Gunman At Planned Parenthood

BedellBrave said:
Do they pull it off better than this guy?
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by "pull it off." They've transitioned well and are very accomplished in their respective fields. They won't win any beauty contests but when has life been all about physical beauty.
 
Wow Bedell -- this just about was your point from the minute this happened. Even the use of the word deranged.
Personally , I think you need to exppand your reading list -- because the playbook you've been given hasn't had such a good track record the past ---- oh say, 10-15 years

Right-Wing Media Try to Distract From Abortion Clinic Shooting

When the shooting that killed three at a Colorado Planned Parenthood clinic -- where the alleged killer, Robert Dear, reportedly ranted about "baby parts" after the crime -- occurred, the folks at CNSNews.com, the "news" division of the right-wing Media Research Center, knew what it had to do: change the narrative.

First on the agenda: dismiss the shooter as crazy, despite the fact that no psychological evaluation of Dear has been performed or otherwise made public. CNS articles portray Dear as "an apparently unstable man," highlighted Dear's "several run-ins with police" touted a Republican congressman's suggestion that Dear has "mental problems" and promoted GOP presidential candidates calling Dear a "madman" and "very unstable," not to mention "deranged."

CNS has done this before; it repeatedly portrayed Scott Roeder, killer of abortion doctor George Tiller, as mentally unstable despite the fact that he did not mount an insanity defense at his trial and a psychologist hired by his own defense found Roeder competent to stand trial.

The next step was to separate Dear from the anti-abortion movement, even though he was echoing its attacks on Planned Parenthood. CNS reporter Lauretta Brown countered statements by NARAL Pro-Choice America president Ilyse Hogue condemning the killings and those who apparently inspired Dear with statements from anti-abortion groups denouncing violence.

Brown quoted the Center for Medical Progress' denunciation of the killings -- in which Dear was dismissed as a "violent madman" -- and proudly noted CMP's "undercover videos over the summer showing Planned Parenthood's harvesting of aborted baby parts," but she did not mention that Dear was ranting about "baby parts" during his rampage.

Similarly, Brown highlighted Operation Rescue's statement denouncing the shooting, but she didn't mention that Operation Rescue official Cheryl Sullenger spent time in prison for plotting to blow up an abortion clinic.

Because Hogue specifically called out Operation Rescue president Troy Newman for "using Operation Rescue to call for state-sanctioned execution of doctors who serve women," Brown went further into defense mode on him as well, repeating an earlier Operation Rescue statement that "Newman has never advocated violence against abortion providers or facilities and has instead adamantly encouraged pro-life activists to work through the legal, legislative, and justice systems to bring abortionists who are breaking the law and harming women to justice."

But claiming that abortion doctors should go through the legal system before being executed is still demanding that they be executed, no matter how much Operation Rescue tries to deny it; the statement from Newman's book "Their Blood Cries Out," which Hogue was referencing, does not differentiate between abortion doctors doing their job legally and "abortionists who are breaking the law."

Brown concluded her article with an apparent attempt to justify the shooting and blame Planned Parenthood itself for it by quoting Mother Teresa: "f we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"

But CNS was not done. Managing editor Michael W. Chapman tried to change the subject altogether with an article on "The latest abortion surveillance report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention," in which "55.4 percent were performed on black or Hispanic mothers." He also wrote a companion article noting that "in New York City 76.4% of the abortions reported by race were of black and Hispanic babies."

Chapman was silent on the ethnicities of the people Robert Dear murdered while apparently inflamed by anti-abortion rhetoric.
 
57Brave said:
Good lord, y'all jump the gun again ..

"A clerical error is to blame for suspected Planned Parenthood shooter Robert L. Dear being listed as a woman on his Colorado voter registration form, officials said Tuesday, a detail that fueled speculation he may have identified as transgender."

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympl...-planned-parenthood-attack-suspect#.xbLQBM7kB
Click to expand...

Good - at least he doesn't think he's a woman! At least his eyes work okay.

50, is the one who brought up his mental state and most everyone that's not a rabid, leftist homer, agrees that his mental stability is at issue - this is not just a problem with guns or evidence of the evils of Pro-Lifers - the narrative you've peddled from the get-go (predictable clockwork).
 
BedellBrave said:
Good - at least he doesn't think he's a woman! At least his eyes work okay.

50, is the one who brought up his mental state and most everyone that's not a rabid, leftist homer, agrees that his mental stability is at issue - this is not just a problem with guns or evidence of the evils of Pro-Lifers - the narrative you've peddled from the get-go (predictable clockwork).
Click to expand...

I did bring that up and I think more than anything, the mental state of Mr. Dear is what is in play here. I think one can argue, perhaps convincingly, that this is an "oily rags in the basement" situation. One can decry Planned Parenthood and urge its de-funding, but the level of rhetoric over Planned Parenthood has been incendiary to say the least and it may have sent Mr. Dear way around the edge. He was already around the edge, but his previous anti-Planned Parenthood activity appears to have been limited to putting Super Glue in a clinic's locks. When civility is surrendered and everyone adopts a "take no prisoners" attitude, those with little self-control easily fall into the swells of the waves. I want to make it clear that I think both sides--left and right--are engaging in pained indignance which simply p*sses off those of us who believe this is a great country and want to see it continue to move boldly into the future.
 
^^^ Much I agree with in 50's post - with this major caveat - Not saying you are doing this 50, but criticism against speech that's deemed over the top (by whose standard?) can be a power play, and means of dismissing the message.

I am a huge Flannery O'Connor fan and she was criticized and her writing belittled as being grotesque and her response I think was spot on - she knew what was grotesque, moderns didn't so much and so sometimes you have to draw grotesque pictures and shout. There is a prophetic role to be played whether folks like to hear it or not.

Now, that said, the Pro-Life message is not, "Abortion is murder, therefore murder abortionists." No more than, "Black lives matter, therefore murder cops who murder blacks." The abuse of a hard but truthful message isn't legitimate justification for gutting or silencing that message, imho.
 
BedellBrave said:
^^^ Much I agree with in 50's post - with this major caveat - Not saying you are doing this 50, but criticism against speech that's deemed over the top (by whose standard?) can be a power play, and means of dismissing the message.

I am a huge Flannery O'Connor fan and she was criticized and her writing belittled as being grotesque and her response I think was spot on - she knew what was grotesque, moderns didn't so much and so sometimes you have to draw grotesque pictures and shout. There is a prophetic role to be played whether folks like to hear it or not.

Now, that said, the Pro-Life message is not, "Abortion is murder, therefore murder abortionists." No more than, "Black lives matter, therefore murder cops who murder blacks." The abuse of a hard but truthful message isn't legitimate justification for gutting or silencing that message, imho.
Click to expand...

I hate the extreme crap too, but to be honest wasn't the whole "the enemy of my enemy must be my friend" pretty much at the core of our foreign policy throughout the Cold War era? I think it's actually ingrained in our national DNA now. The murder of someone you disagree with is still murder. I hate abortion but killing an abortion worker is murder just the same as what those people claim to be against.
 
Gobry - link

"...In a sense, you have to feel sorry for the progressives here. One reason why they're clearly grasping at straws is because what's striking about the pro-life movement is how astonishingly little terrorism it produces. First, let's be clear about one thing: Every single mass movement, no matter how peaceful the aims and methods of its leadership, will have a violent fringe. That's just how human nature works. There was the civil rights movement, and there were Black Panthers. Zionism. Arab nationalism. You name it. Under Apartheid South Africa, the armed wing of the African National Congress conducted acts of sabotage and bombings that killed people, including civilians. If you're anything like me, you find it hard to feel too badly about black South Africans responding with force to Apartheid, which, of course, is precisely my point.

Can you name an organization that is to the pro-life movement as the Black Panthers were to the civil-rights movement, or as the IRA was to the cause of Irish independence? No, you can't, because such an organization doesn't exist.

Psychopaths are around 1 percent of the general population. Roughly half of Americans identify as pro-life, which means that if psychopaths are evenly spread among pro-lifers, there are about one million and a half pro-life psychopaths going around. Not even counting the countless "normal" people who surely have been turned into bloodthirsty maniacs by pro-life rhetoric.

So, how many people have these millions of pro-life psychos murdered over the past 40 years that the pro-life movement has been around? Eight.

Eight people is not nothing. It's also less people killed over 40 years than Nidal Hasan killed in 10 minutes, less than were killed in Columbine High School over the span of an hour.

Aren't progressives supposed to be constantly warning us to be rational about the risks of terrorism? One week ago, it was crazy to be concerned about terrorists sneaking into the West among Middle East refugees, even after terrorists snuck into the West among Middle East refugees. Because the odds of being killed by a terrorist are lower than the odds of being killed by falling furniture!

If anything, the dearth of pro-life terrorism is usually deployed as an argument against pro-lifers. I wish I'd had a nickel for every time a progressive told me that if pro-lifers really believed fetuses are human beings, then they would rise up in arms, because the current abortion regime would rival the Holocaust. In other words, we don't believe what we say we believe — we're hypocrites. (Of course, if we did condone killing abortionists, we would clearly be hypocrites, because that wouldn't be very "pro-life." Heads I win, tails you lose.)..."
 
I think you can be ardently pro-life and support defunding Planned Parenthood without going the Cruz/Fiorina route. All that kind of rhetoric serves to do is turn up the heat in an unhealthy way.

And, as I said, both sides are doing it. Left-of-Center folks are just as big on giant, evil conspiracies as those on the Right and the rhetoric they often employ is just as reprehensible.

Barry Goldwater once said, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." I don't agree because I believe extremism by its very nature is going to compromise the liberty of someone.
 
50PoundHead said:
I think you can be ardently pro-life and support defunding Planned Parenthood without going the Cruz/Fiorina route. All that kind of rhetoric serves to do is turn up the heat in an unhealthy way.

And, as I said, both sides are doing it. Left-of-Center folks are just as big on giant, evil conspiracies as those on the Right and the rhetoric they often employ is just as reprehensible.

Barry Goldwater once said, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." I don't agree because I believe extremism by its very nature is going to compromise the liberty of someone.
Click to expand...

One man's "ardent" is another man's "over the top" or "dangerous" or "extreme." And note, few would ever view themselves as "extreme." Who gets to decide what's extreme or hate speech?
 
BedellBrave said:
One man's "ardent" is another man's "over the top" or "dangerous" or "extreme." And note, few would ever view themselves as "extreme." Who gets to decide what's extreme or hate speech?
Click to expand...

I'm just saying people in positions of responsibility or seeking to ascend to positions of responsibility should check their own rhetoric. Fiorina's self-righteous display at the one Republican debate had only one purpose and that was self-promotion. We have come to a time in history when somehow being deliberative and circumspect is viewed as weakness while acting like a lunatic qualifies one to be a leader.

And once again, as a denizen of the Left, I find the vocal behavior of many in my village to be equally deplorable.,
 
50, I don't think we are that far apart in reality. But, I have no problem calling what PP does in regards to abortion, evil and heinous. Nor do I have a problem with Florina or others saying the same thing.
 
BedellBrave said:
50, I don't think we are that far apart in reality. But, I have no problem calling what PP does in regards to abortion, evil and heinous. Nor do I have a problem with Florina or others saying the same thing.
Click to expand...

It's not what she said, it was the over-the-top way in which she said it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top