Another good one Frank. Keep 'em coming!

Right on...again.

Robertson's "true story": Haiti "swore a pact to the devil" to get "free from the French" and "ever since, they have been cursed"

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201001130024

Is there any tragedy Pat Robertson won't exploit?

http://mediamatters.org/research/201001130044

Limbaugh says, "[W]e've already donated to Haiti. It's called the U.S. income tax"

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201001130022

Limbaugh: Haiti earthquake "made to order" for Obama

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201001140005

I think it's time to TAKE BACK OUR AIRWAVES from rightwing Republican hate radio!

Olbermann Slams Limbaugh And Robertson For Sick Comments

http://www.youtube.com/w...;feature=player_embedded

Oh Frank, why aren't there more like you, and less like Pat?

As usual Frank Schaeffer offers a compelling viewpoint with important insight and information. I applaud and encourage him for that.

And in the hope of expanding the conversation I'd like to throw in some additional critical thoughts for consideration.

I do not blame Frank for what comes across sometimes as a dismissive and angry tone. Indeed, I am often dismissive and angry right along with him. Still, I think(if possible)we need to go beyond that. This subject keeps coming up here at Bradblog(yeah, cuz you keep bringing it up, Lasagna).

Frank's examination, critique, and warnings are all extremely useful. This belief system(or some version of it) he's shedding light on, though a part of our culture for a long, long time, has gained unprecedentd popularity and influence. We really need to understand it. And, in my view, engage it. That's why I suspect a tone of dismissiveness which may lend itself to viewing millions of our fellow citizens as yet another monolithic "them", may not be the wisest path.

In a recent comment section I mentioned Kate Davis, David Heilbroner, and Franco Sacchi's(disclosure-all friends of mine)new doc Waiting For Armageddon.(links provided at end of comment). A remarkable aspect of this powerful little film is that much of the same information Frank conveys is presented by the believers themselves. Thus, it's much easier(and maybe scarier)to realize these people are not freaks, but our neighbors. They are all over the place.

I subscribe to the view that these Evangelicals do not represent one monolithic absolutely unshakable belief system. Yes, there will be those among them who will never be receptive to dialogue. I suspect those are the types--Palin, Cheney, etc., who have the most visibility, making it easy to conflate what I suspect is a more diverse population with a few select sociopaths. There are those with whom attempts at engagement will always be futile(although maybe there is still benefit in the love behind the effort). But I have to believe there are untold others who are reachable. Doesn't the existence of Frank Schaeffer say as much? No one was more in the belly of the beast than he and look at him now. So what contributed to your mind shift, Frank? And why couldn't the sort of transformation you experienced be experienced by others? And isn't that a worthwhile thing to pursue?

We're all in this together. There is a class and culture war being waged by a small powerful minority, consciously and unconsciously in my view, that's imperilling the health and well being of life on this planet. We need to find all the common ground with as many diverse groups as we can in order to overcome the power of these entrenched interests. If the numbers of humanity who in reality share much more in common than not, became a unified proactive team, the power of the "powerful" would be revealed for what it is--illusion.

(first link for Huffpost article by one of the filmmakers, second for movie homepage)

http://www.huffingtonpos...rael-and-t_b_391351.html

www.waitingforarmageddon.com

More from Maddow and the Young Turks on Limbaugh & Robertson's comments:

http://www.youtube.com/w...47BE962D5DF4&index=1

http://www.youtube.com/w...47BE962D5DF4&index=2

http://www.youtube.com/w...47BE962D5DF4&index=3

http://www.youtube.com/w...47BE962D5DF4&index=4

Michele Bachmann & Gohmert: no one was ever waterboarded at GITMO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmTzl0XtbJE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MipNYMVNM0

"There is a class and culture war being waged by a small powerful minority, consciously and unconsciously in my view, that's imperilling the health and well being of life on this planet." Great point David. I look forward to Frank's reply to your post.

There must be a way to get through to more people, that CHANGE is not a bad thing, and YES WE CAN do better as a human race. Afterall, this planet will not put up with our continuing assualt on IT. We are a poison it's gonna spit out sooner or later.
Anyway, thanks for the links David. I'm off to read/view.

Oh, Frank is so wrong on this point...

They are not just rooting for Armageddon.

These fake christians are actually using America to try and START the Armageddon.

I live in Tulsa, OK It is full of this sort of viewpoint/theology. Very hard to engage, but carefully done, with respect and Scriptural backup, one can begin the discussion. Frank has great points, and I like David's tempering of them.

I have just discovered this blog and will continue reading here.

† Soli Deo gloria

#6 DrKeithCurrie said, "Lets pray for preacher Pat Robertson..."

Is there a prayer for Pat Roberston?

May G-d bless and keep Pat Robertson
FAR AWAY FROM US!!!

Apologies to Sholom Aleichem, Joseph Stein and Fiddler on the Roof...

A local blogger had this to ask (I wish I could take credit):

Let me get this straight: they had to make a pact with the devil to fight against the French who were enslaving them and treating them cruelly? God wouldn’t help them in their fight to be free, so they had to turn to the devil? So then was God on the side of the French? So then was God pro-slavery and the devil was pro-freedom?

"Christians" like Robertson have a false sense of superiority that gives them the huberus to make statements like he did. The religious right likes to slam the intellectual eliteism of the left because the left will defer to science if they are unsure of what and why events occur. "Christians" like Robertson default to the hand of their diety when events occur. Since Roberston is an unforgiving and hateful person, his god is similarly vengeful, spiteful and vindictive to all who are unaccepting of his brand of theology.
Robertson seems to believe that since all of us are sinners that the Haitians must have done something worse than Robertson himself to deserve such a retribution (this is because his god has not been vengeful to Robertson himself no matter how horrid his statements and life have been). So he makes up some lame excuse to justify why they deserve the wrath of a diety.
I thought it was not up to humans to try to judge God and understand the reasons behind His actions. Also Robertson believes in a more literal interpretation of the bible, yet he is in the process of interpreting the actions of his diety. If Robertson is interpreting God then isn't he going against his strict literal dogma and is being profane towards his god by interpreting his god's actions?

Frank,
Most of what you list can be explained by run-of-the-mill stupidity, brainwashing, and human, all-too-human evil. I suppose you're being satirical and sarcastic, rather than analytical and insightful, but given the reality of actual people who think of themselves as making actual pacts with the devil, and the actual political power of satanic cults, I'd suggest that you not use words like "pact with Satan" and "cursed" lightly. Again, your anger and frustration with Whatever-It-Is is clouding your judgment - and making you seem like not a serious person. I think you must have deep insights --- you're a bright thinker --- but these insights are not coming across effectively.
Also, your list is sloppy and vague, e.g., "The evangelical hate machine working to deny gays their right to marry" ... and political factionalism is indicative of satanic pacts because ... ? Or "Tax free churches deforming American politics" ... what does it mean to "deform" American politics? And why does it matter that these churches are "tax free"? Do you want our imperial, war-mongering government to collect MORE taxes?
I don't get it.
@ David Lasagna --- you're money, man. Great words of wisdom. Hear hear.

@ myself:
"I suppose you're being satirical and sarcastic, rather than analytical and insightful" --- false and unfair dichotomy ... sorry, Frank. Should have just said "I suppose you're being satirical and sarcastic," --- and then just gone on with my point.
You are being insightful - this dangerous sub-culture must be understood and mitigated ... but I would appreciate deeper analysis and more even-keeled rhetoric ... your stuff is hard to read.
Hey, by the way, maybe the folks would like to hear about Orthodoxy's counter-culture that is waging war against the sub-culture you are (rightly) denouncing?

Symbiont says:

Also, your list is sloppy and vague, e.g., "The evangelical hate machine working to deny gays their right to marry" ... and political factionalism is indicative of satanic pacts because ... ? Or "Tax free churches deforming American politics" ... what does it mean to "deform" American politics? And why does it matter that these churches are "tax free"? Do you want our imperial, war-mongering government to collect MORE taxes?
I don't get it.

Are you serious? It's "vague" that those against gay marriage stem from religion?

And does it matter that churches are tax-free and they're pimping Republicans? You're DAMN RIGHT it matters! Every hear of separation of Church & State?

If you think his points are "vague", what the hell have you been reading for the past years? Are you reading the news?

@ Big Dan, who calmly said:

Are you serious? It's "vague" that those against gay marriage stem from religion?
And does it matter that churches are tax-free and they're pimping Republicans? You're DAMN RIGHT it matters! Every hear of separation of Church & State?
If you think his points are "vague", what the hell have you been reading for the past years? Are you reading the news?

I don't really understand any of your points. "Vague" means unclear and indistinct. In Frank's argumentation, I was not sure what the connection between our Founding Fathers being "cursed" and the fact that most evangelicals don't believe homosexuals have the right to marry, etc. I also didn't know what Frank meant by "deform American politics" --- since he didn't give any clear and distinct examples of what such "deformations" at the hands of "tax free churches" looks like.
What did you mean by "those against gay marriage stem from religion?" This sentence doesn't make sense.
And yes, I think it matters that evangelical churches are "pimping Republicans." And yes, true separation of church and state is something we should strive for, and have never really had. I also think it matters that evangelicals have been theologically co-opted into believing that you can't be a Christian without being politically pro-Israel (and fanatical about Armageddon) in every single instance.
I think a lot of things matter.
And yes, I read the news.
I read other stuff, too. I read a lot, actually.

Okay.

[1] Big Dan is never calm. Hardly a day has passed in the last four years when I haven't spoken with him or heard from him, and he is outright scandalized at all times. So no one should take offense at that.

[2] I don't know what Symbiont has against spaces between paragraphs, but I'd appreciate it if you would give a little more thought to readability and put those spaces in.

[3] I remind everyone that it is optimal to both blockquote and italicize when you reiterate snippets of others' comments or take a snippet from a piece you're linking. This too is about readability.

[4] Whatever can be done to mitigate confusion, anywhere, even here, is devoutly to be wished.

and

[5] I am always more than happy to explain the usage of formatting buttons to anyone who is uncomfortable with them.

Thank you.

All of this can be summed up in one word. RELIGION

In all its many flavors for millennia Religion has been and still is the leading cause of Death, War, Civil Unrest, Hate, Racism, Sexism, Genocide than anything humans have done to themselves in all of history.

