Gosh, why wouldn’t the nation take advice on foreign policy and terrorism from them?!!??!?!

Guess he hasn’t checked out the beauties I have seen that are Republicans vs the code pink crowd, breast not bombs crowd (I think I went blind when I saw that..omg omg omg….I had to gouge out my eyes) and the majority of the democrat or the loony democrats…

Hmmm excruciating…..that would be even looking at “mr scrotum inflator”, or the old men walking around without pants, or the old women with breast down to the their knees and big ol’ hairy armpits…

By the way, I believe those are DEMOCRATS.

I have not seen Republicans that looked like that!
Maybe it just isn’t being covered, but has anyone SEEN a republican or republican demonstration that had men and women exposing themselves to little children? how about a republican infating their scrotum?

Republicans may have some extreme people also, some on the chritian right, BUT, I have yet to see the whacked out, nutjobs on the right as I do see WAY to much of on the left!!!

Remember Kommrads….100 years of failure and 100 million dead proves nothing!

(Brought to you by Laika the Space Dog- Beaming Powery People power and truthiness to the Peoples tinhats everywhere since 1957.)

My comment was in response to the right’s reaction in general to statements like these. Summarily dismissing them with no analysis beyond “he’s crazy”.

Though I see you haven’t actually responded to the issues in my post, either.

I actually am quite curious as to how far you guys want to take executive power. It’s a serious question that I ask in good faith, because I really don’t understand how far you would take it. I haven’t seen the right draw a line anywhere on this issue… just perpetually saying that the line hasn’t been crossed. SO WHERE IS THE LINE? Can you even admint that “technically” it’s been crossed, but not “meaningfully” (for lack of a better term) since we need to be safe? If so, when is the line “meaningfully” crossed?

I’m trying to tease a little analysis of this from the right… if they can’t answer those questions, how can they say they’ve really contemplated this issue honestly?

And thank you for proving that when it comes to that moral relativism, Keith Olbermann has some stiff competition. From you.

Your attacks on the right’s comprehension are laughable, considering it’s you who has the comprehension problems – not to mention have set up several strawmen to tear down, perhaps because tearing down my actual argument was beyond your capability. Don’t feel bad. You’re not alone.

Apparently you need to watch your “passionate” Olbermann again. If this is what qualifies for legit “passion” in the Democratic party, then you guys are even more far gone than I initially thought.

Not once did olbermann compare bush or rummy or anyone to Hitler. His comparison was to the government of Neville Chamberlain and how that government (which was SOOOO wrong) used to silence it’s critic through intimidation and accusations of intellectual and moral bankruptcy.

Olbermann’s words were eloquent and passionate, and you take issue with them because they offend your chosen authority (BushCO). Yet right-blogistan is afire today calling Olbermann intellectually and morally bankrupt. Sometimes I think the right simply suffers from absurdly awful comprehension…I mean, to respond in that way to what he said is to prove his point.

Also,

“dishonest, war-mongering, human-rights violating president” is not a slur.

OK… please, please go on record saying that you believe:

1. The president is honest
2. The president doesn’t start wars
3. The president doesn’t violate human rights

The right has been arguing for quite a while now that the president has to do these things to keep us safe. When someone actually bothers to notice and be upset about it, are they being “loony”? No, they aren’t. They disagree about the necessity of lying, starting wars, and violating human rights.

See the issue here? Anyone?

The “loony” left is telling the truth… but you guys just don’t like what you’re hearing. Stand up for yourselves! Say “Yes, the president is all those things, and it keeps me safe!”.

Of course you won’t, because if you put things that way, YOU sound like the loons. So instead you pretend that it isn’t breaking the law if it makes you feel safe. Rediculous, and you probably know it.

Drop the ad-hominems and critize him on the substance.

If a dictator in this country would keep us safe, why not impose a dictatorship? If our very existence is threatened as you are all so sure of, why don’t we just make Bush dictator?

If not, then where do you draw the line? Do we have to be in MORE danger? Do we need a half-dictatorship? The president can break some laws but not others? Well which ones then?

Moral relativism and slippery slopes come in many shapes and sizes.

The Left has been making these same viscious slurs since at least the Clinton Administration. Whenever I hear some ninny whine about the loss of civility in politics, I tell ‘em, “Tell it to Bill and Hillary. They made it an integral part of politics.” It’s only a short step beyond that to attacking your neighbor for his/her beliefs. Communists/Fascists used that to their bloody advantage.

I admit it, every so often I used to watch Countdown with Keith Olbermann a long time ago. His sarcastic style of delivery was entertaining at times.

Then he started getting on my nerves.