Demonization And Other Examples Of Liberal Hypocrisy

I recall a bit from a Seinfeld episode that involved a bedroom technique known only as “the move.” It was apparently a very potent and successful “move,” indeed:

Elaine: I was with David *Putty* last night.

Jerry: Yeah, so.

Elaine: He did the move.

Jerry: What move?

Elaine: You know…*the* move.

Jerry: Wait a second. *My* move?

[Elaine nods].

Jerry: David Putty used *my* move?

Elaine: Yes, yes.

Jerry: Are you sure?

Elaine: Jerry! There is no confusing *that* move with any other move.

Jerry: I can’t believe it. He *stole* my move.

Elaine: What else did you tell [reaches over to slap Jerry] him. [does it

again] The two of you must have had *quite* a little chat!

Jerry: Oh, it wasn’t like that! I didn’t even mention you. You know, we

were in the garage. You know how garages are. They’re conducive to sex

talk. It’s a high-testosterone area.

Elaine: Because of all the pistons and the lube jobs?

Jerry: Well, I’m going down to that garage and telling him to stop doing it.

Elaine: Well, wait—wait a second.

Jerry: What?

Elaine: Isn’t that a little…rash?

Jerry: No! He stole my move!

Elaine: Yeah, but…*I* like the move.

Jerry: Yeah, but it’s like another comedian stealing my material.

Elaine: Well, he doesn’t even do it exactly the same. He–he–he uses a

pinch at the end instead of the *swirl*!

Jerry: Oh, yeah. The pinch. *I’ve* done the pinch. That’s not new.

Well, with that that long bit of introduction, the Democrats have their very own “move,” – an extremely potent and successful “move” – and they are clearly angry that Republicans are beginning to steal their move.

The Democrat’s “move” – by the way – is demonization.  It’s their move, they’ve used it to great effect for the last twenty years or so, and they don’t want their rivals using it.

Here’s a little story to illustrate the Democrat’s and their “move”:

It Takes One to Know One
“Harvard Law professor Mary Ann Glendon, one of the most prominent Catholic conservative intellectuals in the United States, announced yesterday that she would refuse a prestigious award from the University of Notre Dame rather than appear on the same platform on which President Obama is being awarded an honorary degree,” the Boston Globe reports.

The Globe notes that not all Catholics are unhappy with Notre Dame’s plan to give the president an honorary degree:

“There are some well-meaning people who think Notre Dame has given away its Catholic identity, because they have been caught up in the gamesmanship of American higher education, bringing in a star commencement speaker even if that means sacrificing their values, and that accounts for some of this,” said the Rev. Kenneth Himes, chairman of theology department at Boston College. “But one also has to say that there is a political game going on here, and part of that is that you demonize the people who disagree with you, you question their integrity, you challenge their character, and you brand these people as moral poison. Some people have simply reduced Catholicism to the abortion issue, and, consequently, they have simply launched a crusade to bar anything from Catholic institutions that smacks of any sort of open conversation.”

Now read this 2006 Associated Press dispatch:

Nearly 100 faculty members at Boston College have signed a letter objecting to the college’s decision to award Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice an honorary degree.

The letter entitled “Condoleezza Rice Does Not Deserve a Boston College Honorary Degree,” was written by the Rev. Kenneth Himes. . . .

“On the levels of both moral principle and practical moral judgment, Secretary Rice’s approach to international affairs is in fundamental conflict with Boston College’s commitment to the values of the Catholic and Jesuit traditions and is inconsistent with the humanistic values that inspire the university’s work,” the letter said.

Himes, it seems, is an expert on demonization.

Kenneth Himes lectures us: How DARE you do what I did to you!  There must be something morally WRONG with you!!!  Demonization is “OUR” move, and you can’t steal it!

Well, as Obama folk like to say, “YES, WE CAN!”

Being a liberal means being a hypocrite.  Hypocrisy defines liberals; their shriveled little souls swim in it.  And part of being a total hypocrite means having the pathological ability to be perfectly at home with their own massive contradictions.

For instance, liberals are “tolerant,” which means they lash out and demonize anyone who doesn’t think exactly like them – in the name of “tolerance.”

A few other examples of liberal hypocrisy:

Liberals support high taxes on the rich.  As long as it is understood that they have no expectation to pay such taxes themselves.  Ask pretty much anyone on Barack Obama’s cabinet.  Liberals like “Turbo Tax” Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle, Bill Richardson, Ron Kirk, Hilda Solis, Nancy Kelleher, and Kathleen Sebelius.  And that doesn’t include Congressional Democrats such as Charles Rangel – who is writing YOUR tax laws even as he cheats on HIS taxes.  And don’t forget the mantra from Rangel’s former fellow member of the House Ways and Means Committee William Jefferson: “FBI sting money hidden in freezers is NOT taxable.”

Liberals claim that it is the rich’s “patriotic duty” to pay a shockingly high percentage of total income taxes while simultaneously pandering to the clearly unpatriotic – by their own standard – 42% of Americans who pay NO federal income taxes at all.

Liberals claim that they are generous and conservatives are stingy; yet the facts demand the exact OPPOSITE conclusion.  The fact of the matter is that conservatives are FAR more “liberal” givers than liberalsConservatives give 30% more than liberals even though liberals earn slightly more.  And religious conservatives give THREE AND A HALF TIMES more of their income to charities than secular liberals.  If you’d like some particular cases, consider the loathsome lack of personal generosity displayed by Barack Obama and Joe Biden relative to the extremely generous conservatives like Dick Cheney, George Bush, and John McCain.

