Gut Rumbles
 

June 28, 2004

the religious left

Stories such as this one disturb me. Political discourse always becomes acrimonious in an election year, but what's happening this year goes beyond acrimonious--- it's becoming hideous.

I'm accustomed to having the left brand everybody on the right as church-burning racists who hate the poor, drag blacks behind pickup trucks and rape the environment for the sheer fun of it. I'm accustomed to having the right brand everybody on the left as baby-killing, tax-and-spend communists who can't pour piss out of a boot when it comes to national defense. That's just politics.

But this year is different. The hard-core left is behaving more and more like a religious cult every day. They don't want to argue the issues and they don't really seem to have any coherent philosophy except "WE HATE BUSH!" What passes for debate among that group is nothing more than a chant, a mantra. "Bush lied and people died; it's all about oiiilll.....AHHHH-MEN!"

When a political party annoints Bill Clinton (who would need KY jelly instead of olive oil on HIS head), Al Gore (who flipped the last two wing-nuts holding his brain in place several years ago) and Michael Moore (who resembles the Goodyear Blimp in need of a bath and a shave) as their High Priests, that party is in trouble. When loyal followers drink the communion kool-ade and WORSHIP such warped people, the entire nation is in trouble.

I have a troll on this site who constantly regurgitates the same leftist bullshit every time he reads a post that doesn't fit what he's been taught in the Church of the Almighty Left. He's never posted an original thought and I doubt that he ever will. He's just one of those leftist dolls with a pull-string implanted in his back, so that he has only about a dozen sentences that he can speak and they've all been programmed into him ahead of time.

"Oh YEAH? You don't like Michael Moore, but what about Rush Limbaugh? Huh? Huh? Huh?" (Well, Rush Limbaugh lost a lot of weight. Michael Moore is a fat pig. I believe that my argument is better than yours. At least I have ONE FACT on my side.)

I haven't seen the political landscape so fractured since 1968. I smell venom in the air and I don't like it. The right may still have its share of KKK nutballs, bible-thumping fundamentalists and Confederate flag-waving rednecks, but that's just normal. Those people have always been around and they always will be, sorta like environmentalists and teacher's unions on the left.

What IS NOT normal is the religious fervor I see from people who claim to care about this country when they don't bother to read the news, because nothing they see there is going to change their minds, and they ignore the fact that we are at war, because it interferes with their personal agenda. They are angry, but they don't really know why. They hate Bush, but they can't articulate the resons without resorting to cant and mantra, or outright lies. These are dangerous people.

We don't have Brown Shirts in this country today. We have jihadis.

Comments

"I have a troll on this site who constantly regurgitates the same leftist bullshit every time he reads a post that doesn't fit what he's been taught in the Church of the Almighty Left. He's never posted an original thought and I doubt that he ever will. He's just one of those leftist dolls with a pull-string implanted in his back, so that he has only about a dozen sentences that he can speak and they've all been programmed into him ahead of time." -Acidman

Oh stop it. You bastards had Ken Starr, 7 years and 70 million taxpayers' dollars with which you misused to accuse Clinton of everything from rape to murder.

Now a little 2 hour movie comes out that makes the drunk look like the fool he is, and y'all shit yourselves.

Grow the fuck up. You're all typical ballsless right-wing chickenhawks.

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 08:17 PM

You just proved my point. Thank you.

Posted by: Acidman on June 28, 2004 08:31 PM

Sorry to intrude on your troll-board, A-man, but I have to point out that your punchline is incorrect.

A jihadi, by Islamic definition, is willing to die for his cause. My guess is that less than 2% of the lefty asshats preaching or subscribing to hate-bush dot shit would be as willing to put their lives where their pottymouths are.

Posted by: Rivrdog on June 28, 2004 08:36 PM

Do you chickenhawks really believe Bush's poll numbers have plummeted because of message board "trolls" and Michael Moore?

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 08:57 PM

"My guess is that less than 2% of the lefty asshats preaching or subscribing to hate-bush dot shit would be as willing to put their lives where their pottymouths are."

Sort of like how Bush and Cheney weren't willing to put their lives where their pottymouths were back in the 'sixties?

