Response to a Previous Reader

Barrack Obama was treated like every President before him, except that every criticism of him was determined to be racist. One was forbidden from criticizing his holiness because he was the first black President of the United States. The media, except for Fox News of course, never saw it fit to hold him accountable for anything, and for that they too were determined to be…you guessed it…racist. When the Republicans refused to vote on his final Supreme Court Nominee, that was also determined to be a racist act. Surprise, surprise, I bet you didn’t see that coming. It went like that for eight long years. George Bush was savaged in the press every single day, and the common refrain was that he was a dummy, he was incompetent, and a buffoon who was out of his league. Some of the nastiest things were said about him. For the entire eight years of his Presidency. He never defended himself, his administration and its actions, he took it all and just continued plugging away with his agenda. During Bush’s tenure, one artist put on an art show that displayed a portrait of him made up of several monkeys to form the image of his face. The artist defended his show, many people defended him, and he refused to stop showing the image. There was no outcry or condemnation, no claims that critics were taking their criticism of the President “too far,” no cries of racism. Bush was often caricatured as an animal, and the left was fine with that because after all, it was just another Republican President. That treatment is usually reserved for Republican/conservatives. In another instance, one filmmaker actually did a documentary that imagined what it would be like if President Bush was assassinated, and that too was fair game.  To the guardians of tolerance this stuff never meant anything, because in their minds; George Bush was just another bastard evil Republican who deserved everything that he got. When Democrats did everything in their power to power to sabotage the war effort, they were seen as brave and patriotic. When the effort to initiate the surge in Iraq was announced, Democrats lost their minds, and did everything in their power to stop it. Hillary Clinton famously declared that it would require a major suspension of disbelief to accept General Petraeus’ contention that the effort would be successful. The New York times famously called him “General Betrayus.”

When the Republicans took congress in two thousand and six, they opposed President Obama just as vigorously as the Democrats opposed President Bush. The big difference is that the left did with President Obama what they generally do with black people. They turn them into victims, and true to form they immediately turned the man sitting in the most powerful position in the world into a victim. Every single issue from that point became all about race. The truth is that the Republicans did oppose President Obama on policy, and they did want to make him a one term President. They should never apologize for that! The people who did not vote for him wanted him to be a one term President based on the agenda on which he ran. The Republicans’ opposition to President Obama was no more, or different than their opposition was to Bill Clinton who they also wanted to make a one term President. It was no different than the Democrats Opposition to President Ronald Raegan who they wanted to make a one term President. If you are old enough to remember, you would recall how much the left despised Raegan, and they also called him a big dummy who was going to lead the world into nuclear holocaust. They hated Raegan! The Democrats were not kind to Raegan one bit, but that’s the way it goes. One wishes it were different, but that’s is the reality of politics. It is a dirty game and not for the faint of heart. The Republicans wanted to make President Obama a one term President all right, pretty much like the Democrats want to make Trump a one term President right now. The Democrats want to make him a one term President to the point that several of them started calling for his impeachment even before he took the oath of office. At this moment, they are staunchly opposing him no less vigorously than Republicans opposed President Obama, but definitely more. Maxine Waters famously told us that she “does not respect the President,” she “will not work with him,” and that “it is in the best interest of constituents to get rid of him.” She also let us know that his cabinet nominees were “a bunch of scumbags.” Of course Democrats love to outdo each other in their vitriol, so less a person than the head of the California Democrat Party led a crowd of the faithful at one of their events in a F*** Trump chant, as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and former Housing Secretary Hilda Soliz smiled approvingly in the background. Just a couple of weeks ago crazy aunty Maxine was leading another crowd of enthusiastic supporters in a impeach Trump chant. So how is that for a couple more “anecdotes?”

