Jump to content
Surprising to see at least one of our resident demagogues dialing back the rhetoric. Be interesting to see if it lasts. Color me skeptical.
I'm actually in agreement on one isolated point: George Zimmerman acted stupidly. The cops arrived about 60 seconds after he blasted the kid. If Zimmerman had stayed in his car, the kid would be alive & Zimmerman wouldn't have a target on his back.
The kid acted even more stupidly. The reality is that each man assumed the worst about the other. Martin's knee jerk reaction to that assumption was to attack someone he knew nothing about. Zimmerman pulled as a last resort. Martin's first instinct was violence and bloodshed, and it got him killed. No one is obliged to take a beating. Oliver Wendell Holmes had it right: The right to swing your fist ends where the other man's nose begins. The law agrees with Holmes. And Zimmerman.
Regarding me and my dad being "emboldened" - that's a load of crap. In each instance, we were penned in with no means of retreat; outnumbered two to one. Dad was actively trying evacuate his wife and kid from a bad situation, and was blocked from leaving. In both cases all parties involved went their own separate ways - peacefully.
It's instructive that during all this back & forth over the parameters of self-defense and bravery & cowardice, the only - and multiple - threats of bodily harm have come from the gun control side of the argument. RJ has been explicit, and extended an open ended offer: "Anytime, anywhere" so he can wail on me with his thunderous left. He's assured me I wouldn't last 15 seconds. Or is it only 5? I forget. As it turns out, he's a ferocious badass. Just ask him.
If you watch one of the later (& possibly the very last) of the war room scenes very carefully, you can see the actor who plays the Russian ambassador struggling - and not always successfully - to keep it together, because Sellers is so freaking hysterical. I've read they had to do more takes of that scene than any other because the entire crew was finding it difficult to keep their composure.
Did you follow the link?
Fluoridation: the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face.
So many trolls. So easily worked into a lather like Pavlov's rabid cur. He's here all week, folks. Tip your waitress! And someone bring a mop - there's no end to its drool.
"I'm not biting your bile bait today. You try to have a good one. Go kill something."
"I just agitate the turds pond scum opposition."
"That wasn't a snide tone. That was me calling names directly, exposing the blowhard racist for what he is."
"...this forum serves a continuing purpose, in that it is a release for pent-up frustrations and aggressions, where one can facelessly pound one's chest and act the big man, with none being the wiser " [Gotta love the irony in that one; especially the 'facelessly pounding one's chest' whine, from the faceless chest pounder showing us what a big man he is, with his thunderous left and stuff]
By golly, Steve - you're right. It's little man stuff. What's even more pathetic is that your self-righteous indignation is so selective. Says more about you than you realize.
"...the shank was not for hurting anyone." I'll buy that. It was probably for buttering his toast. Or etching a lovely Haiku into his bar of soap.
I'm guessing no one ever bumped into the Johnsons at a Mensa meeting.
And speaking of straw men, the malignant punk never said 'he will aggressively defend himself' - from anything. Your words, and not at all what the malignant punk wrote. It posted: I will hurt you.
So it's okay for you to interpret and paraphrase what other people say; to assign criminal intent to people you've never met - those you disagree with are not allowed to so presume.
I forgot to add "raging hypocrite" to stupid, malicious, and cowardly.
Straw men? Hardly.
Your immediate contribution after the malignant punk issued its pansy ass threat was to WRITE: Above Rhys offers that he will aggressively defend himself if Mark pulls a gun. That is offensive? I don't get that at all.
And that’s when you deployed your ‘It’s okay to threaten a law abiding citizen because we’re assuming he’s a murderous scumbag’ jive. While simultaneously wailing about how absurd it is that anyone would dare ascribe ill intent to you and the malignant punk.
The semantic contortions you’ve gone through to administer your uber-lubricated hand job are truly remarkable. I haven’t decided yet if it’s a function of stupidity, malice, or cowardice.
I suspect it’s a conflation of the three.
In other words, it's "absurd" for me to presume that Rhys (or you) would ever threaten a law abiding citizen. But it's not absurd for you and Rhys to presume that law abiding citizens like me and Mark would deploy our weapons with the sole intent of committing a violent crime; which according to you is the premise and rationale for Rhys's candy-ass preemptive threat.
Double standard much?
Last login: yesterday
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2015 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.