"I tell people don't kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus -- living fossils -- so we will never forget what these people stood for." (Rush Limbaugh)
"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building." (Ann Coulter)
“I didn’t think I could hate victims faster than the 9/11 victims.” - (Glenn Beck)
"To fight only the al-Qaeda scum is to miss the terrorist network operating within our own borders ... Who are these traitors? Every rotten radical left-winger in this country, that's who." (Michael Savage)
"We are past the time for reasoned discourse" (said several times on The Smallest Minority by various posters and the site owner himself)
It's not legal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. And the theater is currently filled with a lot of pissed off and paranoid wingnuts.
30 comments:
"Notes from the front"
(Markadelphia)
A liberal blog whose name references a warlike confrontation between liberals and conservatives. Such mental images are unproductive and may actually lead to the unbalanced and mentally ill taking such words literally and thus committing violent acts.
Consequences indeed.
Oh, and your reading comprehension problems are showing again. "Reasoned discourse" does not refer to what you are trying to make it out as.
The level of inspiring lethal hostility, a completely uncivilized goal to dispute resolution, falls on the conservatives. Increasingly so all the time.
Now this current shooter was a nut case, period. However, do we need to expose nuts in our society - of which there are PLENTY - to notions of solving differences of opinion with murder? I prefer to not offer that as a "public option".
Clearly the conservatives think it is fine to plant that seed. My last sentence does not mean I believe conservatives are responsible for this shooter's actions, but they certainly do not help in discouraging this behavior.
What ever happened to "personal responsibility"?
It's not legal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
Really? Would you mind citing the law that forbids it? It is amazing how badly this legal concept gets mangled by people, and this is yet another round of pretzel making.
As a constitutional lawyer, I would refer you to the dozens of free speech cases out of which Mark's statement is accurate although a little out context. You can't shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater falsely. Of course you can if there is actually a fire.
I seriously doubt that any real political movement was more important in this case than the fact that the guys was nuts. He seems to have been keen on some imaginary shit (new currency), so I sorta doubt that he was all that tuned in to Beck, Rush, Coulter or Savage. And quite unlikely to have ever wandered into TSM.
People who do this kind of stuff are, fortunately, few and far between - and they are pretty detached from the reality that the rest of us share. They are not just like you or me and suddenly take a step off the edge - they're out past the fringe and don't particularly relate to the rest of us at all.
lee, that's the point that M doesn't get.
It isn't that it is illegal, it is that the speaker is not shielded by the guarantee of free speech. He will be held accountable for what results from his words.
What M wishes to do here is project the very specific requirements for criminal facilitation speech (also unprotected) onto the quoted journalists (and anyone who supported the Tea Party efforts). Which is a rather large stretch (and he likely would think better of it if he considered that at some point it would be enforced by his worst enemies).
These quotes all strike me as being taken out of context.
Sources?
Among other things, what he has done is accuse Kevin Baker of being an accomplice in a multiple murder.
I wonder what jeff c. found over at TSM that he considers an "attack", in light of the fact that Mark calling Kevin an accomplice in a murder earns.... no response at all from him.
Where did they come from?
Once again Marxy is content with throwing around bald assertions as fact, and is unwilling to back those up. So I guess someone else has to check them out.
I've started researching these "quotes" Marxy is using. Here's what I've found so far:
> "I'll tell you who should be tortured and killed at Guantanamo -- every filthy Democrat in the U.S. Congress." (Sean Hannity)
Every site I found listing this quote gave two sources: none at all, or the book "The Quotable Douchbag". Fortunately, Amazon.com allows searching inside that book. Their source? Just like the rest: None at all.
At this point, there's only one page I found which does better than this. Here's what they have to say:
Such a vicious statement would certainly be enough to scare away stations, and rightly so. Here’s the thing, though: there’s no evidence Hannity said it.
Warchol’s source is a not-quite-professional blog called Political Quotes, which claims the quote comes from the June 15, 2005 broadcast of “Hannity & Colmes,” but provides no audio, video, or links to any transcript. All of my attempts to nail down the quotes’ origins thus far have led to the same place. Not even the obsessive-compulsive smear merchants at Media Matters have any record of the quote.
http://bit.ly/hjxWW4
In short, it's a made up quote!
I started researching these "quotes," but as usual Blogger is eating my homework.
Dammit Mark, you have the power to do something about it. And you claim to accept all comments, so do it!
Here's how: http://bit.ly/eyZOol
Trying to get him to dance like a monkey ST? :)
I left you a note in the "Front Loading" post regarding the comments section.
The quote is source from Hannity and Colmes (June 15, 2005)
I traced those "quotes" Mark. The first of the results are in your spam filter. Go get it.
I just saw that note in the other comments.
I'll try posting it again.
I've started researching these "quotes" Marxy is using. Here's what I've found so far:
> "I'll tell you who should be tortured and killed at Guantanamo -- every filthy Democrat in the U.S. Congress." (Sean Hannity)
Every site I found listing this quote gave two sources: none at all, or the book "The Quotable Douchbag". Fortunately, Amazon.com allows searching inside that book. Their source? Just like the rest: None at all.
At this point, there's only one page I found which does better than this. Here's what they have to say:
Such a vicious statement would certainly be enough to scare away stations, and rightly so. Here’s the thing, though: there’s no evidence Hannity said it.
Warchol’s source is a not-quite-professional blog called Political Quotes, which claims the quote comes from the June 15, 2005 broadcast of “Hannity & Colmes,” but provides no audio, video, or links to any transcript. All of my attempts to nail down the quotes’ origins thus far have led to the same place. Not even the obsessive-compulsive smear merchants at Media Matters have any record of the quote.
http://bit.ly/hjxWW4
In short, it's a made up quote!
Nope. Gone again.
I've started researching these "quotes" Marxy is using. Here's what I've found so far:
> "I'll tell you who should be tortured and killed at Guantanamo -- every filthy Democrat in the U.S. Congress." (Sean Hannity)
Every site I found listing this quote gave two sources: none at all, or the book "The Quotable D****bag". Fortunately, Amazon.com allows searching inside that book. Their source? Just like the rest: None at all.
At this point, there's only one page I found which does better than this. Here's what they have to say:
Such a vicious statement would certainly be enough to scare away stations, and rightly so. Here’s the thing, though: there’s no evidence Hannity said it.
Warchol’s source is a not-quite-professional blog called Political Quotes, which claims the quote comes from the June 15, 2005 broadcast of “Hannity & Colmes,” but provides no audio, video, or links to any transcript. All of my attempts to nail down the quotes’ origins thus far have led to the same place. Not even the obsessive-compulsive smear merchants at Media Matters have any record of the quote.
http://bit.ly/hjxWW4
In short, it's a made up quote!
Well, I got it from here.
http://www.quotesstar.com/quotes/i/ill-tell-you-who-should-211619.html
We could find out on our own if we requested a transcript of the show which you can do here.
http://fn.emediamillworks.com/fox/
Be my guest if you'd like to order it. Funny thing is, I've heard him say worse.
Perhaps in light of this horrific act, Markadelphia should give some thought to renaming his blog something such as "Where lines are drawn", which is what I consider a "front" to be. Still, drawing a line is common in speak everywhere from a marriage to a friendship, to a work place dispute. It does not bring to mind military use first 9though it IS used by the military as well. With the overly sensitive to the idea that the "Front" is indeed a term used by military, perhaps it is indeed time for a re-think Mark.
Nothing wrong with drawing a line, taking a stand, being vocal. That is one of the things that makes the USA great. Using military terms for differing political views, may be not the best idea, regardless of the side you favor. Guard duck is, I feel making more out of Mark's tag line than is completely legit, BUT, what is the correct cautioning for one side, well, it should be the correct cautioning for EVERY side.
Can we all agree to do away with terms of disagreement that include violence? Meaning; cross hairs for congressional seats, stating "front lines" as where we draw our lines of discourse, etc.
The reason why he calls this blog Notes From The Front was he started it as an email discussion group right after September 11. I get that you are being a facetious dick but that's simply where the name came from...that we are all on the front lines now against extremism. After last weekend, it's more true now than ever.
Guard duck is, I feel making more out of Mark's tag line than is completely legit
Of course I am, in order to point out by example how ridiculous the countervailing argument is.
we are all on the front lines now against extremism. After last weekend, it's more true now than ever.
Which taken in the context of what has been posted around here the last several days specifically, and the last couple years generally can easily lead one to believe that 'we' means liberals and 'extremism' refers to the right. Which means, obviously, that the 'front lines' exist, around here at least, between the left and right.
In other words, if you were to believe that everyone on the right is an extremist, then a mea culpa that you are 'only' against extremism doesn't carry a lot of credibility on the 'I don't practice inflammatory rhetoric' meter.
Now that Mark retrieved that comment, I can continue posting…
> Be my guest if you'd like to order it. Funny thing is, I've heard him say worse.
I've already paid for an article, as you'll see below. You made the claim, you can pay for this one.
> "I tell people don't kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus -- living fossils -- so we will never forget what these people stood for." (Rush Limbaugh)
Once again, most sites had absolutely zero attribution for this "quote". A few, however, referred to a Denver Post article published on Dec 29, 1995. Fortunately, The Denver Post has their archives available online back to 1993. So I searched for, found, and paid for the article.
It wasn't an interview. It wasn't a news report. Nor a transcript. It was a left-wing "humor" article consisting of a bunch of unsourced (again!) quotes which were apparently made up. The title was "The year of talking dangerously: Next time, folks, consider silence", written by Bill Tammeus, described at the bottom as "Humorist Bill Tammeus is a columnist for The Kansas City Star".
Once again, it's apparently a made up quote!
Ann Coulter's quote is apparently genuine, though I could not find the original source. Her schtick is heavily sarcastic satire, which is part of the reason I don't like her. I tried to read her book "Treason", and even though she made many clear statements which were well supported by references, she mixed in so much acidic snark that I just couldn't stand to finish the book.
Her general point in this case was about how partisan the Times is and how often they undermine national security. She likes to say things in a way to make leftists like you go out of your minds. It works because you keep biting and making yourselves look stupid in the process. But I don't like her because she's so toxic. She seems to be pushing for civil war as hard as M is.
> “I didn’t think I could hate victims faster than the 9/11 victims.” - (Glenn Beck)
This one was easy because Media Matters has the full context.
http://bit.ly/g8dC4k
It was definitely ripped out of context. He was talking about people with a victim mentality nearly causing a riot when they were in the process of being given $2,000 of free money! How can you not be pissed off at someone acting like a brute, unthinking animal?
As for the "9/11 victims" part, I'll let Glenn explain it in his own words:
And I really didn't -- of the 3,000 victims' families, I don't hate all of them. Probably about 10 of them. And when I see a 9-11 victim family on television, or whatever, I'm just like, "Oh shut up!" I'm so sick of them because they're always complaining. And we did our best for them. And, again, it's only about 10.
In other words, he's pissed off at people who were given unimaginable levels of compassion and physical support, yet they're being greedy and continuously holding out their hands for more.
So this is a quote ripped out of context which has a very different meaning once you examine the context.
So far, that's a complete fail on 3 of the 4, with the 4th being both arguable and rejected by many conservatives, including me.
Shall I go on?
And there goes another one about the Glenn Beck quote.
Have you tried posting it without the funky URL you put in? I know that when I see URLs like that here at work they get spammed.
Bit.ly is a service that lets you shorten URLs. There are also others such as TinyURL and so forth. They're just a service, not spammers, though spammers probably do abuse their service to some extent even though their terms of service prohibit spamming.
I used to always use full, live links that you could just click on. But when Blogger starting eating stuff, using simplified non-live Bit.ly links seemed to make comments less likely to get eaten.
> We could find out on our own if we requested a transcript of the show which you can do here.
http://fn.emediamillworks.com/fox/
Did you check that link? It says nothing new has been added since 2003, so the claimed quote can't be checked.
Isn't conveeeeenient how most of these "quotes" can't be verified?
Post a Comment