No, I gathered that, no problem, although I did think that you were seriously using the word "libtard" to insult leftists, as many do. But someone did seem to advance in all seriousness the idea that leftists were taking the discourse into abuse and negative disrespect, in the same thread where seemingly unironic rightists other than you have called liberals "libtards," "idiots," "Marxists," "sheep," and any number of other epithets. More than one rightist somehow "accidentally" missed all these posts, but stated falsely that leftists were primarily responsible for abusive discourse. I am pretty confident that I have shown this to be false, but I can of course provide a thousand examples, fairly easily.

It seemed like a transparent attempt to avoid addressing the good points that some leftists here have made, by repeating the charge of "abusive discourse" that leftists first leveled here, and simply substituting the word "left" for "right," thinking that this would convince any leftists here that they were the abusive side, and that rightists haven't led the charge into hurling epithets. It still seems like such a transparent attempt.

I guess my irony didn't make it into print; maybe I should have put quotes around it! I think if you read my other posts you'll discover that I'm an unlikely patron of Rush Limbaugh, but I know a good act when I see it! If the zeitgeist turned and Rupert Murdoch tought he could make 25 cents selling pictures of "Uncle Joe" Stalin, he'd go for it! But the Salonistas act like their backs are against the wall and someone's about to pull the trigger! Sheesh! It's only politics! Go read Hegel's "Phenomenology" or something!

errantacademic is completely correct! Leftist Progressives are far nastier than the right. These libtard sheep Obama slaves want Marxism in this country. Idiots.*

*All words used by rightists in these pages.

errantacademic, you're pretending, I assume, to have ignored my last post?

Now let me guess: errantacademic will ignore this post, and others will write in to repeat what I and the other leftists have said, substituting "left" for "right." Then, at 3:00 precisely, someone will write in to say: "Salon sucks! I'm outta here!"

Say hello to Richard Mellon Scaife for me.

I remember once commenting on Salon that I read sites that were both ideologically left and right, and that, on the whole, the left sites were nastier. I was attacked for this, for everyone surely knows that progressives are nicer. I think what we've seen here proves my point better than any argument I could have made.

I didn't vote for the two-bit, B-Movie actor either time...

FOX

They suck canal water.

First, Soliel posted:

--I've noticed something...why is it the left who gets personal and hateful?

--I think it's time for many in our public life to learn to disagree with respect and maturity.

And then, IMMEDIATELY BELOW, we read:

--The libtards at Salon need to lighten up!

-- austinboy

Nice try, Soliel: it's the left that gets personal and hateful, but the right's constant use of the word "libtard," indicating that, hilk hilk hilk! Lefists are Mentally Retarded! is featured immediately below your post.

It's become a very familiar pattern: YELLING MAN YELLS a bunch of patently UNTRUE THINGS, ANGRILY AND INSULTINGLY! Then, when people mention the puerile nature of this sort of debate, "Reasonable Man or Woman" weighs in with a heartbreakingly plaintive call for "more civilized and respectful discourse. Why, oh why can't the liberals stop the uncivilized disrespect?", both types assuming that people will ignore the fact that they're simply repeating exactly the arguments that the liberals used, but truthfully, only minutes before. Then, someone says, every hour on the hour, "I'm canceling my subscription to Lame Salon! I'm outta here!"

How much are they paying you people, anyway?

One irony is that "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and other observations" is an extremely well-researched and fact-based set of arguments set in a humorous tone. Franken had a team of Harvard students doing research for him most of the time and he's very careful with his facts. And, unlike Coulter, when Franken uses a footnote or an endnote, it actually makes sense.

What people don't seem to get about Franken is that he came from a working class family and went to Harvard on scholarships. He's a very smart cookie.

Just more humor, coming from a "coma" patient temporarily wakened from his stupor. Somebody get him some recent "Nielson" material before he resumes his swoon into dreamland. Or maybe he's relying, as usual, on his "Faux & Unbalanced" "Noise" sources at FOX. MSNBC, in its 5PM to 11PM programing has topped FOX for some time now. MSNBC (as a news organization), beats FOX "news". COPS, 24, etc., may out-poll MSNBC, but "ifanyright" doesn't seem to recognize the difference between apples and oranges. Understandable, though; his head is buried so far up his bowels, he can't be expected to be conscious of "ratings". Similar to Sean, Glen, Billo, et al. Sweet dreams, comatose-guy!

why is it the left who gets personal and hateful? It's like they have an inability to understand that just because someone is conservative and doesn't see things the same way, it makes them a bad person.

We both have to deal with the fact that Ann Coulter wrote a piece of partisan agitprop ostensibly devoted to the character of the "American liberal mind" entitled Treason, and that Jonah Goldberg, plowing the exact same furrow, called his book Liberal Fascism.

Oh, how I could go on...the American right wing never met a military veteran it didn't like- until that person expresses a disagreeable view, at which point they're thrown on to the bonfire with the rest of the people on the endless enemies list.

If there is one thing that Glenn Greenwald has explicitly and irrefutably exposed in his writings, it's the claim that "it's only the left who gets personal and hateful."

Note: I did not endorse Al Franken's choice for the title of his book. I found it puerile. I don't think that sort of name calling does anyone any credit.

It's bad enough to resort to any type of name calling- it's the most unresponsive means of argument ever, in a political debate. But the "fat" insult is the worst, in that example- roughly on par with racism, in my view. I say this as a skinny guy who's fond of curvy girls, who are often driven to severe mental distress by labels like that one. And fat dudes don't need the pain, either. Or fat kids. Overweight and obesity is a health condition that needs to be addressed, but it's conditioned by metabolism. And I think metabolism is off-limits as a target for derogatory jibes. Not quite as bad as knocking a woman's looks (yes, Ann Coulter-Rachel Maddow-Rosie O'Donnell, etc. haters, I'm talking about you) or casting negative aspersions about a man's genital size (btw- to those adversaries of Dick Cheney who are seemingly obsessed with his apparently not-all-that-teeny family jewels: what are you thinking?)- but knocking someone as "fat" is still veering toward gratuitous cruelty. Does anybody really think that Rush Limbaugh would be the only person insulted by that title- or even the person most impacted by repeatedly having it put in their face? And that matters to a political argument exactly how?

It's too bad that insults and vulgarities seem to be such a ubiquitous part of the valued currency of the age, in popular discourse- seemingly wherever you go, and whatever topic gets discussed. (I can't even send my mother various Youtube clips, because of some of the tasteless comments that get appended to them, anonymously, to no purpose other than cheap-shot cruelty.) Al Franken didn't invent that, but at this point he should recognize it for the unproductive self-indulgence that it is. At best, it's for late night comedy show hosts, not statesmen.

And yes, I did kick things off in this letters column by referring to Republican pundits as "whiny little witches." But that isn't aimed at who they are. It's aimed at how they are.

I think Franken has the potential to act like a mature adult as a legislator, but time will tell. I think he should discharge his humorous tendencies on the side, within his circle of friends, at least until he gets a second term. Far better that he become known as a diligent and well-prepared Senator with the ability to ask hard questions and make tough choices. That would truly wallop the opposition, who are pretty much flat-footedly expecting him to make a jester and a buffoon of himself. Senator Franken will really steal a march if he disappoints them.