Dems brainwashed into fearing political violence

by Rossputin | 2:12 am, September 24, 2009 | Comments Off

Perhaps the ultimate expression of the liberal echo chamber and the current utter disconnect between Democrats and the rest of American society was reflected in a Rasmussen Reports poll released on Tuesday.

The main topic of the poll, voter anger with current federal government policies, was interesting enough, with 90% of Republicans “at least somewhat angry” versus 44% of Democrats. In an ominous sign for Democratic electoral prospects during the next two election seasons, 77% of independent voters were also at least somewhat angry with federal government policies. More than 70% of Republican and independent voters surveyed “say neither party has the answers”, showing that the GOP has plenty of work to do to motivate voters and convince us that there’s some positive reason to vote Republican. (For some voters, a candidate’s just not being a Democrat might be enough – as the converse was certainly enough in 2008 – but that’s generally a thin reed on which to tie your electoral hopes.)

Beyond the interesting implications of those numbers, however, a sub-section of the same poll was truly stunning, even for this jaded observer of politicians and the electorate: The question was “How concerned are you that those opposed to President Obama’s policies will resort to violence?”

Of course, we’ve all heard about Nancy Pelosi demonizing Tea Party participants and MSNBC anchors bemoaning white gun-toting racists (while they knowingly cropped the TV image to hide the fact that the legally armed citizen was black). Apparently the Pelosi-Goebbels strategy, i.e. tell a very big lie and tell it very often, is working:

According to the poll, “Forty-three percent (43%) of voters nationwide are at least somewhat concerned that the political anger will spill over into violence, as some politicians have suggested. Twenty-two percent (22%) are Very Concerned.” But as paranoid as that number sounds, let’s dig a little deeper:

“Sixty-three percent (63%) of Democrats are worried about the threat of political violence, while 71% of Republicans are not concerned. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 63% are not concerned.”

Yes, 63% of Democrats surveyed believe that political violence is a real worry. And since it’s difficult to imagine Democrats (particularly the “likely voters” surveyed by Rasmussen) acting any more aggressively than putting an extra pack of Splenda in their lattes or beeping the tiny horns of their Toyota Pious hybrids, it’s clear that Democrats are afraid of Republicans and libertarian-minded independents. (After all, it’s not the Democrats who have the guns, right?)

Yet the very people whom the liberal media have trained their sheep to fear are by a large majority not concerned. One would think that if there were a part of the population likely to cause violence, they’d be the ones most prone to believing that violence is likely.

In an era of extreme political polarization (by American standards, if not by the standards of most other nations), we have reached a new low. Democrats think non-Democrats are soon to begin actual physical violence where most non-Democrats clearly never even had the thought cross their minds.

Indeed, all the political violence I’ve heard of in recent weeks has been perpetrated by Democrats, such as the union thugs beating up a black town hall protestor in Missouri and a so-called “healthcare reform activist” who bit off the tip of the finger of a counter-protester at a MoveOn.org rally in California.

The cognitive dissonance of the left is on the one hand remarkable but on the other hand understandable. It would seem implausible for large numbers of people to believe that political violence is likely, in part because that’s simply not how Americans normally operate and in part because other than Timothy McVeigh (idiot, murderer, rotting in hell) there’s been no evidence of violent tendencies among those whom the Democrats actually fear. Furthermore, there has not been widespread political violence by Republicans in this country, but there has been widespread violence by Democrats, most recently the Los Angeles riots in 1992 and in the various big city riots twenty-five years earlier. But, when all you read are liberal newspapers and all you watch are liberal television stations, you are so bombarded with the message that non-Democrats are hateful, racist, and likely to shoot you that Democrats actually come to believe it to some degree.

Not since FDR has the United States government participated in such a massive propaganda effort, aimed at demonizing all who disagree with it. The White House press secretary characterizes Tea Parties as organized by a fiendish right-wing cabal, whereas it’s actually the left-wing protests which are highly organized by unions and other leftist organizations. Obama hires a “Diversity Czar” to tell us that heterosexual whites should quit upper level jobs in media so that blacks and gays can “have a chance.” Disgraced activist Van Jones calls Republicans “assholes.” And the media goes along with most of it.

It’s no wonder Democrats are confused.

But here’s what concerns me: It stands to reason that people who are afraid that their opposition is prone to violence (even if that fear is unfounded) are themselves more likely to act violently. Even if it never gets to violence, people who believe their opposition is unstable enough to resort to violence are far less likely to have a rational conversation with that opposition. As long as the media and the government are working together to make non-Democrats seem like marionettes of a lunatic puppet-master, reaching an understanding among the American people will be impossible.

And why would the government want an understanding to be impossible? Because they fear that the arguments of those who oppose this government’s policy aims would be more persuasive than their own arguments. One good barometer of this is the way that independent voters have so rapidly turned negative on their assessment of Barack Obama’s job performance. It’s true that many Democrats will blindly support Obama just as many Republicans blindly supported Bush, but independent voters are a far more objective indicator, not least since they voted in large majority for Obama. But even within both major parties there are people who actually pay attention to principles and results rather than the D or R attached to a politician’s name. And for the Administration and the media which has invested in it, the possibility of those Democrats having a real conversation with people who understand the true nature of Obama’s policies is a chance they just can’t take.

And now we know how you keep Democrats from reaching out to, or attempting to understand, non-Democrats: Make the Democrats think the non-Democrats want to kill them.

I ask you: What has this nation come to when almost 2/3 of this nation’s largest political party believes that political violence is likely, while almost 3/4 of the other party doesn’t? Is it insanity? Is it dangerous? And maybe most importantly, is it intentional?

 

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Comments

Praise for PPC From Our Lefty "Fan"

• "Zany-ass bombast-entertainment...Hackneyed weirdo communist pseudo-nostalgia" --Alan Franklin, ProgressNow

Featured Posts

• Unemployment Up in February, Obama Reelection Chances Down

  February is a long way from November.

• The Greek Deal Saves the Banks
• Geithner Ignores Subpoena to Testify in Lehman Bros. Case
• Plans Revealed for Greek Default on March 23
• Celebrating International Aviation Mandates: Don’t call them Taxes!
• Obamanomics, the State of the Union, and Reality
• Eurozone Recession Accelerates; Moody’s Piles On