Breitbart's BigJournalism: Democratic "agents provocateurs" likely behind threats against Congressmen
March 25, 2010 8:57 am ET by Simon Maloy
Andrew Breitbart's elite squad of nitwit "journalists" have put their heads together and reached a conclusion on the spate of threats directed at Democratic lawmakers: it's all the Democrats' fault.
BigJournalism.com's Michael Walsh built upon BigGovernment.com's claim that the threats are "bogus" by warning the media that the Democrats are likely "exaggerating or even lying." According to Walsh, the perpetrators behind the threats are probably "agents provocateurs" of the type that started the Reichstag fire in Nazi Germany, and the media should report the story with that "historical context" in mind. Walsh, like his colleagues at BigGovernment, offered absolutely nothing in the way of evidence (unless you count the Saul Alinsky quote he provided, but since Alinsky passed away almost 40 years ago his relevance to this story isn't what you'd call high).
Breitbart's flunkies see threats of violence against the Democrats, and imply that not only are the Democrats at fault, but they're just like the Nazis. It'd be sad if it weren't so despicable.
~
Why won't our representatives in Washington acknowledge the will of their constituents?
John Paradox, as a registered Lectroid, what are your thoughts on this matter?
Are there any responsible adults left in the Republican Party? Where the f*** is John McCain?
Listen to am radio, or Fox, visit these far right websites, and you'll see that they spend a lot of time telling themselves that they're arguing substance, and winning debates. They do a lot of back and forth self-esteem boosting, insisting that they're using facts and logic, and that it's everybody else who is being unfair by pointing out their BS.
MOst of their arguments aren't any more rational than breaking a window, a lot of the rhetoric of the right is the verbal or written equivalent of mindless vandalism, but it may be hard for them to accept something as literal as their followers reacting with these violent emotional outbursts.
Destruction of public property seems like a pretty twisted response to a change in policy, but it's not much more empty than what their best thinkers have to offer.
"Equality of opportunity, not quality of outcome" is a favorite platitude of the right. Yet, they always seem confused when they're called to account for their behavior. The leaders aren't much better than some who post here, repeatedly caught in lies and failures, who demand to be treated with the same respect as much more responsible people. The worse they handle themselves, the quicker they go into victim mode.
On top of all that, aren't these public buildings they're attacking ? Doesn't every broken window get repaired with our tax dollars, not to mention every additional security person put on duty ?
I consider is as actually borne of a not-to-be-expressed embarassment/shame over these incidents.
You've trained these attack dogs and they've gone rabid. I think it's possible they may turn on you.
That's not even teensy-weensy journalism.
"Theories on narcissistic personality disorder and shame
"It has been suggested that narcissistic personality disorder may be related to defenses against shame.[21]
"Glen Gabbard suggested NPD could be broken down into two subtypes.[22] He saw the "oblivious" subtype as being grandiose, arrogant and thick-skinned and the "hypervigilant" subtype as easily hurt, oversensitive and ashamed.
"He suggested that the oblivious subtype presents a large, powerful, grandiose self to be admired, envied and appreciated. This self is the antithesis of the weakened and internalized self that hides in a generic state of shame. This is how the internalized self fends off devaluation, while the hypervigilant subtype neutralizes devaluation by seeing others as unjust abusers. This hypervigilant type does not fend off devaluation; he is obsessed with it. [..]"