Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Meanwhile, back on the Insane Right...
Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:07 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:Republican Newsletter From Arkansas Advocates Shooting People Who Step Out Of Line From the Benton County, Ark. Republican Newsletter:Quote:We need to let those who will come in the future to represent us [know] that we are serious. The 2nd amendment means nothing unless those in power believe you would have no problem simply walking up and shooting them if they got too far out of line and stopped responding as representatives. It seems that we are unable to muster that belief in any of our representatives on a state or federal level, but we have to have something, something costly, something that they will fear that we will use if they step out of line. FAR too much more at http://www.nogy.net/bcgop/Apr_2013/index.html] By the way, on the subject of Obamacare, he feels the same:Quote:Part of me feels that this betrayal deserves a quick implementation of my 2nd amendment rights to remove a threat domestic. How about "Liberals Thrilled About Mayhem In Boston Says Gun Nut Larry Pratt" Quote:Gun Owners of America head Larry Pratt agrees with Stan Solomon and Steve Davis that liberals are happy about the Boston bombing because it will foster more government contorl Then there'sQuote:GOP Lawmaker Doubles Down On Demanding Torture For Teenaged Boston Bombing Suspect New York State Senator Greg Ball (R-NY) caused quite the stir over the weekend with his over-the-top demands for torturing 19-year-old Boston bombing suspect, Dzokhar Tsarnaev. On Friday evening — just moments after Tsarnaev was taken into custody – the chairman of the New York State Senate Veterans, Homeland Security and Military Affairs Committee posted on his twitter feed: "So, scum bag #2 in custody. Who wouldn't use torture on this punk to save more lives?" On Sunday, April 21st, Ball tossed more brush on the fire by doubling down on his pro-torture stance, with the following statement:Quote:Terrorists play by a different set of rules by manipulating the greatest strengths of our open society against us. One of the questions to be asked is this: is “torture” ever justified in the war against terror, if it can save lives? I am not shy in joining those who say yes, and I believe we must give those tasked with protecting us every constitutional and effective tool to do so. Wow. Considering that Tsarnaev is an American citizen, was unconscious, and technically has not been proven guilty, them’s fighting words. Then again, since when have Republicans ever cared about proving guilt before torturing people? And what, exactly, does Ball mean by saving “more lives?” According to Bryan Bender from The Boston Globe, city officials report that “all evidence thus far indicates they [Dzokhar and his brother Tamerlan] were acting alone and were not part of a broader conspiracy.” Tamerlan's dead and Dzhokar is in custody. So what life-saving information could Tsarnaev possibly reveal under torture? When asked if he felt surprised by the all the negative feedback, Ball replied:Quote:At the end of the day, I think a lot of politicians typically are, quite honestly, full of crap, they’re scared to say how they feel. And I basically said what I believe a lot of red-blooded Americans felt. And it comes down to this: When you talk about terrorism, information matters. And if getting that information, including torture, would save one innocent life — including that we’ve seen children — you know, would you use torture? And I can tell you I would be first in line. If you can stand it: He says the war against terror "scares the hell out of me", which probably explains why he's convinced Al Qaeda is going to "bring this country to it's knees". Scared people in power are scary as hell... That's your dose of right-wing crazy for the morning. And I was kind enough to leave out Glenn Beck's latest paranoid asshattery, wasn't that nice of me?
Quote:We need to let those who will come in the future to represent us [know] that we are serious. The 2nd amendment means nothing unless those in power believe you would have no problem simply walking up and shooting them if they got too far out of line and stopped responding as representatives. It seems that we are unable to muster that belief in any of our representatives on a state or federal level, but we have to have something, something costly, something that they will fear that we will use if they step out of line. FAR too much more at http://www.nogy.net/bcgop/Apr_2013/index.html] By the way, on the subject of Obamacare, he feels the same:Quote:Part of me feels that this betrayal deserves a quick implementation of my 2nd amendment rights to remove a threat domestic. How about "Liberals Thrilled About Mayhem In Boston Says Gun Nut Larry Pratt" Quote:Gun Owners of America head Larry Pratt agrees with Stan Solomon and Steve Davis that liberals are happy about the Boston bombing because it will foster more government contorl Then there'sQuote:GOP Lawmaker Doubles Down On Demanding Torture For Teenaged Boston Bombing Suspect New York State Senator Greg Ball (R-NY) caused quite the stir over the weekend with his over-the-top demands for torturing 19-year-old Boston bombing suspect, Dzokhar Tsarnaev. On Friday evening — just moments after Tsarnaev was taken into custody – the chairman of the New York State Senate Veterans, Homeland Security and Military Affairs Committee posted on his twitter feed: "So, scum bag #2 in custody. Who wouldn't use torture on this punk to save more lives?" On Sunday, April 21st, Ball tossed more brush on the fire by doubling down on his pro-torture stance, with the following statement:Quote:Terrorists play by a different set of rules by manipulating the greatest strengths of our open society against us. One of the questions to be asked is this: is “torture” ever justified in the war against terror, if it can save lives? I am not shy in joining those who say yes, and I believe we must give those tasked with protecting us every constitutional and effective tool to do so. Wow. Considering that Tsarnaev is an American citizen, was unconscious, and technically has not been proven guilty, them’s fighting words. Then again, since when have Republicans ever cared about proving guilt before torturing people? And what, exactly, does Ball mean by saving “more lives?” According to Bryan Bender from The Boston Globe, city officials report that “all evidence thus far indicates they [Dzokhar and his brother Tamerlan] were acting alone and were not part of a broader conspiracy.” Tamerlan's dead and Dzhokar is in custody. So what life-saving information could Tsarnaev possibly reveal under torture? When asked if he felt surprised by the all the negative feedback, Ball replied:Quote:At the end of the day, I think a lot of politicians typically are, quite honestly, full of crap, they’re scared to say how they feel. And I basically said what I believe a lot of red-blooded Americans felt. And it comes down to this: When you talk about terrorism, information matters. And if getting that information, including torture, would save one innocent life — including that we’ve seen children — you know, would you use torture? And I can tell you I would be first in line. If you can stand it: He says the war against terror "scares the hell out of me", which probably explains why he's convinced Al Qaeda is going to "bring this country to it's knees". Scared people in power are scary as hell... That's your dose of right-wing crazy for the morning. And I was kind enough to leave out Glenn Beck's latest paranoid asshattery, wasn't that nice of me?
Quote:Part of me feels that this betrayal deserves a quick implementation of my 2nd amendment rights to remove a threat domestic.
Quote:Gun Owners of America head Larry Pratt agrees with Stan Solomon and Steve Davis that liberals are happy about the Boston bombing because it will foster more government contorl
Quote:GOP Lawmaker Doubles Down On Demanding Torture For Teenaged Boston Bombing Suspect New York State Senator Greg Ball (R-NY) caused quite the stir over the weekend with his over-the-top demands for torturing 19-year-old Boston bombing suspect, Dzokhar Tsarnaev. On Friday evening — just moments after Tsarnaev was taken into custody – the chairman of the New York State Senate Veterans, Homeland Security and Military Affairs Committee posted on his twitter feed: "So, scum bag #2 in custody. Who wouldn't use torture on this punk to save more lives?" On Sunday, April 21st, Ball tossed more brush on the fire by doubling down on his pro-torture stance, with the following statement:Quote:Terrorists play by a different set of rules by manipulating the greatest strengths of our open society against us. One of the questions to be asked is this: is “torture” ever justified in the war against terror, if it can save lives? I am not shy in joining those who say yes, and I believe we must give those tasked with protecting us every constitutional and effective tool to do so. Wow. Considering that Tsarnaev is an American citizen, was unconscious, and technically has not been proven guilty, them’s fighting words. Then again, since when have Republicans ever cared about proving guilt before torturing people? And what, exactly, does Ball mean by saving “more lives?” According to Bryan Bender from The Boston Globe, city officials report that “all evidence thus far indicates they [Dzokhar and his brother Tamerlan] were acting alone and were not part of a broader conspiracy.” Tamerlan's dead and Dzhokar is in custody. So what life-saving information could Tsarnaev possibly reveal under torture? When asked if he felt surprised by the all the negative feedback, Ball replied:Quote:At the end of the day, I think a lot of politicians typically are, quite honestly, full of crap, they’re scared to say how they feel. And I basically said what I believe a lot of red-blooded Americans felt. And it comes down to this: When you talk about terrorism, information matters. And if getting that information, including torture, would save one innocent life — including that we’ve seen children — you know, would you use torture? And I can tell you I would be first in line.
Quote:Terrorists play by a different set of rules by manipulating the greatest strengths of our open society against us. One of the questions to be asked is this: is “torture” ever justified in the war against terror, if it can save lives? I am not shy in joining those who say yes, and I believe we must give those tasked with protecting us every constitutional and effective tool to do so.
Quote:At the end of the day, I think a lot of politicians typically are, quite honestly, full of crap, they’re scared to say how they feel. And I basically said what I believe a lot of red-blooded Americans felt. And it comes down to this: When you talk about terrorism, information matters. And if getting that information, including torture, would save one innocent life — including that we’ve seen children — you know, would you use torture? And I can tell you I would be first in line.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:17 AM
Quote:‘You’ve Got To Be Kidding Me’: Fox Host Tears Into ‘Laughable’ Questioning Of Boston Suspect As Fox & Friends reported the latest developments in the questioning of Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the some of the hosts were a bit skeptical about the new developments. Brian Kilmeade, in particular, criticized the way the interrogation is being conducted and deemed it “laughable” that the suspect was read his Miranda rights in hospital. Going through some of the information about Tsarnaev being shot in the neck, Kilmeade noted it’s being called into question based on an eyewitness report. He further pointed to the suspect alleging his brother was the driving force and they acted alone, calling Tsarnaev’s account “convenient.” As the topic of religion arose, believed to be the older brother’s motivation, Steve Doocy also chimed in, discussing the brother’s past attendance at a mosque in Cambridge and the anti-American “outbursts” he’d supposedly had there. To that point, Gretchen Carlson added that the older brother appeared to be the radicalized one who influence the 19-year-old suspect. “There’s no way you should believe — everyone’s apparently running with this story,” Kilmeade immediately jumped in. Quote:“You’ve got to be kidding me. You question him for 90 seconds as he’s come out of a harrowing situation like this. He’s in self-preservation mode. This guy needs to be questioned for a couple of weeks, they need to see if his story lines up. They all have the same explanation to get out of it in the beginning. And then you’ve got to drill down on it with professional interrogators. He does not need to see his Miranda rights read to him in bed. Laughable.” Doocy turned to the older brother’s widow, wondering what she knew about the plans. While she’s said to have been in the dark, Carlson remarked that she’d been “brainwashed” by radical Islam, converting from Christianity. Kilmeade, meanwhile, pressed on:Quote:“There is no way logically — how do you not know the man you converted to Islam for is not involved in extracurricular activities? You’ve already switched to his religion. … You don’t think it ever came up that, ‘By the way, honey, I’m taking it to another level.’” http://www.mediaite.com/tv/youve-got-to-be-kidding-me-fox-host-tears-into-laughable-questioning-of-boston-suspect/] Man, these righties reeeely love America and our dedication to the rule of law and our Constitution and stuff...until it's inconvenient, or someone scares them, or they don't like someone...
Quote:“You’ve got to be kidding me. You question him for 90 seconds as he’s come out of a harrowing situation like this. He’s in self-preservation mode. This guy needs to be questioned for a couple of weeks, they need to see if his story lines up. They all have the same explanation to get out of it in the beginning. And then you’ve got to drill down on it with professional interrogators. He does not need to see his Miranda rights read to him in bed. Laughable.”
Quote:“There is no way logically — how do you not know the man you converted to Islam for is not involved in extracurricular activities? You’ve already switched to his religion. … You don’t think it ever came up that, ‘By the way, honey, I’m taking it to another level.’”
Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:23 AM
Quote:Coulter To Geraldo: We Should Have Police Surveillance In Every Mosque — ‘It’s Not A Private Relationship’ Agreeing with co-panelist Alan Dershowitz‘s suggestion that “surveillance is a very good thing” and that “we should learn to live with video cameras” because a mosque, church, or synagogue are “not a private place,” Coulter told Rivera:Quote:“I have long disagreed with my libertarian friends on this. It’s not difficult to explain: Any place a cop can be, or an undercover cop — standing, watching, and observing — you should be able to have a camera. We see how incredibly useful this was, the various cameras out at the Boston Marathon. As Alan says, we’re not talking about invading a private relationship — You wouldn’t be talking to your shrink with an undercover cop standing there; you wouldn’t be in the ladies’ room with an undercover cop standing there.” But, see, that’s the thing: a mosque is a private institution. The Lord & Taylor surveillance camera that at least partially helped identify the Boston suspects was installed by a private business that decided to install the cameras for security reasons. If a mosque or church or synagogue decide to install cameras for their own security’s sake, then fine — as private institutions, they have the right to do so and their members can choose not to attend if they don’t like the tape rolling. But private institutions also have the right not to install cameras, and so the two Geraldo guests’ proposal rings ever-so-slightly in the direction of mandating that surveillance be installed where necessary. And as for Coulter’s and Dershowitz’s logic that “anywhere an undercover cop can be” is where we should put cameras? That’s a seriously dangerous suggestion. An undercover cop can go to some Tea Party gathering at a local VFW. Would Coulter be okay with government surveilling that — you know, just in case? And would Dershowitz really be okay with government forcing synagogues to install surveillance? Or did he just throw that suggestion out there to mitigate his specific desire that we have the cameras rolling on all mosques? http://www.mediaite.com/online/coulter-to-geraldo-we-should-have-police-surveillance-in-every-mosque-its-not-a-private-relationship/
Quote:“I have long disagreed with my libertarian friends on this. It’s not difficult to explain: Any place a cop can be, or an undercover cop — standing, watching, and observing — you should be able to have a camera. We see how incredibly useful this was, the various cameras out at the Boston Marathon. As Alan says, we’re not talking about invading a private relationship — You wouldn’t be talking to your shrink with an undercover cop standing there; you wouldn’t be in the ladies’ room with an undercover cop standing there.”
Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:45 AM
STORYMARK
Wednesday, April 24, 2013 5:01 AM
Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:31 AM
FREMDFIRMA
Quote:Originally posted by Storymark: Nothing new there. They're only interested in preserving the rights they approve of.
Wednesday, April 24, 2013 1:00 PM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Wednesday, April 24, 2013 1:36 PM
CHRISISALL
Quote:Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA: Quote:Originally posted by Storymark: Nothing new there. They're only interested in preserving the rights they approve of. Which is exactly my problem with both "sides", neither of which admits it. Mind you, I dun think anymore highly of the rightwingnuts than you do, but as has been made abundantly clear, the supposedly liberal end of the spectrum does exactly that same pick and choose bullshit, only the rights in question they wanna protect or suppress are different, which makes em not a whit better and I take umbrage they get such a free pass for that bullshit. If one is unwilling to stand for all rights, for all humans, they're just one more wannabe petty tyrant cause the moment you introduce different rulesets you restore social classes and the caste system, one of the primary things this entire goddamn country was founded on a basis of preventing. So, while you're claim about the rightwingnuts picking and choosing is accurate, look to the beam in thy own eye here cause your own are every bit as guilty and should not be handed a free pass for it. -F
Wednesday, April 24, 2013 1:45 PM
JONGSSTRAW
Wednesday, April 24, 2013 11:04 PM
Quote:Originally posted by chrisisall: I'm right there with ya Frem. I'm disgusted with this country's politics now more than ever. The only thing the Right & Left can agree on is total control of... us.
Thursday, April 25, 2013 2:59 AM
Thursday, April 25, 2013 4:53 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: The main problem I have w/ anarchists is that they don't offer any solutions. TEAR IT ALL DOWN! Well, OK. Then what are you left with? A non functional heap of society. Now what ? *** crickets **** Yeah, no thanks.
Thursday, April 25, 2013 5:17 AM
Quote:Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA: Mind you, I dun think anymore highly of the rightwingnuts than you do, but as has been made abundantly clear, the supposedly liberal end of the spectrum does exactly that same pick and choose bullshit, only the rights in question they wanna protect or suppress are different,
Thursday, April 25, 2013 11:26 AM
Thursday, April 25, 2013 11:32 AM
Quote:Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA: Nor does demanding identification at the voting both - but that's different, eh ?
Quote:The problematic case in question was IMHO, some faction seeing how far they could push it as a test,
Thursday, April 25, 2013 7:02 PM
Thursday, April 25, 2013 7:30 PM
Thursday, April 25, 2013 7:51 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Thursday, April 25, 2013 11:01 PM
MAGONSDAUGHTER
Friday, April 26, 2013 2:15 AM
Quote:Originally posted by chrisisall: Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: The main problem I have w/ anarchists is that they don't offer any solutions. TEAR IT ALL DOWN! Well, OK. Then what are you left with? A non functional heap of society. Now what ? *** crickets **** Yeah, no thanks. You don't know what you're talking about here, but what's different about that? And more importantly, it doesn't matter anyway...
Friday, April 26, 2013 3:22 AM
Friday, April 26, 2013 6:02 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: The fact is the rights-trampling LAWS and attempted laws, and stated desires to act upon, from the right EXIST, are being passed around the country, I post them constantly, and they do trample on specific rights, and were INTENDED to trample on rights; they've even slipped and SAID SO on a few occasions, like Voter ID winning a state for Romney, and crowing about having made abortion impossible in another state. Means nothing to those like Frem, whose minds are so swathed in paranoia and illogic that they can't see reality. So be it.
Saturday, April 27, 2013 11:43 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: What do I not know ? How about you tell me, specifically, where I'm missing the point. Help me out here.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL