• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Left Wing Hysterics over "violence"

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
75,694
Reaction score
39,971
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
as usual, VDH puts it succinctly and well:


This week’s talking point is the sudden danger of new right-wing violence, and the inflammatory push-back against health care. I’m sorry, but all this concern is a day late and a dollar short. The subtext is really one of class — right-wing radio talk-show hosts, Glenn Beck idiots, and crass tea-party yokels are foaming at the mouth and dangerous to progressives. In contrast, write a book in which you muse about killing George Bush, and its Knopf imprint proves it is merely sophisticated literary speculation; do a docudrama about killing George Bush, and it will win a Toronto film prize for its artistic value rather than shock from the liberal community about over-the-top discourse.

Socialism and totalitarianism are tough charges from the hard right, but they seem to me about as (or as not) over-the-top as Al Gore screaming “digital brown-shirts” or John Glenn comparing the opposition to Nazis. When 3,000 were murdered in Manhattan, and Michael Moore suggested Bin Laden had wrongly targeted a blue state, I don’t think that repulsive remark prevented liberal politicians from attending his anti-Bush film premiere...

Like it or not, between 2001 and 2008, the “progressive” community redefined what is acceptable and not acceptable in political and public discourse about their elected officials. Slurs like “Nazi” and “fascist” and “I hate” were no longer the old street-theater derangement of the 1960s, but were elevated to high-society novels, films, political journalism, and vein-bulging outbursts of our elites...

So here we are with the age-old problem that once one destroys decorum for the sake of short-term expediency, it is very hard to restore it in any credible fashion on grounds of principle when the proverbial shoe is on the other foot. A modest suggestion: If the liberal community wishes to be more credible in its concern about contemporary extremist anti-administration rhetoric, then they might try the following: “Please, let us avoid extremism and do not fall into the same trap as Baker, Chait, Keillor, Gore, Moore, or Range when they either expressed open hatred toward their president, or speculated about the assassination of their president, or compared their president to a fascist...




or Kerry; who once joked about murdering President Bush. you people need to breathe into a brown paper bag and get over yourselves.
 
I expect VDH would have handwaved Kristallnacht as no more than a little high-spirits from the right.
 
see that's exactly the kind of meaningless foolishness I'm talking about.
 
as usual, VDH puts it succinctly and well:


This week’s talking point is the sudden danger of new right-wing violence, and the inflammatory push-back against health care. I’m sorry, but all this concern is a day late and a dollar short. The subtext is really one of class — right-wing radio talk-show hosts, Glenn Beck idiots, and crass tea-party yokels are foaming at the mouth and dangerous to progressives. In contrast, write a book in which you muse about killing George Bush, and its Knopf imprint proves it is merely sophisticated literary speculation; do a docudrama about killing George Bush, and it will win a Toronto film prize for its artistic value rather than shock from the liberal community about over-the-top discourse.

Socialism and totalitarianism are tough charges from the hard right, but they seem to me about as (or as not) over-the-top as Al Gore screaming “digital brown-shirts” or John Glenn comparing the opposition to Nazis. When 3,000 were murdered in Manhattan, and Michael Moore suggested Bin Laden had wrongly targeted a blue state, I don’t think that repulsive remark prevented liberal politicians from attending his anti-Bush film premiere...

Like it or not, between 2001 and 2008, the “progressive” community redefined what is acceptable and not acceptable in political and public discourse about their elected officials. Slurs like “Nazi” and “fascist” and “I hate” were no longer the old street-theater derangement of the 1960s, but were elevated to high-society novels, films, political journalism, and vein-bulging outbursts of our elites...

So here we are with the age-old problem that once one destroys decorum for the sake of short-term expediency, it is very hard to restore it in any credible fashion on grounds of principle when the proverbial shoe is on the other foot. A modest suggestion: If the liberal community wishes to be more credible in its concern about contemporary extremist anti-administration rhetoric, then they might try the following: “Please, let us avoid extremism and do not fall into the same trap as Baker, Chait, Keillor, Gore, Moore, or Range when they either expressed open hatred toward their president, or speculated about the assassination of their president, or compared their president to a fascist...




or Kerry; who once joked about murdering President Bush. you people need to breathe into a brown paper bag and get over yourselves.

Interesting.

It's always nice to see an apologists for violent idiots do their spin.

WTG, you've almost convinced yourself.

Have a nice day.

:shock:
 
Interesting.

It's always nice to see an apologists for violent idiots do their spin.

WTG, you've almost convinced yourself.

Have a nice day.

:shock:

We could never catch up to the violence perpetrated by liberals over the past several years.
 
I like how people are saying well your side does more than mine and that some how makes it OK. These violent acts towards politicians are always wrong and people should spend less time saying my side is better and condemn it all.
 
The "violence" doesnt exist all, all it is is some spineless punks threatening liberal members of congress. These people have as much of a spine (which is none) as some the posters in this forum. Watching you people go back and forth on this non-issue is quite amusing.
 
We could never catch up to the violence perpetrated by liberals over the past several years.

well, we could; we own more guns. we just won't because deep down too many of us are A) religious B) actually respectful of property and speech rights C) working at jobs or D) all three.
 
see that's exactly the kind of meaningless foolishness I'm talking about.


Since so far you have simply concurred with the specious hit piece, I agree wholeheartedly that VDH spouts meaningless foolishness.
 
The violence is a left wing lie....There were hundreds of cameras at the rallies and not one picture of any violence against any congressman black or white..There is a newsman who has offered a reward for anyone with pictures or information on this issue...None have come forward........

This whole issue is a distraction perpetrated by democrats to take away from the terrible Obama care health program............
 
The violence is a left wing lie....There were hundreds of cameras at the rallies and not one picture of any violence against any congressman black or white..There is a newsman who has offered a reward for anyone with pictures or information on this issue...None have come forward........

This whole issue is a distraction perpetrated by democrats to take away from the terrible Obama care health program............

yup. anyone want to bet how many seconds on google it would take for me to find instances of real violence and destruction at anti-war rallies?
 
Back
Top Bottom