Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Palin stops at Chick-fil-A, left responds with misogyny and sexism

Palin stops at Chick-fil-A, left responds with misogyny and sexism

Thank you, Sarah, for bringing out the best in them again.

My post earlier today, Sarah Palin visits Chick-fil-A, civility and new tone ensue on Twitter, has generated a fair bit of attention.

The tweets highlighted in the post were not even the worst of them. As has become typical when Palin is attacked from the left, the attacks quickly become mysogynistic, sexualized, and sexist, with the “C” word liberally thrown in by women as well as men.

Here are some more samples of the sea of profanity and vitriol, so you realize (which you already do, I know), we are dealing with:


DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

It’s is horrifying to read these comments. Civility??? Guess that is a term liberals know nothing about. Not only horrifying but downright embarrassing. Guess it is idiots like that that cause the PR person for Chik-fil-A to have a heart attach. So sad….

    Casey in reply to tofubamboo. | July 29, 2012 at 1:02 am

    They are civil. You just have to follow the logic:
    -I am a liberal (or) progressive.
    -I am by definition a tolerant, open-minded individual
    -Therefore anyone who disagrees with me must be an intolerant, close-minded hater
    -Ergo they are evil slime, deserving an evil fate.

    It’s really quite simple, once you break the code. I don’t get too fussed, because I’ve seen conservatives work the same “logic” in reverse.

listingstarboard | July 28, 2012 at 6:10 pm

Interesting that quite a few of these cretins are from L.A. Frightening to read the blind irrational hatred that these subhumans have for a decent Christian patriotic woman like Sarah. And one of them has a daughter at St. Johns University. I can’t imagine my daughter reading something like that woman wrote.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to listingstarboard. | July 28, 2012 at 6:41 pm

    That’s California for you. I just moved from that once-magnificent, now-thrid-world-cesspool after living there my entire life.

    Most of the posts seem to be from queers. California is home-base for the most militant homos in the country. They are as foul or even more foul in their behaviors as they are in their words.

If only there were more of them she could be the most powerful person in the world, living in the fevered brains of all those idiots and controlling their thoughts that way.

Tactical suggestion: If we could talk her into scheduling a few public appearances in California on election day she would take so many lefties out of their games the GOP might take back a bunch of seats.

Donald Douglas | July 28, 2012 at 6:23 pm

It’s just what they do. Best thing is to shine a light on it. Great job, William. Linked: “Sarah Palin Supports Chick-fil-A — Progressives Respond With Vile Misogynist Attacks: ‘C*nt-fil-A'”.

Keep it up!

    turfmonster in reply to Donald Douglas. | July 28, 2012 at 8:33 pm

    So true. This is the best way of handling this situation: Put these people in the spotlight and then ask the public at large whether they want these folks having a say in governing at any level.

    If they’re going to be this mean and nasty to public figures with whom they disagree, what’s stopping them from being so to people who rely on Social Security? Or Medicare/Medicaid? Or anything else?

      M-GoBlue in reply to turfmonster. | August 1, 2012 at 1:36 pm

      I’m curious to know who you general “they” applies to? If by they you mean liberals that’s an extreme generalization. I don’t think anyone in their right political mind would want someone to represent them who finds this as an appropriate way to respond to this situation. These particular people can’t be used to define all liberals and their ability to govern.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to Donald Douglas. | July 28, 2012 at 10:01 pm

    If this is what they mean by “tolerance”…

    … then, I want NONE of it!

The biggest single tragedy of the last 60-70 years is the loss of the concept of “fighting words”. When my father was young comments like this would have been a prelude to a fight. How many of these lovely, tolerant people would dare to say these things about Governor Palin if they knew that she, or Todd would rearrange their face?

The loss of fighting words has resulted in all the other stupid crap we face.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to Peter6067. | July 28, 2012 at 7:01 pm

    It would be fun to try an experiment. To walk up to some of these women in person and curse them for no good reason. I am not talking about using any sexual obscenities, no words you couldn’t use to say on TV but just some good old fashioned cursing. May your eyeballs shrivel up, your fingers freeze to your keyboard and your feet turn into cement blocks.

    My guess is they would first be stunned and then deeply hurt. Many of them seem to live in a world were no one ever disagrees with them to their face and everyone acts nice. On Twitter they form part of an irresponsible pack. I suspect none of it is quite real to them unless they are tweeting someone who is part of one of their juvenile cliques.

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to Peter6067. | July 28, 2012 at 7:26 pm

    The people who killed the concept of “fighting words” are the same ultra-wussies that got their asses beaten.

    Now, we have a degrading society. Where once there were consequences to such speech, now it just builds up and comes out in other, more negative ways.

    But Beware, Friends: The next step in the evolution of ‘speech’ is the adoption of hate speech laws. Sadly, some right of center will go along with it, initially. Soon, though we’ll end up like Canada and the UK, where certain, officially forbidden speech will get you criminally prosecuted. Keep the Progressocrat Camel’s nose from under our tent!

