Anger – A Legitimate Emotional Response!

anger-controlPosted by Tina

Spokesmen for the Democrat Party have been characterizing the right wing of the Republican Party as an angry fringe for some time now. The strategy being that the American people will envision an out of control neanderthal, on the edge and about to go on a violent rampage. Talk radio hosts are often credited for whipping up this anger with “bombastic” language and packs of “lies”. The Tea Party, too, is said to have evolved from this angry out of control fervor. Left wing bloggers have been quick to blame this so-called out of control angry fringe for acts of gun violence in our schools, a ridiculous assertion.

I’m one of the people this negative characterization targets. I’ve been a right wing radio listener for a couple of decades. I’ve become more involved, more informed, and better equipped to form an opinion in that time. Have I been angry? Of course, but no more angry that the President was about the situation at the veterans hospitals and no more angry than the left seems to be about “income inequality.”

Anger is a legitimate emotion. No American should be demonized for verbal expressions of anger. Every American has the right to express himself completely when they see things are not working, when they see corruption, when they think their voices are not being recognized and indeed are being marginalized.

The Republican Party doesn’t seem to realize the legitimacy of the anger many Americans are feeling right now. Democrats have done everything they can to shame angry right-wing voices and used the result to their political benefit. In doing this they disrespect and dismiss the legitimate voices of many Republican voters but in the process they also dismiss many Independent and Democrat voters as well.

The people are angry. Their anger is legitimate. In the last seven years recovery from the recession has been dismal. We have seen seven years of high unemployment, growing numbers of people that have given up looking for work, high numbers of people needing food stamps, businesses closing and frozen in mediocrity, and mounting uncertainty about future prospects. The healthcare fix that was promised was not delivered. More people have healthcare we are told but then we discover that most have gone on Medicaid. Many others that had good healthcare insurance before now find they can’t afford rising premiums and the high deductibles. Doctors practices have been disrupted causing doctors to scramble to make their practices workable. Many have thrown up their hands in frustration and retired; others are threatening to do so because of the mounds of paperwork now required.

Terrorism continues to be a growing problem. Terrorists have gained sufficient ground in the Middle East to declare themselves a state. They have decimated churches, destroyed artifacts, and murdered en mass in grizzly ways and they have successfully mounted terror attacks both in America and in other nations. A refugee crisis threatens the economies and budgets of nations attempting to offer them safe haven. The sheer numbers bring up questions about terrorists embedding in the hordes and our ability to properly vet them. Benghazi remains a sore spot as does the secret deal made with Iran which many believe has made the world a more dangerous place. Our military has been demoralized. There has been scandal at our veterans hospitals and returning soldiers are committing suicide at alarming rates. Our reputation around the world has diminished. Our allies have been snubbed and our enemies hugged.

Americans have been targeted by the IRS and other government agencies unfairly and possibly illegally and nothing of substance was done about it. The justice Department declared its intention to refrain from pursuing cases against black Americans and the response was yawns. The administration inserted itself into local criminal matters as activists rather than leaders. The list, as they say, goes on and on.angry

Yes, the American people are angry. We are angry, fed up, frustrated and hungry for relief from the failures and corruption that have marked the last seven years. Conservatives of the Republican Party have further frustrations and angers that come with the realization that even within our party we are treated as an angry mob. This failure to be aware or recognize the legitimate emotions driving the conservative wing discussions occurring on the radio, in our neighborhoods and in our living rooms is perhaps the most discouraging of all. We live in a nation that treasures the right of free speech. We have encouraged disagreement and contention in our politics from the founding of the nation. Some of the angriest speech has come from the left:

“I’m sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we’re Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration.”

I wish I could have found the video or audio. Hillary’s voice was definitely filled with anger.

So when even people like Republican governor Nikki Haley, a woman I admire greatly, chooses to scold the conservative right its frustrating. We expect it from our opponents, although we would prefer to engage in discussion and debate on the issues. But when the right leadership buys into the left’s negative characterization campaign it’s offensive beyond understanding. Have they conveniently forgotten that the persons most responsible for getting them elected in Washington and in states across the nation have been those conservatives labeled as out of control and illegitimate? If so they are terribly out of touch and need to get out and engage some of these people. It should be noted that in two decades the “angry right” as not struck out in anger with our guns; we have participated in the political process along with everyone else.

Message to all doubters of the power of legitimate anger…we are here, we have good reason to be angry…we will not be shamed and we are not going away. We love America. We want America to be strong once more. We want all Americans to have opportunity and success in their lives. We want a strong military. We want our veterans to feel good about the jobs they have chosen to do and be well cared for when they come home. We want medical insurance to be available and affordable to as many people as possible and we want our doctors set free to perform their jobs unrestrained by useless busywork. We want America to work again!

Anger is a legitimate emotion. It can be a powerful motivator. The anger is handled tells us a lot about the person we perceive as angry. Self-expression in conversations about politics and social issues is of heated, anger is a legitimate response, indeed it should be seen as quite normal. Anyone who says otherwise should think again…and back off with the hypocritical criticism.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to Anger – A Legitimate Emotional Response!

  1. J. Soden says:

    Americans aren’t just angry, they’re downright pissed!
    Their elected representatives are more concerned with go-along-to-get-along and getting re-elected than what might be good for the country.
    Add to that a polarizing prez, who has had numerous chances to bring people together but instead chose to promote division and blame others for his mistakes.
    BOTH political parties need a cleanout, and a strong dose of TERM LIMITS!

  2. Peggy says:

    Tina, Here’s Hillary’s “Sick and tired…” video. And yes it is sooooo worth hearing her scream with such emotion.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CzteDucRHo

  3. Peggy says:

    Another group that is filled with anger is the faith based community. And they, like the Black Robe Brigade that led our country during the Revolution and Civil War are organizing to have their say and not be silenced any more.

    Elections: What Pastors Need to Know:

    “Dear Pastor,

    The church, for 20 centuries, has stood as a voice of righteousness in our culture, and its voice is greatly needed in our nation today. We are encouraging you to help your congregation participate in the choosing their elected officials. We are blessed to be able to choose who is Caesar in our nation and personnel makes policy. We are not asking you to tell your congregation to vote for a particular party, but we DO encourage you to tell your congregation to vote biblically, and we have a lot of ways to help you do this.

    1. First, please educate your congregation. Many church-goers are unaware of what the Bible says regarding government. In Romans 13, the Apostle Paul wrote how government is a God-established institution, like the church and the family. When one of these institutions is sick, they all become sick. In 2 Samuel 12 and Matthew 14, we see Nathan the prophet and John the Baptist, representing God, His Word, and his people, correcting King David and King Herod, who represent the government. It is important that we the church stand up and correct when the government steps out of line and does not pursue righteousness. We encourage you to thoroughly educate your congregation on the role of government and the role of the church.”

    Continued..
    http://www.thefamilyleader.com/elections-what-pastors-need-to-know/

    • Dewster says:

      Everyone has the right to be angry.

      However to be angry a government is not reinforcing ones religion one should pause.

      The Bible is not the Constitution. To be angry is ok, but one can not dictate to others what they believe because of their one religion. The founding fathers took measures for Freedom of religion because of historical religious suppression in EU.

      Pope Francis has spoken. But he does not try to dictate to governments.

      Any church trying to dictate to a Gov is trying to seize power. period.

      • Tina says:

        The founders created a Constitution that would protect the freedoms and rights of the people from the government. Religious people are not seeking agreement from government. they are using their voices to influence public opinion…just like everyone else. The activists that have forced change on moral issues are using the courts to create law and that’s wrong. It is also wrong for government to impose obligations that citizens believe are morally wrong. As usual Dewey, your understanding of the Constitution, and the intent of the founders, is a bit upside down.

  4. Peggy says:

    For those of us who are pissed at the way the Benghazi attack and cover up has been handled this is a reminder the movie “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” opens tomorrow.

    “Two questions posed by “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers Of Benghazi” are how it measures up as a movie, and how much impact it will have in the real world. The first question is tricky, given the subject—the disastrous 2012 attack on a United States mission in Libya. Michael Bay’s screen version of Mitchell Zuckoff’s best-seller isn’t an ordinary movie. It’s a Hollywood action spectacular, with all the cinematic firepower of the genre, that also lays claim to quasi-documentary status: “This is a true story,” a title card declares flatly in the opening sequence. Be that as it may, the movie is a relentlessly intense, grotesquely overblown and numbingly long account of extraordinary heroism on the part of six American security operators in the midst of horrific chaos. As for the second question, the answer is a lot. Given the level of official ineptitude that “13 Hours” depicts, this incendiary thriller is sure to fan the still roaring flames of political controversy.”

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/13-hours-review-action-adventure-as-historical-text-1452801309

  5. Libby says:

    Ah, but anger is an irrational state, as evidenced by your enthusiasm for The Donald. And the perpetually angry do not get to dictate policy.

    • Chris says:

      Anger is not always irrational. But misdirected anger is.

      Donald Trump is the poster boy for misdirected anger. He blames Muslims and Mexicans for America’s problems.

      I’m teaching my students “The Diary of Anne Frank” next week. Today I showed clips of Adolf Hitler’s speeches and Nazi rallies, and explained how Hitler blamed the Jews for all his country’s problems. My question of the day was, “Could someone like Hitler become just as powerful today?” Several of the students responded by comparing Hitler to Trump.

      I rarely give my opinion to the class. But I did tell them I think the comparison is overblown. Trump has no equivalent to “Mein Kampf.” I don’t think he has any plans institute another Holocaust. But hate crimes against Muslims have gone up since he started verbally attacking them, which is no surprise. He has said he would consider creating a national database of all Muslims. (If anyone said they would do the same thing to gun owners, you’d riot.) He has said most Mexican immigrants are drug dealers, murderers, criminals, and rapists. This is how hatred spreads.

      • Tina says:

        “He blames Muslims and Mexicans for America’s problems.”

        Even if your statement is true, and I think you’re wrong, how is that different than Obama blaming a cop before having the facts for what has happened and in more than one case? How is it different than a President that has agreed to be the leader of a nation bt has spent seven years pitting citizens against each other?

        It seems to me you have different rules for people in your party. Oh sure, you make some milk toast statements to make yourself seem reasonable, but in the end you do not have the desire to destroy Obama as you do Trump (Or me, just because I don’t agree with your complete assessment of him).

        Trump does make passionate statements that he then has to go back and clarify. You refuse to accept the clarification and instead hold him to a standard even you could not live up to. The people that support Trump know that his remarks are about the situation and that he does not hold ill will toward peoples of different races or nationalities. Anyone who is simply reactionary, like you, won’t give him the chance to clarify. Your own seething hatred needs an outlet. Most people take this process much more seriously.

        “…hate crimes against Muslims have gone up since he started verbally attacking them.”

        What proof is there that his remarks are the cause? It could well be that under Obama we have seen attacks rise both here and across the planet. Muslim terrorists killing innocent people. But you wouldn’t consider that possibility. Obama has been genius at dividing people, blurring the lines between right and wrong, whipping up hatred and division, failing this nation and our allies, and in general making people feel unsupported, more vulnerable, and helpless to do anything about it.

        Seething, controlled anger delivered with a smile and phony pronouncements is much more damaging that the righteous anger expressed by Trump for the people that are feeling unsupported, more vulnerable, and helpless to do anything about it. Obama has created this situation ON PURPOSE!

        • Chris says:

          Me: “He blames Muslims and Mexicans for America’s problems.”

          Tina: “Even if your statement is true, and I think you’re wrong, how is that different than Obama blaming a cop before having the facts for what has happened and in more than one case?”

          The answer is in the question. Blaming individual cops is not the same as blaming entire religious and ethnic groups. Obviously.

          Besides, there was only one case in which Obama specifically blamed an officer, and that was the Henry Louis Gates incident. He also tried to make amends shortly after with the “beer summit.” Does Trump ever show an awareness that he has erred? Does he ever try to make amends? Each time after that Obama has spoken much more carefully and has not cast judgment on officers in specific cases. He has spoken of the need for better training in some communities. Many officers have echoed his concerns.

          Even if you think Obama has fueled hatred against police–I don’t think he has–they are not a minority ethnic group. They are the enforcers of government power. Your comparison is prima facie invalid.

          Trump has said that the majority of Mexican immigrants are murderers and rapists, and that we should register all Muslims in a database. And you’re REALLY having trouble telling the difference?

          “It seems to me you have different rules for people in your party.”

          No. No other mainstream politician, right or left, has spoken like Trump. I have long believed the right has flirted with bigotry, but with Trump it isn’t even dog whistles, it’s blatant. He makes Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz look like a moderate, beltway politician. There is no double standard here; Trump is different from EVERYONE else running.

          “Oh sure, you make some milk toast statements to make yourself seem reasonable, but in the end you do not have the desire to destroy Obama as you do Trump (Or me, just because I don’t agree with your complete assessment of him).”

          Trump will destroy himself. I have no desire to destroy you; my goal is and always has been to get you to think about the things you’re saying.

          “Trump does make passionate statements that he then has to go back and clarify.”

          WHEN does he go back and clarify? When has he ever admitted that he got something wrong? He never took back his statements on the thousands of Muslims celebrating 9/11 in New Jersey. He never took back his statement that nearly half the country is unemployed. He never took back his statement that most Mexican immigrants are criminals. These aren’t “passionate statements;” they are LIES, Tina, and the only reason you accept these lies is confirmation bias.

          “You refuse to accept the clarification”

          WHAT clarification? And no, even if he did “clarify” the above statements (which would have to amount to a complete retraction in order to be truthful), I wouldn’t accept such clarifications unless they also came with an apology to the minority communities that were targeted by his irresponsible and bigoted acts of slander.

          “and instead hold him to a standard even you could not live up to.”

          Ridiculous. “Better than Trump” is not a high standard; I am fairly comfortable saying I live up to that standard. You typically have in the past; your recent defense of Trump has been a tragic lowering of your own standards.

          Do you realize that Trump isn’t even a conservative?

          “The people that support Trump know that his remarks are about the situation and that he does not hold ill will toward peoples of different races or nationalities.”

          No, the people who support Trump THINK that, because they are idiots who hear what they want to hear, rather than the blatantly racist statements Trump has actually said.

          My students–almost all of whom are Hispanic–bring up Trump constantly; they know what he has said about them, and they feel targeted by it. Are they wrong to feel that way? Do you want to come to my classroom and explain how calling most Mexican immigrants rapists and murderers isn’t bigoted toward them? Do you want to explain to my two Muslim students why we have to put their names in a special database, and maybe even have them carry special IDs, right before we read The Diary of Anne Frank?

          They can see it, Tina. I’m sorry you can’t.

          “Anyone who is simply reactionary, like you,”

          You’re defending Trump and calling me reactionary? You’re hilarious!

          “What proof is there that his remarks are the cause?”

          I don’t, but I do know it certainly doesn’t help. But it seems pretty obvious that when you spread hatred and fear against a group, violence against that group is gonna go up. I’ve also shown you that Trump refused to condemn a hate crime done in his name a few months ago.

    • Tina says:

      What enthusiasm?

      If you call defending one of the Republican candidates against criticism then I’m guilty as charged.

      I haven’t been promoting any candidate. I have said that I like Ted Cruz and I think he’s my favorite. But I was impressed this evening by Chris Christie and Marco Rubio and I had dismissed them. It’s January. We have a long way to go. I would support any Republican candidate that gets selected, including Trump.

      I’m most enthused about defeating the Democrat candidate. The perpetually biased and ignorant do not get to dictate policy either, but he has.

      Anger is no more irrational than any other emotion. The question is whether a person lets his anger take over. Evidence of the right being “out of control” with respect to their anger isn’t in evidence. If supporting Trump is evidence that the right is in an irrational state, then sadly the support of the left for Hillary, Bernie, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Elizabeth Warren, Al Gore et al is evidence of irrational compassion, irrational sympathy, irrational caring.

      Come on Libby. We are not the ogre’s you make us out to be.

      • Chris says:

        Do you think Trump cursing out a sound engineer in front of an audience–while he knew he was being recorded–is evidence of him “letting anger take over?”

        Has any other presidential candidate ever cursed out a worker in front of such a large audience?

      • Chris says:

        “If you call defending one of the Republican candidates against criticism then I’m guilty as charged.”

        But you realize that you *haven’t* defended him from criticism, right?

        Saying “the other side does it too” isn’t a defense. It’s an excuse. A justification. A dodge.

        If you’ve offered any actual “defense” of the behavior that we’ve criticized, let me know. So far, I see nothing but excuses, with no actual reasons given why we should accept Trump’s brutish behavior.

  6. Tina says:

    Chris you see things from a different point of view. That’s fine, we all do. However, you refuse to see things from another point of view. Instead people you talk with are constantly urged (sometimes bullied) to see things as you do.

    I was accused of being “enthusiastic” about Trump. I responded by asking, “What enthusiasm?” I then said that if defending a republican candidate from attacks could be considered enthusiasm then I am guilty. I don’t see defending Trump as enthusiasm but I admitted Libby might. Then you counter with this:

    “Saying “the other side does it too” isn’t a defense. It’s an excuse. A justification. A dodge”

    No…it’s calling you out for being a colossal hypocrite! YOU VOTED for a person with the same kind of failings or qualities! You belong to a party that bleeds the same type of gauche, ignorant, intolerant, ugly, demeaning speech; a party whose tactics come from a book dedicated to Satan in which the author wrote, “This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.” You can’t even tell the truth about it! You pretend to be above it all; better than others.

    “If you’ve offered any actual “defense” of the behavior …”

    I said I defended the candidate. That would be from your criticism. Why should I agree with you, someone who pretends to hold the moral ground but continues to support a party that is corrupt and valueless.

    “I see nothing but excuses, with no actual reasons given why we should accept Trump’s brutish behavior.”

    You don’t have to “accept” anything! Nobody is forcing you, or even twisting your arm, to “accept” Trumps “brutish behavior!”

    It could turn out that you get stuck with him, though. Welcome to my world over the last seven years! At least Trump would give you a better economy and improved relationships with our allies. At least Trump would have the good sense to listen to the generals and change course if things were not working. Trumps agenda is driven by his love for America and his desire to see people succeed and to keep Americans safe. All of those things are pluses that make a few rough edges tolerable for me.

    It’s time for the Democrat pretense to end. The Democrat Party is not inclusive. The Democrat party is not kind or compassionate. The Democrat party panders to groups for POWER. Democrat candidates are no more polished or capable generally. The Democrat Party is as phony as a two dollar bill.

    If you have something to say about Trump, say it! You are free on PS to blab away all you want. As for me…

    I’m most enthused about defeating the Democrat candidate.

    • Chris says:

      Tina: “Why should I agree with you, someone who pretends to hold the moral ground but continues to support a party that is corrupt and valueless.”

      Tina, is it your assertion that no Democrat has the “moral ground” to criticize any Republican candidate, simply because they are a Democrat?

      Because that seems to be the implication of your comment.

      I have never made any similar generalizations about Republicans. I criticize specific individuals; you’re suggesting that I am accountable for the actions of everyone in an entire political party. That’s silly and unfair.

      I call out Obama and other Democrats when I truly think they have said something over the line. You seem incapable of doing the same when it comes to Republican candidates.

      “At least Trump would give you a better economy and improved relationships with our allies.”

      No, he wouldn’t, and it is stupid to think that he would. Trump thinks the unemployment rate is higher than the percentage of people not in the labor force; that alone disqualifies him from being a reliable source on the economy. He has said that Mexico intentionally sends over its worst, and that we are going to force them to build a wall; he has said we should not take any Muslim immigrants from any country; and he has said that Vladimir Putin is a great and honorable man. That’s the kind of behavior you think endears us to our allies? That is deranged.

      “Trumps agenda is driven by his love for America and his desire to see people succeed and to keep Americans safe.”

      Trump’s agenda is driven by his love for attention, as any idiot can see.

      • Tina says:

        Most Democrats don’t visit Post Scripts and spend their time badgering and bullying me. Nope my disdain (you noticed?) is just for you.

        You have ZOT going for you in terms of economic growth. The man in the WH has failed with Keyensian economics. Neither you nor he has any idea what it takes to make an economy work…and yet you act superior and tell yourselves fairy tales about how great we’re doing because we’re not (yet) Greece. At least Bill Clinton saw the writing on the wall and changed course.

        Think whatever you want.

        • Chris says:

          Tina,

          I’m not “bullying” you. You don’t know what bullying is. You defend Trump, who has bullied disabled journalists, women, Muslims, Mexicans, protesters, and everyone else who has crossed his path with playground taunts like “loser,” “lightweight,” and more unprofessional and unpresidential comments.

          So forgive me while I play you the world’s tiniest violin.

    • Dewster says:

      NEWSFLASH!

      The RNC and DNC are both phony parties now. WHat did you expect when pandering for donor dollars became the only way to keep your job? You like Citizens United Decision and unlimited money in politics? Than deal with the phony Parties. the GOP is worse! Why because their base buys into all the crap.

      I will never join either party.

  7. Libby says:

    Tina, you gotta look at the numbers. Trump has very limited appeal outside your little bubble, and your little bubble contains only 20% of the electorate.

    • Tina says:

      Guess what Libby, your little bubble is about the same size so Hillary and Bernie, probable felon and avowed socialist, don’t have much going for them either.

      • Dewster says:

        Probable felon? Jeeze Tina you sling mud and ignore your own. Walker wrote a retroactive law to keep himself out of jail. Christi’s bridgegate is just the tip, Cruz did not report loans for his senate campaign, the list goes on.

        DC Politics is corrupt. Greed and money will be the end of the American Empire.

        As long as you play this left and right game you loose.

  8. Tina says:

    Some people are extraordinarily blunt, even rude. Italians are famous for yelling at each other. Those of us old enough to recall the sixties might remember a scene from a Gina Lollobrigida movie in which she boldly asserts with a flair, “I don’t have to make sense, I’m Italian.”

    New Yorker’s are notoriously colorful and expressive in their language and when disturbed they rarely hold back. Trump is a typical new Yorker.

    Some people are pleasant on the outside even when they are seething on the inside. Controlled anger, anger with deep roots, can be even more damaging than a moment of rudeness. They deliver their barbs with careful articulation that often passes for smarts but they are deceitful and calculating with their sting.

    Obama is such a man. His anger toward white people (white privilege) is quite apparent and manifests such that southern cities end up getting burned, suffering millions in damage, and police officers lose their jobs and are forced into hiding. Cutting America down to size is another outlet for seething anger. No better way to do that than to ruin the economy. Tag teaming with the green movement offered an opportunity to do just that. With a smile this angry man promised and then imposed draconian regulations and taxes that would destroy coal businesses, put thousands of people out of work, and force prices higher:

    “If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them,” Obama told the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board in January 2008. “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

    Although President Obama failed to persuade Congress to enact such environmental regulations into law, his EPA has moved to administratively implement this agenda — and at a staggering high cost, according to a new study.

    According to that study by the American Action Forum, tens of thousands of coal miners and power-plant employees have lost their jobs since 2008, the Daily Caller reported.

    AAF, an organization headed by former Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, contends that overregulation by the EPA and other agencies has piled billions of dollars in new clean and water regulations on the industry.

    According to AAF, every $1 billion in regulatory costs results in a loss of about 8,100 jobs.

    “Nowhere is this phenomenon more stark than in fossil-fueled power plants and coal mining, ” according to AAF Director of Regulatory Policy Sam Batkins. “Regulators have added more than $10 billion in burdens on this industry since 2011, with the promise of at least $10 billion more in the immediate future. Not surprisingly, states and the industries as a whole have suffered tremendously.”

    I’d prefer a president with enough discipline to avoid public outbursts, but if I had to choose between a man with seething anger and a man who has the occasional outburst, I’d go with the up front guy and the occasional outburst.

    Our friends on the left are such phonies.

  9. Dewster says:

    Obama is such a man. His anger toward white people (white privilege) is quite apparent and manifests such that southern cities end up getting burned

    ——————————–

    Forget all the ranting WTH does this mean? Obama’s anger at white people? That is delusional.

    But worse is how is the white privilege comment relevant?

    Be honest for a second does race bother you? Calm down. Your post is delusional at best.

    Lay off the RW blogs. You are going to have a HEART ATTACK!

    If so called Liberals are your enemy than aprox 1/2 of America is. Stop the hate.

    Taxpayers are being robbed blind while conservative and democrat corportists run this us and them fight. Americans are not cons and libs they are people. Humans. Living beings.

    Question what ever happened to that 3.6 plus Trillion that disappeared from the Pentagon? has it stopped? Are some pissed if it has been reduced. Wall street and Military contractors are sucking us dry. As long as you fight this Phony political fight they can keep raiding us.

  10. Chris says:

    Acknowledging white privilege is not the same as “anger” toward white people. It’s recognizing the simple fact that the vast majority of our nation’s elite are white, and that this is due to structural social factors that we can and should change, rather than being due to the inherent supremacy of the white race. I acknowledge that; that doesn’t make me angry at myself.

    Equating this with Trump’s bloviations–which include suggesting we register all Muslims in a national database, a la Nazi Germany–is the definition of false equivalence; you’re saying anti-racism is no better than racism. No, actually; you’re saying its worse.

    The coal industry has been dying for years due to cheaper natural gas, and while all job losses are sad, the coal industry is very small, with only about 89,000 workers. The EPA says these regulations will save 34,000 lives due to less coal-related diseases. Every policy has trade-offs; this seems like a good one to me, and motivated by common sense, not anger.

    Your comparisons are inadequate.

  11. Tina says:

    Blah blah, blah blah and blah.

    Once again the squirrel has been let loose in your brain. Focus.

  12. Libby says:

    Dewey, it’s called projection … a psychological term for people who project their fear and loathing (among other things) onto the object of said fear and loathing. Obama hates them, which justifies all the ammo stockpiling, when in fact the hatred is all on the stockpilers.

  13. Tina says:

    Libby has it all figured out. Her evaluation fits her cartoon image perfectly. She wins.

    Isn’t that the way with these progressives/liberals.

    Dewey goes on an irrational rant, imagining I’m sitting at my computer seething with anger, when in fact I am quite calm and somewhat and Libby thinks she must offer an explanation that covers the entire right wing. Let’s see what was that thing that Obama said at a fund raiser in San Francisco a few years back? Oh yeah:

    So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

    I wonder, was Obama projecting his fear and loathing? Did he have contempt for us “bitter clingers?”

    For the record I do not hate Obama. I hate what he’s done to the country and to individuals in certain jobs and businesses, to police officers, and to the social fabric of this nation that, prior to his antagonistic, divisive nature, had made quite a bit of progress toward unity and inclusiveness.

    Does Libby hates the “stockpilers?” It would appear so.

  14. Tina says:

    Error in the above. It should read: “…in fact I am quite calm and somewhat amused…”

  15. Chris says:

    It always cracks me up how the “bitter clingers” remark gets taken out of context by people who insist on clinging bitterly to it.

    Here is the full quote:

    “But the truth is, is that our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s no evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, a lot — like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they’ve gone through the Clinton administration and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate, and they have not. It’s not surprising, then, that they get bitter, and they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. At least in some communities, anyway.”

    Obama was expressing sympathy for people in communities which have deteriorated over the past several decades, and saying that he needed to win them over. He was describing real sociological phenomena; many poor whites in the Midwest ARE looking for someone to blame for their problems, and sometimes that gets taken out on minorities and immigrants. That’s exactly the demographic Trump appeals to.

    Obama’s statement was condescending. It was also true. And it’s even more relevant today with the rise of Trump, who is taking advantage of the basic need of people to look for an easy scapegoat; in Trump’s case, Mexican immigrants and Muslims.

    So thanks for bringing those comments up, Tina, as they illustrate the difference between Trump and Obama quite nicely.

    Obama sympathized with and tried to understand a demographic that he knew would likely not vote for him, and still tried to reach out to them, albeit in a clumsy way. He searched for real reasons behind why they voted in ways that he viewed as counterproductive to their own interests.

    Trump says that anyone who doesn’t support him is a “loser,” proclaims that even after all the terrible things he has said about them, he still has “great relationships” with the Hispanic and Muslim communities, and makes absolutely no effort to find out why he is alienating to a large segment of Americans.

    Obama pointed out that when people are poor and seeing a lack of progress in their own lives relative to those of others, they look for people to blame, and this can lead to blaming minorities for the country’s problems.

    Trump took that as campaign advice.

  16. Libby says:

    The stockpiling is an undeniable fact, and it started the day the poor man was elected. I’m just glad it’s looking like he is going to survive his term in office (knock wood).

    I don’t understand how you can hold your heads up in public, frankly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.