There is No Honest Debate with the Left

Yesterday I didn’t get onto the Internet until around six o’clock in the evening and was greeted with an extremely racist comment left on one of my old posts. I usually allow such things to stand as monuments to the stupidity of the commenter but after a few years of toiling away on the Internet I’ve come to recognize the honest bigotry of the cretin versus the forced imitation by those who claim to not be racists, but think nothing of leaving comments that would make David Duke blush. Then they return and accuse you of being a racist for allowing their own filth on your site.

I speak of course, of the Moby and in this case it was fairly clear that this person was trolling for some positive reaction from me or my readers. Of course, my readership is far too decent and sophisticated to be dragged into supporting such vile racism. Coincidentally, but unrelated to my own Moby, Free Republic was just the victim of a complicated and transparent Mobying scheme set up by Vancouver Sun reporter Chris Parry who also happens to be a DailyKos diarist with handle Hollywoodoz. There he spreads insane conspiracy theories, pimps his scam business and runs a “third world loan” con game on his fellow progressives.

Parry also promoted the idea that Progressives should use any number of underhanded and dishonest Internet tactics to shut down debate with Conservatives, including Mobying. He practices what he preaches apparently since he not only left racist comments on venerable righty site Free Republic, he then used his own comments as material to write a hit piece in the Vancouver Sun. Even Gawker could see this one:

 It gets worse, though. Chris Parry, it appears, has advocated on his Daily Kos blog any number of egregious offenses, among them: posting hate speech on sites like Free Republic and blaming it on conservatives. Parry posted under the name “hollywoodoz” on Daily Kos, where his signature was “Fool me once, I’ll punch you in the fucking head.” Parry outed himself as hollywoodoz here, where he discloses the company he helped start. In essence: Parry, the journalist, found his story right where he’d been circling it for a very long time, and reported it as news. Sigh.

Free Republic is of course on a tear rallying their troops to spread the word on Parry. Gateway Pundit has an example of Parry’s own racism. But this is just the latest example of the dishonest tactics of Progressives on the web. Robert Spencer has long been a target of such attacks by Progressive turned 9/11 Conservative turned Atheist crusader Charles Johnson and his “lizard” cult. Most recently Johnson’s slanderous untruths were used by C.A.I.R. to help bully the American Library Association into rescinding an invitation to Spencer to speak at a symposium they set up. I have blogged before about Johnson’s attack on me and this site, which was also based largely on dishonesty designed to shut down debate.

Which is the point. Progressivism only appeals to fascists. Modern Liberalism, with its identity politics, class warfare and economic policies that externalize the infantilization of our young people, cannot withstand the scrutiny a debate brings. No one really believes you can create more jobs by making it more expensive to hire workers, or that you can safeguard the nation by timidly asking our enemies to forgive us. If debated honestly, most Americans would be swayed to the right of any argument, because most Americans believe in freedom, personal responsibility and doing what it takes to keep their families safe.

So the left in this country seeks to circumvent debate by assassinating the characters of those on the right, and for decades they have been successful. In our schools, in our media and now on the Internet the left has been able to convince generation after generation that we on the right are too unseemly to be taken seriously, that associating with us or our ideas would carry with it a social stigma that could not be endured. The left has been able to win the debate by ensuring no one listens to the other side.

And on the right we still attempt good faith debate, but to what end? Exposing the dishonesty and destroying the reputations of those like Parry and Johnson who use such tactics will do more for the “right wing” in this country than a thousand debates we get disinvited to. It is time we realize that the left is not interested in being convinced that we are right, but only in convincing others that we never could be and thus aren’t worth engaging. We need to change our strategy accordingly, and show a new generation with stories like Chris Parry’s that the left can’t be trusted.

5 thoughts on “There is No Honest Debate with the Left

  1. I’m sad to say I think you’re right, and I’m sorry you had to log into your site only to find such an asshat comment. Thanks for the Moby reference too. I’m a bit behind the times with some of the internet speak. I’ve seen this type of behavior but didn’t know the name for it.

    Regarding this statement: “No one really believes you can create more jobs by making it more expensive to hire workers, or that you can safeguard the nation by timidly asking our enemies to forgive us.”

    When I was a liberal, I disagreed with that statement because I was entrenched in the “Communism isn’t so bad” thinking that the radical feminist agenda pushes, albeit under the umbrella of a ‘matriarchal utopia.’ The only way to push that agenda is to make the bad guy ‘the big white capitalist man who only wants power over’ (one of Starhawk’s favorite terms).

    That kind of thinking feeds on insecurities and makes those who believe it feel morally superior. It’s gotten to the point where this moral superiority has made the liberals as self-righteous as the far religious right that they always rally against. Though the rad fems are just one section of the liberals, I think this principle can apply to others as well.

    I’m not a psychologist though, and I certainly don’t think that liberals who use the odious tactics you mention should be given any slack no matter what emotional problems they have.

  2. Trish have you ever read Tammy Bruce? She tells a similar story abiut being part of the left and accepting the far left doctrine as a way of the group bonding over moral superiority.

  3. Trish Deneen wrote:

    When I was a liberal, I disagreed with that statement because I was entrenched in the “Communism isn’t so bad” thinking that the radical feminist agenda pushes, albeit under the umbrella of a ‘matriarchal utopia.’

    Trish, I’ve been in that position too. Words like “utopia,” and “feminist” can be very seductive, as can the other tenets of liberalism when people on the left contrast them with the “evils” of conservatism. Liberals do a fantastic job of equating their beliefs with all that is good and righteous in the world while simultaneously smearing righties as hateful, greedy, ignorant, and bigoted. The only way the right can win is by taking back control of this narrative and setting the record straight.

    Rob, in addition to exposing dishonesty, we also need to correct the line of thinking that says liberals want the same things conservatives do, they’re just traveling a different path to achieve those goals.

  4. I’ve only skimmed over Tammy Bruce’s website saw a couple of clips of her on O’Reilly’s show. I’ll see if my library has any of her books. I’ve liked what I’ve read so far. Thanks.

    Jen, it can be a slippery slope down the feminist utopian hole can’t it? There were a few things while hanging out with these groups that started to wake me up, but the biggest was realizing that some of their ideals were based on sheer hatred of men in their lives.

  5. Pingback: Shadowscope

Comments are closed.