Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
The bile is strong
Published on March 21, 2004 By Draginol In Democrat

http://www.rightwingnews.com/archives/week_2004_03_14.PHP#001868

The hatred towards George Bush and Republicans in general has certainly increased since the 2000 election. I visit a lot of websites during the week and while I see a lot of idealogues on the right, there is no right-wing equivalent to Democratic-underground.

Even here on JoeUser, the tolerenace for the right by those on the left seems to be problematic, at best. I have seen people argue that this site is right-wing. Why? It's pretty easy to demonstrate that as being false. Just look at the top 20 blog sites on this site (right of page) and you'll see that there are more that are left of center than right of center.

Here's an excerpt John Hawkins found on Democratic underground:

SCRUBDASHRUB: OK, this is juvenile but this is how fed up I am. I need to watch it because I don't want to wind up getting shot, but I was driving to work and some idiot drove by me on the expressway whose license plate read 1GOP1 (I might add, he was driving completely arrogantly (no signalling, etc...typically of the party he's so proud of).

I waited until he got far enough ahead of me and promptly flipped him the one finger salute, then gave him three fingers to spell "W" and the thumbs down symbol.

Jack @ss...

boobooday: "Don't get shot. But really, he deserved it. It's like smoking. We have to make it socially unacceptable to be a Republican.

That's what they tried to do to the word "liberal." Time to ATTACK BACK!!"

nicecakes: Sure thing. Time to go beyond politics and get personal to start a new civil war! After enough victories we will be the only party and one party rule will rool!

MadProphetMargin: "That's not juvenile. Juvenile would have meant following him to a gas station, and "improving" his license plates when he went in to pay.

Try this one: On a Friday, after working hours, put a crack & peel sign on your local republican headquarter's (8.5X11 crack & peel inkjet paper is available at any major office supply company) front door. Have the sign read "Whites only - Blacks please use rear entrance."

With any luck, it will remain up until Monday. For additional fun, call the local papers and complain about what you "just saw".

MPM,
Master election prankster."

lastknowngood: "Call DMV with tag # and get his address then send off for some gay porn to be shipped to his house. Just one of my little evil ideas to use on arrogant christens and prudes."

Now, maybe this kind of hatred and vitriol exists on the right but I can't find it. This isn't some lone kook here, this is several people all wanting to do harm to someone simply because his license plate has the words GOP on it (which may or may not have anything to do with being a Republican).

This is the kind of intolerance Bakerstreet made note of in his article http://bakerstreet.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=10659 .

 

 


Comments (Page 2)
on Mar 22, 2004
Alright, so the left is intelligent enough to put up websites, and the right is stupid enough to meet together in redneck bars in Arkansas. So I'm ranting here, but what would you like me to say to that Brad? I mean honestly, there are rightwing groups in Oklahoma who speak vehemently about lynching democrats. I know, because I lived there. There are pamphlets and public access shows about how democrats, homosexuals, and jews are evil.

Come on Brad, if you think hate is limited to the left than you've lived in a shell.

Cheers
on Mar 22, 2004
jeblackstar: Not cool equating conservatism with racism. Communists killed lots of Jews. I know highbrow Democrats, and their parties are quite, um, monotone?

Arkansas redneck bars? Hrm, I can't see Winston Churchill, Henry Kissinger, William F. Buckley, Steve Forbes, George Will, or pretty much anyone that would read National Review in an Arkansas redneck bar. Actually, aren't all of those full of Clinton Democrats? Most of the redneck bars around here in KY are...

The fact is, the molotov cocktail throwing segment of society have almost always been leftist. Think about the definition of Conservatism.:

"a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change"

Does that really describe people with a lot of need for civil disobedience? The gun-toting KKK members you describe aren't conservative, they are radical, libertarian in their hatred for any authoritarian government at all. You can't call people who want to annex Idaho into a aryan nation "conservative"
on Mar 22, 2004
The fact is, the molotov cocktail throwing segment of society have almost always been leftist


Not the ones that are killing doctors in abortion clinics--come on, there are wack-jobs on both sides of the aisle...don't pretend otherwise.
on Mar 22, 2004
If you get to disown people from the conservative movement, people who self-identify with conservativism and who most people would think of as conservative as opposed to liberal, then we liberals should get to do the same.
on Mar 22, 2004
I try not to judge any party by their more colorful members, unless they're respected by their party.
on Mar 22, 2004

"then we liberals should get to do the same."

You'd have to decide what Liberals really are. At this point "Liberal" is being used to describe anything from anarchists to on-the-fence conservatives. Conservative values are pretty well defined. No one would call white supremacists out to overthrow the government or secede from the nation "conservative", not if they have a dictionary.
on Mar 22, 2004
No one would call white supremacists out to overthrow the government or secede from the nation "conservative", not if they have a dictionary


Brad's blog is talking about "the left", which you refer to as "liberals", but when someone makes a jump from "the right" to "conservatives", you take issue?

The conservative and liberal ideologies, in their true forms, are rarely practiced in real life. On a scale of global political parties, the US Democrat and Republican parties fall pretty close together pretty close to center. Conservative and Liberal ideologies are not limited to the US and can not be intertwined solely with American Democratic and Republican parties.

Labels are easy to use, but very rarely as accurate as we would like them to be. Hate isn't limited to either the left or the right, or the center for that matter. Ideology isn't static and it's not linear--not all conservatives hold the same position on every matter, nor do all Liberals.

If you don't make this a left v. right issue, the story still has a point--why would anyone think that it is acceptable to persecute another based on political belief--regardless of where on the spectrum they fall? In my view, that's the real story--doesn't matter if they are liberal, conservative, left, right, democrat or republican--it's the issue of persecution that's important.
on Mar 22, 2004
Brad, if you can equate me with the tree huggers (no disrespect to hippies) and liberals who spout the kind of nonsense you quote at the top of your blog, then I can equate you with racists, rednecks, etc.

You can't be general about my side and then forbid me from doing the same. My generalities were meant to highlight yours.

Cheers
on Mar 22, 2004
"Brad's blog is talking about "the left""
I think what his post is saying is that radicalism is much, much more accepted on the Left than the Right. I don't think the right embraces "civil disobedience" to the same extent as the left. Leftist liturature is steeped in it. I don't think anyone can say that white supremacists and Waco-style kooks get the same warm embrace from the Right as, say, Palestinian "rights organizations" or WTO demonstrators get on the Left.

Almost every violent protest or attack provokes some people on the left to say "Well, that's what you get...". As if the inevitable is somehow acceptable and you deserve it. We've heard that before and after 9/11. No doubt Israel will hear that a lot in the coming months. I think down deep the Left see it as both an end and a means when it serves their purposes.

From its birth, through the French Revolution, through Russian radicalism in the Victorian era through the October revolution, through radical movements of the 60's, to the militant environmental groups, to the anti-globalization movements now, the Left has embraced Radicalism as means to an end.

I don't think mainstream Liberals feel that way, but you have to see the historical ties and understand that Radicalism has had no problem with violent upheaval, and Conservatives have no appreciation for it. If "Liberals" are truly Liberal, they would do well to dissociate themselves from Radicalism, instead of winking at it.
on Mar 22, 2004
You'd have to decide what Liberals really are. At this point "Liberal" is being used to describe anything from anarchists to on-the-fence conservatives. Conservative values are pretty well defined. No one would call white supremacists out to overthrow the government or secede from the nation "conservative", not if they have a dictionary.


The left-right political scale is not equivalent to the liberal-conservative political scale. While socialists, communists, and anarchists are firmly planted on the left, they are not liberals. Likewise, right wing fascists, fundamentalists, and militants are clearly not conservative, though situated firmly on the right. Liberalism is the theory of individualism, free markets, and the dispersion of power to the ends of greater equality. You cannot be a liberal and oppose the free market. Today's liberals borrow from socialist thinking a concern for social ends or results, believing that liberalism cannot survive if it remains stagnant and loses its idealistic drive. We believe that its structures must evolve and continue to limit the powers that emerge within society, be they governmental, corporate, or religious. However, we are not socialist, because we are willing to let the greatest part of society go untouched by government. Today's conservatives do not possess the same idealism and spirit, but seem to advocate the conservation of liberalism, or at least certain liberal structures, minus the 'unwanted' consequences. Whatever the case, if you are a conservative, you owe your beliefs to older liberals, while opposing newer ones. Your dislike of modern liberalism may be less theoretical, and more disapproving of certain things that liberals stand for or certain ways they conduct themselves, but in the most important things you will agree with the liberals and the liberals will agree with you (although it will never make the news). Right now, there is a broad misuse of the term liberal and a stigma against it. I think people need to be much more careful about how they use the term, and avoid broadly characterizing liberals as extremists of any sort, especially if they expect liberals not to label conservatives as fascists or racists.
on Mar 22, 2004
"I think people need to be much more careful about how they use the term, and avoid broadly characterizing liberals as extremists of any sort..."

