Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Will We Face Another National Upheaval As We Did in the 1960s?

Will We Face Another National Upheaval As We Did in the 1960s?

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Ask a Republican and he’s likely to tell you that liberals are ‘moonbats’ – or something like that.

Fine with me — that’s one of the nice things I’ve been called. But what does it say of Republicans, then, when in a Newsweek poll, 52% of them said that it was either ‘definitely true’ or ‘probably true’ that President Obama wants to impose Islamic Sharia law in America? Only 40% of Republicans said it was either ‘definitely not true’ or ‘probably not true’.

But wait — that’s not all! According to this Pew poll, 31% of Republicans think Obama’s a practicing Muslim — a beer-drinking, pork-eating, praying-to-Jesus Muslim, but still a Muslim!  And it doesn’t stop with Obama.

The head of the Hawaii GOP says a vote for a Democrat is “advancing unrighteousness.”  There are Tea Party people like Sharron Angle of Nevada who wants to completely end public education. Focus on the Family is now claiming that anti-bullying efforts are a front for gay rights activists. The list of sheer idiocy on the Right goes on and on.

Who is it that’s pouring the grape Kool-Aid here? More importantly, why are so many of the Republicans drinking it? Worst of all, why aren’t the completely sane Republicans who aren’t yet party to this nonsense fighting to pull the scales from the eyes of their fellow conservatives?

The answer is obvious: power. Those Republicans who know this nonsense for what it is are more concerned with regaining power than with stopping these nonsensical rumors from spreading. However, it could also be said that the sensible among the Republicans have no choice in the matter, because they cannot politically survive publicly standing up to the conservative pundits who often push this claptrap over most of the airwaves of the nation. So far, I have yet to see a Republican politician stand up to a major conservative pundit who didn’t wind up apologizing a few days later. But anyone who’s familiar with Rwanda knows the power that a radio pundit can wield.

I hope I’m wrong, but to anyone with some knowledge of history this silliness among the Republicans should be very troubling. It’s quite normal for conservatives and liberals of a nation to fight tooth-and-nail, but bad things tend to happen when one side has the perception that the other side is of a religion they hate. Very bad things.  This is why I believe we’re going to see a spasm of violence in the coming two years, probably just before the next presidential election. If we’re lucky, this ‘spasm’ will be only that, and people will wake up to see just how far down the slippery slope to widespread political and sectarian violence we’ve gone. If we’re not so lucky, cities will burn.

But one advantage a student of history has is to take the long view, the opportunity to examine the ebb and flow of societies over the generations, the centuries – and this is what helps me sleep at night. Why? Because the demographic of young adults is much more liberal and more culturally diverse in every way than those currently in power – and someday these ‘moonbats’ will be the leaders of this nation. One could make the argument that such was the case in the 1960s, and to this I would agree and point out how very much we’ve changed as a nation since then: the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and now the Health Care Reform Act.  And let us not forget the election of someone named Barack Hussein Obama — an irony of epic proportions!

I hope we’re not about to relive the societal chaos of the 1960s, but in the long view, even if we do, we’re going to do all right in the end. The ‘moonbats’ will be in charge. In a generation, the Republican party will either have adapted to the great changes coming in our national demographic and accepted some of what they now consider too-liberal platforms (such as their current growing, if grudging, acceptance of LGBTs), or they will have been marginalized.

Any journey worth making will have troubles and hardships along the way. The names of those martyred along the way such as MLK, Harvey Milk, Medgar Evers, and Bobby Kennedy among others, and the many more less famous who lost their lives such as the four students at Kent State; these were all patriots too, and it was their blood that watered the tree of liberty in the 1960s. But whether or not such upheavals will come (global warming notwithstanding), better times are coming. Keep the faith!

Powered by

About Glenn Contrarian

White. Male. Raised in the deepest of the Deep South. Retired Navy. Strong Christian. Proud Liberal. Thus, Contrarian!
  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Glenn, you continue to not get it at all.

    Polls do not work when they ask loaded questions like these. Half the time they just piss off the respondents and they answer with an extreme answer just to skew the poll.

    As for Republicans being willing to accept the crazies to win the election – of course they are. It’s a small price to pay to stop a party which is intent on destroying this country and on winning the 2010 election by fraud. The stakes are too high to quibble at this point.

    What lengths would you go to if you thought you were fighting for the survival of your country?

    And don’t pin your hopes on gay Republicans. They may be gay, but they aren’t going to move the basic agenda of the party to the left at all. They are as conservative or more so on issues other than their personal rights as anyone in the party.

    The basic reality is that the people have woken up, they’ve drawn a line in the sand and they aren’t going to give in to the false lure of bipartisanship or sit by for fraud and abuse of power any longer.

    If this means unrest like the 60s then that’s the way it should be. I think we’ll be lucky if it doesn’t turn into something much more violent. If the massive voter fraud campaign which is already coming to light in this election plays out as I suspect it will you may well see rioting and violence before the year is out.

    Dave

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    “drawn a line in the sane” is perhaps a Freudian slip.

    Letting the “crazies” [your word] — extremists who think government is basically evil — run the government could have plenty of unintended and unpleasant consequences.

    The harsh extremism of your own rhetoric certainly has drawn a line in the “sane.” It’s clear you stand with the crazies.

    Good luck with that.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    Here we go with your ‘massive voter fraud campaign’ stuff again…never mind that you never answered my challenge in which I told you for every fraudulent vote cast due to the voter registration of a few of ACORN’s foot soldiers, I’d show you a thousand voters wrongfully disenfranchised due to the efforts of the GOP and their supporters.

    As before, you disagree on the effect of the demographic in years to come…but at least you do agree with me that there will be violence. Only I don’t think there will be much this year – 2012’s when the real crazies will come out. The vast majority of them will be right-wingers, and you know it. When it comes to manipulation of the vote and peoples’ ability to vote, the vast majority of it is committed by the Republicans.

    Come to think of it, maybe that’s why you don’t say anything about voter fraud and voter caging by the Republicans – the end you seek for the Republicans (power) justifies any means. You also agreed that the Republicans are willing to ‘accept the crazies’ to win the election…but you – a real honest-to-goodness historian – don’t seem to see the grave danger in doing so.

    You’ve publicly verified what I strongly suspected for the past five years. I think this is one of the comments I’m going to remember for a long, long time.

  • John Wilson

    I think Nalle has discarded the last vestiges of political reason with this statement:

    “…stop a party which is intent on destroying this country and on winning the 2010 election by fraud. The stakes are too high to quibble at this point.

    What lengths would you go to if you thought you were fighting for the survival of your country?”

    This should be a warning to those who have advocated for Nalles reasonableness in the past.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    And Dave –


    Polls do not work when they ask loaded questions like these. Half the time they just piss off the respondents and they answer with an extreme answer just to skew the poll.

    I remember the first time I pointed out polls that you didn’t like, and you (and Clavos, IIRC) gave me a response not much different than the above sentence.

    A few weeks later I remember seeing you reference a poll – only difference was that it supported something you agreed with. I guess that’s your litmus test with polls – if it says something you like, you agree with it and maybe even use it. If you don’t like what it says, then “polls are worthless anyhow!”

    Like the polls you referenced here and here and here and here.

    But I guess polls have to be “approved by Dave” before they can be considered as trustworthy on BC Politics!

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Polls should be cited with caution — but also dismissed with caution. They are just a tool, not decisive but not meaningless.

    Still, there is some truth in the saying:

    Torture the numbers long enough and they will tell you what you want to hear.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Because the demographic of young adults is much more liberal and more culturally diverse in every way than those currently in power – and someday these ‘moonbats’ will be the leaders of this nation.

    I’m going to disagree with you here, Glenn.

    I used to believe that *my generation* would change this society for the good of all mankind. Man, was I wrong!

    The truth is, the same people who are pulling all the strings now, are the same individuals whose children will be buying and controlling this country in the years to come.

    Also, as long as people with little power do the bidding of those with enormous power…well you see it…Tax cuts remain at the expense of all of us.

    Fools!!!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Glad you have our best intentions in mind, Dave. LOL

    As for Republicans being willing to accept the crazies to win the election – of course they are. It’s a small price to pay

    Put *crazies* in power because the Liberals are going to destroy America!

    :D You people need a different nomenclature for us, because youare the moon-bats.

  • http://loftypremise.blogspot.com/2010/07/tyrants-start-somewhere.html Tommy Mack

    For the record, the Kent State massacre happened on May 4, 1970. The four dead in Ohio lost their lives to National Guard rifle fire. Bullets also killed “MLK, Harvey Milk, Medgar Evers, and Bobby Kennedy.” The Guard weapons were issued. The weapons used to kill King, Milk, Evers and the Kennedy brothers were protected by the 2nd Amendment ?” a favorite topic of Sarah Palin, Sharon Angle, the Republican Party and the National Rifle Association [the most powerful, single issue lobby organization in the country].

    Before launching into that, however, I want to know why we never hear anything from Republicans about “Equal Justice Under Law.” Those words are literally carved in stone at the Supreme Court building. Perhaps it is because collectively all they know about the Supreme Court is that it is a great place to have some yummy Roger B. Taney stew for lunch.

    Meanwhile, back at the 60s, the country elected Richard Nixon, the law and order president, to end the War in Vietnam and to restore the peace that had been missing at the end of the decade. The nation survived.
    By the way, with respect to ratings, Gallup reports, “At 19%, Congress’ job approval rating from the American people in August remains near the historical lows seen in recent months. Approval is a record-low 5% among Republicans and a lackluster 38% among Democrats.”

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    (I think the term that complements ‘moonbats’ is ‘wingnuts’.)

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Good article, Tommy

    Tyrants…that’s exactly what we are dealing with.

    :D Hope my dots and little face doesn’t make you ignore my compliment.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Hey, Cindy.

    Since my last two comments to you went over like a lead balloon, I’ll just say hello.

    : D

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com roger nowosielski

    Whether one agrees with Dave’s reasoning in #1 or not, or his perception that the party in power is intent on destroying this country – Clavos did refer to the present administration as the first “post-American presidency,” and for a variety of reasons, it is an apt term – I do believe Dave is right about one thing: it is going to come down to another major confrontation between the progressive ideas (pisspoorly represented by the party in power) and those held by the radical Right (the Tea Party mentality).

    So yes, I do expect a showdown, the battle to end all battles, before the dust settles and before we can rebuild again. And to the victors shall go the spoils.

    It’s pretty apparent, too, who the victor shall be. Progressive ideas always win out in the end, though reactionary forces can be a bitch.

    Another Civil War? Not quite in my estimation. Quite the contrary, our hand will not be forced by the termoil within but by geopolitical and geoeconomic forces without. And that’s how this dispute shall end.

    “So It Shall Be Written, So It Shall Be Done!”

    Yul Brenner in The Ten Commandments

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Hiya Jeannie :-)

    (No lead balloons that I saw. :-)

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    This isn’t a race war as they keep telling all who dare ask what their true motives are.

    Who do I refer to? The media or should I say, the propaganda specialists?

    This is all going to boil down to a class war.

    The haves and the haves even more. You know, W’s base!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Of course, this is just, A View From A Broad…

    :D Remember?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com roger nowosielski

    A nice counterpoint, Jeannie, to Kenn’s run-of-the-mill economic grind.

  • zingzing

    dave: “It’s a small price to pay to stop a party which is intent on destroying this country…”

    why would they want to do that, dave? to put themselves out of a job? to make all their money worthless? hmm?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Jeannie

    I used to believe that *my generation* would change this society for the good of all mankind. Man, was I wrong!

    That’s why I said I’d agree with a comparison to the liberal youth of the sixties!

    Jeannie, America today – despite the worst efforts of the Roberts Supreme Court – is far more progressive than during the sixties. Do you not see how much we’ve already changed since then? Like I said, the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Health Care Reform Act, Barack Hussein Obama…and we can add in the Clean Air Act, too!

    AND (when we don’t have Republicans in the White House) we’ve got actual enforcement of laws by the EPA, OSHA, the SEC, and a host of regulatory agencies that the Right wants to put out of the Right’s misery.

    No, Jeannie – we’re FAR more progressive as a nation than we were in the sixties…and it’s the generation that lived the Summer of Love that did it!

    Someone recently wrote that what we’re seeing is essentially the last gasp of Old White America. They see what they knew as America slipping away to be replaced by a far more ethnically- and culturally-diverse demographic. They know little and care less for these new cultures and ethnics.

    And what’s the obvious result? Fear of the unknown. That’s what we’re essentially seeing on the Right. That’s why when they see a mixed-race guy with a funny name in the Oval Office, it’s so easy for them to assume the worst about him with no evidence at all.

    The demographic is irresistibly changing, Jeannie, and you could liken the nation’s growing unrest to earthquakes caused by the slow, inexorable grind of plate tectonics as the Old White America gives way to the New MultiEthnic America.

    Did Nixon take this long view when he accepted the ‘Southern Strategy’? Doesn’t look that way….

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Dave’s rhetoric takes on a life of its own sometimes, and pulls him off the deep end. He has been sliming Democrats for at least 4 years now, incessantly.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Glenn,

    The sixties where smeared royally. But,it wasn’t because *they smoked pot* it was the fact that they weren’t consumers.

    I want to think that our youth will rise up and be heard, but the facts are we are soo splintered now, you would have to create a reality show just to get the national attention.

    :(

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    were not where :(opps

  • Baronius

    “MLK, Harvey Milk, Medgar Evers, and Bobby Kennedy”

    King was killed by James Earl Ray, a Democrat and repeat offender out of Illinois. Harvey Milk was killed by fellow Democrat and former fellow San Francisco Boardmember Dan White. Medgar Evers was killed by Mississippi Democrat and KKK member Byron de la Beckwith. I can’t find any record of Sirhan Sirhan’s political affiliation, but he was motivated by opposition to Israel, so we can guess which party he’d belong to today.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Did you enjoy that bit of gamesplaying, Baronius? Do you think you actually proved something?

    Southern Democrats [Dixiecrats] like George Wallace and Strom Thurmond were never in philosophical agreement with liberals from any region. In fact, they had more in common with some current Tea Party activists — not on race necessarily but on anger with Federal overreach and the loss of “states’ rights.”

    Dan White was a Reagan Democrat [conservative Irish Catholic variety, threatened by nontraditional sexual mores] a few years before Reagan Democrats were given a name.

    People who were or would have been Dixiecrats and Reagan Democrats in the 60s, 70s and 80s are today mostly part of the GOP.

    And reciting the political affiliations of murderers as if that proves something about other Democrats is snide, unfunny, and uncalled for.

    You’ve just given us all an example of your least appealing side. Try saying something worthwhile for a change.

  • Baronius

    Listing the murders as examples of GOP criminality was much worse.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Baronius –

    There you go again, as RR said. Look again at my article – REAL close. I listed the Republicans of TODAY in the first part of the article, but I mentioned no Republicans at all in the LAST part of my article where I listed those who were martyred in the name of civil rights and peace over 40 years ago.

    Seeing the CLEAR division in space in the article, and seeing as how I made NO direct connection between the Republicans of today and the progressives martyred 40 years ago, it is obvious that I neither accused the Republicans (today OR 40 years ago) in the murders.

    FURTHERMORE, Baronius – I’ve written MANY times about a family acquaintance named James O. Eastland – a Democratic senator who was twice president pro tem…and who was the most powerful racist in America for a generation (and whose racist influence still lives today in Mississippi’s “Academy” private school system).

    No, Baronius – I did not blame Republicans. I DO blame the conservatives…for during the sixties, the Southern Democrats were if anything MORE conservative than the Republicans. That’s why they deserted the Democratic party when the Civil Rights Act was passed, and that’s why the South has been almost completely red ever since.

    If I seem to be a bit angry, it’s because I take great exception to being accused of something I didn’t do (having nearly lost my career once due to a false accusation). Accuse me of what I did do and I’ll own up to it as I have on many occasions…but accuse me of something I didn’t do and I get angry.

    I never blamed the Republicans for those murders. I DO blame the conservatives…one of whom my family knew. I hope we’re clear on this now.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    And for those who think that the Democrats will do anything to stay in power, think on this (Dave!):

    LBJ KNEW he’d lose the South (a longtime Democratic bastion) if the Civil Rights Act was passed. He KNEW that the South would leave the Democratic party for the Republicans because of the CRA. He had to know that was enough to lose us elections for many years to come.

    But he did it anyway. Why did he do it? Because it was the right thing to do.

    That, sir, is a shining example of a politician doing something because it was right, while knowing full well it would cost him power.

    Would Republicans have the courage to do the same? They did once – under Abraham Lincoln, back when the Republicans were the liberals. But they’re not now.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    And certainly King, RFK, Evers and Milk were all killed because someone thought they went too far. The “someone” in each case may have been a lone psychopath, but they were egged on by the inflammatory rhetoric of the loudest right-wing voices of their eras.

    That’s why some of us react so strongly now to some of the vicious rhetoric from tea party rallies.

  • Baronius

    Southern Democrats get the blame, again, but these guys were from California, Mississippi, and Illinois. (Actually, the Southerner was born in Cal. and had lived around, but was rooted in Mississippi.) Milk was killed as an afterthought by a classic disgruntled worker who was at City Hall to kill the mayor. RFK was killed for his support of Israel, not for his liberalism. Let’s stop the revisionism.

  • Baronius

    Glenn, LBJ opposed civil rights legislation in 1957, because he thought it would work against him. He favored it in 1965, because he thought it would work for him.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    You can reduce any bit of history to an allegedly “sharp” remark with a right-wing twist, apparently. What is your game here?

    Dan White was “disgruntled” because the liberal mayor and liberal Harvey Milk opposed him, blocked his agenda and sidetracked his career. The gay rights agenda infuriated both White and his Catholic neighborhood constituency.

    Calling Milk’s murder an “afterthought” is both false and deeply offensive. Harvey was a loudmouth who didn’t care how provocative some people found his politics and rhetoric. White was just alienated enough to react fatally.

    If you don’t know enough about something to describe it truthfully, please read up or shut up.

    And what’s all this petty nonsense about geography? What, really, is your point and purpose, besides needling us annoying liberals?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Baronius –

    Read again – I did NOT blame Republicans. But if you insist on making erroneous assumptions concerning my article that are NOT supported by the words I actually wrote in my article, well, I can’t stop you. Go ahead, knock yourself out.

    And concerning LBJ and the choice he made in 1964 by supporting and approving the CRA even though he KNEW it would cost the Democrats the South for a generation…WHY would he do something that would he knew would cost the Democrats the South?

    Whatever choices he’d made before, there’s only ONE possible reason that he’d support the CRA even though he knew it would cost the Democrats what is (after New England) the most important region in the nation for electoral votes. He knew what would happen – he said it!

    There’s only one possible reason he made this choice: he chose what was right over what would keep him (and the Democrats) in power.

    Of course you don’t want to believe that – which is why you’re digging to find some other explanation. But you won’t find a different explanation…because there isn’t one.

  • http://loftypremise.blogspot.com/2010/07/tyrants-start-somewhere.html Tommy Mack

    Sorry, Baronius, that is revisionist. LBJ cultivated other southern senators with his moderate record of opposition to civil rights and desegregation to became the Senate majority leader. In that position, and later as president, Johnson got his way in them getting them to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed discrimination in employment, schools and public accommodations, as well as the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

    After signing the Voting Rights Act, he told his press secretary Bill Moyers “We’ve lost the South for a generation.” Sacrificing himself and his party is hardly something LBJ did “because he thought it might work for him.”

  • Baronius

    Handy, no game. I’m just sick of falsehoods & extreme spins on BC. I’m fact-checking. Maybe Glenn believed that his bashing of Republicans all the way at the beginning of a two-page article would be long forgotten by the end of it, but it read to me like a single thought: we may see a national upheaval by the GOP like we did in the 1960’s. Likewise, the reflexive dismissal of everything that the Democrats did from 1865-1965 as “Southern” would leave the reader with the false impression that Milk, MLK, and RFK were killed by Southerners. It’s conflation, the same as when a right-wing nut talks about the New York mosque and the 9/11 hijackers in the same breath.

  • Baronius

    I phrased that badly – more like “we may see reactionary violence from the GOP like we did in the 1960’s”.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Baronius –

    No. Phrase it as “we will see reactionary violence from conservatives like we did in the 1960’s – and most of those ‘conservatives’ will be either Republicans, libertarians, Tea Party supporters, some mixture of all three…or someone even further right than them.”

    Look again at Dave’s comment #1 – he basically agreed that the violence will come from the Right!

    What lengths would you go to if you thought you were fighting for the survival of your country? And don’t pin your hopes on gay Republicans. They may be gay, but they aren’t going to move the basic agenda of the party to the left at all. They are as conservative or more so on issues other than their personal rights as anyone in the party. The basic reality is that the people have woken up, they’ve drawn a line in the sand and they aren’t going to give in to the false lure of bipartisanship or sit by for fraud and abuse of power any longer. If this means unrest like the 60s then that’s the way it should be.

    Okay, Baronius? Dave understood quite well what I was saying – and he sees the same thing coming from the Right. I’m sure that there will be a few acts by those on the Left, but these will be small fry compared to those from the Right…

    …unless one thing happens: if the current president is assassinated, then you’re going to see unrest America hasn’t seen since the Civil War. It won’t be even a fraction as bad as the War between the States, but it will be many times worse than Watts or L.A.

    This is why I wish you guys – the Right – would tone down your rhetoric, because it’s only a matter of time till one nutcase gets past all security measures and enters the ranks of Lee Harvey Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan. If this happens – as I said in the article – cities will burn.

    The responsibility for it will be in actuality (if not ‘legally’) upon your far-Right pundits with whom even your most powerful politicians cannot disagree and survive politically. They are the ones who – in their never-ending game of “I’m more conservative than you!” – are dragging the entirety of America’s conservatives ever further to the right…and ever closer to the brink of violence.

    I see this. Dave sees this and apparently relishes the prospect. Is this really where you want to go, Baronius?

  • http://loftypremise.blogspot.com/2010/07/tyrants-start-somewhere.html Tommy Mack

    No little blue links. It is not a Twitter function and can’t be.

    Glenn, I think Baronious is putting you on. I hope so.

    But I have to say, the BC writing is better than a lot. Oh, yah, I said that, somewhere before the rest of you got so far off topics, it’s like watching blindfolded soccer in the rain, under the lights, at night.

    And I thought I digress.

  • Baronius

    Glenn, did you have to post this article within 24 hours of an Al Gore-inspired suicide attack on the Discovery Channel? It wouldn’t have been any more accurate, but the timing would have been better. Maybe last week it would have worked. Oh, that’s right, last week a New York peacenik stabbed a Muslim cabbie….Well, maybe next week the article will seem more credible.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Mr B, you can’t argue the facts successfully, so you resort to snark….again? Awful. I’m embarrassed for you.

  • Jordan Richardson

    an Al Gore-inspired suicide attack on the Discovery Channel

    Excuse me?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Tyrants…that’s exactly what we are dealing with.

    Now that’s true, Jeannie. It’s a pity you don’t really get it.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Dave understood quite well what I was saying – and he sees the same thing coming from the Right.

    But Glenn, I see it happening as a justified response to actions from the political left which will push us to the point of breaking. The blame will lie with the left if they push the disenfranchised people to resort to violence to restore liberty.

    Dave

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Oh, you mean, Glen beck and Sarah Palin?

    You meant to say the right

    :D

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    wow, you guys are still fighting what went on in the ’60s? I bet the current generation can’t wait for you dinosaurs to die out and stop wasting everyone’s time.

    “I’m just sick of falsehoods & extreme spins on BC.” writes Baronius who posts
    “within 24 hours of an Al Gore-inspired suicide attack on the Discovery Channel”.

    Apparently he’s not sick of it when it supports his agenda as James Lee was also anti-immigration, so the Right can claim him as well.

  • Cannonshop

    #44 No, James Lee was a nutjob. Does it really matter that his motive was to force the Discovery Channel to broadcast extreme left-environmentalist rhetoric as fact? Not really-the tactic alone shows either a massive disconnect from reality, or just a huge general case of stupid on his part-either way, the outcome was evolution in action-the removal of a bottom-feeder from the breeding pool in a pro-active manner that minimized his ability to kill innocent people on his way to martrydom.

    There’s left, and right, and Crazy-and Crazy may look like Left or look like right, but it’s just what it is-crazy.

  • Cannonshop

    Though, to be honest, I tend to associate threatening lives and property to achieve political ends as more Left than Right, Left tends to use Police to do the threatening instead of running independently-but that’s more a function of which way the established powers currently run.

    After all, the same DoJ that wants to make sure every felon in america gets his vote counted, is assisting State Legislatures in avoiding compliance with Laws requiring them to get Ballots to Service personnel overseas in a timely fashion-which policy is, right on the face of it, more likely to service Left-wing causes than it is to service the concept of equal justice under the law.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    C-shop –

    Though, to be honest, I tend to associate threatening lives and property to achieve political ends as more Left than Right

    Do you really know why you think that way? Because no one really wants to believe that it’s their side that’s presenting the threat.

    If the violence comes as Dave and I think it will (though he thinks it would be justified), then you’ll see who’s really presenting a threat to lives and property.

    But if there’s an assassination – all bets are off. That would be an American nightmare.

  • Cannonshop

    I don’t think, Glenn, that there is honestly enough on either side to generate the kind of violence you’re presuming, nor that there is a competent assassin available (or committed enough) to get CLOSE to carrying it out.

    The Left dominates ALL aspects of Government, the bulk of the media, and most of the sources of resources necessary to stage an uprising. Fact is, Glenn, that the Statists have won, and nothing is going to change that short of a massive plague on the order of the Black Death forcing entrenched elites out of their retrenchments.

    which isn’t going to happen-at this point, it’s darn near physically impossible.

    Will there be protests? Name a decade in which there has not been. Will there be individual acts of violence? damn right there will be-there has been (again) nearly every decade this nation has existed. Will any of it have any effect?

    not really. By the time the heavy hand of government is too heavy for the dependent majority, it’s too late…and we’re damn near too late now, and people still want Uncle Sam to make more of their decisions every day.

    The problem, as I see it, Glenn, is that really, your side IS the Majority, It’s always easier to hand off the responsibilities, the accountability, to hide in Bureaucracy and zero-tolerance policy, to spend other people’s money on your own personal issues of conscience, and then to sod off to the Philipines when it’s time to retire, than it is to be independent, responsible, accept the burden of being offended occasionally, and be financially frugal without harming others, and it’s all too tempting to, with a little bit of intelligence, want such people as followers-because they DO follow-blindly, and gladly accept shackles as a price for “Security”, with ever increasingly weighted chains, yet no actual improvement in their security.

    Fact is, Glenn, for all the yammering about ‘freedom’, most of America does not WANT to be free-they want to be ruled, and your lot are the ones best positioned to take, and keep, that position.

    and that’s not going to change, even as much as Dave might wish it were otherwise.

    It’s only going to continue to get worse-better, I guess, from your perspective.

  • Ruvy

    I looked at the title of this article, and at the basic worry of the author, Glenn. I have ignored all the partisan sniping going on, or the petty arguments over legalities as they are irrelevant to me or my concerns.

    I see that both Glenn and Dave have similar expectations for violence developing along political lines in the States in the near future, even though it is for different reasons and the expectations are detailed out differently.

    You probably have guessed that I have similar expectations for the States, also for different reasons, which I’ll not bore you with here. Roger Nowosielski seems to have similar expectations as well, along with is own slant his expectations.

    When you consider the breadth of the political approaches represented in the same expectation for violence, it is reasonable to assume that while none of us knows the truth, and none of us is a prophet, there is the serious possibility for the kind of violence seen in the United States that might surpass the upheavals seen 5 decades ago.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    EL,

    Never dis a Dinosaur, because someday you may be referred to as such. Remember, Only the lucky get to be old…

    :D The soppy old Hippy.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    What is this *Ale Gore* label, Baronius?

    You know there are now millions of people waking up to the fact that we are destroying our own environment. George Carlin (although I loved his comedy) was not a scientist.

  • Arch Conservative

    When the majority of people start to believe that the quality of their lives is so pitiful that they have nothing left to lose there will most certainly be violence. How could there not be?

    The million dollar question is when will that happen? I don’t think anyone has the exact answer but all signs do point to it happening eventually.

    Currently we’re all walking around pooh poohing the idea of violence because we’re much too civilized and much too high minded. I say horseshit. I look forward to…….well I won’t tell you what I look forward to but you can use your imagination.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Cannonshop,

    You have such a deep disrespect for the sixties generation, that a serious debate with you would prove once again, futile.

    Now, please don’t start your insult about people partying and going to the bathroom on the floor. Glenn and I were not at that *Party*.

    You people left us NOTHING. YOU people, Jeannie, Boomers, Disco-kids, you guys gutted the strongest economy on earth, you handed it out to your friends and smoked it up and drank it away and shit on the floor and partied all night and you left the mess on US, and the younger kids, the ones that are just now growing up.

    WE who were born after 1968, are the worst-educated, lowest-prospect-of-a future, first generation of kids to walk into a nation with a lower chance of improving our condition in American HISTORY. Our ‘future’ was burned up so that the boomers and the Disco-generation could have their fun and feel good about themselves, so that they could keep deluding themselves with bullshit ’causes’ to cover their vanity and their pettiness and shallowness and egotistical drug-dream image of themselves.

    This comment really hurt ME, but I survived, YOU.

    I also came to the conclusion that your view of the 60’s generation is very narrow and full of cliches.

    JD

  • Zedd

    Dave,

    Unless you have done a good study on research methods and sampling… shhhhh. It’s embarrassing really.

  • Baronius

    The Left is very protective of its narrative.

    James Lee and Dan White were both people whose minds broke. White’s killing of a gay man supports the Left’s narrative of evil conservatives, so the fact that White went to City Hall to kill the mayor, well, that just muddies the martyrdom story. It’s got to be “conservative kills liberal”. And if the conservative in the narrative was a Democrat, then he must have been a Southern Democrat, no matter where he was from.

    Lee, who said that An Inconvenient Truth turned his life around, he’s just a lone nutcase. The Left will drop the political motivation for his act. As far as I can tell, Lee wasn’t anti-immigration, by the way. He was anti-people. He wasn’t trying to defend the US borders. In fact, he’d smuggled at least one person into the US himself. His problem with immigration was that it meant less starvation.

  • Clavos

    It’s so touching to see Zedd be so…how shall I put it?…empathetic and giving…in her embarrassment on behalf of those with whom she disagrees.

    [Wipes tear from eyes]

    Truly inspirational.

  • Clavos

    George Carlin (although I loved his comedy) was not a scientist.

    Neither is Gore.

    At least Carlin was intelligent and amusing.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Let’s revisit this statement,

    WE who were born after 1968, are the worst-educated, lowest-prospect-of-a future, first generation of kids to walk into a nation with a lower chance of improving our condition in American HISTORY.

    You are from a generation of spoiled brats who were born into this consumer infested wasteland that we call home.

    The malls, The mindless TV’s, and the over-advertising of EVERYTHING is why you wrote the above statement.

    How can schools compete? How can parents teach their own children , when they have to constantly compete with the almighty dollar and all it can buy…

    We have all heard the children in public, “I want it! I need it! and many, not all…give in.

    Why isn’t there a rehab for Consumerism?

    Because there no money in it!

    JD

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I never said that Al Gore was a scientist.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    “the fact that Dan White went to City Hall to kill the mayor” is a partial truth. He carried a pocketful of extra ammunition — “dum-dum” bullets that cause much more destruction — and reloaded his gun with them after killing Mayor Moscone. He marched quickly and directly to Harvey Milk’s office.

    From Randy Shilts’s The Mayor of Castro Street:

    …[Dianne] Feinstein saw White flash by her office door.

    “Dan,” she called.

    “I have something to do first,” White said.

    White stuck his head into Milk’s office.

    “Say, Harv, can I see you?”

    “Sure.”

    White took Harey to his old office across the hall. He noticed that his name plate had already been removed from the door. Once Milk stepped inside, White planted himself between him and the door. He drew his revolver and fired…

    Shilts also makes clear that a jury composed mostly of Irish Catholics from White’s neighborhood, presented with a less than full-blooded prosecution case, convicted Dan White of manslaughter rather than murder, setting off riots in the Castro almost immediately.

    I’m not “protecting a narrative.” I am telling the truth. I don’t know what you’re doing, but it certainly isn’t very appetizing.

  • Baronius

    Generally, the guy you shoot first is the primary target. The guy you reload for is also a target, but a secondary one. (That doesn’t apply to spree killers, who aren’t focused on any one target.) If White looked around for Milk, and on not finding him went to the mayor’s office, then yes, Milk was the primary target. I don’t get the idea that that happened, though.

    The hollow-point bullets are an interesting touch, though.

  • zingzing

    baronius, you become more silly by the day. “He favored it in 1965, because he thought it would work for him” has to be one of the most ridiculous readings of history i’ve ever seen. ever. it’s so incredibly wrong.

    as to your #61, what do you know about the inner workings of a half-crazed murdering pyschopath?

  • Baronius

    Zing, I’ll take that as an indirect compliment. :)

  • zingzing

    well, given the above, you would, wouldn’t you?

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Baronius sees Left and Right as competing sports teams. He always defends his team, and ignores counterevidence.

    Glenn explained — more than once — that he was blaming an ugly atmosphere of right-wing rhetoric for the murders of civil rights heroes — not the GOP but the “permission” these crazies took from fringe rhetoric.

    Yet he keeps posting obnoxious, tendentious, snide stuff about Dan White and an “Al Gore inspired suicide bomber.”

    Do you really not know any other way to converse/discuss/argue than to aim for mean-spirited gotchas? So foul.

  • Baronius

    “Baronius sees Left and Right as competing sports teams. He always defends his team, and ignores counterevidence.”

    Handy, you’ll note that I left the door open as to who the primary target was in the White shooting, both by positing a possible scenario and by agreeing with you about the hollow-point bullets.

    “Glenn explained — more than once — that he was blaming an ugly atmosphere of right-wing rhetoric for the murders of civil rights heroes — not the GOP but the “permission” these crazies took from fringe rhetoric.”

    …which is why I dropped the GOP angle.

    “Yet he keeps posting obnoxious, tendentious, snide stuff about Dan White and an “Al Gore inspired suicide bomber.””

    Exactly how different is permission from Beck or Gore? You could earn more credibility by acknowledging that Gore inspired that suicide bomber.

    “Do you really not know any other way to converse/discuss/argue than to aim for mean-spirited gotchas? So foul.”

    It’s not my fault that Glenn was spinning; I just pointed it out. Why that constitutes a mean-spirited gotcha, I don’t know, but the implication is that Glenn’s article was a generous-spirited sharing of fact. If my comments seem snide and Glenn’s article doesn’t, then you’re defending your team blindly, Handy.

  • zingzing

    baronius, why on earth do you think lbj’s passing of the civil rights act was politically advantageous for him?

  • Jordan Richardson

    The constant insistence on connecting a politician to global warming science is hilarious. If anything, the criminal we’re talking about had more of a gripe over population overflow than anything Al Gore had to say. So maybe we should be blaming mothers everywhere for his rampage.

  • Arch Conservative

    Who gives a fuck.

    He’s dead.

    And probably in hell.

    Sharing a room with George Tiller.

  • zingzing

    and scott roeder is in jail. getting his rear rearranged for the next 50 years.

  • Arch Conservative

    That makes you happy zing…knowing that a guy’s in jail getting butt raped?

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    that guy, yes

  • Jordan Richardson

    Considering that Archie generally wishes death on nearly, well, everyone, I’d say that Roeder’s getting off easy. Or hard. Harder. Oh yeah, baby, harder.

  • zingzing

    not really, archie. it was a statement of the very probable fact. he’s a murder. but i don’t take the glee in others’ misfortunes that you do.

    does the image of a person getting shot in the head and then burning in hell bring a smile to your face? even if you are against abortion, and if this guy was really breaking the law, he should have been tried and convicted. what if someone disagrees with you? is it alright for that someone to walk up to you and shoot you dead? there’s no justice in that. when shit like that happens, don’t cheer it, because you could face the same fate.

    you seem to think you can decide who deserves to live or die. not a good habit, archie.

  • zingzing

    that habit has a lot of company in hell. kind of like george tiller if you take it far enough. hey! you’ve got something in common.. how neat. roomies 4-eva!

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    I can’t help but be amused [against my better judgment] by the three liberal straight boys making butt-fuck humor to the discomfiture of the conservative straight boy.