The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Democrats: You Can Never Hate Them Nearly as Much as They Hate You

Posted on | January 22, 2013 | 77 Comments

Last night, I saw a post at an anti-Palin blog that had more than 200 vitriolic comments about the woman they called “the Creature from Lake Lucille.” More than four years after Sarah Palin was the Republican vice-presidential candidate, she still inspires frothing rage from the Left.

What prompted that particular outburst of hatred? Palin put up a Facebook post commemorating Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Think about that for just a minute. And then think about something Erick Erickson wrote on Inauguration Day:

Congratulations Mr. President on your second inaugural.
Saying that makes some of you really enraged. I said the same on twitter shortly after his official swearing in. Several of the replies were embarrassing and atrocious. Some accused the man elected by a majority of Americans of treason. Some accused him of willfully destroying the nation.
I believe the President’s policies are destructive and will harm our economy, our nation, and our sense of national self long term. I believe his policies have the effect of turning us into subjects of the government, not citizens in charge of it. Because of his expansion of the social safety net funded through class warfare, Mr. Obama’s policies will cause too many Americans’ fortunes to rise and fall with those of the government, unable to chart a course for themselves apart from government.
But I do not think the President means to do this maliciously. I do not think he is treasonous. I do not hate him. I am not outraged by it.

As soon as I saw that, my attention focused on one sentence: “Some accused him of willfully destroying the nation.”

Yes, of course: David Limbaugh, author of The Great Destroyer: Barack Obama’s War on the Republic, a book I heartily recommend.

Erick Erickson didn’t title his post “David Limbaugh Is Wrong,” or “Don’t Listen to That Idiot David Limbaugh.” He merely dismissed as “embarrassing and atrocious” anyone who agrees with Limbaugh’s argument that Obama’s “War on the Republic” is deliberate.

As to how one should deal with Monday decorously, I took a vow of silence: I simply wouldn’t say a damned thing about Re-Coronation Day.

Didn’t watch it on TV. Didn’t blog about it until it was over. The last time I checked, I still had the right to remain silent. “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all,” and what conservative could possibly say anything nice about America’s public humiliation?

That’s what we’re dealing with here: A stain on our national honor, the negation and antithesis of everything that makes our country great.

Americans should be outraged by it, and we should not be dismissing their expressions of outrage as “embarrassing and atrocious.”

Ordinary Americans don’t always express themselves in such eloquent and measured phrases as meet with the approval of the elite, but why is it that no one on the Left ever bothers to chastise the commenters frothing with rage at Sarah Palin, whereas Erick Erickson feels the need to scold Republicans who don’t like Barack Obama? Why is Erickson embarrassed to be associated with these Republicans, when no one on the Left ever bothers to notice the non-stop messages of hate emitted by the immoral monsters who constitute the Democrat Party’s grassroots? My answer:

The problem, really, is that Republicans just don’t hate Democrats the way Democrats hate Republicans.
Most Republicans are born and raised Republicans, and are spiritually attuned to the sentiments of bourgeois respectability that are core values to the decent, honest people the GOP represents. By contrast, Democrats owe their power to the vilest dregs of humanity — corrupt union goons, Marxist academics, criminals, drug addicts, sexual perverts and race hustlers — who have no respect for the values of decent, honest people.

We do not have to lower ourselves to their level. We merely have to tell the truth about who the Democrats are. People who voted for Obama (or any other Democrat) should be ashamed of themselves.

The GOP’s ridiculous defensive flinch reflex — “Oh, no! Somebody said rude things about Democrats!” — is symptomatic of a larger problem: Republicans let liberals dictate the terms of debate.

If liberals say the problem is that Republicans lack “civility,” then the GOP is beset by hall-monitor types telling us to watch our language. If liberals say the problem is Republicans need to appeal to Latinos, we’ll hear a lot of sermonettes from the open-borders crowd. If liberals say Republicans are losing because of gay-rights issues, we’ll be told to drop our pants and bend over to demonstrate our support for sodomy.

At what point will Republicans figure out they’re being scammed? Liberals lie constantly, routinely and habitually, but never do they lie so predictably as when they’re giving advice to Republicans.

Mitt Romney lost the presidential election. His defeat cannot be blamed on “outrage pimps” (Erickson doesn’t name names, so we don’t know if he meant that term to apply to David Limbaugh or Mark Levin or Michelle Malkin). Nor can the GOP’s problems be excused by scolding people who say rude things about Obama on Twitter.

Why did Erickson feel the need to tee off on “humorless, angry opponents of the President” who “scream ‘Benghazi’ and ‘Fast & Furious'”? Was that aimed at Katie Pavlich, author of Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and the Shameless Cover-Up?

Katie wasn’t offering any “congratulations, Mr. President” sentiments there, so maybe she’s one of those “humorless, angry opponents,” eh?

Here’s the point: All Sarah Palin had to do is put up an MLK Day post on Facebook, and the haters swarmed all over her without anyone in the Democrat Party noticing or complaining. Democrats don’t get any “civility” lectures from their liberal spokesmen. They just win elections.

Democrats hate Republicans with the heat of ten thousand suns. When are Republicans going to give themselves permission to hate back?




  • WJJ Hoge

    I am not a number. I am a free man.

  • kevinstroup

    The Republicans are gutless. Nothing good ever comes to somebody whose main worry in life is whether they will be called racist or homophobic for some comment they make. To put it more bluntly, when you act like the prison B%$ch, you get treated like the prison B#$ch.

  • Bob Belvedere

    We damn well better start hating back because the Left is seeking nothing less than our subjugation under the jackboot of Totalitarianism. They despise us, Erick, you putz.

  • Bob Belvedere

    Stacy wrote: …If liberals say Republicans are losing because of gay-rights issues, we’ll be told to drop our pants and bend over to demonstrate our support for sodomy.

    That’s the Gonzo Reporter I’ve come to know and love [in a manly, John Wayne-ish way].

  • higgins

    When are Republicans also going to start going after the sycophants in the main stream media?

  • AnonymousDrivel

    I both loved and hated what you wrote, RSM. What you wrote is factual and true and must be repeated. That’s the good. The bad? That what you recorded IS true and that it MUST be repeated. How far this nation has fallen. The Progressives and Democrats (BIRM) are joyously cutting the straps on all the parachutes.

  • Jackie Wellfonder

    This, this, and more of THIS. As I said when I linked it, hurt feelings or winning elections, you decide. Bob is right, they despise us. I can relate to some of what Erick said, but then he veers off course and loses me. As a Conservative Christian, I cannot say hate them back. But I can say we need to righteously indignant, we can be righteously angry, and we can damn well do something about it.

  • rosalie

    Was Breitbart nice to them? Hell no!

  • Evi L. Bloggerlady

    You can also fight back with class. WFB did jt, even if he had to occasionally threaten to punch a few mendoucheous mafeasances in the face.

  • Evi L. Bloggerlady


  • sheryl

    Mr. Erickson is a tool in my book, a pompous individual. He attempts to label conservatives, speak for what he *thinks* they mean. I have read posts by him that just make me shake my head at his perceived knowledge of a subject, or particular individual.. He can have at it, fine with me. Mr. Obama has those policies that are destructive to the country, because he believes in those policies. He believes the country should be run with larger government, higher taxes for certain programs that he deems necessary, he also attempts to cut off all opposition to those policies. While Mr. Obama does not care for the republican party, he also does not care for the Americans who do not agree with his vision. ALL of his actions are deliberate, that’s the point of them. You do not *accidentally* enact policies that you fight to impose. They are as deliberate and *on purpose* as a conservatives policies are to limited government, lower taxes, and individual accountability. He did not by accident impose his insurance mandate, or his accidental opposition to the 2nd amendment to the constitution. The president is not a fan of the constitution, that is not hearsay, it is fact, he has written about it. I am loyally opposed to the president because of his loyal opposition to me. I am against the deliberate policies and his vision for a certain type of America.

  • ThomasD

    Erickson is focused on weaseling his way into the Manchurian Media, and is getting close enough to taste it. So he feels it necessary to fire off to the right on occasion – for the ‘bipartisan’ cred.

    It signals that, once he’s arrived, he’ll ‘grow’ just like Brooks or Scarborough.


  • Garym

    Absolutely true. He is angling for the “payday” in the future and by attacking fellow conservatives is the easiest way in. Fuck Erickson.

  • Eric Ashley

    Can’t hate them. Too tired to do so. Don’t like what it does to myself. Understand that some of them are decent folk or want to be. And lastly, what with the orcs on our side I realize we can’t win anyways.

    That said, I don’t have time to be overly polite to a bunch of low class tyrants. Too much like work.

  • JRD1

    Bravo! Encore!

  • McGehee

    I didn’t claw my way to the top of the food chain just to wear chains.

  • McGehee

    His name was floated as a challenger to one of our Georgia Senators over the no-tax pledge, and at the time I thought I could support him if he ran.

    Now, not so much.

  • Pingback: Does it Matter if He’s Eeeeeevil? | Andrew J. Patrick()

  • pabarge

    But I do not think the President means to do this maliciously. I do not
    think he is treasonous. I do not hate him. I am not outraged by it.
    — Erick Erickson

    So, here is my question for Erickson: “have you read anything that Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn have said”? Because if you have and if you are aware that Obama is Ayers’ proxy, then how can you make that statement?

    I would gladly leave this comment on Erickson’s website but the mutt regularly bans people who call him on his idiocy.

  • Christy Waters

    Erick Erickson is of absolutely ZERO value to the conservative movement. He’s a shit-brained fool. And if anyone ever ransacks Erickson’s house, he should congratulate the man and offer to help him load up his loot, because that’s exactly what he’s doing by congratulating Obama on another term.

    “Hey Mr. President, congratulations on scoring another chance to destroy the country! Yaaaay!” A freaking doorknob has more sense than Erick Erickson… just in case I haven’t made myself clear.

  • John LaRosa

    I boycotted social media/MSM “coronation” coverage yesterday, but was happy to hear that a “middle class” conservative friend scored a free inaugural ball ticket and sold it to one of Barack’s “evil one percenters” for $1,500. #Winning #Capitalism

  • whig

    Hatred of individuals is generally antithetical to Christianity. Love the sinner, hate the sin. I believe that hatred you see from the left expressed toward people like Sarah Palin stem from the absence of religious influence on their lives. Leftists have substituted ideology –the personal is political–etc. for religion. Republicans, especially those who express religious views, face conflict with their religious faith if they expressed themselves as do many leftists.

    In the great sorting of parties, the Democrats have become dominated by the non-religious while the Republicans dominate those committed to religion in their life. Counter-examples can and do exist in both parties. Nevertheless, for all of popular culture’s portrayal of religious zealots, in our times, I see much more vitriol coming from those who are secular. For example, I suspect many of Palin’s most vociferous and obnoxious critics in the Republican party would coincide with secularism of the individual. I also suspect these individuals also are on the left in the Republican party as the moderates-see Arlin Spector as a classic case.

  • john norton

    The GOPe are good and practiced at shooting themselves in the foot…

  • richard mcenroe

    The Democrats’ and Progressives’ great gift since the days of Aaron Burr has been finding the arrogant, angry and ignorant and finding someone profitable to point them at.

    Never expect comity from Democrats and Progressives. They never forget or forgive a slight, real or imagined, self-imposed or inflicted from without. (And see above, none of their slights are ever self-inflicted.) When Barack Obama exhorted a howling mob to “vote for revenge” he was expressing the one single, true and constant value of Democrats and Progressives everywhere.

    I’ll give you an example. The publishing house, loosely described, I currently work for imports a British imprint. On of their titles is Could We Have Stopped Margaret Thatcher, written by the leadership of a now-defunct leftist fringe party that won a couple of local council victories and decided, mistakenly, they were ready for the game of empires. The book was originally published in 2004. Margaret Thatcher left office in 1990. Fourteen years later, and to this very day 23 years later, these muesli-eating morons are still campaigning against her. They have to. As with Palin, as with Bush, for all his faults, if they stop screaming their malignant fantasies they are desperately afraid of the consequences of their lies’ exposure.

    No Democrat, no Progressive you know, can ever be trusted to deal with you honestly. When it comes to something they want, they will screw you and then claim you provoked it.

  • richard mcenroe

    They can’t be low class tyrants and decent people at the same time. The people who march behind the tyrants are the source of their power.

  • richard mcenroe

    There’s a good Norwegian word for people like Frum, Brooks, Parker, Noonan and now Erickson: Quisling.


    Trust me Mr McCain when I say that I hate Obama, and that I will never sugar-coat it or be too shy or nice to say it out loud. What he is doing to our country is deliberate, illegal and unconstitutional and Obama and his followers should be paying the consequences for it.

  • Bob Belvedere

    Is Erick the Rover?

  • Bob Belvedere

    Damn right.

    When the bastards falsely accuse you: Just Say So?.

  • Bob Belvedere


  • Bob Belvedere

    It’s so damn fitting, ain’t it.

  • Bob Belvedere

    Damn well put.

  • K-Bob

    I am still seeing people on the right (like on Fox’s panel of yammerheads) who manage to scrape up the time to denigrate “Palin supporters.” Now I had to be honest and admit that a small group of Palin supporters were obnoxious and tone deaf, when they were hammering the other candidates in the Primary. Also and especially after the primary, when we had a raft of Palin commenters who needed banning at Scoops for getting so out of hand. So they exist. But so what?

    Why in the seven hells of Obama would anyone on the right… anyone at all, still be bagging on Palin, Bachmann, Cristine O’Donnell, and Sharon Angle? Especially guys like Krauthammer and company, who just can’t stop themselves from bashing the supporters of those ladies (each of whom, despite their flaws, has evinced more backbone than any of those “analysts” like Erickson, Crystol, and those Powerline guys).

    It’s like having a football team where the left guard decides once in a while to let the linebacker through to hammer the QB. You know, just to show intellectual honesty or something.

    They don’t play to win. They play to show that they have great knowledge and respect for the game and its rules and the people who built the stadiums. Nobody wants to pay money to see that. They pay to see one guy crush the other guy. End of story.

  • Rob Crawford

    Erickson, like so many, is more interested in being friends with the people who will cheerfully herd him onto a one-way train than in defending himself. For too many, staying on the cocktail circuit is more important than liberty.

  • Rob Crawford

    Like Ace?

  • K-Bob

    Heh. I wonder if they’ll ever notice when the particular cocktail party to which they get invited happens to be awfully crowded, low on food, and dark.

  • Rob Crawford

    Decent people do not tolerate fantasies of dragging people behind trucks. Decent people do not tolerate calls for democide.

  • Rob Crawford

    I’m not a practicing Christian, so I have no problem hating people who openly call for my murder.

  • bet0001970

    Erickson is a dickhead who has political aspirations. He fancies himself a congressman or a senator. But the one thing he doesn’t see in his future is a spine.

    Nor does he seem to have any special love for the First Amendment. Ironic, considering his current line of work. If he ever manages to stumble into elected office, he’ll be hanging out with Boehner. Not Cruz or Rubio.

  • Dai Alanye

    Erick Erickson’s heart is in the right place, I imagine, but let’s face it–he’s a bit of a fathead. His judgment might also be affected by the urge to keep appearing on CNN.

  • K-Bob

    Mmmm hmmm. This.

  • K-Bob

    Regarding the hate/not-hate aspect:

    Think of it as a battle. (Because #Metaphor, Loomis, you putz)

    I don’t see it as hatred, specifically, any more than a battalion of our finest engages the enemy out of “hatred.” Some will, and that’s okay, if it doesn’t get our troops killed unnecessarily.

    But a lot of warriors engage at 100% because of a sense of pride in their profession, or a sense of brotherhood, or because training takes over, and because they know they can’t win if they are distracted by emotion. They aren’t dispassionate, but their passion is spent being the winner, not the loser, on the battlefield.

    So for those of you who prefer to follow the teachings of Jesus, and love their enemies as they love themselves, just remember that you can love your enemy, and take the time pray for his soul, while sending him to death’s sweet (#Metaphorical) oblivion.

    The point is: don’t sit back and accept the status quo. We are, in fact, at #War. Fortunately it hasn’t come to massive bloodshed, yet.

  • K-Bob

    Oh, and right on time is this excellent statement by Rep. Louis Gohmert:

    “Obama’s done more to help the rich get richer and the poor get poor than any president in my lifetime”

    Now that’s how you do it. (Link is to Scoop’s)

  • PhillyCon

    This seems to be the theme today. Before we can take on the liberals and Democrats, we have to get our own house in order.

    Palin was vilified not b/c of Tina Fey and Katie Couric. She was vilified b/c our side was silent and did not rally to her defense. After all, where did the Game Change authors get their “information” from?

    Now, on a much larger scale, this is what is currently happening with Ted Cruz and anyone else who doesn’t toe the PC/political class line.

    It’s not a shock that there are very few within our ranks who are actively fighting. They are have been culled by the Dems and our RINO betters.

  • PhillyCon

    Funny story.

  • PhillyCon

    What about useful idiot?

  • PhillyCon

    Also, Erickson lost a lot of credibility with grass roots when he posted that silly, mocking countdown of Palin’s announcement for the Presidency. He’s been headed down this road for awhile now.

  • jakee308

    Erick Erickson is an example of what’s wrong with Republicans and the Republican party.

    I don’t read him or any who post at RS and I won’t ever. He’s in the same class, to me, as Chris Christie or John Boehner. He’s just barely a cut above the Colin Powells and David Brooks’.

    Anyone who’s watched what Obama has done and how he acted and acts cannot say that it’s not malicious. The affects are the same as and thus can be labeled so.

    God help us for the next 4 years.

  • whig


    I totally understand that sentiment. I struggle too with transferring my hatred of a person’s horrific statements (such as wishing death to those who disagree) to hating the person making them. As a Christian, it is tough to reconcile religious teachings like turning the other cheek or a soft answer will turn aside wrath with the gutter fighting of conventional politics (especially as practiced by the Left). Unfortunately, this ambivalence has often led Christians to delay responding until it is too late as in opposing Hitler. To help salve my anger, I try to remind myself to use it as a motivator to positive action that negates what totalitarian leftists are trying to accomplish.

  • Finrod Felagund

    No kidding. I all but flipped the bird to him on his own site there when he was pulling that bullshit.