tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post6018949330942603349..comments2024-03-26T06:17:49.527-07:00Comments on Had Enough Therapy?: The Blame GameStuart Schneidermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12784043736879991769noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-31057476470277934592011-01-11T12:20:50.333-08:002011-01-11T12:20:50.333-08:00You would have to assume that if left-thinking peo...You would have to assume that if left-thinking people wanted to have a rational and deliberative debate they would engage in one. If they do not, that suggests to me that they care much more for manipulating people's emotions than for debating the issues and risking the possibility that they might lose the debate. Perhaps they think that the common people are too ignorant to really understand the issues. Or they cannot accept the possibility that they might be wrong.<br /><br />At the very least, as you suggest, watching the mud slinging from the left and the effort to tar the Tea Party and all Republicans for what Loughner did, one can only conclude that these people cannot tolerate dissent and can surely not tolerate the fact that they no longer have a monopoly over the marketplace of ideas.Stuart Schneidermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12784043736879991769noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-39187280830754157452011-01-11T11:47:15.000-08:002011-01-11T11:47:15.000-08:00Sorry for the double (sort of) post but I was told...Sorry for the double (sort of) post but I was told it was too large and attempted to send it in two sections. I see it was not necessary. Sorry.<br />Steve GAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-70264490499886790782011-01-11T11:43:02.900-08:002011-01-11T11:43:02.900-08:00Because we conservatives do not swallow liberal pr...Because we conservatives do not swallow liberal prescriptions intended for our well being we must be "evil". Nothing else will explain our lack of concern. Thus, anything we say to advance our agenda, such as facts or analysis that demonstrate that one liberal program after another is just too expensive and/or unduly intrusive, by definition, constitutes hate speech and the speaker vile and deranged. This grants to the liberal the right to take up any communications weapon in retaliation. Thus, tarring conservatives as haters when this is nothing more than a reversal of the truth.<br /><br />In a way, liberals and conservatives share the same mother tongue, English, but derive different and wholly irreconcilable meanings from its everyday usage. Not only do we not communicate with each other, no matter how much we try we will never be able to make the other side "understand". I think a lot of the discussion regarding the cause of the Tucson shootings overlooks the language barriers, or at the least the ways liberals use or misuse language to effect their good intentions. Would it be fruitful to redirect the debate in this direction to try and get at the heart of the differences between liberals and conservatives, or is this something that is just taken for granted and not worth exploring?<br /><br />Steve G<br />lgoodman1ATcomcast.netAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-33483303092349702342011-01-11T11:41:07.913-08:002011-01-11T11:41:07.913-08:00I listen to talk radio and watch FOX News a lot. ...I listen to talk radio and watch FOX News a lot. Limbaugh, Medved, Levin, Hannity, Ingraham, Greta, and the bunch of them. It is mostly policy discussions. I have no recollection of any of them targeting any individual for violence or otherwise, except for purposes of reelection to office. Of course, they often speak of shameful conduct and point out who is responsible. The current discussion of how the liberals responded to the Tucson shootings being the latest example. In fact, I take most of this stuff as constituting spirited public debate that is issues oriented. Anyone can tune in or tune out, as they wish.<br /><br />So, why do the MSM and liberal pundits, such as Krugman, the NYT editorial writers, and their ilk, look at the substance of this issues debate and conclude it represents hate speech. That conclusion leads them to tar their opponents, especially Palin, as hate mongers and worthy of death, or worse. But, to any reasonable observer, just where is Palin's hate demonstrated? In her reference to "death panels"? Her having a son with Down's Syndrome? Her acceptance of her daughter's pregnancy without public condemnation, as was expected of such a conservative?<br /><br />As I am not a health professional my opinion is based on my own observations and conclusions and, I guess, not worth that much. But, for the little that it is worth it seems to me that liberals hold themselves out as the "good" people. After all, they cite one anecdote after another to demonstrate how much they care for the little guy. (My opinion here is that they could care less about the little guy and are just going through the motions of putting one over on the rest of us.) In fact, a guy like Harry Reid and another like Dick Durbin seem to have been born with the "I care for you" tone of voice that Bill Clinton is so much the master. Three phoneys, but not to much of the electorate. But to listen to them is to bring on revulsion at their todiness.<br /><br />Because we conservatives do not swallow liberal prescriptions intended for our well being we must be "evil". Nothing else will explain our lack of concern. Thus, anything we say to advance our agenda, such as facts or analysis that demonstrate that one liberal program after another is just too expensive and/or unduly intrusive, by definition, constitutes hate speech and the speaker vile and deranged. This grants to the liberal the right to take up any communications weapon in retaliation. Thus, tarring conservatives as haters when this is nothing more than a reversal of the truth.<br /><br />In a way, liberals and conservatives share the same mother tongue, English, but derive different and wholly irreconcilable meanings from its everyday usage. Not only do we not communicate with each other, no matter how much we try we will never be able to make the other side "understand". I think a lot of the discussion regarding the cause of the Tucson shootings overlooks the language barriers, or at the least the ways liberals use or misuse language to effect their good intentions. Would it be fruitful to redirect the debate in this direction to try and get at the heart of the differences between liberals and conservatives, or is this something that is just taken for granted and not worth exploring?<br /><br />Steve G<br />lgoodman1ATcomcast.netAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-84645373401382067812011-01-11T08:17:41.454-08:002011-01-11T08:17:41.454-08:00TO: Dr. Schneiderman, et al.
RE: I'm Going wit...TO: Dr. Schneiderman, et al.<br />RE: I'm Going with....<br /><br /><i>As James Taranto wrote today, these stories are myths, fictions, or fantasies.</i> -- Stuart Schneiderman<br /><br />....'fantasies'. Or worse....<br /><br />How so? <br /><br />The 'progressives' are desperate and the only think they have to argue with is calling the other side 'names'. It's the application of the third option of <b>The Lawyers Rule....<br /><br />[1] If the Law is against you, argue the facts.<br />[2] If the facts are against you, argue the Law.<br />[3] If the Law and the facts are against you, call the other side names.</b> -- The Official Rules: A Compendium of Truths and Laws for Living<br /><br />And don't expect it to improve. As I see it as projection, of the classic form. <br /><br />Look at the running history of the 'progressives' in politics. And that dates back to the time of Lenin and Stalin, who are their principals. And, as has been stated elsewhere, along with their associates in Mao and Che and Pol Pot, responsible for more mass murder than all of the religious wars combined. And all that in one century alone.<br /><br />Look for more trouble.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />Chuck(le)<br />[If you're not getting paranoid, it's because you aren't paying attention.]cbpeltonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-39647520719942962082011-01-10T21:16:03.609-08:002011-01-10T21:16:03.609-08:00I had a realization during this whole thing:
It&#...I had a realization during this whole thing:<br /><br />It's not so much that the Democrats and elected Democrats think that Loughner was a Republican. It's that they think all Republicans are like Loughner.<br /><br />If you don't support the Obama agenda and all the fashionable leftie things, you are a crazed, gun-toting murderer.<br /><br />This is a Blood Libel....<br /><br />Remember when Bloomberg declared the Times Square Bomber to be: "probably someone upset about healthcare reform."?<br /><br />--Gray<br /><br />wv: "agingamp" That's the device the old lefties are using to amplify this Blood Libel against the Tea Party.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com