« Back to story "Is The Right Wing Inciting Violence?"

Story Comments

Posted by: NoWayMan 9 months ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

75%
NoWayMan9 months ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

IMO, just the fact that this question is relevant (Is The Right Wing Inciting Violence?) means the right is treading along a serious line here.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
10 Replies

loading ...
- sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned9 Replies
  - 88%
    NoWayMan8 months, 4 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    um, you said "questioning the fact..." which means that its a fact that mikey died of pop rocks and soda pop (which you did say), which means you've already stated the evidence.
    
    or did you mean: "Questioning the theory..."?
    
    so...
    
    and of course this is all beside the fact that your analogy holds no amount of equivalency to the topic at hand...
    
    but keep trying.
    
    your waaaay ahead of peple like lovemylibs, endo, libsRfunny, etc.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    8 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned7 Replies
      - 100%
        NoWayMan8 months, 4 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        lets be honest. when it isn't applied correctly and the (supoosedly sarcastic) anaolgy doesn't make sense, it just comes off as snarky.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        6 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned5 Replies
        
        100%
        NoWayMan8 months, 4 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        oh, they snark where i come from. thats why I can tell the difference so easily.
        
        you wanted proof about Bachman and i provided it. thats how this exchange started.
        
        now you want proof of "the glut of conservative rhetoric calling for armed uprising" which I never mentioned. I was just talking about Bachman, her role as an elected official, and her irresponsible behavior as to her choice of language.
        
        your original questioned was asked and answered.
        
        but now you want to change it?
        
        hmmm. interesting.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        4 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned3 Replies
        
        100%
        NoWayMan8 months, 4 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        No. I don't think there's a concerted effort on the right for armed uprising that was planned in some dark, smoky room somewhere.
        
        but I do think Bachman is a crank and an irresposible elected official. and I do think its the GOP's responsibility to reign her in a bit since she is part of their larger team and she's making her team look like a bunch of cranks by extension if they just sit on their hands about it.
        
        most of the inciteful language from the right seems to coming from private sources, like hannity and rush limbaugh. I don't like it, but the first amendment is there to protect even rush limbaugh, and we are free to yell back or boycott his sponsors or whatever.
        
        the problem that I have with the right and the seeming rise of this type of language is that no one on the right is stepping up to be the voice of reason (besides maybe McCain's daughter). all we hear right now are the bachmans and hannitys and limbaughs. and it ain't like foxnews is supporting a centrist message. this seems to be all they put on.
        
        so, how else am I supposed to perceive the right and their goals when they seemingly have no goal but to obstruct, have no ideas to offer, and all we hear is complaining and language that's derisive in its delivery and divisive in its meaning?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        100%
        gamahuche8 months, 4 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        "sorry if I'm lost."
        You got that right, if nothing else.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned

Post Reply

You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.

People Who Liked This Comment (18)

People Who Didn't Like This Comment (6)

Submit a Story

Advertisement