It would be great to ignore these assholes if it weren't for the fact that 75% of the media support these socialist pieces of crap.

A pie in the face—hopefully well-publicized—would underscore the truth that he does not represent the best of America ... only the worst.

I have to say that the irony in that jackass statement is...delicious.

If, G-d forbid, something happened to Bush, the lefties would say that it was his own fault!

Heh.

Something you have to keep in mind: the Daily Cal staff is composed largely of monkeys at typewriters. After reading that dreadful shite for years, I can personally attest to this.

I wonder how Berkeley can square this op-ed piece with their rule sets/codes of conduct on tolerance and hate speech. After all, this speech actually advocates violence against an American public official.

I think the left is half in love with the idea of a fascist crackdown and martial law... otherwise they wouldn't be doing their level best to make such a horror come to pass.

Its part of their "healthy" "self-lothing". The large urban areas (with highest moonbat concentrations) will go to hell a lot faster than the rural.

Then again, they may just be fanatical admirers of Snake Pliskin and the Escape from New York social structure.

Rick's email:

ricks@ssl.berkeley.edu

These are the kinds of idiots who would have remained isolationist during WWII, even after Pearl Harbor. Since you cannot hope to meet a violent enemy without invoking violence yourself, and proving that capability means inevitable losses for your side, you therefore cannot act at all. Plus you cannot use any overwhelming advantage like nukes that would allow you to inflict great damage on the enemy without losses to yourself because then you're just a bully no matter how repugnant the enemy.

Thus the people who are willing to use violence can run amok and conquer at will because their victims lack the will to resist. At this rate Jihadis with slingshots will rule the world in 50 years. This is exactly what Orwell warned about when he wrote that pacifism was an enabler of fascism. Those with no concern for what they destroyed would take power by default.

The amount of handwringing over the casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq reflect a people who've lost all capacity to defend their way of life. Yes, every soldier struck down or maimed is a great tragedy but in the scale of war the losses have been miniscule. There are single days, periods of mere hours, during WWII in which the losses were greater than all those in the current war, including all of the 9/11 victims. The worst of these were because an America unprepared for the inevitable war could early on only slow Japan's advance through the Pacific by sheer weight of bodies.

For all of the whining about our force's equipment today, they're far better off than those tens of thousands who were lost in the first year of WWII as America's armed force struggled to recover from years of neglect.

I think the left is half in love with the idea of a fascist crackdown and martial law... otherwise they wouldn't be doing their level best to make such a horror come to pass.

I've also found it odd that much of the far left uses the term "fascist" as an insult considering the fact it would seem that they would have little problem with fascism as long as they or someone they like is in power.

I think there's quite a bit of psychological projection on the left these days, where they think the worst of us on the right and accuse us of things that they would like to do if they were in charge and not the impotent little whiners that they are.

Wow, that article snippet contained so many errors in logic and facts it was mindboggling.

What cracks me up is the "Berkeley Daily Planet," which now appears twice a week.

What cracks me up is the "Berkeley Daily Planet," which now appears twice a week.

As punishment?

The cowardly left calling for assassinations is pretty unbelievable since they are the same people that are anti-gun. If they are serious they would have to hired mercenaries to carry out the mission because most them wouldn't know which end of a gun to point.