Friday, April 2nd, 2010
- FDA continues its campaign of banning unhealthy consumables because they taste good.
- Fascinating article on our misconceptions about distance and direction. Doesn’t explain my complete absence of any sense of direction, though. Or how every wrong turn I make seems to land me in Anacostia.
- Indiana cops tase, smack misbehaving 10-year-old.
- Will Wilkinson vs. Ryan Avent on the broken window fallacy. If Avent’s bizarre defense of the government coming in and breaking your stuff has you scratching your head, read the comments to his post. Mind blowing.
- Michael Moynihan on the left’s lame efforts to cast tea partiers as Nazis. The similarities between tea partiers and anti-war protesters during the Bush administration, and their opponents’ reactions to them, are uncanny.
- Just read this.
This entry was posted
on Friday, April 2nd, 2010 at 7:26 am by Radley Balko
and is filed under General Criminal Justice, Nanny State, Police Professionalism.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
TheAgitator.com
Tea Party folks seem to me to be easily broken into four groups:
Principled Dissentors
GOP Operatives
Fringe Hate-Mongers – ie Birthers, Truthers, Racists, Homophobes
Confused Old Folks
As a rule, they are bad spellers and grammarians: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pargon/sets/72157623594187379/
Ira: Don’t forget agent provocateurs.
I think it would be well worth the time for anyone with an audience who wants to stop the anti-rational political dyscourse from blocking the truth of matters (media outlets, bosses, teachers, parents, bloggers, etc.) to spend a few minutes to explain the Broken Window Fallacy and Rent Seeking. Just for a start.
Over and over I see political pundits and politicians repeating the same specious arguments. Why do so many people let them pass by uninspected?
Speaking of fallacy, I think you may be engaging in “balance fallacy” in regards to the Tea-Partiers v. the Anti-War Protesters. Yes, they each have their nutty, annoying members, but the degree to which the Tea-Partiers have exalted in their ignorance and threatened violence is way more unsettling than anything the Anti-War Protesters engaged in.
What Mafoo said.
Add to that the M.O. of the two groups: one of which consisting of folks trying to prevent a conflict which has resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead innocent, the other of which seemingly calling for one, well, I just don’t see the comparison.
But then, I’m a rational human being that calls bullshit on the supposed moral equivalence of these two sets of actors.
They already banned clove cigarettes because they taste good. Menthols only got a pass at the time because they’re more popular. The solution to people who want to kill themselves with this stuff is to act more like pot smokers and DIY.
http://www.wikihow.com/Make-Your-Own-Clove-Cigarettes/Kretek
@4 and 5:
Seriously? I think you are a day late.
…is one of the reasons I go to NH TP events just to take photographs. Let the pics speak for themselves about size/growth, signs, content, etc…
As a regular reader of the Economist, that blog article saddens me. Their blogs have been getting more and more ridiculous.
If you are debating with someone that 1+1=28, you are not debating math.
If you are debating the broken window fallacy, you are not debating economics.
Mafoo:
http://www.binscorner.com/pages/d/death-threats-against-bush-at-protests-i.html
Mafoo and Cackalacka, you couldn’t be more wrong if you worked all day to try to get all the facts upside down and backwards.
You obviously missed the histrionics of the anti-Bush/anti-war protesters the past decade. Being anti-Bush and anti-war myself, I found it disgusting how the burn them in effigy, target on Bush’s face pictures, “we support our troops when they frag their officers” types were not shunned by the majority of peaceful demonstrators.
There were endless photos of signs equating Bush/Cheney to Hitler, etc.. Certainly, many more of those types than the Obama as Hitler signs I’ve seen in the news–even though the news media, for the most part, hates the Tea Party type people and either likes or tolerates the leftists. (Recall the guy who showed up with a gun, to exercise his open carry right, near an Obama speech. At least one TV report zoomed in on him to hide the fact that he was black. Anything to distort the facts, I suppose.)
In contrast, the Tea Party crowds have been much better behaved. The incidents of violence have been virtually nil (with a few examples of pro-Obama union thugs or others attacking Tea Party or anti-Obamacare people).
The fact is that nearly all Tea Party protesters are pretty average–not racists or violence-prone rednecks. You wouldn’t know that if you didn’t pay attention, thanks to the intense efforts of Democrats and most of the media to portray them in a negative light.
If you honestly believe what you wrote, I want to know where you get your information, beyond Maddow and Olberman. Please enlighten me.
