Thoughts on death threats from the left.
It’s who they are. It’s what they do. And then, like all their other pathologies, they project it on their political opponents.
30 thoughts on “The “New Civility” BS”
Comments are closed.
Thoughts on death threats from the left.
It’s who they are. It’s what they do. And then, like all their other pathologies, they project it on their political opponents.
Comments are closed.
But did any of them draw a map and put a bulleye’s on it that read “send money here?” If so, I expect Gerrib will show his moral principles and denounce those outrages promotion of violence. In 3, 2, 1 …
Do you think that incivil behavior from a group of people on “the left” invalidates calls for civility from other people on the left? Or, do you think that the latter group of people would less than eager to criticize the former group? If not, I don’t understand why you are using the term “‘new civility’ bs”.
Do you think that incivil behavior from a group of people on “the left” invalidates calls for civility from other people on the left?
Those calls are pretty much self invalidating, given their general nature and targets.
…but were the death-threats civil?
I really don’t understand. Are you saying that the people making death threats are the very same people who are calling for civil behavior? Or, are you saying that the people calling for civil behavior are somehow responsible for the people making death threats?
I am saying that I haven’t heard any of the people who attacked Sarah Palin over the Giffords shooting say anything about this, demonstrating that the so-called “call for civility” was never anything except an attempt to stifle dissent against leftism.
Bob, can you help me out. I can’t come up with a good finish:
I’d like to teach the world to sing, in perfect harmony. And those who don’t have perfect pitch, can…
Curt, some suggestions:
…shut up and hum along in the background like good peons.
…report to their Block Leaders for assignment to other duties.
…bring their Certificates of Completion for Cultural Education Modules (Music) 5 through 9 to their local Community Center in no more than five business days, or incur an additional Community Service obligation for the year.
…expect to have their lack of perfect pitch taken into account during quality-of-life assessments to determine distribution of health care credits.
Did I miss anything?
I haven’t heard any of the people who attacked Sarah Palin over the Giffords shooting say anything about this, demonstrating that the so-called “call for civility” was never anything except an attempt to stifle dissent against leftism.
Who did you have in mind? Do you actually listen to what they have to say? Are you sure they even know about the death threats? When I googled to learn more about it, what dominated the search results was headlines that read, essentially, “MSM ignores Wisconsin death threats”.
But when you say “death threats from the left. It’s who they are. It’s what they do. And then, like all their other pathologies, they project it on their political opponents”, it sounds like you’re talking about everyone on the left, which is a rather incivil and quite untrue thing to say.
I have the same frequent complaint about your writing: you are too quick to write disparagingly about “they” without carefully defining who “they” includes, whether you are talking about the world’s one billion Muslims or the Free World’s hundreds of millions of left wing voters.
When you say “it is who they are”, you seem to be referring to Congresswoman Giffords’s staff and family, and you seem to be referring to perfectly nice readers of this blog such as Chris Gerrib, and, well, me. Hmmph!
I am talking about the they on the left who do this, and they are legion. I said “left,” not “Democrats,” who I don’t consider to be all leftists. If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it. I’m pretty sure I was not referring to Congresswoman Gifford’s staff, unless they’ve been making death threats of which I am unaware.
If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it.
But if doesn’t wear the shoe, how can he claim victim status? Rand, you attacked Bob. You didn’t have to use his name. All you had to do is write “they”, and he knew that meant “Bob”. Rand, you really should up the civility on your blog rather than saying Bob is evil person.
But if he, even…
Sorry, to busy LMAO at Bob’s “I’m a victim” BS to use proper grammar.
Well, we’ve had almost the exact same conversation before, complete with the “if the shoe doesn’t fit” remark. I’m telling you how you sound (to me, at least), and you’re replying “but I didn’t mean it that way.” Since you want to be persuasive (regarding space policy) to a large number of people who do regularly vote for Democrats and who might even be members of the current administration, you might benefit from caring about how you sound, lest they think you are writing about “who they are and what they do”.
Additionally: when you regularly call moderates in the Democratic Party “leftists” (and “socialists”, and “fascists”, and so on), it is very hard to figure out what your labels mean.
One last thing: I don’t mean to sound as though I buy your claim about bonafide leftists either. If you’re writing about leftists, and who they are, and what they do, then go visit a Unitarian church, sit with the pacifists, sing songs about love and peace (they won’t mind if you sing out of key), and then stop and see if you can, with total sincerity, explain to them that they are just like the people who sent Wisconsin politicians death threats.
I’ve never noticed any intrinsic incompatibility between pacifism and making death threats. I’ll bet that a lot of the people making death threats against the Wisconsin Republicans would also tell you they are opposed to the wars. I’ll bet a lot of them even sing songs about love and peace, when among their own kind.
I bet they don’t. But I don’t know how to resolve our bet.
Really? You don’t think that if you canvassed the people making death threats (and you could do it — many of them used their real names) you would find a lot of anti-war sentiment?
Really?
Bob, what do you think they’re opinions on the second amendment would be?
Well, gee, if you were new to the planet, you could always swing by DKos, or you know, one of those places where people likely to issue death threats to “Rethugs” would hang out and ask what they think of “Bush’s wars.”
Since you want to be persuasive (regarding space policy) to a large number of people who do regularly vote for Democrats and who might even be members of the current administration, you might benefit from caring about how you sound, lest they think you are writing about “who they are and what they do”.
Hey Rand, unless you bow to your Masters, they may not like you. So you shut up now and just talk about space; like Bob asks.
Leland’s point is actually the most important to me: I think it is fine to mix your commentary on space with other subjects — makes for an interesting blog. But I don’t see how you can hope to be influential if you regularly sound like you are demonizing broad swaths of perfectly nice people.
Really? You don’t think that if you canvassed the people making death threats (and you could do it — many of them used their real names) you would find a lot of anti-war sentiment?
In 2007 you could find lots of anti-Bush sentiment dressed up as anti-war sentiment. But right after 9/11 was the time to test for pacifism. I knew plenty of anti-war folks who remained resolutely anti-war on 9/12. But such folks were the very last people I’d ever expect to send death threats to politicians. The reactionary sorts who might send death threats over union issues wanted (rightly, in this case) to kick Al Queda’s ass after 9/11.
But I really wanted to bet on songs about peace and love. Yes, I really do think that the folk song army does not death threats.
I don’t see how you can hope to be influential if you regularly sound like you are demonizing broad swaths of perfectly nice people.
See Rand, you should have never suggested it was Tea Party nutcases that pushed Loughner to violence! Oh wait…
Actually, Bob, I would argue that true pacifists aren’t leftists, since the latter have to always use violence or threats of same to get the policy results they desire.
See, there you go again, redefining terms. A pacifist unitarian universalist minister who wants fervently for people to choose for themselves [insert various economically unviable sharing strategies here] is going to describe herself as a leftist. She won’t force anything on anyone. She probably won’t get the policy results she wants, but so what? She’s a “visionary”, and when I read the word “leftist”, I think that term includes people like her.
And to talk about real people: we’ve previously discussed the Kibbutzniks. They weren’t pacifists (they vigorously defended Israel) but they were examples of bonafide leftists who did get the policy results they desired for decades without using violence.
What about the Amish? Are the Amish on the — oh FFS, it doesn’t matter — I’m tired of Rand picking on the Amish!!111ELEVEN!!!
“Yes, I really do think that the folk song army does not death threats.”
As someone who has spent a lot of time with the folk song army, I disagree.
Death threats, wishing for people to die, or taking pleasure in the death of a political opponent is common on both sides of the isle. Just go read the comments at any political porn site. What is not common is actual violence.
In the last 11 years nearly all of the political violence has come from the left. This year the worst has come from unions and their supporters. Wishing someone dead on twitter is bad enough but there are numerous cases of death threats delivered to people’s houses.
The left and the MSM has been attacking the Tea Party out of a fear of potential violence but totally ignoring actual violence that is perpetrated by people on the left. Has Obama and the Democrats spoken out and condemned their party’s actions? No. Instead they get weekly visits to the White House and Obamacare waivers.
Wodun, interesting comment, and I think we agree that ” the folk song army” doesn’t intersect much with “union thugs”. I do wonder why you think “nearly all the political violence has come from the left” in this century. Truthfully, I don’t know, but my guess is that this isn’t true. Do you actually know? Or could it be that our perceptions differ because violence from the right gets other labels like “religious extremism”, “homophobia”, “racial hate crimes”, and the like? Obviously some such crimes really aren’t political but others are more borderline: for example, is an abortion clinic arson an example of rightwing violence? I suppose my next step would be to look to groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center for statistics.
See, there you go again, redefining terms. A pacifist unitarian universalist minister who wants fervently for people to choose for themselves [insert various economically unviable sharing strategies here] is going to describe herself as a leftist.
Gee, silly me. And here I went, thinking she’d describe herself as a “liberal” or a “progressive.”
And to talk about real people: we’ve previously discussed the Kibbutzniks. They weren’t pacifists (they vigorously defended Israel) but they were examples of bonafide leftists who did get the policy results they desired for decades without using violence.
Do you completely lack a sense of irony?
I suppose my next step would be to look to groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center for statistics.
Only if you want to get one-sided lies.
Bob-1 Says:
“Wodun, interesting comment, and I think we agree that ” the folk song army” doesn’t intersect much with “union thugs”.”
I think they do intersect. The videos of the WI protests showed as much.
“I do wonder why you think “nearly all the political violence has come from the left” in this century.”
You could look at violence done to Tea Partiers by Obamacare supporters or Anarchists beating up Republicans outside of fundraisers. But there are the bigger events like the Discovery building shooter, V for Vendetta PTA shooter, the guy who crashed his plane into the IRS building, and a couple other high profile events of a similar nature. Then there is the ELF, Greenpeace, and PETA.
“Or could it be that our perceptions differ because violence from the right gets other labels like “religious extremism”, “homophobia”, “racial hate crimes”, and the like?”
I was very careful to limit examples of violence related to political causes. I disagree that anything you are referring to has a direct relation to right wing politics. You can’t make the assumption that because a person is a victim of a hate crime that automatically means the perpetrator was acting out of a Republican political philosophy.
“is an abortion clinic arson an example of rightwing violence?”
I think that is an example of right wing violence. And to help you out, the murder of Dr Tiller was a case of right wing violence. Throwing firebombs at pro-life protesters is also political violence.
So yes, nearly all of the political violence has come from the left over the last 11 years. There are very few examples from the right, and they are always denounced while much of the political violence from the left is endorsed.
Then there is the ELF, Greenpeace, and PETA.
Yep.
You don’t say.
And they even have their own TV show.