The Pattern

I’ve said this on about 9 different radio stations now.








12 thoughts on “The Pattern”

  1. Eric Rudolph? I know I know, bomb again.

    Norway shooter? Vehement anti-immigration nut who attacked a liberal summer camp because the liberals were ruining Norway.

    Ted Kazinsky, violent liberal but one that used a bomb not a gun

    Holocaust memorial shooter?

    I seem to recall one of the Columbine shooter’s dad being interviewed on his support for CCW prior to columbine, I think the dude was a registered republican and his son shared his advocacy.

    There is probably a bigger connection between people reading Frederich Nietzsche and engaging in mass violence than liberalism.

    Liberalism is silly and wrong because of their paternalistic attempts to tell people what they can and cant do and to gut the constitution, not because of any greater measurable violent propensities.

    1. I agree with what you are saying, but I do believe it may be a valid to point out to a liberal that is arguing the right has a monopoly on violent rhetoric.

    2. Holocaust memorial shooter?

      Liberal. democRAT.

      …>b>I think the dude was a registered republican and his son shared his advocacy.


      1. I don’t think James Von Brunn qualified as anything but a nutcase.

        * White supremacist
        * Holocaust denier
        * Wrote a book entitled “Kill the Best Gentiles” which praises Adolf Hitler and denies the Holocaust.
        * Obama citizenship conspiracy theorist.
        * 9/11 “Truther”

    3. Actually, I think that the paternalistic oppressiveness and attempts to tell people what they can and can’t do and to gut the constitution is what is causing these greater measurable violent propensities.

      Think about it: We have a couple of generations who have been taught moral relativism, by a group who does not hold themselves to a any rules or absolutes but happily holds other groups to theirs, that you can do nothing really wrong AND THEN they turn around and start taking away liberties, rights, and creating laws all in the name of our safety.

      When people are taught that the world is fluffy and its ok to do it if it makes you feel good and then reality hits with the oppressive atmosphere of a nanny state, is it any wonder why people snap?

      I think it actually may be appropriate to say that liberalism run wild is the disease, and these are the symptoms.

  2. Didn’t you just, like a few posts ago, bag on people who were discouraging new shooters? We need to make inroads to young liberals who might otherwise accept guns. If someone, who is young, liberal and likes guns but their only experience with them is in games, and they are looking into buying a gun hears you say that do you think their first thought’ll be, oh maybe I shouldn’t be a liberal, or maybe I don’t want a gun, so I don’t have to be told I’m an asshole.

    I hate being told I’m an asshole, and I hate being told that it’s my fault that gun violence exists. But I was fully in the gun culture before I really heard that. Now, I’d probably still be a gun nut had I heard that nonsense before, but that’s because I am an asshole. But new shooters should be encouraged regardless of their political affiliation. Just sayin’ please be careful and watch what you’re saying.

  3. I was incorrect on the Columbine shooter’s father being a CCW advocate, he was against it. I withdraw that argument.

    Holocaust shooter was no type of liberal. He had been a member of various right wing, holocaust denial/white supremacist groups since the 60s. While these groups have little to do with modern right wing politics they are a reactionary movement desiring to restore old social orders and belong on the right side of the spectrum.

    The bottom line is look into the backgrounds of these people. Erratic and aberrant behavior often carried them out of the mainstream of any political party. Eric Rudolph for instance saw the Republican Party as just stealth liberals. The Tuscon shooter showed and interest in Representative Giffords and even interest in working for her campaign. However like most mentally ill it was an obsession not an interest in her politics that turned as easily to hate against her.

    These incidents are so rare in the grand scheme of things that they are relevant to the left right debate. Liberals tend to want to tell people what to do and that is unacceptable in an of itself. There is no need to draw some connection to violence that is beyond the confines of political debate.

    “Political tags–such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and. so forth–are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire…”
    -Robert A. Heinlein

  4. check out ” liberalism is a mental disorder” by Micheal Savage, it pretty much explains the insane mentality that drives the liberal mind better than anything else.

  5. We have to prevent liberals from possessing firearms, magazines of any capacity, ammunition, knives, blow darts, slingshots and pea shooters. Hey, they might put your eye out.

    Maybe we should just outlaw liberals, crazy people and criminals. Seems like a fair and balanced approach.

Leave a Reply to Steve S Cancel reply
