...then Dan says to me,
I said one chance, Marshall.
"One chance and one chance alone,
Marshall. Do you agree that neo-nazis and KKK members and their comrades
have lost the opportunity to be treated seriously, respectfully or to
be met with anything but contempt?"
THAT is the point of the post.
Do you understand that this is the point of the post?
Do you agree with the point of the post?"
I can't put into words the comedic effect of condescension from someone of Dan's questionable character. The reason for this hubris stems from my original comment after reading his post from Aug.13 called RESIST (yes, it was in caps and bold print, because he's serious, dammit!). He finishes his post beginning with this line:
"Good and moral people must always stand opposed to oppressors."
...and that was what prompted my initial comment, which reads as follows:
"And that's why I stand firmly opposed to abortionists and those who
enable them. The horror and oppression of one group of selfish,
anti-science monsters against the most vulnerable and innocent of our
kind must be opposed at all costs, and those who stand with the very
people who seek to legitimize the practice (the lion's share of the
Democratic Party, for example) are heinous for doing so.
"It's
like all these conservatives who try to mock those who value tolerance
for being intolerant towards some. But who are we being intolerant
towards? The intolerant."
This is a lie. You are being intolerant against people who are intolerant of immoral sexual practices and against the support (legal, social, pseudo-religious) of those practices in all its forms.
BTW...do you think you'll ever address intolerance by black groups any time soon, or are you just opposed to intolerance by "white boys"? Just wonderin'."
Dan doesn't get the connection. So, in his arrogance he condescends and demands an answer to a question I really shouldn't have to answer. But I did. He just didn't like it the answer I gave and deleted it.
You see, the problem is that this post of Dan's constitutes the definition of low hanging fruit. Indeed, the fruit no longer hangs but was lying there on the ground next to where Dan was sitting, rotting half eaten. He just picked it up and apparently feels just so noble and courageous for saying the obvious. My goodness, how righteous he is! HE OPPOSES NAZIS AND THE KKK!!!! He's a pip!
There's so much wrong with his post and his many inane comments that followed in response to both Craig and myself. And my initial response provides a few:
1. Dan is an oppressor himself, and an oppressor of the most vile kind. He is an abortion supporter, recently claiming (sincerely or for effect---it doesn't matter, really) that he no longer finds abortion to be immoral. Here's some perspective from a 2013 article. Dan wants to get all self-righteous about neo-nazis and klansmen while defending that which has killed far more people than all white supremacists in the history of this nation. He wants to posture himself as among the "good and moral people" of America. Clearly my initial comment indicates that I clearly do oppose oppressors beyond just the Klan and neo-nazis.
2. He lied about conservatives being intolerant. It's what the progressives do...because they don't understand conservatism at all, and because they need to demonize others in order to appear to be the morally superior faction while promoting immorality. But while those bozos are intolerant of conservatives and Bible-believing Christians, we're intolerant of behaviors that are displeasing to God...as Christians are supposed to be.
3. Dan takes great joy in referring to the Charlottesville protesters as "white boys". I've never heard him refer to any of those stoked so highly by BLM rhetoric that they assassinated or attempted to assassinate cops. I've never seen him reference those perpetrators as "black boys". What's more, my link referenced three black hate groups. But Dan chooses to lie and say I'm comparing neo-nazis and the Klan to "black folks". Obviously he didn't have the integrity to even click on my links. I was not referencing "black folks". I was referencing hate groups. Groups that have been out there for some time, some of which call for the killing of whites and Jews. Even Bobby Seale, a famous founding member of the original Black Panthers, calls the New Black Panther organization "a black racist hate group."
As if that wasn't enough, we have the shooting of a GOP Congressman by a Bernie Sanders supporter. Don't recall Dan writing a post to decry the shooter in the foul terms he reserves for white supremacists. And he gives Antifa and BLM a pass for their violent behavior because their violence is justified in fighting the "white boys". Except the "Unite The Right" protesters had a permit to be where they were and there is no known evidence I've seen that suggest their intention was to do more than protest the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue. The other lefties, in greater numbers, chose to confront these people, and some of them came armed as well as did some of the white nationalists.
As to that, I've been trying to find anything that points to just who began the trouble in Charlottesville that led to the death of Heather Heyer. This LA Times piece was one that I chose because it gave a list of witness testimonies that help to answer that question. I find it relevant given Dan's choice to believe that it was all the white nationalists. But there are a couple left-wing testimonies that cite the Antifa people as the true instigators. And that's important, because actual Americans understand the the freedom to assemble and protest is a right even scumbags have. Dan believes the Klan lost the right to be treated seriously or with respect. Dan also has a problem with Scripture as he apparently does with the Constitution. One isn't required to like what these people represent, but so long as they're peaceably assembled, they have the right to be assembled without other scumbags interfering.
There are two more points that need to be addressed as regards Dan's idiotic grandstanding:
1. Bad people are also sometimes susceptible to good ideas. That doesn't mean that the person with the good idea is seeking to attract support of the bad people. It also doesn't mean that the person with the good idea needs to tell the bad people to take a hike just so buffoons like Dan aren't confused about the quality of the person with the good idea.
2. The "alt-right", white nationalists and jerks like the Klan and neo-nazis are NOT "right-wing". I recently read a piece by someone suggesting conservatives need to reject the term "right-wing", in part because of how many lefty chuckleheads abuse the term to demonize their intellectually superior opponents. These sorry groups do NOT align with the principles of either constitutional conservatism or the American way/ideals. They are far more comparable to Dan and his leftist/progressive/socialist/fascist circus of clowns. Indeed, Dan said the Antifa people aren't nazis. Well...yes. They are. They are two sides of the same worthless coin.
There's really much more I'd like to say about this nonsensical perspective of Dan's. It's held by many, even by some on the right. It's have to wait till next time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
37 comments:
The following is my comment that Dan deleted. It came before I was given my "one chance and one chance alone".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no connection between conservative groups and the KKK or neo-nazis. None. That some of either might side with some conservative philosophy or other is not proof of said connection. Most conservatives reject homosexual behavior, but don't reject homosexuals who find conservative ideals mostly to their liking.
So you lie to pretend that these people are tied to any true conservative movement, while at the same time promoting fascist ideals (fascism being a center-left ideology).
I defy you, Dan, to find anything anywhere in anything I've ever written at this or any other blog that justifies even demanding I ask so stupid a question as the one you posed to me. If you can do that, I will answer the question. Until then, it is a deceitful insult and typical of one who only gives lip service to the concept of Christian grace.
The abortion point is spot on with your clarion call to oppose oppression and abuse of others. It is the manifestation of the attitude espoused by these groups you think are bees-knees of assholery, despite their incredibly tiny population in this country. Indeed, I would wager that there are fewer neo-nazis and KKK together in this country than there are women who have killed their own children.
My question regarding black hate groups does not equate to "black folk" as you try to portray them, and as such you lie by suggesting I'm comparing the KKK with they typical black person. The groups in the link are every bit as racist, anti-semitic and hateful as the KKK and neo-nazis. What's more, my link is, as you know because you always read every bit of every link I've ever provided for your edification, is from the SPLC, a noted leftist hate group themselves. If THEY don't like those black hate groups, then you obviously have some explaining to do for not publicly rejecting them as you demand I do of those that prompted your post. So again, you're a liar for saying I'm comparing "black folk" with the KKK, the clear and unambiguous fact is that I was comparing black hate groups with white hate groups.
But then, you clearly support those black hate groups because you've never publicly expressed any revulsion of them. Ain't that how it works, Danny-boy? Isn't that exactly what you're doing to me now by insisting I respond to your bullshit question...and what you're doing to Trump for his non-response to questions asked of him (it is my understanding that his initial comments were made before the identity of the driver of the car was made public. Based on his predecessor, it is unprecedented that he would not make assumptions until such info is known.)
Great post and comment on your part. Those Leftist talking points are intellectually bankrupt, hypocritical and predictable.
Clearly NAZIsm and modern American conservatism are diametrically opposed. One is focused on state control and the other on individual freedom.
I too have the note the irony that an organization founded by a racist, established on racist principles, that has killed more black people than the Klan ever dreamed of is lauded by modern democrats as being vital to our nation.
It's also ironic how many democrats idealize Charles Darwin and his theory, all the while ignoring the fact that he too was a racist. Also ignoring the fact that his theory gave scientific legitimacy to Hitler's final solution.
I've pointed out, and been ignored, the fact that people like Che, Lenin, and Mao as well as the red star of communism are routinely celebrated by those on the left.
Yes, the hypocrisy is obvious and accepted, the fact that free speech is under attack from the left not the right is also telling.
One last thought. There was a bomb thrown at a mosque up here a couple of weeks ago, clearly an illegal and morally indefensible act. (Although I believe Dan has defended bombings of empty buildings because they were designed to destroy property rather than hurt people). Yet, the initial response of the left was to call the act "terroristic" and a "hate crime". Now it may well be the case that they're right, but to jump out before even the first bit of investigation is done and make those kinds of pronouncements seems to be jumping the gun.
I could go on with all sorts of examples, but I won't. More than likely Dan will continue his silence no matter how many examples given.
Earlier I counseled you to wait, that it was more important to strongly condemn the actions in question. At the time, I believe that was the best option, but since the left has politicized this and broad brushed conservatives with this, I think it's appropriate to point out the hypocrisy, but also to have the larger conversation to get beyond the fringe elements driving the discussion. So, I apologize.
I ditto Neil's comment. Your argument to Dan is unassailable, which is why he gets his shorts in such a wad.
No apologies necessary, Craig. If all that Dan did was to mourn the deaths, that would have been fine. If Dan's "anti-hate group" rantings followed similar posts directed toward Antifa, BLM or the hate-groups pointed out in the link I provided, that would have been fine as well. We both know he's never mentioned any of them ever...not without being compelled to do so. I'll leave it to him to post a link to any example that proves that wrong.
Again, it's no great courage to note known scumbags are scumbags. Getting out in front of the new scumbag in town is a different matter.
Neil and Glenn,
It's not lost on me that this post represents a "low-hanging fruit" commentary of my own. I would have preferred explaining myself where the discussion began, but one deleted comment was enough. I won't do it on Dan's terms, regulated by Dan's self-serving rules. Now, if he has any real courage, he can come here and respond without risk that he'll be treated in the same despotic manner.
Given recent precedent, I doubt he will. It's much easier to control the conversation when he can set the parameters and make demands.
Have you noticed that whenever a thread at Dan's gets to a point where he might need to actually do something or when he's asked questions that he maybe doesn't want to answer, he writes a new post? This is the third in a row and it just seems convenient.
If facts, data and/or truth matters to you, BLM is not a hate group. Don't be an idiot.
https://www.splcenter.org/news/2016/07/19/black-lives-matter-not-hate-group
But of course, in your eyes, I'm guessing the SPLC is a hate group or a hate group sympathizer.
Nothing much to say to the rest of the silliness here.
You want to post on my blog, you're always welcome. But if I politely ask you to answer a pertinent question, I'll expect that you will answer it. It makes conversations too difficult when you don't.
~Dan
The SPLC is hardly an unbiased source.
Coming from someone who couldn't/wouldn't answer two direct and specific questions the last is almost as amusing as "always welcome to comment". Especially given that your recent actions don't square with your words here.
The SPLC calls Focus on the Family a hate group. Yeah, SPLC is one to trust --- NOT! The SPLC is itself a hate group.
BLM is an anti-police racist hate group, founded on the false narrative of "hands up don't shoot." They are very angry at anyone who suggests ALL lives matter. They are anarchist fascists.
Called it.
Good luck, guys. Stop them Nazis and liberals they support. Oh wait, the Nazis and racists are supporting conservatives and vice versa, NOT the liberals.
Hmm.
Oh, and the SPLC called the Amana Colonies in Iowa a 'hate group," which demonstrates just how stupid the people are at the SPLC.
"Oh wait, the Nazis and racists are supporting conservatives and vice versa, NOT the liberals."
Another distortion of reality here. It is one I intend to address in more detail, time allowing. But briefly, one cannot pretend that just because these groups agree with one or two conservative principles that there's something wrong conservatism, or that conservatism seeks the support of scumbags. What it should suggest to the dimwitted is that there is universal appeal in conservative principles that even scumbags are drawn by them. If, however, they were drawn to conservatism completely, they wouldn't be neo-nazis and Klansmen.
In the meantime, what do we see with the leftist ideology? We see multiculturalism over American culture. I'm nowhere near a racist and I see that as problematic. For example, I have no problem with Italians (I married one), but this ain't Italy. There's no reason why our culture should bend to satisfy Italians over Italians striving to be American. It turns out that the so-called "white nationalists" in their varied denominations, agree with this. That doesn't mean that I have any partiality towards white nationalists. I'm an American. My race has nothing to do with that. My Polish/German ancestry has nothing to do with that. I'm not Polish, nor German. I'm American of Polish/German descent.
So if Nazis and racists are supporting conservative principles, it merely shows that despite their scumbag peculiarities, they're smarter than other leftists...at least on some issues. But until they dispense with their socialist despotism, they aren't conservative at all. They're still socialists...like Democrats.
I didn't say Conservatives en masse were courting them. But that conservatives WERE courting them. Some conservatives, like the president of the US. Other conservatives have done too much accommodating to this train wreck of humanity called Trump, with very few actively opposing him as they should.
And "American culture" IS multiculturalism...!??!
There's just so much wrong in so much of what you say, Marshall.
Look, if Nazis and racists find such good comfort and support and commonality in a group you're in, it's time to reevaluate that group and/or its values. Let's leave it at that.
Dan
Or maybe it's more accurate to say that these folks have chosen to try to attach their essentially non conservative philosophy to one or two areas where they see an overlap. Clearly no serious conservative is actually looking to get the NAZI vote. It was ridiculous to think that before last weekend, it's even more ridiculous now.
It's interesting that Dan feels no compunction about connecting these groups to the conservative movement, while applying a totally different standard to those groups that have attached themselves to the left.
Oh, wait. That's not interesting, it's just normal.
One or two?
Lock her up!
Build the Wall!
God hates gay sex!
Muslims want to kill us!
Ban the Muslims!
Ban the Mexican rapists!
Stop welfare and welfare queens!
Global warming is a farce!
Environmentalists are socialists!
The Bible should be taken literally!
I could go on and on.
And clearly, even conservatives see that Trump is courting and cajoling racists and these alt right types. There may not be many conservatives/GOP folk who want racism or nazism, but many of the ones who voted in sufficient numbers for the president to win this office in the greatest embarrassment in our modern national history apparently are not put off enough by it to not vote for the racist-courter-in-chief.
In May 2016, when Trump was the clear front-runner in the Republican primaries, Moore (who’s also vocal on Twitter) published a blistering op-ed in the New York Times, decrying not just Trump himself but the whole culture of racism and white nostalgia he saw as endemic in white evangelical Christianity.
~Dan
By the way, how do y'all feel about dipping bullets in pigs blood and executing captured Muslims? Good idea or war crime?
Dan
No. Let's NOT leave it at that, because "that" is complete idiocy. If a nazi said he believes that Christ is Lord, and finds comfort in that, are you going to reject or reconsider your belief in Christ as Lord? Really? The point is simple, and even a simple-minded person like yourself should be able to understand: What I believe is not based on what others believe or whether or not other agree with it. If what I believe has great appeal, the fact that it appeals to unsavory characters as well as those of good character is not an indictment of the belief, but rather an indication of the truth of the belief, that it has the appeal it does, even to scumbags.
This is a 180 from your apparent position that the truth and worthiness of a belief is based upon how many buy into it. Truth is truth regardless of whether or not ANYONE believes it. If everyone thought fire doesn't burn, that wouldn't make the effect of fire any less true. Likewise, that nazis agree that fire burns doesn't make me a dickhead for believing fire burns.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
American culture is NOT multiculturalism, and especially not because any lefty says so. Our culture is that to which those of other cultures acclimate and assimilate. That we may see something from another culture that we like, say food, dress or the like, we adapt it whether those from another culture choose to live/visit here or not. That doesn't make us multicultural...not as people like you use the term. I don't want America to be a little more Italian. I want us to remain distinctly American while adopting from the Italians that which serves us to do so. Indeed, I believe that for the most part, the world would improve if it chooses to be more American. But multicultural? No way. No need and no particular benefit that YOU'VE ever been able to demonstrate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which conservatives have ever actively courted racists or nazis? You're not going to go with that misinterpretation of the Southern Strategy again, are you? If not, then who else actively courted racists? The problem with this preposterous notion is that it is the Democrats who seek support based on division. Conservatives act in terms of "Americans". We don't, as standard operating procedure, pander to any particular groups, but instead put forth our ideas and ideologies that by their nature should appeal to people of character and integrity.
And since you claim that Trump courts them, then by all means, provide a link to any speech or proof that he specifically did so. I'll wait here while you don't find any. What you'll offer instead is mere examples of his inarticulate manner and unpolished speech that is a true gift to dishonest people like "your tribe" who easily distorts what he says to make him out to be the evil you need him to be.
So much wrong in so much of what I say? Not that YOU could ever explain.
If America is multiculturalism, then it clearly needs to stop being so. The very notion is absurd.
"Lock her up!"---Lock who up?
"Build the Wall!"---A great idea, especially along our southern border. That nazis or Klansmen agree means nothing and does not in the least mean a politician who promotes the idea does so to court votes of nazis or Klansmen. He does so because he believes it's good for national security...something about which the left is too stupid to consider.
"God hates gay sex!"---It's true. God called it an abomination. That nazis or Klansmen might agree with this only shows they have a better understanding of God's will on the subject than does the typical "progressive" Christian...or Dan.
"Muslims want to kill us!"---A great many of them do, as it flows from their religion and the mouths of most of their "religious" leaders. This is just a fact. That nazis and Klansmen acknowledge this truth shows they do, on this point, deal in reality. That they might think absolutely all of them do does not align with conservative understanding of the issue.
"Ban the Muslims!"---As terrorism, and in it's most horrific forms, is prevalent due to the behaviors of too many muslims, and as many other muslims support such behavior and as still others support Sharia law which calls for such behaviors, there are many who would prefer there be some better way to screen out such people before allowing them to enter our nation. But unlike the leftist nazis and Klansmen, conservatives do so out of security concerns, not ethnic hatred.
"Ban the Mexican rapists!"---I guess Dan prefers to welcome Mexican rapists. But what about rapists from other countries, Dan? Will you welcome all rapists?
"Stop welfare and welfare queens!"---No, let's have MORE welfare and MORE welfare queens, right Dan? Of course, you're not into footing the bill for that so long as you can work to get others to do it for you. Conservatives prefer an expanding economy that reduces the need for welfare and dipping hands into the wallets of others. Don't know what your nazi and Klan friends think on that score.
"Global warming is a farce!"---This is true as it is described by the Paris Climate Accord buffoons, the AlGore folks and lefties in general. Don't know how much Dan's neo-nazis and Klansmen actually speak on this issue.
"Environmentalists are socialists!"---The loudest whiners are. Indeed, they're like soft soap fascists who look to destroy viable industries upon which the whole nation depends, and they seek to do so at the expense of others.
"The Bible should be taken literally!"---All actual Christians believe this. Those who merely claim to be, like Dan, don't even understand what it means. If the nazis and Klansmen believed OR understood it, they wouldn't be leftists.
All in all, Dan would be hard-pressed to show any real similarity, or even overlap, between how his nazis understand these things and how conservatives do. What's more, he's incapable of demonstrating that the conservative position, even the GOP position on any of these points is crafted with the intention of attracting nazis or Klansmen. I, for one, hope true conservatism...constitutional conservatism...someday has great appeal for these sorry individuals...and for leftists in general. The nation...the world...would be a much better place.
"By the way, how do y'all feel about dipping bullets in pigs blood and executing captured Muslims? Good idea or war crime?"
Pretty good, actually. I'd prefer dipping them in pig poop or piss (or a combo of all three) for use on the battlefield, as well as for executing those muslims convicted of capital crimes, but I figure our guys might not wish to handle such, so pig blood will do just fine. Due to their ideology and insane devotion to it, making life as horrible as possible any time they wish to harm others requires more than merely killing them. They have to want to avoid death. Pig blood might help in that regard, so thanks for the suggestion. I wish I'd thought of it.
As to merely executing captured muslims just because...is that another of your nazi/Klansmen's idea? That also doesn't square with right-wing philosophy.
And who's this Moore guy who wrote this "blistering" op-ed in the NYT? What's the point of quoting something without a link so that we can read it for ourselves and laugh at the stupidity? That's kinda cruel to tease us that way. Please don't tell me it's Michael Moore. Or is he supposedly one of the conservatives you want to believe agree with you about Trump courting scumbags?
If so, you still have the problem that your party courts, enables and protects baby-killers and that's more vile than white supremacy...especially as more blacks are put to death by abortion than by white supremacists.
The self described black racist Black Panthers supported P-BO yet I didn't see Dan calling for him to step down.
Really I find the number of liberals calling for asassination of Trump with no pushback from their fellows to be ironic and disturbing at the same time.
Thomas Sowell is a genius. Too bad he never ran for SCOTUS or President. Oh, wait, us whites are supposed to be racists so we shouldn't like Sowell.
Oh yeah, then there's that Carson guy. If I remember correctly Dan had some pretty negative things to say about him.
The existence of a strong and growing group of Black conservatives is one of those things the left would prefer to pretend isn't a reality. You have to love it when a black radio host in AZ is being called a racist.
Don't forget, Dan bravely said negative things about those on his side who engaged in violence. There's a first time for everything and he should be applauded for his bravery.
It looks like my theory has more data to back it up. Dan is increasingly unlikely to venture out from his blog and engage where he doesn't have the ability to invoke control whenever he wants.
He will surely say that we don't engage in good faith, or some such...that we don't answer questions, that never end as he poses them to avoid answering ours. Or perhaps he's too busy except to post other comments.
Still, he is more than welcome to respond.
Yet evidence suggests he won't. At least not in any meaningful way. It's possible he'll make some token commitment in order to try to demonstrate that he's not hiding at his blog.
I missed the Amana Colonies comment. So if the Amish in Iowa are a hate group, and the Amish are Anabaptists, then wouldn't that make Dan (the Anabsptist) at least an associate of a hate group?
Craig,
The Amana colonies were not (no longer a religious community, Amish by the way, just a tourist attraction on the national register of historic places). They were a German Pietist community.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amana_Colonies
We live 30 minutes away and frequently go there for dining and shopping.
It is my understanding that they've been smeared as haters for daring to rent facilities to hate groups for their meetings. While I would not necessarily care to rent my property to such people for even peaceful events, I respect the rights of others to do so for reasons that I might find unsatisfactory. If such business owners objected to renting for SSMs, they'd still be hate groups in the eyes of the SPLC and other idiots like them.
The left does not care about rights, except for themselves.
Darn it, you've ruined my convoluted tongue in cheek attempt to link Dan ever so tangentially with a bona fide hate group.
Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.
You still can. Link him to Planned Parenthood. Should be easy. Neither he nor they believe abortion is immoral.
Yeah, but that's not convoluted enough.
And he's bravely demanded the impossible and is deleting when it can't be done to his satisfaction.
Post a Comment