Amazing right? I guess in today's republican circles it's perfectly acceptable to discuss assassinating the president. I mean not even any dog whistle words or innuendo. Just come right out and ask when someone is going to put a bullet in the president’s head. weird times indeed
Come on, let's be fair. One of the man's colleagues was just shot in one of these townhall type meetings not too long ago. I'm sure he wasn't OK with the question but probably was so stunned by it and unprepared for it that he didn't really know how to address it. Is this guy crazy? Could he have a gun on him right now? What the hell am I supposed to say to that? Do others in this room agree with this guy? Am I in danger? I wish he would have condemned the question on the spot, but I'm not going to blast the guy for being uncomfortable/unprepared to do so in that circumstance.
I know nothing about Rep. Broun and he very well might be unprepared or even venal enough that he didn't want to take on the question but I find it troubling that he answered it and in a way that gave some justification to that sentiment.
a bit about Broun It is hardly surprising that some of Broun’s constituents would be talking about shooting Obama. Out of all of the members Congress, Broun has used perhaps the most vitriolic rhetoric to describe his political opponents, including Obama. He has previously said that Democrats want to take over “all of society,” that the president was spewing “venom” at the State of the Union, that the stimulus and health care laws were going to “kill” the elderly, that clean energy legislation would make southerners die from hyperthermia, and has compared Obama to Hitler, complete with a claim that the president is secretly assembling a version of the Hitler Youth.
OK, from those links I clicked through for perspective: On the "democrats want to take over all of society" line: context is the healthcare reform bill being discussed and further take over of American society by government. I fail to see how that is even relevant to the discussion of what kind of violence goes through the minds of his constituents. On the "venom" issue: That's a total misrepresentation as your link indicates he said Obama "was spewing venom" at the state of the union, when in reality he was preemptively discussing the matter and whether Dems and Reps should sit together at SOTU. His overall belief was that this was an idea drummed up by democrats to make it less obvious how many republicans would be in the chamber that disagreed with Obama. He never said Obama spewed venom this year, because he didn't. But based on last year's SOTU I don't think it would be unreasonable to expect that Obama would have said some things that a republican could consider venomous, like the SC decision allowing foreign companies to control our elections. Killing elderly and southerners: Silly perhaps, but it's not that he talked about any sort of violence from anyone. It's no worse than Grayson with his "republicans want you to die" speech on the floor. Should we be worried that his constituents are violent? The Hitler stuff: I hate the Hitler comparison being used and I hated it when people on this board used it to compare Bush him in the same technicality laden way this guy did. He didn't say Obama was like Hitler, he compared particular policies to being the type of policies Hitler supported, calling them "Hitler-like." That's a terrible comparison that I wish people would stop using, but how many democratic congressmen/senators have talked about things being similar to all sorts of violent acts in America and the world's past? Nothing in any of that rhetoric is any different than what you see from countless reps on both sides. At no time, NO TIME, did he say anything that should mean he thinks violence against Obama is justifiable.
As far as the health care reform and govt. taking over all of society, that is nuttery in itself. The health care reform is not a even a govt. takeover of health care let alone all of society. So for him to make that claim is nuttery, and it was nuttery for Grayson to make his claim. The difference is that Grayson's constituants don't go around talking about killing the President.
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/upvZdVK913I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> This guys just makes me think of this scene . . . actually the whole Republicans do right about now. Rocket River
Q: "Who is going to shoot Obama?" A: "The thing is, I know there's a lot of frustration with this president."
or justifying but definitely not condemning imagine this Q: "Who is going to shoot your family?" A: "The thing is, I know there's a lot of frustration with my family."
Why do teapublicans hate America? The GOP's New Constitutional Amendment: Give States Veto Power Over Federal Laws Republicans say they've found the problem in America -- and that problem is the basic framework of the Union as we know it today. A group of Republicans in the House and Senate are proposing an amendment to the Constitution that would allow a vote by two-thirds of the states' legislatures to override any federal law they did not agree with. The proposed constitutional amendment, a tea party favorite, is being touted by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) in the Senate and co-sponsored by Sens. John Barasso (R-WY) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT). In the House, Reps. Rob Bishop (R-UT), Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Paul Broun (R-GA) are leading the charge. The goal, according to proponents, is to stop the tyranny of Washington over the economy and circumscribe other federal powers.
Would a conservative pls start a mirror of this thread for democrats pls? I want to see how many articles get posted.
