Boehlert: What if Fox News actually wants mob violence?
Conservative commentators were atwitter last week following news that Ann Coulter's speech at the University of Ottawa was canceled in the face of protests. Of course, Coulter has the right to speak her mind on campuses. But in announcing the cancellation, her conservative Canadian sponsor, pundit Ezra Levant, put the blame on out-of-control liberals who had allegedly made it unsafe for Coulter to speak, breathlessly telling reporters that "the police and the security have advised that it would be physically dangerous for Ann Coulter to proceed with this event and for others to come in" and stressing the presence of an "unruly mob" outside.
Naturally, right-wing bloggers south of the Canadian border then went ballistic. Gateway Pundit claimed a menacing mob of 2,000, armed with "rocks and sticks," had surrounded the Ottawa campus building where Coulter was to speak. And yes, a fire alarm was even pulled.
Oh, my!
But it turns none of those hysterical claims were true (except for the part about someone pulling a fire alarm without cause). The 1,000 protesters were peaceful, according to university officials (good luck finding those rocks and sticks). And no, the police did not cancel the event out of our concern for Coulter's safety. They simply thought the event should have been held in a bigger venue to facilitate the large crowd. (Who invites Ann Coulter to campus and then books a lecture hall that, according to one estimate, holds just 400 people?)
Fact: Coulter and her promoters canceled the show on their own. There were no imminent signs of mob violence or threats of personal harm, just good old-fashioned, raucous, campus-style debate. But faced with a boisterous crowd, Coulter took her marbles and went home, while her conservative allies concocted tales of looming left-wing violence and feasted on the publicity.
Later, whining about her traumatic no-show in Ottawa, Coulter told a reporter, "I would like to know when this sort of violence, this sort of protest, has been inflicted upon a Muslim?" [Emphasis added.]
Oh, so now pulling a fire alarm qualifies as "violence"?
The hysterical hand-wringing was predictable. But the real stunner last week was watching the same conservatives who fretted over Coulter's safety then turn around and excuse and rationalize actual right-wing violence and intimidation stateside in the wake of the historic health care vote. Speaking out of both sides of their mouths with astonishing ease, conservatives denounced liberals who protested Coulter's appearance in Canada, and then played defense on behalf of marauding right-wing radicals who unleashed death threats, threw bricks through office windows, and hurled epithets at politicians. All in the name of saving America from President Obama's brand of evil socialism.
That form of intimidation and harassment the GOP Noise Machine had no problem with. Indeed, Democrats themselves were to blame for the rash of political violence.
Or so said the Tea Party team at Fox News, where there was little sense of remorse or shame -- or even apparent concern -- about the unprecedented bouts of violence and intimidation last week. (See list below.)
Instead, like Sarah Palin, Fox News simply reloaded and kept spraying the poisonous rhetoric all around. Worse, the "news" channel spent parts of last week either denying or rationalizing the uncorked madness. For instance, Glenn Beck suggested the incidents had been concocted. "It's almost as if the left is trumping all of this up just for the politics," said Beck.
Fox News friend Rush Limbaugh agreed:
Our side doesn't do this kind of stuff. It's all made up -- 95 percent of it's made up and it's being done to divert everybody's attention."
And from Andrew Breitbart's Big Government: "We doubt these threats are actually real."
Those who weren't denying the acts of violence were busy whitewashing them. On Fox News, S.E. Cupp made fun of Democrats who she claimed sought sympathy after being on the receiving end of a "couple of angry voices mails." Cheered Cupp, "I'm glad people are angry."
Hmm, "angry" voice mails? Here's an example of one of the actual hate messages left on a Democrat's voice mail:
"Congressman Stupak, you baby-killing mother f***er... I hope you bleed out your a**, got cancer and die, you mother f***er," one man says in a message to Stupak.
By skimming over the unpleasant details, Fox News talkers did their best to trivialize the illegal, terrorist threats made against elected officials. In fact, they were glad Democrats received voice mails like that.
And yes, it's been the rationalizing that's been so disturbing to watch -- the way the GOP Noise Machine fervently excused last week's violent behavior and eagerly tried to shift the blame onto the victims of the intimidation, and then demanded to know what the big deal was.
I mean, who hasn't had the line on a propane tank outside his house slashed by vandals? This stuff happens all the time, right? Didn't scores of members of Congress, immediately following the vote in 2002 to authorize the invasion of Iraq, find their office windows shattered by flying bricks hurled under the cover of darkness by nasty anti-war libs? Didn't they receive a steady stream of specific death threats and watch as relatives (and even their children) came under attack? Doesn't this kind of harassment and intimidation come with the territory, and hasn't it always been pushed out and legitimized by mainstream media outlets?
Um, not in America. But that may be changing as Fox News fuels the hate and does its best to provide cover and refuge for those supporting the intimidation campaign, as Fox News and the rest of the right-wing media rationalize the wave of political violence and do their best to shift the blame onto the targets -- onto the victims -- while always avoiding responsibility. (Did anyone on the left suggest Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) was to blame when a YouTube nut job posted a threat against his life?)
Note how so many embraced the frightening notion that because conservatives didn't like health care reform, the violence was expected and nobody should have been surprised because Democrats, by passing the bill (i.e. desecrating the Constitution), pushed people too far. "So why are people angry?" asked Fox News' Steve Doocy last week. "Maybe because they didn't want this bill?"
Talk about the rise of tyranny and the minority-rule mob.
And that's where the fear of the perpetual angry mob comes in, and perhaps why Fox News, rather than lamenting the ugly and cowardly eruptions, seems to be encouraging it, or at least rationalizing it. Perhaps Fox News wants that threat of mob intimidation on the table, and Fox News, the de facto Opposition Party, wants Democrats to be thinking about the political consequences of further upsetting that unhinged mob.
