| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ken HPoJ
Supreme Potentate
USA
1530 Posts |
 Posted - 04/18/2006 : 11:59:42 AM
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401648.html?sub=AR
Best paragraph:
"What's notable about this isn't only the level of anger but the direction from which it is coming. Not that long ago, it was the right that was angry and the left that was, at least comparatively, polite. But after years of being the targets of inflammatory rhetoric, not only from fringe groups but also from such mainstream conservative politicians as Newt Gingrich, the left has gone on the attack. And with Republicans in control of Washington, they have much more to be angry about."
I love that "what's notable". Yes, the reporter muses, there's actual anger here, and it's *gasp* not coming from crazed right-wingers. What's the explanation? It's the crazed righter-wingers fault! Chickens coming home to roost! Inflammatory rhetoric flung about by Newt Gingrich!
Odd. I've been a crazed right-winger myself for decades, well before I personally saw Reagan give a speech the day before he was elected in 1980. I have in that time hung out with myriad other conservatives, read probably hundreds of conservative books and surely thousands of conservative magazine issues, had my period when I listened to Rush Limbaugh, and spent probably the last five years visiting on a daily basis a wide array of conservative websites.
I have never read or heard this level of hatred from my side of the aisle. Ever. It's out there, I'm sure, but despite my focus on conservative literature and web link-jumping, I've never stumbled across it myself, even during the Clinton years when the loonies were probably more evident.
Daily Kos, meanwhile, is the most popular political blog on the Web. The biggest 'conservative' site, meanwhile, is Instapundit, run by a small 'l' liberatarian, classic liberalist who would like to vote for the Democrats more often, but is denied the opportunity by the party's excesses.
I know a lot of people think I take politics too seriously, but, wow, I honestly thank God I'm not like this woman. What a life.
PEGGY: I don't see how having a girl on the team would ruin it. Did a woman judge ruin the Supreme Court?
HANK: Yes, and that woman's name was Earl Warren.
--King of the Hill |
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 3:03:14 PM
|
Well done, Ken, I agree with all points.
...
KIDDING!!!!
No, seriously, come on, man. This is the height of disingenuousness. You never encountered this level of rage from the right? Jeezly-crow, Ann Coulter's at LEAST this angry RIGHT NOW, with her own dream administration in power. Don't tell me you've never encountered her. Ditto Michael Savage, the goons at Capalert.com , Pat Robertson, and so on. These are obscure people you've never heard of?
And if folks like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly aren't really "angry" per se, it's because they at least realize that liberals have been almost totally disenfranchised for the last few years, and all they have to do is keep talking down to them to "win" the conversation. As the numerous scandals start to heat up around the Bush administration, watch the anger start to bubble to the surface again.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
 |
|
|
BT
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
USA
168 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 3:17:44 PM
|
Ken, there's a million different ways I can go here, but I will try and keep it short.
Obviously there is room for disagreement here, but I think you are taking the tone of the article the wrong way. I don't think the author (who is clearly not doing the left any favors with this article) think that the anger is notable, because the right is normally the nutty side of the aisle, but rather it's notable because until 2000, quite frankly, the right WAS much angrier than the left. This isn't due to some inherent character flaw in conservatives, but rather (as the article nominally mentions) it is due to the fact that they were not "in power" during the Clinton years.
You said it yourself, but you really need to understand this, the anger coming from the right WAS out there, and it WAS ugly during the Clinton administration. It took on a different form, as blogs were not prevalent during that time, but I have many perfectly rational conservative friends who HATED Clinton. And for far less (at least perceived) infractions than the left now (perceives) Bush to have committed.
Remember the uproar in the late '90s were over lies (admittedly under oath) about personal affairs, possible procedural missteps concerning fundraising, and which phone Al Gore might have used to make fundraising calls. Now we are arguing about the reasons for entering a war, possibly outing an covert CIA operative for partisan reasons, and the President bypassing congressional oversight. Please note I am not arguing for or against the validity of any of the charges against Clinton/Gore or Bush, as it isn't important in the context of this discussion. The only thing that matters was what each side PERCEIVED the problems to be.
Again, there is much more I could go into, but I will leave it with the fact that the anger from the right was not as obvious as it is now, because you had to listen to Rush or O'Reilly or Hannity, etc, to get just a small sample of the "rage" from the right, whereas now it's just a mouse click away. |
|
|
|
Ken HPoJ
Supreme Potentate
USA
1530 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 4:58:31 PM
|
Dammit, I wrote a long message and my computer ate it.
I stand by my remarks. I have never seen the sort of rage and satisfied hated expressed in this article on the right side of the aisle. To call Rush Limbaugh a purveyor of hate and rage is ignorant, and I can only assume anyone who would say such a thing has never listened to his show.
Ann Coulter is a fringe figure, although if she ever does say something like "I just want to see these [expletive] swinging from their heels in the public square," it's disgusting and it shouldn't be allowed to pass without comment. In fact, the last time I recall her name coming up was months and months ago when she used the word 'ragheads' and it was considered so beyond the pale that she was instantly taken to task on on numerous conservative sites because of it, including Instapundit.
Robinson is a crank, and good luck finding many in conservative corners who believes otherwise. O'Reilly isn't remotely a "conservative," so I don't know why people keep calling him one.
Hannity's a stiff and I don't have cable, so I'm not that familiar with him. Michael Savage, I must admit, I've never heard of.
My main point, however true BT's contention is that the 'right' was 'angrier' prior to 2000 (debatable, to say the least), is that even then I never heard stuff remotely like this. Until the left starts policing its own as rigorously as the right does, it has no claim to the larger public's ear.
PEGGY: I don't see how having a girl on the team would ruin it. Did a woman judge ruin the Supreme Court?
HANK: Yes, and that woman's name was Earl Warren.
--King of the Hill |
|
|
|
Greenhornet
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
1791 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 5:15:23 PM
|
I have memories that go back to the Sixties and I can tell you young punks that the Leftists and the Communists and Socialists that they have allied themselves with (weather or not they MENT to) have ALWAYS been "angry", abusive, rude and obnoxious.
I could give you examples, but one would naturaly lead to another and I would have to write for HOURS without covering all of my experiences.
"The Queen is testing poisons." CLEOPATRA, 1935 |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 5:33:09 PM
|
So Ann Coulter is a "fringe figure" who doesn't count against the right...but a bunch of random nuts with obscure websites, and people who post on Daily Kos and Eschaton (not the site's founders, just people who post there) are examples of the mainstream left?
Bill O'Reilly isn't a conservative? Is that in the same sense that George W. Bush isn't a conservative?
Rush Limbaugh isn't hateful? This is the guy who said "Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream", "When a gay person turns his back on you, it is anything but an insult; it's an invitation", and "I'm serious, let the unskilled jobs, let the kinds of jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do - let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work"?
At this point we're deeply into the realm of willful ignorance.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
Sardu
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
1126 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 8:47:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Prankster
Bill O'Reilly isn't a conservative? Is that in the same sense that George W. Bush isn't a conservative?
Correct. Neither is really a conservative. Bill is right wing on certain issues and left on others. Bush is fiscally about as conservative as Ted Kennedy (who he co-sponsored a bill with, remember??) He's like an anti-libertarian; socially uptight and wanting to be morally controlling and meanwhile spending like a drunken sailor and regulating everything in sight. Kind of like Nixon. And don't bring up the tax cuts; they mean squat without a corresponding decrease in the size of government.
I'm totally with Ken; conservatives tend to be much calmer. Even Ann Coulter- ask yourself, who's having more fun, her or James Carville?? Who's head was closer to exploding, Bill O'Rielly or Al Franken? Sean Hannity or Alec Baldwin? And Micheal Savage doesn't count either, his anger is a total schtick. He's a bozo.
Coming soon-
Eraserhead: The Musical!! |
|
|
|
KurtVon
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
387 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 9:06:13 PM
|
As a person who is dissapointed in the behavior of both political parties (who seem more interested in stirring up mindless bickering than trying to support their supposed goals) I really hate to get involved, but for the record:
1. I've heard Ann Coulter on the radio. I despise her, but not for her supposed "anger" (which I didn't hear even vaguely) but because of the "Oh please, give me a break" comments where they are clearly inappropriate. If she is trying to convince me she's correct, dshe shouldn't just whine on and on with ad hominem attacks (if you call "can you believe this guy?" an ad hominem attack). Say something *convincing* for a change.
2. Sean Hannity is borderline anti-intellectual, but he is definately not a propogater of any kind of hate speech. He almost came across as reasonable the few times I've had to listen to him, and never resorted to insults (which his opponents heaped a-plenty). Granted I haven't seen him enough to say he never does it, but it definately wouldn't fit in with what I did see. I've heard Rush Limbaugh and Hannity is much more reasonable, and I wouldn't call RL hateful either (just obnoxious).
3. Michael Savage I heard exactly once and is the only one where I demanded the radio be turned off. He is incredibly obnoxious and refuses to respond to even reasonable criticism, but even his unpaletable displays (that I heard) did not come close to the comments listed in that article. Although in all honesty I don't think it would have been legal to do that on the radio.
Can't answer to Bill O'Reilly since I only have heard of him and saw a commercial with someone claiming to be him (probably was) for his show once.
I'd also like to add that there is a vast gulf between "insensitive" and "hateful".
|
|
|
|
hentai_wolf
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
139 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2006 : 10:41:39 PM
|
| So, it's mostly liberals watching O'Reilly? Hippies reading Ann Coulter? Jews voting for Buchanan? Well, maybe that last one is a bad example... |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 12:06:15 AM
|
The standards here keep shifting around. I mean, I don't care how outwardly calm Coulter is when she writes that "Liberalism is a mental disorder", that's an angry, hate-filled statement. If the excuse is that she's just trying to provoke, OK, fine, I guess she gets off on a technicality, but it's still a hateful statement. It seems worse to me, actually, because it means she doesn't believe what she's saying and just wants to muddy the waters.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
Neville
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Spain
1590 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 01:36:17 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ken HPoJ
I have never read or heard this level of hatred from my side of the aisle. Ever.
C'on, Ken, how can you say such a thing? Not that long ago any celebrity who dared to speak against Bush' policies (specially, but not only, Irak) was called all sort of names, and some of them even faced boycott. France was also boycotted, just for disagreing with the U.S.A foreign policy, and in many sites (certainly not this one) those who spoke against the war were flamed.
I won't be naive and won't pretend leftists don't practice the same sins, but what you said there is questionable to say the least. |
|
|
|
Terrahawk
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
644 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 07:11:26 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by hentai_wolf
So, it's mostly liberals watching O'Reilly? Hippies reading Ann Coulter? Jews voting for Buchanan? Well, maybe that last one is a bad example...
That's like saying that because a large number of conservatives listen to NPR, NPR is conservative. O'Reilly is a populist or traditional liberal in Truman/JFK mold. He's definitely not conservative. GWB isn't a conservative either. Coulter, who as Ken correctly pointed out got slammed by conservatives for her "raghead" comment, is viewed by most conservatives as comic relief and not someone seriously discussing the issues.
I think Ken's point is not that conservatives don't have some "haters" out there, but that the liberals seem to have a lot more prominent "haters" who are part of the core of the liberal movement. They also never seem to be denounced by the more reasonable members of the left.
The ROPe gives you three options, convert, submit, or die. There is a fourth, resist. |
|
|
|
nshumate
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
464 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 07:37:24 AM
|
Disclamatory preamble: I don't have a dog in this race. I'm to the left of Ken; I'm to the right of every viable Democratic candidate last election. I identify myself as a moderate independent, I read sites which fall to either side of me, and I think both wings of political thought need to stop stumping for handed-down planks and platforms and pull their heads out of their asses.
That having been said, I agree with Ken. The Right is sometimes disgruntled (in the more normative usages, not in the sense that should be followed by the term "postal worker"), but the Left is angry. The Left is drowning in angry-young-man bile. I am frankly stunned by the people whom I would otherwise like to consider intelligent citizens of good will, who will demonize all who disgree with their "tolerant" stance and vent such enormous, almost incoherent quantities of venom over BucraplerRedStateRethuglicansBLEARGH! Snark has replaced thought; enfranchised self-righteousness and implicit assumptions of superiority have replaced reasoned debate.
If I wanted more bile in my life, I'd vomit more often.
Nathan Shumate
http://www.coldfusionvideo.com |
|
|
|
nshumate
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
464 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 07:42:19 AM
|
Bizarro sidenote: The board's obscenity filter objected to my use of a common conflation of "Bush" and "Hitler," which is why the word "Bucrapler" appears in the above.
My giggle for the day.
Nathan Shumate
http://www.coldfusionvideo.com |
|
|
|
BT
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
USA
168 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 08:12:12 AM
|
Couple of points.
I'll give you the fact that Coulter may be a fringe character, but how does that remove her from this discussion, if this entire discussion sprang from an article concerning a woman a thousand times less prominant than Coulter?
We seem to be arguing apples and oranges here. I would assume if any truly public figure routinely talked the way the woman in the article did, they would have a hard time finding a corporate sponsor willing to carry them. So arguing that Hannity or Limbaugh aren't as angry, course, or crazy as her doesn't really seem to accomplish much. I could argue that when Phil Donahue was on, he was unfailingly polite, but I don't think that this would prove the left isn't angry. On the other hand, I am certain I could find a right leaning website with someone just as nuts as the women in this article.
Ken, I don't know how I can "prove" the right was angrier before 2000, but I am almost certain it's true. Again, blogs weren't around, but the hysteria over Whitewater, the claims made by those involved in the Arkansas project, and the reaction to the Monica Lewinsky scandal certainly showed that there were those on the right who were not fond of Bill Clinton. I mean for God's sake, Rush Limbaugh STILL makes claims that the Clintons had Vince Foster murdered.
There is no doubt the left is angrier than the right is right now. But what would the right have to complain about? They have the President, Congress, and the Supreme Court on their side right now. I PROMISE you, if things were reversed, the anger coming from the right would be just as pronounced. |
|
|
|
hentai_wolf
Preeminent Apostolic Prelate of the Discipleship of Jabootu
139 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2006 : 08:32:07 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Terrahawk
That's like saying that because a large number of conservatives listen to NPR, NPR is conservative. O'Reilly is a populist or traditional liberal in Truman/JFK mold. He's definitely not conservative. GWB isn't a conservative either. Coulter, who as Ken correctly pointed out got slammed by conservatives for her "raghead" comment, is viewed by most conservatives as comic relief and not someone seriously discussing the issues.
Actually it's nothing like saying that. Notice I said "mostly" and you said "a large number". Is NPR listened to mostly by conservatives? No. Do a "large number" of liberals watch Fox News? Yes. Simply because both already have very large audiences. Of course, it's also unfair for you to compare an entire station with a single show. Hence that's why I compared it to Fox News instead of a single show within Fox News. Certainly Marketplace is going to be listened to by a lot more conservatives than something like On Point.
And saying that conservatives get their "comic relief" from hateful, spiteful, racist statements doesn't really place conservatives in the best light.
quote:
I think Ken's point is not that conservatives don't have some "haters" out there, but that the liberals seem to have a lot more prominent "haters" who are part of the core of the liberal movement. They also never seem to be denounced by the more reasonable members of the left.
The quote Ken posted was from a comment in a blog. He compared it to a quote in a public speech. The idea that liberal bloggers should have to scour the comments in every liberal blog and regularly denounce them is a little much. And what does "swinging from their heels" even mean? I could see "swinging from their necks" or even "swinging from their ankles", but "swinging from their heels" sounds like something a baseball player does when trying to hit a high inside pitch. Perhaps "Dave" simply wished (I assume Bush) to do poorly in the town square stickball tournament. Or maybe I've been watching that video of Conan O'Brian playing old-timey baseball too often.
"If you threw the ball any lower, I would have to dig through hades itself to find the apple!"
And on a different notte, FreeRepublic.com is just as popular as DailyKos.com. Instapundit certainly isn't the most popular conservative site.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked