0
   

Go Ahead And Flame Me And Give Me My Tinfoil Hat But....

 
 
Reply Fri 18 Sep, 2009 05:16 pm
Scenario... backroom smoke filled DEMOCRAT meeting.. while they bemoan the racist stirrings of the right and the republicans.... they send Pelosi out to deliver, with crocodile tears... an emotional speech about her fears of violence towards the president.... becoming a self fullfilling prophecy..... and giving the dems a martyr, which they milk for so much mileage that they get their way on healthcare and any other number of liberal programs while gathering even more power to themselves as "the good guys".

It makes me sick that we are in such a through the looking glass state that the thought even occurred to me quite frankly.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,361 • Replies: 12
No top replies

 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Sep, 2009 01:01 am
@Bi-Polar Bear,
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Scenario... backroom smoke filled DEMOCRAT meeting.. while they bemoan the racist stirrings of the right and the republicans.... they send Pelosi out to deliver, with crocodile tears... an emotional speech about her fears of violence towards the president.... becoming a self fulfilling prophecy..... and giving the dems a martyr, which they milk for so much mileage that they get their way on healthcare and any other number of liberal programs while gathering even more power to themselves as "the good guys".

It makes me sick that we are in such a through the looking glass state that the thought even occurred to me quite frankly.


God, truly, forbid a nutcase assassinates Obama.

No matter what anyone thinks about him, it would be a national and personal tragedy.

However, you are (reluctantly) correct that should such a heinous deed occur, Pelosi & Company (Franks, Reid, Waxman, Waters, Rangel, et al) will attempt to make political hay about it.

Not than GOP leaders would, without hesitation, do the right thing, but should such a horrible event occur, how the Democrats respond will be most telling.

The thought that only Democratic presidents (and black ones at that) should fear the assassin’s bullet is nonsense.

Any reasonable regard for history will confirm that assassination attempts and performed have little to do with political ideology.
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Sep, 2009 05:04 am
@Bi-Polar Bear,
Quote:
It makes me sick that we are in such a through the looking glass state that the thought even occurred to me quite frankly.


It make me laugh that you are in such a crazy state that you think that outside agencies are inserting thoughts into your head.
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Sep, 2009 06:19 am
@contrex,
contrex wrote:

Quote:
It makes me sick that we are in such a through the looking glass state that the thought even occurred to me quite frankly.


It make me laugh that you are in such a crazy state that you think that outside agencies are inserting thoughts into your head.
conrex I thought of this all by myself....I'ma big boy.

The entire point of the post was that such talk, by either side of the political spectrum, is dangerous and foolish.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Sep, 2009 08:44 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

The thought that only Democratic presidents (and black ones at that) should fear the assassin’s bullet is nonsense.

Any reasonable regard for history will confirm that assassination attempts and performed have little to do with political ideology.

Not to quibble, but looking at the last successful assassinations makes me think otherwise. Granted, that was a different decade, but the message was unmistakable.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Sep, 2009 05:20 pm
@FreeDuck,
Quibble away, but (no offense) that's all your argument amounts to.

The last successful presidential assassination was Oswald's killing JFK. Even if you buy the Warren Commission was wrong (and I don't) there's a long list of conspiracy nut suspects and only one involves possible ideological motives. Whether it was Fidel, LBJ, the Mafia, the CIA, or a right wing cabal, they're all unfounded theories, and of them all, the right wing cabal is the least likely. JFK was a lot of things but a leftist he was not. Hell, he was, arguably, more right wing than a lot of today's Republicans.

If the JFK of then ran today most conservatives would vote for him.

Were the attempts against Ford and Reagan ideological? In the case of Ford they were clearly incompetent, but politically motivated? Reagan was lucky because his would be assassin was not incompetent, but he certainly wasn't an ideology either.

MLK's assassin was motivated more by base race hatred than politics and the fellow who shot George Wallace was hardly a civil rights activist.

The last American assassination that can be, arguably, linked to ideology was McKinnleys death at the hand of an anarchist.

God forbid Obama is assassinated, the chances are much better that the assassin will be a maniac looking for eternal fame than service to a cause.
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Sep, 2009 05:30 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

The last successful presidential assassination was Oswald's killing JFK.

Yeah, but I wasn't limiting myself to presidential assassinations. The last successful assassinations were of prominent leaders all on the same side of the civil rights movement. JFK, MLK, RFK, Malcolm X.

Quote:
Were the attempts against Ford and Reagan ideological? In the case of Ford they were clearly incompetent, but politically motivated? Reagan was lucky because his would be assassin was not incompetent, but he certainly wasn't an ideology either.

I was under the impression that neither attempts were ideology based, hence my argument (that you believe is quibble).

Quote:
MLK's assassin was motivated more by base race hatred than politics and the fellow who shot George Wallace was hardly a civil rights activist.

I forgot about George Wallace. Certainly at that time in the US race hatred and politics were strange bedfellows.

Quote:
God forbid Obama is assassinated, the chances are much better that the assassin will be a maniac looking for eternal fame than service to a cause.

If, God forbid, such a thing were to happen I hope you are right. I prefer not to conjure those thoughts, though.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Sep, 2009 05:00 pm
@FreeDuck,
The people who you cite can only be said to have been roughly on the same side of the civil rights issues of their time. The people who killed them cannot even be roughly grouped together as anything other than murderers.

JFK was killed by an American loser who at least at one time fancied himself a communist.

RFK was killed by a Palestinian loser who is a crazy as a loon.

MLK was killed by an American loser who was a twisted bigot; possibly financed and encouraged by equally twisted bigots of relatively greater means.

Malcolm X was killed by American gangsters who were, themselves, black and served as murderous muscle for the Nation of Islam.

If you can find some unifying theme among their assassins that doesn't relate to mental defect, please describe it.

FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Sep, 2009 06:38 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

The people who you cite can only be said to have been roughly on the same side of the civil rights issues of their time. The people who killed them cannot even be roughly grouped together as anything other than murderers.

I'm not sure why the killers need to have anything in common in order to show that people on one end of the ideological spectrum have more to fear than those on the other. What is clear is that at that time, with the mood of the country, it was quite probable that being on the right side of the civil rights issue and speaking publicly about it could get you killed. I don't at all believe that things now are that bad, but those elements still exist, if greatly diminished.

And that's not even addressing the incredible coincidence of all these "lone gunmen" assassinations.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Sep, 2009 10:44 pm
@FreeDuck,
So what are you saying?

That those on the Left have more to fear from the Divine than the Right?

If those on the Left are shot at more often than those on the Right (something you've not established), and the shooters cannot be identified as a homogeneous group (let alone Right-Wingers), then either Leftists are extremely unlucky or God's trying to tell us something.

It is not clear at all that anyone on the so-called "right" side of civil rights is a greater target than those who are not. This is merely an assumption that you have made based on bias rather than anything approaching facts.

Recently an abortion doctor was shot and killed and an anti-abortion protester was shot and killed. Perhaps you can explain how the one is indicative of a political and social trend, and the other just an anomaly.
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2009 07:19 am
Hey guys it was just an off the wall what if post....
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2009 07:27 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If those on the Left are shot at more often than those on the Right (something you've not established), and the shooters cannot be identified as a homogeneous group (let alone Right-Wingers), then either Leftists are extremely unlucky or God's trying to tell us something.

I'm not really saying "those on the Left". I'm saying those who supported civil rights in the 60s -- which at the time were considered "left" certainly. And I believe I've established they were more likely to be assassinated. Perhaps just because they were more in the public eye or more controversial at the time.

Quote:
It is not clear at all that anyone on the so-called "right" side of civil rights is a greater target than those who are not.

I think it IS clear that a) you're now unsure whether support of civil rights is "right" and b) they were a greater target than those who were not. Again, perhaps they were just more controversial at the time.

Quote:
Recently an abortion doctor was shot and killed and an anti-abortion protester was shot and killed. Perhaps you can explain how the one is indicative of a political and social trend, and the other just an anomaly.

Sounds like tit for tat between people who believe that violence is an adequate means to achieve political goals. Hopefully that violence is not on the rise, but neither of these victims were high profile leaders (unless you want to make the argument about the abortion doctor) so I don't see how they apply.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Sep, 2009 07:55 am
I think we will always have assasinations, bombings, suicide mission and other horrific isolated incidents in this country occasionally as long as we enjoy the benefits of a free society. That's not to say we should be any less upset by it.... but we will NEVER rid the world of crazy and/or evil fuckers and in a place where people are still by and large free to go about their business with a modicum of privacy some asshole is always going to be scheming and a few will implement.

What we can do is get rid of those people quickly and mercilessly (which we don't do) and protect our leaders and high profile figures extensively (which we actually do pretty well at).

I'm sure that people who put themselves in these high profile postitions are cognizant of the possible outcome, and they've got bigger balls than I do.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Go Ahead And Flame Me And Give Me My Tinfoil Hat But....
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 07/01/2022 at 05:11:56