Violent Eliminationist Rhetoric By A Respected QC News Source

From an editorial in the QCTimes via NewsBusters:

“We’ve read and heard all of the justifications for the congressional impasse that is terrorizing our nation. We use the word ‘terror’ emphatically. What else can you call tactics the perpetrators fully intend to wreck the stock market, throw people out of work and remove any semblance of stability for economic growth?”

Where to begin on this inane piece of leftwing political propaganda?

For starters, maybe assuming the writers now have the power to look into “the perpetrators” motives and hearts? What? Has the QCTimes hired Jesus on staff now? How else could they possible know what “the perpetrators fully intend”? They can’t and they don’t—the writer is a Democrat operative.

And really—“We use the word ‘terror’ emphatically”? What word will they use when there is real terror or terrorism—Republicans? Rather than fostering free speech, which I assume QCTimes supports, this moronic editorial has poisoned public debate on an important issue—which might be their goal.

Way to completely marginalize your publication QCTimes—what thinking person could possibly take you seriously after this frothing-at-the-mouth editorial?

But whatever.

The reason I had to link to NewsBusters is because I had already used up all my “free” clicks to QCTimes, but Newsbusters also had some juicy comments about this mindless QCTimes screed. They called this editorial “a valentine” for Bustos “who defeated Tea Party Rep. Bobby Schilling in 2012”.

This isn’t exactly true either. This editorial was a valentine to former QCTimes employee Cheri Bustos—nothing else, which makes me think Cheri might be in trouble.

Also, Schilling isn’t “Tea Party”—he has said as much himself, but then his voting record isn’t very conservative either.

In my view Bobby Schilling isn’t Tea Party or conservative, except for culture war stuff, he’s a Country Club Republican.

Advertisements

Author: qcexaminer

None of your damned business.

20 thoughts on “Violent Eliminationist Rhetoric By A Respected QC News Source”

  1. “In my view Bobby Schilling isn’t Tea Party or conservative, except for culture war stuff, he’s a Country Club Republican.”

    Bobby will say anything and everything to get votes. So he can be anything he wants.

  2. Bobby said he was libertarian. He also said this “One of the biggest problems is — you know, I’ve got some Hispanic friends — is that a lot of those folks that don’t know English, is primarily because they don’t even know Spanish,” Bobby Schilling

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/bobby-schilling-latinos-english-spanish_n_1894299.html

    His campaign manager isn’t too bright either. “It’s not an offensive quote,” Schilling campaign manager Terry Schilling told Quad Cities Online. “It’s simply stating a fact.”

    I take offense to the statement. I am Hispanic. I’m not sure I would consider that “getting votes”. That quote came across as egotistical to me. Reyes will be getting my vote.

  3. Good point G—I should have put scare quotes around “respected”. 😀

    *****

    I agree Paula—I think even Bobby is having problems deciding what he believes and what he doesn’t—he still has no “issues” page on his website.

    I suppose that makes it easier for him to “say anything and everything to get votes”.

    *****

    Calderone, I went to the HuffPo link to see what all that was about—looks like it was a major league clusterf*ck for Schilling.

    I’m anxious to see how Reyes does with turning out the Hispanic vote for his libertarian agenda—should be an exciting campaign.

  4. Do I vote for Bobby because I like and trust him personally, despite his political misgivings? Or do I vote for Reyes because I like his politics but can’t stand his personal life?

  5. I dunno Kurt, why don’t you ask him? 309-755-9200

    ******

    I’ve thought a lot about that too, ricogop, and as I’ve said, I’m looking at this race as a Low Information Voter. But what I think I would do is back Reyes anyway because:

    1. There isn’t much difference between Schilling and Bustos—they are both moderates in their respective parties, and besides, there is no great urgency here since it is extremely unlikely the GOP will lose control of the House.

    2. From what I’ve heard about Schilling and members of his family, they are not exactly The Waltons—their nasty behavior and treatment of Wallace would be a deal breaker for me.

    I’ve heard nasty stuff about Reyes, but at this point I don’t know how much of it is true and how much of it is just a Schilling whisper campaign and generic nasty mudslinging by a family that has no problem smearing people in their own damned party.

  6. “From what I’ve heard”

    And… that’s your problem right there, Miss Examiner. You’re trusting the wrong people and acting like an authority when you literally don’t know what you’re talking about.

  7. You are dead wrong harry; the Schilling Mob has had ample opportunity to make me “trust” them, but this is all I got:

    “Wallace stole a volunteer list, placed Morthland signs on our territory and is not pro-life. According to Bobby’s wife, he has done some shady stuff to mess up our campaign.”

    No one ever came forward to clarify “shady stuff” for me, yet I am just supposed to “trust” Schilling like he’s a god or religion or something?

    I did get the other side and it was more trustworthy than what I quoted above, which is ALL I know about the Schilling side.

    Oh yeah, one more thing—it’s MRS. Examiner to you, dumbass.

  8. I not not sure why the Schilling statement has become so infamous at this point in history. The article was from 2012.

    Still 🙄 Schilling is becoming the Phil “Foot-in-Mouth Disease” Hare candidate. Bustos campaign strategy is/was –> limit your verbal damage. Is Schilling wrong in his statement? Depends on the context. Is there a language barrier? Yes. Do many Hispanics have trouble understanding English. Yes. Can you blame them. No. English is a complicated language. Heck even if English is your spoken language doesn’t mean And it becomes more complicated as we adopt more and more slang into the language. In the Pre 1970’s some guy told you he was gay you think – how nice a happy person. Modern times unless a man is homosexual you aren’t going to find men going around saying they are gay. Just by itself, the Urban Dictionary slang site displays how simple words can turn meanings. One of my early posts talked of how Good Bye was once considered an abomination of a simple phrase – God Be With You. English, Spanish, Russian, Chinese etc.. each language offers challenges to those seeking to adapt and those attempting circumvent the natural barriers to exchange information. Maybe if the Beaver’s Mom hadn’t already died the country could use her to break the communication barriers.

    Still it is an immigrants job to learn the language. But is also the Politicians job to find a way communicate with his electorate and part of this is to help the immigrant adapt to his new country. Bobby Schilling just opened mouth inserted foot in this effort.

  9. IMO it’s not so much the inane statement by Schilling that was the biggest problem, it is proof to me that his near flawless campaign in ’10 must have been a fluke.

    This is what I saw:

    1. Bobby says stupid stuff

    2. Bobby’s son and campaign manager says it ain’t stupid, “it’s not an offensive quote…It’s simply stating a fact.” Fact=Stupid–or something.

    3. Communications Director has to intervene in this family stupidity to spin that stupid isn’t stupid—it was just all a misunderstanding—or something.

    This is something I have noticed in this Schilling go-round—the campaign—and Schilling just aren’t as sharp as they were back in the day.

    PS: Loved the clip with Beaver’s mom—priceless!

  10. Great point, thescoundrel. Didn’t find the comment really offensive.

    “And… that’s your problem right there, Miss Examiner. You’re trusting the wrong people and acting like an authority when you literally don’t know what you’re talking about.”

    harry, please share your story. Sounds like you have the missing piece to the puzzle.

    QCE, Could you reach out to Schilling campaign?

  11. Paula, if the Schillings have something to say to me, they know how to contact me.

    Since they haven’t, I assume they like things the way they stand now.

    Same goes for harry—if he had something substantial to add to the discussion, he would have said so, rather than hurl insults at me.

    There’s no there, there—otherwise we would have been offered facts not vague comments and sneering.

  12. QCE, This behavior by the Schillings is disappointing. What happened to protecting the “little guy”?

  13. Just saw this interview. At 15:05 Schilling is told that he’s being painted as a TEA Party Republican and asked if there’s any truth to that.

    Schilling’s response, “That couldn’t be further from the truth.” Later he tries to have it both ways and says that if he’s asked if he’s a member of the TEA Party he says that he’s for the principles they stand for. If you’re for what the party stands for then why not claim the mantle?

    The only explanation I can think of is cowardice.

    Reyes has my vote. There’s no question about it anymore. I could care less about his personal life. I’m electing a Congressman not a lifestyle coach, and I’ve yet to hear any of this stuff about him that anyone can offer any proof of. Seems like good old fashioned character assassination to me. Typical of weaker issue candidates.

  14. Wowser! Excellent catch LV!

    Schilling’s cowardice about the Tea Party is basically the same as I remember from the ’10 campaign—he was for the principles but not the tag, which is probably smart since Obama, the Democrats and their allies in the press have made a point of blaming the Tea Party for all the woes of the shutdown—and everything else, for that matter.

    Not to mention they are all racists–or something.

  15. I watched Reyes’s video of him speaking up in Carroll (?) County. I think I will include him in my blog, and still talk about issues regardless of Bobby’s lack of them…

  16. Thanks for the link Werner. I saw this earlier but was too stupid to know how to embed youtube. Thanks for saving a technomoron.

    I thought it was a pretty good speech, although he seemed to hurry through it (probably not the first time he gave it lol) and the only thing I disagreed with is when he said any GOPer would be better than Bustos.

    That’s not my view, but I do understand his desire to obey Reagan’s 11th Commandment. 😀

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s