I can agree with this!
Everything else is your opinion!!
Change your avatar back. It's classic.
Shooting throws spotlight on state of U.S. political rhetoric
- Thread starter QueEx
- Start date
I can agree with this!
Everything else is your opinion!!
Change your avatar back. It's classic.
<font size="3">It was an EASY question.
An underhand toss.
One you could have easily hit a home run with.
Instead, you struck out.
QueEx
</font size>
You forgot these:
National Public Radio legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg:
f there is retributive justice [Sen. Jesse Helms] will get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.
USA Today syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux, on Clarence Thomas:
I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease.
Washington Post syndicated columnist Richard Cohen:
For hypocrisy, for sheer gall, [Newt] Gingrich should be hanged.
Comedian and (former) talk show host Craig Kilborn [Caption under footage of George W. Bush]:
Snipers Wanted
Members of the St. Petersburg Democratic Club:
And then there’s Rumsfeld who said of Iraq “We have our good days and our bad days.” We should put this S.O.B. up against a wall and say “This is one of our bad days” and pull the trigger.
Actor Alec Baldwin on Conan O’Brien:
f we were in other countries, we would all right now, all of us together, all of us together would go down to Washington and we would stone Henry Hyde to death! We would stone him to death! [crowd cheers] Wait! Shut up! Shut up! No shut up! I’m not finished. We would stone Henry Hyde to death and we would go to their homes and we’d kill their wives and their children. We would kill their families.
Comedian Chris Rock:
If President Clinton would pardon me I would whip Starr’s ass right now. I will get a crew from Brooklyn and we will stomp him like, like, we’re Savion Glover. We’ll stomp him like it’s bringing da noise.
Director Spike Lee on Charlton Heston:
Shoot him with a .44 caliber Bulldog.
James Carville on Ken Starr:
He’s one more mistake away from not having any kneecaps.
Syndicated columnist Alexander Cockburn:
There is a sound case to be made for dropping a tactical nuclear weapon on the Cuban section of Miami. The move would be applauded heartily by most Americans. Alas, Operation Good Riddance would require the sort of mature political courage sadly lacking in Washington, D.C., these days.
Columnist, author, media pundit, journalist, and newspaper editor Dan Savage:
My plan? Get close enough to Bauer to give him the flu, which, if I am successful, will lay him flat just before the New Hampshire primary. I’ll go to Bauer’s campaign office and cough on everything. Phones and pens. Staplers and staffers. I even hatch a plan to infect the candidate himself; I’ll keep a pen in my mouth until Bauer drops by his offices to rally the troops. And when he does, I’ll approach him and ask for his autograph, handing him the pen from my flu-virus-incubating mouth.
[Mar 5, 2007]
Maher: What about the people who got onto the Huffington Post – and these weren’t even the bloggers, these were just the comments section – who said they, they expressed regret that the attack on Dick Cheney failed.
Joe Scarborough: Right.
Maher: Now…
John Ridley: More than regret.
Maher: Well, what did they say?
Ridley: They said “We wish he would die.” I mean, it was (?) hate language.
Barney Frank: They said the bomb was wasted. (laughter and applause)
Maher: That’s a funny joke. But, seriously, if this isn’t China, shouldn’t you be able to say that? Why did Arianna Huffington, my girlfriend, I love her, but why did she take that off right away?
<font size="3">
Here, I'll roll this one up to the plate.
<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R7046bo92a4&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R7046bo92a4&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>
Try again. This time, try using your brain, without the childish sarcasm.
QueEx
</font size>
Here, I'll roll this one up to the plate.
<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R7046bo92a4&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R7046bo92a4&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>
Try again. This time, try using your brain, without the childish sarcasm.
QueEx
</font size>
Que please, like i told the other poster. I could post a thousand of the hate posters directed toward Bush and other independents who don't agree with your agenda. I can see you guys haven't gotten over the November elections.
Most of America rejects what you and your ilk think. So because you are rejected it is processed as hate.
What a bunch of unsubstantiated quotes by entertainers Shall I fill this thread with Dennis Miller amid Chuck Norris quotes?
Just to show how ridiculous your post is, check out air head wing actress nut Victoria Jackson:
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oR__8jl7PM8?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oR__8jl7PM8?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Poor Jesse Helms:
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KIyewCdXMzk?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KIyewCdXMzk?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Michele Bachmann: I Want People "Armed And Dangerous" Over Obama Tax Plan
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BRQmRy0jJTA?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BRQmRy0jJTA?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o
> </o>
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BRQmRy0jJTA?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BRQmRy0jJTA?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o> </o>
<font size="3">
Why do you insist upon dodging simple questions ???
The question I asked and the point made by Congresswoman Giffords in the video was not: anti-Bush; anti-independents, whether or not they share my points of view; anti-republican; or pro-democrats. And, it had absolutely nothing to do with the November elections.
What I think ???
Pray tell; what exactly are you referring to ??? Please be specific.
QueEx
</font size>
Why do you insist upon dodging simple questions ???
The question I asked and the point made by Congresswoman Giffords in the video was not: anti-Bush; anti-independents, whether or not they share my points of view; anti-republican; or pro-democrats. And, it had absolutely nothing to do with the November elections.
What I think ???
Pray tell; what exactly are you referring to ??? Please be specific.
QueEx
</font size>
Ask and ye shall receive. Can't help it if you don't like the answer.
<font size="3">Like I thought. You're talking out the side of your neck. Never, never any specifics and fast to change the subject when you discover you're in waaay over your head.</font size>
QueEx
<font size="3">
BTW,
In a statement just released, the family of Tucson shooting suspect Jared Loughner says that:
BTW,
In a statement just released, the family of Tucson shooting suspect Jared Loughner says that:
"We don't understand why" Saturday's shooting rampage occurred and that "We care very deeply about the victims and their families."
"There are no words that can possibly express how we feel," the statement reads in part. "We wish we could change the heinous events. ... We are so very sorry for their loss."</font size>
"There are no words that can possibly express how we feel," the statement reads in part. "We wish we could change the heinous events. ... We are so very sorry for their loss."</font size>
Seriously, why are we talking about rhetoric when both sides uses this type of rhetoric against each other...
It's like blaming gang violence directly on gangsta rap. I mean you can make a weak case that listening to gangsta rap will make anyone do anything, but in reality NOTHING CAN MAKE YOU DO ANYTHING.
You have a choice if you want to act on things violently, or not. The rapper does not buy the gun, and the bullets. The rapper does not tell you WHO to shoot. The rapper does not aim the gun. The rapper does not physically pull the trigger on the gun. You ultimately make the choice of your actions. Crazy, or not...
I'm really sick of the finger pointing, and I'm very sorry that I've participated in this bullshit..
It's very immature...
It's like blaming gang violence directly on gangsta rap. I mean you can make a weak case that listening to gangsta rap will make anyone do anything, but in reality NOTHING CAN MAKE YOU DO ANYTHING.
You have a choice if you want to act on things violently, or not. The rapper does not buy the gun, and the bullets. The rapper does not tell you WHO to shoot. The rapper does not aim the gun. The rapper does not physically pull the trigger on the gun. You ultimately make the choice of your actions. Crazy, or not...
I'm really sick of the finger pointing, and I'm very sorry that I've participated in this bullshit..
It's very immature...
WRONG!
Your side has had over 40 years of Richard Nixon and the Southern Strategy to Lee Atwater and Roger Ailes dirty political tricks, 30 years of Limbaugh, 20 years of Faux Snooze toxic political rhetoric and lies of Karl Rove. Now that your vitriol is catching up to you and you want to say both sides are doing it. WRONG. When you people swift boated John Kerry, I never heard your side say stop it. As long as your side were winning elections, it was ok. Now the weak mind followers of your side are on autopilot and people are getting hurt you say this stuff is getting out of hand. You haven't learned a thing from Oklahoma City.
The only way it's going to stop is when you side says 'Uncle'. Just as when Bill Clinton was being hammered by Newt Gingrich and the republicans about Monica, what halted the noise was when Larry Flynt began offering people money for information on all congressman having affairs. Your side (that's right no labelers) decided that it was beginning to hit a little to close to home. Until then, reap what you sowed!
BTW Mr. Anti Obama, now that the GOP has taken control of the House, where are the jobs?
BTW,
In a statement just released, the family of Tucson shooting suspect Jared Loughner says that:
"We don't understand why" Saturday's shooting rampage occurred and that "We care very deeply about the victims and their families."
"There are no words that can possibly express how we feel," the statement reads in part. "We wish we could change the heinous events. ... We are so very sorry for their loss."
Talk about jumping to conclusions!
<font size="3">
BTW,
In a statement just released, the family of Tucson shooting suspect Jared Loughner says that:"We don't understand why" Saturday's shooting rampage occurred and that "We care very deeply about the victims and their families."
"There are no words that can possibly express how we feel," the statement reads in part. "We wish we could change the heinous events. ... We are so very sorry for their loss."</font size>
This was after the fact.
http://www.examiner.com/national:
Arizona shooting update: Jared Loughner’s parents bar FBI from house, report
A new report in the case of alleged Arizona shooting suspect, Jared Loughner, states that his parents set up a barricade, preventing the FBI from access to their home. According to a report by The Arizona Republic the FBI arrived at the home of Jared Loughner on Monday, January 10, 2011, only to find that their front porch had been barricaded with 4x4 double thick plywood boards. The Republic reports that after banging on the boards announcing they were with the FBI and demanding access, they were finally let in by going through the back door.
Update: CBS News/AP Photo of Jared Loughner's Parent's Home
It is unclear why Jared Loughner’s parents chose to barricade the home as it is possible they did so to prevent media from gaining access. The Arizona Republic did not report whether the FBI removed items from the home or not.
A search warrant had been executed on the home on Saturday, January 8, 2011 and according to a probable cause warrant filed with the criminal complaint, a number of items were seized, including documents from a safe which indicated that Jared Loughner planned the attacks and targeted Gabrielle Giffords.
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
Correct. Even his friends labeled him as a left wing lunatic.
Yes Palin has a large following. As someone put it this weekend a character at best.
President material No.
Although I'd have to agree that the political discourse in this country is out of way out of hand.
Obama statements:
“If they Bring a Knife? We Bring a Gun”
calling republicans “hostage takers”
“Argue with neighbors, Get in their face!”
“I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,”
“We talk to these folks… so I know whose *** to kick.”
“A Republican majority in Congress would mean “hand-to-hand combat”
“It’s time to Fight for it.”
“We’re gonna punish our enemies”
“I’m itching for a fight.”[/QUOTE]
This is Sharron Angle's quote in it's entirety:
You know, our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. And in fact Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years.
I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out.
She is literally calling for taking up arms against the government.
Also, the insanity in the video below does not create an unhealthy political atmosphere.
Low life liberal
http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/themes/ws/images/the-weekly-standard.gif
Sanders Fundraises Off Arizona Murders
There has been no shortage of individuals and institutions that have sought to capitalize on the shootings in Tucson. Add Vermont senator Bernie Sanders to that list.
This afternoon Sanders sent out a fundraising appeal, seeking to raise money to fight Republicans and other “right-wing reactionaries” responsible for the climate that led to the shooting.
He writes:
Given the recent tragedy in Arizona, as well as the start of the new Congress, I wanted to take this opportunity to share a few words with political friends in Vermont and throughout the country. I also want to thank the very many supporters who have begun contributing online to my 2012 reelection campaign at www.bernie.org. There is no question but that the Republican Party, big money corporate interests and right-wing organizations will vigorously oppose me. Your financial support now and in the future is much appreciated.
