Quantcast

«

»

Sep 20 2011

Breitbart Wants Armed Conflict

Here’s Andrew Breitbart fantasizing about armed conflict with liberals. He actually says, “They can only win a rhetorical or propaganda war. We outnumber them and we have the guns.” The audience laughs and he follows up by saying, quite seriously, “I’m not kidding.” He then claims that members of the military have told him that they’ve “got his back.” And then he bizarrely claims that liberals are the bullies.

He then goes on and on about “union thugs” showing up at the homes of corporate executives to protest and about how the left would react if conservatives showed up at Katie Couric’s house. What Katie Couric has to do with anything, I have no idea. But funny, I’ve never heard him say a word about “pro-life” bullies showing up at the homes of abortion doctors. They’re only bullies when they’re on the other side.

He then makes it absolutely clear that he’s talking about civil war.

62 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Nibi

    He then makes it absolutely clear that he’s talking about civil war.

    Which would become known as the War of Liberal Aggression.

    Just because liberals aren’t gun totin’ doesn’t mean they aren’t gun owning.

  2. 2
    Michael Heath

    Andrew Breitbart is one of countless examples of emerging conservative leaders who revel in their lack of a proper education. Carnival barkers now serve to broker the conservative voting base with the plutocrats from dying industries.

  3. 3
    Bronze Dog

    They’re only bullies when they’re on the other side.

    What I like to call “Red Team, Blue Team Morality”: Anything your team does is moral, anything the other team does is immoral, even if they’re both performing the exact same act. Being on the same team means never having to say you’re sorry to the followers or question the morality of the leaders. Pure subjectivism.

  4. 4
    Chiroptera

    But funny, I’ve never heard him say a word about “pro-life” bullies showing up at the homes of abortion doctors.

    That’s because contemporary American conservatives think that rules that apply to other people shouldn’t apply to themselves.

  5. 5
    democommie

    Andrew Breitbart is coward who would shit his pants within five seconds of the beginning of hostilities.

    “Hoskins, bring me my brown trousers, STAT!”

    Like most bullies he fantasizes about whippin’ up on the weak and helpless. Let us never forget that the bulk of the fighting, suffering and dying in this and most nations’ wars has been done by the man in the street who had no history of violence, prior to having to kill other people who often also had no history of violence.

    Go ahead, Andy, you fucking wanker, bring it on. Find out just how vicious and deadly the effete liberals can be when you push them into a corner.

  6. 6
    frankboyd

    This is, of course, nothing nothing like Jimmy Hoffa saying

    “President Obama this is your army we are ready to march. Let’s take these son-of-a-bitches out.”

    Anyway, you know he’s not serious. How do you know this? Because it’s being reported here.

  7. 7
    DaveL

    The last time I ordered hunting ammunition, I received a catalog with it – approximately 80% of which was aimed at the civilian “tactical” market. It’s hard to deny the US civilian firearms market has become increasingly militarized.

    At the same time about a third of American adults are not just overweight, but actually obese.

    What we’re left with is a disturbing number of individuals who are obsessed over owning weapons of war who would get winded trying to raid their own pantries.

  8. 8
    raven

    Andrew Breitbart is pretty close to advocating terrorism. Right wing terrorism.

    2/3 of all terrorist incidents since 9/11 have involved fundie xians and/or right wingnuts.

    We all know what Timothy McVeigh did to the Oklahoma federal building. There have been quite of few other attacks and plots. Some guy planned to bomb the TIDES building in San Francisco and ended up shooting it out with the police. The Hutaree Xian militia planned to kill cops. A few of Andew Breitbarts buddies are doing prison terms for threatening to kill congresspeople. Some nut in Spokane just got convicted for planting a bomb along a parade route. It goes on and on. A complete list would take pages.

    I’m sure there will be more fundie xian terrorism and right wing terrorism. Terrorists are like buses. There is always another one coming along. And Andrew Breitbart and his co-fascists can laugh and cheer some more.

  9. 9
    raven

    Waht does anyone think if Breitbart had been a Moslem and said what he said?

    I’d bet homeland security and the FBI would have paid him a visit about now for a friendly little talk and some clarification of what he really means. And all his electronic communications would be collected on a DVD somewhere by the feds.

    Hmmm, well maybe they are. If I was Breitbart right now, I’d assume my phone calls and internet traffic are being monitored by HS/FBI.

  10. 10
    cholten99

    > What we’re left with is a disturbing number of individuals who
    > are obsessed over owning weapons of war who would get winded
    > trying to raid their own pantries.

    What you’re left with is a country full of people that are angry and scared but incapable (physically or mentally) of doing anything about their fears themselves except to vote for the most extreme person they can find.

    Oh, or express themselves via a blog-post comment (the irony is not lost on me).

  11. 11
    DaveL

    frankboyd,

    I believe you meant to post this:

    President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. President Obama, we want one thing: Jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs…(The crowd joins the chant.)

    That’s what we are going to tell America…..When he sees what we are doing here, he will be inspired, but he needs help. And you know what? Everybody here has got a vote. If we go back, we keep the eye on the prize, lets take these sons-of-bitches out and give America back to America where we belong.”

    Now what I’m curious about is this: did you know that was a misquote and do it deliberately, or did you just copy-and-paste what you were told elsewhere without checking it?

  12. 12
    Improbable Joe, bearer of the Official SpokesGuitar

    This goes hand-in-hand with the “Worldnutdaily Invents Violent Protest Fantasy” post. You’ve got the lies about progressives being inherently violent, in order to justify imagining and even advocating right-wing violence against progressives. It is a way to pretend that Breitbart’s fantasy of murdering unarmed innocents is somehow an expression of self-defense.

    Of course, when someone shoots into a crowd of protesters or leaves a bomb by a parade route, Breitbart will backtrack like crazy for a week or three… and then go right back to advocating murder and treason again.

  13. 13
    raven

    Of course, when someone shoots into a crowd of protesters or leaves a bomb by a parade route, Breitbart will backtrack like crazy for a week or three… and then go right back to advocating murder and treason again.

    Doubt it.

    Probably they will laugh some more and cheer.

    These are the same people who recently cheered on TV about a hypothetical 30 year old in a coma without medical insurance, dying. “Let him die. Let him die.”

    Hard to say whether being a right wing Tea Partier destroys people’s empathy and respect for life or if callous people become Tea Partiers. Either way, they are anti-human.

  14. 14
    Area Man

    What does anyone think if Breitbart had been a Moslem and said what he said?

    We don’t even have to take it that far. Imagine if he were merely black.

  15. 15
    Area Man

    “This is, of course, nothing like Jimmy Hoffa saying…”

    Actually, it’s not. There’s no indication at all that Hoffa was encouraging violence. Breitbart, on the other hand, went out of his way to clarify that he was speaking literally.

  16. 16
    MikeMa

    @DaveL,
    I assume frankboyd has done a quick drive by post and will not be back to defend his breitbarting of the quote.

  17. 17
    democommie

    FuckedintheheadBoyd@6:

    Hello, you still out there? Or has putting a turd in the punchbowl completed your list of duties to receive your merit badge?

  18. 18
    frankboyd

    Dave,

    Actually that was not present in the clip I’d seen. It still sounds like your basic union thuggery to me.

    Incidentally, I was able to locate the whole thing:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLvWWu-57DI&feature=related

    What your edit leaves out is his rant about sending “his” jobs to Mexico or China. Nice, corn fed nativism and protectionism. I miss the days of proletarian internationalism.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suVB3YGIUk0

    From my vantage point, the whole of American party political rhetoric is the most tedious thing in the Universe. You have two groups all insisting that they are the only authentic voice of the people, and that only the other side makes use of violent rhetoric/racial politics and incitement/crony socialism with big business/religious demagoguery and tubthumping. I submit that if you’re willing to believe that, you’re willing to believe anything.

    The other thing that I find tedious is this hermetically sealed nativism. Vide raven:

    2/3 of all terrorist incidents since 9/11 have involved fundie xians and/or right wingnuts.

    There have been over seventeen thousand Jihad attacks since 9/11. This week alone there have been 218 people killed and another 531 wounded. But since these are poor people with different hues and shades living elsewhere, they don’t count. They aren’t even registered. And that’s not even counting the slaughter in Darfur.

    There are the nativist corn fed yokels like Hoffa, who are bad. And then there are the intellectuals, who are unspeakable.

  19. 19
    raven

    He then makes it absolutely clear that he’s talking about civil war.

    Advocating treason!!!

    It’s perfectly legal to advocate the overthrow of the US government. IIRC, it’s not so legal to advocate the violent overthrow of the US government. And it is definitely treason to attempt the violent overthrow of the US government.

    It’s been known for a long time. The Tea Party hates the US government and they hate democracy.

