Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Respecting dissent is a two-way street
Published on May 31, 2006 By Draginol In War on Terror

Why is it that the group that claims tolerance and open-mindedness as its mantra so intolerant and close minded in practice? What I speak of is the political left's tendency to interject their political beliefs into every venue that they can while at the same time, actively working to prevent those who disagree with them from having the ability to express their beliefs.

If I watch the MTV Music Awards, I can expect to have some left-winger denounce the war in Iraq.  If I was the Oscars, I can expect to be treated to more anti-US policy rhetoric along with some environmentalist ranting from someone who gets around by personal jet. If I watch Comedy Central or go to a concert or buy a music album or even play an on-line game without someone telling me that their point of view (always the left-wing point of view) is the only "correct" view and those who disagree with them are mean or cruel or more commonly "ignorant".

On PowerUser.TV, we recently discussed how an anti-war protester was protesting in the video game "America's Army" (a game made by the US military as a game/recruitment tool).  My response was that that user has every right to do that.  But I did note the irony that the US military allows the protester their say while left-wingers work nation wide to ban military recruiters from publicly funded campuses.  Tolerance, apparently, is a one-way street.

During the segment, I argued that this sort of thing tends to backfire because it is just another example of anti-war opponents trying to shove their views down the throats of everyone else and few people like that. I mentioned that I happen to support US action and that there had been some pretty positive results in Iraq that seem to be forgotten (20 million people no longer living under Saddam, free elections, etc.).  I never implied that I supported US action because I thought we should "liberate" Iraq. 

In response, on the PowerUser.TV comments a number of people complained about my beliefs.  In fact, they universally used the word "ignorant" to describe my views.  Apparently, ones knowledge on a subject is dependent on how closely your opinion matches that of a left-winger.  The more you disagree with a left-winger, the more ignorant you are.

The left loves that word "ignorant". It is their way of smugly dismissing people's opinions without having to really consider them.  The people insulting me on PowerUser.TV don't know me. They have no idea how much I know or don't know.  All they know is that I mentioned, very briefly, that I happen to support US military action in Iraq. That's it.  That was enough for them to decide that I'm "ignorant".

Anyone who has bothered to look into my background, what I've done and written and especially anyone who knows me personally I suspect will conclude that I'm not "ignorant".  The problem with so many on the left is that they cannot accept that intelligent, well educated, well informed people might have seen the same things they've seen and come to different conclusions.

If I discuss that topic with people who disagree with my conclusions about liberals/left-of-center people, I usually get some sort of moral equivalence argument. Someone will point out Fox News or some right-wing whacko.  If you point out Michael Moore you get Ann Coulter thrown in your face.  But the pattern is usually something that can most charitably be described as "Look at these hundreds of examples" with moral equivalence being "Oh  yea, here's a counter example" as if that makes the two things equal. 

You would be hard pressed to find truly equivalent examples of right-of-center people forcing their views on others. A left-winger watching Nascar doesn't have to worry about one of the drivers coming out and saying "And those of you who don't support the war, you are ignorant cowards."  Even during the heated recent election, right-wing celebrities didn't go on and say "Yea, the John Kerry is a fucking idiot." (the way several celebrities did to Bush or Bush supporters). 

And as we see on that PowerUser.TV thread, it's not me or right-wingers going on and saying how ignorant or cowardly or stupid or uneducated left-wingers are.  What's really ironic is that the left's response to the segment proves the point.  Center of right people (such as myself) are regularly subjected to left of center dogma in inappropriate venues. But we don't riot about it. We don't try to shout down those who do it. We get annoyed about it and that's about it.  That I even mentioned my position (not even making a much of a case for or against the war in Iraq) brought out more posts than any show we've had all using the word "ignorant" and some of them saying things like "Well those people protesting the war are just trying to wake you up."

Apparently, some opinions are simply the "correct" opinions. Those who disagree are "ignorant" and need to be educated. Incorrect opinions need to be subverted, buried, hidden and those who have those opinions shouted down and shamed.  The problem with that strategy, in a democracy, is that the voters tend to have the last laugh. Americans don't take kindly to bullies.


Comments (Page 5)
5 PagesFirst 3 4 5 
on Jun 09, 2006
I have yet to see anyone from the right side of the aisle use a funeral{Coretta Scott King


Paul Wellstone. To name another


who? where did he do it? ands at what funeral, was he joined in by many others in condemning something?

Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-MN) was killed in a plane crash during the 2004 electoral season, when he was running for reelection. The DFL (Democratic Farm & Labor) Party -- the Minnesotan Democratic Party's moniker -- used his funeral as a political rally to further their own prospects and launch the campaign of his replacement on the ticket, Walter Mondale. (Of all people, but that's another topic.)
on Jun 17, 2006
singrdave...I guess this thread has gotten too long. I can't find what it is you're referring to. I don't remember ANYONE condoning what happened at the Wellstone memorial. Still, Mr. Wellstone had family there who made speeches. I cannot, and will not deprive them of their opinion at such an awful time. They stood up and proclaimed what he did....many, many times. If that's wrong, sobeit. It wasn't Jesse Ventura's memorial, it wasn't Trent Lott's. It was Paul Wellstone's. I hope that all of you don't expect that your own memorials will be sullied by the clear presence of those who opposed you in every way possible. These people criticized Paul Wellstone at every turn. To show up to pay "respects" to a man who championed the very causes they chastised him for, is hypocritical to say the least! Just as the Coretta Scott King funeral was.

Would it be o.k. if Hitler paid his respects to Jesse Owen's uncontested? I doubt it.

Jill User, I like you. I like your hubby too. I wish you nothing but the best that the world has to offer. REALLY! But this thread is titled...DO I NEED YOUR OPINIONS SHOVED DOWN MY THROAT?

If that isn't a claim to victim hood, I don't know what is! I've tried...very hard.....to be reasonable in this thread. To no avail. You seem to be looking through stained glass and I can't help you put on 3D glasses to see what I see. What I see may be wrong as it gets, but you can't even imagine how anyone could have a different point of view.

You said that your problem with "liberals" is, that they won't stand up and fight in an arena where they will actually have an opponent. Yet I've been accused of all kinds of "liberal" sins. What is it I'M doing? Have I not been "fighting"? Do you see this as being in a "liberal" friendly arena? Have I not made a point of making my points? Have I called anyone names? Have I been called them? Can I have my own blog on this site? So, who exactly is afraid here? It ain't me!

But you play by your own rules here. You can state anything you wish and people see it as fact. You may even delete this post. I like you, maybe because I have many fond memories of my pregnant wife (she had her tubes tied. Economic reasons). Maybe because I admire what your husband has accomplished. I don't know. I don't even care anymore. You insist on shitting on me and I'm going to shit back...in the only way I can....being as how I can't even have an opinion on this site without these "comment" posts.

This isn't "Joe User". This may be "George User" or, "Kenneth User" or, "Dick User", but the "Average Joe" is not the same person whom you are purposely vilifying. The "Average Joe" is most likely about to go on strike, been ignored...or exploited by this administration, and/or is wondering where in the Hell he is going to come up with the cash to pay for the huge increase in petroleum, to fill his "Average" tank, to get to his "Average" job, to feed his "Average" family!

Or maybe he is worried about his "Average" son or daughter, who is in a country from Hell, which is twice as hot, fighting a war that has been proven to have NO BASIS IN REALITY! For Christ's sake! The President of the United States made a video in which he was looking "here and there" in the Oval Office, proclaiming....No, no weapons of mass destruction here! Wow! How funny! I'm sure you will see the humor should you lose one of your offspring for some reason that seems to change it's face as much as Tammy Faye each morning!

No, you most likely won't have to worry about that now will you? Just like dubbaU. Just like Clinton. Just like 99.9% of the beaurocrats that decide what is our next course of action. That take the lives of people for some ever changing reason.

I've seen your posts. Most importantly, I've seen the post you made as to whether or not you would give your own life to save the world. You know what you said, as do I.

I'm sure that you would be comfortable sacrificing your own siblings life tomorrow for Iraqi freedom right?

LIBERAL!
on Jun 17, 2006
I've read through virtually all of these posts, and would like add my opinions as well. I appreciate TheGuyPC's doggedness in continuing to post on what matters to him. But I feel that he and weeziejefferson are missing the point.

My daughter is a sophomore in college and had to endure extremely liberal political commentary by professor's - in her Math class and in her English class, not just in her Politics classes! What does a rant about how Bush is destroying the country have to do with math? I would think that is inappropriate. During one particularly long and vitriolic rant, she got up and started to leave. Her professor asked her where she was going and she said she had a lot of homework to do and would come back tomorrow when math class was in session. He went beserk and told her if she left she could just not come back! When she refuted a couple of his statements, he wouldn't hear of it. This happens in college campi all over the country. If someone dares to write a term paper that doesn't dovetail with the prevailing liberal attitudes, they can pretty much kiss a good grade goodbye regardless of how well researched and cogent that paper might be. I have never heard of a conservative math professor bullying his captive students into listening to a rant against Bill Clinton, etc. If he did, the liberal professors would be calling for his termination. If my daughter's math teacher were to be called on what he did, I would be willing to bet that the other professors would rally to his defense.

Generally, and I know there are exceptions, conservatives don't hijack non-political venues for political reasons without invitation. Watch how many black churches Democratic presidential candidates attend during their campaigns and speak to the congregations. What would happen if a conservative candidate did that? I have attended some pretty conservative churches in my time, and I can't ever recall the preacher using the pulpit to demonize Democrat's or tell the congregation to not vote for them. Yet it happens all the time in the black churches.

When Air America was forming, I don't recall any conservatives protesting and trying to get the concept killed. Yet, when Dr. Laura was starting her television show, liberal groups organized protests against her even getting her show period. They ended up getting it so watered down that it had no chance of succeeding with the people who listened to her radio show.

Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, et. al. make no secret of their affliliations or agenda and anyone who tunes into their shows knows exactly what they are going to hear. Fox News has many liberals on their staff, but try to find CNN, NBC, etc. doing the same thing. The legacy media outlets attempt to portray themselves as journalists who simply report the news yet do all they can to push their liberal viewpoints. Look at how much air time Kitty Kelly received with her book bashing the Bush family, even though prior to her appearances virtually all of the "sources" she claimed to have received her information from had gone on record that they hadn't said those things or that what they said was taken out of context? Richard Clark was all over the place with his book as well. How many appearances on the Today show have you seen by anyone coming out with a book against the Clintons or about the policy disasters of not taking Osama bin Laden and terrorism seriously enough? Look at all that was published by "journalists" about George W. and his service in the National Guard, especially with the whole Rathergate debacle. It was on all the shows of every type. But, let a group come out against John Kerry and claim that much of his war time heroism was inflated or mis-stated, and you didn't see them on 60 Minutes! All of a sudden, the media is the world's busiest fact checking machine and if someone was off by 20 minutes in their story, the media would say it proved that what they were saying was simply made up. If someone on the right tries to expose someone on the left, they are vilified as being disgruntled and having a destructive agenda. If a liberal makes accusations against a conservative, the media portrays them as a courageous whistle-blower. If that person happens to have gaping holes in their story, well, that is ok because we have to remember that human memory is fallible. The media was all over the place when someone made an accusation against Bush 41 having an affair with his secretary and demanding that the Bush camp prove it wasn't true. Yet, when Ms. Broderick claimed that Bill Clinton raped her, the media ridiculed her and didn't investigate it all. Or the charged by Ms. Willey. They were more than happy to believe anything a hair dresser on one of Arnold's movie sets had to say though.

I will grant that it is always easier to see the insult in the opposing position than it is your own, but I think if you look at how things are handled, you have to see that liberals control much of the media, academia and entertainment and they use those areas as much as they can to promulgate their belief system. Why is it that if a journalist is known to be conservative, the media tries to dismiss anything they say as biased, yet when the New York Times, Washington Post, CBS, ABC, NBC, etc. put out reports compiled completely by people who are registered Democrat's, promote liberal causes, donate as much money as they can to Democratic endeavor's, somehow THEY expect everyone to believe that their personal beliefs in no way affected the story? It doesn't always have to be what is reported that is biased, but often what is NOT reported. Dan Rather put everything into his National Guard story he could that portrayed President Bush in a bad light, but it is now known that many of the sources that contradicted the story were ignored. Rather is paying the price for it now, but usually they get away with it.

And, briefly, it is so sad that a sitting president can't attend the funeral of Coretta Scott King and have it be assumed it was only a photo op. I have tremendous respect for Martin Luther King and what he preached even if I don't agree with many of the attitudes and programs that resulted from it. I have a feeling that Dr. King would not have been totally pleased with how it all turned out. I have never heard President Bush say or write anything derogatory about the King's or black people in general. So, why should he be forced to not attend Mrs. King's funeral? I get so tired of liberals thinking everyone is racist except them. They forget that it was the Democrat's that tried to block the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and it was ONLY because of the Republican's that it passed! Senator Byrd was a recruiter for the KKK, but you don't hear the media bringing that up all the time. Al Gore's father tried to water down the Civil Right's Amendment as much as possible, despite what Al and the media would like you to believe. You can read it in the historical record, but you don't hear about it because it is "An Inconvenient Truth." President Bush didn't take the opportunity to make any political points, only to praise what Mrs. King and her husband believed in and stood for. I could understand the attitude if President Bush was on record as detesting the King's, but that isn't the case. Beside's, there are just some things that are expected from heads of state regardless of their personal feelings, and this would probably be one of them. I distinctly remember Bill Clinton attending Ronald Reagan's funeral and nobody said it was a photo op or that he shouldn't have been there despite his many derogatory comments about Mr. Reagan and his policies.

I think that everyone, on both sides of the aisle, should remember that the First Amendment gives us the right to speak freely, but that doesn't mean there won't be a price. We can't expect First Amendment rights for ourselves but attempt to legislate those rights away for others, even in the name of good intentions or political correctness. I may cringe with embarrassment and disgust if I hear someone insult someone else based on race or anything else, but if I legislate away their right to say it, I am also taking away my own freedom as well.

If anyone has made it this far, I am sorry for the length of this post. I am just passionate about this. I respect the right of anyone to agree or disagree with me, or to think I am brilliant or an idiot. That is the right of an American, and I am glad I live where we have the right to not only think it, but to express it as well. Iraq is getting that right as well, and I wish our soldier's over there safety and success so they might come home soon.
on Aug 09, 2006
vxsjqkc lfodrjtb wupqoxiy auyqgmzb fdsyqjzwn jxzy wutqk
on Aug 10, 2006
who? where did he do it? ands at what funeral, was he joined in by many others in condemning something?


Paul Wellstone is dead. He is referring to the memorial service for Wellstone.

From Wikipedia;

The 20,000 capacity memorial service for Wellstone and the other victims of the crash was held in Williams Arena at the University of Minnesota and was broadcast live on national TV. Many high profile politicians attended the memorial, including Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, Trent Lott and Tommy Thompson. Vice President Dick Cheney offered his attendance but was turned down by organizers. After Rick Kahn began urging that the crowd should win the election for Wellstone and that Republicans should stop their opposition to the Senate seat, Governor Jesse Ventura, seen loudly chomping gum through most of the service, stormed out of the service in disgust later explaining both major parties were politicizing the event. Later in the service, Wellstone's personal eulogy was delivered by Senator Tom Harkin, another notable progressive and Wellstone's close friend in the Senate, who urged those present to "stand up for Paul" in the election.

The event was criticized for its tone. Governor Jesse Ventura, who had the option to pick a replacement senator to serve out the remainder of Wellstone's term through January 2003, went so far as to declare he would solicit resumés for the senatorial position from everyone except Democrats. On the other hand, the pre-election outrage swirling around Wellstone's memorial was condemned by Democrats, like radio personality Al Franken, who was at the memorial and claimed that the outrage was overblown in order to damage the Democratic candidate running as Wellstone's replacement. Some believe that the memorial played a major role in the election of Republican Norm Coleman.
Link
on Aug 10, 2006
Some believe that the memorial played a major role in the election of Republican Norm Coleman.


Yes, "some" believe. And then there are those of us with a brain that don't believe.
on Aug 30, 2006
Ooh! I've got one. You can sometimes go into a church and hear the preacher complaining about "activist judges." In fact my father is a preacher and can barely resist the urge to tell how Democrats are everything wrong with America. - Noumenon

I hate to pry, but what church does your father preach in?
5 PagesFirst 3 4 5