Nothing like these personal attacks happened with President Obama. Of course no individual is perfect, and by extension no group or movement is perfect either, so I am sure if you go digging you can find an exception or two, and internet trolls are in every party. President Obama was resolutely opposed, but there is no reason to attribute this to anything but the fact that the two parties are fundamentally different. Their vision for the country is diametrically opposed. They differ on taxes, health care, and the role of government in the lives of people, the type of judges to put on the Supreme Court, the second amendment and gun control, abortion, gay marriage, regulations, the seriousness of climate change, and a list of other issues. During his time as a Senator, Senator Barrack Obama was one of the most liberal lawmakers in the Senate. He did not simply give that up when he became President, so yes; the Republicans did oppose his agenda. President Obama however was successful in getting a very large part of his agenda passed. Please also remember that when the Democrats had the Senate, Harry Reid refused to bring up over three hundred Republican bills for a vote that were passed in the house. When the Republicans won back the Senate they continued to oppose President Obama, but they also worked with him to pass some legislation. Take a look at President Obama’s last spending bill, it was filled…filled with compromise, and President Obama in particular got a lot of what he wanted. The Republicans did not revoke DACA, and did not defund any aspect of Obamacare like they had the power to do, and they ended up caving on quite a few issues, but they did oppose him on most of his agenda. Anyone who tries to make the argument that opposition to President Obama was personal might be right, but it was personal in the same sense that opposition to Clinton, Bush or Raegan was personal, or to Trump presently is personal, not because President Obama is black. Democrats cry racism so often that the word has been cheapened. It is fine to disagree with this assessment and opinion. We will just have to agree to disagree.

As for the contention that the Democrat Party tried to work with Republicans on health care, that is simply not true. The Democrats had a Super Majority when they initiated and processed the ACA through the house and the Senate.  They literally passed the bill in the dead of night to avoid more publicity over its unpopularity. They never allowed the Republicans to bring any proposed amendments to be brought to the floor, and Nancy Pelosi famously said “we have to pass the bill so that we can find out what is in it.” There was absolutely nothing that the Republicans could have done to stop the bill, to slow it down or do anything to it. There was absolutely no compromise on the bill. The Democrats did compromise with so-called blue dog Democrats who had hesitations about the bill, by agreeing to not let any funding go to abortion. When the bill was passed they then began allocating money to abortion anyway. None of the Republicans proposals were even entertained. The Republicans could not even filibuster the bill because the Democrats had a filibuster proof majority. The bill was an all Democrat bill because they did not accommodate any of the Republicans’ proposals.

As far as the birther movement is concerned, that was started way back in two thousand and four by a gentleman called Andy Martin. He was a serial Senate candidate in Illinois. He is a man who has filed so many frivolous lawsuits that he is now barred from bringing them in court. He also stated that Barrack Obama was a closet Moslem. Nobody takes him seriously, but he has been given a lot of air time over the years by many media outlets. When he started the rumor he was running as a Democrat Senatorial candidate in Illinois. According to the Huffington Post, he has since disavowed the movement. He is a major conspiracy theorist, and has since run for public office as a Republican. To describe Mr. Martin as an outlier would be the understatement of the year. Another originator and promulgator of the birther movement was another Democrat by the name of Phillip J. Berg. He was a former member of the Pennsylvania Democratic State Committee, and he is also a former Democratic Assistant Attorney General of Pennsylvania, and a paid lifetime member of the NAACP. He filed a lawsuit in 2008 asking the courts to declare Candidate Obama ineligible for the Presidency to prevent him from running for President, because then Senator Obama according to him was not born in the US, and for other reasons. No one in the mainstream of the Republican Party gave the birther movement any credibility, in fact when a woman at a John McCain town hall called candidate Obama an Arab, Senator McCain immediately corrected the woman. Mc Cain even fired a member of his campaign staff for using Barrack Obama’s middle name because he felt the person used the name to insinuate something sinister about then Senator Obama. While the Hillary Clinton Campaign itself did not raise the birther issue during her 2008 Presidential run, supporters of hers tried to make it a point. In one instance the Obama campaign even confronted them on the insinuation that President Obama was a Moslem. Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe described the behavior as “the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election.” The Clinton campaign had to defend itself saying “I just want to make it very clear that we were not aware of it, the campaign didn’t sanction it and we don’t know anything about it.” These are the roots of the birther movement. What is even funny is that the Obama campaign tried to insinuate that John McCain may not have been eligible to run for President because he was born in another country when his father was in the Military.

When Barrack Obama won the Presidency it was no longer feasible or made sense for Democrats to continue insinuating that he was not a natural born citizen. Fringe elements on the right eventually ended up giving it new life and bringing it to the national conversation like it had not been done before. Donald Trump also took it up and used it to gain notoriety, but Republican leadership never were a part of the conspiracy theory. They always made it clear that they did not believe President Obama was not a citizen. If people do a Google search no one will come up with Republican leaders pushing the birther conspiracy. Not even talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity and others ever took that up as an issue, and they were always dismissive of the notion. The birther movement was always a fringe, conspiracy movement clinging to straws, upset at the election of a Democrat. It was never anything more. Of course instead of treating this fringe movement for the kooks they were, like most conservatives did; the left did what they do best and resorted to the age old tactic of race baiting. The left has been making a serious attempt to label Trump a sympathizer of the KKK and a white supremacist based on nothing but a notion that is as flimsy as that given for the birther movement, but the left has no problem with that. There are people on the left who believe that George Bush is responsible for the attacks on the Twin Towers on 911, and the mainstream of the Party never lost sleep over that, but when it comes to the stupid birther movement they looked into the hearts and minds of everyone on the right, and saw racism at the center of the movement.