    Or we’ll get THIS: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/uk-pub-singer-arrested-for-singing-kung-fu-fighting-in-earshot-of-chinese-pair/

    BossMedic in reply to Peter6067. | July 28, 2012 at 11:15 pm

    We probably won’t ever agree on too much, but I agree with you here. When I was growing up if someone offended you, you could shut up and take it, or go outside. you learned to either back up what you said, or keep your mouth shut. Nowadays, with social media and the passification of our society (Thanks to my side of the political spectrum for the most part) words often don’t have consequences. People don’t take responsibility for what they say and often times, what they do. It’s a sad state of affairs.

NC Mountain Girl | July 28, 2012 at 6:28 pm

Clip on X Thotep’s icon and it’s clear he trolls for attention the same way a 13 year old boy will cut loose with a fart during Sunday’s sermon. What amazes me is the people who tweet this venom under their own names! Maybe someone should acquaint the mothers and grandmothers with these sorry souls with the Joys of Twitter – Assuming, of course, that they have parents. I suspect some of them were whelped by a copperhead.

These little expositions are actually good.

“Know your enemy” was a famous saying in WWII. And…make no mistake…these people are the enemy of good, rational people of whatever persuasion.

Some of them…if they could get away with it…would burn your family alive and laugh at them for writhing.

    filmstocker in reply to Ragspierre. | July 28, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    Yeesh. No wonder everyone on this forum agrees with each other. It won’t let me answer your question on the Chck-fil-a forum. I’m guessing I’m being blocked? Blocked for disagreeing, that would be pretty low and cowardly. I’m hoping that’s not the case and it’s just a computer error.

    Anywho, you asked for links about the history of same sex unions, doubting my assertion that recognizing such unions is not entirely new in the history of the world.

    Voila:
    Heres the book by Yale historian John Boswell:

    It’s a classic in the field:
    http://www.amazon.com/Same-Sex-Unions-Premodern-Europe-Boswell/dp/0679751645/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1343518118&sr=8-4&keywords=boswell+john

    Here’s an article giving a brief outline of such unions:
    http://www.randomhistory.com/history-of-gay-marriage.html

    And this wikipedia entry gives an interesting overview with many links at the bottom for more sources:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_same-sex_unions

    this one is especially interesting:
    http://www.gaychristian101.com/Gay-Marriage.html

    “a long tradition of same sex marriage indicates that the Christian attitude toward same sex unions may not always have been as “straight” as is now suggested. A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St. Catherine’s monastery on Mt. Sinai. It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman pronubus (best man) overseeing what in a standard Roman icon would be the wedding of a husband and wife. In the icon, Christ is the pronubus. Only one thing is unusual. The husband and wife are in fact two men.”

    That will get you started but there are literally thousands of sources which document the history of same sex unions, both on and off line, so if it’s an area of genuine interest, keep reading. It’s fascinating history.

    Anyway, I posted all these on the other board. I trust I haven’t been banned from this site just for disagreeing. That would be too cowardly and pathetic for words.

So great to see the new civility coming from the Left.

Sickening.
I don’t tweet much, because I kind of don’t see the point of it, but I’d never use this kind of vile language.

The Party of Tolerance proves their intolerance and hatred once again! I bet they watch Bill Maher and Louis C.K. religiously.

Again, sickening.

    Tamminator in reply to Tamminator. | July 28, 2012 at 6:50 pm

    Oh, and I wrote on another post that there were no Chik-fil-a’s in Minnesota. I just found that there are 2.

    I’m gonna get me a chicken sandwich tomorrow! I’ve heard they are scrumptious.

      Tam, you’ll have to wait until Monday; the slave-driving Xtianist homophobe that runs Chick-Fil-A closes all his restaurants on Sunday so his employees can spend time with their families or even attend church.

        Tamminator in reply to SDN. | July 29, 2012 at 10:33 am

        Ha! That’s right, SDN. Thanks for the reminder. I’d have been bummed driving 10 miles only to find out they are closed.
        Lunch Monday, then!

Midwest Rhino | July 28, 2012 at 6:51 pm

A problem is that there is a large base that keep up with “reality TV”, but get their news from Leno, Stewart and Maher. If those guys say Bachmann is an idiot, and she thinks everyone from the middle east is a terrorist, they swallow it whole.

But worse is they get vocal about it, and emote on public media like in an Orwellian two minutes of hate.

“A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.” Orwell 1984

Indeed … they switch from Bush to Palin to Bachmann, I suppose Romney is next, though there seems to be a special passion against tea party conservatives.

But what an incredible woman Palin is. Humble beginnings, takes on Republicans in Alaska, becomes governor, becomes a national spokesman for what so many believe, without selling out. With everyone digging through her trash and every audio tape for hints of a mistake, she emerges victorious. Remarkable.

Why aren’t they attacking Tom Menino for supporting a hate group that wants to execute homosexuals for being homosexual?

Because they are stupid. And liars.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to EBL. | July 28, 2012 at 7:20 pm

    Racism is a big part of why they don’t take Islam’s language proscribing homosexuality serious. For all the diversity talk many have no true respect for members of other cultures. They really don’t think anyone coming from a backwards region will ever be able to act on a threat against their far more civilized world.

      More like cowardice; Christians don’t cut people’s heads off or throw acid on them when offended.

      BossMedic in reply to NC Mountain Girl. | July 28, 2012 at 7:42 pm

      I don’t know if I agree with that. The Quran does have some things to say about homosexuality, as does the Bible, but the difference in America is that it’s folks claiming to be Christian that ae the loudest when condemning it. Christians are the ones out there picketing and carrying hateful signs and such. While it’s true that gays have it alot worse in other countries, I think that’s whee the difference lies, at least in America. Here in Afghanistan, I talked to an interpreter a few weeks ago that asked me if it was legal in the States to shoot someone if they were openly gay. Apparently that sort of thing is ok here. He says he plans to go America to live in the next few years. He picked California because of the beaches and the ocean. I had to laugh.

        Juba Doobai! in reply to BossMedic. | July 28, 2012 at 8:46 pm

        The difference is, in America, it is not the practice of Christians to kill homosexuals. We just do all that we can to combat their agenda. If someone kills a guy for being homosexual, we condemn it. The Koran does more than say a few things about homosexuality. It offers a homosexual pedophilia paradise even as it advocates the slaughter of people who engage in the behavior. Meanwhile, homosexuality is rampant in Islamic societies, more so than in America because women are disdained as being fit only for childbearing while men and boys are for sexual pleasure. There is a reason why birds fly with only one wing in Kandahar.

        Crawford in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 6:11 pm

        “Christians are the ones out there picketing and carrying hateful signs and such.”

        Are you referring to the left’s stalking horses known as the “Westboro Baptist Church”? They’re all registered Democrats, and your average conservative wouldn’t cross the road to urinate on them if they were on fire.

VetHusbandFather | July 28, 2012 at 7:03 pm

So she’s such an awful bigot because she likes Chik-fil-a and the owner of Chik-fil-A doesn’t agree with gay marriage? So does it make her a ‘tolerant’ person if she uses Microsoft products and Gates and Ballmer support gay marriage? The liberals are onto something here… I bet she’s also secretly a huge supporter of the Communist Government in China since she likes to use products that were made in China!

She lives in their heads; RENT FREE.

    LukeHandCool in reply to jakee308. | July 28, 2012 at 7:28 pm

    Aren’t we a bit overdue for a new academic study out from social science professors at Berkeley or some other such place puporting to show conservatives as nasty and intolerant?

    Haven’t seen one in a while.

It’s hard to take someone seriously when they name call like that, even if I think their hearts are in the right place. I’ll come right out and say that I despise everything about Sarah Palin’s politics. I don’t know her as a person so I can’t really make that judgement call. I did try to read “Going Rogue”, but it smacked of Mein Kampf sans all the world domination and anti semitism stuff… the whiny, blame the liberals, part I mean… conservatives, I figured I’d come and represent the more “Grown up” liberal types and engage you guys in adult type discussion. I saw the dude a few posts back referred to homosexuals as “queers” and “militant homos” and recieved no rebuke from the rest of you, but the vulgarity, when directed at Palin, was wrong and somehow typified Liberals everywhere? Can someone explain that one to me?

And while we’re on the topic, I’d like to pose this question. As we cherry pick the bible for things we get outraged about these days, what makes being gay any more of a sin than getting a tattoo? I only ask that specifically because it’s mentioned four verses after the supposed “no homo” verse in Leviticus.

And why also, if America is a nation of no official religion, and one where the ORIGINAL motto was “Out of Many, One” then why is it that Lawmakers are lauded for making laws that they admit are inspired by their religious beliefs (DOMA, anti-abortion laws, etc.), when the constitution calls for the seperation of churc and state, and our founding fathers made it quite clear what that meant.

I know that sometimes we tend to look the other way when our side is making laws that the Constitution might disagree with, but I’d like to get your take on the subject of laws based on religion, which is what laws forbidding homosexuals from marrying their partners are. My opinion is that any such law is unconstitutional.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to BossMedic. | July 28, 2012 at 9:04 pm

    You’re a professed Communist, so you don’t understand how to debate because the people on your side believe nasty verbal attacks constitute debate. It does not. It just demonstrates that you all have no idea how to carry on a rational exchange of ideas. The end result is that no one think your thought farts are worthy of response. There are ways to avoid that around here and on the Conservative web, as a whole.

    Let me give you a crash course in debate strategy: don’t begin with invective, be rational, use logic, avoid demonization, make sure your utterances are verifiable (aka, factual), develop a proper debate vocabulary so that your worn and tired tropes and memes don’t seem so worn and tired, make sure and be nice and polite when you’re being insulting (it will warm the cockles of people’s hearts to have to deal with the not so obvious).

    Okay, I don’t want to confuse you by giving you more new ideas than you can digest. Have a nice day.

      Bravo Juba Doobai! <—- Troll-Slayer Extraordinaire!

      BossMedic in reply to Juba Doobai!. | July 28, 2012 at 10:16 pm

      Wow. So first you call me a gay atheist, and I scroll up a bit and you say that I’m a professed communist. I’d like to know when I ever said anything about communism, or gave you that idea. Do you even know what a communist is?

      So basically what you’re saying here, is that instead of discussing a topic like an adult, you’re going to call me names and then STILL attempt to take the moral high ground AND the intellectual high ground as well? That’s a pretty interesting strategy.