Hrm, sounds... familiar... *cough*. The problem isn't Conservatives branding Liberals extremists, it is extremists calling themselves Liberals. Look at the average political or Hollywood "Liberal" and see if the label is even close to accurate. More often than not, though, true Liberals don't seem to mind for some reason. At least they don't seem to call them out on it.
on Mar 22, 2004
A little logic -

I said:

I think people need to be much more careful about how they use the term, and avoid broadly characterizing liberals as extremists of any sort, especially if they expect liberals not to label conservatives as fascists or racists.


You replied:

Hrm, sounds... familiar... *cough*. The problem isn't Conservatives branding Liberals extremists, it is extremists calling themselves Liberals. Look at the average political or Hollywood "Liberal" and see if the label is even close to accurate. More often than not, though, true Liberals don't seem to mind for some reason. At least they don't seem to call them out on it.


Therefore:

The problem isn't liberals branding conservatives as extremists, it's extremists calling themselves conservative. Look at fundamentalists like Trent Lott and Jerry Falwell and militants like Paul Wolfowitz and Ariel Sharon and see if the label is appropriate. Generally, conservatives don't mind that racist, hateful extremists are among their ranks.

We could play this game all day, but I recommend that we don't.

on Mar 22, 2004

Jeb: I am not arguing that hate is limited to the left. Did you read what I wrote or not? I expressly said that both sides have hate.

BUT... I believe that the rank and file left wingers are much more militant than the rank and file right wingers. I believe that one reason for this is that left wingers tend to base their views more on their feelings rather than on logic. That doesn't maek their views less valid necessarily, but it does, IMO, tend to make them more emotional about their views.

The most popular blog sites on the Internet, incidentally, are conservative. and they're not full of hate like Democratic underground.

on Mar 22, 2004
Most conservatives don't agree, respect, or associate with the extreme right-wing, and most liberals don't agree with the extreme left-wing. What I do see is a lot of hatred in the mainstream left. Much of the political campaign this year has been nothing but Bush hate. I think John Kerry's thing a few weeks back when he refused to give an answer to a question because the questioner vote for George Bush is a perfect example. A persons pary affiliation should not magically discredit them. I do realize this goes both ways. I don't hate John Kerry, I just don't like him at all. Do I not listen or even consider things people on the left say? No. I like to think I can listen to both sides of something and make decisions mostly on facts.
on Mar 22, 2004
Most conservatives don't agree, respect, or associate with the extreme right-wing, and most liberals don't agree with the extreme left-wing. What I do see is a lot of hatred in the mainstream left. Much of the political campaign this year has been nothing but Bush hate. I think John Kerry's thing a few weeks back when he refused to give an answer to a question because the questioner vote for George Bush is a perfect example. A persons pary affiliation should not magically discredit them. I do realize this goes both ways. I don't hate John Kerry, I just don't like him at all. Do I not listen or even consider things people on the left say? No. I like to think I can listen to both sides of something and make decisions mostly on facts.


Trust me, the dislike we feel for Bush isn't at all unfounded. He's not much different from Clinton in many respects, but we are passionately and conscientiously opposed to the way he has deviated from the norm on international affairs, excluding moderates like Paul O'Neil and Dick Clarke from the dialog, and inviting neoconservatives into his bedroom. Neoconservatives and liberals CANNOT reach compromises on international affairs, because the neoconservatives DEMAND total, all out committment. Hate is fear, and if you've seen hate for Bush, you've seen people who are genuinely worried, and not just because he has an R next to his name.
Meta
Views
» 3961
Comments
» 55
Category
Sponsored Links