No, actually I’m not. I pick Bakker as an example, not to stereotype, but to show how stereotyping is a Bad Thing. I thought I’d made that clear in my post, but evidently I didn’t. Let me restate: I realize that not all conservatives are carbon copies of Jim Bakker. Very very few, in fact.
Better?
Huh? I think maybe you didn’t understand my question. Let me rephrase: Ronald Reagan likes jelly beans. I like jelly beans. Am I Ronald Reagan?
As you can probably tell from my screen name, I’m somewhat versed in the world of art, although I’m not an expert by any means. However, in this case I think the reference was to lend credence to her devotion and accomplishment in regard to her being a painter. The south of France is well known in art circles as being full of beautiful and interesting things to paint, and many famous painters have produced beautiful paintings there. I think in this case it was actually intended as a compliment to her, and indirectly to France as well.
Thank you. 
Don’t you think we’re starting to split hairs here…just a little bit? I’m sure you know what I mean.
It appears you are offended because your beliefs are similar to those of Mrs. Baucus and you feel you’re being painted with the same brush. I have no problem with people who feel the way she does regarding politics, war, etc. It’s quite understandable. I’m sure everyone not a despot or wannabe despot or their followers would love to live in a peaceful world. But it’s when a person smugly and often superiorly (is it a word?) holds themselves up as being above this type of thinking and then goes out and engages in it themselves that they reveal themselves to be hypocrites, and it only serves to illustrate that they are no better than those they are contemptuous of.
Not that I don’t trust you or anything, Starving, but I’d really like a link to the original article if you’ve got one…
Agreed, but you seem to state that anyone who shares her views on the war is a hypocrite as well. I’ll quote you an the relevant bits if you’d like, but could you state, for the record, whether this is what you meant?
Oh, take it easy. Sooner or latter some guy who thinks the invasion and occupation of Iraq is a good idea will rob a bank or mix up a batch of meth. Then us leftist, commie, America hating pinkos can post a pull-it-out-of-your-ass diatribe inferring that the bank robber - meth cooker is just typical of Republicans. In the meantime we might as well let our friend add to global warming with his most recent burst of hot air. It’s hardly worth responding to this drivel – somebody might get the idea that there is merit to it.
I’m somewhat confused. I thought I’d answered this a couple of times already. To wit:
“I would say that depends. If the person is an elitist who regards him/herself as being morally and intellectually superior to the other side rather than seeing that we’re all the same and that we need to work as I said above from a foundation of fact, strategy and fairness, then I would say yes.”
“I’m sure everyone not a despot or wannabe despot or their followers would love to live in a peaceful world.”
These previous remarks mean that I don’t view everyone who is anti-war as being a hypocrite and that I’m sure most people, if given a choice as to whether they could live in a world where war neither existed nor was warranted, would eagerly and happily choose it. But if a person goes around espousing non-violence and peaceful co-existence and then beats the crap out of somebody for no justifyable reason, then yes, they are a hypocrite.
Really Not All That BrightNo problem. Here’s one:
I also heard several references to it on various news programs last night, but as tornado warnings and severe hail and thunderstorms were going on here where I live, I was bouncing from one channel to the other and couldn’t tell you what I heard from which one.
Sorry, make that “justifiable.”
Oh, please! Are you sure when you were gelded they didn’t take a hefty portion of your brains with it?
How is robbing a bank somehow hypocritical versus a pro-Iraqi was stance? Does this mean pro-Iraqi war supporters rail about the evils of bank robbing, then when one of them goes out and robs a bank, one of you commie, America-hating pinkos (your words, not mine) will come out to denounce this hypocracy?
This is about the silliest and lamest analogy I’ve ever seen!
Damn! This is what I get for getting only three hours of sleep. Make that “hypocrisy.”
And on that note, I’ve got to run. Feel free to talk amongst yourselves till I return. Thank you all.
Ah, so you did. But you answered it in a rather confusing way. Thanks for clearing it up.
So then on to my previous point – this woman behaved badly. What does that have to do with all other liberals?
Ok, I officially dub myself “paranoid”. 
I take back what I said. I guess I’ve been in too many situations lately where “Harvard professor” is used as a keyword for being an “Ivory Tower clueless liberal”. And too much Kerry as French. I’ll go back under my rock now.
This woman is standing on her husband’s Senatorial Soapbox in order to get her views out there. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. But if you’re trying to get yourself into the public eye, you need to recognize that it never looks away again.
I knew you were going to feel that way, so I tried to put it as delicately as I could. (I guess I’m what’s known as a “compassionate conservative.” I hope you can see we’re not *entirely * bad people. We can feel “paranoid,” about you guys, too, ya know!) 
I’m puzzled by this passage in the OP:
(Boldness added.)
Given the subject matter of the thread (i.e., the wife of Senator Max Baucus assaulting someone over a bag of mulch), I was wondering at what time Franken, Streisand, and/or Moore were ever accused of trying to bodily injure someone? 
My post was to indicate that those on the left, which have always something of a “peace and love and tolerance” reputation, are just as capable of the same types of emotional responses as those on the right who they critisize for having the same types of emotional responses, and not only that, but given the political bent of the country the last few years, and the fact that GWB is president, and the fact that we are at war in Iraq, and the fact that many of the countries they regard as being more “civilized” and “evolved” than we are are currently contemptuous of us, they are driven to even more indignance and outrage than normal, and their response is anger and condemnation – just like the rest of us troglodytes – rather than their usual avowed and morally elevated position would dictate.
In other words, they’re no better than those they condemn, and this woman’s behavior is a perfect example of it. It has nothing at all to do with with the people I mentioned having injured someone themselves, just that they are engaging in the same type of “primitive” responses they decry as being characteristic of those on the right.
(This response has been brought to you by Starving Artist, master of the run-on sentence.)
Sigh.
People have bad days and they can act like an ass. A classics professor I had, a wonderfully kind and brilliant woman who invites dozens of students into her own home and gives them free food, had a bad day at a rental car place that ended in much the same unpleasant way. Did a relative die? Was it medical? Or was she just in a really shitty mood? Who knows, the newspaper didn’t say, and I didn’t ask. But I don’t think what happened that day had any bearing on the validity of her political views, whatever they may be.
So a pacificst got into a slap fight over some mulch? So what? Yawn. Does this really have anything to do with anything?
If you have issues about what you perceive to be liberals looking down on you or your views, then write about that and deal with it. But to see something like this and whine “hypocrite!” and smugly declare “I was right all along” as if you won some argument that no one else was having but you, well, apparently you’re fond of the phrase “no better than those they condemn”, looks like it applies to you as well.
Forget about hypocrisy, does she truly believe Saddam held ‘the cradle of civilization’ sacred? Didn’t he drain the marshes that were inhabited for several millenia?
Link?
Link to the Link?
Of course it does. Look, politics is all about covering your ears and screaming the loudest, then bitching no one gets your message. This is all part of the intra-political bitchfight that’s going on that we’re all supposed to be deeply concerned about.