Why Are Liberals So Rude to the Right?

This article brings up an interesting question and makes some good points, but I sure don't like its conclusion. It calls for more civility from liberals toward conservatives, but the writer forgets that it is rude to kill millions of people, rude to steal their resources, rude to destroy the environment, rude to fleece taxpaying citizens, etc. When someone voted for Bush Jr a second time, or voted for McCain or Romney, they were committing an act of rudeness that would persist for decades and result in immense suffering for millions of people. It's not like cutting me off in traffic or stealing my parking place at the supermarket or interrupting me in the middle of a sentence, something that's over in a moment.

After becoming aware of how Bush Jr and his administration twisted language, lied, and manipulated the public in order to create a "war" against a pathetically weak and broken country (which happened to be sitting atop vast pools of oil), a country that had nothing to do with the 19 Saudis who supposedly perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, to have voted for him a second time was an act of profound rudeness. I would go further and say it was an incremental war crime, each Bush vote a grain of sand weighing down a lever that re-opened the White House door to a bona fide criminal, a mass murderer and thief.

My Libertarian friend Tony of course will argue that I was just as rude to vote for the war criminal Barak Obama. But that wouldn't be fair. There were no good choices in 2008, but there were a lot of less-crappy choices that at least weren't acts of BLATANT rudeness. When I voted for Obama the first time, he wasn't yet a war criminal. McCain, who supported 95 percent of Bush's policies, represented the status quo, the elite .001 percent, not we the people. He was the chosen figurehead for the most dangerous and destructive enemy facing our nation: the transnational oligarchs who now rule and oppress us. So to actually have voted FOR that clown was profoundly rude and selfish, not to mention stupid and evil. But to have voted for Ron Paul or Obama or not to have voted at all--those were at least tries at ameliorating a bad situation that was statistically guaranteed to happen if some action wasn't taken. And while I have zero respect for non-voters, at least they didn't (directly) have blood on their hands from choosing one of the two corporate-stooge war criminals set out for us in a rigged election, an election, it has now become clear, the elites couldn't lose.

By my own arguments, though, Tony would have some grounds to be rude to me for voting for Obama the second time. Still, it was only voting for Romney that was BLATANTLY rude, because Romney was so blatantly emblematic of everything that is wrong in our world today. Romney the billionaire was a symbol for capital being more valuable than people. If given a choice between Nixon and Stalin, anybody in their right mind would chose Nixon.

Should we exhibit our best manners to rapists? To thieves? To murderers? For thousands of years humans have shamed, shunned, and made fun of bad rude humans.


  1. You miss the point.

    I am trying, as with others, to get the rest of the voting public to quit playing the voting game EXACTLY like the PTB want you to.

    The ONLY way the elistist controlled two- party slaughter chute will be overturned is to refuse to give compromised representatives, incumbents, and would be representatives the vote.

    There are good folks in the Dem and Repub party, most certainly, but it takes diligence and wisdom to recognize them.

    What excuse do smart voters have for voting for Benedict Arnolds.

    Jeff, IMHO your voting pattern is akin to voting for Rat Poison in your food.

    Q. What does rat poison have to do with this discussion?

    A. Simple. When you vote for a representative whose positions are poisonous, that is what you will get.

    But.. it is not just anecdotal. It is literal too.

    In this example below, note how many Dem Senators & Repub Senators voted that..

    “you do not have a right to know there is Rat Poison in your Food”

    Rat Poison?

    Yes. Rat Poison.

    The extensive, long term French study of GMOs fed to rats demonstrated deadly increases in cancer, and hugely enlarged organs, and premature death.
    Rat died from eating GMOs
    Therefore... GMOs are Rat Poison
    GMOs Cause Tumors, Organ Damage, and Premature Death in Rats

    71 Senators said, essentially, .... you do not have a right to know whether your food contains Rat Poison.

    Being sucked into the lesser of two evils compromise, folks continue voting Republicans or Democrats without scrutinizing the votes of their representatives with a fine toothed comb.

    Or even if they do scrutinize, and know choices offered them are wicked, they excuse their support using the lesser of two-evils choice mem, excused under the perception that this person is less wicked than the other.

    Indeed, they will play the “ I know he/or she has voted for wars, Monsanto, NDAA, stripping myself, my kids, and grandkids of their Bill of Rights, but this Dem/Repub is better than the opposite choice.

    If the US wiped out 3 million Iraqis from 1991 to 2013 with Gulf One, Sanctions, and Gulf Two, then...
    ..an attack on Iran will probably be 6 million.

    Hillary laughs at the idea of bombing Iran.
    Might as well put a moustache on the SheDevil and give her the vote.

    If you vote for her in 2016, you might as well join Blackwater/Xe and become a volunteer mercenary and kill Iranians.

    Stop voting for unenlightened devils. All it does is empower evil.

    Therefore.. after that segue, back to the Rat Poison
    .. when you vote for one of these bastard CongressCritters, Senators, or Hillary or Jeb (both will vote for Monsanto).. you are voting for Rat Poison in your food

    Hillary’s Law firm represented Monsanto
    US Ambassadors under her are pushing GMOs on countries abroad,

    it naturally follows she is pro – the right of Rat Poison peddler Monsanto to put this poison in your food without labeling

    You know darned well Jeb will continue the same elitist criminal paradigm.

    I hope Steven doesn’t mind, but he has written that he will not vote for either Jeb or Hillary if that is what the elitists try to stack the deck with.

    Will you vote for Rat Poison in 2016 and attacking Iran.. or stand on principle?

    Stand Up!

    Per the Rat Poison choices....
    To wit:
    Here is a what I am referring to, from Lucretia:

    We Know Who You Are: 71 Senators Reject States’ Rights to Label GMOs
    By Katherine Paul
    Organic Consumers Association, May 30, 2013

  2. You make a great point Tony. I think an extraterrestrial sociologist with an IQ that dwarfed human IQ's would consider the man I voted for twice--Obama--a far more dangerous and criminal terrorist than the 19 Saudis who supposedly perpetrated 9/11. Obama has started 4 new nuclear power plants! All intelligent alien sociologists would consider this tantamount to genocide because logic dictates that this is so, at least on a planet like ours that is inundated daily with free energy.

    HOWEVER, if you're a prisoner and your jailer gives you a real choice between eating bread laced with 5% rat poison or bread laced with 10% rat poison, you'd be a fool to chose organic broccoli over the two choices given, since you know for a fact that most of the other prisoners will never do so, and since you know for a fact that at dinner time, either 5% or 10% rat poison bread will be served.

    We ARE in a kind of prison. When almost exactly half of the prisoners actually freely CHOOSE to have more rather than less rat poison, you realize that your prison is much stronger than the bars on your cell or the arms of the nightstick wielding guards. Probably the strongest and most impenetrable aspect of your prison is the ignorance of half of the prisoners.

    You know for a FACT that the prisoners aren't ready to support your logical revolution, i.e., the refusal to vote for rat poison at all. The FACT is discernible from simple statistics. The prisoners who voted for MORE rat poison are demonstrably brainwashed, selfish, ignorant, and even stupid. They cannot be viable comrades in your revolution. Not only are they perpetuating the broken 2-party system of voting, but they're voting for the most extreme choice, the one guaranteed to hurt them the most, the one that works only for the bosses of the rich warden.

    So just as you can't plant corn in the winter ice, perhaps your 3rd-party voting revolution is premature, and can't happen until most of the ignorant, selfish, narrow minded Republican fundamentalist Christians die off (or are killed for their rudeness).

  3. Great Graphic!
    So... in your example, you choose the lesser poisoned bread.
    But the analogy does not hold.
    Because in the elections ARE offered 5% poison, 10% poison, OR organic brocolli
    Yet, you choose to leave the brocolli uneaten.
    Worse, I guess by inference, your chosen choice is the 5% bread.
    So you can agonize over a longer period?
    I choose Brocolli.
    If the others wish to eat the bread, go ahead.
    But all organic offerings will not comprise the full menu until the tainted bread is rejected.
    Now, back to the real world.
    If it is Hillary and Jeb, anybody who votes for Hillary, will be, and is, (using your previously oft stated characterizations) as complicit as those who voted for George Bush the second go around.
    When it comes to war with Iran, she will be the next GW.
    At least the first time around with George, everybody who voted for GW had no idea he and his claque of thugs would launch a war based on bogus, fraudulent, and stove-piped intelligence.
    In 2016, Hillary voters will have no such excuse.
    All the little imps and devils dance with glee and anticipation.
    Jeff, if you vote for Hillary, you must necessarily, by your past stated standards, stand with the GW voters of the second go around.

  4. > Because in the elections ARE offered 5% poison, 10% poison, OR organic brocolli

    No, the organic broccoli was not really offered since there was statistically NO chance you would get to eat it. You are eating the same shitty 5% rat poison bread I'm eating right now, and only because people like me spared you from the 10% kind.

    > So you can agonize over a longer period?

    Yes, and organize. And have more time for the morons to die off. We're already seeing how nicely this works when we look at the changing statistics on gay marriage, with the majority now being in favor of it!

    > anybody who votes for Hillary, will be, and is ....
    > as complicit as those who voted for George Bush [2004]

    OK, now here's where it gets sticky. I don't have a good argument against that. I'm just saying that people who chose McCain over Obama were rude on the highest level--mega-rude, if you will--McCain, a known Iraq war supporter vs Obama who'd spoken out strongly against starting the war. Until Obama, the tradition of an American president being able to make an actual difference still stood: FDR and JFK, both fairly recent in our history. Now Obama has shown that it really makes almost no difference who the president is.

    There's a good chance I will follow your lead in 2016, especially if the candidate on the right is more of a clown than usual. I mean, having Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, or Franklin Graham (Billy's son) as president could almost be seen by progressives in other countries as PERFORMANCE ART on the part of the American left!