Rock Of Ages


This entry was posted in History, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to Rock Of Ages

  1. gjrebane says:

    Robert, it appears you’re not exactly happy about the spread of western civilization in the New World. Since such inter-civilizational conquests (even here in the pre-European Americas) have gone on for millennia, was there a certain point in history that you feel should have seen the end of such dynamics and a propitious time for stasis to have set in?

    • Chris Peterson says:

      Do the words, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” ring any bells for you, rebane?
      It was supposed to be the end of rule by people, such as yourself, who envisioned the continuation of the “dynamics” of domination by one particular race or ideology over that of others. In case you missed that central core of our country’s stated purpose, it’s what our nation was founded on, (notwithstanding the genocide of the previous inhabitants, and the enslavement of another to do our labor).
      But, by all means, please continue your defense of genocide and slavery as a natural social progression; it fits perfectly into the republican arguments of restricted rights for women, minorities, and the gay community.

  2. rl crabb says:

    No one can change history. No one can restore the way of life that endured thousands of years before us honkies decided otherwise. It was no less a holocaust than WWII, and there are still survivors who were unceremoniously ripped from their families and forcibly “civilized.” Did they do that to your family when they showed up here looking for a little sanctuary from oppression?
    The gov’mint is always trying to stick an expiration date on justice. I thought you were against that kind of thing.

  3. Judith Lowry says:

    An end to intercultural conquest equals, “stasis”?
    Spoken like a true colonialist.
    I guess the children in Aleppo would like a taste of that
    stasis right about now.
    But, they might call it “peace”.
    If only they deserved it as much as us, “westerners”.

    Thanks Bob, perfect cartoon for what’s happening at Standing Rock.

  4. gjrebane says:

    Robert 1226pm – not sure I understand your question. ‘My Story’ is online at RR, and probably answers your question. For the benefit of Ms Lowry I’ll attempt the following – yes, anything dynamic that for the first time in history stabilizes and does not change is properly said to have gone into stasis.

    • Judith Lowry says:

      Thanks for the hawkish slant on that definition, but peace (not coming to our planet anytime soon) is not a static condition.
      Peace implies equilibrium, civility and cooperation and that is a dynamic formula for progress.
      What might mankind achieve in a peaceful world?
      We may never know, but we should be working toward it.

      Oh and, stasis in the human body, probably affecting reason, has something to do with fecal retention.

      • Michael Anderson says:

        Judith, I hope you don’t mind me borrowing your wonderful asseveration. I never knew there was such a polite way of telling someone they are full of shit. It’s much better than “I’m sorry that I didn’t explain myself clearly enough for you to understand.”

  5. Greg Goodknight says:

    Earl, I think you got suckered in by the capital R Romantic narrative of the natives vs evil capitalist struggle.

    The local Standing Rock Sioux voted against the campers:
    “Just look at a recent vote in the community for further proof that Fool Bear’s not the only naysayer. When protest organizers presented a request to build a new winter camp in Cannon Ball earlier this month, his community shot it down.
    Of the 88 people who voted, he says 66 were against the camp, less than 10 were for it and the rest remained undecided.”

    The CNN report continues,
    “Fool Bear has had it with the protesters. He says that more than two years ago, when members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe could have attended hearings to make their concerns known, they didn’t care. Now, suddenly, the crowds are out of control, and he fears it’s just a matter of time before someone gets seriously hurt.
    Go down to the camps, he says, and you won’t see many Standing Rock Sioux.
    “It irks me. People are here from all over the world,” he says. “If they could come from other planets, I think they would.”
    The presence of all these people has become a downright nuisance to his community, he says. Given the roadblocks, residents of Cannon Ball are often forced to go more than 40 miles out of their way.”

    • Chris Peterson says:

      The people of Cannon Ball did indeed vote overwhelmingly against having the base camp of resistance in their town, (which would have put their town on the frontline of the conflict), but no vote has ever been taken of whether or not they support the protest itself. Fool Bear certainly doesn’t speak for anywhere near a majority of the Sioux Nation; he’s just a guy who’s trying to keep his town’s casino as a hangout for the pipeline construction workers who are spending their cash at his black jack tables.
      You, and CNN, (a media source you have frequently chided for being spokesmen for the left), have both made the mistake of equating the vote against having the base camp inside their community with non-support of the overall Sioux nations position, Fool Bear’s personal opinion notwithstanding.

      • Greg Goodknight says:

        I thought it obvious Fool Bear was speaking for Fool Bear, and thanks for noticing I have no problem using leftist house organs to present contrary information to leftists making weak arguments.

        Above, you wrap yourself in the Declaration of Independence to justify the mob rule in Cannon Ball, which isn’t Wounded Knee. We have a Republic, if we can keep it, and a demand for the rule of law is what the Revolution was about. The protest is being made to stymie a project that, on the whole, appears to be the best alternative to shipping petroleum by rail and by truck short of stopping the extraction of oil from the Bakken, which is probably the intent of the leftist core of the protesters.

        As far as I can tell the pipeline doesn’t actually traverse Indian holdings. Is that also your understanding?

  6. Chris Peterson says:

    You seem to be getting dumber by the day, Greg.

    First, a little history. The world oil market was facing a glut, with the advent of fracking in Canadian and northern US territory, and as a result, oil prices were plummeting. Good for us consumers; bad for the oil companies. So they asked Congress to lift the restriction that kept them from selling on the open market, and shit-howdy, Congress said OK.
    So, their first project was the Keystone XL pipeline. But the American people said, “Wait, you wanna’ put a pipeline through the heart of our country, to transfer sludge that is 50 times dirtier than regular crude, and to be refined by our old refineries that already are at capacity, all so you can sell it to other countries? No frickin’ way.” And that was the end of that.
    Then, the same companies quietly mapped out a new course for the pipeline, the Bakken, which is only 7 miles shorter than the XL, and were given the right of eminent domain by a 3 man board. Some thought it mighty strange that a for-profit corporation would be given the right of eminent domain to build a pipeline for mostly Canadian sludge, but that must be where your claimed Libertarian credo takes a dump. (More precisely- you don’t give a shit.)
    Anyway; they made their way south, forcing farmers, ranchers, and private land owners to sell swathes of land to Energy Transfers Partners, LLC. When they came to the original proposed river crossing, just upstream from the city of Bismark, the good folks of that town said, “Not upstream for OUR town, you don’t!” You see, the good folks of Bismark know that ETP has the worst track record of any oil pipeline company in the US, with over 200 spills in the last 6 years, according to Reuters, many of those being the “new, improved” pipe the company laughingly says will not break.

    So now, they have decided to make the crossing upstream from the Sioux tribe, who they thought would be a push over. Just equip the cops from surrounding states with surplus war paraphernalia, and bingo, access complete, right? Wrong! People have recognized that this is nothing but the XL pipeline renamed and being shoved down the throats of the local Native Americans.

    All of this leads me to believe two things:
    One- that you have again shown that you’re a closet-republican who supports the ongoing fascism, and
    Two- that I have no doubt that you voted for Trump, since nothing in ANY of your arguments to the contrary has the slightest morsel of Libertarian ideology to it.
    You, Greg, are a bald-faced liar who argues simply for arguments sake, with zero concern for your country, or the people living in it. So, piss off.

    • John Dough says:

      Chris, has anyone ever told you that you come across to strangers as nasty, hateful and angry? Nearly every post that you make on this blog paints you as a very unpleasant person. That can’t be a healthy mindset Chris. If you have any friends that will be honest with you, ask them if they agree. It might really improve your happiness and the quality of your life if you get control of your anger. I wish you well! JD

      • Chris Peterson says:

        If you’re asking if I will admit that some of my comments can be a bit abrupt at times? Certainly. I know that, when I’m constantly bombarded by half-truths and innuendo, I get a little testy. Take Greg’s statement above, for example, that the Brakken pipeline is, ” a project that, on the whole, appears to be the best alternative to shipping petroleum by rail and by truck.” If you count merely the number of incidents, pipelines are the clear winner. But if you state the sheer volume of the spills, there’s really no comparison; the 1.5 million gallon spill into the Kalamazoo River is a good example. No truck can do that kind of damage, which is precisely why the folks in Bismark denied the crossing above their city. Add to that his assertion that, in his opinion, most of the #nodapl protestors are against ANY form of fossil fuel transportation, and you have an intelligent man arguing a stupid point.
        So, do I think you and Greg are stupid people? Of course not; which makes it all the more frustrating, because it’s more than obvious that you’re using someone else’s idiotic talking points to defend billionaires’ destructive actions, or a billionaires’ run for the Presidency, or a billionaires’ reason for war profiteering. And knowing that neither of you are anywhere near billionaires who will actually share in their profits is what makes it comical.

        So, take my criticism with a grain of humor; I’m not laughing at you, I’m laughing at what you’re saying. If that pisses you off, then that’s on you; not me.

        • John Dough says:

          Chris, your team got your ass kicked in a manner that has not happened for nearly 100 years. You lost not only because of a failed message of ridiculous ideas that does nothing but punish both employers and workers, to the detriment of both, but the messenger you hoped to replace the naive and inexperienced community organizer, was exponentially worse. Her corruption and self serving focus was obvious to all but you die hard cool aid drinkers.
          Your response to your complete ass kicking is to brand everyone who is too smart to drink your cool aid as racists and bigots. Try to accept that you lost because your message and your messenger sucks. And possibly even worse, we have so many problems to solve from the past 16 years of bad leadership, but you are going off about your idea of the right way to transport oil half a continent away! How about directing some of your outrage toward the fact that there are several hundred of our neighbors right here in Nevada County that regularly do not have enough to eat! That is something we should be pissed off about. Is that not more important to you than what is happening in the Dakotas?

      • Greg Goodknight says:

        Yes, Chris retreats to his safe place when challenged, which generally means turning off his Reality filter and letting fly with whatever personal abuse he can muster. Usually projecting his own faults onto his adversary.

        • Chris Peterson says:

          Wow Greg, you should have been a lawyer. I rip apart your talking point, and rather than defend it, your closing argument is, “Your Honor, he’s not a nice person.”

          Bada-bing, you got me with that stinger.

          Seriously, I hope whatever crisis is happening in your life clears up soon; you seem to have lost your focus. It’s either that, or the sources that feed you your crap just won the election, and their just not trying anymore.

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            John Dough, see what I mean?

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            “I rip apart your talking point…”

            I am not responsible for your delusions, Chris. You keep diving towards name calling and other character assassinations, and we’ve gone down that road before.

    • Greg Goodknight says:

      Chris, you are welcome to your own opinions but not your own facts:
      “Washington (CNN)A majority of Americans favor the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline — a result that could give Republicans a boost as they move toward a showdown with President Barack Obama over the project — a CNN/ORC poll has found.
      The 1,179-mile Canada-to-Texas pipeline is backed by 57% of the 1,011 Americans surveyed on Dec. 18-21. Just 28% oppose it, while 15% say they are unsure.”

      Keystone XL was killed by Obama appointees, not public opinion. Isn’t CNN one of your faves?

      • rl crabb says:

        A majority of Americans thought Hillary Clinton should be President too. You can’t always get what you want.

        • Greg Goodknight says:

          You can’t have your own facts either, RL. No, a “majority” of Americans did not think Clinton should be President, a bare plurality did, and she wouldn’t have had that without the lopsided California vote. The Electoral College was put in place just for that sort of thing… you can’t win the Presidency because the large populous states went for the ticket that only had real appeal to them.

          And a wide majority of Electors pledged to the GOP won.

          Many Californians would have voted differently had there been a contested election for our Electors, and the advertising from the GOP they didn’t bother to buy (because it was pointless) would have suppressed the Clinton vote. Clinton didn’t have to pay anything for the massive support she got from virtually all brick and mortar news organizations… if all you had read was the ‘Frisco Chronicle or the LA Times, you’d not have any good reasons to not be With Her.

          • rl crabb says:

            It’s quite a stretch to write off 2M+ votes as a “bare plurality,” even in the context of 125M total. It’s even more of a stretch to think that GOP advertising would have significantly changed California’s lopsided total. It’s a deep blue state, and it won’t be long before you’ll only have Democrats on the ballot, battling to see who can get their grimy paws deeper into your wallet. Vegas must be sounding better to you all the time.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            Good gawd, Greg, that tortured explanation was a cross between Dr. Seuss and Ayn Rand. It reminds me of the old Soviet propaganda where their car lost a race against one of ours’, and they explained that they had come in second and ours’ had come in next to last.
            Give it up, meinchik.

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            I’m guessing the two of you had the same teacher for US Government. Chris, what I wrote is straight out of the textbooks, sorry you missed it.

            More voters against Clinton than voted for her, and Clinton’s plurality in the popular vote goes away if California plunges into the sea. Clinton spent twice as much money per popular vote received than Trump did, and Trump got an even bigger bargain per Elector… he did that partially by not wasting any money on California so folks in this state who didn’t read anything but the LA Times or the Chronicle, and watched NBC/CBS/ABC/MSLSD would be blissfully ignorant of Trump’s arguments, not to mention Johnson’s and Stein’s.

            RL, if the Constitution was amended to abolish the Electoral College (have at it, guys, guess how many Red states would have to agree with you to get it done?), LA, Frisco, NYC
            and the other big cities would get carpet bombed with all the sort of crap that played in Vegas last summer, giving people who live in Vegas some relief.

            No matter how many Californians voted for Clinton, she’ll not get any more Electors than we have Senatorial and Congressional seats. Trump is not the only President-Elect in our history to have a split popular-electoral college vote and won’t be the last.

            If Democrats want to be a national party and not just bicoastal, they’ll have to widen their appeal. Being nastier might not be the path to success.

      • Chris Peterson says:

        Here’s an article on more than a few polls that claim the opposite, Greg, some of them only days after your “definitive proof” of approval.
        And here’s another, 5 days after your CNN questionnaire:
        And still another, from a month earlier, showing that support, even among the Canadians, was dropping like a rock.
        Intelligent Americans, which eliminates many of your fellow Trump fans, not only admitted that they didn’t know enough about it to make an informed decision, but were perfectly willing to let the Obama administration decide if it was in our country’s best interest to build it. (Which, it turns out, it wasn’t.)
        Same polls showed that 80% favored a move towards solar, and over 70% for wind. THAT’S the underlying reason why it failed; the American people are smart enough to know that our future lies in renewables, not fossil fuel.
        *And you quote CNN far more than I ever have.

        • Greg Goodknight says:

          NRDC is an environmental think tank with Leonard Di Caprio and Robert Redford sitting on the board. Might not be as finely balanced a news source as CNN.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            You just put your finger on the ignorant coverage that we’re being subjected to by the media; this ridiculous notion that the coverage, especially on matters of climate change and what to do about it, needs to be “finely balanced.”

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            Let’s see what Snopes has to say:
            “WHAT’S TRUE: The U.S Army Corps of Engineers originally considered a Dakota Access Pipeline route north of Bismarck but abandoned the idea, citing eleven miles of additional pipeline length and dozens more crossings.

            WHAT’S FALSE: “Mostly white” residents of Bismarck did not refuse to accept the threat to their water supply, and the project was not subsequently forced upon tribes at Standing Rock because white people rejected the risk.

            Both early reports and Army Corps of Engineers documents showed that an early, scrapped plan did propose a pipeline route north of Bismarck, but the Army Corps of Engineers opted to re-route it via Lake Oahe, citing a shorter pipeline, fewer water crossings, and reduced proximity to residential areas.

            The decision appeared to have been unrelated to objections from residents of Bismarck, and no plan was ever solidified to route the pipeline north of the city before its residents shut it down.”


            Snopes tends to stand to the left of center, should be balanced enough for you, Chris.

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            Regarding ignorance, if I wanted to learn about atmospheric physics and climate, I’d read papers by atmospheric physicists, not watch you tube videos by comedians with Bachelors degrees in English or Mechanical Engineering.

            I have actually read papers by such folk, and if you need help identifying scientists with real competence in the subject and some of the more interesting papers, just ask.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            Ah, interesting; so, you’re arguing that the minute number of scientists who deny climate change, (and therefore support your personally unqualified opinion, and that of those who profit from it), are the “real” scientists, while the vast number who claim it to be real are lesser scientists, therefore the media should be presenting the information as equally disputed?

            Never have I known anyone who’s so willing to call a grain of sand a beach.

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            RL, let me know when that “surrogate” actually gets a job in the Trump White House.

            Chris, no, I was arguing only an idiot gets their science from comedians who know little to nothing about science, or use made up statistics about the number of scientists who accept the IPCC political summaries Climate Change as a subject isn’t a hoax but the 97% number is. For earth scientists as a whole, the actual Doran & Zimmerman survey that claimed 97% of active climate researchers (an anonymous survey of self declared climate experts) also found about half of geologists didn’t believe the IPCC…. to get the 97% number they had to throw out all but 79 out of about 3300 surveys of bona fide earth scientists, out of 10,000 invited to take the survey.

            Mother Earth is running the experiment, the El Nino is over, we shall see. The physicists I’ve been paying attention to so far have a much better track record than the loud voices demanding action now.

            If IPCC’s predictions to date had come true, there’d be no arguments.

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            Checking, Scottie Nell Hughes appears to be a Trump supporter that CNN pays to say stupid stuff for the entertainment of CNN viewers. Mission accomplished.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            So, who’s position is the more laughable here; the uninformed dimwit who goes on CNN and makes ridiculous statements, or you, with the knowledge and capacity to understand it, yet comes to the same conclusions?
            Have you ever stopped and wondered why a complete idiot on TV supports the same essential positions that you do?

            On the flip side; I’d be willing to bet that Hughes can tell the difference between polemic reasoning and the comedic hyperbole of John Oliver, even if she can’t spell them.

          • Steven Frisch says:

            The answer is self evident Chris 🙂

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            Since you both have real problems understanding the differences between shit and shinola, I’d not expect you to have a clue as to the differences between my understanding of climate science and that of a Hughes, or of a Trump.

            Just to start with the most obvious… I’ve never made the claim that AGW was a hoax. I have dumped on the usual GOP suspects for claiming it, but GOP activists are as brain dead as the Chris and Stevie brigades when it comes to such politicized positions.

            Bad science driven by groupthink. There are many voices calling BS but they get drowned out by Democratic party activists like this guy who just knows how to howl at folks who are not conforming:

          • Steven Frisch says:

            Sorry buddy…you are just flat out whacked…I don’t know what happened to you but it is sad.

            I personally know some of the top climate scientists in the world…and they sound very rational.

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            They sound rational to you, Steve, because you share their politics, and your high school general science level understanding of the physics involved means you don’t have a clue as to where their scientific weaknesses are.

            For example, one non scientist famed for being a climate scientist is Gavin Schmidt, now director of NASA-GISS, having moved up after James Hansen retired. He’s a mathematician, and ten years ago at a debate he lost very badly he pointedly denounced research into effects of cosmic rays on climate to be bogus. That he knew it was bogus, and his fellow debater bringing it up, scientist Philip Stott, knew it was bogus.

            The young astrophysicist Schmidt denounced, Nir Shaviv, now the chair of his department at the Racah Institute of Physics in Jerusalem, spent a recent sabbatical year as an IBM Einstein Fellow at Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study, continuing that research Schmidt just knew was bogus.

            Schmidt recently warned Trump not to cut his funding at NASA-GISS. How well that threat works out is to be determined.

            Perhaps if you’d share a name on one of your famed climate scientist friends, preferably with a degree or two in physics, I’d be happy to read some of their papers.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            A very typical response on your part, Greg: “Here’s our smartest guy on the subject, and here’s your dumbest guy.” Everyone on this blog is well aware that you only accept the opinion of those who’s conclusions match your own, and will use your genetic talents to defend the minority, no matter how idiotic their position may be.
            For instance; we could give you a link, which you’re no doubt already aware of, (, which offers a list of over 200 international scientific organizations on climatology who disagree with you, but we all know that you will find some conservative think tank rebuttal, resplendent with politically-skewed numbers to back your preconceived conclusion.
            The main thing that bugs us isn’t that we think you’re stupid; it’s the exact opposite: you have the faculties of an intelligent being, yet you insist on positions of willful ignorance. It’s like, who’s dumber; the person who can’t read, or the one who can but doesn’t?
            So, fine; wallow about in your little world of denial and steadfast negativity; we can all simply laugh at your self-imposed ignorance, if that’s what you prefer.
            And I’ll take the dumb guy who’s got it right, over the smart guy who’s got it wrong, any day of the week.

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            Chris, national academies of science are the folks who help governments dole out research dollars, and yes, back in the mid ’00’s, they all saluted when the IPCC flag ran up the flagpole.

   in a very real sense *is* Gavin Schmidt as he is in charge of that department, which has painted itself into a corner by denouncing heretics like Shaviv rather than sticking to the scientific method which, over recent centuries, has brought us far.

            I leave you with the classic statement from Richard Feynman:
            “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”

          • Chris Peterson says:

            I’m used to hearing it a different way:

            “It doesn’t matter how many scientists come to the same conclusion after conducting decades of experiments, if it doesn’t agree with me…it’s wrong.” -Greg Goodnight

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            Chris, I am not responsible for your deafness.

  7. Judith Lowry says:

    It’s a “happening” alright.
    Complete with non-Indians coopting, appropriating and grandstanding.
    This is typical.
    I even hear some locals are making their way out to Standing Rock to be part of the spectacle.
    Sending money and gift cards to those already there would be a better way to support the folks out there.
    Writing to our representatives and lobbying are other ways to help.
    Conserving energy isn’t glamorous, but it also helps to staunch the flow of oil into our daily lives.
    “They also serve who only stand and wait” – Milton

    Helping our own Nisenan tribe through their 165 years of trials and tribulations here in “gold” country would be much more meaningful.
    Think of it as keeping your activism, “local”.
    Here’s the Standing Rock NDNs take on things.

    • Chris Peterson says:

      Judith, with respect:

      The fight against this pipeline started way before it ever got to the Sioux territory. Hundreds of farmers, ranchers, and land owners have been forced to sell their land to this private, for-profit enterprise under eminent domain in what is essentially the Keystone pipeline revised, and are not just standing alongside their Native American brothers and sisters, but had already launched a myriad of individual court battles to fight what has become a battle for all concerned citizens.
      I find the view that this is only about one tribe’s fight for social justice to be a bit myopic. And heaven forbid if anyone strong enough to brave the harsh winter conditions of a Midwest winter should break into song back at their camp. Really? It’s the Sioux’s battleground, but it’s the American citizens’ fight.
      Being afraid that the actions of a few white people might take the focus off the Sioux Nation seems counter-productive, even if only expressed by a few individuals on their FaceBook page. If a million white people showed up tomorrow, this thing would end quickly on a positive note. So, if folks in Nevada County want to join in, good for them.

  8. Greg Goodknight says:

    The governator of North Dakota has declared Monday 12/5 as the you’d better be gone from the protest campout and drum circle day.

    Here’s a clue for those of you who need a weatherman to tell which way the wind is blowing:

    5/-15 are the high/low for Thursday. Here’s a portion of the special weather statement:




    Global warming strikes again!

    I’m not overly concerned for the safety of Sioux camping out on their home turf but I suspect the lefty white Burning Man herd will be culled if they don’t get out.

    • Chris Peterson says:

      Gee, I hope that recent events favoring a possible peaceful resolution to the issue hasn’t upset you too much, Greg. Guess you’ll have to wait another couple of months for your anticipated fascist orgasm.
      (I know, I know; that damn Obama, once again quelling the violence by taking the people’s side over the greedy corporate interests.)

      • Greg Goodknight says:

        The choice to be peaceful or not is up to the protesters.

        The drilling rig for the tunnel is still in place. New President in less than seven weeks, real cold weather hitting, Burners about to go back to the coasts from which they came and, I suspect, court cases already being filed. Just one more thing.

  9. Greg Goodknight says:

    “Guess you’ll have to wait another couple of months for your anticipated fascist orgasm.”

    That’s exactly the sort of ugly bs that got Trump elected and the Democratic Party having to party like it was 1920 again, with the average age of their leadership in Congress up around 76 years old.

    Every once in awhile some irrational Alt-Leftist feels a need to call me a fascist of one stripe or another, laughable because I remain Pro-Choice on everything. Although you try to call me a liar when I repeat it, I have only ever been registered to vote in one of two parties… Democratic and Libertarian, and have never voted in a GOP primary. I have no dog in this hunt other than a leaning towards the rule of law and not the whims of il Duce in D.C., which really is fascist to the core.

    • Chris Peterson says:

      My Dad was a registered Republican all his life, (so he could screw with their primaries), but never voted that way once.
      Your statement proves nothing.
      And “Alt-Leftist”? That’s a new one. So, if alt-right is a cover for white supremacy, what’s alt-leftist? Communist? Socialist? Or perhaps the opposite of white supremacist: intelligent? I’ll give you 9 points for imagination, but I have to dock you 5 for paraphrasing a third-graders’ “I know you are, but what am I.”

  10. Greg Goodknight says:

    Alt-left is way out there left. Loony. Unable to communicate left. Conspiracy minded left. Believing anyone to the right of moderate democrat is either stupid or evil left.

    Out of the mainstream left.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *