It's happened again. This time, an 89 year-old racist and anti-semite enters the U.S. Holocaust Museum and immediately begins shooting with a rifle. He shoots and kills a museum security guard, and probably intended to kill many other innocent people. Fortunately, security reacted courageously and professionally, and shot the racist nut before he could hurt anyone else.
How do we know this man, James Von Brunn, was a right-wing nut? Easy. He has a web site and a book promoting his racist and anti-semitic ideas. And in 1983, he was convicted of trying to kidnap (and kill?) the members of the Federal Reserve Board. He served six years for that crime.
Last week, it was the murder of Dr. Tiller in Wichita by another right-wing nut -- Scott Roeder. He had also been previously convicted -- for possession of bomb-making materials. Many on the right would like for us to believe these were isolated and rare incidents, but frankly, it's just happening too often.
It hasn't been very long since another right-winger, a follower of Coulter, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, etc., entered a Unitarian Church and started killing innocent people. He thought they deserved to die because they were "liberals". He just took the right-wing hate-speech he heard on a regular basis to its logical conclusion.
And there's more. A couple of weeks ago, a man was arrested in Utah, because as he was pulling his money out of the bank, he told the teller of his plans to kill the president. He's just one of several people arrested for planning to kill the president.
Many on the right became very upset after a government report warned of possible violence from the right. It's beginning to look like the report was right on target. And we shouldn't forget that with the exception of the 9/11 attack, the most deadly terrorist attack on American soil (Oklahoma City) was done by a home-grown right-winger -- Timothy McVeigh.
The nuts on Fox News and right-wing radio churn out their hate-speech on a daily basis, aimed at the president and all "liberals". But when one of their acolytes actually acts on their words, they want to claim their innocence. It doesn't work that way though. If you are going to paint the left as demons destroying America, then you must accept at least partial responsibility when your followers take the words to heart and muder innocent people.
I don't expect bi-partisanship. The Republicans have made it clear that won't happen. But can't we disagree without demonizing our opponents?
It hasn't been very long since another right-winger, a follower of Coulter, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, etc., entered a Unitarian Church and started killing innocent people. He thought they deserved to die because they were "liberals". He just took the right-wing hate-speech he heard on a regular basis to its logical conclusion.
ReplyDeleteIf that it is the case that "logical conclusion" is the product of a warped and delusional mind, something you seem to share with these wackos.
What I love about you, jobsanger, is how you cherry pick your causes celèbres, always making sure that conservatives are blamed for any act of violence that can even remotely be hung around their neck, and conveniently avoiding other such acts that don't fit into that mold.
ReplyDeleteCase in point: The murder of Private William Long by a home-grown jihadist. Where's your post "Islamic Hate Kills Again"? If it wasn't for my comment, this blog would have been totally silent about it.
James Von Brunn is a nut case who's ranted against Jews and people of color for about 50 years, long before Coulter, Hannity and Beck were even born (I guess you can blame Rush, though; he was about 8 years old when Von Brunn started his screeds). By the way, if you visit Von Brunn's website (something I wouldn't recommend), you'll see that he also rants against "neo-cons" (a term he claims is code for Jews).
What really concerns me about your tactics is that they are all too reminiscent of the Reichstag Fire in 1933, when the act of a lone nut (or possibly an agent provacateur) was used to clamp down on the political opposition.
"the exception of the 9/11 attack"
ReplyDeleteThe 9/11 attack was no exception if you define "right-wing" as "fundie nutcase," as I do.
It matters not to which creed you pledge your unquestioning devotion. A fundie is a fundie.
And, yes, Bo and CT and anyone else who may raise this issue, there certainly are people who are unquestioningly devoted to "left-wing" ideas. They aren't liberal, and they aren't progressive. They are fundies.
Are you trying to demonize me?
ReplyDeleteCT-
ReplyDeleteOf course I pick what I want to write about (it happens to be my blog). If you think something should be covered that I haven't covered, you have your own blog.
There's no way I could possibly write about every story in the news.
And by the way, the jihadist who shot the recruiter was another right-wing religious nut.
CT, "the murder of Private William Long by a home-grown jihadist" only proves my point above. A fundie is a fundie.
ReplyDelete"You say Islamist / And I say Christianist / Let's call the whole thing off"
ReplyDeleteWhat really concerns me about your tactics is that they are all too reminiscent of the Reichstag Fire in 1933, when the act of a lone nut (or possibly an agent provacateur) was used to clamp down on the political opposition.
ReplyDeleteYou're being ironic, right, CT?
I mean, seriously, look in your mirror, circa 2002.
Surely you're being ironic.
You have to be.
You're not that stupid. Or blind.
"And by the way, the jihadist who shot the recruiter was another right-wing religious nut."
ReplyDeleteJobsanger's definition of "right-wing": A) anyone with whom I disagree; and/or B) anyone who does anything bad.
Isn't that convenient?
A: Anyone in the media who espouses a conservative point of view = right-wing.
B: Senile racist kills a guard at the Holocaust Museum = right-wing. Crazed fanatic shoots a late-term abortionist = right-wing. Convert to Islam murders a soldier = right-wing.
C: Since A is by definition "right-wing" and B is by definition is "right-wing", therefore anything that B does is ipso facto caused by A, regardless of whether A espouses such action or not, regardless of whether the actions of B are in any way, shape or form interconnected.
Q.E.D.
By your logic, any malfeasance, to include the Lindberg kidnapping, can be attributed to Ann Coulter, Shawn Hannity, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh by simply calling it "right-wing."
Don't be stupid, CT!
ReplyDeleteI never attributed the jihadist to Hannity or the other Fox nuts. But he is a right-wing fundamentalist fanatic - he's just Muslim instead of Christian.
And I don't know who did the Lindburgh kidnapping, and neither do you.
Also, CT, you are totally ignoring me. I made my definition of "right-wing" very clear. Right-wing = fundie nutcase. I guess you don't want to argue with that definition.
ReplyDeleteCurious Texan:
ReplyDeleteBy your rules-- which I think I am well acquainted with after debating you for 4+ years on PTS, I now get to claim victory because you did not directly respond to my argument.
Therefore: "right-winger" is now and hereafter defined as "fundie nutcase". This is the definition I will be using in any future discussions with you here, or on PTS, or basically anywhere at all.
spacedark,
ReplyDeleteThis is a discussion between A and B. What does C have to do with it?
I challenged jobsanger's freewheeling use of the term "right-wing"; I didn't mention anything about your freewheeling use of the term "right-winger."
As an English teacher, I'm sure you're well aware that words mean things. People can't arbitrarily assign their own meanings and expect to be able to communicate.
According to yourdictionary.com, right-wing means: "the more conservative or reactionary section of a political party or group" [Emphasis added] (I usually use Merriam-Webster, but its definition of right-wing is so circular, we'd all be on a rabbit chase for the rest of the afternoon.)
If you want to personally define "right-winger" as "fundie [I assume that's short for religious fundamentalist] nutcase" then I'll duly note that, and call you to task whenever and wherever I catch you using it with any other meaning.
Regarding my allusion to the Reichstag fire and your response, it sounds like the 2009 version of what I was often accused of during the Bush Administration: "Clinton did it too! Clinton did it too!"
I'm well aware that the Bush Administration used 9/11 as a pretext for a lot of actions that were, shall we say, less than forthcoming. That doesn't get jobsanger (or anyone else) off the hook for engaging in the same modus operandi.
This is a discussion between A and B. What does C have to do with it?
ReplyDeleteMy apologies, CT. I assumed that, since this is jobsanger's blog and since he was approving my comments, that I was allowed in the conversation.
Guess I was wrong. Mea culpa.
This is a comment thread - not a private conversation.
ReplyDeleteCT,
ReplyDeleteFundie is short for fundamentalist, often religious, but not necessarily so. I thought I made that clear when I mentioned left-wing fundies. Anyone who adheres unquestioningly to a party line is a fundie and you can hold me to that definition.
I also happen to think that definition jibes with the one you cited, though I'd probably highlight the word "reactionary" instead of the word "conservative". It doesn't make too much difference, though. I couldn't throw a rock in Austin without hitting someone who is quite conservative in their adherence to left-wing dogma.
As far as calling you out on your allusion to the Reichstag fire, I merely wanted to say that we couldn't have said anything of the kind a couple of years ago without you guys hollering about "Godwin's Law."
"And I don't know who did the Lindburgh kidnapping, and neither do you."
ReplyDeleteYou know, you almost had me there. Then, while driving home from work, I remembered that Bruno Hauptmann was convicted of the Lindbergh kidnapping (although if memory serves, there was some question as to whether he might have been framed).
But regardless of who did it, in all likelihood the perpetrator was influenced by some 1930's architypical right-wing radio commentator, like H.V. Kaltenborn. Or perhaps - just perhaps - Hauptmann fell victim to the hate-filled lies of Rush Limbaugh ... Senior.
Very few (if any) people believe nowdays that Hauptmann was guilty.
ReplyDeletespacedark,
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry if you feel slighted that I didn't engage you simultaneously with jobsanger, but being a dumb right-winger -- oops, I mean conservative (I'm an evangelical, not a fundamentalist), I'm lucky to be able to chew gum and walk at the same time, much less take on two left-wingers -- oops, I mean liberals -- oops, I mean progressives -- at once. :)