David Horowitz - Radical Times

[ilanchico]

Free speech as long as no one disagrees with them

fuckin left wing pricks i hate them

[samo0golf]

the latest crimes of jewsh youtube.com/watch?v=r0agl_MLmw­0&feature=player_embedded

[crpleprone91]

he has the freedom of speech. No one forced him to leave the stage, he could have spoken out against islamofascism all he wanted, it doesn't mean that anyone will necessarily listen to you

[MagnesDrachen13]

There's a difference between protests on the outside and shutting down discussion on the inside. The tea party crowd do both. I have no problem with the former, I have a huge problem with the latter.

I don't have to agree with your side, but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to hear the other. The way it should work: they speak up, they're escorted out, the talk continues. They shouldn't shut down the discussion, and the speaker shouldn't stop either.That goes for BOTH sides, for the record

[macdaddi88]

fuck neo cons and ZIONISTS like : bill, horowitz and condi.......!!! dump isreal......!

[blue222blue]

Dump Israel macdaddi? What does that mean? That the US should offer no aid to the only democracy in the Middle East? You'd rather we ally with genocidal "Palestinians"?

[macdaddi88]

pakistan , turkey - EVEN iran has voting....isreal...? ha ha...they mistreat isreali arabs - even arabs who are jews - christians...theyh have 10,000 guys in prison - SOME are under 10 yrs old....grow up, blue.... rense comm

[blue222blue]

I'll address your comment mac, if you answer my question.

[blue222blue]

Oh, well , I guess another leftist and/or Islamist who is incapable of defending his views rationally.

They are eager to "dump" a nation and a people, yet can't put together a decent paragraph.

In case anyone has forgotten WWII, emotionally following genocidal maniacs and repeating their propaganda slogans doesn't work out well in the end.

[oldjoe5]

Democracy? R U kidding? Millions of arabs under Zionist thumb with no rights whatsoever. The attacked Gaza for democratically electing Hamas

[MagnesDrachen13]

He tucked his tail and ran, plain and simple. If he truly believed what he said, he would defend it regardless. If they're loud, he'd be louder. He wasn't, he walked away and complained. He backed out, period.

[teaparty111]

Sounds like you like to have white-trash, ghetto arguments with people screaming and the louder person always wins. People like you have no class--you are the lower segment of society that is trying so hard to destroy what you can't have--a decent life. MAGNESDRACHEN13--you are a boy--a little boy that needs to read for about a decade and then come back and maybe you will be understood.

[LordVigeous666999]

Are you serious? You actually support people making it absolutely unbearable to hear other points of view?

I guess, when you can't win on the facts or the merit of your arguments, destroying dissenting opinion works....

But if you can't win on the merits.... is your point of view really correct? Doesn't it tell you something, if you MUST shout down the opposition, because you can't win on the facts, or by persuasion?

Did it ever occur to you.... that YOU might be wrong?

[MagnesDrachen13]

@LordVigeous666999 Ask the tea party crowd about that, they seem to be pros at it.

[LordVigeous666999]

man you guys really can't handle it can you?

The left protests the war, they shut down speeches, they have die ins, they chain themselves to trees to prevent progress, they protest the building of THE cleanest coal power plant ever built in the country, they shout down people that are skeptic of Global Warming to shut down speech

Conservatives protest once, and you guys go off the wall calling them racist because they couldn't possibly care about a $2 trillion yearly deficit

unbelievable

[LordVigeous666999]

And you know, I guess its really easy for you to say speakers should just 'deal with' people shouting them down. Because your side doesn't have to deal with it, do you?

Conservatives don't do that, we want to win on the merits, win on the points

[MagnesDrachen13]

If David Horowitz' little feelings were hurt and he felt it necessary to take his ball and go home, but they had just as much right to shout him down as he had the right to shout louder. He retreated, he surrendered, he walked away and played the victim. That's his fault.

[nolzz341]

They shouted him down because they didn't want him to get his message out. That's much easier than refuting his arguments, which is what they would have done if they had an argument. Maybe they should burn his books so people can't read them, too.

[MagnesDrachen13]

But HE had the right to stand his ground (like he should have), have them removed, and continue what he was going to say anyway. He let their voices silence his. He CHOSE to give up and play the victim, he didn't fight for his view when the situation called for it. Its easy to say something when no one's there to contradict you. When there's another person on the other end, if you really believe it, you defend it. Horowitz didn't defend his view, he complained about others'.

[nolzz341]

The police didn't remove them, and they didn't stop their childish shouting, so there was no point for him to stay and try to talk over them when he couldn't be heard. If they wanted to contradict him, they could have let him speak, then they could have presented a counterpoint. But they were too uncivilized to do so, apparently because they had no argument. He wasn't "playing the victim".

[teaparty111]

FUCK YOU

[MagnesDrachen13]

So "disagreement" equals "conspiracy"? Hm, if only that's how it worked IN THE REAL WORLD.

[juscurious]

This woman is a POS. She really doesn't believe in free speech and anyone can tell it.

[active786]

That women was very brave and said the truth, rice is ,has always been and always will be a war criminal.

[Whoo69]

A representative of the DNC, a Democratic strategist, is justifying this kind of vile behavior?? This is nonsense! True liberals, true free speech liberals, would condemn these leftist morons. I do. People like Liz here are what's wrong with the Left and Democratic Party of today. The DNC of JFK and FDR would not have tolerated that kind of nonsense.

[jacobins3000]

I think there is something very wrong with the political vocabulary in America. If you wish to resolve conflicts peacefully, through calm negotiation that makes you a 'radical', if you want to bomb everyone and nuke the third world, than that makes you a 'moderate'.

[clemtoe]

no. radicals do not work to manifest negotiation. they support the bombs, bullets and force projections of the "counterhegemon", which they aid by comprising a fifth column armed with politics rather than ballistics.

[jacobins3000]

A 'Fifth Column'? I thought people stopped using propaganda slogans like that after WWII. I don't support the "counterhegemon" or what ever the hell that is supposed to mean, I just think that we should stop launching unprovoked attacks on other nations. Historically launching unprovoked military attacks was considered a 'radical' act.

[bbruhwiler8]

Horowitz is a traitor and should be tried and punished as such. If he were alive in 1930s Germany, he would bend over for Hitler the same way he is now bending over for the Fascists who are quickly conquering this great nation of ours from the inside. OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!

[raccoonbrat]

Horowitz is a brave man who deserves our respect. He is the opposite of fascisim. Ad hominem attacks, such as yours, are not only infantile but also proves that you have no factual basis for what you say.

[StoogeWatcher]

You liberals are the fascist traitors.

[THESHACKLEFERG]

bbruhwiler

just shut up my god just because you have been brainwashed doesn't mean you should rip someone who see the light....

[clemtoe]

its ironic that you advance such nonsense. in fact its lefty sugar daddy, george soros who actually played that role during the nazi occupation of hungary, which he survived by posing as the son of a gentile who worked for the nazi occupation. he actually went around confiscating jewish estates for the nazis.

i suppose in a more unmediated moment you'd say what you really think about horowitz and claim that he's a major cog in some jewish world conspiracy to bend the usa toward israel.

[StoogeWatcher]

Liz Chadderdon is your typical free-speech hating liberal.

[Okie7171]

I love how the FAR LEFT hides behind FREE SPEECH but when ANYONE says something they disagree with they will try to SHOUT THEM DOWN or even ASSAULT THEM! It's the Left philosophy... when you can't win the argument CENSOR your opponent!!

[JohnR22926]

I'm always amazed that the Left is so intolerant of dissent. The Left supports many freedoms like civil rights, gay rights, etc., but if you express any opinion other than leftish conventional wisdom, you're attacked. IMO, for many on the Left, their political causes are like a secular religion. People who believe with this level of intensity can't see disagreement as rational and reasonable, they see it as a form of apostacy. The Left is intolerant and in its own way bigoted. How ironic.

[Okie7171]

It's similar to many people in the Muslim community. They want everyone to Tolerate them while they are the most intolerant people on the planet! It's a two way street, if you want people to Accept your ideas you can't turn a deaf ear to their ideas! This world would be a much SAFER place if people weren't so concerned with Silencing and even Killing people that see things differently!

[smrndoff]

@Okie7171

what's far left about protest against illegal war?

It's funny how you call them ''far left'' and O'Reilly calls them ''fascists''

You guys should get the same script.

[Okie7171]

@smrndoff . HA-HA, if the war was "Illegal", why was it Approved by a Democrat Controlled Congress? Clinton Voted Yea, Kerry voted Yea, Reid voted Yea and Pelosi voted Yea. In other words, the Iraq War... like all wars was an "Act of Congress" because the President LACKS the authority to go to war Without Congressional Approval! So, this so-called "Illegal War" was Approved by Democrats! And let's not forget, the Term "Weapons of Mass Destruction" was Invented by Bill Democrat!

[smrndoff]

@Okie7171

What does HA-HA mean? Are you ten or somethimg? I'm referring to international law. Under international law the war is illegal not ''was'' but is. Bush and Blair are liars who took their respective nations into an illegal war of aggression. We live in a world where the powerful do as they please irrespective of the law. The US is a criminal regime. That's not nice to hear but it's true. You're a mafia state. A crime outfit. A thug regime. A bunch of see you en tees

[Okie7171]

@smrndoff I say HA-HA because both You and Your statements are a JOKE! Let me guess, you're from some Dirt Ridden CESSPOOL run by a Dictator who makes you tow the "we hate America" line! America is the BEST, the most Prosperous and the Most Generous nation on Earth and trust me... if you get in our Way, we'll be Happy to Wipe your Ant-hill off the Map! The only LOSERS who Hate America are the Oppressed Masses who are too dumb to know how Horrible they have it!

[Schniddo]

@Okie7171 "the Term "Weapons of Mass Destruction" was Invented by Bill Democrat!"

Big wow. As if it wasn't common knowledge that he was a warmonger too.

[RogerOnTheRight]

This idiotic woman is a prime example of why Democrats vote for Republicans. If Republicans win this next election by some miracle, it will be in no small part due to the insanity of people like this.

She insists on defending rights of those who agree with her, but won't defend the rights of others.

In other words, it is not about rights, but only power.

Is that not what fascism is about?

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight You're right about her but that is not what fascism is about. It astounds me how little people in the US know about fascism - i suspect it is because politicians and academics on the payroll use its legacy opportunistically. Fascism was a movement backed by big business as a response to the threat of increasing strike waves, worker militancy and ultimately, communism. The only reason the UK and the US went to war in WW2 was because Germany became a threat to Western markets!

[RogerOnTheRight]

@Schniddo

Actually, fascism came about in Italy as the result of obvious failures of international socialism. It became apparent to Mussolini soldiers in WW1 would not rise from the trenches and kill their commanders, as the communists urged them to do. Men would fight for their countries, not the Marxist ideal of "workers of the world, unite!". Mussolini envisioned a new form of socialism, based on nationality, and called it "national socialism".

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight Corporatism is not the same as socialism. If they were so similar why did Mussolini get financial backing from business leaders? The left failed in Italy for many reasons but he didn't the hearts and minds of would be communists. It was the lower-middle class who made the bulk of Mussolini's support - to somehow equate that with a working class movement is plain wrong.

[RogerOnTheRight]

@Schniddo

Why did Obama get such heavy financial backing from Wall Street? Why did his obamacare bill get such heavy backing from big pharmacy companies? Does that make Obama a fascist?

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight Uh... no Roger, but it certainly doesn't make him a socialist. Socialism is about common ownership and workers' control. My point is you can't collapse socialism / fascism into the same paradigm. Both are distinct from classical liberal individualism but they are miles apart in terms of goals. Ultimately fascism is not anti-capitalist - it is more interventionist however and paternalistic towards the working class but it's main aim isn't redistribution.

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight Obama isn't even a social democrat. He's a 'liberal' in the classical sense and I imagine that you are as well (please correct me if I am wrong). I live in the UK where our Conservative government is pursuing deep austerity measures. The Labour government as the 'left' alternative is positioning itself against them saying that the cuts will stunt what little growth there is, that the bond markets will lose confidence (as is the case currently in Ireland)...

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight ... not to mention the social cost. However, Labour were ready to do similar restructuring, the only difference being that they would have a modest stimulus plan to keep the economy chugging along while making cuts slower. Ultimately, both parties are part of a neoliberal consensus. Politics in the US is even narrower and yet people call Obama a socialist! Incredible.

[RogerOnTheRight]

@Schniddo Fascism is indeed a form of socialism. It differs from communism only in implementation details. Instead of killing the business owners, you co-opt them. Do you imagine I G Farben was Hitlers boss? Not hardly, they did his bidding.

Fascism was labeled "right wing" by Stalin, since it represented a non-international departure from his orthodoxy.

What you describe as classically liberal is nothing what Obama is about. He perceives our constitution as a document of "negative rights".

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight Yes Gov had unlimited control over business but the way corporatism worked was as a system of guilds, or associations, of employees and employers to administer various sectors of the national economy. These were represented in the national council of corporations which were generally weighted by the state in favor of the wealthy classes, and they served to combat socialism and syndicalism by absorbing the trade union movement. It still preserved the framework of capitalism.

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight Your mistake seems to be in conflating capitalism with liberal democracy. The two do not necessarily need to coexist (case in point: China). As for Stalin, he himself represented a "non-international departure" from socialist orthodoxy. That was the whole point of 'socialism in one country'. The shape the Soviet Union took under Stalin was very similar indeed to fascism in some ways but that is a far cry from the Russia of 1917.

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight Classical liberalism is all about negative freedoms - ‘negative liberty’ is the idea that a person is free to the extent that they’re able to do what they want, or what they might want to do, without experiencing coercive interference by others (Isiah Berlin) When people talk about a conflict between freedom and equality, what they often have in mind is the idea that if you promote equality, you have to impose all kinds of restrictions on negative freedom.

[Schniddo]

@RogerOnTheRight Positive I'm going to move this to your page, I think!

[RogerOnTheRight]

@Schniddo

Obama's view of the constitution is it is a needless obstruction to governmental goals. And, from policies he has implemented, he clearly has no personal love for the document. It is a convenient tool when it suits him, and a thing to be ignored when it does not.

There is a huge and fundamental difference between the two parties in the U S today, now that some actual conservatives have been elected. You will see this in time.

[RogerOnTheRight]

@Schniddo

Classical liberalism is much closer to what the Tea Party movement represents than any of our established parties represent. The objective of the Tea Party movement is to bring back a respect for the Constitution, and they target Republicans more then Democrats only because the Democrats are hopelessly dominated by hard leftists and openly socialist ideologues.

[RogerOnTheRight]

This sort of thing is always done in the name of free speech.

Amazing.

[lookhearsee]

Someone should have tased that wacko who confronted Condi. Typical liberal commentator would stand up for the wackos free speech but not Mr Horowitz' right to speak, great vid, thanks for your work.

[masudrules]

while I agree that what the woman did was rude and uncalled for, I don't see why people are so radical about it...why tase her? is Rice some kind of God that people can't confront without being tased?

[lookhearsee]

You make a good point, but without tasing requires physical contact, endangering Ms Rice (definitely no God, but an important person who should be protected), the protester, and those nearby. Did you see the other woman almost knocked over by the security guy trying to get between Condi and the protester? Tasing may hurt, but doesn't cause damage, and one might think twice about getting in someones face again.

[masudrules]

well why should they think about getting in front of someone's face as long as she's not posing a physical threat...now whether or not she was is a legitimate debate, but I just find tasing a little extreme and Machiavellian

[lookhearsee]

I would submit to you that no one knew if she was a physical threat, her demeanor led me to believe that she could have done anything. Your point is taken however.

[masudrules]

as is yours...