The blame game gets even more crazy

Page 8 of 17 [ 266 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 17 Next

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

13 Jan 2011, 12:51 am

@ Vexcalibur

Looks to me she was quite accurate in labeling the left's behavior. You're saying she should just sit back and smile when someone accuses her of being an accessory to murder. If she hadn't used that phrase the left would be criticizing every punctuation mistake she may have made. In short get over your Palin derangement syndrome already, all you and the mainstream media have proven is that you and they are not remotely objective nor are you trustworthy.

ikorack
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,870

13 Jan 2011, 12:54 am

lookup blood libel inu

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

13 Jan 2011, 1:02 am

Oh, and about the crazy blame game: http://www.cafemom.com/group/99198/foru ... o_Security

_________________
.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Jan 2011, 7:20 am

Vexcalibur wrote:

Oh, and about the crazy blame game: http://www.cafemom.com/group/99198/foru ... o_Security

Blame the victim?

ruveyn

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

13 Jan 2011, 7:25 am

tbf, I don't think that's exactly blaming her. It's a legitimate question to ask especially after the sheriff there has been so outspoken. Why wasn't there a police officer at such a public event like this? 'And why did it take 15 minutes for the cops to show up?

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

13 Jan 2011, 10:45 am

Inuyasha wrote:

the left has taken the vitriol to a level that the right has not done.

No response is needed or useful when you're talking to someone who is both blind and deaf.

Quote:

Didn't you claim that you said nothing to blame the right for this incident, and then there is Weather Underground. You are saying it is more okay to try to firebomb someone's house to try to kill them than using a gun to go on a rampage. Then you have the gall to accuse me of lieing about what you said.

Learn to read, you dolt. I have quite explicitly said, repeatedly, that the right wing is not to blame for this particular incident in Arizona. Loughner had very ambiguous political beliefs. I have made no comments about the relative morality of bombing and shooting. I have not at any point defended the Weather Underground.

Quote:

Hmmm, didn't you say you weren't blaming the right for the actions of the Arizona shooter, looks to me you're implying that people on the right are responsible.

No, you're just borderline illiterate and unable to distinguish a general comment about right-wing violence from a stance on a specific issue.

People on the right are, very loosely speaking, "responsible" for acts of violence with a clearly right-wing origin, the most obvious example being people who bomb abortion clinics or shoot abortion doctors. They are also "responsible" for someone worked up into a paranoid frenzy that "Obama's coming for our guns" who goes and shoots a bunch of cops.

Similarly, people on the left are, just as loosely speaking, "responsible" for eco-terrorism (eg firebombing SUVs at a car dealership) and any other forms of violence that are obviously left-wing in origin.

Note that "responsible" is in quotes because I don't think this extends, in any sense, to legal notions of actually being charged with a crime. I made that clear at the beginning of this whole issue, but you are stupid enough to need it spelled out for you repeatedly.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Jan 2011, 10:52 am

Vexcalibur wrote:

OT: Palin could have just shut her mouth up. And then this thing would have made some center-ish people think of her as the victim of the charade with all the media supposedly pointing fingers at her.

But no, she had to open her mouth:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/ja ... a-shooting

"Blood Libel" ? Seriously? This woman wants to be president of what is probably one of the 20 most important countries in the world? Really?

In this instance, Palin was on the mark. The Blood Libel is holding a group responsible for what one or a few do and this is exactly the reaction of the some of the extreme pinko stinko commie liberals to the Tuscon Massacre. They blamed the entire Tea Party Movement. And this is nothing new. I remember what was said after JFK was killed in Dallas. The lefties cried out -- The Climate of Hatred killed JFK. No sir. It was one man with a low quality Italian rifle.

ruveyn

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

13 Jan 2011, 10:53 am

ikorack wrote:

Nonsense you label someone right wing then anyone else with that label is said to have similar traits. You can say that a violent nut job is right wing, but you cannot say that you are placing no responsibility on his actions on being right wing if you do so. Especially when the violence is considered political.

Right wing and left wing are both very broad labels. In referring to "right wing violence," this obviously comes from the far right, not the mainstream right. In that sense, the mainstream right is not responsible for the actions of people out on the fringe. (Obviously, the same sentence with "left" also applies) The observation that the right is more violent than the left obviously refers to those segments of each side that are actually violent.

So, right-wing extremism is either more dangerous or more prevalent (or both) compared to left-wing extremism.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

13 Jan 2011, 2:11 pm

Seen in Tucson.

_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson

QueenoftheOwls
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

Joined: 23 Sep 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Female
Posts: 64
Location: Westchester County, NY

13 Jan 2011, 5:11 pm

The shooter was just plain evil, and maybe he was mentally ill as well. But most mentally ill people don't go around slaughtering inncent strangers. If you want to blame someone, we should blame the culture that allowed an evil, possibly deranged individual to just walk into a gun shop and purchase a semiautomatic Glock with 30 rounds per clip. What is such a firearm for except to kill people? You're not going to hunt rabbits with a Glock. You cannot walk into a store and buy a nuclear bomb, why should you be allowed to buy a semiautomatic that can fire off 90 rounds?

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

13 Jan 2011, 5:24 pm

QueenoftheOwls wrote:

But most mentally ill people don't go around slaughtering innocent strangers.

Most end up as harmless drunks and junkies on the streets.

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

13 Jan 2011, 6:11 pm

Dox47 wrote:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/david-brock-tells-matthews-glenn-beck-has-been-responsible-for-3-thwarted-assassination-attempts/

Quote:

Media Matters founder David Brock appeared on Hardball and revealed to Chris Matthews his allegation that “Glenn Beck himself has been responsible for three thwarted assassination attempts this year.” Brock listed three occurrences where a crazed assassin targeted a liberal politician or institution, and where evidence later emerged that the assassin may have been a viewer of Beck’s show.

Matthews just nodded in astonishment, not questioning whether such tangential evidence truly would establish Beck as somehow “responsible” for each assassination attempt. Ron Reagan was slightly less inflammatory with his criticism of Beck, merely asserting that Beck, “constantly refers to political opponents on the left as traitors, treasonous, Marxists, fascists, Nazis, [and saying] we’ve got to do something about it, we may have to take to the street. You can see that as entertainment, but some people like Mr. Loughner are not going to see that as entertainment, they are going to take it seriously. . . . We all expected something like this, awful like this, was going to happen and it did.”

In a discussion about toning down the rhetoric on both sides, it seems as if the founder of Media Matters and Ron Reagan may have missed the memo.

Watch the clip from MSNBC below:

Check the link for the actual video clips, I don't feel any need to comment myself.

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of people on the right defending Beck merely because he is "on your side". I don't see anything wrong with David Brock's statements regarding Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck clearly has singularly influenced the three shooters he mentioned. Also, Glenn Back does constantly refer to his political opponents as Marxists and fascists. He also insinuates bogus motives to people and organizations on the left, even going so far as to compare Obama to Lucifer. He's not content just to disagree with policy, he must stoke irrational fear and fill gullible people's heads with unfounded distrust and paranoia.

Nobody is saying we want the government to forcibly silence him or charge him with inciting murder. We merely would like the freedom to point out that the guy really is a f*****g a**hole and that he does clearly influence violent people. The world is not black-and-white as conservatives like to see it. There are degrees of responsibility, and people like Glenn Beck clearly bear some in the cases mentioned responsibility.

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

13 Jan 2011, 7:24 pm

marshall wrote:

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of people on the right defending Beck merely because he is "on your side". I don't see anything wrong with David Brock's statements regarding Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck clearly has singularly influenced the three shooters he mentioned. Also, Glenn Back does constantly refer to his political opponents as Marxists and fascists. He also insinuates bogus motives to people and organizations on the left, even going so far as to compare Obama to Lucifer. He's not content just to disagree with policy, he must stoke irrational fear and fill gullible people's heads with unfounded distrust and paranoia.

Nobody is saying we want the government to forcibly silence him or charge him with inciting murder. We merely would like the freedom to point out that the guy really is a f***ing a**hole and that he does clearly influence violent people. The world is not black-and-white as conservatives like to see it. There are degrees of responsibility, and people like Glenn Beck clearly bear some in the cases mentioned responsibility.

I'm not on the right and I certainly don't think of Glenn Beck as being "on my side", I don't terribly care about the man one way or the other. However, I have a real problem with some of the attacks on him and the greater First Amendment ramifications. I don't care what he said, all he did is talk, and in a free country that is not a crime. I'm already hearing rumblings about the fairness doctrine and bills have been proposed curtailing speech, so I think my alarm at the attacks on political commentators are well justified.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

13 Jan 2011, 8:39 pm

QueenoftheOwls wrote:

1) Firearms are mostly used for sporting purposes. Lawfully killing in self-defense is sometimes unavoidable, and firearms are constitutionally protected for that purpose as well.

2) Glocks have occasionally been used for hunting, but are more commonly carried as a backup gun along with a rifle or shotgun.

3) If the 33 round Glock mags are so great for killing people, why are there only 2 recorded incidents of them being used in a massacre? On the civilian market, they are popular for recreational target shooting and some owners use them for home defense. Most shooters use whatever weapons they already have on hand and do not plan far enough ahead to select new equipment to better suit their plan. Shooters that do plan ahead almost never use 33 round Glock mags because they are difficult to conceal.

4) Do you to care to elaborate on WTF a nuclear bomb has to do with a semiautomatic gun?

That's the biggest red herring I've heard in a long time.

_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

13 Jan 2011, 10:37 pm

skafather84 wrote:

Seen in Tucson.

I call false advertising; the grouping is terrible.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

13 Jan 2011, 11:15 pm

Dox47 wrote:

marshall wrote:

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of people on the right defending Beck merely because he is "on your side". I don't see anything wrong with David Brock's statements regarding Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck clearly has singularly influenced the three shooters he mentioned. Also, Glenn Back does constantly refer to his political opponents as Marxists and fascists. He also insinuates bogus motives to people and organizations on the left, even going so far as to compare Obama to Lucifer. He's not content just to disagree with policy, he must stoke irrational fear and fill gullible people's heads with unfounded distrust and paranoia.

Nobody is saying we want the government to forcibly silence him or charge him with inciting murder. We merely would like the freedom to point out that the guy really is a f***ing a**hole and that he does clearly influence violent people. The world is not black-and-white as conservatives like to see it. There are degrees of responsibility, and people like Glenn Beck clearly bear some in the cases mentioned responsibility.

The problem is the majority of attacks on Glenn Beck are not about having the government silence him. People are simply pointing out that the conspiracy theories and anti-liberal hate/paranoia being spread by Glenn Beck has strongly influenced some people to take violent action. To deny this fact and instead attack those who point it out is disingenuous. It is not defending free speech, it's defending those people who think the s**t Glenn Beck talks is acceptable. I'd expect for more rational conservatives to distance themselves from Glenn Back, yet they don't. They simply attack others for pointing out that the guy is off his rocker. Glenn Beck makes the whole conservative movement look bad., including libertarians as he likes to call himself one.

Page 8 of 17 [ 266 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 17 Next

Jump to:

The blame game gets even more crazy Post Reply New Topic

The blame game gets even more crazy