Liberal pundit blasts left's tactics to silence women, blacks, who don't fall in line

[bonnie]

WASHINGTON SECRETS

Liberal pundit blasts left's tactics to silence women, blacks, who don't fall in line

BY PAUL BEDARD | MAY 11, 2015 | 10:52 AM 

 

 

 

 

In a stunning slap at her team, liberal pundit Kirsten Powers is charging in a new book that the left is so intolerant of alternative views that it will use sexist and even racist language to shout down women and blacks who don't champion Democratic causes.

Kirsten Powers, a USA Today and Daily Beast columnist and designated "liberal" on Fox, confessed in her new book that the left aggressively tries to "silence people" who don't fall into the liberal line.

In The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech, she calls out the lefty tactics, especially how they belittle conservative women and African-Americans. She said the goal is to silence the right and its outlets.

 

 

"Conservative women are treated as dimwitted, self loathing puppets of the patriarchy, or nefarious gender traitors," she writes in the book from Regnery Publishing provided to Secrets.

Ditto for blacks. "Raffi Williams, a young black conservative who works as the deputy press secretary for the Republican National Committee, told me he regularly gets Facebook comments or tweets from supposed liberals calling him an 'Uncle Tom,' 'house n­-word,' race traitor, and sellout," she added.

Powers is sure to get slapped herself as a sellout for hitting what she views as hypocrisy by liberals, as former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson did before her.

Powers grew up in a liberal family but said that interacting with conservatives, and finding God, has given her a new perspective.

"Two experiences unexpectedly put me in a regular relationship with conservatives: working as a contributor at Fox News and a later in life conversion to Christianity. The more I got to know actual conservative and religious people, the harder it was to justify the stereotypes I had so carelessly embraced. In my early days at Fox, I can remember trying to convince a conservative there that George Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court didn't really count as a female appointment because she was conservative and an evangelical Christian. He was horrified. I was confused as to why he would be horrified. I'm now embarrassed that I ever thought such a thing, let alone said it aloud. Such a prejudiced view was only able to take root because of the lack of ideological, political, and religious diversity," she wrote.

Powers added: "This intolerance is not a passive matter of opinion. It's an aggressive, illiberal impulse to silence people. This conduct has become an existential threat to those who hold orthodox religious beliefs. But increasingly I hear from people across the political spectrum who are fearful not only of expressing their views, but also as to where all of this is heading. I've followed this trend closely as a columnist with growing concern. It's become clear that the attempts—too often successful—to silence dissent from the liberal worldview aren't isolated outbursts. They are part of a bigger story. This book is that story."

Some key excerpts:

• Delegitimizing and "Silencing" Tactics by "Illiberals." With no sense of irony or shame, the illiberal left will engage in racist, sexist, misogynist, and homophobic attacks of their own in an effort to delegitimize people who dissent from the "already decided" worldview. Non­-white conservatives are called sellouts and race traitors. Conservative women are treated as dimwitted,self-­loathing puppets of the patriarchy, or nefarious gender traitors. Men who express the wrong political or ideological view are demonized as hostile interlopers into the public debate. The illiberal left sees its bullying and squelching of free speech as a righteous act.

• A Who's Who of the Illiberal Left. The people who are prosecuting many of these delegitimization campaigns are not fringe characters. They include Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, senior White House aides, administrators and professors of major public and private universities, and the president of the United States. Major media figures and major liberal activist groups consistently carry water for the illiberal left. These are all people who call themselves liberal, and who claim to believe in tolerance, while behaving in the most illiberal manner imaginable.

• The Illiberal Left's War on Fox Women. So pervasive is the smear that all the female commentators and anchors on Fox are dumb blonde chicks that it was actually fact­-checked by Politi­Fact. That's not a joke. They analyzed the female hosts' and anchors' hair color and found the assertion "mostly false," because Fox had its fair share of black-­haired and brunette women.

Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted atpbedard@washingtonexaminer.com.

 

 

Edited May 19, 2015 by Tom Wetmore

[B/W Photodude]

I get the point of the article. Probably for different reasons, it happens to white men too! Even happens on this website! I'm shocked!

[joeb]

B/WPHOTODUDE

with out JESUS  leading   all  people   will say  anything to  prove  a  point

dgrimm60

​Trying to shut people down by making ad hominen attacks such as saying someone is racist, sexist, a hater, a denier, etc... isn't trying to prove a point.  It's attempting to shut down all dialog through intimidation.  It's easier to attack a person than debate/discuss the issues, especially when you're on the wrong side of the issues. 

It's good to see someone one the political left speaking out on this issue.  It's rampant on the left.  Hillary Clinton's election team is going at this full blast.  She has a whole section of her team devoted solely to trying to make sure nobody calls her on anything.  That's not me saying this.  There are those on the left who say it's true, and even Hillary's team admits it's true. 

[Bravus]

So... what if someone *is* racist? What if what they say is egregiously, clearly racist?

Do we call them on it, or do we stay silent?

Who is silencing whom?

From my perspective, no-one is silencing anyone. People are disagreeing with other people and, being human, they sometimes fail to do so civilly.

There's no monopoly on it on any side of politics. We each ought to do our own bit to raise the standard. But freedom of speech inherently includes the right to disagree and challenge.

[D_Bishop]

At this stage of earth's history, I am not surprised by what is said in this country, on the left, or the right, or even in this forum.

[phkrause]

Exactly Bravus

[bonnie]

So... what if someone *is* racist? What if what they say is egregiously, clearly racist?

Do we call them on it, or do we stay silent?

Who is silencing whom?

From my perspective, no-one is silencing anyone. People are disagreeing with other people and, being human, they sometimes fail to do so civilly.

There's no monopoly on it on any side of politics. We each ought to do our own bit to raise the standard. But freedom of speech inherently includes the right to disagree and challenge.

​If someone is clearly racist say so. Don't accuse all those that dislike Obama as racist.  It isn't "sometimes".If Obama is criticized it's racism.Now the term "thug" has been declared racist,code for the N word. Thugs come in all skin colors.Sorry,those that loot,destroy and burn are thugs,regardless of what their skin color is.

Not wanting to pay for abortions is a war on women. Bull. There are those that believe abortion is wrong and they don't want to be part of it.Plain and simple.

Someone opposed to gay marriage is  homophobic, hateful, self righteous Can't be that is is against their religious beliefs. 

We had an interesting incident here in a store I shop at weekly. I purchase a lot of fabric and at that particular store they got hit by a bunch of fruitcakes wanting to force what they saw equality and fairness. The store has their own design dept for some of what they carry. There is fabric,the print is dollar bills. Nothing will do but they discontinue such a blatant show of religion. Imagine it says "In God We Trust" Same goes for fabric with the print of angels for baby items. The most glaring sin is fabric designed for weddings.It actually has a bride and groom.If the store refuses to concede and have "gay/lesbian print they are discriminating. Thankfully the store manager told them to take a hike and start their own business if they were having a problem.

At christmas time they played the traditional christmas carols and hymns. That was really serious and they actually tried to order this store not to play music that was offensive to some.

Whether it is race,women or women to many are very eager to pick about each word and see if they can find hidden racism,or hatred of women

Edited May 15, 2015 by bonnie

[joeb]

So... what if someone *is* racist? What if what they say is egregiously, clearly racist?

Do we call them on it, or do we stay silent?

Who is silencing whom?

From my perspective, no-one is silencing anyone. People are disagreeing with other people and, being human, they sometimes fail to do so civilly.

There's no monopoly on it on any side of politics. We each ought to do our own bit to raise the standard. But freedom of speech inherently includes the right to disagree and challenge.

​Really?  I disagree with a black man, and the only argument made is that I must be a racist is a natural argument?  Nothing is said about about what I disagree with, just that I'm racist for disagreeing.  You see no problem with that?   If criticising a politician can be termed as racist, sexist, etc... who will disagree with the politician?  Not many will voice their thoughts.   Most people will shut up rather than voice their thoughts and be publicly "shamed".  I don't shut up because I've seen this [censored] for many years.  I grew up with it.  I'm immune to "public disgrace" because of it. 

If a politician is known to lie repeatedly, and it has been caught on video tape repeatedly, say something like 80 times, is it racist to call that black man a liar?  Is it racist to question his character?  Is it racist to have no use for him because of his dishonesty?  Didn't Martin Luther King say we should judge each other on the content of our characters?  Isn't that the world he dreamed of?  Yet if it's done it must be racist. 

[Bravus]

You didn't read what I wrote.
 

This may be part of the problem.

[Bravus]

If you said "Obama lies because he is black", that would be racist. The fact that sometimes things are said to be racist when they are not, doesn't mean nothing said is ever racist.

If that's not what you say, then what you say is not racist, and I'll either challenge it on the facts or agree.

There are plenty of criticisms of Obama that I heartily agree with and make myself.

The point is, tone is used to shut people up, and shouldn't be: in all directions. Focus on the facts.

[joeb]

You didn't read what I wrote.
 

This may be part of the problem.

​I read what you wrote.  What I'm saying is that what you said is rarely the case.  What happens is what I described, here and elsewhere.  (There are no consequences here for type of behavior either, unless of course, you're a conservative and begin to use the same tactics because it's been done to you so much.  Then there are consequences.}   Also, if you watch the news media what I describes goes on all the time.  And it doesn't happen to just women and blacks.  It happens to anyone who disagrees publicly. 

[bonnie]

​I read what you wrote.  What I'm saying is that what you said is rarely the case.  What happens is what I described, here and elsewhere.  (There are no consequences here for type of behavior either, unless of course, you're a conservative and begin to use the same tactics because it's been done to you so much.  Then there are consequences.}   Also, if you watch the news media what I describes goes on all the time.  And it doesn't happen to just women and blacks.  It happens to anyone who disagrees publicly. 

​A liberal is not to be disagree with. Otherwise you are guilty of hatred.Just happened again

[Tom Wetmore]

 

[Bravus]

Please quote anywhere that I accused anyone of hatred.

[bonnie]

Please quote anywhere that I accused anyone of hatred.

There wasn't anything said indicating you personally. In another thread concerning restrictions on junk food for food stamp recipients this was ......"There seems to be such a hatred for those who need help"...

In the entire thread there isn't anything remotely close to saying let them all starve. Or to follow them around with an approved list that they are allowed to purchase.

We have a first lady that has taken it upon herself to try to dictate what children are fed,even to the point that there are children that have had their lunches confiscated and given the approved government lunch. For some reason those that provide for their own children along with those that are given free lunch can be dictated to by the government.

Food stamps that were supposed to be for providing adequate nutrition for families,funded by taxpayers doesn't have any such regulation.It is simply eliminating the purchase of junk. If someone on food stamps chooses to purchase that with cash money that is their decision.

I recently stood behind a very obese woman with her very obese young children. One small child maybe 4-5,years old had to weigh 90 lbs,he could not walk without his thighs rubbing together,the other two were not a whole lot better. The cart was full of junk,12 pks of coke,bakery goods,frozen dinners etc. Paid for by the taxpayer. This is not loving compassion to me. I have another definition but will spare you my real feelings on that

 This is not providing family nutrition. No one suggested withdrawing food stamps,only having food stamps reserved in a common sense way. Let them purchase the junk if it is so necessary with the cash they have. When my children were small I could not have afforded to feed them in that fashion even if I chose to,UNLESS I am demanding others provide my groceries. The accusations come easily from some without the slightest idea of what those they are accusing actually try to do for those in need

I don't have any idea what you personally do or don't do for those in need.I don't want to know,it is none of my business. Knowing would not change your personal comittment or lack of it. It does get tiresome to listen to the "do not judge" crowd" freely judge those that see things differently.

I know first hand what extreme poverty looks like,we did not have any help available for our family.  I would not deny a hungry child or family food at my expense or generally from taxpayers. I would deny a hungry family a cart full of junk if possible