No Hate Speech by Prominent Leftists?
A certain intellectual fraud who goes by the name of Glenn Greenwald (as well as a few other names) recently said that leftist hate speech is not uttered by prominent leftist figures, but rather only by anonymous blog comments and e-mailers:
[I]t is undeniably true that there are people of every ideological stripe who express profane and reprehensible sentiments. The difference is that right-wing authors, talk radio hosts and bloggers — read and listened to by millions of people — traffic in such sentiments regularly . . . . But to find such sentiments outside of right-wing circles, one must go where right-wing bloggers went today — digging into anonymous blog comments (or e-mails allegedly received). That difference is so obvious — and so meaningful — that it all ought to go without saying.
This post puts the lie to Greenwald’s ridiculous assertion.
Below I have listed more than 20 examples of hate speech by prominent leftist figures, such as politicians, journalists writing for major newspapers or radio networks, television and movie industry personalities, and the like.
I have restricted the examples to true hate speech, such as calling for (or exulting over) the beating and/or deaths of conservatives, or naked racism and anti-Semitism. I have deliberately excluded speech that simply brands conservatives as Nazis or fascists. Such speech is hateful, but I want to leave minimum room for leftists to quibble with the list.
Brace yourself for the leftist hate:
- National Public Radio legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg:
[I]f there is retributive justice [Sen. Jesse Helms] will get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.
- USA Today syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux, on Clarence Thomas:
I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease.
- Washington Post syndicated columnist Richard Cohen:
For hypocrisy, for sheer gall, [Newt] Gingrich should be hanged.
- Comedian and (former) talk show host Craig Kilborn [Caption under footage of George W. Bush]:
Snipers Wanted
- Members of the St. Petersburg Democratic Club:
And then there’s Rumsfeld who said of Iraq “We have our good days and our bad days.” We should put this S.O.B. up against a wall and say “This is one of our bad days” and pull the trigger.
- Actor Alec Baldwin on Conan O’Brien:
[I]f we were in other countries, we would all right now, all of us together, all of us together would go down to Washington and we would stone Henry Hyde to death! We would stone him to death! [crowd cheers] Wait! Shut up! Shut up! No shut up! I’m not finished. We would stone Henry Hyde to death and we would go to their homes and we’d kill their wives and their children. We would kill their families.
- Comedian Chris Rock:
If President Clinton would pardon me I would whip Starr’s ass right now. I will get a crew from Brooklyn and we will stomp him like, like, we’re Savion Glover. We’ll stomp him like it’s bringing da noise.
- Director Spike Lee on Charlton Heston:
Shoot him with a .44 caliber Bulldog.
- James Carville on Ken Starr:
He’s one more mistake away from not having any kneecaps.
- Syndicated columnist Alexander Cockburn:
There is a sound case to be made for dropping a tactical nuclear weapon on the Cuban section of Miami. The move would be applauded heartily by most Americans. Alas, Operation Good Riddance would require the sort of mature political courage sadly lacking in Washington, D.C., these days.
- Columnist, author, media pundit, journalist, and newspaper editor Dan Savage:
My plan? Get close enough to Bauer to give him the flu, which, if I am successful, will lay him flat just before the New Hampshire primary. I’ll go to Bauer’s campaign office and cough on everything. Phones and pens. Staplers and staffers. I even hatch a plan to infect the candidate himself; I’ll keep a pen in my mouth until Bauer drops by his offices to rally the troops. And when he does, I’ll approach him and ask for his autograph, handing him the pen from my flu-virus-incubating mouth.
That column also appeared on Salon.com. It was a little more than hate “speech” — the guy actually did try to give Gary Bauer the flu.
It’s racism you want?
- Democrat Senator Robert Byrd:
There are white niggers. I’ve seen a lot of white niggers in my time. I’m going to use that word.
- Democrat presidential candidate Jesse Jackson on Jews:
Hymies
and on New York City:
Hymietown
- During his presidential campaign, Jesse Jackson was linked with (and refused to denounce) Louis Farrakhan, who has at times been linked with the Congressional Black Caucus, which also supported his Million Man March. Farrakhan is a man of the left who has been a harsh critic of President Bush.
- Here’s Farrakhan on Jews:
Many of the Jews who owned the homes, the apartments in the black community, we considered them bloodsuckers because they took from our community and built their community but didn’t offer anything back to our community.
- Farrakhan on Pope John Paul II:
no good cracker
- Farrakhan on white people:
White people are potential humans - they haven’t evolved yet.
- And again:
Murder and lying comes easy for white people.
- Here’s Farrakhan on Jews:
Does it count as “hate” speech if you say you “hate” Republicans?
- Howard Dean:
I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for . . .
Back to assassination wishes:
- British pundit Charlie Brooker, during the presidency of George W. Bush:
John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. — where are you now that we need you?
Actual elected officials have engaged in hate speech:
- Democrat Representative Pete Stark, speaking to a Republican:
You think you are big enough to make me, you little wimp? Come on. Come over here and make me, I dare you. You little fruitcake.
- Alabama Democratic congressional incumbent Earl Hilliard, on challenger, Artur Davis:
Davis and the Jews, No Good for the Black Belt
Let’s not forget the bloggers:
- Markos Moulitsas Zuniga crowed over the death of American contractors in Iraq:
I feel nothing over the death of merceneries [sic]. They aren’t in Iraq because of orders, or because they are there trying to help the people make Iraq a better place. They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them.
- Duncan “Atrios” Black discussing ABC’s The Note:
[M]y take on The Note has always been, with apologies to Douglas Adams:
A bunch of mindless jerks who will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
- Huffington Post blogger Tony Hendra wished for Dick Cheney to die:
O Lord, give Dick Cheney’s Heart, Our Sacred Secret Weapon, the strength to try one more time! For greater love hath no heart than that it lay down its life to rid the planet of its Number One Human Tumor.
The point of this list is not to argue that leftists are more hateful than conservatives. There are many documented examples of hate speech on the right; Ann Coulter provides many examples, but she is not the only one. I publish this list simply to rebut the Greenwald-spawned canard that leftist hate speech is exclusively the province of anonymous trolls on the Internet. On the contrary, prominent leftists have said some pretty awful things.
This is an open-source project. If you think of other examples, leave a comment below, or e-mail me at patterico AT gmail DOT com. Bloggers, feel free to blog it and notify me of your post. Make sure to include a link that proves the quote, and make sure that the quote truly represents hate speech. I will continue to add examples as they come in, giving credit (and links, where appropriate) to those who provide new examples.
UPDATE: I have added context for the Atrios quote, and found a more accurate version of the Byrd quote. Thanks to commenters.
UPDATE x2: Some might argue that a couple of the above examples are intended as humor. Of course, that is Ann Coulter’s defense: when she talks about how someone ought to put rat poison in Justice Stevens’s creme brulee, it’s a “joke.” But the point of the “joke” is the same as that of the “jokes” above: I hate this person enough to want to see violence done to him. Ha, ha. Get it?
If leftists defend any of the above quotes on the grounds that they’re “jokes,” they cannot consistently criticize the likes of Ann Coulter for making the same kinds of “jokes.” But they’ll try. Just watch.
It should be obvious that this post is not a “they do it too” defense of Coulter or her ilk. To the contrary, my repeated condemnation of her is a matter of record. For examples, see here, here, here, here, here, and here. I continue to believe that her sort of comments are counterproductive to what conservatives are trying to do — just as the comments listed in this post are counterproductive to the goals of leftists.
UPDATE x3: Comments left between about 8:30 p.m. on March 5 and about 6 a.m. on March 6 may be lost. Details here.
UPDATE x4: My entry on Pete Stark above originally said that the comment was made “on the floor of the House of Representatives.” I have removed that language, as a commenter points out that it was made in a committee hearing room, not on the House floor. Thanks for the correction.
By the way, there are many, many, many more examples in the comments below. I never claimed that this was a comprehensive list. I’ll add the best examples to the post when I get time, but I am currently preoccupied with moving my blog to a new server.
Also, some of you leftist commenters and bloggers really need to learn to read. I have never seen so many people completely ignore the language of a post as today. And Greenwald? I’m including you in this group. I quoted you accurately. It’s a sad comment that you can’t admit when you’ve been busted.
UPDATE x5: I never should have ruled out speech calling Republicans Nazis and fascists. Greenwald cites to posts which trumpet the mirror image, like this one which cites Ann Coulter saying lefties want to do bad things.
That’s what I get for playing fair. OK, commenters, let loose with the Nazi analogies. If those count, we’re gonna be here all year.
Wow.
That’s gonna leave a mark.
Comment by EFG — 3/5/2007 @ 12:15 am
I hope it leaves an indelible mark, so that all effected can be instantly recognized for what they are!
While I’m at it, Liberals seem to desire socialism, Nazi’s were socialists weren’t they? Who are they to call somebody an Nazi? I think the mirror may be tilted and they have just not figured it out yet.
Comment by TC — 3/5/2007 @ 12:52 am
hypocray is as easy to swallow as dry lima beans
Look,Ann was wrong but it wasn’t a homophobic speech nor a long slam at Edwards
It was a tasteless joke and an extremely poor comparison
The difference in left hate speech is its mainly from their PARTY LEADERSHIP our hate speech is from pundits and fringe associations
Its a difference but a huge one
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 3/5/2007 @ 1:19 am
Patterico:
Your Byrd quotation is not exactly correct. I don’t have a transcript in front of me, but I remember it vividly: after saying “white niggers,” he said “I’m going to use that word,” or something very similar — not “if you want to use that word.”
The sentiment is the same, of course; just, in the interest of accuracy, please double-check that quotation.
Dafydd
[You're right. I fixed it. -- P]
Comment by Dafydd — 3/5/2007 @ 1:39 am
“If I had my way, I would see Katherine Harris and Ken Blackwell strapped down to electric chairs and lit up like Christmas trees. The better to light the way for American Democracy and American Freedom!”, from minor radio personality Stephen Crocket
And then there is Randi Rhodes (roughly equivalent to Limbaugh) joking about shooting President Bush. A less biased source might be in order; I can’t figure out how to link to the radio.
Does Ward Churchill count? He’s no blogger, but he’s an author, at least of academic works.
Comment by roy — 3/5/2007 @ 1:47 am
To be fair to Atrios, that’s a verbatim quote from “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”.
[I added a line for context. Thanks.
A couple of these are obviously intended as humor. Of course, that's Coulter's defense, too. -- P]
Comment by Robert Crawford — 3/5/2007 @ 4:16 am
And there’s radio talk show host Mike Webb who was not joking when he suggested having Bush executed for war crimes.
Comment by w3 — 3/5/2007 @ 4:17 am
Don’t forget the Democrat in Congress who used to be a member of the clan… I’m sure he’s used a slur or two in his day…
Comment by Scott Jacobs — 3/5/2007 @ 4:57 am
These two may be tangential. Perhaps as a sub-topic - the popular “The administration questioned my patriotism.”
From memory - both shouted:
Howard Dean: “[President Bush]is not patriotic.”
Al Gore: “[President Bush]has betrayed America.”
Comment by C M Smith — 3/5/2007 @ 5:43 am
Actors and theater people don’t count as major figures, of course, but what about the play running in New York during the Republican convention in 2004 that was about assassinating George Bush ? There were posters up throughout NYC. These are cute fantasies by lefties who get by the ban on such talk by pretending to be writing fiction when they are giving voice to their real fantasies.
Comment by Mike K — 3/5/2007 @ 6:14 am
I was surprised at these. But then not so surprised when I hit the first link and saw that it went to a David Horowitz piece that has no links. Can you get back to the original sources on these things?
Comment by BeowulfSchaefer — 3/5/2007 @ 7:13 am
Hatespeech of the left or right shows that extremist views tend to meld into each other. To demonize those with opposing points of view as not just wrong, but evil, is itself an evil.
Comment by Bradley J. Fikes — 3/5/2007 @ 7:13 am
Expect some of the Atrios crowd to come spilling in here. Our old pal David Ehrenstein has left a comment over there characterizing this post as a defense of Ann Coulter.
Comment by Patterico — 3/5/2007 @ 7:18 am
Spike Lee and some guys at the St. Pete Democratic Club are not prominent Lefties.
[Spike Lee isn't prominent? Or he isn't a lefty?
I'm thinking he's more prominent than you.
Are any of my examples from anonymous blog commenters or e-mailers? You'd never know it from reading the lefties on this comment thread, but that's the Greenwald assertion I'm debunking. You lefties need to go back and read the post. Read Greenwald said about how you *have* to dig into anonymous comments and e-mails to find examples of leftist hate speech. So: is he right? Can anyone here admit that he isn't? -- P]
Comment by Blue Neponset — 3/5/2007 @ 7:22 am
Why disappoint him? I used to read the Chicago Reader for many years. Dan Savage had a (mostly) sex advice column in it. He would edit the questions sent in to start with the salutation: “Hey, faggot!”
Comment by nk — 3/5/2007 @ 7:23 am
Media Mogul Ted Turner and his “Jesus freaks” insult of Catholics on Ash Wednesday back in 2001.
Comment by Roger H. — 3/5/2007 @ 7:27 am
Dan Savage? He’s the guy who boasted of visiting a Republican campaign office while sick with the flu, and attempting to pass the infection on to the volunteers.
Comment by pst314 — 3/5/2007 @ 7:31 am
In other words, he didn’t just recommend doing it.
[I said that in the post. -- P]
Comment by pst314 — 3/5/2007 @ 7:34 am
Al Gore once raged “Republicans are Evil! Evil!” at a Democratic Party convention. Do you remember exactly when, Patterico, and can you find a link?
Comment by pst314 — 3/5/2007 @ 7:36 am
Well-researched post. Thx.
Comment by insider — 3/5/2007 @ 7:44 am
Bush has incredibly low approval ratings, it is tru many Americans HATE him.
Comment by John Ryan — 3/5/2007 @ 7:59 am
He should see more movies.
Comment by Jim Treacher — 3/5/2007 @ 8:02 am
Bill Mahler argues for Cheney’s assassination
Comment by Amphipolis — 3/5/2007 @ 8:09 am
Whoo, boy…
This is gonna be a long thread.
Thanks, Patterico. This should be interesting.
Comment by Leviticus — 3/5/2007 @ 8:09 am
The country is $9 trillion in debt, in the midst of a very expensive war which will drag on for at least another 2 years regardless of whether or not we will “win” or even if we can simply “afford to stay” (which we cannot), the population has a negative savings rate, current values in the stock market are unmoored from reality, most people have declining buying power, the cost of energy has more than doubled, and the housing market has bottomed out like it hasn’t bottomed out in over 35 years. And this is what you come up with? You 30 percenters sure are stubborn. Funny how none of you will actually go fight to defend your country.
Comment by ronjazz — 3/5/2007 @ 8:11 am
To forestall LA calling me a liar again.
Comment by nk — 3/5/2007 @ 8:12 am
“Funny how none of you will actually go fight to defend your country.”
I’m with you. Where’s the front line? Will you equip me or should I bring my own gun and ammunition?
Comment by nk — 3/5/2007 @ 8:18 am
My personal favorite was Bill Clinton calling banged-up war hero Bob Dole an “evil, evil man”.
Comment by spongeworthy — 3/5/2007 @ 8:28 am
Web Reconnaissance for 03/05/2007…
A short recon of whats out there that might draw your attention….
Trackback by The Thunder Run — 3/5/2007 @ 8:31 am
The Right Rev. Al Sharpton:
Jews are “diamond merchants” with the “blood of innocent babies on their hands”.
But he’s not racist.
Comment by Cassandra — 3/5/2007 @ 8:34 am
2nd try… *sigh*
The Right Rev. Al Sharpton:
Jews are “diamond merchants” with the “blood of innocent babies on their hands”.
But he’s not racist.
Comment by Cassandra — 3/5/2007 @ 8:36 am
It kinda loses something, huh?
Comment by Leviticus — 3/5/2007 @ 8:44 am
But, other than those people, what proof do you have?
Comment by Kevin — 3/5/2007 @ 8:53 am
Liberals opposing California Proposition 209 (to ban racial quotas) portrayed the proposition’s backers as racists and Nazis. They even invited David Duke to speak, hoping to confuse voters into thinking he had been invited by conservatives.
Comment by pst314 — 3/5/2007 @ 9:01 am
A prominent political cartoonist portrayed Republicans as elephants in Klan robes.
Comment by pst314 — 3/5/2007 @ 9:01 am
Farrakhan is a prominent leftist?
You’re kidding…
[Association with former Democrat candidate for president Jesse Jackson: check. Calling for Bush's impeachment: check. Association with Congressional Black Caucus: check. He ain't a Republican. -- P]
Comment by Polimom — 3/5/2007 @ 9:05 am
Actually, due to Greeny’s phrasing, almost anything I choose to be offended by qualifies:
…[I]t is undeniably true that there are people of every ideological stripe who express profane and reprehensible sentiments.”
“Profane and reprehensible” can mean anything I choose to find offensive. This is really the key to understanding Greeny’s drivel. If you parse it carefully he’s never literally lying. Sort of like the definition of “is”, you see?
Anyway, there was William Arkin and his mercenary column a few weeks back. I found that reprehensible, so it qualifies.
So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way…
…
But it is the United States, and the recent NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.”
Comment by EllisonEllenbergGreeny — 3/5/2007 @ 9:05 am
I agree with EllisonEllenbergGreeny. He really nailed it.
Comment by Dwilkers — 3/5/2007 @ 9:08 am
“Farrakhan is a prominent leftist? You’re kidding…”
Fascism is one variety of leftism. (If that puzzles you, please read F. A. Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom”, Leszek Kolakowski’s “My Correct Views On Everything, and various analyses by other scholars.)
Comment by pst314 — 3/5/2007 @ 9:17 am
The chairman of the CaliforniaDemocraticParty said that Proposition187 was the “LastGasp of WhiteAmerica in California”. He might have retired very recently, but until a month ago he was still the Chairman.
California] SenatePresident Pro Tem DonPerata refered to some of those opposed to IllegalImmigration as “crackers”. Another case here.
Comment by More examples — 3/5/2007 @ 9:17 am
Let’s settle this. BOTH SIDES spew hate speech at some point. What I am sick of is when it happens on one side, the defense is “Well, the other side says it, too!” And then we have some commenters on here trying to soften what Ann Coulter said. There is no other way to spin her calling Edwards a faggot. Condemn her, and move on. When a liberal says something stupid, condemn that person and move on. If one side or the other doesn’t call their own party on it, then they are worthless. I despise hate speech of all kinds. But today, Ann Coulter is on the hot seat. Why not give her both barrels and avoid the trap of saying the other side are hypocrites?
[I already wrote that post. It's linked above. I've been criticizing her for ages. I should let Greenwald get away with an easily refuted misstatement . . . why? -- P]
Comment by happywash — 3/5/2007 @ 9:18 am
I say ronjazz is clinically depressed and hereby give him a hug. Come on now, let’s show ronjazz some neocon love, or at least a group Zoloft by proxy of our a omni-benevolent cyber will.
Comment by J. Peden — 3/5/2007 @ 9:18 am
aComment by J. Peden — 3/5/2007 @ 9:23 am
EllisonEllenburgGreeny, #37:
Using Hillary’s Rule Number 5 for radicals:
“5. Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
The radical left’s real problem with the military is that due to the Armed Forces’ policies against fraternization they will never get what they would really like from a barracks room with 30 nineteen-year olds in it.
Comment by nk — 3/5/2007 @ 9:24 am
Patterico: Hate Speech From the Left…
Ayup. Patterico’s full of crap. You can say that again. I just did. Oops….
Trackback by WuzzaDem — 3/5/2007 @ 9:25 am
Not a single one of your quote is linked to the ORIGINAL. It is all hearsay.
If you want some credibility, do your homework, get the original offending articles, videos, or audios, and link to them.
Comment by Devil's Advocate — 3/5/2007 @ 9:29 am
I agree “hate” speech comes from all sides. However, I would hope the best deterrent would be for those of us that are in one or the other camp spend our time being critical of those who share our ideology rather than simply launch bombs into the other camps which seems to invite another equally obnoxious response.
Comment by Ron Rouintree — 3/5/2007 @ 9:34 am
You should challenge Greenwald–say, for every one of your examples of left-wing “hate” speech, he has to come up with a hundred from the right. I’ll put all my money on Greenwald…
Comment by Bob Gordon — 3/5/2007 @ 9:37 am
I agree with Ron Rouintree’s comment — It’s trivially easy to come up with lists upon lists where pundits of both political sides say outrageous things. It’s wrong, plain and simple. And we should have the courage to say no to these people. It’s hard enough to come to compromise as it is. So I say these people quoted were wrong, and Patterico is amplifying the problem as much as Glenn Greenwald is.
[What are you talking about? I have criticized Coulter repeatedly. I'm just noting that both sides do it, contrary to Greenwald's ridiculous assertion. I didn't even claim there's more of it coming from the left, though a lot of illiterate leftists seem to think that's my point. My point, however, is simple and undeniable: it's not just anonymous commenters and e-mailers who say this stuff. And Greenwald is flat wrong when he claims otherwise. Simple. -- P]
Comment by Gary Goldberg — 3/5/2007 @ 9:52 am
I’m a liberal and have been one for decades.
But I appreciate it when anyone holds both sides to higher rhetorical standards.
Congratulations. It was painful, but necessary.
Thanks.
Comment by David Terrenoire — 3/5/2007 @ 9:53 am
i think the real issue is not who is claiming the least amount of hateful and mean comments, rather the total departure from real issues into the relm of total illusion. these kinds of colums serve only to perpetuate the hollow rethoric of modern politics rather than prove anything substancial or of interest. lets count the dead bodies and see who is winning, lets count the money and see who is right, let us never asses with our minds the uselesness of right and wrong, black and white, or left and right. god forbid we refuse to judge all those around us, god forbid we are not ourself alone and correct.
Comment by jeff — 3/5/2007 @ 9:55 am
I’m not defending Coulter — just point out (because not many are) that CPAC should have learned their lesson last year with the “ragheads” remark, but instead, invited her back.
Comment by rightwingprof — 3/5/2007 @ 9:58 am
wow… gotta link to the “ORIGINAL” according to Devil’s Advocate….. this must be a court of law or something.
Comment by G — 3/5/2007 @ 9:58 am
Typical right-wing lies and misleading.
I looked into one of the quotes, Alec Baldwin, and sure enough - the video is on the web - it was a *comedy bit*, but the right here misrepresents it as serious commentary. After his ranting to kill the children of the republican politicians on Conan’s show, Conan pulled out an oxygen mask…
It was clearly a satire about his liberal views, planned in advance.
Notice how nearly all the quotes are the democrats attacking one person, not groups with hate speech?
Notice how they are not serious meetings of the Democratic Party cheering them on?
The issue isn’t Coulter attacking Edwards for being a democrat, it’s the ‘faggot’ line, and the crowd’s roaring approval of it, which the examples here don’t show from democrats.
Greenwald was right, and this blog is wrong.
Comment by Craig — 3/5/2007 @ 10:02 am
Hate-speech is hating a whole group of people because of their race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. It’s not hating individual people for their bad policies. Your definition is too broad.
Using the proper definition I can only find 3 legitimate examples. Cockburn, Farrakahn, and Hilliard. Farrakahn has been denounced years ago and has no influence. The other two I’ve never heard of, but I denounce what they’ve said.
None of them play a major role in the Democratic party like Coulter does in the Republican party, and this is the main point that conveniently gets overlooked.
Comment by AkaDad — 3/5/2007 @ 10:16 am
wow… gotta link to the “ORIGINAL” according to Devil’s Advocate….. this must be a court of law or something.
Comment by G — 3/5/2007 @ 9:58 am
No, it is the First Law of Good Research: go the source.
It is also called intellectual honesty, as in presenting the facts such as they are, and letting people decide for themselves what to make of them.
Linking to second- and third- hand sources, whose bias is well-known to make a point is intentionally misleading and totally dishonest.
Comment by Devil's Advocate — 3/5/2007 @ 10:17 am
An interesting postscript to the Jesse Jackson and the Hymietown incident: when the Washington Post’s Milton Coleman duly reported Jackson’s “Hymietown” remarks, Coleman was subjected to a death threat from Louis Farrakhan himself.
Quoting now the editors of The New Republic (April 30, 1984, p. 7):
In the same issue of The New Republic Jackson is also quoted as stating (regarding the death threat): “I think that continuing to raise this issue is overspending my time.”
Comment by DubiousD — 3/5/2007 @ 10:20 am
I can’t wait to see Sadly No! to give Patterico his usual spanking for this drivel. Craig Kilborn? Earl Hilliard? Charlie Brooker? The St. Petersburg Democratic Club? Julianne Malveaux?
If these people aren’t the functional equivalent of anonymous commenters, I don’t know what is.
Talk to me when these people’s products are promoted all over every left-wing blog. When they are the featured speaker at liberal movement events.
You proved Glenn Greenwald’s point better than he ever could.
Comment by Ed — 3/5/2007 @ 10:25 am
uh, yeah, chris rock and alec baldwin are “the left” So’s carrot top I hear. Great job digging up the dirt on the all powerful left.
Coulter is the conservatives sweet heart. Shes political. Chris rock is a comic. What do you not get about that critical difference?
Comment by Alexande — 3/5/2007 @ 10:37 am
This is amazing. There ought to be a website where this could be posted - by itself - until the next national election.
Comment by DRJ — 3/5/2007 @ 10:49 am
Craig,
Really? What major role does Coulter play in the Republican party?
Ed,
Go back to Sadly, No! It should be evident there. And tell Josh we all send kisses.
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 10:50 am
Hillary and Bill Clinton: referring to people as “Jew bastards”, “Mother F*cking Jews”, “n*ggers”, “goddamn n*ggers” etc. etc.
Barry Rubin, director of Nebraska Democratic Party calls someone “Uncle Tom”: http://www.negop.org/newsdetails.asp?id=17
Hillary Clinton implies that Mahatma Ghandi ran a gas station: http://www.counterpunch.org/gavin01102004.html
NAACP Spokesman says to be suspicious of Lieberman since Jews are really into money: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20000810/ai_n14320995
Comment by Lehosh — 3/5/2007 @ 10:51 am
Hey Craig - Coulter thinks that all her stuff is comedy too - it’s not and neither was Baldwin. If you can’t understand that, then you’ll have to repeat 2nd grade AGAIN.
Comment by holdfast — 3/5/2007 @ 10:53 am
Who are these people you’re trotting out?
You might as well involve our secret leader Ward Churchill, too!
Comment by The Liberal Avenger — 3/5/2007 @ 10:56 am
Well, let’s see…Maybe she was telling a joke, too?
Did any of you trolls read the article? Was he defending Coulter? Hell, no!
He was merely pointing out that hateful speech proscribing violence in a joking manner for individuals that are opponents of conservatives does, in fact, exist. He did so with facts. And the fact that a few trolls take fault with his sources (not legit enough? Did you need soundbites?) or his definition of hate-speech is not up to your standard. (Statements condoning violence or murder sound pretty hateful to me.)
Go back and bury yourself in Amanda Marcotte’s cat’s litter box. Come back when you grow up.
Comment by Dale — 3/5/2007 @ 10:58 am
If you’re that clueless, LA, there’s this to help you. Let us know when you get up to speed, OK?
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 10:59 am
Your first two quotes are from a newsmax review of Goldberg’s anti-media book ‘Bias’. Goldberg says they said this, but that is just hearsay.
Coulter spews her venom publicly, she sells millions of books that say similar (and worse) things, and what is the response from conservatives? They show their disapproval by inviting her to speak at CPAC, and to opine on their TV shows.
Comment by Colin — 3/5/2007 @ 11:09 am
She was for two years running, the key-note speaker at a major Conservative conference, where two of the top three Republican candidates for President and many influential Conservatives were present. She speaks for Republicans on Fox and other shows.
Comment by AkaDad — 3/5/2007 @ 11:10 am
Unfortunately, no, this won’t leave a mark. These people are slime. You can’t leave marks on slime.
Comment by Jason — 3/5/2007 @ 11:15 am
Wow. Nina Toutenberg and Craig Kilborn (the notorious lefty, who ran for President in 2000?).
Could you find more obscure people?
Coulter was on the cover of Time Magazine and is trotted out on the political cable shows on a weekly basis.
Cheney goes on Limbuagh’s show so the interviewer won’t laugh in his face when he spouts nonsense (last throes, greeted as liberators, etc).
But thanks for proving Greenwald’s point.
The Left’s wingnuts are obscuros who you have to Google to find out who they are, the Right’s are front and center with the Right’s movement.
I will say this for Coulter though, she’s as funny as she is beautiful.*
*She’s neither.
Comment by Robert — 3/5/2007 @ 11:15 am
Scratch a liberal, get a racist.
Garry Trudeau and Pat Oliphant
Condoleeza Rice.
Some dipweasel named Jane Hamsher
Joe Lieberman.
Comment by Gordon — 3/5/2007 @ 11:16 am
AkaDad,
Really? Key note speaker? What conferences were those? (Mike DeMint was the key-note speaker at CPAC) And who says she speaks for Republicans on TV? Does she have a contract for that? A “spokesperson” title?
Or are you just making that up?
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 11:17 am
Dan Rather refers to plack people using the epithet “Buckwheat”: http://www.newsmax.com/showinside.shtml?a=2001/7/23/162636
Billy McKinney (D-Georgia) blames his daughter’s troubles on a Jewish comspiracy, saying it’s all because of the “J-E-W-S”: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/079tehyf.asp
Doonesbury cartoonist Gary Trudeau refers to Condoleeza Rice as “Brown Sugar”: http://www.command-post.org/oped/2_archives/011436.html
Senate President Mike Thomas V. Miller of Maryland calls Michael Steel “Uncle Tom”: http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20051114-015140-6451r.htm
Senator Biden “YOu can’t enter a Dunkin Donuts or a 7-11 without an India Accent”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM19YOqs7hU
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid slurs Clarence Thomas, suggesting his opinions are written in Ebonics and that he may be the janitor: http://colorblind.typepad.com/the_colorblind_society/2004/12/when_liberals_c.html
Comment by Lehosh — 3/5/2007 @ 11:18 am
Farrakhan is NOT a man of the left. He pushes a rightwing ideology that espouses hate of gays and others.
He’s just loathsome in general.
Comment by Geek, Esq. — 3/5/2007 @ 11:20 am
Coulter is a liar and a hack, so of course she’s revered by the Right.
They revere the liar and hack President too.
BTW, if you want to see Coulter’s REAL Comedy Gold, you need to follow the footnotes in her books. Totally made-up comedy.
But of corse, she pulled the wool over the eyes of the Right, and they missed the humor.
Comment by Robert — 3/5/2007 @ 11:21 am
Yeah, James Carville, Howard Dean, Jesse Jackson, Robert Byrd, Pete Stark, Bill and Hillary…
Who are these nobodies?
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 11:23 am
Wow, this is as convincing as Intelligent Design, The Myth of Global Warming and all the other delusional nonsense the right wing has been pushing as ‘ideas’ lately. I’m the first to say that the level of political discourse has dropped into the sewer over the past twenty years, but I place blame squarely on Limbaugh, Savage, Coulter, and the shouting ninnies over at ‘Fox’. If that’s how you folks want to debate, you shouldn’t whine when you reap what you sow.
Comment by Winston Delgado — 3/5/2007 @ 11:27 am
C’mon, Farrakhan? I promise not to use David Duke as an example of a Conservative if you promise not to use Farrakhan anymore.
Comment by Nick — 3/5/2007 @ 11:31 am
From Markos himself:
dkos@dailykos.com wrote:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/5/95344/96678
A Greenwaldian parsing of that quote manages to include a disregard for the rule of law,torture, *and* reprisals.
Hell, Misha was taken to task by Glenns Greenwald for 5 Supreme Court Justices. Kos would take the whole Supreme Court out. Yet, nary a peep from Glenns.
Comment by BumperStickerist — 3/5/2007 @ 11:32 am
Patterico, you couldn’t have proved Glenn’s point better if you tried. Learn to use original sources (did you take English in college? did you go to college?), which leaves out any bias or omissions by the secondary sources who quote them. The people or orgs you cite are nobodies compared to the regular dose of hate and vitriol espoused by mainstream figures on the right. You proved Glenn’s point.
Comment by alyosha — 3/5/2007 @ 11:35 am
Riiiiight. Like hate of Republicans, perhaps?
Farrakhan calls for impeachment of Bush
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 11:38 am
“While I’m at it, Liberals seem to desire socialism, Nazi’s were socialists weren’t they? Who are they to call somebody an Nazi? I think the mirror may be tilted and they have just not figured it out yet.”
Look up National Socialist on Wikipedia and take a few minutes to educate yourself before spouting such idiotic drival.
R. Mutt
Comment by R. Mutt — 3/5/2007 @ 11:42 am
aloysha,
Quoth moi:
Really, only for of them have run for President of the United States. Never heard of them, have you, aloysha?
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 11:47 am
Riiiiight. Like hate of Republicans, perhaps?
Farrakhan calls for impeachment of Bush
“What should they do about a man who has been lying to America?” Farrakhan said. Then, turning to face Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat who chairs the House Judiciary Committee and shared the stage in Detroit, he added: “If you won’t impeach him, sanction him.”
Speaking of impeachment, I guess that means Dana Rohrabacher hates his own party then and is a “prominent leftist”:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200702/NAT20070207d.html
Comment by Lib4 — 3/5/2007 @ 11:47 am
Fascinating. You’ve really blown the lid off “leftist” “hate”.
It’s irrelevant, of course, that many of your speakers are entirely marginal: several are professional comedians; the St. Petersburg Democratic Club is hardly a “leading leftist figure”; one source was a TV-show reviewer and British to boot; Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, is hardly a liberal. If the definition of “leftist” is merely “insults people you approve of”, then of course many leftists do insult people you disapprove of. (If you scour both sides of the Atlantic, you can come up with not quite two dozen.) QED! Of course, the same definition that makes Louis Farrakhan a “leftist” also makes Pat Buchanan one, but never mind.
Just for fun, though, I took it upon myself to look up the dates of the quotes you give. Here they are:
Totenberg: 1995
Malveaux: 1994
Cohen: 1999
Kilborn: 2000
St. Petersburg Democratic Club: 2004
OBrien: 1998
Rock: 1998
Lee: 1999
Carville: 1998, if not earlier
Cockburn: 2000
Savage: 2000
Byrd: 2001
Jackson: 1984
Farrakhan: 1995, 1994, 2000, 1994
Dean: 2005
Brooker: 2004
Stark: 2003
Hilliard: 2002 (not proven he wrote the flyer)
Markos: 2004
Atrios: 2006 (a direct quote of a joke from The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy)
Hendra: 2006
I can’t help noticing that some of them are as much as 23 years old. In fact, of these 24 quotes, barely a third were spoken in this century (counting from 2001) - only two within the last year. On average, these quotes are almost 8 years old.
But you’ve proven your point: the “leftists” of America and Europe (defined to include religious reactionaries, comedians, and The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy) do say rather undisciplined things about conservatives . . . once a year, on average.
Why, they make Ann Coulter (Pat Budhanan, Newt Gingrich, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Grover Norquist, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney . . .) look positively restrained! Who could have thought there would be any comparison?!
[Provide links. -- P]
Comment by Kevin T. Keith — 3/5/2007 @ 11:53 am
[...] However… I don’t find Ann remarks any less offensive than any thing said by John Kerry, Jack Murtha, Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, or Michael Moore. [...]
Pingback by More On Ann Coulter : “7.62mm Justice” ™ — 3/5/2007 @ 12:00 pm
[...] at least as vile as “faggot.” Posted in Politics, Culture and Society | Trackback | del.icio.us | Top OfPage [...]
Pingback by Common Sense Political Thought » Archives » The Pearl-Clutching of the Left — 3/5/2007 @ 12:01 pm
And Ann Coulter says her remark was a joke. So your point is . . . ? Surely not that Alec Baldwin wasn’t making a serious statement, since he’s nothing more than a Hollywood airhead and is incapable of making serious statements.
Comment by rightwingprof — 3/5/2007 @ 12:03 pm
Watch in awe as lefties search for some niggling reason why it’s different when they do it. They’ll pretend the speaker holds a different status on the Left than on the Right. They’ll claim one was joking when another was serious. They’ll seize on any difference and blow it up to be the determining factor between good and bad behavior. We really ought to make up a name for this.
Left unconfronted is Gleen Grenwald’s idiotic claim, but then I’m sure there’s some niggling reason why it’s different when Gleen does it. I know! Gleen has been quoted by Senators on the floor of the Senate! So it’s, you know, different!
Comment by spongeworthy — 3/5/2007 @ 12:03 pm
In other words, only speech against one of your current little pet groups counts — which renders the definition meaningless, since you can count or not anything you like.
Idiot.
Comment by rightwingprof — 3/5/2007 @ 12:05 pm
[...] Added: Just out of curiousity, when did Louis Farrakhan become a “Prominent Leftist“? Was Polimom left off of another Important Memo distribution list? Again? [...]
Pingback by Polimom Says » So who’s next? — 3/5/2007 @ 12:09 pm
You conveniently left out the rest of that comment and the whole point of it, didn’t you? You know, the “moderate” part.
Comment by rightwingprof — 3/5/2007 @ 12:12 pm
Oh please! College is necessary for thinking logically? College is necessary for blogging an opinion which clearly states that its purpose is not a defense of divisive, senseless, self-aggrandizing rhetoric, but a refutation of a dishonest opinionist. For hypocrisy to be eliminated it must be exposed. Patterico is doing just that. Good job.
Comment by aqvik — 3/5/2007 @ 12:14 pm
“What should they do about a man who has been lying to America?” Farrakhan said. Then, turning to face Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat who chairs the House Judiciary Committee and shared the stage in Detroit, he added: “If you won’t impeach him, sanction him.”
Sorry, Pablo. Farrakan is a Black Muslim, whose social conservatism would be, if it were not for his own racist views of anglos and Jews, indistinguishable from James Dobson, Anne Coulter, or any of the leading lights of modern conservatism.
It’s awfully feeble-minded of you to suggest that merely opposing Bush, or sharing a stage with John Conyers automatically makes you a leftist.
Regards,
R. Mutt
Comment by R. Mutt — 3/5/2007 @ 12:16 pm
Great fisking on the sock puppet!
Comment by Pulchritudinous Patriot — 3/5/2007 @ 12:19 pm
#79 - alyosha - You make a sweeping conclusion without any cites or links to the original quotes that you demand Patterico provide. Follow your own condescending advice: Learn to use original sources (did you take English in college? did you go to college?), which leaves out any bias or omissions by the secondary sources who quote them.
Comment by Perfect Sense — 3/5/2007 @ 12:22 pm
Previous commenter is correct saying that Patterico is not trying to defend Coulter. (He seems to be clever enough to understand he’d lose that argument.)
What he said is that Greenwald is a “fraud” for stating the obvious: conservatives worship Coulter, and by repeatedly inviting her to speak at their most prominent conference, they are endorsing the things she says.
Farrakhan is marginalized. Byrd and Jackson apologized for their remarks. (Coulter celebrates hers.) Baldwin, Rock, Lee, and Kilborn are entertainers and are not invited to speak on political shows (or at Democratic conferences), as Coulter is.
Totenberg and Malveaux: hearsay from rightwing hack Goldberg’s book. Note: they’re not invited to speak at Democratic conferences, either.
Savage, Cockburn, Brooker, Hendra: I’ve never heard of these people.
Stark: Would it have been ok if he told the GOP rep to f*ck himself?
Atrois: He’s right, they are jerks. That’s hardly hate speech.
Kos: He’s not “crowing” over the merceneries’ deaths. He’s saying that he doesn’t care that they were killed. Read what he said again.
Cohen: Get back to me when progressives are lapping up his bestsellers and he’s speaking at Democratic conferences. Besides, everyone hates Gingrich.
On your entire list I’d say Carville is perhaps the best comparison, but even that is a huge stretch. I don’t recall his ‘kneecap’ quote drawing much praise or condemnation, and you have to do a lot of Google digging to even find it. And I’ll say it again: progressives do not worship him or buy his books in droves.
Your list of examples does not support your assertion that Greenwald is a “fraud” when he points out the obvious: conservatives like and approve of the things Colter says, and they prove that by making her books bestsellers are inviting her to speak at their most prestigious (I use the term loosely) conferences.
[There sure are a lot of reading-impaired lefties out there. Greenwald said you can't find examples of hate speech by prominent lefties. -- P]
Comment by Colin — 3/5/2007 @ 12:24 pm
HEY! STIFLE! She bought hate-speech offset credits from Algore before the show! No harm, no foul!
Comment by Mike — 3/5/2007 @ 12:34 pm
I try not to let a Greenwald-related post go by without pointing out that the collective noun for sockpuppets is known as a “glenn” in his honor.
As in:
“The blogger create a literal glenn of sockpuppets to defend her views”.
Comment by David — 3/5/2007 @ 1:04 pm
Be interesting to see a graph of your additional from Sadly Retarded and assorted Greenwald acolytes, Patterico. You seem to have hit a nerve.
I am surprised, though, that you didn’t dig up anything from arguably the single most prominent lefty hatemonger of them all: Michael Moore. And this guy’s won Academy Awards, been a guest of honor at their national convention, and draws standing-room-only crowds at his speaking engagements.
Comment by BC — 3/5/2007 @ 1:06 pm
For crying out loud! Can’t a bunch of folks get toghether and have a good old-fashioned neck-tie party for Ann Coulter without someone like Patterico bringing up “facts” and silly things like the truth?
BTW - If Glenn Greenwald said the sun rose in the East, I’d ask for two reliable confirming sources before I quoted him. Are you his bitch or what?
Comment by Gunga — 3/5/2007 @ 1:06 pm
How about the obscure, little-known Barney Frank accusing President Bush of ethnic cleansing in New Orleans?
Talk about hate speech by leftists.
Comment by Ken McCracken — 3/5/2007 @ 1:07 pm
Also take a look at the language on various left-right sites:
http://newsbuckit.blogspot.com/2007/02/seven-words-you-can-never-say-on.html
Comment by SeanF — 3/5/2007 @ 1:08 pm
Hahaha. Typical bullshit equivocations. This wasn’t the Laugh Factory this was a convention. Cheney and most of the GOP presisential contenders spoke. That was the problem. If she said this on a comedy show it would have been far less of a big deal.
Also, I couldn’t find the quote where Greenwald said you couldn’t find it on the left.
It’s funny how much ire Greenwald stirs up in you guys. I think it’s because he’s such a smart insightful writer.
GG
Comment by Gary Greenwill — 3/5/2007 @ 1:11 pm
Patterico,
You told Kevin T. Keith to “provide links” to the dates he cites for each of your sources in comment #85. He doesn’t need to: they have bylines, and he’s using them.
Although I agree that Greenwald’s statement is characteristically stupid, and that the left wing is just as vitriolic as the right, you may want to find something a little more recent that fits in the mainstream category.
[I meant he should provide links for the examples of right-wing hate speech by the people he mentioned. Then we can all nitpick and cherry-pick the way lefties have here. -- P]
Comment by Leviticus — 3/5/2007 @ 1:13 pm
How about Nancy Pelosi calling President Bush “dangerous” and “a liar”?
Comment by JohnJ — 3/5/2007 @ 1:13 pm
Sorry I have to give Chris Rock a pass. He did say.
“You don’t pay taxes - they take taxes.”
Comment by -joe — 3/5/2007 @ 1:21 pm
John J, it’s not hate speech if it’s truth!
George Bush IS dangerous, and a liar.
You didn’t know that? What planet are you from?
Comment by delphine — 3/5/2007 @ 1:22 pm
fwiw, I think some of Patterico’s examples are a bit long in the tooth. Hymietown was a long time ago - Gore’s ‘extra chromosone’ comment would be more recent.
Glenns’s [sic] point is that Ann becomes more popular the more she uses this kind of rhetoric and that this approach wouldn’t work on the Left. The Left doesn’t reward ‘hate’. Which is ironic since Greenwald himselves engaged in over-the-top rhetorical bomb throwing, et cetera to ascend to his position.
As did Hamsher.
and Atrios.
and Markos.
They spoke ‘truth’ to glower and for some it worked out.
My hunch is the best source for dumbass lefty hate rhetoric will come from The Daily Howler’s incomparable archives - he’s no fan of dumbassedness, whether on the left or the right.
If Glenns’s point is that bloggers don’t count because Ann is a media figure, we can either admit that Air America wasn’t entertaining, or take Randi Rhodes entire show as evidence and good chunks of Al Franken’s show as well.
What will be funny is that the failure of Air America will now be ascribed as a consequence of the Left’s kinder, gentler tendencies. Rather than a poor business model and potentially illegal funding activities. Not to mention talentless hacks as hosts whom the audience never connected.
This brings us to the hoi polloi of the Left and their 68,000 instances of the word ‘Bushitler’ on teh intertubes - a phrase which equates Bush with Adolf Hitler’. Not hateful, at all.
We could throw in all the Chimp/Chimperor stuff as well. It being hate-based material which dehumanizes the President(hey! lighten up, Bush looks like a chimp!), material which to my knowledge Glenns has never publicly chastised his fellow bloggers and/or commenters.
The Jane Hamsher on the Left has a recent post up which claims that Cheney is not only insane, but Dr. Strangelovian crazy … et cetera.
Larry Johnson is a frequent, seemingly deranged, guest on various shows. Ditto Laurence O’Donnell - no stranger to hate-flecked rhetoric he.
That’s about a dozen or so more recent, more prominent lefty types for consideration. If that’s not enough, perhaps someone on the Left could provide the characteristics they’d use to determine who speaks for and to the Left.
;
.
Comment by BumperStickerist — 3/5/2007 @ 1:42 pm
R. Mutt,
The event was honoring Farrakhan on the occasion of his retirement. Why do you think Conyers was there if not simpatico? It’s awfully disingenuous of you to suggest there’s no political connection when there clearly is. If you’d like you can go look for his support of Jesse Jackson’s presidential campaign as well. Jackson wasn’t running as a right-winger, was he?
Now sit. Stay.
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 1:51 pm
I totally agree with Gary Greenwill. That guy is just so insightful and brilliant!
Comment by Gerry Greenison — 3/5/2007 @ 1:54 pm
Leading Democratic Congressman Charles Rangel could have his own hate speech category:
Referring to the Republican Contract for America - “They don’t say sp*ck or n*gg*r anymore. They say, ‘Let’s cut taxes’”
To a cheering crowd at the Congressional Black Caucus’ 35th Annual Legislative Conference - “George Bush is our Bull Connor.”
Referring to the liberation of Iraq - “It’s the biggest fraud ever committed on the people of this country,” Rangel told WWRL Radio’s Steve Malzberg and Karen Hunter. “This is just as bad as six million Jews being killed. The whole world knew it and they were quiet about it, because it wasn’t their ox that was being gored.”
On another note, saying “both sides do it” ignores the context. It isn’t 50/50, more like 90/10 (Left/Right). Hateful speech is routine and widespread on the left.
Comment by The Editors, AFJ — 3/5/2007 @ 1:57 pm
Oh R. Mutt? Farrakhan’s Million Man March?
Who was there.
How about that?
Comment by Gerry Greenison — 3/5/2007 @ 2:01 pm
Here’s one:
Senator Edward “Ted” Kennedy, May 10, 2004.
Comment by DRJ — 3/5/2007 @ 2:04 pm
Nothing pisses me off more than seeing Greenwald get so popular he gets a high-paying gig at Salon while guys like us can’t do anything but toss rotten eggs from podunk sites like this one. Oooohh it makes me so dang mad I could spit. Greenwald is a fake and the only reason he’s so popular is that millions of people pretend to like him. Secretly they don’t. hahaha.
As for hate, if the lefty wackos had their way we’d all be in concentration camps.
Comment by Milo — 3/5/2007 @ 2:12 pm
Craig: Notice how nearly all the quotes are the democrats attacking one person, not groups with hate speech?
What does that have to do with anything? Remember what Rick Ellensburg wrote: [I]t is undeniably true that there are people of every ideological stripe who express profane and reprehensible sentiments.
Thomas Ellers never wrote anything about anti-group biases, he was talking about bad, hateful rhetoric in general.
Your statement is also a blatant lie on its face. How is referring to Jews as “hymies” and Jewish areas as “hymietown” not bigoted against a group? The same goes for Farrakhan’s statements and Hilliard’s.
How is Ms. Malveaux’s death wish on Clarence Thomas not anti-black bigotry?
How is Cockburn’s prayer for the annihilation of the Cuban area of Miami not anti-Cuban bigotry?
How is Dan Savage’s bioterrorism (that’s what you’d call it if a right-winger tried to make leftists sick, and you’d be right) against conservative Christians not group-directed bigotry?
Comment by Daryl Herbert — 3/5/2007 @ 2:18 pm
Salon is paying big money? Really?
I guess P.T. Barnum was right.
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 2:19 pm
You could argue that Ann Coulter’s remark was intended as comedy. Doesn’t excuse it, though. So why is Alec Baldwin’s bit exempt from criticism?
Comment by Steverino — 3/5/2007 @ 2:22 pm
Let me give you one more. The reason the word c**t was invented: Ann Coulter.
Comment by Kary Walker — 3/5/2007 @ 2:24 pm
LA, can you look up “manshake” while you’re there? Let me know what you find - I’m curious.
Comment by John from WuzzaDem — 3/5/2007 @ 2:26 pm
Leftist Hate Speech…
Gotta love the Intranets. So for those of you in denial about the Left and whining that there are no “Coulter equivalents”, think again.
Below I have listed more than 20 examples of hate speech by prominent leftist figures, such as politi…
Trackback by Gay Patriot — 3/5/2007 @ 2:34 pm
Meanwhile, Huffington Post reports on Dick Cheney’s blood clot.
The salient point?
I wonder why that is.
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 2:34 pm
Instead of wasting bandwidth listing incidents of “hate speech” remarks made by prominent (?) leftists just so you can take a cheap and rather lame shot at Glenn Greenwald, where’s the outrage over the deplorable treatment our wounded troops are receiving? Oh, but I guess in rightie-land “support the troops” really means that we good patriots just need to keep telling our troops that they’re doing the right thing by putting their lives on the line for no damn good reason. And “support the troops” means House Republicans voting to increase veterans’ medical fees and voting to reject increased funds for veterans’ health care. And “support the troops” means the wounded soldiers in Building 18 must now stand ready for inspection every morning at 7 a.m. and it means prohibiting them from talking to members of the press.
I think Ann Coulter sums you people up pretty well. In fact, I don’t think you could find someone who better expresses your complete lack of values.
Comment by 3reddogs — 3/5/2007 @ 2:37 pm
This is all you swine have?
Comment by Z-ray — 3/5/2007 @ 2:38 pm
This is what Greenwald actually said. He wasn’t talking about hate speech in the sense of an expression racial animosity or something similar, as some have claimed. He was talking about “profane and reprehensible sentiments.” Patterico has provided a list of such sentiments from prominent people on the left.
Isn’t it reprehensible to refer to New York as Hymietown? Isn’t it reprehensible to wish physical harm or death upon your political opponents, as Malveaux, Lee, Hendra and others did? Isn’t Kos saying “screw ‘em” about murdered countrymen, who were escorting a shipment of food and water, I believe, and whose bodies were burned & hung from a bridge, reprehensible?
If you can’t find these reprehensible, then you’ve elevated party over basic human decency.
Greenwald was clearly wrong. No shifting of the goal posts can change that.
Comment by T-web — 3/5/2007 @ 2:38 pm
Ted Rall. Apologies to anyone who already mentioned him.
Comment by Roger H. — 3/5/2007 @ 2:38 pm
I can’t believe you left out Al Sharpton:
“If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house.”
Comment by LagunaDave — 3/5/2007 @ 2:51 pm
3reddogs–That’s exceedingly lame. By your logic, you should be criticized for wasting time by crticizing us. And Greenwald should be criticized for writing about civility in the first place, since there are so many ohter problems in the world that he could be addressing.
Here’s what happened: A prominent liberal blogger criticized the right. Patterico responded. It’s ridiculous to criticize Patterico for that, or other people for being interested. You’re just trying to change the subject because you’re losing the argument. Suck it up and take your licks.
Comment by T-web — 3/5/2007 @ 2:54 pm
Please consider adding a link to my homepage… http://www.netradionetwork.com
Thank you!
Steve
Comment by Steve — 3/5/2007 @ 3:09 pm
Funny how none of you will actually go fight to defend your country.
Comment by ronjazz
Perfectly said, sir. Absolutely perfect!
Comment by Tom — 3/5/2007 @ 3:10 pm
Here’s another one for you. I heard it on XM comedy channel 150. It’s George Carlin, fairly well-known for his leftism. Here’s the exact quote:
Comment by Gaius Obvious — 3/5/2007 @ 3:13 pm
[...] No Hate Speech by Prominent Leftists? Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:01 am A certain intellectual fraud who goes by the name of Glenn Greenwald (as well as a few other names) recently said that leftist hate speech is not uttered by prominent leftist figures, but rather only by anonymous blog comments and e-mailers: [I]t is undeniably true that there are people of every ideological stripe who express profane and reprehensible sentiments. The difference is that right-wing authors, talk radio hosts and bloggers — read and listened to by millions of people — traffic in such sentiments regularly . . . . But to find such sentiments outside of right-wing circles, one must go where right-wing bloggers went today — digging into anonymous blog comments (or e-mails allegedly received). That difference is so obvious — and so meaningful — that it all ought to go without saying. [...]
Pingback by » Pulled from Pajamas Media site, and you thought all the little lefties were nice? Think again… — 3/5/2007 @ 3:18 pm
The quote by Alec Baldwin was made on Jay Leno’s show not Conan O’Brien’s. It’s the reason that I will not view, rent or support anything the man is involved with.
Comment by Rick — 3/5/2007 @ 3:19 pm
TO ALL CONSERVATIVES WHO ARE GOING OUT OF THEIR WAY TO DEFEND THESE REMARKS:
the “no such thing as bad publicity” addage only applies to entertainers, not politicians or political movements. she will no doubt sell more books, but you will lose voters, along with your credibility.
Comment by brandon — 3/5/2007 @ 3:19 pm
How about candidate for US Senate from Minnesota, Al Franken:
Franken in 1976 on homosexuals: “It’s not preppies, cause I’m a preppie myself. I just don’t like homosexuals. If you ask me, they’re all homosexuals in the Pudding. Hey, I was glad when that Pudding homosexual got killed in Philadelphia.” Source: Harvard Crimson.
Franken in 1996 on Richard Armey: “And Richard Armey is a Big Fat Dick.” Source: Entertainment Weekly.
Comment by Eric Anondson — 3/5/2007 @ 3:24 pm
[...] Gotta love the Intranets. So for those of you in denial about the Left and whining that there are no “Coulter equivalents”, think again. Below I have listed more than 20 examples of hate speech by prominent leftist figures, such as politicians, journalists writing for major newspapers or radio networks, television and movie industry personalities, and the like. [...]
Pingback by World and Global Politics Blog » Blog Archive » Leftist Hate Speech — 3/5/2007 @ 3:25 pm
Does Al Gore referring to the “extra chromosome right wing” count (October 28, 1994)?
-john
* An extra-chromosome would be Down Syndrome for you insensitive, ignorant Gore-types over on the left.
Comment by John — 3/5/2007 @ 3:26 pm
Sort of ironic Liberal Avenger posts in this thread.
I mean, if ANYONE’S behavior proves Greenwald wrong, it’s his.
Incest, homophobia… he and Coulter should take that comedy routine on the road. Preferably somewhere far, far away, on a one-way ticket.
Comment by TallDave — 3/5/2007 @ 3:30 pm
Bob Beckel: Gays hanging out around young boys is like a bank robber hanging out around a bank:
http://gaypatriot.net/2006/10/09/top-democrat-activist-caught-on-tapebob-beckel-equates-gays-among-boys-with-bank-robbers
Source, with video.
-john
Comment by John — 3/5/2007 @ 3:32 pm
Did everyone forget Cindy Sheehan? You know, how she calls people in the military rapists, bloodthirsty animals, murderers, etc. etc. etc. (what about her own son?!), not to mention her ridiculous droning on about “Bush murdered my son?” What about when Zarqawi was killed, she said she wished it was Bush?
(I wish everyone would forget her.)
P.S. For the record, I have not defended Coulter’s “faggot” asshattery in the least. Don’t even bother going there.
Comment by Beth — 3/5/2007 @ 3:35 pm
I’ve said a pox on both your houses a long time ago, if you want to justify or somehow mitigate Ann Coulter’s statements by saying, ‘but they did it too’ then maybe you should all go back to the third grade and learn how to play well with each other.
Doesn’t anyone have any maturity left on either side?
So, if someone jumps off a cliff, is that going to justify jumpping off a cliff?
*shakes his head*
Conservative, Liberal, You all need some serious parenting, cause I wouldn’t let my child behave like that, I certainly expect better from Adults.
And yes, I’m talking to you!
I’ll stick with the Libertarians, they may be kooks, but at least they’re not third graders about it.
Comment by Mark — 3/5/2007 @ 3:41 pm
Please leave Dan Savage out of it, at least for his “give the flu to Bauer” campaign. I’m generally on your side, Patterico, but I’m going to defend Dan when you’re going to associate him with genuine whackjobs like Jesse Jackson or Robert Byrd.
Read his book, Skipping Towards Gomorrah, to get the full scoop on that little bit of exaggeration-to-make-a-political-point. Dan didn’t lick any doorknobs.
Dan’s said much worse; look at his campaign against Sen. Santorum.
Comment by Jennifer — 3/5/2007 @ 3:45 pm
Let’s see, Noam Chomsky accused the U.S. of committing genocide in Afghanistan. That seems pretty offensive, and yet rather than being shunned he was recently voted the world’s leading intellectual. As vile as Coulter can be, she’s only ever accused Mao and Stalin of mass murder, and their crimes are accepted facts.
Remember kids, this thread is not for defending Coulter; this is not a tu quoque defense but a debunking of Greenwald’s assertion was that such speech is common on the right but only found in anonymous comments on the left.
Comment by TallDave — 3/5/2007 @ 3:50 pm
Alexander Cockburn is a Maoist — if that’s your analogy, then that convention was embracing a nazi.
Comment by Jake — 3/5/2007 @ 3:50 pm
It’s worth pointing out that Coulter is not “a prominent conservative, who makes hateful remarks”. She became prominent precisely because of her despicable attitude and all the controversy it created. MSNBC fired her trying to have integrity, but she promptly started making the rounds on Fox News. Conservatives loved her, and made her rich and famous because they loved her hateful remarks. There’s no reason why they shouldn’t be stuck with them now. Some of us hold exactly the same opinion of her as we have for quite some time.
That’s the difference. These “prominent” “leftists” (the use of both is questionable in some cases) haven’t made a career purely out of hate the way Coulter has. By and large these things are small compared to the rest of what they’ve done. With Coulter, it’s all that she’s done.
Comment by Mike — 3/5/2007 @ 3:54 pm
Another, more prominent person who wished that Cheney had died was Bill Maher on his HBO show. He pretty clearly said that, IHO, the world would be better off had the Taliban succeeded.
But did the press report that? Hardly.
Comment by Kevin Murphy — 3/5/2007 @ 4:12 pm
To all the people bringing up the chickenhawk charge (”Funny how none of you will actually go fight to defend your country”), check out the post called “Shape Up, Shut Up, or Ship Out” to discover why it is a bogus argument:
http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/2004/09/shape-up-shut-up-or-ship-out.html
Also: “Dissecting the Chickenhawk Charge: The accusation is less an argument than an insult; it’s also a form of bullying and it rejects the Constitution”:
http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/2005/08/dissecting-chickenhawk-charge.html
Comment by Erik Svane — 3/5/2007 @ 4:17 pm
SNAP!
http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2007/03/well-it-was-only-matter-of-time.html
Comment by blogenfreude — 3/5/2007 @ 4:18 pm
Maher-Cheney quote
Comment by Kevin Murphy — 3/5/2007 @ 4:22 pm
Coulter isn’t on any ballots, that I know of. She is an entertainer, like Michael Moore. She’s selling books and TV appearances. In fact, he’s probably the Democrat equivalent of Coulter, Now With More Bullshit™!
But again, this isn’t a post about “They do it too.” This is yet another hearty, thourough, effective dismantling of Glenn(s) Greenwald’s dishonest partisan tripe.
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 4:25 pm
this is entertaining but very few of these folks you call leftist are actually leftist. Robert Byrd? Nina Totenberg? Chris Rock? Right, and the NY Times is an example of liberal media bias… give me a break
Comment by Ruby — 3/5/2007 @ 4:30 pm
I have a pretty high tolerance of political humor/invective, whether from Ann Coulter or Chris Rock. John Kerry is in a league by himself at producing groaners when he botches a joke, most others I can deal with.
For me, there has been only one utterly reprehensible, unforgiveable political slam in the last decade, and that was for Bill Clinton to stand in Tiananmen Square on the ninth anniversary of the killings and to review the very same army units responsible for the massacre. He slammed every one of those young Chinese who put their lives on the line for the possibility of freedom.
Comment by Charlie — 3/5/2007 @ 4:32 pm
you missed the point, pablo. i’m aware she’s not on any ballots, but 2 guys who spoke on the same stage as her ARE. and this was a political action meeting, not a late night talk show or entertainment magazine.
Comment by brandon — 3/5/2007 @ 4:33 pm
Oh, so many quotes from the left. One hardly knows where to start. But then, that is the left, and after all, we DO expect that kind of rhetoric from them don’t we? So no shock value when they say something outragous.
But we conservatives are the nice guys. We are the ones who hold ourselves to a higher standard. And we eat our own when they misbehave. And like the dimwits that we are, we play right into the hands of the left when they start feigning their indignation over an offhanded comment.
When do we start fighting back? How about “demanding” that the left holds itself to the same standard of civility that they expect for us? Or do we just intend to continue to lose elections?
Comment by retire05 — 3/5/2007 @ 4:39 pm
And Michael Moore sat in the Presidential box at the DNC. So what?
Comment by Pablo — 3/5/2007 @ 4:39 pm
“Coulter can be, she’s only ever accused Mao and Stalin of mass murder, and their crimes are accepted facts.”
have you read her column this week? apparently the left are hard at work exterminating the entire human race:
“Liberals have always had a thing about eliminating humans. Stalin wanted to eliminate the kulaks and Ukranians, vegetarian atheist Adolf Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews…”
hitler: vegetarian, atheist, liberal. they glossed over that stuff in my history classes. damn liberal public schools!
Comment by brandon — 3/5/2007 @ 4:42 pm
See what are the excoration and moralizing got you?
Has any Leftwing blogger come out and said:
“Good job by the Rightwing bloggers in repudiating Coulter. And I agree with them about the offenders on our side, and I want to join them in denouncing the hate speech of those on the Left as well as the Right.”
No?
Didn’t think so.
Comment by gahrie — 3/5/2007 @ 4:50 pm
I don’t think Nazis were socialists. I think they preety much sent socialists to the concentration camps.
Comment by judyinnm — 3/5/2007 @ 4:53 pm
Jennifer #142,
In fairness to Dan Savage, I also thought that he grew up a lot when he and his partner adopted a son.
Comment by nk — 3/5/2007 @ 4:55 pm
so michael moore sat in a box at some conference. did he call anyone a faggot while doing so, to thunderous applause?
for the record, many on the left have distanced themselves from mm for similar reasons the right should ditch coulter. i certainly wouldn’t defend any remarks the man makes.
my point is simply that if the conservative movement wants to have any credibility with the coming generations, they will have to stop aligning themselves with people who spew venomous slurs that denigrate entire classes of people. calling gwb a “ficticious president” (as mm did at the oscars a few years back), however stupid, does not directly insult or alienate 5-10% of the population. if republicans want people to vote for them in the next 5-10 years and beyond, they should really tak a look at the polls: young americans are (thankfully) not nearly as bigotted as their predecesors.
but even more to the point, why would anyone - ANYONE - even try to defend that remark? exactly what does it contribute to legitimate political discourse?
further, if i’m not mistaken, ann herself wrote a bestseller based on the assertion that namecalling and ad hominem attacks were tools employed exclusively by the left when their arguments didn’t have a leg to stand on. by her own logic, if “faggot” is the best thing she can come up with, edwards must have a pretty rock-solid platform.
Comment by brandon — 3/5/2007 @ 4:56 pm
Gahrie,
Here you go. You can shut up now.
Comment by Moops — 3/5/2007 @ 5:07 pm
Moops, do you ever tire of victimology? Everyone is a victim except white Christian males.
Maybe it is time people stop whining and act like adults.
Comment by retire05 — 3/5/2007 @ 5:13 pm
really, let’s talk like we really should: it is far past the time when the little green football dudes should have gotten out their assualt rifles and started ttaking down us leftie/libs. I’d love to see it, because I think the surprise would come when you found out how many of us can actually take you guys down. The nra doesn’t have our guns in their lists that they share with the FBI. We have them hidden, and we know who you guys are. Let’s have that rumble assholes.
Comment by Jimbo — 3/5/2007 @ 5:13 pm
retire05,
Where are the Snowdens of yesterday?
Comment by Moops — 3/5/2007 @ 5:16 pm
Should be yesteryear.
Comment by Moops — 3/5/2007 @ 5:18 pm
Moops:
Halfway there. The author gives a back handed compliment to the Rightwing, but still doesn’t acknowledge and condemn similar behavior on the Left.
Comment by gahrie — 3/5/2007 @ 5:20 pm
I don’t recall either one of you being in my fighting hole… chickenturds always raise the chickenhawk argument.
I also see a complete lack of evidence to support the claim that no one on this thread has failed to serve this country.
How about it Tom and Ronjazz?
Or was it just a joke?
Comment by jcrue — 3/5/2007 @ 5:20 pm
Boy,
You sure had to dig deep for many of those quotes. Many of them are quite old and many of them are from people who most Americans wouldn’t know are “leftists”- hell, many Americans wouldn’t even know some of those D-listers you referenced.
The deal with Coulter is that she routinely makes vile statements and she is a regular feature of CPAC meetings and often appears in the MSM to talk about her “ideas.”
You also might want to try doing some original research for yourself instead of relying on other right-wing sites to provide your “facts.” I also think that you should provide more than just a snippet of what was said. We need to see context. Of course, you wouldn’t really know about that stuff, would you, being trained as an attorney and not trained in the scientific method or in social research.
Comment by Redleg — 3/5/2007 @ 5:21 pm
I am afraid that with very few exceptions,the left will refuse to see what it is you are saying. Unfortunately most of them are not shocked by what other lefties say because they believe “their” politicians,commentators,whatever are correct……
Only the right is capable of “hate” speech according to the left.Because they are evil.
Comment by flicka47 — 3/5/2007 @ 5:22 pm
flicka47,
All those “leftist” comments added together still don’t equal the frequency and consistency of vileness of Ann Coulter’s comments. Jeebus, Coulter has written several books chock full of hateful, stereotyped b.s. about “liberals.” Add to that Limbaugh, Hannity, and the rest and you have a real load of hate speech. Now contrast that with the list from Patterico. Chris Rock? Jeebus.
By the way, you comments suggests a high degree of projection bias on your part. Get a clue, fool.
Comment by Redleg — 3/5/2007 @ 5:28 pm
oh dear, time to post again. I, for one, love the speech Coulter gave. I have grown so uded to being called unthinkable names by the left simply because I am alive and a conservative I thought it was natural to retaliate.
Actually, coulter never called anyone a faggot. She did mention that if she used the word she probably would have to enter rehab, as did the dude who used the n word and several others of the leftist persuati0on. The accusation is completly false, as usual for the left.
Richard
Comment by richard — 3/5/2007 @ 5:30 pm
“calling gwb a “ficticious president” (as mm did at the oscars a few years back), however stupid, does not directly insult or alienate 5-10% of the population.”
brandon just went and proved the point of my 1st post………
Some how that quote is not insulting or alienating to the 50% of the pop. that VOTED for Pres. Bush because brandon believes that Michael Moore was correct…..
nuff said!
Comment by flicka47 — 3/5/2007 @ 5:32 pm
Gahrie,
Read more carefully:
Comment by Moops — 3/5/2007 @ 5:33 pm
#153
I’m betting that while Mitt and Rudy are thankful you noticed, there are a couple of others who are a bit hurt you didn’t notice them…
There were a LOT of people on ballots who attended CPAC.
Sadly Ann was one of them, and thankfully McCain was not…
Comment by Scott Jacobs — 3/5/2007 @ 5:38 pm
she didn’t actually call him a faggot, it’s true. she did say that “faggot” was the only thing she could think of to say about him. edwards must be a pretty strong candidate if that is the case!
since when is stooping to the level of your opponent - especially when the person doing the “retaliating” has made millions writing books on the subject [see "slander" for more on this] - something that is defensible? seems pretty spineless to me, regardless of what you think of faggots.
Comment by brandon — 3/5/2007 @ 5:41 pm
Here’s a couple of examples from the “false charges of racism” category:
It’s not ’spic’ or ‘n*gger’ anymore. They [Republicans] say, ‘Let’s cut taxes.’ - Rep. Charles Rangel, 1994
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder040102.asp
And the NAACP’s James Byrd ad in 2000, where Byrd’s daughter says, “So when Gov. George W. Bush refused to sign hate crimes legislation, it was like my father was killed all over again.”
http://www.mediaresearch.org/BozellColumns/newscolumn/2000/col20001031.asp
(Two death sentences and one life imprisonment - what could a hate crimes law possibly add to that?)
And here’s three from the “Reductio ad Hitlerum” category, all from one Newsweek article:
On Thursday, Gore delivered a speech in which he said that the “administration works closely with a network of rapid responders, a group of digital brownshirts who work to pressure reporters and their editors and publishers and advertisers, and are quick to accuse them of undermining support for our troops.” George Soros, the Hungarian-born financier who has given milli