Navy SEAL: Why yes, I did punch Jesse Ventura in the face for saying we deserved to lose some guys in Iraq at a wake for an MOH recipient

posted at 4:32 pm on January 5, 2012 by Allahpundit

Via Breitbart TV, three minutes from Opie & Anthony with the deadliest sniper in American history. So awful is this accusation that I paused after watching it to consider that maybe it isn’t true. I mean, is this something that a belligerent Truther would be likely to say to a bunch of a servicemen while they’re mourning a fallen comrade? And then I thought: Yeah, this is exactly what he’d say. So there you go.

By the way, was Jesse Ventura actually once governor of Minnesota? This Jesse Ventura? Did I hallucinate that? Content warning.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

The story here is not so much the punch in the face but the statement that Ventura made in a public place that the Seals deserved to lose some guys beacuse he disagrees with the war. What in the world happens to a person to make them think that way. Especially someone who claims to have previously served as a Seal.

pcola71 on January 5, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Chris Kyle has been shot twice, blown up on 6 separate occasions, dusted more 3rd world savages than any other man in the US, and dropped Ventura with a right cross. He gets the medal of Ungodly Giant Brass Sack.

Alden Pyle on January 5, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Guess what? I never said it did. In fact, I said this is not a Constitutional or free speech issue, but it is an issue of rights. No one has the right to use force against someone else because they don’t like an opinion.

Do people not read?

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Guess what? At some point, people stop reading certain people’s comments. But I have stipulated your point about the Constitution. You’re welcome and I will comment from the above perspective from now on.

And don’t forget, I have entertained the idea that Mr. Kyle may pay for his forceful disagreement with Mr. Ventura’s opinion. I hope you’ve read those comments.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 9:57 PM

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 9:36 PM

I totally agree. Isn’t free speech without repercussion just a subset of the no consequences mentality that seems prevalent lately. I don’t know where it came from (I would guess the 1960s) but it can’t operate in reality without government intervention.

If a man made decisions such as these regularly and without government assistance, life would be nasty, brutish and short. The military, and especially critical skills personnel, still care about things like honor. Offend it and you get popped in the mouth. Not really sure what the argument against that is…

blankminde on January 5, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Alden Pyle on January 5, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Wow. That’s an irresponsible thing to suggest.

blankminde on January 5, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Here’s your problem: this isn’t about the law; this is about rights. Yes, everyone has the right to their life and to their person and the right to be secure in their person. This means NO ONE has the right to initiate force against someone else that is not in self-defense. So yes, this means we all have the right to express our opinion without being punched.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Cite, please.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:01 PM

M240H – yep… ;)

I am a female, 62 years old, 5 ft. tall and I would have decked him too !! in a ‘michigan minute’ !!! take THAT all you wussies on this thread !!!

kathy k.

kennedyk49 on January 5, 2012 at 9:16 PM

This time of year, in this part of Michigan, it’s to darn cold to wait a whole minute. Take about three seconds to think about it, and at your height, aim about 7 inches below the belt buckle.

Yoop on January 5, 2012 at 9:35 PM
Gotcha !!! 7 inches below the belt buckle – works for me !!!

I am a little south of you – W.Branch area – Had 36 degrees today – went out to burn the papers & feed the birds & deer in my ever so elegant sweatshirt & sweatpants – did wear my boots tho… don’t even have enough snow for snowmobiling…. Been in Michigan 62 years – don’t need no dam* coat. ;)

Kathy k

kennedyk49 on January 5, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Sounds like Jesse needed that!

Minorcan Maven on January 5, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Wow at a couple of these commenters. I have to assume they are young ones from the everybody gets a trophy crowd.

It’s a punch in the face, I’m sure Ventura has had much worse in his life. Who hasn’t been punched in the face?

reaganaut on January 5, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Do people not read?

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 9:45 PM

You still do not comprehend “rights”. Where on earth does Jesse have the right to not be punched? Who or what gives him that right to be free from repercussion?

There are laws that “protect” you from being punched, but that all depends on whether the LEO can be there to enforce the law. Just as possession is 9/10ths of the law, as soon as the LEO is out of reach, you are at the mercy of the one you insulted. Furthermore, the offended may even make the calculation that being punished by the law is worth the satisfaction of pummeling the offender. Nowhere in this scenario do you have a right.

IOW, to rephrase the old saying; you may be right to assume that the law protects you, but you’d be dead ass wrong when the blow lands.

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Ventura owes those folks an apology.

What a disgrace.

so-notbuyingit on January 5, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Nothing Ventura’d, nothing gained.

Kudos Kyle!

profitsbeard on January 5, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Here’s your problem: this isn’t about the law; this is about rights. Yes, everyone has the right to their life and to their person and the right to be secure in their person. This means NO ONE has the right to initiate force against someone else that is not in self-defense. So yes, this means we all have the right to express our opinion without being punched.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 9:53 PM

We all have the right to express our opinion until the expression of our opinion infringes on someone elses right to not to have an opinion foisted on them in a public place when they are having a wake. The funny thing about “rights” is that they also come with responsibilites. In the real world if you do not exercise your rights responsibly someone may take offense and exercise their right to respond. Then it becomes about the law because without the law the only right you have is the right that you can secure through the use of force. This my friend is way of the world since the beginning of civilization.

pcola71 on January 5, 2012 at 10:11 PM

You still do not comprehend “rights”. Where on earth does Jesse have the right to not be punched? Who or what gives him that right to be free from repercussion?

There are laws that “protect” you from being punched, but that all depends on whether the LEO can be there to enforce the law. Just as possession is 9/10ths of the law, as soon as the LEO is out of reach, you are at the mercy of the one you insulted. Furthermore, the offended may even make the calculation that being punished by the law is worth the satisfaction of pummeling the offender. Nowhere in this scenario do you have a right.

IOW, to rephrase the old saying; you may be right to assume that the law protects you, but you’d be dead ass wrong when the blow lands.

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 10:06 PM

The LEO also has a lot of discretion in how to handle a call. Let’s see, hero SEAL allegedly punches a loudmouth disrupting a wake. I’ll be 10-24, 10-8. No report.

G M on January 5, 2012 at 10:12 PM

IOW, to rephrase the old saying; you may be right to assume that the law protects you, but you’d be dead ass wrong when the blow lands.

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Thats perfect and it’ll go right over his head.

Sultanofsham on January 5, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Dante,

Here’s the problem that I’m having with your argument: if someone who was not black and not Hispanic began patrolling my block shouting that all blacks and Hispanics must die, using every pejorative for said groups and, at some point, received a “convincing incentive” to stop doing what he/she was doing, what problem would you have with that? Jesse Ventura received the equivalent response when he opined that SEALs deserved to die.

You keep talking about rights, but rights come from one source: God. And the reason why people keep bringing up the Constitution is that the Declaration of Independence acknowledges this. Therefore, we agree: Jesse Ventura has the right to express his opinion. The DoC and the Constitution acknowledge his God-given right to that.

Consequences from private parties are merely opinion. You have made yours clear.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Thats perfect and it’ll go right over his head.

Sultanofsham on January 5, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Indeed. That’s how it is with these idealist–no connection to reality. ;)

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Thats perfect and it’ll go right over his head.

Sultanofsham on January 5, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Or right through his head – in one ear and out the other.

MelonCollie on January 5, 2012 at 10:17 PM

You still do not comprehend “rights”. Where on earth does Jesse have the right to not be punched? Who or what gives him that right to be free from repercussion?.

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 10:06 PM

No, it is you you doesn’t comprehend them. I stated it above: everyone has the right to their life and to be secure in their person. No one has the right to initiate force against another that is not an act of self-defense. This is the first right of property, from which all other property rights come from. This is a right we are all born with; it is a right because we exist.

We all have the right to express our opinion until the expression of our opinion infringes on someone elses right to not to have an opinion foisted on them in a public place when they are having a wake. The funny thing about “rights” is that they also come with responsibilites. In the real world if you do not exercise your rights responsibly someone may take offense and exercise their right to respond. Then it becomes about the law because without the law the only right you have is the right that you can secure through the use of force. This my friend is way of the world since the beginning of civilization.

pcola71 on January 5, 2012 at 10:11 PM

No one has a right to not hear or read an opinion they don’t like in a public place. No one has a right to not be offended.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:18 PM

I notice neither Dante or Lord cared to respond to my Yoop on January 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM.

That tells me all I need to know about either of them. No surprise in that Cracker Jack box.

Yoop on January 5, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Dante
Actually, you are wrong. It’s an insult to honor which made the SEAL punch Ventura. I hate to break this to you, Dante. Most of the duels fought in Europe and in the United States in earlier times were not because of a physical attack, but because of one’s honor being trampled upon. Heck, being punch on the kisser was the least of the offender’s problems. One poster had pointed it out, usually that insult is followed by a challenge to a duel using either swords or pistols at the crack of dawn for one’s honor to be maintained or restored and the only way to solve the problem of honor is either you or him die.

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 10:20 PM

No one has the right to initiate force against another that is not an act of self-defense. This is the first right of property, from which all other property rights come from. This is a right we are all born with; it is a right because we exist.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:18 PM

Those rights only exist in your libertarian fantasyland.

sharrukin on January 5, 2012 at 10:22 PM

I don’t know where it came from (I would guess the 1960s) but it can’t operate in reality without government intervention.

blankminde on January 5, 2012 at 9:59 PM

I’m reminded of a Chris Rhea tune entitled “The Road To Hell”.

“And the perverted fear of violence, chokes a smile on every face.”

Congruity ………..

oldfiveanddimer on January 5, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Cite, please.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Well, we could start with John Locke …

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:24 PM

Dante
Actually, you are wrong. It’s an insult to honor which made the SEAL punch Ventura. I hate to break this to you, Dante. Most of the duels fought in Europe and in the United States in earlier times were not because of a physical attack, but because of one’s honor being trampled upon. Heck, being punch on the kisser was the least of the offender’s problems. One poster had pointed it out, usually that insult is followed by a challenge to a duel using either swords or pistols at the crack of dawn for one’s honor to be maintained or restored and the only way to solve the problem of honor is either you or him die.

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 10:20 PM

Wrong about what? Nothing “made” the SEAL punch Ventura; he chose to do so. I hate to break this to you, Dinobot, but duels of yesteryear were consensual.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:18 PM

You keep talking about rights. Well Ventura had the right to remain silent, Kyle strongly urged him to do so and apparently Ventura was convinced.

Oldnuke on January 5, 2012 at 10:28 PM

but duels of yesteryear were consensual.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Yes they were and usually were precipitated by one party mouthing off to another and then the offended party striking the offender.

Oldnuke on January 5, 2012 at 10:30 PM

I hope he gets to meet Obama.. or at least get within 1.2 miles of him.

Alden Pyle on January 5, 2012 at 9:56 PM

You crossed the line there bub.

jhffmn on January 5, 2012 at 10:33 PM

but duels of yesteryear were consensual.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Well, true, but you only declined if you didn’t mind being known throughout the land as a gutless worm.

MelonCollie on January 5, 2012 at 10:35 PM

I hate to break this to you Dante, but duels of yesteryear were not consensual. Refuse a duel and society in general regardless of social status will deem you a coward and your family will lose honor and status. Refusing a duel meant a fate worst than death. The only consensual thing about any duel was showing up.

Nothing made Ventura to open his mouth to insult the SEALS. HE CHOSE TO DO SO AND HE GOT PUNCHED. As they say, you have the right to any opinion, but be prepared to face the consequences.

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 10:36 PM

I hope he gets to meet Obama.. or at least get within 1.2 miles of him.

Alden Pyle on January 5, 2012 at 9:56 PM

The last thing you want is to make a martyr out of him. His death could easily trigger a nation-wide race riot just for starters.

And Obama is only the most visible symptom of the disease – a populace that willingly elects fools like him to office. Just look at who his successors would be, for pity’s sake.

MelonCollie on January 5, 2012 at 10:38 PM

Well, we could start with John Locke …

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:24 PM

Be specific.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:39 PM

Dante,

Here’s the problem that I’m having with your argument: if someone who was not black and not Hispanic began patrolling my block shouting that all blacks and Hispanics must die, using every pejorative for said groups and, at some point, received a “convincing incentive” to stop doing what he/she was doing, what problem would you have with that? Jesse Ventura received the equivalent response when he opined that SEALs deserved to die.

You keep talking about rights, but rights come from one source: God. And the reason why people keep bringing up the Constitution is that the Declaration of Independence acknowledges this. Therefore, we agree: Jesse Ventura has the right to express his opinion. The DoC and the Constitution acknowledge his God-given right to that.

Consequences from private parties are merely opinion. You have made yours clear.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:16 PM

If there were reason to believe that he would act on it, and if it was imminent, then action would be justified.

And for the record, the DOI does not say endowed by “God”; it says from our Creator. Again, we’re going back to Locke and deism, but that’s another discussion. The fact is, our rights exist because we exist.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:40 PM

No one has a right to not hear or read an opinion they don’t like in a public place. No one has a right to not be offended.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:18 PM

No flies on your nimble mind, eh.

I challenge you to test your thesis in one of three ways;
1) Go to into a gay bar and insult them
2) Go up to a white power gathering and insult them, or
3) Go up to a group of black panthers and insult them

Report back if they respected your right to disrespect them.

For extra points, you can get in the front row of the next Oboobi rally and use the words Jesse used to indicate he deserves to die for sending killers to smite innocent people in Afghan/Iraq. Do that and I promise to respect you the morning after as a man of misguided convictions.

Simply put, Jesse knew the code and betrayed his brethren and paid the price. Funny how those on high horses then come along to take offense on behalf of someone who isn’t complaining, much less even interested in the would be defenders.

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 10:41 PM

It would seem that Dante’s problem stems from the fact that he has absolutely no understanding or concept of HONOR, since he’s probably been taught that honor is passe, old-fashioned and something which only rubes, hicks, bitter clingers and other assorted socially unacceptable types consider important.
That’s probably because he’s young, inexperienced and the product of modern, progressive educational institutions and methods.
Honor is something that is no longer considered of any import by far too many young people. And that’s a shame, because they’ll suffer for it in the long run.

Solaratov on January 5, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Seriously Dante? You are WEAK. Your opinion is based purely on your desire to not have to anser to anyone for the words that come out of your mouth. I wonder, would a KKK rally (out front of a black church) where they opined about how all the [insert horrible word here] be free from reprisals in your world? Because I know I would kick a few arses…and you would stand around doing nothing…like a coward…

airmonkey on January 5, 2012 at 10:45 PM

bah, *answer…cant spell when I see red.

airmonkey on January 5, 2012 at 10:46 PM

Honor is something that is no longer considered of any import by far too many young people. And that’s a shame, because they’ll suffer for it in the long run.

Solaratov on January 5, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Spot on. I was beginning to think the same, but you nailed it.

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 10:47 PM

G M on January 5, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Brought back old memories. 10-98 no report.

arnold ziffel on January 5, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Dante,

I’m not saying that Mr. Kyle should not pay the legal price for his action against Mr. Ventura. However, I am wondering about the morals of the situation and I think many others commenting here have the same quandary.

You keep talking about rights. A ‘right’ has a specific definition and I think that the problem is that you have a definition of what rights are and the people you are arguing with (including me) have another.

Please define a ‘right’ as to what you think it is.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Do you have a wife, girlfriend, daughter, mother, boy friend or husband? What if I decided to come to your place and insult her or him by calling him or her names and telling him or her that that he or she is a loser for having you in front of your face with a lot of people seeing and hearing the diatribe . Will you just stand there and take it or will you deck me silly until I stop?

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 10:50 PM

If there were reason to believe that he would act on it, and if it was imminent, then action would be justified.

Your opinion?

And for the record, the DOI does not say endowed by “God”; it says from our Creator. Again, we’re going back to Locke and deism, but that’s another discussion. The fact is, our rights exist because we exist.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:40 PM

Creator=God. Our rights exist because God exists and granted them to us. You disagree or no?

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:51 PM

I hate to break this to you Dante, but duels of yesteryear were not consensual. Refuse a duel and society in general regardless of social status will deem you a coward and your family will lose honor and status. Refusing a duel meant a fate worst than death. The only consensual thing about any duel was showing up.

Nothing made Ventura to open his mouth to insult the SEALS. HE CHOSE TO DO SO AND HE GOT PUNCHED. As they say, you have the right to any opinion, but be prepared to face the consequences.

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 10:36 PM

I hate to break this to you, Dinobot, but they were consensual, otherwise it would be murder.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Do you have a wife, girlfriend, daughter, mother, boy friend or husband? What if I decided to come to your place and insult her or him by calling him or her names and telling him or her that that he or she is a loser for having you in front of your face with a lot of people seeing and hearing the diatribe . Will you just stand there and take it or will you deck me silly until I stop?

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 10:50 PM

I had already asked him to respond to essentially the same kind of situation nearly two hours ago. No response. I wonder why?

Yoop on January 5, 2012 at 11:01 PM

Your opinion?

No, belief. This is core to libertarian philosophy.

Creator=God. Our rights exist because God exists and granted them to us. You disagree or no?

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:51 PM

I do disagree, but as I said, it gets into deism and natural theology, and that’s another discussion. The sentiment, however, is correct.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:02 PM

“We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother”

William Shakespeare – 1599

“Your brothers deserved to die” (paraphrased)
Jesse Ventura

“The F*K did you just say?”
Chris Kyle

Think this pretty much illustrates the point.

PXCharon on January 5, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Wrong, they were consensual to a point because society demands that the offender and the offended party must meet in a field of honor in order to settle their differences . Running away from a duel destroys one’s reputation as well as the family name so much so that a gentleman is forced to go to meet his opponent in that field.
Again, you are wrong, the reason why the offending party and the offender does not resort to murder is this, a person who refused to participate in a duel became a pariah in the eyes of his family, friends and his social circle, a social outcast which in the eyes of his opponent is more deadly than killing the coward.

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Because he was an actual SEAL while Ventura was a cartoon character falsely claiming to be a SEAL.

NoDonkey on January 5, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Ventura was not a SEAL, he was in UDT-12 and he never saw combat. He has lied about it for years but when he was governor he admitted to both those facts.

V7_Sport on January 5, 2012 at 11:11 PM

I hate to break this to you, Dinobot, but they were consensual, otherwise it would be murder.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Not “murder” except as the prevailing law defines it. With dueling, if the offender refuses the challenge and refused to take back the insult, the offendee had the right to kill the offender at his leisure. Because as noted by others, since the beginning of time, insulting one’s honor is punishable by death. Even in this day and age, this code of honor is the rule, rather than the exception and applicable to 9/10s of the world’s population

Now to the other extreme of your “consensus” canard, are you saying that a cannibal who eats his willing & consenting meal is NOT guilty of murder and therefore has the right to suffer no legal/moral consequence for the act? What’s your sense of justice and rights here? Not a hypothetical question, as it happened twice in Germany, while the victim eaten alive meal by meal. They all met each other via cannibal online forums–ain’t the interwebs grand?

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 11:12 PM

If there were reason to believe that he would act on it, and if it was imminent, then action would be justified.–Dante

Your opinion?–baldilocks

And for the record, the DOI does not say endowed by “God”; it says from our Creator. Again, we’re going back to Locke and deism, but that’s another discussion. The fact is, our rights exist because we exist.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 10:40 PM

Creator=God. Our rights exist because God exists and granted them to us. You disagree or no?

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:51 PM

I do disagree, but as I said, it gets into deism and natural theology, and that’s another discussion. The sentiment, however, is correct.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Now I understand. Thanks.

So where do you think rights come from?

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Be specific.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:39 PM

Missed this post.

“Reason, which is that Law, teaches all Mankind, who would but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possessions.”

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Because he was an actual SEAL while Ventura was a cartoon character falsely claiming to be a SEAL.

NoDonkey on January 5, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Ventura was a SEAL.

ted c on January 5, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Do’oah… I meant to quote that one.
Here’s ventura’s spokesman admitting he wasn’t a SEAL.
Here is Ventura admitting he was never in combat.
As a former Sailor and someone who believes in the honor code I loathe a miserable liar like Ventura to the core. He’s a paranoid nut and he should rot in Mexico.

V7_Sport on January 5, 2012 at 11:18 PM

Now I understand. Thanks.

So where do you think rights come

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Nature and Nature’s God.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Not “murder” except as the prevailing law defines it. With dueling, if the offender refuses the challenge and refused to take back the insult, the offendee had the right to kill the offender at his leisure.

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 11:12 PM

Once again you keep trying to make this about law instead of rights. If a person does not consent to a duel, the other has no right to kill him. I don’t think you understand the word consensual.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:24 PM

You keep talking about rights. A ‘right’ has a specific definition and I think that the problem is that you have a definition of what rights are and the people you are arguing with (including me) have another.

Please define a ‘right’ as to what you think it is.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 10:47 PM

As with all other things in this life that are of great worth or value, there is a cost that is directly proportional to the worth or value. Some things are of great value to some, maybe even many, but of no value to others.

Some things are considered to be so valuable (or worthy) that there are those willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to preserve the thing.

Freedom, honor, integrity, faith …… these are perhaps at the top of the list for those who chose to write a blank check to the people of these United States in the amount of “up to and including their lives”.

Common decency requires that those who decide that they are not willing to make such a sacrifice, at the very friggin least, respect the decision made by those who have had their check cashed.

Freedom – perhaps the greatest gift given to us by our Creator – carries with it a hefty cost. For those who haven’t come home, the price can never be repaid …. but it can be respected. And that is the crux of this thread. He that made the ultimate sacrifice to honor those who can’t or won’t – was himself being honored and the responsibility that we all share in honoring that sacrifice was blatantly and selfishly ignored to the emotional chagrin of his family.

All rights come with responsibilities. The greater the value of the right, the greater the inherency of the responsibility. If it were not such, the right would be of little or no value.

Mr. Ventura forgot (or shirked for political purposes) his responsibility. Mr. Ventura got schooled. Mr. Ventura got to go home to his family.
All that is left is for the protected to wring their hands, gnash their teeth, and rend their flesh over the perceived injustice and insult to their cradled sensibilities.

oldfiveanddimer on January 5, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Why does this douche-bag have my name? :(

Jesse on January 5, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Where’s this SEAL bar? In Texas? Good luck getting a jury to convict a man like Mr. Kyle there. There’s the law, then there’s justice.

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Probably McP’s Irish Pub in Coronado. Mr. Kyle is the most awesome man in human history next to Jesus for clocking young frankenstein.

V7_Sport on January 5, 2012 at 11:28 PM

Nature and Nature’s God.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Gotcha and agree. Assuming I haven’t missed it, please cite the Locke idea appropriate to the specific matter.

BTW, in spite of the beating you’re taking from my friends, nice to meet you. You make me think. :)

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 11:29 PM

Jesse was a SEAL
He knows how to play with big boys.
chrishaynesusa on January 5, 2012 at 9:31 PM

He Really, really wasn’t a SEAL. Ventura served in UDT-12, an underwater demolition team. They were bad-ass for sure but when Ventura was serving the SEALs were fighting upriver in Vietnam and the UDT wasn’t. Had Ventura wanted to be a SEAL all he had to do was say “yes” when the UDT teams were asked for volunteers to replace the SEALs getting killed and wounded in the Mekong, but for whatever reason he didn’t. There is no shame in that, but he was a frogman, not a SEAL. His DD-214 shows that he didn’t serve on a SEAL team and he never got a combat ribbon.
Ventura has lied about his service repeatedly. He has claimed the embolisms that he had in his lungs ere caused by agent orange instead of the steroids that he was taking as a pro wrestler. He claimed to have “hunted men” while in Vietnam, all of which was pure BS.
He absolutely deserves to have his face re-arranged just for that, let alone the 9/11 conspiracies or telling a REAL SEAL that they deserved to have more men killed at the funeral of a man who had been given the congressional medal of honor.
Ventura is a POS.

V7_Sport on January 5, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Dante: If Jesse Ventura feels that his “rights” were violated by Chris Kyle, there is a well-established remedy he can pursue, even if the “authorities” refuse to get involved. Hire a lawyer and file a civil suit claiming assault. That would obviously be the right course if what is at issue here is the rule of law and so forth, as opposed to silly old-fashioned concepts based on antique notions such as “honor.”

Wouldn’t you agree?

RedPepper on January 5, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Once again you keep trying to make this about law instead of rights. If a person does not consent to a duel, the other has no right to kill him. I don’t think you understand the word consensual.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:24 PM

So do you have the right to say whatever you want wherever you want and not expect any consequences? A rhetorical question of course, because you seem to be in your own little world.

V7_Sport on January 5, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Dante
Refusing a duel after impinging another person’s honor makes a person an outcast. Refusing a duel destroys ones reputation as a gentleman or an officer. Refusing a duel and running away gives the right to the aggrieved party in certain European kingdoms/states to hunt you down and kill you. Refusing a duel may result in losing not only one’s reputation, but one’s wealth, titles and military rank. For many gentlemen, refusing a duel was a fate worse than death. That was the reason why Alexander Hamilton died. He would rather die with honor than die a coward’s death.
When you stop thinking like you are from the 21st century and start thinking like you were a gentleman from the 18th or 19th century, then you will understand the concept of Honor and duels.

