A year or so ago, I also received the email chain letter telling me to "love it or leave it", shortly after I had received the one that was supposedly but obviously not written by a child who wanted to pray in school and thought he couldn't. The article below was my response then . . . and here's a link to </viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976748121>Catherine's response</a> today.
Get Out!??!
I won't suggest that anyone who doesn't share my religion or political beliefs get out of my country. First of all, no other country deserves our broken citizens. More importantly, I haven't reached the point of delusion necessary to believe I am the boss of the country, and I don't subscribe to the Christian value system that promotes such hypocritical ranting.
Instead of asking them to leave, I'd like to make a proposal. If they agree to live by what they wish on others, I'll leave when they say the plan is working well enough for them that they want to keep it forever.
I wish them twelve-hour lines at the polls next election.
I wish them bank statements that are as accurate as the voting machines in Ohio and Florida.
I wish them a spouse with Tom Delay's integrity, Mitch McConnell's warmth, and Dick Cheney's sex appeal.
I wish them a false arrest, an attorney with George Bush's respect for the law, and a judge with Donald Rumsfeld's idea of fairness.
I wish them children who respect them as much as George Bush respects the truth.
I wish them the same drinking water the people in Iraq and Afghanistan are drinking today.
I wish them an angry, jobless, hungry, desperate next-door neighbor with an assault riffle and a George Bush attitude.
I wish them my health care plan, surgery with no anesthesia, and a shortage of despicable trial lawyers available to defile the system in their name.
I hope everyone they meet treats them with the same respect George Bush has for the constitution, and another year of life for every word of the constitution Bush can repeat with his eyes closed and no box on his back.
I wish them everything they honestly believe George Bush wishes for the man holding the will work for food sign.
I wish them a post-op nurse with a Bush level of responsibility, sobriety, and compassion.
I wish them a face as beautiful as Barbara Bush's mind, and a daughter as beautiful as her face.
I wish them employees who work George Bush's schedule. On the mean side, I wish them a toothache every day he's on vacation and a migraine each time he lies.
I wish them the right to preach about their God, loudly, in public, as long as they agree to accept a sleepless night each time their actions or thoughts defy what their religion is supposed to represent.
I wish them joy in posting those commandments that they can't seem to remember or obey, as soon as they stop killing people in my name, that way they won't look like such hypocrites.
I wish them a long, all expenses paid vacation at Abu Graib.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 92
The most recent of dozens, perhaps hundreds, that I have gotten since September 11, 2001...and maybe a few before that.
Thanks for this, and the pointer to Catherine's article. I've not gotten one of these emails. I guess because my spam filter is set at the highest "bulls__t" level. Now if the "male enlargement" emails would just stop.
Richard, these emails usually come from friends and family, not SPAM, and I think that makes them even more offensive to me because my friends and family know how I feel about these things.
Stephen - thanks!
Christina - I haven't had to stand in a long line in years either, come to think of it. I thought it was because I'm not working any more, so I try not to go during those times the 9-5ers have to all crowd in. However, the long lines I was thinking of when I wrote this were 'created' and absolutely not necessary or excusable.
Faith - thanks - it's always a comfort to know someone has my back.
Catherine - oh yes.. the threats really bother me, also, not that I believe they are real, but that someone who pretends to care about me would send me something like that. Anyone can pray any time - these people aren't concerned about praying, they're only concerned about making a production of it.
Ronald - I'm seeing a lot more 'tude these days and I believe we'll see more. Wonder how it's gonna look when 67% of the country charges out of this corner we've been backed into? I can't imagine it being a pretty picture.
Great pithy response!
See that is the problem we all have with you Sandy.
Where were you when Janet Reno was sexually abusing children and tossing people in jail for trumped up charges?
Were you one of the people demanding that she be made attorney general for her efforts.......
I scream hysterically in frustration at the hypocricy of the left complaining about Bush's record on civil rights, see FRONTLINE: The Child Terror
Sandy, you are the very last person on the face of the earth who should be accusing another of your most obvious vice.
Greg - You came here, and either didn't read the fourteen comments before yours or chose to pretend no one else's comment mattered, and started with "See, that is the problem WE ALL have with you Sandy".
You don't insult me, because your opinion matters nothing to me. But you did insult my friends by totally disregarding their opinions, and I won't sit silent for that. You are a fool, Greg. My article stated MY OPINIONS. I claimed them as MINE. I didn't try to attribute them to anyone or EVERYONE else, as you do. You can come here and say whatever you want about me, Greg. It won't change who I am or how anyone else sees me. I suspect it will only make you look like the fool you are, when you accuse me of doing exactly what you have done right here in a public forum. Kinda silly, don't you think?
Apparently you are seeing something that the rest of us do not. I cannot understand how any rational person could consider Sandy's last post as "tolerant".
Tell me what I am missing
Frankly I find Sandy's article here as intolerance incarnate. It reeks of bigotry, hatred and hysteria.
Do you realistically feel that an article that concludes
as an example of freedom and choice and tolerance?
What exactly do you consider as tolerance?
Greg: Pointing out facts that nullify the claims of the current administration is not intolerant. GWB talks about god's will and caring about the citizens, all the while lining his friends pockets while he drains us dry. His educational policies are a joke. He is destroying the environment so the big businessmen to do have to expend funds on clean air and water policies.
Can you explain to me, honestly, how we can go to war in Iraq, pretty much destoying the infrastructure, and then give a contract, without benfit of a procurement process, or right to bid, to Haliburton?????
You must have blinders on.
The thing that most amazes me about Bush is that he is so blatent! He does not even pretend to care that he breaks the law!
He is, I'm sorry to say, a liar, a cheat, a thief, and a fraud. If this country is still around in 40 years, it would be interesting to see a history book. He will go down as the worst president ever, the one who brought an end to the American dream. And do not think I enjoy saying this. It is the truth. Plain and simple.
I believe Sandy's point here is to say "may they sow what they reap".
All of those so in favor of turning the constitution upside down should be willing to suffer the consequences.
Yes and too bad that all the people who protested against Saddam's removal have lost the chance to live under that which they wished on others.
Sow what you reap?
ONLY LIBERAL AND PROGRESSIVE BIGOTS ALLOWED!!!
I will respect that.
Because if there is, then who do you suppose is responsible for it, ultimately?
And for the record, most of the people that protested against the war, did so on the principle that bombing the crap out of a country to get their oil was immoral, not so that Saddam would remain in power. Most thinking people would not have protested Saddam's removal from office. Most thinking people think it should have happened during the first Gulf War.
Personally, I know that Sandy does not REALLY wish any of these things on another human, except in the rhetorical manner of making people think about what they are saying when they support some of the things going on in this adminstration.
When did Janet Reno abuse children? or throw someone in jail on trumped up charges? Is this related to her time as a judge in Florida?
Personally, I am not a conservative, but I never demanded that Janet Reno be made attorney general of anything. There hasn't been a really decent attorney general in this country in a very long time. As I recall, there was at least one Clinton candidate for Attorney General who was disqualified because of a nanny incident, but who would have been vastly more qualified for the job.
Don't know, Becky.
Abu Gharib is now in Iraqi hands, the coalition forces no longer control the prison. Personally, I would not wish someone being sent to a prison in the Arab world, even to make a rhetoric point.
Before the war, the Iraqi national oil company sold oil on the world market at world price, after the invasion of Iraq, the Iraqi national oil company sells oil on the world market at world price. I fail to understand how one can construe that to be stealing oil.
What I do see in Iraq is for the first time since the Turks left, the country is controlled by the majority of Iraqis rather than a fascist party made up of radicals representing an ethnic minority that barely constitutes 18% of the population.
I also see the Iraqi people flooding to the polls, and a government formed that represents their electoral wishes.
Then we both agree that the opponents to removing Saddam were not thinking people.
Up thread I provided a link to the FRONTLINE story on how Janet Reno made her mark. As chief prosecutor in Dade County, Ms. Reno developed the Miami Method of child interrogation regarding suspected incidents of child sexual abuse. The method would make Spanish Inquisitors blush. The method is what brought her to the attention of the Clintons……..scary.
The ensuing witch-hunt was without a doubt this nation's worst outbreak of civil liberty violations; the hundreds of thousands of people whose lives and families were ruined in the sex-abuse hysteria of the 1980's still have not been fully realized.
My point was that no one on the left, like the ACLU raised a single objection to this witch-hunt……..and now we are to believe them regarding Bush?
"The Financial Times on Nov. 3, 2000, reported that Halliburton or its subsidiaries did more than $23 million worth of work for Iraq between 1988 and 1999. With Dick Cheney at the helm, the company basically ensured that Saddam Hussein's oil fields would stay up and running after the Iran-Iraq war and again after the Gulf War." -Iraq: The Best of Enemies, margie.burns@verizon.net.
"The problem is that the good Lord didn't see fit to put oil and gas reserves where there are democratically elected regimes friendly to the interests of the United States," the former Halliburton CEO (Cheney) proclaimed to a Nightline audience in April of 2002. -http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charlie-cray/the-plan-to-steal-iraqs-_b_11793.html
".Among the fringe benefits of removing Saddam Hussein from power, went the thinking in the United States at the time, would be a rapid recovery of that country's oil production. In some hawkish circles in Washington, it was thought that a free Iraq would eventually undercut OPEC's power and marginalize Saudi Arabia.
The day American troops entered Baghdad, Mr. Cheney told the American Society of Newspaper Editors that Iraq would be able to produce as much as three million barrels a day, "hopefully, by the end of the year." -http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/06/business/worldbusiness/06saudi.html?hp&ex=1123387200&en=47b4606d2f3cc96c&ei=5094&partner=homepage
"When the selling off of the Iraqi oilfields proved literally too explosive, Dick Cheney came up with Plan B, existence of which officials also denied at first. When Palast, using the Freedom of Information Act, obtained the 323-page plan, he found it proposed to develop the oilfields under special negotiated profit-sharing agreements between the major oil companies and Iraq¹s national oil company to enhance Iraq¹s relationship with OPEC. That is, Iraq would agree to follow the cartel¹s quotas to keep production down and prices up. Why would the US government want to keep prices up?
It smelled like Houston,² Palast said. It turned out that the plan was developed with the Houston-based James A. Baker III Institute, a think tank named after the former secretary of state under George Bush I whose law firm represents Saudi Arabia. And Baker actually has an office in the White House, Palast said." –J Cullen, http://www.populist.com,
"Iraqis face the dire prospect of losing up to $200bn (£116bn) of the wealth of their country if an American-inspired plan to hand over development of its oil reserves to US and British multinationals comes into force next year. A report produced by American and British pressure groups warns Iraq will be caught in an "old colonial trap" if it allows foreign companies to take a share of its vast energy reserves. The report is certain to reawaken fears that the real purpose of the 2003 war on Iraq was to ensure its oil came under Western control… Earlier this year a BBC Newsnight report claimed to have uncovered documents showing the Bush administration made plans to secure Iraqi oil even before the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US" -http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article328526.ece
$23 million?
There are suburban Chevy dealerships in Duluth Minnesota that do more business than that in a decade.
Why do you even post such absurdities?
I find that troubling.
To me it suggests an echo chamber where like-minded people engage in unhealthy group polarization. I am rather shocked but somehow not surprised at Sandy's anger.
The "We" I refered to was the conservative half of the American population....none of whom is evidenced on this page until I appeared. One would think that people who were thinking people would be embarrased to participate in a forum where they are not exposed to contrary opinions and where radical opinions are not challenged.
Maybe they all should think of one of their own silly slogans: What would Jesus do?
I used to think that Christians believed in doing unto others.... blah, blah, blah. no more.
Another thing: Doesn't the article's author earn additional points for each post? The way this things going, Sandy might hit gather paydirt.
They have long since been shouted down by their opposition and ignored by the media. They have resorted to expressing themsevles at the polls.
What's at the bottom of Sandy's original post, and most of Greg's posts, in a way, is honesty. Sandy wants more honesty from our leaders, she wants people to look at the issues more honestly and she is honestly pissed.
Greg...I've noticed that you like to work in partial truths. What you say about Iraq selling their oil before the war is only part of the story. The part you are conveniently leaving out is who is benefitting from the sale of the oil. In both cases, the Iraqi people are NOT benefitting from it.
In the case of Abu Ghraib. I had to go lay down for a while to figure out how I was going to answer you. I'd like to know where and when the Iraqi's took over control of this facility, because there are still military AND private civilian American contractors running this facility. I know this first on very very good second hand authority.
I also know at least 50 people over in Iraq who could tell you, this very day, that the elections were not what the majority of the Iraqi people wanted, nor is this new government being celebrated. Unless, of course, you consider killing your neighbors and driving their dead bodies around in your van, celebrating.
I can tell you without hesitation or fear of deceit, that you are not getting more than about 30% of the news that is going on over there, no matter what newpaper you are reading, including if one of your sources is Al Jezeera. I"m not either. However, I would rather trust the voices of the majority of the people who have been there and seen it, than a few talking heads that haven't been there at all.
As for Janet Reno, I'm not a huge fan for a variety of reasons that are completely off topic, BUT I can tell you one thing, her methods in the Department of Family Services in Florida WERE standard at that time. She only implimented a system that had already been being used in California and New York as far back as the 1970's. As for the ACLU, they did take up the cause of people who came to them with clear cut cases of civil rights violations, and clear cut innocence. I don't think you can expect more.As for the witchhunt of child molestors, we have a very close relative who is living through a witchhunt brought on by his mentally ill wife. They live in the State of Georgia, and their daughter will go for her 5th pelvic exam on Wednesday. (so far, there has been no evidence of any abuse.) She is 8 years old.
This is exactly the kind of bullying that the initial article referred to. People using half truths and distortions to bully people into shutting up while out Treasury is being looted, and while the Constitution is being ripped to shreds.
Okay.....I'm done : )
Cheryl, this is no surprise to anyone who knows Greg. This is all he does. I hadn't thought about the paydirt.
Nancy, thank you for reading what I wrote.
Ronald, I am deeply grateful.
Becky, you've given me more credit than I deserve. I do wish many of these things on people who wish them on others. I think that's the only way it'll stop.
First, it's not unhealthy if it's justified consensus. Second, would you be complaining about the "unhealthy group polarization" if it were sympathetic to your views? Methinks not.
It's amazing how many people send them on 'to be polite'. I've responded to the senders, explaining why I was offended and not going to forward the trash to anyone else. Several people have responded with, "Oh sorry. You make good points. I just got it from my niece/preacher's wife/boss.. and didn't really pay attention" Unbelievable!
WHEN RIGHT TO KEEP HER RIGHT
WHEN WRONG TO MAKE HER RIGHT AGAIN.
I'm with you Chris, I see nothing in Sandy's article that is bigoted, intolerant, hateful or hysterical. I see someone, who is like many of the rest of us, who is tired of being told to either be with us or against us.
I think that what Sandy said above is true and very sad. Too many people just reacting with the most basic emotions to these things and not thinking about what they actually mean. This attitude of being "with us or against us" is maddening to me because it automatically deletes any honest attempts at nuance. (remember that word from 2004? I do.)
I had an English teacher who said it best. "Nuance is the difference between Lightning and Lightning Bug."
And John...That is my mantra. I ain't going no where....and I ain't shutting up either.
I'd like to add, My opinion...right or wrong. When Right, take action.
When Wrong, persuade me.
I sometimes tell them, as politely as I can, that I NEVER pass on such trash, especially if it is accompanied by a stern admonition like, "If you are a patriotic American, pass this on to everyone you know."
Yep, Bert, they only read the last line.
Think Greg went off to think about the pennies Martin and I have made off him?
Becky,
On this we agree, before the invasion the people of Iraq did not benefit as much as they should have from the sale of Iraqi oil. The people who benefited the most were the people who opposed the war. The French benefited from kickbacks and under the table deals. The Turks benefited from smuggled oil. The anti-war movement benefited from cash gifts and oil sale deals as well as benefited from being guests in the 20 palaces that Saddam built during the sanctions.
On March 2, 2006, the facility at Abu Gharib was transfered to Iraqi control.
Regardless of that fact, another fact remains, if the "Peace Movement" had its way, Abu Gharib would still be controled by Saddam and the moveoment would be silent on what goes on there.
Spare me the personal testimony.
I know of several hundred million here who believe the same thing about U.S. elections; none the less the Iraqi people turned out in droves and risked their lives to vote.
I can tell you her methods were not standard at any time before. Janet Reno is credited with creating the Miami Method of child interrogation. That is why the word "Miami" is part of the name.
Apparently you did not read the FRONTLINE link that I provided you, please do.
As for the ACLU there is plenty of evidence for their systematic failure to get involved, here is but one instance.
Harvard Law School Conference -- A special report
Echo Chambers are socially and politically unhealthy no matter what views are the subject. There is ample research that illustrates how radicalization grows due to the group polarization effects of unbalanced political and social discussion.
In a healthy situation, Sandy would rejoice that an opposing voice appeared.
Any thinking, rational, caring person who read through the FRONTLINE link that I provided would conclude that the children exposed to Reno's Miami Method were indeed sexually abused by the method.
Exposing a child who was not abused to hours of sexually graphic and explicit questioning until they begin making up sexually graphic and explicit stories of their own......constitutes abuse in anyone book.
The fact that you would deny this screams volumes.
That said we snot nosed, liberal, commie, pinko, gay loving, treehugging, welfare sucking, non-capitalistic, left wing losers need a little "leaven in the mass" to shake up our complacency. The arguments Greg makes, as preposterous as they may seem, are held as solid truth by a lot of people and have drug America to our current low point in history. I hope Greg never quits his postings; we need to know what we're up against, tho Greg sometimes likes to chuck a cream pie just for the fun of it.
At least someone gets it. Very good Sam, very, very good.
Now what you need to do is write a contemptible article like Sandy's from the other perspective. You need to wish things upon yourselves. It is a very healthy practice.
In another forum, I had engaged in a long running debate with a gay activist regarding Gay Marriage. At the point in the discussion where the debated began to stalemate behind predictable lines, I suggested "Let's switch sides", I then wrote my Conservative Case For Gay Marriage and she found herself discovering the motivations of social conservatives.
Echo chambers are useless; the only thing that comes out of them is hate as evidenced by this article.
While we need not get into a debate on the subject here, we should all be cognizant that often times our concern for issues and our self-righteousness are little more than a thinly disguised veneer of a political agenda.
So while Sandy may wish George Bush's respect for the law on someone else as a mean-spirited jab at people she does not know but disagrees with, I would not wish Janet Reno's regard for the law on anyone.
Maybe so but compared to the chaos on your side of the fence, we are as consistant as cogs in a wheel.
Versus tossing monkey wrenches into society then spending $Trillions to buy constituencies and hire social workers, teachers, therapist and drup councelors to play humpty-dumpty?
Conservativism is the natural state of society, always has been, always will be.
Sandy I thinks it's time for your nap...
I am in agreement with you.
"In a healthy situation, Sandy would rejoice that an opposing voice appeared." per Greg. Sandy would welcome the opposing voice of someone who made sense. Greg, for you to say this: "Frankly I find Sandy's article here as intolerance incarnate. It reeks of bigotry, hatred and hysteria" and to continue this disconnected, irrelevant temper tantrum proves that you either did not read what I wrote, or the honesty in it smacked you so hard you can't bear the guilt. I don't suppose you realize yet that it only speaks to those who support the horrors I listed. For you to spend this time trying to debase me or mince my words only makes you look like the fool who supports all those things for others but despises the person who wishes them back on you.. and that's pathetic. You do not speak for all the people on Gather, and you do not speak for all conservatives, and you do not even speak for the all the assholes. You only speak for you, and your words mean nothing to me.
Strict Monarchy or General Franco
They are unable to formulate ideas of their own
And are most content when marching lock step with a gun at their back
They also wish this for you
Ah, but what is your definition of Conservatism, Greg? Certainly not anything like what is currently going on in government. I would argue that Bill Clinton is/was more conservative than Dubya and his goons.
Reagan and GHWB were not conservatives either. At least not fiscally or militarily, if I understand the conventional definition of Conservative.
Jimmy Carter might be closer...he at least tried to free us from dependence on foreign oil, which seems like a pretty Conservative thing to do.
Of course you can go research this, Greg, and find some carefully-selected items to refute my claims. That's easy to do. Every administration does a lot of things, and some of them, carefully selected and out-of-context, can be used to make any point you wish to make.
As I understand it, "true" Conservatives believe in small government, the avoidancd of foreign entanglements, and, of course, they want low taxes. Their Achilles Heel, seems to me, is their lack of concern for disadvangated people. You seem to share that lack of concern, Greg. Please correct me if I have misinterpreted your many statements on this subject.
Here is the link.
My response to a chain letter is this: if I like something that has a chain letter attached (sometimes there are great photos or graphics), I might cut out the end parts where all of the threats or offensive items are included and write a note before sending it to others.
In no way, would I ever forward a chain letter on prayer. I know that there is prayer in school, but I do not want my child to be forced to pray with someone who is saying a prayer like this, "We just thank you, Jesus, that you gave us all that we have in the United States of America. We thank you that you are on our side." I have heard so many prayers like this in my community and feel sick. God created all of us and loves all of us. We do not have a right to exploit the world.
When I receive a chain letter slamming someone, I always go to urban legends sites to check out the veracity of the claims. Then I forward the link to the site where they can learn the true information. I did this with one cousin who was slamming Kerry at the beginning of 2004, so I sent her such a link, and she has never written to me since then, even when I told her that I prayed for her daily as she battled cancer. I think that it is sad.
You take all this much too seriously. Just delete the email crapola.
Sandy used a fun way to voice her views. It is nearly killing those who are her ideological opposites. To even know that opinion not identical to their own exists just frightens them to irrational reaction. If you notice as they slobber and drool onto their keyboards, they cannot post a sentient idea of their own. They can only hack blindly with their hate at any who dare disagree.
Stephen – I think you hit the nail on the head – the defense makes it pretty obvious this is what they depend on… things like sending out the chain email that said "due to the expected record numbers coming to the polls this year, Republicans will vote on Tuesday and Democrats will vote on Wednesday to keep the lines down". That's exactly the kind of nonsense they depend on, and then laugh at 'those dummies' who buy it. The person who sent me that one included me on the mailing list with a group of college students, many of whom would be voting for the first time. There's no defense for purposely trying to deceive others.
Today, "They can only hack blindly with their hate at any who dare disagree." The sad part is that they don't realize how obvious they are in doing this. Greg and Yes Man would probably have support for their position, except they make it so no reasonable person would want to be associated with their views. There are other 'opposite side' people on this site who could come in and address each of my points with intelligent debate. They don't show up where these two are.
This man, Greg Schiller, is publically accusing Janet Reno of sexually abusing children.
Do you think he is sane?
Where were you when Janet Reno was sexually abusing children and tossing people in jail for trumped up charges?
Greg Schiller, Apr 30, 2006
Recently, someone I had mentioned in one of my political articles contacted me. Fortunately, I had spoken the truth, so it was a friendly contact, a thank you for getting involved. After a moment of being flattered, the reality of this situation settled in. We don't know who is reading what we write here.
FRONTLINE did a better job of that than me.
Please explain how showing sexually explicit and sexually graphic images to children who have no experience with sex........is anything other than sexual abuse.
I will bet you didn't even bother to read the FRONTLINE article that I posted, Sam. Go do your homework then come back to the table and we can discuss.
I, like so many of the "we" I refered to was once a progressive. One day, I woke up and found myself surrounded by people driven by hate.
Now I find myself frequently in the company of other ex-liberals and ex-progressives who have fled the insanity that is the left.
Maybe one day I will return -- that day will be the day that the left rediscovers tolerance and optimism.
You seem fond of the word "hate." You claim I'm a Bush "hater." Sandy article referring to Bush is full of "hate." When I think of hate I think of Iago and Othello. Destructive, irrational, an emotion that flies out regardless of the result.
Sandy's article merely focuses the results of this Admin in a new way to make more real the continuing travesty against America and the world by this blinded, incompetent bunch of fools. Consider it more eloquent rage.
No, Sandy is not responsible for Mr. Schiller. His rantings and ravings started long before Sandy was involved with him, in many other threads that I observed and participated in. I think even Greg will confirm that.
Don't blame Sandy!
Thanks, Bert. You are correct. Check out any 'liberal' posting, and you'll most likely find Greg there, with the same spiel. I do think he has a particularly strong dislike for me, however. Should I feel special?
Anyway, after reading all these comments to Sandy's post and understanding about propaganda, I know why the religious, conservatives, and Republicans have to continuously send this drivel around. They have to keep reminding themselves and their followers what they think, and what to think; unfortunately they never remember that some of us have a mind. And, as we have all seen, when one of the mindless encounters a differing opinion it causes a crises of insurmountable size. Being mindless, they have no ability to differentiate opinion from fact, fun activity form necessary activity. It is a one note song, the song of the right, one note, one tune, one step.
The Far Right Conservatives have no sense of humor.