Tea Party Terrorism: Man Arrested For Death Threats Vs. Speaker Pelosi
Tweet
It continues.
Law enforcement officials tell The Associated Press the FBI has arrested a northern California man for making threatening phone calls to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over health care reform.
Charges against the alleged caller have yet to be disclosed.
48 Responses to “Tea Party Terrorism: Man Arrested For Death Threats Vs. Speaker Pelosi”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
“THE FBI HAS A LIBERAL BIAS”-Matt Drudge
The sad thing is, there’s probably a small, yet statistically significant portion of the ‘party that sees these arrests as the first salvo in the ‘black helicopter/FEMA concentration camps/Obama seizing every gun in the nation’ plot.
They’re arresting PATRIOTS for exercising their God-given freedom of speech to threaten Demoncrats?!?!?!
OMFG ISLAMOFASHIST TAKOVER!!!1!!!!1!!!!1!1!1
Before charges have been filed, and the man identified, Oliver’s headline charges “Tea Party Terrorism.”
I hope these baseless charges continue right up into November, so that the Tea Party, the Republicans , and the fair minded independents who get their dander up when people are falsely accused , can step into that Voting Booth, and show the liberal Dem politicians some real terror – unemployment !
I’m not saying these nutcases we keep hearing about are all teabaggers, but it sure seems like liberals, widely derided by the right for wanting to take away people’s guns, don’t go in for armed responses to losing a vote. Taking up arms against the government or its elected representatives should identify people as “fringe” rightwingers, unless you want to claim they represent the mainstream of Republican thought.
As I recall, after losing the vote on Iraq, which opened the door to hundreds of thousands of needless deaths, a trillion dollars and no end yet in sight, we marched and stood on corners waving signs. Sure, there were millions more of us than the teabaggers will ever number, but we never stormed a building or fired a shot. Turns out that we were right, which is salt in the wound, but we never took up arms.
I have yet to hear about a single liberal “militia” drilling and training during the Bush years like the hundreds of rightwing versions we see now and during the Clinton years. I’m trying to remember if any liberals were arrested during the Bush years for stalking GOP pols and fomenting sedition. Nope. None.
Why is this practice of armed response unique to the conservative side of the aisle? Someone must know, so I’m asking you.
Because your side bought up all the dynamite and C4 in the 60′s … “We never took up arms” Or broke windows, assaulted cops, or burnt the President in effigy?
Stop with the moral superiority. Every dastardly political stunt that has ever been pulled, has been pulled by both sides.
I remarked on this a few days ago — this is escalation , pure and simple. Keep on accusing the Tea Partiers of being violent racists, and see how many loonies you can turn loose.
You can condescend, patronize, dissemble and lie all you want, but in November the Dems are getting their asses kicked – in the voting booth.
“Every dastardly political stunt that has ever been pulled, has been pulled by both sides.”
There is nothing on the left within a million miles of Timothy McVeigh.
All the 60s radicals caused less death and destruction than any of a number of right wing attacks of recent years. ( and that was 40 years ago).
You are comparing people who wanted to make a scene, to terrorists who were trying to kill as many people as they could. This isn’t the same. Murder isn’t a form of speech.
Are we now to pretend that McVeigh wasn’t violent.
You sir are a brown shirt.
You can condescend, patronize, dissemble and lie all you want, but in November the Dems are getting their asses kicked – in the voting booth.
I’ll take that for, “No, I don’t know why my side of the aisle is violent and the left is not. So I’ll talk tough about something unrelated.”
Taking you up on your “both sides do it” theme, what’s the MOST RECENT liberal violence that killed somebody, and what is the score over the last 40 years? How many have been killed by rightwing terrorists, McVeigh, Roeder, etc., since the last liberal terrorist killed someone?
If you can count that high.
elspi, get lost… I suppose you’re gonna tell me that McVeigh is a posthumous teabgger?
All the people killed by left wing violence are still dead.
