And perhaps a few points for discussion, debate, correction, and, upon refinement, use in getting a grip on who we are in light of RW propaganda.
I don't pretend to speak for everyone here but I will say there is a hint of truth in what EnderRS said since it does apply to a few people... very, very few. It does NOT however apply to the WHOLE COMMUNITY... au contraire, it is probably not the truth for the vast, vast majority of people here. It may be that coming in with a conservative mindset, one tainted in the 90s by a group who ran BS conspiracy stories and trotted out a new country-endangering controversy every week on behalf of the Clinton administration, that conservatives are overly inclined to paint with such a broad brush everyone here. The lefty model for this is something like assuming that all right wingers are apocalyptic, bible thumpers hell bent on christianizing 'me.'
The commenter formerly known as EnderRS lays out the following hanky-twisters as regards the DailyKos (and I will expand to liberal) community:
Here is what I can't live with and am not interested in living with:
* Because Bush is started a wrong, misguided, and unfortunate war in Iraq, the President of Iran is either similar or better (mostly better if you read here). The poor misrepresented President of Theocracy of Iran is somehow being unfairly attacked by US and is the victim in all of this. The theocracy of Iran that funds Hezbollah and other terror groups, is hurtling towards acquiring nuclear weapons, trains and funds shiite militias in Iraq with the effect of further destabilization, is somehow the good guy or at the very least is entitled to keep doing what they are doing because Bush is "evil".
* Extra security measures that pale in comparison with what we've had implemented in previous eras (WW2, Civil War) are proof of US hurtling towards Fascism, Dictatorship, end of Democracy.
* Christian fundies are a greater threat than millions of Islamists clamoring for the destruction of everything Western.
* AIPAC is the real reason why we do what we do, and the implications thereof.
* Constant gleeful producing of juicy morsels to claim that our economy is flying towards recession, and attributing the entire state of our Economy to Bush.
* Evil neocons blah blah blah blah.
* Conservatism is dead.
* Republicans and conservatives are enemies.
* Enemy of my enemy is a friend. (Castro, Chavez, Ahmadinejad)
* Many other things that bugged me and raised my blood pressure but that I do not want to trouble my beautiful mind remembering.
So, with that in mind, I respond:
- Don't confuse the lack of a pants-wetting concern with sympathy. I can't think of anyone who thinks Ahmadinejad a sympathetic character. Rather, we see one hell of a lot of Bush in him, i.e., authoritarian, simple, abusive of both religious sentiment & fear of the world beyond the borders, and manipulative of current events in order to do/say things that his own people don't want. In short, it is strange to see Bush attacking someone very much like himself. To the point, because we have seen so much manipulation and duplicity, coupled with incompetence, most of us find it very difficult to take any calls of a threat from Iran seriously. We can certainly understand Iran's desire to acquire nuclear weapons in the face of a belligerent US government that launched at least one unnecessary war (remember the Taliban were willing to give up OBL and other AQ leaders in exchange for a promise not to attack) on its borders and one that called it part of the Axis of Evil. But, that's not sympathy, just understanding of a theoretical since no one has actually established Iran's intent to this. Further, we can assume a deeper rationality on the part of Iran, i.e., not wanting to seeing itself destroyed by a much more powerful nation, since they have provided, and still do provide, extensive assistance in Afghanistan with rebuilding efforts, providing supplies and equipment, building residences & camps for refugees, and feeding the same. They also were a big factor in reining in Shiite violence in the early days of the Iraq war, essentially telling Shia leaders in Iraq that they were on their own if they wanted open violence against American forces. That changed when the Americans seemed to just stand by in the face of multiple bloody attacks carried out by Sunnis (with, literally, a little provocation by newly-present AQ - al Zarqawi didn't declare jihad against American forces until 2004, BTW, and prior to that was protected by American and Kurdish forces since his group's focus was on cross-border attacks inside Iran... a Sunni-Shia thing). So, take all of that recent history of actions by Iran, couple it with a lack of decent intelligence on Iran's nuclear ambitions, add in the fact that the US was making tremendous diplomatic headway in a reformist-minded Iran during the Clinton years, and compound it with the laughable statements of neo-con, W-administration sympathizers that Iran is and has been in league with its very prominent, avowed by both sides, enemy, i.e., Al Qaeda, and you have a group of people able to see the bigger picture and think this is indicative of: the bloodlust/ oil greed/ power grab actions we have seen to date by these people and, most frighteningly, they have so endangered our security that Americans and allies would have a damnably hard time taking them seriously should a real threat arise.
- Slippery slope. First, civil liberties infractions don't need to be physical to be real. Much as the perception of a conflict of interest is itself often an actual conflict of interest, the very fact that any American should fear for his/her civil liberties means that we have broached a line we never should have. Furthermore, we abhor weakness and anyone who does not value their freedom more than their security understands far, far too little of what it means to be American and thus has forfeited any perch from which one can dare claim to speak as a patriot or for most Americans.
- There are more Christian fundies with selectively violent biblical interpretations living within our borders than there are Muslims preferring the Koran's violence over its other messages. And, more of the former have committed acts against the civil rights of Americans than the latter even if the latter have been more grand in scope and impact.
- AIPAC does have undue influence on our political process and, perhaps most sadly, represents the belligerent minority in Israel where debate over the Israel/Palestine question is much more balanced, much more open, and much more liberal than the policies espoused by our politicians when kowtowing to the group. In fact, it would probably be a great surprise to most Americans that a majority in Israel favor giving back land, sharing Jerusalem, opening wider diplomatic and economic ties with other countries in the region, and working with Palestinians to gain control of the security situation and help rebuild the Palestinian economy. It would probably surprise most Americans that there is even a real, public debate about these things in Israel. As with America, so too Israel, and so too Palestine. A group of the power hungry and wealthy wish to lose neither power nor wealth and abuse a long history through the classic religious manipulation to maintain their hold and extend conflict, & disrupt moves towards real peaceful settlements of the grievances.
- There is and has been more than enough to suggest a slow, small recovery from the downturn in 2001 and more than enough to suggest that what little has been gained economically since Bush became president could be ready to lurch downwards. I don't think most people blame this solely, or even mostly, on Bush. Most seem to be willing to give some due blame to Clinton for his all-too-close relationship with business leaders that seemed to favor the powerful over the powerless, as well. I would be willing to bet that most here understand all too well that the potential downturn offered up by the indicators is something that has been 15-20+ years in the making. What we do know is that trickle down doesn't work beyond the models produced by Norquist's lackeys on their computers (in the building next to mine where I can see some of them actually plugging their USB cables into their waste bins to upload the input data), that executive actions and legislation passed by recent Congresses have done far more harm than good to the economy (tax breaks that overwhelmingly favor the wealthy, contracting that favors select GOP donors, blind eyes turned to corporate wrongdoing, a complete rejection of environmental concerns and an insistence that everyone carry on as before which has stifled our ability to meet the likely future and when addressing the concerns could lead to new industries and jobs that would carry positive long-term and income-generation opportunities, and even programs written specifically to enhance the wealth and perceptions of success of a few - Bush's brother's educational products, for example, etc.). Anyone who knows anything about economics also knows that deficit spending, especially for a war, has a strong probability of sucking capital away from longer-term investments with deeper impact in favor of short-term injections into an economy.
- Evil neo-cons? Read what they have written, what they have done, what they are now saying and doing, and read the first point above again. I remember many of these actors from the days of their BS fear mongering over Soviet intentions, and burying of CIA and DIA assessments of Soviet military and economic strength, in favor of continued economic extractions for the over-sized war machine.
- If so-called conservatives continue contortions of logic and reason in order to defend almost anything a claimed conservative politician does, conservatism is dead. If conservatism now represents the policies of its former, mostly untrue rhetoric, i.e., big-government, tax & spend, only worse since it is intrusive government, tax less & spend more, conservatism is dead. If paleo-conservatives who dare to point out rightly that current so-called conservatives are more dangerous to America and Americans than their worst fears of DFHs continue to be shunted aside as no longer useful, conservatism is dead. If GOP candidates cling to W's skirt in announcing future policies, not only conservatism but perhaps the GOP is dead.
- Republicans and conservatives are enemies, to one another. The former have also shown themselves to be enemies of the Constitution and the ideals which have served us for most of our country's existence.
- Externally, Bush is not the enemy. In fact, it is the very fact that he has done so much damage to us in terms of reputation, economy, diplomacy, respect, rights, and security that so infuriates us, i.e., he is supposed to represent us and now, thanks to his re-election, the rest of the world believes that he truly does. He is the enemy internally; if that were not the case, we would see many looking to outside help to forcefully overthrow our government. Instead, he is our political foe and one who has hurt all of us enormously and one who should be removed Constitutionally and one whose policies we will spend the next decades attempting to clean up, dispose of, and recover from.
- No comment.