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 11:44 PM

Based on previous comments, I’m betting this is sarcasm or cut and paste fodder for another site.

hawkdriver on January 5, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Sock farmer: Dante = MelonCollie. He’s arguing with his socks like Glen Greenwald used to do. You can hide sock farming from a forum moderator by disguising the same IP with TOR and the use of a different browser.

troyriser_gopftw on January 5, 2012 at 11:55 PM

Dante: If Jesse Ventura feels that his “rights” were violated by Chris Kyle, there is a well-established remedy he can pursue, even if the “authorities” refuse to get involved. Hire a lawyer and file a civil suit claiming assault. That would obviously be the right course if what is at issue here is the rule of law and so forth, as opposed to silly old-fashioned concepts based on antique notions such as “honor.”

Wouldn’t you agree?

RedPepper on January 5, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Can we put on the Judge Joe Brown, the old Marine.

RickB on January 5, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Missed this post.

“Reason, which is that Law, teaches all Mankind, who would but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possessions.”

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:14 PM

But Mankind, being Mankind, consults reason rarely and harms one anothers life, health, liberty and possessions often. You can claim whatever rights you wish however reality shows what those “rights” are really worth.

Sultanofsham on January 5, 2012 at 11:58 PM

Once again you keep trying to make this about law instead of rights. If a person does not consent to a duel, the other has no right to kill him. I don’t think you understand the word consensual.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 11:24 PM

If you think we’re talking past each other, then define “rights” and define “law” and bolster your point. Problem is you’ve been hyperventilating about rights and trying to buttress it with weasel words and or name-dropping without context only to come around and contradict yourself. Plus the fact you cherrypick your responses only go to show what a light-weight you are. If you want to be taken seriously, then be serious & clear.

The “rights” you seek belong only in an utopian world. The last time utopia was seen was in the Garden of Eden, where God said you can do anything you want except eat a certain fruit. And as we all know, the first instance of anger & offense carried to it’s logical conclusion was the murder of Abel.

The takeaway is if you want to retain your right to live, talk & act as you want, then you must first exercise the wisdom to NOT offend. Whether you intentionally or inadvertently offend, then all bets are off. As fools often find out too late, “sorry” may be the hardest word to say, yet it is the strongest word we have to deflect wrath.

Ciao

AH_C on January 5, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Most of us grew up being spanked when we exercised our “rights” in stupid ways, so we learned about reality before kindergarten. Our parents did us a favor, in the long run.

There are a gazillion things we may have a ‘right’ to do that are very, very stupid. Ventura exercised his right to be stupid.

jodetoad on January 6, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Palin / Kyle 2012!

Mirimichi on January 6, 2012 at 12:35 AM

There is a reason animal rights activists throw red paint on old women wearing fur while avoiding confronting outlaw bikers wearing leather.

Jesse wasn’t that smart. I bet he’s a bit more cautious now.

He’ll try to intimidate a little guy like Jim Norton, but he’ll avoid a real SEAL like his pathetic life depended on it.

G M on January 6, 2012 at 12:50 AM

Jesse “the fat lip” Ventura!

Dollayo on January 6, 2012 at 12:50 AM

Is it me or is most of this comment thread a waste of space? A dumb guy makes an even dumber remark to the guy. He gets punched. Big deal.

exliberal on January 6, 2012 at 1:05 AM

You have a right to say whatever you want, it’s just at times you should be very careful who you are spouting off too. Jesse was at a wake with the family present and ate a fist sandwich, which I say was well deserved.

Africanus on January 6, 2012 at 1:07 AM

The law recognizes the concept of “provocation”.

Anyone remember Bart Sibrel, the asshat that lured Buzz Aldrin to a Los Angeles hotel and then followed him around hectoring him about the moon landings being faked. Well Buzz finally clocked him and the LAPD refused to arrest and the District Attorney refused to prosecute because Sibrel had provoked Buzz.

Submitted for your viewing pleasure…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

Provocation..a concept that Dante apparently does not recognize. Fortunately, the law does.

CalFed on January 6, 2012 at 1:20 AM

That SEAL is one decent fellow. I am sure Ventura deserved what he got.

Sherman1864 on January 6, 2012 at 1:41 AM

So yes, this means we all have the right to express our opinion without being punched.

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 9:53 PM

I’ve read all your comments in this thread and I have to say you are really dense. I have the right to walk down a dark alley in the middle of the night without being bothered, but guess what? I don’t do it because unlike you, I am not stupid. What shocks me is that you haven’t learned this lesson already, unless you are under twelve years old.

Night Owl on January 6, 2012 at 3:35 AM

Chris Kyle is my HERO !!! GOOD JOB !!!
Jesse V. completely deserved the ‘fist bump’ to the mouth for what he said to you. Tell the cops that “Sir, I was just giving him a fist bump”…….

kathyk

kennedyk49 on January 6, 2012 at 3:42 AM

I just noticed the ‘troofers’ have unfortunately taken over the comments on the Youtube video.

clancy_wiggum on January 6, 2012 at 4:21 AM

Alden Pyle, why would you say something like that? You knew what would happen. Miss you man.

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 5:10 AM

oldfiver and dimer,

Black Hawk

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 5:11 AM

BTW, in spite of the beating you’re taking from my friends, nice to meet you. You make me think. :)

baldilocks on January 5, 2012 at 11:29 PM

Nice to meet you as well.

Dante on January 6, 2012 at 7:46 AM

I’ve read all your comments in this thread and I have to say you are really dense. I have the right to walk down a dark alley in the middle of the night without being bothered, but guess what? I don’t do it because unlike you, I am not stupid. What shocks me is that you haven’t learned this lesson already, unless you are under twelve years old.

Night Owl on January 6, 2012 at 3:35 AM

I don’t think you’ve been following the thread or the argument. I have the right to not be harmed. This is absolute. This does not prevent me from being armed in case harm would come to me or others. I have a right, as we all do, to think and speak opinions without harm. This, too, is absolute. This does not mean people respect that right, as this SEAL and commenters have displayed.

Dante on January 6, 2012 at 7:51 AM

Dante
Refusing a duel after impinging another person’s honor makes a person an outcast. Refusing a duel destroys ones reputation as a gentleman or an officer. Refusing a duel and running away gives the right to the aggrieved party in certain European kingdoms/states to hunt you down and kill you. Refusing a duel may result in losing not only one’s reputation, but one’s wealth, titles and military rank. For many gentlemen, refusing a duel was a fate worse than death. That was the reason why Alexander Hamilton died. He would rather die with honor than die a coward’s death.
When you stop thinking like you are from the 21st century and start thinking like you were a gentleman from the 18th or 19th century, then you will understand the concept of Honor and duels.

DinobotPrime on January 5, 2012 at 11:44 PM

You are not talking of rights. This seems to be beyond you. When you stop thinking like you are from the 18th or 19th century and start thinking like you are from the 17th, then you might understand. I doubt it, though.

Dante on January 6, 2012 at 8:02 AM

I have a right, as we all do, to think and speak opinions without harm. This, too, is absolute. This does not mean people respect that right, as this SEAL and commenters have displayed.

Dante on January 6, 2012 at 7:51 AM

Ok, Ventura technically has that right. Are you happy? Your comments are stating the obvious. Maybe you like being a contrarian scold, who knows? Does it make you feel superior? Especially principled? You are attacking an argument no one is making.

The fact is that we are not all robots or legal absolutists incapable of using discretion. Besides, all the theoretical and legal technicality talk aside, I think it’s downright wussy-like to deny a man (or woman) the pleasure of punching in the face a jerk who has it coming. Think of it this way: a well-deserved punch to the face is a very pure form of real social justice. The punch to the face is a time-honored way of delivering a message real fast.

Is it wrong to cheer the Navy SEAL for punching out that nutball loser Jesse Ventura? Heck no!

bluegill on January 6, 2012 at 8:31 AM

Why does this douche-bag have my name? :(

He doesn’t. His true name is Jim Janosz. Former mayor of Brooklyn Park, MN.

Con man.

Blowhard.

And yes, our former governor.

sighs

Ygritte on January 6, 2012 at 8:48 AM

bluegill on January 6, 2012 at 8:31 AM

Ok, but please don’t consider yourself anything but a liberal who doesn’t care for the rule of law and instead embraces using force against unpopular speech in the name of social justice.

Hmm…I think there’s another word for that ideology as well…

Dante on January 6, 2012 at 8:56 AM

The SEAL was on BOR last night being interviewed about his book. BOR tried very hard to get the guy to say that he had murdered people and was he OK with that. Kyle never buckled to him and explained why he did what he did and had no regrets. He should be the one to write the new rules of engagement for our troops.

Kissmygrits on January 6, 2012 at 9:09 AM

No one has the right to use force against someone else because they don’t like an opinion.

Do people not read?

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Several people have pointed out that it was not the opinion that was the problem, but the strong EXPRESSION of that opinion that was inappropriate.

Do YOU not read?

dominigan on January 6, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Selective reading. “Do people not read” was in reference to my saying it isn’t a Constitutional issue and then someone thinking they were correcting me by telling me the very same thing later on.

Dante on January 6, 2012 at 9:21 AM

Paul/Ventura 2012…the truth is OUT there.

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Just read a smattering of the posts here, but…

1) I totally support Mr. Kyle for nailing Ventura in the face for comments like that, especially at a wake. It’s the sort of stuff you’d expect to hear from the Westboro Baptist “Church”.

2) That said, there are (or should be) consequences for every action, whether positive or negative. In this case, though, I doubt Mr. Kyle would mind facing them – I couldn’t imagine a jury outside Kalifornia that’d give him much more than applause.

3) That comment about getting Mr. Kyle within a certain distance of President Obama was below the standard of decency I’d expect here.

Aquarian on January 6, 2012 at 9:31 AM

Brought back old memories. 10-98 no report.

arnold ziffel on January 5, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Where were you a cop?

*cough* *woodshampoo* *cough*

Laura in Maryland on January 6, 2012 at 9:41 AM

Ventura’s an a$$. I liked some of his episodes on cable but still, got what he deserved.

abobo on January 6, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Late to the thread,.. had to get the kids to school, caught it mentioned on FOX and Friends.

I don’t think you’ve been following the thread or the argument. I have the right to not be harmed. This is absolute. This does not prevent me from being armed in case harm would come to me or others. I have a right, as we all do, to think and speak opinions without harm. This, too, is absolute. This does not mean people respect that right, as this SEAL and commenters have displayed.

Dante on January 6, 2012 at 7:51 AM

Spoken like a member of the Westburo Baptist Church, or.. a klansman at a NAACP meeting. You may have an absolute right to your opinion, but to say you have an absolute right to enfringe on the location and grief of others to harass and enrage them totally free of consequences is on it’s face moronic. I would also bet, if you didn’t have strong sympathies to the Paulian troofer insanity, you would see that.

Absolute?

Why?

You keep saying that, but where in the Consitution, does it say you have an absolute right to force your opinion on others no matter what, at any time, any place, without suffering any consequences?

It doesn’t say that anywhere.

The 1st Amendment only applies to the government anyway, not private interactions. The courts, even in the Westburo cases have stated they have a right to protest, but that they have no right to attend the funeral to do it, they can be kept at a distance. So They have no “absolute right” either.

The only absolute right, is to think what you want,…

Where you fall down, is in thinking you have an absolute right to force others to hear it, even unwillingly, free of any normal human response. You have repeatedly ducked answering from what I’ve seen, what would you do if some a-hole was in your face mouthing obscenties at your wife and or kids…

You don’t answer.. why?

Because you would be human and punch him? Making you less than pure in your libertarian absolutes?

I have a right, as we all do, to think and speak opinions without harm. This, too, is absolute.

time and place, because that is the only way you can demand freedom of result, if you hold an opinion so grotesqely ugly, it’s as popular as pediphelia. Ventura has an opinion only slightly less toxic. I detest with my whole being Paul and all his works, that doesn’t mean he can’t hold those views… except, if I’d lost a parent on 911 and Paul showed up to rant about blowback and how much we deserved it, Paul would be coughing up a lung from where I kicked him.

There is no absolute anything…

To believe there is, is to deny reality, deny basic human nature.

mark81150 on January 6, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Laura in Maryland on January 6, 2012 at 9:41 AM

CA central valley.

I can’t believe this thread has went on so long. I see Dante’s Inferno and Lordy didn’t change any minds overnight.

arnold ziffel on January 6, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Guess what? I never said it did. In fact, I said this is not a Constitutional or free speech issue, but it is an issue of rights. No one has the right to use force against someone else because they don’t like an opinion.

Do people not read?

Dante on January 5, 2012 at 9:45 PM

This falls under “fighting words”. Basically it is a category of verbal provocations that are sufficiently provocative that getting assaulted is not an unreasonable response.

In a fair number of jurisdictions, walking up to somebody and telling them that it is a good thing that all their buddies got killed falls under that category, and doing that at a wake for said buddies just makes the fighting words more egregious.

Voyager on January 6, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Dante is mixing things up.

You have a right to speak your peace and not have that right trampled upon by the state. The state is the party held bound by the constitution as it relates to rights. Otherwise, you have the give and take of daily grind of life. Jesse has no right to not be punched by another indivual citizen. He may very well have that expectation, but he has no right. The word right is thrown around rather carelessly by folks like Dante, who hasn’t a clue to what a right is.

Now Jesse may choose to file charges for assault and the authorities may then choose to investigate and press charges against this seal. Whether Jesse’s words were considered a gross provocation (my guess is no DA would bring the case and no police force would issue a warrant based solely on that fact, and in fact might cite Jesse for disturbing the peace and place a small fine on him) would be the pivotal issue.

Anyone listening to Dante takes his life in his own hands – not to mention his wallet.

Zomcon JEM on January 6, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Ok, Ventura technically has that right. Are you happy? Your comments are stating the obvious. Maybe you like being a contrarian scold, who knows? Does it make you feel superior? Especially principled? You are attacking an argument no one is making.

The fact is that we are not all robots or legal absolutists incapable of using discretion. Besides, all the theoretical and legal technicality talk aside, I think it’s downright wussy-like to deny a man (or woman) the pleasure of punching in the face a jerk who has it coming. Think of it this way: a well-deserved punch to the face is a very pure form of real social justice. The punch to the face is a time-honored way of delivering a message real fast.

Is it wrong to cheer the Navy SEAL for punching out that nutball loser Jesse Ventura? Heck no!

bluegill on January 6, 2012 at 8:31 AM

and

Ok, but please don’t consider yourself anything but a liberal who doesn’t care for the rule of law and instead embraces using force against unpopular speech in the name of social justice.

Hmm…I think there’s another word for that ideology as well…

Dante on January 6, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Once again with the Paul “If you don’t agree with me you’re a hippy commie fascist” thang?

The ideology is called being a man 101,.. you don’t suffer a dirtbag telling you you deserved to have your friends die, because aforementioned dirtbag is a scumbag troofer. You don’ step back and mumble….

gee,…. sniff,… he has a right to BROWBEAT US AT OUR FRIENDS WAKE….. if you don’t get that, without fallinng back on the tired lameassed “well, you must be a liberal” libertarian smears..

if you’d try being a man for once and not such an ideolog spouting pavloveian answers to every question..

You honestly, cannot give up your utopian views long enough to understand this basic concept.. not everything is in the handbook, and humans when they have been wronged will respond. Call it…

Jesse’s blowback…

so by the Paul handbook, he deserved it, so I suggest he imediately cut all ties to the outside world, retreat to his bunker, cut his bodyguard staff 75% and issue blanket apologies to all he may have offended with his jingoistic views on opinion sharing..

see… how well that works?

mark81150 on January 6, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5