…in Madison. Glenn Reynolds has a pithy explanation:
Because to them, politics is sports and religion rolled into one.
I think that’s true as far as it goes, but it’s also an extremely intolerant religion, and the sports fans are like British football thugs.
[Late evening update]
“Why do “liberals” applaud awful behavior?”
Once you understand that they’re not really liberals, it becomes a little more clear.
Yeah, this business of shouting down people you don’t agree with gets old really fast. Haynes Johnson spoke with pride of his Wisconsin alma mater, in Johnson’s words an audience mainly of WW-II veterans on the GI Bill. who stood for some kind of principle and didn’t let Joe McCarthy talk. I guess that it was Joe McCarthy and the people engaged in the shouting were members of the Greatest Generation gives that action a certain street cred.
A later generation of Wisconsin students didn’t let the junior Senator from the Bay State (cough, Ted Kennedy, cough), although the film of that great moment in history doesn’t get much replay.
On the other side of this, I went to see a “Controversial Speakers” seminar given by Daniel Pipes. His papa Richard Pipes is well known for his writings on international relations. I guess Daniel Pipes is well-written too, but what he does is give his “inflamatory speech” of a few short remarks to the effect that, in his opinion, the lack of peace between Israel and the Palestinians is not the fault of Israel, and then he gets the full-blown protest treatment of campus women who haven’t even seen the inside of a mosque wearing head scarves in solidarity with their sisters who are subject to Sharia law or whatever.
Yeah, I got my dander up over the treatment of Daniel Pipes until I read somewhere on the right-wing Blogosphere that what he does is a kind of street theatre. Since he bears the label of “anti-Muslim” much as Tail Gunner Joe bore the label of “anti-Communist”, his mere appearance provokes these kinds of protests. So yes, free speech, and yes, the students at the U have a tradition for being uncouth slobs and think themselves to be upholding some Grand Tradition. But what Daniel Pipes is doing is the Speakers’ Bureau counterpart to Internet trolling. He knows his mere appearance will incite these stupid protests, and he keeps going from campus to campus showing how stupid the protestors are.
So what is Sarah Palin doing on the Capitol Square sticking up for Scott Walker. Free Speech, and maybe Governor Palin thinks some of Governor Walker will rub off on her and advance whatever political or public life ambitions she has. But just as the yahoos are going to turn out to shout down Joe McCarthy, turn out to shout down, oh yes, Ted Kennedy when he was shilling for the LBJ war policy, and certainly Daniel Pipes (he did get to speak, he just got the “Future Belongs to Me” treatment from Cabaret), and as certain as the day is long, Sarah Palin will get that kind of treatment too.
So, what does this all prove, if anything?
“So, what does this all prove, if anything?”
That people have the right to engage in warfare.
That doesn’t mean that war is good, but that sometimes various “kinds” of warfare could be rationally deemed necessary- and in those cases it might be good.
But if people are going to engage in warfare they should be expected to “give a rational reason” for their choice to use force.
A rational reason would not be simply that I dislike someone. Or they on the blue team and I am on the red team.
Whether war involves nuclear missile or passive resistance, it is evil if it’s merely because they have purple skin or they are on the blue team.
So we back to the point- if dems are the good guys- they need to explain themselves.
“So, what does this all prove, if anything?”
I guess that Paul doesn’t get that whole free speech thing. These thugs think they win if they can shout down a speaker. To be blasé about this abuse of a fundamental right strikes me as…….un-American.
Oh, part of a rational reason would indicate some kind “exit strategy” or “terms of surrender”- what conditions must be met or realized to end the war.
we drew green scarves from the barrel, we must fight those who drew the purple scarves from the barrel.
Yes, I don’t get that whole free speech thing.
This business of enlightened Madison and enlightened UW communities shouting people down has been going on for at least 3 generations if not more. It’s stupid, it’s un-democratic, but they do that around here. The best response is to simply ignore it. OK, I am making a mockery of the First Amendment to suggest that. Should the Governor call out the Guard and start breaking heads? People are stupid and what level of counter-coersion do you have in mind to make them un-stupid?
What are you going to do to reclaim the right of free speech. Call people thugs? Thugs, thugs, and more thugs we say. That is really persuasive. Kinda the right-wing version of those stupid left wing bumper stickers you used to see all across Madison. “Out of Iraq, NOW!” Yes, if that NOW in all caps doesn’t make the point, that exclamation point will really teach em.
What I am also trying to say is that Sarah Palin is engaging in a kind of street theatre to face the thugs and try and speak over that noise. Yes, free speech, but it is a kind of political calculation on her part to do that. Kind of like what Daniel Pipes does.
What I am also trying to say is that Sarah Palin is engaging in a kind of street theatre to face the thugs and try and speak over that noise. Yes, free speech, but it is a kind of political calculation on her part to do that.
Yeah, the bitch deserved it. Did you see the way she was dressed? If she didn’t want me to rape her, why’d she dress that way, huh? It’s her fault!
“So, what does this all prove, if anything?”
It proves that speakers, whatever the topics of their speeches may be, speak where they are invited to speak by people who want to hear what they have to say.
Nobody is asking that heads be broken.
As I’ve said before: the time for reasoned discourse is past in America. People have solidified into ideological hardpoints and no amount of rhetorical ammunition can blast them out. From now on, it’s Might Makes Right.
“What I am also trying to say is that Sarah Palin is engaging in a kind of street theatre to face the thugs and try and speak over that noise. Yes, free speech, but it is a kind of political calculation on her part to do that. Kind of like what Daniel Pipes does.”
I don’t think Palin speaks in public just to piss off Democrats.
“So, what does this all prove, if anything?”
It clearly shows the contrast in how the Democrats want the Tea Party to protest and how the Democrats themselves protest. The Tea Party gets condemned for hypothetical violence that has the potential to happen in the future when the union protests over the last several months have shown real violence. Also real racism. Just listen to what liberals shout at black Tea Partiers.
The new civility of double fist pumping the middle finger while yelling misogynistic and racist slurs with some colorful metaphors mixed in.
It is patriotic to protest especially when the protesters boo during the national anthem.
It might be worth mentioning that the abusive shouts and gestures were not for Sarah Palin alone.
As I’ve said before: the time for reasoned discourse is past in America. People have solidified into ideological hardpoints and no amount of rhetorical ammunition can blast them out. From now on, it’s Might Makes Right.
Reality will succeed where rhetoric fails. Most people already don’t buy that rich people are the ones holding us back.
McGehee, we are the one’s we’ve been waiting for.
What is curious is the amount of projection by the left. It is a form of madness that leaves reason. The tea party, with it’s happy clean up after themselves manners are called violent racists. Actual violent racists OTOH…
Shouldn’t the media be denounced for not denouncing this? How can something so blatant continue as if it weren’t? This isn’t a gray area.
Corruption has become the air we breath and goes unnoticed. Then some lefty will pull their head out of the bubble for a moment and speak truth… but the moment passes.
I strongly supported the right of the Nazis to march through Skokie (home then to many Holocaust survivors). So did the ACLU. Do you? If so, how do you feel about yelling in counter-protest when Nazis start speaking (presuming it is an anti-American anti-Semitic racist hateful message .) Is it wrong?
I don’t think Sarah Palin is a Nazi or anything like one — that’s not my point. My point is that if you strongly believe in free speech, the code of behavior you want those idiots in Madison to follow should also extend to yourself when confronted with something you don’t like. Does it? For me it does — the counter-protesters are idiots. If for you it doesn’t, cut the protesters some slack — perhaps they do see Palin as a Nazi (or actually, as a Slaver — see this: http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/04/the_tea_partys_deficit-spending_trojan_horse.html (I don’t read it, I don’t agree with it, but it was sent to me by a very sincere (and perfectly nice) liberal friend).
And finally: As always, the chief intellectual outrage here is talk about “liberals” (or “Muslims”) as if they were one big homogeneous group. I’m guilty of it too, but it is is stupid. Rand, the answer to your question is that “Liberals” do not uniformly applaud such behavior either, and I really doubt that those who do constitute more than a tiny percent of the total. Which resembles my arguments regarding Muslims….
I don’t know anyone who favors shouting down anyone, who isn’t a leftist. And I think that you dramatically underestimate the numbers, for both Muslims and leftists.
I think lots of non-leftists would happily shout down Nazis. A shorter version of my previous comment: you call them Nazis (brownshirts) but they think “you guys” are Nazis too, hence all the yelling.
Here’s a non-Nazi example: If you encountered a group from the Westboro Baptist Church which was spewing hatred about a specific US serviceman who had lost his life for his country in combat, how far away from his funeral would the Church group have to be for you to not want to shout down them down? Is this a trick question because you would never want to shout them down?
At the Skokie Nazi march, many non-Leftists DID shout down the Nazis (and had nary a kind word for the ACLU), or so I recall.
What are you talking about? Non-Leftists are conditioned from birth to keep their mouths shut when they hear the ubiquitous Leftwing Orthodoxy from parents, teachers, broadcast media, politicians, etc. Your grandstanding is awkward and embarrassing.
Actually bob, the question posed at the end of Rand’s link was: When HAVE conservatives done this? Do they show up en masse at public rallies to keep Bernie Sanders or Michael Moore from speaking? The answer is No. And you respond with Nazis? To suspend sentience momentarily, what would these Nazi counter-protesters be saying? Or does that not matter; they’re using a bullhorn, which is wrong.
Is this a trick question because you would never want to shout them down?
It’s not a trick question. It’s just a (typically) weak attempt to redirect to “shouting down” as a salient point, versus WHAT THE CONTENT IS.
The term “Jihadist” fits and makes use of self-identification of the more confrontational.
It is also easier for the less discerning to grasp who, exactly, one might be talking about.
“I’m at war with anyone who considers themselves to be at war with me.”
versus
“I’m at war with the militant strains of Islam.”
There are a whole lot of people who seem incapable of recognizing that those two statements can be said by someone who means exactly the same thing in both cases. It really is much easier if we follow along with our inclinations to label everything and just make a label to fit. Even if you have to explain what the hell “Jihadist” means because it’s been used in some other fashion elsewhere.
Even just the self-identifying opponents are a daunting task.
I agree shouting people down is wrong. I admit to feeling torn about it, if I was in the presence of horrible evil.
I’m asking if you agree that shouting someone down is wrong even if they are saying something which you think is truly vile. I think a certain portion of non-Leftists think that shouting down evil is praiseworthy, and I’m asking if you, the reader, is one of them.
I do not think Sarah Palin is evil, but if I thought she was evil, I would still not shout her down – I would just feel more torn about it. We might understand some of the Madison protesters (who are idiots) better if we imagine that they think Palin is actually quite evil.
Curt, I’m not promoting moral relativism, I’m promoting empathy.
Too may toe, Toe mah toe
I do not think Sarah Palin is evil, but if I thought she was evil, I would still not shout her down – I would just feel more torn about it.
Illuminating. Just curious, would what the evil is actually SAYING cause you to THINK at all? Or is feeling torn about the extent of it.
Indeed, he wants to shout down (a standard feature of the Left which he seems to have just admitted to) “evil” people, but is torn by empathy on the other side — empathy for “evil” people (???).
I feel like I’m inspecting the inside of an alien piece of technology. It’s fascinating and disturbing all at once.
It’s fascinating and disturbing all at once.
Forensics usually is.
No. I’m admitting that if I encountered actual Nazis (like the kind who marched in Skokie) or if I encountered the Westboro Baptist Church claiming the crap they claim, I’d be tempted to shout them down. I wouldn’t, but I’d be tempted. Would you shout them down? Would you be tempted?
===
As for this: “When HAVE conservatives done this? Do they show up en masse at public rallies to keep Bernie Sanders or Michael Moore from speaking?”
Why did the liberal at the tea party rally get her head stomped on? Here’s a funnier example: there is a group called Protest Warrior. You’d like them – they infiltrated anti-Iraq War protests with sarcastic signs. You can visit their website to see examples. Here’s a quote from Wikipedia — don’t miss the funny yet sad story I underlined at the end:
The group’s primary method of activism was crashing liberal events, chiefly anti-war protest marches and counter-demonstrating within their ranks. For instance, Protest Warriors attended rallies against Halliburton, Caterpillar Inc., Israel, and U.S. President George W. Bush, displaying support for these entities. When doing so, the Protest Warriors carried large signs often designed to appear similar to those held by the participants, enabling them to mingle until observers were close enough to read their signs’ fine-print. At least once this backfired. In August 2005, counter-protesters supporting George W. Bush during a protest in Crawford, Texas failed to notice the sarcasm and tore up some of the Protest Warriors’ signs.
Bob-1 Says:
“We might understand some of the Madison protesters (who are idiots) better if we imagine that they think Palin is actually quite evil.”
Without a doubt they have de-humanized Palin and thus excuse their behavior against her. It is worse than the birther nonsense.
Not sure why the Nazi had to be brought into this but if we want to go there, there is a strong contingent of marxists, socialists, and communists acting in coordination with the Democrat party in organizing protests.
No one wants to take away the right of the Democrats and their socialist allies to protest. It would be nice if they stopped lecturing people on civility though.
“Why did the liberal at the tea party rally get her head stomped on?”
If you watch the videos, her behavior wasn’t exactly exemplary. Stepping on her was over the line but I am not sure why anyone would excuse her behavior.
The secret service would have been much more harsh in the event that someone tried to do the same thing to Obama.
Wodun,
I agree with your first paragraph.
The answer to your second paragraph is two fold: Rand brought up the Nazis first (“brownshirts”), but less trivially, the Nazi march in Skokie was my introduction to free speech — I couldn’t understand why my Jewish grandparents were so vehemently against the march when they had always seemed like such tolerant advocates of civil liberties. They saw it as an opportunity to teach me about the Holocaust, I saw it as an opportunity to assert my love for freedom.
The answer to your third paragraph is that liberals who think the Madison folks are idiots can promote civility without being hypocrites. Treating all Democrats or Socialists as a homogeneous group is a mistake, as I know you know.
The head wasn’t “stomped on.” As I understand it, it was held down with a foot. Not that this (isolated) incident has anything to do with shouting people down. And did the Protest Warriors shout anyone down or prevent them from being heard? Or is this just another red herring and attempt to change the subject?
You needn’t answer that last question. It was rhetorical.
Would you shout them down?
No bob. And neither would you. You’d cover your ears and chant “na, na, na”.
Bob-1: “I strongly support–”
Me: (Zzzzz…)
Bob-1: blah blah blah something that happened in the 1970s blah blah blah
Me: (Zzzzzz….)
Postscript: I just checked, and my memory betrayed me: the Nazis never marched in Skokie in the end. I suppose I can vividly imagine the counter-protests because as a youngster, I knew so many people (from out-of-state, no less) who were ready to go counter-protest.
No and no.
Bob, I wouldn’t drown out Nazis or the “God-Hates-X” people in counter-protest. I consider that a reward for bad behavior. And why are you comparing Palin to Nazis anyway? There’s no legitimate reason to make the comparison.
Bob-1: blah blah blah Read thing thing a Friend™ sent me blah blah blah Nazis! blah blah blah NO U blah blah blah
Me: Zzzz… wha–? Did I miss something? Oh. Zzzz…
Someone wake me up when Bob-1 realizes Barney Miller was cancelled ages ago.
Rand, regardless of the significance of the event, she was stomped on. Stomping did occur. Watch the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txU55iFG9UA
Karl, I’m not comparing Palin to a Nazi. I’m trying to imagine the mindset of the Madison protesters. I thought I made it pretty clear that I don’t think she is evil in any way, let alone like a Nazi.
Rand, regardless of the significance of the event, she was stomped on. Stomping did occur.
And regardless of whether she was stomped on, it is a completely spurious comment and pathetic attempt to change the subject. Unless she was stomped on after being shouted down by an organized crowd. And not even then, really.
Someone wake me up when Bob-1 realizes Barney Miller was cancelled ages ago.
Not yet Andrea, apparently he’s got his netflix subscription and thinks it is still on.
Rand, you are right that it was a bad example. I’m sorry you are questioning my motives. Goodbye.
I didn’t say anything about your motives (I’m not a mind reader). I was simply noting your behavior (changing the subject, presumably because you had no actual response to the point of the post).
Back about the time of the Skokie thing, I was of the opinion the Nazis and Klansmen and the like, should be met with laughter (at, not with). I mean seriously, what is more hilarious than some identity-group loser who takes himself seriously precisely because nobody else will?
And when you gather a bunch of them together, there should be loudspeakers playing “Send in the Clowns.”
….um, if we can’t shout them down is it okay to sing them down?
I am sure that the unionistas and Democrats in large numbers do think of Palin as the equivalent of a Nazi but they are wrong. There is nothing about Palin or the Tea Party that remotely resembles the Nazi.
Nazi would be tossed out of any Tea Party event. That type of ideology is not accepted or supported.
Contrast with socialists, which might not be the entire Democrat party, but their ideology is supported and accepted.
The 2012 campaign will be the ugliest election campaign ever.
Naziism is entirely anathema to what the Tea Party is about. The Tea Party is about limited power, small government. Naziism is about government powerful enough to command industry to fulfill the governments agenda (sound familliar?) be that agenda constitute wiping out a certain ethnic group or wiping out wealth, private enterprise, and American liberty in the guise of environmentalism. Both agendas fall within the platform of National Socialism, but what the Tea Party stands for is entirely the opposite of both.