The Right's Rising Tide of Violent Rhetoric
January 10, 2011 12:53 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords appears be the latest victim of anti-government violence that has taken hold in America since 2009. It’s a wave of violence that’s cresting along with a tide of hateful, insurrectionist rhetoric that far too many conservatives refuse to condemn. Instead, the toxic talk is routinely defended as being nothing more than spirited debate.
It’s not. It’s deadly. And until those in positions of power say so, the dangerous rhetoric is likely to continue.
Whether that rhetoric played a role in the gun massacre that erupted at the Tucson shopping center on Saturday, we don’t yet know. Note that over the weekend the local Arizona sheriff, Clarence Dupnik, condemned “the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business,” and especially the influence it may have on “unbalanced” people, like the Tucson shooter.
What’s undeniable is that the attempted assassination of Giffords took place against a right-wing media backdrop that has been targeting the government, and specifically Democrats, in an unconscionable manner:
* “The suicide-bomber-in-chief, Barack Obama”
* Beck suggests Obama admin might kill "10 percent" of population
* Quinn: "Yes," Obama is "trying to destroy the country"
As facts of the Giffords shooting continue to come in, let’s understand what has transpired in recent months as right-wing partisans have rushed past any sense of common decency and responsibility to endless attack and condemn Democrats. For instance, let’s recall that last March when Congress was preparing to vote on passing health care reform, partisans in the far-right press denounced the vote in apocalyptic language as they depicted Democrats as monsters who deserved to be physically tortured.
Recall that at the same time, a surge of political violence erupted across the county as Democrats became the target of what were essentially terrorist attacks.
- Rep. Tom Perriello's (D-VA) brother's address was erroneously posted online by a Tea Party blogger who invited activists to descend on the house. A gas line outside the brother's house was cut.
- Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) was the target of threatening faxes and phone calls, including death threats.
- A brick was thrown through the window of the Democratic Party office in Rochester, New York.
- Rep. Anthony Weiner's office in Kew Gardens, New York, had to be evacuated after suspicious white powder was found in an envelope mailed to the office.
- A thrown brick smashed a window at Rep. Louise Slaughter's district office in Niagara Falls, New York.
- Slaughter also received a message claiming that "snipers were being deployed to kill those members who voted yes for health care," according to Politico.
- The FBI arrested a California man for making threatening phone calls to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
- A tossed brick demolished a window at the Sedgwick County Democratic Party headquarters in Wichita, Kansas.
- A devoted Glenn Beck fan left a serious of death threats (“Kill the fucking Senator! “) on the voice mail at the office of Sen. Patty Murray
And of course, there was the attack on Gifford’s Tucson office last March. Hours after voting in favor of health care reform, vandals smashed the front door, along with a headquarters window. Days later, Gifford spoke about being targeted.
“Our office corner has become a place where the Tea Party has congregated. And the rhetoric has become incredibly heated. Not just the calls, but the emails, the slurs,” she told MSNBC. “We’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list, but the way she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. And when people do that, they’ve gotta realize there’s consequences to that action.”
Perhaps most telling at the time was the fact that veteran members of Congress told Giffords that they’d never seen the kind of angry, anti-government madness that was unleashed surrounding the health care vote.
But rather than unequivocally condemn, or even rationally discuss how the violent rhetoric had become increasingly indefensible, and rather than encouraging partisan activists to dial it down before somebody got hurt, conservative pundits urged followers to forge ahead with their calls to arms, even blaming Democrats for bringing the deadly threats and acts of violence upon themselves by voting in favor of health care reform.
Indeed, after bricks were being thrown through offices windows and audible death threats left on answer machines, the conservative media mocked the idea that Democrats were being targeted and suggested the well-documented incidents had been somehow manufactured. Last March, Glenn Beck complained, “It's almost as if the left is trumping all of this up just for the politics."
Rush Limbaugh agreed: “Our side doesn't do this kind of stuff. It's all made up -- 95 percent of it's made up and it's being done to divert everybody's attention."
And from Andrew Breitbart's site, Big Government: "We doubt these threats are actually real and, certainly wouldn't condone them."
Chilling.
For those who didn’t get the point, Fox News’ Stephen Hayes shrugged off the acts of violence and threats, suggesting, "This happens all the time," while his Fox News colleague Charles Krauthammer said, "I'm sure a lot of this is trumped up."
Or as the Daily Caller’s S.E. Cupp put it on Fox News at the time, "Democrats who did this, who sort of rammed this down our throats regardless of the fact that it actually won't save us any money -- it's is going to bankrupt us and that the American people didn't want it -- want us to feel sorry for them that they've gotten a couple of angry, you know, voice mails. They should read my e-mail. You know, what did they expect? No one condones threats. No one condones the violence, but I'm glad people are angry. I hope they stay angry.”
Even after Byron Williams, in a jailhouse interview, told reporter John Hamilton that he was heavily influenced by Glenn Beck’s conspiratorial rants at the time when Williams plotted to assassinate leaders at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, what did Sarah Palin do? What did Fox News’ Palin do in response to a direct request that she act as a true leader and call for a cooling off of the increasingly deadly rhetoric that had become a cornerstone of the conservative movement? Palin reaffirmed her support of the talker’s incendiary fear mongering: “I stand with you, Glenn.”
Whatever the reason for Saturday’s semi-automatic killing spree in Tucson, what’s inescapable is that the government and government officials have been elevated to prime targets of physical attack in the last two years. We’ve certainly never seen them targeted so casually within segments of the popular media. The spike in attacks, both the actual attacks and threatened ones, comes amidst a spike in explicit, insurrectionist rhetoric that singles out the government as being a source of intentional evil within America.
There’s a political and media movement in this country that’s eagerly painting a bull’s-eyes on the back of the U.S. government and its representatives. Not surprisingly, more and more marksmen are taking aim.









They will deny with a straight face that listening to their rhetoric day after day might possibly give some deranged psycho an incentive to commit violence. But, they have no problem believing that poor innocent Ted Bundy was turned into a homicidal monster because he looked at girly magazines.
But we all know that what the Republicans say is true, that heavy metal music is responsible for suicides and rap music causes drive by shootings.
Talk about Cognitive dissonance.
A mentally ill person got a gun and hurt a lot of people. To try to connect this in any way to Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck is sad and pathetic. Boehlert is both sad and pathetic in this piece. I am sure that many on left were in fact Happy to see this happen, only to use it as a tool to bash the right with.
The comparison is very appropriate. Words have consequences, POV. Didn't your parents teach you that? Mine did.
Nice try, though.
I am guessing you are enrolled in Beck's University.
Careful, you're making it seemed like educated people aren't all a bunch of filthy liberal, nanny state, vegetarian, socialists plotting to destroy America devil science and evil facts!
Does anyone belive that GBecker or Ms. Palin are sitting at home actively praying that a US Congressman gets attacked? No. Did GBecker or Ms. Palin actually tell this kid to shoot anyone? No.
Does anyone think those two are shameless self promoting hucksters preying on the biases, fears, insecurities, desperation of their audience?? YES!! Do they offer anyting positive to ANY political discoures?? NO a GD thing. How about these two and the rest of the RW echo chamber promote political volunteerism, community activities / service, to gather the strength and power of WE THE PEOPLE to impact political change and "restore" America to her greatness instead of promoting "2nd amendment remedies" and telling everyone the end is imminent.
Every day GBecker goes off on one tangent after another with the end result being that the Government is controlling everything you do, the government is JUST LIKE Nazi Germany, that everything we hold dear is on a precarious tipping point and we are screwed. The monetary system is rigged, a shame, about to go under. The constitution is being trampled and abuse everyday, America is not as YOU remember it, we are lost. Something you hold dear is being killed, targeted, hunted, threatened RIGHT THIS MINUTE.
Ms. Palin throws out no-so-veiled accusations of President Obama's citizenship, his terrorist sympathies, how he's NOT like US, how he doesn't "get" real people. She uses phrases and imagery tied to weapons, and targeting members or congress, and the acceptability of using similar references to resolve political disagreements.
And NO - no one - on the LEFT is HAPPY that people have died and have been injured due to the acts of on ill individual.
No speck of fault to be found.
Clean as the driven snow and proud of it.
Then what does the sign mean...?
It is not about blaming Palin et al, it is about realizing that after the events of saturday, phrases like "Don't retreat, reload" and "second amendment remedies" should never have made it into the political debate. And it's about realizing that maybe, just maybe the events of saturday should be a wake up call for America - time to stop the rhetoric - no matter what side is using it - I mean are you proud that the debate has become so polarized that people only talk to the other side of the aisle in jingoistic visceral sound?
Yes a "mentally ill person got a gun and hurt a lot of people" but this should be a wake up call that the left are seeing - the right instead of trying to deflect.
Sheriff Dupnic merely said that the vitriolic rhetoric needed to be toned down.
Fox and the rest of the right wing propaganda machine IMMEDIATELY yelped like a bit dog and assumed that, without having pinned the rhetoric on anyone at all, Sheriff Dupnik was talking about them.
The first thing that the RWPM said was "hey, they do it too".
He had a fixation with this woman from back in 2007. That was BEFORE teh rise of the Tea Party, and no one outside of Alaska had even herd of Sarah Palin in 2007.
He was an atheist. (So am I, but this position is normally associated with the hard left.
He favorited the Communist Manifesto
He favorited a video where the Amercian flag was being burned.
He identified the U.S. as a terrorist country.
One of his friends from 2007 said that he was a liberal who wanted to change the word. Have any of his friends came forward and claimed that he was a libertarian or conservative? Answer: no
Perhaps it is you who suffers from cognivtive dissonance.
Here's just a short list of one Democrat's, President Obama, violent rhetoric in the last 3 years alone:
1. "They bring a knife...we bring a gun."
2. "Get in their faces"
3. Obama to ACORN thugs: " ***I don't want to quell anger***. I think people are right to be angry! I'm angry!"
4. Obama on business: "We talk to these folks...so I know whose ass to kick."
5. Obama to voters: " Republican victory would mean "hand to hand combat."
6. Obama to Latino supporters: "Punish your enemies!"
7. Obama to Democrats: "I'm itching for a fight."
There are, of course, many more instances, but this is just the shortened list.
Any of you statist drones can feel free to Google any of these quotes.
Imagine how long this list would have been if it would have encompassed all of the violent, threatening rhetoric engaged in by all Democrats.
I do not think that there is anything wrong with this kind of rhetoric though because its just the normal political metaphors and idioms employed, but if you guys want to play this childish blame game then I've got plenty of ammo (Oops! That was violent rhetoric--if someone dies today then I'm to blame.) Some of you simply want to pour down moral condemnation on those you disagree with politically. It's cathartic for you.
I don't know why anyone would disagree that the "tone" of extremists, right and left, should be more low key. When the airwaves are bombarded with that rhetoric, anyone, yes that includes the mentally unstable, can be drawn in. Most people know where to draw the line.
Does that mean that this rhetoric caused the Tucson incident? Probably not. Could it? Probably.
Do you want to continue playing this game? I've got plenty of AMMO left. Oops! I did it again.
ALL of the divisive, seditious rhetoric needs to stop REGARDLESS OF WHAT SIDE IT COMES FROM, and playing games of "they do it too" isn't helpful.
Anytime ANYONE paints Americans as an enemy of America simply because of philosophical differences, melanin level differences, or differences of any other kind, that painter needs to be slapped, and slapped hard.
How about this, then?
Guilty much?
I highlighted the particular phrase of importance about the right being upset - and this was not an inaccurate comemnt - he made this in light of the fact that the right threw their hands up in dismay and called his original press conference comments "partisan". When in fact in his original press conference he had made no accusations directed at one specific party of group.
THE LEFT... has been warning of the dangers of politics practiced with violent rhetoric and imagery...
While THE RIGHT has been producing and defending politics practiced with violent rhetoric and imagery...
Everything known about this deranged man points to the fact that he was completely incoherent and paranoid. You cannot blame anyone, particularly Beck 'et al' when there's no evidence he listened to them. The Communist Manifesto was never recommended reading by anyone on the 'right'. This is pure opportunism on your part and that of the far-left at large.
Do me a favor and Google National German Socialist Workers' Party platform. Pay close attention to those planks that deal with economic issues. They were demonstrably socialists. Some of you think because that they weren't international socialists(communists) that they weren't collectivists. The communists were ideological rivals of the national socialists as are the baptists and the anabaptists; the sunnis and the shiites; the protestants and the catholics, etc. It is a known truth that groups that are remarkably similar to each other ideologically oftentimes reserve much time and effort war-making (sometimes literally) with the other group even though there are only minor issues separating them.
Do you find it a bit odd that millions of Germans (especially young men) could one day swear allegiance to international socialism and the next day switch allegiance to the national socialists (nazis) if there were truly some great chasm separating them?
Looks like the NSGWP collectivist didn't work out so well, especially beginning in 1933. Liberal nirvana? Ooh, maybe not. Economic collectivist only for Hitler's party contributors and Aryans; systematic persecution of Jews, gays, the disabled, and Communists; fervent nationalism; and ruthless territorial expansion--those are what happened, as opposed to anything leftist.
By looking up the term that you suggested klarg Google, I find that, already having the support of many in the lower class (workers, as in "worker's party"), Hitler employed the term "socialism" only to gain support of the middle class (small business)--the non-Jewish small business middle class, of course. Party popularity really took off during the Great Depression, with Jews blamed for many ills, and nationalism hyping a remade, stronger, more pure country.
The literature doesn't agree at all with what you claim about the role of socialism. It shows what you contend to be a shallow attempt at semantics, based on a single word, socialism, but at least you didn't refer to a singular blog rant without attribution, as others do.
Again, I'm glad you suggested to look up a fundamental part of political history, because it enlightened me a little, and there are sources to confirm it. In the 1930's, the Nazis counted on the frustrations of the poor, the working poor, and the recently not-so-middle-class via fear and anger, blaming certain groups of people and promising national rebirth, all to gain power. Collectivist for the Aryans and nobody else.
According to his youtube postings, he was not only anti-government, but found a lot of practices to be unconstitutional. He railed against currency, apparently upset that ours is not backed up by gold or silver.
Sound like anyone in right wing hate radio?
Interesting you had a comeback about the left books he owned all ready to go. For the record, the Communist Manifesto tells us nothing about this guy.
As to your assertion that The Communist Manifesto tells us nothing, I do believe that folks like Beck and Limbaugh would both tell you that it is an undeniable tie to progressives. Since we are, you know, communist/nazi/fascist/big brother loving anarchists.
Oddly enough, Fox 4, the local Fox affiliate here in Dallas, has a segment titled "Viewers' Voice". I just saw the "journalist" read an email from a viewer, in which the viewer excoriated the media for blaming Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, et al for this heinous act. They are no more responsible, she wrote, than The Beatles were for Charles Manson committing mass murder.
Appropriately, the "journalist" didn't point out that Manson didn't actually kill anyone, he is doing time for murders committed by people he urged into it.
Your knee-jerk defense of people whose stock-in-trade is hate speech is what is lame.
Mob mentality. A single person most likely wouldn't smash in a store window and steal a TV. But if he's surrounded by people who are doing it, it will make him more likely to find some rationalization to join in. We are social creatures after all.
The very fact that hate radio fills our airwaves should clue you in that the right is seeking to provoke some kind of reaction and thoughts against progressives. It's either that, or Rush, Sarah, and Beckhead are complete liars and are just doing it for the money. If that's the case, then one of our civil servants elected by the people of her district has a bullet in her head just so some people can get rich.
The Manson analogy stands. If you are disagreement with it, then that's your right (Voltaire) but you are completely out of touch with reality and I feel bad for you.
Talk about desperate to defend the indefensible.
When someone is on a news channel, like FoxNews, and they're telling you day, after day, after day that this guy Obama, and his fellow democrats are destroying the country, and that they need to be replaced no matter what.
What do you think is going to happen?
And make no mistake, it wouldn't matter if the FBI found evidence that he followed these hate talkers religiously, and that he did what he did on what he thought was their behest. Even if they found a diary claiming that he did it specifically because of what one of them said, there would be no repercussions to the talkers.
None of them would, under any circumstances, be held culpable, and there would still be idiots defending their right to spread hate as part of their freedom of speech.
He was denied entrance to the military based on a failed drug test.
Great piece by Eric--quite a few typos though.
It was so obvious that it was sickening. They refuse to confront the Troglodytes for their aggressive, caustic propaganda.
That stuff, it doesn't exist.
This is the point that they miss on. Time and again.
The "main-stream" media such as CNN, MSNBC, NPR, etc, have a clear choice:
1. Fairly report and review the clearly incendiary statements that have been made by not only tea party types but main-stream republican politicians and call for a national dialog to reduce the vitriol.
2. Play the "he-said/she-said" game and pretend that both Left and Right are saying the same thing (despite never having any good examples to attribute to the Left), and generally bemoaning the bad people on both sides (this is what is typically done).
3. Go the Fox/Rush route and just produce outright lies and propaganda ("the shooter was really a Liberal...").
As they (the media) start presenting their stance and choosing which of these three positions to take, I am going to start keeping score. We may be able to finally shake out those media sources that are pretending to be "objective" but will have to go for number 2 or 3 in order to follow the dictates of their Corporate Masters.
Wait and see.
Hate Radio and the FOXbots will go full bore with #3, and I predict that only a handful of Liberal hosts like Olbermann and Maddow will even touch #1.
O_O
Hell, their best defense right now is: This is terrible, but can you blame the guy?
I mean, this is the most reverence they can muster with 6 dead.
Now, if he is found out to be a crazy left winger, these guys like POV will be ALL over it.
BTW, I think you should take your own advice. Try writing a proper sentence with proper spelling and punctuation.
Again, he tried to assassinate a Congresswomen and this somehow has NO political associations?
Yeah, OK.
I though David Brooks (for a change) had a good take on all of this in today's N.Y. Times.
So, if it turns out that this person was driven by right wing rhetoric, and/or used it as an excuse to justify what he did, how will you feel then?
"Please look into protection for your family," Beck told her in an e-mail. "An attempt on you could bring the republic down."
IS THIS NOT THE VIOLENT RHETORIC AND END_OF_TIMES TALK THAT WE NEED TO STOP?
She doesn't hold office.
She doesn't make policy.
She doesn't offer anything to the country.
How would the republic not survive that Glenn?
My lord, these people are freakin unbelievable morons.
As much as I dislike that woman, I would never advocate violence against her, and I can't think of any progressive who would.
I fail to see how an attack on her would any more have the effect of bringing down the country than the attack on Ms. Giffords.
I suppose that, in Beck's view, a Fox employee and failed half-term governor of our least populous state (686,000 residents) is far more important to the survival of this great nation than a sitting representative of Tuscon (population 1.02 million).
Quote from Gabrielle Giffords: "...for example, we're on Sarah Palin's targeted list, but the thing is that the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district, and when people do that, they've gotta realize there are consequencÂes to that action."
Of course this has to be discussed. Get a clue.
I suppose.
It came from a Blackberry, and it has Ms. Palin's name on it, so my assumption is that she twitted it. If not, perhaps she should look into keeping her Blackberry and her account information to herself.
Compare now to the 1960s / early 70s when: John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Medgar Evers, Malcom X, George Wallace, George Lincoln Rockwell were all shot (and all but Wallace were killed); The Weatherman (including Obama's buddy Bill Ayers) were blowing up buildings; The Black Panthers were having armed shoot outs with the police; on and on...
In 1804, a sitting U.S. Vice President (Aaron Burr) shot and killed a former Secretary of the Treasury (Alexander Hamilton) in a duel to the death.
Let's not forget the Civil War when Americans killed more than 600,000 other Americans.
Yes, I feel sorry for the 9 year old girl who was shot and killed. I even feel sorry for the families of the politicians that were gunned down.
However, anyone who is bellyaching about the current "hateful" political environment doesn't know squat about American history.
The last 25 years have been among the most politically peaceful we've ever had in the U.S.
Given the extent that power hungry politicians and greedy bureaucrats have damaged the country, it is surprising that more violence isn't erupting around us.
Someone get this guy's guns...
Thanks for playing, nothing-but-spin.
Looks like she made some people angry.
Nothing like trying to spin that map to support your claim.
You do realize what that map actually represented right?
Of course, it did only take you 4 minutes to find that, did you have it ready just in case we weren't easily fooled foxbots?
Oh.. oh... oh... you are boy blue, aren't you?
Dude, I'm sorry your wife left you, but if it helps you any, it probably had more to do with you being gay than with you losing your job.
And I like how Sarah Palin using gun references makes her a catalyst to violent acts, but Joe Manchin's political ad where he literally shoots the cap and trade bill is just good campaign management.
It is also funny how the FBI searched all of his internet activity and there was no mention of any right wing extremist fueling his passion to shoot Giffords.
Here goes Media Matters making more kool-aid for all of you children to drink up.
Sure, the fact that he parroted Beck on the gold standard and his hatred of government couldn't possibly be taken as a hint.
BTW Giffords voted for health care reform and voted "against" Pelosit as the minority leader.
Instead she voted for civil rights hero and long time Georgia representative John Lewis.
What, do think a LEFTIE did it? That's rich.
MMFA is doing a great job exposing the hate-spewers.
So are these folks.
I have no revolution plans, but I can tell you this for certain:
I don't care who you are or what your political philosophy is, if you take up arms against my country, you had best hope that someone with a Miranda Rights card gets to you before I do.
The Obama hatred came out long before he became President Obama. Long before he did anything to revile him for.
Of course, since he hasn't done anything that would warrant that response, perhaps you can explain to me why those sentiments are out there? Try to not use some Beck, Limbaugh, Palin, or other hate-wing talker points. Give me some specific examples of what President Obama has done to deserve the hatred of the right.
What if a whole lot of people encouraged others to get rid of you with violent or aggressive actions? Would you and those like you learn a lesson. Would the pain, anguish, personal loss and suffering change your dirty and irresponsible mouth?
You and those of your ilk are not the whole problem but obviously you are a significant part of it. Your greed, lies, misrepresentations and manipulations contribute only to America's societal collapse. Try (for a change) to contribute positive things. Be part of the solution and not part of the problem. (it is obvious you are not capable of this)
You and others have tricked so many into believing falsehoods. We don't have the time or money you do to research etc. etc.. We hope that what we hear, read and see in the media is the truth. We were wrong.
Money is your truth, MONEY is our governments truth, MONEY is wall streets truth, MONEY is the truth of the wealthy. Not just greed but irresponsible profit from manipulating or government. I/we can't make our representatives vote a certain way like big business and the wealthy can.
We, that would be 80%+ of America's citizens want our share and we are getting ready to make the changes necessary to get it. Greedy lairs who run America now Democrats and Republicans and those like you will soon be replaced.
If one federal politician honestly cared or was not a liar they would be screaming every day about the political bribes and business manipulations ON BOTH SIDES of our American Government.
They would expose with evidence the unfair (cash paid for) advantage the wealthy and big business has over most of the citizens of our great America. THE WEALTHY AND BIG BUSINESS OWN AMERICA NOT THE PEOPLE.
A tiny percentage of America's profit and tax dollars would allow for a quality nationalized health care system. The wealthy want it all and more. The proof is in the killing more people every year for lack of medical care than died at the horror of 9/11. Every year the numbers of dead and suffering increases.
AND STILL NATIONALIZED HEALTH CARE WON'T HAPPEN. POLITICIANS AND THE WEALTHY AND STUPID PEOPLE LIKE glenn beck DON'T CARE AND ARE CHEATING US TO GET ALL THE MONEY THEY CAN.
Progressives say that the Government holds all of those rights and graciously grants some of those rights to the people.
The person who shot Giffords is definitely on the Progressive side of this divide.
Using this nut job as an excuse to go after the left OR the right is absolutely ludicrous as is this ridiculous article.
I'm sure that you don't realise that the Sainted Founding Fathers were progressives. The conservatives of the time wanted to remain under Britain's thumb.
I realise that we fought your centralised government ideals in the War of Independence.
The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.
BLASPHEMER get thee behind me!!!
Without them there would have been no Constitution.
And why are you asking for someone to get behind you? You clearly are not from America.
My bad, that shoud read "in favor of corporations".
A country like America that was established by founding fathers who were intellectuals inspired by the Enlightenment area has regressed into a nation that has allowed hate and lies to be spewed from extremists like Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, and Fon News 24/7/365.
and you so it seems.