Too much hate


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

I will admit that my posting right now is somewhat lax, mostly because I am depressed and appalled at the level of hate and vitriol coming from the left, against Trump, against his family and children, against Republicans, against anyone who dares express an opinion or take an action that the left disagrees with.

The stories below are only a very very very small sample of similar stories in the past two weeks.

The last story has one further important detail: One of the thugs who harassed Nielsen in the restaurant also works at the Department of Justice.

Civilized people do not act this way. It is beyond the pale, and if it doesn’t stop some very bad things are going to happen, and happen very soon.

Much of this recent hate is centered on Trump’s tough immigration policy, and is generally based on ignorance and emotion, or downright disinformation. Somehow, all the problems we face are Trump’s fault, even though Trump’s arrest policy for illegal immigrants is merely the same policy followed by the Obama administration, but enforced in a more aggressive manner. (Unlike under Obama, no one is being released under their own recognizance.) It is also a policy that is following laws written and passed back in 2008, and signed by Republican president George Bush.

It is perfectly reasonable to disagree with Trump’s approach on immigration and to try to get it changed. Readers of this website know that I myself disagree strongly with Trump on many issues, and have had decidedly mixed opinions so far about the success or failure of his presidency.

To threaten, harass, shout curses, and menace the children of lawmakers over these issues however is unacceptable. It does not solve anything, and can only lead to worse injustices.

I find this situation even more depressing because I do not see anything changing for the better. Instead, I see it getting worse, day by day. The left will simply not accept the results of the 2016 election, and appears willing to do anything to overturn it. Nor do I see the type of voter groundswell necessary that will tell the leaders on the left that this behavior must stop. Their voters remain firmly on their side, and if anything, quite willing to endorse the hate and invective being spouted by their leaders.

So, forgive me if I am “going Galt” over this. I am an optimist at heart, and like to write about positive human endeavors. Unfortunately, it is harder to spot these positive endeavors when the culture is overwhelmed by a dust storm of hate.

Share

52 comments

  • wodun

    These are the same people who think they are more morally evolved than the rest of humans and are obligated to tell us how to live. Trump’s rhetoric is nothing compared to how the Democrats have been behaving and they can’t blame Trump for making them this way because they have acted like this for over a hundred years. Let’s not forget why their party mascot is a jack***. (Sorry if that is viewed as profane but that is the actual name of their mascot, which they adopted out of pride of the accusation.)

  • Matt in AZ

    If the “blue wave” fails to materialize this November, and the Republicans actually _pick up_ seats, it will be interesting to see if those on The Left continue down this road or finally lose their righteous enthusiasm enough to try something different. Unfortunately, I expect a stronger freak-out than we’ve seen thus far, maybe even a return to the failed urban guerrilla activism of the 60s/70s. Here’s hoping I’m wrong.

  • Cotour

    Matt in Arizona:

    They have no other road, this is it. The Left is wed to the irrational and divisive hate, they have no other mode of argument to promote their positions. Thats how bankrupt their philosophy has been revealed to be.

    The Democrat party we see before us is dying and a decisive win by the Republicans in November will certainly be one of the final nails in their coffin, the Democrats of today are going away whether they like it or not. They will be a party in name only cast out into the political power desert for at least 20 years and possibly much more.

    And its all due to the phenomenon in presidential power that is Trump.

  • Sandra Warren

    I’m right there with you, Mr. Zimmerman. Citizens will not listen to each other and accept a position contrary to their own. Critical thinking seems to have vanished. It’s extremely disturbing to see entertainers encouraging mob rule with obscenities and vitriol in the name of free speech. I feel powerless against this wave of sanctimonious tyranny. How sad for our republic.

  • wodun

    Unfortunately, I expect a stronger freak-out than we’ve seen thus far, maybe even a return to the failed urban guerrilla activism of the 60s/70s. Here’s hoping I’m wrong.

    That was a bit before my time but I was surprised to learn of how violent our friends to the left were in those decades. It has been over a hundred years of political violence with some decreases in the 80’s-90’s but now violent events are trending upward. The mob violence we saw during the election and after it, hasn’t stopped but the media has stopped covering it.

  • Cotour

    “I will admit that my posting right now is somewhat lax, mostly because I am depressed and appalled at the level of hate and vitriol coming from the left, against Trump, against his family and children, against Republicans, against anyone who dares express an opinion or take an action that the left disagrees with.”

    Q: Why are you applying logic here? And why are you depressed? These events are the best things that can be going on at this point in time. They are upset and becoming more and more irrational because they understand that they are in an existential struggle and they have no other defense but the one that is being rejected. It should be making them upset.

    Your expectation is that the Left is going to lay down to the growing Conservative pro American movement?

    Like I said, your being irrational.

  • wayne

    Weather Underground Announces Fall Offensive
    October 1970
    https://youtu.be/TfdJ3FiSva4
    10:00

    Weather Underground Bombs the Capitol, Pentagon, and State Department
    March 1971
    https://youtu.be/jbQCpUhONtk
    9:50

  • Cotour: It is very clear from your many comments that you are certain this behavior by the left presages a collapse in the polls and their eventual defeat.

    I however see no reason to believe in your certainty. You could be right, and on some days I agree with you. Most of the time I see nothing to convince me that your glorious victory against fascism is going to occur.

    Germans also did not believe the Nazis would come to power. And when they did, they never believed they were going to do the evil they repeatedly said they wanted to do.

    It is naive to assume the left’s bad behavior will automatically lead to their defeat. History shows too many examples of just the opposite.

  • Col Beausabre

    If the Left loses the Fall, they will totally, TOTALLY spaz out. I would not put violence from someone out of question (I mean firearms, explosives, etc)

    Bob, your friend John Batchelor has spent the past year discussing with Dr Michael Vlahos on a weekly basis whether we are already in a civil war, Vlahos is of the opinion that we are at stage four of five stages. Here is their latest conversation

    https://audioboom.com/posts/6899282-the-new-american-civil-war-peter-strzok-disregards-walmart-s-commoners-michael-vlahos-jhuworldcrisis

  • Col Beausabre: Yes, I am aware. See also my essay, The Think Tank Culture of Washington, written in June 2016:

    What will this elite community do should Trump win the presidency and start demanding that they do things differently? Will they recognize that we are a democracy and work with him, the elected choice of the American people, or will they resist because he isn’t the politician they wanted and wants to institute policies they disagree with?

    I don’t want to make it sound as if everyone at this conference was unreasonable or close-minded. As I noted already, I was impressed by the effort being made by CNAS to work out bi-partisan solutions to the country’s most important national security questions. Their policy papers, six of which I have now read, are thoughtful, pragmatic, and fair-minded. The problem is that they are mostly written from this moderate establishment position, which unfortunately prevents them from considering the conservative perspective that is outside that framework. It was that perspective that was central to the election victories in Congress in 2010 and 2014, and is why the two most dominate Republicans running for President were outsiders Donald Trump and Ted Cruz. That this Washington community seems so unaware of it, even after these political events, is very problematic.

    Thus, I fear that the culture of Washington is becoming increasingly hostile to and insulated against the choices of the American electorate. I fear that they will one day soon decide to team up with the politicians they like to use the concentrated power we have given them in Washington to reject those choices, even to the extent of tossing out the Constitution and the democratic legal system that made the United States once the freest and wealthest nation in the history of the human race.

    I hope I am wrong. I pray that I am wrong. I think we might very well find out in the coming year.

    In retrospect, my words seem almost clairvoyant.

  • Cotour

    You are thinking in absolute political terms, that is incorrect. “Glorious victory”, there will be no glorious victory, it will be a big mess, but it will be our big mess and it is our mess by design. What you are observing is the Constitution in operation at its maximum operating parameters. Look forward to the mess, the mess is the proof that our system works.

    And it is designed to get even messier as long as the rules are adhered to, political power will be controlled by one party primarily and the other party must retool in order to control power again. And if they refuse then a new restructured party will emerge in time.

    There are no absolutes in American politics, just shades of gray that are drawn to one side or the other for as long as the one party offers what the people ultimately want and vote for. That is why elections are so treacherous, anything in the pursuit or the retention of power, ANYTHING. (Do you think that I write that all the time just for giggles?)

    This is why I speak in terms of strategy and terms of morality, what we are witnessing in Trump is pure political strategy and the people who are watching it and the political party that is being beat up by it do not recognize it. Why? Because they are used to only reacting emotionally to political conversations about “Morality”. This border issue is a prime example, and Trump stopped it out and blew it all to hell.

    That is what is failing, the Lefts political conversation is not working any longer, the people are no longer buying it. This scares the hell out of them. Will they get violent? Very possibly, because they are being pushed to the wall.

    Trump acts, and his practicality, speed and willingness to change directions and try something new, scares, the, hell, out of them all and the people see it all and are soaking it all in for future reference.

    So, no absolute glorious victory, just the control of political power shifting for a long time primarily one way. That is called victory in American politics.

    If your depressed then you probably should take a week or so off and allow yourself to decompress. I do it now and then when it gets on my nerves. Its not going anywhere. Maybe take a camping trip to Northern California, take a look around see if you see anything interesting . (Make sure you bring your camera :)

  • Edward

    From the Kirstjen Nielsen article:

    Democratic Socialists of America member Allison Hrabar reveled in her actions Wednesday to the Washington Examiner, saying it “feels really good to confront people who are actually responsible” for arresting any illegal immigrants.

    The Department of (In)Justice paralegal specialist was proud of her abhorrent behavior.

    Ms. Hrabar said her actions were off-the-clock and not official, and that she was merely engaging in speech protected by the First Amendment.

    Apparently she also believes that such horrific behavior should not reflect badly on the Do(I)J, but because of her it now appears that everyone there is a disloyal, corrupt (as wodun said) jack***.

    The corruption is located throughout the Do(I)J, from the top to the bottom, and all levels believe that acting out in the most inappropriate ways is — or should be — acceptable.

    The swamp is deeper than we had suspected, and the sooner it starts being drained the sooner we will get our country back.

  • Cotour: You are certain “the control of political power” will shift. I see no reason at all to have such certainty. I hope you are right, but I think it might be wise for you to consider the possibility that the sharks who have no morality, only want power, and see Trump as a threat, might move to stop him, by any means necessary. They have already demonstrated their willingness to do this in the FBI. They are doing it now with immigration. And they continue to successfully push the federal budget to grow in an out-of-control manner, thus pouring money and power into their hands in Washington.

    You are naive to think they might not seize power, or that Trump is guaranteed to win against them on the political stage. More important, you are naive to think Trump might not simply be another version of these same power-hungry sharks.

  • Cotour

    Anything in the acquisition or the retention of power, anything! (Who originated that and has been writing that for the past several years?)

    Anyone who rereads anything that I have written here for the last 4 years (?), thats the conclusion that they come to, Cotour, naive.

    PS: The control of political power has shifted, thats what this is all about. We are witnessing the internal players on the Left resisting the peoples will.

  • Andrew_W

    Unless I’ve missed the reports of violence, trespass, willful damage and arson I don’t see that there’re reasonable grounds for those supportive of free speech to find the protests outside the restaurant where Nielsen had her taxpayer funded meal objectionable. The alternative to the right to demonstrate is to not have the right to demonstrate, if that’s the policies you believe in you probably should be a Putin cheerleader. Russia and other autocratic states know how to deal with protesters. This inclination to support repression (but only the repression that suits) is the difference between the conservative right and the libertarian right.

  • Andrew_W: As usual, you are quick to make excuses for the bad and hateful behavior of the left.

    No where in my essay was I calling for anyone’s free speech to be censored. I was simply describing the uncivilized and hateful behavior by people who claim to know better, and clearly don’t. And just as they have the freedom to behave like savages (without actually harming others), I have the right to call them on it.

    That you immediately wish to take their side in this debate reminds me exactly of what I was referring to in this comment earlier today.

  • m d mill

    Andrew_W:

    Those who protested Nielsen were not interested in free speech; today they have all the avenues of free speech they could ever need, including 90 percent of all media and academia. They were only interested specifically in disrupting the life of a free citizen who disagrees with them, so as to intimidate her and anyone else who would disagree. We do not have a constitutional right to harassment, or to say or do anything we want anywhere, at any time. Do we all not have a right to pursue happiness? Would you want someone to stalk you 24-7, or 12-3 or even 1-1? Would you think it honorable or justifiable or legal? The attempt to intimidate is the despicable first action of fascists and authoritarians.

    There is no true constitutional right to “demonstrate” or disrupt, and certainly not to do so anywhere, at any time for the purpose of harassment. We have a democratic relatively free and fair process for political change.
    Today, and for decades, the true right to free speech has been purposefully misinterpreted and abused and “weaponized” most by those who would rather destroy it’s true meaning altogether.
    Support of this abuse is despicable in a free and civil society.

  • Andrew_W

    Robert Zimmerman, you make it clear that you think the protesters were not acting in a civilized manner, (“Civilized people do not act this way.”), I think in civilized society that people have the right to protest, for it to be justified to accuse them of acting in an uncivilized way I’d expect them to have done more than conduct a noisy protest, so what actions of theirs are you referring to to justify your accusations of them acting uncivilized?

    “That you immediately wish to take their side in this debate reminds me exactly of what I was referring to in this comment earlier today.”

    Where have I taken “their side”? I argue only for their right to peacefully protest, I’ve made no judgment on the merits or otherwise of their cause.

  • Andrew_W

    m d mill, your arguments remind me of the current belief amongst leftist students that they have the right to be protected against speech that hurts them, that they should have safe spaces and trigger warnings to protect themselves from those hurtful alternative opinions.
    Harden up Snow Flake, I’ve no doubt that Ms. Nielsen is big enough to take such matters in her stride and not need protecting like leftist students from people legally protesting as you evidently believe.

  • born01930

    Robert,

    Only check the political news Mondays and Thursdays. Focus on caves and space the rest of the time, you will be much happier…and you really won’t miss much.

  • Chris

    Andrew – where do you live, and work? Where does your family go for dinner or other entertainment? I think we can show up with signs and bullhorns to show you what this is like.
    Put yourself in the shoes of those being PERSONALLY tracked and protested. This is not a protest at their office nor at an official speech…etc, it is to disrupt their personal lives.
    I doubt many of those doing this would last very long if they were subjected to 1/10 of the treatment they propose for others.

  • Andrew

    There comes a point when the haters cross a line that can’t be uncrossed. When that happens you either act, or you die. Case in point, The Holocaust.

    The Jewish community in Europe was staunchly pacifist. When the haters crossed the line ALL ACROSS EUROPE AND THE WORLD. They did not act. They could not act. They were not armed.

    I have been watching the haters on the left get more and more insane since my high school days at the end of the Vietnam War. McGovern and his supporters, many of that supporters now in leadership with the Dem Party, were insane. He lost.

    But the Hate Goes On, and gets worse. I have long passed the point of civilized discussion with haters. Words alone with them will not work. But words, spoken from behind the sights of a rifle will at least let them know there is a price to pay for hating, especially when what you hate is decidedly NOT a pacifist.

    I feel for you depression. But, feeling bad will not effectively combat hate.

  • Cotour

    The left are justified in doing anything to further their position, because in their minds what they believe is superior to what anyone else believes. They are politically correct and superior.

    There was no protest outside of the restaurant https://youtu.be/QxNVvB8FBEA

    As you can plainly see it is inside and right in your face, up close, personal and threatening. Leftist children applying their “Community organization” skills.

  • m d mill

    Andrew’s response to being stalked, verbally harassed or intimidated…”harden up snowflake”.
    If this is legal “protest”, it should not be.
    Andrew_ W is arguing for the right to stalk, verbally harass and intimidate targeted victims, which is the despicable first step of fascists and authoritarians , and hides it behind the shield of “legal protest” or freedom of speech. This is an inane shallow argument, as is the implication that to resist these tactics is similar to the fascist leftist call to suppress contrary opinions, freedom of speech or vigorous debate.

    Yes, you are right..I DO believe everyone should be legally protected from targeted bullying, harassment, stalking or intimidation. You do not, it seems….and I would defend to the death your right to disagree with me…although calling me a Snowflake was really a low blow!!!…i think I’m gonna cry.

  • Cotour

    Andrew W employs a kind of reason that many in the Left even Democrats employ.

    I have a confused friend, he is always telling me what books that I need to read. And when I decline reading his list he says “You are ignorant, if you do not read then you can not learn anything new”. His latest reading list included a book written by Madeleine Albright, probably one of the worst SOS’s in history, and a book about Fascism. He would not recognize the problems with both if they hit him over the head. Its a dodge for people who really are not informed to somehow have a conversation and attempt to appear relevant. Fail.

    The problem with this kind of thinking is that while reading informs one, I do it all day long, it does not rewrite the nature of the human being or the history of man.

    Everything that is to be known about the subject at hand, the nature of man related to political power, governance and abuse of power was written about 240 years ago in the form of the Constitution. And everything that has been thrown at it only continues to prove it over and over again. Marx attempted to usurp capitalism and supplant it with Socialism and the cooperative and has over time always been proven to be wrong. Wrong, violent, oppressive and deadly as a matter of fact.

    So this technique of pointing a finger accusing one of being narrow minded or not well read is just that, a technique, a dodge. No one will be writing anything that countermands anything that the Founders wrote and gave birth to. People who believe that there are some new rules of operation to be discovered are self delusional and in fact do not understand what it is that they are talking about.

    Andrew W is a politically correct socialist who believes that he is a rock ribbed Conservative. I still say its because he grew up upside down living in New Zealand. By the way, New Zealand grows the best Sauvignion Blancs in the world, hands down, never tasted a bad one.

  • Andrew_W

    Chris, you raise a good point – but it’s one I’ve already considered, referred to and dismissed. At the time of the protest Ms. Nielsen was not acting in her private capacity with family and friends, she was acting in her work capacity with her meal being paid for by the government. If she had been acting as a private individual at the time I wouldn’t be defending the demonstrators right to protest. You can point out that the protesters probably didn’t know that she was still at work – but she was.

  • Andrew_W

    m d mill: “Andrew_ W is arguing for the right to stalk, verbally harass and intimidate targeted victims, which is the despicable first step of fascists and authoritarians . . . ”

    I disagree, the first step of authoritarians is to suppress the voices that speak against them – as you make it clear that you would do given the opportunity.

  • Andrew_W

    Cotour: “Andrew W is a politically correct socialist who believes that he is a rock ribbed Conservative.”

    I’ve made it clear on several occasions that I’m not a Conservative, nor am I a socialist – which I’ve also made clear, your friend is right when he says “You are ignorant, if you do not read then you can not learn anything new”, but he’s wrong in the assumption that if you read you will learn – as evidently you still think there can be only two political ideologies and so you get horribly confused when someone speaks out against both socialism and the authoritarian tendencies of conservatives.

  • Cotour

    Your appearance of reasonability, is just that, an appearance. Nothing that you promote would ever be acceptable to you personally, none of it.

    Its just a part of your technique repertoire, its a “safe” place to operate from.

  • Edward

    Andrew_W,
    You wrote: “Where have I taken ‘their side’? I argue only for their right to peacefully protest, I’ve made no judgment on the merits or otherwise of their cause.

    Your very next sentence answered your own question. You need not state explicitly what you mean, you can also dance around it to make your meaning clear. You imply that an action that chases a patron out of a restaurant is a “peaceful protest.” How peaceful could it be if the target is intimidated into fleeing?

    Once again, you seem to purposefully misinterpret the English language in order to obfuscate. This is no way to present your point of view, as it invites confusion. But that also seems to be your intention.

    your arguments remind me of the current belief amongst leftist students that they have the right to be protected against speech that hurts them, that they should have safe spaces and trigger warnings to protect themselves from those hurtful alternative opinions.

    The leftist concept of safe space is not what was violated in the Allison Hrabar case. She was not stating her point of view but actively intimidating her target. Leftists create safe spaces in order to hide from even a statement of an alternate point of view — it does not have to be harassment or intimidation for them to have an infantile meltdown. If intimidation, provoking strife, being argumentative or hostile fits in with your definition of “peaceable,” as in “the right of the people peaceably to assemble” from the First Amendment, then you may want to reexamine your definition.

    Harassment is not free speech, otherwise we men would be free to harass women as free speech. Your words tell us that you believe harassment is acceptable behavior. Or is it only acceptable when it supports your own leftist position?

    There comes a point when the haters cross a line that can’t be uncrossed. When that happens you either act, or you die. Case in point, The Holocaust.

    Are you now advocating the same actions be taken against the haters? Or actions worthy of self defense? Since you brought up that the Holocaust victims had been disarmed, are you suggesting that firearms should be used? All these are implied by your comment.

    I’ve made it clear on several occasions that I’m not a Conservative, nor am I a socialist

    Actually, what you have made clear is that you have absolutely no idea what either of these two concepts are or what either position represents or believes.

    but he’s wrong in the assumption that if you read you will learn

    Here is something we can agree on. You, Andrew_W, are an example of someone who fails to learn from what he reads, as you have demonstrated time after time.

    By the way, did you learn what peaceable means when you looked it up? I didn’t think so.

  • Andrew_W

    Edward, you claim Ms. Nielsen was “intimidated into fleeing” the restaurant but provide no evidence that that was what happened, you seem to be selectively naive in accepting whatever story you’re offered by the media sources that have condemned the protesters. How was Ms. Nielsen “forced” to flee? Did protesters enter the restaurant and physically accost her? Has Ms. Nielsen claimed that she was forced to flee, her meal uneaten, or did she actually leave when it suited her to leave?

  • Edward

    Did protesters enter the restaurant and physically accost her?

    Actually, yes.

    Once again, you do not know your definitions.

  • wodun

    Andrew_W
    June 21, 2018 at 9:29 pm
    Unless I’ve missed the reports of violence, trespass, willful damage and arson I don’t see that there’re reasonable grounds for those supportive of free speech to find the protests outside the restaurant where Nielsen had her taxpayer funded meal objectionable. The alternative to the right to demonstrate is to not have the right to demonstrate, if that’s the policies you believe in you probably should be a Putin cheerleader. Russia and other autocratic states know how to deal with protesters. This inclination to support repression (but only the repression that suits) is the difference between the conservative right and the libertarian right.

    Not everything legal is ethical. It is poor form to harass people in this manner. It is even worse to harass their children and extended family. Worse still to show up at their house like a lynch mob. Criticizing tactics like this isn’t an effort to outlaw the first amendment but to get people to protest in a responsible fashion without acting like their party mascot. Remember, these are the same people lecturing us about how to live and the destruction of societal norms by Trump.

    They are normalizing abusive protest tactics and violence. Violence has been the cornerstone of Democrat’s #Resistence since long before Trump was even elected.

    And we all know how Democrats and the media would respond if Republicans used violence this way in general and specifically against a woman. Democrats need to live by the same rules they have for others.

    you seem to be selectively naive in accepting whatever story you’re offered by the media sources that have condemned the protesters.

    You have a point here. She might have just finished her dinner and left as planned but it wasn’t the media condemning the Democrat’s militant activists making the claim, it was the militant activists themselves making the claim they drove her from the restaurant.

  • Andrew_W

    “Not everything legal is ethical. It is poor form to harass people in this manner.”
    It might be poor form, or not, depending on your opinion, lots of things are poor form, the unnecessary separation of parents from children was I think poor form, I wouldn’t accuse Mr. Trump and Ms. Nielsen of being uncivilized over it, though others would.

    “They are normalizing abusive protest tactics and violence. Violence has been the cornerstone of Democrat’s #Resistence since long before Trump was even elected.”

    I’ve read several articles about how the word “violence” is being redefined by some on the left, to exercise free speech that others find objectionable is now called “violence”, and only government is licensed to use violence, therefore those exercising such offending free speech are committing acts of violence and should be punished, you can buy into that line of reasoning, I won’t.

    It’s better I think to err on the side of more freedom than less freedom, even if it upsets some snowflakes.

    You mention that children and other relatives shouldn’t be targeted, I agree.

  • Cotour

    Talking about hateful.

    https://youtu.be/RLm6G7oCcBU

    John McCain, no friend of the deplorables or anyone who was not a Democrat.

    John McCain, what the hell went wrong with you? What a disgrace. Lots of disgraceful behavior by lots and lots of political actors all culminating and maxing out in the Obama administration. Says a hell of a lot about what they all had in store for America and Americans in the coming years.

    Thank God Hillary is not the president, love Trump or hate Trump the fact alone that he was able to deny her the presidency was his primary function, any else that he throws up on the score board is gravy.

  • Cotour

    Andrew W;

    Your Leftist commentary (I know, your not a leftist. Funny, you sound exactly like one) is disturbing to say the least, thank God you exist in the Southern Hemisphere. Who needs another one of you here in America?

  • Ryan Lawson

    I have to agree somewhat with Andrew W here. For example, someone like Lois Lerner having used her position of governmental power to harass and make citizens miserable should have in return been stalked and harassed any time she entered the public square. Anyone doing business with her should have refused, restaurants should have refused to seat her and she generally should have been ostracized. In my mind it is the best nonviolent way to deal with abuses that go uncorrected in the justice system when the justice system is aligned to the corrupted power.

    My issue with progressives doing it in this case is that they are applying selective moral outrage as evidenced by the photo that went around of caged kids during the Obama presidency. Maybe it is time for someone to stalk and harass these socialists in the public square?

    I feel as though conservatives have no other options eventually, they continue to fight politically with outdated rank and file tactics while the left employees cover and machine fire.

    Half the reason Trump has been so successful and is hated by the left is that he is employing their political tactics against them.

  • wodun

    the unnecessary separation of parents from children was I think poor form

    Criminals are separated from their parents all the time and it is the fault of those who break the law not the fault of those who enforce the law. This isn’t even new but incepted into the media to distract the populace from good news on the economy, NK talks, and the terrible news that the Obama administration rigged the Clinton investigation and illegally spied on the Trump campaign in order to rig the election and if that fails stage a soft coup.

    This whole “controversy” arose when former Obama officials tweeted pictures of processing facilities under Obama. But that was all their media needed to run their pre-planned operation to distort what is taking place in an effort to attack Trump. Since then we have seen endless examples of fake pictures, fake descriptions of what takes place in the detention process, and fake characterizations of the conditions people are held in. It is deliberately dishonest and planned in advance.

    I’ve read several articles about how the word “violence” is being redefined by some on the left, to exercise free speech

    Andrew_W, there is actual violence taking place and its been going on for some time. When you send a lynch mob to someone’s house how are they supposed to differentiate it from the similar mobs of Democrat’s militant activists that have hospitalized people and destroyed property?

    Half of congress was almost assassinated, Portland had to cancel a parade, several elected officials have been assaulted with vehicles, hundreds of people have been hospitalized, and on and on. There are far too many examples to list and there are the precursor to violence of kicking people out of restaurants, targeting businesses with lawsuits, censoring on the internet, and more!

  • wodun

    I disagree, the first step of authoritarians is to suppress the voices that speak against them – as you make it clear that you would do given the opportunity.

    This is exactly what Democrats are doing and they are doing it by using many different tactics from mobs, violence, lawfare, fascist control over companies, abuse of government power, ect.

    No one is trying to stop the Democrats from protesting. They aren’t even punished when the break the law. People have every right to complain about their totalitarian brown shirt strategy to overthrow our system of government.

    You do realize you are engaging in victim blaming right? How dare the victims speak out about the abuse they receive.

  • Edward

    Ryan Lawson wrote: “For example, someone like Lois Lerner having used her position of governmental power to harass and make citizens miserable should have in return been stalked and harassed any time she entered the public square.

    Vigilante justice is always inappropriate. Too often it leads to inappropriate behavior, as happened to Kristjen Nielsen, and it can easily lead to harming innocent people due to misidentification, as happened to Abner Louima ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abner_Louima ), and those two guys knew better than to apply vigilante justice.

    There is no reason to become the bad guys while fighting the bad guys.

  • Chris

    Andrew_W. So ok it was an “official meal” – so people are not allowed to eat in peace?

  • Too many of you need to reread what I wrote. The key quote:

    Civilized people do not act this way. It is beyond the pale, and if it doesn’t stop some very bad things are going to happen, and happen very soon.

    I was never arguing for censorship, which is the disinformation that Andrew_W is trying to spread. I was arguing that this uncivilized and violent and hateful behavior by the left is inappropriate, and deserves harsh criticism.

    To make believe that statement is trying to deny them their freedom of speech, as Andrew_W does, is exhibiting great intellectual dishonesty.

  • Cotour

    One comment here and I write this respectfully but unambiguously, you use the word “inappropriate”, this demonstrates that you draw a line of civility where certain things or techniques of political argument or discourse should not go or be used.

    You are not quite fully understanding what is going on here or in American politics in general. This is political warfare, there are no rules! You are an educated and civilized person and you operate out of a sense of morality and fair play. Your opponents have no such parameters of civility and fair play that hampers them, why? Because they are more “moral” than you and I, they are political zealots and can and will justify anything in the pursuit of their goal “political correctness” and “social justice” I.E. Globalism. And Globalism is the exact opposite of how and why America was founded and the two can not exist in harmony. One of them has got to go.

    This simple tell in how you see things in politics explains your concern for the potential violence that may or may not appear as the Left is pressured more and more in justifying their positions and the certain demise of the Democrat party as currently structured, anti American and Leftist. They may well become violent and if they do it will be because they are in an existential death struggle with individual freedom. When an animal, political or otherwise, is cornered and is threatened in life ending terms expect them to get as violent as they possibly can to alter that approaching event.

    In a word, you are too nice for this game. When I write it, and I write it often: Anything in the acquisition or the retention of political power, ANYTHING. I mean anything (You don’t get that), politics is just intellectual and ideological warfare without blood, but it is warfare. Lets be hopeful this discourse remains confined to the intellectual and ideological and does not degrade into the desperate physical and bloody. But one way or another this extreme Leftist Democrat party is going away.

    If pushed to choose between the two I choose them going away rather than me, you or us, going away. What ever it takes, its theirs to choose.

  • Cotour

    And here is the extension of the Globalization political model and what this ideological struggle is all about:

    https://ca.news.yahoo.com/xi-says-china-must-lead-way-reform-global-131025093.html

    China, which has no credibility in leading anything, moral or otherwise, is fully supportive of the Soros open borders globalization model for world operation, America must be supplanted as the global leader. The Chinese like this model because they can force others through the faulty politically correct thinking to do as they say and not as they do.

    This is what has been fashioned by the G.H. Bush’s of the world, whether intended or not, this is the end result. Just another political warfare front, will this front become bloody? Look to the South China seas for that answer. I fully expect there to be live fire between American and Chinese war ships and / or war planes at some point in the near future.

    Sometimes in life, there will be blood, its a component of the process of the exercise of power it either reestablishes the line or establishes a new line.

  • Cotour: I totally understand all the points about morality and political warfare. When I say that some very bad things might happen by this disgusting and increasingly violent behavior of the left, I am not merely referring to violence that might come from them. I am writing as a historian who knows how these things play out. The violence, if not restrained, will eventually capture everyone, innocent and guilty, and millions will die. And the left will probably take the most casualties, lose, and force a reshaping of society that is exactly the opposite of what everyone wants.

    You advocate an arms race. I do not dispute the need by the right to fight back. I also do not want the right to become the monster it is trying to fight. We do that, and we lose the constitution, the rule of law, and everything we are supposed to believe in.

    It is on that point that we fundamentally disagree. I think it is very possible for the right to fight back, hard, in the manner of a Grant or Sherman, without losing sight of the morality that justifies that fight.

    You appear to be quite willing to fight back so hard, in order to win, that you are willing to abandon that morality.

  • Cotour

    “You appear to be quite willing to fight back so hard, in order to win, that you are willing to abandon that morality.”

    Not exactly, I am just fully recognizing what is underway. I have no desire for havoc and chaos, not for one second, I want these things to be settled at the ballot box and not in the streets, which is where I ultimately believe they will be settled. You appear to have an expectation for the Leftists we discuss to moderate in some reasonable way as they hurtle themselves towards this clash of civilization models. The most extreme of them can not and will not as they see themselves once again becoming irrelevant, and that is how they should remain. They will tend to be willing to participate in more and more extreme activities to prevent their ultimate fate.

    I have said and I maintain that our Constitution is strong and as long as it is adhered to it is the winning strategy, and that is why the Left must attack it and if they are to be successful destroy it or like they are attempting, to use it against itself. That is why we see the likes of Obama and the like attempting to redefine words and terminology and create tension, confusion and unrest. Because that in the end is all they have in their pursuit of their “More perfect” world.

    In the end our Constitution is strong and by design becomes more and more reinforced as there is more and more pressure put upon it. It works, as long as it is allowed to function as designed, and so the only successful strategy for the Left is to destroy it through the many techniques that we are witnessing them employing.

    And once again I point out here: First we eat, then civilization.

    There is no such thing as morality until it is determined who controls the power, remember its strategy OVER morality. In the ultimate effort to maintain that power in the correct (Subjective, IMO, and I assume yours) hands what are you not willing to do? Your statement once again draws a line where you believe others should draw a “reasonable” line. We are to draw the line, not them. This is the nature of power and make no apologies and draw no lines defined by “others”.

  • Cotour

    And this is what leads them.

    Why? “Because God is on our side”.

    http://www.theamericanmirror.com/maxine-waters-orders-more-public-harassment-of-trump-aides-god-is-on-our-side/

    Anything and any cost, because “God is on our side”. It does not get any more dangerous than that because that is how desperate they are becoming because the people see them for what they are, liars. Liars because that is all they can be because their entire foundation is built upon deceit.

    Oh, its going to get much worse.

  • Ryan Lawson

    @Edward I am not advocating vigilante justice (although I must note the origin of this country began as one giant act of it and it is the reason we have a 2nd amendment).

    I am advocating the use of free association with the right to not serve people that have abused their authority and retired with nice pensions. I am advocating the use of free speech in the public sphere to call these people out as well. The left goes too far when a mob enters a private restaurant to harass people in the middle of a meal, but the owner of the establishment should be able to refuse service.

    The left is playing for keeps and they need some pushback or it will only encourage them.

  • Cotour

    “Too much hate” ?

    http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/25/maxine-waters-race-riots/

    Should have called it “Never enough hate”. (Waters is one of the wackiest and biggest promoters of violence, which makes me wonder that she may be sooo loud that she is in fear of some level of prosecution should the Blue wave not appear (?)

    I again point out that as they realize that the Democrats are becoming more and more irrelevant because they are being revealed as being un American and liars the more crazed they will become. The Democrat party is dying before all our eyes.

    **** And I will throw this thought out here related to how Trump may propose to deal with Mexico’s funneling of illegals to our border. Trump may propose that we either militarily invade the first 20 miles or so of Mexico so no one can step foot on U.S soil, or he may propose that all pedestrian realm / Western union financial transfers will be ended until they stop them at their border, if they do not stop their funneling activities. Choose one.

    You can certainly make the argument that the stream of illegals is a national security threat.

  • Edward

    Ryan Lawson,
    You wrote: “I am not advocating vigilante justice (although I must note the origin of this country began as one giant act of it and it is the reason we have a 2nd amendment).

    Actually, that was a revolution for freedom, not an attempt at justice for a tyrannical King. The seemingly confusing preamble to the Second Amendment means that vigilantism is explicitly not the purpose of that amendment. “[T]he right of the people to keep and bear Arms” fits in with the rest of the Constitution so that we do not take the law into our own hands, but we may use such Arms when it does not violate the rights of others or to protect certain of our own rights from immediate harm (e.g. our right to life).

    From your earlier comment: “Anyone doing business with her should have refused, restaurants should have refused to seat her and she generally should have been ostracized. In my mind it is the best nonviolent way to deal with abuses that go uncorrected in the justice system when the justice system is aligned to the corrupted power.

    This sounds like vigilante justice to me, whenever someone believes that abuses go uncorrected in the proper justice system. You may not be advocating violence, but once we take justice into our own hands, no matter the rationalization, things may escalate. We may even find a congresswoman advocating for her and her party’s followers to practice discrimination and vigilante justice, and with that kind of thing as a rationale, someone may escalate into shooting Republican congressmen while they are grouped together to practice for a charitable event.

    Unlikely as it seems, it could happen. Even in America.

    Indeed, isn’t vigilante justice exactly what (Only) Black Lives Matter advocates, specifically because they believe that abuses have gone uncorrected in the proper justice system? Haven’t (O)BLM’s followers gone on to acts as heinous as murder of innocent police officers, for that very reason?

  • Cotour

    Once again, if I ran that restaurant and Maxine Waters came into my restaurant I would respectfully smile, seat her and ask what I could get for her and made sure she had a good time and the best food.

    I do not use my business to make political statements, very foolish IMO. You work for me and don’t like my neutral policies? Then go home.

    If your going to do politics, do politics, if you are going to do business, then do business, draw a bright policy line between the two. To do otherwise is just asking for 1. Trouble and 2. Its just stupid, juvenile, and here is that word again, disrespectful.

  • wodun

    The left is playing for keeps and they need some pushback or it will only encourage them.

    I am tired of the lynch mob mentality of the Democrats. It didn’t start with Trump, it has been going on many decades. It has been getting worse with the ascendancy of the totalitarian marxists that make up the base of the Democrats.

    Tit for tat is a good strategy to bring people to their senses. The problem is that most normal people find the behavior of the Democrats abhorrent and wouldn’t engage in it under normal circumstances. It would take a deliberate and conscious act to get people on the right to do tit for tat with the explicit goal of achieving specific changes from the Democrat party in terms of conduct, strategies, and tactics.

    I am not certain it would work because for Democrats its more of a religion. Their reality can’t exist if they don’t have monsters to fight. We need a cult deprogrammer but they are usually only to help individuals, not red pill half of society. And acting like the Democrats by doing mass protests, abusing government power, censorship, terrorism, and violent street battles means the Democrats win in their effort to destroy our society and culture.

    They want the revolution, how to stop it without making it a self fulfilling prophecy?

    That said, I like making Democrats live up to the rules they make other people follow.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *