How the “moderates,” while trying to steer an independent course, still buy into Liberal themes.

The Virginian ^ | 6/13/2009 | Moneyrunner

[moneyrunner]

Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic writes that Judith Warner (a synonym for the Liberal hive) writes about

…the recent upsurge in hate crimes, I was struck by what she left out. Two weeks ago, a Muslim extremist shot two soldiers, killing one, outside a recruiting station in Arkansas. Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad acted alone, just as James von Brunn apparently did. He was, like von Brunn, captive to a supremacist ideology that, in his mind, justified the murder of an innocent man. Like von Brunn, authorities said, he had mapped out Jewish targets for potential attack. And yet, no mention of the hate crime committed by a Muslim; …

That’s fine as far as he goes, but then, he buys totally into Warner’s smear of the conservative end of the political spectrum.

…only hate crimes committed by white, right-wing extremists were worthy of mention in Warner's column.

It takes no time at all to determine that by whatever definition you wish to use, von Brunn was not “right wing.” Not unless you want to label anything you don’t like “right-wing” - which is what the Judith Warners of this world do.

Let's look at von Brunn's belief system: he hates Christians, capitalism, Jews, and non-whites.

If it's “right-wing” to hate Christians? Does that make Pat Robertson a left winger?

Is it “right-wing” to advocate socialism? Does that make Karl Marx a right winger?

[NewJerseyJoe]

A moderate is a liberal who hasn’t come out of the closet yet.

[Ukiapah Heep]

Note how fast the MSM double-dribbled the Museum shooting out of sight after it became known who vonBrunn's other likely targets were.

[hinckley buzzard]

Moderate: “Dead skunk in the middle of the road, stinking to high heaven.”