Patrick.net

AZ Shooting

By ¥   Follow   Sat, 8 Jan 2011, 3:18pm   3,842 views   98 comments
Watch (0)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

Parallels with this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Pentagon_shooting#Perpetrator

I sussed this out that there was a 40% chance that this was a tinfoil type of loony and not the typical Tea Party stuff.

The Pentagon shooter had been busted for pot, and had crazy ideas about currency.

Loughner also apparently had crazy ideas about currency (if his youtube videos are anything to go by), and was allegedly a "stoner" in high school (his yearbook picture bears this out).

Some sort of mental damage, of course. Pretty much a tinfoil libertarian from the looks of it.

Apparently bought a high-cap (33-round) mag for his Glock last month. I've long thought that those should be illegal, for obvious reasons.

« First     « Previous     Viewing Comments 59-98 of 98     Last »     See most liked comments

1. tatupu70 Follow Befriend (3) 15 threads 5,718 comments

   59   12:18pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   shrekgrinch says After all, who cares about the rest of the Constitution when the parts we don’t like are open game for pissing all over? I notice you completely ignored his point. The Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. Where do YOU draw the line? Or does that guarantee me the right to own nuclear bomb or 10? Or biological weapons?

2. Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq Follow Befriend 53 threads 658 comments

   60   12:25pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   tatupu70 says I notice you completely ignored his point. The Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. Where do YOU draw the line? Or does that guarantee me the right to own nuclear bomb or 10? Or biological weapons? Don't worry tatupu70. When losing an argument, the followers of Beck will slap on a neatly tailored tin foil hat, stick their fingers in their ears, and start screaming about the Constitution. shrekgrinch says Note the word ‘nobody’…no qualifications about who he refers to as nobody. So therefore, he is defining it as ‘anybody not doing…[rest of verb action of his sentence here]’. Hmmm...Shrek is breaking out the whole "CURRENCY OF GRAMMER" argument. I'm starting to think Loughner has Internet access in his jail cell....

3. tatupu70 Follow Befriend (3) 15 threads 5,718 comments

   61   12:35pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   shrekgrinch says tatupu70 says I notice you completely ignored his point. The Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. Where do YOU draw the line? Or does that guarantee me the right to own nuclear bomb or 10? Or biological weapons? Tatu…try READING for a change before typing on the keyboard, ok? I did not ignore it I WAS REFERRING TO IT. But you seem to be oblivious to that fact because you didn’t follow back far enough where it is clear I was referring to SoCal Renter deciding all on his own to amend the right to bear arms how he sees fit. No, actually, you completely missed his point and went on a ramble of your own making. You can say you referred to it, but sadly, saying it doesn't make it true. If you had actually acknowledged it, then I wouldn't have posted. I'm having a good day, so I'll give you another chance. Where do YOU draw the line? Where does the Constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms end? Or does it end? Should I be entitled to put land mines in my yard? Or have nuclear missiles in my garage? Or a store of bio weapons in my basement?

4. Done! Follow Befriend (4) 159 threads 2,826 comments

   62   12:36pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   SoCal Renter says 16 Tea Party members elected to congress in 2010 and Glen Beck is irrelevant? Who in the Hell is Glen Beck? The National Tea Party Gand Dragon? Get a hold of your self SoCal, you either high opinion of your self and your cause, or a low opinion of everyone who disagrees with you. Or possibly both. Hitler was a national dictator, not a T.V. host or 2008 political candidate.

5. Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq Follow Befriend 53 threads 658 comments

   63   12:51pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Tenouncetrout says Who in the Hell is Glen Beck? The National Tea Party Gand Dragon? Get a hold of your self SoCal, you either high opinion of your self and your cause, or a low opinion of everyone who disagrees with you. Or possibly both. Actually, the Tea Party members are encouraged not to publically use the term "Grand Dragon" as it associates too closely with the KKK. I know Tea Party members usually have dual memberships, but they do like to at least to appear like non-violent non-racists in public settings. When not in mixed company, feel free to use the "Grand Dragon" moniker as the good ole boys will get your double entendre. Glenn Beck created the Tea Party with his 9-12 protests. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-12_Project

6. Vaticanus Follow Befriend (1) 77 threads 1,139 comments

   64   1:03pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   SoCal Renter says Glenn Beck created the Tea Party with his 9-12 protests. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-12_Project Wrong. Rick Santelli, and his rant on the floor of the Chicago Merchantile exchange which was broadcast live on CNBC on February 19th, 2009 and subsequently became a youtube hit was the origin of the tea party movement. You can watch it yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp-Jw-5Kx8k or read about it: http://www.infoplease.com/us/government/tea-party-history.html Then please pull your head out of Glenn Beck's rear.

7. Done! Follow Befriend (4) 159 threads 2,826 comments

   65   1:07pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   SoCal Renter says Tenouncetrout says Who in the Hell is Glen Beck? The National Tea Party Gand Dragon? Get a hold of your self SoCal, you either high opinion of your self and your cause, or a low opinion of everyone who disagrees with you. Or possibly both. Actually, the Tea Party members are encouraged not to publically use the term “Grand Dragon” as it associates too closely with the KKK. I know Tea Party members usually have dual memberships, but they do like to at least to appear like non-violent non-racists in public settings. When not in mixed company, feel free to use the “Grand Dragon” moniker as the good ole boys will get your double entendre. Glenn Beck created the Tea Party with his 9-12 protests. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-12_Project Who made Who?

8. Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq Follow Befriend 53 threads 658 comments

   66   1:07pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   shrekgrinch says Stop the red herrings and please help SoCal Renter provide actual proof that the Right was actually involved in this. He needs the help, trust me. You don't believe Obama has provided sufficient "proof" of eligibility to be President. Therefore, nothing can satisfy your circular, reductive, illogical, and insane requirements for "proof". BTW: Boehner is also a friend of Gabby Giffords. Does this mean he lacks credibility? How does being friendly with someone equal POLICE CORRUPTION? My god, man. If you make these logical leaps with this type of "proof" I have to question your grasp on reality. Are you in a beige jumpsuit right now?

9. tatupu70 Follow Befriend (3) 15 threads 5,718 comments

   67   1:13pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   shrekgrinch says Why does it matter? It matters because it goes to the very heart of your contention: shrekgrinch says After all, who cares about the rest of the Constitution when the parts we don’t like are open game for pissing all over? So I'll ask again--where do YOU draw the line? shrekgrinch says Stop the red herrings You are calling the Constitution a red herring?

10. tatupu70 Follow Befriend (3) 15 threads 5,718 comments

    68   1:52pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   shrekgrinch says The heart of my contention was that if you piss on on part of the Constitution you piss all over it Exactly. And my question is--what part of the Constitution was he pissing on (to use your witty phrase)? I'm assuming you are refering to the right to bear arms. It's obviously very vague. Notice it doesn't say the right to carry high capacity magazine clips. So then, if you are so worried about people pissing on the Constitution, are you up in arms (no pun intended) because it's against the law to own a nuclear bomb? Clearly that qualifies as armament. So the Constitution should protect your right to own it, right? This is not a red herring. It goes to the heart of your argument.

11. Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq Follow Befriend 53 threads 658 comments

    69   2:01pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   shrekgrinch says The heart of my contention was that if you piss on on part of the Constitution you piss all over it. You can’t ‘cherry pick’ what you like and fuck the rest. For example, I don’t like Roe v. Wade — not because of the alleged woman’s right to choose — but because the Supremes ADMITTED to just pulling out of their asses the Constitutional ‘justification’ for it. But it is in there and so must be accepted or the entire Constitution is at risk. You live by the sword, you die by the sword. High capacity magazine clips are mentioned in your version of the Constitution...where, exactly? So like, when the US government amended the Constitution to outlaw Slavery, they were just pissing on the whole thing? The bastards! I guess with the whole Roe vs. Wade thing, your version of the Constitution ommitted the 14th Amendment. Or are Amendments pissing on the Constitution too? I can't keep it all straight. shrekgrinch says SoCal Renter says Hmmm…Shrek is breaking out the whole “CURRENCY OF GRAMMER” argument. I’m starting to think Loughner has Internet access in his jail cell… No, it is because others on patrick.net have used the term ‘nobody’, got caught red handed being proved they were full of shit and tried to weasel out of it by qualifying the term after the fact, that’s why. I'm not following but I assume your refering to other threads, or the other voices inside your head. I just want you to know it will be ok. No one here is going to try to take your grammar currency.

12. Nomograph Follow Befriend (1) 104 threads 2,851 comments

    70   5:37pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   SoCal Renter says Are you in a beige jumpsuit right now? Pretty much, judging by his myspace page: At least he has four friends: http://www.myspace.com/shrekgrinch/friends

13. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,231 comments

    71   5:57pm Tue 11 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   shrekgrinch says They should outlaw liberal idiots from speaking or voting and limit them to scrubbing toilets and fluffing on porn sets as an occupation. There is absolutely no reason such idiots should participate in society otherwise. After all, who cares about the rest of the Constitution when the parts we don’t like are open game for pissing all over? shrekgrinch says a few months ago I predicted that the Dems will continue to piss people off…and piss off people who tend to have guns…so much so that pretty soon said Dems would start getting shot at. I’m serious. I predicted that. shrekgrinch says Truthfully (I’m not Bap33 but will answer that unsolicited if it means I can piss even more people off than I usually do), I’ve always wondered how Liberals can be such dumb-asses when it comes to their fervent drive to totally piss off millions of gun-owners in this country. I mean, THEY OWN GUNS, people! Liberals usually don’t. So, do ‘the math’. While your average Winchester hunting rifle won’t stand up to the National Guard on their worst day of the month, it is more than enough to kill unarmed liberals who stupidly & arrogantly think that they are somehow immune from the wrath of an armed people descended from folks that did take up arms against their government before (Parliament and King George). shrekgrinch says So, don’t do the math then. Instead, keep whacking the nose of said rabid pit bull with your liberal rag of a newspaper while thinking “He can’t touch me! I have the ‘intellectual’ high ground!” Being in denial of the world as is is sooo conducive to one’s survival, after all. shrekgrinch says do ‘the math’.

14. elliemae Follow Befriend (25) 416 threads 7,009 comments Saint George, UT elliemae's website

    72   1:52am Wed 12 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   shrekgrinch says congressbitch...your precious Demobitch... I've stopped listening, now.

15. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,231 comments

    73   7:09pm Wed 12 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   If you haven't seen this already ... Jon Stewart's monologue following the Giffords shooting in Arizona: http://www.buddytv.com/articles/the-daily-show/jon-stewart-on-the-giffords-sh-39033.aspx

16. MarkInSF Follow Befriend 14 threads 1,118 comments

    74   2:19am Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   tatupu70 says I’m assuming you are refering to the right to bear arms. It’s obviously very vague. Notice it doesn’t say the right to carry high capacity magazine clips. So then, if you are so worried about people pissing on the Constitution, are you up in arms (no pun intended) because it’s against the law to own a nuclear bomb? Clearly that qualifies as armament. So the Constitution should protect your right to own it, right? This is not a red herring. It goes to the heart of your argument. Hey shrekgrinch, you going to answer this or not?

17. MarkInSF Follow Befriend 14 threads 1,118 comments

    75   2:47am Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   I think blaming Palin or conservatives in general for this is complete bullshit.

18. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,655 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    76   3:05am Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Protected   Michael Savage: (Obama) "He's a fascist. I know that you don't want to hear this, but the man is a neo-Marxist fascist dictator in the making. He is not using his fascism yet, because he doesn't have enough power to wield the fascist instruments of power, but he is aggrandizing enough power to become a very dangerous president, and you must understand this is an important story." Michael Savage has a huge audience and writes best selling books. If people actually believes this rhetoric is true, why WOULDN'T they take up arms against the Democratic government? Incite to riot is a real crime with real consequences. Propaganda is what brought Hitler to power and enabled the Holocaust. Ignoring hate speech like this is very dangerous no matter what caused the Arizona shooting. Eliminating the fairness doctrine in the United States is another one of Reagan's crimes against this country. Although not generally known, this particular reckless act is perhaps one of the most damaging.

19. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,655 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    77   3:12am Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   Protected   Tenouncetrout says You guys are the biggest Shit slingers out there, and I find it very RICH that you guys sanctimoniously act like, Palin and Beck have the monopoly on Political hate and Fear mongering. Didn't you get the news? There can be no peace between the right and the left. I don't think it was one of the shit-slinging liberals who said it either.

20. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,231 comments

    78   6:24am Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   iwog says Eliminating the fairness doctrine I miss it very much. And I don't understand why nobody ever discusses bringing it back, without the blaming Reagan part (although I agree). Apparently, calmly, intelligently and realistically evaluating both sides are just buzzwords for forcing the media to be more "liberal." To not allow the type of unanswered propaganda (like Savage or Limbaugh) which can be bought, and for which there is a market, is also "liberal." At least some news networks such as Fox have the integrity to take it upon themselves to have a policy of being "fair and balanced."

21. APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich Follow Befriend (28) 182 threads 4,616 comments Premium

    79   7:47am Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Protected   Rambling? Babbling? Everything that came out of the assassin's mouth was almost exactly like a Glenn Beck monologue. If he wasn't an unemployed freak, he would have his own talk show.

22. APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich Follow Befriend (28) 182 threads 4,616 comments Premium

    80   7:49am Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Check out these great keychains! http://www.zazzle.com/sarah_palin_suicide_keychain-146273519029379735

23. Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq Follow Befriend 53 threads 658 comments

    81   12:44pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)   MarkInSF says I think blaming Palin or conservatives in general for this is complete bullshit. I disagree. If I yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater, and someone gets hurt, don't I share some of the blame? The conservatives claim that their yelling "FIRE" did not influence Jared's actions, as there is yet no concrete evidence Jared listened to the right wing hate. Two facts remain. 1) Palin and the right-wing are screaming "FIRE". Their messages are very suggestive of violence. 2) A disturbed person took violent actions against a perceived enemy. This is the same as the following scenario. I scream "FIRE" in a crowded theater. People look around concerned but see no fire. Moments later one individual tramples an old lady to death. Now you can argue that the individual who ran over the lady was just crazy and he did not hear me scream "FIRE". IT WAS JUST A WEIRD COINCIDENCE. Blame can never be proven in either case but that isn't the issue. Conservatives just need to shut the fuck up and stop yelling "FIRE". That is the only issue.

24. ¥ Follow Befriend 35 threads 5,700 comments Bellingham, WA

    82   1:31pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   MarkInSF says I think blaming Palin or conservatives in general for this is complete bullshit.

25. ¥ Follow Befriend 35 threads 5,700 comments Bellingham, WA

    83   1:34pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   SoCal Renter says Blame can never be proven in either case but that isn’t the issue. Conservatives just need to shut the fuck up and stop yelling “FIRE”. That is the only issue. yup. They wanted to move the debate to the right by stoking the fires of anger, fear, resentment, and uncertainty. It is very ugly politics but the true tragedy is that this sort of message has found so many millions of adherents. We in the "reality-based community" can't change the conservative mind from the outside. They have to find their own way back.

26. ¥ Follow Befriend 35 threads 5,700 comments Bellingham, WA

    84   3:06pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Troy says but the true tragedy did I write that? Apologies for taking a rhetorical drift-out there. . . meant to say "central issue" I guess. I don't mind that the right has committed itself to this hate message -- against "socialists", liberals, illegal immigrants, gays, feminists, vegetarians, muslims, etc etc -- I just wish it didn't find such a receptive audience.

27. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,231 comments

    85   7:14pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Troy says I just wish it didn’t find such a receptive audience Yes, right ? Troy you really do get to the crux of the biscuit.

28. elliemae Follow Befriend (25) 416 threads 7,009 comments Saint George, UT elliemae's website

    86   8:43pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Shrekie seems to have left the building.

29. APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich Follow Befriend (28) 182 threads 4,616 comments Premium

    87   8:47pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Protected

30. Vicente Follow Befriend (8) 209 threads 4,521 comments Davis, CA

    88   8:59pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   That picture needs the right caption. Blazing Saddles is the obvious reference.

31. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,231 comments

    89   9:25pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Troy says I just wish it didn’t find such a receptive audience I'm still thinking about this, as I listen to the youtube of Obama's speech yesterday. I'm not actually religious. Sprititual at times, but close to agnostic. But I wish there was a judgement day, for which Beck, Limbaugh, Savage and the rest would have to answer for whether: Do they say these things because they believe them ? Or do they say them because that's what their audience wants to hear, and because there's money in it ? If it is the latter, I wish that they would have to answer for that !!

32. APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich Follow Befriend (28) 182 threads 4,616 comments Premium

    90   9:57pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   Tits and monsters sell lunch boxes Hate sells books and TV and radio ads They don't believe any of it. Shrieking into a microphone about how Obama is going to eat white people, etc. is not maintainable. Someone that out of their minds would be under arrest like this fellow in Tuscon. When the microphone is off, these people go home and spend their money

33. Nomograph Follow Befriend (1) 104 threads 2,851 comments

    91   10:43pm Thu 13 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   APOCALYPSEFUCK says They don’t believe any of it. Shrieking into a microphone about how Obama is going to eat white people, etc. is not maintainable. Someone that out of their minds would be under arrest like this fellow in Tuscon. When the microphone is off, these people go home and spend their money Winner winner chicken dinner. They sell books and advertising space.

34. EightBall Follow Befriend 12 threads 495 comments

    92   6:58am Fri 14 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   So if it turns out this guy was into violent video games and gruesome hollywood movies are you going to start attacking them as well? Oh wait, shoveling death and destruction for entertainment purposes is art and protected as free speech. Nevermind.

35. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,231 comments

    93   7:21am Fri 14 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   APOCALYPSEFUCK says When the microphone is off, these people go home and spend their money If they don't believe any of it, and they are able to influence the electorate that much, just because it sells ad time on the radio, then it's easy to make a very tight logical argument that we need the fairness doctrine back. Now of course, if you are a right winger, then you may not be able to appreciate that one day things could be too far to the right, and at that time the fate of our country could be dependent on leadership that is to the left of where we then are politically. If you don't think that is possible, then you will disagree that the fairness doctrine is a logical necessity. In this case I can point you to your argument. You can talk about the constitution, freedom of speech etc., and so on. Okay, then we continue, and now with corporate citizens able to fund any propaganda they wish. Terrible change doesn't happen all at once. It happens one step at a time.

36. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 171 threads 5,231 comments

    94   7:29am Fri 14 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   EightBall says So if it turns out this guy was into violent video games Speaking for myself, I have no idea whether the shootings had anything to do with right wing talk radio. But read above, or in other thread, people talking about parents and inlaws whose world view is more than a little shaped by right wing radio. If the entertainers on those programs don't even believe what they are saying, but do it simply because hate sells. That's a problem. I may be talking about it now, in this thread, because it's possible Laughlen (sp?) was influenced by those guys. But I'm thinking about elections and the future of the country, not the prospect of cause and effect on violence. Really I'm thinking about education. It seems to me, that even long after school is over, Americans are entitled to education.

37. Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq Follow Befriend 53 threads 658 comments

    95   11:08am Fri 14 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Mr.Fantastic says EightBall says So if it turns out this guy was into violent video games and gruesome hollywood movies are you going to start attacking them as well? Oh wait, shoveling death and destruction for entertainment purposes is art and protected as free speech. Nevermind. This guy is right. His undertones of censorship are about protecting freedom. Freedom from being shot in the head by crazy leftist. I am familiar with most video games and movies. Please show me which ones advocate or simulate killing Congress people. In contrast, please see the much repeated refrains of right-wing radio that argues for "Second Amendment solutions" to Democratic lawmakers, "I came unarmed (this time)" protest shirts, bullet holes and crosshairs targets on Democratic positions in print ads and billboards, etc. Knowing that popular culture is steeped in violent art, is it responsible to suggest any of this violence should be directed at political opponents?

38. EightBall Follow Befriend 12 threads 495 comments

    96   2:17pm Fri 14 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   SoCal Renter says Knowing that popular culture is steeped in violent art, is it responsible to suggest any of this violence should be directed at political opponents? Unbelievable. So if the popular culture wasn't steeped in violent art, it would be OK to suggest violence at a political opponent? Perhaps the problem IS the popular culture?

39. Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq Follow Befriend 53 threads 658 comments

    97   2:48pm Fri 14 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Mr.Fantastic says Have you not seen Air Force One with Harrison Ford? They shot the National Security Advisor. They nearly killed the President, but he was trained by the special forces so of course a leftist with no training is not going to be able to kill someone with special forces training. That wouldn’t be realistic. I don't see how anyone could, even with the craziest of interpretations, conclude that the movie "Air Force One" actually ADVOCATED the killing of the President. However, if by some strange reason, a movie was made that advocated the killing of the President, I would oppose that as well for being inflammatory and a violation of the 14th Amendment's prohibition against formenting rebellion. EightBall says SoCal Renter says Knowing that popular culture is steeped in violent art, is it responsible to suggest any of this violence should be directed at political opponents? Unbelievable. So if the popular culture wasn’t steeped in violent art, it would be OK to suggest violence at a political opponent? Perhaps the problem IS the popular culture? On the contrary. I say it is NEVER OK to suggest violence be directed at a political opponents. I am saying it is WORSE if you believe popular culture is steeped in violence, as conservatives believe, and then ADVOCATE violence against your political "enemies".

40. APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich Follow Befriend (28) 182 threads 4,616 comments Premium

    98   6:44pm Fri 14 Jan 2011   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   They can influence because they are actors. Like Helen Mirren. Old guys buy tickets to the movie thinking, oh, wow, she's older and hot and her tits will be yummy, etc. Fairness Doctrine? Pal, this is Rome about the time that the Goths burned it. Get real. The states is descending into cannibal anarchy. The last thing you'll see on TV before the power goes out forever is a neonazi cannibal beheading a newscaster, grabbing the microphone and announcing that Sarah Palin is Empress of America. marcus says APOCALYPSEFUCK says When the microphone is off, these people go home and spend their money If they don’t believe any of it, and they are able to influence the electorate that much, just because it sells ad time on the radio, then it’s easy to make a very tight logical argument that we need the fairness doctrine back. Now of course, if you are a right winger, then you may not be able to appreciate that one day things could be too far to the right, and at that time the fate of our country could be dependent on leadership that is to the left of where we then are politically. If you don’t think that is possible, then you will disagree that the fairness doctrine is a logical necessity. In this case I can point you to your argument. You can talk about the constitution, freedom of speech etc., and so on. Okay, then we continue, and now with corporate citizens able to fund any propaganda they wish. Terrible change doesn’t happen all at once. It happens one step at a time.

« First     « Previous comments