Is it time for the left to take a look at its own hateful rhetoric?

[Red Dawn]

Right...less dangerous. Like when years of anti-war rhetoric pulls us out of Vietnam when we were finally getting the upper hand there, ultimately leading to the death of millions and brutal "reeducation" of others as the Communists rolled in.

Uhh...when did this happen? maybe you've mistaken Vietnam for Cambodia which was invaded by Vietnam to stop the whole sale murder of millions.

Vietnam was lost before an American ever fired a gun in anger there when we backed the French instead of the Vietnamese after WWII

 

[zsdersw]

I don't want to participate in your thread diversion?

No, that you're just another ideologue; a counterpart on the Right to those you vilify on the Left.

 

[Jhhnn]

Saul Alinsky died in 1972, probably before you were born, boomerang. He wasn't even hateful, just an example of the now defunct leftism of the 60's... We're still waiting for some current examples of that hateful leftwing rhetoric, though...

I'm sure you have some, right? C'mon, give it up, we're all just dying to hear 'em...

 

[boomerang]

Saul Alinsky died in 1972, probably before you were born, boomerang. He wasn't even hateful, just an example of the now defunct leftism of the 60's... We're still waiting for some current examples of that hateful leftwing rhetoric, though...

I'm sure you have some, right? C'mon, give it up, we're all just dying to hear 'em...

Wrong on the first count - by a long shot. Nowhere did I mention Alinksy but I do find it telling that you mention him. A Freudian slip I believe. My post consists of a quote from an article, so perhaps your view is through the bottom of a bottle right now?

As a blind partisan, you wouldn't recognize hateful leftwing rhetoric for what it is anyway so I'm not wasting my time. I've never enjoyed a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

I see your Alinsky and raise you one Alinsky.

LOL at "defunct leftism"! It never becomes defunct. It just gets recycled over and over. It's why it always fails.

 

[zsdersw]

As a blind partisan, you wouldn't recognize hateful leftwing rhetoric for what it is anyway so I'm not wasting my time.

.. says a blind partisan himself.

 

[Jhhnn]

Wrong on the first count - by a long shot. Nowhere did I mention Alinksy but I do find it telling that you mention him. A Freudian slip I believe. My post consists of a quote from an article, so perhaps your view is through the bottom of a bottle right now?

As a blind partisan, you wouldn't recognize hateful leftwing rhetoric for what it is anyway so I'm not wasting my time. I've never enjoyed a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

I see your Alinsky and raise you one Alinsky.

LOL at "defunct leftism"! It never becomes defunct. It just gets recycled over and over. It's why it always fails.

Pitiful dodge, boomerang. pitiful. Your quoted link raves on about Alinsky at some length, and that forms the basis for their argument, such as it is. You quoted the article as a basis for your own argument.

C'mon- give us some examples of that "Hateful Leftist Rhetoric"... Even if you think I won't appreciate it. What about the lurkers? What about the inspiration it would offer to your usual cohorts, who'd find even more following your lead, I'm sure. Give it up! That's the basis for this thread, after all, and I'm sure it isn't just the usual Rightie raving about their own fears and mis-perceptions, is it?

Maybe I can't hear you over all the damned crickets around here...

 

[heyheybooboo]

Wrong on the first count - by a long shot. Nowhere did I mention Alinksy but I do find it telling that you mention him. A Freudian slip I believe. My post consists of a quote from an article, so perhaps your view is through the bottom of a bottle right now?

As a blind partisan, you wouldn't recognize hateful leftwing rhetoric for what it is anyway so I'm not wasting my time. I've never enjoyed a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

I see your Alinsky and raise you one Alinsky.

LOL at "defunct leftism"! It never becomes defunct. It just gets recycled over and over. It's why it always fails.

Yah mama tests sexual aids for Hustler, broadcast through a live internet stream.

To Al Jazeera.

With 2-way audio.

And play-by-play from Newt Gingrich, with commentary from David Vitter.

With sideline reporting from Bill O'Reilly.

Called "Bold & Fresh," sponsored by the US Chamber of Commerce & the American Petroleum Institute.




( more ""Hateful Leftist Rhetoric"" )




--

 

[her209]

So now it's the victim card and a conspiracy? Well done!

It really happens all the time, except the libruhl media is covering it up... That's why you had to resort to false attribution to come up with a single example...

Do you have any idea how nuts that really is?

Do you have any idea how nuts FNE really is?

 

[Rainsford]

I'm not sure the best way to judge an ideology is by specifically looking for the craziest believers you can find. You can find wackjob radicals in almost every ideological camp out there, not because all ideologies are violently radical, but because their wackjob tendencies tend to reflect and amplify any and all points of view. The idea that violent extremists would be better if they had only picked the correct ideology doesn't really mesh up well with human behavior.

Edit: Which isn't to say that no ideology has hateful rhetoric, just that the presence of wacko adherents isn't BY ITSELF enough to prove anything.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm not sure the best way to judge an ideology is by specifically looking for the craziest believers you can find. You can find wackjob radicals in almost every ideological camp out there, not because all ideologies are violently radical, but because their wackjob tendencies tend to reflect and amplify any and all points of view. The idea that violent extremists would be better if they had only picked the correct ideology doesn't really mesh up well with human behavior.

Edit: Which isn't to say that no ideology has hateful rhetoric, just that the presence of wacko adherents isn't BY ITSELF enough to prove anything.

I'll mostly agree. OTOH, deliberate radicalization of any political base is accomplished by pitching to and financing the fringe, something repubs have been doing for at least 30 years. What Righties don't realize is that the views of the Koch bros, the Mellon-Scaifes, Coors and the rest of the rightwing finance machine really are extreme in a Gilded Age sort of way. They finance the repubs, and they get what they want out of it, too.

Here's an interview with the charming and gracious Richard Scaife-

http://www.nndb.com/people/199/000058025/

Speaking of hateful rhetoric, I have yet to see any examples the OP references in such an accusatory fashion... perhaps he and chums have abandoned this thread?

Chiiirp... chirp... chiiiiirp....

I'm starting to like the crickets... nice and peaceful, particularly in comparison to the usual Rightie Raving...

 

[zsdersw]

Infinite diversity in infinite combinations; the only accurate way to describe the many spectrums of belief and opinion that comprise the public consciousness.

 

[Robor]

Do you have any idea how nuts FNE really is?

Nuts or a paid shill? Or both?