*** The Dangerous, Homicidal Rage of The Left ***

I edited a post in another thread removing the gist of what I am now about to write. When I wrote the first time, I was rather subtle, but I thought it would still end up being too controversial, too incendiary. I realize now that I must say what must be said and I must do so in a very plain language.


If George W. Bush is reelected, I fully expect an attempt on his life.


It is already clear that, if Kerry does not win at the polls, Democrats will sue in the hope that he will win before a judge. If that does not work, it seems likely to me that Democrats will try to impeach Bush, using as an excuse either Abu Ghraib, WMD's, or both. That effort will likely fail with too few Democrats in Congress, so what then?


Well, look at everything else that has been trampled upon in an attempt to remove Bush from office.

It's clear the Left does not care about the truth in their contemptible lies about Republicans supressing the black vote, privatizing Social Security, and reinstituting the draft. It's one thing to argue about how much a tax cut went to one sector or another, and to argue when Dick Cheney first met John Edwards. It's quite another to try to scare blacks, the elderly, and young voters with outrageous claims that are so obviously and patently false.

It's clear the Left does not care about free speech. Swift Boat veterans who oppose Kerry's candidacy have tried to get their story out. The Kerry campaign threatened to sue their book's publisher and sue any television station that ran their ad's.

It's clear the Left does not care about private property. Two more Bush/Cheney offices have been attacked, in Cincinnati and Flagstaff. This is just the latest in a series of attacks on Republican party offices; offices in West Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Tennessee, Minnesota, and Washington state have all been attacked.

It's clear that the Left does not care about democracy. Beyond lying to the electorate and attacking opposition offices, Democrats have made clear that any Bush victory would cause them to start filing lawsuits. They plan to sue their way to victory even if they lost in a fair election, and such a stance severely undermines the political process.

Truth. Speech. Property. Democracy. If the Left cares so little about such things, is it possible that someone takes their Machiavellian tactics to the logical, violent conclusion? To threaten life itself?

Yes, it is.


I say that because of a recent article posted at the website of the British paper, The Guardian. Its concluding paragraph follows.

On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you? [link]

Public outrage might cause the site to remove the article; you can find another copy of it here.

Again:

"John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?"

"John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?"

There are a wide range of responses to this vile sentiment. This is appalling even for the Guardian, even for a political season as vitriolic as this one. The author is a coward, if he truly believes what he writes.

And the Left are responsible for this sort of hatred. In particular, those who have knowingly lied about President Bush, convincing people that he is as evil as Hitler, bear a responsibility for the acti

 

Yeah, I fully expect George Bush to be assassinated by some damn leftie, 'cause we all know that Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, JFK and RFK were assassinated by disgruntled members of opposing political parties.

 

Okaaay


Saying that the left will be responsible for an assassination attempt because of their portrayal of Bush as "Hitler like" is like saying the right is responsible for the murder of abortion doctors for saying abortion is like the Holocaust.

 

The Dangerous, Delusional, Holier-than-thou, Hypocritical, Paranoia of the Right.

 

I'll note that you don't even acknowledge that article, much less condemn it.

Darth Guy, the author of that article, which pined for Bush's assassination, is indeed a "damned Leftie."

Flyer, the Right condemns attacks on abortion clinics; will the Left condemn this article for encouraging an assassination attempt? If you three are any indication, no, they will not.

DS77, a liberal writer just called for George W. Bush's assassination. It's not delusion to point that out and to express outrage, and in attacking me rather than that writer, you're making clear that your priorities are very much out of balance.

Your collective response is, thus far, instructive and saddening. I hope that others on your side can demonstrate more reason and humanity.

 

Flyer, the Right condemns attacks on abortion clinics; will the Left condemn this article for encouraging an assassination attempt? If you three are any indication, no, they will not

If Bush is assassinated, I assure you, the Left will condemn it.

 

DS77, a liberal writer just called for George W. Bush's assassination.

And that somehow damns every liberal in existence, or implies that any liberal/Democrat wishes harm on the president?

 

Flyer, I should hope that the Left would condemn an assassination, but should they not also condemn an article that wishes for it?

Writer, of course the article doesn't condemn every liberal. But I think that we're seeing the effects of all these hateful lies against Bush by the leadership of the Left, and I think that liberals need to make clear their condemnation of that article's sentiment.

 

It goes without saying that most people would condemn when some writer from another country says our President should be assassinated.

And I'm sure you were up in arms when Senator Jesse Helms said:

"No, I do not. And neither do the people in the armed forces. Mr. Clinton better watch out if he comes down here. He'd better have a bodyguard." - Spoken on the 31st anniversary of the Kennedy assassination when asked on CNN if he thought President Clinton was "up to the job" of serving as the commander-in-chief[11/23/94]

There is no need to ask conservatives on a Star Wars message board to condemn this statement because I know that most would.

in attacking me rather than that writer

Creating a thread entitled 'The Dangerous, Homicidal Rage of the Left' and then complains about being attacked.

Hypocritical.

you're making clear that your priorities are very much out of balance...Your collective response is, thus far, instructive and saddening. I hope that others on your side can demonstrate more reason and humanity.

Holier than thou.

The original post perfectly fits Dangerous, Delusional and Paranoid.

Thank you for proving my original post to be accurate.

 

You know, I honestly tried to find a website or two that were the 'Right wing' equivalent to the first post, then I realized there was none.*


It is already clear that, if Kerry does not win at the polls, Democrats will sue in the hope that he will win before a judge. If that does not work, it seems likely to me that Democrats will try to impeach Bush, using as an excuse either Abu Ghraib, WMD's, or both.

Excuse? What, using the legal system? Surely you jest?

It's clear the Left does not care about private property.

Yes this is EXCLUSIVE to the Left, never mind that John Kerry supporters have found their signs/vehicals/offices vandalized. Hoolagins come from all political stripes.


There are a wide range of responses to this vile sentiment. This is appalling even for theGuardian even for a political season as vitriolic as this one.

Try reading the Entire article, not just the snippet from the Right winged website.

The Guardian has always been unabashedly leftist, and the whole thing is over the top - sarcasm at its most British.

Is it because of his actions,

You might find it funny, but there are a lot of folks who's opinion of Bush and his policies go far beyond the WoMD/Bungling of the war in Iraq. His policies has crippled the enviroment for a start...

And if you find yourself quietly relishing the thought of Bush being murdered, there is not enough shame that can be heaped on you.

What kind of fools do you take us for? Bush is the only thing that stands between us and Darth Cheney and his cronies who scare me more than he does.

I agree with Jediflyer & DeathStar1977, this is as nonsensical as the allegations presented.

* the sites I found were even more frightening and conspiritial.... scary stuff Maynerd...

 

DS77, I admit I've never seen that statement before, but, indeed, Helms' comment was contemptible. There have been quite a few moments where Helms has made me embarassed to be a member of the same party.

But...

It goes without saying that most people would condemn when some writer from another country says our President should be assassinated.

Most people? What about you? Some writer from another country has said our President should be assassinated. Will you actually condemn it?

I'm not being hypocritical. I'm not complaining about being attacked, per se; my point is that, in two posts, you've attacked me and have not condemned that writer. There's nothing delusional -- nothing paranoid -- in simply pointing out an extreme liberal is calling for Bush's assassination. And "holier than thou"? You seem unable even to feign outrage at that article; I have no problem admitting my equality to all reasonable individuals who can see that article as outrageous trash, but you don't seem willing to join that group.


Breezy, there've been reports of cars with Bush stickers being keyed, too, but how do you explain the fact that Bush offices -- and only Bush offices -- are being attacked?

Most political campaigns are dirty, but Kerry's crowd has taken things to a low not seen in modern times.

And, excuse me, but I did post a link to the original article (using the word "link"). The other link was not to a mere snippet but a copy of the entire article.

And the article's not sarcastic; it's more of the same vitriolic, dangerous hatred of George W. Bush. Was he being sarcastic when he called Bush "a lying, sniggering, drink-driving, selfish, reckless, ignorant, dangerous, backward, drooling, twitching, blinking, mouse-faced little cheat"? Was he being ironic or satirical when he accused Bush of "idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed"? Certainly not. Rather than wave it aside with the excuse that the writer's only joking, you should condemn the article for its bile.

I continue to wait for some decency from the Left, for a condemnation of that article without reservation.

 

Well I can see this forum is rapidly degenerating from the place of "intelligent discussion" into a place of cretinous conspiracy theories cooked up by right and left alike.

Call me when you guys get back on track.

E_S

 

I continue to wait for some decency from the Left, for a condemnation of that article without reservation.

Since you took one person from the Left to represent all of us, then I'm sure you'll take what I say and apply it to everyone on the Left:

I condemn that article without reservation.

Now will you shut up and quit complaining about fringe elements and get back to topics worthy of discussion?

 

Most people? What about you? Some writer from another country has said our President should be assassinated. Will you actually condemn it?

Of course I condemn it. But if we were to post every outrageous comment made by morons on either end from various media sources AND require that everyone condemn each and every ridiculous comment, it would overload the server that theForce.net is on many times over.

 

The Founding Fathers, in their considerable wisdom, foresaw even this nightmarish possibility and prepared against it.

What good would it do them to kill Bush if he wins reelection? Pop him, and Dick Cheney takes the oath of office. If you were lucky and managed to kill them both at the same time, the House speaker Danny Hasert (Republican, Illinois) takes over. Waste all three at the same time, and the job goes to President Pro Tempore of the Senate, Theodore Stevens of Alaska -- a Republican.

And past him on the line of succession is all the members of the President's cabinet. Colin Powell. Condaleeza Rice. Donald Rumsfeld. John Ashcroft.

In other words, you'd have to pretty much decapitate the entire upper level of U.S. government to have a prayer of putting Kerry and Edwards in office. It wouldn't be an assassination or even a series of assassinations, you'd have to perform a coup de e'tat -- and before you'd succeed the U.S. military, which answers to no political party, would step in.

 

Ender, I'm not concocting a conspiracy theory. I'm merely expressing my belief that the rage against Bush and the Left's Machiavellian tactics may go result in even more drastic acts if Bush is reelected.


Flyer, I did not take that one writer to represent all of you. I believe I was clear in my intent. I will highlight two passages in case I was not.

"If the Left cares so little about such things, is it possible that someone takes their Machiavellian tactics to the logical, violent conclusion?"

Notice I wrote "someone," not something like the more universal "they." I believe that the Left has gone quite far in its efforts to defeat Bush and that some individual might go even further.

"I believe Bush stands a good chance of winning the election. Part of me is looking forward to seeing the Left so frustrated by that, but I think this frustration will, for some, transform into a dangerous, homicidal rage."

I went out of my way to say "some," not "all." If I was too subtle on that point, I apologize.

But you're going to condemn that article just to silence this entire issue? I'm afraid I find that unacceptible. Do you not really, truly find the article contemptible? Will you condemn it only to silence criticism about it?


DS77, I don't think we should have to condemn every outrageous comment that every individual makes. But Charlie Brooker's comment is not run-of-the-mill. You went back a decade to find a comparable comment from the other side (though I'll note that novels and plays are also discussing presidential assassination with greater frequency). And the Guardian isn't a random personal homepage. The website is an extension of an ancient and venerated British newspaper, over 160 years old and the winner of the "Newspaper of the Year Award" in 1997 and '98. This isn't penny-ante stuff, here.


Let me make clear the point of my first post. I'm not expecting every liberal on this forum to publically condemn this article, but you should as a group condemn sentiments like the one it makes. You should distance yourselves from it and condemn it without reservation.

It's the only decent thing to do.


Nightowl makes a good point, similar to Breezy's comment that it would not accomplish the assassin's goal of changing the government. But it's still an evil thought that needs to be thoroughly discredited. Not to pick on Breezy, but his comment is worrisome:

"What kind of fools do you take us for? Bush is the only thing that stands between us and Darth Cheney and his cronies who scare me more than he does."

Is he saying that Bush's murder would otherwise be a good idea? He implies that the act would be foolish, but he does not condemn the act for being immoral.

 

//sigh

It's sad we're even having to discuss this.

---

Imagine though if Bush is re-elected.... The left will go nuts.

If Kerry is elected, I suspect the same from the right.

This country is so bitterly divided, it doesn't matter who wins - the other half of the nation will hate him.

 

Bubba -

We did condemn it. Get over yourself and stop telling everyone that they should share your level of outrage and POV on everything.

And I don't care if its reaching back several decades...its dispicable that a Senator, in this case Jesse Helms, would make the comment that he did.

The difference is I accept your condemnation and do not require anything above and beyond.

 

After a good bit of prodding, you did condemn the article -- after, I might add, calling me delusional, paranoid, and hypocritical; and while telling me I'm wrong to expect people to be outraged at a writer calling for the assassination of a U.S. president.

But what do you mean by "we"? Who else?

 

You know Bubba, the real world is a scary place but it is nowhere near as twisted as the world you live in. Why not you come and join us?

I know that it will have the same effect as trying to debate a brick wall, but I'm going to point out a few of the numerous bits of idiocy in your post.

If George W. Bush is reelected, I fully expect an attempt on his life.

Okay I should be able to find a nice, high minded response to this. Let's see...ah, I have it...

Seriously man, you are delusional if you think that

A. Bush will be reelected
or
B. That a liberal will go off and kill him.

Doing that would guarantee Bush status as a martyr and subsequently right wing control of the White House for a few more terms. No liberal would want to bring that upon the US. If [God forbid] Bush is reelected there will be a chorus of shouted obscenities across this great land of ours and then every one will just duck, cover, and start counting the days until Bush has to leave.

It is already clear that, if Kerry does not win at the polls, Democrats will sue in the hope that he will win before a judge.
I doubt it. However it would be funny to see Bush get a taste of his own medicine and lose the White House through litigation.

It's clear the Left does not care about the truth in their contemptible lies about Republicans suppressing the black vote, privatizing Social Security, and reinstitution the draft.

Yep, if the Evil Liberals say it then it must be a lie. Do you do any research outside of Fox ?News?? There have been plenty of documented incidents [most notably of course during the 2000 election] of the Republicans using some pretty underhanded tricks to keep people from voting. This isn?t too shocking considering how little support the GOP traditionally gets from the black community. I?ll concede that I don?t think even Bush could be stupid enough to bring back the draft. Then again I have ?misunderestimated? him before, he might prove me wrong.

It's clear the Left does not care about free speech. Swift Boat veterans who oppose Kerry's candidacy have tried to get their story out. The Kerry campaign threatened to sue their book's publisher and sue any television station that ran their ad's.

Can you say hypocrisy? The Bush campaign has been trying to shut down the actions of MoveOn.org forever. In fact I remember last year they had a competition for the best anti-Bush ad with the winning entry getting air time during the Super Bowl. With a little push from the GOP the Clear Channel stations canceled Move On?s slot saying that they could not possibly put on anything political. Where was your righteous indignation then? Oh right, this was against Bush that means they must have been part of the Axis of Evil. Let?s not forget that the Clear Channel stations were recently trying to force TV stations in swing states to air an anti-Kerry documentary. Like I said, hypocrisy. Whenever something is a threat to a candidate [on either side] they try as best they can to shut it down. This is not a disregard for free speech this is just politics. Then again, maybe it is part of an evil plot. If so then I am sure Michael Moore could use some help from a crusader of justice like you in protecting his 1st amendment rights.

It's clear the Left does not care about private property. Two more Bush/Cheney offices have been attacked, in Cincinnati and Flagstaff. This is just the latest in a series of attacks on Republican party offices; offices in West Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Tennessee, Minnesota, and Washington state have all been attacked.

Breezy has already pointed out to you that this kind of thing happens to both parties. Disregard for private property? Watergate anyone?

It's clear that the Left does not care about democracy.


They plan to sue their way to victory even if they lost in a fair election, and such a stance severely undermines the political process.

That?s true. S

 

Bubba-

o.k., keep trying to play the victim after titling a thread 'The Dangerous, Homicidal, Rage of the Left'.

Your comments have been addressed.

Have a good evening.

 

I'm not playing the victim, DS77; I'm merely pointing out that your condemnation of that article was practically a footnote in comparison to everything else you wrote.

Anyway, if you're not going to explain your use of "we" (were you using it in the royal sense?), I'll bid you goodnight.


EDIT: I'll close by responding most briefly to Yoda. Sir, the Democrats admit to having 10,000 lawyers ready to file lawsuits. Eric Holder, part of the Democrats' "Election Task Force," recently asserted, "If every vote is allowed to be cast, and if every vote is counted, John Kerry will be president within a day of that election." He intimated that a Bush victory is prima facie proof of fraud that would result in an immediate court challenge. Meanwhile, electoral college predictors still see this race very much as a toss-up.

It is not delusional to think Bush may win the election, nor it is doubtful that the Dems would take the election to court.

All your other comments aside, if you cannot grasp the possibility of Bush winning and the likelihood of a subsequent court battle, you are in no position whatsoever to tell me I'm delusional.

 

Being an officer of the DOJ, regardless the feelings in here, talk of assasination of the President is not a smart topic to get into.

 

thegreatyoda - I seem to remember Gore doing rather much of the suing last time around. Am I incorrect?

-Paul

 

Bubba,

I have always enjoyed debates with you because you are, on a normal basis, very rashional. However... This post is a little extreme. Especially for somebody such as yourself.

Yes I am going to condem that article. I think if that person wrote it in a serious manner, then he is a fool To publicly display feelings of murder toward ANY political figure is asinine. I personally do not feel that article was fully serious, but in any case, joking or not, that kind of talk is rediculous, and uncalled for.

Now, that being said... I think that you have been a little unthoughtful with this post. You are making a generalization towards people of the left in general. I consider myself to be more-or-less liberal, but I have no desire to kill Dubya. I may not like the man's politics or ideas, but that doesn't mean I want him dead. Any more than I want Kerry to be outta the picture.

I know you clarified that "some" democrats are dangerous, and full of homicidal rage, but... come on Bubba. The title of this thread indicates something far different from what you said after questioned about generalizing. I personally believe that if Bush loses, he will open a lawsuit as well. Though I have no real proof to back this up, but I believe it is completely possible.

But I do agree that (if true) the democrats saying they will start a lawsuit if Bush wins is completely asinine. That is extremely childish and in no-way-shape-or-form acceptable in modern politics. But that doesn't make all democrats aweful. Many democrats are total ****ers, but just as many republicans are. It all comes down to how people execute their idea's. Many people hate Bush, but a very small crew of democrats and non-supporters are violent or 'up-to-no-good' with their ideas. Same goes for anti-Kerry folk. I mean writing a book about how a handful of Veterans don't like Kerry, and have a book published, edited, re-edited, and changed by people who didn't go to Vietnam is just stupid. People need to get a life.

But, I don't think that an assassination attempt on Bush would do well for anybody. I find it horrible and morally apprehensible, and I think most people do as well. Even if people HATE Bush with a passion, I doubt very many people sincerely want to kill Bush. Again, the same goes for Kerry. It's pretty close to equal on both sides if you're willing to look for it.

Peace

JMA