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 09:00 PM

Seems theres a fair amount of nutballs on the lunatic fringes of fanaticism. Both groups more than willing to drink the kool aid of their faiths beliefs.

It's for us "hate Bush, but know Kerry's not worth much more folks", that you "Kerry's a piece of shit, but damn that Bush guys screwing up mighty bad" people to hash out a middle ground before either extremist camp gets into power and really does freedom in.

Posted by: IXLNXS on June 28, 2004 09:00 PM

And Acidman, I resent being referred to as a "troll". I shall be filing a formal complaint with the Association of Bloogers forthwith.

You've been warned.

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 09:07 PM

Hilarious. We simultaneously referenced Mike Moore and Goodyear blimps. Great minds think alike.

Posted by: Velociman on June 28, 2004 09:14 PM

Great mind? Acidman? Bullshit! Try asshole!
I liven-up his comments section immensely and lookit how the bastard thanks me.

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 09:21 PM

hey troll,
http://politics.slate.msn.com/id/2102723

Why don't you go over and read this, by one of you own, and then TRY to say something to indicate your two vapid brain cells are able to create an original thought.

My guess is that you're ineluctably unable to excogitate

Posted by: wes jackson on June 28, 2004 09:30 PM

I hate white people I hate niggers. If I had the guts I'd put a fucking gun to my head and blow my worthless brains all over my bedroom wall. I'm 16 years old and I hate the world. My mother has AIDS and my father died of an STD when I was 4. I'm a recovering drug addict and HIV +. Can you blame me for being so angry? I'm a raging homosexual and I have sex with women just to infect them with my virus. I wish I were dead. I keep coming back to this blog because I'm envious of Acidman's intellect and knowledge. He really knows what he's talking about and I dont and it pisses me off. Why else would I continue to come back here time after time and comment on the same post multiple times. I'm obsessed. Forgive me. I hope someone tracks down my IP address, looks up my address, comes to my dying mother's house and murders us both. NIGGERS MUST DIE!!! SO MUST THE WHITE MAN!! I'm Arab/muslim by the way.

Posted by: MILDLYDISTURBED on June 28, 2004 09:38 PM

Hitchens is a miserable drunk.
He was so drunk on Crossfire last week he couldn't answer simple questions.
Like Dennis Miller, he's fallen on hard times, so he hos himself to the loony-right.
I don't bother reading drunks.
Why are all GOP heroes drunks and pill-poppers and sex perverts?

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 09:41 PM

Who is the hysterical faery imping me?
Acidman, please send me his IP# and I'll deal with him...

-Thanks,
(The Real) MD

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 09:43 PM

This post is just weak post, A-man.

What on the news is supposed to change our minds? Which anti-Bushite can't name 50 things that he or she does not like about Bush?

Posted by: The Answer on June 28, 2004 09:47 PM

Okay, name them. Fifty reasons are a LOT. Did you think about that number before it flew out of your neck, or were you just pretending to be Michael Moore?

Posted by: Acidman on June 28, 2004 10:05 PM

You are 1,000% right about the religious aspect.
It's just not an issue open to debate.

Posted by: wes jackson on June 28, 2004 10:26 PM

Compare the "70 million" Starr used to bring a felon to justice versus 500 million dollars (yes, you read that right) in travel expenses over the 8 years of Clintoon corruption.

Someone please pull the batteries on these leftbots.

Feel free to use that term anywhere, anytime.

Leftbot: a drone programmed by the ghost of karl marx

Posted by: horse with no-- on June 28, 2004 10:29 PM

"Compare the "70 million" Starr used to bring a felon to justice versus 500 million dollars (yes, you read that right) in travel expenses over the 8 years of Clintoon corruption."

Ding, Ding, Ding. We have a winner for dumbest post of the week.

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 10:50 PM

What these leftist asshats always fail to do is argue the issues.

Hey Mildly, I have a few questions for you to answer honestly, if that is possible:

* What is your response to Putin's statement that he warned the Bush administration that Saddam was planning attacks on the US way before the war?

* What are your thoughts on the recent pronouncement from the glorious UN stating that Saddam HAD WMD but moved them out of Iraq prior to and during the war?

* What do you think of the fact that Al-Zaquawri was in Iraq prior to the war?

* Your thoughts on the scumbag who rolled Leon Klinghoffer in his wheelchair off the Achille Lauro hiding out in Bahgdad?

* Where do you stand on Saddam sending $25,000 to the families of Pali suicide bombers?

Your honest answers, sans spin, would be most appreciated.

Posted by: rightisright on June 28, 2004 10:54 PM

"What are your thoughts on the recent pronouncement from the glorious UN stating that Saddam HAD WMD but moved them out of Iraq prior to and during the war?"

Where do you guys get this stupid shit?

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 28, 2004 10:58 PM

Well, guess we now have a reason for your fancy new carpet cleaner....what with all the droppings left by the trolls and all. Hope it has that deep steam cleaning action.

Great post Rob. And as if by magic the evidance showed up right on que.
Your observation about the venom in the air not being this bad since "68. I think it is worse than that. At least the left and far left at that time (if memory serves) were saying what is now quite common for the first time. And had unporven idealism going for them *then*. The only sad thing is they never grew up. Nor did they seek to find any working solutions for the ills they sought to cure.
Now I think more then venom....there is a more corrosive tinge to what is in the air. And more than a bit of corruptness.
Civility is fast heading south, if not already gone.

Posted by: Guy S. on June 29, 2004 01:06 AM

It has been my experience that these people (The far Left) are so filled with hatred for G.W. Bush that you can't carry on an intelligent or meaningful conversation with them. I wish they could be ignored, but that could prove to be a very dangerous thing.

About all you can do is point out their lunacy and then move on... They will continue to babble and spout their unadulterated crap, but at least they are easily disarmed!

They are such pathetic, mindless, and misguided creatures! Their leaders and social icons are no more intelligent!

Posted by: Bob on June 29, 2004 03:54 AM

"Their leaders and social icons are no more intelligent!"

Hey, Bob. Here's yours!
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2995/dumb.jpg

Now go watch some Faux.

Posted by: MildlyDisturbed on June 29, 2004 10:57 AM

You really need to ban this child molesting freak. For your readers sake.

Posted by: Sam on June 29, 2004 07:59 PM

Yes I am a child molester. But I prefer kittens.

Posted by: MILDLYDISTURBED on June 29, 2004 07:59 PM

RightIsRight -

I'll take that challenge.

* What is your response to Putin's statement that he warned the Bush administration that Saddam was planning attacks on the US way before the war?

That it's total bullshit.

With all of the finger-pointing that's been going on,
with all of the blood-pissing on both sides,
with all of the arguments for and against the war, and before and after the war --

this comes out now? Putin was either holding onto this to curry favor with Bush, or he's ... exaggerating his point. I have no doubt that Saddam harbored thoughts of stiking back at his greatest enemy (that being US), but he hadn't done so directly (or in my opinion indirectly) in the 13 years between wars. That tells me he probably couldn't. It was bluster and nothing more. And Putin presenting it as some sort of "deus ex Russia" to help Bush politically - and himself in the process - is the simplest explanation, with no corroborating evidence or reports from anyone else.

Oh, and let me congratulate you. You've just quoted a dictator-in-the-making to support the President. Good job.

* What are your thoughts on the recent pronouncement from the glorious UN stating that Saddam HAD WMD but moved them out of Iraq prior to and during the war?

Prove it. They haven't. You haven't.

And if they, or we, have evidence of this - real, direct, concrete evidence - then they need to lay it out in front of the entire planet. They don't have to do it in front of the U.N.; they can do it at CIA headquarters, or the White House, or Central Park, or my house. But saying it and proving it are two different things. And if they COULD prove it, they could openly challenge the country or countries storing the weapons, and call them on the carpet a la the Cuban Missile Crisis. It's going to take that kind of direct evidence to build support for another war or attack. The fact that we haven't seen it suggests that either the evidence isn't strong enough to more than pitch rhetoric, or that it doesn't exist. I don't think you could keep that kind of evidence under wraps for long, given the more "leak-friendly" media environment these days.

* What do you think of the fact that Al-Zaquawri was in Iraq prior to the war?

I think the President flat-out failed to do his job in capturing or killing him. One must again ask, "why?" The camp al-Zaquawri allegedly ran had been abandoned for months at the time of Powell's presentation to the U.N. Security Council. Moreover, it was under the northern no-fly umbrella, which means we could have bombed it at any time since we controlled the airspace. Why did we not, if we had supposedly strong evidence that this was THE al-Qaeda man on the ground in Iraq? A possible suggestion is that President Bush left him alone so as not to undercut his case for war with Hussein. If this is true, then Bush failed to remove a threat for political purposes. I do not put this possibility past him. And his subsequent actions placede American lives at greater risk for leaving this man free.

* Your thoughts on the scumbag who rolled Leon Klinghoffer in his wheelchair off the Achille Lauro hiding out in Bahgdad?

The same thought as Nazi rocket scientists and former Waffen SS members living in America. He wound up there. He was in Palestine for years before he wound up in Iraq. Also probably lived in several other places - Tunisia, Libya, Jordan - before moving to Saddam's casspit. So why wasn't he picked up before he moved to Baghdad?

* Where do you stand on Saddam sending $25,000 to the families of Pali suicide bombers?

The extremely secular Saddam was currying favor with the Islamic militants by trying to buy them off. Saddam had even less use for an al-Qaeda presence than Saudi Arabia does, since they wanted to kick his ass as well. Islam was at the bottom of his priority list, and I don't think you can dispute that.

Now, if you want to suggest that Saddam was actually able to buy any influence with al-Qaeda with this little stunt - beyond a little pocket of goodwill here and there for thumbing his nose at America - with his military pretty much decrepit, no influence or political ties with any of his neighbors, and evidence of his impending ouster growing every day from the saber-rattling in this Administration - with no real ability to project any force anywhere, diplomatically or militarily or monetarily - then you're working with a different set of facts than I have found anywhere. The only statement bin Laden has ever made with regard to Hussein that I've heard is that the U.S. is an even bigger enemy then Iraq's secular regime to al-Qaeda's goals for an Islamic resurgence, so for now they fight a common enemy and it's okay to do that for now. It was in one of the broadcast tapes - if I can find a transcript, I'll post it here.

CS

Posted by: Captain Sunshine on June 29, 2004 08:55 PM

Acidman, in your second to last graf you said "They are angry, but they don't really know why." It's been a rough three years for all of us, with 9/11, Iraq, and all, but I'll be more than up-front by saying that it's all about power for these people. Maybe some mean well; who knows? But the way the people you have noted in your post behave, it's all about power for them, and getting it "back" at all cost.

I am only left wondering if they do get it back, would they even know how to know what is good for our country.

Posted by: OF Jay on June 30, 2004 03:53 AM

I thoroughly agree with Acidman's post on the vitriolic left. I am not a brownshirt, and resent being called one by Al Gore.

Posted by: Persnickety on June 30, 2004 02:32 PM

you point out that the right has it's share of nutjobs, but excuse it because it's always been there. that doesn't make it okay.

the extreme left is emerging as a big, obnoxious presence, but they are nowhere near the level of casual acceptance that the extreme right manages to get. the extreme right is ubiquitous, and has been fuming and raving for a long time. so the left is starting to respond in kind. unfortunately, it's a pretty logical progression, if you're getting hammered with constant insults and misleading facts for years, you're probably going to come up with some of your own.

and calling the left jihadi without mention of the actual stated holy-war goals of our mister bush...

and come on, without the extremes what the hell would we watch on tv? fighting is heeee-larious.

Posted by: HENRY OHIO on July 15, 2004 05:31 PM

Actually, the problem clearly isn't one of left-wing extremism, it's the fact that the left in this country isn't active, vocal or violent enough. In Europe, for every skinhead, there are about ten mohawk-wearing, tattoed, chain swinging leftists who shift the balance. This is why Europe has a solid educational system, national healthcare, and a bulletproof retirement system for the elderly. In the US, the right wing can always depend on its fringe to be way scarier than anything the left has to offer, so the whole national debate swings further to the right, and the average person gets screwed.

Posted by: Siegfried on July 15, 2004 05:35 PM
Post a comment














*Note: If you are commenting on an older entry, your
comment will not appear until it has been approved.
Do not resubmit it.