Posted on 01/11/2011 7:27:14 AM PST by La Lydia
...a deranged 25-year-old Jordanian named Sirhan Sirhan slithered through a crowd toward Sen. Robert Kennedy...Sirhan shot and killed Kennedy, wounding several others. The ensuing investigation showed that Sirhan was a raging anti-Semite who’d become fixated on Senator Kennedy because of the latter’s support for Israel.
Two people profoundly impressed by the assassination were the terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. In 1974, they dedicated their own communist manifesto, Prairie Fire, to Sirhan, hailing him as a courageous political prisoner. In the book itself, they and the rest of the Weathermen went on to identify themselves proudly as “communist underground in the United States” who were determined to lead a violent leftist revolution...Their rhetoric, their heedless dehumanization of those they maligned as ideological “enemies,” was coupled with acts of horrific violence, including a plot to mass-murder U.S. soldiers in Fort Dix...
This history is one the modern Left, in which Ayers and Dohrn remain icons, would rather you’d forget. Today, instead, is for politicizing the wanton savagery of another deranged radical, 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner, who stunned the nation by slithering through a Tucson crowd and unleashing a 31-shot fusillade... Already, we have learned a great deal about the assassin. He is a deeply disturbed pot-head. In order to give meaning to the addling emptiness of his life, he turned to the anti-Semitic rants of Adolph Hitler, Marx’s Communist Manifesto, the occult, and what appears to have been an obsession with Representative Giffords...Some acquaintances and schoolmates who’d endured his tirades over the years predicted he’d come to an end just like this.
...the instantaneous reaction of the hard Left, Obama’s base, was to politicize the Tucson atrocity as a natural, an inevitable, result of conservative ideology, enthusiasm for immigration-law enforcement and gun ownership...and dissent from Obama’s policies...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
There is a fair amount of it here on FR. People are angry, and I can't blame them, I'm mad too. But that is exactly what the left wants - an endless food fight over this.
We must just keep doing what we are doing. Telling the truth. To the Media truthtelling is name calling.
We're mixing in a lot of namecalling of our own with the truth.
You are falling for the spin. Snap out of it.
I am doing no such thing. I know what I have been reading, both here and on MSM comments pages. Some folks on the right are responding with facts, but others are descending to the level of those flinging baseless charges from the left. I am simply asking folks to stick to what can be proven and use rational debate here. The left lives to drag the debate into the gutter. Keep it out of there, and we will starve them of the slime they crave.
I agree -- it's a very bumpworthy post.
It takes serious effort not to pound the table when dealing with people who are totally reason-proof, but it does usually pay off. Those who are watching take a lot of stuff into consideration when judging the credibility of what you're saying, including your demeanor.
Not so, kenavi - I at least was planning to reply long before your post spurred me on.
dirtboy, thanks for a very salient, and articulate post. Michael Savage was the first, I believe, to make the observation that “Liberalism is a mental disorder.” This is true.
In my field, psychiatry, a delusion is simply define as, “A fixed, false belief.” It is “fixed,” and cannot be swayed by proof or logic. We don’t even try when such beliefs are firmly held. They are not amenable to reason.
Whether it be a religious fanatic or a patient with schizophrenia or a Liberal, there is no sense trying to persuade them. This is repeatedly clear when talk show or Fox hosts have liberals on, out of some bizarre need to appear “fair and balanced,” or in some hopeless crusade to change their minds. It is a sign of foolishness on the part of the hosts, and the better ones know better.
As the old maxim in the legal profession goes, if you don't have the facts on your side, argue the law, and if you don't have the law on your side, pound on the table.
We don't need to pound on the table here. The fact is that the Tea Party has no history of violence. The fact is that the left uses combat metaphors in politics just as often, if not more often, than the right. The fact is that the shooter is a complete nutcase with nearly incoherent poltical views who seems to have had a personal vendetta against Giffords that predated Palin and the Tea Party. And the open question is, why wasn't more done to get the shooter into the criminal system when he was threatening people - an action that would have blocked him via the Brady check from buying that Glock, as he would have had something for the database search to turn up?
I have stated just those points in person with people who don't pay a lot of attention to politics, and they resonate far more than just saying the libruls are idiots.
For example in the war of words. Calling for a toning down of political speech. The 1st definition of the word Campaign is a military operation in time of war. What would you call the election? A domestic contingency operation? Do not fall for the old traps. They are on a slippery slope to total defeat. I say pour it on. We can no longer have comity with them they must be defeated and totally discredited.
Calling a Socialist a Socialist is not Vitriol.
Really nice post. I totally agree.
I diagree with that. And that is not what I am calling for here. I am saying that in our responses to the left, we should stick to a higher level.
I say pour it on. We can no longer have comity with them they must be defeated and totally discredited.
And I think we can apply political jujitsu against them here - use their own rantings to discredit them, something that is hard to do if you are ranting yourself.
Calling a Socialist a Socialist is not Vitriol.
What the left is doing here has nothing to do with Socialism per se. Labels such as Socialism, IMO, should be used specifically in response to proposals to socialize the private sector. That is my point here. The left will throw in all kinds of completely unrelated crap into this debate - if you haven't seen it yet, look up the email exchange a Freeper had with Danziger, and check out his final response. That was a classic example of what I am talking about, in how we on the right should pursue this debate - Danzinger came across in the end looking like a complete ass, and the Freeper looked rational.
I'll find the link and post it in this thread.
My bad, it was a blogger, not sure if it was a Freeper (if he’s not he should be) - this is EXACTLY the right approach here - note that when Danziger was asked to prove his assertions, he resorted to baseless name-calling.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2654798/posts
Well fine tone it down. You can go the “Compassionate Conservative” route. I expect you will have about the same result as Bush and the prior Rino Congress. But good luck. I do not rant. I tell the truth as I see it. In my opinion the Communists have taken total control of the Democrat Party. It is one of their major goals. They must be fought. Co-existance will not work. The best weapon we have is the Constitution. That is why they fear it so much. But all ant-socialist action is welcome around here.
The last resort of the befuddled socialist. It is an automatic defense mechanism when the logic center of the brains starts to function.
Yeah, I saw that post last night. The blogger completely destroyed the cartoonist by just playing it cool. He got the cartoonist to self immolate.
And for anyone reading that, it drove home that the cartoonist had no facts to support his opinions, only baseless slurs.
The left and the right have totally different definitions for "toning down political speech". To the left, it means nothing more than shutting us up. To the right, it should mean "turn down the volume" -- shouting and screaming isn't getting us anywhere.
They are on a slippery slope to total defeat. I say pour it on.
With every wild incoherent claim, the left indeed slides further down that slope. I agree: pour it on -- with calm resolve. Don't indulge them with wild incoherent claims in response. We're winning this thing -- not because we're louder than they are (we don't have the MSM on our side, after all) -- we're winning it because we're right.
We can no longer have comity with them they must be defeated and totally discredited.
Absolutely true. Squashed like a bug is the way I've put it.
Calling a Socialist a Socialist is not Vitriol.
Of course, it's not. It's the truth. But that doesn't (necessarily) make them an "a dirty, rotten, anti-American Lenin-loving Commie".
The truth is sufficient.
Actually, I believe you and dirt are on the same wave length. You are urging a vigorous and honest defense of our principles -- with the emphasis on vigorous. dirt is likewise urging a vigorous and honest defense -- with the emphasis on honest.
No, we shouldn't get down in the dirt with them. Indeed, it's the fact that we haven't gone incoherent, even violent, that has driven them toward ever more mindless incoherence...and actual violence.
In my opinion, the Giffords Affair has been an exceptionally revealing episode. Dupnik, the media, Democrat officeholders and operatives have all lashed out wildly -- trying to make political points. Anybody in the middle who is paying even moderate attention realizes Loughner was a deeply disturbed young man who shouldn't have been on the street. Politics had nothing to do with it.
Accordingly, every report, every wild claim, has cost the left another measure of credibility. They are hurting themselves.
And that helps us...
And, now, back to your regularly scheduled thread.
The inner-most soul of the left makes itself known:
Ed. We are not in court. I have been watching the development of this combination of loons and opportunists since it started. The Tea Party, the very name is ridiculous. Crazed fat people tortured by their lack of success in life, following the absolute worst of our politicians. Palin, Angel, Quayle’s rotten kid. These people are your choice for anything? The whole thing is based on unreality. Don’t you understand? And Mcveigh was reading that crazy shit from the enbd times or whagtever it is called.In the end the government has GOT to work. We are in competition with the world. Car companies don’t compete. nation now compete. And these asses want to go back to the 1700′s. I’ve written enough. The whole thing is probably unstoppable except with another dumb war. That’s what usually happens. You can have it.
Thank you, Mr. Danziger, for offering your true feelings...
TX. We should never make claims. But it is OK to take known facts to a logical conclusion. The facts I know and the circumstantial evidence allow me to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that. At the very least Obama is a Marxist community agitator. Obama has not changed his mind. His goal is the destruction of as much of the constitution as possible in the time he has. He believes the Ten Planks of communism are a better way to go.
Many in the media consider themselves to be comrades in arms with Obama. They consider themselves to be more ‘Citizens of the World’ than Citizens of the Republic. And on and on.
Not a proven fact. But readily deducible.
It's amazing how many on the left would say, "What's wrong with that?"
I believe the only issue we're talking about it here is a.) the volume at which one offers the deduction and b.) the need to accompany it with "the facts and the circumstantial evidence" that support the assertion.
Only the blind, i.e. moderates and independents, can't see that marxists are in control of the Democrat Party. Persuading moderates and independents needs to be our focus. The liberals, aka marxists, are mostly beyond our reach, but whatever term we call them, it's irrelevant to the moderates and independents. It's just another ad hominem to them.
Self identified liberals are only a fifth of the electorate. IMHO, they can be made irrelevant if we stick to the facts.
Tucson shooting suspect Jared Loughner appears to have posted bizarre messages
The statement said that between February and September last year, campus police were called five times to deal with disruptions Loughner caused in classrooms and libraries. On Sept. 29, the college said, it discovered that Loughner had posted a YouTube video he had made on the campus.
--snip--
On Oct. 4, during a meeting with Loughner, his parents and college administrators, he agreed to withdraw, the college said. School officials told him he could return only if he obtained a clearance certifying that "in the opinion of a mental health professional, his presence at the College does not present a danger to himself or others."
Sheriff: Accused Shooter 'Unhinged,' Made Threats
AZ Suspected Gunman Passed FBI Backround Check
Just present the facts. The only thing the left is doing is making fools of themselves.
Funny, most of the folks I saw at Tea Party events looked quite successful. I talked to some who were small business owners. And the guy whose campaign I volunteered for this year, who was a typical Tea Party-type candidate, has built his dad's small plumbing business into a regional distributorship and had enough coin to put a half-million into his own campaign.
Yet another example of the left having absolutely no idea what the Tea Party is about - and having no desire to make any effort to find out.
Yeah, and then the left will drag you into an interminable debate over the meaning of marxist and socialist.
And the average Joe in the middle really doesn't understand the concepts anyway and glazes over at that point.
But talk about spending money you don't have, and frittering away the future, and they can relate to that.
As well as the problems in dealing with nutcases of all flavors.
More than any other class, the Tea Party is a creature of small business. And the Republican Party is the only political instrument small business has.
My sis, the social worker, still cleaves to the notion that the GOP is the party of fat cats, inherited wealth and big business.
Patiently, I explain to her that Wall Street and the trust fund babies are almost unanimously in bed with the Democrats, while big business will merely support whoever's in power.
And that the backbone of the GOP today are the car-dealers, the druggists, the independent bankers, the oil field supply operators and the wheat farmers right there in her home town. I.e., the people that show up for Tea Parties in Hays, Kansas.
She, like a good little liberal, denies the obvious -- because it doesn't agree with what she "knows".
In 2008, McCain carried Ellis County by 66-32. It has not occurred to her that the 32 is essentially her and the faculty at Fort Hays State. And the 66 is everybody else.
As you noted, arguing these points with liberals is generally pointless. The argument is for everybody else.
But, importantly, small business is the very backbone of the Tea Party and the Republican base. And, if Obama has his way, we'll become an endangered species...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.