Breaking News: Shot fired into Obama Denver campaign headquarters

[GoneBezerk]

So says the idiot posting from the mental ward.

Hell, it could be a nutjob from the OWS group that thinks Obamination isn't far left enough.

The police should profile the following:

1) DNC workers in Denver
2) Radical liberals from the Denver metro area with CU Boulder near the top.
3) OWS nuts in Colorado
4) KKK/skinhead nuts in Colorado

Don't worry, if the police throw out a name msnbc will tie it to a Tea Party person living 5 states away.

oh my word. no point reasoning with you on this. dear me

GoneBerzerk is, well, insane. So is Stephanie. Don't even try.

 

[saveliberty]

No panicking please, prolly just Biden shooting his mouth off.

 

[decker]

Hell, it could be a nutjob from the OWS group that thinks Obamination isn't far left enough.

The police should profile the following:

1) DNC workers in Denver
2) Radical liberals from the Denver metro area with CU Boulder near the top.
3) OWS nuts in Colorado
4) KKK/skinhead nuts in Colorado

Don't worry, if the police throw out a name msnbc will tie it to a Tea Party person living 5 states away.

oh my word. no point reasoning with you on this. dear me

GoneBerzerk is, well, insane. So is Stephanie. Don't even try.

Well i don,t know if i would call anyone insane but seem that partisanship in just addiction for some people sadly.

 

[decker]

So says the idiot posting from the mental ward.

oh my word. no point reasoning with you on this. dear me

GoneBerzerk is, well, insane. So is Stephanie. Don't even try.

its insults like that does this forum no good at all.

 

[thanatos144]

So says the idiot posting from the mental ward.

GoneBerzerk is, well, insane. So is Stephanie. Don't even try.

its insults like that does this forum no good at all.

this isn't something new for you progressives to do.... So of course it stands to reason there is is netters chance that a progressive idiot did it.

 

[decker]

So says the idiot posting from the mental ward.

its insults like that does this forum no good at all.

this isn't something new for you progressives to do.... So of course it stands to reason there is is netters chance that a progressive idiot did it.

no it does not. Why stereotype people that just because of their views they will act in a certain way.

 

[thanatos144]

its insults like that does this forum no good at all.

this isn't something new for you progressives to do.... So of course it stands to reason there is is netters chance that a progressive idiot did it.

no it does not. Why stereotype people that just because of their views they will act in a certain way.

It is not stereo typing... It is using deductive reasoning. Like tea party protest is lawful clean and peaceful where as a progressive protest normaly ends in violence hell the ows protests have drugs, violence, trash, and rape.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

From what I've heard, it was a black limo and George Bush was seen rolling up the window.

how classy

but i guess it's ok to shoot at democrats...

just like it's ok to pretend that voter suppression is a conspiracy theory.

Every single time some shooting has occurred in the last 4 years your liberal buddies have rushed on here and claimed it was done by a right wing nut or a tea party member, and every time they were wrong. This latest shooting is no exception. Meister is just noting how things work around here from your side.

Further every time anything happens and a lefty did it your ilk all remind everyone that they are just one person unassociated with anyone else and every time something happens with a right wing nut you all claim it paints the entire right badly. And yes you do it too. I remember the Gifford shooting and the Discovery channel shooting and your comments.

 

[jillian]

this isn't something new for you progressives to do.... So of course it stands to reason there is is netters chance that a progressive idiot did it.

no it does not. Why stereotype people that just because of their views they will act in a certain way.

It is not stereo typing... It is using deductive reasoning. Like tea party protest is lawful clean and peaceful where as a progressive protest normaly ends in violence hell the ows protests have drugs, violence, trash, and rape.

timothy mcveigh was a rightwinger as are the people who shoot at doctors.

get over yourself.

 

[CaféAuLait]

no it does not. Why stereotype people that just because of their views they will act in a certain way.

It is not stereo typing... It is using deductive reasoning. Like tea party protest is lawful clean and peaceful where as a progressive protest normaly ends in violence hell the ows protests have drugs, violence, trash, and rape.

timothy mcveigh was a rightwinger as are the people who shoot at doctors.

get over yourself.

And Bill Ayers, the first person to bomb the Pentagon and the Capitol AND plan the bombing and murder of soldiers at a Fort Dix dance was/is left wing. There are plenty of left wing wackos out there. I can think of the Discovery Shooter and many make the case that Oswald was a left wing loon, as well as Kaczynski, etc.

 

[thanatos144]

no it does not. Why stereotype people that just because of their views they will act in a certain way.

It is not stereo typing... It is using deductive reasoning. Like tea party protest is lawful clean and peaceful where as a progressive protest normaly ends in violence hell the ows protests have drugs, violence, trash, and rape.

timothy mcveigh was a rightwinger as are the people who shoot at doctors.

get over yourself.

No he wasnt.... He was a anarchist . Learn some facts before you spout out.

 

[Dissent]

Maybe Bush is mad Obama keeps blaming him for his own fuck ups? Or Maybe because Obama is showing Bush up when it comes to attack on civil liberties and war crimes?

 

[Dissent]

It is not stereo typing... It is using deductive reasoning. Like tea party protest is lawful clean and peaceful where as a progressive protest normaly ends in violence hell the ows protests have drugs, violence, trash, and rape.

timothy mcveigh was a rightwinger as are the people who shoot at doctors.

get over yourself.

No he wasnt.... He was a anarchist . Learn some facts before you spout out.

LMAO...you are a retard...try reading a biography on McVeigh...jesus h christ..I see now why you were on ignore you are one stupid motherfucker.Bet you don't even know why McVeigh did what he did....I will give you a chance though...I will revisit this thread in the morning to see if you figured it out.

 

[CaféAuLait]

timothy mcveigh was a rightwinger as are the people who shoot at doctors.

get over yourself.

No he wasnt.... He was a anarchist . Learn some facts before you spout out.

LMAO...you are a retard...try reading a biography on McVeigh...jesus h christ..I see now why you were on ignore you are one stupid motherfucker.Bet you don't even know why McVeigh did what he did....I will give you a chance though...I will revisit this thread in the morning to see if you figured it out.

Why read a biography, why not read his own words:

McVeigh:

The administration has said that Iraq has no right to stockpile chemical or biological weapons (“weapons of mass destruction”) — mainly because they have used them in the past.

Well, if that’s the standard by which these matters are decided, then the U.S. is the nation that set the precedent. The U.S. has stockpiled these same weapons (and more) for over 40 years. The U.S. claims this was done for deterrent purposes during its “Cold War” with the Soviet Union. Why, then, it is invalid for Iraq to claim the same reason (deterrence) with respect to Iraq’s (real) war with, and the continued threat of, its neighbor Iran?
The administration claims that Iraq has used these weapons in the past. We’ve all seen the pictures that show a Kurdish woman and child frozen in death from the use of chemical weapons. But, have you ever seen those pictures juxtaposed next to pictures from Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

I suggest that one study the histories of World War I, World War II and other “regional conflicts” that the U.S. has been involved in to familiarize themselves with the use of “weapons of mass destruction.”

Remember Dresden? How about Hanoi? Tripoli? Baghdad? What about the big ones — Hiroshima and Nagasaki? (At these two locations, the U.S. killed at least 150,000 non-combatants — mostly women and children — in the blink of an eye. Thousands more took hours, days, weeks or months to die).

If Saddam is such a demon, and people are calling for war crimes charges and trials against him and his nation, why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of “mass destruction” — like those responsible and involved in dropping bombs on the cities mentioned above?
The truth is, the U.S. has set the standard when it comes to the stockpiling and use of weapons of mass destruction.

Hypocrisy when it comes to the death of children? In Oklahoma City, it was family convenience that explained the presence of a day-care center placed between street level and the law enforcement agencies which occupied the upper floors of the building. Yet, when discussion shifts to Iraq, any day-care center in a government building instantly becomes “a shield.” Think about it.

(Actually, there is a difference here. The administration has admitted to knowledge of the presence of children in or near Iraqi government buildings, yet they still proceed with their plans to bomb —saying that they cannot be held responsible if children die. There is no such proof, however, that knowledge of the presence of children existed in relation to the Oklahoma City bombing.)

When considering morality and “mens rea” [criminal intent], in light of these facts, I ask: Who are the true barbarians? ...
I find it ironic, to say the least, that one of the aircraft used to drop such a bomb on Iraq is dubbed “The Spirit of Oklahoma.” This leads me to a final, and unspoken, moral hypocrisy regarding the use of weapons of mass destruction.

When a U.S. plane or cruise missile is used to bring destruction to a foreign people, this nation rewards the bombers with applause and praise. What a convenient way to absolve these killers of any responsibility for the destruction they leave in their wake.
Unfortunately, the morality of killing is not so superficial. The truth is, the use of a truck, a plane or a missile for the delivery of a weapon of mass destruction does not alter the nature of the act itself.

These are weapons of mass destruction — and the method of delivery matters little to those on the receiving end of such weapons.
Whether you wish to admit it or not, when you approve, morally, of the bombing of foreign targets by the U.S. military, you are approving of acts morally equivalent to the bombing in Oklahoma City ...

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Inthemiddle]

No he wasnt....

He was a registered Republican, a member of the NRA, military vet. And listen to his own words:

"Those who betray or subvert the Constitution are guilty of sedition and/or treason, are domestic enemies and should and will be punished accordingly. It also stands to reason that anyone who sympathizes with the enemy or gives aid and comfort to said enemy is likewise guilty. I have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic, and I will. And I will because not only did I swear to, but I believe in what it stands for in every bit of my heart, soul and being."

"The government is afraid of the guns people have because they have to have control of the people at all times. Once you take away the guns, you can do anything to the people. You give them an inch and they take a mile. I believe we are slowly turning into a socialist government. The government is continually growing bigger and more powerful and the people need to prepare to defend themselves against government control."

"Go ahead, take everything I own; take my dignity. Feel good as you grow fat and rich at my expense; sucking my tax dollars and property, tax dollars which justify your existence and pay your federal salary. Do you get it? By doing your evil job, you put me out of work."

"I believe we are slowly turning into a socialist government. The government is continually growing bigger and more powerful, and the people need to prepare to defend themselves against government control."

Sure sounds like a right winger to me.

He was a anarchist .

Like there's a difference?

 

[Annie]

No he wasnt.... He was a anarchist . Learn some facts before you spout out.

LMAO...you are a retard...try reading a biography on McVeigh...jesus h christ..I see now why you were on ignore you are one stupid motherfucker.Bet you don't even know why McVeigh did what he did....I will give you a chance though...I will revisit this thread in the morning to see if you figured it out.

Why read a biography, why not read his own words:

McVeigh:

The administration has said that Iraq has no right to stockpile chemical or biological weapons (“weapons of mass destruction”) — mainly because they have used them in the past.

Well, if that’s the standard by which these matters are decided, then the U.S. is the nation that set the precedent. The U.S. has stockpiled these same weapons (and more) for over 40 years. The U.S. claims this was done for deterrent purposes during its “Cold War” with the Soviet Union. Why, then, it is invalid for Iraq to claim the same reason (deterrence) with respect to Iraq’s (real) war with, and the continued threat of, its neighbor Iran?
The administration claims that Iraq has used these weapons in the past. We’ve all seen the pictures that show a Kurdish woman and child frozen in death from the use of chemical weapons. But, have you ever seen those pictures juxtaposed next to pictures from Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

I suggest that one study the histories of World War I, World War II and other “regional conflicts” that the U.S. has been involved in to familiarize themselves with the use of “weapons of mass destruction.”

Remember Dresden? How about Hanoi? Tripoli? Baghdad? What about the big ones — Hiroshima and Nagasaki? (At these two locations, the U.S. killed at least 150,000 non-combatants — mostly women and children — in the blink of an eye. Thousands more took hours, days, weeks or months to die).

If Saddam is such a demon, and people are calling for war crimes charges and trials against him and his nation, why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of “mass destruction” — like those responsible and involved in dropping bombs on the cities mentioned above?
The truth is, the U.S. has set the standard when it comes to the stockpiling and use of weapons of mass destruction.

Hypocrisy when it comes to the death of children? In Oklahoma City, it was family convenience that explained the presence of a day-care center placed between street level and the law enforcement agencies which occupied the upper floors of the building. Yet, when discussion shifts to Iraq, any day-care center in a government building instantly becomes “a shield.” Think about it.

(Actually, there is a difference here. The administration has admitted to knowledge of the presence of children in or near Iraqi government buildings, yet they still proceed with their plans to bomb —saying that they cannot be held responsible if children die. There is no such proof, however, that knowledge of the presence of children existed in relation to the Oklahoma City bombing.)

When considering morality and “mens rea” [criminal intent], in light of these facts, I ask: Who are the true barbarians? ...
I find it ironic, to say the least, that one of the aircraft used to drop such a bomb on Iraq is dubbed “The Spirit of Oklahoma.” This leads me to a final, and unspoken, moral hypocrisy regarding the use of weapons of mass destruction.

When a U.S. plane or cruise missile is used to bring destruction to a foreign people, this nation rewards the bombers with applause and praise. What a convenient way to absolve these killers of any responsibility for the destruction they leave in their wake.
Unfortunately, the morality of killing is not so superficial. The truth is, the use of a truck, a plane or a missile for the delivery of a weapon of mass destruction does not alter the nature of the act itself.

These are weapons of mass destruction — and the method of delivery matters little to those on the receiving end of such weapons.
Whether you wish to admit it or not, when you approve, morally, of the bombing of foreign targets by the U.S. military, you are approving of acts morally equivalent to the bombing in Oklahoma City ...

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I read what you posted. Sounds more like an anarchist to me.

 

[buckeye45_73]

I have a question, where is this place? What about a blood or a crip?

 

[Listening]

Sounds like the NaziCon wingnuts are really coming unhinged...

I knew it wouldn't last. Provide evidence that anyone of a specific political bent is suspected or known to have done it.

They reportedly have a person of interest, so we'll eventually know...

Sounds like when you were accusing the right of trying to bomb an Occupy protest. You were never able to produce any evidence to that effect...but you kept posting it.

Like the liar and spin hocker you are.

 

[thanatos144]

LMAO...you are a retard...try reading a biography on McVeigh...jesus h christ..I see now why you were on ignore you are one stupid motherfucker.Bet you don't even know why McVeigh did what he did....I will give you a chance though...I will revisit this thread in the morning to see if you figured it out.

Why read a biography, why not read his own words:

McVeigh:

The administration has said that Iraq has no right to stockpile chemical or biological weapons (“weapons of mass destruction”) — mainly because they have used them in the past.

Well, if that’s the standard by which these matters are decided, then the U.S. is the nation that set the precedent. The U.S. has stockpiled these same weapons (and more) for over 40 years. The U.S. claims this was done for deterrent purposes during its “Cold War” with the Soviet Union. Why, then, it is invalid for Iraq to claim the same reason (deterrence) with respect to Iraq’s (real) war with, and the continued threat of, its neighbor Iran?
The administration claims that Iraq has used these weapons in the past. We’ve all seen the pictures that show a Kurdish woman and child frozen in death from the use of chemical weapons. But, have you ever seen those pictures juxtaposed next to pictures from Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

I suggest that one study the histories of World War I, World War II and other “regional conflicts” that the U.S. has been involved in to familiarize themselves with the use of “weapons of mass destruction.”

Remember Dresden? How about Hanoi? Tripoli? Baghdad? What about the big ones — Hiroshima and Nagasaki? (At these two locations, the U.S. killed at least 150,000 non-combatants — mostly women and children — in the blink of an eye. Thousands more took hours, days, weeks or months to die).

If Saddam is such a demon, and people are calling for war crimes charges and trials against him and his nation, why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of “mass destruction” — like those responsible and involved in dropping bombs on the cities mentioned above?
The truth is, the U.S. has set the standard when it comes to the stockpiling and use of weapons of mass destruction.

Hypocrisy when it comes to the death of children? In Oklahoma City, it was family convenience that explained the presence of a day-care center placed between street level and the law enforcement agencies which occupied the upper floors of the building. Yet, when discussion shifts to Iraq, any day-care center in a government building instantly becomes “a shield.” Think about it.

(Actually, there is a difference here. The administration has admitted to knowledge of the presence of children in or near Iraqi government buildings, yet they still proceed with their plans to bomb —saying that they cannot be held responsible if children die. There is no such proof, however, that knowledge of the presence of children existed in relation to the Oklahoma City bombing.)

When considering morality and “mens rea” [criminal intent], in light of these facts, I ask: Who are the true barbarians? ...
I find it ironic, to say the least, that one of the aircraft used to drop such a bomb on Iraq is dubbed “The Spirit of Oklahoma.” This leads me to a final, and unspoken, moral hypocrisy regarding the use of weapons of mass destruction.

When a U.S. plane or cruise missile is used to bring destruction to a foreign people, this nation rewards the bombers with applause and praise. What a convenient way to absolve these killers of any responsibility for the destruction they leave in their wake.
Unfortunately, the morality of killing is not so superficial. The truth is, the use of a truck, a plane or a missile for the delivery of a weapon of mass destruction does not alter the nature of the act itself.

These are weapons of mass destruction — and the method of delivery matters little to those on the receiving end of such weapons.
Whether you wish to admit it or not, when you approve, morally, of the bombing of foreign targets by the U.S. military, you are approving of acts morally equivalent to the bombing in Oklahoma City ...

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I read what you posted. Sounds more like an anarchist to me.

he actually sounded a lot like a libertarian in that post.....Wonder if I was wrong and he was a paulbot?

 

[Dissent]

No he wasnt.... He was a anarchist . Learn some facts before you spout out.

LMAO...you are a retard...try reading a biography on McVeigh...jesus h christ..I see now why you were on ignore you are one stupid motherfucker.Bet you don't even know why McVeigh did what he did....I will give you a chance though...I will revisit this thread in the morning to see if you figured it out.

Why read a biography, why not read his own words:

McVeigh:

The administration has said that Iraq has no right to stockpile chemical or biological weapons (“weapons of mass destruction”) — mainly because they have used them in the past.

Well, if that’s the standard by which these matters are decided, then the U.S. is the nation that set the precedent. The U.S. has stockpiled these same weapons (and more) for over 40 years. The U.S. claims this was done for deterrent purposes during its “Cold War” with the Soviet Union. Why, then, it is invalid for Iraq to claim the same reason (deterrence) with respect to Iraq’s (real) war with, and the continued threat of, its neighbor Iran?
The administration claims that Iraq has used these weapons in the past. We’ve all seen the pictures that show a Kurdish woman and child frozen in death from the use of chemical weapons. But, have you ever seen those pictures juxtaposed next to pictures from Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

I suggest that one study the histories of World War I, World War II and other “regional conflicts” that the U.S. has been involved in to familiarize themselves with the use of “weapons of mass destruction.”

Remember Dresden? How about Hanoi? Tripoli? Baghdad? What about the big ones — Hiroshima and Nagasaki? (At these two locations, the U.S. killed at least 150,000 non-combatants — mostly women and children — in the blink of an eye. Thousands more took hours, days, weeks or months to die).

If Saddam is such a demon, and people are calling for war crimes charges and trials against him and his nation, why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of “mass destruction” — like those responsible and involved in dropping bombs on the cities mentioned above?
The truth is, the U.S. has set the standard when it comes to the stockpiling and use of weapons of mass destruction.

Hypocrisy when it comes to the death of children? In Oklahoma City, it was family convenience that explained the presence of a day-care center placed between street level and the law enforcement agencies which occupied the upper floors of the building. Yet, when discussion shifts to Iraq, any day-care center in a government building instantly becomes “a shield.” Think about it.

(Actually, there is a difference here. The administration has admitted to knowledge of the presence of children in or near Iraqi government buildings, yet they still proceed with their plans to bomb —saying that they cannot be held responsible if children die. There is no such proof, however, that knowledge of the presence of children existed in relation to the Oklahoma City bombing.)

When considering morality and “mens rea” [criminal intent], in light of these facts, I ask: Who are the true barbarians? ...
I find it ironic, to say the least, that one of the aircraft used to drop such a bomb on Iraq is dubbed “The Spirit of Oklahoma.” This leads me to a final, and unspoken, moral hypocrisy regarding the use of weapons of mass destruction.

When a U.S. plane or cruise missile is used to bring destruction to a foreign people, this nation rewards the bombers with applause and praise. What a convenient way to absolve these killers of any responsibility for the destruction they leave in their wake.
Unfortunately, the morality of killing is not so superficial. The truth is, the use of a truck, a plane or a missile for the delivery of a weapon of mass destruction does not alter the nature of the act itself.

These are weapons of mass destruction — and the method of delivery matters little to those on the receiving end of such weapons.
Whether you wish to admit it or not, when you approve, morally, of the bombing of foreign targets by the U.S. military, you are approving of acts morally equivalent to the bombing in Oklahoma City ...

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia really? That thing can be edited by anyone...McVeigh was a pissed Army veteran who just had enough of the government murdering it's citizens and its crack down on gun ownership. Its amazing we don't condemn the government for murdering citizens in Waco and Ruby Ridge including shooting a 14 year old child in the back at Ruby Ridge and murdering 18 children in Waco yet we condemn McVeigh to death for essentially doing the same damn thing in OKC....the mind of the common Amurican is so fucked up its pathetic and I truly can't stand talking to the common Amurican.