Liberals love racial diversity – as long as they can continue demonizing black conservatives such as Michael Steele, Clarence Thomas, and Condoleezza Rice as “Uncle Toms and Aunt Jemimahs” or “race traitors.”  Janeane Garafalo is completely free to be a hard-core racist, just as long as the minorities she viciously attacks are conservatives.  Newsweek Magazine –  in wholehearted agreement with Garafalo – literally argued that whites who don’t vote for Obama are racist.

In the same vein, liberals are pro-woman – just as long as “women” are defined as “liberal feminist”; otherwise, they hand out the Sarah Palin treatment (e.g., “Palin: Bad Mother, Bad Woman”).  Ultimately, of course, Sarah Palin is a “bad mother” for allowing her baby born with Down Syndrome to live.

Liberals stand for the helpless and oppressed victim: as long as that helpless and oppressed victim isn’t a baby having his brains sucked out.  Meanwhile liberals attack conservatives as not caring about the poor, even though – as has already been pointed out – conservatives are in fact FAR more generous than liberals (example 1, example 2).

Liberals continually decry the “rightwing smear machine” even as they have hard-core hate sites such as, Media Matters, and the Daily Kos – which DWARF anything even remotely compatible on the right.   The primary funding comes from documented Nazi collaborator George Soros, an American-sovereignty-undermining trans-nationalist who has made his billions undermining currencies all over the world – including America’s.  And his friends have been just as bad.  And Soros and friends such as Peter Lewis, Steven Bing, and Herbert and Marion Sandler have used their massive fortunes to ensure that NOBODY smears like the left: think “General Betray Us.”

Liberals “interpret” the Constitution to find “penumbras and emanations” that they allege mandate a constitutional and sacred right to abortion on demand, but twist and contort the English language until the 2nd Amendment doesn’t give the people the right to bear arms.

Liberals demand socialized medicine.  Michael Moore made a ton of money demonizing America’s privatized system and claiming that Cuba’s socialized medicine was better; yet when that fat SOB needed heart surgery, he elected to go to Cleveland rather than Cuba.  Even more glaring, Belinda Stronach of the Canadian Parliament opposed even allowing private medicine in Canada; but when she was diagnosed with breast cancer she came to the United States to obtain the very thing she denied her fellow citizens from having.

As to the death penalty for convicted murderers, liberals argue that inserting a hypodermic needle into the vein of a death row inmate constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, yet insist that sucking the  brains out of a viable baby whose head is sticking out of a birth canal is compassionate.

They also say that a 13 year old girl should be able to have an abortion without her parents’ consent, then tell parents that they face jail if they don’t ensure that that same 13 year old girl doesn’t miss school (with attendance being the barometer for public school funding).

Liberals demand that they be able to teach issues such as homosexuality in the guise of open-mindedness and diversity, but come absolutely unglued if any school board so much as suggest that evolution is only a theory rather than a law, let alone present any alternative to evolution whatsoever.

On the subject of evolution as it relates to morality, liberals denounce any dependence on the natural law (grounded in a transcendent Creator God) as the only basis for objective morality, and then impose one utterly subjective moral norm after another.  In so doing, they literally subjective natural law and objectivize their own highly subjective moral preferences.

Liberals demand that all children go to government schools and fight any effort to provide vouchers to parents, and then send their own children to private schools.  For all of liberals’ indignant outrage concerning “the children,” the fact is that the teachers’ unions are far more important than the education of children.   Barack Obama ensured that children like Marquis Greene couldn’t go to his daughters’ Sidwell Friends School.

Liberals take private jets to denounce people for being polluters.

Liberals claim that whether the Antarctic ice sheet grows or whether it shrinks, it still proves global warming.

Liberals lampooned President Bush for his verbal gaffes, and yet idolize the “sublime speaking ability” of a man who can’t so much as say, “Good morning” without reading from a teleprompter screen.  Barack Obama has already used his teleprompter FAR more in just his first 100 days than George Bush did in his entire 8 year term.

Liberals repeatedly (falsely) claimed that Jefferson said “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism” when conservatives attacked their lack of patriotism.  They were terribly upset with any insinuation that they might be unpatriotic – because when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid proclaimed defeat in Iraq (QUOTE: “I believe that this war is lost” UNQUOTE) even as our troops were in the field fighting to prevail, he was surrendering as a “patriot.”  And when John Murtha proclaimed Marines who turned out to be innocent of murderous war crimes in Haditha, his demonization of our Marines was “patriotic.” Now, of course, Democrats are all over themselves labeling Republican opposition to their socialist agenda as “unpatriotic.”

As for liberals’ view on patriotism, sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words – when that picture is a cartoon drawn by Ted Rall:


Let’s see: racial hatred directed at white males.  Check.  Cynicism of the patriotism that would make a young man fight for his country.  Check.  Mockery of religion.  Check.  Contempt for America as a country of suicide bombers.  Check.

Or another liberal cartoon.  America as viewed through the warped lenses of the liberal New York Times: the Statue of Liberty swinging a whip at the poor, tired, huddled masses.


As liberals now demand that conservatives stop using “their move,” realize that they will NEVER stop using it themselves.  It is simply who they are.  So we might as well sick their own dog on them – and let us make sure that dog is foaming at the mouth when it bites them back.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

21 Responses to “Demonization And Other Examples Of Liberal Hypocrisy”

  1. hl Says:

    With so much hypocrisy, double speak and so many lies I wonder if they no longer have a conscience. How do they live with themselves?

    Michael, I don’t know if you read this but it is a real humdinger!

  2. bydesign001 Says:

    It is a sad testament that so many do not see liberals for whom they really are.

    Being African American and growing up in an AA community, these days I find myself recalling my seventh grade history teacher. In fact, he comes to mind quite often as I watch the Obama administration in action.

    He defined liberals “as one who will allow you to get ahead and to advance so long as you do not get ahead or advance past him/her.” For some reason that definition stuck in my head. This is the same man that informed me that as we were living in a Democracy at that time (1967), the next step would be fascism then communism.

    As we live through this disastrous administration, I realize that truer words were never spoken.

    Liberals are a bunch of hypocrites and it pains me that so many of my AA brothers and sisters fail to see it.

    Oh they are fine, if you want to sit on your backside and collect $200 a month. They will give you that check to keep you down in a minute all the while telling you that they want the best for you.

    Even worse, we now find ourselves with a generation of young Americans who are spoiled, lazy and willing to accept a check while sacrificing their rights and freedom just so they can play computer games and watch music videos all day long.

    I often wonder myself “how do they live with themselves?”

  3. Michael Eden Says:

    Thank you for sharing your teacher’s comments; he was a very wise man. Wouldn’t it be nice if teachers like that were still in the trenches?

    I have several black friends at my church. Your views strike me as quite similar to theirs. One of those friends is a 93 year old man named John. His daughter takes care of him, but I’ve told him repeatedly that if he ever needs help to call me. The man is a treasure on every level. Men (and women) of his grace and dignity are more rare than Hope-sized diamonds.

    Here’s a guy who I’m sure saw – and likely experienced – some ugly things. But you would never know it. He is a CHRISTIAN FIRST, and his soul swims in the Scripture. Bitterness was like water off a duck’s back with him.

    But bitterness seems to abound with far too many in the African American community – and what seems to go hand in hand in that is, “Where’s mine?” There’s a joke about the difference between Europeans and Americans that seems relevant: an American riding the bus sees a guy in an expensive luxury-performance car and says, “Some day I’LL drive a car like that!” The European in the same situation says, “Someday that SOB will be riding the bus, just like me!”

    Being conservative isn’t about melatonin levels: it’s about values. It is about looking at the Bible and placing yourself under it; looking at the Constitution and understanding its greatness; and as a result of BOTH pursuing freedom and liberty as a responsible member of the civic society. And it is about recognizing that big government invariably becomes a God-substitute. I have no sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus.

    In the 19th century, a great man saw the squalor and filth of London’s slums and tried to help these poorest of citizens help themselves. Their living conditions were rather like a cesspool. He told them, nobody will help you as long as you live and act like animals. But if they see you begin to try to clean up these slums, they will see you differently, and would begin to help with resources. The call to self-responsibility worked, and the wealthy DID see the change and DID provide resources. I wish more leaders in the black community would take up that call, rather than wallow in blame, reverse-racism, bitterness, and demands for more of the welfare that you mention.

    God bless you and keep you safe, bydesign. I know you are like a lemming fighting against the surge. Keep up the good fight!

  4. bydesign001 Says:

    I agree with you Michael on so many levels.

    As an African American female, I have experienced some situations in life that were none too pleasant, but I am sure that they are nothing compared with that of your friend John who has blessed many with his presence of 93 years. God bless him.

    I will not waste energy being bitter and angry, as they are under rated. This is where faith comes in. God gives us the strength to overcome all obstacles, if people would just give him/her a chance.

    If AAs would take the time to look deep into their souls, they too would realize that many of the values we hold dear are more in line with Conservatives, not liberals. We are spiritually connected and for good reason. Many would also realize that by worshipping Obama as they do, they have sold their soul for a false God as well.

    I believe that in time God meant for the United States to have a person of color in the White House. The key words here are “in time.” I also believe that if we try to force God’s hand, we lose the game.

    Too many in our community submit to the “where’s mine” mentality, again highly under rated, self-serving and detrimental to one’s existence. I thank God that my children get it. I raised them with the understanding that nothing is free and hard work has its rewards. Admittedly, it took one or two to “really” get it, but they got it.

    I recall the riots right after Dr. King was killed in the mid-60’s. It can be said that AA leaders and liberals alike took advantage of a good crisis. I remember attending a meeting with my mother and hearing an AA Congressman and crew preach the “burn baby burn” speech. They would go through the community informing AAs that “it was time for us to get our due.”

    To the misfortune and potential demise of many thriving communities, too many fell for the empty rhetoric as they still do today.

    As a teenager, I witnessed honest working folk quit their jobs for a monthly check and those who never worked a day in their lives suddenly felt vindicated purely based upon this liberal hypocrisy. Michael, this is nothing more than brainwashing and those who were not brainwashed were freeloaders looking for an easy way out.

    The result is that generations later, the die has been cast. Those bitter AAs we see today on television are the offspring of those who rioted in the streets of American and took the easy way out. Thus, both parties are guilty of liberal hypocrisy.

    Meanwhile, liberals laugh their way to bank while thriving on and breeding weakness, ignorance, bitterness and modern day slavery within our community. They have tainted our education system through misinformed history books and socialist rhetoric in an effort to further disable anyone who would dare challenge their position.

    While many blame the government for everything that is wrong in their lives, they make no effort to rise out of the ashes of their circumstance. They refuse to think and seek out knowledge on their own thereby further allowing liberal hypocrisy to blind them to that which is the beauty of America.

    In the United States, one has the freedom of choice and opportunity to do better. The doors will open if we knock. We both know this Michael as do your friend John.

    While I am not a millionaire, I am no longer that poor little girl who grew up in Brownsville, Brooklyn because I made a choice, one of which was not to listen to anyone tell me that it was alright to sit home and collect a welfare check.

    For me that was never an option, just more lies and deception courtesy of liberals who today continue to bamboozle the AA community by telling them conservatives are racists (another liberal lie).

    I blame our AA leaders, starting with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

    My daughter-in-law who frequents the same hairdresser as the wife of Rev. Al Sharpton overheard a conversation last spring during the primaries. Sharpton’s wife, who at the time was speaking with her hairdresser said that Rev. Sharpton was not thrilled with Barack Obama. He did not trust or like him. Of course, Sharpton’s wife mentioned also that her husband offered his services to Obama during the campaign. Her exact words were that Barack Obama said he did not need Al Sharpton.

    Then I recall seeing Rev. Jackson speak on a few occasions between March and June before last summer’s well-publicized incident and I got the distinct feeling that Jackson was not exactly pro-Obama either.

    In fairness to Jackson, I believe Jackson tried to voice his concerns, but was quickly shut down by many in the community starting with his son. And also in fairness to Jackson and Sharpton, I do not believe for a minute that they envied this man or the passing of their “so-called glory days.” Those excuses were nothing more than acts of liberal hypocrisy.

    By liberals sending the message that they no longer needed long term AA leaders such Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, they shut everyone else down who would have challenged them.

    The fact is that both of these men had their reasons for feeling the way that they did. I am mature enough and smart enough also to realize that they were not the only ones in the AA community who felt as they did, but all remained silent.

    Why? Because Obama is considered AA is party of it, but AAs have been spoon fed the “where’s mine” and that darn “it was time for us to get our due” mentality for so long, it is second nature for many and speaking publicly against Obama would have been their downfall. In other words, AA leaders such as Sharpton and Jackson and others who failed to speak out sold the community and the nation out for their own self-interest. In so doing, they have committed a grave injustice to this nation.

    Michael I thank you taking the time to engage me. God bless you.

    Peace and blessings,

  5. Michael Eden Says:

    You are indeed a wise and noble woman, and your children were fortunate beyond measure to have you as their mother. I have been blessed to have such a mother, also. And she shaped my values and pointed me in the right direction (always toward Jesus Christ).

    Years back, I was beaten by four black men. I heard a woman shout for help, and ran to her aid – only to get jumped. We can look to the inner city gangs to see that there are a lot of terrible black people out there. And we should also realize that there are a lot of terrible WHITE people. It is always better to look for the good rather than characterize an entire group of people as evil or racist. Goodness and decency has nothing whatsoever to do with the color of one’s skin, but only with the content of one’s character. People who share God-ordained moral values should flock together.

    The tragic thing is that Martin Luther King’s movement was hijacked by people who didn’t deserve to carry his shoes. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton took crying “racist” into a business (in my opinion), and enriched themselves threatening to demonize people and businesses unless they got a big payoff (hefty donations to the organizations they lead, along with a few token concessions). Too many other “civil rights” leaders have used the “race card” again and again to divide the culture and use their power to label people to advance their own agendas and power. I personally think that the elite and entrenched “civil rights leaders” are the problem, not the solution. They are also the most reliable members of the far left in social policy. They are even willing to equate “being black” with “being gay” to advance the radical homosexual rights agenda.

    And, sadly, that campaign has worked for too many in the black community. I frankly don’t know why. Perhaps its human nature to want to wallow in bitterness and point the fingers of blame at everyone but oneselves. When someone wants to inflame the dark side of passions, it always seems to be a down-hill road.

    No one should trust Obama – and that includes the black community. Obama will embrace his “blackness” when it suits him, and distance himself from it when it suits him. He’s ultimately a hard core radical liberal – and that agenda will hurt ultimately black people as much as it will hurt everyone else.

    I, too, have looked forward to the election of the first black conservative to the presidency.

    Sadly, that candidate will be hatefully demonized by the left – and by the “civil rights leaders.” There’s nothing wrong with calling Condoleezza Rice or Clarence Thomas “Aunt Jemimahs and Uncle Toms” and “race traitors.”

    As a strong, independent, GOD-FEARING member of the African-American community, bydesign, you are worth TEN white conservatives. You are an example of our greatest treasure. Let me advance a thought:

    In Christian missions, it used to be white people going to Africa, converting a few souls, and then dressing them up like white people in some enclave. No longer. Now mission organizations realize that the local/native/ethnic Christians are the REAL answer to outreach. And the church has exploded, as people who understand their own cultures and know how to preach Christ to them bring the gospel in a way no “white missionary” ever could. And God bless them all.

    There needs to be a conservative movement to fund black leaders who share your values, and start a movement from within the African American community. The GOP tends to ignore blacks because they are so overwhelmingly Democrat. But conservatism has a power that transcends race if the message is only allowed to be presented.

    What do you think about employing the successful new Missions model to conservative blacks who want to lead their communities to self-empowering transformation?

  6. D Says:

    You know, it’s interesting. I was doing a Google search with the keywords, “What does Jesus say about demonization” and this blog post came up high in the search result. And I’m reading through it, and I find this:

    “Being a liberal means being a hypocrite. Hypocrisy defines liberals; their shriveled little souls swim in it.”

    So… your idea of liberals not liking others taking their “tactic” of demonization is to… well – demonize them? That’s quite an interesting take on it.

    Or take this statement:

    “Liberals support high taxes on the rich.”

    American has the lowest tax rate of ANY industrialized country. Did you know that? Even the rich in American pay the lowest rate among industrialized countries. And a progressive tax structure is quite in keeping with Jesus’ teachings. Look at what He said:

    ” 41Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins,[a]worth only a fraction of a penny.[b]
    43Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.” – Mark 12 (NIV)

    Methinks the “rich” can afford to pay more, as they benefit more from what taxes offer them – military security, transportation infrastructure, etc.

    Or what about the idea that rich Christians should sell all their possessions?

    ” 21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

    Oh, and let’s not forget that it has been conservatives/Republicans that developed the “Southern strategy” of dividing Americans by race, opposing integration, using “wedge” social issues like gay marriage, feminism and abortion to divide people rather than unite them. Funny – Jesus was the kind of guy who actually broke bread and ate with the “sinners” of His day, yet conservatives have done a darn good job of demonizing people too.

    “Affirmative action means black people will take white peoples’ jobs!”

    Hello? That’s NOT demonization?!?!

    Ronald Reagan kicked off his Presidential campaign in Philadelphia MS, a few miles from the spot where black folks were brutally treated by whites. That’s quite the symbolic statement, especially since, as Lee Atwater stated, that conservatives couldn’t say things like, “nigger” anymore, so they’d use euphemisms like “State’s rights.” What did Reagan talk about that day?

    States rights.

    Seems to me you’ve got a big old plank in your eye, while pointing out your brothers’ speck. Conservatives do demonization too, and have done it quite well, for quite a LONG time. The Southern strategy was developed by Pat Buchanan in the early 1970’s.

    “He who is without sin cast the first stone.”

    Looks like you already throwing them. Haven’t we “all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”?

    Put the stones down, dude.

  7. Michael Eden Says:

    As usual, I’ve got another leftist with his logic twisted into a pretzel. Where he’s so messed up, it’s hard to know where to begin.

    First of all (although I never wrote about it and frankly don’t know why I’d be high on a list of “What did Jesus say about demonization?” articles), Jesus actually did plenty of demonizing – primarily at demons whom he threw out of people. It is also a fact – and please check this – that Jesus spoke and taught more about “HELL” than anyone in the Bible.

    So you incorrectly think Jesus didn’t say tough things about those who opposed Him, and then you look at my words based on your now-shown-to-be false premise. And it is your further contention that – by pointing out the left’s demagoguery and demonizing – that I am therefore as bad as they are. Just like if someone comes into my house and shoots me, and then I shoot him, I would be just as bad as my attacker on your logic.

    Let’s look at that. After the killing of an abortion doctor who killed 60,000 fetuses, the left WILDLY and VICIOUSLY attacked conservatives – and particularly people like Bill O’Reilly – as having literally helped murder him. Let’s look at a list:
    Weekly Standard, The Campaign to Blame O’Reilly for Tiller’s Death
    Newsbusters, Liberals Blame O’Reilly for Tiller Murder, Silent on Military Recruiter Shooting
    “Bill O’Reilly’s hit piece on Dr. Tiller is a training tape for Christian Fundamentalist Terrorists.” Huffington Post, Christian Fundamentalist Terrorism
    Huffinton Post, Domestic Terrorism Strikes in the Assassination of Dr. George Tiller

    Let’s look at one quote that I came across – which is by no means worse than what you’d find on the links above:

    “I felt just sick today when I saw the bulletin about the murder of Dr. George Tiller.Sicker still when I saw the “sympathy” letter issued by officials at Operation Rescue, the virulent anti-abortion organization that dogged this poor man for the past two decades. The statement said, “We pray for Mr. Tiller’s family.”They had better say a few prayers for their own souls. They had better pray for forgiveness for relentlessly working to make this man a target.” Huffinton Post, No Mercy

    Now, the left just came out and demonized conservatives who are pro-life. In their presentation, to believe that abortion is wrong is tantamount to having participated in the murder of an abortion doctor.

    It’s shocking. Do these liberals apply the same twisted logic to themselves when a black Muslim murders an Army recruiter in Little Rock, saying he did it because of what the United States has done to Islam? Do they say, “Oh, we’ve demonized the military and we showed all those Abu Ghraib pictures, and we’ve called waterboarding ‘torture,’ and we claimed Gitmo was the worst abuser of human rights since the Gulags, and how we supported boycotts of military recruiting centers – and now we have blood on our hands? NO!

    It’s just blatant, hateful demagoguery and demonization, and it’s just the latest example of what goes on all the time from the left. And we conservatives raise the similarities between the Tiller murder and the Army recruiter murder just to show how hypocritical the left is.

    And I can talk about how Obama demonized Bush for his Gitmo policies, his use of rendition, his use of military commissions, his use of enhanced interrogation, and MANY other policies that Obama has now reserved to himself to continue using. How DARE Obama do that! As an example of the left’s demonizing, see my article here.

    I can point to Nancy Pelosi demonizing Republicans for enhanced interrogation when we now know SHE approved of it – and then she went out to demonizing the CIA rather than admit her own lies.

    And you want to argue that it’s wrong of me to point that out and yell, “HYPOCRISY!”

    And you have the balls to try to say that anyone who points that out is as bad as the “demonizers”?

    Then you go off on some horrifying tangent that has nothing whatsoever to do with the article you are commenting on – the subject of taxes. First of all, you don’t realize that we have a two-tiered system that no other nation has: federal AND state income taxes, and you are only looking at the federal rate. Nor does it seem to occur to you that the lower taxes that Americans have paid is very much the reason why we’ve had the HIGHEST STANDARD in the world for decades – but rather you argue that we should be like the countries who have LOWER STANDARDS than we. And you most certainly don’t realize that we in fact have the HIGHEST CORPORATE TAXES in the world.

    You offer me this “reasoning”:
    “Methinks the “rich” can afford to pay more, as they benefit more from what taxes offer them – military security, transportation infrastructure, etc.”

    Because you apparently believe that a rich citizen gets FAR more “military security” than a poor one. You think that the rich have their very own infantry divisions assigned just for them, while if Kim Jong-Il attacked a poor section of the country, Uncle Sam would just let it slide. Or that there are entire highways specifically reserved for the rich which the poor cannot use (probably millions of miles of them, too). And you don’t seem to care that the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay for 39.9 percent of all federal individual income taxes. And the top 25% paid 86.3 percent of the total tax burden. Is it seriously your contention that the top 1% of taxpayers benefit more from our “military security” than the 40 percent of Americans who don’t pay ANY federal income tax?

    Then you just descend in a Marxist ramble from there. Jesus was a liberal who came to earth to demand higher taxes on the bourgeoisie.

    You also descend into the very hypocrisy that you accuse me of. You talk about the big old plank in MY eye. What about the whole tree that is in yours? If you think that I’m somehow wrong for decrying the monstrous demonization that I just got through documenting from the left, then how on earth do you justify yourself for coming down on me for mine? You, the guy that just implicitly called Reagan a racist for merely having once held a campaign event “a few miles” from a spot where white people once apparently did something bad to black folks?

    You people on the left make me sick every time you come up with your “Let’s don’t point fingers now.” You did this stuff for EIGHT unrelenting years. And now you have the audacity (there’s another Obama word) to get on your damn moral high horse because I did exactly what YOU spent years doing? YOU TAUGHT ME! I”M FOLLOWING YOUR EXAMPLE!

    So just file yourself under that quote of mine you didn’t care for.

  8. bydesign001 Says:

    In response to D,

    Michael the truth is out there. Liberal hypocrisy remains just a doorstep away.

    Not exactly sure where to start…hmmmm…

    D said: “Methinks the ‘rich’ can afford to pay more, as they benefit more from what taxes offer them – military security, transportation infrastructure, etc.”

    Is that saying that the rest of us should be allowed to skirt the benefits offered TO ALL AMERICANS? I guess under the Democratic Party’s agenda, that is exactly what that would mean.

    However, the Democrats are telling half-truths again. As they continue spending, they assure the ignorant, foolish and the illiterate that the rich will foot the bill. Well guess what D?
    There aren’t enough of them to go around, so that leaves you and me. So now, who do you think will have to pick up the tab. Take a moment. Think now. US!!!!

    And D also said “Oh, and let’s not forget that it has been conservatives/Republicans that developed the “Southern strategy” of dividing Americans by race….”

    The Republican Party was founded on the basis of principles invoked by Abraham Lincoln “himself recurred to the principles of the American Founding, specifically the Declaration of Independence, so we can say that the principles of the Republican Party are the principles of the nation.”

    In fact, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. himself was a Republican. Furthermore, it is the Democrats who fought tooth and nail against the civil rights movement, the right for people of color to vote. It is the Democrats who committed the ugliest of offenses throughout history against people of color, but that part has been omitted from the history books and even the movies.

    The Republican Party was created in response to the growing crisis that arose surrounding America’s public opinion on the issue of slavery itself and the reality that the nation had drifted away from the principles of the Founding Fathers in respect to slavery.

    “While the Founders had tolerated slavery out of necessity, many Americans, especially within the Democratic Party, had come to accept the idea that slavery was a “positive good.” While Thomas Jefferson, the founder of what evolved into the Democratic Party, had argued that slavery was bad not only for the slave but also for the slave owner, John C. Calhoun, had turned this principle on its head: slavery was good not only for the slave holder, but also for the slave….”

    The Democratic Party are the masters and creators of deceit, illusion, hypocrisy and demonization. They are further guilty of re-writing history and its books while at the same time keeping the ignorant in the dark and totally illiterate.

    And let us not forget that the birth of the Ku Klux Klan was a gift from the Democratic Party, criminal acts, reign of terror, etc.

    “…The Democratic Party’s war against African-Americans continued after the Civil War (which many Democrats in fact opposed, often working actively to undercut the Union war effort). Democrats, both north and south fought the attempt to implement the equality for African-Americans gained at such a high cost. This opposition was often violent. Indeed, the Ku Klux Klan operated as the de facto terrorist arm of the national Democratic Party during Reconstruction.

    Democrats defeated Reconstruction in the end and on its ruins created Jim Crow. Democratic liberalism did not extend to issue of race. Woodrow Wilson was the quintessential “liberal racist,” a species of Democrat that later included the likes of William Fulbright of Arkansas, Sam Ervin of North Carolina, and Albert Gore, father of Al, of Tennessee.

    In the 1920s, the Republican Party platform routinely called for anti-lynching legislation. The Democrats rejected such calls in their own platforms. When FDR forged the New Deal, he was able to pry Blacks away from their traditional attachment to the Party of Lincoln. But they remained in their dependent status, Democrats by virtue of political expediency, not principle.”

    If Americans would open their eyes, step out the box donned for them by the Democratic Party and think for themselves, they would immediately recognize the ugly reality/truths that continue to be the Democratic Party.

    “… when Strom Thurmond, the praise of whom landed Sen. Lott in hot water, ran a segregationist campaign in 1948, he ran as a Dixie-CRAT, not a Dixie-CAN. When he lost, he went back to being a Democrat. He only repudiated his segregationist views when he later became a Republican.

    Even the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which supposedly established the Democrats’ bona fides on race, was passed in spite of the Democrats rather than because of them. Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen pushed the bill through the Senate, despite the no-votes of 21 Democrats, including Gore Sr. and Robert Byrd, who remains a powerful force in the Senate today. In contrast, only four Republicans opposed the bill, mostly like Barry Goldwater on libertarian principles, not segregationist ones.”

    Indeed, the case of Sen. Byrd is instructive when it comes to the double standard applied to the two parties when it comes to race. Even those Democrats who have exploited the Lott affair acknowledge that he is no racist. Can the same be said about Sen. Byrd, who was a member of the KKK and who recently used the “n” word on national TV?

    “Ah, but this is all in the past,” say the Democrats. “Now we push a pro-African-American agenda.” But the reality differs significantly from the claim.”


    “Take the issue of education. The single biggest obstacle to the achievement of true equality in the United States is not poverty, but education. If Democrats sincerely wished to help the minority children on whose behalf they claim to labor, they would embrace school choice to help such children escape the trap of sub-standard schools. But that would offend the teachers’ unions upon which the Democrats depend for financial and “in-kind” support. So as has often been the case with the group politics of the Democratic party, African-American interests are sacrificed to other groups who have more pull.”

    Source: The Democratic Party’s Legacy of Racism.

  9. Michael Eden Says:

    That was a very interesting read. In fact I read it through twice. A lot of good stuff.

    The “Southern Strategy” was put into effect by Nixon. Thanks to liberal propagandists, it has been held around our necks ever since, when the hard-core racism of Democrats during the same period was whitewashed.

    You want a genuine hard core racist, read up on “the father of the progressive movement,” Woodrow Wilson.

    As president of Princeton, he turned away black applicants, regarding their desire for education to be “unwarranted.”

    He made Jim Crow laws segregating blacks official Washington policy, and told one protesting black delegation that “segregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen.”

    Why is it that Democrat racist sins must be tolerated or expunged, while Republican ones must be demonized for generations?

    Why is it that Sonia Sotomayor saying that a Latina woman would render a “better conclusion” than a white male to be overlooked – with the people who try to point it out deemed as “racist” themselves – when Sen. George Allen was destroyed merely for using the byzantine and repeatedly redefined word “macaca.” Why does Sotomayor get “rephrase herself” when Allen wasn’t? Why was it that the Democrat who ended up taking Allen’s seat having a big Confederate flag up in his garage irrelevant?

    We see this double standard just over and over and over again. And I frankly want to gouge out someone’s eyes every single time I see it used to attack conservatives yet again.

  10. bydesign001 Says:

    There is a difference between the Republicans and Democrats. The Republicans have learned and are learning from their mistakes. The Democrats makes excuses, deny, blame others and dismiss the issues. The Democratic Party is truly the party of “Do As I Say, Not as I Do.”

    See yesterday’s blog entitled, OBAMA AND PLANTATION POLITICS.

    The Republican Party would never be allowed to practice this way. Yes no one sees it when the Democrats do it.

    It is high time we hold the Democratic Party accountable. The double standards must come to an end once and for all.

  11. Michael Eden Says:

    Great article, bydesign. And a great point.

    What Democrats are doing is nearly identical to what Arab dictators have been doing: namely, they are oppressing the country even as they offer a scapegoat for who the ignorant should blame (rather than themselves).

    In their case it is the Jews. In the Democrats’ case it is the Republicans and conservatives.

    Arabs have been demonizing Jews as the source of their people’s impoverished existence since the 1940s. “Palestinians are suffering because the Jews won’t give them land!” No, Palestinians are suffering because the Arabs who have 99-plus-percent of the land won’t give ANY of it for a Palestinian state. They would rather the people suffer in squalid camps to keep them maddened with hate – and then use that hate for their political purposes.

    Decades of the worst kind of idiocy and corruption have been blamed on the Jews – when the REAL fury should be directed at the Arab demagogues in power.

    How much of the $3.27 trillion stimulus went to “the poor”? Virtually none of it. Democrats threw away this country’s economic future to impose socialism and reward their supporters with pork.

  12. V Says:

    You fascist whores. There is no real difference between the democrat and republican parties. They both lie, they both seek out scapegoats to point fingers at, and the politicians on both sides are nothing more than the talking heads of a puppet government.

  13. V Says:

    Awaiting Moderation? HAHAHA. You shouldn’t tell people how to think. Keeping the masses ignorant is the governments/censored medias job. People shouldn’t be told how to think but instead to think at all!

  14. Michael Eden Says:

    Well, I suppose if someone is going to call me a “whore,” it might as well be “fascist whore” – which is a rather interesting term:

    “You will mount me now, by order of the fuhrer! And you will pay the rate dictated by the Party!

    I look at what the Democrats did with the stimulus (which 2 out of 218 Republicans voted for); with health care (which no Republicans voted for in either the House or Senate); with cap-and-trade; and am amazed that you cannot identify no differences between the two parties.

    Let me ask you: did you want the stimulus or not? Or do you live in a world where you both want it and don’t want it at the same time? Do you want ObamaCare or not? Or do you want it even while you oppose it?

    Kind of hard to take a guy who “thinks” like you seriously.

  15. Michael Eden Says:

    I think “Awaiting moderation” was invented for your ilk.

  16. bydesign001 Says:

    Happy New Year Michael.

    Typical of the left, the name calling begins when one has no valid argument. It’s all about distraction from the facts and blaming others for one’s failings, as can be noted by the Obama administration and Democrats this past year.

    True, “fascist whore” is an interesting term especially coming from one who has been fully indoctrinated, but extremely misdirected.

    In furtherance, the left has lost sight of the fact that once the name calling and attacks begin, their argument is lost, moot, a waste of energy and pointless.

    It is pointless to argue with the clueless.

  17. bydesign001 Says:

    Michael Reference your June 5, 2009 response, I apologize that it has taken me six months to respond.

    It’s all about indoctrination and living one’s life in a box aka the comfort zone which is why the Democrats much like the Arabs are so good at demonization.

    It is a huge step for a man or a woman to take that giant leap out of the box or one’s comfort zone. Even worse is that many will not even make the effort.

    How unfortunate it is that so many simply do not get it or at least are unwilling to.

  18. Michael Eden Says:

    I have a book entitled, “O, Jerusalem.” One of the things that it shows is that several of the Arab countries that attacked Israel didn’t really want to – in spite of their previous screaming rhetoric. Rather, they were dragged into the fight BY their demonizations. They had really only intended to make Israel and Jews the foil for their own (i.e. the Arabs’) failure to lead, to end corruption, to have a decent economy, to create decent lives for their people, etc. But their own people who had heard the demagoguery forced them to go ahead.

    There are two ways to lead: with the truth, and for the people; and through lies, and for one’s own political power. Sadly, the Democrats have long-since abandoned the first way.

    Conservatives need to hold the GOP’s feet to the fire to force them to stay with the truth, and the people (I believe that as the Democrats have become more and more dishonest and focused on their own power, the Republicans have moved toward the Democrat model).

    Then there’s another significant thing, which you are getting at: that worldview is at the heart of this. A worldview can be correct, and understand the world as it really is; or it can be bogus, and provide someone with theories that are untrue and even depraved. The Democrats are solidly in the thrall of a bogus, untrue, and depraved worldview. They cannot see the world as it is, or as it should be. They have literally willed themselves to be stupid. And after one failed utopia after another, with each promising a beatific secular-humanist mega-government state, all they have is blame for why their worldview keeps failing.

    And what do you do when your worldview doesn’t work? You either abandon it in favor of one that does, or you become a demonizer attacking others. And the left chose demonization.

    So they end up like Hitler and Marx (both socialists, both from the left), blaming a group or a class of people for all the evils in the world.

  19. Michael Eden Says:

    There’s that old proverb, “Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

    At the same time, fools love to argue and cause controversy.

    Your paragraph,

    Typical of the left, the name calling begins when one has no valid argument. It’s all about distraction from the facts and blaming others for one’s failings, as can be noted by the Obama administration and Democrats this past year

    hits the nail right on the head.

    While I agree with your para re: name calling/yelling destroying one’s one arguments, I also have come to believe that it’s a VERY successful tactic for seizing power. It worked for the Marxists, it worked for the Nazis, and it worked for the Democrats. I’m not arguing that Democrats are Nazis (although there are a lot of key presuppositions shared by both), but I AM saying that both the Nazis and the Democrats got to amass power by demonizing/demagoguing Republicans.

    If BOTH sides don’t end this demonization, this country is likely doomed, as it will swing wildly between failing regimes, with the other constantly cheering the fall of the party in power. But at the same time, it cannot at this point be one party setting aside demonization, as the other (the party that continues to use demonization) would merely remain in perennial power.

    There’s the rub. We managed to come up with a doctrine called “MAD” – Mutually Assured Destruction – that made nuclear war unacceptable to both superpowers during the cold war. Can we do that within our own nation regarding the tactic of demonization?

  20. V Says:

    Well I see I gave you hypocrites something to cluck about. I was surprised to see that my comment hadn’t simply been erased. Well have fun with your scapegoats.

  21. Michael Eden Says:

    I think you need to go back and learn about hypocrites – unless you think I’m shouting about small government, but secretly want total socialism.

    I only delete/block comments/commenters when they rise to a level of loathsomeness or annoyingness that makes them unfit to participate in a civil discussion. You haven’t reached that level yet, but I wouldn’t abandon hope, if it’s your goal to.

    The problem with our “scapegoats” is that they are running the country. They’re either doing a great job or a terrible one. My view is a terrible one.

    And we’re having more fun as more and more of America comes to realize that we were right.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: