Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Djshakes
Participant[quote=ILoveRegulation]I wonder if anyone on the right will condemn Sarah Palin for her ‘crosshairs’ map or her ‘lock and load’ rhetoric? I’m not holding my breath.[/quote]
This is a cross hair for your information. The cross doesn’t expand past circle in a scope now does it.
http://www.noisyroom.net/blog/surveyor2.png
This is a surveyor mark
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114]Agreed that there exists vitriolic assholes on both sides, but it’s a false equivalency to compare any of the left’s ill-advised statements to the right’s gleeful fetishization of guns, “don’t retreat, reload!”, “renewing the tree of liberty” and “2nd amendment remedies.” The comparison doesn’t even come close. I really was hoping the discussion wouldn’t turn into a left-vs-right thing, but it almost begs it.
Even if his personal motivations weren’t political, the fact that his target was a politician makes this an inherently political attack. Events like this don’t happen in a vacuum.
[/quote]
Afx: Two things. First, with a little bit of research on the shooter, you’ll find that he was obsessed with Gifford as far back as 2007, and that his motivation does appear to be personal, not political (a la Hinckley shooting Reagan for his inamorata, Jodie Foster).
Second, it is not a false equivalency to compare Left to Right on this. No, I’m not condoning Beck or Limbaugh, because I do think they’re assholes and contribute nothing to the debate. But, for every Beck or Limbaugh, I can offer a Dylan Ratigan, or a Mike Malloy, or even a Bill Maher. And their speech is just as virulent and violent and they agitate and advocate death and violence with equal ferocity. Think about Ward Churchill’s comments following 9/11 (the “little Eichmanns” who perished in the Twin Towers). Or Nina Totenberg, or Susan Sontag, or Julianne Malveaux, who suggested, without a trace of irony or humor, that Clarence Thomas’s wife feed him plenty of eggs and butter, so he’d die early “like many black men do” (her words, not mine).
I’m sorry but there is an established culture on both sides, Left and Right, that espouses violence as an answer and literally treats its opponents as targets. The Left does it with a little more panache and brio (being the cultural elite and all), but its there and you don’t have to look far to find it.[/quote]
Do you have hard evidence of Beck or Limbaugh inciting violence? I have never heard any, in fact, Beck’s talk show today was the exact opposite. I would ask the same thing of the people on the left you mention but I don’t listen to them (I don’t listen to Limbaugh either).
Seems he is quite anti-violence.
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/01/10/glenns-letter-to-the-american-people-politicians-and-media/
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114]Agreed that there exists vitriolic assholes on both sides, but it’s a false equivalency to compare any of the left’s ill-advised statements to the right’s gleeful fetishization of guns, “don’t retreat, reload!”, “renewing the tree of liberty” and “2nd amendment remedies.” The comparison doesn’t even come close. I really was hoping the discussion wouldn’t turn into a left-vs-right thing, but it almost begs it.
Even if his personal motivations weren’t political, the fact that his target was a politician makes this an inherently political attack. Events like this don’t happen in a vacuum.
[/quote]
Afx: Two things. First, with a little bit of research on the shooter, you’ll find that he was obsessed with Gifford as far back as 2007, and that his motivation does appear to be personal, not political (a la Hinckley shooting Reagan for his inamorata, Jodie Foster).
Second, it is not a false equivalency to compare Left to Right on this. No, I’m not condoning Beck or Limbaugh, because I do think they’re assholes and contribute nothing to the debate. But, for every Beck or Limbaugh, I can offer a Dylan Ratigan, or a Mike Malloy, or even a Bill Maher. And their speech is just as virulent and violent and they agitate and advocate death and violence with equal ferocity. Think about Ward Churchill’s comments following 9/11 (the “little Eichmanns” who perished in the Twin Towers). Or Nina Totenberg, or Susan Sontag, or Julianne Malveaux, who suggested, without a trace of irony or humor, that Clarence Thomas’s wife feed him plenty of eggs and butter, so he’d die early “like many black men do” (her words, not mine).
I’m sorry but there is an established culture on both sides, Left and Right, that espouses violence as an answer and literally treats its opponents as targets. The Left does it with a little more panache and brio (being the cultural elite and all), but its there and you don’t have to look far to find it.[/quote]
Do you have hard evidence of Beck or Limbaugh inciting violence? I have never heard any, in fact, Beck’s talk show today was the exact opposite. I would ask the same thing of the people on the left you mention but I don’t listen to them (I don’t listen to Limbaugh either).
Seems he is quite anti-violence.
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/01/10/glenns-letter-to-the-american-people-politicians-and-media/
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114]Agreed that there exists vitriolic assholes on both sides, but it’s a false equivalency to compare any of the left’s ill-advised statements to the right’s gleeful fetishization of guns, “don’t retreat, reload!”, “renewing the tree of liberty” and “2nd amendment remedies.” The comparison doesn’t even come close. I really was hoping the discussion wouldn’t turn into a left-vs-right thing, but it almost begs it.
Even if his personal motivations weren’t political, the fact that his target was a politician makes this an inherently political attack. Events like this don’t happen in a vacuum.
[/quote]
Afx: Two things. First, with a little bit of research on the shooter, you’ll find that he was obsessed with Gifford as far back as 2007, and that his motivation does appear to be personal, not political (a la Hinckley shooting Reagan for his inamorata, Jodie Foster).
Second, it is not a false equivalency to compare Left to Right on this. No, I’m not condoning Beck or Limbaugh, because I do think they’re assholes and contribute nothing to the debate. But, for every Beck or Limbaugh, I can offer a Dylan Ratigan, or a Mike Malloy, or even a Bill Maher. And their speech is just as virulent and violent and they agitate and advocate death and violence with equal ferocity. Think about Ward Churchill’s comments following 9/11 (the “little Eichmanns” who perished in the Twin Towers). Or Nina Totenberg, or Susan Sontag, or Julianne Malveaux, who suggested, without a trace of irony or humor, that Clarence Thomas’s wife feed him plenty of eggs and butter, so he’d die early “like many black men do” (her words, not mine).
I’m sorry but there is an established culture on both sides, Left and Right, that espouses violence as an answer and literally treats its opponents as targets. The Left does it with a little more panache and brio (being the cultural elite and all), but its there and you don’t have to look far to find it.[/quote]
Do you have hard evidence of Beck or Limbaugh inciting violence? I have never heard any, in fact, Beck’s talk show today was the exact opposite. I would ask the same thing of the people on the left you mention but I don’t listen to them (I don’t listen to Limbaugh either).
Seems he is quite anti-violence.
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/01/10/glenns-letter-to-the-american-people-politicians-and-media/
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114]Agreed that there exists vitriolic assholes on both sides, but it’s a false equivalency to compare any of the left’s ill-advised statements to the right’s gleeful fetishization of guns, “don’t retreat, reload!”, “renewing the tree of liberty” and “2nd amendment remedies.” The comparison doesn’t even come close. I really was hoping the discussion wouldn’t turn into a left-vs-right thing, but it almost begs it.
Even if his personal motivations weren’t political, the fact that his target was a politician makes this an inherently political attack. Events like this don’t happen in a vacuum.
[/quote]
Afx: Two things. First, with a little bit of research on the shooter, you’ll find that he was obsessed with Gifford as far back as 2007, and that his motivation does appear to be personal, not political (a la Hinckley shooting Reagan for his inamorata, Jodie Foster).
Second, it is not a false equivalency to compare Left to Right on this. No, I’m not condoning Beck or Limbaugh, because I do think they’re assholes and contribute nothing to the debate. But, for every Beck or Limbaugh, I can offer a Dylan Ratigan, or a Mike Malloy, or even a Bill Maher. And their speech is just as virulent and violent and they agitate and advocate death and violence with equal ferocity. Think about Ward Churchill’s comments following 9/11 (the “little Eichmanns” who perished in the Twin Towers). Or Nina Totenberg, or Susan Sontag, or Julianne Malveaux, who suggested, without a trace of irony or humor, that Clarence Thomas’s wife feed him plenty of eggs and butter, so he’d die early “like many black men do” (her words, not mine).
I’m sorry but there is an established culture on both sides, Left and Right, that espouses violence as an answer and literally treats its opponents as targets. The Left does it with a little more panache and brio (being the cultural elite and all), but its there and you don’t have to look far to find it.[/quote]
Do you have hard evidence of Beck or Limbaugh inciting violence? I have never heard any, in fact, Beck’s talk show today was the exact opposite. I would ask the same thing of the people on the left you mention but I don’t listen to them (I don’t listen to Limbaugh either).
Seems he is quite anti-violence.
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/01/10/glenns-letter-to-the-american-people-politicians-and-media/
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114]Agreed that there exists vitriolic assholes on both sides, but it’s a false equivalency to compare any of the left’s ill-advised statements to the right’s gleeful fetishization of guns, “don’t retreat, reload!”, “renewing the tree of liberty” and “2nd amendment remedies.” The comparison doesn’t even come close. I really was hoping the discussion wouldn’t turn into a left-vs-right thing, but it almost begs it.
Even if his personal motivations weren’t political, the fact that his target was a politician makes this an inherently political attack. Events like this don’t happen in a vacuum.
[/quote]
Afx: Two things. First, with a little bit of research on the shooter, you’ll find that he was obsessed with Gifford as far back as 2007, and that his motivation does appear to be personal, not political (a la Hinckley shooting Reagan for his inamorata, Jodie Foster).
Second, it is not a false equivalency to compare Left to Right on this. No, I’m not condoning Beck or Limbaugh, because I do think they’re assholes and contribute nothing to the debate. But, for every Beck or Limbaugh, I can offer a Dylan Ratigan, or a Mike Malloy, or even a Bill Maher. And their speech is just as virulent and violent and they agitate and advocate death and violence with equal ferocity. Think about Ward Churchill’s comments following 9/11 (the “little Eichmanns” who perished in the Twin Towers). Or Nina Totenberg, or Susan Sontag, or Julianne Malveaux, who suggested, without a trace of irony or humor, that Clarence Thomas’s wife feed him plenty of eggs and butter, so he’d die early “like many black men do” (her words, not mine).
I’m sorry but there is an established culture on both sides, Left and Right, that espouses violence as an answer and literally treats its opponents as targets. The Left does it with a little more panache and brio (being the cultural elite and all), but its there and you don’t have to look far to find it.[/quote]
Do you have hard evidence of Beck or Limbaugh inciting violence? I have never heard any, in fact, Beck’s talk show today was the exact opposite. I would ask the same thing of the people on the left you mention but I don’t listen to them (I don’t listen to Limbaugh either).
Seems he is quite anti-violence.
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/01/10/glenns-letter-to-the-american-people-politicians-and-media/
Participant[quote=mazeltov][quote=faterikcartman]
You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.
[/quote]
Congratulations you prick!
Another validation of Godwin’s law.[/quote]Is there a similar law for the terms racist, racism, etc?
Participant[quote=mazeltov][quote=faterikcartman]
You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.
[/quote]
Congratulations you prick!
Another validation of Godwin’s law.[/quote]Is there a similar law for the terms racist, racism, etc?
Participant[quote=mazeltov][quote=faterikcartman]
You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.
[/quote]
Congratulations you prick!
Another validation of Godwin’s law.[/quote]Is there a similar law for the terms racist, racism, etc?
Participant[quote=mazeltov][quote=faterikcartman]
You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.
[/quote]
Congratulations you prick!
Another validation of Godwin’s law.[/quote]Is there a similar law for the terms racist, racism, etc?
Participant[quote=mazeltov][quote=faterikcartman]
You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.
[/quote]
Congratulations you prick!
Another validation of Godwin’s law.[/quote]Is there a similar law for the terms racist, racism, etc?
Participant[quote=faterikcartman]It is always those who call themselves liberals that are the first to embrace fascism. And yes, I’m saying the OP is calling for fascism and oppression.
The shooter was known as a liberal. Weren’t his fave books by communists and socialists? Have you heard that the shooter actually worked on the congressperson’s campaign in ’07? Have you read that this congressperson voted against Nancy Pelosi? Have you read that a poster on a liberal blog said she was dead to them as a result? Do you remember that Obama himself said if political opponents bring a knife, [we] will bring a gun?
Have you read that, bottom line, the shooter was a homicidal nut-job?
You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.
You’re counter-revolutionaries. You reject the Constitution. And you reject the concept that oppressed people can justly physically resist.
And unable to counter intellectual arguments you look to simply shut the mouths of the opposition.
I can’t help but think this mindset is the result of some sort of mental illness, stupidity, or you’re all in on the dirty little secret that it is just a ploy to silence those you disagree with.
No one but crazies sees political opponents “in the cross-hairs” as a direct threat. Stopping public discourse is not going to do anything to keep the crazies in check.
That’s the thinking — or lack of it — you get when you teach multi-culti nonsense in schools instead of history. People start thinking there were no wars before guns and no violent crime before television.
I, for one, am tired of sitting idly by whilst a new cadre of commissars call for restrictions on free speech, restrictions on gun ownership so that the people cannot resist an oppressive state, and restrictions on most anything they don’t like in the name of the global-warming hoax.
You so-called liberals have such muddled brains that on the one hand you argue for limitless abortions because you have the right to do what you will with your own bodies. You argue that marijuana should be legal for the same reason — your body, your choice. But more and more communities that are hot-beds for liberalism are banning trans-fats to save people from themselves.
As the guy from Fallbrook pointed out — literally burning Bush in effigy was celebrated by the left.
The left (true fascist haters of individual freedom) goes off the deep end and everyone thinks it’s fine. The so-called right (true classical liberals) uses a political metaphor and they’re accused of calling for murder and people clamour for controls on talk radio and firearms. Conveniently, no one mentions that the liberal mainstream media is left unmolested and the arms of state control remain fully armed.
Now I see how Hitler was able to turn a nation against a minority group and murder six million people on a pretext.
You people need to slap yourselves (now you nutters will accuse me inciting violence — well yes, I’m trying to incite you to violence against yourselves, I won’t deny it), take a cold bracing shower, look yourselves in the mirror, and think about where your dreams lead.
You sorts always look at things through the prism of the current political climate — but fail to foresee what it would be like if future, much less benign, “leaders” were in power with the controls you establish now. Wake up. Freedom has a price and too many people are cheap bastards.[/quote]
I haven’t read a post this good in a long time. Hard to argue with this.
Participant[quote=faterikcartman]It is always those who call themselves liberals that are the first to embrace fascism. And yes, I’m saying the OP is calling for fascism and oppression.
The shooter was known as a liberal. Weren’t his fave books by communists and socialists? Have you heard that the shooter actually worked on the congressperson’s campaign in ’07? Have you read that this congressperson voted against Nancy Pelosi? Have you read that a poster on a liberal blog said she was dead to them as a result? Do you remember that Obama himself said if political opponents bring a knife, [we] will bring a gun?
Have you read that, bottom line, the shooter was a homicidal nut-job?
You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.
You’re counter-revolutionaries. You reject the Constitution. And you reject the concept that oppressed people can justly physically resist.
And unable to counter intellectual arguments you look to simply shut the mouths of the opposition.
I can’t help but think this mindset is the result of some sort of mental illness, stupidity, or you’re all in on the dirty little secret that it is just a ploy to silence those you disagree with.
No one but crazies sees political opponents “in the cross-hairs” as a direct threat. Stopping public discourse is not going to do anything to keep the crazies in check.
That’s the thinking — or lack of it — you get when you teach multi-culti nonsense in schools instead of history. People start thinking there were no wars before guns and no violent crime before television.
I, for one, am tired of sitting idly by whilst a new cadre of commissars call for restrictions on free speech, restrictions on gun ownership so that the people cannot resist an oppressive state, and restrictions on most anything they don’t like in the name of the global-warming hoax.
You so-called liberals have such muddled brains that on the one hand you argue for limitless abortions because you have the right to do what you will with your own bodies. You argue that marijuana should be legal for the same reason — your body, your choice. But more and more communities that are hot-beds for liberalism are banning trans-fats to save people from themselves.
As the guy from Fallbrook pointed out — literally burning Bush in effigy was celebrated by the left.
The left (true fascist haters of individual freedom) goes off the deep end and everyone thinks it’s fine. The so-called right (true classical liberals) uses a political metaphor and they’re accused of calling for murder and people clamour for controls on talk radio and firearms. Conveniently, no one mentions that the liberal mainstream media is left unmolested and the arms of state control remain fully armed.
Now I see how Hitler was able to turn a nation against a minority group and murder six million people on a pretext.
You people need to slap yourselves (now you nutters will accuse me inciting violence — well yes, I’m trying to incite you to violence against yourselves, I won’t deny it), take a cold bracing shower, look yourselves in the mirror, and think about where your dreams lead.
You sorts always look at things through the prism of the current political climate — but fail to foresee what it would be like if future, much less benign, “leaders” were in power with the controls you establish now. Wake up. Freedom has a price and too many people are cheap bastards.[/quote]
I haven’t read a post this good in a long time. Hard to argue with this.
Participant[quote=faterikcartman]It is always those who call themselves liberals that are the first to embrace fascism. And yes, I’m saying the OP is calling for fascism and oppression.
The shooter was known as a liberal. Weren’t his fave books by communists and socialists? Have you heard that the shooter actually worked on the congressperson’s campaign in ’07? Have you read that this congressperson voted against Nancy Pelosi? Have you read that a poster on a liberal blog said she was dead to them as a result? Do you remember that Obama himself said if political opponents bring a knife, [we] will bring a gun?
Have you read that, bottom line, the shooter was a homicidal nut-job?
You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.
You’re counter-revolutionaries. You reject the Constitution. And you reject the concept that oppressed people can justly physically resist.
And unable to counter intellectual arguments you look to simply shut the mouths of the opposition.
I can’t help but think this mindset is the result of some sort of mental illness, stupidity, or you’re all in on the dirty little secret that it is just a ploy to silence those you disagree with.
No one but crazies sees political opponents “in the cross-hairs” as a direct threat. Stopping public discourse is not going to do anything to keep the crazies in check.
That’s the thinking — or lack of it — you get when you teach multi-culti nonsense in schools instead of history. People start thinking there were no wars before guns and no violent crime before television.
I, for one, am tired of sitting idly by whilst a new cadre of commissars call for restrictions on free speech, restrictions on gun ownership so that the people cannot resist an oppressive state, and restrictions on most anything they don’t like in the name of the global-warming hoax.
You so-called liberals have such muddled brains that on the one hand you argue for limitless abortions because you have the right to do what you will with your own bodies. You argue that marijuana should be legal for the same reason — your body, your choice. But more and more communities that are hot-beds for liberalism are banning trans-fats to save people from themselves.
As the guy from Fallbrook pointed out — literally burning Bush in effigy was celebrated by the left.
The left (true fascist haters of individual freedom) goes off the deep end and everyone thinks it’s fine. The so-called right (true classical liberals) uses a political metaphor and they’re accused of calling for murder and people clamour for controls on talk radio and firearms. Conveniently, no one mentions that the liberal mainstream media is left unmolested and the arms of state control remain fully armed.
Now I see how Hitler was able to turn a nation against a minority group and murder six million people on a pretext.
You people need to slap yourselves (now you nutters will accuse me inciting violence — well yes, I’m trying to incite you to violence against yourselves, I won’t deny it), take a cold bracing shower, look yourselves in the mirror, and think about where your dreams lead.
You sorts always look at things through the prism of the current political climate — but fail to foresee what it would be like if future, much less benign, “leaders” were in power with the controls you establish now. Wake up. Freedom has a price and too many people are cheap bastards.[/quote]
I haven’t read a post this good in a long time. Hard to argue with this.
-
AuthorPosts
