Free for All: 12/17/12

What’s on your mind?

About these ads

51 Responses to “Free for All: 12/17/12”

  1. That sound you hear is the tide of history turning. The militant, barbaric, libertarian wing of the Republican Party is finished. We said no.

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/scarborough-questions-his-libertarian-approach-after-newtown-ideologies-of-my-past-career-no-longer-relevant/

  2. People who are using this incident not to find solutions (if there are any) but to score political points against their opponents are not being very helpful. Not helpful at all.

    If you want to use this to bash your opponents, fine, it’s a free country.

    But don’t be surprised if you don’t persuade the “other side” but instead stiffen their resolve against change. Because they may be thinking that you’re not interested in stopping or mitigating these horrors but simply interested in beating your opponents.

    Not good. Not helpful.

    But hey, it’s your call.

  3. There is no “persuading the other side”. You just have to wait for enough people like Scarborough to accept reality on their own, then get some legislation through that can cut down on the carnage in this country. Then you look at those lunatics clutching their damn war weapons to their chests and say, “Sorry, buddy. Civilized society won.”

  4. The other side isn’t a monolith. There are people of all persuasions and viewpoints.

    You get quite upset – rightly so for the most part – when some folks here paint with a broad brush and talk about “liberals.” The “liberals” do this and “the liberals” do that. And you reply, “Not all liberals believe that.”

    Then you turn around – as you did above – and do what you lecture others not to do.

    This event may be a sea change in how we view this issue. The issue of guns, of mental health, of violent imagery in our culture. I think all three to varying degrees contribute to this madness.

    But I’m not going to call makers of violent movies a bunch of names. How is that going to persuade them? I will try to respectfully convince them that perhaps – perhaps – the violent media that some people are immersed may play a role in contributing to this. I don’t know. I’d like to talk to them about it, though.

    But I do know that calling them names isn’t going to help us find answers.

    But that’s me.

  5. I didn’t call Hollywood names, nor did I broadbrush an entire group. My problem is with the crazy libertarians who’ve attempted to take over the GOP, and have brought the NRA with them to oppose anyone who dares take away one of their precious bullets.

    But what I think doesn’t matter; I don’t have to persuade anyone of anything. Demographics took over in the election, and now events are taking over in the debate about what is a reasonable level of legal firepower in this country. All I have to do now is sit and watch, content in the knowledge I’m on the right side of history, and have been since the day I recognized my conservative POV simply didn’t work.

    Anyway, my first post was cable news related, and I better stop and let it speak for itself. Buh bye.

  6. Like I said, you view this as all politics. My side versus their side.

    Go ahead. But include me out.

    This may be a sea change in how we view this issue. I’d like to see if we can have a sea change in how we discuss it too. No more of this “my side good” and “their side bad”.

    That ain’t going to work anymore.

  7. I prefer Nick Gillespie of Reason to Scarborough of MSNBC:

    http://www.reason.com/archives/2012/12/15/4-archetypally-awful-reactions-to-sandy

    (I hope this link works.)

  8. Joe has been predicting the end of whatever since he showed up here. It’s as true now as it ever was. And all that is wrong is the result of conservatism. Same as it ever was. It’s tired and small.

  9. As the saying goes, if all you have is a hammer then all of the world looks like a nail.

    If you see everything through politics, left vs. right, my tribe versus their tribe, then you’re going to respond to events similarly.

    That is you must beat your opponent. The issue doesn’t matter – my side is right, their side is wrong and we must beat them.

    Not persuade, not convince, not talk to – just hector and smear and attack and win. To be sure, folks on the right do it too. It’s a bipartisan method.

    Twenty childen slaughtered. That should have, I would think, changed people’s approach on matters. But I guess not.

  10. It’s liberals who concerned themselves with the rights of crazy people to the point that it’s damn near impossible to get one committed. But conservatism doesn’t work. All of the media, mostly liberal, cannot refrain from glorifying people who do these things, but let’s blame the NRA and conservatism. Same sh\t, different day.

  11. @donsurber
    Under gun control murders rose in DC. After Heller, 50-year lows. The blood from the earlier slaughter is on the hands of the Brady bunch

  12. ^No, no, no…the blood is on the hands of the people who commit these acts. Even the ones like Loughner who are insane. It’s still them that pulled the trigger.

    Let’s not forget who is doing this. The vast, vast majority of us wouldn’t think of doing this much less do it.

    The few people who do are the ones – and the ones alone – who have the blood on themselves.

  13. No, ya think? I believe the point is that “misguided” liberals (if you choose to give them that much credit) thought that taking guns from law-abiding citizens would save lives. In the end, it cost lives, like so much else that they advocate.

  14. May I recommend an insightful article:

    http://thebluereview.org/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother/

    Not actually written by Adam Lanza’s mother but someone who is dealing with the same kind of issues.

  15. Quit lying about my position. All I’m advocating is reducing firepower and closing the gun show/internet loophole. Nobody’s coming to take your precious guns.

  16. “No, ya think? I believe the point is that “misguided” liberals ”

    Okay, but why the need for “the blood is on their hands”?

    What does that mean? It sure means to me what it says.

    We can make these points less provocatively. Especially now.

    Like I say, if both sides want to bash each other, go for it; if you want to persuade, to change their minds, try using less ugly language.

  17. A note to Hannity, hate speech happens to liberals to.

    “Several users of the microblogging service published offensive tweets that condemned Obama’s speech for interrupting a game between the San Francisco 49ers and the New England Patriots Sunday night. ”
    http://mashable.com/2012/12/17/sunday-night-football-newtown/

  18. It means exactly what you think it means, and I stand by it. If idiots on the Left are going to mindlessly blame the NRA, it is also valid to mention what happens when they get what they want. I’m sick and tired of their moral superiority and their simpleminded solutions.

  19. Today Gov. Nikki Haley appointed Tim Scott to Sen. DeMint’s Senate seat. He will be the only African-American currently in the Senate. I would think this is a fairly important story. FOX covered Haley’s news conference; CNN and MSNBC did not.

  20. Business Insider‏@businessinsider
    REPORTS: NBC Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel Is Missing In Syria http://read.bi/T4dqsk

  21. Having said all that, it’s nice to have Erich back, along with anyone else who’s been gone too long.

  22. carolmr, Luke Russert did. In the inimitable style we’ve come to expect from MSNBC:

    With Scott going to the Senate and Allen West losing, the 113th Congress will see no African-American Republicans in the House.

  23. Ha, Savefarris! Of course Luke would say that. What he should have said is that the only African-American in the Senate is a Republican, but this is MSNBC, of course.

  24. @Joe

    Quit lying about your position?

    Your position is all over the map, and only gets explained, or given the “That’s not what I really meant,” when your confronted by the things you’ve actually been saying!

    You ramble on about non-facts, get annoyed when someone asks contradicts you with the truth… and positively freak out when someone asks you for evidence! You don’t want to discuss, you want to scream at everyone, and then get mad when people don’t immediately bow to your will.

    You are unbelievable.

  25. “It means exactly what you think it means, and I stand by it”

    Okay, but this isn’t just liberal vs conservative (and frankly both sides can bring up a long list of grievances done by the other).

    Really, this horror is different. It’s just inconceivable. Pure evil.

    I want to beat pure evil more than I want to beat my political opponents. Whoever they are.

    Thanks for the welcome but I promised myself and the wife not to get into too deep. This stuff can swallow you up and you lose sight of what’s important.

  26. “This stuff can swallow you up and you lose sight of what’s important.”

    Like dachshunds running and jumping and hopping in the snow with their ears flapping like mad.

    Now THAT is sweet.

    Life is sweet but short for certain.

  27. On second thought…

  28. My position has been exactly the same since I joined in the discussion, you dimwit. Ban semi-autos with huge clips, and close the gun show/internet loophole. Anybody who thinks I’m proposing a complete ban on guns – which seems to include almost every conservative here – is too busy putting their own concepts of “liberal agenda” on me to bother reading what I’ve actually written. You don’t listen because the only opinion that matters to you is your self-righteous conservative “superior” one. Since you can’t follow a simple conversation, stop injecting yourself into it.

  29. And what is my opinion, Joe?

    Tell me… what have I said that you disagree with? Since apparently, you’re an expert.

  30. Russert also RTd this, to be fair.
    @LukeRussert
    RT: @HotlineJosh My column on Tim Scott #SCSEN app’t: Tea Party, not establishment, fueling #GOP diversity http://bit.ly/UMCthU

  31. Blue, wtf are you talking about? I answered your accusation that I’m “all over the map”, which was BS from someone who didn’t bother to follow the conversation. That’s all you’re getting.

  32. It really bothers me that the media keeps mentioning 26 victims. Why is Nancy Lanza left out? She was the first victim.

  33. Maybe they’re blaming her for the entire tragedy?

  34. They might not see her as a victim.

  35. The media is in a bit of a quandery with the number because of the memorial service. Everything yesterday was about the 26 who died at the school. Then you have the sticky situation with the first victim’s massive firepower collection being the delivery system for the following horror. If I were a network exec, I would be careful to separate her from the other victims, too.

  36. CNN’s Erin Burnett (among others at CNN) are doing a very good job of speaking to people who knew Nancy Lanza well. They all said the same thing: she was a responsible person who would never leave her guns unlocked; she enjoyed target practice as a hobby; they didn’t know if she ever took her sons to target practice; she usually went to target practice with her friend, a retired police officer; she was a very generous person; she told her friends that Adam had Asperger’s and that it seemed as if nothing she did helped him; she also told her friends that she was moving next year, perhaps to Washington state, so that she could get Adam into a college. All her friends said everything she did, she did for Adam. Are Nancy’s friends being objective? I don’t know. It’s one thing for the public to wrongly blame her for these murders. What gives the media the right to judge her and exclude her from the list of victims?

  37. Today’s episode of Morning Joe was resounding.

  38. Nancy Lanza’s ex sister-in-law says she was a Doomsday Prepper, and took her kids target shooting. A friend of Ms. Lanza says she told him a few days before her death that she was worried that she was “losing control of my son”. A report today says that the killer had developed a habit of burning himself with a lighter, and that he had a problem feeling physical and emotional pain.

    If that picture is correct, there was a psychopath in a home preparing to head for the hills with an arsenal for when “the bad guys come”. Until we get this sorted out, I’m quite comfortable with the murder-suicide involving that family being separated from the murders at the school. It’s the right thing to do for the families of the children and faculty.

  39. Joe, I’ve heard many contradictory things about Mrs. Lanza. I still don’t understand what gives the media the right to decide who is a victim and who isn’t.

  40. It’s just speculation. There could be other reasons for why Mrs. Lanza is not included such as their focus is on the school. Does Bill Hemmer still do the BYA segment? That would be a good question.

  41. Piers Morgan is having a heated interview as he yells at Philip Van Cleave who is a gun rights supporter.
    It makes you wonder why gun rights supporters would agree to appear on his show.

  42. -I still don’t understand what gives the media the right to decide…-

    Well, the first amendment.

  43. Lawrence O’Donnell laid out a timeline typical of how this is being reported: What history we know about mother and son; what happened to the mother; and what happened at the school.

    It’s fair to separate the two crime scenes for just that reason: They’re separate crime scenes. One is between family members in which one member used the other’s weapon against them..not an uncommon crime in this country. The other is a completely unfathomable atrocity at the hands of a complete stranger. They’re not the same story.

  44. You’re right about that smirk, Andy. Alex Wagner looks ridicuous working this story with that look on her face. Every few seconds you can see her “remembering”, then it comes right back.

  45. I view the mother as being a victim, too, but the local and national heartache is over the 26. I don’t think the media is doing anything wrong by covering it from that perspective.

    That highly emotional events like this can become the impetus for necessary change is a good thing. The bad part arises when those emotions are allowed to be the primary force for designing the resulting legislative product because that’s why we so often have laws enacted with unintended consequences. The emotions and subsequent legislation after 9/11/01 might be an example of this.

    Banning large clips for semi-autos might seem like it’s doing something, but it really isn’t. Specifically regarding this massacre, doesn’t look like the clip size mattered. But the weapon design… and I mean it’s appearance, not firepower… in the hands of an obsessive, anger-crazed mind might have had something to do with it.

  46. Appearance. Hm..that’s an interesting thought. What guy wouldn’t pick up that gun and feel a sense of power and danger? You can’t regulate appearance, but I’ll bet you could get a spooked gun industry to mutually agree to tone their designs down.

  47. joeremi Says:
    December 17, 2012 at 1:01 pm

    You don’t listen because the only opinion that matters to you is your self-righteous conservative “superior” one.

    joeremi Says:
    December 17, 2012 at 3:18 pm

    Blue, wtf are you talking about? I answered your accusation that I’m “all over the map”, which was BS from someone who didn’t bother to follow the conversation. That’s all you’re getting.

    Like I said, when confronted you get upset, run away, and then come back only to blame everyone else for your own stupidity.

    You apparently know what my opinion is, which is why you said that at 1:01. But you don’t… and when confronted, you run away and try to blame me for your not knowing.

    Are you really this confused, or are you just this dishonest?

  48. You need to work on that reading comprehension. I said that you don’t know my opinion – which has been spelled out numerous times since Friday – because yours is the only one that matters to you. Being that it’s now Tuesday morning, and this conversation has thoroughly played itself out, I recommend you go find something more productive to do.

  49. For that to make sense, Joe… you’d have to know what MY opinion was in the first place, and where it differed from yours.

  50. Nope. The issue is that you claimed I changed my opinions about this topic. Your opinions have nothing to do with your confusion about mine. Bottom line: I held the same opinions since Friday, and you have not followed them. Not my problem..done here. Babble to yourself if you must.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 217 other followers

%d bloggers like this: