The Patriotic Terrorists?

Posted by: ST on January 25, 2007 at 4:19 pm

Gotta hand it to this guy – he’s gut gots having this piece posted at the hostile-to-conservatives-HuffPo.

I wouldn’t want to be his email inbox for the next few days – LOL!

RSS feed for comments on this post.

25 Responses to “The Patriotic Terrorists?”

Comments

  1. Brandon says:

    Gutfeld’s actually been a regular fly in the ointment at the HuffPo for quite some time.

  2. Bob says:

    But Sister, come on. Do you really, truly believe that the character he describes in his piece, the proverbial “patriotic terrorist” represents anything within the mainstream of liberal or Democratic opinion? One might conceivably argue that Noam Chomsky has some anti-American tendencies (although I seriously doubt that he ever expressed a wish for anyone to be harmed). But who else besides him? The thing is, Gutfield is trying to insinuate that such anti-American views are common among mainstream liberals and Democrats. Anyone who makes such claims has an obligation to provide examples. Who in the Democratic leadership holds such views? What elected members of Congress? Sister, tell me. What proportion of Democrats would you guess hold such views? I’d really like to know.

  3. Great White Rat says:

    Bob jokingly asks: Do you really, truly believe that the character he describes in his piece, the proverbial “patriotic terrorist” represents anything within the mainstream of liberal or Democratic opinion?

    Good knee-slapper there, Bob. Almost had us thinking that was a serious question.

    The answer, of course, is yes.

    Start with this: give me one real proposal for successfully prosecuting the WOT from any prominent mainstream Democrat in the past, oh, three or four years. Joe Lieberman doesn’t count – you guys tried to throw him under the bus. And ideas like running now or running to Okinawa don’t count. If the mainstream liberals were honestly interested in winning the struggle with islamofascism, they’ve had plenty of time to advance constructive ideas, or failing that, to put national interest ahead of party politics and at least not try to damage the effort.

    Mainstream liberals…let’s see, how about Dick Durbin. Number two Democrat in the Senate. That mainstream enough for you? Point me to how much outrage and anger he displayed over the AQ beheadings. For that matter, show me how vocal he was against islamofascists after 9/11. On the other hand, we all know how he took to the floor to rail against our own troops being Nazis, and why? To score a few partisan points? Bottom line is, most liberals don’t see islamofascism as the enemy – go to the recent ’24’ thread and read Sarah’s comments. They see Bush as the enemy. And that’s the problem.

  4. sanity says:

    GWR spot on.

    Liberals hate Bush more than they hate the terrorists.

    In that lies the problem, until a terrorist kills someone close to them, but I fear even then, they will not see the terrorist at fault, they will blame Bush.

  5. Bob says:

    You guys sound like bigots to me. You’re anti-liberal bigots. It’s similar to any other bigotry because you create a distorted repulsive image of people so you have an excuse to hate them. You make stuff up. You say things like, “Liberals hate Bush more than they hate the terrorists.” You have no actual evidence to support such a statement, but you say it because it feels good to you.

    Actually, if anything, I think it’s more likely that you guys hate liberals more than you hate terrorists. It’s really true, isn’t it? Don’t bother to deny it, because I know it’s true. You guys hate liberals so much that you were secretly thrilled about the 9/11 attacks. You knew how New Yorkers tend to be predominantly big-city liberals, how there were lots of gays and religious minorities in the twin towers. You cheered when you saw those buildings fall, and take out all of that liberal scum, didn’t you? Don’t bother to deny it, because I know it’s true.

    Just kidding, but you get the point.

  6. sanity says:

    Bob states:
    Just kidding, but you get the point.

    Somehow Bob, I don’t think you were kidding at all.

    Are you and Sarah dating / married? You guys sound like bigots to me. You’re anti-liberal bigots. It’s similar to any other bigotry because you create a distorted repulsive image of people so you have an excuse to hate them. You make stuff up.

    No, we just hate stupidity. So you could say we are anti-stupid. We have no need to “make things up”, since Liberals seem to give us plenty to work with. Please give us an example of made up stuff?

    You say things like, “Liberals hate Bush more than they hate the terrorists.” You have no actual evidence to support such a statement, but you say it because it feels good to you.

    We say it because that is how Liberals come off with how they act. I would love a liberal to putthe country first without trying to place every blame in the world on President Bush.

    So far I have heard from Liberals that the following is Bush’s Fault:

    – Global Warming
    – Stolen Elections
    – Katrina
    – Iraq
    – Iran goiing Nuclear
    – N. Korea going Nuclear

    Let’s see, Bush is Evil, the Hitler, a Liar, a Monkey, an Idiot, a Moron, a Dufus, is Stupid…….but supposedly out smarted all the Democrats.

    Here is something to chew on:

    For more than three years, the Left has characterised the War on Terror, and especially the liberation of Iraq, as “Bush’s War.” They’ve also referred to Iraq as “Bush’s Adventure,” “Bush’s Crusade” and “Bush’s Folly.” They were calling it “Bush’s Hastily Planned, Poorly Realised and Badly Executed Diversion From the ‘Real’ War,” but pretty much stopped when they realised that it wouldn’t all fit on a Volvo-sized bumper sticker. Liberals don’t understand the strategy of defeating terrorism by changing the totalitarian governments that support it. They don’t get the concept that freedom reduces frustration, which in turn reduces the ability of terrorist groups to recruit. They refuse to acknowledge that Congress voted the Authorisation for Use of Military Force Against Iraq into law. They insist that the war was all Bush’s idea (when they don’t consider him a puppet, that is), and that every setback and problem is all Bush’s fault.

    Well, that’s just fine with me. Let’s establish that in plain English: President Bush is solely responsible for sending troops to Afghanistan and Iraq, the latter decision made in spite of a corrupt United Nations and a compromised France, Russia and China. Therefore, he should be considered responsible for all the results of his decision — the positive as well as the negative. So far, it’s all been about the negative.

    How many countries have been changed for the better by the War on Terror? Afghanistan has become a democracy in which women vote and hold positions of power, and has even sent female athletes to the Olympics for the first time in history. In Pakistan, Pevez Musharraf has handed the government over to civil rule but maintains his permanent position as president. However, Pakistan has been a staunch ally, and provided us with critical information by exposing the activities of Abdul Qadeer Khan. Khan supplied nuclear weapons related technologies, equipment, and know-how to Iran, North Korea, and Libya, and attempted to do the same with Syria and Iraq. Freeing Afghanistan (especially Afghan women), revealing the corruption in the UN and discovering Khan’s activities, none of which would have happened without the War on Terror, must therefore be all Bush’s fault.

    ….

    The Left certainly didn’t want the liberation of Iraq to take place. Senator John Kerry, representing the Democratic party in the 2004 election, repeatedly called Iraq “the wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time.” President Bush has been labeled a warmongering cowboy for sending troops to Iraq. If the blame for Iraq is laid at his feet, then the credit must go with it… and if he has earned the label “cowboy,” then also “liberator.”

    Link

    Interesting though. Will the President be credited with the good as much as he is with the bad?

    Or how much you want to make a bet suddenly the Democrats will try and make it look like anything good coming out of Iraq is because of them.

    Believe me, it doesn’t feel good to say that Liberals seem to hate the president more than terrorists. I wish it didn’t look like that. I wish the terrorists didn’t take such pleasure in seeing that. I wish terrorists didn’t secretly meet with Democrats before the elections. I wish Democrats didn’t go to foriegn soil to bad mouth the President and America.

    I wish we had the same outrage we had after 9/11, and the will to firmly proceed. I wish the media wouldn’t undermine the president at every chance they get. I wish the media wouldn’t report classified information that hurts the ability of our government to protect Americans. I wish people in the government would not leak classified material to the press to try and hurt the president but ends up hurting our ability to find and kill terrorists. I wish retreat ‘redeployment’, wasn’t a common word used by democrats.

    There are alot of things I wish democrats wouldn’t do and I really wish the demcorats would have a plan before they criticize the only one we have going at the moment. I have no problem with them criticizing, but offer up solutions, a plan, and retreating is not a plan. Retreating is a sign of defeat.

    I also wish the democrats and the media could say something, anything positive. Economy? Jobs? Stock Market? Gas Prices?

    You knew how New Yorkers tend to be predominantly big-city liberals, how there were lots of gays and religious minorities in the twin towers. You cheered when you saw those buildings fall, and take out all of that liberal scum, didn’t you? Don’t bother to deny it, because I know it’s true.

    Not going to bother dissecting this, because it is ignorant BS that is being spewed and sounds as if it came right from the depths of the demented minds of KOS or DU people.

    I don’t give a rip what or who was in the twin towers. I don’t care about minorities or what color they were in there. I care that they were AMERICANS, they were human beings, they were mothers, they were fathers, they were sons and daughters, they were murdered by terrorists.

    It seems so many forget that part. Amercians seem to have a short memory for the most part. It seems to have lost some of hte meaning, forgot some of the faces, or the images, or seen the tower collapse. Most vaguely rememebr it or tend to just forget about it, and continue on like nothing happened. Just a bad thing that happened, like Katrina.

    I won’t forget. I will remember and I will keep the outrage, fury and contempt alive within me burning bright against the darkness of forgetfulness and language of stupidity that people spew that dishonor our fallen, our military and the victims of that attack.

    Angry? Damn right I am, and every American should be still.

    And plese don’t try and hit me with the tired cliche that I am some warmongering republican or I am a chickenhawk or some other nonsnese. Personally, I am not sure where I fit in – because I don’t characterize myself as republican, democrat or independent. I have always voted for the best person for the job, not for one party or another. But I will tell you this, I do not relate to the Liberals.

    Gun control means hitting your target.

    Inmate means you don’t have TV, Internet or ‘play time’. Prison means punishment.

    Border control. Armed incursions onto US soil gets met with deadly force. Start emptying the jails of illegals and put them back across the border where they belong.

    These are things I believe in strongly. So I guess that makes me what, a republican? Definately not a democrat or a liberal from what I seem to hear from their side.

    Oh, I am big into personal responsibility too. Quit blaming the problems on other people. Guns dont kill people, they are tools, like a hammer or a shovel, it is the person picking up the tool that is killing people. You put coffee with the lid off between your legs and scald yourself, don’t go suing the restaurant for your stupidity for having the top off and coffee between your legs. If your fat and you constantly eat at McDonalds or other fast food, don’t go suing them because you go there on your own and pay to eat to make yourself fat.

    And finally for the last of my wishes, displeasures and long winded rant…..[winks]….We need to quit being so damn sensitive. Quit being a bunch of wusses, suck it up and move on. Quit asking for an apology for some remark. If someone uses a pefectly good word such as niggardly, don’t get your panties in a twist because perhaps you are too ignorant to know the meaning of the word and consider it an insult.

    Oh, and I quit smoking fags probably 3 years ago cold turkey. It doesn’t mean someone should call the media and complain and it certainly doesn’t mean I was lighting homosexuals on fire.

    PC is going to kill us.

    Sorry for the next and strike it if you want ST, but PC mentality is pussifying America.

    Metro-sexuals? **rolls eyes** Good grief.
    Skin and bone models? Hell we send aid to foriegn countries like ethopia because they look like that.

    What the hell is wrong with the world these days?

    People call Bush a cowboy, well I wish he was more like John Wayne. John Wayne and Dirty Harry for President and Vice President, thats my dream team.

    Sorry for the rant ST, it just sort of bubbled out.

  7. Sluggo_f16 says:

    It will make your day reading some of Greg’s posts over at Huffpo and the comments attacking him. It really sheds light on the type of people on the liberal/left and lends significant ammo for his “Patriotic Terrorists” memo.

  8. Great White Rat says:

    Wow….you hit a whole shooting range full of bulls-eyes with that post, Sanity. Thanks, and kudos. **==

  9. Bob says:

    Sanity, you rube. My paragraph about how you hate liberals more than you hate the terrorists was a pardody of you guys, and the kinds of things you say about liberals. I knew when I said “you get the point” that one of you would take what I said literally, and that I’d have to come back and explain to you literal-minded clods that it was a joke.

    I often wonder why conservatives always seem to be so damned angry about everything. In a world where the U.S. is still one of the top dogs, where conservative politics has run all branches of government for the past 6 years and gotten its way on virtually everything, why are your panties in such a twist? The Dems haven’t had the political power to shove anything down your throat until now. If things are not to your liking, who’s to blame? The hippies who say all those mean things about George W. Bush?

    Jeez, and you’re the one who says things like, “We need to quit being so damn sensitive.” I think you protest too much in your post. Sensitive indeed.

  10. Lorica says:

    Actually, if anything, I think it’s more likely that you guys hate liberals more than you hate terrorists. It’s really true, isn’t it? Don’t bother to deny it, because I know it’s true. You guys hate liberals so much that you were secretly thrilled about the 9/11 attacks. You knew how New Yorkers tend to be predominantly big-city liberals, how there were lots of gays and religious minorities in the twin towers. You cheered when you saw those buildings fall, and take out all of that liberal scum, didn’t you? Don’t bother to deny it, because I know it’s true.

    Isn’t this called transferrance?? Seems to me that only a mind that thinks like this would accuse others of thinking like this. – Lorica

  11. sanity says:

    Hence my very first line:

    Bob states:
    Just kidding, but you get the point.

    Somehow Bob, I don’t think you were kidding at all.

    I hear too many that speak just like that, and if that was not your intention then I apologize, but most liberals that come in here have that type of mentality, and if they don’t speak it, most times it seems to be on their mind. Every once in a while we see them break down when pressed and out it comes….

    Bob states:
    I often wonder why conservatives always seem to be so damned angry about everything.

    We blow off steam like I just did once in awhile, but ANGER is normally the stuff Democrats are fond of. there are some republicans that are prone to anger, but the majority of liberals I see out in demonstration tend to act violently.

    How many republican acts of violence did you hear being perpetrated against other who didn’t agree with their view during the elections? How many Democrats? That might give a clue to start with.

    Bob loses it when he states:
    gotten its way on virtually everythingThe Dems haven’t had the political power to shove anything down your throat until now.

    Dude where the heck have you been?
    Democrats have acted like they have had the majority for some time now, it is the republicans that have failed to act like the majority and rolled over like little lap dogs to the democrats with many things.

    Jeez, and you’re the one who says things like, “We need to quit being so damn sensitive.” I think you protest too much in your post. Sensitive indeed.

    Hypocricy in its finest.

    Democrats bellyache, whine, bitch and maon, then a republican or anyone who doesn’t agree with something they say, says soemthing opposite, or comes out contrary to thier liberal belief, they suddenly either want to “move on” or want the person to quit being so sensitive.

    I bet we see the same thing in congress if the republicans pull the same things the demcorats did while in the minority, and what will the democrats say?

    Probably something along the lines you just did Bob.

    When you get what you give, democrats suddenly don’t think that is right.

  12. I often wonder why conservatives always seem to be so damned angry about everything. In a world where the U.S. is still one of the top dogs, where conservative politics has run all branches of government for the past 6 years and gotten its way on virtually everything, why are your panties in such a twist? The Dems haven’t had the political power to shove anything down your throat until now. If things are not to your liking, who’s to blame? The hippies who say all those mean things about George W. Bush?

    Jeez, and you’re the one who says things like, “We need to quit being so damn sensitive.” I think you protest too much in your post. Sensitive indeed.

    Considering that the left has been foaming at the mouth with rage since Bush “stole” the 2000 elections, only pausing briefly for a couple of months after 9-11, I’d say you are engaging in a heavy dose of ‘pot-kettle’, Bob.

  13. Bob says:

    A case in point, sanity: “most liberals that come in here have that type of mentality, and if they don’t speak it, most times it seems to be on their mind. (emphasis added). The issue that I’m trying to raise is your unfair assumptions about what liberals supposedly think, and your remarkable ability to divine such information when the people in question haven’t actually stated it. You have a caricature of liberals that you insist on applying to people regardless of what they say or actually think.

    You say, “Democrats have acted like they have had the majority for some time now, it is the republicans that have failed to act like the majority and rolled over like little lap dogs to the democrats with many things.” For example? Name a single legislative initiative that the Democrats have steamrolled through Congress in the last six years. Virtually all of the defeats that the Republicans have suffered in Congress lately have been their own fault, because they did such a poor job of convincing the public. Congressional Democrats didn’t have to derail Social Security reform or immigration reform, just like they didn’t have to derail the Supreme Court appointment of Harriet Miers. They didn’t have to do anything to oust Representative Foley or Tom DeLay. The GOP merely self-destructed and became the victim of its own corruption and incompetence. You can be pissed about it all you want, but jeez, don’t blame the Democrats.