Sanders lists several events as evidence that right-wing rhetoric led to the attacks, and then continues:
What should be understood is that the violence, and threats of violence against Democrats in Arizona, was not limited to Gabrielle Giffords. Raul Grijalva, an old friend of mine and one of the most progressive members in the House, was forced to close his district office this summer when someone shot a bullet through his office window. Another Democratic elected official in Arizona, recently defeated Congressman Harry Mitchell, suspended town meetings in his district because of the threatening phone calls that he received (Mitchell was also in the cross-hairs on the Palin map). And Judge John Roll, who was shot to death at the Giffords event, had received numerous threatening calls and death threats in 2009. In light of all of this violence – both actual and threatened – is Arizona a state in which people who are not Republicans are able to participate freely and fully in the democratic process? Have right-wing reactionaries, through threats and acts of violence, intimidated people with different points of view from expressing their political positions?
A staffer in Sanders’ campaign office confirmed that the letter went out today.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/themes/ws/images/the-weekly-standard.gif
Sanders Fundraises Off Arizona Murders
There has been no shortage of individuals and institutions that have sought to capitalize on the shootings in Tucson. Add Vermont senator Bernie Sanders to that list.
This afternoon Sanders sent out a fundraising appeal, seeking to raise money to fight Republicans and other “right-wing reactionaries” responsible for the climate that led to the shooting.
He writes:
Given the recent tragedy in Arizona, as well as the start of the new Congress, I wanted to take this opportunity to share a few words with political friends in Vermont and throughout the country. I also want to thank the very many supporters who have begun contributing online to my 2012 reelection campaign at www.bernie.org. There is no question but that the Republican Party, big money corporate interests and right-wing organizations will vigorously oppose me. Your financial support now and in the future is much appreciated.
Sanders lists several events as evidence that right-wing rhetoric led to the attacks, and then continues:
What should be understood is that the violence, and threats of violence against Democrats in Arizona, was not limited to Gabrielle Giffords. Raul Grijalva, an old friend of mine and one of the most progressive members in the House, was forced to close his district office this summer when someone shot a bullet through his office window. Another Democratic elected official in Arizona, recently defeated Congressman Harry Mitchell, suspended town meetings in his district because of the threatening phone calls that he received (Mitchell was also in the cross-hairs on the Palin map). And Judge John Roll, who was shot to death at the Giffords event, had received numerous threatening calls and death threats in 2009. In light of all of this violence – both actual and threatened – is Arizona a state in which people who are not Republicans are able to participate freely and fully in the democratic process? Have right-wing reactionaries, through threats and acts of violence, intimidated people with different points of view from expressing their political positions?
A staffer in Sanders’ campaign office confirmed that the letter went out today.
I guess this is ok by the liberals, maybe the right took it out of context.
By WSJ Staff
[Editor's note: This blog post was published in 2008. In the wake of Saturday’s shooting rampage in Tucson, Ariz., a number of lawmakers and others have called for toning down the political rhetoric and President Barack Obama led a moment of silence this morning for the victims. Click here and here for more. Also, check back with Washington Wire for updates.]
Amy Chozick reports on the presidential race from Philadelphia.
Mobster wisdom tells us never to bring a knife to a gun fight. But what does political wisdom say about bringing a gun to a knife fight?
That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
Sen. Barack Obama talks at a town hall meeting at Radnor Middle School in Wayne, Pa., Saturday, June 14. (AP)
The comment drew some laughs and applause. But it also struck a chord with his Republican rival. John McCain’s campaign immediately accused the Democratic candidate of playing the politics of fear. They also mentioned that Obama said he would use a gun that would be illegal under Obama’s plans to cut down on illegal firearms.
“Barack Obama’s call for ‘new politics’ is officially over. In just 24 hours, Barack Obama attacked one of America’s pioneering women CEOs, rejected a series of joint bipartisan town halls, and said that if there’s a political knife fight, he’d bring a gun,” McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds said in a statement.
Obama made the comment in the context of warning donors that the general election campaign against McCain could get ugly. “They’re going to try to scare people. They’re going to try to say that ‘that Obama is a scary guy,’” he said. A supporter yelled out a deep accented “Don’t give in!”
“I won’t but that sounded pretty scary. You’re a tough guy,” Obama said.
By WSJ Staff
[Editor's note: This blog post was published in 2008. In the wake of Saturday’s shooting rampage in Tucson, Ariz., a number of lawmakers and others have called for toning down the political rhetoric and President Barack Obama led a moment of silence this morning for the victims. Click here and here for more. Also, check back with Washington Wire for updates.]
Amy Chozick reports on the presidential race from Philadelphia.
Mobster wisdom tells us never to bring a knife to a gun fight. But what does political wisdom say about bringing a gun to a knife fight?
That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
Sen. Barack Obama talks at a town hall meeting at Radnor Middle School in Wayne, Pa., Saturday, June 14. (AP)
The comment drew some laughs and applause. But it also struck a chord with his Republican rival. John McCain’s campaign immediately accused the Democratic candidate of playing the politics of fear. They also mentioned that Obama said he would use a gun that would be illegal under Obama’s plans to cut down on illegal firearms.
“Barack Obama’s call for ‘new politics’ is officially over. In just 24 hours, Barack Obama attacked one of America’s pioneering women CEOs, rejected a series of joint bipartisan town halls, and said that if there’s a political knife fight, he’d bring a gun,” McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds said in a statement.
Obama made the comment in the context of warning donors that the general election campaign against McCain could get ugly. “They’re going to try to scare people. They’re going to try to say that ‘that Obama is a scary guy,’” he said. A supporter yelled out a deep accented “Don’t give in!”
“I won’t but that sounded pretty scary. You’re a tough guy,” Obama said.
BELTWAY CONFIDENTIAL
POLITICS FROM THE NATION'S CAPITAL
Dem Congressman who called for GOP Gov. to be put against a wall and shot now pleads for civility
By: Mark Hemingway 01/11/11 1:15 PM
Ex-Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., pens an op-ed in the New York Times today about the proper political response to this weekend's tragedy. I wholeheartedly support the former Congressman (Kanjorski lost his seat in November) when he argues that, following this weekend's shooting, Congressman need to remain open and accessible to the public. However, Kanjorski is rather hypocritical when he climbs up on his soapbox:
We all lose an element of freedom when security considerations distance public officials from the people. Therefore, it is incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect in which political discourse can flow freely, without fear of violent confrontation.
Incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect? Congressman heal thyself! Yesterday, I noted that, according to the Scranton Times, Kanjorski said this about Florida's new Republican Governor Rick Scott on October 23:
"That Scott down there that's running for governor of Florida," Mr. Kanjorski said. "Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he's running for governor of Florida. He's a millionaire and a billionaire. He's no hero. He's a damn crook. It's just we don't prosecute big crooks."
I'll give Kanjorski the benefit of the doubt that he did not literally mean Scott schould be killed. Regardless, Kanjorski's way over the rhetorical line compared to the kinds of statements liberals are pointing to as evidence that Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh are creating a "climate of hate," to borrow Paul Krugman's phrase. And somehow I doubt that there would have been crickets from the national media if a Republican politician called for a Democratic candidate to be shot barely a week before the election.
POLITICS FROM THE NATION'S CAPITAL
Dem Congressman who called for GOP Gov. to be put against a wall and shot now pleads for civility
By: Mark Hemingway 01/11/11 1:15 PM
Ex-Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., pens an op-ed in the New York Times today about the proper political response to this weekend's tragedy. I wholeheartedly support the former Congressman (Kanjorski lost his seat in November) when he argues that, following this weekend's shooting, Congressman need to remain open and accessible to the public. However, Kanjorski is rather hypocritical when he climbs up on his soapbox:
We all lose an element of freedom when security considerations distance public officials from the people. Therefore, it is incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect in which political discourse can flow freely, without fear of violent confrontation.
Incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect? Congressman heal thyself! Yesterday, I noted that, according to the Scranton Times, Kanjorski said this about Florida's new Republican Governor Rick Scott on October 23:
"That Scott down there that's running for governor of Florida," Mr. Kanjorski said. "Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he's running for governor of Florida. He's a millionaire and a billionaire. He's no hero. He's a damn crook. It's just we don't prosecute big crooks."
I'll give Kanjorski the benefit of the doubt that he did not literally mean Scott schould be killed. Regardless, Kanjorski's way over the rhetorical line compared to the kinds of statements liberals are pointing to as evidence that Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh are creating a "climate of hate," to borrow Paul Krugman's phrase. And somehow I doubt that there would have been crickets from the national media if a Republican politician called for a Democratic candidate to be shot barely a week before the election.
Seriously?
This is your answer to "2nd amendment remedies"? A figure of speech versus literally calling for political hits?
This belongs here too:
Seriously?
What second amendment remedies are you talking about? Please rephrase?
The defensiveness of "conservative" commentators reminds me of the old saying "A hit dog will holla". That sheriff in Pima County didn't put any political spin on his statements about tamping down the rhetoric. The Democrats came out fast saying both sides need to calm down but it's the Republicans who have gone on the the offensive (I mean that in every definition of the word) while defending their volatile language and imagery.
You can't blame Sarah Palin for Congresswoman Giffords being shot but when you put crosshairs on people and they get shot, expect to be under the microscope.
You can't blame Sarah Palin for Congresswoman Giffords being shot but when you put crosshairs on people and they get shot, expect to be under the microscope.
AS you correctly note, Palin, as do many of her riders on this forum, completely miss the point -- that whether there is a connection between the Arizona shooting and the extremes of the Tea Party movement is really beside the point. The POINT is that people are finally taking note over the troubling and offensive political discourse.
But, like you said, the rock must have hit at least one of the dogs !
QueEx
source: Seattle pi
Gunner the master hypocrite!!!
Tea Party Express on Arizona tragedy: Send us money
The California-based Tea Party Express has asked supporters to send it money to counter "leftists" it accuses of "trying to exploit" Saturday's mass shooting in Tucson that left six dead and Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords fighting for her life.
While professing to be "horrified" at the shootings, the group charged that "many in the news media and liberal political figures and organizations" are blaming Sarah Palin and "our grass roots, Constitutionalist movement" for the tragedy in Tucson.
"We're taking our country back through the ballot box and in the public square -- through peaceful means," the letter claims. "And we will prevail, because our ideas and ideals are stronger than the scare/smear/defame tactics of the leftists we face."
"We ask you to please stand with the Tea Party Express and show your support for our efforts. You can make a contribution right now to the Tea Party Express -- CLICK HERE TO CONTRIBUTE."
The Tea Party Express is the creation of Sal Russo, a longtime Sacramento-based Republican political consultant.
It spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in Alaska's Senate race, supporting Tea Party favorite and Palin-endorsed Republican candidate Joe Miller. Miller upset Sen. Lisa Murkowski in the Aug. 24th primary, but Murkowski came back in November to win reelection as a write-in.
The group also funded the insurgent Senate campaigns of Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O'Donnell in Delaware. Both Republican nominees lost in November, in races crucial to keeping Democrats in control of the Senate.
The Tucson shootings have brought renewed attention to "hate speech" and controversial "bullet box" rhetoric by Tea Party candidates and Palin's advice that followers "Reload."
A SarahPAC map using cross rairs to identify Giffords' district was featured on Monday's network morning news programs. Columnists from the New York Times have brought back Angle's talk of "Second Amendment solutions."
In its letter, Tea Party Express tries to assign ideology to accused Tucson assassin Jared Loughner.
"If Jared Loughner does have a definable political ideology, it is that of a far Left anarchist," the group asserted.
It adds:
"It is quite clear that liberals are trying to exploit this shooting for their own political benefits, and they used deception and dishonesty to smear all of us and our beliefs," charges the letter.
Giffords was narrowly re-elected over a Tea Party opponent last November. She was sharply critical of the Palin PAC for using cross hairs to identify targeted Democratic districts.
Tea Party Express is playing a different tune in its fundraising letter.
"We have nothing to do with this awful, tragic event in Arizona," the letter says. "Our prayers are with Congresswoman Giffords and the victims and families of this massacre."
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this attempt to justify your support for a President who is obviously following the same policies initiated by "W" Bush!!!
Granted, you did answer the question to the best of your ability but you need to realize that NAFTA, CAFTA & other trade agreements with foreign nations undermine any ability for unions to gain any ground. It basically renders Pres. Obama's EO's impotent! I was born into the auto industry (No, I'm not against unions) but I cannot understand why any union member would vote Dem or Rep
You may not agree with the things I say but you must admit I raise valid disagreements in this political arena.
A true "no label" cat would run simply on the consistencies of the foreign, domestic, and monetary policies between "W" & Pres. Obama
Feel free to provide any other examples where Pres. Obama has reversed any of the policies of "W" I listed in post 17
Damn shame some of y'all is supportin Dick Cheney's foreign policy as opposed to a position of non-violence we held in the 60's
Lameduck Senate Passes the Largest Military Budget in History
http://www.mediabistro.com/blogshare/content/tvnewser/images/blog_header.gif
ABC
Jared Loughner’s friend says suspect ‘Did not watch TV … disliked the news’
By Chris Ariens on January 12, 2011 10:53 AM
This morning on “Good Morning America,” ABC’s Ashleigh Banfield sat down with Zach Osler, a high school friend of Jared Loughner, the suspect in the Tucson massacre.
Osler says his friend wasn’t shooting at people, “he was shooting at the world.” Regarding the high-pitched talk radio and cable news political rhetoric, Osler says his friend didn’t even watch the news.
He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.
ABC
Jared Loughner’s friend says suspect ‘Did not watch TV … disliked the news’
By Chris Ariens on January 12, 2011 10:53 AM
This morning on “Good Morning America,” ABC’s Ashleigh Banfield sat down with Zach Osler, a high school friend of Jared Loughner, the suspect in the Tucson massacre.
Osler says his friend wasn’t shooting at people, “he was shooting at the world.” Regarding the high-pitched talk radio and cable news political rhetoric, Osler says his friend didn’t even watch the news.
He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.
Keep fishing!
source: Slate
The Tea Party and the Tucson Tragedy
How anti-government, pro-gun, xenophobic populism made the Giffords shooting more likely.
There's something offensive, as well as pointless, about the politically charged inquiry into what might have been swirling inside the head of Jared Loughner. We hear that the accused shooter read The Communist Manifesto and liked flag-burning videos—good news for the right. Wait—he was a devotee of Ayn Rand and favored the gold standard, so he was a right-winger after all. Some assassinations embody an ideology, however twisted. Based on what we know so far, the Tucson killings look like more like politically tinged schizophrenia.
It is appropriate, however, to consider what was swirling outside Loughner's head. To call his crime an attempted assassination is to acknowledge that it appears to have had a political and not merely a personal context. That context wasn't Islamic radicalism, Puerto Rican independence, or anarcho-syndicalism. It was the anti-government, pro-gun, xenophobic populism that flourishes in the dry and angry climate of Arizona. Extremist shouters didn't program Loughner, in some mechanistic way, to shoot Gabrielle Giffords. But the Tea Party movement did make it appreciably more likely that a disturbed person like Loughner would react, would be able to react, and would not be prevented from reacting, in the crazy way he did.
At the core of the far right's culpability is its ongoing attack on the legitimacy of U.S. government—a venomous campaign not so different from the backdrop to the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Then it was focused on "government bureaucrats" and the ATF. This time it has been more about Obama's birth certificate and health care reform. In either case, it expresses the dangerous idea that the federal government lacks valid authority. It is this, rather than violent rhetoric per se, that is the most dangerous aspect of right-wing extremism.
<SCRIPT language=javascript type=text/javascript>placeAd2(commercialNode,'midarticleflex',false,'')</SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/slate.news/bigidea;sz=446x33,300x250;pos=midarticleflex;poe=yes;ad=fb;ad=bb;del=js;ajax=n;dcopt=ist;ad=pop;ad=interstitial;heavy=n;pageId=slate-id-2280711;fromrss=n;rss=n;front=n;msn_refer=n;articleId=2280711;tile=2;ord=864484107834997200?"></SCRIPT>
Often the two issues are blurred together, because if government is illegitimate, rebellion is an appropriate response (hence the Colonial costumes). Conservative entertainers like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin like to titillate their audiences with hints of justified violence, including frequent reminders that they are armed and dangerous. Palin went so far as to put a target on someone who subsequently got shot. Whether or not the man who fired the gun was inspired by Palin isn't the point. The point is that you shouldn't paint targets on people, even in metaphor, or jest.
Guns are also at the heart of how the right's ideology enabled Loughner. Tea Partiers often frame the right to bear arms as a necessary check on federal despotism. "You know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies," said Sharron Angle of Nevada, who nearly defeated the majority leader of the U.S. Senate in neighboring Nevada. In practical terms, easy access to firearms empowers extremists and crazies to challenge government authority at whim. The National Rifle Association position that any attempt to regulate the ownership of firearms is a violation of the Constitution has prevailed both politically and through the courts. That means that there are few things simpler than for someone to walk into a sporting goods store, as Loughner apparently did, buy a dangerous weapon, and carry it concealed to political meetings. How should politicians protect themselves from nuts with guns? By arming themselves, of course. Absent permissive firearm laws, nowhere more lax than in Arizona, Loughner might still have been able to get a gun. But he couldn't have done it quite so easily.
First you rile up psychotics with inflammatory language about tyranny, betrayal, and taking back the country. Then you make easy for them to get guns. But if you really want trouble, you should also make it hard for them to get treatment for mental illness. I don't know if Loughner had health insurance, but he falls into a pool of people who often go uninsured—not young enough to be covered by parents (until the health-care bill's coverage of twentysomethings kicked in a few months ago), not old enough for Medicare, not poor enough for Medicaid. If such a person happens to have a history of mental illness, he will be effectively uninsurable. To get treatment, he actually has to commit a crime. If Republicans succeed in repealing the Obama health care bill, that's how it will remain.
Again, none of this says that Tea Party caused the Tucson tragedy, only that its politics increased the odds of something like it happening. It was in criticizing writers on his own side for their naivete about communism that George Orwell wrote, "So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot." Today it is the right that amuses itself with violent chat and proclaims an injured innocence when its flammable words blow up.
So this is suppose to be more valid than a friend who knew him? Que I think we got a cheerleader!!!
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this attempt to justify your support for a President who is obviously following the same policies initiated by "W" Bush!!!
Granted, you did answer the question to the best of your ability but you need to realize that NAFTA, CAFTA & other trade agreements with foreign nations undermine any ability for unions to gain any ground. It basically renders Pres. Obama's EO's impotent! I was born into the auto industry (No, I'm not against unions) but I cannot understand why any union member would vote Dem or Rep
You may not agree with the things I say but you must admit I raise valid disagreements in this political arena.
A true "no label" cat would run simply on the consistencies of the foreign, domestic, and monetary policies between "W" & Pres. Obama
Feel free to provide any other examples where Pres. Obama has reversed any of the policies of "W" I listed in post 17
Damn shame some of y'all is supportin Dick Cheney's foreign policy as opposed to a position of non-violence we held in the 60's
Lameduck Senate Passes the Largest Military Budget in History
Absolutely.
Unions vote Democratic for the same reason Black people and Latinos (not counting some Cubans) do: the Democratic Party isn't perfect but the Republican Party openly attacks you. If the GOP competed for either constituency, the Democrats would change in a hurry.
G
You're arguing points that aren't really being made or at least shouldn't be. Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Tea Party Nation, none of them made that guy do this but they have created an atmosphere where this type of thing was almost expected.
Those quotes you used from Obama do not compare to Republicans openly threatening that conservative voters would get their guns if they don't get their way.
But what do you expect? - he offered not a single word of his own to the simple question:
Does incendiary public political talk find a ready audience among the gullible, the weak minded, the mentally unbalanced, and the political cheerleaders of the world who suck up every word, perhaps, not even themselves realizing that they may be mere pawns in the political pep rally ? ? ?
. . . not one word. Perhaps, he's in denial
QueEx