rob Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 My kids school has a poster with a book, and the book is covered with a crosshair, and it says "Target good grades!" Terrorism? I can't believe I'm defending Palin, but I don't see her crosshairs as the same as painting a swastika on a truck. I really don't think she meant that. Was it tasteless? Yeah, probably. Should she feel bad? Yeah, probably. Did she want anyone to get shot, or was violence the intention of that poster, in any way? I'm not sold on that. Sounds like a reach. It's OK to disagree on that. Isn't it? Or are dissenters the enemy now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 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. Disagree with TTK and you are "stupid" and have no "intellect". Even if you were/are friends and have agreed on a myriad of issues in the past. Fucking sociopath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 You sure can be a little bitch when somebody disagrees with you. If you were a little bit closer, I'd slap you in the face with 8 inches of limp dick. You sure have an interesting way of engaging in civilized debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 They weren't cross-hairs, they were surveyor's marks! DUH! My bad, I take back everything I've said. Carry on... clearly they were crosshairs. Even still, do you really think that sarah palin intentionally intended them to mean that these people should be shot? Clearly they were surveyor's marks. "Mansour called the crosshairs "surveyor marks." Palin has removed the list from her PAC website, but not from her Facebook page. "I don't understand how anybody could be held responsible for somebody who is completely mentally unstable like this. Where I come from the person that is actually shooting is the one that's culpable," Mansour said, before intimating that the suspect, Jared Loughner, is actually a liberal. "It seems that the people that knew him said that he was left-wing and very liberal -- but that is not to say that I am blaming the left." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 You needn't worry: you're categorically stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I do expect my friends to be smart. Not for everyone, I realize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I'll throw KKK a bone with a triple self-reply....he'll chase after that shit till he drops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Libtards with short memories. Sad, but predictable. http://movies.nytimes.com/2006/10/27/movies/27deat.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I do expect my friends to be smart. Not for everyone, I realize. Yeah, you really know how to treat a friend - we can see that. And you call others "sociopath". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 "There is some evidence, however, that their number has increased significantly in the past year or two. The Sergent at Arms, for instance, counted just 29 threats against senators in 2009, rather than 49 in 2010. And there was a 300 percent increase in such threats against all members of Congress (both representatives and senators) in the first few months of 2010, according to the same office. The journalist Ronald Kessler, meanwhile, wrote in his bestselling book that there has been a 400 percent increase in the number of threats against the White House since Barack Obama took office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 Finally, a clear voice of reason in all this, and excellent production quality to boot! [video:youtube] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 sure, the westboro baptist church is totally the official spokesman for every right-leaning american. He's crazy, so they must all be too. They should be stopped! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Libtards make movies which fantasize about the murder of Bush and other right wing politicians regularly. These films reach millions and are clearly meant to incite violence. Based on TTK's New Revised Standards of Tolerable Freedoms: Fourth Ed., some of your loony-left favorites would be banned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Laws banning threats of violence have been on the books for a long, long time. You are suggesting that such bans on speech be lifted, apparently...if you're post has a message at all. That's in character for you, as you're practically a poster a child for what we've been talking about here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimmo Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 You sure can be a little bitch when somebody disagrees with you. If you were a little bit closer, I'd slap you in the face with 8 inches of limp dick. You sure have an interesting way of engaging in civilized debate. ask him to meow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimmo Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 They weren't cross-hairs, they were surveyor's marks! DUH! My bad, I take back everything I've said. Carry on... clearly they were crosshairs. Even still, do you really think that sarah palin intentionally intended them to mean that these people should be shot? is that really the point here, robbi? i mean, really ? i heard she did come out and say that wasn't her point, though.... I mean, she said it publicly, stating that violence is bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimmo Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 she made a statement, in public! saying violence is BAD! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Larry Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Guns are the number one vehicle of lethal violence in the US, and the Right has long advocated, as a center of their platform, unrestricted gun rights. number of people killed in car related deaths; 2009: 33,808 source wikipedia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Um, yeah. Read it a bit more carefully there, LL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The number of folks MURDERED by cars is probably kinda low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Larry Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Peace & Love Ford was shot at..... Ronnie was shot! Long live the revolution! wikipedia After the Revolutionary War, Jefferson advocated restraining government via rebellion and violence when necessary, in order to protect individual freedoms. In a letter to James Madison on January 30, 1787, Jefferson wrote, "A little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical...It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."[88] Similarly, in a letter to Abigail Adams on February 22, 1787 he wrote, "The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all."[88] Concerning Shays' Rebellion after he had heard of the bloodshed, on November 13, 1787 Jefferson wrote to William S. Smith, John Adams' son-in-law, "What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."[89] In another letter to William S. Smith during 1787, Jefferson wrote: And what country can preserve its liberties, if the rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.[88] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Larry Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 it hasn't made a difference because it hasn't been broad enough. The main problem is the huge bandwidth given to enable hate speech. All of Fox advertisers should be targeted for boycotts. A divestment campaign of companies that work with hate mongers could be quite effective as well. Wikipedia: Corporations Jefferson in 1816 wrote to George Logan, In this respect England exhibits the most remarkable phenomenon in the universe in the contrast between the profligacy of it's government and the probity of it's citizens. And accordingly it is now exhibiting an example of the truth of the maxim that virtue & interest are inseparable. It ends, as might have been expected, in the ruin of it's people, but this ruin will fall heaviest, as it ought to fall on that hereditary aristocracy which has for generations been preparing the catastrophe. I hope we shall take warning from the example and crush in it's birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country.[85] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Lets cut the shit, this is about making political hay out of a tragedy. The guy had no political connections to the right and if you watched his videos you'd know he pretty well hated them. In the past, prior to Palin and the tea party, he had correspondence to the Congresswoman but his ramblings no longer line up with a party affiliation. If anything he could be called a truther since he blamed Bush for 9/11. By the way, he made threats against a bunch of people and was turned into the police. They didn't do anything about it and the real question should be why not? If there was a failing in law enforcement it should come out. The sheriff down there seems to be taking a preemptive position blaming Palin and others, which strikes me as very odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.