Liberal terrorism?

A pro-gay activist posing as an intern and reportedly carrying a Chick-fil-A bag as a disguise opened fire at the Washington headquarters of the Family Research Council.  A security guard for the conservative think tank was shot in the arm but still subdued the gunman, identified as Floyd Corkins II.

Liberal groups have been portraying the FRC as a “hate group” for opposing gay marriage.  Democratic activists have accused Romney of killing a man’s mother (reportedly because his company closed a company and she lost her health care, even though the account has been shown to be bogus) and of planning to restore slavery (Vice President Biden’s remark at a largely black city that if Republicans are elected “ya’ll gonna be put back in chains”).

Conservatives have been accused of sparking that Sikh Temple shooting and other acts of violence because of their harsh rhetoric, even though, as far as I have seen, none of the incidents in the recent spate of shootings has been connected to political or social conservatives.  The connection here to liberal ideology is much closer.

Should the left tone down its rhetoric?  What about both sides toning down their rhetoric?

News from The Associated Press.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Tom Hering

    Cue Mr. Carl Vehse.

  • Tom Hering

    Cue Mr. Carl Vehse.

  • SKPeterson

    Barry Soetero Obummer and the Demonrats, etc, etc….

    Hope that helps Tom.

  • SKPeterson

    Barry Soetero Obummer and the Demonrats, etc, etc….

    Hope that helps Tom.

  • Ryan

    My alma mater believes in liberal terrorism: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterling_Hall_bombing

  • Ryan

    My alma mater believes in liberal terrorism: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterling_Hall_bombing

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    At the very least, it reminds us that violent intent is not limited to one side of the political aisle.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    At the very least, it reminds us that violent intent is not limited to one side of the political aisle.

  • Steve Billingsley

    How about personal responsibility? Same-sex marriage advocates (and I am not one) are not responsible for this shooting. The shooter is. Does it have to be more complicated than that?

  • Steve Billingsley

    How about personal responsibility? Same-sex marriage advocates (and I am not one) are not responsible for this shooting. The shooter is. Does it have to be more complicated than that?

  • Joe

    Steve — no it doesn’t. The shooter is who is responsible for this act. Why he did it is not irrelevant in a broad sense, but it is irrelevant when attempting to assign blame. There are scores of people who find fault with various lobbying groups and say harsh things about them but that does not make them partially liable for the actions of an evil/sick person.

    As for the tone of the rhetoric, please. We don’t even come close to our founders:

    I’ll agree that the tone is to blame when we have an actual armed war between the candidates that is fomented by rousing political speeches. If either convention ends with a march of armed men off to kill the enemy, then we can blame the rhetoric.

  • Joe

    Steve — no it doesn’t. The shooter is who is responsible for this act. Why he did it is not irrelevant in a broad sense, but it is irrelevant when attempting to assign blame. There are scores of people who find fault with various lobbying groups and say harsh things about them but that does not make them partially liable for the actions of an evil/sick person.

    As for the tone of the rhetoric, please. We don’t even come close to our founders:

    I’ll agree that the tone is to blame when we have an actual armed war between the candidates that is fomented by rousing political speeches. If either convention ends with a march of armed men off to kill the enemy, then we can blame the rhetoric.

  • fjsteve

    Steve B, #5, yes, I think it is more complicated than that. Words have consequences; they spur people to action. Every great movement, whether for good or ill, was started with words. It’s quite possible that Floyd Lee Corkins II is a nutbag who would have done this either way but it’s also possible he was an emotionally unbalanced who was influenced by the careless words of those around him.

    To say that he, alone, is responsible for this shooting is true as far as it goes. He will suffer the legal consequences alone. But do others share some moral responsibility for careless rhetoric that was latched onto by an unstable co-worker? I honestly don’t know but it wouldn’t hurt for all of us to ponder the words of our Lord: “For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

  • fjsteve

    Steve B, #5, yes, I think it is more complicated than that. Words have consequences; they spur people to action. Every great movement, whether for good or ill, was started with words. It’s quite possible that Floyd Lee Corkins II is a nutbag who would have done this either way but it’s also possible he was an emotionally unbalanced who was influenced by the careless words of those around him.

    To say that he, alone, is responsible for this shooting is true as far as it goes. He will suffer the legal consequences alone. But do others share some moral responsibility for careless rhetoric that was latched onto by an unstable co-worker? I honestly don’t know but it wouldn’t hurt for all of us to ponder the words of our Lord: “For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

  • BW

    Joe @ 6,

    Even 2,000 yrs ago, I think it was Marc Antony who tried to fire up a mob to go tear down Cicero’s home and estate during one of their disputes. Heated Rhetoric is very, very old.

  • BW

    Joe @ 6,

    Even 2,000 yrs ago, I think it was Marc Antony who tried to fire up a mob to go tear down Cicero’s home and estate during one of their disputes. Heated Rhetoric is very, very old.

  • Joe

    fjs — I think I would be more inclined to agree with you if there was evidence that the shooter sat at the feet of someone preaching violence. If you have a friend/associate that you know is unbalanced of prone to do something extreme, you have a duty to not incite that person to violence. But, to blame a national debate that at times gets heated, that’s just too far removed. How could you ever know what will set someone off. In order to “nice” it down to a level to ensure you have eliminated any possibility of violence, would end the idea of actual verbal communication.

  • Joe

    fjs — I think I would be more inclined to agree with you if there was evidence that the shooter sat at the feet of someone preaching violence. If you have a friend/associate that you know is unbalanced of prone to do something extreme, you have a duty to not incite that person to violence. But, to blame a national debate that at times gets heated, that’s just too far removed. How could you ever know what will set someone off. In order to “nice” it down to a level to ensure you have eliminated any possibility of violence, would end the idea of actual verbal communication.

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    Every side has their nutjobs, some of them even managed to be elected.

    Even if they toned down their rhetoric there would still be some nut job with a gun or a bomb and a political manifesto.

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    Every side has their nutjobs, some of them even managed to be elected.

    Even if they toned down their rhetoric there would still be some nut job with a gun or a bomb and a political manifesto.

  • Carl Vehse

    “Should the left tone down its rhetoric? What about both sides toning down their rhetoric?”

    To no surprise, following yet another leftwingnut attack (this time at the FRC), we have the pecksniffian angst raised about rhetoric. As if what comes from the left and from the right are the same thing: rhetoric.

    And where are the examples of rhetoric from the right… oops, I mean the “harsh rhetoric” conservatives “have been accused of” (isn’t the passive voice so convenient? ;-)), especially against the Sikhs? There is none, but, hey, you have to support the flimsy premise by sticking in some kind of straw dog .

    Speaking of which, Tom Hering and the Cranach liberal lapdogs are yapping as expected in sycophantic agreement. After all, what is now being advocated is not whether what is said by the left or the right are lies or the truth, but instead whether what is said violates the PC commandment by being “rhetoric,” as defined by the leftists, of course. And in denouncing the alleged “rhetoric” of the right, the left is, by their own definition, exempt from any limitations on their rhetoric.

    Conveniently this comes in the election season when Zero and Sub-zero and their gang of thugs have little, if any, truth they want told. And the conservatives (or what passes as ‘conservative’ on the GOP ticket) have an abundance of truth that voters need to know (sentience among the electorate being a generous assumption here).

    So to give the leftists free rein and stifle any truth being told about them, the propaganda slogan, “Tone down the rhetoric!”, will be the new mantra of the MSM’s demonicrat buttboys and political skanks (who, whoopee, will be sharing Presidential Debate moderator duties this year).

    You’ll understand if I don’t join the Cranach choir on this chorus.

  • Carl Vehse

    “Should the left tone down its rhetoric? What about both sides toning down their rhetoric?”

    To no surprise, following yet another leftwingnut attack (this time at the FRC), we have the pecksniffian angst raised about rhetoric. As if what comes from the left and from the right are the same thing: rhetoric.

    And where are the examples of rhetoric from the right… oops, I mean the “harsh rhetoric” conservatives “have been accused of” (isn’t the passive voice so convenient? ;-)), especially against the Sikhs? There is none, but, hey, you have to support the flimsy premise by sticking in some kind of straw dog .

    Speaking of which, Tom Hering and the Cranach liberal lapdogs are yapping as expected in sycophantic agreement. After all, what is now being advocated is not whether what is said by the left or the right are lies or the truth, but instead whether what is said violates the PC commandment by being “rhetoric,” as defined by the leftists, of course. And in denouncing the alleged “rhetoric” of the right, the left is, by their own definition, exempt from any limitations on their rhetoric.

    Conveniently this comes in the election season when Zero and Sub-zero and their gang of thugs have little, if any, truth they want told. And the conservatives (or what passes as ‘conservative’ on the GOP ticket) have an abundance of truth that voters need to know (sentience among the electorate being a generous assumption here).

    So to give the leftists free rein and stifle any truth being told about them, the propaganda slogan, “Tone down the rhetoric!”, will be the new mantra of the MSM’s demonicrat buttboys and political skanks (who, whoopee, will be sharing Presidential Debate moderator duties this year).

    You’ll understand if I don’t join the Cranach choir on this chorus.

  • Cranach Liberal Lapdog

    Yapping in sycophantic agreement? Funny, I don’t remember saying anything but “Cue Mr. Carl Vehse.”

  • Cranach Liberal Lapdog

    Yapping in sycophantic agreement? Funny, I don’t remember saying anything but “Cue Mr. Carl Vehse.”

  • Cincinnatus

    I’ll admit, I laughed when I read that he was carrying a Chik-fil-a bag as a disguise. Does that constitute a mortal offense?

    Anyway, I was going to say something about how a cold-blooded murder is categorically and entirely unrelated to rhetoric, but I see my work has been accomplished more ably by others. I haven’t heard any of the “usual” right-wing–or left-wing–”nutjobs” recommending mass shootings as a valid option in the culture war. Anyone who claims a connection is just demagoguing.

  • Cincinnatus

    I’ll admit, I laughed when I read that he was carrying a Chik-fil-a bag as a disguise. Does that constitute a mortal offense?

    Anyway, I was going to say something about how a cold-blooded murder is categorically and entirely unrelated to rhetoric, but I see my work has been accomplished more ably by others. I haven’t heard any of the “usual” right-wing–or left-wing–”nutjobs” recommending mass shootings as a valid option in the culture war. Anyone who claims a connection is just demagoguing.

  • DonS

    As I have said every time one of these stupid shootings occurs, these people are unhinged. They don’t have a cogent ideology, left or right, and to assign one to them in order to bring fire on legitimate citizens who hold a particular point of view is inflammatory demagoguery in its own right.

    What doesn’t help the situation, though, is the increasingly common habit of left-wingers to label people with whom they disagree “haters”. The Southern Poverty Law Center, which once served a legitimate and honorable function in identifying and fighting institutional racism in the Jim Crow south, has long since outlived its usefulness, and its publication of a list of “hate groups”, comprised of mainstream conservative organizations, is abominable, particularly since it is a nonprofit “nonpartisan” tax-free organization, stooping to cheap, inflammatory, political division. It is the ultimate hate group.

    And, the Chick-fil-A bag “disguise” would have been hilarious, if not for the violence and terror accompanying it. What a pathetic sign of the times.

  • DonS

    As I have said every time one of these stupid shootings occurs, these people are unhinged. They don’t have a cogent ideology, left or right, and to assign one to them in order to bring fire on legitimate citizens who hold a particular point of view is inflammatory demagoguery in its own right.

    What doesn’t help the situation, though, is the increasingly common habit of left-wingers to label people with whom they disagree “haters”. The Southern Poverty Law Center, which once served a legitimate and honorable function in identifying and fighting institutional racism in the Jim Crow south, has long since outlived its usefulness, and its publication of a list of “hate groups”, comprised of mainstream conservative organizations, is abominable, particularly since it is a nonprofit “nonpartisan” tax-free organization, stooping to cheap, inflammatory, political division. It is the ultimate hate group.

    And, the Chick-fil-A bag “disguise” would have been hilarious, if not for the violence and terror accompanying it. What a pathetic sign of the times.

  • Jon

    It is interesting how quiet most of the tv media have been about this incident.

  • Jon

    It is interesting how quiet most of the tv media have been about this incident.

  • Jon

    Do you suppose Mr. Corkins purchased a meal “to go” at CFA in order to get the bag? Or maybe he just requested a free cup of water — “to go”?

  • Jon

    Do you suppose Mr. Corkins purchased a meal “to go” at CFA in order to get the bag? Or maybe he just requested a free cup of water — “to go”?

  • DonS

    Here is some insight into how whacked out the Southern Poverty Leadership Conference (SPLC) has become with its hate lists, from Soledad O’Brien’s favorite liberal blog ;-):

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/family-research-council-labeled-hate-group-by-splc-over-anti-gay-rhetoric.php

    As Beirich (SPLC Research Director Heidi Beirich) told me, there is no difference between the FRC and the KKK in the eyes of the SPLC now. Still, she said that the hate group designation doesn’t mean the SPLC thinks everyone who supports the FRC “has a full understanding of what they’re up to.” Many who support the FRC may do so because of the group’s very public ties to evangelical Christianity, and Beirich stressed that the SPLC designation has nothing to do with an “attack on the churchly world.”
    I asked her if a Republican choosing to address the FRC convention next year would be making the same choice as one who addressed an Aryan Nation rally.
    “Yeah,” she told me. “What we’re saying is these [anti-gay] groups perpetrate hate — just like those [racist] organizations do.”

    Incredible.

  • DonS

    Here is some insight into how whacked out the Southern Poverty Leadership Conference (SPLC) has become with its hate lists, from Soledad O’Brien’s favorite liberal blog ;-):

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/family-research-council-labeled-hate-group-by-splc-over-anti-gay-rhetoric.php

    As Beirich (SPLC Research Director Heidi Beirich) told me, there is no difference between the FRC and the KKK in the eyes of the SPLC now. Still, she said that the hate group designation doesn’t mean the SPLC thinks everyone who supports the FRC “has a full understanding of what they’re up to.” Many who support the FRC may do so because of the group’s very public ties to evangelical Christianity, and Beirich stressed that the SPLC designation has nothing to do with an “attack on the churchly world.”
    I asked her if a Republican choosing to address the FRC convention next year would be making the same choice as one who addressed an Aryan Nation rally.
    “Yeah,” she told me. “What we’re saying is these [anti-gay] groups perpetrate hate — just like those [racist] organizations do.”

    Incredible.

  • Joe

    “Authorities found a box of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches in his backpack.”

    http://www.wtop.com/209/2996023/Man-charged-in-shooting-at-conservative-group-HQ

    Safe to assume he was going to use the sandwiches to explain why the people were killed?

  • Joe

    “Authorities found a box of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches in his backpack.”

    http://www.wtop.com/209/2996023/Man-charged-in-shooting-at-conservative-group-HQ

    Safe to assume he was going to use the sandwiches to explain why the people were killed?

  • WebMonk

    Maybe he was going to try to kill 15 people and stuff one of those nasty sandwiches down each of their throats as a fitting symbol of … something.

  • WebMonk

    Maybe he was going to try to kill 15 people and stuff one of those nasty sandwiches down each of their throats as a fitting symbol of … something.

  • Carl Vehse

    What’s nasty about a Chick-fil-A sandwich, and how would stuffing a sandwich down the throats of people you had just murdered be a “fitting symbol” of anything?!?

    Your suggestion @19, Webmonk, is the kind of unwarranted rhetoric that should be toned down, particularly on the Cranach blog.

  • Carl Vehse

    What’s nasty about a Chick-fil-A sandwich, and how would stuffing a sandwich down the throats of people you had just murdered be a “fitting symbol” of anything?!?

    Your suggestion @19, Webmonk, is the kind of unwarranted rhetoric that should be toned down, particularly on the Cranach blog.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    What really surprises me is that somebody on the left actually knows how to use a gun…

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    What really surprises me is that somebody on the left actually knows how to use a gun…

  • Michael H.

    It’s funny, we can’t even have a discussion about toning down the rhetoric without lots more…well, nasty rhetoric.

  • Michael H.

    It’s funny, we can’t even have a discussion about toning down the rhetoric without lots more…well, nasty rhetoric.

  • WebMonk

    CFA sandwiches are nasty – they’re dry, tasteless, and amazingly poorly spiced. Yuck! They manage to miss the best of both worlds – they miss the multitude of (artificial) flavors of uber-processed foods like McDonalds and the miss the marvelous natural flavor of good chicken. CFA’s sandwiches are nasty. Give me Wendys any day over CFA.

    And congratulations, Vehse, on managing to restate my point while completely misunderstanding it.

    It wouldn’t be a “fitting symbol” of anything except in the shooter’s own twisted mind. That’s why I wrote “a fitting symbol of … something.”

  • WebMonk

    CFA sandwiches are nasty – they’re dry, tasteless, and amazingly poorly spiced. Yuck! They manage to miss the best of both worlds – they miss the multitude of (artificial) flavors of uber-processed foods like McDonalds and the miss the marvelous natural flavor of good chicken. CFA’s sandwiches are nasty. Give me Wendys any day over CFA.

    And congratulations, Vehse, on managing to restate my point while completely misunderstanding it.

    It wouldn’t be a “fitting symbol” of anything except in the shooter’s own twisted mind. That’s why I wrote “a fitting symbol of … something.”

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    @23 Dry, tasteless, poorly spiced? To paraphrase Hank Hill, something just ain’t right about you. ;) I have never had a dry, tasteless sandwich from CFA and I have had a lot of them, from different stores around the country. I wonder from your like of Wendy’s if you haven’t confused glut of spice with tasty.

    If the guy wanted to give away CFA sandwiches he didn’t need a gun, I’d have gladly taken them off his hands. More seriously, I suspect we will find out that much like the student who recently shot up a movie theater, this current suspect will have a history of mental instability.

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    @23 Dry, tasteless, poorly spiced? To paraphrase Hank Hill, something just ain’t right about you. ;) I have never had a dry, tasteless sandwich from CFA and I have had a lot of them, from different stores around the country. I wonder from your like of Wendy’s if you haven’t confused glut of spice with tasty.

    If the guy wanted to give away CFA sandwiches he didn’t need a gun, I’d have gladly taken them off his hands. More seriously, I suspect we will find out that much like the student who recently shot up a movie theater, this current suspect will have a history of mental instability.

  • WebMonk

    Oh what degradation has befallen modern American culinary taste when even such things as CFA chicken sandwiches have their fans.! :-D

  • WebMonk

    Oh what degradation has befallen modern American culinary taste when even such things as CFA chicken sandwiches have their fans.! :-D

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Carl, an admonition about rhetoric from you is like a gentle chiding from Stalin on Human Rights.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Carl, an admonition about rhetoric from you is like a gentle chiding from Stalin on Human Rights.

  • Jon

    “What really surprises me is that somebody on the left actually knows how to use a gun…

    Well, his marksmanship isn’t exactly that great, apparently, thank God.

    Good thing he didn’t practice by watching those Paul McCain shootin’ vid’s on You Tube!

    Y’all should go with the CFA Spicy Chicken sandwich if you don’t like plain.

  • Jon

    “What really surprises me is that somebody on the left actually knows how to use a gun…

    Well, his marksmanship isn’t exactly that great, apparently, thank God.

    Good thing he didn’t practice by watching those Paul McCain shootin’ vid’s on You Tube!

    Y’all should go with the CFA Spicy Chicken sandwich if you don’t like plain.

  • Carl Vehse

    Klasie Kraalogies @26: “Carl, an admonition about rhetoric from you is like a gentle chiding from Stalin on Human Rights.”

    Klasie’s ad hominem droppings demonstrates what I had described earlier @11 about liberal lapdogs:

    After all, what is now being advocated is not whether what is said by the left or the right are lies or the truth, but instead whether what is said violates the PC commandment by being “rhetoric,” as defined by the leftists, of course. And in denouncing the alleged “rhetoric” of the right, the left is, by their own definition, exempt from any limitations on their rhetoric.

  • Carl Vehse

    Klasie Kraalogies @26: “Carl, an admonition about rhetoric from you is like a gentle chiding from Stalin on Human Rights.”

    Klasie’s ad hominem droppings demonstrates what I had described earlier @11 about liberal lapdogs:

    After all, what is now being advocated is not whether what is said by the left or the right are lies or the truth, but instead whether what is said violates the PC commandment by being “rhetoric,” as defined by the leftists, of course. And in denouncing the alleged “rhetoric” of the right, the left is, by their own definition, exempt from any limitations on their rhetoric.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Getting a lesson about ad hominem arguments from Carl is even more hilarious. Do youeven hear yourself Carl??

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Getting a lesson about ad hominem arguments from Carl is even more hilarious. Do youeven hear yourself Carl??

  • Carl Vehse

    Admitting it is a “lesson” is the first step, Klasie. Whether your attitude will allow you to learn and apply it to your future postings on Cranach is the more difficult challenge.

  • Carl Vehse

    Admitting it is a “lesson” is the first step, Klasie. Whether your attitude will allow you to learn and apply it to your future postings on Cranach is the more difficult challenge.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    And, btw mr Vehse, what do you know about my politics in the first place?

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    And, btw mr Vehse, what do you know about my politics in the first place?

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    The great Carl, holding forth on posting etiquette. Is it just me, or are other folks also in danger from dying in a fit of laughter?

    You really are piece of work, Carl. Your splutterings against liberals, which is basically everybody that is even the slightest bit to the left of you, your inability to enter into decent debate, your habit of not responding to folks, places you in a class all by yourself. And then you have the gall to address me about these matters. The mind boggles.

    On the other hand, you are quite a fascinating psychological phenomenon. One could write a thesis about your psychological profile.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    The great Carl, holding forth on posting etiquette. Is it just me, or are other folks also in danger from dying in a fit of laughter?

    You really are piece of work, Carl. Your splutterings against liberals, which is basically everybody that is even the slightest bit to the left of you, your inability to enter into decent debate, your habit of not responding to folks, places you in a class all by yourself. And then you have the gall to address me about these matters. The mind boggles.

    On the other hand, you are quite a fascinating psychological phenomenon. One could write a thesis about your psychological profile.

  • Carl Vehse

    The issue here, Klasie, is rhetoric, and in your case, your posted ad hominem rhetoric. Substance does not appear to be your strong suit.

  • Carl Vehse

    The issue here, Klasie, is rhetoric, and in your case, your posted ad hominem rhetoric. Substance does not appear to be your strong suit.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    You realise that you are lecturing me on ad hominem arguments on the SAME thread where you spoke of Cranach liberal lapdogs. Do you have sense of irony?

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    You realise that you are lecturing me on ad hominem arguments on the SAME thread where you spoke of Cranach liberal lapdogs. Do you have sense of irony?

  • Carl Vehse

    There’s no irony. But it does appear time for your remedial lesson on what I said earlier:

    After all, what is now being advocated is not whether what is said by the left or the right are lies or the truth, but instead whether what is said violates the PC commandment by being “rhetoric,” as defined by the leftists, of course. And in denouncing the alleged “rhetoric” of the right, the left is, by their own definition, exempt from any limitations on their rhetoric.

  • Carl Vehse

    There’s no irony. But it does appear time for your remedial lesson on what I said earlier:

    After all, what is now being advocated is not whether what is said by the left or the right are lies or the truth, but instead whether what is said violates the PC commandment by being “rhetoric,” as defined by the leftists, of course. And in denouncing the alleged “rhetoric” of the right, the left is, by their own definition, exempt from any limitations on their rhetoric.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Btw, Carl, I’m a centrist.

    But more to the point – so it is ok for you to do it, but other people – not so much. One standard for Carl, a different one for other people.

    Got it.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Btw, Carl, I’m a centrist.

    But more to the point – so it is ok for you to do it, but other people – not so much. One standard for Carl, a different one for other people.

    Got it.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X