Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Riley Stays

By Greg L | 18 April 2007 | Crime, Blogs | 24 Comments

NLS has a post up this morning complaining that Riley’s post concerning the murderer at Virginia Tech was out of line, and says he intends to discuss those blogs that still link to Virginia Virtucon. I think it’s probably a good idea to make sure Ben has something substantial to discuss, more than the fact that Virtucon will continue to appear on this site’s blogroll.

Within days of the perpetrator of the bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City being identified, discussions immediately erupted concerning the motivations of Timothy McVeigh and who helped shape a mind that could be capable of such horror. People rightly wanted to know why such a thing could have possibly happened, just as we search for the answer to that same question now in regards to Cho Seung-Hui. The answer then was that radical groups such as the KKK and “right-wing militia groups”, the writings of William Pierce, and the short-wave radio rantings of William Cooper clearly poisoned a mind with murderous hate. Finding the philosophical rationale behind that senseless tragedy was then a noble exercise, intended to help discover the means by which future tragedy could be averted. There were no public complaints about this to my recollection.

The rantings of Cho Seung-Hui point to a different philosophical underpinning. Instead of the politically comfortable bogeyman of the Klan, the basis for Mr. Seung-Hui’s derangement seem to be Marxist class warfare theories, where “the rich” are the source of all, or most of the proletariat’s problems, and consistently display attitudes and behaviors that demonstrate them to be less worthy than the noble everyman or woman. Riley points this out, or rather slams this idea squarely into the reader’s face, and predictably those who might harbor some degree of reverence for this philosophy are reacting as if they’ve been assaulted with a baseball bat. The reaction of some seems to demonstrate just how powerful this argument is. It really is quite a blunt instrument with which to batter the far left. Not Democrats, mind you, who rarely ascribe to the notion that class warfare makes any sense whatsoever. This argument really is the louisville slugger to apply against Marxist-inspired class warfare promoters.

So, all you liberal elitists and sanctimonious Europeans so ready to criticize Virginia and the U.S., take a long hard look at the drivel you’re spewing out into these young minds and see what it ultimately results in.

Statements like this didn’t raise an eyebrow when the country was searching for answers in the wake of Oklahoma City. Now the influence comes from a different direction, and this same once noble exercise is now met with howls of outrage as Marxism is once again demonstrated to be the single most destructive political theory ever devised. Then it was good to understand why and how something like this could have happened. Now this search for meaning is apparently insensitive, wrong, a premature leap to conclusions, and worthy of every expletive that can be directed towards it.

I’m keeping Riley on my blogroll, and I may even decide to borrow his bat.

The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.


  1. whackette said on 18 Apr 2007 at 12:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    This tempts me to sneak Riley onto the blogroll of the site that may not be mentioned here.

  2. stloimpure said on 18 Apr 2007 at 3:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    I like your take on it all

  3. Anonymous said on 18 Apr 2007 at 3:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    Don’t forget that the left also blamed Rush Limbaugh and the 1994 Republican Revolution for Oklahoma City.

    The left is just upset that Cho was following in Jim Webb’s literary footsteps, writing about pedophilia and all, and was counting on him to run for U.S. Senate from Virginia someday.

  4. A Creature of the Left? « Virginia Virtucon said on 18 Apr 2007 at 3:49 pm:
    Flag comment

    […] 2:  Also, be sure to read what Black Velvet Bruce Li, Grumpy’s Gripes, and SWAC Girl are […]

  5. Anonymous said on 18 Apr 2007 at 4:15 pm:
    Flag comment


  6. Jonathan Mark said on 18 Apr 2007 at 4:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    I thought Virtucon’s statement was stupid but not offensive. What if it turns out that the shooter is a Young Republican? Does it even matter? We are dealing with mental illness and criminally violent behavior here.

  7. Not Jim Webb's Gun said on 18 Apr 2007 at 4:33 pm:
    Flag comment

    Boo hoo hoo — the left can’t take it when the shoe is on the other foot.

  8. Batson D. Belfrey said on 18 Apr 2007 at 4:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    I think NLS has missed Riley’s point. Liberal ideals have permeated the college campus. We are no finding out that this was a very troubled young man, The warning signs were there, in his writings, and in his bizzare behavior. What was the response of the liberal educators? Refer him to counseling. Huh?

    Also, the VT campus bans any and all handguns in dorms, and conceealed carry on campus. They can’t bring criminal charges against anyone who is in possession, but the can threaten expulsion for violations of school policy. What did this do? It disarmed the law-abiding. If one student or professor would have been permitted to carry, Cho could have been stopped. Instead, you had the VT police picking their noses at the first crime scene, and the administration sending out emails, two hours after the first shooting. They had two students dead, and no weapon, which would indicate that this wasn’t a murder suicide. Pretty clear there was still a shooter on the loose. Did they lock the campus down? Make announcements over the PA system? No.

