How to Discreetly Feed The Beast

[paft.livejournal.com]

Recently, Eric Cantor provided a textbook example of how the GOP has been countenancing (and therefore encouraging) extremist rhetoric while pretending not to countenance (and therefore encourage) extremist rhetoric.

Right Wing Heritage Foundation Speech 5/4/10

Audience member at Heritage Foundation: My question is – and this is something I personally don’t understand…. in light of what Obama has done to leave us vulnerable, to cut defense spending, to make us vulnerable to our outside enemies, to slight our allies. How…what would he have to do differently to be defined as a domestic enemy?”

(Laughter and applause from audience.)



Eric Cantor (smiling, after waiting for the claps to die down) Listen, let me respond very forthright to that. No one thinks that the president is a domestic enemy. (boos) It is important, it is important, it is important for us to remember, we have the freedom of discourse in this country. And the president’s policies, the administration’s priorities, in my opinion, do not reflect the common sense conservative traditions on which the greatness of this country was built…

Here, Cantor makes a statement that’s been demonstrated to be untrue in the seconds before he made it, and is again demonstrated to be untrue by the audience reaction after he makes it.

“No one thinks the president is a domestic enemy.”

No one? Someone just said he did -- and a bunch of other people just applauded him for it.

A “forthright response” would be to say, “No, the president is not a domestic enemy merely because we disagree with his policies.”

But Cantor just couldn't say that. He knew being that "forthright" might have gotten him booed off the stage by those "no ones" who've been incited by the inflammatory rhetoric the GOP has been banking and encouraging for twenty years.

Comments

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Remind me again, which country did Obama invade after selling us a bullshit story about them being an immanent threat?

The other thing is, the anti-Bush people are sometimes 9/11 truthers, and while I may disagree with them, it's easy to understand the "Bush = Hitler" thing if you believe 9/11 was an inside done with the purpose of instigating wars.

Kinda like the Reichstag fire that Hitler set...

[paft.livejournal.com]

tl: They made a movie about assassinating George W. Bush and cg-ed his head on.

"They" being an obscure British filmmaker who made a film depicting Bush as a martyr.

I've seen nothing to indicate that the crowds demonstrating against Bush had anything to do with making that movie.

tl: They put that movie in theatres.

In an EXTREMELY limited US release to almost universally poor reviews that included a denunciation from Hillary Clinton, who called it "despicable."

tl: I went to a anti-Bush rally, too. They had a giant paper-mached Dubya with a Hitler moustache riding a nuclear warhead. They also had a bloodied Dubya doll hanging from a noose. There were signs comparing him to Hitler "same shit, different asshole" and calling him World's #1 Terrorist everywhere.

And how many signs threatening to bring weapons or invoking guns?

tl: IMAGINE FOR JUST ONE SECOND if people pulled that shit with Obama. Seriously.

They have. And worse.

[paft.livejournal.com]

PFT: I've seen nothing to indicate that the crowds demonstrating against Bush had anything to do with making that movie.
tl: And I see nothing to indicate that people unhappy with Obama are going to stage a massive violent coup on the government.

Where have I claimed they were going to "stage a massive, violent coup?"

TL: I'll admit there's probably a few Timothy McVeigh's floating around on the fringes ...

And my goodness, who would worry about a little thing like that?

tL: but the Tea Party as a whole is not organizing to storm the White House, okay?

Didn't say they were. What I have said is that I'm concerned about another outbreak of right wing shootings and bombings like we had in the '90s. You know..."Those Tim McVeigh's hanging around the fringes."

tL ;Not any more than the wacky leftists in 2006 were planning to assassinate the president. (Even though they talked about it. A LOT. I was there, remember?)

Uh, no, they didn't talk about it. In fact, I never heard any talk like that from anti Bush demonstrators or poster so it obviously wasn't real thick on the ground.

PFT: And how many signs threatening to bring weapons or invoking guns?
tl: I think hanging Bush in effigy and/or setting him on fire were pretty effectively threatening.

And that hasn't happened to effigies of Obama -- WITH signs about guns?

tl: Who needs guns?

Apparently lots of people on the right, judging from their rhetoric about guns.

tL: The left can kill you with their bare hands!

Now you're just being plain silly. Do tell me how many cases you know of in this country in which crowds of leftist activists have "killed people with their bare hands." There have been RIGHT wing riots in which people were assaulted and in come cases even killed by the crowd, but not many left wing riots like that.

tl: I understand why Democrats are so sensitive when folks take potshots at Obama. You identify disrespect to the leaders of your movement as threatening to your security (vision of the future, etc).

No, we're a tad sensitive about inflammatory rhetoric being combined with guns and explosives, especially as regards the first black president, because we can remember the outbreak of right wing violence in the south during the '60s.