[Desertdog]

Liberals - "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy,"
Jim Meyers
http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/11/1/162756.shtml


A new book by a top investigative journalist exposes the blatant hypocrisy of liberals who loudly espouse principles they disregard in their own personal lives.

In "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy," Hoover Fellow Peter Schweizer reveals the glaring contradictions between the public stances and real-life behavior of prominent liberals including Michael Moore, Ted Kennedy, Al Franken, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Ralph Nader – among others. [NewsMax has a free offer for this new book – Go Here Now.]

"Hypocrisy has proved to be a wonderful weapon for liberals in their war against conservatives," Schweizer writes in the November issue of NewsMax Magazine.

"Yet for all the talk about conservative hypocrisy, there has been very little investigation into the prevalence of hypocrisy on the left."

After two years of research into liberal hypocrisy, Schweizer said, "what I discovered was just stunning."

Schweizer's well-annotated book, published by Doubleday, has just been released and its sure to turn several well-known liberals red with anger.

Among the eye-opening revelations of "Do As I Say":

Filmmaker Michael Moore insists that corporations are evil and claims he doesn't invest in the stock market due to moral principle. But Moore's IRS forms, viewed by Schweizer, show that over the past five years he has owned shares in such corporate giants as Halliburton, Merck, Pfizer, Sunoco, Tenet Healthcare, Ford, General Electric and McDonald's.

Staunch union supporter Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) has received the Cesar Chavez Award from the United Farmworkers Union. But the $25 million Northern California vineyard she and her husband own is a non-union shop.

The hypocrisy doesn't end there. Pelosi has received more money from the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees union than any other member of Congress in recent election cycles.


But the Pelosis own a large stake in an exclusive hotel in Rutherford, Calif. It has more than 250 employees. But none of them are in a union, according to Schweizer, author of "The Bushes: Portrait of a Dynasty" and a regular contributor to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and other periodicals.

The Pelosis are also partners in a restaurant chain called Piatti, which has 900 employees. The chain is – that's right, a non-union shop.

Ralph Nader is another liberal who claims that unions are essential to protect worker rights. But when an editor of one of his publications tried to form a union to ameliorate miserable working conditions, the editor was fired and the locks changed on the office door.

Self-described socialist Noam Chomsky has described the Pentagon as "the most vile institution on the face of the earth" and lashed out against tax havens and trusts that benefit only the rich.

But Chomsky has been paid millions of dollars by the Pentagon over the last 40 years, and he used a venerable law firm to set up his irrevocable trust to shield his assets from the IRS.

Air America radio host Al Franken says conservatives are racist because they lack diversity and oppose affirmative action. But fewer than 1 percent of the people he has hired over the past 15 years have been African-American.

Ted Kennedy has fought for the estate tax and spoken out against tax shelters. But he has repeatedly benefited from an intricate web of trusts and private foundations that have shielded most of his family's fortune from the IRS.

One Kennedy family trust wasn't even set up in the U.S., but in Fiji.

Another family member, environmentalist Robert Kennedy Jr., has said that it is not moral to profit from natural resources. But he receives an annual check from the family's large holdings in the oil industry.

Barbra Streisand has talked about the necessity of unions to protect a "living wage." But she prefers to do her filming and postproduction work in Canada, where she can pay less than American union wages.

Bill and Hillary Clinton have spoken in favor of the estate tax, and in 2000 Bill vetoed a bill seeking to end it. But the Clintons have set up a contract trust that allows them to substantially reduce the amount of inheritance tax their estate will pay when they die.

Hillary, for her part, has written and spoken extensively about the right of children to make major decisions regarding their own lives.

But she barred 13-year-old daughter Chelsea from getting her ears pierced and forbid the teen from watching MTV or HBO.

Billionaire Bush-basher George Soros says the wealthy should pay higher, more progressive tax rates. But he holds the bulk of his money in tax-free overseas accounts in Curacao, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands.

Schweizer writes: "Liberals claim to support affirmative action but don't practice it. They support higher taxes but set up complicated tax shelters to avoid paying them. They claim to be ardent environmentalists but abandon their cause when it impinges on their own property rights.

"The reality is that liberals like to preach in moral platitudes. They like to condemn ordinary Americans and Republicans for a whole host of things - racism, lack of concern for the poor, polluting the environment, and greed.

"But when it comes to applying those same standards to themselves, liberals are found to be shockingly guilty of hypocrisy.

"The media and the American people need to hold them accountable."

[HKUSP45C]

Breaking News, This just in:
Cat's like dead fish and apparently water is wet.

[spartacus2002]

Does it mentions Schumer's concealed carry permit?

[Camp David]

"...the prevalence of hypocrisy on the left...Michael Moore... owned shares...Halliburton"

:p :p :p

[JohnBT]

"Halliburton"

He's so dumb he probably misread the name and thought it was a chain of all-you-can-eat fried halibut restaurants.

Well, it seemed funny when I thought of it. :o

John

[BenW]

Out of all the examples in the article, I liked the Michael Moore - Halliburton one the best as well. I just hope bloggers and other non-MSM folks remember that one when he rears his ugly head in the next Presidential election.

[El Tejon]

Michelle Malkin has a similar book out now, "Unhinged." I recommend it as entertainment reading (light read, finished it in one afternoon).:)

[Pilot]

The basic premise of liberalism is hypocritical, because it relies on using other people's money to make you feel good. If they want to feel good use their onw money! Obviously, Soros, Moore, Clinton, Pelosi, etc. just want us to pay. They are too elite to have to pay.

[Don of Kalifornia]

Your so right, every flaming liberal shop owner I've worked for absolutely hates unions and would try to fire anyone for trying to unionize the business. However those of the more conservetive out look understand how unions benfit the workers, and can easily work with the union and the contracts.

[Mongo the Mutterer]

"The media and the American people need to hold them accountable." Yes, lets call Dan Rather or John (Sloppy Seconds) Roberts to investigate...

[ibex]

Michael Moore owns General Electrics stock? I may be wrong, but isn't that the company that makes these nifty miniguns? :evil:

[Gunpacker]

Now what we need to do is to get a court case to get all these people on the stand. WOW. Can you imagine. They like to tar everyone else on the slightest whiff of a possible link to an imagined crime. Now if we can just get the right case where they have all had something to say, or some behind the scenes CONSPIRACY to drag them kicking and screaming to the stand. Hmmmm, something that all libs have communication, trying to influence something???? Sounds like a no brainer to me. Just link them by email to barbara stripesand.:neener:

[TheEgg]

I am sure that this information will be the leading headline tonight on NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN.



:rolleyes:

[R.H. Lee]

These limousine liberals can't help it-they're mentally deranged and consider themselves superior to everyone else and thus entitled to special privileges. For example,
Staunch union supporter Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) has received the Cesar Chavez Award from the United Farmworkers Union. But the $25 million Northern California vineyard she and her husband own is a non-union shop.
Nancy Pelosi
http://www.zogbyblog.com/archives/PelosiPoint.jpg
thinks there is no reason or need for union presence in her business, by virtue of her champion of the poor liberal status. It's only necessary for everyone else because they're all inherently evil.

[BenW]

R.H. Lee -- Don't you dare ever do that again without a warning first. Geez.
:p

[Mongo the Mutterer]

Love it RH... You DO know why she wears turtlenecks, don't you.

After the "tucks" she needs to cover her navel..

[TheEgg]

Ah Ha! Thats why they call her "Stretch"!

[cbsbyte]

These types of book subjects are nothing but below the belt hit jobs. They add nothing to the political discourse in today’s society, and further pull the nation apart into 'Us' and 'Them' camps. One has to read objectively these types of books, since I doubt a lot of the information is accurate, most is probably misrepresented, and exaggerated. For an example, the quote “Staunch union supporter Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) has received the Cesar Chavez Award from the United Farmworkers Union. But the $25 million Northern California vineyard she and her husband own is a non-union shop.” I have serious problems with this line. First, who is the source for this information? Second, she is a faithful union supporter for years, so her not having a union vineyard has little barring on her support for workers. Third, I doubt many vineyards in CA are unionized; most workers are probably immigrants, since I doubt one could not find enough white people to work 10 hrs a day in the hot California sun. One can go through the whole list and find examples of misrepresentation. Sorry, this is not a real piece of documented work, it is another drive by shooting in the political war, and until both sides give up these attacks, the American people are going to suffer.

[Mongo the Mutterer]

No, there are those of us out here who see the double standard that the media has. You can be a Klansman and use the "n" word, but if you have a D behind your name you get a pass.

The Liberal Hypocrisy has always astounded me, because they don't see it, and quite frankly they don't care because they see themselves as the elite, and they "care so much" and "feel our pain" so they should get a pass.

If the accounts are untrue, let them answer them.

If they are true, let them stand. We're big enough people to handle it...

[jfh]

...this is not a real piece of documented work, it is another drive by shooting in the political war....

And your proof for making these statements is--is what? You've read the book?

It seems to me the issue might be whether or not the book's claims are ACCURATE.

So, are Pelosi's business operations non-union, or not?

[TheEgg]

These types of book subjects are nothing but below the belt hit jobs. They add nothing to the political discourse in today’s society, and further pull the nation apart into 'Us' and 'Them' camps. One has to read objectively these types of books, since I doubt a lot of the information is accurate, most is probably misrepresented, and exaggerated.

Really? This author, although fairly conservative, appears to be a serious guy, unlikely to fabricate or misrepresent facts.

http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/bios/schweizer.html

He is a fellow at the Hoover Inst. at Stanford University.

http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/homepage/about.html

[cbsbyte]

I don't care if he is from the Hoover Inst, All I want to know is where he is getting his information. If it is proven to be accurate up to date information, I will take back what I said. Untill he shows his documented sorces, I am not going to take any of his book as accurate or truthful. Right, now it seem to be only a Conservative attack on Liberals. Oh, by the way Fox news is eating this up. Both the O'Reily Factor, the Morning show and Neil's show mentioned this book. Through none of the reporters even asked where he got his information.

[Mr. James]

Then try buying the damned book and reading it - I'm quite confident this guy wouldn't be slinging these inflammatory charges without documenting them. I read an interview of the guy on National Review Online (ewwwwww, a conservative journal), and the guy swears up and down he can document every jot and tittle.

So instead of slandering the guy by accusing him of pumping out a drive-by hit piece, buy the book, read it, document its inaccuracies and then get back to us.

I hear Mary Mapes has a new book out, too - bet yer all over that, eh?

[carebear]

Not to rain on a parade, cause I enjoy seeing this stuff get out, but it's the NUMBER of shares Michael Moore owns that is important. In "Roger & Me," for example, he buys shares (or uses inherited or something) in GM so he can get into the shareholder meetings to ask questions and ply his trade (crappy filmmaking), corporations can bar the general public and media but not shareholders as they are private ownership associations and access to meetings and voting is a right of ownership.

I would assume he also holds (probably close to the minimum tradeable) shares in the other corps to give him similar access. The truth would be to see how many shares and what kind of profit he's making.

For example, I was given a share in Budweiser as a Best Man gift but I don't drink the stuff and last I heard they weren't stalwarts on gun rights. Yet, if I were in the public eye and in the Catch-22 of fame HAD to declare my possession of that share and its dividend to avoid shouts of "tax evader" or "closet pro-DWIer" from political enemies I could then be tagged with a pro-Bud label as well.

Which wouldn't truly reflect the context and reality of my share ownership.

There's good argument and there's juvenile finger-pointing. Some of this out-of-context, "gotcha" stuff tends toward the latter.

[TheEgg]

All I want to know is where he is getting his information.

It all comes from publicly available records, and can be checked and verified by anyone. This guy just spent two years doing that, but anyone can duplicate his work if you would like.


Carebear, I don't know how many shares he actually held, but according to the author it was enough that he was making substantial money and that he was having to submit capital gains tax documentation because of that.

But I don't have the book, so I don't have the details. But I think I will stop at the Book Store on the way home from work tonight and pick this one up. Sounds like fun!

[jfh]

Right, now it seem to be only a Conservative attack on Liberals.

And what's the matter with that, given their history of gun control legislation?

There is nothing redemptive about today's political liberalism.

[MarkDido]

I don't care if he is from the Hoover Inst, All I want to know is where he is getting his information. If it is proven to be accurate up to date information, I will take back what I said. Untill he shows his documented sorces, I am not going to take any of his book as accurate or truthful. Right, now it seem to be only a Conservative attack on Liberals. Oh, by the way Fox news is eating this up. Both the O'Reily Factor, the Morning show and Neil's show mentioned this book. Through none of the reporters even asked where he got his information.

So, what was your opinion of "Rush Limbaugh is a big Fat Idiot" and "Lies and the Lying Liars that Tell Them?"

Both thoroughly researched and documented books by Al Franken :banghead:

BTW when a liberal writes a book, the LMSM trips all over itself getting the author on the all the morning shows, talk shows, etc. Have you heard ANY mention of this book or Michelle Malkin's book on the alphabet networks? (ABC, NBC et al)

[JJpdxpinkpistols]

Right, now it seem to be only a Conservative attack on Liberals.

And what's the matter with that, given their history of gun control legislation?

There is nothing redemptive about today's political liberalism.

Lets hope that the liberals out there have short memories. It is all to easy to dehumanize your opposition...which is all well and good when you have the upper hand.

Politics swing like a pendulum. We won't always be in charge.

[R.H. Lee]

We won't always be in charge. Considering we don't act like we're 'in charge' now, nothing much will change.

[JJpdxpinkpistols]

BTW when a liberal writes a book, the LMSM trips all over itself getting the author on the all the morning shows, talk shows, etc. Have you heard ANY mention of this book or Michelle Malkin's book on the alphabet networks? (ABC, NBC et al)

The last time I saw Malkin on TV she was getting shut down by Tweety when she spouted some nonsense about how the japanese were really hap, hap, happy to be interned for their own safety. snort

I think most folks don't take her seriously. I have never heard her mentioned ONCE in an actual newsroom. Of course, actual NEWS and pontificators aren't in the same place at the same time, so that might be why.

[JJpdxpinkpistols]

Considering we don't act like we're 'in charge' now, nothing much will change.

That ain't the Dem's fault. Go blame the leaders of the Republicans. Oh, wait...they don't HAVE to take blame. Its easier to blame Clinton(s) or make jokes about Teddy. or show photoshops of government leaders. Very high road.

Sorry, but this is starting to turn into Newsmax Lite. Bash the Dems on EVERYTHING. Why? Cuz they all HATE GUNS! Thats reason enough to post inflamatory statements and call people names. Again...so High Road.

Frustrated...married to a pro gun dem in a pro gun Dem state governed by a Marine Vet with a pro gun Dem party platform...and a few LOUD anti-gun dems.

[R.H. Lee]

That ain't the Dem's fault. Go blame the leaders of the Republicans. Oh, wait...they don't HAVE to take blame. Its easier to blame Clinton(s) or make jokes about Teddy. or show photoshops of government leaders. Very high road.
Just 'cause you're conflicted, JJpdxpinkpistols, doesn't mean everyone else is. Most of us KNOW who the real enemy is and it's the Democrats, who by the way, are completely unable to form any kind of coherent opposition party whatsoever, which is the reason the Republicans get away with the crap they do.

[JJpdxpinkpistols]

Just 'cause you're conflicted, JJpdxpinkpistols, doesn't mean everyone else is. Most of us KNOW who the real enemy is and it's the Democrats, who by the way, are completely unable to form any kind of coherent opposition party whatsoever, which is the reason the Republicans get away with the crap they do.

Silly me.

I always thought that the forces of tyranny and communists and maybe terrorists were the enemy.

maybe I will go into a re-education camp so that you can edumicate me as to who the REAL enemy is.

[jfh]

Bash the Dems on EVERYTHING. Why? Cuz they all HATE GUNS! Thats reason enough to post inflamatory statements and call people names. Again...so High Road.


You are quite correct. It IS enough to bash the Dems on EVERYTHING.

I've been around this discussion since I voted for HHH, and I will post inflammatory statements about "Democrats" every chance I get. It may not be the high-road, but I have seen what the current Leftist / Democrats are like on any number of topics and they are far too damaging to be left alone to multiply.

[JJpdxpinkpistols]

I have seen what the current Leftist / Democrats are like on any number of topics and they are far too damaging to be left alone to multiply.

you really don't get it, do you?

You just don't get it. You have been living in your echo chamber so long you haven't seen the changes going on...have you?

One day the Dems are gonna be back in control, and they will be passing laws that they like. We can either work to influence them, or we can demonize them and when it comes time to pass those laws...guess what! We can complain some more! Mmm...complaint sandwich! Tasty!

Furthermore, if we work WITH them, we can actually get them to see the light on many fundemental positions (like guns).

Or we could just outlaw the Dems, and go to single party state. Sound good?

My way or the highway will get you a ticket on grayhound. I hope you like that ride.

[jfh]

"you really don't get it, do you? You just don't get it. You have been living in your echo chamber so long you haven't seen the changes going on, have you...If we work WITH them, we can actually get them to see the light on many fundemental positions (like guns)."

To which I say, BS. The only caveat to that is that when the current generation of gun control freaks dies--SCUBA Ted, Feinstein and the rest, then maybe the Democrat party will change its agenda.

You do realize, don't you, that the gun control agenda in the Democrat Party platform is unchanged?

But go ahead, posture and compromise with them now, while Republicans are in power.

It is not my opinion that will win this war with the Democrat advocates of gun control. It is those advocates' no-holds-barred, whole-hearted defeat.

But hey, believe what you want. "Liberalism" is such a sweet, gooey term we all like it.

This will be my last response to you about this issue--I really don't care to fight with other gunnies (just "hunters"). You are welcome to your opinion; but IMO you just shouldn't try to pass it off as a meaningful approach to firearms legislation.

[Hawkmoon]

Sorry, this is not a real piece of documented work, it is another drive by shooting in the political war, and until both sides give up these attacks, the American people are going to suffer.
And I can assume, then, that you have read the book and know from first-hand knowledge that the information is not accurate? And that it is not documented?

[silliman89]

I've been a lurker here for a few weeks now, but I finally feel I've been pushed into posting. You guys use a LOT of acronyms. I know they accomplish the desired purpose of intimidating and confusing newbies, but come on. Today jfh crossed the line:

"I've been around this discussion since I voted for HHH"

HHH? Do you mean Hoover? Would it have been so hard to write Hoover? I can't be the only one who wasn't born for decades after that election. Did you want no one to be able to tell what you meant? I was a history major back in college but really, I'm only guessing.

I've had my CCW for about a year now, but it took me weeks to figure out what CCW meant. I may be simple, but Concealed Weapons Permit should be CWP...:banghead:

[gc70]

One day the Dems are gonna be back in control, and they will be passing laws that they like. We can either work to influence them, or we can demonize them and when it comes time to pass those laws...guess what! We can complain some more! Mmm...complaint sandwich! Tasty!

Furthermore, if we work WITH them, we can actually get them to see the light on many fundemental positions (like guns).:barf:

When the Democrats were in control, they passed laws as they pleased, with little regard for compromise. They only discovered the word "compromise" when they lost control. And the dictatorial way in which they function as the minority party leaves no doubt that they will remember how to wield power when they ultimately regain control.

Unfortunately, the Republicans were the minority party for so many decades that they forgot how to be in control. Their idea of being in control is too often an exercise in appeasement.

BTW, just how many Democrats in Congress can you name who have "seen the light" on fundamental positions in the last decade?

[Standing Wolf]

If we work WITH them, we can actually get them to see the light on many fundemental positions (like guns).

I'm sure lots of Jews thought they could work with Hitler, too.

HHH? Do you mean Hoover?

Hubert H. Humphrey, I'd guess, presidential candidate of the Democratic (sic) party in 1968.

...it took me weeks to figure out what CCW meant. I may be simple, but Concealed Weapons Permit should be CWP...

Some states issue concealed weapons permits; some issue concealed hand guns permits; some issue concealed hand gun licenses; some issue... "CCW" is generic.

[gc70]

HHH? Do you mean Hoover?jfh would have to be a really old codger to have voted for Herbert H. Hoover. But he wouldn't have to be too old to have voted for Hubert H. Humphrey in 1968.

[jcoiii]

Funny note applied to both sides:

HAHA, they charged "other party guy" with xyz. Look, he's guilty, EVERYONE knows it! (found not guilty)- WHAT?!?! this is some kind of media coverup!

!&^%, who are they thinking they are, charging "my party guy" with abc? It's obvious that this is just a political tactic, EVERYONE knows that. It's a conspiracy!!


Either it's true or it's not. If it is, deal with it and quit this whole cognitive dissonance crap. If it's not, present facts to the contrary and move on.

[silliman89]

"have to be a really old codger to have voted for Herbert H. Hoover"

Oh, so "senior member" doen't mean senior citizen? Like I said, new here...:evil:

[gc70]

Oh, so "senior member" doen't mean senior citizen?My father was a senior citizen. I am just... experienced.:neener:

[whm1974]

Third, I doubt many vineyards in CA are unionized; most workers are probably immigrants, since I doubt one could not find enough white people to work 10 hrs a day in the hot California sun.

If the owners would pay "white" people enough money to LIVE in CA then they wouldn't have so much trouble getting them now would they?

A person is at least worth what it cost him to live. If a job can't that much then a job is not worth having.

-Bill

[Moondoggie]

"Most workers are probably immigrints"????

Ahem....who do you think comprises the members of the United Farm Workers?

Care to research Ceasar Chavez' rise to prominence over the "Boycott Table Grapes" campaign?

Folks who pick grapes....vineyards.....Pelozi's California Winery...get the connection?

(Wow, listening to NPR finally paid off!!)

[scout26]

For example, I was given a share in Budweiser as a Best Man gift but I don't drink the stuff and last I heard they weren't stalwarts on gun rights. Yet, if I were in the public eye and in the Catch-22 of fame HAD to declare my possession of that share and its dividend to avoid shouts of "tax evader" or "closet pro-DWIer" from political enemies I could then be tagged with a pro-Bud label as well.

Anheuser-Busch is very Pro-Hunting. Maybe not "truly" Pro-2A, but definitely not anti. It's enough for me to occasionally purchase some of their products. (Bud and Bud Lite give me a headache.)

[jfh]

1. Standing Wolf must have read my mind--both for who "HHH" was (probably the last Democrat from the postwar era worth voting for), and for doing the "Jews and Hitler" comment.

For the life of me, I don't see how people don't understand political compromise in this political area (gun control) will not result in total confiscation. Look at the current history elsewhere--e.g., UK and Australia--blah, blah, blah.

2. Otherwise, gc70 covered comments from me, too.

FWIW, I am 60; I have both an AB degree from one of the better private Liberal Arts Colleges in the country, and an MAT degree from a state college as well. I started out as a HS English Teacher, and I considered myself a liberal for some time--until I wised up to what political liberalism had become, peddling vote-buying and victimology.

I have been an active pro-gun force for pushing fifteen years now, politically aware for twenty, and I have found that, in the long run, no compromise on this topic is possible if we are to have even minimal firearms ownership twenty or thirty years from now.

"Compromise" on this subject will get us the AWB as a minimum, and Metzenbaum and Feinstein crowing about the "camel's nose under the tent" and "Mr.& Mrs. American, turn 'em all in."

[Geno]

What the heck was that ugly woman doing? She looked like she just passed gas. In fact, she looks like my mother-in-law. That's like double torture. At least my mother-in-law seriously defends my right to my CCW...even more than my own wife. Hum...maybe I married the wrong one?! Pause...naw. Had to go back and look at the picture again...I made the right decision.

Doc2005

[MarkDido]

Silly me.

I always thought that the forces of tyranny and communists and maybe terrorists were the enemy.

maybe I will go into a re-education camp so that you can edumicate me as to who the REAL enemy is.

A nations enemies are not always foreign.

[boofus]

The democrat party has Ted Kennedy, Diane Feinstein, Clintons, Al Gore, Sarah Brady, Carolyn McCarthy, Charles Schumer, Frank Launtenberg, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Cynthia McKinney, Barbara Boxer, Maxine Waters, John Kerry, George Soros, Ray Nagin, Michael Moore at the helm.

The facts-> The jackass party is synonymous with gungrabbing and I didn't need a book to tell me that.

[macavada]

So, what was your opinion of "Rush Limbaugh is a big Fat Idiot" and "Lies and the Lying Liars that Tell Them?"

Both thoroughly researched and documented books by Al Franken


MarkDido: What's your beef with these works. I read them both.

He did a good job of breaking down some of the lies of the right. Real easy to understand, and to my knowledge, no one has been able to come out and de-bunk anything in Franken's books. He tear Rush a new one on a regular basis on his radio show.

Although, for him to come out with a book entitiled "The Truth (with Jokes)", he's setting himself as a target for the right to try to take him down (which they haven't yet). Although, they might be able to dispute whether or not his purported jokes are in fact funny. (However, just because the other party doesn't get it doesn't mean it's not satire.)

[grampster]

As someone who has been around for awhile it's fairly obvious that the power structure of the left is based upon and steeped in the rationale that the average citizen needs to be taken care of. The average guy mostly likes this idea. Why wouldn't he? Security, right? We need to be safe, right? And mostly we want others to make sure that happens. Creeping incremental tyranny is the result as Big Government is the vehicle for this "taking care of".
Hypocricy is evident among its illuminati.


Within the power structure on the right is the notion that each person can become a millionaire and take care of themselves given that government just needs to get out of the way and spend most of its time seeing to border issues and worldwide military might. The problem is, this notion is as scewed as the former because the power structure is more interested in talking about wealth creation but subverts it by not understanding that every man is not equally endowed with brains, ambition, etc. We need to be our brother's keeper at times. Each spectrum is also fully engaged in seeing to feathering its own nest at the expense of those they seem to represent. Tyranny exist here on the right as well. It pits the upper echelons of management of giant corporation against, well, everyone else, worker and consumer. Guess who the winner here is?

Now I realize my comments are an oversimplification, but one would be hard pressed to not see these dynamics at work. Government regulation/taxation (read gun control/welfare state et al) VS unfettered capitalism (read Enron Et al.)

So what's a person to do? It seems the power structure of each polarity is in a death struggle with the other. Look at the polarization that has occured amongst our citizens as a result of it. Conservatives think Lilbs are evil and vice versa. The fact is, both schools of thought have redeeming features but the polarization has obscured this reality. Again, what's a person to do?

I've been a Republican for many years. But I see that party not listening to itself and doing nothing; floundering inanely and accomplishing little. I was a Democrat before that, when I was young. Yet all I hear from them is shrillness and irrational nonsense; a notion that mankind is really just nice, we just need to exhange candy and we'll be fine as long as you pay a lot of taxes and let us tell you how to live. What's a person to do? Third parties are marginalized, not paid attention to, and filled with crackpots. What progress we have is stultified by government fiat and reasonable exploitation of our resources is confounded at every step because there are those that do not believe that resources are exactly that; resources. They should be exploited and used. Creativity results in that type of dynamic atmosphere. We don't need to kill critters and trample much grass to get oil, gas, wood, minerals etc etc. All we need to be is mindful.

In another thread, on another forum, APS, I think, I made mention that maybe the only salvation of our unity is to have some defining thing happen. But then, it did. Sept 11th. Since then we've grown further apart, fighting amongst ourselves while those that hate us use that as fuel for their insanity.
Rather than being united by Sept. 11th, our power structure of the left and right has used it to polarize us. Somehow that notion is despicable to me.

Right about now, I feel about as helpless as I have felt in my entire life when I think about the world that is being created for my grandchildren.