How Not to Approach Women »« Friedersdorf on Meaningless Oversight

Geller Rants Incoherently

Pam Geller led a bunch of wingnuts protesting an event in Tennessee sponsored by the American Muslim Advisory Council, using a bullhorn to deliver her typically incoherent rant about leftists, public schools and how the Department of Justice has been taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood. Here’s the video. Note the sign behind her that says “save our constition.”

Comments

  1. Pyra says

    And there is a guy with the 1st amendment printed on his sign. Really. These sick fucks are totally unable to read. Add me to the file of people giving her another vile name.

  2. atheist says

    Mind blowing how they really seem to believe that the US Justice Department is being taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood.

  3. Gvlgeologist, FCD says

    Ed, what is it with the redundant blog post titles? First it’s “Wingnuts go over the top”, then it’s “Gellar rants incoherently”. Come on, you’re a comic!

    (said with affection and appreciation!)

    Seriously, though, I wonder how people like her can function.

  4. says

    Seriously, though, I wonder how people like her can function.

    Short answer: they can’t — not at the level of adults in a modern high-tech society at any rate.

  5. atheist says

    Unfortunately for us, Ms. Geller functions pretty well as a political gadfly, and she’s had some real success in spreading Islamophobia. She’s a successful hate breeder.

  6. raven says

    Seriously, though, I wonder how people like her can function.

    Short answer: they can’t — not at the level of adults in a modern high-tech society at any rate.

    True.

    Another victim of fundie-ism induced cognitive impairment.

    Michele Bachmann had an easy and high paying job, representing wingnuts in Minnesota. All she had to do is show up once in a while. Even that became too much for her.

  7. atheist says

    @Modusoperandi – June 13, 2013 at 11:30 am (UTC -4)

    To be fair, our constition has been pretty much destroyed.

    Indeed.

    Though I’m pretty sure they mean the magical talisman, not the founding legal document.

  8. John Pieret says

    The freedom of speech is a line in the sand, because without freedom of speech, peace-filled men must resort to violence. And we don’t want to! They came and they want to criminalize speech that’s inflammatory.

    She said out in public with a bullhorn in front of her face and nobody arrested her. Reality never intrudes on fear mongers.

  9. says

    You have to admit that she is brave though. I don’t think I could go to Tennessee and stand up against Islam. That’s like going into the lion’s den, if lion’s dens were full of people just like me and also had no lions.

  10. Trebuchet says

    Ed, what is it with the redundant blog post titles? First it’s “Wingnuts go over the top”, then it’s “Gellar rants incoherently”. Come on, you’re a comic!

    (said with affection and appreciation!)

    Seriously, though, I wonder how people like her can function.

    I was going to respond with the old “and in other news, water is wet…” thing but you beat me to it.

    And regarding the last sentence, I spent a couple of puzzled seconds wondering what a “can function” is, and why people would like it or not.

  11. cptdoom says

    You have to admit that she is brave though. I don’t think I could go to Tennessee and stand up against Islam. That’s like going into the lion’s den, if lion’s dens were full of people just like me and also had no lions.

    Well, modusoperandi, she is a Yankee, just sayin’

    I can’t get past the inherent contradiction of admitting those who criticize her are simply engaging in our free speech rights, while at the same time claiming such criticism is an attempt to silence Ms. Gellar and her racist bullsh*t. Certainly those of us who actually believe all Americans – even Muslims – have civil rights would prefer that Ms. Gellar shut her ignorant trap, we aren’t trying to force her to do so.

  12. says

    The freedom of speech is a line in the sand, because without freedom of speech, peace-filled men must resort to violence. And we don’t want to! They came and they want to criminalize speech that’s inflammatory.

    Says the woman who wants to criminalize some people’s religion.

    I really wonder when one of these numb nuts is going to slip up and use the phrase “final solution.”

  13. jnorris says

    Why is it that the political parties can segregate protestors away from the delegates and ordinary people having a party, rally or something have to endure Geller or Phelps?

  14. Gvlgeologist, FCD says

    And regarding the last sentence, I spent a couple of puzzled seconds wondering what a “can function” is, and why people would like it or not.

    Trebouchet, you owe me a new keyboard.

    cptdoom:

    I can’t get past the inherent contradiction of admitting those who criticize her are simply engaging in our free speech rights, while at the same time claiming such criticism is an attempt to silence Ms. Gellar and her racist bullsh*t. Certainly those of us who actually believe all Americans – even Muslims – have civil rights would prefer that Ms. Gellar shut her ignorant trap, we aren’t trying to force her to do so.

    I think that to a wingnut, criticism = denial of free speech. And free speech = no criticism. Unless they’re doing the criticism.

    Seriously, I think the problem is that much of what they say is so easily proven wrong that if anyone can comment and show it for the BS that it is, they’re intimidated, and therefore they think that they’re being silenced. Note how many ID, Creationist, and far right blogs don’t allow comment.

Leave a Reply