Fox needs to be stopped!

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by JJIII

I'll try...

"It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members"

So far... so good.

"But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. "

Maybe it's the legislation that has been proposed and passed that has angered conservatives.

"Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing.........."

Both sides have exploited the arguements of division. (Maddow, Olbermann..)
Both sides are wrong to do so.

"They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people. "

Many Americans think that the policies offered up by liberal office holders are bad for the country. I don't know how many actually think of the government as "the enemy". Certainly many think that some should be removed from office as witnessed by the last election.


"Now, having seen first hand the horror of political violence, Arizona should lead the nation in quieting the voices of intolerance, demanding an end to the temptations of bloodshed"

That I can agree with whole-heartedly.

Listen, we are not going back to the 19th century so if folks on the right don't like that, tough.

All I read is denial.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by finnbow

OK, Chas, Whell, JJIII and/or Twodogs. Take a moment and read this short piece and please explain where it is that you take issue with it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/op...1.html?_r=1&hp

It's fairly reasonable for a one sided article. Then again, the left hasn't exactly doused themselves with cold water when it comes to political rhetoric.

Let's take a couple of other things into consideration. Congress is polling lower than whale shit, I've seen numbers which indicate that as many as 70% no longer trust the government to do the right thing, illegal immigration IS illegal, the health care bill is very unpopular with basically half of the population, the national debt is out of control, both parties are bought and paid for, and after 10 years even the staunchest supporters of the wars in the Middle East are looking for a way out.

And the unemployment numbers aren't entirely accurate, hell, they're nothing but a pack of lies when you get right down to it.

Does it come as a surprise that people are getting a case of the ass?

Now the Republicans can take a lot of blame for stirring the pot, but they're not the only culprit. I can remember Ms. Pelosi parading through the health care opponents with her oversized gavel it what appeared to me to be an attempt to enrage them.

Not exactly my idea of a come together moment.

The country is divided on the issues, not because Fox and MSNBC tells them their divided. The media simply reflects what's going on. And by and large, the only way anyone is going to get the folks inside of the beltway to pay the least amount of attention to them is to show up with a big envelope stuffed full of cash.

I would say that one of my biggest complaints with those on the left is their myopic view that the level of discontent in this country is solely the fault of the Republicans.

Just a few thoughts.

Chas

[Charles]

Originally Posted by noonereal

Listen, we are not going back to the 19th century so if folks on the right don't like that, tough.

All I read is denial.

Looks to me like we're going back to the Dark Ages.

Chas

[Charles]

Originally Posted by JJIII

I'll try...

"It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members"

So far... so good.

"But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. "

Maybe it's the legislation that has been proposed and passed that has angered conservatives.

"Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing.........."

Both sides have exploited the arguements of division. (Maddow, Olbermann..)
Both sides are wrong to do so.

"They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people. "

Many Americans think that the policies offered up by liberal office holders are bad for the country. I don't know how many actually think of the government as "the enemy". Certainly many think that some should be removed from office as witnessed by the last election.


"Now, having seen first hand the horror of political violence, Arizona should lead the nation in quieting the voices of intolerance, demanding an end to the temptations of bloodshed"

That I can agree with whole-heartedly.

We're on the same page, my friend.

Chas

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Charles

An internet sale, other than black powder or an air gun would require two FFL holders along with a NICS check. It's a pretty secure way to sell firearms, with the vast majority of transactions taking place from wholesalers, and sites like Gunbroker.com or Gunsamerica.com.

Personally, if I decide to sell my Python, Diamondback, original Marlin .410, or a few other collectibles I would use the internet. They will bring a far better price there than they would by selling them through the want ads.

In the good old days, Shotgun News was pretty much the bible for gun brokers, but you still had to work through FFL's. Have you ever seen a copy Finn, they sold everything from a BB gun to a Class III Browning .50. Everything by the book, of course, only a damn fool would take a chance on selling a firearm through the mail, they will put you in jail for that.

I've bought a few mail order guns, the fee was 10% or less, depending on how many favors I'd done for the FFL I was dealing with. But I still had to do the paperwork.

Now if I really want a gun without a paperwork trail, all I have to do is pull some green out of the safe, walk up to the beer joint, and the odds are I'll have something by the end of the day. Especially if I'm willing to pay too much.

Firearms, much like drugs, are highly regulated but easily accessible to anyone who desires them. Unfortunately, the insane aren't regulated until after the fact.

It's always been like that, and I'm not sure that there is any way to change it.

Chas

Then there is a break in the system somewhere because according to this morning's paper he passed the background check.

[merrylander]

Congresswoman Giffords herself spoke of this excessive language being used during a TV interview. I have only one question, and lets not go back to the sixties for this. Can someone find me a case of someone on the left yammering about guns (other than being in favour of more control) or putting out Get Ammo T shirts?

Meanwhile I am going to quietly pray for Ms. Gifford's recovery and comfort for the parents of that beautiful 9 year old child.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

OK, Chas, Whell, JJIII and/or Twodogs. Take a moment and read this short piece and please explain where it is that you take issue with it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/op...1.html?_r=1&hp

Item one:

"But he is very much a part of a widespread squall of fear, anger and intolerance that has produced violent threats against scores of politicians and infected the political mainstream with violent imagery."

Doesn't exist within the "rank and file" conservatives, and is typically confined to individuals like Mr. Loughner. Now, if it makes my friends on the left more comfortable to look at their political opponents through a particular lens, or ads grist to their mill, so be it. But then I have to ask: who's then continuing to stoke the fire of hate, fear and intolerance once Mr. Loughner's (and those like him) dirty deed is done.

Item Two

"This rage, stirred by talk-radio hosts, required marshals to give the judge and his family 24-hour protection for a month. Around the nation, threats to federal judges have soared for a decade."

Is it really "stirred by radio talkshow hosts" exclusively, or at all? I hardly think so. The rise of the internet has given folks like Mr. Loughner ready and easy access to like-minded individuals and groups of individuals. Its exactly the same tactic that our radical Islam uses to attract and retain its militant operatives. Its easy (and, if I may, intellectual lazy) to demonize talk radio and Fox News in this case, and any other case you can point to. However, I can point to recent examples of individuals who carried out misdeeds and likely never tuned in to Fox, but were quite well traveled on the internet.

Item Three

"It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge."

I just love this rhetorical tactic. The above quote is like saying: "I'm not saying you're ugly, but shit, dude, you're ugly." Did any violence break out at any Tea Party Rally? No. Did the most recent Tea Party gathering begin or end with threats of violence, mobs descending on public offices and trashing or shooting up public buildings? No. I just don't get the connection here. Likely because ideologically I'm quite close to those folks whom the NYT article would like to paint with the same broad brush, yet I and like-minded folks I know would never threaten a public official or shoot up a shopping center. Real life just doesn't match the portrait that this NYT editorial would like to paint, but I suspect it comports nicely with the version of reality that some NYT readers would like to believe - some members of this discussion included.

Item Four

"Its gun laws are among the most lenient, allowing even a disturbed man like Mr. Loughner to buy a pistol and carry it concealed without a special permit."

These scenarios used to give the left an opportunity to stand up and blow their cookies about a single issue: gun control. Now the left is doubling - down and using this issue to amplify their b*tch about the right being the locus of all political anger.

Now, were was I. Oh yeah. Still awaiting a response to this post:

http://politicalchat.org/showpost.ph...2&postcount=37

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Congresswoman Giffords herself spoke of this excessive language being used during a TV interview. I have only one question, and lets not go back to the sixties for this. Can someone find me a case of someone on the left yammering about guns (other than being in favour of more control) or putting out Get Ammo T shirts?

Ted Kaczynski (though he tended to like things that blow up more than he liked guns). James Lee. Quite possibly, Jared Laughner.

Laughner may not be a right wing nut case, as the media and some in this forum appear to want to paint him. Info is starting to surface about what he was into and what he posted about on the net. It seems that he was a fan of some interesting schools of thought, none of which would be found at an average Tea Party meeting. IN fact, at best, his brand of ideology might turn out to be quite difficult to pigeon - hole.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Charles

I would say that one of my biggest complaints with those on the left is their myopic view that the level of discontent in this country is solely the fault of the Republicans.

not solely, predominately.

especially this go out and kill em (dems) undertow that has been around since the black man was elected

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by whell

Now, were was I. Oh yeah. Still awaiting a response to this post:

http://politicalchat.org/showpost.ph...2&postcount=37

Were you awaiting congratulations for being cute? Disappointed that you list was not sufficiently provocative? Did you just assume that it was so brilliant that, despite the lack of a question, it would suddenly shift everyone's attention?

Regards,

D-Ray