Comments Posted By Rick Moran
Displaying 661 To 670 Of 1317 Comments
ASSASSINATING BUSH AND OTHER OCCASIONS FOR HUMOR
Hey, idiot lefties:
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/06/ann-coulter-conservative-lout/
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/02/11/how-can-you-top-over-the-top/
Maybe before you open your ignorant yaps, you check your facts first.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 1.09.2006 @ 07:44
Like Goldstein, I find the premise interesting. But I would rather have seen it as an alt/history than a futurist fantasy.
That said, lefty British filmakers only embarrass themselves when they try to make a movie about American society - laughably shallow and so bad that they could have been made by old Soviet propagandists (workers chained to their machines, etc.) I have no doubt that this guy will fail to come out any better.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 31.08.2006 @ 17:57
I find it fascinating that the last two commenters didn't bother to read the post:
The car rampage yesterday in San Francisco may or may not be a case of Sudden Jihad Syndrome. We just don’t know. While there has been much excellent reporting and some intelligent speculation (did the killer know where the Jewish center was?) there have also been some shocking leaps of illogic and even some examples of good old fashioned American bigotry at work in a few of the posts I’ve seen this morning.
Yep...jumping to conclusions allright.
Why don't both of you guys close your mouths when you breathe and learn how to read. Then you can come back here and play with the grown ups.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 31.08.2006 @ 04:15
Violence committed in the name of a political or religious agenda is terrorism no matter who does it.
And nowhere in the piece do I say that all Muslims or even a majority are terrorists. In fact, I specifically take some on the right to task for making such a ridiculous and bigoted assumption.
Those "misguided beliefs" are shared by jihadists all over the world. They are not simply his own. If he's a lone nut, does that mitigate the fact that his inspiration came from people who would just as soon behead you as give you the time of day?
I just want the language we use to describe the threats we face accurately and forthrightly. Are we threatened by Christian crusaders? Or Islamic extremists?
The cold eyed killers who plot the murder of abortionists are just as much a terrorist as Popal. And we have no problem referring to them as domestic terrorists - and if we do that's a problem also. But it is unlikely that the abortion terrorists will branch off and start killing people in the street (far away from any clinic). Thus, the threat from Islamist terrorism is pervasive while the threat from abortion terrorists is highly localized.
Not a difference in severity of the crime but a difference in the degree of the threat. And if we're going to call domestic terrorists by their proper name - someone wrote yesterday what would Mayor Newsome be saying if it had been 15 gay people run down - then all terrorism should be identified and accepted as a threat.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 30.08.2006 @ 14:59
1. Christians are not seeking a global crusade. That's a real tall straw man ya set up there, fella.
2. Where do I attribute the actions of the lone jihadist to a worldwide conspiracy? Put down the kool aid and walk away slowly.
3. Acts of terrorism are just that. And if you're struggling to connect "jihad" to conspiracy you needn't bother. A jihadist need not join a group or a cell to wage war on the west. And both the NC and Seattle incidents involved, from what we can tell at this point, people who are not suffering from any form of mental illness so drop the lone wacko motif. You also have conflicting stories on this fellows mental state from family members.
Terrorism doesn't have to be inspired by radical Muslim beliefs (remember McVeigh!). But when it is, it is idiocy to deny it.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 30.08.2006 @ 13:42
Ed:
You're something of a ninny, aren't you?
This was not a car "driving into a crowd." This was a guy driving around town looking for people to hit.
Big difference, no?
And I thought it would be helpful to make the point that terrorism is terrorism regardless what the authorities choose to call it. Politically motivated violence such as we found at NC and Seattle may be an inconvenient fact for some. But tying oneself into knots in order to avoid the "T" word is stupid and ultimately, self defeating.
Tar Heel:
I was referring to the people in the pit at the time of the attack. I'm sure you'd agree there were some people there at the time who may have been frightened.
As for the police, I'm sure they're more than competent. But there is something almost surreal about denying the political motivations of the perpetrator or, if not denying them, dismissing them out of hand as if they didn't matter.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 30.08.2006 @ 13:14
That's some pug you got there - a lovely pup I'm sure. But it isn't just attention span. It is the complexity of the modern world that has people throwing up their hands and giving up trying to understand.
That and a cynicism about the point of view of the information overlords who are now being challenged. Not necessarily by blogs (and I agree. If anyone dared call me a journalist I'd whop 'em upside the head). But the information is out there if you are willing to spend a little time looking for it. This is where the net is changing all media - and it's only going to get easier to find things of interest as the technology explodes in the coming years.
Dead tree publications will have to adapt. How, no one knows. But as long as there is money to be made with straight news, I suspect someone will try.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 18:13
Okay...let me get this straight...
Bush, King + Bad
Dems, with enormous advantage = Good
Just checking,...
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 17:14
FAP:
I see part of your point but you neglect to point out that our blue state Rep would more than likely have a campaign tailored to appeal to his interests whereas the WY voter would be left out in the cold as far as having his concerns addressed in a national campaign.
Currently, both candidates have to appeal to a broad spectrum of interests. I just don't see that happening in a non EC system.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 12:04
If the Dems nominate a southerner, the differences are huge. Whereas if the Reps nominate a small state candidate, they are in trouble (FL and TX are very competitive for Democrats without a Bush at the top of the ticket).
Look beyond the present and concentrate on the efficacy of the system.
The point is not superior influence but fairness. Chris was saying anyone living in Wyoming may as well live on the surface of the moon for all the influence his vote SHOULD have in a presidential election. Whereas no one is saying that in the EC system about anyone in a big state.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 11:34
