Republican Terrorism

closedI would say that I’ve been watching the goings on in Congress with growing horror, but my horror-level with regard to politics these days is largely tapped out. I’d also like to say that Great Evil must be at work here, because no one could possibly be as stupid as to participate in — or as to allow — this horror show. Unfortunately, there seems no limit to human stupidity, and perhaps Hanlon’s Razor* applies: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

I’d already been pondering the spectrum that leads from discontent through activism and ultimately to terrorism. In the USA, we saw extreme activism with regard to civil rights. And we’ve certainly seen terrorism throughout the world, including on our own shores.

Lately, I think you can view the Republicans as having become home-grown terrorists!

dictionaryThe meat of any good conversation often depends heavily on how you define your terms (which makes understanding and agreeing on the use of language so important). I fully recognize that “terrorism” is a very strong label that will offend many. I want to be clear that I fully intend that offense and think it’s entirely apropos (if maybe a bit hyperbolic, but I’d say much less so than the frequent comparisons of President Obama to Adolf Hitler).

[Yeah, my excuse is, “They started it,” but (a) I’m a warrior — I do fight back, and (2) it’s never been clear to me why “you can’t fight fire with fire.” Real firefighters sometimes do exactly that! In some cases, they use explosives to blow fires up (and out), and it’s becoming clear we need something equally powerful. I’m not saying we should actually explode Congress (as satisfying as that might be), but we desperately need an explosion of social outrage and common sense in this country.]

terrorismLet me start with terminology. If you look up the word, terrorism, most definitions include the threat or use of physical violence, particularly against innocents — people who are not to blame for, or are not even connected with, the perceived issue. The purpose behind the terrorist acts is to force some political or social agenda. However, many definitions include the idea of psychological warfare used to create a reign of fear. (The Wikipedia entry explores the difficulty of defining the word.)

A big component is violence or the threat of violence, so let’s consider that term. It can obviously mean physical harm, and I think most would agree it includes psychological harm. (Ask a woman who has been “roofied” and then raped without being otherwise physically harmed if she feels violence was done.) We do also sometimes use the word in a metaphoric sense. Many of us old Trek fans feel J.J. Abrams did violence to the spirit of Star Trek (but that’s another conversation).

Carrie NationWe saw activism edge into violence that might almost be called terrorism in the Temperance movement (I’m sure many tavern owners of the day would think so). It was effective enough to add the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution.

What’s interesting is that the movement pushed the country’s views to an extreme position we later recanted via the Twenty-first Amendment. The movement did address a real and serious alcoholism problem of the time, and it’s possible the eventual outcome was an acceptable social compromise.

On the other hand, according to the CDC, the effects of excessive alcohol consumption cost the USA 224 billion dollars in 2006, so maybe not.

The lesson may be that big and quick social change has a cost and often involves some form of violence or civil disobedience. The motivation behind such can be to raise awareness or draw attention, but terrorism uses violence to try to force the issue.

A more important lesson might be that activism can sometimes be wrong!

temperanceI will leave it to the reader to decide whether the Republicans are doing violence to this country or to its spirit. For me the answer is an unqualified, “Yes!” (Even if you find “terrorist” too hyperbolic, surely you would agree with “blackmailer,” which isn’t a whole lot better.)

But here’s the conundrum: activists and terrorists believe they are right, and history will ultimately be on their side. (At least, they believe that in principle; I sometimes wonder if terrorists are just stupid, destructive assholes.)

A key question is: How do you tell righteous activism (a social force for good change) from terrorism (a discontented minority group trying to force change their way)? Consider a form of terrorism that’s been present in this country since 1976: attacks on abortion clinics.

The first clinic arson happened in 1976, the first bombing in 1978. It is perhaps a sign of the violent times that anti-abortion-related murders didn’t occur until 1993 (the death count appears to be: four doctors, three clinic workers and one off-duty policeman security guard).

bombingIf a person decides that abortion is truly the murder of a human being, you can perhaps see why they take such extreme measures. We’ve gone to war to kill enemies we perceive are a danger to the state. Individuals who feel they live powerless in a world of corrupt values may feel they have righteousness on their side, just as we do when we go to war. They may feel that they are righting a wrong and that someday history will see them as heroes.

Note that Roe v. Wade was issued in 1973, so all the above anti-abortion acts were in violation of established law. Let me repeat that: Acting in violation of law ratified by the Supreme Court. Does that ring any bells? Can you think of anyone recently acting in violation of Congress-passed, Supreme Court ratified law?

Head Up AssYeah, the fuckingRepublicans are. [Southerners sometimes feel “damnYankee” is one word. So do some baseball fans. I’ve decided that, until things change, fuckingRepublican is one word, one concept.]

Terrorism is rooted in (at least) two things: discontent growing to the level of injustice and the feeling of powerlessness to change the injustice. Obviously, if one has power, one uses it. Terrorism seeks to use whatever is available as leverage. For some that means guns and bombs, which are fairly easy to obtain or make once one decides the law no longer applies.

Consider the willful child or pet that doesn’t want to visit the doctor. There’s no telling them it’s the right and needful thing — logic and reason don’t apply. They will kick and scream (or bite and claw) trying to have their way.

asshat-1Now consider the willful children in Congress. They are increasingly in the minority, and in a right world, would be completely overwhelmed by reasonable people.

[An example: polls indicate 97% over 90% of the citizens of this country want gun registration background checks. [link] Every gun owner I know is fine with it; many wish for it. Yet Congress repeatedly demonstrates that “will of the people” means nothing to them. Lining their pockets and keeping their jobs is the entire game, and it would seem “game” is the operative word for it.]

So what does any child, any terrorist, do in the face of such odds, such clear facts and such utterly clear logic? Anything they can to not hear and not see. Whether they are stupid, craven or corrupt (or some combination of all three), the result is the same. Like the spoiled child holding its breath, the fuckingRepublicans hold the whole country hostage seeking to get their way.

asshat-2How do we tell the difference between righteous activism and evil terrorism? I submit the idea that, “Evil doesn’t question itself.” Though self-introspection, careful thought and honestly answering hard questions, we can examine our ideas. The good ones survive all questions and inspections. When your ideas are bad, you typically fear the questions.

Who in government these days seems to be dodging hard questions or refusing to submit their ideas to careful analysis in the full light or reason and facts? Anyone? Anyone?

wingnutCould any creature be so repugnant is a fuckingRepublican? You decide. And maybe let a few Congress Critters know how you feel. Better yet, can we please vote these fucking assholes out of office?

(The good news seems to be that the country has not been fooled by the recent antics of the f’Republicans, and their credibility is at an all-time low. This shut-down terrorism seems to have fooled no one and to have entirely backfired. Hooray!!)

A long time ago, Joseph de Maistre wrote, “Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle merite.” (“Every nation has the government it deserves.”)

Gee,… ya think?

* For the record, Hanlon’s Razor is variously attributed to Robert A. Heinlein, Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821) and Goethe. Heinlein’s 1941 short story, Logic of Empire, has the line, “You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity.” There is speculation that Hanlon may have used Heinlein’s Razor, which has been defined as, “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don’t rule out malice.” An epigram often attributed to Bonaparte is, “Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence,” but no source exists for the quote. Looking up Goethe’s (sourced!) quote is left as an exercise for the reader.


About Wyrd Smythe

The canonical fool on the hill watching the sunset and the rotation of the planet and thinking what he imagines are large thoughts. View all posts by Wyrd Smythe

14 responses to “Republican Terrorism

  • Charles Harrell

    OK, I’ve been following your posts for a short time and am beginning to get your drift. According to you it is ok to kill children so long as they are still in the womb, It’s ok to issue more presidential executive orders than all of the previous executives, and you don’t mind using erroneous statistics to support firearm registration. And it’s ok operate the government for almost two presidential terms without a budget and it’s ok for that government to live so far beyond it’s means that every citizen in the United States in indebted to the tune of something over a hundred thousand dollars. I try to read conflicting points of view attempting to understand how liberals and progressives think. I’m beginning to conclude they and you don’t live in a real world. You might want to check your statistics regarding gun registration and the source of those statistics prior to posting numbers that indicate which side of whoever’s razor you are on.

    • Wyrd Smythe

      Ah, thank you! I was hoping (what I assume is) a Republican would show up and help me demonstrate the empty tactics of their side. Ready? Let’s begin.

      Your first point fails because “children” are not found in the womb. What’s in the womb is a part of the mother (clearly demonstrated by the simple fact it cannot live on its own). It also fails because you have no idea what my opinion really is, and you seek to characterize me as demonically as possible (fair enough, I’m doing the same to you, but I’m just better at it, plus the facts are on my side). In point of fact, I’m 50.1% in favor of legal abortion and 49.9% against, because it is killing something that may turn into a human being eventually. But sovereignty of the individual is a key principle to me, and ultimately it wins by a percentage point.

      I find myself bemused by the hypocritical irony of a party that seems so in favor of self-determination… except when it comes to the uterus or the vagina. Or anything else they’ve decided offends them.

      I’m not sure what the reference to Presidential Executive orders is supposed to mean. If they’re all good orders, then it’s a great thing. Do you have a particular E.O. that’s a problem for you? Or would specifics be too much of a bother? Here again, I see stunning hypocrisy at work. No doubt the Republicans would love to make orders their way (what would you call the recent attempts at blackmail?). This is just another “handle” for attacking a President that offends. (For the record, I’m not a fan of President Obama. I respect the man, but I think he’s a weak leader (not all of which is his fault). But he is by far the lessor of two evils.)

      Okay, firearms. Here again we see the Republican style at work. Claim my facts are wrong, but provide nothing to prove it. It’s just your assertion, and it’s wrong! Check out the second question, “Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?” Was I off a couple percentage points? Okay, fair enough. The support for background checks is overwhelming, even in the Republican party. (For the record, I am a gun owner, and I fully support gun ownership.)

      As for the economic situation, yes, this country is very much in dire straits, and it’s the Republican’s fault! Under Clinton this country saw major economic growth, a balanced budget and the federal deficit erased. The horror show since then has two names attached: Bush and Big Money. Obama inherited a serious clusterfuck that nearly sank this country. Given the almost treasonous interference by the fuckingRepublicans, it’s a wonder anything good at all has happened.

      Dude. This isn’t a debate you can win. YOU’RE ON THE WRONG SIDE! Facts, logic, reason and compassion are all not in your favor!

  • Wyrd Smythe

    I’ve corrected the aside about gun registration, applied a more correct percentage and added a link to the data.

    See, the thing about reasonable, intelligent, rational people is that we seek to be correct, and when we’re even a little wrong, we’re happy to correct the error. Discovering the truth is important; furthering our own ideology and personal worldview isn’t.

    Notice, too, that the correction doesn’t change the point in the slightest. The most common f’Republican distraction from the realities is to pick on tiny meaningless points they feel they can win hoping you don’t notice they aren’t dealing with the issue at all.

  • Wyrd Smythe

    Okay, Presidential Executive Orders. Not something I’ve ever looked into, so rather than wave vague claims around, let’s look at the actual facts. I realize this will be enormously threatening to any f’Republicans in the audience, but grit your teeth and think of the flag or something.

    Turns out (talk about “erroneous statistics”) this is another f’Republican assertion that is a flat-out lie, complete and utter bullshit.

    Here are the counts of Executive Orders written by the last 14 Presidents:

    Herbert Hoover: 968
    Franklin Roosevelt: 3,522
    Harry Truman: 907
    Dwight Eisenhower: 484
    John Kennedy: 214
    Lyndon Johnson: 325
    Richard Nixon: 346
    Gerald Ford: 169
    Jimmy Carter: 320
    Ronald Reagan: 381
    George Bush: 166
    Bill Clinton: 364
    George W. Bush: 291
    Barack Obama: 163

    Coolidge, Wilson and T. Roosevelt all wrote over a 1000, so “more presidential executive orders than all of the previous executives” is about as far off the mark as you can get.

    In fact, the truth is that, going as far back as McKinley, all Presidents have written more Executive Orders than Obama.

    This is exactly what is so infuriating about the f’Republicans: the Big Lie. They hope if they repeat it often enough people will fall for it. And this is exactly why they oppose education and depend on a stupid populace to swallow their stinking bullshit. The sad thing is that so many do.

    Educate yourselves! Check the facts!! Use your head!!!

    [White House list of Obama’s Exec Orders]
    [Wikipedia list of all President’s Exec Orders]
    [f’Republican Lies Debunked on Snopes]

  • The Color of Lila

    Wyrd, I think you ran him off.

    I’m more in the mind of “blackmailers” or “extortionists” rather than “terrorists,” but… yeah. This latest tactic – holding the nation and the entire world economy hostage over the fact that the fRs have been unable to democratically vote Obamacare out – just went way too far. WAY too far.

    Stupid rather than evil? I am sure there is a good dose of that going around. I can think of a few… and am STUNNED that they actually get elected. I cringe to think of their constituents.

    • Wyrd Smythe

      Fighting hyperbole with a little of my own! Whatever it takes to get the attention and the point across.

      And as I said, pretty mild compared to depicting the President as Hitler. On the web, Godwin’s Law suggests that once you bring Hitler or Nazis into a debate, you’ve lost the debate (for having gone insanely and inappropriately hyperbolic). If being compared to traitors or terrorists makes them uncomfortable, well, sauce, goose, gander, other foot, shoe, see also “pro quo, quid“.

      Between Tea Party wingnuts and the Party of Nope, it went way too far for me years ago. (A big complaint I have with the Democrats is how they allowed it to happen. Their message-handling incompetence and lack of party cohesion let the f’Republicans walk all over’m.)

      I actually don’t think it’s stupidity, although there’s plenty of that to go around. It’s some combination of craven job-keeping behavior, big money lobbying, Washington corruption, aging mentalities, old power and groupthink. The bottom line is they are becoming increasingly marginalized socially, so as with any dying beast they’re fighting tooth and nail to be relevant.

      The world has, to its regret, twice “woken the sleeping giant.” I dream of a time when Americans wake up and have finally had enough. We have the power. We just need to wake up.

  • Charles Harrell

    Nah, I can’t be run off that easily. I don’t mind being wrong if it can be shown that I was. And I was in re: the executive orders. That’s what comes of reading friends emails then commenting on a blog using that info for a basis. Ooops.

    I see you changed the registration of firearms to reflect background checks. Many background checks do not result in firearm purchases and I don’t have a problem with the current system while I am skeptical of any governmental registration. I looked over your links to the polls and searched for “register” where I found the only (maybe!) poll inquiring about registration was a CNN poll. I think they are kinda’ biased in their selection of respondents but you may think otherwise.

    I see also that you get all semantic regarding abortion. I believe that conception is the beginning of human life and voluntarily terminating that beginning is a form of homicide. I know, I know, the Supreme Court disagrees as does planned parenthood but it is alive until it is killed. There are,as always, exceptions for medical reasons. What I am against is killing that potential person simply because someone wasn’t sufficiently careful with their sex life. You have your opinion and I mine so on this point we’ll just have to disagree.

    By the way, I’m not a Republican only a conservative leaning seeker of peace and quiet that should have known better than to comment in the first place and probably the second.

    I do think the hyperbole and profane criticism some use to describe those they think are opponents in somewhat un-necessary as well as unpleasant. Yep, I’m old, and old-fashioned in a lot of ways. There’s a time and place for using fuck as an adverb or adjective but I’m not sure that the internet is either.

    You bought into the idea that the previous president left a mess for this guy to clean up. I’d sure like to know when he is gonna’ start. He had four years to do it and all he could come up with was that Abominable Health Care Plan. Oh, well, The US has survived other incompetents and will survive this one and likely subsequent idiots also.

    You write a pretty good blog most of the time, Wyrd. Don’t let it go to your head. (Dang! I tried to copy and paste the sarc mark in there but it’s
    copywrited, maybe I could find a snark mark instead) Heh.

    • Wyrd Smythe

      Seriously, I couldn’t be more pleased to see you back. I absolutely cop to the hyperbole, but look at how it has moved you to comment! Now we’re having a discussion, but had I written a more timid post you might never have engaged. Perhaps you’ve heard the old joke with the punchline, “First you have to get their attention.”

      With regard to gun laws and abortion, those topics, of themselves, are not part of this discussion. I mentioned the former to illustrate how Congress is not acting as our representatives. There is a clear public mandate, Congress has taken up the matter several times, and yet nothing happens. The topic of guns in the USA is a very complex one I don’t want to delve into here.

      I mentioned the anti-abortion violence only to illustrate terrorist behavior. Regardless of your feelings on the matter, I would hope and expect you to completely disavow such violence. (The horrific irony is that it seems to make a mockery of the idea that every human life is sacred.) The topic of abortion is even more complex than guns, so let’s not go there, either.

      FWIW, I am planning to write “position papers” on both topics, and if you’re of a mind to we can discuss it then. I would like to mention that my views are anything but “semantic.” I’ve spent (literally) decades considering and debating the matter. My views are based on my perception of reality.

      Which does bring up a key point. The irreconcilability of the abortion debate comes from opposing worldviews. This isn’t a case of different tastes that can live peacefully side-by-side. This is a case of clashing worldviews where the sides, especially the anti-choice side, see the other side as horribly wrong. Not “misguided,” but horribly, dangerously wrong.

      The big problem with that thinking is that it often leads to terrorism. We’ve seen that in operation in the Middle East for a very, very long time. We’ve seen it in large measure in our own history with the KKK, who are the moral brethren of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. We saw it in the Temperance movement and the abortion-related violence (which have included arson, bombings and shootings).

      At stake in the abortion debate is human life. At stake in the current debate — supposedly — is the “future of the country” or whatever certain doom they imagine will happen. (I happen to believe Congress is in the pocket of big business and that the real fear here is loss of the obscene income that insurance companies have been raking in for years.)

      The thing is, in the modern world, differing worldviews need to find a way to co-exist. It simply is not the case that there is one right way to live. There is no one right worldview.

      A Conservative view tends to orient on the idea of one right way, or at least in preserving the status quo. That’s really what the word itself means. A liberal view tends to accept other worldviews as being equally viable (sometimes a bit too much — perhaps you’ve heard the old adage about having a mind so open your brains leak out). I so wish we could put ideologies aside and focus directly on ideas and solutions. But there are advantages to a bicameral government; advocacy debates can be very productive. Sadly, in the current polarized environment, neither side gives and nothing happens.

      Human experience shows over and over that the best thing is combining elements to build a strong hybrid. Liberal thought needs the reins of conservative thought, and conservative thought needs the growth energy of progressive thought. Either alone is kind of a disaster.

      With regard to ‘fuck’ on the interweb, my position is expressed on my About page, so we can discuss it there if you’re so inclined.

      And did you know… Unless you’re a computer-savvy person, it’s possible you’re enjoying the ease of use available to regular people these days. You may do some shopping online, possibly even manage your bank and credit card accounts. In all cases, you’re enjoying the fruits of pornography! Porn is largely responsible for turning the internet into the interweb of today. They were the ones that blazed the trail of secure online purchasing and user accounts. Up until very recently, the largest fraction of the interweb was porn.

      You should do a little reading about what happened to banking laws under the younger Bush. That and some other financial shinanigans are responsible for the economic crisis. As I’ve said many times before, I’m not a huge fan of President Obama, but he’s faced two ultimately insurmountable challenges.

      First, the Party of Nope. They sat on their hands from day one. They many times declared publicly that their tactic was full obstructionism in an attempt to create a failed Presidency. Meanwhile, Obama kept seeking bipartisanship long after any sane man should have given up. It mystified me why he kept trying when he had a clear public mandate and (at the time) a majority Congress.

      Which brings me to the second challenge: his own damn party and their general incompetence at unity and message-handling. There is no part of Congress I like at all, and I consider Obama the lessor evil by a country mile.

      As for the Health Care Plan, from where I sit, it’s too little (and again due to opposition obstructionism). I wanted single-payer. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, those are effective and successful programs. We’ve had a horribly expensive, horribly inefficient medical environment in this country, and it’s padded the pockets of business concerns.

      We need to do something. What do you suggest? Why is the current plan Abominable? Not based on what your friends emails — they aren’t doing you any favors — what do you think? What facts have you marshaled to give you the opinion that it’s Abominable?

  • Charles Harrell

    I wish I could engage and discuss with some sense of accomplishment, but I fear that is not possible. If you sincerely want discussion with the conservative folks, may I recommend . . . .

    This specific article is only somewhat representative of the general philosophy of the realist point of view of which I mostly agree. Richard Fernandez has a group of hanger’s on/followers that includes some extremely insightful people.

    As old as I am, I still work for a living ( and enjoy the sense of accomplishment ) so my opportunities for debate are few and intermittent.

    I’m not going away. I bookmarked your site some months back and continue to check it out when I am able.

    Seriously, try the Belmont Club blog on Pajamas Media. You might be surprised. . . .

    • Wyrd Smythe

      Okay, thank you for engaging! If you’ve read far back here at all, you know I’m retired and “of a certain age.” It may be that we share a sense of horror as we view the modern world. It sometimes seems nothing good can come of the current mess. What many would term conservative values (or moral values or just plain sensible values) seem to be sorely needed.

      That said, I hope you’ll take away some sense that the current conservative political group is on the wrong side of things, that they’ve gone too far in trying to force their ideology. Look, when a political group needs to spread deliberate lies — not mistakes, deliberate lies — it says something about their real views, real motivations. The Liberals make their own mistakes, but lies as propaganda is not a typical tactic. There’s no need; the facts are on their side.

      That business with the Presidential Executive Orders is not some “one-off” case. If you take the time to check the facts, you’ll see it happens over and over again. Please stop accepting what these people are saying without checking for yourself. Don’t take my word, either! Trust no one’s opinion! Check for yourself.

      For instance, regarding the link you pointed me to: Any blogger who writes, “But while Global Warming remains a hypothetical…” is not dealing with facts or realism. They’re either deluded by the lies or spreading them deliberately (and please, please check for yourself; they are lies).

      There is nothing, not one single thing, that is “hypothetical” about Global Warming. What was somewhat uncertain until maybe five years ago was whether humans were responsible. But at this point, the chance that it wasn’t our fault has become vanishingly small.

      They lied to you about the Exec Orders… please consider the possibility they are lying to you about this.

  • Charles

    I think there is enough blame to cover both Democrats and Republicans for the recent government “shutdown” – which basically gave 15% of its employees an additional two weeks of paid vacation, plus gave park service employees responsible for barricades and tourist harassment worthwhile amounts of overtime and/or comp time. Senator Reed, for example, has not sent a single budget passed by the House to the Senate floor for consideration – not even when the Democrats had untouchable majorities in the House and the Senate. Even if one choses to assign 100% of the blame for the shutdown to Republicans, it was the Democrat President who chose to make things as unpleasant for the people as possible – even barricading and guarding the war memorials on the mall which are normally open 24/7 without the presence of any park service employees.

    • Wyrd Smythe

      There are times in politics where both parties are equally to blame, but this isn’t one of them. The Republicans have lost their minds politically the last few years from what I can tell. A previous commenter on this thread offered some points that turned out to be Republican Lies — one of them an astonishingly blatant and complete lie. He was just repeating what he’d been told, and perhaps that is true of you as well.

      Calling the shutdown a “paid vacation” is ignorant and callus. I strongly urge you do a bare minimum of looking up the truth for yourself, but consider this: It required an act of Congress (the Federal Employee Retroactive Pay Fairness Act) to provide that back pay, and so far it has only been passed by the House, not the Senate. It likely will be passed by the Senate and made into law, but that will take time.

      Meanwhile, 800,000 government workers have a hole in their pay, and many of them — as many people do — live pretty close to their paycheck. That hole hurts them if the rent is due or they need groceries. There are also the millions of people unable to access government services due to the political games being played by just one party: the fucking Republicans.

      So it is offensive and ignorant to suggest this was a paid vacation.

      And what the Democratic President really did was stand up to blackmailers, spoiled children throwing a temper tantrum because they didn’t get their way and resorting to terrorist tactics trying to force the country into getting their way.

      As for Senator Reid, I would have to research it to comment. There has definitely been conflict between the Republican House and Democratic Senate, and there is a whole conversation to have about President Obama’s (lack of) leadership. In these areas, I do have issues with the Dems, but in this current situation, the lion’s share of the blame falls squarely on the Republicans.

      A good Conservative party is necessary (I feel) to reign in the potential excesses of the Progressives, and likewise, the Progressives are necessary for growth and, well, progress. When both parties are healthy, the result is a good balance of thoughtful progress. But currently the Conservatives have become the party of NOPE and are no longer helping to balance governance.

      The really awful thing — the thing that utterly turns me against them — is the campaign of misinformation and outright lies being deliberately spread to further their ideology. In my book, if you need to lie to make your point, you have no point at all.

  • Wyrd Smythe

    Wow. Interesting to read this post in light of 2016 through 2020! If things were bad in 2013 when I wrote this, they sure got a lot worse!

  • George Carlin | Logos con carne

    […] in 2013, in response to what I was seeing on the Right (ironic name; should be the Wrong-wing), I posted Republican Terrorism. What was true then has become more and more true with time. The far-Wrong is grinding away at the […]

And what do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: