Democrats & Liberals Archives

Find Your G.W.T. Score

This handy quiz will tell you whether you have what it takes to fight in the Global War on Terror ™. You can print it out, or just circle your answers on the screen.

1. The tragic attacks on 9/11 were carried out by people from:
a) Saudi Arabia.
b) Pakistan.
c) Iraq.
d) I don’t know. Who are we going to invade?

2. The person most responsible for the failure to prevent those attacks is:
a) George Bush.
b) No one. They were unavoidable.
c) Bill Clinton.
d) Hillary Clinton.

3. Rudy Giuliani is:
a) The idiot who decided to put the emergency command center in the WTC after it had already been attacked once.
b) A decent mayor who has not advanced the fight against terrorism in any manner.
c) Our next president.
d) I am not worthy to say his name.

4. Valerie Plame is:
a) A former covert CIA agent who was exposed by two officials of the Bush administration.
b) Some crazy chick who thought she worked for the CIA.
c) Who?
d) A traitor who joined the CIA just to embarrass George Bush.

5. An American citizen suspected of Al Qaeda ties is arrested at O’Hare Airport. He should be:
a) Tried in a civilian court like any other citizen suspected of a crime.
b) Tried in a military court as a legal combatant.
c) Detained as an illegal combatant until the end of the Global War on Terror ™.
d) I refuse to answer. To even discuss this is treason.

6. The President wants to listen to your phone calls:
a) He needs to get a search warrant.
b) He needs to get a search warrant, but he can go to a special court designed to rubber-stamp this type of warrant.
c) He can listen all he wants. I have nothing to hide.
d) He… wait a minute, are we talking about Hillary Clinton?!

SCORING:
Give yourself one point for every c) answer and two points for every d) answer.

If you scored…
11-12: You are a true patriot. Send your resume to the White House.
7-10: You are a good American, but capable of subversive thoughts. Watch yourself.
6-8: You are sitting on the fence. Stay away from the New York Times.
3-5: Save yourself. Watch Fox News at least two hours a day.
0-2: You are beyond hope. It would be best to take your own life.

Posted by Woody Mena at September 27, 2007 7:55 AM
Comments
Comment #234528

1. The tragic attacks on 9/11 were carried out by people from:
a) Saudi Arabia.
b) Pakistan.
c) Iraq.
d) I don’t know. Who are we going to invade?
e) Radical Islamic fundementalists from different countries throughout the world!


2. The person most responsible for the failure to prevent those attacks is:
a) George Bush.
b) No one. They were unavoidable.
c) Bill Clinton.
d) Hillary Clinton.
e) The radical Islamic fundamentalists; they choose not to respect human life!!


3. Rudy Giuliani is:
a) The idiot who decided to put the emergency command center in the WTC after it had already been attacked once.
b) A decent mayor who has not advanced the fight against terrorism in any manner.
c) Our next president.
d) I am not worthy to say his name.
e) A great leader, that could be our next president, and patriot who stepped up on a day that will go down in infamy!!


4. Valerie Plame is:
a) A former covert CIA agent who was exposed by two officials of the Bush administration.
b) Some crazy chick who thought she worked for the CIA.
c) Who?
d) A traitor who joined the CIA just to embarrass George Bush.
e) A woman who worked for the CIA that got her “wife” a job and lied about being exposed!


5. An American citizen suspected of Al Qaeda ties is arrested at O’Hare Airport. He should be:
a) Tried in a civilian court like any other citizen suspected of a crime.
b) Tried in a military court as a legal combatant.
c) Detained as an illegal combatant until the end of the Global War on Terror ™.
d) I refuse to answer. To even discuss this is treason.
e) detained and run through the CIA, FBI and military background checks for any suspected ties.


6. The President wants to listen to your phone calls:
a) He needs to get a search warrant.
b) He needs to get a search warrant, but he can go to a special court designed to rubber-stamp this type of warrant.
c) He can listen all he wants. I have nothing to hide.*
d) He… wait a minute, are we talking about Hillary Clinton?!
*He has the Presidential authority to keep his citizens safe from real threats; just like all Presidents in the past have done.


I’m proud to say that, in your world, I would fall into the “beyond hope…It would be best to take your own life.” category. Though, no liberal is going to take my life nor would they ever make me take my own!! Damn skippy!!!

Funny how, with just days removed from that little runt Iranian president speaking to an American audience at Columbia University; the same University that banned the ROTC and mobbed the minutemen, you put a test together with your biased views and score the ones that disagree with you as “no hope”. Some of you are just going to have to accept different viewpoints and “freedom of speech”.

Posted by: rahdigly at September 27, 2007 9:42 AM
Comment #234531

You need to read more carefully. I advised (sarcastically) liberals to take their own life. You are free to espouse whatever views you want, on the phone, without being detained.

I didn’t know Valerie Plame had a wife, but I can see why the righties would be against her then.

As for Columbia, you are ignoring the fact that the president of the university introduced him by saying how terrible he is.

Posted by: Woody Mena at September 27, 2007 10:01 AM
Comment #234534

Note the operative word:

2. The person most responsible for the failure to prevent those attacks is:


Posted by: Woody Mena at September 27, 2007 10:15 AM
Comment #234536

I didn’t ignore it. You ignored the fact that the Iranian speaker was allowed to speak his propaganda, yet, (at the same University) the ROTC was banned and the minutemen were mobbed and not allowed to finish their speech! What do you have to say about that?! Is that right?! Is that Freedom of Speech?!! Would that be scored as “true patriots” (11-12 points)?!!!!!


And, as I said earlier, “2. The person most responsible for the failure to prevent those attacks is”:
The radical Islamic Fundementalists! They could have prevented 9/11 the most; yet, respecting human life just isn’t in their religion and way of life!!!


Posted by: rahdigly at September 27, 2007 10:22 AM
Comment #234539

rahdigly, the point you miss is that the audience that was free to drown out the Minutemen and rejected ROTC had the same option to respond in similar manner to Ahmadinejad. The American people are free to make their choices, Columbia and its audiences made theirs, and their choice was not yours. Live with it and quit moaning everyone is not a clone of rahdigly, thank Buddha.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 27, 2007 10:39 AM
Comment #234547

rah,

‘Freedom of speegh’ is granted by the Constitution, not by any university. The government did not rout the ROTC nor put clamps on the Minutemen. No one, governmental or otherwise, sponsored the asswipe from Iran…

Posted by: Marysdude at September 27, 2007 11:42 AM
Comment #234563

“It would be best to take your own life.”

Just when I thought things couldn’t get any worse ;^)

I mean seven years of W has already been like dieing the death of a thousand cuts :^/

Posted by: KansasDem at September 27, 2007 12:47 PM
Comment #234566

Rahdigly,

The problem with the ROTC is that it discriminates against people on the basis of their sexual orientation. That has nothing to do with free speech.

I am not going to defend a mob, but it has nothing to do with my quiz anyway. This right-wing misdirection routine is tiresome.

Posted by: Woody Mena at September 27, 2007 1:02 PM
Comment #234567
the point you miss is that the audience that was free to drown out the Minutemen and rejected ROTC had the same option to respond in similar manner to Ahmadinejad.

And they DID NOT “drown out” the Iranian president like they DID with the minutemen!! That’s the point!! The President of Columbia banned the ROTC from their campus; yet allowed this dirty runt “freedom of speech”, but with harsh criticism of him. Well then, why couldn’t the columbia president just allow the ROTC to come to their campus and (just) make a harsh criticism of the ROTC?! Why?!! Why deprive free speech to the military or other Americans with different viewpoints, while allowing terrorists and tryannts (ahmandenijad, Chavez) to express their viewpoints?!!! You keep getting away from that. Be honest about this!

Posted by: rahdigly at September 27, 2007 1:08 PM
Comment #234570

Woody:
“It would be best to take your own life.”

Forget that. I think we should raise our glasses in a toast instead!

KD:
“seven years of W has already been like dieing the death of a thousand cuts :^/”

Seriously. And there’s been way too much bloodshed already during those years. :^(

Posted by: Adrienne at September 27, 2007 1:22 PM
Comment #234573


The best way to settle the Columbia University contraversy is to allow the President to take the stage and answer the students questions.

Posted by: jlw at September 27, 2007 1:24 PM
Comment #234578

“allow the President to take the stage and answer the students questions.”

Yep, like that is ever going to happen.

Posted by: Rocky at September 27, 2007 1:37 PM
Comment #234582

rahdigly,

What are you so afraid of?

If the guy is a moron, let him speak and prove himself so.
Just because Columbia doesn’t fit into the little box you have made for it doesn’t make them wrong.

We fought the cold war with diplomacy, and we won.
We stood up to Kruschev, and Brezhnev with words and nary a shot was fired, and the Iron Curtain still came down. These guys actually had a button to push, and were completely capable of pushing it.
Why does Mr. Bush seem incapable of doing the same thing with Iran, a much lesser threat?
Are we afraid by doing so we might give this little man legitimacy?
The fate of the world rests in our hands, and going to war against Iran is not an option.

Posted by: Rocky at September 27, 2007 1:48 PM
Comment #234589

Rah, you’re certainly getting full use of your right to free speech, and neglecting the fact that you didn’t have to tune in to watch the broadcast.
Is there anything in particular you’d like us to do about it, or have you just not worked the rant out of your system?
KD, I think I’m more in agreement with Adrienne’s suggestion, but then again, after a few drinks, what’s a little cut here and there.
Fun post Woody

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at September 27, 2007 2:25 PM
Comment #234590

Woody and Rah,
Woody: Well written and the tongue in cheek was well done.
Rah: This right wing water carrying is getting old. I must give you credit though, you still believe that the Occupant of the White House knows what he is doing. Just keep saying to yourself and to anyone you meet, “You’re doing a heck of a job, Bushie.

Posted by: C.T.Rich at September 27, 2007 2:27 PM
Comment #234591

“This right-wing misdirection routine is tiresome.”

That bears repeating!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: KansasDem at September 27, 2007 2:28 PM
Comment #234595

KansasDem,
As a fellow Jayhawker and Democrat I agree with your comment. I am also tired of the “Do as We say, not as We do” attitude coming from people controlling the Republican Party.
Do you know what we are now calling moderate Republicans, you know RINOs? In Kansas we are now calling them Democrats.

Posted by: C.T.Rich at September 27, 2007 2:37 PM
Comment #234598

Rahdigly,

I deleted your last comment because it seems that you are trying to start a flame war. Your questions about Columbia are repetitive and off-topic. There is a post in the Right column that is much more relevant.

Posted by: Woody Mena at September 27, 2007 2:39 PM
Comment #234603
“This right-wing misdirection routine is tiresome.” That bears repeating!!!!!!!!!!


I could say the same for the “left-wing” red herring routine, but I won’t! Yet some of you continually have been choosing to stop the discussion by crying & throwing around “right wing” slurs. However, it is not going to stop the rahdigster!! So, you can dodge and rant all you want; though, it would be easier to debate and discuss the issue. I mean heck, some of you were infavor of the Iranian thug to express his opinion; why can’t you do the same for your fellow Americans that have a different viewpoint?!

It has to suck for some of you that just can’t take the truth and reality (for that matter) of how “intolerant” modern liberalism is. If you disagree with that statement then explain (directly) why the Iranian President was given the podium to speak and the ROTC was banned and when the minutemen had the podium, they were disrupted and flat out “mobbed”?!!!! Don’t be afraid to discuss that. Step up and explain your side. Oh and by the way, the “right-wing” slurs are not going to work; no matter how many times (and different bloggers) say it!!

Posted by: rahdigly at September 27, 2007 2:53 PM
Comment #234607

Rahdigly,

I’m not here to defend this ‘quiz’ or progressives/liberals in general, but Columbia is a provate institution and therefore can choose to invite and prohibit any speaker that they want. Claiming ‘free speech’ is just an example of how much of an idiot the president of Columbia University is, and why he isn’t fit to run the organization, but he, and the University, were well within their rights as private individuals to have whoever they want, or don’t want, speak.

The ‘truth’ is that you want to attempt to point out hypocrisy where there is none. Bad judgement and openly political, yeah. Somehow ‘wrong’? Nope, not one bit.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 27, 2007 3:08 PM
Comment #234609

“In Kansas we are now calling them Democrats.”

C.T.Rich,

Amazing isn’t it. The Republicans have even resorted to requiring the signing of a loyalty oath:

“I solemnly pledge to always be a Republican, no matter what promises are made by external forces seeking only to undermine the Republican values I stand for. I can have reasonable disagreement with members of the Republican Party; however, at no point will ‘Party switching’ or quitting of the Party be tolerable.

Signed,

X __________________________________ [in blood?]”

Hilarious ain’t it?

Posted by: KansasDem at September 27, 2007 3:12 PM
Comment #234623

Rhinehold, it’s clear that the President of Columbia university is an “idiot”; along with the Iranian prez. It would be nice if others can see that; yet, they don’t. All they want to do is blame Bush and conservatives for everything; even when the “Hitler” (of our time) comes here and spouts his propaganda. The BDSers just don’t see (or don’t want to see) that they hate the right so bad that they’ll give a punk tyrant like that more respect than to our own Americans that have a different viewpoint. I don’t agree with the Iranian prez at all, yet I’m fine with him speaking and debunking himself. I don’t agree with libs (99.9% of the time), yet I allow them to speak their peace (100% of the time). However, the libs do not give the same treatment to conservatives/independents; the banning of the ROTC and the “mobbing” of the minutemen are perfect examples.

And, yes, that is a double standard, it is hypocrisy and the guilty are being called out one it! It’s that simple! Many of you know this and are tyring your best to either ignore it or take it out of context; but they can’t b/c it is as clear as day. It is take your medicine time folks!!!

Posted by: rahdigly at September 27, 2007 4:06 PM
Comment #234624

“If the guy is a moron, let him speak and prove himself so.”

Mission accomplished… Asked about widely documented government abuse of homosexuals in his country, Ahmadinejad said:

“We don’t have homosexuals” in Iran. “I don’t know who told you we had it.”

The audience, appropriately, laughed uproariously.

Rare that I do this, but I gots to throw some props to the Bush administration:

White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said Friday that the Bush administration had no involvement with Columbia’s decision.

“This is a country where people can come and speak their minds,” he said, adding, “It would be wonderful if some of the countries that take advantage of that here allowed it for their own citizens there.”

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at September 27, 2007 4:23 PM
Comment #234625

“So, you can dodge and rant all you want; though, it would be easier to debate and discuss the issue.”

Rahdigly,

You’re right. Let’s do discuss any of the issues brought forth by or mentioned in Woody’s well written and humorous article. Nowhere is Columbia U or Ahmadinejad mentioned, unless my vision is worse than I suspect.

Or have you risen to the level of “issue-decider”?

Posted by: KansasDem at September 27, 2007 4:25 PM
Comment #234629

Doug,

I understand the reply but there was a greater point having to do with our dialouge (or lack of it) with Iran.

Another point is that we Americans love to judge other cultures and countries by our own standards.

How is this any different than the colonial powers trying to save/enslave the “heathens” they found in the New World?

So far all of this guys saber rattling has been verbal, and what are we really trying to do?
What solution can we come up with that doesn’t include an invasion of Iran and massive loss of life?

Baiting Iran isn’t going to cut it.

Posted by: Rocky at September 27, 2007 4:48 PM
Comment #234631

Rocky… yep… great questions…

The intent of my post was to highlight that the guy (by anyone’s standards) is a moron. Did the private university have the right to invite him to speak? Yup… Should they have done so? I’m gonna shrug my shoulders to that one…

I would; however, like to point out to all the homo-phobes here in our country… if you’re looking for a place where you can feel safe, apparently Iran is the place for you!

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at September 27, 2007 4:57 PM
Comment #234634

Doug,

Absolutely.

I recently listened to a program on NPR that was an interview with a gay Iranian expatriate, living in Canada.
There are gays in Iran, however there is no “gay scene”, and needless to say the gays there are not “out”.
I have to say I don’t agree with the Iranian stance on homosexuality, that said, it’s their country, and while I have an opinion on the subject, I really have no say about how they run their country.

Posted by: Rocky at September 27, 2007 5:39 PM
Comment #234636

Rocky… I understand and respect your point of view on this subject and your last post made it a little more clear what you are saying… and to a point, I agree… and to a point, I disagree.

There is right and wrong, and I am the first to admit that in between there are many shades of grey… but there is right and wrong. Torture and killing based on sexual preference is in no way right and is in every way wrong. Am I advocating ‘going in and taking over’? No… Am I advocating sanctions? No… Am I advocating Americans using their right to free speech to point out how wrong this treatment of that segment of the population is? Absolutely! I cannot simply shrug my shoulders and say “it’s their country they should run it how they want.” We did that with Hitler.

It is not neo-colonialism to peacefully point out ills in others’ societies (yes yes yes… there are plenty of ills in our own).

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at September 27, 2007 5:54 PM
Comment #234650
Lets do discuss any of the issues brought forth by or mentioned in Woody’s well written and humorous article.

No problem. The intent of Woody’s “test” was to divide party lines and get people to either bash Bush or Bash Clinton. If you noticed, I didn’t take the bait; the enemy is not Bush, Clinton, or Rudy (for that matter). The true enemy in all this is radical Islam; that is what the libs and BDS crowd just can’t get through their heads. It’s a shame! Some of you said that the Iranian runt visiting Columbia had nothing to do with this thread; however, it absolutely does! It has to do with the fact that the true face of evil (the Hitler of our time) came to speak at an American University and received some laughter and a harsh criticism from the host. Yet, when conservatives (and independents) visited this same campus (and other campuses as well), they get “mobbed”, banned, or pies thrown in their faces! Now that is a totally different reception for Americans w/ different viewpoints than to a thug (terrorist aiding, holocaust denying, WMD wanting) dictactor from Iran!! Do you think the libs would dare throw a pie in the face of the Iranian punk?! Don’t think so!

That is why it is so(oooo) relevant to the discussion. Yet, some of you want to change the subject or just not answer it at all. Sooner or later it is going to catch up to you; better to face it now. That is probably why some of you ran from the discussion. You know that the way the libs have treated conservatives/independents is atrocious and that the Iranian punk received a much better reception. Disgusting!! Shame on those of you that truly feel that way. It is wrong!! You’re going to have to take your medicine on this at some point.

Posted by: rahdigly at September 27, 2007 9:01 PM
Comment #234656

Implying that conservatives would want liberals to take their own lives is out of bounds and a little tacky. I am supprised that it is an allowable post.
A totalitarian regime is always a danger to its neighbors. The face they use to represent it can change.
Religion or race isn’t the problem in the Middle East; it is a lack of freedom. A free society would arrest and jail extreemists.
Rahd, Those who deceive themselves are deceived.
Their hypocrisy is only evident to outsiders.

Posted by: Kruser at September 27, 2007 10:19 PM
Comment #234659

Doug,

“Am I advocating Americans using their right to free speech to point out how wrong this treatment of that segment of the population is? Absolutely! I cannot simply shrug my shoulders and say “it’s their country they should run it how they want.” We did that with Hitler.”

I don’t disagree. We should shout it from the rooftops, but at the end of the day, it is their country, and they will do what they want, regardless of what we want, and possibly in spite of what we want.
Worldwide pressure, OTOH, could move mountains, but I don’t think that is going to happen anytime soon. Oil, it seems, is thicker than freedom.
Isn’t the prejudice against homosexuality a basic tenet of Muslim doctrine?
If it is, there are a hell of a lot of Muslims out there and convicing them is going to take more than just a few voices in the wilderness.

Posted by: Rocky at September 27, 2007 10:47 PM
Comment #234660

rahdigly,

“Now that is a totally different reception for Americans w/ different viewpoints than to a thug (terrorist aiding, holocaust denying, WMD wanting) dictactor from Iran!! Do you think the libs would dare throw a pie in the face of the Iranian punk?! Don’t think so!”

http://www.distantocean.com/2007/09/lee-bollinger-f.html

I don’t think much more needs to be said.

Posted by: Rocky at September 27, 2007 11:03 PM
Comment #234673

Rocky… and I do not disagree with you… oil is indeed thicker than freedom, it seems…

And yes, aversion to homosexuality is a basic tenant of all three of the major western/near eastern religions…

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at September 28, 2007 12:08 AM
Comment #234679

Rocky,

You’d think no more need be said!

But, what would Bush’s response be to that kind of intro?

A visit to Gitmo?

Maybe a poet can make a poem out of the “intro/gitmo” thing,

Posted by: KansasDem at September 28, 2007 1:03 AM
Comment #234691
Implying that conservatives would want liberals to take their own lives is out of bounds and a little tacky. I am supprised that it is an allowable post.

Allowable? Have you seen some of the stuff in the Right column lately. Liberals are regularly flat-out accused of treason.

The take-your-own-life part was an exaggeration of real sentiments among some conservatives. John McCain, for example, recently said that MoveOn should be “kicked out of the country”. He says exile, I say death. Not that much of a leap, is it?

Posted by: Woody Mena at September 28, 2007 7:30 AM
Comment #234692

Woody Mena- You should use the Bell Curve for
scoring your test, that way even the village
idiot could get one question right, or maybe
two points so the imbecile won’t feel bad.

Posted by: -DAVID- at September 28, 2007 7:45 AM
Comment #234697

I would say death is a stark contrast to a suggested exit.
Do you also have trouble seeing the difference between sincere religion and jehad?

Posted by: Kruser at September 28, 2007 8:54 AM
Comment #234700

Is John McCain a conservative?
I haven’t observed much evidence.
They all have their Ideology masks on for the primaries.

Posted by: Kruser at September 28, 2007 9:04 AM
Comment #234813
You’d think no more need be said! But, what would Bush’s response be to that kind of intro?

I don’t know what Bush’s response would be, but I do know that some of you “freedom of speech” loyalists haven’t even come close to answering why Bollinger would allow the Iranian thug to speak at his university and yet ban the ROTC (not Iranian thugs) to speak?! Also, why do libs (even more “freedom of speech” advocates) “mob” the minutemen and throw pies in the faces of conservative speakers?!!

Would some of you consider those actions worse than car bombing and cutting off people’s heads with a dirty knife (in the name of Islam!)?!!!!


Posted by: rahdigly at September 29, 2007 9:18 AM
Comment #234829

“why Bollinger would allow the Iranian thug to speak at his university “

Gee, because he can?

Posted by: Rocky at September 29, 2007 1:35 PM
Comment #234874

rahdigly,

I don’t get what has your panties in a bunch over this guy.
Realistically he is merely a figurehead. While he may be the President, the power in Iran is held by the “Grand Ayatollah” Ali Khamenei, who has the final word on all policies, foreign and domestic.
He has been criticized by his own people for paying too much attention to the West and not enough attention to Iran.
Were you aware that there is gas rationing in Iran?
His popularity in his own country is barely that of George Bush here.

Posted by: Rocky at September 29, 2007 10:28 PM
Comment #234909

Rock, what you “don’t get” is that the issue is about the Iranian Prez being allowed to speak at the same university that banned the ROTC and “mobbed” the minutemen when they were there. How is that possible that a foreign (thug) dictator, whom by your own admission is not popular in his own country, is allowed to speak at an American university and treated more respectfully than our own (conservative/independent) voices in this country?! The ROTC and Minutemen have a different viewpoint; why can’t the libs show more respect for a different point of view?!! That is what debate is all about in this country and this university did a terrible demonstrating that!!!

They (actually) showed more respect for a tyrannt like the Iranian president than they did for conservative/independent speakers who are fellow Americans, I should point out! I don’t like the liberals or there point of view; however, I don’t keep them from speaking. In fact, I want them to speak and explain their position on various topics; that way we (all) know where everyone stands on issues and I know who to trust with certain issues and situations and who not to. Also, I laugh at liberal speakers all the time (just like the crowd did to the Iranian runt); however, I never “mob” the speaker or throw pies in the face of libs, that’s disgusting as well a ridiculous!! And, you bloggers seem to be the ones that are running from this issue; it’s an important point that should be addressed. Yet, some of you haven’t even addressed it; instead, you duck and dodge the issue.

So step up Rock, and (for a change) address this issue and answer these questions!! Unless, of course, you’re afraid to comment on this issue…

Posted by: rahdigly at September 30, 2007 10:55 AM
Comment #234918

Rahdigly,

It is disturbing to me that some students see disrupting another speech or presentation as legitimate protest. There are a number of young student activists who do yell things like “they have no right to speak” and believe it because they equate it broadly with hate speech or other reasons. They are very wrong. I do hope those guilty of the mob mentality are appropriately charged or disciplined.

However, as usual Rah, you equate these young activists with all liberals which is ridiculous. Obviously these students don’t believe wholeheartedly in “freedom of speech”. The great majority of liberals however do.

Cal Thomas makes a similar argument as you do in today’s paper but he also confuses campus administration with misguided and wrong protests by students.

Then you make strange and disturbing comments and pose questions such as:

Would some of you consider those actions worse than car bombing and cutting off people’s heads with a dirty knife (in the name of Islam!)?!!!!

Talk about assigning extreme points of view!

ROTC protests are staged mostly by students and some professors. ROTC bans usually center around the military’s discrimination of gays. That is a policy response to a discriminatory policy, and not “free speech”.


Posted by: chris2x at September 30, 2007 1:52 PM
Comment #234919

As for my fellow liberal bloggers,

Rah accused liberals essentially of being hypocrites on “free speech” so it’s best to answer him directly on the points he made.

This Bollinger guy sounds like a real grandstander and schmuck.

Posted by: chris2x at September 30, 2007 1:54 PM
Comment #234921

Chris, thank you for your (direct) answer to this issue; you’d be suprised how many bloggers ran from this very point. The reason I focused on this point is b/c it shows the “hatred” and “misguidedness” of some (mainly liberals) in this country. They would actually give more respect to a Iranian (terrorsist) Prez than our own people with different viewpoints; to which I think is absurd and disgusting. I don’t believe all liberals are like that; in this particular case, they certainly were liberals.

You said that the ROTC ban is centered around their discrimination of gays and my point is that the Iranian prez denied that they even have gays in his country. And, the reports of what they do to gays and women in his country is just appalling; way (way) worse than “discriminating” against them. The response, from the mainly liberal audience, was laughter; not a ban, nor a “mob” mentality. So, that is why this was an important point; they should laugh at the ROTC and Minutemen, instead of the dispicable acts they’ve displayed.

Oh and the point on the comment: “Would some of you consider those actions worse than car bombing and cutting off people’s heads with a dirty knife (in the name of Islam!)?!!!!”, was a paraphased line from a blogger in the past; in reference to Ann Coulter making that “F*g” comment about Edwards awhile back. Yes, some actually believe “words” are worse than physical destruction of humans (cutting off heads, car bombings, suicide bombings, etc.).

Posted by: rahdigly at September 30, 2007 3:02 PM
Comment #234926

Your point on Iran’s President discrimination on gays is well taken. However, I think giving the American public a more direct and intimate view of this moron as an educational exercise outweighs his ludicrous and dangerous positions. In general, America needs high profile events like this to just get the American public (traditionally not interested in foreign affairs) up to speed on the world around them of which they are often just plain ignorant. A shocking number of Americans still think Saddam Hussein and Iraq were involved in ‘911’. Ahmadinejad’s appearance controversy just made it more apropos.

We liberals like to laugh at the patently absurd even if it is a dangerous or life-threatening position. Ahmadinejad’s comments on gays will now serve to focus more attention on how dangerous it is to be gay (as well as many other things) in Iran.

Posted by: chris2x at September 30, 2007 4:22 PM
Comment #234929

rahdigly,

“Rock, what you “don’t get” is that the issue is about the Iranian Prez being allowed to speak at the same university that banned the ROTC and “mobbed” the minutemen when they were there.”

Again you make assumptions and put words in my mouth.
Having you repeat the question 35 or forty more times doesn’t change the fact that Columbia can ask anyone they damn well please to speak at their facilities, and as David wrote above, they are exercising their own rights to do so.
Is Columbia a private university?
The answer to that question is yes, and as such they answer only to their regents and alumni. They don’t have to let the ROTC on their campus, they didn’t even have to let the Minutemen speak.

Oh, and I am very sure that Ahmadinejad will be invited to speak at Bob Jones University real soon.

Riddle me this;
Just how can Ahmadinejad be a thug dictator if he doesn’t even have the final say about policy in his country? Hmmmmm?

Posted by: Rocky at September 30, 2007 5:27 PM
Comment #234981

Rah,
While I tend to agree with your point about not allowing Americans’ the same right to speak in a PUBLIC forum, in this particular case the university is NOT, a PUBLIC forum. Therefore it is up to the PRIVATE officials in charge of this university to decide who may or may not speak.

Even that should be simple enough for you to grasp.

You did bring up an interesting issue. Considering the lack of knowledge Americans had about Hitler, during the thirties and early forties, perhaps we should have asked him to speak here in the USA. Maybe, then, we could have prevented at least some of the deaths caused by his “unusual thinking process”. (for lack of a better way of expressing it)

As the saying goes: Better the devil you know…

Posted by: Linda H. at October 1, 2007 11:08 PM
Post a comment