On the Fort Hood massacre, isn't it time to consider barring Saudi-financed Mosques in this country? The problem isn't Islam per se, but intolerant forms of Islam, of which the Saudis are prime examples. Why not insist that Muslim clerics in America speak English, be trained in this country, and be drawn from moderate sects of Islam? Would most Muslims overseas object? Would most American Muslims object?

Quoting BornAgainDemocrat: On the Fort Hood massacre, isn't it time to consider barring Saudi-sponsored Mosques in this country? The problem isn't Islam per se, but intolerant forms of Islam, of which the Saudis are prime examples. Why not insist that Muslim clerics in America speak English, be trained in this country, and be drawn from moderate sects of Islam? Would most Muslims overseas object? Would most American Muslims object?

You've heard of something called the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States?

There are limits on the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion. For example, snake handling is illegal, as is polygamy. Shouldn't teaching murder be illegal too?

Quoting BornAgainDemocrat: There are limits on the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion. For example, snake handling is illegal, as is Peyote. Shouldn't teaching murder be illegal too?

It doesn't work that way.

I believe you are mistaken. The question is what the Supreme Court thinks, especially in a time of war.

...isn't it time to consider barring Saudi-financed Mosques in this country?

You mean those American petro-dollar laundering factories? Why not stop sending dollars to Saudi Arabia?

If you have the money, you can bankroll a suit in any court against any cleric you want - if you can make a case. Or, you can pen an amicus brief. It's much cheaper than legislation, and you'll get your verdict quicker.

Quoting BornAgainDemocrat: There are limits on the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion. For example, snake handling is illegal, as is polygamy. Shouldn't teaching murder be illegal too?

Murder? You've come a long way in 2 posts from your initial suggestion that there be a law against Muslims speaking languages other than English.

Your discussion of the Stupak amendment -and the conservative fight over it -was fascinating and very informative. Maybe conservatives should have just vote "present" since now we'll have "Blue-Dogs" saying they were for the health-care bill before they were against it. But I'm still a little confused, won't the final bill (assume without Stupak) have to be voted on and passed by the House?

Quoting BornAgainDemocrat: I believe you are mistaken. The question is what the Supreme Court thinks, especially in a time of war.

What war? Show me the Congressional Declaration.

Quoting BornAgainDemocrat: On the Fort Hood massacre, isn't it time to consider barring Saudi-financed Mosques in this country? The problem isn't Islam per se, but intolerant forms of Islam, of which the Saudis are prime examples. Why not insist that Muslim clerics in America speak English, be trained in this country, and be drawn from moderate sects of Islam? Would most Muslims overseas object? Would most American Muslims object?

I don't see any way that this is not blatantly unconstitutional. On the political correctness point, if the armed forces, the most conservative institution in America, has succumbed, I think the battle is lost.

WTF! What was that about American Mr. Wilson's tattling on their Dennis Mitchell's? Matt, America isn't that paranoid or fascist! The Hasan case now moves to the courts, where the issues become legal, not wingnuttery and foreign policy. Hasan's religious convictions are relevant only as much as they demonstrate criminal intent, one of two criteria for a crime. Hasan's psychological state at the time he committed the criminal acts, the second prong of a crime, is more relevant than his religious orientation. I'm glad this TWIB actually hit the major weekly trends, but it's still fairly thin gruel and redundant. Anti-Senate reform made a comeback in the wake of the health care insurance reform bill and Stupak.

Quoting Moron: Hasan's psychological state at the time he committed the criminal acts, the second prong of a crime, is more relevant than his religious orientation. The above-mentioned notion is not selling. Bye, bye healthcare. Bye, bye libs. You jumped the shark, while riding a jumping shark.

Barring religion in the United States... kind of unconstitutional. At best imams and practictioners can be arrested if they have done something criminal (just like anybody else). Mosque property likewise can be seized if it is connected to say Iran or some group that is barred from doing business in the U.S. A mosque can't be shut down just because it is Wahhabist (sic) though.

The services surrendered to PC back in the 60s long before sensitivity classes of all manner and form and became chic in the private sector.

Quoting Matt: . . . Fort Hood tragedy was biggest issue this week. Correction: it was not a tragedy. It was a massacre and there is a difference. The term "tragedy" implies that it was a twist of fate and nobody was responsible. It goes without saying, this is not the case. Furthermore, Obama and his minions look pretty stupid for sanitizing the "War on Terror" to "Exercise in Futility", or whatever they're calling it. Also, what's the current state of play on Eric Holders' indictments against the CIA and FBI agents? What a fantastic initiative. So bold and imaginative. No possible negative repurcussions from that campaign.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Matt: . . . Fort Hood tragedy was biggest issue this week.

Correction: it was not a tragedy. It was a massacre and there is a difference. The term "tragedy" implies that it was a twist of fate and nobody was responsible. It goes without saying, this is not the case.

tragedy |ˈtrajidē|
noun ( pl. -dies)
an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress, such as a serious accident, crime, or natural catastrophe : a tragedy that killed 95 people | his life had been plagued by tragedy.

I wouldn't use "tragedy" in any sense for what happened. The way most people use the term today cheapens it beyond recognition. Hasan broke the law, period. The only issue I have is, if he committed a crime, what crime, and if he has an affirmative defense against that charge. That's what the jury has to decide, and other commentary we might do makes empaneling a jury that much harder. That would make this situation even worse. Resorting to "tragedy" is also a sign, that Salt has decided not to follow American law and ultimately the Constitution, and is resorting to extra-legal means - the way holy war is extra-legal - to express dissent. Following the Constitution is the sine qua non of being American, so I guess Salt has decided to relinquish his citizenship for whatever pious principles in whatever heaven would have him. Good riddance to all such religious traitors! Speaking of crimes, though, voters are ultimately responsible for ruining their military.

The US military doesn't have to conduct a witch hunt against Muslims. It needs to do more to keep its personnel sane, and to give each one the proper care he/she deserves. The true "crime" is the lack

Quoting Clay: tragedy |ˈtrajidē|
noun ( pl. -dies)
an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress, such as a serious accident, crime, or natural catastrophe : a tragedy that killed 95 people | his life had been plagued by tragedy. I'll prefer Shakespeare's definition of tragedy, where blame is shared or there is no blame. There was no blame-sharing at Ft. Hood, except in Chris Matthews' version.

Teaching doctrine isn't an act, like polygamy or killing a chicken (voodoo). Acts and practices can be banned, but not ideas.

Quoting Clay: Resorting to "tragedy" is also a sign, that Salt has decided not to follow American law and ultimately the Constitution, and is resorting to extra-legal means - the way holy war is extra-legal - to express dissent. ??? Slow down, girlfriend!

Salt: You're clearly not happy living in a republic. You can't wait for a jury to decide, but have to assume the verdict will be wrong. You have resorted to sectarian arguments already to voice your opinion. You've slandered the military institutions, that follow the laws you elected representatives to establish, without ever having - as far as I know - experienced military life. You are contemptuous of those who do observe American law. Why do you live in such a restrictive republican country where your sectarian designs are clearly unsatisfied?

Quoting harkin: There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

There are none so racist as those who are racist.

Quoting harkin: Is Tim like those who even refuse to believe Hasan's religion had anything to do with his murders and that it is just a darn shame that he happened to be a muslim?

I look with scorn on your coy political correctness here: "something to do with"??? Gutless, As are all bigots, you are a coward. You're afraid to say what you want to say. Did Hasan's religion have something to do with the murders that he carried out in the sense that, had he been Christian, he would have detonated a car bomb? Is that what you're implying here? Or do have another idea about how his religion has something to do with his murders?

Quoting Moron: You have resorted to sectarian arguments already to voice your opinion. You've slandered the military institutions, that follow the laws you elected representatives to establish, without ever having - as far as I know - experienced military life. You are contemptuous of those who do observe American law. Why do you live in such a restrictive republican country where your sectarian designs are clearly unsatisfied? Evidence? Or what, I'm not allowed to criticize Obama b/c he's commander in chief of the military, is that it? You take non sequiturs to a new art form. You sound a bit desparate, and I dig that about you. As someone who doesn't need to see you embarass yourself any further, allow me to tell you that your rhetoric has set you on fire. Bail out!

Did Hasan's religion have something to do with the murders that he carried out in the sense that, had he been Christian, he would have detonated a car bomb? Is that what you're implying here?

He's just assenting to the general proposition, that those who can express sectarian views are insane = whether it's Muslim, Christian, or Buddhist

Quoting Salt: Quoting Clay: tragedy |ˈtrajidē|
noun ( pl. -dies)
an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress, such as a serious accident, crime, or natural catastrophe : a tragedy that killed 95 people | his life had been plagued by tragedy.

I'll prefer Shakespeare's definition of tragedy, where blame is shared or there is no blame. There was no blame-sharing at Ft. Hood, except in Chris Matthews' version.

What's that from?

Hasan's psychological state at the time he committed the criminal acts, the second prong of a crime, is more relevant than his religious orientation.

The above-mentioned notion is not selling.

You refuse to wait for the court's verdict, undermining the possibility that any community can impanel an unbiased jury. You've now argued against the value of criminal law itself for American society. How can you live in a country that frustrates your sectarian notions of justice - or injustice, as it were?

I said: Hasan's psychological state at the time he committed the criminal acts, the second prong of a crime, is more relevant than his religious orientation.

You said: The above-mentioned notion is not selling.

You refuse to wait for the court's verdict, undermining the possibility that any community can impanel an unbiased jury. You've now argued against the value of criminal law itself for American society. How can you live in a country that frustrates your sectarian notions of justice - or injustice, as it were?

Quoting Clay: What's that from? Hamlet, for example.

Hasan may have been a reactionary muslim, but he was also an American, and his crime was a pretty American crime. It isn't like he was the first person to ever go on a shooting spree in this country, or even the first person to go on a shooting spree on an American military base. Admittedly his case is unusual-I don't know that I've ever heard of brass going batshit like this before. But I'm not sure why people think his religion is that important in assessing the "meaning" of his crime. Do we need to categorize him as a terrorist? What precisely is the use of doing so? It seems convenient for those hellbent on demonizing Islam, but I don't see how it will be all the useful for preventing future crimes.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Clay: What's that from?

Hamlet, for example.

Where?

I'm sorry to damn you with my praise, but props! Nicely pit!

Quoting Moron: You refuse to wait for the court's verdict, undermining the possibility that any community can impanel an unbiased jury. You've now argued against the value of criminal law itself for American society. How can you live in a country that frustrates your sectarian notions of justice - or injustice, as it were? You really chose your name well, b/c only a true moron would completely suspend his own judgement in a case like this. You are saying that a rational, free-thinking public aren't entitled to their own opinion until a jury or Obama ("don't rush to judgement!") delivers it to them. Ahem, you're on fire. You're not supposed to admit these beliefs in public. I invite you to explain your statements about "value of criminal law" and "sectarian(ism)"? Can't wait.

Quoting Clay: Where? Stratford on Avon, or the library. Evidently not on your bookshelf. You can probably read it online. Okay, I get it. You're being deliberately obtuse. You want me to paraphrase it or quote it. Here's another one for you to chase down. King Lear. Read them yourself or buy a ticket.

Sectarianism: "bigotry, discrimination or hatred arising from attaching importance to perceived differences between subdivisions within a group, such as between different denominations of a religion or the factions of a political movement."

Quoting Moron: Sectarianism: "bigotry, discrimination or hatred arising from attaching importance to perceived differences between subdivisions within a group, such as between different denominations of a religion or the factions of a political movement." Only a brain-dead liberal would confuse the above for an argument. Weak.

Weak

? Yeah! Then, the tenets and practices of any organized religion. BTW, you can pack your bags for Antarctica anytime!

Quoting Moron: Yeah! Then, the tenets and practices of any organized religion.
BTW, you can pack your bags for Antarctica anytime! Bro', I am not going to let you escape this smackdown by feigning insanity or digressing to your atheistic ramblings. I put it to you, what is your argument re "sectarianism"? What are you accusing me of? What evidence do you have? Give it your best shot. Don't be afraid to look like a fool. You already ventured out to that territory once tonight and you're still breathing and typing.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Clay: Where?

Stratford on Avon, or the library. Evidently not on your bookshelf. You can probably read it online. Okay, I get it. You're being deliberately obtuse. You want me to paraphrase it or quote it. Here's another one for you to chase down. King Lear. Read them yourself or buy a ticket.

Where in Shakespeare's plays do you find your definition of tragedy? You ought to be able to look it online easily enough.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Moron: Yeah! Then, the tenets and practices of any organized religion.
BTW, you can pack your bags for Antarctica anytime!

Bro', I am not going to let you escape this smackdown by feigning insanity or digressing to your atheistic ramblings. I put it to you, what is your argument re "sectarianism"? What are you accusing me of? What evidence do you have? Give it your best shot. Don't be afraid to look like a fool. You already ventured out to that territory once tonight and you're still breathing and typing.

"Smackdown?" You're announcing that your part in this debate has amounted to smackdown of your opponent? You're the second guy on this board recently to try the "I say I win, so you lose!" gambit, recently. It doesn't work. If you feel like you need to make the announcement yourself, it's almost certainly not true.

Quoting AemJeff: It doesn't work that way.

It doesn't???

Quoting C: Where in Shakespeare's plays do you find your definition tragedy? Why don't you just read them or rent the DVD? Okay, I'll try to help you out this way. Hamlet and Lear are the main tragic figures in those plays. Are they victims? Or are they innocent? They are both. That is tragedy in a nutshell. It doesn't have much to do with villains at its core, unlike Ft Hood.

Quoting Baltimoron: You refuse to wait for the court's verdict, undermining the possibility that any community can impanel an unbiased jury. You've now argued against the value of criminal law itself for American society. How can you live in a country that frustrates your sectarian notions of justice - or injustice, as it were?

Moron, you are all over the place.

Quoting Whatfur:
It doesn't???

You're going to have to spend a few words arguing the relationship here.

Quoting AemJeff: "
It doesn't work. If you feel like you need to make the announcement yourself, it's almost certainly not true.

Sometimes a duck IS a duck.

Quoting Salt: Quoting C: Where in Shakespeare's plays do you find your definition tragedy?

Why don't you just read them or rent the DVD? Okay, I'll try to help you out this way. Hamlet and Lear are the main tragic figures in those plays. Are they victims? Or are they innocent? They are both. That is tragedy in a nutshell. It doesn't have much to do with villains at its core, unlike Ft Hood.

There's no reason to act condescending. I hadn't heard blame linked to tragedy before. And as far as I can tell you made up the Shakespeare connection and now you're being huffy to cover up for it.

Quoting Whatfur: Sometimes a duck IS a duck.

And sometimes a duck is a character in a Disney cartoon.

Quoting AemJeff: And sometimes a duck is a character in a Disney cartoon.

...and sometimes its something you do when you want to avoid something tangible thrown at you.

Quoting Whatfur: ...and sometimes its something you do when you want to avoid something tangible thrown at you.

No, 'fur. You haven't presented an argument. You want to play, then do your part; otherwise I have no time for it.

Quoting AemJeff: No, 'fur. You haven't presented an argument. You want to play, then do your part; otherwise I have no time for it.

Oh Ok...so its fine that you bounce in an throw a nothing comment at Salt while questioning his methods and his truth-telling but its not ok for me to come in and tell you that you are all wet? I guess I better go re-read the rules.

I'm not an atheist. And, what happened at Fort Hood is not a tragedy.

Quoting Baltimoron: I'm not an atheist. And, what happened at Fort Hood is not a tragedy.

Comedy to you then?

A horrible event, perhaps a crime. But, that's for a jury to decide. I don't resort to religion, be it ancient Greek or Christian, for my opinions.

Quoting Baltimoron: A horrible event, perhaps a crime. But, that's for a jury to decide. I don't resort to religion, be it ancient Greek or Christian, for my opinions.

What the hell happened?...for that last few days I thought you had it already decided.

Quoting Jeff: It doesn't work. If you feel like you need to make the announcement yourself, it's almost certainly not true. So what you're saying is that your "announcement" above is certainly not true. For once we agree.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Jeff: It doesn't work. If you feel like you need to make the announcement yourself, it's almost certainly not true.

So what you're saying is that your "announcement" above is certainly not true. For once we agree.

I made no such self-referential announcement.

Quoting Salt: What are you accusing me of? What evidence do you have? Give it your best shot.

Are you serious? You've fueled this volume of the worst drama criticism I've ever read! I almost want to sell my Euripides collection in disgust! Tragedy is a religious form that has come down to us as a public entertainment form. I'm impressed someone hasn't run to Christianity, but tragedy is as equally contemptuous of American justice as is any form of fundamentalism.

I've rebutted those who would look for answers beyond the courts. my only assumption is, that a defense attorney would seek an affirmative defense of insanity. I'm willing to wait for the trial, and then I'll pass opinion of the verdict's strength.

Jim Harper reminds us, that any analysis of the information newspapers have uncovered of Hasan's activities is only a smoking gun after the fact of the shooting spree (.mp3 file). Another good point is, that for Hasan and many others, al-Qaeda is only an attractive authority after they become upset. The task is to prevent this trauma and to treat it before people seek out trouble.

Quoting Moron: Tragedy is a religious form that has come down to us as a public entertainment form. I'm impressed someone hasn't run to Christianity, but tragedy is as equally contemptuous of American justice as is any form of fundamentalism. Did you actually have to write essays when you were in high school? Are you still in high school, Capt. Ellipsis? You write like you never had any type of instruction whatsoever. Your sentences meander from one topic to the next, and it's impossible to see any connection between the clauses in any one sentence. Your prose is crap. Get help!

Coming from an illogical irritant, that's just fine!

The organization that federal investigators say is a front for the Iranian government has spent millions of dollars over the years on philanthropy...There are no claims of wrongdoing at the mosques.

These mosques weren't seized because of what was being taught inside.

Quoting Ray: There are none so racist as those who are racist.

You fail from step one. Islam is a religion, not a race And are you really, truly denying that there were missed warning signs here? Really?

Quoting Ray: I look with scorn on your coy political correctness here: "something to do with"??? Gutless,

You look with scorn at me, and yet a religious fanatic who put Allah over life, liberty and country and murdered while shouting Allah Akbar........how do you look at him, as a victim of white, christian America? A victim who seemingly rose above his talents because his peers were afraid they'd be accused of discrimination, even after his powerpoint presentation that murdering non-believers was justified?
Do you have any scorn at all left for him? Or are you more like Barack Obama, who expressed 'outrage' on the day that George Tiller was murdered, but could not find it in himself to use that word for Maj Hasan, and instead asked everyone to wait until all the facts were in.

Quoting Ray: As are all bigots, you are a coward. You're afraid to say what you want to say.

More of the bigot smack? And a coward? I'll tell you what a

Yeah, they're not being shut down because of ideas but because the money they've been getting to run their mosques has been seized by the Feds, because it is illegal for Iran or Iranian based business to do business in the U.S. They're going to just have to learn to support privately financed Shia schools themselves or push for opening up trade with Iran. This also isn't a First Amendment issue, but a violation of a Federal statute, not by the mosques, but by this company that is a face for the Iranian government.

Perhaps a crime?

Quoting kezboard: These mosques weren't seized because of what was being taught inside.

Nobody said they were. Purely showing that the 1st ammendment has its limits. Not that difficult kids.

Yo Matt, We live in a snitch-culture without a doubt and for numerous reasons. Cameras everywhere, seeking fame or just wanting to be on TV, rewards for turning people in and law enforcement using snitch as a crime solving method, you couldn't be more wrong. Love how conservative thinkers are always talking about "the good old days" that never were. This is nothing more than future-phobia. They all have it. It's required to be a conservative, like I have a sister, well into her sixties, and since a child she's has a fear of cats. Nothing you can say to her that would calm her fear of cats. Otherwise, she a very normal thinker. You conservative thinkers need to know, this fear is the distortion you cast onto matters of public policy making that hold us back as a culture. All the bullshit fears forecasts by you guys have never come true. These fear tack-ticks are just another way to let your fear stall off progress and the more educated we all become on the issues the less these fear tricks will work. So, I look forward to the reduced effects of your skills in fear induction.

Quoting harkin: And are you really, truly denying that there were missed warning signs here?

No. I'm saying that his religion is not a warning sign.

Quoting harkin: Nope, no warning signs there, but good luck fine-tuning your Race-o-vision!

Sure. There were warning signs. There are always warning signs, and people always ignore them. Then, later, after the crime, the people who should have recognized and acted on the warning signs make up excuses for why they missed the warning signs. In Hasan's case, the excuse is: the U.S. coddles Muslims, an appeal to people like you, who are racist against Arabs and bigoted against Muslims. It's a rhetorical strategy of pure outrageousness. Hasan's superiors and colleagues failed to recognize his lunacy because the U.S. military, which kills thousands of Muslims a year in two wars, is too soft on Muslims. It's an argument that appeals--and could only appeal--to people deeply prejudiced against Muslims.

Quoting harkin: You look with scorn at me, and yet a religious fanatic who put Allah over life, liberty and country

Here your bigotry reveals itself. You're describing his crime as if it were an expression of Islam. In your mind, putting Allah first means killing people.

Quoting harkin: how do you look at him, as a victim of

Quoting Ray: No. I look at him as a crazy American. What he did was the most American thing in the world, as American as Big Macs Ray, your real name wouldn't happen to be Michelle Obama, would it? Well, it doesn't matter, because not even Oprah could sell your abovementioned pitch today. Americans can be shamed into buying alot of self-loathing nonsense, but when the day comes when we accept that all of us are inherently sociopathic killers, America itself will have long ceased to exist and will have been replaced by a world where people like you get to brutalize everyone else. I like the way you threw in that classist reference to Big Macs, like eating one was a mark of fundamental corruption. For the sake of humanity, I hope you are sterile. Do us all a favor and move to Cuba or Venezuela.

Quoting Clay: And as far as I can tell you made up the Shakespeare connection and now you're being huffy to cover up for it. If you read something in a comment I posted, you are free to assume I made it up. In other words, it wasn't you or somebody else who typed it in. Man, you liberals take this abstraction crap way too far. It's like trying to communicate with a dolphin or a chimp.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Clay: Resorting to "tragedy" is also a sign, that Salt has decided not to follow American law and ultimately the Constitution, and is resorting to extra-legal means - the way holy war is extra-legal - to express dissent.

??? Slow down, girlfriend!

I didn't say that. You're quoting the wrong person.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Clay: And as far as I can tell you made up the Shakespeare connection and now you're being huffy to cover up for it.

If you read something in a comment I posted, you are free to assume I made it up. In other words, it wasn't you or somebody else who typed it in. Man, you liberals take this abstraction crap way too far. It's like trying to communicate with a dolphin or a chimp.

You wrote: Correction: it was not a tragedy. It was a massacre and there is a difference. The term "tragedy" implies that it was a twist of fate and nobody was responsible. It goes without saying, this is not the case.

Then:

I'll prefer Shakespeare's definition of tragedy, where blame is shared or there is no blame. There was no blame-sharing at Ft. Hood, except in Chris Matthews' version.
You didn't say, "my interpretation of Shakespearean tragedy." You said "Shakespeare's definition." (It's wrong either way.) If you're going to play the highbrow card you have to back it up. You didn't. Now you're resorting to insults. You're probably not very smart. That's okay. Learn to work within your limits.

Quoting Clay: You didn't say, "my interpretation of Shakespearean tragedy." You said "Shakespeare's definition." Why do I get the feeling you were that dweeb in school who never got tired of saying Simon Says. (!) Not a bad metaphor for liberal mindset. "Obama says, Cambridge police: jump to conclusion!" "Fort Hood: jump to conclusion . . . . Busted!"

Quoting Clay: If you're going to play the highbrow card you have to to back it up. You didn't. Now you're resorting to insults. I can't help it if you haven't seen Hamlet or Lear or Oedipus. Tragedy is an art form that is meant to instruct morally. Usually it involves the central character being caught in adverse circumstances and subsequently inadvertantly sowing the seeds of their own destruction. The innocents standing in line at Fort Hood did NOT do anything to deserve the bullet-holes Maj Hasan gave them. Only dimwits like Ray would argue it. Not even Obama or Oprah could sell that idea to the public today. MSNBC's and NYT's cashflow probably cratered a bit more this week as a result of their editorials. You are aware that NBC and NYT are on the block, right? Furthermore, if we do get to a stage where the public feels it is to blame for a massacre like Fort Hood, the USA will have already fragmented into a group of independent states comprised of citizens who don't hate themselves.

If you were trying to make the point that a mosque can be legally closed down under certain circumstances, okay, I'm with you. But this had everything to do with money laundering and nothing at all to do with the first amendment.

Are you really trying to push the idea that the use of the word "tragedy" in relation to the Fort Hood shooting is an instance of liberal bias and shifting the blame off Hasan? That's absurd. I hate it when people use "tragedy" as a synonym for "disaster" for the same pedantic reasons you do -- to me it seems like it should imply that it was somehow written in the stars or preordained -- but among non-pedants of all political persuasions, the word means something like an epically horrible event, and has been applied to almost every awful thing that's happened in the US for a good long time: George W. Bush: Today, we've had a national tragedy. Two airplanes have crashed into the World Trade Center in an apparent terrorist attack on our country. Denver Post: Colorado lawmakers honored the victims of the Columbine High School shooting Monday, while gun-control advocates rallied outside the Capitol to mark the 10th anniversary of the tragedy. The legislature passed a resolution, "Columbine High School Triumph over Tragedy," as a way of highlighting the school's inspirational response to that dark day. Washington Post: Oklahoma City family

Quoting kezboard: Are you really trying to push the idea that the use of the word "tragedy" in relation to the Fort Hood shooting is an instance of liberal bias and shifting the blame off Hasan? That's absurd. I hate it when people use "tragedy" as a synonym for "disaster" for the same pedantic reasons you do -- to me it seems like it should imply that it was somehow written in the stars or preordained -- but among non-pedants of all political persuasions, the word means something like an epically horrible event, and has been applied to almost every awful thing that's happened in the US for a good long time:

George W. Bush: Today, we've had a national tragedy. Two airplanes have crashed into the World Trade Center in an apparent terrorist attack on our country.

Denver Post: Colorado lawmakers honored the victims of the Columbine High School shooting Monday, while gun-control advocates rallied outside the Capitol to mark the 10th anniversary of the tragedy. The legislature passed a resolution, "Columbine High School Triumph over Tragedy," as a way of highlighting the school's inspirational response to that dark day.

Washington Post: Oklahoma City family

Yes, and like 9/11 and the VA Tech killings, the Ft. Hood killings fall under the category of preventable tragedies. In each case authorities had been alerted, and the information allowed to fall through the cracks. The Hasan case reminds me of a real-life Catch-22.

Quoting Kez: Are you really trying to push the idea that the use of the word "tragedy" in relation to the Fort Hood shooting is an instance of liberal bias and shifting the blame off Hasan? That's absurd. What would really be absurd would be trying to argue against the fact that there was massive blame-shifting by liberals on Hasan's behalf. In fact, I would like to share some of the new lexicon coined by liberals last week:
"Allahuwerence": a meaningless exclamation of no significance to anyone.
"Bumpersticking": a grievous injury or provocation.
"Shout out": a formal eulogy by the president

Harkin said: As Matt points out, if Hasan was Joe Sixpack from Dubuque who had a stack of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck books in his apartment, the lefties would be screaming that they should be off the air. Yes, this is true. The proof is the Southern Law Project essays Jeff has linked.

Quoting badhatharry: Harkin said: As Matt points out, if Hasan was Joe Sixpack from Dubuque who had a stack of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck books in his apartment, the lefties would be screaming that they should be off the air.

Yes, this is true. The proof is the Southern Law Project essays Jeff has linked.

I'm afraid I don't see the link.

What would really be absurd would be trying to argue against the fact that there was massive blame-shifting by liberals on Hasan's behalf.

But what would be really, really absurd would be moving the goalposts around. I wasn't denying that a certain amount of blame-shifting is going around, just that the use of the word "tragedy" is not a symptom of it. I understand that you could perceive the suggestions that Hasan obviously had some sort of mental illness or PTSD as blame-shifting, but I think that the idea that people who said this were motivated by "political correctness" or the need to deny criminality by Muslims at all costs. I think it's the same sort of mental process as after the Columbine shootings when various people came out to blame Marilyn Manson or violent video games or whatever -- people are trying to make sense out of senseless violence. Similarly, while the "liberals" are blaming mental illness, the "conservatives" are blaming jihadi infiltration, as if somehow an Islamist cancer took root inside one army psychiatrist and directed him from outside -- everyone is trying to fit this event inside their own

Quoting claymisher: There's no reason to act condescending. I hadn't heard blame linked to tragedy before. And as far as I can tell you made up the Shakespeare connection and now you're being huffy to cover up for it.

From Wikipedia: "A tragic hero is the main character in a tragedy. The modern use of the term usually involves the notion that such a hero make an error in their actions that leads to their downfall.[1] The idea that this be a balance of crime and punishment is incorrectly ascribed to Aristotle, who is quite clear in his pronouncement that the hero's misfortune is not brought about "by vice and depravity but by some error of judgment." In fact, in Aristotle's Poetics it is imperative that the tragic hero be noble. Later tragedians swerved from this tradition, with the result that the more prone the tragic hero was to vice, the less noble--and the less tragic in the Aristotelian sense of the word.[2]" From me:In Shakespearean plays, the tragic figure or hero is someone who is good, but also fatally flawed. Shekespeare wrote three kinds of plays comedies, romances and tragedies. That's the

Quoting AemJeff: I'm afraid I don't see the link.

It's about not making the connection between Hassan and Islamic terrorism because it is politically incorrect to do so. But on the other hand, the connection can be made between violent acts and right wing radio. Different standards....everybody has them.

Quoting badhatharry: From Wikipedia: "A tragic hero is the main character in a tragedy. The modern use of the term usually involves the notion that such a hero make an error in their actions that leads to their downfall.[1] The idea that this be a balance of crime and punishment is incorrectly ascribed to Aristotle, who is quite clear in his pronouncement that the hero's misfortune is not brought about "by vice and depravity but by some error of judgment." In fact, in Aristotle's Poetics it is imperative that the tragic hero be noble. Later tragedians swerved from this tradition, with the result that the more prone the tragic hero was to vice, the less noble--and the less tragic in the Aristotelian sense of the word.[2]"

From me:In Shakespearean plays, the tragic figure or hero is someone who is good, but also fatally flawed. Shekespeare wrote three kinds of plays comedies, romances and tragedies. That's the Shakespeare connection.

Salt is saying that Hassan is not a tragic figure, therefore what he did was not a tragedy. At least I think that's what he means.

I've seen no claim from anybody that Hassan is

Quoting Kez: I just think the right is mistaken about the narrative of the liberals -- we look at this and think "Wow, the army must be really overextended if they weren't able to catch this guy", not "Poor victimized Muslim". Wrong again, buddy! The right looks at this and thinks, "these are the dividends of Obama's/Holder's intended prosecution of Bush's security personnel instead of the war on terror." These are the consequences of dogging the professionals in the military, Gitmo, etc. This is what happens when you have people like Napolitano spending their time monitoring and threatening tea-partiers. This is what an Orwellian world where Castro and Chavez are the good guys looks like. The right know that liberals don't care about Muslims, per se. Liberals just want to stick it to the crass, BigMac-eating, ignorant American public, which means running to the defense of America's enemies at every opportunity. It is patently obvious.

Quoting badhatharry: It's about not making the connection between Hassan and Islamic terrorism because it is politically incorrect to do so.

But on the other hand, the connection can be made between violent acts and right wing radio. Different standards....everybody has them.

Nobody, certainly not me, has said you can't draw any links between Hassan and Islamic terrorism. Rather: before anything was known, except for the possibility that he might have been a follower of Islam, that was insufficient justification for such a conclusion. In order for your analogy to even begin to have some validity, the SPLC link would have had to claim that Christianity was to blame for those violent acts. That's just not what was said.

Quoting AemJeff: I've seen no claim from anybody that Hassan is a tragic figure. However, his victims may have a claim to that title. I don't see how Hassan's status is germane.

Well, I'm mute on this point. I suppose it's mostly about semantics. I was just trying to define the term because Claymisher wasn't aware of the Shakespearean connection.

Quoting Bad: From me:In Shakespearean plays, the tragic figure or hero is someone who is good, but also fatally flawed. Shekespeare wrote three kinds of plays comedies, romances and tragedies. That's the Shakespeare connection. Salt is saying that Hassan is not a tragic figure, therefore what he did was not a tragedy. Yes. There is nothing redeeming about Maj Hasan; therefore, he can't be a tragic figure. Therefore, no tragedy. For the victims, there is something tragic about being betrayed by an intellectual/leader who's supposed to be looking out for you, but that is not how the media is treating it. The lamestream media wants to view them as victims of a natural disaster or random occurrence.

Quoting AemJeff: Nobody, certainly not me, has said you can't draw any links between Hassan and Islamic terrorism. Rather: before anything was known, except for the possibility that he might have been a follower of Islam, that was insufficient justification for such a conclusion. In order for your analogy to even begin to have some validity, the SPLC link would have had to claim that Christianity was to blame for those violent acts. That's just not what was said.

I think that making the connection between Islam and terrorism is analogous to saying right wing radio is connected to violence. Lots of evidence, not neccessarily correct, could be piled up in either case, which is exactly what the SPLC does with impunity. As Matt points out, if Hasan was Joe Sixpack from Dubuque who had a stack of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck books in his apartment, the lefties would be screaming that they should be off the air. That was the original point made by Matt and quoted by Harkin.I think that the SPLC is making that link when they point to right wing radio as having a dangerous influence and that it incites

Quoting Salt: Yes. There is nothing redeeming about Maj Hasan; therefore, he can't be a tragic figure. Therefore, no tragedy.

For the victims, there is something tragic about being betrayed by an intellectual/leader who's supposed to be looking out for you, but that is not how the media is treating it. The lamestream media wants to view them as victims of a natural disaster or random occurrence.

So what we are talking about is classical definitions which suffer a lot of abuse nowadays.
Lately, "begging the question" has morphed into "a question that is begging to be asked" instead of the rich meaning that "petitio principii" has. We lose a lot when we misuse terms.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Clay: If you're going to play the highbrow card you have to to back it up. You didn't. Now you're resorting to insults.

I can't help it if you haven't seen Hamlet or Lear or Oedipus. Tragedy is an art form that is meant to instruct morally. Usually it involves the central character being caught in adverse circumstances and subsequently inadvertantly sowing the seeds of their own destruction. The innocents standing in line at Fort Hood did NOT do anything to deserve the bullet-holes Maj Hasan gave them. Only dimwits like Ray would argue it. Not even Obama or Oprah could sell that idea to the public today. MSNBC's and NYT's cashflow probably cratered a bit more this week as a result of their editorials. You are aware that NBC and NYT are on the block, right? Furthermore, if we do get to a stage where the public feels it is to blame for a massacre like Fort Hood, the USA will have already fragmented into a group of independent states comprised of citizens who don't hate themselves.

I'm not an expert on tragedy. I've only read a few of the

I'm shocked I'm more aligned with Matt Lewis on these issues since I consider myself a bleeding heart liberal. Matt was a voice of reason in this diavlog.

The right looks at this and thinks, "these are the dividends of Obama's/Holder's intended prosecution of Bush's security personnel instead of the war on terror." These are the consequences of dogging the professionals in the military, Gitmo, etc.

Right. They haven't exactly been quiet about it. I'm well aware of what the right thinks of us and what sorts of things they're willing to project onto us, but I don't believe there's any evidence that any of the wild allegations about this being "Obama's 9/11" or the dividends of anything Obama or Holder has done besides, well, right-wing cultural grievance. So how was the shooting at Fort Hood related to specific measures the Obama administration has taken? What has Napolitano done to transfer resources from tracking Islamist radicals to tracking tea-party people? (No, for the millionth time, the DHS report doesn't count.) How does closing Guantanamo affect Hasan? As for the crass, big-mac eating American public (your characterization, not mine), they elected the administration that you think is so radical, and between 48% and 56% of them -- depending on what poll you listen to -- still approve of him, which is more-or-less where both Clinton and Reagan were

Quoting Bad: Well, I'm mute on this point. I suppose it's mostly about semantics. I was just trying to define the term because Claymisher wasn't aware of the Shakespearean connection. Don't get your nickers in a twist Clay. Just because Bad said you appeared to be out of it, doesn't require you to data dump every drama title you've seen in your life. Quoting Clay: Salt, you're on my ignore list now, so don't bother replying to me. Ouch, that especially hurts given the fact that you forgot to make your original point, except to concede that "I'm pretty sure "where blame is shared or there is no blame" is pretty close to our modern sense of the tragic", because that would mean you agree Fort Hood was not a tragedy.

Quoting Salt: The right looks at this and thinks, "these are the dividends of Obama's/Holder's intended prosecution of Bush's security personnel instead of the war on terror." These are the consequences of dogging the professionals in the military, Gitmo, etc. This is what happens when you have people like Napolitano spending their time monitoring and threatening tea-partiers. This is what an Orwellian world where Castro and Chavez are the good guys looks like. The right know that liberals don't care about Muslims, per se. Liberals just want to stick it to the crass, BigMac-eating, ignorant American public, which means running to the defense of America's enemies at every opportunity. It is patently obvious.

Looks like Salt forms most of his opinions by reading Andrew McCarthy.

Quoting Kez: So how was the shooting at Fort Hood related to specific measures the Obama administration has taken? What has Napolitano done to transfer resources from tracking Islamist radicals to tracking tea-party people? (No, for the millionth time, the DHS report doesn't count.) How does closing Guantanamo affect Hasan? Whatever metric you care to use, as of last week there are 13 more dead to factor. For conservatives the litany of names associated with Obama, it just keeps getting longer and more outrageous each month. Add Maj Hasan to Chairman Anita Dunn, ACORN, Vangry Jones, Skip "Yo Mama" Gates, Nambla Jennings, Bill "Sparky" Ayers, Jeremiah "Do Right Man" Wright. It is a cornucopia of preposterous, dysfunctional screw-ups. The only certainty is it will get longer because the Obamas don't seem to realize that this is not what Oprah pitched and sold to the couch potatoes who voted for them.

I was going to be a smart-ass and say that that Romeo and Juliet was a romance, but I looked it up and found that I was wrong about Shakespeare's three types of plays. The three are comedies, tragedies and histories. Isn't that fascinating?

Quoting Salt: Whatever metric you care to use, as of last week there are 13 more dead to factor. For conservatives the litany of names associated with Obama, it just keeps getting longer and more outrageous each month. Add Maj Hasan to Chairman Anita Dunn, ACORN, Vangry Jones, Skip "Yo Mama" Gates, Nambla Jennings, Bill "Sparky" Ayers, Jeremiah "Do Right Man" Wright. It is a cornucopia of preposterous, dysfunctional screw-ups. The only certainty is it will get longer because the Obamas don't seem to realize that this is not what Oprah pitched and sold to the couch potatoes who voted for them.

The only problem with your list of names is that the left will name just as many to blame on the right. I wonder when we began to think that there is a side which is blameless?

So, I read the comments and now I'm listening to the diavlog. Exempting abortion from the bill does not prevent women from getting one, but that is the way it is being framed. That was to be expected. But it's nonsense. An abortion does not cost so much that a woman could not ostensibly borrow the $$ for one. Besides, there's always this little thing called contraception. OOOPs that would mean personal responsibility. Please don't bring up rape.

Quoting badhatharry: I think that making the connection between Islam and terrorism is analogous to saying right wing radio is connected to violence. Lots of evidence, not neccessarily correct, could be piled up in either case, which is exactly what the SPLC does with impunity.

As Matt points out, if Hasan was Joe Sixpack from Dubuque who had a stack of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck books in his apartment, the lefties would be screaming that they should be off the air.

That was the original point made by Matt and quoted by Harkin.I think that the SPLC is making that link when they point to right wing radio as having a dangerous influence and that it incites people to violence.
This is as incorrect as saying that Hasan was influenced by Islam to commit this act.

I agree that my original analogy was not quite perfect. However, what is true, I think, is that people on all sides are prone to make connections which are weak for political gain or just because.

At this point it seems pretty clear the most important isssue is who knew about this guy and why nothing

Quoting Bad: The only problem with your list of names is that the left will name just as many to blame on the right. I wonder when we began to think that there is a side which is blameless? Who do you want to put up against Maj Hasan? Scooter Libby? Halliburton? The amusing thing is that APART from Maj Hasan, most of the other names are self-inflicted wounds by the left. You have no safe refuge. Come at me on Iraq and you still have to explain Afghanistan. Hit me with Hank Paulson, you'll get a Robert Rubin uppercut, a John Corzine left hook, a Barney Frank knee to the groin, a Chris Dodd jabb and a Franklin Raines roundhouse to the back of the head. Libs do get to put their policies in place now(somewhat), but they seem to believe nobody is keeping score as far as deaths and unemployment, etc. I suppose it's necessary to have an opposition in a democracy. Perhaps it's necessary that they be dangerous and stupid as well, but I can't see why.

Quoting Salt: Hit me with Hank Paulson, you'll get a Robert Rubin uppercut, a John Corzine left hook, a Barney Frank knee to the groin, a Chris Dodd jabb and a Franklin Raines roundhouse to the back of the head.

Stop it. You're overstimulating 'fur. ;^)

A key difference this time is that the federal government — the entity that almost the entire radical right views as its primary enemy — is headed by a black man. That, coupled with high levels of non-white immigration and a decline in the percentage of whites overall in America, has helped to racialize the Patriot movement, which in the past was not primarily motivated by race hate. Oh yeah, You're right. Well documented. How the heck could you document something like that? It's all opinion ala Jeaneanne Garafola.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Bad: The only problem with your list of names is that the left will name just as many to blame on the right. I wonder when we began to think that there is a side which is blameless?

Who do you want to put up against Maj Hasan? Scooter Libby? Halliburton? The amusing thing is that APART from Maj Hasan, most of the other names are self-inflicted wounds by the left. You have no safe refuge. Come at me on Iraq and you still have to explain Afghanistan. Hit me with Hank Paulson, you'll get a Robert Rubin uppercut, a John Corzine left hook, a Barney Frank knee to the groin, a Chris Dodd jabb and a Franklin Raines roundhouse to the back of the head. Libs do get to put their policies in place now(somewhat), but they seem to believe nobody is keeping score as far as deaths and unemployment, etc. I suppose it's necessary to have an opposition in a democracy. Perhaps it's necessary that they be dangerous and stupid as well, but I can't see why.

I must confess that I am much more inclined to the right, however I am not blind to the

Quoting badhatharry: A key difference this time is that the federal government — the entity that almost the entire radical right views as its primary enemy — is headed by a black man. That, coupled with high levels of non-white immigration and a decline in the percentage of whites overall in America, has helped to racialize the Patriot movement, which in the past was not primarily motivated by race hate.

Oh yeah, You're right. Well documented.

How the heck could you document something like that? It's all opinion ala Jeaneanne Garafola.

Let's take your sample a piece at a time:

A key difference this time is that the federal government — the entity that almost the entire radical right views as its primary enemy — is headed by a black man. There are two claims here. The federal government is certainly headed by a black man. Do you want to dispute the notion that the "entire radical right" views the federal government as its "primary enemy?" You could, I guess. But, it's not very hard to find examples of members of the radical right making that claim, themselves. How about the implication that Obama's race is an exacerbating issue? Again, it's easy

I still don't get what, say, Anita Dunn or Van Jones has to do with Hasan, and you've moved the goalposts again. Seriously, do you have any facts to offer?

Quoting Kez: I still don't get what, say, Anita Dunn or Van Jones has to do with Hasan, and you've moved the goalposts again. Seriously, do you have any facts to offer? A: They are all uncomfortable facts that the Obamas own and have to live with now. You know, like libs use to constantly harp on Gitmo, "torture", etc. They are factual signposts, not fictional straw men like "torture", etc. Own it, live it, love it.

Quoting Salt: Quoting Kez: I still don't get what, say, Anita Dunn or Van Jones has to do with Hasan, and you've moved the goalposts again. Seriously, do you have any facts to offer?

A: They are all uncomfortable facts that the Obamas own and have to live with now. You know, like libs use to constantly harp on Gitmo, "torture", etc. They are factual signposts, not fictional straw men like "torture", etc. Own it, live it, love it.

Also learn it kez...Van Jone's issues did not start with him being a truther.

Quoting Salt: not even Oprah could sell your abovementioned pitch today.

What above-mentioned pitch? You mean the statement of mine that you quoted? It seems you know the definition of 'mention' as well as you do that of 'tragedy'. Because you're obviously slow, I'm going to make the implicit explicit here: you don't know English very well.

Quoting Salt: Americans can be shamed into buying alot of self-loathing nonsense, but when the day comes when we accept that all of us are inherently sociopathic killers

'a lot', not "alot"; 'when the day comes that'; etc. Listen, Captain Comprehension, American crime is not the same as crime everywhere. We have crimes in the U.S. that are unknown or much rarer elsewhere. The kind of shooting perpetrated by Hasan is one of them. You're too stupid to remember the McDonald's Massacre to which I referred and far, far too stupid to understand what this reference implies for Americans. No; it doesn't mean that all Americans are psychopaths. It means that the U.S. fosters a particular type of crime. Now, we're going to take this point and place it in the context of this thread. Hold on to your seat! This is going to be a real

Quoting Ray: No. I'm saying that his religion is not a warning sign.

Sure. There were warning signs. There are always warning signs, and people always ignore them. Then, later, after the crime, the people who should have recognized and acted on the warning signs make up excuses for why they missed the warning signs.

It's not an excuse, it's documented reality. If you can't deal with it, at least you can present yourself as an example of PC cluelessness.

In Hasan's case, the excuse is: the U.S. coddles Muslims, an appeal to people like you, who are racist against Arabs and bigoted against Muslims.

More racism smack with no backup? lol

Quoting Ray: It's a rhetorical strategy of pure outrageousness. Hasan's superiors and colleagues failed to recognize his lunacy because the U.S. military, which kills thousands of Muslims a year in two wars, is too soft on Muslims.

You're forgetting that the muslims killed in Iraq and Afghanistan in terrorist bombings and shootings since both wars began were killed by other muslims. I guess they were racist and anti-muslim.....what?

Quoting Ray: It's an argument that appeals--and could only appeal--to people deeply prejudiced against Muslims.

I am only prejudiced against muslims who commit murder as Jihad and their apologists.

Quoting Ray: Here

Quoting Ray: 'a lot', not "alot"; 'when the day comes that'; etc. Strong stuff. Careful how you wield that rhetorical power. You obviously don't know your own strength.

Quoting harkin: It's not an excuse, it's documented reality.

No; it isn't. It's a cover-your-ass campaign. Face it, dude: you are overjoyed that Hasan did what he did. It's just the kind of thing you've been dying for: an excuse to bash Muslims and Arabs while hiding behind a pile of dead bodies. For your kind, this sort of massacre is merely the foreplay to feature-length vengeance porn.

Quoting harkin: You're forgetting that the muslims killed in Iraq and Afghanistan in terrorist bombings and shootings since both wars began were killed by other muslims. I guess they were racist and anti-muslim.....what?

What are you talking about? I never said the U.S. is racist for killing Muslims. And, no, even if the U.S. were racist for killing Muslims, that would not mean that Muslims are racist for killing Muslims. Here, you're trying to pretend that racism can happen only in one direction: from whites to non-whites, the implication being that the very idea of racism is simply an attack on whites. This, in itself, backs up my charge that you are a racist.

Quoting harkin: His words. His words. Why do you give them no value?

I do give his words value; I simply don't have the agenda you have, which is to take up

Quoting Salt: Strong stuff. Careful how you wield that rhetorical power. You obviously don't know your own strength.

Are you going to try to pretend you've read Shakespeare again? C'm'on! You can do it, kiddo! Try to define a word! We'll see if you can do it with five solecisms or fewer and no citations! We know you've got that second part covered...

If what Hasan did at Ft Hood could be construed as "a free exercise of religion" as taught in the Mosques he attends, then would not that constitute grounds for prohibiting that "religion?" How is this essentially different than curbing the right of free speech where "fighting words" are concerned? It is a myth that First Amendment rights are absolute and unqualified.

Quoting BornAgainDemocrat: If what Hasan did at Ft Hood could be construed as "a free exercise of religion" as taught in the Mosques he attends, then would not that constitute grounds for prohibiting that "religion?" How is this essentially different than curbing the right of free speech where "fighting words" are concerned?

It is a myth that First Amendment rights are absolute and unqualified.

The answer to the first question is good luck with that. The second begs for an expert to answer. The assertion at the end is false, in that no such myth exists. The underlying thought is true (obviously), but irrelevant.

You know, when Jones called Republicans assholes, he wasn't talking about you specifically. Also, Salt, for God's sake, I know you hate Obama and think he's a big Marxist fascist communist radical meanie, but you still haven't shown how it's his fault that Nidal Hasan killed all those people.

Quoting Ray: C'm'on! You can do it, kiddo! Try to define a word! Is this a parody you're doing or what? I can't find "pythonesque", so here goes: Asperger. Asperger syndrome is an autism spectrum disorder, and people with it therefore show significant difficulties in social interaction, along with restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests. It differs from other autism spectrum disorders by its relative preservation of linguistic and cognitive development. Although not required for diagnosis, physical clumsiness and atypical use of language are frequently reported.

Damn this thread is boring as shit. They talked about more than Fort Hood, and most of you aren't even talking about their comments re: Fort Hood. Quit sniping at each other and quoting the dictionary.

Interesting New Yorker article on murder in the US in comparison to Europe: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critic...atlarge_lepore

Quoting Francoamerican: Interesting New Yorker article on murder in the US in comparison to Europe:

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critic...atlarge_lepore

I responded in your separate thread.

Quoting badhatharry: I was going to be a smart-ass and say that that Romeo and Juliet was a romance, but I looked it up and found that I was wrong about Shakespeare's three types of plays. The three are comedies, tragedies and histories.

Isn't that fascinating?

Sometimes they are divided into 4 groups -- tragedies, comedies, histories, and romances, but the romances don't have to do with our contemporary use of terms like romantic -- the plays referred to are Cymbeline, Winter's Tale, Pericles, and Tempest. However, these divisions are all generally arguable, because they are imposed after the fact. Similarly, while Aristotle had a theory of tragedy (based on the plays known to him at the time), there's no reason to assume that Shakespeare was attempting to put Aristotle's theory into effect or that Shakespeare's plays follow Aristotle's model. Fact is, they don't. It's a bad interpretation of Shakespeare to claim that no one is to blame in a tragedy, and it's certainly false to attribute such a statement to Shakespeare even if one thinks that Shakespeare's plays as a whole support such a claim. Shakespeare was writing plays, not defining what tragedy is. In any event, kez is right about how tragedy

Quoting kezboard: You know, when Jones called Republicans assholes, he wasn't talking about you specifically. Also, Salt, for God's sake, I know you hate Obama and think he's a big Marxist fascist communist radical meanie, but you still haven't shown how it's his fault that Nidal Hasan killed all those people.

I suggest you go look into Van Jones community organizing.