View Story | 465 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
of right-wing wingnuttery here. The loon is going to do huge damage to the image of Repubicans with this.
by BobNJ on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:03:39 PM PDT
...is irresponsible.
Don't be like the wingers who blamed Oklahoma City on Arab terrorists.
The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.
by DHinMI on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:04:56 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
is the worst thing to do in this kind of situation.
"The Irish were not wanted here. Now an Irishman is President. There is no question that in the next forty years, a Negro can achieve the same position." - RFK
by Matisyahu on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:06:45 PM PDT
that this guy is a radical liberal, given all the speculation here.
Remember, God is ironic, and has a sense of humor.
by Delaware Dem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:14:10 PM PDT
And you are enjoying saying that way too much. I don't know why.
My choices: 1. Obama. 1. Edwards. ... 9,999,999. Hillary.
by blue vertigo on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:16:03 PM PDT
And believe me, I am not enjoying it. But it has been my experience that usually the exact opposite of speculation happens.
by Delaware Dem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:31:53 PM PDT
by voltayre on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:43:20 PM PDT
A suicide bomb threat at a campaign office. Whatever the guy's motivations actually are, this is the new post-9/11 terrorism politics.
--Is RINO a good thing?
by anonymous coward 8 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:32:10 PM PDT
Terrorism is designed to instill fear in people, not to get attention. If this were a terrorist attack the media would have been reporting about a bomb going off in a crowded place, not a man with a possible bomb with a couple of hostages.
by dianem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:44:06 PM PDT
Threatening to kill hostages with a bomb unless they comply with your wishes is a fear-inducing (terrorist) act.
If you are talking about the strategery of terrorism that Bush is fighting with his sham "Global War On Terrorism", this certainly isn't that. Fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here isn't going to stop domestic bomb threats.
by anonymous coward 8 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 02:48:11 PM PDT
Let's not inflate every nutcase who does something stupid to get attention into a terrorist. Sometimes people do stupid things to get attention. Terrorism is much bigger than that - it's designed to instill terror in an entire society, in a large group of people. This was just some guy who was a bit off balance.
by dianem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 04:34:35 PM PDT
Attention getting might be mooning Hillary on camera.
I'd rather not inflate terrorism beyond a tactic for instilling fear. With your definition, it isn't any new highfalutin strategy: the Blitz, Dresden, Shock-n-awe, and the big H were also aimed at instilling terror in entire societies.
Bush's global war on terror has made suicide bombers part of the American experience. Now people on the edge of sanity can now choose that as an attention-getting tactic that might get them on the news.
I'm not saying the guy was an agent of Al Qaida or the VRWC, or anything more than the voices in his head. The tactic is terrorism, whether it is employed by one guy, the Columbine shooters, Blackwater, thugs with tasers, Al Qaida, or a whole country.
by anonymous coward 8 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:14:26 PM PDT
define the type of incident. I used to teach a basic crisis negotiations class, and have negotiated incidents, mostly domestic violence. Here are the types and usual demands in a nutshell:
Types of Hostage Takers Terrorist - Usually demands political or religious change Criminal - Usually demand money, car or freedom Emotionally ill - Demands are changeable and often irrational A person in crisis - Usually no demands Corrections - Usually demand change in prison conditions
Types of Hostage Takers
Terrorist - Usually demands political or religious change Criminal - Usually demand money, car or freedom Emotionally ill - Demands are changeable and often irrational A person in crisis - Usually no demands Corrections - Usually demand change in prison conditions
Since we don't know what his demands are, it's not really possible to figure out what type of hostage taker he is.
"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain
by Shaniriver on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:05:22 PM PDT
Apparently the hostage-taker wants to talk to Clinton.
From other reports, it seems like "emotionally/mentally ill" is the right category here.
With Blue skies ahead, yes I'm on my way... And there's nowhere else I'd rather be
by DarthParadox on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:32:26 PM PDT
It's possible he wants to talk to her to coerce some sort of action or change. I'm assuming that he was planning to make his demands to her, so him wanting to talk to her isn't necessarily his primary goal. It may be just a means to that goal. Does that make sense?
To clarify, he needs to speak to someone on the outside to make his demands known. He chose HRC.
It's very doubtful he will be allowed to talk to her given that one of the cardinal rules of crisis negotiations is that people other than police personnel should not be introduced into the situation, especially if the suspect asks for them.
The reports of his mental illness give an indication that he may be number 3.
Either way, I feel sorry for the negotiator. Negotiating with mentally ill and/or drunk people is HARD WORK, and there is definitely no guarantee of success.
by Shaniriver on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:56:02 PM PDT
I agree that classifying hostage takers on the basis of their demands is reasonable for the negotiator.
Whether or not the guy is emotionally ill and wants Hillary to wave a magic wand and get the alien probe out of his brain, or debate her on political issues, this is going to have fear-based consequences for this election. Didn't Barack Obama already close his Rochester office? Are the other HRC offices going to be just a little bit more suspicious about strangers who walk through their doors? Is a door-to-door canvasser going to be a little more leery of knocking on the wrong door? Are Hillary haters going to denounce this guy?
Right now, anything involving Hillary is political. Bomb threats are terrorism, even if they don't kill anybody. And it is political to choose to attack/lay seige to a political campaign office, especially if your demand is to speak to the candidate.
by anonymous coward 8 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 02:37:23 PM PDT
All of the blogs have it as top stories and none of them have useful information. Since the majority of blogs are analytical and not "reporting/journalism" based, DHinMI is like CNN trolling for useless stories to fill 24 hours.
If you have no new information and no real analysis to provide, why the fuck are you writing 2 diaries about it instead of letting CNN do it's job?
These are the types of stories the MSM rarely get wrong. So all the political blogs "covering" this story have basically taken up space reciting the same bare bones set of facts a properly trained monkey could recite.
by puunjab on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:17:44 PM PDT
it's our "space" to take up with whatever the hell we want, so like it or lump it, brother (see recent highly dubious posting history)
God bless our tinfoil hearts.
by aitchdee on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:28:09 PM PDT
...and if he wants to write that it's inappropriate, then he should be able to do so without fear of trollrating.
by dianem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:45:27 PM PDT
second, yeah it's his space too, however he doesn't get to behave abusively ("why the fuck" and "trained monkey") without rebuke. That's probably why he got TRed.
Virtually all of his comments thus far are along the same lines: you're diary is lame, your post is naive, you think you're funny but you're not, you've got your head up your a**, etc. He is consistently and blatantly ill-behaved. Why shake your finger at me? Frankly I think your indignity is misplaced.
by aitchdee on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:01:14 PM PDT
... then only people with TU status will be able to enjoy the site because so many threads will simply disappear.
by dianem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:52:14 PM PDT
and, once again, I didn't troll rate him.
cheers,
by aitchdee on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:55:01 PM PDT
01-20-09: THE END OF AN ERROR
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:28:15 PM PDT
now there's an oxymoron if I've ever heard one! Why don't you take a fucking pill and relax. Its friday........
by heywho on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:24:55 PM PDT
You're right. Nobody knows yet.
on strike.
by daria g on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:12:23 PM PDT
Please, I know there might be wingnuts capable of this, but that is a wingnut-like comment to make. We are better than that here.
by seanflynn on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:05:33 PM PDT
That the bomber is a right wing nut job is just a rumor. And it is on the internet.
Somebody contact the Washington Post, I have tomorrow's front page story.
by nisleib on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:07:34 PM PDT
unsourced front-page rumor stories are for lefty-bashing!
by DarthParadox on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:33:57 PM PDT
No idea yet, but if indeed this is a Hillary-hating wingnut, his fellows at Fox News and CNN will play this as "See? Hillary is too divisive to be prez."
Writing and Poetry at My Left One.
by socialist butterfly on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:26:36 PM PDT
blaming this on a "disgruntled husband". That was quick.
Barack Obama Respects Your Opinion
by DJShay on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:07:14 PM PDT
It's a neighborly day in this beautywood. Relentless!
by ablington on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:08:03 PM PDT
it was the husband of one of Bills indiscretions.
by DJShay on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:09:14 PM PDT
by ablington on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:12:21 PM PDT
Worst Person In The World -- he's getting nervous that he's losing his touch...
"Old soldiers never die -- they get young soldiers killed." -- Bill Maher
by Cali Scribe on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:13:46 PM PDT
by DJShay on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:14:32 PM PDT
...that it's a blowhard rightwing drug addict.
by DHinMI on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:15:30 PM PDT
by DJShay on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:16:29 PM PDT
but they are for her, and wouldn't do that.
To a tapeworm, man exists for the tapeworm. - Edward Abbey
by jimraff on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:33:41 PM PDT
by Kagro X on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:08:35 PM PDT
What do you expect? Mindlessly bashing the opposition is his job.
I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man - Thomas Jefferson
by Twistyman on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:18:29 PM PDT
if he didn't find a gig running his mouth without any accountablity.
by astoundedstill on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:25:16 PM PDT
You may not be able to change the world, but at least you can embarrass the guilty. - Jessica Mitford
by Swampfoot on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:53:18 PM PDT
Rush, not you, DJS. honest. really.
What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.
by agnostic on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:21:26 PM PDT
We can't know yet if this guy is left, right, middle or Flying Spaghetti Monsterist.
We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"
by Gooserock on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:07:50 PM PDT
Please understand I have no idea who the person is.
I am convinced that whoever the Democrats nominate will be elected President, with one caveat. There are two possible nominees who may not survive an assination attempt.
As we all know here, the real hatred that can support such a lunatic action is on the right. From Obama is a Muslim (thank you Washington Post) to references to Clinton as Hitlery (thank you Rush), it is clear that some on the right truly believe the election of Obama or Clinton will destroy America, and like John Wilkes Booth, someone will have to prevent that.
I remember where I was on November 22, 1963. I hope I am being too paranoid about the hatred that is loose in our country today.
Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren. Bertolt Brecht
by MoDem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:16:29 PM PDT
...where I was March 30, 1981. Hinckley was/is insane. He shot Reagan, a Secret Service officer, and ruined Brady's life in order to impress Jodie Foster.
...where I was September 5, 1975. Fromme was/is a member of Charles Manson's "Family".
...where I was September 22, 1975. Moore was a revolutionary obsessed with Patty Hearst, even working for the charity group Hearst's father created after the SLA kidnapped his daughter. She wanted to kill Ford to creat "chaos".
I was born after Kennedy was assassinated, but I believe Oswald was nuts as well.
How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could get welfare?
by Kaos Klerik on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:48:14 PM PDT
that obama is black. i think there are more people who would want him dead because of that than because of his religious preference. which isn't muslim.
http://cbs2chicago.com/...
by ackeegirl on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 02:15:53 PM PDT
Are you kidding! We FSMers/Pastafarians would never do such a thing! When we take hostages we do so with swords. And I didn't hear that the wack job in question was dressed as a pirate, did you?
Leave us who worship his noodly appendage out of this.
by nisleib on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:18:23 PM PDT
They'll be banning eyepatches and bandannas in schools, soon. They're already keeping us from wearing our ceremonial cutlasses proudly.
Stop impeding our faith, bigots! Plundering ships is an act of devotion, and protected by the 1st Amendment!
by DarthParadox on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:37:07 PM PDT
and it made him go off the deep end? http://www.venganza.org/...
by HugoDog on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:29:37 PM PDT
simply because we do not know the situation. If we find out that this is a violent act taken to advance a political agenda, then sure...we can start in that direction.
---Tired of violent language from right-wing pundits? Buy my book: Outright Barbarous
by Jeffrey Feldman on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:08:36 PM PDT
by Smallbottle on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:08:44 PM PDT
how in the name of all responsible reporting can you blame any specific group of people. What are you going to do if it turns out to be a Democrat, a Green, a libertarian, a disturbed psyco. I just don't believe where some people are willing to go in situations like this. You are as distasteful as the wingnuts you are accusing.
by soccergrandmom on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:09:22 PM PDT
...why he's there or what demons inhabit his mind.
If this had happened to a Republican candidate, we would be upset at rightist speculation blaming it on George Soros or Kos or whatever.
by Twistyman on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:12:48 PM PDT
He's a middle-aged white man with greying hair.
Accordingly, we should round up and question all middle-aged white men with greying hair, according to wingnutlogic.
by Nina Katarina on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:12:58 PM PDT
Billo and Rush can be shipped to Gitmo right now.
by blue vertigo on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:15:18 PM PDT
Don't tempt us with the dark side.
Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -6.50 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.67
by bythesea on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:34:00 PM PDT
No, they only believe this when the perp is someone who doesn't "look like us." Then again, being middle aged with greying hair, I'm going keep a low profile for the next couple of days...
by Twistyman on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:23:14 PM PDT
that the man is Karl Rove doing his own dirty work for a change?
--- January 2009: A time to mend!
by KingBolete on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:15:07 PM PDT
Don't talk if ya don't know.
by WhyWhat on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:18:30 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 465 comments