The Ape Shit Nutjob Right Wingers Want the Gun Grab to Happen Memorial Thread

Thread-I_like_where_this_thread_is_going.jpg
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
Who's the next dipshit Republican asshole to go crazy and kill someone because of their warped and disgusting view of the world we live in?[/QUOTE]

I completely resent that. I expected better from you, myke.
 
I qualified Republican with "dipshit," so you've nothing to be offended by unless...

but for reals. five months with a Democrat president, and we've had three signficant nutjob shootings!?!?!?!? WTF?
 
"Exhibit A,B, & C" are mentally ill nutjobs but to ask when will the "next dipshit Republican asshole to go crazy" is absurd. Similar incidences to the above murders have happened before:

- Tiller has been a target for quite some time including back in '93 when he was shot twice.
- The Holocaust Museum Murder is reminiscient of the 1998 US Capitol shooting.
- And the Poplawski Murders sound similar to many other shootouts.

and to claim that murders A & C are more "significant" than any other nutjob shootings that occur every single day is also absurd. You pick these cases out, try to tie them into Republican gun-toting religious ideology and imply that Democratic liberalism upholds the very best of human rights but you are dead wrong and I won't stand for it.
 
I think when something is broken inside people, there is a greater chance that behavior happens in clusters
similar to an increase in suicides when public suicide policy is in the news or sensational suicide is in the news
 
"Liberals" as the sub human enemy is pretty mainstream among cons.

It is inevitable that a few among them would start to believe the hype.
 
Exhibit A: Scott Roeder

-Condemned by both democrats and republicans, pro-life and pro-choice groups. But hey, who cares, he was anti-abortion so we'll lump him in with conservatives and act like its something they all wanted. He may have been anti-abortion, but since when does murdering someone that murders someone else make what he did right? That's just ignorance there on his part. But anyways.

Exhibit B: James Von Brunn

-Ya, those white supremacists are the true base of the republican party. I don't even need to waste time with this one.

Richard Poplawski

-Another random neo-nazi nutcase.

blahblah blahblah blahblahblah.

Where was your topic when Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad killed an army recruiter and wounded another from his car because he disagreed with the Iraqi war? I mean how can you not be outraged by that? Oh well, I wouldn't expect any outrage from you regarding his death.

It's ok though, we'll ignore that one. I don't really know why you have to make this topic an us vs them topic. I mean honestly, you make it seem as though the three people you wrote about are supported an loved by the republican party. These people are nut cases. That's what they are. They aren't conservative, liberal, republican, or democrat. They have their own kind of club, its called club crazy.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']Exhibit A: Scott Roeder

-Condemned by both democrats and republicans, pro-life and pro-choice groups.[/quote]

I seem to remember a prominent conservative who stated Tiller was merely reaping what he sowed. Bill O'Reilly all but paid for a hit to be put out on him.

Ya, those white supremacists are the true base of the republican party. I don't even need to waste time with this one.
Click to expand...

There is little doubt who they vote for just as there is no doubt they are pandered to by the right.

Richard Poplawski
Click to expand...

The guy was steeped in con bs just like Jim Adkisson. It is undeniable their crimes happened because of the crap put out daily by cons accusing liberals of god knows what.

These people are nut cases. That's what they are. They aren't conservative, liberal, republican, or democrat. They have their own kind of club, its called club crazy.
Click to expand...

No, they are fucking conservative.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
These people all buy into conservative rhetoric.

They are those who believe Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Alex Jones wackos.

They believe the gun grab is coming.
They believe the government is going to harm them.
They believe the government is becoming socialist.
They believe the jews run the banks.
They fight against the federalist government (did you read about von brunn's attempt at a citizen's arrest of Alan Greenspan? that's a page right out of the book of those wingnut fucks that thrustbucket has been following).
They are against the federal government.
They fight for state sovereignty.
They used firearms in support of, or in defense of, the second amendment.
They are anti-semitic, anti-islam, anti-black.
They are xenophobic.

I am not writing them because the right SUPPORTS them. With Tiller, anti-abortion advocates got what they wanted - and you know they're thrilled on the inside. But they - and you, of course - can't publicly say that. You can't admit that you're secretly thrilled Roeder killed Tiller, and the clinic is closed.

The clinic is closed, and the terrorists won.

What we have is three cases in fewer than two months where people WHOSE BELIEF SYSTEMS AND IDEOLOGIES HAVE NOT ONLY COME SOLELY FROM THE RIGHT, BUT HAVE BEEN STOKED, FOSTERED AND FOMENTED BY LIMBAUGH, BECK, AND THE REST OF THOSE LYING fuckS.

The ones who talk about the US becoming a socialist country, who cheer on the US failing, who say that a woman will still have the right to choose. Limbaugh and O'Reilly and Beck are the cheerleaders for these three people.

There's nothing even remotely close to "liberal" or "democrat" about these three nutcases - everything about them and their histories screams conservative republican. you are just ashamed to admit that your parties' hateful cheerleading has led to some more ruby ridge bullshit. you're ashamed to find out that words have consequences, and all the "I want america to fail," "where's obama's birth certificate," "we're becoming a socialist nation," "they're coming for your guns" nonsense actually MEANS SOMETHING to people.

Deny all you want. I've read that line somewhere before: "I am not my brother's keeper," I think it was.
 
You forgot to throw in that 2/3 of them were anti-bush and supported 9/11 conspiracy theories.

No, I am not happy that Tiller is dead. Why would I be glad that someone was murdered? That's just wrong.
 
Shepard Smith agrees with you Myke. He talks about how much "hate email" has increased and gotten nastier, since the election.

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




Still curious why Tiller's killing hasn't been labeled terrorism. The killer stated that more killings are planned. He's trying to change or prevent legal acts through fear and intimidation.
 
Because calling a right wing nutjob a terrorist confuses the simple people of the Bible Belt. According to Fox News, only brown people from the Middle East can possibly considered terrorists.

This all goes to show that the American public is more gullible than ever. They cling to their favorite news channel and get all their info from there. How else do you still think that a significant number of Americans think that Obama is a Muslim? Facts and truth mean next to nothing anymore.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']You forgot to throw in that 2/3 of them were anti-bush and supported 9/11 conspiracy theories.

No, I am not happy that Tiller is dead. Why would I be glad that someone was murdered? That's just wrong.[/QUOTE]

Being anti-bush doesn't exactly ruin your conservative credentials. all the right-wing talking nutjobs have been anti-bush since late-06/mid-07.

You're also trying to avoid the issue that their political views are inherently right-wing in nature. there is nothing leftist, there is nothing centrist. they are all right-wingers.
 
Am I the only one who thinks that lumping these folks in the "conservative" category would be about the same as lumping the members of ELF, ARM and similar movements into the "liberal" category?

I'd like to also mention Bill Ayers and the Weatherman group.

It's easy to take someone on the extreme fringes and hold them up as an example of the main stream.

It's also ignorant and wrong.
 
They went anti-Bush because he didn't outlaw abortion, kick out the illegals, or find Osama Bin Laden.

Bob, how about you use an example from the last twenty years. You can't compare the political and social climate of the 60's and 70's with the one of today. Note that nobody brought up Timothy McVeigh and even that's more current that Bill Ayers.
 
[quote name='Msut77']"Liberals" as the sub human enemy is pretty mainstream among cons.

It is inevitable that a few among them would start to believe the hype.[/QUOTE]

I think more conservatives are baffled by the policies of liberals. i.e. In just human rights most liberals are anti Gitmo/terrorist waterboarding but pro late term abortions. Saving lives inside and outside the womb should be the obvious choice- or so I thought.
 
The guy I brought up James Adkisson was using Bernard Goldbergs book like a to do list of murder.

Don't even get me started on Ann Coulter and her BS.

p.s. tivo, you don't get to use the word think. Not until you know actually have something resembling a thought.

It should really read
I think Rush told me more conservatives are...
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Oh, I'm sorry - I wasn't aware that the ARM and ELF had been inactive for the last 20 years.[/QUOTE]

My bad. I didn't see that you put one relevant nugget in all that shit. ELF is active but a google search of ARM doesn't bring anything up in the first couple pages.

And I don't think many of us are pro-late term abortion. I would be perfectly comfortable outlawing that barbaric procedure if we could get promises that it would end the abortion debate. How about it?
 
[quote name='homeland']
Still curious why Tiller's killing hasn't been labeled terrorism. The killer stated that more killings are planned. He's trying to change or prevent legal acts through fear and intimidation.[/QUOTE]

The Big man himself, Bill O'Rielly, called Tiller's killer a "Domestic Terrorist" in his talking points segment on 6/8.
 
1) mentally ill nut
2) 90 year old conspiracy theory nut
3) moron down on his luck

i know you wouldnt let certain other posters get away with using those stories as anecdotal evidence. these guys werent really republican (though i agree with you theyre more likely to vote for them rather than democrats) but cmon now.

heres a graph to help

msut - democrats - moderates - repubican - these guys

why not include Lovelle Mixon, the guy who shot 4 cops in oakland? why not include carlos bledsoe aka Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad for killing an army recruiter and shooting another. some idiot just killed 1 and shot 6 others in a strip club.

they all have one thing in common, they are all nuts. but you only bring up the 3 to bash the ideaology you disagree with (despite the killers themselves not necessarily agreeing with said ideaology)
 
[quote name='depascal22']My bad. I didn't see that you put one relevant nugget in all that shit.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I know... my posts can sometimes be hard to find in between the posts before it and after it. :D
 
Still nothing about the abortion question, tivo? Seriously, we'll give you late-term abortion in exchange for letting women decide in the first three months.
 
[quote name='tivo']The Big man himself, Bill O'Rielly, called Tiller's killer a "Domestic Terrorist" in his talking points segment on 6/8.[/QUOTE]

And every segment on Tiller from 5/31 on focused on defending himself against accusations of implicit responsibility, reporting on biased and unfounded estimates of the number of operations Tiller performed over his career, and calling him "Tiller the Baby Killer" and "Dr. Killer."

You simply can not absolve O'Reilly of his responsibility in this.
 
The alleged shooter at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum spread historical white supremacist views and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories through a Web site that included the hoax document “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” and a link to a Holocaust denial Web site.

The attack demonstrates why it is a mistake to ignore bigoted conspiracy theories. Law enforcement needs to enforce laws against criminal behavior. Vicious bigoted speech, however, is often protected by the First Amendment. We do not need new laws or to encourage government agencies to further erode our civil liberties. We need to stand up as moral people and speak out against the spread of bigoted conspiracy theories. That’s not a police problem, that’s our problem as people responsible for defending a free society.

Demagogues and conspiracy theorists use the same four “tools of fear.” These are 1) dualism; 2) scapegoating; 3) demonization; and 4) apocalyptic aggression.

The basic dynamics remain the same no matter the ideological leanings of the demonizers or the identity of their targets. It is the combination of demagogic demonization and widespread scapegoating that is so dangerous. In such circumstances, angry allegations can quickly turn into apocalyptic aggression and violence targeting scapegoated groups like Jews or immigrants. Meanwhile, our ability to resolve disputes through civic debate and compromise is hobbled.

Apocalyptic aggression is fueled by right-wing pundits who demonize scapegoated groups and individuals in our society, implying that it is urgent to stop them from wrecking the nation. Some angry people in their audience already believe conspiracy theories in which the same scapegoats are portrayed as subversive, destructive or evil. Add in aggressive apocalyptic ideas that suggest time is running out and quick action mandatory, and you have a perfect storm of mobilized resentment threatening to rain bigotry and violence across the United States.
Click to expand...

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/hate-crimes-and-extremist-politics/
 
Here are some quotes from the guy I mentioned previously although you could honestly say some of this stuff was from any number of posters here.

"Know this if nothing else: This was a hate crime. I hate the damn left-wing liberals. There is a vast left-wing conspiracy in this country & these liberals are working together to attack every decent & honorable institution in the nation, trying to turn this country into a communist state. Shame on them....

"This was a symbolic killing. Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg's book. I'd like to kill everyone in the mainstream media. But I know those people were inaccessible to me. I couldn't get to the generals & high ranking officers of the Marxist movement so I went after the foot soldiers, the chickenshit liberals that vote in these traitorous people. Someone had to get the ball rolling. I volunteered. I hope others do the same. It's the only way we can rid America of this cancerous pestilence."

"I thought I'd do something good for this Country Kill Democrats til the cops kill me....Liberals are a pest like termites. Millions of them Each little bite contributes to the downfall of this great nation. The only way we can rid ourselves of this evil is to kill them in the streets. Kill them where they gather. I'd like to encourage other like minded people to do what I've done. If life aint worth living anymore don't just kill yourself. do something for your Country before you go. Go Kill Liberals.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ya, because there are so many posts here I have read that have conservatives talk about wanting to kill people who have other views. Oh wait, thats just the other side talking about wishing rush was dead. My bad.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']And every segment on Tiller from 5/31 on focused on defending himself against accusations of implicit responsibility, reporting on biased and unfounded estimates of the number of operations Tiller performed over his career, and calling him "Tiller the Baby Killer" and "Dr. Killer."

You simply can not absolve O'Reilly of his responsibility in this.[/QUOTE]

The Washington Post and a Kansas research group claimed roughly 60,000 abortions were performed by Tiller. Dr. Paul McHugh, the head of psychiatry at J.H.U., claimed Tiller use mental health provision to brutally terminate fetuses for just about any reason. And far right groups coined the names "Tiller the Baby Killler". O'Reilly cited all of these sources when he spoke (he frequently cites his sources when speaking) and was therefore only reporting. O'Reilly also said it was within Kansas Law. You can say O'Reilly is guilty of increasing public awareness but to put any more blame of the actions of a nutjob on O'Reilly is insane. O'Reilly condemned the murder of Tiller and stressed that "anarchy and vigilantism will assure the collapse of any country."

Watch O'Reilly- you can disagree with his views but he does bring up stories, presents facts, and performs analysis with those facts all without the snide, sarcastic spin seen spasmodically in shows similar to the snakish KEITH OBERMAN!
 
[quote name='tivo']I think more conservatives are baffled by the policies of liberals. i.e. In just human rights most liberals are anti Gitmo/terrorist waterboarding but pro late term abortions. Saving lives inside and outside the womb should be the obvious choice- or so I thought.[/QUOTE]

Eh, this is the same as many conservatives protesting abortion and then being okay with execution. I dunno, I'm reluctant to paint this as a conservative thing, as it seems that these people were probably emotionally disturbed to begin with.
 
This quote:

"The GOP will not survive if it doesn't accept the fact that the Democrats are its enemy and that it must begin to play for keeps. That means finding another Lee Atwater - only meaner - and not apologizing when we get him" (washingtontimes.com)
Click to expand...

Is from a mainstream conservative (he happens to ignore the fact Atwater basically repented later on on in life) I have pointed out before that this kind of rhetoric is a rock solid part of the conservative movement.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Still nothing about the abortion question, tivo? Seriously, we'll give you late-term abortion in exchange for letting women decide in the first three months.[/QUOTE]

What are you talking about? How/why are you and I going to negotiate the pro-life/pro-choice debate? But o'kay, on one condition... I want every woman who has had an abortion to be physically labeled/tattooed so that I and most of society can call them whores/failures.

Your response?
 
[quote name='tivo']I think more conservatives are baffled by the policies of liberals. i.e. In just human rights most liberals are anti Gitmo/terrorist waterboarding but pro late term abortions. Saving lives inside and outside the womb should be the obvious choice- or so I thought.[/QUOTE]

This is why I bring up the issue. I didn't bring it up first.

My response to the tattooing is that it's absurd but if it did go through I don't want to hear anything when your mother, sister, or daughter came home with the "Scarlet Letter".
 
[quote name='Msut77']Is from a mainstream conservative (he happens to ignore the fact Atwater basically repented later on on in life) I have pointed out before that this kind of rhetoric is a rock solid part of the conservative movement.[/QUOTE]

And?
 
What tivo and I think hovaescobar (one of his earliest posts) write just goes to show the choice debate isn't about "Life" it is about controlling women and punishing "sluts".
 
We must punish the sluts and not the men that impregnate them. It might be a whole different ballgame if dudes manned up and accepted their responsibility but that wouldn't be very Republican would it? In a just world, there would be no abortion but there wouldn't be dudes that have absolutely nothing to do with their children emotionally or financially.
 
[quote name='docvinh']Eh, this is the same as many conservatives protesting abortion and then being okay with execution. I dunno, I'm reluctant to paint this as a conservative thing, as it seems that these people were probably emotionally disturbed to begin with.[/QUOTE]

R U Kidding Me? You don't see the distinction between killing an innocent baby vs. killing a convicted criminal?

Equality of action does not include equality of morals or reason.
 
[quote name='tivo']R U Kidding Me? You don't see the distinction between killing an innocent baby vs. killing a convicted criminal?

Equality of action does not include equality of morals or reason.[/QUOTE]

Are you defining innocent baby as "fertilized egg"?
 
[quote name='tivo']R U Kidding Me? You don't see the distinction between killing an innocent baby vs. killing a convicted criminal?

Equality of action does not include equality of morals or reason.[/QUOTE]


It's funny that conservatives don't support that same innocent baby when he's out the womb. Then they just become welfare babies that suck on the tit of our government. Right wing nut jobs are even worse in that they will kill to stop what can't ever be stopped.

You want to stop abortion? Give single unwed underage mothers more than a kick in the ass when they're down. Ask the media to stop sensationalizing sex. Actually talk to the young females in your immediate family and let them know what's going to happen. Don't scare them. Educate them.

Outlawing abortion makes as much sense as outlawing premarital sex. A law on the book will never stop young people from getting it on but you can lower the number of abortions by treating these girls like human beings instead of garbage.

EDIT -- Left wing extremists are just as bad when they firebomb companies for environmental crimes.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']And?[/QUOTE]

And so when cons try to tap dance around what happens to be the direct results of their rhetoric by say blaming it on crazy extremists they are lying/being disingenuous.
 
[quote name='depascal22']We must punish the sluts and not the men that impregnate them. It might be a whole different ballgame if dudes manned up and accepted their responsibility but that wouldn't be very Republican would it? In a just world, there would be no abortion but there wouldn't be dudes that have absolutely nothing to do with their children emotionally or financially.[/QUOTE]

Women have a lot more control over the 'who' and the 'when' part of sex. (except rape) Its also "their bodies." Plus with so many contraceptives out there- common ladies. So yea, my idea[joke] was absurd (the Scarlett letter is a terrible book) but real Pro-Life people want abortions to occur after very few, if any, exceptions. So, i'm probably not the best guy to negotiate the abortion debate. absurd question = absurd answer.

[quote name='Msut77']Are you defining innocent baby as "fertilized egg"?[/QUOTE]

if you get down to the science and terminology of it = yes.

[quote name='depascal22']It's funny that conservatives don't support that same innocent baby when he's out the womb. Then they just become welfare babies that suck on the tit of our government.

You want to stop abortion? Give single unwed underage mothers more than a kick in the ass when they're down. [/QUOTE]

You want more money to go to unwed single mothers?? That's the opposite of what Republicans want. It also sounds that you'd be rewarding stupid behavior. Single mothers are already glorified by their struggle. We need to reverse that and make them responsible for their actions.


Here's a stat: 53% of Latinas are pregnant by age 20.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Are you defining innocent baby as "fertilized egg"?[/QUOTE]

This. I can agree that there is maybe some ambiguity when life begins, but there is no doubt when you execute someone, they are clearly alive. If you're going to make the argument that outlawing abortion is about saving life, be consistent and be against execution also or your argument doesn't really hold water.
 
[quote name='tivo']if you get down to the science and terminology of it = yes.[/quote]

You can freeze dry and send a fertilized egg via Fedex.

So no egg does not equal baby.

This should probably be the last said on it since I don't think the thread should be derailed any further.
 
[quote name='docvinh']This. I can agree that there is maybe some ambiguity when life begins, but there is no doubt when you execute someone, they are clearly alive. If you're going to make the argument that outlawing abortion is about saving life, be consistent and be against execution also or your argument doesn't really hold water.[/QUOTE]

Really? R U Serious? Doesn't hold water? Your thought process, your physical skull is compete ullage. [look it up] There's a human life forming in a young female that will soon develop into a baby and, if unimpeded, will be a human/us citizen/life force/Boy or Girl. Then there are the bad guys. We WANT to kill the BAD guys. These are individuals who face back to back life sentences for raping and murdering innocent people and have 0 chance of contributing to society.

Alright, let me turn the tables and ask: Will you let us abort terrorists or convicted criminals? many of your counterparts say 'no'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top