I dont really see how you immediately (and logically) came up with GLenn Beck as the starting point. Historically, when economic troubles came up precious metals like gold and silver have always been worth more and considered more reliable then our standard currency. I remember learning that in high school when we went over the great depression, its fairly common knowledge
Dont get me wrong, it is possible (but I would consider it unlikely due to his paranoia) that Glenn Becks gold promotions helped him come to that conclusion but I think its stretching it to jump to him as a cause first
We're not going to know for awhile at best, or ever at worst, what exactly pushed him to buy the gun in November.
I have to admit the cynic in me just wondered if from your point of view you believe they can do no right. Normally you are a rational minded person but its clear that rationale and logic arent being used here. There is no evidence I know of and none that you have posted to show any kind of connection (vague or otherwise) between JLL and Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and/or Glenn beck. However you seem to be very clear that you still want to hold them responsible for the tradgedy, at least in some small way
Because there are deaths that are more linked to Glenn Beck (the three police officers above). It was only a matter of time before some nutjob actually managed to kill someone in a manner that got significant media attention.
I have to cut you off here. "They deserve it" is a very slippery slope. Some of the worst atrocities in history were caused because "They deserved it". Frankly you're better then that.
If you can find me a serious redeeming feature of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or Sarah Palin, I will gladly concede the point.
A serious redeeming feature would be something along the lines of
1) Consistently promoting and supporting a well-recognized and appreciated charity.
2) Consistent calls to avoid violence before Saturday.
3) A consistent history of admitting when they were in the wrong.
...something along those lines. Something that speaks to a greater depth of character than fearmongering.
If you dont mind I would like to quote Mel Brookes here when he was explaining the difference between "dark comedy" and regular comedyBeck Jokes About "Put[ting] Poison" In Nancy Pelosi's Wine
What he meant here is when you look at things from the outside they tend to more funny especially when they are more serious(i.e. when you see one of your friends do something and hurt themselves). When you are part of the situation it seems far less funny because theres an attachment rather then detachment.
I hope that makes sense so far
Now to be completely honest, yes I did chuckle because I have no attachment to either Reid or Pelosi in any tangental sense (read: Detachment). While you will have a hard time seeing it as funny because your attachment (your hatred of torture and belief that its use should be treason) is an all important issue to you. Our perspectives are different and thus so are our reactions.
Whether one finds it funny or not its clear that it was meant as a joke (even you believe that). Was it appropriate? Well yes for the context of the conversation I believe it was. The reason I believe it was was because the point of the discussion was getting "the nuts" out of the white house, the whole kidnap and dont hurt them or waterboard them "well except maybe pelosi" was symbolic of getting them out of office.
"By the way I put poison in your-"
I was actually looking for the clip about O'Reilly saying Pelosi could be found bobbing up and down in a river. The vitriol against Pelosi in particular has been horrific.
On Brandon's point about dark comedy; I think some people point to it as vitriol when it conveniently fits their narrative, and other times brush it off as just comedy when it doesn't. Either it's wrong 99.99% of the time, regardless of the person issuing it, or it is not. These people, O'Reilly, Palin, Beck, etc. are not leaders with lawful responsibilities. Comparing them to say Hitler and how he incited people to commit genocide is wrong headed in my opinion.
How was Hitler a man with lawful responsibilities while in prison writing Mein Kampf? To say nothing of the way Glenn Beck talks about progressives right now in the free.
There are people who respect and listen to what they say, and as such they have responsibilities for that. Even if they're big on pretending not to by quitting their job halfway through.
It doesn't offend me that you don't give my argument weight, or that you decided to use an expletive here. What offends me about this statement is its obvious implication that I'm being less than serious in my comments on these issues. If that's what you meant, well, that's a presumptuous, inappropriate, and offensive thing to suggest. I may lack your level of education or knowledge, but I'm confident that I approach these topics with at least as much seriousness as you or most others do. If that's not what you meant to imply, well, please say so.
Having someone spread lies and hatred so freely, to so many, is a problem. People end up believing the lies. This removes people from, as one conservative think tank put it, 'reality based thinking'.
In the long run, these people will be disadvantaged compared to those who are able to make more apt judgments about their environment, Glenn Beck's popularity will collapse, and history will look more frankly at what caused what in this period.
Yet in the mean time, more people like Byron Williams, Richard Poplawski, Scott Roeder, etc. are all out there, waiting for their crazy to reach the right point.
Here, it sounds like you might be advocating the use of anonymous violence against certain non-violent public protesters. I assume that's not what you meant, but I don't know you well enough to say that for certain, so I'd appreciate clarification. Personally I have no affection for the "Phelps clan" but do not advocate violence against them either; if you do, I'd like to hear you talk about the justifications.
WBC was recently the victim of car vandalism. No one in the entire town would take their money to get their vehicle fixed, and no one was giving any clues about the perpetrator. It was a reference to recent news.
(Emphasis added.) Here, it sounds like you might be advocating the euthanization of certain people with mental illnesses. Granted, you move on quickly from that point, but the point was still made. Again, I assume that's not at all what you really meant, but I don't know for certain, so I'd appreciate clarification.
It's a question that belongs in a different topic, but as you might be aware, the later a mental illness is treated, in many cases, the harder it is to treat - to the point where it's an open question, given their mental state, if forcing them to live is really the humane option.
(Emphasis added.) I don't believe I'm being knee-jerk politically correct or over-sensitive about this. By making such a statement in a public forum and leaving that remark without further explanation, you've left open the possibility that you were making a racist suggestion -- specifically, saying that the girl's race/skin color made her death somehow more horrific or more tragic. I don't know you personally, and neither do many who will read that statement, so please say something to make such a misinterpretation impossible. Thanks.
Oniya got this already.Other people have been murdered already.
I've said this repeatedly. Byron Williams, Richard Poplawski, Scott Roeder - all brushed under the carpet. The media circus is only occurring because of this time, it wasn't police or abortionists in the firefight. It has no bearing on my own racism or lack thereof.