Radical comments.

[aegsm76]

I had actually forgotten about the Supreme Court issue.
I would say that this was worse than the Congressmen who shouted "Liar".
The President had the power and microphone and chose to use it in a "bullying" manner to address the Supreme Court Justices.
He should have apologized for that, just as the Congressman apologized to him.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Over the last 20 years, there has been more violence towards other people coming from the right-winged extremists than the left.

Still, my fellow Republicans won't admit it and they won't admit that the nasty rhetoric some people on the right spew have any effect on the likes of Loughner and other angry white people.

Yep, I bring race into this because race has a part in this discussion.

There were jokes a few years back about the "angry white male".

People weren't laughing after Oklohoma City.

They're not laughing after Tuscon.

JD everything is about race with you, give it a break, and for just once try talking about a topic with your race colored glasses to the side.

Do you think its okay for the president (regardless of skin color) to say "if they bring a knife, we'll bring a gun" or to call "fellow americans" his "enemies"?

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by coadie

The word Idiot as used by you is an example of heated rhetoric.

You are so deeply immersed in left wing ideology it is a natural part of your speech.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Democratic Underground is not mainstream and does not carry the same weight of Beck or others being over the top with their comments.

There are some on the right who are almost consistently making over the top remarks that make the mainstream-- because they are part of the mainstream media.

It's not like Beck and Limbaugh can only be picked up on my transistor radio.



I don't have an agenda to push in this discussion.

LOL-Post of the day

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Can you give an example of that?

I can look back to that one interview she flubbed. She was not prepared and her mistake or foolishness was to go on there and not expect to be grilled. Does that make her an idiot? No I bet most Americans didn't know what issues John McCain was a Maverick on.

Does that mean she is a genius? No not at all nor do we necessarily need someone with a high intellect running the country. Intellect does not translate into leadership skills or a solid moral compass. Rush Limbaugh is a member of Mensa and Im sure even many Republicans would not want him as president.

There are so many more issues than intellectualism to being in a high office.
Basically the intellectuals join think tanks and give leaders ideas.

That is why it's easy for Media to exploit little things about a person's intellect or image to make them look stupid.

For example Bush. I don't think Bush is an idiot. I do think the man has dyslexia and is unconventional in the way he speaks..does that make him a genius? No but by no means an mental moron either

I don't personally think Palin has the qualities of running for the highest office in the land but those qualifications have nothing to do with being smart or stupid.

What is hilarious is the assumption that someone like Obama is of superior intellect. He was telegenic. He could read well. He was young, had a pleasant smile and demeanor. Most of all he was a liberal. So something like "57 states" would get scant attention or played off as evidence of fatigue. Had it been W or Palin, the reruns of the sound bite would've been endless and made Keith Olbermann's "Worst Person" segment.

Yet this guy has no qualifications to be president and his first two years have shown. He can't even understand Economics 101. At least in Alaska, Gov. Palin had a balanced budget, played hardball with the oil companies to give every Alaska citizen several thousand dollar check as a reward for their oil reserves, she cleaned up the corruption in Juneau and she enjoyed a high approval rate.

Oh, but she doesn't read the NY Times, Washington Post, she doesn't believe in global warming and she hunts! Well that must mean she is ignorant, a lightweight, a baffoon.

Notice every liberal leader that comes along is to be admired as an intellectual: Carter, Clinton, Hillary, Ted Kennedy, Kerry, Dukakis, Mondale, Obama. Notice they never are asked questions like "who is the president of Kazhakstan?" Or "What newspapers do you read?" The assumption is made that we need not question their intellect, because they believe in evolution, global warming, gay marriage, legalized drugs, big government, high taxes on the rich, etc.

Professing themselves to be wise they become fools...

[deacon blues]

Mark it down, whoever emerges as the front runner for the GOP will be portrayed in some manner that will have nothing to do with their abilities, achievements or qualifications as president. They will be portrayed be perception: if they make a gaffe, stumble on a question, create a sound bite that can be exploited, you can bet the media elite hound dogs will be all over it. The strategy is always the same: conservaitves are always bigoted, hayseed, religiously fanatical, morons who couldn't lead this country like an Ivy League educated, compassionate, profound, awe-inspiring and attractive liberal.