So Pat Robertson spouts a bunch of hate-filled, insane crapola and Frank Schaeffer thinks that gives him carte blanche to libel conservative Christians with more hate-filled, insane (and scattershot) crapola? Doesn't fly. A bunch of these dots don't connect at all. Examples:

"'Christians' attending funerals ...and screaming God hates fags and America..."

You know fully well that Fred Phelps and his gang of moronic inbreds have no following whatsoever in the Chrsitian community. They are an island amongst themselves.

"Pat Robertson (gee, you forgot Jerry Falwell) explaining 9/11 as God's wrath..."

I agree with you, that viewpoint is vile and disgusting. Kind of like Jeremiah Wright: "America's chickens!...are coming home!...to roost!"

"Sarah Palin..."

Gee, saying her name around left-wingers gets the same response as when you say Bill Clinton's name around people like Randall Terry.

Damail comment #21--

"Pat Robertson (gee, you forgot Jerry Falwell) explaining 9/11 as God's wrath..."

I agree with you, that viewpoint is vile and disgusting. Kind of like Jeremiah Wright: "America's chickens!...are coming home!...to roost!"

First of all, I feel sorry for the word "equivalency" as it must be turning over on its page in dictionaries throughout the universe.

Second of all, I believe Rev. Wright was quoting some respected military man's(a member of the Bush Administration?) evaluation of likely consequences to U.S. foreign policies. If the notion that there will be unwanted consequences to U.S. policies-- invading, occupying, and bombing Muslim country after Muslim country-- is anything other than obvious, you'll have to explain why. That it's largely taboo in the U.S. to discuss this simple and disastrous cause and effect does not change the fact that this is a widely accepted(even in intelligence agencies)point of view. If you can cite the government study validating Robertson's attribution of cause and effect, I'd be most interested to see it.

Third of all--Agent 99, I'd love to learn how to blockquote and/or italicize. I'm computer dysfunctional. Shall we meet at the water cooler or how does this work?

Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the world, and it has been for DECADES, and it sits on our very doorstep.
Robertson and Limbaugh and what they've said about Haiti got me to thinking, and a story came to my mind:

Luke 16:19 ¶ There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

Rush Limbaugh and the rest of us in the United States, especially those of us (myself included) who call ourselves Christians, had best be very careful in how we judge and treat those countries whose poor die daily on our doorstep, lest we end up like the rich man in Luke 16.

Marion Robertson is no more one of Gods children that speaks through him than his father was a Senator and snake oil salesman.

He is a false profit (improper spelling intended)

I wouldn't bother to even read Frank if he toned down his Rhetoric. Keep up the good work Frank, we need more like you and Rep. Grayson to tell it like it is.

Lasagna

Try highlighting what you want to italicize and then hit the "i" button. Same with what you want in the blockquote: Highlight the whole passage and then hit the "blockquote" button. Same with bold. Same with link... only the link button is trickier because you have to be sure to paste the link in or type it in without duplicating the http stuff. Or you can hit the button to open the tags and then close them without highlighting the text....

You can email questions to neufx2@yahoo.com and I will try to be more illustrative.

Comment # 18, Symbiont points out that the person (me) he's arguing with, isn't calm, by sarcastically saying "Big Dan, who calmly said:"

This is for everyone's benefit: learn arguing tactics. Ad Hominem is used by saying I'm not "calm", begging the audience that my point is not to be taken seriously because I'm not "calm":

http://www.don-lindsay-a...c/arguments.html#hominem

Are you ever arguing with someone, and they open with: "Relax", "calm down", "don't have a heart attack"? It's "Ad Hominem". Leading with attacking something personal about the person you're arguing with, like they're not "calm".

Now that I've pointed this out, you'll notice it more.

Actually, Symbiont uses Ad Hominem in his opening arugument with Frank in comment #15, with the statement:

Again, your anger and frustration with Whatever-It-Is is clouding your judgment - and making you seem like not a serious person.

Ad Hominem - trying to give your argument more credence by pointing out a (possibly even non-existent, but definitely not relevant) personal characteristic flaw of the other person.

Frank is "angry and frustrated", Big Dan isn't "calm", therefore I'm right.

Haiti is poor because of it's proximity and dealings with the United States.
Period.

That is it's pact with the devil. Yes I equated the U.S. with the devil. It is devilish to install puppet dictators that keep Americans rich and happy while the people of Haiti suffer poverty almost unheard of in the rest of the world...

Pat Robertson blaming this latest Haitian disaster on Haitians is by definition evil of Robertson, that is an attribute of Satan. Rush Limbaugh's making the Haitian earthquake into a political statement by saying...

Media Matters Jan. 2010
LIMBAUGH: That place, Haiti, has been run by dictators and communists. And how long is it gonna be, how long is it gonna be before we hear Obama and the left in this country say that what we really need to do is reinstate the communist Aristide to the leadership position down there to coordinate putting the country back together? The Haitian economy is entirely dependent on foreign aid. They produce nothing --- zilch, zero, nada.

That my friends is inherently evil...it lacks any human compassion or feeling for your fellow man.

So yes Pat Robertson, a supposed man of faith has a pact with "the devil" whether he consciously knows it or not....to deal in lies and ignore human suffering is by definition devilish and insane...it's anti-Christian.

Isn't the anti-christ portrayed as being Satan...?

I'm just sayin'...

"anti-Christ" is not acting in a Christ like manner.

So yes, it would apply to them so called "Christians" Like Marion and Tush.

Big Dan re comments #26 #27--

I take issue with you, big dude.

1. I don't think you have the meaning of ad hominem right, or are misapplying it in this case. My sense of the word is that ad hominem refers to gratuitously attacking a person's character while avoiding/in order to avoid the substance of the argument at hand. My reading is that Symbiont isn't attacking your character he's giving you shit because you were screaming in his cyberface. I think there's a qualitative difference between giving someone shit and an ad hominem attack. They're perhaps related but distant cousins of conversational technique.

2. According to Agent 99 you are not calm, never have been, never will be(I'm embellishing).

3. You may not agree with Symbiont's arguments but it seems quite a stretch to claim he's trying to avoid the substance of the arguments at hand. Seems the opposite to me. Dealing thoroughly with the argument at hand would seem to disqualify your ad hominem characterization.

4. According to your definition it would appear you're committing ad hominem yourself by suggesting that he doesn't read instead of actually trying to understand what he might be saying.

5. If you like to scream, your choice, but you taking offense at someone giving you a little shit back is a bit much. You like to scream. Okay. Symbiont maybe likes to give people a little shit back. Seems fair.

Point of Blog Etiquette--

I still feel new at this. I just repeatedly referred to Symbiont as "him". I have no idea what I'm basing this sexual characterization upon other than my spider sense and I don't have a spider sense. I'm a dog. I certainly don't want to be misinterpreted and thought to be making an ad hominem attack on anyone's sexual preference. For all I know Symbiont(or anyone else)is male, female, trans, gay, Na'vi, or any other happy choice. I could avoid the personal pronouns all together but that makes the writing a little stiff and effected. What's etiquette? When there's no obvious indication from the username is it acceptable to go by what your ears would have you believe? Do you ask? I assume Agent 99 is female because Barbara Feldon was female(as far as I know).(Is Agent 99 Barbara Feldon?) I assume Big Dan is male because the Dans I've known(of all sizes) have been(except for the Daniellas). Don't want to be rude or presumptuous.

Thanks for the tips my dear blog travel Agent 99.

Dear Gentle Mr. Lasagna,

Mr. Manners wants to lighten your burden.

Referring to a person of unknown gender as "he" is not considered an attack on their sexual preference, ad hominem or not.

As to whether it is sexist, that's another issue entirely. If you are concerned that such forms as "he or she" and "his or her" make your writing seem affected, I'd suggest using "they" and "their." But first, I'd invite you to discover why you have such concern that using "he or she" might seem affected. It doesn't seem affected to Mr. Manners.

Were Mr. Manners not excruciatingly polite in all his dealings, he would suspect a lowbrow attack of sarcasm against "political correctness," the entire concept of which has always appeared to Mr. Manners to be: acting polite to the negros, cripples, fags and bitches is pretty faggy itself.

@ Lasagna: Ha ha, good point. Yeah, I'm a (human) dude. I wouldn't mind being a Na'vi dude, though, now that you mentioned the possibility ... (I'm one of those people with post-Avatar depression; probably because when I left the IMAX, I faced the cold, bleak, grey endlessness of the midwest...)

@ Big Dan: David Lasagna's interpretation of my comments and understanding of the ad hominem fallacy mirrors my own, but he stated all that more eloquently and peacefully than I would have, so I'm glad he said it.

Dear Mr. Manners re comment #33--

Thank you for your instructional offerings.

This--Referring to a person of unknown gender as "he" is not considered an attack on their sexual preference, ad hominem or not.--I'll take under consideration.

Here-- If you are concerned that such forms as "he or she" and "his or her" make your writing seem affected, I'd suggest using "they" and "their." But first, I'd invite you to discover why you have such concern that using "he or she" might seem affected.--I think you misuderstood me. It wasn't the possibility of inserting the "he" or "she" that I was referring to as effected(just maybe inaccurate), but the verbal gymnastics I imagined would be required to avoid using those pronouns. And I'm afraid referring to an unknown sexuant as a "they" or a "them" would only compound my sense of confusion and discomfort.

And here--Were Mr. Manners not excruciatingly polite in all his dealings, he would suspect a lowbrow attack of sarcasm against "political correctness," the entire concept of which has always appeared to Mr. Manners to be: acting polite to the negros, cripples, fags and bitches is pretty faggy itself.--you completely lost me.

If you're trying to discern my tone and intention here and how far or not my tongue might be pushing a cheek or two, I may be able to help.

Yes, I was sorta fucking around with the subject cuz I think it's kinda funny. At the same time I really was curious about what's proper or expected in the etiquette of cyberworld blogging and trying to be sincerely solicitous. It's all crazy and we're all sensitive and my intentions/queries were meant to be both serious and comedic.

So, I guess what I'll do is not worry about it too much and just continue to make up my own rules.

Thanks for your offers of help and the courtesy of your response, Manny.

As a fully-emancipated woman I can state with authority that I was taught in, like, first grade that whenever the gender isn't specific the practice, purely for reasons of not belaboring it, is to use the masculine. That's supremely reasonable, and all this crap by "feminists" about it is just playing the victim card, whining, idiotic and I don't hold with it. Further, I'm not shy about expressing it. Having a cow about using "mankind" instead of "humankind" and "congressman" instead of "congressperson" is fucking prissy little girl stuff.

And, don't you even begin to doubt me, too many women are firmly of the belief that we must emulate men to be equal, and so are quite often much worse than men in the areas where men used to run everything. I'm hoping that this is changing now that we have some generations of women not brought up in "a man's world"... but there are, obviously, still too many man-imitators in positions of power. They need replacing really badly.

Excuse me, but we are equal—not the same—and emulating men is bad for us and for men... and for the world.

What is forgivable is the natural human propensity to find a rationale for why bad things happen to people. What is not forgivable, except perhaps by God, is the vicious human tendency to find blame in others; to find some meaningless characteristic in others, like being gay for example, to justify a,d provide ill fodder for such corrupted thinking on your part. Shame on you Pat Robertson and may your mean-spirited, ignorant statements find you looking in a mirror on your judgment day. What you will see will not be pretty.

Sorry Damail but these view points from stark raving lunatics like this are not "fringe" with Christians, it is mainstream and very prevalent.
98% of all hate groups are religiously based and most are Christian.
Denial of this fact is basically the same as Fundy Christians denying the fact of Evolution.

You're lying, Nunyabiz, and you know you are. What I said about Fred Phelps is 100% true. Furthermore,the vast majority of Americans rebuke any notion that America got what it deserved on 9/11, whether that notion is spoken by Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Jeremiah Wright or Noam Chomsky.

"Hate groups" ? Ever see what happens in the world of radical Islam? Somebody publishes anti-Mohammed cartoons, and people die. Somebody produces a piss-Christ "art" exhibit, and the most radical thing that Christians do is demand that the government stop funding such crap.

You lost another one.

So Damail, you're unaware of what happened to cartoonist Mike Fiore last week when he dared produce a cartoon lampooning the tea baggers?
http://rawstory.com/2010...eath-threats-cartoonist/

Ya know we let you post here all you like, no matter how rude and wrong and obnoxious you are in note after note. I realize you're angry at the world for some sad reason, but is it too much to ask that you do your best to be civil and polite to your fellow commenters who have done you neither wrong nor insult?

Think about it. And nice to see you're doing well.

Those of us who consider ourselves faithful or spiritual but far from being riled-up, Muslim-hating, Christian nutcases, are not being heard. It's not enough that the President of my church, The United Church of Christ, has led the programs at Washington peace marches. It's not enough that we donate a good portion of our offering to aid missions both locally and globally. We will always - in the minds of some - be lumped in with the fundamentalists who demonstrate daily their greed, their prejudice, and their hatred in the name of the same Heavenly Father for whom we spend our lives doing good! That is precisely why I get so angry that they have been granted a voice at all. They say it is a God-given voice, a God-given right to speak out so hatefully. Really? God gave them that? I think not!

@Damail comment # 39

You say---the vast majority of Americans rebuke any notion that America got what it deserved on 9/11, whether that notion is spoken by Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Jeremiah Wright or Noam Chomsky.

In my earlier response to you I was mistaken in saying it was a military man that Wright was quoting saying our chickens were coming home to roost. As you continue to bring this up I thought I'd try to find the exact guy who Wright was quoting cuz I knew it was not Falwell, Roberston, Chomsky, Wright, or anyone like those guys.

Reverend Wright was quoting Edward Peck, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and deputy director of President Reagan's terrorism task force who was speaking on Fox News. Do you dismiss his opinion, also?

More to the point--I took the time to give you a good faith response. You do not respond to the substance of what is being offered back to you as rebuttal. It took me less than minute to find this information through a Google search. You seem to only Google your own thoughts and prejudices.

"...you're unaware of what happened to cartoonist Mike Fiore...?"

One cartoonist received death threats? Well, here's a novel idea: Find the people who sent the death threats and throw their butts in jail. Dude, are you kidding me? That pales in comparison to what actually happened when those anti-Mohammed cartoons were published. People were actually killed! And you had full-blown riots, for crying out loud. All because of a cartoon.

"...do your best to be civil and polite..."

Nunyabiz has actually stated that he wants President Bush and his cabinet members dead. Don't lecture me about civility.

"...no matter how rude and obnoxious and wrong you are..."

I don't go around wishing death on my political opponents. And what I posted before was accurate. By the way, Frank Schaeffer sounds a lot angrier at the world than anybody else I run across.

Nunyabiz has actually stated that he wants President Bush and his cabinet members dead. Don't lecture me about civility.

I will lecture you about anything I want. And I'll remind you you are allowed to post on my blog out my good graces. You now walk dangerously close to breaking our "knowing disinformation" rule for commenting here. I see no comment here from Nunyabiz suggesting anything like you describe. Please share the URL or your comment will be considered either "knowing disinformation" or "personal attack on another commenter" --- both bannable offenses.

By the way, Frank Schaeffer sounds a lot angrier at the world than anybody else I run across.

You, like Frank, are welcome to be as angry as you like. You are not, however, entitled to break our few rules for commenting here. Similarly, you are not entitled to post here at all. If you can't play nicely with others and show a modicum of civility, you won't be here at all for very much longer. Thank you.

Brad, Damail was probably referring to this exchange.

Seems to me that, overall, in general, whether he is an example of blind partisanship or someone determined to mirror blind partisanship his input could be considered constructive, even if frequently infuriating....

Idea: let's keep Damail around as an experiment in the bizarre motif - see if 99 can "herd him". In fact, 99, we can play good cop / bad cop.

This post will surely illicit some rude n' nasty, beyond the pale, ignorant attack from him - you come down on me /give me a verbal ass kicking for being the rude one (I won't take it personally - I never do), causing a special blog-bond between you and Damail that will ultimately serve the greater good.

Over time we can study Damail's freaky adverse behavioral effects, see if he can be deprogrammed. Damail as DE-FOXIFICATION case study #1. If that means I'll be taking Damail's nasty brad-blog-bullets in open terrain, so be it. I'm always more than willing to fall on the brainless grenade if it means we can save just one teabagger.

I know it's a long shot, but maybe - just maybe - working together as faux-adversaries, you and I can BOTH get what we want: The Tea Party's justifiable anger / considerable media draw power re-directed at the actual bad guys.

Perhaps I'm parsing, but since we're all such sticklers for accuracy, around here: in that Damail / Nunyabiz exchange 99 links to above, Nunyabiz writes:

"There was damn good reason to want to see Bush hung."

Hardly an incitement to assassinate, Damail. IR you want, I can to link to about a hundred or so examples of far worse rhetoric from you. Probably even intended a metaphor, even, since Nunya followed that with a statement of desire to see due process of law:

"I hope I live long enough to see that bastard on trial for the war crimes he has committed..."

This implies that Nunyabiz is, in fact, advocating for a fair trial with stated hope tha the jury would sentence Bush to death as justifiable punishment for taking the lives of thousands, if not millions of souls.

It's not against BB posting rules to favor capital punishment, Damail. Nice try, though.

One more minor tidbitty then I'll go back to my corner, Nunyabiz only mentions wanting to see BUSH dead, not, as Damail implies in attempt to mislead us:

"President Bush and his cabinet members dead."

But, hey, if the D.A. could prove to a grand jury that said cabinet members were involved in a conspiracy to murder hundreds of thousands, say by hijacking the very government they always hated and stated they wanted to see destroyed, then I think Nunyabiz would be well within his / her rights to call for justice to be applied to all the crooked, cowardly pickle-pricks.

That's something even Fox News and Damail would consider "a normal, rational call for good ol' American Justice." Might even inspire the collective chanting of "U.S.A., U.S.A." outside the gas chamber, if it weren't for their own doing the spin.

...Right, Damail?

A note to Agent 99: Thank you. I'm not as computer-savvy as the average joe, so I'm not well-versed in pulling up other people's past comments.

A clarification: Apparently, Nunyabiz only talked about having Bush killed, not his cabinet members. Ooooooh, that makes a lot of difference. I guess I got him confused with other websites where the death wishes have included cabinet members. Furthermore, he has already spoke as judge, jury and executioner.

So, Damail, you have been shown to be completely wrong here. Will you do the right thing and apologize to Nunya for the slight?

That would be surprise and delight me.

And, related, Agent 99 said, in re: Damail:

Seems to me that, overall, in general, whether he is an example of blind partisanship or someone determined to mirror blind partisanship his input could be considered constructive, even if frequently infuriating....

I haven't criticized his input --- even as I don't see any of it, to date, as particularly "constructive", other than as a reminder of the knee-jerk "talking points" of the blind, mis-informed partisanship of the hopelessly unapologetic wingnuts.

I have criticized his boorishness and lack of civility (calling folks "liars" without backing up the case, referring to me as "Friedman" and Frank as "Schaeffer").

He is, as I mentioned, welcome to be as obnoxious and rude as he likes, as long as he stays within our few rules. His talking points, as misinformative as they are, would likely be better received if he dug down deep for some politeness and good humor in his opining, but that's up to him. When he posts knowing disinformation --- as is now the case if he repeats the allegations of Nunyabiz --- and/or personal attacks on other commenters, then we have a different matter. Let's hope that doesn't happen.

Finally, instead of apologizing, Damail just doubled-down with this unapologetic bullshit:

Apparently, Nunyabiz only talked about having Bush killed, not his cabinet members. Ooooooh, that makes a lot of difference.

Unless you are making an argument against the death penalty (in which I would join you), the comments that Jeannie Dean and/or 99 linked to make it abundantly clear that Nunya was making a case that Bush was guilty of treason (for which a number of crimes were detailed) and for which the punishment is, indeed, death, according to the Rule of Law.

I find that law to be abhorent, frankly, as I don't believe our government should ever be in the business of killing anybody. That said, for Damail to knowingly twist Nunya's commentary the claim that...

Nunyabiz has actually stated that he wants President Bush and his cabinet members dead. Don't lecture me about civility.

Is disingenuous atleast, and a completely, obnoxious tortured misrepresentation of those comments to boot. As Damail may be wrong on just about everyting, he's not stupid, so I'm quite sure he knows that.

Therefore, knock it off Damail, unless you really really don't want to be welcome here at all anymore.

"You have been shown to be completely wrong here..."

Rubbish. The link that Agent 99 provided backs up my claim.

"Will you do the right thing and apologize to Nunya...?"

No, because he is the one needs to apologize for wishing people dead. Get this straight. He has called for the death penalty on President Bush. That means I was correct when I said that HE WANTS PRESIDENT BUSH DEAD. You can't get around that.

And there's more:

https://bradblog.com/?p=6072#comments

Comment #1. There is Nunya in all his splendor, fantasizing about the possibility of all members of Fox News being killed, and celebrating that possibility.

"...hopelessly unapologetic wingnuts..."

Snort. Chuckle. One of your commenters fantasizes about the death of a former President and the entire on-air staff of Fox News, and yet I am the wingnut. That's worth a good laugh (how's that for a sense of humor, folks?).

By the way, when a commenter says that somebody needs to bag Sarah Palin - the sooner the better - doesn't that sound like a hunting term (bagging a deer, etc.)? In other words, I think a commenter on a previous thread talked about Palin being killed.

Geez Damail

You've managed to hijack the topic haven't you.
Now it's a discussion of the vernacluar of "should be hung" and "bagged" and any discussion comments about Frank's fine piece has been rendered moot...

That Damail is the very defintion of what a troll does...a troll turns a topical discussion into something he finds more topical, usually a flame war or other non-sense.

Seeing that you find Frank's article abhorrent...we see why you would want to twist the convo to something else.

Damail the reasonable thing to have done would have been to excuse yourself if you implied something that Nunyabiz didn't intend and move on to points you liked or disliked about Frank's piece...

Damail=Troll

Actually Damail you proved my point for me.
I am saying RELIGION of all kinds are dangerous not just Christianity.
Christianity is every bit as evil and hate filled as Islam ever dared to be, there are literally 1000s of hate groups in this country of which by FAR the MOST are Christian.
Click on any state you wish, 95% of these well known HATE GROUPS are CHRISTIAN, 100% are RELIGIOUS.

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp

As far as this dust up about Bush and his evil minions I will gladly say again.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Addington, Yoo, Feith, and a host of others in the Bush administration have PROVABLY committed high treason and a whole host of other crimes.
I can hope that someday THEY ARE PUT ON TRIAL AND FOUND GUILTY, SENTENCED AND HUNG!

That is merely a statement of fact no more no less. what the Bush administration did to this country should not be allowed to stand without a trial and due process of law.

Vincent Bugliosi wants Bush on trail for murder.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080707/story

There have been 3 international tribunals that have already put Bush and Cheney on trial for Treason, War crimes, Crimes against humanity and all 3 found them GUILTY.

http://www.informationcl...use.info/article5855.htm

Bush and company was put on trial by an international Citizens 9/11 War Crimes Tribunal and found GUILTY of all charges.

http://www.bibliotecaple.../esp_sociopol_911_34.htm

The Attorney General in Vermont wants Bush charged with murder & war crimes and put on trial

http://chardennett.org/

These are but a few, there are many more.

So YES I want George Bush AND his entire administration of miserable war criminals put on trial and convicted of treason, war crimes, crimes against humanity then sentenced to HANG for their crimes.

Need I say more, ladies and gentlemen? You're the one who proved my point, Nunya. And I will say what I said in an earlier post; Your vile, evil desire to have President Bush and his cabinet members hung WILL NOT HAPPEN. EVER. Make any attempt to have this happen, and the people who try to do so will be thrown in prison. That includes you.

"...3 international tribunals..."

You mean three kangaroo courts that have no jurisdiction over anything.

"Christianity is every bit as evil and hate-filled as Islam ever dared to be..."

Since the moderators around here don't like my use of the word "lying" or any of its derivatives, I will just use the words "recreational drugs" and let everybody connect the dots.

Oh, did you notice, um, Mr. Friedman (my attempt to be civil)? Nunya has confirmed what I said earlier that he wants all of President Bush's cabinet dead. Therefore, I retract my previous clarification.

Damail said, in regard to Nunyabiz' conservative support for the Rule of Law:

Make any attempt to have this happen, and the people who try to do so will be thrown in prison. That includes you.

So you would stop the Rule of Law as defined by the Constitution? Very patriotic of you, Damail.

Nunya has confirmed what I said earlier that he wants all of President Bush's cabinet dead.

What you said, as you know (under the fading presumption that you've got any shred of intellectual honesty), was an attempt to suggest that Nunya had called for their vigilante murder by fiat.

You're simply incapable, it seems, of being honest in recognizing that Nunya was calling for the Rule of Law to be carried out as per the Constitution, as real conservatives (at least used to) support. Real conservatives, such as myself, and apparently Nunya on this point, still do.

As I said before, if you are against the death penalty, as I am, I hope you'll just say so, instead of your disingenous hopes of fooling readers into believing Nunya was calling for something he wasn't. But I realize that sort of thing may be next to impossible for you.

(And, really, there are so many other blogs who fall for your disingenuous Glenn Beck-style wingnut spin to create entirely false story lines. Why continue to waste your time doing it here where everyone sees through that bullshit from the jump? This ain't Fox "News", amigo. We've got actual sentient, informed, intelligent beings who read this blog.)

I fail to see how what I said could remotely be misconstrued by even an extreme Reich wingnut like Damail.
I thought I made myself perfectly clear.
I listed several people that want Bush put up on charges, people that are not wingnuts and lunatics but very credible, upstanding citizens from several countries.
The charges are very clear and EASILY PROVABLE, Bush along with many others in his administration have committed treason & war crimes.
So I am not alone in my hopes that someday JUSTICE is served I am in very good company.

Thank you Brad for defending me from what should be obvious to apparently anyone but Damail.

I am often amazed at how such Reich wingers are so blind to factual reality.

Oh and I too am normally opposed to the death penalty because I think far too many are found innocent while sitting on death row.

However I put cretins such as Bush & Cheney in a special category, when there is absolute proof you have committed War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity, Treason, have murdered not just one, not a dozen, not even 10s of thousands BUT OVER A MILLION people then in my mind the death penalty is warranted.
That doesn't even count how many lives he has destroyed over what he did to this countries economy.

Whew! Damail is taking the word "unapologetic" to new heights.

from the Princess Bride--"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

from Humpty Dumpty--"When I use a word it means just what I want it to mean, neither more nor less."

From my view Brad and Nunya have a different understanding(and one I share)of the meanings of words than Damail. Brad and Nunya are sitting at one table of reality and Damail at another and everyone's using many of the same simple basic words, which to the untrained eye appear to actually be words with an accepted meaning, but which in this conversation have radically different meanings. The spirit of communication is bound, gagged, and thrown in a locker in a situation like this.

Or maybe this illustration will help. It's as if a Russian very proficient in languages was given a crash course in English but for some perverse reason supplied only with joke dictionaries. The joke dictionaries give either completely wrong meanings for words or misrepresent the meanings just enough to give the Russian the appearance of conducting civil conversation but really nobody is talking about the same thing at all.

Either way, and any order you choose - "gagged, tied, bound" is dead on the mark, David Lasagna.

Which is what makes Agent 99's strange assertion that we are not doing enough to somehow harness the Tea Party's omni-directional nastiness and aim it at the appropriate assholes so very, very, veryuncharacteristically optimistic of her.

How would one begin to harness (Damail's) particularly odiferous brand of rabid froth, bottle it, re-package it, then lift it up high enough to launch at the hearts of our giant-sized villains?...

How do you absorb and de-program a Damail?...or thousands like him? IMHO, you'd need like a massive, million-dollar, thousand-mile-stare deprogramming facility the size of 10 football fields. Maybe a bio-dome stocked with everything one needs to re-animate FOXIFIED brain tissue and jump-start the critical thinking skills.

Maybe Frank can write about THAT, next? That way, no matter what horrible thing Damail writes to us all, he can't hijack the thread. Pro-active Tea-people Troubleshooting.

...oh, and your language / joke book example is good, too. I've often used "Fluent in Teabaginese" to describe the disconnect / language barrier, but that was before a cartoonist's life was threatened for doing the exact same gag.

Jeannie Dean @58

Jeannie there will always be unreachables, folks that are so lost out in the corn field and filled with stupidity that they're lost causes to reach.

I think what 99 refers to is reaching a substanstial number of misled tea-baggers, having a belief that most humans possess and inate intelligence. Most teabaggers are simply angry individuals who have been fed a crock. if someone could fill them with the truth...they'll be intelligent enough to listen.

The Damail's of the world aren't reachable...they're filled with hate period. The truth doesn't matter to them.

Those are the lost...

I don't wish death upon my political opponents. Therefore, I am not the one who is filled with hate.

I am now shaking the dust off my feet from this website. The hatred being spewed here may consume all of you, but that is your choice. I'm done.

Jeepers. Jeff Rense's crackpot website is the only site that I have ever visited that is worse than this sewer. I need a shower.

So Damail admits it....

He trolls progressive websites looking to cause havoc.
Damail seems to never be looking for a healthy discourse on any issue...All I've ever seen him do is obfuscate and attempt to hijack topic threads. I have never seen Damail concede valid point or even approach any topic in a civil manner.

He's here to flame what he dislikes...

Damail blathered:

I don't wish death upon my political opponents. Therefore, I am not the one who is filled with hate.

Cool. Then I hope you'll join The BRAD BLOG in our call to end the death penalty for ALL criminals! Whether they are your "political opponent" or not. See? Common ground. Even with Damail!

I'm done.

Don't let the door hitcha...

"Politics, Political Opponents" have absolutely nothing to do with it.
If any Democrat had clearly and blatantly stole 2 elections, committed numerous acts of treason, war crimes, crimes against humanity and then just to top it off destroyed the economy seemingly on purpose I would be calling for that A-holes head just as loud if not more so.

Problem with Damail and those like him is that he has brain washed himself into believing that Bush and Company are guilty of absolutely nothing, never stole any election, never committed treason, or war crimes, never murdered anyone.
The Damails of the country have put blinders on, swallow Fox Opinion lies to the point of self delusion and flatly refuse to accept cold hard fact.

Most of these types either are "Young Earth Creationist" or are at least exactly like them mentally. Totally delusional, unreachable.

"America is cursed all right - by Rightwing nuts!..."

Indeed.