Just in case anyone really believed that “violent rhetoric” was exclusively a product of right:
H/T: QandO
Left-Wing Protesters Call For Clarence Thomas To Be Lynched
44
Comments
44 responses to “Left-Wing Protesters Call For Clarence Thomas To Be Lynched”
-
Steve Plunk,
Since when is Bill Ayer’s an Obama adviser. As I recall, Obama met him at functions, along with thousands of others, because they were both members of the Chicago establishment. I know in the deranged minds of wingnuts, anything Rush or Glenn says is gospel, so it is pointless to even attempt to correct the record. But what he hey.From Wikipedia:
“Investigations by The New York Times, CNN, and other news organizations concluded that Obama does not have a close relationship with Ayers.[63][64][65] In an op-ed piece after the election, Ayers denied any close association with Obama, and castigated the Republican campaign for its use of guilt by association tactics” -
When Democratic members of Congress, national candidates, governors or gubernatorial party candidates, and hugely popular liberal media personalities start saying things like this, let us know.
The left, like the right, has a fringe population. The difference is that we ignore our nuts, while the right makes theirs into leaders.
-
Historically in this country the the vast majority of violence by citizens has come from the left. This includes the socialists, eco-terrorists, and institutionalized violence against babies Deal with the seeds of your 60s “revolution” and the left’s love of anti-government demonstrations. It’s the left’s heritage and they keep trying to deny it.
Kudos for covering this, Doug.
-
Mantis:
here’s a couple off the top of my head:
Alec baldwin wanted to stone henry Hyde & his family. nobel peace prize winner betty williams would love to kill george bush. Obama saying to get in his opponents faces, to bring a gun to a knife fight, & to punish his enemies.And the bigger problem is when people, especially from the left, try to use a nut to define the entire other side. Note the difference in msm reactions between the AZ shooter and the guy who wanted to blow up the discovery channel. Also note the reactions of most of the conservative media to the same events; most blamed the individual and not al gore.
-
Alan Grayson
Voted out of office after one term, and never, to my knowledge, advocated violence against fellow Americans.
Ed Schultz
Who? Oh, some guy on MSNBC that nobody watches?
Shelia Jackson Lee (sic)
Umm, ok? When did she advocate violence against fellow Americans?
The inability of you guys on the left to see that those people are no different from the idiots on the right is the epitome of partisan blinders
It’s not that there aren’t the same types of people on the left and right, but rather that you on the right elevate yours to leaders. Violent revolution, “second-amendment remedies,” “lock and load,” “armed and dangerous,” “hunting Democrats;” these are all examples of the violent fantasies of popular, prominent Republican officials and candidates.
It’s not the idiots that are different. The difference is the left doesn’t want ours at all, while the right wants theirs in charge.
-
Gulliver,
You said:
Historically in this country the the vast majority of violence by citizens has come from the left.
You never said anything about “representing the core ideals of a political party.”
THAT SAID, however, White Supremacy was the dominant political ideology of the South from the 1870s to the 1960s, and violence in the name of white supremacy far outstrips ANY left-wing political violence.
As for the Pinkerton’s, the Republicans were and remain the party of laissez-faire….
-
Doug,
I asked you before, and I’ll ask you again.
I’d like you to show me one example–just one!–of a liberal commentator claiming that no liberals anywhere in the USA have engaged in violent rhetoric. If you can’t do that, then you had better retract what you said, and apologize for attacking a straw man. Otherwise, you will lose a lot of people’s respect for your intellectual integrity.
-
Alec baldwin
Actor.
Betty Williams
Not even American.
Obama saying to get in his opponents faces, to bring a gun to a knife fight, & to punish his enemies.
Well, at least you picked an American politician. One out of three ain’t bad!
Sorry, but anonymously sourced quotes of Obama using metaphors don’t quite rise to the level of Republican candidates openly advocating violent revolution and secession. But let’s have a look, shall we?
“get in his opponents faces”
Hardly violent rhetoric. I get in people’s faces all the time, with never a violent moment.
to bring a gun to a knife fight
An old line from The Untouchables, in the context of fighting back against Republicans dirty tricks.
He [Obama] warned that the general election campaign could get ugly. “They’re going to try to scare people. They’re going to try to say that ‘that Obama is a scary guy,’ ” he said. A donor yelled out a deep accented “Don’t give in!”
“I won’t but that sounded pretty scary. You’re a tough guy,” Obama said.
“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
Anyway, this was probably an unwise choice of words. But unless you’re incredibly dense and don’t get the reference and the context, it does not suggest advocacy of violence. On the flipside, what could “second-amendment remedies” possibly mean except shooting people? Is that a metaphor for something?
I would also note that Obama’s statement did not result in liberals all rushing out and buying guns. Right wing rhetoric about Obama, on the other hand, has driven huge increases in gun sales and a number of deadly shootings.
“Punishing enemies”
Here’s what Obama said:
“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s going to be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”
Now, it’s quite clear Obama is talking about “punishing” and “rewarding” by voting at the ballot box. No honest interpretation of this statement would suggest Obama is advocating punishing anyone with violence.
What I’m talking about is the huge popularity of right wing politicians, elected officials, and media personalities who explicitly, not metaphorically, advocate violence if they don’t get their way.
-
My primary reaction to this is disgust. I didn’t watch the video, but assuming it says what is being claimed, it’s absolutely awful. I wish the primary reaction of everybody to seeing this would be to denounce it, not to use it as a cudgel in a partisan debate.
That said, the idea that this “proves” that the left and the right are just as bad is ridiculous. The examples that Mataconis lists are, if anything, evidence of how weak that case is. The Graysons of the world have never had the platform of the Limbaughs, Becks, Levins, etc. People can make a lot of money spouting rightwing craziness because there is a hungry market for rightwing craziness because there is a lot of craziness amongst far right wingers. People can not make as much money doing the same on the left because there is no comparable market for such craziness. You would think the alleged lovers of the free market would understand this.
-
“Really, this is the best you can do? ”
But this is about the extent to which reporting standards of the tea party are. Get an event with tens of thousands of people, find 2 guys in it with a sign that has racist undertones then write an entire week of articles and cable news “analysis” panels on how the tea party at large is racist at heart.
“People can not make as much money doing the same on the left because there is no comparable market for such craziness. ”
I don’t know. Olberman seemed to have been doing pretty well for himself for quite a while. How many times have we heard “racist tea bagger” thrown around as if that lable is harmless?
It also dynamic when a certain group is not in power. Those out of power are alwasy more wild with their emotions because they are angry/ upset with the status quo. Go back to the Bush years and it was mostly the left that was throwing out crazy comments as they were the ones who were enraged.
-
“First, try addressing my point, without diverting and disseminating (sp?)”
Oh, like you did when you typed this tripe…
“Historically in this country the the vast majority of violence by citizens has come from the left.”
…and then moved the goalposts to this…
“I’m sorry, did I miss a period of history where either one of these represented the core values of a political party?”
…it’s little wonder that you now want to run away…
-
@EJ: “I don’t know. Olberman seemed to have been doing pretty well for himself for quite a while.”
So you list a grand total of one person. And that person doesn’t even have a job anymore. Boy, there sure must be a huuuuuge market for leftward craziness if the most prominent leftwing blowhard just got fired by his profit-motivated corporate bosses.
You guys don’t seem to realize whose point you’re helping to prove.
-
Alan Grayson, Ed Schultz, Shelia Jackson Lee.
The inability of you guys on the left to see that those people are no different from the idiots on the right is the epitome of partisan blinders.
A truly ridiculous thing to say. Your side spews literally thousands of hours of insanity for every little pipsqueak of crazy that comes from our side.
And you know it. And we know you know it. So why try to pass off this bogus equivalency? All it does is earn laughs at your expense.
-
Hey, just applying the same standard to Common Cause and their allies that so many people applied to the Tea Party — find a few attendees and attribute their views to the entire group. But I think you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone from the Tea Party who’d go on camera advocating the torture, maiming, and lynching of a federal official of the status of a Supreme Court Justice.
And again, take a black man out and hang him? Nope, no racial elements there.
J.
-
anjin, you need to pay better attention. EXCESSIVE taxation. For example, if one’s effective tax rate is 33%, then the first 20 minutes you work for the government.
But “we’re mad because we’re being treated like slaves” is comparable to torturing, maiming, and lynching a Supreme Court justice? Man, that’s some weak sauce.
J.
-
> But “we’re mad because we’re being treated like slaves” is comparable to torturing, maiming, and lynching a Supreme Court justice? Man, that’s some weak sauce.
Well, thats not what I said anyway, but don’t let that stop you.
> EXCESSIVE taxation. For example, if one’s effective tax rate is 33%, then the first 20 minutes you work for the government.
So you are saying President Eisenhower was a slavemaster?
