Michael Moore Speaks The Truth On Twitter; Right Wingers Lose Their Minds Over It
Conservatives absolutely love to hate filmmaker Michael Moore. Anytime Moore so much as speaks a line of truth to power, they collectively go bonkers, lose their minds, and line up to attack him.
And it has happened yet again. This time,l as the result of a comment he posted on Twitter shortly after the horrible deaths of nine churchgoing people in Charleston, South Carolina, at the hands of admitted murderer Dylann Roof. Moore wrote:
One proud White American, in less than 2 minutes, has killed TWICE as many Americans as ISIS has in 2 years. White Terrorists. #WISIS.
— Michael Moore (@MMFlint) June 19, 2015
For more of this story, go to LiberalAmerica.org.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2015 Liberaland
By: Andrew Bradford
Andrew Bradford is an author, academic, and political activist who lives in Atlanta. He is a Senior Writer for Liberal America and also has his own blog at deepleftfield.info
127 responses to Michael Moore Speaks The Truth On Twitter; Right Wingers Lose Their Minds Over It
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
whatthe46 June 23rd, 2015 at 13:34
this is gonna be good.
arc99 June 23rd, 2015 at 13:42
A moment of clarity for me.
Until now, I never realized that Jack Nicholson’s character in “A Few Good Men” was talking to American conservatives.
You Can’t Handle the Truth! – A Few Good Men (7/8) Movie CLIP (1992) HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FnO3igOkOk
whatthe46 June 23rd, 2015 at 13:45
good on arc99.
allison1050 June 23rd, 2015 at 14:09
All More said was the truth and they’re “bothered” by that it happens every time.
illinoisboy1977 June 23rd, 2015 at 14:17
I don’t understand the point of the tweet. Was he trying to say that all whites are terrorists? Was he bragging that our terrorists kill more Americans? Was he making an attempt at humorous observation? I just don’t get it.
Hirightnow June 23rd, 2015 at 14:23
Of COURSE you don’t get it!
Everything that criticizes your group HAS to be either an attack on every member of the group, a siding with your enemies, or the product of a deranged mind.
No way could he have made a straightforward observation about how America is harmed more from within than it is by the very people that those who ARE harming America rail about constantly as a threat.
whatthe46 June 23rd, 2015 at 14:32
you know that went over his head right?
Hirightnow June 23rd, 2015 at 20:44
Yeah, but personal integrity forces me to make the attempt.
whatthe46 June 23rd, 2015 at 21:34
and i love it. keep it up.
tracey marie June 23rd, 2015 at 14:25
I don’t get it, are you playing stupid or are you stupid?
Larry Schmitt June 23rd, 2015 at 14:30
Can’t he be both?
illinoisboy1977 June 23rd, 2015 at 14:56
Maybe having a stupid moment, as I really had difficulty discerning his point. I think I get it, now. I was just slow on the uptake.
fahvel June 24th, 2015 at 03:25
please TM, he is consistently stupid.
Larry Schmitt June 23rd, 2015 at 14:30
He specifically said ONE proud white American. He was pointing out that cons miss the home grown terrorist threat while flying into a tizzy about ISIS coming across the Mexican border. Is that specific enough for you?
OldLefty June 23rd, 2015 at 14:53
He was simply pointing out that we are so scared of violence at the hands of foreigners and Muslims, when we are more at risk from violence by armed wackos who are not foreign or Muslims.
It reminds me of my late mom (a heavy smoker) who complained about not being able to sleep in a hotel room because the heat/cooling vent was dirty and, “who knows WHAT I was breathing in…”.
I responded, “Mom!! YOU smoke 2 packs a day!!!”
“Well, that’s different, who knows what THIS is… could be legionnaires disease or anything!! Who knows!!
“But you DO know what you are breathing in with the cigarettes”.
“I guess”, with that “why can’t you be on my side” sigh.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 00:38
Actually, by the statistics, you are most at risk at gun violence if you are a young, black male that is surrounded by young, black males. According to the Washington Post, blacks make up the bulk of firearm-related homicide victims, despite making up only 13 percent of the population. According to the US Dept. of Justice, blacks also accounted for 52.5% of homicide offenders from 1980-2008.
Correlation does not equal causation, of course. I’m just saying, based on statistics, your chances of avoiding gun violence is lower if you happen to have darker skin. There are a plethora of possibilities as to why this could be, from the victim’s income, to the perpetrator’s income, to your home’s distance from gang territories (and the territorial “wars,” that occur there), to actually being in a gang (blacks make up roughly half of all gang members, and the reasons for joining are as diverse as the reasons for experiencing gun violence, whether you are on the receiving end, or the giving end).
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 06:11
That is true of poor minorities in all countries, including Chinese in Japan.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 06:16
You’ll hear no arguments from me. That said, if memory serves, Japan is virtually gun free, isn’t it?
rg9rts June 24th, 2015 at 06:18
Any stats on cop shooting blacks vs shooting whites???
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 06:24
I actually don’t have any stats about that. That said, much like the prison population being majority-black (whites make up a larger percentage when Hispanics are combined), there are two possible reasons for this:
1. Blacks are committing more and worse crimes, and are worse at not getting caught
2. There is a nationwide bias against blacks.
In my humble opinion, the reasons don’t have to be exclusive; it can be both. This is why I believe that all police officers should be equipped with cameras, where the video is kept in an archive for 2 or 3 years. It protects both civilian, AND the police. That way, there would be no need to rely on witness testimony, which is the least reliable form of evidence.
rg9rts June 24th, 2015 at 10:07
NYC paid $440,000,000 for cop screwups in 13 ….31 million to outfit them with cams…it should be a city priority…Then you have that used buttwipe Lynch …head of the PBA that will fight it. Like they fought dash cams till they saw it helped them too.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 10:12
Like I said, it protects both sides. There is no reason not to implement them.
rg9rts June 24th, 2015 at 10:34
Sometime the ignorant have to have their noses rubbed in their stupidity to understand
jasperjava June 24th, 2015 at 12:53
“Both sides”?
You’re insane.
The American people, and the responsible democratic constitutional government that they created, are on the same “side”.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is a dangerous anti-goverment undemocratic freak.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 22:46
So I am an anti-government, undemocratic freak for saying that cameras on police uniforms protect the police from false allegations, while also protecting civilian from abuse?
jasperjava June 24th, 2015 at 23:41
I misread your reply. I was still reeling from your insane idea that the Second Amendment allows for armed terrorists to slaughter our elected government officials and install themselves as dictators.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 25th, 2015 at 00:07
I never said those words. Once you are done trying to put words in my mouth, you can reply in the appropriate place (as I have already responded to that).
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 06:21
I think so.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 06:36
Can I safely assume that you were referring to homicides, and not gun violence, or am I mistaken?
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 06:45
I don’t think it matters.
There are a lot of Chinese gangs in Japan, (and gangs in India where the “racial minorities” are based on parts of India they are from).
Where guns are more freely available and are worshiped, there is more gun violence.
Someone previously posted; http://www.gunrundown.com/
This is similar to the Daily Kos’s “gun fail” which is about “accidents” by so called “responsible” gun owners.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 06:49
I will agree with you that it really doesn’t matter. This is why Great Britain requires ID in order to purchase cutlery. If guns are taken, and the gang members can’t get their hands on gun, you’ll see them make weapons out of whatever they can, right down to and including sharpened pool cues.
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 07:10
But you have a much better chance.
As the late, great Molly Ivins said, “Let me start this discussion by pointing out that I am not anti-gun. I’m pro-knife. Consider the merits of the knife.In the first place, you have catch up with someone in order to stab him. A general substitution of knives for guns would promote physical fitness. We’d turn into a whole nation of great runners. Plus, knives don’t ricochet. And people are seldom killed while cleaning their knives.”
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 07:14
You don’t have to run faster if you know how to throw it, and, when thrown, they CAN ricochet.
As a rebellious mouse once said to a slave driver in a Redwall novel, “A knife can reach much farther than a sword, if you know how to use it.”
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 07:24
That’s REALLY a stretch, especially as we are dealing with tons of people (gun owners) who have neither the skill or the discipline to learn it.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 07:28
I think you would be surprised what lengths people go to. The following is a working gun that was made by someone in a prison. I’ll grant you that its crude, but you also have to grant me that there was a constant risk of the guards catching him at any point in time. I also have an image of a working shotgun, made from pieces of a prison bed and some wire, if you are interested.
The cat is out of the bag, it would seem. People who want them badly enough will have no problem getting a working one in their hands.
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 07:32
No, I wouldn’t be, but get back to me when they take out multiple people in a short time in a single mass knifing.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 07:38
Pretty sure that happened just over a year ago in a school. A kid went running down the school halls slashing everyone he could reach.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/10/suspect-in-custody-after-reports-multiple-stabbings-at-pennsylvania-school/
Yeah, I know it’s Fox News. It was the first result from Duck Duck Go. But I think that qualifies as a mass stabbing, with 22 victims.
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 07:43
Nobody died.
If it had been a gun, 22 would have likely been dead.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 08:19
We’ll never know, thankfully. Doesn’t change the fact that there was a mass stabbing, which is what you asked for.
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 08:39
I think it’s EXACTLY the opposite.
I guess I should have specified death, as in mass shootings.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 09:03
I don’t know what you mean when you say that you think it’s exactly the opposite. Could you please elaborate?
As for death, while I acknowledge that there were no deaths, there could have been, had he been aiming for necks. It doesn’t change the fact that if there can be a mass stabbing with 22 victims, it certainly lends credence to the possibility of it happening with a lack of guns.
I acknowledge there is a disease in the US, and it winds up killing a lot of people who don’t suffer the disease. Things like this were unheard of even 70 short years ago. I just think that taking guns away is the equivalent of putting a bandaid on a leaky dam. We need to get to the root of the problem, and do our best to fix it.
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 09:38
There is no comparison between the amount of damage that can be done with a high capacity magazine and a knife in a short time.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 09:51
That has literally nothing to do with anything that we’ve been talking about recently, but since you decided to bring it up, lets address it.
Why do you think the government ever allowed the creation of such a thing? Military purpose, I would wager. Do you disagree?
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 09:55
That IS what we are talking about and why would the government allow the creation of what such thing??
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 09:57
You don’t think military purposes had anything to do with it, then? You have no idea why it would ever be created? I’m open to alternatives, if you have any.
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 10:10
I think they are created because the industry makes money and the culture glamorizes them.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 10:11
That was their original purpose, then? Just glamor? No other purpose, like say, to allow soldiers to fire more bullets without needing to reload?
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 10:17
I think that military use and personal use are very different.
We don’t allow private citizens to own Bradley tanks, but they have a use in the military.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 10:29
You are jumping the gun a bit (though we will most certainly get to that). I don’t want to skip steps. Would you say that ORIGINAL purpose of high capacity magazines was for military purposes?
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 10:35
Probably, as was ALL weaponry.
That has nothing to do with MY interest in this discussion (perhaps we are simply talking around each other)
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 10:47
We aren’t, or, at least, I don’t think we are. I just don’t want to rush ahead and miss anything (I find it more thorough).
Now, I’m going to take it that the original purpose of high capacity magazines was for military purposes. Now the government has something that civilians don’t have. This is somewhat of a problem, as civilians have the 2nd ammendment for one very simple reason: as a means to resist the government should it go tyranical (and democracies have gone tyranical all the time).
However, we don’t let civilians have everything that the military has, and for good reason. You mentioned a tank earlier. There are plenty of other things, too, like fighter jets, RPGs, grenades, fully automatic weaponry, and mines, just to name a few. The difference between all the things listed and a semi automatic assault rifle is that, with all those other things, one trigger pull means multiple deaths. You can’t selectively kill an individual in a crowd with an RPG, or even a fully automatic weapon, for example. You CAN with a semi-auto rifle, even if you have 300 rounds in a magazine.
In order to resist the government in the event that it goes tyranical, the people NEED the means to defend themselves with weaponry that can oppose large numbers of people. This is why these types of weaponry are necessary, and why the people need them.
If you want to address gun violence, handguns cause the overwhelming amount of gun violence and gun death. This is consistent year after year. If we are to speak of banning any weapons, and be consistent, we need to start by looking at the handguns.
jasperjava June 24th, 2015 at 12:58
The Second Amendment is NOT instituted to provide the means for the population to resist their government.
READ the damn thing, for crying out loud.
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to DEFEND the free state, not to allow a bunch of armed radical freaks to depose the democratically-elected will of the people in a coup d’état.
You’re sick.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 22:41
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Now, a free state is a non-oppressive state. Tyrannies are oppressive. When a government goes tyrannical, it is up to the people to put a stop to it. This is exactly why the Revolutionary War happened. The people were being highly taxed, and given very little, if anything, in return by the state.
As for the wording of the law, there always seems to be someone who doesn’t understand the words. It’s a fierce debate, as people argue that the militias should have a right to keep and bear arms. However, I am going to dispute that, as well.
Lets change out just a couple of nouns, and make a new example
“A well-balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed.”
Who has the right to food? A “well-balanced breakfast” or “the people?”
As a final argument, I present a youtube video explaining the right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4zE0K22zH8
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 10:05
And, for the record, we WERE speaking of gun violence.
OldLefty June 24th, 2015 at 10:09
And, for the record, we WERE speaking of gun violence.
______
Yes. ???
madashellnow June 24th, 2015 at 11:42
Maybe it’s because these folks have not learned to respect other’s lives and property and they have no ethics. Mom always told us that lacking money was NO EXCUSE for bad behavior. These folks haven’t learned that.
Dwendt44 June 24th, 2015 at 12:31
By statistics, a gun owner is more likely to be shot by himself or a member of his family.
ohpaleasegivemeabreak June 23rd, 2015 at 15:03
No shock. (eyeroll)
He’s pointing out the HYPOCRISY of your peeps – i.e.: Rick (Ni**erhead Resort or Camp or whatever that was) Perry saying it was an ACCIDENT that this psycho murdered 9 people in a couple of minutes while declaring he was doing it because they were BLACK and it’s come out that he HATED BLACKS and wanted to start a RACE WAR.
That’s just the tip of the right wing nitwit reactions nightmare but I am not the tiniest bit surprised that you don’t get it at all.
Sheese.
Dim dim dim..
AAASuperPatriot June 23rd, 2015 at 18:22
>> I don’t understand the point of the tweet. Was he trying to say that all whites are terrorists?
Oh, c’mon. I don’t believe you for a second. Of course you understand his point.
And he’s white for goodness sakes. He’s not going to say all whites are terrorists — that would include him.
illinoisboy1977 June 24th, 2015 at 10:53
I actually didn’t get it, yesterday. I was running on about 2 hours of sleep and I was NOT very quick on the uptake.
Chris June 23rd, 2015 at 19:45
I’ll explain the obvious (to everyone else, apparently):
Homegrown terrorism has killed more Americans than ISIS has.
Now, was that so hard?
Dwendt44 June 23rd, 2015 at 20:26
And the wacky right only cares about ISIS, not the racists or home grown terrorists.
illinoisboy1977 June 24th, 2015 at 10:52
Yet. They haven’t killed as many Americans, YET. They’re not dead and defeated, so there’s always a chance that they’ll try to attack Americans abroad, or even try to sneak into this country and wreak havoc. But, I’ll concede Mr. Moore’s point that, thus far, he’s right.
Chris June 24th, 2015 at 12:26
You probably believed there were WMDs in Iraq immediately before we invaded, and that we could have won in Vietnam if we just stayed there longer and bombed more.
illinoisboy1977 June 24th, 2015 at 12:45
We had no business in Vietnam. The reports fo WMD were flawed, but even if they werent, I never believed we had any business in Iraq. Hussein had things well in hand, there. He was a bastard, but at least he was a harmless bastard, to our interests.
I do believe that ISIS will do all they can, to attack American interests. It’s one of their main goals. Even if it never comes to pass, the safe thing to do is to assume that it will and stay on the lookout for anything peculiar. I’d rather report suspicious activity to the police and be wrong, than not report something important and see innocent people get hurt.
The Original Just Me June 23rd, 2015 at 21:44
American Terrorists are Angry, Old, White Guys. Does that ring any of your Bells ?
crc3 June 23rd, 2015 at 23:02
You might want to rethink that “old” part because Roof is 21. Sadly there are many haters that are young mostly because of “bad parenting”…
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 00:19
What qualifies as a terrorist in your mind, if you don’t mind me asking?
If you could connect your definition to white guys who just happen to be irate, I would appreciate it greatly.
cwazycajun June 24th, 2015 at 10:40
right wing malitia see clive bundy the three percenters ,, oaf keepers etc etc..angry white men who need to run around with there semi autos pointed at law enforcement those angry white men…..
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 10:50
So they are terrorists because they irritate law enforcers? Or because they have semi-auto guns? Or both?
The reason I ask is because there were people in Ferguson during the riots that were irritating law enforment. More than a couple of these people had semi automatic pistols, as well (as far as I know, pistols are considered guns). They also destroyed property. Are they terrorists?
illinoisboy1977 June 24th, 2015 at 10:40
Not all are. Just the ones who get the most press.
crc3 June 23rd, 2015 at 22:57
You’re kidding right? Oh wait…..
TuMadre, Ph.D June 24th, 2015 at 00:18
I don’t get it either. I consider it a good thing that ISIS hasn’t successfully attacked any Americans on US soil.
illinoisboy1977 June 24th, 2015 at 10:25
It’s a VERY good thing. Just don’t get too comfortable with the idea. It WILL happen, someday. Be vigilant and always have a plan to get yourself out of the line of fire.
cwazycajun June 24th, 2015 at 10:37
especially if you see some gun tote’in pseudo- second amendment asshtaa walkin toward ya..get down
Bunya June 24th, 2015 at 17:11
Oooh. It’s a good thing you have your killing devices loaded and ready. They’ll be here any day now so don’t get too comfortable! Be very vigilant and stand guard by your window, clutching your firearm of choice! If you see someone walk past your house at night, take no chances. Shoot first, ask questions later! It may be a Jihadist coming to get you.
illinoisboy1977 June 24th, 2015 at 18:37
If that’s how you’d use a firearm, you probably shouldn’t have one. You really are presumptuous about people, based on nothing else than the fact that they own guns, aren’t you? I thought people on the left were against prejudging entire groups, based on the actions of individuals. Hmm…
Bunya June 24th, 2015 at 23:46
Don’t take it personally. I actually like you. You come off as an honest, sensible person and a very intelligent debater. I really have nothing against gun ownership (although I, myself, wouldn’t own one), and I know the majority of owners are responsible, but some days I just like to razz you.
illinoisboy1977 June 25th, 2015 at 09:31
Hey, I’m always game for a bit of fun!
ribbie149 June 28th, 2015 at 19:58
It’s a good thing that Martians haven’t attacked either.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 28th, 2015 at 20:05
I’m not sure if that is supposed to be dismissive of what I’ve said or not. Are you implying that an ISIS attack is about as likely as an attack from something we have yet to prove exists? Because I’m fairly sure Europe just got a bunch of attacks a couple of days ago.
whatthe46 June 28th, 2015 at 20:22
9 people were attacked and murdered by a racist terroist pos, and as of today, 6 black churches were burned by racists terrorist in SC, and they are Americans. and you’re worried about ISIS?
TuMadre, Ph.D June 28th, 2015 at 20:25
It’s only possible to be worried about ISIS OR racists? Not both?
whatthe46 June 28th, 2015 at 20:28
one is more of a threat than the other. crazy ass white racist are here right now. then you have your mcveighs.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 28th, 2015 at 20:32
You didn’t really answer my question. I don’t have a right to be concerned about both?
whatthe46 June 28th, 2015 at 20:38
you can be. but, one is more of a concern than the other. and if you want to drive yourself crazy over one that’s less like to happen, when American terrorist are active as we speak, then by all means fine.
TuMadre, Ph.D June 28th, 2015 at 20:40
Considering that a couple days ago, ISIS performed a “Day of Terror,” I think that both are worth being worried about.
whatthe46 June 28th, 2015 at 20:54
was it here? NOPE
TuMadre, Ph.D June 28th, 2015 at 21:10
Ok. No church has burned in my town, or even within 500 miles of me. Guess that means that it isn’t a big deal for me, using your logic.
Or maybe, death is death, and destruction is destruction, and both are valid concerns.
fahvel June 24th, 2015 at 03:23
never ever show your stupid or dirty underwear in public.
illinoisboy1977 June 24th, 2015 at 10:23
Ignorance isn’t stupidity. It’s a lack of understanding, which can be allieviated with the correct information. I completely agree on the underwear part, though. Sharts are embarrassing.
rg9rts June 24th, 2015 at 06:09
Do you see the word ALL anywhere in his comment??? Must be your conazi mind set
ribbie149 June 28th, 2015 at 19:57
He was trying to say that our fears and priorities are misplaced. American white terrorists are far more dangerous to us than ISIS is, yet conservatives can’t wait to start another unwinnable war. I’m not surprised it went over your head, given the current location of it.
whatthe46 June 28th, 2015 at 20:18
HAHAHAHAHA
Budda June 23rd, 2015 at 15:51
And guns have killed more Americans since 1968 than our total war dead since 1776
Red Eye Robot June 24th, 2015 at 18:11
So have cars, drugs, alcohol tobacco. How many has fast food killed? According to the CDC abuse and neglect kills 6000 kids a year. What’s your point? You like statistics? There are 3,000,000 more Americans carrying concealed weapons than served in the entire Vietnam war.
tracey marie June 24th, 2015 at 18:26
deflection troll
Budda June 24th, 2015 at 20:58
The point is: guns are weapons to kill, cars, drugs, alcohol etc are not made to kill.
Here is a statistic for you; conservatives are less informed and have lower IQs than liberals.
Budda June 24th, 2015 at 21:06
http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html
Red Eye Robot June 25th, 2015 at 06:19
Alcohol which isn’t designed to kill, kills more people annually than guns which are designed to kill. Thanks for clearing that up.
Hirightnow June 25th, 2015 at 07:01
Actually, alcohol wasn’t “designed”; it’s a naturally occurring chemical compound that humans managed to figure out.
There’s nothing as analogous to firearms in nature.
Budda June 25th, 2015 at 08:37
Heart disease kills over half a million Americans a year . To compare that and alcohol to gun deaths is irrelevant, it is the classic strawman. Here is the logic for you; people don’t drink alcohol to kill but people do shoot a gun to kill.
Red Eye Robot July 6th, 2015 at 15:46
People don’t drink alcohol to kill yet it kills far more people than something that is designed to kill? Thanks for clearing that up.
Budda July 6th, 2015 at 18:37
Some folks do not have a clue about the obvious…yo’re welcome
ILuvDubya June 24th, 2015 at 07:55
Moore is a moron, a champagne socialist. The locals in Michigan call his mansion the “hypocrite house”.
crc3 June 24th, 2015 at 12:51
Calling yourself “ILuvDubya” says all we need to know about you….
ILuvDubya June 24th, 2015 at 20:35
And being a fan of this asshole tells me pretty much all I have to know about you…
jasperjava June 24th, 2015 at 23:52
Whatever you might think of Michael Moore, he isn’t a torturer and a war criminal.
The fact that you “luv” the worst so-called “president” within living memory shows that you are not a good judge of who is an asshole or not.
ILuvDubya June 25th, 2015 at 08:32
So Dubya is worse than Nixon, eh? Worse than Carter? Or how about Clinton, who had three shots at bin Laden during his presidency but didn’t take them? Please…
jasperjava June 25th, 2015 at 12:04
Nixon had some redeeming qualities. Dubya doesn’t. Carter has been unfairly maligned by the Right for three decades. He had a difficult, challenging presidency and was unsuccessful despite his good intentions.
The whole “Clinton coulda got bin Laden” fantasy is a conservative urban legend. No use trying to discuss that with you, because to you that’s an article of faith.
ILuvDubya June 25th, 2015 at 12:37
Now THERE’s a bar to set for your president….he was a screw-up, but hay, his intentions were good! LOL! What was so challenging in his presidency that others haven’t faced? Oh yeah, personally managing the White House tennis court schedules couldn’t have been easy! LMAO
As for Clinton, well, I’ll let the article speak for itself:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-bill-clinton-osama-bin-laden-20140801-story.html
jasperjava June 25th, 2015 at 20:42
Intentions count. At least Carter wasn’t a warmongering torturer who was more interested in generating profits for war profiteers rather than the lives of the troops and innocent civilians.
I concede that Clinton could have done more to get bin Laden. However, Dubya famously let him go at Tora Bora, and declared that he “wasn’t all that interested” in capturing or killing the mastermind behind 9/11. He didn’t think about him much, and didn’t care where he was.
Dubya, as I said, is the worst president since Hoover, possibly since Harding.
ILuvDubya June 25th, 2015 at 22:25
That’s quite a standard you set for your heroes…”at least he wasn’t a blah blah torturer”…….second time you’ve used it in this discussion. In addition, you blatantly stated the Clinton thing was an urban legend, but when confronted with the truth it’s like “but, but….”
And I won’t even mention that empty suit currently occupying the office…
jasperjava June 26th, 2015 at 01:48
You don’t think that Dubya’s war crimes are relevant?
I know, I know, that’s what you “luv” about him. You bloodthirsty monsters can never get enough blood and gore, especially if it comes from not-quite-white foreigners. You love to masturbate to images of mangled, charred corpses.
ILuvDubya June 26th, 2015 at 13:58
Wow, you’re one sick puppy, you know that? I could never have conjured up those images in my wildest nightmares. Oh well, I guess it’s nothing for a fan of the party that came up with the Ku Klux Klan…
As for Dubya’s “war crimes”…. only an al Qaeda apologist would think that there shouldn’t have been any retribution for 9/11…you should be ashamed.
jasperjava June 26th, 2015 at 20:18
Conservatives created the Ku Klux Klan. In the 1860s, the Republicans were the bleeding-heart liberals who wanted fundamental social, economic, and political change. The Democrats were the conservatives who wanted to preserve the status quote.
It doesn’t surprise me that you understand little of history or politics. After all, you are ignorant enough to shamelessly proclaim your shameful “luv” of Dubya.
If you think Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, you’re the one who should be ashamed. But I suppose you must be proud of your ignorance.
ILuvDubya June 26th, 2015 at 22:25
Here’s your history lesson for the day, courtesy of PBS:
“At the time of Ulysses S. Grant’s election to the presidency, white supremacists were conducting a reign of terror throughout the South. In outright defiance of the Republican-led federal government, Southern Democrats formed organizations that violently intimidated blacks and Republicans who tried to win political power.
The most prominent of these, the Ku Klux Klan, was formed in Pulaski, Tennessee, in 1865. Originally founded as a social club for former Confederate soldiers, the Klan evolved into a terrorist organization. It would be responsible for thousands of deaths, and would help to weaken the political power of Southern blacks and Republicans.”
jasperjava June 27th, 2015 at 01:53
That’s right. You see? The Democrats in the 1860s were racist conservatives, and the Republicans were liberal. Any competent historian knows that.
I don’t see what’s so hard for you to understand. You must be ignorant, I guess.
ribbie149 June 28th, 2015 at 19:53
And Dixiecrats all became Republican’ts after Civil Rights legislation was passes. What does THAT tell you, MENSA?
ILuvDubya June 28th, 2015 at 21:57
Two day old news, asshole, get with it…
Red Eye Robot June 30th, 2015 at 05:29
Like J William Fulbright? Sam Ervin? Richard Russell?
ribbie149 June 28th, 2015 at 19:52
When Clinton did respond to Al Qaeda terrorism. Republican’ts like you said he was “wagging the dog”. And the people who were trying to impeach him have turned out to be guilty of far worse excesses. You must be so PROUD.
madashellnow June 24th, 2015 at 11:37
One report said his father bought him a gun…straw purchase against the
law.
Another report said he bought it himself and the NICS check did not have
the information he had a drug arrest…he lied on the form….against
the law.
Not to mention he government screwed up the background check, if true.
At any rate, Dylann possessed a gun that he was ineligible to own, drug
charges pending…against the law.
Dylann carried a concealed weapon without a permit….against the law.
Dylann carried a gun into a church..forbidden in SC, unless the church
says otherwise….against the law.
Dylann did physical harm to people…against the law.
Dylann shot people…against the law.
Dylann killed people….against the law.
What new gun control law do you propose that would have prevented this?
NoReplyNeeded July 4th, 2015 at 05:56
Rubber bullets.
johnnybizzoy June 24th, 2015 at 23:33
There is a strong and coordinated push by the oligarchy that runs our country, to brand white conservatives in general, as terrorists. Anytime a white person commits an act of terror, it is blasted throughout the media to re-enforce the perception. The reason? White conservatives will be the primary demographic to resist further moves by the oligarchy to remove our freedoms. White conservatives are the ONLY constituency pushing back against the NSA, and the militarization of police. “Liberals” (who are not classical liberals anymore at all) will embrace the oligarchy’s plans to remove our freedoms for good, because they are easily distracted by identity politics, and patronage to their pet causes (gay marriage, affirmative action). They are sell-outs.
ribbie149 June 28th, 2015 at 19:48
So learned, yet so misinformed. You are the gullible morons who support removing the regulations that protect us from corporate greed. We did our best to defeat the TPP, but your conservative corporatist buddies would have none of it (plus president Obama and a handful of Democrats). I have seen NO indication of any conservative pushback on police misconduct or militarism. Please provide some documentation of it, won’t you? BTW, Republican’ts are the ones making issues of our “pet causes”. We simply accept that they are just and proper. You don’t. And please keep trying to politicize them. You should be very comfortable being on the wrong side of history….AGAIN. We are not the ones requiring invasive ultrasound examinations on women. White conservatives will eventually be brought kicking and screaming into the 21st century, but only after they have made themselves totally irrelevant.
Wilda June 25th, 2015 at 03:54
Make Cash Now 50$daily@alan