Quote of the Day II

Anonymous said...
You are an idiot, W is the man cleaning up this tyrannical, hate-filled earth. It's people like you that love all of your rights, including the 1st amendment, but don't want to protect this great nation from murderers and rapists. Saddam, for instance, is being tried in court for mass murders, grave sites of thousands, did you miss that?
Bin Laden has formulated the greatest attacks on the US ever, did you sleep in? Get the fuck out of our country and live where you belong, a communistic regime where you and all enemies of the state can hate us.

I pulled that quote from Wildsects, because it is pure as the driven snow. Pure in the conservative sense I mean.

Lets have some fun with it and discuss some observations, shall we? After all, I'm all about the "typical" conservative now - and stereotyping and all that. Since I'm laying off the bat-shit crazy Christians for a while, this will be a fun substitute.

First, notice the cookie cutter response. Wingers like that because they can simply troll around and cut-and-paste that standard remark on as many liberal blogs as they can find. For some reason, they think that we would take a generic insult seriously. Liberals do not mind criticism, and we enjoy engaging in a dialog, but only with a person who has an original thought, and makes the effort to have a relevant point.

Next, notice it doesn't address the argument that John had made, but merely says "A-Murka! Love it or leave it!". Again, liberals enjoy arguments, but they need to be substantive and have a point. Generic insults are the tool of the truly retarded (unless they are satirical or humorous insults).

Also notice that he claims that liberals love their rights, but don't want to defend them. The wing-nut says that as he is typing on his computer and not, say, in Iraq defending A-Murka!.

The wing-nut is also not smart enough to understand the nuance of the liberal point of view towards war. He goes on about what a bad man Saddam was - which means that he has bought, hook line and sinker, the Bush transformation for the reason for the war. Wingers tend to have very short memories, and are very open to suggestion. Therefore, this particular winger doesn't seem to remember that the reason the United States military invaded, conquered, and occupy Iraq was because;
a) Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (lie)
b) Iraq had connections to the attacks on 9/11 (lie)
c) Iraq was harboring terrorists (lie)
d) Iraq was an "imminent threat" (lie)

What was missing from that list? Well, what is missing is what the war has become;
e) Saddam was a bad man and he treated his people badly
f) freeance and democracy!

If you buy into this wing-nut's view, and support using our military to solve the social injustice that happens in other countries, I suggest you are totally insane. Many thousands starve in North Korea. There is genocide and civil war in Africa.

Does this wing-nut suggest that the United States send it's military to invade every country that is having serious humanitarian problems? Is that our responsibility? That wing-nut has to be out of his fucking mind to believe that is the test used to determine if we send in our military.

The biggest heart break of all is that over 1800 American service members have died, having been sent to Iraq under the pretext that they were "defending America". It turns out they died for the Iraqi's freedom instead. Even that "freedom" is far from a foregone conclusion.

Were those 1800 people willing to die for the Iraqi's freedom? I'm sorry, but I'm sure as hell not. The Iraqis have a responsibility to themselves.

The wing-nut then references Bin Laden, but of course Bin Laden is Bin Forgotten. The Brits can round up every last suspect in the London bombing in 2 weeks. The Bush Administration can only round up the #3 man in Al Qaeda over and over.

Finally, the wing-nut finishes by calling liberals "enemies of the state". The truth is, the wing-nut is the enemy of the state. Liberals know that a knee jerk reaction to a horrible event is shortsighted. We always keep foremost in our attitude the core principals of what America is all about. The wing-nuts use any excuse to further the central influence of the Federal government. It is as if the wing-nuts want an authoritarian regime to take over the United States, and launch a plan of world dominance.

Liberals are not "enemies of the state", but rather conservatives are "tools of the state". Liberals know that the 9/11 attacks were not an attack on individuals, but rather the freedom we believe in. The conservative reaction to 9/11 has been to restrict those freedoms, thus furthering the terrorist accomplishment.

This particular wing-nut is obviously consumed by paranoia. He seems to relish in the fact that the rest of the world hates A-Murkins, because that allows him to fold in closer to his core constituency, and reinforce his delusional paranoia through supportive conversations with other wing-nuts. If 9/11 had never happened, the wing-nuts would continue to be joined together only within the Montana style "compounds". That is another Bin Laden accomplishment. Bin Laden gave focus and credibility to the wing-nuts, which further damages the core principals of America.

Tell me again, who is the enemy of the state? Is it those of us that value civil liberties more than our own lives, or is it the conservatives that would send the best of America to die for some other country’s freedom?