. This is why I set this site up. Hoping that even though we may disagree on many things, what we can agree upon are the basic freedoms which the founding fathers put into place nearly 240 years ago.
.
But I find this very amusing and can’t believe you are this naive.
.

“They too do not have access to the right wing resources.”

.
You have never been exposed to John Podesta’s group, “Center for American Progress”?
.
To George Soros, the multi-BILLIONAIRE founder and predominant backer of most things we know today as liberal such as MoveOn.Org, etc?
.
Give me a break.
.
No, simply try again to make it sound like Conservatives are the big bad boogeymen on the earth. It is simply laughable.

“We’ve already donated to Haiti. It’s called the U.S. income tax.”
Another funny, amusing, entertaining comment from Limbaugh today.
.
You have to wonder how many people that might have donated to the relief effort won’t because they heard that. We’ll never know for sure, but I suspect a lot of people that might have lived are going to die because of Limbaugh’s ‘comedy’. Not that Limbaugh will lose any sleep over it.

newfreedom: You certainly are defensive for someone that believes that the right has no advantage over liberals in the propoganda zeitgeist.
I am not laughing at the right wing bogeymen.
“We’ve already donated to Haiti. It’s called the U.S. income tax.” The funny Limbaugh today.
No where did I state conservatives cannot believe in freedom. There have been times, while not always agreeing with them, when I have had great respect for consrvatives like Barry Goldwater, John McCain, and even Ronald Reagan.
If this is the way you are going to run your website, don’t expect liberals to rush to indulge in its wisdom.

Well, apr, bob et al:
.
I think you confuse my statements on the freedom of speech as not only condoning what Limbaugh and Robertson have said today or in the past. I don’t believe you can show anywhere where I have done that at all. You can’t even say that I agree with them in totality.
.
You can only claim that I identify myself as “Conservative”, as they both call themselves “Conservative. The difference is that I see it as a freedom, which permits us all to speak out and make our opinions known.
.
You are unfortunately the ones who make implications. I am simply asking that if you want a discourse which is civil you cannot acheive that type of discussion by implication or just calling someone a derogative name. I see daily people from both sides of the political spectrum who resort to name calling and making accusations against that person for the simple pleasure of typing behind a computer like some cyber-bully.
.
You can believe what you choose. I or anyone else will not change those beliefs unless you decide to first listen, and then learn perhaps.
.
But, if you choose to hide, just label someone on this site or any other with name-calling for the sake of thinking you can win an argument. Then by all means do as you wish. I choose not to be a part of it.
.
But, I do thank you for your interest, and the clicks on my site are appreciated.

Dirks, did you mention Disney?
.
They pay 28 cents an hour to their Haitian sweatshop employees:
.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/14-13
.
But, wait, they just donated a whopping 100,000$ so I guess it’s all good:
.
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=AP&date=20100113&id=10986391

[...] Can my Christian family agree to ignore the Pat Robertson nonsense for the time being?  Whether you think the man was out of line or on point, this story threatens to distract from the far more significant events taking place in Haiti.  Using Facebook or Twitter to distance oneself from Robertson seems only to draw attention back to ourselves.  Are you worried your non-Christian friends assume you share Robertson’s belief?  Surely you haven’t given them enough credit.  Perhaps the best thing to come from this story is the possible mud-wrestling match between mega-church pastor Rick Warren and Rain Wilson (Dwight from The Office). [...]

“Now I know he does this to provoke and entertain his neanderthal listeners, but I still can find it disgusting.”

.
This apr is exactly what I am talking about. Suggest that Rush’s listerners are perhaps ill-informed, perhaps. But, “neaderthal”. Please. Move on to someone else’s comments and leave mine alone in the future.
.
Thanks

And I know I’m an aging reactionary, but when CNN declares that Haiti (i.e. 10s of 1000s of dead/dying) is a hot topic on Twitter am I the only one who feels a little sick. Michael’s snarky (I know he’s veiling genuine compassion beneath the cynicism) Tweet-stenography about wrestling, to whatever end, or the post about how this will impact Bill Clinton’s image, god help us, the fatuity is endless. SZ mentioned integrity–I’ll double down on humanity.

Oregon JC:
.
With respect to your nausea ( link to Wikipedia entry for Guy Debord’s “Society of The Spectacle” ):

Degradation of human life

.
Debord traces the development of a modern society in which authentic social life has been replaced with its representation: “All that was once directly lived has become mere representation.”[7] Debord argues that the history of social life can be understood as “the decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing.“[8] This condition, according to Debord, is the “historical moment at which the commodity completes its colonization of social life.”[9]
.
With the term spectacle, Debord defines the system that is a confluence of advanced capitalism, the mass media, and the types of governments who favor those phenomena. “… the spectacle, taken in the limited sense of “mass media” which are its most glaring superficial manifestation…”.[10] The spectacle is the inverted image of society in which relations between commodities have supplanted relations between people, in which passive identification with the spectacle supplants genuine activity. “The spectacle is not a collection of images,” Debord writes. “rather, it is a social relationship between people that is mediated by images.”[11]

You were saying…about “humanity”?

“We’ve already donated to Haiti. It’s called the U.S. income tax.”
Another funny, amusing, entertaining comment from Limbaugh today.
.
I thought that statement was bad when I heard it. It turns out, though, that every time you start to think Limbaugh can’t sink any lower, he proves you wrong.
.
He’s now actively discouraging people from donating to the relief effort. He’s talking about ‘self reliance’ and peddling conspiracy theories about Obama using donations to compile information about Americans. He’s taking the misery of others and actively trying to make it worse.

newfreedom: Let’s see, I am for freedom of speech but don’t talk to me. Happily new I will refrain from responding to your condescending, pompous posts.
Oops, there I go again name calling.
I am just trying to be an entertainer like Rush. His entertainment is much more vicious and harmful but I try.
Dialogue with you is like talking to “HAL”. Daisy, Daisseey… givvvve me..your…answeeer…do…..

Screw him. Donate and say specifically that Flush inspired you to.

jc: Michael’s cynicism is probably genuine. I would like to believe his compassion may also be real. But snarky humor is not appropriate right now. Maybe I am an old reactionary too, but the shallowness of the twitter exchange is not amusing.

apr: I was voted most cynical in my class (of ’88) so i’ve nothing against cynicism.
.
sz: will have to come back to that piece later, as i’m off for the day. it demands greater engagement/resources than i’m able to give it.

‘Donate and say specifically that Flush inspired you to.’
.
Too late. I already donated yesterday. To UNICEF (on top of the monthly donation I had going there already).

It’s a real flaw of mine that I can’t read the name Rick Warren without hearing “Sasha!” in my head.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/
Take a few minutes to watch Shep Smith at FOX and the reporter on location in Haiti. If this doesn’t touch your heart, not much can.
I really admire Smith. Because he is at FOX he doesn’t get the respect he deserves.

Alright, SZ, now I’ve gone & bookmarked SOTS, I hope you’re happy. Recall an earlier ref. to the situationists, at which pt. I could get no further than wiki. Now I’m sufficiently intrigued to want to read it in its entirety. Thanks, damn you.
.
In surfing around, I found libertarian Julian Sanchez riffing on Debord’s Matrix.
.
http://www.juliansanchez.com/2003/05/20/debords-matrix/
.
And also this from the Wiki entry on “Anarcho-Primitivists” — they “claim they owe much to the Situationists, and their critique of the Spectacle and alienating commodity society. Deep ecology informs the primitivist perspective with an understanding that the well-being and flourishing of all life is linked to the awareness of the inherent worth and intrinsic value of the non-human world independent of its economic use value. Primitivists see deep ecology’s appreciation for the richness and diversity of life as contributing to the realization that present human interference with the non-human world is coercive and excessive.”
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivism
.
Which leads me to my own current read, “deep ecologist” Paul Shepard’s seminal “Man in the Landscape.” Wiki on his central theory: “Based on his early study of modern ethnographic literature examining contemporary nature-based peoples, Shepard created a developmental model for understanding the role of sustained contact with nature in healthy human psychological development, positing that humans, having spent 99% of their social history in hunting and gathering environments, are therefore evolutionarily dependent on nature for proper emotional and psychological growth and development. Drawing from ideas of neoteny, Shepard postulated that many humans in post-agricultural society are often not fully mature, but are trapped in infantilism or an adolescent state.”
.
Wish I had the time, energy, focus to actually attempt to express my thoughts.

And when you thought stupidty was one-sided. Here is a link to Danny Glover talking about the earthquake was a result of the response in Copenhagen and Global warming. Yes the religion of left.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/pact_with_gaia/

Any bets on this story being buried

‘And when you thought stupidty was one-sided. Here is a link to Danny Glover talking about the earthquake was a result of the response in Copenhagen and Global warming’
.
Nope. He didn’t say that. Watch your own link. He was warning that disasters of this scale will occur again, to other Caribbean islands, if climate change continues. Are you unaware of the relationship between global warming and hurricane strength?
.
‘Any bets on this story being buried’
.
Sure. I bet that since there’s no story here, the only ones that push it will be wingnuts.

To all conservatives:
.
In the past few days, your peers have engaged rest of the world to display the most disgusting and hateful conduct this side of Civil Rights. It even exceeds the hateful conduct I saw during the Katrina debacle.
.
Under the first Amendment, your peers certainly have the right to conduct themselves in this manner. Even I wouldn’t go so far as to suggest that they be silenced.
.
However, with every right comes responsibility. You may not like hearing this, but that is why you can’t yell ‘fire’ in a theater or ‘bomb’ on an airplane.
.
However,
.
Everyone else in this country, under the same Amendment, has the right to condemn them in the strongest possible terms.
.
And, further, regardless of whether you actually agree with their conduct or not, you had better learn to accept stereotyping as ‘racist’ or ‘hateful’ unless you learn to get your peers to behave themselves and STFU.
.
Don’t waste your time blaming any of us on these blogs for assuming / implying / stating that you racist or hateful are because it is glaringly obvious that the problem lies with your own peers.
.
It is not our problem. Until you clean your own house, you had better learn to accept that that will continue to be the general perception of your movement as well as the GOP in general.
.
You’ve earned it the old fashioned way…

apr2563

“freeinpa: Another one of your responses devoid of fact but imbued with ignorance”

Actually that typifies your responses. It is not a fact because you deem it so.

Air America, Algore TV failed. Why? Nothing anyone wanted hear. And that is a fact! Deal with it.

As the difference between air and sea temperatures rise, so does the intensity of convection in hurricanes.
.
Glover’s a smart man.
.
freeinpa:
.
Ooops. BTW, see following comment. They are quite relevant!

Well, freeinpa, the best we can do is to give you a hankie to wipe the spittle and froth from your mouth as you go into outrage mode, but I’m just not seeing how Danny Glover’s statements are even a blip on the radar.
.
You’re going to give yourself a heart attack if you keep jumping at ghosts and goblins like this…

Oh, now here is an equally interesting story, freeinpa:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070915105639.htm
.
I’m not worried about the publicity…

newfreedomblog:
.
I invite you to read my commentary at 16. Keep in mind that I am not engaging in any such practice unless someone conducts themselves in an equally unpleasant manner.
.
I’ve actually come to enjoy handling it that way as Exiled had made clear a point to me where in effect, I weaken my message if I engage in anything approaching tarring someone else with a label unless they are actually engaged in such practices.
.
I see you are not, however. You are defending your peers actions on the basis of free speech and my commentary on that is quite relevant. Yes, it is an angry comment, but it is a general anger at the ridiculousness of the situation, not at any conservative in particular.
.
It is worth reading and is totally independent of what my opinion or your opinion is of your peers, but it is instead dependent on what perception of your movement and your party is generated at large by their conduct.

I was curious where this came from so I did a quick google search for Glover’s statement. Sure enough, the right wing is in high dudgeon over it. They’ve adopted the misrepresentation and are pushing it as hard as they can. It looks like this is going to be this months ‘Gore said he invented the internet’ smear.

It seems that every week they are trying to cover up their own peer’s misconduct by screaming, with spittle flying:
.
“Look what your peers are doing!”
.
And, of course, failing miserably…

There is science to suggest that climate change could cause earthquakes. Melting ice alters stress on the crust around land masses and could result in earthquakes.
.
Here’s is an article put in layman’s terms.
.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/070830_gw_quakes.html

‘There is science to suggest that climate change could cause earthquakes.’
.
That’s interesting. I don’t know enough to say anything about that one way or the other. I do know this, however: It has nothing to do with what Glover said.
.
Glover was not implying a link between global warming and earthquakes (particularly this one). Glover was warning of a link between climate change and natural disasters (hurricanes) that can plague the Caribbean.
.
To suggest that he said any more or less than that is to play along with the latest right wing smear. On the way to work this morning I heard a radio talker say that ‘Glover said global warming caused the Haiti earthquake’. He used that to ‘balance’ his criticism of what Roberson said (to comply with the MSM rule that you are required to criticize a lefty if you criticize a righty). This smear is taking hold. Resist it.
.
And Gore said he invented the internet.

I don’t consider that there was a connection between the two, and I understand that Danny Glover did not either.
.
The jab here was because the introduction of water into a fault can modify the seismic characteristics of that fault. The water can come from anywhere, hurricanes, etc.
.
However, the changes are not to the total energy of the fault, but instead affect how that energey is released, nothing more.
.
the introduction of water into a fault will cause more frequent smaller quakes and less frequent larger quakes. It will also help to trigger a quake in a dry fault if the energy to produce it is already present.

bobcn1
.
Ridiculing Glover’s statement fails on two(2) levels. One, as you point out, Glover is misquoted. Second, there is the possibility of climate change related earthquakes..
.

McGuire’s speculations of increased geological activity have not yet been published in a journal, but he has written an article about them published in the Guardian Unlimited. Great Science.

Speculations – The science of the left that determines there fantasies to be fact.

Glover, is a leftist buffoon not unlike many leftist here. A lover of the ways of Cuba and Venezuela byt yet still inflicts his stupidity on the US. Listen to the clip. Earthquake caused by global warming..

Nor is your IQ a blip on the radar. Not you can tell me about your vast knowledge of global warming just as you have done about the Black COmmunity.

You must be exhausted

Well, freeinpa, here is how I’ll approach this then:
.
Maybe, since you are such an expert on the Black community, and my time in that community means nothing, then perhaps you can inform us as to what the Black community’s issues and structures are.
.
As for the global warming, I’m sure you could inform me of that as well.
.
The last point being (I’ve listened to it and he isn’t saying global warming is causing earthquakes, see above on the effects of water in faults as well as two articles) even if Danny Glover thinks global warming caused earthquakes, what of it?
.
I don’t see that, even if it were true, as being any more believable than your claim that you know that much about the Black community…

It often takes several years to publish, freeinpa.
.
Usually the procedure is to issue a preprint, a short article in a journal to establish priority of discovery, followed by publication that can be anywhere from 1 to many years later.
.
To make an additional point, speculation (the venturing of an idea without facts) is an anathema to any reputable scientific publication, and is avoided like the plague as it reflects on the integrity of the publisher.
.
So in both respects you are wrong…

53_3
Do you ever think that perhaps, just perhaps, you watch too much news? I don’t ever watch the news at all. Period. And I’m much happier for it. I think you’re exaggerating the extent of the latest ‘discourse.’ The bubble world of the village may be abuzz with talking heads saying ridiculous things. The charlatan Robertson may be up to his usual perversion. However, to suggest that the rhetoric in this country on the right is worse than at any time since the civil rights movement is ludicrous. I haven’t heard a chirp by actual citizens regarding Harry Reid’s comments, the Haiti earthquake or anything else of the nature. All’s quiet on the western front, fifty. From time to time people should learn to ignore what happens in the DC area, as it is truly unrepresentative of the nation.

“Maybe, since you are such an expert on the Black community, and my time in that community means nothing, then perhaps you can inform us as to what the Black community’s issues and structures are”

A twofor: 2 assumptions from 1 idiot. I never claimed to be an expert anywhere nor that your time means nothing. You claimed moral superiority because of the 40 years work you claim to have done. I stated you knew nothing (I could stop here) about me, my beliefs or anything I do but yet you have a knee jerk reaction to calling me a racist. STRIKE 1

=====
“As for the global warming, I’m sure you could inform me of that as well.
.
Never claimed this either although once again you and others are quick to try and silence any critic even as the emails released show intent to commit fraud. Original data that has been destroyed and “adjusted models that are used to demonstrate warming. And then we have Algore, the global warming blowhard who has made outrageous claims but now arrogantly refuses to debate those claims with anyone. Typical of an arrogant smug liberal. well like you. STRIKE 2

=====

“The last point being (I’ve listened to it and he isn’t saying global warming is causing earthquakes, see above on the effects of water in faults as well as two articles) even if Danny Glover thinks global warming caused earthquakes, what of it?”

He does say the earthquake was the result of global warming and the people of Haiti were being punished for the lack of an agreement in Copehagen. How a 2 week old agreement would have stopped the earthquake I am sure the genius of the left can figure that out.And “what of it”. Well first there is no evidence that earthquakes cause any thing but ruined buildings so far. But soon the left will be quoting it as gospel. STRIKE 3

Your out and your final statement points out once again you are a pompous arrogant idiot of the highest order. The Grand Puba of idiots! Don’t ever let anyone tell you that you won’t become anything. Just don’t tell them what it is.

Exiled:
.
I’m actually on the last day of a vacation.
.
But the past few days have been glaringly supportive of the points I make. What I said is a tear-down of the typical defense many conservatives offer to continue the schizophrenic approach to messaging to the rest of the world.
.
Maybe you should take heed.
.
BTW, it’s not just confined to DC. Pat Robertsons’ and Rush Limbaugh’s statements are getting considerable play.
.
And, Exiled, while they may not be your leaders, and I understand that clearly, it is your problem, and not ours.

So really, buried in that long winded tirade is that you resent the fact that I know these things. I’m just keeping people informed of what really goes on when you try to peddle your mis/dis informed rhetoric.
.
You see, virtually everything I point out is widely supported. Really. You should ask people in the Black community if you don’t like my answers. You can find out from them.
.
My point is that instead of opening your mind and doing just that (verifying what I’ve said), you just spew empty insults and rhetoric.
.
It’s equally basic common sense to not take your cues from someone who doesn’t like the Black community and knows nothing about it.
.
It’s simple, freeinpa, all you have to do is ask them! Ask them what is “racist” and why. Ask them, and by all means you are welcome to demonstrate from that why I’m wrong.
.
Hell, Exiled corrected me on an issue the other day, and ohiolib did a little while ago. I don’t mind it. That’s how I learn.
.
As for me knowing these science things, remember that my job pays me to know these things. Just remember the lack of knowledge of any specific subject is a condition and not a fault.
.
I’m sure there are things that you know better than I. There are conversations on this blog that I avoid because I don’t have an in depth knowledge about them, but I don’t resort to insult when I do. I just take my own advise above and wait for topics I do know, and the three topics I’ve discussed are those which I’m very familiar with.
.
If you take that as “arrogance’, then that’s fine with me.

freeinpa wrote: ‘He does say the earthquake was the result of global warming and the people of Haiti were being punished for the lack of an agreement in Copehagen.’
.
That is a bald faced lie! He never uses the words you’;re putting in his mouth. ‘Punished’?? That came from you.. The ‘earthquake was the result…’ came from you as well. He never said that.
.
Why can’t you quote him accurately? Could it be that his actual words would reveal that you’re lying?
.
That fact that you shamelessly cling to the wingnut misrepresentation of Glover’s words says more about you than it does about him. Reasonable people will recognize that his actual words and his meaning (taken in context — and without the additional words you are trying to add) is that global warming can lead to other natural disasters of the scale of Haiti You peddling BS. If you had any shame you’d stop. I don’t expect that you will, however.

I explained that I was citing an article for laymen. Here’s further info:
.
In the early 1970s John Chappell of the Australian National University in Canberra was the first to make the link between glacial advances and retreats and the rate of global volcanism. We now know that the warming that heralded the start of the current interglacial period around 10,000 years ago brought forth a burst of volcanic activity in Iceland, as melting ice caps reduced pressures on the magma chambers below. Allen Glazner of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill identified a similar pattern in eastern California over the past 800,000 years. Increased levels of volcanic activity are also recorded at mid-latitude ice-covered volcanoes in the Cascades Range of the US and in the Andes.
.
Earthquake activity shows a similar pattern. Nils-Axel Mörner of Stockholm University in Sweden first noted that this isostatic rebound triggered earthquakes in post-ice-age Scandinavia, and the effect has since been noted in Scotland and North America. Patrick Wu of the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada, and Paul Johnston of the University of Western Australia in Perth have even gone so far as to suggest that the effect may still be playing a role today. In particular, they have speculated that the continuing rebound of the North American continent may have contributed to the great New Madrid earthquakes that shook the central Mississippi valley in 1811 and 1812.
.
Yet while we may still be feeling the effects of the last ice age, the impact of today’s warming trend might already be making itself felt. In 2004 NASA geophysicist Jeanne Sauber and geologist Bruce Molnia of the US Geological Survey linked unloading of the crust as a result of the rapid glacial melting in south-west Alaska to a magnitude 7.2 earthquake in 1979, and warned that more could be on the way. “In areas like Alaska, where earthquakes occur and glaciers are changing, their relationship must be considered to better assess earthquake hazard,” says Sauber. This has implications for all those parts of the world where glaciers and active faults coincide, including the Alps, Himalayas, Rocky Mountains, Andes and the Southern Alps in New Zealand.

Of particular concern is the continental shelf around Greenland. Here, the unloading and uplift that would follow catastrophic melting of the ice sheet might trigger earthquakes strong enough to dislodge the huge piles of sediment that have accumulated around the edges of the land. The resulting underwater landslides could generate tsunamis on a scale comparable to those that followed the Storegga slide 8000 years ago off the west coast of Norway. The Storegga collapse is thought to have been caused by an underwater earthquake that led to three huge sediment slips. The result was a tsunami more than 20 metres high in the Shetland Isles off the north coast of Scotland and up to 6 metres high along the east coast of the Scottish mainland. This region is now stable, but similar piles of sediment near Greenland are ripe for collapse.
.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19025531.300-climate-change-tearing-the-earth-apart.html?full=true
.
Here is an article from New Scientist with links to scientific articles. Evidence of links between climate and rumblings of the earth crust has been around for years. Crystallizing the mechanisms is currently being investigated.
.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327273.800-climate-change-may-trigger-earthquakes-and-volcanoes.html?full=true

rmrd:
.
I’m thinking wires got crossed. I agree on the issue of water induced seismic activity.
.
It is an excellent summary and much more easily understandable than my explanations.

[...] Perhaps The Last Word On Pat Roberston, Haiti The White House is speechless. Pat Robertson is clarifying. But fellow evangelical pastor Rick Warren has perhaps the [...] [...]

You get dumber by the day. And I did not think it possible. Save your race-baiting tirades. You continue to act as judge jury and God-Almighty himself with your idiot tirades.

Have you noticed though that none of the more reasonable liberals here seem to agree with your strident nonsense.

I have come to accept that you will label any one who disagrees with your self-ordained superiority and expect the name calling. It has as much affect as a child holding his breath. It does cement your title as IDIOT SUPREME. (For all the world to see)

rmrd, 53 and bobcn1, the Moe, Larry and Curley of liberal discourse.

As usual your final discourse is reduced to calling someone a liar. Hmm since that is what the liberal have done in the last 12 months protecting Obama it would seem I have taken a page from your tactics, if it were true.

Once again you don;t like the truth so keep lying to yourself.

“buried.. that I know these things”

Again you make an assumption based on your own say so and claim it as fact. That is the one truth consisten tin everything you say.
===

“everything I say is widely supported”

Widely suppoorted by your own rhetoric and nothing else.
===
“It’s equally basic common sense to not take your cues from someone who doesn’t like the Black community and knows nothing about it.”

This is the best of your lunacy and you prove exactly what I have been saying. You know nothing about me or what I do and insist that only you opinion on blacks matter. Even better is your dumb ass assumption that the black community is monolithic in its thought.

So by virtue of “If you take that as “arrogance’, then that’s fine with me.” I am glad to see you finely agree that you are an arrogant dumb ass. And I am fine with that too.

freeinpa
.
You turn political disagreements into being just disagreeable. You say that the African-American community is not monolithic which is true. The African-American community has people who are religious fundamentalists and Liberal Christians. There are Blacks who support drastic cuts in welfare and Blacks who desire more aid for those in poverty.. 15% of African-Americans self-identify as Republicans.
.
Where the African-American community does become monolithic is at the Presidential ballot box. After the states rights campaign of Barry Goldwater, GOP support from the African-American community fell to the 10% range at best and 5% at worse..
.
GW Bush got 20% of the African-American community in Ohio to vote for him by waving the threat of Gay marriage in front of a strongly religious community. Even pulling the strings of social Conservatism, Blacks rejected the GOP 4:1.
.
Blacks realize that the GOP views them as pawns. GW Bush’s Christian outreach into the Black community disappeared after the votes had been cast.. Blacks were used by the GOP, as 80% of Black Ohio voters realized they would.
.
At the end of the day, African-Americans watch Republicans on TV, read GOP/Conservative commentary in print and read the posts of Conservative bloggers such as yourself. African-Americans analyze these observations and realize that they just don’t want to be associated with people like you..
.
Yes, freeinpa, you are part and parcel of the reason that African-Americans reject the GOP. The stench of the verbiage used in your posts reflects what Blacks hear from the GOP on issues of race.
.
My parents and grandparents were never on welfare. We have earned our living, paid our bills, and served the country. We look at the GOP as the enemy. You help keep that perception alive.
.
Your posts reek of condescension and racial bias. You may not like how 53_3 addresses the issues, but the GOP loses 90% of the African-American vote. You and your cohorts are not viewed seriously on issues of race. That is just the simple fact documented in the Presidential vote every four years.
.
You and the GOP refuse to change. Persisting in the same action, and expecting a different result at the Presidential ballot box ix is a form of mental illness.

.