It’s not pertinent. It’s word salad with some vaguely political bacon bits. The anxiety over the purity of the Constitution and the gold standard does carry a whiff of right-wingnut, I’ll grant, but AFAIK no wingnuts actually believe that the current constitution is a literal forgery created for purposes of mind control, nor that someone can actually create a new currency out of grammar and use it to restore the original (presumably grammatically correct) constitution. Or whatever the fuck the dude was saying, which frankly was well nigh impossible to tease out. As I’ve said in other threads, once your view of reality is that garbled, any input can produce any output.
And of course, that can be true, and it can be true that right-wing pundits are inappropriately stirring up violence. Both these things can be true simultaneously without necessarily enjoying any cause-and-effect intimacy.
Can you please cut the shit for just once? It never works, not here, never. As you fucking well know.
The party to whom you give your absolute devotion has made a practice recently of using “socialist” as a synonym for “Democrat”. As you fucking well know.
Is there no occasion on which you can try to pretend to have some responsibility for our society, or is paraphrasing Fox talking points in polysyllables really all you can do?
To be fair, the people being targeted by right wing violent rhetoric were already complaining (the whiners) before the tragedy.
Lame stuff like “please stop putting me in a gun sight and telling people to “reload”, I am already getting death threats and you are going to push someone over the edge.”
Or “perhaps it is not entirely responsible to tell people they are going to have to fight back against congress with guns instead of votes. We have elections for a reason.”
Granted, right wingers were probably merely using violent rhetoric to cause fear in their opponents, without actually wanting anyone to take them at their word. But lefties didn’t see it that way because they are cowards.
The point is, these silly complaints were already out there before the tragedy, they weren’t just created to take advantage of it.
Both of which are invidious. I actually charitably interpreted it to be #2, but it’s still obnoxious since it’s basically suggesting that Republicans are the victims in all this (as if Loughner’s intentions had anything to do with delaying the repeal vote).
Do they mention their connection to Fox and Sarah Palin?
Frankly, I’d expect them to say anything and everything possible to help pull the little bitch out of the fire.
Do you think they succeeded?
Joyce Kaufman, conservative radio host and Representative-elect Allen West’s choice for Chief of Staff:
“The most important thing the founding fathers did to ensure me my First Amendment rights, was they gave me a Second Amendment. And if ballots don’t work, bullets will.”
That is exactly the kind of rhetoric we DON’T need. Seriously, even hinting at armed insurrection? The only thing worse than this childishness is the certain knowledge is that some people are serious. And the funny thing is that they’ll never do it, they just put people like me in a tenuous and sometimes indefensible position while simultaneously shaking up people who then pass laws to try to ensure that their rhetorical insurrection won’t be armed.
Can’t these people see that they only hurt themselves?
That last was a rhetorical question, by the way. I’m sure you can almost hear the sigh that came after it.
I’m no expert, but I think you’re being whooshed by Bricker.
This is an argument for insisting that “socialist” be used accurately, not that it be stricken from the national vocabulary. Effective opposition to conservative propaganda has to include resisting conservative attempts to control the direction of public language such that the meaning of words is restricted to what benefits their side.
You mean the guys who were careful to send warnings about their infrastructure-targeting bombs before they went off? Those Weathermen? Yeah, there’s equivalence for you.