    Breitbart lying:

    Here’s Andrew Breitbart fantasizing about armed conflict with liberals. He actually says, “They can only win a rhetorical or propaganda war. We outnumber them and we have the guns.”

    This isn’t true. Two of the most hated groups in the USA are fundie xians and the Tea Party. Source, NYT/CBS/CNN polls.

    Last time we fought a civil war with similar groups, they lost.

  20. 20
    frankniddy

    Breitbart talks about anyone to his left the way Muammar Qaddafi talks about the Libyan rebels (well, I guess they aren’t so much the rebels anymore, but still).

  21. 21
    frankboyd

    Oh, frankniddy please get real. This site wouldn’t be covering it if there was any chance of real violence.

  22. 22
    frankniddy

    No chance of real violence my ass. Tell that to the families of the Oklahoma City bombing victims, to the Spokane MLK Parade goers, to those in Norway, to the would-be victims of the Hutaree Militia, etc. Do I need to go on?

  23. 23
    khms

    raven says:

    These are the same people who recently cheered on TV about a hypothetical 30 year old in a coma without medical insurance, dying. “Let him die. Let him die.”

    Kent Snyder isn’t all that hypothetical:

    https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Ron_Paul_presidential_campaign,_2008

  24. 24
    frankboyd

    Awww, diddums. In order, so Breitbart built a time machine and went back and inspired MacVeigh, it’s nice to see you exonerating the KKK (Democrat loyalty?), nowhere does Breivik link to Breitbart….

    Incidentally, speaking of these characters, who said this?

    If Saddam is such a demon and people are calling for war crimes charges and trials against him and his nation, why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of “mass destruction” — like those responsible and involved in dropping bombs on the cities mentioned above.

    The truth is, the U.S. has set the standard when it comes to the stockpiling and use of weapons of mass destruction

    That’d be McVeigh. So. Hmmm. I guess that all of the “anti-war” crowd need to be kept under careful watch. After all, they have plenty of links with the pathological ultra-right…

    See how easy this stupid game is?

  25. 25
    frankboyd

    Actually, one amendment – there is one link to Breitbart in Breivik’s manifesto, but even The Guardian’s node search didn’t list it.

  26. 26
    DaveL

    Actually that was not present in the clip I’d seen.

    I see. Knowing now that they completely distort the quote, no doubt deliberately, to make it seem more violent than it was, will you continue to trust this source in the future?

    I already posted a link to a transcript for the entire quote. Don’t presume to take me to task for selective editing: mine began and ended with the same sentences yours did, except mine didn’t leave out all the text in the middle, like the part about voting. Your hamhanded attempt to change the subject is noted.

    From my vantage point, the whole of American party political rhetoric is the most tedious thing in the Universe. You have two groups all insisting that they are the only authentic voice of the people, and that only the other side makes use of violent rhetoric/racial politics and incitement/crony socialism with big business/religious demagoguery and tubthumping. I submit that if you’re willing to believe that, you’re willing to believe anything.

    Do you know what else is tedious? The old false-equivalence narrative. You’re not fooling anybody, pretending to be some kind of nonpartisan who rises above the rhetoric. We just saw you swallow a right-wing lie hook, line, and sinker and willingly repeat it without verification. At this range I know a skunk when I smell it. Violent rhetoric? You had to misquote Hoffa to make it look like he was calling for violence. Breitbart speaks for himself – even explicitly saying he’s not kidding. Racial politics? The only examples it seems you can think of are to falsely conflate nativism with offshoring and somehow convince yourself that the right cares about how many non-whites die overseas. Please give me a break.

  27. 27
    frankniddy

    frankboyd, I see you completely ignored the more present-day examples I gave. I’m sure you’ll conveniently ignore that someone was inspired by Glenn Beck (another hyper-right-wing loony) to shoot up the Tides Foundation, and Breitbart seems to care even less about inciting violence than Beck. Anyway, I stand by what I said, the rhetoric is very similar. He’s dehumanising all liberals. At worst, Hoffa was only dehumanising conservative politicians. Big difference.

  28. 28
    frankboyd

    Speaking of the tedium…

    Knowing now that they completely distort the quote, no doubt deliberately, to make it seem more violent than it was, will you continue to trust this source in the future?

    Have you an alternative to youtube?

    Don’t presume to take me to task for selective editing:

    Standards are good, double standards are twice as good.

    The old false-equivalence narrative. You’re not fooling anybody, pretending to be some kind of nonpartisan who rises above the rhetoric.

    Oh, little-man and little-mind, I’m the ultimate partisan. I go over to the blogs of places like WND and rake them over hot coals, and then I come over here to do the same. As I say, two sides of the same stupid coin. Freethoughblogs is the WorldNetDaily of the American “left”.

    Now, I do not know just how far your education system has decayed…

    somehow convince yourself that the right cares about how many non-whites die overseas.

    …but you should know that the problem with tu quoque is that it admits the original accusation. What have you just said here? “Of course we don’t give a damn about what happens to furrin’ folk, but you think the Right does?” Well, that rather proves my point, now doesn’t it?

    Incidentally, did you follow my second link? I’d have thought that that would give you pause to call me a rightist. Or don’t they teach you that in school anymore?

  29. 29
    frankboyd

    frankkniddy,

    I responded to three of your silly examples, and I can’t respond to the fourth because it makes no sense. To the “would-be victims”? Would-be, huh? There’s chaps out there with a hankering to be militia victims?

  30. 30
    Francisco Bacopa

    We need to find out whether Breitbart is just bluffing about that “people in the military” claim. If he isn’t, careers need to be shortened.

  31. 31
    Aquaria

    Don’t even bother with human filth like frankboyd. Facts and reality don’t matter to the scumbag. He only cares about wanking over his hate, like the moronic douchebag he is.

  32. 32
    frankboyd

    Aquaria,

    I do hope your mother isn’t reading this.

  33. 33
    DaveL

    Have you an alternative to youtube?

    It may surprise you to learn that Youtube is not a news organization and that its content is provided by others.

    Standards are good, double standards are twice as good.

    Aye. You posted a deliberate misquote. When I showed its context (and linked to the whole transcript) you went and found a whole other part of the speech and pretended I had edited it out for some nefarious purpose. Talk about double standards.

    Oh, little-man and little-mind, I’m the ultimate partisan. I go over to the blogs of places like WND and rake them over hot coals, and then I come over here to do the same. As I say, two sides of the same stupid coin. Freethoughblogs is the WorldNetDaily of the American “left”.

    Boy, could you prove my point any about false equivalence any better? Much of what the WND publishes is outright false. I defy you to come up with actual examples of this imagined equivalence rather than resorting to unsupported general statements.

    I’d also really love to see some links to your supposed comments where you rake WND over the coals.

    …but you should know that the problem with tu quoque is that it admits the original accusation. What have you just said here? “Of course we don’t give a damn about what happens to furrin’ folk, but you think the Right does?” Well, that rather proves my point, now doesn’t it?

    Of course not. Last night while you slept tens of thousands of children died of starvation – but I bet you slept fine. So are you also a racist who hates foreign children? Human beings are simply not psychologically capable of caring about what happens far away to people they don’t know as much as they care about what happens close to home. Where the deception comes in is where you pretend this is a left-wing phenomenon and that it comes from racism.

  34. 34
    frankboyd

    Where the deception comes in is where you pretend this is a left-wing phenomenon and that it comes from racism.

    Not so much racism as an inability to understand that people who live elsewhere are real. In some ways, that’s even worse. That is why you have nativist nits like raven who are entirely and utterly unaware of the scale and magnitude of Jihad atrocity. That is why you will not find the word “left wing” in my post, but you will find the words “nativist”, “corn fed” and “yokel”.

    If this was just some twerp online, it’d be one thing. But I recall watching Richard Dawkins on Bill Maher discussing the Islamic verses that incite violence. Janeane Garofalo chimed in with “Then why is it primarily directed at America?” What’s truly horrifying is that this is the way this person actually thinks.

    People keep asking how we can get clean energy? I’ll tell you how: link up Karl Marx’s body to a generator, and then play some of what’s called “left wing” rhetoric these days. You’ll have energy to spare.

    I defy you to come up with actual examples of this imagined equivalence rather than resorting to unsupported general statements.

    How about a book review? Over here we have FTB praising a paranoid screed about Palin’s plans for dominionism:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/rodda/2011/09/19/the-other-far-more-important-book-on-sarah-palin/

    And here we have WND praising a paranoid screed about Obama’s plans for socialism:

    http://wndbooks.wnd.com/the-manchurian-president-barack-obamas-ties-to-communists-socialists-and-other-anti-american-extremists-2/

    Skip to telling me how the first is a very real serious danger we need to wake up to and the second is nothing more than paranoid gibberish in three, two, one…

    What’s offensive about this isn’t the point of view. It’s that it’s so very, very boring.

  35. 35
    frankboyd

    An older example of this sort of nativist chauvenism:

    http://www.slate.com/id/2104549/

  36. 36
    DaveL

    Frank – reality check here: I asked you to provide actual examples – that means showing how they are both equally unhinged. No, you don’t just get to dismiss the possibility out of hand that one is far closer to the truth than the other. Show your work.

  37. 37
    frankboyd

    Dave,

    Thank you for proving me right. Also, you never show any of your work, why should I show mine? Or more to the point, you never take it on board when I do. If I may repair to it, you do not contest my point about Jihad atrocity. You don’t, because you can’t.

  38. 38
    DaveL

    Ah, so when the left does it, spending money at home rather than abroad is “nativist chauvinism”. Not just shortsighted, or bad foreign policy. How much of your money do you donate overseas, you nativist chauvinist, you? For the right to show nativist chauvinism they actually have to deny opportunities to actual fellow Americans who weren’t born here (or even whose parents weren’t born here). Double standards again.

  39. 39
    Ed Brayton

    No, Hoff’a comments are not equivalent to Breitbart’s. As the full transcript, as opposed to the edited one that appears on all the right wing blogs, shows, Hoffa was talking about voting. We use military metaphors in politics all the time, it is absurd to presume that they are always or even usually meant literally. Hoffa’s actual words were, “Everybody here has a vote. If we go back and we keep the eye on the prize. Let’s take these sons of bitches out and give America back to America where we belong.”

    Breitbart, however, is clearly talking about a real war and how conservatives will win it because they have all the guns. There are lots of instances where right and left really do say and do the same things and then accuse the other of doing them. But this comparison is not one of them. They are not the same thing.

  40. 40
    frankboyd

    Dave,

    Proving me right again. You don’t answer the arguments because you can’t.

    Second of all, I have been a lifelong supporter of ending the disgraceful racket of trade barriers and protectionism. I suppose you don’t understand the distinction, or the importance, seeing as you endorse it:

    deny opportunities to actual fellow Americans

    Buchanite drivel. Good old blood-and-soil stuff.

    Third – did you not read what I wrote about the problem with the tu quoque fallacy?

    Fourth – the other example of this chauvenism is the utter unconcern to the point of not even knowing that they exist of victims of atrocity – provided they’re foreign. You never bother to speak to that.

    That is why I find the whole thing so tedious. A millimeter of difference with the pretense that it’s an interstellar gulf.

    Incidentally, since you want to keep on banging on about the right, why don’t you take your whinge to the right? Why do you keep pestering me with it?

  41. 41
    frankboyd

    Actually, I’ve just thought – Dave – of a picture perfect parallel. The first clip I found on youtube was edited to support the one side, you edited the quote to support your side, nice and neat and balanced.

  42. 42
    DaveL

    . Also, you never show any of your work, why should I show mine?

    You’re the one making the claim of equivalence, that’s why. But sure, how about just a cursory examination of your example? You compare a FTB blogger giving “two thumbs up from me based on what I’ve read so far” to a third party book on one hand to a book actually published by WND on the other.

    On the one hand we can show how Obama is no more socialist than the Republicans of 20 or 30 years ago. His health care plan was a rehash of the Republicans 1993 plan. Cap & Trade used to be the preferred Republican position. The list goes on.

    Now show me someone in living memory who ran on the Democratic presidential ticket who denied the separation of church and state like Palin?

  43. 43
    frankboyd

    Once again, until you show the slightest intention of answering actual points and facts, I will not waste my time wading through the drivel of political pronouncements. I will simply limit myself to noting that when Hillary Clinton does her Bible thumping schtick and megachurch speaking the twerps at WND start shining her shoes and polishing her boots. I rest my case.

  44. 44
    DaveL

    Second of all, I have been a lifelong supporter of ending the disgraceful racket of trade barriers and protectionism. I suppose you don’t understand the distinction, or the importance, seeing as you endorse it:

    deny opportunities to actual fellow Americans

    Buchanite drivel. Good old blood-and-soil stuff.

    I do understand the distinction, nor did I ever endorse protectionism. It is you who doesn’t seem to understand the difference between protectionism and discrimination against fellow Americans due to their country of origin.

    Third – did you not read what I wrote about the problem with the tu quoque fallacy?

    Yes, and it was a fallacy – a red herring, to be specific.

    Fourth – the other example of this chauvenism is the utter unconcern to the point of not even knowing that they exist of victims of atrocity – provided they’re foreign. You never bother to speak to that.

    That you ignore it does not mean I didn’t speak to it.

    Incidentally, since you want to keep on banging on about the right, why don’t you take your whinge to the right? Why do you keep pestering me with it?

    What, I’m not allowed to correct people who are demonstrably wrong? You may not consider yourself to be part of the right, but as long as you uncritically swallow their lies and apply a double standard between left and right to make them look equivalent, you might as well be.

    The first clip I found on youtube was edited to support the one side, you edited the quote to support your side, nice and neat and balanced.

    Sorry, but I included everything from the beginning sentence of your quote to the final sentence of your quote. Since the endpoints were chosen by you, you must bear the blame for anything else you feel was still left out after the excised middle portion was restored.

    Unless, that is, you hold a double standard and expect your opponent to quote articles in their entirety, while you don’t even have to accurately replicate the portions you do choose to quote.

  45. 45
    DaveL

    I will simply limit myself to noting that when Hillary Clinton does her Bible thumping schtick and megachurch speaking the twerps at WND start shining her shoes and polishing her boots

    Hillary Clinton the anti-church-state-separation crusader? Surely you must have some citations for that!

  46. 46
    slc1

    Re Frankboyd @ #32

    Unlike Mr. Frankboyd, Ms. Acquaria knows who her mother is/was.

  47. 47
    Michael Heath

    frankboyd to DaveL:

    Oh, little-man and little-mind, I’m the ultimate partisan. I go over to the blogs of places like WND and rake them over hot coals, and then I come over here to do the same.

    Your grip on reality is in serious need of repair. All you’re doing in this venue is demonstrate you can’t even do disingenuous very well. DaveL sends you down in flames for bearing false witness from the only example you provide in order to build your false equivalency strawman and you claim he has a “little-mind”? Wow.

  48. 48
    democommie

    Franklyaboilontheanalorificeofthereichwing:

    I have spent the afternoon doing things ever so much more important to me (grocery shopping, playing with the dog, sorting my Mother Jones trading cards–that sort of thing) than time wasting refutation of your schtick. It’s old, it’s all been debunked a million times (that is not an exaggeration) and affording a shitdripping piece of scum such as yourself a forum on which to vent your indginorance is something Mr. Brayton tolerates for the same reason that a lioness only cripples an antelope and then lets the young cubs have at it.

    If any of the usual commenters on this blog were to develop, concurrently, senile dementia, alzheimers and paresis, THEN you might achieve some sort of parity. As it is, sadfuck is a sadfuck.

  49. 49
    Improbable Joe, bearer of the Official SpokesGuitar

    Oh wow… I guess I wasn’t quite right. Breitbart might backpedal, but his supporters (including frankboyd) can’t wait to start making excuses for murder and treason. What a goddamned disappointment, although I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. The enemies of America have no shame at all.

  50. 50
    Dennis N

    Improbable Joe says:

    This goes hand-in-hand with the “Worldnutdaily Invents Violent Protest Fantasy” post. You’ve got the lies about progressives being inherently violent, in order to justify imagining and even advocating right-wing violence against progressives. It is a way to pretend that Breitbart’s fantasy of murdering unarmed innocents is somehow an expression of self-defense.

    From Wikipedia:

    Due to high rates of illiteracy at the time of the genocide, radio was an important way for the government to deliver messages to the public. Two radio stations key to inciting violence before and during the genocide were Radio Rwanda and Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM). In March 1992, Radio Rwanda was first used in directly promoting the killing of Tutsi in Bugesera, south of the national capital Kigali. Radio Rwanda repeatedly broadcast a communiqué warning that Hutu in Bugesera would be attacked by Tutsi, a message used by local officials to convince Hutu that they needed to attack first. Led by soldiers, Hutu civilians and the Interahamwe attacked and killed hundreds of Tutsi.

    I don’t want to be overly dramatic, because Breitbart is a clown and obviously has not committed crimes against humanity, but I just wanted to point out that this isn’t a new tactic, and he’s not being original. Hell, Glenn Beck does it all the time.

  51. 51
    Sadie Morrison

    Ed:

    He then goes on and on about “union thugs” showing up at the homes of corporate executives to protest and about how the left would react if conservatives showed up at Katie Couric’s house. What Katie Couric has to do with anything, I have no idea.

    I think Andy’s still miffed that Couric accidentally demonstrated Palin’s incompetence and ineptitude to the masses.

  52. 52
    frankboyd

    Noting what passes for high-level discourse here, I simply restate my point: anyone who has ever had to face real incitement to violence, where the danger is live, is just not impressed by seeing a bunch of middle-class Americans pretending they are standing against the next Rwanda. It’s both pathetic and slightly disgusting. Or very disgusting, given that this is the same movement – no, wrong word, political tendency – that ensured that both Rwanda and Darfur were allowed to complete themselves.

    Quick return to DaveL,

    That you ignore it does not mean I didn’t speak to it.

    Where, exactly?

    Oh, I forgot to respond to this:

    Racial politics? The only examples it seems you can think of are to falsely conflate nativism with offshoring a

    Actually, not. If one takes the case of Willie Horton, and the phrase “Willie Hortoning”, the story in that case was originally unearthed and used by Al Gore against Dukakis, who then presented the perfect weapon to the Republicans. Bill Clinton had his own southern strategy, complete with government sanctioned lynchings. Hillary Clinton is the reason that picture of Obama in tribal dress go circulated. And so on and so on. But, repeat the mantra: it’s only the other side that uses racial politics.

    Who knows, some of you seem to actually believe this.

  53. 53
    frankboyd

    Oh, yes, I thought I remembered something like this. You know why it’s automatically assumed that Union rhetoric like that is violent? Here’s the reason:

  54. 54
    DaveL
    That you ignore it does not mean I didn’t speak to it.

    Where, exactly?

    At #33. I clarified at #44 that it was a red herring fallacy. We criticize the right for engaging in “A”. You counter that the left engages in “B” (which the right, including you yourself, also engages in), therefore the left’s criticism of the right for “A” is invalid. This is a red herring.

    Actually, not. If one takes the case of Willie Horton, and the phrase “Willie Hortoning”, the story in that case was originally unearthed and used by Al Gore against Dukakis, who then presented the perfect weapon to the Republicans.

    Actually Al Gore never mentioned Willie Horton by name or even the incident which made him famous – he merely asked a question about the Massachussetts furlough program. From wikipedia:

    The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Al Gore. During a debate at the Felt Forum sponsored by the New York Daily News, Gore took issue with the furlough program. However, he did not specifically mention the Horton incident or even his name, instead asking a general question about the Massachusetts furlough program.[6]

    Republicans picked up the Horton issue after Dukakis clinched the nomination. In June 1988, Republican candidate George H.W. Bush seized on the Horton case, bringing it up repeatedly in campaign speeches.[6] Bush’s campaign manager, Lee Atwater, predicted that “by the time this election is over, Willie Horton will be a household name.”[6][7] Media consultant Roger Ailes remarked “the only question is whether we depict Willie Horton with a knife in his hand or without it.”[8]

    That you apparently weighed Gore’s probing about the furlough program on one hand, and the Republicans’ campaign ads starring Horton as the Big Scary Black Man on the other, and conclude it’s an example of the the left engaging in racial politics is absolutely staggering. Talk about double standards!

    Bill Clinton had his own southern strategy, complete with government sanctioned lynchings.

    One word: bullshit. Support your assertion. I find it hard to believe that, if there were any credible evidence Bill Clinton had someone lynched, that Republicans would have to wait for the Lewinski scandal to call for impeachment.

    Hillary Clinton is the reason that picture of Obama in tribal dress go circulated.

    Actually that picture was posted to FreeRepublic two days before Matt Drudge claimed to have received it from a Clinton staffer. And even if it did come from the Clinton campaign, it’s an unretouched photo of Obama in tribal robes – would you like to contrast that with some of the ‘artwork’ conservatives have come out with since then? Double standards indeed.

    Seriously, this is the bottom of the barrel you’re scraping looking for anything that will make the left somehow equivalent to the right? Hell, should I dig up a few examples of conservative racial politics from the last year, the last month, the last week, just for contrast purposes?

  55. 55
    Dennis N

    pretending they are standing against the next Rwanda

    And as trolls do by their nature, you completely ignored my point:

    I don’t want to be overly dramatic, because Breitbart is a clown and obviously has not committed crimes against humanity, but I just wanted to point out that this isn’t a new tactic, and he’s not being original.

  56. 56
    frankboyd

    At #33. I clarified at #44 that it was a red herring fallacy

    You claimed it was. Nice use of “A” and “B”, btw. You’ve once again admitted that neither the donkeys nor the elephants (I refuse to dignify these farcical proceedings with the terms left and right) give a damn about overseas.

    The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Al Gore. During a debate at the Felt Forum sponsored by the New York Daily News, Gore took issue with the furlough program. However, he did not specifically mention the Horton incident or even his name, instead asking a general question about the Massachusetts furlough program.[6]

    It’s worth checking the reference on that. MediaMatters, not exactly a neutral source.

    One word: bullshit. Support your assertion. I find it hard to believe that, if there were any credible evidence Bill Clinton had someone lynched, that Republicans would have to wait for the Lewinski scandal to call for impeachment.

    One name: Ricky Ray Rector. Then there’s the membership of the all white golf course, his friendship and endorsement by Orval Faubus etc. etc.

    As to the second part of it, you seriously think the Republicans would start an argument about the death penalty?

    Actually that picture was posted to FreeRepublic two days before Matt Drudge claimed to have received it from a Clinton staffer

    Not according to the newspapers – British newspapers, incidentally, not the unreadable stuff you lot get stateside – I’ve read.

    As I said, you lot can believe this drivel if you want.

  57. 57
    DaveL

    You claimed it was.

    No, I showed it was, and you have offered no rebuttal.

    Nice use of “A” and “B”, btw. You’ve once again admitted that neither the donkeys nor the elephants (I refuse to dignify these farcical proceedings with the terms left and right) give a damn about overseas.

    Donkeys, elephants, or even jackasses like you. None of which has anything to do with nativism – ergo, red herring.

    It’s worth checking the reference on that. MediaMatters, not exactly a neutral source.

    I’m sorry, are you trying to pretend some kind of parity exists between my source and your completely unsourced claims?

    One name: Ricky Ray Rector.

    So now an execution taking place under his governorship is a “state sponsored lynching?” What were you saying about overheated rhetoric? Also notice you’re the one who introduced racially charged terms into that topic.

    Then there’s the membership of the all white golf course, his friendship and endorsement by Orval Faubus etc. etc.

    What, do you imagine Faubus was a liberal? Or are you just using the old trick of conflating the pre-civil-rights-era southern Democrats with modern liberals?

    Not according to the newspapers – British newspapers, incidentally, not the unreadable stuff you lot get stateside – I’ve read.

    There’s an article by the Telegraph still up on the web- they simply report what the Drudge Report claims. They show no sign of having even investigated other possible provenances.

  58. 58
    democommie

    Fuckinglamebrainboyd:

    Oh, Frankie, I didn’t know that you were a British racist piece of shit. I thought you were homegrown. Well, now that you’ve cleared that up for me, I can completely ignore your whanking.

    Ta.

  59. 59
    frankboyd

    This is the sort of thinking that passes for reasoning here. If you oppose nativism and racial incitement, you are advocating racism. This is what passes for intelligent thought here.

    So now an execution taking place under his governorship is a “state sponsored lynching?”

    Let’s see now… If a republican governor, in a hard fought primary battle, flew back to his home state to supervise the execution of a mentally retarded black man, what would be said?

    I rest my case. This is why this party-political stuff is both tedious and nauseating.

  60. 60
    DaveL

    This is the sort of thinking that passes for reasoning here. If you oppose nativism and racial incitement, you are advocating racism.

    I haven’t seen you do either. All you’ve done since you’ve gotten here is throw around red herrings and apply absurd double standards to provide cover for nativists and racists.

    Let’s see now… If a republican governor, in a hard fought primary battle, flew back to his home state to supervise the execution of a mentally retarded black man, what would be said?

    I believe that would be called “business as usual.” I also notice that you fail to establish any basis for imputing racial motives to Clinton for his supervision of the execution. In addition, it hasn’t escaped my notice that you’re digging almost 20 years into the past looking for something – anything that you might be able to sell as racism by liberals. Nor do you bother to examine the views of Clinton’s Republican opponents during the campaign towards the execution or the death penalty in general.

    You see, we don’t have to go back 20 years to find a conservative governor presiding over a highly questionable execution. If I’m not mistaken, in fact, we have one going on todayscheduled for 7 p.m. under Republican Nathan Deal in Georgia.

    But I’m sure that’s just a coincidence. Because they’re both just as bad.

  61. 61
    frankniddy

    It also wasn’t a Democratic voter that said, and I quote, “It takes balls to execute an innocent man.”

  62. 62
    democommie

    Governor Deal has sackage, too. Murdering fuck.

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site