Dr. Frank's What's-it

Galloway is a throwback to the days when it was often only Stalinists and neo-Nazis who were so transparently undemocratic. What a sad pass it has come to to see today's "progressives" try to make a hero of this pompous putz and arrogant ass. This is the kind of thing that has driven out of the Democratic Partyinto the ranks of the decidedly independent.

From Democratic Underground about Galloway:

"One needn't endorse a person in his entirety to express appreciation for a particular action."

Could this also describe Frank's view about our President and the Iraq war?

I realize that poking fun at the extreme left is Frank's shtick but equally hilarious love fest stuff about the extreme right's equivalent(s) of Galloway (take your pick) can be found at freerepublic everyday.

A Clarification:

Perhaps in refering to "Frank's shtick" I was giving the impression that I feel all his blog consists of is making fun of the extremely easy to ridicule extreme left.

For the record I do not feel this way and enjoy Frank's blog very much.

To put it charitably, George Golloway singlehandedly handed the entire United States Senate its ass on a platter.

No matter what your agenda is, or what kind of beef you may have with George Galloway, it was definitely Republican Senator Norm Coleman who came out looking like the "putz" and the "ass" yesterday.

The Democrats should watch and learn.

Among other lessons, George Galloway proved that being too beholden to AIPAC is ultimately a liability for the Democrats because it prevents them from being honest and taking easy and credible punches against post-9/11 Republican policy.

There's no denying Galloway made the Senators look like monkeys, but then almost any MP who regularly participates in the cut-and-thrust of Parliamentary debate could do that. Have the Galloway-glorifiers never watched Prime Minister's Questions?

What's really sad, as a previous poster pointed out, is that the US left has grown so bereft of both purpose and principle that it's ready to conflate an anti-Semitic Stalinist like Galloway with someon like Martin Luther King. But hey, if smarmy drones like Al Franken are the best you can come up with as media voices, I can see where Galloway would look mighty good.

I think Larry has it right: well said.

Thankfully, we don't have such a Spode equivalent in the US, but Pat Buchanan comes closest. Martin Luther King indeed.

Please, Galloway is neither "anti-Semitic" nor a "Stalinist."

Britain has very strict libel laws, and Galloway's already (quite famously, in fact) won a libel suit.

You don't want to be next, do you?

Something tells me Larry shouldn't worry too much about being sued for libel for what he wrote in a blog comments section.

I also imagine that much worse (but probably equally as true)about Mr. Galloway can be found all over the internet.

However I have yet to see any national democrat politician embrace Mr. Galloway, perhaps I am wrong.

As for those on DU, anyone who is impressed by someone who answers the question of how many times they met with Saddam Hussein with "As many time as Donald Rumsfeld did" is probably a lost cause.

Britain's libel laws aren't enforceable here (the US, not just Dr. Frank's comment box) anyway.
I still wonder if the whole point of that bizarre sideshow was trying to get Galloway to say something challengeable for perjury. The Mariam appeal's finances, etc. It just boggles the mind that the Senate would call him over, let him grandstand, and fail completely to elucidate what his role in Oil for Food was supposed to be, let alone present damning evidence of his guilt.
Honey-pot or, as others have mentioned, the superiority of parliamentary debate?
I'm less inclined to go for the latter after having seen how passionate senators become when Major League Baseball players and their union reps are testifying about steroids...

Arya: He "won the suit", but of course that doesn't mean he's not what they said he is - Britain's libel laws are not those of the US. I recall that the court never found that the documents involved were false, nor did he claim so in court, no?

(He also got a mere, what, 150,000 pounds in "damages"? The rest of his claim was for legal fees.)

So, the whole "he won the case!" argument is a red herring as to his actual scumminess.

(Also, AIPAC? Get over it. Thanks.)

"I still wonder if the whole point of that bizarre sideshow was trying to get Galloway to say something challengeable for perjury."

Well, yeah. They're not trying to win a hand, but the game. Remember this -- in America "winning" a "debate" (or two or three) and a buck gets you a cup of coffee. Ask the former Democratic candidate for president. Americans are quite adept at seeing through the BS.

In my opinion Galloway's noxious politics are a side-show for the liberal pro-war peanut gallery. Maybe a more relevant discusion is the deepening bloody crisis in Iraq that is inching closer to a vicious civil war. This is what the pro-warriors asked for maybe the should explain how to get out of this situation.

Most of those on the DU are unaware of Galloway's contentious UK politics -- they merely see someone who, unlike Senate democrats, is not afraid of speaking his mind about the Iraq debacle. And frankly, I applaud him as well, though I have to agree with Larry that just about any MP could skewer a senator in a live debate.

George Galloway vs. Alan Keyes would probably be a good debate.

You bring the popcorn, I'll bring the fire extinguishers.

George Galloway is a as crooked as a dog's hind leg. That he denies with stone conviction crimes he accuses US Senators of (to their faces), and of which he is guilty as hell, is a double dose of opprobrium. If this is the model the American left aspires to we are sunk. A right wing monolith rises as opposition is busy chasing rabbits over a cliff!

Even in America, the burden, of course, is on the accusers of George Galloway - not on George Galloway - to prove the authenticity and relevance of the evidence that allegedly corroborates his supposed crime.

The fact is that this has not been done. Period.

Until his opponents do so, no fair-minded person should accept these allegations for anything more than what they are - suspicious allegations, wrought with documentation that has been proven to be fraudulent, intended to discredit and / or intimidate a minority voice in British parliament.

Plenty of Labour MPs opposed the war. Galloway was not kicked out for that - he was kicked out for wanting British troops to oppose orders.

There is no suggestion that the documents Coleman's Committee has are false, or that the statements made by senior members of the former regime are false. And there is no doubt that Galloway shipped the accounts of the Mariam fund off to Jordan - they have never been examined by the Charity Commission.

The campaign his Respect Party supporters waged in the East End of London had a lot of anti-Semitism and a lot of physical intimidation. He is a Stalinist, he saw the fall of Communism as his worst day, and he did NOT oppose Saddam during the 1990s.

If that is the sort of guy the Dems find cuddly, Lord help the Dems.

99% of the American liberal/left has never even heard of Galloway. Now Harry's Place and and Norm Geras are spreading the word via their blogs that the American left is having a "love affair" with Galloway-- courtesy of Dr. Frank's methodical research of taking a couple of quotes off a website. What Bullshit.

'''''There is no suggestion that the documents Coleman's Committee has are false,''''''

Incorrect. Not only have there been several "suggestions" that the information contained in these documents is false, but there have also been suggestions that the documents themselves could be forgeries, as other similar documents have been proven to be.

'''''or that the statements made by senior members of the former regime are false.'''''

Incorrect. On the contrary, statements by former regime officials have been alleged to be false and made under duress of imprisonment, as a result of bribery, and / or threat of death. Such statements have been rightfully alleged to not be credible.

'''''And there is no doubt that Galloway shipped the accounts of the Mariam fund off to Jordan'''''

Don't know anything about this. Though, even if true, sending funds to the country Jordan is not a crime of which I am aware.

''''''The campaign his Respect Party supporters waged in the East End of London had a lot of anti-Semitism and a lot of physical intimidation. '''''''

Uncorroborated smear.

'''''''He is a Stalinist,'''''''''

Uncorroborated smear.

''''''he did NOT oppose Saddam during the 1990s.'''''''

Incorrect. Galloway, as he himself put it in his Senate testimony, has a better record of "opposing" Saddam than do his opponents.

As a member of the British left I would like evidence that Galloway is an anti-semite. Some people on the left had illusions in Russia. They were wrong. Americans have illusions in America. Despite actually living in the country. Thats a hell of a lot worst in my book. When will American liberals get a backbone? The rest of the world declares an interest. The main thing about Galloways performance was it demonstrated just how easy it is to expose these jumped up little McCarthy's for what they are. A little bit of principle and a little bit of backbone. Anyone could have done it. Tells me all I need to know about the Democrats. As to 'progressives' and what they do and do not think, anyone who did not take pleasure in seeing Galloway screw over those blue bloods (yes, indeed, class hatred!!) is no progressive at all but someone who colludes with torture and denial of civil rights, not yesterday but today. Oh I forgot. They're only muslims...

sorry for the bad temper. If there is one thing I loath more then a neo-con its these fake liberals in the US who remind me more then anything else of the South African variety in the days of Aparthied. Part of the problem not the solution. Galloway showed how to appeal to ordinary people. An American friend of mine self described as 'trailer trash' got a phone call from a friend back home. 'who was that braveheart mother%%%%%%????!'. High praise indeed. People might not have politics but they understand the price of going up against the powerful. The whole of American politics is a charade to conceal these real divisions. What politics in the US needs is a dose of class. In every sense.

aggh- cut out my comment - should read 'some people on the left had illusions in Russia. They were wrong. Some Americans have illusions in America and they live there. Thats a lot worse in my book. When will US liberals develop a backbone. A little principle and a little backbone....etc, etc.