David Corn explains the huge difference between our fringe and the Republican fringe

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/04/05/political-extremism-made-in-the-gop/

Political Extremism: Made in the GOP?
Posted: 04/5/10

The other night I was on "Hardball"; the subject was right-wing extremism. We discussed recent conservative militia action, Rush Limbaugh referring to the Obama administration as a "regime," and Tea Partiers comparing Obama to Hitler. The point: extreme rhetoric can lead to extreme action -- and Republican leaders have been aiding and abetting the extremism. Afterward, some conservative viewers complained, noting that during the Bush-Cheney years you could find left-wing foes of the administration waving signs at rallies decrying the "fascists" in the White House and calling for "regime change." Isn't it a double-standard, they asked, to bellyache about conservatives using such language nowadays?

No. To back that up, I'll point to Nov. 5, 2009, a day that should live in infamy. On that afternoon, on Capitol Hill, Republican congressional leaders struck an alliance with extremism.

Several thousand Tea Party protesters had gathered at the Capitol to protest the health care reform bill that would soon be approved by the House. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who once branded Obama "very anti-American," had called for this emergency rally. The GOP House minority helped organize the event, and the top Republican leaders of the House -- John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Roy Blunt, Mike Pence, and others -- were on hand to eagerly address the gathering. They endorsed this opposition and urged on the angry protesters. But what sort of crowd was this? When speakers compared Obama's health care overhaul to European socialism, the demonstrators chanted, "Nazis! Nazis!" And none of the GOP House leaders present objected.

Ponder this for a moment. At an event officially sanctioned (and cheered on) by the House Republicans, the assembled were calling the president and the majority of Congress "Nazis." Nothing of this sort occurred during the Bush-Cheney years. This was a low moment in American history -- and it marked the GOP's capitulation to the extremism of its Tea Party base. Silence not only implies consent; it can be read as encouragement. And words can lead to action. If someone truly believes Obama and the Dems are akin to Nazis, what would be the appropriate course of action to take? Brad Pitt's character in "Inglorious Basterds" knows: you kill 'em. To be blunt: if protesters are shouting "Nazis! Nazis!" and GOP leaders are supporting the demonstration, what signal could that send to a possible violent nutcase?

[louis-t]

1. repugs love the anger, but are not prepared for the consequences.

This bunch WILL turn on them eventually.

[Mojeoux]

10. They went to Africa and condemned Gays and were all sheepish when

one African country declared homosexuality a crime punishable by death. oops

[spanone]

2. k&r....

[maxsolomon]

3. when the left calls someone a Fascist,

there is typically a reason that jibes with the definition of Fascism.

[intheflow]

9. Exactly!! n/t

[Ron Green]

4. Another huge difference between our fringe and their fringe:

Awareness and understanding as opposed to fear and ignorance.

When millions of us marched in streets around the world in 2002-2003, it was from an understanding that Cheney-Bush were lying to us and manipulating the Congress to wage illegal war for Empire.

When thousands of Teabaggers rally in their lawn chairs, purporting to uphold the Constitution and save the Republic from creeping socialism, they are afraid of a Black Man in the White House and ignorant of the fact that he's a straight-down-the-middle politician, a smart and capable one, but with plenty of corporate connections.

To equate such dissent on the right with what happened during Cheney-Bush (the above example being only one of so many) is in itself ignorance of the highest order.

[damntexdem]

5. The GOP is like a surrey -- their fringe is on the top.

;-)

[gateley]

6. Racism. nt

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

7. The shit that's pissing me off is how liberal pundits let it slide and fail to hit back when

people exclaim that "it happens on BOTH sides!" *It* most certainly does not.

Ed Schultz is a prime example of how unprepared liberals/progressives/Democrats are when it comes to hitting back. He continues to have callers phone in to his show, claiming to be "independent" or not belonging to either party. However, they rail against Democrats/liberals ONLY, dismissing any charges about right wing propaganda or tactics. Rather than Ed hitting back and explaining that it's NOT on both sides, he allows the callers' claims to go unchallenged.

As long as we are unable or unwilling to hit back at right wing nuttery and propaganda, we will continue to put ourselves and our leaders at risk. The fact is that the M$M is allowing Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin to push the claim that there hasn't been any insiteful rhetoric or ugly behavior on the part of the tea baggers and the Republicans. The M$M is quiet about all the hateful rhetoric coming from the likes of Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh and doesn't correct ANY misinformation being peddled to Americans.

And until we take it upon ourselves to be forceful in hitting back, we will continue to lose this battle.

Rachel is o.k., but she's too giggly and quirky. Instead of smiling, laughing and making a joke out of the fact that Brown is lying about her and using her to raise money, she needs to demand that he be reprimanded or file a lawsuit against him for defammation.

[monmouth]

8. And this is why we will not see David Shuster on MSNBC anymore I fear.

He didn't play that game and gave back as good as they spewed. He will be sorely missed.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

11. What did he do? And why is he being fired?

Sadly so many people falsely believe that MSNBC is a "liberal network"! To my knowledge, only Rachel, David, Keith and Ed are purported, self-proclaimed liberals. I'd put Tamryn Hall on that list, too. But, that's it. Those are the only liberals that I know of on MSNBC.

Chris Matthews is not liberal. And I hate it when people put him in that category. He is a conservative, "jimmy Carter" Democrat at best.

[Toots]

12. If talk show hosts were to confront every guest how many would return?

And once people realized that they were not going to get their talking points out, none would show up at all and then there would be no show. It is better to let them speak and then after they have left the studio present the truth. But the truth has to come out or else Republicans will win the battle. They are indeed the best LIARS

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

13. Yes. While I understand that it is impossible to confront *every* liar,

I would like to see more of an effort made to correct the record and do it promptly and forcibly.

My issue is not necessary attacking every instance; rather, it is *HOW* the response is made.

We must be more forceful in combatting these lies. And when we do correct the record, we have to try and make our points as succintly as possible.

The winning formula for the Republicans and the wingnuts is that they reduce the debate down to a few simply catch phrases and words that they repeat over and over again, no matter what evidence/facts disproves their lies.

We have to do a better job at pushing our arguments in a clearer, more succinct and FORCEFUL manner.

[apnu]

14. Its easy to tear down, the "both sides" argument is hogwash for this one reason...

... with all the vitriol against Bush/Cheney, no Democratic politician came out and egged on the protesters. Republicans do, major players in the GOP machine no less.

These pinhead carping about "both sides do it" always fail to mention this major point, its classic straw man.