An Open Letter to the Ayatollahs

Closed MindNo, not the ayatollahs in Tehran.  This is a letter to you, the conservative American ayatollahs who demand purity, just like the ones over there.  I’m not talking about all of you, of course.  But this open letter is for many of you; maybe even most of you – the ones who say you agree with what I write on this Web site and what I say on the O’Reilly Factor almost all of the time, but as soon as I fall out of lock step with you … you vow to never listen or read another word I say or write.  You are the ayatollahs this letter is aimed at.

The last two columns I wrote – one about whether Christian small business owners can refuse to do business with gays, the other about the civil war raging in the Republican Party – have drawn a ton of negative reaction.  In both cases I wasn’t pure enough for many of you.  Let me be clear:  dissent is welcome.  Unlike many of you, I don’t believe I have a monopoly on Truth. Do I like comments that say, “Bernie, right on, we love you”?  Sure.  But those of you who disagree are free to state your opinions just as I’m free to state mine.

But what I’ve learned is that while many of you claim to respect people in the public eye who stand up for their views, no matter how unpopular, what you really mean is you respect people in the public eye who stand up for your views.  What I’ve learned reading your comments over several years now is that many of you only want your views validated.  Nothing else is good enough. You don’t simply disagree with the other guy.  You don’t want to even hear the other guy.  You want the other guy dead (in some cases, I suspect, literally dead!). So this feel-good nonsense that you spout – that you admire people who stand on principle – is just something you say to make yourself feel good — about yourself.  But you don’t mean it.  Like the other ayatollahs, reasoned dissent scares you.  You talk tough.  But you’re weak.

In my particular case, I have never written or uttered a word on TV that I didn’t honestly believe.  Those views often offend liberals who read or listen to me.  Understood.  And every now and then those views rub my hard right friends the wrong way.  But despite what you say, you don’t really respect independence.  You only want to hear from people who agree with you.  You rightly deride liberal colleges for not welcoming diverse opinions.  You rightly wonder what they’re afraid of.  You, my conservative ayatollahs … are them.

You know how many of you (again, rightly) condemn liberals who attack black conservatives for straying from the liberal plantation?  You ayatollahs are no better.  You condemn me for straying from the conservative plantation.  And even if you agree with me most of the time, one false move and I’m dead to you.  Think I’m exaggerating?  Try this sampling (with bad spelling and bad grammar left intact) from those of you angry conservatives who are no better than angry closed-minded liberals:

From Leisa:  “I can no longer listen to you. How disrespectful and foolish can you be. I will stop watching O’Riley in fear I might possibly see or hear from you again.”

From Wade:  “Followed you for years and bought [your] book.  Never again Go to Hell.”

From Vicki:  “Bernie. you have now lost me. wow. you missed the point entirely. You and O’Reilly are done.”

From Conservative Citizen:  I will never watch them [Goldberg and O’Reilly] again. Just like MSNBC.

From Mal: “last time I’ll bother reading Bernie!”

From LaMont:  “Been a long time follower of yours Bernie, but after seeing youR comments on Ted Cruz and Eric Bolling, it seems that you are just anther Karl Rove ASS KISSER.  YOu establishment GOP guys suck – our only chance is if the likes of Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Eric Bolling can get rid of you, Rove, McConnell, and Boehner.  Go screw Pelosi you traitor – I AM DONE LISTENING TO PHONIES LIKE YOU!”

There are many more just like that.

When I wrote about liberal bias while I was still a CBS News correspondent, conservatives applauded me. But some of my liberal CBS News colleagues called me a “traitor” because I didn’t toe the party line.  They were afraid of dissent.  Dissent would force them to consider another point of view, and that’s the last thing they wanted to do. Now I’m called a traitor again – this time by you conservative ayatollahs, for expressing a few opinions you don’t want to hear.  Once again, you are what you condemn in liberals.

There is little difference between the authoritarians on the hard left and those of you ayatollahs on the hard right.  You’re both closed-minded.  You both demand ideological purity.

The ayatollahs in Tehran survive because they will not tolerate dissent.  This is all the proof you need regarding their insecurity.  You, my American ayatollah friends, are no different.  You don’t simply dislike opinions that don’t mesh with yours.  You don’t ever want to be exposed to them.  At some level you see opinions you don’t share as viruses that may do you in.  That’s why, like the ayatollahs over there, you too want to shut down dissent.  You too are insecure.

I know, as I said at the outset, that some of you reading this – whether you agree with my views on various subjects or not – are open-minded enough to hear me out.  That’s all I ask.  It would be nice if more of you took on the ayatollahs with strong comments on my Web site, but that’s up to you.  As for the right wing authoritarians who have threatened to never read another word I write, or listen to another word I say, do what you have to do.

The good people in Tehran will not miss their ayatollahs when they finally go.  And we won’t miss you, either.

Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • Vance Cousins

    Touche Bernie, They deserved that! Even though I very rarely agree with liberal theories, neither side has all the answers and to find common ground where negotiations can begin on any subject, it is essential to know where the other side stands and then try to move to some kind of common ground. It’s an old concept called negotiation! Just like this Obamacare debacle we have going on right now. Everyone agrees that denial of insurance for pre-existing conditions should be illegal. Old school republicans better get a grip on another old concept, it’s called evolution. Without that there is no possible solution. The dems won’t do that simply out of arrogance but if the GOP doesn’t start doing it nothing is ever going to get done and I think the GOP has the best opportunity in decades to look like the party that actually wants to solve something. The Obamacare fallout will be the best opportunity for the GOP to take back the three tiers of the executive branch but if they get them back and play hardline politics as the dems have they will be no further ahead than they are right now. Most importantly, neither will the American people.

  • mcveen

    Bernie, don’t worry so much. That is the human condition. You, nor I, will ever change it. Ultimately, I’m glad to be part of it. You are doing a great job.

  • Joel

    Excellent points Mr.G.! The so called “base” with their litmus tests and their embracing the concept of “nobility of defeat” has cost us the popular vote in every election since 1992 except 2004. The fact that a competent, reasonable, rational, and thoroughly upright man such as Mitt Romney felt the need to sound like a clone of the theocrat Rick Santorum is a sad comment on how the GOP is held hostage by the loud mouths.

    • FreeMind USMC

      Well said Joel. :) And great article Bernie. Probably my favorite you have ever made, because it calls to attention everything that is scaring the crap out of me with those to the right of me.

  • Patrick Wilson

    Reading this is like coming across an Oasis after many years for me. I (was) a thirsty republican. Thirsty for facts, for creative ideas, understanding of the issues. Fox and Ted Cruz are a cancer in the GOP.

    • mcveen

      Ted Cruz represents one of the few conservatives willing to fight for the fiscal future of gov’t.

  • Patrick Wilson

    I would probably change to a GOP again, if only more of them would learn to debate and persuade like this man has. Anyone with a brain (you know the educated liberal elite) CANT follow Fox and Palin and Ted Cruz because THEY DON’T MAKE SENSE. But this man makes sense.

  • Bench Warmer

    Whoa, Bernie! Me thinks you were either having a very bad day or the denouncement s you received we’re much worse than those you posted. In my own view, most folks are overly entrenched in their particular point of view. Some refer to it as human nature. I think it is a bit of an overreaction on your part to label those who elect to turn you off as “ayatollahas”. And let’s be blunt: our Liberal/ Progressive “leaders” have been performing like ayatollahs for decades where the federal government is involved. Remember when Speaker Pelosi refused to entertain any amendments to the Obamacare legislation proffered by Republicans? Now there is an ayatollah for you! I predict those currently put out with you and O’Reilly will be back-soon; after all where else can they go? They (we) are as frustrated as you are. Let’s keep our eyes on the goal-to carefully, systematically-and fairly-begin reigning in the well established ayatollahs, both parties, in D.C. And reduce the size and overreach of our Central Authority.

    • Patrick Wilson

      Bench, your Pelosi reference isn’t the same. Bernie was talking in general about opposing views and how we treat them. She may have been acting like an Ayatollah at that time, but we are talking about an entire mindset of the so called right. A bigger umbrella than one instance. You at least can make a point, you don’t understand that many on the so called right HAVE NO critical thinking skills whatsoever; they are like Palin who is like a pretty doll where you pull the string and “economic freedom’, ‘american values’, ‘free-market’ ‘founding fathers’ ‘North Star’…never specific or on topic. Just a bunch of gobblygook that YOU KNOW entertains the simple of your political leaning.

    • mcveen

      Could not have said it better! We are not mad at Bernie. We are mad about the uncontrolled growth of gov’t and its dominance of our lives.

  • Wanumba

    Exactly! The republican party lost me, and now they are shooting themselves. Sure, it was fun to laugh at the liberals when they had “Bush Derangement Disease”, but now, it is OK to be as crazy and not even suggest “Obama Derangement Disease”. Go ahead, keep making more independents, we don’t need your silly parties any more.

    • Sheila Warner

      Succinct and wonderfully put!

  • John Sponcia

    Bernie, your segment on the factor is my favorite. You are the conservative voice of “sanity in the age if madness” (title of a book I wrote)! Every time you speak I learn something and I can see an issue more clearly. You always “illustrate” a point to drive it home and have it make sense. DON’T STOP EXPRESSING YOUR VIEWS…conservatives need to hear this pragmatic side rather than idealism that ultimately loses elections and keeps liberals in power.
    John Sponcia
    johnsponcia@yahoo.com

  • Lee Church

    a general message for GOP folks that want to respond:

    please don’t. I won’t reply anyway (i already feel dirty having had to read the many silly comments on this blog). Besides, you don’t have time.. You have to go deal with your TP hostage situation.

    You created these monsters, it’s up to you to talk them down from the lies you told them… or just accept what they do to the country/world.

    The poor folks don’t have as much to lose and since the GOP tends to be more wealthy, the TPers holding the country hostage are aiming to do more damage to you folks than the poor folks.

    So you might want to get moving on freeing that hostage instead of debating until the apocalypse.

    And good luck (i really mean that.. we all need it at this point).

  • Lee Church

    well, was any other result even remotely possible? The media in general , and you included, have made a nice profit from sensationalizing and monetizing fear. The media, and you included have their ‘bases’ to pander to (you even suggest folks take on these nuts in the comment on YOUR site.. but skip doing so in generall… no.. would not want that.. noooOOOooo.. geez).

    The socialist, communist, muslim, fascist, kenyan, government take-over, etc.. was ok for years.. it’s made you and others in the media a lot of money, and that’s not counting adding the ginned up stories designed to stimulate the other side to pay money to counter them. You know what i’m talking about.. the story that you put out that you know will create a need for advertising.. and that advertising costs money.. um.. makes you money.

    it’s been a nice game for the media.. who as chuck todd says isn’t the media’s job to tell the truth. it’s a production.

    So the media, and you included work people up with lies for years, and you wonder why they believe the lies now.. you and others in the media taught folks to only listen to what they agree with, and everything else is a lie. The media trained them well, and now you are suprised that they only believe what fits their ideology and anything else is part of the conspiracy.

    You are like a dog that finally catches the car.. you are just figuring out what you have been doing all this time?

    Look, you and others in the media created this monster.. fix it, or you (and the whole country) are going down.. i doubt in a depression ad revenue will be all that great.. well it might be, but it will all be in chinese, russian, and who knows, maybe even korean.

    We get a few days at most to get out of this mess.. you might want to try to rescue the country from the hijackers before it’s too late.. but as you can see, you trained them well.. like in fight club when Tyler instructs his followers to ignore him if he calls things off.. The GOP media spends years talking about how a negative tax credit (the mandate) is the worst evil in history and must be stopped at all costs, and then you are suprised when a group of bozos take you seriously and hijack the country for ransom over it? You are suprised?

    You egged them on for goodness sakes.. What other result did you expect!?
    And it’s pathetic that even in this situation, you care only about saving yourself.. you suggest folks take on the hard liners on your website.. but imply that it’s ok that they don’t elsewhere.. geez.. that’s awful big of you. You knew the lies that folks were starting to believe, and now are the core of this delusional fantasy world of your radical followers, you say the same lies in the media they did; in fact you helped create them. Yet you don’t ask folks to take on the radicals on other sites.. noooo.. just your site. Sounds like you have some fantasy of leading this radical group someday, is that it? Are you as delusional as your radical followers?

    You ginned up all these people, be a man and deal with the problem YOU helped create.

  • moronpolitics

    Bernie is and always will be what he was. His book about liberal bias in the rear guard press may have upset them, but it was because he said they were biased at all, not because of what particular bias he claimed they displayed. I read the original book and it is a testament to their sensitive natures that they took offense as they did. He praised many liberally (yeah, I was trying to be punny) as he pointed out particular missteps. I don’t recall any name calling though, certainly not the repetitive and downright silly ayatollah stuff herein slathered about. INSECURITY? That’s what you call it when masturbation is punished by partial castration? When the High Priest and Elders arranged for an itinerant preacher and reputed miracle worker to be nailed to a post (really, the nicely jointed crosses of so many paintings and the mistranslation of St. James’s scholars et al wouldn’t have been used even had the victim been a carpenter who brought one for his own use. sorry, X-tians) was that INSECURITY? So say ye, Bernard though I doubt it be correct. Indeed, perhaps, you “PROVE” the rule here, making Occam’s instrument as dull as this column.

  • http://www.skeeterbitesreport.com SkeeterVT

    Dear Mr. Goldberg:

    Now you know from first-hand experience that there are many on both sides of the ideological divide who are flat-out extremists, who view the world in absolute black-and-white terms, refusing to acknowledge any shades of gray (let alone any other color). They are totally intolerant of points of view that differ from their own — even when those views are by those to whom they are allied with.

    These extreme absolutists are as closed-minded as members of a cult who hold a view of the world that is totally out of touch with reality. That you call them “ayatollahs” and compare them to the mullahs in control of Iran speaks volumes about how far outside the American political mainstream they really are. Yet they have the audacity to call YOU a “traitor” to their beliefs.

    I concur with your criticism of Sen. Ted Cruz. Not only has he led the Republican Party into a political trap that they cannot get themselves out of, but his self-aggrandizing is damaging the party’s credibility, especially with independent voters

    • Lee Church

      the political trap is the least of your worries.. and calling it a trap is a bit disingenuous.. Cruz was not lured or trapped.. you imply that the left somehow encouraged Cruz. No.. the radical TPers ran full steam and continue to run full steam damaging much more than the GOP party’s credibility, though i understand that is the most important thing to you folks here. For regular folks like me, the damage already done to the country, the possible catastrophic consequences are for worse.
      You folks are supposed to be finance wizards.. surely you know that sovereign funds are already looking at accelerating a move away from the USD as a result. I’m sure you intellectual folk know that banks are preparing how to trade depreciated treasury notes once they default.
      This is already underway. we have already jumped the shark.. The radical TPers, who you egged on with years of acceptance of stopping the President’s agenda by any means necessary. You can’t call it a trap when these delusional folks actually believe your propaganda.. You have TPers fighting against a President they think is a non-citizen, invalid muslim communist socialist and fascist who lacks leadership etc. etc.. You built that… that’s your doing. that’s not some ‘trap’ set by the left. It’s your failure.
      I see you fault Cruz now.. sure.. but only out of concern for damage to the party’s credibility. No concern that Cruz has or will hurt the country.
      If you folks want voters.. particularly independent voters (ah.. that mythical beast died, but keep looking as some stil go by the giant one eye, but see with two), you just might want to actually care about the country a little bit.. at least some concern here and there.. you can start by faking it, and then perhaps as you practice it might become more habit, and one day perhaps.. you will internalize it. As it stands I can see a bit of difficulty with independents when your core theme is everyone fend for themselves. I know that’s popular with the TPers.. but not so much with folks that care more about their country than damage to the party’s credibility.
      Cruz didn’t fall into a trap.. unless by trap you mean he actually believes the silly half truths and outright lies that get repeated daily, including how the majority of Americans support the TP (i hear that alot.. every day TPers say “most americans support.. ” and add they talking point.. so some folks actually believe this.. and that would certainly be a ‘trap for Cruz, and it explains his self-aggrandizing to use your description. I think he was just doing what the GOP has been saying over and over.. he actualy believes it!
      So here we are with a situation where we have already started down the road to apocalyse and most of you think in terms of how it hurts the party’s image. next up, how to blame the left for the damage.
      If you folks were honest the GOP would say “sorry folks, we screwed up, we will deal with these TPers.. “. But no, the GOP tries to spin it that these radicals are really left wing folks.. or that the shutdown is really because of the President, etc. etc. doing anyting BUT taking that personal responsibility that we hear so much about.
      Good luck to you, heck good luck to us all and our country.. we freaking need it with the GOP more concerned about the party’s credibility than the welfare of the country.

      • http://www.skeeterbitesreport.com SkeeterVT

        Actually, Ted Cruz indeed walked straight into a trap — not only a political trap, but a constitutional one as well. It is a violation of Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution for the federal government to default on its debt obligations that Congress had already agreed to under Article I Section 8 of the Constitution.

        For Senator Cruz and other Tea Party hard-liners to openly tie the debt ceiling to defunding Obamacare — knowing full well that the Democrats would never go for it and having already lost the fight against the Affordable Care Act at the Supreme Court — reveals for all Americans to see that these are not rational people, but fanatics who will not listen to reason and are absoloutely hell-bent on imposing their will on the whole of the country, no matter how unpopular their will is with the majority of the public.

  • Ken Mitnick

    Hi Bernie and thanks for this piece. I met you once at a deli in Miami across the street from U of M on US1 and told you I was a fan. You were with CBS at the time. I am a lifelong liberal but acknowledge that there might be some conservative ideas I accept. Your focus in this piece is why I am generally turned off by the orthodox conservatives. Their “my way or the highway” is as much of a turn-off as liberals whose take no prisoner ideas are the same on their side. Nice piece. Good luck to you.

  • TheGoodDoctor

    Dear Bernie, I regret to think that you consider those who don’t agree with you to be among the “ayatollah” faction in this complex world. I find that difficult to believe of you. I do take note that you literally ‘took aim’ at conservatives when much, most, perhaps all of what you had to say is no less frequently true of those on the opposed sides of our partisan divides. If some say they will no longer read or listen to what you have to say, please do not include the greater numbers among us under the same narrow rubric of “ayatollahs.” Probably most of them/us think as I do and for the same reason I regularly attend church services: like them, I am glad to encounter the thoughtful considerations of others who might help keep my own thinking and conclusions, my behaviors, ever more increasingly and better disciplined. If a few get carried away and wax your inbox with criticisms and shutup!-issms, please remember that what may seem like a great number are instead those few who are easily frustrated and moved into the realm called “out of control of their emotions;” while those who did not fill your inbox — the greater number of us — continue to read and listen to your printed and spoken reflections. Simply consider what you have experienced over recent years before you left the so-called main stream media and cool it. Not even Bernie is always right, just like the rest of us.

  • Johanna

    Bernie, I admire and respect you for speaking your truth, and please do not stop! “Truth will always be truth, regardless of lack of understanding, disbelief or ignorance.” — W. Clement Stone
    I don’t always agree with your opinions, but I admire and respect your knowledge of and outlook on politics. I value your opinions–they help me to understand and to reason. I don’t want a closed mind, and I don’t want to be the type of person that isn’t willing to listen to another’s opinion. Keep up the great work, please. Ayatollahs and rude, disrespectful people, are a part of life, so the truth-sayers, such as yourself, need to hold fast. You are the most honest commentator there is out there, bar none.

  • rider237

    BTW, using the word “Ayatollahs” not only makes you as petty as the leftists, it’s inaccurate. knowing that you are a bright man, i have to believe that you are choosing to be petty.

    knowing that you are not a small man, i’ll choose to think that you didn’t think that one through.

    • keith hart

      Some
      audiences are tougher than others. Hecklers and catcallers get mocked — as
      the most effective response to a tough crowd getting unruly in response to your
      material. Chiding and lecturing a tough crowd getting rough — not so much.

    • KStrett

      The article is essentially predicated on the straw-man logical fallacy. He paints “conservative purists” as intolerant and unwilling to listen to another point of view by cherry picking the comments of people.

      He could have easily found comments from conservative purists who respectfully disagree with him and articulate why. If he wrote an article that took the arguments from conservatives purists and gave a counter argument, I could respect that.

      By cherry picking the comments, he is guilty of the exact same thing he is accusing the conservative purist of.

    • rusureuwant2know

      I think you have a “group mentality” and perhaps need to separate yourself from the people he is talking about – I am very conservative, but I know this article is not aimed at me – it’s aimed at those that made nasty statements – I’m seeing a lot of that these days and I’m glad he’s addressing the issue. Why people can’t be civil is beyond me.

      • rider237

        not taking it personally. just trying to point out that one person name calling is no better than another. it’s a pretty poor way to make a point, i think.

        if he is addressing the people on the right who are being nasty, he’s addressing a pretty small group, and they may not be on the right in the first place.
        after lots of playing in the leftists playground, i know that one of their favorite tricks is to post crap and claim to be conservatives. they do it online, at tea party occasions, and have entire FB pages dedicated to it.

        they do it to get a reaction and deflect us from the real issues. also to influence weak minded people who to have to good sense to either research them or ignore them.

        • Lee Church

          Given a fairly large number of folks thought the President was muslim, i would say that small group must have had a very oud voice.

          You folks were fine with that.. so long as they directed their distractions to disrupt the President and the opposing party. That’s when it’s fine to beleive the President is a muslim, socialist, communist, etc. I’m sure you have heard the list.

          And your suggestion that the liberals put on an advertising campaign to paint the President as a muslim socialist communist and fascist is odd.. Occam would suggest that it’s unlikely that folks would advertise against their own candidate. But i’m sure you folks can twist it around so it makes great sense to these TP radicals.

          So that’s it..the liberals have been painting the President as a communist etc.. in a brilliant plot to what again?? I’m sorry I must be weak minded.. I could not follow your logic.. it’s sounds like the next step in the diabolical plan you suggest is that these weak minded liberals then go out and vote against their candidate to prove something or other.. what the heck, they might as well since they just spent all that time painting him as a muslim communistic ‘weak’ President. I mean they might as well get some ROI on all that work.

          It’s brilliant.. your answer is these radical TPers are really liberals in TP clothing. They have infiltrated Congress, and to complete the ruse, they are going to hold the country ransom unless we defund Obamacare.. obviously if they held the country ransom unless we funded a national public option their cover would be blown.. so they go with defunding Obamacare.. yeah.. that sounds about right.

          Your post must have been a joke, right?

          Sure it’s true that folks go to create issues.. there are some in every lot.. and when i see one of our folks do that.. i and others shut them down.. is that what you do? oh wait.. you folks don’t do that.. right.. on any given day there is a troll just cut and pasting junk at OFA.. do you folks tell them, knock it off? no.

          And no.. my post isn’t some guy pretending to be a TPers.. and i’m really Lee Church.. that guy.. yuppers.

          If the ‘reasonable’ GOP thinks like you, you folks have no chance at dealing with the TP radicals you created that are now holding the country hostage. and no, the President isn’t holding the country hostage in exchange for defunding Obamacare.. don’t bother with that pretzel logic please it only will embarass you.

          I sure hope there are people in the GOP that get started on dealing with your little TP hijacker problem.

          Time is running out.

          • rider237

            hmmm. sorry you couldn’t follow my logic, but that makes us even.

            you seem to have built a whole story full of “facts” that i did not reference. i said they post crap. for you to have so many details at hand you are either a fanciful thinker, or one of the posters.

          • Lee Church

            that’s fine.. glad to hear you have never seen the President is a muslim , communist, socialist, non-citizen, and the other so called ‘facts’.
            So it’s true.. you don’t actually know anybody who has heard or seen any of these things.. you deny all knowledge.. they never happened, and if they did, they are either fakes planted by the left, or they are isolated and a very small group.
            alrighty then.. do you happen to have a set of approved facts that exist.. so folks can all work off whatever you say exists?
            I think most folks on here have heard the claims.. Donald Trump has.. i’m pretty sure you have, though i understand you have no recollection of any of that stuff.
            so anything that confirms your theories is true, and anything that disagrees is either a plant from the left (a lie) or an isolated incident, noise in the data, huh?
            and Goldberg.. he is happy to let you live in world and gin you up, unless of course you turn on him.. then of course.. well now.. then you might be closed minded.
            Geez.. i see Goldberg didn’t address you for what 13 hours.. and counting.. so let’s just say assume for now that he is ok with you being like that.. he doesn’t object, after all you are not going ayatollah on him.
            You are the poster child of Shelley’s creature, created and unleased upon the world by Goldberg and others thta worked to built you into the fine thing we see before us now.
            hopefully adults in the GOP will get their act together because TP folks are simply not going to get it done.

      • Lee Church

        The amazing part is that you suggest these ‘nasty statements’ are just increasing now. I don’t know where you have been, but i’ve been hearing the President called a socialist, communist, fascist, muslim, kenyan, and much worse constantly since before he took office.

        I hear in these comments on this thread the various lines.. such as the classic “lacks leadership”..or is the most divisive President.. etc. …and on and on. I hear nonsense statistical lies.. like one of my favorites.. “the top 50% pay y% of taxes” (while not considering HOW MUCH that top 50% make to pay y% of taxes. ). These are lies.. i’m sure you have heard them. And yet you pretend that you are just now hearing an increase in ‘nasty statements’.

        You, like Goldberg were fine with this.. you didn’t object, heck you will say it’s not your job to correct these folks within your party (like heck it isn’t).. you didn’t tell the TPers to knock it off.. you didn’t tell trump to sit down. And now you wonder, only after they turn on Goldberg, why they can’t be civil? Are you kidding me? They were never civil, and you were ok with that.

        The entire GOP/TP strategy has been to object to everything and anything, by all means necessary. You folks ginned these people up for years now. There could be no other result than them ultimately turning on you. What on earth were you thinking?

        The GOP was happy and is still happy to have these radical votes and support.. but you just want them to direct their nasty business at the democrats and the President. You voiced no objection about that for years. I’m sure you heard about death panels.. and whatnot.. i don’t recall you objecting… when did you do that? sure.. some will say ‘both side do it’..ok.. then we should shutdown government and default on our debt unless we get a public option in heathcare? that’s simply not the case, in fact the TPers were counting on the President being ‘weak’. Unfortunately you fed them that and they believed it, so now you have a problem when the President doesn’t cave to these hostage takers.

        So you let these radicals really believe this stuff, and worse you train them to reject any information that doesn’t confirm their warped reality. news at 11.. bringing weapons to town hall meetings to intimidate folks isn’t civil.. it’s a big F in your face U…. you call that civil because you were not threatened.

        Your civility is when they are threatening other folks not you or Goldberg.

        And you say you are glad Goldberg is addressing the issue: Is he? and are you glad? He simply asks people to help HIM.. he doesn’t say stop these clowns from doing it to other people.. just him. So it’s ok they believe this stuff so long as they are attacking other people.. and don’t bother taking them on when they attack other people.. naw.. you just created these monsters.. to rome the earth and create destruction.. it’s somebody else’s problem to deal with that destruction elsewhere.. (obviously you are not a fan of Mary Shelley).

        You folks created these frankensteins. and not only do you deny responsibility for your actions, but seem only interested in getting these creatures to attack someone else. If you are glad he is addressing the issue, and you want civility, then I suggest extend that to more than yourself and Goldberg.

        You fancy talking folks created this mess.. do some fancy talking and free the country from the TP hostage takers. If you can’t or won’t, then your fancy talk isn’t much good for anything except inside baseball and making yourselves feel good.

        Good luck.

  • rider237

    guess we can argue forever about standing for things you believe in, or compromising away your convictions. i happen to think it’s about dang time that people took a stand.

    BUT….what no one has brought up is that we are doing these CRs because the law has been broken. there has been no budget passed…as required by law, since obama has had the con.

    to be fair, he did send one over, but his buddy HR refused to take it up. i don’t think that was an accident. the house has done one, but the senate refuses to act.

    perhaps we are fighting the wrong fight. perhaps we should be holding those responsible for following the law, accountable?

    it is my fear that when the books are done, we’ll find the books have been cooked. we are in far more trouble than we know and it is in part because we are illegally funding the government by CR.

    • keith hart

      Deceit, fraud and larceny are rife with these congress critters. Regardless of party affiliation. When the camera lights darken, they’re drinking buddies. Cooked books? Did someone say cooked books? Who better to cook books than a forensic accountant for hire. Keep in mind, winning an election to a seat in congress is a great gig. Sets you on track to a marvelous life. Provided you don’t piss off the leadership.

  • keith hart

    When I say ‘simplistic political ideologies’, allow me to elaborate. Addressing Conservatives: of all the conservative posts I have read they share certain common elements. A reverence for the founding principles — absolutely laudable. But there it stops. Damn few conservative posts advancing ideas how to apply those founding principles to a modern, complex, fast paced world. You are left at the starting line well after the starter gun has gone off. I recommend you go to Hillsdale College website and put it on your favorites bar. Study it. There you will find many innovative ideas on how our cherished founding principles can be applied. Perhaps then I will begin to see some conservative posts saying more than just praising our founding principles. To the Lefties, ah, the lefties, who hold sneering contempt for those founding principles: outdated, hypocritic, negative rights. They are enamored and dazzled by Saul Alinsky. Even if they don’t know who Alinsky is or ever heard of him, they are getting their Alinsky second and third hand. I strongly recommend studying the concept ‘cognitive dissonance’. Because your political ideology is riddled with it, like Bonnie and Clyde’s Packard — that’s ‘cognitive dissonance’. Start with wikipedia ‘cognitive dissonance’. That should give you a solid grounding primer and a chance to catch up.

  • Geoff

    Stop and think. Before responding, take a deep breathe, clear your head of all emotion. What should be left is some clarity and a large dose of common sense.

    I don’t agree if Mr. G on his position regarding Senator Cruz. I believe in “principaled” positions, but also believe in allowing divergent views as long as those víews DON’T get personal.

    Growth comes from an open mind even when you don’t agree with another’s viewpoint.

    Unfortunately, reading the negative comments reminds me of listening to NBC, MSNBC, NEW YORK TIMES, and all other “lame stream media” outlets.

    Your beliefs are just that, your beliefs! How is it possible to be open minded when you close off others views that don’t agree with yours? How can you consider yourself a fair minded person when only your views are always right and fair? How can you consider yourself a principaled person when your rebuttal to a different point of view is to take your bat and ball home while calling others names?

    Go BERNIE!!!!!!!

    • keith hart

      Oh,please. Stop and think? I think all the time. I can rub my belly circularly and tap the top of my head at the same time. Ride a bicycle and chew gum at the same time. This is not high school debating practice. What is going on is far more sinister than trying to be fair minded.

  • 9zda

    I still think a lot of you who claim to agree with Bernie are still completely missing the point. In the same sentence you shout yes good job Bernie, which by the way excellent piece Bernie, and then two or three sentences later you are blaming Obama or whoever else for everything. He certainly gets some blame no doubt. But quit with all your preconceived notions, and really analyze the situation instead of flying of your rockers with emotional comments or tweets. Cheers Bernie

    • legal eagle

      Obama gets some blame for what?

      • 9zda

        He’s infallible to you huh? Good luck with all that

        • legal eagle

          Hardly infallible….but in this situation the “blame” is squarely on Boehner. If Boehner allowed a vote this whole situation would be over..

          • 9zda

            That’s an incredibly simplistic view you are taking there chief

          • legal eagle

            Simplistic? Why? All Boehner has to do is allow a vote on a clean CR….It would pass easily…

          • 9zda

            Hmmm hard to say, bottom line my original Obama deserved some of the blame comment that you responded to was not about ObamaCare. I was referencing the last 5 years and the general issues plaguing our country

          • legal eagle

            I see…can’t disagree with your premise….Aren’t there always issues plaguing the country? I think it’s called getting older….LOL

  • legal eagle

    Welcome all “I hate the government” cult members….You are in the right place…

    • keith hart

      Welcome, all ‘I hate bloated authoritarian bureaucratically stupid self-serving government’ members. You are in the right place. Don’t mind l.e., the sneering deceiver. He’s an around-the-clock housebound poster residing in a mobile home in Riverside.

      • legal eagle

        Obviously you don’t know much about real estate prices in Southern California. Riverside is too hot but San Diego is lovely…

  • moafu

    To D. Parri,
    Thank you for the reply. You are correct.

  • VermontAmerican

    Bernie, it’s unfortunate so many reacted rudely to your columns. I did dissent with your opinion that businesses should be forced to serve customers whose beliefs/practices they did not support. It’s called freedom. The Constitution no where allows the government to step in and force people to assemble, cavort, or serve against their will. My solution to bigotry? Let the marketplace decide. We need less government. Unfortunately, liberals (and Bill O’Reilly) seem to think that the solution to every problem is more government intervention. Don’t worry. I’ll keep reading you!

    • legal eagle

      What would you suggest put a sign in the window which says “No Asians Welcome”? What an absurd statement….

  • HOME, JAMES

    I’m definitely a conservative but not hard right. It’s not your fault, Bernie. I truly believe that what has transpired under the last five years under Obama is that both sides have become so polarized and eaten with “abject hatred” for opposing views by both the left and the right, that there is almost no “middle” left, hence the emotional outbursts from your readers. One of my gay friends (that’s right, a conservative with a gay friend – I’m hetero), called himself a “liberal conservative.” He’s a businessman with a lot of common sense and despises (without emotion) Obama, and the more I think about it, it may not seem as absurd as it sounds. I think what it really means is that even though we’re both Conservatives, we still are willing to agree with some carefully chosen “soft liberal” views. I’ll just be glad to see this “civil war” end soon, hopefully when Obama leaves office. What we truly need now is a real leader, not just someone with manufactured charisma. Let the emotions end and cooler logical heads prevail.

    • Kathie Ampela

      I agree with you on this county needing strong leadership qualities, not only manufactured charisma. I don’t remember any president being this polarizing in my lifetime. (Blowing a dog whistle to your base is a new phenomenon) Nixon, Carter elicited strong negative reactions in their tenure, but this is something else. Reagan unified the country. Clinton was insincere and power hungry but not polarizing. GW Bush had the Iraq War with 90% public support until 2004. Ultimately it’s the fault of the voters. You can’t elevate someone to the level of chief executive because they give a good speech (both sides included)

      • Lee Church

        Confucious say when play against better chess player, keep tipping board.
        It’s not polarized as much as you think.. it’s that if the GOP/TPers took a tip board strategy since the President was in office. There was no intention to work to help the country.. It was quite clear the primary goal was to make the President a one term President, and you don’t do that by having the country do well in the first term.
        All the fancy talk is fine.. I can ‘talk pretty’ at times also (in fact I was just insulted and called an ‘intellectual’ just yesterday by a GOP/TPer), but it’s been one giant misinformation campaign from day minus one.
        The misinformation game worked well enough that a small group is holding the country hostage.. either give us a true public option in health care.. or the country is going down.. oh wait.. make that either defund Obamacare or the country is going down. Sorry I was confused.. but i just heard the democrats and the President was responsible for the shutdown so I assumed they did it to exact something.. i figured the President was going for the public option.. sorry!
        So carry on.. you were saying something fancy about strong leadership.. someone that caves to hijackers that hold our country hostage or something like that.. yes yes.. please carry on.. i’ll let myself out..
        Footnote:
        (Goldberg at least understands he has a problem with folks believing this crap.. but some, such as yourself have internalized it (“leadership” talking point junk, come on dude) and have no idea that you are the reason you have a radical faction that is holding the country hostage. Neither of you seem to realise that the monster you created is for you to deal with.. your Frankenstein, your responsibility, at least if one reads Shelley. Good luck)

  • Daniel

    You are a good guy Bernie. I am sorry that people have said things to you that bothered you enough to make you write this. Bigots and self righteous conservatives deserve to be called out. I try to judge people by the fruit of their work. Your work has brought much needed laughter and much thoughtful insight. I will continue to read your articles and look forward to seeing you on O’Reilly. Please take it easy on the Christians. We are not all closed-minded. True believers understand that we are all flawed and try not to judge others. Our daily challenge is to actually live our life that way.

    .

    • Kathie Ampela

      This is one of the nicer posts I’ve seen in this forum. It can get pretty rough around here, definitely not for wall flowers. People get so upset sometimes, myself included, that they cut off their nose to spite their face. Because Bernie wrote a column that most disagree with (like the Ted Cruz edition) doesn’t mean that they won’t agree with him the next column. You can’t write off important friends in the heat of the moment.

  • D Parri

    Bernie, I’m going to go out on a limb here and give my perspective to you–free of charge, or charges–that you might feel as if I am dissenting from some of the core of your article. Please, though, do not refer to me as a top-ranking cleric who may someday order the public beheading of my own countrymen. That ain’t me.

    I believe that with the constant state of flux that is American politics there are times in which people of both persuasions–liberal and conservative–find themselves feeling as if they are in a proverbial rowboat in the middle of the ocean. No land is in sight. These (we) folks seek solid ground to stand upon and end our voyage that appears to have no destiny.

    That is when solid ground becomes a view from the extreme of either left or right leanings that seems to change very little over a longer period than those views of the middle, or moderates. Therein lies the real purpose of sustaining a well-defined left or right political base. Likewise, though, true disputes in policy will never be mitigated at the extremes. The ‘far left’ and the ‘far right’ serve as anchors–or, in this case, pilings–whereby those who are a little more liberal, or who are a little more conservative can regain their bearings on a tumultuous sea of politics, media, and commentaries.

    So, Bernie, I just want to point out that the extremes are inherently ‘bad’ simply because of their position. Rather, incivility and hostility should be bottled up and set aside. Then let’s get on with the debate.

  • legal eagle

    Bernie,
    Don’t you believe this Obamacare debate mirrors the Medicare debate of 50 years ago? The difference is the amount of media available today versus years ago…Ronald Reagan stated that Medicare would lead to socialized medicine and the AMA said Medicare would destroy the U.S. healthcare system…Oh, for the good old days…

  • Meadowbrook

    Dear Bernie,
    Many years ago, we had a child die. During our grief counseling we were told” Behind all anger is fear”. I’ve learned it is a very apt saying. The people you call “Ayatollah’s” are, simply put, angry and afraid.
    I read many blogs, but they manage to disintegrate quickly away from the article to angry name calling. I move on.
    Blogs, such as yours, are cathartic ways to vent frustration and frankly fear. They are anonymous and afford power to people who other wise could not express their contempt for those who exert so much control over their lives.
    Ted Cruz, love him or hate him, is one of the first figures I can remember that has the bravado to “act like a liberal” and fight for a cause.
    Please remember that conservatives like myself must endure insults weekly from the likes of Bill Maher, Chris Mathews and such ilk and few fight back. Mr. Cruz took off the gloves and fought back.
    And why write the article? Were you not just a little ticked off that your readers would be angry? If the media was not so terribly biased, the backlash of a few would not have been so strong. Do you really believe they will no long read
    you? Did you need to call them names and label them? Another liberal tactic that is very unattractive. Give these people a break, you have all the power and listen to the anger. It has more meaning than you could ever imagine.
    Mary

    • Sheila Warner

      Hi, Mary, if you visit the public arena of debate, you are going to get ridiculed by some, attacked outright by some, and supported by some. I don’t know who told you that behind all anger is fear, but I strongly disagree. There is such a thing as righteous anger. I was angry when a WW II veteran was beaten to death by teenagers. The man had shed blood in the war to protect our nation, and the total disregard for his life by the perpetrators made me really angry. No fear there, just looking at injustice. I’m angry at both the GOP and the Democrats right now, because there is such little regard for compromise. The word compromise has been redefined as “surrender”, which is not true. I do appreciate your comment to Bernie. I hope you listen to all sides of the issues. Oh, and my full name is Sheila Warner, and I live in NJ. I use “sheila0405″ because someone else has my name as a user ID. My birthday is April 5. I do not need anonymity to speak my mind. I own everything I say. And, hopefully, will learn some things as well.

  • keith hart

    Well said Mr. Goldberg. If I may add, in the overall bigger picture, what does political ideology really matter? When other far more important realities matter more. Published, established historians conclude that 150 years ago, Congress — both houses — the breadth and depth of which was rife with corruption. They say it now — of 150 years ago — because it’s safe to say so — they’re all dead. So, in another 150 years will historians be saying the same thing about this current crop of congress occupants. Because it will then be safe to admit it? How good is a system when the criminals run it? One could make a case that since the last congressional evaluation, corruption has been refined over the ensuing 150 years. Fraud and larceny becoming more sophisticated and less naked, less in your face. Complexity within obscurity wrapped in cognitive dissonance, whereby theft becomes legal theft. But legal theft is still theft after all. Folks eventually, sooner or later, just will not stand for it. As King John of England found out the hard way in 1215 A.D. People know, innately, when you steal a person’s money, you steal their time. And humans — all humans — only have a finite amount of time.

    • legal eagle

      Criminals? A little extreme don’t you think? Politicians are no more criminal than the people who elect them…

      • D Parri

        Eagle, I’d like to agree with you but for one thing.

        There are politicians who don’t appear to be very honest, and they come from both sides of the aisle. If they are not honest in stating their campaign platform, then there is a likelihood that the electorate would be duped.

        If that is the case, then the criminal aspect would rest solely with the politician. If re-elected, then I would agree 100% that the people would be getting what they deserved.

        • legal eagle

          I believe there is a vast difference between dishonesty and criminality…You don’t really believe that anyone who is dishonest with you is a criminal?
          Perhaps you might rethink your use of the term “criminal”? To some, it hurts your credibility….
          I might suggest the use of the terms liar, slimebag, or BS artist…LOL

          • keith hart

            No. Criminality will suffice. With various degrees of felonies and misdemeanors.If it hurts my credibility with criminals, so be it. The only difference between dishonesty and criminality is the value of the consideration involved.

          • legal eagle

            It hurts your credibility with rational people…

          • legal eagle

            Your statements would not have helped your credibility with someone like Sonny Werblin….

          • keith hart

            l. e., see ya. you ready?

          • D Parri

            Lying on the witness stand while under oath is being dishonest and it is a criminal act. Just one example where dishonesty is criminal.

          • D Parri

            Ok, how about “malefactor”, as in an evildoer?

      • keith hart

        No. Fraud and larceny is so widespread it’s accepted as normal. The honest person is the one not be trusted because they are the unreliable ones unwilling to playball “Politicians are no more criminal than the people who elect them” — you said it. Except, they are the most talented at it

    • D Parri

      One thing I’d like to point out here. The single common thread that you can see which binds all these facets together is greed.

      With much power comes much responsibilities. If those responsibilities are corrupted, then many will suffer. Greed is the universal corrupter of a power-central government that loses control of its own destiny.

      • keith hart

        D Parri, Greed? Hmm. I wish it were that simple. I must say, after a lifetime in the financial markets, I find fear a more powerful motivator than greed. Greed climbs a wall of worry. Whereas fear stampedes for the exit. God help you if you are one who stumbles to the floor. You surely will be trampled. In my humble opinion the answer to your considerations is not greed — human nature itself. A complex mixture of light and dark. And dark seems to consistently gravitate to the center. My observation of human group dynamics is : free agents join together in common cause to a perceived need, the group functions effectively on a horizontal, circular structure, selfserving type A’s elbow their way to the center, creating a leadership, building a vertical structure and allowed to so by the inaction of the others. Before long they operate the group for their own advantage and that of their immediate crew, providing only enough crumbs to the members to keep them from quitting. The group ceases to serve the original intent. Now, is the problem the leader’s greed or is it the fact he is a type A, or that the others allow it to happen? I return to my original comment concerning historians’ evaluation of 150 years ago and the level of corruption that presided. If anyone would care to address that specifically. Are we to endure such evaluations every 150 years — when it is safe to make such reports — into the distant future? Until God knows when, human nature changes. Until then I have my moments of considering issues of political ideology to be merely rearranging deckchairs on the Ttanic.

        • D Parri

          Greed can corrupt a virtuous person or society. Fear can inhibit, provoke, or otherwise motivate individuals through a whole spectrum of feelings, from worry to panic.

          My bet for the common thread in a society that loses its moral compass is the greed which is always insidious and often unrecognizable at the outset.

          • keith hart

            D Parri, In my youth, I had the
            good fortune of a mentor, a one David (Sonny) Werblin. One summer evening, he was discoursing on
            human nature. He was expressing his
            belief that human nature was improving — slowly; but, surely.
            And in time the day would arrive when symbiosis not predation would be
            the primary law of nature among humans. But til that day, how best to deal with
            human nature? Now. This moment. Tomorrow
            morning. Sonny gave me what he called
            his five rules of negotiating: 1. bring
            breath mints for everyone. 2. listen
            carefully. 3. ask questions. 4.
            get it in writing. 5. have an
            effective plan for when they try to screw you.

          • D Parri

            Keith, I think you were very fortunate to have such a wise soul to listen to as good ol’ Dave. (respectfully)

            It is psychologically healthy to maintain an optimistic outlook, but as Dave said (paraphrased) “…cut the cards.”

            Thanks for sharing that.

          • keith hart

            D Parri, you really have no idea who “ol’ Dave” was, do you? My point is, greed is a small part of the problem. The complexity of human nature is where solutions will be found. Not in simplistic political ideology. It is psychologically healthy to maintain a realistic outlook. Sadly, I think my humor is lost on you.

          • D Parri

            Keith, I did not mean any offense or disrespect towards your friend.

            I meant that there are rules of civility and respect to be recognized, written contracts are good, and don’t blindly trust anyone. This is a less humorous statement of what your friend had said, but I believe the same points and principles are encapsulated by both statements.

            I’m sorry that you did not see the humor in my response but let me explain. My father was one of the best people that I’ve ever known and I’ve called on many of the principles that I learned from him all throughout my life. The less respectable things I’ve been responsible for are mine and mine alone in terms of casting any blame.

            There was a bit of wisdom that he used to help me out at times whenever I was confronted with the issue of whether to trust a particular and the accompanying doubts that sometimes go along with that decision. I thought it was a quote from John Wayne (my dad was a big fan), but I did research and it appears to be attributed to Finley Peter Dunne, an interesting fellow and a political humorist.

            The quote was, “Trust everybody, but cut the cards.” The parallel between this quote by Mr. Dunne and the discourse you received from Sonny Werblin was significant enough that I felt a re-framed paraphrase was adequate enough to be taken as a tongue-in-cheek “I agree with that bit of humorous perspective.”

            I started to do a quick check on the internet regarding Sonny Werblin when you first wrote that comment, but I did not and I apologize for not doing that. However, I still give Sonny credit for having framed this bit of wisdom within a humorous vein, and I still respect both my dad for giving his advice–“Trust everybody, but cut the cards–and the original author for his political acumen.

            The humor was not lost…I’m sorry that I failed to make that point originally.

          • D Parri

            BTW, now I know a little about David Abraham “Sonny” Werblin, thanks to Wiki.

          • keith hart

            D Parri, thank you for your response. You didn’t have to do that, I know. Very much appreciated. The key to Sonny’s five rules was in the first, ‘bring breath mints for everyone’. He kept everyone close, even his enemies — dependent. At Giant stadium, in his personal suite on the 50, at halftime, 300 people would show up to pay their respect and ask favors. He would grant favors even to his enemies.

          • D Parri

            You are quite welcome, and I’m sorry for the misunderstanding. I’m that glad you shared Sonny’s five ‘golden’ … ;-) … rules with me.

            I believe that some of our best lessons learned come from our most trying experiences. I’m sure that Sonny’s emphasis on breath mints came as a result of lessons that he had to learn.

            I did a little research regarding the author of another quote which uses this same vein of logic, and it appears to have been attributed/misattributed to about three different sources. “…keep your friends close but your enemies closer….” has been assigned by different sources as owing to Tsun Tsu 400 B.C., a Chinese general, Niccolò Machiavelli, in The Prince, 1513, and finally, “Michael Corleone” in The Godfather Part II (1974), written by Mario Puzo & Francis Ford Coppola. It seems that the last reference is most likely the source for its current form.

            In my honest opinion, breath mints would certainly be requisite for anyone practicing this strategy. ;)

          • keith hart

            D Parri, Sonny had been Jewish by faith, but he knew the Sermon on the Mount word for word. He once said to me, “Kid, do you know the Sermon on the Mount? Read it, learn it, memorize it word for word. Recite it aloud to yourself everyday, at the start, when you get up. I guarantee it will give you a good handle on the day”.

      • Lee Church

        keith is right that loss aversion trumps greed. It’s a pretty well known, particularly in financial circles. Of course they sell both lottery tickets and insurance.. so there is a market for both in addition to behavior driven by each as well.
        But loss aversion (fear) is a bigger motivator than greed.
        It’s no surprise that we hear about death panels, and a communist take-overy ..they play to fear.. there isn’t a lot of greed driving that propaganda, but it’s sure effective.. some percentage between what you are want to argue to up to about 30% of the country likely still thinks the President is a muslim.. and folks fear muslims.. at least we do in the states.. they didn’t choose that because of greed. if they did that they might say he was jewish.. and obviouslly that isn’t going to work.
        This isn’t some controversial thing.. fear or greed.
        Goldberg is well aware of it, i’m sure.. Fear was driving him to try to stop the rebellion.. the zombies were turning on him.. so he went into panic to save himself. And he uses fear to in pretty much everything i’ve read of his so far. I see that today he asserts that President Obama is ‘rooting for chaos’ so as to pre position for anything bad being his fault, and anything short of chaos a victory for the good people of the TP. It’s calculated of course.. we see it in the talkng points you folks repeat over and over. we see it in pretty much every thing you do. it’s all talking points, it’s slogans, and ‘facts’, whether he is a muslim or not.. just asking.. didn’t say he was though.. is the President a citizen? questions have been raised.. and is he trying to take your guns? these are playing to your greed. He well knows how to play to your fears.
        It’s sad though..and i don’t which is more pathetic, his greed off profiting from you folks, or your fear which allows him to manipulate you so easily. if we had more time, it would worth exploring.. but as it stands we really do have a crises.. His Cruz thing was him panicing that he might not be able to get the gennie back in the bottle.. Cruz actually believed Goldberg’s stuff and though Goldberg gins up up to attack the left for Goldberg’s gain, the present course will create losses for Goldberg and for everyone (no safe harbor). It’s speculation.. but hey, isn’t that what Goldberg does pretty much every day.. it’s his opinion.. and you take what you agree with and it builds your conviction that you are right..but then when Cruz realises that cruz is going to hurt his gravy train, then well something must be done.. and his surprise and panic when folks turn on him.. the revolt must be put down, so he asks you to take on these ayatollahs.. but only here.. not the same ayatollahs who he has trained to attack his opponents.. that’s ok.. but here. only here.
        You folks have a nice place.. it’s like a fantasyland.. well it is a fantasyland. but you had better get your act together quik or china will start selling treasuries well before the default date…and the cascade will get the TP long desire that a depression would be good because it would reset the country.. (good luck with that).
        hopefully the GOP adults will take your keys away and stop you driving the country off a cliff. fear trumps greed.

  • Jay Bergman

    Dear Mr. Goldberg: You are absolutely right to call out elements on the Right that are just as self-righteous and intolerant as are many on the left. It takes courage to deviate from “the party line,” and you’re doing so on this and other issues is admirable. My only quibble is your describing your attackers as “ayatollahs.”. The Ayatollahs in Iran kill people, lots of people, and as odious as the attacks on you are, analogizing those carrying them out to mass murderers seems a bit harsh. (Of course my criticism in no way nullifies the excellence of your posting as a whole; nor will it cause me to stop reading you. How self-defeating that would be!). With respect, Jay Bergman, Professor of History, Central CT State University, New Britain CT — and one of only three self-proclaimed conservatives on a faculty of 456.

    • Bernie

      Thanks, Professor. Your point is noted. And I appreciate the feedback.

      Bernie

      • D Parri

        Bernie, you should take some pride (a little) in the fact that you’re able to stir the pot a little and create such a boil. You are receiving what so many strive for–attention. Chin up!

      • KStrett

        I am a conservative purist. If you have an opinion and I disagree with you, I will point out why I disagree with you. I am not going to close my eyes, stick my finders in my ears, and never listen to a word you say again.

        Your article was predicated on a straw-man. It is easy to pick out readers comments from people on both sides and present them as intolerant or crazy.

        For example, if a conservative website ran a story that had nothing to do with politics there are always several people making comments about President Obama.

        The initial story is about a summer shark attack but there will be several anti-Obama comments instead of comments about never stepping in the water again.

        It is easy to hold people like this up to make a point. I could argue that you only engage people who agree with you on here. Does that mean you are unwilling to listen to another view?

        I disagree with the GOP needs to be moderate to win argument. Why? It has failed over and over again and it is leading us over a cliff edge.

        Here is how it works:

        The democrats roll out a bill that increase spending by 1 trillion dollars. The media immediately either starts talking about compromising or flat out endorses the bill.

        Compromising to the media means Republicans give the Democrats exactly what they want.The media demonizes anyone who disagrees with the democrats. They paint anyone who wants to cut spending as an extremist.

        The end result of the moderate argument is the GOP compromises agreeing to increase spending by 500 billion instead of 1 trillion. This process is repeated time after time. The democrats get more than what they want and the country only goes in one direction.

        Notice the problem isn’t the American people are really moderate and disagree with cutting spending. The problem is the media has become the propaganda arm for the Democratic party. They attempt to destroy, discredit, and smear any and all conservative purists.

        Why do they need to do this if the country already agrees with them? If conservative purist are destroying themselves, why do liberals get so upset with a conservative view point?

        They always want to give the GOP advice about how to get more voters. The advice is always predicated on acting more like liberals. If the GOP is destroying themselves wouldn’t they shut up and let them do it?

        The answer is conservatism argued properly wins the majority of all political debates and the left knows they can’t win the argument. However, if the choice is between a liberal-lite and a liberal, democrats know they will win the fight.

        This moderate GOP compromise argument is leading us over a cliff edge. If government only increases spending and never cuts spending, eventually America will reach a tipping point.

        If you are going over a cliff edge should you just sit there and let it happen or should you attempt to stop it, even if stopping it isn’t popular with the elitists or the 51% of low information voters?

        This is why certain conservative purists are taking a stand on Obamacare. The law was designed to destroy the healthcare system. After it has destroyed the system, democrats will argue America needs a single payer socialized system.

        Obamacare ostensibly transforms America into a socialist country. Once it is implemented, there is no going back. People will forget the bill was a Trojan horse that ruined the health care system and go along with the democrats socialized medicine idea.

        The Karl Rove wing of the GOP looks at Obamacare and thinks the GOP can tinker with the bill and make it better. They don’t mind big government programs. In fact, they like like them.

        They don’t view Obamacare as a big deal. The moderate argument gives the American people the choice between big government and bigger government while the government grows incrementally as time goes on. This can not work. Eventually the country will hit a wall.

  • Jay Bergman

    Dear Mr. Goldberg: You are absolutely right to call out elements on the Right that are just as self-reighteous and intolerant as are many on the left. It takes courage to deviate from “the party line,” and you’re doing so on this and other issues is admirable. My only quibble is your describing them as “ayatollahs.”. The Ayatollahs in Iran kill people, lots of people, and as odious as the attacks on you are, analogizing those who conduct them to mass murderers seems a bit harsh. (Of course my criticism in no way nullifies the excellence of your posting as a whole; nor will it cause me to stop reading you. How self-defeating that would be!). With respect, Jay Bergman, Professor of History, Central CT State University, New Britain CT — and one of only three self-proclaimed conservatives on a faculty of 456.

    • legal eagle

      Dear Mr. Bergman,
      Have you taken a poll of all 456 faculty members?…LOL

  • moafu

    This
    writing is in reply to two categories of people who respond to Bernie’s
    essays: 1) Evangelical Christian Conservatives, and 2) Conservatives
    who are not necessarily Evangelical Christians. Personally,
    I have been an Evangelical Christian Conservative since 1957 when I had
    a born again experience watching a Billy Graham tv broadcast. I have
    been an Evangelical Conservative Pastor since 1967. I graduated in 1967
    from a very Conservative Seminary.

    1. To Evangelicals:

    As
    a Pastor over the last four + decades, the most grief I have
    experienced within my own spirit
    has been the result of bitter and unkind words I have heard or read
    that were uttered by Christians to other people. Some of the words I
    read in the “comment” column to Bernie’s essays are grievous to me.
    It’s one thing to disagree. It’s quite another to be unkind and
    impolite. You forget Who you represent.

    Gal 6:10

    As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men,

    The
    word “good” in the Greek of this passage means to be “pleasant,
    honorable and polite”. You folks that reply in this comment column have
    an “opportunity” to be pleasant and polite- to be an example – to be an
    ambassador (II Corinthians 5:17). There is nothing polite about
    telling Bernie to “go to hell”. As a matter of Scriptural fact, saying
    those words are a pronouncement of a curse on someone. By the authority
    given to me in the Lord, I disallow all of those curses against Bernie
    in the name of the Lord !

    Beloved, your first responsibility before the Lord comes from:
    I Timoth 2:1 I exhort therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings, be made for all men;
    2 for kings and all that are in high place; that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and gravity.
    People
    want to live lives that are upright, honest, peaceful, and prosperous.
    The responsibility of the Evangelical Christian Conservative in view of
    politics and social issues lies within the Scripture above. If you are
    not taking at least 10 minutes to 15 minutes a day to do the “first”
    things required of you, you really should not be investing time in
    impolite and harsh words against anyone, especially against another
    Conservative. Prayer is the weapon that will bring change in
    government. The Queen of England recognized that in the prayer life of
    John Knox of Scotland (Google it) !

    Additionally, if Evangelical
    Christians (according to Wikipedia there are 14 million of you who are
    voters) had voted instead of
    giving up and not voting, they would not be so frustrated. The polls
    show that most of you stayed home and did not vote in November, 2012.

    There is so much more I want to say, but….I also learned in years of preaching when to “shut up”. :))

    2. To Conservatives who are not Evangelical Christians –
    Like
    you, we want – limited and smaller government, balanced budgets (no one
    can borrow their way out of debt), reduced trade deficits, limited
    terms, and a Congress that abides by the same laws as the populace. We
    are in agreement. You may not agree with our religious views, but we
    can be civil toward each other in communication – especially since we
    mostly have the same goals for society. In communicating responses to
    Bernie’s essays, I would urge you to be civil so that you don’t
    undermine your own cause.

    The difficulties you are seeing in
    government and American society today were
    predicted by a scholar named Dr. Francis Schaeffer in his book, “How
    Should We Then Live”. He predicted in 1974 that in these days America
    would see:
    a. Random Violence in large scale and increasing number of occurrences
    b. Inflation and Financial Challenges that can not be solved
    c. Despair among the teenage culture
    d. Efforts to “redistribute wealth”
    e. a diminishing supply of resources
    His
    predictions were based on the actions of people in Western
    Civilization abandoning the Universal Principles found (essentially) in
    the 10 Commandments.

    He was a Christian philosopher and that may
    turn you away. Therefore, I’ll keep this section in a non-religious
    vein. When I was growing up, I was raised by a family that was not my
    birth family. The father of the family drilled me almost daily with the
    phrase: “A gentleman is that individual who has respect to other
    people”. Please, if you disagree with Bernie’s view, at least be
    respectful. He paid an awful price in being truthful about his factual
    observations of the Leftist leanings of the media. He has earned
    respect !

    wishing everyone good health and peace,
    Pastor Ed

    • D Parri

      With much wisdom comes much sadness.

      Excellent comment, Pastor.

  • D Parri

    Bernie, sorry, but no apologies from here. If I disagree with you on a viewpoint I simply state that fact and go on with my support of why I disagree. There’s no need to be uncivil or hostile.

    However, I did detect some degree of belligerence in your tone and I can understand why. This is not a place for people ONLY of like-minds to come and huddle for the purpose of ganging up and attacking dissenters. A healthy discourse and debate necessarily entails an open forum wherein many contributions could be stated, considered, and ultimately become incorporated into a refined solution to the problems and issues we take up.

    Bernard, I hope you were able to get a chuckle out of some those negative comments because I really don’t know why those folks want to get hostile when they disagree with what you have to say. Are you not their leader anymore? Were you ever their leader? They might need to find a new one.

    • keith hart

      Mr. Goldberg, D Parri does make a valid point. In my opinion, political/social commentators — on-air pundits — share similarities with Vaudeville/Burlesque performers of old. Some crowds are tougher than others. Hecklers and catcallers get mocked. They either standby their material or they don’t. Meaning absolutely no disrespect, modern day on-air punditry does have its entertaining Vaudevillian element. I mean, it’s not — it can’t — just all be creased brow dead serious education.

      I stopped watching Mr. Beck when his
      eccentricities were making me squirm. A Michael Savage — crude beyond what
      civility can accept. Although, his line “Liberalism is a mental
      disorder”, I would not disagree with. I prefer to consider it ‘cognitive
      dissonance’ — more accurate. Sean Hannity — too strident and an irritating
      facility for saying the same thing in seven slightly different ways —
      Jeez. Make your point and move on. Bill
      O’Reilly with his frequently annoying manner of being dismissive of anything he
      hasn’t the patience to understand. And Bill there are many times I would like
      to actually hear what your guest has to say. Even Bernie with his predilection
      for “on the one hand …… but, then again on the other” He reminds
      me of Harry Truman’s plea for a one armed economist. Chris Matthews, whose
      opinions are about as well thought out and hold as much relevance as that of
      any other old drunk falling off his barstool. Rush Limbaugh’s laugh is beguiling,
      frequently making me feel relaxed and his infectious optimism, ‘that everything
      will be alright in the long run’. I suppose I’d be an optimist too, if I made a
      million dollars a month. No, wait a minute, I do make a million dollars a
      month. Currency trading has been very, very good to me.

      • keith hart

        If I may add an after thought. Given the choice between an hour of commentary and an hour of hard news. I choose hard news. I very much like Bret Baier.

    • D Parri

      Bernie, get it? I.e., the last paragraph? That was a joke…smile!

  • Snellville bob

    We still won’t be getting ham sandwiches in Jewish Deli’s.

    • legal eagle

      Then sue the Deli….better yet eat what’s on the menu….

    • Tova Feinman

      Oh, poor baby.

  • Bob Olden

    It takes a lot of courage to say what you believe even though you know it may rub a lot of people the wrong way. But that’s just the point of freedom of speech isn’t it? It gets people to think, to reason why they agree or disagree, and maybe adjust their point of view when they consider a good point made by “the other side”. As long as we don’t get set in cement, we can learn to get along. But when the side that has the power attempts to shut down the other side, we really have a problem.

    That’s why the ayatollahs I fear are all on the left. The ones on the right are just annoying. And if the ones on the right ever got the power again, they are more likely to respect the constitution and protect the rights of dissenters.

    • Sheila Warner

      Unless you are Richard Nixon, anyway.

    • legal eagle

      Stay afraid….stay very afraid…

  • Craig1748

    Still respect your point of view on all subjects Bernie……..but just what are we going to do to save this Republic when we have such dysfunctional government?? The far Left has taken the Democratic Party and the far right is causing turmoil in the GOP, but at the same time some of the GOP old line Senators (McCain, McConnell, L. Graham) don’t seem to have a clue or care about the feelings and everyday struggles of the American people, especially the Middle Class that has always been the engine that has kept America going. What are we to do??

  • Tired of both parties

    Bernie,
    I seem to be going the same direction as you. While disagreeing with many democrats for many year, the republicans are losing me too. I am tired of paranoia on both sides, and no desire to find a common way and compromise to get something done in Congress. Tired of both parties

  • Coteyankee

    Bernie, I have to admit that I started off reading the article that people are freaking out about with my hackles a bit raised. But, as I read on, I found myself saying, “He’s right.” Don’t worry, Bernie, I still adore you! Carry on!

  • hihoze

    I always like Bernie’s analysis of what is or is not news and why. Also his insider knowledge of their bias.

    It’s only a guess but perhaps many conservatives are quick to snap at Bernie and others because the Manifesto mafia that controls the Democratic Socialist Party seems to spend all their time collectively condemning any conservative while standing shoulder to shoulder with each other.

  • http://theromancatholicvote.com/ catholicvoter

    Hi Bernie,
    I am a devout Catholic and it disappoints me to see some of the comments left on your site. While I am much more conservative than you are, I enjoy reading your columns and I like seeing you on O’Reilly’s show. What people do not seem to understand is that by telling you literally or otherwise to “go to hell” people are putting their political passions above God himself. For some of these people their political views have become strange gods.
    Besides the fact that it displeases God for folks to insult one another, I like you! I do not always agree with your point of view, but you are adorable, smart and thoughtful. People also have to understand that you are not a Christian, but a Jew so of course you are going to see some things differently than most of your readers.
    Best of everything. I’m looking forward to seeing you on The O’Reilly Factor on Monday.

    • legal eagle

      Jews see things different than Christians? Would you like to share what differences you are referring to?

      • AbdullahtheButcher

        Probably religious matters, I suspect.

      • http://theromancatholicvote.com/ catholicvoter

        Hi Legal Eagle,
        Sorry for the delay. I meant that Bernie’s faith is different than that of most Americans, given most Americans identify as Christians. The Jewish faith is different than that of Christianity. This is in no way a put down to Jews or Christians. Just pointing out that the two viewpoints, at least theologically, are different.

  • Hextejas

    Well, Mr. Goldberg, you have it wrong 2×2, and I have to admit that I am disappointed with you.
    I strongly disagree about the florist or any other merchant being able to refuse service based upon sexual orientation. The state forcing them to give in or having to close shop is going too far. Let the couple or triple go elsewhere where they’d be more welcome.
    Not in my shop, nowhere, and no when. And attempting to equate this to discriminating based upon skin color is just plain silly. Not even close.

    I find it kind of amazing that this is the 1st and 2nd time that I have disagreed with you. Up until now we have thought alike. I gave up watching O’Reilly except when you are on because I cannot stand the man but you make the show watchable.
    The 2nd disagreement being when you called the complainers an ayatollah.
    I certainly can’t recall these jerks issuing any fatwas, can you ?

    Regards

    • Patrick H.

      No, they may have not issued fatwas, but like the ayatollahs in the Taliban, they aren’t very tolerant of dissent or falling away from ideological purity. I mean, these are the same people who would call any Republican who was pro-choice or pro-gay marriage or, God forbid, both, a RINO! Their ‘No True Scotsman’ ideology is very hardline and heaven forbid, you disagree with them.

      • hihoze

        I don’t see Republicans who are social liberals as RINOs at all. What bothers me is the steady march of big government and central planners taking over our private economy, promising to uphold and defend the Constitution while doing little to stand up and oppose the Socialist Democrats who are crazed, in your face, tyrants or worse joining their ranks on key votes to shrink the circle of freedom around the individual. We are being ruled by Washington DC’vers from both parties who are in government for the money and power that feeds their growing egos.

      • Tova Feinman

        Who’s not tollerant? have you read some of the hateful, nasty, and STUPID comments coming from the Left?

        • Patrick H.

          Yes I have, but that doesn’t discount the intolerance of the Right.

    • Sheila Warner

      The bakers had to close up their shop because of the boycott of their business. The shame of it was the venom directed at the owners. But the free market prevails. If you make a choice and stand on it, the free market can work in a way that allows consumers to stop using your services. I doubt the owners of the bakery regret their choice. You can’t penalize businesses for refusing to allow blacks in without having that same principle applied, eventually, to other groups. It’s called long term thinking. It’s why the gays are making substantial progress. Everyone is short sighted. Perhaps the Jim Crow businesses would have been better to be shut down through boycotts. Discrimination is a complex issue, and it leads all over the place. Me? I’m for civil rights for every American. Sometimes that means that my personal beliefs are challenged. But who am I to decided which person or group is “worthy?”

  • Peep

    I didn’t like the list book. So there!

  • Larry in Texas

    Not bad, Bernie. I don’t agree with EVERYthing you write, spout, etc. No offense with “spout”, OK? It’s your opinion. I sample, listen and watch opposing/left viewpoints every few weeks or so to see if they are still off-bubble and they generally are, MSNBC being the worst. When the argument has no facts and reverts to emotional, feel-good diatribes, lies and trumped up scenarios my ears close, I hit the off butotn or walk away. Some of you and O’Reilly’s stances are beginning to lean left, which is troubling to me, Almost as if the plethora of manufactured crises from the left is wearing you down. But I still watch, analyze and write my opinions – Bill never airs them. They get a bit close to home and Bill can’t talk over email as long as he does his guests. That’s another thing. The interruptions are my biggest peeve. It’s getting harder and harder to hear either side. HE is listening less and less. Even in your segments with him. That is the main reason I drop his show from time to time. Just too tedious. It’s like a family reunion at my house. Cannot get a word in edgewise and miss half the conversation.
    Otherwise, your segments are always interesting and fair, Bernie. Was it Winston Churchill that said, “Never give up. Never, never give up”? That is absolutely a quote the left took seriously to heart and action and that too many conservatives have forgotten or discarded. Quitters never win; winners never quit.

  • Douglas Mortimer

    Bravo, Bernie. This is one libertarian who appreciates your work, even when I disagree. You nailed it in recognizing that an ideologue is just that, be they on the right or left. For proof, see Mike Hunt’s snark on your thread. Keep up the good work, sir. We may disagree at times, but that keeps things interesting!

  • Mike Hunt

    Spare me your phony angst Goldberg. You have built up quite a nice little cult following over the years. This website exists solely for the purpose of incitement of a hating frenzy in your cult followers. Intolerance? You need look no further than your column contributors. Perlutsky who threatened blood in the streets unless Obama is impeached. Who intoned that “we have all the guns” and advocated for shooting liberals on sight. Webb who compared the Newtown parents to NAMBLA child molesters and was tickled to death by the image of Diane Feinstein’s attempt to use her fingers to stem the blood flowing from the gunshot victims in SF. Culminating in your “I Have A Racist Dream” speech where you reduce blacks to a single entity defined by the least of them. Now you attempt to moderate your views and act surprised when the hatred you have cultivated is turned against you? That is the height of hypocrisy and you deserve everything you get. You have responded to other comments here but no doubt you will be too gutless to respond to this one.

    • Douglas Mortimer

      Your personal hatred (as opposed to personal disagreement) for Goldberg is both palpable and creepy.

    • legal eagle

      Your 100% right about Bernie’s cult members….Bernie constantly feeds them right wing red meat in order to sell books.

    • kidwinona

      You need help . God bless you

    • Jeff Webb

      Just couldn’t help yourself, could you, IHF?

      • Mike Hunt

        You will never shut me up Pops. AND YOU WILL NEVER TAKE THIS COUNTRY BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Lsal

    You are correct to a degree. However I think many of us are so used to being attacked by the media that we don’t liked being attacked by people we feel are on our side of most issues. You NEVER hear a Democrat attack another Democrat. But always see Republicans attacking other Republicans. McCann, King etc. The good old boys attacking the new crowd. Criticize, Ok. maybe. but publicly run down NOT! Have you ever seen a progressive publicly run down another of his or her party? No. We should be building not running down our side.

    • legal eagle

      Talk about collective victimization and paranoia….”many of us are so used to being attacked by the media” Have you ever been attacked by the media ?

  • DaveW

    Bernie,

    I agree with your balanced, logical approach. The far right are a real danger to the survival of the Republican Party. Their irrational, close minded and wrong headed views will cost the Republicans in upcoming elections. To appeal to the far right, you have to always support far right views…no exceptions!

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      So Dave W what are the particular issues that the “hard right” should fold on? It is nice to here your complaint but you don’t list a damn thing you would like to see the “hard right” compromise on. Some examples please. The same would go for Bernie, where would Goldberg like to see the “ayatollahs” compromise. How do you compromise with folks who declare they will not negotiate? While your at it how about some examples of what you would like to see the Pelosi/Reid/Obama thugs compromise on (good luck with that Bernie).

      • Bernie

        Donald

        Calm down! I don’t think I used the word “compromise.” What I said is that Senator Cruz’ efforts would not produce the results he seeks. I also said if his actions led to a government shutdown the GOP would be blamed. Most Americans are against OmbaCare, but most don’t want to defund it if it means even a temporary shutdown. I put a lot of effort into what I write. So read more carefully. OK?

        • Bob Hadley

          To repeat the line that most Americans are against Obamacare, without qualification, is misleading. I hear that line all the time on Fox News. While true on its face, polling says that the majority of Americans favor some kind of comprehensive medical insurance reform.
          Of those opposing Obamacare, a significant portion – as I recall it’s somewhere near 15% of opponents of Obamacare – favor a public option or a single payer system. A balancing question is: how many Americans favor the status quo to Obamacare?

          • Larry in Texas

            You haven’t checked the new rates, deductibles, mandatory options and coverage deletions in the new healthcare “reform”, have you Bob H? Thought not. They’re outrageous. They will break the middle class in rates and/or fines. We are heading full speed into socialism/communism/Marxism. Their plan all along.
            Rich and poor only. A duplicate Mexico. Privilege and power for the top and their buddies. While you’re at it, read some history and talk with some former Soviet “citizens”. Wake up. Think I’m kidding?

          • Bob Hadley

            You haven’t read my post, have you Larry? I thought not! You’re responding to something else.
            You addressed a completely different set of issues from mine. You’re obviously thinking with your emotions. I keep hearing that is what liberals do.
            Take a cold shower and then read my post. Then maybe we can have a meaningful dialogue. (HINT: my post did not address the actual merits of Obamacare.)
            As an aside, we currently have socialist health care. Anyone can use the ERs for primary or emergency care, even if they cannot pay the bill. Guess who pays for this burgeoning expense? But, before you address this issue, try your best to address the issue raised in my post above.

          • legal eagle

            Most Americans are for closing the gun show loophole as well as a ban on Automatic Weapons…did Congress listen to them?

          • Bob Hadley

            Noooooooooo. And you point is?

          • legal eagle

            My point is that Republicans claim that Americans are against Obamacare therefore it should be defunded….The American people are against a lot of laws that Congress passes….so what?

          • Bob Hadley

            That much is obvious. Sometimes Congress goes with the will of the people but sometimes Congress goes against the will of the people. And there’s a time to be a profile in courage and a time to follow the will of the people.
            When a politician goes with the will of the people and when others oppose him, he’s simply pandering or sticking his finger in the air. When a politician goes against the will of the people and other favor him, he’s standing up for principle and being courageous. So, what’s new?
            What I don’t understand is why you’re saying this in response to me. Bernie made the point that a majority of American don’t like Obamacare (which, by the way, has not yet been fully effected). I made the point that to say that, without qualification (as happens repeatedly on Fox News), is misleading because a substantial percentage of those disliking Obamacare think that it doesn’t go far enough. This is a good example as to how a “news” organization can be factually correct but misleading.
            And the only time I’ve heard it said on Fox News that the deficit has been cut in half and is declining at a record pace was at the very end of one of O’Reilly’s shows. This is particularly deceitful since Fox News was constantly making the budget an issue when it was over $1 trillion. But I digress……

          • Bob Hadley

            P. S. My point is also that a majority of the American people probably prefer to keep Obamacare if the only alternative is the status quo.

          • Patrick H.

            Probably and I’m guessing that also includes those against a single payer system, a public option, or this system too. Frankly, the status quo is something almost nobody of any political persuasion really likes except the special interest groups.

          • Bob Hadley

            What other plausible alternatives are there to the ones you just mentioned? The GOP had a health care plan in the early 1990’s, but they scrapped it as soon as Hillarycare was shot down. BTW, the GOP’s plan back then involved an individual mandate.
            I’ll give you a hint: no plan is feasible that does not provide for near universal coverage. There probably is no perfect or near perfect solution, just one that maximizes benefits while minimizing drawbacks.

          • legal eagle

            “The will of the people” means what? It’s a concept to be interpreted by those is positions of authority…What is your point? How do you know what the “will of the people is on any particular issue”. Which survey should you believe?
            The bottom line is this…Obama ran on the promise of implementing Obamacare. Romney ran on repealing Obamacare…Obama won a convincing victory….The “people” have spoken..

          • Bob Hadley

            “The bottom line is this…Obama ran on the promise of implementing Obamacare. Romney ran on repealing Obamacare…Obama won a convincing victory….The “people” have spoken..”
            Huh??? Has anything I’ve said even indicate to you that I disagree with this??? You seem to keep misreading my posts. I guess it’s possible that my posts are ambiguous and you’ve taken them in a way I did not intend. But I think it’s very likely that your defensiveness sometimes dominates your thinking.
            I used the term “will of the people” loosely, referring to what the majority of Americans favor and disfavor. I find it very plausible that a majority of Americans disfavor Obamacare theoretically, but that a majority of Americans also prefer Obamacare to the status quo.

          • legal eagle

            Sorry, didn’t mean to offend you…You may have a point about my defensiveness but it comes from being an attorney for many years…..LOL

          • legal eagle

            ERs may be used by some for primary care but I doubt this occurs that much in big cities…As I recently had a ER experience I can tell you that absent an emergency the wait is unbelievably long..

          • Sheila Warner

            Legal Eagle is right on this point. People don’t use the ER for primary care. They don’t have any primary care at all. They can’t afford preventive visits or the medications necessary when they have a chronic condition. So, they take a turn for the worse and end up in the ER. I think it’s fair to assume that nearly every person dreads having to go to the ER, even when there is a life or death issue, such as a heart attack.

          • Bob Hadley

            By primary care, I meant non-emergency care – the flu, a sore throat, etc. It got so bad here Hawaii that ads were run urging people not to use the ER unless for a real emergency.
            I’ve known people who work in ERs. They’ve confirmed this.

          • Sheila Warner

            So, you mean people without a primary care physician. Sometimes the flu is life threatening, especially for the very old, the very young, and those with chronic conditions such as asthma. I remember my ER rotation well, from when I was in nursing school. People do not use ERs lightly. They are usually very ill or in pain, or their child is very ill or in pain. There are always the drug seekers, of course, but that’s a whole other topic.

          • Bob hadley

            Yes, I mean people without a pc and without insurance. Otherwise healthy people not infrequently come in with non-life threatening symptoms. Possibly they may think that the symptoms might be life threatening.
            And this is in Hawaii, where we have a much higher rate of insured than most other states.
            Even Rush Limbaugh lavishly praised the care he received when he thought he was having a heart attack while on vacation here. After being told that the hospital he was taken to was highly unionized, however, he started back-pedaling.

          • Sheila Warner

            I don’t think for one minute that you are kidding. That’s what is so scary. There are legions of you behind Senator Cruz.

          • legal eagle

            Legions behind Cruz? What percentage of Obama voters are behind Cruz?

          • Sheila Warner

            I’m speaking of the many Tea Party voters in America. There are tons of them out there. And, I think your question about the percentage of Obama voters who support Cruz is a good one. I’m certain that there are voters with “buyer’s remorse”, but obviously not enough to prevent the re-election of President Obama. I’ve spoken to one person who expressed disappointment in how things are going. There must be more out there, somewhere…

          • legal eagle

            No doubt there are “disgruntled’ Obama supporters but I believe 98% of the voters who support Obamacare voted for Obama and vice versa…This is a political issue not a policy issue…Let’s not forget that many Republicans were opposed to Medicare….In fact, they still wont admit that the program has been a great success..

          • Sheila Warner

            Policy decisions are always driven by politics. If you think otherwise, I believe you’d be incorrect. Why else all the polls put into the field by both sides of the aisle?

          • Bob Hadley

            “I’ve spoken to one person who expressed disappointment in how things are going. There must be more out there, somewhere…”

            How can someone be disappointed with the way things (Obamacare) are going, when nothing is going yet? Obamacare has not yet taken effect. In fact, it will be at least a few years before Obamacare is in full swing.

            The only thing currently going is the propaganda war. And the anti-Obamacare people have banging that tocsin relentlessly. They are trying their best to ensure that Obamacare will not work.

            Ironically, Ted Cruz read Green Eggs and Ham on the floor during his so-called filibuster. Green Eggs and Ham is about some dufus who decides he doesn’t like something before he even tried it. He tries it, and then decides he likes it. Maybe Cruz is the ham.

            Obamacare is a vessel. It’ll only work optimally if we all run with it. As you indicated elsewhere on this website, Obamacare will have some bugs and will have to be tweaked. Maybe there will have to be some substantial improvements. And I bet that the majority of Republicans in Congress will fight improving Obamacare with all they’ve got.

            And, yes, Obamacare will work better for some and worse for others. That’s par for any system. The point is that the current system (or, if you will, non-system) works far too poorly for far too many.

          • Sheila Warner

            You jumped into a thread about percentages of people on either side. It had nothing to do with the merits of Obamacare. I do disagree with one thing you said. Obamacare isn’t completely implemented, but parts of it have been implemented. The “goodies”, (or what I call basic human decency requirements), such as doing away with pre-existing condition discrimination, not being permitted to drop someone if he gets sick, and requiring that a certain percentage of the insurer’s profits are used directly for health care, are in place right now. It’s not an either/or effect–it’s either in effect or it’s not–but it is being put into place step by step. Supposedly the entire law will be up and running in 2014, but with the software glitches and the suspending of the employer mandate, I suspect it will be past 2014 before it’s all implemented. Oh, and I’m one of those who want single payer healthcare. It’s this public/private partnership thing that just doesn’t seem to be a good fit in healthcare. Kind of like the Post Office, which is not a government agency anymore, but it’s not completely private, either.

          • Bob Hadley

            You’re correct that most of Obamacare’s benefits have kicked-in, while the cost-saving measure are mostly yet to come. The anti-Obamacare are screaming about premiums rising, etc., hoping (nay praying0 that Obamacare will not work. In many cases, the premiums have fallen.
            The Congressional Budget Office forecasted that under Obamacare premiums would at first rise, but then they’d start falling.
            It’ll probably be a few years before we see the full effect of Obamacare.

          • legal eagle

            The rates in California are excellent…I’ve checked…

          • Sheila Warner

            Here in NJ, we will only have 3 insurance companies offering plans. There will be a total of 29 from which to choose, which is much lower than the national average of 53. But we New Jersey citizens are used to that sort of thing. Just look at our car insurance rates. NJ is a terrible place for consumers of any type of insurance.

          • legal eagle

            but gasoline is cheaper…..LOL

          • Sheila Warner

            Oh, yeah, NJ gas is MUCH less expensive than in CA!

          • Sheila Warner

            Excellent! I’d love to know how many of these polls are push polls. You know, the kind that Frank Luntz does. He hasn’t been around for awhile. I wonder why that is. Perhaps Hannity is too far booked ahead for him?

      • Johnny K9

        We don’t negotiate with terrorists or Fascists

        • Larry In Texas

          Yeah, right.

        • Drew Page

          You mean like those in charge of Egypt, or Iran, or Libya, or China or Russia?

        • Sheila Warner

          Terrorists or Fascists? You just lost your credibility. Ad hominem attacks are pointless. Will you guys ever get that? Do you want to be better than your “opponents?” Then start being substantive, and keep your emotions in check. Seems like you cannot stand the rough and tumble of vigorous debate–unless it’s your guy doing the arguing.

    • Drew Page

      What “irrational, close minded and wrong headed views” are you talking about? Wanting border security first before amnesty? Wanting to defund Obamacare? Wanting a smaller government bureaucracy? Wanting to reduce our national debt? Wanting the government to live within its means? Wanting voters to show a picture ID before voting? Wanting to not attack Syria that poses no direct threat to the U.S.?

  • hankster

    Let’s see… Your article, “…ayatollahs,” posted earlier today. As I write, 254 responses have been entered, the majority supporting what you write. Count me among your fans. I don’t always agree with your views/positions, but I respect your right to express an informed view/opinion on various topics. The reason is because, unlike 98% of your media colleagues, you’re willing to “tell it like it is.” (I read your book) This alone demands respect since so much truth gets covered up by the media. In my opinion, you need to be even more vocal and forceful about what is really going on.

    • Bernie

      thanks, hankster.

    • Don777

      Why then can you not respect the fact that Christians cannot, will not and should not capitulate to the so-called “gay” community and in doing so disagree with God? When we merely say that we disagree with them we are hateful but when they spew venom of all sorts at us, why, they have a good reason to.

      • Sheila Warner

        Here’s why. There is a plethora of evangelical Christians who attack the gay person’s dignity. Some of the venom out there might surprise you. One pastor advised his followers to look for their gag reflex whenever gay rights issues are mentioned. Gag reflexes. God doesn’t gag at gays. He loves them. And, within those loving congregations are folks who are divorced and remarried, without hearing any condemnation whatsoever. In the Bible, I believe it is in Micah, God states that he hates divorce. When cherry picking the Bible for clobber passages against gays, some Christian leaders skip the ones about traditional marriage being a lifelong sacrament.

  • Chris Matthewson

    As Reverend Wrong would say, Bernie, your chickens have come home to roost.

    As I wrote here awhile ago (4/23/13) in response to one of the many extreme, right-wing Obama-haters who regularly unleash their venom (it is in the comments following the article written by Bill O’Reilly nitpicking Obama’s use of the word “tragedy” to describe the Boston massacre):

    “You cannot be as ignorant as you sound. Yet, words count and yours place you firmly in the racist and hateful camps of those you purport to deplore and against which all good Americans have fought for decades.

    “I hope your deplorable comments are the unfortunate result of
    an irrational, extreme anger; and that you will soon look back on your post in
    shame. However, I fear that I am being much too charitable to you.

    “to the rest of you: This is why the commentators who opine on this and other conservative sites and networks, should be ashamed of themselves. They, like Mr. O’Reilly and and Mr. Goldberg (and the many other, lesser lights), should seriously reconsider how repeatedly tossing “red meat” to their ravenous readers, listeners and viewers affects the more deranged and unbalanced among their audience, and how that infected meat then gets reinfected, regurgitated and rebroadcast by the crazy right-wingers among us.

    “These commentators act as lenses that collect the diffuse hatred and prejudice out there, from the boondocks to the boroughs, and refocus
    it into a laser-like, piercing, pernicious hatred, which will increasingly
    manifest itself not only in the ignorant remarks we see so often on sites like
    this one, but in actual harmful acts against the commonweal.

    “Of course, these commentators will, like Capitaine Renault at Rick’s Café Americain casino, express shock and outrage at the suggestion that their views could inspire such venom and hatred from their audience. They will
    even point to previous remarks they have made decrying the outrageous statements of some of their followers. However, it can no longer be reasonably denied that many of our most popular conservative pundits are actually harming the country they purport to love and want to preserve, protect and defend.

    “Mr. Goldberg has written eloquently about bias in the past. What he and O’Reilly seem to forget is that bias exists in all people about all things. It can never be eradicated–at best it can be recognized, understood and controlled. The vast majority of their audiences have a natural bias in
    favor of these commentators. They will forgive their transgressions and cut
    them breaks, a natural result of the connection people make to those they know or think they know and are familiar with.

    “O’Reilly, Goldberg and the others know and take advantage of this. It is one of the reasons legitimate reporters probably harbor resentment against them. So, when they simply cater to their naturally biased audience, instead of challenging them, these commentators are actually doing a disservice
    to both themselves and their audience, and ultimately, to the country.

    “Of course, everyone (especially those in a business driven by ratings and mouse clicks) wants to be liked and popular. But you would think that once someone in, say, Bill O’Reilly’s position has achieved all the fame and recognition he has, that he would begin to put it to some good.

    “I suppose that is just too much to expect of a TV personality.”

    To the extent Bernie is now heeding my chastisement, I applaud him.

    • Larry in Texas

      Go outside and get some air, Chris M. Take a break. “…tossing ‘red meat’ to their ravenous readers, listeners and viewers…”?
      And almost ten paragraphs?! You just described MSNBC’s entire MOS. And a good part of the MSM. The left are masters at fabrication, racial incitement and outright lies. Masters. I’ve been watching this crap for decades. Since the 60’s, in fact. You may be on edge of a psychotic episode. Just kidding, but lighten up, uh?

    • Bob Hadley

      You gave yourself away with your reference to Casa Blanca. :)

  • Phillip

    Bernie – Don’t sweat the “small” people. It’s all going to be O.K.

  • AbdullahtheButcher

    Bernie, buddy, maybe a reason why there are Righties that are emotional is because they’re worried. They’re worried that Obama and his policies are basically wrecking America and all too often it seems that the Republicans, who are supposedly the Party of Opposition now, do little if any real opposing. Look at the issue of amnesty for illegals, for example. All too often it seems that the Repubs basically just roll over and don’t even try to do the job that they were elected for. That may not be the case, granted, but it seems like that. As for gay marriage, the notion that a government may legally tell a public business about who it can serve has always been constitutionally questionable, but it was enshrined in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Bear in mind thought that it was done to undo Jim Crow a set of systematic discriminations that made a group of people be considered second class citizens in their own country. This situation is considerably different, in the sense that people are making choices of their own, and the availability of service on a broad nondiscriminatory basis is the norm and readily available.

    • legal eagle

      The Civil Rights Act was to further equal rights for all Americans, It is enshrined in the Constitution…

      • sjangers

        What does this even mean, Eagle? The Civil Rights Act isn’t part of the Constitution, nor are its provisions enshrined in the Constitution. Even the concepts receive only passing reference in the Constitution and modest clarifications in subsequent amendments. The 1964 legislation was passed in order to create legal protections that either didn’t previously exist or were not yet clearly defined..

        • legal eagle

          The basis for the CRA can be found in the Bill of Rights….
          What do you disagree with? I’m not quite sure what you are referring to? Do you believe the CRA only covers blacks in the South?
          If so, that’s not how the law reads….Are you arguing that discrimination against certain groups is OK?

          • sjangers

            That’s a bit of a stretch, my friend. Your original comment is kind of like arguing that the Model T was the direct predecessor of the ’56 Corvette.

            But the connection is tenuous, at best. One came before the other, they might even share some design features, but the two were created for vastly different purposes.

            The direct linkage of noble purpose exists only in the minds of a few advertising people, perhaps after downing a couple of Vodka Collins, who decide that the marketing slogan for the Corvette should be “Taking your grandfather’s Model T to a whole new level”. Cute, but far more misleading than realistic. Much like your original comment.

          • legal eagle

            Because a law is enacted to remedy a problem doesn’t mean that it is not applicable to other situations…..If the CRA was meant to only apply to the South it should have been written that way….
            While your theory may be correct, elimination of discriminatory practices is, I hope you would agree, an admirable goal…

          • sjangers

            I fully agree that elimination of discriminatory practices is a worthwhile goal. I don’t always agree with the way we try to reach that goal. Sometimes the small harm we deflect is outweighed by the cost of the cure.

          • legal eagle

            Well we agree on that…but society adapts…albeit, sometimes slowly…

          • sjangers

            That’s been my point all along, Eagle. Society will adapt. Why involve coercion unless there is a clear and immediate need and the harm remedied will outweigh the damage done by the punitive measures? If the need isn’t clear, why administer the nasty medicine? Most minor illnesses will get better on their own. The trip to the doctor is unnecessary and expensive.

          • legal eagle

            Coercion? Punitive measures? This is not a criminal matter it’s a civil matter and they are generally resolved.

          • sjangers

            What happens if a citizen is found to have violated the legally-designated civil rights of another? Isn’t the consequence punishment? Isn’t the threat of punishment coercive? Does it matter if the defendant actually goes to court and awaits a verdict or decides to settle out of court for fear of the outcome of a trial? It’s still punitive and coercive.

          • legal eagle

            If someone does not comply with the law they are subject to whatever remedies the laws allow…These remedies are civil penalties not criminal…What’s the issue?

          • sjangers

            A couple of exchanges back you questioned my use of the terms “coercion” and “punitive”, contending that they didn’t apply if a dispute is resolved in a civil action. My point is quite simple. If the power of the state is used to compel behavior else negative consequences ensue, isn’t that still the use of punishment to coerce compliance? Why do you think it isn’t? And what point are you trying to make?

          • Sheila Warner

            Of course you are correct. The government uses coercion all the time. We have to pay our taxes, and on time, we have to obey speed limits, we cannot use insider trading to reap huge profits, we can’t kill someone because we hate him, and on and on. Some laws are civil, such as contract laws, and some are criminal, as in homicide. If there were no restraints by government, and everyone could do whatever he wanted, we would have anarchy. The mandate to have health insurance, in my opinion, is no better or worse than mandating car insurance. The cost to society incurred by those without proper insurance is astronomical.

          • sjangers

            I think there are distinctions to be made between a mandate to have automobile insurance before engaging in a voluntary activity and a mandate for all citizens to have health insurance, but I won’t quibble with you over that in the context of my exchange with Eagle, Sheila. In the end, I suspect that my position and yours wouldn’t be too far apart, although perhaps for very different reasons.

          • Sheila Warner

            I believe you may be correct in that assessment.

          • legal eagle

            The terms coercion and punitive overstate the penalty for not following any law….Are you coerced into not driving above the speed limit? Is the penalty for getting caught “punitive”? My opinion is that a “punitive remedy” is an unduly long prison term….
            If the state does not have the power to enforce laws then you have do not have a civil society…Most people I know would rather pay a fine than go to prison….
            There are degrees of coercion as well as degrees of punishment…

          • sjangers

            To your last point, Eagle: Exactly! So why do you continue to quibble with me over the way I use language to express myself when we both agree the concept is appropriate, if not the exact degree to which it might be so?

            You insist on engaging in a battle of semantics. This isn’t a legal forum. This is a forum for the expression of ideas. It’s not relevant that the way I use language to express myself isn’t exactly the way a legal scholar would express him or her self so long as the idea is expressed clearly. The words I use to express myself are consistent with the way they are defined in Webster, Oxford, or any reasonable general dictionary of the English language, even if the meaning of the word is defined somewhat differently in Black’s Law Dictionary.

          • legal eagle

            So you’re saying that you don’t believe people should be coerced by the government into following the law? I disagree with your premise that anti-discrimination laws should be selectively enforced….

          • sjangers

            And I disagree with your premise that every piece of legislation should remain permanently enshrined as if the world hasn’t changed at all since the day it passed into law.

            What I’ve been saying- perhaps poorly, or perhaps you’ve simply put an inordinate amount of effort into misunderstanding me- is that sometimes government coercion is not the best way to achieve a social goal. Sometimes it ends up being counterproductive. Laws shouldn’t be selectively enforced, but with some laws there comes a time to retire them and find less intrusive ways to ensure that our society continues to progress along the path we desire. I think you know that.

          • legal eagle

            I don’t disagree with your overall view. However, there is no legislative mechanism to terminate a statute. Changes in laws are often adjudicated effectively in the court system.
            The issue of civil rights/discrimination has been ongoing since the Civil War and will bill be a political issue well after we are all gone….One person’s civil rights is another person’s individual freedom…

          • sjangers

            Sure. In our diverse society there will always be competing interests, some of which involve civil rights and fair treatment for all citizens. And when one group of citizens’ civil rights interfere with another’s individual freedoms- and vice versa- we ought to ask whether or not the balance between the two is fair and reasonable for the current needs of our society.

            I’m sure it’s just a matter of semantics again, but I don’t understand your statement that there is no legislative mechanism to terminate a statute. My understanding is that most laws can be revised or even eliminated if there is sufficient support in the legislative body and executive approval. Even the Constitution can be rewritten with sufficient support for the legislative body and the respective states. Revising existing law works much the same as creating new law.

          • legal eagle

            Technically you are correct. Practically speaking, it is the function of the judiciary to rule on the applicability of a statute.
            As an example,there are several Southern states that still have anti-sodomy statutes on the books including the State of Virginia. However, the courts have made these statutes moot. Repeal of the statute would not be politically viable and legislators are political bodies. In fact, Ken Cuchinelli, who is the Republican candidate for Governor of Virginia has refused to state whether he is opposed to Virginia’s anti-sodomy law.
            While as an individual I agree that semantics are often irrelevant, as a lawyer I would tell you that semantics matter..

          • sjangers

            Semantics would certainly matter in a courtroom. But it seems to me that semantics have been an obstacle to you and I having a reasonable conversation here.

          • legal eagle

            I’m an attorney…Semantics count in my world….I don’t want to be disagreeable but the U.S. legal system as well as the legislative system is based upon the writing on the page…

          • sjangers

            And in your world I would do as you Romans do. But in this arena it doesn’t enhance communication when you insist on interpreting words and phrases the same way they are interpreted in the court room. That’s not how they’re being used here.

          • legal eagle

            I’ll do my best…LOL

          • AbdullahtheButcher

            Getting rid of discrimination is certainly a good thing; however, sometimes we do disagree about how to do it. I’m concerned that in some cases the solution might well be worse than the problem.

      • AbdullahtheButcher

        Where in the Constitution is it enshrined? Also, the Civil Rights Act was to benefit black Americans who were subject to a system of institutional discrimination in the South. With all due respect, were homosexuals ever enslaved, or lynched or denied the vote or forced to sit in the backs of buses, or not allowed to eat a certain restaurants, sleep at certain hotels or even drink from certain water fountains?

        • legal eagle

          The CRA has been ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court and it was not written to benefit any one group. It is to protect all Americans against discrimination even Right wing nut jobs like yourself…

          • AbdullahtheButcher

            Legal Beagle, I know that the CRA is the law of the land and I have no complaints. I know that it’s purpose is to protect citizens against discrimination, even including Bolshevik buffoons like you. As for the gay wedding thing, I myself might swallow my pride and take the homosexual couple’s money and give them the cake.

  • Kathie Ampela

    I don’t always agree with my side and I find it creepy agreeing with “your side” just to “not hurt the cause,” it crosses the line into collectivism. Like kood aid drinking or Manson family stuff, I don’t like it. Idealogues eat their own, it’s counter productive. Fight the enemy, not each other. The enemy is bad policy corrupt politicians and REALLY bad ideas. Maybe people were just as virulent 50 years ago and we weren’t aware of it because there weren’t public forums like this one, or maybe there was more common sense back then. I suspect it’s probably both. I live in New York where the polls indicate we will have a Communist/Marxist mayor in November, so I feel pretty sure about the lack of common sense part. Nothing like putting a commie in charge of the beating heart of America’s capitalist system ;-) There’s certainly a lot to be upset about. But I keep thinking about Mr. & Mrs. Driveby America, living their lives in oblivion, unaware of the civil war going on right now. The future of this country is in THEIR hands, not the ideologues who participate in forums like this one.

    • legal eagle

      The ideologues don’t care about the country, their fellow citizens or whether America is a just society…They care about protecting their turf and resisting change…

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        There are a whole lot of “ideologues” out there. Most Americans don’t care about what is happening to their country. The minorities have lived in cesspools for a very long time and it becomes a given after a while. When it totally collapses around them (see Detroit) they move on to another cesspool. Most of the middle class live for weekends so that they can recreate themselves into oblivion of Saturdays and Sundays and sometimes during the week with their kids, uninformed of the collapse about to overtake them (see Roman Empire). Most Americans are not even registered to vote and those that are don’t vote (see recall in Colorado). Most Americans cannot name their Congressperson or their Senators that is why only a couple of words can move mountains (Hope and Change; Yes We Can; etc.).

        • Larry in Texas

          You are absolutely right on here, DonaldYR. And it took just two generations of nibbling and dumbing-down the populace to do it.
          Wake up folks. Get off the couch. Now. Do something.

          • legal eagle

            Good idea….Do something….go play with your kids and stop fighting with your wife…

        • legal eagle

          Typical doom and gloom…If you don’t do things our way America will come to an end…..pure B.S.

        • Sheila Warner

          Well, it’s a good thing we have you, oh model citizen, probably white (since you referenced “minorities”), with your voter registration card in one hand and the Constitution in the other. You proudly wave that flag and make certain everyone sees you out and about being a true patriot. OMG, if only you could see how arrogant your remarks come across. “Most” Americans don’t care what happens to the country? Are you kidding me? I haven’t met an American yet who doesn’t love this country.

          • legal eagle

            The fact is that the so called Tea Party movement has no agenda other than their hatred of government, particularly when the governing party is Democratic….
            There agenda is obvious…hope the country fails so they can blame the Government for the failure….The term “small government” is a cliché for “no government” unless it serves their purpose.
            This movement has been going on among Republicans since the 1964 Presidential election and the nomination of Goldwater. Fortunately, their bark is far louder than their bite, which is amplified by Fox News and right wing radio…

    • Sheila Warner

      Read Joe Lhota’s official web site. He wants to involve the government as a partner in bringing more jobs to NYC. The “public/private” partnership is exactly what is wrong with the Postal service, and Obamacare. Anytime the government is some kind of partner in private enterprise, there are strings attached. I’m not so sure Mr. Lhota is all that different from other politicians out there. He just wants the taxes to flow into other coffers. Mf Lhota can claim he is for lower taxes in some areas, but in order to attract the high-tech, biolife R&D he wants, into the city, tax dollars will have to be spent. It is up to New Yorkers how they want their taxes disbursed.

  • EDI_Mike

    Excellent points Bernie. I respect your opinion even when I don’t completely agree with it. Keep it up so we conservatives don’t become just like the left.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      I am one of Bernie’s “ayatollahs” and have no desire to take advice from Goldberg nor O’Reilly. Bernie still has that CBS mutated liberal virus in his system, yes he has strayed to the right but his DNA is still infected with a liberal political philosophy.

      • legal eagle

        and you’re infected with what? The bitterness virus?

    • Bernie

      Thanks very much EDI_Mike … much appreciated!

  • Monica Gfoeller

    Bernie, you views are refreshing and worthwhile. Now, you just ignore the “Taliban” screechers on both sides. People who really want to keep our society strong and our government healthy want and enjoy and honest expression of views and exposition of ideas. They are going to want to keep on reading columns and listening to commentaries like yours. If others don’t get it, then they don’t get it. Keep on speaking and keep writing, and please do continue to use good grammar while doing so. (:

    • Bernie

      Monica

      Thanks you!

      Bernie

  • Jose

    One hundred percent agreement. What’s more problematic is that such position – being intolerable to dissent – helps the liberals by allowing the left to showcase the intransigent of the right and using it as a shield to hide their statists program.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      All I am hearing here form Bernie and folks like you is it is better to roll over and look for the lubricant of which the left is so willing to hand out. Explain to me how one negotiates with someone who is on TV every damn night stating loudly and clearly that they will not negotiate. You folks are laughable. Why is it that the “ayatollahs” are always suppose to be compromising and not the ding bats on the left, explain please.

      • Sheila Warner

        For 21 hours we listened to Senator Cruz, who also is unwilling to negotiate. It’s get rid of Obamacare only, or else the GOP will band together behind that particular stubbornness, the nation be d@mned. Why is it that the Right cannot see that they are mirrors of the Left? Opposite, yet just as stubborn.

        • AbdullahtheButcher

          Couldn’t the Congress just take out portions of Obamacare? Wouldn’t that be sufficient?

    • Sheila Warner

      Trust me, Jose, there is plenty of intransigence on both sides of this issue.

  • Ed I

    Been involved with politics since 1960s. I am a staunch Constitutional conservative. I am a fiscal conservative and a social libertarian. I do respect dissent and another’s opinion when it differs from mine and they can argue their point with reason and facts. That is not what we get from 95% of those on the Left, which includes the Democratic Party Leadership, most of the media, certainly the broadcast networks and national dailies. If the latter had just played the role they sold us and functioned as the skeptical, loyal opposition the vote on much of what we face and being debated today would be quite different.
    Certainly many conservatives have become just as entrenched in their beliefs today as the Left has been for decades. However many believe we are seeing the destruction of the USA as founded, the dimming if not putting out of the shining light on the hill. That their voices have become strident is far more than understandable. If their voices are ignored and we do not return to our roots more than their voices will be strident.

    • Sheila Warner

      Very nicely said. You do, however, see some of the comments put forth by conservatives, though, right? The ad hominem attacks are amazing, from folk who complain about the “vicious” nature of the Left’s rhetoric. There is plenty of blame to go around on both sides.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      I love these “staunch Constitutional conservatives” like yourself, Beck, Cruz, Rubio, West, Paul, Levin. Here we have a Constitutional disaster sitting in the middle of the nation’s best protected “sleeper cell” with a stack of fraudulent documents that enable him to sit there and all we true patriots get is complete and utter silence. This Fraud in Chief is our nation’s top security risk and we are allowing him and his idiot Secratary of State negotiate with the world’s most evil nation. They all make me puke.

  • Susan Colvin

    I watch you on O’Reilly all the time and I don’t always agree with you or Bill but I will never stop watching or reading. Your book 100 people who are screwing up America is an eye opener time for a new book. Please don’t lump me in the with all the other ayatollahs. Keep up the good work and enjoy the weekend.

    • Bernie

      Thanks, Susan … and I would never lump you in with the ayatollahs.

      • D Parri

        Hey Bernie, I watch O’Reilly every night and I like you too. Why do you think I am on your website now?

        Say hi sometime.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      Bernie, please put me at the top of your “ayatollahs” list. Oh, thanks for deleting some of my favorite posts, you thin skinned angry little man. Ooops!! I guess this would make me the Muslim Mahdi.

  • Sheila Warner

    Excellent!

  • Sally Gallardo

    This is an awesome article you wrote. And believe it or not what you wrote hit the nail right on the head. I don’t know why people can’t look at both sides of a situation and be reasonable. But as far as I can see they are just selfish and want to believe only what they want to hear. My hat goes off to you Bernard Goldberg for speaking your mind. I will definitely follow you on Facebook or any show that I know your gonna be on. Thank-You for your truthfulness, keep up the good work.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      And what would be “both sides of the issues” and what would those “issues” be?

      • Sheila Warner

        What would be “both sides” of the issues. Let’s stick to Obamacare. There is bipartisan agreement on the need to get rid of the medical devices tax. There is agreement that those seeking insurance ought to have more choice in what type of coverage they want, instead of the the rigid requirements of Obamacare. There is agreement for a delay for everyone, not just businesses. But the GOP want to take every piece of Obamacare away, including the good parts–no pre-existing discrimination, making sure that a certain percentage of premiums paid are directly for health care, covering in full all preventive visits, no lifetime caps, and no dropping you if you get sick. Those of us in the middle like quite a bit of the law. We just want it fixed, that’s all.

        • AbdullahtheButcher

          If I were the Republicans, i would create a alternate plan, and I would be willing to include any portions of the ACA that may actually be beneficial.

        • legal eagle

          Can you explain to me what relevance the issue of a medical devices has other than to politicians who receive campaign contributions from lobbyists. Why is a 2.5% tax on certain medical devices problematical…What is the negative to this tax?

          • Sheila Warner

            Are you aware of how the tax is levied?

  • bonzo3244

    Fanatics from any side are a F()cking BORE. I think some people on both sides surrender their critical judgement and lazily adopt the party line to save them the trouble of thinking.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      And list a few of those “fanatical” beliefs on both sides that you would like to see compromise on? Give it a shot. It is nice to make a judgment call but an example or two might help.

  • Thewryobservator

    Point taken. And still happy to read what you have to say -and happy to disagree with you when I think there’s more to the story than one viewpoint will cover. But I get the point -people abuse and write off persons who air opinions they don’t like – versus grappling with the opinions or ideas. Still, I would like to see some of the reasoned response made in disagreement with the recent articles you’re referencing. That would be interesting reading, too, I suspect.

  • Sheila Warner

    Bernie, what you wrote is so true. As to standing up against the hard right on the forums, I’m sure you’ve read the threads. You just can’t reason with someone whose mind is locked tight. So many times, I read “shut the F*** up” when a cogent point is made. The First Amendment be damned; the one who dares to utter another view is told to stop talking. While I appreciate what it is you wrote, closed minded people won’t change.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      The right is always willing and open to a discussion, it is the left that is name calling one sentence into the debate. When people attempt to express themselves in debate even folks like Bernie will delete the comment. Bernie has a little “book burning” in his DNA.

      • Sheila Warner

        “…it is the left that is name calling one sentence into the debate” “You started it”! “No, YOU did”! Don’t you get it? Both sides are acting like kindergartners. I like Bill O’Reilly’s rule that you don’t point to previous bad behavior to justify your own bad behavior. But the point of Bernie’s article is that he sees the intransigence mostly on the Right at this time. He is entitled to have that point of view. The GOP decry the President’s “my way or the highway” stance, then take exactly the same stance. Those of us not on the extreme of either side are getting headaches from all of the grade school shenanigans.

  • Ted Crawford

    Bernie I’m afraid your are stuck in the ’60s’! It seems you believe that the debate is still between Liberals and Conservatives. If that were in fact the case you would be right. Then both Parties shared the same Dreams and Goals for America. We all wanted a Strong, Growing, Prosperous, Secure America, where we could raise our families and teach them our values.We simply had different, sometimes very different, ideas of how best to achieve these Goals!
    You seem to believe that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Et Al are comparable to John Kennedy, Walter Mondale and Hubert Humphrey! Nothing could be further from the truth!
    Our schools are ran be those who demand Absolute compliance! Demand that students stomp on the American Flag, Cross Dress, Females are forced to wear Burkas, Elementary School Children are forced to sing Obama Praise songs, and on and on!
    The moral code of these Progressive Democrats can be found scrawled on the walls of men’s rooms in any dive! Not a one of the Liberal Democrats, not even John Kennedy ever felt that America needed to make these “fundamental” changes!
    If you plan your campaign, based on an inaccurate assessmen of your opponent, you WILL lose, and lose big! It’s no longer a difference of methods, it’s a total, “fundamental” conflict of diametrically opposite Ideologies. It is the time Mr. Khrushchev predicted would occur! As Mr. Reagan pointed out, “Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction” If we underestamate the intent of our opponant now, this will be that generation!

    • Sheila Warner

      Did Bernie mention political parties in the column as the source of the outrage? He did not. He was speaking to ultra conservatives, whose party affiliations vary.

      • Ted Crawford

        My post stands. We are dealing with an Ideology that intends to completely undermine our Foundations. It’s a foolish Lamb who invited the Wolf to dinner!
        “The Shaft of the arrow had been feathered with one of the Eagles own plumes. We often give our enemies the means to our own destruction” Aesop

        • Sheila Warner

          And the Left believes the same way you do about their principles. There is merit and truth to be found on both sides. By the way, a fixed firm belief in something that isn’t true is called a delusion. The Left and the Right are delusional.

          • Ted Crawford

            OK, perhaps I have an opportunity to expand my understanding What “delusion” do you percieve I’m beguiled by here?

          • DonaldYoungsRevenge

            How about a few examples of “delusional” honey?

          • Sheila Warner

            The Left is delusional when it believes that Obamacare is 100% good for this country. The Right is delusional when it believes that Obamacare is 100% a disaster for the country. Neither side will budge. There are merits in both the GOP and the Democratic ideas on health care. But both sides are so angry at the rhetoric and tactics of the other, that now they are in a “win at all costs” mentality, which is also delusional if either side thinks this is what is best for the nation. You seem to keep overlooking my disagreements with the Left as well as the Right.

  • Nicholas344

    If you truly valued freedom you would apprediate why some are not willing to compromise.

    “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Benjamin Franklin
    We know this to be true. That is why political correctness is not for us. For example imagine a woman being raped five days a week. Finally she is given a gun and she tells the rapist that if he comes near her again he will be dead.
    What is the fair compromise? He is used to raping her five days and now she is insisting on none. What is the fair compromise? 2 maybe 3 days a week. Some who value liberty would say no days. You could say she is unwilling to compromise. This may be true but I would still support her just as I support those who are defending a free America from being raped by efforts to devolve it into statist slavery.
    So yes, I’m unwilling to compromise and stand against efforts to defend her liberty and American freedom. It isn’t that I don’t respect the enemy but rather want no part of their efforts because of what it threatens.

    • Sheila Warner

      But those on the other side of the aisle see their motives as being just a pure. They want the nation to be a better, fairer place. They see compromise as something that will hurt the nation, just as you do. Those of us in the middle continue to shake our heads while both extremes throw verbal bombs at each other. Each side, of course, claims they are standing on principle. It is maddening to be in the middle.

      • Ted Crawford

        And for good reason as Mr. Miyagi explained!

      • Nicholas344

        Sheila, consider Aristotle’s observtion. ” ‘Tolerance And Apathy Are The Last Virtues Of A Dying Society’ – Aristotle
        When nothing matters, when apathy and tolerance called “middle ground” are the dominant influences, freedom must die.
        The question you have to ask yourself is if a free society is worth the voluntary obligations people must adopt to sustain freedom or is it better to just invite the natural results from apathy and tolerance?
        The middle ground isn’t a finality. The middle ground continues moving either in the direction of freedom or statist slavery depending upon dominant influences. it cannot remain static.
        I’ve made my decision and will support the cause of freedom. IMO, you must make a choice as well. Apathy and tolerance can only result in a dying society without values to defend.

        • Sheila Warner

          Love the Aristotle quote. It’s for those who are apathetic. Nothing could be farther from the truth for those of us in the middle. I walk into the public arena of ideas, as in a smorgasbord. There are some dishes I don’t bother to try out, b/c I know that I am pro-life, pro-Second Amendment. But there are other ideas out there as well. Ideas that challenge my point of view. One of those is health insurance coverage. I have been in the medical field since I obtained my nursing license in 1995. I’ve seen firsthand how the system doesn’t work. For years I have been weighing different ideas out there as to how to fix it. Some on the Right have good ideas, and some on the Left do as well. I pile up my plate with samples of those dishes, and I end up liking some of both sides. We can make the access to health care much better than pre-Obamacare, and certainly better than Obamacare itself. My frustration lies in the unwillingness of either the Right or the Left to sample other dishes. Compromise is a dirty word in politics, far worse than the F bomb. The vast majority of the country lies somewhere in the middle of the far Right or Far Left. We are the ones who get hammered by the intransigence from both parties.

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        Well, sweetheart, you are in the “middle” of a total radical progressive nightmare. Look what has happened in 5 years can you imagine what the place will look like in 8 years? This is what happens when you ignore the historical background of this radical we elected. You should take a journey thru the massive research that Frontpage did on all the Obama CZARS he appointed (not one was subject to Congressional investigation). You should take a journey to Pajamasmedia and take a gander at the massive research they did with background checks on all the radical progressive lawyers that Eric Holder appointed. It would make your hair curl. It is a miracle that we haven’t totally collapsed, perhaps a testimony to how strong we once were.

        • Douglas Mortimer

          You really are just begging for attention, aren’t you? You interject into every thread just trying to get someone to notice you. It’s both pathetic and hilarious as you are tge poster child for Goldberg’s article here…and you are too filled with rage to see it.

          • DonaldYoungsRevenge

            You noticed!

          • Sheila Warner

            What’s even more hilarious is that he calls me “sweetie” and “honey”. Does he see himself as a sweet and loving person? I don’t see that in his responses, myself.

        • Sheila Warner

          Do you think that I voted for the President? I did not, in either election. But he is our President now, so all of the hand-wringing from the far Right about his background is not going to change what is taking place on the Hill. I used to watch Beck avidly when he first started on FNC, with his 5 pm show. I got tired of him being apoplectic over things he could not change, such as the types of people the President appointed as czars. I’m sure the Left was in such a dither when GW Bush dragged us back into Iraq. I’m know for certain how they felt about DIck Cheney. I can read. The ad hominem attacks on the characters of the players in Washington D.C. on BOTH sides of the aisle do nothing for the American people. The evidence was in plain view prior to the election. People made their choice. Now we have to figure out the best way to move forward. If the GOP doesn’t understand this, then they will continue to be the minority party. The GOP thinks they have a lock on what the American people want, even though they lost in 2008 and 2012.

      • Drew Page

        I’ll grant you that maybe some on the Left see their motives as pure and just and that they want the nation to be a better, fairer place. I will assume you are among that group. On the other hand, I see the majority of politicians on the Left, exploiting the differences of opinions we hold and choosing to divide and conquer through the promotion of class warfare. I see them willing to sell out the taxpayers to buy the votes and campaign contributions of minorities, unions and cronies.
        When Obama says “I will not negotiate with Republicans on Obamacare or on the Continuing Resolution”, do you consider that as a refusal to compromise that will hurt the nation? Do you think that such an attitude could lead to a government shutdown, or is it only the Republicans that can be guilty of shutting down the government?
        I don’t want to see the government shut down, but I don’t want to see Obamacare go into effect and I don’t want to see an increase in the debt ceiling unless there are equivalent real cuts in spending to offset the increase in the debt limit. Nancy Pelosi that there is no room to cut anything? Do you honestly believe that?

        • Sheila Warner

          Well, your assumption of me is incorrect as far as the fairer part goes. I am an Independent, not a Democrat, I did not vote for the President. I also lived through the Newt Gringrich era, the one with the “Contract For America.” I know that being stubborn is not limited to the far Left.

      • Toros

        Sheila, you seem like a sincere person, and trying to find your place in the political spectrum. Right now our country is getting more and more polarized like never before in the past 25 years the I have been be living here. The European style social democracy is gradually advancing and by Obama’s election, like Ted Crawford posted above, there is a tremendous effort to “transform” our free-market system into a more socialistic system. That’s why there is polarization, and that is why people like you have to think about it and make a choice. If you want a nanny state, that government will take care of you, like in most of the European countries, you should move to left; but if you want your children to live free and unencumbered by ever growing government, you have to move to the right and fight the left. Those two systems are mutually exclusive, you can’s have a big, bloated, powerful government and to keep your freedoms too. Right now, there is a war of those two ideologies, and in any kind of war the middle is the most dangerous place to be, because that is where the bullets are flying from both sides.
        I lived under socialism for 30 years, and past 25, I have been in the US. I was moderate, and was not interested in politics; voted for Obama the fist time, and quickly realized that made a mistake, because everything he said before the election was not true. I will never, ever trade my freedom for big government nanny state. Good luck!

        • Sheila Warner

          I’ve lived as an American citizen since birth, for 58 years now. i’ve heard some such as you, who are very upset with the direction of the country, based on your own experiences in Europe. I’ve also encountered Canadians who like the health care system there. I read an article by two Americans: one, an expat living in Canada, who loves the healthcare system there; the other, an American tourist who got hurt through his own stupidity. His medical care was rendered to him without any judgment. He did not have to pay for it. The big picture? Working folks are supplementing the health care of those who use the system. It’s the same here in America. Taxpayers supplement every program out there. I pay school property taxes here in NJ, and if you know anything about NJ, our school taxes are nearly the highest around. My children went through the school system, and now it’s my turn to pay for the children who are currently in school. I make my concerns known about the individual programs my taxes fund. I am for universal healthcare precisely because I want my children free from facing bankruptcy if they become seriously ill or are terribly injured. I did NOT vote for President Obama either time, by the way. You say being in the middle is dangerous; I say that being in the middle allows me to see the good and bad of both sides, and then choose to fight for the good I extrapolate. That is freedom to me. I can make up my own mind without being in lock step with either side’s ideology.

  • ramonespinosa

    Well written Bernie, you are a patriot and if the Republican base cry foul just remind the folks those guys cant walk on water/ that being said keep writing and if it boils over let them throw the first stone…/./

  • 633

    While I certainly agree with Bernie’s assertion that the visceral personal attacks are out of bounds and too typical of an emerging and destructive party component, I think the media exaggerates-based on noise, particularly from the radio babblers.-the extent of their influence. On the service to gays issue I’m conflicted. I think a public business has a defacto commitment to provide service, short of dealing with an obviously obnoxious client. But that isn’t a legal obligation, and I’m less than enthusiastic about government being able to dictate whom you have to serve.I realize that public accommodations law was initiated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to effectively repeal the Jim Crow laws of the South. That remedy was always constitutionally dubious., but like much of the civil rights legislation it was a special circumstance remedy for a general discrimination against an entire class of people-a discrimination that was legally induced in the first place. in the first place. The decision of an individual tradesmen isn’t legally induced or generic: the vast majority of florists as an example will be quite happy to take the gay clients money. It is not and should not be the province of government to assume that personal equity is an obligation for government relief in what in every isolated circumstance. The abuse potential of that government authority is obvious.And the whole event description sounds like a typically orchestrated ACLU pilot program, which will be legally leveraged to create a body of case law compelling the broader society to pay homage to the cultural endorsement of homosexuality and allow harassment of opposition attitudes. Note the morphing of hate speech ordinances in Canada. Note that Catholic adoption agencies are in some areas already legally barred by their policy of not making adoptive placements with gay couples. Unless the society in general is somehow meaningfully effected, I see no justification for government denying individual tradesmen the right of moral choice in their business dealings.

    • Sheila Warner

      This is a pretty good reply. When I read about the florist and the baker who refused to serve gay weddings, I reacted as you did: just take your business elsewhere. Do we need government interfering in such petty affairs? My own view is that I would not do business with someone who refused to serve gays, but that is my personal right in a free market. There is no nation wide set of Jim Crow type laws barring gays from living their lives in America, unless one considers gay marriage a constitutionally protected right. But it is the power of the individual who can really effect change. Look at the media attention on President George H W Bush, who witnessed a gay marriage this past weekend. It’s those types of events that should move us forward, not heavy handed laws.

  • Toros

    Bernie, I disagree with the offensive comments addressed to you. But, I disagree with your reaction to it too. Ayatollahs!? Isn’t that too extreme?

    • ARJ127

      I don’t think so. Ayatollahs seems like an apt description of the hard right lunatic fringe who hate any dissenting views and who vilify anyone who expresses them. The lunatic fringe who infested the forum here is a good case in point. Perhaps you should read some of the stuff there.

  • Milli G

    After reading todays column I went back to re-read the one you wrote that the complaints are about. You were absolutely right in your opinion. I watched the presidents talk today and he was actually smirking at one point. He’s pushing them to the wall and knows he’ll get away with it no matter how it ends up. It’s a sad time.
    I’ve always had the belief that all things work for a reason so can only hope that this disruption will end up really cleaning house. There’s a lot of fresh talent in the country. We need term limits and a retirement. age.

  • CSG

    I wonder if Grounding Fathers is a better term than Founding Fathers?

  • CSG

    Lets face it. There are no more statesmen, simply pols. No one even knows how to dissent. The meta message is “if you don’t agree with me100%, you are evil”. Those who grew up with civil discourse, even civil dissent, are nearly extinct. How sad that the Gounding Fathers’ dream is morphing into a nightmare.
    I completely agree with your position, as you can see. But it makes me very sad.

  • rgcomega

    Bernie! Boy did we light your fuse. Liked the article. Can’t help but like a guy who stands up for himself – as long as it isn’t BS like someone we all know at 1600 PA Ave. Thank God we have a few correspondents who say it like they believe it…even it causes some ripples – unlike many on the left, especially the media and internet babies who couldn’t know or find the truth with both hands in a lighted room if it was tattooed on their a**.

    • Sheila Warner

      Your comment proved Bernie’s point.

  • joepotato

    Bernie, compared to ME, you are a liberal…:-) I sometimes agree in part with some of your views while I consider you too “establishment” for MY views which would be classified as extreme by the BSM. Bill O in MHO is a sellout… The naked truth about the level of corruption in the halls of our former constitutional republic is being ignored by ALL BSM outlets including FNC. The level of corruption is so unbelievable, that most people can’t believe it…. but some of us that research the alternate info that has surfaced due to the internet info-bombs… well, the truth is out there, and it should make you very wary .. Have a GR8 weekend…

  • legal eagle

    Bernie …you’re dealing here with members of the American Taliban…they have a single agenda…If Obama is for it, they are against it….
    They believe in simplistic solutions to complex problems and have no loyalty to the U.S.A. or to anyone who disagrees with them.

    • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

      .. says the guy with a chronic case of Bush Derangement Syndrome. lol.

    • Brian Fr Langley

      Limerick?
      .
      To legal I’m only contrary,
      just because, of President Barry,
      It’s not that he lacks,
      of socialism smacks,
      legal must also believe in tooth fairy.

      • D Parri

        I just now found this one. Great going!

    • joepotato

      There are logical reasons for people to be against the Indonesian (Manchurian) Candidate. He has no valid documentation of citizenship posted or shown that would hold up in a court of (real) law… So I guess you can defend the indefensible…. How do you like YOUR communism? …regular style or with a splash of hard tyranny?

    • Drew Page

      And if somebody disagrees with Obama they are racist, or are you replacing the old standby with “Americant Taliban”?
      Eagle, you seem to be defending Bernie these days. Do you agree with the conclusions in his book “The Media’s slobbering Love Affair with Barack Obama”?

      • legal eagle

        Do I have to agree with everything or nothing someone says? Is there anyone you agree with 100% of the time other than your teabag cult leaders? I don’t agree with anyone 100% of the time…

  • delble

    Bernie,
    I didn’t say YOU called conservatives racist, i said the main stream media reports it constantly. Good grief, Cokie Roberts has just chimed in that we are racist. Racist, racist, etc. It’s like hearing a fog horn over and over again. I said that you calling me an Ayatollah is something you will regret. And, I gave a good example of why. You have over reacted – I’m disappointed in you. Period.

  • Don777

    Regarding Christian being forced to comply or forced out of business for and by the homosexuals, it is not only that this conservative disagrees with you, but as Spencer Tracy said in Bad Day at Black Rock, “you are wrong at the top of your voice”.

  • Barry Jones

    Don’t worry Bernie- you wrote “Bias”, so your bono fides are good enough for me. Always enjoy your writing.

  • legal eagle

    Republicans are against Obamacare because of Obama…..they could care less about health insurance or the issues involved in medical cost containment….Republicans were also against Medicare….Republicans are the party of no….

    • 633

      Your comment has little to do with mine. As an aside however the GOP House majority favored Medicare when it originated. The GOP Senate did not, but only because the program amendments which would have capped its growth were not approved. All of which is unfortunate, because the program is an enormous and largely unfunded generational transfer payment. If it had been initiated in the first place as a premium support plan with a high deductable the prospective explosion in the structural deficit would be largely eliminated. Ryan’s reform proposal probably doesn’t go far enough, but there is no constituency in the GOP i’m aware of that wants to eliminate government structured generational health care.Now as then the GOP position is essentially to make it more needs based and capped. And it ultimately will be, because even the government party (Democrats to you) will have to bow to the reality of the math.

    • Toros

      Yes, we care for your healthcare…
      Yes, Medicare is broke, and needs to be fixed…
      Yes, Obamacare is bad for the country ….
      Yes, I think you are mistaken…

    • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

      >>Republicans are against Obamacare because of Obama

      Ridiculous. That would be like me saying that Democrats are against tax-cuts because of George W. Bush… and Bush Derangement Syndrome was a far bigger problem than Obama Derangement Syndrome has ever been.

      Republicans don’t like Obamacare because of a fundamental difference in how they view the role of government, personal responsibility, and the free market.

      • Ron Bon Jovi

        Well put Mr. Daly

    • AbdullahtheButcher

      The Repubs oppose Obamacare because they see it as not the solution to the problems in our Medical care. They also see it as growing government in the medical sector, and a step towards nationalized health care. If you would remember, they also opposed the Clinton’s attempt to socialize health care as well.

      • legal eagle

        And what proposals did the Republicans make from 2001-2009?

        • AbdullahtheButcher

          I suspect that the more conservative ones would probably prefer a free market type solution.

          • legal eagle

            That is a vague generality….A free market solution like the oil industry? Hasn’t that worked out wonderfully?

          • AbdullahtheButcher

            They would probably get the government bureaucracy out of the medical sector, make it easier for competition across state lines. Also, medical care is not the same as the oil industry, believe it or not.

          • legal eagle

            Medical care is a necessity just as energy is a necessity…
            Why do you think competition across state lines would make an iota of difference? if you live in California and buy a policy from an insurance company in Iowa aren’t they going to base your rate upon where you live?
            And which state would regulate the market, California or Iowa…
            Do you really believe that insurance companies would work without regulation?

          • AbdullahtheButcher

            >Why do you think competition across state lines would make an iota of difference?

            Maybe because insurance companies might make their policies cheaper to afford and with better benefits perhaps?

      • Sheila Warner

        Abdullah the Butcher? Just curious as to what your politics are. Your comment here seems pretty reasonable to me, yet your user ID is a bit, well, dramatic.

  • markinlv

    Well, said, Mr. Goldberg. I think this kind of intolerance is why millions of voters stayed home last November and gave us four more years of Obama and his minions. It seems liberals can tolerate dissent among their numbers as long is in the end, everyone agrees that more government more of the time will be achieved. It’s said that if you can agree with your spouse 80% of the time, that will allow for a good marriage. We conservatives need to understand that we will disagree some of the time, but realize how much we share in core values and how much we lose when we write each other off because of inevitable disagreements.

  • sniper2535

    Last night on O’Reilly James Carville called Obama Care a “republican plan”. Sighting both Romney and the Heritage Foundation. This is what happens Bernie. They’re already laying the foundation. If the right is going to get the blame anyway why not stand up and fight now.

    • Indi4ever

      Carville is right about that, but the DEMS OWN this monstrosity. I would love to see him try and pass that explanation when they don’t want to own it anymore. That will be a laugher.

      • sniper2535

        Fannie Mai and Freddie Mac nearly collapsed our entire economy. Were Chris Dodd and Barnie Frank held accountable in any way? Did the media fairly report the sequence of events leading up to the collapse? The Dems “Owned” it. The Dems “own” Amtrack. The dems “owned” social security and medicare. The Dems own the US postal service.
        Oh no…..but we’ll get ‘em this time.
        Prediction, the media will start calling Obama Care “the affordable care act” again or change the name entirely.
        I do respect your opinion though Indi and I hope you’re right. I’m just a little tired of hoping.

        • Indi4ever

          Both Dodd and Frank are gone. The Fannie and Freddie problem did not come to collective consciousness until after the collapse. Obamacare does not have that luxury.

          My question regarding Freddie and Fanie is: what happened to $90 Million Franklin Raines? Only the WSJ covered him, but even they let it go. No FoxNews coverage AT ALL!

    • sjangers

      If the Democrats and their allies do try to pin the failure of Obamacare on the Republicans, why not simply point out again that it was the legislation proposed by the President and his Democratic allies, hurried through the legislative process by the same Democratic allies, and viciously defended by the President and his allies against years of Republican criticism. And now they’re trying to blame the Republicans? Be serious.

      • sniper2535

        Simply point it out to whom? the media? rookie

        • sjangers

          There’s more than one way to get a message out, Rookie. Moderate and conservative news and information outlets (television, radio, print), panel discussions on left-leaning news outlets, blogs, vlogs, mailings, direct voter contact. The list is endless. There’s no need to stick your head in the sand and give up because one medium for reaching the public isn’t handling your message fairly.

          • sniper2535

            free agent rookie

    • Barancy Peloma

      he can call it whatever he wants. the fact is NO republican voted for it.
      let it go and watch how it turns out. i doubt it will work well and the dems will have no choice but to own up to it.

      • sniper2535

        They’ll own NOTHING!

      • Ted Crawford

        Perhaps you are unaware of the power of the media. The Democrats claim credit for the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voters Rights Act, inspite of the facts that, the Civil Rights Act was Filibustered by the Democrats, lead by Senator Byrd, and that only 34% of Democrats voted for it while 72% of Republicans voted for it!
        SPIN

  • map291

    Bernie,
    I am truly sorry so many have attacked you in the name of Christianity. To be sure, many of those folks would have outright rejected Jesus when he was here the first time. We forget that we’re to be as harmless as doves but as wise as serpents (we often get that backwards). We forget that our struggle is not against flesh and blood. We forget that we too are in need of a savior and that but for the Grace of God we go also. I am sorry the representation of God’s love to the fallen world is often some person chaining themselves to an abortion clinic, or worse, blowing it up. I am sorry we have distorted the truth to an unrecognized facsimile that it no longer sets free but binds up. I am sorry my testimony is hidden by the cacaphany of rhetoric that has spewn from my own mouth. I am ashamed of my behavior. It only serves to remind that I am still a man in need of a savior. Forgive our poor representation of God and lay not this charge against Christ. I appreciate you Bernie.

    • Bernie

      Thanks map291

      Bernie

  • Indi4ever

    The only thing Ted Cruz is going to win is the political Darwin award. For Mark Levine, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. Guess what, Reagan was at first a Democrat. He NEVER insisted on a PURE party. He was INCLUSIVE!! The individual mandate? First proposed by the Heritage Foundation.

    We hate Obamacare too! We’re just smart enough to survive to fight when we can actually do something about it.

    • Toros

      What do you think Cruz is doing? He is fighting for us and for the country. Do you think what he did is so crazy? The guy just used the senate floor to bring awareness to the ObamaCare, for god sake! He didn’t offend anyone, he didn’t call names, he just used his privileges given by the Senate. Is this so offensive? Come on, get real!

      • Indi4ever

        I have no idea what Cruz is doing, other than starting the demise of the party who COULD in the future do something!!

        Who is UNAWARE of OBAMACARE? What is offensive is his social ineptness!

        The implementation here is fixed. You can’t do a darn thing about it until more Dems are OUT. Cruz is actually taking awareness AWAY from Obamacare by making HIMSELF the focus.

        You can complain about the media all you want, but when you CANNOT do anything procedurally about it (except delay), the focus is on the person NOT the horrible law. Cruz needs to get back to reality!

        • Toros

          The founders gave a mechanism to Congress, the power of the purse, to withstand the out-of-control executive branch. Very few disagree that our executive branch is out of control, including the runaway spending. Congress is doing its job by defunding Obamacare that will destroy our healthcare and put the country in a deeper hole. This fight needs to be fought today not in the future. Cruz does lives in “realville” and is leading that fight. If you believe in it, join the fight and help, if not stay out of it. Tomorrow will be too late, I’m afraid…

          • Indi4ever

            Except that Cruz is not the Congress. The Congress is the Congress. IF Congress could defund it, it would happen. What Cruz, and apparently LOTS of others can’t seem to figure out, is that there are NOT ENOUGH VOTES!!! EVEN IF EVERY REPUBLICAN VOTED TO DO THIS, IT WILL NOT HAPPEN!

            GET IT?

            Oh I know, your fighting on principle. That’s what I see as the principle of idiocy. We go around and around on this, into more arcane constitutional options, but they all end up at the same place–not able to stop it!

            The only way to win this is to get more liberals OUT. Making yourself look foolish trying to do so anyway makes the cause that much harder.

          • Toros

            Tone down, Indi! You seem like a reasonable guy.
            Our one fallback is the Constitution, no matter how arcane it is. House already voted to defund ObamaCare, and Cruz was galvanizing support to do the same thing in the Senate. He didn’t come from the street, he is part of Congress.
            Once the law is defunded, we need to support the GOP. Right now this is our best option, because two years from now it is practically impossible to get rid of it.
            I’m all for electing more “real conservatives” who will stand and fight for us. Electing people like McConnell, McCain, Corker is no use, they are simply corrupt and wont fight for us. Cruz is fighting, like he said he will, that’s no reason to through stones at him. We should support people like him.

          • Sheila Warner

            “Once the law is defunded…” That’s where you lose the debate. The Senate will not vote to do that. Already the Senate voted to strip the defunding portion of the House bill out. The House can put it back in, but it won’t pass in the Senate. The ping pong goes on. The President would veto any bill that defunded his signature legislation, anyway. The thing to do is to fix it, not block it entirely. There are parts of it that are good. No lifetime caps on benefits, funding preventive care, no pre-existing condition denials, etc..

          • Sheila Warner

            It’s not so much a principle of idiocy, but of poor math. The votes just aren’t in the Senate. Even if they were, the President would veto such a bill. I like the idea of passing bipartisan ideas, such as making Congress live under its own laws, attached to the debt ceiling limit. The country would be behind such a move.

          • Toros

            - Obamacare was passed without single republican vote (no bipartisanship), so you must not like it?
            – country is against the Obamacare… by over 65% or so

          • Sheila Warner

            Then, be afraid. Be very afraid.

          • Toros

            Get lost, bozo!

          • Sheila Warner

            Sorry, I have a First Amendment right to be here. Also, ad hominem attacks do nothing to promote your ideas. How about some substance to add to your grade school level type of name calling? There are not enough votes in the Senate to prevent Obamacare from moving forward. I don’t fault Ted Cruz for standing on principle, but I think he is wrong to imply that other GOP members like the health care law if they don’t vote the way he does. After all, the GOP was fighting to prevent the law before Sen Cruz was in office.

          • Toros

            the substance apparently escarped you, but you are good at playing word games…I guess. My point was, “I’m not afraid of you.” But it came out the wrong way, I’m afraid… Do disrespect.
            but I will try one more time, out of respect for your first amendment right.
            Cruz said, if you vote to fund it, you are for it…
            They are all on the record saying that it is a disastrous law, and should be repealed. If that’s the case why don’t they vote to continue the standoff, to keep the filibuster going to rally the support of the people. But they didn’t. There were enough votes to keep the filibuster going if all voted for it. That’s his point.
            It is irrelevant who was where when thing went south. It is important what is happening now. No one blamed anyone for not fighting for it in the past.

          • Sheila Warner

            “If you vote to fund it, you are for it.” That’s Senator Cruz’s opinion. That is not true. And, it does indeed matter that the GOP fought tooth and nail against this bill from its inception. Why? Because they knew it would “go south.” It was going south right from the start, considering all of the sweetheart deals made in order for the Democrats to pass it. The fact that no member of the GOP voted in favor of the law is vital. The worse it gets, the more the GOP looks good and the Democrats look bad. Your last sentence said “no one blamed anyone for not fighting for it in the past.” And who would the “anyone” be that did NOT fight it? Only the Democrats who voted “yes.” And they are being blamed, big time, by the GOP.

          • Toros

            Sheila, we are not far a part in our opinions. As I understand you are for repealing of the Obamacare as well as I do. Our disagreement might be in this, I am for standing tough on this fight right now, right here, not postpone it, not delay it, but outright defund it now. The reason is, if we let this law go in effect, government will be starting to subsidize the perineum for millions of people, and even if in 2016 GOP takes over the presidency, it will be much harder to repeal the Obamacare, because those millions will be already addicted to the subsidies and will fight against repeal, and Democrats will cry wolf for GOP rubbing the “the hoi polloi” from their already existing healthcare. If the history is any guide, it is practically impossible to repeal any entitlement after people are used to it. Therefor, it has to be done now, as it is still unpopular with the majority. I know a lot of people say let Obamacare collapse on its weight, but I think it is too risky to leave if to the future. That what Cruz is fighting for, that why Burnie is calling him and his supporters extreme, and I disagree.

          • Sheila Warner

            You misunderstood me. I am not for defunding Obamacare. I’m for fixing the bad parts only. There is good in this bill. No pre-existing condition discrimination, no lifetime caps, preventive visits fully funded, a set percentage of profits being used directly for health treatments–these are the good parts.

          • AbdullahtheButcher

            That may be, but how much of Obamacare is the good parts and how much is the bad?

          • Toros

            Instead of socializing our entire healthcare, why not fix the existing healthcare system? The current system is also based on supplemental basis, supported by the pool of the participants. The main cost drivers are the government regulations and mandates for coverage, restrictions to buy insurance across the state lines, lack of tort reform. Extricating the healthcare system form government regulations and bringing more competition will drive the costs down. That is a better way to reform the health system rather then putting the government in charge of it. In Canada people wait for care for 4-5 months, and it is up to the government if you can get certain care at all. You have to remember, by socializing thing you can get chipper care at the beginning, because the government will subsidize it for you, but there is only certain amount of money, and eventually we will run out of it. And then, there will be rationing, there will be shortage of funds, the system will go brock, just like Medicare. There is no free lunch… we are already broke.
            I also live in NJ, and as you know people are leaving for lower taxing states. Higher taxes and gov. subsidizing is a failed system and will eventually collapse.

          • Sheila Warner

            Oh, and I was referring to your “get lost Bozo” comment as the one without substance.

          • Patrick H.

            Beyond that, President Obama would veto any bill repealing Obamacare and assuming the Senate did get enough votes to vote against it (They wouldn’t), they would never have enough votes to override a veto.

          • Bob Hadley

            “Sorry, I have a First Amendment right to be here.”
            You should be sorry. You have Bernie-given right to be here, NOT a constitutional right. Bernie can allow or disallow anyone from sounding off here for any reason.
            I suppose that a theoretical exception to this would be if he banned or censored people according to their race, religion, etc.
            Apparently, Bernie does give people – like Toros – the right to engage in a degree of incivility.

          • Sheila Warner

            And Bernie has a First Amendment right to censor comments he deems inappropriate. That’s still the First Amendment. It’s not okay to tell someone with a differing point of view to “hit the road.” Not when it isn’t your choice to make. And, it sounds like you have no decent reply to that comment, but only seek to get the one who challenged you out of the room. Not very substantive.

          • Bob Hadley

            No one was challenging me. I jumped into the dialogue.
            But, 1st amendment rights restricts Congressional action, not actions carried out by private individuals. The 14th amendment extends 1st amendment protections to any government action – state or federal. Private actions (i.e. with no government funding or assistance) by private individuals do NOT fall within the 1st amendment
            For example, if I own a newspaper that is independent of any public funding, I can censor or exclude from publication anyone I want for any reason (other than perhaps race, religion and any categories protected by the COTUS as interpreted by the SCOTUS).
            Have you ever read “movement” newspapers like The Daily Worker? Do you think these newspapers care to be balanced? They can say almost anything they want.
            And BTW, I did say that Toros was uncivil to you. Publication of his remark had nothing to do with the 1st amendment. It was Bernie’s call.
            I have no problem with your remarks appearing on this website.

          • Sheila Warner

            Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

          • AbdullahtheButcher

            With all due respect, dude, that was a bit much.

          • Toros

            I accept, it was a terrible misunderstanding. I beg for Sheila’ forgiveness.

          • Sheila Warner

            Forgive you for what? You haven’t wronged me.

    • AbdullahtheButcher

      >Guess what, Reagan was at first a Democrat. He NEVER insisted on a PURE party. He was INCLUSIVE!!

      Maybe so, but he was still a committed conservative. Whereas all too often it seems that Republicans are basically spineless squishes. The reason why Cruz is popular among the base is because he is a staunch conservative, even if he might well be making a mistake in this case.

  • RickonhisHarleyJohnson

    Two things, Bernie. 1st – methinks though dost protest too much. 2nd – I find it a bit snarky, condescending, and downright elitist; when you criticize the spelling and grammar. Fine to challenge the intransigent dissenter, but their spelling/grammar? Give me a break, Bernie.

    • legal eagle

      Elitist? Is that Code to describe anyone who graduated from high school?

      • RickonhisHarleyJohnson

        You make my case, legal eagle. Your comments are exactly what an elitist says; somehow making themselves better than someone because of education, birth, or … well, you pick – you’re the brains.

    • Bernie

      I responded to another comment like yours, RicksonhisHarleyJohnson.
      you might want to find it and read it.

      • RickonhisHarleyJohnson

        Sorry. Looked for it, searched on ‘Bernie’ and couldn’t find it. Help direct me please. Thanks.

    • Sheila Warner

      Bernie merely pointed out that the spelling and grammar were not his. It gets tiresome having to add in [sic] all the time. It’s terrible how many people cannot write properly. It points to a lack of education. And, education is the key to success.

      • RickonhisHarleyJohnson

        If I believe that to be true, I think he would have said spelling and grammar intact, or put it in quotes. Alas, he gives himself away when he includes ‘bad’ spelling and ‘bad’ grammar. You go right on defending him, Sheila. It seems to be your mantra.

        • Sheila Warner

          Yes, I see your point. And, yes, I will continue to support Mr Goldberg, as I assume you will continue to support the conservatives in Congress. There is not a thing wrong with supporting those who present your views in a substantive manner. But it is very distressing to see the vast numbers of people on the forums who cannot write a decent sentence. Is it the poor school system, laziness on the part of the writers (who have the option of proofreading their comments prior to posting, as well as the option to edit afterwards), or is it that emotions just take hold and basic English skills go out the window. I know that I find it incredibly hard to find a post credible if it is filled with many mistakes. Some mistakes are inevitable, but some of the folks around here consistently prove their 1) lack of education, 2) laziness, or 3) apathy about the English language. And, I bet lots and lots of conservatives want English to be the official law of the land.

          • RickonhisHarleyJohnson

            I certainly agree with you on the need for good grammar and spelling; and your stated possibilities for the lack of it in comments. However, I don’t think that was the point of Bernie’s article, which made it appear snarky to me.

            For the record, I love Bernie’s blog and read it daily.

          • Sheila Warner

            Then you know that he is allowed to be snarky. It’s his column, after all.

  • VRC

    Nicely said. Keep saying it.

  • amparis

    Bernie,
    When you see what Obama is doing to the country, lying, blaming everyone, destroying the Constitution, calling mayor scandals “phony scandas”, destroying the economy…..and on and on, some of us are really concern and are crying for someone to stand up to this president even if the battle will be lost.
    Dr. Ben Carson, just metioned that he compares the battle of the ALAMO to what these few courageous Republicans are doing. Yes, they may lose the battle now, but we may win the next election and try to save the country from a massive health disaster.
    I WILL ASK YOU: Are you going to get the Obama health plan or are you keeping your present plan? ” Every” man or woman who is not switching to Obamacare health plan should support these brave Republicans.

    • legal eagle

      Bernie’s is on Medicare…He doesn’t need Obamacare…..Maybe you should read about who Obamacare is applicable to…

      • Jeff Webb

        …which would be anyone but the politicians who forced it on us, and whomever they want whenever they want.

  • John Havlicek

    Here’s the deal Bernie (pardon my overly-familiar tone if it’s over the top), one of the reasons I like what you say is you seem completely honest. That’s no small thing in itself, since we (the public) have come to expect talking heads and opinion-writers to be …er…disingenuous. I have much less of a problem even with those who I take strong exception with, IF they have come to their beliefs by honestly. Simply parroting what those around you say and believe can lead to anything from racism (“hey, it’s what I grew up with!”) to simply being dead-wrong.

    Second thing I like about you Bernie, your generally-conservative viewpoint is rational and comes from the same place where “truth” often does…somewhere between the extremes. There’s what the left says, there’s what the right says…and somewhere in the middle is the truth.

    Third thing you (in my opinion) get “right” is that you ARE tolerant of opposing views…to a point. When those views are held by elected officials and inform policy (ie: the rest of us have to live with them), well then of course that’s a different matter, but that’s as it should be.

    So, keep on keeping on. Rational/dispassionate discourse is exactly what’s missing in both Washington and the media. We can disagree without character assassination and name calling. There are far more people “in the center” with views that go from slanting left to slanting right, than there are at the extremes. To carry your “Ayatollah” analogy even further, those in the center tend to be less vocal and visible…less militant (as those moderate Muslims we keep hearing about are supposed to be…if they are real). Maybe this little dustup will awaken them? You can be conservative, rational and inclusive, without being ideologically “pure”. In fact it’s easier and just plain makes sense!

    -John Havlicek

    • Sheila Warner

      One can only hope that those of us in the middle can prevail. My neck is sore watching the same tired ball get ping-ponged back and forth. There is room for middle ground.

  • Monica Gfoeller

    Bernie, as a GOP precinct committeeman, I see the same intolerance, a Taliban-like party-within-a-party that fails to provide common support to get out the BASICS of a GOP vision for the community. However, regarding the gay wedding issue, I think it is also fair for people to disagree with you, albeit without wishing you ill. I agree with a previous commentator for your original article that marriage (one man and one woman) is a community duty. There is a biological basis for recognizing and setting apart those relationships and treating and celebrating them differently. Marriage relationships serve the responsibility of raising the next generation in a stable home. In the generations preceding test tube babies, this relationship was so basic and understood, it is no wonder the nature of it is not spelled out in the Constitution. Homosexuals should be free to marry and have the possibility of creating children with members of the opposite sex, as well as heterosexuals. Our Constitution’s “penumbra” of a right to privacy, articulated in several 20th century US Supreme Court opinions, prevents our government from intruding beyond communicable disease tests into fertility levels, racial mixes, bixsexual or homosexual inclinations in those relationships. It is a matter for public policy to decide whether to accord legal privileges to same sex relationships, and I suspect many Americans believe same-sex life partners should be accorded a “domestic partner” status, but they object to the semantical games played with the word “marriage”. Same sex domestic partnerships will never be marriages. They are not the same, and quite frankly they are not as important to society’s future.

    • legal eagle

      Good point…. Republicans are for freedom and equal rights for some…..but not for others….How sad…

      • Jeff Webb

        You really pay no attention to what your side does, do you? Or are you a pathological liar?

        • legal eagle

          You love that “liar” word” …Are you still in the third grade or is name calling the best you can do?

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            When someone says things all of the time that simply aren’t true (as you most certainly do), what term would you suggest better applies? Truth-intolerant?

          • Stimpy

            Legal Seagull — and you haven’t used your favorite word ‘hater’ yet. Are you slipping?

          • keith hart

            you do your share and more. jack webb, his description is better served with ‘sneering deceiver’.

      • Monica Gfoeller

        Legal eagle I don’t know what you’re thinking of with your comment. People who are sane, sober, sentient and over 18 should be free to marry one member of the opposite sex and possibly procreate their numbers, whether they are gay or straight. Every Republican I know would agree with that statement. Long ago folks may have thought gay people should be denied the right to do so, that they are unfit etc., but I say they’re wrong. As for any other relationship getting special protection, legal recognition and privileges etc, that’s a matter of public policy. Many Americans today, including Republicans, are probably sympathetic to gay couples and would support recognizing their relationship legally in some fashion, being able to name each other in health insurance, serve as guardian, inherit each others’ property.

      • Drew Page

        The same can be said for liberal Democrats, so why didn’t you?

    • AbdullahtheButcher

      >It is a matter for public policy to decide whether to accord legal privileges to same sex relationships.

      If you’re referring to voting for measures on the ballot, there have been cases when arrogant activist judges have basically denied the will of the people. Myself, I’d just get government out of marriage altogether-have it perform just civil unions for both gay AND straight couples, and let the religious denominations decide if they want to perform gay marriage or not.

  • SkyCitizen

    Bernie,

    I suspect some percentage of those Ayatollahs who have clearly defined themselves in this comment section are actually written by liberals. Especially those who make the O’reilly connection. Welcome to the internet where genuine commentary, like yours, is at a premium.

  • Bernir34

    Hey Bernie
    hopeterry, Loved your intended (?) hypocrisy….. Mute O’Reilly… frustrated with those who won’t listen. LMAO

  • Rebecca Ingino

    OMG…I love this post! Give them hell, Bernie! You are exactly correct!

    • Bernie

      Thanks Rebecca …Much appreciated

  • Chuck Edinger

    Bernie: I’m a bit unusual, but what I like most are arguments that differ with my own assessment of a given issue. It’s the only way I have of clarifying and strengthening my own understandings, which given our present-day flood of daily information are often subject to small adjustments within a strategic perspective that is solidly libertarian (along with Franklin, Jefferson, Madison and a lot of other good company). You are always helpful in this regard because you are not reflexively fixed in your assessment.

    Our Liberal/Progressive brethren and sistern are afflicted by a fundamentally flawed way of seeing the world, although their Collectivist vision has been humankind’s curse since before the Pharaohs. Human beings have been forced, but often willingly, to surrender their inherent freedoms in return for a false security supplied by kings, parties and governments. But that surrender has brought its surrender-ies nothing but shared misery and a life of distorted realities. Only within the Classical Anglo-American Liberal tradition has the fundamental truth that individuals are the source of all value been effectively implemented, with incredible results attained. Now the American manifestation of Collectivism, the Liberal/Progressives under Our Dear Leader, are attacking the foundations of the humankind’s last, best hope. Reagan’s “Shining City on a Hill.”

    A key tool wielded by the Lib/Progs and their media press agents is the distortion of reality and the rejection of facts that show the failure of their myriad programs and regulations. Those of us who know better (we libertarians refer to ourselves as “The Chosen”), need to avoid a similar trap by subjecting information to our own ideological frame. You are someone who is grounded in reality and that is a true gift. Thank you and Illegitimi non carborundum, if you know what I mean. Warm regards, CDE

  • LAPhil

    Bernie:
    I hear what you’re saying, but it really sounds like you’re overreacting a little. As a commentator you have to expect that some people who disagree with you are going to send you hate mail and hate tweets. You call people on the right who get angry with you when they disagree with you “ayatollahs”, but maybe the reason they’re mad at you is you don’t share their passion for their ideals. Yes, believe it or not, ultra right-wingers are passionate people and believe in freedom with a passion. It’s understandable to me that when someone calling himself a Republican is too willing to cave in to the Democratic position (which some would call compromise), that that Republican is labeled a RINO, and the label is deserved in a lot of cases. What your “ayatollahs” are particularly incensed about is the cowardice on the part of these Republicans who would like to espouse the conservative position on an issue but are too afraid to alienate their constituents.True conservatives such as Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan are not afraid to stand up for their principles. In the case of Goldwater it cost him a Presidential election in a landslide but in the case of Reagan it got him elected to two terms. So there’s no guarantee that we don’t pay a price for sticking to our guns, but at least the true conservative is willing to do regardless.
    As for you other point about being intolerant of those who don’t toe the conservative line, I agree with you, there’s really no percentage in it, as in the long run it can cost elections. 2012 was a classic example with many Republicans staying home rather than voting for a candidate who didn’t fulfill all of their expectations, but at the cost of getting Obama re-elected. If this were 2015 or 2016 right now, instead of being one of the ayatollahs (as I kind of am now) I would be yelling at them for not unifying behind the nominee, even if he didn’t share all of my conservative positions. The prospect of Hillary getting into the White House is a lot scarier to me than any Republican doing so without marching in lockstep with me on every issue.

  • lemonfemale

    Consider it this way. The Internet makes it so easy for the trolls- and that’s what they are. No need to even lick a stamp, just tap a few keys and your thoughts are online for everyone to see. And say these are less than one percent of your readers. Less than one percent of however many millions who read these is a LOT of people. Just ask them if there isn’t a bridge they are supposed to be under. I do not include all the ones who get angry in this list. You may have hit their hot button: if they are civil when they tell you they will never read you again, oh well. IMO anyway.

  • Haaseline

    Couldn’t have said it better Bernie, when they start to smell and act like a club, MOVE AWAY. These folks are entitled to their beliefs and in many cases I agree with them. When it becomes the CLUB , they are just like the liberals ( although the liberal club rules are wide open, if you vote their way your in ” brain or not” ) . The problem is they are club centric and the majority of smart liberals ( yes in many case much craftier than us ) know the right buttons to push “edifying or controversial ” to move this GOP club like puppets. Unfortunate for us the other side of the GOP is just as bad in the liberal puppet game. Until these ayatollahs can get the plan where the “brain or nots” understand it… we will continue to melt down. Good news is O’Reilly’s ratings will continue to dominate because all he cares about is the truth!!

    • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

      Well said. I hadn’t thought of it that way.

  • david

    Bernie….Since the 1960s I have been flooded with the “other guys” propaganda. I dont want to hear it from you or any other conservative in whatever form it takes. You are great and I buy and read your books.

  • Larry blaspheming liberalism

    There is one difference between those of us on the right and the hard Left: I insist on reasoned dialogue that can be subject to cross-examination (both ways). The Hard Left doesn’t give a **** about facts, only about getting their way, no matter how childish they act.
    I don’t agree with the comments that you have listed, and I doubt they represent the majority of real conservatives.

    • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

      A great quote I heard the other day: “Conservatives get angry when you lie to them. Liberals get angry when you tell them the truth.”

      There’s definitely something to that. That’s why I don’t like it when I see conservatives starting to get angry over the truth.

      • legal eagle

        A wonderful campaign slogan…very deep…

        • Jeff Webb

          >>A wonderful campaign slogan…very deep…<<

          Said the perpetual source of shallow cliches.

          • Barancy Peloma

            ha- well done!!
            and true.

        • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

          Legal, you’re living proof that the quote is true.

  • hopeterry

    Bernie one cannot always been right – but O’Reilly does not seem to acknowledge that state – when I do not like his stand – I mute the TV – my frustration is with people who do not listen to the other person’s view – I am frustrated a great deal of the time.

  • monkdiz

    Bernie: Your writing constantly amazes me. You are a master. But I suspect from the comments of some of your readers that some do not completely understand everything you write and state. Some have slanted perspectives that prohibit proper absorption. You always make good sense to me. MANY thanks for the wonderful work!

  • Jim Pell

    Their name-calling stung you — so you respond by calling them names? C’mon, Bernie, get a grip. We’re your loyal listeners, and readers. Rock on!

  • Bernie34

    Bernie; Right On! I read your book about bias many years ago when the world was slightly less insane. Love you and O’Reilly and generally agree with you. Open your minds America…..Entrenched beliefs are seldom altered by the facts, but just give it a try!
    Many wonders will be opened to you if you just listen.

  • PeshawarJim

    Bernie,
    People in this country have either never learned or have forgotten how discourse works. Apparently, all that is acceptable anymore are cookie-cutter affirmations that validate whatever canned ideology a person professes – there is no gray and truth is absolute.
    And these views are largely offered by reasonably schooled individuals – not to be confused with reasonably educated individuals. Imagine the views of those not so well schooled.
    Perhaps that explains the absence of formal debating skills in high school.
    For many, accepting canned ideology is much easier and simple than thinking objectively and creating one’s own political philosophy. The accountability is much different as well. It’s much harder to defend a unique self-created view than to simply hide in an ieological herd.
    Keep speaking your mind and don’t worry what others think. I can handle differences of opinion with you and I always enjoy hearing your perspective, even if I disagree with you on an issue.

  • JJ

    Bernie, I have always thought that friends were those that agree to disagree! I have read the comments of the past several days, and being a newbie to to your website I was horrified at the hatred being throw your way. I feel that one can disagree all they want to, but need not resort to such hateful comments.

  • gene

    Given my limitted mental capacity and reading ability along with poor comprehention, I looke to you and others, not all of which are on Fox news for my information. I am what Billy would refer to as a Bible thumper. I seek words of wisdom and, when avalilable, truth. If I hear things that do not align themself with Biblical teaching, I take a mental note of who the sorce is. I have heard things from just about everyone I listen to, that don’t line up. But there are many times these very same people have given me enough factual information to give greater clearity to a topic and thus change “my” truth. Every day I wake up as a different man.
    I have a hard time telling the wolves from the sheep and there is nothing more incideous than to wrap a lie inside a bushel of truth.
    Off topic: the way I see Islam is that it ONLY brings death and the US government, fed/state/local, are always protecting and promoting it. I could
    say they “pimp” for Islam but I won’t.

  • Donna

    Very well said.

  • Bernie

    Bernie,
    You are right and I support you ALL THE WAY! These people should stop and listen to what you have to say with an unbiased frame of mind. Stop and think about what was said for awhile instead of making an angry, immature impulsive reaction. This behavior is just useless and uncivil. Are we only cordial, political or otherwise, to just a select few? To be name calling just because someone else has another point of view is outrageous. What’s next fist fighting? Can’t individuals just say that they disagree and voice their opinion? I, for one, would be interested to hear all opinions before I make a decision. This is still America isn’t it? What is going on with the Republican Party? Can’t they see that Obama and his Administration are just sitting back and enjoying this infighting mess – it takes the pressure off them. The important issues and problems we’re having and have had over the past five years are just going unattended – their fading away people – they’ll just be memories…. is that not the plan of a few who wish not to address them? While the Republican’s are arguing with each other, the Democates/Liberals are getting away with things like teenages whose parents left them alone for the weekend. Wake Up People!! There will never be another Republican in the White House with this lack of cohesion. Nothing will ever get accomplished in this type of environment! It’s sometimes difficult to be honest with yourself but, people should give it a try – examine what you truly believe in. I may not always agree with you but, I do today! I have always appreciated the unique and logical way you present, analyze and give your opinion on the topics. I look forward to your time on the program – wish it was more often. You provoke thinking! You provide a simplistic understanding of the issues which allowes me think about the facts from various points of view. Thank you for your insight. We all should strongly believe everyone has a the right to their opinion – to be heard without reprisal. You’re comments make a lot of sense and I totally agree with you statements in today’s piece. I’ve never commented before – on anything I’ve read – but, this time, I felt it was necessary! In my opinion, if the Republican Party doesn’t gel together, they will lose big especially in the next election and this infighting won’t mean a thing when we’re buried under the anticipated overwhelming problems we’re headed for. Our country is failing apart. It’s a challange to be optimistic! We need LEADERSHIP – fast! The Republican Party need to know we’re counting on them – ELECTED them – to change the mess we’re currently in. So, stop the fighting and start working – try jointly!!! Please keep it up, say what you believe and continue your spot on O’Reilly.

  • Seattle Sam

    This from someone who frequently comments about Obama’s thin skin.

  • NJNuke

    This is exactly why I changed from a Republican to unaffiliated. Just like the Left, there are closed-minded people who can’t handle dissent on the Right, too. This intra-party GOP fighting, if it keeps up, will result in at least this one thing: Hillary Clinton elected to the White House in 2016. I know many in the country don’t think much of New Jersey overall , but there’s a reason Chris Christie is popular and effective here. He works with people with whom he does not agree to get things done, and participates in, rather than shuts down, the debate.

    • begbie

      History shows that a country that’s as polarized as ours only resolves itself to equilibrium again through 2 means…..all out civil war (US did this once already) or the collapse of the country through internal corruption and public ignorance (Rome). Rarely, there’s a leader to emerge to avoid both but I do not see that person anywhere.

      Call me pessimistic but I’ve never seen things this bad in my lifetime.

      • legal eagle

        Bet your parents said the same thing 50 years ago… Your getting old and grumpy…

        • sjangers

          On the topic of things parents said fifty years ago, Eagle, is it true that your mother said “Dammit, you were supposed to pull out”?

          • Jeff Webb

            A bit rough, sj, but I gotta admit he earned it.

          • sjangers

            Sorry about that, Jeff. Generally, I believe in civil discourse. But sometimes there are questions that are just begging to be asked.

            All-in-all, Eagle is an interesting enough character. He just seems to get off on ruffling other people’s feathers. I imagine he’s tough enough to stand having a few of his own feathers ruffled occasionally. If not, I’ll be hearing about it soon enough.

  • http://sevensentences.com/ Geoff Talbot

    Interesting post Bernie — I would be considered a liberal by most Americans (where I now live) although in my own country (New Zealand) I would be a conservative.

    I think the issue you are discussing here cuts deeply to the bone of white American history — in general there seems to be a lack of respect for “process” here. It doesn’t matter what side you are on. It’s them against us with very little room for open discussion, learning about different perspectives and creative compromise.

  • WillVMI68

    Hypocrisy is so … hypocritical.

  • Dennis

    Bernie: You are expecting people to do something they spend their lives avoiding like the plague. Something they would rather eat their children than do. You expect them to allow a rational thought to somehow slip under the radar, get past all of the barriers they have set up and sneak its way into their tiny little heads. You want people who only ‘think’ with their emotions, believe what they want to believe and never allow a dissenting thought to get through, to somehow start doing that. Good luck.

    As far as Eric Bolling goes, between his Mount Everest size ego and hubris and the irrational, emotionally driven incapable of reason Bob Beckel, The Five is becoming almost unwatchable.

    Bolling, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul (who is really just a smoother version of his goofball dad) and the other ‘true conservatives’, if they really get their way, they should all start practicing pronouncing this: President Hillary Clinton. Win a battle but lose the war and call it a victory. Won’t that be delightful?

  • Lou Mougin

    Well, the problem seems to be that if a mind doesn’t open in the direction somebody wants it to, it’s closed.

  • Mike Vazquez

    I always read you and enjoy your appearances at the Factor. I may agree or disagree with your statements but, that isyour right to express them as much as my right to disagree. This last article I find that, a gentleman as you are, have fallen in the trap of unnecessary name calling which does you a disservice. Bernie, please keep walking the high road for your reader’s and your sake. I enjoy your opinions even though sometimes we may not agree.

  • golfmax13

    Bernie,

    I can’t tell you how much I enjoy your reporting – on Fox, Real Sports, and here. Well, until the last two days anyway. We farther right folks do want a little purity in politics and after the Obamacare debacle, we’d like a little support in our own party.

    Can you really blame us for pushing back a little bit? OK, a lot? It’s human nature, we’ve been kicked around, lied to, mislead and vilified by the President, the Media, all Liberals, and now even some in our own party. Of course we’re going to push back.

    You think it’s wrong for Cruz to do what he did, I don’t. It was information that needed to go out to the American people. Hell, congress won’t listen but the hell with them anyway – they’re worthless.

    I can’t wait for Obamacare to be fully up and running even though it’s going to cost my family an arm and a leg. I can’t wait for the clusterfug to shine brightly to all those who pushed for it. Maybe its bad politics to do what the far right has done but is that really the most important thing – politics? Isn’t it at least admirable to stand up and let the people know that a big piece of crap is coming, knowing full well you’re going to lose points politically?

    Republicans think Dem’s are crazy and the reverse is also true. Things have become almost completely polarized not only in Congress but also for us common folks out here who pay attention to the goings on in DC. That’s why all Republicans push back harder nowadays, and the reverse being also true.

    The farther Right folks just have a little different way of pushing back – we shouldn’t be ostracized for loving our country, our constitution, our capitalism and our passion for each.

    You might consider giving us a break now and again, Conservatives are already divided enough without devouring our own.

    Just my opinion.

    Joe

    • begbie

      This is a great post, well articulated. And I agree with every word. Thanks Joe.

  • Mainline Fl

    Bravo Bernie. I’ve always felt that anyone towing the party line on every issue is no more than a sheep A truly independent thinker does not need their opinion mass-produced for them on every issue. Some things I’m conservative on (violent crime, hard drugs, child abuse) and others I’m more liberal (marijuana legalization, gay marriage, separation of church & state). No one party has a monopoly on what is true or right. More than ever this country needs more independent and open minds.

  • Acu-Vue

    Bernie, whether I agree or disagree with you on a particular subject, I will always respect your view and take the time to understand why you have chosen that side. I have been following you for many years and almost feel as though I know you personally. No two individuals are going to agree on everything and if they did, one would either be lying or completely mindless and boring. Keep writing, keep talking, and most importantly,—When the hell are you coming out with a new book. Far too much time has past since “Slobbering”. P.S. My wife posed a question to me some time ago. She asked “If there was one famous person you could have dinner with, who would it be?” I answered “Bernie Goldberg”

  • Perry

    Bernie,fortunately I enjoy diversity even in the conservative conversation.
    I guess the “New haters” of Bernie have never been wrong. I respect your
    decades of being respected and objective.

  • Jody

    Didn’t you say when Eric speaks you will do the opposite?
    That’s being open minded?
    I will still listen.
    I have friends that are democrats and it is a challenge.

  • sjangers

    I agree with most of what you’ve written here, Bernie, although I’m not sure if it will do much good. But I understand the frustration that brings out a comparison of some on the right to the ayatollahs.

    I’ve also used the term a few times to describe the rigid and vindictive elements of the right (as well as the PC hierarchy, but that’s another matter). It’s a metaphor for attitudes and behaviors that pops out in frustration after hours of trying to explain the problem falls on deaf ears (and sharp tongues).

    Refusal to hear any other point of view, coupled with harsh invective toward those who try to express those views, isn’t likely to make many friends and persuade others to change their perspective. And while trying to explain this to those who behave that way hasn’t really had much impact on their behavior, calling them “ayatollahs” probably isn’t going to help either. We might do better to spend our efforts on showing moderates and independents that the vocal right doesn’t control or represent the entire Republican Party and rarely has more than modest influence on the direction of the party. Some of them might actually listen.

    • monkdiz

      Sjangers comments align with my thoughts. Well done.

  • James

    They’ll call you a racist if you keep it up.

  • Russell Childs

    Bravo Bernie! Your article wasn’t so much about right wing Ayatollahs as it was about decency, respect, intellectual honesty, basic Christian charity toward others and learning how to deal in truth and transparency in our communications and dealings with others.
    I have followed you since you came on fox and I value your honesty, integrity and the consistency of thought that you share.
    I would love to meet you some day, look you in the eye and shake your hand!
    From a very principled and conservative thinker: well done!

  • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

    I would love for someone to explain to me why it’s a better idea for the Republican party to have an ideological purity test, than it is to have it as the “big tent” party Ronald Reagan helped create.

    Reagan didn’t win by weeding out the people who didn’t think exactly like him. He didn’t win by telling people that unless they’re not sufficiently conservative, or in lockstep with everything he says, they can go to hell.

    He rallied people together around common goals and visions.

    I’ve gotten so sick of this “RINO” nonsense. When I hear people like Eric Bolling essentially say, “This is the way it’s going to be now, and if you don’t like it, get out of the way,” I want to ask him, “Who in the hell are you?”

    Honestly, what makes a guy like that (and those who think like him) the arbiters of the conservative cause, and by extension the Republican party?

    I’m willing to bet that I’ve personally spent more time trying to get conservatives into office than most of the people who visit this website. And I’m not talking about the columns I write. I’m talking about the volunteer work I’ve done, the neighborhoods I’ve walked through and knocked on doors, the phone banks I’ve sat in, making calls for campaigns when I think the candidate is worth it.

    Believe me, I don’t like doing this stuff. It’s awkward, and it’s time-consuming. But I’m so concerned with my children’s future in this country that I feel that I need to put forth the extra effort.

    Yet, when I mention that I’m for gay marriage, or point out when fellow conservatives make stupid tactical decisions and say stupid things, I get the same kind of responses that Bernie’s been getting. People essentially tell me that I’m not a “real” conservative – a “phony” if you will. Some even tell me I’ve been “duped” by the liberals which I find absolutely absurd, as if I’m not smart enough to form my own, educated conclusions.

    I typically don’t write about this sort of stuff because, frankly, it doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the enormous damage liberals are causing to this country. But this conscious attempt by many conservatives to demonize and shun people who would probably agree with them on more than 80% of the issues, is pretty darned ridiculous, and self-defeating.

    • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

      The problem is, the RINO wing of the GOP is damaging the GOP. They won’t stand up to Obama or the dems at all. Now because of this we have higher taxes and a bigger fiscal problem. The current leadership of the GOP is useless. Also, these are the same RINO’s that now want to give us Shamnesty. Next, we will get a capitulation from the RINO’s on Guns and the Debt limit debate.

      • sjangers

        Strangely enough, G, many of us in the so-called RINO wing have a very different perspective. We view the conservatives within the party as far too vocal and divisive around policy positions that have little appeal to the majority of American voters. We are concerned that we’re all going to be identified with those positions and eventually lose too much electoral support to be able to compete as an effective alternative to the Democrats. When that happens, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party will have even more influence over the policies that govern our country,

      • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

        I’m sympathetic to what you’re saying, but the Republicans are largely ineffectual not because of “RINOs”, but because they don’t have enough seats in D.C. to stop the Obama agenda. That’s the far bigger problem.

        And I just don’t buy this often repeated notion that Republicans are losing elections because they’re not conservative enough. They’re losing elections because their messaging often stinks, and they have a media machine against them that they haven’t figured out how to effectively counter.

    • sjangers

      Amen, John. I’ve been on the receiving end of the “RINO” or “Democrat” label more than a few times. Occasionally I get frustrated enough to point out that I’ve given more of my time, money and reputation for the good of the Republican Party than most of the conservative e-warriors here who want to tell us all how it is will ever think about contributing.

      Disagreements within the party are frustrating when you’re trying to forge a cohesive message and policy. But if you end up driving away large portions of people who generally think like you, simply because they aren’t pure enough in thought, word and deed all the time, then you will eventually end up with a pretty small congregation.

      • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

        It’s certainly frustrating, though I can take it. I know what I stand for, and the Republican party far better represents me than the Democrats. But my fear, as you described, is that others will get turned off by a group telling them that they’re support isn’t wanted unless they’re lockstep with their beliefs.

        • legal eagle

          You mean you’re not a member of the American Taliban?

          • Jeff Webb

            As hard as it is, please keep your racism to yourself.

    • legal eagle

      The good old days of St. Reagan? Still longing for the days before the Tea Party crazies and the long arm of the Koch Brothers…….
      Don’t forget that Ronnie was against Medicare calling it “socialized medicine”.

      • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

        You’re delirious.

        • legal eagle

          Great response…as usual…

      • Jeff Webb

        It seems you actually believe your own B.S.

        Dude, before you start calling others crazy, avoid voting for a guy who ardently supports infanticide and hangs out with unapologetic terrorists. If you’re going to whine about rich donors, then at least wait for George Soros to close his checkbook.

        • legal eagle

          looks like you’re doing your Hannity/Limbaugh imitation….How unoriginal…

          • Jeff Webb

            Now now, no need to be a bigot.

      • WhiteHunter

        Shut up.

    • Brian Fr Langley

      Well I can’t disagree with your analysis, but. Whether aware of it or not (I guess that’s what’s meant by being duped) the bigger the tent, the further all things move left. Just less than 2 years ago, even far left folks like Barack Obama declared “marriage” as being between a man and a woman. So what changed? I suspect just a short few years you would have shared a similar sentiment. So what changed? As we jettison values for power, (you know the lesser of two evils) all we end up with, is no values, and no power? The lesson liberals learn (again and again), is they were right all along. The lessons Independents learn, is that conservatives are more motivated by gaining power, than by standing up for their values. What is needed here, is for a serious conservative leader, to articulate a coherent message (and vision) that the traditional values, that served the Nation so well, remain the solution, not the problem.

      • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

        >>the bigger the tent, the further all things move left.

        Not under Reagan, they didn’t. And if the Republicans limit themselves to a small tent, I can tell you that things will go WAY further to the left.

        >>I suspect just a short few years you would have shared a similar sentiment.

        Actually, no. I’ve been for gay marriage for quite a while. I’m not sure I was ever really opposed to it. I just don’t think it was something most people even really thought about that much until recent years, and when it turned into a political issue, I had no objections to it.

        You’re absolutely right that the Republican party needs a stronger, coherent message.

        • Brian Fr Langley

          One of the more significant elements of same gender marriage in Canada, is the rising cost to public pension plans. Virtually all public service pensions survive the beneficiary, and then passes on to their spouse. (until their spouses death). Due to same gender marriage, tens of thousands more folks, now qualify. Couples already bearing the burden of raising children, are now being burdened further. (through tax increases). It seems quite an injustice, that partners in traditional marriage, with it’s commensurate societal benefits, are being further penalized for another type of marriage, that has as it’s primary rational, only an individual (s) personal benefit?

        • Brian Fr Langley

          PS limerick?
          .
          He married the opposite sex,
          but having no money was vex,
          not being shy,
          he married a guy,
          along with his Government checks.

    • Jeff Webb

      It’s hard to disagree that conservatives are being too hard-line in this situation. I think it would’ve been more practical for the GOP to, as I said in Bernie’s last column, pass the CR with triggers.

      If there’s any argument for Sen. Cruz’s current approach, and I admit it’s based a little more on history than pragmatism, it’s that being less aggressive than the democrats has only made things worse for us and the country. That, and democrats (as usual with the MSM’s support) will lie their way past any collapse we’ll see with O’care, all the way up to the ’14 election.

  • Kevin M. Temple

    The truth can be painful, but necessary for liberty.

  • Penelope Bointon

    Bravo Bernie. If you want to get something done politically, you need to understand what the other guy wants. This is the basis for any successful negotiation. And this means that you need to LISTEN to the other side. Most people don’t understand the power inherent in “knowing the enemy”. It’s been the basis for all sound military intelligence for centuries. Listening and understanding does not equate with capitulating. In fact, it allows you to gauge your own chances of getting what you want!
    We’re becoming a nation of morons. Pls keep writing and maybe the light will shine through.

  • Jen

    Now you have lowered yourself to name calling and hate just like the liberals. Nice. Have you ever stopped to think of how the Conservative voice is ALWAYS lied about, mocked, ignored, described in hateful ways on every single type of media there is? We have had it! There is no representation for Conservatives in Washington except for a couple.

    You are kind of calling the kettle black here too. When you want to support your values like homosexual marriage, you mock and name call Conservatives that don’t agree with you.
    We can’t agree on everything but we can unite against this sick, disgusting group of elitist, criminals in Washington right now. I am talking about both parties.

    • legal eagle

      The poor victimized Conservatives….Still whining after all these years…

      • Jeff Webb

        Poor pathetic liberals…they only have the majority, just not 100%, of the media and political control in America.

        Don’t get greedy, boy. You’ve got it better than you think.

  • Kevin M. Sullivan

    I don’t believe I’ve seen you this put out in a long time. But I’ve got to say you’re correct. These folks who are acting out in mean-spirited ways are doing a disservice to their cause, and they’re an embarrassment to those of us who believe in civil and rational discourse.

    • begbie

      Agreed and well put. Bernie, with respect this is a more rational way to say the same thing. Just my opinion, Mr. Goldberg….

  • JerryB

    I think of myself as a religious zealot and right-wing fanatic, but I try to do it with reasoned thought. I really appreciate what you’re saying and doing; I’ve learned a lot. Thank you.

  • Thomas Ernst

    Bernie,

    The reality is these Ayatollahs are a small minority of the voting population with no real political power in Washington. As conservatives, we need to be attacking liberal Democrats rather than forming circular firing squads around people like you. I am as frustrated as any conservative with constant growth of the government in my life and the loss of my individual freedoms. I prefer to focus my efforts on electing people who generally support my view rather than listen to those who hyper ventilate over something that will never happen ..defund Obamacare.

    • legal eagle

      You mean your a member of the American Taliban? What freedoms have you lost?

      • Jeff Webb

        As hard to believe as it is, your posts just get more boring when you repeat them. With all this pasting you could wallpaper the Staples Center.

  • joe

    Point well taken Mr Goldberg. Disagreement is OK, and useful. But resorting to name calling, well that is just juvenile.

  • lark2

    Conservatives have had to deal with Democrat “ayatollahs” for as long as we remember. It has been their way or the highway for 70 years and the Republican Losers have gone along to get along. When Republicans won the house in 1994 … it was the first time in 40 years that they had won. Wow, what a successful political party. Republicans are just “merry losers” and any desire for sternness and adherence to principle is met with a chorus of boos. The Democrats never waiver and demand constant capitulation dressed up as “compromise” . It is interesting that you choose to criticize REPUBLICANS for their meager attempt to stand up for what they believe. There is a reason why REPUBLICANS are losers … they don’t stand for anything … they cave on everything and all they really stand for is RE-ELECTION. I support you and I enjoy your commentary on Media dishonesty however, if you are honest, you need to re-examine your expectations of Republicans. Constant capitulation disguised as compromise, reaching across the aisle to appear nice is over … at least I hope it is or you will be writing about the fall of the Grand Old Party. It is time for a third party.

  • Lois Oleson

    Mr. Goldberg: I always enjoy hearing you on Bill O’Reilly’s show. I mostly agree with what you say, and when I don’t, I say to the t.v., “Hey Bernie, you are wrong”, but not with dislike or fear. I know what I believe and if you believe different, that is your right. Sorry for the garbage talk you have gotten. Never an excuse for that! Stay tough!!!

  • Pat

    Whether I agree or disagree with you makes no difference. I will always be a fan. Thank you for honest commentary.

  • Drew Page

    Come on now Bernie, you seem to be getting a little thin skinned. I disagreed with your conclusions about the futility of Teed Cruz’s filibuster. that doesn’t mean I will stop reading your articles or stop watching you on O’Reilly’s program. If we agreed on everything, one of us wouldn’t be needed.
    I saw most of the comments from those who were angry at you for your comments about Ted Cruz. Some went over the line and were really uncivil.
    Your comments hit an exposed nerve among many of your readers, who are fed up with Republican “leaders” who seem to think that capitulation is compromise. Many of us are frustrated beyond words with what has been happening in this country since Obama got elected and re-elected. Unfortunately, for you, some of us are frustrated, but not beyond words. We have heard more than we care to from our opponents about how stupid we Republicans are for daring to shut down the government and that resistance is futile. The vast majority of us do not want to shut down government, we want to defund Obamacare and eventually repeal it. Many of us feel bullied by this administration. Eventually some people get sick of being bullied and fight back, even though they know they are going to get their ass kicked. But if you never fight back, you find that you can’t stand looking at yourself in the mirror.
    We have elected Republicans that we hoped would represent us. Many of us don’t see that representation. And when we see these representatives supporting our opponent’s positions we don’t like it and say so. That carries over to those whom we felt shared our positions.
    We may disagree with you from time to time Bernie, but you don’t need to call those of us who do “purists” or “ayatollahs”. It’s like Nancy Pelosi referring to the Tea Party folks as ‘Nazis’. You are a better man than that Bernie. No hard feelings.

  • SoulSeekerUSA

    For those of you that do not know why I have the image of an upside down flag as my profile picture here is the reason.

    “Upside Down Flag:
    Flying the American flag upside down is an officially recognized signal of distress.
    Here is the relevant part of the US Code of Laws regarding how to fly the flag when in distress:
    THE UNITED STATES FLAG CODE
    Title 4, Chapter 1

    § 8(a)The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.”

    I will continue to display our great nations flag this way until we have defeated the traitorous pigs in DC and have made things right with our nation and our GOD!

    I want to add to this because I sense that we are edging closer to a confrontation with the tyranny in DC that calls itself our government. Everyone that reads this needs to pray because if there is a revolution it will not be a short event, it will be very bloody and a very drawn out battle. The career politicians in DC and worse of all the lackeys that control them will not go quietly and I think all of you know that.

    I am a peaceful man and I have a wife and nine children and all I wanted to do was live my life in peace with my family. If I keep my mouth shut and let this happen chances are that I will get to do just that BUT and it is a very very big BUT, my children will not get the freedom that I had growing up and will only know what this traitorous government wants them to know. That my friends is the reason I say what I say. I do it for my children and their children. It is time for my generation to give back what we have taken for grated for far to long. Great men have died for our freedoms and now it is our turn to stand up for what we know is right to bring the fight to those that want to turn our great nation into a cesspool, in the end we may die but it will all be worth it if our children live in a free America.

    It is my friends, our time to start the great Revolution to free our country from the tyranny that is at our doorstep.

    GOD BLESS AMERICA & GOD BLESS THE REVOLUTION!

  • SoulSeekerUSA

    The truth that no one is saying here is that DC is full of traitors, simple as that. They will not give up their power unless they are forced to. Our country is in way to deep and there is no way out now unless the government is dismantled and we start over. How this is done depends on how much they want to continue to be traitors to :”We the People”. The politicians work for us but for some reason they think they can tell us what to do and we cannot tell them what to do. They need to all go, period!

  • Proud conservative

    Your letter describes the liberal Democrats perfectly!! Because we disagree strongly with you does not make us “right wing authoritarians” either!! Somehow when a Christian or conservative states their beliefs or believes literally in the Constitution, limited Federal Government, etc. we are authoritative!! Is there never a black and white or only gray?? Never a right or wrong? Only what you personally believe in??

    • begbie

      Agreed. A bit harsh there, Bernie. I felt like I was reading an article written by an angry drunk. When heading over to the local biker-bar, leave the iPad at home, brother.

      Seriously, you normally seem to ignore the more vicious posts to your columns but this time you seem to feel really burned. Cruz and Boling are only projecting what most Americans feel and there’s nothing wrong with that….we’ve all been burned for a long time by the politicians.

    • Josh

      He didn’t say disagreeing makes people “right wing authoritarians.” He’s trying to convey the point that people who will shun him and go from liking him to hating him, all due to a single difference of opinion, are totalitarian personalities. They’re ayatollahs. They’re unwelcoming, uncompromising zealots who don’t appreciate freedom but rather demand a one-way ideology where anything different isn’t considered valid or worthy of existing in their perfect utopia comprised of their views and only their views.

      If that shoe doesn’t fit your foot, I would suggest not trying to wear it.

      It’s a whole lotta pain that could easily be avoided.

    • legal eagle

      Spoken like a true cult member of the American Taliban….

      • Jeff Webb

        Start being original and tolerant–it’s not as bad as you think.

  • 633

    I don’t know who Bolling is, so can’t evaluate. But its clear that conservative cause is not going anywhere if pitchfork rhetoric is the price of ideological admission. More to the point, strategically Cruz is a representative of the visceral tone deaf right (check the term surrender caucus). Tone counts. Negotiation theater which threatens government closure-even if its a feint-doesn’t resonate with a majority electorate. If the goal is to win he’s not your man.Insisting on a self defeating strategy which is emotionally gratifying but ineffective has no practical purpose. Realistically the lead institutional critic of the Affordable Care Act should be a House Member: Ryan would be my choice. And Cruz should support his party’s House leadership and help create an integrated legislative response. If Coburn is now a RHINO the GOP identity is hopelessly muddled.

  • Russ

    Bernie,
    I think the point that Bolling, Cruz, et. al. make is a legitimate one. They are reflecting the mandate of the people to stop Obamacare any way they can, even if it turns out ot be symbolic and the Democrats twist the meaning of those actions for the benefit of use by the liberal media. Your “take” on the Bolling and Cruz’s strategy is legitimate, but it’s not necessary to take a shot at Bolling (you did) to bolster your argument for your own strategy to defund or kill Obamacare. Both you and Bolling want the same result, you just see going at it differently. Bolling was a gentleman about it on O’Reilly last night. You could shoot him a quick note telling him that no insult was intented.
    You still owe me lunch at the deli.

  • WhiteHunter

    Bernie, my good friend, at least none of us has threatened to punch you in the nose, as that clown Geraldo did (and for which he should have been fired, but, inexplicably, wasn’t).

    I think a big part of the exasperation that so many of us feel (and that some express so intemperately) is that while no Democrat EVER publicly disagrees with, or has an unkind word to to say about, any other Democrat, Republicans feel no such reluctance to engage in fratricide. So instead of “having one another’s back,” we have to keep looking over our shoulders for the fellow Republican (or RINO) who’s right there to STAB us in the back.

    I wish we could just stop it and focus on HOW TO GET IT DONE while we still have at least the shreds of a country left to defend, rather than fall into sniping at one another while Obama, Pelosi, Durbin, Matthews, and Maher sit back and enjoy the show.
    Fighting and defeating the criminal Racketeering Enterprise that now holds power should be the easiest job in the world, except that our side prefers to fight, sneer at, ridicule, and attack one another.

  • MarioG

    I am not questioning your honesty, Bernie. Just the way your wishy-washy brain works. Where have we come as a country when we, as individual business people, don’t have the choice of whom we do business with based on our deeply held religious beliefs. These were florists and bakers. The gays could have taken their business elsewhere.

    In the other column, you did not just disagree with Eric Bolling; you impugned and attacked his conservative beliefs, which are in line with many I know in the Tea Party movement. Why did you have to single him out by name anyway?

    Then I heard your friend Bill O’Reilly tell Eric Bolling last night that you had not attacked him personally. Was that an honest thing to say to those of us who had read your column? Are you going to be honest and tell O’Reilly he was wrong?

    I’d really like to know.

    • Bernie

      Mario

      I did not attack him personally. I did not call him stupid or shallow or anything like that. I put him in the same camp as hard right conservatives who differ from people like Krauthammer, Hume, Steve Hayes, the editorial board of the WSJ and — me. So no apology will be coming.

      As for your comment that business people should have the right to do business with whoever they want: no, they don’t. There are laws that say who you can and can’t discriminate again. No shoes, no service. That’s legal. tell a gay customer you won’t accept their business — even though you’re shop is on a public street and you’re open to the general public — not legal.

      Bernie

      • MarioG

        Bernie, to begin with, thanks for responding. You may be right about the legality of turning down customers on religious grounds but I hope this is challenged in court. I see the Little Sisters of the Poor have sued the Obama administration to see if they can discriminate against women who want abortions and contraceptives under Obamacare.

        Regarding Eric Bolling, of course you called him stupid and shallow without using those precise words. What did you think you were saying when you wrote, “Here’s how I come to my political opinions these days: I listen very carefully to what Eric Bolling says about a particular issue from his perch at Fox News. And then I take the opposite position.”

        Then you moved on to attack all “true-blue conservatives” when you wrote, “Bolling is one of those true-blue conservatives who believes the words “moderate Republicans” are nothing more than a nice way of saying “no backbone weasel good-for-nothing Republicans.” He’s not alone, of course. Conservatives on talk radio think the only reason Democrats win the White House is because the GOP puts up moderates who turn off the base.”

        You specifically singled out Bolling, gratuitously interpreted what he means when he refers to “moderate Republicans” before moving on to include all true-blue conservatives and conservatives on talk radio.

        Those foisting Obamacare on us after everyone who has studied it from Congress to the AFL-CIO want to avoid it like the plague, are Barack Obama and Harry Reid, not Eric Bolling and true-blue conservatives. Barack Obama and Harry Reid are uncompromising far-left wing liberals. What chance does any “moderate Republican” have in dealing with them? John Boehner has tried for four years and gotten bubkis. The only realistic option in changing anything is to defeat them at the ballot box and in the marketplace of ideas. If you have converted to any version of conservatism please train your verbal weapons on them, not on someone else trying to oppose them. The enemy of your enemy is not your enemy, unless to choose to make him one.

        • amparis

          Ecxellent response, coulnd’t have been said better.

      • legal eagle

        It appears to me that the only people who are against Obamacare are those with health insurance. All the people I know who are currently uninsured are quite happy with the new system…

        • Josh

          No health insurance.

          I don’t want to be forced to buy it.

          Maybe I’m in the minority here, but I don’t have a problem with being billed by the hospital. It works for my credit cards. It works for my car. It works for my home. It works for my furniture, TV and cable.

          I get the goods, I get a bill, I pay the bill.

          There’s something wrong with the medical system in America, and I personally don’t see forcing insurance plans on people and subsidizing more of the medical industry a solid fix. I see something more akin to tuition rates happening with insurance rates and medical costs.

          It needs to be fixed. No doubt about that. But to think this particular government has the solutions for all Americans — well, I only have to look at government-controlled Native American insurance policies to see how incredibly pricy they are and how little they work. Other directions I could look, like even in the direction of the bureaucracy surrounding schools and business licensing, but that one particular area of government health insurance speaks volumes of the ineptitude of government to make things better.

          I don’t conflate compassion with competence.

          • legal eagle

            Same concept as car insurance…It’s mandatory like death and taxes…Do you have auto insurance? Why aren’t you calling for repeal of mandatory auto insurance? How about mandatory Social Security and Medicare? Do you want that repealed also?

