Meanwhile, back on the Insane Right...
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Saturday, November 15, 2025 22:40
VIEWED: 2694
PAGE 1 of 3
News from the Land of the Right-Wing Crazies:Quote:
Republican Newsletter From Arkansas Advocates Shooting People Who Step Out Of Line
From the Benton County, Ark. Republican Newsletter:Quote:
We need to let those who will come in the future to represent us [know] that we are serious. The 2nd amendment means nothing unless those in power believe you would have no problem simply walking up and shooting them if they got too far out of line and stopped responding as representatives. It seems that we are unable to muster that belief in any of our representatives on a state or federal level, but we have to have something, something costly, something that they will fear that we will use if they step out of line. FAR too much more at http://www.nogy.net/bcgop/Apr_2013/index.html]
By the way, on the subject of Obamacare, he feels the same:Quote:
Part of me feels that this betrayal deserves a quick implementation of my 2nd amendment rights to remove a threat domestic.
How about "Liberals Thrilled About Mayhem In Boston Says Gun Nut Larry Pratt"Quote:
Gun Owners of America head Larry Pratt agrees with Stan Solomon and Steve Davis that liberals are happy about the Boston bombing because it will foster more government contorl
Then there'sQuote:
GOP Lawmaker Doubles Down On Demanding Torture For Teenaged Boston Bombing Suspect
New York State Senator Greg Ball (R-NY) caused quite the stir over the weekend with his over-the-top demands for torturing 19-year-old Boston bombing suspect, Dzokhar Tsarnaev. On Friday evening — just moments after Tsarnaev was taken into custody – the chairman of the New York State Senate Veterans, Homeland Security and Military Affairs Committee posted on his twitter feed: "So, scum bag #2 in custody. Who wouldn't use torture on this punk to save more lives?"
On Sunday, April 21st, Ball tossed more brush on the fire by doubling down on his pro-torture stance, with the following statement:Quote:
Terrorists play by a different set of rules by manipulating the greatest strengths of our open society against us. One of the questions to be asked is this: is “torture” ever justified in the war against terror, if it can save lives? I am not shy in joining those who say yes, and I believe we must give those tasked with protecting us every constitutional and effective tool to do so.
Wow. Considering that Tsarnaev is an American citizen, was unconscious, and technically has not been proven guilty, them’s fighting words. Then again, since when have Republicans ever cared about proving guilt before torturing people? And what, exactly, does Ball mean by saving “more lives?” According to Bryan Bender from The Boston Globe, city officials report that “all evidence thus far indicates they [Dzokhar and his brother Tamerlan] were acting alone and were not part of a broader conspiracy.” Tamerlan's dead and Dzhokar is in custody. So what life-saving information could Tsarnaev possibly reveal under torture?
When asked if he felt surprised by the all the negative feedback, Ball replied:Quote:
At the end of the day, I think a lot of politicians typically are, quite honestly, full of crap, they’re scared to say how they feel. And I basically said what I believe a lot of red-blooded Americans felt. And it comes down to this: When you talk about terrorism, information matters. And if getting that information, including torture, would save one innocent life — including that we’ve seen children — you know, would you use torture? And I can tell you I would be first in line.
If you can stand it:
He says the war against terror "scares the hell out of me", which probably explains why he's convinced Al Qaeda is going to "bring this country to it's knees". Scared people in power are scary as hell...
That's your dose o
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, maybe just one more: Quote:
‘You’ve Got To Be Kidding Me’: Fox Host Tears Into ‘Laughable’ Questioning Of Boston Suspect
As Fox & Friends reported the latest developments in the questioning of Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the some of the hosts were a bit skeptical about the new developments. Brian Kilmeade, in particular, criticized the way the interrogation is being conducted and deemed it “laughable” that the suspect was read his Miranda rights in hospital.
Going through some of the information about Tsarnaev being shot in the neck, Kilmeade noted it’s being called into question based on an eyewitness report. He further pointed to the suspect alleging his brother was the driving force and they acted alone, calling Tsarnaev’s account “convenient.”
As the topic of religion arose, believed to be the older brother’s motivation, Steve Doocy also chimed in, discussing the brother’s past attendance at a mosque in Cambridge and the anti-American “outbursts” he’d supposedly had there.
To that point, Gretchen Carlson added that the older brother appeared to be the radicalized one who influence the 19-year-old suspect. “There’s no way you should believe — everyone’s apparently running with this story,” Kilmeade immediately jumped in. Quote:
“You’ve got to be kidding me. You question him for 90 seconds as he’s come out of a harrowing situation like this. He’s in self-preservation mode. This guy needs to be questioned for a couple of weeks, they need to see if his story lines up. They all have the same explanation to get out of it in the beginning. And then you’ve got to drill down on it with professional interrogators. He does not need to see his Miranda rights read to him in bed. Laughable.”
Doocy turned to the older brother’s widow, wondering what she knew about the plans. While she’s said to have been in the dark, Carlson remarked that she’d been “brainwashed” by radical Islam, converting from Christianity.
Kilmeade, meanwhile, pressed on:Quote:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/youve-got-to-be-kidding-me-fox-host-tears-i
“There is no way logically — how do you not know the man you converted to Islam for is not involved in extracurricular activities? You’ve already switched to his religion. … You don’t think it ever came up that, ‘By the way, honey, I’m taking it to another level.’”
nto-laughable-questioning-of-boston-suspect/]
Man, these righties reeeely love America and our dedication to the rule of law and our Constitution and stuff...until it's inconvenient, or someone scares them, or they don't like someone...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, hell, there's just too damned much..."Freedom of religion" don't mean shit to 'em, either, obviously:Quote:
Coulter To Geraldo: We Should Have Police Surveillance In Every Mosque — ‘It’s Not A Private Relationship’
Agreeing with co-panelist Alan Dershowitz‘s suggestion that “surveillance is a very good thing” and that “we should learn to live with video cameras” because a mosque, church, or synagogue are “not a private place,” Coulter told Rivera:Quote:
“I have long disagreed with my libertarian friends on this. It’s not difficult to explain: Any place a cop can be, or an undercover cop — standing, watching, and observing — you should be able to have a camera. We see how incredibly useful this was, the various cameras out at the Boston Marathon. As Alan says, we’re not talking about invading a private relationship — You wouldn’t be talking to your shrink with an undercover cop standing there; you wouldn’t be in the ladies’ room with an undercover cop standing there.”
But, see, that’s the thing: a mosque is a private institution. The Lord & Taylor surveillance camera that at least partially helped identify the Boston suspects was installed by a private business that decided to install the cameras for security reasons. If a mosque or church or synagogue decide to install cameras for their own security’s sake, then fine — as private institutions, they have the right to do so and their members can choose not to attend if they don’t like the tape rolling.
But private institutions also have the right not to install cameras, and so the two Geraldo guests’ proposal rings ever-so-slightly in the direction of mandating that surveillance be installed where necessary.
And as for Coulter’s and Dershowitz’s logic that “anywhere an undercover cop can be” is where we should put cameras? That’s a seriously dangerous suggestion. An undercover cop can go to some Tea Party gathering at a local VFW. Would Coulter be okay with government surveilling that — you know, just in case?
And would Dershowitz really be okay with government forcing synagogues to install surveillance? Or did he just throw that suggestion out there to mitigate his specific desire that we have the cameras rolling on all mosques?
http://www.mediaite.com/online/coulter-to-geraldo-we-should-have-polic
e-surveillance-in-every-mosque-its-not-a-private-relationship/
These people are amazing...they claim it's the LEFT who wants to do away with our rights???
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nothing new there. They're only interested in preserving the rights they approve of.
Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum
"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, Brenda, you shouldn't even bother! I can't resist putting this shit up, but mostly it's to remind any potentially intelligent right winger just HOW stupid his/her party has become. I quit the Democratic party a long time ago because of their assininity, tho' I'm still a liberal certainly, but the reasons I quit were NOTHING like as stupid as we see from the right on virtually a daily basis. I don't comprehend how they can continue to support these...uh, "people" (I use the term advisedly at best). I suppose on some level I keep thinking surely eventually they just HAVE to wake up... (I know, silly me 
)
It's really gotten so far out of hand it even continues to amaze ME, and that's saying something. I certainly don't put this shit up to remind the rest of the world what horrible shape we're in; it's just embarrassing!
I suppose I ought to keep a scrapbook of all the times some politician on the right wants to jail or shoot or whatever people they disagree with, so every time Rap throws out his little non sequitors, I can remind him of exactly WHICH side it is that wants to ignore the Constitution and laws when they're pissed at someone...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Nothing new there. They're only interested in preserving the rights they approve of.
Which is exactly my problem with both "sides", neither of which admits it.
Mind you, I dun think anymore highly of the rightwingnuts than you do, but as has been made abundantly clear, the supposedly liberal end of the spectrum does exactly that same pick and choose bullshit, only the rights in question they wanna protect or suppress are different, which makes em not a whit better and I take umbrage they get such a free pass for that bullshit.
If one is unwilling to stand for all rights, for all humans, they're just one more wannabe petty tyrant cause the moment you introduce different rulesets you restore social classes and the caste system, one of the primary things this entire goddamn country was founded on a basis of preventing.
So, while you're claim about the rightwingnuts picking and choosing is accurate, look to the beam in thy own eye here cause your own are every bit as guilty and should not be handed a free pass for it.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Not familiar w/ the Founders of this country, I see.
Hmm.
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
Resident USA Freedom Fundie
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'm right there with ya Frem.
Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Nothing new there. They're only interested in preserving the rights they approve of.
Which is exactly my problem with both "sides", neither of which admits it.
Mind you, I dun think anymore highly of the rightwingnuts than you do, but as has been made abundantly clear, the supposedly liberal end of the spectrum does exactly that same pick and choose bullshit, only the rights in question they wanna protect or suppress are different, which makes em not a whit better and I take umbrage they get such a free pass for that bullshit.
If one is unwilling to stand for all rights, for all humans, they're just one more wannabe petty tyrant cause the moment you introduce different rulesets you restore social classes and the caste system, one of the primary things this entire goddamn country was founded on a basis of preventing.
So, while you're claim about the rightwingnuts picking and choosing is accurate, look to the beam in thy own eye here cause your own are every bit as guilty and should not be handed a free pass for it.
-F
I'm disgusted with this country's politics now more than ever.
The only thing the Right & Left can agree on is total control of...
us.
We are a nation of wingnuts now.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Blue Squadron is launched! You did it Bree. Stay close to your wingnut.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
I'm right there with ya Frem.
I'm disgusted with this country's politics now more than ever.
The only thing the Right & Left can agree on is total control of...
us.
*produces card*
Might I interest you in a subscription of Anarchism-whenever-we-get-round-to-it?
Seriously though, that whole "Rights for me and not for thee" (aka I got mine, fuck you) bullshit is just plain pissin me off - meet the new boss, same as the old boss, and the only goddamn difference is WHICH rights they wanna piss all over - and I will have none of it, thus making me and mine hated by em both, which is fine, but them pretending to be better-than annoys the crap outta me.
I note, profoundly, that no explaination has been coming from not a single one of em in regards to why the right to vote, a very dangerous thing given that more people have been killed via strokes of political pens than every weapon in the world ever, is so sacrosanct it should not suffer any restriction whatsoever, no way, no how....
And yet the right to own weapons, they mean to infringe, for the very same fucking reasons the other side wants to infringe on the right to vote, a statistically NEGLIGABLE amount of issues with it.
Nor do they even have the excuse that the right to vote and misuse of it never harmed anyone, as there's a whole lotta dead Afghan and Iraqi people who might not otherwise be so, in regards to abuses which folks were tried and convicted for in Ohio, and were it not for Shrubs relatives blocking any legal investigation, mighta happened in Florida too.
So that there, my little acid test, shows up their hypocrisy crystal clear, cause every single time I ask it they run like cockroaches when someone flips the light on, revealing their true nature for all to see.
I remember when we had that whole discussion about Right-Wing-Authoritarians (RWA), and I pointed out that yes, there WAS such a thing as Left-Wing-Authoritarians (LWA), and that given half a chance, they'd be just as malicious, and just as dangerous - and Lo and Behold, here we are.
That's one of the primary reasons Anthony doesn't come round here much no more, he found that the people he thought would be natural allies were in fact truly no different from any other enemy of freedom and the enlightenment of humanity and that upset him quite a bit.
Me being a paranoid, cynical bastard, it neither upset nor surprised me.
There's REASONS imma Anarchist, yanno.
-Frem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME