(CNN) -- At least 12 people were shot at a Tuscon grocery store on Saturday, and U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was among them, a Democratic party source told CNN.http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/08/arizona.shooting/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1
Giffords was holding a constituent meeting at the grocery store when the shooting occurred, according to a schedule posted on her website.
Neither Giffords' condition nor that of any of the other wounded was immediately available. The Democratic source described the situation as "pretty serious."
The shooting occurred at a Safeway shortly after 10 a.m. MST, according to sheriff's spokesman Deputy Jason Ogan.
Odds are pretty good it was some disgruntled Tea Party dude. :-\
jesus. wtf
diunx, why would it be a beaner? she was in favor of immigration reform AFAIK
NPR was reporting people as saying the shooter was firing indiscriminately. They're now reporting that six other people were killed as well.
He lists Ayn Rand, the Communist manifesto, and Mein Kamf as favorites ???
He lists Ayn Rand, the Communist manifesto, and Mein Kamf as favorites ???
As little sympathy as I have for Sarah Palin, I think we should be careful about blaming politicians for the acts of the mentally disturbed.
lmao PD owned?
What is her obsession with guns? Hell, I don't understand the right's obsession with guns period.
What is her obsession with guns? Hell, I don't understand the right's obsession with guns period.
It's an American right to be able to protect yourself, and there's this irrational fear that Obama is going to take it away.
I definitely agree that they serve their purpose and I'm certainly not blaming them for all of America's crime. Such a statement would be ridiculous.no idea. just saw police at my apartment complex one night (about 10 squad cars and two ambulances) and then got a letter on my door from the apartment complex letting us know what's up the next day. we moved one of our handguns by the couch and another by the bed just in case for a while. I also carry one in my car most of the time. You don't even need a CHL for that in Texas.
That sucks about your neighbor. Did she live alone? I DO think that a woman should have a gun to arm herself in case something like that happens.
that said, the right has been fueling this stupid fear of xxxtreme socialist takeover for quite awhile, to feverish levels, and i think you can safely lay the blame for this at the feet of their collective rhetoric
Yeah, political rhetoric has consequences. But violence by the mentally ill isn't one, or at least it's such a rare, unpredictable, indirect, and unproven consequence that we shouldn't worry about it. People should not have to tailor their speech based on what an insane listener might do.
The harm Palin and her allies do is through the normal political process. If we want to talk about the language of politicians leading to killing, we should be talking about Iraq and Afghanistan.
seems this dude was way out in alex jones country, where political affiliation ceases to matter. definitely figured obama was gonna usher in the days of barcodes and brownshirts, and apparently? decided to make a statement. he definitely wasn't religious, and i don't think he was a palinista -- just one of your far-right/left/whatever anti-gubmint paranoiacs that apparently like to shack up in arizona.
What is her obsession with guns? Hell, I don't understand the right's obsession with guns period.
It's an American right to be able to protect yourself, and there's this irrational fear that Obama is going to take it away.
all left wing nuts are brain damaged! what is happening to our great country? put this messed up loser in the electric chair!
Sick, sick, sick. Knew it! The shooter's a college intellectual. Only those scumbags are capable of such unprovoked violence and love to "read" books like Marx's Communist Manifesto and Hitler's Mein Kampf.
This reprehensible act will be used for a push on gun control.
Now we sit back and watch how the Liberal/Soros media spins this guy..........who is obviously a flaming Lib
I don't care what his problems are, he should be tortured to an incomprehensibly slow and painful death.
The first tragic event of the day for me was, of course, the killings and injuries by this horrible individual. The second tragic event was reading the comments on some of the liberal websites(yahoo especially) spewing venomous, hateful, obscene comments blaming conservatives, Beck, Limbaugh, Palin, etc. for this massacre. Some are demanding Palin be indicted for murder because of sayins"locked and loaded" and having targets drawn on some members of Congress. I came away from the sites disillusioned with the citizens of this country and sick to my stomach. I never imagined liberals were this nasty. The loss of life and injury weren't foremost in their minds - finding a way to blame those they don't agree with came first. I have to say that reading the comments here helped restore my faith that there are still many good people in this country.
I have a jo staff and a boken right next to my bed "just in case":lol :lol :lol
(The potential future Mrs. Nuff also sleeps with a kendo sword next to her bed too)
NEEEEEEEEEEERDS
(http://www.aikidoforchildren.com/images/Kid-%20Jo-72lpi.GIF)
[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7046bo92a4[/youtube]
If it turns out that this video was in fact posted by the same Jared Loughner who is suspected of shooting Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords today in Arizona, then we have some sense of his politics. As Ben Smith notes:
"You don't have to accept the federalist laws," the video above says; It also insists on the gold and silver standard, talks of revolution, and suggests that the government is imposing "mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar."
There's also a clear sense, from watching the above video, that its creator is, at the very least, somewhat paranoid—and perhaps ready to act on his paranoia and anti-government feelings. "I am a terrorist," says one of the lines in the video.
The question: If the culture were filled with more statements like this, from Bill Clinton in 1995 (and via an e-mail from another journalist), instead of with rhetoric that seems to stoke the kind of anti-government paranoia on display above, would today have turned out any differently?
Quote from: ClintonSo I say this to the militias and all others who believe that the greatest threat to freedom comes from the Government instead of from those who would take away our freedom: If you say violence is an acceptable way to make change, you are wrong. If you say that Government is in a conspiracy to take your freedom away, you are just plain wrong. If you treat law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line for your safety every day like some kind of enemy army to be suspected, derided, and if they should enforce the law against you, to be shot, you are wrong. If you appropriate our sacred symbols for paranoid purposes and compare yourselves to colonial militias who fought for the democracy you now rail against, you are wrong. How dare you suggest that we in the freest nation on Earth live in tyranny! How dare you call yourselves patriots and heroes!
UPDATE: Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, speaking in Arizona just now, seems to be pondering the same question:
Quote from: DupnikWhen you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And, unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the Mecca for prejudice and bigotry.
It's not unusual for all public officials to get threats constantly, myself included. And that's the sad thing of what's going on in America. Pretty soon, we're not going to be able to find reasonable, decent people who are willing to subject themselves to serve in public office.
I'm a gun nut myself, and I hate people who are against using it. But I think you should go under psychological investigation before your allowed to be near one, some people own them for all the wrong reasons.I don't think that would work, anybody who wants a gun can probably regurgitate the right answer for a psyche exam. The system is obviously fucked up that somebody like this guy could get glock with a 30 round magazine with just $500 bucks and a phone background check. It's not like there's any real restrictions at the moment.
The feds are reportedly probing whether shooting suspect Jared Lee Loughner has ties to an anti-Semitic, anti-government hate group that has ads for tea party organizations on its website.http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47308.html#ixzz1AYwq9Bxt
A Department of Homeland Security memo quoted by Fox News says the agency is looking into whether Loughner is “possibly linked” to the fanatical group American Renaissance.
The group promotes views that are “anti-government, anti-immigration, anti-ZOG (person who believes in the development and protection of a Jewish nation Occupation Government), anti-Semitic,” the memo says.
It’s not immediately clear that Loughner is actually a member.
Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the target of Loughner’s firing frenzy, is “the first Jewish female elected to such a high position in the U.S. government. She was also opposite the group’s ideology when it came to immigration debate,” according the memo.
The group’s website features what appear to be paid advertisements for tea party versions of the “don’t tread on me” flag.
Jared Taylor, editor of American Renaissance, made clear in an interview with Fox News that the group considers itself a think tank of sorts with a conservative circular that’s available by subscription.
Asked about the memo, he said, “That is complete nonsense. I have absolutely no idea what DHS is talking about.”
He told the cable channel that his group checked subscriber lists for its circular and found no record of Loughner subscribing or attending events.
Mark Potok, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project, described the American Renaissance’s journal as a “kind of white-collar, white supremicists outlet, better described as white nationalists” that is read by “pseudo intellectuals” and “academic racists.”
He said the group focuses on race and IQ issues, specifically that African Americans are not as intelligent as whites.
The group had a debate about whether they should also concentrate on Jews, but the majority “was not into that,” Potok said.
“Jared Taylor is not an anti-Semite,” Potok said
Yeah this is funny. Guns to protect yourself :lol. They're much better at killing you, the vast majority of gun deaths are either murders or suicides. America smh
spoken like a true european, dude, you don't know how to handle a firearm, there are four rules that if you follow - safety will be achieved,
Pretty sure the four rules won't stop murderous psychopaths from killing innocents. :P
Drew is so easy to get riled up. I miss being in irc with him.
but he was referring to someone owning a gun for protection, claiming that the mere presence of a gun in a house puts the lives of those inside at danger, which at least in my case is rendered mute by the use of a trigger lock which basically turns my cz into a six hundred dollar hammer
Come to think of it, I once saw somebody buy a Glock 18 (the full-auto machine-pistol) with 2 33 round mags for $700 once. In public, on the streets of America, with a police officer literally standing next to him.
yeah but it doesnt depend on the state when it comes to class 3, no if ands or buts about it, fully automatic anything is illegal unless you are le or mil
dude why do you insist on being so aggro towards me? im just sitting here shooting the shit with some people and yet you feel compelled to crack a zinger.
but he was referring to someone owning a gun for protection, claiming that the mere presence of a gun in a house puts the lives of those inside at danger, which at least in my case is rendered mute by the use of a trigger lock which basically turns my cz into a six hundred dollar hammer
And yet I'm still pretty sure that the statistics bear out that a legal gun owner is more likely to use his gun to kill himself and/or others than he is to use it defending himself or his property....
but don't let those pesky stats get in the way of your ideology....
Though we can never know what is going on inside their head personally, everything we see is that their instinct is just to tuck their heads and charge....Even though, as has been noted by others, Palin's first instinct is to scrub her website....if you've done nothing wrong, why edit your material?
And yet, I'm pretty sure that both those statistics are astronomically dwarfed by the amount of people who own guns whom nothing ever happens at all.
knock yourself out bro, hey maybe after that you and the biz can get together and compare uniforms
America is what it is. That battle for gun control has been mostly lost and its never going to change (or not going to change anytime in the forseeable future) despite most of the statistics that say having all these guns around or so easily available probably isn't a good idea.
I love guns in videogames. Not so much in real life when I see all the knuckleheads who actually tend to own them (not aimed at anyone in this thread). But its the second ammendent. We need all these guns lest the King of England tries to take back our country.
America is what it is. That battle for gun control has been mostly lost and its never going to change (or not going to change anytime in the forseeable future) despite most of the statistics that say having all these guns around or so easily available probably isn't a good idea.
I love guns in videogames. Not so much in real life when I see all the knuckleheads who actually tend to own them (not aimed at anyone in this thread). But its the second ammendent. We need all these guns lest the King of England tries to take back our country.
:lol
MARGE
No! No one's using this gun! The TV said you're fifty-eight percent more likely to shoot a family member than an intruder!
HOMER
TV said that? But I have to have a gun! It's in the Constitution!
LISA
Dad! The Second Amendment is just a remnant from revolutionary days. It has no meaning today!
HOMER
You couldn't be more wrong, Lisa. If I didn't have this gun, the King of England could just walk in here any time he wants, and start shoving you around. (he starts pushing Lisa) Do you want that? Huh? Do you?
LISA
No...
HOMER
All right then.
He reaches for the gun.
A classmate of the man accused of shooting Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords this morning describes him as "left wing" and a "pot head" in a series of posts on Twitter this afternoon.
Caitie Parker did not immediately respond to our request for an interview, but her "tweets" in the hours after the shooting paint a picture of Jared Loughner as a substance-abusing loner who had met Giffords before the shooting. She says, Loughner described the congresswoman as "stupid and unintelligent."
I'll agree that rhetoric on all sides left, right, up, down are all out of hand. I can't even watch the news or listen the radio anymore. I've pretty much given up on caring .
Like Prole said earlier (and you guys ignored) is that the shooter seems to occupy an extreme fringe position where the traditional left/right political dichotomy breaks down.
wut?
It just boils down to fanaticism. Religion, politics, crime, anything. That fear of shit permeates everything in our society. Whether it's fear of the gov't, brown people, rising tides, hell, corporations, meat, rich people, child molesters, video games, guns, bird flu, etc, etc... ad infinitum. Most nutjobs with guns (and I'm not saying everyone with guns is a nutjob, I own plenty of em... although that's probably a bad example) would have loved to have been there and shot the bad guy and saved the day. When we let relatively isolated tragedy curtail speech, permit emergency legislation, and alter how we view each other as humans we lose the best pieces or our own society.
With that said I hate Sarah Palin and hope she is devoured alive by her youngest child. When that happens I will delete this post and not explain myself.
Media, politics, and this guy's mental state doesn't matter at all to me. This type of incident just shows to people how normal violent criminals, like psychopaths that kill for money and not for fringe political beliefs, can get these weapons and magazines and THAT is what should motivate people to want a ban on semiautomatic handguns and large magazines imo.
That's a longshot but best thing I can imagine is that Giffords comes out of the hospital swinging at how there's no real restriction on anybody's ability to get a gun. At least that will raise some support.
It's a group that is probably more likely to blame Obama for the shooting spree than themselves. "Well, if he wasn't such a muslin and palled around with terrorists then this never would have happened!"It' not probably, it is exactly what is going on right now. There will be no admission of anything done wrong by the right. They want this stuff to happen. The right doesn't talk to just hear themselves. They give out very specific marching orders, wait for a "patriot" to carry them out, then wash their hands of any responsibility. Even, blame the other side.
On November 5, 2009, Maj. Nidal Hasan opened fire at a troop readiness center in Ft. Hood, Texas, killing 13 people. Within hours of the killings, the world knew that Hasan reportedly shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before he began shooting, visited websites associated with Islamist violence, wrote Internet postings justifying Muslim suicide bombings, considered U.S. forces his enemy, opposed American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as wars on Islam, and told a neighbor shortly before the shootings that he was going "to do good work for God." There was ample evidence, in other words, that the Ft. Hood attack was an act of Islamist violence.
Nevertheless, public officials, journalists, and commentators were quick to caution that the public should not "jump to conclusions" about Hasan's motive. CNN, in particular, became a forum for repeated warnings that the subject should be discussed with particular care.
It's a group that is probably more likely to blame Obama for the shooting spree than themselves. "Well, if he wasn't such a muslin and palled around with terrorists then this never would have happened!"It' not probably, it is exactly what is going on right now. There will be no admission of anything done wrong by the right. They want this stuff to happen. The right doesn't talk to just hear themselves. They give out very specific marching orders, wait for a "patriot" to carry them out, then wash their hands of any responsibility. Even, blame the other side.
I can only imagine what this guy's brain must be thinking. Thinking he was going to be a martyr for his right wing cause only for them to call him a liberal. :lol
That's the point. That is what is happening. You are even doing it yourself!
Carry on with your deflection of blame and false equivalences. It's the conservatard way!
Yeah, give me a break Feelbad, no more of this "both sides are guilty" bullshit. That was true in the 70s when you had far right and left nuts carrying out violent acts, but since the 90s we've seen a clear pattern of far right extremism and far left pacifism.
If you don't see the difference between jokes on the internets and political incitement, smh. Is Prole a raging homophobe/racist for his posts, or is Cajole gay? well nm :'(
Yeah, give me a break Feelbad, no more of this "both sides are guilty" bullshit. That was true in the 70s when you had far right and left nuts carrying out violent acts, but since the 90s we've seen a clear pattern of far right extremism and far left pacifism.
Stoney with the real talk. Internet forum shenanigans and major political/media figures making implicit references to violent political upheaval aren't nearly the same. Sorry Eel, you're way off base on this.
I'm wondering, could this be the end of the Tea Party movement? ???
Nah, it will cause some hand-wringing for a few weeks and then it's back to socialist conspiracies/birth certificates/shariah law for them.
.
I'm smart enough to know the difference, thanks. But on this board and in real life I have read/heard several variations on the following:while I can see where you're coming from (if you check the political thread, I avoided saying I wanted Fred Phelps dead because I felt like a hypocrite), I do feel like there's a big difference between insinuating it on a national platform (Palin) and saying it in passing in private with friends and family or even anonymously on the internet.
"We should drag (group of people) out in the streets to be shot."
"When the revolution comes (group of people) will be the first against the wall."
"When is someone gonna kill (person)?"
Joke or no joke, all of these statements have at least the germ of genuine emotion behind them. And now people want to act shocked and point fingers at the other guy when someone takes those kinds of latent feelings to the extreme and acts on them. How many people watched that kid's videos and thought "lol internet trolls" and how many drew inspiration from it? A troubled mind isn't going to know whether you're joking or not when you say some fat-cat politician ought to be stripped naked and flayed alive.
I wouldn't ever call for censorship (although I am quite sure there are others who would have no problem with it as long as their right to say whatever the hell they want isn't encroached upon). I wish people would practice a little more self-censorship, though. Not going to happen, though. People are going to go right on saying these types of things and then acting shocked when the "other side" does it, and when tragedies like this happen they're going to feign outrage and call for some type of law or regulation against that " other side" while forgetting all about their own indiscretions. That's how you win, right?
i've seen people on this very board post comments about violent revolution, public lynchings, etc, and the reaction was usually chuckles instead of condemnation
i've heard with my very own ears a person ask when someone was going to kill a dude who made some ill-informed conservative documentaries (i forget the doc guy's name, i don't keep up with stuff like that)
...but them's just jokes!
got news for you - if you say it or write it down, the feeling is in you somewhere, whether you pass it off as a joke or not
both sides are guilty of this kind of bullshit, but i guess it's just casual conversation or joking when it's targeted at certain groups of people
some of you wallow in your own hypocrisy like a dog rolls around in its own shit
If she lives, I think she might have a great shot at the Presidency. She'll be a political celebrity, a woman, she's married to an astronaut, she's attractive, educated, and survived an assassination attempt where she was shot in the head. Not even JFK or Lincoln can say that.
No shit. You have to be crazy to walk into a crowd of people and start spraying bullets, killing a bunch of elderly people and a little kid. That is crazy.
The point we have been trying to make for the last couple of years is that Republicans need to stop whipping up crazy people with violent political rhetoric. This is really not a hard concept to follow. There are crazy people out there. Stop egging them on.
If she lives, I think she might have a great shot at the Presidency. She'll be a political celebrity, a woman, she's married to an astronaut, she's attractive, educated, and survived an assassination attempt where she was shot in the head. Not even JFK or Lincoln can say that.
She'll be lucky to eat on her own, much less speak again. A bullet went through her fucking brain.
Violent crime may have been going down but even if it was increasing, it would be hard to say how much of an impact pistols and high capacity magazines have. My point is that they have a net negative effect if anything based on how much they are used in crimes versus justified self-defense. Their use in mass shootings does not concern me since those are so rare.Media, politics, and this guy's mental state doesn't matter at all to me. This type of incident just shows to people how normal violent criminals, like psychopaths that kill for money and not for fringe political beliefs, can get these weapons and magazines and THAT is what should motivate people to want a ban on semiautomatic handguns and large magazines imo.Licensing would be good. Make the basic license to own a private firearm the same as the CCW qualifications that require range qualification. Violent crime has been going down for the last 15 years or more, that includes after the sunset of the specified weapon and high capacity magazine ban.
Violent crime may have been going down but even if it was increasing, it would be hard to say how much of an impact pistols and high capacity magazines have. My point is that they have a net negative effect if anything based on how much they are used in crimes versus justified self-defense. Their use in mass shootings does not concern me since those are so rare.
The reason that I believe this shooting may garner support for gun control is that shows that a paranoid schizophrenic can get concealed firepower like this which makes any shooting tests or background checks seem pointless, making any solution other than an outright ban seem hopeless. I'm not saying that people who already own handguns or large magazines should get them taken away but banning the future sale of concealable guns would hopefully lead to them being too expensive and rare for normal criminals in a few decades.
It seems unlikely that something that broad could happen but hopefully we could at least get private sales that have no paper trail and conceal carry permits revoked. If you have to openly carry a gun that can be traced back to you then you're probably not as likely to do something that you shouldn't do. Hopefully the politician with a new hole in head can articulate that argument better than I can.
What never seems to fail these days is that everything turns into mass death. What could very well have been an assassination attempt turned into a mass shooting, and a fucking kid died. I mean, WTF? How do you possibly justify that?
What never seems to fail these days is that everything turns into mass death. What could very well have been an assassination attempt turned into a mass shooting, and a fucking kid died. I mean, WTF? How do you possibly justify that?
Nice hyperbole. Mass shootings aren't the norm.
Modern CHL law in Texas partly originated out of one such massacre. A lot of people wouldn't be able to legally obtain a CCW had a certain gunman not shot up a luby's 2 decades ago, and one of the survivors then run for the Texas House of Representatives.
The norm for what, typical human behavior? I'd agree there. Norm for personal outrage manifesting itself through armed violence? Sure starting to seem that way. Some jackass was mad the gubmint and took down a federal building. Oh, and a fucking daycare. McDreamer here blasts a politician, a bunch of other characters and a kid. There seems to be no fucking direction here, and that's a real problem. And much like your common violent act of terrorism, it can't possibly be good for whatever cause it is that drives the perpetrators. That would be the only positive, but it doesn't seem to affect the mindset of those actually carrying out the acts.
He didn't have a CCW license of any sort.He didn't have the license since you are allowed to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona without a permit, I think Arizona doesn't even require a permit to buy a handgun like that glock actually. As far as carrying a gun with you for protection, what's the benefit in concealing the gun or in not having a paper trail identifying the current owner?
CCW/CHL holders are far less statistically likely to commit violent crimes than the general public. Hell they're less likely than law enforcement to commit violent crimes. Rather than addressing the weapon it would be better to address the circumstances that lead to violent behavior. Address the factors of disenfranchisement that affects some demographics more than others and you'd do far more to address our "homicide" problem than if you were to ban a certain class of weapons. The fact that a young black man is 6 times as likely to die as a victim of homicide in the US as his white counterparts is fucking revolting. We have a self reinforcing prison system and distinguished mentally-challenged laws that are asymmetrically applied to the most disenfranchised in the US. We need to fix the core of the problem first, not pass showboating laws that do little to reduce actual homicides and primarily affect law abiding citizens.
Also, what John Cole said. (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/01/09/day-2-the-excuse-making-begins/)QuoteNo shit. You have to be crazy to walk into a crowd of people and start spraying bullets, killing a bunch of elderly people and a little kid. That is crazy.
The point we have been trying to make for the last couple of years is that Republicans need to stop whipping up crazy people with violent political rhetoric. This is really not a hard concept to follow. There are crazy people out there. Stop egging them on.
some of you wallow in your own hypocrisy like a dog rolls around in its own shit
He didn't have the license since you are allowed to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona without a permit, I think Arizona doesn't even require a permit to buy a handgun like that glock actually. As far as carrying a gun with you for protection, what's the benefit in concealing the gun or in not having a paper trail identifying the current owner?As far as demographics of the victims go, I don't doubt that there's a lot of inequality built into the system but I don't see a 6 times difference (in this chart anyways):
http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_02.html
edit: ^forgot there's a 6X white:black ratio in the US so you're right.
I can't think of any real solution to the revolving door of the criminal justice system and I wouldn't try to think of one since I don't know nearly enough about that subject and how viable different solutions would be. But the fact is that 2/3 of our homicides are done with a gun and about 70-75% of the time the gun that is used is a handgun. That's a trend that would probably continue even if the homicide rate was much higher or lower.
If we're going by the abstract stats, your homicide rate is 4x that of ours.....but keep thinking that your gun culture has nothing to do with that. I'll be laughing at you for it, as a law enforcement official who doesn't feel naked wandering around unarmed off duty.
Good for you, you get to be an authoritarian shitheel with your precious monopoly on force and make other people afraid.
Must be nice, Do-Right, but it's a shame this case has nothing to do with the bullshit you're spewing.
Never waste an opportunity to push an agenda, though, right?
Jared Lee Loughner was a registered independent, didn't vote in 2010 election
(http://i55.tinypic.com/swaafd.jpg)
Sounds eerily similar to someone
QuoteI mean, WTF? How do you possibly justify that?
seen several variations of "that 9 year old was going to grow up to be a librul anyways, so no loss" including on Sarah Palin's facebook.
Some UK woman tracked the mods on Palin's facebook site and, whilst some negative right wing stuff was removed, any critism of Palin was getting taken down in under a minute. However, the variation of the above shocking sentiment remained whilst responses to that statement were removed.
#sadface
I love that liberals are eating crow over all this.
(http://i55.tinypic.com/swaafd.jpg)
Sounds eerily similar to someone
Again:
(http://www.kfiam640.com/cc-common/mlib/616/01/616_1294716588.gif)
I love that liberals are eating crow over all this.It's at least kind of logical for people to have initially thought that this was a politically motivated attack since it happened at a public event to a pro-immigration democrat and all that.
I can't believe liberals threatened to shoot, uh, Nevada? ???We liberals in SF regularly drive over and shoot arrows at Nevada.
If Charles Guiteau is remembered at all, it's as the crazy guy who assassinated a president because he wanted to be Ambassador to France. He thought President Garfield had promised him an ambassadorship, and he also thought God had told him to kill Garfield. He was delusional, no doubt about it. A lone nut. Just a crazy, crazy guy, is all.
What's less remembered, probably because it's too complicated, is that Guiteau's delusions were distorted and amplified by the overheated political battle between factions of Garfield's and Guiteau's own Republican Party. To boil things down so I don't have to write an entire essay explaining a forgotten old-timey political squabble fought by guys in giant muttonchops (if you want that, Sarah Vowell's Assassination Vacation is a fantastic read), Garfield was trying to dismantle the enormously powerful, enormously corrupt political machine in New York. The people running this system wanted to keep it going, because it made them what today would be billions of dollars--really, billions--so they formed a Republican faction called the Stalwarts to attack Garfield.
They really went at him. Accused him of treason, of disloyalty to his party and his country. Predicted the end of the republic if his reforms went through. Declared that he had to be stopped at any cost. Observed pointedly that Garfield's vice president, Chester A. Arthur, was a Stalwart in good standing. There was no TV or radio, of course, so they put out a lot of fliers and got a lot of editorials into newspapers. Blanketed the old-timey equivalent of the airwaves with ginned-up fear and politically convenient hate.
And so Charles Guiteau, who heard voices, who hallucinated that the President had promised him France, who would later, from prison, write a bizarre hymn to his own execution and wish aloud that he could have paid a little extra for a handgun with a mother-of-pearl handle because it would look prettier in a museum someday... so this lone nut, who undoubtedly had no understanding of or interest in the actual issues behind the Republican infighting, shouted to the horrified crowd as he was dragged away, "I am a Stalwart of the Stalwarts... Arthur is President now!"
And that's why we don't do that.
(If it makes you feel any better, the new President Arthur immediately turned on the Stalwarts and dismantled the old patronage system, which is why it's no longer common for large chunks of the nation's GDP to just vanish at the New York Port Authority, shortly after which all the government bureaucrats working in that neighborhood suddenly and mysteriously become multimillionaires.)
Alex Jones? Really? Thats the strongest link you guys can make between him and "the right".
That's pretty pathetic and quite a reach.
I can't believe liberals threatened to shoot, uh, Nevada? ???We liberals in SF regularly drive over and shoot arrows at Nevada.
STEWART: So here we are again, stunned by a tragedy. We've been visited by this demon before. Our hearts go out to those injured or killed and their loved ones. How do you make sense of these types of senseless situations is really the question that seems to be on everybody's mind. I don't know that there's a way to make sense of this sort of thing. As I watched the political pundit world, many are reflecting and grieving and trying to figure things out. But it's definitely true that others are working feverishly to find the tidbit or two that will exonerate their side from blame or implicate the other. Watching that is as predictable, I think, as it is dispiriting. Did the toxic political environment cause this? A graphic image here, an ill-timed comment, violent rhetoric, those types of things. I have no fucking idea.
Despite the fact that Stewart had previously held out Washington politicians and the media that lavishes attention upon them as chief drivers of society's ills, he mostly pulled his punches tonight, saying, "I wouldn't blame our political rhetoric any more than I would blame heavy metal music for Columbine...and that is coming from somebody who truly hates our political environment."
"It is toxic," Stewart averred. "It is unproductive. But to say that that is what has caused this or that the people in that are responsible for this...I don't think you could do it...you cannot outsmart crazy. You don't know what a troubled mind will get caught on."
Nevertheless, Stewart said:
I do think it's important to watch our rhetoric. I think it's a worthwhile goal not to conflate our political opponents with enemies if for no other reason than to draw a better distinction between the manifestos of paranoid madmen and what passes for acceptable political and pundit speak. It would be really nice if the ramblings of crazy people didn't in any way resemble how we actually talk to each other on teevee.
I love that liberals are eating crow over all this.
QuoteSTEWART: So here we are again, stunned by a tragedy. We've been visited by this demon before. Our hearts go out to those injured or killed and their loved ones. How do you make sense of these types of senseless situations is really the question that seems to be on everybody's mind. I don't know that there's a way to make sense of this sort of thing. As I watched the political pundit world, many are reflecting and grieving and trying to figure things out. But it's definitely true that others are working feverishly to find the tidbit or two that will exonerate their side from blame or implicate the other. Watching that is as predictable, I think, as it is dispiriting. Did the toxic political environment cause this? A graphic image here, an ill-timed comment, violent rhetoric, those types of things. I have no fucking idea.
Despite the fact that Stewart had previously held out Washington politicians and the media that lavishes attention upon them as chief drivers of society's ills, he mostly pulled his punches tonight, saying, "I wouldn't blame our political rhetoric any more than I would blame heavy metal music for Columbine...and that is coming from somebody who truly hates our political environment."
"It is toxic," Stewart averred. "It is unproductive. But to say that that is what has caused this or that the people in that are responsible for this...I don't think you could do it...you cannot outsmart crazy. You don't know what a troubled mind will get caught on."
Nevertheless, Stewart said:
I do think it's important to watch our rhetoric. I think it's a worthwhile goal not to conflate our political opponents with enemies if for no other reason than to draw a better distinction between the manifestos of paranoid madmen and what passes for acceptable political and pundit speak. It would be really nice if the ramblings of crazy people didn't in any way resemble how we actually talk to each other on teevee.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/10/stewart-colbert-tucson_n_807164.html
(http://i54.tinypic.com/eum4hd.png)
Again:
[img]http://www.kfiam640.com/cc-common/mlib/616/01/616_1294716588.gif[img]
(http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2011/01/10/slowpoke-violentspin-1-_custom.jpg?t=1294702569&s=4)
Dem Congressman who called for GOP Gov. to be put against a wall and shot now pleads for civility:lol
Each day seems to bring new and disturbing revelations about the mental state of accused shooter Jared Lee Loughner in the days and months leading up to the attack. The Wall Street Journal has unearthed 131 posts written in an online forum for gamers between April and June 2010. Some of the comments are chatter about weight lifting, rejection by women, or his difficulties job hunting (he wrote that he hadn't had a paycheck in six months, submitted 65 applications without an interview, and confessed to a "mental breakdown" after getting fired from five jobs). Other ramblings troubled members of the forum who worried whether Loughner had mental-health issues or was abusing drugs. The postings "exhibit fixations on grammar, the education system, government and currency, which some friends and acquaintances have described separately in the days since the attack. They are peppered with displays of misogyny." In a comment in early May, Loughner asked, "Does anyone have aggression 24/7?" Later that month, he wrote, "I bet your hungry....Because i know how to cut a body open and eat you for more then a week. ;-)"
:drudge
'HE DID NOT WATCH TV. HE DISLIKED THE NEWS. HE DIDN'T LISTEN TO POLITICAL RADIO'
Suck on that distinguished effete fellows.
Some folks: "We should maybe take a moment to do some soul searching and see if this is in fact the political climate in which to nurture a healthy democratic process"
Other folks: "WHAT IF HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH RHETORIC WHAT WE'RE DOING IS ABSOLUTELY FINE NO PROBLEM HERE NONE AT ALL BUT WHILE WE'RE AT IT THE OTHER SIDE HAS SAID SOME NASTY STUFF AND THEY SHOULD BE CHASTISED FOR IT BUT NOT US NO SIREE ANYONE WANT TO COME TO COME TO MY POLITICAL FUNDRAISER SLASH GUN SHOOT"
See the disconnect, Beardo?
I'm also pleased to see that Sarah Palin is using this moment to remind everyone that she is the real victim in all of this.
So you're saying that any calls for civility in political discourse are in fact just blaming conservatives so everyone should just forget it?
Any suggestion of any actions of any conservatives being inappropriate at any time ever = cynical liberals trying to score points for their own nefarious agenda.Pretty much this.
cf. all discussions of race in the US.
And no, i don't think that was the best time. the best time would be, say in an overheated election cycle when people had gone totally off their rockers...wait a second, we did that
In this thread...
Liberals: "Look, Republicans like Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck are killing people with heir hate-filled rhetoric. KILLING PEOPLE!!!11"
Conservatives: "Wait, this guy didn't listen to talk radio or follow politics at all"
Liberals: "Whoa why are you being all defensive, just trying to have a discussion"
::)In this thread...
Liberals: "Look, Republicans like Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck are killing people with heir hate-filled rhetoric. KILLING PEOPLE!!!11"
Conservatives: "Wait, this guy didn't listen to talk radio or follow politics at all"
Liberals: "Whoa why are you being all defensive, just trying to have a discussion"
Are you seriously this dumb? I don't think anyone is saying Rush or talk radio killed ANYONE.
Insert Quote
I'm sure there's some far left people who will, but the posters here aren't. We're talking about an environment of extremism and hate being inappropriate, and this shooting further highlights that fact.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 28% of Adults say the shooting in Arizona was the result of political anger in the country. Fifty-eight percent (58%) say instead that it was a random act of violence by an unstable person. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided.
QuoteA new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 28% of Adults say the shooting in Arizona was the result of political anger in the country. Fifty-eight percent (58%) say instead that it was a random act of violence by an unstable person. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/econ_survey_questions/january_2011/questions_arizona_shooting_january_10_11_2011 (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/econ_survey_questions/january_2011/questions_arizona_shooting_january_10_11_2011)
QuoteA new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 28% of Adults say the shooting in Arizona was the result of political anger in the country. Fifty-eight percent (58%) say instead that it was a random act of violence by an unstable person. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided.
It's good to see rational thought gets a show of hands when the shooter is a white male. Next stop, let's see these percentages if it's a crazy muslim person, i wonder what % will jump back and say "IT WAS ISLAM THAT MADE HIM DO IT!"
Please don't ever post polls on what people believe.
QuoteA new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 28% of Adults say the shooting in Arizona was the result of political anger in the country. Fifty-eight percent (58%) say instead that it was a random act of violence by an unstable person. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided.
It's good to see rational thought gets a show of hands when the shooter is a white male. Next stop, let's see these percentages if it's a crazy muslim person, i wonder what % will jump back and say "IT WAS ISLAM THAT MADE HIM DO IT!"
Remember the Fort Hood Shooting? You know the one last year where the shooter WAS muslim and the media narrative was "We need to be cautious and get all the facts" I'n fact you wouldn't even have known he was Muslim even though it's reported that he shouted "Allahu Akbar" at the beginning of his shooting.
Funny how quick the narrative changes when there are political points to gain.
Remember the Fort Hood Shooting? You know the one last year where the shooter WAS muslim and the media narrative was "We need to be cautious and get all the facts" I'n fact you wouldn't even have known he was Muslim even though it's reported that he shouted "Allahu Akbar" at the beginning of his shooting.
Two Shootings:It's normal to guess about what the motivation is for a person to shoot a federal judge and congresswoman, the first thought is that it's an assassination or something but once it was found out that this guy was insane and spraying into the crowd it's clear that his personal agenda was not that important.
In one the media urges the public to be cautious and not make hasty judgments. Conservative point out that he had contact with a radical Muslim clerics in the middle east.
In the other the media tried to paint the shooter as a radical right winger who gets hate speech messages from Sarah Palin's website.
One of the is actually true the other has absolutely no roots in reality. You'll probably need 4 or 5 guess to figure it out.