But only slightly more. And you would proceed to say that typifies the thing you call “the left”, wouldn’t you?
Being true makes it not extreme, pretty much by definition, doesn’t it?
Nice wheels on those goalposts. This is not about invective, insults or vitriol; it is about invoking violent imagery. Show us members of Congress or candidates for federal office that raised the likelihood of armed insurrection if they weren’t elected.
I think she meant what she said, that she was concerned that people were so disappointed with congress and fed up with the bullshit that people might get serious and take back control of the government: marches, protests, and yes, maybe even gun violence. But she said she didn’t want to see that happen and said that taking Reid out of office would be a step in calming the people who are so upset.
And to answer your question another way, the evidence I have that she didn’t mean for anyone to actually commit violence is that I am unaware of her ever shooting anyone or committing any other violent act. Or of her even instigating a violent act in the past.
So, now I have to ask you, what evidence do you have that she was actually intending or hoping for Reid to be shot? Beyond your take on her words, of course. What supporting evidence do you have?
She called for the assassination of Reid? Or you kidding me? Where do you get that from? From her “take him out” line? (as in “take him out of office”.) Please tell me you have more than this.
She DIDN’T call for anyone’s assassination. Please. It’s one thing to claim that her rhetoric was so heated that it contributed to what happened in Florida. It’s another to just talk out of your ass completely. But let’s say you’re right and I’m wrong and that she really was calling for the assassination of Reid. Don’t you think that someone calling for the assassination of a Senator would be arrested. Or at least questioned by the FBI or Secret Service. Do you have any evidence that she was. Or is it more likely that people who are paid to assess risks to sitting Senators heard her statements and wrote it off as over the top political rhetoric?
You’re claiming she called for assassination when she didn’t. And you’re ignoring all the words that point to her NOT wanting violence to occur, Mr. Partisan. Sheeze.
Beck always backpedals and denies. Why? Because he has no guts and is full of shit. He is a lousy fake and a coward who probably doesn’t even believe half the shit he spews. Hell, just check it out. Everyone according to him is Hitler. Everyone is always doomed. It’s the same old shit all the time. And then when he goes too far (even for him) he back pedals like a motherfucker.
mag, I think you know better than that.
“Take out.” It’s a euphemism.
The Patriot Shop has scrubbed the “Liberal Hunting License” sticker from their site, but it still comes up on Google.
A lot of us thought he was fucking stupid, incompetent and dangerous and were not afraid to say so. Some thought he was a scumbag and said so. I know some wanted to see him go to jail but I can’t remember ANYONE saying he should get the “second amendment solution”.
The second amendment solution is about bearing arms, to stop a tyranny. How do you use arms to stop a tyranny? By KILLING SOMEONE. Whether this was a deliberate call for murder or just fiery rhetoric is open to discussion, but still and all, figurative or not, the imagery is all about KILLING someone. Don’t pretend it isn’t.
By the way, I remember some of the Bush era invective. A LOT of it centered around dealing with traitors. Those traitors of course were anyone who wasn’t a big fan of Bush, a true believer, a partaker of the Kool Aid. There was a lot of bold talk about GITMO, ass kicking, waterboarding and bullets back then. All directed at the lefty librul traitors.
So, I would like to take this moment to holler BULLSHIT on damn near everything.
Fucking cowards. If they had any balls they would leave it up. I’d respect them more for that. No. Damn. Balls.
Yes, American Midwest Standard with some dialectical curveballs. Very specific, my dialect is.
Maybe she meant that if Reid didn’t do what she wanted, they would form a well-regulated militia. Which would, by its very existence, “take out” Harry Reid. Metaphorically.
I’m no SCotUS justice but, aren’t those first two First Amendment solutions?
Shit, they’re shooting Congresscritters in Florida too?
CMC fnord!
I hear that Drudge and David Frum are advancing the explanation that the gunman was a degenerate due to being a pot head. Rotted his brain. So there you have it, the smoking gun.
I agree with you, but you have to bear in mind that some of the people you’re talking about are actually crazy. You can’t compare yourself to them. It’s not fair. It would like be like [del]me[/del] Ludovic* saying he’s better at admitting his errors than Susanann, as though that was an achievement.
*Non-crazy liberal poster selected at random.
It has everything to do with guns. They are contiguous concepts. Like I said.
So, what does “Second Amendment solution” mean, exactly?
nm
Are we still jerking off to the definition of “second amendment solution”?
For fuck’s sake.
Well, it’s obviously used in a political context and has nothing to do with home defense, hunting or gun collecting. Anything else it could conceivably be is to “gun violence” as “apple” is to “apple.”