Feelings of Political Bigotry

In reply to: Want to see why I have grown to hate the left? | Political Byline, and recreated from memory, because someone accidentally closed a page he intended to leave open... (It was early, and I was still sleepy...)

---
Well, there's no point in my debating against your feelings, I guess (only you can change how you feel)... ...but I still maintain that the blogesphere would be a whole lot more civil (and perhaps even more respectful, too) if folks would stick to attacking the individuals who actually say or do the bad things, rather than everyone who happens to be in the same political or social group as that one bad actor. (It'd be even better if we could all stick to attacking the behaviors and ideas with which we disagree, and not attack the people at all, but I can see where that might be a flag too high to capture, given where we're starting out...)

I urge you to give this whole political bigotry idea some thought as you read (& reply to) the things posted out there in the vast political blogesphere, and I hope you enjoy your day...
---

Submitted for moderator approval somewhere in the neighborhood of 5:30 AM, IM blog time (and rejected, I think, because my other moderated comment offered at Political Byline this morning is still on the site (as moderated), while this one is nowhere to be found... "Freedom of speech" only goes so far, I guess...) ((Yes, I know it's not really a free speech issue... but them's the words Pat (the owner of the PB blog) used in explaining (& later defending) his decision to allow my earlier comment(s) to appear, and I don't want to cloud the issue now by bringin' the government into it...))

UPDATE, 6:30PM: Yep, it's confirmed... According to the e-mail I just received from the man himself, Patrick moderated away my comment because he felt it insulted him and his right to hate the left... So there you have it, as straight from the horses mouth as I can give you. (While I do think that one has the right to cut'n'paste the private e-mails to which one is a party into a blog post, I think it's cheesy to do so unless it's absolutely necessary.)

As to his allegation that my comment was insulting or in any way infringed on his rights, I'll simply note that I said nothing of rights, and only discussed the ethics of hating entire groups of people for espousing a particular political philosophy with which one disagrees... Given his plea for civility earlier on in that very post, I find his insistence on holding on to his hate pretty disturbing... But so it goes, I guess... (And his initial posts and comments at Don's place seemed pretty reasonable, too... Sad.)

Touchy…Touchy..., Touché.

In reply to: Touchy…Touchy…Touchy…. | Political Byline
---

AmericanNeocon IS Donald Douglas.

Well technically, Donald Douglas IS American eocon (there’s no second “N,” perhaps because, in his mind, being a neocon is the only way to be a “real” American.) But yes, I was aware. As Ex-DLB–and to some extent, Donald himself–pointed out, the professor and I go back a long way… I only used his Americaneocon appellation here because that is the name under which he posted.

Please Do.

I thought a good bit about whether to engage on this point, but I’m going to decline, at least until goaded on further… Several instances of this kind of behavior are posted on my blog and on his own, and I just don’t have the energy to dig ‘em all up and rehash them again. (Besides, is this really the kinda thing you want filling up your comment section?) If I were to name names though, I’d probably begin by suggesting that you do a search of a guy named Paleo Pat, and read the unpleasant comments Donald Douglas would write in reply to that guy when he made occasional comments at American Power… (And for the record, I know who Paleo Pat IS, too…) Then you might wish to check out the Erin Andrews saga (one example, from a third party), faux Liberty Bell situation, his war on Conner Friedersdorf, his war on the Ordinary Gentlemen blog and everyone who writes for it, … (and yes, there are others… But given your feelings as expressed elsewhere, I hesitate to bother going on, fearful that you will just refuse to see any of it… …and besides, I said I wasn’t going to get into it, didn’t I? )

As I said in my earlier comment, you’re welcome to think and feel as you will… …but from where I’m sitting, one is only Don’s friend as long as s/he’s willing to tow his particular party line… Strike too far out on your own (or use sarcasm or some other literary device he fails to comprehend), and you get added to his ever-growing enemies list–your willingness to take the punch and give him the benefit of the doubt notwithstanding…
---

Submitted for moderator approval March 15th, 2010 at 5:52 am, Political Byline blog time

Yeah, Bush posters bad, too. But that hypocrisy thing goes both ways, y'know...

In reply to this: Le.gal In.sur.rec.tion: Because Only The Far Right Incites Violence (& indirectly, this: Le.gal In.sur.rec.tion: Obligatorily Snarky Obama Joker Poster Post):
---

What 2470144 said.

Demonization like this reduces us all. I disagreed with Bush. I didn't hate him. (But to be fair, I also didn't speak up often enough when people on the left did these kinda things, just like not enough people on the right speak up now.) It is a partisan world, at least here on the internet. (I'm of the opinion that most Americans believe partisan bloggers & protesters right and left are nutcases who ought to get a life, in the first place, and that things like this only further cement that nutcase part).

Like the rumors folks are spreading about the Palin & Obama families, (& others, of course) it's lowest common denominator stuff that is more about hurting people personally than it is about issue advocacy.

Anyone who supports these pix while disparaging those (or vise versa) is a hypocrite. Wrong is wrong, period.
---
Submitted for approval, 8/4/09, 1:38 PM (IM blog time)

Oh, btw... This is what 2470144 said:

Regardless of which side puts forth the propaganda that demonizes the opposing side, the profitable exercise succeeds because it relies upon the vast zombie-wing condition of the nation.

The typical member of the zombie-wing has no real 'news & information' cognizance and thus, like some barnacle, must firmly attach him or herself to whatever political and informational vehicle is at hand – including family, social peer group and cultural environment.

Most people do not invest any time or interest in discerning the nature of their moral or political belief system. If the Reformed Lutheran Church tells them that late-term abortion is okay, then it simply is. If the Church tells them that God hates homosexuality, then gays are bad. If a media outlet proclaims so-and-so a racist, then he is. If one political party declares the other ‘evil,’ then it’s so.

The zombie nation watches sports; it doesn’t comprehend political viewpoints unless there is a feel good angle. A moral zombie doesn’t know right from wrong or up from down.

Hate Bush. Dems are Socialist. Conservatives are racists. Liberals are weak. America is to blame.

June 3, 2009 1:33 PM

UPDATE: Same answer to this wingnut blog that, predictably, has no comment area of it's own:
Liberal Hypocrisy of the day | Political Byline
I wouldn't even bother responding to the following ass (assuming he had comments, of course), but he does provide a nice listing of those on the wingnut right typing away about this brilliant picture with just one hand, until the donkey can't cum anymore. (points): Jokebama � docweaselblog