#14 Liberal Demagoguery, Hate and Violence – A Compendium
A Reference Library
Capsule: #14 Liberal Demagoguery, Hate and Violence – A Compendium looks into the dark side of liberalism’s Jekyll and Hyde activism in America. The Dr. Jekyll persona publicly assures that liberals are tolerant and compassionate, but the Mr. Hyde persona exposes liberalism as a malevolently reactive disposition with ugly consequences.
So, Let’s Get This Straight: Tea Partiers Are Domestic Terrorists, But the Benghazie Attack was a Spontaneous Protest
Focus: Who throws rocks at police? Conservatives or liberals? Who riots at political conventions? Conservatives or liberals? Which president refers to Tea Partiers as domestic terrorists? Conservative or liberal?
Details: #14 Liberal Demagoguery, Hate and Violence – A Compendium is one surprise after another. Did you know that Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma city bomber was a secularist whom iconic liberal, Gore Vidal, called a “true patriot”? Would you be surprised to discover that religion did not produce the tyrants who were the worst mass murderers in history? Secularism did – virtually every one of them. Shock revelation: Fred Phelps, the leader of the Westboro Baptist Church that is well known for desecrating the American flag and protesting at military funerals is a Democrat. Liberal talk radio hosts make Rush Limbaugh look like Miss Manners. Unions have a massive history of hate, intimidation and violence. Virtually every documented, violent hate group in the United States has a liberal ideology. These are just a small sample of the multitude of examples in this essay of liberal demagoguery, hate and violence in America.
Excerpts: ~Over at the extremely liberal and paranoid Daily Kos discussion forum they ran a poll on whom members thought the Times Square bomber would turn out to be. The closest they got to offering a choice for “liberal” was a “A war protester”. Out of 645 votes it got less than 1% of the vote. … But conservative options under “A militia wackjob” and “A teapartier” and “A religious wackjob (did this in the center of media world, some anti-abortion statement?)” received a full 62% of the vote. Liberals think conservatives are violent. Whereas, the most likely profile any normal person would think of would be an Islamic terrorist – duh! But that got only 22% of the vote. As you will see with the multitudinous examples I offer below, if the Times Square car bomber was not an Islamic terrorist he would much more likely have turned out to be an angry liberal. In fact the bomber, Faisal Shahzad was actually a registered Democrat who was anti-Bush and objected to the Iraq War. Except for his name, he sounds just like a typical anti-war liberal – you know – the option that got less than 1% of the Daily Kos vote. [rolls eyes] It is a paranoid liberal mantra that conservatives are just angry and bitter citizens. So what do these supposedly angry conservatives do with their anger? They form Tea Parties to engage in the political process. But what do angry liberals do? They express real hate and get violent. See for yourself, American neighbor.~
Preface: The Nuclear Counterarguments Essay Series is written for both contemporary American liberals and contemporary American conservatives – for the liberal (or progressive) as an exit counseling process with the purpose of removing the inherent paranoia that prevents them from seeing that in their core belief they are, in fact not a liberal, and for the conservative as a strategy for dealing with liberal acquaintances. (FYI, I am a Canadian – the implications of this are explained in the Introduction and #1 Deprogramming Liberalism with Nuclear Counterarguments.)
[All citations are active number/letter codes. Code links beginning with an * indicate that the linked page has additional information for the topic at hand. Links without an * are cited for evidence of existence and reference only, as in a quotation or number or case in point. Citations validate my points so that you can trust my claims, and will often provide you with invaluable supplemental information.]
Written in first-person narrative to liberals,
but also for conservatives.
• Mini critical thinking exercise
• Guilt by historic association
Using guilt by historic association is a popular demagogic tool of contemporary liberals to demonize conservative opponents. As an example let’s examine the animus contemporary liberals have towards Christianity. Yes, of course, many liberals claim to be Christians, but they seem to have a hard time standing up for Christianity when it is demagogued by secular liberals. They often seem to be ashamed of their faith to the point that they feel they have to hide or even overtly criticize their own professed religion to prove to secular liberals that they would never let their beliefs in Christianity take them off the liberal reservation. Let’s deal with one of these arguments.
Secular liberals are compulsively paranoid about Christianity, with delusions about tyrannical theocracies and witch burnings. They love to demonize Christianity by asserting that it is a barbaric world view that leads to mass murder. To make their point they, of course, bring up the Crusades, claiming that barbarous Christians slaughtered unbelievers in the name of Christianity, but my question to them is, “So what is your point?” Sure Christians killed mostly Muslim invaders that had first killed Christians when overrunning peaceful Christian countries. Liberals have a problem with that?!? If Christianity had not reacted to the Muslim invaders, but turned the other cheek as these secular liberals seem to suggest they should have, the West would not currently exist and neither would secular liberals. We would all be Muslims still living in an extended Medieval age. Is that what secular liberals would have preferred?!? [/incredulousness]
And what’s with liberals having to stretch back to Medieval times to make a dubious claim about Christianity being a religion of mass murder? Estimates of deaths over the period of two centuries that encompass most of the Crusades go from one million to as high as five million (this high estimate by an author with obvious animosity toward Christianity, and probably bias in his numbers). And many of those deaths were Christians who died at the hands of the Muslim invaders. [4v64kpz]ac
• Secularists are the mass murderers of history
On the other hand, let’s take a look at secularism’s rich history of mass murder, and we need not go back a thousand years to make the point. Here are the 800 pound gorilla death totals from some notable secular leaders from the recent past (from the book Death by Government by R.J. Rummel):
Here we have the most murderous tyrants in history, all secularists. Just seven of them managed to kill 122 million people, most of them their own fellow citizens. (And new research suggests that these numbers are conservative in the cases of Stalin and Mao who may have been responsible for more than 60 million deaths each.) [mfjc78] None of them genuinely killed in the name of any religion (Hitler shrewdly used his Aryan superiority delusion and Christian knowledge from his upbringing as religious propaganda tools to cater to a largely Christian German populous, separating himself from the openly atheistic communists, while at the same time planning the ultimate destruction of the church – as outlined in The Nazi Master Plan). All were ideological and killed to advance their own power (or in the case of Hideki Tojo, his emperor’s power). Additionally, Kim Jong Il and his father Kim Il-sung in North Korea doubtlessly killed millions and should also be added to the list. Millions more have been killed by a multitude of less prominent secular tin pot dictators in Asia, Africa and South America, including liberal hero, Che Guevara. So, for you secular liberals who go around stamping your little feet insisting that Christians condemn their own religion for something done a thousand years ago, try looking in a mirror at your own world view first. If we play your own game of guilt by historic association, the person looking back at you is a bloodthirsty monster! (Besides being very delusionally paranoid.)ad
300-word pages of text = 48
Reference citation links = 30
Recommended-reading links = 102
Profound insights = 40
Cover photo: Cover photo: U.S. Department of Energy photograph XX-09 GEORGE
Cover background: SQUIDFINGERS [4rol8]
Copyright 2012 Jim Autio License Note: Although free, this essay remains the copyrighted property of the author, and may not be reproduced, copied or distributed for commercial or non-commercial purposes. For fair use only.
• Smearing the Tea Party
Since the beginning of the Tea Party movement liberals have attempted to portray it as raging hicks, violent rednecks and an “angry mob” of the American right. I had a hard time not laughing while reading alpha liberal, Arianna Huffington’s column on “Right Wing Rage” (a classic example of paranoid delusion). [y7mgw3u] While stretching back one hundred years to some obscure utopian populist group to attempt to prove her theory of conservative violence (uh – conservatives don’t believe in utopia, Arianna – that’s your thing), she could not produce one single recent incident of conservative violence as evidence. Then she pointed out that there is that damnable Fox News and Sarah Palin out there supposedly fomenting violence on the extreme right wing, before finally coming to the paranoid conclusion that conservatives are (GASP!) “scapegoating”.
“ALARM! ALARM! VIOLENT SCAPEGOATERS ALERT! VIOLENT SCAPEGOATERS ALERT! Please take your children and pets and proceed to your basements until the notice of all-clear is sounded. Authorities are on the hunt for these dangerous scapegoaters in your neighborhood as we speak. ALARM! ALARM! …” [/derisive sarcasm]
• Timothy McVeigh was much more a liberal than a conservative
Huffington’s column is typical liberal sophistry and demagoguery. Of course, Huffington also included the obligatory finger pointing at Timothy McVeigh, as if his Oklahoma City bombing had anything to do with the same people who comprise the Tea Party movement. However, she neglected to point out that McVeigh was a nihilist who was admittedly inspired to act by the FBI Ruby Ridge killings and the Branch Davidian massacre in Waco, Texas, not from objecting to expanding government, huge deficits and radical healthcare reform (I’m sure she just missed these niggling little details). As we have seen, those on the left often have mixed beliefs where their subliminal belief system believes in one direction while their conscious belief system believes in the opposite direction. McVeigh had just such paradoxical belief systems, at once holding to some rational beliefs like adhering to the Constitution on gun rights, while also possessing the distinctly leftwing view that the ends justify the means. Indeed, prior to McVeigh’s execution his biggest fan was bitter leftist writer and liberal icon Gore Vidal, who over the years has been as critical of many liberals for not being liberal enough as he has of conservatives for being conservative. He corresponded with McVeigh in prison on a regular basis, sending him some of his own essays. Remember from #2 Contemporary American Liberalism = Paranoid Delusion, it was Gore Vidal that said:
~ “The Republican Party … is a mindset, like Hitler Youth, based on hatred — religious hatred, racial hatred … they’re fascists.”~ [yh2en7w]
Contrary to liberal common perception, McVeigh was no conservative. McVeigh wrote to Vidal while reading a collection of Vidal’s essays:
~ “I think you’d be surprised at how much of that material I agree with…”~ [66a5lzu]
Now, NO conservative would EVER write that to Gore Vidal. I dare say, most conservatives with a gun held to their head would take the bullet rather than concede to anything out of Gore Vidal’s twisted thinking. Alpha liberal, Vidal is a malicious critic of conservatism in the same league as Ward Churchill and his “little Eichmanns” delusions about the victims in the twin towers that were attacked on 9/11. McVeigh, like Vidal was prone to believing in government conspiracies and would no doubt have joined Vidal as a truther, believing the Bush administration was complicit in the 9/11 attack (talk about paranoid delusion – sheesh!). Essentially, in many paranoid liberal minds, Vidal gave an air of intellectual legitimacy to the idea of the truther conspiracy, so that even less than extreme liberals could also safely jump on the bandwagon (meaning he primed their scoff reflex). [yw9fp5] And apparently both Vidal and McVeigh saw the Constitution the same way – as a justification for mass murder of Americans for the crimes of their government (Waco):
~Vidal became a supportive correspondent of Timothy McVeigh, who blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City in 1995 killing 168 people. The huge loss of life, indeed McVeigh’s act of mass murder, goes unmentioned by Vidal. “He was a true patriot, a Constitution man,” Vidal claims.~ [yh2en7w]
How eccentric must one be to define Timothy McVeigh as a “true patriot, a Constitution man” after he had mass murdered 168 Americans?!? Now, from the other side, Vidal would NEVER say this about a true conservative for any reason. Vidal is a liberal elitist in the truest sense, often calling down others as inferior in one way or another:
~ “Does anyone care what Americans think? They’re the worst-educated people in the First World. They don’t have any thoughts, they have emotional responses” [...] “My usual answer to ‘What am I proudest of?’ is my novels, but really I am most proud that, despite enormous temptation, I have never killed anybody and you don’t know how tempted I have been.”~ [yh2en7w]
Vidal was an early and vocal leader of the liberal pseudo-love/hate-America crowd. It is not hard to imagine him as a wonderful and terrible tyrant, claiming allegiance to the Constitution while executing those (almost everyone) he despises. Apparently that’s what a “true patriot” does. (800 pound gorilla alert!) No wonder he and McVeigh were soul mates, even calling himself McVeigh’s “friend” [2ch6t5v] and referring to McVeigh as a “hero”. [66a5lzu]
But leave it to Bill Clinton to deliberately mix up the context in order to hint that conservative unrest leads to dead Americans. As is typical of this former President, when he opens his mouth lies fall out:
~ “What we learned from Oklahoma City is not that we should gag each other or that we should reduce our passion for the positions we hold—but that the words we use really do matter, because there’s this vast echo chamber, and they go across space and they fall on the serious and the delirious alike. They fall on the connected and the unhinged alike.”~ [87fjr8u]
Except we did not learn that from the Oklahoma City bombing. We learned that presidential actions speak much louder than words. Timothy McVeigh was a secular agnostic [2ch6t5v] that reacted to President Clinton’s decision to attack the Waco cult. Yes, yes, Clinton got his attorney general to fall on her sword for it, but it is intellectually dishonest (that means playing stupid) to think that she would have made that decision on her own without his OK first. There was simply too much at stake politically and legally. In fact former Clinton right-hand man Dick Morris has since revealed that Clinton was indeed responsible for the decision. [y4e5hou] Clinton went on to say:
~I’m glad they’re fighting over health care and everything else. Let them have at it. But I think that all you have to do is read the paper every day to see how many people there are who are deeply, deeply troubled.”~
• Fraudulent liberal video can’t prove Tea Party racism
Another liberal paranoid propaganda website, Think Progress joined in the Tea Party bashing fun by producing a deceptive video that supposedly proved that Tea Partiers are racists. Except that every example on the video was a fraud. [*2asy9vh, *3yjkrws] And I heard in February, 2011 Jesse Jackson phoned in to Sean Hannity’s talk radio show and admitted on air that the Tea Party is not racist. This even after a Democratic Congressmen fallaciously accused Tea Partiers of calling them the n-word multiple times (we’ll deal with this later). If even Jesse Jackson, who has a hair trigger for calling conservatives racists, will not call Tea Partiers racists, what else is there to say?ag
• Liberals incite hate by painting conservatives as hate-filled & violent
Update: Now in August, 2013 Jackson has said to liberal journalist Glenn Thrush: “The tea party is the resurrection of the Confederacy.” I guess it depends on who Jesse Jackson is talking to as to whether he sees evil monsters crawling out from beneath a rock – progressive fascism.
Contrary to liberal claims that American political violence is a production of incendiary rhetoric from conservatives, this is just another example of liberal projection and compulsive paranoia. For a refresher perhaps you should reread the Liberal leaders justify destroying conservatives section in #2 Contemporary American Liberalism = Paranoid Delusion, American neighbor. Maybe start just above that section with the long discourse on Senator Edward Kennedy. It was Kennedy that gave the rhetorical OK to fellow liberal leaders and rank and file liberals to turn into demagogic attack dogs. [*64xpvlo] (Be sure to put on your Mr. Spock demeanor along with your third person analysis for this.) The leaders of liberalism and the Democratic Party flippantly accuse conservatives and Republicans of not caring about the working class and deliberately putting people out of work, using racism as a political strategy to divide the nation, advocating smaller government to satisfy conservative criminal intentions, taking joy in allowing Democrat supporters to die, wishing to throw away the right to be tolerant (whatever that means?!?), that conservatives are bitter and unsympathetic toward others not like them, that conservative leaders are only interested in benefiting the rich and are unwilling to stand up for the little guy, that pro-life Republicans don’t care about children once they are born, that conservatives only want healthcare for the rich, that conservatives thrive on fighting an “enemy”, that conservatives are unintellectual, quick to anger, and quick to blame others, that Republicans want to destroy the human race and the planet, they want to profit from disaster, that Bush was more evil than bin Laden, that Bush wanted people to suffer, that conservatives enjoy poor people dying from a lack of healthcare, that opposing Obama is the same as wishing to tear down the country, that conservatives have a Hitler Youth mindset, that conservatives want education, police protection and first responders only for the rich, that conservatives see the middle class as an enemy, that conservatives have an attitude like the slavers from before the Civil War, that black conservatives are no better than mass murdering dictators or the DC Sniper, that Sarah Palin deliberately targeted Gabrielle Gifford to be shot, that Republicans want to go back to the Jim Crow laws, with conservatives being the “forces of evil” in America who want to destroy food safety and education, and want to dirty the air and water, all to the point where the President of the United States of America labels conservatives as “Domestic Terrorists” without apology. American neighbor, only an onset of very deep paranoia could lead to these sort of extreme, irrational, over-the-top, demagogic accusations. And only deep paranoia could allow rank and file liberals to cheer on this reckless demagoguery without objection or even pause. This practically amounts to a societal psychopathology – progressive-fascism.
If those sorts of statements from the leaders of contemporary American liberalism aren’t a type of Blackshirts incitement of hate toward conservatives and Republicans I’d be welcome to hear your alternative explanation, American neighbor. Sheesh! If I believed half of what liberal leaders say about conservatives and Republicans, I myself might want to get a few of my union buddies together and go play some baseball on one of those evil bastards that are deliberately attempting to thwart American utopia! [/exaggeration for effect]ah
• Liberals play stupid about themselves
Nothing quite illustrates the programming of liberals like exploring their view of themselves. This essay is especially important for delineating the contrast between your own self-interest and the groupthink of the collective – you’ll see how truly paranoid and ugly it is, American neighbor. It illustrates how completely delusional liberals are. Liberals are so selective about the amount of reality they allow themselves to believe they actually think conservatives are the primary hatemongers in America, and that liberal hate is rare if not nonexistent. [*4mtea6b, *cnjc4ay, *239x648] It takes a deeply ingrained scoff reflex to live in such a paranoid delusion which is so contrary to the evidence displayed in the media every day.
Over at the extremely liberal and paranoid Daily Kos discussion forum they ran a poll on whom members thought the Times Square bomber would turn out to be. [24yzk4v] The closest they got to offering a choice for “liberal” was a “A war protester”. Out of 645 votes it got less than 1% of the vote. See? I told you liberals don’t think liberals are violent. But conservative options under “A militia wackjob” and “A teapartier” and “A religious wackjob (did this in the center of media world, some anti-abortion statement?)” received a full 62% of the vote. Liberals think conservatives are violent. Whereas, the most likely profile any normal person would think of would be an Islamic terrorist – duh! But that got only 22% of the vote. As you will see with the multitudinous examples I offer below, if the Times Square car bomber was not an Islamic terrorist he would much more likely have turned out to be an angry liberal. In fact the bomber, Faisal Shahzad was actually a registered Democrat who was anti-Bush and objected to the Iraq War. [2769ady] Except for his name, he sounds just like a typical anti-war liberal – you know – the option that got less than 1% of the Daily Kos vote. [rolls eyes]
It is a paranoid liberal mantra that conservatives are just angry and bitter citizens. So what do these supposedly angry conservatives do with their anger? They form Tea Parties to engage in the political process. But what do angry liberals do? They express real hate and get violent just like Mussolini Blackshirts. See for yourself, American neighbor.ai
• Liberal paranoia naturally leads to justifying liberal hate & violence
Let’s look at a real track record of political hate and violence as practiced by liberals. The one constant about liberal violence is that it is continuous throughout good times and bad times, and throughout times of war and times of peace. In other words, almost anything can trigger liberal Blackshirt hate and violence. As we have seen, liberals view society itself as the cause of all problems, which naturally turns liberalism into an angry and compulsively paranoid ideology, inevitably leading to violence and terrorism and displays of hate. Liberalism promotes an ends justifies the means philosophy, so it is not surprising when liberals and leftists in general transform their beliefs, fears and hatred into extreme measures. Don’t forget – in their paranoia they view themselves as self-righteously fighting evil for the noble cause of utopia. It is important that you closely examine every link in this list to see for yourself how much Blackshirts liberalism drives hate and violence in American society. This is going to be an eye popping experience for you, American neighbor. Make sure you have engaged your Mr. Spock demeanor with third person analysis – you’ll need it so that you don’t blow a fuse. See you on the other side…aj
• Liberal paranoia naturally leads to liberal hate & violence
(My first intention was to list every incident of hate, violence, etc. by liberals that I could find with a link to each, thinking I might find a couple hundred or so. But after a little research I determined that there were literally thousands of newsworthy instances over the years, so I scrapped that idea. I have instead attempted to limit the number of links to a minimum by linking to lists of liberal demagoguery, hate, violence, etc., but there are still so damn many links – sorry, American neighbor – that’s just the nature of the beast. 800 pound gorilla alert – herds of them!)
• Liberal talk show host quotes. Here are literally dozens of vile, hateful quotes by Balck Shirt liberal talk show hosts. By comparison they make Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck sound as gentle as the Dalai Lama. [*2dtnul5]
• Liberal celebrities and politcos. Here are a few dozen more Blackshirt liberal hate speech quotes. [*bdnyhy]
• Various categorized examples of Blackshirt liberal hate speech. [*4agjeu3]
• Seven Reasons for Leftist Anti-Semitism. [*4ebzfjf]
• Liberal media fret over anti-Muslim hate crimes, but virtually ignore anti-Semitic hate crimes which happen at a rate of eight times over those against Muslims. [*39xh69v]
• Liberals are worried about phantom Islamophobia sentiments in America, but the liberal media ignores real Christian persecution around the world. [*2djsz22]
• Liberal anti-war protests are often filled with Balck Shirts hate, violence and arrests. [*497qqy7, *6bu6fr] Try a Google search for >anti-war*protest*violence< – 14 million results (include the * between the words – they are proximity limiters).
• Bush as Hitler, Swastika-Mania: A Retrospective. [*nr6qrm]
• More Bush as Hitler. [*ye2aw4g]
• More death threats against Bush. [*ygbtgxz]
• Even more Bush hatred. [*l5w72x]
• And more liberal Blackshirts insanity. [*7eo27]
• September, 2006 – a liberal documentary depicted a George W. Bush assassination during his Presidency. [*etxnp]
• A few more reminders of Bush hatred. [*6bb3o7q]
• Blackshirts liberals embrace the Cloward-Piven strategy and Saul Alinsky tactics to help achieve utopia. [*2d9qr9b]
• The Marxist doctrine of creative destruction. [*ydzuqdm]
• Liberals are crude. [*5ux9us]
• Blackshirts liberal eco-terrorism groups. [*dmxphh] Try a Google search for >eco*terror< – 61 million results!
• Westboro Baptist Church – Led by Democrat Fred Phelps the Westboro Baptist Church is well known for desecrating the American flag and protesting at military funerals. Also considered an ally by some liberals. [*by3ml, *ygrl4ug, *7tjqgo9]
• Of course liberal union violence and law breaking is very common. This Wikipedia link provides a few select instances. UnionFacts.com catalogs hundreds of instances. [*4g2xjat, *3wa2cow, *3mlgpry] Try a Google search for >union*vandalism< – 19 million results. Or try >union*intimidation< – a staggering 27 million results. Or even better yet try >union*violence< – a run-over-by-a-train 450 million results!
• Almost all violent riots where Americans have participated that were not related to sports or war are Balck Shirts leftwing anti-capitalists and anti-globalists from liberals to communists to anarchists. [*48gkv9o] Here are a couple of examples from dozens over the years: Toronto G-20 Summit [*48ct83g] Pittsburgh G-20 Summit [*7yyydo3]
• Extremely violent and radical liberal Blackshirts groups. Animal Liberation Front [*ndjfp] Black Liberation Army [*3wzzoq] Black Panther Party [*y3vdjd] Code Pink [*44kl95k] Earth Liberation Front [*dqlxr] May 19th Communist Organization [*yeyywet] New Black Panther Party [*2b66l3] Symbionese Liberation Army [*9mx77] United Freedom Front [*4naaz5a] Weather Underground [*6anatv]
• Public union members also showed their civility (lack thereof) in Wisconsin: [*7dgkd67, *4zuwb85, *726kcvw] The last link lists the civil congratulations of liberals after the recall shellacking. [/sarcasm]
• Here is a list of Blackshirts liberal violence tabulated since 2004, up to 2011: [*ya6397n]
• The Occupy Wall Street protests have been claimed to be the left’s alternative to the Tea Party. However, unlike Tea Party rallies the Occupy protests are naturally violent. This great witticism pretty much sums up the liberal attitude: “Free speech is violence when we disagree with it, and violence is free speech when we agree with it.” The third link has a list of everything you need to know about the Occupy Wall Street protestors (only updated to Dec. 6 /11 – remember, President Obama endorsed this). [*44s3628, *7dztb6u, *7kpwobv] Tea Partiers follow the law, but are penalized for following the law by liberals. Occupy protesters do not follow the law, but are accommodated and supported by liberals. [*7motbyk]
• Try a Google search for >”tea party” terror< and you’ll get tens of millions of results like, “The tea party’s terrorist tactics”, “Tea Party Terror” and “Tea Party brews terrorism”. Even Vice President Biden got in on the action, calling Tea Partiers “terrorists”, and President Obama called them the particularly vile term, “tea-baggers” (shameful from a sitting President). The idea that Tea Partiers are terrorists is so laughable as to be tragic. When they have a rally they leave the venue where they rallied cleaner than when they arrived, for heaven’s sake! (Terrorists leave pools of blood and body parts.) This vilifying of the Tea Party is just another blatant illustration of the extreme paranoid delusion of liberals that Richard Hofstadter warned us about in his 1964 essay, The Paranoid Style in American Politics (see essays #2 and #5), but of course, according to liberals we must NEVER call Muslim terrorists, “terrorists” – that would be insensitive or something. [/incredulous disbelief] You can also try searches for tens of millions more results: >”tea party” hostage< or >”tea party” jihad< or >”tea party” suicide bombers< or >”tea party” evil< or >”tea party” toxic< or >”tea party” racist< All are phantom accusations with NO evidence or even rationality to back them up. In fact Americans agree with the Tea Party (and conservatives), who see big government as the primary problem in America, whereas Occupy Wall Street (and liberals) erroneously views big business as the problem. [*7tzqdsn, *cmtd43u]
• Leftwing study proves leftwing violence
In November of 2012 a study was produced ostensibly documenting “America’s Violent Far-Right“. [banux72] As usual they label many groups “far-right” using the ill-defined methods of past ideological scales which are mostly arbitrary in their placements, measure nothing, or group nihilists and anarchists together with minimalists. To gauge their lack of research (and likely their bias) one need only know that they label Timothy McVeigh as “far-right”, despite that we have seen that he was indeed a nihilist and agreed with liberal icon Gore Vidal’s far-left ideology. Using our Nuclear Counterarguments Ideology Scale developed in #7 Finally! A Scale of Ideologies that Makes Sense that measures liberty protected versus liberty removed, we find that many of the groups defined in this study as “far-right” are actually far-left, including the KKK, Neo-Nazis, Arian Nations, Skinheads and even many militias. All of these groups have goals of removing liberty from society, other groups and/or individuals, which makes them all leftwing. Rightwing violence can be defined as those whose motive is defending liberty. The only movement identified in this study that falls under this definition would be anti-abortion groups whose motive would be a defence of liberty for the unborn. It is even more curious, however, that of the 4327 attacks listed since 1990, 3354 (78%) are label as “unaffiliated”. Although the study promises at one point, “this issue will be discussed at length in the next section”, it in fact provides no further detail on this majority grouping in their study. There is not even a definition describing why they differentiate these attacks as ideological crimes rather than mere criminal acts. As a study, it is ill-defined and unfocused, but it does document a few hundred more (not counting the “unaffiliated” which are unidentifiable) instances of leftwing violence to our above lists.al
• Liberals consider those with morals as ‘haters’
~ “Hate begets hate; violence begets violence.”~ Dr. Martin Luther King
Now, American neighbor, you have seen for yourself that liberalism is overflowing with demagoguery, vicious name calling, race baiting, hate, uncivil protest, and outright violence and terrorism. Liberals are hardly tolerant – their compulsive paranoia turns them into extraordinary Blackshirt haters and demagogues. Liberalism is saturated with hate and lives off its related emotions of anger, resentment and envy, but then when liberals are confronted with their hate they all of sudden play stupid and deny, deny, deny. You see, American neighbor, a hate group to a liberal is defined as one who adheres to moral principles. Pro-lifers take the moral side of the abortion debate, but are considered haters by liberals. Tea Partiers take a moral stand on out of control government spending, government corruption and taxes, but are labelled as terrorists by liberals. Conservatives take a moral position which demands strong law and order principles, and yet liberals call them haters for this stand. Conservatives morally object to illegal immigration, and are called racists. Conservatives see self-reliance as a moral position, and for this they are called haters. Remember, in the completely upside down thinking of John Dewey, morals corrupt a society, and liberals have absorbed this attitude as a foundational doctrine. It is all the more frightening in that liberals are in utter denial about their own Blackshirt hate and violence (the scoff reflex). Liberals actually believe, or in many cases play stupid that they are the peaceful ones and instead accuse conservatives of being the cause of hate and violence in American society. We can now see this as perhaps the ultimate example of liberal self-projection. In response to all of the real liberal hate and violence documented above, liberals have their own witch-hunt websites whose sole political purpose is to demonize and smear conservatives as if all of those links you just looked at weren’t really about liberals, but about conservatives – classic projection.am
Truther – A form of conspiracy theorist that believes that either the Bush administration knew of the upcoming 9/11 attack and purposely allowed it to happen pretty much as reported, or that Israel actually did the attack in coordination with the administration, or that the administration itself planned and executed the attack, but used drones and explosives placed in the buildings to bring them down.
Birther – Ranges from conspiracy theorists who doubt President Obama’s story of his birth, to those who simply want an explanation for Obama’s bizarre spending of two million dollars on legal fees to keep a document secret he claimed exonerated him from any inconsistencies in his birth story and later finally released.
Lyncher – A type of paranoid conspiracy theorist whose origin dates back to the Oklahoma City Bombing, who believes conservative leaders deliberately attempt through the use of language and symbolism to provoke unstable members of their followers and society to attack liberal leaders or produce terrorism against the public.
Liberals have been going on about a “climate of hate” since the Tea Party began, and before that about town hall meetings. Obviously they mean a conservative climate of hate. On the other hand, liberals are these gentile personages who personify “can’t… can’t we all just get along?” (Except of course for those few minor, minor aberrations listed above. [/sarcastic understatement of the year]) But surprise! Who is it that are the real hatemongers? Who is it that comprise the lynch mobs? Just like our look at secularism from the beginning of this essay, the ones who go around making the accusations are the same ones who best fit their own definition (projection). I started this essay talking about liberal use of guilt by historic association, but don’t think liberals stop there, American neighbor. Guilt with no association (lynchers – the attitude of a lynch mob) is also a demagogic liberal strategy. Being a lyncher allows even ordinary beta liberals to participate in liberalism’s hater-demagoguery. See for yourself.an
• Lynchers see all violence as a result of conservatism
On January 8, 2011 a disturbed young man shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and many others. From what has been discovered on the internet and with interviews of schoolmates about the suspect, Jared Loughner at the time of his crime seems to have been a psychologically unbalanced loner. Ideologically, if he was sane enough to have an ideology, he would be described as an anarchist or nihilist: He was an atheist. He was a registered independent. He didn’t watch TV news or listen to political radio. [6bcqwnz] He believed in an upcoming apocalypse. His favorite video is a burning of the American flag (who burns flags – conservatives or liberals?). He had ranted about two illegal wars (who rants about two illegal wars – conservatives or liberals?). His thoughts revolved around conspiracies – he was a truther (who are truthers – conservatives or liberals?). He hated George W. Bush (who hates Bush – conservatives or liberals?). A former classmate from high school described the now 22-year-old Loughner as “left wing” and “quite liberal” and a “political radical”. [2vq9jw8, 83stjqy]
These attributes do not describe a conservative in any way, but that did not stop paranoid liberal lynchers from scoffing this all off and attempting to link this crime with conservatism in general and Sarah Palin specifically. After all, that is what liberals do. Lynchers attempted to paint Timothy McVeigh as a conservative and a tool of talk radio (even President Clinton contributed to this meme). Lynchers attempted to associate the Times Square bomber with the Tea Party before any evidence had come to light. Indeed lynchers have repeatedly attempted to tie liberal nutcases to conservatives. This is what liberal lynchers do with people who commit crimes whose stories liberals think they can twist into being examples of conservatism gone wrong. [*4nnvutk] Of course they have again used this same demagogic strategy with Jared Loughner, attempting to pin his mass murder spree on Sarah Palin. It is all about a compulsive paranoia exhibited in self-projection that sees conservatism as evil, necessitating a destruction of Sarah Palin.ao
• Sarah Palin shoots up a meet-n-greet
Paranoid liberal lynchers immediately jumped on an irrational assertion that Sarah Palin was the cause of this terrible mass murder because of a tweet that said, “Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: ‘Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!’”, and a map posted on a Sarah Palin website and her FaceBook page during the previous November midterm election that used a surveyor’s map symbol as a graphic indicating Democrat House seats she especially wanted to win. See for yourself, American neighbor. [m5fbtly] Notice in the second image the very upper left survey symbol. It is essentially the same symbol used in Palin’s map. Of course lynchers insisted it was a depiction of a rifle scope and this proved that Sarah Palin was sending out coded messages (talk about paranoid thinking), to nuts like Jared Loughner to go shoot Democrats. But Sarah Palin addressed this when the controversy over this map first surfaced in March of 2010 [85skqsv]
Notice also that the poster says, “Let’s take back the 20, together!” In lyncher thinking (if one can call what they do thinking) wouldn’t that mean that all 20 Democrats should have been shot together? Jus’ ask’n…
How many scopes have you looked through, American neighbor? I have looked through quite a few. And I can tell you two things. First, I have never looked through a scope that shaded the view area as gray or red. And second, I have never seen a scope where the cross hairs can be seen outside of the scope’s circle of view – duh! Both of these descriptions are characteristics of the markers on Sarah Palin’s map. Have a look through any scope. The view area is clear and of course you cannot see lines outside the circular view area – duh again! And for a humorous bonus we have a lyncher Daily Kos thread on this very issue. [*4sm87ut] Look at the third image of various scope crosshairs to the right, sourced from the Daily Kos comments. Notice that none are shaded and none have the crosshairs visible outside of the circular viewing area. If you want a chuckle try reading through the comments – these Kos lynchers are truly paranoid kooks! My favorite is:
~Doesn’t matter what she says. Nor does it matter what the ultimate “truth” is. Not anymore. The entire GOP refuses to “believe in science,” as in eschew scientific facts. Following their model is certainly appropriate now: Sarah, la-la-la-la-la, I can’t hear you. And if I could, I wouldn’t believe you. I don’t care if she personally crawls to my home through 16 feet of snow, toting accredited text books that thoroughly document the birth of the surveyor’s symbol, along with its birth certificate. I won’t, don’t and will never believe her. I don’t care if a million ethical surveyors testify under oath and penalty of death that they looked at that as a surveyor’s mark. I don’t care and their statements would mean nothing to me. IOW, I’m outta “facts.” The GOPers don’t respect truth or facts. This is not the time for me to press intelligently. This is the time for me to scream at the top of my lungs: This is wrong!! You are complicit. And I don’t believe a word you say.~
OK, OK – we believe you – you don’t have to scream, for heaven’s sake! Someone should give this lyncher a link to #1 Deprogramming Liberalism with Nuclear Counterarguments (and maybe some Valium) – he desperately needs help for his extreme paranoia. In fact this pretty much sums up Daily Kos – every one of them needs to be given a link to D.L. ASAP. Of course this is nothing new at Daily Kos. Head lyncher Markos Moulitsas has a public record of leading the paranoid charge: [*68q72ql]
And just one last thing about the tweet, American neighbor. If “RELOAD” means “go shoot someone” as lynchers are implying, wouldn’t that mean that the “Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America” who Sarah Palin was addressing must have already unloaded their clips into a bunch of other Democrats and bystanders first? Shouldn’t there have been piles of victims around the country already? (Just trying to get this lyncher reasoning sorted out, American neighbor.) [index finger draws little circles beside head]ap
• Gabrielle Giffords probably provoked Jared Loughner
If anyone provoked this shooting it was likely and inadvertently Gabrielle Giffords herself:
~ “I have a Glock 9 mm., and I’m a pretty good shot.” –Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, in an interview with the New York Times last spring, after her office was vandalized following her vote for the Obama health care bill.~ [5vzrcjg]
Is what Gabrielle Giffords said really any different than when in regard to Iraqi insurgents George W. Bush challenged, “Bring ‘em on. We’ve got the force necessary to deal with the security situation.” Who did Jared Loughner have within his sphere of thinking? Sarah Palin? No. He was obsessed with Gabrielle Giffords whom he saw as personally having dissed him when he asked her a question in 2007. Is it not conceivable that Jared Loughner with his personal grudge and in his twisted mind might not have seen that quote by Giffords as a direct challenge to himself personally? He even chose to use the same gun she boasted of having. Now compare those Giffords and Bush statements with, “Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!” which was said specifically in regard to campaigning. The first two quotes were definitely incendiary – the third was a harmless raw-raw, three-cheers-for-the-team campaign slogan. (Oh drat – are these paranoid lynchers now going to finger George W. Bush for shooting Giffords?)aq
• Lynchers see conservatives as evil
Even Gabrielle Giffords’ father saw the Tea Party as filled with “enemies”. [3y3wrzb] This is how the compulsive paranoia of liberalism twists the mind. Liberals do not see the Tea Party as opponents or political adversaries, but as “enemies”. Any Tea Partier could have been the suspect. And any suspect could have been triggered by Sarah Palin. (The irony of picking Sarah Palin for this blame is jaw-dropping when you consider the no-bounds vitriol the left has thrown at her for the past three years.) In fact, in the mind of a liberal a Tea Partier SHOULD have been the shooter. Reading Daily Kos in the days after the shooting you could sense the giddiness. They hate Sarah Palin with a red hot passion, and this looked to them like the day that she could be eviscerated for good! This is the irrationality of compulsive paranoia that sees honorable liberals as targets for attack from evilly motivated conservatives. After only one day a Google search for >sarah palin crosshairs loughner< found 64,500 pages. On the day of the murders alpha lyncher bloggers with no evidence whatsoever picked up on this meme and ran with it. [*2dtl9wl] 
On the afternoon of the shooting the NY Times’ alpha lyncher, Paul Krugman led the charge, with virtually no information yet disclosed about the shooter. [*23wtv2s] On the same afternoon the creator of the Daily Kos website, alpha lyncher, Markos Moulitsas tweeted, “Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin.” Later in the day another meme developed that Sarah Palin had “scrubbed” her tweet and the supposedly offending map from her internet sources, for lynchers a tantamount admission of guilt. Another Google search of >sarah palin crosshairs scrubbed< returned 38,500 pages. The “scrubbed” part turned out to be wrong, and the association of guilt was just more lyncher paranoid delusion. [*3x38kk9]ar
• Lynchers excuse liberals for doing what they convict conservatives of
Of course, there is always that liberal double standard thingy. It seems Democrats are not above using bull’s eyes to target opponents as in this Democratic Leadership Council page from the 2004 presidential election (scroll down). [*96e7wrz] Notice the reference to “wreak havoc behind enemy lines” and “ripe targets” (and there’s that “enemy” word again). Or this Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee page that uses “Targeted Republicans” as a description. [*23xkn5a] Then there was this on alpha lyncher, Markos Moulitsas’ own Daily Kos website where he rhetorically puts a “bulls eye” especially on named and bolded Blue Dog Democrats like Gabrielle Giffords. (For those of a Daily Kos level intelligence quotient attempting to discredit this as “photoshopped”, a disclaimer has been provided as one of the updates below the graphic.) [*398gtzc] And here is a surprise – not! Democrat operatives (alpha lynchers) by design are behind at least some of the heated political rhetoric on the internet and in the orthodox media. [*7c2dgze] It seems there is no low too low that Democrats won’t go. [*2c3fqod]as
• Liberals blame Sarah Palin & ‘want’ her to be responsible
This is the level of hate and paranoia liberals have for conservatism. They will use anything to destroy conservatives and conservatism. Howard Kurtz asked an apparently rhetorical question in his column about the fact that military and like phraseology are used in political discussion all the time, “But does anyone seriously believe she [Sarah Palin] was trying to incite violence?” [2vgfuan] Howard, wake up! The answer to your question is YES! If alpha liberals in the press and blogs say it is true, beta liberals swallow it whole. It is irrational (and paranoid) to hold to the claim that Sarah Palin had anything in any way to do with this mass murder, but millions of lynchers actually do believe it. And it does not matter whether lynchers are actually only playing stupid and pretending to believe this to promote the destruction of Sarah Palin, or whether they really do believe that there is this supposed Palin connection. Either way is bewilderingly irrational and deeply paranoid thinking. Not only do many liberals believe that there is a connection, many desperately WANT there to be a connection. Here is the explanation: [*35hhu8x] Only in a dysfunctional society could this happen. Liberalism is the name of that psychopathological dysfunction – progressive-fascism.
Liberals are desperate to pin some great evil on conservatism and discredit it once and for all. This is why they cling to this irrational portrayal of Nazism as extreme conservatism (dealt with in #6 Tyranny Versus Liberty). Liberals are absolutely convinced that conservatism is motivated by evil and are constantly searching for the final proof that will discredit it forever. One day some liberal defence lawyer is going to take a case like this one and convince his client that the way to turn himself into a victim is to claim that in some way conservatism made him commit his evil crime, or maybe someone like Jared Loughner will put two and two together and claim that he listened to Rush Limbaugh, watched Fox News and followed Sarah Palin, and so was a supposed victim of their conservative manipulation. This will become a lyncher’s wet dream come true. The lyncher orthodox media will be giddy with 24/7/365 stories of how conservatism drives people to murderous violence. Lynchers will have found their hero to slay that evil conservative dragon. (This despite the multitude of evidence presented earlier in this essay illustrating that it actually is liberalism that drives people to hate and violence.)at
• What if Jared Loughner was an involved conservative?
What if it were true? What if it turned out Jared Loughner did listen to Rush Limbaugh, watched Fox News and followed Sarah Palin? Well, of course, this would be portrayed as the guilt by association that liberals love to apply to conservatives. OK – I can play this game too. Tell me, American neighbor. Do most prison inmates support Republicans or Democrats? By a huge margin they support Democrats! That is why the Democratic Party is always pushing for voting rights for inmates. So using liberalism’s own guilt by association standard we can now precisely conclude that liberalism causes crime. Simple, huh? How do you like that, American neighbor? We have just discovered how to eliminate the vast majority of crime. Using liberalism’s own irrationality we have now discovered that if we just ban liberalism (and the Democratic Party) we can stop the vast majority of criminal behavior. Damn! Why didn’t I think of this earlier? I could have saved myself from the effort of writing this essay series. We just need to outlaw liberalism. Maybe utopia is real after all!!! [/sarcastic euphoria]au
• Crazy thinking!
What if Jared Loughner specifically stated in his “assassination letter” that he did it because he thought Sarah Palin’s map told him to. Now, how crazy is that, American neighbor? That would be pretty crazy. Would you think that Sarah Palin would be responsible for that sort of crazy idea even if he said it? Even if he wrote it in his own blood? Responding to a political map that any sane person would understand was referring to winning an election, by shooting people is a craziness that hardly needs a map, but what if he regularly watched Keith Olbermann and he said he did it because Barack Obama said, “If they bring a knife to a fight, we bring a gun” and that it is right to “punish our enemies”? (And again there’s that “enemies” word.) That’s still craziness, but is it crazier than doing it because he saw a map? No, both responses would be equally crazy. Would lynchers be blaming Barack Obama? Com’on, American neighbor – lynchers wouldn’t blame Barack Obama even if his fingerprints were found on the weapon! [/slight exaggeration for effect]
Do we need to wait for this sort of demagogic story to come along? Just look at this essay, American neighbor. No demagoguery was necessary – just the evidential links provided. They are a compilation of paranoia-inspired hate and violence, including numerous multiple murders. And now ask yourself, American neighbor: What have you learned throughout this essay series? Liberals project the failures of liberalism and what they despise about themselves onto conservatives, so is it surprising that liberals attempt to demonize conservatism with every nut that comes along? Not at all – it is exactly what liberals do. If you want to understand what liberals despise about their liberalism look at what they use to demagogue their opponents. Liberals despise their own liberalism for the hate and violence it produces, and so they project their disgust onto conservatives – hence, lynchers.av
• More crazy thinking!
Here is something else to consider, even though it is almost as crazy as blaming Sarah Palin over a map, but what the heck – lynchers seem to enjoy crazy. What if the shooter saw this:
~ “Obama has to reconnect with the people. Remember, President Clinton reconnected through Oklahoma [city bombing]. And the President seems removed, and it wasn’t until that speech that he clicked with the American public. Obama needs a similar kind of event. … Words will work if he finds that right moment.”~ [2f33opn]
So Jared thinks to himself, “The President just lost an election real bad. I can provide him with that ‘right moment’ to ‘reconnect with the people.’” I know it sounds terribly crazy, but is it any crazier than shooting a bunch of people over a map? I actually think it sounds a little saner (but only a little). Maybe it had to do with the Democrats bringing down the polls for Congress to the lowest level in history. Maybe he thought they should be punished. I know – crazy! But lynchers started it. However, Barack Obama could make a valuable contribution to this event by publicly calling off his lyncher attack dogs. (Oh dear – do you think some nut might read this and let loose a pack of Rottweilers after the President?) And speaking of scrubbed, Jared Loughner’s MySpace and FaceBook pages have been scrubbed clean. What are they hiding? And Daily Kos scrubbed a thread about Gabrielle Giffords by some poster (not Loughner) who was very upset with Giffords titled, “My CongressWOMAN voted against Nancy Pelosi! And is now DEAD to me!” It was dated January 6, 2011, just two days before the assassination attempt. Did Jared Loughner read that Diary? Is that Diary what triggered him? Is Daily Kos the real perp here? Just askin’, American neighbor. Crazy, I know. Here’s another theory: Liberals know that most kooks out there that commit these crimes are liberal to one extent or another. By blaming Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Fox News as evil personified, are liberals actually attempting to send signals to these kooks to specifically target Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and other Fox News personalities? Again, just putting it out there – just sharing some crazy talk with lynchers who revel in that sort of thing.aw
• Even more crazy thinking!
Now, on the second day, the new liberal mantra is a “plea for civility”. So let me ask you this, American neighbor. If I make some remarks to you about reloading instead of retreating and other military or hunting styled statements, are you going to go nuts on me and shoot up some people? Because that is what Washington political lynchers are now implying. Anyone could be a nut set off by just the wrong words, or some map with surveying symbols on it. How is anyone to know whether you aren’t the next Jared Loughner on the verge of mass murder? Or maybe your brother, or your neighbor, or the bus driver. If a simple map is a threat to America’s security, then tell me what isn’t, American neighbor? The news, movies, music, magazines and computer games are all filled with violent imagery (someone even made a movie about assassinating President Bush – where was the “plea for civility” then?). Do we have to shut it all down? After all, if some nut can’t tell the difference between a political map and an assassination map (is there such a thing – in lyncher minds I guess there is – crazy!), what is to stop him from mistaking any military, hunting, police enforcement, gangster rap, action movie, or whatever violent news story as a directive to go kill people? Indeed if the threat is as bad as lynchers insist, shouldn’t there be multitudes of these kinds of mass shootings every damn day?!? I know – CRAZY!!!
Look, American neighbor. Jared Loughner is certainly a disturbed individual, but lyncher response to this mass murder is in many ways very disturbing as well. And it is worse than you think, American neighbor. Some lynchers will continue to blame Sarah Palin even if Jared Loughner himself denies any link or it is proven that Jared Loughner had no clue about her map. That is how crazy lynchers are – they can scoff off anything. We’re talking a special kind of paranoid crazy here – a playing stupid kind of crazy that lynchers embrace as their perception of reality. This new mantra will continue on in the comment sections of every media and political blog site forever. Lynchers will never let go of blaming Sarah Palin for this shooting. Lynchers ARE that crazy!ax
• And even more crazy thinking!
After all, as liberals are saying today, “words have consequences”. What if another nut out there sees this blame game going on as a signal to go shoot a bunch of conservatives at a political meet and greet? What will lynchers say then? That it’s all Sarah Palin’s fault for having provoked lynchers into playing this blame game, because she had a map that Jared Loughner never saw? But that is even crazier! But when has even crazier ever stopped liberals from going further? Yeah, I know – CRAZY!!!
There seems to be two types of crazy in this tragic story, American neighbor – Jared Loughner’s crazy, and liberal lynch mob crazy, but even paranoid lyncher crazy can be divided between the beta crazy of those who spontaneously believe what alpha lynchers claim, and the calculated manipulation of the alpha crazy lynchers who know what they are doing and don’t care. They’re just playing the game – playing stupid and crazy is what they do – progressive-fascism.ay
• A couple of liberals object to the hordes of lynchers
Now the third day since the murders it has been revealed that Jared Loughner had a specific run-in with Gabrielle Giffords that was most likely the beginning of the path to the tragedy that would unfold, so it seems it was personal for him. [4k72vyv]
To be fair a few media liberals attempted to call for sanity, chasing the lynch mob down the street, decrying the blame game to no avail. I would provide links, but their additional demagoguery of conservatives in the same articles to prove to liberals they otherwise had not completely abandoned the liberal cause, doesn’t make me feel that charitable. Instead I’ll provide you with a link to Ed Koch, former Democratic Mayor of New York City, who while admitting his disagreements with Sarah Palin, doesn’t do it with condescension or an additional demagoguery toward conservatism (classy guy). [*5utanbk] (Now if a Democrat politician can do this, why can’t the supposedly objective orthodox media?!?)az
• Some lyncher examples
Here is a Blackshirt lyncher using the nine-year-old mass murder victim to incite hate against Sarah Palin and conservatives. He makes a video that overtly does what he claims conservatives are doing with “subliminal psychology” (a giant conservative conspiracy out there I guess). [49mzt4a] “We need to get rid of these hypocritical people that’s going around inciting all the evil that kill innocent people.” How exactly is this paranoid Balck Shirt lyncher proposing to “get rid of these hypocritical people”? How does one “get rid” of millions of American conservatives? Take them out at the bus stop? Blow up their churches on Sunday morning? Extermination camps? If this isn’t a blatant incitement of violence, I don’t know what is. Here is another Blackshirt lyncher video that sort of parallels the lyncher Daily Kos commenter quoted above:
~ “I have no doubt without even knowing anything about the shooter – he is a young, white, middle aged twenties, Republican who listens to Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and probably voted for Sarah Palin and John McCain. I can guarantee you already that is how it is going to be.”~ [4fma88t] Uh – no.
And here is a chilling video of tweets about Sarah Palin – scary stuff: Twitter Users Wish Death on Sarah Palin [4z67kav] Hmmm – later in the day YouTube “scrubbed” it, but you can view it here: [*4m94gx9] And here’s more sweetness and light from liberals – some people have a lot of time on their hands I guess – and very few brain cells. [*6ljpa2v]
Now on day four – as astutely picked up in the comment section of this thread on Daily Kos, we have reached the threshold of Goodwin’s law. [6h49c] Incredibly, for the audacity of actually defending herself and others accused with her, Sarah Palin’s video response which was released this morning is described as, “yet for me, it smells very much like the finger pointing Hitler used when he accused the Jews with the burning of the Reichstag”. [5slfe2b] So, is this playing stupid, or just stupid? I can’t always tell.
Oh, oh – just where did Jared Loughner get his radical ideas from? [*6la6qtu]ba
• Sarah Palin proves she’s guilty by defending herself
Of course the Blackshirt lynchers needed something to attack Sarah Palin with when she eloquently defended herself and others with her “America’s Enduring Strength” speech, so they chose to attack her use of the term “blood libel”. But as is typical with liberal arguments, they almost always end up being based on double standards. Here’s a few examples: [*4dy38s7, *4nrurmr] Only two days before Sarah Palin’s speech a headline in the Wall Street Journal was “The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel”. [2a5ub4y] Not a peep from liberals to that one either. Some liberals are now claiming she inserted herself into the story by defending herself and doesn’t know when to quit. Another double standard – first she’s a quitter and now she’s not quitter enough. (These people make my head spin.)bb
• President Obama politicizes the Gabrielle Giffords shooting
So President Obama finally attempted to leash his Blackshirt lyncher dogs of war in his memorial, kick-off the re-election, redefine his Presidency, campaign-sloganned T-shirt, butt covering, pep rally speech in Tuscon (oh-oh – can someone warn the President about potential pack of Rottweilers roaming outside the White House). Can anyone please explain to me exactly why it took him four days to figure out that “what we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other”? Where has he been since day one when his Blackshirt lynchers were out in full lather and drool? Oh yeah – he was praising Sheriff Dupnik of Pima County for his full lather and drool (apparently the Sheriff, as an expert on judging societal mood, thought there was such a violent atmosphere, created by Tea Partiers or something, that he did not bother to send even one officer to the Giffords’ meet and greet – convoluted much?). Obama’s memorial speech about not turning on each other was pure bull! He was just covering his butt after-the-fact when polls showed that the American people weren’t buying the rhetoric of Sheriff Dupnik which Obama had complimented and was hoping would stick. [*67e24vx] He has done it again in 2013: [*mcdv4rb]bc
• The shooter is forgivable – Sarah Palin & the Tea Party are not
Well, it turns out there actually was some violent hate that was provoked from the incendiary political climate. Eric Fuller, a liberal blowhard who was a victim of Jared Loughner, after ranting about torturing Sarah Palin, Tea Partiers and other conservatives, turned into a perpetrator himself when he threatened the life of a Tea Party leader. [4qqr86v] In a bout of liberal tolerance or something, he also said he had forgiven the shooter. (Now let me get this straight. The shooter is forgiveable, but Sarah Palin and Tea Partiers who had nothing to do with the shooting are not forgiveable. Uh – OK. Paranoid liberal thinking, I guess. If you can call that thinking…) Apparently authorities were going to submit Fuller for a psychological examination. (So why was Jared Loughner never given a psychological exam since there were numerous complaints to the police about his erratic behavior? Over to you for that answer, Sheriff Dupnik…) Fuller was arrested, which creates an irony that is breathtaking. The unintended consequences of the Blackshirt lyncher campaign obviously came home to roost.bd
• The Tea Party infiltrates Norway
One last update must be made about paranoid liberal lynchers using the 2011 Norway massacre to compare “Christian fundamentalism” with that of Islamic extremism, but no Christians cheer on murders done in the name of Christianity or done by so-called Christians. This is not the case with Muslims, some of which even claimed the Norway massacre as their own. Despite that the shooter, Anders Breivik has been labelled a Christian fundamentalist by lynchers, he explicitly disavowed any faith in Christ in his manifesto, conclusively putting the lie to that claim. His very limited, secular humanist view of Christianity simply as a social description of white Europe, included seeing himself as a Templar knight despite the fact that the Templar knights were officially disbanded (and mostly executed) by the year 1312. The additional lyncher charge that Breivik links conservatism to mass murder is also proven fallacious in that, despite the fact that he shares a few conservative views (and liberal ones), quotes conservatives (and liberals), his primary motivation for his actions was not any marginal conservatism he may have held, but his own secular nihilism. His self-defined conservative position was that of anti-immigration and race-based (and anti-Semitic) deportation and extermination, actually a type of us-versus-them populism reminiscent of nazism, which is in fact nihilistic (remember we determined in #7 Finally! A Scale of Ideologies that Makes Sense, that nazism and nihilism are both distinctly anti-liberty leftwing positions). True contemporary conservatives embrace immigration – they only oppose illegal immigration, of course believing in rule of law – the opposite of Breivik’s nihilism. In fact, Breivik’s basic motivation for his actions was not conservative in origin, but an extreme leftwing position. [*3fjjw58, *3czwu5y] Indeed, his positions on many issues are decidedly liberal, or even Marxist, and his paranoia directly parallels contemporary liberalism. And the “cultural Christian” he identifies with as “not a religious organization” actually describes contemporary liberal Christians who see Christianity as more of an affiliation rather than any supposed fundamentalist Christians, who do very much see Christianity as a “religious organization” (among other things). [*8y3w3kf] As mentioned by a commenter below the article about his manifesto: “It’s an interesting blend of some of the beliefs of Al Gore, Barack Obama, the Unabomber and Adolf Hitler.”be
• Overtly liberal crackpots are ignored or even championed by liberals
As a contrast to liberal lynchers, a gay liberal activist walked into the Family Research Council building in August of 2012 intending to shoot those inside because he (vocally) objected to their politics (they disagree with gay marriage). Many possible murders were pre-empted when an unarmed security guard was shot, but still able to wrestle the man to the ground until police arrived. Did conservatives go looking for liberal politicians and media personalities to pin blame on? No. Conservatives are not lynchers – liberals are. The media hardly touched the story. Instead, liberals have been defending the Southern Poverty Law Center that has publicly and irrationally equated the Family Research Council with the KKK, a terrorist group with a history of mass murder and lynchings. This is not surprising because, of course, liberals see conservatives as motivated by evil, and it is righteous to point out the supposed evil of conservatives. [rolls eyes]
Now imagine if it was a ‘fundamentalist’ conservative who had walked into a gay bar, shooting and yelling that he disagreed with their stance on gay marriage. We would never hear the end of it, American neighbor. Every major Republican would be expected to answer for the crimes. Sarah Palin would probably be blamed again, along with Rush Limbaugh and Mitt Romney. It would be mainstream news everyday in the media for weeks. (Double standards, anyone?) Mind you, there is no reason for liberals not to demagogue this incident as an example of conservative violence. Liberal talk show host Mike Malloy actually claimed that the shooter had to be a conservative, because no liberal would have a gun (I kid you not, American neighbor). He even blamed the FRC for bringing it on themselves for their stance on abortion, even though the gunman was a gay activist and yelling about gay issues. Amazingly, Malloy hasn’t blamed Sarah Palin or Rush Limbaugh – yet. [bsxumht]
One last update: Christopher Dorner murdered cops and many liberals actually cheered him on as he ran from the law. Talk about crazy… [*a4xhfch]bf
• Orthodox media = hate enablers
Some liberals like to complain that the corporate media are all conservative because they are all owned by the rich and corporations (more paranoid delusion – remember we dealt with the liberal super rich and liberal corporations in #9 Liberals Are the Compassionate Ones – Really?). However, through this belief we can separate the Marxists from simple progressives. You see, American neighbor, only Marxists believe all private corporations are evil simply because they are (they think that the government running the media would be ‘fair’ – sheesh!). Progressives can tell the difference between conservatively biased media corporations and liberally biased media corporations (at least to an extent). This is why if you go to a Blackshirt liberal media watchdog website that supposedly searches out and exposes conservative media bias they will focus the majority of their attention on admitted media conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, and Fox News (who although denying a news reporting bias, undeniably have a few admittedly conservative biased opinion programs). [No link - if you don't know who I am referring to, that suits me fine.] Their narrow focus and bully tactics make them seem obsessed, because what is glaringly absent are any watchdog reports on the orthodox media like CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, the NY Times, the Washington Post, AP, or Bloomberg, etc. The only criticism that shows up in regard to these orthodox media outlets is once-in-a-blue-moon toward their token conservative opinion columnists that are employed or invited as guests onto these media programs, papers and websites. Also notable is that they plaster dozens of links on their home page to make it seem like there is a lot of conservative bias going on out there, but if you go back in a day or two almost nothing has changed. Mostly they just nitpick about Limbaugh and Beck and throw in the odd other story from Fox News for a bit of variety (honestly, you’d think Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are the only major news sources in America). Recently they have admitted that their primary goal is to destroy Fox News – this from the ideology of ‘tolerance’ and free speech. (Uh-huh. So much for freedom of the press.) They have actually boasted that they intend to use the courts and intimidation through digging into employees’ pasts. (Sounds like the same type of corporate terrorism liberals call fascist.) Of course, in their minds, their motives are as pure as religion, and Fox News is exclusively motivated by the evil of Satan – progressive-fascism.
However, if you go to a conservative media watchdog website like NewsBusters that searches out liberal news bias, you will find media bias criticisms on all of the orthodox news media outlets mentioned above and many more, and a dozen or more new stories everyday. [*6hjn7bh] Much of it will be centered on their news reports, not just their opinion makers, and their stated goal is not to destroy anybody, just to expose the bias and correct the errors. Except to Marxists, the differences between these two watchdog group’s targeted media outlets makes it obvious that the orthodox media in America is overwhelmingly biased toward liberalism. Both watchdog groups correlate on this. Liberal watchdog groups focus on a very narrow selection of conservative media, while conservative watchdog groups have a cornucopia of liberal media to scrutinize. It is not surprising that liberal hate and violence seldom shows up in the orthodox media, while conservative supposed hate and violence is magnified or even made up out of whole cloth. The Blackshirts orthodox liberal media love to portray liberal nuts as conservative nuts. Here is a study of objective data that proves a liberal media bias: [*y9g8nbc]bg
• Irony – liberal hate group presented as hate watchdog group
The orthodox media even have their own self-defined hate watchdog group which they devotedly quote as if it is objective when, in fact, it is supported exclusively by leftwing associations and deliberately ignores leftwing hate groups like Barack Obama’s Trinity United Church in Chicago where Barack Obama brought his children to associate with thousands of America haters who cheer America bashing from the pulpit. [Again - no link for the same reason as above.] This so-called watchdog group also plays stupid to inflate their numbers by counting arms of the same supposed hate group in different states and sometimes different counties as supposedly completely separate hate groups (how convenient). Of the supposedly one thousand hate groups they list, over one quarter of them apparently exist in space or someone’s empty head (from an investigation which is still in progress), since no town, city, county, state, country or planet can be found where they are headquartered. Subtracting these homeless hate groups actually leaves black member racist groups topping the list – I guess the Klan ain’t what it used to be. Qualifying as a hate group seems to be fairly simple – just disagree with liberalism, and voila! – a hate group you are! It seems that their deemed hate groups are really just groups that they hate. The spokesman for this supposed watchdog not long ago actually had the gall in a television interview to broad brush that the extreme right in the country is the largest threat domestically. [LOL! – Talk about paranoid!] Threat to who? Squirrels at gun ranges?!? Perhaps he could explain where all of this rightwing violence is. I’ve already revealed literally dozens and dozens of examples of extreme leftwing violence, and I didn’t need millions of dollars from billionaire sugar daddies to make them up out thin air (but if there are any interested in donating to the cause, please contact me through my blog – thank you). The reporter doing the interview actually called this guy an “expert” on hate groups. More like an expert on playing stupid with a dour face! It is also interesting that this supposed liberal rights group’s top ten people in management are all white in a city that is fully half black. If this was a conservative rights group, it would no doubt be branded as a white supremacist hate group! (Shouldn’t Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton be protesting inside their lobby?)bh
• False media stories cause deaths
It is not surprising that the large majority of the media are liberally biased. The Blackshirts orthodox media are overwhelmingly crooked as well, American neighbor. False media stories have caused deaths around the world, lost investments for people, made money for reporters, caused companies to lose market share, covered up atrocities by dictators, invented atrocities as with Katrina, libeled American troops in combat, falsely indicted Israel of war crimes, and an attempt was made to smear a President with manufactured evidence so as to cause his re-election loss. These are just the ones that got caught. If they are the tip of the iceberg imagine how many have never been discovered. [*27w535, *5s4hypk] Imagine how many innocent people have been ruined by a corrupt and malicious liberal press. Few people have the means or friends to defend themselves as do George Bush and Sarah Palin. Here is a fascinating article by a liberal media member admitting his and other liberals’ hate. He ends it by saying:
~But, although Bush hatred can result in irrationality, it’s not the product of irrationality. Indeed, for those not ideologically or personally committed to Bush’s success, hatred for Bush is a logical response to the events of the last few years. It is not the slightest bit mystifying that liberals despise Bush. It would be mystifying if we did not.~ [*bpxm3ct]
He actually admitted that he thought that Bush was so bad that he deserved to be hated by liberals. This is of course, true. Liberals believe that the supposed evil motives of conservatives justify hatred from liberals who, of course, supposedly have honorable motives. However, he thought that his hate was an exceptional, but rational reaction. He was wrong on both counts. The only thing that was exceptional was his recognition and admission of his hate. His hatred was entirely normal. Bush was the target, but any Republican President would generate more or less the same response. It was not Bush – it was the reporter’s programmed reaction to any opposition to utopia as a result of the liberal foundation of paranoia. He was terrified, because to him Bush was obviously motivated by evil to move America away from utopia, and so he hated him for it, just like pretty much every other liberal. And because of their programming they all felt that it was rational, justified and even honorable.bi
• Two kinds of politics
There are basically two kinds of politics, American neighbor. There is the civil politics of persuasion that contemporary conservatism embraces. After all, conservatism is about a free and civil society. It is a political discourse of debate about the substance and merits of issues. Mostly it is practiced in virtual town hall meetings on talk radio shows, in publications, the internet, and at peaceful rallies and protests. Although admittedly isolated threats and violence can occur on the right, they are rare and rejected and denounced by mainstream conservatives and the principles of conservatism. Acts of violence are extremes that border on liberal tactics.
The second kind of politics is that of intimidation which is wholly embraced and practiced by the compulsively paranoid left. The purpose of liberal hate, violence and intimidation techniques is to make it too expensive a price to pay for conservatives to publicly defend conservatism or criticize liberalism through their persuasion politics. Liberals see themselves as nobly fighting conservatives who are seen as motivated by evil, so any type of demagoguery is acceptable, including threats of violence, riots, terrorizing families in their homes, race baiting, putting out malicious lies, threatening to drive customers away from small businesses with union nudge-nudge, wink-wink hints of, “Nice small business you have there – it’d be a shame if something were to happen to it”, and actual terrorism. These are the seeds of fascism that Mussolini’s Blackshirts used to intimidate and silence gatherings, rallies, speeches, fundraisers, etc. of opposition parties. They are being used and justified by liberals and other assorted groups on the left in America right now. Intimidation politics can be either spontaneous or organized. Like with the Arizona murders the liberal lynchers needed little organization to spontaneously explode throughout the internet and the media crying “murderers!” against conservatives at every turn, and as has been witnessed with the Wisconsin unions and the Democratic Party, organized intimidation politics were implemented for a period of months. But this is the truly scary part: As the liberal rhetoric and violence escalates they feed on each other as the compulsive paranoia among liberals grows, with supporters increasingly justifying more extreme measures until the politics of intimidation becomes a stepping stone to tyranny – of course, to the paranoid cheers of those same supporters - progressive-fascism.bj
• Please list Tea Party riots, violence & clashes with police
I have a few questions for you, American neighbor. Where are the lists of Tea Party riots including clashes with police, burning cars and looting stores? Where are the lists of named conservatives groups that have actually performed domestic terrorism, damaging property and murdering innocent people (not these imaginary terror lists created by Blackshirt liberal smear organizations)? Where are the lists of lone domestic terrorists with supposedly conservative beliefs that don’t end up having communist manifestos or grudges against conservatism of some sort? Where are the lists of conservative talk radio hosts publicly wishing death on liberal leaders that have a health problem? Where are the lists of conservative talk radio hosts publicly accusing liberals of desiring certain groups of citizens to die? Where are the lists of conservative leaders wishing liberals should be killed or should just die? Where are the lists of conservative anti-Semitism? Where are the lists of conservative leaders asserting evil motives to liberals on almost every political issue? Where are the lists of photos of dozens of conservative signs accusing liberals of being Hitler, Nazis, fascists or equivalent? Where are the lists of dozens of photos of conservatives wishing death on a liberal president? Where are the links to conservative videos fantasizing about the death of a liberal president? Where are the lists of conservative union violence? Where are the links about a church group run by a Republican that desecrates the American flag and disrupts military funerals? Where are the links to conservative union mobs wrecking a state legislature building to the tunes of millions of dollars? Where are the lists of conservatives terrorizing liberal leaders’ families at their homes? Where are the lists of conservatives rioting at Democratic Party conventions? Just where are all of these lists of supposed contemporary conservative hate and violence, American neighbor? They don’t exist. All of the hate and violence lists are about contemporary liberals and other leftists. Unlike conservatives, liberals do not shun their own acts of hate and violence – they excuse them or even embrace them as supposedly legitimate descent to fight evil - progressive-fascism.
No, American neighbor, the Tea Party is not an extremist hate group. In a comparison with liberals, Tea Partiers come across like a bunch of Contract Bridge playing teetotalers.
Update: Liberal lynchers were at it again with the Boston Marathon bombing, immediately looking for conservatives to blame. [d9xf7ap, cenmm7b, cmgzrd3, d3e4643, cebwvml, c46zg6h, ctmduqb, bu7sz3e, bnhqxyy, cp58ryy, d7cj6ac, c4mtpe5, d22dehz] As usual, the bombers turned out to be nihilist Islamists.bk
• Deprogramming lessons
Liberalism is the ideology of the lynch mob: Contemporary liberalism is a type of societal conditioning. It is a calculated and/or emotional paranoid response to an event where an “enemy” is targeted to be punished with little or no evidence necessary: Compulsive paranoia is the foundation of contemporary liberalism. And what did we learn from John Dewey? We learned the origin of this liberal principle: The essence of contemporary liberalism is that the individual is blameless and society is always guilty. And this one: Contemporary liberals employ chaos as a political strategy to destabilize society so that liberal solutions can appear more palatable. What did we learn from the lyncher reaction to the 2011 Arizona shooting? We saw a Blackshirts lynch mob mentality that ignored the individual perpetrator and instead focused on blaming a segment of society for the crime for political benefit. To the Blackshirts liberal lynch mob Jared Loughner was virtually irrelevant to the crime. The real criminals were the Tea Party, Republicans, talk radio and Sarah Palin - progressive-fascism. (What?!? – no George Bush? Have they forgotten they’re favorite whipping boy already?!?)
Of course: Contemporary liberalism requires a strict adherence to playing stupid. Liberals had to deliberately block out all of the evidence that contradicted their meme of conservatives being the cause of the shooting, and then create out thin air excuses for believing their meme. Contemporary liberalism relies on a programmed, instinct-like scoff reflex to preserve itself from the consequences of critical thinking. For the contemporary liberal groupthinker, sophistry and demagoguery are the weapons of choice against critical thinking. This required a huge dose of playing stupid. Even with evidence that liberals do even more of exactly what they accused conservatives of doing, this makes no difference to them. In a liberal’s mind, any conservative descent is a type of hate, while liberal violence is laudable civil disobedience: Without irrational double standards contemporary liberalism cannot exist. But why would they so plainly set themselves up to look like such fools? Because they feel safe in the herd: A contemporary liberal’s honorable motives and noble fight against contemporary conservatism excuses all liberal failures and indiscretions. And because they self-righteously see themselves as fighting evil: A contemporary conservative’s evil motives justify their destruction by any means necessary. And because they cannot help themselves – they project what they hate about themselves onto their “enemy”: Contemporary liberals project what they subconsciously loathe about themselves as demagoguery toward their opponents and society as a whole. They project what they themselves have done to Sarah Palin for 2 1/2 years, onto Sarah Palin and anyone that agrees with her conservatism. After all, they can’t allow any fault to lie with them: For contemporary liberals superficial rationalization is always the first and final element in their ideological line of thought.
Again we see the utter truth of the principle: Contemporary liberalism is absurd. Liberals see themselves as tolerant and peace loving, while their actions prove they are in fact experienced, talented and paranoid haters, capable of delivering hate and even violence through any medium and at any opponent (enemy) they envision as deserving of it. As my wife observed, no doubt some alpha liberals will call me a hate-monger just for exposing all of this liberal hate. [rolls eyes]
How do you feel about liberalism now, American neighbor? So much for all of that compassion and tolerance stuff – huh? Certainly it is a difficult thing to do, to look in the mirror at one’s own presumed ideology and see a monster drooling back at you. Do you see now, more than ever, that at your core you are not a liberal? Are you awakening from your slumber, American neighbor? We can all be grateful for it.bl
• Deprogramming exercise
Here is a link to a page that is like an archive of the Arizona, 2011 shooting: [*78oz4j4]
To further investigate the hateful and violent connections within the liberal movement of America explore this extensive website, American neighbor: A Guide to the Political Left [*3ddunq]
For more links to liberal craziness explore this website: zombietime [*bfoqr]
And for a simple explanation of what happened after the Tuscon shooting watch this video: Sarah Palin Blood Libel [*49mako7]
• Humor, sort-of
We began this essay with a look at secularism’s contributions to solving the overpopulation problem in the past century [/sarcasm], so I thought we should end it with something for our religious readers. We have a special sermon from none other than Jeremiah Wright, with a strategy to fight off the phantoms and devils paranoid liberals see under every overturned rock: [*4wy6wlx]
As an alternative for those who don’t wish to think about such perplexing world view complications, we have a new er-label:
Earther – No longer believes Barack Obama is from this planet. (Count me in!) [first comment 63cnjzr]
Update: Barack Obama claims that he can tell who was born in America just by looking at their faces. [npxzbqd] I CAN RELATE TO THAT! I too have a similar uncanny ability – I can tell whether a President is from earth just by looking at his face. And when I look at President Obama I see an alien lizard creature (or it could be a giant cockroach – it’s hard to tell which) disguised as a human. If anyone gets an up-close look and can identify which it is, please let me know. However, beware of any men in black suits with sunglasses and little red lights…