ONEILL: Blood in the streets - again

Sometimes I wonder why the media bothers to report shootings that take a bunch of innocent lives when some crazy SOB goes off on a rampage in a school, a restaurant, an office building, or a Safeway parking lot. Full Story
First Prev
of 11
Next Last
Bill

Chico, CA

#1 Jan 15, 2011
He wrote the same story for that little c*o*m*m*i*e rag in Chico. To think he is such a left-wing extremist adjunct professor teaching our kids and grand kids at Butte College is so ludicrous! I'd like to change HIS climate, the irresponsible lefty bastid!
Robyn Valentine

Riverside, CA

#2 Jan 15, 2011
Bill wrote:
He wrote the same story for that little c*o*m*m*i*e rag in Chico. To think he is such a left-wing extremist adjunct professor teaching our kids and grand kids at Butte College is so ludicrous! I'd like to change HIS climate, the irresponsible lefty bastid!
You are lucky(and I may be going out on a limb here)if you can change your own undies.
You DO change them occasionally, right?
Jamie Sucks

Hemet, CA

#3 Jan 15, 2011
once again, O'Neill shows his colors - YELLOW - get a clue, you Liberal fool - some people are BAD, some people are CRAZY - murders happen, wherever there are PEOPLE - in other countries, they kill each other with machetes, knives, hammers, and big sticks ... keep your hands off my guns !
Jamie Sucks

Hemet, CA

#4 Jan 15, 2011
I didn't know this lame sonofabitch was a TEACHER !!, no wonder this country is getting so fouled up !
Linda R

Chico, CA

#5 Jan 15, 2011
I guess that Jamie has forgotten about all of the people that promoted the killing of George Bush because they disagreed with his policies. Using Jamie's arguments, those too must have been right-winged extremists, because Jamie refuses to acknowledge that political extreme rhetoric comes from both sides of the aisle. And I guess that using bull's eyes on a map is not incendiary but target hairs are. Intelligent people recognize Jamie for what he is, a liberal progressive that throws word bombs at others while not looking at how his own words are doing the same thing he is complaining about.
Robyn Valentine

Riverside, CA

#6 Jan 15, 2011
Jamie Sucks wrote:
once again, O'Neill shows his colors - YELLOW - get a clue, you Liberal fool - some people are BAD, some people are CRAZY - murders happen, wherever there are PEOPLE - in other countries, they kill each other with machetes, knives, hammers, and big sticks ... keep your hands off my guns !
You are correct.
Some people are bad and some people are crazy, and most of them populate the fascist right wing in this country, and have through out history.
Pull yer head out.
Robyn Valentine

Riverside, CA

#7 Jan 15, 2011
Jamie Sucks wrote:
I didn't know this lame sonofabitch was a TEACHER !!, no wonder this country is getting so fouled up !
Another COWARD hiding behind SOMEONE ELSE'S NAME.
Why is it that you fascists can never back up your words with your real names?
The biggest terrorist we have to worry about are people like you.
Not to mention your obvious lack of vocabulary and your mental laziness.
Really.
You poor fascists can't comment without using gutter language?
That's the result of spending so much much time in the intellectual gutter.
PITIFUL.
dcc

United States

#8 Jan 15, 2011
thats the problem with this country now days, kids dont get an education from oneill and his cronies, they get an indoctrination.
i know i'm wasting my time trying to convince the lefty, gun grabbers that more restrictions on law abiding fire arms owners will not solve any problem, it will only make it worse.
people have been killing other people since time began, that's just the way it is. if some nut job wants you dead, he or she will find a way to make it happen. i love how the left wing liberal media in this country convenienlty chooses to ignore facts whenever there is a shooting in this country which takes multiple lives.
they fail to mention that the worst single mass murder in american history carried out by one individual, did not involve a gun, it only took 1 pissed off whack job and a gallon of gas and a lighter to block the exits at the happyland disco in new york city back in 1990 to kill 87 people in a matter of minutes. not a gun sight! but these facts are overlooked because they do not fit with the agenda that is being crammed down the american peoples throats. wake up and get a clue. guns are not to blame, sick, twisted a$$holes, that shouldnt be walking the streets are to blame. this idiot in tuscon could have done just as much or even more damage with a 2 ton car by plowing it in to the same crowd of people. so i guess by the left wing liberals logic it's time to ban cars, gallon containers of gasoline, and lighters, then we can all sleep safe and sound in the imaginary utopia that they have created.

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Paradise, CA

#9 Jan 15, 2011
We all knew this Oneil column was coming. I think in some ways it is sad that oneil's writing has become so completely predictable, everyone knows in advance what his Saturday piece will be, when it is political that is, his work is mainly a rehash of the far left talking points.

From a story at NPR about a study done by the Secret Service on assasins.

"It was very, very rare for the primary motive to be political, though there were a number of attackers who appeared to clothe their motives with some political rhetoric," Fein says.
What emerges from the study is that rather than being politically motivated, many of the assassins and would-be assassins simply felt invisible. In the year before their attacks, most struggled with acute reversals and disappointment in their lives, which, the paper argues, was the true motive. They didn't want to see themselves as nonentities.
"They experienced failure after failure after failure, and decided that rather than being a 'nobody,' they wanted to be a 'somebody,' " Fein says.
They chose political targets, then, because political targets were a sure way to transform this situation: They would be known.
Murderers Searching For A Cause
"If the objective is notoriety or fame, that's the most efficient instrumental mechanism by which to achieve that. I don't mean to be flip about that, but a public official is likely to bring them a substantial amount of recognition instantly, without having to achieve something," says Randy Borum, a professor at the University of South Florida who worked on the study.
And one thing Borum and Fein say about choosing a political figure as opposed to choosing a show-business celebrity is that the would-be assassins are able to associate themselves with a broader political movement or goal. That allows them to see themselves as not such a bad person. In this way, Borum says, assassins are basically murderers in search of a cause.
"People make decisions to act, and then from that, construct for themselves and potentially for others a narrative about why that is OK, or what the rationale would be, or how this could be justified," Borum says. "It's sort of a reverse pattern from what we would typically think."
This can be seen very clearly, Borum says, from the way many of the assassins in the study chose their targets. Though occasionally they would fixate on a single person who represented a clear political position, many just went from target to target to target.
"About half of the assassins in this study had multiple targets or what sometimes are referred to as directions of interest, throughout the course of deliberating about an attack," he says.
For example, there was one guy who was fixated on his governor until he heard that the vice president was coming to his area.
"He said he had read enough to know that there hadn't been anybody who had attempted to assassinate a sitting vice president," Borum says.
So he made the vice president his target. He told the researchers he thought he'd get more attention from historians. "He said in the books on assassination, there might even be a whole chapter on him," Borum recalls."

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/14/132909487/fame-...
Jaime

Chico, CA

#10 Jan 15, 2011
Linda R wrote:
I guess that Jamie has forgotten about all of the people that promoted the killing of George Bush because they disagreed with his policies. Using Jamie's arguments, those too must have been right-winged extremists, because Jamie refuses to acknowledge that political extreme rhetoric comes from both sides of the aisle. And I guess that using bull's eyes on a map is not incendiary but target hairs are. Intelligent people recognize Jamie for what he is, a liberal progressive that throws word bombs at others while not looking at how his own words are doing the same thing he is complaining about.
Please show me a single instance of any Democrat, any talk show host, any newspaper columnist, or anyone who "disgreed with his (Bush) policies who "promoted the killing of George Bush. It's easy to say such a thing, but rather hard to find evidence for it. There was lots of disagreement with Bush policies, lots of anger about his failings and decisions (Iraq, tax breaks for the rich, big taxpayer funded gov't contracts for his friends, etc.) but I simply don't recall anyone ever "promoting his killing," or engaging in the day-in day-out stuff we get from Beck/Limbaugh/Palin calling him un-American, not like us, a man who pals around with terrorists, a guy who hates white people, a foreign agent intent on imposing Marxism on this country, a Muslim, and all that other stuff, amplified with calls to arm ourselves, reload, take our country back, and the rest of it.
There's a difference between disagreement and this kind of demonization and demagoguery. And though there may be no direct connection betweeen Palin's irresponsible words, and the Tea Party propensity for engaging in violent rhetoric while wearing guns to rallies, there's a big difference between that kind of talk and honest and even fervent disagreement with people like George Bush. But please, Linda, show me all these examples of people promoting the killing of George Bush. I disliked Bush's policies as much as anyone, and I followed that criticism of him pretty closely, and I just don't remember anything like what you claim.

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Paradise, CA

#11 Jan 15, 2011
Jaime wrote:
<quoted text>
Please show me a single instance of any Democrat, any talk show host, any newspaper columnist, or anyone who "disgreed with his (Bush) policies who "promoted the killing of George Bush.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shru...
Jaime

Chico, CA

#13 Jan 15, 2011
Sam Lowree wrote:
Ok, Sam, I accept most of these examples, and most of them are awful. I repudiate them, and I'm appalled at some of the ugliness. I would have repudiated them at the time some of these demonstrations against the Iraq war were taking, if I'd known about them, though nearly all of them are new to me. I participated in demonstrations against going into Iraq, and I saw nothing like this stuff.

Now, if you and others who share your views would repudiate, just as loudly, the vile stuff that's come at Obama and Pelosi that has been similar to the worst of this stuff you post, that would be a good thing. I haven't seen you do it, though. Ever. You've been silent when Beck stirs up racism by saying Obama "hates white people," or the daily barrage of hate from talk radio that so often distorts things and demonizes even programs once supported by Ronald Reagan because they now come from Obama. Every week I get stuff via email from Tea Party people who talk about the "Ubangee," and similar racist stuff, and since you spend so much time on right wing websites, I know you see this stuff, too, but you never seem to have a problem with it. When the right wingers call for Muslims to renounce their extremists, that's appropriate. I only wish they would do it themselves.

Incidentally, I believe that Bush/Cheney are war criminals, as do some of the sign carriers in your posting. But I don't believe in vigilante justice for war criminals; I believe in criminal prosecution. Unfortunately, the Obama Justice Dept. doesn't share my views. I don't think they should be shot for that, either.
Jaime

Chico, CA

#14 Jan 15, 2011
dcc wrote:
thats the problem with this country now days, kids dont get an education from oneill and his cronies, they get an indoctrination.
i know i'm wasting my time trying to convince the lefty, gun grabbers that more restrictions on law abiding fire arms owners will not solve any problem, it will only make it worse.
people have been killing other people since time began, that's just the way it is. if some nut job wants you dead, he or she will find a way to make it happen. i love how the left wing liberal media in this country convenienlty chooses to ignore facts whenever there is a shooting in this country which takes multiple lives.
they fail to mention that the worst single mass murder in american history carried out by one individual, did not involve a gun, it only took 1 **** off whack job and a gallon of gas and a lighter to block the exits at the happyland disco in new york city back in 1990 to kill 87 people in a matter of minutes. not a gun sight! but these facts are overlooked because they do not fit with the agenda that is being crammed down the american peoples throats. wake up and get a clue. guns are not to blame, sick, twisted **** holes, that shouldnt be walking the streets are to blame. this idiot in tuscon could have done just as much or even more damage with a 2 ton car by plowing it in to the same crowd of people. so i guess by the left wing liberals logic it's time to ban cars, gallon containers of gasoline, and lighters, then we can all sleep safe and sound in the imaginary utopia that they have created.
We lose over 30,000 lives to gun violence every year, and another 70,000 wounded. If that was a war, it would be a big war. And yes, people have always found ways to kill one another, but you've got a 84% chance of surviving a stab wound to the heart, but less than a 30% of surviving a gun shot wound to the heart. Beyond that, the sheer ease of killing a large number of people with a 30 round clip and a semi-automatic 9 mm. makes murderous impulses far more likely.
I'm not advocating taking guns away from everyone; I own guns myself. I do think we could use a little sanity on the subject, though. We are the most heavily armed citizenry on the planet. The average gun owner has six guns. We kill more of our fellow citizens than any other nation. Do we need to insist that everyone, including crazy people, have easy access to semi-automatics with big clips? Are we happy that every gangsta rapper extolls the virtues and values of assault weapons? Do we continue to sacrifice children so that the grownups can have unlimited number and kinds of toys?
Dode Penrod

Lakewood, CA

#15 Jan 15, 2011
Nothing in the column even hints at how we can stop the hatred in this country. And to say that the Tucson massacre is not news is incredulous.
Jaime

Chico, CA

#16 Jan 15, 2011
The word Dode is looking for is "incredible," not "incredulous." And I guess she couldn't read the tone when I wrote that another mass killing hardly qualifies as news anymore.

"We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list. But the thing is the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. People do that, they've got to realize there's consequences to that action."

Gabrielle Giffords, 2010.
shawn s woodbury

Chico, CA

#17 Jan 15, 2011
Dode Penrod wrote:
Nothing in the column even hints at how we can stop the hatred in this country. And to say that the Tucson massacre is not news is incredulous.
I think the article itself serves the purpose if we keep giving people the notoriety they want then we will have more problems to share amongst those people. It's not about left wingers or right wingers murder is a terrible conjunction among any debate.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#18 Jan 15, 2011
Sam Lowree wrote:
So easy to prove O'Neill wrong.
shawn s woodbury

Chico, CA

#19 Jan 15, 2011
Sam Lowree wrote:
We all knew this Oneil column was coming. I think in some ways it is sad that oneil's writing has become so completely predictable, everyone knows in advance what his Saturday piece will be, when it is political that is, his work is mainly a rehash of the far left talking points.
From a story at NPR about a study done by the Secret Service on assasins.
"It was very, very rare for the primary motive to be political, though there were a number of attackers who appeared to clothe their motives with some political rhetoric," Fein says.
What emerges from the study is that rather than being politically motivated, many of the assassins and would-be assassins simply felt invisible. In the year before their attacks, most struggled with acute reversals and disappointment in their lives, which, the paper argues, was the true motive. They didn't want to see themselves as nonentities. "They experienced failure after failure after failure, and decided that rather than being a 'nobody,' they wanted to be a 'somebody,' " Fein says.
They chose political targets, then, because political targets were a sure way to transform this situation: They would be known.
Murderers Searching For A Cause
"If the objective is notoriety or fame, that's the most efficient instrumental mechanism by which to achieve that. I don't mean to be flip about that, but a public official is likely to bring them a substantial amount of recognition instantly, without having to achieve something," says Randy Borum, a professor at the University of South Florida who worked on the study.
And one thing Borum and Fein say about choosing a political figure as opposed to choosing a show-business celebrity is that the would-be assassins are able to associate themselves with a broader political movement or goal. That allows them to see themselves as not such a bad person. In this way, Borum says, assassins are basically murderers in search of a cause.
"People make decisions to act, and then from that, construct for themselves and potentially for others a narrative about why that is OK, or what the rationale would be, or how this could be justified," Borum says. "It's sort of a reverse pattern from what we would typically think."
This can be seen very clearly, Borum says, from the way many of the assassins in the study chose their targets. Though occasionally they would fixate on a single person who represented a clear political position, many just went from target to target to target.
"About half of the assassins in this study had multiple targets or what sometimes are referred to as directions of interest, throughout the course of deliberating about an attack," he says.
For example, there was one guy who was fixated on his governor until he heard that the vice president was coming to his area.
"He said he had read enough to know that there hadn't been anybody who had attempted to assassinate a sitting vice president," Borum says.
So he made the vice president his target. He told the researchers he thought he'd get more attention from historians. "He said in the books on assassination, there might even be a whole chapter on him," Borum recalls."
http://www.npr.org/2011/01/14/132909487/fame-...
Sam if you knew this article was coming you should be ashamed of yourself not for ignorance but absolute stupidity.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#20 Jan 15, 2011
Jaime wrote:
The word Dode is looking for is "incredible," not "incredulous." And I guess she couldn't read the tone when I wrote that another mass killing hardly qualifies as news anymore.
"We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list. But the thing is the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. People do that, they've got to realize there's consequences to that action."
Gabrielle Giffords, 2010.
To date there has not been any evidence that connected anything Sarah Palin or any other Republican has said that speaks to Jared Loghner's actions, though I'm sure many pinned their hopes on the early reports that the shootings were the work of a Tea Party inspired activist instead of another left wing nut case.
Dode Penrod

Lakewood, CA

#21 Jan 15, 2011
Jaime wrote:
The word Dode is looking for is "incredible," not "incredulous." And I guess she couldn't read the tone when I wrote that another mass killing hardly qualifies as news anymore.
"We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list. But the thing is the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. People do that, they've got to realize there's consequences to that action."
Gabrielle Giffords, 2010.
I guess if the perfesser could just correct everyone's spelling or dictate word usage, life would be perfect. What a small mind.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 11
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wally Herger Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
California Rep. Dreier announces plan to retire (Feb '12) Mar '12 torch 4
Gloria Darlene Linch, Red Bluff: SmartMeters (Feb '11) Sep '11 Jeanne S 34
Calif. rep. wants shared sacrifice in debt talks (Sep '11) Sep '11 lastoutlaw 10
Herger in downtown Chico on Tuesday (Aug '11) Aug '11 Angry American 8
Marijuana-legalization push gets voice on Capit... (Dec '10) Jul '11 roaddog 288
House Republicans seek IRS probe of AARP (Mar '11) Jul '11 joey 37
GOP calls for IRS probe of AARP (Apr '11) Jul '11 joey 2
More from around the web