The libs can dish it out, but they sure can't take it. I seem to recollect an abundance of vitriol during the eight years of George W. Bush. In fact, the treatment of Bush was far more over-the-top than anything that has been said about their dear savior, Barack Obama.
Is it my imagination, or was there a movie produced about the assassination of Bush, not to mention, a book? Didn't someone on Air America pretend to shoot Bush, including gun shot noises? These are just two of the examples of liberal rage.
But, now that they have their candidate in office, we are supposed to roll over and play dead. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. America is still a nation of free speech. Obama is working to change that, but he's not implemented his "silence the opposition" treatment yet.
Read from the American Thinker:
Liberals are not much on short term memory
Ethel C. Fenig
"Oh sure, death threats, bullets and even vile language and other stunts against opposition politicians are to be condemned as Democratic politicians, foaming at the mouth and brain, are demanding. The poor dears just can't take it when the garbage is hurled at them. But just a few short years ago, the Dems and other assorted liberals were silent as the dirt, the lies, the gleeful thoughts of the death of President George W. Bush (R) grew louder and louder from their core, not just the fringe.
Heck, all this happened more recently than a few short years ago, it is happening now. Sarah Palin anyone? And who uttered these threats? Why, the Democrats. The liberals. And they justified it by babbling freedom of speech, street theater not to mention their own moral superiority. And of course they cited President Barack Obama's (D) community organizing mentor, Saul Alinsky and his Rules for Radicals.
Alinsky begins this way:
'What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away. (snip)
Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do. (snip)
Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. "You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."
Rule 5: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It's hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage."
Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself.'
And the famous
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don't try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. "The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength."
Ps-s-st! Obama is still following these rules.
Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, apparently some opponents of Obamacare, deliberately or not, remembering the tactics used against Bush--and even themselves--decided to employ them. And boo! hoo!, proving they can dish it out but can't take it, the liberals are crying foul! As Victor Davis Hanson puts it
More Bottled Piety
'This week's talking point is the sudden danger of new right-wing violence, and the inflammatory push-back against health care. I'm sorry, but all this concern is a day late and a dollar short. The subtext is really one of class - right-wing radio talk-show hosts, Glenn Beck idiots, and crass tea-party yokels are foaming at the mouth and dangerous to progressives. In contrast, write a book in which you muse about killing George Bush, and its Knopf imprint proves it is merely sophisticated literary speculation; do a docudrama about killing George Bush, and it will win a Toronto film prize for its artistic value rather than shock from the liberal community about over-the-top discourse.
Socialism and totalitarianism are tough charges from the hard right, but they seem to me about as (or as not) over-the-top as Al Gore screaming 'digital brown-shirts' (snip)
When 3,000 were murdered in Manhattan, and Michael Moore suggested Bin Laden had wrongly targeted a blue state, I don't think that repulsive remark prevented liberal politicians from attending his anti-Bush film premiere.'
Indeed, Moore won an Academy Award from his fawning believers for another movie.
So libs, stop playing helpless victim. Acknowledge your nasty contribution to the low level of political discourse and then...grin and bear it while you behave yourself.
Sure you will."
Isn't it interesting that the libs follow Alinsky and his tactics? Isn't he the one who dedicated his book "Rules for Radicals" to Lucifer, otherwise known as Satan? Figures.