Liberal Forum

You ARE the MOONBAT. These people in fact WERE slaves as they made so little they could not pay back th " charge" on them if they worked 10 years and while they were lied to PROMISED one thing, it was a SCAM and it meant year of SLAVERY before they could just get free with NOTHING. I doubt you CARE since obviously SOMEONE made a lot of MONEY and in your value system, that's bottom line.Save the Poor Little Moonbaby line...Lie, Smear....BULL shat...we heard it. The Saipan Slave/sweatshop thing was well documented. BRAG that you are just FINE with slavery,Heck if Union Busting is good, slaves ought to be even MORE Tea Cult.You're a ranting, brainless moonbat, who's cited not one single word of actual evidence.

Fox News Alters Hoffas Speech to Mislead Public of Violent ThreatTurns out Hoffas Speech was not the violent Call to Arms Fox News wanted you to believe. They edited the speech to make it look like he was calling for a violent threat against Republicans and Tea Parties. What Fox Said: President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Lets take these son of [female dogs] out and give America back to an America where we belong, Hoffa added. What was Actually Said: Everybody heres got to vote. If we go back and keep the eye on the prize, lets take these son of a [female dogs] out and give America back to America where we belong! Thank you very much!In an initial report on Hoffa's speech at 1 p.m. on Fox News, Ed Henry reported that Hoffa said that "we'll remember in November who's with the working people" and "said of the Tea Party and of Republicans, 'let's take these sons of [female dogs] out.'" Henry made clear during that segment that Hoffa's comments were references to voting out Republican members of Congress, not to violence. And roughly 20 minutes later, he explained on Twitter that the "full quote" of the "take these son of a [female dogs] out" comment is "Everybody here's got to vote. If we go back & keep the eye on the prize, let's take these sons of [female dogs] out":But in a second segment that ran at roughly the same time as Henry's tweet, Fox News dishonestly edited the speech in the manner seen above. Andrew Breitbart's Big sites, Real Clear Politics, The Daily Caller, the Media Research Center, and the Drudge Report have all highlighted that footage, using it to condemn "the violence emanating from union thug bosses" and demand that Obama "denounce" the comments.In the Fox News segment that included the dishonestly cropped video, Republican consultant Brad Blakeman decried the comments as "thuggery at its best" and "the kind of remarks you'd expect out of Tony Soprano," and commented that "when a union president says 'let's take these sons of [female dogs] out,' that usually means someone's legs are going to get broken, somebody's going to disappear." Fox wouldn't do something like that, would they? Edited by MistyBlue, 06 September 2011 - 03:38 PM.

Tea Party Zombies Must Die Video Game Riles RepublicansAn online video game that allows players to shoot zombie versions of Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich and Fox News' Bill O'Reilly has angered conservatives in America. The online first-person shooter game called Tea Party Zombies Must Die, gives players the chance move around a decaying Fox News studio, killing zombie versions of presidential candidate, Michele Bachmann, star of the Tea Party movemenSarah Palin, speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and right-wing broadcaster Glenn Beck using an array of weapons. Other undead creatures players may encounter include likenesses of the former Senator for Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum and Fox News host Bill O'Reilly. They can also target a series of generic characters, of which the descriptively-named "Expresses racist views anonymously on the internet modern klan zombie" and "Factory-made blonde Fox News Barbie who has never had a problem in her life zombie". The game, which was created by StarvingEyes Advergaming who make games for online viral campaigns, has attracted criticism from some conservatives. Brent Bozell, president of Media Research Center, a right-wing media analysis organisation, said: "The liberal media have been preaching for years that conservatives are the ones who invoke violent imagery and rhetoric. Yet in the space of two days, the radical, pro-Obama left calls us 'son-of-a-[female dogs]' and says they want to 'take us out.' And they follow that with a hideously violent game where they do just that - depicting ways of shooting prominent conservatives, presidential candidates and journalists. The news media would be in an uproar if violence had been incited against liberals. Their silence disgusts me."Some of the other generic characters are the 'Koch industries Koch Whore lobbyist pig zombie' the 'generic pissed off old white guy zombie' and the "pissed off stupid white trash redneck birther zombie'.

Edited by MistyBlue, 11 September 2011 - 05:58 PM.

Just when you think that the Republican base can't sink any lower.......First they applauded and cheered the record breaking 234 executions (now 235) that took place in Texas under Perry, then they shouted YES when Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul if we should let a 30 year old man in a coma die because he doesn't have health insurance, and now they've hit a new low, booing a member of the military serving in Iraq.Not one of the nine **** on stage said a word about it.The night Republicans booed a soldier.

