How about the government of Myanmar executing protestors on live television?

Oh wait a minute, I forgot. China backs Myanmar, which puts it along with Muslims, African-Americans who beat white kids half to death, and women who make false rape accusations, in the category of good liberal entities.

Never mind, Glenn, I'm sure you are on top of things. I love reading the comparisons that you and other liberal commentators make of Bush to a dictator; the fact that once glance at the real world shows that you are full of shit should not slow you down one bit.

A Bush government that doesn't know how to fight the war on terror for one:

December 6, 2001:

Q Ari, what's your understanding of the deal that's been struck to hand over Kandahar? And is it acceptable to the President to allow Mullah Omar to stay in Kandahar and live under the protection of the local authorities?

MR. FLEISCHER: Secretary Rumsfeld just concluded a briefing in which he addressed that question. I have nothing to add, beyond what the Secretary said. The situation on the ground remains fluid. As for Mullah Omar, the President has made it plain that those who harbor terrorists need to be brought to justice. That statement directly applies to Mullah Omar.

December 9, 2001:

CHENEY: The people of Afghanistan feel a great sense of liberation, having the opportunity to get out from under the heavy hand of the Taliban.

And at the same time I think there's a real sense of outrage on the part of many Afghans about what Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden brought down on the heads of the Afghan people.

The fact that they did become a sanctuary for terrorist, of course, has been devastating from the standpoint of what we've had to do to go rout them out. And they blame Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden for that. So they're eager to wrap them up.

RUSSERT: If either are captured alive, we will insist that they be turned over to the American authorities?

CHENEY: Yes.

RUSSERT: No international court?

CHENEY: No. We made it very clear we want Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar and their senior leadership. And if they're taken alive we expect to take custody of them.

Six Years Later:

Karzai offers Taliban government office

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - President Hamid Karzai offered Saturday to meet personally with Taliban leader Mullah Omar for peace talks and give the militants a high position in a government ministry as a way to end the rising insurgency in Afghanistan.

http://mccarthy.vg/articles/07/09/29/1431249.shtml

"Taking the corrupt political tactics wielded by the war-hungry Right and applying those same tactics to them (rather than ineffectively protesting the unfairness of the tactics) is the only way to ensure they cease." -- G.G.

As the saying goes, truer words were never spoken. What Glenn is calling for here is very simple: It's called "deterrence" and was very popular on the Right back in the Cold War, when it was used to justify the building of huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons and other way-cool military gizmos. It's a mistake to suppose that if Democrats get nasty too, that will just drag U.S. politics further into the gutter. No, it's the only way to get things back out of the gutter, because it's the only way to stop the vicious and dishonest attacks from the other side. Once it's clear that both sides can play the same game, neither side will gain an advantage from doing so, and both will have to factor in the risks they'll be running if they try. Bullies are terrified of a real fight, and when you make clear that you're prepared to give them one, that's when they'll back down.

This is why I haven't thus far been supporting Obama. I don't think he gets it -- he seems to think that you raise the tone of politics by calling for a higher tone, when in fact the way to do it (these days) is to beat the living crap out of the party that's been lowering the tone. Hillary's problem is different, but it has the same effect: She's too "establishment" and too afraid of coming across as strident. The only leading candidate who seems ready to rip the heads off a few righties is John Edwards, and I think if that remains the case over the next few months, he's got a better chance of winning over Democratic voters than the pundits are currently giving him.

There is nothing noble about unilateral disarmament. ~GG

Are all those who disagree with Glenn’s call for a Congressional resolution condemning Rush Limbaugh really guilty of unilateral disarmament?

Is this really such a black & white argument with no shades of gray? Are not there other tactics that could be used? Can we really discuss the efficacy of other tactics if all other tactics are automatically smeared as “unilateral disarmament?”

If you want to see an example of someone cowardly advocating “unilateral disarmament” perhaps FireDogLake is the place to start:

The needed remedy for Congress’ shameful actions last week is to rescind the resolutions they already passed. Contrary to the confused Senators who thought it would be politically shrewd only fair to also adopt a resolution condemning all criticisms of the military — e.g., those on Senators Kerry and Cleland as well as Petraeus — no resolution should ever have been offered or passed. And no such resolution should be considered for condemning Rush Limbaugh.

Like any veteran who has fought in America’s wars, I’m offended by Limbaugh’s odious statements and his ongoing disrepect for those who served in the military — but who happen to disagree with his narrow, right wing views. He deserves the strongest public criticism from us and others — but not from Congress.

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/09/28/first-amendment-first-principles-and-rush-limbaugh/

... African-Americans who beat white kids half to death, and women who make false rape accusations, in the category of good liberal entities....--Anonymous

Ah.... yes! Those horribly maltreated, noose hangin' white kids in Jena -- one of whom brandished a gun at at some of the aforementioned black kids. When they wrested it away from him, the black kids were charged with theft (of the firearm) by the local authorities. The white kid who threatened them with the gun -- no charges! That was probably the most obvious and hard to justify of the differential applications of justice in Jena, but it's not the only one.

There are a great many people who need an ass-whupping in Jena, and they are not all black. Nor are they all white. But, then, if you took into account every bit of asinine and violent macho behavior in the Jena incident you couldn't include it in your litany of Liberal Infamy!!!!! Since you have....it makes me wonder about the accuracy of the rest of your list.

Just which Aryan-sniveler website did you pull that one off of?