Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: DC Shooting....No Thread or Talk, eh?

  1. #1
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,724
    Post Thanks / Like

    DC Shooting....No Thread or Talk, eh?

    Given the recent events, and the apparant political nature of this shooting, suprised no one has mentioend it yet.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/16...est=latestnews

  2. #2
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,884
    Post Thanks / Like
    I hadn't read about it Fish, to be honest, until now... I heard something briefly mentioned on the radio this morning but I was on the phone and heard no one was killed and the shooter was tackled or something before he was able to get into the building...

    Reading that story though, that security guard is awesome... I know a lot of stuff gets said about those guys not being real LEO's and what not but that's truly heroic stuff... I'm glad his surgery went well and hope he has a full and speedy recovery...

    As to the politics of it all, he seemed adamant to voice his intentions and it seems to lead more toward theatrics to me than truly diabolical... That doesn't change the fact that there's obviously lunacy involved but it does hold a stark contrast to the recent dark events in Colorado...

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,414
    Post Thanks / Like
    George Stefanapolis reported on it. Apparently the shooter Floyd Lee Corkins has a name that corresponds with a Tea Partier out of VA. They are looking in to the connection. Apparently there is a Lee Callahan that posted something on a local Arlington Tea Party message board. ABC news is looking in to whether that was Floyd Lee Corkins posting under a nome de plume.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Not much to say. It's obviously ideological, obviously deplorable, and deserves condemnation from every corner.

  5. #5
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Not much to say.
    Really?

    I would think, given past conversations here, that there would quite a bit to be said regarding an act of (possible) Political Violence.

  6. #6
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,259
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Really?

    I would think, given past conversations here, that there would quite a bit to be said regarding an act of (possible) Political Violence.
    Imagine if the same exact thing happened at a liberal lobbying agency, Planned Parenthood perhaps. It would be given top billing and round the clock coverage on every outlet.

    You're right, people have been strangely silent.

    Has Obama said anything about it?

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    18,700
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    Imagine if the same exact thing happened at a liberal lobbying agency, Planned Parenthood perhaps. It would be given top billing and round the clock coverage on every outlet.

    You're right, people have been strangely silent.

    Has Obama said anything about it?
    I lol'd.

    Nothing to be gained.

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    reading the article it gives the impression that since this guy was a "Lefty" who went after a coservative group it is now okay to put the onus on the political opponenents speech:


    Perkins gave his first interview to Fox News' "America Live." He made it clear that he blamed the suspect for the shooting, but said he was "given a license" by groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center, which labeled the Family Research Council as a hate group.

    "I think it's time for people to realize what the Southern Poverty Law Center is doing with their reckless labeling of organizations that they disagree with," he said.
    I thought the right found this kind of scapegoating and politicizing deplorable? I didn't watch the video, so I do not know if the Fox anchor interviewing this guy questioned or challeneged that statement.



    Do people agree? is this a case where we should police political discourse? That what The Southern Poverty Law center said enabled this guy?

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,943
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    Imagine if the same exact thing happened at a liberal lobbying agency, Planned Parenthood perhaps.
    :searches JI for threads started about Planned Parenthood that was bombed in April:





    I got nothing

  10. #10
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    reading the article it gives the impression that since this guy was a "Lefty" who went after a coservative group it is now okay to put the onus on the political opponenents speech:

    I thought the right found this kind of scapegoating and politicizing deplorable? I didn't watch the video, so I do not know if the Fox anchor interviewing this guy questioned or challeneged that statement.

    Do people agree? is this a case where we should police political discourse? That what The Southern Poverty Law center said enabled this guy?
    Everyone claims to decry scapegoating, till they get a chance to do it. They always decry it most when it's their side being goat'ed.

    With that said, the guard (nor the FRC) speak for "the right" as a whole. But his criticism on the SPLC is, IMO, legitimate. How they were appinted the ultimate arbiter of what is or isn't a "hate group" is a mystery to me. I would never say I'd curb their right to speech, but I would say it's dangerous to simply take their word that any group they label is what they label them.

    As for PK's Planned Parenthood bombing, , was your "start thread" button broke that day? I don't recall the story in teh emdia either, including the liberal media, but it's been a rather flashy-violent year thus far to say the least.

  11. #11
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Everyone claims to decry scapegoating, till they get a chance to do it. They always decry it most when it's their side being goat'ed.
    agreed

    With that said, the guard (nor the FRC) speak for "the right" as a whole.
    I agree, but a quick google search can see a few different "righties" sharing the sentiment, it will be interesting to see how this story cycles through the right-leaning news, and if they lend legitimacy to his claim, which rightfully gets slammed when left-leaning news does the same thing.


    But his criticism on the SPLC is, IMO, legitimate. How they were appinted the ultimate arbiter of what is or isn't a "hate group" is a mystery to me. I would never say I'd curb their right to speech, but I would say it's dangerous to simply take their word that any group they label is what they label them.

    I think to criticize what they said is fair, to implicate them as "giving a license" to the shooter is not. Sort of how I felt during the Giffords shooting.


    What I thought then pretty much still stands now: I think it is irresponsible for anyone, right or left, to imply that their political opponents are dangerous enemies. I think it is wrong to use terms that appear to incite violence directly. I think when speech crosses into that territory it can be dicey. I don't think anything any group says though should be considered an open invitation to violence nor should the onus be on some groups simply for making incendiary remarks, unless it is actual indoctrination.

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,943
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    As for PK's Planned Parenthood bombing, , was your "start thread" button broke that day? I don't recall the story in teh emdia either, including the liberal media, but it's been a rather flashy-violent year thus far to say the least.
    I'm not much of a thread starter.


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

  13. #13
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    I agree, but a quick google search can see a few different "righties" sharing the sentiment, it will be interesting to see how this story cycles through the right-leaning news, and if they lend legitimacy to his claim, which rightfully gets slammed when left-leaning news does the same thing.
    Only "righty" reaction I've heard is Levin, who stated the GLBTLTw/mayoonrye Community was not, stress not, responsible for the man's actions.

    I have, though, read much online comment from liberals, for what little online comment is worth, that the FRC deserve to die, and that the shooter was a "cracker whitey shooting hateful crackers" and the like.

    The point, of course, is that if one wishes to find a viewpoint being expressed, they can. Just look online for 5 minutes.

    I think to criticize what they said is fair, to implicate them as "giving a license" to the shooter is not. Sort of how I felt during the Giffords shooting.
    The first step in legitimization of violence is dehumanization. Declaring an organization a "hate group" could certainly fall inot that category, as we (generally) think of those in "hate groups" as lesser than the "rest of us normals".

    What I thought then pretty much still stands now: I think it is irresponsible for anyone, right or left, to imply that their political opponents are dangerous enemies.
    In fairness, such a viewpoint could also be conveniently used as a shield for those who are, in fact, factually dangerous.

    I think it is wrong to use terms that appear to incite violence directly.
    For example? Specificly?

  14. #14
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    I'm not much of a thread starter.


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...
    Well, there you go. Now you know why there was no thread.

    The guy who heard it at the time (you) didn't start a thread.

  15. #15
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Only "righty" reaction I've heard is Levin, who stated the GLBTLTw/mayoonrye Community was not, stress not, responsible for the man's actions.

    I have, though, read much online comment from liberals, for what little online comment is worth, that the FRC deserve to die, and that the shooter was a "cracker whitey shooting hateful crackers" and the like.

    The point, of course, is that if one wishes to find a viewpoint being expressed, they can. Just look online for 5 minutes.
    generally speaking for me, I qualify a comment from a "righty" or "lefty" by someone of some level of official status, a spokesperson for an organization, a politician, a pundit, tv/radio personality. So when I say I heard some from the right or some from the left I am not talking about random comments.


    The first step in legitimization of violence is dehumanization. Declaring an organization a "hate group" could certainly fall inot that category, as we (generally) think of those in "hate groups" as lesser than the "rest of us normals".
    I can probably agree with that, although I still think it would be a little thin to claim that those who did declare some group a "hate group" responsible for violent actions taken on by individuals except probably in rare cases.

    In fairness, such a viewpoint could also be conveniently used as a shield for those who are, in fact, factually dangerous.
    well, it matters what level you are talking about. I don't think someone with different yet sane political ideas is exactly "dangerous". I don't think I would make that claim about most politicians, despite how wrong I think their policies may be.

    I guess, like everything else in the real world, we would have to consider these things case-by-case.

    For example? Specificly?
    I don't really have any specifics, I was speaking generally. I would think speech that advocate dealing with someone, or a group of people in a violent manner. Speech that encourages others to do so.

  16. #16
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    generally speaking for me, I qualify a comment from a "righty" or "lefty" by someone of some level of official status, a spokesperson for an organization, a politician, a pundit, tv/radio personality.
    Aye.

    And in 10 min., I can find at the least a TV/Radio Personality who would echo almost any online comment.

    Have I mentioned the things I hear on "Make It Plain" on Sirius Left?

    I can probably agree with that, although I still think it would be a little thin to claim that those who did declare some group a "hate group" responsible for violent actions taken on by individuals except probably in rare cases.
    Agreed, very thin. But some days crazy only needs thin.

    well, it matters what level you are talking about. I don't think someone with different yet sane political ideas is exactly "dangerous".
    Agreee to disagree. Policy positions can, in my view, be exceptionally dangerous, in real meaningful ways. More, in fact, than a single lone gunman kook.

    I guess, like everything else in the real world, we would have to consider these things case-by-case.
    Of course, and even then, we won't agree.

    I don't really have any specifics, I was speaking generally. I would think speech that advocate dealing with someone, or a group of people in a violent manner. Speech that encourages others to do so.
    Well, without specifics, it's impossible to really debate. We'd need some sort of example upon which to judge.

    The devil is in the details, not generalities.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,903
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    George Stefanapolis reported on it. Apparently the shooter Floyd Lee Corkins has a name that corresponds with a Tea Partier out of VA. They are looking in to the connection. Apparently there is a Lee Callahan that posted something on a local Arlington Tea Party message board. ABC news is looking in to whether that was Floyd Lee Corkins posting under a nome de plume.
    You forgot to mention the Sarah Palin six degrees of seperation.

  18. #18
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    6,926
    Post Thanks / Like
    Just another example of liberal hatred. Intolerance of other people's intolerance. Chick-Fil-A is a brave organization protecting the institution of marriage and society as we know it.

  19. #19
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    6,926
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    Imagine if the same exact thing happened at a liberal lobbying agency, Planned Parenthood perhaps. It would be given top billing and round the clock coverage on every outlet.

    You're right, people have been strangely silent.

    Has Obama said anything about it?
    Top Billing? The Super Bowl halftime show would be a memorial concert for the victims of the killer of the pro-abortion murderers.

    Baraka Hussein Osama is saying nothing because he condones this crap.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us