Monday, August 03, 2009

When we ban torture, can we also ban tortured reasoning?

Did you know that the Bible explicitly names Barack Obama as Satan? OMG!!



This video makes a convincing case for Obama being the Anti-Christ. After all, Luke 10:18 clearly states - with a little help from some back-and-forth Babelfishing - that Satan's name is "Baraq Bamah." Oooooh!

Why haven't we heard this before in 2,000 years of Christianity? The answer is obvious: YouTube wasn't around in the days of the New Testament. Though it has been around since 2005, so there's no excuse for not disseminating this information in 2008, WHEN IT COULD HAVE BEEN USEFUL!!

Jesus Christ.

I can respect people whose faith helps them get through life, but DAMN. Is there really such irrational hatred for Obama, and so little to hate him about, that they have to resort to faulty translations of faulty translations? (You know how adding "a" to the front of "typical" makes it a completely different word? Well, there's a lot of that going on here, multiplied by thousands of years and across multiple languages.) Dumb dumb dumb. And, by the way, not the best argument to abandon Obama and become a religious nut.


"I lit this cross with fire from my loins because I like burning crosses, which means I am not only Satan, but am also in the Klan. All hail Rev. Wright, my secret-Muslim Christian pastor!"

If you Obama critics are so hungry for fodder, why don't you take a cue from his critics on the left? They at least have some genuine issues in their petty bickering.

47 comments:

Nick Istre said...

Thank you for keeping up with this craziness so I don't have to!

herb said...

Jesus, our last President was Hitler according to the left, and this one is the anti-christ according to the right. The US can't catch a break.

NOLA Progressive said...

Isn't it amazing how religion can pervert and condemn anything? Not just Christianity obviously. Organized religion provides a conduit for so much ignorance and hatred that it is hard to see past it to the positive works of particular adherents sometimes!

herb said...

I always find it amusing how all these militant atheist liberals are quick to bemoan how horrible religion is when it comes to a story about Christians...but when it's a story about how fucked up Islam is they suddenly start talking about understanding and how Islam really is great/bad apples/shut up islamaphobe. It's this amazing double standard when it comes to which religions they hate.

Ian McGibboney said...

Nick - Not a problem. I'm drawn to this kind of stuff like poop to a sewage plant.

NOLA - I feel like most holy texts are so ambiguously written that literally anything in the world could be justified. Sometimes I wonder if they were composed that way on purpose.

Herb - No one seriously thought Bush was the literal manifestation of evil. And if they did, they didn't have the standing within the Democratic Party that the fundies on the right have with the GOP. Bush gave people plenty to hate him for without the tortured supernatural subtext.

Your double standard is bogus, too, because liberals object to blanket condemnation of any religion over the actions of their fanatics. That's nothing like having to tolerate the ridiculous arguments of a fanatic American calling the president the anti-Christ.

herb said...

liberals object to blanket condemnation of any religion over the actions of their fanatics.

Lol, you really believe that don't you? I love how you have this fantastical, idolized vision of modern liberalism, when liberals actions over the past 8 years show that vision to be a total fallacy.

Ian McGibboney said...

Calling out the Christian right on its sleaze, fearmongering, hatred, hypocrisy and lust for power is not religious persecution.

Calling to round up all Arabs or Arab-looking people and/or referring to the war on terror as a "crusade" IS religious (and racial) persecution. Get some perspective, Herb.

herb said...

So I was right, you call out the bad stuff about the "christian right" (which, by the way, is a "blanket condemnation", but who's counting?) and defend Islam. It's like I'm clairvoyant or something.

How come you never call out Islam for it's fearmongering, hatred and hypocrisy? Why is that Ian? Why is your denouncement of religion so...selective?

NOLA Progressive said...

It seems to me that liberals are pretty heavy-handed on religion in general. I mean hell, one of the most prolific liberals (loved or hated) I can think of is Bill Maher, and he never holds back on oranized religion of any type. Religulous was an entire documentary devoted to basically pointing out the absolute absurdity of most of the world's major religions.

That is typically the reaction that I notice from the liberal/progressive crowd on the subject. I specifically always wonder why we need a book or mysterious figure in the sky to tell us to do good things for one another. I love the good deeds that come from the adherents of religion, but find the ying to their yang is pretty bitter.

Also, Herb I'm not sure if your comment of

I always find it amusing how all these militant atheist liberals are quick to bemoan how horrible religion is when it comes to a story about Christians...but when it's a story about how fucked up Islam is they suddenly start talking about understanding and how Islam

was directed at me or not, as it directly followed mine, but I believe I specified not particularly Christianity in that comment.

Ian McGibboney said...

Herb, why don't you take that equivalency bullshit somewhere else? You shouldn't have to look too hard to find your way, because there is a very well-trodden path there.

I am condemning the Christian right here because that is who is behind this. It is not generalizing to say that they are an extreme faction that nevertheless has a lot of political influence. I never said that they encompass all Christians; if I had, Herb, you might have a point. But, as usual, you don't.

And Muslims have nothing to do with this. Nothing. I shouldn't have to qualify everything I say about Christian extremists with, "Oh, but Muslim terrorists are bad too." The only people who even request that of me are those who can't argue the issue on its own merit and are desperate to change the subject.

But I won't change the subject, Herb. Do you think Obama is the anti-Christ? What do you think of the people who admire this video?

herb said...

I think my opinion on the video was encapsulated in my first comment, it's as ridiculous as the lunatic liberals that compare Bush to Hitler.

As for my bringing up Islam, I'm merely trying to determine why it is liberals like you seem to try and present this facade that you hate all religions equally yet only ever seem to hate on Christians, and Judaism to a lesser extent. I mean Muslims perpetrate injustices far more grievous than calling Obama the anti-christ yet you can't seem to find the time to denounce them. A quick search of your archives shows the last time you even used the word "Islam" (outside of a small mention in your last update) was 2006, yet Christians seem to get a lot of shit from you. You see Ian it seems that you are less of an atheist, as I've seen you claim, and more of someone who just hates Christians. As a true atheist myself I believe "atheists" like you give us a bad name.

Ian McGibboney said...

Right-wing Christians get a lot of shit from me because, in terms of American political dominance, they have been on top or nearly on top for years. I also have no love for people who try to discredit Obama with stupid things like his religion and/or birth certificate. Either agree with me or not, but don't suggest my argument is weak because it doesn't mention Muslim terrorists in the same breath. That's weak.

Chris B. said...

Today in my Christian devotion, I played a game I call Bible Roulette. It's pretty fun, you should try it sometime.

Basically, today I tried flipping to three different verses in the Bible and tried to make them all relevant to my devotion this morning.

It didn't turn out quite as planned, but I still wish to obey the Word of the Lord as it was shown to me.

I flipped to random verse 1. Matthew 27:5 came up, and it read as follows: "he cast down the thirty pieces of silver in the temple, and Judas went and hanged himself."

Wishing for a different verse to offset this one, I flipped to another random verse, but this came up...Luke 10:37 said "Jesus said...go, and do ye likewise."

I was not satisfied with this. I had to keep looking for something a bit more positive, but I actually ended up with something that sealed this word from above.

1 Corinthians 14:40 - "Let everything be done decently and in order."

Great.

herb said...

My beef is that you claim to be part of this mythological breed of liberalism that is tolerant and doesn't issue "blanket condemnations" against a religion...yet you seem to have no qualms doing exactly that against Christians, and sorry Ian, as much as you like to think otherwise "right wing christians" aren't some fringe group that somehow is an exception to your rule. They are still a large part of a religion that you are issuing "blanket condemnations" to.

If I recall correctly muslims called Bush the anti-christ, hell I'm sure liberals did to in one of their many useless marches. Did you condemn them to? I have my doubts.

Ian McGibboney said...

Herb, I think it's obvious that I'm not referring to all Christians as right-wing and that not all conservative Christians are fanatics.

But therein lies the rub: American Christianity has become so defined by this extremist, hyper-political faction that you assume I'm talking about all believers when I criticize. That's why I'm careful to qualify it. I shouldn't have to.

Being liberal doesn't mean tolerating hate, falsehoods and outright perversions of religious tenets. I don't have to accept unconstitutional attempts to meld church and state, or half-informed videos designed to appeal to our worst prejudices.

And I definitely don't have to put up with Americans trying to cast other Americans in this light. I've been a vociferous critic of past presidents; but that criticism never involved digging up a Bible and making a case that a black man is specifically cited in it as pure evil. You and I might think it's stupid, but there are lots of people that will see this as absolute truth, because it reinforces everything their ignorant minds want to believe.

I'm sorry you see fit to apply your one-track template argument to this, Herb. It deserves much better than that.

Chris is a friend of mine and a passionate Christian. We don't see eye to eye on all issue, but we have intelligent conversations and he is a strong example of what faith should be: something that guides you postiively, not a weapon to be used to stoke fear and prejudice.

herb said...

I'm just wondering why your religious hating seems to be so selective and focused solely on Christians. I think that's a valid inquiry, but I can see why exposing it makes you uncomfortable.

8 Christians, including women and children, were recently burnt alive by muslims in Punjab, what is your response to that? Why no blog post about those extremists Ian? I guess maybe if the muslims made fun of Obama while burning children alive they may have warranted a response from you. Right?

O and honestly, your inclusion of your great buddy Chris (who?) into the convo to bolster the argument that you can play well with Christians smacks of the caught racist talking about how he has plenty of black friends. I find that funny.

NOLA Progressive said...

Ian, I think your statement

You and I might think it's stupid, but there are lots of people that will see this as absolute truth, because it reinforces everything their ignorant minds want to believe.


is right on the money. Many adherents to the Christian faith take this type of bologna deadly serious. Whats worse is that they get together with other people who believe this stuff and they move from being absurd to being dangerous.

Take a look at Rachel's show last night, if you haven't already, and look at how Freedom Works and its ilk have stirred this very demographic up to promote hooliganism and violence at health care speeches. These are people waving their Bibles around at a debate on health care!! It's disheartening and frightening to the extreme to witness how completely ignorant and devoted these people are. What's worse is this astro-turfed bullshit sets fire to the MSM and colors public opinion in a way that is completely innaccurate.

The bottom line is this remarkably ignorant demographic has been controlled by the conservative right for decades and wielded a lot of power. So, until the adherents of Islam are the puppets of the often powerful controlling sect of government, Herb, your argument and complaint to Ian about parity is unfounded, completely irrelevant, and just as ignorant as the video he is discussing in this thread!

herb said...

These are people waving their Bibles around at a debate on health care!! It's disheartening and frightening to the extreme to witness how completely ignorant and devoted these people are.

The horror! How dare these people engage their Representative! Don't they know reasoned debate starts with throwing pies at the speaker and unfurling banners calling the speaker a fascist! At least that's what the left has shown us the last 8 years...you know, when dissent was patriotic and not "dangerous and frightening".

Ian McGibboney said...

Herb, the only thing you have said here so far is that liberals are hypocrites. That because we criticized Bush for eight years, that we should not be mad when someone criticizes Obama.

Funny thing is, when I criticized Bush for eight years, I got a LOT of shit for it. People called me unpatriotic, un-American, military-hating, race-hating, hellbound and many other epithets...TO MY FACE. The things they wrote in letters to my college paper and on my blog were even worse. Few of these criticisms came within a mile of a valid point, preferring instead to attack me personally, I guess because that's easier.

Do you really expect me to lend the courtesy of tolerance to those attacking Obama with false, incendiary bullshit, when those same people never extended that courtesy to me when I had a real point? The real hypocrisy, Herb, is in expecting that.

Why don't you just admit that you can't defend these people, Herb, and we can move on? Because this hypocrisy/equivalency crap is long past tired.

herb said...

I think that's the first time I've heard a "they were mean to me so I can be a hypocrite" argument, bravo for being a trailblazer.

Don't you liberals claim to be better than the opposition? Yet you get a little power and you're exactly the same. Except instead of calling us unpatriotic you claim we're "dangerous and frightening" for having the gall to demand our Reps not bankrupt the country.

Ian McGibboney said...

Herb, only someone like you would equate criticizing the president over the economy (which is legit) with a video making a case that Obama is the antichrist (which is nuts). The whole point of this particular blog is to address this extreme, faith-driven movement. It makes me and a lot of people nervous, because it is irrational and potentially dangerous. Far from being a lark by some crazy guy in his parents' basement, this video is a well-produced, articulate product. For some people, this is all they need to reaffirm their perverted beliefs. And I'm not hearing much in terms of distancing from mainstream conservatives. This obviously isn't necessary for every kook out there, but this particular video I think deserves scrutiny for its timeliness and reach.

Herb, I understand your only purpose here is to pick a fight. You're very short on facts and tend to turn every discussion into a tirade against those with whom you disagree, nitpicking over dust mites while ignoring the elephant in the room. But, still, STILL, I'd like to know what you think about the topic I've brought up for discussion. There's a first time for everything.

herb said...

Ian please, you do this with everything right wing, you blow it up like every right winger in the world thinks this or that is the incontestable truth or the best thing ever. You did it with your Palin post, then again with your birther post and now with this. The simple truth is this: The website C&L got this from, WND, is shunned even by right wingers as a bunch of idiots...and even WND was skeptical of it and you could tell they didn't believe it. Also the Youtube video this was pulled from had a grand total of 75,000 hits, I know shitty local bands that have more hits to their youtube videos. So your insinuation that this has "reach" is laughable and indicative of your constant stream of alarmist pap you think is relevant.

I'd like to know what you think about the topic I've brought up for discussion.

Maybe you should brush up on your reading comprehension because I've already expressed at least twice what I think of this video.

Ian McGibboney said...

Maybe if you could make your point without burying it in a mound of abusive rhetoric and smelly red herrings, I might recall it.

And that conservatives shun WorldNetDaily is news to me. As far as I can tell, it's pretty popular. I can only wish you were right about it.

herb said...

Maybe if you could make your point without burying it in a mound of abusive rhetoric and smelly red herrings, I might recall it.

Maybe if your posts were filled with facts and not red meat for your 3 liberals readers I might not have to be so...cutting..when it comes to my replies. Are you capable of handling criticism at all or are you so full of yourself that that isn't even an option for you? I'm trying to be constructive and point out the deficiencies in your arguments, you should embrace my commentary, but you won't.

As for WND they're not popular, they "break" stories that generally are bullshit. No prominent right wing bloggers use them as any kind of reputable source. Hell I think even Glen Beck has called them kooks.

Ian McGibboney said...

"I'm trying to be constructive and point out the deficiencies in your arguments, you should embrace my commentary, but you won't."

Oh, I see. You're providing a service. Tough love to someone who obviously needs it for his three readers.

Jeez, you sound like an abusive husband. But I'm not your battered doormat wife, so get a new trick.

NOLA Progressive said...

Herb, why don't you just state what your purpose is in reading and commenting here? You are simply here to take every post that Ian makes and criticize and rabble-rouse it.

Ian could post tomorrow saying that health care reform is going to bankrupt the country and our kid's, kid's, kid's, kids, and you would pick at his post and come up with some pejorative comments.

You are trying to apply some sort of parity argument to the theological debate here, and it is rambling and completely without point or merit. No "liberal" (I'd really like you to define that term some day to by the way) movement stands on the idea that Christianity is evil and Islam is wonderful. Most liberal individuals see no place for religion in political decision at all. Further, they typically applaud a person's good deeds whether they are religiously motivated or not. They are indeed scared by the violence that is exhibited in the name of religion and various gods.

Also, no one is saying that constituents shouldn't engage their representatives, but I think even a completely contrary individual like yourself can concede that religion has nothing to do with healthcare reform, so don't push back on me highlighting the wackadoo thumping her Bible at a health care reform protest.

Especially don't pander to me about the patriotism of dissent when these people's strings are astroturfed by Freedom Works and pals, complete with a "dissent by the numbers" playbook put together by lobbyists.

Save the Bible thumping and speaking in tongues bullshit for the pulpit on Sunday.

herb said...

Are you really comparing yourself to a battered wife? Wow, talk about a lack of perspective.

NOLA Progressive said...

Do all conservatives lack the ability to interpret and apply analogy and hyperbole or is it just Herb?

herb said...

Especially don't pander to me about the patriotism of dissent when these people's strings are astroturfed by Freedom Works and pals, complete with a "dissent by the numbers" playbook put together by lobbyists.

I always find it amusing how liberal "astroturfing" campaigns backed by Soros or MoveOn or ANSWER are true "grassroots" movements, but conservative groups backing conservative protesters is verbotten. It's funny, this liberal double standard. Can you explain it for me?

Ian McGibboney said...

The only people who ever talk about Soros, MoveOn or ANSWER are right-wing flacks. But even if that weren't the case, they are private individuals and/or activist groups. Fox News is a cable news network (so to speak) that is not only absolutely everywhere, but is also by definition not supposed to back political movements.

Ass, meet elbow.

NOLA Progressive said...

I sincerely doubt that I can explain anything to you. Run with that statement as you wish.

I'd point out the difference in funding and organization and status . I'd point out the extreme difference in tactics. I'd point out a lot of things, but why do it? I mean really why?

Ian McGibboney said...

Yeah, NOLA, there really is no point. Herb has a single-track double-standard mind. It's his only argument, and not a good one.

herb said...

Ian, who was talking about Fox News? Is that like the only ace in the hole you have? Just shout FOX NEWS (or is Faux News still to you guys?) and eventually it will make sense!

NOLA, I'll take that to mean you can't explain it. It's Ok, I wouldn't want to attempt the glaring double standard either if I was you.

NOLA Progressive said...

Like I said chief, run with it as you wish.

herb said...

You're like typical liberals, you talk big behind the cone of silence that surrounds your blog echo chambers, and as soon as you find a conservative with the temerity to challenge you you clam up and act as if the discussion is beneath you. That's fine, if you want to look like the coward, be my guest.

Ian McGibboney said...

Herb, "temerity" implies that you are doing something challenging and/or daring. Leaving dozens of comments about "typical liberals" is anything but. Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.

By the way, my Fox News reference was in reference to who advertised and sponsored the tea parties - my point being that, while you bark about activist groups sponsoring lefty protests, it's much worse that a news network does the same under the guise of "grass-roots" movement.

herb said...

Who was talking about tea parties?

It's like you have this set list of talking points you have to run down when talking to a conservative and you can't deviate from it.

NOLA Progressive said...

OK Herb fine. One of my major character flaws is being overly argumentative so sure why not.

If you want to compare the astroturf statment that I made earlier let's do that. You'll come up with the same old bullshit, but hell, I know this before I even hit a key so it's my fault for being easily goaded.

Primarily, I'd compare motives and tactics. I am not aware of moveon.org developing a tactics list and disseminating it to the members which outlines how to completely shut down civil discourse, disrupt legitimate open discussions of issues, and promote violent and tense situations during said discourse. I am completely aware of freedomworks.org doing exactly that.

To a lesser extent I'd look at some breakdowns of funds and donations. While you are absolutely correct in stating that Soros pumps a lot of money into moveon.org, a very large portion of its funds comes from small donations made by indviduals. Freedomworks.org is not primarily funded by individual donations (although it does accept them), but rather by Dick Armey and co. There is not parity when you compare the amount of money the controversial figures which back these two make to their respective groups.

Finally, I am not aware of moveon.org ever setting up a false business front and corrupt deal with Medical Savings Insurance Co. and siphoning off portions of payments to them to fund their organization. I am, however, aware of Freedomworks.org doing just that.

Oh and also Freedomworks.org fights reforms that would positively impact a broad spectrum of people's lives by the way. That's also a tidbit to consider.

But, hey I can't explain a double standard, I'm scared, I'm a hypocrite, blah blah blah. This isn't all that hard to explain when you defend an Armey of Dicks, oh I mean defend Dick Armey. Think that was Freudian?

Ian McGibboney said...

You were talking about "astroturfing" and I countered that liberal attempts at that pale next to the astroturfing of the right. You know, at 8:15?

But it's understandable if you forgot. Your repetitious bile suggests a short-term memory deficiency.

NOLA Progressive said...

Do you really not see the link between talking about the astro-turfed events/involvement of said event's backers and Fox news (I still like Faux News btw or Fixed Noise or douchebag pretend journalists you pick) astroturfing the TeaBaggers?

Is it really that hard for you to follow? This isn't particularly deep stuff here Herb. Ian isn't throwing Nietzsche references at you or anything. It's only a relevant extension of exactly the same topic being discussed. Not that tough chief.

herb said...

Primarily, I'd compare motives and tactics. I am not aware of moveon.org developing a tactics list and disseminating it to the members which outlines how to completely shut down civil discourse, disrupt legitimate open discussions of issues, and promote violent and tense situations during said discourse.

"promote violence and tense situations" wtf? I've looked through this Freedomworks shit and have yet to see anything promoting anything of the sort. I just find it funny that liberals, after years of throwing pies and calling speakers racists/fascists, is suddenly all concerned about people disrupting speeches. Do you not see your own hypocrisy?


To a lesser extent I'd look at some breakdowns of funds and donations. While you are absolutely correct in stating that Soros pumps a lot of money into moveon.org, a very large portion of its funds comes from small donations made by indviduals. Freedomworks.org is not primarily funded by individual donations (although it does accept them), but rather by Dick Armey and co. There is not parity when you compare the amount of money the controversial figures which back these two make to their respective groups.

Haha, you act like MoveOn are some paupers that barely scrape by against the big bad Freedomworks, who by the way I've never heard of before today. Looking at the "Financial Contributions" section of MoveOn's wiki entry they appear to get funding from a wide range of liberal higher ups and advocacy groups. I guess in your mind it's bad when "Armey and Co" fund a group, but a good thing "Soros and Co" fund a group. Hooray for that famed liberal double standard!

Finally, I am not aware of moveon.org ever setting up a false business front and corrupt deal with Medical Savings Insurance Co. and siphoning off portions of payments to them to fund their organization. I am, however, aware of Freedomworks.org doing just that.

What does this have to do with anything? I guess I could bring up Soros' insider trading conviction, but it has no bearing on this conversation.

Oh and also Freedomworks.org fights reforms that would positively impact a broad spectrum of people's lives by the way. That's also a tidbit to consider.

If by "broad spectrum of people" you mean Democrats and their corrupt allies you are right, because this boondaggle they are trying to ram through won't help Americans, it will just bankrupt us.

But, hey I can't explain a double standard, I'm scared, I'm a hypocrite, blah blah blah. This isn't all that hard to explain when you defend an Armey of Dicks, oh I mean defend Dick Armey. Think that was Freudian?

Again, who the fuck cares about Dick Armey and his PAC no one has heard of before today? You're like Ian, you find one little thing and blow it up to outrageous proportions and act like all Republicans get constant memos from the desk of Dick Armey and follow his orders, when the truth is no one has even heard of Freedomworks.

I've seen automatons parrot DNC talking points before, but you 2 take the cake.

Ian McGibboney said...

Herb, are you clinically incapable of making a point that doesn't come right back to double standards and/or projection?

I get the feeling you greet people you know by telling them, "Good morning! But it would be better if liberals didn't have a double standard about Morning in America."

Seriously. Get a life. You're unworthy of further discussion.

herb said...

Are you capable of handling criticism at all? Sorry if pointing out your double standard is so horrible, maybe if you didn't have such a glaring double standard when it came to protesting I wouldn't have to bring it up.

Ian McGibboney said...

Herb, I can handle criticism, but it helps if it isn't obviously canned like yours is, and doesn't take the form of un-instructive abuse. You're just like those teabagger hecklers who are infecting town hall meetings and trying to shout down the politicians. They're not interested in any real conversation and neither are you. Obstruct and intimidate. Bullying tactics. It's all you guys have left. And I'm not putting up with it anymore. Come back when you have something constructive to say.

herb said...

Wow, you really can't take anyone not as immersed in liberal talking points as you, can you?

I'm a real person Ian, my thoughts are my own. Sorry they clash with your liberal ideology, but that's what debate is built around. Too bad it's obvious you don't want to debate, you just want people mindlessly agreeing with you.

Ian McGibboney said...

This is the last comment of yours I'm going to publish, Herb. You and I both know that this isn't about ideological disagreements; it's about you heckling me and anyone else who supposedly spews "liberal talking points" (read: anything not wingnut batshit crazy). Your alleged "ideas" are nothing more than reactionary disgust over anything anyone else says. I know plenty of people that share your (presumed) ideology who can be civil, but you're not one of them. And, unfortunately, your type has become so prevalent both online and off, that you drown out any reasonable voices of dissent. Which can only hurt your cause, assuming that you even have one and aren't just here to be a bully.

I've never had to censor people before in five years of blogging, but now I've had to ban three just in the past couple of months. I don't know what you think you're accomplishing, but all I see is more and more reason why the right guy is in the Oval Office and why obstructionist, theocratic, reactionary and morally and economically bankrupt right-wing politics are finally over.

Goodbye, Herb.

NOLA Progressive said...

Wow, first day back at work after the Summer break, and I don't take a look at this ongoing saga which has blossomed since last night.

Goodbye Herb indeed. It is indeed affirmation that the right man is in the oval office Ian. Anytime, someone who stands an iota of a chance to do something for those who are not mega wealthy enters the whitehouse, the corporate sponsored right and unfortunately some of the Dems go into wingnut mode. The louder they yell, or the louder the citizenry that they lie to in order to stir up yell, the more frightened they are.

Herb was just another of those. In four to eight years Herb let's talk again.