It's comforting to far more than just conservatives. How many mainstream Americans want to do the "hard work" of re-thinking our foreign policy? No more than the number of Britons who wanted to examine imperialism when they could afford to maintain the empire, is my bet.

Hey, ass-kissing Bushies, help me out!

Which is it - do the Islamofascistterroristas hate us (as Shrub has repeatedly said) because we love, go to church, have freedom for women, are just and kind

OR, in the latest head-snapping reversal, do they hate us because we're decadent, corrupt and promiscuously pornographic????

Don't you get a sore neck from having to believe two contradictory things at the same time???

So what do muslims think of Europe? We come in a distant second to Europe on the liberalism front. Are they playing nice with their non-muslims, or is there real tension between the cultures?

So if the Muslims think our morals are in the gutter and the conservatives agree. Why do they want to keep fighting the Muslims. They should invite them over to discuss how to deport Britney Spears and the rest of the Hollywood infidels to Antarctica

How des this country bumpkin get a show a cable news network? I mean, really, its about the $$$ and does this guy really pull the numbers to warrant his existence on TV. If so, I think the muslims are one to something.

So conservatives are hell-bent on fighting them "over there" so that we degenerates can keep living our sordid lives stateside? Awesome. Thanks, guys!

Bin Laden is quoted as saying: "You don't see us attacking Sweden." Sweden! The source of the finest pornography available to humanity.

The Bush wing and bin Laden -- match made in heaven.

I bet they would like us better if we stoned Glenn Beck to death.

Note this isn't a recommendation to stone Glenn Beck to death.

Note on note, I added the note so I could type the phrase "stone Glenn Beck to death" a second time.

RSM,

Why don't you visit Europe and find out for yourself? Be prepared to go off the beaten path, be open and you will be surprised at how friendly Europeans (all flavors) are.

Earnestly try to speak their language and you can capture the hearts of an entire village (been there, done that)

Muslims have done quite a bit of changing to integrate themselves. Yet, so have those interacting with them, a feature Americans really could emulate without losing anything.

I suspect that Beck and the other social conservatives secretly admire the Islamic Right for making the culture war a literal one.

For me the best articluation of the connection between far-right Muslim extremism and far-right Christian extremism was this article by Ellen Willis in The Nation, published shortly after 9/11:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011217/willis

Opening graph:

"It often happens that the lunatic right, in its feckless way, gets closer to the heart of the matter than the political mainstream, and so it was with Jerry Falwell's notorious response to September 11. In suggesting that the World Trade Center massacre was God's judgment on an America that tolerates abortion, homosexuality and feminism, Falwell--along with Pat Robertson, who concurred--exposed himself to the public's averted eye. For most Americans, from George W. Bush on down, resist the idea that the attack was an act of cultural war, and fewer still are willing to admit its intimate connection with the culture war at home.

Opponents of the "clash of civilizations" thesis are half right. There is such a clash, but it is not between East and West. The struggle of democratic secularism, religious tolerance, individual freedom and feminism against authoritarian patriarchal religion, culture and morality is going on all over the world"

"They hate us for our Doritos" makes about as much sense too.

I, for one, welcome our Dorito overlords.

Beck: More and more Muslims now hate us all across the world, and it really has not a lot to do with anything other than our morals.

Well, I agree. You have to question the morals of a country that starts preemptive war under false pretenses, holds numerous citizens of a country without trial, tortures prisoners, and causes the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent citizens and justifies it all by saying "better over there than over here". Yeah, I think Muslims are certainly questioning our morals at this point.

So if the Muslims think our morals are in the gutter and the conservatives agree. Why do they want to keep fighting the Muslims. They should invite them over to discuss how to deport Britney Spears and the rest of the Hollywood infidels to Antarctica

I have always feared that the day will come when the Christofascists, the Judeofascists, and the Hindufascists all find common cause with the Islamofascists against us secular types.

I say we keep them all fighting amongst themselves for as long as possible -- who's with me?

They can have my freedom, but leave my pork rinds alone, dammit!

Sweden! The source of the finest pornography available to humanity.

Allah bless Sweden.

of course they hate us for our morals... especially the morals that cause 'us' to kill them by the hundreds of thousands and call them "subhuman" and call for the murder of their scientists, and religious leaders.

wacky mooslums!

and Mrs. T. says they'll have to pry her pork hocks out of her cold, dead hands!

Right there with you, Disputo. Let's pour some gasoline on that fire and then duck and cover.

What is this porn of which you speak? I'm a nice Jewish girl who knows not of these things.

When I worked in Egypt during the 1980s, I worked two months on and one month off. When I came back to the States, my Egyptian crew regularly made requests that I bring back pornography for them. They preferred blonds and big boobs.

My point is people vary everywhere. There may well be people who hate us because we allow pornography, but there are others who envy us for that same thing. My guess is it's about the same proportion as here, and what matters politically is which group is in power, or which group supports those in power.

Red State Mike: So what do muslims think of Europe?

The ones I worked with (granted not the best educated) thought either that Europe was one of the American states or America was a European country.

Wow, talk about your "blame America" crowd. That's exactly right, they blew up the world trade center because I wore a short miniskirt on 9/10.

So, if we just give up our freedom--you know, freedom of choice, to love who we want, to wear what we want, to marry who we want, to worship God (or not) as we please, to say what we want, to work at whatever job we choose--we'll be safe? All that "life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness" stuff is all it'll cost to ensure we don't die in a massive terrorist fireball?

Great plan, Glen.

(Although, if it involves the expunging of Ana Nicole Smith from our TV screens, I have to say this capitulation to the extremists does start to sound appealing...)

Hmmm... They hate us for our freedoms and we hate us for our freedoms too!

