Right-wing extremism is a growing problem? Nah, that’s just a lot of made-up LIEberal bull to make teabaggers look bad.
RELATED: Good grief, now they’re filing lawsuits threatening violence.
Nothing to see here
Published Tuesday, April 6, 2010 brain damage , whackjobs , wingnuttery 30 CommentsTags: IEDs, right wing extremism
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](https://i0.wp.com/www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/tny_ag_en_usoz_2.gif)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](https://i0.wp.com/www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
unrepentant old hippie 
The solution is quite simple. If Mr. Lo doesn’t like abortion, he shouldn’t have one. Perhaps his mother should have, though.
smelter rat,
Most who oppose elective abortion see it as infanticide.
In an analogous fashion, many who oppose capital punishment see it as homicide.
The ill-advised slogan, “Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one” is as reasonable as arguing for capital punishment with an opponent of it by saying, “Don’t like execution? Don’t execute anyone.”
Both slogans lack anything like a forceful argument. Arguments for the continued availability of elective abortion designed to try to sway the opinion of opponents simply must be more compelling if they are to have any effect.
Note: “They” is plural; the story only references one person…
Brian: PICKY PICKY PICKY. It’s just a figure of speech.
smelter rat
😆 😆 😆
Well, of course! If mothers of rotten individuals would start killing them before they take up so much room, we would save a bloody fortune on prisons, courts, homeowners’ insurance, police departments — and even probably a fair amount of the worldwide military budget.
We wouldn’t have those bothersome bullies in school anymore, and rape or incest wouldn’t even take place. No more terrorists, no more bureaucrats (I realize that redundancy was a redundancy).
And no more rap nor hi-hop! Yyyeesss!!!
Just wanted to make sure I wasn’t figured within that speech…
Brian, was that tirade supposed to be sarcasm?
Don’t quit your day job.
We all have to start out slowly…
Man! I wish I had a day job! I’ve been outta work since September. I made a nice amount last weekend as lead guitarist two nights in a row, but unfortunately that sort of thing doesn’t come along very often.
Scenty and crew says it’s all a left-wing hoax and demand evidence. When you provide them with evidence, they say the evidence is also a hoax. Brilliant, eh?
Of course, he’s also toeing the incoherent Republican “It didn’t happen but they deserved it because they were inciting it” line. I guess when you’re proud of being called “the Glenn Beck of the north”, regurgitation of Beck’s B.S. comes part and parcel.
So, I guess this is also a hoax…. because only the left is angry. Right? :eyeroll:
It is pathetic to take the actions of one person, and attempt to tar an entire group because of them.
Given how many conservatives there are in the US, and how angry we are, if this one out-of-control individual were emblematic, there shouldn’t be any more living Democrats.
Really, wake up and smell the coffee. Every group has fringe extremists. It is naïve if you’re sincere, and vile if you are promoting propaganda to even try to characterize the right through the actions of Charles Alan Wilson.
Funny, right-wing bloggers had no qualms about tarring all liberals for the Amy Bishop killings.
They were wrong for doing that. But listen, if you didn’t like that (as I infer from your bringing it up by name), then you should be against someone else doing that same thing, right?
BTW, I point out to fellow conservatives that they are being over the top, too. for instance, I have received an email advocating voting all incumbents out of office. I think that is excessive, and a poor idea — I told him so. If he sent me an email, “Look at what the liberals are up to!” that was anecdotal like this, my immediate response would be to go check it out, and if it were either a lone extremist, or a small cadre on the fringe, I would write back and explain to him why the incident was not sufficient to make any judgments. I ain’t no right wing blogger, but I’ll just bet you are over-stating the case to say “the right wing bloggers” as if it were a universal.
That page you linked to is, in my opinion, over the top. This appellation, “…chubby Venezuelan Socialist Strongman Hugo Chavez” is an example that makes me care nothing for what “Gregory of Yardale” has to say. Would he suddenly like Chavez if he were thin? Of course not. So why bring it up?
It should be pretty clear that Amy Bishop was nuts, so to infer anything about liberals from her behavior is without legitimacy. I know, some blow-hards think it’s funny to label liberalism as a mental disorder, but that, too, is over the top.
“It is pathetic to take the actions of one person, and attempt to tar an entire group because of them.”
Who you calling pathetic? Or naive? Or asking to ‘smell the coffee’? That’s called projection, Jasper… err.. Brian.
It’s just one of many, Jasper.. err.. Brian.
I know a pattern when I see one.
Now answer the question. Was that one a hoax?
Yes, Wilson may be the first one arrested but certainly not the first to threaten or act.
Brian –
Then this would be a good time for you to learn something about the markets and start daytrading 😉
Nobody is tarring an entire group — it’s just that these threats of violence are happening more & more lately. When it’s come to the point where police officers are being trained to recognize IEDs, there’s some seriously Bad Craziness happening.
FF – Brian isn’t Jasper, at least according to my site meter.
Besides, Brian seems fairly articulate — unlike Jasper with his “sodomite baby killer” rhetoric 🙄
Sure have thought about it — I mean, it’s not like I have a lot to lose…
I even now receive a bunch of emails every day from PennyStockChaser.com.
I do know that. Road rage is on the rise, people are un-civil in the grocery store (at least more than I recall being the case in the past) — and it seems to be everywhere among people of all manner of stripe. It makes me sad, and dims my hope for the future. Fist-clenching, tooth-grinding, neck-vein-popping rage is disruptive to reaching consensus and working together.
Here in Washington state a neurologist followed a car that had apparently angered him. When the car being followed stopped, it turned out to be being driven by an older man (I seem to recall 70 years old). The neurologist, according to witnesses, dragged that man out of his car, and beat him both with his hands, and with a thermos that man had in his car.
Sometimes I feel like I am in Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Out of nowhere sane people erupt in behavior never seen in them before, and which is incomprehensible. Even when that doesn’t happen, people all over seem to think that any level of incivility is acceptable if the target of their ire disagrees with them.
Brian
You think that might have something to do with the kind of rhetoric that’s being used by people like Limbaugh and Beck, the teabaggers and the GOP in general? Describing the passage of a health care bill as “Armageddon”? Describing liberals as “The Enemy”? Describing the president as a “communist, nazi, fascist” etc? (Although in fairness, lots of people on the left called Bush a nazi.)
I’m all for free speech, but IMO right-wing rhetoric has gotten way over the top and people have been whipped into a brainless frenzy. Someone will probably have to get killed before it stops… and maybe not even then.
JJ!!! You didn’t say that he was suing for $999 trillion dollars? 😆
Not Limbaugh and Beck, but probably Michael Savage and Mark Levine, and Al Franken, Janeane Garofalo, Randi Rhodes and Michael Moore.
But really, in the bigger picture, you and I, and most here know what many in that list say regularly, but the population at large, not so much.
I think lotteries play a role, because I think people get the impression that manifests in “Everybody else is getting theirs; where’s mine?!?” In movies, in large measure a problem develops, and is solved in 45 minutes through the use of explosives and fire arms, conveying the message, “Vengeance is sweet!” Movies and advertising enjoy much greater reach than Limbaugh and Garafalo; a lot of people just aren’t paying attention, as I’m sure you know.
Maybe even it’s none of these things. Maybe it’s something in the water, I don’t know. I do know though that it seems to be getting worse, and that grieves me.
Yeah, Brian.
Janeane Garofalo has the MASSIVE media outreach that Rash Limbaugh has. Not.
Janeane Garofalo utters the same hateful drivel, non-stop that Rash Limbaugh does. Not.
Janeane Garofalo makes millions of dollars fanning the flames of hatred, fear and prejudice in her thousands of daily viewers, just like Rash Limbaugh. Not.
Janeane Garofalo, like Rash Limbaugh, visits south Asian countries for their sex tourism. Not.
What was the point you wanted to make by comparing Garofolo to Limbaugh?
I know that, JJ. Just having a little bit of fun.
The point was the level of hostility with respect to the rise in antipathy people are showing toward those with whom they disagree. Janeane is vastly more hostile and angry than is Rush.
Janeane’s utterances are far more hate-illed than what Rush says, and I find that hateful.
Rush does not “fan the flames” of hatred of anyone toward anyone. He does not solicit nor inspire fear. He does incite prejudice against the sorts of things people might say. For instance, if someone shows up at your door saying, “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help,” you should be immediately skeptical until you have reason to feel otherwise. That is a prejudgment, and all people should operate this way, with their radar out.
But as for Janeane, recently, on Olberman (who gives her a reach something like Rush’s), she said:
She doesn’t explain exactly why tea parties don’t know their history, or even why that is germane to her point.
But she implies that anyone who is involved with the Tea Party movement is in exactly the same position as being involved in the KKK movement. She further “explains” that Republicans and conservatives are that way because they have a genetic malformation of their brain, causing physical impingement on the frontal lobe, and interfering with the thought process — it was clear that she was not joking, but was trying to be serious. This sounds to me like the beginnings of the kind of thing that was seen in Germany in the mid ’30s, as they sought to show why Jews and Gypsies were physically inferior to Aryans. And you think Rush is a problem?!?
I am not a racists. I opposed nationalized health care when a white woman was the main promoter, and I opposed it when a black man opposed it, and I would oppose it no matter who was promoting it. But propagandists, following Saul Alinski’s suggestions are picking the Tea Party movement as a target, freezing it, personalizing it, and polarizing it. This is not a rational debate, it is a propaganda campaign, and Janeane is following the propagandists formula.
But as for Rush, he does not “fan the flames” of racism (the most common use of “prejudice), misogyny, or anything else of that sort of prejudice. I don’t really know what Janeane has to say in this area — I mean whether she makes racist statements. As shown above, she does make prejudicial statements, fanning the flames of hatred against those with whom she disagrees.
If Rush did visit a south Asian country for sex tourism, it would have nothing to do with this topic. It would be debauched, but it would not be very likely to enhance the hostility level in society at large. That was the point, after all. As far as I can tell, the only evidence that Rush was engaged in sex tourism is that he had Viagra in his possession when he came back fro the Dominican Republic. No one there has alleged that he was engaged in sex tourism. I suppose it is possible that he was, but to assert that he did based on this evidence is craven, and contemptible.
Janeane is very, very angry. Not knowing you, I would need to guess, but I would guess (given the things you said in the post above about Rush alone) that you are angry, and are angry about the same things Janeane is angry about, so it doesn’t get your attention that she’s hostile, but she is.
Um, I’m not a US citizen so my exposure to the toxic culture that Tea Party Patriots have created is limited.
It gets my attention that Rash Limbaugh is a bombastic, self-agrandizing and prevaricating media figure with his own show.
That you don’t see that makes you willfully blind to those traits, and the content of his programming.
It has been amply documented that TPPs are woefully ignorant about the US constitution, taxes and the electoral process of your country as well as displays of their racist hatred for your president.
If that were the case in Canada, I would also be angry.
The population at large has a better favorable opinion of Tea Party participants than of the US Congress (something like 53% to 34%). $0% or more of the people participating in tea party rallies are independents of democrats.
The tea party movement is not creating a toxic culture, the MSM losing the sway they have had is reporting that that is the case, in a bid to regain some of their ground.
If that is your opinion of Rush Limbaugh, then you are uninformed. As a shtick he feigns self-aggrandizement. But unlike many others, he does not ”believe his own press.” Just as someone happening upon Charlie Chaplain in costume would have thought he was a tramp if they didn’t know it was part of an act, it is the same with Rush.
Many don’t like his style of show, and there is, of course, nothing wrong with that. But to believe that he believes about himself the things he says about himself as part of the show is to misunderstand.
This is simply untrue. Some are, to be sure. This is a large group, and every movement has people at all kinds of edges: violently trying to promote the movement (whether progressivism, communism, conservatism, et al.).
There are members of Congress who have sworn to uphold the Constitution who don’t know what it says. There was one member of Congress who thought that FDR got on television and informed people of events in 1932.
It hasn’t been “amply documented,” there has been wide distribution of sensationalistic photos of some of the worst examples. Janeane Garafolo, as just one example, has trumpeted that the Tea Party movement is sheer racism. She is simply lying. That does not constitute “documentation.” The other media are more than happy to take her lies, and run with them.
Take for example the lie that Congressman Lewis had racial epithets hurled at him. This was in a crowd, during a very agitated moment in the moves to pass HCR. There were cameras and recorders everywhere, from cell phones to news crews. There is currently a $100,000 reward for anyone who can provide any corroboration. None is forthcoming.
Another incident was someone accused of spitting on a congressman. Later, this was reduced to that he had allowed some of his spit to get on the congressman, the equivalent of “Stop spraying me as you talk!” Now, the congressman won’t even talk about it anymore.
But the “news” that Lewis had been subjected to racial slurs, and a congressman was spit on were the lead stories on many “news” casts. This is not “documentation” either.
I recognize that you oppose what the Tea Party movement stands for, but that hardly makes it something that creates a toxic environment.
So I guess I am agreeing with you that your exposure to the movement is indeed as you say, limited.
I realize that you’re thoroughly unwilling to hear anything positive about Rush Limbaugh, whatsoever. But it would appear to me that that casts you, much more than me, in the light that is described as “willfully blind.” Just an observation, given your animus toward him.
It’s not what he says about himself that is troubling.
Well, that was addressing the allegation that he is self-agrandizing.
It is certainly true that no matter what he says about himself, and what that says about his personality, the vast majority of what he says is on other topics, and that is almost certainly the component of his talking that most disturbs those who dislike him.
Sorry Brian, I didn’t realize that Rash was a close personal friend of yours.
You’re a TPP, aren’t you? It’s flattering for JJ that you’re popped in so regularly to spread disinformation but did you notice that this is a Canadian blog?
I’ve never been to a Tea Party rally, don’t receive emails from them, have not looked to see whether they have a web site (though I assume there are quite a few Teat Party movement web sites and blogs). I have no contact with anyone who I know to be involved in the movement. I think my former boss, who I stay in email contact with might be, but I haven’t asked, and he hasn’t said. Considering all that, I guess I’d have to say no, I’m not a TPP.
Rush isn’t a close personal friend of mine. But I believe in being even handed, and the diatribes & smears against Rush don’t seem to be even handed or honest to me.
Now Canada… That’s North of the Great Lakes, right? Doesn’t Santa live in Canada? (I can’t exactly recall…) What goes on in the US affects Canada somewhat, and what goes on in Canada affects the US somewhat, right?
Anyway deBeauxOs, no worries, eh? No apology necessary on this — I’m good. Thanks for the consideration, though.