SEIU successfully intimidates teenager alone in a house

[webrockk]

It will be interesting to see how November plays out. If the right splinters, throwing over people who are not " pure enough", the left wins and we do it all over again.

The lead up to November, and the elections will be the most interesting "reality show" in history....for me, anyway.

I think the stench is so strong, enough folks will hold their nose and vote for anything but the status quo. However, If the economy makes some miracle turnaround, and unemployment numbers drastically improve in the next 4/5 months, all bets are off. Ones "smell o meter" should be tuned and sensitive to manipulated "pie in the sky" economic numbers coming from the WH and media around the end of August.

 

[washunut]

The lead up to November, and the elections will be the most interesting "reality show" in history....for me, anyway.

I think the stench is so strong, enough folks will hold their nose and vote for anything but the status quo. However, If the economy makes some miracle turnaround, and unemployment numbers drastically improve in the next 4/5 months, all bets are off. Ones "smell o meter" should be tuned and sensitive to manipulated "pie in the sky" economic numbers coming from the WH and media around the end of August.

What you point to is exactly why the stimulus package was aimed at mid/ late 2010 versus 2009 when we really needed the help. The majority of Americans I am afraid are sheep led by the media and how they like to classify themselves as rep or dem.

 

[webrockk]

What you point to is exactly why the stimulus package was aimed at mid/ late 2010 versus 2009 when we really needed the help. The majority of Americans I am afraid are sheep led by the media and how they like to classify themselves as rep or dem.

Politicians rely heavily on the dull eyed "sheep" thing.... promoting divisive "herd" mentality while at the same time attempting to gain trust from the skittish, and exploiting apathy and extremely short memories.

Perhaps a new breed is now grazing on the fruited plains....informed, motivated and pissed off.

'tis my dream, anyway.

 

[roughdraft274]

If I may interject. I find it hideous what leftists are willing to accept in the name of prtotecting their own. I am not sure if you have a family, but if you do and see no problem with hundreds of people surrounding your house, while you are not there and chanting while a child is in the house you simply cannot be a compassionate person.

When I hear trash like this, put together with the tactics of this regime to damp out people who do not agree with them. I wonder what left winf nuts cross over to fascists, or are they one and the same.

This regime? damp out people who don't agree with them?

When I read that kind of stuff it makes it hard to take the rest of what you say seriously. This "regime" isn't trying to kill or hurt or round up dissenters. If you buy into this nazi talking point crap then you need your head examined. They aren't trying to limit freedom of speech. Those kinds of talking points as if they really are fascists are stupid at best.

With that said, I said in my first post that I wouldn't join in a mob outside someone's home. I said that the two articles from Breitbarts people weren't reliable and there's a good chance in my opinion that were grossly exaggerated. I understand why people wouldn't like that happening and I'm sure I would be peeved if it happened outside my house I would be peeved. But I'm also guessing that if this were a tea party protest outside a senators house and all they did was chant a slogan, the right would have little if any to say about it. If then Keith Olberman did a big report making up crap about that group I bet the right would also comment on how it's not coming from a reliable source.

Also, I pointed out the misrepresentation that these people were trying to terrorize a teenager. That clearly wasn't their intention. Misrepresentation is misrepresentation regardless.

I'm fine with someone saying "they shouldn't have done this" or the like. But to try to blow this up to something that it clearly isn't is dishonest, plain and simple.

 

[webrockk]

If 700 leftist SEIU thugs took up residence on my front lawn, I'm quite sure the ensuing calamity would be considered a big deal.

 

[cpwill]

If 700 leftist SEIU thugs took up residence on my front lawn, I'm quite sure the ensuing calamity would be considered a big deal.

oh yes indeedy. I wonder if they are too leftist to carry concealed? I wonder if they are too leftist to practice?

read an interesting piece that pointed out that cash-strapped SEIU owes Bank Of America (which got out of the subprime market in 2001, incidentally) quite a bit of money, and that SEIU is trying to 'organize' bank tellers and -having trouble- needs to bring down moral and threaten corporate leadership at the bank.

seriously. trespassers will be shot. trespassers threatening (directly or implicitly) my children will be shot in the stomach.

 

[webrockk]

oh yes indeedy. I wonder if they are too leftist to carry concealed? I wonder if they are too leftist to practice?

read an interesting piece that pointed out that cash-strapped SEIU owes Bank Of America (which got out of the subprime market in 2001, incidentally) quite a bit of money, and that SEIU is trying to 'organize' bank tellers and -having trouble- needs to bring down moral and threaten corporate leadership at the bank.

seriously. trespassers will be shot. trespassers threatening (directly or implicitly) my children will be shot in the stomach.

I've read SEIU is on the hook to BOA for about $90 million.

Yes, the gut shot....reserved for the most vile among us.

 

[washunut]

This regime? damp out people who don't agree with them?

When I read that kind of stuff it makes it hard to take the rest of what you say seriously. This "regime" isn't trying to kill or hurt or round up dissenters. If you buy into this nazi talking point crap then you need your head examined. They aren't trying to limit freedom of speech. Those kinds of talking points as if they really are fascists are stupid at best.

With that said, I said in my first post that I wouldn't join in a mob outside someone's home. I said that the two articles from Breitbarts people weren't reliable and there's a good chance in my opinion that were grossly exaggerated. I understand why people wouldn't like that happening and I'm sure I would be peeved if it happened outside my house I would be peeved. But I'm also guessing that if this were a tea party protest outside a senators house and all they did was chant a slogan, the right would have little if any to say about it. If then Keith Olberman did a big report making up crap about that group I bet the right would also comment on how it's not coming from a reliable source.

Also, I pointed out the misrepresentation that these people were trying to terrorize a teenager. That clearly wasn't their intention. Misrepresentation is misrepresentation regardless.

I'm fine with someone saying "they shouldn't have done this" or the like. But to try to blow this up to something that it clearly isn't is dishonest, plain and simple.

Your response is a sad commentary on where we stand today. I use a word regime to get a rise from folks and you compare to to some type of nazi representation.

So I would put your response in with those in this administration ( better?) who for example want to investigate that Beck nut for selling gold or some such thing. Calling people who tried to stand up for their rights during the Chrysler crisis by having the president saying they do not stand stand with us ( the american people) calling all sorts of people liars. I am sick of it.

I am especially sick of people on this forum who try and turn a phrase into some type of nazi thing, which is reprehensible.

I do not care if it is the tea party, the coffee party, union nuts, or whomeever. I find attacking someone's family because you do not like the company the father works for the act of cowards. The police that were there and did nothing do not deserve to continue in their jobs.

 

[roughdraft274]

Your response is a sad commentary on where we stand today. I use a word regime to get a rise from folks and you compare to to some type of nazi representation.

So I would put your response in with those in this administration ( better?) who for example want to investigate that Beck nut for selling gold or some such thing. Calling people who tried to stand up for their rights during the Chrysler crisis by having the president saying they do not stand stand with us ( the american people) calling all sorts of people liars. I am sick of it.

I am especially sick of people on this forum who try and turn a phrase into some type of nazi thing, which is reprehensible.

I do not care if it is the tea party, the coffee party, union nuts, or whomeever. I find attacking someone's family because you do not like the company the father works for the act of cowards. The police that were there and did nothing do not deserve to continue in their jobs.

To get a rise out of folks? Sorry, i didn't get the humor in that. My bad. :roll:

The nazi crap is being brandied about by alot of people now a days and I was using it for example. In my experience, the people who think like you and think the administration is out to round people up or is trying to silence free speech tend to buy into that crap. I wasn't trying to say that you said it, just that it's in line with the other stuff you were saying.

Name a person in the administration that want to investigate beck for selling gold.

As far as the chrysler thing i have no idea what you're talking about. Care to find me a link describing what you have a problem with?

You're throwing words like "regime" and saying that they are trying to "damp out people that they don't agree with" but the things you list are that he once criticized bankers and auto company CEO's and something about Glenn Beck that you don't seem to know much about since the description you came up with is "for selling gold or some such thing."

I only brought the nazi thing up cause it's a popular talking point of nuts on the right (and some on the left) who really actually think that this administration is out to get them and hates america which are just silly notions by people that are butt hurt from losing in 2008. There's really no kinder way to put it.

 

[washunut]

To get a rise out of folks? Sorry, i didn't get the humor in that. My bad. :roll:

The nazi crap is being brandied about by alot of people now a days and I was using it for example. In my experience, the people who think like you and think the administration is out to round people up or is trying to silence free speech tend to buy into that crap. I wasn't trying to say that you said it, just that it's in line with the other stuff you were saying.

Name a person in the administration that want to investigate beck for selling gold.

As far as the chrysler thing i have no idea what you're talking about. Care to find me a link describing what you have a problem with?

You're throwing words like "regime" and saying that they are trying to "damp out people that they don't agree with" but the things you list are that he once criticized bankers and auto company CEO's and something about Glenn Beck that you don't seem to know much about since the description you came up with is "for selling gold or some such thing."

I only brought the nazi thing up cause it's a popular talking point of nuts on the right (and some on the left) who really actually think that this administration is out to get them and hates america which are just silly notions by people that are butt hurt from losing in 2008. There's really no kinder way to put it.

Again you cjoose to try and put people in boxes that fit your perception. So just for the record I am a third generation Democrat. That is my grandparents, parents and myself for the first 35 years that I voted always pushed the democratic lever.

As far as not knowing what I am talking about, you should be ashamed of yourself. You should have known that the NY congressman Weiner is looking at charges against Beck. He says that because he is talking fear on his show and then has commericals selling gold. Weiner wants to charge him with fraud.

You should know better about the Chrysler fraud issue. It was not banks but PE and other firms that held Chrysler debt that did not feel they should have to take a haircut. Obama was pissed, because he wanted to give his sweetheart ( my sense) deal to the unions that helped get him elected. You full well know if you are half as informed as you let on that Obama ranted that those people did not stand with him this coerced them to take less than they derserved. By the way these people invest for things like pension funds so he was taking money out of those places to give to the unions. No one who was awake during this period needs a link. So I will not waste my or your time.

Lastly I am especially sensitive to people using the word nazi as easily as you do as much of my extended family were murdered by them.

Reasonable debate can be fun, I can go to the basketball court for thrash talk.

 

[roughdraft274]

Again you cjoose to try and put people in boxes that fit your perception. So just for the record I am a third generation Democrat. That is my grandparents, parents and myself for the first 35 years that I voted always pushed the democratic lever.

I don't care who you voted for. The kind of stuff you were saying sounded nuts. Plain and simple.

As far as not knowing what I am talking about, you should be ashamed of yourself. You should have known that the NY congressman Weiner is looking at charges against Beck. He says that because he is talking fear on his show and then has commericals selling gold. Weiner wants to charge him with fraud.

And how is Anthony Wiener in the Obama Administration?

As far as I can tell he has said that Goldline's selling tactics need to be examined because of reports, and that they are often selling gold while lying about it's melt value. I don't know who's right, but asking the sec and ftc to examine whether a company is lying to it's customers isn't "fascism".

You should know better about the Chrysler fraud issue. It was not banks but PE and other firms that held Chrysler debt that did not feel they should have to take a haircut. Obama was pissed, because he wanted to give his sweetheart ( my sense) deal to the unions that helped get him elected. You full well know if you are half as informed as you let on that Obama ranted that those people did not stand with him this coerced them to take less than they derserved. By the way these people invest for things like pension funds so he was taking money out of those places to give to the unions. No one who was awake during this period needs a link. So I will not waste my or your time.

The worst thing you can come up to call this administration a "regime" is that you think he low-balled some investors? He gave a bunch of money to unions? Sounds like pure BS to me. Just find a quick link describing what you're talking about. Sorry, but 99% of the time when I hear silly accusations like this it turns out to be fake, kinda like the Obama is taking your guns, banning deep water fishing, muslim, kenyan, gay etc.

Lastly I am especially sensitive to people using the word nazi as easily as you do as much of my extended family were murdered by them.

Reasonable debate can be fun, I can go to the basketball court for thrash talk.

As easily as I do? I was pointing out that alot of nuts are using it as talking points. I never compared anyone to Nazi's, I never said anything is similar to what the Nazis did etc. When you start off with that "regime" crap you hardly have a leg to stand on that someone simply saying the word "nazi" offends you.

You started in with the fascist BS. This administration isn't silencing fox news, it's not silencing talk radio, you still have freedom of speech. For god's sake, people from the tea parties and other groups have been protesting this administration constantly, sometimes even carrying loaded guns, and this administration did nothing to "dampen" them. The idea that they're taking away your freedom and that they want to control every aspect of your life is nonsense.

