Jay Stephenson: wannabe murderer

Well, I was going to point out the obvious but it looks like someone beat me to it. I guess sometimes you have to stop looking at pictures and actually read the text.

Telling, isn’t it, that not only did he respond, not only did he not remove the picture, he hasn’t even removed the trackback link to your story from his site…

He’s removed it twice and you managed to get it placed in the same position on the list each time? Cool. Of course, he could probably just block your ID or your IP from linking if he was that determined to keep drivel off of his links list.

Which question do you want answered? All I saw in your entry was a bunch of accusations followed up by some empty, meaningless inquiries that served no basis for a serious discussion. Why should he feel inclined to answer your questions AFTER you’ve already slandered him? You’re not engaging him, you’re harrassing him.

Did I find it fall-down funny? No. Did I appreciate it as humor? Yes. STACLU and ADF (to my knowledge) have never gone after a lawyer or member of the Anti-Civil Liberties Union in any way outside of dealing with them on the issues. As someone who despises the ACLU, I viewed the photo, not as a call to kill lawyers, but as a metaphor for destroying the ACLU itself and I would suggest that any reasonable person without a personal axe to grind would also understand it to be just that.

Now don’t you think you’re being just a bit silly? Maybe trying a little too hard to generate some hits, to ride Jay’s coattails?

Really, what it is that you think that Jay is out to do? Run a website or go to prison? And what is it that you hope to accomplish (besides embarrassing yourself)? Get him to confess to you that he is conspiring to committ murder? Convince him to shut his site down because you’re ‘on to him’?

Give it up…

oh, i see now. twuz a joke. how hillairious! reminds me of proverbs 26:18-19:

18Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death
19is the man who deceives his neighbor

and says, “I am only joking!”

I am a conservative and agree that the “joke” was totally inappropriate. I listen to Rush and Laura Ingram and I find it hard to stomach the petty nic names, name calling, the repeated audio gaffs and the mimicry of leftist/Democrats. Its childish.

I fully understand where the venom comes from on the Right. This is because Leftist (i.e. all modern Democrats and their surogate legal group, the ACLU) essentially attack humanity’s basic values. Not everyone is going to calmly take an attack on their family values, but will have a normal, visceral reaction to such unrepentant human greed.

For me, I see it a little more calmly – modern Democrats have serious character flaws, no doubt about it. It explains a lot. Rather than these petty exchagnes, I would prefer putting Democrats in a place where they would be happier. I would like to see a 3/5ths Compromise for modern Democrats.

I am pretty sure that this was an amendment to the constitution trying to account for slave population. While it is a sorry episode in American history, its not inappropriate to apply to modern Democrats who thoroughly deserve to have their votes and status as citizens to be devaluated.

So, please dont take offense at the thoughtless joke on the other web site. Look beyond that to the future of something more appropriate, second or third class citizenship for people who hold values similar to modern Democrasts. At least your children, should you have any, or other children could then see a moral horizon. That horizon is mighty cloudy thanks to the ALCU.

Seriously, you would be happier, I think, as a second class citizen. Living in a free market economy is hard when you really dont know how to live as a human being. All those values you might hate, are actually what makes for a decent life.

Hope this explains things for you,

Kappy

Thanks for your quick response. Frankly, I am concerned that at this point the country is so polarized that factions have stopped talking to each other. For that reason I would like to follow up on this thread. At some point prior to our first Civil War, the nation probably reached the point where people just stopped talking. Kind of like now.

On the other hand, I doubt seriously that any argument from me will make a person suddently see an obvious concept if they have a character flaw the size and strength of a black hole in their head. As far as, say, traditional family values – a fequent target of ACLU, my work with foster children, observing effective and stable familes has provided the laboratory from which I make my observations.

What a contrast in human selfishness, pro abortion people (will you grant me that this is a ACLU issue?), idealogically ready to kill any featus, in the same room with my family and foster kids. Thats when reality of character choices hit home. I would imagine that its easy to retreat from that here. Those featuses dont have internet access.

I also doubt that any amount of facts about the threat of Iraq and Saddam will actually motivate anyone who has made up their mind that they will not protect anyone under any circumstances.

Its an interesting war we’re in. (Well, you may not even consider yourself in it, or care, but the US is at war with a nasty enemy). Its actually a propaganda war, for the most part.

So, let me think aloud here….if I were an newspaper publisher, TV network, or even a memeber of Congress, and I get up one morning I say to myself, ‘shall I support America’s enemies and pander for press, votes, honorable mention from Hamas, Iran, Cuba, Eurotrash, Democrats eventhough it will hurt the war effort, or shall I try to do my part to win the progragand war, and help save lives?’

For some people this is not a hard decision, but for others, its more a computation. The actual decision process is found in the third paragraph. Like I said, its a study in selfishness, whether you are talking about saving babies or soldiers.

Well, my friend, I think you are safe here. I will visit you from time to time. Reality is harsh, dont step outside of the blog. That first step is a “dusey.”

Kappy

first Civil War? I meant “Civil War”.

Well now, are you a lawyer for the aclu meathead?

If so I may seriously reconsider my stance on the comedic value of that ‘toon.

I am going to go ahead and say, since you have blocked my comments so it probably wont get past your moderation, but at least you can see it, that you are one of the most pathetic bloggers I have ever seen.

Most of your posts attack one of the members of TWA or STACLU, and those that don’t get very little commentary on them.

You are more pathetic as a human than the hardcore socialist tiwts I have sparred with from france, and THAT is really stating something.

Why don’t you learn to write something besides hollow attack pieces on your betters, son, and leave the thinking to the grownups?

HA….you still haven’t answered any of my questions!!!!

There are innumerable morons strewn all across America, including the huge segment of the populace that haunts the Internet. But people like Jay, Kender and their cronies are exceptional in that they are both bone-shatteringly stupid and aficionados of the political scene. Most bona fide numbskulls can’t be bothered to even follow public policy, much less craft semicoherent blogs about it; they prefer to sit in front of the tube watching NASCAR or go on hunting and fishing trips or whatnot. But not these fringe-dwellers of the Republican party masquerading as true conservatives. As you’ve seen, it’s a grisly (though sometimes amusing) combination. They can justify every hateful thing they say on the basis of it being either God’s will or the “real” interpretation of the Constitution, with logic and reason having absolutely no influence on their piss-soaked minds. Let ‘em have their blog; it’s written at a fifth-grade level and no one takes things like that seriously anyway except for the other zealots (who, unfortunately, are considerable in number).

Thinking meat? More like beating meat to me… Dunce. What a nonsensical thing to lay claim to. And all the more reason to find the Einstein photoshop funny.

What a maroon.

vFor what it’s worth, Mr. Meat, you and many of your comment posters (especially beaming visionary) would benefit from a few lessons in English grammar, punctuation, and usage. Frankly, you have a way to go before you can claim competence with our language.

You might also try a few classes in rhetoric, logic, and didactics. Your arguments are actually fairly weak in spite of your passion, which you allow to overwhelm your purpose. The problem you face (in your presumed search for credibility) is that you draw to your blog supporters (again like bv) who are even less articulate than you, but who know a lot of words they can’t use properly in sentences. This gives them a veneer of intelligence unsupported by substance—they’re two feet wide by a half inch deep. The fact is, some people really are educated way beyond their intelligence, and I’d say it’s mirror time around here.

But just to end on a positive note, I would guess you have real potential as a Peace Corps middle school teacher in the Amazon somewhere (that’s in South America) or if that’s not good for you, maybe as a research analyst for the ACLU, which seems to have the same problems you do knowing what really matters.

BTW, thanks for giving me something easy to write about—like swatting a fly stuck in syrup.

“You saw a single statement of fact: Jay Stephenson advocates the murder of ACLU lawyers.”

This whole post is built on this outrageous lie and purposeful misinterpretation—not a fact. Jay did not “advocate the murder” of ACLU lawyers, nor anything even close to it. He posted a photo-shopped picture of “rope+tree+ACLU lawyer = pinata” written on a blackboard, apparently by Einstein. Most people can reasonably assume that Eistein never was photographed writing that on a chalkboard (that makes it more funny). However, even people who don’t know about photoshop do know that tying a lawyer to a tree and beating him with sticks until he splits open will NOT result in candy pouring out onto the ground. So, he’s not really a pinata, he’s only like a pinata. That makes it funny, too.

Oh, goodness. Did I just advocate something terrible myself? Please don’t vilify me and point out my logical fallacies!! Woe is me!

Your article is a joke, right?