BREAKING: House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, multiple aides shot at Congressional baseball practice

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Oh what a shock. Hostile childish narcissistic conflict-loving Trump supporters who drink the tears of liberals... are facing.... hostility???

Maybe there's reason to appeal to goodness and hope and togetherness?

So. .

Are you saying we should be more like you or else more violence will occur?

Listen to yourself. You resist all reason.

So we should be more like you.

Ignore me. You should put importance on empathy, love, fairness and togetherness. Let it reflect in the policies you support.

originally posted by: Darkphoenix77

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
You guys always have the option to stay ignorant. Keep supporting a guy who only knows how to insult and demean those who disagree with him. Keep ignoring all observable reality.

I'm sorry....of whom do you speak? If I remember correctly there was an insulting and demeaning a plenty from all concerned this past election cycle.....

Yeah I pointed this out to him a few pages ago. Predictably he ignored it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Grambler

Bernie is not a child. It is easy for everyone to just condemn violence. What would be noble and difficult is to be consistent, which he has not been.

In some ways, we all are children. I pity the poor soul who has completely lost that spirit and energy of youth.

But yes, it would have been much better if he had been consistent, or even if he had apologized and admitted wrong. But in this case, consistency would have meant what? Resigning? Desecrating the remains? Reality must sometimes intrude on ideology.

And why does bernie deserve respect for merely condemning violence?

Grambler... I know you're better than that.

Literally 95% of people say that. Its hollow words if your position isn't consistent.

Better than some of that 95% changing to not verbally condemning violence.

Konduit posted a political cartoon above that pretty much seems to sum up the fears of many: too many fiery voices lighting the fuse. Are you saying you want more of those fiery voices?

I guess we will see. But I want to get you on the record, if Bernie even once from this point on blames any violence on Trumps rhetoric, will you admit that his statement yesterday was just lip service?

Whenever that question is asked of me, I immediately go into Jeff Sessions mode....

On the record, if Bernie ever unjustly accuses Trump of inciting violence or unjustly accuses anyone of not doing more to quell violence, I will indeed call him out, not just for his position, but for his hypocrisy.

Fair enough?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Oh what a shock. Hostile childish narcissistic conflict-loving Trump supporters who drink the tears of liberals... are facing.... hostility???

Maybe there's reason to appeal to goodness and hope and togetherness?

So. .

Are you saying we should be more like you or else more violence will occur?

Listen to yourself. You resist all reason.

So we should be more like you.

Ignore me. You should put importance on empathy, love, fairness and togetherness. Let it reflect in the policies you support.

I find it ironic that you apparently put importance on empathy, love, fairness and togetherness but like 90% of your posts spew vitriolic hatred.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Oh what a shock. Hostile childish narcissistic conflict-loving Trump supporters who drink the tears of liberals... are facing.... hostility???

Maybe there's reason to appeal to goodness and hope and togetherness?

So. .

Are you saying we should be more like you or else more violence will occur?

Listen to yourself. You resist all reason.

You really don't see it do you?

a reply to: Ohanka

Ironic, but not surprising. It's pretty standard today for them. They're perfectly fine with hate, as long as its directed at the right people.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Oh what a shock. Hostile childish narcissistic conflict-loving Trump supporters who drink the tears of liberals... are facing.... hostility???

Maybe there's reason to appeal to goodness and hope and togetherness?

So. .

Are you saying we should be more like you or else more violence will occur?

Listen to yourself. You resist all reason.

So we should be more like you.

Ignore me. You should put importance on empathy, love, fairness and togetherness. Let it reflect in the policies you support.

Because if we don't, someone will shoot us.

originally posted by: Grambler
Yep that includes me, and I hope you. Condemning someone shooting people is a pretty standard stance, not one that I feel is in itself reason for applause.

Well, my perspective is a bit different on the subject, to be completely frank. I have been shot a grand total of 7 times in my life. Five times while in the military and two times in civilian life. "Condemning" someone for the act of employing firearms is not to me an automatic assumption. And let's think about it, the general act of fighting as a whole does not necessarily represent reprehensible action (for instance using deadly force if your home or family are in clear danger).

Some people view their acts as patriotism, even if they are misguided.

In a way you are correct. I guess if Trump comes out and says "I want my supporters to shoot people!" then you would have a point.

He doesn't have to really. All he has to do is allude to the fact that maybe violence should have been the recourse to protestation. Which he has done, it doesn't have to be as black and white or as morose as you suggested above.

But barring that, the rednecks stance (I hope I am not mischaracterizing this) is that he does not feel the democrats rhetoric is responsible for this shooting, and he disagreed with Bernie's statement that right wing rhetoric needed to be condemned in light of the Gifford shooting, but did not make those claims after the Scalise shooting.

Personally speaking, I feel that anyone who decides to fall-back on the "he made me do it" excuse is full of snip. Are the American people THIS gullible now that we have begun entertaining childhood tactics to find culpability? YOU (the general you, not you specifically) are responsible for your own actions and you alone. Don't blame the media; don't blame the republicans; don't blame the democrats....blame you only.

And so if Bernie in the future would blame right wing rhetoric on violence (barring an actual for violence) he would again be falling back into the wrong mentality.

Blaming ANYONE'S rhetoric for a shooting is the wrong mentality. Even if a shooter believes he or she is doing so for the right reasons or for patriotic reasons, their reasons should be their cross to bear alone and history will dictate if their acts were in FACT patriotic and deserved or simply madness.

a reply to: TheRedneck

So calling him out for hypocrisy today is fanning the flames of hatred and should not be done. But calling him a hypocrite in the future is ok?

It doesn't make sense.

For example, I can easily say that your post calling for Acosta to have his press privileges revoked is fanning the flames of hate.

Why can you call out what he did wrong, but it is fanning hatred to call put Bernie?

If Acosta apologizes, will you retract your demand he lose his credentials?

I already explained what I felt consistency would have been. He could have admitted his past comments were wrong, or he could have stood by them and applied the same logic to this incident.

I applaud your attempt to have civil discourse, but I disagree on what you think that excludes. I do not feel asking people to be consistent is fanning the flames of hatred.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

Well, my perspective is a bit different on the subject, to be completely frank. I have been shot a grand total of 7 times in my life. Five times while in the military and two times in civilian life. "Condemning" someone for the act of employing firearms is not to me an automatic assumption. And let's think about it, the general act of fighting as a whole does not necessarily represent reprehensible action (for instance using deadly force if your home or family are in clear danger).

Some people view their acts as patriotism, even if they are misguided.

Oh my mistake. You don't condemn this violence. Great, another one.

He doesn't have to really. All he has to do is allude to the fact that maybe violence should have been the recourse to protestation. Which he has done, it doesn't have to be as black and white or as morose as you suggested above.

Then I assume you blame the lefts calls for blood for yesterdays attack.

Personally speaking, I feel that anyone who decides to fall-back on the "he made me do it" excuse is full of snip. Are the American people THIS gullible now that we have begun entertaining childhood tactics to find culpability? YOU (the general you, not you specifically) are responsible for your own actions and you alone. Don't blame the media; don't blame the republicans; don't blame the democrats....blame you only.

Yet you just blamed Trump above.

Blaming ANYONE'S rhetoric for a shooting is the wrong mentality. Even if a shooter believes he or she is doing so for the right reasons or for patriotic reasons, their reasons should be their cross to bear alone and history will dictate if their acts were in FACT patriotic and deserved or simply madness.

Again, you say this, yet you blame Trump in this very post for violence.

You go ahead and wait for history to decide before you condemn this violence.

I am going to condemn it.

Here, lemme' throw ya' a bone, SZ...

You know what I have a problem with? I have a problem with the notion of "Congressional baseball practice", that's what I have a problem with. I have even more of a problem with the opposing team taking the field with guns and actually KILLING the other team rather than beating them, but none the less I have a problem with Congressional baseball practice.

There, feel better now?

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Oh what a shock. Hostile childish narcissistic conflict-loving Trump supporters who drink the tears of liberals... are facing.... hostility???

Maybe there's reason to appeal to goodness and hope and togetherness?

So. .

Are you saying we should be more like you or else more violence will occur?

Listen to yourself. You resist all reason.

So we should be more like you.

Ignore me. You should put importance on empathy, love, fairness and togetherness. Let it reflect in the policies you support.

I hope everyone can see this. This is a mentality that is prevalent with many people, and its disturbing.

Your actions are not what makes you a good person. Its the policies you support. In his mind it doesn't matter if someone is personally violent, as long as it is n the name of good policies.

There is no debating policy positions here. There are good policies, and these are the ones he agrees with, and there are evil policies, those against his. If you are not for his policies, you are evil.

And people wonder why drives the violence we are now seeing.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: amazing

No, it's progressive terrorism. Liberals are condoning this via twitter. Track them down via their social media and give them a one way ticket to a FEMA camp.

And we've had quite a few threats and conservatives condoning this type of thing about Obama, but you'll never hear me call that a conservative terrorist. He's just a wacko that was influenced by right wing media. but not terrorism.

Reading threads here on ATS there are people --- from BOTH sides --- that routinely post comments that easily rise to the level of those posted by the shooter. I sincerely hope someone is watching because I would hate for the next tragedy to have been committed by one of this community.

originally posted by: jtma508
Reading threads here on ATS there are people --- from BOTH sides --- that routinely post comments that easily rise to the level of those posted by the shooter. I sincerely hope someone is watching because I would hate for the next tragedy to have been committed by one of this community.

Wan't Loughner a member of ATS when he shot up Giffords?

a reply to: amazing

Okay, I think I understand your post. Let me ask you a question though...

On the theme of 'progressive terrorism', when progressives don't get their way they riot and start fires. Not all of them, but notably more than just a few. The MSM gladly shows video clip after video clip, non-stop around the clock, of this same violence, and people start rioting and setting fires in other cities. And so on, and so on.

How is this not terrorism again?

Oh, and "right wing media"??? What's that? Never heard of it.

a reply to: Grambler

Ok let me know when you're done trolling for stars and want to have a reasonable conversation without your constant putting words into peoples mouths just that you can feel better about yourself.


At that point I will be willing to open conversation with you.

a reply to: introvert

Was he????

I didn't know that!!

(seriously)

a reply to: introvert

Yes, although I think it had been a year or so since he had posted when he shot Giffords. I also don't think his contributions were about politics, but it's been a while since I looked at that.

(ETA: 'Erad3,' Link)

I think there was another mass shooter that was an ATS member, too.
(ETA2: Or I remember reading about another one when I read about Loughner. I don't know if it's true or not and I can't remember his name.)

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: Grambler

Ok let me know when you're done trolling for stars and want to have a reasonable conversation without your constant putting words into peoples mouths just that you can feel better about yourself.


At that point I will be willing to open conversation with you.

Do you condemn this attack or not?