      As for trolling, I’m not. I came here to talk to people with different ideas. See, debating is whee two people come together for a discussion who have different opinions. So here on this board are a bunch of people who have conservative beliefs. Your discussions aren’t debate. You’re conversing with like minded people and reinforcing your own positions. When you inject different opinions into the discussion it becomes a debate. I’m trying to espouse my views, and you’re doing likewise.

      Also, much like not all conservatives behave a certain way, not all liberals do either. You saying so is what we call stereotyping. It would be better for the conversation if you didn’t sink to that level. I’m not here to name call or troll. I’m here to talk about our various positions on issues as adults.

        CalMark in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 1:59 am

        If you despise us so much, what are you doing here?

        More to the point: are you a real human being who pathetically spends hours trolling hate and discontent at a site filled with people he despises? Or are you one of Obama’s bought-and-paid-for “fake people by committee?”

        P.S. A word to the wise, Mr. Expert on Everything. Brevity is the soul of wit. And you are anything but brief. Take that any way you like it.

        Ragspierre in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 11:10 am

        OK, I’ll accept that you are not trolling, since you show no evidence of that. (Trolling has a definition…like “marriage”…HEH!).

        You sort of tried to pose some debatable ideas, I enjoy debate, so…

        Name a law that is not based in moral belief. Even some of the gnat-straining regulatory laws are derivative of some moral position.

        One does not have be religious…or of a certain religion…to oppose a fundamental corruption of a cultural norm.

        Such terms as “queer” have only recently…and very selectively…been denoted to be “hateful”. Some of us resist the whole notion of “politically correct” speech codes, and do so with elan.

    votermom in reply to BossMedic. | July 28, 2012 at 9:12 pm

    I’ll come right out and say that I despise everything about Sarah Palin’s politics.

    So you despise reform and support bribery and corruption in government? You support big oil buying politicians?

    I have to agree with you on one point, the term “queer” as in “WE’RE HERE, WE’RE QUEER, GET USED TO IT” is not adult-like behavior.

      BossMedic in reply to syn. | July 28, 2012 at 11:00 pm

      True Story. That whole thing is a response though. Gay people are a persecuted minority but their condition isn’t the same as blacks or Jews or some ethnicity because they come from all ethnicities. Their only commonality is the fact that they are attracted sexually to the same sex.

      Are there gays that shove their sexuality in your face and act badly? Sure there are. And like anyone else who does that, they make things worse for those that don’t. But the fact is that they deserve the same protections and freedoms under the law as eveyone else. I’m not saying that any religious institution should agree with them or even be obligated to support them. I am saying that if we are to have a secular government that works for ALL of our citizens, then the rules need to be the same for everyone. And if marriage is something that the government is going to say is a legal and binding contract between two consenting adults, then we cannot make laws that say only some adults can enter into that contract. As a government institution, marriage deals with child custody, property rights, etc. Gay couples ought to have the same rights in that regard as straight couples. My wife and I got married in a courtroom by a judge. But our marriage is legally the same as one conducted in a church, and recognized just the same. Marriage is no longer a soley religious institution. If it were, this wouldn’t even be an issue.

        Ragspierre in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 11:14 am

        “Gay people are a persecuted minority…”

        No they are not. They are, in fact, a protected class.

        Cripes! If you are just going to say silly crap, you can’t expect to last long in a “debate” here.

        legacyrepublican in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 2:09 pm

        No BossMedic, marriage is an institution designed around a biological reality that promotes the preservation of the species.

        The argument that same sex marriage is about equality is BS!

        Marriage in reality is a marriage of unequals, male and female, not male and male or female and female. There is no equality in marriage. My wife bears children for nine months, I don’t. I don’t have a monthly reminder of what sex I am. I don’t nurse my children with my breasts. I have to shave my face, my wife doesn’t. My wife doesn’t have to worry about prostate cancer. My wife, because she is female, is likely to outlive me by a considerable time.

        Marriage is a social convention based on a biological reality that monogamy serves our species well because we were made both male and female.

        Monogamy, between a male and female, promotes a healthier population. The children raised by monogamous parents are better protected, educated, and more successful in life. Disease transmitted by indiscriminate sexual practices decrease dramatically. The list goes on.

        Same sex marriage does nothing to protect the species biologically. In fact, promoting it and extolling its virtues does in fact bring the greatest harm to the species.

        Same sex marriage is an attempt to mainstream a homosexuals lust looking for partners for unregulated sex.

        Just look at uncensored photos of a gay pride parade in San Francisco to see just how bad it will be. And don’t forget when you view them that patient 0 who spread the AIDs virus knew he was sick and didn’t care whom he infected just as long as he could get his sexual thrill.

        Blaming President Reagan is just a smoke screen to keep us from disusing the ethics and morality of how this one homosexual man with his unbridled lust spread an awful disease.

        Now multiply and increase this modern relativistic morality and ethic by promulgating same sex marriage as safe and wholesome, and you have released a biological time bomb that will ravage our society with unheralded ills and evils that will make aids and Aurora, CO, look like the good ole days of good health and sanity.

        Crawford in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 6:17 pm

        “Gay people are a persecuted minority…”

        I submit that you have no concept of “persecution” if you truly believe this.

    SmokeVanThorn in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 9:20 am

    BossMedic also believes that laws against theft and murder are unconstitutional – Ten Commandments and all that.

    punfundit in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 11:03 am

    Funny… how a leftist will decry a lack of outrage from his/her/its ideological opponents but not decry the same from his/her/its own. Oh sure, you can come here and write “I’m the adult in the room,” but point us to *your* outrage against your own. Show us you mean what you post. I have no reason to believe you whatsoever. I keep it simple: I assume you are a two-faced lying hypocrite. (Yeah, go ahead and censure me for being mean and uncivil. Go ahead, you know you want to.)

    Funny… because the left learned a valuable tactic from Saul Alinsky (whom I admire despite his horrific goals), which in so many words teaches you to paint your opponents into a corner by using their morality against them, and point it out. (Which then leaves the left free to employ any method it chooses because the moral outrage is directed against the opposition.)

    Which is exactly what you’re doing here. So you try to censure at the social level. Very clever. That censure becomes a form of socially enforced censorship. Very clever indeed. In this way you can reserve political censorship for the most dangerous voices of opposition. Yes, we’ve noticed that too.

    The point here is that the left will claim in broad daylight and on national television that they are the voices of tolerance, of peace, of love, of acceptance. And because the dinosaur media agrees with their ideology, they can say such things without fear of serious challenge. And as George Lackoff… rhymes with… taught, repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth.

    So the left claims to be the arbiters of tolerance and love, but then we see that isn’t the case at all. These posts by Professor Jacobson and so many others in the New Media set out to demonstrate the two-faced nature of the left. And they are evidently profoundly effective, because the goose-stepping thought police always show up.

    So by “funny” I mean typically two-faced.

    punfundit in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 11:35 am

    Given that you believe any law banning gay marriage to be unconstitutional, would you find constitutional a law which *obliges* those with the legal authority to perform marriages to marry gay couples?

      Crawford in reply to punfundit. | July 29, 2012 at 6:18 pm

      Ah, but Arizon courts have already ruled that declining to participate in a gay marriage ceremony is illegal!

LukeHandCool | July 28, 2012 at 7:33 pm

I think the anthem for these people should be:

Gerry & The Pacemakers

“How do you do it?”

“How do you do what you do to me,

I wish I knew,

If I knew how you do it to me, I’d do it to you,

How do you do what you do to me,

I’m feelin’ blue,

Wish I knew how you do it to me but I haven’t a clue …”

Yes, and sometimes we may be pleasantly surprised.

A Hollywood type (Russell Brand) made an extremely crude remark concerning Sarah Palin viz Chick-Fil-A, etc. as reported in the Huffington Post.

In response Sandra Fluke sent out the following tweet:

Sandra Fluke‏@SandraFluke Completely unacceptable remark re Sarah Palin. Female politicians deserve to be judged on merits of their ideas only.
https://twitter.com/SandraFluke/status/229330518368456704

If people want to read the Huffington Post article, etc. go to the twitter link.

Given the unwarranted vitriol being thrown at Sarah Palin, when people show class, even if we disagree with that person’s political views, it is appropriate to acknowledge the stance.

P.S. Thank you Professor Jacobson for your posts on this matter. It is important to expose the vitriol and intolerance while holding up the mirror. Sunlight and more speech is the best disinfectant.

David Yotham | July 28, 2012 at 7:57 pm

Mental illness. People who identify themselves as homosexuals are mentally ill.

    BossMedic in reply to David Yotham. | July 28, 2012 at 8:08 pm

    Not being very religious, I could use your own logic to state that religious people have an inferiority complex and need some unseen force running their lives because they’re afraid to make their own decisions. I could say that, but I won’t.

    My uncle is an openly gay man, and he’s no where near mentally ill or deficient. It just happens that he’s sexually attracted to men. It’s no different than being attracted to red heads, or big busts, etc etc. In addition to which, it’s none of my business. Having been in the army and served, and serving now with several gay people, I’ve discovered that it’s not a big deal. I’m straight and their gay. But we’re both people. Who you love or what you do with them in the provacy of your own bedroom ultimately makes no difference in the type of person you are.

      OrgunCon in reply to BossMedic. | July 28, 2012 at 8:52 pm

      One can’t compare sexuality preference to preferences for hair/body type. One is a subset of the other.

      I have a live and let live attitude, the problem is we live in a society with hate crime laws. Thats not an idea that promote equality. I don’t much care about who one’s sexual partner is but I don’t have to approve of it, accept it, and promote it either.

      Juba Doobai! in reply to BossMedic. | July 28, 2012 at 9:13 pm

      And what if you love your dog or your goat? What if you love your sister or brother? If two men or two women are legally and socially acceptable, then all is permissible. Frankly, the arguments you make in your posts suggest that you’re a gay man who is virulently anti-Christian to such an extent that you disregard the history, and spiritual and legal foundation of the United States and replace something with nothing but “love.” Go re-read what you have written and you will see what I mean.

        BossMedic in reply to Juba Doobai!. | July 28, 2012 at 10:05 pm

        To compare having sex with another consenting adult and having sex with an animal is a chidish bit of reasoning. Can dogs or goats give legal consent? No. Can another adult? Absolutely. It’s apples and Meat Loaf that you’re comparing.

        And the arguments that I’m making in no way paint me as a gay anti Christian. Did I ever say that I was attracted to men? Did I ever say that I don’t beleive in God? Actually, I’m a straight agnostic. My wife is a Christian, who also happens to be straight. Frankly I’m a little dissapointed, not suprised, that you would resort to name calling in an argument on a thread in response to an article about name calling. Guess that whole civility thing gets thrown out on both sides huh?

          punfundit in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 11:15 am

          You learned your Alinsky very well.

          The point is the left claims to be the voice of tolerance and civility, but we see time and time and time and time and time again it that turns out not to be the case. And so we have the temerity to point it out to as many people as will pay attention.

          So then the goose-stepping though police show up.

          Ragspierre in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 1:22 pm

          “To compare having sex with another consenting adult and having sex with an animal is a chidish bit of reasoning. Can dogs or goats give legal consent? No. Can another adult? Absolutely.”

          It is not childish. It is an argument…perfectly valid in this context…regarding “normalization” of perverted behavior.

          As I expect you are aware, homosexuality was not long ago considered a pathology.

          That has been done away with as a small group of people…more “enlightened” than their predecessors…determined it was “normal”.

          The same kinds of people militating for the corruption (my word) of the idea of “marriage” are militating for the normalization of pedophilia, bestiality, etc.

          Does that mean I confuse these different perversions? Nope. Not a bit. They are sometimes expressed in the same individual, however.

          Aren’t they?

      punfundit in reply to BossMedic. | July 29, 2012 at 11:26 am

      You could say that, so you did.

Do these clowns kiss their mothers with those mouths?

It would be fun to forward some of these to the idiots’ bosses.

Is there some way to find out who the twitter person it? For instance, if the “person” who wrote the first one above worked as a store clerk or cashier near where I live, I’d love to walk up to them, tell them I just ate at Chic-fil-A, and ask them in a fairly loud voice if they want me to die as well. No doubt hilarity would ensue.

Lovely. I’ll print some of these out and ask my aging ultra-liberal (but still quite cultured and decent) aunt, during brunch tomorrow, which party, again, represents the “good guys people”?

Truly a Proud to be Democrat moment.

@ Barbara etal

I wonder if these idiots have any idea that the whole world can see their tweets and perhaps some future hirng manager won’t find them quite as funny and may decide to hire someone else

Oh silly me, these are progs they will never actually have jobs anyway.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to daPenguin. | July 28, 2012 at 11:20 pm

    Those people tweeted with their real names. Think about that for a minute.

    Michelle Malkin, for example, has received all kinds of harassment and death threats from people over the years. There was totally misogynistic and disgustingly racist one she received from this one in particular – but the guy who sent it wrote it from his work e-mail.

    She traced it and called the bosses of his workplace. Got fired that very same day. Ooopsie!

      9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to theduchessofkitty. | July 29, 2012 at 12:31 am

      I used to follow Michelle Malkin on twitter. I had to stop because she re-tweets all of the vile comments and I couldn’t take it. I don’t know how she does (or Andrew Breitbart did).

Henry Hawkins | July 28, 2012 at 8:44 pm

To those who believe this proves something, I must object. This is an anecdotal sampling of the uglier anti-Palin posts. I submit that the number of people who use twitter is sufficiently high that it wouldn’t matter what subject or issue you choose to examine, you will find a couple dozen – or couple thousand – equally ugly tweets in response. Do conservatives never post similarly ugly tweets after some Obama, Pelosi, Wasserman-Schultz, Olbermann, et al, news tweets? Of course they do. No party owns the market on ugliness.

I’m not saying there isn’t a pervasive lack of civility among the left; I am saying that assertion is not proved by this handful of ugly tweets, nor if a thousand were posted. I need to know the percentage of the whole.

I saw a goodly number of equally sick tweets from conservatives following Obama’s “you didn’t build it” gaffe. You see them after every such bit of O-shit news, the same kind of ugliness from conservatives, yet none of us would consider that proof that all conservatives are chockful of uncivil ugliness. If this set of tweets establishes that the whole left is uncivil and ugly, then we must accept – by the same evidence – that the right is just as bad.

To make a set of tweets stand as evidence that uncivility and near-evil ugliness is endemic to leftists, we need to know the percentage of the total that are as ugly as those above.

So, what is that percentage? I don’t know myself, and it isn’t offered. If one doesn’t know….

——

I smell an 0-fer on the Like/Dislike bar coming on!

    The point of posts like these is to expose the simple fact that the left is not even remotely innocent when it comes to engaging in the sort of hateful, uncivil, intolerant, etc. rhetoric that they are always complaining about the right using.

    Just remember these tweets and the countless more not posted when you hear liberal talking heads going about some horrible thing some right-winger has said while pretending that saying such horrible things is a right-wing problem that doesn’t plague civilized lefties like themselves.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to JA. | July 29, 2012 at 11:45 am

      My point has little to do with leftist Alinskyism, per se. It has to do with a basic rule of assertion: the plural of anecdote is not data. Those who consider a selected-out set of tweets as representative of the whole set themselves up for error. It does not correct or refute an opponent’s wrongs to replicate their processes and practices. The use of anecdote sans context is a false path to accurate conclusions. (Anyone sampling certain The Blaze comment threads, for example, would come away thinking the entire right is a bunch of wackos).

      The tweeters of these extremely nasty anti-Palin tweets are not who we are up against, that is, they are not movable. There is no conceivable argument, no set of data, no collection of facts that would change their minds. They do not proceed on logic and reason and therefore are not affected by ours. They are part of a static uber-liberal core that is matched by a conservative core which outnumbers them and cancels out their votes.

      What we are up against is the middle stripe of independents and the wrongful assumption that they are mostly low-information fence-sitters who decide who to vote for based on last minute whimsy. There may have been truth in that at one point and there certainly are voters like that, but voters that flaky tend not to vote at all – because it’s raining, or there’s a sale at the mall, or some other minor issue. Those who now make up the set of independent voters are increasingly those who have grown disenchanted with their party and left it – and for damn good reasons usually. What happened to the Democrat Party that made it an unwelcome home to folks like moderate liberal Joe Lieberman? How many conservatives think the GOP is doing just great and have few issues with its leadership, practices, and direction?

      What we are ‘up against’ is not broken Washington. That is just a primary symptom, the result of the actual disease, which is a formerly poorly informed American voting public that is now grossly overinformed by the explosion over the past few decades of cable TV and the internet, wherein 90% of it is bullshit to varying degrees and the average voter hasn’t the time or inclination to sort it all out.

      I try to check news media assertions, at least the more substantive ones, and LI slowly emerged from its competitors as one venue where I never found any chicanery, no playing around with the facts, no hyperbolic overplaying, and that’s why I am here.

        punfundit in reply to Henry Hawkins. | July 29, 2012 at 11:58 am

        Fair points, Hawk-man. And you are essentially making one of my basic points. The New Media is a powerful voice in opposition to the hypocritical left’s power bases.

        But that does not mean we shouldn’t point out the other face of the left. Lest we forget, their dominance of the dinosaur media still shapes opinion and drives political and social forces, by design. What we are in danger of is oversaturation of leftist hypocrisy, a creeping inability to keep up with their misinformation overload. That’s a potent tactic in information warfare.

        So we need to learn how to manage this overload, identify the most potent threats, and counteract them quickly and effectively.

        David Yotham in reply to Henry Hawkins. | July 29, 2012 at 2:05 pm

        re: “What we are ‘up against’ is not broken Washington. That is just a primary symptom, the result of the actual disease, which is a formerly poorly informed American voting public that is now grossly overinformed by the explosion over the past few decades of cable TV and the internet, wherein 90% of it is bullshit to varying degrees and the average voter hasn’t the time or inclination to sort it all out.”

        I agree to a large extent – Obama is not the problem, but merely the symptom of the problem. He, and those in his cohort, are the fruit of a system of twisted ideology intertwined into the very fabrics of our society. Just electing someone else isn’t going to fix much – short term solutions for long term problems never solve much.

          punfundit in reply to David Yotham. | July 29, 2012 at 3:25 pm

          Truth.

          This is a long struggle, and our side has made too damned many strategic blunders to fix anything anytime soon. This struggle requires a long view, patience, and a strong stomach.

    punfundit in reply to Henry Hawkins. | July 29, 2012 at 11:48 am

    Henry, don’t get too wrapped around the axle on this. JA’s got it.

    You know as well as the rest of us the left loves to claim to be the moral authority of tolerance and civility. What’s happening here is exhibition of their two-faced nature. They are not the moral authority of anything, they just like to say they are.

This post has inspired me to create my first blog…

http://liberalcivility.blogspot.com/

TeaPartyPatriot4ever | July 29, 2012 at 12:52 am

The left is a cancerous toxic ideology, and can and will completely destroy a civilized society of Freedom, Liberty, Democracy, and the Truth, in a blink of an eye.

Liberals use their pretense of tolerance and inclusiveness as a ruse to be intolerant, controlling, vitriolic, hateful, and even violent to anyone they wish to, and pretend that the law is only what they say it is, and is only applied to who and what and when they say it does, excluding them of course.

Thus as I have said before many times, leftists must be defeated, not placated and appeased like their just spolied children. They are indoctrinated pawns, like any form of immoral destructive ideology, hierarchy, and machinery apparatus in place does to people, who have no qualms about their hatred, vitiolic actions and words, and even physically violent actions to good and decent people in the world.

If America is to be saved, it must be done by ridding the anti-American letfist from power and authority and tall levels of govt, and building our base through economic, poltical, and social prosperity like president Reagan had done in the 1980’s, regardless, and in spite of the left’s hatred and the many agents of evil that promulgate their cause of leftist desruction and tyranny at and in every level of society and govt.

Thye themselves prove whaqt hey are to America, but it is up to Americans to either stop them, and rid them from society as the pararsites that they are, or forever allow to them to control and dictate their perverted hate filled immoral and oppressive anti-American ideology upon the good people of America.

    David Yotham in reply to TeaPartyPatriot4ever. | July 29, 2012 at 2:24 pm

    re: “If America is to be saved, it must be done by ridding the anti-American letfist from power and authority and tall levels of govt, and building our base through economic, poltical, and social prosperity like president Reagan had done in the 1980′s, regardless, and in spite of the left’s hatred and the many agents of evil that promulgate their cause of leftist desruction and tyranny at and in every level of society and govt.”

    *sigh* Good luck with that! The liberal left has spent almost 100 years building up their base. I believe it’s accurate that they need removed, but by the sublime application of systemic ideology and not by force – like removing aphids from a rose bush, you use a systemic poison.

    This is how the liberal left has infected the founding fathers meme for America. Otherwise, it’s very possible for the cure to be worse than the disease. It takes a long time to derail a juggernaut like America – but they have succeeded. We’re now trillions of dollars in debt without any good way of paying our creditors – this is not going to go away regardless of who wins the election.

TeaPartyPatriot4ever | July 29, 2012 at 12:53 am

The left is a cancerous toxic ideology, and can and will completely destroy a civilized society of Freedom, Liberty, Democracy, and the Truth, in a blink of an eye.

Liberals use their pretense of tolerance and inclusiveness as a ruse to be intolerant, controlling, vitriolic, hateful, and even violent to anyone they wish to, and pretend that the law is only what they say it is, and is only applied to who and what and when they say it does, excluding them of course.

Thus as I have said before many times, leftists must be defeated, not placated and appeased like their just spoiled children. They are indoctrinated pawns, like any form of immoral destructive ideology, hierarchy, and machinery apparatus in place does to people, who have no qualms about their hatred, vitriolic actions and words, and even physically violent actions to good and decent people in the world.

If America is to be saved, it must be done by ridding the anti-American leftist from power and authority and tall levels of govt, and building our base through economic, political, and social prosperity like president Reagan had done in the 1980’s, regardless, and in spite of the left’s hatred and the many agents of evil that promulgate their cause of leftist destruction and tyranny at and in every level of society and govt.

They themselves prove what hey are to America, but it is up to Americans to either stop them, and rid them from society as the parasites that they are, or forever allow to them to control and dictate their perverted hate filled immoral and oppressive anti-American ideology upon the good people of America.

Diversity is now the disgust you feel in your stomach after reading these tweets.

Whenever I am around evil I feel slimed. So…
I’m going to church again today. After that I’ll be looking for a Chick-fil-A restaurant in my area. I need to be around good people.

Thank you Sarah for promoting the good.

“The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones,” Shakespeare

So scary, that they have no shame and even use their real identities. There are people who I disagree with it all the time, and do not have to resort to this. I’m sure they don’t care about my concern. They are not expressing an idea, just verbal bullying.

I have no facts but I would be inclined to dispute the premise that the Right does as much of the vile tweeting/slurs/etc as the Left. Given the willingness of the media to highlight every perceived instances of biotry/racism if we routinesly used language toward Hillary Clinton or even DWS as is used toward Palin the media would be blasting it on the front page of every lib rag.

I am not saying people don’t say stupid insults but the level of crude sexual trashing toward Palin is something I’ve never seen.

When you actually try and look at who these vile post are coming from many appear to be from younger people, both make & female, many appear to be from gays, many from black wannabie rappers and a surprising number from what appear to be normal middle aged people who would be seriously offended to have someone talk to them or women in their family that way.

    punfundit in reply to katiejane. | July 29, 2012 at 3:43 pm

    Interesting point, katiejane.

    I recall Madame Speaker Pelosi decrying the racism from the Tea Party Movement during her triumphant march with the Dems to the House when they voted in ObamaCare. She claimed someone spat on a black Congressman. She claimed the n-word was hurled at them.

    Of course there was no evidence of this, but she didn’t let that stop her from making the accusations.

    I was there when they went marching past; Madame Speaker with her smug, drunk-on-power expression and that ridiculously oversized hammer (one wonders where she hid the sickle). Nobody spat. No racial epithets were hurled. Nothing of the sort was seen.

    But I’ll tell you what was seen. THOUSANDS of smartphones with cameras connected to the web. I saw network television cameras. I saw documentarians with cameras. I saw Capitol security with cameras. I saw security cameras on the Capitol. And yet not a single one of these managed to capture this supposed ignominious moment in American history. If such a thing had occurred it would have been plastered all over every television network in the world, every newspaper, every blog, YouTube, you name it. And it would have been repeated over and over and over and over again.

    But it didn’t happen. So Madame Speaker merely said that it happened. And the dinosaur media never challenged her.

I couldn’t stomach reading the comments or the silly trolls so I found a new love song to Chick-fil-A from Tim Hawkins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YI_d3fkRsis
R.I.P.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Longtime-Chick-fil-A-spokesman-Donald-Perry-dies-3741466.php
Mr. Perry was a Chick-Fil-A employee for 29 years and look at his picture. Mr. Perry is BLACK.

[…] can choose more homosexuality and with it bullying disguised as “Diversity.” You can choose less family values when you vote for […]

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend