He has to leave. If he keeps posting, he just shows himself to be a larger hypocrite.

estarcatus: “My claim is that there are plenty of loud mouths on both sides. You seem to feel the loudest, foulest mouths are on the right. Do I have this about right?”

My claim is Rush Limbaugh is a racist asshole. I can supply the quotes if you want.

My claim is Michael Savage is a bigoted prick. I can supply the quotes if you want.

My claim is Glenn Beck is a deranged nut bar. I can supply the quotes if you want.

Your claim seems to be, ‘Both side have their nuts and are therefore the same.’ Unless you have quotes to back it up, this is false equivalency.

“You are certainly correct, this is not an argument, it was my attempt at generating an actual conversation.”

I’m not interested in a conversation. I’m interested in an argument. An argument as defined in most textbooks on logic and reasoning.

I.E. Two sides with differing views, each putting forth claims with evidence to back up those claims.

A conversation is devoid of claims and evidence.

My claim is that there are plenty of loud mouths on both sides. You seem to feel the loudest, foulest mouths are on the right. Do I have this about right?

“You are…

1.) Putting words in my mouth.
2.) Moving the goal posts.”

1. Perhaps so.
2. Not sure I see this one. What I will say is that my attempt to have a conversation were entirely unsolicited, and not entirely welcome, I think, so I will let it go.

“I can tell you what this is not. This is not an argument. In an argument you put forth evidence that what you say is true.

You are merely saying there are those on the left who are just as bad, but refuse to even give names.”

You are certainly correct, this is not an argument, it was my attempt at generating an actual conversation. As for listing those I think are “just as bad”, that, as you must surely know, is entirely subjective. Certainly, I have some in mind that probably would greatly increase the level of our national political discourse if they simply were to be quiet, but that is entirely my own opinion. It would seem to me to be as fruitful as arguing over what tastes better, cherry or grape. Maybe I’m wrong about that, but I think I am not.

Instead, I thought, maybe, it might prove a useful exercise to have a discussion on extremism, and how it is provoked by the things we see and hear on a daily basis, in the media, on the Internet, etc. This, probably, is not the forum for that, so I will let this thread die a natural death.

I wish you well, though, and take care.

Estarcatus: “Well, I was hoping that you would single out one and we would take the conversation from there.”

It’s your claim. You do the research.

“But, if it is your position that there is no one, absolutely no one, on the left that you feel does more harm than good, what can I say?”

You are…

1.) Putting words in my mouth.
2.) Moving the goal posts.

“At that point, this is not a conversation so much as a polemic.”

I can tell you what this is not. This is not an argument. In an argument you put forth evidence that what you say is true.

You are merely saying there are those on the left who are just as bad, but refuse to even give names.

So says the man who keeps responding to my posts.
Care to explain this bit of obvious hypocrisy?

“Are you serious? Where on earth did you pull “most economists” from? (Answer: Barack Obama’s speech.)”

Paul Krugman, actually. You might have heard of him. He recently won a Nobel prize.

Me: “To quote a website…”

Kev: “That’s very authoritative.”

Wow. Classic poisoning the well. Instead of dealing with my point, you attack my source. I’d link to a website giving the definition, but I know how you dislike websites as sources. … Except when you post links to them.

Hmmm. More hypocrisy?

“What is this supposed to mean? Oh, are you suggesting that there’s a consensus here as well? ”

Oh dear god! You’re a denier. This makes so much sense.

Yes, there is a consensus on global warming. There’s as much a consensus here as there is on evolution. But perhaps you are a creationist as well?

“And seriously, the Left needs to get over this ‘Bush lied about WMD’ bull. I was NOT a fan on the invasion of Iraq because I didn’t think we’d met our burden of proof for Just War, but relaying bad information is quite different from lying.”

It wasn’t bad intelligence; they fucking lied. Remember ‘yellow-cake uranium from Nigeria’? That was a lie. It was debunked before the State of the Union speech, but it was included anyway. That was a fucking lie.

And that’s just one example. They intentionally shut out any expert who didn’t agree with there pre-approved conclusion, which was most experts. (Got that information from the man who headed up the weapons inspectors in Iraq after the first war, who was American, so you can’t say, ‘Hans Blix was a Germany, and didn’t want to find WMD.’

Kev: “P.S. Enjoy some commentary from a few of those that don’t fall into your ‘most economist’ misnomer of a category:

“Government spending does not cause a net increase in jobs over the long run; Every dollar the government spends is either taxed or borrowed from the private sector, which means it ‘crowds out’ private sector job creation. And because government spending is less efficient than private sector spending, the economy actually grows more slowly in the long run as the government gets bigger.”

A couple of points…

1.) We are not talking about long term, but short term.
2.) I noticed they declared the government to be less efficient as fact instead of an assumption.

Look at the overhead of the IRS. Now compare that to the overhead of private collection agencies.

Look at the overhead in the Canadian health care system. It’s roughly 17%. Look at the overhead in private health care in the United States. It’s 33$. That’s not even close.

If the premise is wrong, the conclusion can only be right by accident.

Ann Coulter argued for bombing the NYT building. Can Savage top that? ”

I said we will start with one. Notice I did not say we would end there. I’ll stay with Savage.

“Got any prominent Left Wingers that have said something like that?”

Well, I was hoping that you would single out one and we would take the conversation from there. But, if it is your position that there is no one, absolutely no one, on the left that you feel does more harm than good, what can I say? At that point, this is not a conversation so much as a polemic.

“Government spending does not cause a net increase in jobs over the long run; it costs jobs. Every dollar the government spends is either taxed or borrowed from the private sector, which means it “crowds out” private sector job creation. And because government spending is less efficient than private sector spending, the economy actually grows more slowly in the long run as the government gets bigger.”

More here.

“Most economists…”

Are you serious? Where on earth did you pull “most economists” from? (Answer: Barack Obama’s speech.) I understand that the pretense of a consensus is a classic political technique, but come now, we’re all adults here. That’s just not very persuasive. And to assume that there’s only one school of economic thought is just juvenile. Several historians, particularly those who study the Great Depression, would heartily disagree with you.

“To quote a website…”

That’s very authoritative. I’d probably have left that nugget out of my comment, but you… you get the C.O. Jones award of the day for sticking with it.

“Look at his record on Global Warming.”

What is this supposed to mean? Oh, are you suggesting that there’s a consensus here as well? Would you like to discuss the fear mongering used in the global warming camp? (Or is it climate change now?) Denying a ridiculous theory and calling it for the farce that it is– not a bad record from what I can tell.

And seriously, the Left needs to get over this “Bush lied about WMD” bull. I was NOT a fan on the invasion of Iraq because I didn’t think we’d met our burden of proof for Just War, but relaying bad information is quite different from lying. Our intelligence agencies had the same misinformation as Britain and Russia’s, and corroboration like that would lead any reasonable person to assume that it’s valid info. As much as it helps support the Bush Derangement Syndrome, you have to come to terms with the fact that Bush himself didn’t manufacture some grand lie. He relayed bad info.

And again, why does it seem like the Lefies in this thread are more attuned with Savage’s show and Beck’s program than anyone? Do you really tune in for that much of their program, or are you speaking authoritatively on a subject where most of your information comes via YouTube clips?

He was an internet loon. You want to go around comparing internet loons?

“And no the left just gives them prime time shows on msnbc.”

Give me examples of Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow doing anything like what Michael Savage has done. Or Rush Limbaugh. Or Bill O’Reilly.

Give me examples, or take your false equivalency and show it up your ass.

The left has nuts of there own, but the right seem to elect them to office, or give them a time slot on national TV and / or radio.”

He was a contributor to Indy Media not exactly a conservative media site. And no the left just gives them prime time shows on msnbc. You made the salient point when you said,
“The left has nuts of there own.” As does the right.
Thats where the whole story should lie. Just a another pathetic loser who had an urge to do harm.

JerseyGeorge: “Oh but I do ,It wasn’t on TV but online;”

Really? Andrew Mickel is a member of the ‘liberal media’ or a member of the Democratic congress?

The left has nuts of there own, but the right seem to elect them to office, or give them a time slot on national TV and / or radio.

Well, they think they do, anyway. And that’s what’s important.

“..just like the Bush Administration used fear mongering to get people to feel unpatriotic for opposing the War in Iraq.”

Funny thing. I didn’t feel unpatriotic for opposing the war in Iraq.

Oh but I do ,It wasn’t on TV but online;
“Hello Everyone, my name’s Andy. I killed a Police Officer in Red Bluff, California in a motion to bring attention to, and halt, the police-state tactics that have come to be used throughout our country. Now I’m coming forward, to explain that this killing was also an action against corporate irresponsibility.”
A self professed left winger He was an idiot contributor for Indymedia Andy Mickel is awaiting a execution date in California.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24016-2005Apr3.html
The Washington Post article about him also parades some of the comments from idiots supporting Him. So don’t spread the manure that the left doen’t practice intolerance and does not preach revolution.
They invented it.

Kev: “I appreciate your swift self-contradiction.”

I wasn’t advocating violence. I was using your phrase. You can destroy these people by isolating them and deminishing them.

By the way, it is not intolerant to fight intolerance. Anyone who says otherwise is as stupid as someone who thinks Ice T is a news reporter. … Oh wait.

“Briefly: I don’t care what Jon Stewart, Ann Coulter, or Rush Limbaugh say about themselves.”

And I noticed you’ve dropped Ice-T from that list again.

“MY ORIGINAL POINT was that it’s irrelevant whether its news or entertainment, both can potentially have strong effects on their audience.”

And your original point is wrong. 100% wrong.

Entertainment is there to entertain.
New is there to inform.

It is primary goal to effect the opinions and attitudes of its audience.

The two are different.

You are falling for the False Continuum. To quote a website, “The idea that because there is no definitive demarcation line between two extremes, that the distinction between the extremes is not real or meaningful…”

“And I shouldn’t even need to speak out against someone like Savage. One blanket, emphatic, ‘No,’ should be sufficient for my feelings on that shouting lunatic for the rest of my days. I won’t waste time on him.”

Savage isn’t some lunatic. He’s a best selling author. He has a highly rated, nationally syndicated radio talk show.

And what about Rush? He interviewed Dick Cheney. Kind of hard to call that fringe.

“I didn’t say the Obama Administration incited violence, I said they were fear mongering. Fear mongering to get everyone to capitulate to his ridiculously bloated government plans just like the Bush Administration used fear mongering to get people to feel unpatriotic for opposing the War in Iraq.”

Gee… Lying about WMD or using expert advice to predict the future.

Yeah, more false equivalency.

“By the by, I know Glenn Beck gets all excited and cries all the time, but what is it you find so crackpot about him?”

Did you see his show recently when he had all of his stage lights on so he could waste as much energy as possible? Look at his record on Global Warming. He’s a crack pot.

Hell, he recently used Nazi imagery when talking about the Obama administration.

“That’s right, Jefferson wasn’t so much advocating the right to bear arms for personal protection as he was for protection from the government.”

Well, duh. Don’t think you make a remarkable discovery there.

And yeah, I know the context of Michelle Bachman’s quote.

Considering her record, saying she was referencing Jefferson is being kind. Or naive.

“Why can’t you unamerican traitors accept that?”

Just a question, Tom, but what should be done with un-American traitors? If that is what a majority of Republicans are, what, exactly should we do? You equate them with the “Reich”, which can only mean you feel they are, at the very least, Nazi-ish, so what is your idea about how they should be dealt with?

Funny – I don’t recall anyone on the right asking that question when Rush and Coulter and Hannity et al say the exact same thing about Democrats. Even today.

Maybe one day Republican’ts could stop taking orders from Rush and his ilk, say something along the lines of “We apologize for debasing the dialogue for the past forty years”, and actually treating the opposition as fellow americans. That could be a starting point (as long as they keep to their word). Until then, you have no right to even ask me that question and expect me to consider answering it.

From your tone, I wonder if you feel they should be jailed, exiled…or worse. I wondered the same thing about Savage when I caught his show. Couldn’t ask him, but I can ask you.

From my tone, you might be able to catch the whiff of parody that I use to highlight this sort of incendiary rhetoric from the right. Funny how I continually get called on my rude manners and uncivil dialogue by the people who have been rude and uncivil in their dealings with the opposition for forty years. And usually they’re rude and uncivil while they do it. And funny how you don’t even notice that in your hurry to try and get a quotable blurb from a DFH commie pinko fag junkie…

Tell ya what – Sparky: you get all those riech wing gasbags on the telly and all of the a-list bloggers on the right to stop using their huge mass media platform to say something very similar (but, generally speaking, much worse) about liberals and Democrats, and I’ll think about ratcheting things down a bit on my end. You should start looking at your own house and getting them to stop tossing stink bombs before getting on the fainting couch because I farted in the room…

For forty years we’ve been hearing this sort of talk about liberals from you lot. One z-list blogger imitates your rhetorical ‘style’ and you get your knickers in a twist about it. Yet another example of those fine upstanding Republican’t values…