This entry was posted on June 11, 2009 at 4:51 am and is filed under Film, Humor. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
284 Responses to “What Happens During Open Thread Ejaculation?”
Ive been watching the news coverage of the murder yesterday of Officer Johns, the man who was killed opening the door for his killer. Shot in the heart, by a monster that has no heart. And what strikes me, is he was killed, being kind and respectful, the very things that the murderer, probably felt as if he wasn’t afforded often enough, but here he had it, right before his eyes. This monster, filled with all the rage that a person can muster, finally acted on his thoughts and emotions. I place the responsibility for this hineous action at his feet, however, how much of the hate talk, and lies of late, affected him to a point, where he felt he had no other choice, the time was here, to do something. And something he did.
I watched/heard Limbilk call this man a “liberal”, because after all, its the liberals who display this this behaviour, only the left spreads the hate. My moral compass tells me, that this jackass is full of shit, but what about all the others like Brunns out there, just waiting for just enough to make them pop? At what point, do we insist that those making a living from spewing such vile verbal vommit, take responsibility for their words and actions? Free speech. Who would have thought it would come to this….
I have no issue with the opposing side, taking up the debate over policy, but to constantly fan the flames of all these fringe issues, such as birthcertificate, religious pref., socialist, hates whitey, queer (oldie, surprised its not hit on more often), and the list goes on and on, hell, its added to almost daily!
Im blown away, at the level of deceit passed around by some really important folks…I don’t get that, whatever happened to integrity and just being a good person? I used to admire my political leaders. I cannot phathom how we got here.
What ever happened to slander? Isn’t it against the law to do so?
All I know is, something has got to give, and I fear alot of days like the few we have been having of late. Many of us here that have been surfing the blogs have seen it coming, the “fringe”. And we must apologize for reconizing it….humph…typical, slight of hand by the “right”
“Look over here….don’t look at what we are really doing right there, but look over here at this situation we have just created for your shocking pleasure.”
I’ll be glad, when someone in the Republican party, grows some balls, and stands up to their crazy assed self righteous base, and stops apologizing to Limbaugh for trying to become reasonable.
It is all well and good to blame incidents like the Holocaust Museum shooting on the right wing, Republicans and Rush Limbaugh. But, to be fair, the venom, vitriol and rush to hate have not been a monologue or one-sided conversation. If Limbaugh, O’Reilly and Hannity must take responsibility, then Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and Rachael Maddow must also step up to the plate and say some “mea culpas”.
In 2001. Bush came to the White House proudly proclaiming that he was a uniter. In 2009, Obama did the same. Yet, today the country is more divided, the schism between opposing political views greater, than at any time in my 66 years. If blame must be assigned (and it seems that’s how we function nowadays) then lay it where it belongs. And that is on each and every individual personally. The climate of hate that dominates cable television doesn’t do so because there is a vacuum. Television is a business. If so called liberals didn’t tune in, agree and send love notes to MSNBC, their talking heads would be fired. Likewise, FOX would cease to exist if so called conservatives tuned out.
When I was growing up, my parents had certain rules we had to live by. If Dan Rather, John Cameron Swayze or Chet Huntley ran a piece that said a good way to cool off in the summer was to go outside and play in the mud, no one actually went out and played in the mud. We knew if we did, our parents wouldn’t give a tinkers damn who suggested it. We were told not to do it and that was that. It was our responsibility to observe their rules and it was our backsides that got tanned if we didn’t. As a society, we have certain laws and expectations that we will treat everyone in a civilized manner. When one of us fails to do so, it is ridiculous to say that so and so behaved badly because someone on a cable talk show told them to do so. If and until people return to accepting responsibility for their own acts and, until society expects them to do so without everyone jumping on the bandwagon and saying the devil (whoever you perceive the devil to be) made them do so, we can expect more and more of these kinds of unacceptable and evil acts. We need to stop blaming an industry, a political party and our neighbor and start expecting, make that demanding, better of our fellow citizens.
OK. I’m done. Soapbox is now available for someone else to use.
Peggy, I totally agree both sides should be held accountable, but I have not heard the same types of things out of those that you mentioned.
and Im not speaking of just “normal” Republicans either, when I say right wing, Im meaning the extreme.
I did say, that I put the responsiblity at Brunn’s feet. And Im not saying, he did it because of the talking heads, but one has to wonder, if it is a catalyst for things to progress.
And obviously…folks are getting in the mud these days! LOL…some crazy fools out there, that will do just about anything, because “rush said so”…I hear that man quoted almost every day around where I live, and they use what he says, as a basis for their opinion. Im just noticing how things have changed, and yes, it does seem as though its gotten worse now that Obama has won the WH….makes me wonder, just exactly why all the discourse, is it because of his skin color?? I hope not, but it sure seems that way sometimes. I don’t think we can blame Obama for this division, that is not what he sought to do, but it sure is how some are reacting to it.
Thanks for the response, Peggy…its nice to have just a nice debate!
it’s all the republican’s fault, don’t even try to drag rachel maddow into this. all she does is make fun of what republicans already did,
but on to other news:
cher’s daughter by sonny bono, is getting a sex change operation.
hahahah yeah peggy,
who woulda thought when they first saw sonny and cher on (what was it?) lloyd paxton/rod bernard/ dick clark/ed sullivan… that they would end up in the news like this.
she used to hang out at a house on esplanade and make the news all the time for what we thought then, was outrageous.
It is nice to just talk, isn’t it. I guess because I’m a moderate with no horse in the race, I listen to things or hear them differently. I still hold both sides accountable but stick to the argument that it is ultimately the individual who has to answer for his/her actions.
I wasn’t making the point that President Obama was a divider. Simply that, for some reason, people are becoming much more divided. Or, at least, they are certainly more vocal about it. While I would like to think race has nothing to do with it, even I’m not that naive. I guess as long as there are people, there will be those that think anyone who looks different, acts different or has a different set of ideas must be dealt with in a harsh manner. If you haven’t done so recently, check out Daily Dose. Alex wrote a cool and very articulate piece about just that subject.
In a way, I envy those of you who are passionate on both sides of the political aisle. I can only recall three elections in my long memory where I absolutely committed to a candidate and felt the world would only be better if they ran the country. The first two were JFK and Bobby Kennedy. I cried with the rest of the nation and the world when their young lifes were cut short so cruelly. It took forty years for me to do that again. My choice in 2008 was Hilary and when she withdrew from the race, I returned to my moderate leanings.
Over the years, I have felt that I must support whoever our President was until that person proved they didn’t deserve the commitment (think Nixon).
You raised an interesting point about slander. Maybe Cube, with his legal background and sharp mind, could weigh in on that one. My gut tells me that, as long as they make it clear that this is an opinion based on nothing, or couch it in terms of repeating comments they read somewhere or someone else said first, they can walk away with no legal consequences. I could be blowing smoke BUT they do get away with some outrageous stuff and are still out there talking crap. There has to be some sort of protection in place for them.
Cube, you started this thing with your open thread. Help us out here.
In 2001. Bush came to the White House proudly proclaiming that he was a uniter. In 2009, Obama did the same.
This happened because, when each of these presidents claimed to be the uniter, their respective opposition responded with “The hell you are!”. Neither was given a chance, but I am not sure either deserved a chance. Politics is about debate which, supposedly, slows rash action and knee-jerk [emphasis on jerk] reaction.
Sometimes I think we would be much better off if all congressional proceedings did grind to a halt in gridlock. To hell with uniting. It seems that every time congress compromises to take any kind of action we the people get taken for 100s of billions of dollars … and a little more freedom.
And Im not saying, he did it because of the talking heads, but one has to wonder, if it is a catalyst for things to progress.
Michelle – You do to blame the talking heads for Brunn-like actions. Here is what you said over at Tommy’s site:
Comment by Michelle on June 11, 2009 7:35 pm
OH yes we can blame the Right for murder…its YOUR right talking heads that keep fanning the flames of hate.
I don’t hear it from the left, in fact, I don’t recall talk like this from the left.
It is what it is, Splash.
The right peddels hate for the most part, and until the masses stand up to the likes of Rush and company…it will remain as such.
Let me remind you: “It’s not God bless America, but God Damn America”.
How about Jesse Jackson when he thinks his mic is off??
Read almost anything from Louis Farrakhan.
Have you ever listened to Randi Rhodes on Air America?? How about just listening to Air America for your daily dose of hate speech from the left.
And Rush’s show that you listened to said [paraphrase]: If you want to hear hate-speak, listen to MSNBC. It is hate-speak from the left 24/7/365. And it is.
When can we expect the masses (left) to stand up to them? To stop defending them?? Anytime now … Right? I mean, left?
We are all Americans from folks on the left, to folks in the middle like you (although sometimes I wonder), Peggy and PCL, to the folks YOU hate (yes, Michelle, I’m sorry to point it out, but apparently YOU hate too). But this is what we have come to expect from the left, the shirking of personal responsibility. To shed blame for anyone’s actions, even slightly, onto anything that someone else said is an attempt to politically break down the foundation of freedom that free speech creates in this country. That you blame free speech at all (“Free speech. Who would have thought it would come to this….”) when a majority of our access to it is so incredibly dominated by the left is, at best, appalling.
Tell me, Michelle, if some nut killed Rush Limbaugh because they read your hate speech, would we be right (or should I say ‘left’) to blame you for the killers actions? Or even Rush’s words? Would you accept some of the responsibility for the killing? Derive a certain satisfaction from it? Or maybe, just maybe we should do the right, scratch that, correct thing and hold the nut case 100% responsible for their actions.
What you are dangerously close to saying is that “He told me to do it!” is a legitimate defense for hatred and murder inflicted on our fellow [wo]man. Do you really believe that? Surly not.
Okay, I’m done.
disclaimer: the previous post by Splash is in no way intended as hate speech, nor does it represent the views and/or opinions of the blog writer and/or other commentors. Blog writer and/or other commentors not responsible for the actions against other by others that may misconstrue said comment as an encouragement to direct hatred or bring harm to any other individual/entity. Comment not valid with any other comments. Comment subject to change at any time. Editing/deletion of said comment subject to approval and may or may not invalidate the original non-hateful intent of the comment in question.
PS -Michelle, remember, it is just a debate. I love you (wo)man!
Well, Splash, I know what I said, and I also know what I mean by my words,
If you will read back in my post, you will see what I mean, when I say “right”, meaning the radicals, and yes, I see Rush as a radical.
My hate speech? Do tell….to me, hate speech is words that are not true, and slanderous. To tell the truth, if its the actions of another in which I speak, to me, is not hate speech.
The twisting and lying of the radical right ( let me be more specific, since I did not arm myself with a disclaimer), has added fuel to the fire. Can I be certain that it was Rush or Hannity that set Brunn off? No, I cannot, but I maintain, it can’t help.
You say MSNBC is hate 24-7-365… thats strikes me as funny…because I see them pointing out things that the radical right has said, and they back it up with footage, and they point out how wrong it is.
Its not like they sit on the air and make claims like the ones that Hannity, Rush and of the like do.
It not only sounds good, it is good and the precise quote from Bachmann is:
“I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous ON THIS ISSUE of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us, having a revolution every now and then is a good thing, and the people — we the people — are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country. And I think this has the potential of changing the dynamic of freedom forever in the United States.”
Caps added so you won’t miss it this time. Your intellectual dishonesty is quite apparent, Louie, and Minnesotans (or anyone) who get “pick up guns and start blasting” from what Bachmann said is either responsible for their own individual actions or they are a liberal like you who wants to pretend that he is a “right winged” Minnesotan taking up arms thanks to Bachmann.
Here is my favorite twist of her words: “Rep. Michele Bachmann has sump’m to say, she does! She wants everyone to get a gun and go kill the Democrats and establish a new government, because of some tax.”
This is total bullshit twisty spin and you, Louie, are a grand part of the masterful scheme; a pawn on their board; a cog in their wheel; fuel for their fire. Each night you and The Big O’s army of O-bots religiously and obediently plug your brain into your boob tube and download the latest O-botic programming to puke out en masse on forums like this.
Temporarily accepting your boneheaded premise that “hate-speak” leads to “hate-action”, I wonder if these kooks are reacting to what the talking heads say or to what mind numb O-botic spinsters like you tell people they said. C’mon, Louie, unplug yourself. It’s your brain; Take control of it! There are plenty of reasons to oppose the GOP; there is no need to regurgitate a twisted perversion of the truth in order to do so. Leave the GOP to their own destruction. They are doing just fine on their own.
gee, “armed and dangerous” and “revolution” seem to have alternate definitions to you that other people who speak english were previously unaware of.
in context : “ON THIS ISSUE” is the pretext for said mayhem.
personally as a uber conservative and racist, I definitely heard bachman tell me to get my gun and get fixin’ to start a revolution.
all my gun fan friends and military acquaintences heard her say the same thing.
I sht U not.
you oughta hear what guys say when it’s just us white guys.
just unbelievable michelle,
just clicked on those videos.
do any of these neocons ever have the balls to just go ahead ans pay for their medical proceedures themselves out of their own pockets?
NO- they want to be insured so that they don’t have to pay full price for anything, but they expect to pick and chose like marie antoinette at an all you can eat buffet.
they expect our premiums to go up, so that they can live on twinkies and soda in front of TV.
did you hear rush going on about health nuts straining the system because of their athletic injuries?
and how it’s better to be sedimetary and fat, so that you won’t accidently get injured in sports.
In case you’ve been wondering, ATT has been hate fucking my internet. On a brighter note, my contacts finally went to shit and I had to get glasses. I have something funky in my eyeballs. And, I’m legally blind apparently without specs. So now, I look like a cross between Groucho and a pedophile.
There will be a show. I’m on with att now. I’m running at half warp speed, which is still fast. No contacts for a week and I get to wear what we defense attorneys like to call “The Diddlers.” Diddlers are those thick ass glasses most pedophiles seem to wear we notice. Anyways, I just have the umm… expensive pedophilia glasses. I’m sooooooo hot.
Cube is destined to be the new Oliver Peoples in his next incarnation!
Meanwhile….In opposition to Rove, The VALID DHS report was immediately and vehemently rejected by numerous conservative commentators, such as Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin, and David Asman, who portrayed it as an illegitimate and politically motivated assault on conservatives.
Following the Holocaust Memorial Museum attack, these commentators faced criticism for their earlier dismissiveness. Some have since unconvincingly (and in the case of Joe Scarborough, inaccurately) defended their past assessment, and a handful of reporters and analysts are still engaging in falsehoods and inconsistencies in criticizing the DHS report.
But on Fox News, Shepard Smith took a different position — for which he was attacked by conservatives — saying that the report: “was a warning to us all. And it appears now that they were right.”
maybe he’ll behave himself on his own blog…we can hope.
And you caught my drift on the chads dilly…I feel really sorry for the people in Iran, I think they really wanted something different, all those young people over there. Its going to be intresting, how this plays out.
I think, what they did, was switch the names on the votes…like its really the other guy with the high number of votes…and how did they count them so fast? weren’t they paper ballots?
Sorry I took so long to get back to you. You deserve better from one of the only Conservative you trust.
If you read Bachmann words, the actual quote and not all the liberal twists, they cannot mean anything other than: I want my constituency to be completely informed on this issue and what Washington is doing to us so that we can stand up and stop it.
Bachmann was talking about Cap and Trade for Christ’s sake. Tell me was Newt’s REVOLUTION and armed revolt? Was the Reagan REVOLUTION an armed revolt? Although revolution back in TJ’s day was done through battle right on up through the Civil War, but after that revolution is understood to take place at the BALLOT BOX and through pressure on your local representatives.
Only two types of people would see Bachmann’s words as pick up a gun and go shoot some motherfucker. Liberals like you who want to pluck four words from context so they can blame the next madman’s murder on their political opponent – a rather unconscionable, coldhearted and thoughtless affront to the surviving family by making a political tool of their tragic loss.
The other type would be the nut job that committed the heinous act who now, thanks to you and your first types, has an additional defense to clog up our courts and raise the cost of frying their sorry asses.
If you think that we should control free speech because some nut case might kill somebody then you really do not have a firm grasp on what freedom means. For example over dinner with friends you say “I would like to kill the man who invented clothes.” Next thing you know the man you saw sitting at the table next to you turns out to be Andrew Cunanan and ***BOOM*** there goes Gianni Versace. Further looks into Cunanan’s background reveal that he was a gay prostitute who preyed on older men and it is more than speculation 4 of his 5 vics were former clients.
Now – Is it your fault that this liberal wingnut snapped and went on this killing spree? Should we control the way you are aloud to voice or even choose your words. What words did J D Salinger write in Catcher in the Rye onto which you would allow Mark David Chapman to sluff some of the blame for killing John Lennon?
As far as YOUR hate speech, YOU and other liberals have broadened the definition to include “those who oppose my politics” which makes everything you have to say about your political opponents “hate-speech”. If you would like to rein in your definition back to actual hate then you and MSNBC are fine, but then so is Rush, Hannity, FOX etc. As far as MSNBC backing up their “reports” so does Rush; go to his web site. Everyday he puts all the sources for his show on his site. Rush and MSNBC are the same, just on opposite sides of the aisle. So they are either both hate speech or they are both not. Take your pic.
Splash, Newt and Reagan’s Revolutions were not framed with speech such as “armed and dangerous”….poor choice of words on her part, and especially bad on her part, because of what she is really trying to do with using such language. Its called pandering, but thats a tangent for a later time.
Your argument on hate speech is weak at best…and your example is also week. apples oranges sweetheart…
I do not have any issue with those that opposing views on politics or anything else, what I do take issue with, is the energy and intent behind the words. There are way too many falsehoods out there, being used and it just seems to beat the tempers of a few up into a frenzy.
If we are all taking responsibility for our actions, our activity of slinging rhetoric should be possibly called into play. We are not talking about just idle dinner conversation here, Splash. Im all for free speech, I enjoy that right quite liberally myself, but I have never spoken in the way that some do towards those that they do not agree with, you can try to frame me that way all you like, you can even see me that way, matters not to me, I know the direction Im coming from, and I know my intent.
And again, “Liberal like me”? Not even close my friend, you are painting me with the wrong bursh.
I don’t think either side should take part in such language, this should be filed under, “just because you can, maybe you shouldn’t”…its one thing to speak this way, in company that you know and trust, and that you realize you can take certain leeways in, and expound on certain topics, without pushing the envelope so far as to rip at the fiber of society. Speaking so freely in a mass situation…prolly ain’t such a good idea…ya neva know who’s listening…
Is this a notion of controlling free speech…maybe…is yelling FIRE in a crowded movie theater controlling speech? to an extent, yes…but for the better of all involved.
You had mentioned several “liberal talking heads”, well…I choose to file those types in the same can as the “rightwingnut talking heads”.
Im all for free speech, I enjoy that right quite liberally myself, but I have never spoken in the way that some do towards those that they do not agree with, you can try to frame me that way all you like, you can even see me that way, matters not to me, I know the direction Im coming from, and I know my intent.
You seem to think you know the intent of many others as well. Unfortunately it is something you can no more truly know than that their words were responsible for some goons actions. You did take Bachmann’s words out of context, you just don’t wish to admit it.
As far as the brush I’m painting you with, you don’t seem to like the independent you claim to be. Everything that comes out of your comments is left. What is that saying? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck? Yeah-huh.
So, if I am hearing you left, and I think I am, you think that Bachmann’s free speech should be controlled (much the same as we disallow the yelling of fire in a theater) because some nutjob might decide to pick up a gun and shoot a democrat? Maybe everything we say should come with a disclaimer attachment.
And you do, under your own rewritten definition, use hate speech, but whether you do or not, and EVEN if you are a liberal, I still like you and there isn’t much you can do to change that, including not liking me. I will just smile the hate right out of your liberal self.
so what you’re saying is that you want us to pretend that bachman is too much of a bimbo to know what she was saying in a prepared speech practiced over and over before her minions and family, then delivered on national televison.
No. What I am saying Louie, is that you are too much of a bonehead to be able to decipher what someone means in a clearly and concisely delivered message. You would rather use it O-botically to help out your guy at the expense of others.
I know splash,
we’re just fkn witch you.
bachman really meant armed and dangerous and revolution in an abstract, intellectual, figurative way, completely divorced from the armed and dangerous and revolution in the literal sense –
like what did in fact occur after she said that with such conviction and belligerance with that crazy look in her eyes.
……..just like she really didn’t mean that stuff about Obama concentration camps that neoclowns pretended to believe, right after she said that stuff.
I have to confess that everytime bachman gets up there to say things that she doesn’t mean,
I sit back and imagine what she looks like naked.
I’m still working on tan line versus no tan line and the style of her bikini wax.
LOL. Louie. She is a nut and she has probably had both tan lines AND no tan lines at one point or another. But you are still a bonehead as I had to explain to you what MB meant even though you clearly had the educational capacity to do it yourself … or bought the cliff notes to her speech.
oh, yeah but when I said tan line vs. no tan line and style of bikini wax, I was just using bachmanisms and didn’t mean tan lines vs. no tan lines and style of bikini wax.
I meant the other definition of tan lines vs. no tan lines and style of bikini wax that doesn’t mean tan lines vs. tan lines and style of bikini wax.
Yes there are worse things, Michelle. The good news is that boneheadedness is a reversable condition. All ya gotta do it unplug from the O-botic system and interpret what the opposition actually says sans twist. That’s it. Or you could take Jeremiah Peabody’s poly unsaturated quick dissolving fast acting pleasant tasting green & purple pills since all you really need is the placebo effect. Boneheaded O-boticism is a state of mind, all you need to do is decide not to participate, not to twist, not to spread untruthfulness.
You only twist Bachmann-type words to help The Big O, which is what makes you an O-bot (which may be incurable) It’s like hiding your kid from the police; it is wrong, but you feel you must. A lot of apologists did it for Billy Boy; it is no different for The Big O this go round. He’ll do everything W did in triplicate, but now, suddenly, it is all ok.
Inconsistency … a major characteristic of a bonehead … but it can be reversed. All ya gotta do is wanna.
You know, honey, I remember you using those same type of words a long time ago. Hmmmm.
“As far as the brush I’m painting you with, you don’t seem to like the independent you claim to be.”
Although I agree with many of your points as to the whole ‘hate’ speech thing, I take issue with the above statement to Michelle. If Michelle says she is an independent thinker, does not thinking exactly as you do mean she’s not? If she forms her own opinion based on how she interprets data, exclude her from being an independent thinker? To say otherwise could mean that you are influenced totally by the right’s biased punditry–and I KNOW that’s not true.
There is one thing I know about Michelle, her stand on the issues, right or wrong, is based on her own independent analysis of the issues.
Splash, I am not inconsistant. I continue to confuse the hell out of folks such as your self, thats pretty consistant in my book.
I’ll keep my bonehead bimbo statis, thanks…
The issue I have with Bachmann…several actually, but…instead of choosing the words, armed and dangerous, wouldn’t it have been better, and more “leader like” to use the words, informed and alert? How bout, educated and aware….I know..those just don’t carry the same punch, but it sure would have made her appear to be more legit and informed herself, rather than clamping onto buzz words that wake up a fear in some people.
She is a manipulator, and if you like that sort of thing…welllllllllll
I take issue with whoever gave you the status of ‘bonehead bimbo’. Am I gonna have to go back and read every little word here??? Dammit!!
On Bachmann. Of course she didn’t mean for people to take up arms; however, the first rule in public speaking is the same as writing an English 1A (or English Lit) paper–know your audience. Bachmann was merely pandering to her constituents, which says a lot about her TRUE thoughts of them. Yes, she wanted to get them fired up, and she used unsophisticated words in order to achieve that, I give her credit on her strategy. I give those constituents of hers no points for not seeing through said strategy and not being insulted by such manipulation.
However, I can’t include her in those who espouse ‘hate speech’. If she is doing that, then every politician is doing it. They all use the other side’s platform to get their own side revved up. Politics are no different than sports–each side uses whatever is in their arsenal to defeat the other side, and what’s in both sides’ arsenal these days is a weak economy, a scary world, biased punditry, and too many ignorant people.
Yes, she is a manipulator–a very transparent one at that.
My point exactly, PCL. You cannot redefine hate speech to include your opposition without including yourself no matter what side you are on.
I never called you a bimbo, Michelle. Just a bonehead (and only regarding politics). I would like to see you as an independent thinker as PCL insists that you are. However, some kids copy the work of their classmates and it is never more apparent than when the classmate they copied from gets an answer wrong. You ‘copied’ from O-botic programming that Bachmann was telling her constituents to pick up their guns and go kill a democrat(s).
Cure: Disconnect from motherboard.
Pre-op: You must want to.
There are signs of hope though, like your take on killing terrorist rather than torturing them for info. Although I would torture them, get info and THEN kill them, your take is a very good sign that we diagnosed your slight case of boneheaded-ness early enough; the prognosis is very, very good.
My point exactly, PCL. You cannot redefine hate speech to include your opposition without including yourself no matter what side you are on.
This does not just apply to hate speech.
I never called you a bimbo, Michelle
No one said you did. Honey, I know you would never do that. Seriously.
Love the little ‘disease’ synopsis.
Conclusion: Think like me, and you won’t be a bonehead–others might just say: we’re just gonna have to agree to disagree.
Ahh new term ‘stupid speech’–I like it! And it DOES apply to her, but she is playing to her masses, as you did indeed say.
As for Rush and Hannity, I just call that biased punditry. Alhough it may seem like their crap incites some people, I think those it incites have to have the necessary ingredient of ‘mental illness’ to go overboard with it.
But the question should be raised, should we think more about what we are saying, before we say it…I don’t think that would hurt any of us… to think before we put the mouth in action.
That woman is just…just…….errrrggggggggg
I watched her on CSPAN the other day, railing some congress person, THAT SHE IS WORKING WITH IN COMMITTEE…railing on his ass, for doing something that she herself is doing….I just wanna say, sugar…step away from the camera, your moment has passed.
According to my daddy, we should always think before we speak–that generation had all the rules down pat, what the hell happened?? Now everyone just goes all willy nilly and someone gets pissed or hurt or both.
The decline of humanity, eh Michelle? Just plant me in a small village in the South of France with my Pinot Noir, real butter, and some really fresh French bread–et vie est belle de nouveau.
PS: My thoughts on Bachmann: she’s dumb as a rock, an affront to feminity, and one hell of a poster-child for the dangers of Botox overdosage. And that, Splash honey, is NOT HATE speech–that is pure, unmitigated, rooted in facts, cattiness. And I own it. 😉
Y’all are good, but you only call it stupid speech because you, I guess don’t mind standing idly by while the government finds every way to tax us into oblivion. Defend it and it is in fact O-botic, but even without defending it you are just following the herd over the cliff.
Unless, of course, you are going to actually pick up a gun and start shooting Libbies, and by that I mean of course voting them out in 2010.
And you did infer that Bachmann’s words were hate speech. You called it crazy, but assigned it the same responsibility for the actions of a loon that you did Rush and Hannity, who are only speaking hate when you dumb down the definition from what it actually is.
I do not agree that we need to watch what we say just because some wing nut might fly off the handle. If that were the case then we should all just STFU. As PCL (and later, Matt Lewis) said, we should address the real problem: Mental Illness. The Bachmann quote in question, regardless of her other statements, was well delivered, eloquent and echoed many great speeches before her by many great Americans.
So, maybe we should pass yet another regulation that requires the attachment of disclaimers to everything we say we say; it is not as though lawyers have enough money making opportunities already. Or how about just stamping all politicians with warning labels on their foreheadsalerting us that their words may be randomly hazardous to our health. Then who is next? Comics? Hollywood’s elite? [shutter] certain rock and roll legends???
And Bachmann, in all likelihood, wears whopper wear (granny panties) under those hose which makes any kind of waxing unnecessary, eebie and jeebie.
Okay, let’s not get carried away, honey. The day Bachmann comes even close to delivering an eloquent, great speech that deserves to be along the lines of other great American speeches is the day you will call yourself a Liberal. And there is nothing wrong with ‘thinking’ before one speaks–many a business deals have been made or broken over that very concept, as have love affairs.
That being said, although I agree Bachmann’s speech was not ‘hate speech’, I might have picked more sophisticated words than she did–but then I might want to attract a more sophisticated audience than she did. Still, I don’t hold her responsible for the mental cases in society that may go off on her words, she has know way of knowing who such individuals are. However, where does she stand on funding of research and treatment of mental illness? Ohh!! GOOGLE!!!
Honey, what did I tell you, in fact warn you, about that certain rock n’roll legend? Really? Are we gonna bring in that most perfect of human beings into this? Fine. Bring it–but come armed, because it will be DANGEROUS. I said come.
And there’s an idea–granny panties UNDER panty hose. Hmmmmm.
Re the NYT article, do you think that the Conservaqtive movement is silent over the completely mislabeled “right winged” rage? Crime is crime and loons are loons regardless of how they interpret the world. These nuts would not become your average good taxpaying citizens if the Conservative outrage over the Liberal takeover of our country did not exist. They would still, in all likelihood, kill.
Time to treat the illness with medical attention. Politics can be treated at the ballot box and has, no?
Heheheh! If I come across an article that supports your argument, don’t you think I will post that, too? So stop your sniveling.
Now–open up that Conservative mind of yours and just try to see the possibility that maybe, just maybe there is something viable in what Rich is saying. I opened my, um mind, to let in the possibility that there was some validity in what you say on this subject, have I not? I agreed with you on some things.
Furthermore, this is not, let me repeat, this is not totally about Conservative outrage over the Liberal takeover of our country. This is how the human mind reacts to the very nature of ‘change’. This is about how some want the status quo. Unfortunately, progress only comes about through change. Some are just not of the progressive nature. Some are scared shitless of ‘change’ or even progress for that matter. And then there are some who will use that fear to further their own FEAR of change, because that change will, in fact, lead to their loss of power. Scary indeed–just look at what it is doing to Cheney.
Politics is always treated at the ballot box–and as I said before, candidates will use whatever is in their arsenal to exact that change–even the fear of ‘change’.
Trust me, he is rearming himself probably at this very moment. He had better hurry up, though–the Finals are on about a half, and he doesn’t want to miss his Magic going down in flames. Heheheheh! KOBE rules!!!! Lakers Baby!!!!!
“Holiday Road! oh oh oh oh, Holiday Road! oh oh oh oh, Holiday Road! oh oh oh oh. Jack be nimble, Jack be quick, take a ride on the West Coast kick!” Gonna have to put that one in my ringtones–such a happy tune. Thanks Cube!
Splash, PCL’s sense of reason is a great companion to my own.
And I suspect, you see me through very limited eyes, or you have misunderstood what Im about from the beginning.
You have labeled me, as you see fit, you have even gone as far as to try and use my own words, to suit your twisted view of MY view…its ok…Im used to it, been done that way be the best of the twisters….
the label is in the eye of the beholder….I get that.
Your suspicion is unfounded as my observation of you is panoramic. They were, however, your words. I did not pull them out of context as you did Bachmann’s and they were not loaded with the imagery of our American beginnings as were Bachman’s; they were what they were.
If you don’t want labels then you need but shed them from your views. However, even if you don’t and remain an O-botically liberal independent Reagan Democrat, it was still just a debate in which you had (and still have) my utmost respect.
I didn’t say shed your views, just shed the labels with which you are burying yourself by misrepresenting what those you oppose politically have to say. You can still have your views without doing that and thus shed the labels. It makes no difference to me if you do, but no matter how much you claim it doesn’t bother you, the attention you continue to give it begs to differ.
And it is beyond halftime and appears that the Lakers do, in fact, rule.
I don’t see how either of you need to shed your views.
However, and this is not aimed at either of you, occasionally when one has a strong view and is provided with info that is contrary to that view, it is difficult to give it up. Whether it be pride, tenacity, or sheer obstinacy, it is just hard to do. I said hard.
It takes a lot to look at an issue objectively to the point of changing one’s view on it–and when one does change their view, they are often ostracized over doing so, particularly where political views are concerned–just ask any Dem who voted in favor of the Iraq war.
Labels are a whole different can of worms–and anyone who knows me, knows I abhor labels and refuse to wear any of them.
Sorry honey, but the Lakers do rule. But there’s always The Gators.
Thanks for the warning. I will try to tip toe through your tulips. I was careful not to tell you how you feel; I simply gave evidence to the possibility of you being bothered; the need to warn me is yet more evidence of the same.
As far as my ‘advice’, self reflection will be up to you. I think it was pretty clear, even to you, that you take the opposing sides words (this time Bachmann) out of contest and use them to your sides political advantage. You’ve done it with Rush and Hannity too on other threads. All I was saying is that doing so emphasizes that your argument is too weak to be won without doing so. And your side doesn’t really need to do that where the GOP, and especially the Religious Right, is concerned.
And you DO have a side – a least a more dominant one, but if you prefer that I refer to you as an independent from now on I will affectionately call you Indy, okay?
Indy is cute, but Im not sure if I qualify politically as an independent. I do mostly vote Dem. but I do share some conservative views, apparently we haven’t touched on many of those yet.
I said touch.
I can be a bit hardheaded, thats why the boneheadedness is so close to me. =) I don’t deny it. I have convictions, I know what I like, and I know what repulses me…I have a high tolerance for some things…and none at all for others…don’t think that is so different from anyone else.
I won’t deny, that alot of the opposing sides words, do set me back, some on the left have also, but those don’t seem to hit me quite the same way…conditioning? you’ll think so…me, I haven’t decided the common denominator yet, but its a line crossed, Im sure of it.
I have a streak about me, and I know you like “surrender”….lol good luck, many have tried, and failed…don’t take it so hard…
I said hard….
Splash, you know I love ya man…my blogbro and all….but you are a lil mind game playa….with all due respect of course, and the utmost of affection.
LOL!! Sure, we can move on. And although asking permission is a form of surrender, I find surrender boring and thus our debate invigorating. And for the record … we have touched on things conservative, I just chose to ignore them here. They didn’t seem to apply, Indy. I know you would just a soon kill terrorists than waterboard them, for example.
I new you were joking by the darling and … THAT”S a smile?!?!? LOL!
Now there’s an idea–we can all get together for a game of hoops to settle our differences. And afterwards, we can do as Cube has often suggested: go to a bar and drink and see who beats the shit out of who. LOL!
I think we will see alot more studys, on society coming in the next few years, there is surely a shift, and a new set of possibilities out there, for what society has to offer in the way of types of folks out there…
you should move here then, Louisiana is a completely socialist state.
it works for us.
I even have neoclown friends who complain about their fear of socialised health care -before, after and during their heart surgeries at the local state run “charity” hospital.
and all the people who complain about welfare wouldn’t dream of having a maid who wasn’t on welfare, otherwise they’d have to pay the difference in salary.
you forgot socialist marxist————-hahahha
I just remembered that my favorite neoclown post was the one about obama’s mother attending a
“high school that was a hot bed of marxism.”
they do have uniforms-
hip hugging onion skin jeans and sandals with midrifts and tattoo just above the butt crack, heavy liquid eyeliner and dyed black hair.
evidently you get thrown out of school if you try to dress differently.
I believe you water boarded me for the offense. Wasn’t that the choking incident? or was that something else? My offenses run together. You must have let me off the hook because, like water boarding, there was no permanent damage as far as I can tell.
that was very funny.
Our college professors ususally go there, but you can tell from their research they only ran around paris drinking with other people from louisiana.
oh this thread is getting tooo long, I just saw the post about my garden from waaayyyyy up there.
…………just ripped out all that tired green colored foliage and did the perimeter hedge in yellow variagated ginger and red iresene (the kind that gets BIG), and interspersed some split leaf philodrendron.
changing the ground cover to purple reina morada….etc.
Oh Louis, your garden sounds so beautiful. I have so much work to do in mine, and I have to do it this week–graduation party next weekend for my daughter. My ferns need pruning and my fountains need a purge. It will get done–and my hands will suffer. Got Baby Tears for ground cover–easy maintenance.
Ahhh. That’s right, I remember you mentioning something about a farm at one time. Well, I don’t have the room to grow all my own food–but I do well with tomatoes, lettuce, onions, garlic, bell peppers, and grapes. But this year, the lack of rain has prompted some communities to volunteer to cut back on water–so I have and I have had to cut back on my veggie garden to do that.