Wow, just wow. I knew Ted Rall was an idiot, but I didn't know anyone took him seriously. Anyone who reads his strip for a week should know he's a vicious hack and should be treated with the same disdain one reserves for fascists and religious fundamentalists.

.

Cheap, two-bit shock journalism and last-gasp desperation for a jump in MSNBC's dismal ratings.

.

"treated with the same disdain one reserves for fascists and religious fundamentalists."

which is exactly what MSNBC does. They love him, just as they love Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Khomeini, etc. etc.

That's the state of the political left, worldwide.

Memo to Ted Rall:

Bring it on! I've got something for you and your leftist pals!

Both of you are the reason I have a gun.

Read your own call to arms:
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/304143.php

Hypocrite.

He and Spencer Ackerman can take on the world!

TimWB, apparently you have a reading comprehension problem.

I wrote in that post noting what has occurred, what has come to pass, and how I/we should prepare to react in the future. I advocate for preparations that are defensive in nature if the government invalidates itself or collapses.

Rall wants a proactive militant strike on behalf of liberal totalitarianism, concluding of conservatives that "They will never get weaker.We have as good a chance at taking them on as ever."

You lack the basic ability to tell the difference between defense and offense.

Why should any of us take you seriously?

Bring it.
Any girl child can pull a trigger.
Meet me on the field with a blade. I got something for you.

Ah, the self righteous whine of the Interwebs Fascist-Hunter (TM).

No wonder CCFK's running interference for Affirmative Action POTUS & friends - CCFK thinks just like them. When someone calls you on your Leftist stupidity, just play the fascist/race/class/xenophobe card, lather, rinse repeat (see the Messiah's unfortunate "guns and religion comment, for another example of how these "people" "think"). It's also good to see he/she/it can't defend Ted Rall's argument OR show where CY advocated violence against dissenting private citizens. A tacit admission of failure, IMO.

Racheal Corrie had more balls than this whimp.

The don't have many kids and then they abort 50 million of thier potential progeny and they wonder why they lost the last election?

They're stuuupid.

These socialists are doomed. Dead Culture walking.

I would like to see them walk unsaying through a Muslim neighborhood, at night, in London. After they kick the crap out of him or kill him lets hear what he would have to say then.

Pardon my confusion. It's just that when I read:

"I'll lay it out bluntly for you; either the American people—not extremists, but good and decent patriots like your neighbors and yourselves—will revolt and destroy the ruling class and reform our government based upon first principles, or the United States we know as our forefather conceived it is dead."

Did you mean "destroy" as "to end" , as opposed to "tear down and demolish"?

If so, then why "reform"? If already ended, there would be nothing to reform, which implies a form which continues.

So I assumed "tear down and demolish", in order to "reform" the rubble. Tearing down and demolishing are violent actions.

Later, you write that the choice is to "reform or replace." Never mind that "reform increasingly is a fleeting option." This leaves "replace" which doubled my conclusion regarding "destroy".

Then: "Revolution is a brutish, nasty business. Innocents will fall along with patriots and the corrupt, and success is not assured."

Fall in what way? If there is nothing but peaceful reform, in what way are innocents and patriots going to fall?

Then the whole tone of the remainder. From a one-paragraph link in which the writers want to "prune" the government, you write words with war hyperbole: entrenched, revolt, destroy, coup, standing on the brink. Even your Adams quote includes subdued, surrender, and invader.

"I pray for peace." I'm sure you do.

"But I prepare for war." Your language makes me believe you put in a lot more of the latter than the former.

I didn't even look at the Rall quote, because I know he's a jerk.

But dude, based on this post, I have to conclude that you want a war, a nice dramatic one where you can stand on the ramparts and go down in history and shake hands with patriots.

People who want wars never say "oops I killed the wrong guy" or "maybe I could have listened a little more" or "I wonder if they're getting enough soup in the prison camps?" They talk about innocents falling.

And *that's* why this moderate has a gun.

Oh come on man. "Totalitarian Leftists" are misquoting you, by posting a URL and then posting what you said from it?

Sorry man. Either you can show HOW these quotes are "out of context", by showing other things you said in the same article - or the quotes are in context and you are a hypocrite.

I didn't make the laws of logic. I'm just reminding you of them.

Hey Nine-of-Diamonds--

Self-righteous whine? Spare me. I'm not the one with the ouija board pretending to divine the "first principles". I'm not the one who claims perfect knowledge of when one needs to take up arms to replace the current government. I am the one calling CY on his ahistorical reimagining of what history actually tells us.

You've typed,

"I'll lay it out bluntly for you; either the American people—not extremists, but good and decent patriots like your neighbors and yourselves—will revolt and destroy the ruling class and reform our government based upon first principles, or the United States we know as our forefather conceived it is dead."

which is also what Rall said.

Oh, dear. Looks like keyboard fascist hunter's post vanished right after I responded.

"I'm not the one who claims perfect knowledge"

Cite, please? Yeah, I thought so. And newsflash: Strawmen are a well-known fascist debating tactic, comrade. Stop employing them, or we'll have no choice but to question your allegiance to Dear Leader.

Anyway ... Good thing that our Affirmative Action superstar hasn't been speaking about "punish[ing] enemies", "tear[ing] [people] up", "hand to hand combat", and other metaphors. Again, you see, that's clear convincing proof of fashisum. And homicidal, bible thumping, gun-clingy christofashist tendencies - Ted Rall told me so in his latest cartoon. I think.

Now quit standing - there's interwebz fashistz to stop, and stuff!111! A Conservative blogger using "destroy" must be stopped. A very important man, unlike the TOTUS. Onward, fashist fighters! Make Teleprompter-boy proud!

seems to me what I read from CY was, a call that ordinary patriotic americans who love the country as a nation of free men, may need to take action to keep themselves from ending up serfs.

imposed from a ruling class.

what im reading from rall is a call to start killing anyone who isnt a leftist socialist.

that has nothing to do with the desire to remain free of shackles imposed by others,

it has everything to do with wanting to start murdering political oponents. at every walk of life right down to my nieghborhood.

I beleive that would end very badly for anyone who "listened" to rall.

rall is a punk, rall is an evil toad. he hates america, he hates patriotic americans he hates anyone who wants to keep america the country it has allways been.

in other words he's a goblin. so who cares what that weasil says.

You guys are fun-ny.

What's really funny is drawing faulty conclusions about CY's violent tendencies based on willful misinterpretation of his metaphors, while ignoring even more charged language by 0bama and quite a few others in his cabal. But of course, the Conservative blogger is the threat here - not the Commander in Chief.

Homegrown communist revolutionaries like Rall love to talk the talk of Ho Chi Minh and Che Guevara. But the walk? Well, I'd lay a 1911 with a loaded mag and empty chamber in front of him and have a good laugh watching the Che wannabe try to execute me for my beliefs. Rall is just another fat pampered pig. He's a limousine liberal living in fantasy land without the courage of his convictions. I am pretty sure that Rall is actually Maureen Dowd dressed to look like a very ugly and effeminate man.

The banality of evil...

Over the years, I have seen Ted Rall's sh*tty hateful little comic from time to time. I despised the mentality behind it. But in all that time, I never imagined him to be the lisping, delusional, chinless metrosexual douchebag he turns out to be upon actual field observation. I assumed he was, how shall I say, a more representative sample of the North American male population. Don't ask me why.

The outcome of the 2010 election ("a restraining order" per P.J. O'Rourke) is squeezing some rather unattractive juices out of the Progressive bar rag.

Say - can any of the trolls explain this (at Youtube): 62L3nxWOlX4

It's in several parts. Tell me what you think. Take your time. Put some thought into it.

Cabal. Not charged at all.

The dichotomy may be true, or true-ish; Mr. Rall is an unusual specimen and reasonable people ignore him, as they should. But the post and its comments are lying by arguing that one dose of nutjob violent talk on the left balances the habit and tradition and essential embrace of violence on the right. Your language is permeated with violence; that you don't see and acknowledge it is a violence of another kind.

You squeal and wet yourselves at every gesture from the Terrorists, then wave your guns around, magazines full of bravado, then take terrible offense when somebody calls you violent. You claim that the president is an elitist, magically stupid and deviously intelligent at the same time; then you cavil and quibble over the interpretation of 'metaphors'. Love of Jesus, delivered with a club.

You are consistent. I'll give you that.

ice9