If one cannot argue the point intelligently, or win the debate, then the predilection is to simply end the debate by any means. Perhaps these people should move someplace like Iran, where people with dissenting opinions are jailed.

Free speech is only free if it is your speech according to Dems.

I’ve been consistent. I’ve said that this country has been governed to the left EVERY year for over 6 decades. Conservatives do not have a governing majority and the answer is NOT to elect leftist Democrats….

One thing you aren’t clear on it seems is that the constitution provides for the government to provide for our security. The 3 big entitlements can be debated and even how the government provides for the American people’s security can be debated but let’s be clear that constitutionally providing for our security is not something I consider to be “big” government no matter how liberals want to frame it or mislabel things as unconstitutional. While I’ll agree with you on the skyrocketing domestic spending (which Democrat leaders have called cuts – lying) shows bigger and bigger government and perpetuates the problem this country faces as the big 3 entitlements are up to 50% of government spending and defense spending has gone from 50% of spending 3 decades ago to 20% today, the problem is not defense but the myriad of leftist programs that will never be fixed because we don’t have enough conservatives in office. Making Nancy speaker will not help.

ST asks, “That’s not exclusionary, it’s just recognizing where it comes from the most. Don’t you guys EVER read what you critique or do you just pass off standard talking points memos and hope people won’t question what you say?”

Reading Comprehension problems are exhibited by almost every lefty on this site.

Let’s have some clarity here for lefties. There are examples of the right I’m sure who do not let the left speak – are there big examples? I don’t know. But Peggy penned her story with her perspective for a reason. With all of the fresh examples these last few years the only way the left can really change our perspective (Peggy’s perspective) on this issue is not by being shrill and making false accusations about Peggy being exclusionary but by the left looking at their own behavior and controlling it.

One of the great lessons of life (and one of the hardest to learn) is that you can’t control others. You can only control your own words and actions. Peggy’s perspective (and mine and ST’s) is what it is and if a lefty wanted to do more to change our perspective they could look at their own behavior and words and change their selves. Of course that would leave us to look at our behavior and words.

The amount of fascism and control that lefties want to exert over people with differing viewpoints speaks for itself to us. Let us be free to make idiotic points. If we make idiotic points like calling somebody a traitor with no facts to back it up and the perspective is way out there…. then let us look like idiots. Let free speech be. But the issue on the table is the shutting down of speech. Just because you don’t like the speech doesn’t mean you should shut it down. I love lefties exposing their beliefs (like Charlie Rangel letting us know there isn’t one Bush tax cut that he’d consider removing or letting expire). It helps people decide who they want to vote for!!!

It’s very telling that you should say something like that in this thread.

Dr. Sanity has some interesting psychological thoughts on these narcissistic solipsistic self-absorbed witless, clueless fools on the far left addicted to their own solecisms. My personal take is that they are victims of mass psychosis.

I don’t listen to Barbara Steisand and never will. But maybe Barbara should have put a disclaimer to the ticket purchasers that she was going to do this. The people are paying to hear her sing. Her politics are offensive to many americans. The good news being that this is one of the early shows of her tour, so now the people know what to expect and can vote with thier pockets books. Shut up and sing Barbra. That’s the job they are paying you to do.

Yet one more person who can’t seem to read what is written. Noonan mentioned the right, here:

And all this continues to come more from the left than the right in America.

That’s not exclusionary, it’s just recognizing where it comes from the most. Don’t you guys EVER read what you critique or do you just pass off standard talking points memos and hope people won’t question what you say?

Furthermore, your declaration that mine and Noonan’s examples are “somewhat pitiful” is more than “somewhat pitiful” in and of itself. The fact that you and the rest of your pals on the far left live in your little made up reality doesn’t change reality of what I wrote, nor what Noonan wrote. The far left, especially lately, has become completely unhinged and simply cannot stand to be challenged on their viewpoints. The examples provided bear that out, contrary to your lame protestations to the contrary. That is a fact that only the ignorant, ill-informed, and clueless will try and deny.

Its so interesting that those in power must constantly play the victim.

And for anyone who goes to a Barbra Streisand concert to suddenly wake up and discover that she has strong political beliefs and express his discomfort with her right to express them can certainly vote with his pocketbook. The examples that you, Ms. Noonan and the author of this blog employ are somewhat pitiful. It is this administration that has used public funds to stage public events where any dissenters are excluded and even subject to arrest.

It is the din of your blessed talk radio mavens that has drowned out all dissent by ratcheting up the volume and vitriol. Limbaugh blames the pages for Foley’s amoral behavior. Noonan disproves her own thesis by blaming only one side.

And all the while these mavens of sensitivity are concerned that there can be no debate. Please provide me with one example of the current holders of power engaging the opposition party in anything even remotely resembling a debate on the issues.

This is one.

1) The bigger government is, the less potentially prosperous a nation can be and standard of living among the people is less – The average European has less living space than the poor (defined as being under the poverty line) American.

2) The bigger government is, the more at stake there is for continuing programs and grants to certain researchers and perpetuating funding for this or that. CA has a problem where Unions in this state have self grown themselves with doubling their funding from employees paychecks in recent years to claim that Arnold has cut funding for education, fire fighters pensions, first responders, health programs etc, when none of these accusations are true. Every year there is an increase in their budget and it is a black and white fact.

3) The bigger government is, the more government gets involved in like bothering themselves with limiting the freedom of speech. And it’s leftists who agree with this big government approach and PRACTICE this big government (fascist) approach.

We are LUCKY that talk radio came into being and the Internet is healthy during a time when the Democrats had a basically 54 year control of Congress. Now that the monopoly of information to big drive by media is over (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, WaPo, NYT) I believe this country is a little better off than other countries who aren’t hearing these alternative points of view and perspective. More and more we are voting in conservatives. Little by little. It continues to surprise big government leftists but the American people are more full of common sense than leftists realize.

- Bang

The left can dish it, but they sure can’t take it. I think the people at the concert were entitled to a refund once she turned it into a political rally.