    But getting back to my original post, we can disagree about all of these things (and Lord knows, we do). But I would just ask that you all think twice before making such damning assumptions about what liberals supposedly think.

  14. NC Cop says:

    So, Bob, I take it that you frequent liberal websites and correct them when they say similar things, right?

  15. sanity says:

    Give the whole quote if your going to quote me Bob:

    I hear too many that speak just like that, and if that was not your intention then I apologize, but most liberals that come in here have that type of mentality, and if they don’t speak it, most times it seems to be on their mind. Every once in a while we see them break down when pressed and out it comes….

    Hence that is why I have said what I did.

    Because I knew for a FACT that some liberal would come along and try and accusew me of reading their minds. (sorry the tin foil is blocking me)

    I have seen it quite a few times where when pressed and a liberal get cornered this type of rhetoric comes out.

    Nice try though.

    Bob states:
    You have a caricature of liberals that you insist on applying to people regardless of what they say or actually think.

    No Bob, I don’t judge people like you see mto think. I respond to what is said, I disseminate, and give what I think are reasonable responses to what is being said. I respond to what they say, not what they ‘think’.

    Bob states:

    Name a single legislative initiative that the Democrats have steamrolled through Congress in the last six years. Virtually all of the defeats that the Republicans have suffered in Congress lately have been their own fault, because they did such a poor job of convincing the public.

    Its not what they ‘steamroll’ through, but what they block, and continue to block, no matter if it is good legislation or not. If it is promoted by a republican it seem to be automatically blocked or not even given a up or down vote.

    But I will give you this, you are right when you say it is the republicans fault, but not because they didn’t convince the public (public doesn’t block votes or filibuster), it is the republicans fault that they laid down, rolled over and allowed deomcrats to play dominant when the democrats were in the minority. If the republicans banded together and psuhed as hard and strong as democrats do with the untied front they pull off, things literally would have been different – but they didn’t and as you said, that is their fault.

  16. Bob says:

    Sanity, you say, “Every once in a while we see them break down when pressed and out it comes….” Out what comes? They confess that they hate America? Are you kidding me? Show me an example where you broke someone down like that. And even if it happened “every once in a while” which I doubt, would that mean that they all think that way? I mean, who the heck are these people that you guys keep going on and on about? As I asked at the top of this thread, give me a concrete example. Is it Ted Kennedy, who lost one brother in wartime and two more to assassination while they served our country at the highest level? Do you think Kennedy hates America? How about Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Jim Webb, et al. How can you possibly treat this supposed phenomenon of America-hating liberals as though it were a significant thing, without any proof at all?

    I’ll tell you why: it’s cheap rhetoric designed to create a groundswell of hatred among conservatives so you can be “mobilized” to support conservative causes. It’s just B.S. But it seems to be working.

  17. Bob says:

    Note: Sister, I thought I’d posted a response to NC Cop before my last one to sanity. I could be mistaken about that, though. Another possibility is that you thought there was something objectionable in it (although I’m not sure what would have made you think that). Did you remove the post?

  18. I have not deleted a single thing you’ve posted, Bob.

  19. Bob says:

    Hey, NC Cop. To answer your question, would you consider CNN to be a liberal site? Seriously, I do visit both liberal sites (like Huffington Post) and conservative ones like this. I chuckle to myself about the silly things people on both sides say, like when liberals refer to Bu$h, Bu$hCo, Chimpy, Repugnicans, and the like. I tend to think that anybody’s credibility suffers for saying such things. But I find that conservatives seem to be the ones pushing the envelope on outright hate speech. I think the KSFO talk radio case is a good example. I’ve never heard a liberal commentator anywhere refer to hog-tying and castrating political opponents, or fantasizing on-air about executing the editor of a prominent newspaper by electric chair (complete with sound effects), like several of KSFO’s on-air commentators have done. I’ve never heard a liberal commentator say something like “Get AIDS and die” the way Michael Savage said to a caller when he had a TV show on MSNBC (or wherever it was). I think that there are more examples of commentators like Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin on the right, who are so quick to condemn fellow Americans as “traitors.”

    And it’s one thing for goofballs like us (sorry if I drag you down to my level) to say “shut up” or call each other stupid occasionally. But I think that professional commentators like the ones above, or like Gutfeld, have more of a responsibility to try to be fair and honest, and not use cheap and unfair rhetoric to fan the flames of hatred. It’s fine to disagree and argue about politics—it’s a good thing—but when the line is crossed and people are demonized, defamed, and threatened with violence, although it’s all free speech, I think it’s often regrettable.

  20. sanity says:

    I will grant you that republicans have their share of hate speech, but when you want to try and pass: But I find that conservatives seem to be the ones pushing the envelope on outright hate speech.

    Your completely wrong, completely.

    Lets start with, on global warming, if you don’t agree with global warming alarmist – which side tries to shut you down, wants to threaten to remove your credentials? Who has said that if you don’t agree with them that you should be JAILED?

    So began another year in which liberals engaged in, and mostly got away with, grotesque slanders and slurs about conservatives — the kind of poisonous rhetoric that should be beyond the pale in a decent society. Once again, too many on the left — not crackpots from the fringe, but mainstream players and pundits — chose to demonize conservatives as monsters rather than debate their ideas on the merits.

    As in years past, Republicans were almost routinely associated with Nazi Germany. Former Vice President Al Gore referred to GOP activists as “brown shirts.” Newsday columnist Hugh Pearson likened the Republican National Convention to the “Nazi rallies held in Germany during the reign of Adolf Hitler.” Linda Ronstadt said that the Republican victory on Election Day meant “we’ve got a new bunch of Hitlers.” Chuck Turner, a Boston city councilor, smeared National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice as “a tool of white leaders,” like “a Jewish person working for Hitler.”

    Such Nazi labeling is no less disgusting when it comes from Republicans, of course. According to Bob Woodward, Secretary of State Colin Powell described Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith as running a separate government out of his “Gestapo office.” Commentator Ralph Peters, writing in the New York Post, accused Democrat Howard Dean of using the tactics of Hitler and Goebbels to silence his competitors. Too many conservatives and libertarians refer to antismoking extremists as “tobacco Nazis,” or to the humorless critics of fast food as “food Nazis.” Whether it comes from the right or the left, language like that is vile.

    Overwhelmingly, though, political hate speech today comes from the left. It has increasingly become a habit of leftist argumentation to simply dismiss conservative ideas as evil or noxious rather than rebut them with facts and evidence.

    Link

    That is why there was no uproar when Cameron Diaz declared that rape might be legalized if women didn’t turn out to vote for John Kerry.

    Or when Walter Cronkite told Larry King that the videotape of Osama bin Laden that surfaced just before the election was “probably set up” by Karl Rove.

    Or when Alfred A. Knopf published Nicholson Baker’s “Checkpoint,” a novel in which two Bush-haters talk about assassinating the president. “I’m going to kill that bastard,” one character rages.

    Chevy Chase, hosting a People for the American Way awards ceremony at the Kennedy Center in Washington, slammed Bush as “an uneducated, real, lying schmuck.”

    A cartoon by the widely syndicated Ted Rall described Pat Tillman, who gave up his NFL career to enlist in the Army and was then killed in Afghanistan, as a “sap” and an “idiot.”

    A political flier in Tennessee, depicting Bush as a mentally disabled sprinter, bore the message: “Voting for Bush is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you’re still retarded.”

    The St. Petersburg, Fla., Democratic Club took out an ad calling for the death of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. “Then there’s Rumsfeld who said of Iraq, `We have our good days and our bad days,’ ” the ad read. “We should put this S.O.B. up against a wall and say, `This is one of our bad days,’ and pull the trigger.” Fantasies of murder likewise animated British pundit Charlie Brooker, who ended his Oct. 24 column in the Guardian with a plea for Bush’s death: “John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. — where are you now that we need you?” Brooker later assured readers that he “deplores violence of any kind” and had meant his call for an assassin only as “an ironic joke.”

    Yeah, when called on it, it suddenly becomes “a joke”. I was just joking….**rolls eyes**

    But the “joke” of left-wing hate speech stopped being funny a long time ago. There is room in the marketplace of ideas for passionate, even angry, rhetoric, but there are also lines that, as a matter of decency and civic hygiene, should not be crossed. The violent invective so often hurled at conservatives pollutes the democratic stream from which all of us drink. Democrats no less than Republicans should want to shut those polluters down.

    What, you need more?

    Julianne Malveaux, a radio host and USA Today columnist, caught no flak when she prayed aloud for the death of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. “I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease,” she snarled on PBS.

    MSNBC fired right-wing talk host Michael Savage in July, and rightly so, when he told a gay caller to “get AIDS and die, you pig.” The liberal Nina Totenberg, on the other hand, suffered no ill effects for saying, during the flap over General Jerry Boykin’s views of Islam and the war on terrorism, “I hope he’s not long for this world.” When the startled host asked if she were “putting a hit out on this guy,” Totenberg backtracked and said she only wanted to see him expire “in his job.”

    [I can't stand Savage and i think he is a big one for Hate speech, but he is not a republican though either, or liberal, he seems to hate everyone by the sounds of him - sanity]

    Debating the pros and cons of racial preferences or US foreign policy can be difficult; much easier to simply hiss “Racist!” or “Nazi!” or some equally poisonous insult.

    Hmm and you want to single out a radio station, ok, how about you include air america in on that also…

    “What you have now” — this is left-wing activist and actress Janeane Garofalo, analyzing the Republican Party during an appearance at the 92d Street Y in New York this year — “is people that are closet racists, misogynists, homophobes, and people who love . . . the politics of exclusion identifying as conservative.” That was apparently enough to win her a guest-host slot on CNN’s “Crossfire,” where she offered this thoughtful critique of the Patriot Act: “It is in fact a conspiracy of the 43d Reich.”

    [oh how can we forget the picture of her Nazi salute on national TV. - sanity]

    Oh and how can we forget Joe Lieberman:

    My brief and unhappy experience with the hate and vitriol of bloggers on the liberal side of the aisle comes from the last several months I spent campaigning for a longtime friend, Joe Lieberman.

    This kind of scary hatred, my dad used to tell me, comes only from the right wing–in his day from people such as the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy, with his tirades against “communists and their fellow travelers.” The word “McCarthyism” became a red flag for liberals, signifying the far right’s fascistic tactics of labeling anyone a “communist” or “socialist” who favored an active federal government to help the middle class and the poor, and to level the playing field.

    I came to believe that we liberals couldn’t possibly be so intolerant and hateful, because our ideology was famous for ACLU-type commitments to free speech, dissent and, especially, tolerance for those who differed with us. And in recent years–with the deadly combination of sanctimony and vitriol displayed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Michael Savage–I held on to the view that the left was inherently more tolerant and less hateful than the right.

    Now, in the closing days of the Lieberman primary campaign, I have reluctantly concluded that I was wrong. The far right does not have a monopoly on bigotry and hatred and sanctimony. Here are just a few examples (there are many, many more anyone with a search engine can find) of the type of thing the liberal blog sites have been posting about Joe Lieberman:

    • “Ned Lamont and his supporters need to [g]et real busy. Ned needs to beat Lieberman to a pulp in the debate and define what it means to be an AMerican who is NOT beholden to the Israeli Lobby” (by “rim,” posted on Huffington Post, July 6, 2006).

    • “Joe’s on the Senate floor now and he’s growing a beard. He has about a weeks growth on his face. . . . I hope he dyes his beard Blood red. It would be so appropriate” (by “ctkeith,” posted on Daily Kos, July 11 and 12, 2005).

    • On “Lieberman vs. Murtha”: “as everybody knows, jews ONLY care about the welfare of other jews; thanks ever so much for reminding everyone of this most salient fact, so that we might better ignore all that jewish propaganda [by Lieberman] about participating in the civil rights movement of the 60s and so on” (by “tomjones,” posted on Daily Kos, Dec. 7, 2005).

    • “Good men, Daniel Webster and Faust would attest, sell their souls to the Devil. Is selling your soul to a god any worse? Leiberman cannot escape the religious bond he represents. Hell, his wife’s name is Haggadah or Muffeletta or Diaspora or something you eat at Passover” (by “gerrylong,” posted on the Huffington Post, July 8, 2006).

    • “Joe Lieberman is a racist and a religious bigot” (by “greenskeeper,” posted on Daily Kos, Dec. 7, 2005).

    And these are some of the nicer examples.

