Las Vegas shooting = Tea Party terrorism

[Chas]

I am not a fan of the word "terrorist". It elevates the sickos to freedom fighters in the eyes of their supporters. They should be treated as the mere thugs and criminals they are.

In the civil west we are supposed to accept that sometimes we win or lose elections and should value the peaceful transfer of power. Getting violent does not prove to me you are worthy of listening to.

Slamming planes into buildings, shooting abortion doctors, or murdering cops on a lunch break, makes you a murderer, not a hero. Violence takes no brains. Thinking through problem solving and conflict resolution does.

---

Um, no.

Eisenhower sent the first troops in. He was hardly a liberal.

---

No, we can't. You seem to be calling any kind of wacko a 'gun nutter' if he happens to have a gun.

And the media demonize gun owners far more often than not. How is that 'enabling'?

Bullshit argument. This is the same problem Harris has with liberal atheists and theists about enabling the zealots. You do not do humanity any favors by hiding be hind religion to protect nuts. Same with guns. You do not help yourself as a gun owner by getting angry at the people who know it is a problem. Instead you should be getting angry at the people who make it a problem.

"Not all people" is a bad argument which is not what we argue with religion or guns. All it takes is "just enough" to fuck things up for everyone.

Get angry at the right people instead of getting angry at the people who are merely pointing out a problem exists.

Why do you assume that I'm liberal, or that I am angry at anti-gun nuts, or that I am not angry at gun-nuts and actual crazy people with guns?


That is one large pile of assumptions based on fuck all. It was a rant that did not respond to my post at all.

---

No, we can't. You seem to be calling any kind of wacko a 'gun nutter' if he happens to have a gun.

And the media demonize gun owners far more often than not. How is that 'enabling'?

What I mean to say is that making the second amendment an issue leads to gun promotion and puts more of them in the hands of the unbalanced. But this article was about more than that. Media types and government officials who openly talk of renewing democracy with a little blood letting are a problem. Open carry zealots are a problem. People are a problem who think they have a responsibility to judge at a personal level when their second amendment rights call for an overthrow of government.

I don't disagree, but let's at least have some truth in labeling. Not every liberal is anti-gun, not every gun owner is a 'gun nut', not every person looking for a solution is a gun confiscator.

But the Second Amendment is there and has been deemed an individual right by the Supreme Court. That is a reality that has to be acknowledged.

Gun control laws must not violate it. Don't like it? Get it changed.

But how about we address the causes of violence in U.S. society. Solutions that have been effective in other countries may not work in the U.S. if the societies are too different.

[Ryantology]

There is a left-wing equivalent to the Tea Party, the Occupy Wall Street lunatics. OWS was endorsed by both the American Nazi Party and the American Communist Party.

Does it make you a Nazi if a Nazi says something nice about you?

One OWS protestor balmed Jews on Wall Street and five anarchists who participated in OWS protests were arrested in an FBI sting for plotting to blow up bridges in Cleveland, Ohio.

Every large political movement has a violent fringe. That's not the point. The point is that the Tea Party intentionally encourages action from their violent fringe. Now, show me where any Democratic politican or Occupy-affiliated media personnel openly and repeatedly called for action of this nature.

According your judgement then, the far-left Occupy Wall Street movement is nothing but a left-wing terror group which is made up of anti-semites, nazis, commies, and murdering anarchists.

Nope. Not even close to the same thing. How many times have cops come through with blunt objects and tear gas on a Tea Party rally? The occupy movement has its violent elements, but on the whole, it suffered a lot more than it dished out. The Tea Party has been fortunate on that point. The power of moneyed interest protects that movement, rather than trying to destroy it. Though, that may be changing soon now that Big Business is losing control of its useful lunatics.

And, as a final nail in the coffin, Occupy was never a political organization like the Tea Party, and never took overt political action, so it's not even fair to categorize them in the same way.

[John V]

We've listened to the Tea Party call for weapons hoarding and armed revolution against the government. We've heard them repeat sayings about the tree of liberty needing blood. For five years, we've listened to these people openly advocate violence and death in the interest of achieving their political goals.

What's with all the we's? Speak for yourself. People who know what the tea party says are either tea party members, or far left people who like to walk around pissed off. Those of us in the middle don't give them much attention.

[Whateverist]

We've listened to the Tea Party call for weapons hoarding and armed revolution against the government. We've heard them repeat sayings about the tree of liberty needing blood. For five years, we've listened to these people openly advocate violence and death in the interest of achieving their political goals.

What's with all the we's? Speak for yourself. People who know what the tea party says are either tea party members, or far left people who like to walk around pissed off. Those of us in the middle don't give them much attention.

.. and you can get away with that until, if you are a policeman on a lunch break, one or couple of them decide that their 2nd amendment inspired overthrow of government will start with you. So, sure, this bell probably doesn't toll for you. But can you really afford to wait for the one that does?

[popeyespappy]

Unless you count all the bodies from two illegal wars conservatives are responsible for, that is.

Well the president for those wars were started by good liberals JFK and LBJ and their wonderful escapade in Vietnam. Also there has been plenty of domestic leftwing terrorism in history.

Already addressed by Chas, but Eisenhower was president when the first US troops arrived in Vietnam in 54 or 55 to help train the ARVN troops. It was part of a $100 million aid package that was supposed to stop what would later be called Eisenhower's domino effect. The first combat related death of a US soldier in the conflict was in 59.

[Minimalist]

Ah, yeah. "Training." The Great American Panacea.

We could have trained those Iraqi fuckheads for 50 years and they would have run away at the first shot. Training cannot replace commitment.

[John V]

.. and you can get away with that until, if you are a policeman on a lunch break, one or couple of them decide that their 2nd amendment inspired overthrow of government will start with you. So, sure, this bell probably doesn't toll for you. But can you really afford to wait for the one that does?

Yes. I'm not paranoid.

[Ryantology]

What's with all the we's? Speak for yourself. People who know what the tea party says are either tea party members, or far left people who like to walk around pissed off. Those of us in the middle don't give them much attention.

I assumed that anybody who would even bother reading a thread with 'Tea Party' in the title is someone having at least basic familiarity with the Tea Party and their goals.

If that's not you, your participation in this thread doesn't really make a lot of sense.

[Ryantology]

Gov. Bobby Jindal euphemistically threatens violent rebellion against the federal government.