I love when progressives get mixed messages

[jmotivator]

Seems to me that whenever one of these tragedies happen, right wingers are always crossing their fingers hoping that it's a Muslim, so they can place blame on liberals, Democrats, immigration, and pretty much anything they can conjure up.

Actually, they are often right that it was Muslims. It's a pretty safe bet any any such shooting.

When it turns out to not be a Muslim, it's "well, he's probably got ties to Muslim fundamentalists anyway".

No, this never actually happens.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Actually, they are often right that it was Muslims.

Actually, that's irrelevant to my point.

No, this never actually happens.

Sure it does... or some other disappointing excuse. Point is that your post was one-sided partisanship. So I pointed out that your side does the same thing.

 

[bubbabgone]

Nowhere did I deflect criticism or suggest you can't inject politics. I'm saying that he should have done it in a way to where he isn't positively giddy about a mass shooting. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried, like usual.

And you were so thoroughly wrong with your reaction right out of the box when you responded to his original post that the conclusion most people would reach was that you were engaged in deflection knowing the multiple murders were going to call attention to the ridiculous approach of the current Administration who can't even bring themselves identify the perpetrators by naming their motivation.
If that was merely your misunderstanding of his intention, fine, I apologize for thinking you were deflecting.

But the poster was chuckling at the Left's reaction to the murders, not the murders, and that protective reaction is what's happening as I showed in the WAPO story.

 

[jmotivator]

Actually, that's irrelevant to my point.

It's perfectly relevant. We assume it is a Muslim when we see these senseless acts of violence because history tells us that that is probably the profile of the attacker. The left keeps hoping it's a Cristian conservative as a matter of faith because that rarely matches the attacker.

Sure it does... or some other disappointing excuse. Point is that your post was one-sided partisanship. So I pointed out that your side does the same thing.

Show me one example where that happened.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

It's perfectly relevant. We assume it is a Muslim when we see these senseless acts of violence because history tells us that that is probably the profile of the attacker. The left keeps hoping it's a Cristian conservative as a matter of faith because that rarely matches the attacker.

No, it's completely irrelevant. Doesn't matter whether it's a Muslim or not. BEFORE the perp gets identified, conservatives are drooling over themselves hoping it's a Muslim. That's the point.

Show me one example where that happened.

Any time that one of these tragedies happens, conservatives do anything they can to distance the shooter from his religion or ideology, even when either his religious fundamentalism or conservative fundamentalism is clearly a motivation. Dig up something that says he once associated with liberals, or something that does ANYTHING to not take responsibility that ideology has something to do with it. And yes, liberals do it too, believing that fundamentalist Islam is irrelevant to these things happening. But the point that you are missing... but are actually helping me to make, is that conservatives are just as guilty of doing the same thing you identified in liberals in the post I initially quoted. Denying that is part of the problem.

 

[jmotivator]

No, it's completely irrelevant. Doesn't matter whether it's a Muslim or not. BEFORE the perp gets identified, conservatives are drooling over themselves hoping it's a Muslim. That's the point.

Sorry for the spoilers. We've seen this tragedy before.

Any time that one of these tragedies happens, conservatives do anything they can to distance the shooter from his religion or ideology, even when either his religious fundamentalism or conservative fundamentalism is clearly a motivation. Dig up something that says he once associated with liberals, or something that does ANYTHING to not take responsibility that ideology has something to do with it. And yes, liberals do it too, believing that fundamentalist Islam is irrelevant to these things happening. But the point that you are missing... but are actually helping me to make, is that conservatives are just as guilty of doing the same thing you identified in liberals in the post I initially quoted. Denying that is part of the problem.

So you don't have an example? Not surprising.

 

[KLATTU]

Liberal get all apopleptic when a Republican Congressman makes a statement like" My thoughts and prayers are with the victims".

"Her'e what the NRA gave them to offer them nothing."

BUT, when Obama offers up a substance- free,nothing, platitude like this, they get all dreamy.

"In the face of hate and violence, we will love one another "

 

[roughdraft274]

If that was merely your misunderstanding of his intention, fine, I apologize for thinking you were deflecting.

The only misunderstanding was yours. I know exactly what he's saying. It's offensive. You started droning about how I'm trying "to deflect criticism by suggesting injecting politics is just so wrong" and I never did that in any way, shape or form. He and anyone else are free to discuss political implications of tragedies and they'll hear nothing from me. But when you express your down right giddiness and excitement over the implications of the tragedy, it's ****ing offensive.

Imagine how offensive it would be to you if someone on these forums wrote a post about how they were celebrating that Bush would be a 1 term president days after the September 11 attacks. Imagine how fast you'd cross the line and join me in saying how ignorant and offensive and disgraceful that person was being. I guarantee you that you wouldn't be spouting bull**** about how we are just criticizing the person in order to deflect.

Understand yet?

 

[X Factor]

The only misunderstanding was yours. I know exactly what he's saying. It's offensive. You started droning about how I'm trying "to deflect criticism by suggesting injecting politics is just so wrong" and I never did that in any way, shape or form. He and anyone else are free to discuss political implications of tragedies and they'll hear nothing from me. But when you express your down right giddiness and excitement over the implications of the tragedy, it's ****ing offensive.

Imagine how offensive it would be to you if someone on these forums wrote a post about how they were celebrating that Bush would be a 1 term president days after the September 11 attacks. Imagine how fast you'd cross the line and join me in saying how ignorant and offensive and disgraceful that person was being. I guarantee you that you wouldn't be spouting bull**** about how we are just criticizing the person in order to deflect.

Understand yet?

Would that be something you'd actually condemn though or are you speaking entirely hypothetically in some sort of fantasy context?

 

[bubbabgone]

The only misunderstanding was yours. I know exactly what he's saying. It's offensive. You started droning about how I'm trying "to deflect criticism by suggesting injecting politics is just so wrong" and I never did that in any way, shape or form. He and anyone else are free to discuss political implications of tragedies and they'll hear nothing from me. But when you express your down right giddiness and excitement over the implications of the tragedy, it's ****ing offensive.

Imagine how offensive it would be to you if someone on these forums wrote a post about how they were celebrating that Bush would be a 1 term president days after the September 11 attacks. Imagine how fast you'd cross the line and join me in saying how ignorant and offensive and disgraceful that person was being. I guarantee you that you wouldn't be spouting bull**** about how we are just criticizing the person in order to deflect.

Understand yet?

And I apologized if you hadn't meant to do that.

But the poster didn't do what you suggested.
Perhaps you're a tad defensive because you sensed he was right and it made you uncomfortable.
The poster made an accurate observation about the Left's knee-jerk reaction to protect Obama.
And Obama & Hillary reacted as predicted and his supporters did as well.

Suppose a Trump supporter wrote a post that said by using Trump's statement about the ethnicity of Curiel the Left was deliberately fomenting ethnic tension.
What would be your reaction?

 

[Hicup]

Well, it's wonderful a situation that results in so many dead bodies can get you so excited and overjoyed that you just must profess your "Love" of the results of such situations and how much "fun" the fallout is.

Oh Gawd.. from you, Zyphlin? I expect better. I'm not doing anything more or less than what the prime-time MSM will be doing this evening.


Tim-

 

[X Factor]

Good for you. We should all be so lucky as to have a faulty hit-or-miss moral compass.

You asked and I answered. Why so pissy?

 

[Moot]

It's perfectly relevant. We assume it is a Muslim when we see these senseless acts of violence because history tells us that that is probably the profile of the attacker. The left keeps hoping it's a Cristian conservative as a matter of faith because that rarely matches the attacker.



Show me one example where that happened.

Was Dylan Roof a Muslim? Was Adam Lanza a Muslim?

 

[Zyphlin]

Oh Gawd.. from you, Zyphlin? I expect better. I'm not doing anything more or less than what the prime-time MSM will be doing this evening.

Tim-

You shouldn't, unless you foolishly think that I change how I post based on whether or not the person is on my "team" or not. My disdain for the immediate leveraging of these kind of things for political ends and thrills is something I've voiced routinely on this forum for quite some time. Forgive me if "I'm just being like the tick-like sensationalist profiteers of tragedy" isn't exactly a great defense in my mind.

 

[Hicup]

I said they'd agree with me if this thread were started under reversed circumstances. If you have anything to suggest I'm wrong, present it. If you have anything to suggest that I'd act differently, then present that. Otherwise you're trailing further and further from the actual thread.

I don't give a flying **** about "cred". Something is either wrong or it's right. If the dumbest, most biased, intellectually dishonest, borderline retarded person on this thread said that 2+2 equals 4, then they are correct regardless of their "cred".

I find it offensive how this thread was started. I have seen numerous threads that were started after mass murders like this where the original poster was not taking joy in the ensuing politics, but rather just discussing the politics of it, and they get rampaged for being so heartless. Yet here is a prime example of someone downright taking glee in the discussions, yet here we are, debating whether I have the "cred" to call him out for it, and for calling out the people that are insensitive enough to defend him.

I've been here long enough not to need any defending, I'm quite capable of defending myself when it is warranted. I take glee in the political implications, specifically how the left is going to get beat down hard for their positions they immediately take when something like this happens. I take glee and sometimes outright joy whenever the left proves by their ideology to be completely incorrect. You want to show disdain, how about announcing the beheading of an American by ISIS, and then 5 minutes later go golfing.. So please shove your outrage where it belongs.

Tim-

 

[KLATTU]

Was Dylan Roof a Muslim? Was Adam Lanza a Muslim?

The left keeps hoping it's a Cristian conservative as a matter of faith because that rarely matches the attacker.



Show me one example where that happened.

Was Dylan Roof a Christian Conservative? Adam Lanza?

Because that's what he asked.

 

[Moot]

The left keeps hoping it's a Cristian conservative as a matter of faith because that rarely matches the attacker.



Show me one example where that happened.

Was Dylan Roof a Christian Conservative? Adam Lanza?

Because that's what he asked.

I think the right were hoping that Roof and Lanza were Muslims because that would fit their false narrative that all Muslims are terrorists.

 

[VanceMack]

And I "love" to see yet another right winger ignoring that he was born in New York and was a natural born citizen...

WOAH...Who has been ignoring that fact? Hell...just like the San Bernardino terrorist attack, the people that have been ignoring the shooter is the Muslim defending left. I have seen the fact that he is a home grown Muslim emphasized NUMEROUS times. Those sick ****s dont have the luxury of being born in a cave, they were born in the US and had lives of opportunity and promise. And they STILL chose radical Islam and killed people.

Ignore it? You owe it to yourself to check it.

 

[Zyphlin]

I think the right were hoping that Roof and Lanza were Muslims because that would fit their false narrative that all Muslims are terrorists.

Standard tactics by the hyper partisans on both sides in these things. There was a time back when the Tea Party was big where Vegas could've made a killing (no pun intended) by opening up wagers as soon as any big event went down as to whether it was "TEA PARTIER" or "MUSLIM". And you could see it play out routinely on this forum, with the hyper partisans from both side salivating at the potential for it to go their way.

 

[WCH]

He's gleeful about the supposed political implications.

I've never said you can't discuss the implications. But to express excitement over it and how much fun he is having over it is just sickening to a moral human being.

The anti-gunners are probably more happy than anyone. Leftists who place a lot of energy in identity politics are a close second.

 

[Hicup]

You shouldn't, unless you foolishly think that I change how I post based on whether or not the person is on my "team" or not. My disdain for the immediate leveraging of these kind of things for political ends and thrills is something I've voiced routinely on this forum for quite some time. Forgive me if "I'm just being like the tick-like sensationalist profiteers of tragedy" isn't exactly a great defense in my mind.

I've never considered you "on my team", nor I assume you, me, however, I do consider you to be a reasonable poster on this forum, someone, although I sometimes disagree, to be thoughtful and thorough. As pointed out by those that did not fall for the bait, my post was an accurate assessment of the political scorecard as it will play out over the next few days, perhaps weeks. It also demonstrates the feigned indignation of the broader active liberal poster on these forums.

Truth, here's some.

1. Progressives were hoping the gays were killed by a white Christian hell bent on making a statement that gays are bad and evil. Truth, it did not happen that way, result, narrative unsubstantiated.
2. Progressives were hoping to use this as even more leverage to justify taking guns away from law-abiding citizens. Won't happen now, nor will it ever, but they keep trying.
3. Obama, Hillary, Sanders, Warren, all the usual suspects are left sounding awkward that the shooter was indeed Muslim, motivated by his faith, and obtained the guns legally. What it does is not bolster their case against guns, but bolsters the rights case for having more of them, and everywhere.
4. Trump will be Trump on this, he will win the war of words, and possibly get a huge bump from it. Trump university will go away for a while, and THAT is exactly what Trump wanted.
5. The left is on the wrong side of the gun debate. Most American's see the hypocrisy of the Washington elites, and how it's ok for themselves their kids to be protected by guns, but the rest of us can go suck on it. THAT is a losing ideology, and MOST American's see it that way.

If Trump plays this correctly, at least politically he stands to gain the most from this tragedy. No, sorry, tragedy is the wrong word. This act of barbarism, and terrorism!

Tim-

 

[roughdraft274]

And I apologized if you hadn't meant to do that.

But the poster didn't do what you suggested.
Perhaps you're a tad defensive because you sensed he was right and it made you uncomfortable.
The poster made an accurate observation about the Left's knee-jerk reaction to protect Obama.
And Obama & Hillary reacted as predicted and his supporters did as well.

Suppose a Trump supporter wrote a post that said by using Trump's statement about the ethnicity of Curiel the Left was deliberately fomenting ethnic tension.
What would be your reaction?

He didn't do what you think I suggested. He did do exactly what I suggested. And the only one bring up Obama here is you. You can't debate the facts so you change topic and pretend I said or meant something other than what I actually said.

 

[roughdraft274]

But the poster was chuckling at the Left's reaction to the murders, not the murders...

Quote where I said otherwise. Give me a direct quote where I said he was chuckling at the murders.

 

[roughdraft274]

You asked and I answered. Why so pissy?

Would you be pissy if I said I wasn't offended by someone throwing a party to celebrate that Bush would be a 1 term president the day after 9/11? You wouldn't think that's in bad taste?

I care about what people actually think, not how vocal they are about their thoughts. And if you aren't offended by that then I have to think less of you. It's just reality.

 

[roughdraft274]

I've been here long enough not to need any defending, I'm quite capable of defending myself when it is warranted. I take glee in the political implications, specifically how the left is going to get beat down hard for their positions they immediately take when something like this happens. I take glee and sometimes outright joy whenever the left proves by their ideology to be completely incorrect. You want to show disdain, how about announcing the beheading of an American by ISIS, and then 5 minutes later go golfing.. So please shove your outrage where it belongs.

Tim-

I typed out a response. But then deleted it. Not worth my time.

Next.