Hooray for hate mail!
As you guys know, I get a lot of hate mail, especially when I post anything that goes against the liberal groupthink. Last week I posted pictures of the Occupies’ May Day party. http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/05/03/a-legitimate-political-movement/
I didn’t even comment much. The pictures pretty much speak for themselves. It is a bunch of hoodlums throwing a temper tantrum and wrecking other people’s stuff, but check them out if you haven’t already.
However even posting unflattering pictures will rile up the stupid, and Hanna is pretty damn stupid. If you want to read the original exchange it is in the comments of the other thread, but I decided that she was entertaining enough (though she certainly is no nickwolf!) that she still deserved her own post. Her comments are in bold, my responses in the thread are in italics.
Perhaps they should act more like the teabaggers, and actually start stomping on people smaller than themselves? http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/10/rand-paul-supporter-stomps-on-woman.html
So the Occupies attempted to blow up a bridge, mailed fake anthrax, and committed several thousand property crimes last week, and Hanna’s response to show that the Tea Party was morally equivalent was how one protestor got shoved down at something that wasn’t a Tea Party event two years ago (when the Occupies were busy raping, overdosing, and shooting at the Whitehouse).
The left loves to play the moral equivalence card. That’s why their standard answer for every horrible thing Obama has done is “but George Bush did blah blah blah!” Yep. Gotcha. Heard you the first 8,000 times. Didn’t really like him either. It is never about something being right or wrong, just that your own wrong things are of similar wrongness to the other guy.
When they don’t have moral equivalence they try to manufacture some.
Uh-huh. And do you apply that same level of whiny self-justification to the OWS incidents you cite?
I’ve pointed this out before, but my hate mailers always call any disagreement “whiny”. Because of course the entire OWS movement is based upon being mad because somebody else has more stuff than you do, crying about fairness, throwing tantrums in the street, and demanding that you get free stuff. Obviously that’s not whiney at all.
On the other hand, wanting to keep your own stuff makes you a whiney little bitch.
I responded, and one of the things I said was this: Now here is the thing. My side gets accused of violence all the time. Ironically enough, we’re the side with the guns and the knowledge of how to use them. When we do get uppity, trust me, you’ll know.
But, Larry, every time your side has tried, you failed. Such as when your side attempted to evade taxing the rich in France in the 1780s, or when your side declared war on the United States in 1861 so you could continue to keep slaves, or when your side invaded Poland in 1939.
Heh. You mean when the populists started running people through the guillotine, when the Democrats fought to keep slaves, or when the National Socialists invaded Poland? Your grasp of political philosophy is apparently as good as your grasp on history.
Each and every time, right-wingers who thought they had the monopoly on violence and could use it to defend their privilege over others turned out to be dead, dead wrong.
Oh, I have no delusion that the right have a monopoly on violence. After all, it was the left that managed to murder over 100,000,000 of their own citizens in the last 100 years… But I’m sure it’ll be different this time.
And your guns and your knowledge of how to use them isn’t going to help you when you start something this time and get stomped, either.
Start something what? Are we going to round up undesirables and put them in camps? Oh… wait, when that happened in America it was done by your side.
You know, come to think of it, there have been other instances where underemployed young men were used as useful idiots to smash a bunch of windows and bully people. Last time they called it Kristallnacht.
Riiiight – you think the National Socia1ists were leftist because they used the word “Socia1ist” – and you accuse others of having a poor grasp of social philosophy?
No. I’m sorry, the name Nazi actually translates as Fluffy Puppy Rabbit Happy Fun Time Hug Party, but my German is rusty. Yes, dumbass, they were socialists. But they were only runners up compared to the commies. Now those assholes mechanized murder into something like farming.
But what do I know about the history and social movements of the 1930s? (regular readers are laughing at you right now, Hanna, not with you).
The national socialists—shockingly enough—were socialists. The main reason that era originally fascinated me is because it was a war of ideologies between the state owned individual and the individual owned state.
I find it highly ironic that the side that wants to grow a government enormous enough to take care of everything, control everything, regulate everything, provide everything, and crush everything thinks of themselves as freedom fighters, while they say the side that wants to make government smaller and less capable are dangerous statists… But I suppose that’s why people came up the term “useful idiot.”
Afterwards one of my regular posters put up the original Nazi party platform, which, minus the German specific stuff and some weird Aryan race garbage, sounds sort of familiar, including the state providing for everyone, getting rid of debt, taking the profits from different industries, communalization, national education, and national healthcare… Now where have I heard this stuff before?
The only thing more retarded than Jonah Goldberg’s bleatings are the morons who take him seriously.
I have never read a Jonah Goldberg book, however if I ever meet him, I will gladly buy him a drink, because anyone that causes lefties like you so much consternation deserves my thanks.
You’re just another right-wing apologist and dupe for elites who think they can continue to use violence to keep everyone else in line while they loot countries and exploit others. Same as the Blackshrts, same as the Confederates, same as the French Ancien Regime.
Dupe for the elites? Man, I’m going down on the liberal hate scale. Last year when I complained about paying 40 grand in taxes all you little wingbats were calling me “the elite” and snarling at me that I should be happy to pay my “fair share”.
As for your grasp of right vs. left, apparently anybody who is mean = right, and anybody you like = left. It is really interesting when you bring in political movements that predate the current right vs. left paradigm, and use that as some sort of justification. Yes, Hanna, the conquistadors and Genghis Khan were on my side too.
And just like them, you masturbate over fantasies of violence. And, just like them, you turn out to be no match for a democratic people.
I can’t say I masturbate over fantasies of violence, though I did spend a decade learning how to get really good at it. (violence, not masturbating, my gosh just imagine the chafing!)… Seriously lady, if my side was 1/10th as blood thirsty as you make us out to be, all of you fuckers would be dead before breakfast. But you’re not.
Meanwhile to justify your side’s childish temper tantrums you come up with one incident of assault from 2 years ago, which looks pretty insignificant when compared to the couple thousand felonies your side committed last week. Same reason that the media likes to assign us dochebags like Loughner and McVeigh, even when they don’t have anything to do with us. Because when you don’t have reality, run with narrative.
The American nazis and the communists have backed Occupy rather the Tea Party for a reason. You guys are fellow travelling useful idiots.
But wait! There’s more. Before Hanna showed up I had Rev. Bob try to throw down.
I hope you’re going to apply the same standards to the “pro-life” movement and the Tea Party. Stalking and killing abortion doctors, taking guns to political rallies, advocating the violent overthrow of an elected government…
So I responded to him too: Ahh, the good old moral equivalence argument. But the other kids were being bad too!
Stalk somebody, get prosecuted. Murder somebody, get prosecuted. Sounds simple.
Taking guns to political rallies? Not breaking any law. Newsflash. If you go to a political rally in a place like Utah or Texas, and it is a right wing rally, 1/2 of the audience are carrying firearms. What you and the media are calling advocating the violent overthrow of the elected government is probably what most of us refer to as the 2nd amendment. However, if somebody had actually committed conspiracy to commit violent acts against government officials, then bring charges and prosecute. Since this hasn’t happened… Huh… I wonder why. The only people I’ve seen talking about violence against the authority are the OWS types talking about killing the police. Go figure.
Jack Franz said: No one tried to blow up a bridge. FBI paid conspirators were successful in convincing a group of inbred ohioans to place packages of play-do on a bridge. Slight difference, and I never understand why the ridiculous parts of propaganda are sited as legitimate when they colour people who don’t agree with you.
No. They did try to blow up a bridge. They just sucked at it.