    One Sunday morning on C-Span I debated Nation editor Katrina vanden Heuvel on the Lieberman versus Lamont race. Afterwards I received a series of emails–many of them in ALL CAPS (which often suggests the hyper-frenetic state of these extremist haters)–that were of the same stripe as the blog posts, and filled with the same level of personal hate.

    But the issue is not just emotional outbursts by these usually anonymous bloggers. A friend of mine just returned from Connecticut, where he had spoken on several occasions on behalf of Joe Lieberman. He happens to be a liberal antiwar Democrat, just as I am. He is also a lawyer. He told me that within a day of a Lamont event–where he asked the candidate some critical questions–some of his clients were blitzed with emails attacking him and threatening boycotts of their products if they did not drop him as their attorney. He has actually decided not to return to Connecticut for the primary today; he is fearful for his physical safety.

    Link

    That was an op-ed from a Liberal talking about how bad liberals have gotten, to the point where one of your own is in fear for his life to go back to Connecticut.

    How many republican speakers have been attacked, pies, salad dressing, ect.

    How many liberal speakers have been attacked by republicans?

    Oh in comparing ann coulter, rush limbaugh, ect for hate speech, pease don’t forget kieth olbermann, rosie odonel, ect.

    After reviewing the above quotes, please do not try and pass off that republicans or conservatives are the ones pushing the envelope on hate speech.

    The above proves that false.

  21. Bob says:

    Oh Christ, don’t get me started on global warming again, sanity. But your point is well taken, and I do acknowledge that people on the left say dumb and mean-spirited things too. I don’t have any survey data at hand that would indicate which side uses the really extreme language the most—although I suspect that the items culled from KSFO alone could easily fill up a linear yard of column space—but I will categorically agree with you than whatever side of the spectrum it comes from it should be frowned on. However, like I think I said above, I would make a distinction between nut-jobs who write comments in forums like this (respondents like me, I mean—I’m not dissing Sister Toldjah herself) and professional bloviators like Savage, Garofalo, Hannity, et al.

    And getting back to my original post at the top, I still take exception to what Gutfeld said. While there are certainly those on the left who indulge in ugly rhetoric (a small minority, I hope), I think that he’s trying to imply that there is a significant proportion of liberals who essentially hate America, or love their political ideology more than they love America. I think that’s cheap slander, and if you see him at one of your conservative cross-burning ceremonies, you can tell him I said so (come on, I’m kidding!).

    Have a great weekend, sanity.

  22. Marshall Art says:

    Don’t forget all the lovely things written about Michelle Malkin and sent to her by email. Lovely stuff that only cowards and uncouth buffoons would say only to women her size.

    But as far as lib/Dem hate for America, it might be more accurate to say that they support things that are not helping the effort, but hurting the effort, and the motivation and intent claimed is besides the point. The consequences of their actions are enough to say that they are anti-American. What’s sad is that it is hard to determine if it’s a result of willful intent or abject stupidity, but the consequences are harmful in either case. (Sanity listed most, if not all of them.)

  23. Bob says:

    Marshall Art, each political extreme has its own little set of cozy unquestioned assumptions that everybody on that side takes for granted. On the left, people like to pretend that George W. Bush is retarded, for example. Conservatives, on the other hand, have this fictitious notion that liberals somehow hate America. It’s so common that it’s become a cliché and a running joke among liberals (the link is to a cartoon that depicts a secret liberal America-hating party . . . you’ll just have to click through an ad to see it. It’s not offensive at all, just wry and funny). Just because we disagree about politics or have a different set of priorities does not give you justification to say things like, “The consequences of their actions are enough to say that they are anti-American.” A lot of opponents of the Iraq war, for example (which includes a significant number of Republicans) openly say that the war has made us less safe and exacerbated the problem of terrorism. Does that give us justification to say that you’re anti-American? Like I said before, in the end, it’s just cheap rhetoric. We can disagree about politics and debate the issues, but saying that our countrymen are anti-American when it’s not true in any way, shape or form, is wrong.

  24. NC Cop says:

    And it’s one thing for goofballs like us

    Watch it, mister!!! I’m a goof off!!!

    And I’m proud of it! :d

  25. Bob says:

    Sorry, NC Cop, like I said, I knew I was unfairly dragging you down to my level. I’m a goof-ball aspiring some day to be promoted to good-off. I’d be grateful for any pointers you’d care to give me. ^:)^