Lets try not to get out of hand. Keep nasty remarks to yourself(hopefully I can practice what I preach!). Lets all try so we can keep coming on here and having fun.

Just curious if you actually know what a neocon is? You throw it around and than talk about things that are not in line with the neoconservative beliefs. I have no problem being considered a neocon.

From wiki;

Neoconservatism is a Political philosophy that combines a pragmatic approach to economics with a traditional approach to culture and Social issues. ^[1] In Economics, unlike paleoconservatives andlibertarians, neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a limited welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes.^[2] On Military issues it defines national Interests in a manner that allows for the inclusion of ideological interests e.g. the defense of other nations with similar ideologies for geopolitical purposes.

Just curious if you actually know what a neocon is? You throw it around and than talk about things that are not in line with the neoconservative beliefs. I have no problem being considered a neocon.

From wiki;

For me, and I suspect others, I use it in the more pedestrian way - meaning the new wave of conservatives who are more to the right and extreme than what moderate conservatives have been. It was/is a term used by the media to refer to many in the bush administration and I'm sure they weren't referring to your textbook definitiion.

I could ask the same of you when you toss around the term liberal in the most perjorative way:

Liberal (Websters)

capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives

Do I get the same benefit of just making up a definition to a word to fit the use I want it too if the real definition doesn't agree with me? Can I call you a communist if in my mind I really think it means something else? This is BY FAR your worst argument to date. My wife, the 3 friends that over watching football right now and I all literally LOL'ed when I read that aloud. Thank you. And go Packers!!!

Do I get the same benefit of just making up a definition to a word to fit the use I want it too if the real definition doesn't agree with me? Can I call you a communist if in my mind I really think it means something else? This is BY FAR your worst argument to date. My wife, the 3 friends that over watching football right now and I all literally LOL'ed when I read that aloud. Thank you. And go Packers!!!

Actually you do make up the definition of liberals every time you use that term - to mean wanting more people to become dependent on the government, etc..

And I was called a communist by tea party extremists when I spoke at my republican congressman's town hall meeting and presented evidence (from the Washington Post) about the real cause of the deficit.

The media uses the term neocon all the time.

I am glad I could provide amusement for your little whippersnapper friends.

Neocon Coup at the Department d'État

By MAUREEN DOWD

Published: August 06, 2003

WASHINGTON Let others fight over whether the war in Iraq was a neocon vigilante action disrupting diplomacy. The neocons have moved on to a vigilante action to occupy diplomacy.

The audacious ones have saddled up their pre-emptive steeds and headed off to force a regime change at Foggy Bottom.

President Bush staged a Texan tableau vivant last night, playing host at his ranch to the secretary of state, his wife, Alma, and his deputy, Richard Armitage. Mr. Bush wanted to show solidarity after a Washington Post story on Monday that said that Colin Powell, under pressure from his wife, said he would not be part of a second Bush term, nor would Mr. Armitage.

Mr. Bush might be trying to signal his respect for Mr. Powell, but the president is not always privy to the start of a grandiose neocon scheme.

The scene was reminiscent of last August in Crawford, when Mr. Bush dismissed press ''churning'' that the administration was on the verge of striking Iraq, saying, ''When I say I'm a patient man, I mean I'm a patient man and that we will look at all options and we will consider all technologies available to us, and diplomacy and intelligence.'

We all know how that turned out.

When the neocons want something done, they'll get it done, no matter what Mr. Bush thinks. And they think Mr. Powell has downgraded the top cabinet post into a human resources job, making nicey-nice with the U.N. and assorted bad guys instead of pursuing the neocon blueprint for world domination through what James Woolsey calls World War IV (World War III being the cold war.)

Countering the Post story, Mr. Powell's posse claimed that neither the secretary of state nor his deputy had ever said they intended to step down, and charged that the neocons were leaking a canard to turn the two men they consider lame doves into lame ducks.

''This is the revenge of the neocons for two months of bad news, looking like they're falling all over themselves in Iraq,'' said a Powell confidant, noting that Alma Powell was furious she had been dragged in.

In The Post, nearly all of the names of those who could move up if Mr. Powell moves out are Iraq hawks: Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz and Newt Gingrich were mentioned as candidates for secretary of state; Wolfie, Cheney Chief of Staff Scooter Libby and Condi deputy Steve Hadley, who may be radioactive after the uranium mistake, were mentioned for national security chief.

Why don't you debate Maureen Dowd on her use (the one I use) of the term neocon? Now that would provide amusement for my friends.

Hardly the postings of someone on the far left. Anti-government, anti those who don't speak English, etc.. I can't trust the CURRENT government...

That comes right out the the right wing playbook.

By Robert Anglen and Brennan Smith, The Arizona RepublicThe 22-year-old suspect in the shooting of U.S. Rep Gabrielle Giffords and others at a Tucson grocery is Jared Loughner, who lives in the same city.On MySpace and YouTube web pages, a man who identifies himself as 22-year-old Jared Loughner posted anti-government messages that talk about mind control and suggested he will soon be adopting a new consciousness.

<P class=inside-copy>SHOOTING: Congresswoman shot, at least 6 others killedGABRIELLE GIFFORDS: Who is she?PHOTOS: Images from Giffords' career, the Jan. 8 shootingVIDEO: Latest on Tucson shooting

"Goodbye," Loughner posted on his MySpace account at approximately 5 a.m. Saturday. "Dear friends ... Please don't be mad at me."

Photos on MySpace show a close-up picture of an automatic handgun sitting atop a book or paper titled United States History. This picture is accompanied by several videos posted to Loughner's Youtube account, including one of a masked man burning a U.S. flag and another with the words, "Don't trust the current government, listener!"

It is unclear if Loughner is the person burning the flag in the video.

Additional pictures show a coded message, Loughner on the street and a close-up of his face.

<P class=inside-copy>ON THE WEB: Local coverage from AZCentral.com

On both the MySpace and YouTube web pages, Loughner mentions his concern over literacy rates and the fact that few people speak English. He also talks about his distrust of the government and suggests that anyone can call anyone a terrorist.

"I can't trust the current government because of fabrications," Loughner wrote in a YouTube slide presentation. "The government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar."

My wife and I were watching the news yesterday and her thought is, everything posted about this guy seems to go against dem point of view.

1-He shot a dem.

2-He is linked to some racist group.

3-He talked about the literacy rate of Arizona(I would assume he's against the proposed immigration laws).

My wife and I were watching the news yesterday and her thought is, everything posted about this guy seems to go against dem point of view.

1-He shot a dem.

2-He is linked to some racist group.

3-He talked about the literacy rate of Arizona(I would assume he's against the proposed immigration laws).

Exactly, and he also spoke about those who don't speak English. He was obviously mentally deranged and regardless of whether he was influenced by the hate speech coming from the right - we must have a dialogue in this country about how those words affect people. Words matter. We hold bullies accountable when their taunting words lead to a young person's suicide. We need to hold those on the right accountable for the words they choose and the message they are sending.

This is what I am talking about (from an expose on the Rolling Stone website and dailykos):

Another Ohio Democrat, Steve Driehaus, clashed repeatedly with Boehner before losing his seat in the midterm elections. After Boehner suggested that by voting for Obamacare, Driehaus "may be a dead man" and "can't go home to the west side of Cincinnati" because "the Catholics will run him out of town,"

Driehaus began receiving death threats, and a right-wing website published directions to his house.

Driehaus says he approached Boehner on the floor and confronted him.

"I didn't think it was funny at all," Driehaus says. "I've got three little kids and a wife. I said to him, 'John, this is bullshit, and way out of bounds. For you to say something like that is wildly irresponsible.'"

Driehaus is quick to point out that he doesn't think Boehner meant to urge anyone to violence.

"But it's not about what he intended — it's about how the least rational person in my district takes it. We run into some crazy people in this line of work."

(

emphasis mine

)

Driehaus says Boehner was "taken aback" when confronted on the floor, but never actually said he was sorry: "He said something along the lines of, 'You know that's not what I meant.' But he didn't apologize."

That bears repeating: "It's not about what he intended -- it's about how the least rational person in my district takes it." And confronted with the obviousness of that appeal, the John Boehners of the world don't apologize. They just keep the steamroller of hate running right along through Crazytown until somebody inevitably gets hurt.

There's been a lot of jostling between the right and left, each trying to paint the murderous gunman as a member of the Other Side. The truth is that the murderer is a paranoid libertarian whackadoo, closer to the Right than to the Left, but not fitting neatly into either mold. He's much more Alex Jones than Glenn Beck or any Lefty equivalent. John Cole perhaps said it best:

The point we have been trying to make for the last couple of years is that Republicans need to stop whipping up crazy people with violent political rhetoric. This is really not a hard concept to follow. There are crazy people out there. Stop egging them on.

Exactly. This is not about what the shooter is or is not, from a purely political point of view. He's a nutcase. What matters is that when irresponsible charlatans like Sarah Palin plant surveying targets bullseyes on members of Congress, that has an effect on the least rational people in those districts. Particularly on those least rational individuals given to potentially violent paranoia. This is the Becking of America: the promotion of hate speech to provoke the irrational into violent conduct, while giving the promoter plausible deniability. After all, that's not what they meant, right?