I would wager that when Mr. Beck says " Our morals are just out the window...verge of moral collapse...our promiscuity is off the charts," he is really speaking about his own behavior. The tranposing of his moral failings to modern American culture allows him to condemn those he disagrees with politically and foment war with those whom his superego actually agrees with.

Beck is a morbidly conflicted fuck. I hope he cracks up soon.

So maybe I'm just being dense or something, but I think when Bush says "they hate us for our freedoms," that is not meant to be in sympathy with their hate. It's supposed to mean that what's BAD about our evil enemies is that they hate freedom, America's great gift to the world. So rather than perpetuating this trope, the Glenn Beck view that the Muslim world hates us for our freedom to be immoral is fundamentally at odds with it.

anonymous sez:

That's exactly right, they blew up the world trade center because I wore a short miniskirt on 9/10.

So that was you?!

shorter Glenn Beck:

"We have to be more like the repressive Muslims that we hate so that the Muslims will not hate us for not being more like them."

Or something.

Then how is Glenn Beck any different from Pat Robertson - who also blamed America for the attack on 9/11?

Poor, pathetic libs. It took you this long to realize that we Conservatives feel the same as Bin Laden about the decline of American morality? I guess being so slow to figure things out is what you get for wrecking the American educational system with politically correct "feel good" claptrap about evolution and global warming.

Welcome to reality. The terrorists aren't anti-American, they're anti-liberal.

And now you can weep and despair as the brilliance of Bush's true plan dawns upon you. By deliberately deflecting attention from Afghanistan and the anti-liberal Taliban and the search for anti-liberal Bin Laden, by helping anti-liberal Fox News become "mainstream", by getting our military bogged down in Iraq with insufficient force to actually win against anti-liberal insurgents, by making sure anti-liberal North Korea has nukes, by passing the anti-liberal Patriot Act, by helping the anti-liberal forces in Iran overcome the wimpy moderates, and by shaping the Supreme Court into an anti-liberal powerhouse, Bush has left you pathetic liberals with nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.

Think about it. Bush has single-handedly reshaped the entire planet in favor of those of us who are opposed to "women's rights," "gay rights," "scientific facts," and all those other things that liberal corruption has foisted upon us.

BWA HA HA HA HA!

Best. AHock. Ever.

Then how is Glenn Beck any different from Pat Robertson - who also blamed America for the attack on 9/11?

Glenn is pudgier and dull looking while Pat somewhat resembles a bulldog and is dull looking.

Another difference: I don't think Glenn ever gets a Word of Knowledge about a viewer in Mobile who is suffering from gout. That's not to say he doesn't have quite the dull look.

Then how is Glenn Beck any different from Pat Robertson - who also blamed America for the attack on 9/11?

bigger audience, cheaper suits.

So Bush appeases them by taking away our freedoms?

Maybe it has something to do with our bombing the hell out of them and stealing their natural resources. Last I checked, murder and theft qualified as moral issues.

Just a wild guess.

When you get down to it, this is the best defense of social liberalism you could come up with.

If the Muslims hate us for our loose morals, then if we go conservative here at home, we're letting the terrorists win. As a patriotic America, you have the *duty* to smoke pot, have wild orgies, play violent video games, listen to loud music, and wear revealing clothing.

Loving the American Hock parodies. However, I wonder if we will ever see American Hock and Al's Mommy in the same room? Somehow I doubt it - I think there is a Superman/Clark Kent thing happening here...

This is a common theme among the loony right. One idiot is following Falwell and Robertson by blaming 9-11 on liberals. D'Souza says American society should become more like fundamentalist Afghanistan: end the Democracy experiment, stop educating women etc. There really isn't much difference between the fundamentalist mentality from one sect to any other.

He says morals? Bushistas have morals? I haven't met one Bushista yet who demonstrates the existence of morals in their behavior or personality.

Joe Wilson - June 14, 2003

"The real agenda in all of this of course, was to redraw the political map of the Middle East. Now that is code, whether you like it or not, but it is code for putting into place the strategy memorandum that was done by Richard Perle and his study group in the mid-90's which was called, "A Clean Break - A New Strategy for the Realm." And what it is, cut to the quick, is if you take out some of these countries, some of these governments that are antagonistic to Israel then you provide the Israeli government with greater wherewithal to impose its terms and conditions upon the Palestinian people, whatever those terms and conditions might be. In other words, the road to peace in the Middle East goes through Baghdad and Damascus. Maybe Tehran. And maybe Cairo and maybe Tripoli if these guys actually have their way. Rather than going through Jerusalem."

19:46: http://next.epic-usa.org/epicdev2/_media/2003forumaudio/28-lecture-wilson-32.mp3

"On the other ones, the geopolitical situation, I think there are a number of issues at play; there's a number of competing agendas. One is the remaking of the map of the Middle East for Israeli security, and my fear is that when it becomes increasingly apparent that this was all done to make Sharon's life easier and that American soldiers are dying in order to enable Sharon to impose his terms upon the Palestinians that people will wonder why it is American boys and girls are dying for Israel and that will undercut a strategic relationship and a moral obligation that we've had towards Israel for 55 years. I think it's a terribly flawed strategy."

13:33: http://next.epic-usa.org/epicdev2/_media/2003forumaudio/29-lecture-qa-32.mp3

What is it Kevin?

Only idiots have to insult other people to make their points, stupid. God, I wish you knew how dumb you look when you argue ad hominem. Can't you make a point without resorting to insults and put-downs, you dick-for-shit.

I defy you to respond to the logic of my reasoning.

Actually a recent global poll shows that the majority of people polled around the world do not believe there is, in fact, any clash of civilisations. Generally we believe that the differences are primarily political - whether struggles for oil, a homeland, political freedoms, national pride, etc.

It ain't about religion, and most people, it seems, are perceptive enough to realise it.

Who cares what numbnuts like this commentator, and the clueless and irrelevant trolls like egbert or Kenneth think?

The world thinks differently - and it's one of the most positive things I have found in these dark days.

The Beck arguement also makes "social liberalism" resposible for 9/11.

oil, control the DAMN OIL--THAT'S WHY WE'RE THERE.

No mistake has been made--no clash of civilizations, no differences betweens the politcal parties.

That's why Hillary won't admit she made a error in going to war..she's an oil addict.

it's just the damn oil!

Floopmeister
Actually a recent global poll shows that the majority of people polled around the world do not believe there is, in fact, any clash of civilisations.

Yea, but that leaves somewhere between 10-30% depending on the culture who believes it is. And that means a billion or so may. And of those, certainly a pile are willing to at least accomodate if not actively support those that actually take action against us.

How many Americans favored independence back in Revolutionary War times?

They may not hate us our freedoms, but the response to the cartoons of Mohammed certainly suggest they are incompatible with our freedoms.

Everything that I hear from the Middle East (especially Iran) is that they love the American people, it's just the (mainly) Republican administrations that they despise.
It is convenient for neo-cons to claim its our morals they hate.. then they don't have to rethink the actions of St. Ronnie and Bush Sr. Incompetence didn't begin with Jr.

I wonder what "morals" Glenn Beck is talking about? By some metrics (divorce, teen pregnancy) we're doing better now than in the 70s or 80s, and others (drug use, poverty) seem to be about the same (they go up and down, we are not at a historic high or low). Gay marriage is legal in MA now, but it wasn't in 2001, so that couldn't have motivated that attack, and the number of gay marriages is not large (around 8100, according to Wikipedia).

Foreign aid as a percentage of GDP, that's down. Income inequality, that's up, but those are the only trends I see, and I doubt that either is what he was talking about.

Yea, but that leaves somewhere between 10-30% depending on the culture who believes it is.

Oh well - there'll always be a fringe element out of step with mainstream opinion, but generally these marginal views don't reflect the society as a whole and in democratic societies their overall influence matches their demographic clout.

BTW - isn't Bush's approval rating around the 30% mark?

What is much more important to large numbers of world citizens is, of course, global warming. The supporters of the 'Clash of Civilsations' / GWOT should be seen for what they are - a minority fringe.

Well, if Glenn Beck really wants to talk about morality, what kind of morality is it that allows the government to send other people's kids to war without the proper armor, not take care of them or their families properly because they're busy cutting veteran's benefits, conducts a war with mercenary soldiers that get paid two and three times more than the reservists and national guardsmen that they fight alongside, and all the while support big bucks for their friends in the military-industrial complex while they raid the treasury with war profiteering. Oh, and by the way, there will be tax cuts in a time of war, but primarily for the already wealthy.

The less than wealthy on the other hand, get government snooping into their phone conversations, their internet conversations, their bedrooms and procreative activities. Government has seen fit to restrict the lesser classes access to bankruptcy filings, including a "blame the victim" implication, even though studies have shown that most people file bankruptcy due to medical bills or divorce. There are so many things wrong with this country that need fixing, from our profligate abuse of the environment and our consumerist attitude, and yet we are consumed with the morality of abortion rights and whether we should allow stem cell research or allow the unwanted embryos to just expire or be incinerated. The terrorists don't need a reason or an excuse to hate us, they just do, and they will no matter what we do, because they are poor and powerless and we have so much we don't know what to do with it all, and then we whine that we have a right to their oil.

We want to be free! We want to be free to do what we want to do! We want to be free to ride. And we want to be free to ride our machines without being hassled by The Man. And we want to get loaded. And we want to have a good time! And that's what we're gonna do. We're gonna have a good time. We're gonna have a party!

You got a problem with that?

The things that they were saying about us were true. Our morals are just out the window. We're a society on the verge of moral collapse. And our promiscuity is off the charts.

It's a mite indelicate, but the idiomatic paraphrase that popped into my head after reading Glenn Beck was, simply:

"Courtesan, fuck thyself."

The point of view is backwards. Bush and his conservative colleagues are jealous of the theocratic control Muslim leaders have over their followers, and would like to have that power here.

American Hock is a god of a satirist.

Glenn Beck pollutes the air everytime he speaks. Conservatives decrying social liberalism have had enough hypocritical incidents to last a lifetime. Their own self righteous loud mouth representative of moral values--Rush Limbaugh, known to speak out against pre-marital sex, and "let's lock up all junkies," caught with a bottle of viagra without his name on it returning from the Dominican Republic, he unmarried. And his Oxycontin scandals. And the video of him ridiculing a man with parkinson's disease.
... the Mark Foley scandals grooming young male pages for sexual gratification-- the conservatives failing to address this dismal abusive situation and in fact allowing it to continue to keep house seats-- for years.
Hypocrites, all.
How moral is the deteriorated situation of the Walter Reed Medical Center, of the attempts to reduce benefits for veterans and their families, of continuing this obscene war, of leaving the poor, elderly and disabled to languish for days in the heat in New Orleans, while the administration partied and shopped.
No doubt they hate us for the abuses at Abu Grahib--so degrading and unforgivable--and the continuing violence against those of Moslem faith in the Middle East, sanctioned and made perpetual by this imperial admininstration's crusade. And the treatment of detainees, extraordinary rendition...it is endless

Do Muslims not party?
Does a burka not permit the eating of Doritos?
Do said leaders all have a Cheney to show them the way?

The asking of serious questions must wait, cat demanding food.

And if they hate us for our freedoms, guess what? It means they don't hate us for our actions. And that means there's no need for us to change anything we're actually doing in the Middle East.

Yeah Kevin, you just hit the ball with the sweet part of the bat. So-called conservatives actually make statements like that with a straight face, leaving the rest of us to wonder, “do they really believe something so stupid, or are they just puttin’ us on.”

Some of “them” hate us for our actions and many more dislike us for our actions. Bin Laden has talked about how he watched our big artillery shells hit the buildings in Lebanon, fired just for spite in retaliation for the Marine barracks (as though we were punishing the actual people who blew them up), and he was very much angered. Who wouldn’t be? That’s just acknowledging a fact, not defending a terrorist.

How many American bombs have “those people” seen dropped on “their kind”? Few of us have any idea; there have been just so damn many. How many American artillery shells? Aw, not important, right?

Red State Mike writes: They may not hate us our freedoms, but the response to the cartoons of Mohammed certainly suggest they are incompatible with our freedoms.

Come on Mike, how many Americans were offended by John Lennon’s statement about the popularity of God vs. the Beatles? I remember bond fires and hatred in response. But was that surprising? Was it that big a deal? No. No, it wasn’t.

Glenn Beck: "We're a society on the verge of moral collapse. And our promiscuity is off the charts."

Reading between the lines: "Why can't a dazzling urbanite like me get laid?"

It's almost Inkblot time.

Friday's almost here.

Red State Mike: "[Muslims] may not hate us our freedoms, but the response to the cartoons of Mohammed certainly suggest they are incompatible with our freedoms."

Your continued overt bigotry toward Muslims also strongly suggests that you're none too compatible with them yourself.

Damn, Cheryl. You are calm tonight. Had a glass of wine or something?

If I keep posting it... maybe somebody here will go watch these videos.

Go to Google video and watch the Power of Nightmares. Parts I,II,III.

It is the best in-depth examination and explanation of the radical islamic movement and it's relationship to the neocon movement.

It is 'must watch' stuff or anyone who's actually interested in what's going on. This should be shown in on every teevee channel and in every theater until Americans 'get it'.

Come on Mike, how many Americans were offended by John Lennon’s statement about the popularity of God vs. the Beatles? I remember bond fires and hatred in response. But was that surprising? Was it that big a deal? No. No, it wasn’t.
Posted by: little ole jim from red country

You're right, the response to Lennon wasn't a big deal. Ultimately, respect for our freedoms won out over their anger. But the response to attacks on Mohammed are a big deal. Fatwa to kill the author of Satanic Verses. Riots about some cartoons. Murdering Theo Van Gogh. Those are all things condoned in the large by muslims, and incompatible with western society.

Beck is actually lamenting that Democrats have dramatically gained ground with the so-called values voters. Beck exhibits amazing hubris.
It's a bit much having him on, then Nancy Grace tearing up the airwaves.

Every time you think you've heard every ridiculous, stupid, hypocritical and cognitive dissonant thing these guys could say, along comes someone like Beck to grab the crown as the authoritarian right's biggest fool. He's actually telling us that if we just followed the directions of the Muslims--his avowed enemies--all would be well. We won't have to kill them anymore if we just do what they tell us to do!

Red State Mike on February 22, 2007 at 8:47 PM:

Ultimately, respect for our freedoms won out over their anger. But the response to attacks on Mohammed are a big deal.

Damn. Talk about missing the point.

Wasn’t Theo Van Gogh murdered in 2004? Prior to the cartoons?

Crazy Mulim murders somebody. The U.S. military is not the answer to this problem. Our amazing weapons of war are not the answer to this problem.

I've never understood idiots like Beck. If they hate us for our freedom...we're supposed to quit exercising those freedoms?

Isn't that the acquiescing to the terrorists they're usually blaming liberals for?

Screw that--if you wanna fight terrorism, go do your spouse/neighbor's spouse/boytoy/girltoy in some kinky position or three, rent some porn, drink some beer, watch Jerry Springer, vote Democrat, and drive over the speed limit listening to rock music.

bobbywally: "We want to be free! We want to be free to do what we want to do! ... We're gonna have a good time. We're gonna have a party! You got a problem with that?"

Left on the cutting room floor:

The Peter Fonda character in the movie The Wild Angels, from whence this quote comes -- bet you didn't think anybody'd know that, did you, bobbywally? -- would eventually grow up, move to Evanston, IL and join the Republican Party, where he supported the election for Gov. George Ryan in 1998 and was eventually given full immunity by prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in exchange for crucial testimony in the illegal kickback scandal that sent his boss to federal prison.

Muslims may not hate us for our freedoms, but the response to the cartoons of Mohammed certainly suggest they are incompatible with our freedoms.

Christians may not hate us for our freedoms, but the response to [The Last Temptation of Christ, Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction, the teaching of evolution, a blow job, sex ed, "Gay" day at Disneyworld] certainly suggest they are incompatible with our freedoms.

Damn. Talk about missing the point.
Posted by: grape_crush

OK, what was the point?

People fussed over Lennon, but his comments stood. Muslims fussed over the cartoons, and the west self-censored. Big diff.

Christians may not hate us for our freedoms, but the response to [The Last Temptation of Christ, Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction, the teaching of evolution, a blow job, sex ed, "Gay" day at Disneyworld] certainly suggest they are incompatible with our freedoms.
Posted by: yeah

Last I checked, Last Temp of Christ is still available, Janet's wardrobe malfunctioned as planned, evolution still gets teached, etc. Liberals pushed back. Have they pushed back against muslims about the cartoons, or did they acquiese?

Last I checked, Last Temp of Christ is still available, Janet's wardrobe malfunctioned as planned, evolution still gets teached, etc. Liberals pushed back. Have they pushed back against muslims about the cartoons, or did they acquiese?

Hey, Redstatemike. You forgot what you were arguing. You weren't basing your original claim on how liberals responded to the complaint. It was about the complaint itself.

