tvashtarkatena

You needn't worry: you're categorically stupid.

Again, you're being fucking stupid, and you know I fucking hate stupid, by ignoring the obvious component in any message: context. Sarah Palin is the leader of a movement which has repeatedly advocated guns as a way to solve problems. No, Rob, its not exactly the same. When you get your intellect back, let me know.

You seem to be implying that words and symbols don't have real power to sway, particularly the insane, to violence. For realz? Anyone care to spray paint a swastika on their car door and test that assertion? Get real. You're responsible for what you put out there. I've called a few morons morons on this site, and I take full responsibility for whatever erosive effect its had on their already truncated self esteem. It's not easy to be fuckin stupid, and I do have some empathy for these posters for the trog-like, primary color existence these poor potato-eaters are sentenced for life to. We've all seen one dumb cunt post his gun collection here as a lame, ineffectual threat. What if that dumb cunt had 30 million followers? Would posting that gun collection and, say, posting a name and location be as cool? Would a carry with it some responsibility?

Funneling direct corporate contributions has been illegal in Texas for years. DeLay's just the first asshole in a long line to be prosecuted for it. Arbitrary? Hey, you can only ignore a pile of dogshit in the middle of the floor for so long. In a way, Tom did 'play by the rules'. Problem was, those rules weren't legal. OK, PP, you may resume your lying now.....

So, yeah, sorry about the junk yard dog. Musta gotten off his chain. Maybe we can get on with our discourse, now, assuming he's bitten enough ankles. The fact that a pro violence, pro punishment movement is also pro gun should come as a surprise to no one. There is nothing inconsistent in the tea bagger message in this regard. It is an open threat that should not be discarded lightly, particularly after Saturday's tragedy. All political movements, like all behaviors, are not created equal. Some openly and actively attack the public good. The tea bagger movement is one of them.

I don't know about us being good, but them's definitely bad, and definitely anti-constitutional, which makes them Anti-me and Anti-American in my book, for the numerous value and action based reasons I've detailed. Anything you find heart warming about that agenda, Rob? This is not demonizing. This is making a rational decision based on the observed actions and statements of that movement. It's fascism lite, plain and simple, and its a clear and open threat to all of us.

Have you read Ted Rall's book, "The Anti-American Manifesto?" Have you read his interview with liberal journalist Dylan Ratigan? (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/msnbc-guest-suggest-violent-revolution/ -- aretarded source, I know, but that's not the point.) I'm sure you'll have a comeback for that. Yeah, I have a comeback: Who? Anyone NOT know who Glenn Beck, Bill Oreilly, or Sara Palin (feel free to ad to this LONG list) is?

Rob is attempting to also consider the tea bagger movement has somehow being as healthy as the general liberal movement that has brought us from pre-war peasantry to enlightened prosperity. It's not. It's an inherently destructive, unhealthy movement, in that it is an irrational one based on the emotions of fear and anger that targets, well, other people. It has openly attacked the middle class (toll takers and teachers, right FW?) and advocated continued wealth concentration amongst the upper few percent. It is anti gay, anti constitution, and anti compassion. It proposes no solutions, only the marauding of decades of liberal policies that made this country a more just, enlightened, compassionate, and prosperous place for everyone. There is not a single shred of what I consider true American values: liberty (the right to marry who you want), compassion (a healthy middle class being the best way to get there), fairness (tea bagger racism needs no introduction), stewardship (nor does their anti-environmental, drill baby drill, anti regulation, climate change denying leanings). It should be viewed as what is really is: an irrational threat to the future health and well being of this country (and the world). It should be dealt with as was the Fundamentalist movement, which has largely lost its bid to recreate this country into its own grotesque image.

it's one of many intimidation quotes from a tea bagger candidate who got a little too full of herself...and now she's paying for it big time. Google 'Second amendment Remedies' - her actual words. Oh...you'll get right to it, I guarantee you.

BTW, it would be in your best interest to get together with me this week so we can scream in person. Ya know....

Did you read the article about the crimes she was accused of? This is the first sentence. (italics added) Again, explain to me how property damage and murder are equivalent in any way. My point is that we live in an extremely polarized politcal climate, and the fault of that does not lie ONLY with the republicans. My point has nothing to do with which side is "worse." It's an easy point to grasp. I know you can do it. 'Polarized' does not equal 'advocate or imply violence or having the ability to do violence'. That tendency is clearly in the Right camp, not the Left at this time. No, it's not hard, but you also hate to lose, even when it's obvious that you're arguing from what is essentially a non-position. Where, um, are the Left wing pundits or politicians advocating 'second amendment solutions', eh Rob. Yeah...that would be no where.

I believe there's a significant portion of the tea bagger movement, which, given its agenda, violent rhetoric, and irrationality, attracts a more sociopathic membership...and enough of those people are celebrating (wrongly) what they perceive as an event that has increased their ability to intimidate their political opponents. I certainly am not going to swallow that every member of that movement is as shocked as the rest of us. Think I'm wrong? Read the replies to any news story or blog about this incident and think again. You'd probably need to be a sociopath to applaud this event. The problem is, given the tea baggers agenda of racism, xenophobia, homophobia, extreme religiosity, gun fetishism, gold standardizers...it's a perfectly engineered movement for attracting and concentrating America's 4% or so of sociopaths into a single movement. I'd wager 10% or more of the tea bagger movement is made up of clinical sociopaths because of this concentration effect. Palin, the movement's primary spokeperson, is obviously a sociopath. How many of them applaud this attack? Enough, I'm sure, to give us pause.

Quit being a dumbshit. That's what I object to the most, here. Don't try that shit on me. The pervasive, daily, violent rhetoric from the Right for the past decade - GREATLY increased in volume by the tea baggers - do you have anything recent and even in the same universe in volume, magnitude and now, effect, from the Left, Rob? No. So kindly respect our intelligence and quit playing rhetorical games with what is not a light hearted issue. I refuse to believe your arguments are anything but strawman or devil's advocate (and not a good one, at that)...you're much smarter than that.

ummmm i don't recall anyone asking that.... and if they did, perhaps examples other than tree spiking might better bolster your position? perhaps the tone of the responses to your equivocation and conflation seemed to you to be "left-wing" violence apologetics or dismissal? Hence...the self quote game.

Congresswomen. Point blank, in the head. 9 year old. Judge. Retiree.... You're done here, Rob.

1987. Spiking denounced afterward by Earth First. No one confirmed it was a tree spike to begin with. One incident. Non fatal. Not to mention that Earth First, unlike the tea baggers, were never a very popular movement among the Left or anyone else. NEXT STREEEEEEETTTTTTCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDDDD analogy?

1944?

You're debating ME, man, not Billcoe or some other dumbshit!

Oops.... "One possible injury from tree spiking occurred in the United States in 1987. California mill worker George Alexander was seriously injured when the bandsaw he was operating was shattered by either an old nail or a tree spike. This led many many progressive Earth First! groups to denounce tree spiking.[1] Other activists[citation needed] were led to either reject this form of sabotage entirely, or take some precautions, such as putting warning signs in the area where the trees are being spiked. Tree spiking is condemned by opponents as eco-terrorism as they claim it is potentially dangerous to loggers or mill-workers,[2] although only this one injury possibly resulting from tree spiking has been widely reported.[1]"

Poor loggers! Watch out for them spikes, man!

Actually, a lot of logging operations don't even use chain saws anymore.

Yeah, a bucking chain saw is pretty much the same as shooting somebody point blank in the head for their political representation. Great argument, buddy...followed by a very logical conclusion. Good job.

You'd think public outcry would be enough, but so far, most Darlings of the Right remain completely unapologetic and in denial of their role in creating and disseminating the kind of gun focused, violent memes that are now so pervasive. This leads me to support increased government scrutiny of talk shows etc for criminal speech. Just the threat of a investigation is often enough to tone things down a bit, even as the talk show host continues to rail against the intrusions of 'Big Gubbamint', the prospect of going up against the DOJ would probably result in a quite omission of formerly incendiary rhetoric involving 2nd Amendment Solutions. Talk show callers should be prosecuted as well as their hosts for any criminal speech. I'm a free speech advocate - as one essential pillar of a free society. Violent intimidation has no place in a free society. It's not protected speech, nor should it be. Comprehensive gun bans DO work, as expected, to reduce gun crime, which reduces the lethality of crime in general. Mostly domestic violence; the majority of gun deaths (and suicide). They absolutely keep guns out of the hands of the criminally psychotic. Not in America, though, thanks to a particularly paranoid, xenophobic culture, ignorance, cherished myths, and convenient 'updating' of our founding history. Politically feasible? Probably not. Perhaps the debate, which has largely died, might start once again, however.

Sergeant Nick Penis was tougher. He didn't even need a parachute.

The thought is that if we shun the kind of violent rhetoric we've seen the Right adopt in the past few years, we'll be able to conduct our affairs with fewer people getting shot. The problem with the tea bagger movement is that it is, at its core, a sociopathic one that seeks to circle the wagons in an effort to further concentrate dwindling wealth at the expense of the country as a whole. Rather than band together during a difficult time, they've chosen to jump in the lifeboats first. The logical strategy would be to disenfranchise everyone else, which, of course, they are actively seeking to do.