23 Replies to “The Tolerant Left”

  2. “…the ‘incivility’ of conservatives.”
    The appalling hypocrisy of the pro-Obama crowd is just off-the-scale. Here’s just one example: a couple of months ago LA Weekly went into outrage-overdrive over the Obama “Joker” poster, saying “the only thing missing is a noose.”
    Well, yeah, the noose WAS missing – i.e. it didn’t exist except in their own fevered imagination – but a noose wasn’t missing in a piece that that same LA Weekly published a few months earlier which showed a Sarah Palin mannequin hanging from a noose.
    The “art” was being auctioned off on E-bay; the “artist” who made it was quoting as saying “Her noose accessory will be included.”
    To which LA Weekly added,
    “Super! But will she be shipping in a coffin? Maybe, says (the artist), in a pine box.” Then they added a helpful link – “just click here.”
    If a conservative entertainment-info rag showed an effigy of Obama hanging from a noose, and provided happy-go-lucky righteous quips and a helpful link to the auctioneer, it would be all over the news, and the purveyors would be hounded underground. When an effigy of Palin hung from a noose, it’s just funny, an excuse for jaded, sneering jokes. Good fun.
    There is zero chance that the Obamites are unaware of their double standard. They just think they have an absolute dispensation to get away with it.
    I hope conservatives are starting to understand exactly what sort of people they’re up against.
    Sickening.

  3. It’s difficult to be surprised by Michelle’s mail. Not that she invites it, but more that she’s a lightning rod for what bothers the left so thoroughly. and for now, that includes a complete inability to tolerate dissent from their agenda.
    I’m a fan, and I hope that bothers some people.

  4. This surprises you?
    If liberals didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all…

  5. That they must resort to cheap (to put it mildly) insults just shows that they have no intelligent answers to the questions she raises. It’s been much the same with the responses to her book – rolling eyes from Bill Maher who couldn’t even be bothered to open the cover…no discussion or countering of the facts she lays out.

  6. Spot the anti-concept:
    “incivility”
    … means “disagreeing with a leftist”. Which in most cases means “mopping the floor with a leftist”.
    It reminds me of the Stephen-Harper-is-too-angry campaign up here a few years ago. How did that work out?

  7. I lost track of how many people said they
    1. wanted to kill Bush or
    2. hoped somebody would kill Bush

  8. I’ve said this to my wife many times when stories like this surface, and I’ll say it here. But for the persistent race-baiting and identity politics aggressively purveyed by the left and Liberals in general, racism in the U.S. and Canada would be largely extinct.

  9. Erik:
    Regardless of how many people wanted to kill Bush, that number was dwarfed by the number of people who called him “Bushitler” or compared him to Hitler.
    But it’s conservatives who lack civility.

  13. I’ve said this to my wife many times when stories like this surface, and I’ll say it here. But for the persistent race-baiting and identity politics aggressively purveyed by the left and Liberals in general, racism in the U.S. and Canada would be largely extinct.
    Yes. But a lot of people have a deep financial investment in race-baiting and identity politics; those things go away and so does the moolah.
    Same thing with class warfare. It benefits liberals to keep segments of society impoverished and oppressed…instant voting blocs, and the excuse to tax the hell out of everyone else.

  14. “Yes. But a lot of people have a deep financial investment in race-baiting and identity politics; those things go away and so does the moolah.”
    Right on the money (no pun intended).
    As with most, if not all, things in life …. follow the money. This applies to everything from race-baiting to saving the environment to the anti-smoking lobby. If the so-called problems were dealt with, the money would dry up and those making the noble gestures would have to get a real job. There is far too much at stake to let facts get in the way.

  15. Amy P., You might like this quote:
    “There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs-partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.” Booker T. Washington, 1911.

  16. I don’t like hypocrisy. There are many posts here on this site that refer to those on the left of the spectrum in rude and demeaning ways.
    It cuts both ways.
    Not too many “sides” can claim the mantle of nobility these days.

  17. Well, I LOVE hypocrisy! In fact, I’m having spam, spam, spam, spam, baked beans, spam, spam and hypocrisy!

  19. Eric: referring to one’s political opponents in rude ways may not be a good thing, but it’s only hypocritical if those doing so tout themselves as people who don’t do such things.
    On the matter of “the tolerant left” (the title of Kate’s post), those on the left, including Obama supporters, typically laud themselves as the tolerant ones, and as fighters against intolerance. That’s their raison d’etre: they portray their cause — witness their political campaigns — as being rooted in equitable treatment for all, but their actions reveal a different truth: that they crack down harder on dissent, and (apparently) feel they have an entitlement to break at every turn the very rules *they* set for others.
    Their vaunted “tolerance” is in that sense hypocritical, and it couldn’t be more obvious. Obamacare opponents were portrayed by Obama supporters, including by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as an unruly, dumb mob, even though the protesters were remarkably well-behaved compared to those at the average anti-Bush or anti-G8 or G20 protest. It was night and day. The charge was a considered, deliberate, strategic inversion of the truth, in effect. Consider too the outrage over the “Joker’ poster in the context of their lack of similar outrage over burning Bush effigies, or “art” showing Sara Palin hanging from a noose outside a suburban home.
    I didn’t see too many conservatives expressing hurt feelings and outrage over burning effigies of Bush or characterizations of conservative blacks as house negroes, albeit they certainly pointed out the inherent hypocrisy in their opponents’ putatively peaceful and anti-racist position.
    If conservatives were prone to making self-referential, self-lauding pleas for truth and tolerance, and then collectively campaigned to portray, say, a peaceful leftist demonstration as an unruly mob, and faked outrage over the grave danger to the republic of such a sit-in, they too could be accused of hypocrisy, and would have to wear it.
    Conservatives who support the bailout of large industries, for example, or support the idea of large government grants for a company they work for, can legitimately be accused of hypocrisy, just as those who laud themselves for their tolerance, and who endlessly tout their superiority on the specific grounds that they’re more tolerant can certainly be accused of hypocrisy if they reveal themselves to be endlessly intolerant.

  21. Had an upclose and personal experience with this mindset just this weekend.
    A few friends over for wine and giggles and to share some photos of our vacations.
    One woman had a picture taken with a cardboard cutout of Obama on her Hawaii trip.
    Nothing to make a big deal about … BUT … as she reluctantly turned the picture to me I was admonished to Say Nothing about it.
    Eh?
    Turns out that it did not matter whether or not I had anything to say about it because before I’d decided whether it was worth it I was subjected to a barrage of the most mind numbing, incoherent justification for her LOVE for the man that ever has been heard.
    Turns out little Ms. Hope n’ Change is wrapped up in a world of fear and confusion. Fear and confusion so deeply embedded in her psyche that there is no room for any reason on even the possibility that there are any facts that contradict the self defense mechanisms that rule her emotion driven life.
    Sad …. truly and profoundly sad that any person can be so dependent upon the soothing that empty words of frauds and charlatans profer. And while displaying such dependence upon empty words and just plain false ideas feels perfectly justified in demanding that those who don’t conform to this view be subject to summary punishments under law.
    Liberalism IS a mental disorder or at least the LAST refuge of the disordered mind.
    In vino veritas.

  22. There is genial urbane and affable Lloyd Robertson on CTV. Ah yes, touching on the Rush Limbaugh bid (it is said) to acquire a football team. Some vituperation allowed by others re racism on Limbaugh’s part. A football player saying he would not play for that team.
    The Reverend Jesse Jackson is quoted. The biggest racebaiter or a least a front runner of that group. He was ordained at the age of 10 years. That should tell us something.
    There is dear old Lloyd and his quizzical smile signing off.
    The devils want our tax money too!

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation