How Low Can We Go?

| | Comments (39) | TrackBacks (0)

I never thought I would live to see the day when Larry Flynt is the class act in the crowd. Flynn is a social uber liberal, a smut peddler, a member of the Democrat party and about as partisan as they have come. I do not like him, one bit. I recall him threatening to 'out' Senators who voted to convict Clinton during his trial. Yet here we are today, and Flynt is the voice from the left that actually sounds reasonable:

I hated everything he stood for, but after meeting him in person, years after the trial, Jerry Falwell and I became good friends.

A statement that while recalling the differences still gave the recently deceased the due dignity. Which is in sharp contrast to the following ...

he was such an unctuous, smug, obnoxious blowhard that it's really difficult not to celebrate his death. I'm trying, but it's .... so .... HARD

or the following two ...

No loss. It came 20 years too late.
First class *ssh*le..now worm food...the world finally makes sense.
or elsewhere at the DU the following movie . Go see it for yourself.

Then at the Washington Post (an obscure left wing rag) the following from their website:

Jerry Falwell's death does little other than add salt to the wounded pride of the Bush/Cheney Regime and their flock of narrow-minded followers.

And

Am I the only one whose first thoughts here included a particular scene in "The Wizard of Oz?" Say, with some Munchkins celebrating in song...

Or

Good ridence. Jerry al Falwell was imbicile who thought that the whole world should think and believe just like him. Too bad there were so many gullible people in this country who fell for his nonsense and sent so much money to him. So does this mean that Pat bin Robertson moves up to the slot of chief idiot? The Christian taliban marches on....

It all is pitiful, wretched and oh so small. I cannot but help remember the fiasco at Paul Wellstone's funeral when several Republican Senators showed up to honor Wellstone and where attacked by the crowd and told the only way to honor Wellstone would be to become Democrats.

Give it a rest. First of all the political party we either belong to or support should not be what defines us; nor should the end of the political spectrum we happen to be parked in. Human being, Christian, American, father, engineer, come before political labels for this blogger. Ask yourself this question. How do you define yourself? If a political party or spectrum location is before 'American' or 'Human', then venom is the order of the day when someone who disagree with you dies. But it is a strange sad that world you live in.

Can we let the guy grow cold before we spit on his grave. I was never a fan of Falwell, the whole 'God is a Republican' was wrong on oh so many levels; but the guy also did foster many Charities and charitable acts. He had a huge impact on the American political scene back in the late 70's and 80's. This is the time to leave some things well enough alone.

In a bygone era, when Gen Sherman (USA) was buried in NY, his chief protagonist, Gen Johnson (CSA) attended his funeral out of respect. Face it, that conflict represented a far bigger difference in philosophy with far greater consequences than anything we are facing within our country today. Why could Johnson, who was on the losing side of that argument, show more generosity of spirit than any of clowns the above? Why am I left having to point out Larry Flynt as the class act?

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: How Low Can We Go?.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://novatownhall.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1093

39 Comments

Good post, Jacob. Thank you.

Ron said:

We saw the same venom from the left when Reagan died. As John F. Kennedy might have said, "no class."

There is a class of liberals for whom "Christian" is bad, but "Christian/Southerner" is the apogee of evil. Add to that the fact Falwell was articulate and influential in the corridors of power for a few years and you can get a sense of why there would be such spontaneous glee.

Jack said:

These are just further examples in support of the "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder" theory.

zimzo said:

Of course, it's OK for you guys to attack Ann Richards when she died of cancer. And does your "speak no ill of the dead" rule apply to everyone? Apparently not. You were pretty gleeful about al-Zarqawi's death. I'm not saying I was too unhappy about that either. But why should this rule only apply to people you like? To many Falwell was a bad guy who said that "AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals" and who on the day after this country experienced one of the worst tragedies in its history blamed "the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way." To many people he mocked and exploited the tragedy of people who died of AIDS and on 9/11. Instead of offering compassion, he used these events as a cudgel to make political points. So if some people are less than reverent about his death, it shouldn't be surprising since he was not especially reverent about the death of people he didn't like.

Does that make it right? I don't think so. I don't think it's very classy to express glee or attack someone when they have died. Falwell had a family and people who loved him, and in his later years he even softened his positions on gay people and did some reaching out. By the same token he brought pain to many people when he was alive so it is understandable that not everyone is mourning his loss. But it's pretty hypocritical and self-righteous to suggest that it is only liberals who lack class when it comes to mourning the dead. I wonder how heartfelt your obituaries of Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy or any of your other bete noires will be.

Jack said:

Here are some more from DailyKos:

"THANK ALLAH -- the pig is dead. now toasting on a spit in hell, with an apple in his mouth, and not a second too soon. God IS great and merciful after all."

"Look, Fallwell Was A, White Supremacist in a minister's robes & he used those robes to terrorize this nation. This was not his democracy because he didn't believe in democracy. Soooooo for all of you who think that the rest of us who actually think & are actually celebrating the death of this hateful Son of Bitch, need to get a fucking clue!!!
I'm sorry I'm cussing so much, but, Fallwell was an emotional terrorist & anything that got him off the world's stage is a thing to celebrate!!!
May his eternal soul burn in hell & may we never see his soul come back!!!!"


"i am glad he is dead. That man was a racist homophobic evil fucker. I am sure if there is a hell he is burning in it right now. Now if Pat Roberton or Anne Coulter would die of a heart attack we really would be getting somewhere"

"Falwell was a racist, bigoted asshole in life and I imagine he is in death, too, if there is, indeed, an afterlife."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/15527/2018

Ron said:

Who attacked Ann Richards when she died?

I would say Zarqawi was different since he was a terrorist and a murderer. Just like Saddam Hussein. If some sudden and violent end befalls many of the leaders of the current regime in Iran, don't expect me to express much grief.

There are a lot of people who are tactless when reacting to the death of prominent people. However, it's pretty clear that the Angry left dominates the rabid expressions in these cases. In a case like Joe Lieberman's we can easily predict that the unkind words will come more from the left than the right, even though Lieberman is a pretty liberal Democrat!

So zimzo, you've always been respectful when hearing news of the passing of anyone to the political right of you?

Jack said:

Zimzo:

No-one here called Ann Richards any names at all. I only said that her veto of the Texas Concealed Carry referrendum contributed significantly to her defeat by George Bush, and thus to his becoming President: http://www.novatownhall.com/blog/2006/09/thank_you_ann_richards.php

Only someone with a mental disorder could consider that an attack.

jacob said:

zimzo,

1. Show me a sight were Ann Richards was refered to in the manner like the examples I outlined above.

Show me were someone wished she burned in hell.

Show me someone who said she should have died sooner or is a hate monger.

I imagine you can't. You most certainly can't find such venom in such numbers.

You can't and you won't.

There is a difference. Your side of the argument heaped the same venom atop Reagan. It has become part of the culture of the left.

It is sad.

2. as for "But why should this rule only apply to people you like?"

First of all: I do not like Falwell. Read all of the post.

Second of all: spitting on the grave of an enemy of our country is not the same as spitting on the grave of a fellow American. Do you get that?

I can't stand Hanoi Jane. Still, I am not wishing her dead, because that goes to far. The point is we are Americans before we are liberals or conservatives and we are losing sight of that.

Our conflicts no longer end at the water's edge, or at the grave. This needs to end.

zimzo said:

I'm saying it's a silly right-wing myth that only the left behaves this way. I have seen plenty of sickening comments from the right. When plans to assassinate Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were revealed Little Green Footballs and other right-wing cesspools expressed regret that he didn't go through with it. After the election commenters at LGF said they hoped America would be attacked by terrorists again. Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler suggested lynching Supreme Court Justices. Ann Coulter suggested poisoning Justice Stevens and bombing the New York Times.

And on this blog Joe suggested I "degrade the human race" and chided me for "taking in oxygen."

So spare me your self-righteousness about uncivil lefties. There is plenty of classlessness to go around.

I don't think saying Zimzo degrades the human race after he writes something repugnant is classless at all. :-|

stay puft said:

Richards and Falwell don't compare in terms of their influence on our society and the divisiveness of their statements.

show me a dead liberal who was as divisive as Falwell and I'm sure I could find some "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead" post for ya.

the thing is that if someone who identifies as conservative says something crazy, you guys say they're just a lone nut, but it the person identifies as a liberal, you see their comments as being representative of the left.

Jack said:

"the thing is that if someone who identifies as conservative says something crazy, you guys say they're just a lone nut, but it the person identifies as a liberal, you see their comments as being representative of the left."

That's because conservatives decry their nuts, while the liberals embrace theirs.

stay puft said:

hmmm. No, I don't think that's it.

jacob said:

Marshmallow,
I recall the conversation revolving around Ann Coulter. She got it from both the left and right for calling John Edwards a faggot. Your basic point back then was that this did reflect the right even thought the right was busy giving here a collective backhand.

I now see words far more offensive being directed at Falwell, and all I see you doing is whining how we are saying this is representative of the left, and not just a lone nut. That is because in our case it WAS a lone nut, and here I can find scads more of similar postings if I wanted to.

Furhtermore, these 'netroots' are a HUGE part of the left today. The powerbase of the Democrat chairman rests in the slime I posted above. This includes te WP, not just the DU. You don't like it? Good, but don't kill the messenger (ME), attack the message (the netroots' vitriol).

As for divisive, lets see ...
Gloria Steinhem, Hanoi Jane, and Mikey Moore. I suspect you will find something for all of them. But will you it in these numbers? Will you find this much hate? I don't think so. You will find something. Go post it, we'll see how it compares.

zimzo said:

No that's not it at all. Don Imus was liberal and it was liberals who went after him and conservatives who defended him. Ann Coulter was defended on this very blog. Joe apparently thinks it is OK to dehumanize someone if he doesn't like what they say. Personally, I don't think that's very classy. I pointed out something that was stated in the very post he linked to, that racist and white supremacist sites were linking to the story. I know Joe sometimes doesn't like facts that contradict his world view but attacking me by saying I didn't deserve to live strikes me as being beyond the pale. To then try to attack all liberals because a few liberals did the same thing is pretty incredible.

jacob said:

zimzo,
"I'm saying it's a silly right-wing myth that only the left behaves this way."
Thats nice, now go proove it. Otherwise you are just making assertions.(again)

I asked you to go point out a few things you allege the right said about Ann Richards. Apparantly the right spit on Richards the way the left just spat upon Falwell. OK, lets see some proof.

I guess you could not find them. Pesky things those assertions, you need to back them up with facts.

jacob said:

zimzo,
Coulter was also attacked on this blog. By me. You have a bad case of selective amnesia boy.

zimzo said:

Gloria Steinem is divisive? Because she's a feminist? Jane Fonda opposed the Vietnam War 40 years ago and you still call her Hanoi Jane for doing things when she was young that she has apologized for many times over. Talk about fighting ancient battles.

Jane Fonda happens to be a Christian, by the way. Real Christians believe in redemption and forgiveness. That's more than you can say about a lot of people who claim to be Christians.

Jack said:

Being a Christian doesn't "happen," zimzo.

zimzo said:

I was referring to the fact that Ann Richards was attacked on this blog the day that she died.

However, here are some examples of those oh-so-civil conservatives on her fellow Texan Molly Ivins:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-anderson/molly-ivins-right-winger_b_40155.html

jacob said:

zimzo,
I was asked for divisive. I gave some contemporaries of Falwell. Jane Fonda did annoy/enrage a lot of people in her time. The meaning of divisive. GS and her bycycle remark did a lot of damage to the family, and is NOT admired by manny, and admired by others. That fits the divisive bill. Or does divisivein your thoughtspeak world mean 'only one who enrages the left?'

Falwell did most of his work annoying the left in the 70's and 80's.

As for redemption and forgiveness Falwell did apologise for HIS remarks regarding 9/11 (a low point in my opinion) but that really did not go very far, now did it?

I know what you mean zimzo! We only are supposed to forgive those who are liberals. Is that it?

You want something newer?
Hillary has whopping big negatives. Then there is there is ol' Red Nanny Pelosi
http://www.novatownhall.com/blog/2007/04/red_nanny.php#more
I know dear ol 'Reverend' Jackson. Rosie Odonnel maybe?

When did Jane Fonda come to Christ? What is you evidence? For that matter when did she apologise? I remember one of her 'aplogies' it went like this, "I am sorry you are too ignorant to know how much I tried to help you." A paraphrase to be sure. But, I am supposed to forgive that?

zimzo said:

It's in Jane Fonda's biography and numerous press reports, Jacob, including her 60 Minutes interview. I've also talked to her personally about it a couple of times, but I don't expect you to take my word for it. Where is your evidence that she said "I am sorry you are too ignorant to know how much I tried to help you"? I don't believe she ever said anything like that. We all know how great your memory is, for example, when you made up a story about John Edwards and then repeated it after you had already been called on it.

You're the one who claims to be a great Christian so forgive me (so to speak) for expecting you to act like one.

By the way calling her Hanoi Jane and calling Nancy Pelosi "Red Nanny" makes you look like an idiot. I'm not saying you are one...

stay puft said:

that's powerful Jack

Jacob, let's talk. "I see you doing is whining how we are saying this is representative of the left"

Well, so far I've only made one comment on this thread, and I said one other thing: that Falwell was divisive. Big-shot voices of the right tend to be divisive figures. Ann Coulter's expressed goal is to piss off liberals. One day she will die, and one day so will Rush Limbaugh and others. I'm sure there will be some who will cheer when that happens. Is it classy to celebrate someone's death? Of course not.

Now, are there any prominent, influential liberals who have attacked an entire subset of American society?

The lefty folks you mentioned mainly attacked policies and specific people who perpetuated those policies. The conservatives I mentioned tend to attack broad groups of people in American society.

stay puft said:

HA!

Shouldn't the fact that she once said, "I am sorry you are too ignorant to know how much I tried to help you" be evidence enough?

jacob said:

zimzo,
First of all the term 'great' Christian is an oxymoron. Second of all I never claimed to be a 'great' anything.

If anything you are the one who claims prominence. You have in the past have claimed to have interviewed important people (your words). I guess you needed to tell me you spoke to Jane Fonda. OK, thats nice.

Sorry, when someone repents they change their behavior. I see no such change in Jane. I see someone looking for label to ward off attack.

jacob said:

zimzo,
BTW, went to the HP, and though the poster there had some hateful sentences as examples of attacks on Molly Ivans.

I followed the link the particular msnbc comments section I did not find the particulars laid out by the HP post. Granted they could have been removed by now.

Wht I did find interesting was on the same page on the HP was this
"In Dean's case he manages to somehow associate Molly Ivins, Paul Krugman, and Maureen Dowd with spittle-flecked sub-human freak shows like Ann Coulter and Michael Savage"
Yep, you libs ooze with the milk of human kindness.

BTW, followed up to Deans link, he claims to be a lib, all the comments were very nice about Ms Ivans.

jacob said:

Marshmallow,
"Well, so far I've only made one comment on this thread, and I said one other thing: that Falwell was divisive"
No disagreement there.

"Big-shot voices of the right tend to be divisive figures"
yup, unlike Michael Moore, Al Franken, Christopher Hitchens, Rosie Odonnal etc. All those guys are just soooooo agreeable.

Face it, all 'big-shot' voices when they are making a point are divisive.

Lincoln was divisive would you not say? Nothing wrong with being divisive. It is what you are being divisive about that makes you either right or wrong.

stay puft said:

That's right: divisiveness is a good thing.

now tell me, do any of those liberals single out specific segments of the population?

Jack said:

"Hymietown"?

Jack said:

"If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house" -Al Sharpton

>

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2411

>

http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article2138.html

"Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America." -- Rosie O'Donnell

jacob said:

zimzo,
Why would that cause a nightmare? Jane's thought processes and view points are what I find revolting. She herself, is/was a beautiful woman.

Now, if you showed me a video of Madeleine Albright giving someone a kiss like that , well that is another kettle of fish now ain't it.

There might be a small glimmer hope for you.

jacob said:

Marshamllow,
Jack has answered your question, see above.

Jack,
Thank you for answering the question posed to me by Marshmallow. However, if you would in the future address him when answering the question the poor dear will then realise he must put his reading glasses on.

stay puft said:

OK, thanks.

Of course! How could I forget about Jackson's saying "Hymietown"? You bring it up in almost every single conversation!

It sucks to say "Hymietown," although a search on adl.org makes it look like these guys have done a lot more to end antisemitism than to encourage it. These are examples of stupid statements which are out of line with their careers, not central tenants of American liberalism.

Nevertheless, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see some "good riddance" when those revs pass.

that's not to say that any of this stuff is justifiable. Both sides have their characters with issues...

I tend to agree that we should be wary of radical movements, but I think Rosie is pretty annoying.


Jacob,

What? You seem to be under the impression that he had already answered the question when I asked it.

AFF said:

I get the feeling that Jacob doesn't often get to rub shoulders with well connected people.


jacob said:

Marshmallow,
No. I was just pulling you chain.

stay puft said:

ok, have a nice weekend

Robin said:

Guys,
I'm not fond of bigotry on any end of the spectrum. No matter who says it, it is simply wrong.
Also, although I did not vote for Mr. Reagan, I did cry at his funeral because despite his politics, he seemed like a decent human being (and my dad died from the same horrid disease). I can't honestly say that for Falwell. I can't shed tears for someone who said the things he did. I do wish his family all the sympathy possible. I would, however, rather mourn for the goodness that was Yolanda King. She stood for peace, brotherhood and faith.

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

ECOSYSTEM