• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Washington Post Catch and Kill, not noticeably better than the Enquirer’s.

Republican speaker of the house Mike Johnson is the bland and smiling face of evil.

So it was an October Surprise A Day, like an Advent calendar but for crime.

My right to basic bodily autonomy is not on the table. that’s the new deal.

Republicans in disarray!

Republicans: slavery is when you own me. freedom is when I own you.

Not so fun when the rabbit gets the gun, is it?

Republicans cannot even be trusted with their own money.

They are lying in pursuit of an agenda.

Following reporting rules is only for the little people, apparently.

When do we start airlifting the women and children out of Texas?

Hot air and ill-informed banter

We still have time to mess this up!

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

Jesus watching the most hateful people claiming to be his followers

Disappointing to see gov. newsom with his finger to the wind.

Trump should be leading, not lying.

This year has been the longest three days of putin’s life.

Narcissists are always shocked to discover other people have agency.

You’re just a puppy masquerading as an old coot.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

An almost top 10,000 blog!

It’s the corruption, stupid.

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you do not.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Open Threads / Media Bias

Media Bias

by John Cole|  April 19, 200710:24 am| 102 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads

FacebookTweetEmail

Just curious. What do you think the media and others would label someone who wrote this before murdering 31 people:

You had everything you wanted. Your Mercedes wasn’t enough, you brats. Your golden necklaces weren’t enough, you snobs. Your trust fund wasn’t enough. Your vodka and Cognac weren’t enough. All your debaucheries weren’t enough. Those weren’t enough to fulfill your hedonistic needs. You had everything.

Do you know what it feels to be spit on your face and to have trash shoved down your throat? Do you know what it feels like to dig your own grave?
Do you know what it feels like to have throat slashed from ear to ear? Do you know what it feels like to be torched alive?
Do you know what it feels like to be humiliated and be impaled upon on a cross? And left to bleed to death for your amusement? You have never felt a single ounce of pain your whole life. Did you want to inject as much misery in our lives as you can just because you can?

You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience. You thought it was one pathetic boy’s life you were extinguishing. Thanks to you, I die like ALLAH, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people.

I am betting half the blogosphere would be drawing up plans to invade Iran (the new Originals*), and the words Islamic terrorist would be flowing freely. Hell, some in the blogosphere were HOPING for that to be the case.

*- Sorry for the Spinal Tap reference.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Profiles In Courage (A Continuing Series)
Next Post: Why President Bush Irritates People »

Reader Interactions

102Comments

  1. 1.

    United We Lay

    April 19, 2007 at 10:29 am

    He also likened himself to Christ, but I guess they cut that part out.

  2. 2.

    metalgrid

    April 19, 2007 at 10:29 am

    Can we invade Vatican City now?

  3. 3.

    Dreggas

    April 19, 2007 at 10:30 am

    I read the same excerpts last night, of course unaltered. Wonder where the outrage is and the demand to invade, oh, say…kansas or something since this guy was making himself out to be some sort of christian martyr.

  4. 4.

    Pb

    April 19, 2007 at 10:43 am

    Run! Mad Muslim homicide terror Paki bomber on the loose!

    (Of course, that’s totally different from the perfectly legitimate and loving cause of being a warrior for Christ, fighting off the evil demons that surround and accost us all day, every day…)

  5. 5.

    jenniebee

    April 19, 2007 at 10:53 am

    Debbie Dear has removed her post. Screenshots anyone?

  6. 6.

    Scruffy McSnufflepuss

    April 19, 2007 at 10:58 am

    Half the blogosphere is drawing up plans to invade Iran anyway. What does that prove? Beyond the fact that half the blogosphere is severely mentally disturbed, I mean.

  7. 7.

    Blue Neponset

    April 19, 2007 at 10:58 am

    I think Debbie’s stupid dial goes to 11 and it has been pegged for a good while now.

  8. 8.

    Dreggas

    April 19, 2007 at 10:59 am

    O/T but listening to the Senate Panel grilling Gonzalez and am experiencing shock and awe. Sessions is verbally jaw-jacking him.

  9. 9.

    Dreggas

    April 19, 2007 at 11:00 am

    Scruffy McSnufflepuss Says:

    Half the blogosphere is drawing up plans to invade Iran anyway. What does that prove? Beyond the fact that half the blogosphere is severely mentally disturbed, I mean.

    Ummm you mean like 28% of the blogosphere.

  10. 10.

    Tulkinghorn

    April 19, 2007 at 11:01 am

    Bad analogy, John. Allah is G-d, who can not die. Rather, switch in Hussein or Hassan, and you have a pretty good Shi’a martydom statement.

    Sunnis are not so big on martyrdom, at least they were not until Sunni Palestinians had to compete with Maoist Palestinians who had picked up the suicide bombing tactic from the Tamil Tigers. Al Qaeda then picked up the suicide bombing tactic from the Sunni Palestinians.

  11. 11.

    Rome Again

    April 19, 2007 at 11:06 am

    Do you know what it feels like to dig your own grave?

    No, and apparently he didn’t either. Whoever’s grave he dug, it certainly didnt’ end up being his own.

    Rhetorical questions, judgmental bullshit, and we’re going to end up with “he was a terrorist after all”. Great, all we need in this age of insanity. He asked a couple of questions that might have been important, but nobody will take his questions seriously now.

  12. 12.

    Rome Again

    April 19, 2007 at 11:08 am

    He also likened himself to Christ, but I guess they cut that part out.

    That Christ guy, everyone thinks he was so perfect. Was he really? Did he even really ever exist at all? Hmmmm.

  13. 13.

    Fwiffo

    April 19, 2007 at 11:11 am

    An accurate label would be “psychotic”, “mentally damaged”, “incoherent”, or “batshit fucking insane crazy person who is crazy and insane as his full-time occupation”.

    I’m sure people will attach whatever ideologies to him that will satisfy their personal political wet-dreams, but the fact is that his mind was so warped that it couldn’t even contain a rational thought, let alone any sort of coherent political or religious ideology. The comparison of himself to Christ or martyrdom aren’t about religion, they’re about his paranoia and delusions of persecution.

    I actually found the stuff he mailed to NBC to be strangely comforting. Sometimes mass murderers or serial killers have some part of them or their psychology that seems “normal”. The idea that a seemingly normal (but disturbed) person could one day “snap” is pretty disconcerting. But to see how crazy this guy was, through-and-through is a relief. There was nothing normal or OK about this guy. He was 99 44/100% pure nutjob (the remaining fraction being hair, teeth and bellybutton lint.)

  14. 14.

    Jake

    April 19, 2007 at 11:14 am

    Which will happen first?

    1. Some lack-wit (see Debbie S.) will pull John’s edit and claim it’s the actual text of Cho’s rant.

    2. Some lack-wit (see your favourite Christianist) will claim this proves Cho was an Islamofascistpuppystomper and of course the librul media (see NBC) is in on the plot to descredit the religion.

  15. 15.

    Andrew

    April 19, 2007 at 11:19 am

    What do you think the media and others would label someone who wrote this before murdering 31 people:

    Dinesh D’Souza?

  16. 16.

    Pb

    April 19, 2007 at 11:20 am

    jenniebee,

    Her post is still in Google’s cache — for the moment, at least. Get ‘cher Paki Muslim terror bombers while they’re hot!

  17. 17.

    Scruffy McSnufflepuss

    April 19, 2007 at 11:21 am

    Ummm you mean like 28% of the blogosphere.

    John was the one that said half the blogosphere. I assumed he was in on some inside blogosphere polling results. The silent majority of BJ readers are actually wingnuts, that kind of shit. Then again, surely half the country would get behind a nice war with Iran at this point, right?

  18. 18.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 11:43 am

    I dunno, if you ask me, he hated us for our freedoms.

    Just another sociopath. They’re a dime a dozen, we have a few running this country as we speak.

    What’s the difference between this insane rant, and the blabberings of Pat Robertson? Just the fact that Robertson’s language is more polite, as near as I can tell.

  19. 19.

    Sam Hutcheson

    April 19, 2007 at 11:57 am

    What’s the difference between this insane rant, and the blabberings of Pat Robertson? Just the fact that Robertson’s language is more polite, as near as I can tell.

    And the fact that Robertson, for whatever his shortcomings may be, has never gunned down 32 people in cold blood.

    But otherwise, yeah, run with that comparison.

  20. 20.

    tBone

    April 19, 2007 at 12:00 pm

    And the fact that Robertson, for whatever his shortcomings may be, has never gunned down 32 people in cold blood.

    …that we know of.

  21. 21.

    Equal Opportunity Cynic

    April 19, 2007 at 12:02 pm

    Schlussel took the whole entry down. That’s the way to demonstrate the courage of one’s convictions!

    If someone’s going to use the above rant to demonstrate the guy was Muslim, it doesn’t appear he was a very knowledgeable one. I’m pretty certain Allah doesn’t die in Muslim theology.

    @Rome Again: It’s pretty well-documented that there was a guy named Yeshua from Nazareth who was crucified as a blasphemer. If you want to debate the reliability of Josephus, well, it’s probably a debate I’d learn a lot from (if I had time to participate).

  22. 22.

    srv

    April 19, 2007 at 12:03 pm

    “Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It’s no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and discrimination and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history.”

    …

    “The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.”

    – Pat Robertson

    I’d be afraid if I were at a 700 club taping.

  23. 23.

    Zifnab

    April 19, 2007 at 12:03 pm

    You thought it was one pathetic boy’s life you were extinguishing. Thanks to you, I die like ALLAH, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people.

    Oh, please. I flipped on Michael Savage (my absolute favorite go-to right-wing crazy-as-all-get-out pundit) who is STILL totally convinced that this guy is an Al Qaida sleeper agent, and is petitioning anyone from the FBI, CIA, or other government big-shot agency to help him make his case.

    I think Little Debbie hit all the bases right off the bat. The VT shooting was because A) not enough guns in schools, B) libruls are pussies, C) illegal immigrants are crossing our boarders, and D) Team Al Qaida/Hussien struck again! Slip in some evolution/godless college campuses/violent video games for good measure.

    Why? Because these are the big GOP talking points, and everything from the state of Wall Street to the newest archeological find to random campus shootings must catagorically prove GOP talking points at all times.

    :-p Screw you “reality-based” community! We write our own headlines.

  24. 24.

    John S.

    April 19, 2007 at 12:14 pm

    What do you think the media and others would label someone who wrote this before murdering 31 people

    He hated people for their elitism, their hedonism and their debauched ways…he sounds like an angry right-winger who fulfilled Dinesh DeSouza’s dreams.

  25. 25.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 12:14 pm

    run with that comparison

    Indeed, I will, and thanks to you, I will highlight it again.

    The comparison is apt. What is the difference between Cho’s bullshit, and, say, Robertson’s bullshit after 911?

    Just the politeness of the language. The sociopathic agenda is pretty much the same as near as I can tell.

    Just because Robertson himself didn’t pick up a gun, or hijack an airplane, doesn’t mean that his ugly and insane blabberings are not just as reprehensible. Any fool can see that. Well, any fool but you, apparently.

  26. 26.

    Jake

    April 19, 2007 at 12:18 pm

    Gads, Little Debbie is having a fit because the Post’s front-page photo on the 17th featured women wearing head scarves. It must be some sort of plot, to make us look at women who cover their heads!

  27. 27.

    Rome Again

    April 19, 2007 at 12:29 pm

    @Rome Again: It’s pretty well-documented that there was a guy named Yeshua from Nazareth who was crucified as a blasphemer. If you want to debate the reliability of Josephus, well, it’s probably a debate I’d learn a lot from (if I had time to participate).

    I’ll take you up on that: If I lived in the time of Cleopatra and wrote something regarding the life of Cleopatra and stated I was Cleopatra, it’s very possible that people would be arguing now if Cleopatra left any writings. Of course, many people don’t realize there were many Cleopatras in the heirarchical family and no one would have been able to tell the difference between one and another. Furthermore, I could have been someone who KNEW Cleopatra and wanted to railroad her reputation for posterity. Who would have known any different thousands of years later? Though my own reputation might have been slandered during the time of writing, that kind of history is lost after a while. It could be that what was once common knowledge (that I wasn’t Cleopatra at all) becomes lost on a whole entire future society.

    You are talking about writings from an author that lived so long ago no one can say for sure if the author was really who he stated, whether the information was fabricated, or whether the story were merely allegory.

  28. 28.

    Dreggas

    April 19, 2007 at 12:31 pm

    Jake Says:

    Gads, Little Debbie is having a fit because the Post’s front-page photo on the 17th featured women wearing head scarves. It must be some sort of plot, to make us look at women who cover their heads!

    I seem to recall a time when head scarves were fashionable, trendy even. All those old pictures of the models wearing them. It wasn’t a big deal…now…well…{walks off muttering and shaking his head}

  29. 29.

    Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop

    April 19, 2007 at 12:31 pm

    Did you really mean to title this post “Media Bias?”

    If you want real media bias, contrast the Duke case and the coverage it received with this case and the way it’s been buried.

    Caution: Don’t read unless you want to get pissed off.

  30. 30.

    jenniebee

    April 19, 2007 at 12:36 pm

    Thanks for the google cache.

    But Debster! What’s with the CAPS?

  31. 31.

    Bubblegum Tate

    April 19, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    Really, Cho sounds like blame-America firster Mark Noonan.

    It is funny that the same halfwits who are trying desperately to turn the whole Ismail Ex thing into absolute proof that this guy is a TERRIST MOO-SLEM HERE TO CHOP OUR HEADS OFF BLARGH!!!!! are conveniently overlooking all Cho’s stated Christian references.

  32. 32.

    Equal Opportunity Cynic

    April 19, 2007 at 12:44 pm

    If I lived in the time of Cleopatra and wrote something regarding the life of Cleopatra and stated I was Cleopatra

    I’m not getting the relationship to Josephus specifically. Josephus didn’t claim to be Jesus, nor did any of the Gospel authors. Jesus certainly made plenty of claims of deity, but he wasn’t the one writing them down for posterity. But perhaps I’m not really getting your point about claiming to be Cleopatra.

    I certainly want to educate myself on the documentary evidence. Right now, though, I don’t have the time to dig very deep. I would just encourage anyone looking deeper to consider what standards of documentary integrity we accept for, say, the writings of Homer. Comparatively, I believe that the evidence for the historical existence of Jesus is quite strong indeed.

  33. 33.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 12:47 pm

    Cho sounds like blame-America firster Mark Noonan.

    B4B and Noonan appear to be spoof. Surely nobody takes these clowns seriously?

  34. 34.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 12:53 pm

    I believe that the evidence for the historical existence of Jesus is quite strong indeed.

    Indeed. Jesus does my yard every Thursday afternoon.

    I thought we had long ago established that?

  35. 35.

    Sam Hutcheson

    April 19, 2007 at 12:53 pm

    Just because Robertson himself didn’t pick up a gun, or hijack an airplane, doesn’t mean that his ugly and insane blabberings are not just as reprehensible. Any fool can see that. Well, any fool but you, apparently.

    Yeah, let’s just ignore that whole “things they’ve actually done” bit and pretend that the _rhetoric_ is what makes this whole VT thing heinous. I mean, if he had just gunned down 32 people randomly and not spewed the terrible thought-crimes he would have been okay, but with the hate-speech he’s JUST LIKE PAT ROBERTSON!

    Don’t be an idiot. Robertson is reprehensible for a lot of reasons, including his proclivity to say vile things to millions of people, but he IS NOT LIKE A MASS MURDERER because, get this, HE’S NOT A MASS MURDERER.

    Hateful, inflammatory idiocy spewed to millions: regrettable, often dangerously so.

    Unloading 10 clips on your classmates and teachers: notable worse.

  36. 36.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 12:56 pm

    but with the hate-speech he’s JUST LIKE PAT ROBERTSON!

    Yes, exactly. In terms of hate speech, he is like Robertson. More to the point, Robertson is like Cho.

    That is the point. You are really working hard to avoid it, though. Maybe some deep breathing exercises would help?

    Hate speech is hate speech. It is not necessary to personally commit murder in order to validate that it is hate speech.

    If an appreciation for hate speech in and of itself is not the issue here, then why are we having the thread? To celebrate the utterings of a madman?

    You tell me, Mister Potatohead.

  37. 37.

    Andrew

    April 19, 2007 at 12:59 pm

    If I lived in the time of Cleopatra and wrote something regarding the life of Cleopatra and stated I was Cleopatra

    I’m watching Rome right now and Cleo is a bangin’ hottie.

  38. 38.

    Sam Hutcheson

    April 19, 2007 at 1:03 pm

    If an appreciation for hate speech in and of itself is not the issue here, then why are we having the thread? To celebrate the utterings of a madman?

    I don’t know that you’re a madman so much as easily excitable.

    To the point, hate speech without action is free expression. If Pat Robertson says hateful things and uses those hateful things to stir up a mob who then goes out and acts on his words, THEN you have cause to complain. Until something actually occurs, it’s just speech, which is sort of protected and the like.

    I’m not here to defend Robertson’s insane ramblings. They are insane ramblings. In that they are in fact insane ramblings I suppose there is very broad spectrum “similarity” between them and Cho’s paranoid rants. But minus the actual murdering Cho’s rants are just that — rants. Nothing more, nothing less.

    All of which skips the broadstroke slur which is your primary purpose with this comparison, which is to try to equate Robertson — nutty old fucker that he is — with a mass murderer. That’s intellectually dishonest and you damned well know it.

  39. 39.

    Pb

    April 19, 2007 at 1:05 pm

    Robertson is reprehensible for a lot of reasons, including his proclivity to say vile things to millions of people, but he IS NOT LIKE A MASS MURDERER because, get this, HE’S NOT A MASS MURDERER.

    Only by proxy–he’s just in bed with some African dictators… Hey, if Pat Robertson funded Charles Taylor, and Charles Taylor funded al-Qaeda, that makes Pat Robertson a terrorist [according to Bush], right?

  40. 40.

    Tony J

    April 19, 2007 at 1:09 pm

    Now I’m wondering what the search through his hard-drive and book collection are going to turn up vis-a-vis his taste in inspirational reading material.

    If it comes out that psycho-boy was a regular on one of the Kristo-Konservative blogs…

  41. 41.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 1:11 pm

    hate speech without action is free expression

    Heh, very clever. Hate speech is hate speech, period. It doesn’t become hate speech at the point of murder. Your analysis is plainly wrong.

    Whether it’s “free expression” or not is entirely a separate matter. Whether you, or anyone else, “equates” Robertson with Cho, entirely another matter. But the thread is about the speech, and the speech does equate. It’s the same speech, only the genteel smirks of Robertson distinguish his from Cho’s.

    Robertson is a sociopath. His chuckling aw-shucks denials aren’t convincing (except maybe to you).

    One guys suggests that God will kill and destroy innocent Americans for their sinful ways. Another guy doesn’t have a tv network but says that he’ll do essentially the same thing …. and does. Like I said, sociopathy is easy to come by. You can get on cable, day and night. Basic cable, even.

    I don’t know what point you think you are making, or to whom you think you are making it, but you lost this exchange about three cycles ago. Keep going, though, I am impressed by your zeal for digging yourself in deeper.

  42. 42.

    Sam Hutcheson

    April 19, 2007 at 1:17 pm

    Hate speech is hate speech, period. It doesn’t become hate speech at the point of murder. Your analysis is plainly wrong.

    No it isn’t.

  43. 43.

    Dreggas

    April 19, 2007 at 1:22 pm

    Don’t be an idiot. Robertson is reprehensible for a lot of reasons, including his proclivity to say vile things to millions of people, but he IS NOT LIKE A MASS MURDERER because, get this, HE’S NOT A MASS MURDERER.

    Charles Manson never killed anyone either…he just spewed the rhetoric that incited others to do it for him.

  44. 44.

    tBone

    April 19, 2007 at 1:29 pm

    Don’t be an idiot. Robertson is reprehensible for a lot of reasons, including his proclivity to say vile things to millions of people, but he IS NOT LIKE A MASS MURDERER because, get this, HE’S NOT A MASS MURDERER.

    …THAT WE KNOW OF.

  45. 45.

    Jake

    April 19, 2007 at 1:31 pm

    *- Sorry for the Spinal Tap reference.

    You never, ever have to apologize for a ST reference.

  46. 46.

    Baby Jane

    April 19, 2007 at 1:34 pm

    Is Hate Speech still hate speech if it has majority support?
    Is it still hate speech if it becomes public policy?
    Would then hating on Hate Speech be hate speech?

    (Yesterday, I had BDS. Today, I’m just cracked.)

  47. 47.

    tBone

    April 19, 2007 at 1:39 pm

    If you want real media bias, contrast the Duke case and the coverage it received with this case and the way it’s been buried.

    EEEL is apparently on lunch break from Jackalopes ‘r Us.

  48. 48.

    The Other Steve

    April 19, 2007 at 2:07 pm

    Schussel has taken down her blog post, apparently ashamed of it.

    Although given her comparison of George Soros to Hitler now up there, I’m not sure she is ashamed of anything she writes.

  49. 49.

    Sam Hutcheson

    April 19, 2007 at 2:08 pm

    Charles Manson never killed anyone either…he just spewed the rhetoric that incited others to do it for him.

    Oh bloody fucking hell. You can’t be serious. I tell you what, you go find me any single credible piece of evidence that Pat Robertson has sent his love-slaves out to brutally murder pregnant women in the Hollywood hills and I will promise to stop calling you a complete fucking moron.

  50. 50.

    The Other Steve

    April 19, 2007 at 2:13 pm

    If you want real media bias, contrast the Duke case and the coverage it received with this case and the way it’s been buried.

    Well they’re not really doing a very good job at it.

    You go over to the Knoxville Sentinel and there are many articles.

    http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/local_news/article/0,1406,KNS_347_5322475,00.html

  51. 51.

    Dreggas

    April 19, 2007 at 2:15 pm

    Sam Hutcheson Says:

    Oh bloody fucking hell. You can’t be serious. I tell you what, you go find me any single credible piece of evidence that Pat Robertson has sent his love-slaves out to brutally murder pregnant women in the Hollywood hills and I will promise to stop calling you a complete fucking moron.

    Oh that’s right he just inspires stupid lemmings (not unlike stupid love-slave lemmings) to go bomb abortion clinics, calls for the assassination of political leaders, incites people to violence against homosexuals…nah, nothing wrong with that.

  52. 52.

    The Other Steve

    April 19, 2007 at 2:15 pm

    Oh bloody fucking hell. You can’t be serious. I tell you what, you go find me any single credible piece of evidence that Pat Robertson has sent his love-slaves out to brutally murder pregnant women in the Hollywood hills and I will promise to stop calling you a complete fucking moron.

    He did defend Charles Taylor.

  53. 53.

    Dreggas

    April 19, 2007 at 2:17 pm

    TOS,

    He also called for a nuke to be dropped on the state dept.

  54. 54.

    Sam Hutcheson

    April 19, 2007 at 3:00 pm

    Oh that’s right he just inspires stupid lemmings (not unlike stupid love-slave lemmings) to go bomb abortion clinics

    Cite one example thereof. When you stop futilely searching for it, think about the possibility that Eric Rudolph and his ilk might be responsible for their own actions.

    calls for the assassination of political leaders

    And is rightfully called a raving lunatic for it. Words; words, words.

    incites people to violence against homosexuals

    Run along and search for a cite again. Robertson, being a raving Christian lunatic, condemns what he considers to be mortal sin and sounds like a raving Christian lunatic when he does. He has his fingers in far to many cogs of the government, certainly. But you’ll have to show me an instance where he “incite people to violence against homosexual.” I’ll wait patiently while you look that up.

    On the Charles Taylor thing, yes, he did defend Charles Taylor. Yes, this does mean that he is a vile little bastard who will defend mass murdering tyrants if it suits his political or economic aims. It does NOT mean he is guilty of Charles Taylor’s crimes.

  55. 55.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 3:09 pm

    No it isn’t.

    Of course it is. Your whole schtick here is to avoid calling a spade a spade. But, you see, a spade is a spade.

    Robertson’s speech was sociopathic hate speech in 2001, and again in 2005 when he said basically the same things about Katrina. It isn’t taken out of context, it isn’t misunderstood. His smirky delivery and couching of the grotesque admonitions in religious terms don’t disguise his meaning, which is, “People whose behavior I don’t like deserve to die.” That’s it. It is what it is.

    Take Cho’s blabberings and take out the repetitions and the swear words and add Robertson’s phony smile, and there you go … it’s the same speech.

    Speech is what it is. It doesn’t matter whether Mother Theresa says it or Charles Manson says it. When it’s advancing death and destruction against innocent people, it’s hate speech and it’s sociopathy.

    Whether you see it, agree with it, or like it or not.

    That’s why the world recoiled from the crazy fuck in 2001 and 2005 and no doubt will again when he does it again one of these days.

    He did defend Charles Taylor.

    He didn’t just defend Taylor, he profited from business deals that flourished under Taylor’s corrupt regime. Robertson is a particularly odious piece of crap and deserves whatever scorn and ridicule can be heaped upon his sorry sociopathic head.

    Journalist Bill Sizemore followed Robertson’s political and economic activities for years. In 1999, he published an article in The Virginian-Pilot newspaper reporting that Robertson had signed a development agreement with then Liberian President Charles Taylor, a man frequently criticized by international human rights groups. Robertson established a for-profit corporation known as Freedom Gold, Ltd., based in the Cayman Islands, with himself as president and the firm’s only director. Televangelist Robertson reportedly told President Taylor, “I pray that this investment may become a wonderful blessing to the people of Liberia and will be one of the many significant investments that will be made under your administration in the nation of Liberia.”

    According to Sizemore, there are similarities between this venture and an earlier enterprise Robertson was involved in with another African strongman, Zaire dictator Mobutu Sese Siko. In that arrangement, Robertson was wined and dined on Mobutu’s private yacht and established the African Development Company after receiving lucrative concessions to develop timber and diamond reserves. Mobutu—dubbed the “President of Kleptocracy” for his looting of Zaire’s wealth—was driven into exile in 1997, and subsequently died of cancer. It is estimated that he embezzled as much as $2 billion from his nation, but Robertson remained firm in defending Mobutu as “a good Christian.” Mr. Robertson found him a “good Christian” despite the preacher’s own words: “If you’re . . . cheating and stealing and lying and greedy.”

    Pat Robertson is a fucking train wreck, a moral cesspool.

    Defend him all you like. You deserve the guy.

  56. 56.

    Pb

    April 19, 2007 at 3:27 pm

    Sam Hutcheson,

    On the Charles Taylor thing, yes, he did defend Charles Taylor. Yes, this does mean that he is a vile little bastard who will defend mass murdering tyrants if it suits his political or economic aims. It does NOT mean he is guilty of Charles Taylor’s crimes.

    See above–he didn’t just defend him, he went into business with him. More here:

    But in May 1999, Robertson, through Freedom Gold Limited, an offshore company registered in the Cayman Islands but based at CBN headquarters in Virginia Beach, signed an agreement with Taylor and key cabinet members allowing the for-profit Freedom Gold to explore and receive mining rights in southeastern Liberia, where gold is believed to be in the ground.

    It’s a great deal for Liberia, which is now an economic basket case thanks to the long civil war and Taylor’s corruption. It’s also good for Freedom Gold, which was formed by Robertson in 1998. Liberia — and for all practical purposes we’re talking Taylor — gains 10 percent ownership of Freedom Gold.

    He even called the company “Freedom Gold”, for crissake–how sick is that?

  57. 57.

    Rudi

    April 19, 2007 at 3:28 pm

    LOL – Now Mark Steyn is tying Monica and Clinton to the VT story over at NRO.
    Clinton BJ

    Point one: They’re not “children.” The students at Virginia Tech were grown women and — if you’ll forgive the expression — men. They would be regarded as adults by any other society in the history of our planet. Granted, we live in a selectively infantilized culture where twentysomethings are “children” if they’re serving in the Third Infantry Division in Ramadi but grown-ups making rational choices if they drop to the broadloom in President Clinton’s Oval Office.

    Shorter deranged Steyn: Monica’s BJ caused the VT massacre. Cho was in dire need of a BJ(Good Morning Vietnam)

  58. 58.

    Dreggas

    April 19, 2007 at 3:33 pm

    Rudi Says:
    Shorter deranged Steyn: Monica’s BJ caused the VT massacre. Cho was in dire need of a BJ(Good Morning Vietnam)

    Well Monica did get rich off of the whole affair…

  59. 59.

    Rome Again

    April 19, 2007 at 3:48 pm

    I’m not getting the relationship to Josephus specifically. Josephus didn’t claim to be Jesus, nor did any of the Gospel authors. Jesus certainly made plenty of claims of deity, but he wasn’t the one writing them down for posterity. But perhaps I’m not really getting your point about claiming to be Cleopatra.

    No, EOC you’re not getting it. Perhaps, because those words were written so long ago, we can never know if Josephus was telling the truth, or lying, or what? There is reason to believe he was just a tool. Nobody else mentions Jesus in any writings, just this one person (and are we sure it was him to begin with at all? Or some other fellow using Josephus’ name for credibility where none existed.

    Religion seems to sell things that way. I wouldn’t be surprised if Josephus wasn’t Josephus at all.

    My Cleopatra example was to show the confusion that exists with writings that happened that long ago. We can never know if anything that was written about a supposed Messiah 2000 years ago is true. There is nothing besides Josephus’ writings and a few ideological crazy guys who contradicted each other and put their thoughts into what the church eventually regarded as a holy book. With any writings from that long ago, there is no way to verify them. There never will be, unless Jesus comes back and says he was the guy (don’t hold your breath, I got it on good authority that will never happen).

  60. 60.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 3:50 pm

    He even called the company “Freedom Gold”, for crissake—how sick is that?

    Right on a par with “Operation Iraqi Freedom” I think.

  61. 61.

    Rome Again

    April 19, 2007 at 3:52 pm

    No, EOC you’re not getting it. Perhaps, because those words were written so long ago, we can never know if Josephus was telling the truth, or lying, or what? There is reason to believe he was just a tool. Nobody else mentions Jesus in any writings, just this one person (and are we sure it was him to begin with at all? Or some other fellow using Josephus’ name for credibility where none existed.

    Sorry meant to preface “nobody else mentions Jesus” with the word “credible”. Josephus is the only possible credible source of knowledge of a man who thought he was the son of God, and there is controversy as to whether he is credible as well.

    The crazy scribes of the Bible are ideaological tools for a religion and they are not credible, unless you go to Christian Conservative universities.

  62. 62.

    les

    April 19, 2007 at 3:58 pm

    It’s pretty well-documented that there was a guy named Yeshua from Nazareth who was crucified as a blasphemer.

    Alternate definition of “well-documented”: Some time after the fact, a noted historian from someplace else made a passing reference that a guy with a common name, from a well known community, suffered a common punishment. No one else seemed to notice at the time.

  63. 63.

    Rome Again

    April 19, 2007 at 4:06 pm

    Alternate definition of “well-documented”: Some time after the fact, a noted historian from someplace else made a passing reference that a guy with a common name, from a well known community, suffered a common punishment. No one else seemed to notice at the time.

    That’s it exactly, les. Thank you.

  64. 64.

    Sam Hutcheson

    April 19, 2007 at 4:08 pm

    Defend him all you like. You deserve the guy.

    Well here’s the thing you’re missing between the rapid panting and the blurred-vision: I’m not defending Pat Robertson. At all. Anywhere. I’m simply calling you on the intellectual dishonest required to try to equate him with a mass murderer.

    What amazes me is that you believe it’s necessary to draw that false equality. Robertson is plenty damnable on his own merits and it doesn’t require your smear tactics to make him look onerous and dispicable. Yet you smear anyway. That’s weird to me.

    Pat Robertson = bad guy. Pat Robertsion != mass murderer. No amount of specious rhetoric around the fuzzy definitions of “hate speech” is going to change that.

  65. 65.

    DougJ

    April 19, 2007 at 4:09 pm

    Great post.

  66. 66.

    Jake

    April 19, 2007 at 4:11 pm

    They would be regarded as adults by any other society in the history of our planet.

    Methinks Steyn-gun is pining for the days when you could marry a twelve year old.

  67. 67.

    tBone

    April 19, 2007 at 4:46 pm

    Pat Robertsion != mass murderer.

    …as far as we know. But has anyone checked his freezer?

  68. 68.

    grumpy realist

    April 19, 2007 at 4:57 pm

    …that’s where he keeps the stack of $100 bills…..

    Even more interesting for Biblical Afificonados, start looking for independent historical references for Solomon and Solomon’s Temple.

    Ain’t any.

    Oops.

  69. 69.

    sidereal

    April 19, 2007 at 5:15 pm

    Robertson, for whatever his shortcomings may be, has never gunned down 32 people in cold blood

    Yet. I hear he and Cheney have a running bet, and Cheney’s up on him by one.

    If Pat Robertson says hateful things and uses those hateful things to stir up a mob who then goes out and acts on his words, THEN you have cause to complain. Until something actually occurs, it’s just speech, which is sort of protected and the like.

    Wow. The gap between ‘complain about’ and ‘draft legislation prohibiting’ is so vast that to conflate them must have taken Herculean strength. Congrats.

    Seriously, no one on this thread has (seriously) called Robertson a mass murderer, yet you keep trying to disprove it. Why?

    Here’s the chain of reasoning. Cho’s writings = some fucked up victimization shit, therefore Cho dangerous and crazy. If, Cho’s writings ~= Robertson’s blathering, then Robertson ~= dangerous and crazy. Which part of that are you disputing?

  70. 70.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 5:26 pm

    I’m simply calling you on the intellectual dishonest required to try to equate him with a mass murderer.

    I didn’t. I said the speech was equivalent. Not that the speakers are equivalent. The speech, the speech, the speech. It was all about the speech.

    You leep making the “false equivalency” as a strawman which is having a hard time standing up in the wind for lack of straw. Maybe if you accused me of pederasty, or something else? I’m just trying to help you out.

    What I said was clear, and it stands: Both of these assholes advanced sociopathic hate speech. The speech is what it is. You can talk all day about your insistence that Robertson didn’t personally kill anybody, it has no relevance to what I said.

    If you don’t want to get that, then tough shit. The argument is over, and you lost. About 4 hours ago.

  71. 71.

    Baby Jane

    April 19, 2007 at 5:33 pm

    Gunman’s sister works on Iraq reconstruction team

  72. 72.

    Sam Hutcheson

    April 19, 2007 at 5:33 pm

    The batter does not call the balls and strikes, Eunice.

  73. 73.

    ThymeZone

    April 19, 2007 at 5:41 pm

    No amount of specious rhetoric facts around the fuzzy definitions of “hate speech” actual topic of the thread is going to change that my intention to keep propping up this lame-assed strawman argument.

    Whatever, dude. If you like, I can draw you a little stick figure to keep arguing with.

  74. 74.

    ttk

    April 19, 2007 at 7:08 pm

    It’s been demonstrated that this person lifted dialogue and poses from a movie popular in China about a man on a revenge rampage. None of this stuff is really him.

    After listening to the debate about the massacre, it occurs to me that the guy was a student. Maybe he couldn’t be arrested or hospitalized involuntarily, but he certainly could have been expelled for violating the code of conduct at that university. They mystery is why he wasn’t even after professors were so afraid of his behavior they wouldn’t let him in their classes.

    The other sad thing is that he was able to easily buy a gun without even a waiting period or a background check. Conservatives are fond of saying that guns don’t kill people, people kill people. GUNS KILL PEOPLE.

  75. 75.

    Baby Jane

    April 19, 2007 at 8:30 pm

    GUNS KILL PEOPLE.

    Yes. You’ll certainly find that entry in The Excruciatingly Unpleasant Long List of Things That Kill People.

  76. 76.

    Rome Again

    April 19, 2007 at 8:33 pm

    Conservatives are fond of saying that guns don’t kill people, people kill people. GUNS KILL PEOPLE.

    Challenge to conservatives, tell me how someone gets shot without a gun.

  77. 77.

    Baby Jane

    April 19, 2007 at 8:45 pm

    I’m no conservative, but I guess you could crazy glue a bullet to your bumper.

  78. 78.

    Rome Again

    April 19, 2007 at 8:59 pm

    I guess you could crazy glue a bullet to your bumper.

    How does that give the bullet enough momentum to penetrate the body?

  79. 79.

    Zifnab

    April 19, 2007 at 10:46 pm

    How does that give the bullet enough momentum to penetrate the body?

    Simple. You drive at the speed of sound.

  80. 80.

    Zombie Santa Claus

    April 20, 2007 at 9:47 am

    Challenge to conservatives, tell me how someone gets shot without a gun.

    Maybe you could drop the bullets from a tall building or out of an airplane or something.

  81. 81.

    Zombie Santa Claus

    April 20, 2007 at 9:50 am

    Does getting shot with an arrow count?

  82. 82.

    Rome Again

    April 20, 2007 at 10:09 am

    Maybe you could drop the bullets from a tall building or out of an airplane or something.

    That would be a problem for accurate aim, wouldn’t it?

    Does getting shot with an arrow count?

    No, we’re talking bullets.

  83. 83.

    Dreggas

    April 20, 2007 at 10:18 am

    Rome Again Says:

    Challenge to conservatives, tell me how someone gets shot without a gun.

    Not a conservative myself but people don’t get shot without a gun (unless it’s the needle kind of shot). Of course the gun is an inanimate object unlikely to jump up and shoot someone of its own accord so therefore it is the person who uses the tool to kill another person.

  84. 84.

    Baby Jane

    April 20, 2007 at 10:22 am

    How does that give the bullet enough momentum to penetrate the body?

    Responding to this question is like being a contender in the Special Olympics.

  85. 85.

    The Other Steve

    April 20, 2007 at 11:00 am

    Well here’s the thing you’re missing between the rapid panting and the blurred-vision: I’m not defending Pat Robertson. At all. Anywhere. I’m simply calling you on the intellectual dishonest required to try to equate him with a mass murderer.

    you don’t find it odd that you are being intellectually dishonest in failing to acknowledge points made in this discussion?

  86. 86.

    Rome Again

    April 20, 2007 at 11:08 am

    Not a conservative myself but people don’t get shot without a gun (unless it’s the needle kind of shot). Of course the gun is an inanimate object unlikely to jump up and shoot someone of its own accord so therefore it is the person who uses the tool to kill another person.

    But, without the gun, the victim wouldn’t be shot. It is not just one person killing another person, it is the gun as well. The killer in possession of a gun is the ONLY way that happens. It’s NOT an either/or situation.

  87. 87.

    Dreggas

    April 20, 2007 at 11:17 am

    Rome Again Says:

    But, without the gun, the victim wouldn’t be shot. It is not just one person killing another person, it is the gun as well. The killer in possession of a gun is the ONLY way that happens. It’s NOT an either/or situation.

    Unless of course the killer does it with a knife, a baseball bat, or other means. Again it’s the choice of the method. Guns make it easier and more efficient I will give you that but it’s still the person wielding the gun who commits the crime.

    Please don’t think I am really taking the gun nuts side on this, honestly I don’t see why a person needs a high capacity clip for a firearm or an assault weapon. Hell the running joke when I lived back east was that the only reason you needed an AK-47 for hunting was if you planned to shoot and gut the deer at the same time or make hamburger.

    My general point is that regardless of the weapon, the person wielding it is the one ultimately responsible, the gun might be the means but it is definitely not the ultimate culprit.

  88. 88.

    Jake

    April 20, 2007 at 11:18 am

    Maybe you could drop the bullets from a tall building or out of an airplane or something.

    Or a sleigh. Or maybe the radioactive reindeer drawing the sleigh could spit them out at high velocity. Much more exciting than giving a lump of coal to the bad little boys and girls.

  89. 89.

    Rome Again

    April 20, 2007 at 12:11 pm

    My general point is that regardless of the weapon, the person wielding it is the one ultimately responsible, the gun might be the means but it is definitely not the ultimate culprit.

    and my general point is that without the weapon, killing someone would be a lot more difficult.

  90. 90.

    Dreggas

    April 20, 2007 at 12:18 pm

    Rome Again Says:
    and my general point is that without the weapon, killing someone would be a lot more difficult.

    Until they find a new weapon. If someone wants to kill someone or a lot of someones they will find a way to do so.

  91. 91.

    Rome Again

    April 20, 2007 at 12:51 pm

    Or maybe the radioactive reindeer drawing the sleigh could spit them out at high velocity.

    Dear God, please let me witness this one time before I die, please?

  92. 92.

    Rome Again

    April 20, 2007 at 12:53 pm

    Until they find a new weapon. If someone wants to kill someone or a lot of someones they will find a way to do so.

    It is a synergistic relationship, sure… but it’s a hell of a lot harder to kill someone (or a bunch of someones) with your bare hands.

  93. 93.

    Dreggas

    April 20, 2007 at 1:18 pm

    Rome Again Says:

    It is a synergistic relationship, sure… but it’s a hell of a lot harder to kill someone (or a bunch of someones) with your bare hands.

    That’s a given, hence the evolution of weaponry both for hunting and warfare. It’s also, of course, a helluva lot messier LOL.

    Of course my personal belief is that guns are a cowards way of doing things (with the caveat that in modern warfare you need one) when it comes to fighting another human being and swords are much more honorable.

  94. 94.

    Dreggas

    April 20, 2007 at 1:21 pm

    Rome Again Says:

    Dear God, please let me witness this one time before I die, please?

    oooo me too, that would be a trip…in fact I think I should propose this as the next B-horror flick, nuclear apocalypse over the north pole mutates reindeer into bullet breathing monsters. Santa becomes the Toxic Avenger or something….

  95. 95.

    Rome Again

    April 20, 2007 at 1:21 pm

    Of course my personal belief is that guns are a cowards way of doing things (with the caveat that in modern warfare you need one) when it comes to fighting another human being and swords are much more honorable.

    en garde!

  96. 96.

    Rome Again

    April 20, 2007 at 1:27 pm

    oooo me too, that would be a trip…in fact I think I should propose this as the next B-horror flick, nuclear apocalypse over the north pole mutates reindeer into bullet breathing monsters. Santa becomes the Toxic Avenger or something….

    Now, THAT I would pay to see!

  97. 97.

    Dreggas

    April 20, 2007 at 1:28 pm

    Rome Again Says:

    oooo me too, that would be a trip…in fact I think I should propose this as the next B-horror flick, nuclear apocalypse over the north pole mutates reindeer into bullet breathing monsters. Santa becomes the Toxic Avenger or something….

    Now, THAT I would pay to see

    along with an army of teenage mutant ninja elves.

  98. 98.

    Baby Jane

    April 20, 2007 at 2:24 pm

    Modified nail gun.

  99. 99.

    Rome Again

    April 20, 2007 at 2:32 pm

    Modified nail gun.

    But see, even the inventors of such a product decided it was so close to a gun that they put the word “gun” right in the product name.

    Furthermore, it would still qualify as a weapon.

  100. 100.

    Dreggas

    April 20, 2007 at 3:03 pm

    Baby Jane Says:

    Modified nail gun.

    kinda reminds me of the scene outta “Real Men” with Jim Belushi and John Ritter where Jim makes a machine gun out of a bandaid box filled with nails and a vacuum cleaner set in reverse.

  101. 101.

    Scruffy McSnufflepuss

    April 20, 2007 at 10:02 pm

    oooo me too, that would be a trip…in fact I think I should propose this as the next B-horror flick, nuclear apocalypse over the north pole mutates reindeer into bullet breathing monsters. Santa becomes the Toxic Avenger or something….

    Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Hit-Reindeer. I’m just envisioning the malls around Christmastime. No mall Santa show would be complete without the presence of an artificial Rudoplh who shoots paintball pellets at shoppers. Holiday season just got a lot cheerier, for the misanthropes among us!

  102. 102.

    BIRDZILLA

    April 21, 2007 at 11:41 pm

    TED TURNER has compaired himself to some of histories greatest movers and shakers i this dweeb is full of himself and he is one of the bigist eco-freak extremists ever he is the one who gave us that nasty CAPTIAN PLANET programs

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - Mike in Oly - Woodard Bay Natural Resources Conservation Area
Image by Mike in Oly (5/24/25)

Recent Comments

  • eclare on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (May 24, 2025 @ 9:59pm)
  • Geminid on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (May 24, 2025 @ 9:55pm)
  • Professor Bigfoot on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (May 24, 2025 @ 9:49pm)
  • PatD on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (May 24, 2025 @ 9:46pm)
  • schrodingers_cat on Open Thread: Concerning Senator Fetterman (May 24, 2025 @ 9:42pm)

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
War in Ukraine
Donate to Razom for Ukraine

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Meetups

Upcoming Ohio Meetup May 17
5/11 Post about the May 17 Ohio Meetup

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!