The conversation between Driehaus and Boehner, quoted presciently by Taibbi last week, needs to be retold again and again in the wake of the Giffords shooting. Especially in the context of the paranoid lies and deceit that lay like a dark shroud over the healthcare debate at the time, it is exemplary of everything that is wrong with the modern Right.

If the John Boehners of the world are not deliberately shamed into changing their rhetoric and their behavior, this sort of tragedy will happen again and again, with devastating consequences.

The daily kos was quoted just a few days ago as saying "Giffords is dead to us". They've since removed that from their website, I'll search later to find the original quote, I've seen it floating around a few different places. You are living in a complete dream world if you honestly believe the left doesn't engage in the same "hate speech" or "war speech" whatever your calling it these days.

From 2004

From 2009

Targets, gasp, they must be calling for violence those damned democrats. Again, cm I challenge you to have the courage, to realize "your side" does the exact same things as "my side."

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/01/tea-party-group-blames-leftist-for-giffords-shooting/69153

Tea Party Group Blames 'Leftist' for Giffords Shooting

JAN 9 2011, 1:49 PM ET400

Showing no sign of tamping down on divisive political rhetoric in the wake of the shooting of 20 people that left six dead in Tuscon Saturday, the Tea Party Nation group e-mailed its members Sunday warning them they would be called upon to fight leftists in the days ahead and defend their movement.TPN founder Judson Phillips, in an article linked off the e-mail "The shooting of Gabrielle Giffords and the left's attack on the Tea Party movement," described the shooter as "a leftist lunatic" and Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik as a "leftist sheriff" who "was one of the first to start in on the liberal attack." Phillips urged tea party supporters to blame liberals for the attack on centrist Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, who was shot through the head and is now fighting for her life, as a means of defending the tea party movement's recent electoral gains.

"The hard left is going to try and silence the Tea Party movement by blaming us for this," he wrote. Clinton used the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing to "blame conservative talk radio, especially Rush Limbaugh" and "The tactic worked then, backing conservatives off and possibly helping to ensure a second Clinton term."

"The left is coming and will hit us hard on this. We need to push back harder with the simple truth. The shooter was a liberal lunatic. Emphasis on both words," he wrote.

The Tea Party Nation is the sponsor of the Tea Party Convention at which former GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin was the keynote speaker in February 2010. "America is ready for another revolution!" Palin told the assembled at the conference, to standing ovations.

Other tea party groups took a less combative tone. Tea Party Express Chairwoman Amy Kremer said Saturday her group was "shocked and saddened" by the "terrible tragedy."

"These heinous crimes have no place in America, and they are especially grievous when committed against our elected officials. Spirited debate is desirable in our country, but it only should be the clash of ideas," Kremer said in a statement published by the New York Times. "An attack on anyone for political purposes, if that was a factor in this shooting, is an attack on the democratic process. We join with everyone in vociferously condemning it."

The daily kos was quoted just a few days ago as saying "Giffords is dead to us". They've since removed that from their website, I'll search later to find the original quote, I've seen it floating around a few different places. You are living in a complete dream world if you honestly believe the left doesn't engage in the same "hate speech" or "war speech" whatever your calling it these days.

From 2004

From 2009

Targets, gasp, they must be calling for violence those damned democrats. Again, cm I challenge you to have the courage, to realize "your side" does the exact same things as "my side."

Big deal, you found two maps with "targets" when liberals used the same example as neocons (and for your future reference, I will be using that term in the same context and meaning as Maureen Dowd) and the extremist on the right. And btw - who was the person behind this map? I name names.

I challenge you to find any public figure from the left, liberals or democratic party who have either run for office, are in office or are just a celebrity like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sharon Angle or Michelle Bachman to name a few.

Sarah Palin had targets on a map of those democratic districts she was targeting. One of them was Gabrielle Giffords. She spoke about this on MSNBC and said her district was in the crosshairs of Sarah Palin's target. She said words and images have consequences. Her office was vandalized. She's been shot. So, why don't you tell her and her family what Palin did was okay?

Palin has also called for her followers to reload not retreat. She often uses gun metaphors. Why? If her message is good enough, why the need for the not so thinly veiled reference to guns and targets?

Sharon Angle called for second amendment remedies and wouldn't explained what that meant when pinned down.

Michelle Bachman wants her constituents armed and rising up against what she calls the wrong doings of goverment.

Here is some hate speech from the right:

Glenn Beck:

-Hillary Clinton is a stereotypical bitch

-Cindy Sheehan a tragedy slut

-he said he was thinking about killing Michael Moore and wondered if he could do it himself or have to hire someone.

Michael Savage:

Here's what he said about girls from the private Branson School who have been serving meals to San Francisco's homeless;

The girls from Branson can go in and maybe get raped...because they seem to like the excitement of it. There's always the thrill and possibility they'll be raped in a dumpster while giving out a turkey sandwich.

About Obama he has said - he is an Afro-Leninist, and I know he's dangerous, and he's a muslim, a dictator, a terrorist, Obama hates and is raping America.

O'Reilly on the rape and murder of 18 year old Jennifer Moore in New York - He called her moronic. After all, he said she was walking alone at night in a mini skirt and bare midriff.

Then there was those on the right who published the address of a democratic congressman's brother by mistake - I think it was like Palladino. Well, someone went to the brother's house, thinking it was the congressman's, and cut the gas line on his gas grill. This man had a wife and 4 children.

In typical neocon fashion, you and others are trying to go on the offensive and change the focus. We certainly wouldn't want to dig too deep at the extreme right wing movements in this country and who funds them and what their real agenda is.

Nice try, but it won't work. The hate speech, the hateful rhetoric, the constant bashing of the government, making it the enemy, the constant references to guns - ALL OF THIS IS COMING FROM THE RIGHT, NOT THE LEFT. And you know it, and I know it and you can try to deflect and come up with a few examples, but I think most people in this country aren't confused as to where this hateful, divisive dialogue is coming from. And certainly not me!!!

http://www.theatlant...-shooting/69153

Tea Party Group Blames 'Leftist' for Giffords Shooting

JAN 9 2011, 1:49 PM ET400

Showing no sign of tamping down on divisive political rhetoric in the wake of the shooting of 20 people that left six dead in Tuscon Saturday, the Tea Party Nation group e-mailed its members Sunday warning them they would be called upon to fight leftists in the days ahead and defend their movement.TPN founder Judson Phillips, in an article linked off the e-mail "The shooting of Gabrielle Giffords and the left's attack on the Tea Party movement," described the shooter as "a leftist lunatic" and Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik as a "leftist sheriff" who "was one of the first to start in on the liberal attack." Phillips urged tea party supporters to blame liberals for the attack on centrist Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, who was shot through the head and is now fighting for her life, as a means of defending the tea party movement's recent electoral gains.

"The hard left is going to try and silence the Tea Party movement by blaming us for this," he wrote. Clinton used the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing to "blame conservative talk radio, especially Rush Limbaugh" and "The tactic worked then, backing conservatives off and possibly helping to ensure a second Clinton term."

"The left is coming and will hit us hard on this. We need to push back harder with the simple truth. The shooter was a liberal lunatic. Emphasis on both words," he wrote.

The Tea Party Nation is the sponsor of the Tea Party Convention at which former GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin was the keynote speaker in February 2010. "America is ready for another revolution!" Palin told the assembled at the conference, to standing ovations.

Other tea party groups took a less combative tone. Tea Party Express Chairwoman Amy Kremer said Saturday her group was "shocked and saddened" by the "terrible tragedy."

"These heinous crimes have no place in America, and they are especially grievous when committed against our elected officials. Spirited debate is desirable in our country, but it only should be the clash of ideas," Kremer said in a statement published by the New York Times. "An attack on anyone for political purposes, if that was a factor in this shooting, is an attack on the democratic process. We join with everyone in vociferously condemning it."

This is a tactic used by the right. If you repeat a lie often enough people will believe it. Like death panels. I hope we have learned from their edited videos that they put out to the media, like the one about Shirley Sherrod, that they will lie, use deception, any tactic to push their extremist agenda. I wouldn't believe one word that comes out of any tea party member or leader's mouth. They are funded by and shills for corporate america and ground zero for them is their hatred of Obama. I hope that if anything positive comes out of this tragedy is that people start looking at the tea party and other extremists more closely and seeing them for what they are.

I tried to post some video's but this forum is HORRIBLE for posting any media.

So I post PROOF, of the left using the same tactics and you just what? choose to ignore it? Is that how that works? That seems very similar to you making up your own definitions to words and using them. You can say all you want I do that to the term liberal, but the only reason I use it is because you call yourself one, you were calling me a neocon in an attempt to insult me, and when it didn't work, and I showed you that you didn't know what you were talking about, you were using a definition that is made up, you decided that definition is the one you'll use anyways, because you want too. My new definition of yellow is a cloudless night in October, does that make it the new definition? You talk about backpedaling, your falling down backwards so hard it's laughable. Literally.

MSNBC guest, calling for VIOLENT REVOLUTION

Francis Fox Pivencalling for Violent Revolution on NYE.

Several Leftwingers openly rooting for Violent Revolution.