John Stewart spoke the truth tonight...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=230675&title=blame

"The media's arguments over who is to blame for the James Von Brunn shooting devolve into their lowest form."


The knee-jerk discussions haven't just been taking place on TV and Radio. DU has been a hot spot for this BS.

"Freerepublic should be shut down. It's a terrorist breeding ground!!!"

"O'Reilly should be shut down. He's a terrorist. HE HAS BLOOD ON HIS HANDS!!!"

"ACORN is a terrorist group!!!"

"Shut down Operation Rescue. It's a terrorist group!!!"

"Tiller the baby killer is a murderer!!!"

"That man is a murderer because the left brainwashed him!!!"

"That man is a murderer because the right brainwashed him!!!"

"You have blood on your hands!!!"

"No you have blood on YOUR hands!!!"


I am watching any hope of intelligent discussion fly out the window. It seems to me that there is more and more screaming and yelling on DU and less and less discussion. People are attacked for simply having a dissenting opinion. This needs to stop. I am guilty of being irrational, and I have seen this with many other DUers.

What we need is reason. We can discuss the potential repercussions of O'Reilly's speech without calling him a terrorist. We can discuss the potential wrong doings of Operation Rescue without calling it a terrorist group.

The same goes for the Right. Both the Left and Right need to stop the mindless name calling. It accomplishes nothing.


*Puts on flame resistant suit*

"a man can dream, can't he?" Wobagger the infinitely prolonged.

it later made me wonder if a joke, even from the Hitchhiker's Guide, was the best way to show I agreed with your OP. Plus, I spelled Wowbagger rong.

But sometimes it's good to leave out the W.

that book really added to my bizarreness ...

required ... a distraction from the people who actually are running the place ...

"NO, you make sense!"


The truly sad part is that we have to look to a fake news show to be the voice of reason.

I refuse to reduce that point to a "he said she said" dispute. There is such a thing as truth, and the truth is that white supremacists are fringe right wingers.

As to the other points I pretty much agree. But Operation Rescue is always flirting with terrorism. Let's not forget that woman's number was in Roeder's car, and she admitted to giving him info on Tiller's church etc. I don't think she's too upset about what happened. If these people were Muslims, it'd be evidence enough to lock them all up without charges.

You are now saying that it is okay to practice the racist profiling of the Bush administration. I don't want Muslims locked up for what people like O'Reilly do. I don't want O'Reilly locked up either.

What I am saying is that there is no such thing as "flirting with terrorism". That is a loaded suggestion meant to incite a hateful image of whatever group you are targeting. It's a knee-jerk phrase.

You cannot place a one or two word name tag on what Operation Rescue does. Doing otherwise is really irrational. I see the right-wing media doing this all the time to groups like ACORN and ACLU. I don't want the left doing the same thing.

The number could have come from a website or previous email where the woman innocently gave out her number to a supporter. The Tiller church conversation could have been as innocent as "Yeah Tiller even goes to church. Can you believe that? Yeah he goes to such and such a church".

I'm not saying that's what happened. I'm just saying that some potentially innocent things have occured that many on here insist on turning into a conspiracy theory.

Why don't we investigate and discuss the evidence instead of making wild accusations? That's all that I'm asking for.

"Sullenger served about two years in prison after pleading guilty to conspiring to bomb an abortion clinic in California in 1988. She has since renounced violent action."

So she's a convicted terrorist. You're right, "flirting with" was an inappropriate modifier.

I understand your concerns, I think, but I didn't endorse racial profiling, I was making a point. And to be clear, I don't think O'Reilly has committed a crime--he's just an asshole.

But the view that Operation Rescue puts forth--and they're not alone--that abortion is murder, that abortion is worse than the Holocaust, leads inexorably to terrorism. If it's really worse than the Holocaust, they should all be out there killing doctors, right? It's the moral thing to do under those circumstances. If you had a chance to kill Hitler, what kind of person would you be if you said, "well, let's try to stop him through the courts"?

Even still, I don't want to see them thrown in Gitmo. But I would like to see investigations, audits, and general keeping-a-close-eye-on. It's not equivalent with the ACORN hysteria because ACORN doesn't actually engage in election fraud, but Operation Rescue actually does preach a dangerous, hateful message, one that literally demonizes their opponents and labels them sub-human. That's no conspiracy theory.

That there is "no helping" kids who kill cats. That they are "punks" or "despicable". "Put them out of their misery".

You are telling me that isn't the same kind of dangerous, hateful language being used by people at OR?

What I am willing to do is look at what OR does and attempt to understand the impact of their actions. What I am not willing to do is lose my head in the process.

Sounds like a plan. For the record, I find the lynch mobs off-putting too. Proof: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5860707&mesg_id=5860715

That is, it does not cure people. It can only assist those people who believe something is wrong with their lives and who want to correct it. Against psychopaths, sociopaths and just plain crackbrains, psychiatry is powerless.

If you don't want to outright kill them, the traditional technique of locking them in the attic and keeping them away from humanity is the only real solution.

I realize it's probably a shock to you to realize that God has created failures. Welcome to reality.

There is no god. At least I see no evidence that there is a god.

Second off, psychiatry may not cure sociopaths. But like all other forms of science, it is an ongoing experiment. We might one day find a way to cure sociopaths. Or we might find a usable treatment.

But really, your argument that we have to lock people "away" from humanity is a bunch of fucking bullshit. Incarcerating them is fine. I realize that true sociopaths cannot be set free. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to give them the best life possible. That doesn't mean we confine them to a solo cell for the rest of their life. They deserve better.

They have a right to life just like all other self-aware beings. Killing them IS NOT AN OPTION. Sorry, but I'm not about to support mass murder.


What is being spewed about the severely mentally ill is a bunch of unscientific, hateful BS.

Giving them a "good life" hasn't worked, has it? They escape or are released from the hospitals and they kill again.

And as far as a "right to life," how did that work out for Harris and Klebold's victims?

You're a perfect case of naivete hitting the cold cinder block wall of reality.

Putting words in my mouth won't make you sound right. Sorry.

How many sociopaths or psychopaths have escaped relative to the amount we incarcerate? Really I'd like to know. Because I'd be willing to guess it is a very, VERY small percentage.

Other prisoners escape. I don't see you calling for all prisoners to be executed.


You are simply using fear mongering to achieve an emotional response from me. Sorry bud, it's not going to work.

Speaking of the limits of psychiatry, did you hear Stephen Colbert's still alive? Or perhaps he's been replaced by a super-sophisticated android?

You remember, the Columbine kids? The ones that weren't killed before they killed so many others? Or the many postal workers who kill their co-workers? Or nice old Mister Von Brunn?

Gee, psychiatry really helped them become healthy and productive citizens.

I was referring to this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3912884&mesg_id=3913059

But you already knew that.

They have combined with the racist crazies and the anti-immigration nuts.

Go to the Southern Poverty Law Center's website to read about them.

When it comes to keeping an eye on things, SPLC does more good than just about any other group. They sue, the prosecute, and they put people in jail, too.

Some of the recent assassinations have made me angry enough that my first reaction was that we should just jail all these nuts and throw away the keys. I am sure that is what some of the people here are doing -- they are just reacting.

We have to keep the pressure on our government to do whatever is legal to stop these people. And if we can, we should support groups like the SPLC.

This is like blaming Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow for that recruiter being killed by a young Muslim american.

to broadcast.

Olbermann isn't part of an organized effort to incite violence.

They are religious conservatives, just like fundamentalist Christians. They are anti-abortion, anti-gay, and anti-progress. There is nothing liberal about them.

politics is not about pure reason. never has been, never will be. there should be a balance, ideally we have programs and policies and platforms that are solidly rooted in logic, argued passionately with at least a little bit of illogic. people, especially when in crowds and masses, are decidedly illogical and it takes some choice illogic to get their attention, to sell your case, to motivate them, and so on.

the other side has so skillfully used the weapons of emotion and illogic that they have come to rely on them to the point of absurdity, to the point where their positions are hostage to their illogical messages. they couldn't help themselves, they had to impeach clinton, they had to meddle in the schiavo case, they had to defend torture, etc.

obviously we need to avoid going to those extremes, but we're in no immediate danger of that. we need our logical voices but we also need some voices of passion.


remember that we're fighting an opposition party who accuses us of being traitors for trying to extent unemployment benefits. you can't always fight with just logic, it's like bringing a scalpel to a gun fight.

There is no benefit to being illogical. And if you aren't thinking logically, you are being just that.

The argument that we "aren't as bad as the otherside so we are okay" is a weak one at best. It's similar to the logic "hey US healthcare isn't perfect but it's better than other places, so stop bitching".

If we actually give a damn about what we believe, we would want to be as rational in our beliefs and actions as possible.

Being irrational means denying fact. It means that you are literally denying reality.

I would rather be laughed at for being logical, than to be idolized as a fool.

call me illogical if you wish, but 100% pure logic will never work in politics.
reconizing this and adapting to this reality is itself quite logical. it's not denying reality at all. on the contrary, relying totally on logic is to deny humanity's intrinsic nature.

and well-funded effort to incite violence.

It accomplishes CHEAP teevee and ratings. The MSM (and regrettably the people) have crap for brains. Where is the logical discussion taking place? Certainly not Faux News. I agree we need actual DISCUSSION. Logical, reasoned - not yelling and screaming 9th grade insults.

So how do we change the 90% of the media that is acting like a bunch of idiots? Because it's what people hear 24/7 and get used to. It's an information cascade - I know there actually are good discussions, but they get drowned out by the other 90% screaming....

Isn't trying to stop or change something through fear and intimidation the definition of terrorism?
And if that's so, then aren't operation rescue's tactics and O'Reilly's rhetoric terrorism?

Just saying-

:crazy:

Senator McCarthy was in a position of power and it was reasonable to question whether he and his associates in the House of Representatives were using the actual cases Soviet penetration of our government agencies as a pretext to introduce a larger and more pervasive climate of fear to limit domestic dissent and the electoral success of the opposition party.

HUAC's preoccupation with cultural contamination through TV and films is not so very different than other grandstanding committees in the more recent congresses.

The fact that some blowhole was hawking fear like 3 day old fish doesn't mean there was nothing to fear or that something didn't stink.

It was a grave mistake to be distracted from the job of finding actual Soviet agents and Senator McCarthy should have been called on his sideshow antics of going after eastern elites and hollywood coffee house revolutionaries.

You don't call McCarthy and his henchmen, including the distinguished HUAC alum President Nixon, you ridicule them for their irrelevance and blatant self-promotion.

And all the killers listened to the some of the same talk shows, read the many of the same books. posted on the same websites & hated the same people - we're not allowed to look at the political movement that spawned them? And define it for what it is? Bullshit. There is an important difference between the right and the left in this country: the right makes conscious effort to dehumanize people & then go out and kill them.

If bin Laden is a terrorist, the so is O'Reilly. If al Qaeda is a terrorist group, then so is Operation Rescue.

... we demonstrate too little.

Terror has a clear definition. The person who said:
"In contemplating college liberals, you really regret, once again, that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals by making them realize that they could be killed, too."

...Is a terrorist.

That now, they have their opportunity to label people on the right as such and they using it. I think it's pretty childish, the right should just be ignored and if that's what you want to do.