Ann Coulter, accomplice to murder

Sure, the guy is nuts, but this is what inevitably comes from violent, eliminationist rhetoric:

The shotgun-wielding suspect in Sunday’s mass shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church planned to shoot until police shot him, Knoxville Police Chief Sterling P. Owen IV said this morning.

Jim D. Adkisson, 58, of Powell wrote a four-page letter in which he described his feelings and why he committed the shooting, Owen said.

Adkisson said he was frustrated about not being able to obtain a job and how much he hated the liberal movement, Owen said.

Adkisson hated liberals… and so he shot up a Unitarian church. During a children’s play.

Committing suicide by going on a shooting rampage in a Unitarian church is like shooting fish in a barrel and expecting the fish to shoot back. The Unitarians I’ve known are about the most peaceful and harmless folks I’ve ever met; indeed, the only church less likely for Adkisson to find armed resistance would have been a Friends meeting house. (And even then, only maybe.)

So of course this guy was crazy. Sane people don’t go on shooting rampages.

But hatred like his doesn’t grow in a vacuum; it is nurtured, shaped and focused by hate-mongers like Ann Coulter and Bill O’Reilly, who cheer at the notion of killing a few liberals to keep us in line, or who have made careers out of vilifying the political opposition as terrorists or traitors or worse. No, neither Coulter nor O’Reilly nor any of their cohorts pulled the trigger, but they surely understood that their words might feed the insanity of someone who could. If these are the mullahs of the extremist right, then the liberal-hating homicidal Adkisson is a suicide bomber of their own creation.

Say what you want about the aggressive rhetoric of netroots activists like me, but we don’t advocate violence, because we understand that ultimately, the sole purpose of advocacy is to incite action.

UPDATE:
Sam Smith at Scholars and Rogues weighs in:

Jim Adkisson was an unbalanced man, and perhaps it was only a matter of time before he snapped. But two questions to ponder: first, who created the conditions that hastened the snap? And second, when the train jumped the tracks, who created the bogeyman that the diseased brain latched onto as the cause of all the pain?

I can’t tell you who to point to specifically if you need to blame somebody. But I can tell you that yesterday’s tragedy at Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church occurred in a context, a known and knowable context. His reasons strike us as familiar because they are. Every day for the past 30 years we’ve heard words like these – on talk radio, on right-wing propaganda outlets like FOX, on blogs aimed at dividing and conquering we the people, from the mouths of sub-human politicians who’ll do anything to assure their spot at the trough. And eventually, from the mouths of ordinary citizens who have been systematically denied the kinds of educational programs necessary to inoculate them against these obscenities, which to the genuinely critical mind are so transparent as to be invisible.

I can tell you that while there’s no way to point at one person, it’s easy to point at those who worked together to poison the well from which Jim Adkisson drank. Limbaugh. Rove. Savage. Schlesinger. Murdoch. Helms. Falwell. Robertson. Dobson. O’Reilly. Phelps. Matalin. Ingraham. Hannity. Beck. Bush. The list goes on for quite awhile, but these are some of the bigger names.

There’s also ample blame for the dolts in charge at CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, USA Today, and hundreds of local papers and stations around the country, because you ignorantly parroted their lies in the name of “balance.”

Adkisson is on you. All of you. And while yesterday might prove, mercifully, to be the last event of its kind that we ever see, only a moron would bet on it.

Comments

  1. 1

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    From the same source…
      

    The man accused of a mass church shooting this morning was described by his Powell neighbors as a helpful and kind man, but one who had issues with Christianity.

    “He had his own sense of belief about religion, that’s the impression I got of him,” said neighbor Karen Massey. “We were talking one day when my daughter graduated from Bible college, and I told him I was a Christian, then he almost turned angry.
    “He seemed to get angry at that.”

      
      
    Wow, had issues with Christianity?? Doesn’t sound like one of those right-wing religious freaks.
      
    If anything, this is proof of what happens when people are forced to do/accept something. In the article I linked it talked about his anger at his parents for forcing him to go to church.
      
    Did the government force him to accept things he didn’t want to? Did his opinion have a voice on abc, cbs, nbc?

  2. 2

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Does anyone still doubt that liberals must arm?! What if some rightwing nut burst into your home with the intent of murdering your entire family?

    Wait, that’s already happened, and right here in Seattle. On Christmas Eve of 1985, a neo-Nazi nut went to the home of Chuck Goldmark and murdered him, his wife Annie, and their two sons in the mistaken belief they were Jews.

    Chuck Goldmark, although not Jewish, had liberal credentials. His family was well known because his father was a state senator from eastern Washington who won a famous libel trial against a rabid rightwing owner of a small-town newspaper who branded his dad as a “communist” back in the McCarthy Red Scare era. And Chuck Goldmark was the Washington state manager of Gary Hart’s presidential campaign.

  3. 3

    Sonofagunny spews:

    Good post.

    It seems that there is literally no difference between the Wahabi Imans in Mecca and the fundies in Colarado Springs. Which is scarier .. our Air Force Academy that celebrates Jesus the warrior or the Wahabi classrooms spread all over the world?.

  4. 4

    proud leftist spews:

    MS @ 1
    Are you just pretending not to get the point of the post, or are you really so dumb that you just don’t get it? Whether the killer was a Christian or not has nothing to do with the source of his hatred. Coulter advocates doing harm to liberals and nutcases on the right eat that shit up.

  5. 5

    spews:

    @1
    Wow, had issues with Christianity?? Doesn’t sound like one of those right-wing religious freaks.

    No, someone who shoots up a liberal church because he hates the liberal movement isn’t a right-wing religious freak, of course not!

    Al Qaeda has problems with the rest of Islam and is very critical of the average believer. So I guess they’re not really Muslims then, right?

  6. 6

    spews:

    @4
    Are you just pretending not to get the point of the post, or are you really so dumb that you just don’t get it?

    I’m going to assume the latter for now, but even for Marvin, that was a stupid comment.

  7. 7

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Today, more than 20 years later, Chuck’s brother Peter is carrying on the Goldmark family tradition of public service by running for state lands commissioner.

    While rightwingers fume, spew hate, and their rage explodes in violence, public-spirited people like the Goldmarks quietly carry on with the task of making the world better for all of us.

    It will be a crying shame if Peter Goldmark never holds public office. Not because he deserves it, but because we need him. Does the lands race matter? Yes, absolutely, because our state lands belong to all of us and they’re being ravaged under Republican management. Our legacy is being logged, grazed, and eroded to ruin under Doug Sutherland. Sutherland’s sexual harassment scandal is a sideshow; what really matters in this race is the future of our public lands.

    Peter Goldmark, a rancher with a Ph.D., is a conservationist whose approach to public lands management is based on best science and a long-term view, in sharp contrast to the G.O.P. Party’s approach, which is to rape public resources for short-term private profit without regard for the damage they leave behind for taxpayers to clean up or the long-term needs of our state and our citizens.

    Why anyone would ever vote for a Republican for any public office is a mystery.

  8. 8

    Devil's Advocate spews:

    Time to play.

    Therefore, are Liberals responsible for that motorist who got beat up, his windows broken, and tires slashed by that gang of hoodlums that call themselves “Critical Mass”?

    After all, the city has a habit of allowing this gang of pedaling hells angels do their illegal acts unimpeded. Which political party does the city of Seattle favor?

  9. 9

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @1 Hitler wasn’t exactly a fervent Christian either, but he certainly was a rightwinger (and everything that implies including xenophobic, militarist, totalitarian — and, above all, violent). Let us never forget that violence is the very heart of the rightwing belief system.

    That’s why liberals must arm.

  10. 10

    delbert spews:

    He hated Christians…
    He was violent and irrational…

    Sounds like one of the regular posters here, anybody seen YLB or Daddy love recently?

  11. 11

    spews:

    I’ve seen Roger Rabbit commit hate speech against Republicans, even advocating violence against them, and Goldy remained silent. Seems to me turning the other way when others advocate violence is just as bad as advocating it yourself.

  12. 12

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @10 Give it up, delbert, you dicksucking righty mental case. The article specifically stated that he was a “rightwinger.” Just like you. He thinks just like you. If he voted, he voted just like you. I’m not saying you’re as sick as he is. But, clearly, your keel isn’t level either.

  13. 14

    spews:

    @8
    Um, the guy drove into a crowd of bicyclists, and even admitted he made a mistake. Try to keep up.

    @10
    Sounds like one of the regular posters here, anybody seen YLB or Daddy love recently?

    I had no idea that YLB and Daddy Love hated the liberal movement! Shocking! Wow, the stupids are out in force today…

  14. 15

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    16. Mr. Cynical spews:

    GBS–
    Back in to JRCC yesterday @ $32.50.
    Could be another short-term trade.
    07/25/2008 at 12:12 pm

    Hey Rog!!!
    Sold this AM @ $40.25.
    You were too stubborn to get on the COAL TRAIN that GBS recommended.
    Now I suppose we’ll have to listen to yet another lecture about the evils of Investing and Profits from a fellow profiteer who doesn’t profit as much.
    Let’s hear it again Rog.

  15. 18

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @8 How do you know those bikers aren’t rightwing skinheads? They acted like it. Their behavior was much more characteristic of the Far Right than of anyone who could be considered “liberal.”

  16. 19

    spews:

    @16
    Does anyone know if Goldy ever made a post connecting Fundamentalist Islam to Naveed Haq?

    Haq was not inspired by Fundamentalist Islam, but he was likely inspired by very radical anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli sentiments.

  17. 20

    Sonofagunny spews:

    Roger Rabbit

    Tx for the reminder about Goldmark, I had not made the connection.

    I was actually not going to donate to the campaign since this seemed like puny job for a great guy, but you changed my mind.

    **************************

    The Goldmarks, the Haq murder spree, this story … they are all of a kind. Our concept of tolerance should reject intolerance, perhaps especially when that is fomented by a religion.

    Coulter, O’Reilly, Hannity and their ilk should be shunned by all civilized people. Kudoes to Obama for refusing interviews to these hate mongers!

    I find it sad that our society is so tolerant that it shys away form condemning bigoted religions. The Southern Baptists, for example, convinced Jimmy Carter to resign from their church because of their bigotry. Is it reasonable to tolerate that?

    Even some aetheists can commit this crime.

  18. 21

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @11 Yeah, but I put an asterisk on it, and they don’t. They’re serious, I’m not. In fact, since you obviously don’t understand the intent and purpose of my posts, I’ll spell it out for you:

    I’m mimicking rightwing hate speech so you asswipes can see what hatemongers like Coulter look like from the other side’s perspective — in the hope that knuckleheads like you will stop applauding the right’s hatemongering.

    So far, it’s been a fruitless effort. So here’s the deal: I’ll stop when your side stops. But your side has to stop first, because your side started it.

  19. 22

    spews:

    @17,

    Doesn’t matter. This is still a public forum, and Goldy remains silent when violence against Republicans is advocated. There’s a chance an unstable reader could be influenced by Roger Rabbit’s hate speech. Some would argue that turning the other way is tantamount to condoning said speech.

  20. 23

    Sonofagunny spews:

    @16 Lee

    are you dropping bait again or just making things up?

    How do you know that Haq was not exposed to the Wahabi-ist education that was wide spread when he was growing up?

    Have you read Ishad Manji ? Or do you suppose the problem is worse in Canada?

  21. 24

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @20 “Coulter, O’Reilly, Hannity and their ilk should be shunned by all civilized people.”

    Precisely. That’s all I’m asking for, and I’ll settle for nothing less.

  22. 25

    spews:

    @22
    There’s a chance an unstable reader could be influenced by Roger Rabbit’s hate speech.

    Um, no. There isn’t. But you’re more than welcome to make him feel so powerful.

  23. 26

    spews:

    @23
    For starters, everyone who has ever talked about Haq has said that he had little to no interest in Islam. He even attempted to convert to Christianity at one point, but got bored with that too. It’s very likely he was influenced by external sources of anti-Semitism, but it was not within the context of fundamentalist Islam.

  24. 27

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @22 You didn’t read #21, did you? So I’ll spell it out for you even more explicitly:

    What I do is take rightwing hate speech and shove it up rightwingers’ asses.

    Any questions?

  25. 28

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @25 Thump! thump! thump! thump! thump! Feed the rabbit! Feed the rabbit! Thump! thump! thump! thump! thump!

    What would I do without our wingnut trolls to kick around? I’d die of boredom.

  26. 29

    Devil's Advocate spews:

    #14

    So, I am stupid because a dead man did not have a chance to admit he is wrong. A insulting dismissal says more about the blinders you wear than anything I said.

    Ann Coulter, one of the right wing’s useful idiots’, was far away from this horrific tragedy.

    Critical Mass has had the blessing from liberal city hall for these violent protests.

    “Corking” people is another way of saying unlawful detainment. I think that is illegal.

    Hard to look in the mirror, Lee? Or is it just denial? Republicans do not win elections on their values, they usually win them demonizing liberal hypocrisies like this one.

  27. 30

    spews:

    @26

    Lee, why are you unwilling to question the tenuous connection between the church shooter and Ann Coulter, but are confident Naveed Haq, who was raised Muslim, was not even remotely influenced by radical Islam?

  28. 31

    spews:

    @29
    Um, the man isn’t dead. In fact, he gave an interview yesterday where he admitted that he made a mistake.

  29. 32

    spews:

    @30
    Lee, why are you unwilling to question the tenuous connection between the church shooter and Ann Coulter

    Because he attributed his motivations to the exact same refrain that has defined Ann Coulter’s career.

    but are confident Naveed Haq, who was raised Muslim, was not even remotely influenced by radical Islam?

    Because while he was raised Muslim, everyone who knew him testified that he had little interest in the religion. It’s well-known that his anti-Semitism arose from a more general anger towards Israeli foreign policy, nothing to do at all with the Koran or Islamic teaching.

  30. 33

    spews:

    @30
    As for Coulter and the Tennessee shooting again, there’s still more that we could learn about this man’s motivations or his influences. I’m sure some of it won’t fit the usual profile, but when someone talks of a hatred for liberals, that’s the exact pool that O’Reilly and Coulter have been peeing in for years.

  31. 35

    ROTCODDAM spews:

    Look everyone!

    It’s another terrorist attack against innocent American citizens! Peacefully praying in their house of worship no less.

    And it wasn’t prevented!

    Turns out that burning the Constitution and giving Dick Cheney the authority to crush children’s testicles hasn’t made us any safer.

    I’ll bet nobody saw that one coming.

  32. 36

    michael spews:

    @8, 14

    A couple of the cyclists who got out of hand got hauled off to jail. So much for “allowing this gang of pedaling hells angels do their illegal acts unimpeded”

    For the critical mass thing to have any relevance to the church shooting, at a minimum, the driver would have had to been singled out because he was a conservative. He wasn’t.

  33. 38

    ArtFart spews:

    City Hall has been “looking the other way” with respect to Critical Mass for far too long. Not only do these shitheads unlawfully disrupt traffic (and I’m not at all reluctant to believe they sat on the Subaru before the driver did anything), but they’ve been known to charge en masse along downtown sidewalks mowing down pedestrians. Appparently it serves their collective Walter Mitty crusader fantasy to create confrontations and try to provoke fights to “prove” that the whole world’s out to get bicyclists.

  34. 39

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    4. proud leftist spews:
    MS @ 1
    Are you just pretending not to get the point of the post, or are you really so dumb that you just don’t get it? Whether the killer was a Christian or not has nothing to do with the source of his hatred. Coulter advocates doing harm to liberals and nutcases on the right eat that shit up.

      
    I didn’t see any reference to ann coulter in the article. To assume it’s because of ann coulter is pretty ignorant.
      
    It doesn’t even mention him as a political person.
      
    I’m a troll, I make links that aren’t. Seems like Goldy has learned a few things from me.

  35. 40

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    33. Lee spews:
    @30
    As for Coulter and the Tennessee shooting again, there’s still more that we could learn about this man’s motivations or his influences. I’m sure some of it won’t fit the usual profile, but when someone talks of a hatred for liberals, that’s the exact pool that O’Reilly and Coulter have been peeing in for years.

      
    If it comes out he’s a political junkie the discussion can begin. Until then don’t paint the picture via your biased view on life.

  36. 41

    Daddy Love spews:

    MS @1

    While he may have had “issues with Christianity” a couple of years ago, he told the cops yesterday that he did it to kill liberals.

  37. 42

    michael spews:

    Just as a refresher, we should be talking about how right wing hate speech by media pundits like Ann Coulter leads to violence committed by some of their less stable fans.

  38. 43

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    17. Lee spews:
    @11
    Roger Rabbit isn’t on TV or getting books published either.

      
    He could if anyone thought they could make $ off him. Unfortunately, his views are repeated on all lefty blogs, he’s got nothing new to add to the dailykos talking points.

  39. 44

    ByeByeGOP spews:

    This is how the extreme right views the world. If you don’t agree with it – kill it. They can’t win arguments because the facts don’t support their positions. They can’t reason with others because frankly they’re just too fucking stupid. So they go all RED WHITE & BLUE (Redneck, White Trash and Blue Collar) on those they disagree with.

    I tell you that it won’t be long before their ilk tries to force Americans to carry Bibles the way the right’s pal Osama bin Laden forces women to cover their heads.

    There’s NO difference AT ALL between right wing Christians and Islamic terrorists. NONE!

  40. 45

    Daddy Love spews:

    40 MS

    “Poliitcal junkie?” No, he’s a mentally ill right-wing idstiot of the type your side has been expoilintg for years.

    BTW, all, the best source on the eliminationists is David Neiwert’s Orcinus blog. Click through and enjoy!

  41. 46

    spews:

    @39
    It doesn’t even mention him as a political person.

    The man himself admitted that his motive was that he hated the liberal movement. Are you retarded?

    @40
    If it comes out he’s a political junkie the discussion can begin.

    The man himself admitted that his motive was that he hated the liberal movement. Are you retarded?

  42. 47

    ArtFart spews:

    44 You’ve basically written a concise definition of fascism. It’s a disengenuous elite seducing the marginalized with the lie that all they have to do do make their lives wonderful is blame “those other people” for the fact that they’re too dumb to pour piss from a boot and too lazy to try.

  43. 48

    spews:

    @42
    I agree, and since several of her less stable fans are regulars in these comment threads, it’s a fun topic.

  44. 49

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    25. Lee spews:
    @22
    There’s a chance an unstable reader could be influenced by Roger Rabbit’s hate speech.
    Um, no. There isn’t. But you’re more than welcome to make him feel so powerful.

      
    Why couldn’t some unhinged individual (byebyegoop) read his words and incorrectly interpreting them as a call to violence? Do you think a google search for kill republicans doesn’t find ha?
      
    What about that “liberal” that was posting signs on northgate way telephone poles that suggested hanging &killing republicans

  45. 50

    proud leftist spews:

    Drawing a connection between the motives and inspirations of the Critical Mass riders and the Tennessee church shooter requires a special type of mind, a mind that eschews reason and logic. The disorder that produces such thinking, according to the DSM-V, is called “Republicanus Pathologica.” It is an essentially untreatable disorder, but with adequate sedatives some of the more antisocial symptoms can be controlled.

  46. 51

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @49 “Do you think a google search for kill republicans doesn’t find ha?”

    I just googled “kill republicans” and didn’t get any HA hits. I did, however, get a lot of links to news articles talking about Republicans “killing” bills in Congress (a common journalistic vernacularism). I got 1 hit on a sicko website selling “Kill Republicans” t-shirts and merchandise, but this is pretty minor compared to the volume of “kill” speech on extreme rightwing websites like Free Republic.

  47. 52

    spews:

    @49
    Why couldn’t some unhinged individual (byebyegoop) read his words and incorrectly interpreting them as a call to violence?

    For the same reason why you’re not influenced when everyone here confronts you with basic common sense and logic.

    Do you think a google search for kill republicans doesn’t find ha?

    Why don’t you try it, Einstein?

    What about that “liberal” that was posting signs on northgate way telephone poles that suggested hanging &killing republicans

    What about it? I live very close to there and I never heard about this. Please tell me you’re not stupid enough to believe that someone writing full-length books that are published and distributed across the country has no more influence than a random person posting things to telephone poles. Seriously, Marvin, you’re one of the stupidest people I’ve encountered in my entire life, but you can’t be THAT stupid.

  48. 53

    SeattleJew spews:

    @26 “everyone who has ever talked about Haq has said that he had little to no interest in Islam. He even attempted to convert to Christianity at one point, but got bored with that too.”

    I doubt very much Lee has any sources on Mr. Haq other than the public media but because Lee worries (reasonably) about bigotry against Muslims he gives bigotry by Muslims a pass.

    FWIW, Haq did “convert” to Christianity … bUT one needs to distinguish between conversion rituals and practice. Based on his words, Haq was a muslim at the time of the attempted massacre.

    Tolernce of bigotry is bad idea. For example. Whoopi Goldberg DEFENDS the use of the n word by Blacks because she is blind to the obvious white:black dichotomy implied when a rap singer celebrates himself as a “N.” Jeremiah Wright tolerates and even celebrates Farrakhan because the Muslim leader teaches Black self reliance … a lesson very much in tune with the lesson of David Duke toward poor whites. Hell, even Chris Hitchins’ nasty comments about God worship have more than the needed load of venom.

  49. 54

    ArtFart spews:

    50 It’s sort of a matter of degree, but the similarity is there. Attacking motorists because it’s more exciting than lobbying for more and better bikeways (or biting the bullet and admitting that, by God, if you’re out riding a bicycle on a public thoroughfare, you’d better be damn careful) is a shitty excuse for problem solving. Spraying bullets around in a church because you’ve become convinced that the people in there are somehow responsible for your own wretched, piddly-ass life is infinitely shittier. Walking into a public marketplace wearing a C4 vest and blowing yourself and everyone around you to smithereens is shittier still. Encouraging other people to do any such things sucks donkey balls.

    As the saying goes, “Your right to swing your fist stops at my chin.”

  50. 55

    spews:

    I remember those Northgate Way signs. I once accused RR of being the guy who put them up, but he denied it.

    This is actually a good post of Goldy’s. It gets you thinking. But I still have to disagree with the linkage to Coulter, because I think when she (or anyone) calls for this or that action, it’s actually less dangerous than the sort of slow, constant, day after day demonization of (fill in the blank) group. In other words, it’s not in the calling for action that I’m concerned by, but it’s more of the fueling of the anger and hate that I see as the main problem. When you are constantly dehumanizing a group, it makes it easier and more justifiable for some to take action. So on one level, yeah, Coulter is one of those who demonizes others, but then again, she’s not alone.

  51. 56

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @29 “Critical Mass has had the blessing from liberal city hall for these violent protests.”

    And you base that on what? (crickets chirping)

  52. 57

    spews:

    @53
    I doubt very much Lee has any sources on Mr. Haq other than the public media but because Lee worries (reasonably) about bigotry against Muslims he gives bigotry by Muslims a pass.

    I’m not giving bigotry by Muslims a pass at all. But what I refuse to do is to assert that Haq’s hatred of Jews came from Islamic teaching. It’s very clear from his profile that it did not. His hatred of Jews came from radical anti-Israeli sentiments. They were political in nature, not religious. It’s still wrong, but by blaming people at a particular Islamic Center without any evidence, you have yourself compounded the hatred and bigotry.

  53. 59

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @34 Of course I am, but satire is too complicated for Coneheads to understand, so of course it all flies over their pointy heads.

  54. 60

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @39 “I didn’t see any reference to ann coulter in the article. To assume it’s because of ann coulter is pretty ignorant.”

    You have to be willfully blind or ignorant to not see the connection. Coulter, Malkin, O’Reilly, and their ilk have been stirring up emotions with their very public hate talk for years now. Given how many nutjobs population the Far Right, it’s inevitable someone would act on their words, sooner or later.

    Looking back on the Nazi thuggery against Jews of the ’30s, followed by the Nazi genocides of the ’40s, people ask “how could it happen?” And the answer is, the Nazis spent years planting the seeds of hate in the minds of German citizens with the same kinds of messages that the Far Right’s haters spew in America today. Only a damn fool would ignore what Nazi hate propaganda led to in the last century, or ignore the possibility that the hate propaganda of vicious extremists like Coulter could lead to something similar here.

  55. 61

    W. Klingon Skousen spews:

    re 55: Some people rob banks and kill people — and they are not alone either. Does that excuse or ameliorate their actions? The fact that they are not alone?

    That is such a poor excuse. If you demonize ‘liberals’ and suggest that their death would be a good thing, and then one of your own, only slightly more retarded than yourself, kills someone, then the inciter to violence is MORE responsible for the mayhem than the right wing ‘tard that was manipulated into the hate crime.

    I don’t advocate pre-emptive violence against anyone, but I do advocate self-defense that is appropriate to the attack.

  56. 62

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @43 There are two essential differences between what I do, and what Ann Coulter does.

    1) For her, it’s a money-making business. I have absolutely no interest in getting published, or getting paid to write this stuff.

    2) I merely mimic rightwing hate-talkers in order to attack their hate-talking.

    You are wrong that my views are “repeated all over lefty blogs.” I’m rarely quoted or referred to on other blogs. You’re more likely to find references to “Roger Rabbit” on Sound Politics than anywhere else.

  57. 63

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Furthermore, no one on our side is spouting trash like this:

    “Congratulations Speaker Pelosi, now let the bombs fall where they may. My prediction: terror attack on domestic soil passenger aircraft within the next six months. Casualties in the 2-300 range. And, unfortunately, maybe that’s just what we need. It’s obvious people don’t remember what happened 5 years ago. Posted by FullContactPolitics at November 8, 2006 10:52 AM”

    http://blog.usefulwork.com/cgi.....ry_id=7430

  58. 64

    andy a. spews:

    Why dont someone file murder charges against COULTER AND Oreilly for giving the nman the idea

  59. 65

    andy a. spews:

    Why dont someone file murder charges against COULTER AND Oreilly for giving the man the idea

  60. 66

    ArtFart spews:

    Perhaps we’d all be better off if the common-sense-impaired more commonly took their frustrations out strictly on inanimate objects, in the manner of the guy who recently attempted to “adjust” his lawnmower with a shotgun.

  61. 67

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Novak Has Brain Tumor

    Republican propagandist Robert Novak has been hospitalized with a preliminary diagnosis of brain tumor. A biopsy is pending to determine whether the tumor is malignant. I sure hope he survives! I want him to stand trial for revealing the identity of a CIA “noc” agent.

  62. 68

    Politically Incorrect spews:

    Total bullshit: O’Reilly has nothing to do with this crackpot. O’Reilly’s campaign is aganist what he calls “secular progressives,” and he doesn’t advocate violence against any of those folks.

    Coulter? I don’t know or care about her, but I’d guess she had nothing to do with this crazy bastard either.

  63. 69

    Politically Incorrect spews:

    andy a. said:

    “Why dont someone file murder charges against COULTER AND Oreilly for giving the nman the idea”

    O’Reilly might counter with, “Why not file murder charges against the judge that let’s some pervert off with a 60 sentence for child molestation?” Get a grip, andy a.

  64. 70

    Daddy Love spews:

    Dave Neiwert wrote a ten-part series on eliminationism in 2006. I’ll post the link here, and only liberals will follow it and read them, because Republicans think they know everything they need to know already, and facts that don’t fit their ideology are to be avoided at all costs.

    dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/12/eliminationism-in-america-i.html

  65. 71

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    FactCheck.Org Exposes Another McCain Smear Ad

    “McCain Links Castro With Obama

    “Under-the-radar Web ad quotes the Cuban’s praise but omits his criticism.

    “By D’Angelo Gore | factcheck.org

    “Summary

    “The McCain campaign has been running an under-the-radar Web ad that shows photos of Fidel Castro and Barack Obama, and says, ‘Fidel Castro thinks he is the most advanced candidate.’

    “In fact, the quote comes from an article by Castro that was … critical of Obama. Castro … complained that Obama views the Cuban revolution as ‘anti-democratic’ and that Obama makes the ‘exact same’ arguments used by U.S. administrations ‘to justify their crimes against our country.’”

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/149248

    (Quoted under fair use.)

    Roger Rabbit Commentary: As McCain’s popularity ratings sink to cigaret-smoke levels, he’s getting more shrill with every pass day.

  66. 72

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    FactCheck.Org Exposes Another McCain Smear Ad

    “McCain Links Castro With Obama

    “Under-the-radar Web ad quotes the Cuban’s praise but omits his criticism.

    “By D’Angelo Gore | factcheck.org

    “Summary

    “The McCain campaign has been running an under-the-radar Web ad that shows photos of Fidel Castro and Barack Obama, and says, ‘Fidel Castro thinks he is the most advanced candidate.’

    “In fact, the quote comes from an article by Castro that was … critical of Obama. Castro … complained that Obama views the Cuban revolution as ‘anti-democratic’ and that Obama makes the ‘exact same’ arguments used by U.S. administrations ‘to justify their crimes against our country.’”

    (Quoted from Newsweek under fair use.)

    Roger Rabbit Commentary: As McCain’s popularity ratings sink to cigaret-smoking levels, he’s getting more shrill with every passing day.

  67. 73

    Daddy Love spews:

    Neiwert also has a handy “What is eliminationism?” topic written as an introduction. Sample:

    …[while] eliminationism’s most startling historical example was provided by the Nazis, it also has a long and appalling history in the annals of American democracy. It was manifest in the genocidal wars against Native Americans, when “the only good Indian was a dead Indian”: in the many anti-immigrant campaigns waged by Nativists of many different stripes; in night-riding Ku Klux Klansmen, Jim Crow segregation, and the lynch mobs who murdered thousands of innocent blacks during the heyday of white supremacism; in the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans in World War II; in the continuing march of hate crimes that target various kinds of “undesirable” members of society for terrorization and exclusion; and in the lingering far-right “militias” and related hate groups who scapegoat minorities and immigrants, gays and lesbians, government officials, and liberals generally, making them the targets of both hateful rhetoric and actual violence.

  68. 74

    Rick D. spews:

    David Gold Stain’s hate site calling O’Reilly and Coulter haters???

    HAHA…….you’re kidding right!

  69. 75

    Steve spews:

    @52 “Seriously, Marvin, you’re one of the stupidest people I’ve encountered in my entire life, but you can’t be THAT stupid.”

    He really is that stupid, Lee. But we should also keep in mind that the poor, hapless bastard has got some really deep-seated issues he’s working on.

    The eliminationist rhetoric that is transmitted by the right-wing Coulters and Limbaughs is well detailed on Orcinus. Anybody who has read book titles in recent years knows the score – the left and anybody else who won’t walk lockstep with the extremists on the right is comprised of godless, terrorist sympathizing, commie-fascist traitors. The venom drips all the way down to hate-spewing trolls, some of whom even choose eliminationist screen names such as “LibsMustDie”, who posted on Huffpo. Maybe it was LibsMustDie who finally cracked and went, his gun ablazing, into a church to kill liberals and their children. Who’s next?

  70. 76

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @73 HA is a news source that reports facts about goat-fucking neoconvicts like you.

  71. 77

    spews:

    Wow. And you idiots get upset when I call you anti-american, for declaring Bush and Cheney as war criminals who should be executed like Saddam Hussein… what flaming, lying, fat-mouth hypocrites you blue-wavers are. Especially you Goldy. What little respect I ever had for you is gone for good now. Best decision KIRO ever made was getting your garbage off the air.

  72. 78

    spews:

    Wow. And you idiots get upset when I call you anti-american, for declaring Bush and Cheney as war criminals who should be executed like Saddam Hussein

    Can you provide a link to when someone at this blog said that Bush and Cheney should be executed?

    Also, can you explain how attacking two individual people who have clearly committed crimes is the same as attacking a vague category of completely innocent people who simply share a political outlook one disagrees with?

    What little respect I ever had for you is gone for good now.

    I’m sure he’s devastated.

  73. 79

    W. Klingon Skousen spews:

    re 68: I guess when O’Reilly advocated bombing San Francisco, it was merely a rhetorical device.

  74. 80

    Politically Incorrect spews:

    W. Klingon Skousen said:

    “re 68: I guess when O’Reilly advocated bombing San Francisco, it was merely a rhetorical device.”

    Yep.

  75. 82

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    59. Roger Rabbit spews:
    @34 Of course I am, but satire is too complicated for Coneheads to understand, so of course it all flies over their pointy heads.

      
    You mean like that new yorker satire that offended sooooo many liberals/democrats?

  76. 83

    SeattleJew spews:

    Roger,

    I am not so sure that all lefty hate mongering here is excusable. There has to be a line between satire and commentary.

    It seems to me that we have gone to far in tolerating this sort of hate-speak. On the left, libruls make subtle distinctions such as anti-zionism is OK because it is not antisemitism or its OK to jump out of Iraq because “those” people kill each other anyhow. On the right, it has (ironically) become OK to tolerate the Chinese cultural genocide in Tibet or the US Air Force;s use of Jesus as a training tool because if it is our guys it is OK to hate.

    Why do we tolerate any organization that demeans others .. whether it is a Mosque, a Klavern, or golf club, if it sponsors hatred we should treat it with disgust.

  77. 84

    spews:

    @81
    You mean like that new yorker satire that offended sooooo many liberals/democrats?

    Um, being offended by something is not the same as not understanding it.

    Did you take double the dosage of your stupid pills this morning?

  78. 86

    spews:

    @82
    Why do we tolerate any organization that demeans others .. whether it is a Mosque, a Klavern, or golf club, if it sponsors hatred we should treat it with disgust.

    Exactly. Like this guy who accuses specific Muslims of promoting hate without any proof.

  79. 87

    Tukow spews:

    It seems to me that we have gone to far in tolerating this sort of hate-speak.

    ———

    Couldn’t agree more.

  80. 88

    spews:

    @84
    That’s a comment. I’m talking about Goldy or one of the co-bloggers.

    Plus, as I mentioned to Orbusmax, there’s a big difference between targeting an individual who has committed crimes and targeting innocent groups.

  81. 90

    Rick D. spews:

    Lee~ are you that ignorant? He provided you with proof that you requested @ 77 “where someone from this blog” said it ….and he succeeded. Now you’re changing the goal posts to Goldy or one of his minions posting like Darryl or yourself? Nice try. Oh, and by the way, Bush isn’t a war criminal. Just because you believe so doesn’t make it so, sunshine.

    Moron! Goldy’s hate site is full of liberal lemming mental cases beginning with Roger Roadkill and some pervert with his eye as an avatar.

  82. 91

    Steve spews:

    @89 A single anonymous post from 2006 makes this a hate site? How pathetic.

    Psst, Ricky, your hate is showing.

  83. 92

    spews:

    @88
    Through a trial obviously. But if I personally witness a crime, I don’t need the trial as proof. One does not need a trial to be personally convinced of someone’s guilt. And I’ve never personally said that Bush, Cheney, or anyone else who has very openly and obviously committed crimes should be convicted without a trial. I’ve just followed the situation in this world closely enough to know that they’ve broken the law and should stand trial.

  84. 93

    Tukow spews:

    @90
    A single anonymous post from 2006 makes this a hate site? How pathetic.

    ———————

    Stuff does tend to get tossed out liberally, and that can lead down all sorts of paths. One contributor referred to all Republicans as “warm criminals,” for example. Microsoft has been a big contributor, through its PAC, to the Republican party and local candidates, leading one to ask how Microsoft and, for that matter, its employees should be viewed.

  85. 94

    proud leftist spews:

    90
    Wingnuts are quite capable of extrapolating from the wispiest shred of evidence, or none at all if necessary, an entire theory. Witness supply-side economics or WMDs in Iraq. With Wittle Wicky above, he just doing the best he can. We should cut him some slack.

  86. 95

    spews:

    @89
    If Bush authorized torture and oversaw extraordinary renditions, then he is a war criminal. So is Cheney. If a third-world leader did those things, he would be a war criminal. Bush and Cheney don’t get special treatment just because they’re “our” guys.

    I could be nitpicky and say that he was referring to Rumsfeld, but Goldy crossed a line there that I wouldn’t have crossed.

  87. 96

    W. Klingon Skousen spews:

    Respected lawyer Vincent Bugliosi wrote a book outlining his case for trying Bush For murder.

    I doubt that even Dr. Leo Buscaglia would be averse to that!

    “It’s not enough to have lived. We should be determined to live for something. May I suggest that it be creating joy for others, sharing what we have for the betterment of personkind, bringing hope to the lost and love to the lonely.”

    Leo F. Buscaglia
    1924-1998

    Does any righty come close to that? No. Not by a long shot.

  88. 97

    Rick D. spews:

    @ 94 ~ …and the key word there is “IF”.

    Since it isn’t known and rarely would such actions land all the way up the chain as far as Bush or cheney, all you’re left with are unsubstantiated rumors and assumptions based on your political ideology.
    Otherwise, we’d also have to look at Clinton and Gore as well, right? No of course not, they’re Democrats.

    ..take the partisan blinders off once in awhile.

  89. 98

    Tukow spews:

    @91

    And I’ve never personally said that Bush, Cheney, or anyone else who has very openly and obviously committed crimes

    @94
    If Bush authorized torture and oversaw extraordinary renditions, then he is a war criminal.

    ———-

    Are you saying the war crimes they openly committed (91) are those you list in 94 (where you apply an “if”)?

  90. 99

    Daddy Love spews:

    81 MS

    It would have been like that if the New Yorker had included a footnote explaining its satire, as Roger does.

  91. 100

    Steve spews:

    @96 “..take the partisan blinders off once in awhile.”

    Funny, coming from a commie-fascist goatfucker such as yourself who puts party before country.

  92. 101

    spews:

    @97
    You’re talking about two different issues. It’s absolutely known that Bush committed a crime by bypassing the FISA court to spy on Americans (although Congress has just pardoned him for it essentially). But that’s not a war crime. It’s also very, very likely (although the proof is not as solid yet) that he committed war crimes with regards to authorizing torture and rendition.

  93. 102

    W. Klingon Skousen spews:

    re 99: I can forgive almost anything except goatfucking. When I know a Conservative has fucked a particular goat, the cheese made from the goat is always suspect.

    I hate those righty goatfuckers, too!

  94. 103

    spews:

    @96
    Otherwise, we’d also have to look at Clinton and Gore as well, right?

    You bet. If Bill Clinton authorized the torture of anyone, I’d demand that he be tried for a war crime.

  95. 104

    Daddy Love spews:

    So, torture is a war crime, in violation of the Geneva Conventions that we signed and ratified, making them the supreme law of the land (US Constitution Article VI)

    Bush’s executive staff discussed, planned and approved specific tortures (video here).

    Bush approved this torture plan.

    QE fucking D

  96. 107

    spews:

    @104
    Not based upon what we know. I think it was the biggest foreign policy mistake in this country’s history, but I think that the fact that Saddam was himself a criminal makes it very difficult to truly make the case there. I could be wrong.

    @103
    I have to admit, I haven’t paid as close attention to some of the recent revelations as I should, so the evidence may be there now.

  97. 108

    Tukow spews:

    Not based upon what we know. I think it was the biggest foreign policy mistake in this country’s history, but I think that the fact that Saddam was himself a criminal makes it very difficult to make a case there. I could be wrong.

    ————

    Don’t follow this. What’s his being a criminal (an issue unto itself) have to do with providing a legal basis for invading?

    And that’s my last question – I have to run!

  98. 109

    spews:

    @107
    Because I think it’s too difficult to definitively pin down the exact rationale for invading. There were legitimate moral reasons to want to use military force to remove Saddam from power. There just weren’t practical reasons, but that doesn’t necessarily add up to a war crime.

    One avenue that could potentially make the invasion a war crime is if Bush and Co. knowingly lied about it. I think that’s possible, but I don’t think anyone will ever be able to prove it in a court of law. As much as it bothers me to admit that Bush might have “gotten away with it,” the value that I place on adhering to judicial principles leaves me with doubts that his guilt on this can be proven without a reasonable doubt.

  99. 110

    Steve spews:

    @108 “leaves me with doubts that his guilt on this can be proven without a reasonable doubt”

    But, but, don’t we get to waterboard anybody on the right? Oh, darn.

  100. 111

    Daddy Love spews:

    108 Lee

    Tommy Franks, who commanded the invasion of Iraq, has admitted that the pre-war bombings were designed to “degrade” Iraqi air defenses in the same way as the air attacks that began the 1991 Gulf war. These “spikes of activity” were, in the words of then British Defense Secretary, Geoff Hoon, designed to “provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an excuse for war”. British Foreign Office legal analysis concluded that these attacks, designed to start a war, were illegal under international law.

    Bush approved them: therefore, he is a war criminal.

    An attack that is not carried out in self defense violates the UN Charter, which the US hads both signed and ratitified, giving it the force of law. This unprovoked attack therefore violates international law.

    Bush approved it: therefore, he is a war criminal.

    But don’t ask me, even though I know, ask these guys. Or these guys.

    And OF COURSE they lied about it, but that’s not a war crime, though we do have laws against propagandizing the public in this country. They’re common criminals in that and sundry other regards, such as Hatch Act violations etc. etc. etc. etc., but again, not war crimes.

  101. 112

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @76 We don’t think they should be executed. We’ll settle for throwing them into Spandau for 20 years.

  102. 113

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @76 (continued) Explain to us why you think people who started a war based on lies (as Kaiser Wilhelm and Hitler did), who run secret prisons and torture innocent people (as Tojo, Hitler, and Saddam did), shouldn’t be handed over to international tribunals for prosecution?

  103. 114

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @82 So you think we should let wingers kick us and not say anything in response? You can do that if you like. But that’s not how I operate.

    I’m compelled to question your judgment, SJ. The rightwing hate-spewing has been going on since at least the 1930s. Are we supposed to roll over? You seem to think so. Why is it OK for them to do it, but us doing it back is somehow impermissible? What twisted logic obligates me to stay on the high road when they don’t?

    Our fathers didn’t win WW2 by playing nice with the Nazis and Japs. They hit them with everything they had — machineguns, shrapnel, flamethrowers, napalm, A-bombs. That’s what war is, my friend. You don’t wait for the other guys to decide to play fair. If you want to survive, you kick the motherfuckers in the shins, and anywhere else you can, as hard as you can.

    It’s nice that you’re a pacifist, SJ, but if you wish to surrender to these fascist assholes, you’ll have to do it without me. I’d rather fight.

  104. 115

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @88 First, you get hold of the evidence they’re hiding by making witnesses who don’t obey subpoenas talk by arresting them and hauling them before the body that is duly authorized to issue the subpoenas.

    And you go after their papers with subpoenaes and court orders. For some strange reason, those who abuse power often document their actions. The Nazis and Stalinists did. I’ll bet this bunch does, too.

    Then you arrest them and bring them before a court for trial.

  105. 116

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Generally speaking, the people who oppose prosecuting Bush and Cheney for war crimes are the same ones who oppose laws against street racing, hunting out of season, and embezzling.

  106. 117

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @89 Hey! I don’t pretend to be polite to wingnut goat dick lickers like you. WYSIWYG! This is a liberal blog, and you come here of your own free will — I assume because you enjoy getting crotch-kicked. I’m here to serve! Wouldn’t want you to leave unfulfilled.

  107. 118

    Stephen Schwartz spews:

    @85
    Lee, you are a sad choice as a critic of the Coulters and O’Reilly’s.

    Tell me, are you different than the Coulters, Hannities, Limbaughs, and O’Reilly’s. Like them, you feel free to make up science that does not exist, use profanity to demean others, and attack others for words you make up.

    As for the noble blog art of decoration of opinions by profanity, how many folks here have been complimented by your equating them to “retards?”, or are the mentally disabled your handy substitute for niggers?

    Frankly, you even hurt the causes you support. Take marijuana. Like every scientist I know, I think the illegalization of mj is stupid. But, you foment a rather cruel view of marijuana by confounding patients real problems with your evangelical drive to treat cannabis as a substitute for the true cross. These folks need and deserve help, from doctors who have the legal right to prescribe legal marijuana, not from a quack who wants them to smoke stuff you grow in your basement. You are wlecome, as far as I am concerned, to smear coal tar from cannabis all over your skin, but pushing inhaled smoke puts you, IMHO, in a legaue with them funny folks from Durham NC.

    Frankly, there are times when your shrill tones make me want a good ol’ MJ brownie!

    Lets me finish this diatribe with responding once again to your malign effort to foment hatred between me and Muslims more disturbing. You will keep this up till someone is hurt, like some twelve year old kid with too much testosterone. Have you ever gone to bed at night wondering if some poor person reading your posts might decide to hurt me or my family?

    Before you throw any more verbak bombs, perhaps you should remember Dr. King’s comment:

    “an eye for an eye, a tooth for the tooth, leads only to a land of the blind and toothless.”

  108. 119

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @92 I judge Microsoft and its employees by what my MSFT shares are worth in the open market.

  109. 120

    cmiklich spews:

    Wow RR: You call yourself Christian? With language like that?

    Nowhere can there be found more hate than on the left.

    Murder of innocents through abortion? Check.
    Working to save the lives of the most brutal murderers in the land? Yeah, that’s liberalism.

    Slaughtering the aged through forced euthanasia? Yep, that’s the loving left.

    From cradle to grave, if a person is moral then liberals hate ‘em. If they can’t kill the innocent and celebrate the debauched, then they’re not leftists.

  110. 121

    Stephen Schwartz spews:

    @100 Lee

    Jeeezzz….

    I have zero admiration for GWB but what fucking good does it do to pretend to redefine our nation’s laws. Congress did not and cannot create a pardon.

    Read the ffin legislation!

  111. 122

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @96 Only an ignorant fuck who chooses to park his head under a rock could still believe at this stage of things that Bush and Cheney weren’t involved in secret renditions and torture.

    But my conclusions don’t matter, and neither do yours. This is for a court to determine, based on evidence. All we’re saying on this blog is that Bush and Cheney should be referred to the legal system for investigation and trial. No one here is suggesting that anyone take these matters into his own hands.

    There is a very strong probability that Bush and Cheney will never be held accountable for their actions. However, America already stands convicted in the court of public opinion in much of the world. From now on, if you travel abroad, you will encounter foreigners who put our country in the same basket as Nazi Germany and assorted tinpot dictators — and they will make no effort to distinguish between “good” and “bad” Americans. We are all condemned by world opinion because of you rightwing asswipes. Thanks for nothing. Fuck you. Go to hell.

  112. 123

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @109 “But, but, don’t we get to waterboard anybody on the right? Oh, darn.”

    I don’t think we’ll have to. Plenty of the rats now abandoning the GOP ship will talk of their own free will. Some already have, and more book deals are on the way.

  113. 124

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    Ouch. I just read that the killer had a few books of right-wingers. Shows how much goldy knows, it wasn’t an ann coulter book.
      
    Liberal bias in the media?
     
    Does anyone know what books the Virginia Tech killer had in his place?

  114. 125

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @119 Evidently you haven’t been on this blog long enough to know that I have repeatedly stated in these comment threads that I personally oppose abortion on moral and religious grounds.

    You also seem unaware that I have supported use of the death penalty in appropriate cases.

    Evidently you’re also ignorant of the fact that I do not support euthanasia of the elderly — only of useless dogs. In fact, I don’t know of anyone who does support that — I’ve never seen a comment on this blog in support of involuntary euthanasia of the elderly, which is not the same thing as giving terminally ill people the legal right to choose to terminate their suffering.

    Cute rant, but you’re full of shit. Why are all you righty stupes so fucking ill-informed? Because you’re too stupid to comprehend what you read, or because you’re too lazy to read, or because you don’t know how to read?

  115. 126

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @123 I know what books you have in your place. None. You’re part of the population segment that gets all its information from action movies and believes reading is for prissies. You wouldn’t be caught dead with a book because the kind of people you hang out with would laugh at you if they saw you with a book. And the bookmobile refuses to come to your trailer park because of the crime rate.

  116. 127

    Steve spews:

    @82 “we should treat it with disgust.”

    We showed disgust in the 1990′s. What did that get us other than endless war, Gitmo, Monica Goodling and Karl Rove? You may not understand this, but there a lot of decent people, myself included, who are feeling quite fed up these days, even to the point of feeling very mean spirited. It’s been a long time coming.

  117. 129

    Stephen Schwartz spews:

    @113 Roger Rabbit

    No Roger I NOT a pacifist. OTOH, I do not want to give in t the el Qaedas, Wahabis, Bushistas, nazis .. etc by becoming like them.

    You do remember who Lenin’s fancier was? STALIN! The young man organized a crime gang and robbed banks to send money to the cause. The same mentality invented a form of fascism that may have transcended the government of the Tsars AND the Nazis.

    Of course I believe in fighting. I idolize the heroes who gave there lives in Warsaw and Mississippi, knowing that there lives were to be lost but believing that the lesson left behind was more important than death. I myself played a minor role in the civil rights “wars” and still have a couple of scars from youthful encounters of the less than gentle sort.

    For that matter, I have no real idea how or why the righties would focus on you as a hate monger. I don’t think calling Bush an asshole or
    equating Chaney with Torquemada is hate speach .. rather it is good, old fashioned invective. Hell, I LIKE clever invective.

    I guess I wil;l have to watch and learn.

  118. 130

    Stephen Schwartz spews:

    @126. Steve

    @82 “we should treat it with disgust.”

    We showed disgust in the 1990’s. What did that get us other than endless war, Gitmo, Monica Goodling and Karl Rove? You may not understand this, but there a lot of decent people, myself included, who are feeling quite fed up these days, even to the point of feeling very mean spirited. It’s been a long time coming.

    What did we show disgust toward in the 90s??? People with less nice cars??? Clintonism was about a key American virtue … opportunity! But disgust for bigotry????

    Rather it seems to me that the Repricans fanned their hatred of Billary to ridiculous level, burning a real hole in our society and giving us something called a compassionate concervative who claimed God as his mentor, fometed hatred of gays anfd frenchmen, built an antire government on fear, etc.

    Screw all that. We need eight years of rationalism and respect for others. We need Obama.

  119. 131

    Devil's Advocate spews:

    Oh gosh, this was fun, fun, fun. I had RR and Lee trying to defend the indefensible, for what, 6 hours? Love ya, RR, but you have got to take the blinders off, babe.

    Critical Mass uses force to protest, and make a political point. That idiot in inbredville whoshot those people used force to make a political point. One of the differences between the two is…..one happens in our fair city regularly, with the consent of city hall.

    Because, as Geddy Lee once sang “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.” And if the people in charge of public safety decide not to interfere with violent protest, then there must be a reason. Inherently, that reason must be that they agree with the politics of the protest.

    That was all I was trying to say, and predictably, you guys couldn’t get past your rigid dogma. You knee-jerked it. So once again, I must spoon feed you.

    Proud Leftist at #50 nailed it by still having a liberal(Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas) mindset, as defined between the parentheses by Websters. He got past his politics, and saw the connection.

    Remember, my first sentence was “let’s play”. I love how you guys assumed I was a right winger because I took an alternative viewpoint.

    BTW, if you think I am a neo-con(how soon that bit of the lexicon died) troll, my other handle was arguing for Obama on this blog,when all you guys had the hots for Hillary. I told you it was over for Hillary on February sixth.

    Still think Obama is unelectable? Gosh, doesn’t it seem the Republicans are a bit unprepared for Obama’s candidacy? Maybe they were prepping for Hillary all along, like I told you, over, and over, and over, and over during the primary season. How I do miss Dustin James and his assinine comments…Ah, memories.

  120. 132

    Daddy Love spews:

    130 DA

    The difference between Critical Mass and the church shooter is that Critical Mass runs an event every month and only once has there been an incident of this type, while the church shooter killed two people with a shotgun after leaving his home full of right wing books.

  121. 133

    Ben spews:

    Incredible.

    This is the event that has turned the far left as far right as the far right has ever been.

    Consider, that if they were to follow the counsel they offered post 9-11, the reaction would be more like:

    1)What did those churchgoers do to provoke such an attack? Isn’t this just another example of “blowback”?

    2) How can we reach out to the far right crazies with love and respect?

    3) What can we do to accomodate their ideas and values into our society?

    and of course…

    4) Could it really have been an inside job? Would the far left set this up just to give the next administration an excuse to clamp down on the civil rights of the far right?

    As I see it, compared to the attack on the world trade center, setting up this would be a cake walk.

    Ben

  122. 134

    Steve spews:

    @129 “Rather it seems to me”

    As it seems to me as well. However, the left’s response was, at best, disgust. An insufficient response, as it turns out. Did ever a people talk so much and do so little? Further, was there ever a failure of the left from which a lesson was ever learned? The failures of left deserve their fair measure of credit for bringing on the right-wing rampage of the last eight years. The left did their part in giving America Karl Rove and Monica Goodling, Katrina and Iraq, and shooting friends in the face.

    “respect for others”

    Huh? For “Repricans”?

  123. 135

    Devil's Advocate spews:

    #130

    “The difference between Critical Mass and the church shooter is that Critical Mass runs an event every month and only once has there been an incident of this type”

    Oh Really?

    From Wikipedia:

    Critics have claimed that Critical Mass is a deliberate attempt to obstruct automotive traffic and cause a disruption of normal city functions, asserting that individuals taking part in Critical Mass refuse to obey the vehicular traffic laws that apply to cyclists the same as they do to drivers of other vehicles.[19]

    In California’s San Francisco Bay Area, there have been several incidents of conflict during Critical Mass events.[20] Similar conflicts have arisen during critical mass rides in Winnipeg, Manitoba and Seattle, Washington.

    [edit] March, 2007 San Francisco, California

    On the evening of March 30, 2007 monthly ride in San Francisco, a bicycle rider was arrested on felony (later reduced to misdemeanor) charges in San Francisco’s Tenderloin neighborhood for denting a limousine using a bicycle lock. The limousine driver told police he got out of his car to talk to two cyclists who allegedly blocked his path. After briefly exchanging words with one of the cyclists, the limousine driver said he grabbed one of the cyclists’ bikes and tried to pull it out of the way. He then got back into his limo in hopes of going around the riders. Before he could move, however, the limousine driver said another cyclist smacked into the front driver’s side of his car, then punched the hood with a u-shape bicycle lock, denting it. The cyclist, however, told police officers that he only hit the limo with his lock after the driver had gunned his engine. During the incident, one of the limousine’s tires was slashed and the driver’s car keys stolen.[21]

    Near the end of the ride that evening, near the Japan Center and Western Addition neighborhoods, a resident of Redwood City, California tried to drive through the mass of bicycle riders. An eyewitness claimed to have observed the driver strike a cyclist and flee the scene of the accident before cyclists chased after and surrounded her vehicle.[22][23] The driver denied striking a cyclist and alleged that hundreds of bicyclists surrounded her minivan while she and her 11- and 13-year-old daughters were inside, banged on the sides of her car, “keyed” the paint, and threw a bicycle through the rear window of the vehicle, causing $5,300 in damage.[24]

    San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, in April 2007, requested that Critical Mass riders “police themselves.” “It does the bicycle-advocacy community no good to have people that are aggressive and dispirit the entire movement,” Newsom said. “I would encourage the bicycle coalition to say, ‘Look, we don’t put up with this, enough is enough.’”[25][26]

    [edit] May 2007, Berkeley, California

    On May 11, 2007, a similar incident occurred in Berkeley, California.[27] Bicycle advocates claimed that a driver shouted, “I’m sick of you people,” [28] deliberately attempted to strike cyclists and drive through the side of the monthly ride,[27] causing approximately $3,000 worth of damage to bicycles. However, the driver and his wife alleged that the bikers threw their bicycles under the vehicle.[29][30] Critical Mass participants then pounded on the hood and windows of the car, breaking its windshield.[31] Berkeley police did not make any arrests in the incident.[32]

  124. 136

    SeattleJew spews:

    @81 I thought the cover was phenomenally stupid. Like Lee I got the joke but not all that quickly and when I did I felt demeaned.

    WADR, the editor responsible for this deserves to be put in a Dunce stool and made to walk aroounf with a sandwich sign apologizing for her increpit inanity.

  125. 137

    Don Joe spews:

    @ 130

    Critical Mass uses force to protest, and make a political point. That idiot in inbredville whoshot those people used force to make a political point.

    Almost correct. The idiot in Tennessee used violence to make a political point, “violence” being a subset of “force” that’s intended to do physical, bodily harm to human beings.

    But, that’s such a small difference. After all, killing people is so almost like sitting on a bicycle in front of a 3000 lb vehicle.