FWIW, I approve of the Tea Party protests against increases in taxes and the deprivation of our rights of choice in Obamacare, but I wish they’d been out there when the elephants were racking up massive deficits (unprecedented since WW II). And, I wish they hadn’t fallen for the faux-patriotism of foreign invasions and nation building.
Doesn’t explain my complete absence of any sense of direction, though. Or how every wrong turn I make seems to land me in Anacostia.
I think I have a pretty good sense of direction, but when I lived in D.C. every wrong turn always took me to the G.W. Parkway. I was back there over the winter for work and had to drive from Dulles to Rockville. Sure enough, when I hit the Beltway, I somehow ended up on the Parkway. At least it’s pretty, I guess.
Radley-
Point taken, and no I have never seen those photos before. I’m mainly interested in refuting the attempt by many to impose moral equivalence in every political situation. Life isn’t that simple. By the way, Cackalacka’s point that one situation was based on invading another country and the current one is based on health care is valid (though I suppose one could argue that the Left’s protest climate of the 00s paved the way for the current one…).
Steve-
Dude, just because you disagree with something I write, doesn’t mean that I heart Maddow and Olberman. And something tells me you’re the type to equate them with the worst of the right, such as Michael Savage, just so you can feel like you’re being objective.
“FDA continues its campaign of banning unhealthy consumables because they taste good.”
I know writers have to choose a subject to earn a living, but c’mon already, the horses left that barn a couple of hundred years ago.
My favorite comment from Grier was that banning things because they taste good is “going down a dangerous road.” Look around Grier! We’re about a million miles down that road.
I see a light at the end of the road, but it’s an oncoming tank. Too late.
If someone believes that the broken window fallacy is not a fallacy, I invite him to kill himself.
Same principle.
So much wrong with that article, but I think the money quote is:
“Stun guns can be safely used on children, although the public may not find that acceptable, said Steve Tuttle, spokesman for Taser International Inc., which made Johnson’s weapon.”
“Indiana cops tase, smack misbehaving 10-year-old.”
I’m gonna go out on a limb here and word this very carefully that the only thing I find objectionable is that it was State agents doing the corporal punishment with a taser.
Assuming the 10-year-old boy was not justified in behaving so badly toward his caregiver and the facts of his behavior as reported are correct, as a parent myself, I believe any disciplined parent or “in loco parentis” is justified in resorting to violence to control such a situation. The authority of the parent must be defended, just as the State claims the power to defend its authority, else authority is lost.
Was using a taser overkill? Sure. But physically subduing the child and battering him if necessary is a decision every disciplined parent must face when confronted with an out-of-control child.
Mafoo + 1, again.
Tell you what, not being an involved participant in either the Iraq war protests OR the teabagger nonsense, I’ll readily admit that I’m not an authority on this matter.
That said, I don’t recall prominent liberal polititians calling for armed insurrection back in 2003.
This ‘Shape of the World: Views Differ’ nonsense might get a lot of traction because some 20 year-old anarchist made an offensive puppet 7 years ago, or a stray bullet happened to strike Cantor’s office. But to those of us with working moral compasses, ones who have listened to their upside-down-flag-since-Jan-09-neighbors oh-so-coherently espouse violence, we know what shape it is.
The window for respectful disagreement closes quite a bit when folks start calling for violence.
Nice speech from Jackson, the Nuremberg prosecutor.
Seems a bit quaint today, no?
I can imagine Mary Beth Buchanan in the audience with her index fingers in her earholes chanting “Lalalalalalalalalala … I can’t hear you … lalalalalalalalala ….”
Hell, even Little League umpires won’t follow Jackson’s principles.
From Moynihan: “This bizarre invocation of genocide was to be found on the op-ed page, from the hysterical ex-theater critic and Tea Party obsessive Frank Rich.”
Pat Sajak, host of Wheel and quite the erudite writer, ripped Frank Rich a new anus just the other day:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=36241
Frank Rich preaches to his choir, which consists mainly of frightened little old upper-middle class New York Jewish ladies just like my mother.
Good Lord.
#6 The banning of clove cigarettes was actually inspired by Phillip Morris. They didn’t make clove cigarettes, they made menthols. Cloves were the largest group of imported cigarettes in the country, even then they only held about 3% of the market. So Phillip Morris used the health scare against their own products to push a policy that would ban the competition (yay regulation!).
Of course unintended consequences being what they are, the FDA appears to being using that as a precedent for banning anything that tastes good. The loss of Menthol would likely kill many American companies and cause the loss of thousands of jobs. All in the name of stopping adults from engaging in a voluntary behavior with inconsequential health concerns.
The drug policy in this country is based entirely upon popularity. Prescription drugs and alcohol are enjoyed or at least socially acceptable to a majority of Americans. But if a substance has a recreational use enjoyed by a minority of Americans the steps toward prohibition become swift. Compare the policies taken on Viagra vs. Ecstasy, Oxycontin, and now even cough syrup. Look at the last 50 years of tobacco. Once enjoyed by the majority and present everywhere, now enjoyed by less than a 1/3rd of adults and it could be reasonably banned or legislated out of existence in the next 20 years.
The authorities make their decisions on banning substances not based on health concerns, public danger, or even the basic rights of adults. The laws and enforcement policies are made on whether or not there are enough people to oppose them. Its another excuse to wage war on the American people. And the most depressing thing is that so few Americans care about the principles of freedom or liberty that they support these policies. Your neighbors are willing to throw you in jail because they don’t like your recreational activities, its as simple and horrifying as that.
The Uncanny similarity comes from the fact that the fringe eliments of both the anti-war movement and the tea partiers are the media focuses on. Mafoo and Cackalacka have both focused on the Tea Party fringe and decided since a handful of people have talked about armed uprising, birth certificates, etc, that all Tea Partiers are this way. It’s not any different than Fox News finding some truely anti-american protestors in the anti-war rallied and painting the whole lot with the same brush.
It’s also like saying because the KKK is a racist group, all white people are that way. Or that because these 11 arabs flew planes into buildings, all arabs are terrorists. The problem is that everytime the shoe changes foot, everyone still fails to see their own hipocrisy.
I also really hate it when people point out that a few people are advocating violence against our government without mentioning that our government commits a tremendous amount of violence against people everyday. It’s not right in either scenario, but it comes across as very one sided when one party is singled out and not the other.
One of the main problems with the comparison of Tea Party vs. Anti Bush protesters is that despite the fact that literally hundreds of thousands of people turned out in overwhelmingly peaceful protests against the war and what any sane educated person would realize was a criminal administration, the mainstream media did not fawn over the antiwar movement like they are over the tea party. Maddow and Olberman aside, why is this TeaParty getting all this attention and the anti war protesters were treated like some little fringe group?
Why do the cameras follow around these little groups when some of the biggest marches in US history were basically ignored by those in charge?
Not to say some of the tea parties are not news worthy but despite the fact that most of what they shout is factually incorrect they are treated like “regular americans” when the anti war protesters were treated like “non-Americans”
And how could any one deny that Glen Beck isn’t using “eliminationist” rhetoric when he tells his fans that progressives are a “cancer” that must be eradicated. And there are numerous other comments from actual Congress people saying basically the same thing- Steve King, Michelle Bachman
#19 Cackalacka:
It might be possible to listen to your arguments seriously were you not falling back on the tired, pathetic “teabagger” pejorative. Grow up.
Point taken Mattocracy, mostly.
I must admit that my perception is clouded by my conservative neighbors rainy day patriotism. Seriously, as a liberal who loves the country and the flag, it disgusts me to no end that for decades I was told how much my ilk thrived on disrespecting the national symbol, yet the only time I have ever witnessed its disrespect, was via a neighbor who has hung it upside down every day/night/rain or shine since the Inauguration. I’m not making this up.
“I also really hate it when people point out that a few people are advocating violence against our government without mentioning that our government commits a tremendous amount of violence against people everyday. It’s not right in either scenario, but it comes across as very one sided when one party is singled out and not the other.”
You lost me there. One side got vocal about the government violence and protested it. The other side got vocal about deficit spending on January 21st 2009, and protested it, with prominent national and regional politicians actively discussing violence. You can chalk up the first group to youth and naivete; you can chalk up the second group to violent losers.
See the disconnect in your paragraph yet? Did any WTO protesters who called Bush Hitler get their own second-hand ‘interview’ shows on a top-rated cable news organization while I wasn’t paying attention.
Apples from 2003, meet Oranges from 2010.
jppatter-
This ‘pejorative’ was first coined and self-applied by movement conservatives. Is this to be considered a wingnut n-word now?
I love how quickly folks retreat to feigned victimhood when the facts don’t quite square with their perception.
Random guy-
‘…And the most depressing thing is that so few Americans care about the principles of freedom or liberty that they support these policies. Your neighbors are willing to throw you in jail because they don’t like your recreational activities, its as simple and horrifying as that.’
nice job wording this in a way that even idealistic, save-the-world teenagers can understand. sorry I can only give one thumbs up!
The problem I had with the two wars were that each (1) is waged with money taken forcibly from taxpayers, many of whom wanted no part in funding that war, (2) the tactics used too often resulted in civilian deaths, and (3) the occupation included nation building, i.e., forcing other people to live by our rules.
Some of the people who started the wars did have good intentions, even if they were delusional in how easy it would be. Similarly, I think some of the Obamacare supporters have good intentions to help people and improve things, but each and every one of them are totally delusional, as the actual law does neither and is an affront to freedom.
Those who supported the war who knew of the horrible cost to civilians (and the cost to the US deficits), just like the Obamacare supporters who knew the dirty secrets–especially those who wanted to punish “the wealthy” in the name of egalitarianism–all deserve a prison cell next to Bernie Madoff, at the very least.
I have never heard Savage. I have no clue what he’s said. But, I have watched Maddow and Olberman. They are thoroughly and disgustingly dishonest and the handful of people who watch them and take them seriously, without reading, listening to, or watching other news sources, will be woefully ignorant and misinformed.
It was just a guess. Please let me know where you actually get your news.
“I also really hate it when people point out that a few people are advocating violence against our government without mentioning that our government commits a tremendous amount of violence against people everyday.” — Mattocracy
Sometimes there just isn’t enough + karma to give.
As a detached observer, I watched the “tea party” thing start off as a grass roots movement with some decent ideas then die in essence when Palin & Beck became the official faces.
Please name actual politicians who now call for armed insurrection. I’ll wait.
I don’t advocate violence at this time, because I think it would be a pointless waste of life. I especially don’t agree with any threats against innocents (family members or indiscriminate bombings). That said, considering the countless assaults on the rights of Americans, for decades, by the various governments in the US, I would say that certain, specific acts of violence right now would be a clear-cut case of defensive reaction, and not an initiation of force. Like I said, though, I think it would be a waste.
If, however, the government started rounding up people, trying to disarm those who had done nothing wrong, shutting down TV and radio stations (as Hugo Chavez has done), that it would be time for Americans to resist them violently, and come to the aid of their neighbors. There is a line everyone must draw and, whether you believe the US government will ever cross that, the fact is that the lines do exist. Sometimes violence is the answer, before the Gulags, preferably.
If you didn’t want to fund the wars and refused to pay your taxes and refused to be arrested (since you’d done nothing wrong), I’d never vote to convict you on a jury for defending yourself. Similarly, if you refused to buy health insurance and refused to be arrested, I’d also vote not guilty. Or, if you refused to give up your scary looking gun because of some new ban.
Perhaps. But when the majority of people angrily oppose Obamacare, but it gets passed with parliamentary trickery anyway, many people are going to come to the conclusion that their “respectful disagreement” earns them nothing but higher taxes, ruined businesses, and inferior health care. When you tell a majority of the population to shut the fuck up and take it, and you give them no peaceful means to protect themselves from the socialist predations, why act surprised when violence becomes an option for more and more people?
If you want respectful disagreement, then tell your goddamned Democrats to repeal Obamacare, start over with a transparent process which takes into account the rights of their constituents not to be forced to buy something they don’t want. Tell them to have honest and open meetings where they allow everyone to be heard, instead of dishonestly demonizing anyone who opposes their power grabs. Tell them that if they announce they want to fix a problem, don’t write a bill that doesn’t do what they claim it does, with all sorts of poisonous shit like giving union thugs a pass on paying what everyone else pays.
Frankly, I don’t think you’ll get anywhere with any of them and I’m very afraid that their recalcitrance and power-hungry ambitions will tear this country apart and provoke good, decent people to violence at some point.
#27 Cackalacka
I don’t recall portraying myself as a victim. I simply made the mistake of thinking that people who wish to have civilized debates and conversations could do so without painting “enemies” with childish insults (whether you came up with the term yourself or merely parroted the words of others is irrelevant; childish is childish). But thank you for reminding me that insult-free dialogues are apparently a thing of the past.
I wholeheartedly admit that the conservative side of America is rather deingenious protesting against government spending now that they are in the minority in DC. If your neighbor was really serious about standing up against an unconstitutional government, he should’ve been hanging his flag upside down for about 10 years now. I have a feeling that he really wants the freedoms that he thinks are important, but not for anything he disagrees with. So I’m with you there.
I don’t hear too many prominent politicians openly calling for violent revolt. Maybe some are, but I can’t imagine calling them prominent. Citation needed. And if I’m wrong, then they’re full of shit. I suppose that’s what really gets me about the “violent” tea party” talk. I’ve interacted with enough to know that they are all talk beyond a few broken windows. I think it’s silly that anyone gives them any real validity. They aren’t going to try to take over dick no matter what might be said.
As far as government violence goes, I guess I didn’t make is clear that I’m talking about a broader issue beyond Tea Party/Anti-War protestors. I’m talking about all citizens vs. gov’t. Try standing up for rights with any form of law enforcement and more than likely they are going to resort to violence to force compliance.
I’m not saying the anti-war people were out there advocating violence. My point is that it isn’t just a handful of conservatives that talk about violence as a means to an end. A lot of groups do it from environmentalist to animal rights advoctes to our own government agencies. It’s the violence administered and advocated by law enforcment groups that is more worrisome in my estimation than a few tea partiers making hollow threats.
I think we’re kinda closer in our estimations than our previous posts let on.
Steve – please bear in mind that should the “good, decent people (resort) to violence at some point” some liberals who cherish the 2nd Amendment will fight back.
Cynical said:
“If someone believes that the broken window fallacy is not a fallacy, I invite him to kill himself.
Same principle.”
Just spewed coffee all over the screen due to laughing. Score one for Cynical.
While I am neither an expert on anti-Bush protesters or Tea Party protesters, I would like to point out that the anti-Bush protesters would often be outnumbered at their own protests by off-duty military and law enforcement personnel, shouting them down as “Traitors” and making threats.
Is that happening to the Tea Partiers?
Ira, if “liberals” join with other good, decent people to fight back against the government when it starts rounding up people, shutting down news stations, and such, then I welcome them. Anyone who acts defensively against an aggressive initiation of force is morally justified.
If, however, you mean that “liberals” will join in the aggressive initiation of force help the government to trample the rights of other Americans, then they are not “fighting back” but aiding in the unethical assault on the rights of innocents.
About 99.9% of people who mention violence today (Tea Party, threepers, Oath Keepers, militias) do not threaten to initiate violence. Rather, they either say they will defend themselves when others come for them, or (in the case of Oath Keepers–who are cops and soldiers) that they will lay down their arms and refuse to obey illegal orders to use force against American civilians.
Tell me something, is there anything the government would do, any line it would cross, to make you decide that violent reaction by decent American citizens was the answer? Or, do you think that no matter what, even if they were being herded onto cattle cars, that citizens are obligated to never use violence against authority?
Again, for those of you idiots who are clicking the thumbs down on me, I am anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-Republican (in addition to being anti-Obamacare, anti-Obama, anti-Democrat) and I do not advocate violence now. I fear that the unethical politicians are driving good people into a corner and that violence which I do not want to occur will unfortunately be the last resort. Learn to read.
The selective focus of the media in the case of antiwar protests and the nasty stuff going on in St Paul for the RNC has left me with very little trust in the media reports on the teabaggers. It’s clear enough that if there are a thousand sane people and one insane clown at tea party rally, the TV coverage will be entirely of the insane clown. My sense (maybe I’m misremembering) is that the antiwar protests got almost no coverage at all–perhaps as little as the news sources imagined they could get away with. In both cases, I feel like my picture of reality is being actively and intentionally distorted….
How about a trip down memory lane?
Steve – spare me the hyperbole. What if space aliens attacked your neighborhood? Would you fight back?? Please.
You stated that some nutters may turn to violence and I warned of a possible reaction.
Take you hatred and vitriol and shove it up your ass please.
Come at this liberal in the real world with it and you’ll take a beating.
http://www.backwoodshome.com/blogs/ClaireWolfe/2010/04/02/uh-oh-were-the-new-extremist-threat/
Link fail. Try this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6b1VOAATNk
Ira, the fact is that space aliens have never attacked anyone. Governments, on the other hand, murdered on the order of 150,000,000 people the last century.
Your childish scoffs show you either don’t know anything about human history or that you are cynically trying to downplay what you know is closer at hand than at any time since the Civil War.
Your “reaction” doesn’t seem to be defensive, considering your dishonest portrayal of others.
Quit lying, Ira. I stated that sane, good people who are pushed up against the wall may defend themselves, with total moral justification. By definition, this excludes the “nutters” (your word) who, I’m guessing you your attitude, are people who would initiate force against innocents. THAT IS A STRAWMAN AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT I’VE WRITTEN. You are invited to stuff the whole scarecrow up your nose, since your lack of brains means you have plenty of room.
I have no hatred for anyone who leaves innocent people alone. I hate those who violate the rights of others. Period. Full stop.
If anyone is a “nutter” it’s you, imagining that someone who has repeatedly denounced the initiation of force will be “coming at you.” You’re a pathetic liar.
The only time I’d do harm to you is if you were trying to harm me or my family, or my neighbors. Leave us alone and you can sit there in peace until you keel over waiting for a doctor under the Obamacare nightmare.
Cynical,
But physically subduing the child and battering him if necessary is a decision every disciplined parent must face when confronted with an out-of-control child.
I agree with your premise, but I worked for years with batshit crazy (and wonderful) kids and there is absolutely no cause to strike a kid – even a much older, bigger, stronger kid – in order to subdue him. It’s not that difficult, but these cops just weren’t trained on how to do it.
Steve: Your fear is comforting. Your belief that the government will round folks up into cattle cars is laughable. Your implied belief that the time is coming to put Jefferson’s “water the tree of liberty” line into practice is just sad.
The truth is you don’t like a political outcome and advocate violence.
You are a simpleton.
So, go ahead and work yourself into a full-on self-righteous rage. Just don’t bring your rage my way or your spittle filled mouth will meet a fist or two.
I have to agree with Wilkinson’s commenter “parmenides”: Wilkinson and Avent are talking past each other.
How come it’s child abuse if parents do it but its ok if agents of the government who wear badges do it?
Ira, you are proving yourself to be an unrepentant liar. Regardless of how many times I correct you, you come back with more dishonesty. You really are embarrassing yourself.
I get physically ill when I recognize that the country I love is being fundamentally transformed and that there are tangible risks of horrible violence, which anyone who has read history can see clear as day.
Please stop lying. Please stop making up things I did not say.
The cattle cars example is a rhetorical technique to demonstrate that unquestioned obedience to authority and an indiscriminate condemnation of all violent resistance is an affront to humanity. It’s like taking a mathematical equation, plugging in zero for a variable, to demonstrate that the equation is false. Maybe there will never be anything like cattle cars, but that serves as an example to illustrate the point.
Once again, you’re lying. You’re making up things I didn’t say.
Go back and read what I wrote. I said I “fear” what could happen, that the possible violence is something I do not want.
Just stop lying, please.
Now you’re slandering me? That’s just lame.
Please stop being such an unrepentant lying propagandist.
How many ways can I say that nobody is bringing anything your way?
Really, the level of dishonesty in your comments is so blatant, I have to wonder if you’re an agent provocateur or a self-loathing masochist.
“Please name actual politicians who now call for armed insurrection. I’ll wait.”
Steve, don’t retreat, just reload.
I’m sure you’ll be justifying this with some fanciful justification that she is not calling for violence in this instance, so you’ll forgive me if I neither wait for your concession, nor address the flights of fancy the rest of your meandering paragraphs take.
jppatter-
I’ll make sure to take your delicate sensibilities into consideration moving forward. In the mean time, victim on!
Cackalacka, that is your answer? Sarah Palin?
Your surrender is accepted. *guffaw*
OK, Ira didn’t answer this, so I invite an answer from Chakalaka and Mafoo and anyone else lying about the amount of violence, trying to smear millions of people who have nothing to do with the few bad apples:
Is there anything the government would do, any line it would cross, to make you decide that violent reaction by decent American citizens was the answer? Or, do you think that no matter what…citizens are obligated to never use violence against authority?
Don’t distract with strawman arguments. Don’t slander me or change the subject.
Just answer the damned question.
Roderick Long accurately summarized the Tea Parties a year ago.
And pricipled liberals like Jane Hamsher understand the makeup and the history of the Tea Parties, even writing 5 Lessons The Tea Parties Can Learn From The Anti-War Movement. They also don’t like the Health Care bill.
” I would like to point out that the anti-Bush protesters would often be outnumbered at their own protests by off-duty military and law enforcement personnel, shouting them down as “Traitors” and making threats.”
So point it out. When. Where. Got video? Anything?
It seemed a lot of the protesters of the Iraq war were not at all concerned with governments killing people. Just that the US stayed out of it. Lots of protesters at those rallies seemed to be pro-killing people, long as they were Jews. And then there was the folks encouraging soldiers to kill their officers. I would imagine, since there might be a couple of fringe players on the tea party side that folks in this thread are using to invalidate the entire thing, it would work both ways. It looks like the tea party people at least try to marginalize their crackpots. Looking at the anti-war marches, the crackpot signs out numbered the non crackpots.
“Tell you what, not being an involved participant in either the Iraq war protests OR the teabagger nonsense, I’ll readily admit that I’m not an authority on this matter.”
Perhaps you should educate yourself on this “nonsense” before passing judgment on it. Everyone has a line. For millions of Americans that line has been stepped over. The question, I guess is where is YOUR line?
So, to summarize, you think people who advocate violence are simpletons, and your response to them is to threaten violence if they come within arm’s reach?
#51 Cackalacka
If I ever feel like a victim of anything I will make sure that you are the first to know. In the meantime, I have no interest in wasting any more time on the likes of you. Have a fantastic weekend.
Scooby,
Ira is lying. I did not and do not advocate violence. And, he’s pretending that he’s the subject of threats, when that’s completely false. It’s a propaganda tactic, pure and simple.
If I could persuade enough people to ignore the political leaders and look at the basic principles of individual rights and human dignity, I’d call for millions of people to peacefully withdraw their productive efforts from anything which enabled the government–massive civil disobedience. Ideally, that would include anti-war protesters, too. Let the politicians feel the dissatisfaction of the populace by watching their power melt away. But most agitators are easily distracted by the usual party propaganda (as Nick’s cite of Roderick Long explained), so that’s not going to happen. They’ll make noise and foolishly file in to the polling booth, only to see that no matter how many times they vote, the outcome will be the same: less freedom.
vote
get screwed
goto 1
The tragedy is that there are enough people familiar with history, who are paying attention to the actuarial tables of US debt, Social Security, etc., to see the coming train wreck, but just about none of them are doing a damned thing to convince people to end the status quo.
Steve,
No, Ira might not be lying. He might just be a troll (likely), or one of the least self-aware people I’ve come across lately.
‘#41 | Ira |
‘Come at this liberal in the real world with it and you’ll take a beating.’
Match.com has nothing but ‘hot’ chicks and ‘handsome’ guys, too. I love anonymous internet brawlers.
“Stun guns can be safely used on children, although the public may not find that acceptable, said Steve Tuttle, spokesman for Taser International Inc.”
Jesus. I get the impression that this man’s criteria for “safe” is merely “not dead.” By that measure, you could exchange the term “Stun gun” in that sentence for “Heroin”, “Kama Sutra” or “Waterboarding” and still be accurate.
Stun guns were not designed to be used on children and, although little research has been done, many experts warn that, even if the taser does not trigger a cardiac arrest (which prepubescent childen would be at increased risk for), the jolt could very well cause unobvious but long-term injury to a child’s heart.
What’s worst, in my opinion, is that the ever-increasing use of tasers on children signals one of only three things – that these officers are incredibly lazy, woefully under-trained or frighteningly sadistic.
I’m with Cynical in CA (#18), here – heaven help us if the government ever strips us of our right to employ physical discipline. Just the threat of physical consequence is often the leverage that makes non-violent consequence effective. That said, we aren’t doing anyone – ourselves or the target – any favors if we allow that violence to be excessive… and I can’t help but find the practice of tasing 10 year olds to be rather excessive.
Speaking of the “government” and “parenting”, Barry Cooper (who has had his share of coverage on this blog) and his wife may lose custody of her son because the police say teaching kids to mistrust government makes them ‘unsuitable’ parents.
Re: Ira — “I have to wonder if you’re an agent provocateur or a self-loathing masochist.”
He’s neither. He’s …
INTERNET TOUGH GUY™
Welcome back INTERNET TOUGH GUY™. It’s been too long.
“Just the threat of physical consequence is often the leverage that makes non-violent consequence effective. That said, we aren’t doing anyone – ourselves or the target – any favors if we allow that violence to be excessive…” — Athena
Precisely, Athena. I wasn’t kidding when I wrote that I was going to word my comment very carefully. I’m actually surprised at the overall positive response.
The key word in my comment was “disciplined,” referring to the parent. Parental violence is only warranted if the parent is DISCIPLINED — honest, patient, deliberate, following established procedure and exhausting all reasonable non-violent avenues first.
A parent spontaneously lashing out at a child without observing these qualities is guilty of child abuse.
The sad but true is how easy it is now in America to substitute “government” for “parent” and “citizen” for “child.”
Excellent link Nick, thanks.
I’m thankful for many things. Now I can add not living in Texas to the list.
From the broken window debate comments, Mr. Horn lands winner:
“Ah, but that’s the thing. If you know having a rock through your window is better for you, why don’t you throw the rock yourself?”
Sinchy, I invite you to actually research what TEA party protests are about, the things they say (or shout, as the case may be) are far from “factually incorrect. They are the same things we bitch about here in this forum every damn day.
Cackalacka, hanging a flag upside down is not disrespect, it is a signal of distress. And most of the initial TEA party protests were planned before the November election which elected Obama, and were just as much about Bush’s violations of his oath of office, the heavy taxation we are subject to at all levels of government, and Bush’s bailouts as they were ab out Obama dong the same things. And the “conservatives” who coined that perjoriative word were trying to marginalize the TEA party movement, they were NOT a part of it. Of course now those same neo-con “conservatives” are attempting to co opt the movement for their own purposes.
David, the TEA party movement is still grassroots, Palin and Beck are NOT our spokespeople in spite of how they are trying to take the movement away from us and make it their own (with a whole “new” agenda which is merely the same old thing we’ve had from both Ds and Rs for far too long and is not even close to what we originals have as our agenda).
Steve (#38), oh, I SO agree with what you wrote. And so do most (real) TEA party activists.
Nick, Hamsher hit the nail square on the head. And Long did, too, that is why the real TEA party activists do not blindly support either party; many activists are vetting candidates of both parties for their loyalty to liberty and the Constitution looking for more like Ron and Rand Paul, others are looking outside both parties for their candidates like to the Libertarians and Constitution Party for the same kind of loyalty. And those latter are getting the same “you’ll split the vote” or “you’re going to waste your vote?” comments from the sheeple and even from some of their fellow activists. Personally, Ron Paul is the ONLY Republican I have ever voted for at any level of government and I have NEVER voted for a Democrat; with that one exception my votes have always gone to Libertarians (or if none were in a race, NOTA).
That’s when I called it.
John McCain is about them least principled Republicans. When the GOP is on the right side of an issue, you can be he’s being a maverick and siding with the Democrats. And vice versa. The GOP couldn’t have done more to demonstrate to me that they were not going to protect our rights, short of nominating the cigarette pointy girl from Abu Ghraib. Or, maybe Arlen Specter.
Very, very late to this party but let me say that I think Ira nailed it in comment #1 however I would have listed Principled Dissentors #4 on that list.
And as far as the questions as to “is there any line government could possibly cross” let me say that there probably is but universal health care ain’t it.
I also think it is very important to remember that a substantial portion of the people who hate the bill hate it because there is not a public option not because it takes away our inalienable right to be uninsured.
I enjoy watching the Tea Party myself and I want them front and center. Adults in coonskin caps will always be a political entertainment winner in my book.
I can only speak first hand about Tea Party events in Georgia because that is the state I live in and let me tell you the movement down here is driven by the fact that there is a ni**er in the White House and that is a big fuckin’ deal.
Maybe it is not that way nationwide.
And I thought the movement was the brainchild of Ron Paul and Dick Armey. But you hear all kinds of shit most of it not worth trying to get to the bottom of.
Anyway, when a political movement draws 7,000 people to the premier event in the desert it is not doing as well as a AAA high school football championship here in Georgia.
And I would bet that the reason most of the Tea Partiers are against universal health care is the fact that they already have socialized medicine. Well, that seems to be the case in Georgia anyway.
Back to Ira’s first comment I would have put fringe hate-mongers #1 but again I am basing that on a local level not a national level.
Regarding the tasered 10 year old, what can you say? Of course the tasering is ridiculous. Many have blamed the parents who may have been at fault. I blame the structure of modern society. Many kids spend their days in classrooms and day cares, contstantly supervised and not allowed an outlet for their energy. Boys especially need an outlet. Decades ago most children would be allowed a lot more freedom to play, to rough house. Now we have a generation who are not allowed to play tag because it can have a negative impact on self esteem. A hundred years ago a boy of 10 would most likely spend part of his day doing physical labor on a farm. We evolved over millions of years to do things, to be physically active and to be agressive. In the course of a few decades we turn all of this upside down, stick kids in storage while parents work and wonder why we have hyper active kids who act out.
I inserted the last two words to make your sentence correct. It was wrong before.
Each person has his or her own line, and for some people that line has already been crossed.
Elroy, very well put. I’d add that, considering how H. sapiens evolved, diet likely has a big influence on mood.
Go take a look at what they feed kids in school.
“What’s worst, in my opinion, is that the ever-increasing use of tasers on children signals one of only three things – that these officers are incredibly lazy, woefully under-trained or frighteningly sadistic.”
If they were lazy they would’ve just left (or not gone in the first place and just stayed in the donut place). Saying they were under-trained makes unfounded assumptions about the goals of their training that contradict everything we know about pig culture. With those possibilities removed from consideration, I think we have a winner.
What Mafoo and Cackalacka said.
Yes, tea-partiers and anti-war protestors verrry similar. Both protesting aggressive war sold to the public under false pretenses, leading to the deaths of 100s of 1,000s.
Oh wait….