    When are liberals going to wake up and realize that candle-light vigils and the like are nothing more than the sheep standing together in a herd. Stricter gun laws would not have prevented this. Identifying this individual as a potential threat could have. Allowing law-abiding students who have been vetted by the state as part of the CHP application process to carry on campus may have. A competent response by the VTPD and the VT Admin most defintely would have.

  9. AWCheney said on 18 Apr 2007 at 5:41 pm:
    Flag comment

    This is not a “carry or not carry” issue, in my opinion. It is, however, an issue of law and order on our college campuses. From all reports, this young man had previously been guilty of arson and stalking, both of which would have placed him into the criminal justice system…most certainly the arson. Had his case been presented to local law enforcement for adjudication, he would have been going through the system right now, probably winding up in a secure mental health facility. Instead, it was handled internally and he was sent to counciling, most likely voluntary counciling…and he probably only showed up once. If colleges believe that parents want their children to live under a different set of rules, perhaps they should ask those parents.

  10. mack said on 18 Apr 2007 at 7:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    “We are dealing with mental illness and criminally violent behavior here.”

    No Jonathan, we are dealing with evil here.

    And I’m tired of hearing “tragedy” from the drive-by media. It was not a tragedy — it was evil.

    The leftists have a hard time dealing with the reality of evil; the atheists even more so.

    Riley is right, correct, accurative.

  11. Mad Hatter said on 18 Apr 2007 at 7:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    BVBL - I think you make an excellent parallel between McVeigh and Cho.

    Both were influenced by radical - I repeat radical - belief systems. They may have been on opposite ends of the spectrum, but the result was the same… Mental depravity. Death.

    Riley might have been a bit hasty with his post (c’mon… at least wait a week) but the principle there stands. Hatred of people leads to death - whether it be hatred of black or white, rich or poor, man or woman.

    The lesson should be taken to heart by both liberal and conservative extremists.

    BDB - He should have failed out of Tech, judging by the quality of his writing. How did he make it to his senior year? The media keeps reporting how his professors were afraid of “setting him off,” so they didn’t report his behavior, press him for explanation, or flunk him… apparently they failed. Miserably. You are right that the warning signs were there. It is heart breaking that no one picked up on it earlier. But who is to say that we would have done any different, in their shoes? Now 33 families have a gaping wound where a relative used to stand.

    However, the answer is not to go out and arm every man, woman, and child in the Blacksburg area.

    Nor is it to stop selling guns to anyone.

    Nor is it to point your fingers at the VT faculty, the VT police, and the VT student body.

    This was an example of pure evil enacted upon humanity.

    The only person to blame is dead. Cho, an obviously disturbed young man.

  12. NoVA Scout said on 18 Apr 2007 at 10:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    People are missing Riley’s point, I think. It’s impossible that what he said was not intended as parody or lampoon. I think he was just poking fun at the type of person who can reduce any human tragedy to being attributable to the politics of people with whom he disagrees. It may not have been the best time for such a light-hearted poke, but it’s not possible that Jim really thinks Cho was overcome by liberal political forces that made him murder. Give Riley a little credit.

  13. Anonymous said on 19 Apr 2007 at 12:06 am:
    Flag comment

    the culture of violence is what killed those 32 people. the culture of violence is most actively supported/championed/profited from by those on the right side of the political spectrum. ergo, riley was completely wrong and so are his apologists.

  14. Greg L said on 19 Apr 2007 at 1:27 am:
    Flag comment

    Yeah, like those Earth First folks, Pol Pot, Che Guevara, the EZLN, Shining Path, and those people in Philadelphia who rigged their house with gasoline bombs and blew them when the cops showed up. They’re all followers of Richard Nixon.


  15. Anonymous said on 19 Apr 2007 at 2:04 am:
    Flag comment

    As a general rule, liberals tend to favor peace and diplomacy while conservatives tend to favor militarism and force. The bloodletting we’re seeing in Iraq right now is a perfect example. 9-11 is another example. Bush and Bin Laden are united in their belief that violence is a good way to solve problems and to force their conservative ideologies down the rest of the world’s throats. They both have so much blood on their hands that they wouldn’t even know how to begin finding their way to salvation. They both need to get on their knees and beg the world for forgiveness.

  16. The Ward View » I think Ben needs a nap. said on 19 Apr 2007 at 7:01 am:
    Flag comment

    […] talking are Greg at Black Velvet Bruce Li who says:  Riley Stays - I’m keeping Riley on my blogroll, and I may even decide to borrow his […]

  17. Greg L said on 19 Apr 2007 at 9:13 am:
    Flag comment

    Liberals seem to favor surrender and servitude while conservatives favor a strong defense and deterrence, from my perspective. In this instance, liberal adherence to the tenets of Marxism seems to have fueled the rage within a very troubled young man, and made him think that he needed to follow in the footsteps of folks like Che Guevera and strike a blow for the proletariat.

    When you spew marxist class warfare rhetoric, sometimes the results are somewhat different that the noble goals liberals are trying to accomplish. Fundamentally, this is the problem with liberalism — while it attempts to accomplish some great things, the means and methods of liberalism create outcomes far more serious than the problems they were trying to address.

  18. Matt said on 19 Apr 2007 at 9:33 am:
    Flag comment

    I am shocked by this whole thread. How can anyone say Cho did this horrible act because he followed Marxist ideology? Does anyone here have access to the full texts of his writings or the contents of his library? All we know is that he hated rich kids. Pidgeonholing this act, or the McVeigh act, into a liberal vs. conservative argument is insulting to the victims and their families.

    Anonymous said on 19 Apr 2007 at 12:06 am is an idiot and the wide brushstrokes being painted by Greg and others is nothing but cariciture of those on both ends and in the middle of the political spectrum.

    I hope that NovaScout is correct is his analysis of Riley’s intentions, because if he isn’t, Riley and the people who want to break this down into something political have no heart or compassion for what has happened.

    If you take the time to read about each of the victims or talk to someone who was there you would know that politics has no place in this discussion. It has taken me several hours to get thru the bios of the victims because their loss is so tragic and I can only get thru a couple at a time.

    There are issues, like immigration, that I had hoped to work on with Greg and others on the Republican side but that is made much more difficult b/c of this blind hatred of people who don’t see things in the same way as you. You can’t paint those who disagree with you as raging Marxist liberals. Not all Democrats are Marxists and not all Republicans are Fascists; we all just need to get over our tendency to profile those with whom we disagree or we will never be able to work together to solve problems that affect us all.

  19. Mad Hatter said on 19 Apr 2007 at 9:52 am:
    Flag comment


    Obviously, and understandably, many people have been deeply hurt by this tragedy.

    Some cry on others shoulders. Some go into seclusion. Some flame Cho on blogs.

    Natural human responses… anger, reticence, and tears.

    Those whose response is to flame Cho will of course accuse him of believing in opposite ideology as them. Who would attack someone by saying “he must have agreed with me, that’s why he did this evil act!”

    So please… let it slide. At least for a few days. If people are still trying to blame this horrific situation on liberals next Friday, then you should be worried. But now… now they are still hurting.

  20. Anonymous said on 19 Apr 2007 at 10:11 am:
    Flag comment

    The point people are missing (and that Ben conveniently omitted for his own reasons) is Riley’s post was entitled “A Creature of the Left?” (asking a question, trying to determine why Cho did what he did as so many other people are searching for answers to the question of why) as opposed to “A Creature of the Left” (making a statement of fact as Ben tried to portray Riley as doing.)

  21. Greg L said on 19 Apr 2007 at 11:57 am:
    Flag comment

    I had hoped to be more clear that I am not trying to claim that Democrats in general are at fault here. They are not. I think there’s a case to be made here that liberalism, which does seem to incorporate a substantial amount of marxist philosophy, may potentially have a lot to do with what seeded the fertile soil of this evil man’s mind with the philosophical nugget that later grew into a monstrous hatred. I also don’t believe that there’s any intent whatsoever on the part of liberals to cause this. No one wants outrages like this to occur.

    This may be an example of the unintended consequences of liberalism, and it’s not at all wrong to explore this possibility, just as it was not wrong to explore what drove Timothy McVeigh to commit his atrocity.

  22. Anonymous said on 19 Apr 2007 at 4:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    Conservatism is clearly at fault here. Easy access to guns, emphasis on violence as a means of addressing problems, an under-funded mental health system that lets people like Cho fall through the cracks, etc., etc. — these are all core tenets of Republican/conservative ideology and they are directly to blame for this tragedy.

  23. Greg L said on 19 Apr 2007 at 5:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    OK, what conservative foundation seems to underpin what Cho said motivated him to do what he did? Was it his statements in support of low taxes? Opposition to abortion? Personal responsibility? What exactly did he say that leads you to believe the motivation for what he did came from any sort of conservative policy position?

  24. Mad Hatter said on 19 Apr 2007 at 5:39 pm:
    Flag comment

    Anon just PWNed you, Greg.

    You waltzed joyfully into his trap of words.

    Now stop trying to use it for political advantage.

Comments are closed.

Views: 4411