Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords Shot In Arizona

[Wild Cobra]

They're not crosshairs--they're "surveyor's symbols."
This is true. Didn't realize I missed that until now.

That particular one is used to mark locations on maps.

[Winehole23]

(Reload!)

[Blake]

This is true. Didn't realize I missed that until now.

That particular one is used to mark locations on maps.

Did Palin just now realize it too?

[MiamiHeat]

(Reload!)

so why exactly was I going to be gone for months and not be alive? :wakeup

[Wild Cobra]

Did Palin just now realize it too?
I don't know, but I'll bet who designed it knew the difference. No idea the internal workings of who decided to pull the map from the site, but too often, ignorance wins out over sanity.

[ChumpDumper]

lol surveying

[Winehole23]

so why exactly was I going to be gone for months and not be alive? :wakeupYou're an infrequent poster here, is all I meant.

[RandomGuy]

ignorance wins out over sanity.

I find that to be one of the most ironic things you have ever said.

[RandomGuy]

These liberals don't realize, his party is the occult.

Link?

Just about every liberal here has fully acknowledged he was a simple nutjob.

Now who is pushing a narrative?

[rascal]

Yeah. Couric was really interested in exploring those avenues. That's why she cut off Bloomberg mid-sentence to add "home-grown".

It most likely was discussed just not posted here. I guess they only spoke for this short time by your account.

[LnGrrrR]

Oh, and I commend you Lngrr for being the only one to respond to that link I posted. I'm not using that article as a "gotcha. This is what caused it" kinda thing. It's just stupid. This and the Palin thing. Anyone that believes either one is the slightest bit responsible is pretty dumb IMHO. Theres simply crazy people in the world. The Unabomber graduated from Harvard. Did anyone blame universities for his stupidity?..... Politicians INCLUDING our President spew this rhetoric and vitriol day in and day out on tv and across the internets. Now it's the latest buzz word on tv and is making eveyone "come together". This is all a charade. Just people gaining votes. continuing to care about themselves(the elected officials) and no one else.

Fair's fair Viva. It did seem like a post from a regular front-page author, who obviously should have known better. DKos is certainly not known for their temperance/patience. after this, perhaps they will think better before hitting the "post" button.

I don't think that Palin was responsible. I think that she should probably think better of what she says, being a public figure and all. Maybe this incident will get everyone to be a little bit more responsible with their public rhetoric, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Wild Cobra]

Link?

Just about every liberal here has fully acknowledged he was a simple nutjob.

Now who is pushing a narrative?

There are plenty of links out there. Google his name and skull, or occult.

Predicting the Left-Wing Spin on Jared Loughner’s Occult Skull Shrine (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/01/10/2011-01-10_chilling_shrine_in_madmans_yard.html)

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01800/Jared-Altar_1800629c.jpg

[LnGrrrR]

Did you notice his favorite books:

Animal Farm, Brave New World, The Wizard Of OZ, Aesop Fables, The Odyssey, Alice Adventures Into Wonderland, Fahrenheit 451, Peter Pan, To Kill A Mockingbird, We The Living, Phantom Toll Booth, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Pulp,Through The Looking Glass, The Communist Manifesto, Siddhartha, The Old Man And The Sea, Gulliver's Travels, Mein Kampf, The Republic, and Meno.


Obviously a hard-core right winger. :rolleyes

This guy is just a crazy fuck.

But keep being classy and trying to blame this shit on talk radio, Palin, tea party, etc.


Stupid fucks.

That's the most important piece to take from this. Some people aren't right or left... they're just crazy. They have some stuff which makes tehm seem righty, others which make them seem lefty. But really, they're just crazy.

[LnGrrrR]

More than anything, that list of books looks to me like the kind of thing someone would post as a desperate attempt to appear super literate. Too much of a greatest hits list to be real.

Here's the thing I don't get... how do you put Animal Farm, Brave New World AND Fahrenheit 451 on your list...

But NOT 1984? Really? How is that possible?

[boutons_deux]

Jared Loughner is 100% Pure Americana in the Great Tradition of American political assaassins.

[Winehole23]

What is the Great Tradition of American political assassinations?

[Wild Cobra]

Jared Loughner is 100% Pure Americana in the Great Tradition of American political assaassins.
If you say so. I marvel at how you would have insight to such a mind. Maybe this applies to you too, From the article I linked a few posts ago:


Loughner had once tried to join the military but was deemed unsuitable, officials said.

You talk about how the military has such low standards... Even they saw trouble in the man!

[TeyshaBlue]

Look at me!

[Oh, Gee!!]

This is true. Didn't realize I missed that until now.

That particular one is used to mark locations on maps.

since she's always blathering on and on about hunting and using gun metaphors in her sophmoric speeches, you'll have forgive us for not linking those symbols to her lesser-known hobby of land surveying.

[coyotes_geek]

BTW, Giffords is now able to breathe on her own, so good news there. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110111/ap_on_re_us/us_congresswoman_shot_giffords

Apologies for going off topic.

[boutons_deux]

Tradition?

Lincoln / JW Boothe

Kennedy / Oswald

Kennedy / Sirhan

MLK / Ray

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_assassination_a ttempts_and_plots

[clambake]

since she's always blathering on and on about hunting and using gun metaphors in her sophmoric speeches, you'll have forgive us for not linking those symbols to her lesser-known hobby of land surveying.

:lol

[coyotes_geek]

since she's always blathering on and on about hunting and using gun metaphors in her sophmoric speeches, you'll have forgive us for not linking those symbols to her lesser-known hobby of land surveying.

Although if Palin could start figuring out how to drop land surveying lingo into her political quips, my opinion of her would go up. Come on Sarah, show us what you can do with "declination", "metes and bounds", or for extra credit, use "vara".

[George Gervin's Afro]

since she's always blathering on and on about hunting and using gun metaphors in her sophmoric speeches, you'll have forgive us for not linking those symbols to her lesser-known hobby of land surveying.

I have to disagree..most sophmores would probably find her to be an idiot..

[Bartleby]

Here's the thing I don't get... how do you put Animal Farm, Brave New World AND Fahrenheit 451 on your list...

But NOT 1984? Really? How is that possible?

I was sort of surprised that Catcher in the Rye was not on his list.

[CuckingFunt]

I was sort of surprised that Catcher in the Rye was not on his list.

It's been done.

[ChumpDumper]

He's a phony.

[Nbadan]

Another non connection is found!


Forty-five percent of Americans believe that Jared Loughner's political views were "probably" a factor in the shootings in Tucson Saturday, a new CBS News poll shows. One in three say they probably were not a factor, while 22 percent say they do not know.

Loughner has not cooperated with investigators in the wake of the shooting, and evidence suggests he held muddled political views far outside the mainstream. Many partisans have nonetheless tried to link the alleged shooter to the right or left.

The poll also shows that while three in four Americans say violence against the government is never justified, 16 percent say it can be justified -- the same percentage that said as much in April. Twenty-eight percent of Republicans said such violence can be justified, compared with 11 percent of Democrats and independents.

CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028218-503544.html)

Palin, Rush, BECKKK, et al, may not have put the gun in the guy's hand but they sure supplied the bullets!

[Nbadan]

How about that "shrine"

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2011/01/10/alg_loughner_shrine-exclusive.jpg

....but, but...he had a shrine!

[ChumpDumper]

Won't somebody think of the orange slices?

[Nbadan]

...like being crazy makes him any less of a wing-nut....or having wing-nut tendencies...

[redzero]

Another non connection is found!



CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028218-503544.html)

Palin, Rush, BECKKK, et al, may not have put the gun in the guy's hand but they sure supplied the bullets!

:rollin

Polls are not evidence of motive, you moron.

:lol

Nobody can be this stupid.

[Nbadan]

You are...

tyqmZs0VoPw

You betcha!

[Crookshanks]

nbadan - I'm not sure where you got that polling information because I heard something quite different:

CBS News is out with a new poll today that finds Americans strongly rejecting the notion that the political climate played a role in Saturday's attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

Fifty-seven percent of respondents say that the nation's "harsh political tone" didn't have anything to do with the shooting rampage, compared with 32 percent who say it did play a role. Not surprisingly, Republicans are more unified in denying any linkage (a 69 to 19 percent margin), but even a plurality of Democrats -- 49 percent -- agree that there was no connection. Among independents, the spread is 56 to 33.

This is somewhat heartening, given that so many commentators on the left -- including, I must say, some of my colleagues here -- have since Saturday been playing up the extreme rhetoric that Sarah Palin and other Tea Party favorites have spouted these past few years, claiming that it all somehow created a climate conducive to Jared Loughner's shooting rampage.

As I wrote on Sunday night, I find this to be a very slippery argument. We know that no connection between Loughner and Tea Party politics has been established, and what we have learned about him strongly suggests that he lacked a recognizable political identity. He looks to be a deranged young man and it's unclear if he was even aware of the political debate/conversation that the rest of us follow every day. There's just no evidence of any connection between Loughner and Palin, the Tea Party and conservative movement.

[BlairForceDejuan]

That's a fucking weak shrine. If you are going to go ahead and make a shrine, you gotta MAKE A SHRINE. I dare say that is not even a shrine. He put a skull and some peaches in his mom's flower pots.

[redzero]

You are...

tyqmZs0VoPw

You betcha!

lol bringing up a video that provides no evidence of Loughner's motive as proof of Loughner's motive.

[Don'tCallMeBubbles]

Another non connection is found!



CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028218-503544.html)

Palin, Rush, BECKKK, et al, may not have put the gun in the guy's hand but they sure supplied the bullets!

Good stats. Much better to take a poll from the public at large, that way they can't have their views reflect that of what's been reported.

Those teachers and students don't have the numbers to create a solid poll......

[Nbadan]

lol bringing up a video that provides no evidence of Loughner's motive as proof of Loughner's motive.

:rolleyes

[Nbadan]

nbadan - I'm not sure where you got that polling information because I heard something quite different:

CBS News is out with a new poll today that finds Americans strongly rejecting the notion that the political climate played a role in Saturday's attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.[/B]

I provided a direct link to CBS with my info....

[redzero]

I've asked you a million times, Nbadan.

Where is the evidence that Palin, Limbaugh, Beck or the Tea Party directly influenced Loughner's actions?

[Nbadan]

I've asked you a million times, Nbadan.

Where is the evidence that Palin, Limbaugh, Beck or the Tea Party directly influenced Loughner's actions?

You can't see it with your wing-nut colored glasses on......see the forest for the trees man!

[redzero]

Fuck the burden of proof. I'll accuse people of instigating several murders and provide nothing to back up my claims.

If somebody asks for evidence, I'll just call them crazy.

[Nbadan]

That's all you got? Misquoting me? Seriously?

Run along boy...

[redzero]

I posted this somewhere else, but this is exactly how every conversation I have had with people blaming Palin has turned out.


Sarah Palin should apologize.

Apologize for what?


The shootings that happened in Arizona.

Is there any evidence that connects the shootings to Sarah Palin?


Palin's camp posted imagery of a cross hair that targeted Gabriel Giffords.

Is there anything to show that Loughner was influenced by this imagery?


Why are you asking so many questions? I already answered that.

No you haven't. You still haven't made a connection between the shooter's motive and Palin.


You're just a troll/crazy.

Repeat ad infinitum.

[Don'tCallMeBubbles]

Rationalize the irrational.

Shitty, shit, shit............

[Yonivore]

since she's always blathering on and on about hunting and using gun metaphors in her sophmoric speeches, you'll have forgive us for not linking those symbols to her lesser-known hobby of land surveying.
Okay, let's recap since this has gone so far afield that even the batshit crazies, like Nbadan, are lost in their narrative...

First, and most important, there is absolutely no evidence to show Loughner was motivated by inflammatory, vitriolic, partisan, political rhetoric. None. Zilch. Zero.

What we do know is that Arizona has a law, in place, by which Loughner could have been subjected to psychiatric evaluation long before he snapped. In fact, the Sheriff that continues to rail against the Right, has had several opportunities to intervene since he said, himself, he was aware of Loughner and that he had made death threats in the past.

So, I say the blame starts with Loughner, moves through the many people who contacted him over the last few years and failed to use the tools their legislature provided to deal with the mentally ill, on to the law enforcement agency that knew he was dangerous and failed to act.

Now, about that SarahPAC ad that seems to be the focus of everyone's derision and scorn.


http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/sarahpac_0.jpg

Who in here thinks Sarah Palin personally sat down and designed that ad? And if, as you say, she is so fond of martial imagery, where are the references to "target" or "bullseye" or "lock and load" or any other violent euphemism? There not there.

In fact, in that context and on that image, surveyor marks make more sense. Districts are geography. The marks are placed on geographic locations, not people.

Chances are a marketing intern or aide came up with bright idea on their own. Even in the 2010 mid-term elections, there are similar examples of such imagery from the other side of the political spectrum.

The Democratic Leadership Committee put out this "Targeting Strategy" graphic:


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/media/DLC-Targeting-map.gif

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee issued this one (each bulls eye represents a Republican Congressman):


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/media/recovery.jpeg

And, in the realm of what might have motivated someone to "target" Congresswoman Giffords, specifically? I think The DailyKos takes the blue ribbon on that one...

Two days before she was shot, Some unbalanced frequent contributor to DailyKos posted this:


http://www.wnd.com/images/110108kos.jpg

And Moulitas himself, back in 2008, "targeted" and put a "bullseye" on Giffords, along with other Democrats because they didn't tow the party line the way he thought they should.


Who to primary? Well, I'd argue that we can narrow the target list by looking at those Democrats who sold out the Constitution last week. I've bolded members of the Blue Dogs for added emphasis.

[Giffords was one of several targeted by Kos and placed in the bullseye]
Giffords, Gabrielle (AZ-08)

Not all of these people will get or even deserve primaries, but this vote certainly puts a bulls eye on their district.
Particularly since Kos's vitriol is more contemporaneous to Loughner's first contact with Giffords (2007), when his friends became aware he didn't like her very much, wouldn't it make more sense to put the blame there and be excoriating him? Oh wait, he's a friendly.

The Democrats have failed again. Yes, again. From JFK to Loughner, Democrats first assertion, whenever something like this occurs, is that right-wing extremism and vitrolic rhetoric caused it. Not only has that never been the case, more times than not it's turned out to be either an insane person or left-wing idiot.

[redzero]

So, Nbadan, have you found anything yet that proves violent rhetoric motivated Loughner to shoot several people, or are you content with making baseless accusations and calling those who want evidence trolls?

[Yonivore]

So, Nbadan, have you found anything yet that proves violent rhetoric motivated Loughner to shoot several people, or are you content with making baseless accusations and calling those who want evidence trolls?
He's out back with his skull.

[TeyshaBlue]

Another non connection is found!



CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028218-503544.html)

Palin, Rush, BECKKK, et al, may not have put the gun in the guy's hand but they sure supplied the bullets!

This application of a poll is unquestionably the stupidest post you've ever made. Its so absurd its actually a thing of wonder. Congrats.

[Yonivore]

From Dangerous Dan's "poll"


http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2011/01/11/pie_chart_ArizonaShootings_v1.jpg

Just what the fuck were Loughner's "Political Views?"

[Yonivore]

How funny! Here's a CBS Poll that refutes Dan's CBS Poll

Poll: Most Americans Feel Rhetoric, Tucson Shooting Unrelated (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028105-503544.html?tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea)


http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2011/01/11/poll_politicaltone.gif

:lmao Not even a majority of Democrats are buying it, Dan.

Hey, Dan! Maybe your oranges aren't shriveled enough -- better get some more candles for that alter.

[Nbadan]

How funny! Here's a CBS Poll that refutes Dan's CBS Poll

Poll: Most Americans Feel Rhetoric, Tucson Shooting Unrelated (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028105-503544.html?tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea)


http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2011/01/11/poll_politicaltone.gif

:lmao Not even a majority of Democrats are buying it, Dan.

Hey, Dan! Maybe your oranges aren't shriveled enough -- better get some more candles for that alter.


Reading is fundamental.....my poll says that most Americans think Lougner's political views influenced the shooting, not the right's political rhetoric...although I would question how any American not in Arizona, like the Sheriff, would know crap about the 'political rhetoric' in Arizona...but details have never been on Yoni's side politically...

[Yonivore]

I wonder when Katie Couric is going to get around to asking Sheriff Dupnik what he knew and when he knew it?

The Dupnik Cover-Up -- He Knew About Loughner? (http://spectator.org/blog/2011/01/11/the-dupnik-cover-up-he-knew-ab)

Fitting editorial:

Pima County sheriff should remember duty (http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2011/01/11/20110111tue1-11.html)


Dupnik needs to recall that he is elected to be a lawman. With each additional comment, the Democratic sheriff of Pima County is revealing his agenda as partisan, and, as such, every bit as recklessly antagonistic as the talk-show hosts and politicians he chooses to decry.
He's also compromising the criminal case.

[Nbadan]

This application of a poll is unquestionably the stupidest post you've ever made. Its so absurd its actually a thing of wonder. Congrats.

I wonder where you get your facts in every post....

[Nbadan]

So, Nbadan, have you found anything yet that proves violent rhetoric motivated Loughner to shoot several people, or are you content with making baseless accusations and calling those who want evidence trolls?

:lol

this has to be Darrin

:lmao

[Yonivore]

:lol

this has to be Darrin

:lmao
In any case, to the question; do you have any evidence Loughner's acts were motivated by rancorous vitriolic right-wing political rhetoric?

[Yonivore]

Reading is fundamental.....my poll says that most Americans think Lougner's political views influenced the shooting,...
I know what your poll said, that was kind of the point. Where have his political views been made known?


...not the right's political rhetoric...
But, that's the assertion being made, that the right's political rhetoric is what animated this guy.


...although I would question how any American not in Arizona, like the Sheriff, would know crap about the 'political rhetoric' in Arizona...
The political questions being debated in Arizona have been national news for quite some time now, Dan.


but details have never been on Yoni's side politically...
Again, what evidence do you have that right-wing rhetoric -- and specifically, the SarahPAC ad, had absolutely anything to do with why Loughner attempted to assassinate Congresswoman Giffords?

[redzero]

:lol

this has to be Darrin

:lmao

:lmao

Dodging the question because he knows that he has no answer.

Is this mouse?

[TeyshaBlue]

I wonder where you get your facts in every post....

Well, admittedly its harder when chained by logic. I envy your unfettered approach to "facts".:lmao

[Nbadan]

In any case, to the question; do you have any evidence Loughner's acts were motivated by rancorous vitriolic right-wing political rhetoric?

Do you have proof it wasn't? Do you have proof he never listened to vitriolic political hate speech 24-7 from his local WOAI?

[Nbadan]

Well, admittedly its harder when chained by logic. I envy your unfettered approach to "facts".:lmao

Logic usually stands up to time, like most of my posts....well see about yours...

[Yonivore]

Do you have proof it wasn't?
Yeah, he's hated Giffords since before SarahPAC and the 2010 midterms. Several witnesses have attested to his insanity without once mentioning saying he mentioned the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh. Nor did they allude to any "right-wing vitriolic hateful rhetoric" he may have been spouting, prior to or during the attack.


Do you have proof he never listened to vitriolic political hate speech 24-7 from his local WOAI?
Do you have proof he didn't read boyBlue's post on DailyKos on the 6th and declare, "That's fucking it, that bitch is dead!"

[redzero]

Do you have proof it wasn't?

Goddamn, are you trolling or are you actually serious?

[Yonivore]

Goddamn, are you trolling or are you actually serious?
No, he's serious.

[Nbadan]

Yeah, he's hated Giffords since before SarahPAC and the 2010 midterms. Several witnesses have attested to his insanity without once mentioning saying he mentioned the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh. Nor did they allude to any "right-wing vitriolic hateful rhetoric" he may have been spouting, prior to or during the attack.

You keep moving the goal posts...you wanted me to show you evidence of wing-nut hate inspired terrorists attacks in the U.S.....I think the TNT video did that...now you want absolute proof that this guy listened to and was inspired by wing-nut hate speech....I showed last night that this guy was associated with an anti-immigrant group, many of which have latched onto common goals with the tea party.....I've shown you evidence that some tea party members openly advocate shooting liberals and immigrants...I've shown you proof that some wing-nut politicians have called for a revolution against their own government.....but mainly liberals..

[Yonivore]

Logic usually stands up to time, like most of my posts....well see about yours...

You mean like this pinnacle of logic?

Do you have proof it wasn't? Do you have proof he never listened to vitriolic political hate speech 24-7 from his local WOAI?

[rascal]

Okay, let's recap since this has gone so far afield that even the batshit crazies, like Nbadan, are lost in their narrative...

First, and most important, there is absolutely no evidence to show Loughner was motivated by inflammatory, vitriolic, partisan, political rhetoric. None. Zilch. Zero.

What we do know is that Arizona has a law, in place, by which Loughner could have been subjected to psychiatric evaluation long before he snapped. In fact, the Sheriff that continues to rail against the Right, has had several opportunities to intervene since he said, himself, he was aware of Loughner and that he had made death threats in the past.

So, I say the blame starts with Loughner, moves through the many people who contacted him over the last few years and failed to use the tools their legislature provided to deal with the mentally ill, on to the law enforcement agency that knew he was dangerous and failed to act.

Now, about that SarahPAC ad that seems to be the focus of everyone's derision and scorn.


http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/sarahpac_0.jpg

Who in here thinks Sarah Palin personally sat down and designed that ad? And if, as you say, she is so fond of martial imagery, where are the references to "target" or "bullseye" or "lock and load" or any other violent euphemism? There not there.

In fact, in that context and on that image, surveyor marks make more sense. Districts are geography. The marks are placed on geographic locations, not people.

Chances are a marketing intern or aide came up with bright idea on their own. Even in the 2010 mid-term elections, there are similar examples of such imagery from the other side of the political spectrum.

The Democratic Leadership Committee put out this "Targeting Strategy" graphic:


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/media/DLC-Targeting-map.gif

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee issued this one (each bulls eye represents a Republican Congressman):


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/media/recovery.jpeg

And, in the realm of what might have motivated someone to "target" Congresswoman Giffords, specifically? I think The DailyKos takes the blue ribbon on that one...

Two days before she was shot, Some unbalanced frequent contributor to DailyKos posted this:


http://www.wnd.com/images/110108kos.jpg

And Moulitas himself, back in 2008, "targeted" and put a "bullseye" on Giffords, along with other Democrats because they didn't tow the party line the way he thought they should.


Particularly since Kos's vitriol is more contemporaneous to Loughner's first contact with Giffords (2007), when his friends became aware he didn't like her very much, wouldn't it make more sense to put the blame there and be excoriating him? Oh wait, he's a friendly.

The Democrats have failed again. Yes, again. From JFK to Loughner, Democrats first assertion, whenever something like this occurs, is that right-wing extremism and vitrolic rhetoric caused it. Not only has that never been the case, more times than not it's turned out to be either an insane person or left-wing idiot.

The geographic locations represented the people, thats why she included the names. She should not have any names on there. She would be aware of the add since her name is on it. It was done in bad taste and has enough violent references from the cross hairs to the words Lets Take Back and 17 more to Go.

If it wasn't done in bad taste why was it pulled quickly after the shootings?

And yes the right has riled up their base with violent angry references continuously on conservative talk radio 24/7. I can't even find a left leaning radio station where I live. Its constant Conservative propaganda and the weak minded like yourself cannot see through it. You fall right into their trap.


I know enough hateful republicans, it never used to be this bad before conservative talk radio has become a media force.

[Nbadan]

You mean like this pinnacle of logic?

...logic defies you...

Wing-nut reasons why Gifford was shot....

..he shot a popular Democrat Arizona politician because he....

1. blamed her for his breakup with his girlfriend
2. blamed her for ignoring his stupid question a few years ago
3. smoked pot out of a skull
4. bad timing
5. no particular reason

it wasn't political....

[rascal]

There also could be a coverup not to rile the left into angry retaliation. So they don't disclose every detail of his motives. You may never know all the truth.

[Nbadan]

There also could be a coverup not to rile the left into angry retaliation. So they don't disclose every detail of his motives. You may never know all the truth.

Not to mention that the corrupt, compromised M$M will bury any evidence that wing-nut rhetoric was related....just as they always do...

[rascal]

...logic defies you...

Wing-nut reasons why Gifford was shot....

..he shot a popular Democrat Arizona politician because he....

1. blamed her for his breakup with his girlfriend
2. blamed her for ignoring his stupid question a few years ago
3. smoked pot out of a skull
4. bad timing
5. no particular reason

it wasn't political....

He shot her just because he is crazy with no motives. That is the rights reasoning. :rollin

[Yonivore]

You keep moving the goal posts...you wanted me to show you evidence of wing-nut hate inspired terrorists attacks in the U.S.
I don't recall asking you for that. I want to know what right-wing rhetoric cause Loughner to act.


....I think the TNT video did that...
I don't recall the video, you must have posted in response to someone else or, I wasn't inclined to watch.


now you want absolute proof that this guy listened to and was inspired by wing-nut hate speech....
Hell, I'll take ANY proof.


I showed last night that this guy was associated with an anti-immigrant group,
That nut that took hostages at Discovery was an anti-immigrant nut. That, alone doesn't make either one of them right-wing.


many of which have latched onto common goals with the tea party.....
Okay, did Loughner latch on? There's nothing to indicate he did.


I've shown you evidence that some tea party members openly advocate shooting liberals and immigrants..
Have you seen the movie portraying the assassination of President Bush? Or have you ever read the DailyKos, DemocraticUnderground, or watch just about anybody on MSNBC?

And, again, where is the proof Loughner acted in response to any of that?


.I've shown you proof that some wing-nut politicians have called for a revolution against their own government.....but mainly liberals..
And that has exactly what to do with Loughner?

I can show you gigabytes of left-wing hatred and vitriol -- directed at President Bush alone. Don't even mention Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld.

[redzero]

There also could be a coverup not to rile the left into angry retaliation. So they don't disclose every detail of his motives. You may never know all the truth.

So even if no evidence is found that connects Loughner to Palin, you can fall back on "They aren't telling the truth."

A win-win situation for you, right?

[PublicOption]

NgnOgROJ8mg&feature=related

[Nbadan]

He shot her just because he is crazy with no motives. That is the rights reasoning. :rollin

...it gets better...

6. He was bat-shit crazy

..the very definition of being a wing-nut!

[Nbadan]

I don't recall asking you for that. I want to know what right-wing rhetoric cause Loughner to act.

What other proof do you need than politicians in Arizona resigning in mass because they fear for their lives and the lives of their families after many threats and this shooting?

Speaks volumes!

[Nbadan]

Have you seen the movie portraying the assassination of President Bush? Or have you ever read the DailyKos, DemocraticUnderground, or watch just about anybody on MSNBC?

You really want a battle of moral equivalency on this?

[redzero]

http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/5209/loughnerwiki.jpg (http://img840.imageshack.us/i/loughnerwiki.jpg/)

Yep, sounds sane to me.

[Nbadan]

I can show you gigabytes of left-wing hatred and vitriol -- directed at President Bush alone. Don't even mention Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld.

Neo-cons don't get assassinated...they do the assassinating!

[Yonivore]

The geographic locations represented the people, thats why she included the names. She should not have any names on there. She would be aware of the add since her name is on it. It was done in bad taste and has enough violent references from the cross hairs to the words Lets Take Back and 17 more to Go.
I notice you don't address the left-wing "target" graphics or DailyKos directed hatred at Giffords. And, no, you don't know Sarah Palin had much to do with that ad, at all. She didn't autograph it. They used an image of her signature. Did she know about it? Sure, in the context of a buttload of political advertising this year.


If it wasn't done in bad taste why was it pulled quickly after the shootings?
It was pulled after the election ended...that was in November.


And yes the right has riled up their base with violent angry references continuously on conservative talk radio 24/7.
I don't feel riled or violent. The message from right-wing radio is that this administration and the liberal agenda is ruining this country. There was 8 years of liberal counterpoint from 2000 to 2008.


I can't even find a left leaning radio station where I live.
Because the liberal message doesn't resonate with enough Americans to keep a radio talk show profitable. Ask Jeanene Garofalo and the gang over at Air America.


B Its constant Conservative propaganda and the weak minded like yourself cannot see through it. You fall right into their trap.
I happen to agree with the conservative position on most issues, I'm not trapped.


I know enough hateful republicans, it never used to be this bad before conservative talk radio has become a media force.
I don't know how old you are but, Conservative talk radio has been around for quite some time.

Progressives, liberals, socialists, communists (and, face it, those are all comfortable in the Democratic Party) have been killing people over political ideology for a lot longer, though.

[Yonivore]

Neo-cons don't get assassinated...they do the assassinating!
Oswald, Hinkley, Fromme, Booth, et. al. were neo-cons?

[redzero]

What other proof do you need than politicians in Arizona resigning in mass because they fear for their lives and the lives of their families after many threats and this shooting?

What do politicians resigning prove about Loughner's motive?

[rascal]

So even if no evidence is found that connects Loughner to Palin, you can fall back on "They aren't telling the truth."

A win-win situation for you, right?

Just giving you all the options to consider.

[Yonivore]

You really want a battle of moral equivalency on this?
Actually, I would like for you to show me any evidence, one shred, that Loughner was motivated by right-wing rhetoric.

[johnsmith]

Well, for some reason that is just totally beyond comprehension, I went through and read this entire thread.

First of all, I'm now dumber.

Second, many of the posters in this thread are a prime example of what is wrong with American politics, American culture, and human beings nowadays.

Third, it reaffirms my belief that the root cause of the beginning of the end for mankind is a combination of both 24 hour news channels and the internet.

Good job though.

[Nbadan]

Actually, I would like for you to show me any evidence, one shred, that Loughner was motivated by right-wing rhetoric.

Prove to me Glenn Beckk didn't murder a little girl in 1990....

[Yonivore]

Prove to me Glenn Beckk didn't murder a little girl in 1990....
Exactly. There's no proof of either.

[Yonivore]

Well, for some reason that is just totally beyond comprehension, I went through and read this entire thread.

First of all, I'm now dumber.

Second, many of the posters in this thread are a prime example of what is wrong with American politics, American culture, and human beings nowadays.

Third, it reaffirms my belief that the root cause of the beginning of the end for mankind is a combination of both 24 hour news channels and the internet.

Good job though.

:tu

[redzero]

Just giving you all the options to consider.

Sure.

From your side, even if you are wrong, you can still claim to be right, right?

If it is found out that Loughner was influenced by Palin, you win.

If it is found out that Loughner wasn't influenced by Palin, you can claim that the truth is being withheld and you still win.

Am I right?

[Nbadan]

Exactly. There's no proof of either.

Except that he shot a democratic politician for no particular reason...

[Yonivore]

Except that he shot a democratic politician for no particular reason...
For no rational reason. He is insane.

In the assassination attempt most like Giffords, Hinkley shot Reagan to impress Jodi Foster. Where's the poltical motivation there?

And, in thinking back, I don't recall anyone blaming the left for that.

[redzero]

Except that he shot a democratic politician for no particular reason...

But didn't you claim to know why he shot this politician?

[rascal]

For no rational reason. He is insane.



Keep believing that, no motives. :lol

[redzero]

Keep believing that, no motives. :lol

:wakeup

What is his motive?

I'll just wait for you to either lie or not respond.

[Nbadan]

But didn't you claim to know why he shot this politician?

No, I merely presented evidence that he was associated with a group, a rabid anti-immigrant group, which disagreed with Gifford's immigration policy and was anti-Semitic...Gifford voted for the DREAM act and was Jewish..

[redzero]

No, I merely presented evidence that he was associated with a group, a rabid anti-immigrant group, which disagreed with Gifford's immigration policy and was anti-Semitic...Gifford voted for the DREAM act and was Jewish..

So you admit that you have no idea what the motive is, correct?

[Nbadan]

:wakeup

[QUOTE]What is his motive?

What was his motive?

Ill just wait for you to respond with the M$M excuse of the day...

[ChumpDumper]

At least this guy is alive. Eventually we might learn what his motives actually were.

[redzero]

What was his motive?


I don't know what his motive is, which is why I am not blaming the murder of six people on politicians I don't like, like you are.

[Yonivore]

Keep believing that, no motives. :lol
No one said he didn't have a motive. All indications are he was motivated by some insane idea he had about Giffords. There are no indicators he was motivated by right-wing ideology.

[BlairForceDejuan]

At least this guy is alive. Eventually we might learn what his motives actually were.

Because he tells you what "his motives" were? Look at him. He went into full blown attention whore mode after the shooting.

No eyebrows + smirk = he will string the public along. Is this before or after he tries to puss out with an insanity plea?

[rascal]

:wakeup

What is his motive?

I'll just wait for you to either lie or not respond.

He wanted smaller government, had the belief that government was ruining peoples lives, that has been established. That is a strong selling point of conservatism.

Giffords supported the healthcare changes(Bigger Govt.) . Not too hard to make the connections that he was leaning to the right and influenced by the rights rhetoric.

[ChumpDumper]

Because he tells you what "his motives" were? Look at him. He went into full blown attention whore mode after the shooting.

No eyebrows + smirk = he will string the public along. Is this before or after he tries to puss out with an insanity plea?You've watched far too many Fox News body language spots.

[redzero]

Giffords supported the healthcare changes(Bigger Govt.) . Not too hard to make the connections that he was leaning to the right and influenced by the rights rhetoric.

http://tkware.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/citation_needed_bumper_sticker-p128912061722662976trl0_400.jpg

That's called an assumption.

[Nbadan]

I don't know what his motive is, which is why I am not blaming the murder of six people on politicians I don't like, like you are.

....he didn't shoot the clerk at his local 7-11...he shot a popular liberal politician who's policy he did not agree with...an opinion shared by many Arizona Tea baggers.

Wingnuts love to play the guilt by association card unless its a right-wing domestic terrorist...

[BlairForceDejuan]

You've watched far too many Fox News body language spots.

:lol Only somebody who watches Billy O would know of those segments.

[redzero]

....he didn't shoot the clerk at his local 7-11...he shot a popular liberal politician who's policy he did not agree with...an opinion shared by many Arizona Tea baggers.

Wingnuts love to play the guilt by association card unless its a right-wing domestic terrorist...

You keep bringing up irrelevant information.

He disliked Gifford because she didn't answer a question to his liking 3 years ago.

Does that sound insane? Of course it does. Why? Jared Lee Loughner is fucking insane. It has become painfully obvious that Loughner is loony, but you keep trying to take this opportunity to blame politicians you don't like.

[rascal]

You keep bringing up irrelevant information.

He disliked Gifford because she didn't answer a question to his liking 3 years ago.

Does that sound insane? Of course it does. Why? Jared Lee Loughner is fucking insane. It has become painfully obvious that Loughner is loony, but you keep trying to take this opportunity to blame politicians you don't like.

Again the no motive theory. :rollin

[ChumpDumper]

He could have an insane motive.

[scott]

Interesting history of events on the Wikepedia page for Loughner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loughner

[Nbadan]

He could have an insane motive.

which is the very definition of being a wing-nut...we're going in circles here...

[BradLohaus]

Haven't read every page so this may have been said already, but...

Remember a while back when that crazy guy took hostages at the Discovery Channel headquarters, saying that they weren't doing enough to save the planet, after citing Al Gore and other environmentalists as influences on his website?

And then for days the MSM was saying how the crazy rhetoric of extreme environmentalists had a direct hand in influencing him.

Oh wait that never happened.

[redzero]

:lol

These two are honestly trying to claim that this guy isn't insane.

:lmao

Like ChumpDumper said, he could have an insane motive.

But continue to claim to know what his motive is while providing zero evidence.

[ChumpDumper]

which is the very definition of being a wing-nut...we're going in circles here...But you want to ascribe a political rationale to it in order to achieve some perceived political advantage.

Will you invoke this shooting like Rudy invokes 9/11?

[scott]

:lol

These two are honestly trying to claim that this guy isn't insane.

:lmao

Like ChumpDumper said, he could have an insane motive.

But continue to claim to know what his motive is while providing zero evidence.

What definition of insane are you working with? I think he could very well be insane, or he could be a quite sane sociopath. Insane is a term with a specific meaning, and words matter.

[Yonivore]

Interesting history of events on the Wikepedia page for Loughner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loughner
Nothing in there that hasn't already been posted here. Stoking, scott?

What are your thoughts?

[scott]

Admission: I can't read all 34 pages.

I'm on the fence between loon and sociopath.

[redzero]

What definition of insane are you working with? I think he could very well be insane, or he could be a quite sane sociopath. Insane is a term with a specific meaning, and words matter.

http://dictionary-psychology.com/index.php?a=term&d=Dictionary+of+psychology&t=Insanity


Or madness is the behaviour whereby a person flouts societal norms and may become a danger to himself and others. Greek tragedies and Shakespeare often refer to madness in this sense. Psychologically, it is a general, popular and legal term defining behaviour influenced by mental instability. In modern usage, it is most commonly encountered as an informal, unscientific term, or in the narrow legal context of the insanity defense. In the medical profession the term is now avoided in favour of more specific diagnoses of mental illness such as schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. When discussing mental illness in general terms, "psychopathology" is also considered a preferred descriptor.

Even though the first sentence is a little broad, Loughner seems the profile.

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/10/jared-lee-loughner-s-mental-state.html


Whatever his motive, Jared Loughner was, by all accounts, an antisocial character whom most found odd and off-putting. Wearing a hoodie even in the scorching Tucson summer, and sealing the world out with his iPod earbuds, Jared would walk the family dog around the neighborhood, oblivious to those who tried to greet him. “I’ve said ‘hi’ multiple times, but he’s ignored me and continued with whatever he’s doing,” says Anthony Woods, a 19-year-old airplane mechanic who’s lived next door to the Loughners for seven years. “He seems very depressed, he was hunched over at all times.” (By contrast, neighbors say Jared’s mother is very friendly and outgoing, although his father, Woods says, is “very aggressive, very angry all the time about petty things—like if the trash is out because the trash guys didn’t pick it up, he yells at us for it.” The Loughners couldn’t be reached for comment). In recent weeks, Jared seemed to grow even more antisocial. “I’d try to engage him in a conversation and he’d run or walk away” says Jason Johnson, 33, who lives across the street and met Jared for the first time a few weeks ago. “I saw him two days ago and I said hello. He turned and walked back into the house. He had a look in his eyes like something wasn’t right,” Johnson says. “You know how it is when you talk to someone who’s mentally ill and they’re just not there? It was like he was in his own world.”

Loughner’s world was indeed a strange and unsettling place. “He was very disconnected from reality and from our class,” says Lydian Ali, a classmate of his in a poetry writing class at Pima Community College. “I remember him being incoherent when he contributed to class discussions. He would make a comment about someone's poem and none of us would know what he was talking about.” Another student, Amy Jensen, wrote on her website Saturday that she dropped out of a class at Pima in part because of Loughner’s bizarre behavior. “He was creepy. He would laugh to himself nearly all the time, even about things that weren’t funny,” Jensen wrote. “I sat behind him in that class and dropped it partially because of him. He was the kind of guy I pictured bringing a gun to class and shooting everyone.” Pima Community College suspended Loughner in September after administrators grew disturbed over one of his Internet posts, and told his parents he would need a mental health clearance if he wanted to return. Instead, Loughner dropped out the following month.

And of course, there's his beliefs that the government was controlling his mind through grammar, that he is conscious dreamer, and that there will be a new currency of something.

[Stringer_Bell]

Admission: I can't read all 34 pages.

I'm on the fence between loon and sociopath.

Schizotypal would be my guess, but I'd change that answer if it means he gets to plead insanity because of it. It's pretty funny that he's got a Wiki page about him, controlled by the current currency...his existence is unconstitutional!

[scott]

http://dictionary-psychology.com/index.php?a=term&d=Dictionary+of+psychology&t=Insanity



Even though the first sentence is a little broad, Loughner seems the profile.

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/10/jared-lee-loughner-s-mental-state.html



And of course, there's his beliefs that the government was controlling his mind through grammar, that he is conscious dreamer, and that there will be a new currency of something.

I definitely think he could be a nut. But he could still just be a guy so hell bent on F'n with people as his other old friend was quoted as saying. That wouldn't make him insane, clinically (but colloquially we'd all call him crazy).

[scott]

Schizotypal would be my guess, but I'd change that answer if it means he gets to plead insanity because of it. It's pretty funny that he's got a Wiki page about him, controlled by the current currency...his existence is unconstitutional!

Wikipedia is an amazing beast. I enjoy reading the talk pages every now and the and the policing process. The page has been frequently attacked by folks labeling him with one political ideology or another (not unlike this thread) but they do an amazing job of keeping it clean.

[Yonivore]

Wikipedia is an amazing beast. I enjoy reading the talk pages every now and the and the policing process. The page has been frequently attacked by folks labeling him with one political ideology or another (not unlike this thread) but they do an amazing job of keeping it clean.
I think that's because they've been raked over the coals for allowing it to become like Spurstalk.com in its earlier days.

They want to be respectable. They want teacher to quit rolling their eyes when a student cites Wikipedia.

[scott]

I think that's because they've been raked over the coals for allowing it to become like Spurstalk.com in its earlier days.

They want to be respectable. They want teacher to quit rolling their eyes when a student cites Wikipedia.

We'd still roll our eyes. Wikipedia is not a source, as it contains no original research. As it has been forever, however, everything is sourced. A student too lazy to scroll to the bottom of the page to get the real source deserves to fail.

Edit: and a teacher/professor who doesn't know this doesn't deserve a job

[Yonivore]

Barry and Sarah talk violence (http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/8251389/)

Democrats are experiencing a major narrative fail.

When the lefty talking-point assault hasn’t even convinced Barbara Walters (http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/10/barbara-walters-i-cant-shake-the-feeling-that-this-isnt-sarah-palins-fault/) and The Economist (http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/01/spinning_tucson) is calling it “toxic,” it’s a pretty major fail. . . .

It Isn't The Rhetoric They Fear, It's The Passion (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2011/01/it-isnt-the-rhetoric-they-fear-its-the-passion.html)

[ChumpDumper]

English?

[ChumpDumper]

and lol passion

[DMX7]

:lol Only somebody who watches Billy O would know of those segments.

Comedy Central crew makes fun of them every once and a while.

[Oh, Gee!!]

if only AZ had looser gun laws, some bystander would have taken this guy out before he shot a second bullet.

[MannyIsGod]

They want to be respectable. They want teacher to quit rolling their eyes when a student cites Wikipedia.

A student who cites Wikipedia is one dumb motherfucker. There are links to the actual sources in every Wikipedia article. Its a great source to start with but if you end it there you're a waste of space in a university class room.

[TeyshaBlue]

....he didn't shoot the clerk at his local 7-11...he shot a popular liberal politician who's policy he did not agree with...an opinion shared by many Arizona Tea baggers.

Wingnuts love to play the guilt by association card unless its a right-wing domestic terrorist...

Ok. Now she's liberal. Pick a position, boy.

[TeyshaBlue]

which is the very definition of being a wing-nut...we're going in circles here...

Dan's comfortably ensconced within his tautological retreat. Nice.

[RandomGuy]

if only AZ had looser gun laws, some bystander would have taken this guy out before he shot a second bullet.

http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gunlaws_az.htm

Not sure if serious... heh.

No concealed carry law, for whatever that is worth.

All you gotta do is carry it in a holster. Yippie ki yay, my friend!

[Wild Cobra]

since she's always blathering on and on about hunting and using gun metaphors in her sophmoric speeches, you'll have forgive us for not linking those symbols to her lesser-known hobby of land surveying.
I agree, I don't blame the lay person, like I said, I missed it myself. I blame those making a fuss as the source, and for credibility purposes, they should do at least a small degree of fact checking on the relevant points.

Would you agree that reporting requires fact checking, else is bullshit?

[Wild Cobra]

I have to disagree..most sophmores would probably find her to be an idiot..
It depends on the part of the country you are in.

What do you think of valley girls?

[Wild Cobra]

Do you have proof it wasn't? Do you have proof he never listened to vitriolic political hate speech 24-7 from his local WOAI?
Wow...

You are a typical libtard...

Guilty until proven innocent...

[Wild Cobra]

NgnOgROJ8mg&feature=related
Yeh, yeh, yeh, we know...

It's on Youtube, so the allegations must be true.

[Vici]

if only AZ had looser gun laws, some bystander would have taken this guy out before he shot a second bullet.

:rollin

You know there was a guy there with a gun right? He didn't do shit with the gun until the shooter was out of ammo. He used his gun to just help keep him subdued until the police came.

[Wild Cobra]

Loughner believed in numerous conspiracy theories and espoused views such as: the United States Government was responsible for the September 11 attacks; a New World Order would bring about a one world currency; there would be a 2012 apocalypse; NASA had faked spaceflights; and the government was using mind control to brainwash people by controlling grammar. He was a member of the online conspiracy theory message board Above Top Secret, though members of the site did not respond warmly to his posts.[24][26][27][28] Reports appearing after the shooting noted similarities between the statements made by Loughner concerning grammar and mind control, and the views of conspiracy theorist David Wynn Miller.[29] Miller stated “He’s just repeating things I’ve had up on my site the past 11 years.”[30][31] According to Zach Osler, the online conspiracy theory film Zeitgeist: The Movie affected Loughner's view of the world.[7]

Yep, sounds sane to me.
Like I said before, sounds like a few people on this board. Mouse, Cosmos, and Parker for example. Would anyone call them Tea Party conservatives?

[Blake]

I agree, I don't blame the lay person, like I said, I missed it myself. I blame those making a fuss as the source, and for credibility purposes, they should do at least a small degree of fact checking on the relevant points.

Would you agree that reporting requires fact checking, else is bullshit?

if such a self-known expert as yourself missed it, why would you expect a layman source to look at the symbols and think them to be anything but crosshairs?

[Wild Cobra]

http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gunlaws_az.htm

Not sure if serious... heh.

No concealed carry law, for whatever that is worth.

All you gotta do is carry it in a holster. Yippie ki yay, my friend!
Ahhhh... Weren't most people attending democrats? How many democrats would admit to carrying guns around other democrats?

[Wild Cobra]

if such a self-known expert as yourself missed it, why would you expect a layman source to look at the symbols and think them to be anything but crosshairs?
I never claimed to know all topics. I have been exposed to that before, years ago. I have probably forgotten more things than most young people know.

[Blake]

I never claimed to know all topics. I have been exposed to that before, years ago. I have probably forgotten more things than most young people know.

that didn't answer the question

[boutons_deux]

It's all Giffords fault she got herself shot

Tucson tea party founder says Giffords to blame for getting shot

""The real case is that she [Giffords] had no security whatsoever at this event. So if she lived under a constant fear of being targeted, if she lived under this constant fear of this rhetoric and hatred that was seething, why would she attend an event in full view of the public with no security whatsoever?"

"For all the stuff they accuse [Palin] of, that gun poster has not done a tenth of the damage to the political discourse as what we're hearing right now.""

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/tucson-tea-party-founder-giffords-blame-shot/

======

Over to you, Yoni, to agree with this fucktard.

[boutons_deux]

Speaker Boehner skips Tucson memorial for RNC cocktail party

The new speaker of the House skipped a nationally televised memorial in Arizona honoring victims of Saturday's shootings, opting instead to host a cocktail party Wednesday night.

Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) declined an offer to ride to Tucson on Air Force One with President Barack Obama and other lawmakers,

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/speaker-boehner-skips-tucon-memorial-rnc-cocktail-party/

[Oh, Gee!!]

Speaker Boehner skips Tucson memorial for RNC cocktail party

The new speaker of the House skipped a nationally televised memorial in Arizona honoring victims of Saturday's shootings, opting instead to host a cocktail party Wednesday night.

Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) declined an offer to ride to Tucson on Air Force One with President Barack Obama and other lawmakers,

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/speaker-boehner-skips-tucon-memorial-rnc-cocktail-party/

probably for the best...there's not enough tissue in tuscon to stop his tears. he woulda flooded the place with his crocodile tears

[clambake]

probably for the best...there's not enough tissue in tuscon to stop his tears. he woulda flooded the place with his crocodile tears

he'd of been hit by a car. blends in too well with all the terracotta.

[Spurminator]

Speaker Boehner skips Tucson memorial for RNC cocktail party

The new speaker of the House skipped a nationally televised memorial in Arizona honoring victims of Saturday's shootings, opting instead to host a cocktail party Wednesday night.

Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) declined an offer to ride to Tucson on Air Force One with President Barack Obama and other lawmakers,

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/speaker-boehner-skips-tucon-memorial-rnc-cocktail-party/

Blah blah blah scoreboarding.

Enough of this shit.

[Wild Cobra]

if such a self-known expert as yourself missed it, why would you expect a layman source to look at the symbols and think them to be anything but crosshairs?

----

that didn't answer the question
People can be as ignorant as they want in their assumptions. I have no control over someone's ignorance. If you watched the movie "Davinchi Code," symbols at the beginning were shown, and their meaning was answered wrong for their root. I should know better than libtards jumping to conclusions, but I forget that too many libtards are highly prejudiced against the right. I don't think that way, and simply forget others do.

Think of it this way. Such jumps in conclusion are a form or bias. If we did that to a minority, we would be called racist. No... too many people are just bigots against the right, and rather than seek the truth, blame first.

[clambake]

yeah, the meaning was much deeper than crosshairs. lol

[boutons_deux]

"Davinchi Code"

Cobraphonics :lol

[Wild Cobra]

"Davinchi Code"

Cobraphonics :lol

I'll take my minor slip ups any day over your gross incompetence.

[Blake]

I should know better than libtards jumping to conclusions, but I forget that too many libtards are highly prejudiced against the right.


Think of it this way. Such jumps in conclusion are a form or bias. If we did that to a minority, we would be called racist. No... too many people are just bigots against the right, and rather than seek the truth, blame first.

so you are basically bigotted against "libtards".

k.

political ramblings aside, that still doesn't really answer why you expect a source to check out what looked like crosshairs to the majority of laymen out there.

[Oh, Gee!!]

I agree, I don't blame the lay person, like I said, I missed it myself. I blame those making a fuss as the source, and for credibility purposes, they should do at least a small degree of fact checking on the relevant points.

Would you agree that reporting requires fact checking, else is bullshit?

I think your defense of her is bullshit. She put crosshairs on a map and is now trying to distance herself from that. I don't think it is a big deal that she did it in the first place tbh. I think it's a bigger deal that she's lying about it now. She needs to stand up for herself and stop playing the victim constantly.

[BlairForceDejuan]

Blah blah blah scoreboarding.

Enough of this shit.

It can't help it. I'll be doing this the rest of its life.

[boutons_deux]

Arizona Has Turned into a Gun Lover's Paradise -- and That's Why It Ranks Among the Highest in Gun Deaths

Arizona provides ample evidence that the presence of a large number of untrained but heavily armed citizens running around doesn't make anyone safer.

The state ranks dead last in gun controls, according to the Legal Community Against Violence (LCAV), a group that advocates for tighter gun laws.

Arizona doesn't require background checks for private gun sales;

it doesn't prohibit assault weapons, 50 caliber rifles, high capacity magazines;

it doesn't impose a waiting period or limit the number of guns that can be acquired in a single purchase,

and it doesn't regulate “junk guns” – cheap and often unsafe “Saturday Night Specials.”

Last year, the state passed a law allowing individuals to carry concealed firearms in public without a license or permit.

Has this made the citizens of Arizona, a gun-lover's paradise, safe?

Well, the state ranked 7th in the country in per capita gun deaths

, according to statistics compiled by The Daily Beast, and eighth in terms of the overall rate of violent crime, according to Census data. And its lax gun laws spill over its borders; according to LCAV,

“Arizona ranked 11th among the states in terms of number of crime guns supplied to other states per capita.

Perhaps more shockingly, in 2009, Arizona provided more crime guns per capita to Mexico than any other state.”

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/149502

[LnGrrrR]

Boutons, I think there's different ways to define "safe". The pro-gun person might say that there might be less crimes overall committed in that state. Are there any type of metrics that show overall crime going down? Or even lowered rates in areas like theft, robbery, break-ins, etc etc?

[rascal]

Boutons, I think there's different ways to define "safe". The pro-gun person might say that there might be less crimes overall committed in that state. Are there any type of metrics that show overall crime going down? Or even lowered rates in areas like theft, robbery, break-ins, etc etc?

The point is that loose gun laws do not diminish gun deaths, like conservatives claim.

[LnGrrrR]

The point is that loose gun laws do not diminish gun deaths, like conservatives claim.

I wasn't aware if conservatives claimed that or not.

[TeyshaBlue]

I wasn't aware if conservatives claimed that or not.

Newsflash to the batch processors like rascal.....I'm a conservative and I don't tout that. Hell, I don't even know the stats.

[boutons_deux]

Various studies have been done on gun owner population vs crime. Studies found it both ways, so NRA and other gun-pushers that claim, eg, it's a great idea to let college students carry guns on campus to prevent another Virginia Tech (or University of TX) are full of bullshit, and just trying to sell more guns and ammo, which is the Real Story behind the NRA, not 2nd Amendment or "freedom".

[Nbadan]

What will the wing-nuts say next when Loughner's insanity plea falls on deaf ears in court?

[Nbadan]

"I don't think he's mentally ill at all. I think he's honestly, I think he's faking everything. I think he's planned it, planned for sometime."

http://www.kgun9.com/Global/story.asp?S=13834898

[Nbadan]

The 22-year-old man accused of trying to assassinate Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in a deadly shooting rampage wrote "Die, bitch" in a note found at his home, a sheriff's official told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

Investigators believe the handwritten message was a reference to Giffords, Pima County Chief Rick Kastigar said. The note was found in a safe alongside other ones, including "I planned ahead," "My assassination" and the name "Giffords."

The source also told Milton that investigators are looking into whether Loughner may have conducted surveillance on Giffords’ district office and campaign rallies.

CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/11/national/main7236979.shtml)

The authorities are trying to follow some leads as to how that unemployed slacker was able to purchase $1,000.00 worth of guns/ammo prior to the shooting. I think the entire story is going to be very complex, and perhaps surprising. The guy had a history of beating up jewish kids at school, long before all of this behavior happened.

[redzero]

What will the wing-nuts say next when Loughner's insanity plea falls on deaf ears in court?

Why would anybody have to say anything?

[Blake]

What will the wing-nuts say next when Loughner's insanity plea falls on deaf ears in court?

"hooray"?

[Wild Cobra]

so you are basically bigotted against "libtards".

k.
You have that backwards. I already hate those who i call libtards.

political ramblings aside, that still doesn't really answer why you expect a source to check out what looked like crosshairs to the majority of laymen out there.
I expect any source, who wishes to maintain the public trust, to fact check.

Is that too much to ask?

[BlairForceDejuan]

LOL @ Palin being responsible for Uncle Fester through use of a commonly used graphic while Gavin Newsom gets jack shit for showcasing a blind eye as some murderous illegals enter his city and gun down his tax-paying citizens.

Just admit you gentlemen have an unhealthy obsessive hatred for Sarah Palin and look to pin bullshit on her every waking second of your lives.

[clambake]

blood libel lol

[Blake]

I expect any source, who wishes to maintain the public trust, to fact check.

Is that too much to ask?

the Palin website took the crosshairs..........errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrr......surveyor symbols down an hour after the shootings.

I fact checked.

why would Palin need to take surveyor symbols down?

what kind of cartography was Palin doing on this particular map?

[Wild Cobra]

the Palin website took the crosshairs..........errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrr......surveyor symbols down an hour after the shootings.

I fact checked.

why would Palin need to take surveyor symbols down?

what kind of cartography was Palin doing on this particular map?
It's called backlash. Even when you did nothing wrong, idiots like you will not understand.

[clambake]

It's called backlash. Even when you did nothing wrong, idiots like you will not understand.

:lmao look at these 2 sentences!

[Blake]

It's called backlash. Even when you did nothing wrong, idiots like you will not understand.

so you are saying they were fully aware they looked like crosshairs.

thanks for the confirmation.

[Wild Cobra]

so you are saying they were fully aware they looked like crosshairs.

thanks for the confirmation.
No, that they became aware that so many people were pathetic enough to twist the truth. Even with the truth known, hatred of people like you is relentless. Fucking ass.

[clambake]

No, that they became aware that so many people were pathetic enough to twist the truth. Even with the truth known, hatred of people like you is relentless. Fucking ass.

so.....she's just a coward.

thanks for admitting that.

[boutons_deux]

They were scope crosshairs targeting politicians.

surveyor symbols?

printer's page registration symbols?

:lol :lol :lol

Don't nobody go foolin with WC's stupid bitch.

[LnGrrrR]

No, that they became aware that so many people were pathetic enough to twist the truth. Even with the truth known, hatred of people like you is relentless. Fucking ass.

WC, if the average person saw that symbol, what do you think they would say?

Choice A) Those are targets/crosshairs.

Choice B) Those are surveyor symbols.

If choice A, do you think that those were pathetic peope trying to twist the truth?

[LnGrrrR]

Also, did Palin ever admit those were surveyor symbols and not crosshairs? And then, did she explain why she used a surveyor symbol in her map, seeing that the map has nothing to do with land surveying?

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Anybody claiming those weren't cross hairs is either a complete fucking moron or completely fucking disingenuous. Either way, it's not looking good.

Seriously WC how the fuck you always manage to be on the indefensible side of every argument is beyond me.

[RandomGuy]

WC, if the average person saw that symbol, what do you think they would say?

Choice A) Those are targets/crosshairs.

Choice B) Those are surveyor symbols.

If choice A, do you think that those were pathetic peope trying to twist the truth?

Context is everything.

"surveyor symbol" is pretty much ass-covering bullshit, everybody god-damned well knows what the symbol meant, just as "A" is a symbol for the first letter in our alphabet that everybody recognizes.

All that does is allows the rabid cool aid drinkers a fig leaf of modesty.

[DarrinS]

What will the wing-nuts say next when Loughner's insanity plea falls on deaf ears in court?


The wing-nuts will say what they've been saying -- that "violent political rhetoric" caused him to "snap".

[DarrinS]

"surveyor symbol" is pretty much ass-covering bullshit


I agree, especially since nobody's ass needed to be covered.

[RandomGuy]

The wing-nuts will say what they've been saying -- that "violent political rhetoric" caused him to "snap".

Who exactly is saying that at this point?

[Blake]

I agree, especially since nobody's ass needed to be covered.

sadly, Palin's people felt the need to cover hers.

[Wild Cobra]

WC, if the average person saw that symbol, what do you think they would say?

Choice A) Those are targets/crosshairs.

Choice B) Those are surveyor symbols.

If choice A, do you think that those were pathetic peope trying to twist the truth?
I don't know what "average" would be considered. Consioder this. Have you ever seen scope crosshairs go outside the circle? You never see it looking through a scope. I guess the average indocrtinated kid today will believe anything.

Look, I am speaking of those pushing an agenda without doing any homework on the topic. People are prejudiced. We all know that. I won't blame everyone jumping to conclusions, just those pushing the misinformation.

Do you agree or disagree that jumping to the conclusion that they are cross-hairs is a form of prejudice, or not? Seems to me it's pre judging without being properly informed.

[Wild Cobra]

Also, did Palin ever admit those were surveyor symbols and not crosshairs? And then, did she explain why she used a surveyor symbol in her map, seeing that the map has nothing to do with land surveying?
To my knowledge, she never got caught up with the BS. Should she waste her time on idiots when others already explained it?

[Wild Cobra]

Context is everything.

"surveyor symbol" is pretty much ass-covering bullshit, everybody god-damned well knows what the symbol meant, just as "A" is a symbol for the first letter in our alphabet that everybody recognizes.

All that does is allows the rabid cool aid drinkers a fig leaf of modesty.
"Everybody know?"

Bullshit. You're prejudices are showing...

[DMX7]

You have to be one dumb motherfucker to believe that those are surveyor symbols.

Putting surveyor symbols in that poster doesn't even make sense.

[Wild Cobra]

You have to be one dumb motherfucker to believe that those are surveyor symbols.

Putting surveyor symbols in that poster doesn't even make sense.
Again, they are symbols for a map, to indicate location. Generally used in surveying.

I don't know about you, but I have never looked through a scope, and seen the cross-hairs stretch outside the circle.

Have you?

[Blake]

Do you agree or disagree that jumping to the conclusion that they are cross-hairs is a form of prejudice, or not? Seems to me it's pre judging without being properly informed.

so was Palin not properly informed?


Remember months ago "bullseye" icon used 2 target the 20 Obamacare-lovin' incumbent seats? We won 18 out of 20 (90% success rate;T'aint bad)

http://twitter.com/SarahPalinUSA/status/29677744457

[LnGrrrR]

I don't know what "average" would be considered. Consioder this. Have you ever seen scope crosshairs go outside the circle? You never see it looking through a scope. I guess the average indocrtinated kid today will believe anything.

Do you think that kids would more readily associate the image with land surveying then crosshairs?

Do you think it makes any sense for someone to use land survey symbols in the aforementioned picture?


Do you agree or disagree that jumping to the conclusion that they are cross-hairs is a form of prejudice, or not? Seems to me it's pre judging without being properly informed.

I would say we all jump to conclusions. You, after all, assumed that the person who made the picture meant to put land surveyor symbols in there, without knowing. Are you prejudiced in favor of Palin?

[ChumpDumper]

so was Palin not properly informed?That was a typo.

My God.

[Wild Cobra]

so was Palin not properly informed?
A bullseye is a target. Crosshairs are what you aim weapons with. Not a proper comparison.

[Wild Cobra]

Do you think that kids would more readily associate the image with land surveying then crosshairs?
Good comparison...

Liberals to the mind of a child!

Do you think it makes any sense for someone to use land survey symbols in the aforementioned picture?
They are not only a land surveyor symbol. It is a location symbol for map usage.

You know, I can confidently say that this is where our schools lack the level educating the kids. I know I was exposed to such things in school. I simply forgot until reminded. I'll bet everyone got that as part of their rounded education in the 50's and older schooling.



I would say we all jump to conclusions. You, after all, assumed that the person who made the picture meant to put land surveyor symbols in there, without knowing. Are you prejudiced in favor of Palin?

I am only making the factual observation of what it is. I find those who twist the meaning without evidence carrying a touch of evil with them.

[Wild Cobra]

You have to be one dumb motherfucker to believe that those are surveyor symbols.

Putting surveyor symbols in that poster doesn't even make sense.
Putting map location symbols on a map that are also used by surveyors make sense to me. I guess you have to be pretty libtarded for them not to.

[CosmicCowboy]

The crosshairs argument is just as stupid as the "Obama undermined the case against the Arizona shooter in his speech" argument. They could have just used X's or dots on the map but you know what? X's and dots are both used on targets too...all my bow hunting targets use dots. Official nRA .22 targets use X's. What could they have used that you liberal apologists would have approved of? Little ponies? Rainbows? Hell, that probably would have offended PETA and gays. Y'all are a bunch of sensitive little bitches...

[ChumpDumper]

A bullseye is a target. Crosshairs are what you aim weapons with. Not a proper comparison.So you are saying Palin is stupid.

OK.

[Blake]

A bullseye is a target. Crosshairs are what you aim weapons with. Not a proper comparison.

again, Palin was misinformed


We’ll aim for these races and many others. This is just the first salvo in a fight to elect people across the nation who will bring common sense to Washington. Please go to sarahpac.com and join me in the fight.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/dont-get-demoralized-get-organized-take-back-the-20/373854973434

[Blake]

So you are saying Palin is stupid.

OK.

I think he's saying she is libtarded.

[Blake]

The crosshairs argument is just as stupid as the "Obama undermined the case against the Arizona shooter in his speech" argument. They could have just used X's or dots on the map but you know what? X's and dots are both used on targets too...all my bow hunting targets use dots. Official nRA .22 targets use X's. What could they have used that you liberal apologists would have approved of? Little ponies? Rainbows? Hell, that probably would have offended PETA and gays. Y'all are a bunch of sensitive little bitches...

I have no problem with the crosshairs myself.

I think it's ridiculous to say they aren't.

Just apologize or defend it, but don't lie about it.

[Ignignokt]

You have to be one dumb motherfucker to believe that those are surveyor symbols.

Putting surveyor symbols in that poster doesn't even make sense.

It's like the dept of Education and the State of Texas putting a crosshair on UTSA to signify a goal to increase the universities standings amongst the worst schools in the nation, and to stop it from allowing retards and mongols to get physics degrees tbh

[Winehole23]

Mongols?

[ChumpDumper]

Palin should have put tic tacs on the map.

[admiralsnackbar]

The crosshairs argument is just as stupid as the "Obama undermined the case against the Arizona shooter in his speech" argument. They could have just used X's or dots on the map but you know what? X's and dots are both used on targets too...all my bow hunting targets use dots. Official nRA .22 targets use X's. What could they have used that you liberal apologists would have approved of? Little ponies? Rainbows? Hell, that probably would have offended PETA and gays. Y'all are a bunch of sensitive little bitches...

So the semiotic options are targeting symbols that are inextricably associated with weaponry (and, thus violence) or unicorns and rainbows? I don't believe you are that unimaginative.

We'd both agree, I think, that of course Palin didn't intend to incite violence with her poster; she was just marketing herself using the attention-grabbing trappings of her brand/persona.

But just the fact that people are having this discussion proves there are morons on both sides out there who can't distinguish between the literal and the figurative use of crosshairs, or the literal and figurative use of "patriotic freedom fighter" rhetoric, etc. It follows, then, that there are people who are dumb enough to misinterpret things in extreme, potentially gruesome ways, be it in support of what they think you said, or contrary to it.

It's more of a philosophical question than anything, I guess: If we take as a given that the larger our audience, so the lower our common denominator, so the greater probability of being mis-interpreted; at what point, then, do we need to begin exercising restraint in our public statements in order to make ourselves better understood to everyone, both followers and adversaries?

Palin should be free to say what she wants to however she chooses to, but if her business is protecting her brand, she needs to find equilibrium, I think, in the same way that a dairy farmer may really like salt, but realize that salty milk would not net the greatest return, or a CEO may like dirty jokes, but realize it would hurt his stock to bust out the ribaldry at a public function.

If she's content with being a small-time entertainer, her present tack will suit her fine and she'll end up turning into a Pat Buchanan cable clown. But if she's legitimately vying for high office, she's going to have to tone down some of the cutesy, divisive marketing strategies she's used so far and find the (pretty vast) middle ground between kitschy Christian moose-hunter/freedom-fighter branding and gay-ass, PETA-friendly ponies and rainbows.

[RandomGuy]

Mongols?

Mongols are perfectly nice people these days.

http://www.bi-bid.com/images/great_story_of_mongols_all.jpg

Can't see the problem. Sure we could bicker over who killed who, but what would that solve?

[boutons_deux]

"Palin should be free to say what she wants to however she chooses to"

I hope she continues, because she couldn't shoot herself in her foot more than with the "blood libel" crap, although I figure she can do worse.

She has no chance for any elected office, except maybe game warden for Wasilla Alaska.

[Yonivore]

We'd both agree, I think, that of course Palin didn't intend to incite violence with her poster;...
Correction: Palin didn't incite violence with her poster.

To date, there is absolutely zero evidence the political rhetoric of Ms. Palin, the Tea Party, or anyone else on the right, incited any violence.

This needs to be recognized and those who have pushed the narrative for the past week need to apologize.

[clambake]

lol crosshairs
lol blood libel

[Yonivore]

lol crosshairs
lol blood libel
:lmao no incitement, no culpability, no responsibility.

[clambake]

:lmao no incitement, no culpability, no responsibility.

:lmao clinging to hearsay
:lmao crosshairs
:lmao blood libel

[Yonivore]

:lmao clinging to hearsay
:lmao crosshairs
:lmao blood libel
And, behold, a perfect example of the unhinged left that will cling to a narrative in the face of overwhelming facts to the contrary.

Thanks for playing along clambake.

[clambake]

And, behold, a perfect example of the unhinged left that will cling to a narrative in the face of overwhelming facts to the contrary.

Thanks for playing along clambake.

the only overwhelming fact is that a guy went on a killing spree at a democratic rally.
:lmao stupid yoni

[George Gervin's Afro]

And, behold, a perfect example of the unhinged left that will cling to a narrative in the face of overwhelming facts to the contrary.

Thanks for playing along clambake.

sincerely,
the guy who knows malkin's article starts off with lies yet supports it while calling out other's for ignoring the overwhelming facts

[Yonivore]

sincerely,
the guy who knows malkin's article starts off with lies yet supports it while calling out other's for ignoring the overwhelming facts
I'm sorry, what was the lie?

[George Gervin's Afro]

I'm sorry, what was the lie?

obama blamed the right.

thank for playing

[Yonivore]

obama blamed the right.

thank for playing
The article is linked in here? Forgive me for not believing you but, I'd like to read that for myself.

[George Gervin's Afro]

The article is linked in here? Forgive me for not believing you but, I'd like to read that for myself.

:lmao

[Yonivore]

:lmao
There are 38 pages of posts...seriously, I don't recall the essay.

[boutons_deux]

Arizona GOP Pushing For Guns On College Campuses

Arizona Republicans remain adamant that the shooting will not dissuade them from pushing their pro-gun agenda.

They want new laws allowing college and university faculty members to be able to carry concealed weapons on campus, an issue that gained attention after the 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech University. Only Utah has a law allowing concealed weapons on college campuses while 24 states have bans, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/17/arizona-republicans-guns-college-campuses_n_809944.html?view=print

==========

childish, drunk college kids packing heat. yep, the insane are running the asylum

[Trainwreck2100]

Arizona GOP Pushing For Guns On College Campuses

Arizona Republicans remain adamant that the shooting will not dissuade them from pushing their pro-gun agenda.

They want new laws allowing college and university faculty members to be able to carry concealed weapons on campus, an issue that gained attention after the 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech University. Only Utah has a law allowing concealed weapons on college campuses while 24 states have bans, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/17/arizona-republicans-guns-college-campuses_n_809944.html?view=print

==========

childish, drunk college kids packing heat. yep, the insane are running the asylum

would still be illegal per your article


They want new laws allowing college and university faculty members to be able to carry concealed weapons on campus

[Yonivore]

would still be illegal per your article
Don't confuse b_d with facts.

[admiralsnackbar]

Correction: Palin didn't incite violence with her poster.

To date, there is absolutely zero evidence the political rhetoric of Ms. Palin, the Tea Party, or anyone else on the right, incited any violence.

This needs to be recognized and those who have pushed the narrative for the past week need to apologize.

I liked it the way I had it, thanks -- our legal system has a fondness for weighing people's intentions that I guess rubbed off on me somewhere along the way -- even if the poster had incited a depressing incident, I would still not fault Palin because, for all her Gomer Pyle Machiavellianism, she doesn't strike me as being capable of willfully standing behind actual calls to violence. She just wants the money, Lebowski.

That said... you want apologies? Seriously? :lol

It's crass and depressing, but all these politicians and pundits on both sides are going to exploit the shit out of this tragedy and turn it into a football to try to and get some yardage until something else catches the nation's attention. The Left attacks Palin. Palin attacks the Left. Obama condescends to mediate. Rinse, repeat.

Maybe it's a good thing, I dunno... at least by using these murders as political devices in larger self-promotional narratives, they can make the completely pointless and arbitrary murders/injuries of the victims seem as though they make sense in a Big Picture way.

[Yonivore]

I liked it the way I had it, thanks --
Of course you do. It subtly infers her poster incited violence.

[ChumpDumper]

Eh, I'm sure yoni believes rap music incites black people to violence and gas station yelling.

[CuckingFunt]

Correction: Palin didn't incite violence with her poster.

To date, there is absolutely zero evidence the political rhetoric of Ms. Palin, the Tea Party, or anyone else on the right, incited any violence.

I am of the opinion that Loughner's actions were likely not the result of any specific rhetorical influence, and would generally agree that there has been no evidence suggesting a direct connection between the shooting and Palin's poster, but I'm curious as to why you're confusing the lack of evidence of a connection for the evidence of no connection.


This needs to be recognized and those who have pushed the narrative for the past week need to apologize.

Should Palin and the right apologize to themselves? Because I've seen this narrative pushed by the right as much as by anyone else.

[admiralsnackbar]

Of course you do. It subtly infers her poster incited violence.

It unsubtly inferred it was stupid marketing because it makes some people on either end of the political spectrum think about violence -- that's about it.

[Yonivore]

I am of the opinion that Loughner's actions were likely not the result of any specific rhetorical influence, and would generally agree that there has been no evidence suggesting a direct connection between the shooting and Palin's poster, but I'm curious as to why you're confusing the lack of evidence of a connection for the evidence of no connection.
No confusion. In this case, the lack of evidence when combined with the overwhelming amount of media supposition and assertion of a connection needs to be pointed out. All of the evidence, so far, tends to walk away from there being any influence from right-wing political rhetoric.


Should Palin and the right apologize to themselves? Because I've seen this narrative pushed by the right as much as by anyone else.
The right is pushing the narrative that right-wing political rhetoric caused the shootings in Tucson?

[Yonivore]

It unsubtly inferred it was stupid marketing because it makes some people on either end of the political spectrum think about violence -- that's about it.
But, by saying she didn't intend to incite violence infers that's exactly what happened.

I didn't think of violence when I saw the SarahPAC ad or any of the similar graphics issued by the Democrats. If you did, perhaps you should seek counseling.

[clambake]

hearsay is not evidence.

[CuckingFunt]

The right is pushing the narrative that right-wing political rhetoric caused the shootings in Tucson?

They're damn sure pushing the narrative that the left thinks it did. The defensiveness and victim status claimed by the right since moments after it happened has made the association as clearly as anything else has.

[DarkReign]

About the congresswoman being shot...

Maybe its the cynic in me that feels badly for her and her family, but doesnt feel a damn thing for politicians who might actually be killed for their actions as lawmakers.

In my dream world, there would be three sets of laws. One for the military, one for a citizen and another for elected/appointed public officials. The penalties of law for public officials would be extreme compared to a citizen's.

Flame away.

[admiralsnackbar]

But, by saying she didn't intend to incite violence infers that's exactly what happened.

I didn't think of violence when I saw the SarahPAC ad or any of the similar graphics issued by the Democrats. If you did, perhaps you should seek counseling.

You act as though we're writing for people in the future who know nothing about the circumstances of this incident. :lol

The gunman was a fucking nut and had been since long before Palin bombed on Couric, much less released an under-cooked political poster.

As for counseling... you buy, I'll fly, buddeh! :toast

[Yonivore]

They're damn sure pushing the narrative that the left thinks it did. The defensiveness and victim status claimed by the right since moments after it happened has made the association as clearly as anything else has.
Meanwhile, the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/opinion/16pubed.html?_r=1) makes an admission...

Granted it took them several paragraphs -- during which they talked about reporting the early error that Giffords had been killled -- but, come clean (sort of) they did:


The Times’s day-one coverage in some of its Sunday print editions included a strong focus on the political climate in Arizona and the nation. For some readers — and I share this view to an extent — placing the violence in the broader political context was problematic.

C. Wenk, a reader in Alexandria, Va., criticized “an egregious rush to judgment in the Times coverage of the Arizona shooting, specifically aimed at linking the shooting to various conservative or Republican political rhetoric.”

A second reader, Kevin O’Donnell of Greenbrae, Calif., saw it as a case of The Times jumping too quickly: “I understand the larger point about coarse speech raising the potential for violence. By offering that debate within hours of events, doesn’t The Times risk starting at the conclusion end of the argument?”

The Times had a lot of company, as news organizations, commentators and political figures shouldered into an unruly scrum battling over whether the political environment was to blame. Meanwhile, opportunities were missed to pick up on evidence — quite apparent as early as that first day — that Jared Lee Loughner, who is charged with the shootings, had a mental disorder and might not have been motivated by politics at all.

So why does a story get framed this way? Journalism educators characterize this kind of framing as a storytelling habit — one of relating new facts to an existing storyline — and also as a reflex of news organizations that are built to handle some topics well, and others less well.

Jerry Ceppos, dean of the journalism school at the University of Nevada, Reno, said journalists’ impulse to quickly impose a frame on a story is “genetic.”

“Journalists developed automatic framing protocols generations ago because of the need to report quickly,” he said. “Today’s hyper-deadlines, requiring journalists to report all day long and all night long, made that genetic disposition even more dominant.”
In other words, we had a prepared narrative that right-wing political rhetoric was the cause of violence and ran with it.

[Winehole23]

(Leaky underpants shd be changed.)

[admiralsnackbar]

Meanwhile, the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/opinion/16pubed.html?_r=1) makes an admission...

Granted it took them several paragraphs -- during which they talked about reporting the early error that Giffords had been killled -- but, come clean (sort of) they did:


In other words, we had a prepared narrative that right-wing political rhetoric was the cause of violence and ran with it.

Not surprising given similar arguments were put forth after the Killeen killer, and the murder of Dr. Tiller and the Holocaust museum guard in DC. That's the trouble with the 24/7 media schedule... nobody does research because they'd rather be wrong than get scooped. But it's always something in this country -- if it isn't right-wing radio it's heavy metal or gangsta movies or porn, or or or.

[diego]

So why does a story get framed this way? Journalism educators characterize this kind of framing as a storytelling habit — one of relating new facts to an existing storyline — and also as a reflex of news organizations that are built to handle some topics well, and others less well.

Jerry Ceppos, dean of the journalism school at the University of Nevada, Reno, said journalists’ impulse to quickly impose a frame on a story is “genetic.”

“Journalists developed automatic framing protocols generations ago because of the need to report quickly,” he said. “Today’s hyper-deadlines, requiring journalists to report all day long and all night long, made that genetic disposition even more dominant.”



In other words, we had a prepared narrative that right-wing political rhetoric was the cause of violence and ran with it.

a narrative which I'm sure, had absolutely nothing to do with this:

R7046bo92a4

[Yonivore]

a narrative which I'm sure, had absolutely nothing to do with this:

R7046bo92a4
Nope.

[DMX7]

Again, they are symbols for a map, to indicate location. Generally used in surveying.


Pitbull disagrees with you again.

"The graphic that was used was crosshairs..."
-Sarah Palin on Hannity 1/17/2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJV2hE9u1kw

[Blake]

Pitbull disagrees with you again.

"The graphic that was used was crosshairs..."
-Sarah Palin on Hannity 1/17/2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJV2hE9u1kw


Yeh, yeh, yeh, we know...

It's on Youtube, so the allegations must be true.

[DMX7]

Looks like the cover story reached the peasants before it reached governor half-wit.

[DMX7]

Yeh, yeh, yeh, we know...

It's on Youtube, so the allegations must be true.



That's a legitimate point.

Corrected: http://video.foxnews.com/v/4501208/exclusive-sarah-palin-on-hannity/

[vy65]

In other words, we had a prepared narrative that right-wing political rhetoric was the cause of violence and ran with it.

Are you literate?

[Wild Cobra]

Pitbull disagrees with you again.

"The graphic that was used was crosshairs..."
-Sarah Palin on Hannity 1/17/2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJV2hE9u1kw
So she says it was. She also explains the root of them pretty good. Now we can debate angles of this, but the bottom line is this. It doesn't matter what the truth is. You libtards will find any thing to hate her over.

[LnGrrrR]

So she says it was. She also explains the root of them pretty good. Now we can debate angles of this, but the bottom line is this. It doesn't matter what the truth is. You libtards will find any thing to hate her over.

So who is wrong, Palin or you? :lol

You could at least admit one of you is wrong.

[ChumpDumper]

So she says it was. She also explains the root of them pretty good. Now we can debate angles of this, but the bottom line is this. It doesn't matter what the truth is. You libtards will find any thing to hate her over.The truth is this:

Palin used crosshairs in the graphic.

The representative who was shot previously complained about the crosshairs.

Some douchebags tried to tie the graphic directly to the shooting.

Palin distastefully whined about the attempts by the douchebags to tie the graphic directly to the shooting.

Palin's approval numbers fell and her disapproval ratings rose in the wake of her whining.

And here we are.

[Wild Cobra]

So who is wrong, Palin or you? :lol

You could at least admit one of you is wrong.
Do we need to go into that?

They are map symbols for location. She was wrong, either not knowing, or by design. If she said they were map symbols, then the left would still hate her. Sometimes, admitting to a lie is less painful. Gets things done and over with. Which the truth is, beats me. I see it as still being either possibility.

Like I said. No matter the truth, libtards will hate her.

[ChumpDumper]

Do we need to go into that?

They are map symbols for location. She was wrong, either not knowing, or by design. If she said they were map symbols, then the left would still hate her. Sometimes, admitting to a lie is less painful. Gets things done and over with. Which the truth is, beats me. I see it as still being either possibility.

Like I said. No matter the truth, libtards will hate her.:lol

This is a new gambit: defending Palin by throwing her under the bus.

[Yonivore]

I think the point is, it doesn't matter what they were; the SarahPAC ad didn't cause any violence -- nor did the similar Democratic ads to which Palin referred in the interview.

Obviously, if Ms. Palin says they were cross hairs, who are we to argue?

[DMX7]

Do we need to go into that?


Yes, we do. :lol

[LnGrrrR]

She was wrong, either not knowing, or by design.

I just wanted you to admit it, to be honest. :D Like I said, evenn if they were targets, the only thing I think Palin might be guilty of is poor taste in her symbols. (And given the political climate, it's not like she was the only one. Tea partiers seem more explicit with their violent rhetoric, but there's plenty of examples from all parties.)

[LnGrrrR]

Obviously, if Ms. Palin says they were cross hairs, who are we to argue?

In this case, your "we" would probably be WC. :D