Literally, could you not write a book on this subject? I mean the most intolerant people I have met are liberals (okay, drill sergeants come in a close second).

devices (i.e., molotov cocktails), here’s another one tossed in for free: Community Activitists (i.e. ACORN) + Government Workers (i.e. Congress) = economic destruction.

---

Activists Taking Action: Unified Patriots

…(and I mean that sincerely)…does “Blam” ring a bell?

Intolerance is a problem with humanity, not a particular party.

Just my two cents.

by some groups that are offended by those businesses’ support of gay rights and that offer same sex partner benefits?

Recently McDonald’s stopped their support for an organization that championed gay rights under pressure from Conservative groups. I’m sure that you were outraged that McDonald’s could possibly lose business simply because of their political views.

Liberals are rank hypocrites to the very core of their being, but I don’t have a problem with them boycotting this hotel. If they don’t like the owner/manager’s politics, they have a right to avoid giving her/her their money. If they decided to block the entrance, picket, or otherwise seek to intimidate those who do choose to do business with the hotel, that’s a different matter. Politics is religion for liberals. That’s why they act like enraged muslims when they confront those with a different worldview.

I do have a huge problem with same people screeching about denial of “first amendment free speech” when Disney or the Dixie C*ts are on the receiving end.

These folks are free to take their business wherever they’d like. So am I.

I’m telling everyone that with the White House and congressional majorities in both houses this is only the beginning.

First the “fairness doctrine”, some criminalization of political opponents, etc.

Here is a thought for Redstate readers;

**Maybe the Republicans are not agressively pursuing Dodd, Frank, Waters, et al as it relates to Fannie and Freddie because they fear reprissals come November

Using a hypocritical argument to make an argument that liberals are hypocritical. I imagine several of the people here supported the boycott against Disney for their gay-friendly policies, or the boycott of the Dixie Chicks for their comments about Bush.

But the thing is…neither of those was an infringement on the offending group’s right to free speech. And this case isn’t either. No one is saying that Disney or the Dixie Chicks or this hotel owner don’t have the RIGHT to say what they want. They’re just exercising THEIR right not to support people they don’t want to support.

Are you somehow arguing that people in the town should be obligated to patronize the establishment? I would hope not, any more than people don’t have an obligation to go to Disney World or by a Dixie Chicks CD.

shadow of the things to come.

Any individual or group has the right to protest against someone for something that they believe in.

This really is a non-issue.

on the Republican facebook discussion forum. I think they must be giving points to liberal trolls to post there.

The current Democratic Party leadership is the greatest threat to freedom of speech this country has seen in a very long time, in my opinion.

Though I’m frustrated with the McCain (oh, wish it was the Palin campaign), here’s perspective on the daily tracking polls, especially Gallup. See the daily numbers from the 2000 race. For most of mid-late October, Bush maintained a significant lead, even up to 13-points. Well how’d that race turn out? Lil’ close? Take and breath and keep up the fight.

McCain is going to pull this out.
And I think it is time to get behind this.
WE are in the home stretch, and Obama has not pulled away.
The lefty hacks have the phonied up report on Palin out now, and they got a nothing burger.
McCain is tough, and has been tough.
He will keep his word and fight.
This hotel guy is expressing his civil rights, and the lefty hacks who want to shut him down over this are only sending more votes to McCain.

Eventually we’ll all become government workers paid out of the Charles Schumer National Bank.

Prince George’s County has become a total cesspool: imagine the audacity of having an opposing view!

if you have no ambition and enjoy being a zombama.

not to “tolerate” them.

Merriam Webster online says the etymology of the word is this:

Latin toleratus, past participle of tolerare to endure, put up with; akin to Old English tholian to bear

“Tolerating” someone means that you “put up with” them, not that you care about them or feel anything at all for them, but that they are a burden that you choose to bear. In fact, saying that you could “tolerate” someone used to be considered an insult.

Think about it, where else do you hear the word “tolerate?”

• Maybe from your doctor? “How bad is the pain, is it something you’re going to be able to tolerate?”
• • From your kids teacher? “We can no longer tolerate Jimmy’s behavior in the classroom.”

We “tolerate” things that we would do away with if we could, but are forced to live with.

Tolerance, the way liberals use it, is a sad counterfeit of love, created as a social necessity for keeping peace between groups of people who hate each other but need to work and live together (pretty much the definition of the Democratic Party, but also how many liberals see America).

It is practiced for the good of society, not out of any special consideration of the individual. As such, when one group is seen as detrimental to society, it is no longer necessary to tolerate them. Like the handicapped kid in the lifeboat, if they are no longer contributing it’s time to toss them overboard.

but I agree that these people have every right to be boycotting something they don’t like (however misguided that may be).

What I think is more troubling is how some people think that this sign was somehow “disrespectful.” This wasn’t a sign attacking Obama, it was merely a sign showing support for his opponent. Since when is disagreeing with someone something to be considered “disrespectful?”

Reading the article, I also noted the following:
“June White Dillard, president of the Prince George’s chapter of the NAACP, said the type of events (Democrat fundraisers) Colony South has booked in the past is the reason the sign cut so deeply. “

Apparently, if you’re Republican, you aren’t allowed to lease your property out for Democrat events. Personally, I think it would be worse if Colony South had refused to allow any Democrat functions at their place because they were McCain supporters instead of just putting their sign out on the yard, but then again we are dealing with the same people who weren’t disgusted by Obama’s past boycott of Fox….

Here are some of my favorite examples of liberal tolerance. Of course the media won’t draw any attention to these examples of enlightened behavior.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQalRPQ8stI

http://www.webtrec.com/ebay/palin3.jpg

[But your need to push back on this is noted. - Moe Lane]

This is this week’s new talking point. After hearing from liberals about how McCain is whipping up a racist frenzy on the right, Drudge has reminded us about true liberal openness and acceptance of people and ideas in this video.

It’s simply disgusting. Election not withstanding, I think we need to think about organizing parades each week in liberal strongholds to break the stranglehold on free expression. Call it weekly marches with Morrie. Set up funding for folks with signs, flags and video cameras to parade in these areas until they accept it. Call it immunotherapy for intolerance. I also think some civil disobedience is also warranted. It could be beautiful.

Andrews Air Force Base is home to Air Force One, and is also in Prince George’s county. It is amazing that these tolerant liberals would allow G.W. Bush to even step foot in their Liberal Shangri La. I tell my wife often that most liberals I have known are the most intolerant, racist, bigoted, and sexist people on Earth. They hone in on differences in people that most Conservatives I know don’t seem to notice.

Let me say at the outset that everyone is acting within their rights here. It’s the hotel owner’s property, and if he wants to stick a sign there that’s his right. But the funny thing about free speech is that everyone has it, so if other people want to express their negative views, up to and including a call for a boycott, that is their right.

Not all businesses are alike. They come in different sizes, and serve different needs. If, for example, the city’s tow truck contractor has Obama stickers on all his trucks, might someone with a McCain sticker on the car feel justified in being a little put out?

A hotel is a public accommodation. They’re in the hospitality business. They take all comers, so long as they have the money and obey the rules. I think a sensible hotel owner would want everyone who walks through the door to feel comfortable. By taking sides with one candidate in a hard-fought national election, the hotelier is making some portion of his customers feel unwelcome.

This is certainly his right, and I don’t dispute that. But it’s also the right of those who disagree with him to make their feelings known. I don’t know enough about the hotel business to be able to say what percentage of revenues or profit contribution comes from itinerant travelers as compared to more local enterprises that might book events in meeting rooms. My gut says that these are both substantial factors.

My gut also tells me that the local enterprises are more volatile, or at least more personal, as opposed to itinerant travelers who more typically book on the Internet or through corporate travel bureaus and therefore are unaware of any of this until they approach the place in their rental car at 10 p.m. are either soothed or outraged.

The hotelier in this case, whether he did so after careful thought or mere impulse, learned that his local customer base doesn’t share his political views and is not shy about making that fact clear. Once again, everyone is within their rights.

Maybe the hotelier decided that whatever publicity he might get, and resulting business from like-minded local customers, outweighed any potential negative reaction. Or to put it differently, maybe the whole thing was the product of some weighing and balancing of options, in which the hotelier decided that appealing to McCain partisans would outweigh the negative reaction from Obama partisans.

To me, having been around the block, I go back to the idea that, in my heart of hearts, I consider a hotel to be a hospitality operation that welcomes everyone. Even if a hotelier had a political sign that I agreed with, a voice in the back of my head would be murmuring that this is an operation willing to make some people feel less welcome than others, and that therefore the appropriate relationship between vendor and customer had been disrupted.

Or, to put it more directly, I really don’t want my hotel to endorse a political candidate. Not even my own candidate. I’m there for a good night’s sleep, a clean room, cable TV, and plumbing that works, and maybe a restaurant and room service. I’m not sure I want them to be electioneering, even if I agree with their point of view.

…for now. Let’s see what they think 6 months from now. One of my bama customers was complaining that I was not getting his work done fast enough. I explained that I had some rush jobs and some new clients and that I would get his job done as promised. I did and explained to him that I was doing all I could to gain new clients and bill as much as I could because of the wacky economy. He of course said how much better it was going to be when Obama becomes president…..
I really had to hold in my laugh that almost burst out.
I have a bad feeling that I will finally have plenty of free time
for golf and to clean up my office.

What is with the government workers comment at the end? I know that the prevailing belief here is that a smaller government is preferable, but I don’t see how that should translate into contempt for government workers.

Both my parents worked for the government at one point in time, and are incredibly hard workers. Of course, there are always lazy louts, but you’ll find that anywhere. I find your comment at the end unnecessary and frankly, offensive.

… if a person wishes to not purchase from/do business with a company whose policies they disagree with, that is their right.

Boycott the Dixie Chicks? Sure, go for it.

Throw things at the Dixie Chicks? No.

Boycott a hotel/business? Sure, go for it.

Call the business and harass them? No. (A business, one I believe was in the Carolinas, had a sign that was a bit more eyecatching than the one described in this article, it got on the ‘Net and he started getting calls from all over.)

Boycott Disneyland? Sure.

Blow up Disneyland? No.

Avoid a web site you disagree with to keep them from getting web ad revenue? Sure.

DDOS attacks against that site? No.

I support the right to protest, be it by signs and picket lines or by simply choosing to take your business elsewhere — but breaking windows like what happened in St. Paul during the RNC, or harassing a business because they utilized their right to free speech by putting up a sign has nothing to do with protest.

It makes perfect sense to me….