Where Is Pelosi To Denounce This?

Nancy Pelosi was all weepy one day discussing the terrible rhetoric that she hears and stated that she has heard it in the past and it led to violence. Of course, the violence she was talking about was the murder of Harvey Milk and George Moscone in San Francisco. The murderer, Dan White, was a Democrat and it was over a political dispute involving White’s job.

So Pelosi made this big deal in order to marginalize those opposed to the current administration’s actions. These TEA Party members are some violent folks, you know.

Except at every TEA Party event, there have been no confirmed reports of violence involving them. Some of the TEA Party members have been attacked by the other side but the members themselves have not resorted to violence even though the left is provoking them in hopes of making them turn violent.

Since this is obviously not working, the left has resorted to manufacturing violence. At the ceremony where members of the Congressional Black Caucus walked arm in arm to the Capitol several claimed they were spat upon and that they were called the N word. There is no evidence that these incidents took place. So far no video has surfaced to show that it happened. If that evidence existed we would have seen it non stop on the MSM. Olberman would loop it and play it for the entirety of his show.

It did not happen. Andrew Breitbart however, is offering a cash reward (now up to $100,000) for video evidence that it did. I think his money is safe.

So this gets play in the MSM but once calls for evidence go out they have nothing. What next? Take a small number of calls threatening violence and couple them with a few acts of vandalism and blame them on the TEA Party and right wingers. There is no way of knowing who did this, only speculation. The very left that calls people Islamophobes for saying that a Muslim was involved in a bombing incident are quick to indict the right for acts that could have been done by anyone.

If black lawmakers will invent a racist story to advance the party line then it is not beyond reason that the left was involved in these incidents in order to pin the blame on the right.

Make no mistake, the people who committed the vandalism and who made the threats need to be found and dealt with appropriately. But let’s find them and determine ideology before we make claims. Even then, the nut jobs involved are the only ones responsible.

For real violence, Andrew Breitbart tells of Harry Reid supporters who threw eggs at the TEA Party express bus and threatened him with harm. Since we must apply the same standard, I will need some evidence that this happened so if anyone has video, please post it. [See update below]

We do know that the left is engaged in many acts of violence and vandalism. They slash tires, break windows (sometimes their own party’s), and bite off fingers.

Sometimes they even have members of the New Black Panther Party stand outside polling places with nightsticks intimidating voters.

But the violence claim is aimed (is aimed a word that incites violence) at TEA Party members who have been peaceful.

This is by design because they know they are in trouble and need to marginalize the opposition if they hope to avoid a bloodbath in November.

Let’s keep our powder dry (oops, another phrase linked to violence) and focus on our agenda. Don’t be goaded into violence.

This is what they want.

And the last thing we want to do is give them what they want.

UPDATE: I asked for it and I got it. The video that shows eggs hitting the TEA Party bus, a guy holding an egg and a moron saying it was TEA Party people who threw the eggs is now available. There is also a man threatening Andrew Breitbart, he says that if Breitbart does not leave “I am going to jail today.” So it looks like Breitbart backed up his claims with video. Can the Congressional Black Caucus do the same with regard to the alleged racist remarks and spitting directed at them?

Video 1
Video 2

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

30 Responses to “Where Is Pelosi To Denounce This?”

  1. Adam says:

    “Sometimes they even have members of the New Black Panther Party stand outside polling places with nightsticks intimidating voters.”

    You have to toss a sprinkling of lie into every post like a garnish…

  2. Adam says:

    The Democrats did not ask them to appear and threaten individuals nor did they condone their actions. Sprinkle, sprinkle…a little lie here…a little lie there…

  3. Adam says:

    And of course no mention lately of the Christian militia group busted by the Feds for building illegal explosive devices. They’re probably not right wing though right? And if they claim to be I bet that’s just a bunch of liberals pretending to be violent right wing militants in order to further marginalize your side and provoke a response.

    • Big Dog says:

      If those people were plotting to kill cops and had weapons they deserved to be taken down. Interesting how it is happening now.

      I wonder when DHS is going to raid the Muslim compounds in NY and other states where they are using weapons and training.

      If those people were right wing they are the fringe and you can bet your ass Holder will not drop the charges against them (nor should he if they are actually doing what is alleged).

      Maybe the national party did not send those guys out but the local party certainly knew and no one from the party told them to stop or to leave. Their acts were approved by the refusal to condemn.

      • Adam says:

        “Interesting how it is happening now.”

        Interesting in what way?

        “I wonder when DHS is going to raid the Muslim compounds in NY and other states where they are using weapons and training.”

        Feel free to provide evidence that Muslims are using illegal weapons and that DHS knows about it and isn’t doing anything.

        “Their acts were approved by the refusal to condemn.”

        The acts of intimidation were without authorization or knowledge from local or national Democrats or even authorization or knowledge of their own NBPP organization. So tell me how any of these groups needs to jump up and condemn these acts lest they be perceived as approving of them? There’s no logic there.

      • victoria says:

        This makes me really mad because true Christians don’t do this first of all and so not only are they trying the smear the right but they are trying to smear Christians as well.

      • victoria says:

        That was no “CHRISTIAN” militia group because there is no such thing. It may have been a wacko militia group but it was not Christian.

        • Adam says:

          This is basically the No True Scotsman fallacy.

          On a side note it would have been telling had those arrested been Muslims. Would you still be defending the vast majority of Muslims against the fringe then the way you seek to defend the vast majority of Christians against the fringe?

        • victoria says:

          There is a difference between a Scotsman and a Christian. A Christian is a true follower and believer in Jesus Christ. And I dare you to say that Jesus Christ taught violence. He said love your enemies and do good to those who hate you. Turn the other cheek and if someone asks you for your shirt give him your cloak also. So don’t give me any crap about true Scotsman.

      • Darrel says:

        Bigd: “If those people were right wing…”>>

        DAR
        If? They were trying to start your revolution Bigd.

        “Nine suspects tied to Hutaree, a Christian militia that was preparing for the Antichrist were charged with conspiring to kill police officers, then kill scores more by attacking a funeral using homemade bombs,…”

        D.
        ————–
        “…while the more secular and libertarian leaders of the militia movement may distance themselves from the Hutaree, the two militant strains of right-wing activism share some tactical affinities,…
        “What you’re starting to see in the number of militia groups sprouting up in the last year is a general antigovernment ideology,” Stern says. “The targeting of cops is not inconsistent with that. The literature that glorified that white supremacist movement that helped the militia movement take off in the 1990s advocated those tactics — especially in books like ‘The Turner Diaries.’ And some of these groups — like the Order and others — started setting traps for law enforcement and going after first responders.”

        “…whenever you have a combination of the ideology that says, ‘the government is evil and we’d better do something about it,’ and a religion that says, ‘Hey, God wants you to do something about it,’ that can be problematic.”

        Link.

  4. Big Dog says:

    Yeah, when Muslims use their religion to justify their hatred of us and our government it can be problematic as well but I don’t see the DHS rooting out those groups that are training for that right here in the US.

    Whoever did this is a fringe element and should be dealth with appropriately. Seems convenient to do it now as opposed to some time ago.

    Our Founders were not too big on government so they got rid of it and started over.

    The anarchists make threats all the time, when was the last time they were raided?

    My revolution is a peaceful one at the ballot box.

    The Black Panthers called for killing the police, and guys in the Obama admin have sided with cop killers.

    It is good that these guys, if they were really doing what is alleged, were found out but the timing is strange.

    These guys were nothing more than Bill Ayers from the other side. let them go free as a bird so they can make lots of money. Unlike Ayers, they never caused anyone’s death…

    • Adam says:

      “I don’t see the DHS rooting out those groups that are training for that right here in the US.”

      When Muslim groups try to commit crimes they too get “rooted out” so to speak. Just ask the Muslims in New York that were arrested in a sting trying to blow up Jews.

      I suppose you’re suggesting that the timing of these arrests were political? Is that what you’re getting at?

      “The Black Panthers called for killing the police, and guys in the Obama admin have sided with cop killers.”

      When did the Obama admin side with Black Panthers on anything?

      • Blake says:

        Of COURSE those arrests were political- only a moron could deny this-the timing was just what the brain-dead left asked for, because they seek to marginalize the Tea Party advocates. This is because they are a threat politically to the left.
        Face it- the left by themselves couldn’t turn water on- they NEED independents,and they have been losing independents the way a dog with mange loses hair- actually, that is a very apt comparison, if you view, as I do, the progressives as a detrimental disease.

  5. Big Dog says:

    I think I have made it clear that the radical Muslims who pervert the religion are the problem (though the Koran directs them to violence) and that there are plenty who want nothing to do with it. I also note that plenty of everyday Muslims keep quiet instead of speaking out.

    I don’t know how many different ways I need to say that those who break the law (regardless of where they stand) need to be held accountable.

    The Justice folks gave approval by not prosecuting those against whom they had already won. They were guilty and the DOJ had won the case and dismissed it. This is approval. If they cared about the law and the intimidation they would have followed through.

    As for the Muslim camps, if the DHS does not know about them then they need to be disbanded:

    Examiner

    They are not listed as foreign terrorists. Are those just arrested listed as such? Why not call them domestic terrorists and go after them?

  6. Big Dog says:

    An investigation by Britain’s Scotland Yard led to the discovery of the camp in Marion, Ala. The facility is called “Ground Zero USA.”

    Bullet-riddled police cars and a school bus with mannequin targets are scattered around the property. Inside a huge shed is an equally macabre scene, shot-up mannequins, male and female, in domestic settings, some with red, blood-like stains on them.

    Scotland Yard knows, wouldn’t you think DHS does? It sounds like the training is designed to attack police (shot up cop cars) and children (shot up school bus). ABC News

    Wouldn’t Janet be doing her job if she went after them as well?

  7. Adam says:

    When you find Muslims breaking the law and DHS ignoring the law breaking then let us know. Training militant Muslims in the US is no different than radical right wing militias training. When they start to buy illegal weapons or build bombs then they get cracked down on.

  8. Big Dog says:

    Looks like some AK 47s in there which are fully automatic and illegal. I am sure that if they go in there like they did the Michigan group they will find the illegal weapons. The group is training for war against the US which is something we should not allow them to do here.

    The so called Christian group was calling for war against the anti-Christ which, as far as I can tell, is not illegal.

    I am not surprised you would defend the one group and not the other. I call for all of them to be taken care of but you go ahead with your narrow view.

  9. Big Dog says:

    On a side note it would have been telling had those arrested been Muslims. Would you still be defending the vast majority of Muslims against the fringe then the way you seek to defend the vast majority of Christians against the fringe?

    The question is, why doi you condemn the Christians and give the Muslims a free pass? When Muslims do bad things you say they do not represent the whole and yuou excuse the behavior for one reason or another.

    Why have you not done that with this group?

    • Adam says:

      “I am not surprised you would defend the one group and not the other. I call for all of them to be taken care of but you go ahead with your narrow view. … When Muslims do bad things you say they do not represent the whole and you excuse the behavior for one reason or another.”

      Feel free to point out where I’ve defended the illegal activity of Muslims or claimed that the actions of this militant Christian group represent all Christians or even a large number of Christians. You can’t just say it’s so and then attack me with it.

      “Looks like some AK 47s in there which are fully automatic and illegal.”

      Not all AKs are restricted as you know so you’d need to determine what model it was to know if they broke the law.

      To suggest the FBI or DHS has ignored similar Muslim threats as this militant group is without merit. There have clearly been Muslims arrested for taking their plans a step further than a planning phase just like this militant group this week has allegedly done.

      • Big Dog says:

        You can determine the legality of the weapon by listening to it shoot. They are not legal and neither is the C4 or roccket propelled grenades.

        The Muslim groups were arrested after taking it a “STEP FURTHER than the planning phase” (per you). The so called Christian group was in the planning phase and not a step further. No further along than the Muslims shooting police cars and buses…

        At least the Canadians see it.

      • victoria says:

        Adam you absolutely refused to call the FT. Hood a terrorist and I bet you still won’t.

        • Adam says:

          “There is a difference between a Scotsman and a Christian. … So don’t give me any crap about true Scotsman.”

          It’s not an exact match with the fallacy of course because there are indeed a couple of things that make one Christian or not. I just think you approach fallacy territory when you start to narrow it way down as much as you’re doing.

          “Adam you absolutely refused to call the FT. Hood a terrorist and I bet you still won’t.”

          Sorry. I just refused to call the man a terrorist until his motives were more clear. People commit mass murder all the time and it doesn’t make it terrorism just because it’s a Muslim doing it. Just because your assumptions were shown to be true does not mean they were any less assumptions at the time. Don’t forget that.

          • Big Dog says:

            So knowing the people I do who told me about Hasan and listening to what he believed and did made my belief about him an assumption but you, saying that it is people who are against health care and right wingers who are cussing out Congress critters, making threats and committing acts of vandalism without one shred of evidence is not an assumption?

            How do you reconcile this Adam? It might turn out that you are right but if so it would not make your beliefs any less assumptions, yes?

            • Adam says:

              Well, first of all I don’t assume it is opposition to health care. They left notes saying so. If you still want to argue without evidence that it was liberals making the whole thing up…well…go ahead. You sound like lunatics when you explain why we’d want to do that and it makes me laugh.

            • Big Dog says:

              And Hasan asked about killing in the name of jihad. His actions and words to others including yelling Alla Akbar pretty much clued us in but you said we were making assumptions. He gave as many clues as you say the callers did.

              I did not argue that liberals made it up. I said that I would not be surprised that they did.

              You know, like they Black Caucus guys who claimed to have been called the N word and spit upon.

              That did not happen. Unless you have any proof of it…

            • Adam says:

              “And Hasan asked about killing in the name of jihad. His actions and words to others including yelling Alla Akbar pretty much clued us in but you said we were making assumptions.”

              You were. There was a lot of confusion from the attack and you know it. It was many days before we knew what was true or not yet (and months even on some details) just days in you were calling it a terrorist attack and blaming it on PC. I never said he wasn’t a terrorist or that it wasn’t PC. I simply asked for evidence of that which you were certain of. You had very little proof for a long time.

              “I did not argue that liberals made it up. I said that I would not be surprised that they did.”

              Well, there’s not much difference is there? You can entertain alternative theories not supported by any evidence or you can look at the evidence that is in front of you. With the attacks I have not blamed one specific group but I have simply said the evidence points to it being anti-health care motivated and that the vast majority of those opposed to the bill are on the right.

              “That did not happen. Unless you have any proof of it…”

              You say he made it up with certainty at this point which I find dishonest since there’s an inconclusive video. In the video the man clearly signals he was spit on and the one he’s accusing cannot be heard on the video so we don’t know what he said or if he said a slur. Whether it happened or not I don’t know and I haven’t seen enough evidence one way or another myself to talk about it much more than what I’ve said here.

            • Big Dog says:

              Well I certainly had some information you did not because of people who worked with the guy. However, the evidence pointed to terror and that is what it was. You say evidence points to right wingers and it might turn out that way.

              The man said he was spit upon. How do you know that someone was shouting and spittle came out while screaming and that he did not actually expectorate? In other words, if spittle came out it was an accident (as sometimes happens when people scream).

              One would think that there would be a lot of heads turning if the N word was yelled and one would think that others would look at a person spitting.

              It appears contrived. They had video cameras and did not get it on record? Proof, not their words. I have no doubt they would cry wolf to disparage the opposition.