"THERE IS NO LEFTIST EQUIVALENT"

[Hissyspit]

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2011/01/lets-get-this-straight.html

Let's Get This Straight

Posted by Melissa McEwan at Monday, January 10, 2011

Both sides are, in fact, not "just as bad," when it comes to institutionally sanctioned violent and eliminationist rhetoric.

An anonymous commenter at Daily Kos and the last Republican vice presidential nominee are not equivalent, no matter how many ridiculously irresponsible members of the media would have us believe otherwise.

There is, demonstrably, no leftist equivalent to Sarah Palin, former veep candidate and presumed future presidential candidate, who uses gun imagery (rifle sights) and language ("Don't Retreat, RELOAD") to exhort her followers to action.

- snip -

There is no leftist equivalent to Glenn Beck, host of a long-running nationally syndicated radio show, former host of a show on CNN and current host of a show on Fox, best-selling author, DC rally organizer, and longtime user of eliminationist rhetoric, including equating universal healthcare to rape, joking about victims of forest fires being America-hating liberals, comparing Al Gore to Hitler, condoning the murder of Michael Moore, accusing Holocaust survivor George Soros of being a Nazi collaborator, joking about poisoning Nancy Pelosi, equating immigration reform with burning US citizens alive, publicly endorsing violent revolution, and winkingly telling his viewers not to get violent, all of which amounts to a speck on the tip of a very big iceberg.

- snip -

There is no leftist equivalent to Rush "I tell people don't kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus—living fossils—so we will never forget what these people stood for" Limbaugh, nationally syndicated radio show host and invitee to the Bush White House.

- snip -

Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

This is not an argument there is no hatred, no inappropriate and even violent rhetoric, among US leftists. There is. This is evidence that, although violent rhetoric exists among US leftists, it is not remotely on the same scale, and, more importantly, not an institutionally endorsed tactic, as it is among US rightwingers.

This is a fact. It is not debatable.

- snip -

The shooting in Tucson was not an anomaly. It was an inevitability.

And as long as we continue to play this foolish game of "both sides are just as bad," and rely on trusty old ablism to dismiss Jared Lee Loughner as a crackpot—dutifully ignoring that people with mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators; carefully pretending that the existence of people with mental illness who are potentially dangerous somehow absolves us of responsibility for violent rhetoric, as opposed to serving to underline precisely why it's irresponsible—it will be inevitable again.

READ THE WHOLE THING

[nashville_brook]

1. amen.

[Hissyspit]

2. My comment:

"The corporate-owned MSM reliance on false equivalence as a self-serving, disingenuous, lazy, cowardly perversion of the concept of 'analysis' and balance is despicable." And telling.

[nashville_brook]

7. shit howdy. well done.

[molly77]

64. Thank you

It is moderates and progressive who are getting shot at and maligned. Period. MSM is the propaganda machine that keeps the hate going. Turn it off. These people are irrelevant.Soon the banking industry that controls this country and others will be in the mud.

[66 dmhlt]

65. The last time a prominent Republican was shot ...

Dick Cheney was doing the shooting!

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[snagglepuss]

4. NO Dem should accept the BS about both sides being just as bad.

There is no equivalency but how much do you want to bet that Obama is going to cede that point?

[emulatorloo]

5. I don't understand the impulse to drag Obama into this and make "predictions"

Other than to rhetorically demonize him. And I am pretty sensitive to demonizing rhetoric right now. I guess you know why.

For what it was worth Olbermann's comment was everybody needs to tone down the rhetoric. While acknowledging that the right is much more guilty than the left. The left does not call for political violence, the right wing does all the time.

[snagglepuss]

11. I'm refering to Robert Reich's comment in the NYT that Obama doesn't challenge

the Republican narrative. Reich's column appeared before the shooting so they aren't related to the shooting however the onservation that Obama doesn't help people connect the dots applies to the media bias which is solidly RW. Obama should challenge all statements that the Left is equally to blame but he won't.



snip

“If you widen the lens, the public is being sold a big lie — that our problems owe to unions and the size of government and not to fraud and deregulation and vast concentration of wealth. Obama’s failure is that he won’t challenge this Republican narrative, and give people a story that helps them connect the dots and understand where we’re going.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/business/economy/08reich.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

[SteveM]

36. Yo-u-u-u got it. Obama does not challenge statements that the Left...

is equally to blame" because he wants nothing to do with anything resembling the left or liberalism: the Right has made a turd stew out of the image of the left, liberalism, progressiveism, or anything to the left of D.D. Eisenhower.

The country's politics are not polarized. There is but one tower of power: the Far Right.

[Enthusiast]

53. Damn right!

Obama would never challenge the false equivalency M$M message.

[defendandprotect]

124. Thanks ... and in "not challenging Repugs" ... Obama is supporting their lies ....

That's the saddest part of this --

when the American people don't hear some contradiction to the lies that the Repugs

are telling them -- lies that should be disputed above all by our Democratic president --

they can be confused and believe those lies.

[snagglepuss]

10. self del

[nashville_brook]

6. an "institutionally endorsed tactic" -- is the bottom line

the GOP can't compose an email, let alone run a campaign without using the language of "war, killing, shooting, eliminating, etc" -- they're going to have to actually come up with some ideas...and it's not a given that they'd be able to.

[grahamhgreen]

70. +1

[Whisp]

8. That writer/thinker, Melissa, is absolutely brilliant.

Best thing I've read in a long while. Passionate, fact laced and an overall understanding of what the big picture is on this issue.

Love her.

[lib_wit_it]

9. K&R 1 million times, even before reading the whole thing.

[leftstreet]

12. There's no political "Left" in the US to begin with

K&R

[TBF]

14. Thank you. I have been saying this in various threads this morning

to no avail. They literally purged the communists in the 1950's. I can count the number of actual far left members of this board on my two hands.

[leftstreet]

15. It's stunning...watching the M$M create a narrative, and everyone buying it

I've watched it develop for years, but JEEZ! :banghead:

[readmoreoften]

18. +1 K&R

[Lorien]

48. Nope, they condemn what are essentially Reagan republicans

but they are so enraged by the brainwashers that they can no longer see the obvious.

Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. True election reform NOW.

[Enthusiast]

59. Plus one on the Fairness Doctrine! nt

[defendandprotect]

125. True - we have a right wing party and a radical right wing party - both controlled by WEALTH

[Solly Mack]

13. k/r

[kwolf68]

16. Awesome

Brilliant read.

[paparush]

17. Angry Lefties march, carry signs, sing songs, sign petitions. Angry Righties

chant hate filled slogans, carry guns to political rallies, blow up buildings, and shoot people in the head.

[xxqqqzme]

19. They also stomp on heads.

That image of unrestrained hate is burned into my memory.

[Enthusiast]

54. It is they that tread on me.

Quite literally.

[MsPithy]

20. Let's say, for the sake of argument that the left was

using violent rhetoric to the same extent as the right. Now let's compare the reactions on "both sides" to a horrible act of violence. Keith Olbermann, ON THE SAME DAY AS THE SHOOTING, issues a special comment on his own, single instance of violent rhetoric, re-apologizes and pledges never to use that type of speech again.

On the right, they are falling all over themselves in their attempts to deny and deflect, in one of the most pitiful displays of cognitive dissonance I have ever seen.

Case closed!

[Enthusiast]

55. Pretty clear to anyone

with a shred of objectivity.

[blackspade]

21. Great post.

The Republican Party owns this tragedy.
Their pandering to the most hate fueled among us has borne bitter fruit for the families of the shooting victims and the nation as a whole.
Sadly we will see more false equivalency as the M$M narrative evolves.
I hope I'm wrong though, I really do.

[katty]

22. EVERYTIME there is a whacko,horrid, politically charged

terrorist shooting (cause that is what this is)-it's from the white/right-winged fringe, tea baggers, etal-it's home grown terrorism.

[mzmolly]

23. HEAR HEAR!

Absolutely right.

[cate94]

24. McEwan gets it exactly right.

Further, it is also apparent that the MSM will try to silence anyone stating the facts by pretending it is "blaming" and finger pointing.

We need to demand accountability for the constant calls from the right for violent action against anyone who disagrees with them. Demanding accountability is not the same as blaming. It is expecting adults to act like adults and take responsibility for what they have said and the consequences of their calls to violence.

If you don't want to be held accountable for something someone else has done, then quit telling them to do it.

[Supersedeas]

25. John King and Candy Crowley compare military peaceniks and treehuggers to RW gun weilding activists

[fascisthunter]

26. The Right WIng is so Extreme they consider Gabriel Giffords and Everyother Dem

to be a liberal... maybe that's because they are so far to the right that everybody is to the left unless they agree with them. That right there is fanaticism...

[humbled_opinion]

27. Selective memories?

Look whether you acknowledge it or not, the bottom line is that over the top rhetoric is used by both the left and the right, pundits and politicians, I am defending neither. Bush in the crosshairs signs, hang Bush for war crimes, Bush wanted dead or alive those were prevelant at anti-war rallies. I have listened to many a Keith Olberman diatribe that lit a fire under me and made me plenty angry at the occupant of the White House at the time. It seems to me that this is just natural political discourse when one party or the other is in charge.... As far as the Arizona incident is concerned, I personally think it would be wise to leave politics out of it but many have chosen to take a stand on this incident and try to create the impression that the Nutcase that did this was on one side of the political spectrum and thats what caused his outrage, that may backfire someone should check his voting record and affiliations first, its very hard for me to buy that this crackpot shot the congresswomen because of his political ideology....

[Hissyspit]

29. I remember...

that the Tides Foundation attempted shooter was inspired by Glenn Beck.

"Bush in the crosshairs signs, hang Bush for war crimes, Bush wanted dead or alive those were prevelant at anti-war rallies."

I went to a number of the marches in D.C., and they were not "prevelant," if I remember seeing them at all.

[humbled_opinion]

31. OK...

wrong adjective, but there was much over the top rhetoric in those days by politicans and pundits who were not in favor of the war, and by many who believed Bush was the equivalent of Hitler. Your OP suggests that this vitriol is completely one sided and I am sorry to report that in fact it is not and never has been for as long as political parties have been. My personal take is that there are always two sides to a an argument and the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle.

[Hissyspit]

34. The OP does not say it is "completely one-sided." Read it again.

And the analogies to Hitler were due to the fact that the Bush administration was using multiple techniques of fascism characteristic of those used by the Third Reich or originated by them. Loaded analogy, culturally problematic, to be sure, some over the top, but not at all necessarily inaccurate.

'Two sides to every story' is an extension of the false equivalence. Much of the time the truth is not in the middle at all, and the perceived middle moves.

[humbled_opinion]

44. Metaphors and analogies....

Do you honestly believe left or right that any of the politicians or pundits that have used misguided metaphors, poorly worded analogies or regretful languagee have ever truly wished harm to come to their poltical opposition?

Is it time to difuse the political rhetoric, certainly, but never advocate for infringement on freedom of speech, because sometimes passion is necessary to convey deeply held political beliefs and for defending ones principles and ideals.

[Enthusiast]

58. "Is it time to diffuse the political rhetoric"

When? After the right wing has been caught red handed for inflaming hatred and incitement to violence. But until that happened it didn't matter what they said. Again, another load of bullshit.

[humbled_opinion]

101. You have no proof he was rightwing...

Everything I have been able to put together about this guy has shown that this was in no way poltically motivated... Loughtner didn't even vote in the 2010 elections, he was registered as an independent.

[Enthusiast]

57. Not in favor of a war

the reasons for which were fabricated? And this is your equivalency? Two sides to an argument? Free Republic would be a far more appropriate venue for you, if you feel there are two sides to this argument.

[humbled_opinion]

99. Yeah OK ...

:eyes:

[Rainbow Wave]

83. Wasn't the war itself

"over the top"? And if so, can it be anything other than a duty of citizens in a democratic country to oppose it?

FYI: Protesting a war is not even remotely equivalent to calling for the death of a specific person.

I am also concerned about this sudden need people feel to even try to find an equivalency all of a sudden between left and right. A white guy influenced by patrior/militia rhetoric shoots a bunch of people and now it's suddenly very important to find something bad to say about the left. Why exactly is that? Democrats - and especially Democrats of color - have been reporting attacks and death threats for the past two years. There is a very visible attack on a Democrat. So now we need to find something bad to say about Democrats - while carefully pointing out that this guy is just a crazy loner who has nothing to do with vitriolic Republican discourse.

