Leading liberal murdered for his views

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

See man, that other Darrin (I'll call him Darrin #2 for clarity)also said this, and that seems to disagree with your implication about Mr. Loughner's atheism:

---

Your sarcasm detector sucks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thompson

I might say the same about those who listen to NPR/MSNBC/Olberman/Maddow/Obama, that people follow them 'without much questioning' without having any supporting evidence for that other than my opinion. In any case, what do you propose to 'fix' the problem you perceive?

---

Democrats on the whole are much more fractious than Republicans.

.. and do you really want to equate Maddow to Beck? Seriously?

I will owe up to Olbermann being something of a demogogue, but Maddow?

The other part where that analogy fails is simply sheer numbers.

As many conservatives like to point out, Fox ratings, as well as Mr. Limbaugh's tend to swamp anything on the left.

Given this, do you really think it is a hallmark of "the left" to blindly follow people like this?

I have no doubt there are some that do, and will readily accede that.

What I do doubt is that the nature of liberalism would tend to produce large proportions of that view point that would follow such people, and the very ratings I mention support that contention.

The other thing that supports that is how quickly liberals turned on the President once he started doing things they didn't like.

You can't compare that to the lock-step solid ranks behind Bush, even when he was doing things that infuriated conservatives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Hmm. There is something a guy named Darrin told me about this topic...



Why don't you and him have a long talk, and get back with me when you figure out what is relevant, since you brought up atheism, as if it is relevent somehow.

edit--
Seems like the second Darrin thinks the first Darrin is a "stupid fuck".

I'm not sure I would put up with that.

Go get him, Darrin.

---

:rollin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randomguy

See man, that other Darrin (I'll call him Darrin #2 for clarity)also said this, and that seems to disagree with your implication about Mr. Loughner's atheism:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Your sarcasm detector sucks.

---

Nice try, Darrin #1.

Why do I not buy that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Your sarcasm detector sucks.

---

But hey, I can be fair.

Straight up tell me his religious views are irrelevant, and I will accept that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

But hey, I can be fair.

Straight up tell me his religious views are irrelevant, and I will accept that.

---

His religious views are irrelevant. His political ideology (whatever it is) is also irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

His religious views are irrelevant. His political ideology (whatever it is) is also irrelevant.

---

he waited for a democratic rally.

irrelevant lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

I am not making a case against "angry speech" that was allegedly behind the shooting of the congresswoman. Dude was a nutjob with serious issues. No more, no less.

The fact that his representative was a Democrat appears to be almost entirely incidental, but I will readily confess to suspecting otherwise immediately afterwards.

My point is that I am really kind of concerned that a sizable portion of our population get their opinions from the Beck/Hannity/Limbaugh/Palin bunch, without much questioning.

Whithin any given large population, there are bound to be *some* nutbags, and the outright demogoguery on the part of the aforementioned group concerns me.

No more, no less. I really wish we could/would elevate the discussion in our country a bit.

---

Just fuck off.

So, because you had fears about the motivations of the shooter which turned out to be utterly groundless, that for some reason now reinforces those fears.

Believe me, I only wish the American right would get upset enough about something to start slitting the throats of Marxist shits who so deeply deserve it. But they won't.

The reason you can't stop shitting your pants about it is because you are a pussy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

he waited for a democratic rally.

irrelevant lol

---

Victim had a (D.) after her name, therefore....


You and sheriff dipnuts are deep thinkers.

if you can't see that he attacked at a democratic rally.....you are not a deep thinker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

I have cared about Pakistani liberals for a long time.

---

As evidenced by your countless threads on the plight of the Pakistani liberals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

if you can't see that he attacked at a democratic rally.....you are not a deep thinker.

---

Victim had a (D.) after her name, therefore....


You and sheriff dipnuts are deep thinkers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Democrats on the whole are much more fractious than Republicans.

.. and do you really want to equate Maddow to Beck? Seriously?

I will owe up to Olbermann being something of a Demogogue, but Maddow?

The other part where that analogy fails is simply sheer numbers.

As many conservatives like to point out, Fox ratings, as well as Mr. Limbaugh's tend to swamp anything on the left.

Given this, do you really think it is a hallmark of "the left" to blindly follow people like this?

I have no doubt there are some that do, and will readily accede that.

What I do doubt is that the nature of liberalism would tend to produce large proportions of that view point that would follow such people, and the very ratings I mention support that contention.

The other thing that supports that is how quickly liberals turned on the President once he started doing things they didn't like.

You can't compare that to the lock-step solid ranks behind Bush, even when he was doing things that infuriated conservatives.

---

So the Bush's low approval ratings at the time of his exit from the presidency don't mean anything? Are we supposed to take your word for it that Democrats are more fractious (and does fractious necessarily mean more critical listeners, anyway)? And do high ratings necessarily mean those listening are not critical thinkers? You make a lot of assumptions.

It's anecdotal evidence, but I've seen it a lot with people I know as well; prior to Obama's election, I think it was Leno's show that was walking the streets, asking Obama supporters questions like 'what do you think about Obama's strong condemnation of Russia for invading Georgia/ his opposition to abortion/etc. (actually stating the opposite of Obama's position).' The Obama fans immediately voiced support for what they thought Obama supported.

As far as 'lock-step solid groups,' what about the black vote? Last I checked, Obama gets around 90% of it. Are they necessarily uncritical? They do generally differ with Obama on some issues (school vouchers, gay marriage [yes Obama is for it, he just lacks the political courage to flat-out say so right now]) and yet they support him.

There are uncritical people on both sides. I'm sure you feel the vast majority of them are on the right. I don't think you can provide significant evidence for that though.

hmmmm...this OP starts to prune up when it's peeled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Victim had a (D.) after her name, therefore....


You and sheriff dipnuts are deep thinkers.

---

democratic rally, einstein.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

if you can't see that he attacked at a democratic rally.....you are not a deep thinker.

---

Are you really trying to pin the tail on the causation donkey here, baker of clams?

Or are you just needling Darrin with the pin? lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Are you really trying to pin the tail on the causation donkey here, baker of clams?

---

Well, everyone knows that government mind control through the manipulation of grammar as well as 9/11 trutherism are core conservative principles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Are you really trying to pin the tail on the causation donkey here, baker of clams?

---

this birther is fucking stupid. he's so desperate for everyone to agree with his adopted opinion that he can't admit that this guy went on a killing spree at a democratic rally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

this birther is fucking stupid. he's so desperate for everyone to agree with his adopted opinion that he can't admit that this guy went on a killing spree at a democratic rally.

---

Victim had a (D.) after her name, therefore....


You and sheriff dipnuts are deep thinkers.

stupid birthers

i hope the other birthers aren't as stupid as darrin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homeland Security

Just fuck off.

So, because you had fears about the motivations of the shooter which turned out to be utterly groundless, that for some reason now reinforces those fears.

Believe me, I only wish the American right would get upset enough about something to start slitting the throats of Marxist shits who so deeply deserve it. But they won't.

The reason you can't stop shitting your pants about it is because you are a pussy.

---

Reading comprehension fail.

My concerns about the tone of conversation in this country existed prior to this shooting. The shooting had no effect on those concerns. I was relieved that the guy turned out to be obviously clinically insane. This incident did not reinforce any views, other than the view that we probably do a poor job of getting such people help they need.

As for the last of it, the OP acknowledges that there are places in the world where holding or expressing certain views mark you for murder.

I made peace with my own death years ago. If telling people about what I think is right, or believing strongly about what is right were to be the cause of my own death, that would be a good death.

We don't live in such a country, and hopefully never will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homeland Security

Just fuck off.

---

I am sorry you are still butthurt about my thread claiming your existance is pointless. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

As evidenced by your countless threads on the plight of the Pakistani liberals.

---

If you think my interest in Pakistan is recent or not really all that heartfelt, you are incorrect.

Most Americans aren't interested for informed enough to merit an entire thread over Pakistani politics. Given the scant responses when I *do* post something about Pakistan, I don't bother much beyond noting that we should be doing far more to improve the lot of the average Pakistani.

The timing of this man's death does make for a good thread hook.

I have been saying for over a decade that we need to do more to help moderates and liberals in muslim countries, if only to make us safer.

In that I might use recent events in the US to draw attention to something else we kinda need to be worried about: Mea culpa.

As for what else I think about Pakistan, here are some bits, only from this one board. I posted frequently on myspace in their politics forum for years as well, when I wastn't here, although their search function sucks sweaty monkey balls.

Fight terror in pakistan by donating to flood victims (2010)
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=162392

Help pakistan's poor to help their moderates (2010)
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=164647

Pakistan's police need help: (2008)
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111416

We need to encourge democracy in the middle east (2005)
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30659

A thread discussing Parvez Musharaff (2006)
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50596

Empowering moderates in the muslim world, Pakistan included, makes us safer. (2006)
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50686

Feel free to post the threads you have started concerning Pakistan. :toast