Just when you think that the Republican base can't sink any lower.......First they applauded and cheered the record breaking 234 executions (now 235) that took place in Texas under Perry, then they shouted YES when Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul if we should let a 30 year old man in a coma die because he doesn't have health insurance, and now they've hit a new low, booing a member of the military serving in Iraq.Not one of the nine **** on stage said a word about it.The night Republicans booed a soldier.Wow, the Democrats must really be desperate if this is all they can talk about after the debates. It's actually kind of embarrassing. The rest of the country is focusing on real issues and the problems that face the country, and the left is mud-slinging. I guess it makes sense though. Why would the Democrats want to talk about policies and ideas when all of theirs have failed?

Fox News Alters Hoffas Speech to Mislead Public of Violent ThreatFox wouldn't do something like that, would they? LOL, are you some kind of left-wing zombie?This is old news, but here's Hoffa's entire quote: We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? Theyve got a war, they got a war with us and theres only going to be one winner. Its going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. Were going to win that war. President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march (not vote). AndPresident Obama, we want one thing: jobs, jobs, jobs Thats what were going to tell him. Hes gonna be and when he sees what were doing here, he will be inspired. But he needs help. And you know what? Everybody heres got to vote. If we go back, and we keep the eye on the prize, lets take these son of a [female dogs] out and give America back to an America where we belong.No, there's absolutely nothing in that speech that would hint at violence or fighting. Nothing at all. When he said "The one thing about working people is we like a good fight", he was obviously talking about voting.

Just when you think that the Republican base can't sink any lower.......First they applauded and cheered the record breaking 234 executions (now 235) that took place in Texas under Perry, then they shouted YES when Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul if we should let a 30 year old man in a coma die because he doesn't have health insurance, and now they've hit a new low, booing a member of the military serving in Iraq.Not one of the nine **** on stage said a word about it.The night Republicans booed a soldier.And one more thing...how do you know the political affiliation of the people who booed?

And one more thing...how do you know the political affiliation of the people who booed?Yeah, 'cause we Libs boo gay people all the time. [/sarcasm]

Wow, the Democrats must really be desperate if this is all they can talk about after the debates. It's actually kind of embarrassing. The rest of the country is focusing on real issues and the problems that face the country, and the left is mud-slinging. I guess it makes sense though. Why would the Democrats want to talk about policies and ideas when all of theirs have failed?All the Republican candidates ever do is sling mud. Not one of them has any solutions to the problem this country faces.That's because they are one of the biggest problems this country faces. Their policies are what got us here, and their only answer is to continue those same failed policies.

All the Republican candidates ever do is sling mud. Not one of them has any solutions to the problem this country faces.That's because they are one of the biggest problems this country faces. Their policies are what got us here, and their only answer is to continue those same failed policies.Adherence to the Constitution caused our problems? Tax cuts? Free Market policies?And every single one of them has excellent policies. Every single one of them would be far, far superior to that bumbling Marxist-in-Chief.Shameless lying moonbat.Just when you think that the Republican base can't sink any lower.......they shouted YES when Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul if we should let a 30 year old man in a coma die because he doesn't have health insuranceThe usual deceitful crap from a lying DNC hack.I heard cheering for Paul's advocacy of personal responsibility and independence.Wouldn't you cheer for that?and now they've hit a new low, booing a member of the military serving in Iraq.Not one of the nine **** on stage said a word about it.Bulls***. They booed someone who was announcing his homosexuality to his father on Youtube. I'd have groaned about that.Way to embarrass the guy who raised you. Sheesh!And how are they supposed to know he's in Iraq and not some clown impersonating a soldier, as the liberal left has done so many times before? Edited by RichClem, 24 September 2011 - 09:04 PM.

MistyBlue: ...and now they've hit a new low, booing a member of the military serving in Iraq.Not one of the nine **** on stage said a word about it.Bulls***. They booed someone who was announcing his homosexuality to his father on Youtube. I'd have groaned about that.Way to embarrass the guy who raised you. Sheesh!As usual you have no idea what you're talking about. You seem to have your soldiers mixed up. The guy who asked the question at the debate was not the same one who came out to his Father on YouTube.I guess all gay men look alike to you.And Randy Phillips' Father did not seem embarrassed at all. He told his son his would always love him no matter what.Don't project your homophobia onto others Puss.And how are they supposed to know he's in Iraq and not some clown impersonating a soldier, as the liberal left has done so many times before?The people running the debate said that this soldier was stationed in Iraq.Are you calling Fox News and Megyn Kelly liars?

