Planned Parenthood Bombed

Planned Parenthood Bombed

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/04/02/456446/planned-parenthood-in-wisconsin-bombed/

PLANNED PARENTHOOD IN WISCONSIN BOMBED | Police are investigating after a homemade explosive device started a small fire at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Grand Chute, Wisconsin. A small device placed on a windowsill went off around 7:30 last night and started a fire. Firefighters responded, but the fire had burnt itself out when they arrived. The clinic was empty and no one was hurt. The state has been debating a number of bills that critics say amount to a “war against women,” including one limiting abortion coverage in private medical plans and another basically equating single motherhood with child abuse.

The GOPers need to stop these attacks against on Planned Parenthood that they're telling to "appeal to the base." Now we having domestic terrorism against a valuable provider of women's health services that provides a wide range of services including breast cancer detection and STD screenings. This is far from the first time clinics have been bombed.

GOP, your overheated rhetoric is beyond irresponsible.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

If only Jesus had written a book spelling it all out. Anything.

For all we know, he was a deaf mute.

BTW, was Jesus a Christian.

His was a surrogate birth, the result of planned parenthood.

Originally posted by sgunhouse:

Sounds like both parties to me. So the only difference is, you agree with the Democrats and not the Republicans, correct?

No. When have the Democrats on the presidential campaign (not minor idiots in local races)trail ever accused a respected institutions of ethnic cleansing and the like? Your question sounds reasonable enough at first, accusation and counter accusation. But at least in modern times, it simply isn't true because of the scoop and seriousness of the accusations

Originally posted by sgunhouse:

As far as it goes, you could probably equally blame Obama, since his health care plan forces those opposed to abortion to pay.

In fact, that's remotely true. Obama caved in long ago on that the contraception issue and the employer is somehow morally opposed to contraception, the women pay for through their premiums by dealing directly with the insurance company. Besides, this issue (and clinic bombings...) long predates the Obama administration. It's absurd to blame him.

However, it's not absurd to place some culpability on the GOP politicians that are lying Planned Parenthood and eugenics and other lies. Words have power and inspire actions, even if those actions are unintended. This has been long understood. I'm not saying anything that hasn't been recognized for centuries. Have you ever considered the practical reason for hate speech laws that exist in many countries? They're not necessarily to protect anyone's feelings, but rather to prevent someone from making a hateful speech about a group of people that's so extreme that it inspires violence. Is this connection so hard to understand?

Originally posted by string:

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

If only Jesus had written a book spelling it all out. Anything.

For all we know, he was a deaf mute.

BTW, was Jesus a Christian.

His was a surrogate birth, the result of planned parenthood.

My mother's name was ggg-mom.

Most of the story is now clear? (See here.) Somehow, I don't think so...

What do we know about Francis Gerald Grady, the man police have charged with Sunday’s firebombing incident at a Planned Parenthood office in Grand Chute, Wisconsin? Not a whole lot yet.

The main thing we know about Grady, 50, is that he has a lengthy criminal record dating back at least to 1999, when he was charged with failing to pay $2,128 in taxes. In May 2000, Grady pleaded guilty to cocaine possession, Three years later, Grady was accused of violating a restraining order taken out by his estranged wife, Sally. Five years ago, in June 2007, Grady pleaded guilty to felony bail-jumping and failure to pay child support.

In July 2008, Grady was arrested for reckless driving with a revoked license – he had apparently been twice convicted of DUI — and pleaded no contest in April 2010. He was represented in that case by a public defender. In August 2010, Grady was charged with “resisting or obstructing an officer,” and pleaded guilty a year later, when he was sentenced to a year on probation.

Grady’s most recent offense, prior to the Planned Parenthood incident, was when he was arrested on Dec. 26 with resisting or obstructing an officer. The district attorney formally filed that charge on Friday — Grady was scheduled for a May 3 court appearance on the charge — and two days after the charge was filed, Grady is alleged to have attacked the Planned Parenthood office in Grand Chute.
(source)

I'd have to agree with Robert Stacy McCain's assessment of the "journalism" being practiced.

Sang, of course, will continue to sing the only tune he knows...

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Have you ever considered the practical reason for hate speech laws that exist in many countries? They're not necessarily to protect anyone's feelings, but rather to prevent someone from making a hateful speech about a group of people that's so extreme that it inspires violence. Is this connection so hard to understand?

And how has that worked out?

So far, it's a trifle hard to tell if the GOP has anything at all to do with it. From the sound of the above post by Oakdale, I'd hazard a guess that the perp did the dirty deed because the voices in his head told him to, and for no other reason.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

I'd hazard a guess that the perp did the dirty deed because the voices in his head told him to, and for no other reason.

The circumstances say otherwise. Psychopaths attempt to murder, this Grady didn't. In fact, he denies that it was bomb at all. Further, information that he had been attending demonstrations by Pro-Life Wisconsin (a mainstream anti-abortion group), although that' still under investigation by state and Federal authorities.

If the charges by GOP members against PP at least stayed sane and if this was an isolated incident, even barring the fact that the device doesn't seemed to be meant to kill; I could agree this was just a lone crazy person. However, neither of those conditions are true. The GOP members/anti-abortionists should tone done their rhetoric and present something remotely resembling a balanced picture of the organization that saves more lives than all the anti-abortion groups put together. Why the term "anti-abortion?' Because if have one bit of knowledge of what PP does and yet oppose them, you are NOT pro-life the truest sense of the word.

The two problems here are the inflamed anti-abortion rhetoric is the problem, and any violent consequences of it. This is the case regardless of which group perpetrates it.

It cannot be completely denied that much inflamed anti-abortion rhetoric comes from groups either members of, affiliated with, or identifying with the Republican Party. However, although there is a correlation here, there is no inextricable tie.

The fallacy here reminds me of the argument seen in other threads. al-Qaeda are Muslims, al-Qaeda bombed US buildings, therefore Muslims are out to get us. Don't fall into the same trap, please.

Feel free to not agree with people who are anti-abortion. But don't lump them all into the same category. Fight the hate speech, fight the terrorism. Leave the rest alone.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

So far, it's a trifle hard to tell if the GOP has anything at all to do with it. From the sound of the above post by Oakdale, I'd hazard a guess that the perp did the dirty deed because the voices in his head told him to, and for no other reason.

Well, there were plenty other voices which exist outside of his head which kept telling him "PP baaaaad, PP baaaaad, PP ..."

Not to mention, the ones so often calling Federal prisons "country clubs"…

Grady was held in the Outagamie County Jail, but with the filing of the Federal charges, he will be or has been transferred to Federal custody.
(source)

Macallan and Sanguinemoon of course support all efforts to protect the vulnerable via censorship: The Internet, video games, books, protests; they're all fair game!? Right…

The pretzel-logic that elevates rhetoric to compulsion is typical, and routinely hypocritical. No?

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

So far, it's a trifle hard to tell if the GOP has anything at all to do with it. From the sound of the above post by Oakdale, I'd hazard a guess that the perp did the dirty deed because the voices in his head told him to, and for no other reason.

Well, there were plenty other voices which exist outside of his head which kept telling him "PP baaaaad, PP baaaaad, PP ..."

Well, that guilt-by-association game can be played lots of ways. Maybe Democrats talking about anti-abortion activists taking rights away from women caused this. Maybe rhetoric against US military actions caused this. The possibilities are virtually endless.

Originally posted by Macallan:

And by the look of it, way too man conservatives are unable to tell the difference between "you're wrong because <whatever>" and "shut the hell up!!!!!one!eleventyone!!" - in fact they rarely ever fail to take the former as the latter.

Well, in fairness though it's usually lefties who scream for people like Limbaugh and Beck to be taken off the air. I don't hear many conservatives screaming for, say, Bill Maher or Keith Olbermann to be shut up.