On the issue of the Klu Klux Klan, it is always interesting to hear Democrats talk on this. The Republican Party and the conservative has never ever had any affiliation with the Klan, the Nazis or any white supremacist movement. Ever! They have never endorsed any of these groups. These groups and people like David Duke are persona non grata in the party and to the movement. Please also remember that David Duke also ran as a Democrat in the past. He did not become a Republican until nineteen eighty nine, and when he ran as a Republican the last time over twenty years ago, the Republican Party supported the Democratic candidate. The rally in Charlottesville had nothing to do with the Republican party or the conservative movement, by the same token, some of the people who were there were not part of the so-called alt right, and even a New York times article entitled “Some Charlottesville Protesters Were Not White Supremacists, Nazis” acknowledged this. Some people were there simply to protest, and exercise their first amendment rights. They were not part of any white supremacist group. On the other hand the rally was organized by a despicable group of people who nevertheless had the right to be there. They had the permits to be there, and were the only ones authorized to be there. It does not matter that they represent a horrible cause. They had the right to conduct their rally in peace. They deserved to be protected by law enforcement. The police had the obligation to protect them, and keep the counter protesters away. They did not, and they allowed the ANTIFA protesters to disrupt the rally. That is how and why the rally descended into violence. Why it is difficult to believe this, no one knows because the ANTIFA protesters have a history of violence, despite the glowing reports and news features on them. That is part of their modus operandi. After getting a lot of tacit support on the left for a long time, even Nancy Pelosi had to eventually come out and condemn them.

Apart from all of these facts, the Democrat Governor said that the alt right had weapons placed all over the city, and that the police had inferior gear. He gave that as the reason why the police did not get involved. The police chief said there were no weapons hidden across the city. In addition to all of that, despite their despicable cause, these people have not condoned this type of violence before. The organizers of the rally, no matter how much one despises their cause did not start the violence. And yes, conservatives do get to disassociate from the killer that day because he had nothing to do with the conservative movement. If conservatives do not get to disassociate from this person, then the Democrat Party, and the left in general does not get to disassociate itself from the Orlando night club shooter who was a staunch Hillary Clinton supporter, or the black Nationalist who massacred five police officers, or the man running through the streets of Los Angeles shouting Allahu Ackbar looking for white people, and shooting and killing two of them in the process, or the Bernie Sanders supporter who fired on Republican Congressmen injuring Congressman Scalise. That is just a few from a very long list. Another thing that is always fascinating to see is how the left goes into defensive mode whenever there is a radical Islamic attack against Americans. They do everything in their power to tell Americans that these attacks have nothing to do with Islam, and to not confuse the actions of a few with the religion, but they have no problem taking isolated incidents like the Charlottesville incident, and trying to associate it with the conservative movement and Republicans. By the way in pointing out violence on the right, you forgot to mention the abortion clinic doctor, and Timothy McVeigh. Again, no one claims that the right is innocent. The claim is that violence, vitriol and venom as a political tool is the domain of the left. The history of the left is littered with this behavior and no one can deny that. The examples previously given to you are not anecdotes. They were numerous, and just a small fraction of what has happened since Trumps election. One can find incidents in the news like this every single day. In fact, just today another celebrity by the name of Morrissey said that if given a chance he would assassinate Trump for the good of humanity. There will be no outrage over this statement, no looping of the statement on the twenty four hour news cycle, because the left is allowed to get away with this type of behavior. Look again at all of the things that the left has said and done since President Trump’s election that were mentioned.

Ted Nugent did not threaten the President! There is no problem admitting that he has said some crazy stuff that should be condemned, but he did not threaten the President. The quote that you gave was part of an entire piece in a talk that he gave to the National Rifle Association. You can read the entire thing here: But again, the point is not that the right is innocent. Nugent and anyone else like him in any case is not the norm. There is no movement that is perfect. On the other hand you could find numerous examples like Joss Whedon saying that he hopes a rhino f*** Paul Ryan to death, or  Saturday Night live calling President Trump a cheap cracker, or Mickey Rourke threatening to beat the President with a baseball bat, or the GrubHub CEO threatening workers who voted for Trump, or the PackettSled CEO who threatened President Trump on Facebook, or Robert Dinero saying I’d like to punch him in the face, or David Simon saying to pick up a God D*** brick if Trump fires Mueller, or Lea DeLaria threatening to “take out” Trump and Republicans, when they won the elections, or Chelsea Handler calling Stacy Dash and Ben Carson “black white supremacists,” or Marylyn Manson simulating a Trump execution on stage, or Sarah Silverman calling for a Military Coup against the duly elected President of the United States, or Stephen Colbert portraying Stephen Miller’s head on a spike. I could go on with numerous more examples, and while I am sure you may be able to provide a few more (using your favorite word) anecdotes to say that the right does it too, you cannot show anything that is comparably close happening on the right. You simply cannot. Another difference is that when the right does the stuff that you talk about, they are usually criticized and harangued for their behavior even by people on the right. Nothing close happens on the other side. Take for instance when Glenn Beck said that Obama had a deep hatred of white people. One would have taught that someone set off a nuclear bomb. Before you knew it, Beck was apologizing for blaspheming the holy one.  When one congressman said I am not touching that “tar baby, he was not calling Obama a “tar baby” but was using the word in the context of what the term has always meant “a sticky situation.” One would have thought it was world war three the way that media reacted to the statement. That type of reaction by the media is generally reserved for conservatives, and just as night follows day, the Congressman apologized for his sin of blasphemy.

At the end of the day the Republican Party does not have a history of racism. In the last fifty years they do have a history of being accused by Democrats of racism, but you cannot point to one racist law that currently exists, that was passed by the Republican Party. Oh yes maybe you can…ID voting laws, riiight. Yeah, that’s racist! Every major atrocity that has happened to minorities, and other groups in America, happened at the hands of the Democrat Party. Everyone, without exception! (Except of course voter ID laws, that are so, so racist…ooooh scary). You cannot point to one single atrocity in America that was carried out by a Republican Administration. That does not mean there are no bad people in the Republican Party. Human beings are flawed and they exist everywhere, but let us lay blame for wrongs committed at the feet of those who committed the wrong. Today the only things that the left can point to are so called “racist tropes,” “dog whistles” and other interpretations of racism where none exists (like voter ID laws) to accuse their political opponents or racism. After being on the wrong side of every civil rights issue for their entire history, the Democrat’s began to, and still accuses everyone who opposes their socialist agenda of being racist. It is one of the greatest sleight of hand tricks ever performed. They then try to cover their sordid history with talk of the “the big switch.” It is a myth, It never happened! The only switch that occurred was with Strum Thurmond. All of the segregationists remained in the Democrat Party until their deaths, and for all the talk of the South Switching to Republican after the civil rights movement, the Democrats continued to dominate in the South after the civil rights victories. It was only in the nineteen nineties that the South became Republican, after civil rights change occurred there. Of course Democrats claim that is because the South was upset, and wanted to go back to how it used to be before civil rights.

Today, in a classic attempt to revise history the left tries to associate nationalism with Nazism, but Hitler’s version of Nazism was founded in leftist ideology. Nazism had nothing to do with the control of illegal immigration, love of the free market, low taxes or any of the other planks of conservatism. NAZI is the abbreviation of the term “Nationalsozialist” in German. Listen to the words of Adolf Hitler “We’re all socialists. We are the enemies of today’s capitalist system of exploitation. And we’re determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” Look at the platform of Hitler’s Nazi Party and see if the looks anything like conservative ideology. Here are just a few as pointed out by a very astute political commentator “Abolition of incomes unearned by work. Profit-sharing for workers and all large companies. Broader pension systems, paying higher benefits. And universal free health care and universal free education. Today the left has taken out the racist elements of Nazism, and attribute them to the right, but the treatment of the Jews by the Nazis has more in common with the way Democrats were treating black people in America, not anything the Republican Party has ever done to any group.

That is enough, otherwise this will turn into a book. It is already longer than intended. There is no doubt that it will mean nothing to you. After seeing you call the many examples of leftist hate, anecdotes; it became obvious that nothing will move you from your position, and that you will not even concede a good point even if you disagree with it. But that is okay. At least you will know a little about other side’s views despite your caricature of them. Well, this conversation is over.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s