Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 159 (8167 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-26-2014 8:50 AM
59 online now:
bee, CosmicChimp, deerbreh, jar, Larni, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Stile, Tangle (9 members, 50 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: MarkG
Upcoming Birthdays: Raphael
Post Volume:
Total: 742,002 Year: 27,843/28,606 Month: 2,900/2,244 Week: 304/710 Day: 14/161 Hour: 5/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
8910
11
1213Next
Author Topic:   Politicizing the AZ massacre
Huntard
Member (Idle past 196 days)
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 151 of 185 (601189)
01-19-2011 3:34 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by crashfrog
01-19-2011 12:28 AM


Re: Even more
crashfrog writes:

Is this like how you idiots on the right wanted Julian Assange "arrested for treason"?


Hey Crash, think you can stop generalizing a bit? I already showed you that "the right" is not the only ones to use "dangerous rhetoric", must I now start reminding you that not every "right" person wants Assange arrested. I for one don't, and political figures on the right in my country don't want that either.

So please, enough genralization, ok? Not every "right" person is a cuckoo tea party redneck.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2011 12:28 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

    
onifre
Member
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 152 of 185 (601236)
01-19-2011 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by xongsmith
01-18-2011 7:28 PM


Re: Advertising influence
Oni uses it the way I do. You promote your music or your comedy routine or your Irish Spring soap. Then you wait and see what happens. The two things are disconnected. The Later Developments do not and could not change the "promotion".

Right, and it is commonly used in that way. Crash gets this, he's just being a douche about it and dragging it on like another "embassy" situtation.

If nothing happens, then it remains promted as you and I use it. If something happens, then it takes on Crash's definition.

He gets it, he's just being a douche.

Great post though.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by xongsmith, posted 01-18-2011 7:28 PM xongsmith has acknowledged this reply

    
onifre
Member
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 153 of 185 (601246)
01-19-2011 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by crashfrog
01-18-2011 8:27 PM


Re: Letters since 2007
People don't say "promotes violence" like they say "promote a band".

Sure they do. I'm people, I used it that way. Xong understood the way I used it, and xong is people too.

See, here's where you're conflating two definitions, again. I'm not talking about products that are promoted, I'm talking about products that promote.

Do you understand the difference?

Yes I do. But I don't care how you are using it, it's my use of it that we are discussing. You need to understand how I'm using it and not drag this out telling me there is only one way to use a word.

All of your difficulties in this discussion are based on the fact that you don't appear to understand the difference between "contribute to the growth of" and "present for buyer acceptance", which are two very different definitions of the word "promote."

What YOU need to understand is how I'm using the word, and in what context, not the other way around. How you WANT me to use the word is of no concern to me.

When I say: Islam promotes violence as a resoultion to violence.

- If no one acts on that, then "promote" takes on the "present for buyer acceptance" definition.

- If someone does act on it, then "promote" takes on the "contribute to the growth of" definition.

It's that simple.

Similarly, we should recognize that the increase in right-wing violence directed against Democrats, minorities, and government employees is a function of unbalanced, violent people doing violent things and the creation of an rhetorical environment where violence is repeatedly invoked and approved of against the political enemies of the right-wing.

Ehh, I don't think it's that dramatic. But I get what you mean.

Well, it's not much of an apology but it's roughly the level of maturity you usually evince.

I'm just myself, not some up-tight, intellectually arrogant, faux personality that I only exibit on forums.

I mean you yourself identified in the Hitler example that we can't tell which Nazis were oppressing Jews because they were incited to do so by Hitler, and which were doing so because Nazism provided an outlet for their own pre-existing antisemitism.

Right. We have two facts, one that Hitler's speeches contributed, the other that their own personal feelings contributed. It could have been either one. And you'd have to do a case by case study asking each individual why he/she did it. Not only impossible, un-necessary. But you couldn't confidently say it was one specific one of those. More than likely, it was both, as you agree. Each case is different, but it remains pointless and speculatory to credited one specific one.

Loughner had far left propaganda and anti-capitalist propaganda. Also, there is the republican rhetoric. Just as above with germany, you couldn't confidently say it was one specific one of those. Each case is different, but it remains pointless and speculatory to credited one specific one.

So I'll end this the way I explained it to Jazzns, if you're only point is that Republican rhetoric creates a hostile political environment, then we are in complete agreement.

But to your original argument that Palin influenced Loughner, and the crosshairs lead to the congress woman being shot, you are wrong and should admit that.

- Oni

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by crashfrog, posted 01-18-2011 8:27 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by crashfrog, posted 01-28-2011 8:51 PM onifre has responded

    
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 728 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 154 of 185 (601305)
01-19-2011 6:37 PM


its been an entertaining read so far
Rahvin writes:

As for Olbermann, I applaud his suggestion that perhaps everyone can calm the fuck down on the violence-themed words in our political discourse. I can't see how less talk of "second amendment solutions" would do anything but improve the nation as a whole.

I am sure Benedict Arnold felt the same way.

Taq writes:

They knew what was in the pot when they were stirring. Palin and others knew that there was a militia-like streak running through the Tea Party, and they played to it. I remember Tea Party sympathizers showing up to Obama rallies openly carrying fire arms and holding signs with overtly violent themes. I remember signs at Health Care protests with the line "Kill the Bill" above a picture of Obama climbing into a coffin.

You reap what you sow. The rooster has come home to roost. Pick your cliche, but I, like you, felt this coming.

sure if the shooter was a tea party memeber, something that has not been proven, in fact he seemed rather lib to me.

crasfrog writes:

The Tuscon tragedy was an entirely predictable result of conservative assassination language. How do I know that? Because Giffords predicted it. She precisely predicted this outcome.

mmmmmm that kool-aid must be delicious. once again was the shooter a conservative?

Taq writes:

I have speculations, but that is it. It is worth mentioning that Giffords did beat a Tea Party candidate in the last election. It is also worth mentioning that Loughner could have been a complete nutcase trying to impress Jodie Foster. However, given the strained political environment in the US right now I tend to suspect a political motivation.

ahh so there is no evidence, its just convenient from your political side to characterize this person as a member of the opposition on a personal hunch. It seems as if the OP was correct.

crashfrog writes:

Hyro, nobody thinks Sarah Palin actually wanted anybody to be shot. Nobody thinks that she was literally calling for the death of Giffords or anybody else. The point here is that there are some things you don't say in politics, some kinds of rhetoric you don't employ, precisely because of its predictable effect of inciting crazy people to violence.

So do you think the founding fathers were comeplety wrong in using this language as well? Maybe we should have stayed subjects to the British Crown? sounds all very loyalist to me.

Rahvin writes:

Irrelevant, unless you actually think that a "second amendment solution" is an appropriate response to losing an election, which is how it's been used so far.

that is not what the 2nd Amendmet solution is. you are taking it out of context.

rahvin writes:

Do you really believe that violent revolution and political assassination belong in the toolkit of American politics? Really? Because a "second amendment solution" means murdering your countrymen because you disagree with them. Because you lost an election, and have sour grapes. It's saying "if I can't win, nobody wins!"

strawman.

I don't give a flying fuck what the Founding Fathers thought.

here we are going to disagree further, i think you live in the wrong country.

Thomas Jefferson thought it was hunky dory to possess slaves.

rofl.
The real revolutionaries and the original Tea Partiers were from a place called New England, none of these folks owned slaves, and many settled around a place called Boston. they were the ones who preached the violent retoric from the begining, and had to covince the other colonies that it would be profitable to fight the crown. There were many more loyalists in the Southern Colonies, who were complacent in the way thier life was. Nice try trying to use slavery, but in reality slave holders were more on your side of the arguement, as business was booming under Crown rule, and they faced more uncertanties as independant states.

You cannot, in any way, shape or form, successfully prosecute a civilian campaign against the US Government using small arms. The Army has fucking artillery. And tanks. And nukes.

interesting...can you please share this with the Northern Vietnamese. a group of rice farmers with Kalashnikovs, and RPGs. Or with modern day Mujahadeen Fighters in Afghanistan. It seems with your logic the United States would trounce either one of those opponents in a matter of weeks.

The context of violent political revolution has completely changed since the days of the Founding Fathers. Now, violent revolution and "second amendment solutions" means targeting and assassinating political opposition leaders, terrorism, and so on.

no it doesn't, its the same as it ever was.

Taq writes:

When lefties show up to Palin rallies packing heat in order to intimidate Palin and her followers let us know.


out of context. Carrying to a rally is not used as a device for intimidation, it is as much as a demonstration of 2nd amendment rights, as the rally is to 1st amendment rights.

Hyroglyphx writes:

This is nothing more than a cheap tactic for political sensationalism and nothing more.

its simple character assassination, they just got worked in the last election, and now they have to attack someone's character and demonize that person as much as they can so they can feel better about they're righteous cause. think about the children.

crashfrog writes:

What on Earth does that matter? Who says Loughner had to be a conservative to be influenced by conservative murder rhetoric?


the rhetoric is the same on both sides of the board, and has been, its nothing new, and nothing will change because of it, its just fun to debate about.

But Democrats didn't do it. Dart boards aren't crosshairs.

ROFLMFAO! a target is a target. if you want to get to a gnats ass on this the "cross hairs" aren't even realistic cross hairs, I have never seen a sight picture like that before (i thought they were targets the whole time).

Jaderis writes:

Why do conservatives interpret an across the board call for less violent rhetoric as a personal affront? As an attack? Guilty conscience?

cause this is America, and we are gonna say what we want. klik klak

Hyroglyphx writes:

I attended the rallies of both Kerry and Bush. I was attacked and physically assaulted (with my kids there!) both times. Both times it was by Progressives. That's not an isolated incident either.

you can open carry almost anywhere in New Hampshire, the free staters are not going to let that change.

Onifre writes:

Evidence?

C'mon man, you know there aint no evidence, this is all BS the OP was correct.

Geez, how white are you? You know Hip Hop incorporates rap but it's not rap, right? Just as Hip Hop incorporates DJ'ing and scratching but Hip Hop isn't DJ'ing and scratching.

you forgot graffiti and break dancing.

Since I've been there and seen it myself, I don't have to be naive as you say and take anyone's word for it. And the fun part is, I'm moving not far from there in March to Bushwick. So I'll take a pic for you.

you are leaving Miami for Brooklyn...DANG...why?

Oh that white...

It's Ice T not Tupac!

LOLOLOLOL...definately not the illest nigga in Nebraska. not bout it bout it.

Conservatives openly carrying loaded firearms to peaceful townhall meetings.

there is nothing violent or illeagal about this.

crashfrog writes:

For the most part, murder and assassination rhetoric by leading political figures is a phenomenon limited to the right here in the US, yes. Nobody shouts "kill him!" at an Obama rally. Democrats don't invite supporters to fire automatic weapons at pictures of their opponents.

The examples provided thus far by conservatives to rebut that point have been flimsy, to say the least. Dart boards aren't crosshairs. "Bringing a gun to a knifefight" is quoting The Untouchables, not inviting people to actually bring guns anywhere. It's the conservatives that ask their supporters to come to rallies with guns.

wow it really is kool-aid.

Bill Maher is a libertarian, not a leftist.

um...yeah...ok

Edited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by onifre, posted 01-19-2011 6:55 PM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded
 Message 156 by Artemis Entreri, posted 01-19-2011 7:21 PM Artemis Entreri has acknowledged this reply

  
onifre
Member
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 155 of 185 (601306)
01-19-2011 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Artemis Entreri
01-19-2011 6:37 PM


Re: its been an entertaining read so far
you are leaving Miami for Brooklyn...DANG...why?

Comedy dude. I'm wasting too much money flying to and from the city, I need to make it my home base. And why Brooklyn? Cuz it's fucking Brooklyn. Plus it's the cheapest place within 15min to the city, and specifically the lower east side.

Plus, once Jersey Shore came down to Miami, the city hasn't been the same.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Artemis Entreri, posted 01-19-2011 6:37 PM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded

    
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 728 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 156 of 185 (601312)
01-19-2011 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Artemis Entreri
01-19-2011 6:37 PM


Re: its been an entertaining read so far
right on, i hear ya, I had do the same when I left Missouri for Virginia. good luck, be careful, it looked a lil grimey when I was last there.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Artemis Entreri, posted 01-19-2011 6:37 PM Artemis Entreri has acknowledged this reply

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 157 of 185 (602570)
01-28-2011 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by onifre
01-19-2011 11:43 AM


Re: Letters since 2007
I'm people, I used it that way.

You may have, but that's not what the people you're talking about mean - they mean "promotes violence" as in "causes an increase in violence." That's what would be objectionable about that speech. Nobody would have any objection to speech that "promoted violence" as in "promoted a band."

You're just dishonestly equivocating on terms (and calling me names about it.)

But I don't care how you are using it, it's my use of it that we are discussing.

No, it's not. It's the use of the term by third parties that we're discussing - the third parties that object to speech that "promotes violence", or people who advertise products that "promote hair growth."

How would a product "promote hair growth" unless people grew new hair by using it? When I asked you that before you dishonestly changed the subject to promoting hair growth products even though that clearly wasn't anything we were talking about.

When I say: Islam promotes violence as a resoultion to violence.

Right, and you mean that Islam causes an increase in violence, "promotes violence."

I'm just myself, not some up-tight, intellectually arrogant, faux personality that I only exibit on forums.

Are you talking about me, now? I don't know how you could possibly conclude that I'm not uptight, arrogant, and fake in real life, too.

We have two facts, one that Hitler's speeches contributed, the other that their own personal feelings contributed. It could have been either one.

It could have, but the truth is that it was both. Hitler's speeches both promoted anti-semetism in people to whom it had never before occurred to be anti-semites, and it provided an environment supportive to, and emboldening of, people who already harbored anti-semetism.

Similarly, conservative murder speech is contributing in the US to an environment condusive to violence against liberals, Democrats, and minorities both by convincing people to become violent against such people and by creating an environment supportive of people who already were, like Loughner.

But to your original argument that Palin influenced Loughner, and the crosshairs lead to the congress woman being shot, you are wrong and should admit that.

I never said that the "crosshairs led to the congresswoman being shot." But it's clear that Loughner's actions were the predictable consequence of Palin's rhetoric. And how do I know that? Because Giffords predicted it before it happened. Only what is predictable can be predicted, by definition.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by onifre, posted 01-19-2011 11:43 AM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by onifre, posted 02-04-2011 6:23 PM crashfrog has responded

  
onifre
Member
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 158 of 185 (603520)
02-04-2011 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by crashfrog
01-28-2011 8:51 PM


Re: Letters since 2007
Sorry dude, just saw this. Thought you left the thread.

You may have, but that's not what the people you're talking about mean

But I wasn't talk about anyone, really, I just made the statement to convey what I meant. And I gave everyone the courtesy of explaining myself further, because it could be read in different ways.

You're just dishonestly equivocating on terms (and calling me names about it.)

Na, man. On the equivocating part. I am totally calling you names, though.

When I asked you that before you dishonestly changed the subject to promoting hair growth products even though that clearly wasn't anything we were talking about.

Not dishonestly, it was to explain further how I am using the word. And I changed it to penis growth because those are products that are promoted but in effect do nothing.

I know how you are using the word, and if you made the statement, and explained it to me, I would go with your use of the word. You're telling me you can't do the same?

It''s really not that big of a fucking deal to say, "Oh, you're using it that way. Cool. I've heard it used other ways but I get the jist of what you're saying."

Is it?

Right, and you mean that Islam causes an increase in violence, "promotes violence."

No I don't, even if I'm using the word completely wrong, that is not what I meant. And I've explained myself further to correct that misunderstanding. But I'm not using the word completely wrong, just not the same as you do.

Are you talking about me, now? I don't know how you could possibly conclude that I'm not uptight, arrogant, and fake in real life, too.

Good point.

Similarly, conservative murder speech is contributing in the US to an environment condusive to violence against liberals, Democrats, and minorities both by convincing people to become violent against such people and by creating an environment supportive of people who already were, like Loughner.

I agree with all of that, untill you get to Loughner. I think this kid is a leftist nutjob, with anti-government and anti-establishment opinions, and he went a bit too far with that. I don''t think he listens to Beck or Rush, and I highly doubt some targets on a map lead him to do anything.

I never said that the "crosshairs led to the congresswoman being shot."

You did, and I provided the quote in the post to Jazzns.

Because Giffords predicted it before it happened.

She did nothing of the sort.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by crashfrog, posted 01-28-2011 8:51 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by crashfrog, posted 02-04-2011 10:09 PM onifre has responded

    
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 159 of 185 (603538)
02-04-2011 10:09 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by onifre
02-04-2011 6:23 PM


Re: Letters since 2007
It''s really not that big of a fucking deal to say, "Oh, you're using it that way. Cool. I've heard it used other ways but I get the jist of what you're saying."

And it's really not that big of a fucking deal to say "oh, you're right; I said something I didn't intend to say, made bad word choices, and miscommunicated my position." So why not man up and do it? Why is it that you, dronester, and the rest of your little chuckle hut have absolutely no capacity to admit error in anything even approximating an adult fashion? It's like you see that old Frogger cabinet art and you just completely lose your shit.

No I don't, even if I'm using the word completely wrong, that is not what I meant.

Fine, fine. Let's talk about it your way.

Does promoting things work? Does promoting a brand of soap ever result in more people buying that soap? Or is all of modern advertising just an enormous waste of time and capital? (Somebody tell the writers of Mad Men.)

I think this kid is a leftist nutjob, with anti-government and anti-establishment opinions, and he went a bit too far with that.

I think he's a currency nut who believes that the government is engaged in an effort to control the attitudes and actions of the American people through language. How, exactly, is that any different than Glenn Beck's program every single night?

And please, spare me another tiresome dictionary game about whether or not Glenn Beck is a conservative.

You did, and I provided the quote in the post to Jazzns.

And yet in that quote I do not state that the crosshairs led to the congresswoman being shot. That is not a claim I have ever made - the claim I'm making is that the crosshairs contributed to an environment that has directly resulted in violence by conservatives against perceived conservative targets. Or is it just a coincidence that Frances Fox Piven started getting death threats the day after Beck devoted an entire show to his goofy conspiracy theories about her?

Conservatives are promoting violence against liberal targets. (And I do mean "promoting" as in "contributing to an increase in.") The proof of this is the dramatically increased violence and threats of violence against the very liberals conservatives are designating as targets - Giffords among them.

AbE: I forgot - I'm not using the old Frogger cabinet art anymore; I'm using a "Retro" Frogger poster created by a Kotaku artist.

Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by onifre, posted 02-04-2011 6:23 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by Coyote, posted 02-04-2011 10:16 PM crashfrog has responded
 Message 164 by onifre, posted 02-06-2011 12:51 PM crashfrog has responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 4828
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 160 of 185 (603539)
02-04-2011 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by crashfrog
02-04-2011 10:09 PM


There are leftist nutcases too
Let's not forget this all time favorite:

Bill Maher thinks we should be able to wish Cheney dead

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGsHB7Hjpi4


This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by crashfrog, posted 02-04-2011 10:09 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by crashfrog, posted 02-04-2011 10:35 PM Coyote has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 161 of 185 (603541)
02-04-2011 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by Coyote
02-04-2011 10:16 PM


Re: There are leftist nutcases too
Keep talking about bumper stickers, Coyote. People are actually dying at the hands of the people on your side:

quote:
Latinos are still wondering why the murder of 9-year-old Brisenia Flores raised none of the outcry of rancher Robert Krentz’s killing, which fueled Arizona’s tough immigration law. But the trial of a female Minuteman may finally bring the girl’s killers to justice. Terry Greene Sterling reports from the trial’s first day.

As a wounded Gina Gonzalez played dead on the floor of her mobile home in Arivaca, Arizona, in May 2009, she silently told herself to “stay real calm.” Her goal, Gonzalez told a Tucson jury on Tuesday, was to survive so she could save her 9-year-old daughter from the tall intruder in blackface who had already shot Gonzalez twice and killed her husband, Raul Flores. The killer “was all out of bullets,” Gonzalez testified, so he reloaded as her child, Brisenia Flores, pleaded for her life. Then Gonzalez heard two shots, and from the corner of her eye she saw her daughter’s body “fall back on the couch.”...

Gonzalez is a chief prosecution witness in the murder trial of Shawna Forde, a beautician and hardcore nativist from Everett, Washington. Forde is accused of masterminding the killings as part of her plan to steal drugs and money to fund her fledgling group Minuteman American Defense, which she envisioned would patrol the Arizona border in search of illegal “invaders.” She has pleaded not guilty to the murder charges, and her lawyer has tried to portray Raul Flores as a drug dealer and user, although only pot residue was found in the Flores trailer after the murders.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/...enia-flores-mother-testifies

quote:
Beck Linked With Stoking "Fears" That Caused Charles Wilson To Threaten Murray

In October 2010, Charles Murray was sentenced to a year and a day in prison for threatening Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) with "violence" in phone calls to her office.

Wilson Said He "Want[ed] To [Expletive] Kill" Murray Because Of The Passage Of Health Care Legislation. In an April 6 article, Politico reported that Wilson "allegedly called Murray's office on numerous occasions" saying that she " 'had a target on her back,' and 'I want to [expletive] kill you,' according to court documents." Politico also reported that Wilson "allegedly told undercover FBI agents that he carries a concealed firearm with a permit, and said he was 'extremely angry' with the passage of health care legislation."


quote:
On July 18, 2010, Byron Williams was stopped by California Highway Patrol and engaged in a shootout with law enforcement. He later said he was on his way to murder individuals at the Tides Foundation and ACLU.

Williams Wanted To "Start A Revolution" By "Killing People Of Importance At The Tides Foundation." On July 18, 2010, Byron Williams, a convicted felon, engaged in a shootout with police after being pulled over on I-580 in California. Williams was heavily armed, wearing body armor and wielding "a 9mm handgun, a .308-caliber rifle and a shotgun." After being taken into custody, Williams reportedly told investigators that "his intention was to start a revolution by traveling to San Francisco and killing people of importance at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU." [San Francisco Chronicle, 7/21/10]

Williams' Mother: Son "Was Upset" With "The Way Congress Was Railroading Through All These Left-Wing Agenda Items." The San Francisco Chronicle further reported that Williams' mother, Janice Williams, described her son as "angry at left-wing politicians" and at "what's happening to our country." The Chronicle further reported: "Williams watched the news on television and was upset by 'the way Congress was railroading through all these left-wing agenda items,' his mother said." [San Francisco Chronicle, 7/19/10]

Williams: "The Things" Beck Exposed "Blew My Mind." During an interview with reporter John Hamilton after his arrest, Williams said: "I would have never started watching Fox News if it wasn't for the fact that Beck was on there. And it was the things that he did, it was the things he exposed that blew my mind. I said, well, nobody does this." Williams continued: "You need to go back to June -- June of this year, 2010 -- and look at all his programs from June. And you'll see he's been breaking open some of the most hideous corruption. ... A year ago, I was watching him, and it was OK, he was all right, you know? ... But now he's getting it." [Media Matters, 10/11/10]


quote:
Fox Allegedly Inspired Gregory Giusti To Repeatedly Threaten To Destroy Pelosi's Home

In December 2010, Gregory Lee Giusti was sentenced to a year and nine months in federal prison for threatening to destroy former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's home if she voted in support of the health care reform law.

Giusti Admitted To Making "More Than 30 Phone Calls" Threatening Pelosi Not To Support Health Care Reform. The Associated Press reported in April 2010 that in one recorded call, "Giusti said, 'if you pass this freaking health care plan don't bother coming back to California cause you ain't gonna have a place to live,' according to a transcript of the message included in an amended complaint." The AP added: "Officials said the caller often recited Pelosi's home address and said if she wanted to see it again, she should not support the health care overhaul bill that since has been enacted. Giusti left at least two recorded messages containing threats involving one of Pelosi's residences in Northern California, according to the complaint." [The Associated Press, 4/8/10]

Giusti Called Pelosi "A Witch" And Said He Didn't Like Her Pushing Health Care Bill "Down The People's Throats." The AP further reported that Giusti "told investigators he had phoned Pelosi about a half-dozen times, called her a witch and said he did not like her 'pushing the health care bill down the people's throats,' the complaint stated." [The Associated Press, 4/8/10]


http://mediamatters.org/research/201101130002

quote:
PITTSBURGH — A gunman wearing a bulletproof vest and "lying in wait" opened fire on officers responding to a domestic disturbance call Saturday, killing three of them and turning a quiet Pittsburgh street into a battlefield, police said.
Police Chief Nate Harper said the motive for the shooting isn't clear, but friends said the gunman recently had been upset about losing his job and feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,512560,00.html

quote:
(CBS) The woman who was wrestled to the ground and kicked in the head for holding a critical sign at a Rand Paul event says that the violence was "premeditated" and that her partner heard Paul supporters say, "We're here to do crowd control and we might have to take someone out."

http://www.cbsnews.com/.../10/27/earlyshow/main6995613.shtml

But that's fine, Coyote. Keep listening to Bill Maher - the libertarian - run his mouth. People are dying and you're concerned about bumper sticker slogans.

Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Coyote, posted 02-04-2011 10:16 PM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by Coyote, posted 02-04-2011 10:49 PM crashfrog has responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 4828
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 162 of 185 (603542)
02-04-2011 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by crashfrog
02-04-2011 10:35 PM


Re: There are leftist nutcases too
But wait! There's more...

How can we forget Alec Baldwin's infamous rant?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxVVhF3jQis


This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by crashfrog, posted 02-04-2011 10:35 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by crashfrog, posted 02-04-2011 10:53 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 163 of 185 (603544)
02-04-2011 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Coyote
02-04-2011 10:49 PM


Re: There are leftist nutcases too
Who did Alec Baldwin shoot?

Be specific, Coyote.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Coyote, posted 02-04-2011 10:49 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
onifre
Member
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 164 of 185 (603638)
02-06-2011 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by crashfrog
02-04-2011 10:09 PM


Re: Letters since 2007
And it's really not that big of a fucking deal to say "oh, you're right; I said something I didn't intend to say, made bad word choices, and miscommunicated my position."

Because I didn't make a bad word choice, or miscommunicate anything. If you notice, you're the only one hanging on this like newbie in a whore house. Let it go, brotha.

I used "promote" within it's accepted definition. You're claiming that "people" don't use it like that. Ok, fine, your opinion. I have heard people use it that way when refering to violence, so what happens now? Your way for you, my way for me. But in the spirit of good dialogue you should have, like everyone else has, read my entire argument to understand in what context I used the word.

Does promoting things work?

Come to an open mic in NY on a Tuesday and see if any of the promoting worked; when I'm performing to the 6 comics that were booked for the show like me, I can assure you, sometimes, promoting works for shit.

I think he's a currency nut who believes that the government is engaged in an effort to control the attitudes and actions of the American people through language. How, exactly, is that any different than Glenn Beck's program every single night?

Don't know, don't listen. I listen to his radio show at times, during the day if I'm driving - there is always good material. What is the point of this, though?

And please, spare me another tiresome dictionary game about whether or not Glenn Beck is a conservative.

Really? Me? After you've dragged on about one fucking word in what 30 plus posts? You got some balls, froggy.

And yet in that quote I do not state that the crosshairs led to the congresswoman being shot.

C'mon, you said almost that word for word.

CF writes:

...those crosshairs were on Rep. Giffords, that Giffords herself predicted that she would be subject to violence as a result, and that she was proven right.

Now who's the one being dishonest?

Or is it just a coincidence that Frances Fox Piven started getting death threats the day after Beck devoted an entire show to his goofy conspiracy theories about her?

Oh please, David Letterman gets death threats. It goes with being in the public eye and on TV. Beck gets plenty of death threats too, so do they all.

But Beck is an entertainer, so what's your point? You bashed Coyote for bringing up quotes from Bill Maher claiming Maher wasn't a politician. Well, neither is Beck...so who gives a shit what he says.

Conservatives are promoting violence against liberal targets. (And I do mean "promoting" as in "contributing to an increase in.") The proof of this is the dramatically increased violence and threats of violence against the very liberals conservatives are designating as targets - Giffords among them.

The liberals are being their usual faggy selves and being drama queens about the violence. Maybe they should learn to fight, because they're getting their ass kicked by the GOP, literally. They look like bitches out there. Whiny bitches at that.

Gifford was not targetted by a conservative, a right-winger or someone who follows that camp. She was shot by a looney kid with wacked out leftist ideologies.

Actually, this is one for my camp. Damnit.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by crashfrog, posted 02-04-2011 10:09 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by crashfrog, posted 02-06-2011 1:17 PM onifre has responded

    
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 165 of 185 (603640)
02-06-2011 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by onifre
02-06-2011 12:51 PM


Re: Letters since 2007
Because I didn't make a bad word choice, or miscommunicate anything.

Or, I guess you could just continue to pretend like you've never misspoken in your entire life. That's cool, too.

Whatever.

You're claiming that "people" don't use it like that.

No, I'm saying that when people say "promotes violence" like it's a bad thing, the "bad" part of that equation is the increased violence as a result, otherwise from what possible basis would they object? If "promoting something" had no effect on the rate or popularity of that something why would people even bother?

You got some balls, froggy.

Jesus, why so personal all the fucking time? Can't we just talk about this shit? Why does every little thing have to be such a huge fucking issue with you? Why do you have to be right about absolutely everything, even the stupid stuff?

Why do you so completely lose your shit when you talk to me? What's the deal, here?

Now who's the one being dishonest?

You, as usual. Where in the quoted material do I state that "the crosshairs led to Giffords being shot"?

Oh please, David Letterman gets death threats.

David Letterman always gets death threats because he has a national TV show. Does Frances Fox Piven have a national TV show? What is the name of the show and when does it air? Be specific.

It goes with being in the public eye and on TV.

Since when is Frances Fox Piven on TV? Be specific.

But Beck is an entertainer, so what's your point?

Since when is Beck an "entertainer"? Be specific.

You bashed Coyote for bringing up quotes from Bill Maher claiming Maher wasn't a politician.

No, I bashed Coyote for bringing up quotes from Bill Maher who isn't on the left, and who isn't someone whose speech has incited any violence against right-wing figures. Glenn Beck has, as I've proven. Sarah Palin has, as I've proven. This speech has an effect because it promotes violence. We've not yet seen the end of conservative murder speech and the result is that we've not yet seen the end of conservative murders and attempted murders - like the MLK attempted bombing that threatened the lives of so many liberals and minorities in Washington. The FBI recently concluded that the bomb was one of the most sophisticated they've seen in a long time. Of course, since a Muslim is not suspected to be the bomber the national media all but ignored it. It is, after all, now considered off-limits to try to link openly-armed Tea Partiers calling for insurrection to any actual instances of domestic terror.

The liberals are being their usual faggy selves and being drama queens about the violence. Maybe they should learn to fight, because they're getting their ass kicked by the GOP, literally.

Well, wait now. Do both sides do it, or not?

She was shot by a looney kid with wacked out leftist ideologies.

How is it "leftist" to be a white, male currency nut obsessed with political correctness? Sorry, Oni, that's a right-wing beef. Giffords was shot by a Randroid gun nut. This kid was about as "leftist" as Paul Weyrich.

Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by onifre, posted 02-06-2011 12:51 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by onifre, posted 02-06-2011 2:06 PM crashfrog has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
8910
11
1213Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014