PDA

View Full Version : The Left's Game of Connect-the-Dots


radioguy
06-12-2009, 05:11 PM
The Left's Game of Connect-the-Dots
By Jonah Goldberg
June 12, 2009


When an abortion provider in Wichita, Kans., was murdered, the predictable chorus pointed fingers at Fox News's Bill O'Reilly. After all, O'Reilly had said that George Tiller was a "baby killer" and had railed against the doctor's late-term abortion practice for years. He must be to blame! No one bothered to ask whether Tiller's accused murderer had ever watched O'Reilly, or to ponder whether a militant pro-life extremist really needed a talk-show host to tell him anything he didn't already know about one of the less than a dozen doctors in the country who still performed third-trimester abortions.

But never mind. Such details don't matter when you're trying to delegitimize people.

Now we have James von Brunn. He is an 88-year-old loon, considered a dangerous nut even within the dangerous-nut community. He took his gun and shot up the Holocaust Museum and murdered a guard. Reporting suggests that von Brunn wanted to fulfill his revenge fantasies against the Jewish-neocon globalist cabal, which apparently outsources much of its work to the Bush family. A 9/11 truther, convinced that the bagel-snarfing, string-pulling Jooooooooooozzz are behind everything, von Brunn is the kind of fanatic the zombies who talk to themselves at the bus station would give a wide berth.

But, of course, we have Sarah Palin to thank for von Brunn. So says some genius at the Daily Kos. A competing braniac at the Huffington Post says, "Thank you very much Karl Rove and your minions." Pretty much the entire media establishment is comfortable labeling von Brunn as a member of the "far right." Putting aside other objections to that nomenclature, if von Brunn is a member of the far right, then it would be helpful and journalistically responsible if the press would start calling Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Sean Hannity, et al., moderates and centrists.

That won't happen, because the whole point of these exercises is to paint the Right as an undifferentiated blob of evil.

Never mind that von Brunn isn't a member of the far right. Nor is he a member of the far left, as some on the right are claiming. He's not a member of anything other than the crazy caucus. Von Brunn's True North is conspiratorial anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. He's not a member of the Christian Right. In fact, he denounces Christianity - just as Hitler did - as a Jewish plot against paganism and Western vigor. Nor is he a capitalist. Again, just as Hitler did, he hails socialism as the solution to the West's problems.

Still, if we are going to play this game where we take the words of politicians and pundits, compare them to the words of murderers and psychopaths, and then assign blame accordingly, then let's blame the New York Times, Chris Matthews, left-wing blogs everywhere, and the academics who penned The Israel Lobby (which blames a fifth column of Israel loyalists for our troubles).

After all, for years, mainstream liberalism and other outposts of paranoid Bush hatred have portrayed neoconservatives - usually code for conservative Jews and other supporters of Israel - as an alien, pernicious cabal. "They have penetrated the culture at nearly every level from the halls of academia to the halls of the Pentagon," observed the New York Times. "They've accumulated the wherewithal financially [and] professionally to broadcast what they think over the airwaves to the masses or over cocktails to those at the highest levels of government."

NBC's Chris Matthews routinely used the word "neocon" as if it was code for "traitor." He asked one guest whether White House neocons are "loyal to the Kristol neoconservative movement, or to the president." Von Brunn may have wondered the same thing, which is why he reportedly had the offices of Bill Kristol's Weekly Standard on his hit list.

Unhinged Bush-hater Andrew Sullivan insists that "The closer you examine it, the clearer it is that neoconservatism, in large part, is simply about enabling the most irredentist elements in Israel and sustaining a permanent war against anyone or any country who disagrees with the Israeli right." Leading liberal intellectual Michael Lind warned about the alarming fact that "the foreign policy of the world's only global power is being made by a small clique" of neoconservative plotters.

Even with Bush out of the picture, some see the problem emerging again. Just this week, Jeremiah Wright, the president's longtime mentor and pastor, whined that "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me."

Maniacs like von Brunn connect dots that aren't there because that's what paranoid anti-Semites do. What's the Left's excuse?

Link (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/06/12/the_lefts_game_of_connect-the-dots_96972.html)

.

MintJulep
06-12-2009, 07:18 PM
If O'Reilly is responsible for Tiller the Killer's murder, then bammy's best friend, "Reverend" Wright is responsible for the Holocaust killing.

