The Morning Rant:

It's Not Us...It's Them

Chuck Colson, the evangelical Christian leader who first came to national prominence as a member of the Nixon Administration died yesterday.  


Some of the comments I saw at CNN's news story on Colson's passing showed that many Leftists will not let an opportunity go by without expressing their true nature.  


http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/21/us/chuck-colson-obit/index.html

Liberals think it's OK to vent the vilest, most personal, most over-the-top expressions of hatred at some people and then turn around and lecture others about being civil in their public discourse.  


Sometimes I see Conservatives wondering if maybe we provoked these people or something.  Maybe if we were nicer they wouldn't do this.  


That's misunderstanding the problem.  You could be the nicest, politest, soft-spoken person they've ever met and it wouldn't matter. Your Conservative beliefs 'prove' to them you are full of hate, and therefore you are a 'fair game' target for the most vile personal attacks they can creatively think up.  It's not your conduct, it's your BELIEFS that are so deeply and personally offensive to them.  


Plus you can't overlook the fact that they are so full of hate and resentment and envy towards people they disagree with politically since they react to everything on such a deep personal level that they end up projecting that same hate onto their target.  


They really don't see themselves being full of hate even though they can spend HOURS hurling the most hateful speech they can think  up at others.  


This is why they can spend long minutes hurling the most vile, misogynistic, putrid hate-filled words at someone like Michelle Malkin and then turn right around and - seriously now, with a straight face - demand you watch your tongue and be polite or you will offend their delicate sensibilities and prove you are not fit for a polite conversation.  


I kid you not. They really do this. I've seen it.  


Why? Because they are PATHOLOGICAL.  And they proved it again yesterday: 


[Twitter Rant, so you read it from the bottom up!]

Many of the comments at CNN lampoon and make fun of the idea of Chuck Colson changing at all as the result of being born again and following Christ.  The idea of  a true religious conversion is an anathema to the Left and most treat it like some kind of cosmetic make over.  

Even religion has to be PC for the Left; in their minds everything is political - even science.  There are no boundaries for them, lines that can't be crossed for the glorious Cause.  

This is why they lack all sense of decorum or proportionality for their hatreds.  And why they never really understand how most of the rest of the country views them: Loud, angry, perpetually pissed off hate-filled ranters who then want to lecture others about how to behave in public.  

In case anybody missed it, here's my Love Letter To The Left: 

http://drawandstrike.blogspot.com/2012/03/dear-left-open-letter-to-kind-caring.html

UPDATE:

One of the commentators pointed out that Andrew Breitbart had some harsh criticisms of Ted Kennedy that he made on Twitter just after the late Senator's death.  

So - moral equivalence here?  Does that take the wind right out of my sails, if Breitbart celebrates the death of Ted Kennedy?  

Well let's take a look.  Talking Points Memo had a nice summary of  Breitbart's comments: 

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/08/26/57997/breitbart-kennedy-twitter/?mobile=nc

Early this morning, news broke that Sen. Ted Kennedy had passed away after serving in the U.S. Senate for nearly 50 years. Soon after, conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart began a sustained assault on Kennedy’s memory, tweeting “Rest in Chappaquiddick.” 

Over the course of the next three hours, Breitbart unapologetically attacked Kennedy, calling him a “villain,” “a big ass motherf@#$er,” a “duplicitous bastard” and a “prick.” “I’ll shut my mouth for Carter. That’s just politics. Kennedy was a special pile of human excrement,” wrote Breitbart in one tweet.
When Politico’s Michael Calderone highlighted Breitbart’s attacks in an article called, “Not all Kennedy critics hold fire,” a pleased Breitbart tweeted:

When a fellow conservative tweeted to Breitbart asking him not to treat Kennedy like they believe some on the left treated the passing of Tony Snow and Ronald Reagan, Breitbartresponded “How dare you compare Snow & Reagan to Kennedy! Why do you grant a BULLY special status upon his death? This isnt lib v con.” Despite his claim that his attacks weren’t about “lib v. con,” Breitbart repeatedly justified them in ideological terms. 

“Look, this man was granted absolution for nothing. Class, life station played a part but PARTY was everything. GOP couldnt get away with it,” complained Breitbart in one tweet. “IF a GOP possesses 1/100 of human failings of T. Kennedy he/she is TOAST,” he claimed in another. “In this moment I cant but recognize absolute backwardness of media & society. Bush=EVIL. Ted Kennedy=SAINT. Im gonna keep fighin’, folks,” Breitbart said in another tweet.

Now, let's look at what was said there. Ted Kennedy died and Andrew Breitbart brought up:

1. Chappaquiddick

2. called Kennedy a villain, fat, a lying bastard, a prick, and a pile of excrement.

3. called Kennedy a bully

4. claimed death did not grant Kennedy sainthood

Public decorum and civility does demand you cease political attacks during the mourning period, and Breitbart obviously violated that here.  Even if the guy was a total prick, you're not supposed to publicly say so during the mourning period.  

But let's note what Breitbart DIDN'T say here:

1. He didn't say he was GLAD Kennedy had died.

2. He didn't say he hoped Kennedy was burning in Hell and in agony. 

3. He didn't say he was disappointed Kennedy didn't suffer more before dying. 

4. He didn't say he had hoped Kennedy would die sooner.  

He was simply refusing to say NICE things about Kennedy's character and his legacy, which is what many people were doing even if they didn't think Kennedy was a nice man or  thought much of his legacy harmed the country.  

In other words, Breitbart continued to say the exact same things about Kennedy in death that he had said of him in life, and he was pointedly doing it right after the Senator's demise, but this is a far cry from saying he was glad Kennedy was dead.  

Now somebody pointed out in the comments that he could go to plenty of sites on the internet and find comments on blogs supposedly of Conservatives celebrating the death of Liberals.  

First of all, both sides have their extremes. Far be it from me to deny when Kennedy died there were commentators on some Conservative blogs that said things like "I hope he's burning in Hell screaming in agony."  I saw posts like that.  Yes, it happened.  

The point is not that both sides don't do it, it's that Conservatives don't tolerate it, don't condone it, and their LEADERSHIP doesn't engage in it or encourage it. It's kept to a small premium on the Conservative side.  On the Left, not only do the top leadership and most popular bloggers do it and encourage it, they'll do it proudly.  It's a badge of honor among the Left to boast about how happy you are that some major life tragedy has struck a prominent Conservative.  

It's not just hordes of random, anonymous commentators on the Lefty blogs that chortle over Reagan, Tony Snow, Breitbart, or Colson dying.  It's the leaders.  

They'll stand up in public and say "I wish this Conservative would die."  Then when some prominent Conservative does die, they say openly "Good riddance. Should have happened sooner."  

There is  no moral equivalence here.  Conservative leaders do not get up in public and say "I hope this famous Liberal dies soon."  And when they do die, they don't go around chortling in public "Oh he's dead? Awesome.  About time.  Why didn't this happen years ago? Hope he's burning in Hell!"

You know what I've learned from my experience? Most of the anonymous commentators on Conservative blogs that post the really hateful stuff about Liberals aren't even really Conservatives.  They're the extreme Libertarian types that make common cause with Conservatives on some issues, but they aren't Conservatives themselves.  Libertarian blogs don't really exist or get much traffic, so these people end up going to the Conservative blogs to post. 

I've seen this on the Ann Coulter message board I've hung out at since 2003.  Every election year like clockwork all the Ron Paulbots show up, start attacking a lot of what Conservatives believe, especially on social issues, but then as the election heats up they want us all to line up and march behind The Evil Gnome and help get him into the White House.  

And when Conservatives on the board don't volunteer to swell Paul's numbers, the knives come out and they will start saying the most hateful things.  "Vote for Ron Paul or you hate the Constitution!", etc. etc. 

Which is funny, having watched them for the past year lampoon, mock and argue about basic Conservative values and beliefs, they then act all offended when we won't get behind their candidate and buy their totally absurd talking point that Paul is some kind of Conservative.  

I've seen them post racist posts, hateful posts, and while they attack Conservatives, they save most of their spleen for Liberals and I have seen them say pretty vile stuff.  

But Libertarians aren't leaders in the Conservative movement.  They don't run the popular Conservative blogs or the New Media.  

Their counterparts on the Left have been shown so many times wishing Conservatives would get cancer, get sick, drop dead, or high-fiving each other and gloating over actual deaths, do I really need to drop a long laundry list in here to prove it? 

Conservatives will also police themselves.  Even Breitbart was warned by other Conservatives when he refused to 'play nice' after Kennedy died, that he was crossing a line.  

On the Left, they actually seem to play "Can You Top This!" with people vying to see who can put up the most over-the-top hate tweet about the latest Conservative to suffer a tragedy.  The deluge of hate tweets happen because the top people on that side don't crack down on it.  

This is because the Far Left honestly and truly sees Conservatives as evil.  They genuinely want bad things to happen to evil people, and rejoice when they do.  We think they're misguided and wrong.  They think we're the New Hitlers.  We want them to wise up.  They want us to die.  Literally.  

And a Chuck Colson dying gives them an opportunity to reveal the depth of the hate they have for Conservatives, especially Christian ones.