Calm Down Take Two Carbon Offsets and Call Me In The Morning

Isaac Smith really needs to calm down. Yes, we condemn any violence or incitement to it. As if that needed to be said.

Of course, its creedal for the left that conservatives and Republicans sow seeds of anger hate and violence. In their Democrats could never ever incite anger or commit election season violence or other nastiness.

I suppose it was the libertarians who tied a mattress to Eddie Adams’ truck causing it to burst into flames.

No Obama supporter tossed dog feces in the pickup of a McCain supporter because he doesn’t “hate McCain.”

Trending: Thank You

Sandra Bernhard never said Sarah Palin would be gang raped.

Its perfectly fine to slap an “Abort Sarah Palin” bumper sticker on your car, preferably adjacent to your 1.20.09 sticker.

Then there is the oh so progressive and tolerant crowd from the upper west side, middle fingers and all.

The left never made a movie fantasizing about the assassination of George W. Bush.

Democrats never slashed tires of rented Republican vehicles in Wisconsin in 2004.

Bill Maher and HuffPo readers never expressed regret that an assassination attempt at Dick Cheney failed.

According to Isaac, only Republicans commit election fraud and Democrats never do because Isaac and ACORN say so.

No, ACORN never committed the “the worst case of voter-registration fraud in the history of the state of Washington.”

Obama supporters would never use thug tactics of shouting down opponents who are digging into a past he refuses to be completely truthful about.

Missouri prosecutors and law enforcement officers who are Obama supporters never threatened to bring criminal charges against people who dare criticize Obama.

The Obama campaign never urged the Justice Department to prosecute donors to a 527 that dared to truthfully criticize him.

Since Isaac takes a dim view at the “level of discourse” here at Red Maryland. Let’s examine the level of his discourse:

Well, my feelings may be hurt, but the truth is, that report concerns claims of someone yelling “Kill him!” at a McCain-Palin rally in Scranton, Pennsylvania, whereas I was thinking of this report of someone yelling “Kill him!” at a Palin rally in Clearwater, Florida, as well as this video of a McCain rally in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in which a woman appears to yell “Kill him!” about six seconds in.

Okay Isaac, well shouldn’t you have written what you were thinking in the first place? That is usually the point of writing something. The report he was “thinking” of was from Dana Milbank, who, until he modestly disagreed with him was a frequent guest of the straight down-the-line even handed Keith Olbermann. Excuse me for doubting the veracity of Dana Milbank.

Isaac says that in the Albuquerque video a woman “appears” to yell kill him. The noise from the crowd is so inaudible that she/he could appear to be yelling anything. But this a Republican rally so it must be a violent incantation.

Now, I may be misinterpreting what she was yelling, but that video also has John McCain saying, “Who is the real Barack Obama?” and getting the reply,
“Terrorist!” which he seems to approve of. And that’s the point I was trying to make, and which Newgent and his cohort, for all their bluster, refuse to acknowledge…

I’d say Isaac did indeed misinterpret, because its damn near impossible to ascertain what anyone in the crowd was yelling. Furthermore, how does he know what McCain “seems to approve of”? You can’t tell from that clip. In fact, McCain has bent over backward to keep this kind of stuff out of his campaign, and all he’s gotten for it John Lewis comparing him to George Wallace. Anyone who knows anything about McCain is that he would never approve, condone, or suborn such talk.

However, going by Isaac’s own absurd standard–anytime someone boos or jeers at a campaign rally its an incitement to violence by the candidate–then Joe Biden is guilty as well.

Most likely, all of this will be lost on Isaac, and he’ll once again accuse me of not arguing in good faith. Of course his definition of “good faith” is not disagreeing with him. Given the evidence, I’d say he’s right in line with the philosophy of his preferred presidential candidate.

But please, do go on about our level of discourse.

Send this to a friend