[humbled_opinion]

100. You have no proof of anything you just stated

It is your brand of inflaming rhetoric, the more you talk the more you sound like those that you blame...

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

38. Name a violent incident committed by a so-called leftist that occurred in the last

two years. Name one! Name one in the last 10 years. You can't. You simply can't.

Alas, you can't name ONE violent incident that occurred as a result of "Teabaggers" on the left.

Until you can do that, there is NO moral equivalent.

I live and work in D.C. and worked blocks away from the Holocaust Museum where people were killed by some deranged rightie lunatic upset about reproductive rights and Jews.

Again, if you can name one violent incident committed within the last two to 10 years as a direct result of political rhetoric on the left, I will applaud you and apologize.

[humbled_opinion]

42. I reject your premise

You come at this as if this recent act of violence was directly attributed to the heated political rhetoric of today's climate and you have no proof of that. All I am saying is that the rhetoric on both sides has been over the top, if you fail to see room for improvement in you own political arena then you too are part of the overall problem. If any of the political figures or TV pundits that have been mentioned actually condoned the violence that you attribute to them then they would be removed from the airwaves. Get a grip, crazy people do crazy things, your labeling murderers based on political ideology is what I reject. This is exactly what the right tried to do to Obama with the Bill Ayers connection, I rejected that as most thinking Americans did...

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

46. Again, name ONE incident on the political left where the rhetoric

can be compared to that of the right; in other words, inciting violence, either implicit or explicit. And remember: it can't be just some random Democrat. It has to be from the left.

Don't think about what happened this weekend. Think about all the other acts of violence that have been proven to be motivated by hatred on the right, such as the Holocaust Museum incident or the Tiller assassination.

If the violence and vitriol are on BOTH sides, as you assert, please name ONE incident in the last two years that can be directly connected to rhetoric on the left.

If you cannot do that, then you cannot assert with certainty that the DEGREE and SEVERITY of the rhetoric is the SAME on BOTH sides.

[Lagomorph]

62. There are plenty of examples....

Lots of "Kill Bush" signs. "We support the troops when they shoot their officers". Plenty of paranoia for everyone. People who want to throw the opposition into concentration camps. All it does is sell guns and ammo to the people who are waiting for the pogroms to start.

[BlueMTexpat]

68. Where are the photos giving examples of these signs?

I've never seen any such. And even if there are some few, just how "institutionalized" were they apart from being the products of anonymous individuals - who could even have been provocateurs?
The OP here is talking about how the former VP candidate of one of the two major US political parties deliberately used - and continues to use - inflammatory rhetoric to incite the basest of her base. She has never been called out for that by the leadership of her party. That alone gives her inflammatory rhetoric the appearance of being acceptable or mainstream. There is NO Democratic equivalent for that. None.
There is NO equivalent on the left for the hate-filled rhetoric of Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and lesser-known but equally - or even more - rabid hatemongers in the M$M. None. Keith and Rachel give impassioned commentaries, but they are not only fact-based (something that eludes Palin and the other hate-mongers almost entirely), they do NOT call for physical violence against any individual or groups of individuals.
If anything, we on the left call for legally appropriate measures (impeachment, investigation, prosecution, etc.) to be taken against those who have demonstrably committed crimes - such as lying to the American people to begin an illegal war, or creating separate prison facilities where they can ignore human rights altogether and even torture anyone whom they designate an "enemy combatant" - even when that person is a US citizen.
How on earth are those instances anywhere comparable? They simply are NOT.

[humbled_opinion]

95. Get out much?

Every parent sees the angel in their own children.....

[BlueMTexpat]

103. If that's all you've got, it's truly pitiful.

Nearly seven decades of experience living and working on four different continents and multi-lingual as well ... I get out and about quite a lot, thank you.
But keep right on drinking that Kool-aid.

[humbled_opinion]

104. The problem is that you

haven't reflected on the large portion of America that doesn't think like you do. Explain the 2010 elections? The Repubs didn't run on a platform they ran as the party of NO and on an anti-Obama and Anti-Democrat agenda, with alot of flaming rhetoric, so what does that tell you? Given that there are always 20 percent hardcore in one side or the other how did one side swing so many logical thinking centrists to the right? Don't give me that fox news and talk radio crap either those that listen to either are already on the right and you will never win them over.

[Rainbow Wave]

118. You're reading things into the election that aren't there.

Let me preface this by saying that I am a Green, not a Democrat. I never voted for Obama, and I do not like Obama. But I don't like him for real reasons - he's a corporate sell-out - not that nonsense made up by Republicans.

That said, the Republicans did not win because people like their ideas. In fact, polls consistently show that, outside of the South, people in the US are ideologically aligned more closely to the Democrats than to the Republicans. They won because:

1. There is always smaller turnout in non-presidential elections. The reason Republicans are always trying to suppress voter turnout is because, the more people vote, the more likely the Democrats will win.

2. There was general disaffection among the more leftist Democrats with the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress who squandered their majority and broke promises to progressives. This suppressed the Democratic voter turnout even more.

3. The economy sucks and doesn't appear to be getting better any time soon. Under such conditions, people always punish the party in power, no matter which one it is. If John McCain were in the White House and Speaker Boehner in the House, Boehner would have been handing that gavel to Pelosi this month.

[BzaDem]

130. Actually, exit polls show that liberal turnout wasn't any worse than in the last midterm.

Do you think that liberal turnout was supressed back in 2006 then as well?

[Name removed]

132. Deleted message

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

[BlueMTexpat]

131. So what on earth do your screeds have to do with the OP and

my responses to it which you have pooh-poohed without giving concrete examples?
Nice, but incoherent, attempts at deflection.

:eyes: :shrug:

[liberation]

74. If there are plenty of examples

you should have no problem producing them.

[liberation]

93. *crickets*

[Hissyspit]

77. Again, I was at many of these D.C. protests.

Do not remember these signs. Please provide examples. I never saw a sign that said "Kill Bush."

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

108. I also live and work blocks from the National Mall and the Capitol Building.

I also participated in many anti-war protests. And while there admittedly were anti-Bush signs and pictures comparing him to Hilter, I never saw ANY provocation to violence. I never saw nor heard any inciteful language asking people to bear arms and commit acts of violence.

None of these people claiming that there are examples on BOTH sides are reaching! Point blank.

I'm simply asking for events or incidences where an act of violence was committed in the name of a liberal cause within the last two years. They cannot name one, so they talk about signs.

It's ridiculous!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

107. Give me one EXPLLICIT example of violence that ensued as an indirect or direct

result of rhetoric on the political left.

You are talking about incendiary language and yes, there were signs.

But, you cannot name ONE incident of violence, can you?

Stop reaching and name one!!!!

[humbled_opinion]

122. You are way too logical for this crowd.... peace.... n/t

[Hissyspit]

127. delete nt

[Le Taz Hot]

129. I've never seen anything

even remotely like the signs you claim to have seen and I've been to lots and lots of protests. IF anything like you described was ever hoisted, they would have been asked to remove the sign or leave. I KNOW. I've organized enough of them and signs like that would be counter-productive.

Show me pictures of these so-called signs. I want to know when. I want to know where. I want to know details. You made the claim, you prove that these exist. I call total and complete bullshit.

[humbled_opinion]

94. The problem is in your assertions

You assert that specifics like the Holocaust Museum incident or the Tiller assasination is directly attributable to the rhetoric on the right and if that were true you must be very specific about the direct language that was used by a pundit or politician on the right that caused these acts of violence, i.e., "Tiller the baby killer" may have provoked anger among anti-abortionists but they never called for his murder so my point is that your broad assertion doesn't hold water... Here let me put it another way it would be like the right accusing the left for every attack on any rich white person in America, the perp may have been robbing the rich guy but following your logic and assertions, the case could be made that the left had villified that person to the point of attack.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

109. How about these...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x176149

Again, you need to name an equivalent act of violence perpetuated on the political left. You assert that there is no direct link between Tiller's assassination and rhetoric on the right. However, you cannot name one incident on the left that is even remotely equivalent. No have NO credibility!!

If you can't do that, then you have absolutely no credibility and I will put you on "ignore" because you are wasting my time.

You have absolutely no intellectual honesty at all if you are asserting that it is the same on BOTH sides and yet cannot come up with proof of that.

[Rainbow Wave]

84. Yeah, right!

A white guy influenced by militia/patriot rhetoric commits an act of violence and suddenly it becomes very important to invent incidents of left-wing hate speech while simultaneously absolving right-wing hate speech by saying this was just a crazy loner. Funny how that works.

We would not be having this discussion if he were a Muslim. Then it would be patently obvious that an ideology led to his act. But a right-wing white guy? He must be crazy. Either that or it's the left's fault.

[Rainbow Wave]

92. Acts of Violence

that cannot be attributed to heated political rhetoric. (And this is just from the first page of my Google search).

- MoveOn.org worker reportedly received concussion from attack at event for Rand Paul.
- Scott Roeder, a Kansas resident, murdered Dr. George Tiller at church because he was an anti-abortion fanatic with ties to a right-wing extremist group.
- Jim Adkisson shot up a Unitarian church, killing two, because he hated liberals and gays.
- White Supremacist James Von Brunn shot up the Holocaust Museum.
- Richard Poplawski, a right-wing extremist, allegedly gunned down three police officers in Pittsburgh, in part because he feared the non-existent "Obama gun ban."
- Rep. Tom Perriello's (D-VA) brother's address was erroneously posted online by a Tea Party blogger who invited activists to descend on the house. In March, a gas line outside the brother's house was cut.
- On October 21, an envelope containing "a plastic bag of white powder and two pieces of paper with swastikas written on them" was reportedly mailed to Rep. Raul Grijalva's (D-AZ) campaign office.
- A Washington man was sentenced to prison last week for repeatedly threatening to kill Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) after she voted in favor of health care reform legislation.
- AZ federal judge threatened, Grijalva office fired on after ruling on AZ immigration law.
- Phoenix man indicted for alleged murder threats against Grijalva and his aides.
- Byron Williams set out to kill people at Tides Foundation and ACLU.
- Members of right-wing militia group arrested for allegedly plotting overthrow of the U.S. government.
- The FBI arrested a California man Wednesday for allegedly making threatening phone calls to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
- A Denver television station reported that Rep. Betsy Markey's (D-CO) chief of staff "said the calls came on Saturday before the House cast its final vote on health care reform. She said in the first, the caller said to one of Markey's staff members, 'better hope I don't run into you in a dark alley with a knife, a club or a gun.' In another instance, a caller said something like 'better tell your boss that she better be careful when she comes back here to Colorado.'"
- Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) was the target of threatening faxes and phone calls, including death threats. Some of the faxes included "racial epithets used in reference to President Obama," according to CBS News.
- Picture of a noose faxed to Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC)
- New York Daily News reported on March 22 that, after the House health care vote, a "brick, to which a piece of paper bearing the message "Extremism is defense of liberty is no vice" was attached with a rubber band" was thrown through the headquarters of the Democratic county headquarters in Rochester, New York.
- CNN reported on March 24: "Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-New York, said her Niagara Falls district office had a brick thrown through one of its windows and a message that referred to 'snipers' was left on one of her campaign offices."
- Authorities are investigating a package with white powder and an angry letter that referenced the health care legislation that was sent to Congressman Weiner's Kew Gardens office today. The letter said the Congressman should "drop dead" and complained about the historic health care legislation passed by Congress this week.
- Politico reported on March 24 that a right-wing blogger had published the home address of Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-OH) and asked protestors to show up at his house. In addition, Driehaus reportedly received death threats.
- ike Vanderboegh of Pinson, Ala., former leader of the Alabama Constitutional Militia, put out a call on Friday for modern "Sons of Liberty" to break the windows of Democratic Party offices nationwide in opposition to health care reform. Since then, vandals have struck several offices, including the Sedgwick County Democratic Party headquarters in Wichita.
- Over the weekend, the tea party protests — organized by corporate lobbyist-run groups Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks — were scenes of violence and hate towards gay and African American Democratic members of Congress.
- Statistics gathered by the National Abortion Federation suggest that 1994 was the big year for murders and attempted murders of abortion providers in the U.S. The two instances of violence in 1993 were accompanied by a spike in hate mail and death threats, eventually reaching a massive rise in hate mail activity in 1992. By the onset of the murderous seasons of 1993 and 1994, hate mail threats was playing a central role as a form of political disruption and incitement.
- White Man Shoots Latino Neighbor In AZ Over Immigration Law

Of course, these were all isolated incidents of crazy loners. No pattern here. Now if we can only get the left to stop their hateful rhetoric!

[sulphurdunn]

133. A problem I have with your position

is that you seem to assume that because there is no necessary relationship between hate speech and violent acts that none can be inferred. Yet you infer that because the gunman was mentally unbalanced his motives would less likely be political even though he went to a political event to shoot a politician with whom he had no personal relationship. Also, you state that hate rhetoric from both sides has been "over the top". Even if that were true qualitatively (as you seem to claim) it most certainly is not quantitatively true. Furthermore, you fail to note the pattern of politically motivated homicide in this country over time and the ideologies of its perpetrators. There is no equivalency of any kind there. Lastly, you cannot possibly divine the motives of celebrity provocateurs or those who employ them. It would be illogical to assume that incendiary rhetoric and violent symbolism directed daily to a mass audience is done for some purpose other than incitement to violence.

[Enthusiast]

60. Flying a pirate flag.

How appropriate.

[Hannah Bell]

51. please link to the equivalent statements of keith olbermann.

[Enthusiast]

56. It differs in orders of magnitude.

There is no left wing equivalency.

While the right is ready and willing to advocate the killing of Democratic politicians for voting for universal health care, the left gets angry at Bush for using manufactured intelligence to take us to war or engaging in torture as our fascist WWII enemies did.

[humbled_opinion]

96. I never said it was logical

you are right if you believe in peace and humanity, but many people don't see this side of the issue because they see it from their own perspective. In your mind there is no equivalency but stop for one second and believe even if it pains you that there are millions of Americans that don't think like you do and for them in their reality stopping goverment control of their lives is very patriotic and purely American and defending America in the wake of 911 was the right thing to do regardless of how it was done. Now you can say it is because they are ignorant or uneducated or misinformed but it is a fact that not everyone thinks like you do. Maybe you can explain how we lost so many seats in Congress in the last election? What platform did the Repubes run on? Oh thats right they ran on reject Obama agenda, would you have that dissent silenced? Would you call for only information that you approve of be distributed? I don't think anyone wants a totalitarian state, left or right.

[Politicub]

63. Your argument doesn't hold water

There is no equivalent. And if there is, it sure isn't present in the liberal circles that I associate myself with.

[grahamhgreen]

71. Advertising works, or it would not be a business

when you have major media figures and outlets continually advocating for violence, even if they used caged language, eventually, you will get the violence.

The right wing, by their very nature and philosophy, continually argues for violent solutions, the left argues for peaceful ones.

[liberation]

72. How many anti-war rallies have you attended?

And, no... interpretative dances with ugly paper mache puppets are not the same as the imagery you're trying to convey, regardless of what FOX says.

[Rainbow Wave]

90. Not to mention the fact that

protesting a war is in no way akin to "joking" about killing somebody, as Beck, Coulter, Palin et al do regularly. And that protesting a war that is unjust is a patriotic duty, not over the top partisan bickering.

[Rainbow Wave]

81. It's sad

That even on a progressive website you would hear this apologism. Is he crazy? Of course. But it's equally crazy that blue collar white people would be voting against unions, the estate tax, and raising taxes on billionaires. This country has become crazy, and Arizona more so than other states. Democratic politicians and Hispanics are regularly subjected to death threats. The sheriff knows what he is talking about. The whole state has gone crazy. And you know, if you are intellectually honest, that we would never be having this "he's crazy" dialogue if he were black, Hispanic or a Muslim. He's as crazy as his state, but he and the rest of them are still responsible for their actions.

[humbled_opinion]

97. So your solution to this is to

silence any opinion or voices on the right? You want totalitarianism as long as it is left leaning. Such newcomers to Politics have much to learn, sit down and take notes.

[liberation]

113. Wow...

Sweet zombie Jesus what a load of strawmen and red herrings you're bringing. I take the smell of the rotting fish is supposed to distract people from the fact that you have not been able to provide a single proof for your earlier claims?

I guess you guys are in damage control mode now...

[humbled_opinion]

117. LOL, you guys...

ad hominem much? I didn't claim anything, there are always two sides to every thing or as I was corrected earlier multiple sides to everything. Do you reject that? I am sure I am not the only person on this board that has questioned whether it was wise to try and politicize this issue. I guess you missed my motivations completely.

[liberation]

119. Thanks for proving my point.

LOL indeed.

BTW, you apparently have plenty of time for red herring fishing but have failed to provide a single factual example of your accusations yet.

Cheers.

[humbled_opinion]

121. AHEM !!

I could easily provide your requested comparisons but I won't troll the rightwing forums to do it. You seem to believe that you don't have an ideological opposite. Are you that isolated? The right will list just as many flaming rhetorical points and list just as many attacks that they will say were done by lefty's for one reason or another.... I am not debating right and wrong, I am debating wrong and wronger.... People that want to politicize this tragedy are wrong, people that use rhetoric to incite such tragedies are wronger....

have a pleasant day... ;-)

[liberation]

126. Weeeeeak

So your answer is that you do not have proof of the accusations. Using your own line: "You seem to believe" that fallacies such as strawmen and red herrings constitute valuable substitutes to your utter lack of proof.

No need to pollute this thread with so much BS when you can simply say that you made up the accusation in order to support your point.

Cheers.

[Rainbow Wave]

82. It's sad

That even on a progressive website you would hear this apologism. Is he crazy? Of course. But it's equally crazy that blue collar white people would be voting against unions, the estate tax, and raising taxes on billionaires. This country has become crazy, and Arizona more so than other states. Democratic politicians and Hispanics are regularly subjected to death threats. The sheriff knows what he is talking about. The whole state has gone crazy. And you know, if you are intellectually honest, that we would never be having this "he's crazy" dialogue if he were black, Hispanic or a Muslim. He's as crazy as his state, but he and the rest of them are still responsible for their actions.

[Rainbow Wave]

89. FYI

"in the wake of the shooting, the feds arrested someone threatening Sen. Michael Bennet, Rep. Danny Davis received an email over the weekend saying he was next, and a leader of the Minutemen responded to the Tucson shooting by writing “Too bad Traitor Raul Grijalva wasn’t with her! He won’t be missed!” All three of these politicians are Democrats."

[humbled_opinion]

98. OK ...

So now that you have proven that Jared Loughtner was a right winger.... he must have voted in the last election since all of the talking heads on the right told their masses that it was imperative to stop Obama at all costs and thos rascally Democrats are implementin socialism nationwide etc, etc,... Should be easy to find his voter registration and if he voted... So maybe this wasn't really about politics afterall maybe there are just crazy people out there that do crazy things.... What will you say when every crime against anyone with money starts being called a radical leftwingers hate crime because the rich have been villified by Obama and the Democrats....

There is a time for politics and this just isn't one of those times.... sorry...

[Rainbow Wave]

102. ???

I'm not exactly sure how my post led to this.

Let me take this in parts.

Jared Loughner's rambling writings and videos reveal that he is familiar with the ideas of some people in the radical right militia/patriot movement and he shot at a politician who is from what is considered the leftwing party in this country (there are actually several to the left of the Democrats, but whatever) who was attacked by the right throughout last year. So, yes, he's most definitely a rightwinger. An extreme rightwinger. I don't see how that can even be questioned.

The climate of hate that has been created in this country, and especially in Arizona, is not about stopping Obama's policies (which are NOT socialist, by the way. I'm a socialist. I know what socialism is. Obama is no socialist.) or Democratic policies. It's about demonizing and dehumanizing people - liberals, Hispanics, gays, Muslims, blacks, whoever - to the point that their destruction is of no consequence or is even seen as a necessary and good thing. If this were actually a matter of debating policy, no one would be complaining. Well, I certainly would not be complaining. I have Republican friends with who I love to debate. What we're talking about here is completely different. When someone calls somebody a vampire and says they want to drive a stake through their heart (Beck), I have no idea what their policy positions are. I only know that they have violent fantasies and that they are dehumanizing someone else. When someone says they wish the New York Times had been bombed (Ann Coulter), I have no idea what their policy positions are. I only know they have violent fantasies and don't consider the lives of people working in the NYT building valuable.

Voter registration? If the guy was into the militia stuff, he's anti-government. I seriously doubt he's registered to vote. But politics does not begin and end with the two major parties. Politics is about how we structure our society, and how we have been structuring our society over the past three decades - and how Arizona has structured its society recently - is deeply dysfunctional. This is a political issue, whether you like it or not. The fact that there are so many Loughners out there is a problem that we as a society created, and we have to deal with it collectively. This is very political.

[humbled_opinion]

105. Again your twisting things..

I agree that the rhetoric in politics has been heated by there are two sides and Loughtner had a history with this congresswoman that went back to 2007. Congresswoman Giffords was hardly a leftwinger, her positions on immigration and gun control classifed her as a blue dog conseravative Democrat. Couldn't the right start making the argument that he poltically targeted her because she was not far enough left for him? Loughtner was registered as an Independent, Loughtner voted in the 2006 and 2008 elections but did not vote in the 2010 elections, I find that extremely telling, regarding political motivation, (which I reject, by the way). If he was rightwing I am sure that a completely controlled Democrat congress and white house just pegged his meter but yet he doesn't do anything to try and change that? When you call him an extreme rightwinger in my opinion the extreme right and the extreme left share some of the same ideology so wouldn't he be better classified as an extremeist period. He read Marx and Orwell... hardly rightwing propaganda. I have read some accounts that he was openly gay, hardly a reason to target a Democrat that was fighting for his rights and finally if we follow your logic... then the next rich white guy that gets mugged will be cause for the right to declare the violent leftist class warfare in action....

[Rainbow Wave]

111. I'm not at all sure what I twisted.

There are a lot more than two sides, but outside of ecovandalism on SUVs we don't really have a violence problem on the left. The problem is on the right. Yes, Keith Olberman has his "worst person in the world" and DU had it's top 10 idiots, and Al Franken wrote very funny books making fun of O'Reilly and Limbaugh, but that does not equate with G. Gordon Liddy telling listeners to shoot for the head or the groin of law enforcement officials, or a radio shock jock telling listeners to beat their Democratic representatives to a bloody pulp, or talking about second amendment solutions if the elections don't turn out like somebody wants. If all that Beck did was call Obama a Nazi and a socialist, he'd still be wrong, but it wouldn't be the problem it is today. The problem is worshiping violence as some kind of expression of freedom, power, and individuality. There are a lot of miserable people desperately seeking freedom, power, and individuality, so if you keep telling them violence is the way to do that, they're likely to try it. Rachel Maddow, Jon Stewart, Al Franken, and Keith Olberman do not suggest that physical harm should be done to someone or fantasize out loud about killing someone. Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, G. Gordon Liddy, Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, etc. do. Moreover, the left in general is more pacifist than the right (remember, we're the peaceniks who were out there protesting the war), so if the media icons of the left were to suggest violence it would likely fall on deaf ears.

BTW, I was at virtually every anti-war protest in California during the Bush years, and I saw a lot of signs saying "Bush Lied, People Died," "No More Blood for Oil," and just plain "Peace." I never saw a sign suggesting Bush or Cheney be murdered. I have thankfully never been to a tea party rally, but I've seen a lot of videos and photos of them, and the t-shirts and signs threatening violence are rather prevalent. You might, if you're fond of George Bush, think the anti-war signs were over the top, but a war in itself is a tremendous thing, and that war in particular was highly controversial, to say the least. I don't think you can say the rhetoric was too extreme in that case because the thing being protested was so very extreme.

There is leftwing violence in this country, but it is minute in comparison with rightwing violence and it's targeted at property, not people (the SUVs I mention above, for example).

Now to some of the factual errors in your statement.

Loughner is an extreme rightwinger. His rhetoric is - not "I think it is," but IS - taken from the writings of fringe militia/patriot leaders. Even that stuff about grammar. All of your arguments about Loughner being a leftist omit that simple fact. I'm not saying you or the Republicans are extreme rightists. I'm saying he is. This is just like when Napolitano's office came out with that warning about how rightwing violence was likely to rise. All the usual suspects came out crying foul. The report wasn't talking about Limbaugh or Joe Six-Pack Republican. It was talking about the extreme right. It was talking about people who turn their homes into armories, get swastika tattoos, and plan for civil war in the desert. Given this, it doesn't matter how conservative Giffords is. She's to the left of him. John Boehner is to the left of him. (BTW: Obama too is a conservative Democrat, but that doesn't stop people from calling him a communist. Perception, not reality, is what matters here.) When you put yourself in Loughner's head, you're thinking like a mainstream Republican. He's not a mainstream Republican. You don't want to own this guy, believe me. But because there are Loughners out there, people in very public positions should not be using violent language targeting others. It feeds their delusional fantasies, and some of them act on them.

It's nice that in your opinion the extreme right and the extreme left share the same ideology, but you're wrong. First of all, this country has tilted so far to the right that what is called the extreme left is really just left, and sometimes center-left. When a conservative Democrat like Obama gets confused with a socialist, you know something is seriously off. The only extreme left we have in this country are the anarchists, and they are few and far between. Besides, they're mostly just intellectual philosophy majors or, at most, people who throw rocks through windows at a protest every five years or so. We do, however, have a problem with the extreme right in this country, as Napolitano's report stated. They're are a lot more of them and they are prone to violence. A good number of them have already acted.

You don't actually know that he read Marx and Orwell. You know he said that. He also says he read Ayn Rand and Hitler. The readings he listed follow a pattern of worship of the individual, which is actually quite prevalent in militia thought.

You have read some reports that he was openly gay? Yeah, I'm sure those were credible. Don't believe everything you read.

Lastly, there is no violent leftist class warfare. Arguing for the estate tax or a progressive tax system is not warfare and it's not violent. It's what we're supposed to do in a democracy - present, explain, and argue for our ideas. People as wealthy as Warren Buffet and Bill Gates Sr. make the same arguments we do. Would you argue they are violently attacking themselves? What they are doing is arguing for a betterment of the system. If someone has an argument to make against progressive taxation and paying for social services that benefit many, as opposed to few, they can make it. That's part of the political process. But screaming, "That's class warfare!" is not really an argument. That's just childish. They might as well say, "You're a pukey head!"

[humbled_opinion]

116. You stated that very well...

I would just say that I agree with much of your summation and I am rethinking the issue. I am focusing more on the words liberal and conservative instead of on the left wing and right wing. Certainly crazy people can take heated rhetoric and act on it and it is certainly possible that the punditry on the right doesn't even realize that they are stirring up those nut cases when they say it, I just find it hard to believe that responsible people would intentionally motivate the unbalanced for a cause. I was accused of being a Pollyanna in an earlier thread, I may reflect on that awhile however, as far as the language is concerned, I really don't see a solution to the problem because one of the planks in the Conservative ideology is that it equates massive government controls as tyranny and oppression to the people and vows to speak out against those controls, that rhetoric will always be viewed by the anti-government types as fuel for their fire. As far as the heated rhetoric signs of the anti-war crowd just google it they were there, hell someone even made a move about assassinating Bush but I digress.

[Beartracks]

28. "Eliminationist rhetoric"

Finally, an accurate description. It's not "over-the-top rhetoric" or "heated debate." I don't remember either Lincoln or Douglas calling for murders in their famed heated debates.

"Eliminationist rhetoric" -- that's calling it what it is.

---------------------

[sam kane]

30. Jon Stewart popularized this meme of the sameness of the right and left.

Stewart laid the groundwork for pretending pacificsts and Karl Rove were the same in our moment.

[SteveM]

32. The columnist Rich of the NYT made much the same observation...

The "both sides are bad" and "Republicans can be hateful, and Democrats can be hateful" is just another labored myth MSM continues to tirelessly promote. This all stems from these facts:

(1) No one, not the Obama administration, not the Democratic Party, not MSM, wants ANYTHING to do with the "Left," except to say that they are somehow, some way equivalent in their actions to the Right.

(2) MSM and other commentators KNOW the far-right is very much in charge of the dialogue in this country, but are afraid of it, so they curry favor by blaming both "sides" "equally."

(3) MSM and other commentators are desperate for some mythical "third way," when in reality there is the Right, the Far Right, and the shit-in-your-pants-and-go-to-heaven Right. There is no measurable Left left, only a stick figure by which to maintain myths of equivalency. MSM should realize that the Democratic Party is already center-right, and this No Labels thing is redundant.

[RainDog]

33. EXCELLENT observation n/t

[Lorien]

49. I'll say it again. Take ACTION

Demand a reinstatement of the Fairness doctrine. Demand that OPINION be labeled OPINION once again and not be disguised as "news". Demand REAL ELECTION REFORM NOW!!

[DeeOwl]

35. There is a "left" in the US of A?

Really? I thought most of elected officials irregardless of party affiliations were somewhere right of Generalissimo Franco. Especially when it comes to foreign policy. This country is doomed. Period. Start learning other languages and saving up money for land/real estate purchases overseas. It ain't going to be pretty. This country has made way too many enemies, big and small, and the time is coming...

[DirkGently]

37. Remind us which libs protest with guns? Which lefty extremists applaud killing doctors?

Which leftists blew up the Murrah building? Which lib flew his plane into the IRS building? Let's hear them name the top 10 anti-government leftist militias playing war-games in the forest, dreaming of sweet, sweet Armageddon.

Let's not be ridiculous. The American rightwing has wrapped itself in flags and guns and the language of armed insurrection for decades. It's a game for Tea Partiers to sound more unhinged and to hint more openly that "If we don't get what we want, there's gonna be some 'Second Amendment remedies.'" Anti-government paranoia was Angle's whole campaign. It's Beck's entire career. It was the entire healthcare "debate."

Crazy, violent talk IS rightwing politics today. They don't have anything else.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

39. I, for one, would like to hear of any incidents that occurred during the last two years since

the emergence of the Tea Party. Since, they are trying to convince us that the vitriol is the same on the right and left, I want to know where the violence on the left is. Where is the left's Tea Party? The Coffee Party? Hell, very few people have even heard of the Coffee Party.

Until someone can provide any evidence at all of an incident involving violent leftist that occurred as a direct or indirect result of incendiary language or rhetoric coming from the left, I will keep my promise and apologize.

Other than that, this "it happens on BOTH sides" crowd can kiss my black ass up and down the street!

[deutsey]

52. Which liberal shot up a UU church?

Which liberal was apprehended in California on his way to shoot up the ACLU and Tides Foundation?

[liberation]

75. For the media, the non-existing incidents by leftist are clearly a "pattern"

whereas the very real and numerous instances where the right turns violent are "isolated incidents."

Let's face it, the media in this country will never ever indict the right for these acts, because to do so would imply that they are guilty as well. Since NONE absolutely NONE of this would have been possible sans the cooperation of a big chunk of the American media. The narrative for the past half a century in this country has been that of a literal open season on the left, and the media was all to happy to comply with it... Corporate profits being what they are, and the media in this country being first and foremost a for profit proposition, we should not be surprised.

[DirkGently]

87. Yes. The bigger lie being protected is that liberalism is dangerous; conservatism "patriotic."

[Dappleganger]

40. Yes, we need to shut down that false equivalency on THIS site.

[TheKentuckian]

41. + infinity or so

[StarsInHerHair]

43. recc'd up to 111

nt

[glinda]

45. I know. I don't even know what a Lefestt equivalent would be.

:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:

[Maraya1969]

47. When leftist have protests they sing songs and climb trees

The Repubs not so much.

[Raine]

50. NO there absolutely is NOT! nt

[blondeatlast]

61. Precisely. k/r

[closeupready]

66. No, there isn't. It's just an excuse told by reichtards to let themselves off the hook.

It is ALL them, ALL on them. K&R

[Swampguana]

67. All so true

[grahamhgreen]

69. The shooting was not just an inevitability, it was a goal. Remember,

whenever a gun is fired or a bomb is dropped someone makes money.

For some people, civil strife equals profits.

[Zax2me]

73. You must not listen to Mike Malloy....

And I guess that is your point, he doesn't have the audience rush has so no equivalent.
But I have heard Mike say some things that, come on - push the violent rhetoric envelope. In any case I don't see anything wrong with Malloy and think he deserves a larger audience. I don't always agree with him but more often than not he is a refreshing voice to hear when all that is available everywhere else is the right wing violent rhetoric you describe.

[liberation]

76. Huh?

Do pray tell, how exactly is Malloy's rhetoric and deeds in any way shape or form comparable to what Rush et al do on a daily basis?

There is a big difference between being angry for being kicked in the teeth, and being angry enough to kick someone in the teeth.

[yawnmaster]

80. Mike does have some very strong rhetoric, which does mention more than teeth kicking...

"The Republican Party needs to be murdered" yes, the party isn't a person, but this is over the top rhetoric, in my opinion.
"...Drudge, somebody ought to wrap a strong Republican entrail around his neck and hoist him up about six feet in the air and watch him bounce.”"
That's a fun one, but also over the top, again, in my opinion.

I don't think this rhetoric should be supported, but it does make for good drama, doesn't it?
And we all want to be entertained, don't we?

It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt.


btw, google searches will find all kinds of over the top quotes...yes by both sides (although, it's easier to find rhetoric from the right, possibly due, in part, to the right's control of radio.)

[liberation]

85. I stand corrected

I had no clue about those quotes from Malloy (the top google hits for those quotes are from righty sites, but I will still take them for their veracity).

To be fair, the level of pervasiveness of Malloy vs. Rush Limabugh, for example, are not even remotely comparable. Furthermore, if any lunatic (or sane alike) was to use Malloy's words and act upon them, Malloy should be held accountable.

[Hissyspit]

78. "You"

You do realize that person who wrote this piece is not on this site?

[Gregorian]

79. I'm seeing a parallel here. It is the bankruptcy of America.

Suddenly I see the love of the 2nd Amendment as a means by which a segment of this country can be free to use guns as their means of getting what they want. And that segment is not the liberal one.

I think I've stumbled upon something significant. And that is the subject of regulation. What liberals have is regulated behavior. What that gunman did was behave in an unregulated way. He just did what he wanted. Sure, we all wanted to see Bush stopped one way or another. But we're a country of laws. And then some. There's more to life than just getting what one wants. We created this country for a reason.

Unregulated banking, unregulated military growth. And now we're bankrupt. Unregulated behavior, and we have a society that the rest of the world looks down upon.

[Courtesy Flush]

86. Olberman last night

Announced that his "Worst person in the world" segment was permanently defunct.

Not only was this segment in no way violent, but he dropped it, just to contribute to a more civil discourse.

[underseasurveyor]

88. THANK YOU

Very VERY much!

It's such bullshit that anyone believes, much less says, that both sides are just as bad.

[BrklynLiberal]

91. Sam Seder Agrees..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x581393

This false equivalency is BULLSH*T!

[upi402]

106. This guy disagress

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=171954&mesg_id=171954

Fugh, it's so frustrating. Mouse turds to elephant piles...

[fascisthunter]

110. yeah, well... what did you expect

plenty of turds around here... there is no place for us anywhere. Even on the underground they follow us.

[Initech]

112. Their side is fucking guilty, and they're in total denial about it.

[Jefferson23]

114. Exactly right, who is the left equivalent of Palin, Beck, Hannity, Savage and Limbaugh??

The deniers need to come up with some evidence that tallies up to more than those who went to
ralies with signs hating Bush/Cheney.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

115. A-freakin-men. nt

[HuckleB]

120. Kick.

[defendandprotect]

123. Agree 10000% -- and thank you for posting this!

[deacon]

128. "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining" is my message to the MSM. n/t

[jeepnstein]

134. Was the shooter a right winger?

I'm not sure I'm buying that quite yet.

[saras]

135. Leftist equivalent?

During the Bush era, I had a bumpersticker saying Impeach. Prosecute. Convict. Execute.

All legal. No 'shoot first, ask questions later.'

These days, it seems fairly acceptable to suggest that W was guilty of war crimes.

The evidence, though, is no different now than it was then. Only public opinion has changed.