Jihad in Boston: Death Penalty for Bomber?

[b.k. barunt]

As with so often, Jon Stewart hits the nail on the head with the conservative pundit response to this:

That's the best commentary that i've seen yet on the rape of our Constitution.


Honibaz

I'm just bringing this one up front so we can go through it. How is the Constitution being raped (asking for your words)

Is it John Stewart by saying rights don't need to be read anymore?

Don't waste my time scotty. It's obvious by your post here that you watched about 5 seconds of it and turned it off. Typical neoconservative behavior. Due process, cruel and unusual punishment, and freedom of religion were addressed in the clip (drawing from memory), but now you want me to spoonfeed it to you because you couldn't take the time to watch the whole 2 minutes by yourself? Niggaplease.


Honibaz

[Phatscotty]

I watched it twice. btw it's 7 minutes of out of context editing

I'll pick out the fattest one I'm sure everyone has a problem with, and that is Ann Coulter saying the mother should be in prison just for wearing a hijab. #1, that's ridiculous. #2 she was talking about the mother being a phony, wearing a hijab NOW that she is on TV, since the mother has warrants out for her arrest for stealing thousands of dollars worth of glitzy Western clothes.

See what I mean about editing one comment to make it sound horrible. Context is everything, and that clip from John Stewart has none.

Sorry you are so wrong about me not watching it, and about me being a neo-conservative.

For the record, I was the first one here who voiced a problem with him not being read his rights. so whatevibaz

[Woodruff]

I watched it twice. btw it's 7 minutes of out of context editing

I'll pick out the fattest one I'm sure everyone has a problem with, and that is Ann Coulter saying the mother should be in prison just for wearing a hijab. #1, that's ridiculous. #2 she was talking about the mother being a phony, wearing a hijab NOW that she is on TV, since the mother has warrants out for her arrest for stealing thousands of dollars worth of glitzy Western clothes.

See what I mean about editing one comment to make it sound horrible. Context is everything, and that clip from John Stewart has none.

If "context is everything", what was her justification for saying that the mother should be in prison for wearing a hijab? I'm VERY curious as to how the context makes that statement less disturbing.

Sorry you are so wrong about me not watching it, and about me being a neo-conservative.

Heh.

[BigBallinStalin]

As with so often, Jon Stewart hits the nail on the head with the conservative pundit response to this:

That's the best commentary that i've seen yet on the rape of our Constitution.


Honibaz

Agreed. I love seeing their inconsistency. Reminds me of PS.

[b.k. barunt]

I watched it twice. btw it's 7 minutes of out of context editing

I'll pick out the fattest one I'm sure everyone has a problem with, and that is Ann Coulter saying the mother should be in prison just for wearing a hijab. #1, that's ridiculous. #2 she was talking about the mother being a phony, wearing a hijab NOW that she is on TV, since the mother has warrants out for her arrest for stealing thousands of dollars worth of glitzy Western clothes.

See what I mean about editing one comment to make it sound horrible. Context is everything, and that clip from John Stewart has none.

Sorry you are so wrong about me not watching it, and about me being a neo-conservative.

For the record, I was the first one here who voiced a problem with him not being read his rights. so whatevibaz

Ok my bad insofar as your watching the clip - i assumed such because you only mentioned the Miranda warning. As far as "out of context" editing" though i think you're way off base and only a neoconservative would make such an allegation. The wankers he was "editing" were having a stereotypical neoconservative hen session where our Constitutional rights were depicted as Liberal tools to make things soft for criminals. I've heard such crap since i was a kid and it turns my stomach, not to mention giving me a severe case of the redass. Stewart's editing merely showcased their stupidity - the content of their comments was not changed, except for Coulter's statement about the hijab, and that was an obvious joke. Funny that's the only example you gave of the "out of context" editing.


Honibaz

[Phatscotty]

Like I said, lets take them one at a time.

So you admit that Coulter was taken out of context, but not the rest? What about gutfield in the beginning. I cant see what he said cuz the video doesn't exist anymore, but stewart showed him making a comment, of which we have no idea what that comment is about, but it's used like it's a response to another edited comment make later in the show by Eric bolling. I don't know why you are comin at me all sideways. I was just talking about John Stewarts editing, idk why we are talking about me being a neo-con. Ron Paul is my guy by miles, and he is the opposite of a neo-con. Sure, Stewart is brilliant at pushing his agenda, perhaps too brilliant...

but I can see nobody actually wants to talk about this, they just want to provide commentary and ridicule. so whatevibaz

[b.k. barunt]

Like I said, lets take them one at a time.

So you admit that Coulter was taken out of context, but not the rest? What about gutfield in the beginning. I cant see what he said cuz the video doesn't exist anymore, but stewart showed him making a comment, of which we have no idea what that comment is about, but it's used like it's a response to another edited comment make later in the show by Eric bolling. I don't know why you are comin at me all sideways. I was just talking about John Stewarts editing, idk why we are talking about me being a neo-con. Ron Paul is my guy by miles, and he is the opposite of a neo-con. Sure, Stewart is brilliant at pushing his agenda, perhaps too brilliant...

but I can see nobody actually wants to talk about this, they just want to provide commentary and ridicule. so whatevibaz

Actually i toned down my response a good bit, considering my emotional reaction. Stewart's video was the best commentary i've seen on how these wankers glibly dismiss our Constitution and then wave the flag with great vigor. That flag is nothing more than a bit of colored cloth if it fails to represent the Constitution it was sewn together to represent.

I was raised by neoconservative parents who indoctrinated me to the point that i enlisted in the army on my 17th birthday. Not a brilliant idea in 1968. I came away from that experience acutely aware that my parents had fed me bullshit all my life and we are not the good guys. I spent 2 days in jail under the "Patriot Act" for no legal reason - no phone call, no access to an attorney, and no explanation as to why i was detained. So yeah i tend to go a little sideways on folks when they take the side of the assholes who rule us under false pretenses.


Honibaz

[b.k. barunt]

And yes, i admit it and take full responsibility - i was the one who voted to torture the kittens.


Cruel and Unusual Honibaz

[Woodruff]

People actually have a problem with this guy being buried? Really? I do not understand this.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/10/tamerlan-tsarnaev-virginia-burial/2150167/

[BigBallinStalin]

The civil thing to do would be to hang him from the neck until he dies, douse his body with gasoline, and then light it. Or so the logic goes.

[Phatscotty]

People actually have a problem with this guy being buried? Really? I do not understand this.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/10/tamerlan-tsarnaev-virginia-burial/2150167/

pretty sure it's about "where" he is buried. You are missing the context of the matter, that is why you do not understand.

[Phatscotty]

Like I said, lets take them one at a time.

So you admit that Coulter was taken out of context, but not the rest? What about gutfield in the beginning. I cant see what he said cuz the video doesn't exist anymore, but stewart showed him making a comment, of which we have no idea what that comment is about, but it's used like it's a response to another edited comment make later in the show by Eric bolling. I don't know why you are comin at me all sideways. I was just talking about John Stewarts editing, idk why we are talking about me being a neo-con. Ron Paul is my guy by miles, and he is the opposite of a neo-con. Sure, Stewart is brilliant at pushing his agenda, perhaps too brilliant...

but I can see nobody actually wants to talk about this, they just want to provide commentary and ridicule. so whatevibaz

Actually i toned down my response a good bit, considering my emotional reaction. Stewart's video was the best commentary i've seen on how these wankers glibly dismiss our Constitution and then wave the flag with great vigor. That flag is nothing more than a bit of colored cloth if it fails to represent the Constitution it was sewn together to represent.

I was raised by neoconservative parents who indoctrinated me to the point that i enlisted in the army on my 17th birthday. Not a brilliant idea in 1968. I came away from that experience acutely aware that my parents had fed me bullshit all my life and we are not the good guys. I spent 2 days in jail under the "Patriot Act" for no legal reason - no phone call, no access to an attorney, and no explanation as to why i was detained. So yeah i tend to go a little sideways on folks when they take the side of the assholes who rule us under false pretenses.


Honibaz

It's no sweat Honi. I don't take things personally like everyone else here does. We can disagree with honor.

Stewart's video was the best commentary i've seen on how these wankers glibly dismiss our Constitution and then wave the flag with great vigor.

I say that is the picture Stewart wanted to paint, and he did it with heavily edited and out of context clips. That doesn't mean I don't think we are losing our Freedoms, obviously you know I think we are. That also doesn't mean the issue cannot be misrepresented.

I think, if he wanted to, he could make the case with a lot more integrity, and I would agree with him in many areas. But he doesn't, because he is a comedian with a 30 minute show that specializes in misrepresenting Conservatism and training people to hate and tease anyone who doesn't agree with Leftism. And yes, every once in a while, Stewart will demonstrate a good point from the right, but it's nothing like the daily bullying he broadcasts from the left.

[Woodruff]

People actually have a problem with this guy being buried? Really? I do not understand this.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/10/tamerlan-tsarnaev-virginia-burial/2150167/

pretty sure it's about "where" he is buried. You are missing the context of the matter, that is why you do not understand.

I didn't miss any context. Perhaps you can explain to me why anyone gives a shit where he's buried. Does he have some post-mortem communicable disease? Seriously, this is retarded thinking.

So...what is the context that makes his being buried there a problem?

[Woodruff]

I think, if he wanted to, he could make the case with a lot more integrity, and I would agree with him in many areas. But he doesn't, because he is a comedian with a 30 minute show that specializes in misrepresenting Conservatism and training people to hate and tease anyone who doesn't agree with Leftism. And yes, every once in a while, Stewart will demonstrate a good point from the right, but it's nothing like the daily bullying he broadcasts from the left.

In all seriousness, anyone who believes that Jon Stewart, who plainly admits that he leans to the left, specializes his show in misrepresenting conservatism or uses it to train people to hate anyone who doesn't agree with the left, is a moron.

Yes, I am absolutely serious. If you believe that, you're just fucking stupid.

His show is primarily about highlighting hypocricy. He certainly doesn't shy away from pointing out hypocricy on the left. It just seems that, these days, so much more material comes from the Republican side of things.

[Metsfanmax]

I think, if he wanted to, he could make the case with a lot more integrity, and I would agree with him in many areas. But he doesn't, because he is a comedian with a 30 minute show that specializes in misrepresenting Conservatism and training people to hate and tease anyone who doesn't agree with Leftism. And yes, every once in a while, Stewart will demonstrate a good point from the right, but it's nothing like the daily bullying he broadcasts from the left.

His show is primarily about highlighting hypocricy. He certainly doesn't shy away from pointing out hypocricy on the left. It just seems that, these days, so much more material comes from the Republican side of things.

While a few years ago I might have disagreed, I think this is just true in the last couple of years. It is probably the reason that Phatscotty still keeps on linking that video of Pelosi talking about finding out what's in the Obamacare bill instead of finding something more up to date

[Phatscotty]

The point of posting that video is to show that even Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives at the time, confirmed that she nor anyone else knew what was in OBamacare before it passed, and there was no way for the people to know what was in it before it passed, and that there will be plenty of "surprises" in the future.

Woodruff is wrong. I don't care about her hypocrisy or "the left" or anything like that. When I share this clip, it's to show that nobody really knew what was in the bill, and plenty of people still do not know what is in the bill years after passage. It has to do with Obamacare and what's in it.

It's Woodruff who constantly veers things into left right paradigms.

However, why is that in this thread? Oh, Woodruff derailing again? This is about the Boston Bombing and things related. Mets, please do not feed the troll

[Woodruff]

Woodruff is wrong. I don't care about her hypocrisy or "the left" or anything like that.

Well now you're just lying again. For heavens' sake, Phatscotty, I don't honestly understand how you can even say such a thing.

It's Woodruff who constantly veers things into left right paradigms.

The evidence runs contrary to that statement.

However, why is that in this thread? Oh, Woodruff derailing again? This is about the Boston Bombing and things related.

Where one of the Boston Bombers is buried and the apparent uproar it has caused amongst the morons isn't relevant to the Boston Bombing?

I didn't derail anything, so you can stop trying to mischaracterize me. Maybe you could satisfy your boredom by actually responding to my questions, for a change.

[Woodruff]

People actually have a problem with this guy being buried? Really? I do not understand this.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/10/tamerlan-tsarnaev-virginia-burial/2150167/

pretty sure it's about "where" he is buried. You are missing the context of the matter, that is why you do not understand.

I didn't miss any context. Perhaps you can explain to me why anyone gives a shit where he's buried. Does he have some post-mortem communicable disease? Seriously, this is retarded thinking.

So...what is the context that makes his being buried there a problem?

Phatscotty?

[ooge]

This is John Stewart addressing the attack that his clips are edited to show a bias against Fox news.

[pimpdave]

[Woodruff]

This is John Stewart addressing the attack that his clips are edited to show a bias against Fox news.

I'm confused as to the relevance of this to the Boston Bombers...

[BigBallinStalin]

Is "Islam" his girlfriend?