There are many more dickbags out there praising this murderer.
A Planned Parenthood clinic has been shot up.
- Thread starter greasytshirt
- Start date
There are many more dickbags out there praising this murderer.
Of course there are. Everybody has their own agenda. Why do you think some people so desperately need the shooter to be a devout Christian. Others see this as a chance to go after the guns. People with an agenda will milk this for all it's worth for their agenda.
I guess it's the people that want others to die because they disagree are the ones that I most want to bring attention to.
Yes, good example of an agenda.
Except, there's no evidence whatsoever that Robert Dear shot anybody because of <insert political or religious reason> much less because all those he shot disagreed with him. There's not even any evidence that he engaged any of his victims in conversation to even know what positions they had on any subject at all.
Also, except, if you hadn't characterized Dear as a "pro-lifer killing people" right from the get-go, politicized it on the heels of the White Christian Homegrown Terrorists extravaganza, then the whole, "Hey, I'm just sayin'" walkback might seem sincere.
There are just a snotload of liberal, progressive Democrats who have, recently, engaged in mass shootings. The Tucson shooter was a leftist, Socialist, Marxist who shot a Democrat. He was initially portrayed in the media as a right wing conservative. Whoops. The "Dark Knight" theater shooter was a progressive Democrat, was a staff worker on the Obama presidential campaign, and wrote extensively of his hatred of Christians, yet he was portrayed in the media initially as a right wingnut. The Virginia Tech shooter was a Democrat who regularly wrote hate mail to President Bush. The media couldn't report fast enough that he was a Christian. The Navy Yard shooter was a liberal, Obama supporter, a staff worker on the Obama campaign, and, oh, yeah, he was black. But he was also a Christian, so that's what the media banged on.
What do all of these nutjobs have in common, and also have in common with Robert Dear? It's not politics or religion. It's that they're all batcrap crazy. And trying to pound them into a political or religious mold for the purposes of furthering one's own agenda is reee...taaar...deddd.
The shooting in Colorado Springs is shocking, abhorrent, and disgusting. But that's really all it is. There's no need to take that shooting, or any other, and try and use it to broad brush associate an entire group of people who had nothing to do with it.
Depends on the type of shooter. Liberals tend to be the mass spree killers, or more accurately, the mass spree killers tend to be liberals. Sure, you have the occasional White Christian Gun-loving Right Wingnut that gives the media and liberals at large the ol' leg tingle, as in all things there are exceptions to the rule. But generally speaking, when you drill right down to it, the mass killers tend to be liberals in their thinking and views.
The serial killers on the other hand, the Ted Bundy's, BTK Killers, the Ted Kaczynskis (Unabomber) are virtually all conservatives. Same exception to the rule applies here where not all of them are conservative, but for the most part, yeah, they are. Unlike liberals, there is no conservative favoritism here - the serial killers' conservative buddies will give them electric chair in a heartbeat and not feel sorry for them at all. One of the more glaring exceptions to the conservative serial killer rule is, of course, John Wayne Gacy (Pogo the Clown), who was a liberal activist Democrat who campaigned for Jimmy Carter (shown here in the rather famous picture with First Lady Rosalynn Carter).
Liberals and conservatives think very differently. They process information in very different ways. Not just in differing views or values, but underlying, fundamental difference in personality and temperament, that can often be spotted in childhood.
For example, liberals are more open-minded. Conservatives tend to be more structured and persistent in their judgments whereas liberals are more open to new experiences and idea, and will tolerate ambiguity and conflict better. Conservatives say things like "I'm the decider, we're doing it my way." Liberals say things like "What do you think? Let's try it this way."
Both liberals and conservatives think they're right, but it's the conservatives who believe it with authoritarianism and/or the punitive religious arrogance that often causes a condition called "libertarian sociopathy," something marked by scornful, narcissistic, lack of compassion or empathy. Basically, conservatives are right, they know they're right, and if you don't also think so then you're a dumber than dirt idiot and they don't give a rat's ass about you because you're not worthy.
There are some other interesting differences, as well.
Conservatives tend to be more generous and give more. Author Brooks showed in his book, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism, for example, how conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood than liberals, and also donate more of their time and money to charities. Liberals tend to spend an inordinate amount of their time trying to dictate to conservatives how the conservatives are to use their time and money.
Conservatives tend to be a little bit jumpy. The calm, cool and collected one tend to be liberals, while those who react strongly to sudden noises and threatening images tend to be conservatives. According to a study in the journal Science, calm individuals are more likely to support foreign aid, liberal immigration policies, pacifism, and gun control. The nervous, skittish, jumpy peoples are more likely to support conservative policies such as military spending, school prayer, the death penalty, and the individual right to carry guns. So it's the jumpy, nervous people who most strongly defend the right to keep and bear arms. Now you know why.
Liberals are slobs. It's true. Liberals tend to be much messier than conservatives. Liberals' rooms have more clutter and more loud, mismatched color. They tend to have more different types of travel documents, maps of other countries, and flags from around the world. Conservatives are neater, and their rooms are cleaner and less cluttered better organized, more brightly lit, and more conventional.
Liberals are, in general, a rather unhappy bunch. Married or single, rich or poor, church-going or not, right wingers report greater life satisfaction than left wingers. Why? Conservatives tend to rationalize social and economic inequalities - they think the world is the way is it and that's the way it is, it's always been that way and it always will be, therefore the world is fair. And this makes them happy. Liberals, on the other hand, are not able to look at inequality in a positive light at all, so they're perpetually frustrated and unhappy.
Liberals are smarter than conservatives, too. According to a study in the Social Psychology Quarterly, liberals are more intelligent than conservatives (there are many, many studies that confirm this, BTW). Other studies show that liberals have higher IQs. And, more intelligent children are likely to grow up to be liberals. Smarter people are also more likely to be atheists or agnostic (since we know the very nature of religion makes you stupid, as religion already has all the answers). More proof: Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Rick Santorum, and the Great Pyramid Grain Silos of Giza.
So, unless these spree killers or serial killers make it clearly known that they are killing for the religion or their political ideology, and that it was the primary motivation for their actions, it's probably best not to try and paint them with your own agenda's brush, and just accept them for what they are, crazy, instead of what you need them to be.
The serial killers on the other hand, the Ted Bundy's, BTK Killers, the Ted Kaczynskis (Unabomber) are virtually all conservatives. Same exception to the rule applies here where not all of them are conservative, but for the most part, yeah, they are. Unlike liberals, there is no conservative favoritism here - the serial killers' conservative buddies will give them electric chair in a heartbeat and not feel sorry for them at all. One of the more glaring exceptions to the conservative serial killer rule is, of course, John Wayne Gacy (Pogo the Clown), who was a liberal activist Democrat who campaigned for Jimmy Carter (shown here in the rather famous picture with First Lady Rosalynn Carter).
Liberals and conservatives think very differently. They process information in very different ways. Not just in differing views or values, but underlying, fundamental difference in personality and temperament, that can often be spotted in childhood.
For example, liberals are more open-minded. Conservatives tend to be more structured and persistent in their judgments whereas liberals are more open to new experiences and idea, and will tolerate ambiguity and conflict better. Conservatives say things like "I'm the decider, we're doing it my way." Liberals say things like "What do you think? Let's try it this way."
Both liberals and conservatives think they're right, but it's the conservatives who believe it with authoritarianism and/or the punitive religious arrogance that often causes a condition called "libertarian sociopathy," something marked by scornful, narcissistic, lack of compassion or empathy. Basically, conservatives are right, they know they're right, and if you don't also think so then you're a dumber than dirt idiot and they don't give a rat's ass about you because you're not worthy.
There are some other interesting differences, as well.
Conservatives tend to be more generous and give more. Author Brooks showed in his book, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism, for example, how conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood than liberals, and also donate more of their time and money to charities. Liberals tend to spend an inordinate amount of their time trying to dictate to conservatives how the conservatives are to use their time and money.
Conservatives tend to be a little bit jumpy. The calm, cool and collected one tend to be liberals, while those who react strongly to sudden noises and threatening images tend to be conservatives. According to a study in the journal Science, calm individuals are more likely to support foreign aid, liberal immigration policies, pacifism, and gun control. The nervous, skittish, jumpy peoples are more likely to support conservative policies such as military spending, school prayer, the death penalty, and the individual right to carry guns. So it's the jumpy, nervous people who most strongly defend the right to keep and bear arms. Now you know why.
Liberals are slobs. It's true. Liberals tend to be much messier than conservatives. Liberals' rooms have more clutter and more loud, mismatched color. They tend to have more different types of travel documents, maps of other countries, and flags from around the world. Conservatives are neater, and their rooms are cleaner and less cluttered better organized, more brightly lit, and more conventional.
Liberals are, in general, a rather unhappy bunch. Married or single, rich or poor, church-going or not, right wingers report greater life satisfaction than left wingers. Why? Conservatives tend to rationalize social and economic inequalities - they think the world is the way is it and that's the way it is, it's always been that way and it always will be, therefore the world is fair. And this makes them happy. Liberals, on the other hand, are not able to look at inequality in a positive light at all, so they're perpetually frustrated and unhappy.
Liberals are smarter than conservatives, too. According to a study in the Social Psychology Quarterly, liberals are more intelligent than conservatives (there are many, many studies that confirm this, BTW). Other studies show that liberals have higher IQs. And, more intelligent children are likely to grow up to be liberals. Smarter people are also more likely to be atheists or agnostic (since we know the very nature of religion makes you stupid, as religion already has all the answers). More proof: Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Rick Santorum, and the Great Pyramid Grain Silos of Giza.
So, unless these spree killers or serial killers make it clearly known that they are killing for the religion or their political ideology, and that it was the primary motivation for their actions, it's probably best not to try and paint them with your own agenda's brush, and just accept them for what they are, crazy, instead of what you need them to be.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see what his motivations were.
My main concern is that he wasn't a total nutcase, that he did this consciously, with a clear purpose.
Hopefully you understand the point im trying to make.
My main concern is that he wasn't a total nutcase, that he did this consciously, with a clear purpose.
Hopefully you understand the point im trying to make.
Even the craziest of crazy complete their actions with clarity of conscience and with a clear purpose.
I think I understand the point you're trying to make, but I could be wrong. It appears the point is that he's a White Christian Anti-abortion Conservative Wingnut who shot up an abortion clinic because his anti-liberal and religious values told him to. It's the same point that the media and many others so badly want to make.
The media is really bad about it. Blatant, and irresponsible about it. Whenever there is a mass shooting the first thing they do try and find a conservative connection, and if it's a Christian connection, all the better. If they can't find a clear connection, they'll suggest one to plant the seed, anyway. I'm mean, just look at the news articles (including many right in the headline to grab your attention) so far on this guy, where is very rare to find an article that doesn't mention "no more baby parts," despite the fact that they don't know what it means, and is spite of the fact that the police have been stressing ever since that statement was made that they don't know what it means, either. But they keep repeating it, because it's the seed that causes people to infer the Anti-abortion right Wingnut. They publish the comments of his ex-wife that portray him as a good, Christian man, but invariably fall to publish the comments of those who have known him since the divorce who say the divorce caused him to go off the deep end.
And let's not forget the #3 Google Search term for 2 days immediately following the shooting: Planned Parenthood Shooter Christian
There's a deep-seated (or seeded) need by many liberals for this guy to be Christian, anti-abortion, conservative so they can use that to punish every Christian, anyone who is anti-abortion, and anyone who isn't liberal. They desperately want to say, "I told you so!"
I think I understand the point you're trying to make, but I could be wrong. It appears the point is that he's a White Christian Anti-abortion Conservative Wingnut who shot up an abortion clinic because his anti-liberal and religious values told him to. It's the same point that the media and many others so badly want to make.
The media is really bad about it. Blatant, and irresponsible about it. Whenever there is a mass shooting the first thing they do try and find a conservative connection, and if it's a Christian connection, all the better. If they can't find a clear connection, they'll suggest one to plant the seed, anyway. I'm mean, just look at the news articles (including many right in the headline to grab your attention) so far on this guy, where is very rare to find an article that doesn't mention "no more baby parts," despite the fact that they don't know what it means, and is spite of the fact that the police have been stressing ever since that statement was made that they don't know what it means, either. But they keep repeating it, because it's the seed that causes people to infer the Anti-abortion right Wingnut. They publish the comments of his ex-wife that portray him as a good, Christian man, but invariably fall to publish the comments of those who have known him since the divorce who say the divorce caused him to go off the deep end.
And let's not forget the #3 Google Search term for 2 days immediately following the shooting: Planned Parenthood Shooter Christian
There's a deep-seated (or seeded) need by many liberals for this guy to be Christian, anti-abortion, conservative so they can use that to punish every Christian, anyone who is anti-abortion, and anyone who isn't liberal. They desperately want to say, "I told you so!"
If you're looking for dickbags and their stupid comments, Twitter is definitely the place to go. They span the entire political spectrum and exponentially outnumber those who are intelligent and informed. There are many other places that are far better sources of material with which to make one's point.
There are many more dickbags out there praising this murderer.
On the flip side of this coin there's the UC Merced killings; notice how the media and even the local sheriff go out of their way to put distance between this muslim wacko and his religion in spite of his written manifesto planning his attack - complete with beheadings - and frequent references to Allah. This also is an attack on innocents - with a KNIFE - but has received scant coverage by the media compared to the PPH shootings in CO.
Attacker’s manifesto reveals plan to kill ‘a lot of people’
UC Merced stabber's manifesto includes plans for beheadings
turtle you definitely missed your calling, maybe johne has an opening in h.r. for you...lol, he is wasting you driving your sprinter!
Like actual news sites? This article is particularly telling.
Working at Planned Parenthood: 'Every day, someone threatened to kill me'
I've been at other forums (for dirt bikes, as an example), and if there's ever a stereotype for white male christian land-owning right wing extremists, it's people that ride/race dirtbikes. I guess I'm a little jaded with some people praising this shooter. So if I offended any Christians here on this subject, I apologize.
Unless you secretly agree with the shooter's actions. Then you (or whoever else) can get bent.
The thing that galls me, or one of them, is how vehement the left is demanding we not identify and consider all Muslims as terrorists and demand restrictions on them but as soon as a lunatic does something with a gun they label all guns and owners as bad and demand all sorts of additional laws and restrictions.
I personally have no qualms about identifying the religion of any attacker, including those that adhere to Islam, or of people with no religion.
I also love guns, own several, and don't want the rights of law-abiding citizens abridged when someone uses a gun to do something stupid.
"Every day, someone threatened to kill me". Wonder if she has any empathy for the LEOs that protect their clinics and provide other critical services for the public's well-being. They go to work every day knowing there might be some lunatic that will kill them for doing a job that provides beneficial services for the public.
Why wouldn't she?
LEO's know and accept that going in - it's part of the job description. It should NOT be part of the job for a health care worker, and the fact that it is is why the LEO needs to be there, protecting the clinic that provides essential services for the public's well being.
It just boggles the mind that the level of harassment at Planned Parenthood clinics is acceptable to people. "Protestors' yell at and call women approaching "baby killer!", hold graphic mangled fetus photos up on signs, write down license plate numbers of cars in the parking lot, follow staff home, then send letters to their neighbors advising them of "the monster among you", run live webcam feeds at the clinic entrances to film women entering & leaving - in what civilized society is this acceptable behavior?
Further, why are men silent on the issue? Don't they care about the women in their lives? Don't they want to have families too, when the time is right? [And not before, which is the whole point of PP]
To be fair, "no more baby parts" is a pretty specific statement, given the furor over PP "selling baby parts" that has been going full blast since the antiabortion fanatic Daliedan released his highly misleading [and deliberately deceptive] videos. Also too, the rhetoric on the side of anti abortionists is extremely inflammatory, using words like "barbaric", "butchery", evoking highly repugnant mental images of "innocent babies" in their cause. That is terrorism of the stochastic kind, plain & simple. Neither fact nor reason has got the anti abortion fanatics what they want, but appealing to emotion is working out much better for them, sigh.
We don't know whether he was Christian or conservative, but we do know that he (according to one of his ex wives) was harrassing an abortion clinic in the past, and that he asked a bystander where the Planned Parenthood Clinic was, so that was his destination, without a doubt.
Those who use words to hide the truth are the antiabortionists. A fetus is a medical term, plain & simple truth, but "an innocent baby" is how it's described by those who need to relabel it to appeal to emotion. The same people call an antiabortion place a "Crisis Pregnancy Center", even advertise under 'abortion', refuse to discuss the subject until & unless a woman comes in person, because they can't get them in if they speak the truth. Once they get them inside by deception, they continue to lie, telling them abortion is linked to breast cancer, depression, substance abuse - none of which has a shred of truth. And those protesters, the ones who shout at women entering clinics, call them "Baby killers!", wave graphic photos of fetuses [or sickly sweet ones of weeks old babies] in their faces? They call themselves 'sidewalk counselors'.
We know who speaks the truth, and who needs to lie to persuade people.