Posted on 01/01/2010 11:32:02 AM PST by d3b1976
HATE IS WRONG UNLESS IT IS DIRECTED TOWARDS PEOPLE WITH WHOM WE DISAGREE.
By: Andy DeStephano
Why do left wing radicals denounce intolerance unless it’s against something they support? How come it’s acceptable to dehumanize only certain people, beliefs and organizations?
Just recently radio talk show commentator Rush Limbaugh was rushed to the hospital for chest pains. As I searched for news regarding his condition, I was appalled by the comments posted by other readers. The venomous words used to express their distain for his existence were simply horrific. Although disturbed by what I read it certainly comes as no surprise as it seems Conservative bashing has become widely accepted by the Left.
Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman and Ann Coulter are prime examples and targets of liberal attacks; however when Bill O’Rielly commented about Helen Thomas you would have thought he had insulted Mother Theresa. The double standard of what is considered humorous and objective is extremely skewed. In fact, most are just down right mean spirited and foul. In order to be fair and objective, I also take issue when conservatives engage in these practices.
I wish that the very same people that seek to destroy Glenn Beck would have the same passion for destroying Osama Bin Laden. I would like to hear the same people that say Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers are activists agree that Sean Hannity and Mark Levin are commentators not messengers of hate. It would be nice to have these people be as irate when Michelle Malkin is attacked, as they are when Hillary Clinton is criticized. Ultimately I would love to believe the Obama Administration is as passionate about fighting terrorism and enforcing the Patriot Act as they are in eliminating Fox News and supporting the Fairness Doctrine. Once again I must admit none of these will ever happen even though this is change I can believe in.
” Post anything on this site, just one thing that Obama has done correctly.”
You first. Name it. Name something he has done correctly.
Huh? I’m anti-abortion.
“Dumbest statement ever! A law that forbids killing another person is taking which right away? Do you even have a clue what a “right” is? Your rights end where someone else’s rights begin. I have the right to life so you don’t have the right to kill me, so how is alaw against murder taking away any right you think you have?”
Thanks for proving my point on my first post.
Isn't that backwards? Left wing radicals only denounce intolerance when it's against something they support.
” Post anything on this site, just one thing that Obama has done correctly.”
>>You first. Name it. Name something he has done correctly.<<
Allowed the US military to strike the terrorists in Yemen.
I understand what you’re saying about the postings. If you’ve seen what some people have said to me I think you’d say “You do know”.
Let me just say that I don’t think it’s always “hate” behind it. I think it’s too broad. I think a lot of people are frustrated and are taking it out on others. I don’t believe such frustration equates to “hate”. I think a lot of people here type things hastily (and I have done that reading something a little too quickly) and also sometimes do not take things in proper context and shoot back. I don’t necessarily think the underlying emotion is “hate” as much as it is trying to one-up someone in those instances and letting one’s pride get in the way. Sometimes people here write things they’d never say to someone’s face, but I don’t think they hate the people they are doing it to. They might think they can be tougher because of internet anonymity/disconnect, but being a jerk doesn’t necessarily mean that hate is the foundation they are working from. I think the context as to what the argument is and where it’s going needs to be looked atto see if it’s degrading into stuff that not really productive and not helping anyone, and I think that happens, but I don’t think I’d classify the large majority of things going on here in that category. Of course I don’t read everything posted here either.
Misreading things, taking something out of context, being in a bad mood and taking it out on someone who’s critical of something you posted and taking it personally, coupled with the ‘isolation/disconnect’ of the internet itself, allows people to be more efficient jerks, if they want to be, or nail someone back pretty easily. I guess I just don’t usually see it as “hating” the other person.
I will agree and say that there are some people that enjoy riling up and ripping others jsut for the sake of doing it, or just like arguing for the sake of arguing, but I will tell you that I see way more DU troll type people here that like doing that rather than real conservatives. Personally if I find myself involved with one of those people at some point I realize I’m just beating my fists against a wall and drop it.
The other thing I’d say is that heated discussions that raise people’s tempers aren’t always a bad thing. You think our Founding Fathers just sat around at desks sitting calmly sipping tea and never raising their voices at each other? Over principles? Or even taking low blows to one another?
Well, I guess since he's been slapped around by reality for a year, he now realize what crap he was feeding to his leftist base about ending wars and closing prisons. So, it turns out that even he's not insane enough to believe his own campaign rhetoric; rhetoric honed from years of marinading in the bile of the world class America haters he's always surrounded himself with.
It's at least conceivable that he could be worse. That's sorta kinda a good thing, no?
Actually Obama is the worst president for where I believe the country should be headed. He sucks IMO.
I’m not above hating too (I’m human), this isn’t about self-righteousness on my part. It is just the overall understanding that hate isn’t reserved for any particular side of the aisle.
Very well put (especially about the founding fathers).
Also, I agree the Internet has caused a lack of civility in discussions. It is a shame, but I know I’ve been on both sides of that lack of civility with my lack of tact in responses. I’ve also had my opinion change by a couple of people, that’s a part of being open minded (not due to my intelligence). I’ve run into some that were far more intelligent and that’s the beauty of FR.
Hatred is a valuable instrument when channeled on the side of right. Without a certain element of hate we could not fight our enemies. Otherwise we wouldn’t have enemies. But, like all human qualities it must be tempered by rationality and discipline. Channeled as opposed to blind irrational hatred is a virtue when fighting your enemies.
I think you confuse hatred for low tolerance of willful stupidity.
Thanks for the nice reply.
Yes, it is a shame. Not having face to face conversations, and hearing the inflections of the voice, also make misunderstandings more common too. I read somewhere awhile ago that when it came to communicating with others, 70% was visual (face/body language), 20% was auditory, and 10% was what was said. We only get 10% of the info reading the written response, we have to assume and imagine the rest of the context. I think a lot of times when we’re kind of torqued about something we assume the worst and take a defensive posture a lot quicker.
I have had to actually sometimes just log off and do something else. I probably need to walk away more. Or at least just say “I guess we will disagree” and leave it at that. One of my rules of thumb here is if after I’ve been posting awhile if I feel I’m getting more agitated and frustrated, it’s time to step back awhile.
You know, I was thinking also about one other thing you mentioned about people reacting to Obama in such negative ways (not love). I think part of the response besides not liking socialists in general who have always planned the destruction of this country, I also think part of it is an attempt to balance off the press’ obvious pro-bias they have in reporting on every aspect of Obama’s ANYTHING he does. They are such excuse-makers and enablers for him, I think there is a natural backlash against the obvious, blatant bias of most of the media - and even more so when they lecture US about how objective they are and that WE’RE the ones that aren’t ‘professional journalists’.
I just read story by the media offering sympathy for Obama because his vacation is ending yet he looks tired. Have we ever seen any concern like that for Bush, or any Republican president? If so it would have been offered in the context of “well if he isn’t up to the job physically, he needs to resign, we can’t have him on vacation all the time”.
I can tell you I spent high school and college on the papers in various editor positions and had a lot of friends in the college of journalism, while I was in the college of engineering. They had a hell of a lot more free time and partying than I did. Journalism wasn’t a hard place to get a degree.
I'll bet you've never served in the US Armed Forces. If you found "hatred" anywhere in my post you must be excessively thin-skinned and would wilt away in a heart beat.
However, you've peaked my curiosity. What part of my post qualifies as an example of "hatred?"
You've been here for six months and you're trying to label FReepers as "Haters."
If you consider name calling a hate-crime (or possibly a thought crime?) you wouldn't last long at foot-ball camp, deer-camp or in a military unit. Thin skinned people who take themselves too seriously tend not to recognize good natured ribbing for what it is.
Again you peaked my curiosity, what did Barack Hussein Obama do right? When you respond, remember that personal triumphs during his endless vacations don't count.
Thanks for proving my point on my first post.
Disagreeing with CSA Rebel is now an act of hatred?
Mizz Pelosi, is dat you?
Meanwhile, our Rules of Engagement have hamstrung our ability to effectively strike those targets.
Bloodying a terrorist's lip is now a war crime.
Hooray.
Here's where you argument falls apart.
Our country wasn't FOUNDED on any of the views your "damn good liberal friends" espouse.
Our country wasn't FOUNDED on any of the views your "damn good liberal friends" espouse.
To paraphrase a wiser man then I: the ungrateful liberals sleep soundly in their beds because rough men stand ready to do violence on there behalf, which is even worse than mean ol' name calling!
Hear! Hear!
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.