Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Dem brownshirts have ABC reporter jailed

Someone remind me again how Bush is the one who is the heavy-handed tyrant?  Man, those Dems sure are thin-skinned these days, aren’t they?  Anywho, from ABC News:

Police in Denver arrested an ABC News producer today as he and a camera crew were attempting to take pictures on a public sidewalk of Democratic Senators and VIP donors leaving a private meeting at the Brown Palace Hotel.

Police on the scene refused to tell ABC lawyers the charges against the producer, Asa Eslocker, who works with the ABC News investigative unit.

It was two hours later when Denver police arrived to place Eslocker under arrest, apparently based on a complaint from the Brown Palace Hotel, a central location for Democratic officials.

During the arrest, one of the officers can be heard saying to Eslocker, “You’re lucky I didn’t knock the f..k out of you.”

Eslocker was released late today after posting $500 bond.

Eslocker and his ABC News colleagues are spending the week investigating the role of corporate lobbyists and wealthy donors at the convention for a series of Money Trail reports on ABC World News with Charles Gibson.

Exit question #1: Is it a violation of Godwin’s Law to compare these tactics to a certain party in 1930’s and 1940’s Germany?  Just sayin’…

Exit question #2:  Is this blatant disregard for the First Amendment, as well as the tendency to want to sue/jail a perceived political threat, what we can expect from Senator Hopenchange should he get elected?

August 27, 2008 Posted by | corruption, shameful, tolerance | 5 Comments

Liberal “compassion and tolerance” myth refuted by study

I’ve seen with my own eyes here on my blog, to say nothing of other right-of-center blogs, the foulness that the left can display.  If you’re one of my decent liberal visitors (e.g. Vince, jen, or HP, among others), then relax…I’m not talking about you.  I’m talking about stuff like this (from Michelle Malkin):

When I was on the book tour for Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild, critics predictably countered by playing the moral equivalence card. Show them how intolerant, racist, sexist, hateful, conspiratorial-minded, and violent the Left can be, and they sputter “B-b-b-b-b-ut the Right is just as bad.”

Spend anytime in the blogosphere and it’s clear that the two sides of the political galaxy are not created equal. One side burns effigies of American soldiers and craps on the American flag. The other does not. One side wraps itself in assassination chic. The other does not. One side indulges in vicious Sambo photoshops, rank religious bigotry, death wishes, gloating over the illnesses of public figures, and fill-in-the-blank derangement syndrome. The other does not.

Now comes fascinating statistical evidence that the Left is indeed more hateful than the Right. Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks writes in the WSJ today about annual surveys that shed light on just how unhinged liberals really are:

Do the data support the claim that conservatives are haters, while liberals are tolerant of others? A handy way to answer this question is with what political analysts call “feeling thermometers,” in which people are asked on a survey to rate others on a scale of 0-100. A zero is complete hatred, while 100 means adoration. In general, when presented with people or groups about which they have neutral feelings, respondents give temperatures of about 70. Forty is a cold temperature, and 20 is absolutely freezing.

In 2004, the University of Michigan’s American National Election Studies (ANES) survey asked about 1,200 American adults to give their thermometer scores of various groups. People in this survey who called themselves “conservative” or “very conservative” did have a fairly low opinion of liberals — they gave them an average thermometer score of 39. The score that liberals give conservatives: 38. Looking only at people who said they are “extremely conservative” or “extremely liberal,” the right gave the left a score of 27; the left gives the right an icy 23. So much for the liberal tolerance edge.

Some might argue that this is simply a reflection of the current political climate, which is influenced by strong feelings about the current occupants of the White House. And sure enough, those on the extreme left give President Bush an average temperature of 15 and Vice President Cheney a 16. Sixty percent of this group gives both men the absolute lowest score: zero.

To put this into perspective, note that even Saddam Hussein (when he was still among the living) got an average score of eight from Americans. The data tell us that, for six in ten on the hard left in America today, literally nobody in the entire world can be worse than George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

The BDS crowd often points to conservative Clinton-haters in the 1990s to argue that the Right was just as hateful as the Left is now. That, too, is not supported by statistical evidence. Brooks notes:

In 1998, Bill Clinton and Al Gore were hardly popular among conservatives. Still, in the 1998 ANES survey, Messrs. Clinton and Gore both received a perfectly-respectable average temperature of 45 from those who called themselves extremely conservative. While 28% of the far right gave Clinton a temperature of zero, Gore got a zero from just 10%. The bottom line is that there is simply no comparison between the current hatred the extreme left has for Messrs. Bush and Cheney, and the hostility the extreme right had for Messrs. Clinton and Gore in the late 1990s.

“Simply no comparison.”

Put that on a bumper sticker.

This is because liberals don’t think…they “feel” instead.

January 18, 2008 Posted by | moonbats, tolerance | Leave a comment

Libs singing a different tune

Yet again, the left’s “Good enough for me, but not for thee” attitude. Now they’re the ones who are “quacking”. From LaShawn Barber:

While President Bush and pro-amnesty members of Congress are pushing an unpopular immigration “reform” bill that would bestow American citizenship on millions of people who have no regard for America’s laws, liberal Democrats across the Washington region are increasingly complaining about overcrowded houses, noise, loitering and general public nuisance — all caused by illegal aliens.

These local liberals are in no mood for “celebrate diversity” chants.

Listening recently to frustrated folks call a local radio talk show to vent about illegal aliens loitering in front of stores and cramming into $400,000 houses in their neighborhoods, I wondered if those same liberals accused pro-enforcement Americans of being “nativists,” “xenophobes” and “racists” for complaining about the same problems.

Now that illegal aliens have migrated to their neighborhoods, such liberals have become pro-enforcement all of a sudden. (Has anyone checked the forecast for Hell to see if it’s snowing? – Ed.)

A Republican called in to say her Democratic friends labeled her a racist when she’d complain about illegal immigration (Hmmm…I seem to recall having heard the same thing before. – Ed.). She’d tell them something like, “You just wait until it happens to you. Then you’ll be singing a different tune.”

It’s happening to them, and they are singing a different tune. It turns out that liberals in half-a-million-dollar houses don’t like living next door to a single-family house filled to the brim with illegal aliens who park on the front lawn, throw trash everywhere and urinate outside.

Congressional Democrats don’t talk about such discontent among their constituents, but locals are keenly aware that the federal government has abdicated its role as immigration law enforcer. State and local governments are compelled to assume control.

Democrats on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors in Virginia may be ousted in November if they don’t deal with the growing problems. Rick Gordon, a homeland security consultant, told The Washington Post that “Enough is enough. These frauds need to go!”

He complained about an illegal alien boarding house in his neighborhood, and Supervisor Penelope Gross told him “The county’s hands were tied.” (Turque, Bill and Brulliard, Karin, “Overflowing Fairfax Homes Split Neighbors,” Washington Post, May 13, p. A1)

Gordon emphasized that his was no “right-wing Nazi community. … Everybody is a liberal Democrat.”

Local governments are forced to try to fix what the federal government will not. Last year, in the town of Herndon, the people removed the mayor and two town council members who voted for a day labor center. The town applied for and obtained permission to begin 287(g) immigration enforcement training, which will give local law enforcement the authority to carry out federal immigration laws.

Citizens in Manassas organized a group called “Help Save Manassas” to raise awareness of the negative effects of overcrowding and loitering.

Leesburg is considering adopting stricter regulations on overcrowding.

The Virginia House of Delegates passed a measure that would block public funds to charities and other organizations that provide services to illegal aliens.

Some black residents in the Brentwood section of Northeast Washington have gone on record to complain about illegal aliens — who litter and urinate — gathering near the Home Depot in their neighborhood.

Perhaps it will take a lot more overcrowding, loitering and public urination for congressional Democrats (and the Republican president) to understand the urgent need to enforce immigration laws currently on the books instead of writing new ones to reward lawbreakers with American citizenship.

Local liberals are learning a valuable and important lesson: Not all “diversity” is worth celebrating.

Why, how utterly “intolerant”!

June 1, 2007 Posted by | hypocrisy, illegal immigration, tolerance | 1 Comment

Liberals and tolerance…

…should rarely go in the same sentence, since it is a bigger myth than unicorns. From Texas Rainmaker:

How do you think the MSM would cover a story involving a conservative refusing to shake hands with Hillary Clinton simply because she was a woman or Joe Lieberman because he’s Jewish? I can almost guarantee there’d be a lot more coverage and certainly more specials on diversity or tolerance than there is when a liberal refuses to shake hands with a conservative candidate because he’s a Mormon.

Mitt Romney’s visit to New Hampshire started on a sour note Tuesday when a restaurant patron declared he would not vote for the Republican presidential contender because of his faith.

“I’m one person who will not vote for a Mormon,” Al Michaud of Dover shouted at Romney when the former Massachusetts governor approached him inside Harvey’s Bakery. Romney was kicking off the second of two day’s worth of campaign visits in the lead primary state.

Romney kept smiling as he asked, “Can I shake your hand anyway?”

Michaud replied, “No.”

Michaud later told reporters he was not “a right-winger,” alluding to some evangelical Christians who have compared Romney’s faith to a cult. Instead, Michaud stated he was “a liberal.”

Cultural diversity is a one way street for liberals. When they preach “tolerance” it’s tolerance of them, not tolerance from them…

As one of TR’s commenters point out, there was indeed MSM coverage of the incident. However, I think TR’s point wasn’t that the story wasn’t covered, but how it was covered. In other words, had a Republican done the same thing, the spin would have clearly been more pronounced.

But to me, the MSM bias or lack thereof isn’t the point. The point is that the myth of liberal “tolerance” is being exposed more and more each day.

May 31, 2007 Posted by | hypocrisy, tolerance | 1 Comment