Move on if you must. In the end, in the giant scheme of things, it really doesn't matter. As far as that book you mentioned....I never heard of it but it does seem interesting. Thanks for the tip. I may just want to read that one.

It's obvious to me that you are just set in your ways and will just defend your ideology no matter what. You said I "sidestepped" the issue but as I said, it's been hashed out here on more than one occasion the fucked up things the right wingers do. Why rehash them. And if you don't feel comfortable accepting the fact that liberals can also be completely full of shit at times, then what can you do. You're obviously free to think what you like. In the meantime, I'll come to my own conclusions using my own mind and not just accept some ideological correctness to prove how intellectual I'm supposed to be.

If you really believe liberals in this country have your interests at heart, go on believing your delusions.

In the end, to these people, both the left and the right, they see the American people as "useful idiots". They don't care about you at all.

You're right, we just have to agree to disagree...

BTW, I'm done with this topic. This thread has sunk far enough down to where it's just you and me arguing back and forth and I think we've both articulated where we stand. If you want to offer a rebuttal, be my guest, but I'm moving on.

Well, you still side-stepped the issue a bit (I'm pleading with you to go to a right wingsite and see how tolerant they'll be of your opinions there), but your bullet-point list is pretty silly. #1 and #2 were poached directly from wingnut author Peter Schweizer's Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy (which was widely sourced on all of those rightwing sites you don't visit -- I do). The book's main premise is that liberals are hypocrites because some of them are rich. Michael Moore's Center for Media and Alternative Culture did own Halliburton stock back in 1999, but it was sold a year later (read: they don't own it anymore)for a whopping $377 gain. The assertion in #2 about Chomsky and the Pentagon has been shot down repeatedly, even by conservatives. Basically, who at MIT isn't working for the Pentagon in one form or another? And if you want to use Schweizer's book as source material, here's what he said about Ralph Nader, a frequent target in his book and a man you voted for twice: "bourgeois materialist, stock manipulator and tyrannical sweatshop boss."

Regarding #3: I'm sure you're talking about things like complaints over student fees being used to bring Ann Coulter to campus to speak or protests over those utterly stupid affirmative action bake sales college republicans think are so cheeky, but I've never heard about "stealing right wing newspapers and burning them." Is this happening all of the time or are you talking about an isolated incident? Regardless, people have a right to protest and/or boycott things they don't like in this country. It's hardly fascist behavior. Righties do it all of the time. Are lefties supposed to sit on their hands and just "deal with it" while righties have free rein to bitch about everything because they're "extreme fuck ups"? I'm missing what your point is. Maybe you have some material from David Horowitz that will help you with this argument.

And regarding #4, oh good christ (excuse the pun), liberals have no problem with religion, but when evangelicals/dominionists start trying to ram God down everyone's throat (that phrase was just used by conservative John Cole on "Ballon Juice" due to his disgust with the Santorum wing of the party) and move toward elimintating the line between church and state, well, how can we not take the gloves off? The future of our country hangs in the balance.

I'm still not clear what you want out of liberals, but from what I can tell you expect them to be near-perfect penniless church mouses who sit quietly by while righties, who apparently can wield limitless powers of assholery because folks like you don't think they're worth challenging because "that's just how they are," tear them to shreads with abandon and do whatever they want to this country.

Fuck that, Sergio. No, liberals aren't perfect (name me one group of people who are), but, hell, I'll take their comparitively modest imperfections over the massive piles of swill the right heaps on this country at every untethered opportunity.

Kevin: Pointing out Right wing follies is a waste of time because it's too obvious what extreme fuck ups they are. Put simply, it's a given, so why sit here and give examples when they merely speak for themselves. In other words, preaching to the choir gets us nowhere. The left tends to do that quite a bit. They only associate with those who think like themselves, speak to others with the same opinions etc, so what good is that?

When I point out the left wing hypocrisy, I merely try to make the point that the left wingers in this are sometimes just as hypocritcal about things. And believe me sometimes they are...and in a big way.

There are plenty of examples of left wing hypocrisy and there are plenty of instances in which to see it if one is open minded enough to admit it. You keep saying I'm "non-partisan". I never said that. My sympathies lie with the left but I will point out whenever my "fellow-travellers" are wrong or being hypocritcal.

Just some examples:

- Michael Moore bashes Haliburton all the time, yet he owns stock in Haliburton.

- Noam Chomsky is always railing about the military industrial complex yet receives his paycheck from the Defense Department. Rails against trust fund people yet has them set up for his own kids.

- Liberals on campus are always on about free speech and freedom of expression yet enforce this so-called political correctness by banning certain kinds of "speech" on campus all the time; sometimes going as far as stealing right wing newspapers and burning them. (Even though I am NOT a right winger as you like to point out, I still feel they have a right to express their point of view, regardless of what I think about it).

- Liberals pride themselves on being tolerant yet are completely intolerant of anyone's ideas but their own; especially when it comes to religion. (I am an atheist, just for the record, but I still feel people have a right to believe in ghosts if they want to).

There are many more. Just because you identify yourself as being a "left winger" or "liberal" doesn't mean you have to defend everything they do.

Right wingers: We all know the story about them. So why sit here and point it all out when everyone here knows already?

Maybe I point out the fucked up things lefties are doing because since I consider myself on their side and when they are acting like hypocrites and fascists it needs to be pointed out. Otherwise, you become no different from those you claim to be so against....

Heh.

Man, you are a squirmy little thing, aren't you?

What I'm saying—and I'll say it really slow for you, Sergio, since I must be confusing the hell out of you being an "intellectual giant" and all—is that you spend nearly all of your time bashing lefties over here and since you're so perfectly non-partisan, I'd like to know if you go to any right/Republican sites to point out their follies? I mean, they are running everything (into the ground) in DC right now, so you've probably got some criticisms and/or advice for them, right? I'm giving you a chance to prove me wrong, Sergio. Run with it.

Kevin K: Intellectual giant!

"Either you see things exactly my way or you must be a right winger!"

I don't know what right-wing blogs you are talking about but apparently if you don't agree with me...that means I MUST be looking at them, right?

You sound like the opposite of those McCarthy-era folks who used to accuse everyone of being a communist because they didn't adhere to EVERYTHING they believed in.

I guess some groups learned something over the years, no?

Sergio, I'm still waiting for links to those rightwing blogs where "Nader-guy Sergio" questions their party-line bullshit and calls them on being intolerant. I do recall asking you for proof of that a very long time ago. Still waiting.

Whatever man...whatever...

Kevin K: A typical knee-jerk reactionary.
- Anyone who does not agree with me is a "right winger"

- Anyone who takes a position not condoned by liberal orthodoxy is also a "right winger"

- Anyone who doesn't follow the party line is...guess what? a "right winger".

This coming from one who prides himself on being open-minded and tolerant.

Whatever man...whatever...

You'll be back.

Anyway, this has been fun...I'll be moving on (que applause). KK keep up the shitty work. Peace.

I understand Kevin...you are completely incapable of reason.

Olaf K, how exactly have you been effected by christian oppression this week?

"Now would you like to explain what the US is doing in Iraq if free speech is truly "unimaginable in any Muslim nation"? Sounds like you don't support the troops."
Sorry Olaf (Kevin K no doubt), can you rephrase this question?. I have no idea what you are asking me.

I love the "If you don't agree with me, you must be a right winger" thing. I must be the only right winger here that voted for Nader in 2000 & 2004. I forget how right wing he is sometimes.

This whole "left wingers can never be wrong" bit is a little tired.

If you're asking if I think killing people over cartoons is bad, um yeah, it's bad. It's horrible. Puppies are usually soft'n cute, snots can be icky, and boycotts are far preferable to death threats. Happy?

To further state the obvious: trying to understand the cartoon rioters doesn't mean that I'd like to excuse violent reactions to the drawings. But living in the US, I'm more inclined to speak up about the right wing Christian nutters that seek to oppress us here.

Only an idiot, or an asshole, would assume loud criticism of local oppression implies an acceptance of violent oppression elsewhere. Just as only a corrupt dipshit would attack Iraq instead of going after Osama.

Now would you like to explain what the US is doing in Iraq if free speech is truly "unimaginable in any Muslim nation"? Sounds like you don't support the troops.

Ok Olaf...hear is a needless clarification. Muslims in Denmark (US,France etc) enjoy freedoms unimaginable in any Muslim nation. Now would you like to disagree with any of the views I have expressed or do you wish to focus on semantics.

Muslims in Denmark (or US, France etc) enjoy freedoms that would be unimaginable in their respective homeland.

I find it curious that Joe thinks Muslims born and raised in Denmark (or US, France etc) are enjoying freedoms that would be unimaginable in Denmark (or US, France etc).

It is interesting that you are more concerned about Christians using their "monolithic" power to sway television sponsors than Muslim fanatics that believe that murder is an appropriate response to blasephamy. Muslims in Denmark (or US, France etc) enjoy freedoms that would be unimaginable in their respective homeland. It is unbelivable that you would suggest that oppression in their adopted countries is the source of this psychotic behavior. Muslims worldwide are oppressed by their own religous fervor. This is precisely why nations of people sitting on the world's most valuable commodity are living in poverty. I find your slam on Israel (racist) curious. Do you think that Muslims in Israel have less rights than Jews (or Christians, Buddhists etc) in let's say Syria?

Joe, eloquent. No wonder Sergio spends all of his time defending you delicate-as-flowers righties against us vile, venom-spewing lefties.

Jah Brah, thanks for being you.

Anonymous asked: re: Christian backlash over the TV program Book of Daniel and the Left criticism of the action taken by Christian groups to boycott NBC sponsors. Do you "understand" their outrage? If someone can explain why it is acceptable to bash Christians while preaching tolerance for Islam please enlighten me.

this is a good question/point. there is no reason to find bashing one group over the other acceptable. but perhaps the explanation for the left's knee-jerk bashing of US Xians and apparent sympathy for European Muslims is that the left tends to rally around the oppressed.

and Muslims are being beseiged here and abroad, be it French discrimination against immigrants, US round'em ups post 9-11, or Alliance military might rolling through the middle east region. Muslims feel beseiged whether you/we accept that or not, and the left's hearts bleeds knee-jerk style for them.

i think i do "understand" U.S. Christian outrage over the TV flap and i most certainly prefered their non-violent response.

but unlike European muslims, U.S. Christians wield monolithic power and influence ($$$-wise and voter-wise) and seeing them win victories even that small makes my knee wobbly too.

if the folks who spearheaded the TV backlash didn't also support the racist state of Israel, George W. Bush's making-the-desert-safe-for-Starbuck's campaign, and the myth of trickle-down economics, my knee would probably not have moved an inch over the TV flap issue.

Jah Brah

Kevin K = full of shit

Nerve=not touched, just as I'm not touched by your "Only Sergio is free of sin" rigamarole.

Oh, yeah, I forgot....I'm the "conservative" because I don't agree with you. And why talke it personal? I didn't say YOU were full of shit, did I? I said a lot of lefties are. Why include yourself in that category unless it somehow touches a nerve?

Nevertheless....a lot of lefties ARE full of shit. As much as a lot of right wingers are. They are just as hypocritical and just as much a slave to ideology as anyone else.

Sergio, having you say "a lot of lefties ... are completely full of shit" is like Tony Blankley talking disparagingly about "fat chicks."

Welcome back Sergio.

Well, Joe...it's because a lot of lefties (though certainly not all) are completely full of shit. That's why...

Jah Brah, I agree that these cartoons were very disrespectful. I also also agree that it is irresponsible to publish these cartoons. My problem is the Left's hypocrisy when it comes to objectionable speech. Freewilliamsburg (don't remember the specific person) posted a story about the Christian backlash over the television program Book of Daniel. Left-leaning posters were very critical of the action taken by Christian groups to boycott NBC sponsors. Do you "understand" their outrage? If someone can explain why it is acceptable to bash Christians while preaching tolerance for Islam please enlighten me.

Jah Brah, I agree that these cartoons were very disrespectful. I also also agree that it is irresponsible to publish these cartoons. My problem is the Left's hypocrisy when it comes to objectionable speech. Freewilliamsburg (don't remember the specific person) posted a story about the Christian backlash over the television program Book of Daniel. Left-leaning posters were very critical of the action taken by Christian groups to boycott NBC sponsors. Do you "understand" their outrage? If someone can explain why it is acceptable to bash Christians while preaching tolerance for Islam please enlighten me.

Joe sed:

the Left seems to be giving these people a pass. Hypocritical? Obviously! Unbelievable!

I say: first of all, lefties (like me) aren't giving rioters a pass, nor do we think those cartoons should be censored. they just should never have been published in the first place because they are offensive. refusing to publish something is not censorship, it's called freedom of choice. the Danes made a bad choice.

if other publishers wanna publish them that's their right i guess, but i woulnd't support their "right" to provocate by buying or reading their product. and that's all those cartoons are: a provacation. the Danes are dorks for choosing the worst time ever to attempt their feeble free-speech challenge.

and as for rioters, i don't condone their actions (nor their religion - or any religion), i just understand it. they are offendeed and poor and uneducated (largely) and have no other way to express their outrage.

the reason the Danes didn't see it coming (and the Right doesn't care about said outrage) is because they have no respect for others unlike themselves, and use the "free speech" card to defend their improper human behavior.

J

The piss christ/muslim cartoon paralell is a pretty clear one to me. Lefties screamed bloody murder when RudyG stated that taxpayer dollars should not be spent on objectionable art. Now you have a group of nutters who are trying to squash free speach with riots and death threats and the Left seems to be giving these people a pass. Hypocritical? Obviously! Even worse I have heard Lefties pull out the tired "You can not cry fire in a crowded building" argument when explaining why media channels have a responsibility to censor material relating to these cartoons. Unbelievable!

Gentrification?

Hipsteritis?

I live in atlanta georgian and i am procrastinating on yet another research paper... i have a question that maybe...hopefully you can answer.... Williamsburg used to be a not too great an area of new york... the fact that it wasnt too great dropped the prices to lower than New York's usual high prices. The artists moved in because of low prices and now Williamsburg is a much much better area.... What do you call the evolution of this area... it happens all the time i just have to find a source that can back up what i say........... sorry for such a weird comment please email me if you have an answer....

On a conciliatory note, Phantom, I enjoyed your Vietnam blog. Thanks for sharing. Always wanted to go there.

It was only a matter of time before Piss Christ trickled in here. What that wornout symbol of bad art has to do with the argument at hand is beyond me.

Listen, the "our bar is higher than their bar" argument doesn't move me at all. Our bar should be way higher than their bar. We're Americans. Unfortunately, the right in this country has lowered the bar so far these days (read the article "The Memo" linked above, if you can stand it) that I don't think we serve as much of an example for the rest of the world anymore.

I still stand by my argument. I'd rather not attend or support a rally for "freedom" populated by people who don't support it fully here in America (much like I wouldn't attend a "Stop European Racism Now" rally sponsored by the Klan). And don't get me started about the thinly-veiled (excuse the pun) Islamophobia that fuels a lot of the attendees' passion for this cause...

At least we can agree that serving "freedom cheese" is, well, cheesy. Do you want to discuss the guy with the Danish flag painted on his face or the guy wearing the viking helmet?

Just joking.

p.s. I looked in the mirror in the bathroom and, boy, I really need a haircut. Thanks for the recommendation.

There is no reason in the world to think that this is hypocritical. Hokey, no question. Hypocritical, why do you think so?

The right-wing guys who criticize asshole " artists " who put crucifixes in urine or who put feces on paintings of Mary do not advocate those artists being beheaded, nor do they advocate that there be trade sanctions against their home countries or that terrorism be brought to those places.

But that is --exactly-- what the Allah fans advocate happening to the artists concerned and to Denmark.

So, who's the hypocrite, bro? There's a mirror in the bathroom.

But as to hokey? Yeah it is. Freedom fries was retarded and this is hokey.

Oh, settle down.

I'm mocking their hypocrisy (I thought I made that perfectly clear—apparently not). And "freedom cheese" is shamelessly hokey and worthy of condemnation.

So, the open and liberal country of Denmark is in a moment of peril for --publishing fucking cartoons -- and some few people come to its defense, and you choose to mock them for a sign that someone brought? Shame on you.

And you need freedom cheese to...

"Freedom cheese"? Is that a joke?

Rufus W. is included with Laura Nyro, Ian Curtis, and Fela Kuti on the Paste 100 Best Living Songwriters ballot. In the space for "other" I wrote in Fred Imus, because I couldn't think of another songwriter I'd prefer to see dead.

(kidding about F.Imus, I wish the racist all the best)