|This idiot from Michigan was just|
wondering if shooting a couple
protesters would help end all those
Our latest exhibit in this wall of shame is Dan Adamini, the Secretary of the Marquette (Michigan) County Republican Party. And possibly soon to be former Secretary.
Adamini was apparently upset by a demonstration that turned violent in Berkeley, California and forced the cancellation of a talk by odious weird right-winger Milo Yiannopoulos.
Adamini tweeted this gem in response: "Violent protesters who shut down free speech? Time for another Kent State. Perhaps one bullet stops a lot of thuggery."
He also went on Facebook and said this, grammer issues included:
"The violent protests at universities certainly indicate Portage acacian at the lower level. I'm thinking another Kent State might be the only solution protest stopped after one death. They only do it because there are no consequences at all."
That's quite a bit of word salad there, but you can see what Adamini seems to be suggesting. Just shoot somebody and that will make people just shut up already.
Kent State, as you might remember, was the 1970 anti-Vietnam protest at Kent State University in Ohio. Some of the protesters threw rocks and such at police and National Guardsmen. The Guard opened fire, killing four of the demonstraters.
So yeah, that's right, Adamini was suggesting what happened at Kent State back in 1970 was a swell idea.
Of course, if you want demonstrators to quiet down and stop, maybe shooting them isn't the best idea for many reasons, beyond the crime of killing people.
It'll backfire, pardon the awful pun. People were so outraged by Kent State that many believe it hastened the end of the Vietnam War. Which wasn't exactly what the Nixon administration wanted back in 1970.
Would violence against anti-Trump protesters hasten the end of the Trump era? I frankly don't want to find out, and I'm sure most other people feel the same way.
Since posting and taking down those offensive posts in social media, Adamini says he's against violence, too.
He posted this on Twitter, says MLive:
"Taking a lot of heat for a very poorly worded tweet yesterday. Sorry folks, the intent was to try to stop the violence, not encourage more."
Well, maybe, if he considers all demonstrations against Trump and his actions and his minions "violence." It doesn't seem to daw on Adamini that telling people to shut up when the criticize an elected official is also an attempt to squelch First Amendment rights.
I'm being Captain Obvious here, but sometimes, you gotta spell it out.
Calling his bad tweet "poorly worded?" I think the problem here goes way beyond grammar issues.