« Lessons Learned From The Left | Main | Go west Maureen Dowd »

What I have learned about the Left this week

Jay Tea shared the lessons he learned this week from the reaction to Sarah Palin and her daughter's pregnancy. I have learned a few things myself, but mostly have just come up with a slew of questions. Here are a few:

First, I wonder if those on the left, on the loony left that is (I assume there are still some on the left that are sane), can sink any lower? Every time I ask that question, the answer comes back "yes." Times I have asked the question in the past include the Wellstone memorial service, John Kerry's use of "Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian" in a 2004 presidential debate, John Murtha declaring U.S. Marines cold-blooded killers, those on the left openly pulling for the mission in Iraq (and later the surge) to fail, those on the left celebrating news that Laura Ingraham and Tony Snow had cancer, those on the left openly adopting more and more callous and extreme positions on late term abortion, and many more.

Over the weekend I read through hundreds of comments posted at Daily Kos and Democratic Underground. These are leading Democrat websites, both in traffic and influence. Democrat congressmen and other prominent Democrats like Elizabeth Edwards and Keith Olbermann post there so it is hard to label them as the fringe of the party. Although they are often foul and disgusting and sometimes over the top wacko, they are, sadly, openly embraced by many prominent in the party.

Some of the comments I read there this weekend were as low as I have seen. In addition to comments speculating on whether or not Sarah Palin's fifth child was hers or her daughter's, there were quite a few speculating (and some even claiming) that he was the product of an incestuous relationship between Palin's husband and daughter. If there were only one or two such comments I would have written them off as lone crazies or perhaps even GOP operative infiltrators trying to make those on the left look disgusting, but there were many. There were some at the sites who warned others there that the subject was not appropriate or likely to backfire, but many at the sites continued to speculate with glee. As late as last night there were still some floating the incest insinuation. There were other spin-off theories as well, including this doozy accusing Palin of trying to induce a miscarriage with her son Trig.

The Anchoress said it better than I ever could.

They're in serious trouble of the mind, and trouble of the heart and trouble of the soul. They are so paranoid, and so full of hate, at this point, that they are clinging to an insane idea - one that betrays a sort of soul-sickness that leaves me feeling both incredulous and chilled.

How much do you have to love your hate in order to surrender your reason, and your humanity, to it?

...Clinton and Bush "hate" grew over time to the insane levels. These people admit they knew nothing about Palin before John McCain announced her, yet their hate for her was immediate and electric. It is not sane. It is disturbingly unnatural. It is almost supernatural.

Can they sink any lower? It doesn't seem possible, but there are still two full months to go before election day and I am extremely pessimistic at this point.

Will the gutter behavior by so many on the Left be exposed? Will it backfire? Not as long as the media is protecting those participating in it. Read Kevin's post below which outline some of the connections between the recent Palin baby smears and those in the Obama camp. Redstate and others have done excellent work on connecting the dots (for lack of a better term). In a post titled Don't Believe a Damn Thing Lefties Write About the Palins, Ace deconstructs the way those on the left create their own reality over and over again, whether it be regarding Palin's baby or the economy or Iraq. Repeat an untruth enough and it becomes planted in the voters' minds. (Please read his post in full).

Do those on the left actually know anyone they routinely label as "religious right" or "fundies?" I don't see how they could. Their conception of what conservative Christians believe is so far from anything resembling reality that I can't imagine they actually know anyone personally who falls into the category. Constantly throughout reading the posts and comments at DU and Kos I was shocked at how they thought conservative Christians would react to news of Palin's pregnancy. This has happened in the past, as well. They thought those on the right would be shocked and angered to find out that Dick Cheney has, gasp, a lesbian daughter. Do these people really live on planet Earth? They have such an over-the-top stereotype image of who those on the right are that it is hard to believe they could know anyone on the right personally. They believe those on the right who are of faith are all about judgment. They completely disregard or discount (or are perhaps unaware of?) forgiveness, which is, of course, the foundation of the faith. They also miscalculated what would be important to conservatives of faith -- not that a teenage girl became pregnant, but the reaction of she and the child's father and their families. They took responsibility. They chose life. As so many others have pointed out -- they walked the walk.

Jeff Goldstein touched on this this week at Protein Wisdom.

Many on the left will believe, quite mistakenly, that such an announcement is likely to weaken Palin's support among "the hard-right conservative base". But in fact, it will do no such thing -- first, because the "hard-right conservative base" that liberal Democrats consistently invoke is largely a caricature that lives only in their minds and as a convenient trope in their rhetoric, from whence it can be trotted out as a foil and a boogeyman on cue...

I am just scratching the surface here. There are many interesting blog posts on the questions discussed here and more. Here are a few:

Melissa Clothier, Mike's Noise, Mike Gallagher, Bookworm Room, Newsbusters,
multiple Ann Althouse posts -- just keep scrolling.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/31279.

Comments (40)

Good post, Lorie. I see yo... (Below threshold)

Good post, Lorie. I see you've got one tag there for Newsbusters. I saw today that Newsbusters also caught instances of CNN and ABC openly raising the 'Palin neglecting Trig by running for VEEP' foulness.

you know, something just po... (Below threshold)

you know, something just popped into my head (although I'm sure I'm not the first its occurred to), is this intense, immediate smear campaign (using nonsense they'd never raise if they'd properly prepared for Palin) a concerted effort to get Palin off the ticket? It could certainly be viewed that way, leading to speculation that it proves the left is scared you-know-what-less about a McCain/Palin ticket vs. Empty Suit/Career Politician.

Lorie, I am never surprised... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Lorie, I am never surprised at how vile the left has become. They are self loathers, and if you do not have a healthy outlook about yourself, you cannot for other people. They hate just to hate. I see it here at Wizbang time and time again. The KOS and DU are now the mainstream democratic party so they are all tainted. ww

Bravo, Lorie. Regarding yo... (Below threshold)
Edward Sisson Author Profile Page:

Bravo, Lorie. Regarding your statement "Do those on the left actually know anyone they routinely label as "religious right" or "fundies?" I don't see how they could. Their conception of what conservative Christians believe is so far from anything resembling reality that I can't imagine they actually know anyone personally who falls into the category."

It isn't that surprising that people on the left don't know any of the people they label as "religious right," and probably few people on the right know any of the people they see as lefties. People tend to know people who are like them, rather than people who are so significantly different.

But the people on the right have, ironically, this advantage: because lefties dominate the TV news and the writing and producing of TV shows and movies, people on the right have a far more accurate understanding of the people on the left, than do the people on the left have concerning those on the right. As a result, people on the right, whether their side wins or loses in politics, usually are not confused as to why it happened. But people on the left, when they win, attribute victor to the wrong reasons, and when they lose, they are baffled and angry and feel they were somehow unfairly out-thought. And this sense of unfairness then seems to convince them that it is OK for them to use ever-increasingly unfair tactics, such as Ace talks about in the post you linked.

Hello Lori - I am more in t... (Below threshold)
John:

Hello Lori - I am more in the middle with this situation, and I do not agree with any malicious attacks about anyone, or BS, propaganda information from "the left" or "the right". But I am also surprised with your attacks on the "left" or the media, for trying to uncover as much information as possible on a candidate running for such an important position in our government. I would expect the scrutiny of Sarah Palin to be even more intense than usual, and it makes complete sense. We have 2 months to really find out who this person is, so it's common sense that the lack of time will really intensify efforts to reveal every information about her as soon as possible. Americans like myself wanted to find out as much about Obama before, and we want to find out as much about her Palin as well, before deciding if she is fit to be a VP. I know information coming from both the Republicans and Democrats will be biased information, a lot from the media will also be biased left or right, depending on who is reporting. The bottom line is - we live in a democratic nation, not an authoritarian one. Everyone has a right to information about our public figures, whether is for or against that individual. I will not just accept any information given by either party without thinking about it and forming my own opinion on it first.

McCain had months and month... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

McCain had months and months to choose and vet a running mate and this is who he picked. The meanspirited, personal, merciless Liberal/Media attack just can't be unexpected. You don't make a multi-million dollar decision not taking things like that into consideration.

Bullshit, Adrian. Your fel... (Below threshold)
John Irving:

Bullshit, Adrian. Your fellow travellers would attack anyone this same way, as demonstrated by the disgusting displays we have seen over the last few days.

Isn't Obama a love child? ... (Below threshold)
COgirl:

Isn't Obama a love child? Were his parents married when he was conceived?

Let's call Adrian on his/he... (Below threshold)

Let's call Adrian on his/her bullshit. Who does he/she think McCain SHOULD have picked for veep? Who might have won over his/her support?

J.

(Nothing snide about the pronouns intended; Adrian is just one of those androgynous names, like Pat, Chris, Jackie, etc. etc. etc.)

John Irving, you are correc... (Below threshold)
John:

John Irving, you are correct, others would be attacked the same way. If I remember correctly, Obama was also slammed to no end when we were first finding out about who he is, and COgirl has just proved my point. I think both the left and the right has lost all their marbles.

7:Reread my commen... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

7:

Reread my comment. I said the the reaction was NOT unexpected. Of course she was attacked.

9:I doubt McCain wou... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

9:
I doubt McCain would ever pick someone that would get my ideological support -- I'm way, way, way, way, waaaaaaaaaaaaay too Liberal/Progressive.

But, speaking purely politically, I'm glad McCain picked Palin.

My only point was that the personal attacks had to be expected.

I know Christians who have ... (Below threshold)
Tammy:

I know Christians who have had teenage children that produced children out of wedlock. I also know Christians who have gay/lesbian children. I know Christians who have children that have been incarcerated for murder. None of the aforesaid were bad parents. In fact, they were fantastic parents. However, a child will go its own way once he or she reaches the age of majority; and that "train up a child" verse is a generality, as in, they're more likely to turn out well if you actually try to rear them correctly. However, I know many otherwise good kids who have made bad decisions. Many have corrected their paths and lead exemplary lives. Really, I don't understand why the left-leaners are so shocked. Isn't this the sort of tolerant "I'm okay, you're okay" ideology they supposedly espouse? You're right, it's a state of mental derangement.

Limbaugh went after Chelsea... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Limbaugh went after Chelsea Clinton, and the only author on this site I can recall pointing out how shitty that was is Jay Tea. The rest of you are hypocrites. Palin's daughter and grandchild are not fair game, but neither was Chelsea Clinton.

Omigod, some left-wing internet and MSM writers are assholes! That's news to you? Your faux incredulity is hilarious.
depp=true
notiz=Broadbrushing again?

Shut up Hyper, my Canadian ... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Shut up Hyper, my Canadian friend. Making fun of a downs syndrome child, saying dad fathered Bristol's child, saying Gov. Palin was responsible for making her child have downs syndrom. Going after the family again and again is past decency. If Limbaugh said something about Chelsea that was wrong, but did the mainstream media pick up on it also? Did the blogs pick up on it? ww

Hyper, Limbaugh apologized ... (Below threshold)
Big Mo:

Hyper, Limbaugh apologized IN PERSON to Hilary Clinton for what he said.

Did you know that?

hyperbolist - "Limbaugh... (Below threshold)
marc:

hyperbolist - "Limbaugh went after Chelsea Clinton, and the only author on this site I can recall pointing out how shitty that was is Jay Tea. The rest of you are hypocrites"

So, absence of comment equals being a hypocrite?

How so?

Or, are you just projecting?

Or, possibly, in possession of some unknown mental powers held in secret that allows reading the minds of some.

Or perhaps, you're what my Grand Mama used to call "off your rocker?!

Yep. Point is, he said it. ... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Yep. Point is, he said it. Those words came from his mouth. Say, would you care if this asshole diarist apologized? No, because now Palin is a victim of "the left" (which obviously means everyone who believes that her personal life warrants public scrutiny), and the professional wingnuts are already scripting a narrative to fit that. Victimhood plays well to the public.

Obama's campaign hasn't participated in the smears that have everyone so upset. Obama is not the DailyKos. Neither is his campaign. Trying to conflate him or his staff with internet diarists is a stretch, and the general public won't care either way because the general public is not as hip to the interweb discourse as people who blog seem to imagine they are. Hell, even conflating Markos Moulitsas with diarists on his site is a stretch.

Willie, I don't know if the blogs picked up on it at the time. I wasn't reading them, as I wasn't interested in politics. Don't tell me to shut up, it makes you sound like an empty-headed angry old kook who can't be bothered to respond to the charge of hypocrisy. Oh, wait...

hyper - "Obama is not t... (Below threshold)
marc:

hyper - "Obama is not the DailyKos.

No one that I've read has said he is, but they have noted he feels no remorse for cavorting with the trash that resides there. And THAT seems to be an ongoing and consistent problem for him in any number of areas.

"Hell, even conflating Markos Moulitsas with diarists on his site is a stretch."

So, the owner/publisher of the site isn't responsible for what goes on under his name? Leaving that lunacy aside, Moulitsas has more than enough past and very well documented history to conclude he's far, very FAR left boarding on nutjob.

"Don't tell me to shut up, it makes you sound like an empty-headed angry old kook who can't be bothered to respond to the charge of hypocrisy. Oh, wait...

I responded to your charge of hypocrisy in the related thread, care to respond. Sensibly.

One of the richest and best... (Below threshold)
Maggie:

One of the richest and best lessons learned
is that of the Prodigal Son.
Raised up in a loving and wealthy family,
he lived a ruinous life as a young adult.
Yet after all the mistakes he made he was
returned to the family in a loving way by
his father.
It gets no better than that.

Obama's campaign h... (Below threshold)
Obama's campaign hasn't participated in the smears that have everyone so upset.

Ahem. Some of the anti-Palin "moby" sites have been traced back to what looks suspiciously like the Obama campaign.

Despite Obama's lofty rhetoric, I suspect there's a lot going on behind the scenes.

No, Markos Moulitsas is ... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

No, Markos Moulitsas is not responsible for all of his diarists. He's not the editor of a magazine. It's a community, a very large one.

And I was speaking to Wild Willie, marc. In the couple of years I have been an occasional reader/commenter here, I have yet to see him contribute one substantial comment to a discussion on any topic. He's free to go backwards and find one thing with an iota of substance to prove me wrong, but as far as I can remember, the totality of his "contributions" could be summarized as follows: "I don't like 'the left' ", punctuated with the occasional homophobic slur.

I think I responded to your comment in the other thread.

Hyper,Let me fix y... (Below threshold)
Kenny:

Hyper,

Let me fix your posting for you:

In the couple of years I have been an occasional pain-in-the-ass commenter here, I have yet to contribute one substantial comment to a discussion on any topic. I Can't go backwards and find one thing with an iota of substance to prove this wrong, but as far as I can remember, the totality of my "contributions" could be summarized as follows: "I don't like 'the right' ", cherry-picked irrelevant facts, insults, and strawmen, lots of strawmen.

Kenny, that for the assist ... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Kenny, that for the assist but not necessary. Hyperbolist has in his mind there is rules and qualifications for adding comments, I suppose. And if you differ with him on same sex issues, he goes right to the labels. Hyper proves to be immature in his responses to most posts. Very, very rarely do I see a hint of wisom but then he ruins it with the "asshole" dumb shit" lines. I figure he is from Canada and they are challenged in some way. After all, it was against the law for years to have a satellite dish. What's up with that? ww

Huh? Satellite dishes? I wo... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Huh? Satellite dishes? I wouldn't know, I was raised in a household that understood the value of television vs. the value of books. Were you raised by an idiot box?

Sure, I like to make fun of people for saying stupid shit, which is juvenile, but I also do argue with people, which I have never seen you make an attempt at. "The left are all sick and they hate America and are radicals" is not something that can be engaged with, Willie, so I pay your comments as much courtesy as they warrant. You have never contributed anything novel to a discussion on anything of which I'm aware, but again, you or anyone else are welcome to prove me wrong.

And no, your "differing" with me on same sex issues does not count, because your view on that subject is insane and immoral at face value. Meaning, your opinion that homosexuals are "deviant" is not an argument that can be intelligibly engaged with, so instead I insult you for being a bigot. Don't like it? Stop being a bigot. It's the 21st century.

Kenny, two questions: 1) who is your favourite Backstreet Boy; and 2) why?

hyper - "No, Markos Mou... (Below threshold)
marc:

hyper - "No, Markos Moulitsas is not responsible for all of his diarists. He's not the editor of a magazine. It's a community, a very large one."

Well now there's your problem right there. You believe, apparently firmly, that because Moulitsas isn't the editor of a "magazine" he's not responsible for what is written on a site wholly owned and registered under his name.

I wouldn't take that allegation into a court of law fella, 'cause you'd lose your ass and a buttload of cash.

And I note you didn't address the trash himself, i.e. Moulitsas, and his rather despicable list of comments from the past and Obama is so reluctant to disassociate himself from. (Gee where have I heard that before?)

Yep. Point is, he ... (Below threshold)
Yep. Point is, he said it. Those words came from his mouth.

Good grief, hyper, Limbaugh made a mistake and personally apologized for it. What more do you want? A pound of flesh?

Say, would you care if this asshole diarist apologized?

Yes.

I would also give Kos himself points if he announced a general apology for all the raw filth that his site's diarists spewed out over the weekend about the Palin family. I actually would be impressed by that.

The one thing I remember hi... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

The one thing I remember him saying that was truly awful, the "Screw 'em" comment in regards to the dead mercenaries in Iraq, he apologized for. Rush Limbaugh apologized for ridiculing Michael J. Fox and (I learned today) Chelsea Clinton. People say regrettable things, and people who disagree with them on nearly every subject aren't likely to forgive them for it. Goes without saying.

So you think a guy with a massive internet community registered under his name is legally responsible for all of the posts and comments on said internet community? Does that thereby mean that the size of the community must be restricted to something small enough for one person (or as many lawyers as they can afford to hire) to monitor? I'm asking these questions honestly, not trying to be snide. I really don't think he can be held personally responsible for everything on the DKos.

hyperbolist, there is an ar... (Below threshold)

hyperbolist, there is an argument that was made about hosting companies hosting spammers that seems especially applicable to Kos:

"If you're too big to act responsibly, you're too big."

His name is on every page, he owns the whole shebang, he cashes the checks that the site generates. That means he owns the bullshit, too.

J.

If someone says something s... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

If someone says something slanderous on that site, sue the author for libel. I don't see, though, how Markos would be responsible for anything other than disclosing that person's contact information to the authorities, assuming he even has it, and removing the post.

Lying about someone on the internet is not the same as spamming. Still, it's as good a reference point of any that I'm aware. And the fact that he does make money off of all of the diaries' ad revenue means you're probably right. Thanks.

Hyper,Thanks for m... (Below threshold)
Kenny:

Hyper,

Thanks for making my point, you just post diversion and insults, not reasoned argument and debate.

It's too bad you can't find some lefties open to an honest debate.

Hey Kenny, I am talk... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Hey Kenny, I am talking to some other people, but I don't want to talk to you, so I reiterate: 1) who is your favourite Backstreet Boy, and 2) why?

Hyper,More insults... (Below threshold)
Kenny:

Hyper,

More insults from the libtard.

At least I don't believe you should be dead, you asshole.

The one thing I re... (Below threshold)
The one thing I remember him saying that was truly awful, the "Screw 'em" comment in regards to the dead mercenaries in Iraq, he apologized for.

He did? When? I don't recall him ever doing this.

So you think a guy with a massive internet community registered under his name is legally responsible for all of the posts and comments on said internet community?

I don't claim to know how the legalities work in such a situation, but whether Markos Moulitsas is legally responsible or not, the issuance of a general apology for all the sewage that appeared on his site over the weekend would have been a good gesture on his part.

John #5 - "But I am also... (Below threshold)

John #5 - "But I am also surprised with your attacks on the "left" or the media, for trying to uncover as much information as possible on a candidate running for such an important position in our government."

We all expect candidates to be scrutinized. And closely. Nothing enlightening there. But I'm a little curious as to why you'd use this argument as it does not, in any way, apply to what is going on or Lorie's "attacks" on the stereo-typing and preconceived notions used to broad brush entire groups of people. Any inquiring about these rumors imply that the base accusations are acceptable and reasonable and deserving of discussion and cannot be characterized as "scrutinizing". It's better characterized as wallowing in salacious and slanderous gossip.

If ONLY they would cut the crap, we could actually talk about her qualifications as a candidate.

When I used the old phrase the other day, "that well was poisoned long ago", I had NO IDEA how bad the attacks would get.

Hyper, Limbaugh did NOT mak... (Below threshold)

Hyper, Limbaugh did NOT make fun of Michael J.Fox. He was trying to demonstrate for viewers of the "Dittocam" what Fox looked like when he was off his meds when testifying before Congress.

Media Matters and other slur factories disengenuously claimed Limbaugh was making fun of him.

So if I pretend to be a han... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

So if I pretend to be a handicapped person and start slurring my words and tripping over my feet, Big Mo, I'm not making fun of them, but merely trying to demonstrate their behaviour.

Michael J. Fox has Parkinson's disease, which inspired Limbaugh to make himself look like an asshole trying to discredit the guy for supporting stem cell research. I don't care if you think it's a "slur" to say that Limbaugh was being an asshole, because it's obvious to most everybody (including Rush!) that he was, in fact, being an asshole.

I think you are m missing t... (Below threshold)
Don L:

I think you are m missing the point. The idea is this.The left is a spring of "compassion" -of caring about the little guy. "Compassion" is their self-defining word, but it must always be accompanied by a heavy use of the their other self-defining word, "sensitivity."
What you have witnessed this week is just a clear demonstration of what the left really means by compassion, caring, and sensitivity.
The kind of love they exhibited for the poor Down's Syndrome Child's birth was not the cruel insensitivity of the average republican. Why it almost rose to the level of the sensitivity and dignity of...well...a Paul Wellstone funeral.
There is no better way to see and understand the depths of human depravity than to watch the left's Godless, moral relativists, drop all pretense of being humans, in order to win -This untethered vicious fighting, is a virtue to them that they just can't summon up from the dark depths of their souls when it comes to fighting the real enemy.

What sick people!

I agree with your post, but... (Below threshold)
Jason in Japan:

I agree with your post, but I'm writing for a different reason.
The phrase "but the reaction of she and the child's father" should be "but the reaction of her..."
"Her" is the objective form and since "her" is the object of the preposition, you shouldn't use "she".
Switching they is bad English, if you understand what me am trying to say. ;-)

All that these pitiful atta... (Below threshold)
Ryan:

All that these pitiful attacks on Palin just show that the left doesn't think they are actually capable of winning arguments on _merit_ any more.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy