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

[quote name='camoor']The mainstream American political/religious right has always been full of hypocrites, are you just waking up to this? Regardless people like Sarah Palin and Tivo are fast becoming irrelevant.

It just saddens me that the people I though of as progressive are starting to act like the arrogant boobs in charge during the reign of Bush Jr.

People who complained that the neo-cons used Saddam, Baath party, and Taliban interchangably are now equating neo-Nazis, extreme religious fanatics, and seriously insane criminals to Republicans.

If your point is that guns should/will be taken away from everyone because three insane people used a gun to create a tragedy, then IMO you don't have much of a point. I feel foolish even posting because I suspect this is a joke thread, but I figured I'd throw in my 2 cents anyway.[/QUOTE]

Er ... what? I didn't say anything about guns.

However, I *did* say: live by the sword, die by the sword (metaphorically). Conservatives don't get to redefine "terrorism" based on the political leanings, color, or religion of the person doing the terrorizing. By the standards they've been using for eight years, these guys are terrorists. Shit, that's not even controversial. You know that Department of Homeland Security report that Bush commissioned (that the Righties like to credit/blame Obama with)? The one about right-wing extremism being on the rise? This is what it was referring to.

That's all. You're quoting/picking a fight with the wrong dude.

[quote name='Brak']Those people do definitely tend to be Republicans, but you can't say that Republicans tend to be those people[/QUOTE]

This is probably the right way of looking at it, IMO.

[quote name='perdition(troy']And yet you ignore the fact that Von Brunn has entire blogs dedicated to railing against fox news and the free market system. What a great conservative![/QUOTE]

Uh ... because they're not conservative enough and run by Jews.

[quote name='fullmetalfan720']There you are. A liberal murdering a conservative.[/QUOTE]

Where does it say he was a liberal? He was a former skinhead and missionary from a deeply religious family, who was mad because he was kicked out of the missionary program. I'm not getting "secular humanist" from that.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Did you even read my posts?[/quote]

To be honest I stopped reading after the link claiming liberals murdered conservatives with the evidence being a devil found on some driftwood.

There you are. A liberal murdering a conservative.
Click to expand...

Christian is not a political affiliation in either case. So no, words cannot express how wrong you are.

The civil rights murders of the 60's were done by the KKK. If you think the KKK is a typical conservative organization
Click to expand...

Then? Maybe.

The point was (since you really must be that clueless) that the crimes were not committed by crazy people.
 
Myke, this thread is beneath you, especially to label these wackos as Republicans. I don't like it when right-wing folks label left-wing extremists as Democrats, or call Democrats supporters of terrorism, either. What a crock.

And it's obviously extremely offensive as someone who is pro-life to be told that I am "thrilled" that someone was murdered, even if it was literally one of the worst people in the world. You do know what pro-life means, right? To be against murder? Sure, I will freely admit to being happy the clinic is closed. After all, that means no more babies will be murdered there. But a murder is a murder, and Roeder is no better than Tiller was: a murderer, the lowest of the low in society. Lock him up and throw away the key.
 
I know that pro-life is not a correct term for anyone.

It's a frame for an argument.

Nobody is pro-life, just like nobody is pro-abortion (i.e., supporting the legality of something doesn't mean that people think it's great that it's used).

You're no pro-life, you're anti-abortion.
 
^^ semantics. Yes, in modern usage, pro-life and anti-abortion are used almost interchangably. We can get into why positions are called the way they are as regards abortion, but I would rather not waste the time.

Suffice to say you have gone too far in this thread. I also wonder if this is not just about the same as reposting Krugman's latest article here, in which he repeats the same ridiculous accusations.
 
Haven't seen that column, but there must be a reason I like Krugman so much.

If you think it's "too far," fine. Be that way. But I guarantee you that I will play the "I told you so" card the next time a right-winger decides to kill someone (or many someones) as a means of protest.
 
Surprise, you completely avoided the question.

As to your answer of "left wing" killers of the past three months, I do apologize, but I cannot come up with any high profile results for your inquiry. I do not take any kind of pleasure from crazy people going on murdering sprees - as such, I don't create lists and notes about the details of what happened in an attempt to glorify my political view points on gaming forums.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Surprise, you completely avoided the question.

As to your answer of "left wing" killers of the past three months, I do apologize, but I cannot come up with any high profile results for your inquiry. I do not take any kind of pleasure from crazy people going on murdering sprees - as such, I don't create lists and notes about the details of what happened in an attempt to glorify my political view points on gaming forums.[/QUOTE]

I don't know you, but I like you! There is no point to this thread at all, I see no evidence that either of these 3 people were Republicans or had any vandetta against liberals, just maybe their viewpoints. People have lost their jobs under every president and every now and then one goes off the handle, abortion doctors have been killed before. If you can't connect the dots and link it to coming from someone in the Republican party, or give me a specific line where Rush and Hannity told these men to do this then shut the hell up, this is theory and opinion, so don't parade around with your political hate. Labeling a whole political party, almost half the country makes you, the OP an otherwise intelligen person, sound like a complete dumbass. These 3 men were psychos but to link them, rather poorly, or should I say, not really at all, to Republicans is just another bitch-a-thon post, we get it already, CAG is overwhelmingly liberal, you guys won the election, you can stop bitching now, ok?
 
Do tell me; what was the original version of that painting you have in your signature?

Care to link to it for us? This thread is as good a place as any.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinion/14rich.html?em

Frank Rich, like Krugman, sees what you all refuse to. There are consequences to saying things like Obama "pals around with terrorists," and suggesting that we're headed towards a nazi/socialist/totalitarian government the way Beck does.

That honeymoon, if it was one, is over. Conservatives have legitimate ideological beefs with Obama, rightly expressed in sharp language. But the invective in some quarters has unmistakably amped up. The writer Camille Paglia, a political independent and confessed talk-radio fan, detected a shift toward paranoia in the air waves by mid-May. When “thetone darkens toward a rhetoric of purgation and annihilation,” she observed in Salon, “there is reason for alarm.” She cited a “joke” repeated by a Rush Limbaugh fill-in host, a talk-radio jock from Dallas of all places, about how “any U.S. soldier” who found himself with only two bullets in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden would use both shots to assassinate Pelosi and then strangle Reid and bin Laden.

This homicide-saturated vituperation is endemic among mini-Limbaughs. Glenn Beck has dipped into O’Reilly’s Holocaust analogies to liken Obama’s policy on stem-cell research to the eugenics that led to “the final solution” and the quest for “a master race.” After James von Brunn’s rampage at the Holocaust museum, Beck rushed onto Fox News to describe the Obama-hating killer as a “lone gunman nutjob.” Yet in the same show Beck also said von Brunn was a symptom that “the pot in America is boiling,” as if Beck himself were not the boiling pot cheering the kettle on.
Click to expand...

Some of you may think this is parody, or think this is funny - but here's the thing. Many, many people don't listen to Limbaugh for his political wit, but for his analytical mind. And if they're the kind of person who doesn't believe Obama is a legit American citizen and they're clamoring for his birth certificate - how can we be so confident that their cognitive abilities let them discern this bit as an attempt at humor?

Rich also adeptly shows how Beck is trying to have his cake and eat it too. Beck, like many of you, plays the "Von Brunn was a lone nutjob" card - at the same time that he plays the "people are outraged at the government and 'boiling over'" card. And you people fall for it, attacking me for suggesting that fearmongering and paranoia have consequences.
 
The Ape Shit Nutjob Right Wingers Want the Gun Grab to Happen
signature_singh.jpg

 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinion/14rich.html?em

Frank Rich, like Krugman, sees what you all refuse to. There are consequences to saying things like Obama "pals around with terrorists," and suggesting that we're headed towards a nazi/socialist/totalitarian government the way Beck does.



Some of you may think this is parody, or think this is funny - but here's the thing. Many, many people don't listen to Limbaugh for his political wit, but for his analytical mind. And if they're the kind of person who doesn't believe Obama is a legit American citizen and they're clamoring for his birth certificate - how can we be so confident that their cognitive abilities let them discern this bit as an attempt at humor?

Rich also adeptly shows how Beck is trying to have his cake and eat it too. Beck, like many of you, plays the "Von Brunn was a lone nutjob" card - at the same time that he plays the "people are outraged at the government and 'boiling over'" card. And you people fall for it, attacking me for suggesting that fearmongering and paranoia have consequences.[/QUOTE]

I saw that Rich article too. I disagree with him as well. It's just not a vast right-wing conspiracy that is behind people like von Brunn (who thought Bush knew about 9/11 and had the Weekly Standard on his hit list). I don't think that left-wing Democrats, who have stirred anti-military sentiment on college campuses among other places, are responsible for attacks against military recruiters or the plot against Fort Dix, for example, either. There was plenty of hate for Bush, as I'm sure you'll not soon forget, as well...and a lot of sentiment that because of his perceived dishonesty with respect to Iraq that thousands of people have died. Yet only the far-right folks would blame Democrats for violence resulting from that.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I saw that Rich article too. I disagree with him as well. It's just not a vast right-wing conspiracy that is behind people like von Brunn (who thought Bush knew about 9/11 and had the Weekly Standard on his hit list). I don't think that left-wing Democrats, who have stirred anti-military sentiment on college campuses among other places, are responsible for attacks against military recruiters or the plot against Fort Dix, for example, either. There was plenty of hate for Bush, as I'm sure you'll not soon forget, as well...and a lot of sentiment that because of his perceived dishonesty with respect to Iraq that thousands of people have died. Yet only the far-right folks would blame Democrats for violence resulting from that.[/QUOTE]

Because names and faces who are everyday elements of the mainstream media, watched by millions, are comparable to...what, exactly? College protestors?

What a weak comparison. I'm not talking about someone with limited access to people, or with limited influence. I (and Krugman, and Rich) are talking about faces and persons on the radio, on Fox...the O'Reillys, Limbaughs, Hannitys, and Becks (among others). People who talking about these topics from these frames every day, and who influence millions of people.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Did you even read my posts?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316322,00.html
There you are. A liberal murdering a conservative. Msut's conclusion: Liberals are peaceful and rational.
Now, when a conservative murders a liberal. Msut's conclusion: Conservatives are dangerous killers, and we should ban all guns.

The civil rights murders of the 60's were done by the KKK. If you think the KKK is a typical conservative organization, then I guess the Weathermen, Socialist Worker's Party and the Symbionese Liberation Army are typical liberal organizations.[/QUOTE]

First of all, the guy grew up in Chritian household so it looks like Christian on Christian crime. Don't see where you get him being a liberal from.

Please stop equating the Weathermen, SWP or the SLA with the KKK. Those groups operated for a couple years and are no longer active while the KKK has been denying civil rights for over a century and is still kicking.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0209/p02s02-ussc.html
 
He was also thrown out of the missionary school.

There's a massive chasm in logic needed to jump from that article to defining him as liberal.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Because names and faces who are everyday elements of the mainstream media, watched by millions, are comparable to...what, exactly? College protestors?

What a weak comparison. I'm not talking about someone with limited access to people, or with limited influence. I (and Krugman, and Rich) are talking about faces and persons on the radio, on Fox...the O'Reillys, Limbaughs, Hannitys, and Becks (among others). People who talking about these topics from these frames every day, and who influence millions of people.[/QUOTE]

Obviously nobody in the mainstream media stoked rabid anti-Bush/neocon hatred. What a silly thing to think!
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Obviously nobody in the mainstream media stoked rabid anti-Bush/neocon hatred. What a silly thing to think![/QUOTE]

Yeah, with respect to the Iraq war the media was providing critical commentary from day one. Course, it doesn't hurt that the Dubya White House invited criticism from hard-hitting journalists like Jeff Gannon.
 
[quote name='camoor']Yeah, with respect to the Iraq war the media was providing critical commentary from day one. Course, it doesn't hurt that the Dubya White House invited criticism from hard-hitting journalists like Jeff Gannon.[/QUOTE]

You must not have been watching the same news coverage. EVERY major media outlet supported the war until at least a year into it. It wasn't until everyone figured out there weren't any WMD's that you started to see coverage shift. I guess it's easier to just say that liberal media just slants everything to fit a liberal point of view.

Hell, it's even funny that liberals weren't giving Bush half as much shit (before 9/11) as the talk radio guys have and are giving Obama. I heard alot of praise towards Bush when he picked his cabinet because it was filled with seasoned political operators from all walks of life. I rejoiced in his pick of Colin Powell as the Sec. State. I looked at the picks and thought that this was a man that actually gave a damn about diversity instead of pretending to let minorities have a say like most of you current conservatives.
 
[quote name='depascal22']You must not have been watching the same news coverage. EVERY major media outlet supported the war until at least a year into it. It wasn't until everyone figured out there weren't any WMD's that you started to see coverage shift. I guess it's easier to just say that liberal media just slants everything to fit a liberal point of view.

Hell, it's even funny that liberals weren't giving Bush half as much shit (before 9/11) as the talk radio guys have and are giving Obama. I heard alot of praise towards Bush when he picked his cabinet because it was filled with seasoned political operators from all walks of life. I rejoiced in his pick of Colin Powell as the Sec. State. I looked at the picks and thought that this was a man that actually gave a damn about diversity instead of pretending to let minorities have a say like most of you current conservatives.[/QUOTE]

I agree - I guess you couldn't see me winking over the internets :D.

Me agreeing with holier-then-thou Elprincipe should have been enough to set the sarcasm alerts blaring. In the end though I thought Jeff Gannon would give it away: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gannon
 
[quote name='camoor']I agree - I guess you couldn't see me winking over the internets :D.

Me agreeing with holier-then-thou Elprincipe should have been enough to set the sarcasm alerts blaring. In the end though I thought Jeff Gannon would give it away: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gannon[/QUOTE]

My bad. My internet sarcasm meter has been way off the last couple months. :lol:
 
[quote name='depascal22']You must not have been watching the same news coverage. EVERY major media outlet supported the war until at least a year into it. It wasn't until everyone figured out there weren't any WMD's that you started to see coverage shift. I guess it's easier to just say that liberal media just slants everything to fit a liberal point of view.

Hell, it's even funny that liberals weren't giving Bush half as much shit (before 9/11) as the talk radio guys have and are giving Obama. I heard alot of praise towards Bush when he picked his cabinet because it was filled with seasoned political operators from all walks of life. I rejoiced in his pick of Colin Powell as the Sec. State. I looked at the picks and thought that this was a man that actually gave a damn about diversity instead of pretending to let minorities have a say like most of you current conservatives.[/QUOTE]


Sorry, but when the hell does believing in diversity have anything to do with making a coherent, rational decision, or become a valid qualification for a job that requires such? You think that in order to be legitimate people have to be or be in a group that's diverse? That's a more warped pov than I've ever heard from you before.

Knowing right from wrong or good from bad has not one iota to do with ethnic diversity. It has everything to do with moral character. Regardless of one's color or origin, there are truths that must be upheld that transcend race.

I could give two shits if Obama's cabinet were from the donkey fucker race. As long as they believe in the constitution and individual rights they're okay with me. You "rejoiced" because Bush put a black man as Sec of State and fourth in line for the presidency? That's seriously knucking futz - AND racist.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Sorry, but when the hell does believing in diversity have anything to do with making a coherent, rational decision, or become a valid qualification for a job that requires such? You think that in order to be legitimate people have to be or be in a group that's diverse?[/quote]

I think the decision being bandied about as an example is the dredd scott case.

Knowing right from wrong or good from bad has not one iota to do with ethnic diversity. It has everything to do with moral character. Regardless of one's color or origin, there are truths that must be upheld that transcend race.
Click to expand...

Even only speaking as Americans. A few hundred years of history shows you to be wrong.

Reagan supported Apartheid, did his moral character transcend race?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bmull, if you read what I wrote, I said that they were seasoned political operatives from all walks of life. Many of them were white but he brought in Condoleeza (even though I don't like her) and Powell (a man I respect and admire). Bush could've toed the Republican line that minorities don't matter because they didn't need them but he welcomed all people in regardless of race. That's my point.

Diversity doesn't legitmize them but the Cabinet's legitmacy was ENHANCED by it's diversity. America should be governed by the people not some old white dudes that have never ventured to the South Bronx.

As much as you say that we should transcend gender, you've been the biggest opponent of every social program that has tried to level the playing field.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top