Which people wanted to make a scene? The people who blew up Fraunces Tavern? Or the people who blew up the lab at UW , Madison?
How come every time there’s a madman with a left wing connection, he’ s “just a wacko”, but if he has a conservative connection, he’s a violent right winger.
Instead of looking at McVeigh’s body count, and saying he caused more deaths in one incident than any anybody on the left, try this : Were the number of deaths caused by left wing robbers, vandals and terrorists “a million miles away” from 168? No, they were not.
How long were people in fear when ever they went to a government building or a bank after McVeigh’s act? Now compare that to the Reign of Terror that lasted from 1965 right through the second Bush administration.
You , sir , are a goddammed liar. And, now, sir , that you have called me a brown shirt, you can kiss my shiny metal ass.
The original conservative, Thag of the Bear Clan, was known to throw mastodon bones at the liberal Og cave. Conservatives started it. Last tag no tagbacks.
Frank, you left out ther dates of the incidents you are referring to, but aren’t they on the order of 40 years ago?
What “reign of terror” are you referring to? Can you identify the incidents where liberal terrorists killed somebody and who was terrified by them?
I think you found a left wing bombing in the seventies, but you never showed me the liberal militias drilling and fomenting sedition for the last twenty years.
Did you forget?
Frank, you really have no idea what you’re talking about, do you? This guy in California, and the one in Washington; friends of yours?
Who cares who started what and when! Going back to the 1960′s? Really why stop there? How about the Spanish American War? How about the violent reaction against the immigration explosion? Why not go back to the violent rhetoric of Women’s voting rights? How about the Civil War? How about those who were against the LA purchase? How about the Revolutionary War? Please, who cares. Let’s talk about what is going on NOW.
The facts about what are going on NOW are simple. 1) words like communism, socialism, fascism, despotism and monarchy are used (because those who use those words do not understand they are NOT interchangeable), 2) other words like Nazi, death panels, ‘killing grandma,’ revolution, internment camps, regime, government takeover, Hitler, Stalin, terrorist, ‘the POTUS is a Muslim,’ and my personal favorite ‘unconstitutional’ are all words of phrases used to create a atmosphere of fear, 3) images such as a swastika, piles of bodies from concentration camps, Obama as a terrorist, confederate flags, the Gadensen Flag (otherwise known as the ‘don’t tread on me’ flag), the ‘join or die’ flag (which did not originate with the US revolution) are all used with our leaders RIGHT THERE and most of them saying NOTHING about their use to stoke people’s emotions, and 4) ELECTED politicians are receiving death threats! These are not made up threats as some claim, yet we have ELECTED leaders ignoring these recent actions.
Who cares what happened 40 years ago? Who cares about what happened 5 years ago? There is a old saying….2 wrongs don’t make a right. The fact remains there is a SERIOUS problem in this country RIGHT NOW. Add to all these things violet militia groups, talk of succession, celebrating the confederacy, people concerned about their guns, death threats against census workers and we have a problem.
If, you, as a person fail to realize that this is a problem and should not be stopped immediately, I fear for this nation. Ignorance and uneducated masses are the principle problem for any society.
Frank, you really have no idea what you’re talking about, do you?
Welcome, Ken! You are a quick learner.
And Levine, Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck sit back, rub their greedy little freedom hands together and count their mounting fortunes.
FDS – “Keep on accusing the Tea Partiers of being violent racists, and see how many loonies you can turn loose.”
What a ridiculous point of view this is. You really are out doing yourself. If all it takes is a little name calling to unhinge the cons, then you really do have a problem in freedom land. Makes me wonder how the POTUS should react with all those lies told about him, 24 fucking 7? Remember, you shouldn’t always believe what you think.
would that you were such a quick learner.
No, Ken, they are not. Perhaps you are not quite as quick a learner as Mambo might suggest.
Oooooooh, sick burn, Frank! Isn’t it past your bedtime, old man?
Yes , you are right. The political dialogue has gotten out of hand . I hope you are not suggesting that this is one sided.
Because, if you are, then you don’t want it to stop. You only want criticism of the President and his policies to stop , while you call members of the Tea Party, teabaggers, violent, and ignorant. That does not make for a peaceful atmosphere.
Let’s look at what you are saying the tea partiers are doing:
The facts about what are going on NOW are simple. 1) words like communism, socialism, fascism, despotism and monarchy are used
So?
other words like Nazi, (used against the previous President many times, without objection by the left) death panels (the term did not exist until this administration) ‘killing grandma,’ (“no blood for oil”) revolution (now THAT’s a left wing perennial), internment camps ( haven’t heard that one used by the right yet) regime (used to refer to the previous administration on many occasions, without objection from the left) , government takeover (ho-hum) , Hitler [you mean "Bushitler"?], Stalin [haven't heard that one yet], terrorist (used to refer to the previous administration on many an occasion, without liberal objection) ‘the POTUS is a Muslim,’( we never had a President anyone thought was a Muslim before – if he isn’t , then it’s ridiculous; if he is, then it’s the truth) and my personal favorite ‘unconstitutional’( that , too , is my favorite — you know why? Because the left has been pushing the Courts around and playing fast and loose with the Constitution , since the Warren – Douglas Court, to get what they couldn’t from the legislatures) are all words of phrases used to create a atmosphere of fear, (like Tea Party terrorist? )
3) images such as a swastika (used innumerable times in demonstrations against the prior administration, without liberal objection), piles of bodies from concentration camps (never seen it), Obama as a terrorist (Bush as a terrorist), confederate flags (oooooooh, is that as bad as a red flag, a hammer and sickle, or a black flag, all present at leftist demonstrations) the (join or die’ flag (which did not originate with the US revolution)[ ho-hum] are all used with our leaders RIGHT THERE and most of them saying NOTHING about their use to stoke people’s emotions, (as I repeated several times above, when these tactics were used by the left, no leaders objected then , either)and 4) ELECTED politicians are receiving death threats! [ elected politicians have always been receiving death threats – on May 22, 1856, Sen Charles Sumner of Massachusetts was beaten into unconsciousness on the Senate floor)
I really hate to play “you did it, too”, but when you continue to imply that this awful behavior is unique to the current conservatives, you ignore the fact that you have your President in the White House, and your Party in control of both Houses, and that your behavior was very similar to theirs from 2000 – 2008.
Canadian Bacon, if anybody had a right, and perhaps still has a right, to go totally Billy Jack berserk , it’s the previous President, who took abuse from the left 24 fucking 7, 365, and STILL DOES, and he has been out of office for 15 months.
“A little name calling”? See my comment above… BTW, see how unhinged that guy has become, and his team won !
Thanks for the compliment. But no need for concern – I always have time to listen to a dope with a big mouth.
Frank, I saw this on a self-help website.
(((((Frank)))))
It’s a cyber hug. I hope that helped.
That’s how much he screwed up the country, and the world. Other U.S. presidents – of both parties – handed off much better situations to their successors. Bush ran into into a ditch, pissed on the nation, then handed Obama the keys.
So Frank you still want to obsess with the past. Would it be fair to say in your opinion two wrongs do make a right? Lets look at your retorts to my post:
1) saying ‘so’ when I listed the words communism, socialism, fascism, monarchy, and despotism. So? To refer to our government as one of those is factually untrue and simply designed to stoke people’s fears. Don’t believe me? I will assume that you are aware that all of those forms of government are different. But if they are different, why do people refer to them interchangeably? Because they don’t know any different and they are listening to people preying on their fears.
2) you defense of people using swastikas and using a tern like Nazi was to compare it to people on the left doing it to Bush. I said it them and I’ll say it now, it was equally distestable. And before you suggest I am just saying that, as a Jew I find ANY reference to Hitler, a swastika, the SS, or Nazi’s objectionable and unbearable. But once again you seem to condone this imagery because it was done under Bush.
3) Saying that death panels was not around until this administration is true. The term was a made up term to scare people. Who made it up? Sarah Palin and then the Republican party fell in line. It was designed, AGAIN, to scare people. Nice to see you condone that language and refuse to denounce that as well.
4) In reference to ‘killing grandma’ which was made by Senator Grassley (IA), you bring up ‘no blood for oil.’ AGAIN, nice to see you condone the use of inflammatory and false language meant to scare people. You compare it to a slogan where people did not want out US troops to die for what was perceived as a US interest in oil? Wow, the two comparisons are nothing alike and once again you are living in the past.
5) Revolution is a “left wing perrenial.” Congressman Steve King (R-IA) stated a revolution may be necessary. http://iowaindependent.com/30125/king-losing-sleep-over-fear-of-socialism-in-health-care
6) Haven’t heard about the internment camps from the right yet? Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) discussed how the taking part in the CONSITUTIONAL census would lead to possible internment camps. http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/25/bachmann-fox-census/. OR how about the reeducation camps that she suggested would happen becasue of national service? http://minnesotaindependent.com/31237/bachmann-reedcuation-camps
7) I already touched on the use of words like regime and hitler so there is no need to repeat myself.
9) Using a word to describe the POTUS as a terrorist is being used in different context than the previous administration. Once again, you refer to the past. People call the POTUS a terrorist out of fear. They associate his name with being Muslim and a defender of Islam and therefore he must be sympathetic to terrorist who want to destroy us.
10) you miss the meaning of the word unconstitutional. If you want to discuss the Court and its influence, that is perfectly acceptable. What is not acceptable is for everyone to scream that things are always unconstitutional when in fact they either don’t know what they are talking about, or that issue is not even addressed by the Constitution.
11) Images of bodies in concentration camps, my personal favorite that you deny seeing. Reminds me of when Congressman Eric Cantor denied knowing the sign was at a rally when he stood right IN FRONT of it. PHOTOS…http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/11/scenes-from-a-tea-party.php OR http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/rep-steve-israel-d-ny-calls-out-bachmann-for-use-of-holocaust-imagery-at-capitol-hill-tea-party.php OR http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/cantor-says-tea-partys-dachau-photos-inappropriate-takes-issue-with-limbaugh.php?ref=fpb.
12) If one has to even question is the Confederate flag is “as bad” as another flag, when the answer should be self evident, is mind boggling. The simple answer, especially in this environment is yes it is.
13) Your response to our ELECTED leaders getting death threats is that it has always been going on? And you bring up a example from the 1800′s? The level and seriousness of these threats against SEVERAL lawmakers INCLUDING the POTUS has never reached this level.
I know there is alot to go over Frank, but I hope I responded to you appropriately.
Hmm, I wonder if his name was Willard McVayne?
“PISSED on the nation”?
OW, I think Shrub did a lot worse than piss. And Obama has a lot of fecal matter to clear…and if McCain had won (God forbid), he’d have had the same problem.
People like FDS seem to enjoy wallowing in the shit that the right spreads around.
Frank,
I have to agree that the political discourse in our country needs improvement.
However, a lot of posters on this thread have used examples that go far beyond political discourse. Death threats against elected officials, bombings, airplanes being flown into buildings, shootings of police officers and the public at large, etc. These are things have have emanated from the right in increasing frequency over the last 20 years, particularly when Democrats hold the presidency.
I’ll note for the record that the left side is not lily-white. There has been property damage from left-wing radicals protesting against the IMF, and some radical environmental groups who torched Hummer lots in CA.
However, outside of heated political discourse and property damage, I haven’t seen anything like what I see from the right. Can describe parallel left-wing acts of violence? Please give specific examples.
Must spend a lot of time talking to yourself.
Stop with the moral superiority.
Why should I? I am morally superior to you.
Canadian Bacon, if anybody had a right, and perhaps still has a right, to go totally Billy Jack berserk , it’s the previous President, who took abuse from the left 24 fucking 7, 365, and STILL DOES, and he has been out of office for 15 months.
I mean, it’s not like Bush has done anything wrong.
And Frank, how many incident will it take before you admit these “anomolies” form a pattern?
Zython, no one is morally superior to anyone.
Zython, Pres Obama has done wrong things, too. You just don’t think so, because you wuv’im to pieces.
Zython, when they form a pattern , and represent the acts of more than .0001 percent of all the people who did not vote for Pres Obama , added to all the people who are sorry they voted for him, I will call it a pattern
1) saying ’so’ when I listed the words communism, socialism, fascism, monarchy, and despotism. To refer to our government as one of those is factually untrue and simply designed to stoke people’s fears. (who says? You? I disagree) But if they are different, why do people refer to them interchangeably? (Are you saying that there are people who, individually, have used these terms interchangeably? Or that within a group, demonstrators have used different terms during the same demonstration?) That would not necessarily indicate that “they don’t know any different” or that “they are listening to people preying on their fears.”
You are making quite a few unsubstantiated assumptions here.
2) your defense of people using swastikas and using a tern like Nazi was to compare it to people on the left doing it to Bush. I defended no one; you have omitted the fact that I mentioned that it was done with no disapproval from the Left. That was the point, not that I was condoning anything (once again, a baseless assumption).
3) Saying that death panels was not around until this administration is true. The term was a made up term to scare people. (you mean to make them think twice about swallowing ObamaCare hook, line and sinker? Indeed it was.) Who made it up? Sarah Palin and then the Republican party fell in line. It was designed, AGAIN, to scare people. I think that accusing me of “condoning that language” and not “denouncing it” in the same breath is a bit heavy handed, don’t you? And is this really “frightening”? Considering the media’s concerted effort to malign Gov Palin’s use of the term at every opportunity, I don’t think anyone was scared. Except maybe the Left, who might have feared that if people gave ObamaCare too much thought, they might have never passed the Bill.
4) In reference to ‘killing grandma’ which was made by Senator Grassley (IA), you bring up ‘no blood for oil.’ AGAIN, nice to see you condone the use of inflammatory and false language meant to scare people.
AGAIN, you have omitted the FACT ( see ? I used CAPS TWICE! hoohah!) that I said that that inflammatory statement was used without liberal disapproval.
5) Revolution is a “left wing perennial.” Congressman Steve King (R-IA) stated a revolution may be necessary. http://iowaindependent.com/30125/king-losing-sleep-over-fear-of-socialism-in-health-care. So? That means that I was incorrect? And Rep King didn’t say “Death to the Pigs” Or “F*ck the Establishment!” He was referring to repealing the Income Tax, which could probably be done without bloodshed. What do you think?
6) Haven’t heard about the internment camps from the right yet? Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) discussed how the taking part in the CONSITUTIONAL census would lead to possible internment camps. (Bachmann: “I’m not saying that’s what the Administration is planning to do.”) [Did you think I wouldn’t read it?) OR how about the reeducation camps that she suggested would happen because of national service? Yes there is a real concern that National Service could lead to non-military duties, that would involve a left wing oriented concept of service that could be comparable to re-education… Absolutely. If that makes you afraid, vote Republican next time.
9) Using a word to describe the POTUS as a terrorist is being used in different context than the previous administration.
Right . Calling Pres Bush a terrorist = Good
Calling Pre Obama a terrorist = Bad
Baloney.
What is not acceptable is for everyone to scream that things are always unconstitutional when in fact they either don’t know what they are talking about, or that issue is not even addressed by the Constitution.
Is that a rule?
11) Images of bodies in concentration camps, my personal favorite that you deny seeing.(deny? as in I saw them, but I am lying?) Reminds me of when Congressman Eric Cantor denied knowing the sign was at a rally when he stood right IN FRONT of it (for the record, if he stood in FRONT of it — it was BEHIND him, so MAYBE he DIDN’T see it ).
That’s pretty disgusting, and outrageous, but designed to invoke fear? The same thing goes for Bushitler, and swaztikas all over leftist demonstrations.
12) If one has to even question is the Confederate flag is “as bad” as another flag, when the answer should be self evident, is mind boggling. The simple answer, especially in this environment is yes it is.
Yes it is … ALL those flags as symbols of dissent are over the top.
We agree.
13) Your response to our ELECTED leaders getting death threats is that it has always been going on? The level and seriousness of these threats against SEVERAL lawmakers INCLUDING the POTUS has never reached this level. ( I beg to differ – I would bet that Pres Bush and Pres Nixon probably received 100′s of threats, and I would be willing to bet that Congressman and Senators have received all sorts of threats, including death threats, for years, and that you have no evidence whatever that Pres Obama and / or the current group of Senators and Representatives have received any more or any less threats , when they have attempted to force unpopular policies on the American people. )
As for going “back to the past”, what else can one do, when you are all enthralled with the current President, and thrilled that there is a Democratic majority in the House and the Senate?
Let’s see how calm and peaceful the Left is , when the tide has turned in January of 2011.
Of course, you and your ilk have already said it was OK to go ballistic over Pres Bush, because he did bad things, whereas Pres Obama is good, and kind, and gentle, and should never be seen as being in error.
no one is morally superior to anyone.
What? Do you really believe that? You’re an idiot.
Pres Obama has done wrong things, too
1. No one has said he hasn’t.
2. Obama’s missteps are minute compared to Bush. It’s like a comparison between the amount of water in my bathtub after a shower and the fucking Pacific Ocean.
3. You’re an idiot.
when they form a pattern , and represent the acts of more than .0001 percent of all the people who did not vote for Pres Obama , added to all the people who are sorry they voted for him, I will call it a pattern
1. It’s probably more than 0.0001% of people who didn’t vote for McCain. There have been more than 60 incidents.
2. No you won’t.
3. You’re a fucking idiot.
no one is morally superior to anyone.
What? Do you really believe that?
Yes I do, and I’ll bet you have not one scintilla of evidence to the contrary. You don’t even believe in a Creator , let alone a Supreme Being or Lawgiver. So how would you measure one’s moral superiority? By comparing the ratios of their shoe sizes to their hat sizes?
You’re a dope with a big mouth.
Pres Obama has done wrong things, too
1. No one has said he hasn’t.
No one has said he has – at least not any mistakes that involve being too liberal.
2. Obama’s missteps are minute compared to Bush.
You mean like expanding the present and future Budget to a point where it take Scientific Notation just to write the quadrillion dollar figures on one line? That will cause more suffering than 10 wars.
You’re getting to be a pain in the ass, as well as a dope with a big mouth.
when they form a pattern , and represent the acts of more than .0001 percent of all the people who did not vote for Pres Obama , added to all the people who are sorry they voted for him, I will call it a pattern
1. It’s probably more than 0.0001% of people who didn’t vote for McCain.
.0001% of the people who voted for McCain = 59 people
add to that , .0001% of the people who wish they had not voted for Obama, and you get more than 60. But the story says 42.
You see, you big mouthed dope ?
2. No you won’t.
You have no idea what I will do, or what I won’t do. Besides which, the number of people who are sorry they voted for Obama, will probably increase more quickly than the number of people making threats ( especially if you consider that in some instances, perhaps many instances, you will not have any idea of their political affiliation. You will only know that they are disenchanted with the wunderkind).
That being the case , the number of people making threats will NEVER reach .0001% of the combined figures of those who voted for McCain, and those who are sorry they voted for Obama.
Jeebus, you’re a dopey bastard, Mambo!
Proving you’re a dumbass is kinderspiel.
DiSalle’s Iron Law of Political Debate: In any political discussion, the first person to resort to mud-slinging, name calling and personal insults, will ALWAYS be on the left,
Frank DiSalle: how would you measure one’s moral superiority? By comparing the ratios of their shoe sizes to their hat sizes?
No, Frank. Everyone knows it’s done by comparing their inseam to the width of their lapels.
Now, can we put aside the stupid? Someone disagrees with you, finding your view outlandish and you respond by bringing on even more ridiculousness just so you can avoid having seriously explain your position. How about you just explain For example, to take the intentionally extreme case of Mother Teresa vs Idi Amin. Neither morally superior to the other in your view?
F Dis: Pres Obama has done wrong things, too
mambo: No one has said he hasn’t.
F Dis: No one has said he has – at least not any mistakes that involve being too liberal.
Move the goal posts much? What next? Somebody does criticize him for being too liberal on, say, defense, and you then going to complain that nobody has criticized him for being too liberal on entitlement programs?
And do the near constant criticisms from the right not count as someone saying he is making mistakes that involve being too liberal? Or is your complaint also going to be refined to be overly specific there, too. Nobody to the left of William Ayers has ever criticized him for being too liberal?
Fact is, folks from across the political spectrum have complained about Obama (as they do about nearly any politician) not being at the same spot in the spectrum as they are. To bitch that folks to the left of him don’t complain about him being too much to the left is a ridiculous complaint on its face.
Corollary to DiSalle’s Law: Anything said by the left (such as pointing out facts like 42 isn’t 1.8 times as big as 15) can be perceived as an insult and thereby justify any insults from the right.
Quaker’s observation on Iron Laws: “Iron laws” usually aren’t laws at all, but rash generalizations.
Yes I do, and I’ll bet you have not one scintilla of evidence to the contrary. You don’t even believe in a Creator , let alone a Supreme Being or Lawgiver. So how would you measure one’s moral superiority? By comparing the ratios of their shoe sizes to their hat sizes?
1. Are you actually suggesting that Ghandi and Stalin had equal moral standing?
2. If you did not believe in God, would you be out raping and murdering people?
3. If God can’t keep his own PR department in line, it doesn’t seem like he’d make a very good Lawgiver(TM).
You have no idea what I will do, or what I won’t do.
Actually, judging by your previous actions, the odds are pretty good that you wouldn’t.
Frank DiSalle: no one is morally superior to anyone
SDM: How about you just explain For example, to take the intentionally extreme case of Mother Teresa vs Idi Amin. Neither morally superior to the other in your view?
Zython: Are you actually suggesting that Ghandi and Stalin had equal moral standing?
Frank has been asked straight-forward, reasonable questions about an apparently outlandish statement he has made. If he follows his typical pattern, we won’t hear from him again on this thread.
Sean we are all equally capable of sinning in the eyes of God. Sin is in your heart and soul : “God is the Author and Finisher of our faith.” Not you, not Pres Obama, not Zython the Puny, not mambochicken the dope with a big mouth.
You, and God , determine how moral you are.
Would I have rather had tea with Mother Theresa than Idi Amin? I suppose so.
And if you follow your typical pattern , you will wait a few hours , and come with some asinine response, and then say I am refusing to answer.
Why do you thing Zython the Puny, always waits until the thread is a day old, before he tries his juvenile attempt at “Fisking” me.
I love the way you can link to my comments, but can’t find jack shit anywhere on the whole Internet to support the absurd statements you make .
Meanwhile , I provide you with links, and you say you don’t like the people who sponsor the links. I provide with books, and you say, “I ain’t readin’ no e-stinkin’ books!”
In other words, you are hear to assure each other that what you believe is true, because you have not the courage of your convictions.
Do you think I need to go to a conservative blog, and say, “Yeah! That’s right!” ? Why would I ? They are right. And they know it.
Sean we are all equally capable of sinning in the eyes of God. Sin is in your heart and soul : “God is the Author and Finisher of our faith.” Not you, not Pres Obama, not Zython the Puny, not mambochicken the dope with a big mouth.
You, and God , determine how moral you are.
Would I have rather had tea with Mother Theresa than Idi Amin? I suppose so.
And if you follow your typical pattern , you will wait a few hours , and come back with some asinine response, and then say I am refusing to answer.*
Why do you think Zython the Puny, always waits until the thread is a day old, before he tries his juvenile attempt at “Fisking” me?*
I love the way you can link to my comments, but can’t find jack shit anywhere on the whole Internet, a link to support the absurd statements you make .
Meanwhile , I provide you with links, and you say you don’t like the people who sponsor the links. I provide you with books, and you say, “I ain’t readin’ no e-stinkin’ books!”
In other words, you are here to assure each other that what you believe is true, because you have not the courage of your convictions.
Do you think I need to go to a conservative blog, and say, “Yeah! That’s right!” ? Why would I ? They are right. And they know it.
* Please keep in mind that none of you has ever felt obliged to answer any of my questions, so why should I feel obliged to answer any of yours?
Why do you thing Zython the Puny, always waits until the thread is a day old, before he tries his juvenile attempt at “Fisking” me.
First of all, what the hell is “Fisking”? Here’s a memo: The 40′s are over. Secondly, you answer your own question here:
“Do you think I need to go to a conservative blog, and say, “Yeah! That’s right!” ?”
They are right. And they know it.
Except for, you know, everything.
* Please keep in mind that none of you has ever felt obliged to answer any of my questions, so why should I feel obliged to answer any of yours?
No, we do answer your questions. You just don’t like them because they don’t mesh in with the fantasy world you’ve created for yourself.
love the way you can link to my comments, but can’t find jack shit anywhere on the whole Internet, a link to support the absurd statements you make .
Again, it’s not that we haven’t linked supporting fact, it’s that you don’t like the links.
Zython the Puny:
First of all, what the hell is “Fisking”?
From your favorite Internet Source:
The term fisking, or to fisk, is blogosphere slang describing a point-by-point criticism that highlights perceived errors, or disputes the analysis in a statement, article, or essay.
” … “Fisking” was coined by bloggers in December 2001 …”
The 40′s , eh?
When will you ever learn?
Huh, interesting.
But wait, Frank, I thought you said Wikipedia was the devil’s tool that should never ever be trusted.
Frank DiSalle: I love the way you can link to my comments, but can’t find jack shit anywhere on the whole Internet to support the absurd statements you make .
Show me an absurd statement I’ve made and I’ll explain my thinking.
Until you can do that (won’t hold my breath) I’ll stick to pointing to your absurd statements (since you actually are the one who makes them) and pointing out how you utterly refuse to answer anytime someone asks you a reasonable question about them.
Frank DiSalle: Meanwhile , I provide you with links, and you say you don’t like the people who sponsor the links. I provide you with books, and you say, “I ain’t readin’ no e-stinkin’ books!”.
Your post is address to me, Frank, so I have to assume you’re addressing me. Show me where I’ve done that?
* Please keep in mind that none of you has ever felt obliged to answer any of my questions, so why should I feel obliged to answer any of yours?
While not for a moment accepting the basis of your claim, I love how your standard of behavior continues to be “I’m no worse that you guys.” And to further point out what a pathetic and sad position that is to take, you continually point out how “you guys” are morally and intellectually bankrupt idiots.
That’s the standard you brag about meeting.
The term fisking, or to fisk, is blogosphere slang describing a point-by-point criticism that highlights perceived errors, or disputes the analysis in a statement, article, or essay.
IOW, a point by point factual refutation of someone’s argument.
Yeah, I can see why you don’t like it, Frank.
BTW, Frank, still waiting on your explanation for your “absurd statements”.
For the answers to these and other questions…. don’t look to Frank.