With age, comes wisdom

Just because the Federal Government, you, Joe, Merrick, & FBI traitors label the people who are against abortion as terrorists does not make them terrorists ( a few may indeed be nuts, but certainly not terrorists like Hamas) no matter how many times you or Jorg say it.

Since Roe vs Wade in 1973 there have been ONLY 7 shootings at abortion clinics in the United States. Unfortunately, a total of 12 people were killed, none since 2015. Yet over that same period of time, over 60 MILLION babies have been aborted. But that’s okay because for some odd reason, it’s a woman’s choice to let her baby live or die an agonizing death.

Inexplicably, the self proclaimed Marxist group BLM isn’t considered a domestic terrorist group even though they are are responsible for massive increases in murders within the black community. And Antifa riots and a city block take over is no problem as well.

From the Heritage Foundation

“The FBI has made it official: 2020 saw the biggest spike in murders in American history—30 percent. The year that saw Black Lives Matter-inspired racial turbulence on a scale that hadn’t been seen since 1968 blew past that year’s previous record murder spike of 12 percent.

That is an extra 5,000 Americans killed in 2020, a majority of them African-Americans, as they make up 53 percent of homicide victims. All told, this brings the number of extra Americans murdered since 2014—the year Black Lives Matter’s founders gathered with other far-leftist groups in the city of Ferguson, MO, to organize a nation wide movement with revolutionary demands—to perhaps more than 11,000.”

Yet Merrick Garland and dopey Joe are more worried about a man who pushed another man in self-defense of his son.

Let me help you out, Not So Common. A terrorist is "a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims." This applies to folks who advocate harming abortion doctors and bombing clinics. It does not apply to people seeking medical care for their own bodies.

Terrorists are not defined by the volume of people they kill. The anti-choice terrorists have been very effective at threatening doctors. Many commute in from different states to supply care because it is not safe for them to live near their patients, other areas have no care available. The terrorism has been effective in preventing many women and children from receiving abortion services, and no doubt has caused the deaths of many pregnant people--as evidenced by the current state of affairs in Texas where people have to sue the state now in order to receive medical care.

What is your definition of Great and Again? When I hear the MAGAts explaining it, it seems to pretty much be get women and folks with any amount of melanin back in their place and (not coincidentally) make rich men richer. Oh and guns, and the right to export our military-grade guns to drug dealers across our southern border while denying refuge to the victims of this policy.

None of those you list were abortion fanatics like we see among the right wingers today, Dirk! No one should be for abortion, of course, and certainly not as a form of birth control. But ultimately it should be a woman’s decision, since it affects her body and her life, and certainly not left to some old guys finding it convenient as a political issue, like we see today, regardless how great they may feel by finally enjoying some power over women.

Jorg - Liz Cheney is a miserable establishment representative. Most Republicans despise her not because of her TDS but she represents the neocons, exactly the group that you always had a problem with. I know her background very well, and her book is just another way to whitewash her out-of-step positions. You should know that if she teams up with radical Rachel, you are looking at strange bedfellows. You are the one who should be ashamed but as long as you can dig up someone who exhibits the same hate for Trump, you are content. As in, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Dirk: How typical! You toss out something you have absolutely no understanding of, and then go into hiding when asked to explain! Liz Cheney was always a highly respected Republican, and the 3rd in line in that hierarchy. She gained even Democratic respect by her excellent handling of the Jan. 6 commission. It took a lot of unselfish courage on her part to be honest and do the right thing, as it did also for Cassidy Hutchinson, another Republican indoctrinated from birth. So again, Dirk: Where is she wrong? Are you still in blind favor of Trump, even after all we have seen from him? Why even object to what I write, when you have nothing but nonsense to contribute? Perhaps reading Rachel Maddow’s latest book, “Prequel” might give you some insight into what is happening in this country, and scaringly similar to what happened in the thirties and during WWII!

Hello, Jorg

I've noticed you have recommended Rachel Maddow's book, "Prequel," three or four times over the past week. "Reason" magazine reviewed Rachel's book two weeks ago and reported, "'Prequel' is a deeply flawed and deceptively framed history of right-wing radicalism in the United States on the eve of American entry into World War II... Deficiencies in her sources, methods, and analyses make for a book that recapitulates past passions at the expense of sober reflection and reality."

How would you respond to literary criticism that says Rachel's book selectively uses sources that support her narrative but ignores prominent works that offer other explanations? Is "Prequel" just a retelling of Rachel's truth?

Ray: I base my evaluation of her book on my own reading of the book, what I know about history, and what I lived through as a young child.

Hi, Jorg

So, it's OK to cite deficient sources and analysis as well as ignore research that disputes an author's thesis? That's OK if we can agree such writing is not news or scholarship, but essentially just more partisan talking points.

Ray: Instead of basing your evaluation on a single review in a Right-leaning magazine, why don't you read the book yourself? You just might learn something! You should also have listened to the many interviews between Maddow, Cheney and Hutchinson about the subject. Those 3 women are bright and accomplished, and certainly to be taken far more seriously than Trump-followers, like some on this sight, who seem to be extremely slow learners.

Sorry, Jorg... once bitten, twice shy. I have read material recommended by you in the past... it does not live up to the hype. Forgive me, but I'll take the word of an Army vet who is a foreign policy researcher with intel experience over a cable news anchor who pushed Russian collusion theories until they... evaporated.

You can have the last word, venn.

Ray: Remember what the “Reason” review said in the beginning: "American democracy itself was under attack from enemies within and without," Rachel Maddow writes in Prequel: An American Fight Against Fascism. If you're not sure whether she is speaking of the past or the present, that's because she wants to conflate the two. Exactly, on purpose! The two are intertwined. What we called fascism in the 30s, is authoritarianism lurking today, blessed by Trump, the uneducated masses in need of a leader, and the superstitious evangelists, looking for someone who can control others for them.

The 3 female-authored books I have recommended, are all sincere warnings to all of us, - at least someone like you should understand that, or what?

Jorg, Jorg, Jorg... you are too precious. I did offer you the last word, and you finished your comment with a question. I'll address it.

The Reason Magazine review makes the observation that Maddow has conflated fascist activity in the 1930s with right wingers today. However, the review points out the fascists in the US were not a threat to the republic as Maddow suggests. The same can be said of ultra right wingers today. They can make noise, but they are not a threat to the republic. Maddow endorses using any means at hand to suppress today's right wing extremists. While any law breakers should be prosecuted, what other measures do you feel are necessary? If left wing extremists get a pass for calling for the extermination of Jewish people, what should we do with folks on the other extreme of the political spectrum?

Maddow's book is poorly researched and asserts a claim the narrative cannot support. Maybe you're thinking if the president of Harvard University can do substandard research, then it's OK for Rachel to do the same. Look at the entire review... that may change your mind.

Jorg - all you need to know about Liz is reading "Angler" by Barton Gellman. She is a devious monster as propped up by her Dad, likely the most awful VP in the history of this nation. She is not self-made by any stretch. And, as far as Rachel is concerned, that woman has zero credibility, a flim-flam news reader posing as a journalist. No wonder you are so mislead, you take their positions as gospel. Ignorance is no excuse.

The ignorant one is you, Dirk! You haven't even read the books I mention, so you don't have a clue on what you are talking about. As far as Rachell Maddow, you can hardly find someone more mentally gifted, and better informed than her!

Dirk: If you read Liz Cheney’s “Oath and Honor” with an open mind, I am confident you would learn quite a lot, and change your opinion about Trump and events around the Jan. 6 insurrection, provided you are honest enough to accept the indisputable truth recorded by a reliable eyewitness, who sacrificed her political career for the country and the truth. How can anyone with a fiber of integrity explain away the events around Jan. 6, as well as Trump’s lies and unpresidential actions?

Not a single honest insider has taken issue with anything in her book, - so who are you to discard it all, without having even read it? You have lost all credibility, Dirk!

Dear Jorg - David did not ask for an endless debate. However, you missed the point as usual. The House will have a public hearing after the closed door version. That is the usual process but I understand that you know better.

Jorg - please man - these proceedings are attended by both Democrats and Republicans. All verbiage is recorded and made public as usual Congressional record. Either party can then summarize as it wishes but the official records speak for themselves. Let's hope that there are no bomb shells, our country needs to get together before it implodes.