If you’re not reading blogger friend Andy’s place, you’re missing a lot. Here at The Blog That Nobody Reads, we somewhat often get compliments to the effect of “That’s precisely what I was thinking, I just didn’t know how to say it.” If this is some kind of a food chain, Andy would be on the next link up, because we’ve been noticing this for awhile but we didn’t know how to say it:

The liberal response to pure entertainment, of the drama kind, when the good guys start acting like conservatives and the bad guys act like liberals — it is peculiar. It seems to go right over their heads. FrankJ once said (somewhere) something to the effect of “I’m confused, when they watch ’24’ do they root against Jack Bauer?”

Andy wonders if they like westerns:

Whether he is a crooked town sheriff or the leader of a pack of bandits, the villain of the Western is a fan of punishment by death, likes guns, is sometimes even clean-cut and well-dressed (because crime has been paying), physically bland or unattractive, and everything a liberal might look at and think “Oooh, evil conservative crook!”

Meanwhile, the hero is often a disheveled mess of a “bad boy” type, a little too good-looking to be realistic, coming off of a drug or booze bender, and expected by the town people to swoop on in and save the day all by his lonesome. Naturally, the liberal sees this and shouts “Hey, he’s one of us!”

But watch out, because the evil conservative villain actually terrorizes entire town populations by telling them how to run their saloons and feed stores, taking a cut of their profits, and dictating how much they are allowed to earn, all while be being followed around slavishly by a bunch of underlings who he has made sure are inferior to him in as many ways as possible. You don’t get much more left-wing than that.

And the hero? Just a guy tired of seeing people being tyrannized by a spineless bully. He has a pretty clear idea of how to get the town people back in charge of their own affairs, and he just wants to hang around long enough to set that in motion and be on his way. If making a fool of the bad guy is in the cards, too, then so be it. But the goal is always to restore control to the citizens, and once he has done that, he leaves them to prosper or fail of their own accord. Sure, sometimes he stays on and runs a business or becomes sheriff, but he minds his own pretty well. Sounds conservative to me.

Also up, is a delightful post about Hyperactive Presumptive Disorder Diagnosis Syndrome, which must be a first cousin to my own concoction of Obsessive Compulsive Bullshit Alphabet Soup Acronym Shopping and Behavioral Disability Invention Impulse (OCBASASBDII).

Cylarz put one up, and when I tried to research the origin of it, I realized there are many of them out there.

Let’s start first with the ones who are honestly trying to make it seem like a good idea. DailyKOS:

Dan Kurtzman, who keeps the political snark fires burning over at About.com, wrote a terrific piece for his recent book, How to Win a Fight with a Conservative. We present it here with the author’s kind permission:

Liberal Manifesto

Liberals believe in clean air, diplomacy, stem cells, living wages, body armor for our troops, government accountability, and that exercising the right to dissent is the highest form of patriotism.

Liberals believe in reading actual books, going to war as a last resort, separating church and hate, and doing what Jesus would actually do, instead of lobbying for upper-class tax cuts and fantasizing about the apocalypse.

Liberals believe in civil rights, the right to privacy, and that evolution and global warming aren’t just theories but incontrovertible scientific facts.

Liberals believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment that (1) prohibits another Bush from ever occupying the White House, and (2) prevents George W. Bush from ever becoming baseball commissioner before he does to our national pastime what he did for America.

Liberals believe in rescuing people from flooded streets and rooftops, even if they’re too poor to vote Republican.

Liberals believe that supporting our troops means treating our wounded vets like the heroes they are, and not leaving them to languish in rat-infested military hospitals under the outsourced management of incompetent cronies who think they’re running a Taco Bell franchise.

Liberals believe in pheromones, sex ed, solar panels, voting paper trails, the common good, and that, no matter how fascinating a story it may be, a president should never sit around in a state of total paralysis reading “My Pet Goat” while America is under attack.

And above all, liberals believe that it’s time to come together as a country and put a collective boot in the ass of shameless conservative fearmongers, hate merchants, and scapegoaters who are sucking the freedom out of all our souls.

Laced up! Ready to go!

A “Buzzflash Reader Contribution”:

I’m a Liberal.

That means that I believe we have a responsibility to those who cannot care for themselves,

I believe we should help the poor,

I believe old people deserve to be treated with respect & dignity,

I believe we should protect the environment,

I believe we should not invade other countries without the majority of the worlds democracies’ agreeing it is the last option,

I believe that the government is no more corrupt or inefficient than a huge multinational corporation (Enron),

I believe the government should be transparent and open to prevent corruption rather than always hiding behind “national security”,

I believe in the separation of church and state,

I believe it is more important to have high wages for your employees than high profits for your CEO,

I believe that we are innocent until proven guilty,

I believe the “patriot” act is unconstitutional,

I believe we create more terrorists by bombing other countries and randomly imprisoning suspected “terrorists”,

I believe racial profiling is just racism,

I believe that voting machines should provide a paper trail,

I believe election day should be a national holiday,

I believe that all persons should have equal rights such as the right to marry the one they love,

I believe we should spend more money educating our children than we do building prisons,

I believe multinational corporations do not always act in the best interests of America,

I believe that women should have every option available to them when it comes to their health,

I believe children should be taught science not mysticism,

I believe that taxes should be paid by those who can most afford to pay them,

I believe running huge government budget deficits will hurt our economy,

I believe that everyone is entitled to health care,

I believe that the government wastes more money on military spending than it does on welfare or aid to the needy,

I believe corporations are not people and should not have the same rights as persons,

I believe we should take affirmative action to correct the socio-economic imbalances created by racism and sexism,

and I believe that we are a nation of immigrants and we should welcome those with the drive, determination and ambition to come to America in search of a better life.

The American Prospect put one up in that contentious year of 2006.

We have all opposed the Iraq war as illegal, unwise, and destructive of America’s moral standing. This war fueled, and continues to fuel, jihadis whose commitment to horrific, unjustifiable violence was amply demonstrated by the September 11 attacks as well as the massacres in Spain, Indonesia, Tunisia, Great Britain, and elsewhere. Rather than making us safer, the Iraq war has endangered the common security of Americans and our allies.

We believe that the state of Israel has the fundamental right to exist, free of military assault, within secure borders close to those of 1967, and that the U.S. government has a special responsibility toward achieving a lasting Middle East peace. But the Bush administration has defaulted. It has failed to pursue a steady and constructive course. It has discouraged the prospects for an honorable Israeli-Palestinian settlement. It has encouraged Israel’s disproportionate attacks in Lebanon after the Hezbollah incursions, resulting in vast destruction of civilian life and property.

Make no mistake: We believe that the use of force can, at times, be justified. We supported the use of American force, together with our allies, in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. But war must remain a last resort. The Bush administration’s emphatic reliance on military intervention is illegitimate and counterproductive. It creates unnecessary enemies, degrades the national defense, distracts from actual dangers, and ignores the imperative necessity of building an international order that peacefully addresses the aspirations of rising powers in Asia and Latin America.

The misapplication of military power also imperils American freedom at home. The president claims authority, as commander in chief, to throw American citizens into military prison for years on end without any hearing, civil or military, that would allow them to confront the charges against them. He claims the power to wiretap Americans’ conversations without warrants, in direct violation of congressional commands. These usurpations presage what are likely to be even more drastic measures if another attack takes place on American soil.

—

At the same time, the president is unconstitutionally seizing power on other fronts. He seeks to liberate himself from the rule of law by issuing hundreds of “signing statements” asserting, with unprecedented sweep and aggressiveness, his right to ignore congressional control. Such contempt for the people’s representatives verges on monarchical pretension.

The administration’s politics of panic diverts attention from pressing questions of social justice and environmental survival. The president remorselessly seeks to undermine the principle of progressive taxation. Under cover of patriotism, he promotes vast tax cuts to the rich at the expense of policies that strengthen the common ties that bind us together as a community.

We reaffirm the great principle of liberalism: that every citizen is entitled by right to the elementary means to a good life. We believe passionately that societies should afford their citizens equal treatment under the law — regardless of accidents of birth, race, sex, property, religion, ethnic identification, or sexual disposition. We want to redirect debate to the central questions of concern to ordinary Americans — their rights to housing, affordable health care, equal opportunity for employment, and fair wages, as well as physical security and a sustainable environment for ourselves and future generations.

Instead of securing these principles, the president and his party view the suppression of votes indulgently and propose new requirements for voting that will make it still harder for the poor and the elderly to exercise their democratic rights.

The administration’s denial of reality reaches a delusional peak in its refusal to acknowledge basic science describing the massive climate change now under way. Against the advice of all serious experts, the government has grossly failed in its responsibility to our descendants. It has consistently sought to undermine the Kyoto treaty and refused to encourage energy conservation. We insist on a clean break with this shameful record. Our government should be taking the lead in reducing greenhouse gases, recognizing our responsibilities as the world’s leading polluter. We should be investing massively in energy sources that carry out a commitment to environmental stewardship and help restore our manufacturing base at the same time.

The administration’s contempt for science is of a piece with its general disdain for reason — a prejudice that any modern society ought to have left behind. Whether confronting scientific research, evolution, birth control, foreign policy, drug pricing, or the manner in which it makes decisions, the Bush administration has defied evidence and logic, sabotaging its own professional civil servants. It refuses serious consultation with experts and critics. It acts secretly, in defiance of the powers of Congress. It refuses to identify those whose advice it solicits, even concealing the names of the vice president’s staff. It stifles civil servants attempting to do their jobs. It appoints cronies whose political loyalty cannot compensate for their incompetence. When challenged, it responds with lies and distortions.

—

Reason is indispensable to democratic self-government. This self-evident truth was a fundamental commitment of our Founding Fathers, who believed it was entirely compatible with every American’s First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. When debating policy in the public square, our government should base its laws on grounds that can be accepted by people regardless of their religious beliefs. Public commitment to reason and evidence is the bedrock of a pluralist democracy. Nevertheless, it has been eroded by the present administration in an ongoing campaign to pander to its hard right wing.

This government’s failures to respect the process of public reason have generated predictable consequences — none of them good. The Bush administration has failed to protect its citizens from disaster — from foreign enemies on September 11, 2001, and from the hurricane and flood that afflicted the Gulf Coast in 2005. It has driven the war in Iraq to an impasse. It is incapable of presenting a plausible strategy to bring our military intervention to a tenable conclusion.

We insist that America be defended vigorously against its real enemies — the radical Islamists who organize to attack us. But security does not require torture or the rejection of basic guarantees of due process. To the contrary, this administration’s lawless conduct and its violations of the Geneva Conventions only damage our moral standing and our ability to combat the appeals of violent ideologues. By defending torture, the Bush administration engages in precisely the kind of ethical relativism that it purports to condemn. Meanwhile, it refuses to confront its responsibility for the human-rights violations at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and elsewhere. Having failed to plan for obvious contingencies, it has scapegoated low-level military personnel when it should be identifying and punishing broader command failures.

We refuse to confine our criticisms to personalities. We believe that the abuses of power that have been commonplace under Bush’s rule must be laid not only at his door — and the vice president’s — but at the doors of a conservative movement that has, for decades, undermined government’s ability to act reasonably and effectively for the common good.

—

We love this country. But true patriotism does not consist of bravado or calumny. It resides in faithfulness to our great constitutional ideals. We are a republic, not a monarchy. We believe in the rule of law, not secret prisons. We insist on justice for all, not privilege for the few. In repudiating these American ideals, the Bush administration disgraces America and damages our claim to democratic leadership in the larger world.

It will take hard work to undo this damage. It will take more than defeating the hard-line right at the polls. We must engage in large acts of political imagination and inspire a new generation to take up liberal principles and adapt them inventively in a new century.

It’s interesting that in 2006, someone thought it entirely unnecessary to state any liberal ideals that existed independently of the administration. To offer a litany of what it was doing, and what you didn’t like about it, was quite sufficient. Someday, this is going to be an unavoidable fact of history in the “How Obama Came To Be” chapter of the textbooks; liberals didn’t know what they wanted, they just knew what they didn’t want.

Rick Moran handily fisked this one.

And then there is the one read in by Cylarz, from over here, which is perhaps the most honest.

I am a proud liberal. I want to be safe and happy. Even though America is a mean and terrible country, I want to live here and nowhere else. I will never support national defense or the military. I do, however, want someone else to defend me and make sure I am safe, but I will not tolerate it if they hurt or scare anyone while doing it. I also want everyone else to be equal and happy. But I don’t want to pay for that. Others should pay for that so I don’t have to. I don’t believe in personal responsibility and self reliance either. I believe that only government should be responsible and we should all rely on the government for benefits and programs. There will never be enough government benefits and programs. I like being a liberal because only liberals want equality and a clean environment. I believe in equality because I think many persons are too stupid or lazy to make it on their own. I believe that if incomes drop, tax rates must be increased to make up for the deficit, because if anyone has any income left they should share it. I know that the Founding Fathers were just a group of dead greedy white men whose views should not be believed or respected. I don’t believe in reading or learning about history either because it is all based on capitalist lies. I believe that marriage must be open to all persons or groups of persons who wants to be married. It is just the fair thing to do. But I’m not certain yet which person is the husband or if there is a wife at all. Finally, I believe in group thinking and community action. I believe these facts because I learned them in High School and University, both of which I attended with government support. The teachers there are very smart. They taught me what to think and I answered their test questions just the way they wanted me to. Then they even gave me a degree to prove that I now know more than anybody. All this is true and none of it is open for discussion. Now you know why I am a proud liberal.

And then there’s this…

1. We believe that notions of good and evil are outdated and should never be used unless we are talking about George Bush, other Republicans, or Right Wing, Born Again Christians who are clearly responsible historically for most of the evils of the world.

2. We are strong advocates of choice, unless people want to choose their own schools, radio shows, cars, cigars, unhealthy food, health care providers, amount of energy to use in the home, salaries to pay employees, location for religious assembly, location for religious symbols, and the amount of money to leave their children in a will as opposed to giving half to the government. We do continue to celebrate “a woman’s right to choose an abortion” but we also like the laws in China that limit how many children one can have, because too many people in the world contribute to Global Warming, so the one remaining choice is only a temporary one.

3. We believe that having women on the Supreme Court offers necessary balance, as women will always bring a perspective men cannot offer with important decisions that guide our country. On the other hand, when it comes to guiding children in a family atmosphere, we do not believe gender to be of any importance whatsoever. Indeed, a child with two fathers is going to be every bit as healthy as a child with a father and a mother and in such a case, female influence is nonessential to development and health.

4. We believe in standing up for the rights of the weak and the disenfranchised, (unless we are talking about an unborn baby.)

5. We believe in tolerance and those who are unwilling to tolerate the same lifestyles we tolerate should no longer be tolerated. Thus, we strongly advocate laws forbidding Hate Speech and if those guilty of Hate Speech do not see their speech as hateful, it only means they are especially hateful and that their intolerance should be especially NOT tolerated.

6. We believe that as regards gay marriage, church and state should be completely separated. Christians have no right to pass laws about who can or cannot be married out in the secular world. Marriage in the church can be defined any way they want, so long as they do not impose that belief on the rest of us. However, we strongly support those who sue churches for refusing to marry gay couples because, after all, this is a Civil Rights issue and not a religious issue. Therefore, religious people should not be exempted.

7. As a specific example of our inclusive philosophy, we believe that when Conservatives oppose President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, their only possible motives must clearly be racism. It couldn’t possibly be for concerns about a judge who would legislate from the bench. However, when Democrats opposed Clarence Thomas and Alberto Gonzalez, race had nothing to do with it.

8. In that same vein, we accept Judge Sotomayor’s right to claim that a Latino woman will give better rulings than a white male judge. Such a statement cannot be construed as racist because people of color do not have the power even though this woman, as a judge, has kind of, sort of, had a lot of power for years. Meanwhile, should a white judge ever claim that a white man can rule better than a Latino woman, we will expose him as the sexist, racist, bigoted vermin whom he truly is.

9. We believe that all rich people are evil, with the exception of rich Democrat politicians, George Soros, Michael Moore or any Left-Wing Hollywood activist.

10. We believe religion should be left out of any political discussion unless some Democratic politician wants to say that Jesus would have accepted illegal immigration or some gay, Episcopal priest wants to talk about how the Bible teaches that God is loving and tolerant. In such cases, religion is a very appropriate ingredient to bring into the mix.

11. We believe Intelligent Design does not belong in the class room due to church and state legalities and should not be put forth, even as a theory, to be discussed. We also believe that if an instructor wants to talk about how stupid it is to believe in God, he should be allowed. Separation between church and state does not apply in such a situation.

12. When a professor, such as Ward Churchill, compares the victims of 9/11to Nazis, his speech (outrageous as it is) must be protected under the First Amendment. On the other hand, when the President of Harvard suggests that men and women tend to score differently on math tests, such talk should never be allowed because (First Amendment put aside) the college campus must hold its staff to a higher standard. Besides, we know that men and women are not different at all about anything, (even though, once again, women do bring a unique perspective to the Supreme Court.)

13. We believe it is wrong for a mother to spank her child. That is child abuse. But if she wants to kill this child in the womb, that is her fundamental right.

14. We are very concerned about Global Warming and those who would ask us to prove it scientifically should just get with the program and stop being so dog darned argumentative. However, we will ask Christians to prove their belief in God scientifically and if they can’t, they have no place in our public dialogue. Indeed, they pollute our public dialogue. Oh yes, and if Christians claim they can prove God scientifically, they should be especially banned from public dialogue. Never mind that we asked them to prove God. We only asked because we were sure they couldn’t do it.

15. We believe that almost anything you can imagine (and a lot of stuff you never would have imagined in a million years) contributes to Global Warming, including Christmas lights and even cow dung. But the private jets that Democrats fly around in to give lectures on Global Warming are not a problem. While we are on the subject of private jets, when Wall Street CEO’s fly on such jets, they are EVIL!.. That is, they would be evil if such a thing existed and in the cases of people we don’t like, it does exist. (See Point One)

16. We believe that smaller cars will keep our atmosphere safer even if accidents in such cars will kill a whole lot more people than big cars. People come and go, but the planet is most important.

17. Finally, we believe Right-Wing ideas are too stupid to even debate. That is why we do not debate them. We call Right-Wingers names instead, because they deserve to be called names. (Hitler is always a good one). Would you debate with a Nazi or with the Ku Klux Klan? Of course not! Can we prove that all Right Wing people are like the Nazis or the Klan? Well, no. To do that, we would have to have a debate and we are not going to debate. Haven’t you been paying attention?

In the name of tolerance, free thought, open discussion, personal choice and sound reason, we the undersigned do proudly uphold this Liberal Manifesto.

Most folks on the innerwebs seem to share a rather well-defined vision of what exactly the term “troll” is supposed to describe. It’s some person participating in the content of a group discussion, without really participating in its subject. He just says stuff to get folks riled up, slimes, slanders, drifts away, doesn’t truly engage the topic or any dialogue around it. Wikipedia says it’s “someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community…with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response.” The Urban Dictionary says it’s a “member of an internet forum who continually harangues and harasses others.”

Just about everyone seems to agree, more-or-less, on what a troll is.

The really hardcore lefty people, though, have a different definition. Before we define that, let’s define them. “Of course Obama doesn’t have everything fixed yet, it’ll take Him a very long time with the damage that’s been done to this country for the last eight years.” I think that’s a good definition. No standards to be imposed on Holy One, but pretend things are the exact opposite, that Holy One is raising the standards, while failing to fulfill any. And anything & everything can be satisfactorily answered with one more zinger at Bush. That’s what I call hardcore left. Works for me.

Their definition seems to be…if you offer an argument, and I can’t respond to it logically, or even look like I’m responding to it logically…in other words, if you have me backed into a corner. That makes you a “troll.”

They are really marching to the beat of their own drummer on this one, on the usage of that particular word.