If the Muslim response to the cartoons shows that they are incompatible with our freedoms, then the Fundamentalist response to the Piss Christ photo or the Last Temptation of Christ (etc., etc.) shows that they are also not compatible with our freedoms. Both are examples of thin-skinned religious fundamentalists not being able to stand the idea that their primary religious figure is being ridiculed by people who don't share the same faith.

You're a lot more like the Muslim fundamentalists than you'll ever admit.

obobo
If the Muslim response to the cartoons shows that they are incompatible with our freedoms, then the Fundamentalist response to the Piss Christ photo or the Last Temptation of Christ (etc., etc.) shows that they are also not compatible with our freedoms. Both are examples of thin-skinned religious fundamentalists not being able to stand the idea that their primary religious figure is being ridiculed by people who don't share the same faith.

I'm more interested in the response of liberals to the fundamentalists. One of your two examples above is an example of liberalism and free speech winning the day over fundamentalism. The other is an example of liberalism being cowed into accepting the fundamentalist's desire to censor. Guess which is which?

You're a lot more like the Muslim fundamentalists than you'll ever admit.

Really? I'm arguing that we shouldn't bow to any fundamentalist's wishes. I choose not to give special dispensation to muslims. Why do you accept their desire to censor?

Muslims fussed over the cartoons, and the west self-censored.

Just in case you still miss the point, some self-censored and some didn't. You can still find those cartoons very, very easily if you want.

And some self-censored in the case of Last Temptation of Christ and some didn't. You can still get a copy of it if you want.

Last I checked, Last Temp of Christ is still available, Janet's wardrobe malfunctioned as planned, evolution still gets teached, etc. Liberals pushed back. Have they pushed back against muslims about the cartoons, or did they acquiese?

Last I checked the cartoons were published in over fifty papers worldwide including in the U.S.

Last I checked Christians hadn't yet completed their Holy Time Machine in order to unslip Janet's top so they settled for brutal and ridiculously large fines on the broadcasters to extract their pound of flesh...so to speak.

Last I checked Christians were going so far as stacking school boards and issuing death threats to judges - or should I say "fatwas" - to get the teaching of evolution banned.

When is someone going to ask Beck, on the question of promiscuity, is he with America or with the terrorists?

Red State Mike on February 22, 2007 at 9:21 PM:

OK, what was the point? People fussed over Lennon, but his comments stood. Muslims fussed over the cartoons, and the west self-censored.

Similar outrage over remarks made about religion, simliar public outcry, similar attempts to censor.

You can still buy Lennon's music, and you can still google the 'toons.

I don't hear too much continued outrage over Lennon's remarks over 30 years after they were made. I don't anticipate that 30 years from now the 'toons will be much more than a Trivial Pursuit history category question.

Get the point now, Mike?

Big diff.

No, not really. The only distinction you've made is that once group is Muslim and the other Christian. And you seem to have only excused the Christian group for their past behavior, Mike.

"And if they hate us for our freedoms, guess what? It means they don't hate us for our actions."

It also means, by inference, that we would benefit by having fewer freedoms. And I have to agree—but only as it relates to Glenn Beck's lying, filthy mouth.

The argument over the 'toons or Lennon's music/actions still misses one big point - these were the actions of noisy minorities.

Ditto the statue of the 10 Commandments outside the courthouse...

Or the Schiavo flap...

Do you really believe the outcry over the cartoons would have been so small if a significant proportion of the world's Muslim population really cared about it more than they cared about their kid's education, or getting a promotion, or checking out the latest Bollywood blockbuster?

Anything more serious actually happen other than a lot of sound and fury? Other than a lot of reactionary (Islamist) idiots using the 'scandal' to push their own agendas?

It was a noisy minority, once again.

Don from Hawaii - You were referring to the actual person Fonda's character was based on correct? I am somewhat of an old movie buff, and this is killer trivia! What is the name, and any other good tidbits on his association with the Ryan probe? Thanks.

Red State Mike on February 22, 2007 at 9:42 PM:

One of your two examples above is an example of liberalism and free speech winning the day over fundamentalism.

No, Mike. Both are examples of free speech (didn't know that free speech was a liberal value, Mike) matched against fundamentalism.

You have no argument, Mike.

RE: HATING US FOR OUR FREEDOMS

Let's get real here, guys. Conservatives hate liberals because they think liberals have sex every night, take drugs, and otherwise have more fun in one night than a conservative has in an entire lifetime.

It's not true, of course, but it is what the perception is.

Unfortunately, rather than taking advantage of the perception to encourage more people to be liberals, liberals try to come off as "moderates", thus turning off those that are undecided, and coming off as liars to conservatives.

So here is what I think liberals should do: have sex every night, take drugs (or drink, as long as no one gets hurt), and have more fun every night than conservatives do in a lifetime -- then tell people about it.

I guarantee you the world will be a better place if you take this advice.

EOM

yeah
Last I checked the cartoons were published in over fifty papers worldwide including in the U.S.

Following your link, more like 150, with about 28 in the US (out of how many papers publishing in the US?) Of those, missing were LA Times, NY Times, Washington Post, WSJ, USA Today, Balt Sun, and pretty much every major rag in every major city in the country. Self-censored.

I don't hear too much continued outrage over Lennon's remarks over 30 years after they were made. I don't anticipate that 30 years from now the 'toons will be much more than a Trivial Pursuit history category question.

No one cares now. If Lennon made the same comment, there would be a collective yawn. But how long between The Satanic Letters fatwa and the cartoons? I'm not seeing muslims evolving to a more liberal position.

No, not really. The only distinction you've made is that once group is Muslim and the other Christian. And you seem to have only excused the Christian group for their past behavior, Mike.
Posted by: grape_crush

Bzzzzt! I am taking issue with liberals for rolling over in response to muslim's desire to censor while (properly) taking on christian fundies.

Glenn Beck and the various trolls on this board should be watching "Ghosts of Abu Ghraib" ---
a powerful expose of the abuse of prisoners in the fall of 2003, detailed by some of the soldiers and prisoners involved--playing now on HBO-E.
I am choked up and it has been on a mere twenty minutes

If anyone is interested in the issues of Guantanamo Bay, check out this SBS show on the issue of David Hicks (the Australian still in Gitmo).

It lays out the whole thing very, very powerfully.

http://www20.sbs.com.au/sbs_front/index.html

Click on the link for 'Hicks on Trial'.

So there are some Muslims and some Christians who think that, on the whole, Americans are too promiscuous. There are Hindus who think that too. And some secularists.

Are there some Christian countries run as puritanically and misogynistically as Saudi Arabia? (I mean in the present.) How about Muslim countries with as strong a freedom of the press as India or Israel?

as Janna points out, this argument is appealing to conservatives because it's a way of condemning social liberalism. Beck was actually criticising promiscuity, which isn't equivalent to social liberalism. The Muslims (well, the governing Muslims of Iran and Saudi Arabia) punish homosexuals the same whether they are promiscuous or not. Lots of liberals I know are appalled by the promiscuity of some gay people, as by some straight people, without suffering from intolerance of gays at all. There may be some conservatives who conflate liberalism with promiscuity, but not most of them.

Of those, missing were LA Times, NY Times, Washington Post, WSJ, USA Today, Balt Sun, and pretty much every major rag in every major city in the country. Self-censored.

Because once there is a controversial image it must be published in every single paper in order for it not to be "self-censorship"?

That must be why Janet Jackson's nipple was shown on the front page of every paper in the country.

Not.

If you want to get into it, the real fucking test case are images of the dead from Iraq. We see NONE in the media. No graphic images of dead and wounded Iraqis or American soldiers are shown on our news programs EVER in this country, while they're commonplace in the rest of the world. Utterly and completely sanitized here. Talk about your self-censorship. Dozens and sometimes hundreds of people are blown to bits in that country every day and yet given the absence of those images on the news you'd think Iraq was as safe and uneventful as Poughkeepsie.

This self-censorship is to appease none other than the reactionary Right in this country. It sure as hell isn't for the sake of the Left. Were Americans forced to see the ACTUAL images of war on their teevees, goofballs in Toby Keith tee shirts would have burned down the studios of the "traitorous and treasonous" CNN and MSNBC long ago.

If Mohammed is sacred to the Muslims, then Dubya's war is just as sacred to our religous and cultural extremists.

They hate us for our Trojans.

The blindness to what is happening in Europe with Muslims is almost funny.

Here is one small example. In Paris you are besieged with Muslim beggars and the gangs in the banlieues exclude the police. The French are waking up to the danger, however, and that is why tey are so friendly to Amnericans these days. Not the government, of course, which is still seeking accomodation with the jihadi states but the people know better.

In 10 years we will see a flood of immigrants here fleeing the Islamization of Europe.

This makes Glenn Beck, quite literally, a terrorist sympathizer, just like Dinesh D'Souza before him.

I think CNN should start introducing his show by saying, "Coming up next, terrorist sympathizer Glenn Beck."

I've come to the conclusion that islam itself is a religion of hate. They may hate us for our freedom or perhaps for our lack of morals. But why does Shiate hate Sunni and Sunni hate Shiate enough to commit the atrocities that they do on each other? Hate is a powerful tool for controlling the naive.

Notice how the trolls completely miss the point of the article Kevin posts:

"However, there's another reason that this argument has generated a certain amount of conservative appeal lately: it perpetuates the trope that "they hate us for our freedoms." And if they hate us for our freedoms, guess what? It means they don't hate us for our actions. And that means there's no need for us to change anything we're actually doing in the Middle East.

And that's a pretty comforting thought for conservatives, isn't it?

—Kevin Drum

And if they hate us for our freedoms, guess what? It means they don't hate us for our actions. And that means there's no need for us to change anything we're actually doing in the Middle East.

And that means we could actually be victorious in Iraq if we clean up our act here at home, and that could mean that if we are not victorious in Iraq it's because we failed to redress our moral turpitude here at home, and so when we finally pull the troops out of Iraq it won't be that we lost because the war was an ill conceived irrational act of blatant aggression planned and executed by a crew of chickenhawks who learned military strategy watching videotapes of Ken Burns's PBS series, The Civil War. No, it will be because our morals are just out the window. We're a society on the verge of moral collapse. And our promiscuity is off the charts.

Islam doesn't have the hate-mongering market cornered. Christians killed one another with an almost pornographic glee during the Troubles in Northern Ireland.

More blood has been spilled in the name of one almighty god or another than all other ideologies combined, I seem to recall reading somewhere.

Because once there is a controversial image it must be published in every single paper in order for it not to be "self-censorship"?

It was a huge story, and the pictures were central to it. Most readers probably never saw the pictures.

That must be why Janet Jackson's nipple was shown on the front page of every paper in the country...Not.

Janet Jackson's nipple was shown on the most watched TV program of the year.

If you want to get into it, the real fucking test case are images of the dead from Iraq. We see NONE in the media. No graphic images of dead and wounded Iraqis or American soldiers are shown on our news programs EVER in this country, while they're commonplace in the rest of the world. Utterly and completely sanitized here.

The cartoons *were* the story. We already know what dead people look like. We don't show dead car wreck victims or cancer patients either. Although you can watch the HBO special to see our soldiers dying on the table. Or if you're in town with military, actually talk to the wounded. And the passing of milestones such as the 1,000th dead, or a new record in dead in a month, is always duly noted.

Why do you want to see our soldier's dead mangled bodies?

...In Paris you are besieged with Muslim beggars and the gangs in the banlieues exclude the police. The French are waking up to the danger, however, and that is why tey are so friendly to Amnericans these days. Not the government, of course, which is still seeking accomodation with the jihadi states but the people know better.

In 10 years we will see a flood of immigrants here fleeing the Islamization of Europe.

I suggest a bladder control medication, Mike K.

Janet Jackson's nipple was shown on the most watched TV program of the year.

Nice try.

Why do you want to see our soldier's dead mangled bodies?

I didn't single out soldier's bodies and you know it, I said the "dead and wounded bodies of Iraqis and American soldiers."

What a disingenuous move on your part.

Why show the images of the dead in a war? Because that's what makes it real. Without those images Americans can just pretend that everything is fine and avoid making an informed judgment.

And that's what has happened with Iraq. For most of America it's an abstract news story they can hide from.

The images convey the reality. It's the images of poverty or starving children or people trapped in New Orleans that convey the reality of the story and move people to action.

Why not show the images of the dead? You know why, Mike. Conservative and hawks shit their pants at the prospect of this ever happening.

The minute accurate, graphic images of this war is displayed is the minute it's over and done with. Woken from their reverie, forced to face the truth, the American people will never allow it to go on.

I'll go you one better, though; we don't need to show images of dead soldiers (more people die in car accidents, right?) just images of the Iraqis. Once that happens there won't be any more dead soldiers anyway as we'll be bringing them home alive.

Mike K on February 22, 2007 at 10:23 PM:

Here is one small example.

Oh, you can do better than some conservative Brit tabloid, can't you?

Red State Mike on February 22, 2007 at 10:01 PM:

No one cares now. If Lennon made the same comment, there would be a collective yawn.

I beg to differ. Any person who's been dead since 1980 making a public statement would be a big deal.

But, more seriously, any person of Lennon's stature making a similar statement nowadays would prompt some backlash. Look at what happened to the Dixie Chicks for disparaging Dubya...And Natalie Maines isn't Lennon and cutting on Dubya isn't bashing God...

At least to sane people, anyway.

But how long between The Satanic Letters fatwa and the cartoons?

Satanic Verses, Mike. Almost 20 years. When is the last time you've heard of the Satanic Verses fatwah in the news? You're grasping now...

I'm not seeing muslims evolving to a more liberal position.

You could make the same statement about Christians in the US...And still be wrong.

I am taking issue with liberals for rolling over in response to muslim's desire to censor while (properly) taking on christian fundies.

And I am telling you that your 'issue' is a hallucination brought on by too many nights spent listening to people like Glenn Beck feed your paranoia and fill your mind with crap.

Show me a liberal who's 'rolling over in response to muslim's desire to censor', whatever the hell that means...

You don’t suppose Muslims might hate us for doing things like this or this or even this.

Of course, we could listen to the words of Osama bin Laden himself . Here is an excerpt from one of his 2004 recorded messages:

”No, we fight because we are free men who don't sleep under oppression. We want to restore freedom to our nation, just as you lay waste to our nation. So shall we lay waste to yours.”

But that Glenn Beck is just so much smarter than us liberals, yesiree. He has everything plum figgered out, don’t he?

Yeah - I make it a point to find pictures from international news sources and post them when I post about the sectarian civil war that is raging in Iraq as a result of Bush's Folly.

And I agree that the coffins at Dover make it real.

My nephew's skin is in the game, and I take it personal that the sacrifice is muted and that the military is at war, but America is at the mall.

Color me disgusted and cynical.

It is way to late and I am way to tired to google for a long, long list of the conservative Republicans who are being arrested, indicted, or resigning from a Congressional office for promiscuous and perverted behavior. Not mention the fraud, waste, and abuse of taxpayer money committed by Republicans.

Speaking of such things as being "hated for our freedoms" now:

'Fake Marriages' Lift Pressure - (Washington Post)

In China, gays and lesbians say societal pressure drives them into marriages of convenience.

"Convenience", meaning not wanting to be killed for being openly gay. Some like Orson Scott Card would approve of such hiding in the closet, I'm sure. I don't.

It is way too late and I am way too tired to google for a long, long list of conservative Republicans who are being arrested, indicted, and resigning Congressional seats for promiscuous and perverted behavior; but, the lists are out there.

In his book Arabian Sands, Wilfred Thesiger described a trip on camelback across the Rub' al Khali from Oman into Saudi Arabia just after WWII to look for locusts. He said the bedu he traveled had an interesting way of signaling their interest in a woman. A young man would sit beside a young woman around the campfire and run his camel prod under the sand to poke her in the butt unseen by the others around the campfire. If she ignored him, he would withdraw the prod with no dishonor. If she (as I remember it from reading it 20 years ago) faced him and smiled, they would meet out in the bushes later.

The point? All guys get horny, and Moslem guys find a way to mess around with chicks, too, even if they have emptied their last few ounces of water to perform ablutions before prayer.

He also asked some Bedu what they thought of Jews, and they asked him who Jews were, some tribe of Arabs they hadn't heard of?

Then how is Glenn Beck any different from Pat Robertson - who also blamed America for the attack on 9/11?
Posted by: ckelly

glenn can't leg press 2000 lbs ... and he doesn't have god's own age defying shake.

They hate us because we're different from them. Wasn't that always obvious? It's what they've said all along.

And, I don't want to give up these differences. I want to preserve and protect tolerance for gays, equality for women, religious freedom, political freedom, and all the rest. I wouldn't change one single thing about America to placate those fanatics.

It's the America-haters who are surprised. In their view America and the west should be blamed for the hatred that radical Islam bears toward others. Get a clue. Their hatred is caused by themselves and their version of Islam, not by us.

The only blame I would assign to the west is taking too little action to halt the spread of radical Islam.

They hate us because we're different from them.

Maybe a few fanatics, but we have our own version of ultra-religious nutjobs who hate everyone different than them.

The stone-cold, unspinnable fact is, most of the non-fanatic types who hate us none-the-less hate us for our meddling ways, our hubris and our propensity for making a sport of who can fuck the indigenous people the hardest.

Their hatred is caused by themselves and their version of Islam, not by us.

Damn, but I feel sorry for you, ex-liberal. You really do keep waking up on the wrong side of history, don't you.

But the response to attacks on Mohammed are a big deal. Fatwa to kill the author of Satanic Verses. Riots about some cartoons. Murdering Theo Van Gogh. Those are all things condoned in the large by muslims, and incompatible with western society.
Posted by: Red State Mike

you really believe this bullshit, don't you? It fits with your previous racist anti-muslim commentary.

I'm not even sure you realize when your occasional (but reliably persistent) racism peeks through.

Muslim Scholars, Leaders Condemn Cartoon Violence

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) deplored Sunday the attacks on the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus, describing them as detrimental to the image of Islam.

I want to preserve and protect tolerance for gays, equality for women, religious freedom, political freedom, and all the rest. I wouldn't change one single thing about America to placate those fanatics.

We're talking about conservatards, right?

Because they're (you're) the ones who've always worked at discriminating against gays, fought against equal rights for women, casually disenfranchised the poor and minorities of political rights, and been intolerant of religions other than your own.

Just so we're clear.

people polled around the world do not believe there is, in fact, any clash of civilisations.

I was speaking to my spouse, who immigrated to the US from Korea, about respect for parents. All cultures respect their parents. My spouse usually thinks Americans do not respect their parents and are decadent, but she recognizes even Americans love and respect their parents, despite my example.

when we finally pull the troops out of Iraq it won't be that we lost because the war was an ill conceived irrational act of blatant aggression planned and executed by a crew of chickenhawks who learned military strategy watching videotapes of Ken Burns's PBS series, The Civil War. No, it will be because our morals are just out the window. We're a society on the verge of moral collapse. And our promiscuity is off the charts.

Sounds like premature ejaculation caused by guilt from the act of sex. And its true. We are a society on the verge of moral collapse when we invade and occupy other countries to seize their natural resources. We are a society on the verge of moral collapse when we glorify the soldier's obedience to covetous, deadly commands. Our immorality gives us guilt, which becomes rationalized as a shortcoming - a weakness - immoral and the reason for our failure. The US invaded Iraq and does not have the patience and moral strength to stay in longer and succeed because we know it is wrong to invade, kill and steal. At the same time we want to give Iraqis democracy, liberty, rebuild their schools and free them from tyranny.

Those who adovate raping and stealing are also the ones who decry the immorality of their society, which they claim is superior to the society with the coveted goods. Our conflicting desires to lustily rape and lovingly satisfy need to be reconciled in order for us to renounce militant solutions to political problems.

TRANSPOSE

Blue Girl, Red State (aka Global Citizen): Maybe a few fanatics,

Yes, it's the fanatics I meant to allude to. The ones who commit murder and terrorism in the name of their religion. Unfortunately, they are not that few in number. They are committing terrorism in many parts of the world: the US, Canada, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Europe.

The stone-cold, unspinnable fact is, most of the non-fanatic types who hate us none-the-less hate us for our meddling ways, our hubris and our propensity for making a sport of who can fuck the indigenous people the hardest.

And, some love us for our meddling ways.

Now, "If you talk to these sheiks, they’ll tell you that they’re in no hurry to see the Americans leave al-Anbar," he said.

"One thing Sheikh Sattar keeps saying is he wants al-Anbar to be like Germany and Japan and South Korea were after their respective wars, with a long-term American presence helping ... put them back together," MacFarland said. "The negative example he cites is Vietnam. He says, yeah, so, Vietnam beat the Americans, and what did it get them? You know, 30 years later, they’re still living in poverty."

http://alphabetcity.blogspot.com/2007/02/ramadi-shaykhs-in-no-hurry-to-see.html

god's own age defying shake

I started a religion called the New Shakers, which is also nown as the Church of Latter Day Beats.

Fatwa to kill the author of Satanic Verses. Riots about some cartoons. Murdering Theo Van Gogh. Those are all things condoned in the large by muslims, and incompatible with western society.

"Fatwas" on Iranian and Venezuelan leaders and Iranian scientists by right-wing bloggers and televangelists; "fatwas" on liberals by right-wing talk show blowhards and skinny blonde neonazis; and "fatwas" on judges, abortion doctors, film directors and country music singers by ordinary everyday right-wing rabble.

Murdering Martin Luther King, Jr and shooting James Meredith.

Those are all things condoned in the large by American Christians when they happened, and incompatible with western society.

What's a an allegedly enlightened democracy to do?

I'd be the first to punch Joan Goldberg in the face...just for purely ideological reasons, of course.

I'd be the first to punch Joan Goldberg in the face...just for purely ideological reasons, of course.

Only if you pulled me down the stairs and stepped on my back! :)

Here is the email I sent off to Talk of the Nation today when they actually gave him a microphone on the issue of Global Warming (he maintains that we just need to adapt to the deforestation and desertification because it will cost money to confront the problems).

We can't afford NOT to stop global warming! Why is Jonah Goldberg even being taken seriously on this (or any) topic? He is qualified to address neither economics nor science, and his "shiny, happy people, technology will save us" vision is delusional at best. Unbelievable! Again I am left looking about helplessly for the missing "liberal media" that we keep hearing so much about. Even NPR, the last bastion of common sense, has fallen through the looking glass and given this unqualified gasbag a microphone to spread his propaganda about a serious topic! For shame!

--{my real name}

The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...' --Isaac Asimov

The only blame I would assign to the west is taking too little action to halt the spread of radical Islam. - ex-liberal

Wow, so the west is perfect, without fault, flawless. They must be awfully jealous.