Draginol Draginol

Do I need your views shoved down my throat?

▼

Do I need your views shoved down my throat?

Respecting dissent is a two-way street

from JoeUser Forums

Why is it that the group that claims tolerance and open-mindedness as its mantra so intolerant and close minded in practice? What I speak of is the political left's tendency to interject their political beliefs into every venue that they can while at the same time, actively working to prevent those who disagree with them from having the ability to express their beliefs.

If I watch the MTV Music Awards, I can expect to have some left-winger denounce the war in Iraq.  If I was the Oscars, I can expect to be treated to more anti-US policy rhetoric along with some environmentalist ranting from someone who gets around by personal jet. If I watch Comedy Central or go to a concert or buy a music album or even play an on-line game without someone telling me that their point of view (always the left-wing point of view) is the only "correct" view and those who disagree with them are mean or cruel or more commonly "ignorant".

On PowerUser.TV, we recently discussed how an anti-war protester was protesting in the video game "America's Army" (a game made by the US military as a game/recruitment tool).  My response was that that user has every right to do that.  But I did note the irony that the US military allows the protester their say while left-wingers work nation wide to ban military recruiters from publicly funded campuses.  Tolerance, apparently, is a one-way street.

During the segment, I argued that this sort of thing tends to backfire because it is just another example of anti-war opponents trying to shove their views down the throats of everyone else and few people like that. I mentioned that I happen to support US action and that there had been some pretty positive results in Iraq that seem to be forgotten (20 million people no longer living under Saddam, free elections, etc.).  I never implied that I supported US action because I thought we should "liberate" Iraq. 

In response, on the PowerUser.TV comments a number of people complained about my beliefs.  In fact, they universally used the word "ignorant" to describe my views.  Apparently, ones knowledge on a subject is dependent on how closely your opinion matches that of a left-winger.  The more you disagree with a left-winger, the more ignorant you are.

The left loves that word "ignorant". It is their way of smugly dismissing people's opinions without having to really consider them.  The people insulting me on PowerUser.TV don't know me. They have no idea how much I know or don't know.  All they know is that I mentioned, very briefly, that I happen to support US military action in Iraq. That's it.  That was enough for them to decide that I'm "ignorant".

Anyone who has bothered to look into my background, what I've done and written and especially anyone who knows me personally I suspect will conclude that I'm not "ignorant".  The problem with so many on the left is that they cannot accept that intelligent, well educated, well informed people might have seen the same things they've seen and come to different conclusions.

If I discuss that topic with people who disagree with my conclusions about liberals/left-of-center people, I usually get some sort of moral equivalence argument. Someone will point out Fox News or some right-wing whacko.  If you point out Michael Moore you get Ann Coulter thrown in your face.  But the pattern is usually something that can most charitably be described as "Look at these hundreds of examples" with moral equivalence being "Oh  yea, here's a counter example" as if that makes the two things equal. 

You would be hard pressed to find truly equivalent examples of right-of-center people forcing their views on others. A left-winger watching Nascar doesn't have to worry about one of the drivers coming out and saying "And those of you who don't support the war, you are ignorant cowards."  Even during the heated recent election, right-wing celebrities didn't go on and say "Yea, the John Kerry is a fucking idiot." (the way several celebrities did to Bush or Bush supporters). 

And as we see on that PowerUser.TV thread, it's not me or right-wingers going on and saying how ignorant or cowardly or stupid or uneducated left-wingers are.  What's really ironic is that the left's response to the segment proves the point.  Center of right people (such as myself) are regularly subjected to left of center dogma in inappropriate venues. But we don't riot about it. We don't try to shout down those who do it. We get annoyed about it and that's about it.  That I even mentioned my position (not even making a much of a case for or against the war in Iraq) brought out more posts than any show we've had all using the word "ignorant" and some of them saying things like "Well those people protesting the war are just trying to wake you up."

Apparently, some opinions are simply the "correct" opinions. Those who disagree are "ignorant" and need to be educated. Incorrect opinions need to be subverted, buried, hidden and those who have those opinions shouted down and shamed.  The problem with that strategy, in a democracy, is that the voters tend to have the last laugh. Americans don't take kindly to bullies.

31,587 views 67 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sorry, Brad. You came back to your defense while I was writing #25.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
So, fans and radio stations gave their opinion in the way that they could, boycotting their music


if they'd confined themselves to doing that, your argument and my throat would be in a lot better shape. i'm not sure why each and every raging righty hadda have a turn at venting his/her outrage (just about what seemed to be happening for a good two weeks following the incident) but the net result was the vast majority of people in this country for whom the whole thing was a non-isssue really did have it shoved down their uncaring throats whenever they turned on a tv, picked up a paper or listened to a radio back then...and now as well.

In other words, the left could not handle what they dished out, like usual.


1. i'd hardly consider the dixie chicks the voice of the left. if you do, you're seriously in need of a long, relaxing time out.

2. a lotta people saw what was happening then as a trainwreck (and considerably more see it now). she wasn't demanding action or demeaning anyone who disagreed with her. she sure the hell didn't seem determined to bankrupt them.

3. even if she was the voice of the left and she'd barred the doors and refused to let anyone leave until they signed an impeachment petition or paid her off, none of yall shoulda been even slightly surprised cuz by now--having endured it for years--you should expect it.

at least you're honest enuff to concede (albeit solely by silent assention) your team 'dishes it out'.
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ooh! I've got one. You can sometimes go into a church and hear the preacher complaining about "activist judges." In fact my father is a preacher and can barely resist the urge to tell how Democrats are everything wrong with America. Liberals are more strident, though. Partly they have less access to powerful positions where they can enact their wishes instead of yelling about them, but partly they're just not cool.

Possibly conservatives would rather talk among themselves about how bad the other guy is, and liberals would rather reach out?
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
I said- "You are on the right. You interjected your political beliefs into PowerUser.Tv.
I've never watched it myself, but is this a political broadcast?"

To which you replied- " First off, you didn't listen to PowerUser.TV did you? No, you just assumed that I went on some political rant. I didn't. The story was about a war protester protesting the war in the "America's Army" video game"

Besides re-stating what I had clearly said myself, you have twisted my well meant words way out of context. You mentioned in your original post that you discussed political issues and where you stood on the war. I did not refer to anything you did on PowerUser.TV as being a "political rant" . Nor did I assume anything.

You seem to view me as your enemy. You keep lumping the "left" together and you refuse to see that the "right"
are every bit as vicious as the left.
I try not to equate the misguided beliefs of those people with you. I don't see you as my enemy. I'm more interested in understanding your point of view.
I stand by my comments. We can just agree to disagree. (Though I actually agreed with you on a couple of points)

Really nice site BTW. Maybe someday, when I can start my own blog, you'll stop by and say howdy? :) PC
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
If there is one person on all of these boards that I can depend on, to come rally around the liberal flag, it is you.

How does the statement go: Blind patriotism to one's political party is the Political Hack's last refuge?


that aint how the statement goes (nice try tho). there's no such hting as patriotism to a political party. even if there were, no party represents me so i'm obliged to no party.

as far as rallying around any flag--but even more specifically an imaginary 'liberal' standard only you can see--i hate to have to be the one to pull your coat to something.

you've been deliberately misled by your own team.

past generations of 100% bonafide american conservatives have been spinning in their graves on and off for more than 40 years. not a one woulda willing permitted the country to involve itself in nation-building or regime chance.

they begin revolving even faster every time gonzales is given anohter opportunity to abuse the constitution (which is pretty much every time they offer an opinion). good thing there aint no such thing as avenging ghosts. good, at least, for all those who insult these restless dead by claiming international travel voids the law or that the president has powers above and beyond those of the congress and the court.

i could go on and on and on...but not without a break. i've not even mentioned the complete lack of fiduciary restraint and i'm far too dismayed and depressed to go there now.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
You degrade an entire group of ppl with generalizational insults, while crying about their own personal opinion.

In other words: the country fans (why didn't you just go on and call them uneducated, ignorant hillbilly rednecks? That is what you were getting at, right? But instead of just being simple, you had to put in your own "intelligent" description?) shouldn't have been allowed to be offended....


whatever you do for a living, i sincerely hope it don't involved critical judgement on your part. even if you hadn't seen my comments in the thread of bakersteet's dixie chicks article Link --and we both know you did--you'd be outta line for putting words into my mouth.

this is one more excellent example of you doing exactly that for which you so eagerly condemn others.

you don't know anything about me or my backround. you're welcome to peruse my archives in hope of finding evidence to support your analysis. why bother tho? you won't...and it's much easier to talk out your ass.


'self-proclaimed' country music fans is a too sadly accurate appraisal cuz what currently passes for country music ain't. wouldn't surprise me a bit if that tune supposedly recorded by the giant produce characters seen in fruit-of-the-loom underwear ads doesn't scoop all the big awards next year (in fact i'll be even more surprised if it don't).
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top

i'm not sure why each and every raging righty hadda have a turn at venting his/her outrage (just about what seemed to be happening for a good two weeks following the incident)

Why would, in your terms, "Each amd every raging righty" have less rights than the Dixie chicks to voice their opinions?  That statement confirms Brad's article.

Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
Why is it that the group that claims tolerance and open-mindedness as its mantra so intolerant and close minded in practice? What I speak of is the political left's tendency to interject their political beliefs into every venue that they can while at the same time, actively working to prevent those who disagree with them from having the ability to express their beliefs.


Wow, I feel the same about the political right. I am generally very conservative, but I would never want to associate with those that call themselves conservative because they act exactly the way you describe "liberals" to act. I haven't seen many liberals take a strong stand lately, but I see it every day with so called "Conservatives" that this statement seems like a hipocritical joke to me... I appologize for the insult, but just reading that made me angry.
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top

Possibly conservatives would rather talk among themselves about how bad the other guy is, and liberals would rather reach out?
Wrong!  Conservatives merely tend to show more respect than liberals.  Conservatives tend to know that there is a time and place for things.  Just because you have the legal right to do something doesn't mean you it is the right thing to do.

Wow, I feel the same about the political right.
Really Martimus.  Again, since I have yet to see a legitimate example, what venues are the Right interjecting politics into?  I don't recall Arnold  Swarzenegger going to a Planet Hollywood opening and using the event to bad mouth Democrats or espouse his Republican theories.  He saved that until he entered the political arena.

People always try to stretch and use Ann Coulter as a rebuttal to Mikey Moore.  How often do you see Ms. Coulter at an entertainment venue?  Did she crash the DNC?  No.  You see her on Fox, buy her books or go to her speeches if you choose.  You know what you're in for if you so choose.

When I tune in to the Oscars, I expect to see actors and people who work in the movie industry receive awards for their achievements in their field.  I don't tune in expecting to hear some actor or producer preach their own kooky political ideas.  I don't care what they think.  They aren't politicians, they only play them on TV.

If George Clooney (just for sake of example) wants to run for office, sure, I'll listen to what he wants to say.  If he starts his own TV show where he discusses world affairs, fine.  I know whether or not to tune in.  Until then, don't hijack nonpolitical venues!

Just for those of you still unclear on whether or not PowerUser.TV was an appropriate venue or not, the discussion was about a video game and whether or not it was appropriate for someone to make a political protest during said game.  Brad pointed out that the guy has the right to do it although it is annoying.  He then elaborated on why it is annoying.  So yes, it was an appropriate venue.  Ironically, the people who tend to argue on behalf of those who hijack other venues are the ones who then commented and told him what he shouldn't talk about on his podcast.

 

Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top
Re: celebs, there's something patently dishonest about artists, who spend their life expressing themselves and getting paid big to do it, devoting only the awards podium or interviews to their activism. With the exception of a few directors, "angry" Hollywood is churning out the same insipid junk, and then using a few other public moments to rant. As artists, shouldn't it be the other way around?

Of course not, because people want to be entertained, not preached to. When asked why they didn't make a serious piece instead of that teen comedy, they'd no doubt tell you it is their job to entertain. Only when it comes to venues that pay them personally, though. Any other time they have a captive audience ready to chuckle or sigh they have to ram in a political message.

Re: balance, people who say they haven't seen Liberals, or more accurately faux-Liberals, taking a stand are usually so much more radical that the Left seems Right to them. I see people all the time say that the press is biased TO THE RIGHT, and when you talk to them you find that they are so radical that reality itself is injustice to them.
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
... but...

The whole point of this was the protestor in the AA game and the inability of faux-Liberalism to promote itself without insulting people. The idea has always been that they are educating a brutish world on how better to take care of itself. The whole "light in the darkenss" vibe is silly and sad, and often misapplied to the same failed ideals that were tried and discarded over and over ages ago.

If these faux-Liberal ideals haven't been successful or engaging enough to take hold after all these years, then maybe THEY are the has-been philosophies. These quasi-enlightened people to me appear more and more like harrowed televangelists. They have their cheering peanut gallery in a world that rejects their ideals and couldn't really care less if they are thought to be "ignorant" in doing so.

Sadly, as a culture we've accepted somehow that they are soclially 'enlightened". Perhaps someday we'll see them as being just as enlightened as televangelists are holy.

Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
Has it ever occured to you that it might be better to bash the actual person that is causing the problem instead of bashing an entire group of indiviual minds and opinions?

