Violence hitting supporters of health care reform bill

[FerrelGeek]

You miss my point entirely. What I'm pointing out is that liberals aren't all sweet and innocent, like many of them portray themselves to be. The KKK is pure evil, racists are evil, the OK bomber-boys were evil. I freely admit that. Violence is wrong, irrespective of which side of the spectrum it comes from. What gets me angry about this is that when the libs do this sorta stuff, they get a pass - 'We have to understand their rage'.

It's wrong - period. But let he who is without sin throw the first brick.

That being said, it seriously disturbs me that the new tack will now be to try to intimidate any dissent against what the .gov is doing right now. People have a constitution right to express their anger at (what even cnn.com called) the brinksmanship that got this healthcare bill passed. I'm certainly not about to go and kill anyone, but I have a right to say that I think it's a travasty. Saying so doesn't make me a racist, a terrorist, or unpatriotic.

The civil war was due to right wing violence...

The KKK was and is right wing.

Black Legion was right wing.

Civil rights/segregation violence was right wing.

Tim Mcveigh was right wing.

Abortion bombers are right wing.

Are you trying to claim that Andrew Joseph Stack was liberal? Haha!

 

[highland145]

Too funny. It's like 2001 - 2008 never even happened. Heck, I see posters in this very thread that espoused/cheered violence against right wingers now crying like little babies about the big mean tea-partiers.

It's because they don't have any way of protecting themselves since they hate guns. The righties weren't worried.

 

[FerrelGeek]

As I said; Liberals ignore their own sins.

I remember a Bush/Cheney office getting broken into and ransacked...

Tires getting slashed...

etc.

 

[CitizenKain]

The average college kid who spat on Viet Nam vets wasn't a conservative.

Thats hilarious, "those poor soldiers, they got back from killing children and someone spit on them."

Nevermind that it never actually happened.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Thats hilarious, "those poor soldiers, they got back from killing children and someone spit on them."

Nevermind that it never actually happened.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[shadow9d9]

You miss my point entirely. What I'm pointing out is that liberals aren't all sweet and innocent, like many of them portray themselves to be. The KKK is pure evil, racists are evil, the OK bomber-boys were evil. I freely admit that. Violence is wrong, irrespective of which side of the spectrum it comes from. What gets me angry about this is that when the libs do this sorta stuff, they get a pass - 'We have to understand their rage'.

It's wrong - period. But let he who is without sin throw the first brick.

That being said, it seriously disturbs me that the new tack will now be to try to intimidate any dissent against what the .gov is doing right now. People have a constitution right to express their anger at (what even cnn.com called) the brinksmanship that got this healthcare bill passed. I'm certainly not about to go and kill anyone, but I have a right to say that I think it's a travasty. Saying so doesn't make me a racist, a terrorist, or unpatriotic.

We are here discussing violence, not talk.

I have never committed violence, so your judgment doesn't apply to me. It applies to some made up group of people that don't exist("libs").

Nothing happened in the passing of this bill that hasn't happened many, many times before. Compromise and arm twisting is essential in passing pretty much everything in congress. To try to make it seem like anything special occurred here is to stick your head in the sand.

How did immigration and social security reform work out for you?

 

[shadow9d9]

Thank you for proving my point.

I still don't see how spitting could ever be considered violence.

I wasn't aware of any literal spitting on people, but I'll look it up.

 

[shadow9d9]

As I said; Liberals ignore their own sins.

"Liberals" are not a cohesive group. They all have their own ideas. Whereas the "teabagger" morons ARE a cohesive group preaching hate, intolerance, and violence. Additionally, they are controlled and operated by Fox news, which preaches hate and violence openly to them.

 

[highland145]

"Liberals" are not a cohesive group. They all have their own ideas. Whereas the "teabagger" morons ARE a cohesive group preaching hate, intolerance, and violence. Additionally, they are controlled and operated by Fox news, which preaches hate and violence openly to them.

lol

 

[shadow9d9]

lol

Republicans do anything bad= LIBS have done it before so it is ok!

As linked earlier in this thread... Palin is pointing out targets with crosshairs on a map. Teabagging bloggers are giving out addresses to cut gas lines and attack others.

LIBS have done bad things so nothing to see here!

 

[highland145]

Republicans do anything bad= LIBS have done it before so it is ok!

As linked earlier in this thread... Palin is pointing out targets with crosshairs on a map. Teabagging bloggers are giving out addresses to cut gas lines and attack others.

LIBS have done bad things so nothing to see here!

Never said I agreed with any of the violence but both sides are equally guilty. Just happens to be the righties today. As long as people post equally condemning the violence and hate when it happens then they get the hypocrite pass. If they remain silent when it's their party/group, no pass and labeled. Of course, most of us may be guilty. We yell the loudest when we're being done wrong.

 

[alchemize]

"Liberals" are not a cohesive group. They all have their own ideas. Whereas the "teabagger" morons ARE a cohesive group preaching hate, intolerance, and violence. Additionally, they are controlled and operated by Fox news, which preaches hate and violence openly to them.

Every time I think you've bottomed out on stupidity and partisanship, you raise the bar.:thumbsup:

 

[shadow9d9]

Every time I think you've bottomed out on stupidity and partisanship, you raise the bar.:thumbsup:

Coming from you, that means nothing. Thanks though. Partisan of who? The moron democrats?

 

[shadow9d9]

Never said I agreed with any of the violence but both sides are equally guilty. Just happens to be the righties today. As long as people post equally condemning the violence and hate when it happens then they get the hypocrite pass. If they remain silent when it's their party/group, no pass and labeled. Of course, most of us may be guilty. We yell the loudest when we're being done wrong.

Don't we generally focus on the violence of today?

Equally guilty is your problem. Equal is not even close. The civil war was caused by the righties and was our bloodiest war. Pretty sure that makes them worse.

 

[highland145]

The civil war was caused by the righties

I think the Brits said the same thing about the revolution and look what that got us.

 

[shadow9d9]

I think the Brits said the same thing about the revolution and look what that got us.

Are you trying to say that fighting a war of secession over the ability to keep slaves could be in any war construed as the right side?

 

[Turin39789]

You miss my point entirely. What I'm pointing out is that liberals aren't all sweet and innocent, like many of them portray themselves to be. The KKK is pure evil, racists are evil, the OK bomber-boys were evil. I freely admit that. Violence is wrong, irrespective of which side of the spectrum it comes from. What gets me angry about this is that when the libs do this sorta stuff, they get a pass - 'We have to understand their rage'.

It's wrong - period. But let he who is without sin throw the first brick.

That being said, it seriously disturbs me that the new tack will now be to try to intimidate any dissent against what the .gov is doing right now. People have a constitution right to express their anger at (what even cnn.com called) the brinksmanship that got this healthcare bill passed. I'm certainly not about to go and kill anyone, but I have a right to say that I think it's a travasty. Saying so doesn't make me a racist, a terrorist, or unpatriotic.

You do have a constitutional right to express your opinion, and it is your patriotic duty to do so. If you do it with speech, and not bricks or gas lines.

It's because they don't have any way of protecting themselves since they hate guns. The righties weren't worried.

That's not true.

 

[her209]

I think the Brits said the same thing about the revolution and look what that got us.

The difference being the South lost.

 

[Turin39789]

The difference being the South lost.

Also some differences in motivations

 

[alchemize]

Are you trying to say that fighting a war of secession over the ability to keep slaves could be in any war construed as the right side?

Why not just let them secede from the Union instead of fighting a war? Violent lefties.

What days of the week was Lincoln a rightie, and what days a leftie? So hard to keep track.

""If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that." A. Lincoln

"I am not now, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social or political equality of the white and black races. I am not now nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor of intermarriages with white people. There is a physical difference between the white and the black races which will forever forbid the two races living together on social or political equality. There must be a position of superior and inferior, and I am in favor of assigning the superior position to the white man." A. Lincoln

Keep raising that bar!

 

[Darwin333]

It has been more than a few broken windows and I believe I even linked it in this thread(page 3).

Ok, a cut gas line. Sounds like attempted murder to me, throw the book at his ass. Still not a terrorist and it still isn't treason. I am sure they can even figure out a bunch of other charges to pile on ensure he spends a very looong time in jail.

As far as political speech not being protected by the 1st because it might incite violence, who gets to decide if it may or may not incite violence? We were not given the freedom of speech to protect popular speech and simply because a few dumbshits interpret something that way does not make the author a traitor nor a terrorist.

 

[FerrelGeek]

We are here discussing violence, not talk.

I have never committed violence, so your judgment doesn't apply to me. It applies to some made up group of people that don't exist("libs").

Nothing happened in the passing of this bill that hasn't happened many, many times before. Compromise and arm twisting is essential in passing pretty much everything in congress. To try to make it seem like anything special occurred here is to stick your head in the sand.

How did immigration and social security reform work out for you?

I pointed out specific groups - reading comprehension fail on your part. I never accused you of violence. My point was to highlight typical liberal hypocrisy when it comes to this topic. 'Liberals' aren't a made up group. Yes, politics is a dirty game (on all fronts), but the steps taken to pass the healthcare bill in the House took it to a whole new level.

I still don't see how spitting could ever be considered violence.

I wasn't aware of any literal spitting on people, but I'll look it up.

Not violence? Go spit on someone in front of a cop and see what happens. You'll be charged with assault.

"Liberals" are not a cohesive group. They all have their own ideas. Whereas the "teabagger" morons ARE a cohesive group preaching hate, intolerance, and violence. Additionally, they are controlled and operated by Fox news, which preaches hate and violence openly to them.

So says dailykos, politico, moveon, etc. The teaparty movement isn't that cohesive and (as a group) they're not preaching violence any more than you are.

Sorry, but you're ignorant an pathetic.

 

[Danube]

For weeks Stupak and others who said they couldn't vote for bill were threatened and harassed. The media and Dems weren't employing histrionics over that. This violence and intimidation of Dems thing is phony and contrived. It's clearly their strategy to defame opposition - as usual. Polls show 70% of the people are angry at congress but Dems would defame anyone who opposes them as radicals. I don't see people being arrested and most of the "threats" being cited don't seem substantiated by much if anything. The videos of the pols walking through crowds don't really show much in the way of slurs and threats. It's phony.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Well said!

Ok, a cut gas line. Sounds like attempted murder to me, throw the book at his ass. Still not a terrorist and it still isn't treason. I am sure they can even figure out a bunch of other charges to pile on ensure he spends a very looong time in jail.

As far as political speech not being protected by the 1st because it might incite violence, who gets to decide if it may or may not incite violence? We were not given the freedom of speech to protect popular speech and simply because a few dumbshits interpret something that way does not make the author a traitor nor a terrorist.

 

[Linflas]

Are you trying to say that fighting a war of secession over the ability to keep slaves could be in any war construed as the right side?

Yep that is exactly what the civil war was all about. Here is Lincoln in his own words talking about his crusade to end slavery:

Executive Mansion,
Washington, August 22, 1862.

Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.

I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.

As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.

Yours,
A. Lincoln.