Brown vs. the corrupt liberal democrats in Washington

got it right again Jim! Massachusetts agrees with you.

Marie...you can tell when my blog facts are too hard for the liberals to debate. They either attack me with the most vile and vicious language or attacks on me and my family or they run for cover. You be the judge.

If you make up extremely bad or unpleasant lies about our sitting President, like call him a terrorist or as bad as Hitler, would that fall in the definition of "anti-American?" If you attack the "people or the government" is that anti-Americanism? Yes, if you trust the dictionary. Now, if you express those words in print that our President is like Saddam or bin Laden, or Hitler, and you lie as much as you can so to harm him or her and then try to push your falsehood on Americans as if it was not your opinion but the truth (the key issue) and all to get your political parties candidate in office, is that not acting anti-American? If not, than what is? – Jim Hayett Sept 10 2008
I agree with this whole heartedly, but now I have a question, does this only apply to a liberal when they a conservative, and does it apply to a conservative when they attack a liberal. If it only applies to a liberal then why does it not apply to conservatives when they are guilty of the exact same behavior?

I agree with your quote from September 10 2008 whole heartedly, but now I have a question, does this only apply to a liberal when they attack a conservative, and does it apply to a conservative when they attack a liberal. If it only applies to a liberal then why does it not apply to conservatives? And why not?

onlyoneme...no, it applies to everyone and I will defend any president, congressman, or senator when those type of LIES come up. I stood behind President Clinton (which you fail to mention from Jakes comment which I see an a different blog was also twisted) when he was being accused of all his corruption and womanizing in and outside the White House (which we all know was true). But I stood up for Bubba.

Now, can you show me in the above blog where I'm lying when I mention facts about our president or others liberal democrats that would make me "anti-American?"

only...here's the actual blog. It was defending and describing the word "anti-American" since the lies and unwarranted attacks where on Bush.

9/10/08...That's been a hotly debated issue as of late with us bloggers. So let's do the so called "scientific" approach and make some sense of this. Here is the Merriam-Webster definition of anti-American: (1773): "opposed or hostile to the people or the government policies of the U.S." So what am I missing when I call someone who is "opposed or hostile to the people or the government (our sitting President) policies of the U.S.?" Or, anti-American.

If you make up extremely bad or unpleasant lies about our sitting President, like call him a terrorist or as bad as Hitler, would that fall in the definition of "anti-American?" If you attack the "people or the government" is that anti-Americanism? Yes, if you trust the dictionary. Now, if you express those words in print that our President is like Saddam or bin Laden, or Hitler, and you lie as much as you can so to harm him or her and then try to push your falsehood on Americans as if it was not your opinion but the truth (the key issue) and all to get your political parties candidate in office, is that not acting anti-American? If not, than what is?

I'm not talking about opinions, beliefs, impressions. I'm talking about pushing those fallacies (opinions) etc., as if they were the truth.

If you do not fit into this definition or category, than I truly and sincerely apologize. If you do, shame on you.

I did not say you were lying in there Jim. I was only curious if you views went both ways. Based on what you said; “it applies to everyone and I will defend any president, congressman, or senator when those type of LIES come up. I stood behind President Clinton (which you fail to mention from Jakes comment which I see an a different blog was also twisted) when he was being accused of all his corruption and womanizing in and outside the White House (which we all know was true). But I stood up for Bubba.” (I was very disappointed with him at that time, I did vote for Bubba; however, that was before I turned to Libertarianism. I will vote republican if I like the candidate like I did for Ron Paul. Nevertheless, I will most likely vote libertarian in all the upcoming elections.
I did not see that comment, probably because I didn’t read all of the blogs from that era. I only read your blogs from Sept 10 and Oct 31. I found it by binging your name, one of the links was Amy satire blog posted Oct 2, after you had left in which she described you as a “closet Liberal’ for all your charity work, which BTW I do commend you on.
I am not aware of all the insults thrown back and forth between you and Jake, and frankly I don’t believe I need to know about all of the insults. That is for the two of you to share.
After reading the comments and your description as to what happened, I could not blame you for not wanting to continue blogging.

Onlyoneme...you and I actually agree on much. Its just how we display our ideologies or facts to one another. Especially when we don't agree!

You know Jim we do agree on a number of things. I do agree that Obama has broken many of his promises; I hesitate to call it campaign lies, however. I don’t think there is a politician alive that has lived up to all the promises they made to gain office, did they all lie to get into office. I prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt and a chance to prove themselves, before I get ready to tar and feather.
However, it is only natural that there are a number of things that you have said that I do not agree with. I do not believe that liberals are the danger you and Amy make them out to be. I do not and will never listen to talk radio, I listen to the radio to be entertained and I don’t see talk radio as entertainment. I have never held any faith in polls and polling, I believe it contributes to stereotyping.

Only...I would be surprised if you did agree with my liberal theory. However, what I do know about liberals, and you seem to admit it, is that liberals use the excuse "all Presidents lie to get our votes". I'm not so sure about that. Bush, Clinton (1st term), Reagan. If they did, their lies could never compare to the amount (assume I underlined amount) or the seriousness of Obama's and Reid's.

Polls: They are reliable with Rasmussen the most accurate to this day. Look how the polls swung severely against Obama, Reid, Pelosi and others and then compare that to how America just voted in the elections from Nov. up to this last Tuesday. Look how the polls went against the GOP in mid to late 2008 when McCain had a nice led on Obama. Rasmussen again called that move and all from their polling results.