Father of Columbine victim states conservative point of view on CBS

[ProfJohn]

What she said

We also knew some might even find it repugnant.

Notice she does not say some of you said YOU found it repugnant.
No, she inserts the word repugnant in order to imply that some might feel that way.

There is a difference.
repugnant:
1. distasteful, objectionable, or offensive:

That is Katie's implication, not that of her views, or else she would have said so.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Rush on CBS 'freespeech'

It is time to face a hard cold fact: Militant Islam wants to kill us just because we are alive and don't believe as they do. And they have been killing us for decades. It is time to stop pretending these are mere episodic events and face the reality that our way of life is in grave danger. This threat will not just go away because we choose to ignore it.

Some say we try diplomacy. Tell me, how do we negotiate with people whose starting point is our death? Ask them to wait for 10 years, before they kill us? When Good negotiates with Evil, Evil will always wins.

And peace follows victory, not words issued by diplomats.

Unfortunately, some Americans are not interested in victory. And they want us to believe that their irresponsible behavior is Patriotic. Well, it's not.

When the critics are more interested in punishing this country over a relatively few incidents at Abu Grahib and Guantanimo than they are in defeating those who want to kill us; when they seek to destroy a foreign surveillance program which is designed to identify those who want to kill us and how they intend to do it; when they want to grant those who want to kill us U.S. constitutional rights, I don't call that patriotic.

Patriotism is rallying behind the country, regardless of party affiliation, to defeat Islamo-Fascism. Patriotism is supporting our troops on the battlefield, not undermining the mission and morale.

But let there be no doubt about this. America will prevail. We are the same America that survived a massively bloody Civil War, defeated the Nazis, and the Soviet Union. Each generation has a responsibility to the next. Our generation won't disappoint.

Hey, Zendari - can you do more than post more quotes?

 

[ProfJohn]

From the Washington Post article I linked earlier

Rome Hartman, the newscast's executive director, said he was "surprised" by Rohrbough's remarks and "of course I knew that his remarks would be controversial, perhaps even offensive to some. I also knew that some people in our audience would agree with him. I also thought to myself, 'This is "Free Speech." We don't tell people what to say or what to think.' . . . I decided to run the segment."

You see what he says compared to what Katie says? "I knew that his remarks would be controversial, perhaps even offensive to some. " While Katie implies they are repugnant, not saying that some views saw it that way, it was Katie's judgement that people would see it as repugnant.

On CBS, Columbine Dad Blames Violence on Secularism

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Hey, Zendari - can you do more than post more quotes?

Who the hell is Zandari? Some character on Babylon 5??? Get over yourselfs already.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
What she said

We also knew some might even find it repugnant.

Notice she does not say some of you said YOU found it repugnant.
No, she inserts the word repugnant in order to imply that some might feel that way.

There is a difference.
repugnant:
1. distasteful, objectionable, or offensive:

That is Katie's implication, not that of her views, or else she would have said so.

Wow.. you even have me confused.. What the hell did she do wrong

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
From the Washington Post article I linked earlier

Rome Hartman, the newscast's executive director, said he was "surprised" by Rohrbough's remarks and "of course I knew that his remarks would be controversial, perhaps even offensive to some. I also knew that some people in our audience would agree with him. I also thought to myself, 'This is "Free Speech." We don't tell people what to say or what to think.' . . . I decided to run the segment."

You see what he says compared to what Katie says? "I knew that his remarks would be controversial, perhaps even offensive to some. " While Katie implies they are repugnant, not saying that some views saw it that way, it was Katie's judgement that people would see it as repugnant.

On CBS, Columbine Dad Blames Violence on Secularism

Cry me a river. Talk about much ado about nothing. Your thread title is completely misleading, and your reading comprehension would get you a C- in a junior-high English class.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Hey, Zendari - can you do more than post more quotes?

Who the hell is Zandari? Some character on Babylon 5??? Get over yourselfs already.

I'm shocked more people haven't seen it as well... Maybe you should post more quotes to cover your tracks....

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Who the hell is Zandari? Some character on Babylon 5??? Get over yourselfs already.

"Yourselfs"? Are they calling fired shop-class teachers "professor" nowadays?

 

[her209]

LOL. So this guy is claiming that the shootings in school is due to immorality being taught in the schools, secularism in the government, greenlighting abortions, etc. So how does he explain away the school shooting at the Amish school? :laugh:

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: her209
LOL. So this guy is claiming that the shootings in school is due to immorality being taught in the schools, secularism in the government, greenlighting abortions, etc. So how does he explain away the school shooting at the Amish school? :laugh:

umm.....the shooter was a truck driver, since when did truck drivers attend an Amish school?

 

[umbrella39]

Nice to see you going for your old record of 1000 post in 3 months time PJ. One of these accounts err times, you'll get it right. :roll: It's amazing that someone who has posted so many times over the years has so little to say. Here's to your next permaban :beer:

 

[slash196]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Saw this on O'Reilly tonight so I went over to CBS and got the info.
If you remember the TV coverage of Columbine this man's son was the one laying on the side walk outside the school for a few hours.
CBS started a new segment called "freesspeech" this is what he said:

I'm saddened and shaken by the shooting at an Amish school today, and last week?s school murders.

When my son Dan was murdered on the sidewalk at Columbine High School on April 20, 1999, I hoped that would be the last school shooting. Since that day, I?ve tried to answer the question, "Why did this happen?"

This country is in a moral free-fall. For over two generations, the public school system has taught in a moral vacuum, expelling God from the school and from the government, replacing him with evolution, where the strong kill the weak, without moral consequences and life has no inherent value.

We teach there are no absolutes, no right or wrong. And I assure you the murder of innocent children is always wrong, including by abortion. Abortion has diminished the value of children.

Suicide has become an acceptable action and has further emboldened these criminals. And we are seeing an epidemic increase in murder-suicide attacks on our children.

Sadly, our schools are not safe. In fact, we now witness that within our schools. Our children have become a target of terrorists from within the United States.

The evolution comment is in regards to the fact that killers at Columbine said on a video tape that what they were doing was "survival of the fittest" and one of them wore a shirt that said "Natural Selection"
FreeSpeech: Brian Rohrbough

That boy is severely insane, at least as insane as the Columbine shooters. He's just exploiting his son's death to get his crazy message out to people.

I can't believe these people are in control of our country right now. I can't believe we even allow them to vote.

 

[Termagant]

Someone's grasping for straws with his hands covered in oil....

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: her209
LOL. So this guy is claiming that the shootings in school is due to immorality being taught in the schools, secularism in the government, greenlighting abortions, etc. So how does he explain away the school shooting at the Amish school? :laugh:

umm.....the shooter was a truck driver, since when did truck drivers attend an Amish school?

Obviously, bad things only happen to bad people, i.e. people without faith.

 

[Termagant]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: her209
LOL. So this guy is claiming that the shootings in school is due to immorality being taught in the schools, secularism in the government, greenlighting abortions, etc. So how does he explain away the school shooting at the Amish school? :laugh:

umm.....the shooter was a truck driver, since when did truck drivers attend an Amish school?

Obviously, bad things only happen to bad people, i.e. people without faith.

Well, the Amish are very anti-war and anti-military, some Americans feel we are in a holy war doing God's will, so the Amish could be construed as unfaithful in that regard.

 

[Enig101]

Well he is a moron, but it seems acceptable for a program called "Free Speech".

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: her209
LOL. So this guy is claiming that the shootings in school is due to immorality being taught in the schools, secularism in the government, greenlighting abortions, etc. So how does he explain away the school shooting at the Amish school? :laugh:

Uhm Clinton...


On the other topic, he can say whatever he wants, but the fact taht his sone was killed in a school shooting doesn't give him any more credibility than any random person off the street.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
Nice to see you going for your old record of 1000 post in 3 months time PJ. One of these accounts err times, you'll get it right. :roll: It's amazing that someone who has posted so many times over the years has so little to say. Here's to your next permaban :beer:

Is this the best you guys can do? Call me somebody I have never heard of? How many times do I need to prove to you I am not some banned person come back to life?
I'm going to put this in my sig.... sheeeesh
Go to general hardware and search my name, first post was around 7-28 asking a computer question, over the next month I asked many questions before finally buying my nice new Gateway, that was why I joined this lovely site.
Then around August 28 or so I made my first post in P&N, you can search for that too.

So if I am some crazy guy back from the dead why spend a month asking computer questions before coming in here?

BTW: nothing I post is any worse than Harvey, Dave, straighttalker, Duhanan and that I.C.M. guy. So why all the hatred pointed at me? Anyone care to answer?

oh... while I am at it, I am not being paid to post here either, as I pointed out the other day the most recent thread with a lot of view sits at just over a 1000 views, why would anyone pay someone to post as much as I do in order to hit a couple of hundred people?

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Balt

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Can someone please explain why Couric would use the word repugnant when talking about what this guy said? He did not preach hate, and yet Katie has to treat him like he is some dangerous loony saying something so wrong and evil that it is "regugnant" what a shame.

She didn't say his views were repugnant, she just said that some viewers would perceive them that way (as many apparently did). This is like me saying (correctly) that some people feel that the deaths of American GIs are the result of our country angering God by tolerating homosexuality. Obviously I don't agree with that view, but it does exist.

Your reading comprehension is lower than mine was when I was in 4th grade. You must be a professor at Hamburger U.

Why use the word "repugnant"? Why not say some people would be upset? Why give it that negative of a connotation? Sort of like calling Foley a pedophile, it's not bad enough to say he is a pervert or someone who abuses his power, but we have to give him a false label to make him appear even worse, or to make the charges more salacious.

Katie knows that every word she uses will be examined, I am sure she knew how this comment would be viewed, maybe she was appealing to her left base by casting his comments in a negative light?

It's called being articulate. It's what she's paid to do. Just because our president can only communicate in the simplest possible terms doesn't mean everyone else has that limitation.

that didn't take long. for playing the Bush card :laugh:

 

[HomerJS]

Didn't the right also blame the killer tsnuamis on Liberalism?

 

[umbrella39]

PJ, save your energy. You have a lot of posting to do today. Aren't new ISP's wonderful? Give it a rest.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: DonVito
Where, exactly, did Katie Couric "go crazy"? Her comments in your post seem completely neutral. Is this just your typical dissembling? In this case it borders on libelous, since it's completely false, but I doubt that will slow you down.

In the "Professors" world, she went crazy, OK?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: umbrella39
Nice to see you going for your old record of 1000 post in 3 months time PJ. One of these accounts err times, you'll get it right. :roll: It's amazing that someone who has posted so many times over the years has so little to say. Here's to your next permaban :beer:

Is this the best you guys can do? Call me somebody I have never heard of? How many times do I need to prove to you I am not some banned person come back to life?
I'm going to put this in my sig.... sheeeesh
Go to general hardware and search my name, first post was around 7-28 asking a computer question, over the next month I asked many questions before finally buying my nice new Gateway, that was why I joined this lovely site.
Then around August 28 or so I made my first post in P&N, you can search for that too.

So if I am some crazy guy back from the dead why spend a month asking computer questions before coming in here?

BTW: nothing I post is any worse than Harvey, Dave, straighttalker, Duhanan and that I.C.M. guy. So why all the hatred pointed at me? Anyone care to answer?

oh... while I am at it, I am not being paid to post here either, as I pointed out the other day the most recent thread with a lot of view sits at just over a 1000 views, why would anyone pay someone to post as much as I do in order to hit a couple of hundred people?

Because this board is collectively leftist...the vast majority of convservative posters were banned for quite questionable reasons, yet there has never been one single prominent leftist poster banned (edit: well one, but he came back under a new ISP, I even proved beyond a reasonable doubt who he was. Umbrella39 nor anyone else took any umbrage at that of course, partisans one and all). I think myself and Corn are the only ones left standing, and that's cause we have polaroids of the mods

So folks like umbrella think they can pile on and try to get another ban in. You are the current target, because you are posting a lot of things they don't want to read. See, they love free speech, as long as it's a like-minded circle jerk.

 

[shadow9d9]

For the misleading titlle, this should be locked...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: alchemize

So folks like umbrella think they can pile on and try to get another ban in. You are the current target, because you are posting a lot of things they don't want to read. See, they love free speech, as long as it's a like-minded circle jerk.

Do you agree with PJ's defenses of Mark Foley? Do you agree, in the context of this thread, that Katie Couric "went crazy"? For whatever reason P&N sees several new radically conservative, low-quality posters every year, most of whom end up burning out and disappearing without a ban. PJ is just one more in that tradition IMO.