Violence Has It's Home On The Left.

[daveman]

Jeesh...you make rightwingloons look sane. Did you ever post under the name tboater?

See? You can't acknowledge the fact, choosing instead to lash out emotionally.

I've no idea if most terrorists are muslims or not. And as far as I can tell it has nothing to do with PC's OP.

Unless you are trying to make the connection between rightwingloon Muslims and rightwingloon Christians and Republicans.

It has as much to do with PC's OP as does your claim that most violent criminals in the US are Christian.

 

[G.T.]

Booth and a group of co-conspirators planned to kill Lincoln, Vice President Andrew Johnson, and Secretary of State William Seward in a bid to help the Confederacy's cause. Although Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia had surrendered four days earlier, Booth believed the war was not yet over because Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston's army was still fighting the Union Army. Of the conspirators, only Booth was completely successful in carrying out his part of the plot. Seward was wounded but recovered; Lincoln died the next morning from a single gunshot wound to the back of the head – altering the course of American history in the aftermath of the Civil War.

I can see all those Liberals when Vacationing in the South, with their Confederate flags a wavin.'

What a schmuck Coulter is.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Left violent? No way? Can't be? The Black Panthers only want to murder White babies. What's so violent about that? Quit nitpicking. Sheesh!

and the KKK never lynched black folk, right?

yet another disingenuous, ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism.

"...ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism."

1. Translation from Lib to English: I can't find anything in the OP that is in error, so I'll use the default attack, i.e. it must be evil

2. I resent any appellation that includes 'intellectual,' even in half the term!
That term is a pejorative, reserved for the omniscient on the left.
From a book review of Dr. Thomas Sowell's "Intellectuals and Society."

a. He first examined the conflict between a “constrained” vision of politics and social change and a vision of society by which intellectuals (“the anointed”) seek permanent “solutions” to social and national problems. Modern intellectuals, Sowell writes, have a “vision of themselves as a self-appointed vanguard, leading towards a better world.”

b. Unlike advocates of the more conservative, constrained vision, this intellectual vanguard tends to take the “benefits of civilization for granted.” The “vision of the anointed” lacks respect for the wisdom inherent in experience and common opinion. Its practitioners value abstractions—dreams for a peaceful, egalitarian world where conflicts have been overcome—over the “tacit knowledge” available to the parent, the consumer, the entrepreneur, and the citizen.
(emphasis mine)
An Independent Mind by Daniel J. Mahoney, City Journal 18 June 2010

3.An aside to my good friend Jillian: based on your education, I would expect a more insightful response, or defense of your beliefs...
instead, you fall back on this kind of vapid, vague, nattering, nebulous attack.

You must know by now that that strategy falls short with me...how about some real serious posts? We can make this interesting for all concerned.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So NO ONE here can make a coherent argument that Sirhan Sirhan is a liberal?

Anyone here even want to argue that claiming Sirhan Sirhan is a liberal is not the stupidest thing posted so far this week?

Carby, give it up already.

Sirhan Sirhan assassinated Robert Kennedy for espousing a right wing position: support of Israel.

That puts him in one of the major cohorts of the left.

If you ask this again, you will be in the cohort of BoringFriendlessGuy, who goes on and on interminably.

 

[G.T.]

. Two months ago, Richard Poplawski, a right-wing extremist, allegedly gunned down three police officers in Pittsburgh, in part because he feared the non-existent "Obama gun ban." A few weeks ago, Scott Roeder, another right-wing extremist, allegedly assassinated Dr. George Tiller in Kansas. A few hours ago, Von Brunn, another right-wing extremist, allegedly opened fire at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.

There are other recent examples that bear similar characteristics. This story out of Tennessee from last year continues to haunt.

Knoxville police Sunday evening searched the Levy Drive home of Jim David Adkisson after he allegedly entered the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church and killed two people and wounded six others during the presentation of a children's musical. [...]

Inside the house, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly.

The shotgun-wielding suspect in Sunday's mass shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church was motivated by a hatred of "the liberal movement," and he planned to shoot until police shot him, Knoxville Police Chief Sterling P. Owen IV said this morning.

Adkisson, 58, of Powell wrote a four-page letter in which he stated his "hatred of the liberal movement," Owen said. "Liberals in general, as well as gays."






The Washington Monthly

Ignorance is bliss. - Ann Coulter

 

[Rinata]

The Left violent? No way? Can't be? The Black Panthers only want to murder White babies. What's so violent about that? Quit nitpicking. Sheesh!

and the KKK never lynched black folk, right?

yet another disingenuous, ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism.

"...ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism."

1. Translation from Lib to English: I can't find anything in the OP that is in error, so I'll use the default attack, i.e. it must be evil

2. I resent any appellation that includes 'intellectual,' even in half the term!
That term is a pejorative, reserved for the omniscient on the left.
From a book review of Dr. Thomas Sowell's "Intellectuals and Society."

a. He first examined the conflict between a “constrained” vision of politics and social change and a vision of society by which intellectuals (“the anointed”) seek permanent “solutions” to social and national problems. Modern intellectuals, Sowell writes, have a “vision of themselves as a self-appointed vanguard, leading towards a better world.”

b. Unlike advocates of the more conservative, constrained vision, this intellectual vanguard tends to take the “benefits of civilization for granted.” The “vision of the anointed” lacks respect for the wisdom inherent in experience and common opinion. Its practitioners value abstractions—dreams for a peaceful, egalitarian world where conflicts have been overcome—over the “tacit knowledge” available to the parent, the consumer, the entrepreneur, and the citizen.
(emphasis mine)
An Independent Mind by Daniel J. Mahoney, City Journal 18 June 2010

3.An aside to my good friend Jillian: based on your education, I would expect a more insightful response, or defense of your beliefs...
instead, you fall back on this kind of vapid, vague, nattering, nebulous attack.

You must know by now that that strategy falls short with me...how about some real serious posts? We can make this interesting for all concerned.

You're the one that started this pitiful thread. Why didn't you set an example of making it serious??

I'm sorry, but your "teaching thread" is a bust. I remember that you have stated before that you have to educate people. I think you have a need to be important and looked up to. But it's not going to happen here, dear. Your ideas and the information you provide are not the least bit impressive.

 

[G.T.]

and the KKK never lynched black folk, right?

yet another disingenuous, ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism.

"...ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism."

1. Translation from Lib to English: I can't find anything in the OP that is in error, so I'll use the default attack, i.e. it must be evil

2. I resent any appellation that includes 'intellectual,' even in half the term!
That term is a pejorative, reserved for the omniscient on the left.
From a book review of Dr. Thomas Sowell's "Intellectuals and Society."

a. He first examined the conflict between a “constrained” vision of politics and social change and a vision of society by which intellectuals (“the anointed”) seek permanent “solutions” to social and national problems. Modern intellectuals, Sowell writes, have a “vision of themselves as a self-appointed vanguard, leading towards a better world.”

b. Unlike advocates of the more conservative, constrained vision, this intellectual vanguard tends to take the “benefits of civilization for granted.” The “vision of the anointed” lacks respect for the wisdom inherent in experience and common opinion. Its practitioners value abstractions—dreams for a peaceful, egalitarian world where conflicts have been overcome—over the “tacit knowledge” available to the parent, the consumer, the entrepreneur, and the citizen.
(emphasis mine)
An Independent Mind by Daniel J. Mahoney, City Journal 18 June 2010

3.An aside to my good friend Jillian: based on your education, I would expect a more insightful response, or defense of your beliefs...
instead, you fall back on this kind of vapid, vague, nattering, nebulous attack.

You must know by now that that strategy falls short with me...how about some real serious posts? We can make this interesting for all concerned.

You're the one that started this pitiful thread. Why didn't you set an example of making it serious??

I'm sorry, but your "teaching thread" is a bust. I remember that you have stated before that you have to educate people. I think you have a need to be important and looked up to. But it's not going to happen here, dear. Your ideas and the information you provide are not the least bit impressive.

lol well be fair, they're not even her ideas.

 

[PoliticalChic]

and the KKK never lynched black folk, right?

yet another disingenuous, ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism.

"...ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism."

1. Translation from Lib to English: I can't find anything in the OP that is in error, so I'll use the default attack, i.e. it must be evil

2. I resent any appellation that includes 'intellectual,' even in half the term!
That term is a pejorative, reserved for the omniscient on the left.
From a book review of Dr. Thomas Sowell's "Intellectuals and Society."

a. He first examined the conflict between a “constrained” vision of politics and social change and a vision of society by which intellectuals (“the anointed”) seek permanent “solutions” to social and national problems. Modern intellectuals, Sowell writes, have a “vision of themselves as a self-appointed vanguard, leading towards a better world.”

b. Unlike advocates of the more conservative, constrained vision, this intellectual vanguard tends to take the “benefits of civilization for granted.” The “vision of the anointed” lacks respect for the wisdom inherent in experience and common opinion. Its practitioners value abstractions—dreams for a peaceful, egalitarian world where conflicts have been overcome—over the “tacit knowledge” available to the parent, the consumer, the entrepreneur, and the citizen.
(emphasis mine)
An Independent Mind by Daniel J. Mahoney, City Journal 18 June 2010

3.An aside to my good friend Jillian: based on your education, I would expect a more insightful response, or defense of your beliefs...
instead, you fall back on this kind of vapid, vague, nattering, nebulous attack.

You must know by now that that strategy falls short with me...how about some real serious posts? We can make this interesting for all concerned.

You're the one that started this pitiful thread. Why didn't you set an example of making it serious??

I'm sorry, but your "teaching thread" is a bust. I remember that you have stated before that you have to educate people. I think you have a need to be important and looked up to. But it's not going to happen here, dear. Your ideas and the information you provide are not the least bit impressive.

Actually, you started the thread, or your comment did.

And, of course, none are as needy of education as you are.

"But it's not going to happen here, dear." And that is probably the reason that education has never take hold in you....sadly.

There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.

Thanks very much for allowing me to start this thread; I've explained it to you, but I can't comprehend it for you.

 

[L.K.Eder]

"...ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism."

1. Translation from Lib to English: I can't find anything in the OP that is in error, so I'll use the default attack, i.e. it must be evil

2. I resent any appellation that includes 'intellectual,' even in half the term!
That term is a pejorative, reserved for the omniscient on the left.
From a book review of Dr. Thomas Sowell's "Intellectuals and Society."

a. He first examined the conflict between a “constrained” vision of politics and social change and a vision of society by which intellectuals (“the anointed”) seek permanent “solutions” to social and national problems. Modern intellectuals, Sowell writes, have a “vision of themselves as a self-appointed vanguard, leading towards a better world.”

b. Unlike advocates of the more conservative, constrained vision, this intellectual vanguard tends to take the “benefits of civilization for granted.” The “vision of the anointed” lacks respect for the wisdom inherent in experience and common opinion. Its practitioners value abstractions—dreams for a peaceful, egalitarian world where conflicts have been overcome—over the “tacit knowledge” available to the parent, the consumer, the entrepreneur, and the citizen.
(emphasis mine)
An Independent Mind by Daniel J. Mahoney, City Journal 18 June 2010

3.An aside to my good friend Jillian: based on your education, I would expect a more insightful response, or defense of your beliefs...
instead, you fall back on this kind of vapid, vague, nattering, nebulous attack.

You must know by now that that strategy falls short with me...how about some real serious posts? We can make this interesting for all concerned.

You're the one that started this pitiful thread. Why didn't you set an example of making it serious??

I'm sorry, but your "teaching thread" is a bust. I remember that you have stated before that you have to educate people. I think you have a need to be important and looked up to. But it's not going to happen here, dear. Your ideas and the information you provide are not the least bit impressive.

lol well be fair, they're not even her ideas.

but she likes them so much, she feels like they are her own. surely that must count for something.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You're the one that started this pitiful thread. Why didn't you set an example of making it serious??

I'm sorry, but your "teaching thread" is a bust. I remember that you have stated before that you have to educate people. I think you have a need to be important and looked up to. But it's not going to happen here, dear. Your ideas and the information you provide are not the least bit impressive.

lol well be fair, they're not even her ideas.

but she likes them so much, she feels like they are her own. surely that must count for something.

hmmmm, psychosis maybe?

 

[L.K.Eder]

"...ugly thread with an O/P masking hate inside of the pretense of some warped type of pseudo-intellectualism."

1. Translation from Lib to English: I can't find anything in the OP that is in error, so I'll use the default attack, i.e. it must be evil

2. I resent any appellation that includes 'intellectual,' even in half the term!
That term is a pejorative, reserved for the omniscient on the left.
From a book review of Dr. Thomas Sowell's "Intellectuals and Society."

a. He first examined the conflict between a “constrained” vision of politics and social change and a vision of society by which intellectuals (“the anointed”) seek permanent “solutions” to social and national problems. Modern intellectuals, Sowell writes, have a “vision of themselves as a self-appointed vanguard, leading towards a better world.”

b. Unlike advocates of the more conservative, constrained vision, this intellectual vanguard tends to take the “benefits of civilization for granted.” The “vision of the anointed” lacks respect for the wisdom inherent in experience and common opinion. Its practitioners value abstractions—dreams for a peaceful, egalitarian world where conflicts have been overcome—over the “tacit knowledge” available to the parent, the consumer, the entrepreneur, and the citizen.
(emphasis mine)
An Independent Mind by Daniel J. Mahoney, City Journal 18 June 2010

3.An aside to my good friend Jillian: based on your education, I would expect a more insightful response, or defense of your beliefs...
instead, you fall back on this kind of vapid, vague, nattering, nebulous attack.

You must know by now that that strategy falls short with me...how about some real serious posts? We can make this interesting for all concerned.

You're the one that started this pitiful thread. Why didn't you set an example of making it serious??

I'm sorry, but your "teaching thread" is a bust. I remember that you have stated before that you have to educate people. I think you have a need to be important and looked up to. But it's not going to happen here, dear. Your ideas and the information you provide are not the least bit impressive.

Actually, you started the thread, or your comment did.

And, of course, none are as needy of education as you are.

"But it's not going to happen here, dear." And that is probably the reason that education has never take hold in you....sadly.

There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.

Thanks very much for allowing me to start this thread; I've explained it to you, but I can't comprehend it for you.

see, rinata. it's YOUR fault. you made her do it.

 

[jillian]

You're the one that started this pitiful thread. Why didn't you set an example of making it serious??

I'm sorry, but your "teaching thread" is a bust. I remember that you have stated before that you have to educate people. I think you have a need to be important and looked up to. But it's not going to happen here, dear. Your ideas and the information you provide are not the least bit impressive.

lol well be fair, they're not even her ideas.

but she likes them so much, she feels like they are her own. surely that must count for something.

well, she fancies herself an intellectual.

as soon as i find evidence of that, i'll be sure to comment.

 

[PoliticalChic]

lol well be fair, they're not even her ideas.

but she likes them so much, she feels like they are her own. surely that must count for something.

well, she fancies herself an intellectual.

as soon as i find evidence of that, i'll be sure to comment.

You misunderstand...

it is the opposite: I'm not anti-intellectual.

I'm not ashamed of reading, studying, and actually having the knowledge that allows me to analyze political positions.
And I believe that that is apparent in my posts, which are usually informative if incendiary, and rarely attack others for imaginary mental defects.

That is what separates us.

 

[Ravi]

Your posts aren't informative. They are propaganda in a thin veneer (badly cracked) of intellectual thought.

 

[washamericom]

p.c. you seem really condescending. in just about every post you make, you position yourself from a perch of superiority. what makes your opinion more important than anyone elses?
maybe you should be relegated to to the looney bin section of this forum... (actually it's not that bad a place)

Very perceptive of you.

Carry on.

you're military? that costume is terrific, do you have a lassoo of truth ?

 

[Valerie]

And I believe that that is apparent in my posts, which are usually informative if incendiary, and rarely attack others for imaginary mental defects.

That is what separates us.

Try again?

Welcome to USMB Day School!

Today's lesson in 'etymology and definitions' is the word 'raving,' meaning "Wild, incoherent, or irrational talk"...

Let us see if our little friend Ravi has use the word correctly, or is simply mouthing a term she heard in the school yard:
Incoherent: unable to express yourself clearly or fluently
Irrational: not consistent with or using reason

Now, little Ravi, did you find the OP's listing of presidential assassins as not being expressed clearly?
Was there confluence of names or terms unreasonable? If so, in what way?

Now do you see why you should do more reading? Then you would use the correct terminology.

OH...now I see...it's the reason that you are 'ravi'...as in raving!
Very good!

Now, I realize that you want to participate, but by using proper language, it would be easier to determine whether you hate Ms. Coulter, or are trying to associate her with yourself!

Try again?

 

[PoliticalChic]

p.c. you seem really condescending. in just about every post you make, you position yourself from a perch of superiority. what makes your opinion more important than anyone elses?
maybe you should be relegated to to the looney bin section of this forum... (actually it's not that bad a place)

Very perceptive of you.

Carry on.

you're military? that costume is terrific, do you have a lassoo of truth ?

My comment was a bit flippant...

my point was that I don't post unless I feel that I know something about the topic at hand.


Nor am I wiling to behave like many public school teachers, and accept warmly every incoherent, nonsensical post as though it was brilliant...and perhaps you see that as a "position... from a perch of superiority."

Nothing I like better than butting heads with someone equally prepared.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And I believe that that is apparent in my posts, which are usually informative if incendiary, and rarely attack others for imaginary mental defects.

That is what separates us.

Try again?

Welcome to USMB Day School!

Today's lesson in 'etymology and definitions' is the word 'raving,' meaning "Wild, incoherent, or irrational talk"...

Let us see if our little friend Ravi has use the word correctly, or is simply mouthing a term she heard in the school yard:
Incoherent: unable to express yourself clearly or fluently
Irrational: not consistent with or using reason

Now, little Ravi, did you find the OP's listing of presidential assassins as not being expressed clearly?
Was there confluence of names or terms unreasonable? If so, in what way?

Now do you see why you should do more reading? Then you would use the correct terminology.

OH...now I see...it's the reason that you are 'ravi'...as in raving!
Very good!

Now, I realize that you want to participate, but by using proper language, it would be easier to determine whether you hate Ms. Coulter, or are trying to associate her with yourself!

Try again?

You are trying soooo hard to be abrasive....

if only you had the equipment.

You fail to see the difference between "imaginary mental defects" and treating her like a child.

But I'm sure that Ravi will give you a pat on the head, and, after all, that is what you pine for.

 

[Valerie]

Very perceptive of you.

Carry on.

you're military? that costume is terrific, do you have a lassoo of truth ?

My comment was a bit flippant...

my point was that I don't post unless I feel that I know something about the topic at hand.


Nor am I wiling to behave like many public school teachers, and accept warmly every incoherent, nonsensical post as though it was brilliant...and perhaps you see that as a "position... from a perch of superiority."

Nothing I like better than butting heads with someone equally prepared.

Excellent..I'm going to make a project of amassing your VAST array of personal insults on this board. Be patient, it's gonna take a while!

 

[PoliticalChic]

you're military? that costume is terrific, do you have a lassoo of truth ?

My comment was a bit flippant...

my point was that I don't post unless I feel that I know something about the topic at hand.


Nor am I wiling to behave like many public school teachers, and accept warmly every incoherent, nonsensical post as though it was brilliant...and perhaps you see that as a "position... from a perch of superiority."

Nothing I like better than butting heads with someone equally prepared.

Excellent..I'm going to make a project of amassing your VAST array of personal insults on this board. Be patient, it's gonna take a while!

Let me know if I can help...