          • Jeff Webb

            Wow, you really trying the car insurance strawman? It was boring in 2009, it’s pathetic now.

            If you don’t understand the difference, you aren’t smart enough to operate a tricycle.

          • legal eagle

            Terrific non answer… What about Social Security and Medicare?

          • Jeff Webb

            Oh, I was just trying to spare you the embarrassment. You’re either unaware they are woefully mismanaged or you think you can get away with yet another lie.
            Obamacare is designed to diminish Medicare, unless you have some magic wand that both makes doctors like less compensation and makes up for a $700 billion loss.

            Obama has said it before, and Harry Reid said it recently: the goal is single-payer. Let’s cut the crap already.

            Social Security would be great if politicians were better at managing money than citizens. They aren’t. Undoing it and letting people handle their money themselves won’t make it worse, and in fact can only make things better.

            Want to keep playing or do you want to try your BS on someone else?

          • legal eagle

            I’ll stop…You have every cliché down pat…Government is bad, facts don’t matter and ideology trumps common sense…

          • Jeff Webb

            No need for all those words, big guy. You’d save yourself time and embarrassment with a simple “I surrender.”

            I thought I told you to talk to your therapist. That projection problem of yours won’t go away on its own.

          • legal eagle

            Tired of arguing with ideological zealots….I’m used to dealing with rational people..

          • Jeff Webb

            You’re late for your appointment. Chop chop!

          • legal eagle

            and if you can’t pay the bill?

          • Josh

            That question could be posed for anything anyone’s paying down. Some have figured it out, some haven’t.

            I don’t see a scenario arising in which I couldn’t pay the bill. Only if I refused to pay the bill.

            Now, I might not be able to pay X per month, or I may fall behind, in which case a negotiation would enable a new payment of Y per month.

            If it arose that I lost all income and was unable to pay anything, then I don’t know what could be done. That’s my home, my car, food, etc. That would make me reliant on charity or on government until I could get back on my feet.

            So, I suppose a safety net people can fall into needs to be transformed into a basket to carry people in?

            If one wishes to increase the breadth of American entitlements, then, please, own it, say it, and be proud about it. I can respect it; I just don’t agree with it.

            As for your “car insurance” bit below, I’m railing against that as soon as government forces me to buy a car.

            As for “Social Security and Medicare,” I’d much rather use my money to save and invest rather than having government do it.

            As for government-run healthcare in general, I’m not against the principle but rather the practice.

            I can agree with the compassionate arguments and feel for people whose lives are crippled by outrageous medical expenses. The question for me becomes one of efficiency, effectiveness, and actually assisting in the problem rather than making things worse for the sake of having a notch on the bedpost. An accomplishment to boast about, where more Americans have “insurance,” as substandard as it is, at the expense of private industry and personal freedoms.

            I see it the same as throwing out more SNAP cards and proclaiming one is healing hunger. No. It’s just taking the easy, support-gathering way out by throwing money at an issue while avoiding doing the work which may drop food prices, make food more abundant, and drive more people to do more for themselves — like, perhaps, gardens, innovating in business, having no more kids they can’t afford, etc.

            When someone’s go-to answer for problems is more government involvement, especially the federal government, I have to wonder what type of nation they would be satisfied with. Honestly, I don’t know if folks who want more government and more entitlements just have the hand-holding social utopia vision, or if they’re under the false impression that they’ll be part of the ruling class and not the subjugated class.

            Meanwhile, at the hall of Social Justice, Detroit gets another $300m.

            Government has done so well for that city and its citizens. This must be the reward money finally coming through.

          • legal eagle

            You agree that there is something wrong with the medical system. You don’t have any solution but you know the “government” is not the solution. The solution is not the insurance industry as this “solution ” has not worked…
            May I suggest that those who oppose Obamacare might consider coming up with a viable solution?

          • Josh

            Well, let’s try to float something up there in the ether and let it fall where it may.

            How about asking what my proposed solutions for the healthcare system are instead of assuming I don’t personally have any.

            Worth a shot?

            Here’s just an abridged version of some of the things I’d personally like to see.

            – Bye-bye government. You make things exceedingly complicated with your inflated bureaucracy, your wallet-stuffing, your genius solution of spending more of other people’s money to grow programs every single time there’s a hiccup.

            – Allow people to actually keep more of their money.

            – Allow insurance companies to actually compete.

            – Work prevention into those currently pointless “Health” classes in school which so far fail at even teaching children to use condoms correctly.

            – Reward healthy lifestyles better via package prices.

            – Reward employees for offering insurance; don’t simply force it for the sake of forcing it.

            – Try to get more people into clinics for their checkups and screenings and such, which may boost their revenue and increase the level of care they’re able to provide for poorer individuals. It’s a lot cheaper for everyone.

            – Let people get their flippin’ meds from competitive outlets without treating everything coming in like it’s crack cocaine.

            – Stop government from consistently scaring away private innovation. Fewer people want to enter or even entertain a field where they fear being smacked with a thick rule book, being taxed silly, and potentially having to face the backlash of the federal government. And when government manages to put up our money for any potential innovation, it almost never fails to be squandered. They’re just not very good at innovating.

            – Bill per procedure/diagnosis, not per every aspirin given and every gown used. And let people know their pricing options.

            The insurance industry doesn’t have an opportunity to be a solutions-oriented industry. Between the smothering weight of government and an army of lawyers large enough to crush a Euro country waiting to sue, the private insurance industry is boxed in so tightly that it can’t even scratch the jewels when that tingle hits.

          • Sheila Warner

            Mostly all good ideas. I bet we won’t hear any of these proposals in the media if they come from the GOP. We need to really fix things, not attack problems with bloated government which seems incapable of seeing long-term consequences. It’s like trying to kill a gnat with a cannon when gov’t gets involved.

          • legal eagle

            Some of your suggestions are good..Let me address some of them
            Eliminating government is impossible…VA, Medicare and Medicaid cover millions of Americans and are all federal or state government programs…..
            Allow people to keep more of their money? I’m not sure what you are referring to?
            Insurance companies do “compete” just as they do in auto insurance, life insurance and casualty insurance…National competition might lower prices.
            Insurance companies set rates…if they’d like to give discounts for “healthy lifestyles” no one is stopping them?
            I ‘m not sure how government stifles innovation in healthcare? You’re a bit vague…
            If you don’t want some government regulation who do you propose should mandate hospital billing practices?
            The Republicans have blocked , for the past 20 years, any attempt to be able to import drugs from foreign countries…The pharma lobby is extremely powerful…
            Thank you for the discussion..

          • Josh

            VA is for veterans. Government, as an employer (or whatever word fits best there), should be handling their healthcare — and should be doing a much damn better job of it too.

            Medicare/aid is SNAFU. What a disappointment. I can’t even muster the strength to rail against it. It’s just disappointing. (And that’s where allowing people to keep their money comes in, enabling them to handle it privately rather than relying on government to somehow, against all odds, do something intelligent with it.)

            Insurance companies “compete” like auto insurance companies only in the sense that they’re private industry. The parallels pretty much stop there.

            Insurance companies allowed to compete on a broader scale and without being hamstrung may bring about a lot of good things. Though it’s only speculation, I suppose this beloved auto insurance example of yours could be used as a potential gauge.

            If I’m a historic bad driver, Auto Insurer X may not want to give me insurance at all; and if they do, they may want to charge me a fortune for it. This is their natural inclination as a company thriving on profit. But if they act in such a manner, there are a dozen companies behind them willing to insure me.

            If there’s a niche in the market of people who are considered “un-insurable” by the industry, then a new industry standard is created after new companies usher in new policies which provide insurance for those drivers. The package options change. The initial premium may be higher, as my bad-driving a$$ is still a huge risk, but I can take advantage of safe-driving discounts; I can whittle that bill down by doing things which make me less of a risk.

            The competition within the health insurance industry is far too regulated to allow that sort of thing. So now it must be forced into existence by the same regulatory body impeding its existence? Oof-ah. My glutes clinch up.

            ….

            I said the healthcare system needs to be fixed, and I subsequently provided a few measures I would personally like to see instituted, and things I would like to see happen. Not all of them are anti-government or anti-Obamacare measures. The insurance industry most definitely has to clean things up on its end, and the average person in America needs to be more responsible as well.

            I don’t see insurance companies as innocent victims here, nor do I see them as some saintly presence. I see them about the same way I see mortgage lenders and private universities, jacking their rates up through the roof in concert with government subsidies and overall interference.

            It’s an industry that needs to be tweaked at every position. But the absence of a corrupt, inflated, inept government is a great starting point.

            If there’s an insurance company out there refusing to lower its rates or to offer fair services, regulation isn’t needed. Another insurance company able to pop up and truly compete will do a much better job than a thick, bloated, confusing, pork-stuffed, unrelated-provisions-laced piece of legislation which, without fail, complicates things rather than streamlines them.

            If the practice worked as lovely as the principle sounds, then I’d be on the rooftops screaming for government to regulate X, Y and Z. But don’t we have enough examples of government failing to do things well in this country? Maybe I’m speaking to one of those Occupiers or an anti-capitalism person; I don’t know and I’m trying not to assume. So maybe my time is wasted making a quick case for a market to thrive rather than regulators who exist on our blood.

            But for my money (literally), government involvement in any capacity beyond a watchdog just screws the pooch.

          • legal eagle

            What is your problem with Medicare? Do you have any idea how prohibitively expensive health insurance is for people over 60 ?
            Other than your dislike of government why is Medicare a problem?

          • Josh

            Madoff’s operations were more ethical. The Joker setting fire to the stack wasted less money.

            Many of these questions don’t seem to be questions, but rather rhetorical statements made with the audacious assumption that no answer but yours is correct.

            Since this has long passed the point of transforming into a one-way stream of picking nits for no apparent purpose other than picking them, let me ask some questions:

            How does more government regulation in the healthcare industry streamline care, make it more affordable, make it more efficient, and provide people with the high-quality care America is known for?

            How does allowing exponentially more government involvement not transform healthcare plans for all Americans into those grossly expensive monstrosities provided to Native Americans?

            How does the massive amount of fraud and waste plaguing government-controlled aspects of healthcare now not increase to the point the system completely decimates the economy?

            How does the Affordable Care Act actually make care affordable while benefiting–or at least not harming–people who were already satisfied with their situation?

            How is this just not forcing the top down rather than uplifting the bottom?

          • Sheila Warner

            Well said.

          • Josh

            If only I knew legal’s game was to ask questions (well, pseudo questions; showy statements and sundry strawmen) by the bundle without bothering to answer, anything I said would have been better said with silence. Like most others have caught on to, apparently.

            It’s what I get for not being cynical enough about partisans.

          • Sheila Warner

            In NJ, we saw many auto insurance companies flee the State rather than do business here, because of the strict regulations NJ has in place. It’s why our premiums are so high. Every state has an insurance regulation industry. The rules set forth by the individual states determine the premiums, as well as the level of competition in place. Obamacare seeks to overrule some of the regulations in the states. Unfortunately, some of Obacare’s regulations, such as what must be offered in a policy, drive up the cost as well. It doesn’t have to be either/or; it can be both/and if there is bipartisan agreement to take a look at how the law is being implemented, instead of merely demanding that it be funded in full or defunded in full. I would bring in the States’ governors for the discussions as well. Each state has unique needs. We need some flexibility here.

          • legal eagle

            I don’t want to pay Social Security…so what? I want to drive 80 MPH in my car….so what? As a citizen you are forced to do things whether you like it or not…
            You want unfettered business licensing with no oversight on business practices?
            You want no oversight over what the pharmaceutical industry can sell to consumers?
            You want no oversight over the safety of food or water?
            Get real…your talking ideology not practicality…

          • Josh

            So, instead of answering anything asked of you, you just found a fresher spot to ask new questions (which, again, aren’t actually “questions”).

            Good luck with all that.

          • legal eagle

            What is your question?

          • Josh

            What is the game in acting as if they’re not listed here?

            If it satisfies more to troll than to engage in conversation, I can see why so many here allow you to go at it alone.

            Live and learn, I guess.

        • Jeff Webb

          How wonderful for .00000000000001 percent of the population that despises Obamacare.

          Can we have your permission to be against it when we lose the plans we liked, that Obama lied about?

          • legal eagle

            So you’re opposed to Obamacare because “we” will lose the plan “we” liked?
            What plan will you lose and who will cause you to lose it….I assume you’re talking theory, not fact?

          • Jeff Webb

            Calm down, son. I just happen feel the same about Obamacare as the politicians who passed it.
            If you’re still confused, take it up with them, and read Michelle Malkin’s “Obama lied…” column.

  • 4Deuce

    Seeing you so at ease in calling conservatives “ayatollahs” makes me question your openness about dissent being welcomed. Your name-calling seems like something I hear daily from Pelosi and Reid. In fact, your use of demeaning words seems more strident when you are disagreeing with Conservatives than the Pelosis and Reids of the world.

  • Brian Fr Langley

    I still luv ya Bernie, but I’ll poke fun at you anyway, on this matter.
    .Limerick?
    There once was a fella named Bernie,
    embarked on conservative journey,
    the fight with the left,
    has left him bereft,
    now seems he’s making left turny.

  • Paul Borden

    I always thought it was “toe” the party line. BTW, it smacks a bit of arrogance on your part to throw in the “bad spelling” and “bad grammar” comment. If not arrogance, it shows that perhaps you are bit more upset/hurt about the criticism you received than you might like to acknowledge. And I’d like to see Burt reply to the columns at issue. Might be an entertaining read!

    • Bernie

      Paul

      You are right … it should have been “toe.” Fixed. I left in the spelling and grammar so people didn’t think I was making fun of them by mis-spelling words, etc

      • Paul Borden

        OK to leave it in, but why even point it out?

  • Cecilio Mendez

    Bravo, Mr. Goldberg! I’m: a Vietnam veteran with a service-connected condition since the very first day I got out of service. (I drank myself stupid the whole first year as a civilian, then I went to work for 30 years and retired in 1999.); a left-handed guy who learned to live in the right-handed world everyone knows – no whining or bitching about it; a Latino who disagrees with the recent “let-the-illegals-become-Americans-in-their-own-terms” mentality; and a we-all-are-Americans Constitutional Conservative. Each one of those gets me in trouble… every time!

  • Michael

    I will still listen. I don’t think I agree with ANYONE 100% of the time. I do think you were out of line with your comment about Eric. You implied that he is an idiot, at least that’s the way it can across. You should have just explained that that you disagree with him on that issue.

  • Pollyanna

    Everyone needs to lighten up. I disagree with Bernie on Ted Cruz, but I also disagree with my husband about a number of things but I’m not about to call it quits! I think conservative have been bullied and beaten down for years, so we may be a tad sensitive when one of ‘champions’ says something we find to be liberal. I find it hard to believe ALL Democrats are pro-choice or against the second amendment, but I don’t see them forsaking Obama, Pelosi, or others of their ilk. Maybe the media just doesn’t cover dissent among liberals? Or maybe they are more inclined to lay their principles aside for political reasons?

    I do know that conservatives need to get our act together. We have to compromise something or else we will self-destruct. For starters, we need to drop social issues from our platform. The party line should be “I think that should be left to the states” then move on. Shut up about social issues! We will continue to lose people who otherwise might be conservative if not for social issues.

    Bernie is obviously more socially liberal but I don’t think he could ever possibly go back to being a Democrat.

    Let’s not destroy ourselves like we did during the primaries. Everyone calm down and remember that political parties aren’t pure but rather represent several ideals, not all of which we may agree.

    If more conservatives had left their pure ideals at home and voted for Romney, we may not have to have suffered four more years of Obama.

    • hillery70

      Yes, Yes, and Yes.

    • AbdullahtheButcher

      We can be socially conservative, just be careful not to go too far.

  • jerseygirl

    Bernie,
    I think you are missing the point I am the people and we the people want the New republicans to fight for defunding Obama Care. The argument is “why not wait until the plan takes efffect and the Democrats and Obama see what a disaster it is and how the President lied”, what good will that do the Democrats and Obama voters will never blame the President or the administration this man is the teflon king he will never get the blame. The people who voted for him will never admit his mistake they would rather ignore it just like no one was ever named responsible for the Benghazi, IRS, Syria etc. I applaud Senator Ted Cruz I think new blood is needed the older career politicians are still stagnet and are still just worried about themselves not the people . Look how many campaigned on this and when elected ignored the people. Let Cruz,Lee, Rubio and the others do the job we elected all to do get rid of Obama Care and start thinking about the American people who want our Country to survive what is becoming a socialist Country..

    • 4Deuce

      The very fact that Obama and the Dem Reps and Senators will not use ObamaCare tells me they don’t care about any heath care collapse as long as their elitist bottoms are covered. I agree -Stop ObamaCare now before it is too late to do anything other than suffer.

  • Greggsan

    This quote comes to mind:

    “Nothing is more dangerous than an idea
    when it’s the only one you have.”
    — Emilé Chartier

  • Richard

    Bernie-Love the metaphor! When we conservatives start acting as small-minded and vitriolic as some of our progressive friends, we need to stop and catch our breath. Thanks for pointing that out. We need to win the hearts and minds of as many as we can and spewing myopic rhetoric is not the way to do that. Keep fighting the good fight.

  • Robert Miller

    Bernie, I watch you on O’Reilly and even read your blog. You are mildly interesting but incapable of accepting that you might be wrong. The correct reply when asked about Ted Cruz is a simple “I wish him luck, respect his effort but disagree with the tactic because I don’t think it is going to be successful” NOT to make fun of him to millions of people who admire and support him. A bad career move. Good luck, I am leaving the fold.

  • Tim in California

    Bingo Bernie….you are correct. And, I might add all too sadley. The Conservative tent ought to have a large canopy with room for all who are non- leftists & non liberals. Instead, there is a litmus for anyone who wants to be a”Republican”. Where does that take us? It gives us 8 years of President Obama, and if the hard right American-Ayatollahs keep it up, it will give us 8 years of Hilary.

  • Ed Doyle

    I agree totally with you. Your job is to tell us how you feel. Our job is to decide how we feel. If we don’t agree that’s okay. If we do agree that’s okay too. Bottom line is this is America. Last I checked, we are all entitled to our views. I don’t expect anyone to agree with my views all the time. What I do expect is honesty and that is what you have done. Thank you for speaking your mind; whether I agree with your thoughts or not.

  • Mollywashington

    Bernie, I am not hard right, but I lean conservative. I can accept your heart-felt opinions, even when I don’t agree, but it is the condescending tone, the direct shot at Eric Bolling, a Fox colleague,, that bothers me., Perhaps you were not intentionally snarking Eric, but it read that way. I get what you are saying and agree with you that demanding ideological purity leads to dead end polarization, but really, did you need to call real hard right conservatives Ayatollahs? You might call it righteous indignation, but I call it a defensive condescending tone. I think you are a good writer, and I certainly will not quit reading or quit watching you on O’’Reilly, but enough of this insulting rhetoric.

    • rs724504

      I agree. I don’t have a problem with anything you say, even when I disagree but your shot at Bolling was cheap and gratuitous. I think there was a much less insulting way of saying the same thing you said. That was childish in my opinion.

  • Saigon1975

    Stick it Bernie. Who is the Ayatollah here? You, or those of us who are dissenting from your opinions on your site? You seem to be intolerant of ouropinions just because we have disagreed with you!

    If you want to keep your readers perhaps you should stick to your effective analyses of leftist media bias.

    You have a platform. You have used it to make a successful post-CBS career of how the regime media refuse to tell both sides of the story. You could also use it to explain how “right-wing” media like FOX sometimes fail to report both sides.

    But don’t call us names.

    Ad hominem, attacks are never a substitute for reasoned argument.

  • Mark McComas

    We have met the enemy, and he is us! –Walt Kelly in the comic strip Pogo

  • D Rhodes

    Bernie, I disagree with you on this one, but continue to respect and admire you and your commentaries. Don’t let them cut your fences or get you down. Thanks to you and Bill for all you do.

  • brickman

    You seem surprised. Don’t you ever read the comments on any other blog? If not, why not, since you are so open minded. When my conservative friends tell me that there is as much black racism as white racism , I ask them to pick any political site at random, and look in the comment field. They usually say that those are trolls, so we go into the comment history of that person. They have read comments and never noticed the vitriol. It’s a shame it had to effect you personally before you noticed.

    • Bernie

      Brickman

      No, I noticed. But because it’s vitriol, as you correctly say, I intentionally avoid it. It’s not the opinion I don’t want to be exposed to — it’s the nastiness. For the most part, this site attracts civil people. Even the ayatollahs, with whom I clearly disagree, aren’t name-callers — make that … most aren’t name-callers.

      thanks for you comment.

      • brickman

        Thank you for your reply. It’s not the differences in the opinions that bother me( in fact I like sparring with someone on the other side) and I go in with the thought that I can change someone’s mind or at least get them to consider another point of view. It bothers me when the vitriol is the sum of their opinion.

  • Phil

    Sic ‘em, Bernie!

  • Patrick McLaughlin

    Me thinks you protest too much Bernie. If you can’t take the heat, then stay out of the kitchen. Two old bromides that I have plagiarized in answer to your “Poor Me” rant. You really shouldn’t resort to name calling. Your better then that Mr. Goldberg. Your fans expect more from you.

    • Josh

      I think the fans that actually respect Bernie admire that he’s giving back on the same level he received, calling a duck a duck after multiple quacks went quacking. I think his fans that simply show up looking for self-gratifying echo-chamber pieces to reaffirm their own views don’t want to hear or read anything of Bernie’s that doesn’t reflect their position and only their position.

      And that’s exactly why this open letter is accurate.

  • hillery70

    Bernie,

    I am convinced that if we had a face-face talk it would be boring. I think I would be talking to myself. I agreed with your last two columns and this one.

    I have found that the Rs (I have always considered myself one) are far less accepting than I ever imagined.

  • speed

    i suppose it depends on whether you’re expressing opinions in order to persuade, and possibly convert, those who think differently, or you’re just sounding off because it makes you feel good. To be persuasive, you have to draw a line from where the other guy is to where you are, but if you’re not listening and understanding his thoughts, how can you possibly lead him to yours? Clearly, the loudest voices are not those that seek to persuade, but those who insist they themselves cannot be persuaded.

    If we think differently, and you will not be persuaded nor are you interested in persuading me, why are we even talking?

  • savage24

    I disagreed with you on your article on the Republicans fighting ObamaCare, but I believe in the Constitution and under the 1st Amendment you have the right to your opinion and the right say it, print it, and believe it. You may think of me as a purist, but I still believe that the Constitution is the law of the land, and that almost all the laws enacted and signed into law are really unconstitutional that includes ObamaCare.

  • delble

    Bernie – good grief!!! Talk about an over-reaction to criticism! I’m surprised at you! Like President Truman who greatly regretted the letter he hastily mailed to the columnist who criticized his daughter Margaret’s singing, I think you will greatly regret calling me and others like me an Ayatollah. As a great-grandmother who has lived through a lot of history, frankly, I’m surprised and hurt. The reason so many of us responded to you as we did is that for years the main stream media,who are such hypocrites, constantly attack us. Now we learn the IRS has done the same to conservative groups. And, of course, the administration does nothing but DENY. It made some of us think that you were caving and falling into lock step with them – calling the conservatives racist, racist, racist, or worse when they can’t come up with a good debate on any subject. I gave you more credit.

    • Bernie

      Debbie

      I never — NEVER– called conservatives racist. I said the media would play the story that way. Go back and re read what I wrote.

      • delble

        Bernie, see my second comment to your reply above.

  • allen goldberg

    Bernie: You are correct somewhat…but there are huge differences. The people in the Islamic world, treat dissent, by death, head removal and various other violent forms…people here who think you are wrong, merely rant a bit, and tell you off. Perhaps develop a thicker skin….but what do you expect in a climate where the media commits Fraud everyday, carries a Fraud’s water on every issues, lies, distorts and then claims absence of malice? And politicians who defy the public, refuse to be held accountable and pretty much allow the violation of the constitution every damn day? You want to receive sweet nice ‘atta-boys”? You are in the wrong business sir.

  • kayakbob

    But seriously. Yes, I agree. Ya know there is one thing the political left does that gets under my skin. When they lament the “lack of tolerance for other views” what I have come to realize is that is a four-lane highway all in one direction. About 99% of the people I know that play the tolerance card are the worse offenders, figuratively and sometimes literally.

    It has become, unfortunately, a staple of the left. We (the right) should do our best not to fall into that same trap. Added to which, I don’t understand the need blow-up (figuratively) people that I probably agree with 70-80% of the time.

  • Brian Fr Langley

    So let’s all just go along to get along. Fight the liberal agenda in a constant retreat because the mainstream media picks on us. How’s that worked so far? Nearly 1 million abortions this year. Nearly 50% of kids abandoned by their fathers and raised by single mothers. (nearly 70% of them in poverty). For the African American community nearly 3 out of 4 children are abandoned by their fathers. As for debt and deficit, they are now so high (when you factor in State and municipal debt) that they are not just unsustainable), that default is likely inevitable. And worse the Government is printing money as fast as Zimbabwe. All in all compromise has been just great. Let’s keep it up.

  • ger

    Good for you. Those readers and listeners you lose aren’t worth keeping.

  • pat brady

    The ONLY thing I find surprising here is that this is news to you Bernie.

  • Ed

    “Hear YOU out”? Just who the hell do you think YOU are? You’re a waste of Skin fella.

  • mcbrian

    You are trying to win friends and influence people by calling them Ayatollahs, good luck fellow, someone as brilliant as you should know better. I do respect anyone who stands up for their beliefs, whether I agree with them or not, and am a little insulted that you think otherwise, but like me, you are entitled to your opinion and have a much larger megaphone to broadcast it, ill informed as it may be.

    • Uncle Dave

      I think you have missed the point. Bernie is not calling everyone on the Right an ayatollah … just the closed minded chowderheads who defend their own little dream world … so, if you fit in to that catagory, then you can feel insulted.
      I guess we all have a little “ayatollah” in all of us. I just do my best to keep it to a minimum. :)

  • kayakbob

    I am reminded of a letter to the editor at Sports Illustrated, wayyyy back when the only way to read the magazine was to buy it at the news stand or have it delivered to my door. So…every year after the swimsuit model issue there would be a smattering of “cancel my subscription” letters to the Editor (LTTE), which SI would dutifully publish. (I always thought that odd since that was one of the reasons I subscribed in the first place.) Then one year they published the best ever LTTE. I read simply:

    “What? Only one picture of Cheryl Tiegs? Cancel my subscription!”

    Not sure what that has to do with anything, other than I am reminded of it reading the first paragraph of this editorial.

    • WhiteHunter

      Good one. Makes me think of WFB Jr.’s famous repartee (and, I think, maybe the title of one of his books): “Cancel your OWN damn subscription!” :-)

  • JDinSTL

    Bernie,

    I enjoyed this article and I believe you are on the mark.

    I suppose I would say I empathize somewhat with the ayatollahs in certain areas, as they’ve been lied to for years by those claiming to represent them.

    It makes them very defensive.

    Once they realize that only a limited government will restore America, we’ll be getting somewhere.

    I think that day is closer than we all realize.

    Unmasking the Republican DC phonies was a necessary step – and we actually owe Barack Obama for that.