• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Another Tea Partier Concerned With Taxes and Spending

marplots said:
Can someone explain the joke at the link in the OP?

(Warning: Probably offensive/racist)
Click to expand...

Could it be related to this nuttiness?

http://worldundercontrol.com/2012/05/08/pepsi-using-dead-fetus-cells/

Pepsi are using the cells of dead human fetuses in order to test the chemical reaction of the artificial flavouring in their drinks despite having other options.

To be more specific, it is Senomyx, a company which Pepsi work with and get their flavouring chemicals from who are doing the testing but Obama has said it is perfectly reasonable.
Click to expand...

I'm often prone to wondering if the entire right wing is performance art.
 
tyr_13 said:
:confused:
Click to expand...

"If libs took responsibility for their safety and the safety of their families, they wouldn't be sheep to the slaughter when a nut has a gun."

"I'm sorry a liberal shot some innocent people in a Blue State. Learn to defend yourselves instead of taking guns from law-abiding citizens."
 
Brainster said:
"If libs took responsibility for their safety and the safety of their families, they wouldn't be sheep to the slaughter when a nut has a gun."

"I'm sorry a liberal shot some innocent people in a Blue State. Learn to defend yourselves instead of taking guns from law-abiding citizens."
Click to expand...

How do you possibly defend yourself against a random drive-by shooting?

The things I can think of, bullet resistant garments or never leaving your house, aren't quite the same as carrying a gun. I don't see much value in having a gun under these circumstances.
 
Brainster said:
"If libs took responsibility for their safety and the safety of their families, they wouldn't be sheep to the slaughter when a nut has a gun."

"I'm sorry a liberal shot some innocent people in a Blue State. Learn to defend yourselves instead of taking guns from law-abiding citizens."
Click to expand...
Sorry, I have no clue what you're point is. Are you repeating those quotes because you agree with them? Or....
 
DavidJames said:
Sorry, I have no clue what you're point is. Are you repeating those quotes because you agree with them? Or....
Click to expand...

To clear up my confusion.

Brainster, calling the victims and perp 'liberal' (I have no clue if the victims were or were not and neither do you) is not the especially offensive part.

Saying that they should have been able to defend themselves and implying that they are in part responsible for their own victim hood is. It's offensive to intelligence to think that there is a meaningful way to defend yourself from a random drive by or being run over by a car. Such surprise attacks could only be foiled before by luck or hyper-vigilance. Maybe some can be cut short by intervention, but the nature of these attacks was designed to avoid that. Short hit and run tactics. It's offensive to decency to attack a grieving family. And this was an attack. If he had only made the point that using such an attack for political hay is wrong and an appeal to emotion, fair enough. That's not what he did.

In fact, what he did is exactly what he was critical of. He used these attacks to make political hay. There isn't a defense here, just douchbaggery all the way down.
 
johnny karate said:
I honestly have to wonder what kind of severe emotional or psychological trauma a person has to suffer to fill them with so much rage and hatred.
Click to expand...

I think the constant media barrage of 'You're in danger!!!' followed by a 15 minute distillation of all the bad things that have happened to some of the other 300,000 people that share his country might have had something to do with it.
 
3point14 said:
I think the constant media barrage of 'You're in danger!!!' followed by a 15 minute distillation of all the bad things that have happened to some of the other 300,000 people that share his country might have had something to do with it.
Click to expand...


And yet FBI crime statistics show that nearly every major category of crime in the U.S. is at the lowest rates it's been in thirty-five to forty years.
 
Corsair 115 said:
And yet FBI crime statistics show that nearly every major category of crime in the U.S. is at the lowest rates it's been in thirty-five to forty years.
Click to expand...


It's essentially mass produced, anecdotal data that, coupled with people's inability to deal with large numbers* means that people get their sums really wrong when it comes to relative risk.





*I, er, missed some zeros....
 
Corsair 115 said:
And yet FBI crime statistics show that nearly every major category of crime in the U.S. is at the lowest rates it's been in thirty-five to forty years.
Click to expand...

Shhhhh! That's not going to help the cause of disarming America!
 
If you believe that these shootings are actually false flag events, designed to take away Americans' guns, I suppose it's easy to justify to yourself making the the type of tweets this Kincannon character does. (the you being a general you, not specific to anyone in this thread). I ran into that type of thinking at work when Sandy Hook happened. Damned near walked out because I couldn't tolerate the BS being spewed by my ultra right wing, government is evil, conspiracy's a-lurking everywhere coworker. (Ultimately, my boss got involved and that pretty much took care of that.)
 
Brainster said:
Shhhhh! That's not going to help the cause of disarming America!
Click to expand...


Works both ways, it seems to me. The more vehement pro-gun advocates can't say, "Look at all that horrible crime! You must have a weapon for self-defence or else the criminal hordes will devour you!"
 
tyr_13 said:
To clear up my confusion.

Brainster, calling the victims and perp 'liberal' (I have no clue if the victims were or were not and neither do you) is not the especially offensive part.

Saying that they should have been able to defend themselves and implying that they are in part responsible for their own victim hood is. It's offensive to intelligence to think that there is a meaningful way to defend yourself from a random drive by or being run over by a car. Such surprise attacks could only be foiled before by luck or hyper-vigilance. Maybe some can be cut short by intervention, but the nature of these attacks was designed to avoid that. Short hit and run tactics. It's offensive to decency to attack a grieving family. And this was an attack. If he had only made the point that using such an attack for political hay is wrong and an appeal to emotion, fair enough. That's not what he did.

In fact, what he did is exactly what he was critical of. He used these attacks to make political hay. There isn't a defense here, just douchbaggery all the way down.
Click to expand...

In addition to all of the above, I would also point out 2 things
1) this guy was a law abiding legal gun owner (that is until he wasn't) so the whole right wing meme of - oh if you control guns only criminals will have guns is yet again blown out of the water.

2) the whole Lib blue state dung pile by this guy and certain posters here reveling in the deaths of innocent people. is also crap.

CA has the SECOND highest rate of gun ownership only surpassed by TX. while MR. puss buckets state comes in some 20-30 places below and lower than most of the lib blue states. SO according to this morons logic, his son IS far more likely to die cowering somewhere while getting shot.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/archive/index.php/t-197866.html so even in pure numbers he's just a moron.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom