PDA

View Full Version : General Politics FBI: Surge in death threats against lawmakers


dirk digler
05-25-2010, 09:00 AM
Alot of fucking crazy people out there

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37726.html

I voted for you,” the caller said in a voice mail to Democratic Rep. Heath Shuler’s district office. “If you vote for that stimulus package, I’m gonna kill you. Simple as that.”

The FBI (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37721.html) says the caller was a 70-year-old resident of Shuler’s North Carolina district with a history of mental illness and a cache of guns. In the weeks before calling Shuler’s office, the FBI says, the caller beat and choked his wife. She told the FBI that she’d tried to clear her home of guns — and that she went to bed at night with a can of mace tucked under her pillow.

When agents showed up at the man’s door, they asked him why he’d threatened to kill Shuler.

“I was trying to work the political scene,” he said.

The threat against Shuler is one of several detailed in 2009 FBI documents provided to POLITICO pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (http://topics.politico.com/index.cfm/topic/debbiestabenow) (D-Mich.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) were threatened with assassination. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Rep. Ciro Rodriguez (D-Texas) were threatened with bodily harm. Someone told Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) that her throat would be cut. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) was told someone would physically “f—- her up” if she held a town hall meeting in her district, according to the FBI files.

There may have been more threats — the FBI won’t release information on investigations that are still open — and there will likely be more this year; Senate Sergeant at Arms Terrance Gainer says threats against members of Congress were up 300 percent in the first few months of 2010.

FBI agents arrested the North Carolina (http://topics.politico.com/index.cfm/topic/northcarolina) man who threatened Shuler, and prosecutors charged him with threatening to kill a federal official — a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Court records show that the case was dropped after he was found incompetent to stand trial.

Shuler says he was shaken — and that he has taken precautions to protect himself and his family. Family members have altered their daily routines to be more security conscious, and Shuler said that he and his wife have obtained concealed-weapons permits.

“You get a threat like that, and you start to rethink your priorities,” Shuler said.

Though each threat case is different, the FBI documents reveal some common characteristics. The suspects are mostly men who own guns, and several had been treated for mental illness. Most of the suspects had just undergone some kind of major life stress, such as illness or the loss of a job.

In February 2009, a man left voice mail messages for Stabenow in several of her Michigan offices.

“We’re gonna [expletive] get you,” he said in one message. “We’re gonna get you with a lot of [expletive] bolt action. Like we did RFK; like we did MLK. We know who you are. We’ll get you.”

FBI agents tracked the calls to a 54-year-old Texas man who lived alone — and who at one time had owned a 20-gun arsenal of handguns, shotguns and rifles. According to the documents, he told officers that he was “really, really drunk” when he made the calls. He said he was just “venting” — taking out his frustrations after hearing a discussion of the Fairness Doctrine and becoming concerned that the government would attempt to abolish the radio shows of Sean Hannity (http://topics.politico.com/index.cfm/topic/seanhannity) and Rush Limbaugh (http://topics.politico.com/index.cfm/topic/rushlimbaugh).

In testimony submitted to Congress, Capitol Police officials have said that the threats against lawmakers have caused them to dramatically increase their security efforts. Police who work on protective details say demands on their time have skyrocketed, and the department has requested a 54 percent increase — of $2.7 million — to fund travel for its dignitary protection officers in fiscal year 2011.

In fiscal year 2009, dignitary protection was provided at 139 congressional events, a nearly 100 percent increase over 2008. Capitol Police also moved to provide “a more robust role” to town hall meetings, including working with hundreds of law enforcement agencies.

Capitol Police made 3,626 mountain bike patrols around House and Senate office buildings, up from 3,500 from fiscal year 2008. They responded to 142 suspicious packages in 2009, compared with only 34 in 2008, and conducted 1,808 bomb sweeps, compared with 970 the year before.

The Hazardous Materials Response Team investigated an average of 38 suspicious package calls per quarter last year, compared with 32 per quarter in 2008. The team conducted 967 sweeps per quarter to ensure the security of areas where congressional meetings and sessions were being held — up from 142 each quarter in 2008. The department also dealt with 13 disturbances or demonstrations, five more than during the previous year.

“When an incident like the one in Times Square (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36965.html) happens, it makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up,” said Gainer, who recently attended a nationwide sergeant at arms meeting at which state officials were urged to put plans in place to accommodate congressional town hall meetings this summer.

“We have about 12 open cases at any given time, but most of those are relatively low threat, meaning there’s no specificity to them,” Gainer said. “But if there’s a serious threat, we’re going to have a pretty stern response.”


Law enforcement responded immediately when Ryan (http://topics.politico.com/index.cfm/topic/paulryan) was threatened back home in Wisconsin. The lawmaker was out walking with his daughter when a black sport utility vehicle pulled up alongside them. “You’ve got a bull’s-eye on your head,” the driver allegedly told Ryan. “You’re gonna die, motherf---er.”

Local police records show that the driver believed Ryan had “blood on his hands” for supporting the war in Iraq. He told police that he was on disability for arthritis and that he felt “frustrated” that he could no longer support his family, the documents show.

“Congressman Ryan told me that although they receive threats quite often, this one was more specific and directed,” a Janesville police detective wrote in his report.

The man was arrested for disorderly conduct, but the U.S. Attorney’s Office decided not to prosecute him after a search of his home revealed no weapons, according to FBI documents.

Last September, the documents show that a veteran in a counseling session said he wanted to “kill everyone who does not help me” — and that he included in the list Cornyn, Rodriguez and first lady Michelle Obama. When police checked on the man, they found that he was frustrated that those individuals hadn’t helped him with a retirement claim process through the Office of Policy and Management.

According to the documents, he admitted to police that he was taking “too many medications to list” for mental health problems that included depression, anxiety and a sleep disorder. He was out of work and on disability. The man’s wife had hidden his collection of shotguns and handguns and wouldn’t let him drive the family car, fearing he would pay a visit to Rodriguez, according to FBI files.

“Veteran verbalized not knowing what he would do other than something that would get him locked up,” the responding detective wrote. “That he would get a gun and shoot everyone involved.”

With the exception of Shuler, the lawmakers identified in the FBI reports declined to discuss the threats. Their offices said they wanted to move beyond the incidents and stay focused on their work.

“We’re not going to be frightened. We’re just going to go on with our lives and keep doing our jobs. We don’t want to be defined by this,” a Lofgren staffer said. “They don’t control this. We do.”

But the threats clearly have an effect — if not on how members do their jobs, at least on how they live their lives.

“The first time you get a death threat, it’s really, really alarming, not to mention they know where you live and can find your family,” Shuler said. “It is very difficult when you serve in public office.”

ClevelandBronco
05-25-2010, 09:07 AM
When one of those threats includes a burning AIDS volcano spewing antifreeze, you'll know that our outlet here has failed one of us.

dirk digler
05-25-2010, 09:31 AM
When one of those threats includes a burning AIDS volcano spewing antifreeze, you'll know that our outlet here has failed one of us.

LMAO

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:01 AM
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." — Thomas Jefferson

Let the tyrants bleed.

NewChief
05-25-2010, 11:03 AM
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." — Thomas Jefferson

Let the tyrants bleed.

Wow.

dirk digler
05-25-2010, 11:03 AM
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." — Thomas Jefferson

Let the tyrants bleed.

:spock:

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:05 AM
I knew that'd get a reaction.;) :D

NewChief
05-25-2010, 11:08 AM
I knew that'd get a reaction.;) :D

Wishing death upon someone usually does get a reaction.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:10 AM
Wishing death upon someone usually does get a reaction.

I didn't wish anything on them. I just expressed no sympathy for them. BIG difference. Kinda like not feeling sympathy for Lenin, Stalin or Mao. That sort thing.

NewChief
05-25-2010, 11:11 AM
I didn't wish anything on them. I just expressed no sympathy for them. BIG difference. Kinda like not feeling sympathy for Lenin, Stalin or Mao. That sort thing. So get off your the holier than though lecture.

You said, "Let the tyrants bleed." That certainly implies a wishing of harm, especially in the context of a thread about death threats.

But whatever, I knew you'd try to squirm out of accepting any responsibility for your statements.

cdcox
05-25-2010, 11:11 AM
I didn't wish anything on them. I just expressed no sympathy for them. BIG difference. Kinda like not feeling sympathy for Lenin, Stalin or Mao. That sort thing.

These are public leaders elected by a democracy. What a great constitutionalist you are.

The Mad Crapper
05-25-2010, 11:12 AM
I can't for the life of me understand how people can be so upset. don't they love all this hope and change?

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:13 AM
These are public leaders elected by a democracy. What a great constitutionalist you are.
We're not a democracy.
Jefferson was a great Constitutionalist too. Look at what he says. I happen to agree. In fact, that's how this country's liberty was won.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:15 AM
You said, "Let the tyrants bleed." That certainly implies a wishing of harm, especially in the context of a thread about death threats.

But whatever, I knew you'd try to squirm out of accepting any responsibility for your statements.

No, I take responsibility for my statements just not how you choose to color them. I have no sympathy for evil being threatened. Our liberty was won with blood being spilled. Enough said.

At least I don't send innocent men and women off to their deaths for some frivolous foreign escapade where there is no threat.

cdcox
05-25-2010, 11:15 AM
We're not a democracy.
Jefferson was a great Constitutionalist too. Look at what he says. I happen to agree. In fact, that's how this country's liberty was won.

Elected by a constitutional process then.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:16 AM
Elected by a constitutional process then.

Fair enough.... based on lying politicians who then don't even follow the Constitution. Tyrants.

cdcox
05-25-2010, 11:17 AM
So BEP, what we really need is small federal government + constitution + a few political assassinations?

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:17 AM
I have a low tolerance for injustice, cdcox.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:17 AM
So BEP, what we really need is small federal government + constitution + a few political assassinations?

Do you disagree with Jefferson's quote?

|Zach|
05-25-2010, 11:18 AM
I knew that'd get a reaction.;) :D

You're a cunt.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:19 AM
LMAO

boogblaster
05-25-2010, 11:20 AM
And the privilaged bleed ... its really too late ....

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:21 AM
And the privilaged bleed ... its really too late ....

Let 'em....after they have their cake.

cdcox
05-25-2010, 11:22 AM
Do you disagree with Jefferson's quote?

Jefferson made the quote when he did not have a vote to change the process. He did not have the constitution. In order to apply the quote to today, you'd have to be in favor of overthrowing the government and setting up a new form of government.

So for our circumstance, living under the US constitution, in a representative form of government, yes I disagree with it.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:26 AM
Jefferson made the quote when he did not have a vote to change the process. He did not have the constitution. In order to apply the quote to today, you'd have to be in favor of overthrowing the government and setting up a new form of government.

So for our circumstance, living under the US constitution, in a representative form of government, yes I disagree with it.

We don't have a Constitution anymore either in actual practice.
Remember, according to few Democrats recently..."there are no rules." And it's "just a piece of paper."

Don't forget that closed door meeting with Progressives like Schumer, Reid etc where they forbade any recordings. Only one progressive did record, accidentally. These guys said they wanted to be able to do away with the Bill of Rights with a simple vote. That's lawlessness.

Says all. ———————————> TYRANTS!

dirk digler
05-25-2010, 11:30 AM
You're crazy BEP.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:31 AM
You're crazy BEP.

That's a compliment, especially when it comes from someone who's willing to mass murder innocent Persians.
Our Founders were "crazy" too according to some.

dirk digler
05-25-2010, 11:39 AM
That's a compliment, especially when it comes from someone who's willing to mass murder innocent Persians.
Our Founders were "crazy" too according to some.

better them than us.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 11:39 AM
better them than us.

Yeah, like they did anything to us. And you were judging me.

dirk digler
05-25-2010, 11:46 AM
Yeah, like they did anything to us. And you were judging me.

No they have only been committing terrorist acts against our country for 30 years and are about to get a nuke to destroy Israel and attack the US.

Other than that you are right. Killing Congressman = Iran

RaiderH8r
05-25-2010, 11:56 AM
Meanwhile Obammy's SEIU thugs are leading mobs to the homes of various businessmen.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/19/news/companies/SEIU_Bank_of_America_protest.fortune/index.htm

If not for the neighbor being a part of the press would this have been reported?

Leading mobs to the homes of citizens? Really, this is what we're allowing now?

This is the kind of shit you expect to see in Venezuela or Zimbabwe a mob rolling the streets threatening citizens to submit to their will outside of their homes. Grab your torches and pitchforks, it's Obammy's America now.

This is Obama's "Get in their face" style of politics come to life. Hope? Change? Civility? Unity?

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:04 PM
No they have only been committing terrorist acts against our country for 30 years and are about to get a nuke to destroy Israel and attack the US.

Other than that you are right. Killing Congressman = Iran

Where on the US homeland has Iran attack any US civilians?

No! Military bases, or installations over there in the middle of a pre-existing conflict DOES NOT count as terrorism. You want to get involved in someone else's war expect to be considered their enemy and be hit. It's common sense. We've already argued this extensively before...you know that right?

The only terrorist group with a global reach that threatens our homeland is Al Qaeda.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:06 PM
Leading mobs to the homes of citizens? Really, this is what we're allowing now?
Wow! They really do act like Bolsheviks.

This is the kind of shit you expect to see in Venezuela or Zimbabwe a mob rolling the streets threatening citizens to submit to their will outside of their homes. Grab your torches and pitchforks, it's Obammy's America now.

Exactly! Tryants.

The Mad Crapper
05-25-2010, 12:07 PM
Meanwhile Obammy's SEIU thugs are leading mobs to the homes of various businessmen.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/19/news/companies/SEIU_Bank_of_America_protest.fortune/index.htm

If not for the neighbor being a part of the press would this have been reported?

Leading mobs to the homes of citizens? Really, this is what we're allowing now?

This is the kind of shit you expect to see in Venezuela or Zimbabwe a mob rolling the streets threatening citizens to submit to their will outside of their homes. Grab your torches and pitchforks, it's Obammy's America now.

This is Obama's "Get in their face" style of politics come to life. Hope? Change? Civility? Unity?

Or Chicago.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:08 PM
Looks like Ron Paul and Gerald Celente were right. Be prepared for civil unrest.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:09 PM
Other than that you are right. Killing domestic tyrants/communists = Iran

FYP

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:15 PM
dirk, the people should not fear their own govt. The govt should fear its people.

dirk digler
05-25-2010, 12:31 PM
Where on the US homeland has Iran attack any US civilians?

No! Military bases, or installations over there in the middle of a pre-existing conflict DOES NOT count as terrorism. You want to get involved in someone else's war expect to be considered their enemy and be hit. It's common sense. We've already argued this extensively before...you know that right?

The only terrorist group with a global reach that threatens our homeland is Al Qaeda.

That's crap BEP. They have committed terrorist attacks against US installations killing civilans and soldiers. They have hijacked planes, blew up planes all killing innocent civilians.

Quit trying to excuse the Iranian terrorists and their behavior. Unbelievable.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:33 PM
That's crap BEP. They have committed terrorist attacks against US installations killing civilans and soldiers. They have hijacked planes, blew up planes all killing innocent civilians.

Quit trying to excuse the Iranian terrorists and their behavior. Unbelievable.

List them.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:34 PM
I'm not excusing their behavior. You're excusing the behavior that we can take sides and not automatically pick up new enemies.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:43 PM
TEHRAN, May 24 (UPI) -- Iranian energy companies stand ready to help respond to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico
if asked by U.S. officials, Iranian oil executives said.

Mehran Alinejad, the director of drilling operations at the National Iranian Drilling Co., said Iranian companies had experience controlling vast oil spills in the region. He told the official Islamic Republic News Agency that technical teams in Iran had "major achievements in oil well capping."


http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Resource-Wars/2010/05/24/Iran-renews-offer-to-help-with-Gulf-spill/UPI-98271274710346

dirk digler
05-25-2010, 12:46 PM
List them.

I have listed them before but here is the notable ones:

Hostages taken at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran -1980
Bombing of U.S. Embassy in Beirut - 1983
Bombing of Marine barracks in Beirut - 1983
Bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait - 1983
CIA Station Chief William Buckley kidnapped and killed - 1984
Bombing of U.S. Embassy annex northeast of Beirut -1984
Hijacking of Kuwait Airways Flight 221 - 1984
Hijacking of TWA Flight 847 - 1985
Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 - 1988

Then you add in how Iran is funding AQ and other terrorists inside Iraq and Afghanistan the last 9 years and it pretty obvious they have been attacking the United States for a very long time.

Donger
05-25-2010, 12:49 PM
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." — Thomas Jefferson

Let the tyrants bleed.

Wow. You're f*cking nuts.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 12:51 PM
Wow. You're f*cking nuts.

Well, like I said before, you can take a Brit out of Britain but you can't take the Brit out of them. You like empire.

Donger
05-25-2010, 12:54 PM
Well, like I said before, you can take a Brit out of Britain but you can't take the Brit out of them. You like empire.

You are talking about duly-elected representatives. You know, by your fellow citizens.

Do you even know what the definition of "tyrant" is? And, if so, please explain how any of these representatives meets that definition.

mikey23545
05-25-2010, 01:07 PM
FBI: Surge in death threats against lawmakers


I hope those worthless bags of shit pee themselves every time someone slams a door too loudly.

RJ
05-25-2010, 01:07 PM
FBI agents tracked the calls to a 54-year-old Texas man who lived alone — and who at one time had owned a 20-gun arsenal of handguns, shotguns and rifles. According to the documents, he told officers that he was “really, really drunk” when he made the calls. He said he was just “venting” — taking out his frustrations after hearing a discussion of the Fairness Doctrine and becoming concerned that the government would attempt to abolish the radio shows of Sean Hannity (http://topics.politico.com/index.cfm/topic/seanhannity) and Rush Limbaugh (http://topics.politico.com/index.cfm/topic/rushlimbaugh).





I remember as a child having a similar reaction when NBC cancelled The Monkees.

Garcia Bronco
05-25-2010, 01:42 PM
"FBI: Surge in death threats against lawmakers "

What should one expect when one wants more money that belongs to others to provide services people can't get or won't get because the promises are too big and idea too bold and unsustainable?

Garcia Bronco
05-25-2010, 01:43 PM
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." — Thomas Jefferson

Let the tyrants bleed.

I agree. Great quote

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 01:48 PM
You are talking about duly-elected representatives. You know, by your fellow citizens.
See earlier posts about lying politicians getting elected and who are in violation of their Constitutional oath to defend and uphold the US Constitution. They are corrupt and lawless.

Do you even know what the definition of "tyrant" is? And, if so, please explain how any of these representatives meets that definition.

See above.
A tyrant is also a tyrant at the level of thought when they call someone crazy they disagree with because they can't formulate an argument.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 01:59 PM
I realize this post gets the ire of my fellow righties up but it has to be done to refute your claims. I have no more intention of debating them beyond this though.

Those are ALL 22 years ago at the latest date, with the earliest being 30 years ago. All of them stemming from taking a side in a conflict/war making us a party to it. Yet, not even Reagan recommended mass murder of innocent civilians, (many now who were not even born then) in retaliation for what is guerrilla warfare tactics as you have 22 years later.

To sum up, you've got one act of terrorism on this list. Your list shows a misunderstanding of the word terrorism.


Hostages taken at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran -1980
We waged a coup inside their country for British Petroleum interests putting in an oppressive leader, the Shah. Used our CIA to counsel their SAVAK the "most hated and feared institution" which used torture on Iranian civilians.

So when a revolution by the people in Iran overthrows these powers, which we helped put there, you’re naïve enough to expect no retaliation? We took sides. That's the price of intervention dirk. This isn't terror. It's a revolution no different than the one we had in America. If we lost what do you think would have happened to the French who helped us?

You act, much like the NeoCons, on this one thinking we have some sort of divine right to commit govt terrorism inside another country and expect to suffer no consequences for it. It's a responsibility level of a child using blame. Yet, you're the one calling me crazy. LOL!

Bombing of U.S. Embassy in Beirut – 1983
Iran denied any role in the attack. Islamic Jihad Organization took responsibility for it. Charge is disputed. However, embassy staff members and US Marines and sailors are US govt involvment in ME conflict. We’d do the same to anyone who was involved in our conflicts here. It's a guerrilla warfare tactic.

Bombing of Marine barracks in Beirut - 1983
Attack on military is not terrorism. It's an attack.

Bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait – 1983
The motivation of this bombing is thought have been punishment of Kuwait, America and France for their military and financial assistance to Iraq in its war against Iran. We were involved in another war and must accept the consequences when the opposing side finds out.

CIA Station Chief William Buckley kidnapped and killed - 1984
Ahem, the CIA doing it’s dirty work, covert warfare, in a foreign country while we have taken sides in not just one conflict but three: Israel, Lebanon and Iran/Iraq wars.

Bombing of U.S. Embassy annex northeast of Beirut –1984
Hezbollah is a terrorist organization formed by radical Lebanese Shi’a groups in 1982 with the goals of the expulsing Israeli and western presence in Lebanon during a war. Again, being involved in another conflict or war. Blowback.

Hijacking of Kuwait Airways Flight 221 – 1984
Kuwait Airways is America now?

Hijacking of TWA Flight 847 - 1985
Hijacked by two Lebanese. Hostages were not killed but a navy diver was.

Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 – 1988
Okay this one is terrorism because 179 of the 259 people on board were Americans civilians. But it was was thought to be done by a Libyan.

Again, it was retaliation for Reagan bombing Libya's capital Tripoli and the Libyan city of Benghazi in 1986 which was in retaliation for a Libyan bombing of a Berlin nightclub where U.S. servicemen were killed. That's not terrorism on a US civilian.

Then you add in how Iran is funding AQ and other terrorists inside Iraq and Afghanistan the last 9 years and it pretty obvious they have been attacking the United States for a very long time.
First I heard of this and it sounds like BS because AQ is also Iran’s enemy. Per CFR (http://www.cfr.org/publication/9362/) Iran has extradited all foreign members of al-Qaeda.

You forgot the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed nineteen U.S. servicemen. Just sayin’ because you’ve lumped all acts of war, guerrilla tactics in a war, as terrorism when they are acts on military and govt. This event wouldn’t be terrorism either because it also wasn’t civilians.

Cannibal
05-25-2010, 02:14 PM
I would think that advocating political assassinations of duly elected officials on one side of a two party system means that person must want civil war ending in a single party totalitarian regime.

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:22 PM
See earlier posts about lying politicians getting elected and who are in violation of their Constitutional oath to defend and uphold the US Constitution. They are corrupt and lawless.



See above.
A tyrant is also a tyrant at the level of thought when they call someone crazy they disagree with because they can't formulate an argument.

Please provide a specific example of a representative violating the Constitution.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:24 PM
Please provide a specific example of a representative violating the Constitution.

Oh brother! Just use the search. I am not going to repost 4 years of posts.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:25 PM
I would think that advocating political assassinations of duly elected officials on one side of a two party system means that person must want civil war ending in a single party totalitarian regime.

Who advocated political assassinations of anyone?

There was one person who stated they didn't feel sympathy for those receiving such threats. You lefties are as bad as the NeoCons at twisting and alterating words to worsen their meaning. Oh wait, both are lefties.

We have a single party totalitarian regime. At least I've posted divided govt would be the best we can get these days.

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:26 PM
Oh brother! Just use the search. I am not going to repost 4 years of posts.

Yeah, that's what I figured.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:27 PM
Yeah, that's what I figured.

You mean you finally figured out that I've posted plenty of examples to date.
Good. You're slow but you eventually catch on for a statist.

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:29 PM
You mean you finally figured out that I've posted plenty of examples to date.
Good. You're slow but you eventually catch on for a statist.

No, I figured that you were just full of hot air, as per normal.

NewChief
05-25-2010, 02:29 PM
You mean you finally figured out that I've posted plenty of examples to date.
Good. You're slow but you eventually catch on for a statist.


BINGO!

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:30 PM
No, I figured that you were just full of hot air, as per normal.

Yet, you never post anything of substance to refute anything except to ask a million questions....most of which are rhetorical.
I have routinely posted what I've considered unConstitutional. You just choose to ignore them. And most likely if I did repost you'd only follow with a thousand more questions to deflect for the sole purpose to waste someone's time. You're the one who is normally full of hot air.

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:32 PM
Yet, you never post anything of substance to refute anything except to ask a million questions....most of which are rhetorical.

Well, if Congress is full of tyrants, it really shouldn't put you out to name one (just one) and why you think that.

Right?

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:32 PM
Well, if Congress is full of tyrants, it really shouldn't put you out to name one (just one) and why you think that.

Right?

Why haven't you noticed that I already have?

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:33 PM
Why haven't you noticed that I already have?

On this thread? Where?

If not, where?

|Zach|
05-25-2010, 02:34 PM
FBI: Surge in death threats against lawmakers


I hope those worthless bags of shit pee themselves every time someone slams a door too loudly.

There are not many people who live in as much fear as you do.

This must be a disappointing realization.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:35 PM
On this thread? Where?

If not, where?
Why haven't you answered my original question?
How come you don't understand my post answering your question as to where?

Cannibal
05-25-2010, 02:36 PM
TWho advocated political assassinations of anyone?

There was one person who stated they didn't feel sympathy for those receiving such threats. You lefties are as bad as the NeoCons at twisting and alterating words to worsen their meaning. Oh wait, both are lefties.

We have a single party totalitarian regime. At least I've posted divided govt would be the best we can get these days.

Oh we don't have elected official from two separate political parties serving in Congress anymore? I guess in my opinion it would be best for the country if the Republicans would win the battle of ideas and win elections instead of insighting violence.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:39 PM
T

Oh we don't have elected official from two separate political parties serving in Congress anymore?
Apparently you don't know what one party rule means.

I guess in my opinion it would be best for the country if the Republicans would win the battle of ideas and win elections instead of insighting violence.

That's a shame you think that.

Cannibal
05-25-2010, 02:44 PM
Apparently you don't know what one party rule means.



That's a shame you think that.

So did the Republicans up and quit? Or are they still in Congress?

Apparently you do advocate violence instead of winning elections legally

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:46 PM
So did the Republicans up and quit? Or are they still in Congress?
Some Clues on what single party rule means:

Who holds the majority in the three branches currently?
Who held the majority in the three branches before 2008?
Why is it that all govt action continues leftward no matter who is in power partywise?

Apparently you do advocate violence instead of winning elections legally
Well, I did support American Revolution? Didn't you?
I do support secession which is legal and peaceful.
I do support nullification.


I, however, do not feel sorry for tyrants who abuse our Constitution and lie their way into office despite the election process.
Nor can I muster up any sympathy if one of these types get threatened.

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:48 PM
Why haven't you answered my original question?
How come you don't understand my post answering your question as to where?

What original question?

Where have you given an example (by name) of a representative who you consider to be a tyrant?

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:50 PM
What original question?
What do you mean "what question"?

Where have you given an example (by name) of a representative who you consider to be a tyrant?

I don't need to. That's my opinion regarding those mentioned in the original article.

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:52 PM
What do you mean "what question"?


You just wrote: "Why haven't you answered my original question?" To what question are you referring? Please repeat it and I'll answer it.

I don't need to. That's my opinion regarding those mentioned in the original article.

Wow, you really are a coward, aren't you.

RJ
05-25-2010, 02:52 PM
I thought Donger was a nihilist.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:54 PM
You just wrote: "Why haven't you answered my original question?" To what question are you referring? Please repeat it and I'll answer it.
How come you can't recognize schadenfreude?

Wow, you really are a coward, aren't you.
Why are you projecting by using ad hominem?

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:55 PM
I thought Donger was a nihilist.

No, I like girls.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 02:55 PM
I thought Donger was a nihilist.

Certainly has been unable to spot repeated Constitution arguments over time.

orange
05-25-2010, 02:57 PM
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." — Thomas Jefferson

Let the tyrants bleed.

He was talking about Shay's Rebellion, not the American Revolution. Shay's Rebellion - that he opposed and ridiculed:

"I say nothing of it's motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, & always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive."

And you're reading FAR too much into something that was basically bull-shooting:

"The want of facts worth communicating to you has occasioned me to give a little loose to dissertation. We must be contented to amuse, when we cannot inform."

p.s. How many "patriots' " blood being spilled will you be okay with?

Donger
05-25-2010, 02:58 PM
How come you can't recognize schadenfreude?


Why are you projecting by using ad hominem?

It really is pretty simple.

You seem to think that there are members of Congress who are tyrants.

I'm simply asking for one example of a member of Congress who you think meets that definition.

It's easy for you to go on a rant without providing some specific examples to back up your claims, but it does make you look a little, well, f*cking nuts at the same time.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 03:01 PM
It really is pretty simple.
You seem to think that there are members of Congress who are tyrants.
Correct.

I'm simply asking for one example of a member of Congress who you think meets that definition.
I referred to the article for one.

Why can't you realize that your question is not simple to answer but would require a long and lengthy post? And why can't you accept that I just don't feel like doing that?

It's easy for you to go on a rant without providing some specific examples to back up your claims, but it does make you look a little, well, f*cking nuts at the same time.

Rant? Isn't that what you're doing right now right here?
Why do you think my first post, which was quite short and to the point, to be a rant?

Why do I have to give you a single effin'g example to back up any opinion?
Why can't you see who and what I think is unConstitutional or tyranny in many of the posts already in this forum?

Why are you being a bully at the level of thought because you don't like my opinion?

Why? Why? Why do you ask so many questions?

Why can't you just accept an opinion and just disagree with it?

Why Donger, why? LMAO LMAO

orange
05-25-2010, 03:04 PM
Jefferson made the quote when he did not have a vote to change the process. He did not have the constitution. In order to apply the quote to today, you'd have to be in favor of overthrowing the government and setting up a new form of government.

So for our circumstance, living under the US constitution, in a representative form of government, yes I disagree with it.

"Happy for us, that when we find our constitutions defective and insufficient to secure the happiness of our people, we can assemble with all the coolness of philosophers and set it to rights, while every other nation on earth must have recourse to arms to amend or to restore their constitutions."

Donger
05-25-2010, 03:09 PM
BEP, you are referring to Reid and Schumer as tyrants because of the no recording deal? Even if that truly happened, what part of the Constitution does that violate?

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 03:09 PM
"Happy for us, that when we find our constitutions defective and insufficient to secure the happiness of our people, we can assemble with all the coolness of philosophers and set it to rights, while every other nation on earth must have recourse to arms to amend or to restore their constitutions."
That quote doesn't address tyranny though. It addresses defections: like needing to ensure blacks did not have their citizenship abused in the state they resided in with the 14th amendment; seeing that women should be able to vote etc. Those things are not tyranny.

Jefferson didn't live to see the day that socialist ( aka communists) would take over America either by lying about "hope and change" with it meaning govt take over of major industries and bailouts of foreign countries while printing massive amounts of paper money via a govt created Fed accountable to no one.

Times have changed and our Constitution has not used the Amendment process where it should have. This is an abuse of power.

Isn't the "times have changed" stand what the left uses to stomp all over the document? Yup! Sure is. Try to be consistent orange.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 03:12 PM
BEP, you are referring to Reid and Schumer as tyrants because of the no recording deal? Even if that truly happened, what part of the Constitution does that violate?

Oh brother!
Really, Donger, if you have to ask that then you don't know your Constitution much at all. You belong in Europe.

Yes, that did truly happen and it was a Progressive that reported it too.

Donger
05-25-2010, 03:13 PM
Oh brother!
Really, Donger, if you have to ask that then you don't know your Constitution much at all. You belong in Europe.

Yes, that did truly happen and it was a Progressive that reported it too.

Educate me. Please BEP. I'd really like to know.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 03:15 PM
Educate me. Please BEP. I'd really like to know.

How come you don't realize that is a considerable amount of work....hours even?
It took me a good hour to refute dirk earlier.

Why can't you educate yourself? Why can't you use the many links in the many threads I've already put up for such things?
I know you've seen some of them.

RaiderH8r
05-25-2010, 03:17 PM
I thought Donger was a nihilist.

Nihilists! F--k me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

Cannibal
05-25-2010, 04:51 PM
Some Clues on what single party rule means:

Who holds the majority in the three branches currently?
Who held the majority in the three branches before 2008?
Why is it that all govt action continues leftward no matter who is in power partywise?


Well, I did support American Revolution? Didn't you?
I do support secession which is legal and peaceful.
I do support nullification.


I, however, do not feel sorry for tyrants who abuse our Constitution and lie their way into office despite the election process.
Nor can I muster up any sympathy if one of these types get threatened.


Funny how I didn't hear you complaining about any of this or empathizing with nut jobs wanting to take out politicians during the Republican controlled congress and Bush administration period of "one party rule". Hmmm.... kinda strange.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 04:55 PM
Funny how I didn't hear you complaining about any of this or empathizing with nut jobs wanting to take out politicians during the Republican controlled congress and Bush administration period of "one party rule". Hmmm.... kinda strange.

WTF are you talking about? I criticized the Republicans all the time back then. I don't remember you being around then to even know.
Were you one of the ones on the left what wanted Cheney to have a heart attack? I had wondered when he'd get another one when in power.

Geezaz! I just said I'd not feel sorry for them. I want them to fear the people a bit more these days.

Time to chill.

Cannibal
05-25-2010, 05:01 PM
WTF are you talking about? I criticized the Republicans all the time back then. I don't remember you being around then to even know.
Were you one of the ones on the left what wanted Cheney to have a heart attack? I had wondered when he'd get another one when in power.

Geezaz! I just said I'd not feel sorry for them. I want them to fear the people a bit more these days.

Time to chill.

I know you complained about Bush's war which I've actually given you credit for on multiple occasions. Don't remember you complaining about "one party rule" though. However, maybe you did and I just don't remember. I generally don't pay alot of attention to your posts, I only responded here when you were apologetic to the nutter that wants to kill elected officials.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 05:05 PM
You and the other lefties that posted in this thread have made one strawman argument after another.

Rain Man
05-25-2010, 05:07 PM
Que Sirhan Sirhan.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 05:10 PM
I know you complained about Bush's war which I've actually given you credit for on multiple occasions. Don't remember you complaining about "one party rule" though. However, maybe you did and I just don't remember. I generally don't pay alot of attention to your posts, I only responded here when you were apologetic to the nutter that wants to kill elected officials.

I most certainly did post about one party rule under the GOP several times and said I did not want to see any "one-party" rule again which we have again just the other side. I said divided govt was the best we can hope to get these days.

I did not just criticize the GOP on the Iraq war, I also criticized the pork, the spending, the bailout, their views on presidential war powers, and the prescription drug benefits. I criticized them for their big govt ways.

I did not criticize the GOP or Bush for tax cuts or Katrina off the top of my head. I always said I would never agree with Obama on domestic issues such as taxes, welfare spending, or economics. I did support Obama on civil liberties when he was for them and more war. Some of which he's backtracked on. The one good thing is he hasn't bombed Iran.

BucEyedPea
05-25-2010, 05:12 PM
Que Sirhan Sirhan.

As a first act of terrorism in the US or blowback from involvement in ME conflicts?

Pants
05-25-2010, 05:12 PM
Make lobbying illegal, create watchdogs to sniff out corruption and this country will become great again. That is all.

The Mad Crapper
05-25-2010, 05:47 PM
Que Sirhan Sirhan.

que será

ROFL

KC native
05-25-2010, 08:55 PM
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." — Thomas Jefferson

Let the tyrants bleed.

http://memegenerator.net/Insanity-Wolf/ImageMacro/1184138/Insanity-Wolf-All-STatists-must-die.jpg

RaiderH8r
05-26-2010, 08:18 AM
Make lobbying illegal, create watchdogs to sniff out corruption and this country will become great again. That is all.

Lobbyists are nothing more than citizens availing themselves of our political process. They can not be made illegal. Lobbyists are not the problem, the American public is the problem. The problem begins and ends with a populace so far up its own entitled ass its forgotten how to truly produce and how to live a life without a guiding government hand wiping their ass and telling them how truly awesome they are with their dumb ass. Americans are the problem with America. That is all.

The Mad Crapper
05-26-2010, 08:20 AM
Lobbyists are nothing more than citizens availing themselves of our political process. They can not be made illegal. Lobbyists are not the problem, the American public is the problem. The problem begins and ends with a populace so far up its own entitled ass its forgotten how to truly produce and how to live a life without a guiding government hand wiping their ass and telling them how truly awesome they are with their dumb ass. Americans are the problem with America. That is all.

Hence the inevitable dictatorship.

BucEyedPea
05-26-2010, 08:42 AM
Lobbyists are nothing more than citizens availing themselves of our political process. They can not be made illegal. Lobbyists are not the problem, the American public is the problem. The problem begins and ends with a populace so far up its own entitled ass its forgotten how to truly produce and how to live a life without a guiding government hand wiping their ass and telling them how truly awesome they are with their dumb ass. Americans are the problem with America. That is all.

Awesome Rep!

Donger
05-26-2010, 08:45 AM
How come you don't realize that is a considerable amount of work....hours even?
It took me a good hour to refute dirk earlier.

Why can't you educate yourself? Why can't you use the many links in the many threads I've already put up for such things?
I know you've seen some of them.

I went through the Constitution last night, and I found nothing about requiring recordings.

Donger
05-26-2010, 08:46 AM
http://memegenerator.net/Insanity-Wolf/ImageMacro/1184138/Insanity-Wolf-All-STatists-must-die.jpg

LMAO

BucEyedPea
05-26-2010, 08:47 AM
I went through the Constitution last night, and I found nothing about requiring recordings.

That's what you actually looked for? Lol!

I doubt you would understand how to read it since it's a negative rights document—not a positive rights document.
That's the BIG European mind-set you're unable to shed since coming here.

Donger
05-26-2010, 08:50 AM
That's what you actually looked for? Lol!

I doubt you would understand how to read it since it's a negative rights document—not a positive rights document.
That's the BIG European mind-set you're unable to shed since coming here.

Well, that was your point, was it not? That they were violating the Constitution by not recording their meeting?

If not, what did you mean?

BucEyedPea
05-26-2010, 08:55 AM
Well, that was your point, was it not? That they were violating the Constitution by not recording their meeting?

If not, what did you mean?

I didn't a clue what your talking about until this post. No, I did not say that—AT ALL. Go back and reread it. The recording part had absolutely nothing to do with the Constitution. I'm not going to answer a multitude of question for you today.

Donger
05-26-2010, 08:58 AM
I didn't a clue what your talking about until this post. No, I did not say that—AT ALL. Go back and reread it. The recording part had absolutely nothing to do with the Constitution. I'm not going to answer a multitude of question for you today.

Okay.

Don't forget that closed door meeting with Progressives like Schumer, Reid etc where they forbade any recordings. Only one progressive did record, accidentally. These guys said they wanted to be able to do away with the Bill of Rights with a simple vote. That's lawlessness.

Says all. ———————————> TYRANTS!