APWU (American Postal Workers Union) President Cliff Guffey appeared on The Ed Show on MSNBC on Sept. 27th to discuss the Republican agenda to destroy the Postal Service. Politicians have been on a mission to get rid of the Postal Service since the year 2006 when they passed an unbelievable lame duck session law, Schultz told viewers, referring the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, which requires the USPS to pre-fund 75 years worth of future retiree health benefits within just 10 years. Guffey discussed the campaign to Save Americas Postal Service and APWUs efforts to build support for H.R. 1351, legislation that would restore financial stability to the Postal Service.More from Ed Schultz on Republican efforts to destroy the Postal Service and how it will affect us.VIDEO

Mr. ed is one funny guy. I particularly enjoyed watching him blow a gasket the night they lost on the Wisconsin recalls. He is the true definition of a pompous ***.

Bulls***. They booed someone who was announcing his homosexuality to his father on Youtube. I'd have groaned about that.As usual you have no idea what you're talking about. You seem to have your soldiers mixed up. The guy who asked the question at the debate was not the same one who came out to his Father on YouTube.Yes, I did make that mistake.But as usual, you're spreading Democrat Talking Point Lies, trying to smear almost everyone in the audience. You claimed:and now they've hit a new low, booing a member of the military serving in Iraq.What are the facts?Sarah Rumpf, who was in attendance, writes: The debate included video questions that were submitted on YouTube, and one came from a soldier serving in Iraq who is gay and asked about the candidates opinions on dont ask dont tell. There was audible booing after his question . . . however, please note that it was not the crowd booing. It was only one or two people. I was at the debate, in the audience on the right hand side about halfway back (heres my tweet of the video screen that was right in front of us). The person who booed was just a few rows in front of us. The booing got an immediate and angry reaction from nearly everyone sitting around him, who hissed and shushed at him. Lots of loud gasps, Shhhh! No! Shut up, you idiot! etc.http://www.nationalr...raq-his-serviceAnd Randy Phillips' Father did not seem embarrassed at all. He told his son his would always love him no matter what.Don't project your homophobia onto others Puss.So you wouldn't be the slightest bit disappointed if one of your kids was homosexual?Liar.APWU (American Postal Workers Union) President Cliff Guffey appeared on The Ed Show on MSNBC on Sept. 27th to discuss the Republican agenda to destroy the Postal Service.Typical of most government workers, Post Office workers screw Americans by using federal power to enrich themselves.It's a violation of federal law for anyone to put something in my or any American's mailbox. That effectively kills any private competition to the Post Office.That law ought to be repealed. Let the Post Office survive on its own or collapse.

Yes, I did make that mistake.But as usual, you're spreading Democrat Talking Point Lies, trying to smear almost everyone in the audience. You claimed:and now they've hit a new low, booing a member of the military serving in Iraq.What are the facts?The facts are that the audience booed a gay soldier serving in Iraq.So you wouldn't be the slightest bit disappointed if one of your kids was homosexual?No. My love for my children is unconditional.Typical of most government workers, Post Office workers screw Americans by using federal power to enrich themselves.It's a violation of federal law for anyone to put something in my or any American's mailbox. That effectively kills any private competition to the Post Office.That law ought to be repealed. Let the Post Office survive on its own or collapse.The post office does survive on it's own Puss.It takes not one penny of taxpayer dollars.The only reason it has a deficit right now, is because when Republicans lost control of the House in 2006, they quickly put through, in the lame duck session, a law (the 2006 Postal Accountability Enhancement Act),which requires the Postal Service to overfund their retirement plans by billions of dollars. If not for that law, they would actually have a surplus right now.According to The Postal Reporter, in 2010, an audit by the office of Inspector General showed that the FERS pension plan was overfunded by $6.8 billion, and they had previously reported that the USPS had overfunded its CSRS retirement obligations by $75 billion.As usual, the facts escape you.If you think that privatizing the Postal Service would be good for Americans, think again.For one thing, the Postal Service is not required to make a profit, therefore that keeps the cost of postage down, and for another thing, there are many rural areas that a private company would not find profitable to serve, therefore they would not deliver to those areas. Edited by MistyBlue, 30 September 2011 - 01:02 PM.

Video shows a group of peaceful female protesters, already penned in, pepper sprayed by a senior NYPD police officer, deputy inspector Anthony Bologna. I thought we had a right to peaceful protest in America?

The insanity from the right is coming too fast and too furious to start a thread every time one of these Republicans says or does something crazy. So I decided to put it all in this one thread.Looks like Harty could use some of those mental health services himself.To the people who live in Harty's district......Keep voting for this senile old bastard. Good job.Another "compassionate conservative"!

MistyBlue, on 11 March 2011 - 03:42 PM, said:The insanity from the right is coming too fast and too furious to start a thread every time one of these Republicans says or does something crazy. So I decided to put it all in this one thread.Another "compassionate conservative"!It's better if you read this thread backwards, as the more recent stuff is at the end of the thread.I can't really start any threads, because of one crazy stalker who disrupts and derails every one of them, so I use this thread as a place to vent, when I feel the need to say something. Edited by MistyBlue, 30 September 2011 - 02:37 PM.

In their constant effort to undermine democracy, the GOP has really revved up it's voter suppression tactics.By Heather Digby Parton-September 19th, 2011In the 1964 presidential elections, a young political operative named Bill guarded a largely African-American polling place in South Phoenix, Arizona like a bull mastiff.Bill was a legal whiz who knew the ins and outs of voting law and insisted that every obscure provision be applied, no matter what. He even made those who spoke accented English interpret parts of the constitution to prove that they understood it. The lines were long, people fought, got tired or had to go to work, and many of them left without voting. It was a notorious episode long remembered in Phoenix political circles.It turned out that it was part of a Republican Party strategy known as "Operation Eagle Eye", and "Bill" was future Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist. He was confronted with his intimidation tactics in his confirmation hearings years later, and characterised his behaviour as simple arbitration of polling place disputes. In doing so, he set a standard for GOP dishonesty and obfuscation surrounding voting rights that continues to this day.This week, in one of its greatest acts of elective chutzpah yet, Republicans in the state of Pennsylvania set forth a plan to split the state's electoral votes for president proportionally by congressional district. This is not illegal, or even unprecedented. Two other states have this system. And some people have been arguing for years that the whole country should abolish the Electoral College altogether in order to avoid such undemocratic messes as the 2000 election. Many of them have settled on the idea of all states simultaneously adopting the system of alloting electoral votes proportionally instead of winner-take-all as a sort of compromise.But that's not what's happening here.Suffice to say that the Republican move in Pennsylvania is not motivated by the idea of a more democratic method of electing presidents. Instead, it's a cynical manoeuver to take advantage of redistricting to ensure that a state Obama will likely win will no longer be in play in the 2012 election. Nobody has ever had the nerve to do that before. Indeed, changing something so fundamental to our federal election system for craven short-term gain would have been unthinkable in the past. Not anymore.As it happens, there has been pushback from Pennsylvania's Republican members of congress, and as a result, the plan is unlikely to pass. It turns out that even though the plan might be helpful to the Republican presidential candidate, it could end up hurting Republican congressional candidates, because Democrats would be able to move resources to challenge them in their districts. But it's notable that the idea that it would be injurious to our democratic system to go about changing the rules to suit the partisan configuration of the moment hasn't been mentioned. This is all self-serving political expediency. Principles have nothing to do with it.Undermining DemocracyVoter intimidation and vote suppression had long been a part of Democratic politics in the South, in places where African-Americans had been granted an illusory right to vote. But as the South made its dramatic shift to the Republican Party in the wake of the Civil Rights Act, and as African-American voters in the North then shifted to the Democrats, the Republicans began to dominate the process and thus began the decades-long GOP project to suppress the vote. Along the way it has developed into a full-blown operation to undermine democracy in general, at whatever choke points are available. According to a comprehensive report by the Center for Voting Rights in 2004, in the wake of Jesse Jackson's successful mobilisation of black voters in the 1980s, the GOP power elite recognised that it could no longer rely on volunteers and crude local efforts, which were running afoul of the Voting Rights Act and ending up in front of judges. So a group of former lawyers in the Reagan administration created the Republican National Lawyers Association, which was characterised at the time as a sort of "Rotary Club for GOP Stalwarts" (and which also happened to provide continuing legal education credits). It became a combination of a professional bar association, a political law firm, an educational institute and an old boy network for Republican lawyers, many of whom concentrated their work for the group specifically on how to use voting laws for their partisan advantage.They made their bones in the Florida recount in 2000. Here was a situation in which a national group of lawyers steeped in election law could be brought to bear on a situation in which the interpretation of the rules were being written on the fly, and they did their jobs well. The 2000 presidential election marked a new chapter in Republican vote suppression, and signalled a new willingness to subvert the workings of democracy by any means necessary. And it wasn't surprising that Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist once more put his thumb on the scale. It may be his most enduring legacy. What followed during the Bush years was a wholesale abandonment of rules and norms that had been established for decades. In a break with long-standing tradition, House majority whip Tom Delay oversaw a re-gerrymandering of Texas after the 2002 election, which gave the Republicans a greater edge in Congress. The Bush Department of Justice more or less closed down the civil rights division, which had monitored compliance with the Voting Rights Act. It even concocted an illegal scheme to replace US Attorneys who refused to flout laws and Department of Justice rules against interfering in elections.The federal courts, which had been packed with GOP judges for decades, began to rule in favor of "Voter ID" laws on the basis of claims of systemic voter fraud for which there was no documented evidence. More states found reasons to deny the vote to people convicted of breaking the law, even after they had paid their debt to society. "ACORN" became a euphemism for inner-city voter fraud. Little by little, it became more and more difficult to exercise for people of colour, immigrants, the elderly and the poor to exercise their franchise. The resultant red tape and bureaucratic delays have made it more difficult for working people to vote as well. It's hard to believe that it could get any worse than that, but it has.Assault on Voting RightsIt shouldn't have come as any surprise that the historic election of the first black president, thanks in part to an influx of new voters, would revive the panic Republicans had felt at the prospect of Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition successfully mobilising Democratic voters more than 20 years before. And as before, it resulted in an energised effort to subvert democracy.Rolling Stone contributor Ari Berman has documented an assault on voting rights since the 2008 elction that makes the previous eight years look like child's play. Since then, 38 states have introduced legislation designed to make voting more difficult, if not impossible, for American citizens. Berman documents efforts across the country to impede registration, cut short early voting, repeal same-day registration, and more. Berman reports that this was all centrally coordinated by yet another Republican organisation, the American Legislative Exchange Council, funded in large part by billionaire Tea Party activists David and Charles Koch. The piecemeal approach used by anti-abortion activists to make it extremely difficult for women to exercise their right to abortion is now being used by anti-democracy activists to make it extremely difficult for poor people to vote.In the United States, there has always been tension about the franchise, going all the way back to the beginning of the Republic. Aristocrats were afraid of it for the simple reason that it would mean the government might have to represent and defend people whose interests interfere with their own interests: to maintain their wealth and pass it down to their heirs. Whenever you give the vote to poor people and others who need government's protections against the predations of privilege, you are endangering that arrangement - and the privileged fight back. Conservatives are traditionally their soldiers in that battle.But over time, the United States progressed to the point where people began to believe strongly that every American has a fundamental right to vote (in spite of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's insistence that no such thing exists). Extending the franchise to every American citizen (subject, of course, to the vagaries of residence and criminal status) was one of the great American democratic accomplishments of the 20th century. Unfortunately, for every two steps forward we apparently must take a step back, and conservatives have been able to leverage racial resentment and a sort of perverted populism to help their wealthy benefactors keep their money.One certainly hopes for their sake that the GOP grassroots voters never figure out how they've been played in this game, or the modern aristocrats may find themselves without anyone left to vote for their interests. Unfortunately, by that time it may be too late for the people. The system may be rigged so thoroughly that even the Tea Partiers will find it hard to cast a vote in protest.Hubert Humphrey famously said, "It is not enough to merely defend democracy. To defend it may be to lose it; to extend it is to strengthen it. Democracy is not property; it is an idea". If that is true, it's an idea that has become nothing but an inconvenient abstraction to the Republican side of the aisle. Extending democracy is beyond our wildest dreams at the moment, as conservatives work overtime to make it harder for average citizens to vote, instead of easier. Defending democracy is the only option we have.Heather Digby Parton writes the liberal political blog Hullabaloo. You can follow the blog at http://digbysblog.blogspot.com.Some of the GOP tactics to make it harder for people to vote include, stricter voter ID laws, redistricting, doing away with early voting, changing the way electoral votes are distributed, and making voter registration much more difficult.They can never win fair and square. Edited by MistyBlue, 30 September 2011 - 02:35 PM.