The Southern Poverty Law Center has released it's "year in hate" review (http://www.splcenter.org/home/2013/spring/the-year-in-hate-and-extremism)of alleged dangerous right-wing extremists again. Among their list of terrorists, the "Granny Warriors."


For example a North Carolina-based group calling itself "Granny Warriors" appears on the SPLC list of active "patriots."
(http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/us/splc-extremist-groups-report/index.html)
But founder Linda Hunnicutt says her organization is harmless.

"I am deadly!" she joked. "I'm 74 years old. I have COPD. I have congestive heart failure. I'm sewing a quilt."

Hunnicutt acknowledges she's no friend of the federal government, but, she wishes no harm on anyone.

"All these people that want to bomb places and kill children, come on," she said. "Who would be in sympathy with them?"

Hunnicutt said she and her group just want Uncle Sam to leave them alone. When Granny Warriors showed up on the SPLC list, Hunnicutt said she wasn't surprised. But it made her wonder, "Is this all they have to do?"

Nonetheless, Hunnicutt's thankful to be on the list because she said it increases her group's notoriety.

Yeah, we better look out for those 74-year-old's with COPD sewing quilts.

After feverishly and erroneously linking Sarah Palin's "crosshairs" map and (virtually anything else a conservative has done or said) to the Giffords shooting, the left and their media somehow are awfully disinterested in the Family Research Council shooter picking his target from the SPLC list (http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/02/floyd-corkins-hearing-accused-frc-shooter-may-take-plea-deal-84917.html).

Oddly enough, the SPLC failed to list the hate crime of shooting up the FRC office (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-incidents?year=2012&state=CO), wounding a guard that likely prevented a much worse tragedy, in their list of hate crimes.

The SPLC: "Fighting Hate • Teaching Tolerance • Seeking Justice"

Really? By listing the targets of your own hatred?

They do this garbage every time they are having a fund raiser.

Hello:

I don't know. From coast to coast, the gun stores are empty, but don't look at that.. There's nothing to see. Move along.

excon

Well duh, is there still something you don't get about Americans - not just those on the SPLC's pathetic hate list - disliking the idea of their rights being threatened?

There actually was a point to this thread by the way, if you can discern it.


After feverishly and erroneously linking Sarah Palin's "crosshairs" map and (virtually anything else a conservative has done or said) to the Giffords shooting, the left and their media somehow are awfully disinterested in the Family Research Council shooter picking his target from the SPLC list.

Oddly enough, the SPLC failed to list the hate crime of shooting up the FRC office, wounding a guard that likely prevented a much worse tragedy, in their list of hate crimes.

The SPLC: "Fighting Hate • Teaching Tolerance • Seeking Justice"

Really? By listing the targets of your own hatred?

Hello:

I dunno. From coast to coast, the gun stores are empty, but don't look at that.. There's nothing to see. Move along.

excon

That is only because of speculation. There is a huge greed running rampant in the gun/ammo industry right now.

That is only because of speculation. There is a huge greed running rampant in the gun/ammo industry right now.

Bad enough they cannot be sued, but can hide behind he NRA as it enriches itself on the fears of the rest of us.

Bad enough they cannot be sued, but can hide behind he NRA as it enriches itself on the fears of the rest of us.

Sued for what? There are people buying on the thought that it is going to be of greater value then what they paid for it. The rise in ammo alone has more then doubled making it harder for those that shoot to maintain the best possible shot if the situation should arise.

Hello dad:


Sued for what?A BB gun manufacturer can be held liable for his product. A REAL gun manufacturer can't. Don't make sense to me... But, of course, I'm a liberal.

Excon

And naturally as a liberal you think someone else should be sued for others misuse of a product that worked as intended. What is it about personal responsibility you libs don't get?

They could make a product that a talented kid could not modify.

Hello again, Steve:


What is it about personal responsibility you libs don't get?The cigarette manufactures argued the same thing. But, as a nation, we found out their "freedom" to sell POISON bumped up against our right NOT to be poisoned.

BECAUSE we, as a nation, took ACTION, 100 MILLION people don't smoke today, and might be DEAD if we didn't... Now, you can argue about personal responsibility, but in the face of reality, it falls flat.

I don't know how you stand on OUR war against tobacco, but from your arguments here, I'll bet you think lots more of us should be smoking.. Don't make sense to me... But, of course, I'm a liberal.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

The cigarette manufactures argued the same thing. But, as a nation, we found out their "freedom" to sell POISON bumped up against our right NOT to be poisoned.

BECAUSE we, as a nation, took ACTION, 100 MILLION people don't smoke today, and might be DEAD if we didn't... Now, you can argue about personal responsibility, but in the face of reality, it falls flat.

I dunno how you stand on OUR war against tobacco, but from your arguments here, I'll bet you think lots more of us should be smoking.. Don't make sense to me... But, of course, I'm a liberal.

excon

I don't know of any instances of a gun or a cigarette spontaneously harming anyone, do you?

Back to the point, why shouldn't the SPLC be held liable for their irresponsibility? Was the FRC shooting, target picked from their list of "hate" groups, somehow not a hate crime? Those haters at FRC had it coming, huh?

Hello again, Steve:


I don't know of any instances of a gun or a cigarette spontaneously harming anyone, do you?

Back to the pointSo, you DO think millions more of us should be smoking!! That IS the point... You simply don't believe the federal government has a role in protecting us from whatever the free market decides to bestow upon us.

I fundamentally disagree with that position.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

So, you DO think millions more of us should be smoking!!! That IS the point... You simply don't believe the federal government has a role in protecting us from whatever the free market decides to bestow upon us.

I fundamentally disagree with that position.

excon

In other words you refuse to answer my questions in favor of assigning positions to me I haven't taken. I understand, either you have no answer or you really think the SPLC should not be held accountable and those haters at FRC deserved it.

The FRC shooter admitted on video that he targeted them because the Southern Poverty Law Center listed them as a hate group (http://washingtonexaminer.com/fbi-video-domestic-terrorist-says-he-targeted-conservative-group-for-being-anti-gay/article/2528072).


Family Research Council (FRC) officials released video of federal investigators questioning convicted domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins II, who explained that he attacked the group’s headquarters because the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) identified them as a “hate group” due to their traditional marriage views.

“Southern Poverty Law lists anti-gay groups,” Corkins tells interrogators in the video, which FRC obtained from the FBI. “I found them online, did a little research, went to the website, stuff like that.”

The Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard reported that Corkins, who pleaded guilty to terrorism charges, said in court that he hoped to “kill as many as possible and smear the Chick-Fil-A sandwiches in victims’ faces, and kill the guard.” As Bedard explained, “the shooting occurred after an executive with Chick-Fil-A announced his support for traditional marriage, angering same-sex marriage proponents.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center still lists FRC as an “anti-gay” hate group on the “hate map” Corkins used. “The SPLC’s reckless labeling has led to devastating consequences,” said FRC President Tony Perkins. “Because of its ‘hate group’ lists, a deadly terrorist had a guidemap to FRC and other organizations. Our staff is still reeling from the attack, and the chilling effect this could have on organizations that are simply fighting for their values is outrageous.”

Waiting for the left to connect the dots...

There are no dots to connect in a reasonable way for the actions or motives of a LOON! You believe him if you want, I chose not to.

LOL, talk about denial.

Hello again,

Was listing them as a hate group the same thing as Sarah Palin putting targets on a map? Six of one, half dozen of another...

You guys have problems with the MESSENGER, but none with the MESSAGE... Pssst.. You're concentrating on the WRONG thing.

excon

Hello again,

Was listing them as a hate group the same thing as Sarah Palin putting targets on a map?? Six of one, half dozen of another...

You guys have problems with the MESSENGER, but none with the MESSAGE... Pssst.. You're concentrating on the WRONG thing.

excon

Except for one thing, there is no connection to that silly, harmless crosshairs map to anyone getting shot. You guys are really great at connecting dots that aren't there to right-wingers but can't connect the obvious dots connected to violent left-wingers. Actually you do see them, you just won't admit it.

Hello again, Steve:

No connection, huh? I don't know.. One of Palins targets was Tuscon (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/10/AR2011011006653.html), and Gabby Gifford got shot.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

No connection, huh? I dunno.. One of Palins targets was Tuscon (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/10/AR2011011006653.html), and Gabby Gifford got shot.

excon

Coincidence. Would you mind showing us where that wacko was inspired by the map? You know, actually connect some dots.

Hello again, Steve:

So, a wacko has to SAY what inspired him, huh?? Nahhhh...

excon

You of all people know what motive is. The FRC shooter's motive is clear, dots connected. What was Loughner's motive? Come on, connect the dots if you can.

Don't wackos get their motives from all kinds of sources, real or imagined?

Don't wackos get their motives from all kinds of sources, real or imagined?

Yes, so?

Hello again, Steve:

Some people don't need to be hit over the head with dots in order to connect them..

In any case, the purpose of this thread is to show how BAD the left is for instigating wackos... I COULD agree with you, but not when you DENY that Sarah Palin did the same thing - EVEN if the outcome may have been different...

So, I'm NOT going to agree. Why would I? It's ONE way and it's BONKERS.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Some people don't need to be hit over the head with dots in order to connect them..

In any case, the purpose of this thread is to show how BAD the left is for instigating wackos... I COULD agree with you, but not when you DENY that Sarah Palin did the same thing - EVEN if the outcome may have been different...

I've never denied she had a map that you guys call "crosshairs", but what exactly did it instigate besides left-wing knees jerking all over the place to connect dots to the Tucson shooting that aren't there?


So, I'm NOT going to agree. Why would I? It's ONE way and it's BONKERS.


I agree, it IS one way and it IS bonkers. In your view everything is the right-wing's fault even when it isn't, and nothing is the left's fault even when it is. That's as bonkers as it gets.

Hello again, Steve:

but what exactly did it instigateYou missed it again.. The OFFENSE, if there was one, is publishing the targets/year in hate - NOT the outcomes or lack thereof..

You think one was wonderful and the other not so wonderful. I don't make those distinctions.

Excon

Laughner counts the "Communist Manifesto" among his favorite reads and a video of the American flag burning as his favorite YouTube post.
Yeah clearly he's a right wing nut .

Hello again, tom:

Whatever he believed is NOT the issue. The ISSUE is whether Sarah Palins TARGETS guided him.

Or more specifically, why is the SPLC so bad and Sarah Palin so good?? They BOTH published incendiary stuff.

excon

And you've been offered quite some time to show the map guided him. I've done my. Part, time for you to stop bloviating and prove the link to the map. Otherwise you got nuthin' no matter how try to spin it.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!

Hello again, tom:

Whatever he believed is NOT the issue. The ISSUE is whether Sarah Palins TARGETS guided him.

Or more specifically, why is the SPLC so bad and Sarah Palin so good??? They BOTH published incendiary stuff.

excon

The problem with your narrative is Floyd Lee Corkins specifically stated he drew inspiration from the SPLC list . Laughtner has never mentioned Palin's campaign map. It is all a fabrication in the left wing mind to try to make the connection.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

Or in other words reality doesn't matter.

Whose reality are we speaking about? I have no clue of what yours is that blames others for the acts of the criminally insane.

the problem with your narrative is Floyd Lee Corkins specifically stated he drew inspiration from the SPLC list . Laughtner has never mentioned Palin's campaign map. It is all a fabrication in the left wing mind to try to make the connection.


Your statement is not accurate. Nowhere does the individual talks about, "inspiration". Instead the limited interview talks about a means to an end. Any line of reasoning that pursues "inspiration" can not be substantiated from the information available.

Your statement is not accurate. Nowhere does the individual talks about, "inspiration". Instead the limited interview talks about a means to an end. Any line of reasoning that pursues "inspiration" can not be substantiated from the information available.

His inspiration was Chik-Fil-A standing for traditional marriage, taking revenge on "anti-gay" groups. He admittedly picked his target from SPLC's irresponsible list of alleged hate groups.

Excon contends the Tucson shooter did the same from Palin's "crosshairs map" even though there is no evidence to support that, it was manufactured outrage trying to paint the guy as a right-wing wacko inspired by Palin's "hate."

Only the first scenario is true.

His inspiration was Chik-Fil-A standing for traditional marriage, taking revenge on "anti-gay" groups. He admittedly picked his target from SPLC's irresponsible list of alleged hate groups.

Excon contends the Tuscon shooter did the same from Palin's "crosshairs map" even though there is no evidence to support that, it was manufactured outrage trying to paint the guy as a right-wing wacko inspired by Palin's "hate."

Only the first scenario is true.

Of course it is irresponsible. But one groups irresponsibility does not necessarily translate into "motivation" for another person or groups of people.. It can, but there is no evidence from what has been made available that this is the case.

Inspiration and motivation aren't exactly the same things, Tut. But your colors are showing again. Instead of taking issue with those making a connection that doesn't exist and downplaying one that does, you're nitpicking on word selection.

You seem to be nit picking your own narrative and dismissing those that don't fit your narrative. Hard to be objective in evaluating facts that way.

Inspiration and motivation aren't exactly the same things, Tut. But your colors are showing again. Instead of taking issue with those making a connection that doesn't exist and downplaying one that does, you're nitpicking on word selection.


I agree that inspiration and motivation are very similar. I would also agree that it would be nitpicking if I were trying to separate an individuals motivation from his inspiration. This is not what I am doing in this case.

Again, you put me in an invidious situation. In the final analysis I would say that no one has any dots to join up. I am no different to anyone else who posts here. I post my comments and people are free to agree, disagree or ignore my comments. Just like everyone else.

You seem to be nit picking your own narrative and dismissing those that don't fit your narrative. Hard to be objective in evaluating facts that way.

The facts are clear, I don't have to nitpick. The SPLC's hate list played a role in the FRC shooting, the map played no role in any violence whatsoever. Only one scenario is true, Tal, why so much denial? Is your hatred for conservatives like Palin so deep you can't see the plain truth in front of you or are you in that deep of denial you can't acknowledge the actual hatred and irresponsible behavior on your side? Both?

I hate no one, but cannot understand why you put so much credibility into the rantings of a criminally insane fool and I don't care what Palin said or did to be honest its still no excuse to the actions of another criminally insane fool.

What part of not caring what triggers and motivates a loony to murder and mayhem is it you don't understand? There are no excuses for that kind of behavior. Stop trying to connect the dots to justify your own narrative which is hardly objectionable, and quite prejudiced.

There is enough lunacy to scare everybody, no matter your politics or religion in my view.

I can't understand why you can't acknowledge the facts. The whole point of this thread is just as with the Tucson shooting, the left cannot see their crusade against hate is itself an exercise in hate.

And yet another exercise in hate in the crusade against hate. I've mentioned Femen before, see if you can spot the haters.

NSFW PHOTOS: Naked feminist protesters drench Catholic archbishop as he prays quietly
(http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/24/nsfw-photos-naked-feminist-protesters-drench-catholic-archbishop-as-he-prays-quietly/)

Hello again, Steve:

naked feminist protesters drench catholic archbishop as he prays quietlyI don't know WHY you're having trouble with DISTINCTIONS this morning... They REALLY do make a difference...

You see, if these women really HATED the priest, they would have doused him with something OTHER than water... What THEY did was make a POLITICAL point... What they DID was civil disobedience. Dissent is one of the HIGHEST forms of patriotism..

Excon

Looks like assault to me .

Actually it fits the legal definition of 'battery'
Battery generally requires that:
1.an offensive touching or contact is made upon the victim, instigated by the actor; and
2.the actor intends or knows that his action will cause the offensive touching.

Hello again, tom:


looks like assault to me .Yeah, water..

Excon

As long as they're on the left you guys can justify all sorts of bad behavior. But no this was not "civil disobedience," they would have to be defying civil authority for that to be the case, I don't know why you can't discern simple things today. No sir, that was assault on a private individual, another exercise in hatred in the alleged crusade against hate.

As long as they're on the left you guys can justify all sorts of bad behavior. But no this was not "civil disobedience," they would have to be defying civil authority for that to be the case, I dunno why you can't discern simple things today. No sir, that was assault on a private individual, another exercise in hatred in the alleged crusade against hate.

This is an overseas example. Is anyone, or any group involved in this bad incident claiming they are involved in a crusade against hate?

This is an overseas example. Is anyone, or any group involved in this bad incident claiming they are involved in a crusade against hate?

Does being overseas matter? These are radical feminists and if you'd read the article their attack on this priest was to "stop homophobia," so I think that qualifies as a crusade against hate as defined by the left.

as defined by the leftWhat is "the left"?

Really? SMH...

No really, how do you define the expression "the left"? It would be useful since you use it constantly.

Hello again,

I don't know... I've been asking my fellow libs if they HATE somebody, would they throw water on them, or would they try to HURT them...

Guess what? They said if they wanted to make a POLITICAL point, they'd throw water.. If they wanted to make a PERSONAL point, they'd throw knives..

I don't know WHY you don't understand HATE... HATE isn't political. You don't throw water when you HATE somebody... You throw them in OVENS...

excon

Hello again,

I dunno... I've been asking my fellow libs if they HATE somebody, would they throw water on them, or would they try to HURT them...

Guess what? They said if they wanted to make a POLITICAL point, they'd throw water.. If they wanted to make a PERSONAL point, they'd throw knives..

I dunno WHY you don't understand HATE... HATE isn't political. You don't throw water when you HATE somebody... You throw them in OVENS...

excon

I don't go to my friends to reach a consensus on what something means in their world, it's already defined.

Hate (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hate): to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest: to hate the enemy; to hate bigotry.

Hate doesn't have to involve anything physical, but their actions were a manifestation of pure hate. You aren't going to win this one no matter how you equivocate. You know the old saying, you can solve a problem if you refuse to admit there is one.

Ah I get it, hate is what I read in the Current Events board, like those who exhibit extreme hostility towards all things/persons liberal.

Ah I get it, hate is what I read in the Current Events board, like those who exhibit extreme hostility towards all things/persons liberal.

Obviously you don't, we're just having a discussion and at the end of the day it's nothing personal, until they can't compete with me in fantasy baseball.

Nah, it's not a discussion, it's an echo chamber of hate. Can't you see it?
Does your mindset ever change due to the discussion? Of course it doesn't; that's how it is with bigotry.

Nah, it's not a discussion, it's an echo chamber of hate. Can't you see it?
Does your mindset ever change due to the discussion? Of course it doesn't; that's how it is with bigotry.

Thanks for the demo, I don't know why you feel the need to make my point for me but I appreciate it.

I see what you're trying to do, but it's not working.
You can't solve a problem if you refuse to admit there is one.

No I'm quite certain you're just clueless.

Your personal attacks just bounce off me. :D
It means you have nothing else to offer.

Do you really not have anything more to offer than ankle-biting? It really floors me that this website doesn't give a rat's a$$ about your behavior. Go ahead mods, flag me again for standing up to his bullsh*t.

You mean like you posting "You first"?

You stand up to me big man!

You have no class, dude, and neither does a website that tolerates your constant goading and personal attacks. But thanks again for validating my point.

Does being overseas matter? These are radical feminists and if you'd read the article their attack on this priest was to "stop homophobia," so I think that qualifies as a crusade against hate as defined by the left.

Well it actually does in this case. Given the fact that you have said that the aim of the this thread is to show how the left is by mounting a crusade against hate while at the same time exercising their hatred.

In order to be consistent with your assessment of the thread you would need to demonstrate that the overseas example has in place a similar, "crusade against hate" and they are in fact hypocritical in this respect.

So its not actually a crusade against hate in the overseas example you give. It is actually (as you point out ) a crusade against homophobia. You are conflating the positions to demonstrate a point.

Personally the only difference I see in Femen and US anti-hate crusaders is they do it topless. I'll stand on my previous comments.

Personally the only difference I see in Femen and US anti-hate crusaders is they do it topless. I'll stand on my previous comments.

Of course you don't see the difference and of course you stand by your previous comments. Of course you'll never see it any other way.

The reason for this has already been pointed out.

I see no reason to back down when I believe I'm right and you're simply nitpicking.

I see no reason to back down when I believe I'm right and you're simply nitpicking.

If it is nitpicking then you could try a rebuttal of the main points of my argument.

Tut, half the time I don't even understand your point, I'm a simple guy. If your point is the difference between a "crusade against hate" and a "crusade against homophobia" it depends on one's view of homophobia. In this country homophobia is another synonym for "hate", and given the behavior of Femen toward this priest I think I can safely assume that's how they perceive it as well. I stand on my previous comments.

Tut, half the time I don't even understand your point, I'm a simple guy. If your point is the difference between a "crusade against hate" and a "crusade against homophobia" it depends on one's view of homophobia. In this country homophobia is another synonym for "hate", and given the behavior of Femen toward this priest I think I can safely assume that's how they perceive it as well. I stand on my previous comments.

OK, then sorry about the nitpicking

RGIII must be one of those uppity fellows ex mentioned. He offered this Tweet (https://twitter.com/RGIII/status/329334674402967552)yesterday:


In a land of freedom we are held hostage by the tyranny of political correctness

Apparently that didn't go over too well with some (http://twitchy.com/2013/04/30/awesome-redskins-qb-rgiii-blasts-tyranny-of-political-correctness/). Doesn't he know he can't get out of step with real blacks?

Who?

What's your point?

What's your point?

Just keeping up with current events.

who?

Robert Griffin III (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGIII)

Never heard of him. Why does his opinion matter again?

Never heard of him. Why does his opinion matter again?

As if yours does?

As part of the district-wide “Day Without Hate", Evergreen Middle School in Colorado invited the Earth Guardians - child activists - who earlier took over a Boulder County Commissioners meeting (http://energy.i2i.org/2012/12/11/hate-fuels-fracking-debate/), to enlighten the students with, an anti-fracking rap.

hBKKPYgA0oM

Yep, get 'em while they're young and twist their minds. Whatever happened to education?

Education that fracking is bad, very progressive, now if we could just educate them that f... ing is bad

It's bad enough they allowed this crap in a public school system or felt a need to sponsor a "Day Without Hate" instead of teaching what them math, but why in the hell are people using children to do their wacko activist bidding? These kids didn't come up with this on their own, they were coached.

Hello again, Steve:


Yep, get 'em while they're young and twist their minds. Whatever happened to education?Yeah, it's better to send 'em to Sunday School where they can get a proper education. Home schooling is even better. That way you can TOTALLY indoctrinate them.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, it's better to send 'em to Sunday School where they can get a proper education. Home schooling is even better. That way you can TOTALLY indoctrinate them.

excon

Because parents have no rights and their children don't belong to them anyway. What the hell is it about libs that they think anyone BUT the parents should teach their children and instill values?? Really?? And before you say it we've already been down that road, no I will not interfere if parents want to raise little liberals, that's their business.

Nobody said that and you took a commercial entirely out of context. Mellissa Perry and others on the left promotes community cooperation for the benefit of kid, that empowers parents through support systems.

I don't care what context it was in, that was a offensive and irresponsible thing to say, that we have to get over this idea that children belong to their parents. There is NO context that can make that any less egregious. Not to mention the FACT that the left works tirelessly at undermining parental authority at every turn, in school, abortion, sexually and otherwise.

The left only want parents that toe the liberal line, they are positively horrified at the idea of sending children to schools other than your controlled public school atmosphere. This idea that her promo was taken out of context and meant something else is laughable, it wasn't an off the cuff remark, it was planned, edited and ran without anyone raising a red flag. She was saying out loud what progressives have been thinking all along - you want the state to raise children, not parents.