Oh Terri!

From an earlier post by Terri:

What if there was a bumper sticker during WWII that said: “The real Axis enemies are Roosevelt, Wallace, and Hull.” Does this sound patriotic?

First of all, I doubt that they had bumper stickers back then.

Second, Terri should read a bit of history and not just bumper stickers:

Here's a little nugget from the Libary of Congress website that Terri might find interesting:

"Two of [George C.] Marshall's harshest critics were U.S. Senators Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin and William Jenner of Indiana. Both men fed the anti-communist hysteria of the era that became known as "McCarthyism." In one Senate speech Jenner said "General George C. Marshall is a living lie" and asserted that "he is eager to play the role of a front man for traitors." An even more vicious assault came from McCarthy, who published two books attacking Marshall's entire career and delivered a 60,000-word Senate speech that accused Marshall of being part of "a conspiracy on a scale so immense as to dwarf any previous such venture in the history of man."

Makes a few local bumper stickers pale in comparison, don't ya think, Ter?

Dear Terri Tyson,

You seem to think that you are more principled than all of us liberals in Chapel Hill.

Yet when you ran for Town Council in 2003 according to your candidate biographies in the local newspapers and the State Board of Elections you were a registered Democrat.

Now you are a registered Republican and a leading voice for the right wing in southern Orange County.

Unless you have undergone a massive personal transformation in the last two and a half years (doubtful) you were registered as a Democrat for mere political expediency because you knew you could not be elected to office as a Republican.

I don't care if you think we're unamerican or if you hate bumper stickers. I do care that you intentionally misled the voters of Chapel Hill and that you are willing to play around with your party affiliation to try to get elected to office.

I complained that the bumper stickers in Chapel Hill get on my nerves and that there are new and more extreme ones every week. I'm merely exercising my right to free speech, so why do the posters on this site insult me, for example, by calling me a demagogue?

If you want names, then I challenge the readers of this website to agree or disagree with the original bumper sticker cited in my letter:

"The real axis of evil is Bush, Cheney, and Ashcroft, not the terrorists."

Paul implied that the bumper sticker was inappropriate, but after all this discussion, no one else has stated whether they agree or disagree with it, (which is different than the right to express it). That is my challenge, and you'll get your names.

I found the quote on the anti-communist hysteria in the ‘50s interesting, it reminds me of the current anti-Bush hysteria! I am a graduate of University of Virginia, so I loved the Thomas Jefferson quotes.

To Tom:
What difference should my party registration make in a non-partisan race like Town Council? Actually, I thought there was room for conservative Democrats in the party since there are hundreds of thousands of Democrats in North Carolina who are even more conservative than me. Yes, I did think it would help me since some people can't see beyond party lines. But I was not welcomed into the party in this county.

I haven't misled anybody. I've been forthright in my advocacy for moderate and conservative views all along. During my campaign, the press and local politicos immediately labeled me as the conservative candidate because I was against two of the bonds and wanted to ease up on some of the rules and regulations that discourage economic development.

If you don't care what I think about bumper stickers, why are you attacking me? I'm not running for anything now. My guess is that you've been saving your bit of ammunition and that you do care!

Terri,

I don't agree entirely with that bumper sticker. I would say "The real axes of evil are the terrorists, Bush, Cheney & Ashcroft". While that may offend you, I believe that Bush, Cheney & Ashcroft have systematically worked to pander to the rich and the conservative right at the expense of the middle class and poor and a wide variety of minorities. If your offended by those sentiments I'm sorry but I won't apologize. I'm offended by the Bush administration's lack of humanity.

Terri, so someone has an offensive bumper sticker, so what?

You generalize from this that the whole area is full of "uber leftists." That's quite a leap.

And I see you failed to address my post above of the charges made by conservatives during the Korean War that went FAR beyond what any liberal elected officials say today, except to say you found that period in our history "interesting."

And you have still not named even ONE of these supposed "leftists" who prefer enemy nations over the US.

In a county of over 100000 people, you will find a few nuts on both sides. But these are marginal people, not in power. Here's a bigger challenge for you, Ter, name a liberal elected official who prefers "enemy nations" over the US.

I doubt you can, Ter, because you substitute knee-jerk reaction for actual thought.

johnk, I guess you thought we liberals were wimps.

Wrong!

We have to fight fire with fire. With demogogues like Terri out there, we can't afford to be "nice."

But we do still love little children and fuzzy puppies.

At least I do!

And I would hazard a guess that if Gore and Bush ran against each other today, Gore would win in a landslide.

Could he POSSIBLY have done worse than Bush?

You are right, johnk, Terri should quit abusing liberals by accusing us of being treasonous "America haters" because we are not gung-ho jingoistic "patriots" who don't want to fight the world, but to engage it.

I do agree with on that.

By the way, who are you? We know who Terri is, we know who I am, who are you?

Thnx Ruby. I continue to think that everyone or no one posting on OP should be required to disclose first and last name. I know some people say they need confidentiality b/c of work, etc., but I don't think that's an acceptable reason. They just shouldn't be allowed to post if they can't or don't want to post their first and last names. That should be the price of admission, IMHO, or we should all just use first names.

"They just shouldn't be allowed to post if they can't or don't want to post their first and last names. That should be the price of admission, IMHO, or we should all just use first names. "

I disagree. I think there are a number of reasons, VALID reasons, why people don't want to use their full names. (Googling being chief among them.) I don't have a problem with people wanting to maintain some anonymity--and I think we would lose some valuable input if Ruby insisted on full names.

That said, I think this has degenerated into a flame war. Last night I'd composed a (too) long response to both Ms Tyson and Johnk...and deleted it.

So here is the short version:

Ms. Tyson:
I love my country. I happen to believe our current President used spurious evidence to take us to war in Iraq--BEFORE we had "finished business" in Afghanistan. Now BOTH regions are in upheaval--and the US has become a boogey-monster for extremists to use as a recruiting tool. Fabulous.

Johnk:
IS there a way to criticize an administration without being accused of "bashing?" I wouldn't have picked you as one of those who believe "You are either for us or your against us." I happen to think the current administration made a series of VERY bad choices. I am desperately unhappy with the results. So that makes me a "Bush Basher?"

melanie

I guess I'm like Rodney Dangerfield the old "Lite Beer" commercials when it comes to using one's complete name on this board: I feel strongly both ways.

On the one hand, I can see where some people may not be able to use their complete names because of employment or other potential conflicts, but on the other hand, it is much easier to make incendiary comments if no one knows who you are.

For me, being self-employed and WANTING people to know who I am, it is a "no-brainer." For others, it may not be.

I guess each person has to judge for themselves what they can or can't do.

But as Ruby told "johnk", don't be surprised if your comments aren't taken seriously by others if you don't identify yourself.

Paul,

Don't worry about feeling strongly both ways. You're a "progressive" Democrat.

WillR and Brian R don't use their last names either. Some people know who they are, but not everyone does. Why is the criticism only directed toward johnk?

Terri Buckner--"WillR" has his website, willraymond.org posted next to his name, so I think it is pretty obvious who he is.

And I don't think the point was aimed at just "johnk," he happened to be the one who was the example at the time, it is true of others, although most people on this site do use their full names.

And Mark, yes, I am a "progressive" who is conflicted about many issues.

I have no stone tablets under my desk that contain all truth and knowledge. It must be nice to have such.

I admit to being an imperfect human. Sorry about that.

Personally--I am MUCH less likely to leap to a conclusion of who someone is when I see only a first nake and and initial--because there are probably numerous "Johnk's" out there.

Johnk:

I hope you come back from time to time--though I don't blame you for leaving. There ARE times when it seems only limited points of view is welcome here--but hey, it IS Ruby's site. As she has taken pains to remind me on more than one occaision.

That said, Ruby, if it's that important to you--I think you SHOULD change the posting rules, so that only folk who are comfortable posting first and last names are allowed to post.

Or quit giving people who DON'T use both names a difficult time. Choose.

If Terri can't handle the bumper stickers in Chapel Hill her head must explode when she goes to Asheville.

Marc--

My favorite is "Help keep Asheville WEIRD."

melanie

Mark--

My POINT is that one can't have it both ways. Chiding someone for not using his/her full name, when one's site ALLOWS for such anonymity, is unfair. And I DO think most people are likely to make assumptions if two people share the same name--rather than the same first name and initials.

I would ASK John Doe "hey, are you the John D that posts on OP.org?" But if the name attached to the posts WAS John Doe, I'd don't know that I WOULD ask. I would make an assumption. So I believe Johnk's reasons.

I don't think he was trolling, either...otherwise I wouldn't have responded. That's the BEST thing to do with trolls, BTW. They get very irritated when one ignores them...

melanie

She's baackkk!

How is it Terri doesn't get the logic that she has to put up with bumperstickers that offend her just the way the dreaded Chapelhillienses Liberales have to put up with the ubiquitous rightwing bumperstickers that might offend them?

(Similarly, how is it that she doesn't get that the same dreaded C. Liberales are as welcome to speak the town forum provided by the CH News letters page as she is? )

In any case, it is offensive to be called unpatriotic if I think that our current administration is doing great harm (the word "evil" is evidently "politically incorrect" -- see below -- although the harm I perceive goes well into a realm I would deem a matter of morals) to our country, domestically and internationally. And somehow I'm still less patriotic if I wish to say so, even if I feel morally obligated to speak out? I love my country, even as I weep for it – perhaps even more so.

Bumperstickers are the modern version of the old soapbox or sandwich board. In America anyone with the price of the soapbox, sandwich board, or bumper-equipped car is entitled to "speak." I was offended by the "America, Love It or Leave It" bumperstickers in their day. I am offended now by the bumperstickers that suggest support of our troops and pride in our flag "belong" only to those who support the current leadership. But what kind of arrogance would it take for me to write to a newspaper and tell rightwingers to knock it off because I don't like it?

The hallmark of healthy monarchy is unquestioning loyalty. The hallmark of healthy democracy is dissent. Using the idea that we are now at war to justify all kinds of debatable actions -- indeed to take them out of debate -- simply doesn't cut it unless the ideal for America is power centralized in one party and one mindset, acting with utter and unfettered impugnity. The "war conditions" under which we now live -- leaving aside questions of when they began and who is the enemy -- will, most sadly, persist for decades. We will know that it's over and that the other side won when the bumperstickers disappear.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And a note for the record about "political correctness": This was a term coined by a journalist to describe a Mass. candidate's stupid move when he managed to insult his largest voting bloc by using a derogatory, stereotypical term to describe them. Whatever it may have been that he said and whichever party he may have belonged to, it was not politically "correct" for him because he alienated them and lost their vote (and the election). Obviously, this term could be applied to anything insensitive and stupid said about an identifiable political group on whose support someone's future depends.

Equal opportunity here: a conservative or a liberal could be equally insensitively stupid about using offensive language that will alienate an ally. Happens all the time. For me, the minute someone starts to say, "I hate to be politically incorrect, but...," I know we are about to hear something stupid and probably offensive.