The Censorship Of Madmen
Within hours of the attack on Arizona Representative Gabrielle Giffords, liberal bloggers, pundits, and even politicians raced to pin responsibility on the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and the general “climate of hate” produced by opposition to President Obama’s agenda.
The idea that millions of Americans should meekly submit to an aggressive statist agenda, because resistance might provoke a lunatic to shoot a congresswoman, is deeply offensive to the ideals of liberty and free speech.
The attempts to link resistance to violence, or discredit it through manufactured charges of racism, is nothing less than totalitarian. If the exercise of free speech makes you an accessory to murder, there is no such thing as free speech. The Left has spent the last few hours screaming that all dissent from their ideology leads to violence. Well, there is only one form of government that requires violence to achieve dissent. If the Left wants to push this meme, they are indicting themselves as tyrants.
Go read the whole article. Then go read the fun posts on Democratic Underground where they are calling for the banning of FOX News, Glen Beck and the jailing of Sarah Palin. Good stuff there, very well thought out.
34 comments:
I think you should go to the playground and say "Hey little girl I'm gonna fuck you!" and see how that works out.
Oh wait, that free speech is different? Why?
6:42.. thought police now?
anon 6:42 HUH!!!
ANON 6:42, you need to take your meds.
Let's cut the crap: this was yet another example of right-wing terrorism.
And let's cut through more crap, and count the things that Miglavs did not say.
1) He did not condemn the act.
2) He did not mention any of the victims.
3) He did not express a word of sympathy toward the victims and their families, or regret that the incident took place.
4) He did not deny (or criticize) any of the the inflammatory rhetoric from Palin, etc.
What he did say suggests that all he's really concerned about is whether this will affect him, whether he'll somehow be forced to "shut up."
The only ones who have been shut up were six innocent people in Arizona, including a 9-year-old girl.
And Miglavia marches on ...
Actions cause reactions: Miglavians shocked
Anon 8:57, there are a lot of people who did not condemn the act. We should not jump to conclusions until the facts are out. Unfortunately, a lot of people have already said it's Palin's fault.
I thought we should wait until all the facts are out like when the media said we should wait when the muslim terrorist shot up our folks at Ft Hood.
Here's an interesting comparison. Muslim murderers people and MSM says let's not jump to conclusions, white American murders people and the MSM says it's Palin''s fault.
The only death that really bothered me was the child. People die every day. In fact, criminal aliens murder women and children everyday in this country. Are you condemning their acts? I doubt it. You probably think that is the collateral damage so you can have cheap lettuce and your lawn mowed for you. Where is your concern for them?
With your post Daniel should be on the highest building in the state shouting what you want him to shout.
What was the inflammatory rhetoric from Palin? Is it anything like Obama's sayings, assaults by SEIU thugs, Black Panther intimidating white voters rights or any other inflammatory rhetoric or actions by the left?
I too am concerned if my 1st amendment and 2nd amendment rights will be further limited. Democrats don't want to let another good crisis go to waste. Since a person goes nut, why should I have my rights violated? I didn't do anything. In fact, it sounds like the sheriff of the country already knew about him and threats he had already made. It sounds like the sheriff fell down on his job and innocent people got butchered for it. Of course, he's a democrat sheriff. They are never responsible for their actions or in actions. I think it is Sheriff Clarence Dupnik. He's the democrat who allowed those people to be murdered by a person who was a threat to the public. Are you condemning him?
The only death that really bothered me was the child....
Well that's pretty much all you had to say, Dave. It's clear where you're coming from. I can only imagine what you'd say about me if I said something as totally inane as, "The only violent acts committed by criminal aliens that really bother me are those against children."
Just curious: How long has the hospital been letting you out into the community so you can have Internet access?
P.S. Actually, I don't have to imagine what you'd say, since virtually every time someone takes a position opposed to yours, your response is likely to include the ridiculous accusation that they "support" the rape and murder of children.
Oh, and by the way, I'll make you a deal: I'll condemn Sheriff Clarance Dupnik for "allowing" those people to be killed when I hear you condemn the entire Rainier Police Department for "allowing" someone to murder Chief Ralph Painter. No ... wait. That still doesn't really achieve your level of stupidity: You need to condemn Chief Ralph Painter for "allowing" someone to kill him.
Don't assume that any particular political motivation was behind this murder, at least until more information is in. The guy has been called a liberal etc. but his brain seems so scrambled that any political stance is probably meaningless.
In other words, wait for the facts people!
(And for the one good thing that came out of this, see my blog on Arizona Heroes at
http://www.hallillywhite.blogspot.com)
All murders are a tragedy. What do you want me to do, cry all day long, take the day off from work? What is your solution. You can read about murders all day long on the internet.
What should I do according to you?
ANON 12:50 PM
Here is an article that shows the sheriff failed in his duty:
http://thechollajumps.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/jared-loughner-is-a-product-of-sheriff-dupniks-office/
No wonder the ole sheriff was blaming everyone but himself.
Hopefully, more of the facts will come out soon.
What should I do according to you?
For starters, the next time there's a mass shooting in the U.S., you might refrain from posting a statement like, "The only death that really bothered me was the child."
Hint for slow learners: Because, Dave, the subtext or implication of a statement like that is that the deaths of everyone else didn't bother you. At all. That's ... um, how shall I put it? Problematic? Sick? Psychotic? Sorta calls into question basically everything you say, Dave.
You are telling me that we should be more concerned about multiple deaths in one location than the same or more deaths in different locations? I have to say you are the sick one. Five deaths in different locations is okay but five deaths in one location is not okay. You are the sick one. Five dead people is five dead people, no matter where they are.
Hints for slow people like you: the subtext or implication of a statement like that is that the deaths of everyone else didn't bother you.
Would it better for simple minded people like you if I said, the one that bothered me the most was the child.
That's ... um, how shall I put it? Problematic? Sick? Psychotic? Sorta calls into question basically everything you say.
Nice dance, Dave. But you're not persuading anyone but yourself.
The fact is: Six innocent people were killed by an individual who appears to have been motivated by right-wing political impulses.
Another fact: One of those innocent people was a 9-year-old child who was born on 9/11.
And you said:
"The only death that really bothered me was the child."
They're your words, Dave. Either the words mean what they mean, or words don't mean anything.
Here are some more words:
"I tell people don't kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus - living fossils - so we will never forget what these people stood for."
- Rush Limbaugh, Denver Post, 12-29-95
"Get rid of the guy. Impeach him, censure him, assassinate him."
- Rep. James Hansen (R-UT), talking about President Clinton
"We're going to keep building the party until we're hunting Democrats with dogs."
- Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX), Mother Jones, 08-95
"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."
- Ann Coulter, New York Observer, 08-26-02
"We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors."
- Ann Coulter, at the Conservative Political Action Conference, 02-26-02
Miglavs actually got it right for once, Dave. Maybe you should just shut up.
I can post a list just as easily as you can where democrats have said such things. Don't forget the hateful speech against Palin and her family.
Adults die every second, why are you not crying about their deaths. It must only be mass murders when you give a shit. You are the sick one. When have you ever given a shit when somebody was murdered? You seem to be a hypocrite.
It looks like the deaths may have been prevented. Why are you not bitching at that dickhead sheriff? Cause he's a democrat.
I think the real issue here is that the only reason you're bitching about the sheriff is because he's a Democrat, one who (unlike Obama) had the guts to call right-wingers' fascist asses out.
Sarah Palin? Are we talking about the same Sarah Palin who published a map with crosshairs over the victim's congressional district urging people to "Reload"? The map that she's since taken down? I wonder why she took it down. Hmmmm ....
The reason I haven't responded to your question about the sheriff is because I regard it as an obvious effort by you to change the subject from the most extraordinary (not to mention disturbing) statement that appears anywhere in this thead, a statement referring to the murder of six innocent people in which you said:
"The only death that really bothered me was the child."
FTFY:
http://i.imgur.com/uHROC.jpg
Anon 8:57am,
"Let's cut the crap: this was yet another example of right-wing terrorism."
Let's see what your friends on the left have to say:
"The important thing is for everyone not to jump to conclustions," said retired Gen. Wesley Clark on CNN.
"We cannot jump to conclusions," said CNN’s Jane Velez-Mitchell.
President Obama: "I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts."
Political analyst Mark Halperin urged a "transparent" investigation into the shootings "so the American people don’t jump to conclusions."
Whoops! My bad! Wrong shooting. Apparently it's now OK to jump to conclusions since we're not talking about Ft. Hood.
Another valiant attempt by the Miglavians to change the subject. Thanks for that, FP. Dave needed the break.
FP, I just heard this morning that obama is going to AZ, did he show the same respect and concern for the Ft Hood soldiers? I can't remember if he went down there.
ANON 4:28 PM, it looks like your fantasy of right wingers being the cause (as you call it) of the mass murders is bullshit. It looks more like he was an anarchist devil worshiping nut job. I don't think that is categorized as conservative or right wing. It's more like the left wing nut jobs.
The reason I mention that sheriff is because it looks like there has been events that should at least raised eyebrows and because of favoritism for county employees or lack of doing his job, six people got murdered. Now he wants to blame it on everyone but himself. If you or I had made similar death threats like Loughner did, we would be investigated. At least I would be, since you are an obama lover, you would probably get a pass.
Dave: You've made it sickeningly clear where you are coming from: If he'd missed the girl, it apparently wouldn't have bothered you much. If at all. That is the only logical conclusion that one can draw from the words you used and have only lamely clarified:
"The only death that really bothered me was the child."
Which is why this conversation is over.
ANON 9:16 AM
You are an idiot. I would have been very happy if that young girl was still alive. You're a typical liberal, trying to put words into peoples mouths. You only seem to give a shit when large amounts of people are murdered together. You don't give a shit when large amounts of people are butchered in different locations.
You are trying to give me shit because I care more about a young girl. Why don't you? I am more concerned about the young, old and weak. Why are you not even concerned when many more people die everyday in different locations. You are sick and morbid because you like large slaughter scenes.
You might be getting ready to do a large scale terrorist attack. That seems to be your fascination. You must spend all your time searching the internet and news for large scale murder scenes. You are starting to rant about nonsense, kinda like the piece of shit Laughner. I should probably report you to the FBI. Have you been worshiping the devil lately?
... kinda like the piece of shit Laughner.
Well, I can't ignore that. That's the most passion (and sense) you've had about this since you opened your mouth. About time. Maybe there's hope for you yet.
The next step: Helping you understand why Laughner is your piece of shit.
"The next step: Helping you understand why Laughner [sic] is your piece of shit."
Do tell. I'm interested in hearing just what the evidence is to support your conclusion that this deranged shooter is Dave's P.O.S.
Anon 9:40,
Where's the distraction? Certain anonymous commenters here are trying to pin this massacre on an entire political philosophy before all the evidence is in. So tell me: what is it about this particular shooting that warrants all the finger pointing while we had to show restraint assigning blame regarding the Ft. Hood shooting? How is that not relevant, considering it's the same side of the aisle who, having advised us to not "jump to conclusions" regarding Ft. Hood, are now the ones doing exactly what they told the rest of us not to do?
Gee anon, what IS the word for that?
How is that nut my piece of shit? I want proof. Can I say that or is that incendiary? That's probably disrespectful of obama. A dope smoking devil worshiping nut is a conservative? I don't think so.
PROVE IT PROVE IT
Dave, it goes without saying that anyone, regardless of their ideology, who opens fire on innocent people is deeply disturbed. Of course he’s a nut.
I am not saying he’s a Republican with a capital “R.” I am not saying he is somehow representative of Republicans, mainstream or otherwise. He isn’t, thank God. Actually, he sounds largely apolitical.
But clearly this guy had a political antenna. Whose station was he tuned to? Whose signals was he picking up? Whose rhetoric was he repeating? The fact that he’s crazy does not mean these questions aren’t relevant.
For starters: His angst-ridden references to gold and silver backing for U.S. currency -- an issue that Glen Beck, for one, pounds on endlessly, every day. Would you agree that Beck is a political conservative? Or do I need to prove that, too?
His insistence on the primacy of the English language. Is that a pet issue for anyone you know, Dave?
His declaration that a woman who had an abortion was a “terrorist.”
His selective attacks on the U.S. Constitution -- like the 14th amendment.
Just before he started shooting, Republicans in Congress launched a campaign to scrap the 14th Amendment to deny the right to citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants. In his video postings, Loughner rails against “the second constitution,” a term a term used by hard conservatives to refer to the post-Civil War 13th Amendment banning slavery and the 14th Amendment.
Scrapping the 14th amendment … let’s see: Is that a pet issue for Democrats? Is that on Nancy Pelosi’s “to do” list? Is that a rallying cry for Obama? Or is that something right-wingers have a hard-on for?
Oh yes … law enforcement officials have said there may be links between him and American Renaissance, which the Department of Homeland Security describes as “anti-government, anti-immigration, anti-ZOG [Zionist Occupation Government], anti-Semitic.” The online publication of the organization advocates white supremacy and racial separation.
The source for that last item? FOX News.
FP: You have no idea what I said, read, wrote or believed (and when I believed it) regarding the Fort Hood shooter. In fact, I’m not even sure what “conclusions” you believe that I believed you weren’t supposed to jump to. But I salute you: Your attempts to steer the discussion away from Loughner are admirable for their tenacity.
Dave, it goes without saying that anyone, regardless of their ideology, who opens fire on innocent people is deeply disturbed. Of course he’s a nut.
I am not saying he’s a Republican with a capital “R.” I am not saying he is somehow representative of Republicans, mainstream or otherwise. He isn’t, thank God. Actually, he sounds largely apolitical.
But clearly this guy had a political antenna. Whose station was he tuned to? Whose signals was he picking up? Whose rhetoric was he repeating? The fact that he’s crazy does not mean these questions aren’t relevant.
For starters: His angst-ridden references to gold and silver backing for U.S. currency -- an issue that Glen Beck, for one, pounds on endlessly, every day. Would you agree that Beck is a political conservative? Or do I need to prove that, too?
His insistence on the primacy of the English language. Is that a pet issue for anyone you know, Dave?
His declaration that a woman who had an abortion was a “terrorist.”
His selective attacks on the U.S. Constitution -- like the 14th amendment.
Just before he started shooting, Republicans in Congress launched a campaign to scrap the 14th Amendment to deny the right to citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants. In his video postings, Loughner rails against “the second constitution,” a term a term used by hard conservatives to refer to the post-Civil War 13th Amendment banning slavery and the 14th Amendment.
Scrapping the 14th amendment … let’s see: Is that a pet issue for Democrats? Is that on Nancy Pelosi’s “to do” list? Is that a rallying cry for Obama? Or is that something right-wingers have a hard-on for?
Oh yes … law enforcement officials have said there may be links between him and American Renaissance, which the Department of Homeland Security describes as “anti-government, anti-immigration, anti-ZOG [Zionist Occupation Government], anti-Semitic.” The online publication of the organization advocates white supremacy and racial separation.
The source for that last item? FOX News.
FP: You have no idea what I said, read, wrote or believed (and when I believed it) regarding the Fort Hood shooter. In fact, I’m not even sure what “conclusions” you believe that I believed you weren’t supposed to jump to. But I salute you: Your attempts to steer the discussion away from Loughner are admirable for their tenacity.
Sorry for the double post, unintentional. I don't know why that happened. Feel free to delete one, Miglavs, I won't scream "censorship."
I don't delete posts.
Gerald, are you the anonymous in the previous thread? It's difficult to keep track of conversations when everyone is anonymous.
You stated he was a conservative. I doubt it.
I just read an article by some person who took some classes with him. That person stated ""He appeared to be to me an emotional cripple or an emotional child," Coorough said. "He lacked compassion, he lacked understanding and he lacked an ability to connect."
I think that describes most of the democrat, progressives and commies. All the dems, prog, commies that I have met are emotionally crippled. Kinda sounds like obama too.
Loughner sounds more like a nut jobs every day. I think that makes him a democrat.
FP, thanks for posting that statement by Gen Wesley Clark. I had hoped he had disappeared into an old folks home. I never forgave him for butchering the Serbs when he worked at NATO under Clinton.
I'm not sure if you know, but the Serbs saved 500 downed American fliers in WWII? We thank them by handing them over to the commies after WWII and killing them in the nineties. I wonder why anyone ever wants to help out the US when they know a change in government and we could be killing their women and children next.
Now back to the new crazy murdering dirt bags.
Gerald,
"You have no idea what I said, read, wrote or believed (and when I believed it) regarding the Fort Hood shooter."
It goes without saying that NO ONE knows what you said, read, wrote or believed regarding the Fort Hood shooter. Up until now you had been posting anonymously. Read my posts. I wasn't talking about your readings, writings, or beliefs regarding Ft. Hood in the first place. My point isn't even about Ft. Hood. I was talking about the left's reaction to the shooting, comparing and contrasting the reactions after two similar events.
Regarding your "evidence", I could just as easily argue and offer evidence that Loughner was a leftist, given his proclivity for Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto (apparently among his favorites), the fact that people who knew him, such as Caitie Parker, described him as "liberal or Left-wing", his propensity for pot, etc.
"But clearly this guy had a political antenna. Whose station was he tuned to? Whose signals was he picking up? Whose rhetoric was he repeating? The fact that he’s crazy does not mean these questions aren’t relevant."
How are they relevant, Gerald? What's the purpose of bringing up his alleged political beliefs, which may not even be what you think they are? How do they tie in with what he did? Would the questions be any less relevant if Giffords was a Republican? Is it relevant that the judge he killed was a staunch Republican and described as "very conservative"?
Why is the left unwilling to assign blame squarely where it belongs? Loughner is the one responsible for the Tuscon murders. Loughner is the one who pulled the trigger. Not Palin, not Limbaugh, not Beck, not the Tea Party, not conservatism in general, and especially not Dave. Loughner. He is the one to blame. Not any "toxic" political environment, not any rhetoric by anyone on any side of the aisle, and not society in general.
Continued in next post...
...continued from last post.
Could this unwillingness be used as an excuse for certain Democrat politicians to seek more unchecked power for themselves? Lincoln Chafee is calling for an advertising boycott of talk radio in his state of Rhode Island, saying that the advertisers should "shut them down". This doesn't bother you? What about Rep. Robert Brady wanting to introduce legislation that would make it a federal crime to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a federal official or member of Congress? How do you square this rather subjective idea with the First Amendment?
How do you explain the reaction of the left, with its brazen hypocrisy, lack of civility, and lack of basic human decency, as anything other than an attempt to destroy the opposition, especially considering the outcome of the 2010 election? The bodies of the dead weren't even cold and in the ground before all the baseless attacks and finger-pointing began.
In short, they used evil to perpetrate more evil.
The undisputed fact is that Loughner is a deranged, deeply disturbed individual; therefore, none of his beliefs can be taken as indicative of any coherent political philosophy, much less one that a plurality of the American people identify with.
By the way, any alleged links Loughner had to American Renaissance have been debunked. So much for that one, slick.
Testing testing. FP, trying to respond to you, giving up tonight. Will try again tomorrow. Having web/posting problems.
Post a Comment