Quote:
Originally Posted by _Will_
Not to be rude, but what does your post have to due with the topic? A democratic congresswoman is seeking to use tragedy to further the assault on our 2nd amendment rights. Approve of her actions? Disapprove? Why?
|
Check out Neal Boortz's interview on CNN tonight ... even the host finally had to interrupt and ask ... what are you talking about ?
... this from Beitfart ~
tucson shooting - Big Government
In Defense of Inflamed Rhetoric
Sheriff Dupnik’s political sermon came before any conclusive or even circumstantial proof had been offered that the shooter had been incited by anything except the gas music from Jupiter playing inside his head.
For as long as I’ve been alive, crosshairs and bull’s-eyes have been an accepted part of the graphical lexicon when it comes to political debates.
Such “inflammatory” words as targeting, attacking, destroying, blasting, crushing, burying, knee-capping, and others have similarly guided political thought and action.
Not once have the use of these images or words tempted me or anybody else I know to kill.
I’ve listened to, read—and even written!—vicious attacks on government without reaching for my gun.
I’ve even gotten angry, for goodness’ sake, without coming close to assassinating a politician or a judge.
From what I can tell, I’m not an outlier.
Only the tiniest handful of people—most of whom are already behind bars, in psychiatric institutions, or on psycho-meds—can be driven to kill by political whispers or shouts.
Asking us to forever hold our tongues lest we awake their deeper demons infantilizes and neuters us and makes politicians no safer.
Quote:
|
p.s. where about in Alabama are you? One of my potential moving destinations in 2012.
|
Are you kidding ?
Just prior to my departure from CFPR&C, one of the wackos (a nOOb one that) stated he was gonna find out where I lived and steal my FRC, pack it with a fertilizer bomb and detonate it where Obamas kids play ...
Sad.