Congress has lost its mind...

[TheMercenary]

CROWLEY: Enemies of the stateAdministration smears some opponents, arrests others

By Monica Crowley

During President George W. Bush's two terms, you couldn't drive far without seeing a particular bumper sticker: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." Now that Democrats control the White House and Congress, the left treats dissent as the lowest form of treason. When the left agitates over government policies, it's considered righteous anger. When the right - and much of the center - agitate, it's painted as the rantings of the criminally and violently insane.

With Obamacare signed into law, Democrats have stopped congratulating themselves long enough to notice that the American people aren't cheering on the sidelines. According to a CNN poll released last week, 58 percent oppose President Obama's handling of Obamacare, while Gallup shows him this week with a 46 percent job approval, his lowest yet. A CBS poll released after the House of Representatives passed Obamacare showed Speaker Nancy Pelosi's favorable rating at 11 percent and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's at 8 percent, higher only than Beelzebub's.

Aware that their "reform" is rejected by most of the American people and that they will face serious consequences in November, the Democrats have decided that the best defense is a good offense: Attack those who oppose Obamacare. It doesn't seem to bother most Democrats that that pernicious strategy puts them in the weird and politically untenable position of attacking most of the American people.

Over the past week, a parade of Democrats have accused members of the Tea Party movement and other opponents of Obamacare of threatening them. There may be an infinitesimal number of looney tunes who have engaged in that kind of unacceptable behavior out of hundreds of millions of Americans. But the Democrats have dishonestly extrapolated from a few claimed incidents to taint all those who reject Obamacare as wild-eyed wackos.

If this sounds familiar, it's because the Democrats have shown a disturbing pattern of demonizing those who disagree with them. A year ago, Mr. Obama's Department of Homeland Security issued a report for law enforcement called "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment." It suggested that anyone who opposed abortion, illegal immigration and oppressive taxes, supported gun rights or served in Iraq and Afghanistan should be singled out for special attention. Why? Because such people might burst into a spasm of violence at any time. There was no mention of being on the lookout for potential violence committed by Islamic jihadists, even after actual acts of violence committed by an Islamic jihadist in Little Rock. (The Fort Hood shooting happened later.)

In other words, if you go to church, believe in protecting innocent life, own a gun or defend your country, the Democrats consider you a potential enemy of the state. It was no coincidence that the Homeland Security report was issued just as the Tea Party movement was gaining real national traction.

Not surprisingly, then, once they had passed their widely unpopular health care bill, the Democrats moved quickly to delegitimize opposition to it. Their defiant move in the face of overwhelming popular resistance gave them another excuse to equate big-government progressives with good patriots and small government advocates with potentially violent nutcases who must be watched.

As if on cue, this week, Homeland Security, the FBI and the Department of Justice's Joint Terrorism Task Force carried out raids against a purported "Christian militia group" in the Midwest. According to reports, nine people have been charged with plotting to kill police officers with "weapons of mass destruction." The indictment describes the group as an "anti-government extremist organization" and the FBI special agent in charge, Andrew Arena, cast it as "radical and fringe." That may be, but the description has a conveniently familiar ring to it.

Interestingly, the head of the Michigan branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Dawud Walid, rushed to announce the raids at a CAIR banquet at about the same time the story became public. "We salute the FBI for breaking up a militia that was seeking to harm American Muslims," he said. It's curious that he would know that at a time when the FBI still had the investigation under seal. (We're still waiting to hear why Homeland Security and the FBI chose to use the descriptive word "Christian" when they seem unable to use the word "Muslim" in connection with Islamic extremism.)

It's mind-blowingly coincidental that these raids on a supposedly "Christian" militia group would come at the exact moment that Democrats were trying to change public opinion on Obamacare by claiming persecution by their opponents. They have cast Tea Partiers, conservatives, independents, Christians and militia members as all cut from the same unstable, volatile cloth. How can anyone take their opposition to the Democrats' agenda seriously when they're toting guns and being raided by Homeland Security and the FBI? They're all nuts, don't you know?

The Democrats handle dissent by isolating it, smearing it and delegitimizing it in order to crush it. The warning should be clear: If you have small-government, traditional values, you may be considered by your own leadership to be an enemy of the state.

Monica Crowley is a nationally syndicated radio host, a panelist on "The McLaughlin Group" and a Fox News contributor

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...=home_showcase

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

CROWLEY: Enemies of the stateAdministration smears some opponents, arrests others



Monica Crowley is a nationally syndicated radio host, a panelist on "The McLaughlin Group" and a Fox News contributor

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...=home_showcase

Monica Crowley is another one of those blonde bombshells on the right...just not as well known as Coulter or others.

You whine about propaganda....but pretend that this partisan opinion piece is not propaganda?

So whats your point?

[TheMercenary]

Like or not, her assessment is accurate.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Like or not, her assessment is accurate.

Of course, we know that you believe with all your heart that conservative talking points are factual and liberal talking points are propaganda.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Of course, we know that you believe with all your heart that conservative talking points are factual and liberal talking points are propaganda.

Fail.

It has little with "conservative talking points", for you it has only to do with anyone who disagrees with your Demoncratic and White House talking points. Just admit it. You continue to be a shill for the Party of the Dems. I support no party.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Like or not, her assessment is accurate.

Its simple, Merc.

Prove that her assessment is accurate...and not with partisan opinions but with objective cites.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Its simple, Merc.

Prove that her assessment is accurate...and not with partisan opinions but with objective cites.

It is an assessment. I could give a shit if you agree with anything I post. Your partisan opinions are not important to me. If you think it is bullshit prove it is not accurate, you are the one who is disputing it... And while you dispute it, use objective cites.

So you demand that I provide cites to back it up when I state and fact or an assessment and you demand that I prove your links and assessments are not factual. No burden of proof is ever on you.

Nice try.....I never was on a debate team, but I think it is fair to say that if we were in a formal debate, you would have been tossed from the stage.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

So you demand that I provide cites to back it up when I state and fact or an assessment and you demand that I prove your links and assessments are not factual. No burden of proof is ever on you.

Nice try.....I never was on a debate team, but I think it is fair to say that if we were in a formal debate, you would have been tossed from the stage.

You are the one who is disputing the assessment, dispute it. I am good with the assessment as it stands. Prove it wrong, pretty simple, I am not asking for much. You are so sure of your convictions. All I am asking is for you to pony up. I generally agree with what she stated, not all of it, but generally she reflect the feelings of a lot of people today. If you think it is wrong, state where and why you think it is wrong. Oh, and cite with objective data, or if you like just state your opinion....

You know, the funny thing is if your name was UG, people here would be all over your ass...you say much of the same as UG, but his are more humorous and less hateful.

But your "friends" are more than happy to criticize UG, but give you a pass. I'm been around long enough now to know how it plays out here.

I would love to get you in a formal debate here...no links, an objective moderator to ask questions.....but I dont think you have the balls to do it.

Let the people decide.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

You know, the funny thing is if your name was UG, people here would be all over your ass...you say much of the same as UG.

But your "friends" are more than happy to criticize UG, but give you a pass.

I would love to get you in a formal debate here...no links, an objective moderator to ask questions.....but I dont think you have the balls to do it.

Let the people decide.

No, really, I am completely open. You have the floor. If you want to dispute the "assessment" that this person has put forward, and so many agree with, please do so. You have my undivided attention. If it is so "partisan" you should be able to just pick it apart.

I respectfully await your response.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

No, really, I am completely open. You have the floor. If you want to dispute the "assessment" that this person has put forward, and so many agree with, please do so. You have my undivided attention. If it is so "partisan" you should be able to just pick it apart.

I respectfully await your response.

Respectfully?

Come on, dude. What ever I post and cite, you will immediately call propaganda or talking points. Anything that contradicts you opinion is automatically propaganda...the CBO, the GAO, independent economists, etc.

That is hardly respectful...or honest.

Find an objective moderator...even from within your family here.....Let that person post questions and we offer our response w/o attacking the other's opinion.

Set a time and lets do it!

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Respectfully?

Come on, dude. What ever I post and cite, you will immediately call propaganda or talking points. Anything that contradicts you opinion is automatically propaganda...the CBO, the GAO, independent economists, etc.

That is hardly respectful...or honest.

Find an objective moderator...even from within your family here.....Let that person post questions and we offer our response w/o attacking the other's opinion.

Set a time and lets do it!

1. The GAO and CBO are not independent. They take data that is given to them by the Administration or Congress and produce results that are only based on the data given them. That is an established fact.

2. I do not represent any one party. You have stated on a number of occassions that you do. You are not objective. I am not objective because I disagree with much, but not all, of what the current Administration is doing to our country.

Oh, and I think Pelosi is an evil bitch and should be ousted from power by any legal means available. (I know you love her)

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Set a time and lets do it!

How about a duel?

So I take it that you are not interested in an objective/moderated discussion where you have to justify your opinion and not simply attack.

I propose UT as moderator...our own Tm Russert or Tony Snow...two late (but only one great) talking head/moderators types.

Let me know if you change your mind and we can set the rules with UT.