Does that sound like any Tea Partier YOU KNOW? Hint: No.
What's to stop anybody from joining in the huge crowds of Tea Partiers and screaming obscenities at anybody? What's to stop the left from doing that to make the movement look bad?
Here's a quote from the article:
"On Saturday, Frank, however, said he was sorry Republican leaders didn't do more to disown the protesters. "
"Republican leaders?" WHY? Can he absorb the fact that not all Tea Partiers ARE Republicans, or even Conservatives? Some are Democrats who can't stand the big government take over. Some are ...........shhhh...........BLACK!! ("Oh, my GOD!! That means they just CAN'T be Republican, RIGHT?!!" wrong) And, there were many at the only Tea Party I ever went to here in L.A., by the way.
This kind of thing is WRONG, NOBODY should use the N word .... but let's not be Democrats like Frank, jumping in SO EAGERLY to condemn all Republicans. That is ridiculous. And, oh, please, let them find out James Carville put someone up to this. Please..........wouldn't that be rich? But, we'll never find out. The Left always wins....the media's so on their side there's barely an attempt at finding out the truth anymore. By the way, Frank just called Republicans "clowns"...now that is REALLY rich, huh? !!!
And, please, everybody, let's not get into a conversation about the N word being fai
Then, we have Rep Neugebauer from Texas apologizing for having yelled "Baby Killer" at Stupak when he capitulated. Neugebauer says he said "IT's a baby killer," but, nevertheless....apologies needed again by the Republicans. So....do you think there will be an apology to pro life groups who supported Stupak after they see THIS VIDEO that Beamish brought to our attention in a comment here at GeeeeeZ? (heard about THIS in the media? ya. sure...not)
z
90 comments:
Pass the popcorn. This is primo.
You've got about a dozen states that are taking it to the mat and bringing this to the supreme court.
More popcorn please.
When it's all done, health insurance costs will still eat us alive but why not be entertained while the ship goes down?
Yep, It was pretty upset this morning, but we will continue the fight. We real Americans don’t just lye down. We fought an honorable battle, and they fought a dishonest one. We weren’t the one’s who bribed, and twisted arms, and bought votes and made these filthy illegal promises . And met behind closed doors at night.
The Democrats didn't win anything, they bought it, broke arms to get and every underhanded trick they could find, and they will pay dearly for it. But, it ain't over yet! States are already filing lawsuits against the federal government. We've only just begun to fight this fight. Hang on America. It ain't over yet. The fat lady hasn't sung yet.
This is not the America I once knew and loved. I just don't recognize it anymore. I feel like a outsider in my own country.
Why wait for November? Why wait until Obama tries to force another socialist program down our throats? Now is not the time to shrivel away. Now is the time to stand up and fight back harder then ever before. Now is the time to take the fight to them. Will you join us on a campaign to DESTROY THE MOUTHPIECE OF OBAMA'S SOCIALIST AGENDA, THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA? WE ARE IN A FIGHT FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTRY, A FIGHT FOR OUR CHILDREN'S FUTURE. Join the fight here, http://sosssn.blogspot.com/
STUPAK spelled backwards is KAPUTS.
Heh heh heh!
By the way Michael Medved said this afternoon there was no real chance of ever rescinding this bill.
I NEVER DID like Medved.
~ FreeThinke
I am surprised that many people are so misinformed about the TEA Party members. It is a diverse group, not just one particular party. Good grief! We are people who are unified about one thing, NO MORE TAXES!! That just went out the door along with our freedom when that atrocity passed last night.
Radio talk show hostess and St. Louis Tea Party organizer Dana Loesch will be on O'Reilly tonight. From what I heard in her show in the car home from work tonight, she's prepared to kick ass. Might be worth tuning in.
The Cherokee part of me doesn't put much stock in Supreme Court rulings against Presidents. I appreciate the noble efforts on the part of states, but government "fighting for me" got us here.
Nobody votes their way out of socialism.
about 37 states, Ducky, Lefty AG's included.
Lots of popcorn, keep it coming.
No, health insurance costs didn't have to eat us alive but the left wouldn't listen to the right..ah, well.
Fire up the popcorn, it has to happen...this is America, we don't stand for being told we HAVE to do about ANYTHING.
FT..I"m not a huge medved fan, either, mostly for his stand on immigration.
But, he's right. Even if we get a majority in November and repeal, Obama has the veto pen :-(
Leticia, I always thought it was a bad idea for the Tea Partiers not to be organized in one national group, tho I kind of liked the concept. Now we have a kind of bedlam and need unity...And the biggest thing we need unity with is the Republican party.
Without that joining, we will NEVER WIN in November.
Beamish..you're right about socialism...
malcontent...me, too..I'm looking for America; it still LOOKS like America outside my windows but it's not.
VIOLENCE is probably our only real hope, and it will be very destructive of us, even it destroys the tyrants.
The French Revolution! The Civil War!
And I don't care what ANYONE says, we have NEVER recovered from the Civil War. Lincoln was our first DICTATOR. He opened the door for all the subsequent abuses of power, and made it easier to tyrannize.
"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion."
Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
~ FreeThinke
Z, while it was said racial slurs were hurled, there is no evidence at all that it happened. Not on video tape, nor reported by the police. They could find no evidence of it.
I just saw it was covered on O'Reilly. There is nothing to prove any racial slurs were said.
Pris
I just saw it, too, Pris, but, as O'Reilly says, something was clearly said....we don't know exactly what.
My point is that ANYTHING can be said and the left could have said it...
this thing's BLOWN out of proportion (and probably lied about) because the media's in SUCH cahoots with the leftwing...and the lies.
Stupak is a disgrace and he deserved to be called a baby killer. Z, there absolutely IS abortion funding in the healthcare bill. NO Presidential executive order can override a law written by Congress. It was a political trick designed to fool the masses who are not fully aware of how our government. A symbolic gesture designed to give cover to supposed anti-abortion Democrats. My congressman, Alan Mollohan, was one such Democrat. He betrayed his district and he will pay the price in November.
Bill O'Reilly has been trying to find video and audio tape of anyone calling the Congressional Black Caucus Congressmen the "N-word." With all the cell phones and cameras all over that crowd, it's hard to believe no one caught it on tape. Maybe it's a lie that didn't happen. You can't prove a negative.
IT MAY NOT HAVE EVEN BEEN SHOUTED.
Words...are no longer the answer. We've shouted, protested, marched and let it be known...LOUD & CLEAR...that the majority of AMERICANS WERE AGAINST this fiasco.
The bastards in the Capitol know that they have a near 80% DISAPPROVAL rating. We've spoken enough folks. And maybe it was pitchforks back in the old days....but by the time the last civil war began...it elevated to explosive materials and means.
It..is time for civil unrest and disobedience.
Forget the vote them out crap...it doesn't work any more as cute as you might think it is. As...Politically correct you might think it is. Our votes have been ignored, nullified, disregarded and tossed into the garbage can of political lies and expediency. We need a pogrom...a purge...a cleansing of the stench and the rotten ruling royalty's corpses in DC.
We should ALL know by now that Socrates was spot on when he said this FOUR-HUNDRED YEARS before CHRIST:
"The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions."
Socrates (470-399 B. C. )
Unfortunately, that works BOTH ways.
I admit I vacillate between advocating violent overthrow of the tyrants, and trying to find ways to overthrow them by other means. After all in THIS country they got where they are today by SUING their way to the top.
Couldn't we turn the tables and sue THEM into extinction?
The trouble with "US" is that "WE" just cannot begin to match "THEM" in guile, craft, ruthlessness and sheer VICIOUSNESS.
That's because "THEY" fought their way up from the BOTTOM, and "WE" have been too used for too long to being on TOP. Because "WE" have been spoiled by having "OUR" way for so long, we became COMPLACENT, WEAK and DECADENT, and therefore, vulnerable.
Working "OUR" way back up from the serfdom into which we are now falling back will be a LONG ARDUOUS process. It may take centuries to REGAIN what have been losing for the past hundred years.
Look up Alexander Tyler's view of the history of societies. It's depressing, but VERY persuasive.
What it all bpoils down to is this>
"The lesson we learn from history is that we learn NOTHING from history."
And as Santayana said:
"He who cannot remember the past is condemned to repeat it."
~ FreeThinke
This country should split in half. Duckyland and the Free States of America.
FT,
Violence as a last resort.
Passive resistance. Civil disobedience. Be the guy willing to test the government's intent to fine and jail people who refuse to purchase health insurance for themselves. Be the guy having his home sieged by law enforcement on national TV for refusal to buy health insurance. Be the guy in jail having a hunger strike for being placed there for not buying health insurance.
Remember the rule of thirds. 1/3rd of the people oppose you. 1/3rd of the people support you. 1/3rd of the people are playing X-Box and don't give a shit either way.
Some of that last third is going to wake up to increased taxation, rationed health care, and news of people being jailed for not buying health insurance.
Stay alive to paint the picture for them. There's no way the government can make jailing people for not buying insurance look good.
Since ALycee Hastings , and other such stellar members of congress have said we don't need any rules, but could make them up as needed, then by gosh, we CAN and WILL repeal this thing that got dropped off on us.
YES WE CAN.
And Yes Obama Baby can veto, but, if you get the right numbers, THAT can be overcome, too, if I remember Civics correctly.
As for pressing for immigration skullduggery..I say, ok, just keep pushing boys and girls.
Nothing worse than making people feel like there is nothing left to lose.
BE careful Lefties, PRIDE does go before a fall.
And ladies and gentlemen, we shall be waiting for that fall.
I have not given up on this country , no sir.
This is just one of those bad times that comes along.
As for that popcorn, better make sure there is no fattening butter on that stuff, Madame Pelosi and Co, might just outlaw that stuff.
WVDOTTR
"There's no way the government can make jailing people for not buying insurance look good."
Beamish, that is FOR SURE.
Fair Witness, we just can't know...but, if it DID happen, I'd be surprised if it wasn't a lefty plant. Although I know there are some nutty conservatives, trust me...
FT...you ARE on a MISSION! WOW!
Our kids can't remember America's past because they've not been exposed to it..oh, except that Columbus was a rapist, Washington loved slaves (!), Jefferson abused Black women (yes, I"m kidding...but that's what they are learning..) OH, and we ALL LOVED slavery and the Dems freed the slaves! YOu can't make this stuff UP, but some of our lefty teachers sure are.
We're condemned to repeat because our kids don't know it...just could happen, couldn't it...revolutionary war?
I hope not
Secession...constitutional lawsuits...state by state. Sure the bastard Holder into chains.
by the way..off topic, did you get a post card saying NOT TO FORGET TO FILL OUT THE CENSUS FORM?
So, I got one warning that it's COMING$$$, then the actual form $$$ and now a post card saying "you should have rec'd it by now...it's important you respond$$$
is THIS how they're going to run health care?$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
By the way, on this post card, it says "If you have already provided your census information, please accept our sincere thanks. There is no need to provide your answers again."
WHAT? AGAIN? If we turned in the form already, how WOULD we provide MORE answers AGAIN?
geeeeeZ
Z, you sure have a running dialog going here. It took me about 20 minutes to read all the posts. I have to admit I agree with them. I'm a little concerned with the insurrection by the people for the people though.
Pops
Conservative Outrage
The only "funny" thing that can happen now is if Senate parliamentarians determine the House reconciliation bill affects Social Security in any way, which kills the reconciliation right there.
Which means the Senate bill alone, sans any House input whatsover, goes to Obama to sign.
Nancy Pelosi and her oversized gavel will be triumphantly celebrating the passage of a bill no one in the House of Representatives had a hand in writing. They will have walked off a cliff for nothing.
A Republican House next year can refuse to fund its mandate.
There are some bright sides to find, but still the nasty taste of undoing that which should have never been done in the first place is going to linger.
Z: Tea Partiers apparently shouted the N word at some Black politicians Saturday.
Does that sound like any Tea Partier YOU KNOW? Hint: No.
If you announce that you don't know any such people, then there are none, eh? Tea partiers, who are described as angry folks convinced their freedom is under attack from the government, and describe themselves as that, wave some protest signs at their little tea parties that are far out.
The fact that I do not KNOW any American who would murder someone in cold blood is not logical proof that there are no murderers in American society.
What's to stop anybody from joining in the huge crowds of Tea Partiers and screaming obscenities at anybody? What's to stop the left from doing that to make the movement look bad?
What's to stop the right from spitting on members of the black congressional caucus, as they cross the street to vote in favor of health care reform, and hurling racial epithets at them, so that rightwing extremists can charge the left all across the blogosphere with inexcusable conduct impersonating the rightwing extremists? The opportunities here for nested conspiracy theories are fantastically rich. But,obviously, many tea partiers think the black congressmen didn't get as bad treatment as they deserve.
Freedom, in the popular mind, is unbuckling your seatbelt. You have nothing to lose but your life.
Fauxthinker: STUPAK spelled backwards is KAPUTS.
Fact: KAPUT is an adjective; it doesn't take a plural form, unless concern about English grammar is kaput.
Heh heh heh!
By the way Michael Medved said this afternoon there was no real chance of ever rescinding this bill.
I NEVER DID like Medved.
Medved is Devdem backwards. That is Devious Dem. Get it?
ABNPOPPA..welcome to GeeeeeZ..I like your blog, too. Thanks for coming by..we get some very good stuff going around here most every day.
We've got to fight...it's a good and worthwhile fight!
I'm a tad worried about the insurrection stuff, too..and hope it never comes to that.
But, you know, look at the big stink the media made on the N word (which NOBODY has on tape on ANY cell phone, etc., which is a little suspect as eye witnesses are saying it never happened...something must have been said, though....)..Anyway, remember the union people kicking and beating on that Black Tea Partier 9 months back or so? The media didn't cover it.
But, let any nuts at a Conservative gathering (though there are Dems and Indies at the Tea Party events, too)say anything disparaging and "they're ALL RACISTS"
typical media....no surprise there
If an event that lasted only a second or two was not captured on a "cell phone, etc.", it did not occur in the view of rightwing folks, if the event may reflect poorly on them. The taunting and insulting of a counter-demonstrator at a tea party who had Parkinson's disease was caught on cell phone and played on TV. It is undeniable that tea partiers are in an ugly angry mood. Especially, when there are some who openly declare "It..is time for civil unrest and disobedience ", and talk of pogroms and secession and violence.
What a wretched nation we present to the world when persistent racial hatred carries over from the segregation era, resurfacing as lack of basic respect for black congressmen who vote for health care reform.
The 30 or so House members of the Congressional Black Caucus marched through a gauntlet of cellphone cameras and recording devices and nobody captured any racial epithets being hurled.
Ockham's razor says no racial epithets were hurled at black Congressmen, hence none were cuaght on record.
Duck is correct:
When it's all done, health insurance costs will still eat us alive
How about some radical ideas?
Enact tort reform.
Greatly limit the possibility of medical bankruptcy (which easily occurs in spite of one's having health insurance).
Eliminate employer-based insurance, including that for all government employees. Only the military would be eligible for government coverage.
Then watch the health insurance companies start offering competitive premiums.
I'm in a start-over mood!
When does the shooting start?
Ducky, folks are really pissed off right now, but nobody is going to start shooting. We don't need to resort to violence to defeat the Obama-Pelosi-Reid regime. We also won't descend into racial hatred or discrimination. Whether Progressives acknowledge it or not, there are millions of Americans of color who DON'T support the socialist agenda. 80% of all Americans opposed the healthcare bill. That's 240 million citizens against the bill versus only 60 million who support it. This battle is about freedom and individualism. Race has no part in it.
Being the Marxist-Leninist snakes that they are, why wouldn't they insert racial epithets into the controversy? The chances of the political affiliation of the alleged racial slur being some left wing wacko are as likely as it being somebody from the right, IMO.
They are rightly concerned about the Tea Party movement—it shows a large segment of the country disapproves of the actions of the administration. They will do anything to marginalize and denigrate those protesting the actions of the Obama administration and nothing is above them including pretending to be part of the movement in order to make the right appear to be racist. Seems that is exactly what is being said about Beck now that his show attracts more viewers than the whole evening lineup at MSNBC.
Waylon
Waylon, the PR people in the WH are very good and they're the ones starting this huge YOU WILL LIKE THIS HEALTH CARE BILL push on TV and print...
They're also the ones behind ridiculing Beck as much as they can.
Happily, I think enough people are waking up to that...the Dems showed their nasty little hand during this debate. Obama should never have promised CSPAN coverage because it exposed their scheming and belittling just as well as I'm sure he'd hoped it wouldn't.
When does the shooting start?
So far it's been limited to your fellow socialists shooting up the Holocaust Museum, Ducky.
beamish: The 30 or so House members of the Congressional Black Caucus marched through a gauntlet of cellphone cameras and recording devices and nobody captured any racial epithets being hurled. Ockham's razor says no racial epithets were hurled at black Congressmen, hence none were cuaght on record.
Congressional black caucus members crossing the street to the Capitol is not of itself a newsworthy event. No one has any knowledge of how many people witnessing it possessed cell phones. William of Ockham would no doubt point out that chances for someone, especially a nonprofessional, capturing a momentary incident of hatred or disrespect are minuscule. After all, when, during a televised session of the House of Representatives, Neugebauer breached decorum to insult Rep. Bart Stupak while he was speaking, there was no camera that had a visual of the act.
beamish: So far it's been limited to your fellow socialists shooting up the Holocaust Museum, Ducky.
It is manifestly clear that rightwingers have an acute psychological need to blame all such incidents on the left, including the insulting of black and homosexual members of Congress.
Neugebauer is criticised for breaching decorum? After the way our President has behaved over the last year? Unbelievable. Neugebauer may have been out of line, but at least HE was honest.
It is manifestly clear that rightwingers have an acute psychological need to blame all such incidents on the left, including the insulting of black and homosexual members of Congress.
Except that there is live video of the entire procession of said black congressmen entering the House of Representatives through large groups of people protesting outside as well as large groups of those in support of the health care bill, many with cameras, and not one of them captured any evidence of racial epithets hurled at black congressmen as they passed. There is no evidence to support the occurance of an event that didn't happened.
On the other hand, the Holocaust Museum shooter was an avowed socialist, which puts him on the left.
Jen: Neugebauer is criticised for breaching decorum? After the way our President has behaved over the last year? Unbelievable. Neugebauer may have been out of line, but at least HE was honest
The presiding officer during the session in which Neugebauer interrupted Stupak's speech banged his gavel and said the conduct was out of order. Fox identified it as a breach of decorum, which means the same thing.
It is not unbelievable that it would be a breach of decorum to interrupt a recognized speaker with a rude comment. Neugebauer, if not many rightwingers, had the honesty to recognize as much and apologize to Stupak.
beamish: Except that there is live video of the entire procession of said black congressmen entering the House of Representatives through large groups of people protesting outside as well as large groups of those in support of the health care bill, many with cameras, and not one of them captured any evidence of racial epithets hurled at black congressmen as they passed. There is no evidence to support the occurance of an event that didn't happened.
The presence of cell-phone recordings is a newly invented standard for the legitimacy of an event. Whether it occurred crossing the street or on their entrance into the House, the scene was so chaotic and unruly that few people would be positioned to witness such a momentary event. The evidence that racial epithets were hurled is the testimony of John Lewis and other black congressional members.Rightwingers, cognizant of how such conduct can destroy a political movement, have to brand these congressmen liars if they are to continue zealously insisting no evidence exists.
On the other hand, the Holocaust Museum shooter was an avowed socialist, which puts him on the left.
There are no cell-phone pieces of evidence that confirm that spin. James Von Brunn, the Holocaust Museum shooter, had a racist Web site and wrote a book titled "Kill the Best Gentiles," alleging a Jewish conspiracy "to destroy the white gene pool." He also claimed the Holocaust was a hoax. He also believed Obama was born in Kenya.
"Prosecutors said that von Brunn, an admitted white supremacist who lived most recently in Annapolis, had been planning the assault for months and that he hoped 'to send a message to the Jewish community' that the Holocaust was a hoax. 'He wanted to be a martyr for his cause,' a prosecutor said in court."
PsiBond,
So, the black congressmen heard racial epithets hurled at them over the the din of a "noisy and chaotic scene" where cameras and other recording devices wielded by people in that "noisy and chaotic scene" that recorded their passage through them did not, and no one in that crowd reports hearing them? You've got two possibilities:
1.) The black congressmen are lying, and never heard a racial epithet from the crowd of people filming their procession into the House of Representatives
2.) There's been a massive conspiracy by both Tea Party movement supporters and ObamaKare supporters working diligently together in a bipartisan fashion to supress and destroy all recorded evidence of what had to be louder than the crowd racial epithets and prevent witnesses from coming forward to corroborate the black congressmen's account
Number one is the correct answer. There's nothing to corroborate the black congressmen's charges of racism because they are false.
Leftists, as representatives of the side of the political spectrum composed entirely of people that are incapable of rational thought, jumped the shark with this tiresome "only racists oppose Obama's agenda" meme over a year ago.
Given the left's innate zeal for imbecility, it would be insensitive of me to ask them to take a more intellectual approach. But can't they, can't you, find a new way to be stupid?
As for your fellow leftist that shot up the Holocaust Museum, Von Brunn calls himself a socialist and advocates socialism in his writings. You'll have to crawl out of his bed by yourself.
Fearing and respecting the idea that it is wrong to use "racial epithets" and, therefore, their expression should be forbidden, is falling into the hands of tyrants.
Political Correctness is just another form of TOTALITARIANISM.
Jefferson said,
"I am unalterably opposed to every form of tyranny over the mind of Man."
And my mother said,
"Sticks and stone may break my bones, but NAMES will never harm me."
Being free means retaining the right to be distasteful and patently offensive.
And this precisely why stinking pieces of shit like Ducky and Psi bond are not BANNED here at geeeeZ, and why they and their kind are not routinely rounded up and HANGED, SHOT DEAD or BEHEADED. It's also why loud-mouthed rabbling rousing nîggers are allowed to do their worst and even make their way to the White House.
NO ONE should be held immune to insults and criticism. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."
Name-calling is as American as cherry pie.
Defend to the the death the right to be OBNOXIOUS.
Then let those who are suffer the consequences. ;-)
~ FreeThinke
FreeThinke,
Being free means retaining the right to be distasteful and patently offensive.
And this precisely why stinking pieces of shit like Ducky and Psi bond are not BANNED here at geeeeZ, and why they and their kind are not routinely rounded up and HANGED, SHOT DEAD or BEHEADED.
While I would never condone unjustifiable violence upon leftists, as homosexuality and abortion keeps their numbers manageably small anyway, I do have to recognize removing leftists from a room tends to exponentially increase the median IQ of that room.
psi bond: The presiding officer during the session in which Neugebauer interrupted Stupak's speech banged his gavel and said the conduct was out of order. Fox identified it as a breach of decorum, which means the same thing.
It is not unbelievable that it would be a breach of decorum to interrupt a recognized speaker with a rude comment. Neugebauer, if not many rightwingers, had the honesty to recognize as much and apologize to Stupak.
----------
I am completely aware of the events that unfolded on that day. I am also aware that unfortunately, nobody has had a gavel in hand to bang on the MANY occasions that our President has breached decorum.
When I said that Stupak was being honest, I meant he was being honest in saying "baby killer", which is true of our new health care bill. Although a breach of decorum is never attractive, if it comes with honesty it may serve a purpose, which is more than I can say for Obama's poor behaviour.
AAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!
beamish, how many times has a soldier shot on the battlefield been photographed at the moment the bullet entered the body? Apparently only once: in Robert Capa’s justly famous photograph taken during the Spanish Civil War. This is an event that, by nature, cannot be anticipated and, as such, is similar to the recent widely-reported incidents involving the use of racial epithets and spitting.
The dominant element in the crowd were, it seems, tea partiers and Republicans. These folks can be expected to be canny enough to avoid making a record of disgraceful and hurtful conduct by their ideological colleagues, or to destroy any such records in their possession. If there were among this unruly crowd any supporters of the health care reform bill, they would probably be too shocked too react so as to make a record. These are plausible explanations based on human nature. There is no need for the double conspiracy theory necessary for making sense in the second of the only two possibilities that you are able to conceive of.
The first of the two possibilities that you recognize is one that involves impugning the honesty of respected black congressmen. But you cannot stop there. You must also impugn the honesty of the two dozen or so congressmen who say they received death threats or drawings of a noose.
And you must impugn the honesty of Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, who was spat on while walking to the Capitol to vote, which led Capitol Police to escort him and other black caucus members inside the building out of concern for their safety. The spitter was arrested, but the congressman declined to press charges. There is no evidence that this incident was made up. And there is no convincing evidence that all these congressmen are lying. On the other hand, there is a body of evidence that, in the last several days, tea partiers and Republicans have grown unusually angry and vituperative, for which your post, beamish, and those of others here (both the articulate and inarticulate ones) are unwitting, self-incriminating examples
Von Brunn calls himself a socialist and advocates socialism in his writings.
He’s dead. Can you quote any writings in which he specifically does what you claim? He said he was opposed to “international Jewish Communism”.
The evidence is that he devoted his political activity to racist causes (he was a white supremacist who believed that Hitler did not kill enough Jews), not to building socialism (he had disdain for the government), or to supporting supposedly socialist Obama (von Brunn was a “birther“). His political ideology was an illiberal one that excludes people and denies their rights on the basis of their race. The relentless zeal with which you try to place him on the left is symptomatic of the lack of a fair and balanced view.
Jen: I am completely aware of the events that unfolded on that day. I am also aware that unfortunately, nobody has had a gavel in hand to bang on the MANY occasions that our President has breached decorum.
Your notion of decorum differs from that prescribed by House procedural rules for civil, dignified meetings.
Apparently, if the President does something that displeases you or other rightwingers, it is conveniently denounced as a breach of decorum, even if there are no procedural rules that apply.
When I said that Stupak [?] was being honest, I meant he was being honest in saying "baby killer", which is true of our new health care bill. Although a breach of decorum is never attractive, if it comes with honesty it may serve a purpose, which is more than I can say for Obama's poor behaviour.
Actually, Neugebauer’s abusive, emotional rhetoric is not an honest use of words. Terminating the development of a fetus before viability, pursuant to the impregnated woman’s decision, is not baby killing under the law. Baby killing, which is also known as infanticide, is illegal in America and is prosecuted severely when discovered. If Neugebauer’s conduct was honest, then he had nothing to apologize for. But, being honest, Neugebauer did apologize.
Clearly, breaches of decorum cannot be permitted if order is to be maintained in a meeting. There is no impartial evidence that Obama has breached the House’s procedural rules, nor any other rules by which he is constitutionally bound. To declare he did so, as extreme partisans are wont to do, is simply not an honest use of the term ‘breach of decorum’.
Clearly, breaches of decorum cannot be permitted if order is to be maintained in a meeting. There is no impartial evidence that Obama has breached the House’s procedural rules, nor any other rules by which he is constitutionally bound. To declare he did so, as extreme partisans are wont to do, is simply not an honest use of the term ‘breach of decorum’.
----------
Good points, psi bond. However, is it not instinctive to say that our President is acting 'un-presidential' when he screams like a maniac to whip a crowd into a frenzy, the way he did prior to the vote on the bill?
You're great at pointing out technicalities. I can appreciate that. I'm great at seeing people for what they are...or at least for what they present to the world. Our President presents a disrespectful, arrogant, deceitful man who has no need to follow precendent or abide by an unspoken set of social rules in order to maintain the appearance of dignity. He is all about personality and emotion. It's quite simple, really.
I take comfort that the more thoughtful, honest Democrats have admitted being embarrassed by his behavior. I try to be reasonable, and I find that admission to be reassuring.
Terminating the development of a fetus before viability, pursuant to the impregnated woman’s decision, is not baby killing under the law.
------------
No need to argue 'baby' vs. 'fetus'. I won't go there. Is there killing involved? I say yes. You'll say no.
Nothing new here.
If Neugebauer’s conduct was honest, then he had nothing to apologize for. But, being honest, Neugebauer did apologize.
------------
Neugebauer apologized because that's what Republicans do. They are held to a different standard than Democrats. Or should I say conservatives as opposed to liberals.
Of COURSE all tea partygoers are racists. If COURSE they're bigots. Of COURSE they're filled with hated. Of COURSE their main purpose is to incite the nation to violence towards blacks, Jews, Hispanics, and anyone who doesn't think and believe in lockstep with them.
The left has said so, therefore it MUST be true. Anyone who disagrees with a leftist on the slightest point is NAZI, a dangerous lunatic, and an all around worthless piece of crap.
I can't BELIEVE you didn';t KNOW that.
geeeeZ!
~ FreeThinke aka The Pompous Snot
And let me again ape the great Piet Hein:
The Marxicrats may
Be as great as they say,
But they wouldn't be missed
If they didn't exist.
So, yes, Beamish, you're right. The bathroom smells so much nicer after the toilet's been flushed.
~ FreeThinke aka The Pompous Snot
Jen: Good points, psi bond. However, is it not instinctive to say that our President is acting 'un-presidential' when he screams like a maniac to whip a crowd into a frenzy, the way he did prior to the vote on the bill?
What you wish to characterize as screaming to whip a crowd into a frenzy is nothing unusual for politicians who wish to inspire an audience with their vision of things. Such a speaking style has been used since time immemorial. Even Republicans use such high-pitched tones in speeches. In fact, John Boehner used them in his final speech in the House before the vote on the health care reform bill “Hell no, you can‘t!”, Boehner shouted repeatedly at full volume in the House. Since he was the recognized speaker, that was not out of order.
You're great at pointing out technicalities. I can appreciate that. I'm great at seeing people for what they are...or at least for what they present to the world. Our President presents a disrespectful, arrogant, deceitful man who has no need to follow precendent or abide by an unspoken set of social rules in order to maintain the appearance of dignity. He is all about personality and emotion. It's quite simple, really.
It is just that I am in support of the proper use of words: That is no technicality. It is common sense that communication becomes possible when people agree on the meaning of words. A breach of decorum is not simply anything a political opponent wants to criticize or denounce a politician for.
“Disrespectful, arrogant, deceitful.” What you say about Obama can just as well be said about many Republican office holders, and it has. Those sorts of comments are all about emotional partisan politics. It’s that simple.
Society’s rules for speaking in public are not the same as those for speaking in private. And the House’s rules for speaking in chamber are another matter again.
I take comfort that the more thoughtful, honest Democrats have admitted being embarrassed by his behavior. I try to be reasonable, and I find that admission to be reassuring.
I doubt it is reasonable to describe as “more thoughtful, honest Democrats” those whom you believe see Obama’s personal behavior in the same partisan terms as you do.
psi bond: Terminating the development of a fetus before viability, pursuant to the impregnated woman’s decision, is not baby killing under the law.
------------
Jen: No need to argue 'baby' vs. 'fetus'. I won't go there. Is there killing involved? I say yes. You'll say no.
Nothing new here.
Using ‘baby’ when referring to a ‘fetus’ is to dishonestly color and cloud the issue.
Is a woman’s body her own? I say yes. Anti-abortionists say no. Does the government have a right to intrude on decisions that a woman makes concerning her own body? I say no. Anti-abortionists say yes.
psi bond: If Neugebauer’s conduct was honest, then he had nothing to apologize for. But, being honest, Neugebauer did apologize.
------------
Jen: Neugebauer apologized because that's what Republicans do. They are held to a different standard than Democrats. Or should I say conservatives as opposed to liberals.
To be fair, you should admit it is not true that Democrats or liberals never apologize: Rules of decorum in the House are the same for all.
Neugebauer apologized because he understood that he had done something he needed to apologize for.
What you wish to characterize as screaming to whip a crowd into a frenzy is nothing unusual for politicians who wish to inspire an audience with their vision of things.
----------
When else in recent history have you seen a President act so hysterical? Name a Republican. I'll say it was inappropriate. I don't care who does it, it's un-presidential. I'm not saying it's written in the books that he shouldn't behave that way. I'm saying that he's destroying the dignity of the position for which he was elected.
He's setting new precedent. He's lowering the bar.
But beyond his behavior, I'm more concerned with the ease and charm with which he tells lie after lie after lie.....
Using ‘baby’ when referring to a ‘fetus’ is to dishonestly color and cloud the issue.
-------
I could just as easily say that you're dishonestly clouding the issue by calling my unborn baby a fetus.
Your elitist attitude is appaling.
And before you copy and paste the medical definition of fetus for me, let me assure you that I've been well-informed already.
Let me ask you this: assume a woman delivers a baby, hears the baby cry (which indicates breathing independently), prior to the cord being cut. The baby dies.
Is that baby documented as a fetal death, or infant death at birth?
Please don't get on your pro-choice high horse with me. I know all about what is my body versus what is my baby's body.
I don't need you or anyone like you to masquerade in the name of protecting MY RIGHTS on this issue.
You are dealing with a woman who is acutely aware of the fragility and sacredness of life, both mother and child. Tread lightly.
It is common sense that communication becomes possible when people agree on the meaning of words.
------
We agree on this, but I will stand my ground when I do disagree. I won't be bullied.
I doubt it is reasonable to describe as “more thoughtful, honest Democrats” those whom you believe see Obama’s personal behavior in the same partisan terms as you do.
----------
It's perfectly reasonable.
First, because I wasn't discussing his personal behavior. I was talking about his behavior in public, which is very much my concern, as he is basically my employee.
Second, I find it reassuring that although we differ on politics, my opponents are willing to make an admission of dismay at the behavior of their leader. It's difficult to admit that you do not approve of your party's leader.
Sometimes common sense needs to trump party loyalty...but then we'd all be Conservatives!
;-)
What you wish to characterize as screaming to whip a crowd into a frenzy is nothing unusual for politicians who wish to inspire an audience with their vision of things.
----------
Jen: When else in recent history have you seen a President act so hysterical? Name a Republican. I'll say it was inappropriate. I don't care who does it, it's un-presidential. I'm not saying it's written in the books that he shouldn't behave that way. I'm saying that he's destroying the dignity of the position for which he was elected.
He's setting new precedent. He's lowering the bar.
But beyond his behavior, I'm more concerned with the ease and charm with which he tells lie after lie after lie..…
That he acts “so hysterical” is a judgment of Obama that I don’t share. It seems you see his personal conduct differently than I do. It’s that simple.
The term ‘lies’ has lost its true meaning in political discourse, as a result of its excessive misuse.
None of this has anything to do with what Neugebauer did. You are disingenuously changing the subject.
Using ‘baby’ when referring to a ‘fetus’ is to dishonestly color and cloud the issue.
-------
Jen: I could just as easily say that you're dishonestly clouding the issue by calling my unborn baby a fetus.
Your elitist attitude is appaling.
It clouds the issue to call a fetus a baby because ‘baby’ has an abundance of emotional overtones that the correct term ‘fetus’ does not. It is an elitist attitude to think words mean exactly what you wish them to mean.
Please don't get on your pro-choice high horse with me. I know all about what is my body versus what is my baby's body …..Tread lightly.
Jen, You cannot bully me with the high-handed attitude that you are Woman.
You are not all women. The fact is: A large number of women do not want the government telling them what they must do with their bodies.
It is common sense that communication becomes possible when people agree on the meaning of words.
------
We agree on this, but I will stand my ground when I do disagree. I won't be bullied
I have no intention of bullying anyone. I just think we should agree on the meanings of the words we use in order for us to talk about the same thing.
I doubt it is reasonable to describe as “more thoughtful, honest Democrats” those whom you believe see Obama’s personal behavior in the same partisan terms as you do.
----------
Jen: It's perfectly reasonable.
First, because I wasn't discussing his personal behavior. I was talking about his behavior in public, which is very much my concern, as he is basically my employee.
In this case, your disagreement is with the understanding of the word ‘personal’. Reasonable folks understand that in this context ‘personal’ does not mean ‘private’. On the contrary, it means ‘specific to a particular individual’.
“Disrespectful, arrogant, deceitful.” These are personal characteristics that a particular individual may be alleged to exhibit.
Second, I find it reassuring that although we differ on politics, my opponents are willing to make an admission of dismay at the behavior of their leader. It's difficult to admit that you do not approve of your party's leader.
Whatever your liberal friends tell you, freely or after coaxing, about the man’s personal qualities, it is reassuring that he still has a large amount of support for his policies.
That he acts “so hysterical” is a judgment of Obama that I don’t share. It seems you see his personal conduct differently than I do. It’s that simple.
-----------
Okay. I like simple. I don't mind if we disagree. :-)
The term ‘lies’ has lost its true meaning in political discourse, as a result of its excessive misuse.-------------
It has been misused, but that doesn't change the meaning of the word. A lie is an untruth. The man has told lies to the American public. I am speaking of his recent speech in Ohio about the HC bill in which he took several specific aspects of the bill out of context (which look very attractive) in order to make the bill more appealing to the crowd. Now, you'll say that he wasn't telling lies because technically what he said was true. I'll give you that. But I say that he was being misleading by not explaining the aspects of the bill in context. How is it not a lie to say this bill is going to save us billions of dollars...unless he means that we'll not be spending those billions on Medicaid/Medicare, rather on the new bill, plus some. It's a lie when told in context.
PsiBond,
The Robert Capa "Falling Soldier" photograph from the Spanish Civil War you refered to is widely known now to have been faked. Ironically, so is your argument that follows from it.
Recorded footage of the black Congressmen entering the House of Representatives is continuous video and audio. If anyone yelled an expletive or racial epithet audible over the crowd noise it would have been recorded. It was not. The reason it was not recorded is because it did not happen.
Question the honesty of a partisan hack politician? Who me? Never!
Come on, PsiBond. As a leftist I don't expect you to be able to post anything intelligent, but don't start challenging Ducky for the Most Imbecilic Poster trophy. He's earned it, and he'll go out his way to prove you're smarter than him to keep it.
As for the curiousity of congressmen allegedly recieving threatening voice mails and faxes, I fail to see how that equates to "right wing violence" as if it resembled anything like lefty Bill Ayers bombing sprees, the left-wing window smashing WTO riots in Seattle back in 1999, or even left-wing labor activist Adolf Hitler's movement to exterminate Jews. It doesn't even rise to progressive leftist President Woodrow Wilson's revival of the Ku Klux Klan and advocacy of lynching.
And as to the anonymity of it all those allegedly violent voice mails and faxes, how do you blame it on right-wingers, except for the distinguishing marks that they didn't cause property damage or loss of life? These voice mails and faxes are anonymous. What makes them right-wing, and not a false flag operation from leftists? Recall that left-wing national socialists under Hitler burned the Reichstag and blamed their rival left-wing international socialists for it. Recall than in 2008 in Denver Colorado, a Democrat campaign HQ was trashed by a Democrat operative trying to pin the "attack" on Republicans. Leftists fake things all the time.
There's no clear reason to suggest right-wingers are involved in these alleged "attacks" on Democrats except for the telling hallmark that Democrats are still alive to talk about them.
It clouds the issue to call a fetus a baby because ‘baby’ has an abundance of emotional overtones that the correct term ‘fetus’ does not. It is an elitist attitude to think words mean exactly what you wish them to mean.
-----------
We certainly wouldn't want to get emotional when it comes to the miraculous even of creating and birthing LIFE, now would we? ;-)
I carried my babies within me, and that time was sacred. They were not sterile, non-human organisms prior to birth, and emotional / feeling / deserving people minutes after the cord was cut. It was a continuum of humanity.
Speaking of the cord, you never answered my question.
--------------------
Jen, You cannot bully me with the high-handed attitude that you are Woman.
You are not all women. The fact is: A large number of women do not want the government telling them what they must do with their bodies.
--------
I didn't mean to bully you with anything. I have personal experience with the loss of a child at birth, so I am quite passionate about this subject. I realize that I'm not all women, far from it. I've become much more respectful of life and it's fragility since my loss and I find it hard to understand how people so easily discard of human life.
However, I also have more empathy towards suffering and I know that I've not walked in anyone's shoes but my own.
I still say that the helpless must be protected.
Whatever your liberal friends tell you, freely or after coaxing, about the man’s personal qualities, it is reassuring that he still has a large amount of support for his policies.
------------
Coaxing? Hahahaha. That made me laugh. I don't coax them. Sometimes people feel the need to confess their mistakes out of a sense of guilt for the damage it has done the country.
You find it reassuring that he has a large amount of support?
Have you seen his approval ratings lately? How about Congress? Do you find that reassuring?
I do. ;-)
psi bond, I've enjoyed the back and forth with you. You've helped me to choose my words more carefully. You're fun to interact with.
Have a wonderful Passover!
That he acts “so hysterical” is a judgment of Obama that I don’t share. It seems you see his personal conduct differently than I do. It’s that simple.
-----------
Okay. I like simple. I don't mind if we disagree. :-)
The problem arises when one acts as if his impression of the man is the same as fact.
The term ‘lies’ has lost its true meaning in political discourse, as a result of its excessive misuse.-------------
It has been misused, but that doesn't change the meaning of the word. A lie is an untruth.
It’s not that simple. A lie is not really the same thing as an untruth. A lie occurs when a person offers something as true that he knows is untrue.
The man has told lies to the American public. I am speaking of his recent speech in Ohio about the HC bill in which he took several specific aspects of the bill out of context (which look very attractive) in order to make the bill more appealing to the crowd. Now, you'll say that he wasn't telling lies because technically what he said was true. I'll give you that. But I say that he was being misleading by not explaining the aspects of the bill in context. How is it not a lie to say this bill is going to save us billions of dollars...unless he means that we'll not be spending those billions on Medicaid/Medicare, rather on the new bill, plus some. It's a lie when told in context.
Perhaps he accepts what the Congressional Budget Office told him about costs and savings. Unless he has certain knowledge, at the time it is said, that what he said is untrue, it is not a lie. A lie does not consist of merely being mistaken on the facts as he spoke, or as a result of what was subsequently learned about the matter. Frequently, when a person calls a political opponent a liar, the former may be lying or exaggerating for his own advantage.
Doubtless, every politician in America has been branded a liar by someone somewhere at some time. Given the enormous abuse of the word in political discourse, it has little or no sting.
It clouds the issue to call a fetus a baby because ‘baby’ has an abundance of emotional overtones that the correct term ‘fetus’ does not. It is an elitist attitude to think words mean exactly what you wish them to mean.
-----------
Jen: We certainly wouldn't want to get emotional when it comes to the miraculous even of creating and birthing LIFE, now would we? ;-)
Right on. We wouldn’t want to get emotional when soberly considering women’s rights in society, and the need to protect them from government intrusion.
I carried my babies within me, and that time was sacred. They were not sterile, non-human organisms prior to birth, and emotional / feeling / deserving people minutes after the cord was cut. It was a continuum of humanity.
Amen. But I will not be bullied by your penchant for sanctimonious digression. The continuum of humanity should embrace the right of women to choose.
Speaking of the cord, you never answered my question.
Your question does not apply to what I was discussing, a fetus before viability.
--------------------
Jen, You cannot bully me with the high-handed attitude that you are Woman.
You are not all women. The fact is: A large number of women do not want the government telling them what they must do with their bodies.
--------
I didn't mean to bully you with anything.
It may not be your intention, but it is how your words came across to me. To order anyone to tread lightly is very presumptuous.
I have personal experience with the loss of a child at birth, so I am quite passionate about this subject. I realize that I'm not all women, far from it. I've become much more respectful of life and it's fragility since my loss and I find it hard to understand how people so easily discard of human life.
I am sorry for your loss, but I do not believe that gives you the right to judge other women, or the decisions they must make. Infant deaths at birth are especially harsh tragedies, but so are miscarriages, which are Nature’s way of choosing.
However, I also have more empathy towards suffering and I know that I've not walked in anyone's shoes but my own.
This seems to mean that you are tolerant and respectful of the decisions that other women must make for themselves, on their own. If I am wrong about that, let me know.
I still say that the helpless must be protected.
I agree with that: Helpless persons ought to be protected, if not by a family or a community, then by the government.
Whatever your liberal friends tell you, freely or after coaxing, about the man’s personal qualities, it is reassuring that he still has a large amount of support for his policies.
------------
Jen: Coaxing? Hahahaha. That made me laugh. I don't coax them. Sometimes people feel the need to confess their mistakes out of a sense of guilt for the damage it has done the country.
I did not say you coaxed them. It’s just that I see many hosts on Fox energetically trying to coax liberal guests to say things that can be used against them and to imply a sense of guilt.
You find it reassuring that he has a large amount of support?
Have you seen his approval ratings lately? How about Congress? Do you find that reassuring?
I do. ;-)
Rightwingers’ representations of the polls are misleading. While many Americans say they disapprove of Obamacare, a significant number of them do so because they feel that it doesn’t go far enough. And a Gallup poll taken after health reform’s enactment showed the public, by a modest but significant margin, seeming pleased that it passed.
When Bush was president, rightwingers said that his low poll numbers didn’t mean anything. Now that Obama is in the White House, they insist they mean everything.
Presidential approval ratings fluctuate. Obama’s has improved in the last week. I find that reassuring.
psi bond, I've enjoyed the back and forth with you. You've helped me to choose my words more carefully. You're fun to interact with.
Thank you. If I have taught you something, I am humbled.
Have a wonderful Passover!
Thanks. You, too.
beamish: The Robert Capa "Falling Soldier" photograph from the Spanish Civil War you refered to is widely known now to have been faked. Ironically, so is your argument that follows from it.
It is not true that it is widely known to have been faked. Wikipedia says, “While some authors claim that the photograph is authentic, others have stated that it was staged.” My argument is still valid: Namely that unanticipated momentary events are inherently difficult to capture in a photograph. If "Falling Soldier" was indeed staged, it is then true that no authentic photograph exists that documents such an event on the battlefield. If, on the other hand, it is not staged, it is the only one documenting such an event. The only other photograph I know of that comes close is Eddie Adams’ photograph of a Saigon police chief executing a Viet Cong soldier in the streets of the city. That image from the Vietnam War is also justly famous. The uniqueness of these two images, real or not, proves my contention----the virtual impossibility of capturing a brief unstaged event of this kind. Which explains why there’s no record of the racial epithets or the spitting that you furiously dispute.
Your partisan zeal is shamelessly foaming over, beamish. Thus I cannot reasonably expect you to post anything that is not disingenuous. Your revisionist take on the political spectrum is tailor-made to satisfy the far-right thesis that it is only the left in Europe that has committed genocide.
I suppose you would claim that lynchings in the South were perpetrated by liberals to blacken the reputations of honest Southern white folk who love all men. Or do you claim that lynching photographs were faked, and that lynchings that were not photographed did not occur? The murder of Julius Caesar was not filmed or taped. Neither was the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. By your strictly modern standards of evidence then, these events did not occur. There is none so blind as he who sees only what he wants to see.
The Ku Klux Klan was founded by defeated Confederate soldiers who were very conservative about preserving their traditional way of life. Timothy McVeigh was a rightwing crazy who blew up a government building and killed 168 people because he believed the government was threatening his freedoms. Hitler was handed absolute power by the German rightwing elite. In April 2009, Richard Poplawski, a right-wing extremist, armed with a high-powered assault rifle and a pistol, gunned down three police officers in Pittsburgh from his bedrom window, in part because he feared the non-existent "Obama gun ban." In May of that year, Scott Roeder, another right-wing extremist, assassinated Dr. George Tiller in Kansas. In June, Von Brunn, another right-wing extremist, opened fire at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. Militias in the U.S. aggressively advocating the supremacy of white folks discard the basic principle of liberalism, which posits the equality of all men, and celebrate instead privilege by birth (which had its heyday when kings reigned and the right sat on the rightwing of the king). And on it goes.
Concluded
Knoxville, Tennessee police searched the Levy Drive home of Jim David Adkisson after he entered the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church and killed two people and wounded six others during the presentation of a children's musical. Inside the house, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly. The shotgun-wielding suspect in Sunday's mass shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church was motivated by a hatred of "the liberal movement," and he planned to shoot until police shot him, Knoxville Police Chief Sterling P. Owen IV said Adkisson, 58, of Powell wrote a four-page letter in which he stated his "hatred of the liberal movement," Owen said. "Liberals in general, as well as gays."
Aside from historical and police evidence, additional clear reasons suggesting rightwingers are participants in the attacks and threats targeting Democrats who voted for health care reform are provided by the increased vitriol and belligerence of rightwing posters like you, beamish.
PsiBond,
You're just like every diaper-soiling leftist in this week after the health care bill has passed.
You remind me of Russ Carnahan (D - St. Louis) who is currently in a bonkered panic feeling "threatened" over people gathering on a public sidewalk outside his home to pray for his health.
Meanings of words, indeed.
Unsurprisingly, your last post, beamish, confirms what I said about your predictable disingenuousness.
beamish: You remind me of Russ Carnahan (D - St. Louis) who is currently in a bonkered panic feeling "threatened" over people gathering on a public sidewalk outside his home to pray for his health.
The news reports are somewhat different than what you suggest. The local reports say a Tea Party protest, in which a coffin was pointedly used, was held in front of the congressman's office . The protest moved to Rep. Carnahan's house in the St. Louis area, and the coffin was left in front of the house. The Health Care Reform Act, on which Carnahan voted yes, had been passed that day.
This came after Rep. Tom Perriello’s (D-Va.) brother’s gas lines were cut, Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) received death threats and Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) received a message saying snipers were being deployed to kill children of those who voted for health care overhaul.
I don’t know what the protestors at Carnahan's house chanted, but, I suppose, if they had yelled, “May your death be swift and peaceful,” you would insist, beamish, that that is a prayer concerned for the health of the 52-year-old congressman (whose brother died in the same plane crash that took the life of his father, the former Governor of Missouri and posthumous U.S. Senator-elect).
Best wishes for his health, indeed. No, it’s an American minute of shame, part of a pattern suggesting surly rightwingers are behind the ugly incidents of recent days that you fanatically dispute.
Invading an individual’s personal space with inappropriate behavior fits the meaning of a threat.
Yes, it's true. The pro-life group that gathered outside Russ Carnahan's home littered when they left a coffin on his lawn.
Littering creates green jobs for those who are bothered to clean up, so I don't see the "threat" there.
I'll leave it to you to explain why "threats from the left" are always defined by pipebombs, Molotov cocktails, injuries, loss of life, and property damage and "threats from the right" are anonymous phone calls, faxed pictures, and littering on lawns.
beamish: Yes, it's true.
So, you confess it was not merely praying for his health, as you previously alleged?
The pro-life group that gathered outside Russ Carnahan's home littered when they left a coffin on his lawn.
Although leaving a coffin in front of someone’s house may in some technical sense be littering, most people understand it is usually done for a more ominous reason.
Littering creates green jobs for those who are bothered to clean up, so I don't see the "threat" there.
Littering commonly involves throwing onto the ground something that someone is too lazy to put into a garbage can. The ostensible motive was clearly not littering. Rather than a green job, it was a black job. Is leaving behind a burning cross in front of a person’s house littering also, in your view?
I'll leave it to you to explain why "threats from the left" are always defined by pipebombs, Molotov cocktails, injuries, loss of life, and property damage and "threats from the right" are anonymous phone calls, faxed pictures, and littering on lawns.
You will have to explain why rightwing violence in America is about killing doctors, organizing militias like the Hutaree to kill policemen, and blowing up heavily occupied buildings like the .government building in Oklahoma in which 168 people lost their lives, while the buildings Bill Ayres (the right‘s favorite example of a leftwing “terrorist“) bombed in his youth were, according to plan, all unoccupied at the time and the area around the statue he targeted twice was deserted when he bombed it.
When a rightwing extremist puts a bullet in the body of a doctor or a civil rights worker, does that bullet constitute litter in your grotesque mind?
PsiBond,
Your typical leftist lack of reading comprehension skills is what it is, and it isn't a refutation of what I said.
PsiBond,
You may want to rethink your argument about left-wing terrorists never hurting anyone.
There is a commonality between Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, anthrax letter sender Bruce Ivins, Pentagon shooter John Patrick Bedell, and the death threat video recorder Norman Leboon.
All four have this in common:
All of them were registered members of the Democratic Party.
beamish: PsiBond, Your typical leftist lack of reading comprehension skills is what it is, and it isn't a refutation of what I said.
You said: “You remind me of Russ Carnahan (D - St. Louis) who is currently in a bonkered panic feeling ‘threatened’ over people gathering on a public sidewalk outside his home to pray for his health.”
You made no mention of the coffin left in front of his house, about which his spokesperson expressed an objection. Your distorting that reported incident into a claim that the congressman was upset about people gathered supposedly “to pray for his health” is either a personal lack of reading comprehension skills or a willful disregard for the facts.
beamish: You may want to rethink your argument about left-wing terrorists never hurting anyone.
There is a commonality between Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, anthrax letter sender Bruce Ivins, Pentagon shooter John Patrick Bedell, and the death threat video recorder Norman Leboon.
All four have this in common:
All of them were registered members of the Democratic Party.
And all four of them were or are Americans. And they are all males----another commonality. You may want to rethink your conception of the Democratic Party, beamish, for, as, anyone cognizant of history and current affairs is aware, Democratic Party membership is not an indicator of whether one’s political ideology is conservative or liberal.
An ultra-conservative poster, Jay Tea, on March 28, celebrated and boasted about the “achievement” of McVeigh:
In the end, McVeigh and Terry Nichols achieved far more than all the Weather Underground ever did with their bombs; McVeigh took out a whole federal building and almost 200 people, while the biggest score the Weather Underground ever pulled off was an "own goal" where they blew themselves up.
McVeigh was largely motivated by the federal government's handling of the Waco Siege (1993) and the Ruby Ridge incident (1992. McVeigh, said the prosecutor in his trial, had developed a hatred of the government during his time in the army, after reading The Turner Diaries (a novel that “depicts a violent revolution in the United States which leads to the overthrow of the United States federal government, nuclear war, and, ultimately, to the extermination of all Jews and non-whites. The book was called ‘explicitly racist and anti-Semitic’ by The New York Times and has been labeled the ‘bible of the racist right’ by the Federal Bureau of Investigation“). McVeigh’s beliefs were supported by what he saw as the militia movement’s ideological opposition to increases in taxes and the passage of the Brady Bill, to which the Waco and Ruby Ridge incidents provided reinforcement for him. All of these are issues that enrage the far right, not the left.
Wikipedia says: “According to the Anti Defamation League, it [The Turner Diaries] is "probably the most widely read book among far-right extremists; many have cited it as the inspiration behind their terrorist organizing and activity….The novel was initially only available through mail order and at gun shows, and partially serialized in National Alliance publications.”
Your rhetoric, beamish, that relentlessly singles out one group for universal blame---in your case, the Democrats----has been tried before. Hitler did it with the Jews.
You made no mention of the coffin left in front of his house, about which his spokesperson expressed an objection. Your distorting that reported incident into a claim that the congressman was upset about people gathered supposedly “to pray for his health” is either a personal lack of reading comprehension skills or a willful disregard for the facts.
I did mention the coffin being "litter" on Carnahan's lawn, but it turns out I was in error.
When the pro-life prayer group left the area of Carnahan's home, they took their coffin prop with them. Nothing was left on Carnahan's lawn. Their coffin prop was clearly marked as a symbol - "the death of American freedom" was emblazoned on a sign on it.
It wasn't a implied death threat at all, and certainly not on the order "threat" perceivable in the burning effigies of George W. Bush seen in historical leftist displays of free speech.
Your rhetoric, beamish, that relentlessly singles out one group for universal blame---in your case, the Democrats----has been tried before. Hitler did it with the Jews.
Be honest, PsiBond. My "rhetoric," as you call it, gives names and examples of leftists commiting violent acts where you're reduced to conflating anonymous voice mails into "threats" and the tired leftist excommunication of Hitler from their ranks for not reaching the kills per capita quota set by Stalin.
The history of political violence confined to American soil alone is pretty skimpy once you remove all instances of left-wing violence from it. The history of the labor movement itself is a who's who of left-wing terrorism.
If you had any means of refuting my argument that leftists tend to have a penchant for violence that rightists can't even begin to match, surely you would have employed it by now.
You made no mention of the coffin left in front of his house, about which his spokesperson expressed an objection. Your distorting that reported incident into a claim that the congressman was upset about people gathered supposedly “to pray for his health” is either a personal lack of reading comprehension skills or a willful disregard for the facts.
beamish: I did mention the coffin being "litter" on Carnahan's lawn, but it turns out I was in error.
You characterized the coffin as litter after I pointed out that you failed to mention the coffin at all.
When the pro-life prayer group left the area of Carnahan's home, they took their coffin prop with them. Nothing was left on Carnahan's lawn. Their coffin prop was clearly marked as a symbol - "the death of American freedom" was emblazoned on a sign on it.
Where is the cell-phone video of that? You implied that that’s the only sort of evidence you accept. Or do you have a double standard?
It wasn't a implied death threat at all, and certainly not on the order "threat" perceivable in the burning effigies of George W. Bush seen in historical leftist displays of free speech.
Try applying your reading comprehension skills. I did not say it was a death threat. It is a threat in the sense of invading personal space with unacceptable behavior. You seem to forget the burning of effigies of Bill Clinton by rightists.
Your rhetoric, beamish, that relentlessly singles out one group for universal blame---in your case, the Democrats----has been tried before. Hitler did it with the Jews.
Be honest, PsiBond. My "rhetoric," as you call it, gives names and examples of leftists commiting violent acts where you're reduced to conflating anonymous voice mails into "threats" and the tired leftist excommunication of Hitler from their ranks for not reaching the kills per capita quota set by Stalin.
No, beamish, your reading skill betrays you once again. I did not conflate “anonymous voice mail” into rigtists’ revisionary view of Hitler. I pointed out an obvious similarity between your relentless demonizing of Democrats and Hitler’s relentless demonizing of Jews.
The history of political violence confined to American soil alone is pretty skimpy once you remove all instances of left-wing violence from it. The history of the labor movement itself is a who's who of left-wing terrorism.
Your examples are skimpy of violence committed by those you allege to be leftwing radicals in America. Norman Leboon, a Muslim, made videos threatening not only Eric Cantor, but also Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and the firstborn of all YouTube employees.
If you had any means of refuting my argument that leftists tend to have a penchant for violence that rightists can't even begin to match, surely you would have employed it by now.
Only someone resolved to disingenuously ignore or misrepresent facts can make that assertion. As cited before: “McVeigh and Terry Nichols achieved far more than all the Weather Underground ever did with their bombs,“ crowed a far-right blogger.
The most up to date news of the "coffin on Carnahan's yard" incident reports that the coffin was found "near Carnahan's yard" not "left behind in Carnahan's yard."
So, it's a littering incident afterall, and not even in Carnahan's yard. Obviously not a violent threat.
The black Congressmen entering the House of Representatives also filmed their procession. We have video from all angles of their entrance, and not any of them contain any racial epithets from the crowd. This was pure fabrication. There were no racial epithets shouted at the black Congressmen.
So you're reduced to flailing about anonymous voice mails and faxes that could easily have been fabricated by Democrats attempting to smear the right in the absence of actual death threats to pin on the right.
Seriously, PsiBond. Your Pee Wee Herman Alinskian word-twisting act is beneath me.
Give me a sign you're willing to have a honest discussion. Start with an easily observed fact everyone can agree on, like the fact that you're an imbecile.
beamish: The most up to date news of the "coffin on Carnahan's yard" incident reports that the coffin was found "near Carnahan's yard" not "left behind in Carnahan's yard."
The most up-to-date news, albeit unsurprising, is that when challenged to present evidence that satisfies standards you yourself set, you are unable to do so.
So, it's a littering incident afterall, and not even in Carnahan's yard. Obviously not a violent threat.
Littering is impersonal; leaving a coffin at someone’s house is personal.
Politico.com, a source often cited authoritatively by Fox, reports that the coffin was placed “in front of” Carnahan’s house.
After all your defensive flip-flopping around, what remains true is that no sane person wants his property violated and threatened in that way.
The black Congressmen entering the House of Representatives also filmed their procession. We have video from all angles of their entrance, and not any of them contain any racial epithets from the crowd. This was pure fabrication. There were no racial epithets shouted at the black Congressmen.
The clips without sound that were played on O'Reilly's program clearly show that the black congressmen were the recipients of verbal abuse from people in the crowd. The racial epithets may not have been shouted, as you assume, but delivered at close range face to face. Since Congressman Cleaver was spat upon, the encounters must have been at close range. Except for the hysterical insistence of a rabid hater of Democrats per se — you — there is no evidence of fabrication.
So you're reduced to flailing about anonymous voice mails and faxes that could easily have been fabricated by Democrats attempting to smear the right in the absence of actual death threats to pin on the right.
I made no mention of voice mails and faxes. You have done so, adopting Z's favorite conspiracy theory that Democrats counterfeited them, although you have no evidence of this.
You’re reduced to making this what you want to keep talking of so as to avoid taking any notice the rise of rightwing militias in the U.S. that I mentioned.
Seriously, PsiBond. Your Pee Wee Herman Alinskian word-twisting act is beneath me.
It is not beneath you to wage a hate-filled crusade against Democrats and liberals that is not dissimilar, in your small-scale amateurish way, to Hitler’s against the Jews, so what may be beneath you is not anything that I care about. Seriously.
Give me a sign you're willing to have a honest discussion. Start with an easily observed fact everyone can agree on, like the fact that you're an imbecile.
Obviously, you are at odds with those rightwingers (one of whom I quoted) who assert pridefully that the right is much more accomplished at deadly violence than is the left.
What is easily observable, beamish, is that you’re obsessed with the vilification of people opposed to your political ideology.
Post a Comment