>This Terror Attack Brought To You By Another Right Wing Nut Job

>[UPDATE]:

Turns out the parents had warned authorities that their mentally deranged son may have bought a gun.

Wow, if only it weren’t so damn easy for crazy people to get their hands on guns.

Of course, we have no “national registry” for mentally ill people, nor would we want one. Problem is, people are snapping all over the place. You never know who is gonna snap. Like this guy. Or this guy. Could be this guy. Or this park ranger, who just snapped and killed his whole family. It’s not just guys: some folks think the Alabama researcher snapped.

Yep, people are snapping all over place, like rubber bands, just snap snap snap. And I don’t want to be around the next gun nut when he or she goes snap.

—————————

Nobody could have anticipated this:

John Patrick Bedell, whom authorities identified as the gunman in the Pentagon shooting on Thursday, appears to have been a right-wing extremist with virulent antigovernment feelings.

If so, that would make the Pentagon shooting the second violent extremist attack on a federal building within the past month.

As someone recently commented, “I can’t imagine where they get their ideas.”

Indeed. One really must wonder.

Let’s also not forget Virginia post office hostage taker Gator Taylor, the unhinged right wing shooters from last year, and the rednecks preparing to live out their “Red Dawn” fantasies like the Texas Taliban’s David Grisham and Louisiana’s Operation Exodus. Seeing how tenuous your grip on reality is, let me say I really don’t feel safer knowing you folks are looking out for me.

And by all means let’s not be so impolite as to refer to John Patrick Bedell and Joseph Stack as terrorists, which as we all know is a term used to reference brown, Muslim-y people who attack government buildings, not honest hard-working white Merkins.

Funny, we aren’t even at the one-year anniversary of last year’s outrage over a Dept. of Homeland Security report looking at right wing extremist groups. Remember that? I didn’t think so. No one remembers anything that happened longer than two weeks ago. Hell, if I didn’t have this blog I’d probably have forgotten it, too.

26 Comments

Filed under right-wing hate

26 responses to “>This Terror Attack Brought To You By Another Right Wing Nut Job

  1. >Hmm, an anti-Bush, 9/11 truther from California?Sure, that just SCREAMS "right-wing nut job."You want so desperately to paint any incidence of violence as "right-wing extremism / terrorism" that you'll make that claim regardless of the facts.Hmm, kinda like you've done numerous times on your blog before. Lie your ass off and ignore and / or omit facts so you can push your agenda. That shows an astounding lack of integrity on your part.Then you've got the IRS guy, who you lefties all screamed "Right Wing Terrorist" when the dude railed against George Bush and quoted The Commmunist ManifestoYeah, because quoting Marx just SCREAMS "right-wing nutjob"

  2. >Facts have a known liberal bias, it's true.

  3. >What gun law could have prevented this SoBeale? (proposed or current)I do wish that the government would take things more seriously when parents inform them in the manner Bedell's did (or the underwear bomber for that matter)Nevermind of course that the pentagon is a gun-free zone. Didn't seem to stop him from trying to murder someone. I guess we should be extremely happy he didn't have a bomb.I know! We can pass a law banning middle names!

  4. >The constant screed about muslims,illegals,socialists,evil government,liberals,gays,baby killers,they're taking over our country and God wants us to stop it! is influencing the actions of people who are already unbalanced.Social attitudes and social environment have a lot to do with how far some people will step over the line.The Nazis are a fair example of how irresponsible rhetoric can become dangerous dogma.If sane rational human beings no matter what their political leanings do not stand as one against this kind of incitement, we will ALL be guilty of its aftermath and this is only the beginning.

  5. >Oh, and he's as much a pro-2A "gun nut" as a child pornographer is a "photography / camera nut"Hell, Amy Bishop was a liberal "Obama Nut." Should we blame Obama for her actions? Blame the Left? Blame the gun she used?Crazy is crazy.

  6. >It appears that Bedell was more nuts than anything in particular. I've looked at about 20 stories, most of them lacking any real facts about his political views. There was this one:"Investigators were trying to unravel a bizarre series of Internet postings that suggested Bedell was fascinated with conspiracy theories, computer programming, libertarian economics and the science of warfare."So if you know any folks that exhibit more than two of those traits it might be worth keeping an eye on them.I am curious where he bought the guns. I'm sure it will turn out that for that one day when he was gun shopping he took all of his meds and didn't any arguments with an imaginary partner while in the store where he bought them.

  7. >Guns don't kill people — bullets kill people.

  8. >Anon – 1st right-wing Democrat ever.I wonder if we'll see a retraction from SoBeale? Given her track record I'm betting we won't.

  9. >"Anon – 1st right-wing Democrat ever."You mean other than, for example, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Joe Lieberman?And, mikey, would know all about people saying something that they know was not so much a misstatement as an outright lie and not owning up to it–or issuing a retraction. But, it's different if you're mikey.

  10. >The only person I've seen claim he was a registered Democrat is Michelle Malkin so excuse me for being skeptical. For all I know she made it up, like she makes up everything else. But even if it's true that's hardly the point. I'm trying really hard to balance the competing narratives about Democrats here. I thought we Democrats liked big government, Big Brother, Socialism, big taxes, you know, the whole thing you guys keep saying about us. Meanwhile this guy was virulently anti-government, was pissed at the Pentagon because it wouldn't fund his nanotechnology weapons system, was a 9/11 Truther, railed against public education, etc.Conservatives have been flogging anti-government sentiment for months. It started with nuts like Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Michael Savage with their inflammatory hate-speech, and now it's been mainstreamed with folks like Tim Pawlenty telling people to act like Elin Woods and take a nine-iron to the IRS and Michele Bachmann sayins she wants people "armed and dangerous." She got her wish.Last year Newt Gingrich feigned outrage over a report warning of right wing loonies. Yet he's remained silent as these attacks continue. I don't hear inflammatory anti-government calls to arms coming from the left right now. I do hear it coming from the right. One of these days one of your media stars is going to be called to account for pushing the nutballs to the breaking point.

  11. >Gna just share my views from top to bottom as I see them.I feel this is a good simply because it’s consistent with how the user is used to seeing the comment form and filling out information in general. Filling out the name and email wont take me much time, and if you really wanted to go ahead and type the comment first, you can do so, not really that big of a work around. I’m . study abroad

  12. >The only person I've seen claim he was a registered Democrat is Michelle Malkin so excuse me for being skeptical. For all I know she made it up, like she makes up everything else.Well you could do some actual research if you're so quick to just dismiss something because of the source. But hey, then you might find that the facts don't fit your preconceived views, and we can't have that can we?Dismissing information out of hand because you don't like the source is the easy, lazy way out.

  13. >Or you could do like mikey; use those facts which support your bias and dismiss or ignore those that do not.

  14. >Or you could do like mikey; use those facts which support your bias and dismiss or ignore those that do not.You mean like the mountain of factual data you and Sobeale brought into gun control discussions?Oh wait, you didn't bring them, because the facts simply don't support your side.

  15. >mikey:You use the same FBI crime stats as the gun control people use, to arrive at different conclusions. Here's the fact that it undeniable. the majority of murders in the U.S. are commintted with GUNZ (something like 10,000 in 2008)–you can add to this a lot of suicides. You can buff that turd as much as you like, it's still gonna be a turd. Gunz don't cause death–idiots and crazy people with guns cause death.

  16. >idiots and crazy people with guns cause death.as do idiots and crazy folks with knives, bombs, poisons, blunt objects, cars, and a plethora of other tools.Hell, in DE per 2007 FBI UCR firearms weren't even the most prevalent tool for robberies. There were more strongarmed (no weapon) robberies than there were robberies with a firearm. (745 vs. 691)The presence of firarms didn't cause robberies. People who chose to deprive others of their property by force caused the robberies.BTW – If you're going to start pulling facts I expect you to provide citations. Make sure your links work, unlike the last time I make you look like a fool.

  17. >Hell, crazy people with box cutters and an improvised bomb full of jet fuel killed nearly 3000people, but hey, at least they didn't have "GUNZ"The largest school massacre in U.S. history was committed with a bomb. Hey, at least Kehoe didn't use "GUNZ"(See Bath School Disaster)http://listverse.com/2008/01/01/top-10-worst-school-massacres/

  18. >nice strawman argument, mikey.Let's focus on the statement I actually made. See, I didn't say folks didn't die from other means. I said a lot of people, over 20,000 is a pretty fair guess from being on the wrong end of the gun. I hear the gunnutz say (or say something quite like:"But, but, more people died from auto accidents that same year, why don't we outlaw carz!?" Well, mikey, it's because carz are necessary to the conduct of modern american life. They are also taxed, regulated, licensed and inspected. And if someone is a really bad or really dangerous driver there are various legal mechanims available to address those problems.(Next comment by the gunnutz)"Ha! Driving is a privilege, shooting my gunz is a RIGHT and it shall not be infringed."I find it quite interesting that many of the most ardent gun rights folks are connected with organizations that pal around with white supremacists. Those folks thought that the Constitution was very clear on slavery until they were told it wouldn't be legal anymore.The laws on your side, bulletboy, for now. Maybe it will stay that way, maybe not. But if it does change it will be in no small part due to the activities of you and your idiot friends who spend WAY too much time thumping your chests while whining about your "Right". Keep at it, mikey, you're helping to convince more people every day–convince them that you and your gunpalz are loose cannons.

  19. >Thanks for that Bath School bombing link, mikey."Prior to May 18, Kehoe had loaded the back seat of his car with metal debris. He threw in old tools, nails, pieces of rusted farm machinery, digging shovels, and anything else capable of producing shrapnel during an explosion. After the back seat was filled, Kehoe placed a large cache of dynamite behind the front seat and a loaded rifle on the passenger's seat.[9]"It would appear that Mr. Kehoe was a.) completely nuts and b.) a very methodical maniac. He as also a very, very early "teabagger" if accounts about his blaming his personal business on the gummint and their damned taxes. I would say, based on what I read that Kehoe was interested in killing as many people as possible and going out in a blaze of self glory as a martyr to whatever warped cause he believed in. Now, if he had, say, an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine (and some spares) he coulda done the close in work with them Hornady TAP rounds and shot all the people without damaging the property at the school grounds overmuch. And if he'd had a Barret Rifle he would have been able to pick off that nasty schoo superintendent from a mile away.

  20. >Yeah, because everyone knows that Barrett 50's and AR-15's are weapons of choice for criminals.They're not of course, but facts (and a total lack of basic knowledge RE guns) have never stopped you from spouting your BS before Demo.It's really sad that all you have to spout is hysterical fearmongering that preys on ignorance.

  21. >Oh Boy! A whole ton of unsubstantiated bullshit from Democommie. Do you know how to back up anything you say?I find it quite interesting that many of the most ardent gun rights folks are connected with organizations that pal around with white supremacists.Yeah, I'm SURE you can back this up. Oh wait, your full of shit again.You're also FOS with regards to Barrett rifles, AR-15's, and various defensive ammo choices. But hey, keep spewing your ignorance. I mean god forbid you actually educate yourself!You dismiss my comment as a "strawman" to avoid addressing plain facts, and then jump into some random babbling about cars. Hello strawman! Thanks for showing your blatant hypocrisy again.You pull numbers out of your ass and follow them with phrases like "pretty good guess." Man, it must really be terrible to never have factual data on your side.if someone is a really bad or really dangerous driver there are various legal mechanims available to address those problems.Yup, and the same is true of gun owners. Criminally misuse your 2A rights and you lose them.

  22. >Oh, mikey, you just ain't got no sense of humor. Seems that AR-15's are sometimes the choice of the unlawful. The Barrett will, sooner or later, show up at a crime scene–it's just the law of averages.http://www.urbanwarfarecenter.com/2008/11/north-hollywood-shootout.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_courthouse_shootinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_RidgeBut it's okay, cuz' you'll be safe in your fortress with your gunz.

  23. >Anecdotes. Hard data please, not 3events spanning years.Of course I already have the hard data. We know that so-called "assault weapons" are used in a fraction of 1% of all violent crimes, and since AR-15's are but a fraction of the politically constructed "assault weapon" category that means the percentage actually drops BELOW a fraction of 1%.As for the Barrett. They have been used in exactly ONE crime. (by a cop) Hardly the massive danger to the public you say it is. But to hell with facts. You think they're evil, scary guns, so you wnat them banned. Your position is ignorant and emotional, not based on objective data.

  24. >Seems that AR-15's are sometimes the choice of the unlawfulSo are large rocks or rope. Your point is what exactly?

  25. >Wow, if only it weren't so damn easy for crazy people to get their hands on guns.How do you suggest we fix this SoBeale?