Just Because Both Sides Do It

Anyone remember this:

As I documented at length this weekend, Michelle Malkin, John Hinderaker, Red State, David Horowitz and many others of that sort spent the weekend engaged in the most vicious and self-evidently misguided attacks on The New York Times based on a puff piece in this weekend’s “Escapes” section. Because the article contained a photograph of Don Rumsfeld’s vacation home, they insisted that this was reckless and even retaliatory– i.e., done with the intent to enable Al Qaeda operatives and other assassins to murder Rumsfeld (as well as Dick Cheney), and that it was further evidence of the war being waged by the NYT and its employees on the Bush administration and the U.S.

For so many obvious reasons, based on easily obtainable information — including the fact that multiple right-wing news outlets such as NewsMax and Fox and others had previously disclosed this same information months earlier, that this information is commonly reported about government leaders in both parties, and the fact that we always know where our top government officials live and spend their weekends because they have Secret Service protection — these accusations were as false as they were hysterical.

***

Ironically, photos were taken with Secretary Rumsfeld’s permission.

That, of course, led to them doing the following:

This weekend, prominent neoconservative David Horowitz proclaimed that the United States is fighting a war and “the aggressors in this war are Democrats, liberals and leftists.” In particular, he cited the now infamous NYT Travel section article on Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld’s vacation homes as evidence that the employees of the NYT are among the enemies in this war, and he then linked to and recommended as a “proposal for action” this post from his associate, Front Page contributor Rocco DiPippo. The post which Horowitz recommended was entitled “Where Does Punch Sulzberger Live?” and this is what it said:

    I issue a call to the blogosphere to begin finding and publicly listing the addresses of all New York Times reporters and editors. Posting pictures of their residences, along with details of any security measures in place to protect the properties and their owners (such as location of security cameras and on-site security details) should also be published.

DiPippo published the home address of NYT Publisher Arthur Sulzberger, along with directions to his home, and linked to a post by right-wing blogger Dan Riehl which contained directions to Sulzberger’s home along with photographers of it. In a now-deleted post, DiPippo also published the home address of Linda Spillers, the NYT photographer who took the photograph of Don Rumsfeld’s vacation home (with Rumsfeld’s express permission), and he urged everyone to go (presumably to the home address he provided) and confront Spillers about her actions.

Good times. Just thought that was worth remembering that publishing an aerial shot of a house is a call to violence now that I have learned this week that it is completely inappropriate for people to be upset about violent rhetoric and crosshairs over politicians after one of the targeted politicians is almost assassinated by a deranged lunatic. Normal people might think this is reasonable, even if the assassin wasn’t directly motivated by said rhetoric. It’s just the sane way to look at things, or so I thought. I’ve also learned, interestingly enough, that opponents of gun violence have a moral obligation to just shut the fuck up about gun violence whenever there is… horrible gun violence. Additionally, I’ve discovered that when you say “We need to tone things down a bit and tamp down the violent rhetoric,” you are actually launching a full frontal assault on Republicans. Who knew?

I try to keep up on the rules of discourse, but it is so hard these days. On the upside, at least the shooter didn’t do something really horrible, something that might have sent the right-wing into a full-on frothing tizzy. Something like say “putting lipstick on a pig.” If that shit had happened, Republicans would be calling for apologies and more civil discourse. As it is, he only put a bullet in a Democrat, and it is totally unreasonable to look around at violent imagery and rhetoric and tell people to stop it. Because shooting liberals, as we know, is no big deal:

Provided the right paperwork, of course.






101 replies
  1. 1
  2. 2
    kdaug says:

    Cole, you’re not doing anything for my blood pressure here.

  3. 3
    JPL says:

    Please pictures of Rosie. She has not been seen around this site in a while and some of us fear that Tunch ate her.

  4. 4
    Kryptik says:

    Ugh. Thanks for the reminder about the Rumsfeld house thing. Such blatant double standard bullshit at work there, and shows just what passes for ‘violent rhetoric’ and ‘enabling’ according to the right.

    The “Liberal Hunting Permit” is, sadly, something I will never ever forget however. And yet this is somehow pawned off as a ‘joke’ and simply proof that ‘liberals have no sense of humor’. Quelle shock.

  5. 5
    emily says:

    Back when I was in high school — around 1978-1980 — I had fellow classmates whipping out their N***** hunting licenses and bragging about it in class. There was also a KKK office in my little hometown and I would drive by men with guns passing out “leaflets” on my way to school. Of course they were in full “uniform” and had rifles resting upright on their hips. My hometown was ok with Mexicans (they did the hard work), but blacks were a bridge too far. Couldn’t live with them.

    I remember spending some time that weekend you refer to on the internet arguing with someone named Bart and jwest on GG’s blog comments. I came across jwest again on OTB’s blog comments this weekend trying to argue that the REPUBLICAN judge was the shooter’s primary target, not the congresswoman.

    IOW — all those same people — even the commenters — are still out there. Much like us, I guess.

  6. 6
    Jack says:

    Speaking of pigs, for those protesting so much about being labeled as provoking violence, the best response is this:

    If you lay down with pigs, you shouldn’t be surprised if you end up covered in shit.

  7. 7
    Halteclere says:

    Maybe someone has already mentioned this (I have not been able to read ALL comments since the shooting), but don’t forget Ann Coulter’s “joke” about poisoning a sitting Supreme Court Justice.

    But Liberals say that Thomas is vindictive and unqualified, so both sides do it.

  8. 8
    merrinc says:

    Obviously you have forgotten that all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.

  9. 9
    iriedc says:

    I had happily forgotten about Rumsfeld house nonsense. Ugh.
    Sigh.

    Brilliant post.

    Edited to add: I may have unwittingly plagiarized Kryptic. Apologies!

  10. 10
    Svensker says:

    I thought you were filled up to here with wingnut bullshit?

    Surprised no one has talked about Peter King‘s “gun control for me but not for thee” bill. Apparently, strong and manly government folks need to be protected from mean folks with guns, but the rest of us get the freedom of the wild west. Yippee!

  11. 11
    The Dangerman says:

    I listen to O’Reilly (because my Dad listens to O’Reilly and, anything short of ear plugs, I can overhear him) and, goodness gracious, he was losing his shit tonight over this Sheriff calling out the rightwing rhetoric.

    I would have guessed they would lay low for short while; I was wrong.

  12. 12
    stuckinred says:

    @The Dangerman: This whole deal is not going to to one goddamn thing to change one single mind.

  13. 13
    Cassidy says:

    As I said in the earlier thread; they simply aren’t people to me anymore. They are no better than slightly intelligent animals who can manage to vocalize thoughts, yet have no ability to reason or process information past base animal instincts. The sooner this animal is extinct, the better the world is.

  14. 14
    The Dangerman says:

    @stuckinred:

    This whole deal is not going to to one goddamn thing to change one single mind.

    On the Right? Not a chance. I think that is called epistemic closure.

    I think that Independents are watching this reaction from the Right and some of them are changing their minds.

  15. 15
    hilts says:

    Rep. Trent Franks (Starburst Repub-Ariz.) : “If every person in the world was like Sarah Palin, there probably wouldn’t even be need for government because no one would be in danger of any kind, If every person were like Sarah Palin, this world would be a peaceful, beautiful world to live in. If Sarah Palin has one hallmark, it is her commitment to protect and defend all innocent human life”

  16. 16

    Is it OK if I just view this as a tragedy and don’t want to read any deeper meaning into it, and don’t think it serves as evidence as to why my side is better than theirs?

  17. 17
    stuckinred says:

    @The Dangerman: On any side, it’s the same old shit.

  18. 18
    Dave C says:

    @Cassidy:

    Uhhh…no. I see no difference between your comment and many of the more outrageous things uttered by wingnuts.

    EDIT: What I mean to say is that eliminationist rhetoric is pretty fucking ugly no matter what political bent the source is.

  19. 19
    ronin122 says:

    I see we have a new category for posts.

  20. 20
    Jack says:

    @hilts:

    Of course, then it depends upon who you think is “human”…

    Asimov included this definitional problem in one of his later Robot novels.

  21. 21

    Amen, brother Cole.

  22. 22
    Mark S. says:

    According to Instadouche, real men applaud surveyor symbols. Or something.

    Really? If some Web guy had done that map, Tim Pawlenty would have looked at it and said, pre-Tucson, “Oh noes, those look like crosshairs! Take them off!” Tim Pawlenty may say he would have done that, and for all I know may even think he would have done that.

    Has Reynolds suffered some brain injury he’s been keeping secret? He can’t believe a politician might reject a certain image because it sends an easily misconstrued message? Is that really a difficult concept for him?

  23. 23
    stuckinred says:

    @Cassidy: yea, just gooks,haji’s, spooks, . . .calling George Carlin.

  24. 24
    Face says:

    Why was “lipstick on a pig” such a big deal? I’ve forgotten.

  25. 25
    jwb says:

    @Dave C: I’m glad someone else was appalled by Cassidy’s comment. About made my hair stand on end when it was posted earlier today.

  26. 26
    stuckinred says:

    A friend from Tucson just sent this

    I saw innumerable Gold Finch fly and perch singing on bushes in the Rillito. A cheerful flock rose into a Palo Verde nearby. The blue blue sky above the tiny birds gold and black, the Palo Verde lime green. Gift. May the energy of that gift flow into Gabrielle Giffords and all the other wounded and send healing to all that are in need. Let it grow, let it flow, quiet and clean.

  27. 27
    Cassidy says:

    @stuckinred: I don’t mind all them. Race has nothing to do with it. But I’m tired of this pretending that their ideology has a place. It is horrific and toxic and does nothing but bring misery. The sooner it is gone, the better the world will be.

  28. 28
    stuckinred says:

    @jwb: So he posted it more than once? People need to stand the fuck up when that kind of shit is posted.

  29. 29
    burnspbesq says:

    @Svensker:

    King is grandstanding again, which he only does on days that end in “y.” With the current state of the law and the current composition of the Supreme Court, there’s not even a ghost of a chance that you can write legislation like that and have it be upheld.

    Even worse, both houses of the Zona lege unanimously passed legislation specifically designed to keep Fred Phelps & Co. away from the funerals. Brwer will of course sign it. Idjits. Let them show up. Keep a camera on them at all times. Let the entire world see for itself what scum Phelps is.

  30. 30
    JPL says:

    @Face: You have to put yourself into the mind of a whacko.. Sarah wore lipstick..a pig wore lipstick so a pig must be Sarah or something. lol
    Miss Piggy was insulted.

  31. 31
    stuckinred says:

    @Cassidy: It’s the same dehumanizing goddamn thing.

  32. 32
    burnspbesq says:

    @The Dangerman:

    I would have guessed they would lay low for short while; I was wrong.

    Advertisers expect to get their money’s worth.

  33. 33
    merrinc says:

    @stuckinred:

    There probably won’t be any substantive change. But it sure looks like there’s a good chance the wingers will get meaner and louder as they defend themselves against the evil liberals who want to take away their free speech.

  34. 34
    Jay in Oregon says:

    Let us not forget that having a bumpersticker or T-shirt critical of President Bush was worthy of being exiled to a “Free speech zone” where no one could see you, but carrying firearms to townhall meetings is a matter of exercising your freedom.

  35. 35
    iriedc says:

    @Face: then-Senator Obama used the phrase when talking about McCain’s economic policies, and the RW spin machine said that he was referring to Palin. Was after Palin’s pitbull with lipstick one-liner.

    I’m sorry I can remember it.

  36. 36
    Cassidy says:

    @stuckinred: Already said they aren’t people to me anymore. So, yeah, they have dehumanized themselves to me. And no, I don’t feel bad or guilty about it. With a small statistical exception, they have made it their life’s goal to make other people miserable. So, I don’t care if they get on a boat to Somalia, if Jeebus comes and takes them all to heaven, or they simply commit mass suicide in some sort of psycho-sexual religious fervor…the next day is the best day ever.

  37. 37
  38. 38
    merrinc says:

    @Face:

    Obama made it during the general election in regard to well, I can’t remember which issue exactly but as this was after McCain had selected Palin as a running mate, his team immediately interpreted it as a slur against Lady Starburst and started demanding apologies for his blatant misogyny.

  39. 39
    ajr22 says:

    @hilts: He has a point, if every person in the world was making 12 million dollars a year off the wingnut welfare circuit everything would be perfect! Also, too if every person was as nice as Palin there would be no need for a government, cause healthcare would flow from the niceness. Corporations would pave the streets out of the kindness of their hearts. Think about it we wouldn’t even need to protect ourselves from teh Muslims, cause they would be like SARAH!!!!

  40. 40
  41. 41
  42. 42
    jwb says:

    @Cassidy: And as I said before in dehumanizing the other, you dehumanize yourself. Neat how you also try to blame them for bringing it upon themselves too. You have a real future as wingnut: you’ve already internalized the logic.

  43. 43
    Cassidy says:

    @stuckinred: Exactly.

  44. 44
    Jay in Oregon says:

    @Cassidy:

    I think it has more to do with this particular dehumanizing rhetoric:

    they simply aren’t people to me anymore. They are no better than slightly intelligent animals who can manage to vocalize thoughts, yet have no ability to reason or process information past base animal instincts.

    And remember, as a pseudonymous commenter on a blog your voice carries as much weight as a Republican member of Congress, GOP party official, or right-wing talk show host.

  45. 45
    Cassidy says:

    @jwb: I disagree. The fact is, they are the enemy. This culture war, that they have started and want, will not cool off. And yes, they are at fault. I want to let people live as they want, gay, straight, religious, atheist, etc. They do not want and I reject their notions of what is right. Their viewpoint is unacceptable. Their viewpoint is toxic. So, if you have an infection, then you get rid of it. Period. You don’t let it fester and spread.

  46. 46
    stuckinred says:

    @Cassidy: So put a fucking airstrike on em, willie peter is nice, nape will do but you might want to mix in some clusters to pick off any stragglers.

  47. 47
    Barb (formerly Gex) says:

    @stuckinred: I agree. Dehumanizing is what *they* do. It makes it easier for violence to occur.

  48. 48
    Alex Scott says:

    @Cassidy: How does it feel to become that which you despise?

    God, that liberal hunting license. My regular blogs have been making me angry enough, but that… How is that even supposed to be funny? How am I *supposed* to take that? I mean, several members of my family are conservative, and they’re the people I LEAST want to burn bridges with. I hate, hate, HATE this feeling that we’re supposed to be enemies.

    Argh…

  49. 49
    Cassidy says:

    @stuckinred: If they start their civil war, that I think they want, that would be an option. Until then, I’ll just sit here and hope that jeebus comes to take his flock sometime in the near future, so that the rest of the good people in this country can live their lives in peace and goodwill.

    Not big on napalm….no need to destroy that much surrounding area. And getting WP on target so that it sticks requires some really accurate fire.

  50. 50
    jwb says:

    @Cassidy: You don’t dehumanize your enemy either if you want to emerge from the fight with your selfhood intact. That doesn’t mean you don’t fight them for all your worth; but it does mean that you respect your enemies’ humanity even if they don’t respect yours.

  51. 51
    stuckinred says:

    @Alex Scott: This is the kind of shit they’ll pull down and use as an example of why we are all the same. Guess they are right.

  52. 52
    Barb (formerly Gex) says:

    @stuckinred: At least we are on record as pushing back, hard.

  53. 53
    wazmo says:

    Back in the days when Microsoft was the 800-lb gorilla their mantra was:

    “One World, One Web, One Program.” -Advertisement for Internet Explorer

    The right’s view is: “One God, One Gun, One Party”.

    Compare and contrast:

    “Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuehrer.” -Adolf Hitler

    Now one thing that Microsoft did very successfully was their ’embrace, extend and extinguish’ by ‘cutting off their (competitors) air supply.’

    Now how do you do that? Simple-by forcing true free-market deregulation reforms at the FCC by mandating that pay television services offer 100% a-la-carte programming.

    After all, why should a lefty subsidize Fox programming by their cable/dish bill anymore than a righty subsidize MSNBC?

  54. 54
    Cassidy says:

    @stuckinred:

    And remember, as a pseudonymous commenter on a blog your voice carries as much weight as a Republican member of Congress, GOP party official, or right-wing talk show host.

  55. 55
    emily says:

    @Cassidy:

    As I said in the earlier thread; they simply aren’t people to me anymore

    I remember when people said that to me on protein wisdom.

    Hey, does John still defend Jeff and Darlene?

  56. 56
    MikeJ says:

    @wazmo:

    “One World, One Web, One Program.” -Advertisement for Internet Explorer

    I still have an AOL tshirt that says “the internet will be Microsoft’s Vietnam.”

  57. 57
    hildebrand says:

    Cassidy,

    Time to trot out this rather sage piece of wisdom – perhaps overused (and perhaps apocryphal), but rather important nonetheless: An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

    You are trundling down the same path as those whom you castigate. Can you not see that? We cannot wait for the other side to break the cycle, we have to be the ones who decide the live the better way, we have to be the ones to take the risk to be better human beings. It is undoubtedly the harder road, but it is also the only right choice if we want any kind of future.

  58. 58
    hilts says:

    Looking to further expand his growing media presence, Glenn Beck, has hired a onetime chief executive of Huffington Post to lead his new Web site, The Blaze. Betsy Morgan, who ran The Huffington Post for two years, ending in 2009, will become president of The Blaze. The appointment of Morgan to The Blaze (which Beck named after the Biblical story of Moses and the burning bush) raised some eyebrows at The Huffington Post because of her shift to a polar opposite political point of view. But Morgan said in an interview, “I am a very apolitical person. I’m a business person, who is absolutely fascinated by brands.”

    h/t http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01.....;ref=media

  59. 59
    unabogie says:

    Folks, Cassidy is a troll hoping to a get a link back here
    demonstrating how liberals are eliminationist too.

    DNF

  60. 60
    gnomedad says:

    It’s not too late to get one. Fun for all ages!

  61. 61
    jwb says:

    @hilts: Just what we need: another “apolitical” person trying to make money by playing at politics.

  62. 62
    emily says:

    Back in the day I was stupid enough to leave enough info on protein wisdom for Dave and Jeff and those guys to figure out where I work.

    They are all cowards, so everything turned out ok. I learned my lesson, but I saw Steve of no more mister nice blog go through the same grief latter. Protein wisdom is one of the blogs often left off of lists that is worse than any other.

  63. 63
    jwb says:

    @unabogie: I’ll admit that the thought had crossed my mind. The wingnut logic runs strong in that one.

    ETA: my other thought was that Cassidy was running an experiment to see how different sites reacted to expressions of eliminationist rhetoric.

  64. 64
    Cassidy says:

    @unabogie: Nope, I’m a bona fide liberal, gay brother and all, and atheist. I just happen to be pretty assertive/ aggressive and not shy about expressing my true feelings.

  65. 65
    stuckinred says:

    @Cassidy: so you just run your mouth on blogs or do you actually do something with that hate?

  66. 66
    blogreeder says:

    I’ve discovered that when you say “We need to tone things down a bit and tamp down the violent rhetoric,”

    John, is that REALLY what you said? Who said WE? The only mention of WE anywhere here is when you’re mocking something the right’s said. Man, that borders on delusional. Maybe I’m wrong, was there a post with such a reasonable request? There are a lot of posts here after all.

  67. 67
    Cassidy says:

    @stuckinred: I said earlier, I’m not homicidal. I have no intention. Now if these creeps actually grow enough of a spine to start their civil war, I will happily fight them; I’d come back into the military for that opportunity. And I’ve got no problem confronting them when they run their mouths.

  68. 68
    stuckinred says:

    @Cassidy: They are the fucking military but I assume you knew that.

  69. 69
    Cassidy says:

    @stuckinred: I’m still active, but etsing soon. I guarantee that the military will not side with secessionist wingnuts. Some of the officers are tools, but the rank and file are pretty good.

  70. 70
    stuckinred says:

    @Cassidy: Now I’m down with confronting the shit when there is a person attached to it, the sweeping generalizations, not so much. ETS that motherfucker either way.

  71. 71
    hildebrand says:

    Cassidy,

    You are trundling down the same path as those whom you castigate. Can you not see that? We cannot wait for the other side to break the cycle, we have to be the ones who decide the live the better way, we have to be the ones to take the risk to be better human beings. It is undoubtedly the harder road, but it is also the only right choice if we want any kind of future.

  72. 72
    wazmo says:

    @mikeJ:

    I still have an AOL tshirt that says “the internet will be Microsoft’s Vietnam.”

    No, the Internet wasn’t Microsoft’s Vietnam: their internicene fighting and Ballmer’s leadership is what caused them to limp along, while a near-unstoppable Google and a resurgent Apple ate their lunch.

  73. 73
    gbear says:

    I just finished watching Rachel Maddow’s monday program (no TV here so I have to wait a day). Almost every statement in John’s rant was dealt with amazingly on Maddow’s monday show. Her show, even a day late, is the most essential news analysis program available, bar none.

    …and until I watched her show today, I had no idea that there are 90 guns for every 100 people in the US. Yemen came in second with 61 per 100. What kind of death freaks are we?

  74. 74
    stuckinred says:

    @Cassidy: I will say this, about the time I ETS’d I was just as angry as you are now. It was 41 years ago but I remember.

  75. 75
    blogreeder says:

    John, have you read Cassidy’s comments? Appalling. See what you’ve created with your rhetoric? Your constant hate filled comments against the party of Lincoln? I’m holding you responsible for that toxic individual and whatever he does.

  76. 76
    SFAW says:

    At the risk of inviting slings and arrows:

    I don’t know if Cassidy is lib or troll (although I guess I take him at his word in 67), but he does raise an important (to my feeble mind at least) question:

    At what point does one say “Enough is enough”? And what do you do next, after saying that? (OK, two questions and counting.)

    (I’ll flatter myself by thinking that the questions are important enough for their own post, but that’s just me.)

    The other thing that occurs to me: warfare is, in general, a dehumanizing experience. (Disclaimer: never been in the service, so there’s a reasonable likelihood that I’m full of shit about a lot in this paragraph.) And it seems to me that combatants on both sides need to buy into the dehumanization – if they didn’t I would think the idea of killing “that nice guy you knew from Metro City or Stuttgart or Baghdad or wherever” would drive you nuts after awhile, if you do enough of it. But that’s how war is. And it sucks that the dehumanizing has to happen, but until wars cease, I’m not sure I see away around it. And plenty of soldiers [sic] come back and become “human” again – although I guess it can be tough.

    So I guess I see Cassidy as being someone who has reached the stage where he sees the wingnuts as fighting an undeclared (by the Left, at least) war, and is prepping for the day when the wingnuts actually start doing what they “joke” about. I also view his attitude as a slightly more advanced stage of my frequent “I wish they’d all secede and move to Dumbfuckistan already”.

    As the saying goes – YMMV.

  77. 77
    SFAW says:

    hildebrand @ 71 –

    That’s all well and good in theory, but if the other side keeps punching, there are only so many cheeks you can turn before getting dain bramaged from the pummeling.

    I think I’d rather punch back, instead of hoping that they realize the error of their ways before they do some real damage.

  78. 78
    Royston Vasey says:

    @mikej at 56

    Others include:

    Is Online search Microsoft’s Vietnam? Jul 2008

    Will Android be Google’s Vietnam? Sep 2008

  79. 79
    Midnight Marauder says:

    What a surreal thread…

    +7

  80. 80
    Cain says:

    @Jay in Oregon:

    Let us not forget that having a bumpersticker or T-shirt critical of President Bush was worthy of being exiled to a “Free speech zone” where no one could see you, but carrying firearms to townhall meetings is a matter of exercising your freedom.

    Clearly, when we elect a Republican president we liberals should all open carry and show up at these things with signs that say “we’re not exercising our 2nd amendment rights… this time”

    Then when right wing complains, tell them the second amendment allows us and then complain to the NRA. That would really fuck things up.

    cain

  81. 81
    hildebrand says:

    @SFAW: I am a hopeless idealist on this front. Jesus, Gandhi, King – I think these guys had the right idea, and really the only one that breaks the cycle. Yes, I know, their bright ideas got each of them killed. That doesn’t mean that they were wrong. I know its pie in the sky, but I have to hold on to something that doesn’t involve hate, death, and continuing the cycle.

  82. 82
    Cain says:

    @SFAW:

    I don’t know if Cassidy is lib or troll (although I guess I take him at his word in 67), but he does raise an important (to my feeble mind at least) question:

    He’s a lib. He runs out of patience with people though. It’s one thing to say something like that on a blog but yet another to actually do it.

    I have a lot of right winger friends, other than their perchance to vote republican there is nothing wrong with them. They’d give the shirt off their back to help me. (and remember, I’m non-white) Nothing at all like your tea baggers. They aren’t cultural war’ists for the most part. But they are anti-democratic party and anti-taxes. But we respect each other’s position and generally have the grace not to flaunt our political positions to each other. That way leads madness.

    I’m comfortable that they’ll figure it out soon enough.

    cain

  83. 83
    Cain says:

    @hildebrand:

    @SFAW: I am a hopeless idealist on this front. Jesus, Gandhi, King – I think these guys had the right idea, and really the only one that breaks the cycle. Yes, I know, their bright ideas got each of them killed. That doesn’t mean that they were wrong. I know its pie in the sky, but I have to hold on to something that doesn’t involve hate, death, and continuing the cycle.

    Their solutions require an enormous amount of discipline and nearly impossible to do. Especially in this country where violence is almost celebrated. Remember all those 80s movies? Jeezus, they were all right wing movies, shit like Cobra, were all about gung ho people shooting up the place and getting shit done. Lame-o.

    cain

  84. 84
    SFAW says:

    hildebrand @ 81 –

    To each his own. I understand your view/position, and don’t really disagree with it – in theory. I’m just less sanguine about the possibility that they’ll “come to Jesus” – despite their professed love of the guy. (Of course, the Jesus they love is Republican Jesus, who bears little resemblance to the so-called Prince of Peace. Is General J.C. Christian still around? He had it pegged.)

    I hope you’re right, except for the part where they kill a lot of us before they give in.

  85. 85
    SFAW says:

    Cain –

    Don’t forget Red Dawn! “Vulvarines! ! !”

    (h/t to gil mann, wherever he is)

  86. 86
    Jeanne ringland says:

    @hilts: Ok, now I’m laughing.

  87. 87
    Cassidy says:

    @hildebrand: I appreciate it, but here’s where I go different. I’m a very self-aware person. I know that I wasn’t Ceasar in a past life. I know I’m not good at math or the sciences that involve math. I’m not the better man. I know this. As mentioned earlier, turning the other cheek doesn’t suit me. it never has. I grew up fighting bullies, fighting other people’s bullies, fighting people who picked on my effeminate brother, etc. There comes a point where you accept that you are not jesus or Ghandi, or MLK. I’m not that good.

    I’ve embraced my disgust and hate. It doesn’t mean i’m going to go shoot something or deliberately pick a fight. I’m passionate, but not a criminal. But I don’t shy away from it either. So yes, I hate them. And I despise them. And i willingly say that the world would be a better place without that toxic mindset. And maybe, it will go away in time due to progressive timelines and feelings. That would be good; I doubt it though. And I’m not ashamed of feeling this way. I’m not ashamed to feel that the world is better without them.

  88. 88
    smith says:

    Can you imagine the swooning, gasping pearl-clutching shrieks of horror from the right if someone ever made a “Conservative Hunting License?” And then we told them if they didn’t like it to STFU and get a sense of humor? The person who made that bumper sticker would become a pariah.

    I laugh a lot and I think I have a pretty wicked sense of humor, but sorry conservatives out there: I fail to find the humor in the fact I should be gunned down just because I don’t grovel at the feet of Republican ideology.

  89. 89

    @Cassidy: That’s cute. You think it’s alright — healthy, even — to fantasize about killing people as long as they meet some minimum personal threshold you’ve laid out for “deserving it,” but hey you know a gay guy and don’t believe in God so you’re no rightwinger!

    I’m not sure you understand the definition of “liberal,” but then it’s probably a lot more likely that you’re just trolling.

  90. 90
    Batocchio says:

    Yeah, I remember it – I posted on it at the time. Malkin really started racheting up the crazy about then, or it just got more coverage. Later the same year, after the Israeli Air Force fired a missile at a press vehicle, Hinderaker wrote, “Given Reuters’s coverage of the conflict in Lebanon, it would perhaps be understandable if the Israelis started firing on Reuters vehicles.” They’re immature, hateful brats.

  91. 91
    Barb (formerly Gex) says:

    @smith: One time the GF and I were driving around and the car in front of us had one of those bumper stickers advocating pissing off liberals.

    She flipped him off, and he got really pissed and started chasing us. Which we found confusing, because wasn’t that the point of his sticker?

  92. 92
    smith says:

    @Barb (formerly Gex):

    That actually made me laugh out loud. This must be the reason conservatives are always so miserable – they get the reaction they want and still complain about it.

    Please make my day and tell me you outran him. I would love it if this hump had to go home and tell his friends that two liberals outraced him. But then again, he’d probably turn it around and tell everyone you were evil terrorists who were chasing him and he bravely fought you off and lived to tell the tale.

  93. 93
    West of the Cascades says:

    this is the only source of something approaching truth in media today. Damn you, Cole, for being indispensable and creating this community. I could happily be watching “American Idol” or some other mind-numbing reality show, or getting mesmerized by Fox News, but no, you SOB, you make me think.

    +4

    also, too – Midnight Marauder, impressive you can type at +7

  94. 94
    hamletta says:

    @wazmo: Sorry, but a la carte on a channel-by-channel basis is unrealistic, even now that the cable companies are moving to all-digital.

    I work in a [mumble] call center. (Lucky for [mumble], its customers, and me, I don’t take customer calls.)

    But the cost of doing what you’re suggesting would send your cable bill through the roof. If each channel were sold individually, the call volume would skyrocket.

    You’d be surprised at how relatively primitive our technology is. I’m lucky that I still get to use the old terminal emulation interface to access customer accounts. It’s ugly, but it’s speedy, and I can update a customer’s channel mapping in a flash.

    Customer service, however, has to use a logy, browser-based interface that takes at least five minutes to do anything. Extend that out with hundred of thousands of subs adding and subtracting channels, and you’re looking at hours-long hold times. For what? An extra $1/month?

    Not gonna happen.

  95. 95
    Cassidy says:

    @johnny walker: I’ve never fantisized about killing anyone. Punching a few people in the face, maybe, but not killing.

  96. 96
    Rihilism says:

    Far to early in the morning to read all these comments, so apologies in advance if my own comments plagiarize someone….

    Addressing Cassidy –

    I believe you stated that you have a gay brother. If so, you are likely aware of the “It gets better.” campaign (sheesh, it really is hard to get away from the military metaphors in our society…).

    Well, it does, “get better” that is.

    But not simply for gay rights. Think, House on UnAmerican Activities, or Nixon, or Reagan, or Newt, or Junior…

    American culture has almost always been “enthralled” within the simple rule, “Three steps forward, two steps back”. This ain’t you’re granddaddy’s country….

    When I was younger, I was stupid. In my defense, all young people are stupid. It took some time for my brain to develop the realization that history repeats itself to the point that you’re frequently hit by feelings of deja vu or are at least concerned that you may be experiencing the first symptoms of alzheimers (I could have sworn I left my country on the coffee table but there it is in the middle of a 400 degree oven…).

    As your brain ages, it settles into it’s cavity and the muscles that used to hold it up, relax. That relaxation causes previously unused neurons to trigger, activating the complex thought processes required for simple mathematics, i.e.,

    “Damn it, we just took two steps back. FUCK! (Or, UGH!, when children or young people are around). Hang on a sec, though. We did take some steps forward, didn’t we? How many was that? What do you mean, I thought you were keeping track? Oh, never mind, leave me alone I’m trying to count… let’s see, one, TOOHOO, threeeee. That’s three foward, two back…three minus two is one… +3 – 2 = +1. Thank goodness, I was afraid things would devolve into a civil war if we weren’t moving (albiet slowly) in the positive direction…”

    You see, Cassidy? It’s quite simple. If you bite into your country prior to the fourth lick, the world may never know….

  97. 97
    drkrick says:

    @Barb (formerly Gex): No, the point was either to give his redneck buddies a yuk-yuk (like the first 40 times they saw the same joke) or to cause libruls to cower in well-deserved terror. Having someone call them on it is the last thing they expect – One of the interesting things about the right, especially the cultural conservatives, is how absolutely terrified they are of disagreement. Bill Maher calling them a name is worse than someone shooting him in their minds.

  98. 98
    The Raven says:

    Guns don’t kill people. Guns make people crazy and stupid. Then people kill people.

    We corvids are very pro-firearms.

  99. 99
    Mongo says:

    There’s a little diner on US101 looking out at Discovery Bay on the Olympic coast, Washington. It’s always busy; so we stopped in once to see what the deal was. The food was nothing special, but tacked on the walls, and ceiling are thousands of dollar bills. Many have notes written on them. A surprising number of them express this same sentiment; shoot the liberals, kill the liberals, the only good liberal is a dead liberal, etc… I guess I am naive, but I was stunned.

  100. 100
    Molly says:

    I try to keep up on the rules of discourse

    There are rules?!?

  101. 101
    The Populist says:

    Point proven: They are a reactionary bunch alright. Gee, I show a photo of something or somebody’s house and the right escalate an innocent act into nuclear war by publishing my address, names of my kids, my employer and anything else they feel relevant to post out of retaliation.

    Who, again, is starting what? Sorry righties, you lose on moral grounds here. Photos of houses with no addresses or info beyond “hey, it’s Don Rumfeld’s nice house” does not mean you can invade my fucking privacy asshats.

Comments are closed.