After the Michael Moore/Soros/Movon.org hate machine eight-year Bush hate bonanza, they don't have a leg to stand on.

The deeds of the past will be thrown right back in their faces, every time.

Bill Cosby
06-12-2009, 10:19 PM
Why you make another thread on this blame shit.......
Get over it.

The guy is nuts.. DOn't matter what color he is, what stupid crap he believes or thinks or what political party or sports teams he likes. HE IS NUTS!!!!!

STOP already

Zebulon0351
06-13-2009, 01:56 AM
Never mind that von Brunn isn't a member of the far right. Nor is he a member of the far left, as some on the right are claiming. He's not a member of anything other than the crazy caucus.

This clears up everything. Thank you radio for pointing out that he isn't sharing the views of either of our established political parties. Quit pointing fingers when it is happening both ways you fucking moron.

radioguy
06-13-2009, 02:08 AM
This clears up everything. Thank you radio for pointing out that he isn't sharing the views of either of our established political parties. Quit pointing fingers when it is happening both ways you fucking moron.

Are you talking to me? Seriously?

.

Zebulon0351
06-13-2009, 02:17 AM
Are you talking to me? Seriously?

.

I was referring simply to your title of the thread. I know you aren't the worst of the bunch by far.

The Professor
06-13-2009, 02:22 AM
The patient, septuagenarian Prof has expressed repeated frustration with the almost universal misuse of the term, neocon

he has several times posted the wiki-link to the neo-con entry to set the facts straight

The proud to provide Prof will here simply put in brief perspective a summing up, an upshot:

the basic distinction between a neocon and, say, a genghis con such as The principled, uncompromising Prof, concerns FOREIGN POLICY

a neocon is a con who rejects the oldline ISOLATIONISM of, say, robert taft, mr conservative

heck, of george washington, who warned against entangling alliances

a neocon is a right winger who instead of pushing for traditional america-first-and-last values advocates a foreign policy FAR MORE ACTIVE

ESPECIALLY IN THE MIDDLE EAST

definition of neocon---a right winger who advocates an active foreign policy, as opposed to isolationist, especially in the middle east

the founder of neoconservatism, according BOTH to wik and The pedantic Prof's prodigious memory, is IRVING KRISTOL, father of FOX NEWS' bill

in other words, the post at the top of this thread is impressively SPOT ON when it comes to the proper use of that particular archetype

spot on

the shooter was an american nazi, no mystery

as such he would naturally despise the kristols, bush, fox news...

among many other things

again, a lot like reverend wright, obama's spiritual mentor, the pastor whose sermon suggested the title, audacity of hope, of bigears' first book, the father figure the son simply had to ASSASSINATE in order to succeed, to fulfill those opulent obamite ambitions

cliff

radioguy
06-13-2009, 02:31 AM
Zeb, I think you owe me an apology.

The guy was a fucking kook bairdi. He subscribed to an ideology of hate, not republican or democrat.

I think it's pretty lame for you, or anyone else, to attempt to assign this guy to a political party. He embraced anyone that subscribed to his brand of hatred, which you can find on both the extreme right, and the extreme left.

http://www.dcjunkies.com/showpost.php?p=106030&postcount=9

You know people... This is one of those situations where politics shouldn't be involved in the discussion. This guy could fit with the far right, or the far left. He is a racist, and the point here should be to denounce, and not encourage, racism on either side of the fence.

I realize of course, that there will be very few of you here that will give a rats ass about what I just said, and continue to point fingers and make this a political issue... So carry on.

http://www.dcjunkies.com/showpost.php?p=105532&postcount=61

ENOUGH!

The guy is a white supremacist... Therefore, he supports Republicans.

The guy is an anti-Semite... Therefore, he supports democrats.

It's a tie!

http://www.dcjunkies.com/showpost.php?p=105540&postcount=67

Look SC... You know I'm a conservative that supports republicans. But the fact is, the man was a White supremacist, and most White Supremacist support republicans.

And as you have pointed out, he was a anti-Semite, which as we know, is synonymous with far left liberals.

The point is, it really doesn't matter. The guy was a nut from the fringes, and hate like that needs to be denounced, not encouraged.

http://www.dcjunkies.com/showpost.php?p=105562&postcount=84

Don't you think?

.

Zebulon0351
06-13-2009, 02:34 AM
Zeb, I think you owe me an apology.

Don't you think?

.


Then don't title the thread the way you did.

But I'll man up.. I'm sorry.

radioguy
06-13-2009, 02:39 AM
Then don't title the thread the way you did.

But I'll man up.. I'm sorry.

The title of the thread, was the title of the article. I didn't create it...

And apology accepted.

.

bairdi
06-13-2009, 08:04 AM
Zeb, I think you owe me an apology.









Don't you think?

.
radioguy, I think you owe me an apology.

The guy was a fucking kook bairdi. He subscribed to an ideology of hate, not republican or democrat.

I think it's pretty lame for you, or anyone else, to attempt to assign this guy to a political party. He embraced anyone that subscribed to his brand of hatred, which you can find on both the extreme right, and the extreme left.

http://www.dcjunkies.com/showpost.ph...30&postcount=9

rg....I never attempted to assign this guy to a political party and find it quite offensive that you would even accuse me of that especially in light of what I have posted on this incident.

Originally Posted by bairdi
Yes, most times these people belong to parties that are on the fringe if they belong to a party at all. However, the point I have been making is that everyone has a belief that falls somewhere along the political spectrum, either right or left. People like this guy usually fall somewhere to the extreme side of that spectrum. In this guy's case, his beliefs are way out to the right. Had he written about the illegality of the Iraq war and walked into some military building and opened fire, I would say he was a far left wacko.

Originally Posted by bairdi
What the fuck are you talking about? Conservative Republican? Where did that come from? The guy is a wacko. On that point we all agree. Does he have right wing leanings or left wing leanings? I think I have shown that in the man's own words, his leanings are very much on the right side of the political spectrum.

http://www.dcjunkies.com/showpost.php?p=106033&postcount=10

Don't you think?

radioguy
06-13-2009, 10:46 AM
My apologies bairdi.

.

disrupter
06-13-2009, 11:38 AM
The right believes in making up their own dots.

They are very 'dotty'.

Bill Cosby
06-13-2009, 11:54 AM
The patient, septuagenarian Prof has expressed repeated frustration with the almost universal misuse of the term, neocon

he has several times posted the wiki-link to the neo-con entry to set the facts straight

The proud to provide Prof will here simply put in brief perspective a summing up, an upshot:

the basic distinction between a neocon and, say, a genghis con such as The principled, uncompromising Prof, concerns FOREIGN POLICY

a neocon is a con who rejects the oldline ISOLATIONISM of, say, robert taft, mr conservative

heck, of george washington, who warned against entangling alliances

a neocon is a right winger who instead of pushing for traditional america-first-and-last values advocates a foreign policy FAR MORE ACTIVE

ESPECIALLY IN THE MIDDLE EAST

definition of neocon---a right winger who advocates an active foreign policy, as opposed to isolationist, especially in the middle east

the founder of neoconservatism, according BOTH to wik and The pedantic Prof's prodigious memory, is IRVING KRISTOL, father of FOX NEWS' bill

in other words, the post at the top of this thread is impressively SPOT ON when it comes to the proper use of that particular archetype

spot on

the shooter was an american nazi, no mystery

as such he would naturally despise the kristols, bush, fox news...

among many other things

again, a lot like reverend wright, obama's spiritual mentor, the pastor whose sermon suggested the title, audacity of hope, of bigears' first book, the father figure the son simply had to ASSASSINATE in order to succeed, to fulfill those opulent obamite ambitions

cliff


This would of made a great thread..............:thumbsup:

I think the term neocon (I don't hear it very often any more) as it is usually expressed is meant as slander...... A slur, a show of disrespect......... Just as teh term liberal is used here......... IMO both terms are out dated...

Having been much more conservative most of my life I have always leaned heavily on the non-interventionist side of the equation... This "concept" is not even repulblican but was set in motion by a democrat-truman...

It is naive & extremely dangerous doctrine set forth by him........ This is one of the pillars on which the military industrial complex rests...... & what Ike warned against....

bairdi
06-13-2009, 12:00 PM
My apologies bairdi.

.
Apology accepted.

disrupter
06-13-2009, 12:00 PM
We are still tied up in the Iraq invasion.

That makes neocon adventurism both current & relevant.

We have spent at least 1/2 a Trillion dollars breaking the Iraq egg & then pretending we are going to magically fix the egg.

It is stupid to break the egg.
It is insane to think you can ever have enough resources to un-break it.