The new Leftist buzzword: "Fear"

[Hawkmoon]

I somehow got on an e-mail list for a Democratic senator from a blue state. I haven't tried to get off his list because he is a rabid anti-gun type, and I think it's good to know what the Left is looking at with regard to the 2A. The following excerpt from his latest e-mail, though, shows that the Democrats are obviously planning to double down on stoking the [real or imagined] fears of their constituents for the next four years.

Here it is (bold-face added for emphasis]:

I know how you're feeling, xxxx. This isn't the inauguration any of us hoped for. And like you, I am very worried about the future of our country.

But I know that my fear is nothing compared to the fear many families across the country are feeling right now. I am not going to lose my health care. No one is trying to deport the Murphy's of Connecticut. And as a white man from the northeast, there is no systematic effort to deny my reproductive or voting rights.

But here's my promise to you: I am going to fight for those families every single day. Because that's our choice right now; we can give into our despair, or we can fight.

I choose to fight.

As you know, I am up for re-election next year. And I want to spend as little time as possible attending fundraising events and in "call time" asking rich people for money. There are bigger priorities right now, and your response to emails like this allows me to focus on the work you expect of me right now. But that's why I have to ask:

Can I count on you to make a $3 contribution to our re-election campaign right now to help us meet the modest fundraising goals we are just short of hitting as Donald Trump takes office?

Every e-mail he sends asks for $3. That seems to be their new formula, but I have no idea why that number is what they chose. And I have no idea where he gets the notion that the Trump administration is out to take away reproductive rights or voting rights. (No, I don't happen to think that illegal aliens have a right to vote.)

[230RN]

They're doubling down on every semantic jab they can find.  Fear, as you can tell from recent news events, is their most obvious characteristic right now, and playing on that is pretty effective, I would reckon.

The only thing I can think of relating to the $3 is the old expression "queer as a $3 bill."  No offense to anyone, that's just the expression that was used and I'm just reporting my recollection.  Although, considering inflation, I guess nowadays it should be "$30 bill."

There may be some kind of market research which shows that $3 is at the crossover point between trivial to the contributor but significant to the requestor and not an accounting burden.

Their biggest fear, to my mind, should be that we stop calling them liberals or progressives or pinkos or globalists or community activists and other semantically gentle terms and start calling them what they are.  Communists.

It would be helpful to many if you could say what "blue State" is involved.  It will also be helpful to many if I point out that the "Report to moderator" button is at the lower right corner of this post.

Terry

[Perd Hapley]

I have no idea where he gets the notion that the Trump administration is out to take away reproductive rights or voting rights. (No, I don't happen to think that illegal aliens have a right to vote.)

They're worried about efforts to prevent illegal votes; and when you cut govt. funding to something (contraception/abortion), lefties treat it as taking that thing away.

They're always fear-mongering (even when they're trying to make you fear fear-mongery). But it sounds like every political fund-raising letter, ever, doesn't it?

[230RN]

Damn.  I forgot the term "lefties."

Thanks for the reminder.

[RevDisk]

And I have no idea where he gets the notion that the Trump administration is out to take away reproductive rights or voting rights. (No, I don't happen to think that illegal aliens have a right to vote.)

Trump, not so much. He's been a NYC'er his entire life. Gays, women's rights, etc aren't a huge deal to him. Sure, he's probably misogynistic judging by his behavior but probably less so in reality than Bill Clinton. Clinton usually just mouths the right platitudes for his behavior to be ignored by his side. Pence is definitely a more conventional/stereotypical right wing type of guy. The Republicans currently are not always the most fond of reproductive rights. If Pence is off the leash, sure, I buy it. If he's kept on even a moderate leash, not so much.

[sumpnz]

The left has won if we refer the ability to vacuum a fetal human being piece by piece from its mother's uterus as "reproductive rights."  Call it "legal abortion" if you want, but outlawing it does absolutely nothing to the rights of people to reproduce.

[Hawkmoon]

The left has won if we refer the ability to vacuum a fetal human being piece by piece from its mother's uterus as "reproductive rights."  Call it "legal abortion" if you want, but outlawing it does absolutely nothing to the rights of people to reproduce.

Perzackly. Maybe if they'd practice a bit more morality and a bit less promiscuity they wouldn't have to worry about their "reproductive rights" (which they are the ones interfering with, not the .gov, anyway).

[Hawkmoon]

Classic example: Guy gets on an airplane. Woman in the seat next to him gets in his face because he might be a Trump supporter. Woman demands that the guy be moved because "he's in my space" (No, lady, he's in the seat he paid several hundred dollars to sit in ... just as you did).

Justice prevails.

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/video-passengers-cheer-woman-berating-trump-supporter-kicked-off-plane/

[dm1333]

It would be helpful to many if you could say what "blue State" is involved.  It will also be helpful to many if I point out that the "Report to moderator" button is at the lower right corner of this post.

Terry

I'm guessing Chris Murphy from CT.  My home state pulls its weight when it comes to producing people like him.  I doubt the CG could make Art. 88 of the UCMJ stick but I don't want to test that theory so I won't say any more. 

[230RN]

http://www.forthoodpresscenter.com/external/content/document/3439/1416867/1/

Talks about social media & military personnel.  Did not read, not relevant to me.  I just looked it up to confirm what Art 88 was about.

Other non-mils may find the link convenient.

[K Frame]

So, who's the Senator? Why are you not naming him?

[Perd Hapley]

His name was in the letter itself.

[K Frame]

His name was in the letter itself.

Ah. I thought that was either just a colloquial use of a name (like Tom, Dick, and Harry) or that he's saying that Scots/Irish are a protected class.

Either one works.

[Scout26]

If you want to see bat-crap crazy, get on Alan Grayson's e-mail list.  I could always tell when I had one from him in my inbox.  I could see the crazy oozing out of my computer before I even logged in.

[Hawkmoon]

So, who's the Senator? Why are you not naming him?

It came from Chris Murphy, one of Connecticut's senators. I have no idea how I came to be on his e-mail list, and I didn't name him or the state because I suspect that similar communications are being sent out by other leftist congresscritters all over the country. I know I receive them from several, they all seem to follow a template, they all now ask for $3, and they all have an identical "Donate now" button at the end. Most likely the DNC made up the template and distributed it to all the Democrats in Congress.

This Murphy clown, though, is far more stridently anti-gun than probably any other Democrat from whom I receive communications. That's why I don't ask to be removed from his contact list -- I like to know what the other side is [allegedly] thinking.

[Perd Hapley]

You want left-wing fear mongering?

https://diversityoftactics.org/2017/01/21/why-the-left-wing-needs-a-gun-culture/

Here's the article in a nut-shell [brackets mine]:

The [armed] Mississippi [black civil rights] movement represents the most effective organizing of the post-war Left; Their policy on armed self-defense can teach us a great deal, particularly as the whole country begins to feel more and more like the Jim Crow South.

He talks a surprising amount of sense on firearms, and it's worth reading just to see that. But the article reads like a laundry list of things the Left is wrong about, or just exaggerates, to make America into the pre-fascist nightmare of their fever-dreams. The Left's cheese has slid far enough off their already dangerously tilted cracker, that some of them have come around to common sense on the gun issue. It's as if they had to lose their minds in every other way, in order to find it on just this one subject.

At one point, he claims that the Zimmerman case (not a hate crime) tells us that hate crimes won't be punished, right after listing examples of other supposed hate crimes that appear not to be hate crimes at all.

He goes on to cite so-called militia groups' confrontations with the Bureau of Land Management as evidence of fascism (no, seriously), and claims that A.G. Jeff Sessions (you know, the guy who actually DID prosecute the Klan?) would be friendly to "white power terrorists."

He makes no mention of anti-white or anti-Trump violence, or of the black racist riots, murders or arsons of the past few years.

But in the end:

...bearing arms is a US citizenship right—and has been a citizenship right for most of our history. If conservatives have successfully claimed this privilege, then it makes no sense for the Left to disarm itself and unilaterally renounce the Second Amendment. The Right won’t follow their example...

[K Frame]

" then it makes no sense for the Left to disarm itself and unilaterally renounce the Second Amendment."

Yeah it does.

Well, it does to me. Because I don't want those stupid *expletive deleted*ers being armed. I want them to think that their marching and sign waving and chanting and drum circling and whatnot are effective methods of change.

Let them have their tree hugging, hairy armpit "women"/bun wearing "men" fantasies. An armed left wouldn't be about self-defense, it would be about violent revolution (violent is the wrong word, because only fascist conservatives can be violent) as a way of establishing social utopia based on anarchist/communist/sharia...

Because everyone knows, Che/Mao/Osama/Pol Pot was a man of all people who all people (especially gays, loved them literally to death), kissed puppies, and petted babies.

[Scout26]

I thought the new leftist buzzword was "hate", that's what they seem to be bandying about a lot in relationship to Trump and the people who voted for him

[Perd Hapley]

I thought the new leftist buzzword was "hate", that's what they seem to be bandying about a lot in relationship to Trump and the people who voted for him

Neither hatred nor fear are new talking points for the left.

[Ron]

Fear is one of the most powerful emotions if not the most powerful.

Fear keeps us alive, some fears are legitimate.

If the fear cannot be explained and demonstrated as being something legitimately dangerous or undesirable AND possible then it is irrational.

The left is ruled primarily by emotions and are especially susceptible to "fear" being used to influence them.

Those of us on the right are also frequently manipulated by the use of fear also. I just find that the left is overwhelmingly emotional in all their thought processes.

The *expletive deleted*ing neo-cons played the right with "fears" and we allowed them to invade and destroy middle east countries that were not a threat to our national security.

Never again will I be manipulated like that.