“Americans Calling For Politicians To Denounce The Growing Calls of Violence ” — I was glad to see this Facebook group pop up immediately after the health care reform vote and all of the craziness that went with it.
The group’s moderator does a great job of keeping things in check. However, it began to bother me that only one group was deemed capable of violence.
After a few days the trend among some of the contributors was clear: it was ONLY the conservatives and Teabaggers and Rightwingers that were violent and angry … and they were very, very dangerous.
As many of you know: I self-proclaim to be conservative.
But did you know that I am also active in the Coffee Party movement? I don’t froth at the mouth when I have something to say, my research into political trends is fairly comprehensive, and I spend most of my time lobbing questions about conduct towards those on the right.
Anyone that reads Bill4DogCatcher often should be able to vouch for me having some sense of balance and fair play.
I met ‘political correctness‘ today and there are folks that want me to feel dirty! guilty! full of remorse for having an agenda!
My agenda: work against political violence and provocation for political violence.
But the agenda that I am supposedly guilty of is something different … the reality is that I published photos of protesters calling for violence and death against someone that is not someone on the left, or left of right. That is unacceptable. Only the right is violent and dangerous.
In doing some research I ran across an article from the Huffington Post ”10 Most Offensive Tea Party Signs And Extensive Photo Coverage From Tax Day Protests (PHOTOS)’, from December 28, 2009 — exactly 90 days ago.
Holy cow, thought I, these photos are nothing compared to the anti-Bush signs that Americans saw from 2003-2008. There is a doublestandard at work.
So I republished the anti-Bush signs in the group denouncing political violence.
The anti-Bush photos easily depict the story of how conservatives and the Right and the TEA folks actually are mild in their ability to call for violence compared to what is shown in the anti-Bush photos — see end of blog story for just some of the photos.
Bill4DogCatcher.com is no friend of the Bush Administration. In 2004, this dog voted Kerry. Bill4DogCatcher has been very critical of Bush and Bush policies. Yet … political correctness is strong with the force.
To prove the point that anger and violence and dangerous people exist just as much on the left as on the right I posted some of the anti-Bush photos. After a few ‘WTF’ responses, I challenged folks to find one, just one, photo calling for the death of Obama — yes many tactless and racist signs have marched in protest — but I didn’t find any death to Obama signs in my Google searches. What I did find was tons of ‘Death to Bush’ signs and signs with very descriptive ways in which he should die.
Within hours of me posting the anti-Bush photos:
- Several folks wanted them off Facebook as being not relevant to the topic — denouncing calls for political violence.
- My favorite response is ‘The lefties are all talk. Those on the right will actually hurt you’. …. ummm, really? So?
- A number of folks wrote things like ‘the whole world hates Bush’s guts‘ … ‘it is Bush after all‘.
- One reader repeatedly took me to task for trying to compare the photos to those in the Huffington Post story … that story is old (90 days is old?) … the point is that while tacky the ’10 worst’ signs focused on policy not a person.
- Another reader wanted to know where I got the photos … off a conservative website, right? … Hello, no! I gave the Google search criteria used to find my photos: ‘Anti-Bush protest sign‘. … But what if I had found them on a conservative website? Does information from a conservative website invalidate the message in the photos or the MANY, MANY photos available on the web that called for Bush’s violent death?
Bottom Line: Advocating political violence and actual violence is wrong. We should work to dissuade, to confront, and to vigorously enforce laws quickly against those that would use or advocate violence. However, ignoring the calls for violence from one end of the political spectrum and calling it ‘discourse’ is also not acceptable.
Accept no excuses. Make no excuses. Do not be a hypocrite — it’s contagious!
WARNING: the following images depict anger and hate and a call for violence that no one has seen in almost two years — although many people may think they have seen signs like these because the media constantly barrages us with how one part of America is just so, so … well, you know.
Bill Golden's Bill4DogCatcher.com 
Those signs are as offensive as the Obama ones I have seen–maybe more so.
Actually, Bill I agree with the position that this comes from all sides. Posting the anti-Bush signs was, if nothing else, an attempt to at least allow that the Tea Partiers are nothing new. The problem with the violence prone groups or those with the most extreme hate speech is their inability to communicate in a manner that actually generates real goal-driven discussion.
I actually abhor “political correctness” as it is a worn-out cliche with negative connotations which actually gets substituted for “concern for a need for change” or an awareness of offensive behavior that needs to be corrected.
But, I to feel that both sets of displays are offensive in nature.
Well said!
Sad, very sad. I can see why people wo uld be upset–ugly people don’t like to look at themselves in mirrors.
I agree there is a lot of anger, violence and dangerous people on both sides. However, correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t recall any former Democratic Vice Presidential candidates, senators or congressmen/women appearing at anti-Bush rallies.
Worthy of research. Will do.
There is no doubt that Republicans are using the TEA Party movement, and perhaps the opposite can also be said.
However, I do not think that they are the same in the longterm. I know many fine TEA Party folks — and many of them strongly dislike the Republicans (although survey says — as of early March 2010 — that TEA Party members favor Republicans by 81%).
It becomes very easy to believe that some of these groups are just fronts for the Republican Party, which does not want to be caught publicly saying what these groups will say for them.
Straight up.. some of the best blogging I have seen. Great job.