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

So far, it's a trifle hard to tell if the GOP has anything at all to do with it. From the sound of the above post by Oakdale, I'd hazard a guess that the perp did the dirty deed because the voices in his head told him to, and for no other reason.

Well, there were plenty other voices which exist outside of his head which kept telling him "PP baaaaad, PP baaaaad, PP ..."

Find one piece of GOP literature, or even one piece of Christian literature (Westboro Baptist Church may be excluded only because those folk are completely crazy) that tells people to bomb PP centers. For that matter, I have doubts that even Westboro Baptist has such literature.

You'll find plenty of literature that says PP is the largest provider of abortions, and in the Christian and Pro-Life communities PP won't get any good press, but I don't think you'll find much material demanding the bombing of these places or the killing of doctors.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

The fallacy here reminds me of the argument seen in other threads. al-Qaeda are Muslims, al-Qaeda bombed US buildings, therefore Muslims are out to get us. Don't fall into the same trap, please.

In principle, you are correct. The only thing is that one can't help notice the rise in violence and increasing ridiculous charges. The PP engages in literally NAZI-like practices, ethnic cleansing - according to the anti-abortion activists. Fanfaron is also correct. It is a guilt by association fallacy. However, the GOP/anti-abortion activists should also reconsider their statements and once again it's not just the fringe that are making these statements.

Consider this article , which starts off reasonably enough, be quickly turns to charges of genocide against PP. Who cares, right? Who even hard of this site? People that commit the violence, such as Grady. Does it help that mainstream GOP politicians are passing along this message?

Originally posted by Rick Santorum:

This is an organization that was founded on the eugenics movement, founded on racism — I mean, it’s horrific. It’s origins are horrific. And you can say, ‘well it’s not that anymore.’ It’s not far from where it was in my opinion.

The GOP is a political party that has allowed its wacko fringe to become mainstream and that's dangerous.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Find one piece of GOP literature, or even one piece of Christian literature (Westboro Baptist Church may be excluded only because those folk are completely crazy) that tells people to bomb PP centers.

Are you seriously back to this? I thought were beyond that point.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Consider this article, which starts off reasonably enough, be quickly turns to charges of genocide against PP. Who cares, right? Who even hard of this site? People that commit the violence, such as Grady.

Sang seems unhappy with the valiant efforts of our heroic and tireless Minitrue RecDep.

Sure, Sang thinks he's being reasonable, "be quickly turns to charges" of incitement. And, of course, the irony of his position escapes him.
The only consistancy he knows is "ut h" against them... (But that's an inconvenient admission, hence he leaves the "ut h" out, trusting that those who agree with him will make the correct assumptions and that "plausible deniability" can be maintained when answering criticism from them!)
______________________________________________
Some interesting reading. More to come?

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

So far, it's a trifle hard to tell if the GOP has anything at all to do with it. From the sound of the above post by Oakdale, I'd hazard a guess that the perp did the dirty deed because the voices in his head told him to, and for no other reason.

Well, there were plenty other voices which exist outside of his head which kept telling him "PP baaaaad, PP baaaaad, PP ..."

Find one piece of GOP literature, or even one piece of Christian literature (Westboro Baptist Church may be excluded only because those folk are completely crazy) that tells people to bomb PP centers. For that matter, I have doubts that even Westboro Baptist has such literature.

Where did anyone make such a claim? I certainly didn't, neither in the part you quoted nor anywhere else. Voices in your head?

You're still making the outrageous claim that the GOP is behind it, he's asking for actual evidence. Anything wrong with that?

As they like to say on some other sites, correlation is not causation. I'm starting to think this thread ought to be closed as trolling, so far I have seen almost zero content related to the subject line (and the stuff that is was posted by Oakdale).

No voices in my head, I assure you. But, when I see Sang make the claim repeatedly that the GOP is in any way responsible for somebody bombing a PP office, a little proof that the GOP did, in fact, instigate or in any way incite the bombing would be a good plan. If you have such proof, the authorities need to know it. Otherwise, you're just making too much noise.

Did you read the affidavit by the FBI agent, mjm? I'm curious as to what Lynch might have to say, beyond what was required for probable cause...

Don't worry ... while I'm just getting frustrated with people here I wouldn't really close this thread - this is D&D after all. Well, unless they resort to personal attacks or something similar.

Thanks!The latest update says "Stay tuned..."

I just got off the phone with the Grand Chute police chief. I’ll have more news about this case later.
(source)

If you haven't zoned out already, you might want to hear this...

Political speech has its own characteristics. It has to be strong, emotional, fallacious and often allegorical.
"Dirty" tricks to make opponents go out of reason it's a basic tool.

Sanguinemoon's position was not bad at that...
But when it fails, better thing to do is to deny your own words and move away to something else. If not, it will turn against you.

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

Thanks!The latest update says "Stay tuned..."

I just got off the phone with the Grand Chute police chief. I’ll have more news about this case later.
(source)

If you haven't zoned out already, you might want to hear this...

In the link, it says the perp may have been in some of the pro-life protests at the clinic. Perhaps we can find out who, if anybody, told this guy he should firebomb the clinic later in the link. Sorry side-note: It's bad when a blogger has to do the work the main-stream media won't do. Like, basic fact-checking and following up leads.

Originally posted by sgunhouse:

You're still making the outrageous claim that the GOP is behind it, he's asking for actual evidence. Anything wrong with that?

And where, in reality please and not your imagination, did I make this claim? I said some GOPers are cheering them on, you should really go by what was actually said, not what you think I meant.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Sorry side-note: It's bad when a blogger has to do the work the main-stream media won't do. Like, basic fact-checking and following up leads.

Agreed. But this blogger has creds:

From 1997 to 2008, he was a writer and editor for The Washington Times. [...]
A native of Atlanta and graduate of Jacksonville (Ala.) State University, McCain was awarded the George Washington Medal by the Freedoms Foundation at Valley Forge in 1996 for his series of columns in the Rome (Ga.) News-Tribune about the National Standards for U.S. History.
(from his bio)

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by sgunhouse:

You're still making the outrageous claim that the GOP is behind it, he's asking for actual evidence. Anything wrong with that?

And where, in reality please and not your imagination, did I make this claim? I said some GOPers are cheering them on, you should really go by what was actually said, not what you think I meant.

Which GOPers? Most everybody I hear from, regardless of party affiliation, says bombing places and killing doctors is bad. So, how's about something to tell us which GOPers are cheering bombers? Who said it, what did they say?

For, I lost track of how many times this thread, who the 'eff said that? Nobody. And you already been told what they did say. I hope your just playing at being this dense. Oh yeah, and I even clarified that it was GOP politicians (and gave an example) that made at least tacit agreement that PP was engaging in those horrible things, and not the national party.

You've gone full Oakdale on us, making up what I said and ignoring any clarifications if my OP was too broad, which I can agree that it was. And at the same time, pretending you lack reading comprehension. I know you can read better than this, I just don't understand why you're choosing not to.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

For, I lost track of how many times this thread, who the 'eff said that? Nobody. And you already been told what they did say. I hope your just playing at being this dense. Oh yeah, and I even clarified that it was GOP politicians (and gave an example) that made at least tacit agreement that PP was engaging in those horrible things, and not the national party.

You've gone full Oakdale on us, making up what I said and ignoring any clarifications if my OP was too broad, which I can agree that it was. And at the same time, pretending you lack reading comprehension. I know you can read better than this, I just don't understand why you're choosing not to.

I made a point of going back over this thread and reading your stuff, and the links you provided, specifically.

Conclusion: You hate the GOP and will try to tar and feather them with anything you can lay your hands on. When asked for proof that the charges are so, you will accuse Oakdale, Sgun and me with poor reading skills, even though a careful reading will reveal no proof.

OK, you don't like Republicans. Smiley doesn't have much use for Democrats and he is not above saying outrageous, unproven (and often unprovable) things against Democrats. So, I guess it balances out.

Since this seems in some way to tie in with presidential politics (I picked that up from some of the links) I can only say that in November, one of these candidates is going to win. May God help us all.

Originally posted by Macallan:

I said some GOPers are cheering them on, you should really go by what was actually said, not what you think I meant.

And where have you proven that. It isn't true.

Originally posted by sgunhouse:

Originally posted by Macallan:

I said some GOPers are cheering them on, you should really go by what was actually said, not what you think I meant.

And where have you proven that. It isn't true.

It can't be proven. But, since Oakdale, you and I lack the reading skills to be able to take Macallan and Sang's word for it, we persist in asking for proof that isn't possible to provide.

It's not even their word for it, really. Sanguinemoon has been mostly quoting left-wing opinion bloggers ... might as well be quoting talk radio, as much truth to either.

Originally posted by sgunhouse:

Sanguinemoon has been mostly quoting left-wing opinion bloggers ...

And I don't fault him (much ) for that. I mostly quote right-wing bloggers, myself. But sometimes the blogosphere goes off the rails. (Yes, Sang, on the right, too!) And -when the topic is tied to a developing news story- what's needed is news.

Talk radio can be entertaining, but it's difficult to do well. (Ray Appleton, out of Fresno, on KMJ, remains a favorite of mine. But I still have fond memories of Avi Nelson and - I think it was David Brudnoy? - both on the air in Boston in the '70s.) And, whatever one thinks of Rush Limbaugh, it must be admitted that he changed the radio business almost single-handedly. It was mostly just plain dull, before Limbaugh...
Luckily (no smiley, I'm serious!), this story isn't well-suited to talk radio.

So, we're left with the blogs, what little actual news there is, and our own opinions. And -of course- whatever feuds we bring with us!

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Rick Santorum:

This is an organization that was founded on the eugenics movement, founded on racism — I mean, it’s horrific. It’s origins are horrific. And you can say, ‘well it’s not that anymore.’ It’s not far from where it was in my opinion.

The GOP is a political party that has allowed its wacko fringe to become mainstream and that's dangerous.

Well, there is the matter of Margaret Sanger. I don't like Santorum's politics, but sitting there painting him as a wacko doesn't in itself make him a wacko. He's wrong in saying that PP is still in line with Sanger's views on eugenics and race, but that makes him wrong, not a wacko. And are you going to tell me that you represent the "mainstream" of American public opinion?

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by sgunhouse:

You're still making the outrageous claim that the GOP is behind it, he's asking for actual evidence. Anything wrong with that?

And where, in reality please and not your imagination, did I make this claim? I said some GOPers are cheering them on...

Passive-aggressive. Guilt-by-association is bullshit. I'm tired to death of bullshit orthodoxy, having mouthed a lot of it myself over the years without any thought other than lousy groupthink. Cheering WHO on? Name some of these GOPers. Say what you mean and mean what you say.

But quoting Sanger herself is so, so unfair! (Need I refer you to Minitrue RecDep?)

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

But quoting Sanger herself is so, so unfair! (Need I refer you to Minitrue RecDep?)

Yeah, I know. But yet the Southern Baptist Convention is still a KKK organization, don'tcha know.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

So, how's about something to tell us which GOPers are cheering bombers? Who said it, what did they say?

Exactly.

I can understand that there might not be much written material to back up these claims. I'm reasonably sure that if somebody prints out a pro-bombing piece, the law will be all over it like white on rice within hours. There's been stories of students getting arrested after putting something on their Facebook page about wanting to shoot up their schools, seems these days school administrators and police monitor Facebook. So, printed evidence may not actually exist. It still might be possible, though, to find out (a) if something was, in fact, said, (b) who said it and (c) the circumstances surrounding the statement. Right now, we really don't have anything.

At this point the mean meme is all they've got, fan. But I suspect that's all they want...

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

I can understand that there might not be much written material to back up these claims. I'm reasonably sure that if somebody prints out a pro-bombing piece, the law will be all over it like white on rice within hours. There's been stories of students getting arrested after putting something on their Facebook page about wanting to shoot up their schools, seems these days school administrators and police monitor Facebook. So, printed evidence may not actually exist. It still might be possible, though, to find out (a) if something was, in fact, said, (b) who said it and (c) the circumstances surrounding the statement. Right now, we really don't have anything.

Remember though: the Tea Party was guilty of the gravest crimes of violence and racism. Ask for evidence other than a misspelled sign here and there, or a goofy reference comparing Obama to Hitler, and you'd get "I never said that." Any real violence occurring within OWS precincts, on the other hand, was a fabrication cooked up by the media in the control of the Koch brothers.

I can take having political differences. I can't take blatant dishonesty, from whatever quarter it comes.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Remember though: the Tea Party was guilty of the gravest crimes of violence and racism.

Ah, yes! The "seriousness of the charge" meme. Post-modernism, at its finest!

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Remember though: the Tea Party was guilty of the gravest crimes of violence and racism.

Ah, yes! The "seriousness of the charge" meme. Post-modernism, at its finest!

"The seriousness of the charge" only works one way, though. Try flipping the flop and watch what happens next. Unfounded charges against Democrats won't be allowed to stand unchallenged, no matter how serious they are.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Unfounded charges against Democrats won't be allowed to stand unchallenged, no matter how serious they are.

And that's how it should be! At least one side needs to be reasonable and responsible...

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Unfounded charges against Democrats won't be allowed to stand unchallenged, no matter how serious they are.

And that's how it should be! At least one side needs to be reasonable and responsible...

Unfounded charges shouldn't be allowed to stand period. I could favor going OT on this type of thing. If you make a charge against someone, and on examination the charge is not proven, then whatever punishment you were set to unleash upon the person you charged would happen to you. That could end a lot of false charges before they get started.

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Unfounded charges against Democrats won't be allowed to stand unchallenged, no matter how serious they are.

And that's how it should be! At least one side needs to be reasonable and responsible...

Well, I'll never forget how Sarah Palin was personally responsible for the Tucson shootings. How someone could be -- as we were assured -- a dumb bimbo one moment but yet so devilishly clever the next is beyond me.

In other words, enough of the cheap demonization. I don't think very many "normal" people are buying it anymore anyway.

In fairness, we're going to have to lean on Smiley from time to time, for the same reason. Posting unfounded charges as if they are undisputedly true against Democrats is just as bad as what we're beefing about here.

(I'll let you in on a secret, mjm: Most conservatives, most moderates, and most liberals don't care for -or fall for- such, anyway...)

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

OK, you don't like Republicans

None of that means that I, at any point, said anything like the GOP was sending out brochures advising people to bomb Planned Parenthood nor did I accuse your church of doing the same. I merely pointed out the obvious. Irresponsible accusations, as opposed to legitimate criticism, against PP by the GOP politicians and anti-abortion groups likely led to to increase in domestic terrorism against Planned Parenthood.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Unfounded charges shouldn't be allowed to stand period. I could favor going OT on this type of thing. If you make a charge against someone, and on examination the charge is not proven, then whatever punishment you were set to unleash upon the person you charged would happen to you. That could end a lot of false charges before they get started.

And yet I don't see you defending Planned Parenthood against the charges, which I documented, of eugenics, racism, etc. Hypocrisy anyone?

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

OK, you don't like Republicans

None of that means that I, at any point, said anything like the GOP was sending out brochures advising people to bomb Planned Parenthood nor did I accuse your church of doing the same. I merely pointed out the obvious. Irresponsible accusations, as opposed to legitimate criticism, against PP by the GOP politicians and anti-abortion groups likely led to to increase in domestic terrorism against Planned Parenthood.

So did rhetoric from the other side of the issue result in the death of the anti-abortion protester? And we're still waiting for specific quotes from someone other than Rick Santorum. And what would "legitimate criticism" look like, anyway? Give me some proof, right now, that the bomber wasn't motivated by pro-life lefty Nat Hentoff.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Irresponsible accusations, as opposed to legitimate criticism, against PP by the GOP politicians and anti-abortion groups likely led to to increase in domestic terrorism against Planned Parenthood.

Weasel word.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

And yet I don't see you defending Planned Parenthood against the charges, which I documented, of eugenics, racism, etc. Hypocrisy anyone?

I've said that Santorum was wrong in equating PP in the present day to Nazis. Meanwhile, aren't you one of those who were reveling in unfounded charges against the Tea Party types? Hypocrisy anyone?

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

It can't be proven. But, since Oakdale, you and I lack the reading skills

Sadly, in this thread, you appear to. What you've been saying bears no resemblance to my hypothesis.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

And what would "legitimate criticism" look like, anyway?

The fact that you're asking silly questions like this illustrates the problem. Legitimate criticism is critiques of the organization that have some basis in fact, unlike "PP practices eugenics." "Planned Parenthood covers up child sex trafficking." is not legitimate criticism.

Do you guys truly not know that words have both intended and unintended consequences? T Meanwhile, the ludicrousness of the accusations has been escalating nearly in time with the violence. Like I said, the power of rhetoric to inspire even unintended accusations has been known for centuries.

This is fictional example but it shows just how old this knowledge is:

Originally posted by William Shakespeare :

So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Caesar answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest--
For Brutus is an honourable man;

What he means is that Brutus is NOT an honorable man. And so the crowd gradually turns against Brutus.

All
Revenge! About! Seek! Burn! Fire! Kill! Slay!
Let not a traitor live!

Just has with the pro-life groups and members of the GOP, Anthony urges the crowd to refrain from violence; even as everything else he says eggs them on. And yet, you guys act like saying inflammatory rhetoric can inspire violence is any thing close to controversial.

Fanfaron asks for other examples besides Santorum. Do you not know how to use Google, or Bing or some other search engine? Hint, I was actually more informed by RIGHT wing sites than the Left.

Methinks Sang doesn't get the plot… But at least he knows that it was the dastardly republicans that killed poor innocent Caesar?

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Do you guys truly not know that words have both intended and unintended consequences?

Yeah. Let's not use words… (We are not all blessed with your inabilities, Sang.) Of course —given your stated views on the effectiveness of rhetoric and mob psychology— one could easily make the case that you (and most sources you quote) are deliberately inciting violence against Republicans…
How would you defend yourself against the charge, Sang?

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Do you guys truly not know that words have both intended and unintended consequences? T Meanwhile, the ludicrousness of the accusations has been escalating nearly in time with the violence. Like I said, the power of rhetoric to inspire even unintended accusations has been known for centuries.

What escalating violence? You mention one incident and act as if Planned Parenthood employees are having to hunker down everywhere. And unsurprisingly you still didn't address any of the questions I raised... because you're caught in your own web of illogic and you can't answer any of them. Are GOPers the only ones who've ever harshly criticized Planned Parenthood?

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

This is fictional example but it shows just how old this knowledge is:

Originally posted by William Shakespeare :

So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Caesar answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest--
For Brutus is an honourable man;

What he means is that Brutus is NOT an honorable man. And so the crowd gradually turns against Brutus.

Of course. This was the technique used against the Tea Party, for example, and other assorted members of Left Demonology.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

You mention one incident and act as if Planned Parenthood employees are having to hunker down everywhere

Thanks for proving that you didn't even read the the thread

This really isn't surprising, since yet another study just came out that demonstrates "low effort" thinking promotes conservationism.It takes zero intellectual effort to knee jerk and say that the GOP/anti-abortion movement didn't hand out brochures advising people to bomb clinics. It takes more effort to connect the dots between two Planned Parenthood bombings in three months to the increasing absurdity of the charges against the most respected women's healthcare provider in the country that happens to do abortions in some (but not all*) clinics as 3% of its business.

*out of 27 clinics in that state, only 3 offer abortion services. source, just select Wisconsin from the drop down. . Notice that many of them offer services of men, as well. That's more "liberal" higher effort thinking; what happens to men often effects women (and vice/versa) of course.