death threats from liberals over pro-life bill

[B. W.]

Texas representative receives death threats from liberals over pro-life bill

Confession of Liberal Intolerance

NYT Columnist Savaged by Fellow Liberals for Suggesting They're Intolerant

The article cited below was to show how 'today’s leftist shut down their opposition though bullying tactics and violent interactions' and the historical parallel is simply uncanny showing us what we face...

Hilmar Von Campe, a former Nazi youth, was interviewed on Hannity years ago and described how today’s leftist youths shut down their opposition though bullying tactics and violent interactions. The Nazi youth of yesterday would shut down opposition rallies. Today intolerant leftists use these same violent acts to shut down conservative speech in America. Whether it’s Code Pink, Bernie Sanders supporters, or Black Lives Matter goons, they all use Nazi tactics to silence their opposition.

Hitler would be proud.

Author, speech writer and columnist Peggy Noonan wrote about these thuggish leftist tactics in The Wall Street Journal back in 2006.

What is most missing from the left in America is an element of grace — of civic grace, democratic grace, the kind that assumes disagreements are part of the fabric, but we can make the fabric hold together. The Democratic Party hasn’t had enough of this kind of thing since Bobby Kennedy died. What also seems missing is the courage to ask a question. Conservatives these days are asking themselves very many questions, but I wonder if the left could tolerate asking itself even a few. Such as: Why are we producing so many adherents who defy the old liberal virtues of free and open inquiry, free and open speech? Why are we producing so many bullies? And dim dullard ones, at that.

American Left Has Resorted to Nazi Brown Shirt Tactics byJim Hoft Dec 21st, 2015

-
-
-

[Jac3510]

BW the intolerance of the left is worth discussing. But can I suggest that introducing the topic with a Hitler comparison makes you look ridiculous?

edit:

It's doubly frustrating because I think the intolerance on the left is significantly worse than the intolerance from the right, and I say that with a sincere appreciation of there being a lot of intolerance on the right. The problem with your article and general approach is that it delegitimizes the discussion from the get go. In other words, when you make a Hitler comparison, people immediately tune you out. So don't do it. It's harmful to the truth. And my hope is that you're more interested in truth than you are in strongly emotional comparisons that really do nothing more than satisfy your own distaste for a particular subject.

[edwardmurphy]

From the NYT article:

A study published in The American Journal of Political Science underscored how powerful political bias can be. In an experiment, Democrats and Republicans were asked to choose a scholarship winner from among (fictitious) finalists, with the experiment tweaked so that applicants sometimes included the president of the Democratic or Republican club, while varying the credentials and race of each. Four-fifths of Democrats and Republicans alike chose a student of their own party to win a scholarship, and discrimination against people of the other party was much greater than discrimination based on race.

Truth Revolt's conclusion (based on the NYT article):

And there it is: you won't find another group of people less tolerant of other viewpoints than the holier-than-thou liberals who preach against the intolerance of others. Well, maybe ONE other group: radical Muslims. They use violence to silence their opposition; liberals use political correctness enforced by speech codes and university discrimination. Both are ragingly intolerant, but one tactic is easily recognizable as terrorism, the other is sold as social justice and truth -- a truth that changes according to the left's needs.

Hmm...

[Jac3510]

I don't think that's a very fair critique of TruthRevolt's position, Ed. The four-fifths stat ought to be expected. It's called confirmation bias. Anyone who thinks they don't have it it, well, just exemplifying it. But to use that to write off the larger case is, I think, irresponsible. And that for two reasons:

1. Whatever discrimination Republicans might have in choosing professors based on ideology in an academic setting, well, frankly we don't know. You can't immediately assume that because 80% of people, regardless of party, are more likely to select the winner of some prize based on party affiliation that therefore 80% of people would make hiring decisions based on party affiliation. That might be true, but it might not. What is true is that the social sciences are dramatically more likely to intentionally discriminate against hiring conservatives (or Republicans, you can decide which is more fundamental -- I'd be curious to see a study looking at haring conserative Democrats vs liberal Republicans). So perhaps you can argue that if conservatives were in charge, then they would be the ones discriminating against hiring liberal professors. And perhaps you would have exactly the same types of arguments from them that you are getting from liberals--that liberals ought not to be hired, to justify the discrimination. Who knows? We can guess, but the fact is that we don't know, because that isn't the reality. And that leads to.

2. The reality is that conservative scholars are being discriminated against for hiring purposes. Even granting that conservatives would do the same thing, does that justify liberals doing it? I hope you would say no. Perhaps you do agree with liberals who claim that conservative ideas ought to be discriminated against in academia. I hope not. If so, though, you don't need to point out that four-fifths point at all. That totally misses the point and is a red herring. If you really want to say that conseratives ought not to be hired because they are conservative (and conservative ideology ought not to be allowed to be taught from a lecturn), then far from pointing that conservatives would do the same thing subconsciously, you'd just point out that liberals are right to discriminate in this case. On the other hand, if you agree that such discrimination is a bad thing, well then it doesn't matter that conservatives would do it, too, then does it (and that's assuming that they would . . . again, we don't know that. We can guess, but we don't have the studies.)?

Now, I'm glad that Kristof rejects the idea of affirmative action for conservatives. I am opposed to that idea in principle and I think it would be stupid to do it here. But I do think it is a conversation that needs to be had. The first question is whether or not such discrimination is happening. The obvious answer is "Yes." Then the second question is, why it be happening? That's a harder question, but I think we'd be on fair ground to start with two obvious points, the first being the noted fact that people are probably more likely to hire in accordance with party affiliation (so grant that conservatives might do the same, everything else being equal (though I would quickly add that everything else is never being equal)), and second that liberals apparently tend to think that conservativism actually ought to be discriminated against, at least in academia. And that raisese the third question, which is should it be happening? My answer is no. I hope yours is, too. But if not, that's a better question to discuss than to merely point out that Republicans might be just as inclined to make the same mistake that Democrats do.

With all that said, I would also say that TruthRevolt doesn't help it's case to refer to liberals as "holier-than-thou" in this context. Maybe it helps in that it matches the mood of its readers and so will encourage more traffic. But in terms of the argument itself? It's stupid for reasons you're aware of. I just think it's way off base and unfair to make that the centerpiece of any sort of response to what Kristof or TruthRevolt for that matter is saying.

[Hortator]

To make a brief point, the left have always played two cards heavily: the race card, and the woman card. To have the abortion issue settled once and for all would take a card away from them, one that is potentially more profitable considering women are not a minority. Women are the 52% in this country, actually. Despite being treated like one. I'm not a woman, but I know that they are not a special interest group whose only concern is elective, feminine surgeries, however you may wrap it.

[abelcainsbrother]

BW the intolerance of the left is worth discussing. But can I suggest that introducing the topic with a Hitler comparison makes you look ridiculous?

edit:

It's doubly frustrating because I think the intolerance on the left is significantly worse than the intolerance from the right, and I say that with a sincere appreciation of there being a lot of intolerance on the right. The problem with your article and general approach is that it delegitimizes the discussion from the get go. In other words, when you make a Hitler comparison, people immediately tune you out. So don't do it. It's harmful to the truth. And my hope is that you're more interested in truth than you are in strongly emotional comparisons that really do nothing more than satisfy your own distaste for a particular subject.

Jac,the truth is the truth and libs are communists just like Hitler.Who is rioting in the streets,shutting down free speech at college campuses? liberals. And now it is death threats.You did not see this kind of stuff going on with tea-partiers and they accomplished alot.They were just patriotic Americans that got together and organized themselves. The liberals are out of control exposed as the communists they are and until the leaders denounce these activities they are going along with it.They are now pushing the agenda of their base and their base are these rioters who are tearing up property,etc. I know the truth hurts,but libs are communists.The Democratic Party is not like it once may have been say 50 years ago,it has been taken over by communists who have abandoned the Constitution. It is conservatives that protect what freedom we have left and as much as we can't stand the biased liberal MSM we would never shut down their free speech,instead we just ignore them. Free speech is about protecting speech that we find offensive and conservatives protect it and would not take it away like liberals are trying to do and have done.We do want more competition in the media and not monopolies of a few people owning all of our media like we have now.It is good in a capitalist society to have competition and monopolies have to be broken up from time to time,but this is not shutting down free speech.Liberals force things on America against its will like abortion and same-sex marriages using activist judges that legislate from the bench.Liberals are not moderates like you imply,they are communists and they have done much damage to America.

[B. W.]

BW the intolerance of the left is worth discussing. But can I suggest that introducing the topic with a Hitler comparison makes you look ridiculous?

The purpose of these types of threads is to introduce news topic so you all discuss this, not me. It was the writer of the latter article that made the comparison, not me. So take up quips with them.

This is for you all to discuss as well as you all to seek out other news reports on this matter.

With that you all have a nice day...
-
-
-

[B. W.]

Here is more food for thought...

Violent Protests Over The Past Several Years

????

[Jac3510]

"They" didn't post their Hitler analogies here. You did. You could have quoted from any article, and you picked that one. You can, of course, post all the Hitler comparisons you want. I'm just offering you--and the community as a whole--the thought that maybe you might not want to come across that way. And, as an aside, I find the analogy incredibly offensive. Six million people were murdered by Hitler. To say that the left's intolerant PC tactics are similar to the murder of six million people trivializes the holocaust. Even abortion shouldn't be compared to it, because while abortion is a terrible evil that has taken far more lives, it is, frankly, rooted in an entirely different set of problems. The holocaust was rooted in an intentional malice and desire to exterminate a group of people simply for being that group. That is, the holocaust was expressly and intentionally about genocide. Abortion is not. It's rooted other horrible and terrible and detestable sins, but not an intention to commit genocide. So, again, let's not trivialize the intentional murder of our Jewish brothers and sisters by comparing SJW Snowflake tactics to gas chambers. It's beneath you. And if it isn't beneath you, I hope it is beneath the rest of this community.

[abelcainsbrother]

"They" didn't post their Hitler analogies here. You did. You could have quoted from any article, and you picked that one. You can, of course, post all the Hitler comparisons you want. I'm just offering you--and the community as a whole--the thought that maybe you might not want to come across that way. And, as an aside, I find the analogy incredibly offensive. Six million people were murdered by Hitler. To say that the left's intolerant PC tactics are similar to the murder of six million people trivializes the holocaust. Even abortion shouldn't be compared to it, because while abortion is a terrible evil that has taken far more lives, it is, frankly, rooted in an entirely different set of problems. The holocaust was rooted in an intentional malice and desire to exterminate a group of people simply for being that group. That is, the holocaust was expressly and intentionally about genocide. Abortion is not. It's rooted other horrible and terrible and detestable sins, but not an intention to commit genocide. So, again, let's not trivialize the intentional murder of our Jewish brothers and sisters by comparing SJW Snowflake tactics to gas chambers. It's beneath you. And if it isn't beneath you, I hope it is beneath the rest of this community.

Jac the left is trying to use Islamic terrorism to exterminate instead of gas chambers.

[Jac3510]

And that's why I have you on permignore, ACB. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourself. That's vile.

[abelcainsbrother]

And that's why I have you on permignore, ACB. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourself. That's vile.

It's true,nonetheless whether you ignore me or not. We see Islamic terrorist attacks in every country where muslims live and the left is trying to bring more in.Tell us what is different than gas chambers and Islamic terrorist attacks.More Christians have been killed by Islamic terrorists that at any other time in history.

[Hortator]

And that's why I have you on permignore, ACB. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourself. That's vile.

I'm taking a Critical Thinking class right now, and the professor deplores nazi references. If he ever hears somebody say feminazi, fascist, or any other derivative of those terrible years, he always says "Oh, they're a nazi? How many Jews have they killed today?"

I can see where you're coming from, Jac. I know you have a degree in Philosophy, so every day I feel like I'm starting to become a little bit more like you. (Not a major, but it's still very enlightening to take)

Edit: as for the topic, I can also see where BW and ACB are coming from. (ABBCW) they obviously feel very strongly on the matter, but might I recommend a constructive solution?

Rush talked about how many people attended Trump rallies, filling stadiums butt to gut while Hillary got hundreds and Vernon got six. The support for Trump has not changed.

Wherever you may live, I am sure there is a satellite solidarity March or demonstration for the Trump agenda, conservatism, or both. Probably in the nearest major city, but if you feel powerless, fear not! If millions of Americans found time out of their jobs to support Trump in his election, there are just as many who are willing to now, I bet. Get involved, you'll feel better for doing something good like involving yourself in the political process directly.

[Jac3510]

It is irritating, eh? It's one of those things that once you see it, you can't unsee it. Nazi/Hitler/Holocaust references always make me . To your other point, I see where they're coming from, too. That's why I made the comment to BW that I did. It's actually a very legitimate conversation. But framing it against Nazi Germany delegitimizes it.

[abelcainsbrother]

Jac I know where you are coming from and I have heard the nazi-comparison thing before and how it hurts our argument when we compare them to Hitler, but these commies we have here in America need to be defeated though so that they cannot do so much damage than they already have. So I respect your view but I just believe we are dealing with commies.We have a chance to reduce their political power even more than we already have and clean up their messes and get America back on track.