I think that there's a fine line between appreciating the political value of punditry and actually tuning in to what the figureheads have to yell on any sort of meaningful level. You like to dangle the Rush Limbaugh's and Ann Coulter's as negative entities -- much like the Koch brothers -- seemingly without realizing, or atleast covertly dismissing, that the end of the spectrum you tacitly advocate on behalf of must (and does) produce the same components in order to survive.
First of all sorry I've taken so long getting back with you, I'm currently in Florida (after 2 days of hard driving) and will be here for the next couple of weeks m/l.
Now to be honest the first thing I thought when I read your message was "What the fook"? Then after I dug out my Dennis Miller thesaurus (thankfully I packed it) and looked up some of those words then I thought, "wasn't Hawk's degree in finance or something along those lines".
OK, I have to make this quick, got to get back on the road to the Keys for some serious sun and relaxing. After the events of the past year my wife talked me into taking this vacation and planned ahead enough that it was almost affordable. 
First let me say this, because almost all of my arguments/points relate back to this starting place with me. I realize the Rs on this board don't like me saying these things, nor will they ever agree with me, at least in the slightest (and as long as nobody's looking) context, but if you really felt like you saw a danger or an evil that your friends were into that they didn't see/realize wouldn't you point it out?
Rule #1: I don't care what the Dems say or think. I'm not concerned with waking them up or turning them back from the brink. I will say this, the Dems on this board are (as a group) much nicer and far less hostile than the Rs on this board when I point out their party's flaws/mistakes. This is a general statement and not aimed at any one person, but it is, nonetheless a fact, at least from my experiences. This is where Bedell and I sometimes butt heads, he points out (and often rightly so) that I don't hold the Ds to the same standards as I do the Rs. Guess what, I don't intend to. That's the same basic logic that I've seen students try and use on me when they point out differences in grades, punishment for behaviors, etc., and while I don't think Bedell or anyone else here means it that way, it's still the same thing, a criminal mentality. I want to make sure my side gets away with as much as the other side. That's wrong no matter how you slice it. And going back to your previous statement about choosing the lesser of two evils, guess what, if you are successful at choosing the lesser of 2 evils every single time you're still picking evil. And the quite correct theory of we live in a democracy with only 2 legitimate parties so you're always going to have flawed human beings in either, that's true, but once you give up that you have any control over their behavior then you're not really living in a democracy anymore, you're just trying to sugar coat it rather than accepting an ugly truth that you don't live in a democracy anymore and you don't care enough to stand up to evil. As much as I sometimes disagree with sturg, at least he has the courage of his convictions to stand up for a party he actually believes in, though to be fair he still can't look at a simple video of someone purposely stepping on someone's leg while pretending not to notice that leg was there and see that for what it really was.
And be honest, isn't this whole post (of yours) basically being Limbaugh or Coulter? Isn't this whole debate about trying to convolute which side is evil and since you're an honest man and you can't lie that I'm right about the Rs being run by evil people then you bring other things into the argument to take the focus from that. Yes the Ds are run by evil people too, yes I dislike George Soros just like I dislike the Kochs or Adelson, but pointing out "hey they're misbehaving too" doesn't really change anything and it certainly doesn't make the Rs one iota better. And on the religion/faith side of the argument do you know how many Christians I know and have seen over the years who take their over the top showmanship as how Christians are supposed to act? It's no wonder so many people are getting into other religions. Bedell would rightly point out that those people don't speak for him on religious matters, but isn't this the same thing as expecting peaceful Muslims to stand up and decry bad behavior from the small but very dangerous lunatic fringe of Islam?
The realization of the inherent, omnipresent evil in the system is one thing, the suggestion that one belief group possesses an approach that is somehow lower in toxicity is another. The former is a much stronger starting point than the latter.
So you agree with me then? Toxic is toxic right? Are you going to get any less poisoned by playing in Nagasaki (the bomb that didn't work quite as well numbers wise as the other one) than you would by playing in Hiroshima? There's still time to turn things around in this country, but not as long as people keep drinking the Kool Aid, especially people who are plenty smart enough to know right from wrong.
I would rally behind you if I felt the preponderance of your evidence wasn't so rigged.
I think I admitted to this one earlier but just in case anyone missed it, I admit it, I expect more from the Rs than I do from the Ds and unless you have adopted this (what I refer to as) criminal mentality, you should join me.
Your interest in social Darwinism seems to derive, perhaps, from the belief that one party is somehow more able to provide more adequately for the equality of man than another. I'd bite if we had the luxury of considering the populace at large in a vacuum -- but I think that when you take a moment to roundly consider capitalism at its very core (and agree to leave your politics at the door) you'll find that the definition of equality is quite relative.
