Greg Roach's Berkshires Blog
Friday, January 15, 2010
  The Insane Right is Far Worse Than the Looney Left
The right wing web is "outraged" that in a DSCC there is a stock photo used where you can see one of the World Trade Center towers off to the left. Rudy Guilliani is freaking out.

Nevermind that Scott Brown actually voted to deny actual Red Cross 9/11 volunteers financial assistance.

No, in the crazy world that is Tea Bag Land, this mock-up passes as political satire.

This is perhaps the most disgusting American political comment I have ever seen on the web, and I have seen a few.
If you have to dig down to anonymous postings on Free Republic to get such a graphic you really haven't shown much about the Right (generally, or even "Insane"), have you? I mean, if one wants to play that game, you can go to the Zombietime site and find dozens of members of the "Looney Left" who were willing to march and be photographed in public with posters saying "We support the troops when they shoot their officers" or "Bush did it, 9/11 was an inside job." Either of which is a more offensive sentiment than "Obama is using 9/11 for political gain", the message of the satirical graphic you just posted.

So while I agree that the satire is offensive and unfair (in that the Coakley ad was really not an attempt to exploit 9/11), I call bullshit on your "Far Worse" claim.
The "far worse" is an ongoing series, usually to do with the threat of right wing violence. While this graphic is just a picture, it certainly symbolizes the dehumanizing nature of the right's eliminationist rhetoric.

The graphic is just one of 100s of truly insane things said in the past few days. I stand by my claim.
So was this graphic "just one of 100s of truly insane things"? -- or is it "perhaps the most disgusting American political comment I have ever seen on the web, and I have seen a few"? The distinction rather matters, because if it was anything close to the latter, then your post actually tended to refute your broader claim about hateful and eliminationist rhetoric, didn't it?

You've stepped back by several orders of magnitude in your specific claim. Would it be too painful to avoid paradoxically then writing "I stand by my claim"? Especially when you cannot show me right-wing writings which are more hateful than claiming Bush ordered 9/11, or that US soldiers should shoot their officers.

I'll concede that you can occasionally publish an error without the whole edifice of liberalism falling down. Why don't you concede it as well?
Post a Comment

<< Home
A blog of random thoughts and reactions emanating from the bank of a mountain stream in the farthest reaches of the bluest of blue states.

May 2006 / June 2006 / August 2006 / September 2006 / October 2006 / November 2006 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / April 2007 / May 2007 / June 2007 / July 2007 / August 2007 / September 2007 / October 2007 / November 2007 / December 2007 / January 2008 / February 2008 / March 2008 / April 2008 / May 2008 / June 2008 / July 2008 / August 2008 / September 2008 / October 2008 / November 2008 / December 2008 / January 2009 / February 2009 / March 2009 / April 2009 / May 2009 / June 2009 / July 2009 / August 2009 / September 2009 / October 2009 / November 2009 / December 2009 / January 2010 / February 2010 / March 2010 / April 2010 / May 2010 / January 2011 / May 2011 / June 2011 / July 2011 / October 2011 /

greg at gregoryroach dot com

"Livability, not just affordability." - Dick Alcombright

My ongoing campaign for North Adams City Council

iBerkshires' Online Event Calendar

Because a Chart is Worth 1000 Words

Congressional Budget Office data

Powered by Blogger