Stitch on 11/1/2011 at 19:14
Also: this isn't just a debate about the merits of the new Star Trek movie, a shooting just went down in (more or less) my girlfriend's hometown. I see no reason to hold back on those who are spreading shit.
It is debatable whether or not RBJ should have treated CCCToad with more civility than he did, but the point he made is unimpeachable.
Bluegrime on 11/1/2011 at 19:54
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
Never mind the fact that nobody here gives a shit about what some dumb fuck he listens to on the radio says, nor the fact that that is a fringe opinion not worth giving two shits over, nor is it being actively advanced here.
So yeah, he's a fucktard and that's a strawman, pretty clear, eh?
No it really isn't.
Even though it isn't being spouted here there are plenty of people who find Sarah Palin responsible for this. Just because an opinion isn't being pushed here, in this rather small community of posters dosen't mean it dosen't exist* and dosen't have room for discussion. Calling someone out for using something they saw in life to further a thread, especially one that had just started to go off topic (partially to blame here), is pretty reasonable behavior. Infact I can back up his sentiment on people thinking Palin's responsible by virture of having discussed these events with people around the water cooler. Nothing CCC said or did in this thread was untrue or even offensive and running him out should be reserved for when he's actually in the wrong.
Hell
Dethtoll said you made a mis-step there, and frankly I take him as the reigning authority on CCCToad hate.
*Also here's some other people who agree with the opinion Triple C mentioned, Jane Fonda aside. This is just a casual google search and I'm not going to link to the dozens of "PALIN KILLED EM" blogs out there for the sake of brevity.
Howard Stern - (
http://www.examiner.com/howard-stern-in-national/howard-stern-blames-sarah-palin-crosshairs-map-they-should-lock-her-up)
A report on the blog-o-sphere catching on fire with rage at Palin - (
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/01/08/sarah-palin-blamed-by-bloggers-for-shooting-of-gabrielle-gifford/)
Greg Guftifeld of the Huffington Post - (
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-gutfeld/sarah-palins-murderous-we_b_126539.html)
"Sarah Palin uses media to incite murder", The Examnier - (
http://www.examiner.com/political-issues-in-modesto/sarah-palin-uses-media-to-solicit-murder)
Rug Burn Junky on 11/1/2011 at 20:11
You really aren't following along, since none of them say "it it weren't for sarah palin..." either.
Especially cute is the article from september of 2008.
Bluegrime on 11/1/2011 at 20:19
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
You really aren't following along, since none of them say "it it weren't for sarah palin..." either.
Especially cute is the article from september of 2008.
Oh I have been owned. I shall die in shame.
Rug Burn Junky on 11/1/2011 at 20:45
Do as you please, so long as you recognize that you were wrong, and that my point stands unmolested.
Stitch on 11/1/2011 at 20:47
Quote Posted by Queue
My God, is she okay?
She and her Tucson friends are (more or less) fine.
My point in bringing this up was not to throw down the personal story gauntlet and squelch discussion--something I abhor--but to point out that for some of us this isn't just an interesting current event that invites discussion. America has a genuine problem of escalating violent rhetoric from prominent leaders on the right, and all that the left (and some members of the right) are currently arguing is that this is contributing to a toxic environment that
may enable the kind of violent act that just occurred. To push angles in this story that simply aren't true--as CCCToad was--simply clutters up the landscape and makes it more difficult for us to work toward a solution.
Kolya on 11/1/2011 at 21:08
Your point, RBJ, was to apply legal logic to something CCC said in an internet discussion. The superlawyer you are, you couldn't rest before calling someone a stupid fuck, because you know sine qua non, and he doesn't. That's first semester shit. I know as much just from sleeping with a law student. I also know that good lawyers are able to deal with normal fuzzy speech that we all use everyday without acting like dickheads about it.
And you Stitch, are justifying his aggressive antics because "America has a genuine problem of escalating violent rhetoric". No, makes perfect sense.
Queue on 11/1/2011 at 21:09
Yeah, I deleted that after figuring I was being too much of an asshole. Sorry about that, Stitch. Glad to hear they're okay.
You know, my family came from the Flint area, and I saw first hand how the old neighborhoods feel into decay over the years. My grandparents house was in one of those quite little areas right outside of downtown that, at one time, was full of retirees from the shops. Now, you do not want to be caught there at night, or the daytime, andthe old house was one of the crackhouses that burnt down in the recent rash of fires.
In the 70s, my mother was robbed at gunpoint while working on the eastside at a butchers. The robber locked her and the manager in the meat locker, leaving them to potentially freeze to death. While working on the northside in the late 80s, I was robbed at gunpoint coming out of a store where I had just fixed their cash register.
That's two gun crimes in one family!
Rug Burn Junky on 11/1/2011 at 21:17
Quote Posted by Kolya
Your point, RBJ, was to apply legal logic to something CCC said in an internet discussion.
No, it plainly wasn't. The distinction between "but for" and "contributing to" exists in the real world, you don't need to have any legal training to understand that
But that doesn't matter to you. Because you only want to assume the worst and be a hyperaggressive asshole to me, all while loudly proclaiming how awful I am. At least you could do us all a favor and admit that to yourself.
Kolya on 11/1/2011 at 21:23
A "contribution" in normal speech can be essential or not. That quality isn't defined in the word.
