POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Criticism

[bunnycat]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

I have conservative friends and family, and no, I wouldn't say I toss offensive labels with abandon. Feel free to look through my posts and find offensive language directed at other. I try to refrain. However, I have had plenty of labels tossed at me, personally,from people I know.

Sorry bunny; I didn't intend to mean 'you personally toss labels around' with my quote. It was a general question.

Thanks. No worries. It is a serious issue on both sides. I do read commentary, always. And depending on the tone of an article you are reading it's the exact same commentary just an exchange of phrases. So a more liberal leaning article you'll see lot of libtard, snowflake, alt-left nazi and other similar commentary. In conservative article you'll see right-wing nut job, nazi, fascist...etc... It's just not really possible to say that one side does it more than the other if you read articles and commentary from both regularly, and I do.

 

[OreoRosies86]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Yes, I am absolutely saying that women who wore pink hats to the Women's March are far more civilized than the fringe extremists who applaud the likes of your favorite Breitbart writers. We've already established that pussy hats don't cause me to... what did you call it? Clutch my pearls? What is your point?

 

[E B]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Politically, the problem with shutting Yiannopoulos down is obvious. The reason the College Republicans invited him in the first pace was “because we believe there exists a dearth of intellectual diversity on this campus,” and “conservative thought is actively repressed.” Not letting him speak on campus just makes their point. It lets Yiannopoulos depict himself as a victim of “political correctness.” Which is the grievance that fuels his ugly persona in the first place.

But the argument for letting Yiannopoulos speak is more than tactical. It’s a matter of principle. Conservative students have the right to bring obnoxious bigots to speak on campus and other students have a right to protest. But universities should not let the protesters shut them down. That was hard for many leftists to accept even before Trump’s election. Now that an obnoxious bigot occupies the White House, it’s even harder. But Trump’s presidency is, in part, a test of whether ordinary Americans can avoid sinking to his level, whether a citizenry can respect the principles that its leaders do not. What happened to Milo Yiannopoulos this week is part of that test. It’s important that progressives at Berkeley, and around the country, do not fail.

Couldn't agree more, except for this bit: "universities should not let the protesters shut them down." (The part about "conservative thought is actively repressed sounds like snowflakey BS too, but I can't say for sure at this particular uni.) It sounded like this was a matter of safety for everyone involved, Milo included. He's whining about not being able to speak, but if he'd had a bottle thrown at him, or had been punched in the face, he'd have whined about not being properly protected by the awful, biased university that obviously wanted him hurt. The university had to make a call, and they absolutely made the right one.

I'm sure Milo feels the mean, liberal world has done him and other poor, defenseless conservatives wrong, but the fact of the matter is that he IS a racist, sexist, xenophobic bag of flaming dog sh*t. The labels for him are 100 percent true. So his argument, for the most part, flies right out the window. Same goes for most that point to him and say, "Seeeeee? It's all true!"

BTW, the "libs think/say all conservatives are racist!" stuff has been debunked to hell and back. That may be a fringe opinion, but there are fringe opinions about anything. It's been said 100 times but heck, let's make it 101: Most people disappointed in Trump didn't think anyone who voted for him was racist, they were disappointed that those who voted for him knew he was (in addition to the other -ists and -ophobes) and decided all of that wasn't too big a deal. Very different things.

 

[E B]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Thanks. No worries. It is a serious issue on both sides. I do read commentary, always. And depending on the tone of an article you are reading it's the exact same commentary just an exchange of phrases. So a more liberal leaning article you'll see lot of libtard, snowflake, alt-left nazi and other similar commentary. In conservative article you'll see right-wing nut job, nazi, fascist...etc... It's just not really possible to say that one side does it more than the other if you read articles and commentary from both regularly, and I do.

THIS. In the same political threads here that you (OP) say conservatives are labeled, liberals are called snowflakes, "special," offered safe spaces, play-dough, "aww, can't deal with the real world," and I loved the assumption in the crowd size thread that there were more people at Obama's inauguration because Trump supporters "have jobs, unlike libs." Complete with a racist undertone! Etc., etc. There isn't a day that goes by on the internet that I don't see the word "libtard" (don't even get me started) at least ten times. Twitter's great for making you feel completely hopeless about the world going forward.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

I've been trying to make sense of your views, but all I can really say it that it seems most of your views align with those who would be considered extremist. If that's your thing, great.

I'm sorry you're so challenged comprehending my views. I'm not really sure what more I can possibly do to clarify something to help you. Perhaps ask me a direct question about something you're confused about, and I'll do my best to help you. I'm not really sure how you could consider someone who is conservative and pro-choice & pro-equal rights 'extreme'.

Middle-right, maybe.

Yes, I am absolutely saying that women who wore pink hats to the Women's March are far more civilized than the fringe extremists who applaud the likes of your favorite Breitbart writers. We've already established that pussy hats don't cause me to... what did you call it? Clutch my pearls? What is your point?

Who said I like Breitbart or even have a favorite writer there? My reading of the 'birth control' pill article someone else posted was the first writing of Milo's I've ever read, and maybe the second time I've ever visited that site. Sheesh, eat a snickers already.

My point was trying to understand your definition of the term you used: 'civilized women'. Does Amy Schumer & Sarah Silverman fall into that category as well for you?

 

[OreoRosies86]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

What is this eat a snickers thing you're always adding to your condescending commentary?

 

[lovedogs]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

We already know what he says. Read his articles. Civilized women aren't interested.

Are these the same civilized women who wore "lady part" hats & costumes at the women's March?

...we need to be nicer and more understanding of different viewpoints.

Are you suggesting we should not be tolerant of others' viewpoints?

[/quote]


I am suggesting that I am NOT tolerant of this horrible human being's viewpoint. He doesn't even have "viewpoints", he has hate speech. And I certainly won't apologize for not being more "tolerant" of his garbage.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

THIS. In the same political threads here that you (OP) say conservatives are labeled, liberals are called snowflakes, "special," offered safe spaces, play-dough, "aww, can't deal with the real world," and I loved the assumption in the crowd size thread that there were more people at Obama's inauguration because Trump supporters "have jobs, unlike libs." Complete with a racist undertone! Etc., etc. There isn't a day that goes by on the internet that I don't see the word "libtard" (don't even get me started) at least ten times. Twitter's great for making you feel completely hopeless about the world going forward.

Just for clarification sake, my use of a couple of those in the Berkeley thread was specifically about those who caused violence; people who do that stuff (commit any violent type of crime really) don't deserve rights, IMO (I know they have them, but I wish they didn't because I don't condone violence). But that's a whole other thread; don't get me started!

I also don't care for the term "libtard" because I think it mocks people with disabilities for which they have no choice, and 'being liberal' IS a choice. I don't recall using the other terms myself, but I do recall recently someone - Elliott, I believe (I could be wrong; if I am, I'm sorry) - making reference to something like banishing herself to her safe space with play doh, and I think she invited me. My head is loopy tonight from being sick, so I don't recall the thread or deets.

Do we agree that - either side - casting labels on people for their beliefs (be them religious, political, etc.) is generally 'wrong'? I'm not talking about calling someone a doofus, dingus, or some other 'socially jovial term of endearment'.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

What is this eat a snickers thing you're always adding to your condescending commentary?

That wasn't condescending; it was a joke. It's a nice way of saying "quit being so darn feisty" ... like posting the 'chill pill'.

Have you really NEVER seen any of the "eat a snickers ..." commercials?

Go forth and be amused: https://youtu.be/vW6ZXHWvaGc

 

[OreoRosies86]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Speaking of challenged, do you not understand the difference between: female comediennes who embrace dialogue about their bodies, and the men who would prefer they tell us what to do with said bodies? You claim to have a highly developed sense of humor, so maybe that's where my "challenges" lie.

 

[bunnycat]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

I'm not really sure how you could consider someone who is conservative and pro-choice & pro-equal rights 'extreme'.

Middle-right, maybe?

(Edited out emotional content.)

Lol, perhaps we just need to cut straight to this.

Hi, I'm Bunny. And I am a non-religious, pro-choice, equal rights advocate, and socially liberal.

 

[wildcat03]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Wildcat: I am a bit confused by your comment lovedogs quoted. Are you saying its "permissible" (for lack of a better word; my brain is fried) for citizens to halt/prevent the first amendment rights of other citizens in public?

Let's start with the text of the first amendment. It reads

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Thus, PRIVATE CITIZENS can not have their First Amendment Rights infringed upon by other private citizens. The First Amendment places no duty on private citizens and has NOTHING to do with their actions. It says that the government can not infringe upon the right of the private citizens to speak their mind, publish their dissent, assemble, etc.

The "press" (if that's what we're calling Milo) can not have their First Amendment rights infringed upon by other citizens either, for the same reason.

Example: I'm a doctor. If I go stitch Milo's mouth shut and glue his fingers together, that is criminal and assault and illegal and wrong. But even though it takes away his ability to communicate, it does NOT violate his First Amendment Rights. If, on the other hand, the legislature passes a bill that says that I must do those things - that WOULD violate his First Amendment rights.

 

[lovedogs]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Speaking of challenged, do you not understand the difference between: female comediennes who embrace dialogue about their bodies, and the men who would prefer they tell us what to do with said bodies? You claim to have a highly developed sense of humor, so maybe that's where my "challenges" lie.

I think perhaps the word "comedian" needs to be both bolded and underlined here. Are we seriously going to compare female comedians who's entire job it is to make people laugh (and who do so by talking about their bodies) to a man who writes for a known hate site, isn't trying to be funny, and is just a sexist/racist/every other horrible thing piece of trash? Because that cannot seriously be the comparison you are trying to make.

EDIT: similarly, how are women who dressed as vag*nas comparable to this guy? Since when is a statement about women and their rights comparable to hate speech?? I am seriously dumbfounded.

 

[OreoRosies86]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Speaking of challenged, do you not understand the difference between: female comediennes who embrace dialogue about their bodies, and the men who would prefer they tell us what to do with said bodies? You claim to have a highly developed sense of humor, so maybe that's where my "challenges" lie.

I think perhaps the word "comedian" needs to be both bolded and underlined here. Are we seriously going to compare female comedians who's entire job it is to make people laugh (and who do so by talking about their bodies) to a man who writes for a known hate site, isn't trying to be funny, and is just a sexist/racist/every other horrible thing piece of trash? Because that cannot seriously be the comparison you are trying to make.

EDIT: similarly, how are women who dressed as vag*nas comparable to this guy? Since when is a statement about women and their rights comparable to hate speech?? I am seriously dumbfounded.

I imagine it falls into the "locker room talk" category.

 

[lovedogs]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Speaking of challenged, do you not understand the difference between: female comediennes who embrace dialogue about their bodies, and the men who would prefer they tell us what to do with said bodies? You claim to have a highly developed sense of humor, so maybe that's where my "challenges" lie.

I think perhaps the word "comedian" needs to be both bolded and underlined here. Are we seriously going to compare female comedians who's entire job it is to make people laugh (and who do so by talking about their bodies) to a man who writes for a known hate site, isn't trying to be funny, and is just a sexist/racist/every other horrible thing piece of trash? Because that cannot seriously be the comparison you are trying to make.

EDIT: similarly, how are women who dressed as vag*nas comparable to this guy? Since when is a statement about women and their rights comparable to hate speech?? I am seriously dumbfounded.

I imagine it falls into the "locker room talk" category.

INSERT MY VOMIT EMOJI HERE!

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Speaking of challenged, do you not understand the difference between: female comediennes who embrace dialogue about their bodies, and the men who would prefer they tell us what to do with said bodies? You claim to have a highly developed sense of humor, so maybe that's where my "challenges" lie.

I didn't say I have a "highly developed sense of humor"; just a regular 'ol, run of the mill, made in the USA sense of humor.

Yes, I see the difference between your 'apples to Styrofoam cups' example. In this case; however, all three (Amy, Sarah & Milo) are entertainers. Milo isn't (correct me if I'm wrong) a doctor, a lawyer, a politician, law maker, your spouse, or anyone else who would have any sort of impact or say over your body. He appears to write what I perceive to be satire albeit with his political slant, and he goes around performing for audiences. Even IF he's full on serious with every word he says/writes, I definitely don't understand why anyone else would give his words - whether they find them humorous or not - so much power or "free rent" in their head to the point of lowering oneself to use the same hateful rhetoric about him that you (collectively) claim he does about others.

I personally have no problem with a man making jokes about women, their bodies, 'how we do'. We don't have a monopoly of humor; we do a lot of crazy stuff at times to warrant a joke or 3; and it'd be pretty hypocritical as well as a double standard to think "women can be raunchy, mock their bodies, etc., but whooooa Nelly ... that's off limits to to the men folk." Amy/Sarah tell jokes about men; Chris Rock tells jokes about whites; brunettes tell jokes about blondes; and EVERYONE tells jokes about lawyers & politicians.

And the world still magically goes on somehow.

 

[OreoRosies86]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

If that's what you think I'm saying then.... okay? Let's put Milo Whatshisname in the same category as Bill Burr and Louie CK because yes, you're right Jenn. They are the same. You have the final word here.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Lol, perhaps we just need to cut straight to this.
Hi, I'm Bunny. And I am a non-religious, pro-choice, equal rights advocate, and socially liberal.

Hi, Bunny; I'm JJ. I'm a 'believer', pro-choice, equal rights advocate, and conservative.

Look how well we just did that!

I think perhaps the word "comedian" needs to be both bolded and underlined here. Are we seriously going to compare female comedians who's entire job it is to make people laugh (and who do so by talking about their bodies) to a man who writes for a known hate site, isn't trying to be funny, and is just a sexist/racist/every other horrible thing piece of trash? Because that cannot seriously be the comparison you are trying to make.

EDIT: similarly, how are women who dressed as vag*nas comparable to this guy? Since when is a statement about women and their rights comparable to hate speech?? I am seriously dumbfounded.

This is NOT "two women comedians" vs "a writer". BOTH of these comedians are WELL known for throwing their voices into the political spectrum on many occasions when they are NOT on stage being paid for it; they cross that line willingly. So no, they don't get a pass (from me at least) as the "innocent women who like to grab their parts as a sign of empowerment" that you or someone else might try to make them out to be.

On your second comment/edit: it wasn't a comparison; re-read my question.

 

[bunnycat]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Lol, perhaps we just need to cut straight to this.
Hi, I'm Bunny. And I am a non-religious, pro-choice, equal rights advocate, and socially liberal.

Hi, Bunny; I'm JJ. I'm a 'believer', pro-choice, equal rights advocate, and conservative.

Look how well we just did that!

Thanks. For me personally, even if I may not agree with something you write, knowing this will always now temper my assessment of things.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Thanks. For me personally, even if I may not agree with something you write, knowing this will always now temper my assessment of things.

Likewise!

And I should clarify my use of the term "advocate" as I think many on here view it slightly differently. I don't participate in marches, demonstrations, etc. If I am walking down the street, and I see someone being "wronged" or discriminated against because they are black, gay, handicapped, whatever, I will swiftly and surely jump their shizz to defend the person being wronged, and I have - including a few of my family members' comments & behavior, including one who is black. I treat people without judgment/fairly per the golden rule. You get the point.


But in ALL things, tolerance IS a two-way street - show it, get it; don't, I'll show you the door. Again, golden rule.

 

[elizabethess]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

But in ALL things, tolerance IS a two-way street - show it, get it; don't, I'll show you the door. Again, golden rule.

Hey, hi, literally just skimming through posts and not deeply involved in ongoing discussions, just a quick clarification because this is a common misconception: maybe you actually mean 'tit for tat'? The Golden Rule is specifically about acting morally towards others WITHOUT expectation of reciprocity, Treating someone as you would wish to be treated, regardless of actions back! So: show it; maybe get it? And if you don't, still keep showing it.

Hope that clears it up!

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

But in ALL things, tolerance IS a two-way street - show it, get it; don't, I'll show you the door. Again, golden rule.

Hey, hi, literally just skimming through posts and not deeply involved in ongoing discussions, just a quick clarification because this is a common misconception: maybe you actually mean 'tit for tat'? The Golden Rule is specifically about acting morally towards others WITHOUT expectation of reciprocity, Treating someone as you would wish to be treated, regardless of actions back! So: show it; maybe get it? And if you don't, still keep showing it.

Hope that clears it up!

Hi! One is a 'rule', the other is a reaction. And we all have different beliefs when it comes to defining 'morality'.

I observe the "golden rule". AND when someone else does not, or repeatedly treats me disrespectfully/unkindly, my "show you the door" means anything from simply 'dismiss you from my circle' to 'reciprocate the treatment you have shown me' ... because yes, I am HUMAN, and my kindness does in fact have limits; I am not perfect, but I am also NOT a doormat.

http://www.thinkhumanism.com/the-golden-rule.html

 

[partgypsy]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

I agree the comment that Milo is a professional troll. This is going to come up more and more, where, what are the rights for those who are simply espousing hate speech with no other substance, allowed to have bully pulpits? I feel he has enough platforms to spread his views. College republicans certainly have many many other people they could have chosen to give a talk that might bridge barriers or be educational in some way. I don't see a woman comedienne self-depreceatingly talk about herself, as being any way similar to a man attacking women. Kind of like African Americans using the n-word with each other, versus white people using the word. It seems pretty clear the difference.

 

[Maria D]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

I couldnt watch the entire video--got about 30 seconds in of him blaming the left for being "anti free speech", and then looked up his disgusting writing. That told me all I needed to know about him as a person.

Maybe you can overlook all the commentary and just listen to what he says.

Are you saying that you overlook his words when you listen to his interview? Do you feel that he doesn't deserve criticism for his written work because he is able to verbally articulate ideas that you agree with? I'm seriously confused.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

I agree the comment that Milo is a professional troll. This is going to come up more and more, where, what are the rights for those who are simply espousing hate speech with no other substance, allowed to have bully pulpits? I feel he has enough platforms to spread his views. College republicans certainly have many many other people they could have chosen to give a talk that might bridge barriers or be educational in some way. I don't see a woman comedienne self-depreceatingly talk about herself, as being any way similar to a man attacking women. Kind of like African Americans using the n-word with each other, versus white people using the word. It seems pretty clear the difference.

The Women's March was allowed to give Madonna & others some consider socially & politically "extreme" a "platform". Why do conservatives - American Citizens - not deserve the right to choose their "speaker"?

Your argument seems to support Milo's use of a few slurs (e.g., his references to gays, since he is). If you justify use of discriminatory slurs by one, you make it okay for all. I don't condone the use of the N-word by ANYONE, just like I don't consider any other slur "acceptable".

Demanding "equality" only when it's self-serving is not equality; it's selfishness.

 

[Maria D]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

I agree the comment that Milo is a professional troll. This is going to come up more and more, where, what are the rights for those who are simply espousing hate speech with no other substance, allowed to have bully pulpits? I feel he has enough platforms to spread his views. College republicans certainly have many many other people they could have chosen to give a talk that might bridge barriers or be educational in some way. I don't see a woman comedienne self-depreceatingly talk about herself, as being any way similar to a man attacking women. Kind of like African Americans using the n-word with each other, versus white people using the word. It seems pretty clear the difference.

This underlying hate is what is fueling the modern day republican party. Who are college republicans supposed to invite, a loser like John Kasich? Any republican that would be speaking about traditional conservative republican views wouldn't get an audience. Trump may have lost the popular vote but he won the republican party nomination BY FAR. And he did it in large part by espousing hate.

Dems, Repubs, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, all, need to realize that this is what has become of the republican party.

 

[OreoRosies86]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

Hate drove Trump's campaign and won him votes. These extremeists are the people representing this party now, and people are listening. The truth doesn't matter anymore. You can laugh at it if you think it's funny, but don't trick yourself into thinking you're not somehow identifying with hate speech. Last I checked Sarah Silverman isn't taunting Muslim women while wearing a bulletproof vest at shows.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

I couldnt watch the entire video--got about 30 seconds in of him blaming the left for being "anti free speech", and then looked up his disgusting writing. That told me all I needed to know about him as a person.

Maybe you can overlook all the commentary and just listen to what he says.

Are you saying that you overlook his words when you listen to his interview? Do you feel that he doesn't deserve criticism for his written work because he is able to verbally articulate ideas that you agree with? I'm seriously confused.

THAT was actually MaryPoppins' advice (in defense of an anti-Chump article she posted) to anyone who might be 'put off' reading something they disagree with so they can still get the overall message.

Ignore the commentary in the article like I did and all that's left is a transcript of the speech.

In this particular case, the 'message' is that conservatives' rights ARE being violated & oppressed by those on the left. Conservatives ARE being falsely & stereotypically labeled by those on the left. Conservatives ARE sick & tired of liberal hypocrisies, are speaking up in objection, and THAT is why they elected Chump - to demand equality for THEIR rights, treatment, etc.

Criticize whomever you (collectively) want; just be fair and objective in those criticisms ... if you don't, you can't (reasonably) get "bent" or expect someone to take you or your positions seriously.

 

[Maria D]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

JoCo, I'm even more confused than before. It sounds like your "ignore the commentary" remark then was mild sarcasm because mary poppins said something like that in another thread? Maybe your motivation here is general debate?

For the record, I couldn't give a flying f*k about Milo Yiannopoulos, what he writes, what he says, and his victim claims. It's just a huge distraction from the very real problems we (the entire world) are facing. It does give Fox News more fuel for their agenda - oh, look at how those lefties are denying us our right to free speech! Let's go on endless news cycle about that for a while, now that no one gives a crap about Benghazi anymore.

 

[wildcat03]

Re: POLITICAL: Milo Speaks Out re: Liberals' Labels & Critic

In this particular case, the 'message' is that conservatives' rights ARE being violated & oppressed by those on the left. Conservatives ARE being falsely & stereotypically labeled by those on the left. Conservatives ARE sick & tired of liberal hypocrisies, are speaking up in objection, and THAT is why they elected Chump - to demand equality for THEIR rights, treatment, etc.

Criticize whomever you (collectively) want; just be fair and objective in those criticisms ... if you don't, you can't (reasonably) get "bent" or expect someone to take you or your positions seriously.

And now the left is watching the rights of others be trampled. So I'm not sure why you think it's ok to tell us to sit quietly and watch it happen or expect that we will.

And don't even get me started on conservative hypocrisy...