For all the people who say "both sides are responsible," I have a great big "Fuck you."

[TheWraith]

Yeah, "both sides do it." And it's just a coincidence that every time someone goes off and kills a guard at the Holocaust museum, or shoots up a bunch of cops, or murders someone in a church, it's a right-winger. I'm sure George Tiller would affirm that it's just a coincidence, even though nobody's tried to knife Randall Terry. I bet all those folks who got killed at the Unitarian Church in Tennessee, or the builders of the mosque in Tennessee that had an arson attack, would agree. And so would the Democratic officials and "liberal media" figures targeted by the anthrax terrorist in 2001.

The black Congressman who was spit on and slurred by the Teabaggers during HCR? The rocks through the windows of the Monroe County Democratic Committee headquarters, less than an hour drive from my house? Coincidence. The guy who flew an airplane into the IRS building? Accident. The vandalism of Louise Slaughter's office? The liberal activist who got curb-stomped by Tea Partiers? No big deal. It must be, if as people say, "both sides do it," because I haven't heard one single instance of some disgruntled MoveOn member trying to shank John Boehner, or an activist driving their Prius straight through a crowd of Tea Partiers trying to run them down.

From Glenn Beck's follower wanting to wipe out the Tides Center, to the would-be assassination of Representative Giffords, from mail-bombs to Janet Napolitano to the guy in Pittsburgh who murdered three cops with a shotgun because he hated Obama, every single case of domestic political violence in recent years has come from the extreme right, directed either at the left, people thought to be on the left, or mainstream America.

You cannot find one single Republican congressperson who has been letterbombed, or powder-mailed, or shot at, because it hasn't happened. So don't tell me that it's a universal problem. Don't give me false equivalences. Don't try to tell me I'm paranoid when I say that the people controlling the right wing want to encourage violence, or that our people need to protect ourselves.

A few months ago, I became part of a fairly high profile effort to support the Park 51 mosque project in New York City. Since that day, my 12 gauge shotgun and about two dozen shells for it have never been far from my bed when I go to sleep, because I am acutely aware that the level of hate, bigotry, and violence that the right wing is intent on inflaming towards liberals doesn't have an "off" button, and that this sort of fringe extremism can spiral out of control quickly. It's this sort of witch's brew of xenophobia, hatred, and desire for control that brought the Brownshirts to Germany, or the genocide to Rwanda. Political violence isn't exclusively an "over there" problem--we've been lucky enough to have a civil, nonviolent political process for the last hundred years.

So don't tell me "it can't happen here." Because it already has.

[Peregrine Took]

1. Kieth O. just said that BOTh sides have to calm down our rhetoric.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. And Keith is wrong about that.

There is no equivalency.

[bettyellen]

10. he said it only in the context that both sides must stop NOW. but blamed the RW for the

mojority of it for the past few years. very honest reporting. the TPM guy said the LW hasn;t been doing this since the late sixties.

[Warren Stupidity]

17. what are we supposed to stop, exactly?

Pointing out that the right is saturating the airwaves with violent hateful rhetoric? Noting that their actions are resulting in actual acts of political violence?

[bettyellen]

26. the threats toward people in public life. the video and transcript will be up soon, I m sure.

he says it better than I ever could.

[JustAnotherGen]

37. As well

In regards to comments he made about HRC during the 08 primary. Meaning he/himself/the media. He also reached right out to me/us and told us NOT to retaliate.

He was being responsible. Something sorely lacking in other talking heads.

[Neurotica]

However, he did say there is no equivalency in his talk

with Josh Marshall from TPM

[2Design]

14. you keep repeating that lie instead of going and listening again

[TheWraith]

18. Keith should know better than that.

He rightly took Jon Stewart to task not that long ago for doing something similar, creating a false equivalence between the left and right on rhetoric.

[ZombieHorde]

77. Stewart did not create a false equivalency. You simply misunderstood what he was saying. nt

[liberation]

128. So were are the hordes of Marxists from the extreme left trying to subvert the US constitution

... that Stewart used to make his case (i.e. the false equivalence)?

Explain away, oh enlightened one....

[ZombieHorde]

131. Although I must thank you for recognizing me as the enlightened one, I can't really make sense of

your question.

[Doctor_J]

57. Keith's special comment was good until then

His jab at Hilary during the primaries had nothing whatsoever to do with hate radio's 24/7 incitement. It tainted his entire SC, IMO.

[MsPithy]

79. I think you and some others here missed Keith's point.

Like an adult, Keith reviewed his own actions. He re-apologized for, repudiated and promised to never repeat, ONE instance of violent rhetoric from his show. The Republicans, like children, are falling all over themselves to deny and deflect their responsibility. Because Keith made the point in this way there can be no doubt about the contrast between Democrats and Republicans, and who should take the blame for inciting this completely predictable violence.

[pasto76]

82. KO's statement is a continuation of the problem

yes D and R both do unethical things in congress, and are at the beck and call (mostly) of the lobbyists and corporations.

However, Dems DO NOT INCITE VIOLENCE TO WIN. That is purely a R tactic.

"trying to be nice and reasonable" like KO did for a second in his comment is only giving the hate mongers a pass.

[molly77]

103. I second that fuck you.

What public figure is actually talking about the right wing hate speech? I can't think of one.

[Lint Head]

2. Did I miss something about a republican being shot?

[jtrockville]

19. Or receiving an anthrax-laced letter?

[stray cat]

3. Progressives are incapable of murder? Since when? It's worse on the right

But the left is not as pure as newly fallen snow only advocating peace, love and understanding

[TomClash]

9. In this country recently?

Not since the SLA.

[TheWraith]

32. Incapable? No. But left-wingers aren't out there assassinating Republican congresscritters. nt

[liberation]

120. Whatever.

Even when a dem is lying with a bullet to her head, after being labelled a target by Palin et al no less, you guys from the center-right can't help themselves and have to stick it to the left.

[EstimatedProphet]

124. STFU

[JDPriestly]

133. So, list 3 acts of violence by liberals in the US in the last 30 years.

Acts that have to do with politics and not personal rampages or reactions to police repression --- just random acts of violence that are intended to harm political opponents or people who are on the opposite side of an issue (like the killing of the abortion doctors). Name three.

[malaise]

4. Including KO

:puke:

[bettyellen]

15. he was being strict about what is regrettable sppech and admitted he had regrets

himslef. i didn;t hear him call out a single lefty, and he named every RWer and quoted them. Did you see it? I thought it was very powerful, very honest

[TomClash]

6. Kick and Rec

You're not paranoid.

[bigwillq]

7. I don't support anyone that calls for violence.

If the left, or a liberal or a democrat calls for violence, then I don't support them and would hold them responsible if their words actually inspired violence.

[Raster]

8. Thank You!

:applause:

[liberalmuse]

11. Amen.

I'm sorry, but the truth is, right wing radicals have been killing lefties for decades, if not eons. It isn't a problem on both sides. I may call Palin the 'c' word here (no one else gets that particular distinction), but I'm not going to fucking shoot her. Liberals tend to have more self awareness and understand ethics more than right wingers. We get frustrated, but tend to be satisfied with the fact that we are more intelligent (and smarmily so) than the neanderthals who tend to flock to the right wing. I mean, we don't give a shit about a mansion in the sky or a crown of jewels for simply treating people the way we'd like to be treated. If you fucking have to have a carrot dangled in front of you to do the right thing, you ain't that moral of a person.

[DearAbby]

55. AMEN

:applause:

[Mad_Dem_X]

63. + 1,000

[renate]

87. "If you have to have a carrot dangled in front of you to do the right thing"

"... you ain't that moral of a person."

Very well said.

And I really think you're right about the difference in the natural inclination to violence, at least these days.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tekisui]

23. That is not leftist talking or thought. It's anti-government libertarianism.

It is delusional and erratic, but it is closest to libertarian thought.

He was no lefty.

[denem]

25. Ayn Rand was a stanch atheist. That proves nothing.

Libertarian - not left wingers, routinely call for the abolition of the Fed and restoring the gold stand.

[justiceischeap]

31. The things you're using as proof to prove that he's from the left can also be used to prove he's not

It's the extreme right who believes that the government is trying to control us through grammar
It's the extreme right who feels that we should do away with any currency that isn't backed by gold and silver
It's the extreme right that LOVES them some Mein Kempf
It's those on the right who LOVES them some Ayn Rand

I could go on...

[JDPriestly]

134. No one on the left likes Ayn Rand or Mein Kampf although

dislike for the Fed is both left and right. Wanting a gold standard is more common among people on the right, but some on the left favor a gold standard. I doubt that anyone on the left would would care enough about the Fed or the gold standard to resort to violence.

The real difference at this time between the left and the right in our country is the extent of the patience with the slow process of change in the system. Everybody wants change. We don't agree on what kind of change we should have. That is a matter of course.

But we on the left, although impatient for the changes we want, and although quick to gripe and fuss and argue and needle each other about the issues, really don't threaten, or even talk or think about using force to get change. The most violence you will get out of people on the left is a peaceful march.

On the right, however, some individuals carry guns to political rallies. They wear tee-shirts with violent slogans (sometimes in gest), they use a lot of violent metaphors and slurs. Rarely if ever do you see that kind of post on DU or by liberals on any websites. And I have never heard talk of that sort in political meetings of Democrats -- never, ever and I've been active a long time.

[treestar]

13. You're right.

The most that comes from the left is a generalized call for a revolution of some kind. But there aren't any concrete examples I can think of.

[JDPriestly]

135. Revolutions don't have to be violent.

You can have revolutions in technology or in methodology, all kinds of revolutions that are not violent. In fact, I would say that we have been going through the computer or artificial intelligence revolution (sort of like a modern industrial revolution) for some time now. Revolution just means definite, swift and very drastic change as it is used nowadays.

[Richardo]

16. Bravo. I'd like to copy and pass around if you're amenable.

Highest :rec: :patriot:

[TheWraith]

27. You're welcome to. nt

[Kaleva]

20. I say the shooter is responsible.

[AsahinaKimi]

21. I agree

The Republican, Tea Bagger, right wing is about violence. They have proved it over and over again. I can't recall too many people who were liberal inciting violence.. maybe I am blind and deaf, but I haven't seen it.

[butterfly77]

22. Kick,kick,kick &recommended!

LOL!I concur :kick:

[seabeyond]

24. agree. nt

[ThomCat]

28. Both sides DON'T do it.

While they lie and try that claim that both sides do it, they're just trying to find some excuse to avoid investigating and prosecuting people on the right for threats of violence, and for real violence.

Meanwhile we have the FBI rounding up nonviolent peace activists and holding them without charges indefinitely because for some reason they think peace activists are the biggest violent threat to this country right now.

That's right, they think that peace activists are a threat, but somehow the right-wing, gun-toting religion inspired nuts who really do attack and assassinate people every few years aren't on their most-wanted list. They aren't rounding up the right to lifers, the militia secessionists, the tea-baggers who loaded weapons to political events with printed threats announcing the intention to use them "next time," et al.

They think vegans are a threat. They think liberals who want free speech are a threat. They think advocates for the poor are a threat. The government is happy to spy on, infiltrate, and try to disrupt any lefty activist group because trying to help people is seen as terrorist.

But these people who openly talk about wanting to hunt and kill people on the left, they aren't seen as terrorists, and even when they do hurt and kill people, it gets minimized as just some lone wacko who went nuts. It is never legitimated as a big system that educates and trains these people to hate and aims them at targets on the left.

Why does our own government And the corporate media invest so much in this double standard?

[stillwaiting]

58. Because our government and media are owned and run by massively wealthy right wing assholes.

They LOVE the successful movement that's clearly been built against the left/liberals over the past decades.

They, no doubt, want it to continue (if not ramp up).

The left is the only threat to their financial monopoly, and they will do anything to hold on to it.

[Demoiselle]

29. Well said, Wraith. (nt)

[WinkyDink]

30. Seconded.

[SargeUNN]

33. Your title tells exactly why it has some truth

Fact: I have almost totally quit posting here because of the hostile nature of this site at too many times.

Fact: You used a closed minded, no debate encouraged statement with the FUCK YOU ending. That tells you don't want to hear it and your message is hard to read because your words are so limiting.

Fact: I have said and still feel that I will not do political talk again, which I did progressive talk for 3 1/2 years, but the hostile calls I got from left and right at times caused me to feel my life could be in jeopardy so when I left and was asked about coming back I said no.

Fact: I live in Arizona and I certainly have had times that I was as afraid of being a target as I was when I KNEW for a fact there were those trying to kill me when I stood up to Haley Barbour and his Corporate buddies I took on to keep people in 2 section 8 housing complex from being evicted in 30 days just a few short months after Katrina. The corporations wanted the land for commerical devolpment. However, I have felt that same type concern here in Arizona among those that call themselves liberals or progressives although not at the same threat level, but to a some degree.

I know some don't want to hear this, but it is the way it is and living in Arizona I certainly feel it is time the vicious and flaming talk be tempered with some thought of influencing excessive hatred.

If in any statement I have ever made on air spurred violence I denounce it and as for any post of that nature here, I also denounce and apologize for. It is time we stop the flaming and the extreme harshness.

[TheWraith]

34. Please show me the examples of liberals going out and attempting to kill conservatives.

That is my point. The idea that somehow, the left wing is equally responsible for the undercurrent of threatened political violence in this country. There's a long, long list of right-wing attacks on the left and the middle. There is no such list of left-wing attacks on the right.

[justiceischeap]

36. How far back do you want to go? Or are you referring to the current climate.

In the 60s there was a lot of radical left violence towards the right (and center). Granted it wasn't towards congress critters necessarily but it was towards the political system. However, your point stands that since then, the left has resorted to other means to get our point across.

[Quantess]

39. The '60s was over 40 years ago.

A lot of Americans were not even born then. No, the 60s is too long ago to even enter the discussion, IMHO.

[Hello Joe]

43. So what should we say about this?

Here is something more recent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots

Excerpt --- Widespread looting, assault, arson and murder occurred, and property damages topped roughly US$1 billion. In all, 53 people died during the riots and thousands more were injured.

Just sayin

[justiceischeap]

46. I think the '92 riots and what happened today are two separate issues

But thanks for trying. :)

[Hello Joe]

47. Sorry about that

Guess I misunderstood.

I was just responding to your ----- "since then, the left has resorted to other means to get our point across."

[Quantess]

49. Okay, I'll accept that, sort of...

That was pretty much a racially fueled event, which to me, doesn't exactly = liberals gone wild.

If that's all you've got, then I'll take it.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Quantess]

52. Sorry, I was not trying to minimize the LA riots.

"if that's all you got" meant, it's a real stretch to say it was about liberals taking aggression out on political targets. And what do Dems have to do with any of that? Sorry, I'm really not following your argument. Dems are to blame for the Rodney King riots?

Yes, I agree that the shooter is mentally ill. So we can agree on that.

You wouldn't blame him on any party, but you do feel that the LA riots were a black eye to be blamed on Democrats?

Edit to add: is it because Obama is black?

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Quantess]

54. I know you're not trying to be argumentative.

It's just that I don't agree that racially motivated riots qualify as Democrat or liberal violence. It sort of fits the category, but not that well. Racial tension goes a lot deeper than just political.

As for the Obama reference, I'm just trying to figure out how Democrats get the blame for the LA riots, in your mind. I'm making a connection that the rioters were mostly black, and Obama also happens to be black. I know, it's a stretch, but I really am at a loss for why Democrats are somehow responsible for a race riot.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Quantess]

75. Yes, first and foremost, the shooter had serious mental problems.

It will be very interesting to see how the case unfolds.

Looks like your start at posting here was fairly intense. Sometimes the arguments are more fun to read than to participate in.

As a group, DU is pretty definitely progressive and left. Some of us are farther to the left than others, but aside from that, there are also a lot of great articles to be found here.

I hope you stick around. Welcome to DU!

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Quantess]

147. Why not? DU is a great place to read new information, news articles, etc

that are not found in the mainstream, corporate media.

Edit to add: the newbie in question seems sincere and reasonable, just misinformed.

[Name removed]

152. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Quantess]

153. This person seems to want to stick around.

I am not insecure enough as to worry whether I am "trolled". Thanks for your concern, Dude.

But, there are many people who are misinformed and misguided by our media. It is not their fault.

[whathehell]

99. Lefties have mental problems too -- they still don't shoot people for being Right Wing

I know what you're saying to Hello Joe...but there's just no equivalence..NONE.:shrug:

[Quantess]

137. No, there isn't an equivalence. I never said there was, nor did I get convinced there was.

I figured I'd agree to disagree with our newbie, Hello Joe, since he seems like a reasonable person.

[lob1]

94. But the riots were not provoked in advance by dems.

The riots weren't political in nature, as in republican or democrat. And if the riots were perpetuated by democrats, the victims of their anarchy was also dems because they lived in the same area. It's not the same at all.

[Name removed]

146. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JDPriestly]

139. The issue is whether the rhetoric of Democratic leaders and

spokespeople and the rhetoric of Republican leaders and spokespeople are comparable in terms of inciting violence in those individuals who are mentally unstable.

The riots in LA were not incited by the comments of Democratic leaders. No Democratic leaders were inciting violence in LA.

The 1992 Los Angeles Riots, also known as the 1992 Los Angeles Civil Unrest<1><2><3> and Rodney King Uprising,<4> were sparked on April 29, 1992, when a jury acquitted four white Los Angeles Police Department officers accused in the videotaped beating of black motorist Rodney King following a high-speed pursuit. Thousands of people in the Los Angeles area rioted over the six days following the verdict. At that time, similar, smaller riots and anti-police actions took place in other locations in the United States and Canada.<5> Widespread looting, assault, arson and murder occurred, and property damages topped roughly US$1 billion. In all, 53 people died during the riots and thousands more were injured.<6>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots

Mayor Tom Bradley (African-American if you recall), the governor (Wilson at the time) and President George H.W. Bush along with all kinds of leaders from both parties urged calm. The riots had nothing to do with political language. They were simply a reaction to poverty and injustice.

That is a totally different matter --- not comparable at all.

[JDPriestly]

138. Hello Joe, I'm from LA and was living not far from the riot areas.

Name one Democratic politician who used any sort of violent rhetoric at that time that set off those riots. I don't believe there was one single politician who encouraged those riots.

The riots were a response to the racist Rodney King decisions.

By the way, I am white but worked for a homeless project downtown at that time.

[JDPriestly]

136. I was in LA during the 1992 riots and working and living in areas not that

far from the riot zone. There was nothing left or right about those riots. The rioters were hungry folks tired of sleeping on the floor when others were sleeping on mattresses. Lots of immigrants and people who felt they had been victimized by racism all their lives. Those riots were not due to rhetoric on the left. They were set off by the Rodney King verdicts and the reports in the mainstream news about the Rodney King verdicts. The community leaders and political leaders on left and right tried to discourage the rioting. Meanwhile certain elements in our police force -- led by a man who was most definitely not left-wing, sat on their hands until the riots got out of hand.

I remember standing in my office in downtown LA watching the smoke from the first of the fires in the impoverished areas of South LA.

Those were pretty much race riots. They were not in any way fostered or encouraged or incited by the rhetoric of LA politicians on the left.

[MH1]

59. That was a riot sparked by an immediate event.

That was NOT brought about by the 'left' using violent metaphors to ostensibly instigate political action.

Did Democratic candidates or political campaign staff pass out flyers showing certain businesses with bullseyes marking them to be 'taken out'?

Can you identify anything that was put out by the left political establishment - and I mean the part of it that actually gets elected, not some gang members or fringe group that will never see political office - prior to the riots, that is analogous to what Palin and Angle and Giffords' opponent have done?

I doubt that you can. The riots were triggered by massive group anger at a very visible perceived injustice, that was seen as one more in a long string of injustices.

VERY different than a buildup of suggestive rhetoric that triggers an unstable person to go on a rampage. Except in one aspect: the injustices prior to the LA riots should not have happened, just as the violent rhetoric of those republican campaigns should not have happened.

[Erose999]

68. How do you connect the LA Riots to the Left? I don't know of anyone in the "liberal media" telling

people to go out and riot.

You'll need more than a wiki link to make a connection that implicates the Left. This ought to be good...

[sulphurdunn]

89. Are you suggesting that the acts of police

brutality and judicial malfeasance that the triggered the LA riots were the result of incitement by the left? The source you cite certainly doesn't suggest that.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

112. Violence has consequences. In the real world.

Even though it was not incited by the left, I know a fine young man who was ORPHANED by the L.A. Riots.

He lived in the oriental section of East L.A., went off to play; he was seven years old.
He came back and the hood was in flames. Although I do not know their names, both his parents were killed.

I was told that the blacks torched the convenience stores owned by the orientals, because there were no other businesses to destroy.

He went to high school with my daughter in another city, and they are best of friends for the last ten years.
He is one-quarter Japanese and the rest Mexican.
The people I thought were his parents are actually his aunt and her husband who adopted him.

He graduated from the Ringling School of Art in Sarasota, FL and is an excellent artist.

[sulphurdunn]

117. You sound like

a very pacific and gentle person. Consider: Everything has consequences. Events move only forward.

[JDPriestly]

140. The LA riots are explained on Wikipedia. They had nothing

to do with politics and were not due to political rhetoric by political leaders.

They were due to the Rodney King verdicts and terrible poverty. A lot of innocent people were caught up in the violence. I have known some of them. But our mayor, Tom Bradley, and other Democrats as well as Republ ican leaders worked to try to quiet the crowds and end the violence.

The riots were not due to political rabble rousing. There were no Rush Limbaughs and Sara Palins and Rand Pauls and others on the left who used violent metaphors to excite people to violence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots

he 1992 Los Angeles Riots, also known as the 1992 Los Angeles Civil Unrest<1><2><3> and Rodney King Uprising,<4> were sparked on April 29, 1992, when a jury acquitted four white Los Angeles Police Department officers accused in the videotaped beating of black motorist Rodney King following a high-speed pursuit. Thousands of people in the Los Angeles area rioted over the six days following the verdict. At that time, similar, smaller riots and anti-police actions took place in other locations in the United States and Canada.<5> Widespread looting, assault, arson and murder occurred, and property damages topped roughly US$1 billion. In all, 53 people died during the riots and thousands more were injured.<6>

[stevenleser]

119. I say IBTTS n/t

[H2O Man]

126. pathetic

[Skittles]

150. Hello troll

how does it feel to have the blood of a 9yr old girl on your hands?

[WinkyDink]

61. Being a revolutionary is not the same as targeting ONE side. BTW: If you want to use "the 60's":

JFK
MLK
RFK

Match THAT list.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

64. It was not condoned by the Establishment in the 60's

That is the difference, IMO, between then and now.

[Knight Hawk]

81. Yes

The person who shot Govenor George Wallace was not to the right of him.

[TheKentuckian]

71. Nothing you talked about is anywhere near the decades long murderous agenda of the far Reich

and it is disgusting to attempt to paint it that way.

Increasingly, I'm glad you are off the air Sarge. All you want to do is attack the left and coddle the Reich despite knowing first hand how they operate and what they do in running over the poor, the disenfranchised, and labor in this country.

[fascisthunter]

85. .

[RoccoR5955]

35. K & R.. I couldn't agree more

I do not see Liberals going out and shooting people. No Liberals call for a "second amendment solution."

Though it may have been somewhat true in the 60s, it was because of the draft, and the war. AFAIC, the Left is all about peace and justice, not assassination and violent revolution.

[still_one]

38. I agree, and I bet dollars to donuts the president will play that equivalency game /nt

[Erose999]

70. Oh you know he will roll over. Just like he did when Lauren Valle got stomped by Randroid's

staffers. He has yet to issue a verbal challenge to the hate talkers or the Teahadists.

Like any bully, they pick on you until you challenge them. He is letting them get away with it so they have no reason to stop. I think if he would confront them directly a lot of this foolishness would disappear.

[Carolina]

40. K&O!

Amen to your comment.

I, too, am sick of the false equivalency.

The right wing is SOLELY responsible for today's vitriol and the associated violence. Those who say otherwise, including Keith, are wrong!

[charlie]

41. No shit

They had to dig up a nobody like Ward Churchill and his year old paper no one read so they could tut-tut the left for being as extreme as the fuck-ton of bellicose warmongering shitheads on the right. Who the fuck is Ward Churchill and where is he now?

It's contrived horseshit. It's always contrived horseshit.

[silenttigersong]

42. OK

I admit it. I am a radical- pacifist that believes in Gandhi, not guns.

[Uzybone]

44. yes sir

Fuck those who pull this both sides shit.

[RegieRocker]

45. Exactly.

[AdHocSolver]

48. K and R. n/t

[Hello_Kitty]

50. K to tha R times infinity!!!

:yourock:

[upi402]

60. Yeah sick of DUers saying the media is not to blame

and that these acts are not incited by their hateful propaganda.

[W_HAMILTON]

62. One thing both sides DEFINITELY aren't doing:

Calling for the rhetoric to be toned down, and apologizing for past heated rhetoric.

Those on the left have been doing this, but not those on the right. If the right really believes the left incites just as much violence, why not do like the left is doing and apologize and pledge to watch their words?

[Oilwellian]

65. That was righteous

Yes, the left wing can be violent but what we're seeing today is exclusively from the right and there's a lot of evidence to support that. I may just make a video about it. Hmmm. :freak:

K&R

[Pathwalker]

66. K & R and bookmarked. THANK YOU!

Thank you for this!

[11 Bravo]

67. With a barbed wire dildo.

[RegieRocker]

69. What he said!

[Batgirl]

72. Discussion thread on this topic, dated from last Spring

It's eerie to read comments like this one:

"Somebody may have to get killed...
Before these right wing elements and their enablers are slapped with the "domestic terrorism" label and taken care of."

One small list someone created around the time of healthcare reform vote:
"* 10 house members express fear of right-wing threats
* Brick thrown into Rep. Louise Slaughter's office
* Louise Slaughter receives threats of assassination and family being "snipered"
* Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords' office window shattered
* Tea Party website tries to post Congressman's home address and encourages users to "drop by" and "express their thanks"
* Propane line slashed at Rep. Tom Perriello's brother's home. He has 4 children under the age of 8.
* "No to Obama" brick thrown through the window of the Sedgwick County Democratic Party HQ
* Glass doors destroyed by brick at the Monroe County Democratic Committee in Rochester, N.Y
* To Rep. Bart Stupak: "You’re dead; we know where you live; we’ll get you."
* Rep. Dennis Cardoza receives physical threats
* Chairman of the North Dakota Republican Party read Pomeroy’s cell phone number aloud on the stage
* African-American Rep. James E. Clyburn receives fax of noose
* Death threats aimed as Rep. Louise Slaughter's children. She has 3 daughters.
* Thank you to Sharoney for this one: United march in DC with rifles, ammo and loaded pistols in a "display of their First and Second Amendment rights"
* Thank you to greengrrl for this one: Rep Betsy Markey receiving threats
* Thank you to leftymama for this one: Rep Anthony Weiner receiving anti-Semitic notes, including swastikas
* Thanks again greengrrl!: Blogger suggests bringing back "tarring and feathering"



http://agonist.org/sean_paul_kelley/20100325/right_wing_violence

[hulka38]

73. Thank you for this.

The case of Ayers and the weathermen bombings will be I think the big RW/Centrist talking point to make the case of "both sides". The facts are that Ayers and that group did not target people and it was not proven that they killed anyone but a few of their own bomb makers by accident. Their purpose was to target structures and symbols representing the Viet Nam War. Of course, I don't support this action in the slightest (had to state this explicitly to not confuse certain members). But wikipedia and two minutes should be all you need to completely counter this bogus argument with facts. This leftist group did not target people.

[firehorse]

74. TheWraith, thank you

I wondered the same thing this morning. Are their any examples of the left acting out with guns and violence? Or as you say, driving their Prius's through a crowd of tea party members?

[Fire1]

76. Totally agree with the OP! America is a WAR!! n/t

[Skip_In_Boulder]

78. Show me one statement that could be construed as violent by a liberal

and I can show you a hundred put out by the right wing hate machine.

[WillyT]

80. Big K & R !!!

:kick:

[Knight Hawk]

83. Check your premise.

How sure are you that this guy is on the right?He is more crazy than left or right.From what I have read (but will certunly do more research)he loved to read,smoked pot,read communist literature and was an atheist.Does this fit the profile of a hard core right wing nut case? We need more information.Was the nut who lived in Montana and mailed out a bomb to an Alabama judge etc .a right wing nut caes?

[onestepforward]

84. K&R

[TatonkaJames]

88. I agree with your OP, the "Both sides" argument exists and is a totally different subject though

I have done some research on this and when you look at websites that are operated and participate in by former Bush officials
like "Project for the New American Century" which calls for the revamping of our nuclear missiles and believe we need to be
at war all the time for the economy clearly shows the difference between the parties and their agenda. One is for peace and the
other for imperialism. They want to hold onto the "Empire" in their perverted way instead of realizing we can't and will not be able
to sustain our role as #1 anymore and they and their ilk must come to terms with this so we get past the mindset that led to this
tragedy in AZ.
However I feel we have let them get to the point of no return and control our destiny now which is why you see more and more of this
played out in this nation. We allow criminals to go free when they lay waste to our land (BP) and when we lose our homes. (rubber stamping
foreclosure notices without checking if they are current).
We are screwed and I don't mind saying it will take what Europe is going through now, a full blown revolution. Sorry but that's my opinion.

[hulka38]

91. You are a heretic

and I think that's great. Never apologize for coming to your own thoughtful conclusions.

[TatonkaJames]

144. Thanks for the compliment

and lesson in self assurance. Appreciate it ! :hippie:

[newtothegame]

90. Wow, welcome to DU.

This ought to bring in new voices in droves.

[sulphurdunn]

92. You can bet that there are

a lot of right wing high fives being given in places you might not expect. The right will not come to its senses. The violence it perpetrate is no unintended consequence of careless words and misguided passion.

[JenniferJuniper]

93. Here is just a small sample of the right-wing rhetoric

we've been saturated in for the past several years. Courtesy of the Daily Kos:

I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us 'having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,' and the people -- we the people -- are going to have to fight back hard if we're not going to lose our country."
~Michele Backmann

"Don’t retreat. Instead — reload!"
~Sarah Palin

"I hope that's not where we're going, but you know if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out."
~Sharon Angle

''Our nation was founded on violence. The option is on the table. I don't think that we should ever remove anything from the table as it relates to our liberties and our freedoms.''
—Tea Party-backed Texas GOP congressional candidate Stephen Broden

''I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. ... No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out.''
—Glenn Beck, May 17, 2005

''My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.''
—Ann Coulter

''Obama's got a health care logo that's right out of Adolf Hitler's playbook ... Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate.''
—Rush Limbaugh, Aug. 6, 2009

''Barack Obama ... chose to use his name Barack for a reason -- to identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical? Is -- really? Searching for something to give him any kind of meaning, just as he was searching later in life for religion.''
—Glenn Beck

''The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel.'''
—Sarah Palin

''We need to execute people like (John Walker Lindh) in order to physically intimidate liberals.''
—Ann Coulter

''I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.''
—Rep. Virginia Foxx

''Baby Killer!''
—Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas), shouting at Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI)

''He has no place in any station of government and we need to realize that he is an enemy of humanity.''
—Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), on President Obama's decision to fund international family planning organizations that support legal abortion, Sept. 26, 2009

''I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out: Are they pro-America or anti-America?''
—Rep. Michelle Bachmann, calling for a new McCarthyism, Oct. 2008

"The exact phrase ’separation of Church and State’ came out of Adolph Hitler’s mouth, that’s where it comes from. So the next time your liberal friends talk about the separation of Church and State, ask them why they’re Nazis."
~Glen Urquhart

[golddigger]

95. Great list. We should put up a master list in a forum

of every right-wing teabagger quotes and then send it to Keith and rachel.

[JNelson6563]

96. Hear, hear!

:toast:

[90-percent]

97. 12 gauge shotgun!!!!!

Please be extremely well educated on the handling of a firearm inside your home. The probability of accidents injuring yourself or family members with a gun in the house is extremely high.

Make sure you understand all possibilities and are ready with the most appropriate response either for your intruder or your family!

-90% Jimmy

[TheWraith]

114. Actually, the probability of an accident is incredibly low.

Firearms accidents in the US are at an all-time low after having been falling for decades. And the statistic that a gun in the home is more likely to injure a family member than an intruder is false, based on bad research.

In any event, my 12 gauge is quite safely stored on a wall mount gun rack, magazine loaded, chamber empty, safety on. In that condition, it's about as safe as a firearm can be while also being available for use.

[maritzasolito]

98. "The media trips all over themselves to pump up"

"the fringe wing of the right, including the guy from Westboro church. Funny thing is that when they were trying to ruin the President's chances at the WH, they ran daily endless cycles of Rev Wright saying America's "chickens are coming home to roost," yet I don't recall them falling over themselves to interview him. Nope, they decided to tell you what he was thinking, yet they give the Tea Party a platform to say all types of hateful shit, but its ok I guess because well let's be honest, they are white. They think it is amusing. The Tea Party is nothing more than the bigoted wing of the Republican Party, but the media wouldn't dare say that, but they said all kinds of shit about Wright. They didn't think he was amusing. They didn't call him a hero. They didn't even try to understand where he may have been coming from, and what period he grew up in. They never highlighted his service in the military. Hey I will never justify what he said, I am just making a point about how the media handles things today. They are a disgrace. Palin has said much more hateful things than Wright, but how come she is a hero, popular, and a contender for the WH in 2012 up until this point but Wright was labeled by the media as a "bigot?"
The Tea Party has called the President every name in the book, and they are given a platform, and their rallies are covered, yet the media would never cover Wright at a rally, or lets say Louis Farrakhan. Why is that? Oh yeah, the Tea Party is white. No one who preaches hate should have a platform regardless of color. I am just pointing out how the media is complicit in the dumbing down of America instead of doing anything substantial for this country. What a disgrace. I will not and have not been giving them my viewership. I refuse to reward bad behavior."


"Let's not forget George S. asking the President if "Rev Wright loves this country." A man that served his country at that. Have they ever asked Palin that? When she put her political adversaries in the crosshairs did anybody in the media ask her that?
Has the media ever asked the Republian Party how they can stand at rallies with Tea Party folks comparing our President to a Nazi, and support them with their flaming rhetoric, if they "love this country?" Have they ever questioned the Republicans the way they questioned how the President could be a member of Wright's church? The answer is no. Oh no, they decried the President as racist as well, but no no no, Palin can say all the bigoted BS in the world, and the media wouldn't dare call her that. What about the fact that her husband was a member of an Alaska secessionist group? The media made sure to just ignore that little tidbit. The hypocrisy is astounding. Considering Palin has no military experience, her education doesn't compare to Wrights, and she has said just as much if not more hateful stuff than he has, by the media's standards, doesn't that make Wright qualified to be President? If he came out today saying he was running the media would foam at the mouth digging up those tapes, but not those witch doctor tapes from Palin's church, and again no mention of Todd being a member of a secessionist group. Why is that? I am sure you can understand where I am coming from and now I digress."

I did not write the above, p/u from a comment at OFA.

[DBoon]

100. Left wing anarchists trashing Starbucks does not equal the death of a child

The damage done by the most violent fringe element of the left does not even measure to what "mainstream" talk radio advocates day in and out.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

101. Kick to keep this thread above the passive-aggressive infantilic RW troll copycat.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

102. Kick. Same reason..

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

104. Kick. Same reason.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

105. Kick. Same reason.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

106. Kick. Same reason.

[B Calm]

107. Excellent post! K&R

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ThatsMyBarack]

109. I knew that....

But thanks for pointing that out.

[Bluerthanblue]

110. this attitude helps no one.

It may make you feel better, but it hurts us all ultimately.

I hope you come to understand this.

[20score]

111. K&R! This false equivalency BS is a slap in the face to anyone who respects reality.

[Mafia Killer]

113. you are SO right !

and I hate it when they tell me....calm down...it's just talk....words can't hurt you.
sticks and stones may break my bones......but bullets kill.
I'm like you friend......I'm a liberal with a gun.
shoot at me......I shoot back. period.

they had their "8" years of control.......now they need to get with the program.
America....love it or leave it.
I'd prefer they leave.
and don't come back.
Iraq would be a good place for them to resettle.....after all...they should be looked at as "Liberators" over there.

[JDPriestly]

143. Calm down, now Mafia Killer. Don't let things get to you.

[femrap]

115. I have yet to hear

a call to violence from ANYONE who is either a Dem, a liberal, a progressive, or on MSNBC.

On Faux, it's a daily event.

[Doctor_J]

116. Yeah, if this were happening in the other direction, the right

would be figuring out how to fight back. Here we have a lot of hand-wringing and denial that hate radio is a cancer on this country, and we are in the end stage. Most of these apologists are going on my ignore list. They are a large part of the problem.

[Name removed]

118. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[liberation]

121. So many straw men...

... such potty mouth.

[Swampguana]

122. Just because both sides aren't responsible doesn't mean

liberals should change how they are. No need to stoop to violence.

[TheWraith]

130. If someone shoots at me, I'm damn well going to shoot back.

That's not stooping, it's rationality. I have no desire to see blood running in the streets, but I'm also not going to make myself an easy target, and I'm going to be prepared if these guys choose to cross the line.

[Swampguana]

154. what are you saying?

You mean to say that the next time you go to a rally to support your candidate you're going to come bearing arms?

[Urban Prairie]

123. Almost everything that the Reich-Wing stands for

and wants to see happen or made law in the US would ultimately result in the deaths or imprisonment of tens of millions in the US, IMO. Is pure conservatism itself not a genuine and real threat to the stability, survival and well-being, from birth to death, of ANY US citizen, regardless of their ideology?

They do NOT need to make or have made more or less threats of violence than Democrats/progressives/liberals. There is NO need to make ANY comparisons about who is more responsible. The very core of conservatism is "personal responsibility" and to achieve their ultimate "wet dream" goal of shrinking our government to a size small enough to "drown it in a bathtub" means to me that they would need to privatize everything with the possible exceptions of the military, and the three branches of government, the latter of course, being comprised only of conservatives.

They have made and will CONTINUE to make demands to drastically reduce, if not better still...ELIMINATE all forms of government support for US citizens, and instead, they expect the federal government (or what is left of it), to abandon the disabled, poor, infirm, and aged, ie...anyone who can not or never could support themselves. They firmly believe that only family, friends, relatives, charities, churches, and prayers should serve as the only means of obtaining any assistance or help. That scenario happening would eventually become a PRISON sentence, if not ultimately a DEATH sentence for tens of millions of US citizens, if it was to become reality.

[EstimatedProphet]

125. Agreed, and the fuck you should extend to those here saying the same thing.

[blackspade]

127. Right on.

I second your False Equivalency FUCK YOU!

[Styxiv]

129. EXACTLY!!

I couldn't have said it better myself. Funny how that works huh? IF (not something like this) a right-wingers slurs a Democrat IF you can even get them to admit it it's ALWAYS "Well both sides do it you did it too neh neh" like a little third grader. YET if a liberal slurs some repuke its always "SEE those dam Democrats are at it again I call on them to condemn this action" umm HEY where's the "BOTH sides do it" you were speaking of just a second ago? Funny how that works huh?

I heard a lady on Cspan running with some bullshit she says she heard, saying " I heard a girl who knows this man saying in an interview he was VERY LIBERAL" but later I had MSNBC on and they cut that part out". Ya right they are already blaming this on the left saying he was a lefty. Ya we ALWAYS go around shooting our own like "IF" we even did that sort of thing there aren't enough right-wingers to shoot. (and as I said I'm not advocating this by saying that just making a point).

Are there some nuts on the left WELL DUH every side has a fringe BUT if you could have a poll or gather some sort of percentage I'd be the percent of nuts on the right FAR out weighs the nuts on the left AND they tend to be more violent.

[RoccoR5955]

132. I agree!

And to boot, the people who SHOULD listen to KO's words will not!

[texshelters]

142. "But you liberals use nasty words and call us names" and

that hurts. Ouch, stop it!

Yes, the right are overwhelmingly involved in the violence, especially since the end of the 60s and early 70s. Liberal movements are avidly non-violent. The Tea Part, etc, not so much.

Only 276 recommend?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[democracy1st]

145. wow! what a great rant ty

[HEyHEY]

148. Of course, you're just as bad as they are

"Anyone who doesn't agree with me can be dismissed with a 'fuck you!'" Bullshit is how this stuff starts. Carry on.

[Rex]

149. How is he as bad? Did he call for the death of a political opponent?

Bullshit indeed.

[HEyHEY]

151. Oh, we draw the line at death threats now

Seems to me drawing the line and saying "fuck you" to people who disagree is a much more civilized and productive way to deal with it. But, people love to get angry.