Has it ever dawned on you to write to the broadcast companies and complain?

You say you expect it. Why watch then? Turn the channel. Is the MTV awards really that important? Personally, I'm much more offended by rappers then I ever would be by someones political beliefs.

If it bothers the "right" so much, why do you give it so much attention? These people only do this because they know it's going to get them tons of t.v. time on Fox and other right wing broadcasts.

Regarding the Podcast

It states very clearly that politics was discussed. This is interjecting politics is it not?
I only asked what is and isn't considered an "appropriate venue" as described by Brad.
I tried to listen to the Podcast. It wouldn't play. Actually none of them would.
I really don't need to. It's all right here in the original post.

Brad's words

But I did note the irony that the US military allows the protester their say while left-wingers work nation wide to ban military recruiters from publicly funded campuses. Tolerance, apparently, is a one-way street.

During the segment, I argued that this sort of thing tends to backfire because it is just another example of anti-war opponents trying to shove their views down the throats of everyone else and few people like that. I mentioned that I happen to support US action and that there had been some pretty positive results in Iraq that seem to be forgotten (20 million people no longer living under Saddam, free elections

In response, on the PowerUser.TV comments a number of people complained about my beliefs
*******
So why am I attacked for asking the simple question "was this an appropriate venu"?

Were people who watched the Podcast not subjected to a right wing point of view?

They are just supposed to let these views be shoved down their throats?

Baker Street
Sadly, as a culture we've accepted somehow that they are soclially 'enlightened". Perhaps someday we'll see them as being just as enlightened as televangelists are holy.

***********
Would you be referring to televangelists like Pat Robertson or, Jerry Falwell? Both right wing supporters and regular guests on Fox News?
**********
Brad
And as we see on that PowerUser.TV thread, it's not me or right-wingers going on and saying how ignorant or cowardly or stupid or uneducated left-wingers are.
*********
It appears to me that this is exactly what you are trying to do.
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top
I suspect Baker would have no problem including Robertson, Falwell & Robison with the likes of Bakker, Hinn & Swaggart, but I'll let him speak for himself.

As for this conservative, they are all cut from the same cloth (pardon the pun). Televangelism is about money and building empires. Unfortunately, most of what is called "organized religion" seems to be the same, at least to me, but that's another topic.
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
No, thatguypc. *boggle* It really doesn't matter what political affiliation the televangists are on average.

I'm referring to believing particular things about people not because of the realistic quality of their argument, but because of the culture that surrounds it. For example, the assumption that these quasi-Liberal ideals are somehow more intelligent and evolved, and therefore the people who espouse them are also. Therefore you can support failed programs and self-destructive policies forever, because they are "right".

I can understand the ease at which you can just take something out of my point and show me analogous conservatives, but you missed the point. The reference to TV evangelists is apt because many people are so blinded by the message that they are unable to see the messenger.

Just replace 'holy' with 'intelligent' or 'enlightened' and you'll have the undeserved respect for the quasi-Liberal liberal culture explained. We assume that all this meathead-era idealism is head and shoulders above the norm because we've been taught that 'good intentions' are always superior, even if they lead to tragic implementation.
Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top

Very well said Baker.

TheGuyPC, I think you are being too defensive to see the point here.  If anyone is taking a neutral look at the subject, they will concede that there is no right wing equivalent of what the left wing is doing in regards to shoving their agenda down the public's throat at any and every opportunity they get.  And no, I don't buy the "They're just trying to reach out" argument because when the religious right tries to "reach out" at inappropriate times and places, I am equally revolted.

Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top

We assume that all this meathead-era idealism is head and shoulders above the norm because we've been taught that 'good intentions' are always superior, even if they lead to tragic implementation.

That should be engraved and placed above the DNC headquarters as that is their heart and soul.  results be damned!  Judge us on our intentions.

Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well apparently I'm too much of a "meat-head" to understand your argument.



Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top
"Well apparently I'm too much of a "meat-head" to understand your argument."


...

... ...

...no, meathead was a character on a 70's show called "All in the Family" who epitomized the quasi-Liberal culture of the time. Coincidentally, the actor who portrayed him, Rob Reiner, is now one of the most noteworthy political embarassments in Hollywood.

When I said meathead-era idealism I wasn't talking about you, but the failed faux-Liberalism of the 60's and 70's that we hold to now just because we believe it is "right", even though it never works. As an extension, we feel that people who espouse them are somehow smarter or more enlightened.

Now that I have explained that, twice, maybe you'll stop assuming I am talking about you or the political affiliations of televangelists...
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have yet to see anyone from the right side of the aisle use a funeral{Coretta Scott Kings} behave like the democrats did, to use a funeral and turn it into a bash bush fest shows a distinct lack of class and common decency.
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have yet to see anyone from the right side of the aisle use a funeral{Coretta Scott King


Paul Wellstone. To name another
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
I believe it has been said, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
45 by Dr. Guy
Thu, June 01, 2006 6:20 PM


I have yet to see anyone from the right side of the aisle use a funeral{Coretta Scott King


Paul Wellstone. To name another


who? where did he do it? ands at what funeral, was he joined in by many others in condemning something?
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think a better idea would be for YOU and YOUR condescending attitude to take that vacation in Iraq
and see what has and hasn't been accomplished. Billions of dollars and thousands of lives are gone.
What have we gotten so far?


Thanks The PC Guy, I've been there (and a few other places in my 24 year military career). I know what it's accomplished...nothing. These are the people that riot and kill over a traffic accident. That's how most of them should be treated. The trouble is we coddled them too much. If the Germans or Japanese were not defeated so ruthlessly, and slowly it would have been the same. War is to quick and painless now to frighten people from making it. So now that ME and My condescending attitude have had their Iraqi vacation...why don't you book your's?
Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top
So now that ME and My condescending attitude have had their Iraqi vacation...why don't you book your's?


No, it's not my war. And, I'm way too busy dancing around, spreading daisy petals, teaching everyone about the liberal happy happy joy joy philosophy and trying to get them to watch old re-runs of All in the Family so that we can all blindly follow televangelist Rob Reiner and his merry gang of liberal do-gooders over to Michael Moore's house. It's too bad Caroll O'Connor can't be there to join us.



Once there, we are going to scheme and plan how to take control of everything and create a huge deficit while raising taxes as high as we possibly can. If anyone causes problems, we are going to grab them and pull them close. We will just hug them until they understand the err of their ways. That's what us bleeding heart liberals do.



We will promptly order any soldier who is either liberal or Democrat home. That shouldn't be too hard as most of us happy happy joy joy left wingers don't sign up for the military anyways. We are too enlightened and we just don't have the courage. We get offended when we see people playing'Duck Hunt"! For the ones we do bring home, we will promptly take them to either Massachusetts or San Francisco. From there, we will make frequent trips for guest appearances on any show that we think the "Right" may be watching. Once we find our way on stage, (it's hard when you're in the dark all of the time), we will spread our beautiful butterfly wings and sing the praises of all that is good and true and left wing. And, yes. The left wing of the butterfly will be prettier. I know, it's just not fair.



If you try and stop us, we'll.....we'll.......we'll..........well I don't know what we will do but it won't be nice. We can be real bullies when we want to be! When we bully you, don't try to talk to us at all. You bunch of rednecked bible thumpin' uneducated people. We are much smarterer then you end we don't lyke it when ewe point out fax tu us!



Yes, get used to it. It is always going to be US doing anything that you don't like. We have strategery meetings to figure out our next moves..... as history is replete with one adversary misunderestimating the other and suffering the consequences. Well that won't happen here. No sir-ee Bob Dole!



Once we re-gain the Whitehouse, we are going to color it in beautiful pastels and throw a huge party with all of the leaders of the most evil countries we can find. And then, we'll shower them with love, blessings and all of the money we can steal from the rich! They will become enlightened and apologize for doing such terrible things. Oh, Joy!



We will ban all religion because, after all, best selling author Ann Coulter had us pegged dead to rights. We hate religion. Not a one of us attends church.



In God we trust will be taken off currency as will the former tyrant presidents and will be replaced with a wonderful rainbow! In front of that rainbow will be a married gay couple waving French flags with the words "In welfare we trust". Money won't be green anymore either. It will be pink and, it will have yellow stripes to match our bellies.



Capitol hill will become "Broke Back" hill. The "House" will become the "quaint little cottage" and the Senate will become the Sin-it.

Get it.....Senate.....Sin-it? Oh, we are so smart!



I have to go now, I have a beautiful ToeFu dinner waiting for me in my tree house. (Afterwards, I just may treat myself to a lavendar bubble bath with lots of lit candles) (Oh, the bubble bath was never tested on animals and comes packaged in a Hemp container).



There you go. You have exposed us.

I'm sorry liberal lefty's. The truth is the truth and I just cannot handle the pressure anymore.



Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top

TheGuyPC - you can quote someone typeing "quote" and "/quote" with brackets around them.

Then it is much easier to read
.