Comments: A Spree Killer's Long, Rambling Manifesto

Okay, this is in poor taste here. There are a thousand reasons why people kill. I admit one gets nowhere ignoring man's capacity for violence, any man. BUT it is hard to link a politically-motivated, calculated and expedient act of violence by the powerhungry to an emotionally-motivated act of violence by a member of the perceived powerless. Cho had nothing to gain from what he did, and he even had the courtesy to off himself. Bush does not have the courtesy to commit harakiri before us when he finishes his war or if he ever does.

So this is very poor taste.

Posted by En Ming Hee at April 19, 2007 11:20 AM

I admire your snazzy reversal of the expected response! Well done.

Seriously, though, what I find interesting about this is how the psychology of people who are genuinely insane—to the point of being unable to function at all in society—is generally just an extremely exaggerated version of "normal" human psychology.

In this particular case, we see how people always, always justify violence as being the responsibility of others. They were forced to do it! It was self-defense! Etc.

Posted by Jonathan Schwarz at April 19, 2007 11:31 AM

Your argument is a total non-sequitor, En Ming Hee. The motivation for the respective acts is irrelevant, what's relevant is the parallels of their shifting of the guilt.

Posted by anon at April 19, 2007 11:33 AM

And if you post this at your favorite neo-conservative watering hole, more than likely they will still not get the point; either they will complain "you took it outta context!" or they will bleat the equivalent of "The president has mentally ill tendencies. He's still good--he's still good!"

And another compare-and-contrast for ya:

The disclosure added to the rapidly growing list of warning signs that appeared well before the student opened fire.

I think all of us here knew/know the "warning signs" for GWB; blowing up frogs with firecrackers, anyone?

Posted by The tECHIDNA at April 19, 2007 11:33 AM

And if you post this at your favorite neo-conservative watering hole, more than likely they will still not get the point; either they will complain "you took it outta context!" or they will bleat the equivalent of "The president has mentally ill tendencies. He's still good--he's still good!"

And another compare-and-contrast for ya:

The disclosure added to the rapidly growing list of warning signs that appeared well before the student opened fire.

I think all of us here knew/know the "warning signs" for GWB; blowing up frogs with firecrackers, anyone?

Posted by The tECHIDNA at April 19, 2007 11:37 AM

My apologies for the double post. The Intertubes are constipated.

Posted by The tECHIDNA at April 19, 2007 11:41 AM

I had the same reaction that En Ming Hee did. I also agree with Jon. This makes my head hurt! Seriously, though - isn't always in poor taste to point out that we're governed by murderous liars?

Posted by Aaron Datesman at April 19, 2007 11:47 AM

Actually it isn't in poor taste to point out why murderous liars run the world, it's only poor taste to point out why people have had to lie and murder to run society.

Posted by En Ming Hee at April 19, 2007 11:56 AM

Sorry I meant that it is in poor taste to point out that murderous liars run the world, it is not in poor taste, however, if you point out that lying and murder have been part of society and civilization from the beginning.

Posted by En Ming Hee at April 19, 2007 11:59 AM

we have, and always will, put the last generation's crimes behind us

Posted by hibiscus at April 19, 2007 12:27 PM

oh, and, crimes can only be committed by criminals — captains of the universe may scoff at the law, but they are not scofflaws

Posted by hibiscus at April 19, 2007 12:38 PM

GWB blew up frogs with firecrackers? Ugh.

I'm sure you could find serial killers and dictators who self-consciously delighted in their agency of violence; you can find a horrorshow example of just about anything.In general I'm not a big fan of drawing any kind of material at all from these one off insane murder sprees--small number statistics and all that. Wikipedia has a good summary of them, however, and it does seem that the *pattern* of exzternalizing blame even when suicidally cruel, and I'd rather compare that pattern with the presidential pattern.

Posted by Ile at April 19, 2007 01:12 PM

If only George would be "quiet, a loner, and keep to himself."(!)

If he went back to being an alcoholic ne'er-do-well who didn't kill people I imagine there are literally millions of people who'd be more than happy to buy him beer.

Posted by Jonathan Versen at April 19, 2007 01:51 PM

No mater what George has done or is going to do, WE are his crime partners, WE finance him in ALL he does, WE are the power behind his throne, WE are his military might, WE are that endless resource from which he draws strength, THE TAXPAYER.

Posted by Mike Meyer at April 19, 2007 03:41 PM

Hey Mike, what are you always talking about? Do you have some sort of rambling manifesto written up? I certainly don't have any power to influence GWB, and believe me, my taxes are withdrawn and directed very much counter to my desires. But there's these laws, y'see, where you go to jail if you don't pay your taxes? Cf. Capone, Al.

Posted by saurabh at April 19, 2007 06:39 PM

Saurabh -

I know. Every year I write on my taxes, "Please use this money to educate poor people and not to kill people in other countries."

And they NEVER acquiesce.

Posted by Chance at April 19, 2007 08:57 PM

When I saw Cho I thought of Bush.
They are/were both self-important and psychopathic little pricks.
Keep them off my television screen.

Posted by whizkid at April 19, 2007 10:30 PM

The decision to start a war was Bush's; he's the one with blood on his hands. It's not our fault. Where have I heard that before?

I agree with you Mike Meyer; we are complicit. If enough of us were willing to risk going to jail or getting banged up a bit, we could stand up and insist on the type of government we want. Democracies, after all, are about pressure from below, not benevolence from above.

No one needs to waste ink suggesting that I volunteer to go first. I admit to being a pedantic, lazy coward.

Posted by New Day at April 19, 2007 10:31 PM

the only reason I pay taxes is the fact that they will get more $$$ out of me if I try not to do so - so the only ethical choice is to be very very poor and maybe homeless...... so, lacking the courage to do that, I pay the taxes, and I am therefore complicit in these crimes, even if I do spend 30 hours a week non-violently trying to stop them.

Posted by Susan at April 20, 2007 02:58 AM

Jonathan, Anon, I think you are both only half-right. There is an obvious parallel about their unwillingness to accept responsibility for their actions, but the fact is that Bush was enabled by others, namely the American voters who let him get away with it. Meanwhile, chances are Cho was known to have problems and was either ignored, or pushed further by people who wanted a cheap laugh, or something. They are both responsible for what they did, but everyone else around them are responsible for what *they* did (or didn't do). Neither Bush nor Cho made people stupid or apathetic.

There seems to be this implicit assumption that people all act in complete isolation and that nobody is responsible for what influences us. The only responsibility we ever acknowledge is that of the actor, not that of the influence who either pushed or enabled them to act in the first place.

Posted by Shade Tail at April 20, 2007 12:18 PM

Wow - If only bush would kill only 30 MORE people and THEN KILL himself ! ! !

That would be our best case synario...
Perhaps he could snap at a cabinet meeting and take out dick for as a final gesture.

Posted by Bush is Ossoma at April 20, 2007 12:55 PM

Wow - If only bush would kill only 30 MORE people and THEN KILL himself ! ! !

That would be our best case synario...
Perhaps he could snap at a cabinet meeting and take out dick for us as a final gesture.

Posted by Bush is Ossoma at April 20, 2007 12:55 PM

Why is everybody dumping on Cho? He killed only 32 people. That's in 23 years -- about 1.4 per year. Hell, Bush had killed over a hundred times more US soldiers, and thousands times more 'furriners'.

Posted by Roy at April 20, 2007 03:30 PM

The two quotes are about blaming others for one's actions.

Mike Myer's point was no one is taking responsiblity for their funding of a neocon,
murdering, insane administration using income tax participation as the metaphorical point.
The reality of course is the personal income tax pays for nearly nothing.

Arron Russo's film Freedom to Fasism clearly shows that there are no laws
demanding private citizen taxation on money earned.

Most of your comments clearly indicate a lack of understanding what is going on in our country
and in the world other than headline news feeds which assist the slight of hand to misdirect the publics focus.

Posted by Bob Daniels at April 20, 2007 06:24 PM

Well, gosh, Bob Daniels, I guess you'll have to take a few points off for content. How'd we do on spelling and punctuation?

Posted by New Day at April 20, 2007 07:52 PM

Can anyone say P-A-T-S-Y. If you haven't figured on Karl Rove being behind this: SHAME. ON. YOU... Fucking pathetic man. Fucking pathetic... You 'Merikans are flipping retarded.

Posted by at April 23, 2007 10:34 AM

Even in victory, Liberals and Liberalist institutions seem doomed in The United States. Very scary.

Posted by at April 23, 2007 10:36 AM

Forget about the taxes then. What about voting him back to office in 2004?

Posted by arajand at April 24, 2007 08:37 PM