Mail Bombs Are Just Another Example Of Increasing Political Violence From Both Sides

The big news this week has been the pipe bombs mailed to a number of left-leaning political figures and media outlets. Although none of the bombs has detonated or led to injuries or deaths, the attacks come at a time when tensions are already running high. There is little doubt that the string of attempted bombings will further stoke tempers in an already precarious situation.

President Trump denounced the attacks in a speech at a rally in Wisconsin. “No nation can succeed that tolerates violence or the threat of violence as a method of political intimidation, coercion, or control,” the president said. “No one should carelessly compare political opponents to historical villains, which is done often,” the president continued. “It’s done all the time. “

Trump then turned his attention to one of his favorite targets, which was also a target of the bomber, saying, “The media also has a responsibility to set a civil tone and to stop the endless hostility and constant negative and oftentimes false attacks and stories.

Thus far, political leaders have been quick to denounce political violence from the opposing team but slow to critique their own side. In fact, even though radicals on both sides have carried out attacks on the other, few on each side seem to acknowledge or remember acts perpetrated by their own side. If you have friends on both sides of the political spectrum, as I do, you’ll see posts from both sides claiming that the other side is perpetrating all the violence while theirs is as pure as the driven snow.

Even though no suspect has been arrested in the mail bombings, many on both sides seem to have made up their minds already as to the motive of the perpetrator. Since the targets of the bombs are all people who have been rhetorically attacked by President Trump, it’s reasonable to assume that the bomber is a Trump supporter.

On the other hand, with no supporting evidence at all, some on the right are beginning to make the argument that the bombs are a false flag operation (to use Alex Jones’ favorite phrase) to make Trump supporters look bad. Similarly, in the wake of the Charlottesville car attack, some on the right falsely claimed that James Alex Fields, Jr. was a “radical leftist” and Clinton supporter.

Let’s set the record straight. Both sides have violent extremists and both sides are increasingly violent. James Fields was a white supremacist. James Hodgkinson, who attempted to kill Steve Scalise and other Republican senators, was a liberal Bernie Sanders volunteer. Right-wing activists launched an armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge and staged an armed resistance to the arrest of Cliven Bundy. Leftist Antifa radicals have rioted in numerous cities. Leftists have used the threat of violence to deny conservatives such as Ben Shapiro the right to speak. President Trump threatened riots if he was denied the Republican nomination. A Trump supporter threatened to shoot Boston Globe reporters because the newspaper was an “enemy of the people.” Liberals have taken to confronting conservative politicians and media figures in restaurants. Right-wingers did the same thing to Nancy Pelosi.

In this age of mass media directed to different niches, the two sides are increasingly separated into camps that have little contact with the other. A recent conservative meme series refers to liberal supporters as NPCs, nonplayer characters, that are faceless, generic subhumans that don’t think for themselves. The left seems to think the same of the right, frequently referring to the president’s supporters as “Trumpbots.” It shouldn’t be surprising that as both sides dehumanize the other, the potential for violence increases.

Leaders of both sides need to come together for a bipartisan statement that rejects the increasing political violence. This needs to be done with no caveats. Republicans and Democrats should both tone down their rhetoric and instruct their supporters to make their voices heard at the ballot box, not in the streets.

If the leaders won’t take this action, it is up to the American people to reject violence. Don’t condone and excuse violent rhetoric or behavior just because it comes from your team. One way to address the problem is to shame people who take part in this sort of behavior. The second Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville was smaller than the first, in part because neo-Nazis from the first rally were publicly identified and shamed online. Perhaps a similar strategy could be used against Antifa and the Proud Boys.

Reject hatred and violent rhetoric online. The anonymous and isolated nature of social media makes extremism thrive. Unlike and unfollow radical accounts and pages. Report users who violate the terms of service and community standards. Point out the hypocrisy of supporting your own side’s violence while condemning the other.

Both sides claim to want to take their country back, but I suspect that the people who really want their country back are the exhausted middle who are tired of the constant crises and outrage-of-the-day from both sides. It is these moderate and independent Americans who decide elections and they can make a difference by rejecting those who condone violence. These are people who can hold America together while politicians and activists try to rip it apart.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Time to step back from the brink

With this morning’s shooting at the congressional practice field in Virginia, it is fair to say that our political discourse has finally sank too low. After watching rhetoric on both sides become more incendiary and violence slowly escalate over the past few years, someone has really gotten hurt.

Not bruises, broken bones or damaged pride either. Congressman Steve Scalise (R-La.) or the other people at the practice, including the security officers, could have been killed. That was apparently the aim of the attack.

The Washington Post has identified the shooter as James T. Hodgkinson, 66, of Belleville, Ill. Hodgkinson was a campaign worker for Bernie Sanders whose Facebook page allegedly features a post that reads, “Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”

Political violence is not new to this country. We fought a War Between the States over our political differences. Groups like the Ku Klux Klan used violence and intimidation to further their political aims. There have been assassinations, from Abraham Lincoln to Huey Long. Radical anti-war groups in the 1960s used bombings to further their political aims.

In the last half-decade, things seemed to change. We have enjoyed a relatively peaceful period. There was violence against political figures, but for the most part, it was the work of the mentally ill, not political assassins. The attempted murderers of Ronald Reagan and Gabrielle Giffords were both crazy, not trying to make a political point.

While it is still too early to say for sure, the baseball field shooting feels different. The shooter reportedly asked which team was playing, the Republicans or the Democrats, before opening fire. If the reported Facebook posts are accurate, there seems to be a clear motive for the attack.

There will be plenty of anger against the liberal media and Democrats for stoking the fires of Hodgkinson’s anger. At this point, those charges seem to be legitimate. Much of the reporting about the Trump Administration has been sensationalist and over-the-top. The problem is that the liberals aren’t the only ones to blame.

Both sides are guilty of whipping up the anger of the base with outrage-of-the-day styles of reporting that focus on the most extreme and offensive actions of the opposition. For every action, there is an equal and opposite overreaction.

Hodgkinson’s Facebook post was repeated almost verbatim on many right-wing timelines over the past eight years. Just substitute “Obama” for “Trump.”

Liberals stage a play depicting the assassination of President Trump. Conservatives circulated internet picture of President Obama with his head in a noose. Liberal protesters riot and stop traffic. Conservative protesters stage armed revolts and occupy a federal building in Oregon and engage in standoffs with law enforcement on federal land. Businesses destroyed by riots had it coming according to the leftist narrative, but so did reporters and protesters who get beat up, if you listen to those on the right. President Trump is a Russian traitor? President Obama is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, so there!

The two sides barely even talk anymore. We listen to different media, read different newspapers and websites. We focus on our differences and they become magnified.

Originally published on The Resurgent

As David French recently wrote, we seem to be headed for a national divorce. If we really love our country, we need to look at what a spouse would do to prevent a divorce. Look to find the good in our political opponents. Look for common ground instead of nitpicking. Realize that we aren’t going to get everything on our political wish lists. The alternative is likely to be more political violence and national divorce that is unlikely to come amicably. 

Interview with Busta Troll

Last week, the infamous internet “goat” leader, the identity of Busta Troll was revealed by a group of conservative activists (read the story here). Examiner contacted Christopher Lyman, Busta’s true identity, via Facebook messages on Monday. Lyman agreed to the email interview with the stipulation that his answers be repeated in their entirety. What follows are Busta’s own words with only minor grammatical editing for clarity. The conclusion is also Busta’s.

How and why did you start goating pages?

I started goating pages because I can’t stand it when a page posts ridiculous rumors that can be easily debunked by five minutes of searching Google. When they post those things and won’t listen to reason, I feel it’s better for the general public to see a harmless picture of goats instead.

Why goats?

Goats became a staple of our [liberal troll] community before I became Busta Troll. I use them out of respect for those who started this movement.

How many pages were you responsible for goating?

I personally goated 17 pages.

Are you done with goating for good?

This is how my career will end. I don’t see a future in it or in Facebook for that matter. I plan to ride off into the sunset having accomplished my mission.

Now that you are out of the goating business, will you return control of the goated pages to their original owners, shut them down, or leave them in place?

The pages I was given were in turn given to others. I remained an admin on them until yesterday when I deleted myself. After the initial admin change, I very rarely post. The herd takes over from there. Those pages will always be for the goats.

Have you actually been harassed or contacted by anyone since your identity was revealed? Are you still concerned for your safety or your job?

The employment information given about me was old. I am no longer employed there. I have resigned my position as Little League umpire for the safety of the people in my town and my children. I am and always have been an advocate for responsible gun ownership, gun safety law, and reasonable restrictions on military grade equipment like most Americans. If these nut jobs think they’re going to show up at my house and threaten me or my family they have another think coming.

Are you concerned that the owners of the goated pages will take legal action against you (i.e. theft by fraud)?

I’m not at all concerned that the previous admins of goated pages will take legal action against me. Before you make someone an admin on your page, you have to enter your password after reading the disclaimer that they will have the same power as you. The pages are still there and I have never even been contacted by Facebook telling me I’ve violated their terms of service.

Is it true that you were a “paid liberal troll?” If so, who paid you?

No. I was not paid to troll.

Do you have anything to say to the owners of the pages that you goated?

To the original owners of the goated pages I say this: You posted pure hate and lies. You refused to talk about it, listen to reason, or even debate in a civil manner. Therefore, you got what you deserved.

~Busta Troll smiles and waves and walks off into the sunset.

 

Read the full story on Atlanta Conservative Examiner

Leader of liberal ‘goat’ con men outed on Facebook

The true identity of the leader of the group of liberal con men known as “goats” has been made public by a rival group of conservative internet activists. The leader of the goats, who used the online persona of “Busta Troll” as well as many other false identities, was revealed last week by a Facebook community page called Kevin Kopper. Kopper provided the details of the outing to Examiner.

As Examiner reported last January in a story that went viral, Busta Troll and the goats would befriend the administrators of conservative Facebook pages to gain their trust. This was accomplished by using false identities and making promises to help administrators expand their pages by gaining “likes.” In some cases, the goats apparently ran their own pages and recruited real conservatives to run them. When the administrators could be convinced to give the con men administrator status on their pages, the goats would hijack the page, deleting the other administrators and replacing the content with memes of goats and vulgar attacks on conservatives and Republicans.

“One of our friends had their pages taken and goated by Busta Troll and we decided to stop him,” Kevin Kopper told Examiner. “We posted a $1,000 reward for the real identity of Busta Troll so we could shut him down and stop him from stealing and goating any more conservative pages. We had no idea how many different people were working on it independently from our efforts and the leads started pouring in.”

Eventually, Kopper said that several leads led to Christopher Lyman, a cabinet maker from a small town in Maine. When Lyman’s name and personal information were linked to Busta Troll in online postings, Busta/Lyman admitted that the information was accurate in a post on the Busta Troll Facebook page saying, “Posting my name is all well and good, I don’t really care, but when someone posts the name of my employer and the little league I umpire at so a bunch of teatarded [sic] gun nuts can show up and scare a bunch of kids, mine included, they’ve crossed the line.” Lyman continued, “My wife is absolutely mortified and I actually fear for the safety of my children.” Christopher Lyman’s Facebook page currently features a meme that announces “I am Busta Troll.” Examiner attempted to contact Lyman, but had received no response at press time.

Kopper says that Busta/Lyman “is lying about his family being threatened. Nothing could be further from the truth. We simply posted his correct ID. If anyone else has acted in a threatening manner we are unaware of those activities and certainly would not condone any threats of harm to him or his family.”

The personalization of politics is becoming more common as the country becomes more divided. Liberal activists have harassed the supporters of conservative initiatives such as California’s Prop 8 definition of marriage amendment. The most well known victim of the effort was Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich who was forced to resign in April after the fact that he had contributed to the effort to pass Prop 8 became publicized. In another incident, the IRS leaked the donor list of the conservative National Organization for Marriage to its chief political foe, the Human Rights Campaign, which then passed the list along to the Huffington Post. National Review reported that NOM chairman John Eastman told Congress that the harassment and intimidation of the group’s backers included business boycotts, physical assault and vandalism. Eastman said, “Our donors tell us ‘We are fearful of giving money to you to help support the cause that we believe in because our businesses and our family are at risk.’”

So far the goats have apparently limited their harassment to the internet. R.W. Burgin, owner of a Facebook page called “The Seditionist,” said that liberal internet trolls had copied pictures from his page and used them to make parody pages and videos. The pictures, which included Burgin, his girlfriend, their parents and grandchildren, were put on other pages. In some cases, the pictures were photo shopped onto pornographic videos. Burgin says that he was called a pedophile and that personal information, including his employer’s name, was posted online and that the trolls threatened to try to get him fired. The trolls also contacted his mother and girlfriend. Burgin is not sure if the trolls that harassed him were affiliated with Busta/Lyman, but says the he hopes Busta’s unmasking “will make people start to think before they threaten or torture people.”

Kopper says that he has been in contact with Busta/Lyman via Facebook private messages and that “he has informed us that he has taken down his pages and is done.” Examiner confirmed that the Busta Troll Facebook page, as well as a second page called “Busta’s Army,” is no longer active.

“We feel very satisfied with the outcome and will be providing Lyman’s information and messages to the admins of the pages he took,” Kopper said. “If they decide to pursue legal action we won’t have any problem with that.”

Kopper said that the $1,000 reward would be sent on Monday. He declined to name the recipient, citing the source’s wish to remain anonymous. He did note that the source was a retired military veteran.

The desire to remain anonymous is understandable given the vitriol that the goats have unleashed upon Kevin Kopper’s Facebook page. The postings there by the goats include the typical goat pictures along with profane insults and graphic sexual innuendo.

Jason Doolin, owner of the goated Citizens’ Post Facebook page, hailed the news of Busta’s retirement: “I’m happy about it. He deserves the agony of every person he terrorized and stole from” Doolin said that he hoped that Lyman would find something less harmful to replace “whatever was leaving that hole in his heart which he used hatred to fill.”

Doolin added, “There was a time when I would have gladly disseminated his personal information, whether or not anything negative came out of it. I would have been neutral or happy even. I’m ashamed of myself for that. In an effort to be more like [my friends who were calling for people not to be hateful] I want to share that same message: Love. Period.” Doolin says he has no plans to take legal action.

Kopper says that the team that identified Busta will remain in place. “We will absolutely be continuing our work, focusing on stopping goatings wherever and whenever possible. We have more tools and tactics at our disposal and we intend to use them.”

Read the full story on Atlanta Conservative Examiner

New poll shows conservatives outnumber liberals in 47 states

A new Gallup poll released on January 31 shows that conservatives outnumber liberals in 47 states. Although liberal identification has reached a new high in the wake of Barack Obama’s reelection, conservatives still make up the largest ideological group in most states. Nevertheless, the average gap between conservatives and liberals shrank from 15.9 to 14.6 percent since 2012.

The three states in which liberals outnumbered conservatives were Hawaii, Massachusetts and Vermont. Other states that rounded out the liberal top ten were Delaware, New York, Oregon, Maine, California, and New Jersey. The District of Columbia is the most liberal “state” with 38 percent of its population identifying as liberal.

Wyoming is the most conservative state with 51 percent of its population considering themselves conservative. Mississippi, Idaho, Utah, Montana, Arkansas, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Alabama make up the rest of the conservative top ten, all with greater than 44 percent conservatives. Last year’s most conservative state, Alabama, fell to number 10.

The swing states from recent elections all boast a double-digit conservative advantage leading one to question why Florida, Virginia, Iowa, Colorado, and Ohio all voted for Barack Obama. According to Gallup, the answer lies with moderate voters.

Even though conservatives are the largest ideological group in most states as well as nationally, the fact that they make up less than 50 percent of the electorate means that Republicans need to reach out to moderate voters, something that they have had problems with in recent years. An Examiner analysis of exit polls from 2008 and 2012 found that moderates made up 44 and 41 percent of the electorate in the two elections. In both years, Barack Obama won moderates handily. In 2008, Obama won 60 percent of the moderate vote. In 2012, he won 56 percent. North Carolina was the only swing state in which Mitt Romney was able to eke out a victory even as he lost moderates.

Gallup notes that the percentage of liberals has been slowly increasing since the 1990s and suggests that the resurgence in liberal identification may be a result of Americans becoming comfortable with the term once again. After being popular in the civil rights era and 1970s, the term “liberal” fell into disfavor in the 1980s and early 1990s. Many liberals eschewed the label and chose to identify themselves as “progressives” or “moderates.”

Originally published on National Elections Examiner

The Christian Right

In this election season, as well as the past several years in general, much is being made of the Christian Right and their effect on politics and government. The “religious right” has been decried as a monolithic bloc that votes on the orders of religious leaders and as a “branch office” of the Republican Party.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Instead flocking to the Republican Party to grasp for political power, Christians are being pushed out of the Democratic Party. As I grew up in the 1970s, the Democratic Party had a solid lock on southern politics. My family, as well as most other southerners, considered themselves strong Democrats. In my home state of Georgia, most elections were decided by the Democratic primary. The general election against a Republican challenger was merely a formality (assuming that there even was a Republican challenger).

What happened? Ronald Reagan forced us to take a hard look at the Democratic Party that we thought we knew. We found that many of the planks of the Democratic platform did not match our personal beliefs.
.
The Christian Coalition, founded by Pat Robertson, was as much a result of this awakening as an instigator of it. The Christian Coalition’s primary mission was to put out information on how candidates had voted on issues in the past. Incumbents, especially liberal ones, cried foul when their track records were made public. Constituents often found that what their representatives said and how they voted were often dramatically different.

The truth is that today there is no bloc of Christian voters who look to evangelical leaders, such as Dr. James Dobson, to tell us who to vote for. Church leaders are prevented by IRS regulations from endorsing candidates (although they can preach on specific issues). If they violate these rules, the church can lose its tax-exempt status.

Christian voters are individuals who look at each individual candidate and make up our own minds. We look at issues that are important to us. For that reason, we are referred to as “values voters,” although in reality all voters are “values voters.” Each voter has different values and priorities that they look for candidates to address.

In the past few decades, we have found that the Republican Party espouses values most similar to our own. The Democratic Party is often hostile to many beliefs that we hold dear.

One of the most important values that Christian voters consider is national security. This is a basic duty of the federal government, and, especially in wartime, is a high priority. We want the government to protect our families from terrorists. We want the government to efficiently prosecute the war in order to make our country safe and to make it less likely that our small children will one day have to fight and die against Islamic extremists. Democrats have shown repeatedly that they are unwilling to admit that we are at war with Islamic Extremists, much less to prosecute the war to a successful conclusion.

Similarly, we oppose the income redistribution policies of the Democrats. We give generously to charities and our local churches, but do not like “forced giving” to the government. Government social programs are notoriously inefficient and prone to fraud. The also rob people of the will to work and create unforeseen consequences, such as the rise in single parent families. The Bible tells us “if anyone will not work, neither shall he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10). If someone does not have the ability to work, then they deserve our charity, but if they do have the ability to work, then they should be productive members of society.

Currently, entitlement spending, including Medicaid and social security, make up over 60% of the federal budget. In contrast, defense spending, even while we are at war, makes up only 19%. As baby boomers leave the work force, fewer workers are supporting more and more Americans through entitlements. This is not sustainable in the future and unless we change, the federal budget will drown within a sea of entitlements within our lifetimes.

Gay rights is another area of disagreement between Christians and the Democrats. Most Christians are not like Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church, which teaches that God hates homosexuals. We believe that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). God loves us all and desires that we follow Him and accept His forgiveness (John 3:16). Neither do we seek to ban homosexuality or persecute homosexuals.

On the other hand, we do not support the movement to legalize homosexual marriage. Traditional marriages provide vital stability for childrearing and are the foundation of our society. Numerous studies have shown that gay unions lack this stability and that children need both male and female role models.

With respect to affirmative action, Christians believe that there is “neither slave nor free” (Galatians 3:28, Colossians 3:11), implying that all men are equal in the eyes of God. We believe that, as Martin Luther King said, that a man “not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Abortion is considered to be the cornerstone issue of the religious right. Democrats vehemently defend the right to abortion as “a woman’s right to choose” and oppose any restrictions on it. Democrats opposed laws that require parental notification when teens get abortions, that would ban the barbaric partial birth abortion procedure, and some, such as Barack Obama, have voted in support of policies that would allow living babies to be born and left to die without medical treatment. Bill Clinton even sought to silence pro-life protesters by invoking the RICO law used to prosecute mobsters.

On the other hand, scientific advances make it harder than ever to deny the humanity and life of unborn babies. First, ultrasounds allowed parents to see a shadowy view of their baby’s movement, then, more recently, three dimensional ultrasound technology was introduced that even allows portraits of unborn babies. We can now see babies reacting to stimuli, and even smiling, while still within the womb. These images give lie to the claim that a fetus is nothing more than a mass of tissue. If an unborn baby is alive, then abortion is murder.

Through movement away from Christian values on these and other issues, the Democratic Party has alienated Christian voters. I would really like to have a viable choice between two candidates who share my views, but as long as the one party continues to nominate candidates that oppose my beliefs, then I’ll have to continue to vote my conscience. I don’t consider myself to be a Republican, but a Christian and a conservative. I, like many other Christians in the United States, look at the both the candidate and the issues and make up my own mind.

Eagles-Long Road Out of Eden Reviewed

I am a big Eagles fan and have been ever since I discovered the band when I was in high school back in the '80s. At one point or another, I think that I have owned all the classic Eagle albums on either cassette or CD. I even had some in both formats.

I was in college when the long awaited Eagles reunion tour happened in the '90s. I managed to get out to see the band live on two occasions. Both shows were great crowd pleasers.

I was pretty excited when word of the new release, "Long Road Out of Eden," was announced. With the release so close to my birthday, I even had a good excuse to drop a hint for my wife to pick it up.

Having said all that, it really pains me to say that the one word that comes to mind when I listen to "Long Road Out of Eden" is "depressing."

The Eagles' most popular songs were an upbeat fusion of rock and country such as "Take It Easy," "Already Gone," and "Lyin' Eyes." They also mastered ballads and slower songs. "Take It To the Limit," although slow in tempo, was a powerhouse. "Desperado" and "Hotel California" were probably the best known Eagles songs.

I'm sorry to say that there is very little of the old Eagles on the new album. The album moves about as fast as a funeral and is just as cheerful. Close to half of the tracks beat you over the head with a leftist, anti-Bush, anti-war message.

I've always been of the opinion that music and politics don't mix well. Movies and comedy lend themselves to political messages much more than music. "Schindler's List," for example, vividly portrayed anti-Nazi themes by showing a tiny fraction of the brutality of the Nazis to a widespread audience. Various politicians are easy fodder for comedians. With music, however, I don't want to be talked down to. I want to sit back and listen, lose myself in the beat, maybe dance a little.

In the United States today, we are constantly bombarded with political messages, particularly leftist ones. We hear them on the news. We see them in the movies and on television. You can't hear a comedian on Comedy Central or HBO without being forced to listen to repeated Bush jokes. The left is finding out that there is oversaturation of the message with the poor results of Robert Redford's new movie, "Lions for Lambs." I think that "Long Road Out of Eden" may suffer a similar fate, once word gets out.

After the break up of the Eagles, Don Henley and Glenn Frey, the two most prominent Eagles had successful solo careers. Henley's work delved into politics and got slower and slower, while Frey's remained more upbeat. Henley did score a few hits, notably "Dirty Laundry" and "Boys of Summer." Frey tackled politics in a more upbeat manner with his hit "Smuggler's Blues." If you like Henley's solo work, you will like the new Eagles, otherwise you will be disappointed.

The album is not a total write-off, however. "How Long" is easily the best track. It is a fast paced, country style song. Instead of politics, it deals with a man thinking about his lover as he runs from prison. This is like the best of classic Eagles and a sure hit. Actually, this isn't really new Eagles, reportedly they used to do this song live in the old days.

Another decent song is "Somebody." This is slightly slower than "How Long," but still fast paced. It deals with the guilt that one feels when they've done something wrong and feel that someone knows. This may have been intended as political, but it isn't overtly so.

The remainder of the songs are slow and forgettable. While they are okay, they really aren't what I would expect from the band that gave us "New Kid in Town" and "Heartache Tonight." Even the effort by Joe Walsh, "Last Good Time in Town," feels more like a hangover.

There are an assortment of love gone bad songs. The best of these is Don Henley's best song on the album, "Too Busy Being Fabulous." It has a good beat and deals a wandering lover, something most people can identify with on some level.

Too much of the remainder is diatribes against Bush ("and when El Jefe talks about our freedom, here is what he really means, business as usual, how dirty we play"), patriotic Americans ("Good old boys down at the bar, peanuts and politics, they think they know it all, they don't know much about nothing"), and the American lifestyle ("music blasting from an SUV, on a bright and sunny day... having lunch at the petroleum club, smoking fine cigars and swapping lies"). If a poltical song is to be successful, it had better have plenty of saving graces, like "Dirty Laundry," which employed humor, a catchy tune, and a good beat. Unfortunately, these songs lack both sublety and entertainment value.

I would recommend that Eagles fans, unless you happen to be die hard leftists, spend their money on the "Very Best of the Eagles," which is also on sale at Walmart. This is another two CD set of classic hits that includes the popular Eagles hits as well as some lesser known, but great, songs such as "Midnight Flyer," "In The City," and "Please Come Home for Christmas." Hopefully, if they make another album, the Eagles, as well other entertainers, will get back to the basics, in other words, songs that people like.