I despair for some of our lefty friends, many of whom have severe reading impairments.
Yesterday I catalogued just a few examples of leftist hate speech by prominent figures, and I said: “The point of this list is not to argue that leftists are more hateful than conservatives.” And got a flood of leftists saying, you haven’t proved leftists are more hateful than conservatives!
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.
And I got a flood of leftists saying: why are you defending Ann Coulter?
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.
And they did, blind to the counterargument I had already made.
And finally, I got the most reading-impaired lefty of them all, Rick Ellensburg himself, saying that, according to my post, he had argued “that no liberal of any kind has ever said anything offensive or wrong in the entire history of the world.”
Well, no, sir, you didn’t say that. I’ll grant you that. What did say was precisely what I quoted and debunked:
[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.
The bolded part — which was bolded in my original post, for the benefit of reading-impaired sock-puppeting lawyer/bloggers — was debunked quite neatly by my post.
And you, Glenn Greenwald, are too proud to admit that.
But it’s obvious to any sentient being not blinded by ideology.
If any liberal tried to make such a list of alleged conservative hate speech, I could easily cherry-pick and nitpick it until the cows come home, using the same lame arguments leftists used yesterday. This quote is old. This person is not a politician. Your source on this is a leftist web site and not the original recording. Blah blah blah. You think the same stupid arguments all you people made can’t be flipped around? Go ahead, try it.
Even this “Lean Left” post, cited by Greenwald as excellent evidence of righty hate speech, merely cites 13 things Ann Coulter said that boil down to: lefties don’t care about the good of the country. For example: “[Environmentalists] never intended for us to survive,” and “Liberals want mass starvation and human devastation.” Oh, that’s what you mean by hate speech, Glenn?? Because if it is, I can give you examples of the left saying things like that all day long. I was trying to play fair and stick to actual hate speech, like threats of death and violence, and naked racism. But if calling Republicans Nazi counts, you have opened the floodgates, my friends.
Commmenters, start giving us examples of Republicans being called evil. It’s all Glenn Greenwald-approved “hate speech” now.
By the way, Greenwald claims that one of my examples was a quote from Conan O’Brien. It wasn’t. It was a reference to Alec Baldwin’s appearance on Conan O’Brien. But Greenwald says I quoted “such towering political leaders on the left as Conan O’Brien, Chris Rock, Alec Baldwin, Alexander Cockburn, Dan Savage, and Louis Farrakhan.” (Well, and DNC Chairman Howard Dean, Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, top Democrat strategist James Carville, and former presidential candidate Jesse Jackson.)
But not Conan, Glenn. Not Conan.
Why is this mistake interesting? Because the Conan O’Brien mistake was made by the “Lean Left” blogger cited above, whom Greenwald had relied on to provide a defense. You see, Greenwald did what he has always done in the past when I have whacked him across the head. He relies on his army of sycophants to come up with any argument against my broadside, no matter how misleading — and he relies on those arguments without checking their accuracy.
This is who he is. And this is what he does.