LOL

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253055&kaid=127&subid=171

from 2004:

Quote :

"The heartland strategy begins by choosing likely targets for Democratic gains. Let's go to the map:"

I guess this just as much to blame as the Tea Party?

1/10/2011 9:18:00 AM

The mental stability thing - and why he didn't get the help he needed - reminds me of the conversations that were had after the VaTech shootings.

Quote :

"Really? Wouldn't that stuff be subject to HIPAA?"

I think the mental health stuff will ping...

oh here: http://crime.about.com/od/guns/a/handgun_check.htm

Quote :

"'Denied Persons File' According to the FBI, states must provide to the NICS Index information on people declared mentally ill "including supporting documentation to prove an individual was adjudicated as a mental defective or involuntarily committed for treatment" to be included in the system's "Mental Defective File." Some states and jurisdictions have privacy laws that prohibit the release or sharing of mental health information. In those cases, "states can provide information for inclusion in the Denied Persons File of NICS with no specifics on the mental health issue," which would go into the NICS index, the FBI says. Only 22 States Participate As of April 2007, only 22 states submit mental health information for the NICS database. Those states are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming."

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 9:19 AM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 9:18:36 AM

Quote :

"Hey, man, he's just rebelling against that police state you keep warning us about."

You're pathetic.

Think about it for 5 more minutes and maybe something will fire

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 9:35 AM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 9:35:17 AM

Also gotta love how the right is suddenly believing in mental illness again when one of their own goes on a rampage.

1/10/2011 9:37:53 AM

so McDanger, care to comment on my link above?

1/10/2011 9:44:33 AM

Quote :

"You should take it personally, you're an idiot. A guy who prescribes people glasses and calls himself a doctor, lol. Anyway, that was a horrible attempt at trying to rationalizing your full-retard approach to this thread. Also, I'm in school and have never been a secretary. I began school like 2 years ago. You're talking about shit I posted over 2 years ago? What a pathetic life you must have. "

Im sure it is a great school. Congrats.

I see that chip is still large and on the shoulder.

Yeah, still find the economist's article funny. Based on no facts. Classic Krugman

And yes Terp a person with a Doctor of Optometry degree is called a doctor. Maybe you can change that law one day. We also have a DEA number which means we can write prescriptions for medicine... amazing isnt it. idiot

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 10:26 AM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 10:06:01 AM

Dabird, here is another

http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/dlc-targeting-map.gif


Behind enemy lines, targets, oh my. Doesnt this create a climate of hate/violence?

1/10/2011 10:08:03 AM

Quote :

"The only actual violence here was the shooter."

True, but violence itself has been idealized on the media by the right wing. Case in point, the man in Arizona who brought weapons to the Obama and was lauded on tv and radio as a second amendment hero. True it may just be the fantasy of the "second amendment solution" but certain people aren't able to distinguish that from reality, and when you encourage this man's worldview through fantasy, you fan the flames.

Quote :

"As for your tea party comment: The Tea Party Movement of 2009 had no connection with, and nearly opposite aims to, the Boston Tea Party of 1773; it merely misappropriated the name without understanding its meaning, much as it has done with the Constitution (along with the Constitution Party and nearly every other right-wing organization or movement)."

This may be true, but is completely irrelevant. These people chose the name in order to feed this fantasy of them being american patriots violently fighting the their opposition.

Quote :

"Was it not just last month that a leftist environmental group got in trouble for espousing that everyone denying catastrophic global warming was guilty of genocide and if only they could be violently executed?"

And these people don't get an entire tv network and elected into office. In fact, if you didn't look them out, you wouldn't even know of them.

Quote :

"the democrats model their party after violent revolutionaries like Che Guevara"

No they don't.

Quote :

"This guy wasn't a liberal, conservative, tea partier, anything. This guy was a nutcase and nothing more."

I bet he would have agreed with the "second amendment solution", and you can be guaranteed he took some level of inspiration from the other man in arizona who brought a gun to a political rally but failed to shoot anyone.

1/10/2011 10:11:20 AM

Quote :

"Really? Wouldn't that stuff be subject to HIPAA? (I'm not really familiar with the scope of an FBI background check and what kind of information they can gather.)"

It depends. IIRC, if you voluntarily commit yourself, it won't show up on the NICS check, but if you are ever involuntarily committed, that will show up and is a reason to deny you:

Quote :

" * A person who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year or any state offense classified by the state as a misdemeanor and is punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than two years. * Persons who are fugitives of justice—for example, the subject of an active felony or misdemeanor warrant. * An unlawful user and/or an addict of any controlled substance; for example, a person convicted for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past year; or a person with multiple arrests for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past five years with the most recent arrest occurring within the past year; or a person found through a drug test to use a controlled substance unlawfully, provided the test was administered within the past year. * A person adjudicated mental defective or involuntarily committed to a mental institution or incompetent to handle own affairs, including dispositions to criminal charges of found not guilty by reason of insanity or found incompetent to stand trial. * A person who, being an alien, is illegally or unlawfully in the United States. * A person who, being an alien except as provided in subsection (y) (2), has been admitted to the United States under a non-immigrant visa. * A person dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces. * A person who has renounced his/her United States citizenship. * The subject of a protective order issued after a hearing in which the respondent had notice that restrains them from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such partner. This does not include ex parte orders. * A person convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime which includes the use or attempted use of physical force or threatened use of a deadly weapon and the defendant was the spouse, former spouse, parent, guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited in the past with the victim as a spouse, parent, guardian or similar situation to a spouse, parent or guardian of the victim. * A person who is under indictment or information for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. "

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/general-information/fact-sheet

Oh and that culture of violence:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/kilborn-cbs-target-bush-0

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 10:33 AM. Reason : it's nothing new]

1/10/2011 10:22:22 AM

more possible insights by someone who claims to be his friend

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/jared-lee-loughner-friend-voicemail-phone-message?page=1




my take:
He was a crazy.

and

Quote :

"True it may just be the fantasy of the "second amendment solution" but certain people aren't able to distinguish that from reality"

this interview makes it seem like the guy had major issues with dreaming and reality

1/10/2011 10:25:15 AM

Quote :

""I saw his dream journal once. That's the golden piece of evidence. You want to know what goes on in Jared Loughner's mind, there's a dream journal that will tell you everything.""

I found pictures of it:

1/10/2011 10:30:07 AM

Quote :

"so McDanger, care to comment on my link above?"

No, because you didn't care to think for 5 minutes before posting it.

Quote :

"Behind enemy lines, targets, oh my. Doesnt this create a climate of hate/violence?"

Yes, yes it does. In a vacuum, it does. Let's ignore the entire context of the Tea Party, its members, and the rhetoric being used both by "officials" and by the regular people.

IT'S ALL THE SAME DEMOCRATS ARE DOING IT TOO. Doing what, Mr. Conservative? NOTHING, NOBODY'S TO BLAME HERE.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 10:36 AM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 10:35:41 AM

Also kinda interesting is that loughner's grammar seemed to somehow be connected to this guy?

http://dwmlc.com/

There are some STRANGE people in this world.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 10:49 AM. Reason : which is why the internet is so great?]

1/10/2011 10:44:31 AM

McDanger, I dont find fault of "targeting" districts from either party. I dont think they incite violence at all. Im mostly concerned about the hypocrisy from the media/left and how they rush to blame a teaparty/right winger everytime something bad happens without even knowing any facts.

1/10/2011 11:33:19 AM

Quote :

"McDanger, I dont find fault of "targeting" districts from either party. I dont think they incite violence at all."

By itself it's probably not a big deal. When coupled with the rest of the rhetoric and the overall "revolution" narrative/fantasy, do you still deny it?

Quote :

"Im mostly concerned about the hypocrisy from the media/left and how they rush to blame a teaparty/right winger everytime something bad happens without even knowing any facts."

Except the main bulk of the discussion has been whether or not violence-inciting/glorifying rhetoric should be used at all, especially with respect to domestic politics and policy. The fact that you've ignored this and have instead focused on minor issues divorced completely from context means that, while your words might "fit" into the discussion now and again, you are talking to yourself. Join the grown-up conversation anytime you'd like.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 11:36 AM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 11:36:19 AM

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2011/01/friend-of-loughner-i-felt-like.html

Quote :

"Tierney, described as "an old and close friend with whom he had gone to high school and college" in the Mother Jones report, said that Loughner had repeatedly called Giffords a "fake," and that his hatred of Giffords intensified after he attended a campaign event where he posed a question to the congresswoman. According to Tierny, Loughner's question was, "What is government if words have no meaning?" "He said, 'Can you believe it, they wouldn't answer my question,' and I told him, 'Dude, no one's going to answer that,'" Tierney recalls. "Ever since that, he thought she was fake, he had something against her.""

He's an idiot, anti-government conspiracy theorist. He was personally insulted that Rep Giffords didn't answer his stupid ass question.

1/10/2011 11:42:12 AM

Quote :

"True, but violence itself has been idealized on the media by the right wing. Case in point, the man in Arizona who brought weapons to the Obama and was lauded on tv and radio as a second amendment hero."

Yes. Because he had a gun and the restraint not to use it. Had he taken a shot at Obama, those same people would have instead been condemning him as a terrorist.

By your logic, someone praising car ownership should be lumped in with someone that drives down a police officer.

Quote :

"This may be true, but is completely irrelevant. These people chose the name in order to feed this fantasy of them being american patriots violently fighting the their opposition."

Like I said, the Boston Tea Party was at most an attack on property. No one was harmed or threatened with harm. Had that not been the case, then most of these people would not identify with it.

Quote :

"I bet he would have agreed with the "second amendment solution""

Last I checked, Sharron Angle lost the election and holds no party position whatsoever. As such, whatever that confirmed witch says has nothing to do with either the Tea Party or republicans in general.

1/10/2011 11:49:16 AM

I think you all should think about it for five minutes.

1/10/2011 11:52:42 AM

good post loneshark

Yes, I dont see masses of people organizing for an armed revolution. I see some of the left calling for that. I think this is mostly used to get people motivated to VOTE for change.

Quote :

"whether or not violence-inciting/glorifying rhetoric should be used at all"

Are you really Tipper Gore going after Rap?

1/10/2011 12:03:19 PM

Quote :

"Are you really Tipper Gore going after Rap?"

Do you really see no difference between a performance artist and a politician? Maybe this is the problem with our country.

1/10/2011 12:10:47 PM

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41087

Glad some people are picking up on the Krugman joke.

1/10/2011 12:10:54 PM

Quote :

"Except the main bulk of the discussion has been whether or not violence-inciting/glorifying rhetoric should be used at all, especially with respect to domestic politics and policy."

The problem is determining what counts as "violence-inciting" or "violence-glorifying" rhetoric. It's already illegal publicly call for violence against someone, so we've got laws for that. If we want to say that it's illegal for anyone to say anything that could possibly be perceived as "inciting violence," that's extremely subjective, and I'm certainly not willing to cede control one party or the other so they can take political prisoners.

Does anyone here really believe that Sarah Palin meant literal cross hairs? When Obama talked about bringing a gun to a knife fight, did he mean we should literally be fighting in the streets, with guns and knives, to decide policy?

1/10/2011 12:13:23 PM

Yeah some random blogger with no conception of the facts and the writing skills of a toddler

I'm glad TruPatriots (tm)* are starting to really pick up on The Truth





* Trademark of the Koch brothers

Quote :

"The problem is determining what counts as "violence-inciting" or "violence-glorifying" rhetoric. It's already illegal publicly call for violence against someone, so we've got laws for that. If we want to say that it's illegal for anyone to say anything that could possibly be perceived as "inciting violence," that's extremely subjective, and I'm certainly not willing to cede control one party or the other so they can take political prisoners. Does anyone here really believe that Sarah Palin meant literal cross hairs? When Obama talked about bringing a gun to a knife fight, did he mean we should literally be fighting in the streets, with guns and knives, to decide policy?"

I think it's ridiculous that whenever a clear example of a culture of violence has been presented (most red states at this point with their frothing Tea Party wannabe chickenhawk fantasies), then people like you come out and ask for a hard-threshold or a fucking generalized algorithm to pick out when a "culture of violence" has been reached.

Is there any way I can assume you have some common sense and then proceed from there?

Quote :

"Does anyone here really believe that Sarah Palin meant literal cross hairs? When Obama talked about bringing a gun to a knife fight, did he mean we should literally be fighting in the streets, with guns and knives, to decide policy?"

Nobody believes any of these people are being literal, but one of the two people you mentioned is part of an entire narrative/set of concepts and delusions that uses violent imagery as a rallying call.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 12:17 PM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 12:14:07 PM

Quote :

"I think it's ridiculous that whenever a clear example of a culture of violence has been presented (most red states at this point), then people like you come out and ask for a hard-threshold or a fucking generalized algorithm to pick out when a "culture of violence" has been reached. Is there any way I can assume you have some common sense and then proceed from there?"

I live in a red state, and I'm the least violent person you've ever met. Violence, I think, diminishes with education, at least on the aggregate. Yeah, there's definitely a redneck gun culture that glorifies violence, aggression, killing, racism, and probably a lot of other garbage. People that incite violence should be punished.

I guess I'm just not sure exactly what action you want to be taken. Are you trying to make it illegal for politicians to use weapons or tools of violence in speech as figurative devices? Or are you simply saying that there is a culture of violence that needs to be dealt with, one way or the other? I don't disagree with that, but I don't think the association between the culture of violence and the Tea Party as a whole is as strong as you would like to think.

1/10/2011 12:21:33 PM

Quote :

" eyedr-in about an hour-b: "good post loneshark"

oh really? what was good about it? where he seriously posed a strawman comparing an assault rifle to an automobile? you're telling us that brandishing weapons at a political rally is analogous to driving your sedan to a political rally?

the only thing more pathetic than that drivel, is you following behind greedily slurping it up.

Quote :

" LoneSnark: "Last I checked, Sharron Angle lost the election and holds no party position whatsoever. As such, whatever that confirmed witch says has nothing to do with either the Tea Party or republicans in general."

except that she is seen as the representative of Republicans and Teabag activists by 44% of the population of the state of Nevada where she was a 7-year state representative and the party candidate selected to challenge the incumbent Majority Leader of the United States Senate.

and now you're dismissing her as a "confirmed witch"? is this some new strategy to distance yourself from your party members who cause P.R. difficulties? slander??








[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 12:32 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2011 12:25:59 PM

Quote :

"The problem is determining what counts as "violence-inciting" or "violence-glorifying" rhetoric. It's already illegal publicly call for violence against someone, so we've got laws for that. If we want to say that it's illegal for anyone to say anything that could possibly be perceived as "inciting violence," that's extremely subjective, and I'm certainly not willing to cede control one party or the other so they can take political prisoners. Does anyone here really believe that Sarah Palin meant literal cross hairs? When Obama talked about bringing a gun to a knife fight, did he mean we should literally be fighting in the streets, with guns and knives, to decide policy?"

Of course no one thinks she meant literal crosshairs. But pretty much everyone can agree that the current political atmosphere is in a very bad place at the moment. And it's examples such as this that contribute to that. It's both side. But it does seem like the right breeds it a little more readily. For every Maddow, Olbermann (that's all I can think of, actually) there are 4 or 5 Rushes or Becks or Coulters or O'Reillys. And it's politicians too. Joe Wilson is a good example off the top of my head. I can't think of any Democrats who are as loud and aggressive as people on the right right this second. It's just the way that people are so ready to jump up and start screaming at the other side when they disagree than chill the fuck out and have a civil debate. When people see these leaders acting loud and aggressive towards their opponents, they get the idea that it's alright to do the same and it's not alright.

And of course this is all created by the fact that 95% of Americans are just completely fed up with government in general and that creates a lot of animosity. But our leaders need to sit down and tell these ordinary people who are incredibly passionate about their politics that there's a fine line between passion and violence. It's just not acceptable to go as far as a lot of them go and it starts at the top.

1/10/2011 12:29:12 PM

Quote :

"I live in a red state, and I'm the least violent person you've ever met."

If you think this addresses what I just said then you're wasting my time.

Quote :

"Violence, I think, diminishes with education, at least on the aggregate. Yeah, there's definitely a redneck gun culture that glorifies violence, aggression, killing, racism, and probably a lot of other garbage. People that incite violence should be punished."

Except you're unwilling to accept any reasonable definition of "incite". Like most right-wingers you have literally no idea what "personal responsibility" means. This incident is a great example as I've seen nobody even close to center or right of it willing to examine the rhetoric being used in this country and if it's having again. No attempt to even reflect on the issue, just anti-scientific, anti-empirical, from-the-hip denial.

Quote :

"I guess I'm just not sure exactly what action you want to be taken. Are you trying to make it illegal for politicians to use weapons or tools of violence in speech as figurative devices? Or are you simply saying that there is a culture of violence that needs to be dealt with, one way or the other? I don't disagree with that, but I don't think the association between the culture of violence and the Tea Party as a whole is as strong as you would like to think."

I'm not proposing any action yet, I'm just saying we need to discuss this issue honestly and look at whether or not this divisive rhetoric is tearing our nation apart or not. This is the first shot that struck. What's going to happen next?

I'm not even suggesting any officials get involved in this, I'm saying, as a people, what is okay and what isn't? What should we work against allowing into our culture? The fact that you assume I implicitly mean government regulation or crackdown here is your own paranoia and has nothing to do with what I think.

So if anything I'm closer to your second disjunct, except you seem wholly unconcerned about whether or not the Tea Party and its attendant rube culture is actually harmful or not. They are closer to you politically and so you'll just plug your ears. It's not like you're a scientist or anything, why would I expect you to look at facts?

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 12:31 PM. Reason : Scientists are probably the last Americans who understand the nature of evidence]

1/10/2011 12:29:44 PM

I was looking up the Federal charges against Loughner: http://documents.nytimes.com/criminal-complaint-against-jared-lee-loughner

and then I looked up those sections and found this excellent prose

Quote :

"Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing; or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture against a child or children; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed, is murder in the first degree. Any other murder is murder in the second degree."

18USC1111a: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/51/1111

1/10/2011 12:35:24 PM

um. thanks.

1/10/2011 12:38:38 PM

like you'd expect the US Code to be extremely dry and technical the whole way through, and then you find such turns of phrase as "malice aforethought"

1/10/2011 12:40:35 PM

Quote :

"like you'd expect the US Code to be extremely dry and technical the whole way through, and then you find such turns of phrase as "malice aforethought""

I expect legal code to be written in a way that benefits legal professionals.

1/10/2011 12:41:50 PM

^^ just because you're ignorant in law, don't expect everyone else to be.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/malice+aforethought

1/10/2011 12:45:52 PM

So was the guy that took the hostages in the Discovery building a result of this "culture of hate" too? Or was he just a nut job?

1/10/2011 12:46:11 PM

I don't think it's divisive rhetoric that results in this kind of thing. Politics has always been divisive. Any leader worth a damn has condemned violence. The tea party has its fair share of idiots, anyone that takes an "honest look" knows that. This guy wasn't a tea party guy, though. You've caricatured the tea party/right/whatever and tried to peddle that version (that only exists in your mind) as settled upon fact. The reality is that violence has been condemned again, and again, and again. Yes, there's a substantial number Americans that glorify violence, and some have joined right wing groups. When movement leaders and fellow members condemn violent rhetoric, and a few individuals still continue using it while parading under the same banner, what else can be done?

1/10/2011 12:47:12 PM

Quote :

"I don't think it's divisive rhetoric that results in this kind of thing. Politics has always been divisive. Any leader worth a damn has condemned violence. The tea party has its fair share of idiots, anyone that takes an "honest look" knows that. This guy wasn't a tea party guy, though. You've caricatured the tea party/right/whatever and tried to peddle that version (that only exists in your mind) as settled upon fact. The reality is that violence has been condemned again, and again, and again. Yes, there's a substantial number Americans that glorify violence, and some have joined right wing groups. When movement leaders and fellow members condemn violent rhetoric, and a few individuals still continue using it while parading under the same banner, what else can be done?"

I'm sorry is this supposed to be an argument, or just a poor attempt at dressing your opinions with the form of one?

I haven't caricatured the Tea Party, they did it to themselves. Whose fault this is in their mix (whether the Koch bros. or the rubes they Lord over) is really irrelevant here. The image I have of them is not "media manufactured" it's proudly accepted by many of them. The thing you can't seem to understand is that the face they present to the country through the more authoritative members of the group is not the movement itself. You have to look at the swarms of xenophobic, racist, uninformed bigots out there, many of whom (while not violent) sympathize with violence.

It's like you don't read the news and only look at TWW.

You want to know "what can be done" when "rogue elements" in a movement end up hijacking it. Why not follow what every conservative expects of Muslims worldwide, and expect the tea party to, as a whole, kick these people out and denounce what they're up to?

Sarah Palin tells people not to "retreat", but to "reload" and puts a bunch of congresspeople in obvious sniper scopes. You've TP candidates in places like Texas calling for violent overthrow as an "option on the table", and a bunch of peckerwoods like the minutemen running around playing rambo. Yet NOTHING CAN BE DONE here, we must throw our hands in the air and shrug, because apparently the vast sea of "normal" Tea Party members can't be bothered to criticize their comrades in arms.

You start your post changing the topic from violent, divisive rhetoric to simply "divisive rhetoric", claim it has nothing to do with anything, and then spend the rest of your post arguing that its effects can't be stopped or even mitigated. How am I supposed to react to you?

Quote :

"So was the guy that took the hostages in the Discovery building a result of this "culture of hate" too? Or was he just a nut job?"

He was certainly a nut-job. He could have been hooked into some community that egged him on and amplified his feelings of hatred. Whether he was or not I don't know, because if he was, it wasn't a mainstream American political movement.

Extremist environmentalists certainly have their own webs of propaganda and hatred. Did I ever claim they didn't? Can you point to an appreciable stretch of land in this country where extremist environmentalists repeatedly use hateful and violent rhetoric? Can you stop wasting my time doing the thinking for you and put an extra few minutes in vetting your own fucking opinions before you repeat them?

(I forget you're just a propaganda amplifier like you've always been.)

1/10/2011 12:59:17 PM

^^ That's what we're asking too.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 12:59 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2011 12:59:22 PM

Quote :

"He was certainly a nut-job. He could have been hooked into some community that egged him on and amplified his feelings of hatred. Whether he was or not I don't know, because if he was, it wasn't a mainstream American political movement. "

And the evidence we have that this gunman was "hooked into some [mainstream American political movement] that egged him on and amplified his feelings of hatred" is what exactly?

Quote :

"Can you point to an appreciable stretch of land in this country where extremist environmentalists repeatedly use hateful and violent rhetoric? "

What?

Culture of Violence:

1/10/2011 1:07:22 PM

Quote :

"And the evidence we have that this gunman was "hooked into some [mainstream American political movement] that egged him on and amplified his feelings of hatred" is what exactly?"

I suppose he could be completely ignoring the news and talking to literally nobody, you're right!

Quote :

"What?"

What's confusing about what I said? You wanted to know if the discovery-channel nut was part of a "culture of violence", I asked what vast stretch of the country you can point to where his hateful ideas receive respect and are broadcast?

^ Why do you imagine I'd appreciate that image or that it has literally anything to say about our topic? Is throwing molotovs into police cars part of a liberal hate campaign that stretches contiguously over the majority of our landmass?

1/10/2011 1:10:15 PM

^^ "anarchist bookfair?"

thanks for bringing the relevance.



[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:11 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2011 1:10:43 PM

Remember, an anarchist book fair limited to a single location in a city somewhere is completely relevant and equivalent to the tea party!!!!

1/10/2011 1:12:25 PM

joe you dont see the difference between someone carrying a weapon and someone using it?

Or see how people support your right to carry a weapon, but would then condemn those who use it to murder?

That seems to me what loneshark was getting at.

McDanger you have evidence the teaparty gets together to plan a violent take over? Where are these armies?

BTW, he is being described by his friends as a liberal pothead. Which makes sense, 23, living at home, no job, no car. Not a knock on you fuctional potheads.

1/10/2011 1:18:23 PM

The politicising of this event sickens me.

I cant believe the stuff I hear

and sometimes you just gotta shake your head at mcDanger, good for a laugh tho.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:34 PM. Reason : g]

1/10/2011 1:25:06 PM

What is your solution joe?

btw, I think you will be right on your diagnosis

1/10/2011 1:26:16 PM

Quote :

"I suppose he could be completely ignoring the news and talking to literally nobody, you're right!"

You obviously haven't been paying attention to any of the actual evidence that has been leaked about this guy. I dislike the Tea Party and Palin as much as you probably, but his reason for attacking Rep Giffords has been revealed. He asked her an inane, conspiracy-laden question at a rally, she refused to answer it because it was stupid, and he got pissed.

Now the ties to his anti-government, anti-establishment views and the violent rhetoric from the Tea Party could be discussed, but the evidence is lacking. I actually have some insight into the anti-government culture and there's not as much overlap with the Tea Party as you'd expect. When they're talking about how the Federal Reserve is a crime, and stuff you purchase with dollars is owned by the government if you really read the law, then they've ascended past Republican and Democrat or even Libertarian.

What I'm reading of this guy puts him squarely in the paranoid conspiracy culture. It wouldn't surprise me if he hated Sarah Palin as much as Gabrielle Giffords.

1/10/2011 1:34:38 PM

Quote :

"eydrinaboutanhourb: "liberal pothead""

my god, sometimes you're just laughable.

on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, you attempt to insinuate via hearsay that a confirmed anti-government, anti-immigrant, gun-toting nutjob with alleged ties to anti-semitic and white supremacist groups is now a "liberal"

LOL

by the way, a core tenet of libertarian philosophy is drug legalization. and refusal to grant any public support whatsoever to any religion or church.








[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:42 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2011 1:36:26 PM

Quote :

"I suppose he could be completely ignoring the news and talking to literally nobody, you're right!"

News like when Obama tells him to bring a gun to a knife fight? Or again, is it only a culture of violence when it comes from one side of the political spectrum? Or are we now assuming that our crazy person was Glen Beck NUMBA ONE FAN!

Fact is, the guy was absolutely nuts, and there's no evidence to support any accusation that his crazy was encouraged or promoted by anyone other than himself.

Quote :

"I asked what vast stretch of the country you can point to where his hateful ideas receive respect and are broadcast?"

California.

Quote :

"Remember, an anarchist book fair limited to a single location in a city somewhere is completely relevant and equivalent to the tea party!!!!"

So it's not the culture then? Or do you suppose an acceptance of anarchist fairs (so much that people bring their children to them) is not a part of the culture

Culture of violence:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/29/palin.noose/

Culture of violence:




Culture of Violence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_a_President_%282006_film%29

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:42 PM. Reason : gfj]

1/10/2011 1:40:22 PM

anarchists have a culture of violence yes.

and what is your point, Master of the Obvious?

how do fringe anarchists, who wish to overthrow the government by violent means apply to this discussion. anarchists have nothing in common with any political party.

OH WAIT

you found a picture on the ineternet of a couple white chicks and a little girl at an "anarchist bookfair"

THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!!!!1





[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:48 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2011 1:48:09 PM

Quote :

"how do fringe anarchists , who wish to overthrow the government by violent means apply to this discussion. anarchists have nothing in common with any political party."

And do you think the number of Tea Party people who support violence against the politicians is more than a fringe?

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:52 PM. Reason : asdf]

1/10/2011 1:50:45 PM

yes, they are a very visible and vocal fringe with viable political capital within one of the two major political parties.

and my anecdotal experience is that violent "revolution" against godless liberals is a sympathetic idea and often found in certain biblical interpretations to be acceptable, and these sympathies exist in varying degrees across a large section of the more provincial and conservative elements of our society.





[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:59 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2011 1:54:07 PM

joe_myopic_schmoe

Read the whole fucking sentence I wrote jackass.

Here ill repeat it for you.

Quote :

"BTW, he is being described by his friends as a liberal pothead."

Yes, that could be wrong, things could have changed. But apparently it is from someone who actually knew the kid.

Btw, what is your solution to all this joe?


^and what is your evidence to that statement joe?

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:56 PM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 1:56:00 PM