All Moo, No Cow
By Mitch Berg
The IRS notes that the wave of Tea Partier threats and violence against that most intrusive and divisive arm of government, the IRS…
…well, isn’t:
The country’s chief tax collector pushed back Monday against assertions that working for the Internal Revenue Service has become more dangerous as a result of growing anti-government sentiment and the recent passage of President Obama’s health care plan.
“No, the risk has not increased,” IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman said. “There has been a lot of stuff in the press about increased threats, which is actually inaccurate.”
…
Some liberal groups and bloggers also have raised fears that anti-tax and anti-government rhetoric employed on talk radio and by protesters within the “tea party” movement could incite violence against IRS agents.
Which was really what it was all about, all of it – the specious claims of racist slurs and threats, the victorian vapours about the tiny fringe of Tea Partiers with objectionable signs, and conservative talk radio as a whole – without exception; impugning dissent.
It’s kind of good to see, actually. I remember how depressing it felt to realize that Bob Dole’s only campaign message in 1996 was “I’m not Bill Clinton”; about the only thing the Dems have so far going into November is an albatross of a “health care” plan, and constant chants of “teh teabaggerz are teh crazee, and we not be they”.
And that’s not so bad.
April 7th, 2010 at 10:04 am
Did you miss the arrest yesterday of the right wing nutjob that was threatening Washington Senator Patty Murray (D)? The FBI called him, pretending to be from a certain right wing anti-health care group. The conversation included a number of comments that have been described as resembling very closely those on the tea party and other anti-health care reform protest signs and comments from Fakes news and the more extreme right wing radio.
Unlike the man who was arrested for threatening Cantor (and Pelosi and a number of Democrats), this man does not appear to have a history of recognized mental illness.
You might want to check out the self-proclaimed tea party email threats to Rep Steve Cohen as well that were just released.
Both contradict your argument.
Let me be clear – I don’t beleive that all tea party supporters are like this; I particularly don’t believe YOU, Mitch, are like this. But it does appear that a distinct segment – and not only a rare few individuals – ARE like this.
April 7th, 2010 at 10:09 am
Mitch, you should have a thread on liberal reaction to the Palin-Bachmann rally today. Taryle has a web site mocking Palin’s visit. The left is going nuts over this visit.
April 7th, 2010 at 10:11 am
Dog Gone, so you found one wacko in Washington State. Wanna go down to the Mpls convention center today and watch the liberal reaction to the Palin-Bachmann rally? Better yet, do to the Mpls paper web site….read the comments on the article about the rally.
April 7th, 2010 at 11:03 am
Notice DG’s typical response; an anecdote noted by her overrides the statistical evidence provided by the head of the IRS. Yikes.
If we want to play anecdotes, well, then, there was the guy on the left who threatened Eric Cantor….not to mention the rather violent protests from the far left at virtually every G8 summit, political conventions…..
OK, my apologies. On the left, it’s getting to the point of being statistical evidence. Oops.
April 7th, 2010 at 11:09 am
DG,
So a guy allegedly did something, and got arrested. That’s what’s supposed to happen, presuming he’s guilty.
As to what he may or may not have said, and whether or not it sounded like something on a Tea Party sign – so what? If the guy wanted lower taxes and private healthcare, and also threatened a Senator, then the threat is what’s at issue. Try to tie this to the Tea Parties because of anecdotal similarities of slogans is…
…well, the kind of thing the left is relying on – trying to smear ALL dissent by association.
Which is, by the way, exactly what you’re doing, wittingly or not. Try and reflect on this for a bit, if you would; it’s a pretty reprehensible trend, along the lines of those “if you don’t support the President, you’re not patriotic” memes from seven years ago. The difference being the meme from the right never actually happened, while everyone from the President down to you, DG, is taking part in it today.
April 7th, 2010 at 11:26 am
Dog:
“Let me be clear – I don’t beleive [sic] that all tea party supporters are like this… But it does appear that a distinct segment – and not only a rare few individuals – ARE like this.”
What is the difference between your claim that you don’t believe all Tea Party supporters are “like this” (whatever that means: mentally unstable, violent, threatening, law-breakers) but a distinct group from within the Tea Party supporters are?
You’re hiding behind a vague statement, Dog. You “let me be clear”, but you’re anything but clear.
You gotta lotta boogeymen, Dog. It ain’t gonna help you… however, your “concerns” might just help paint your side of the political aisle as a bunch of lying jackasses.
[Rodney Dangerfield] “Oh, but it looks good on you though! [/Rodney Dangerfield]
April 7th, 2010 at 11:49 am
Has-been singer Ricki Lee Jones circa 2004:
“I’m not saying President Bush should be assassinated, but it might not be a bad thing…”
We can safely infer that all liberal hippie musicians are closet terrorists.
April 7th, 2010 at 12:07 pm
http://www.theolympian.com/2010/04/06/1197074/wash-man-charged-with-threatening.html#ixzz0kR1uqpRm
1. What Crisis Did
“Celebutante”
Emerge From?
2.
3.
Main Entry: 1smear
Pronunciation: \ˈsmir\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English smere, from Old English smeoru; akin to Old High German smero grease and probably to Old Irish smiur marrow
Date: before 12th century
1 a : a viscous or sticky substance b : a spot made by or as if by an unctuous or adhesive substance
2 : material smeared on a surface (as of a microscopic slide); also : a preparation made by smearing material on a surface
3 : a usually unsubstantiated charge or accusation against a person or organization —often used attributively
April 7th, 2010 at 3:44 pm
In deegee’s world one equalls “a distinct segment”
The Useful Idiots will repeat these talking points.
See Alinsky Rule #12, Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.
April 7th, 2010 at 6:33 pm
Chuck I was at the Bachman event today. Saw maybe 5 libs protesting, 1 was still there when we left after Palin spoke.
Side note Pawlenty has polished up his stump speech.
DG, Hope we can all agree that anyone making terroristic threats is breaking the law and needs to face the consequences.
April 7th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
jpmn-
Is an unsigned letter saying “You will rot in Hell for this!” a terroristic threat?
Not in my opinion. There is a legal definition of what a credible threat is. It involves a “reasonable person” test.
I think many of the so-called threatening letters trumpeted by the media after Obamacare passed were of this nature. I believe that many of these FBI investigations were initiated following this sort of conversation:
FBI Guy: “The letter says “you will rue the day you voted for Obamacare”. There is no credible threat there to you or your family.”
Congressman Milquetoast: “I feel threatened! I want an investigation!”
FBI Guy: “Uh . . . Okay. We’ll put our best team on it, Congressman!”
Congressman Milquetoast: “Great! Can I say that you are investigating when I write the press release?”
FBI Guy: “Whatever.”
April 8th, 2010 at 9:37 am
jpmn-
“Is an unsigned letter saying “You will rot in Hell for this!” a terroristic threat?”
NO! And any lawyer worth his salt will get the accused off if that is all the evidence presented. I would be surprised if even a hack political appointee would even consider an arrest warrant if that was all the evidence presented. Let alone a jury.
April 8th, 2010 at 9:43 am
My wife and I were nearly clipped by a bicyclist while in a crosswalk with the walk signal on while walking to the event. My wife was missed by only a few inches.
I am in favor of sharing the road with Bikes. But obey the same rules the rest of traffic does.
April 8th, 2010 at 9:50 am
JP,
Well, yeah. Pedestrians in crosswalks get the right of way. Nothing about the “boise stop”, by the way, changes that.
Of course, if I could have a nickel for every time I’ve had to haul up short in an intersection, on bike, foot or in a car, to avoid some numbnuts who’s run the red light, I could buy a new bike.