I think it may be a bad idea to give too much attention to really dangerous wacko wingnut types unless it's the kind of attention that gets them some help and doesn't encourage them. -T
A Guide to Conservative Rhetoric Sticks, Stones, and Conservative Insults By Doctor Biobrain Until recently, I was scared of words. Specifically, insults frightened me. And when patriotic conservatives bravely confront my openly anti-American nihilism by calling me "the enemy" and a "brain dead libtard," I pee myself a little. Yeah, I'm self-loathing enough to admit to that publicly. But then I did some research online and discovered that, to my great relief, my bones can only be broken by "sticks and stones," and that the words I feared so much could "never hurt me." And yeah, whew! I feel a lot safer now. And that's just a joke, of course, because I've never been "scared" of insults, but rather find them to be quite humorous. A properly placed insult can actually take the heat off of a tough debate and make things a bit more lighthearted. Thus said, many conservatives actually use them as substitutes for debate, and this is when they become a problem. But I find their misuse of insults to also be funny, particular when they combine it with whines about how mean us "libtards" have been to them. Wah! And recently, I wrote about a Mark Harvey, a conservative who made a pseudo-threat against Obama, Sotomayor, Congressional Democrats, and half the GOP; saying that he wanted to make "damn sure" that they were "scared to death" of him, because they're the enemies, similar to the enemies he killed in Iraq. And I thought my point was clear: The implied threat was too much and he needed to tone things down. But I assumed good faith on his part, and refrained from insulting him or suggesting that he was a crazy who was going to assassinate Obama. But as usual, this good-faith effort was not rewarded in kind. Rather, he completely smeared me as "the poor troglodyte at brain dead in person." And wow, I'm not even sure what that means. And somehow, he thought I was offended because he labeled me "the enemy," rather than because his comment was an implied assassination threat. And that's the extent of his rant against me: It's just a series of insults which insist that I'm scared of him. And just to keep you in on part of the joke: I'm a big enough guy that I never get threatened in person. And if he tried this shit in person, I'd laugh at him just as much as I'm laughing at him now. And the funniest part is that he seems to believe that liberals are winning because we insult them more. And by insulting us, we're now "scared" and need to "get used to it and keep looking over your shoulders." But I'm not scared of this bozo's words. Who would be? He can call me a braindead liberal all he wants, as long as he keeps the assassination threats to a minimum. And of course, I didn't insult him. Yet, he keeps insisting that he's just returning fire while venomously insulting me for being scared of his insults. How weird. BTW: He never backed down from his implied assassination threat or suggest I was wrong. I had expected him to insist that I had smeared him by reading his comment as a threat, but no. He ignored the point completely and insisted that I was scared of his insults. Again, weird. Timothy McVeigh as Jihadist And one other point: My post referenced Dave's aggressive attitude as to being similar to why Timothy McVeigh blew up the Oklahoma Federal Building. But of course, this dude dismisses this by saying that "the Oklahoma City bombing was a Jihadi operation" and that "McVeigh was the scapegoat and was a tool of the Leftinistra to cover up the Act Of War upon this Nation." But of course, McVeigh confessed to the bombing, going as far as to explain why he did it, bragging about how after his execution, the score would be 168 to 1, and that his only regret was that he couldn't have killed more people. And sorry, Dave, but you're saying much of the same stuff McVeigh said before he was executed. You're not the only one who sees us as "the enemy," and linking McVeigh to your side is entirely appropriate. We didn't do that. He did. He was one of you; conspiracy theories notwithstanding. But to bolster his claim, he cites an irrefutable source: Another post he wrote on the bombing. Wow, I'll never be able to dispute that. And in that one, he went ahead with the standard conservative line that Clinton "did nothing" after the first WTC bombing. And as I pointed out to him, we convicted four of the bombers the year after the attack, and two more in 1997; including the mastermind, who is serving a life sentence in Supermax at Colorado. How do they not know this stuff? But of course, he imagines that I'm the "numbskull" that he's educating; simply because I don't believe in conspiracy theories that completely defy known reality. The ignorance is as scary as it is amazing. But as long as I keep reminding myself that words can never hurt me, I'll feel a lot safer. More: http://biobrain.blogspot.com/2009/05/sticks-stones-and-conservative-insults.html -- Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. Have a great day, Tommy -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