As the blogger known as Digby noted last week:
They know that serious violence is very likely. They are simply inoculating themselves against the charge that it was their inflammatory rhetoric that caused it. It will be the Democrats complaining about their inflammatory rhetoric that made the teabaggers snap. If they'd just stayed quiet and not made daddy mad, he wouldn't have had to hit them.
And speaking of irresponsibility, who helped created the red-hot aura of right-wing hysteria over health care reform? Who has been driving the dangerous insurrectionist rhetoric? The right-wing media, of course. This was Beck, just days after the vote:
Get down on your knees and pray. Pray. It's September 11th all over again, except that we didn't have the collapsing buildings.
That's right, the U.S. government (by moving to help insure millions more Americans) had unleashed a surprise terrorist attack against the defenseless civilian population. But no, Glenn Beck doesn't incite people. Why would anybody think that?
And why
would anybody think there was a connection between Fox News' hate speech and the
recent police blotter of violent and frightening political incidents:
- Rep. Tom Perriello's (D-VA) brother's address was erroneously posted online by a Tea Party blogger who invited activists to descend on the house. A gas line outside the brother's house was cut.
- Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) was the target of threatening faxes and phone calls, including death threats. Some of the faxes included "racial epithets used in reference to President Obama," according to CBS News.
- A brick was thrown through the window of the Democratic Party office in Rochester, New York. The note attached read: "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice," roughly quoting 1964 Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater.
- Rep. Anthony Weiner's office in Kew Gardens, New York, had to be evacuated after suspicious white powder was found in an envelope mailed to the office.
- A thrown brick smashed a window at Rep. Louise Slaughter's district office in Niagara Falls, New York.
- Slaughter also received a message claiming that "snipers were being deployed to kill those members who voted yes for health care," according to Politico.
- A tossed brick demolished a window at the Sedgwick County Democratic Party headquarters in Wichita, Kansas.
- There were confirmed accounts of Tea Party protesters hurling anti-gay slurs at Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) on the eve of the health care vote.
- "Vandals also smashed the front door and a window at Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' office in Tucson early Monday, hours after the Arizona Democrat voted for the health care reform package," reported the Kansas City Star.
Fox News' response to the mayhem? "This happens all the time," shrugged paid contributor Stephen Hayes. His colleague Charles Krauthammer added, "I'm sure a lot of this is trumped up."
It's a chilling prospect, but one that seems more and more plausible: What if Fox News actually wants mob violence?
Follow Eric Boehlert on Twitter.





















The Terrorist Networks are Al-Qaeda, The Taliban & Fox News.
You tell me which is the most dangerous?
Two can cause Serious Destruction, but only one can completely Destroy a Nation.
Mr. News
Obviously Fox News wants violence. TV thrives on dramatic pictures and video. The worst thing for Fox would be to have to cover civil and respectful discussions on the substantive issues of the day.
That's why they have Glenn Beck whipping people into a frenzy over the demise of America:
That's why they have Liz Trotta dismissing violence by saying that "a brick through a window is pretty low on the violence scale."
I wonder how she would react if it were her window. The intent is just so apparent here that the question hardly seems necessary.
More irony: Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, and Beck talking about the "liberal elite." 4 white males who are insanely wealthy media-titans. Who's part of the elite again?
The MOST GLARING IRONY: people calling our President a Nazi acting like Nazis. Let's review. Who went around inciting violence, terrorizing people at their homes and places of business, making death threats, smashing windows, spreading hatred and fear, putting up ugly caricatures, screaming racial epithets, and making people into scapegoats for the problems of a nation? Oh yeah, that's right. The big H and his thugs. So tell me again why the guy trying to get people to work together and pass legislation he believes in is on a poster looking like the scary Nazi. Wow. Are people really not smart enough to see the crazy?
Simple...anyone who watches them. Please people, know the REAL villians here...or at least have the courage to recognize them.
Simple...anyone who watches them. Please people, know the REAL villians here...or at least have the courage to recognize them.
Sorry E. You can't have it both ways.
You, my friend, are as deranged as Beck, and as in as much irrespensible, delusional denial as Fox. What will it take, huh? The assissanation of the President? The gassing of Congress? A Bomb in the Supreme Copurt after they refuse to overturn Roe v Wade? (Or are those just par for the course, expected results?) At what point in this psychopathic world view do the simply ends no longer justify the means?
And what has ANY liberal done in the past three decades that even comes close to what we're seeing from so much of the right these days? Where's YOUR proof?
The Right has long since ceased to be defending America. They are defending only their own fantasy world. They are traitors to our laws, constitution, values and way of life and they are becomeing violent. And when they are eventually put down by the police, FBI or (hopefully it won't come to this) Military, it will be their own fault for breaking the law and not some fantastic "liberal conspiracy."
When this time comes, I wonder how much PROOF you'll believe there is, as the evidence against them piles up and spills over. The Right have lost their minds, dude. Absolutely lost their freaking minds. And at this point, you'd have to be stupiud to believe them and crazy to defend them.
--------------------------------------------------------
The world is moving on without and despite you. I'll never understand why so many want to be consistantly behind the learning curve of history.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/30/daniel-cowart-kill-obama_n_518408.html
-------------------------------------------
Right-Wingers at their finest
--------------------------------
So there you go.
----------------------------------------------------
And after all, why wouldn't it be one of "the best behaved mob[s] that DC has seen in a LONG time"? It was also one of the smallest.
I have to disagree with you there, niceguy. Paranoid Scizophrenic is not a political ideology. This man had already threatened to exact divine vengeance upon President Obama (he thought he was God after all). For the right to count this lunatic as liberal is just them once again relying on their followers not to use their critical thinking capacities.
LOL!
So we "win", even if you take the farthest possible stretch in their favor!
-------------------------------------------------------
IMHO
------------
;)
This nutcase threatened Obama last year, and so this is just his latest threat, and isn't directly comparable to the threats from people who are going after anyone who's not on their side politically.
I don't think there's any evidence he's a liberal. The guy, Norman Leboon, had videos up on YouTube that said he "wanted to burn CNN to the ground, and he told ABC News employees that they will lose their firstborn sons. Leboon also threatened to burn down all the malls in America until the movie "Babe the Pig" was removed."
That doesn't sound like someone who was going after Cantor for political reasons.
And it turns out he wasn't. He hated Cantor because Cantor's a jew - well, because Leboon is CRAZY, but the 'reason he gave' was because Cantor was a jew.
"Congressman Eric Cantor, and you and your cupcake evil wife," the video said. "Remember Eric... our judgment time, the final Yom Kippur has been given. You are a liar, you're a Lucifer, you're a pig, a greedy f---ing pig, you're an abomination, you receive my bullets in your office, remember they will be placed in your heads. You and your children are Lucifer's abominations."
One crazy guy, against dozens of crazy militas )just for a start.)
But those crazies will destroy the Republicans and the Right LOOOONG before they'll do any real damage to the left. Political parties and movements are almost always destroyed from within rather than by their opponents.
------------------------------------------------
And the Right has just fallen off the Tiger it's been riding.
--------------
LOL
It won't destroy them by killing any of them. It will destroy them as any political force worth mentioning. The number of people who actually will want to associate with these people will shrink to rump-party status. They may control lots of space (and even Senators), but they will be vastly outnumbered in population.
These militia will guarantee a Democratic Presidency and House for the next fifteen to twenty years. Democrats ought to think long and hard to deal with a strong Republican minority in the Senate for the next two decades.
-----------------------------------------------
The Republicans will keep the DEEP South, the least populated of the Mountain States, and Alaska and that's about it.
Instead I ended up getting tons of rebuttals from people who otherwise AGREE with me! LOL
----------------------------------------------
I guess that's what they mean by "unintended consequenses!"
He claimed to be god, he claimed to be the messiah, he claimed to be able to kill your first-born son just by thinking about it.
Yep, he gave a donation to the Obama campaign a couple of years back. That doesn't make him a leftist or a democrat -- obviously, he is neither -- he is just an all-purpose misanthropic megalomaniac. I mean that clinically, not rhetorically.
Cantor wants to be the Repub veep candidate -- or top of the ticket -- in 2012. He'll milk everything he can. But we don't need to help him. A lot of folks are referring to Leboon (the banana) as if he were proof that "the other side" has it in for Republicans. No, we don't. He's not one of us, and he has it in for everybody, not just Republicans, not just Eric Cantor.
-------------------------------------------------
I'm honestly not sure which, but I'm leaning towards the latter.
"The Left" see a health care system that works against the American consumer. We have tried the pure capitalist unregulated health insurance market for decades now. It continues to trend to larger profits, with less coverage for the American people forcing emergency rooms and social programs to try and fill in the gaps. In other words, it's a failing system of corporate socialism NOW.
We're going to try a small baby step toward a more regulated market now. The Insurance companies still love this bill. It's not perfect and it is filled with concessions to republicans who had no intention of ever voting for it anyway no matter what.
Instead of apocalyptic doom and gloom, how about we try the approach that people who the majority of Americans voted into office campaigned on?
Oh, and your last comment proves Boehlert's point. Making threats of the type you posted is violence per se.
Try looking up "authoritarinism." You'll probably find your picture on the page. You aren't a conservative.
Check every link and verify the claims. Are there any local newspapers or footage that covered this "scary" Coulter incident?
-----------------------------------------------
It's insane.
Fox is smarter than that. They will be asking the question "did they bring this on themselves?" or "did their liberal views get them killed?"
When faced with indisputable facts, the extreme Right simply cast aspersions on the victims & accusers. Andrew Breitbart and John Zeigler are perfect fonts of this tactic. They never answer questions about how their 'facts' are wrong and invariably impugn the person asking the question.
There is however, a statute of limitations on how long you can blame a democratic president for every single thing that is wrong with the world. For example, Jimmy Crater was responsible for everything negative in the world from 1976 - 1992 (no wonder Republicans still hate that guy!), then Bill Clinton was at fault from 1992 - 2008, Obama is currenlty to blame for everything bad in the world since 2009.
How about it was done by ACORN, at the behest of Obama, to cover up that Obama is secretly funneling billions of TARP money to Al Qaeda to fund the attacks on American soldiers?
-------------------------
IMHO
No matter how you try to take the parallax view, the unfounded hatred and violence is almost entirely the province of the Tali-baggers.
Yes, the man is a kook, like you said, a pretty all purpose kook for sure. They should lock him up, and look inside of his head, and see what's going on there, because he does appear mentally ill, or at the very least, mentally disturbed.
(NOTE: I've just checked his YouTube Page to post the link here, and YouTube's suspended his account. All videos are gone. However, the Huffington Post article concerning the arrest shows the username in a link attached to the report:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/29/norman-leboon-arrested-th_n_517246.html?page=11&show_comment_id=43476368#comment_43476368)
At this point in time, I'm unclear whether he's a 'fan' of Shia Islam, a member of Shia Islam, an American-Muslim or Muslim immigrant, or what.
This angle has not--to my knowledge--been explored by the media, at least on the net. I don't have a TV and I don't listen to regular AM/FM radio, so I can't speak for broadcast or cable media.
It may be that it's being played down to prevent a backlash by the right and/or Teabaggers against innocent Muslims and other non-Christians.
He had a large amount of videos on YouTube; I believe about 515 uploads. . .and he doesn't seem to be cool with Wahaabi or Sunni Islam, either.
As with some past religious extremists--especially of the Christian sort--he considers himself the 'last prophet', and just a step away from deity itself; something that David Koresh, Jim Jones and so many others also shared.
Just like it's not fair to come to any conclusions about liberals based on the professor in Alabama who shot some co-workers by the reports from one family member. She was a crazy, and she was rabid in her support of Obama. That wasn't part of her motivation to kill anyone, and her political views didn't affect her actions.
What if there was no evidence of the alledged 'racists comments' at the Tea Party rally in DC two weekends ago? The allegations get tons of coverage. The cameras were right there as Congressman Lewis and Speaker Pelosi walked past the crowd....show the evidence.
They can rationalize all they want, but the reality is that the vitriole being spewed from the leaders of the Republican party (beck, hannity, etc) is on a level never before seen. They can talk about non-violence all they want, but any fool understands that when you scare the h#ll out of people with lies about marxism, the end of American, blah blah blah, you are inciting action from some of the less stable people you are preaching to.
Of course Faux News wants violence. It should be pretty obvious to anyone who has their blinders off that the subtle messages and images the Republicans and Fox News are presenting to their mind controlled puppets is violence. I know they can spin it however they may see fit, but I'm pretty sure putting bulleyes on target states is not their way of saying bring a muffin basket.
What is really shocking about the tea baggers is that they prominently use the whole Obama is Hitler/Stalin/Castro/random dictator they feel the need to extort. This is ironic since Hitler (like the tea baggers) belonged to a "alternative" party and Hitler (like the tea baggers) shared an "anti-socialist" platform. Of course, most tea baggers are unaware that their party is potentially another incarnation of the Nazi Party but I have a feeling Fox News is aware. Well, maybe not Glenn Beck and his hand puppets. But those on top of the chain like Rupert Murdoch or Roger Ailes are very aware and either don't care or doing it deliberately (hoping for the first). Scary stuff.
Hopefully we can learn from history and offset any violence before they go on a mass annihilation of anyone they see as liberal, gay or jewish.
I mean, it's not really a stretch to say that the "n" word was used against black caucus members of Congress from tea party folks, who tend to be white, old, angry, and from the South. The tea party events I've been to, I have personally heard lots of people throwing around the "n" word in the crowds, but a camera didn't catch it, so it must not have happened right?
If a tea party member calls Obama, or anyone else the "N" word, and a camera doesn't catch it, I guess it never happened.
If Harry Reid supporters threw eggs at the bus, then they should be cited for vandalism just like anyone else, or whatever the appropriate charges are.
Are you trying to tell me though that smashing someone's windows of their office, cutting gas lines, and general attempts at intimidation are the same as a few folks tossing some eggs? They're both stupid acts, but they're not on the same level.
The movement is not racial. The movement is not violent. Acts of violence from both sides are equally repugnant. However, the media portrays things negatively with a VERY broad brush as far as the tea parties are concerned. Then they ignore the actual violence coming from the left.
Examples?
G20 conference in Pittsburgh
ELF destroying property (SUV's and radio towers) in CA and WA
I would hope that acts of violence are denounced on both sides whenever they happen.
You seem to be saying, if they weren't caught on film, then they don't exist.
A black member of Congress got spit on, that's violence.
Black members of Congress were called the N word, that's not violence, but should also be denounced.
I will agree that for the most part, the tea party movement is not racial, but it sure seems that way. Almost completely white. Almost completely older Americans. A lot from the South (majority). And as I said, as I milled around the crown on 9/12, lots of N bombs dropped in reference to President Obama. Lots of Confederate flags. Lots of signs portraying Obama in a negative racist way.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.
So, tea partiers cleaned up after themselves, good for them.
It's easy for the media to portray tea parties as negative, because they are almost entirely negative in what they're trying to do. Basically, they're looking to get Obama out of office, regardless of the way they do it.
The stupid people who destroy things during G20, or G8 protests are just that, stupid.
ELF is a completely fringe group WAYYYYYY out on the left, and bears no immediate resemblence to democrats at all, and they are stupid as well.
Thing is, here we have many random acts of violence and intimidation against Democratic members of Congress, and I wonder where the people who committed said acts were from? Tea party. I mean, we have a tea party organizer putting the address out on the internet of a Congressman, telling folks to go and pay him a visit. This wasn't some rank and file member of the "movement", this was a local organizer.
Do you denounce those actions?
The only video I've seen of the spitting incident is a guy with his hands cupped around his mouth...yelling. Two questions for you. Do you cup your hands around your mouth to spit and can you spit and yell at the same time?
It looks like what happened here is that as he was yelling he had some spit fly out. I'm sure its happened to you. That isnt the same as "spitting on him" and you know it.
Again, black members of Congress were called NI****! At least, the tea partiers doing that did it to their faces, albeit from the crowd.
Again, I'm not painting the tea party with a broad brush, their actions do that for them. Again, we had a tea party organizer incite against a Congressman, because he voted yea on the health care bill. Unfortunately, he put the wrong address out on the web, and someone cut the gas line at his brother's house.
Yeah, that's an action directly tied back to a tea party organizer.
What about the hundreds of signs I saw basically threatening violence against the Obama administration, talking about we came without guns, this time, and so on? I was there, saw them, took pictures of them.
You say you denounce violence, and then, try to explain it away.
My favorite sign from DC...."It doesnt matter what my sign says because you are just going to call me a racist anyway"
In DC, I saw again, hundreds of signs with Confederate flags, racist images of Obama, the N word flying around. I'm not talking about 5 people, I'm talking about possibly hundreds of examples I saw in the few hours I was there. I will state that I did have good conversations with a few folks there (few, as in, 2) who seemed to know what they were actually talking about and we had a good debate on the merits of different topics. In my honest opinion, they didn't really belong there, they were too smart for most of that crowd.
I think by far, most, as in, a majority of tea party members are racists, and if they're not, they don't really care about the Government performing, they care that democrats are running it. If they would be honest, and come out and say, this is an anti democrat movement, that would be a lot more truthful. Instead, they try to describe themselves as every day Americans who, all of a sudden, became politically motivated, after Obama was sworn into office.
Again, some of these violent actions have been traced right back to organizers, and again, you ignore that.
If you want to talk about the event...then you'll have to eliminate about 3 out of the five 'incidents' that Magnolia has listed.
Just because Beck and Fox cite these numbers, doesn't mean it's true.
The thing that gets me is, why weren't these people up in arms when Bush and his Congress ran up the largest deficit in history? They took a surplus and trashed it. Where were the "tea partiers" then? Seems to me that they didn't get mad about it until a Black man moved into THEIR White House.
You really beleive that if Obama was white and instituted the exact same policies that we wouldnt have the exact same reaction....the formation of the 'tea party' movement????
Tea Party folks dont long for the days of George Bush. Bush was driving us down the road to of big government and financial ruin....Obama is now doing it at light speed.
The reaction to that is not based on race.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/columnists/mdavis/stories/DN-markdavis_0331edi.State.Edition1.2b0c949.html
Tell me your thoughts on this story as it pertains to actions taken by members of an organization?
http://www.laindependent.com/news/89492892.html
Bush did actually grow gov't and the deficit in a wholly unreasonable way. His spending and tax cuts were totally unjustifiable and unnecessary.
Obama, on the other hand, has NO HISTORY of these excesses and ill-advised behaviors. The deficit spending that Obama has done? Necessary and warranted and wise. It's unwise to constrict gov't spending when one is in a terrible recession as part of a worldwide financial contraction that threatens to turn into a second Great Depression.
So, if they were to actually look at reality without some kind of blinders on, they wouldn't be marching on Washington NOW - they would have done it during Bush's administration!
So, what's clear is that the reason they're angry is NOT what they claim it is. And there's good reason to believe that some portion of it is because he's black. Denying that is to deny reality.
Form the Lemonade Party or something, and make it part of your platform that there will be no racist imagery or rhetoric allowed. Get your fellow lemons to sign a pledge that they'll discuss issues, not spew ethnic venom.
Or keep on running with the racist Teapersons... you march under their flag, you get tarred with their brush, and deservedly so.
News footage from our local stations here in DC of the site after the Partiers went home shows they left as much junk around as any other rally. It's inevitable; there's never enough trash cans around. So leaving the mess isn't a sin, but lying about it...? Eh, par for the Tea Party course.
I agree with you: ELF and the Democrats don't have any overlap. They're too crazy for us, and we're too mainstream for them.
ABC
CBS and CBS Video
NBC Video
Radio Towers:
ABC
CNN and CNN Video
NBC
SUV's:
CBS
CNN
Now you're moving the goalposts to assert some pulled-from-your-backside ratio of ELF/G20 stories to Teabagger stories, which you wouldn't be able to prove if you tried.
Of course, if anyone tunes into the nightly national news whenever a G8 or G20 meeting is going on, we'll see nightly broadcasts of said violent protests.
And guess what? Those schmucks doing that are entirely wrong as well.
So, you're caught in a lie yet again, and you heap scorn upon the person who caught you in the lie rather than apologizing for the lie itself.
Typical.
Don't blame me, blame the MSM, and that includes Faux News.
Faux News version of reality may be skewed from what everyone else seems to agree on but; they aren't pushing ELF stories any more than anyone else.
Now, more on topic.
What if Fox News actually wants mob violence?
Well, heck. Wouldn't that make for great Tee Vee????
The most common comparison people want to make here is to the anti-war movement. The anti-war movement always, always remained in the peripheral of American vision. It was always a bit fringe-y. I definitely think there were some great Americans out there, who just happened to be opposed to the war, but I definitely think there were a whole lot of wackos out there just for the opportunity to act rowdy and scream curse words (or worse). And this is why the anti-war movement always stayed fringe-y.
The Democrats never went out and declared solidarity with the anti-war protestors. They never tried to adopt the movement or say, "it's us and them together fighting the power!" or something like that. They kept their distance. Same goes for prominent liberals in the media. Say what you want about MSNBC, but I don't remember them ever running free promos for anti-war rallies the way that Fox does for the tea party movement.
The tea party movement is being mainstreamed. They have corporate sponsorhip from a major cable news network who will give them as much coverage as they could ever want. They have been embraced and adopted by Republican politicians. They are being beamed into American living rooms every night and injected into the everyday American politics. Can you say the same thing about the anti-war protestors or the G20 protestors or ELF? Heck no. They're the fringe! And everyone knows they're the fringe!
But the tea partiers? They are being mainlined into American politics. We are being forced to accept the tea partiers as part of the everyday political landscape now. They're on tv everyday (on Fox 24/7). When a movement that quote obviously has fringe elements is being mainstreamed, it is a cause for concern.
I'm guessing that you were not around in 72' when Mcgovern was nominated.
It is disingenuous for mainstream purveyors of incendiary far-right rhetoric to dismiss groups such as the Hutaree by saying that there are "crazies on both sides." This simply is not true.
There was a time when the far left was a spawning ground for political violence ... But for the most part, far-left violence in this country has gone the way of the leisure suit and the AMC Gremlin ...
By contrast, there has been explosive growth among far-right, militia-type groups that identify themselves as white supremacists, "constitutionalists," tax protesters and religious soldiers determined to kill people to uphold "Christian" values. [...]
Demagogues scream at people that their government is illegitimate, that their country has been "taken away," that their elected officials are "traitors" and that their freedom is at risk. They have a right to free speech, which I will always defend. But they shouldn't be surprised if some listeners take them literally.
Personally, I don't go around spitting on people, ever, so I can't really speak directly to your "point." Perhaps your experience as an accomplished spitter has blessed you with a deeper perspective on the issue.
That's what would have happened had it simply been unintentional spittle from someone shouting. Instead, it was more than that.
Watch the video. Look at the guy in the white hat. He's rhythmically yelling a 3 word phrase, most likely "kill the bill", since that's what the group is yelling. You can see his body moving in rhythm with that shouting that he's doing. Then, look at about 9 seconds into the video, when Rep Cleaver is right next to him. The protestor's body movements change slightly, and I believe it's because he purposely intended to spit on the guy.
http://www.laindependent.com/news/89492892.html
Most do not condone the violence or threats to anyone. Period.
There is a video about the name calling but, the right is saying it is either not real or just dismissing it.
Things will not change until people begin to accept responsibility. Much more on the right is this ignoring bad behavior, excusing it or pretending it is not happening then to face up to it and denounce it.
And this is not just with the threats.
The right needs to grow up and begin to take responsibility and needs to face up to realities. So much of it reminds me of grade school.
Name calling, pretending, finger pointing, justifications like, 'if so and so does it then so can I'
It is high time to stop being like kids and to take on being adults and focusing on problems and solutions and stop with this game playing.
Eyewitness testimony is evidence. Always has been, always will be.
No one has said it's conclusive evidence - that's not the issue. We don't NEED conclusive video or audio evidence.
And doofus, when a lot of people are shouting "kill the bill", a camera that's not right next to someone shouting "N****R" won't hear that racial epithet being shouted, but the person walking right in front of that person yelling the racial epithet WILL hear it!
What part of that is difficult to understand?
Also, members of the media heard the N word as well.
Which would you prefer be thrown in your direction, a brick or an egg?
I'd prefer the egg myself for the obvious reasons, but then I'm not a bagger.
I'm not sure why the media would have even covered the BS this past weekend, anyway. It was a staged event promoted by Fox and paid for by Dick Armey's group. The majority of the people who go to these events are unemployed or retired and they are living off of GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS. The very programs they are bit*hing about. These folks have NO IDEA what the hell they are protesting. Some of them, when asked if they are objecting to Medicare say, "no, we're talking about GOVERNMENT programs." When they are told that Medicare is a government program, they refuse to believe it.
The tea parties are political theater . . . that's all. Very DANGEROUS political theater.
The cameras picked up an angry white Teaperson spitting on Congressman Cleaver's face as he walked to work during that rally. All the real news channels carried it.
You missed it? Hmmm. Well, there's always YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmP4Gb2pEsY
See 0:15 and 0:31
Fox is cancer on the collective soul of this country. I urge everyone to ask for the channel to be changed whenever possible and to register complaints with management whenever Fox is left on in public areas.
Scary thing is, she takes pride in watching it, and only it, 24/7.
She forwards me all those silly emails about death panels and the anti-christ. I've even gotten Ads for glen beck:
"Hope you all are watching Glen Beck on Fox News this week. he comes on at 5 pm EST in our area. Just the facts and nothing but the facts, very good. Very Scary.."
Rather baffling : \
Since Fox never saw a naked woman or a sexually active teenager it didn't like, this argument works on almost any day.
Hmmm... if there are parental controls on your mom's TV... well. Up to you. And you can't do a thing about the TVs in the common rooms. But I feel for you, because my mother has just hit seventy and likes the bright colors and loud voices Fox provides. It's really creepy, completely against everything she's believed in all her life. I wish she'd get hooked on the Cartoon Network instead.
It seems to me his whole program is about not just hating progressives and Obama but, also doing something about it before its too late.
Over half of those tea partiers are part of it because of Beck.
Our country has been taken away from us!
Armageddon!
We need to take our country back!
Obama must be stopped at all costs!
Obama is a fascist.
Obama is a communist.
Obama is a Nazi.
He wasn't born in the US.
And so on, and so forth, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that they're are ginning up false anger about a lot of things that just aren't there.
Whaddya mean "if"?
I think the media also needs to stop pretending Faux is a real news network and stand up to these bullies and liars.
But where do you go from there? When it comes to action, they are all cowards. They would never step into the line of fire or lead a physical revolution. They don't have a clue that they will have to account and atone for their words. They are empty people who feed off negative energy. In the course of evolution, they are the bottom of humankind. Only the Lord could have mercy on their souls.
Democrats in congress have more backbone than teabaggers...
I just wonder when SOMEBODY will do SOMETHING about Fox pundits?
I would like to participate, if somebody has a good, logical idea of how to dismantle these liars once and for all (violence free, of course...).
Think about this: these teabaggers are so completely uneducated and trustworthy of their loyal "news" outlet, they've developed this huge trust of the pundits, believing everything they say, regardless of radical claims.
They've decided fact-checking is too much work. They've allowed Fox to become their political interpreters, while also supplying them with opinions dressed as fact...usually forgetting to supply the reasoning to go with it...but for these fundamentalists, debate holds no sway on their beliefs and facts are merely liberal lies...
It would be amazing to find out what these teabaggers really believe in...but they don't even know themselves! I can tell you WHO they DON'T believe in...but that's about it...that's probably all they know too...
And every time they are unable to debate something with a pre-fabbed response, they immediately label it as a liberal lie...
But what I'm getting at is when dedicated followers, with no capacity for individual though, lose their leaders, they are FORCED to SCATTER. With nobody to tell them what to believe, they will have NO CHOICE but to start believing the truth.
These pundits are responsible for EACH and EVERY radical claim these teabaggers have come to believe. PUNDITS are the source for a majority of the smears and lies out there, yet they act as if they've received their information and granted it upon their chosen ones from a "higher" source....they act as if they just "report the news" and have no personal responsibility for what they say or the actions they provoke.
Pundits (Fox), those who take advantage of the feeble-minded and uneducated citizens to peddle their propaganda, are the SCUM of this society. I hope they don't believe in Hell...
These people can be stopped, but in order to do this, the PUNDITS have to be stopped.
We are at a point where "freedom of speech" has devolved into "freedom of hate." It's not about how somebody can improve upon our system, or what ideas they can bring to the table, it's about how they can bash the President and stonewall ANY sort of progress this administration seeks to accomplish.
These teabaggers are NOBODY without their pundits to tell them what to think. They are empty souls and vehicles for self-serving lies.
I have NEVER met a teabagger who has an original opinion. I have NEVER met a teabagger who has chosen to even CHALLENGE any of the lies from the right...though they hop on the bandwagon to criticize the left...these people are horribly fundamentalist, and already have their minds made up before even approaching debate.
TEABAGGERS ARE SHILLS FOR THE GOP. And if ANY teabaggers read this, PLEASE, stop!! The GOP IS USING YOU!!
I just wonder how far these pundits will take their "leadership" before they reach the point of no return? I'd sure like to see these guys ANSWER for their beliefs...
This is what you said.
"These people can be stopped, but in order to do this, the PUNDITS have to be stopped. "
This is also what you said. I don't think you understand freedom of speech. It doesn't have to "improve upon our system." What you are talking about is communism, quiet the voices that don't agree with you. Call them names, accuse them, inspire outrage, incite action against them.
Since you have 3 thumbs up, I'll assume one is your own. I'd venture to say that there are at least 3 communists here.
The exact M.O. of Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Quinn, and the entire right wing media conglomerate, described perfectly.
I'd venture to say there's at least one Tail-Gunner Joe wannabe here.
See "freedom of speech" means freedom from government interference with speech. That's not what we're talking about.
The First Amendment only guarantees that the GOVERNMENT is prohibited from infringing upon our speech.
[Oh, and you probably want to look up the "ists" you're accusing people of being. Based upon your post, you are using the Beckian definitions. They are woefully incorrect.]
This isn't about Murdoch's political inclinations, though he may, in fact, side with some of "Fox's" views. It's about his financial inclinations. It's about prepping his audience for this summer's big new series - "Tea Party Rumbles!"
It is about having a product to sell, and a devoted auidence willing to purchase it. Beck, likes Hannity, works on Fox because he knows, just like the rest of them, that the Fox indoctrinaires will buy any POS that you sell to them. As long as you fly a flag, pay lip service to "out great soldiers" and Reagan, and whip them into hysteria, they'll plunk down the dollars anytime. Gold coins? Penny stocks? Lame-ass diet pills? A concert for the soldiers? Obama is a Muslim Marxist who hates America? It's all so much sliced cheese to peddle.
And that's what Fox is about - not politics, but peddling. They don't see that there is any downside for them in creating civil unrest. A few people may get killed, but millions more will be at home, too scared to go out. And a large percentage of them will be watching Fox. Ka-CHING.
Murdoch has bought the GOP by appropriating the media coverage. They hooked the party of the free stuff, and now they own them, lock stock and barrel. The Tea Parties? Created out of whole cloth as a Fox stageset. Did you see the photos at TPM of how small the gathering was? Most folk festivals are larger - or daylight crowds at a Six Flags theme park.
These guys are about creating and selling content. And political violence will be guaranteed high-demand content. They will probably peddle it on pay-per-view.
I'll believe he's really sincere in what he's saying when he goes to his local Social Security Administration and tells them that he no longer needs/wants his own personal, specially designed for him, "socialist-inspired" government handout.
" And no, the police did not cancel the event out of our concern for Coulter's safety."
Mr. Boehlert forgot to mention that in the article referenced Ottawa police spokesperson Alain Boucher said "We had safety concerns with the sheer number of people that were there...with different views on issues."
Keep twisting Eric. Why you keep lying...who knows? Your rhetoric of hate and dismissal is so typical it doesn't even phase me any more.
A retraction would be nice Eric.
A Canadian associated with the university informed Coulter of the country's laws that prohibit the use of hate speech, and students had already been exposed to Coulter's drivel from her other speeches on other Canadian college campuses. The students in Ottawa decided to protest, and Coulter caved all on her own. This is it in a nutshell.
Not one person/agency in Canada ever said Coulter was prohibited from speaking at any venue. Coulter saw that the students didn't like what she was going to say, and that they felt strongly enough to make their feelings noticed, so they protested, as is their right. There were also Coulter supporters at the same event. Coulter could have followed through with her appearance at the University of Ottawa, but like other "throw bricks and hide your hands" persons, she caved and then blamed the students. there isn't one shred of evidence that any of these students posed a credible threat to Coulter.
Mr. Boehlert reported the series of events the same way that others have reported it. The bias is in you, not him. No retraction is needed, and no retraction should be issued. And while you're demanding retractions, there is a long list of "news" organizations and blogs that need your attention: big government, gateway pundit, drudge, redstate, free republic, Fuchs Noose, rush limbaugh, alex jones, glen beck, and sean hannity, to begin with. I refuse to capitalize these names until they issue retractions for the thousands of comments they've made that have been 100% wrong.
The issue was never that she was prohibited. Those are your own erroneous words. Foolish words I might add. The Ottawa police suggested to Coulter that it was potentially unsafe. You need to find out what Boehlert was saying.
"We strongly suggested that this venue was not large enough to accommodate all the people that had attended," he said. "We had safety concerns with the sheer number of people that were there...with different views on issues."
"there isn't one shred of evidence that any of these students posed a credible threat to Coulter."
You are right, the police are not a credible source. Neither is Boehlert. Try again.
"Mr. Boehlert reported the series of events the same way that others have reported it. The bias is in you, not him."
Hmmm...show me who else reported please, I know your are probably a trustworthy person but links would be appreciated....if you can find them.
"there is a long list of "news" organizations and blogs that need your attention: big government, gateway pundit, drudge, redstate, free republic, Fuchs Noose, rush limbaugh, alex jones, glen beck, and sean hannity, to begin with."
I post where I can. I refute lies and propoganda where I see it. Sometimes it is factual, and sometimes it is my humble opinion. I'm not a journalist, but I'm glad that the internet provides a forum where I can test my ideas against others. It shows me my weaknesses and bolsters my strengths.
"I refuse to capitalize these names until they issue retractions for the thousands of comments they've made that have been 100% wrong."
I rarely see comments that are ABSOLUTELY 100% wrong. Maybe thats the difference, between you and me, I look for the truth, and i find it. You seem to look for what you want to see, and you find it. Good Luck.
Coulter was advised by the Canadian authorities that Canada does not have the same free speech laws as the United States. They told her that they had rules regarding hate speech and that based upon her past comments, she needed to be warned. Coulter chose to ignore the warning and had already made derisive comments to a Muslim student at the first university where she spoke. It upset the Canadians and they protested her appearance.
This has nothing to do with "liberals" in this country or with Coulter being denied "free speech." She was the guest of a foreign country and had been informed of their laws. She chose to ignore them. Has nothing to do with American politics. It was not a free speech issue. She didn't have the same rights in Canada.
Where does this end?
It doesn't have to be inevitable you know. :)
First you say:
I post where I can. I refute lies and propoganda where I see it. Sometimes it is factual, and sometimes it is my humble opinion.
Then you say:
Well at least you admit there will be a societal colapse. Validating Beck's suspicions, hardly your character.
It doesn't have to be inevitable you know. :)
Validating Beck's suspicions, huh. Sorry but; Beck's views are mostly propaganda, the rest are just the rantings of an out of control FM morning zoo jock who now has a Tee Vee show.
I will defend him however, if he was correct, or if his message was distorted to promote, in this case, MMFA's agenda.
The fact is, you have a 2 dimensional view on Beck and politics. You are right, he is wrong, MMFA is infallable, and Beck is never right.
You should attempt independent thought. It may hurt at first but with enough exercise it becomes habit.
I can't remember but I think, I commented on another post of yours that was clear plagarism... I'll see if I can find it.
Big friggin' deal.
And, speaking of "independent thought," if you didn't have right-wing hate radio fueling your thought processes, your skull would be far emptier than it is right now. And it's running on fumes right now.
Just because you pull crap off of blogs [and Wikipedia] and post them here as your own thoughts doesn't mean other people do.
BJ, is that you????
Bilbo usually has more original thoughts than you, and far more creative ways of expressing them. Perhaps you have been using the term, I highly doubt it though. The fact that you used it so promptly after Bilbo suggests you are lying though. The chance it is coincidence are to great.
"Just because you pull crap off of blogs [and Wikipedia] and post them here as your own thoughts doesn't mean other people do."
Where is your proof? Hmmmm....??? All i want is a little proof. PLEASE IT IS ALL I WANT, PROOF. I use google all the time, I read every link, and then I think about it.
Unlike you I don't read the previous posts, and copy what they said and try to pass it off as my own.
"BJ, is that you????"
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Your argument falls apart with the teeniest efforts at refuting it.
Try again, Zoo Jock and unstable radio zoo DJ are not the same thing. Bintx tried to use it after he saw Bilbos post.
Poser.
Come on Eric think of the children. Doesn't everyone have a right to read your book, why didn't you post it for free online, why do I have to buy it at Amazon?
....nevermind it looks like you can get a government subsidized copy here.
I don't think a person should be left penniless and begging for food. I don't think a person should get any book they want for free. I don't think a person should be given a free car. I don't think a person should have to worry about how much it costs when they need a doctor. I don't think a person should be handed a million dollars.
How is it possible for me to hold all of these positions at the same time, without even being inconsistent? Please, please don't come back until you've solved that riddle, even if it takes you forty years.
Good god, what a dullard.
"I don't think a person should be left penniless and begging for food. " Thats right everyone deserves free money and free food. Government subsidized.
"I don't think a person should get any book they want for free." So which books should they get for free?
"I don't think a person should be given a free car." But the government should subsidize new car purchases. (Cash for Clunkers.)
"I don't think a person should have to worry about how much it costs when they need a doctor." MAybe if the government gave doctors some of your free money and free food, paid for their cars, and gave them the books they needed to practice medicine; then maybe Doctors would work for free.
"I don't think a person should be handed a million dollars." So how much should they be handed since you said they should be given money above. How much free money are people entitled too?
"...without even being inconsistent?" Hmmmm...I don't even know what to say.
Entitlement is a vicious cycle.
Why are right-wing "jokes" not funny in the slightest?
And why do they usually place "lol" at the end of their unfunny jokes? Surely they can't be laughing out loud at their lack of wit.
OK, they could be.
Rupert Murdoch is destroying this country and it's time for people to wake up and see this and demand action against Fox before it's too late. (If it's not too late already).
If people haven't seen this yet, please watch it.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/tea-partier-victoria-jackson-too-crazy-fox
Oh, and here's Ann running her mouth and getting owned by a Canadian interviewer
The crowd numbered in hundreds, not thousands. The protesters were about fifty strong, unarmed, vocal but not violent.
Ann was probably insulted by the size of the hall. She was, reportedly, drinking at a nearby country club at the time she was supposed to start speaking. She had no intention of going to the hall. Faced with the possibility of disagreement, the slight chance that she would be charged with hate speech and open dislike from the students, she did what any coward would do, she ran away.
Just so she knows, that "hopey changey thingy" is working out just fine thank you very much!
She has claimed it is "time for another revolution", told her supporters to "reload", and now wants her supporters to harass citizens who are exercising their free speech. But her supporters don't believe she is inciting violence, unbelieveable.
These people are inciting violence and they don't care.
the AP report
The other one was anecdotal. I heard a woman talking about it happening to her on the radio.