PrintSmith wrote: Any bets on whether or not they repeat that call in the wake of publishing the sentiments expressed by their columnist? I don't think even the looniest left-wingnut Democrat would take that bet.
I would. They believe in new speak. There are no tax increases, only revenue enhancements on "millionaires and billionaires".
Edit: I believe LJ is a great example of what is echoing in the left wing echo chamber. New speak is coming soon to a theater near you.
LadyJazzer wrote: INow, if you want to admit that what the Tealiban Terrorists ..
Somehow I don't think the Times would want to be held responsible as one of the most virulent supporters of the Democrats for the gale of anger that is sure to follow the dissemination of such inflammatory rhetoric when leftists take to the streets and start overturning cars, lighting fires and clashing with police forces. I could be wrong though......they might actually issue the call for such behavior, or at the very least applaud it in their editorial section.
I JUST LOVE ALL the TOLERANCE the leftists SHOW!!!!
I LOL, the frick'in hypocrites, makes them look like fools everytime... lj proves her tolerance all the time, she tolerant of you ONLY if you agree, with her leftist "ideas".
I'm getting quite a kick out of this thread watching all the usual suspects complain about liberals. Yet, when the right has done the same or worse...when right wing columnists make hateful remarks about liberals or Obama.....not a peep from these same suspects.
Sorry conservatives, but your recent conscience is laughable when viewed in light of your past behavior.
Not nearly as big a kick as I am watching the left engage in behavior which it only so recently decried as being destructive and hateful, bringing back memories of all the violence that happened earlier in our history when the discourse lacked the civility that it should have. A universal hue and cry raised up by those on the left to pillory those with whom they disagreed - including the very same newspaper that published this most recent example of the disingenuous content of their words at the time. The left doesn't believe that the discourse should be civil or heal rather than divide any more than the right does. Those of us on the right, however, are principled enough to admit that this is so rather than pretend we believe otherwise. We never said that "targeting" political opponents in elections should be barred from being used in political discourse, that came from the left archer. And it came from a group of people whose only purpose in pretending they believed it was that it would give excuse to create intrigue using that pretense.
