+99
Signed up: 9 years ago (2/28/05)
Last signed in: 1 day ago
Friends217 Friends
Block
SloeBombFizz
SloeBombFizz
Rally of the ZaniesSo in my microcosm of a world, I heard some folks saying last week they were going to start getting active with the Tea Party again.
I suppose that's to be expected in the days right after the terrorist attack in Austin.

Charlton Heston and his goul squad always had a recruiting bonanza whenever children got gunned down. Nutjobs thrive on attention and chaos... being stupid, the details don't matter. An incident that should make right wing fanatics take a hard look at themselves only serves to get them whipped up and back on the bandwagon... truth, facts, details... none of that matters to a wingnut. Another radical is in the news and people are dying... quick, let's have more rallies to support the cause the terrorists believed in!!!
Strike while the iron is hot! (and before the bodies are cold)

For normal people this might be a time to rally together AGAINST the causes that our attackers hold dear. Remember the Alamo! Remember Pearl Harbor! And so on and so forth. Although for my part, I don't think we should be rallying efforts to protect ourselves from radical fringe groups after they attack us... I'd like to make people wake up and take a look at the policies and intentions of such people all the time... preferably BEFORE attacks. Or before more attacks, anyway now.

So I haven't been rallying about specifics of the right wing in this or the last journal, instead I'm trying to draw attention to the way people react. Particularly the way people you and I might meet on a daily basis, or interact with online, and the ones who rationalize away and minimize the common interests they share with these violent criminals. And in the case of today's journal, the people who get even more entrenched in their rightwing dogma and more agitated in the cause after such tragedies occur. What the hell's wrong with these people?

Maybe part of it is defiance. An intuitive compulsion to fight the notion they might feel towards guilt, shame or any sense of decency or responsibility! These things are anathema to the fringe groups like the TeaBaggers, NRA, neocons, anti-choice, al quaeda, christian fundies, muslim fundies, ayn rand fundies, my pretty pony fundies, et al. They bristle and rebel at any feelings (their own or perceived from others) that they should be held accountable for what their fanatical devotion to ideology results in.

Heaven Forbid, they formed their ideas based on how the world works rather than selectively describe the world based on their preconceived whakadoodleness!
Or for that matter... just stopped rallying behind murderous causes.

4 years ago  |  Comments (9)  |  + 8 Ditto
9 COMMENTS Sort by Likes · Date
swooper74 Sponsor
dude, when you get on a rant, it's a thing of beauty
#1  Posted 4 years ago  |  + 1 Funny
kickcows Sponsor
Oh, Chuck Heston. Forever gun crazy.

I don't understand why some people think the way that they do. That guy protesting a peaceful ceremony? WTF is wrong with you?? People rallying to arms because something occured? Why not rally BEFORE anything happens? That's the way I would do it, had I something I wanted to rally about. Be proactive.
#2  Posted 4 years ago
SloeBombFizz
In reply to swooper74, #1:

I kinda you a little bit right now.
Or else I have gas.

Might be the bratwurst I had for lunch.
Yep, prolly the brats.
#3  Posted 4 years ago  |  + 1 Funny
SloeBombFizz

Oh, SPECIAL NOTICE

I just heard this morning there was another school shooting.
I didn't know it before I composed and posted this. Nothing in here is about, or based on that incident.
My news filter can be kinda slow with the weird work schedule, lack of cable TV and generally spending quality time on my XBox.

I mention it because in the journal above there's a reference to Chuck and the standard NRA reaction to these kinds of incidents.
* Just in case anyone should get themselves all confused.
#4  Posted 4 years ago
osiris32
Playing the Devil's Advocate here, I've seen memebers of both the right AND the left over-react to events. Currently we're dealing with the backlash of a police shooting some time ago. A male was shot by police while it appeared that he was surrendering peacefully. A Grand Jury looked at the evidence, and decided that by law the officer who shot was not legally at fault. It has turned into a mega-shit-storm, with none other than Jesse Jackson coming up here. I doubt he would have poked his nose into the affair, except that the officers were white and the victim, Aaron Campbell, was black.

But you have a valid point, a VERY valid point. People on both sides over react to situations, and cause more hamr further along. The Patriot Act, the suspension of Habeus Corpus, ACLU lawsuits against over-taxed law enforcement agencies, none of these ever help matters. All they do is make the person who starts them feel good for a little while, until the actual ramifications of what they did come to light.

Maybe we just need to educate people to STOP AND FUCKING THINK. Don't allow your emotions at a stressful event cloud your judgement. Look at the future effects that your decision to pass a law/enact legislation/make yourself look like a fool will entail.

And, like swooper74 said, when you rant, it's a thing of beauty.
#5  Posted 4 years ago  |  + 2 Cool
SloeBombFizz
In reply to osiris32, #5:

Some very good points again. Very valid!
I didn't think to go in that direction because it strays away into a broader area I wasn't even touching on, but everything you say is absolutely true.

I'll wholeheartedly agree on all the points. We see people overreact.
Sometimes demanding retribution in the name of justice or sometimes acting out of fear with unfair treatment.
Jenga posted something on FB today that makes me think of it.
www.ktvu.com/news/22666350/detail.html
Lynch mobs and examples like the one you provided all make the same point.

But again... those aren't quite the same thing as people who go thru mental gymnastics to avoid the ugly truth of the weirder dogmas that some people cling to. And it is very different from people feeling compelled to rally behind the dogma of terrorists whenever one of their own acts on those beliefs with horrific violence.



#6  Posted 4 years ago
SloeBombFizz
Addendum or just blathering on further from SloeBombFizz, #6:
In reply to osiris32, #5:


Now I still think your points are valid and they have a place in the conversation.
But they aren't on the point I was making. Here's a horribly crude graph to help me explain.





Taking point ( 2 ) on the vertical line of the graph as a basepoint... just neutral and doing nothing.
A point I don't have much respect for, but it's a starter point.

Then I'd say there's room to discuss and debate all stages of action moving up the scale from there... how much action to take and what action to take.
Some of the points... the most radical points... would be bad.
Top of the scale for ( 1.L ) and ( 1.R ) would be overreacting and you correctly identify them as bad.
I agree.

Fine... now how about moving down the scale?
That's good too. When there's too much of an extremist movement up the scale at 1.L or 1.R, then we could use some action at ( 3.L ) or ( 3.R ) to counteract and protect us. That's generally where you'll find the ACLU or civil rights groups of most kinds.

I'm all for saying that there's plenty of good reason to debate and discuss the merits of activity near ( 2 ) ... above or below it... to the left or to the right... no problem.

Now we come to the point where I am focusing and which I think you've missed.
Everything in ( 4 ).

It's not really a Left or Right issue at all.
Except we don't have any problems in this country with anything in ( 4.L ) being ignored. Hell, I'm hard pressed to imagine any examples where it exists.
But on the other hand... ( 4.R ) is considered some kind of norm and people are going thru an awful lot of trouble not to see it. And in many cases, support it and justify it.

I do not like watching the sins of folks in an area that fits on ( 4 ) being washed over with a generalized lump into the top of the scale at ( 1 ).
It's not the same thing.
And I'm hoping I can make that clear.
#7  Posted 4 years ago
osiris32
It all makes sense now that you attached a graph.

No, I get what you're saying. It's an X-Y graph, with just how liberal/conservative you are and what your reaction/actions are to events.
#8  Posted 4 years ago  |  + 1 Funny
SloeBombFizz
In reply to osiris32, #8:

I know, I know... hoakie and stupid.
But I'm trying to draw that distinction between people who might be pro-active and go too far vs. the issue I'm highlighting.

It's one thing to want to do good and go too far.
Or even the people who aren't really doing any good but hide their uglier aspects under a veil of virtue.

But there's a whole other world of scumbags who react to the horrors of their cause by rallying behind it.
Not attempting to root out the bad from their midst... like us normal people might be prone to doing.
But to rally deeper and harder to the cause.
And to defend against their critics all the harder.
#9  Posted 4 years ago
Count3D Site Admin
I just can't take the tea party seriously. Kevin Smith ruined that phrase for me.
#10  Posted 3 years ago  |  + 1 Zing!
Please sign in or sign up to post a comment.