 

[washunut]

I don't care who you voted for. The kind of stuff you were saying sounded nuts. Plain and simple.

And how is Anthony Wiener in the Obama Administration?

As far as I can tell he has said that Goldline's selling tactics need to be examined because of reports, and that they are often selling gold while lying about it's melt value. I don't know who's right, but asking the sec and ftc to examine whether a company is lying to it's customers isn't "fascism".

The worst thing you can come up to call this administration a "regime" is that you think he low-balled some investors? He gave a bunch of money to unions? Sounds like pure BS to me. Just find a quick link describing what you're talking about. Sorry, but 99% of the time when I hear silly accusations like this it turns out to be fake, kinda like the Obama is taking your guns, banning deep water fishing, muslim, kenyan, gay etc.



As easily as I do? I was pointing out that alot of nuts are using it as talking points. I never compared anyone to Nazi's, I never said anything is similar to what the Nazis did etc. When you start off with that "regime" crap you hardly have a leg to stand on that someone simply saying the word "nazi" offends you.

You started in with the fascist BS. This administration isn't silencing fox news, it's not silencing talk radio, you still have freedom of speech. For god's sake, people from the tea parties and other groups have been protesting this administration constantly, sometimes even carrying loaded guns, and this administration did nothing to "dampen" them. The idea that they're taking away your freedom and that they want to control every aspect of your life is nonsense.

I think you do understand that when eithe people in the administration make comments adverse to a certain group it has a chilling effect. Another example is access to administration officials for TV interviews which they seem to dole out as favors to " journalists" they feel will put them in the most flattering light.

What I find interesting about the liberals of today is how truely unliberal ( not sure if that is a word) they really are. If you don't say exactly the words one wants to here then you acting as a fasict or a nazi.

I think you know that is why there can no longer be civil debate.

So that is my rebuttal to your comments, there is no point in continuing this diatribe.

 

[roughdraft274]

I think you do understand that when eithe people in the administration make comments adverse to a certain group it has a chilling effect. Another example is access to administration officials for TV interviews which they seem to dole out as favors to " journalists" they feel will put them in the most flattering light.

What I find interesting about the liberals of today is how truely unliberal ( not sure if that is a word) they really are. If you don't say exactly the words one wants to here then you acting as a fasict or a nazi.

Kinda like what Bush did? and Clinton did before that? You really thing it's something new for this administratiion to talk to who ever will put them in the best light? That's called politics. That's why for the most part McCain and Palin stuck to Fox news. If the cameras weren't on I'm pretty sure Palin would have had to get a restraining order on Sean Hannity after watching that interview during the campaign. While Bush was President his and Cheney's number one go to news service? Of course it was Fox. I don't blame him for it. If you were Obama would you bring in Sean Hannity or Beck in to interview you so that they could just keep asking you if you hate america or if you're a socialist?

Once again, I don't know why you're complaining about liberals calling people fascist or Nazi. I didn't call you a fascist or a nazi. You came in and insinuated that the administration was fascist.

I'm not going to stop this debate because we can't have an honest debate, I'm stopping it because you obviously don't want to. :2wave:

 

[washunut]

Kinda like what Bush did? and Clinton did before that? You really thing it's something new for this administratiion to talk to who ever will put them in the best light? That's called politics. That's why for the most part McCain and Palin stuck to Fox news. If the cameras weren't on I'm pretty sure Palin would have had to get a restraining order on Sean Hannity after watching that interview during the campaign. While Bush was President his and Cheney's number one go to news service? Of course it was Fox. I don't blame him for it. If you were Obama would you bring in Sean Hannity or Beck in to interview you so that they could just keep asking you if you hate america or if you're a socialist?

Once again, I don't know why you're complaining about liberals calling people fascist or Nazi. I didn't call you a fascist or a nazi. You came in and insinuated that the administration was fascist.

I'm not going to stop this debate because we can't have an honest debate, I'm stopping it because you obviously don't want to. :2wave:

You will find that people from the Clinton and Bush administrations went on all of the Sunday morning shows they could. I really can never remember an administration stating that they were in effect boycotting one network because they were not treated fairly.

While by itself it looks like looking into a gold company for fraud claims is innocent and should be reviewed, it should not be hard to connect the dots and ask why a liberal senator from NY is getting into the frey. Why not the gold merchant we hear on CNBC that seems to me like a shyster.

More examples, while I do not like what Goldman Sachs did, I am concerned when a Senator uses foul language on TV while trying to embarrass the CEO. Just not right. When the trasportation secretary went after Toyota and said he would not drive one if he owned it, the reported facts are that 89 people died in crashes due to the problem with accelation. This is horrible , but probably less than die due to something stupid like choking on their steak.

Bully pulpits are fine and are in fact part of the tradition of the powers of the Presidency. Just feel that there is a line of decency that this administration does not seem to care about.

 

[roughdraft274]

You will find that people from the Clinton and Bush administrations went on all of the Sunday morning shows they could. I really can never remember an administration stating that they were in effect boycotting one network because they were not treated fairly.

While by itself it looks like looking into a gold company for fraud claims is innocent and should be reviewed, it should not be hard to connect the dots and ask why a liberal senator from NY is getting into the frey. Why not the gold merchant we hear on CNBC that seems to me like a shyster.

More examples, while I do not like what Goldman Sachs did, I am concerned when a Senator uses foul language on TV while trying to embarrass the CEO. Just not right. When the trasportation secretary went after Toyota and said he would not drive one if he owned it, the reported facts are that 89 people died in crashes due to the problem with accelation. This is horrible , but probably less than die due to something stupid like choking on their steak.

Bully pulpits are fine and are in fact part of the tradition of the powers of the Presidency. Just feel that there is a line of decency that this administration does not seem to care about.

Think Progress Perino admits the Bush administration essentially froze out MSNBC ‘towards the end.’

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Gillespie's Letter to NBC News

Mr. Capus, I'm sure you don't want people to conclude that there is really no distinction between the "news" as reported on NBC and the "opinion" as reported on MSNBC, despite the increasing blurring of those lines. I welcome your response to this letter, and hope it is one that reassures your broadcast network's viewers that blatantly partisan talk show hosts like Christopher Matthews and Keith Olbermann at MSNBC don't hold editorial sway over the NBC network news division.

Sincerely,

Ed Gillespie
Counselor to the President

Once again, these complaints are just silly to me. They're being mean to Fox news? They won't share their toys with them? Maybe they think they have coodies? :roll:

Toyota produced a faulty car part that killed people (and theres good evidence that they covered it up and produced them KNOWING that they were faulty and could endanger lives). They didn't run them out of business. They didn't kick them out of the country. To act like they bullied Toyota around or were over reacting is silly. I have alot of coworkers that wouldn't let their wives or kids drive their toyota cars until they went and got them fixed. It's common sense.

As far as Goldman Sachs goes, good again. They screwed over the whole country and every CEO that knew what was going on should be in jail. They lied to investors among all the other shady crap they've been up to.

It's funny how you started out with fascist talk and when called out on it now you're talking more like "well I just really don't like how they've been kinda mean to this company" etc. If you don't like how they talk to a CEO, thats fine. To insinuate that they are fascists or anything like that is stupid.

 

[washunut]

Think Progress Perino admits the Bush administration essentially froze out MSNBC ‘towards the end.’

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Gillespie's Letter to NBC News


Once again, these complaints are just silly to me. They're being mean to Fox news? They won't share their toys with them? Maybe they think they have coodies? :roll:

Toyota produced a faulty car part that killed people (and theres good evidence that they covered it up and produced them KNOWING that they were faulty and could endanger lives). They didn't run them out of business. They didn't kick them out of the country. To act like they bullied Toyota around or were over reacting is silly. I have alot of coworkers that wouldn't let their wives or kids drive their toyota cars until they went and got them fixed. It's common sense.

As far as Goldman Sachs goes, good again. They screwed over the whole country and every CEO that knew what was going on should be in jail. They lied to investors among all the other shady crap they've been up to.

It's funny how you started out with fascist talk and when called out on it now you're talking more like "well I just really don't like how they've been kinda mean to this company" etc. If you don't like how they talk to a CEO, thats fine. To insinuate that they are fascists or anything like that is stupid.

When was the last time you heard a transportation secretary say we should stop driving one car company's product. Seems like a bit of hysteria to me. Maybe not evil just amateurist.

As far as Goldman Sachs is concerned I am not sure what you know about how the economy of the United States works. Or for that matter what the role of our financial institutions are.

If you work for a large company, then compare the results and pay of your CEO with the compensation of Blankfein.

It is easy to demonize people and comanies that is why it is so important for the President and his staff to be careful when attacking folks and their companies. It isn't always about political advantage, a President should care about the long term welfare of our nation.

As to the fasict comments, take them in this context. I am concerned when I hear government officials of ANY party who seek to stifle debate. We are in 2010 so we are talking about the administration in power now. What seems to have happened in the last 20 or so years in politics people like you rationalize things that are wrong with the current administration by pointing fingers at previous administrations and say " they did it to". I did not let let that work when my son was 8 and I shouldn't have to hear it now from people who should know better.

 

[roughdraft274]

When was the last time you heard a transportation secretary say we should stop driving one car company's product. Seems like a bit of hysteria to me. Maybe not evil just amateurist.

As far as Goldman Sachs is concerned I am not sure what you know about how the economy of the United States works. Or for that matter what the role of our financial institutions are.

If you work for a large company, then compare the results and pay of your CEO with the compensation of Blankfein.

It is easy to demonize people and comanies that is why it is so important for the President and his staff to be careful when attacking folks and their companies. It isn't always about political advantage, a President should care about the long term welfare of our nation.

As to the fasict comments, take them in this context. I am concerned when I hear government officials of ANY party who seek to stifle debate. We are in 2010 so we are talking about the administration in power now. What seems to have happened in the last 20 or so years in politics people like you rationalize things that are wrong with the current administration by pointing fingers at previous administrations and say " they did it to". I did not let let that work when my son was 8 and I shouldn't have to hear it now from people who should know better.

If a car company is knowingly making a faulty product and is slow on fixing it, they deserve to be called out.

I don't care how much a CEO makes. If they take so much that the entire company goes out of business, fine, I don't care, it's their business. When an entire company lies to investors to invest into something they know is worthless and is about to come tumbling down? Then I have a problem. I never complained that they made alot of money. I have no idea really why you even brought it up.

I'm also not rationalizing whats wrong with the current administration. I'm pointing out that, and maybe I'm way off base, but I don't think so, that they aren't stifling debate. Are they as transparent as Obama talked about during the campaign? No, I can honestly say they aren't. But the idea that they're stifling debate by only talking to the journalists that they want to is insane. I understand, there's problems in government, I'd like to see changes too. But now that Obama is in office I'm hearing a crapload of this fascist, socialist, totalitarian bull that couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[washunut]

If a car company is knowingly making a faulty product and is slow on fixing it, they deserve to be called out.

I don't care how much a CEO makes. If they take so much that the entire company goes out of business, fine, I don't care, it's their business. When an entire company lies to investors to invest into something they know is worthless and is about to come tumbling down? Then I have a problem. I never complained that they made alot of money. I have no idea really why you even brought it up.

I'm also not rationalizing whats wrong with the current administration. I'm pointing out that, and maybe I'm way off base, but I don't think so, that they aren't stifling debate. Are they as transparent as Obama talked about during the campaign? No, I can honestly say they aren't. But the idea that they're stifling debate by only talking to the journalists that they want to is insane. I understand, there's problems in government, I'd like to see changes too. But now that Obama is in office I'm hearing a crapload of this fascist, socialist, totalitarian bull that couldn't be further from the truth.

No offense but from your answer is doubt you understand the role of a firm like Goldman Sachs. To point out the example posed by senator Levin. Some analyst at Goldman called one of the investments they were pushing sh***y. That does not mean that at a certain price someone thinks that investment will be good down the road. It is easy to look in a rear view mirror and pick the investments that work or not. That is what makes markets.

Unless you are paying for advise, it is not the role of the firm to give you their opinions. As a matter of fact, in response to another blow up, Enron the attorney general of New York critisized companies for giving advise. Now congress wants to blame firms for not giving advise.

Another example, I am sure that many financially savvy people in this administration and the Fed know that 10 and 30 year treasuries are selling at a price which will almost certainly go down as interest rates go up in the next few years. I do not hear anyone warning the public against buying long term treasuries because it is in their self interest for people to buy them. Many feel that is the NEXT bubble.

On the stifling debate issue. Just like conservatives do not like to admit people like Beck are off the wall, I find people on the left overly protective of thid administration. What I call true liberals would denounce what this white house is doing.