Within the last 24 hours we have been attacked by both the liberals and the conservatives, so today we are going to swat some flies.
First, the conservatives:
We've always thought that the fundamental difference between a conservative and a liberal is the willingness of one and the refusal of the other to lie. Liberals seem to have a "the ends justify the means" mentality while Republicans are willing to be truthful and let the chips fall where they may.
Yesterday, we published a letter and made some short comments. Imagine our dismay when an unpublished commenter implied that we were somehow not a Republican because we had illuminated that sometimes not just liberals have an ends justify the means mentality. We're guessing that a "good Republican" would have just ignored a false claim because it assisted a "true Republican." Needless to say, we don't exactly buy that reasoning.
Now the leftys:
That was mild stuff compared to the lefty (he described himself with this word on an earlier comment on this site) who didn't much like our "First, They Came For The Jews" essay. As with all propagandists, he pretended to ignore the plain point that we were making and claimed that we were:
equating the arrest of these protesters with the murder of Jews in the holocaust.
He backed off a few hours later and opined:
I don't think they are accusing Udall of being Hitler. They are so desperate to make the case that these war protesters rights were so violated by Udall that they stretch as far as to post out the famous statement by Pastor Martin Niemöller. It's patently absurd. These protesters were allowed to protest peacefully for weeks and who were given due process. The Jews were afforded none of those luxuries.
We took great care when we wrote our comment. We first went to the Wikipedia entry and tried to learn what the author of that poem meant by it.
His poem is well-known, frequently quoted, and is a popular model for describing the dangers of political apathy, as it often begins with specific and targeted fear and hatred which soon escalates out of control.
It is quoted often, but it is not quoted in the context of calling anyone a Nazi. Had "Steve Balboni" done any research, he would have also seen from Wikipedia:
The quotation was widely circulated by social activists in the United States in the late 1960s.
In order to make certain that we could not be accused of calling anyone a Nazi, we inserted a comment about Republicans also being willing to look the other way immediately before the poem. We also then provided our own interpretation of the words which said nothing about anyone being a Nazi:
Draw your own conclusions as to its meaning. I think it means that while I dislike everything Caroline Bninski stands for, I shouldn't stand by and see her mugged by Mark Udall and the courts without saying something unless I am willing to be victimized by the same muggers in the same way.
Civilized people speak out. Cowards can never see that they will end up unprotected by their cowardly silence.
We suspect that "Balboni" knew exactly what we were doing, and knew the history of that quote, but in his liberal mind, the ends justify the means. Claiming that we were labeling folks Nazi's served his purpose. It did not, as he well knows, serve the truth.
We wonder if he would agree that he might be
too smugly blinded by your politics to see right from wrong.
And finally "Steve Balboni" comments
Colorado Index is a good blog. The folks at Schaffer v. Udall though couldn't debate themselves out of a wet paper bag
Pretty funny, when you think about it. Thanks for the complement...and the slam. SvU isn't intended as a debate blog. Just so you know, we have a lot of fun on both.