Said Clint Eastwood, quoted at The Guardian.
At Salon, Sophia A. McClennen — a professor who "writes on the intersections between culture, politics, and society" — takes a shot:
Eastwood’s aggressive cowboy bravado has come to stand for a tremendously vicious attitude among a loud faction of the GOP. These extremists return again and again to the idea that, if you disagree with someone, shooting them might be the best option. Recall, for instance, that Sarah Palin had a website called “Target of Opportunity” that used gun-sight symbols over contested congressional districts. One of those districts was the one belonging to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot at point-blank range during a meet and greet event in a Tucson-area Safeway parking lot...I know Eastwood has played a cowboy in a number of motion pictures — some pretty great movies — but I read his remark about Charlton Heston as not cowboy at all. It seems gently caring about an ailing old man. And Heston — in that Michael Moore documentary — came across not as any kind of bully but as an amiable old man who might have thought nice people had come to visit with him. It was Moore who tricked his way in with ill intentions to get footage that could be edited against Heston. Here's what Moore extracted for his movie "Bowling for Columbine" that prompted Eastwood to go a little edgy with a gun-related joke:
Death threat jokes like Eastwood’s and Palin’s are clearly a sign of not-so-repressed desires for violence.....
What is most disturbing about this turn in U.S. politics is that extremist Republicans now bully, threaten, and aggressively attack anyone they disagree with....
पोस्ट्स
८९ टिप्पण्या:
Self defense is so last century.
The left always projects. The hate and violence are almost exclusively on their side.
They always accuse the "other side" of whatever wrongdoing they are perpetrating.
"Sarah Palin had a website called “Target of Opportunity” that used gun-sight symbols over contested congressional districts. One of those districts was the one belonging to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot at point-blank range during a meet and greet event in a Tucson-area Safeway parking lot..."
That statement is so disingenuous, very misleading, liberals have a projection problem.
Dead commies. Nothing wrong with that.
OT: News media continue to lie and mislead on behalf of their false narrative.
Recall, for instance, that Sarah Palin had a website called “Target of Opportunity” that used gun-sight symbols over contested congressional districts. One of those districts was the one belonging to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot at point-blank range during a meet and greet event in a Tucson-area Safeway parking lot...
Did the collective liar left ever prove that Jared Loughner went to Palin's web site?
Michael Moore is an asshole.
What?
Everyone is thinking it. I would have thought it would be the first comment.
Who does what he did to Heston?!? If you have ever walked the walk with a loved one who is suffering from Alzheimer's, you'd understand why Moore is an asshole. Actually you don't need the Alzheimer's/Heston asshattery...
"if somebody was on your property"
It's right there in Eastwood's quote. Why is Salon deaf to that? I could think of a few reasons, but who cares? I'm so tired of the Left/Right News services not hearing each other (or refusing to, for the outrage clicks). I'm running out of f***s to give.
I read a NYTimes article the other day, and the headline included "target and cross-hair".
Is the NYTimes guilty of inspiring violence?
"Recall, for instance, that Sarah Palin had a website called “Target of Opportunity” that used gun-sight symbols over contested congressional districts. One of those districts was the one belonging to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot at point-blank range during a meet and greet event in a Tucson-area Safeway parking lot..."
But please don't recall, for the sake of my hit piece, that the two had nothing to do with each other.
Senator Barack Obama was fund-raising Friday night in Philadelphia. But he was talking about “the Chicago way.”
Channeling the mob drama, “The Untouchables,” Mr. Obama said in reference to the general election rumble with the Republicans: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”
https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/14/obama-we-bring-a-gun/
Leftist progressive neo-fascists grab on to their false narratives and never let go.
Karen of Texas is right. The MSM should ignore this guy. He feeds on controversy. Unappealing. And that baseball cap. Gag.
The fact that Michael Moore is a liberal is enough to drive decent people to conservatism..
Death threat jokes like Eastwood’s and Palin’s are clearly a sign of not-so-repressed desires for violence.....
As opposed to our leftie "friends," who have a not-in-the-least-bit-repressed desire for violence.
I'll ask again.
Did the collective left ever prove that Jared Loughner went to Sarah Palin's web site?
I hear comments about the hoped for assassination of you know who from my daughter's millennial friends maybe once a month.
" that prompted Eastwood to go a little edgy with a gun-related joke."
Awww, he was just funnin'!
Thanks, Ann. Needed a good chuckle this morning.
Would like to see Michael Moore pull that with this guy.
Most Armed Man in America Dragonman's on FB
Some day I hope to visit his museum in Colorado Springs.
Moore is not a liberal, he's a rat-B lying progressive democrat communist.
Moore rolls into Cuba and sings the praises of communist health care, ignoring the suffering by ordinary Cubans under the thumb of the oppressive communist dictatorship.
Moore(D) is a liar.
Absolutely no introspection and nothing but projection from the Left.
I hate to be the one to break it to you honey...but all of the violence, real and threatened, is coming from the Left....
a professor who "writes on the intersections between culture, politics, and society"
IOW, a bogus professor.
This Penn State drivel really calls for more extended fisking by our hostess.
The tone-deaf response to the "edgy" Eastwood comment on Moore, the usual smears against "vicious" GOPers, the recitation of fake-news anti-Palin BS, the un-self-aware projection of "desires for violence," the attribution of attacks on "anyone they disagree with" to the right at a time when all such attacks come from the left . . . It's yet another illustration of "progressive" insanity.
Possibly Prof. McClennen could have a human explain the concept of 'humor' to her.
Shoot Michael Moore? Well, OK. But there's no sport in it.
Remember when the violent, hateful right made a film imagining what would happen if Barack Obama was murdered?
I stopped early in the video of the interview, when agreeable Mr. Heston responded to an early question with a dazzling smile. I wondered how a man of his age could retain such physical beauty and charisma. I didn't want to go further and see nasty Michael try to hurt this magnificent old man.
"Death threat jokes like Eastwood’s and Palin’s are clearly a sign of not-so-repressed desires for violence....."
Death threats? I'm sure she writes often of 'microagression', too, like the menacing stare or the intimidating raised eyebrow.
Salon closed the comment thread after allowing 2.
I hope that someday somebody can grow rich by humiliating Mr. Moore in his hour of need and weakness, as he has so profitably done to others far better than he could ever hope to be.
Yes: not very Christian of me. I denounce myself. But Moore has earned that kind of payback.
"a loud faction of the GOP. These extremists return again and again to the idea that, if you disagree with someone, shooting them might be the best option"
And yet, the violence is almost all on the Dem side. Antifa "activists" with masks and clubs.
"These extremists return again and again to the idea that, if you disagree with someone, shooting them might be the best option."
So the professor can't tell the difference between someone disagreeing with them and barging into their house with a film crew?
I'll bet she could when the time finally comes that it's her house.
That passage is wrong on so many levels that it must be willful:
Eastwood’s aggressive cowboy bravado has come to stand for a tremendously vicious attitude among a loud faction of the GOP. These extremists return again and again to the idea that, if you disagree with someone, shooting them might be the best option.
a) since when is protecting yourself and property "aggressive cowboy bravado"?
b) since when is protecting yourself and property "tremendously vicious attitude among a loud faction of the GOP"?
c) since when is protecting yourself and property "extremist"?
d) since when is protecting yourself and property "if you disagree with someone, shooting them might be the best option"?
None of that is what he said. He said "I think once years ago somebody asked me what would I do if a guy like him came to my house with a whole film crew and started filming away like he did with Charlton Heston. Unfortunately, Charlton Heston was ill at the time with Alzheimer’s. But I thought if somebody was on your property, you could shoot him."", i.e. trespassing onto private property and filming without permission. That is not "protesting speech", that is protecting yourself, property, and privacy.
I guess Sophia A. McClennen would be fine with me and a few friends showing up at her place, uninvited, and start filming her and asking her questions, right?
Death threat jokes like Eastwood’s and Palin’s are clearly a sign of not-so-repressed desires for violence.....
It's interesting she has no condemnation for the blackshirts committing actual violence in support of the left.
Rick said... [hush][hide comment]
Death threat jokes like Eastwood’s and Palin’s are clearly a sign of not-so-repressed desires for violence.....
It's interesting she has no condemnation for the blackshirts committing actual violence in support of the left.
4/4/17, 9:56 AM
Well wait just one minute there fella! There is a HUGE difference between an old conservative man stating an opinion on principles, rights, and morals AND young thugs committing actual acts of violence and mayhem in support of a fascist political cause! The first is never justifiable (to a lefty) and the second always is.
First, what tremendous bullshit: "death threats like Palin's." Sorry to say, but that's fake news. Like, that's the definition, I think--that's propaganda.
Second, why is it documentaries like Moore's are never described as "heavily edited?" Last week when stories about CA's ridiculous charges against the people who carried out an undercover video operation on Planned Parenthood were running I'm pretty sure ALL of those stories used the phrases "heavily edited" or "deceptively edited." Now, I happen to know that group released the full, unedited footage as well as a short, edited versions suitable for news reports, etc, but put that aside for a moment. Put aside also that every Media story that runs is edited in some way. Let's focus on this: why is Moore's work never described as "heavily edited?"
I mean, he himself is described as heavy, sure. But I can't remember hearing some newsreader say "Moore's heavily edited documentary alleges..." or anything like that. Why?
Is there a reason why this is news today? Clint Eastwood didn't shoot Michael Moore did he?
Heston came across gentle in that documentary, but more importantly it was hard to understand exactly what Moore's point was. For example, he points out that Columbine was near weapons contractors, and that it is easy to get a gun on the same day you open a bank account (since disproved allegations) but then he sort of undoes his anti-gun point by noting that Canadians have more guns per person than we do but a much lower crime rate. Then he focuses on how we're such a racist society because we put too much emphasis on black crime (though Canada has a much smaller black population than we have).
So what does that leave us? We're just hopelessly violent? Guns aren't the problem, we are? But we should restrict guns anyway? Besides being a disingenuous documentary (e.g. the Heston scene) it was also a mess in terms of narrative.
All of us have repressed desires for violence. I certainly do.
Virtue is in the repressing, the denial of the natural urge.
This is a cause of many modern psychological problems, a tradeoff for the benefits of civilization.
Anyway, realistically, an old retired man usually has very little to lose, with very few exceptions he is a fifth wheel, and this is so even if he tries to be helpful. And this is regardless of his wealth, as of course you cant take it with you.
Murdering someone like Moore in the act seems like it would be a fine public service as the culmination of ones life, and this is not specific to Moore. Spending the rest of ones days in prison and in legal troubles does not seem worse than the usual troubles of age, if taken with a serene acceptance of the inevitable. A pagan Roman would have thought so, and would have been constrained only by the risk to his progeny and the reputation of his house.
But without family and reputation, the only constraint on a vengeful old man in this modern world is Christianity.
One may disagree with Eastwood's words, but you notice that Moore has stayed well away from Carmel, California.
We live in a post truth world. The truth used to be that those were death threats by Palin, but now there are many who question that obvious truth.
Science!
How Fat Must a Human Be to Stop a Speeding Bullet?
This may be a question not many people have asked themselves, and it may sound crazy, too. But in theory, if a human being were covered in a layer of fat thick enough, a bullet could be stopped from reaching vital parts of the body.
The Cavendish Laboratory at the University of Cambridge really performed such a test for The Naked Scientist website, where they attempted to calculate exactly how fat should a man, or woman, be in order to be able to be shot and live to tell the tale.
The degree of resistance of a material depends on the chemical compounds it's made of, how they are layered, the caliber and composition of the bullet, the powder load of the cartridge (which affects its speed), and other factors, such as weather.
Mostly, the main effective way of stopping projectiles from penetrating a person's body is to diffuse the bullet's impulse energy, so that the final impact causes little or no damage at all. That means you have to find a way to absorb the bullet's energy once it's been shot from a gun.
The fatty (or adipose) tissue is the human body's means of storing metabolic energy over extended periods of time. In fact, fats in the body are nature's way of insulating body organs against shock, among other functions. But scientists really wanted to know how thick the layer of fat must be to completely dissipate the impact energy of a bullet.
For this, they used a perspex tube which was filled with gelatin, having a density similar to fat, much like the ballistic gel used to create molds of human bodies for various testing. A bullet was fired at the 36 centimeters (1.1 ft) thick gelatin tube, from a gas gun, a chamber filled with high pressure helium, that expands extremely rapidly forcing the bullet out of the barrel at supersonic speeds.
The speed of the bullet was recorded at around 500 m/s (1600 ft/s). The exit speed was calculated at 180 m/s (550 ft/s). The result is disappointing for all Superman wannabes. A person would have to have a layer of fat at least 72 centimeters (2.2 ft) thick to be able to take a bullet and live.
So it's better to just use a bulletproof vest if you want to get into a shooting and get out of it alive.
Lets see that violence against opposition ledger again.
Lefty projections die hard.
Recall, for instance, that Sarah Palin had a website called “Target of Opportunity” that used gun-sight symbols over contested congressional districts.
Sophia A. McClennen — a professor who "writes on the intersections between culture, politics, and society" — (A professor of what? Not mathematics, of that I'm certain.) is either ignorant or a liar, probably both. Those gunsight (no need to hyphenate, professor) symbols are standard registration marks used in publishing. Only someone who has never used a telescopic gunsight would confuse them.
A person would have to have a layer of fat at least 72 centimeters (2.2 ft) thick to be able to take a bullet and live.
Michael Moore has nothing to fear from Clint Eastwood.
If they think Trump's cute jokes are what incites violent men, what are they gonna do with the Video Games sold today.
"One may disagree with Eastwood's words, but you notice that Moore has stayed well away from Carmel, California."
I'm pretty sure Moore doesn't want to make Clint Eastwood's day.
"Those gunsight (no need to hyphenate, professor) symbols are standard registration marks used in publishing."
I have been trying to delete them from my book to convert it to Kindle. They are all in the pdf files that went to the printer.
I doubt the "professor" has ever published a book.
"I hear comments about the hoped for assassination of you know who from my daughter's millennial friends maybe once a month."
They've just been "prompted to go a little edgy" with such jokes, is all.
"Remember when the violent, hateful right made a film imagining what would happen if Barack Obama"
As yes, that time Bush filmmakers were just funnin around, for they'd been "prompted to go a little edgy" with a gun joke.
Never mind that the Left always seems to engage in Assassination Pr0n whenever a Republican sits in the White House. Never mind that there was already one attempt on Trump's life by a deranged Leftist during the campaign - OK, it was terribly inept, but it was in earnest.
Michael K,
It's likely that the professor hasn't self "published" any books anyway.
THOU SHALL NOT KILL means what it says. Killing animals for sport is wrong, so hunting and trapping must stop, and the heinous perpetrators must be incarcerated. Keeping a loaded gun around has a downside as Michael Moore pointed out - a child may kill someone or themselves.
However, guns are important for self-defense, suicide, revolution and revenge. There are probably other legitimate uses, but I won't speculate.
Moore first showed Charlton that he was a card-carrying member of the NRA, then lashed out at Heston for his dangerous loaded guns, and allegedly being insensitive to gun violence such as the tragedy at Columbine. Moore also suggest that Heston was insulated from gun-violence reality by living in affluent Beverly Hills. Moore wanted Heston to suddenly become a sociologist and explain gun violence in America.
I didn't think much of Michael Moore's stunt, but to suggest he be murdered is crude, ugly, and a capital crime in most states.
Trumpit said...THOU SHALL NOT KILL means what it says. Killing animals for sport is wrong, so hunting and trapping must stop, and the heinous perpetrators must be incarcerated.
And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, 11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: 12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. 13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common
"THOU SHALT NOT KILL" is a mistranslation of the actual Hebrew. Unless you're one of those King James Versionist morons?
And we all know that Hollywood never glorifies violence in any way.
Did the collective liar left ever prove that Jared Loughner went to Palin's web site?
Nope. There was no connection. That's what makes it so amusing when they seek to "inform" us.
Steven asserts: "THOU SHALT NOT KILL" is a mistranslation of the actual Hebrew. Unless you're one of those King James Versionist morons?
The proper translation is 'murder'.
but to suggest he be murdered is crude, ugly, and a capital crime in most states.
Just to be clear...
You are asserting that if you suggest that Michael Moore be murdered, you can be arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to death?
Where?
I think someone should throw Michael Moore feet first into a wood chipper.
Do I need to hire a lawyer?
Moore is not to be trusted. Don't let him interview you.
(Trumpit said I didn't think much of Michael Moore's stunt, but to suggest he be murdered is crude, ugly, and a capital crime in most states.
Pretty sure suggesting someone be murdered is not a capital crime in most states.
In fact, merely suggesting it would be good if someone did, without telling people "go do that", would be ... protected 1st Amendment speech in every state.
Because America.)
Gahrie asks: I think someone should throw Michael Moore feet first into a wood chipper. Do I need to hire a lawyer?
And if I agree, does that make me an accessory to murder?
"I think someone should throw Michael Moore feet first into a wood chipper.
Do I need to hire a lawyer?"
If you are making a "terrorist threat" against Moore, you could be in trouble with the law. If you are inciting violence against him, you can also be charge. So, I think you should be thrown in a wood chipper for your comments. I want to make clear that it is no more than a fervent wish that you die painfully. I have no plans to kill you, nor do I encourage anyone to actually kill you, but you certainly deserve to die in my opinion, and if you are convicted of said crimes, I would be ecstatic.
We are not, after all, living in the days of Henry II.
I hope I live long enough to see the day when it is reported that somebody put about nine .22s into Moore's skull. I'd party like an Arab on 9/11.
Trumpit!
You are in violation of blog terms.
"try to be responsive to the post, don't make personal attacks on other commenters,"
vanderleun, I hope you die the same way. You are disgusting.
Again!
Pizza the Hut doesn't need shooting.
His heart is pumping buttermilk.
Fatass is killing himself.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terroristic_threat
The term of art is "terroristic threat," not to be confused with terrorist threat.
Don't be an ass, Walter. These nasty commentators are suggesting Michael Moore be murdered because that have no words to explain why they hate him so. They talk big like, Trump, but they are simply intolerant _____. Walter, you can fill in the blank with your favorite derogatory noun.
Walter doesn't understand Trumpit's comments.
Sad!
Yeah..wishing commenters here to die is pretty nuanced. I just. don't. understand.
"Sophia" means "wisdom," supposedly, but apparently not in that professor's case.
I think someone should throw Michael Moore feet first into a wood chipper.
You'll need a crane.
A self published book is a book written.
Demented men can support murderous policy, too.
Was Heston senile when he was an NRA spokesperson, their icon?
Fuck this post it makes no sense. Heston was the turd who was brought in to bring respectability to an organization devoted to making sure that terrorists and the mentally ill have access to as many guns as it takes to make people think that frequent massacres of our innocent youth are unavoidable. The fact that he was thought to be a little, er, more mentally ill than before when his voluntary on-screen comments and reactions were made is actually oddly fitting.
Clint's joke about Killing Moore is hilarious.
Personally, after watching the video, I'd settle for a good horsewhipping.
Right-wingers don't have humor. They have sadism and masochism.
And I have news for Moore, the Germans DO NOT have a history of killing each other using private firearms.
They have a history of their Government killing foreigners.
Its the same with the English. In the late 19th century you could own a machine gun in England and there was still very little murder.
"I mean, he himself is described as heavy, sure. But I can't remember hearing some newsreader say "Moore's heavily edited documentary alleges..." or anything like that. Why?"
They want you to know the falsehoods you speak are ridiculous but that you are forced to say them anyway against your will, or just impotently ask "why" like a child.
That is how they know they control you.
Why do they want to control you?
Because they can.
"Right-wingers don't have humor. They have sadism and masochism."
I thought we owned bondage too. Did we cede away the slaves I put in chains or something? Those chains aren't cheap friendo.
Maybe I will use zip ties next time.
I remember being a kid and thinking that documentaries were supposed to be non-fiction.
What finally drove me batshit was convicting Trump of Obama's crimes.
Bastards.
"Right-wingers don't have humor."
Ha! Pretty rich coming from the side of the spectrum where triggering and safe spaces were born.
(I think Alzheimers should be enough to secure one a safe space)
Michael "The Whale" Moore is lower than whale shit. Always has been.
Moore is a jerk and Heston apparently was a very nice and kind man. My wife had some business dealings with him over several media days (she was his host) and reported he was a very nice man. He also wrote her a kind and funny thank you note after the visit.
I found this video fascinating. The diminished Heston still came across as smart and nice, with good judgment. Moore at some level seemed to sense that what he was doing was very wrong and seemed to hold back. Maybe he is not quite a monster. At the end, when Heston had the good judgment to leave, Moore became worse, trying to tie a dead child to Heston, but Heston still had the good sense to keep walking. Overall, a win for Heston and a loss for Moore on many levels. And, if this was a version edited by Moore, imagine how well Heston must have done in the part that was cut out.
If, by chance, someone were to actually shoot Michael Moore, it would not be inappropriate to awarded them the Congressional Medal of Honor. Not that I'm saying anyone should waste effort or ammo on the project.
Did the collective liar left ever prove that Jared Loughner went to Palin's web site?
Still waiting for the truth.
Ah poor Ritmo - he's tormented by his devotion to his leftist bent, but cannot bring himself to admit that Moore is a creep and a liar, and that Jared Loughner never ventured into Sarah Palin's web site.
Sort of off point but CNN and the mainstream media's reaction to the Susan Rice story is amazing. They immediately either refuse to cover it or dispute it. They don't even care about truth or objectivity anymore.
There is only one proper reaction. Unmasking by Susan Rice is now being reported based on leaks. Rice said two weeks ago she had not information on the issue. Yesterday, she confirmed that she sometimes initiate unmasking, but denied that she did the unmasking, only that she did it for political reasons. We do not yet have information to confirm or dispute Rice's denial.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा