Liberal paper publishes favorable article on George Galloway

[they don't love you like i love you]

man, I'm getting frustrated with DU. There's about 10 200+ flame war threads on Galloway and loads of folks are showing true believer syndrome.

There are several categories from what I see:

1-People who simply flat out do not like Galloway. This includes myself.
2-People who do like him for the things he's said about Bush and the war but admit to having some reservations about him. I can respect this view.
3-People who say things like "well I know there is some dodgy stuff about him but all I care about is that he kicked Norm Coleman's ass and told the truth that no one in Congress was able to, etc." Basically that they'll support anyone who hates Bush and opposes the war.
4-The complete kool-aid drinkers who worship the man as a God and refuse to take any criticism of him into account because he blasted Bush and the war. Whenever someone posts a criticism of him they reply with something like "Quit posting the right wing talking points and drinking the neoCON kool-aid (quite ironic that they accuse the anti-Galloway folks of being kool-aid drinkers), this man speaks TRUTH 2 POWER" or when someone basically says he was more than anti-war and basically a friend and supporter of Saddam they reply with some sort of red herring like "The neoCONS supported Saddam for many years and now continue to support thugs like Musharraf, Karimov and Sharon today, all they care about is the advancement of American imperialism and corporate interests, blah blah blah" which is a valid point if arguing with a true neocon or war supporter but rather pointless against someone who hates Bush just as much as they do. These types are starting to drive me insane.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You get some real nutters on there don't you?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Most people at DU are fairly reasonable. Note that this statement is compatable with the statement "some people at DU are completely batsh**t crazy". That being said, DailyKos seems to have more reasonable people that DU. I think they have a better sense of framing issues so that people besides the left will agree.

Anyways, I haven't really been on DU that much. I can't find a thread on Galloway. The people I've interacted with have been fairly reasonable except for the person who got mad at me for pointing out that some exit poll probability was really about 1 in 100 million instead of 1 in a billion or something.

I'm not a subscriber, so I can't search or look up my posts older than 2 days.

[Serenity Now]

man, I'm getting frustrated with DU. There's about 10 200+ flame war threads on Galloway and loads of folks are showing true believer syndrome.

There are several categories from what I see:

1-People who simply flat out do not like Galloway. This includes myself.
2-People who do like him for the things he's said about Bush and the war but admit to having some reservations about him. I can respect this view.
3-People who say things like "well I know there is some dodgy stuff about him but all I care about is that he kicked Norm Coleman's ass and told the truth that no one in Congress was able to, etc." Basically that they'll support anyone who hates Bush and opposes the war.
4-The complete kool-aid drinkers who worship the man as a God and refuse to take any criticism of him into account because he blasted Bush and the war. Whenever someone posts a criticism of him they reply with something like "Quit posting the right wing talking points and drinking the neoCON kool-aid (quite ironic that they accuse the anti-Galloway folks of being kool-aid drinkers), this man speaks TRUTH 2 POWER" or when someone basically says he was more than anti-war and basically a friend and supporter of Saddam they reply with some sort of red herring like "The neoCONS supported Saddam for many years and now continue to support thugs like Musharraf, Karimov and Sharon today, all they care about is the advancement of American imperialism and corporate interests, blah blah blah" which is a valid point if arguing with a true neocon or war supporter but rather pointless against someone who hates Bush just as much as they do. These types are starting to drive me insane.

I'd be number 2, but I did think his speech against Coleman was good, but I was very suprised by that. Maybe replace "some" with "many". The speech isn't a vindication of him as a whole.

Lot's of the DUers ought to know that many neocons did oppose or at least criticize Sadamm Hussein - even in the 1980's - Paul Wolfovitz was among them I believe. It was more the Republican establishment (GHW Bush and Bob Dole for example) who were unwilling to condemn, and often therefore support, the Iraqi regime.

[Democratic Hawk]

He was such an illuminary in the House of Commons that I'd never even heard of him 'til his opposition to Iraq

Surely you must have heard the "I salute ...." speech on TV before that?

Funny enough, no I hadn't! Galloway was, and is, just another no mark as far as I'm concerned

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Good work Don.  But it's certainly not characteristic of the entire anti-war left to praise Galloway.  I'm pretty sure most people actually find him embarrassing.  This paper was obviously an exception.

Why would he be embarrassing?

Because he's George 'Saddam's Ass Wiper' Galloway - that's why he is embarassing. He was such an illuminary in the House of Commons that I'd never even heard of him 'til his opposition to Iraq

Dave

And of course most of Parliament were 'Bush's Ass Wipers' - of course you don't mind that.

No, I don't mind that at all. In fact, the Iraq War is the ONE thing I agree with Bush on. Even though, I've gotta admit as a Labour Party guy I don't feel any real affinity with Bush or the GOP

Dave