Why stop at the '60s when we could include anti-FDR incitements from the 1920s and '30s? …or we could avoid the inevitable infinite regress and try to discuss the current political climate. EDIT: yup, xenophon41, it’s liberal hypocrisy once again.
I don’t know about Bricker, but it seems like common sense to me.
Of course, it will still be common sense if someone attacks due to their left-wing convictions, it wil be equally fair to attack the left.
If you meant “rhetoric” instead of “convictions”, then I still agree, but with the same sort of caveat.
We can’t really show that this person committed a rape because of pornography, and due to the First Amendment we can’t really do anything to reduce the amount of pornography produced, but we still need to condemn the pornographers and their nasty product.
IYSWIM.
Regards,
Shodan
Regards,
Shodan
Dear God, has anyone informed the FBI that this terrorist is on the loose?
And friend Shodan helpfully produces the apolitical and totally nonpartisan David Horowitz to show us the continuing critical importance of 1960’s radicalism. Well played use of instant irony sir.
Um, right wing Israeli assassin … I’m not sure where you’re going with this, Mr. Moto. If he were an American, it would be a Second Amendment, does Israel even have a second amendment equivalent?
I’m not surprised that leftists’ immediate reaction was to blame their ideological enemy. Politics is tribal, and folks will grab any club that lets them beat those fools on the other side - Bayesian inference and intellectual rigor be damned. What is surprising is the extent to which the media transparently let left-leaning journalists act based on their kneejerk biases. This whole episode is rather revealing on both the allegiances of the media elite and the decaying hold of the tradition of journalistic objectivity. They’ve probably tipped their hand more than they’d have liked.
Again, this went both ways. And your post seems to reveal the same bias you’re pointing out in others.
Really, so you don’t think there’s any logical connection of the absolute demonification of the left by the mainstream right - EVIL SOCIALIST COMMUNIST MUSLIM SLEEPER AGENTS - and thinly veiled calls to violence (“second amendment solutions”, etc) - and the assassination of a democratic politician? This is just a “oh, blame the other side no matter what” thing to you? Just totally random, no logic behind it whatsoever?
Sure, if you can show the mainstream rhetoric on the left is creating a poisonous atmosphere.
I doubt Bobby Seale was commanding $75,000 speaking fees as Palin does (not to mention her TV appearances and her own reality TV show).
I do not think Bobby Seale had a nationally syndicated radio show like Rush Limbaugh does.
I do not think Bobby Seale had a national, daily show on a major news network as Glenn Beck does.
I do not think Bobby Seale had numerous best selling books like Ann Coulter does (Coulter being known for such gems as, “My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.”).
And, FWIW, Seale did go to jail for his actions.
So sure, if you can find the equivalent to the above on the left I’m right there with ya.
I’m pretty sure I qualify as a “lefty”. Haven’t even thought about Bobby Seale in maybe thirty years. Until Bricker told me how much I admire him. Rather a surprise, really.
So, tell me, Bricker, which of us has so much as mentioned his name in the last seveal years? And while you’re about it, point out for us who has spoken of the Weather Underground in glowing terms?
Yes. There are extremists on both sides, and people are biased to demonize the other side’s crazies and downplay their own. The left demonizes the right plenty (remember anti-war crazies in the Bush era?) and the right overreacts too. But it’s hard to see that when you’re always surrounded by folks on your own side and live in that sort of partisan echo chamber. In such an environment you’re always bombarded with cherrypicked anecdotes of the mean old other side, and the misdeeds of your own never seem to garner much interest.
The wisest thing is to recognize your tribal biases, attempt to compensate for them, and if you enjoy reading partisan political websites, sample those on the other side (without a reflective arrogance at those deluded fools) to gain a vaguely balanced perspective.
Except, ya know, when the left-wing rhetoric complained about the war, the war actually existed. When the right-wing rhetoric discusses the imminent destruction of everything we hold dear due to socialist fascist policies, the links to reality are considerably more tenuous.
Keep pushing for full equivalence though - you shall overcome someday!
Not to mention the left wing crazies are not front and center. Right wing crazies are in congress (ala Michelle Bachmann or others in congress who called to see Obama’s birth certificate). Add in my list from my last post. And that is just for starters.
Can any vitriol whatsoever on your side of the political spectrum be excused as long as you can find an example you think equals it on the other side of the spectrum? Isn’t there a point where you say, “We can’t go that route no matter what the other side does!”?
OK, fair enough. I listen to Rachel Maddow frequently. A swans neck, a mind like a steel trap, a girlish laugh when she harpoons tighty-righty horseshit, what’s not to love? So, for balance, I should pay respectful attention to…who? Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, Erik Erickon, Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Mike Savage, Matt Drudge, Hugh Hewitt, Michael Medved or any of a list of second stringer local radio talk hosts, each of whom is struggling to reach their paycheck level by spewing more violent venom than the next guy? Wanna bet if I were willing to take the time, I could find you fifty?
I trust you see the problem here.
You forgot Keith Olbermann and Michael Moore and maybe Bill Maher and…I dunno, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert? and…help a guy out here…
No.
Thought this illustrates the issue well:
Yeah, I’ve heard the “if there was an obscure leftist blogger that called Bush bad things for starting an unnecesary war, then it’s the same as a vice presidential candidate endorsing a church that calls our president an illegal muslim” shit over and over. What “anti-war crazies” are you talking about? Just regular anti-war protestors? Kooky conspiracy theorists? If the latter, did they rise to national prominence, being either elected officials or people with a high degree of national exposure?
The irony of this is that you’re absolutely right, yet completely oblivious to the fact that you’re not adhering to this advice at all. I am essentially unpartisan - I am not a democrat, nor have I ever been. I’ve been in the past much more sympathetic to republican ideals - the shit they say they stand for. I’ve voted for more Republicans than Democrats.
So my criticisms of the right do not come from an echo chamber or tribal affiliations. Even when I was anti-democrat and more pro-republican, I did not think the democrats of national prominence were crazy or over the top - I just thought they were wrong. Sometimes liars, I guess - like Michael Moore. But nothing equivelant of the completely over the top baseless hatred that the Republicans now spew.
And for that matter, I don’t think the Republicans did the same thing for most of my adult lifetime. They went nuts over the Clinton blowjob thing, and the idea that somehow if you didn’t support Bush you were a traitor was definitely worrisome and a step in the wrong direction, but even factoring that in, the crazy jump in rhetoric that has occured since roughly 2007 is completely unprecedented and way more intense and yet with less substance than anything I’ve ever seen.
Quite frankly, anyone who pretends they can’t see the massive radicalization of the last 3 or 4 years I can’t take seriously. It’s not subtle. It’s not a matter of subjectivity. How can anyone honestly be blind to the rise to prominence of the extremists? That takes complete blind partisanship and a complete lack of critical thinking. Maybe they do see it, but they think it’s necesary to act dumb to present a united front. I honestly don’t get it.
Anyway, I’m not seeing stuff that isn’t there because of my political biases. Rather, I was sympathetic to republican ideals (again, what they say they stand for) but was driven away by the party (and media) takeover by the crazies.