News Article: WSJ: Why the left is so consumed with hate
- Thread starter Displaced Bama Fan
- Start date
I can't get past their pay wall.
Does Mr. Steele also address why the right is so consumed with hate?
OK. I scanned the article.
Basically, blame the hippies of the 1960s for the virulent opposition to Trumpland.
And Ferguson was an isolated event, a single shooting of an African-American by the men in blue.
I guess what we saw from 2001-2009 never happened.
As the saying goes, Mrs. Lincoln, aside from the shooting, how did you like the play.
Last edited:
Like when Bush was called Hitler and people were making movies about him being assassinated?
They do seem a little angry but that's only the politics doing that - otherwise they are just regular people.
It used to be that a Buckley or a Reagan or "name your own conservative" would make an intellectual argument. They held optimism for all the American people. And so on.
Then people like Breitbart came along and said outright that conservatives had to fight fire with fire. They looked for the most extreme examples of "incivility" of the left and matched or exceeded the tone and tenor. This was done purposely and has added to the poisonous nature of politics and allowed the rise of Trump, who is essentially the culmination of all that effort.
That criticism is before I even begin to tear down that article as tripe - which it is.
Can't speak for everyone, but currently it's because I can't watch the Dukes of Hazzard because of the General Lee even though the entire theme of the show promotes treating people equitably and justly to the point that the main villain in his cartoonish all white suites is an allegory for the clan and its deleterious effect on small towns in the rural south; and yet, every time I turn on the BBC, they are showing Robin Hood: a story about a young British man who travels to the Middle East and returns to wage a terrorist war on his government.
PS: I feel like we should apologize to the moderators before we even start threads like this.
I am pretty sure that you can't call it the far right anymore. Fox News peddles this crap constantly. I think if you have one of the 4 major news networks dedicated to shoveling this stuff, it no longer qualifies as being "far" anything.
Oh, it still is but has become more mainstream.
A plurality of the public is independent.
The political spectrum is so tilted right that a centrist Presidency such as Obama's is deemed "far left" by Fox and their like minds.
And to be fair, far right by the left and MSNBC, though mostly not to the same extent but by a very few.
So far most comments are about the media, not the actual people.
I thought the topic was about the people.
I thought the topic was about the people.
Breitbart represented the worst of the right and Bannon took it even further. They and others had profound influence on their audience. When alive, he made known his intent to do just that. So yes, he was a member of the right who created his media outlet to influence politics in the guise of being a member of the media. In a sense, it is media by definition but it is also a propaganda of sorts.
Latest threads
-
SEC West Showdown Sends Alabama to Oxford to Meet with Ole Miss- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Davis II Named to Stopper of the Year Midseason Watch List
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Eleven-Run Third Powers Alabama to 14-5 Win over Samford
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Maybe aTm's Pockets Aren't So Bottomless After All -- Layoffs In The Athletic Department
- Started by 4Q Basket Case
- Replies: 9
-
Time to un-vacate 2005-2007 on field victories and un-forfeit the 1993 season?
- Started by CmdrThor
- Replies: 24
-