We need to spread this video around to expose this GOP woman and her supporters advocating assassination because she and the people who applaud her don't like how the American people voted in a fair and free election last November.
These people are incensed because the free elections held last November do not reflect their political philosophy. They didn't win at the ballot box, and now they advocate armed insurrection to change the results and negate the will of the American people.
If I remember correctly, this type of incitement is called sedition, is it not?
sedition - an illegal action inciting resistance to lawful authority and tending to cause the disruption or overthrow of the government
Steven D. over at Booman Tribune asks the question:
"You tell me: is this a direct threat of assassination made against Democratic elected officials (including, but not limited to, President Obama), or not?"
*********************************
This woman is advocating armed insurrection and rebellion because she and her followers don't agree with the policies of a freely elected Congress and President of the United States.
This is the way third-world countries change their governments, not countries that follow the rule of law.
She is a meance and threat to American Democracy. I hope the FBI pays this hysterical nutcase a visit.
And soon.
UPDATE:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/17/754653/-Buchanan-resigns-from-MSNBC,-will-run-Crabill-campaign
64 comments:
Wondering what she said; not going to crash my browser (which happens a lot) fishing through the youtube video. Is this the person who said "buy guns", or did she say something far worse?
"We have the chance to fight this battle at the ballot box before we have to resort to the bullet box… But that's the beauty of our Second Amendment right.
I am glad for all of us who enjoy the use of firearms for hunting, but make no mistake, that was not the intent of the Founding Fathers. Our Second Amendment right was to guard against tyranny."
Looks pretty bad.
Is anyone going to be able to spin this positively in comments here?
I see Pat Buchanan is on the campaign. This is the man who recently commented that Sotomayor did not belong on the Supreme Court since she did not resemble the founding fathers (white males).
This is the leftist strategy, you know. Let's review:
(1) Crucify Joe the Plumber for having the audacity to speak out against income distribution.
(2) Comb through Sarah Palin's garbage to see what kind of personal habits she has.
(3) Brand Frank Ricci as litigeous and make fun of the fact that he suffers a debilitation.
(4) Castigate a Hispanic fireman for the nerve to join in the lawsuit.
(5) Accuse O'Reilly of causing the death of an abortionist simply because he criticized the doctor on a television and radio program.
(6) Threaten Glenn Beck's family because he has a libertarian point of view.
(7) Work to impose restrictions on free speech in order to silence dissenting opinions.
(8) Castigate Mark Sanford, but ignore Charlie Rangel's and Barney Frank's corruption.
-------
But do not question the activities of the Obama Gang, nor any of their disreputable behaviors.
I don't know how we got to the point in this country when almost everyone accepts a double standard in personal behavior. How do we ignore the unsavory associations of a federal judge/supreme court nominee because she's Hispanic, apply a completely different standard to everyone else, and feel good about ourselves as a society?
I will say this: it is ruinous to our society and dangerous to the future of our country.
Wise up, America.
I hate lists.
Zekester wrote:
"(1) Crucify Joe the Plumber for having the audacity to speak out against income distribution."
Shaw replied:
No we “crucify” Joe the Plumber” for being neither a plumber nor a guy named Joe. He was a phony. And not too bright. The GOP is welcome to use this fraud to promote its "values."
Zekester:
"(2) Comb through Sarah Palin's garbage to see what kind of personal habits she has."
Shaw:
Don’t know who did this—but I can say, personally, I have no interest in her garbage—spoken or discarded.
Zekester:
"(3) Brand Frank Ricci as litigeous and make fun of the fact that he suffers a debilitation."
Shaw:
My parents taught me never to make fun of anyone with a debilitation. So I won’t.
Zekester:
"(4) Castigate a Hispanic fireman for the nerve to join in the lawsuit."
Shaw:
I am against forced castigation—for both animals and humans.
Zekester:
"(5) Accuse O'Reilly of causing the death of an abortionist simply because he criticized the doctor on a television and radio program."
Shaw:
He may not have caused the death, but anyone who is forced to listen to O’Reilly would surely wish for it.
Zekester:
"(6) Threaten Glenn Beck's family because he has a libertarian point of view."
Shaw:
Poor angry Glenn Beck and his hysterical rantings against liberals and Democrats. But why attribute to malice that which can be more easily be explained as stupidity.
Zekester:
"(7) Work to impose restrictions on free speech in order to silence dissenting opinions."
Shaw:
Not I. I will defend your right to say as many stupid things as you wish to. Carry on.
Zekester:
"(8) Castigate Mark Sanford, but ignore Charlie Rangel's and Barney Frank's corruption."
Shaw:
As for corruption, all politicians are equal opportunity offenders. But some are more offensive than others. Paging John Ensign!
Shaw: (snort!)
As for what the speaker said, she's pretty much paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson. You know, the former president who didn't say that dissent is the highest form of patriotism?
Actually, I think that the list that Zekester posted was pretty cool.
However although I do agree with it, I think it's important to have a solid list of resources.
But I think they were true. Except, I don't know what "Castigate" means...lol
The radical right is brimming over with kooks like this blabbermouth.
But, some of their minions are best-selling authors like Annthrax Coulter who suggested New York Times staff members should be "executed" over the paper's reports on the National Security Agency's warrantless domestic eavesdropping program, and Coulter also said she wanted to poison Justice Stevens.
Remarkably, this anorexic shrew is off her leash and presumably off her meds to continue making threats. I fully expect the next time she has a book to plagiarize -- I mean, sell, she will add President Obama to her hit list.
Anne Coulter is thin. Wow. I know I could come up with more substantive criticisms of her than that.
You also brought up the "radical right", which, from evidence, is not involved in any of this.
The overwhelming pride I have for America when I hear our National Anthem is tempered by the fact that shitheads like Yung Dre call my First Lady an "asswipe."
You are beneath contempt. You are no doubt one of the hoards of blind, right wing fools that whined when we questioned the intelligence and sanity of Bush and his Administration. You jokers said it "emboldened our enemies." You are hypocrites and assholes of the highest order.
I apologise for the name calling Shaw. If you must delete, you must delete.
Yung Dre,
I will not tolerate your personal attacks on any of the people who comment here.
I detect a seditious attitude in "commoncents". If CommonCents is an American, the term "your first lady" should be replaced with "our first lady". Like it or not, her spouse was duly elected President, and she is the first lady of Americans.
Whining sore-losers were bad in the year 2000 when Gore lost, and they are bad now not accepting that McCain lost.
This is the way the Constitution works. If you don't like it, work to get opposition candidates who will block Obama's agenda elected next year, and another President elected in 3 years.
(As an aside, on a matter I was corrected on. Calling Bush a monkey was a lame insult from those who lacked substantive criticisms of our previous President. However, equating African-Americans with monkeys has a deep history as a racial epithet.
Ever consider actually criticizing Obama on his policies instead of on how he and his wife supposedly look?)
commoncents: "And you bet I'm American! As much or more than you are."
I am an American under the law of the land, the Constitution of the United States. The same Constitution under which Barack H. Obama is OUR President (and by association, his wife is OUR First Lady).
That someone does not accept the law of the land does not make anyone less of an American. Just a poorly informed one who is contemptuous of the Constitution. I've seen it before in the aftermath of Gore losing the 2000 election. And I fear that every time there is an election from now on, there will be a certain contingent who claim that the President is not a real President just because they did not vote for him/her.
I knew Crabill reminded me of someone. The elegant turn of phrase. Her rhetorical gifts. The power of her vision.
Thomas Jefferson.
Yeah. That's it.
Well, Arthurstone, most of what we know of Jefferson comes from his writing, not his informal speeches. While he was indeed good with words and ideas, for all we know he was wretched at public address.
Sadly all the video from Jefferson's term has been erased so we don't really know how he did as a public speaker. Just as Crabill's rhetorical flight into complete lunacy beautifully conveys the vacuity of the uncluttered mind we are able to discern the quality of Jefferson's mind by what does remain. We are left solely with his accomplishments as evidence of the power of his vision. Briefly (and incompletely) they range from his architectural and landscape designs at Monticello and the University of Virgina to his contributions to the Declaration of Independence, archeology, horticulture, higher education and diplomacy and well beyond.
It isn't much but it's what we have to go on.
Mind you, John Adams thought that Jefferson and his friends were pretty much guilty of sedition. He did prosecute some of Jefferson's supporters, but not Jefferson himself.
So by opposing a woman who supports Jefferson's sentiments, you're pretty much lining up with the high Tories of the time. Tsk, tsk. I never took you for a Royalist, Shaw.
Gordon,
Jefferson's "sentiments" also included the keeping of slaves, including, but not limited to carnal relations with them.
Another one of his "sentiments" was his great admiration for the "Reign of Terror" during the French Revolution, as well as all things French.
Our Founding Fathers were men of immense talent and intellect, but like all great men; they were also capable of great blunders (See John Adams and his Alien and Sedition Act) and embarrassing actions (see Jefferson's flight from the British invasion of Virginia in 1780 to save his backside.)
To the poster who names itself Michael Wolke:
The only illustration of anything in your attack on the Obamas is that you have an inordinate hatred of our president and his wife.
You really ought to get help for your malady.
I've deleted your comment because it had nothing to do with the subject of the post.
I suggest you start your own blog so you can enjoy reading your own rants as often as you wish and not have to bother to come here to admire them.
Thank you.
Interesting that even 200 years ago politics was as much about charging the other side with heinous accusations. Back then it was seditionists. Then came anarchists. Then commies and now socialists.
The more we grow up the more we act the same. If nothing else, it gives creationists a good argument. After all these years, for the most part, we're still disingenuous jerks.
I don't "CALL" myself Michael Wolke, that happens to be my name.
If you are going to delete my comment and others that you don't like, why don't you restrict your blog to people that only agree with you?
If the only voices that you want heard are yours and those that you agree with then you should just state that one your blogs homepage and be done with it.
You stated :”I've deleted your comment because it had nothing to do with the subject of the post.
I suggest you start your own blog so you can enjoy reading your own rants as often as you wish and not have to bother to come here to admire them.”
Well my response to you is:
1. My comment did reflect your subject, but it evidently did not suit you.
2. I don’t have nor do I wish to have my own blog, however I do not see why that should interfere with my responding to other persons blogs. I do see others here that do not have blogs and theirs are not deleted as long as you agree with them.
My comment was not vulgar as some of the others I’ve seen here, it did not include name calling as some of the other I see here and are not deleted such as you pet commenter Christopher, who seems to have a “name” for everyone that he disagrees with be it a politician or a poster. And yet you deleted mine!
As a blog author, you should allow all comments no matter if you agree/disagree, the importance of all this is to have debate and not just a yes Ma'am situation. But it’s your blog and as they say, cest la vive!
I’m still feeling so proud to be black. Words cannot expressed how proud I am. Our President is intelligent, has a sensible plan, a cool temperament, and yes… He’s an African American. What more is there to be proud of at this moment?
I’m black and I’m proud; but knowing that Barack is the world’s choice is a part of understanding that he’s much bigger than his blackness. Barack’s blackness is huge; but his humanity is even bigger.
I feel that he is really breaking down more walls for all of us so we can have the courage and strength to make a better way in this country. I am so thankful to be living in America at this time.
But keep in mind, Obama's victory does not mean that America is no longer racist. I keep reading blogs of black people saying that “now the barriers are shattered” and they are living on Fantasy Island because NOOOOO the class barriers are not shattered and a black boy from the projects has the same probability of being gunned down by the age of 18 as he did BEFORE November 4th… black women have the same probability of dying from HIV as they did BEFORE November 4th.
Barack Obama is where he is today because he COMMITTED HIMSELF TO EXCELLENCE. He was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he earned his socioeconomic status and proved that a commitment to excellence, along with audacious hope and belief in oneself can lead anyone to accomplish great things. We can’t get caught up in the mental barriers of where we’re from or what odds are stacked against us. With that mindset, we’ll continue to be stuck.
We have to have the courage and the conviction to reach for the stars. So perhaps kids in the projects won’t be able to get into Harvard, but they may be inspired to work harder in their local public school and go to an state college, or the city college. It’s about an improved mindset and pride in ourselves that will encourage us to pursue our highest goals. Everything in the middle is just hurdles. They CAN be overcome. Barack getting elected is a wonderful and a gigantic start.
♥
What the hell do you have against the GOP that you are so damn arrogant about?
Does everyone have to agree with you and your politics in order for them to get a spot on your hideous blog?
Do you think that only liberals pay taxes?
And after the way the liberal congress rammed their bills through the House with little debate, without legislators even reading it… and while quarantining the GOP from any meaningful input whatsoever, any foolhardy individuals who still believe Obama’s threadbare “bipartisanship” spiel ought to have their head examined."
Funny, but the money doesn't go into a hole, it goes into politicians favored cronies! pockets!! Are those to politicians that you are so damn prod off? It must be, because they are the ones that are in office!
For havens sake, why is everyone so afraid to speak out? Someone please help me to understand how this travesty can happen in a place like America?
Michael Wolke,
I have a number of commenters who do not agree with my political POV.
Gordon, dmarks, James, The Griper, Pamela Hart, Jennifer, just to name a few.
This is what you ended your comment with and it had nothing to do with the Crabill post. It has everything to do with your personal dislike of the Obamas and your slur that they have done nothing in service to their country.
Perhaps if Michele or Barack Obama had ever done anything in service of their country, they would feel the same way.
This is slander and a lie.
But not Michelle. It took Obamasiah and the cult of Obamania to really make her proud to be an American. I would wonder just how proud of American she would have been had Barack lost the election?
This illustrates the kind of people the Obama’s are and that America will regret the day that this blow hard became president.
What has that nonsense have to do with the post?
Nothing.
You offer no evidence for your allegations that Mr. and Mrs. Obama have done nothing in service to their country.
Were you as critical of Dick "Five Deferments" Cheney? Just wondering.
Again, I suggest you get your own blog so you can bash the president of the United States to your heart's content.
By slandering the First Lady and the President, you can show America and her enemies what a true patriot you really are.
"What the hell do you have against the GOP that you are so damn arrogant about?
Does everyone have to agree with you and your politics in order for them to get a spot on your hideous blog?" --prashanthan
See my answer to Michael Wolke.
And thank you for stopping by and commenting on my "hideous blog."
Looks like you have you panties in a wad today Shaw.
These liberals just have no sense of humor when it comes to their moral leaders…
Good comment britgyal25
Yes, Our Chimp in Chief has found an answer to quiet down the rowdy and hard to control blogosphere. He is creating his own version of the Fairness Doctrine for the internet. His useful idiots in the television media apparently don’t think that he will would ever eventually turn on them. If they don’t see the hand writing on the wall now they are far dumber than Keith Olbermann. People need to start writing their senators and congressmen now!
funny thing is none of the libs complained about the lies that the likes of Huffpoop and the media matters(truth doesn’t) sites when attacking GWB, Governor Palin, and their children.
Eeka: Maybe hold that off until 2012? Madison Avenue-style campaign fluff looks out of place at this time.
"...hope and belief in oneself can lead anyone to accomplish great things..."
britgyal25 gave it an incredible amount of thought and typed:
Looks like you have you panties in a wad today Shaw.
bebo swooned:
Good comment britgyal25
Oy.
You're really pitted against some heavyweights Shaw.
Arthur: Seems like we get 5 or 6 new ones a week. And these "new" ones type exactly like the previous batch that came and went.
Shaw said: "By slandering the First Lady and the President, you can show America and her enemies what a true patriot you really are."
Huh?... Thank you Shaw. We're all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of view.
The fact that no one understands what you doesn't mean anything, but think you anyway.
dmarks said...
Arthur: Seems like we get 5 or 6 new ones a week. And these "new" ones type exactly like the previous batch that came and went.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winnah!
Yes. These same trolls (or troll) keep coming back here under various names and criticize me for having a liberal point of view on a liberal blog.
After they complain to me for running my blog the way I see fit, they launch into ad hominem attacks on the president and his wife. But I understand this phenomenon because as a wise man once said exceptional people often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds.
Wordsmith wrote:
"Huh?... Thank you Shaw. We're all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of view.
The fact that no one understands what you doesn't mean anything, but think you anyway."
I know those are typos, but man, that's pretty funny.
Think you, too. ;-)
Shaw Kenawe said...
Wordsmith wrote:
I know those are typos, but man, that's pretty funny.
Think you, too. ;-)
Yoer wlkcom :)
I was meaning to ask britgal just how many Myspace accounts she had.
Wow Shaw...I haven't been here in a while but you really know how to draw them don't you.
What so many of them don't understand is that unless you present an educated argument no one will take you seriously and hence no one will listen to you.
As much as I don't like Obama, he was elected and although we have the ability and responsibility to protest and dislike what he is doing, he is still the president. I don't see where over throwing the government will accomplish anything, especially with violence. Congress is just as bad. Anymore politicians only look out for themselves and I don't see this administration any different.
He was elected and the only way to change that is to find someone that can beat him. That isn't looking very promising at least at the moment. Until we find somebody, we have to honor what the public voted on and chill with the whole insurrection thing.
Jennifer,
Thanks for coming by and showing the trolls that someone who opposes the president can actually express herself without using invective and abusive language.
You're always welcome here.
I forgot to mention this, Jennifer.
I've been by your blog several times, but for some reason I haven't been able to leave comments.
I'm using IE, I had, in the past, used Foxfire, then switched back.
Maybe that's the reason?
Actually everybody has had trouble commenting on my posts. I took off word verification and now it works fine. I'm not sure what the issue was because other people have the word verification on and their comments work fine. Thanks for visiting though! :-)
I think Jennifer's comment on proper opposition to the President was very well stated.
Jennifer said "As much as I don't like Obama"
Humm, I wonder why?
Shaw: you and Truth get the funniest trolls. These super angry people come over here and throw a tantrum, but then their blogs (if they have one) soon fizzle out...
Anon: It should not be surprising that someone is opposed to Obama. After all, a little less than half turned out at the polls in November to oppose him.
Even now, 57% do not approve of Obama's actions on the deficit. And overall more Americans disapprove of his job performance than approve.
Right wing God Ronald Reagan also suffered a drtop in poll numbers during his first term. Remember his "stay the course" commercials?
Truth: Yes. Good point. I remember "stay the course". And along came the first mid-term election after Reagan's election, and the other party gained 27 seats in Congress.
A similar shift next year might very well cost Nancy Pelosi her current job title. Especially if the carbon tax kicks in (and kicks the economy to hell) or the worst aspects of the current health care plan stay in.
The popularity of both Obama and his agenda are rather soft right now, with polls showing that 2008 primary loser Mitt Romney would be even with Obama in the 2012 election, and "can't even serve out one term of high office" quitter Sarah Palin also making a surprisingly strong showing against him.
Six months into the first Obama term and, imagine, all our problems haven't been solved. What a surprise.
And folks think baby boom liberals have immediate gratification issues.
Mmmm...Arthurstone, I think we would be happier if we believed that he wasn't making the problems much worse rather than merely attempting to solve them.
Shaw, the comments you leave on my page require approval, and I don't know why. Normally once I approve one comment by a visitor all subsequent comments are approved automatically.
It's clearly a conspiracy.
And I'm still waiting for the vodka sauce recipe....
Gordon,
It's because I'm a commie, maxists, America-hating librul, and your comment page is only trying to protect you from reading my anti-American opinions. ;-)
Is it because I've switched back to IE? I had been using Mozilla Firefox as my browser.
I've been busy with all sorts of appointments and family obligations these last few days, and been doing drive-by blogging and commenting.
I'll get you that penne with smoked salmon and vodka sauce recipe in the next few days.
Promise.
I voted for Obama. I knew when I did so that it was time for a change. The GOP way of doing things wasn't working and hadn't worked for a good long while. We were stuck in two wars. The economy had been nearly destroyed and it was definitely time for George to go cut brush and work on 'refilling his coffers'. His work was finished. Sigh.
I also knew full well voting for Obama that many things would get worse before they got better. I knew he would have a hostile minority in congress opposing him who, emboldened by the narrow margin of his election victory, would bleat the 'bipartisan' blues endlessly. I knew he would have 'centrist' Democrats ready, willing and able to do the bidding of their business/health care/defense contributors. I knew that a significant portion of the media would work day and night to perpetuate stories about Obama's 'citizenship', and his 'Marxist' & 'terrorist' leanings.
These were givens. A reasonable person would not be surprised by any of this. The magnitude of the problems we face is immense. Likewise the obstructionist, petty partisan politics of the opposition is equally immense. Combined with the tiny attention span of the American voter and the endless urge for an immediate fix displayed by all facets of our society we have an entire nation full of people agitated, pissed off and eager to have things better yesterday.
Yet another reason I am happy not to own a television.
Or read polls.
Cheers!
Here's a Pole I like to read:
Children of Our Era
by Wislawa Szymborska
Translated by Joanna Trzeciak
We are children of our era;
our era is political.
All affairs, day and night,
yours, ours, theirs,
are political affairs.
Like it or not,
your genes have a political past,
your skin a political cast,
your eyes a political aspect.
What you say has a resonance;
what you are silent about is telling.
Either way, it's political.
Even when you head for the hills
you're taking political steps
on political ground.
Even apolitical poems are political,
and above us shines the moon,
by now no longer lunar.
To be or not to be, that is the question.
Question? What question? Dear, here's a suggestion:
a political question.
You don't even have to be a human being
to gain political significance.
Crude oil will do,
or concentrated feed, or any raw material.
Or even a conference table whose shape
was disputed for months:
should we negotiate life and death
at a round table or a square one?
Meanwhile people were dying,
animals perishing,
houses burning,
and fields growing wild,
just as in times most remote
and less political.
Excellent.
Here are my two favorites:
Bruno Schulz excerpt from 'The Cinnamon Shops'
A Treatise on Mannequins or, The Other Book of Genesis
‘THE DEMIURGUS’ said my father ‘had no monopoly on creation — creation is the privilege of all souls. Matter is given to endless fecundity, an inexhaustible vital force, and at the same time the beguiling power of temptation that entices us to be creators. Deep within matter, barely perceptible smiles are shaped; faces freeze agog — congealing attempts at figurations. All matter ripples with endless possibilities, which pass through it in sickly shudders. Awaiting the invigorating breath of the soul, it overflows endlessly into itself; it tempts us with its thousand sweet encirclements and the pliability it dreams up out of itself in its blind reveries.
Count Jan Potocki from 'The Manuscript Found at Saragossa'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manuscript_Found_in_Saragossa
Shaw: I've only seen the "librul" word from those on the Left. A lot of these instances have been here :)
You recognize, people each time manufacture comments when anything is predicted to take place in 2012, like “fairly that is if the world is hush here.” You do understand that the Mayans prognosticate the creation will finish on Dec. 21 (or 23rd)? So in all good chance if anything is booming to turn up in 2012 there is only the slimmest chance that the everybody hand down take ended already it happens.
[url=http://2012earth.net/harmonic_convergence_and_2012.html
]doomsday 2012
[/url] - some truth about 2012
Post a Comment