Gunnin' and Funnin'
I loaded the above Joe Wilson image with Huffpo’s headline into the cyber chamber of the Palmetto State Armory screenshot, and I’m firing it at you.
My brain is revolting at how ugly the above sentence is.
Yuck. I never wanted think about Joe Wilson again. But how comforting that it comes in the context of gun nuts having special feelings about owning a weapon with an insult to President Obama inscribed on the hardware.
Are there actual assassination fantasies being entertained? Fuck.
In other news of homicidal fun times, look at Tucson’s billboard for Rush Limbaugh.
I had a wingnut joke about taking me hunting with Dick Cheney once on this site. So, I stopped using my real name and nicknamed me writechic, because to me it wasn’t funny. But I poked the wingnut back by editing his post to say “I like wearing lacy, pink lingerie.”
It’s a natural transition in my mind: sinister to pink nighties on men. The dude went nuts on his site about me. 😯
Whatever.
A wealthy man has been arrested for threatening to kill a representative. The man does not want his trust fund taxed.
I mentioned in earlier comments about the black GOP official in Arizona who resigned because he doesn’t want to be murdered by Tea Partiers who keep threatening his life.
I’ve seen attempts to make a false equivalence about violent rhetoric. One Democrat was used yesterday to balance the volume of kill speech on the right. It’s absurd.
Here’s a little perspective from Melissa McEwan at Alternet:
There is no leftist equivalent to Glenn Beck, host of a long-running nationally syndicated radio show, former host of a show on CNN and current host of a show on Fox, best-selling author, DC rally organizer, and longtime user of eliminationist rhetoric, including equating universal healthcare to rape, joking about victims of forest fires being America-hating liberals, comparing Al Gore to Hitler, condoning the murder of Michael Moore, accusing Holocaust survivor George Soros of being a Nazi collaborator, joking about poisoning Nancy Pelosi, equating immigration reform with burning US citizens alive, publicly endorsing violent revolution, and winkingly telling his viewers not to get violent, all of which amounts to a speck on the tip of a very big iceberg.” -Melissa McEwan
It occurs to me that the whole “we’re fucking nuts and willing to take any measure to defeat you” approach works. Remember when Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong Il, and Ahmed Ahmadinejad were named as world lunatics? Hussein pleaded for help from the U.N. The other two?
My Korean and Persian are a little rusty, but I believe the Iranian and North Korean leaders’ response went something like, “Come and get us, America! We dare you! We are a couple of crazy mother fuckers, and we dare you.”
And then I saw Saddam Hussein hanged on youtube.
A friend sent me this link yesterday. It seems apropos:
WriteChic Press 
“But how comforting that it comes in the context of gun nuts having special feelings about owning a weapon with an insult to President Obama inscribed on the hardware.”
Wow. I heard that a few days ago but my naive mind didn’t connect the dots.
The United States won’t be a democracy until they don’t have the means to tell the gun lobby to f*** off.
It’s just too bizarre.
It’s sick. Hate is a disease.
The United States won’t be a democracy until they don’t have the means to tell the gun lobby to f*** off.
I won’t allow guns in my home but I’m of the mind that owning them is protected. Remember, just because a democracy passes a law doesn’t mean that it’s just.
For example, the majority could pass a law that makes it illegal to eat hamburgers on Thursday. I’m fairly certain that America’s Democracy will be BETTER served by allowing her citizens to own guns.
Hello, Pino. 🙂
The main point is that the rhetoric has devolved to nothing that resembles a good exchange.
Gun lobbyists, most lobbyists are soulless lapdogs for industry, and it doesn’t matter if they’re selling a product you like or a policy I like. They’d sell their own mothers. They suck.
A discussion about the second amendment versus Angle’s second amendment remedies are two completely different worlds.
Hello, Pino.
Hi chic.
The main point is that the rhetoric has devolved to nothing that resembles a good exchange.
That is a true fact.
However, the toast may better be delivered with the jam of bi-partisanship. For example, when discussing rhetoric and uglieness and the only
examples are from the right-wing loons, the impression is one of right-wing loonery. And, in a spirit of partisanship, that may be your point. However, I sense a certain legitimate hope that ALL sides tone it down.. THAT message would be better served by including ugliness from both team “Pepsi” and team “Coke”.
Gun lobbyists, most lobbyists are soulless lapdogs for industry
Without a doubt.
A discussion about the second amendment versus Angle’s second amendment remedies are two completely different worlds.
Ctrl+F = Phrase not found 😉
But yes, I get your point. However, if you take mine, you may wanna include this map:
I’m not defending the decency of people who talk like that. And I’m not condemning the partisans on both sides who ARE. I’m just saying that when you only point out one side in this ugly mess, it sounds like you are a partisan.
Which, if ya are, is colio with me.
The thing is, IMO, the “both sides” argument is like comparing a Twinkie to, in the words of Dr. Egon Spengler, “a Twinkie thirty-five feet long, weighing approximately six hundred pounds.”
In re: the quantity of the crazy, the quality of the crazy, and the importance of the party individuals condoning and/or participating in the crazy.
The thing is, IMO, the “both sides” argument is like comparing a Twinkie to, in the words of Dr. Egon Spengler, “a Twinkie thirty-five feet long, weighing approximately six hundred pounds.”
Okay. I’m certain I won’t change your mind.
Just know that when you stand and condemn a political map all the while wearing a political map on your T-shirt, you lose moocho credibility as a neutral participant.
As I said, you may very well be a partisan; which I personally think is fine. Just don’t be surprised or shocked when ya get called out on it.
Welp, this is where I’m coming from:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1/10/934890/-Stochastic-Terrorism
Regardless of your opinion of DKos, take a look at the examples listed of recent right wing violence/attempted violence: Jim David Adkisson; Richard Poplawski; Scott Roeder; Byron Williams. I have not seen a similar list of folks that, say, became unhinged because the public option didn’t pass and decided to shoot up a Walgreens. I can recall a brick through a GOP HQ in, I think, Colorado, and that’s all that comes to mind.
“Partisan” — In your comments, pino, it’s yet another label used to disregard reasoned disapproval with the behavior of individuals who happen to be in one particular party. It’s not “partisan” to find the actions and words of Republicans and TPrs and gun nuts to be reprehensible. Call me out – go ahead, I’m fine with it.
Sliding the reply over to extend space.
Regardless of your opinion of DKos, take a look at the examples listed of recent right wing violence/attempted violence: Jim David Adkisson; Richard Poplawski; Scott Roeder; Byron Williams.
Hi Owhole, I read the piece; ugly examples to be sure. There is no denying that violence seeded in extreme right wing views takes place.
It’s not “partisan” to find the actions and words of Republicans and TPrs and gun nuts to be reprehensible. Call me out – go ahead, I’m fine with it.
Hi SDS, You’re
right correct. It isn’t. What IS, however, is finding ONLY the words of Republicans and TPers reprehensible:Hmm, it would appear I didn’t close the tag. Sorry. Hope you get the point.
I did. And thank you for joining in on the conversation in a civil manner.
I should tell you up front, Pino, it’s pretty obvious I am not your genre of blog. That said…
If you mean to say the homicidal repartee that has become casual is a problem equally shouldered by liberals and conservatives…that has no basis in reality. So I don’t know how to help. I’m not going to pretend like liberals are going around talking about offing people the way conservatives do. I’m not going to pretend like liberals have been ginning up the nutters and bigots. I don’t work for a news agency; so, I don’t have to pretend there’s equal bullshit on both sides for this particular issue. There’s not.
I’m not 10, so I’m not going to assume from the context of your post that partisan is a naughty word that I want nothing to do with. Skewing it as an ad hominem as a method of persuasion is fallacious and wastes both our time.
Neutrality that ignores reality is absurd.
I’ll go one extra step in the name of diplomacy. Liberals have their own set of problems that aren’t relevant to this post (group spinelessness for one). Conservatives and liberals both have the problem of being beholden to varied corporate interests which too regularly these interests trump the best interests of citizens in general.
I should tell you up front, Pino, it’s pretty obvious I am not your genre of blog. That said…
I think I agree. I’m guessing you lean [how far I don’t know–just bumped into ya] left. I’m reversed. However, I’m trying to read more of the stuff the left has to say and engage; hopefully not in a caustic inflammatory way, but in a reasoned and polite way.
If you mean to say the homicidal repartee that has become casual is a problem equally shouldered by liberals and conservatives…that has no basis in reality.
I DO wanna say that the yucky venomous rhetoric in political theater is equal on both sides. When we say that we need to tone down our rhetoric, we mean that our elected officials and pundits have to tone down our rhetoric. No one is talking about tamin’ Bubba down at the Do Drop Inn.
I’m not 10, so I’m not going to assume from the context of your post that partisan is a naughty word that I want nothing to do with.
It’s not, not at all. Partisanship is all good, healthy to a degree. My point is that a call of bi-partisan tamp down of rhetoric is better achieved in a bi-partisan manner. And if not done in a bi-partisan manner, only STOKES those rhetorical flames.
I’ve gone back and read your post several more times this morning. I don’t think it was your position to address this in that bi-partisan manner; so perhaps my complaint is indeed out of bounds. Or maybe I was responding to the tone here:
It sounded there like you were reaching out some….
I’ll go one extra step in the name of diplomacy
Thank you but I don’t think that’s needed. Both sides have issues, the Left has some silly places they won’t abandon and the Right is full of whack jobs with stone age mentality too:
I mean serious. Do you know how many months, years, that sets back the Republican party here in North Carolina? Even if a politician thinks that [which I find reprehensible] why the ‘eff would you SAY it?
I drop this thread with this last thought, you can have the last word:
“You yelling at me to stop yelling doesn’t make me wanna stop yelling.”
By the way, I DO like your writing style. Good stuff.
I respect the word “yucky.” 😀
“bi-partisan manner. And if not done in a bi-partisan manner, only STOKES those rhetorical flames.”
(So maybe Boehner is helping by putting Bachmann on a committee where she’s not allowed to talk and keeping King (IA) out of leadership on immigration.)
You’re on the same page as Keith Olbermann with a call for a unified front sans finger-pointing against crazy talk. I don’t reject standing together. I reject glossing over the current state of things. I don’t have to compromise. I’m a mom. 🙂
Thank you for liking my writing style, too.
How could anyone find it appropriate to inscribe an obvious insult to the president on a gun??? This is just highly disturbing to me.
All of this homicidal bullshit talk spoken as chitchat and supposedly “just funning you” rhetoric is insane, but seeing it play out as business plan. 🙄
*hope you’re well, Helen*
Dude, who *doesn’t* like lace-ing it up?
Not so much with the pink, though.
As far as the mouths on the right go, I’m eternally reminded of the nuns and their perpetual “liberty vs license” talk — ie, “just ‘cuz ya can, doesn’t mean ya should.”
Precisely. I am forever indebted to the good sisters. 😀
(Not the priests…fucking pervs)
News this afternoon said that Palmetto pulled the AR-15 reciever unit off the market . The news story that never ceases to amaze me, everytime a mass killing goes down, the weapon in the news flies off the shelves of the gun sellers. That’s right, grab $500 and get that Glock as soon as possible to go with the 15 or 20 or 30 or more guns kicking around the house. And you have my sympathy for the perv abuse. It may be related to your photo avatar and such, as your apearance is quite fetching.
Demo. You said I’m cute. 😀
Clear Channel in Tucson has pulled its Rush Limbaugh “shoot ’em up” billboard, too.
Doing the right thing after the fact isn’t as sexy, but it’s a baby step for good that the ad is coming down.
there was some stupid reporter on hardball today (forgot her name), and she was making the ‘both sides are guilty’ bullshit argument. tweety, to his credit, called her on it.
And most folks know who the militants are with all their sneer and jeers, and it’s no mystery who’s packing heat at events. Mathews has been calling a lot of BS lately, but I had to cut off the Poor Tom interview because of tendancy to want to throw things at TV screen when that weasel talks. I cut it off and went out in the trees and gathered faggots instead, or is it fagots? (can make about a dozen jokes at this point).
http://www.castleton.co.uk/caverns/